Searching for Sodom and Gomorrah Talkback Add Your Comment
Sidebar: Explaining Sodom’s Destruction Sodom and Gomorrah. They are perhaps the most infamous cities of the Bible, inhabited by men and women so vile and wicked that only their utter annihilation could appease God’s wrath (Genesis 19).  Click to view a slide show of larger images and captions. But where does the Bible locate these legendary dens of iniquity, and does any trace of them still exist? It is clear from various Biblical passages that Sodom and Gomorrah should be located in the Dead Sea region. When Abraham and his nephew Lot part ways (Genesis 13:8-13), Lot chooses to settle in the Jordan valley “in the direction of Zoar” and moves his tents to “the cities of the plain” as far as Sodom. According to Genesis 14, the “cities of the plain,” which include Sodom, Gomorrah, Zoar, Zeboiim and Admah, join forces to battle a coalition of Mesopotamian kings in the “Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea),” a clear reference to the Dead Sea region. Another clue is found in Genesis 10:19, which describes the southern border of Canaan as extending east from Gaza “in the direction of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim,” again placing the cities in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. But Biblical scholars have long been divided about where exactly around the Dead Sea the cities were located. Most traditional theories place the cities at the southern end of the Dead Sea, in and around the well-watered and fertile plains and valleys south of the Lisan peninsula. At the southern end of this region, the Bible and other sources, including the first-century A.D. historian Josephus and the sixth-century A.D. Madaba Map, locate Zoar, one of the cities of the plain and the place to which Lot and his daughters fled following the destruction of Sodom (Genesis 19:22-23).* 
Finding no clear archaeological evidence for Sodom and Gomorrah in the vicinity of Zoar, however, W.F. Albright and others conjectured that the remaining cities of the plain lay submerged beneath the shallow waters of the Dead Sea’s southern basin. They argued that during the time of Abraham, when the level of the Dead Sea was possibly much lower, the entire southern basin would have been a lush valley watered by rivers flowing down from the highlands of Moab.  Click to view a slide show of larger images and captions. By the late 1970s, when the level of the Dead Sea had begun to drop considerably due to industrial exploitation and damming projects, archaeologists had an unprecedented opportunity to search the now mostly dry southern basin for remains of the lost cities. But alas, not a sherd was found; there was no evidence that the cities had been submerged beneath the salt sea. While exploring the high fertile banks along the southeastern shore of the Dead Sea, however, the same archaeological expedition discovered the ruins of four towns that had been inhabited during the Early Bronze Age (3300-2000 B.C.).** Some scholars, though certainly not all,*** date the origins of the stories of Abraham and Lot to the end of this period. The expedition, headed by archaeologists Thomas Schaub of Indiana University of Pennsylvania and Walter Rast of Valparaiso University, excavated two of the largest sites in the plain—Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira—and discovered that both had been thriving Bronze Age cities that were destroyed at almost exactly the same time, about 2350 B.C. Rast proposed that the Biblical story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah originated from ancient traditions surrounding the near-simultaneous demise of these once-prosperous twin cities.1  Click to view a slide show of larger images and captions. Although many have adopted Rast’s view of the southern provenance of the Sodom and Gomorrah tradition, others have proposed that the Bible actually locates the fabled cities at the northern end of the Dead Sea. The most vocal proponent of the northern theory is Dr. Steven Collins of Trinity Southwest University, who argues that Lot’s apportioned territory and all the “cities of the plain” (Genesis 13:8-13) should be located in the broad circular plain where the Jordan River meets the Dead Sea. First, according to Collins, Genesis 13 places the separation scene between Abraham and Lot somewhere around Ai and Bethel, an area that has commanding views over the northern Dead Sea and southern Jordan valley, not the southern Dead Sea region. Second, the passage describes Lot’s territory as the “circular” or “disc-shaped” plain (Heb. kikkar) of the Jordan, a term which Collins argues refers specifically to the broad alluvial plain of the southern Jordan valley just north of the Dead Sea.  Click to view a slide show of larger images and captions.  