Jericho: A Case Study
Evidence
There is insufficient evidence of an occupation or destruction at Jericho (Tell es-Sultan) in the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC) to support the traditional dates of Joshua’s destruction of the town. However, there is evidence of an Iron I (1200–1000 BC) occupation of the site that is consistent with a latter 12th century BC destruction that fits a Conquest date of c. 1135 BC.
While not widely known or discussed in academia, Jericho was reoccupied in the Iron I period (after c. 1200 BC)—having lain fallow for a century, if not more. Kathleen Kenyon’s excavation in the 1950s found a toppled outer defensive wall that appears consistent with the Bible’s account of Joshua’s destruction of the site.
This fallen wall is overlain by deep layers of erosion material, attesting to a long period of abandonment of the site after the collapse of the wall. Above this erosion material is an Iron II reoccupation.
Ernst Sellin and Carl Watzinger, who excavated Jericho from 1907–1909 recorded little-noted evidence of an Iron I (1200–1000 BC) occupation of the site in their 1913 excavation report. These pioneer excavators had little grasp of the importance of identifying discrete strata of successive occupational periods. In their wide-area exposure of the central and northern part of the Jericho mound they evidently dug through the Iron II to the Iron I occupation stratum in some areas, believing what they uncovered was a single occupation of the Israelites.
Kenyon’s Composite of Excavations (1907–1958)
Iron I and II pottery from Jericho discovered by the Sellin/Watziner Expedition (1907-1909)
Almost 70 years after the excavation two German scholars studying the Sellin-Watzinger excavation report found that the report included both Iron I and Iron II vessels on the same depiction (apparently assuming all the vessels came from a single occupation level). But these vessels did not come from a single stratum. Sellin and Watzinger had conflated three strata. It is the presence of the Iron I vessels that testify to a reoccupation of the mound that may date in the early 1100s BC.
The Bible’s “stratigraphy” of the Jericho mound lists three successive strata associated with the Joshua story: 1. The stratum Joshua destroyed (Josh. 6:26). 2. The stratum of abandonment. 3. And the stratum of reoccupation in the reign of Ahab (1 Kgs. 16:34). This sequence may appear in Trench I of Kathleen Kenyon’s excavation reports from the 1950s.
Iron I and II pottery from Jericho discovered by the Sellin/Watziner Expedition (1907-1909)
In her deep vertical cut through the tel (Trench I), Kenyon depicted the outer defensive city wall of mudbrick that had toppled outward (presumably by an earthquake). The fallen brick material forms a ramp of debris leading up to the rampart of the mound, matching the picture recorded of Josh. 6:20; the Israelites climbed up this debris into the city.
The date of this fallen wall is the key to associating these remains with the Bible’s account of Joshua’s conquest of Jericho. Unfortunately, there is no definitive evidence for dating this wall or the date of its collapse. But suppose we allow the testimony of the biblical account and the circumstantial evidence at a dozen other archaeological sites in Canaan and the Transjordan. There is a good case for dating the wall’s collapse to the latter 12th century BC (c. 1135 BC).
Since Kenyon’s time, there has been general agreement that the mound was uninhabited in the 13th century BC. There are only sparse indications of sedentary occupation at any time during the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC). The next period of occupation dates to Iron I (after c. 1200 BC), based on the discovery of Iron I pottery in the Sellin-Watziner excavations.
Jericho’s resettlement in the early 12th century BC should be considered probable since it is consistent with evidence of the Settlement taking place throughout the highlands of Canaan in the early 1100s BC. During this period, the population density in the northern highlands tripled—evidence of refugees fleeing the collapse of Late Bronze Age cities to the north.
These newcomers to Canaan destroyed many sites in their path but also built many new ones. Importantly, they reoccupied long-abandoned sites like Ai, Hebron, and presumably Jericho.
Jericho would have been a prime site for new settlers in this period: It had ready-made defensive structures (based on the massive 15-foot high cyclopean revetment wall (built in the Middle Bronze Age) that braced steep defensive ramparts; the site had a prolific spring capable of irrigating the surrounding fertile fields; and it was strategically located along commercial roads. The new settlers had only to clear the face of the revetment wall down to bedrock and construct a mudbrick wall atop the revetment wall to establish a virtually impregnable defensive system. (Kenyon calculated the size of the mudbrick wall to be 12 feet high and 6.5 feet thick based on the volume of the mudbrick debris.)
The deep layers of erosion above the fallen bricks indicate an extended period of abandonment. According to 1 Kings 16:34, the site was not reinhabited until the 9th century BC. Based on the evidence supporting the Conquest occurring c. 1135 BC, the date of the fallen wall best fits this period in agreement with the Bible’s account.
For an extended discussion of the evidence (including an assessment of datable pottery sherds within the strata), see the chapter on Jericho in The Bible and the Origins of Ancient Israel.
Trench I excavated by Kathleen Kenyon in the1950s. #1 and #2: Middle Bronze Age sherds within and below the fallen wall material.
MB, LB, and Iron Age sherds appear in the erosion above the fallen red bricks.