Chronology of the Kings of Israel and Judah – Part 91
Eshbaal, or Ish-Bosheth, is one of the least known characters in the Bible. According to II Samuel, he was the second King of Israel, coming between two of the Bible’s more famous kings—his father Saul and David—but he is often overlooked when the Kings of Israel are listed. His story is recounted in II Samuel, Chapters 2-4. When Saul dies, the House of Judah proclaim David King:
And the men of Judah came, and there [at Hebron] they anointed David king over the house of Judah. And they told David, saying, That the men of Jabeshgilead were they that buried Saul. And David sent messengers unto the men of Jabeshgilead, and said unto them, Blessed be ye of the Lord, that ye have shewed this kindness unto your lord, even unto Saul, and have buried him. And now the Lord shew kindness and truth unto you: and I also will requite you this kindness, because ye have done this thing. Therefore now let your hands be strengthened, and be ye valiant: for your master Saul is dead, and also the house of Judah have anointed me king over them.
But Abner the son of Ner, captain of Saul’s host, took Ishbosheth the son of Saul, and brought him over to Mahanaim; And made him king over Gilead, and over the Ashurites, and over Jezreel, and over Ephraim, and over Benjamin, and over all Israel. Ishbosheth Saul’s son was forty years old when he began to reign over Israel, and reigned two years. But the house of Judah followed David.
And the time that David was king in Hebron over the house of Judah was seven years and six months. (II Samuel 2:4-11)
Mahanaim and Jabesh-Gilead were in Transjordan. Hebron lay in the territory of the Tribe of Judah, on the other side of the Jordan.
The dispute over the kingship leads to war between David and Ish-Bosheth:
And Abner the son of Ner, and the servants of Ishbosheth the son of Saul, went out from Mahanaim to Gibeon. And Joab the son of Zeruiah, and the servants of David, went out, and met together by the pool of Gibeon: and they sat down, the one on the one side of the pool, and the other on the other side of the pool.
And Abner said to Joab, Let the young men now arise, and play before us. And Joab said, Let them arise. Then there arose and went over by number twelve of Benjamin, which pertained to Ishbosheth the son of Saul, and twelve of the servants of David. And they caught every one his fellow by the head, and thrust his sword in his fellow’s side; so they fell down together: wherefore that place was called Helkathhazzurim, which is in Gibeon.
And there was a very sore battle that day; and Abner was beaten, and the men of Israel, before the servants of David. (II Samuel 2:12-17)
A prolonged war ensues, but David gradually gains the upper hand:
Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker. (II Samuel 3:1)
Abner’s power and influence grow to such an extent that he and Ish-Bosheth have a falling out:
And it came to pass, while there was war between the house of Saul and the house of David, that Abner made himself strong for the house of Saul. And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father’s concubine?Then was Abner very wroth for the words of Ishbosheth, and said, Am I a dog’s head, which against Judah do shew kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father, to his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee into the hand of David, that thou chargest me to day with a fault concerning this woman? So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him; To translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.
And he could not answer Abner a word again, because he feared him. (II Samuel 3:6-11)
Abner, who was Saul’s first cousin (I Samuel 14:50) defects to David:
And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, saying, Whose is the land? saying also, Make thy league with me, and, behold, my hand shall be with thee, to bring about all Israel unto thee.
And he said, Well; I will make a league with thee ...
And Abner had communication with the elders of Israel, saying, Ye sought for David in times past to be king over you: Now then do it: for the Lord hath spoken of David, saying, By the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel out of the hand of the Philistines, and out of the hand of all their enemies. And Abner also spake in the ears of Benjamin: and Abner went also to speak in the ears of David in Hebron all that seemed good to Israel, and that seemed good to the whole house of Benjamin.