Click to view a slide show of larger images and captions. What is more, Collins believes he has located the actual site of Biblical Sodom on a high bank overlooking the valley. The site, Tell el-Hammam, is one of the largest mounds in the plain and supported almost continuous occupation from the Chalcolithic to the Byzantine period. Although the site has substantial Early Bronze Age remains (as at Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira), Collins believes that the extensive and well-fortified Middle Bronze Age city (c. 2000-1550 B.C.) represents the Sodom known to Lot and Abraham, Biblical figures that he and many others believe should be dated to the first half of the second millennium B.C. In one area of the Middle Bronze Age city, Collins located a massive destruction layer over 3 feet thick. Could this layer be the archaeological residue of God’s infamous judgment on Sodom? Whatever the case, Collins hopes to uncover even more evidence of the Biblical story in future seasons of excavations at the site. But whether one locates Sodom and Gomorrah south or north of the Dead Sea, there is plenty of reason to suspect that the Biblical tradition surrounding the doomed cities of the plain was more than just fanciful legend. As suggested by Amos Frumkin in his May/June 2009 BAR article on the salt pillar known as Lot’s Wife, the Sodom story told in the Bible likely represents an ancient memory of a single catastrophic event that affected the cities and peoples of the Dead Sea region nearly 4,000 years ago. The final destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is vividly described in Genesis 19:24-25:
If the Biblical story does reflect a genuine historical memory of an ancient disaster in the Dead Sea region, what natural disaster would have brought about such a calamitous retelling? As far back as the first-century A.D. historian Josephus, visitors to the Dead Sea have hypothesized about the nature of the catastrophe that “overthrew” the cities of the plain under a shower of brimstone and fire. For some, the explanation was a powerful flood that inundated the much shallower and then-dry southern basin of the Dead Sea. For others, the destruction was wrought by an ancient volcano that has become hidden and dormant in the centuries since. Some have even postulated that God’s fury was unleashed by a fiery ancient asteroid over a half-mile in diameter that destroyed everything in its path. But the explanation that provides the most likely historical and geological context for the legendary destruction is a massive earthquake. The Dead Sea, part of the enormous geological fault line known as the Great Rift Valley, has been the epicenter of powerful earthquakes for countless millennia. Indeed, geologist Amos Frumkin believes that an earthquake measuring 8.0 on the Richter Scale gave rise to both the Sodom and Gomorrah tradition as well as the story surrounding the Mt. Sedom salt pillar (known as Lot’s Wife) some 4,000 years ago. Other scholars have proposed that the earthquake caused the narrow isthmus between the northern and southern Dead Sea basins to give way, which in turn flooded the southern “Valley of Siddim” and inundated the wicked cities and all their inhabitants. Matching the earthquake theory to the Biblical conflagration, however, has required additional explanation. Most have proposed that the earthquake caused the natural sulfur and bitumen deposits of the Dead Sea area to erupt to the surface, thereby releasing large quantities of natural gas into the air. When exposed to fire—perhaps created by a lightning strike from above—the gas could have ignited and turned the entire plain into a huge furnace, consuming everything and everyone that could not escape. Notes
*Konstantinos Politis, “Where Lot’s Daughters Seduced their Father,” BAR, January/February 2004.
**“Have Sodom and Gomorrah Been Found,” BAR, September/October 1980.
***Kenneth Kitchen, “The Patriarchal Age: Myth or History?” BAR, March/April 1995.
1See Walter E. Rast, “Bab edh-Dhra and the Origin of the Sodom Saga”, in Leo Perdue, Lawrence Toombs and Gary Johnson, eds., Archaeology and Biblical Interpretation: Essays in Memory of D. Glenn Rose (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987), pp. 185-202.
Joey Corbett
Check out “How Lot’s Wife Became a Pillar of Salt” by Amos Frumkin in the May/June 2009 issue of BAR for more information relating to Sodom and Gomorrah.
Date of Sodom's DestructionOne further point: In assessing any Pentateuchal story, geography trumps chronology simply because of chron imprecision which is the nature of the text (whether we like it or not). Their serial geographies do possess a level of precision allowing the IDs of many site location, incl that of Sodom. Now that we know were all the Cities of the Kikkar of the Jordan are located, their destr date will tell us how to adjust our chron for the Abrahamic narratives. This is proper historical procedure. • • • • • • • Sodom Destruction DateHi Kenny: You see no way around the long Egypt/soj because you refuse to assess the evidence objectively (see my BRB article). The C14 evidence is moot. Within historical timeframes, isotopics are never as good as ceramic assemblages based on morph. All of your adding/subtracting, shifting and manipulating are simply non-applicable in a cultural environ that obv does not us a base-10 arithmetic system in the 1st place. Simply put, the date for Hammam's destr is that of Sodom's destruction. • • • • • • • SodomDr. Collins I have a question. What are the oldest and youngest C14 dates and their error bars, for the destruction layer only? As I've shown, I see no way around a long stay in Egypt and even trying to "wiggle" the numbers I can not get below 2041 for a destruction date. Between the exodus and Solomon's temple I removed one yr. for each transition, for overlap. I also removed 8 years from every 40 yr. period listed in case