Concept

Jericho Conquest

Q: What did Bryant Wood argue about Jericho?

In a 1990 article in Biblical Archaeology Review, Bryant Wood argued that Kenyon had misdated specific pottery samples and that the actual destruction layer extended into the Late Bronze period (c. 1400 BC). Wood claimed the destruction matches the biblical Joshua narrative in specific details: walls falling outward (in some sectors); the city burned with everything still inside; the destruction occurring in spring (matching Joshua 5.10-12). The Wood re-dating is contested by mainstream archaeology but defended by conservative and evangelical scholars.

Intro

In Joshua 6, the Israelites cross the Jordan, march around Jericho seven times, blow trumpets, and the walls of the city fall down flat. The narrative is one of the most famous in the Old Testament. The archaeology of the Jericho site has been one of the most contested questions in biblical archaeology for almost a century.

In the 1950s, the British archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon conducted excavations at Tell es-Sultan (ancient Jericho) and concluded that the city's major destruction had occurred around 1550 BC, well before any conventional chronology placed Joshua's conquest. On this reading, Jericho was already in ruins when Joshua got there; the biblical account has no archaeological basis. The Kenyon dating became mainstream consensus for decades.

In 1990, the American archaeologist Bryant Wood published a re-analysis in Biblical Archaeology Review, arguing that Kenyon had misdated the pottery and that the actual major destruction layer was around 1400 BC, fitting the early-date Exodus chronology and Joshua's conquest. Wood's re-dating is contested by mainstream scholarship but has been defended by other evangelical and conservative archaeologists. The Jericho question remains one of the most-discussed disputed cases in biblical archaeology.

In full

Jericho (Tell es-Sultan in modern Palestinian Authority territory, in the lower Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea) is one of the oldest continuously occupied human settlements in the world, with archaeological remains dating from the pre-Pottery Neolithic period (c. 9000 BC) onward. The site was excavated extensively in three major campaigns: Charles Warren (1860s), John Garstang (1930s), and Kathleen Kenyon (1952-1958). Garstang originally argued for a Late Bronze Age destruction layer matching Joshua's conquest; Kenyon's subsequent more refined stratigraphic excavation re-dated the destruction earlier, to roughly 1550 BC (Middle Bronze IIC, well before any Joshua chronology). Bryant Wood's 1990 re-analysis re-argued for a Late Bronze date (c. 1400 BC) matching the early-date Joshua chronology, based on pottery typology and stratigraphic re-examination. The Wood dating is contested by mainstream archaeology but defended by some evangelical scholars. The dispute centers on the dating of specific pottery sherds and stratigraphic features in Kenyon's excavation reports.

Discovery

Tell es-Sultan was first identified as Jericho in the 19th century and was excavated by Charles Warren (1868), Ernst Sellin (1907-1909), John Garstang (1930-1936), and Kathleen Kenyon (1952-1958). Each successive excavation applied increasingly refined stratigraphic methods. The Kenyon excavations established the modern stratigraphic standard for the site. Bryant Wood's 1990 re-analysis was a re-reading of Kenyon's published reports rather than a new excavation. Subsequent re-examinations have continued the debate.

What it shows

Three relevant attestations, with contested status:

Jericho was a real major Bronze Age city. The site has been continuously inhabited from the Neolithic period onward, with substantial Bronze Age architecture, fortification systems, and material culture. The biblical narrative of Jericho as a fortified Canaanite city in the period before Israel's settlement is archaeologically grounded.
The Kenyon dating (mainstream consensus). Kathleen Kenyon's stratigraphic excavations dated the major destruction layer to roughly 1550 BC (Middle Bronze IIC), with the city largely abandoned during the Late Bronze period. On this reading, no significant destruction layer matches any Joshua chronology; the biblical narrative would have to be read as legendary, theological, or symbolic rather than historical-archaeological. This remains the dominant view in mainstream archaeology.
The Wood re-dating (contested). Bryant Wood ("Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho?", Biblical Archaeology Review 16.2, 1990) argued that Kenyon misdated specific pottery samples; that the actual destruction layer extends into the Late Bronze period (c. 1400 BC); and that the destruction matches the biblical Joshua narrative in specific details (the walls falling outward; the city burned with everything in it; the timing in spring). Wood's re-dating has been substantively engaged in subsequent scholarship; opinion is divided. Conservative evangelical archaeology (Hoerth, Yamauchi, Mazar) treats Wood's re-dating as a serious option; mainstream archaeology generally maintains the Kenyon dating.

Biblical references

Joshua 2, the spies in Jericho; Rahab.
Joshua 3-4, crossing the Jordan and entering the land.
Joshua 6, the conquest of Jericho.
Joshua 6.20, "The wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city."
Joshua 6.24, "They burned the city with fire."
Hebrews 11.30, "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days."

Evidential status

Genuinely contested. Mainstream archaeological consensus follows Kenyon's dating (Middle Bronze IIC destruction, c. 1550 BC) and concludes that no archaeological destruction layer matches a Late Bronze Joshua conquest. Bryant Wood's re-dating (Late Bronze destruction, c. 1400 BC, matching the early-date Joshua chronology) has been substantively engaged but is not mainstream consensus. The find is best presented in apologetic discussion with the contested status explicitly noted; the apologetic case does not depend on Jericho specifically and is willing to acknowledge contested dating where mainstream archaeology disagrees with maximalist readings.

Common questions this page answers

Q: Did the walls of Jericho really fall down?

The Jericho question is one of the most-debated cases in biblical archaeology. The mainstream consensus (following Kathleen Kenyon's 1950s excavations) dates the major destruction layer at Tell es-Sultan to roughly 1550 BC, well before any Joshua chronology. On this reading, no destruction layer matches the biblical conquest. Bryant Wood's 1990 re-analysis re-dated the destruction to about 1400 BC, fitting the early-date Joshua chronology; the Wood dating is contested but defended by some evangelical scholars. The dispute is empirical and ongoing.

Q: What did Kathleen Kenyon find at Jericho?

Kenyon's 1952-1958 excavations applied refined stratigraphic methods to Tell es-Sultan and concluded that the major Middle Bronze city destruction occurred around 1550 BC, with the city largely abandoned during the Late Bronze period when the Joshua narrative would place the conquest. The Kenyon dating became mainstream consensus and remains dominant in current scholarship.

Q: What did Bryant Wood argue about Jericho?

In a 1990 article in Biblical Archaeology Review, Bryant Wood argued that Kenyon had misdated specific pottery samples and that the actual destruction layer extended into the Late Bronze period (c. 1400 BC). Wood claimed the destruction matches the biblical Joshua narrative in specific details: walls falling outward (in some sectors); the city burned with everything still inside; the destruction occurring in spring (matching Joshua 5.10-12). The Wood re-dating is contested by mainstream archaeology but defended by conservative and evangelical scholars.

Q: Is the Jericho destruction debate resolved?

No. The dispute is empirical and ongoing. Mainstream consensus maintains the Kenyon dating (1550 BC Middle Bronze destruction). Conservative evangelical scholarship (Wood, Hoerth, Geisler) defends a Late Bronze dating matching the early-date Joshua conquest. Radiocarbon evidence is partial and contested. The find is best presented with appropriate caveats; the apologetic case for the Old Testament's historical reliability does not depend on Jericho specifically and is willing to acknowledge contested dating where mainstream archaeology disagrees.

Q: Where is Jericho today?

At Tell es-Sultan, in the lower Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea, just north of the modern Palestinian city of Jericho in the West Bank. The site is partially accessible to visitors.