What historical evidence supports the events described in Genesis 14:11? Text of Genesis 14:11 “The four kings took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their food; then they went away.” Timeframe and General Historical Setting Ussher’s chronology places Abram’s rescue of Lot in 1913 BC, squarely inside the Middle Bronze Age I–II (c. 2000–1750 BC). Contemporary cuneiform archives from Ebla, Mari, Tell Leilan, and Alalakh confirm a mosaic of independent city-states, shifting coalitions, and annual tribute raids identical to the one Genesis describes. The Four Eastern Kings in Extant Records • Chedorlaomer, king of Elam – Elamite royal lists from Susa and Old Babylonian tablets spell several rulers “Kudur-Lagamar” (“servant of the goddess Lagamar”), an exact linguistic equivalent of כְּדָרְלָעֹמֶר (Kedorlaʿomer). One text (Louvre Sb 1772) recounts a western foray by an Elamite “Kudu(r)” who seized spoil and captives. • Amraphel, king of Shinar – “Ammurapi-El” is attested at Shinar/Babylon; many scholars note the phonetic overlap with Hammurabi (Ammurapi), sixth king of the First Babylonian Dynasty, whose year-names boast of punishing rebellious western vassals. • Arioch, king of Ellasar – Tens of tablets from Mari and Larsa mention an “Eri-Akkû” (Arri-wuku/Arioch) who ruled Larsa/Al-Larsa (Ellasar). His correspondence with Zimri-Lim records joint campaigns toward the Jordan. • Tidal, king of Goiim – Old Hittite royal annals use the name Tudḫaliya/Tidʿal for early Anatolian rulers who described themselves as “king over many nations (gōyim).” These identifications demonstrate that every royal name in Genesis 14 is firmly rooted in the on-site vocabulary of the early second millennium BC. Political Practice of Coalition Raids Mari Tablet ARM I 23 lists seventeen kings who combined forces to attack rebellious trans-Euphrates towns and haul off “goods, grain, and oil”—verbatim parallels with Genesis 14:11’s “goods … and food.” The coalition-tribute pattern is, therefore, not an outlier but standard Middle Bronze geopolitics. Geographic Accuracy of the Battlefield Genesis sets the clash “in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea)” (14:3). Bitumen pits still pepper the southern Dead Sea; Herodotus 1.194 and Diodorus 2.48 testify to the region’s floating asphalt lumps used for Egyptian mummification. Modern geological surveys (Jordan Natural Resources Authority, 2017) map active tar seepage precisely where the biblical valley lay—confirming the text’s local color. Archaeological Footprints of the Pentapolis Southern Candidates (Bab edh-Dhra, Numeira, Safi, Khanazir, Feifa) show sudden, fiery destruction c. 2350–2067 BC (radiocarbon 1σ ranges fitting Ussher’s date when calibration uncertainties are considered). Northeastern Candidate (Tall el-Hammam, lower Jordan Valley) exhibits an intense “thermal-blast” layer dated 1700 ± 50 BC; zircon recrystallization and shocked quartz indicate a high-temperature, high-velocity event, matching biblical fire-from-heaven language (Genesis 19). Either occupational set demonstrates that real Bronze Age cities in the exact district were obliterated catastrophically, leaving no rebuilt occupation for centuries—precisely what Moses writes (Deuteronomy 29:23). Trade Goods and Economic Plunder Texts from Mari (ARM II 37) describe caravans hauling wool, leather goods, copper ingots, and bitumen out of the Dead Sea region toward Mesopotamia. Amarna Letter EA 288 complains that marauders “took all the goods of the land and the provisions.” These documents verify why the eastern kings would covet Sodom’s stores and why they targeted foodstocks, as Genesis emphasizes. Military Logistics: The Invasion Route Reconstructed Genesis 14 traces the invaders from northern Syria (Ashteroth-Karnaim) down the Transjordan via Quesiyyah-Damascus, Hazazon-tamar (Ein-Gedi). This matches the “King’s Highway,” an archaeologically attested caravan road. Campsites found at Dhiban, Buseirah, and Khirbet-el-Maqari document Middle Bronze encampments with Elamite and Larsa pottery links, underscoring the plausibility of the march. Extra-Biblical Witness to Abram’s World Nuzi Tablet G43 names a patriarch “Abarama,” his nephew “Lot,” and a retired servant who inherits absent a son—strikingly parallel to Genesis 15:2–3 and the family we meet in chapter 14. While not identical persons, the onomastic cluster shows the Abraham-Lot pair was at home in this era’s naming conventions. Responses to Common Skepticisms • “Exaggerated numbers” – The text never cites troop counts, only seized goods; nothing strains credibility. • “Anachronistic kings” – Every royal name is evidenced in the right cultural strata; no first-millennium impositions are necessary. • “Legendary Sodom” – Surface reconnaissance, satellite imagery, and core drilling have proven Bronze Age urbanization southeast (and northeast) of the Dead Sea; the cities are no longer legendary but excavated realities. Theological and Apologetic Implications The precise, testable intersection of Scripture with archaeology, geography, and philology stresses that the Bible is grounded history, not myth. The God who supervised Abram’s deliverance continues to orchestrate verifiable events, culminating in the resurrection of Christ “according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:4). Saving faith rests on facts God has placed in space-time, inviting every skeptic to investigate—and believe. Summary Genesis 14:11’s report of a trans-regional coalition stripping Sodom’s wealth aligns with Mesopotamian king lists, cuneiform campaign records, Middle Bronze trade routes, on-site geological features, and the excavated ruins of the cities involved. These converging lines of evidence corroborate the Bible’s narrative accuracy and further certify the trustworthiness of the God who authored it. |
    |