10:29–39 The southern campaign takes place as a consequence of the battle in defense of Gibeon and the subsequent pursuit of the coalition army toward its regional heartland. Libnah is only about 8 miles (12.9 km) north-northwest of Makkedah; Lachish is only 6 miles (9.7 km) south-southeast of Libnah. This is the point at which the force from Gezer joins the fray. It is difficult to know why, as the report (v. 33) is very sparse. Gezer is over 20 miles (32 km) to the north of Lachish. Eglon, Hebron, and Debir are all farther to the east and south.

Clearly much is shared between the five (six, if Makkedah is included) reports of city destruction, although no one report includes all the elements shared between them. Of the thirteen features, six are common to each report: (1) the formulaic that “Joshua and all Israel with him passed on from . . . ,” which sets the trajectory to the next city; (2) “fought against” (Makkedah is not part of this sequence); (3) the two place names (PN) as links in the chain, except Makkedah and Debir (first and last), where the name of that city alone appears; (4) that they were “struck . . . with the . . . sword”; (5) that this fate came to “every person in it”; and (6) a back reference to previous action in the phrase “as he had done . . .” A seventh feature, the notice that “he left none remaining,” is missing only from the Eglon report. In spite of the irregularities, a significant amount of overlap remains.

One of the striking aspects of these connected accounts is the way in which insistent and inclusive language of total extermination only partially intersects with the language of kherem. The immediate import of this is not to distinguish Libnah and Lachish as in some way not being subject to kherem but rather to observe that in each case the total annihilation called for in Deuteronomy 7 has been inflicted by Israel under Joshua’s leadership. From the perspective of Deuteronomy, this bespeaks the obedience of Israel to the terms in which God set out for their inheritance of the Promised Land. Subtler is the observation that a number of these cities will be encountered again in the next part of the book or in Judges. The observation has been made that “the Joshua narrative elsewhere describes how there were quite a few local inhabitants left; see e.g. 11:22; 13:1–7; 15:63.”94 While registering this datum does not soften the rhetoric of destruction in this passage, it nonetheless alerts modern readers to the presence of some hyperbole in the account.

Certain of the infrequent features remain noteworthy. Of only two cities, Libnah and Lachish, do we read that “the Lord gave it . . . into the hand of Israel” (Josh. 10:30, 32). Since the overarching theological import of the narrative is that “the Lord fought for Israel” (vv. 14, 42), perhaps persistent reiteration is unneeded in the individual reports of the cities conquered—but this only makes the cases of Libnah and Lachish a little more odd: why these two? We cannot say with certainty. It is noteworthy, though, that this mention comes in the first two cities beyond Makkedah. If it is right to discern the gradual withdrawal of the Lord from overt involvement in battle, then the training has its intended effect, as the remaining cities are likewise captured by Israel. Another feature occurs only twice: a “siege” is employed in the warfare against the cities of Lachish and Eglon. The impression left by the sequence of reports is of a very rapid conquest, carrying on the momentum of the preceding section’s narrative of the pursuit of the coalition army. Pausing for siege warfare would seem like an impediment to the flow, except for the notices in only these two cases of how long the engagement lasts: Lachish is captured on day two of the siege (v. 32) and Eglon apparently on the first day (v. 35). These are very short sieges!

The oddity of Gezer’s involvement (v. 33) was noted above. It is also significant that the city itself is not here engaged or overthrown. It was well outside the line of march of the Israelite army, at least at this time. Although Gezer is located in the northern Shephelah, and thus part of what might be thought of as the territory of Judah, it persists under Canaanite control (cf. Judg. 1:29) at least until the time of Solomon (1 Kings 9:16).

10:40–43 The final summary emphasizes the rapid success of Israel under Joshua (Josh 10:42) and sketches the boundaries of the territory represented by these conquests: basically, from the line of Gibeon south to northern reaches of the Sinai (Kadesh-barnea) and east-west from the coastal plain to Israel’s base at Gilgal. This is an extensive region, suggesting much greater reach than would be accounted for by the conquered cities and their hinterland alone. Beside this geographical attention, we also find a theological assessment. The conjunction of the application of kherem and obedience to the word of the Lord is now made explicit (v. 40). Israel’s obedience meets with covenant blessing (cf. Lev. 26:7–8), as the notice first encountered at Joshua 10:14, (“the Lord fought for Israel”) is again repeated (v. 42). Even if the Lord is receding from prominence in terms of narrative attention, it is clear that the actions of Israel undertaken obediently find a counterpart in the empowering action of the divine warrior.