f)ractically unbroken hostility, the treaty of Ben- latlad II. in 1 K 2U'" appearing as merely a compact ^^Tung from him in a moment of danger, and broken at the first opportunity (22'- '). In fact, the pro- phetic historian had little interest in events which lay outside the horizon of Israel, and even within it he had little in those which did not directly serve his religious purpose. We find, for example, no explanation how it was that Hamoth-giload, after flie events of 1 K 22, passed into the bands of the Israelites, as we find it in 2 K 8'^ 9'. Again, from the variety of sources from which the history is drawn without the needful sifting and arrange- ment, there are some serious inconsistencies. It is difficult, for example, to reconcile 2 K 6-^ witli 6". From the Assyr. inscriptions, however, we learn that in 854 Israel was a member of a very important alliance of small kingdoms centring in Damascus, wliich was summoned to his assistance bv Irkhulini, king of Ilamath, against the Assyr. king, Shalmaneser II. (see Badvlon'IA, vol. i. p. 1S4''). Ahab is said to have furnished no fewer than 2000 ( !) chariots and 10,000 footmen, Benhadad 1200 chariots and 10,000 footmen. Altogether 80,000 to 90,000 men were brought into the field. A great battle was fought at l^arkar (Aroer). After a desperate encounter the As.syrians claim to have won the day, killing 14, (XK) (or according to another account 20,r)lHi), but Shalmaneser .seems to have been too crippled to make any further advance. The alliance now appears to have broken up. At any rate, in the next two Assyr. campaigns against Benhadad, in 840 and 846, Ahab takes no part. Syria, from its position, was more exposed to attai-K tlian Israel, which was en- couraged by this circumstance to attempt the recovery of Kamothgilcad (1 K 22'). During Benhadad's reign Imstililies between the two kingdoms usually took the form of guerilla war- fare, bands of tlie Syrians continually bn'akiiig into the country and carrying oil' spoil. Hazael, the murderer and successor of llenhadail II., proved a far more serious enemy. At lirsi. however, he was kept in check by Assyria. In h-12 Shalmaneser invaded Syria, deleated Hazael, who was now
deserted by his allies, with the loss of 1600 men, but was not successful in his attempt to take Damascus. The other small states, and Jehu among them, did not venture to resist, but sent tribute to Shalmaneser. The account of this campaign ia inscribed on what is known as the Black Ubeli-k in the British Museum (No. 98). One of the sculptures represents Jehu paying tribute to Shal- maneser, and underneath is the following inscrip- tion : — 'The tribute of Yahuah (Jehu), ton of Khumri (Omri !), silver, gold, bowls of gold, vesselt of gold, goblets of gold, pitchers of gold, lead, scei>tres for the king's hand, (and) staves I received ' (see JiP v. 41). But towards the end of Jehu's reign Hazael, left unmolested by Assyria, invaded the territory of the Transjordanic tribes with such ell'ect as to reduce them to complete submission (2 K 10=^^ "). He afterwards invaded the South, taking Gath, and forcing even Jerus. to capitulate. In Israel itself, during the reign of Jehoahaz, the son and successor of Jehu, Hazacl's successes were so great that the fighting men were reduced to the merest minimum (2 K 13'). The tide of fortune began to turn in the reign of his son Jehoash, who is said to have recovered from Benhadad III. all the cities taken from his father by Hazael. He also defeated an expedition sent out b\- Amaziah, king of Judah, and proceeded to invest Jerus., where he broke down a large part of the wall and reduced it to submission (2 K 14"). It was during his reign that Kamman-nirari, the warlike grandson of Shalmaneser II., defeated the feeble Mari'a, the successor of Benhadad ill., and even took Damascus; but it is not certain whether the Israelites were allected hy this campaign. The Syrians being thus temporarily crushed, and the As-sj-rians being at first too much engaged with Eastern affairs, ami after- wards too much weakened by internal disconls and the feebleness of their rulers to interfere, the king- dom of Isr. continued to gain strength, and reached the height of its power under Jeroboam II., who even ' recovered Damascus and Hamath ' (2 K 14^). With Jeroboam's death the kingdom rapidly declined. Divided by political factions, enervated by its moral corruption and social selfishness (Hos 4"-", Am 2» 4' 8»- • etc.), it easily fell a prey to the Assyrians, who gained an accession of strength under the warlike Tiglath-pileser III. (l^il, 2 K 15'''). With the exception of IVkah, none of the pettj' kings, who ruled for very short periods, have the least historical importance, except so far as by their folly or selfishne.ss they advanced the ruin of their country. Twice Tiglath- pileser successfully invaded the North, and on both occasions probably Menahem |>aid tribute, thereby reducing his country to vassalage for the sake of securing his own rule, and in order to obtain money had to impose heavy taxes (2 K IS'"). A spirited etfort to resist Assyria was made by Pekah, who, like so many of tlie kings of Israel, gained his kingdom by the sword. In allianci. with Kezin, king of Dama.>;cus, ho invadeii Judah (in 735), in order to dejH)so Ahaz and set uii the Syrian Tabeel, with a view to forming an alliance against Assyria (Is "'■*). But -Vliaz had already submitted, and sent tribute, to Tiglath-pileser, and in the next year the hitter invaded the North ami utterly defeated Itezin and other Syrian menil>ers of the alliance, capturing and spoiling no fewer than 591 Syrian cities. At the same lime the lsraeliti^<h cities ea-tt of .lordan fell into his hands (2 K 15^), and the population was taken caj>tive; some of the Western cities were also taken. I'ekah himself was forced to take refuge in Samaria, while the rest of the eoutitrj' was reduce<i to a desert. The final etfort to throw olf the .\ssyr. yoke nimle by Hosliea, who adopted the fatal [Kilicv of allyiiia himself with So (Shabaka), king of ICgypt (2 ^