Biblical Archaeology Review

For the geology of the salt diapir, see Israel Zak, “The Geology of Mount Sedom” (Ph.D. thesis, Hebrew Univ., 1967 [in Hebrew with English abstract]).

We use the spelling “Sedom” for modern place names, following the Hebrew place name “Sedom” in accordance with Naftali Kadmon, Toponomasticon (Tel Aviv: Survey of Israel, 1994), reserving the more familiar form, “Sodom,” for references to the Biblical town.

Although most ancient and modern versions and commentaries translate h\eµmar as bitumen or asphalt, we believe, based on field evidence as well as etymological considerations, that the preferable translation might be “slime,” which is more commonly found in the Dead Sea pits.

Dag Oredsson, Moats in Ancient Palestine (CB OTS 48; Stockholm: Amlqvist & Wiksell International, 2000), p. 178. A cuneiform tablet from Mari also refers to a siege moat. See G. Dossin, Correspondence de Sðamsûi-Addu et ses fils (Archive royale de Mari I; Paris, 1950), vol. 90, pp. 18–21; and the brief discussion in Israel Eph‘al, Siege and Its Ancient Near Eastern Manifestations (Hebrew; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1996), p. 41.

Amihai Mazar, “The Temples and Cult of the Philistines,” in Oren, The Sea Peoples, p. 227.

The ceramic typology appears to be earlier than Lachish III or Miqne II, but later than “classic” late Iron Age I–early Iron Age II (Miqne IV or Ashdod XI–X). Parallels may be identified in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, Lachish IV–V or Ashdod IX–VIII. Preliminary radiocarbon dating would place the assemblage more in the early eighth than the late ninth century.

James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Third edition with supplement; Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ., 1969), p. 287.

See Ehrlich, Philistines, pp. 160–161.

Schniedewind, “Geopolitical History,” pp. 70, 76 note 1.

See Eliezer Oren, “Sera, Tel,” NEAEHL, vol. 4, pp. 1329–1335 and Schniedewind, “Geopolitical History,” p. 74