Jericho's walls did fall down

[Sekhmet]

History

Sorry but in this case last paragraph comes first.

But then came a time in which they woke up from their heedlessness because the latest wall, dating back to that period reveals quick ill-contructed repairs on the remains of a wall previously constructed. The foundation stones appear as if they had been hurriedly dropped and with no organization. Then the wall started to be built of baked brick moulds over the stones. Baked brick moulds used in other walls appear on this wall. But calamity overtook those folks before they completed the construction of that wall which was itself destroyed by fire, and the town fell into the hands of raiding Bedouin tribes.

The start of Jericho's own story of its Early Bronze Age walls

The defensive walls were repaired and rebuilt sixteen times during the First Bronze Age which lasted 600 years. It is often difficult to indicate the various periods when the renewal of the building of the walls was made, as they used to fall down as a result of earthquakes, or because of infiltration of water into their foundations, and the people were prompt to repair them. Some destruction befell the walls as a result of enemy attacks. In any case there appear on these walls during that period the traces of destruction and ruin, but traces of repairs and renewed building are also apparent on then. This goes to show that the inhabitants of the town lived a life devoid of security and stability.

Nevertheless, the general picture shows a continuous improvement in the fields of civilization and construction as people started to use copper in large quantities in order to manufacture weapons and tools. Pottery utensils show an abundance of trade exchange with all neighbouring valleys.

This period revealed a great progress in civilization, as it was accompanied by the appearance of new towns in numerous sites that had been hitherto uninhabited. But this civilization, along with other civilizations preceding it, crumbled and came to an end at the hands of Bedouin raiders. It seems that the people at the end of First Bronze Age started to enjoy a greater stability and tranquility leading to the neglect of these defensive fortifications.

The walls of Jericho at the end of the Early Bronze Age fits with the original desire to place Exodus at the end of the Old Kingdom of Ancient Egypt (end of the Early Bronze Age as well). These walls of Jericho, were capable of falling after the sons of Israel march around them seven days while blowing rams horns just as scripture says.

Dr. Bryant Woods prefers to remain in the dark using the chronology first based upon ancient Greek and Roman pagan belief in a short history of history.  I regret this fine Biblical archaeologist believes in fairy tales, not the science he was educated in.

[Moses]

Archeology is far as I know have a similar event mentioned in the Joshuah
time conquest dated some 1000 years earlier then the biblical interpreters of chronology think.

Wile it is possible that these events happened multiple times one additional
item of information given in the Bible is that not only walls came down but actually the city was burned.

Archaeological excavations in the area of what is believed to be ancient Jericho show such event of burning and current method of carbon dating leads them to think that it happened in 2200 - 2400 BC.

The same groups of Archaeologists cant find evidence at the same sites to support a later chronology.
Unless that Jericho was located in another area.

[Sekhmet]

Archeology is far as I know have a similar event mentioned in the Joshuah
time conquest dated some 1000 years earlier then the biblical interpreters of chronology think.

Wile it is possible that these events happened multiple times one additional
item of information given in the Bible is that not only walls came down but actually the city was burned.

Archaeological excavations in the area of what is believed to be ancient Jericho show such event of burning and current method of carbon dating leads them to think that it happened in 2200 - 2400 BC.

The same groups of Archaeologists cant find evidence at the same sites to support a later chronology.
Unless that Jericho was located in another area.

Agreed sir.  Except since Jericho's  existence dates to the 9th millennium BCE I find the mis-identifiction of Jericho a farther stretch than simply adjusting the biblical chronology it fit the facts archaeology is well able to supply.  Thank you Moses a nice day to you and yours, as to all. 

[turanclancath]

http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/root/2001/RadiocarbonBruins/?pFullItemRecord=ON

very interesting C14 report about the destruction of Early Bronze Jericho.

http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/root/2001/RadiocarbonBruins/?pFullItemRecord=ON


Open up also the PDF file you see for the full report.
According to Bruinsma/van der Plicht their C14 data they propose to push back all the traditional Early bronze data some 100/300 years.

And to pusch back the Egyptian dynastys 1 till 6 also some 300 years.
very interesting based on C14 calibration.



and also very interesting

403 Forbidden
turanclancath

[Sekhmet]

http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/root/2001/RadiocarbonBruins/?pFullItemRecord=ON

very interesting C14 report about the destruction of Early Bronze Jericho.

http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/root/2001/RadiocarbonBruins/?pFullItemRecord=ON


Open up also the PDF file you see for the full report.
According to Bruinsma/van der Plicht their C14 data they propose to push back all the traditional Early bronze data some 100/300 years.

