II Kings 15:13-15 · Bible study
2 Kings 15:13-15 Commentary: Shallum's One-Month Reign
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
2 Kings 15:13-15 study: Shallum's one-month reign illustrates swift judgment after Jehu's prophecy fulfilled.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Shallum's one-month reign ends with his assassination by Menahem, exemplifying the instability following the end of Jehu's dynasty.
- Key words: conspiracy (קֶשֶׁר, qesher), month of days (יֶרַח יָמִים, yeraḥ yamim), struck down (נָכָה, nakah).
- Main debate: Whether Menahem acted to avenge Zechariah or simply to seize power.
- Theological theme: Divine judgment on rebellion and violence; the durability of God's word against human schemes.
- Best use: A warning against trusting in political maneuvering or violent means; an illustration of the speed with which unjust power can fall.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
13In the thirty-ninth year of Uzziah’s reign over Judah, Shallum son of Jabesh became king, and he reigned in Samaria one full month.
14Then Menahem son of Gadi went up from Tirzah to Samaria, struck down and killed Shallum son of Jabesh, and reigned in his place.
15As for the rest of the acts of Shallum, along with the conspiracy he led, they are indeed written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel.
WEB World English Bible 2000
13Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the thirty-ninth year of Uzziah king of Judah, and he reigned for a month in Samaria.
14Menahem the son of Gadi went up from Tirzah, came to Samaria, struck Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, killed him, and reigned in his place.
15Now the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his conspiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
KJV King James Version 1769
13Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the nine and thirtieth year of Uzziah king of Judah; and he reigned a full month in Samaria.
14For Menahem the son of Gadi went up from Tirzah, and came to Samaria, and smote Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.
15And the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his conspiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
13Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the nine and thirtieth year of Uzziah king of Judah; and he reigned the space of a month in Samaria.
14And Menahem the son of Gadi went up from Tirzah, and came to Samaria, and smote Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.
15Now the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his conspiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
13Shallum son of Jabesh hath reigned in the thirty and ninth year of Uzziah king of Judah, and he reigneth a month of days in Samaria;
14and go up doth Menahem son of Gadi from Tirzah and cometh in to Samaria, and smiteth Shallum son of Jabesh in Samaria, and putteth him to death, and reigneth in his stead.
15And the rest of the matters of Shallum, and his conspiracy that he made, lo, they are written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
13Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the thirty-ninth year of Uzziah king of Judah; and he reigned a full month in Samaria.
14And Menahem the son of Gadi went up from Tirzah, and came to Samaria, and smote Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.
15And the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his conspiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
13Sellum, the son of Jabes, began to reign in the nine and thirtieth year of Azarias, king of Juda: and reigned one month in Samaria.
14And Manahem, the son of Gadi, went up from Thersa, and he came into Samaria, and struck Sellum, the son of Jabes, in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.
15And the rest of the acts of Sellum, and his conspiracy which he made, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Israel?
