In 2 Chronicles 25:23–24, are there external historical sources that corroborate King Joash of Israel’s conquest, including breaching Jerusalem’s wall and taking treasure from the temple and palace?

Passage and Biblical Context

2 Chronicles 25:23–24 records:

“Then Joash king of Israel captured Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Joash the son of Jehoahaz, at Beth-shemesh. Then Joash brought him to Jerusalem and broke down the wall of Jerusalem from the Ephraim Gate to the Corner Gate, a section of four hundred cubits. He took all the gold and silver and all the articles found in the house of God with Obed-edom and the treasuries of the royal palace, as well as some hostages. Then he returned to Samaria.”

This passage describes the conflict between Amaziah of Judah and Joash (often referred to as Jehoash) of Israel, culminating in Joash’s victory and the partial destruction of Jerusalem’s wall. The text also mentions Joash seizing treasures from both the temple and the royal palace.

Historical Setting of the Event

The setting occurs in the ninth century BC. During this era, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah often experienced hostilities. Joash of Israel's confrontation with Amaziah of Judah aligns with a broader pattern of inter-kingdom warfare described elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures (e.g., 2 Kings 14:8–14). The biblical account situates this clash around key fortifications such as Jerusalem’s wall and references the theological significance of the sacred items taken from the temple.

Josephus’s Account in Antiquities

Although Josephus wrote in the first century AD and often relied on the Hebrew Scriptures themselves, his work remains a valuable historical commentary from the ancient world. In Antiquities of the Jews (Book 9, Chapter 9), he summarizes these same events, reiterating how Joash defeated Amaziah, captured him at Beth-shemesh, and plundered Jerusalem. While Josephus is not an external pagan or non-biblical contemporary source, his first-century retelling affirms the biblical narrative as it was understood within early Jewish tradition.

Archaeological and Historical Corroboration

1. Lack of a Direct Inscription

No specific extant Assyrian, Babylonian, or other contemporaneous inscriptions explicitly detail Joash of Israel’s incursion into Judah. This is not unusual, as ancient near-eastern records often focus on larger regional powers (e.g., Assyria) rather than smaller-scale conflicts unless they served a major strategic purpose.

2. Fortifications and Destruction Layers

Archaeological investigations in Jerusalem dating to the ninth and eighth centuries BC reveal evidence of repairs and expansions of walls. Explorations of the City of David and portions around the known gates of Jerusalem show multiple layers of fortification and destruction consistent with various conflicts. Precise identification of each destruction layer can be challenging, and many events across centuries can overlap in the archaeological record. Nonetheless, the pattern of repeated rebuilding efforts is compatible with biblical narratives describing conflicts, including Joash’s attack.

3. Corroborating Political Climate

Documents and stelae from neighboring regions (such as the Moabite Stone, or Mesha Stele) show that major and minor kings in the Levant engaged in shifting alliances and raids. While these sources do not mention Joash by name, they verify the broader historical backdrop of small kingdoms fighting for dominance, which aligns with the reality that Israel and Judah were likewise in conflict.

4. General Epigraphic Evidence

Inscriptions like the Tel Dan Stele confirm the historical existence of Israelite kings and references to the “House of David,” supporting an overall chronological framework in which kings of Israel and Judah interacted in warfare. While not naming Joash’s specific action against Jerusalem, the presence of these inscriptions offers corroboration of the monarchic milieu described in Scripture.

Consistency with Scriptural Themes

The Scriptures describe a covenant context in which military victories or defeats often had theological significance. The catastrophic breach of Jerusalem’s wall recorded in 2 Chronicles 25 is presented as a direct consequence of Amaziah’s pride (cf. 2 Chronicles 25:19–21). Even though no extant non-biblical text independently recounts Joash’s conquest, the biblical narrative’s details regarding political intrigue, tribute, plunder, and hostage-taking fit well with standard practices in ancient near-eastern warfare.

Conclusion

An absence of direct external inscriptions mentioning Joash’s destruction of Jerusalem’s wall and seizure of temple and palace treasures does not negate the event. Josephus, writing in the first century AD, retells the incident consistent with 2 Chronicles, although based primarily on the Hebrew Scriptures themselves. Archaeological discoveries in Jerusalem show repeated destruction and reconstruction phases that align broadly with biblical descriptions of sieges and attacks.

Additionally, ancient near-eastern records such as the Tel Dan Stele confirm Israel’s monarchy and the House of David, providing indirect endorsement of the Scriptural timeline and consistent details regarding kings and city invasions. Taken together, the available evidence and the recognized reality of inter-kingdom conflict in the region uphold the plausibility and historical reliability of 2 Chronicles 25:23–24.