it meant a full generation (Gen. 11, 32yr average). • • • • • • • chronologyJust one further little note... Once the "Bronze Age Scriptures" (Gen-Judg) are allowed to own their own numerical conventions (even if a mystery to us!) apart from simplistic modern arithmetic values, then synchronisms between text and ground start popping out all over the place. I've written at length on this subject, and there are some amazing things to behold if one knows how to coordinate the data in a true scientific manner. (Both minimalists and maximalists are typically bad at this!!!) • • • • • • • location of SodomMr. Hoyt stated: "It seems easier to correlate Genesis one (and other Biblical creation texts) with earth history than Abraham and Moses with archaeology." I heartily disagree! Once one is aware of the "formulaic-honorific" nature of the Bronze Age patriarchal life-numbers, then everything falls into place with remarkable precision. And I promise you (and anyone else dealing with the issue), that if you don't make this concession, you'll never see the amazing historical synchronisms! • • • • • • • assessing all the dataA note on the criteria for Sodom: Tall el-Hammam is, far and away, the only fit out there. It's in the right place, in the right timeframe, and has all the right stuff. It fits all the individual OT geographical criteria for Sodom (at least 25 of them), actually more than for any other OT site (Jerusalem is 2nd with 16!). All the associated Bronze Age sites required by the text are in tow. If T. Hammam isn't Sodom, then one could question the veracity of the texts pointing to its location. • • • • • • • dating and the BibleFor the proper location and identification of Sodom one need only have three sets of data from which to triangulate: 1) right place; 2) right time; 3) right stuff. As for the first, Tall el-Hammam is in precisely the right place to satisfy all the biblical geographical criteria. As for the second, T. Hammam possesses a set of chronological remains well within the "wiggle room" of the biblical chronology. As for the third, T. Hammam is a homerun all the way. There is no other viable option. • • • • • • • ChronologyThere are two topics. What does the text say? And, how does it fit archaeology? I believe that I've shown the TEXTUAL evidence to support a long stay in Egypt. As far as archaeology, some say MBA and others EBA. Once the sites can be definitively identified and good radiometric dates can be obtained (as with Hezekiah's tunnel) it can be settled. It seems easier to correlate Genesis one (and other Biblical creation texts) with earth history than Abraham and Moses with archaeology. • • • • • • • chronologyAnother item that disallows a long Egyptian sojourn is the fact that, if one posits an early Exodus, a long sojourn pushes Abraham's career back into the Intermediate Bronze Age, effectively losing all the historical synchronisms from the MBA embedded in the patriarchal narratives. For example, both of Abraham's covenants are clearly later MBA (see K.A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the OT). Thus, if one insists on a long sojourn, a late date for the Exodus must me adopted. • • • • • • • ChronologyThe events in Gen. 15:13 all occurred in Egypt (Gen. 47:4, 27; Ex. 1:6-16). Nothing in the context indicates more than one land. The LXX says "your seed will be strangers in a land (Egypt)…and THEY will enslave them…." THEY can only refer to the people of the land (singular) just mentioned. Seed Isaac 60 + Jacob 130 – 20 yrs in Paddan-aram only equals 170, not 200 or 215 yrs, which Dr. Collins requires. Abraham was already in Canaan when he was told that his seed would be strangers in a land. • • • • • • • chronologyMr. Hoyt's interpretations of the MT of the passages in question are simply faulty. The 400 years in question (in the Hebrew) includes both "they will be strangers in a country not their own (Canaan)" and "they will be enslaved and mistreated (Egypt)" (both!) for 400 years. Mr. Hoyt's management of the chronology is simply non-sequiturious through and through. And, I repeat, trying to treat these Bronze Age numbers in a literal arithmetic fashion is unwise and unwarranted. • • • • • • • ChronologyDr. Collins, the 4th generation equals 400 yrs. (Gen. 15:13, 16). God refers to a single nation and land, in which they would serve. It would then be punished (Gen. 15:13-14; Egypt). I dealt with the generation numbers below (there were as many as 9, not 4). I said that genealogies were often telescoped (shortened) and numbers rounded. The only evidences that fit the short time span are those that rely on the LXX. I showed why that is a problem. I gave multiple lines of evidence. • • • • • • • chronologyRe: chronology...the Gen 15 passage states that the Israelites would come out of Egypt in the 4th generation from those that went in. This supports a short sojourn, as do all other lines of evidence. One must also consider that the biblical numbers of the patriarchs are honorific and/or formulaic, and cannot be taken with literal mathematical precision. Historical synchronisms are better than "dates" for fine-tuning connections between ANE and biblical history once you're in the ball park. • • • • • • • Chronology 4The genealogy of Ephriam lists 8 generations between entering Egypt and Nun's birth . This would give an average generation time of just