JEHOIAKIM (0'p;'i.-i;, t3'p;V, o-p^' ' J" raiseth np ' ; Joakim, 1 Es i". as. ss ggg gpg gjj^ j,, _
King of Judah, second son of Josiah ( 1 Ch 3").
The circumstances under which this prince succeeded to the throne were the first and most significant indication of the long period of igno- minious subjection ushered in by the defeat of Josiah by Necho at Megiddo, n.c. 609 or 610. Necho emphasized the new con<lition of things by deposing the popular Jehoahaz in favour of his elder brother, at the same time imposing on the latter a new name, Jehoiakim, in place of Eliakim. The substitution of the sacred title Jah for the ambiguous El was probably suggested bj' the young prince himself ; yet the change of name was, none the less, a token of vassalage (cf. 2 K 24"). The direct history of this reign is brielly summed up in 2 K 23»<-2,j', 2 Ch 3G'-» ; but considerable light is thrown upon it by the writings of the contemporary prophets Jeremiah and Habakkuk (see Jer 7-9. 10""» 14-17'" 18-20. 201S-1K 25. 26. 35. 36. 45-46'''' 47. 49).
At no previous epoch was Judah in a more helpless condition of religious and moral decay. The one visible result of Josiah's reformation was that the teiiijile and the Law were regarded as a palladium, and that the Levitical worship was accurately observed (Jer 7*-=' 8" IS"). But with the death of the good king all the old abominable idolatries returned in full force, and under the highest patronage, both of the king and the I)rinces, who from this time forward take a large share of the government. Baal and Ashtoreth were worshipped in the very precincts of the temple ; the valley of Hinnom was again liideous with the infant sacrifices to Jlolech ; and from the city - roofs incense went up to all tlie host of heaven. Cruelty, corruption, and oppression flimrislied unchecked, for the people had ' in their vi<:iousness grown hard.' They felt and averred ' there is no hope.' Of such a nation Jehoiakim was the representative man. In the terrible denunciation (Jer 22""") he is charged with covetousness, the shedding of innocent blood, oppression, and violence. All that is recorded of hrm bears this out. He erected by forced labour (cf. Hab 2""") a spacious palace ' cieled with cedar and painted with vermilion,' thus (Jer 22'°) vying with Ahaz (Bs, cf. 2 K 16") or Ahab (A, cf.
1 K 22^^). He relentlessly pursued and murdered, with marks of indignity, the prophet Uriah who had denounced him (Jer 26**). A similar fate was well-nigh shared by Jeremiah and Baruch (Jer 36"). He cut and burnt with his o^vn hands a roll of di\-ine words, similar to that the recitation of which caused Josiah to rend his garments (Jer 36--) ; and, as an instance of his covetousness,
2 K 23*" specially notes that he satisfied the demands of his suzerain (LXX, v.", 100 talents of gold, Syriac and Arabic 10 [so also certain Greek cursives and the Coraplutensian]) by a general taxa- tion of his subjects, not, as had been customary, from the treasuries of the palace or the temple. Jos. {Ant. X. V. 2) well sums up his character as 'un- just and malignant ; neither holy towards God nor forbearing towards man.' Ezk 19°", in which the career of Jehoiakim and the fate of his son seem combined in an ideal picture, has no reference to his moral qualities, unless we adopt the KVm of V.', which implies a charge of lasciviousness, irrelevant here, tiiough probably true in fact.
Two matters in connexion with this reign require special mention — (a) the invasion of Nebuchad- nezzar, and {b) the end of Jehoiakim.
(a) 'The pretensions of Egypt to the empire of Syria were finally crushed by Nebuchadnezzar at the battle of Carchemish, B.C. 605 (2 K 24'). This battle took place in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (Jer 25' 46'), and opened up Syria to the Chal- dieans. However, they had not yet attacked Judipa in Jehoiakim's Ji/th year (Jer 36*' *
JEHOIAKIB
JKIiUKAM
5?9
'eighth' Bx, 'fifth' AQ). The fast then pro- claimed by the whole nation in the 9th montli was possibly in view of their approach, which yet was not so certain that one couUl safely predict it. Carchemish is on the Euplirates, and there were many important places, e.q. Tyre, to be re- duced before the Chaldxans could reach Jerusalem. This being so, it is evident that there was no siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in Je- hoiakim's third year as stated in Dn 1'. (Seder Olam 25 understands this of the third year of his rebellion.) The dat« assigned in Daniel is due to a mistaken impression (Dn 9-) that Jeremiah had predicted a 70 years' duration for the captivity of Judah (2Ch 30-'-«' = Ezr !■ follows Daniel); but the 70 years of Jer 25" 29"> RV refer to the dura- tion of Babylonian supremac3', beginning from the victory at Carchemish. Moreover, Ezekiel (1' 40') reckons the captivity of Juilali to begin with that of Jehoiacliin, B.C. 597. When Nebuchadnezzar at last appeared before Jerusalem, it is likely enough that he carried off some captives (Berosus in Jos. Ant. x. xi. 1 ; Dn 1^) and some of tlie temple vessels (2 Ch 36', Dn P). It is certain that J. submitted to him, but rebelled after three years, incited by tlie Egyptians (Joseplms). Jer 47' possibly refers to this. Nebuchadnezzar, who had returned to Babj'lon, did not at lirst think it necessary to quell this revolt in person, but sent (2 K 24^ cf. Jer 49', Ezk 25^0, Zeph 2') some of his own troops, assisted by bands of the surrounding nations, to harry Judiea, not arriving himself until after the accession of Jehoiachin (2 K 24"). To this interval Jer 35 probably belongs. Now J. reigned eleven years, and at least a year must be allowed to elapse between his revolt and his death, so that the first Chaldtean invasion may be dated in his 6th or 7th year. Jos. [Ant. X. vi. 1) places it in the 8th year of J., thus making Juda;a independent of Egj-pt and Babylon alike for four years ; but tliis is at variance with his authority Berosus, and leaves no time for the events of 2 K 24».