Reassessing the Terminal Canaanite Occupation at Jericho: Sultan IV or Sultan V?

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Calibration with the 1993 decadal curve of Stuiver and Becker, using OxCal, results in 1-a ranges of equal probability, 1601-1566 cal BCE and 1561-1524 cal BCE.

“According to Bruins and van der Plicht (1995, 218-219) [13] “Calibration with the 1993 decadal curve of Stuiver and Becker, using the OxCal computer calibration, program, results in 1-a ranges of equal probability, 1601-1566 cal BCE and 1561-1524 cal BCE.””

• cites [13]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The results of BM-1790 were revised to 3300 ± 110 BP, resulting in a date from the Middle Bronze Age.

“The results of BM-1790 were revised to 3300 ± 110 BP, (Bowman et al. 1990, 59) [12], resulting in a date from the Middle Bronze Age.”

• cites [12]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The outlier GrN-18538 tested at 3614 ± 20 BP, while GrN-18721 and GrN-18722 yielded dates similar to the other nine (3385 ± 20 BP and 3368 ± 17 BP, respectively).

“The outlier (GrN-18538) tested at 3614 ± 20 BP, while the other two samples (GrN-18721 and GrN-18722) yielded dates similar to the other nine (3385 ± 20 BP and 3368 ± 17 BP, respectively).”

• cites [13]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The present author examined the bichrome pottery from Garstang's Middle Building at the Rockefeller Museum and determined that its fabric is of similar quality to the regular, unpainted LB IIA pottery he excavated at Shiloh.

“The present author examined the bichrome pottery from Garstang's Middle Building while at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem and determined that its fabric is of similar quality to the regular, unpainted LB IIA pottery he excavated at Shiloh.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Kenyon found evidence of destruction in phase liv-lv.

“She found evidence of destruction in phase liv-lv, although she provided no specifics.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The tablet was significantly damaged, with only a handful of signs discernible, not enough to translate anything meaningful with certainty.

“The tablet was significantly damaged, and only a handful of signs are discernible, not enough to translate anything meaningful with certainty.”

• cites Horowitz and Oshima 2006, 96Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The remains of a few courses of the mudbrick walls atop the Cyclopean Wall on the northern end of the tell can be seen in a photo from Garstang's excavations.

“The remains of a few courses of the mudbrick walls atop the Cyclopean Wall on the northern end of the tell can be seen in this photo from Garstang's excavations.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Kenyon found remains of the LB Mudbrick Wall in Trench I (west), Trench II (north), and Trench III (south).

“Kenyon also found remains of the LB Mudbrick Wall in Trench I (west), Trench II (north), and Trench III (south).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

In Trench I, Kenyon noted the revetment wall with mudbrick remains atop in Stage XLIII, Phase lxi and fallen red bricks piling nearly to the top of the revetment in Stage XLIV, Phase lxiv.

“In Trench I, Kenyon noted the revetment wall with mudbrick remains atop in Stage XLIII, Phase lxi and fallen red bricks piling nearly to the top of the revetment in Stage XLIV, Phase lxiv.”

May combine two claims.

Jericho City V was a modest city of approximately 11 acres (4.5 ha), whose fortification walls stood atop the MB III Cyclopean Wall.

“Jericho City V was a modest city of approximately 11 acres (4.5 ha), whose fortification walls stood atop the MB III Cyclopean Wall.”

May combine two claims.

The exposed Cyclopean wall stood at least 15 feet tall, with a mudbrick superstructure rising an additional 19 feet above it.

“The exposed Cyclopean wall stood at least 15 feet tall, with a mudbrick superstructure rising an additional 19 feet above it.”

May combine two claims.

Garstang correctly identified the Late Bronze mudbrick superstructure atop the MB III retaining wall in Trench d-d, Square C6, D6, and E6, even though he misidentified the double city wall as Late Bronze when it belonged to the Early Bronze city.

“Garstang correctly identified the Late Bronze mudbrick superstructure atop the MB III retaining wall in Trench d-d, Square C6, D6, and E6 (Garstang 1930, Pl.VI) [46], even though he misidentified the double city wall, suggesting it was Late Bronze when it really belonged to the Early Bronze city.”

• cites Garstang 1930, Pl.VI) [46]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Jericho City IVc was abandoned for a period of 100-150 years after its destruction.

“Since Jericho City IVc was abandoned for a period of 100-150 years after its destruction, many of the mudbricks likely disappeared through erosion.”

May combine two claims.

Hatshepsut was despised, and her name was systematically erased from inscriptions in Egypt in antiquity.

“Unlike popular pharaohs, like Thutmose III and Amenhotep III, Hatshepsut was despised, and her name was systematically erased from inscriptions in Egypt in antiquity (Tyldesley 1996, 114-115) [39].”

• cites [39]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The British Museum laboratory had a problem with the calibration of their equipment from 1980-1984, which yielded erroneous results that tended to date samples younger than they really were.

“However, the laboratory at the British Museum had a problem with the calibration of their equipment from 1980-1984, which yielded erroneous results that tended to date samples younger than they really were (Bowman et al. 1990, 59) [12].”

• cites [12]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Kennedy's recalibration demonstrates that individual determinations may calibrate slightly differently under IntCal20, but it does not establish that the conclusions drawn from the complete radiocarbon dataset by the original authors require revision.