under 17 yrs. The surrounding context seems to rule this out. Gen. 11 gives generation times of about 32 yrs. In Gen. 37:2 we are told that at age 17 Joseph was just a youth. Males may have been considered adults by age 20 (Ex. 30:14; Num. 1). Also, the Bible shows people getting married much later than this. So, the theory of 215 yrs. contradicts the evidence. • • • • • • • Chronology 3So, the clock only starts with Jacob, who is told to go into Egypt and that God would bring them out. Another way to test between the two different views is by genealogies. Many genealogies in the Bible are telescoped, so to get an idea as to the amount of time, we need to find the most complete ones. Remember that the theory that the stay in Egypt was only 215 yrs. has to subtract the 80 yrs. of Moses' life, because he was born long before the exodus. Now we have 135 yrs. left. • • • • • • • Chronology 2The LXX (Greek) and Josephus (see, bk. 1, ch. 10, sect. 3; bk. 2, ch. 9, sect. 1 and bk. 2, ch. 15, sect.2) are internally inconsistent. They both take the 430 yrs. in Exodus 12 and divide it between Canaan and Egypt, but they both agree with the Hebrew in Genesis 15:13 that God said the descendants of Abraham would be in Egypt alone, 400 yrs. In fact in Gen. 15:13-15 Abraham is told that the 400 yrs. are for his descendants, not him. Then in Gen. 26 Isaac is told not to go into Egypt either. • • • • • • • Chronology, in segments. Why the word reduction?This promise was made with Abraham (Gen. 15:13-18), but repeated to Isaac (Gen. 26:2-6) and Jacob (Gen. 46:1-7). This is confirmed in 1 Chron. 16:15-19 and Ps. 105:8-12, 23-25). Notice that both of these references say that the covenant was confirmed (amad – to make stand, establish; i.e. confirm) to Jacob. Gal. 3:17 speaks of the Law coming 430 years after the Abraham's covenant being confirmed (prokuroo – previously ratified or confirmed). • • • • • • • chronologyMr. Hoyt has given a classic example of reading something into a text that isn't there. The Galatians passage states clearly that the law came 430 years after the promise was spoken to Abraham. Nothing is mentioned of Jacob or any "confirmation" of the promise. What Paul is giving is specifically the LXX rendering of Ex 12:40 which specifies that the period from Jacob to the Law was 215 years, something that Josephus was quite forceful about when dealing with that passage. • • • • • • • Sodom and GromoraI have been a subscriber to your magazines but got discuraged by all the bickering and sniping among the archaeologists that did the digs, however, after a restpid I have been thinking of starting back up. That said, I have felt all along that these two cities are located in the north end of the dead sea but possibly farther north up the Jordan River. Reason, Bible says that Lot left Abraham when he saw the water in the Jordan Valley. • • • • • • • SodomThe time in Egypt was 430 yrs. (Ex. 12:40-41). Paul also supports this in Galations 3:17. Moses was given the Law 430 years after the covenant which was confirmed. The covenant was made with Abraham, sworn to Issac and confirmed (by his entering into Egypt) to Jacob. See 1 Chron. 16:15-19 and Ps. 105:8-12. God told Abraham that the captivity would take place over a 400 yr. period which equaled 4 generations. This can be found in Gen. 15:13, 16 and Acts 7:6. The 400 yrs. and 4 generations was a rounded figure based on the generation time, from Abraham to Issac, of 100 yrs. In Luke 3 lists most of the generations from Abraham to Jesus. Assuming David was born about 1040 yrs. before Jesus we can devide that by Luke's 43 names and get 24 yr. generation times. Then from Abrham's possible birth time of 2230 to David's and filling in some skipped generations we have 29 generations. Remove Abraham and Issac (160 yrs. combined) we get 1030 yrs. devided by 27 for 38 yr. generation times. When I gave my dates for Sodom's destruction and Abraham's birth I did say, ABOUT. There are rounded numbers in the Bible, but 215 yrs. for the time in Egypt is not supported by the Biblical text. • • • • • • • Bible BelievabilityWhat one believes of/about the Bible is generally a function of one or more of three elements: research, knowledge, and faith. As for research, (for example) I don't think anyone who's done a detailed investigation into the geographical nature of the Bible would disbelieve much or any of the biblical geography. As for knowledge, one's educational background and biases will certainly affect the way one processes things historical, even theological. As for faith, one's personal experience will certainly color how one relates to the spiritual dimensions of the Bible. But regardless of how one approaches the biblical text, and from which angles, it remains one pretty amazing book. Without it, both minimalists and maximalists would have to look for other means of employment! • • • • • • • Matching the years in the Bible to the archaeological chronologyThe calendars are different in different cultures and at different historical periods. As I see it, from Abraham to Solomon the year was 6 months long - an equinox year. So the number of the years should be divided by 2 and it will match with the archaeology: Abraham lived about 1500 BC., Joseph went to Egypt around 1400 BC, exodus was in 1200 BC, the period of Judges was 200 of our years until Solomon in the 10th