10:1–5 Gibeon is not the only neighbor to react to the destruction of Ai. But the peace with Gibeon makes an even greater impact on Adoni-zedek, king of Jerusalem. Both his name and his city deserve notice. As for the city, this is the first mention of Jerusalem in the Bible. It is striking that the city that will be the place at which the Lord will choose “put his name and make his habitation” (Deut. 12:5) is, at the moment of its first appearance in the biblical story, hostile to the invading Israelites and their God. The place will be transformed as well as its people. The king’s name, meaning “the Lord of righteousness” or “my Lord is righteous,” is very close to the name of the first king engaged in battle by Israel in the book of Judges, Adoni-bezek, who is also associated with Jerusalem (Judg. 1:5–7).

Gibeon’s initiative in seeking peace with Israel confronts Adoni-zedek with a dilemma. The defeat of Jericho and Ai would be cause enough for alarm. But, as Joshua 10:2 clarifies, the status and prowess of Gibeon were on a different scale than Ai’s—and yet they sought terms from Israel rather than confronting them in battle. It is this, rather than the military conquests, that makes Adoni-zedek “fear greatly.” What is he to do? Rather than capitulate, he outnumbers the Gibeonite tetrapolis (cf. 9:17) and gathers a coalition of five cities: Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon. They fan out to the southwest of Jerusalem,86 thus placing themselves even farther from Gibeon, which lies just less than 6 miles (9.7 km) to the north of Jerusalem. It is telling that the circumstance he announces in his summons to the four kings is that Gibeon has “made peace” and is the target of their aggression, rather than pointing to the defeat of Ai or Jericho and coming against Joshua and Israel. The coalition is formed and lays siege to Gibeon, chief city of the tetrapolis.

10:6–8 The summons issued by Adoni-zedek in verses 3–4 finds a close counterpart in the Gibeonite response of verse 6. As the king of Jerusalem “sent” to his allies (v. 3), so too do the Gibeonites to theirs. The terms of their requests are shifted: whereas Adoni-zedek’s plea is to “come up . . . help . . . and let us strike” (v. 4), the Gibeonite request to Joshua is for Israel to “come up to us quickly and save us and help us.” The demands of the covenant agreement mean not only Israel’s preservation of Gibeon but also the latter’s salvation.

Joshua’s response is immediate, marching the army of Israel to Gibeon (v. 7). Given the preceding history, one might wonder whether some attempt to seek God’s guidance would have been prudent; the absence of such an inclination has proved damaging to Israel’s standing before the Lord previously. However, the reassurance comes in verse 8, in forthright terms. The formula “Not a man of them shall stand . . .” is a distinctive divine assurance in the book of Joshua, occurring again at 21:44 as confirmation of the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel and at 23:9 as Joshua himself reflects on God’s faithfulness.87 On this occasion, then, Joshua has discerned rightly: fidelity to the covenant with Gibeon requires this response on Israel’s part. God’s reassurance of victory, however, is not so much corroboration of good judgment as confirmation that Israel’s progress into the Promised Land is to move forward.

10:9–11 Israel’s rapid mobilization takes place at night. Its remarkable nocturnal march from Gilgal provides an element of surprise as it encounters the coalition forces the next morning at Gibeon. Israel does not act alone, however. Just as Joshua’s initiative of verse 7 meets with divine partnership in verse 8, so again the Israelite action of verse 9 as they engage in combat with the enemies of the Gibeonites—now also their enemies—is matched by the intervention of the divine warrior, who makes here the first of three actions on Israel’s behalf in this battle. The Lord brings panic into the ranks of the coalition at the same time Israel “struck them with a great blow” (v. 10). The very thing that Adoni-zedek sought to inflict on Gibeon with the help of his allies (v. 4) Israel inflicts on the coalition as they come to the aid of their covenant partner.