So Abner came to David to Hebron, and twenty men with him. And David made Abner and the men that were with him a feast. And Abner said unto David, I will arise and go, and will gather all Israel unto my lord the king, that they may make a league with thee, and that thou mayest reign over all that thine heart desireth. And David sent Abner away; and he went in peace. (II Samuel 3:12-13 ... 17-21)
Abner, however, lives to regret his decision to defect. Joab, David’s nephew and the commander of his army, has not forgotten that his brother Asahel was slain by Abner after the Battle at the Pool of Gibeon:
Then Joab came to the king, and said, What hast thou done? behold, Abner came unto thee; why is it that thou hast sent him away, and he is quite gone? Thou knowest Abner the son of Ner, that he came to deceive thee, and to know thy going out and thy coming in, and to know all that thou doest.
And when Joab was come out from David, he sent messengers after Abner, which brought him again from the well of Sirah: but David knew it not. And when Abner was returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside in the gate to speak with him quietly, and smote him there under the fifth rib, that he died, for the blood of Asahel his brother. (II Samuel 3:24-27)
David laments for the death of Abner, but the Israelites are also troubled by the news that the man who betrayed their king is dead:
And when Saul’s son heard that Abner was dead in Hebron, his hands were feeble, and all the Israelites were troubled.
Ish-Bosheth’s anxiety is justified:
And Saul’s son had two men that were captains of bands: the name of the one was Baanah, and the name of the other Rechab, the sons of Rimmon a Beerothite, of the children of Benjamin: (for Beeroth also was reckoned to Benjamin. And the Beerothites fled to Gittaim, and were sojourners there until this day.)
And Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son that was lame of his feet. He was five years old when the tidings came of Saul and Jonathan out of Jezreel [ie their deaths at the Battle of Mount Gilboa], and his nurse took him up, and fled: and it came to pass, as she made haste to flee, that he fell, and became lame. And his name was Mephibosheth.
And the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, went, and came about the heat of the day to the house of Ishbosheth, who lay on a bed at noon. And they came thither into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat; and they smote him under the fifth rib: and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped. For when they came into the house, he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, and they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head, and gat them away through the plain all night.
And they brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David to Hebron, and said to the king, Behold the head of Ishbosheth the son of Saul thine enemy, which sought thy life; and the Lord hath avenged my lord the king this day of Saul, and of his seed. (II Samuel 4:1-8)
And so ends the short reign of Ish-Bosheth, or Eshbaal. But how much of this is genuine history? There are many curious details in this brief episode which give us pause:
Surely this is good news? Perhaps in an earlier version it was Abner’s defection which caused them to despair. Charles Ellicott suggests that Abner was not defecting to but negotiating with David on behalf of the Israelites, and his death threw the Israelites into confusion (Ellicott 454).
Some versions translate the Hebrew word חמש [chômesh] as abdomen or belly. Strong derives this from a different root than that of an identically spelt word meaning fifth (Strong 40-41). Similarly, Charles Ellicott comments that the fifth rib should be translated as abdomen (Ellicott 449).
Note that Saul had two sons by his concubine Rizpah, one of whom was also called Mephibosheth. Ellicott suggests that Mephibosheth’s lameness, which renders him unfit to rule, is emphasized to make it clear that with the death of Ish-Bosheth there will remain no legitimate Saulide claimants to the throne (Ellicott 454).
To avoid unnecessary bloodshed between the tribes of a common parentage, and also, perhaps, to prevent the weakening of the nation in the face of their common Philistine foe, Abner proposes that the struggle should be decided by a combat between a few champions chosen on either side, and Joab immediately accepts the proposal. Hervey (Speaker’s Commentary) aptly compares this combat to that of the Horatii and Curiatii, under strikingly similar circumstances and with similar results, as described by Livy (1:10:22-25). (Ellicott 448)
A bloody battle ensued because the deadly game was tied, with all twenty-four combatants dying.
