Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
2 Kings 9:27-29
Ahaziah Of Judah Is Also Slain As A Worshipper of Baal (2 Kings 9:27).
Having seen what was happening Ahaziah naturally also fled, taking the way of the garden-house. But he found no way of escape for Jehu pursued him and called on his fellow charioteers to smite him as well, in his chariot. This they accomplished at the ascent of Gur, and once satisfied that he would not live, allowed him to be carried off to Megiddo where he died of his wounds. His servants then bore his body to Jerusalem, where he was buried with his fathers in his sepulchre in the city of David. His reign is then summed up in 2 Kings 9:29 where it will be noted that the reckoning is in Israelite terms, ignoring the initial regnal part year (contrast twelve years in 2 Kings 8:25 where the reckoning is on the basis used in Judah where the initial part year is counted as a full year).
Analysis.
a But when Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this, he fled by the way of the garden-house (2 Kings 9:27 a).
b And Jehu followed after him, and said, “Smite him also in the chariot,” and they smote him at the ascent of Gur, which is by Ibleam (2 Kings 9:27 b).
c And he fled to Megiddo, and died there (2 Kings 9:27 c).
b And his servants carried him in a chariot to Jerusalem, and buried him in his sepulchre with his fathers in the city of David (2 Kings 9:28).
a And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab, Ahaziah began to reign over Judah (2 Kings 9:29).
Note that in ‘a' Ahaziah fled, and in the parallel his reign is described. In ‘b' he was to be smitten in his chariot, and in the parallel was borne to Jerusalem in his chariot to be buried. Centrally in ‘c' he fled to Megiddo and died there.
‘But when Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this, he fled by the way of the garden-house. And Jehu followed after him, and said, “Smite him also in the chariot,” and they smote him at the ascent of Gur, which is by Ibleam. And he fled to Megiddo, and died there.'
When Ahaziah saw what was happening he fled in his chariot. But as brother-in-law to the dead king he would be seen as of Ahab's house and thus equally liable to blood vengeance. Indeed if allowed to live he would have been responsible to avenge the blood of his wife's brother. Thus Jehu pursued him, accompanied by his own chariots, and bade them smite Ahaziah down. ‘The garden house' may have been a prominent landmark in the gardens around Jezreel (it may even have once been Naboth's garden house). Alternately it might have been on the road taken by Ahaziah in his desire to reach the safety of Judah. Many identify it with En-gannim (Joshua 19:21 - modern ‘Jenin') eleven kilometres (seven miles) south of Jezreel, which was only two kilometres (about one mile) short of Ibleam (possibly modern Tel-bel‘ameh). But his flight was in vain and they caught up with him at ‘the ascent of Gur', near Ibleam. ‘The way up to Gur' may refer to the road to modern Gurra near Taanach.
Once he had been smitten Ahaziah recognised that he could not hope to make Judah, and instead took the road to Megiddo, a chariot city in Israel which would hopefully still be loyal to Jehoram (they would not yet know about the rebellion). It would seem that it was so, for it took him in and he died there.
‘And his servants carried him in a chariot to Jerusalem, and buried him in his sepulchre with his fathers in the city of David.'
His body was then borne by his servants in a chariot to Jerusalem where he was buried in his sepulchre with his fathers in the city of David. As his death had not been the result of an assassination at the hands of his people he was seen as dying ‘peaceably'.
‘And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab Ahaziah began to reign over Judah.'
The whole passage from 2 Kings 8:25 is now summed up by a repeat of the fact concerning Azariah's succession, so that 2 Kings 8:25 and 2 Kings 9:29 form an inclusio. (It will be noted that it is also required for the chiasmus). The difference lies in the fact that here the Israelite method of reckoning regnal years (eleven years excluding the accession year) is used instead of that used in Judah (twelve years including the accession year). This is interesting evidence that the passage includes information extracted from both the annals of the kings of Israel and the kings of Judah, with the statements being extracted from each without being altered.