And to pusch back the Egyptian dynastys 1 till 6 also some 300 years.
very interesting based on C14 calibration.

turanclancath

A great Sekhmet roar for my most dear Sir Turanclancath for again providing most excellent links!

I had heard and read of such developments for sometime happening.  That it might happen is exciting.  Until it is offically accepted, I am stuck with Dr. Hawass' chronology because I believe as Secretary General of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities he is in the need to know position of this most important ancient land.


Regarding The Archaeological Chronology of the Bible Lands since it is based on archaeological findings of Old Kingdom Pharaohs and not so much time.  Such a change to older dating would not change the intent of chronology.

Again thank you my dear Sir Turanclancath.

[Michael]

The Bible claims Jericho burned everything thing in the city. Afterwards he curses anyone who rebuilds the city.

Jericho was unoccupied until the Middle Bronze Age, when people occupied the city once again.

This causes me to suspect the text about Jericho was originally written at some time before the MB occupation.

Comments?

[Moses]

Michael its interesting observation.
After Jericho fell, Joshua pronounced a curse on any who would rebuild the city, a prediction that was fulfilled in the days of Ahab (Josh 6:26; 1 Kgs 16:34).


Collapsed MB Wall

Sellin and Watzinger and later Kenyon found remains of a collapsed mudbrick wall at the base of the stone revetment wall. 

Bryant Wood points to the base of that mudbrick wall.  All agree that the wall fell down, but they differ on the date.  Wood's conclusions are the most informed and they date the destruction of the wall to the time of Joshua (1400 B.C.) - Late Bronze Age.

Storejars of Grain

Both Garstang and Kenyon found dozens of storejars full of grain from the last Canaanite city of Jericho.  The obvious conclusion: these were from the time of the harvest when the city was burned (not looted) by Joshua. As such, the archaeological record fits the biblical record at this point precisely.
 
Michael
I don't hide here me addopting the  Maximalist views. :-)

Jericho (Walking in Their Sandals)  Gives easy-to-read information on the location, biblical significance, etc.  Features links to photographs and on-line scripture references. 
Jericho - Walking in Their Sandals - location profile

Not to far from Jericho in the central hill country we find based on the work of Israel finkelstain the late bronze age (15 to13 cent BCE) had 29 settlements, Iron 1 age (12 - 11 cent BCE) the settlements grew to about 254 and Iron 2 ( 10 to 7 Cent BCE) the settlements grew to 520.
So new population was emarging there. The oval shape sites point to beduin like settlements. The Shasy mentioned in Egyptian writings.

Also interesting reading

BIBLE STUDY MANUALS: JERICHO'S WALLS FELL DOWN - OUTWARDLY

[Michael]

The stone walls of Jericho fell in the Early Bonze Age. It was the same period  Ai was destroyed. That is when it was detroyed by fire. Your sources that claim 1400 BCE are based on old speculation and not C-14 dating. The secondary "mudbrick" of the MB age is insignificant to the story. It an an apologsts way of attempting to make the dates work, rather than accept the facts as to when the stone wall fell.

Joshua didn't go through all that nonsense so he could storm a mudbrick wall. I don't buy it.
Is Bryant Wood's chronology of Jericho valid?
The chronology of Jericho is by no means the only problem associated with the traditional biblical chronology of the Exodus and Conquest. For example, even if Wood's chronology of Jericho were viable, the complete absence of fortified habitation at et-Tell (identified by almost all scholars with the biblical Ai) for 1000 years prior to the traditional biblical chronology date for its destruction by Joshua is still left to be explained. And the archaeological and historical data from Egypt must also be explained. These depict Egypt as a stable, properous nation at the very time the traditional biblical chronology date for the Exodus says Egypt should be a nation devastated by plagues.



