anointed ones of Jehovah, although the record does not specifically state that each individual king was literally anointed with oil when he ascended the throne. Literal anointing oil is recorded as being used when a new dynasty was established, when the throne was disputed in David’s old age, as well as in the days of Jehoash, and when an older son was passed over for a younger son at the time Jehoahaz was enthroned. (1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13; 1 Ki. 1:39; 2 Ki. 11:12; 23:30, 31, 34, 36) It seems likely, nevertheless, that such anointing was the regular practice.

The king of Judah was chief administrator of national affairs, as a shepherd of the people. (Ps. 78:70-72) He generally took the lead in battle. (1 Sam. 8:20; 2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Ki. 22:29-33) He also acted as the higher court in the judiciary, except that the high priest would consult Jehovah for decisions on some matters of state and on certain matters in which the decision was very difficult or evidence at the mouth of witnesses was insufficient.—1 Ki. 3:16-28.

Kingly restraints

The restraints placed upon the king in the exercise of his authority were his own fear of God, the law of God, which he was bound to obey, and the persuasive influence of the prophets and the priests as well as the advisory counsel of the older men. He was required to write for himself a copy of the law and to read in it all the days of his life. (Deut. 17:18, 19) He was, as Jehovah’s special servant and representative, responsible to Jehovah. There were, sad to relate, many Judean kings who broke through these restraints and ruled despotically and wickedly.—1 Sam. 22:12, 13, 17-19; 1 Ki. 12:12-16; 2 Chron. 33:9.

Religious leader

Although the king was prevented by law from being a priest, he was supposed to be the chief non-priestly supporter of Jehovah’s worship. At times the king blessed the nation in Jehovah’s name and represented the people in prayer. (2 Sam. 6:18; 1 Ki. 8:14, 22, 54, 55) Besides being responsible for safeguarding the religious life of the people from idolatrous intrusions, he had the authority to dismiss an unfaithful high priest, as King Solomon did when High Priest Abiathar supported Adonijah’s seditious attempt to take the throne.—1 Ki. 1:7; 2:27.

Wives and property

The marriage and family customs of the Judean kings included the practice of having a plurality of wives and concubines, although the king was not to multiply wives to himself, a thing that Solomon did to his undoing. (Deut. 17:17; 1 Ki. 11:4) The concubines were considered to be crown property and were passed on to the successor to the throne along with the rights and property of the king. To marry or take possession of one of the deceased king’s concubines was equivalent to publishing a claim to the throne. Hence, for Absalom to have relations with the concubines of his father, King David, and for Adonijah to request as wife Abishag, David’s nurse and companion in his old age, was tantamount to a claim on the throne. (2 Sam. 16:21, 22; 1 Ki. 2:15-17, 22) These were treasonable acts.

Aside from the king’s personal estate, spoils of war and gifts (1 Chron. 18:10), other sources of revenue were developed, such as special taxation of the produce of the land for the royal table, tribute from subjugated kingdoms, toll on traveling merchants passing through the land, commercial ventures, such as the trading fleets of Solomon, and so forth.—1 Ki. 4:7, 27, 28; 9:26-28; 10:14, 15.

INSTABILITY OF NORTHERN KINGDOM

In the northern kingdom of Israel the principle of hereditary succession was observed except when it was interfered with by assassination or revolt. The practice of false religion kept the northern kingdom in a constant state of unrest that contributed to frequent assassinations of its kings and usurpation of the throne. Only two dynasties lasted more than two generations, those of Omri and Jehu. Not being under the Davidic kingdom covenant, none of the kings of the northern kingdom sat on the “throne of the kingship of Jehovah” as the anointed of Jehovah.

GENTILE KINGS AND SUBORDINATE KINGS

Babylonian kings were officially consecrated as monarchs over all the Babylonian Empire by grasping the hand of the golden image of Bel-Marduk. This was done by Cyrus the Great so as to gain control over the Babylonian Empire without having to conquer the entire empire by military action.

Other kings came to their thrones through appointment by a higher king, such as the one who conquered the territory. It was a frequent practice for kings to rule conquered domains through tributary native kings of lesser rank. By this process Herod the Great became a tributary king of Rome over Judea (Matt. 2:1), Herod Antipas became king over Galilee and Perea (Matt. 14:1), Herod Agrippa I over territory in the Palestinian area (Acts 12:1), and Aretas the king of the Nabataeans was confirmed by Rome in his tributary kingdom.—2 Cor. 11:32.

