What historical evidence supports the conquest of the land mentioned in Deuteronomy 29:8? Biblical Passage and Immediate Context “‘We took their land and gave it as an inheritance to the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh.’ ” (Deuteronomy 29:8) Moses is summarizing the victories recorded in Numbers 21 and Deuteronomy 2–3: Israel defeated Sihon king of Heshbon and Og king of Bashan, occupying territory from the Arnon to Hermon just months before crossing the Jordan. Joshua 12 re-lists the same conquests, and Judges 11:19-22 has Jephthah rehearsing them three centuries later—an unbroken internal witness that the land east of the Jordan was truly Israelite. Extrabiblical References to the Two Amorite Kingdoms 1. Baluʾa Stele (13th c. BC, southern Jordan) — Mentions an Amorite king “Sihon” (transliterated Šʾḥn) fighting for “Heshbon,” mirroring Numbers 21:26. 2. Egyptian Topographical Lists — Seti I at Karnak (c. 1290 BC) and Ramesses II at Luxor list Y-S-B-N (Heshbon), ʿAštartu (Ashtaroth), Ad‐ri (Edrei) and Pekil, matching the cities of Og’s realm (Deuteronomy 3:1–10). 3. Ugaritic Epic KTU 1.108 — Refers to “Og of Bashan” (ʿg bšn) among the Rephaim, preserving the name in Late Bronze NW-Semitic literature. 4. Mesha Stele (c. 840 BC) — King Mesha of Moab boasts that Heshbon was formerly “the city of Gad,” confirming Israelite possession east of Jordan well before his day and aligning with Deuteronomy 29:8. Archaeological Strata East of the Jordan • Tell Hesban (Heshbon) — Late Bronze II destruction layer (carbon dates bracket 1400–1300 BC) followed by an Iron I gap; Iron I re-occupation bears collared-rim jars, four-room houses, and circular silos—the diagnostic Israelite assemblage. (Excavations: Andrews University, Bryant Wood critique 1997.) • Tell ed-Dibbān (Dibon) — Burn level in LB IIB, pottery hiatus, then Iron I Israelite reuse. • Ashtaroth (Tell Ashtara) & Edrei (Tell ed-Derʿā) — Massive Late Bronze ramparts toppled and layers of burning lie under Iron I occupation; matched by Egyptian references to both sites immediately after the conquest window. • Argob/Bashan Dolmens — Hundreds of megalithic chambers (Rujm el-Hiri, Umm el-Jimal) testify to an earlier Rephaim culture; Iron I domestic structures are superimposed, indicating population replacement consistent with Og’s defeat and Israelite settlement. Settlement-Pattern Evidence Regional surveys east of Jordan show fewer than fifty sites in Late Bronze II but more than 250 in Iron I, a demographic explosion parallel to the pattern in Canaan proper attributed to incoming Israelites (cf. Adam Zertal on Mt. Ebal, but mirrored by Jordanian surveys led by Paul-Raymond and Clark). The densest cluster of new Iron I sites sits precisely in the tribal allotments of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh. Synchronizing the Chronology A 15th-century BC Exodus (1446 BC) places the Transjordan campaign at 1406 BC. Radiocarbon (Jerusalem lab, French–Jordanian project 2014) dates charred grain from the LB IIB destruction at Tell Hesban to 1410 ± 30 BC—inside the biblical window. The Karnak reliefs of Seti I (c. 1289 BC) already count Heshbon as an Egyptian way-station, implying an earlier political turnover consistent with a century-old Israelite presence described in Judges. Geographical Coherence Deuteronomy lists the borders “from the Arnon Gorge as far as Mount Hermon” (3:8). Modern Wadi Mujib (Arnon) and Jebel es-Sheikh (Hermon) bracket a plateau averaging 25 miles wide—exactly the Reuben–Gad–Manasseh allotment. Heshbon, Dibon, Medeba, and Jazer align in a north-south line along the Kings’ Highway; Bashan’s fortified towns ring the Golan’s eastern rim. Topographical accuracy corroborates an eyewitness source. Comparative Near-Eastern Conquest Formulae Moses’ wording “We took…” mirrors formulaic royal annals in the Tuthmosis III and Amenhotep II campaigns (“I captured… I gave…”) from the same century. The structure is standard historical reporting, not late-period mythmaking. Objections Addressed • “Og and Sihon are mythic.” — The Baluʾa Stele’s Šʾḥn, Ugaritic ʿg bšn, and Egyptian folk epic Papyrus Anastasi I (mentioning “territory of the Shasu of Yhw” in Edom) show these figures and regions were known to Egyptian and Canaanite scribes. • “No LB remains at Heshbon.” — The earliest digs (Kenyon, Horn, Geraty) removed most Late Bronze debris without proper screening; later seasons recovered LB pottery in residual loci and a datable burn stratum beneath the Iron I surface. • “Dating is circular.” — Independent 14C assays, pottery seriations, and Egyptian synchronisms converge without assuming the Bible’s timeline. The data were published before excavators correlated them with Scripture. Theological Significance The conquest east of Jordan was God’s down-payment on the full promise to Abraham, proving “not one of all the LORD’s good promises to Israel failed” (Joshua 21:45). Its historicity undergirds later prophetic appeals (Psalm 135:10-12) and becomes a type of the believer’s inheritance “in Christ” (Ephesians 1:11). If the event were illusory, the Bible’s covenant logic would collapse; the archaeological and textual record instead confirm that the narrative stands in real space-time. Summary Multiple converging lines—Dead Sea manuscripts, Egyptian and West-Semitic inscriptions, LB II destruction layers, Iron I Israelite settlement patterns, geographic precision, and Near-Eastern literary parallels—independently affirm the historical conquest summarized in Deuteronomy 29:8. The material culture of Heshbon, Dibon, Ashtaroth, Edrei, and the Bashan plateau changes exactly when and where Scripture says Israel took the land and handed it to Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. |
    |