The End of the Early Bronze Age

R. de Vaux, “Palestine in the Early Bronze Age,” The Cambridge Ancient History, Third ed., vol. I, pt. 2 (1971), ch. xv, p. 236. [According to J. Mellaart ("The Catastrophe at the End of the Eartly Bronze Age 2 Period,” The Cambridge Ancient History third ed. [1971], Vol. I, pt. 2, p. 406) in the period after the catastrophe the number of settlements “is reduced to a quarter of the number in the previous period.” Jacques Courtois, reporting the results of a survey in the valley of the Orontes, writes of the “extreme density of habitation of the plain in the Bronze Age, and particularly in the Early Bronze Age.” (Syria, 50 [1973], p. 99). In eastern Arabia “a sharp downturn in settlements and activity becomes apparent” after ca. 2000 B.C. (Michael Rice, “The States of Archaeology in Eastern Arabia and the Persian Gulf,” Asian Affairs, 64 [1977], p. 143). According to Kathleen Kenyon, “The final end of the Early Bronze Age civilization came with catastrophic completeness . . . Jericho . . . was probably completely destroyed. . . . Every town in Palestine that has so far been investigated shows the same break. . . . All traces of the Early Bronze Age civilization disappeared.” (Archaeology in the Holy Land [London, 1960], p. 134). According to Ernest Wright, “one of the most striking facts about the Early Bronze civilization is its destruction, one so violent that scarcely a vestige of it survived. We do not know when the event took place; we only know that there is not an Early Bronze Age city excavated or explored in all Palestine which does not have a gap in its occupation between Early Bronze Age III and the Middle Bronze Age. To date this gap, we know that it must be approximately contemporary with a similar period in Egypt called the ‘First Intermediate Period’ between dynasties VI and XI (ca. 22nd and 21st centuries B.C.).” ("The Archaeology of Palestine” in The Bible and the Ancient Near East, Essays in Honor of William Foxwell Albright [1961], p. 103

[Sekhmet]

The problem is solved when we accept scripture as basically sound, and the newer archaeological evidence that so well proves scripture.  The only losers with this view, are those that want to throw out scripture.

In throwing out scripture, as I reminded an interested party makes the identification of the Arab peoples, so proud of their connection to Abraham very shakey as is the Jewish connection.

I understand in this light that just this past week the King of Saudi ate for the first time in the same room as the Israeli President.  Small steps are best for building great things in my humble opinion.

To all a great day!

[Michael]

The problem is solved when we accept scripture as basically sound, and the newer archaeological evidence that so well proves scripture.  The only losers with this view, are those that want to throw out scripture.

In throwing out scripture, as I reminded an interested party makes the identification of the Arab peoples, so proud of their connection to Abraham very shakey as is the Jewish connection.

I understand in this light that just this past week the King of Saudi ate for the first time in the same room as the Israeli President.  Small steps are best for building great things in my humble opinion.

To all a great day!

Actually the best solution is to accept science and achaeology and question the text. After all the person who wrote the text was of extreme bias, a story teller and not an historian. This can be demonstrated by the vast amount of private conversations recorded in the text, with no one to record them, i.e they were made up. Accepting the Bible as true when the archaeological evidence demonstrates oherwise can be called "faith" or "wishful thiking." However, it can not be "truth"or "scientific" or "reasonable"or even 'logical."

And that is not just my humble opinion, but how the community of scientific thought and reasoning works.

[Sekhmet]

The problem is solved when we accept scripture as basically sound, and the newer archaeological evidence that so well proves scripture.  The only losers with this view, are those that want to throw out scripture.

In throwing out scripture, as I reminded an interested party makes the identification of the Arab peoples, so proud of their connection to Abraham very shakey as is the Jewish connection.

I understand in this light that just this past week the King of Saudi ate for the first time in the same room as the Israeli President.  Small steps are best for building great things in my humble opinion.

To all a great day!

Actually the best solution is to accept science and achaeology and question the text. After all the person who wrote the text was of extreme bias, a story teller and not an historian. This can be demonstrated by the vast amount of private conversations recorded in the text, with no one to record them, i.e they were made up. Accepting the Bible as true when the archaeological evidence demonstrates oherwise can be called "faith" or "wishful thiking." However, it can not be "truth"or "scientific" or "reasonable"or even 'logical."

And that is not just my humble opinion, but how the community of scientific thought and reasoning works.

I attempt in all things sir to surround myself with experts so wishful thinking on my part is held in check as a rule.  I allow for redaction so I do not automatically accept scripture it has to meet certain tests to eliminate the excuse of redaction. 

