Jon Smyth
Location of Lachish?
Mon Apr 24, 2017 21:22
70.53.10.203

Thankyou for raising this issue.
I just recently bought David Ussishkin's, Biblical Lachish, 2014, so still working my way through the book.

Letter 4 has always troubled me. It only stands to reason that if "they" cannot see the fire signals of Lachish, they are not standing in Lachish. You don't need a PhD to figure that out.

Tell ed-Duweir cannot be Lachish, but also why does the letter say "we cannot see Azeqah"?
Could Azeqah normally be seen from their vantage point, but something has occurred to prevent Azeqah being visible or, do they mean they cannot see the fire signals of Azeqah either?
In other words, Azeqah has been taken.

It has been suggested that the vantage point for the writer of Letter IV was, Tel Mareshah.

Jon S.


Letter 4: "And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah."

So Lachish (Tell ed-Duweir) is not the real location of biblical Lachish. This letter from Tell ed-Duweir says the men were looking out for the fires of Lachish, which seems clearly to mean Lachish was elsewhere, and Azeqah was not visible from Tell ed-Duweir. Any other suggestions for what Tell ed-Duweir is that I am not aware of?

Regards Tory

  • Location of Lachish?Tory, Sun Apr 23 06:11
    Letter 4: "And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah." So Lachish (Tell... more
    • Location of Lachish? — Jon Smyth, Mon Apr 24 21:22
      • Re: Location of Lachish?Tory, Wed Apr 26 00:29
        Hi Jon Jer 34:7 clearly states that only Lachish, Azekah, and Jerusalem were the fenced cities that withstood the Neo-Babylonian invasion. So I'm not sure what is keeping scholars from putting the... more
Click here to receive daily updates