Asa became king of the two tribes of Judah in 914 BC. He would reign for more than forty years. In that long-reigning period, he was witness to eight kings in Israel, the ten-tribe kingdom: Jeroboam, Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Zimri Tibni, Omri, and Ahab. Of them, Tibni hardly played a role, and neither did Zimri (he was king for only a week). Asa himself did what is right in God’s eyes (1 Kings 15:11–13).
1 Kings 16:8–10 deal with the reign of Baasha’s son Elah. The writer says that he reigned for two years. It is probable that this statement does not mean two full years but parts of two years, the one succeeding the other, perhaps 885–884 BC. His reign began in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of Asa in Judah.
Elah's mere two-year reign contrasts with the twenty-four-year reign of Baasha, his father. Apparently, the son did not have the strength and charisma of his father. Not every strong father will have an equally strong son. This was a risk with this hereditary monarchy. In the two-tribe kingdom of Judah, the hereditary kingship of David and his descendants relates to God’s promises and God’s faithfulness (2 Samuel 7:12–16), but in the ten-tribe kingdom it was based on power and violence. On that basis, this kingship would not last long. A powerful hereditary kingship, based on God’s promise, also leads to confidence, tranquillity, and stability among the population. Such a kingship is not guided by popular favour and is characterized by wisdom and love for God and the people. Even if a weak king appears in a continuous line of strong monarchs, there may still be forces present that provide stability. The continuation of the king’s line in Judah shows this, although it is not a guarantee. This also shows at the end of the entire history of all the kings.
After two years, Elah is killed by his own army commander Zimri, who came to power just like Baasha. He took advantage while Elah was getting drunk in the capital, Tirzah. In 1 Kings 16:15–16 we read that in those days the Philistine city of Gibbethon was besieged. Thus, there you find the army, but the king was safe at home drinking. This tells enough about the kingship of Elah: feasting and drinking, but not taking responsibility.
The writer waits until 1 Kings 16:13 to give a moral evaluation of Elah. The verses before us give a brief narrative of the circumstances of his assassination. He was getting drunk in the house of Arza, a high official having some measure of authority over Elah’s household.
Scholars differ as to the nature of this man’s office. Some see his authority only in terms of the palace. Donald Wiseman, however suggests that Arza could have been, in fact, the prime minister of the kingdom.1 The answer to this question depends upon how broadly you interpret the word house
(Heb. byith).
Whatever the exact nature of Arza’s office, a question that cannot be answered is whether or not he was implicated in the assassination. Did he intend for the king to become drunk to make Zimri’s task easier? The text does not tell us, but one reason to entertain the possibility is that the writer tells us that the assassin conspired against the king. A conspiracy requires more than one person. More than Zimri was involved, but who they were, we do not know.
More important than Azra in the narrative is Zimri. He served as commander of half of the chariots in Israel’s army. This was a significant command but not comparable to Omri, whom we will hear of soon, who commanded the entire army. This makes me wonder whether Zimri’s plot to become king was not doomed from the start, since chariots are basically offensive and not defensive weapons.
Be that as it may, Zimri entered Azra’s house and killed Elah. Thus, Zimri brought an end to the brief reign of Elah and put himself in his place.
8 In the twenty-sixth year of Asa king of Judah, Elah the son of Baasha began to reign over Israel in Tirzah, and he reigned two years.