What archaeology sir?  That of Dr. Albright, and Dr. Woods?  Dr. Albright passed way sometime ago and is not available to comment on the finds since his retirement.  Dr. Wood does not allow for redaction and maintains the status quo of circular reasoning of the Albright school.  That has resulted in the rise of the nihilists and minimalists.  I do not limit my work to only such and such era of archaeological discovery, I embrace it all and the newer the better.

A pleasure sir thank you for your point of view.

[Michael]

I use Stiebing's "Out of the Desert" as my primary source and then go from there with more recent discoveries, should they prove to be archaeological and not some apologist's wild notion.

I do not accept, "Maybe, or "it could have been" or "Lack of evidence is not evidence" excuses. In archaeology lack of evidence is evidence.

This means there was no recycling of metals to create chariots that didn't exist.
The stone walls of Jericho fell in the Early Bronze age as ws Ai's destruction.
Heshbon, conquered by Moses, did not exist until 1100 BCE or later.
Jerusalem was a small town at the time of the supposed United Monarchy and most of Judea was rural. The time of the great Canaanite city states was the Middle Bronze Age, not Iron Age.


Abraham could not have lived with actual Philistines.

Israel was never a captive in Egypt, nor did the Red Seas part, or a million people wonder in the desert for 40 years. There was no Exodus conquest of the Canaanites. There was no influx of customs or Egyptian names into the Canaanite culture, which would have happened had such an event occured.

That is what science and archaeology teaches. That is the inerrant truth. The Biblical text in no way comes close to truth.

[Sekhmet]

I use Stiebing's "Out of the Desert" as my primary source and then go from there with more recent discoveries, should they prove to be archaeological and not some apologist's wild notion.

I do not accept, "Maybe, or "it could have been" or "Lack of evidence is not evidence" excuses. In archaeology lack of evidence is evidence.

This means there was no recycling of metals to create chariots that didn't exist.
The stone walls of Jericho fell in the Early Bronze age as ws Ai's destruction.
Heshbon, conquered by Moses, did not exist until 1100 BCE or later.
Jerusalem was a small town at the time of the supposed United Monarchy and most of Judea was rural. The time of the great Canaanite city states was the Middle Bronze Age, not Iron Age.


Abraham could not have lived with actual Philistines.

Israel was never a captive in Egypt, nor did the Red Seas part, or a million people wonder in the desert for 40 years. There was no Exodus conquest of the Canaanites. There was no influx of customs or Egyptian names into the Canaanite culture, which would have happened had such an event occured.

That is what science and archaeology teaches. That is the inerrant truth. The Biblical text in no way comes close to truth.

Yes sir, as you wish.  We will just have to agree to disagree.  With time I can wait the past 20-30 years has produced more information on the Predynastic and Old Kingdom than scholars dreamed.  It also agrees wonderfully with scripture.  Again I look forward to reading your book.

My best sir, to you and yours as to all.

[truthforlife]

It is all about chronology

Dr. Gerald Aardsma, a professional CHRONOLOGIST, has pointed out repeatedly that traditional biblical chronologies (such as Usher's chronology) are seriously in error prior to the time of Samuel and the Israelite kings. (See, for example, his article "Evidence for a Lost Millennium in Biblical Chronology" (Radiocarbon 37, No. 2 (1995): 267--273; Proceedings of the 15th International 14-C Conference, edited by G.T. Cook, D.D. Harkness, B.F. Miller and E.M. Scott.) This is why later events, such as the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., have been so well confirmed by biblical archeology and why no earlier biblical events, such as the Exodus, have been confirmed at all by biblical archeology. Biblical archaeology, as a scholarly discipline, persists in using a wrong, out-of-date biblical chronology. There is no more chance of finding the Exodus in the second millennium B.C., where old-time biblical chronology scholars such as Ussher placed it, and where ALL biblical archaeologists continue to insist on looking for it, than there is of finding World War II in the first millennium A.D.

When one gets their biblical chronology right, biblical archeology confirms the historicity of the Exodus every bit as much as it confirms the historicity of the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. Read Dr. Aardsma's book "The Exodus Happened 2450 BC" (Resources: Books: The Exodus Happened 2450 B.C.) if you doubt this.

[Moses]

Dr. Gerald Aardsma has impressive credentials 
But he has no credentials is Anthropology, Bible study, Archeology or History.
Wile very interesting and compelling information I don't think any Archeologists nor Biblical scholars recognize Dr Aardsma chronology.