century. • • • • • • • Editor's NotePlease note that the Biblical Archaeology Society does not attempt to either prove or disprove the veracity of the Bible. Please refer to our mission statement: "The Biblical Archaeology Society (BAS) was founded in 1974 as a nonprofit, nondenominational, educational organization dedicated to the dissemination of information about archaeology in the Bible lands." - Ed. • • • • • • • GeneralIt is amazing how many of your articles show clearly that the writers do not believe what the Bible says, and yet they purport to try to "prove" the Bible true. • • • • • • • SodomMr. Hoyt's "literal" chronology is well known to those of us who've dealt with these issues for decades. Actually, the earliest such date for Abraham's birth that can be squeezed out of such a configuration is 2166 BCE (see J. Finegan's work on the subject of Biblical Chronology). However, that figure supposes a long (430 year) Israelite sojourn in Egypt, which is fundamentally flawed and unsupportable. The actual length of the sojourn is 215 years, making Abraham's birth at least that much later. Then one must realize that the patriarchal lifespan numbers are demonstrably formulaic in nature, further shortening the chronology. But that's a little deeper than we can go here (I've written much on the subject elsewhere). Suffice it to say that there isn't any way to legitimately connect up Abraham's career with a place like Bab edh-Dhra or Numeira, even if one take's the earliest possible literal dates for Abraham (b. 2166 BCE). The walled settlement at Bab edh-Dhra was destroyed ca. 2350 BCE, so it's out as a candidate for Sodom merely on chronological grounds. W.F. Albright was wrong about a lot of things, but he was right on in placing the career of Abraham during the Middle Bronze Age, at the height of Canaanite civilization in the southern Levant, likely during Egypt's Hyksos Period. One should note that all of the southern Dead Sea sites ended ca. 2350 BCE, with a few carrying on briefly into the Intermediate Bronze Age, but only as small, unwalled villages, hardly anything that one could call the mighty "Cities of the Jordan Disk." The truly mighty Jordan Disk sites NE of the Dead Sea were all going like gangbusters during the MBA, and were all destroyed toward the end of the MBA, whereupon the area was abandoned for at least 5 centuries. The synchronisms between those sites and the biblical description of the Cities of the Plain are infinitely more than coincidental, in my opinion. I should point out that it's much, much easier to propose a later chronology for Abraham, even down to the end of the MBA, than it is to try to force it backward toward the EBA, wherein one loses elements of cultural specificity, such as the affinity of Abraham's covenants with MBA contracts and treaties (see K. Kitchen's On the Reliability of the OT, also his 1995 BAR article on the subject). • • • • • • • Sodom's DestructionStarting with a date of 966 B.C. for the fourth year of Solomon's reign and then adding all of the Biblical numbers in, I get a date of about 2130 for the destruction and 2230 for Abraham's birth. Abraham begat Issac 100 yrs. Issac begat Jacob 60 yrs. Jacob into Egypt 130 yrs. In Egypt 430 yrs. Ex. to Moses' d. 40 yrs. Joshua lead 30 yrs. Judges and oppressions 390 yrs. Saul 40 yrs. David 40 yrs. Solomon to temple rebuild 4 yrs. (966 B.C.) This timeline can be tested against the rounded figures of 480 yrs. in 1 Kings 6:1 and 300 yrs. in Judges 11:26. • • • • • • • SodomThere isn't a legitimate biblical scholar or archaeologist who ever believed any of Ron Wyatt's unfounded claims. He knew virtually nothing about archaeology, wasn't an archaeologist, and was only a casual "day-tripper" with a video camera and a fertile imagination who succeeded in duping a lot of gullible folks with his "biblical explorations." (I'm being infinitely more than kind!) The Hebrew word goprit is often colloquially rendered "sulfur," but, in the context of Gen 19, probably should reflect its more base meaning: "(to the ancient mind) the material of which lightning consists." Thus, the text is likely referring to some sort of lightning (from "the heavens"!) or electrical discharge relative to the fiery cosmic event that brought about the destruction of the Cities of the Plain. Finding sulfur balls (they're not uncommon throughout the rift valley) is a non sequitur to any discussion of Sodom's location (as are "slime pits" and "the Valley of Siddim"). Those sulfur balls are embedded in, and thus wash out of, much more ancient geological formations that already existed (with sulfur balls in tow!) millennia before recorded history. The existence of southern Ghor sulfur balls is a perfectly terrestrial phenomenon, and has absolutely no connection to the human history of the region. One must learn to think critically regarding these matters. • • • • • • • Already foundRon Wyatt has already found Sodom and Gomorrah, with millions of small balls of high density sulphur imbedded in the ash, included. You can get his video about the place from his website: http://www.wyattmuseum.com/ He also found Noah's Ark and the Ark of the Covenant (although the Israeli Antiquity Authority secretly took it and destroyed any evidence of where it was found.) He brought the only item ever found from Solomon's Temple out of the same underground