What archaeological evidence supports the events described in Joshua 6:14? Joshua 6:14 in Context “On the second day they marched around the city once and returned to the camp. They did this for six days.” The verse sits inside the broader narrative of Jericho’s fall, detailing Israel’s daily march that culminated in the supernatural collapse of the walls. Archaeology has probed Tell es-Sultan (ancient Jericho) for more than a century, and multiple data sets converge to affirm the biblical description. The Site: Tell es-Sultan • Location: 21 km northeast of Jerusalem, 250 m below sea level—the lowest city on earth. • Occupational strata: Early Bronze through Persian periods, with a Late Bronze destruction layer of greatest relevance. • Four major campaigns: Sellin/Watzinger (1907-09), Garstang (1930-36), Kenyon (1952-58), and the Italian-Palestinian Expedition (1997-present). City Fortifications Consistent with the Biblical Account Garstang exposed a stone revetment wall (4-5 m high) at the foot of the tell and a mud-brick city wall (another 2 m) atop it. Kenyon confirmed the same defensive system on the north and west. When the upper mud-brick superstructure collapsed outward, it formed a ramp of debris against the revetment—exactly what the text implies when it later says, “Each man charged straight ahead into the city” (Joshua 6:20). Collapsed Mud-Brick Debris Field Kenyon described “a substantial deposit of fallen red bricks piled nearly to the top of the revetment.” The bricks lay outside, not inside, the wall: proof of outward collapse, not inward battering. This debris would have provided an impromptu ramp for ascent, rendering siege ramps or ladders unnecessary—harmonizing with a silent march culminating in sudden entry. Catastrophic Burn Layer All excavations identified a thick burn stratum (up to 1 m) saturated with ash, charcoal, and calcined stones. Kenyon dated it to her Late Bronze Age City IV. Garstang labeled it “City D.” The Bible specifies that “they burned the city with fire” (Joshua 6:24). The destruction debris still contained full jars of carbonized grain—more than six bushels were recovered—indicating (1) the siege was short; (2) the destruction occurred just after spring harvest (cf. Joshua 2:6; 3:15); (3) the conquerors did not plunder the grain—precisely as the ban (ḥerem) required. Radiocarbon and Scarab Dating • Radiocarbon tests on the charred grain from Kenyon’s excavation yield a calibrated date range of 1410 ± 40 BC (Bruins & Van der Plicht, 1996). • Garstang unearthed a sequence of Egyptian scarabs spanning from Hatshepsut to Amenhotep III; the latest dates to c. 1400 BC, with none from the post-Amarna period. Both datasets anchor the destruction in the late 15th or very early 14th century BC—matching a Conquest under Joshua in 1406 BC (Ussherian chronology). Seasonal Markers Barley heads found in the destruction layer were fully formed, consistent with the biblical timing just after Passover (Nisan/Aviv). The Jordan was at flood stage when Israel crossed (Joshua 3:15), signaling the same agricultural window. Evidence of an Earthquake Seismologists note Jericho sits atop the active Jericho Fault. Garstang recorded fissures under the collapsed walls, and Italian geologists have identified earthquake horizons in the relevant stratum. An earthquake could be the ordinary means through which God effected the collapse simultaneous with the trumpet blast. Wooden Roof Beams Charred but Intact Beneath Rubble Kenyon cataloged carbonized cedar and date-palm beams sandwiched between brick tumble and burn layers, implying the roofs fell in after the walls but before the fire swept the city—again matching a sudden wall failure followed by conflagration. The Northern Sector and “Rahab’s House” Kenyon intentionally left the north quadrant largely untouched, yet Garstang had earlier found a small section of the wall still standing with attached dwelling rooms. The biblical narrative locates Rahab’s home “in the wall” (Joshua 2:15). The surviving wall portion lay on the north—exactly where a fleeing family could have exited toward the hills of Benjamin as the text records. Pottery Correlation Large storage jars with everted rims and dipper juglets characteristic of Late Bronze I populate the burn layer. Kenyon originally misdated them to Late Bronze II on comparative grounds, leading her to place the destruction around 1550 BC. Subsequent ceramic re-evaluation by Bryant Wood demonstrated that the forms align with LB I (c. 1480-1400 BC), correcting the chronology and harmonizing with Scripture. Rebuttal to Common Objections 1. Kenyon’s “1550 BC” date relied on the absence of imported Cypriot bichrome ware. Such ware is rare in Jericho strata regardless of period due to trade patterns. 2. The gap Kenyon perceived between her City IV and the Iron Age town is real but irrelevant; the biblical record also shows Jericho largely unoccupied during Judges. 3. Claims that the Israelites lacked the technology or manpower ignore the text’s emphasis on supernatural intervention: Yahweh, not siege engines, toppled the defenses. Confirmatory Lines Beyond Jericho • Egyptian topographical lists (e.g., Amenhotep II) omit Hazor, Beth-Shan, Megiddo, and Jericho in the decades following c. 1400 BC, implying their temporary desolation. • The Amarna Letters (EA 286–289) depict Canaanite kings pleading for help against Ḫabiru invaders during the same window, echoing the Hebrew Conquest milieu. • The Merneptah Stele (c. 1210 BC) presupposes Israel already settled in Canaan, placing the Conquest earlier, not later. Why the March Matters Archaeologically Joshua 6:14’s repetitive, daily circuit explains the absence of standard siege artifacts—arrowheads, battering-ram scars, or extended famine indicators. The Bible depicts mobility, quiet, and sudden cataclysm; the tell presents precisely a short-lived siege, surplus food, and instantaneous wall failure. Synthesis with Biblical Chronology Using the Exodus at 1446 BC (1 Kings 6:1; Judges 11:26) and forty wilderness years (Numbers 14:34), Jericho’s fall in 1406 BC aligns with the radiocarbon and pottery evidence. The archaeological record thus supplies a remarkable, multilayered witness to the literal historicity of Joshua 6:14 and the surrounding narrative. Conclusion Tell es-Sultan yields a fortification system, outward-fallen mud-brick walls, a destruction-by-fire layer, carbonized grain, seasonal markers, radiocarbon dates, scarabs, pottery, and earthquake traces—all cohering with Joshua’s account down to fine detail. Far from myth, the archaeological testimony invites confidence that Scripture accurately records real events orchestrated by the living God who “does great wonders” (Psalm 136:4). |
    |