Psalm 136:19–20 records the defeat of Sihon and Og; do nonbiblical sources confirm these conquests, or could they be mythological exaggerations?

Historical and Biblical Context

Psalm 136:19–20 states, “and Sihon king of the Amorites—His loving devotion endures forever. and Og king of Bashan—His loving devotion endures forever.” These verses recount the Israelites’ victory under Moses over two Amorite kings: Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan. The context of these battles is expanded in Numbers 21:21–35, Deuteronomy 2:24–37, and Deuteronomy 3:1–11. The biblical narrative describes an Israelite campaign east of the Jordan River, where these two kings, ruling strategically significant regions, were defeated prior to Israel’s entry into Canaan.

Sihon’s realm was centered in Heshbon (Numbers 21:26), and Og reigned in Bashan, an area known for its fertile lands and strong fortifications (Deuteronomy 3:4–5). The significance of these victories for Israelite history is highlighted repeatedly in Scripture (e.g., Joshua 12:1–6), suggesting these conquests were central events within the formative stage of Israel as a nation occupying the Promised Land.

Overview of Nonbiblical References

Several ancient Near Eastern records mention groups and places in the Transjordan region, where these battles would have occurred. While no surviving extrabiblical document has been definitively shown to name Sihon or Og directly by those exact titles, the broader cultural and geopolitical landscape aligns with the biblical witness of Amorite rulers in the area. Key points include:

• The region of Bashan appears in various ancient texts as a known territory with fortifications, which matches the biblical depiction of Og’s strong cities (Deuteronomy 3:4–5).

• Egyptian inscriptions from the New Kingdom period (c. 16th–11th centuries BC) refer generally to peoples east of the Jordan, sometimes describing them as “Shasu” or other nomadic or semi-nomadic groups. While these inscriptions do not specifically reference Sihon or Og, they confirm the presence of fortified kingdoms and local chieftains in the same corridor where the biblical accounts place the Amorite kings.

• The historian Josephus (1st century AD) in his “Antiquities of the Jews” (Book 4, chapters 5 and 6) recounts the biblical narrative, indicating the common knowledge of these conquests within Jewish tradition and its transmission into the broader Greco-Roman world. Although Josephus is not outside the Judeo-Christian tradition, his works demonstrate that the conquests of Sihon and Og were recognized by Jewish and early Christian communities as historical events.

Archaeological and Geographical Considerations

Archaeological surveys in regions east of the Jordan often reveal destruction layers, fortified city ruins, and occupation shifts consistent with large-scale military movements in the Late Bronze Age. While correlating these layers precisely to the Israelite conquests can be challenging, the evidence does not contradict the possibility that Israel’s campaigns could have toppled local rulers:

1. Heshbon Region: Excavations near the ancient site of Heshbon (Tell Hesban) have uncovered remains suggestive of multiple occupational phases. Although the direct link to Sihon’s defeat is debated among archaeologists, the site reveals that the city was indeed occupied and influenced by various powers over many centuries, aligning with the biblical portrayal of a city under Amorite rule prior to Israelite encroachment.

2. Bashan (Golan Heights) Area: The territory associated with Og shows a pattern of densely fortified sites. Deuteronomy 3:4 mentions “sixty cities” with walls and gates. Archaeologists working in the Golan region note numerous walled settlements, indicating a more robust urban presence than some other areas of Transjordan.

3. Historical Setting: The Late Bronze Age saw significant shifts among Canaanite and Amorite city-states, which can open the door for military campaigns such as those recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures. Though archaeological interpretations vary, the patterns of settlement and upheaval can accommodate the biblical accounts.

Addressing Claims of Mythological Exaggeration

Skeptics sometimes propose that stories of giant kings or miraculous victories could be mythological. However, biblical descriptions of Sihon and Og do not necessarily demand hyperbole:

• Giant-Like Portrayals: Og is referred to in Deuteronomy 3:11 as having a notable iron bed. This detail underscores his reputed physical stature and the might of his kingdom. Yet large or formidable figures in the ancient Near East, including tall warriors or robust rulers, were not uncommon. Many city-states boasted well-equipped kings, and a notable artifact like Og’s bed does not surpass cultural norms for royal grandeur.

• Military Successes: The successes in these conquests are presented as God’s intervention on behalf of Israel (Psalm 136:19–20). While miracles are fundamental to the biblical text, historically plausible scenarios—such as an alliance of local tribes supporting the Israelites, or the Amorites being weakened by other regional conflicts—could also explain rapid Israelite victories.

Unity of the Scriptural Account

The conquest of Sihon and Og appears in cross-references throughout the Old Testament (Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Psalms, and later references in Nehemiah 9:22–23). These consistent mentions reflect a coherent narrative rather than a disjointed legend. The biblical authors use these events to emphasize divine intervention and faithfulness. From an internal consistency standpoint, the repetition across multiple biblical books strengthens the claim that the text preserves a foundational historical memory rather than an isolated fabrication.

Conclusion

Though direct extrabiblical inscriptions naming Sihon or Og by title have not been located to date, the overall historical context, archaeological patterns, and external references to Transjordanian polities affirm the plausibility of these Amorite conquests. Ancient sources acknowledge fortified kings east of the Jordan, and archaeological surveys reveal occupation layers consistent with the biblical milieu. The narrative’s unity across the Old Testament indicates a well-established historical tradition, rather than a mythological or exaggerated tale.

When viewed together, these lines of evidence lend credibility to the biblical portrayal of Sihon and Og’s defeat as genuine historical events. The retelling in Psalm 136 remains anchored in the ancient reality of Israel’s formative conquests and testifies to a cohesive scriptural narrative upheld by archaeology, external records of similar conflicts in the region, and the broader historical framework of the Late Bronze Age.