cave. Biblical Archaelogy Review did a story on it authenticity last year - the ivory pomegranate with Hebrew text, that was considered a fake for decades. Ron Wyatt has also found the authentic place of the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelis, with ancient chariot wheels located on the sea bed. And he has found the authentic Mount Sinai, with the remains of the Israeli settlement there and the unchiselled altar that Moses built and surrounding temple remains. They are in Saudi Arabia. • • • • • • • Searching for Sodom and GomorrahI really enjoyed this artical • • • • • • • Searching for SodomWhen it rains once a year down near the dead sea round clusters of salt appear even today from the Hail of sulfur. Incredible proof, but author doesn't seem to agree to it. Also the reason in Torah Abraham was told about the upcomming destruction was G-d had just pledged the land to him and his decendants through Issac. • • • • • • • Date of the destruction layer in Tell el-HammamThe article "Searching for Sodom and Gomorrah" by Joey Corbett mentions "In one area of the Middle Bronze Age city, Collins located a massive destruction layer over 3 feet thick". Is there any estimation of the age of that destruction layer? If it is towards the end on Middle Bronze Age, maybe around 1500 BC, that would fit to my chronology. Anyway, if we rule out major tectonic movements, and the possibility to have remains of cities under the current surface of Dead Sea, the theory of Dr. Steven Collins seems to be the best for now, and could deserve an article in BAR. • • • • • • • Destruction of SodomAs far as the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is concerned, there were no geological upheavals of note in the Dead Sea region during any of what might be called "historic" times. Earthquakes, yes. Major tectonic movements or adjustments causing substantial shifts in local elevations, no. This is according to all geological studies of the region done during the last 50 years, as well as human settlement surveys. It is a fact that the configuration of the Dead Sea hasn't changed appreciably in the past 15,000 years, except that the shallow southern end did pretty much dry up during the Byzantine Period (which is why the Madaba Map has no Lisan). Indeed, no settlements ever existed in the area occupied by the Dead Sea's shallow southern waters. Again, one can posit just about anything if the text is ignored. The biblical writer does not in the least suggest that the ground opened up, or that there was any kind of geological disturbance. The text does describe a fiery matrix of cosmic origin (an airburst event, perhaps)impacting from a heavenward direction. The text also specifies that it was a very localized event involving just the Cities of the Kikkar of the Jordan, the circular alluvial area north of the Dead Sea, particularly east of the river. One shouldn't make this "targeted" destruction bigger than it's description in the text. Actually, as such "airbursts" go, it was a pretty small event, say, less than 300 square kilometers (encompassing a handful of significant Middle Bronze Age sites) based on ensuing Late Bronze Age settlement patterns. • • • • • • • The Cause of the destruction of Sodom and GomorrahAlthough I am not familiar with the geological history surrounding the Dead Sea area; I am familiar with geological upheaval, having lived in Iceland 40 years. Based on what you have written and what is written in the Bible, it seems (as correctly surmized) that a great geological event was set in motion by The Lord. The description is that of a cataclysmic quake, which would have caused a tremendous tectonic and magmatic shift, resulting in a major fault to open up. Let us keep in mind, that after an earth quake, a strong smell of sulphur is frequently present, as are high winds (effects of shockwaves), when there is a sudden tectonic movement after great tension mounting up, BALL LIGHTNING is frequently released, which is the result of the rock layer/foundation breaking. This would ignite any gassess released. If this was combined with a fault line eruption (like LAKAGÍGAR) as opposed to a normal cone shaped volcano (VEZUVIUS) sea water might have been channelled into the fault line, causing a tremendous and violent eruption and explosion which would have sent a tsunami racing racing down the dead sea area and a cataclysmic cloud like Vezuvius created, and since the pumice created in that area is more lighter and stickier it would have travelled farther and covered the towns in a relatively short time, this being compounded with the high salt content of the area (like salt lake valley) would have been positively devastating. Considering the recent geological event, where a 1 400 km fault line opened up under the ocean and caused a major tsunami to travel around many parts of the world, and lifting large portions of islands out of the water, it is not unlikely, that the cities SODOM and GOMORRAH would have been on the tectonic plate that was lowered, and thereby being removed from the existing maps of the day. • • • • • • • Sodom and Lot's WifeIn the BAR article “How Lot’s Wife Became a Pillar of Salt” (May/June 2009), Amos Frumkin has given us the kind of nonsensical speculation that exceeds any thread of myth of which the biblical writers might be accused. It seems that the only “text” consulted