This view of the catastrophe of the cities of the plain has, however, not passed without the dissent of some writers. It was easy to explode the opinion long cur- rent that when the five cities were submerged in the lake their remains — walls, colinnns, and capitals — might still be discerned below the water, for exploration has discovered no such relics. Not content with this, Re- land led the way in modern times in attacking the whole theory in question of the meteorological and geological agencies employed in the event {Palteiif. p. 257), and De Saulcy {Deail Sea. i, 370, Amer. ed.) and Stanley (^iSin. ami A//, p. 289) have followed in the same line. Their arguments are the following:
(1.) Only two words are used in (ien. xix to describe what happened : rTI'l"!!, to throw down, to destroy (ver. 1.3, 14), and "En, to overturn (ver. 21, 25, 29). In neither of these is the presence of water — the sub- mergence of the cities or of the liistrict in which they stood — either mentioned or im|)lied. This would per- haps be a valid objection if the submersion were re- ganled as the jirincipal cause of the destruction ; but as, under the above statement, it comes in merely as a con- sequence of that event (see Keil, Comment, ad loc), the argument hardly ap])lies. Moreover, in the latter of the two terms employed ("Ei^, fiap/idk, to overturn) there does seem to be a covert allusion to the under- mining action of a subterranean force; and perhaps in the former (r^rt'^n, hixrhith, to wipe out) there is im- plied the erasive violence of a rush of water. Certainly these terms do not forbid such an explanation of the mode of destriution ; and in the confessed inability of the opponents of this view to suggest any other natural means, we may well acquiesce in this as the most plau- sible hitherto found.
(2.) "The geological portion of the theory does not appear to agree with the facts. 'l"he whole of the lower end of the lake, including the plain which borders it on the south, has every appearance not of having been h)wered since the formation of the valley, but of under- going a gradual pn.cess of tilling u)). This region is, in fact, the delta of ihe very large, though irregular, streams which drain the highlands on its east, west, and
SODOM
857
SODOMITE
south, and have drained them ever since the valley was a valley. No report by any observer at all competent to read the geological features of the district will be found to give countenance to the notion that any dis- turbance has taken place within the historical period, or that anything occurred there since the country as- sumed its present general conformation b{'Vf>nd the quiet, gradual change due to the rcifiilar operation of tlie tirdinary agents of nature, which is slowly tilling up the chasm of the valley and the lake witii the washings brought down by the torrents from the highlands on all sides. The volcanic appearances and marks of fire, so often mentioned, are, so far as we have any trustworthy means of judging, entirely illusory, and due to ordinary, natural cawses." On the contrary, we have ad<iuced above the testimony of travellers and the opinion of competent scientists to sustain the convulsive character of the region in modern times. Until counter-evidence shall have been brought forward of a more decided character than merely round assertions and general in- ferences, we may rest the case upon these grounds. Prof. Hitchcock shows (Bibliufheca Sacra, July, 18G7, p. 4G9 sq.) that the present geological features of the region confirm the Scriptural account of the fate of the cities of the plain where Sodom stood.
(3.) " The ' plain of the Jordan,' in which the cities stooil (as has been stated), can hardly have been at the south end of the lake." This position of Sodom favors, indeed, the foregoing theory, by reason of the compara- tive shallowness of the water in the southern end of the Dead Sea; but it is not essential to the mechanical agencies employed, whether volcanic, meteorological, or fluvial. As, however, the two questions have been in- volvedin each other, we will proceed to consider,
IV. The Location of the City. — Until a very recent period it has universally been held that the cities of the ])lain were situated at the southern end of the Dead Sea. Josephus, although he speaks indefinitely about the po- sition of Sodom, expressly fixes Zoar (^A nt. i, 1 1 ; War, iv, 8) in Arabia, under which name he was in this case referring to the south-east end of the Salt Sea ; and to the same effect is the testimony of Eusebius {Onomast. s. V.) and of Jerome {Ep. cviii, 11 ; Comment, in Esa. xv, 5). This view seems to have been universally held by the mediaeval historians and pilgrims, and it is adopted by modern topographers, almost without exception. In the words of one of the most able and careful of mod- ern travellers. Dr. Robinson, " the cities which were de- stroyed must have been situated on the south end of the lake as it then existed" {Bibl. Res. ii, 188). This is also the belief of De Saulcy, except with regard to (iomorrah ; and, in fact, is generally accepted. Besides the above arguments in favor of the submersion beneath the shallow waters of the south end of the sea, a con- sideration of much force is the existence of similar names in that direction. Thus, the name Usdum, attached to the remarkable ridge of salt which lies at the south- western corner of the lake, is usually regarded as the representative of Sodom (Robinson, Van de Velde, De Saulcy, etc.), notwithstanding a slight difference be- tween the two words. See SoDOMinsir Sea. The name W mra/i, which is attached to a valley among the mountains south of Masada (Van de Velde, ii, 99, and map), is an almost exact equivalent to the Hebrew of Gomorrha ('Amorah). The name Dra'a, and nearly as strongly that of Zof/hal, recall Zoar. The frequent salt pinnacles in the same vicinity are likewise a striking memento of the saline incrustation which overtook Lot's ■wife, although, from the miraculous character of the lat- ter incident, we are not inclined to press this coincidence. See Lot's Wife.