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Kings 15:13
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators consistently see Shallum's one-month reign as a demonstration of divine retribution for his murder of Zechariah. Gill states that 'so soon were the conspiracy against his sovereign, and the murder of him, punished.' Wesley adds that 'dominion seldom lasts long which is founded in blood and falsehood.' The Cambridge Bible notes that Menahem's act, unlike Shallum's, is not called a conspiracy, suggesting he may have acted without helpers. Barnes points out that Tirzah, the old capital, reappears as a place of importance, giving birth to this pretender. Clarke proposes that Menahem, as a general of Zechariah, came from Tirzah to avenge his master. All highlight that this rapid turnover marks the beginning of an era of instability in Israel, with the prophecy of verse 12, that Jehu's dynasty would last only four generations, immediately fulfilled, followed by chaos.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: Shallum's one-month reign was cut short by Menahem's coup, showing the swift judgment on his conspiracy and the ongoing political instability after the end of Jehu's dynasty.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Fulfillment of prophecy (2 Kings 15:12) | All commentators agree that Shallum's coup against Zechariah ended Jehu's dynasty, fulfilling the word of the Lord. | None. The prophetic word is universally understood as accomplished. |
| Swift judgment on Shallum | All agree that Shallum's one-month reign is a form of divine retribution for his conspiracy and murder. | Some emphasize moral retribution (Gill, Wesley); others focus on the political instability as a consequence of the nation's sin. |
| Menahem's motivation | Menahem acted to remove a usurper and seize the throne. | Clarke suggests Menahem was a general avenging his master Zechariah. Cambridge and Barnes present it as a straightforward power grab, noting Menahem's later ferocity. |
| Historical setting | The passages uses authentic annalistic sources (the book of the chronicles). Tirzah and Samaria are historical locations. | No significant disagreement on the historicity. |
Historical & Cultural Context
These events take place during the reign of Uzziah (Azariah) of Judah, a long-reigning king in the south (2 Kings 15:1-2). In the north, the dynasty of Jehu ended with the murder of Zechariah after six months (2 Kings 15:8-12). Shallum, whose father Jabesh may suggest he came from Jabesh in Gilead, seized the throne but held it only 'a month of days', a Hebrew expression literally meaning 'a month of days' (יֶרַח יָמִים). The Cambridge Bible explains this as an adverbial phrase emphasizing a full month, parallel to 'the space of a month' in Genesis 29:14.
Menahem, likely a military commander, advanced from Tirzah. This city had been the first capital of the northern kingdom under Jeroboam I (1 Kings 14:17) and later the scene of a seven-day reign by Zimri (1 Kings 16:15). Barnes notes that Tirzah, as the former capital, 'once more appears as a place of importance.' Menahem came to Samaria, struck down and killed Shallum, and seized the throne. Keil and Delitzsch describe Menahem as a general who probably acted with only a small force, leaving the army at Tirzah. The text does not morally evaluate either man's action, but the pattern is clear: violence breeds more violence.
This period of rapid coups, Shallum one month, Menahem ten years, then Pekahiah two years, precedes the Assyrian threat. Menahem later pays tribute to Pul (2 Kings 15:19), highlighting the external pressure on a fractured kingdom. Proverbs 28:2 rings true: 'In rebellion, a land has many rulers.' The formulaic conclusion 'written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel' (v.15) points to the official annals used by the author.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no major textual variants for this passage. The Cambridge Bible observes that the phrase 'and reigned in his stead' in verse 14 is absent from the Septuagint. The Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts.
Reception History
Josephus, in his Antiquities, described Menahem as a commander besieging Tirzah when he heard of the king's murder and then marched to Samaria to remove Shallum. This historical reconstruction was repeated by later commentators such as Gill and Jamieson-Fausset-Brown. Throughout church history, this passage has been cited as an example of the instability of rule founded on violence and the certainty of divine judgment. Some traditions have used it to illustrate the principle that 'those who live by the sword die by the sword,' while others have seen in it a warning against political strife within the covenant community.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The Fulfillment of Prophecy: Shallum's conspiracy ends Jehu's dynasty, confirming God's word in verse 12.
- The Swiftness of Judgment: Shallum's one-month reign is cut short by Menahem's coup within the same capital.
- The Record of Instability: The closing formula shows that even brief, violent reigns were chronicled, leaving a legacy of chaos.
Five-point outline
- Background: God's promise to Jehu about a four-generation dynasty is completed (v.12).
- Usurpation: Shallum takes the throne by murdering Zechariah in public.
- Brief Reign: He rules only one full month in Samaria.
- Retribution: Menahem, likely a commander of Zechariah, strikes down Shallum in a counter-coup.
- Legacy: His acts are recorded in the chronicles, but his reign is little more than a footnote.
Illustration hooks
- A CEO who cheats financial records to reach the top but is exposed within weeks.
- A sports team that wins a championship through a scandal, only to have the title stripped within a month.
- A new homeowner who cuts corners in construction finds the house start to crumble quickly.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why did God allow so much bloody turmoil in Israel's history?
- Was Menahem an instrument of God's justice, or just another ambitious murderer?
- How does this ancient political instability speak to our world of shifting loyalties and broken promises?
