In Psalm 135:10–11, God is said to have struck down nations (including Sihon and Og)—why is there limited archaeological evidence of such direct divine intervention?

I. Scriptural Reference and Context

Psalm 135:10–11 declares: “He struck down many nations and slaughtered mighty kings—Sihon king of the Amorites, Og king of Bashan, and all the kings of Canaan.” These verses reflect a praise of God’s mighty works, referring back to Israel’s conquest of the Promised Land (cf. Numbers 21:21–35; Deuteronomy 2:24–3:11). In that context, Sihon and Og were regional rulers whose defeat symbolized God’s power to protect and guide His people. While the text asserts a decisive, divine intervention against these kings, some have wondered why we do not see abundant, direct archaeological evidence for this event.

II. Historical Setting of Sihon and Og

1. Sihon, King of the Amorites

According to Numbers 21:21–31, Sihon ruled an Amorite kingdom in Transjordan, generally placed east of the River Jordan near Heshbon. The Amorites appear in multiple biblical references, and outside texts such as the Mari Tablets (18th century BC) refer to Amorite tribes, affirming their general presence in the Ancient Near East.

2. Og, King of Bashan

Og is described in Numbers 21:33–35 and Deuteronomy 3:1–11 as the ruler of Bashan, a region likely corresponding to parts of today’s Golan Heights. Deuteronomy 3:11 highlights Og’s notable “bed of iron,” underscoring his reputed stature and strength. Bashan appears in later historical references, including Assyrian records mentioning the region, albeit not by Og’s personal name.

III. Nature of Divine Intervention in Scripture

Scripture frequently portrays God’s involvement in military events or historical outcomes (e.g., Exodus 14:26–31). These manifestations do not always leave behind an extensive material record. Sometimes events are localized, or the archaeological remains are destroyed over time. Moreover, the biblical text often presents these acts as targeted judgments rather than large-scale ventures leaving monumental ruins.

IV. Archaeological Patterns in the Ancient Near East

1. Sites Destroyed and Rebuilt

Regions in the Jordan valley and surrounding areas have been destroyed and reconstructed numerous times over centuries. Cities such as Jericho, Hazor, and Ai (Josh. 6–8) present layered remains where evidence can be inconclusive if certain layers have been eroded or destroyed by subsequent invasions or urban developments.

2. Lack of Inscriptional References

Many ancient cities or kingdoms remain unattested outside Scripture because the kings themselves did not leave inscriptions that survived, or they did so in materials long since decayed. Even prominent figures like Sargon II of Assyria (mentioned in Isaiah 20:1) were once doubted until archaeological findings (such as Sargon’s palace inscriptions) surfaced. The absence of contemporary extra-biblical references to Sihon and Og is neither unusual nor discrediting, given the limited nature of preserved documents.

3. Geopolitical and Climatic Factors

Climate, terrain, and the relative scarcity of extensive digs in certain regions affect what archaeology can unearth. For example, some areas of Transjordan have had fewer comprehensive archaeological studies compared to sites within modern Israel. Erosion and mud layering also obscure or erase former structures and artifacts.

V. Limitations of Archaeological Evidence

1. Fragmentary Remains

In the Levant, many small-scale kingdoms and city-states existed concurrently, leaving behind scant physical footprints. Some are entirely lost or remain undiscovered. Ruins from short-lived conflicts—especially in the second millennium BC—are often poorly preserved.

2. Historical Bias and Destruction

Later conquests, such as those by Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome, repeatedly swept through these regions, potentially razing older remains or repurposing stones and artifacts for new construction. This re-use of material culture reduces the likelihood of discovering intact evidence that would directly attest to a specific biblical battle.

3. Absence of Evidence vs. Evidence of Absence

Caution is warranted in concluding that a lack of direct archaeological attestation disproves an event. Key biblical figures like Belshazzar (Daniel 5) were once considered mythical until the Nabonidus Cylinder was found, affirming his historicity. Over time, new archaeological discoveries have repeatedly supported biblical narratives.

