The Words of Ahikar is the oldest surviving Israelite story, with known copies in Aramaic dating back to the 5th-century BC. As it has been translated into many languages over the past two and a half millennia, it now has several names and translations, including the Words of Ahiqar, the Story of Ahikar, and various variations of the name, including Achiacharos, from the Greek translation, Ảḥyqr from the Aramaic translation, Akyrios from the Old Slavonic translation, Ḥayqār from the Arabic translation, and Xikar from the Armenian translation. This translation uses the most common English variation of Ahikar, which is based on a transliteration of the oldest surviving Aramaic version of the name. The oldest fragments of this book found to date, were discovered in Elephantine, Egypt, and date to the 5th-century BC, making it a couple of centuries older than the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

While the story is set during the Assyrian Captivity of the Samaritans during the 7th century BC, it is generally accepted by scholars that the book was written in its current form in the 6th century BC, during the Babylonian Captivity of the Judahites. The primary reason for this dating is the repeated referenced to Bôlả, which is generally accepted as a reference to the Neo-Babylonian god of the 6th century BC named Belu, more commonly called Bel in English based on his appearance in the Septuagint's Book of Daniel, where he was called Bel (Βῆλ). This book also repeatedly refers to the Highest God, El Elyon, the ancient Canaanite and Israelite god from the Torah, however, does not mention Yahw, and therefore does not appear to have been written by a Judahite. As Tobit claimed to be Ahikar's uncle, and a Naphtalite captive in Assyria, this indicates that Ahikar was viewed as being a Samaritan, and not a Judahite at the time that Tobit was written.

The Words of Ahikar is not considered to be a true historical story by any modern academics or theologians. It is universally considered to be a work of fiction for several reasons, not the least of which are the boys flying on the back of trained eagles. Another reason that the work is not considered historical, is that the Assyrian kings are not mentioned in the correct order, as King Esarhaddon was actually Sennacherib's son, not his father. Both Kings are well known from the historical records of the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Egyptians. Moreover, Esarhaddon and his son Ashurbanipal liberated Egypt from Kushite rule, and established the vassal state of Egypt which ultimately became independent again when the Neo-Assyrian Empire fell. During the time of Sennacherib, Egypt was still under the control of Kush, and there was no Pharaoh for Ahikar to visit.