Archaeologists have shed light on a further troublesome contradiction between the Assyrian annals and the biblical versions. In 2 Kings 19.9, Sennacherib demands surrender from Hezekiah a second time because of fears that Tirhakah, King of Egypt, is approaching with a large force to rescue the Judahites.

It is clear, however, that Tirhakah, a later pharaoh of Egypt’s twenty-fifth dynasty, did not ascend to the throne until 690 B.C. (Kitchen 161). Since he was still eleven years away from being king when Assyria attacked, the biblical reference is another incongruity worrying many scholars.

Some have responded by simply shrugging off the biblical reference as an anachronism (Rowley 121). Others have argued that Tirhakah might have been old enough to lead a force against Sennacherib. If the earliest date for Tirhakah’s predecessor’s reign is accepted, then Tirhakah could have been summoned at twenty years old to Egypt in 701, and therefore could have taken part in some sort of attack on Sennacherib (Kitchen 158-9). 

Admittedly, an inexperienced youth being put in charge of an important invasion is unlikely, and the title ‘King of Egypt’ would still be an anachronism (Bright 300); but perhaps the previous Pharaoh sent Tirhakah as a figurehead of the invasion to gain experience, with a proper commander leading behind the scenes.

Kitchen emphatically argues that the title is a retrospective addition with the foresight that Tirhakah would eventually become king. Following this line of thought, the writer of 2 Kings chose to identify him as Tirhakah, King of Egypt much like a modern historian might say ‘President Bush went to college at Yale’ even though he was not president while in college (159-60). Nevertheless, all these explanations only permit an unlikely possibility of Tirhakah involved in an Egyptian strike, and they still leave a difficult situation that needs a simpler explanation (Bright 300).

Back to Top