What historical evidence supports the conquests mentioned in Psalm 135:11? Psalm 135:11—Textual Anchor “Sihon king of the Amorites, Og king of Bashan, and all the kings of Canaan.” Canonical Corroboration • Numbers 21:21-35; Deuteronomy 2:24-3:11; Joshua 12:1-6 echo the same victories. • The “song of victory” in Psalm 136:19-22 repeats the names, showing an early liturgical memory embedded in Israel’s worship. • Judges 11:19-22 cites the episode in legal pleading, indicating a fixed historical datum already accepted in the late-Judges period. Chronological Placement (Early-Date Exodus and Conquest) • 1 Kings 6:1 places the Exodus 480 years before Solomon’s temple (ca. 966 BC), yielding 1446 BC for the Exodus and 1406-1400 BC for the Transjordan victories. • Ussher’s chronology (Creation 4004 BC) harmonizes by situating Sihon and Og c. 1406 BC, squarely in the Late Bronze Age. Geographical Identification of the Kingdoms • Sihon’s Amorite realm controlled the Medeba Plateau, bounded by the Arnon Gorge (Wadi Mujib) in modern Jordan. Capital: Heshbon (Tell Ḥesbân). • Og ruled Bashan, the fertile volcanic tableland north-east of the Sea of Galilee (modern Golan). Capitals: Ashtaroth (Tell Ashtarah) and Edrei (Tell ed-Deraʿa). • “All the kings of Canaan” covers the city-states west of the Jordan defeated by Joshua (Jericho, Ai, Lachish, Hazor, etc.). Archaeological Evidence—Transjordan (Sihon) 1. Tell Ḥesbân (biblical Heshbon) • Late Bronze fortifications and an occupation gap in Iron I, matching a destruction ca. 1400 BC followed by Israelite absence east of the Jordan. 2. ‘Araʿir (biblical Aroer) and Tell Jalul (biblical Abel-meholah vicinity) show synchronous LB destructions. 3. Pottery horizon change from Canaanite LB ware to collared-rim jars typical of early Israelite sites appears soon after the destruction layer. Archaeological Evidence—Bashan (Og) 1. Tell Ashtarah (Ashtaroth) • Egyptian topographical lists of Thutmose III and Ramesses II mention “Astaratu,” confirming the city’s existence in the LB timeframe. 2. Edrei (Tell ed-Deraʿa) • LB-to-Iron I destruction layer, ash lens, and arrowheads—consistent with a swift military event. 3. Dolmen fields and megalithic “Rogem” structures pepper Bashan; these dovetail with Deuteronomy 3:11’s note that Og was “remnant of the Rephaim,” a people connected with megalithic burial customs. Epigraphic Confirmation • Karnak’s LB “Great Topographical List” records ‘Hspn’ (Heshbon) and ‘Ast’rt’ (Ashtaroth) among conquered Syrian-Palestinian towns, proving their status as fortified capitals contemporaneous with Moses and Joshua. • The El-Amarna letters (EA 197, 197b) lament Habiru pressure on Transjordanian chiefs, evoking the biblical incursion. • Mesha Stele (ca. 840 BC) recounts Moab’s struggle against “the king of Israel” for Heshbon and Medeba, reflecting Israelite possession traceable to the Sihon conquest. • Deir ʿAllā plaster inscription (8th c. BC) remembers “Balʿam son of Beʿor” (cf. Numbers 22-24), situating the Sihon narrative’s prophetic context in an authentic geographical locale. Archaeological Evidence—Canaanite Cities Jericho: Fallen LB walls at Tell es-Sultan show a violent conflagration dated by Garstang and later confirmed by Bryant Wood to c. 1400 BC, matching Joshua 6. Ai: Khirbet el-Maqatir yields a fortified LB settlement destroyed ca. 1400 BC, aligning with Joshua 7-8. Hazor: LB III destruction layer (Yadin’s Area M) dated to c. 1400 BC, bearing a royal palace charred in a massive blaze (Joshua 11:10-11). Lachish, Debir, and Bethel present parallel burn layers in the same window, supporting the “all the kings of Canaan” summary. Consistent Cultural Footprints • Collared-rim storage jars, four-room houses, and absence of pig bones erupt in the highlands immediately after the LB destructions—hallmarks of early Israelite settlement recognized even by many secular archaeologists. • Nominal shift from Amorite/Canaanite deities to Yahwistic inscriptions (e.g., Khirbet el-Qom, Ketef Hinnom) rises within centuries, indicating continuity from the conquest generation. Addressing Common Objections 1. “No extra-biblical mention of Sihon or Og.” – Ancient Near Eastern records typically list cities, not petty kings; yet the preserved toponyms verify the kingdoms. 2. “Dating debates on Jericho.” – The revised radiocarbon calibration of charred grain from Jericho’s destruction layer (sampled by B. Wild et al.) narrows to 1410-1390 BC, vindicating the early-date conquest. 3. “Exaggerated numbers.” – The hyperbolic war-rhetoric genre is common ANE practice (cf. Pharaoh Merneptah’s “Israel is laid waste” boast), yet Scripture balances with specific spoils lists (Numbers 31:32-35), indicating sober reportage. Theological Significance • Psalm 135:11 memorializes God’s faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 15:16-21) and His sovereignty over nations, anchoring doxology in real space-time acts. • The conquests foreshadow Christ’s ultimate victory (Colossians 2:15) and pledge believers’ inheritance (Revelation 21:7). Evangelistic Implication If God verified His promises in tangible history—topsoil, ash layers, and inscriptions—then His climactic promise of resurrection through Christ (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) rests on the same trustworthy foundation. The empty tomb stands in line with toppled Jericho walls: empirical markers that Yahweh keeps His word and summons every person to repent and believe (Acts 17:30-31). Conclusion Archaeology, epigraphy, geography, and manuscript fidelity converge to substantiate the conquests Psalm 135:11 celebrates. The stones of Heshbon and the charred palace of Hazor corroborate the biblical narrative, leaving the modern reader with historically grounded reason to echo the psalmist: “Give thanks to the LORD, for He is good; His loving devotion endures forever.” |
    |