Places in the Bible Today:
Ai 1
Data
| Translated Names | Ai, Hai |
|---|---|
| Type | settlement |
| Geo Data |
KML (for Google Earth) GeoJSON (for GIS applications) |
5 Possible Identifications
- Et Tell (modern): 55% confidence
- Khirbet el Maqatir (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Khirbet Nisieh (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Khirbet Haiyan (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Khirbet Ibn Baraq (modern): less than 10% confidence
Verses (32)
- Gen-Deut (2)
- Gen 12:8, 13:3
- Josh-Ruth (30)
- Josh 7:2, 7:3, 7:4, 7:5, 8:1, 8:2, 8:3, 8:5, 8:9, 8:10, 8:11, 8:12, 8:14, 8:16, 8:17, 8:18, 8:20, 8:21, 8:22, 8:23, 8:24, 8:25, 8:26, 8:28, 8:29, 9:1, 9:3, 10:1, 10:2, 12:9
Linked Data Identifiers
| Source | Identifier |
|---|---|
| Biblemapper.com | 114, 115 |
| Logos Factbook | Ai of Joshua |
| OpenBible.info (2007) | Ai 1 |
| OpenBible.info | a7e13e1 (Ai 1) |
| TIPNR | Ai@Gen.12.8 |
| UBS Names Database | ot ID_2194 |
| Wikidata | Q403166 |
Sources
- Aharoni, Land of the Bible (1979): page 430
- Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (1992): Ai (place)
- Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land (1990): Ai; Hai
- Baker Encyclopedia of Bible Places (1995)
- Baker Illustrated Bible Dictionary (2013): Ai
- Baly, Atlas of the Biblical World (1971): Ai
- Carta Bible Atlas, 5th Edition (2011)
- Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000): Ai
- ESV Bible Atlas (2010)
- Expositor’s Bible Commentary (1984): Josh introduction: Archaeology
- Grollenberg, Atlas of the Bible (1957): Ai
- Hammond Atlas of the Bible Lands (2007): Ai
- HarperCollins Bible Dictionary (2011): Ai
- HarperCollins Concise Atlas of the Bible (1991)
- Hess, Joshua (1996): 7:2
- Holman Illustrated Guide to Bible Geography (2020): page 127
- Howard, Joshua (1998): 6:27 Excursus: Jericho and Ai
- International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1979): Ai
- IVP Old Testament Bible Background Commentary (2000): Josh 7:2
- Lexham Bible Dictionary (2016): Ai of Joshua
- Matthews, Genesis (1996, 2005): 12:8-9
- McKinny, Historical Geography of the Administrative Division of Judah (2014): pages 73, 325
- Monson, Regions on the Run (2009): map 7
- Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary (2014): Ai
- New Bible Atlas (1985): Ai
- New Bible Dictionary (1996): Ai
- New Interpreter’s Bible Dictionary (2009)
- New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (1988)
- Oxford Bible Atlas, Fourth Edition (2007)
- Reader’s Digest Atlas of the Bible (1981): Ai
- Rogerson, New Atlas of the Bible (1985): page 153
- Schlegel, Satellite Bible Atlas (2016): page 38
- Tübingen Bible Atlas (2001): ha-Ai
- Waltke and Fredricks, Genesis (2001): 12:8
- Wenham, Genesis (1987, 1994): 12:8
- Westminster Historical Atlas to the Bible (1956): Ai
- Woudstra, Joshua (1981): 7:2-5
- Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia (1975): Ai
- Zondervan Atlas of the Bible (2010)
- Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible (2010)
- Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (2009): Gen 12:8
- Zondervan Pictorial Bible Atlas (1972): page 74
Confidence Trends over Time
This chart indicates how confidence in the identifications is changing over time. Each dot (connected by a dotted line) reflects the confidence of an identification over the preceding ten years (e.g., the 2009 dot reflects scholarship from 2000 to 2009), and the corresponding solid line reflects a best-fit line for the identification. Confidences that cluster near or below 0% indicate low confidence. Because of the small dataset, it's best to use this chart for general trends; if one identification is trending much higher than the others (in this case, Et Tell), then you can probably have higher confidence in the identification. This chart only reflects the sources I consulted (listed above), not an exhaustive review of the literature.
Places with Similar Names
Thumbnail Image Credits
Bukvoed, Contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data 2019, Biegel, Dvirraz
About
This page attempts to identify all the possible locations where this biblical place could be. The confidence levels add up to less than 100%, indicating that the modern location is uncertain. It's best to think about the confidences in relative rather than absolute terms. Often they reflect different schools of thought, each confident in their identifications.