Zedekiah's Covenant (34:1-22) 549when Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, and all his army, and all the king-
doms of the earth under his dominion, and all the peoples were fighting against
Jerusalem and against all its cities. Giesebrecht wants to take this chronologi-
cal notice as secondary, even though he admits it is accurate. Holladay the
same. But textual support for its omission is lacking, and there is really no rea-
son why it should not be taken along with other documentary notices as be-
longing to the original narrative. A siege of Jerusalem is in progress, which
according to the higher chronology, began in Tebet (January) 588 B.C. (see
Note for 39:1). The question is whether the event reported here occurred be-
fore or after the Egyptian advance (37:5), which led to a lifting of the siege and
a Babylonian withdrawal (dated by Bright to the summer of 588 B.c.). Zede-
kiah's first embassy to Jeremiah was at the beginning of the siege, before the
Egyptian advance (21:1-7). His second was after the Babylonian withdrawal, at
which time he was moving freely about the city (37:3-5). The report following
(34:8-22), about the release of the Hebrew slaves and their reclamation, is after
the Egyptian threat failed to materialize and the Babylonians resumed their
siege that would bring about a final surrender. The event reported here may
then have taken place before the reclamation, if, as some commentators main-
tain, Jeremiah's visit to Zedekiah was while he was still moving freely in the
city. But he may not have been. It is possible that he could have gone to see
the king from his place of confinement in the court of the guard, which was in
the palace precinct. The word given here to the king bears its closest resem-
blance to the word given in 32:3b-5, which was when Jeremiah was confined
to the court of the guard (32:2). So, while the present event cannot be dated
with certainty, indications are that it (together with the event th;:it follows, vv 8-
22) belongs to the final stage of the siege, when the situation for Zedekiah and
the nation had become desperate.
and all the kingdoms of the earth under his dominion, and all the peoples. The
LXX has a reduced reading, eliminating at least "and all the peoples." GL, S, T,
and Vg support MT It sounds as though a coalition of vassal states is joining
Nebuchadrezzar's army in the fight. Contingents from other nations did Neb-
uchadrezzar's bidding prior to his own arrival in Judah in 597 B.C. (2 Kgs 24:2).
Note also a plurality of anticipated attackers in 1: 15 and 25 :9. Vassal kings were
required to swear loyalty to their sovereigns, one of the clauses in the treaties
binding the two being that the vassal king would provide military assistance if
needed. A treaty between Hittite King Mursilis II and Duppi-Tessub of Amurru
(14th century B.c.) provides for military assistance from vassal kings in time of
war (ANET^3 204 ##9, 10; CS II 97 "Military Clauses"). Weinfeld (1976a) cites
other examples from the ancient world, one being a vassal treaty drawn up by
Esarhaddon, king of Assyria (680-669 B.C.), which contained a clause requir-
ing Median vassal kings to be loyal to Esarhaddon's designated successor,
Ashurbanipal. They must be prepared to fight and even die for him (lines 49-
50, 229-31; Wiseman 1958a: 31-34, 45-46; ANET^3 535-36). Military assis-
tance clauses existed also in Greek and Roman treaties and are common as
well in treaties of the modern world. In the present case, we must assume that