William H. Shea*
*William H. Shea, Ph.D., M.D., works with the Biblical Research Inst. in Washington, D.C. He is also adjunct professor at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Mich.
The archaeological survey of the Ghor (valley or plain) southeast of the Dead Sea was first reported by W. Rast and T. Schaub in 1973. Since that time, Bible and Spade has been prominent in pointing out parallels between sites and findings from that region and information known about the Cities of the Plain from Genesis 14–19. (See Bible and Spade, Summer 1974, Winter 1977, Summer 1978, Summer-Autumn 1980, Winter-Spring 1983.) In that survey five relatively similar sites were located that were all occupied at the end of the Early Bronze Age, late in the third millennium BC (approximately the time of Abraham).
North to south these five sites are: Bab edh-Dhra, Numeira, Sail, Feifa, Khanazir. Since that time a number of seasons of excavation have been carried out at Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira.
Our purpose in this article is to study some details which have emerged from the excavation of Numeira, 13 kilometers south of Bab edh-Dhra.
General Archaeological Setting
Bab edh-Dhra is located along the Wadi Kerak near the neck of the Lisan Peninsula in the Dead Sea. The southernmost of the five sites – and the smallest of them – is Khanazir, located at the southern end of the Ghor. Of the other two sites in the series, es-Safi is located nearer to Numeira in the north and Feifa is located nearer to Kha-nazir in the south. In general, these sites decrease in size as one proceeds from north to south.
Are there other sites in the area that date from the end of the Early Bronze Age? At the time when Rast and Schaub carried out their surface survey of the area in 1973, they were unable to find any other sites there that dated to the same period of occupation.
A common feature of all five sites is that of location. They are all near permanent springs, and along wadis which carry seasonal runoff of the rains. They share a common geological setting. They are not located down in the plain of the Ghor where they would have taken up valuable farmlands, but rather on the geological shelf overlooking the plain. This also provides the towns with a good defensive position. At the eastern end of each town, on that end which pointed away from the plain, an observational tower was built to watch over the area from which an enemy might attack. The same segmented type of construction was employed in building the walls of these cities. This technique was probably meant to protect them from the effects of earthquake. Common burial customs were shared by the five towns. And they all exhibit a similar type of pottery from the end of the Early Bronze
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 13
Map of the Dead Sea area showing the Ghor.
Note the five cities all at about the same level above the Dead Sea and each one beside a stream.
Was this Gomorrah?
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 14
ABR staff member Bryant Wood (mentioned in the article) at the Bab edh-Dhra excavations. This may have been Sodom and is north of Numeirah.
Age. They were destroyed and abandoned at approximately the same time and, with the exception of Sail, never occupied again to any significant extent.
From their location, their time of occupation, the nature of their destruction, and their abandonment without further occupation, it is already evident that these five towns fit reasonably well with the profile of the five Cities of the Plain in the Bible. We turn next to some details from one of these sites that may make that connection more direct.
The Excavation of Numeira
Three main seasons of the excavation at Numeira have been reported so far: the 1977, 1979, and 1981 seasons. Each successive season has revealed more about the nature of the occupation of the site. The excavators have pursued three main goals in their work: 1) to explore the construction of the southern wall, 2) to determine the nature of the eastern tower, and 3) to examine the residential area from the southern wall to the northern edge of the site where it has been eroded away.
Like other towns in this series, Numeira is somewhat rectangular in shape with an east-west orientation. The northern margin of the site has been eroded away and fallen into the wadi on that side of it. Since the wall around the site survives on only three sides, the exact extent of the entire original city can only be estimated. The site had a relatively short occupational history, being settled only in the Early Bronze Ill period [late 3rd millenium] as determined by C14 and the pottery. In spite of this relatively short period of occupation the excavators turned up evidence for two main periods of building. This distinction is important for the historical discussion which follows.
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 15
A) The Wall
The segmented type of construction found in the southern wall is the same as that found in the city wall at Bab edh-Dhra. There also appears to have been an earlier phase of occupation at the site which was unwalled. Of this earlier phase one of the excavators has written, “While some of the earlier wall lines differ from those of the latest phase, the nature of the earlier occupation seems similar to that of the later, including such typical features as underground silos and hearths. It is reasonable to associate this earlier phase with the prefortification settlement, since similar structures were found under the city wall and antedating the construction of the east tower” (BASOR [Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research] 225:76).