Both accounts mention the fact that Ish-Bosheth was in bed, but the former says that the assassins smote him under the fifth rib while the latter says that they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him:
There is no difficulty with the repetition in verse 7 of what has been already mentioned in verse 6, for it is common in the Scripture narratives to repeat statements when any additional fact (as here, the carrying off of the head) is to be mentioned. (See, e.g., chap. iii. 23, 24, where Joab’s arrival is twice mentioned, and chap. v. 1-3, where the mention of the assembly at Hebron is repeated.) (Ellicott 454)
I believe that these repetitions reflect the fact that the compilers of the Old Testament were drawing upon several different and independent sources.
We are told explicitly that he reigned for two years, but that David’s reign at Hebron lasted seven years and six months. The French scholar Charles François Houbigant suggested that II Samuel 2:10 be emended to six years on the grounds that the Hebrew expression translated as two years, וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנִים [ū·šə·ta·yim šā·nîm], is grammatically incorrect:
Houbigant, dissatisfied with all the common modes of solution, proposes to read ששית שנה shishshith shanah, six years, for the שתים שנים shetayim shanim, two years, of the text, which he contends is a solecism; for in pure Hebrew the words would be שתים שנה [shetayim shanah], as they are everywhere read in the first book; and 7\W is the reading of eleven of Kennicott’s MSS., and nine of De Rossi’s; but the number two is acknowledged by all the ancient versions, and by all the MSS. yet collated. (Clarke 312)
In II Samuel this character is called Ish-Bosheth, [אִישׁ־בֹּשֶׁת], a Hebrew name interpreted as Man of Shame (Strong 12), or There is Shame (Berlin & Brettler 608). But in I Chronicles the same man is twice called Eshbaal [אֶשְׁבַּעַל], variously interpreted as The Fire of Baal (Ellicott 448), Baal-Exists (Berlin & Brettler 608), Man of Baal (Strong 17), The Lord is Great, The Lord Gives, and Man of the Lord (Freedman 574):
And Ner begat Kish, and Kish begat Saul, and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal. (I Chronicles 8:33)
And Ner begat Kish; and Kish begat Saul; and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal. (I Chronicles 9:39)
It has been argued that Eshbaal was this person’s real name but Bosheth was substituted for Ba‛al, the name of a pagan deity, after this became an unspeakable name. But Ba‛al, meaning Lord, had previously been applied also to Yahweh, and it is commonly assumed that this is the case here (Freedman 574). Among the names in which the element Ba‛al probably referred to Yahweh is that of the Judge Gideon, who was also called Jeruba‛al [The Lord Strives]. This was altered to Jerubbesheth in II Samuel 11:21.
Was Eshbaal’s unspeakable name, then, replaced with one more acceptable to later rabbinic scholars? See Hosea 2:16. If so, this would certainly strengthen the argument that Ish-Bosheth was simply a more acceptable name than Eshbaal. Note how the same word bosheth (shame) seems to have been substituted for Ba‛al in Hosea 9:10 (McClintock & Strong 297).
Another of Saul’s sons is called Ishui in I Samuel 14:49. Is this the same individual as Eshbaal (Singer 647)? Rabbinic sources identified this figure with Abinadab (Ginzberg 4:76).
It is certainly unlikely that anyone would willingly give his son a name that means Man of Shame. It is theorized that this form of the name is a dysphemism (Avioz 12). Remember that Saul had a son by Rizpah called Mephibosheth, and Saul’s son Jonathan also had a son called Mephibosheth. This name is interpreted to mean From the Mouth of Shame (Freedman 5823), or Dispeller of Shame (Strong 70). But Jonathan’s son is given a different name when he is referred to in I Chronicles, one that, like Eshbaal, contains the unspeakable name:
And the son of Jonathan was Meribbaal; and Meribbaal begat Micah. (I Chronicles 8:34 and 9:40)
Some scholars believe that the original form of this name was Mephibaal (Freedman 575, 5823 : Avioz 18).