vis-à-vis the Sodom and Gomorrah story seems to be some Hollywood B-movie version of it, or some modern, urban, colloquial notion. Given the penchant of ANE writers, particularly the biblical ones, to labor meticulously over the geographical details of their stories (no doubt due to their familiarity with the real-world landscapes over which their tales are layered), it’s anybody’s guess why Frumkin would place his etiological (nightmarish) scenario in the southern Dead Sea region, when the Genesis (10, 13, 14, 19) text (the only ancient source for the story and its geography) clearly places the Cities of the Plain above the north end of the Dead Sea, east of the Jordan. With all due respect, Frumkin’s piece is a good (bad!) example of what happens in the minds of scholars when textual, geographical, and archaeological facts are categorically ignored in favor of the (often inaccurate) geographico-etiological musings of writers like Josephus in late antiquity. Non-biblical traditions about biblical geography should never be trusted over a rigorous analysis of geo-indicators embedded in narrative biblical texts. Frumkin’s kind of approach to biblical geography is especially egregious when one considers that most of the more lengthy OT narratives are serial geographies, and must be treated as such. Frumkin’s attempt to wed a quirky geological formation with the history of Bab edh-Dhra with the story of Sodom is weak beyond words. When “text-be-damned,” Frumkin’s article is what you get. Ironically, the same issue of BAR carries a nice little piece by 19th century scholar Henry Baker Tristram titled “Flora and Fauna of Mt. Sedom.” Tristram was principally a geographer, and an excellent on at that. If anyone bothers to read his detailed explorations and comments regarding the location of Sodom and the Cities of the Jordan Plain (= kikkar = circle, disk), they’ll quickly discover that Tristram argues cogently from the Genesis text against the southern Sodom theory (etiologically adopted by Frumkin), and concludes that Sodom and Gomorrah must be NE of the Dead Sea on the Kikkar of the Jordan (kikkar hayarden), where, not so coincidentally, several significant Bronze Age cities/towns exist dating from the EBA, IBA, and MBA (the latter being the time of Abraham and Lot). But excuse me for bringing up the idea of analyzing truly relevant data in the pursuit of biblical archaeology. Steven Collins Dean, College of Archaeology, Trinity Southwest University, Albuquerque, NM, USA Director, Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project, Jordan • • • • • • • Tall el-HammamI have worked at the northern site Tall el-Hammam for 3 consecutive year. scientific study and extensive survey. Thanks for providing accurate space to Dr. Collins theory. I really wish you would visit the site and look at the evidence of TeHEP. BAR needs to give proper space to this work. • • • • • • • Sodom chronology, sites, and the pillar of saltFor me it looks like Israelites used an equinox year from patriarchs to Solomon. I assume there was a new year at the spring equinox and another new year at the autumn equinox, and the Bible seems to support that practice. Thus in those days a year was roughly 6 lunar months long. I assume that the sabbatical year was an intercalary lunar month (a leap month) in autumn to match the calendar to solar years. All this means that the number of years has to be halved in order to get our years. Thus Exodus was around 1200 BC according to the Bible and Israel spent 200 years in Egypt before that. Then the time of Abraham and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was about 1500 BC. My chronology differs from most others, like Frumkin's in BAR 2009/3. When using my chronology there are problems since no major populated places are found in Levant in LB1. On the other hand, the climate was dry at that time and the level of Dead sea was low. Does anyone have precise info of the level of Dead Sea at that time, compared to the current level? The other thing is that I prefer that Sodom was in the northern part of Dead Sea, near or North of Hebron. Then I would expect to find some settlement traces in the northern Dead Sea, below the sea surface. A third remark is that I've heard an African view that the phrase "looked back" means that Lot's wife tried to return to Sodom (in order to pick up something?) and probably she succumbed to the gases and heat, perhaps at the beach. Then the salty waves just encapsulated her with salt. Maybe something can be found some day? • • • • • • • Prospective sites for the Cities of the PlainPeter van der Veen's comments are most appreciated. As my previous post suggested, as is also touched upon in Joey's article, all geographical and chronological data from available sources must be taken in concert. There are multiple lines of data that support the northern location of the Cities of the Plain, not simply two or three. Historically, I think a placement of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob before the second half of the Middle Bronze Age (Hyksos Period) is problematic (again, historical synchronisms must be carefully considered). I would also point out that Bab edh-Dhra was contemporaneous with Tall el-Hammam for all of its existence, except that the latter continued through most of the Middle Bronze Age. Our excavations at Tall el-Hammam