The coalition warriors flee, with Israel in pursuit (vv. 10–11). Their route takes them to the north of the Gibeonite tetrapolis before veering south in the general direction of Jarmuth. And just as at the battle’s inception, so again during the flight and pursuit are the actions of Israel supported by the intervention of the divine warrior. While Israelite swords work, so too does divine hail, first described as “large stones.” Hail (Hb. barad) stirs memory of the seventh plague God brought against Egypt (Ex. 9:13–35); both the hail in Egypt and the hail in this battle are destructive (cf. Ex. 9:19, 25) and selective (Ex. 9:26), striking down the Egyptians and Canaanites but in neither case touching the Israelites. More widely, hail is very much part of the divine arsenal, celebrated as such in Psalm 18:13–14, announced as such in the theophany of Job 38:22–23, and wielded by the Lord also against Assyria in Isaiah 30:30–31. While the origins of the panicked confusion the Lord threw on the fleeing coalition might have been difficult to discern, the torrent of destructive hail is much more clearly the action of the divine warrior.

10:12–14 The third of the Lord’s interventions in this battle is by far the most dramatic, and the most famous. We have seen at least one celestial phenomenon of note in this episode, the cataclysmic fall of hail; there might have been another, if the light of the moon assisted Israel’s nighttime march from Gilgal to Gibeon. The climax of dramatic celestial signs comes in these verses, as the “sun stood still, and the moon stopped” (Josh. 10:13) in response to Joshua’s cry (v. 12). The preservation of the prayer and reply in poetry, along with the reference to the “Book of Jashar” (known otherwise only from a similar remark introducing David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan; 2 Sam. 1:18), further evokes a sense of mystery that is already roused by the astonishing and awesome event itself. Attempts to provide some explanation for the miracle either look to natural phenomena that might explain the account, such as an eclipse, or appeal to parallels from ancient Near Eastern literature that provide the event some religious or cultural context.88 All such explanations evacuate the event of its primary meaning. Calvin remarked that “the question of how the sun stood still in Gibeon is no less unseasonably raised by some than unskillfully explained by others.” The editor of the nineteenth-century English edition of Calvin astutely remarks, “The rebuke here administered to those who attempt to explain the miracle applies with double force to those who attempt to explain it away.”89 The fundamental point to be made to any who seeks to rationalize the miracle is that, in any case, explanation of mechanism is not the same as explanation of meaning. For example, explaining the biological processes involved in a mother’s giving birth does not explain the meaning of a human life.

The point concerning Gibeon is made with some force by the narrator in Joshua 10:14 regarding the incomparability of this day: “for the Lord fought for Israel.” More helpful, then, is the parallel in the prayer of Habakkuk 3:11, which describes how “the sun and moon stood still in their place at the light of your arrows as they sped.” There, like here, the heavenly bodies are subject to the one who made them; God’s own “weapons” take precedence.90 It has further been observed that this intervention by God—indeed, all three of them (the confusion, the hail, and the longest day)—were not strictly required in military terms. Israel’s army is well on its way to victory.91 The narrator’s brief but pointed summary, repeated again at Joshua 10:42, when all the events set in train by the Gibeonite covenant have been concluded, remains the essential one: the Lord fights for Israel.

10:15 Gilgal remains Israel’s base of operations, in spite of the distant pursuit of the Jerusalem coalition. Although Gibeon has been secured, their enemies remain at large. For the moment, however, Israel rests. This may seem an unusual pause. As action resumes in the succeeding verses, Israel is back in the environs north of Jarmuth, where the dramatic events in the valley of Aijalon took place. Whether we are dealing with a narrative like that of chapters 3–4, which does not unfold in strict chronological order, or whether this conveys the movements of Israel in the campaign, is difficult to determine.

10:16–21 Attention reverts to the five kings of the coalition who seek to evade capture by hiding themselves in “the cave at Makkedah.” It may be that this is a known site (“the cave”), as the question arises why the kings should shelter here rather than in their own fortified cities. The simplest explanation is that they are on the run from Israel; as verse 19 suggests, the battle persists in the field. Joshua’s strategy is to deal with the enemy while it is exposed and not protected by its fortifications, much as he learned to do in the successful battle against Ai (ch. 8). Makkedah is about halfway between Lachish and Hebron, just north of Eglon (if it is to be identified with Tel ʾEton).

