JOSHUA 5-6: ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE

The biblical understanding is that God interacted directly to influence historical events on earth. Therefore, there should be no ultimate contradiction between definitive archeological findings and the biblical accounts. However, the findings may influence how we interpret those events. A prime example is the case of Jericho. Excavations there are complicated by the fact that the city was continuously occupied for millennia. In such cases, older structures were often demolished to provide building materials for later constructions. 

There is also a long history of excavation at that site, with the results vis-a-vis the Joshua account flip-flopping several times:

    1867-68 original excavation  This was actually the second site in the Holy Land (after Jerusalem) to

be excavated.

    1907-1911 Large fortified walls found, which had collapsed outward. It was confidently stated that 

the account in Book of Joshua had been proved.

    1952-1958 Kathleen Kenyon (British School of Archeology) carried out several seasons of 

excavations in one portion of the site. She especially looked for bichrome pottery from Cyprus which 

was widely traded in the Mediterranean area during the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan (ca. 

1500-1200 BC). She couldn't find any. She dated the pottery she did find to before this time and 

concluded that the city was abandoned by the time Joshua got there. She confidently stated that the 

account in Joshua had been disproved. And this opinion is still held by most current archaeologists.

    1981-1991 Thirty years later Bryant Wood (University of Toronto) continued the excavations in 

eleven seasons of digs and found that Kenyon had misdated her pottery finds. They came from a later 

time period. Not only that, but he did find imported bichrome pottery in the wealthier part of city, 

where Kenyon hadn't excavated.

 

He also found Egyptian scarabs and seals with names of pharaohs dating up to 1350 BC, showing 

occupation during Joshua’s time. C-14 dating on charred wood from the destruction of city showed an 

age of 1410 BC (give or take 40 years), well within the proposed date of the Exodus. This 

finding fits well with the account in Joshua 6:24: “They burned down the city.”

Also of great interest was a large amount of grain found in the city in an underground storage pit.

a. It confirms that the city was taken in spring just after the harvest (consistent with 

Joshua 5:10, which said that the conquest took place right after the Passover).

b. It confirms that inhabitants were not starved into surrender after a long siege the way 

most walled cities were taken (Joshua 6:15 says it only took seven days).

                        c. It confirms Joshua 6:18 in that nothing but metal was plundered from the city.

Joshua 6:20: “the wall collapsed and everyone charged straight ahead.” Traditional understanding was 

that all the walls around the city collapsed. However, Bryant Wood showed that bricks at only one part 

of the city walls had fallen outward, providing a large gap in the wall. The fallen stones formed a ramp 

so that the soldiers could charge straight into the city without having to scale two walls. This is an 

example of archeology perhaps changing our interpretation of a text.

 

But the last word on Jericho has not been written by a long shot. Even more recent findings on the 

C-14 dating of the grain in the storage pit are said to confirm Kenyon's view on the timing of the 

city's destruction, rather than that of Wood. If true, this would, in itself, not disprove the biblical 

account, but it may cause us to redate the time period of that event and of the Exodus. That would not 

be unexpected in light of the uncertainties in dating certain events in Egypt at the time.

This story has several morals to it:

    1. Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

    2. Science never stops re-evaluating the evidence, and archeology as a discipline really straddles the 

line between history and science.

    3. As Christians, we should be aware of the latest findings that might impact our 

understanding of the Bible. However, we must neither (a) live in fear that they will destroy our faith or 

(b) continue to quote outdated findings just because they happen to say something we want them to say.