B) The Eastern Tower
The east tower shows several phases of use and they seem to be somewhat different in character. The first or earliest phase demonstrates a more domestic character. The pottery and other artifacts found in the five rooms cleared resemble those found in the houses elsewhere on the site. Only one of the five rooms appears to be somewhat distinct from the others. In it were found plastered benches extending along two of its walls, and a circular vat 1 m. in diameter and 1 m. high was found in front of one of them. This phase of use in the tower area is particularly important for it reveals the first of two destruction levels found at the site. This destruction is described in more detail below.
There was a distinct change in the character of the structure located here when rebuilding took place after that early destruction. “The two subsequent major phases of use of this area were defensive. The city wall originally enclosed this eastern perimeter; a delineation is visible both from above and from ground level. The wall incorporated surviving foundations of the earlier phase. At a subsequent date, probably for strategic reasons, this wall was strengthened by the addition of a 3.5 meter projection. The entire complex formed the structure we have designated the east tower” (BASOR 225:79–80).
In its third and final phase, the tower was expanded and strengthened even further. The important point to be noted here is that this particular area of the site went through two main phases of use: the first was apparently peaceful and domestic, the second was more directly defensive in nature.
C) The Residential Area
In the 1981 season the excavators extended their work in the residential area north across the site. Previously they had cleared seven rooms extending from the southern wall to a street. In 1981 they cleared seven more rooms and these extended from the street to the northern edge of the site that has been eroded away. The rooms were similar in nature to those that had been cleared previously. The walls of the rooms were constructed with stone, not mudbrick. Sunk in the floors of these rooms the excavators found storage jars, clay silos, a mortar, door sockets, a hearth, and other kinds of pits. One of the last rooms to be cleared appears to have been used as a ceramic workship where pottery vessels were repaired and stored. More than 100 restorable vessels were found in this room. Of special importance is the fact that the residential area here provides the most direct evidence for the
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 16
final destruction of the site. The ash found in these burned rooms and houses is up to half a meter thick.
Having surveyed some of the main archaeological findings at Numeira from three seasons of digging, we now look at those findings for more direct connections with Scripture.
Possible Historial Connections: First Destruction
A) Archaeology
In its relatively short period of occupation Numeira underwent two destructions. The final destruction is particularly evident from excavation of the residential area. The evidence for the earlier destruction of the town comes especially from the eastern end of the town where the defensive tower was built. It is described as follows, “This earliest phase of occupation was destroyed by fire; the walls and rooms that collapsed over the ashy destruction debris consisted of considerable mudbrick detritus, many large wooden beams, and carbonized grasses and reeds still tied by the ropes that had held them together as thatch. On the occupational surface of Room V Was the skeleton of a mature male who had perished in the destruction of this earliest phase” (BASOR 225:79).
B) The Bible
Since the five Early Bronze Age sites in the Ghor present some of the same characteristics that one might expect from the Cities of the Plain in the Bible, a working hypothesis would be to assume they are equivalent. It is reasonable to expect that the list of the five cities in the Bible (Genesis 10:19, 14:2) reads in geographical order. Probably this order is from north to south rather than from south to north. Putting these three assumptions together would identify Bab edh-Dhra as Sodom and Numeira as Gomorrah. For our present purposes, therefore, we will compare Numeira archaeologically with Gomorrah biblically and see how well they correspond.
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 17
Ceramic Grain Storage Silo Found at Numeira
Even the general reader can see some resemblances between the Arabic name of Numeirah and the biblical name of Gomorrah. The only real difference between the two is the consonant “N” in the Arabic name and “G” {actually ‘ayin in Hebrew). This shift through time could have taken place through a process known as nasalization. In other words, Numeira may preserve elements from the old biblical name of Gomorrah. Sometimes historical names are preserved in Arabic. However, this is not true in connection with the other four sites.
What can be said about the earlier destruction of Numeira? Is there anything in the biblical record that could correspond with it?
Sodom and Gomorrah were actually involved in two biblical events, not Just the better-known one recorded in chapters 18 and 19. In Genesis 14 Sodom and Gomorrah led the coalition of western kings into battle against Chedorlaomer and the armies of the kings from the east against whom they had rebelled. When the western kings were defeated and fled from the field of battle, the eastern kings followed up their victory by plundering Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14:11 says they “took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their provisions, and went their way.” We also know that they took prisoners along with them, for Abraham’s nephew Lot was included among them.