Before attending to the kings, however, Israel must bring its action against the coalition armies to a conclusion (10:20). The Hebrew is curiously emphatic in describing the finality of Israel’s defeat of the coalition. The “great blow” (cf. v. 10) Israel inflicts is framed by two terms conveying completion and finishing, the latter in a phrase that often implies something done to death (Hb. ʿad-tumam). But it is curious in the sense that some refugees manage to escape back to their fortified cities. That some element of life is left is clear also from the later story of Caleb, which involves taking the city of Hebron (14:13–15; cf. also Debir, 10:38–39; 15:15).

Earlier in the Joshua narrative, especially around the crossing of the Jordan, we saw numerous parallels that aligned the entry of Israel into the Promised Land with the departure of the exodus generation from Egypt under Moses. One of the last of these in Joshua is encountered here in the defeat of the Jerusalem coalition. As the defeat of their armies is completed, the narrator records: “Not a man moved his tongue against any of the people of Israel” (Josh. 10:21). This is an evocative description of the regard in which the populace holds Israel. More than that, the Hebrew idiom “cut [the] tongue” (harats + lashon) means “snarl” (cf. NJPS). It occurs only one other time in the Hebrew Bible. In Exodus 11:7 Moses is instructing the people concerning the final plague of death to the firstborn of Egypt and the lamentation it will arouse: “Not a dog shall growl against any of the people of Israel, either man or beast, that you may know that the Lord makes a distinction between Egypt and Israel.” So here in Joshua, not a man “growls” against Israel. The lesson that Moses applied in Egypt should also be understood here in the conquest context. The Lord is making a distinction between the Amorite kings, and their armies, and Israel. The scenes about to unfold are among the bloodiest of the book. And yet, as this distinction is drawn, the fact that this engagement has been provoked by the coalition on account of Gibeon’s peace with Israel implies that it need not have been so.

10:22–27 As the fate of the kings draws near, again they are patiently enumerated. A somewhat strange ceremony now unfolds, as Joshua instructs the “chiefs of the men of war” (Josh. 10:24) to place their feet on the necks of the five kings. This sort of ritual humiliation finds parallels in the ancient Near East. Of several examples of victorious kings’ treading down their vanquished foes, perhaps the closest parallel to this moment is found in an inscription of Tukulti-Ninurta I (c. 1244–1208), who declared regarding Kashtiliash IV (c. 1242–1235) of Babylon: “I placed my feet upon his lordly neck as a footstool.”92 God is speaking to and through Joshua and to the Israelites in a language that Bronze Age people would understand.

In these circumstances Joshua’s further encouragement to his chiefs to “not be afraid or dismayed; be strong and courageous” (v. 25) may seem obvious enough. Although the positive and negative pairs of these verbs appear often enough, only in Chronicles is the combination of all four found again. On two occasions these are the terms in which David encourages Solomon to be faithful in constructing the temple and arranging its worship (1 Chron. 22:13; 28:20). Likewise, Hezekiah rallies the people of Jerusalem as preparations are made to face the Assyrians by declaring, “There are more with us than with him. With him is an arm of flesh, but with us is the Lord our God, to help us and to fight our battles” (2 Chron. 32:7–8). There is an element here of summons to simple, physical courage in the face of temptation to be cowed or craven. But more than that, and perhaps predominantly, is a further spiritual dimension to be obedient to the claims of service owed to the sovereign Lord, who fights with and for his people.

The execution of the five kings, their exposure, and the final disposition of the corpses follows the pattern of the treatment of the king of Ai (Josh. 10:26–27; cf. 8:29), and, as on that occasion, the strictures of Deuteronomy 21:22–23 are followed. The close alignment of this sequence with the Deuteronomic law implies the fulfillment of the conditions for that law to be enacted—a sin (“crime”) “punishable by death” (Deut. 21:22)—and further brings a recognition of the judgment of that sin on the victim: “for a hanged man is cursed by God” (Deut. 21:23; cf. Num. 25:4). As in the other cases of stone memorials in Joshua, the site serves to maintain the community’s memory.

10:28 The city of Makkedah brackets this subsection, which began at Joshua 10:16. Its king is likewise executed and the city subject to kherem, with Jericho cited as the precedent. Although kherem has not been prominent in the immediately preceding chapters, it now returns to the forefront of the narrator’s account. As such, this verse also serves as a transition to the sequence that follows in verses 29–39 (cf. comment there), each successive conquest resonating with this account of Makkedah.