Places in the Bible Today:
Makkedah
Data
| Translated Name | Makkedah |
|---|---|
| Type | settlement |
| Geo Data |
KML (for Google Earth) GeoJSON (for GIS applications) |
6 Possible Identifications
- Khirbet el Qom (modern): 45% confidence
- Khirbet Beit Maqdum (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Tell Beit Mirsim (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Tel Goded (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Khirbet Kheishum (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Tell Bornat (modern): less than 10% confidence
Verses (8)
Josh 10:10, 10:16, 10:17, 10:21, 10:28, 10:29, 12:16, 15:41
Linked Data Identifiers
| Source | Identifier |
|---|---|
| Biblemapper.com | 646 |
| Logos Factbook | Makkedah |
| OpenBible.info (2007) | Makkedah |
| OpenBible.info | abf8e4e (Makkedah) |
| TIPNR | Makkedah@Jos.10.10 |
| UBS Names Database | ot ID_1832 |
| Wikipedia | Makkedah (redirect) |
Sources
- Baly, Atlas of the Biblical World (1971): Makkedah
- Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000): Makkedah
- ESV Bible Atlas (2010)
- Grollenberg, Atlas of the Bible (1957): Makkedah
- Hammond Atlas of the Bible Lands (2007): Makkedah
- Hess, Joshua (1996): table 11
- Holman Illustrated Guide to Bible Geography (2020): page 131
- IVP Atlas of Bible History (2006): Makkedah
- IVP Old Testament Bible Background Commentary (2000): Josh 10:10
- McKinny, Historical Geography of the Administrative Division of Judah (2014): pages 203, 204
- Monson, Regions on the Run (2009): map 6
- New Bible Dictionary (1996): Makkedah
- Schlegel, Satellite Bible Atlas (2016): page 40
- Tyndale Bible Dictionary (2001): Makkedah
- Tübingen Bible Atlas (2001): Makeda
- Woudstra, Joshua (1981): 15:41
- Zondervan Atlas of the Bible (2010)
- Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible (2010)
- Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (2009): Josh 10:10; Mic 1:11-12
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, Khirbet el Qom), 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.
Thumbnail Image Credits
Contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data 2019, Hanay, Deror avi, Joeuziel
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.