Places in the Bible Today:
Amam
Data
| Translated Name | Amam |
|---|---|
| Type | settlement |
| Geo Data |
KML (for Google Earth) GeoJSON (for GIS applications) |
3 Possible Identifications
- Be’er Nevatim (modern): 40% confidence
- Nahal Yattir 205 (modern): less than 10% confidence
- Bir el Esani (modern): less than 10% confidence
Verses (1)
Josh 15:26
Linked Data Identifiers
| Source | Identifier |
|---|---|
| Logos Factbook | Amam |
| OpenBible.info (2007) | Amam |
| OpenBible.info | a3e2b20 (Amam) |
| TIPNR | Amam@Jos.15.26 |
| UBS Names Database | ot ID_289 |
| Wikipedia | List of minor biblical places#Amam (anchor) |
Sources
- Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (1992): Amam (place)
- Hess, Joshua (1996): table 11
- International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1979): Amam
- IVP Old Testament Bible Background Commentary (2000): Josh 15:21-32
- McKinny, Historical Geography of the Administrative Division of Judah (2014): page 128
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, for example, 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
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.