It was a common practice of ancient kings to burn the cities they conquered after they looted them. The later kings of Assyria claimed this on many occasions. It would have been quite natural, therefore, for the same thing to have been done to Gomorrah in this instance. This was not just a question of obtaining valuable goods, it was treatment for a rebel city. Thus ff Numeira is Gomorrah, one might expect to see the effects on Gomorrah by Chedorlaomer reflected in the archaeological record..
Although the earlier destruction level at Numeira is not specifically labelled for us by a victory stela left behind by Chedorlaomer, the archaeological evidence exca-
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 18
vated here is compatible with such a pattern. This interpretation was first suggested by Bryant G. Wood in an article in Bible and Spade (Winter-Spring 1983:25–26}, and that interpretation is adopted here.
It is particularly from the eastern end of the city where the later defensive tower stood that evidence for the earlier phase of destruction has come. There was good reason for a foreign conquerer to destroy any part of the city that had a special connection with its de-fences. One of the defenders may be represented by the skeleton of a mature adult found in the destruction debris of the tower area.
Rebuilding the City’s Defences
The natural reaction of a conquered city is to rebuild the de-fences so that history will not be repeated. Regardless who caused the earlier destruction at Numeira, that kind of development is what appears in the area of the eastern tower. The earliest structures built in that area may not have been defensive at all. But the later structures built there certainly were. More than that, they went through two building phases and the defences got bigger and thicker in the second phase. The same type of thing may be revealed in the residential area if the first main phase of the settlement was unwalled and the second main phase was walled.
The Interval
A) Archaeology
There is some interesting paleobotanical evidence found at Numeira which may help us approximate the time between the two destructions of the city. Immediately adjacent to the eastern tower, on its western side (or inside the city wall), an area of outdoor activity was found. This area is said to have been in use during both the final phases of the tower. That means this area was in use between the two destructions of the city. The excavators observed, “Within the city, the area adjacent to the inner (west) face of the defensive system in both phases was an outdoor activity area. More than 20 alternating layers of chaff and carbonized material, including copper fragments similar to those found within the city wall in Area 5, suggest seasonal activities. Over the final layer was a thick (.10-.50 meter) layer of ashy debris, in which were found the skeletons of the two mature males who perished in the final destruction of the town; over this was mudbrick detritus and rockfall” (BASOR 225:80).
While it is possible that the debris here might represent the byproducts of working with the annual grain harvest, an archaeological find may provide a better explanation. In excavating the lowest level of occupation adjacent to the tower area they found “carbonized grasses and reeds still tied by ropes that had held them together as thatch” (BASOR 225:79) along with large wooden beams. Together these obviously made up the roof over the tower area. Since the chaff referred to above was found on the floor, these materials may represent the roof repair on the tower after each season’s winter rains.
Whether this chaff represents debris from the annual grain harvest or an annual rethatching of the roof on the tower, the interpretation seems sound that these lenses of chaff represent seasonal work. The materials are the same in each case. Thus they may represent the season for that type of activity in each agricultural year.
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 19
In other words, we appear to have a span of some twenty years represented by the residue of each year’s activity.
With some 20 layers present, they appear to represent approximately 20 years. And stratigraphically, these 20 years appear to extend through the two later phases of the life and use of the tower, i.e. between its two destructions. In this way, the interval between the two destructions of Numeira may be estimated at 20 years.
B) The Bible
We are dealing here with relative chronology in the Abraham narratives. The question is, how long a period of time elapsed between the campaign of the eastern kings in Genesis 14 and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19? Since Abraham was a participant in or observer of both events, his life can serve as a chronometer for the interval between them (cf. Bryant G. Wood in Bible and Spade, Winter-Spring 1983:26).
Abraham came to Canaan when he was 75 years old (Genesis 12:4). Isaac was born to Abraham when he was 100 years old (Genesis 21:5). Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed the year before Isaac was born (Genesis 17:1, 18:10, 14). The campaign of the eastern kings is not dated precisely in terms of Abraham’s age, but it comes rather early in the section of text that extends from Genesis 12 to Genesis 19.
