Sodom and Gomorrah - The Final Chapter

Abstract:

The locations of Sodom, Gomorrah, and other "Cities of the Plain" are determined from geographic clues. Alternative locations are refuted. El Lisan is identified as the spill of a large landslide. The visible effects of a landslide (both during and afterwards) are found consistent with the destruction of the Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Where were the Cities of the Plain (Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim, and Bela/Zoar) located?

The cities were along the border of the land of the Canaanites in a well-watered plain where there could be found "slime-pits" (much like the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles, California), in the valley of the salt sea, which is indisputably the Dead Sea. While the valley to the west of the Dead Sea is dry, a good map will show that numerous streams and small rivers flow into the Dead Sea from the east.

The level of the Dead Sea has been gradually falling through recorded history, like that of numerous other basin lakes without outlets (Lake Bonneville, Utah; Mono, Tulare, and Kern Lakes, California; Aral Sea, C.I.S.; Lake Chad, Chad). During the Ice Age, the level of the Dead Sea was 100 feet above sea level. It is now more than 1300 feet below sea level. It is likely that , in the days of Lot, the Dead Sea was at an even higher level than any ever recorded historically. Sites that are now under the Dead Sea were almost certainly under the Dead Sea 4000 years ago, as well. Thus the assertion that Sodom and Gomorrah were at sites that are now flooded is unlikely. This assertion was probably made by someone who considered the lack of evidence for Sodom and Gomorrah on the accessible soil surface, and concluded that the sites had been covered by water.

It has also been suggested that Sodom and Gomorrah were located in the mountains overlooking the Dead Sea from the east. That is disproven by the fact that Lot dwelled by Sodom, on the plain.

After the destruction of the cities, Lot fathered two sons: Moab and Benammi. The Moabite and the Ammonites both held lands to the east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea, respectively south and north of the Arnon, a stream entering the Dead Sea from the east. The mountains to the east of the Dead Sea mark the edge of the Moabite Plateau. The city of Ammon still stands east of the Jordan River and north of the Dead Sea. Presumably, these lands became available to the sons of Lot because the previous tenants were no longer in residence.

The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were almost certainly on the plain to the east side of the Dead Sea, as were the cities of Admah and Zeboim. The city of Bela, renamed in the time of Lot as Zoar (after the king who fought the invaders from the north), was at the south end of the Dead Sea. The ruins of Zoar have been identified just south of the city of Safi on the Jordanian side of the sea.

What is the geology of the area?

The Dead Sea occupies a low spot in a rift valley. A rift valley is a valley formed when the land between two geological (tectonic) faults sinks as they pull apart. The sides of the valley are steep and parallel, following the lines of the faults. Small streams flow into the valley at right angles to the line of the valley. A single river flows within the valley parallel to the walls. There is no outlet for water or sediment flow, as all the surrounding land is higher. Erosion tends to cause sediment to accumulate on the valley floor. The direction of flow of sediment is (almost) always downhill. In the Jordan Valley, this means from the east and west sides into the center. Thus the tectonic features of the valley are aligned on a north-south axis, and the erosional/depositional features are aligned east-west.

An interesting feature is the peninsula called El Lisan ("the tongue"). This is a peninsula in the southern half of the Dead Sea that is about 12 km (7 miles) long east-west, and 20 km (12 miles) wide north-south. It intrudes upon the sea from the east, as if it was a depositional feature. It is composed mainly of minerals produced by evaporation of the lake waters. Since lake deposits are invariably deposited in horizontal layers, it seems certain that these materials were moved after they were deposited.

The sheer amount of material involved (over 200 square km, or 20,000 hectares) precludes the thought that El Lisan could be man-made. This raises the two questions: where did the material come from, and how did it get moved?

The answer to the first comes by simply examining the area directly uphill of El Lisan, the Moabite escarpment. The fault line that marks the eastern boundary of the rift valley should be a straight line that is tracked well be the edge of the escarpment. Careful examination reveals that there is a definite arc and eastward displacement of the escarpment east of El Lisan. The arc deviates from the straight line of the rest of the escarpment, from a point just north of the peninsula to another point just south of the peninsula. The total length of the arc is about 25 km (15 miles). The arc is concave into the plateau.

This peculiar combination of geographic features: a curved escarpment, an elevated area of sedimentary deposits starting at one side of a valley, and a hill composed of sedimentary deposits in the opposite slope of the valley, is a signature for a landslide. More recent landslides have been thoroughly studied, and their behavior is well known. They require weakly consolidated soils on a steep slope and a triggering mechanism. In the case of El Lisan, a particularly large landslide, it may have been triggered by one of the earthquakes common to the region. This answers the second question.

A landslide of this size would have happened essentially without warning. The hillside would have fallen at a speed too great to flee, much as the pyroclastic flow of a volcanic eruption. There would have been a great amount of noise and dust. The dust would have risen thousands of meters into the air, and would have taken hours to fall back to earth. The dust (mostly from salt deposits and desert soil) would have strongly resembled the thick, yellow-white smoke produced by burning sulfur.

The effects would have been simple. Everything in the path of the landslide would have been annihiliated! Further, the soil left by the landslide would have been free of humus, seeds, or even the microbes that are essential to normal plant growth. Remediation of a sterilized soil can take years in the best of circumstances; in a desert it can take forever. El Lisan is still unplowed.

If there had been inhabited cities in the path of such a landslide, they too would have disappeared from society. There would have been no visible trace left ,as the sites would have been buried under tens to hundreds of meters of soil. Such destruction, even today, would be considered as an act of God (presumably a very angry God). If Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were destroyed by a landslide, it would have been the single deadliest landslide in recorded history.

[ The Cynic's Footnote: What a wonderful opportunity for a high priest to create an object lesson - simply accuse the unfortunate victims of whatever behavior you wish to discourage (there is nobody left alive to dispute your charges), declare that it is offensive to the gods (or God, or Ba'al, or whatever), and let the faithful observe the consequences Such post hoc revisionism may be the reason that Genesis xiii.13 reads as if it was added as an afterthought, with little direct relevance to the story of the parting of the brothers Abram and Lot.]

(Biblical references taken from the King James version)

Genesis 10