VI. Theological Considerations

1. God’s Sovereign Work

The Scriptures emphasize that these events display God’s power and authority rather than serving purely as expansions of Israel’s territory. The Old Testament frequently ascribes victories to divine intervention (Joshua 10:42; Judges 7:2), suggesting a miraculous nature outside normal historical patterns.

2. Purpose of the Conquest Narratives

These narratives instruct later generations about God’s faithfulness and holiness (Deuteronomy 7:9). A primary aim is theological: to show that God can fulfill promises through direct action. Even if archaeological proof remains elusive, the biblical text preserves the significance of the event for faith.

3. Consistent Scriptural Witness

The conquests of Sihon and Og are reiterated multiple times in Scripture (Numbers 21; Deuteronomy 2–3; Joshua 12:4–5; Psalm 135:10–11; Psalm 136:18–22). Repetitive mention in different books written across various eras underscores the consistency of the biblical record.

VII. Relevant Archaeological and Historical Parallels

1. Cities and Artefacts of the Transjordan

While direct artifacts of Sihon’s or Og’s battles are sparse, excavations in the Transjordan region (such as at Tell Hesban, possibly ancient Heshbon) have uncovered Iron Age remains reflecting continuous occupation. Such finds, though not conclusive regarding a specific battle, support historical occupation, matching the biblical timeframe when the Amorites and other inhabitants resided there.

2. Future Potential Discoveries

Archaeological investigations ongoing in Jordan, Syria, and Israel could potentially yield inscriptions or stelae referencing these kings. Many essential findings—like the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Tel Dan Stele—came to light unexpectedly, dramatically impacting our understanding of biblical history.

3. Independent Confirmation of Cultural Context

Nuances of language, local deities, architectural styles, and settlement patterns in the biblical text accord with extrabiblical data. Although each individual piece of evidence may not directly certify a “divine smiting,” collectively they corroborate the general historic context in which Psalm 135:10–11 took place.

VIII. Lessons from Limited Evidence

1. Historic Reliability and Faith

The limited or indirect nature of archaeological corroboration for certain events does not undermine the broader reliability of the biblical narrative. History is full of battles and regimes known primarily from a single source. Faith rests on the unified testimony of Scripture, upheld by—rather than solely dependent on—archaeological discoveries.

2. Perspective on Miraculous Events

Miracles, by definition, defy purely naturalistic explanation. Where Scripture highlights God’s direct intervention, physical evidence may be less forthcoming than for conventional historical processes. The overarching biblical record, however, is replete with other verifiable details demonstrating coherence and historical grounding.

3. Continual Unfolding of Research

Archaeological work is an ongoing endeavor. Numerous events in Scripture were once deemed unsubstantiated but now stand supported—one famous example being the Hittites, long thought to be mythical until the discovery of their vast empire in modern Turkey.

IX. Concluding Observations

Psalm 135:10–11 depicts a momentous display of divine power on behalf of the Israelites, culminating in the defeat of Sihon and Og and paving the way for Israel’s settlement in the Promised Land. While direct, incontrovertible archaeological evidence may be scarce, multiple factors—successive destructions, limited written records in antiquity, and the nature of divine acts—can help explain why physical proof remains elusive.

Nevertheless, Scripture itself provides a consistent account of these kings’ defeat. The broader historical and archaeological backdrop for the Bible is increasingly buttressed by discoveries in the Levant and beyond. Ongoing research may yet reveal additional clues, and as with many ancient events, the absence of incontrovertible artifacts does not negate the veracity of Scripture’s claims. The biblical narrative exhibits coherence across its manuscripts, and the historical context of the Transjordan resonates with established archaeological findings. Ultimately, this underscores the important nexus of faith and verified history while leaving open the door for future breakthroughs in archaeological exploration.