There is some additional evidence from the birth of Ishmael in Genesis 16 which follows the campaign of the eastern kings in Genesis 14. Genesis 16:16 says that Abraham was 86 years old when Ishmael was born. These correlations mean that the campaign of the eastern kings in Genesis 14 should have occurred some time between Abraham’s 75th and 85th birthdays. Beyond this we lack chronological tools with which to date more precisely. That being the ease, we could average the difference and estimate that the campaign in Genesis 14 should have occurred when Abraham was approximately 80, 20 years before Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed when he was almost 100.
It is important to note, therefore, that the biblical chronology for the interval between the campaign of the kings from the east in Genesis 14 and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah comes out at approximately 20 years. This is also the length of time for the interval between the two destructions of Numeira based on the paleobotanical evidence discovered.
The Final Destruction
A) Archaeology
Evidence for the final destruction of Numeira is abundant, especially in the residential area. The extensive amount of ash present from the final destruction was already evident from the surface survey in 1973. The three seasons of excavation at Numeira have amply confirmed that preliminary conclusion. From the 1977 season it was reported that, “these rooms were largely impacted with debris, much of it containing evidence for burning. In NE 3/I were large pieces of burnt wood and ash … The remains of whole and restorable pottery in the ash also pointed to a general destruction of the site by fire” (AASOR (Annual of the American Schools…) 46). Work in this same area in 1979 demonstrated that, “The major occupational surfaces, with minor variation from room to room, were sealed by thick destruction debris, including charred timbers and ash
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 20
Door sockets at Numeirah. Was this the entrance to a home in Gomorrah?
layers” (BASOR 240:43). For example, Room No. 3 contained, “thick destruction debris, including burnt wooden beams that had collapsed on storage jars” (BASOR 240:44).
More evidence was found in the 1981 season when the excavators extended their work in the residential area northward across the street that runs east and west. “The entire area was covered by the ashy debris of the final destruction of the town, up to .4 meters in depth. The ash contained fragments of wooden beams that had supported the roofs of the dwellings and lay immediately over the latest occupational layer within each room, sealing the material beneath it. Not infrequently there was mudbrick detritus over the ash, which had resulted from the collapse of the mudbrick superstructures after the final conflagration; in Room I0 the secondarily burnt mudbricks themselves were clearly articulated” (BASOR 255:76).
B) The Bible
The Bible states that Sodom and Gomorrah were finally destroyed by fire and this fire was initiated by God. Genesis 19:24 refers to the fire and brimstone that rained down upon those cities. Whether this was a supernatural miracle or God utilized some of the natural elements present in the valley to accomplish his purposes is not clear in the bible. All of the natural elements necessary to produce such a destruction (geological fault line, petroleum, salt) are present in the area for God to have used if He chose.
It is clear from the Bible that the Final destructive agent for Gomorrah was fire, and it is clear from the excavations that Numeira was also destroyed by fire. From a
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 21
biblical standpoint, this fire appears to have been particularly intense. The smoke from it could be seen as far away as Hebron where Abraham dwelt in the hill country west of the Jordan River. The striking evidence for the final destruction of Numeira by fire would be compatible with the picture of so intense a destruction, but it would not be specific for it. To find an element from this final fire which more specifically connects Numeira archaeologically and Gomorrah biblically we may turn to evidence from paleobotany which indicates the time of year Numeira was destroyed.
The Time Of Year When Numeira And Gomorrah Were Destroyed
A) Archaeology
One type of material which excavators found in the rooms of the residential area of Numeira during the 1977 campaign was burned foodstuffs. Clusters of barley found in the ash of square SE 3/1 are rather non-specific chronologically because grains remain in a good state of preservation for considerable time. Grapes, on the other hand, are perishable produce. Hence carbonized grapes found in the same area are more chronologically significant for the time of year when the destruction engulfed these rooms.
The 1977 season was very productive in the quantity of grapes found by the excavators. In comparison to the numbers found in other excavated sites, the quantity of carbonized grapes found in the residential rooms of Numeira is outstanding. “Although carbonized whole grapes have been reported from Salamis, Hesban, and Jericho, the size of the Numeira hoard which consisted of over 700 whole grapes is uncommon” (AASOR 46). The state of preservation was also outstanding. “It is remarkable, for example, that the grapes in Locus 17 of SE 3/1 were preserved even with their outer skins, due perhaps to the burning material which collapsed over the area and sealed these items, as it did also the… barley in Locus 20” (AASOR 46).