Non-Israelite kings were less accessible to their subjects than those that ruled God’s people. The Israelite kings evidently mingled quite freely with their people. The Gentile kings were often very remote. To enter the inner court of the Persian king without express permission automatically made that one liable to death unless the king gave his specific approval by extending his scepter, as was done with Esther. (Esther 4:11, 16) The Roman emperor, however, was available for audience on the appeal of a Roman citizen from a decision made by a lower judge, but only after a process of going through many lower officials.—Acts 25:11, 12; see BURIAL PLACES OF THE KINGS, OR, OF DAVID; CHRONOLOGY; JESUS CHRIST; KINGDOM.

KINGDOM

Basically, a royal government; also the territory and peoples under the rule of a king or, less frequently, a female monarch or queen. Often the kingship was hereditary. The sovereign ruler might bear other titles such as Pharaoh or Caesar.

Kingdoms of ancient times, as today, had various symbols of royalty. There was generally a capital city or place of the king’s residence, a royal court, a standing army (though perhaps quite reduced in size in times of peace). The word “kingdom,” as used in the Bible, does not of itself reveal anything definite as to the governmental structure, the territorial extent, or the authority of the monarch. Kingdoms ranged in size and influence from the mighty world powers such as Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome, on down to small city-kingdoms such as those in Canaan at the time of the Israelite conquest. (Josh. 12:7-24) The governmental structure also might vary considerably from kingdom to kingdom.

The first kingdom of human history, that of Nimrod, seems to have been initially a city-kingdom, later extending its realm to include other cities, its base remaining at Babel. (Gen. 10:9-11) Salem, over which King-Priest Melchizedek ruled in the first kingdom with divine approval, was also apparently a city-kingdom. (Gen. 14:18-20; compare Hebrews 7:1-17.) Larger than the city-kingdoms were those embracing an entire region, such as the kingdoms of Edom, Moab and Ammon. The great empires, ruling vast areas and having other kingdoms tributary to them, generally seem to have arisen or grown out of small city-states or tribal groups that eventually combined under a dominant leader. Such coalitions were sometimes of a temporary nature, often formed for war against a common foe. (Gen. 14:1-5; Josh. 9:1, 2; 10:5) Vassal kingdoms frequently enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy or self-rule, though subject to the will and demands of the suzerain power.—2 Ki. 17:3, 4; 2 Chron. 36:4, 10.

BROAD USAGE

In Scriptural use the term “kingdom” may refer to specific aspects of a royal government. It can refer to the realm or geographical area over which sovereignty is exercised. The royal realm thus included not merely the capital city but the entire domain, embracing any subordinate or tributary kingdoms.—1 Ki. 4:21; Esther 3:6, 8.

“Kingdom” may refer in a general way to any or all human governments, whether actually headed by a king or not.—Ezra 1:2; Matt. 4:8.

It may signify kingship, the royal office or position of the king (Luke 17:21), with its accompanying dignity, power and authority. (1 Chron. 11:10; 14:2; Luke 19:12, 15; Rev. 11:15; 17:12, 13, 17) Children of the king may be referred to as the “offspring of the kingdom.”—2 Ki. 11:1.

THE ISRAELITE KINGDOM

The Law covenant given through Moses to the nation of Israel made provision for a kingdom rule. (Deut. 17:14, 15) The individual heading the kingdom was empowered and given royal dignity, not for personal exaltation, but to serve for the honor of God and the good of his Israelite brothers. (Deut. 17:19, 20; compare 1 Samuel 15:17.) Nevertheless, when the Israelites in course of time requested a human king, the prophet Samuel warned of the demands such a ruler would make upon the people. (1 Sam. chap. 8) The kings of Israel seem to have been more approachable and more accessible to their subjects than were the monarchs of most ancient Oriental kingdoms.—2 Sam. 19:8; 1 Ki. 20:39; 1 Chron. 15:25-29.

