Achav, Aram, and the Battle of Qarqar/0

Achav, Aram, and the Battle of Qarqar

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Biblical Sources

Melakhim I 20 and 22 discuss the foreign relations between Aram and Israel during the reign of Achav. 

• In Chapter 20, Ben Hadad, the king of Aram, initiates war and is defeated. He and his servants surrender, don mourning garments, and approach the Israelites in the hopes that Achav will have mercy and spare them death. Somewhat surprisingly, Achav greets him without malice, saying "הַעוֹדֶנּוּ חַי אָחִי הוּא." Ben Hadad offers to return to Achav certain Israelite cities previously conquered by Aram and the two make an alliance.¹ The prophetic reaction to Achav's actions is severe, and the king is told that he will pay with his life for having sent Ben Hadad free.
• Chapter 22 tells of another battle between Aram and Israel, which takes place just three years after the previous one. This time, Achav is the initiator, and the point of contention is Aram's possession of Ramot Gilad.  During the war, Achav meets his death as an archer innocently hits him by arrow, fulfilling the prophecy of Chapter 20.

Extra-Biblical Sources

Extra-Biblical sources do not speak of the Israelite wars with Aram discussed at the end of Sefer Melakhim I, but they do describe another interaction between the two powers, an alliance made by Ben-Hadad and Achav against Shalmaneser III in the Battle of Qarqar. Significantly, this took place in 853 BCE, right in between the two battles mentioned above.

The Battle of Qarqar is discussed on the Kurkh Monolith,² a stele which depicts the Assyrian king, Shalmaneser III, and describes the various military campaigns he undertook in the first six years of his reign.³  According to the stele, in 853 BCE, the Assyrians met a coalition of "12 kings" at Qarqar in Syria.⁴ Hadadezer of Damascus⁵ and Irhuleni of Hamath stood at the head of the alliance, while Achav of Israel provided major military support.⁶ After delineating the number of soldiers and chariots supplied by each king, Shalmaneser declares himself victorious, and claims to have slain 14,000 of his enemies.⁷  It should be noted, however that despite the king's claims, it seems that the battle's outcome was not decisive. None of the listed kings appear to have lost their thrones, and Shalmaneser embarks on several more campaigns to the region in the ensuing years suggesting that his goals had not been achieved.

Relationship to Tanakh

The information gleaned about the Battle of Qarqar might shed light on Achav's motives in freeing Ben Hadad. The suggestion, "וַאֲנִי בַּבְּרִית אֲשַׁלְּחֶךָּ," apparently relates to the coalition spoken of on the monolith.  It is likely that Achav recognized that Assyria was a much bigger enemy than Aram, and that it was politically expedient to make peace with Aram so the two could work together to topple the real superpower.⁸ Once there was relative quiet on the Assyrian front, however, the two resumed their old feud.

In light of Achav's motives, one might question the prohet's negative reaction.  Why was he so upset if Achav was acting in the country's best interests?

• Prof. Grossman⁹ points out that this was part of the general prophetic opposition to making alliances with foreign nations. Such alliances often brought foreign spiritual influences in their wake.¹⁰ In addition they expressed the belief that victory is a matter of military power, and not God's doing.
• The prophetic wrath might also relate to the events of Chapter 21, and the story of Navot's Vineyard. In that episode Achav allows a judicial farce so as to have the innocent Navot killed. The prophet decries Achav's willingness to let a national enemy survive, while at home he kills his own citizens.

The Aftermath: Israel, Aram and Assyria

¹ The verse is ambiguous regarding who initiated the alliance, Achav or Ben Hadad.

² The stele was discovered by J. Taylor in 1861 and is named after the location in which it was found. It is currently housed in the British Museum. The stele is made of limestone, and stands about 7 feet tall.  The inscription is written in Assyrian cuneiform.

³ The battle is also mentioned in later editions of the annals of Shalmaneser, and alluded to in the Black Obelisk Inscription, but it is only in the Kurkh monolith that Achav is mentioned by name.

⁴ The inscription goes on to list only 11 names.  As such, it is possible that the phrase "twelve kings" is a scribal error, or, alternatively, that it is simply an expression used to denote a large alliance of enemy kings and does not signify a specific number.

⁵ Hadadezer is the equivalent of Tanakh's Ben Hadad.

⁶ The inscription attributes to him 2000 chariots (which is more than that of all the other countries combined) and 10,000 soldiers. In addition, he is listed third, suggesting that he was the next most important member of the coalition. See, though, H. Tadmor, "Que and Musri", IEJ 11:3,(1961):144 and N. Naaman, "Two Notes on the Monolith Inscription of Shalmaneser III from Kurkh," Tel Aviv 3 (1976): 89-106 who point out that the number 2000 is likely a scribal error.  Even the much larger Assyrian army only records having that many chariots.  A. Malamat מלחמות ,ישראל ואשור in היסטוריה צבאית של ארץ ישראל בימי המקרא, ed. Y. Liver (Jerusalem, 1964): 240-261, on the other hand, suggests that Achav might have headed an army composed from other nations in the area who were his vassals or allies (such as Yehuda).  The chariots, thus, did not come from Israel alone.

⁷ undefined

⁸ See A. Grossman, "השימוש ברקע הסטורי בהוראת נביאים ראשונים" in הוראת המקרא (Jerusalem, 1985): 294-297 and Y. Aharoni, "ארץ ישראל בתקופת המקרא" (Jerusalem, 1988): 258-260.

⁹ See article cited above.

¹⁰ See Melakhim II 16 regarding Achav's alliance with Tiglat Pilesser and his ensuing cultic changes in the Mikdash.