and surveys of the surrounding area are revealing the existence of probably two significant city-states, the largest being the cluster centered on Tall el-Hammam. All the best. • • • • • • • Sodom and GomorrahI really appreciate Joe's comments to clarify the situation with both Tell el-Hammam and its vicinity (sites that were destroyed before the end of the MBA) on the one hand and Bab edh Dhra and Numeira (Feifa, Khanazir etc) on the other. The latter towns were destroyed earlier as Joe correctly notes, i.e. traditionally ca. 2200 BC. As we, however, show in a new book surrently in preparation on the archaeology of the biblical Patriarchs which should be out early 2010 (first in German and then somewhat later in English), the date of 2200 BC (i.e. the end of the Early Bronze Age III Period) is not actually proven to our view. As Rupert Chapman from the British Museum has recently shown in his article on the Intermediate Bronze Age (in: P. Parr ed., The Levant in Transition, PEF, 2009), there may well have been a substantial overlap between the end of EB III and IBA in some areas (including Megiddo and Jericho, the latter being near the Dead Sea). Other scholars such as Helga Weippert had previously suggested much the same. While some of the urban EB sites continued to exist for some time, in other more arid zones such as in the Northern Negev people were forced to adapt to a different more semi-nomadic life style. Naturally there was not such a thing as people saying: "yesterday was EB now we are living in IBA". As with the end of the MBA as well as the end of LBA there were transitional periods, i.e. times of extensive overlap. With other words, the EB III sites of Bab edh Dhra and Numeira may have been destroyed much nearer 2000 BC than 2200 BC. That does not make them contemporary with Tell el-Hamman however and the two sets of data must be kept strictly separated. They are two different theories which both deserve careful consideration. But with Bab edh Dra nearer to 2000 BC (and this is only a working hypothesis!) its firy destruction may also have something to do with the biblical story. Best wishes Peter van der Veen • • • • • • • Tall el-Hammam as SodomJoey: Tall el-Hammam isn't "on a high bank overlooking the valley" as you describe it. The massive occupational mound actualy sits directly on the eastern edge of the Jordan Plain (kikkar=circle) itself. The lower tall rises 15+ meters above the surrounding plain; the upper tall 40+ meters. It also should be understood that TeH does not stand alone, but is surrounded by numerous other Bronze Age cities, towns, and villages that were all destroyed sometime before the end of the Middle Bronze Age (the time of Abraham and Lot), with the enire eastern Kikkar remaining unoccupied for over five centuries. Additionally, the dates for the Early Bronze Age don't go down to 2000 BCE (your're using the old system). The EBA ends about 2350 BCE. The Intermediate Bronze Age goes from about 2350-2000 BCE, and is marked by a major absence of cities in most areas, including the southern Dead Sea area. Neither Bab edh-Dhra nor Numeira were occupied beyond about 2200 BCE, and then, in their short-lived IBA existence, both were small, unwalled, and hardly could have been called "cities" at all. All of the southern sites were abandoned long, long before 2000 BCE. The southern Dead Sea area always allowed only marginal existence at best. Even Bab edh-Dhra at its height was only a fraction of the size of massive Tall el-Hammam to the north. Not only did TeH and its immediate neighbors survive the EBA "catastrophe" ca. 2350 BCE, but it (and they) thrived right on through the IBA and into the MBA. Why? Because the Jordan Kikkar was well-watered to the extent that climatological fluctuations didn't affect them much at all (remember, Gen 13:1-12 says that the area was watered like Egypt!). But, at any rate, I thought your treatment was fair for the short space of it. Thanks! I invite your readers to check out the Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project website at www.tallelhammam.com. All the best to you, Joey. • • • • • • • |
 Incomparable Israelwith expert scholar-guide Amnon Wallenstein February 1–16, 2010
Visit one of the world’s most sacred and history-drenched lands on an adventure that only we can provide. Join BAS in Israel!
FREE Downloadable E-BooksIsrael: An Archaeological Journey
From Babylon to Baghdad: Ancient Iraq and the Modern West
Exploring Jordan: The Other Biblical Land
Island Jewels: Understanding Ancient Cyprus and Crete
The Olympic Games: How They All Began
The Dead Sea Scrolls—What They Really Say
Real or Fake? Forgery Conference Report |
||||||||||
INFORMATION |
PUBLICATIONS |
FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER |
Joey Corbett is an assistant editor with the Biblical Archaeology Society and is a regular contributor to BAS’s on-line e-features section. In his life outside BAS, Joey is a graduate student in Near Eastern archaeology at the University of Chicago and is currently writing his dissertation on ancient inscriptions and rock drawings from pre-Islamic Arabia. He and his wife Elena have lived and traveled extensively throughout the Middle East, including Israel/Palestine, Jordan and Egypt. Joey also worked as a volunteer and square supervisor at the site of Ashkelon in southern Israel for four seasons.