Leading a Discussion
This short passage shows how quickly power can shift when it is seized through violence. Shallum's one-month reign reminds us that God's word stands, that judgment is often swift, and that human schemes cannot outlast divine purpose. As you meet, let the text challenge you to consider the foundations you build your own life on.
Discussion questions
- What do you notice about the way the writer describes Shallum's rise and fall? What details stand out?
- How does Shallum's reign compare with Zechariah's six-month rule (2 Kings 15:8)? What does that contrast suggest?
- Why do you think the author includes the phrase 'a month of days'? What does it emphasize?
- In what ways does this passage fulfill the prophecy about Jehu's dynasty (v.12)? Why is that significant?
- Menahem's act is not called a conspiracy, unlike Shallum's (v.15). Does that imply approval? What does the later account of Menahem's cruelty (v.16) add?
- How does Proverbs 28:2 ('In rebellion, a land has many rulers') connect to this story?
- What does this passage teach about the consequences of building a life, or a nation, on violence and deceit? Where do you see that principle at work today?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| I Kings 16:15 | In the twenty-seventh year of Asa king of Judah, Zimri reigned seven days in Tirzah. Now the people were encamped against Gibbethon, which belonged to the Philistines. |
| I Kings 16:24 | He bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver; and he built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built, Samaria, after the name of Shemer, the owner of the hill. |
| II Kings 15:1 | In the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam king of Israel, Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah began to reign. |
| II Kings 15:8 | In the thirty-eighth year of Azariah king of Judah, Zechariah the son of Jeroboam reigned over Israel in Samaria six months. |
| Job 20:15 | He has swallowed down riches, and he will vomit them up again. God will cast them out of his belly. |
| Psalms 55:23 | But you, God, will bring them down into the pit of destruction. Bloodthirsty and deceitful men shall not live out half their days, but I will trust in you. |
| Proverbs 28:2 | In rebellion, a land has many rulers, but order is maintained by a man of understanding and knowledge. |
| Proverbs 28:17 | A man who is tormented by blood guilt will be a fugitive until death. No one will support him. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke draws attention to the shocking brutality Menahem used to secure his throne. When the people of Tiphsah refused to open their gates, he took the city by force and committed extreme cruelties, including ripping open pregnant women.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes observes that Tirzah, the earlier capital, regained importance as the home of one of Israel's later kings. That king alone among his rivals died a natural death and passed the throne to his son. The text also suggests Tirzah stood on lower ground than Samaria.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentary notes that Menahem's slaying of Shallum is never called a conspiracy, suggesting he acted alone with particular ferocity, possibly as an officer from Tirzah avenging his master with no helpers needed.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note emphasizes the swift justice that overtook Shallum: he seized the throne through treason but held it barely a month before being assassinated by a rival. The brief reign illustrates how quickly political treachery can be repaid in kind, as recorded in Israel's royal chronicles.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill observes that Shallum's reign lasted only one month, a swift punishment for his conspiracy and murder of King Zechariah. He notes that Menahem quickly came from Tirzah to Samaria, killed Shallum, and took the throne, as if judging that Shallum had no better right to rule than he did.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB notes that Menahem, who according to Josephus was commanding troops besieging Tirzah, acted immediately upon hearing of Shallum's regicide. He lifted the siege, marched against the usurper, killed him, and took the throne after Shallum's single month of rule.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch argues that Tiphsach was not a local town but Thapsacus on the Euphrates, the distant northern border of Israel from Solomon's time. They maintain that Menahem marched from Tirzah to recapture this strategic fortress, which had revolted during the anarchy after Jeroboam II. The horrifying punishment of ripping open pregnant women was a brutal act of war.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange reads this chapter as a theocratic reckoning in
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry stresses that God's promise to Jehu was kept exactly as spoken: his dynasty lasted four generations, no more. The rapid succession of short-lived, violent kings that follows shows both the precision of divine judgment and how quickly a kingdom unravels once God's restraint lifts.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley observes that any reign established through violence and deception is inherently unstable. His point is that power seized by bloodshed and lies rarely lasts, because its foundation is corrupt from the start.