By Daniel H. King, Sr.
Who in modern times has not read the account of the destruction of ancient Sodom in Genesis 18 and not been left to think: “I wonder whatever became of that once great city?” Over the last two generations it seemed that perpetual frustration had beset the biblical archaeology community on account of the identification of the city with Bab edh-Dhra (and Gomorrah with Numeirah in the same area) and the fact that this site seemed an impossible match for the location of the city of sin to the south of the Dead Sea. Neither of those sites dated from the right era, and their destruction was 250 years apart rather than contiguous with one another as the Bible says.
This false identification in the south even had Russian archaeologists searching the seabed beneath the Salt Sea for the remains of the complex of cities, all to no avail. (Although, it has rightly been observed by some modern scholars that at the present time the Sea is lower than it has ever been in its entire history, so a location beneath the waves of this body of salty water is not very probable).
Earnest Wright and William Foxwell Albright along with others who shared their way of thinking about biblical sites during the time of Abraham had originally placed its location at the south end of the Sea. And their view was taken as undeniable by most of modern researchers until recently. Dr. Steven Collins changed all that, even though there are still some holdouts who question his identification of the site. That number is growing smaller, however.
According to his own account of events, he went to the approximate area where Abraham and Lot stood prior to the nephew’s departure for the vicinity of Sodom, i.e. in the foothills between Bethel and Ai. From that point he looked across to the East to the kikkar of the Jordan, the flat round disk of earth at the end of the Jordan River Valley as the river enters the plain and empties into the Dead Sea. The Bible says that Abraham watched as the cities of the plain were terminated. He also saw clearly the column of smoke as it rose to the heavens. If Abraham could see it from there, then he ought to be able to see it from there also, Dr. Collins reasoned.
Collins, however, observed that he could not see the south end of the Dead Sea from that perspective, but that the north end of the Jordan rift valley was easily visible from that angle. Additionally, there were several other features of the biblical description which were met by that area. The text says that the region was “well watered like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt (Gen. 13:10), which is characteristic of the sector north of the Dead Sea, but not south of it. As well, it is alluded to as the “kikkar of the Jordan,” which associates it naturally with the north of the Sea but not south of that body of water (Gen. 13:10). Moreover, when Lot travelled in the direction of Sodom, the Bible says that he went “toward the East” (Gen. 13:11), which again fits the northern area nicely but does not work with the area beneath the Sea, which is mostly in a southerly direction.
So he decided to travel to the area and scout the locations present which might represent potential candidates for the once mighty city of the plain. In his book Discovering the city of SODOM (2013), Professor Collins describes his logic in approaching the search for the city. By a process called “sherding” wherein the sherds of ancient pottery were examined from each of the potential sites, he knew that he was looking for a Middle Bronze Age site (more specifically, MB2, a fact generally recognized on account of the nature of the cultural indicators regarding the Abrahamic Age in the Bible), so all that did not contain sherds of pottery from that age would be immediately bracketed out. Those that did would be placed on a list of possible candidates.
Also, Sodom is always listed first in order of seeming importance when it is described with a list of other cities in the Bible, so he reasoned that it must have been a major city of very large dimensions as well as relative importance as compared with others in the area. After much time spent examining every potential site north of the sea in the kikkar region, he settled upon a single location, described as Tall el-Hammam (“hill of the hot baths”).
The most interesting feature of this location was that it fit the biblical description perfectly, with a settlement period up to MB2 and a long period of desolation for seven centuries afterward, with an interesting configuration of other ancient cities nearby. A second smaller site which could potentially be identified as Gomorrah stood not far away, and two other sites, a major one (most likely Admah), and a double city that matched Zeboiim (the name is a Hebrew plural), both stood off to the northeast. As might be expected, a great number of small ancient villages also dotted the area round about.
When he visited the mound where the city once stood, he was impressed by the sheer magnitude of the massive ancient city that had been there and wondered that no archaeologist up to now had ever considered that it might be the location of ancient Sodom. “The wonder is that it has escaped the notice of most Bible-focused archaeologists, all but virginally untouched for most of the one-hundred-plus years that modern archaeology has existed,” he wrote (23). Collins noted that “Ten of the City of David would have fit inside Sodom’s city walls, with room to spare.” It’s towering height gave it a visual vantage point, and subsequent excavation has shown that over its history there is no indication that it was ever destroyed by a military enemy. “Somewhere between 150 and 200 million mud bricks formed a rampart around it that made its great height virtually unscalable. With a 35-degree incline, and covered over with a smooth layer of dried clay, no human being or beast could climb up it without great, hunched-over, vulnerable struggle” (36).
Associated with an extensive field of megalithic stone circles, menhirs (large upright standing stones), and more than 500 bench-like stone dolmens, (covering several square kilometers and aggregately larger than the landscape of Stonehenge). Tall el-Hammam has also been identified as Abel Mizraim (Gen. 50:11) of Joseph’s era, and Abel Shittim, the final camping sites of Moses and the Israelites before they crossed into Canaan (Numbers 33:49). It was obvious to Collins from the start that this site represented one of the largest Bronze Age cities in the southern Levant during that historic era. It has both an upper and a lower city. The upper one is one hundred feet higher and less than half the size of the lower one. The Tall proper spreads over almost 90 acres, all apparently within the ancient city’s fortifications.
Surveys and subsequent excavations have confirmed that there existed in this location a general occupational footprint at this spot from as far back as the Chalcolithic Period through the Middle Bronze Age, some 1500 years total. Significant later occupation on many parts of the site are evident during the late Iron Age as well as the Roman period. Collins and his excavators have been working the site for over a decade now, with very exciting results.