Efficent Conquest

[Teallaura]

I'm working on better formulating a hypothesis of mine. Military ain't my thing so maybe y'all will see flaws/improvements I won't.

Assumptions:
1) Clearing the Promised Land of other cultures is necessary to establish and preserve Israel as a 'priesthood' nation.
2) God isn't trying to wipe the Canaanites out but to remove them completely from the area.
3) Jericho is not a strategic location (this was suggested in a documentary and seems reasonable).
4) The more fearsome the reputation of the Israelites the fewer civilians who will hang around for the army to arrive.

Hypothesis: The instructions from God to kill every living thing and the attack on Jericho are instruments to reduce the subsequent civilian opposition and the number of people that will be killed en toto.

Jericho, according to the documentary, presents Joshua with an opportunity for an easy victory with which to bolster the morale of his troops (not that they were demoralized but every little bit helps). It occurs to me that it is in actuality a strategic battle - not from a military POV but from a psychological standpoint.

The account of Rahab tells us that it's possible to escape Jericho via the apartments built into the casements. The documentary posits that spies might also have come back into Jericho that way but it seems more probable to me that refugees would make use of that in order to escape. Rahab tells the spies her people are already afraid of the Israelite army. My posit is that the manner of the destruction of the walls is also a psychological tool to increase the fear/panic of the population.

After each day's march, the Israelites withdraw. The text doesn't indicate any effort on their part to contain the people of Jericho beyond letting the walls do so. That withdrawal, it seems to me, leaves a significant opening for the people to attempt to flee. It seems highly improbable to me that there were no ropes lowered during the night, no one running from the doomed city, absent any counter measures to prevent it.

My suspicion is that while there may have been some outposts the Israelites not only would not have impeded refugees - they were actually trying to create them. Day after day of the silent, terrifying march followed by long, dark nights with no apparent guards - seems a recipe for creating refugees.

The sixth night is likely also significant. The last few stragglers have to chose - flee toward other towns in the day when they might be seen or flee to the hills and hide until night falls again. Some would no doubt chose the hills - and be there to bear witness to what happened next. They would hear the horns blow, see the walls fall, see the army fall upon what was left within and its terrible lack of mercy. It wouldn't take many such witnesses to terrify the surrounding lands. The Israelites gain the psychological advantage without violating God's instructions.

Which means that the next town Israel marches toward probably doesn't wait for them to get close before the masses begin to flee. Some smaller towns probably evacuate and are taken without so much as an arrow shot. Others would have only defenders left within, families and civilians having been sent away. Only larger, well fortified towns would have been likely to try their hand against the invaders - and probably even those lost some refugees before the siege began.

Terror becomes a weapon in its own right and the conquest becomes much easier. Seems to me, if you want to minimize civilian casualties, running them off beforehand accomplishes that and more.

[Teallaura]

Another thing (finally) occurred to me: ancients didn't normally 'run off' indigenous peoples. Enslave and subjegate, yes; eliminate or run off, no. The 'civilians' were part of the spoils - true even well into the medieval period (with a shift to serfdom over slavery they were arguably part of the value of a given piece of land). God's edict to kill everyone was arguably essential to get anyone to get out of the way. Civilians would ordinarily flee only the immediate battle (blood thirsty warriors not being noted for keeping 'fighter/non-fighter' particularly straight) but not the land (once the 'carting off people as slaves' bit stopped). The Promised Land is unusual in that not only fighters/prominent citizens were to be eliminated/removed (the first for military and the second political reasons) but the peons as well.