More carbonized grapes were found in the 1981 season. “The infrequent small finds included… more whole carbonized grapes with the stems attached, and what preliminary analysis indicates were carbonized watermelon seeds (both evidence for dating the destruction of the site to late spring)…” (BASOR 255:77). In the 1981 excavation report the chronological significance of these grapes, and the watermelon seeds associated with them, has been noted. In the Madeba Plains area northeast of these Dead Sea sites the grape crop develops by mid-summer. Down in the valley near these sites, however, this crop comes to fruition earlier – in late spring or early summer – due to hotter temperatures there earlier. Because of the large number of grapes preserved, because their state of preservation points to a fresh and ripe condition at the time of the destruction, and because of the perishable nature of this crop, the conclusion about the time when these grapes, and the site around them, were destroyed is sound. As the report of the 1981 excavation season notes, therefore, the site of Numeira was destroyed sometime in the late spring of the year.
B) The Bible
The time of year when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed can be estimated from chronological statements made in Genesis. The messengers who came to announce
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 22
the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah also told Abraham something that would happen in his own family. Much to his and Sarah’s surprise they told him that Sarah would conceive and bear a son. They also told Abraham the time of year when his son would be born, “I will surely return to you in the spring, and Sarah your wife shall have a son … At the appointed time I will return to you, /n the spring, and Sarah shall have a son” {Genesis 18:10, 14). The phrase which the Hebrew text uses here refers to the time when life revives again, in the spring when nature revives again after the barrenness of winter.
We may figure nine months backward from the time of Isaac’s birth to the time when he was conceived shortly after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. If we allow approximately a month between the time that this news was made known to Abraham and the time that Isaac was conceived, that would put about ten months between the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the birth of Isaac the next spring. Depending when in spring he was born, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah ten months earlier should have occurred late in spring or very early in summer of the preceding year. That is, the very time of year to which the large crop of carbonized grapes harvested by the archaeologists at Numeira points for the destruction of that city! Thus the paleobotanical evidence from Numeira corresponds to what one would expect of Gomorrah according to the biblical record.
Summary
There are a number of respects in which the five Early Bronze Age sites discovered by Rast and Schaub in their survey of the Ghor correspond to the five Cities of the Plain referred to in Genesis 14–19. General similarities suggest a correspondence between the two. More specific evidence which strengthens this identification has come from the excavations at Numeira. As one would expect from the early period in Palestinian history from which these sites come, no written material has been recovered from them. Lacking written material identifying them, one must turn to other types of archaeological evidence to reach some conclusion about their identity,
From archaeological evidence at Numeira a historical profile of the occupation can be developed. It was only occupied for a relatively short time, considerably less than a century. During this period of the site’s existence it suffered from a preliminary destruction and a final destruction. Paleobotanical evidence recovered has helped to refine the information from these two destructions. The number of periods of seasonal use represented on a working surface near the eastern tower indicates the interval of time that elapsed between those two destructions. It is approximately 20 years.
From additional paleobotanical evidence found directly in the debris of the final destruction it can be estimated that the site was finally destroyed in the spring of the year. All of these more specific details in the history of the occupation of Numeira find correspondences in the history of the occupation of Gomorrah recorded in Genesis 14–19.
To conclude, additional features which add strength to the identification of Numeira as Gomorrah are summarized in the table on the next page. I
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 23
Resources (in chronological order):
AASOR (Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research)
BA$OR (Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research)
Rast, W.E., and Schaub, R.T., “Survey of the Southeastern Plain of the Dead Sea, 1973,” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 19 (1974):5-53.
“Bab edh-Dhra, 1975,” AASOR 43 {1978): 1-60.
“Preliminary Report of the 1979 Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan,” BASOR 940 (1980):21-62.
“The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season,” AASOR 46 (1981}: 1–190.
Rast, W.E., “Settlement at Numeira,” AASOR 46 (1981):35-44.
MeCreery, D.W., “Flotation of the Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira Plant Remains,” AASOR (1981) 46:165–170.
Coogan, M.D., “Numeira 1981,” BASOR 255 (1984):75-82.
BSP 1:4 (Autumn 1988) p. 24