Adonizedek
People's Dictionary of the Bible [1]
Adonizedek ( A-Dô'Nî-Zç' Ăek or A-Dŏn-I-Zç'Dek ), Lord Of Justice. The Amorite king of Jerusalem who organized a league with four other Amorite princes against Joshua. These confederate kings having laid siege to Gibeon, Joshua marched to the relief of his new allies and put the besiegers to flight. The five kings took refuge in a cave at Makkedah, whence they were taken and slain, their bodies hung on trees, and then buried in the place of their concealment. Joshua 10:1-27.
Smith's Bible Dictionary [2]
Adonize'dek. (Lord Of Justice). The Amorite king of Jerusalem who organized a league with four other Amorite princes against Joshua. The confederate kings having laid siege to Gibeon, Joshua marched to the relief of his new allies and put the besiegers to flight. The five kings took refuge in a cave at Makkedah, whence they were taken and slain, their bodies hung on trees, and then buried in the place of their concealment. Joshua 10:1-27. (B.C. 1450).
American Tract Society Bible Dictionary [3]
A king of Jerusalem who made an alliance with four other kings against Joshua. A great battle was fought at Gibeon, where the Lord aided Israel by a terrific hailstorm, and by miraculously prolonging the day. The five kings were utterly routed, and hid themselves in a cave at Makkedah; but were taken by Joshua, and put to death, Joshua 10:1-43 .
Hawker's Poor Man's Concordance And Dictionary [4]
The lord of Zedek: supposed to, have been one of the ancient names of Jerusalem; and which is said to have had four: Salem, Jebus, Zedek, (or Justice) and Jerusalem. (See Joshua 10:1)
Kitto's Popular Cyclopedia of Biblial Literature [5]
Adonize´dek. The name denotes lord of justice, i.e. just lord, but some would rather have it to mean king of Zedek. He was the Canaanitish king of Jerusalem when the Israelites invaded Palestine; and the similarity of the name to that of a more ancient king of (as is supposed) the same place, Melchizedek (king of justice, or king of Zedek), has suggested that Zedek was one of the ancient names of Jerusalem. Be that as it may, this Adonizedek was the first of the native princes that attempted to make head against the invaders. After Jericho and Ai were taken, and the Gibeonites had succeeded in forming a treaty with the Israelites, Adonizedek was the first to rouse himself from the stupor which had fallen on the Canaanites ( Joshua 10:1; Joshua 10:3), and he induced the other Amoritish kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, to join him in a confederacy against the enemy. They did not, however, march directly against the invaders, but went and besieged the Gibeonites, to punish them for the discouraging example which their secession from the common cause had afforded. Joshua no sooner heard of this than he marched all night from Gilgal to the relief of his allies; and falling unexpectedly upon the besiegers, soon put them to utter rout. The pursuit was long, and was signalized by Joshua's famous command to the sun and moon, as well as by a tremendous hail-storm, which greatly distressed the fugitive Amorites [JOSHUA]. The five kings took refuge in a cave; but were observed, and by Joshua's order the mouth of it was closed with large stones, and a guard set over it, until the pursuit was over. When the pursuers returned, the cave was opened, and the five kings brought out. The Hebrew chiefs then set their feet upon the necks of the prostrate monarchs—an ancient mark of triumph, of which the monuments of Persia and Egypt still afford illustrations. They were then slain, and their bodies hanged on trees until the evening, when, as the law forbade a longer exposure of the dead ( Deuteronomy 21:23), they were taken down, and cast into the cave, the mouth of which was filled up with large stones, which remained long after ( Joshua 10:1-27). The severe treatment of these kings by Joshua has been censured and defended with equal disregard of the real circumstances, which are, that the war was avowedly one of extermination, no quarter being given or expected on either side: and that the war-usages of the Jews were neither worse nor better than those of the people with whom they fought, who would most certainly have treated Joshua and the other Hebrew chiefs in the same manner, had they fallen into their hands.