Though the kingdom of Israel began with a king from the line of Benjamin, Judah thereafter became the royal tribe, in keeping with Jacob’s deathbed prophecy. (1 Sam. 10:20-25; Gen. 49:10) A royal dynasty was established in David’s line. (2 Sam. 2:4; 5:3, 4; 7:12, 13) When the kingdom was ‘ripped away’ from Solomon’s son Rehoboam, ten tribes formed a northern kingdom, while Jehovah God retained one tribe, Benjamin, to remain with Judah, “in order that David my servant may continue having a lamp always before me in Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen for myself to put my name there.” (1 Ki. 11:31, 35, 36; 12:18-24) Though the Judean kingdom fell to the Babylonians in 607 B.C.E., the legal right to rule eventually passed on to the rightful heir, the “son of David,” Jesus Christ. (Matt. 1:1-16; Luke 1:31, 32; compare Ezekiel 21:26, 27.) His kingdom was to be endless.—Isa. 9:6, 7; Luke 1:33.

A royal organization developed in Israel to administer the interests of the kingdom. It consisted of an inner circle of advisors and ministers of state (1 Ki. 4:1-6; 1 Chron. 27:32-34), as well as various governmental departments with their respective overseers to administer crown lands, supervise the economy and supply the needs of the royal court.—1 Ki. 4:7; 1 Chron. 27:25-31.

While the kings of Israel in the Davidic line could issue specific orders, the actual legislative power rested with God. (Deut. 4:1, 2; Isa. 33:22) In all things the king was responsible to the true Sovereign and Lord, Jehovah. Wrongdoing and waywardness on the part of the king would bring divine sanctions. (1 Sam. 13:13, 14; 15:20-24) Jehovah at times communicated with the king himself (1 Ki. 3:5; 11:11), at other times he gave him instructions and counsel or reproof through appointed prophets. (2 Sam. 7:4, 5; 12:1-14) The king could also draw upon the wise counsel of the body of older men. (1 Ki. 12:6, 7) The enforcement of instructions or reproof, however, rested, not with the prophets or older men, but with Jehovah.

When the king and the people faithfully adhered to the Law covenant given them by God, the nation of Israel enjoyed a degree of individual freedom, material prosperity and national harmony unparalleled by other kingdoms. (1 Ki. 4:20, 25) During the years of Solomon’s obedience to Jehovah, the Israelite kingdom was widely renowned and respected, having many tributary kingdoms and benefiting from the resources of many lands.—1 Ki. 4:21, 30, 34.

Jehovah God’s kingship, while visibly expressed for a time through the Israelite kingdom, is one of universal sovereignty. (1 Chron. 29:11, 12) Whether acknowledged by the peoples and kingdoms of mankind or not, his kingship is absolute and unalterable, and all the earth is part of his rightful domain. (Ps. 103:19; 145:11-13; Isa. 14:26, 27) By virtue of His creatorship, Jehovah exercises his sovereign will in heaven and in earth according to his own purposes, answerable to no one (Jer. 18:3-10; Dan. 4:25, 34, 35), yet always acting in harmony with his own righteous standards.—Mal. 3:6; Heb. 6:17, 18; Jas. 1:17; see KINGDOM OF GOD.

KINGDOM OF GOD

The expression and exercise of God’s universal sovereignty toward his creatures, or the means or instrumentality used by him for this purpose. (Ps. 103:19) The phrase is used particularly for the expression of God’s sovereignty through a royal administration headed by his Son, Christ Jesus.

The word rendered “kingdom” in the Christian Greek Scriptures is ba·si·leiʹa, meaning “a kingdom, realm, the region or country governed by a king; kingly power, authority, dominion, reign; royal dignity, the title and honour of king.” (The Analytical Greek Lexicon, p. 67) The phrase “the kingdom of God” is used frequently by Mark and Luke, and in Matthew’s account the parallel phrase “the kingdom of the heavens” appears some thirty times.—Compare Mark 10:23 and Luke 18:24 with Matthew 19:23, 24; see HEAVEN (Spiritual Heavens); KINGDOM.

