Overview of an Article

This next post attempts to summarize an interesting article I read by Bryant G. Wood entitled From Ramesses to Shiloh: Archaeological Discoveries Bearing on the Exodus-Judges Period. This article addresses discoveries from archaeology that have to do with the many doubts people express about Israel’s history before the kingdom period. Because of a supposed lack of evidence, many people simply address the Biblical accounts as myths or legends. However, the author makes the point that many of the arguments used fall into four categories: either they misrepresent the chronology given in the Biblical text, the come to conclusion based on arguments from silence or arguments because of no supporting evidence, or a lack of in-depth study or misinterpretation about the actual archaeological evidence and lastly, “just plain bad scholarship.”

Next, the author tackles the topic of the Exodus and the unnamed Pharaoh of Exodus 1:8. He presents arguments for why this could be the first Hyksos king, Maaibre Sheshi, and explains that because he was a foreigner, he would not be familiar with Joseph’s work years beforehand and overall would be semi-handicapped in matters about Egyptian history. Supported by the Turin king list, the Hyksos took over Egypt in a forceful manner during the mid-seventh century B.C. and ruled for about one hundred and eight years. During this time it is probable that they feared the Israelites would join forces with the Egyptians against them, hence they put them into slave labor building certain cities. Archaeologists have studied one of these cities: Ramesses. The author gives the history of the city and its different names in the past such as Rowaty, Avaris, and Peru. This city is principally important because when Jacob and Joseph’s brothers first migrated to Egypt, they settled in this area. There remains evidence of nomadic pastoral settlements that possibly support the original Israelite settlement. Of particular interest is the largest building excavated containing the tomb of an Asiatic dignitary that was broken into and the bones removed. This evidence possibly points to Joseph and the passage Joshua 24:32 (NIV) which says, “And Joseph’s bones, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem in the tract of land that Jacob bought for a hundred pieces of silver from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. This became the inheritance of Joseph’s descendants.”

The next section of the article talks about the major cities of the Israelite conquest in Canaan after the Exodus. The first city they conquered is Jericho, which I talked about in my last post. There has been a lot of controversy about this city and whether or not it was actually there for the Israelites to defeat according to the Biblical text. Wood concludes the section on Jericho by talking about wall dimensions, the presence of grain and the evidence of walls collapsing and fire. The second city conquered is Ai, which has presented a lot of difficulty in identifying its actual location. Wood ends this section by talking about the requirements the city of Ai must meet according to Joshua chapters seven and eight. Next, the city of Hazor was conquered. Hazor was one of the largest cities in Canaan and there is evidence of destruction by fire.

Before the conclusion, the author also briefly covers these topics: the Amarna Letters, Eglon’s Palace at Jericho, the destruction of King Hazor by Deborah and Barak, the migration of the Danites, Abimelech at Shechem and the fall of Shiloh. Out of all these, I found the section about Abimelech to be the most interesting. Archaeology presents evidence from this important urban center of a temple of Baal-Berith, the East Gate and the destruction level, which all coincide with the Biblical account.

Overall, scholars continue to press the issue of a lack of extra biblical literary evidence to support the Bible. However, it seems unreasonable to expect verification of every single text in the Bible and most likely that will never be achieved. Wood concludes by defending that the evidence available does shed light on events in Israel’s early history that complements the Biblical accounts well. I found this article to be very interesting and helpful. It reminds me of the importance of keeping archaeology in its place. Archaeology cannot be used to prove or disprove the Bible and our faith should not rest on it. The authority of Scripture completely trumps man’s ideas about the past. Man is looking at bits and pieces from the past and trying to make sense of it all. Honestly, I would rather trust the people who were actually there and wrote about it. 

Man vs. History

            “A minority of scholars agrees with the Biblical chronology, which places the Israelite entry into Canaan in about 1400.” I think it’s interesting how quick people are to throw what the Bible says right out the window because of so-called evidence from archaeology. Archaeology attempts to investigate the past, but cannot account for every single thing. Man does not know everything and it seems ridiculous to say something did not happen just because we cannot find what we think should be there thousands of years later.

            One of the most debated topics is Jericho, whether or not it happened when the Bible’s chronology says it did, or even if it happened like the Bible says at all. Jericho accounts a major conquer for the Israelites as they began their conquest of Canaan. The Bible says that after seven days of marching around the city, Jericho’s walls came tumbling down and the Israelites burned the city. Following the chronology of the Bible, the Exodus, where the Israelites left Egypt, took place around 1447 B.C.; this places the capture of Jericho around 1400 B.C during the Late Bronze period (c. 1550-1200 B.C.).  

            Several people have been involved in excavating the area where Jericho was located at Tell es-Sultan, west of the Jordan Valley and north of the Dead Sea. The first major excavation took place by Ernst Sellin and Carl Watzinger from 1907 to 1909 and again in 1911. Though pottery chronology had not been well developed at this time, they came to the conclusion that when the Israelites were said to begin their conquest of Canaan that Jericho was not occupied or even fortified.

            Next to investigate the site was John Garstang. He used modern methods that had been developed and immediately published what he found. He excavated a double city wall and what he referred to as City IV from 1930 to 1936. From his findings he concluded that the city and the wall met their destruction about 1400 B.C., which he credited to the Israelites.

            Kathleen Kenyon excavated again from 1952 to 1958 at the ruins of Tell es-Sultan. She agreed with Sellin and Watzinger’s conclusion that there was no Late Bronze city for Joshua and the Israelites to conquer. She expected to find imported Cypriote ware which is supposedly a diagnostic for Late Bronze dating. She dated the wall Garstang excavated to a thousand years before 1400 B.C. and the city’s destruction at about 1550 B.C by the Egyptians or Hyksos.

            The most recent review of the excavations was conducted by Dr. Bryant Wood. He agrees with Kenyon’s conclusion about the double wall, but is skeptical of the date she assigns to the city. Here a few issues with her dates:

·         Kenyon lacked a focus on local pottery

·         Jericho was not located on the major trade routes and you would not necessarily expect to find the imported Cypriote ware

·         Her conclusions were based upon an argument from silence—what was not there rather than what was

·         Her and Garstang both excavated poor quarters of the city

·         Her analysis was of a very small excavation area

·         There is no evidence for her claim that Jericho was destroyed by Egyptians or Hyksos

Next, Wood gives four areas of evidence that support Garstang: ceramic data, stratigraphical considerations, scarab evidence and radiocarbon date. A closer look at the pottery Garstang found shows that there actually was Bichrome ware pottery! There are several other indications that support the Biblical narrative such as evidence of “tumbling down”, evidence of fire, lots of grain that was stored and left, so they obviously were not starved out, etc! Other evidence now suggests that Israel did occupy Canaan throughout the Late Bronze period.

            All in all, I reviewed this debate over Jericho to show that people have all kinds of opinions! Even though they may excavate the same areas, people come up with their different conclusions. One person thinks this, another thinks that… We are attempting to figure out the past from what we know now; this is not a fair judgment of the past! We cannot expect to prove anything 100%. Can you prove to me, without any doubt, that George Washington was the first President of the United States? Were you there? We cannot prove anything historical with 100% certainty. Remember that, and do not let man’s fallible interpretations weaken your faith.