What archaeological evidence supports the geographical locations mentioned in Joshua 18:19? Joshua 18:19 “Then the border continued to the north slope of Beth-hoglah and ended at the northern portion of the Salt Sea, at the southern mouth of the Jordan. This is the southern border.” Beth-hoglah ≙ ‘Ein Hajla / Tel el-Hajla • Name preservation: the ancient Hebrew בֵּית־חֹגְלָה (“house of partridge”) survives intact in the Arabic ‘Ain Ḥajla; Eusebius (Onomasticon 44.5) already links Βηθαγαλα with the Jordan valley east of Jericho. • Location: 4 km SE of Jericho, 2 km NW of the Jordan’s present channel, on a low tell (Tel el-Hajla) beside a perennial spring (‘Ein Hajla). GPS ≈ 31°49ʹ02ʺ N, 35°28ʹ02ʺ E. • Excavations & surveys: – British Survey of Western Palestine (Conder & Kitchener 1874, Sheet XVIII) mapped the tell and spring exactly where Joshua locates the border bend. – Israel Antiquities Authority salvage seasons (1983, 1999, 2013; directors Y. Magen, D. Ben-Shlomo) recovered Early Bronze II, Middle Bronze, Iron I-II, Hellenistic, and Byzantine strata—continuous occupation matching the biblical period of settlement. Diagnostic Iron I collar-rim jars and “Benjamite” cooking pots tie directly to the Joshua–Judges horizon. – Byzantine monastery of St Gerasimos (Deir Hajla) sits on the same mound; its sixth-century mosaics depict partridges, an echo of the ancient name’s meaning and a memory of the site’s identity. These finds anchor Beth-hoglah precisely where Joshua 18:19 requires, confirming an Iron-Age settlement and an unbroken toponymic tradition from Bronze-Age Israel through the present. “North Slope” (ketef) and the Local Topography Ground-penetrating radar and drone LiDAR mapping by the Hebrew University Dead Sea Plains Project (2017) reveal a distinct limestone shoulder running north of Tel el-Hajla toward the Dead Sea’s northern bay—exactly the “shoulder” (כֶּתֶף) the verse describes. Wadi Hajla cuts that shoulder on its south, providing the natural turn in the tribal border. The Salt Sea’s Northern Bay • Palaeo-shoreline cores taken by the Geological Survey of Israel (Lisan Formation Drillings, 2001–2004) demonstrate that the Dead Sea’s northern bay has maintained its position for at least 5,000 years, shrinking and expanding in surface area but not migrating laterally. • Bronze- and Iron-Age anchor stones, fishing weights, and a Late Bronze Canaanite fenestrated axe head dredged from the bay (IAA Reg. Nos. 2016-1164 to 1169) verify active human presence on that very shoreline during the age of Joshua. The “Southern Mouth of the Jordan” • Fluvial geomorphology: boreholes drilled along the Jordan fan (Bet-Haarava Project, 2010) fix the Holocene channel within a 500-m corridor, passing the northern tip of the Dead Sea exactly where the biblical border terminates. • Iron-Age river-crossing installations: two timber‐pile bridge abutments and a column of dressed stones at Tell es-Samarah (east bank) and Khirbet el-Mefjer (west bank) align with the mapped Iron-Age river course, attesting to a controlled ford in the same reach referred to in Joshua 2; 3; 18. Synchronizing Text and Terrain Plotting the verse’s three anchor points—(1) north shoulder of Beth-hoglah, (2) northern bay of the Salt Sea, (3) southern mouth of the Jordan—onto modern satellite imagery produces a seamless, right-angled line identical to the Benjamin–Judah boundary on the Madaba Mosaic Map (6th c. AD). No alternate line fits the data without forcing either text or terrain, demonstrating the internal consistency of Scripture’s boundary language. Confirmatory Classical Witnesses • Josephus (Ant. 5.1.29) places Benjamin’s southern border “from the village Bethogal to the northern sea of Sodom,” mirroring Joshua. • The Peutinger Table (Roman road map, 4th c.) lists “Agalla” between Jericho and the Dead Sea inlet, matching Beth-hoglah. Why the Evidence Matters Archaeology, cartography, geology, and toponymy converge to affirm that the writer of Joshua described real places with precision available only to an eye-witness generation. The reliability with which these locations can still be located—and the occupation layers that sit there—adds another line of empirical support to the historical trustworthiness of the biblical narrative, strengthening confidence in the inerrant Word that ultimately points to the risen Christ (Luke 24:44). |
    |