The government of God is, in structure and function, a pure theocracy (from Greek the·osʹ, god, and kraʹtos, a rule), a rule by God. The term “theocracy” is attributed to Jewish historian Josephus of the first century C.E., who evidently coined it in his writing Against Apion (Book II, par. 17). Of the government established over Israel in Sinai, Josephus wrote: “Some legislators have permitted their governments to be under monarchies, others put them under oligarchies, and others under a republican form; but our legislator [referring to Moses] had no regard to any of these forms, but he ordained our government to be what, by a strained [coined] expression, may be termed a Theocracy [Gr., The·o·kra·tiʹan], by ascribing the authority and the power to God.” To be a pure theocracy, of course, the government could not be ordained by any human legislator, such as the man Moses, but must be ordained and established by God. The Scriptural record shows this was the case.

ORIGIN OF THE TERM

The term “king” (Heb., meʹlekh) evidently came into use in human language after the global flood. The first earthly kingdom was that of Nimrod “a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah.” (Gen. 10:8-12) Thereafter, during the period down to Abraham’s time, city-states and nations developed and human kings multiplied. With the exception of the kingdom of Melchizedek, king-priest of Salem (who served as a prophetic type of the Messiah [Gen. 14:17-20; Heb. 7:1-17]), none of these earthly kingdoms represented God’s rule or were established by him. Men also made kings of the false gods they worshiped, attributing to them the ability to grant power of rulership to humans. Jehovah’s application of the title “King [Meʹlekh]” to himself, as found in the post-Flood writings of the Hebrew Scriptures, therefore meant God’s making use of the title men had developed and employed. God’s use of the term showed that he, and not presumptuous human rulers or man-made gods, should be looked to and obeyed as “King.”—Jer. 10:10-12.

Jehovah had, of course, been Sovereign Ruler long before human kingdoms developed, in fact before humans existed. As the true God and as their Creator, he was respected and obeyed by angelic sons numbering into the millions. (Job 38:4-7; 2 Chron. 18:18; Ps. 103:20-22; Dan. 7:10) By whatever title, then, he was, from the beginning of creation, recognized as the One whose will was rightfully supreme.

GOD’S RULERSHIP IN EARLY HUMAN HISTORY

The first human creatures, Adam and Eve, likewise knew Jehovah as God the Creator of heaven and earth. They recognized his authority, his right to issue commands, to call upon them to perform certain duties or to refrain from certain acts, to assign land for residence and cultivation, as well as to delegate authority over others of his creatures. (Gen. 1:26-30; 2:15-17) Though Adam had the ability to coin words (Gen. 2:19, 20), there is no evidence that he developed the title “king [meʹlekh]” to apply it to his God and Creator, although he recognized Jehovah’s supreme authority.

As revealed in the initial chapters of Genesis, God’s exercise of his sovereignty toward man in Eden was benevolent and not unduly restrictive. The relationship between God and man called for obedience such as that a son renders to his father. (Compare Luke 3:38.) Man had no lengthy code of laws to fulfill (compare 1 Timothy 1:8-11); God’s requirements were simple and purposeful. Nor is there anything to indicate that Adam was made to feel inhibited by constant, critical supervision of his every action; rather, God’s communication with perfect man seems to have been periodic, according to need.—Gen. chaps. 1-3.

A new expression of God’s rulership purposed

The first human pair’s open violation of God’s command, instigated by one of God’s spirit sons, was actually rebellion against divine authority. (Gen. 3:17-19; see TREES.) The position taken by God’s spirit adversary (Heb., sa·tanʹ) constituted a challenge calling for a test, the issue being the rightfulness of Jehovah’s universal sovereignty. (See JEHOVAH [The supreme issue a moral one].) The earth, where the issue was raised, is fittingly the place where it will be settled.—Rev. 12:7-12.

At the time of pronouncing judgment upon the first rebels, Jehovah God spoke a prophecy, couched in symbolic phrase, setting forth his purpose to use an agency, a “seed,” to effect the ultimate crushing of the rebel forces. (Gen. 3:15) Thus, Jehovah’s rulership, the expression of his sovereignty, would take on a new aspect or expression in answer to the insurrection that had developed. The progressive revelation of the “sacred secrets of the kingdom” (Matt. 13:11) showed that this new aspect would involve the formation of a subsidiary government, a governing body headed by a deputy ruler. The realization of the promise of the “seed” is in the kingdom of Christ Jesus in union with his chosen associates. (Rev. 17:14; see JESUS CHRIST [His vital place in God’s purpose].) From the time of the Edenic promise forward the progressive development of God’s purpose to produce this kingdom “seed” becomes the theme of the Bible and the key to understanding Jehovah’s actions toward his servants and toward mankind in general.