Eshbaal was a genuine name of that time. In 2012 archaeologists discovered a ceramic jar at Khirbet Qeiyafa (30 km southwest of Jerusalem), which was inscribed with the name Eshbaal ben Beda [Eshbaal Son of Beda] (Garfinkel et al 217 ff). The identity and age of Khirbet Qeiyafa are both disputed. Some archaeologists date it to the early Iron IIA age, shortly before the rise of the Divided Monarchy—the rival Kingdoms of Israel and Judah—and identify it with one of two cities associated with David: Sha’arayim and Neta’im (I Chronicles 4:23). Other archaeologists variously ascribe the site to the Canaanites, the Philistines, or the Kingdom of Israel. The inscription is Canaanite rather than Phoenician (Garfinkel et al 217).
In II Samuel 2:10 we are told explicitly that Ish-Bosheth was forty years old when he became king, but this figure has been disputed:
According to the accession formula in 2 Sam 2:10, Eshbaal was 40 years old when he began to reign; and he ruled for two years. It is likely that the reported age at accession is a round figure meant to imply maturity rather than a precise age. Even so, the figure is almost certainly inaccurate. Eshbaal’s absence from the battle of Gilboa, requiring Abner to detour probably to the capital to retrieve him so that he could be crowned king by the surviving troops who were in Mahanaim, strongly implies that Eshbaal was under 20—the legal age for military service (Num 26:2, 4)—at his accession. His youth tends to be confirmed by other considerations. Jonathan, the eldest of Saul’s sons and heir-elect, appears to have only been in his twenties when he died, as indicated by his having a single infant child at the time of his death. As the youngest son of Ahinoam, Eshbaal could not have been 40 when crowned. In addition, Eshbaal’s failure to produce an heir during his two-year reign, before his premature death, also suggests a youthful age at the time of his accession. (Freedman 575)
II Samuel 2:9 tells us that Eshbaal reigned over Gilead, Asher (assuming the Ashurites refer to the Asherites—see Ellicott 448 and Freedman 780), Jezreel, Ephraim, Benjamin, and over all Israel. As the following verse tells us that David was king over Judah, the reference to all Israel in verse 9 is anachronistic. It was clearly written by a scribe who lived at the time of the Divided Monarchy, when the land of the Israelites comprised Israel and Judah. If the story is true, this means that for two years Canaan was divided among Israel and Judah, just as it would be after the death of Solomon.
Is it possible, then, that the story of Eshbaal’s reign conceals the true origins of the Divided Monarchy? It is interesting that rabbinic sources connect the rise of the Divided Monarchy with an injustice David committed against Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth:
As for Saul’s grandson Mephibosheth, he, too, was reputed a great man. David himself did not scorn to sit at his feet, and he revered Mephibosheth as his teacher. The wrong done him by David in granting one-half his possessions to Ziba, the slave of Mephibosheth, did not go unavenged. When David ordered the division of the estate of Mephibosheth, a voice from heaven prophesied : “Jeroboam and Rehoboam shall divide the kingdom between themselves.” (Ginzberg 4:76-77)
Eshbaal’s reign is not mentioned in Louis Ginzberg’s The Legends of the Jews.
The discrepancy between the name this figure is given in II Samuel and the name by which he is known in I Chronicles casts some doubt upon his historicity, but the explanation given that later scholars emended the name to avoid invoking the unspeakable name of Ba‛al actually rings true.
There are also many elements in this story that incline me to believe that it is based upon some historical event. I suspect that the true history behind the story may have something to do with the origins of the Divided Monarchy. If we come to set David and Solomon aside as unhistorical characters, then the history of the Divided Monarchy begins with Eshbaal. On the other hand, the presence of Ba‛al in Eshbaal’s name could mean that this figure belongs to the Canaanite period before the Joshuan Conquest of Canaan. This interpretation is supported by the fact that the Eshbaal inscription from Khirbet Qeiyafa is Canaanite.
Is it significant that the war between Eshbaal and David is actually waged by their generals Abner and Joab? Were these men the true founders of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah? According to II Samuel 4:12, David buried Ish-Bosheth’s head in Abner’s tomb.
But it is too early to draw any definite conclusions.
And that’s a good place to stop.
