Tweet
That is a fair assessment.
Jericho, A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence is as good as any write-up that I have seen
Douglas Petrovich weighs in on the debate
There are questions about the reliability of carbon-dating accuracy for periods in the second millenium BC
Wood's claim about carbon dating finds support from a PDF
Jericho, A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence is as good as any write-up that I have seen
Garstang's conclusion, based on his findings at Tel Es Sultan (Jericho) 1930 - 1936, was that Jericho fell around 1400BC "Garstang concluded that City IV came to an end about 1400 B.C.E., based on pottery found in the destruction debris, on scarabs recovered from nearby tombs and on the absence of Mycenaean ware. He ascribed the destruction to invading Israelites."
From her work in the 1930s, and the follow-up work of 1952 to 1958, Kenyon concluded that Jericho fell roughly 1550 BC - 150 years (roughly) earlier than Garstang's estimates. However, her write-up of the latter excavations hasn't been published.
recently, new evidence has come to light suggesting that Israel was resident in Canaan throughout the Late Bronze II period. As new data emerge and as old data are reevaluated, it will undoubtedly require a reappraisal of current theories regarding the date and the nature of the emergence of Israel in Canaan.
Douglas Petrovich weighs in on the debate
... dating the destruction of Jericho to 1558 BC. Not only does the archaeological record for Jericho, as articulated by Dr. Wood, prohibit such a date, but the archaeological record for Hazor also prohibits such a date. For this, you can consult my article on Hazor, which was published both in JETS and on ABR's website.
There are questions about the reliability of carbon-dating accuracy for periods in the second millenium BC
Wood's claim about carbon dating finds support from a PDF
Comment