01_Dubovský_321_346 28/10/14 10:32 Pagina 331 WHY DID THE NORTHERN KINGDOM FALL? 331 In conclusion I pointed out another element leading to the dis- ruption of the Northern kingdom ― its gradual deterioration. There was not only one rebellion, but the entire kingdom was caught up in conspiracies and revolts. The intrigues and murders did not spare the king even in the safest place of his kingdom ― the keep of the royal palace. Moreover, the corruption of the Northern Kingdom reached such a level that even the king’s most trusted people turned out to be murderers. I also argued that by prolonging narration time the final redactors underlined the fact that the uprisings had a ten- dency to increase. Finally by noting the accumulating disastrous events in Pekah’s reign, the reader can observe that while the pre- vious kings had to cope only with one disaster, Pekah had to handle three disasters. This gradual deterioration of the kingdom was an- other reason that, according to my analysis of 2 Kings 15, ulti- mately decimated the entire kingdom. III. Rivalry between the tribes and cities The above analyses pointed out that the main reasons for the col- lapse of the Northern Kingdom were its increasing instability and the frequent coups d’état. In this section I study some seemingly redun- dant details that can illuminate the underlying tensions which could have also contributed to the dismantlement of the Northern Kingdom. The first detail regards Shallum ― vbey-!B, ~Luv; (2 Kgs 15,10.13). J. Gray suggested taking the term Jabesh as a geographical name (Jabesh-Gilead) 22. If this proposal is accepted, then the conspiracy was based in Transjordania, and Jabesh would be identical with Eli- jah’s place. While Gray’s suggestion remains only a helpful hy- pothesis, verse 15,25 unquestionably attributes an important role in the uprisings to Transjordanian tribes stating that Pekah de- throned Pekahiah with the help of 50 men from Gilead. T. Ishida showed that the rivalry between the Gileadites and the tribes settled west of the Jordan was an important factor in the struggles for the throne in the last decades of the Northern Kingdom 23. Thus, this seemingly redundant detail indicates that one of the reasons for the 22 J. GRAY, I & II Kings. A Commentary (London 1970) 621. 23 T. ISHIDA, The Royal Dynasties in Ancient Israel. A Study on the Forma- tion and Development of Royal-dynastic Ideology (BZAW 142; Berlin 1977).