God’s delegating vast authority and power to creatures (Matt. 28:18; Rev. 2:26, 27; 3:21) in this way is noteworthy inasmuch as the question of the integrity of all God’s creatures, that is, their wholehearted devotion to him and their loyalty to his headship, formed a vital part of the issue raised by God’s adversary. (See INTEGRITY [Involved in the supreme issue].) That God could confidently entrust any of his creatures with such remarkable authority and power would in itself be a splendid testimony to the moral strength of his rule, contributing to the vindication of Jehovah’s name and position and exposing the falsity of his adversary’s allegations.

Mankind’s need for divine government manifested

The conditions that developed from the time of the start of human rebellion until the time of the Flood clearly illustrated mankind’s need for divine headship. Human society soon had to contend with disunity, bodily assault and murder. (Gen. 4:2-9, 23, 24) To what extent the sinner Adam, during his 930 years of life, exercised patriarchal authority over his multiplying descendants is not revealed. But by the seventh generation shocking ungodliness evidently existed (Jude 14, 15) and by the time of Noah (born about 120 years after Adam’s death) conditions had deteriorated to the point that “the earth became filled with violence.” (Gen. 6:1-13) Contributing to this condition was the unauthorized interjection of spirit creatures into human society, contrary to God’s will and purpose.—Gen. 6:1-4; Jude 6; 2 Pet. 2:4, 5; see NEPHILIM.

Though earth had become a focus of rebellion, Jehovah did not relinquish his dominion over it. The global flood was evidence that God’s power and ability to enforce his will on earth, as in any part of the universe, continued. During the pre-Flood period he likewise demonstrated his willingness to guide and govern the actions of those individuals who sought him, such as Abel, Enoch and Noah. Noah’s case in particular illustrates God’s exercise of rulership toward a willing earthly subject, giving him commands and direction, protecting and blessing him and his family, as well as evidencing God’s control over the other earthly creation, animals and birds. (Gen. 6:9–7:16) Jehovah likewise made clear that he would not allow alienated human society to corrupt the earth endlessly; that he had not restricted himself as to executing his righteous judgment against wrongdoers when and as he saw fit. Additionally he demonstrated his sovereign ability to control earth’s atmosphere and created elements.—Gen. 6:3, 5-7; 7:17–8:22.

The early post-Flood society and its problems

Following the Flood, a patriarchal arrangement apparently was the basic structure of human society, providing a measure of stability and order. Mankind was to “fill the earth,” which called not merely for procreating but for the steady extension of the area of human habitation throughout the globe. (Gen. 9:1, 7) These factors, of themselves, would reasonably have had a limiting effect on any social problems, keeping them generally within the family circle, making unlikely the friction that frequently develops where density of population or crowded conditions exist. The unauthorized project at Babel, however, called for an opposite course, for a concentrating of people, avoiding being “scattered over all the surface of the earth.” (Gen. 11:1-4; see LANGUAGE [Multiplication of human languages].) Then, too, Nimrod departed from the patriarchal rule and set up the first “kingdom” (Heb., mam·la·khahʹ). A Cushite of the family line of Ham, he invaded Shemite territory, the land of Asshur (or Assyria), and built cities there as part of his realm.—Gen. 10:8-12.

God’s confusion of human language broke up the concentration of people on the plains of Shinar, but the pattern of rulership begun by Nimrod was generally followed in the lands to which the various families of mankind migrated. In the days of Abraham (c. 2018-1843 B.C.E.) kingdoms were active from Asian Mesopotamia on down to African Egypt, where the king was titled “Pharaoh” rather than Meʹlekh. But these kingships did not bring security. Kings were soon forming military alliances, waging far-ranging campaigns of aggression, plunder and kidnapping. (Gen. 14:1-12) In some cities strangers were subject to attack by homosexuals.—Gen. 19:4-9.

Thus, whereas men doubtless banded together in concentrated communities in search of security (compare