“Consequently, Kennedy's recalibration demonstrates that individual determinations may calibrate slightly differently under IntCal20, but it does not establish that the conclusions drawn from the complete radiocarbon dataset by the original authors require revision.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Nigro contends, based on these radiocarbon dates, that Jericho City IVc was destroyed ca. 1530 BCE.

“Nigro contends, based on these radiocarbon dates, that Jericho City IVc was destroyed ca.1530 BCE (Nigro 2024, 58) [3].”

• cites [3]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The sequence of Late Bronze Age scarabs discovered in the tombs at Jericho is Hatshepsut, Thutmose III, and Amenhotep III, with dates varying according to whether one uses the high or low Egyptian chronology.

“Depending on whether one uses the high chronology or the low chronology, the sequence of Late Bronze Age scarabs discovered in the tombs at Jericho is as follows: Hatshepsut ca.1504-1484 BCE, Thutmose III ca.1504-1450 BCE, Amenhotep III ca.1391-1354 BCE (Aling 2014, 15-16) [40] or Hatshepsut ca.1473-1458 BCE, Thutmose III ca.1479-1425 BCE, Amenhotep III ca.1390-1352 BCE (Shaw 2003, 485) [41].”

• cites Aling 2014, 15-16Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Shaw 2003, 485Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Kenyon never provided site-wide stratigraphy for Jericho, choosing instead to date each trench and square independently.

“Kathleen Kenyon, who excavated from1952-58 [5], never provided site-wide stratigraphy for Jericho, choosing instead to date each trench and square independently.”

• cites [5]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Kenyon concluded that the destruction of Garstang's City IVii did not occur in the Late Bronze Age, but was the terminus of the Middle Bronze city, which she associated with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt.

“She concluded that the destruction of Garstang's City IVii did not occur in the Late Bronze Age, but was the terminus of the Middle Bronze city, which she associated with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt (Kenyon 1967, 275) [6].”

• cites [6]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The radiocarbon dates published by Marchetti and Nigro are unhelpful, as one would seem to support a destruction around the end of the MB III (ca. 1550 BCE), and the other would support a destruction around the end of the LB I period (ca. 1440 BCE).

“The radiocarbon dates published by Marchetti and Nigro are also unhelpful, as one would seem to support a destruction around the end of the MB III (ca.1550 BCE), and the other would support a destruction around the end of the LB I period (ca.1440 BCE).”

May combine two claims.

Nigro's research indicates the Middle Building was used in the LB IIB, but also acknowledges a scarcity of thirteenth-century archaeological material.

“Nigro's research (2020, 202) [7], indicates the Middle Building was used in the LB IIB, but also acknowledges a scarcity of thirteenthcentury archaeological material.”

• cites [7]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

According to Nigro's site stratigraphy, Stratum Va and Vb represent the Late Bronze occupation, not Stratum IVc, which they date to the Middle Bronze Age.

“According to their site stratigraphy, Stratum Va and Vb represent the Late Bronze occupation, not Stratum IVc, which they date to the Middle Bronze Age.”

May combine two claims.

The scarabs discovered in the necropolis of Jericho indicate the site was occupied during the LB IB/IIA horizon, associating them with City V.

“Similarly, the scarabs discovered in the necropolis of Jericho indicate the site was occupied during the LB IB/IIA horizon, associating them with City V.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The debate persists because different excavators produced contradictory interpretations of the site's stratigraphy.

“The debate persists because different excavators produced contradictory interpretations of the site's stratigraphy.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Radiocarbon samples from Jericho City IVc derived from charcoal and grain seeds have been analyzed on several occasions with mixed results.

“Radiocarbon samples from Jericho City IVc derived from charcoal and grain seeds have been analyzed on several occasions with mixed results.”

May combine two claims.

Because no single category of evidence is sufficient to establish the chronology of the terminal occupation, the study's conclusions were based on the convergence of multiple independent lines of archaeological evidence rather than on any single argument.

“Because no single category of evidence is sufficient to establish the chronology of the terminal occupation, conclusions were based on the convergence of multiple independent lines of archaeological evidence rather than on any single argument.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: No single category of evidence is sufficient to establish the chronology of the terminal occupation.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Archaeologists and scholars continue to disagree over which stratum represents Jericho's final Canaanite occupation during the Late Bronze Age.

“Yet, despite more than a century of excavation, archaeologists and scholars continue to disagree over which stratum represents Jericho's final Canaanite occupation during the Late Bronze Age.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Previous discussions have generally focused on defending one stratigraphic model or the other rather than systematically analyzing the published data for both Sultan IV and V and evaluating it using the same criteria before drawing a conclusion.
• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The archaeological evidence has rarely been considered alongside all of the pertinent ancient textual witnesses concerning the destruction of Late Bronze Jericho.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A careful reading of Kenyon reveals her reasoning was more nuanced than the one-dimensional caricature presented by Kennedy and Wood.

“A careful reading of Kenyon, however, reveals her reasoning was more nuanced than the one-dimensional caricature presented by Kennedy and Wood.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

The radiocarbon dates published by Kenyon are suspect, given known problems with the equipment at the British Museum laboratories, although they eventually pointed to a Middle Bronze date.

“The radiocarbon dates published by Kenyon are suspect, given the known problems with the equipment at the British Museum laboratories, although they eventually pointed to a Middle Bronze date.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Garstang developed a site stratigraphy that included five strata, in addition to the Neolithic settlement.

“British archaeologist John Garstang (1948, xvi, 128) [4], who excavated Jericho in the 1930s, developed a site stratigraphy that included five strata, in addition to the Neolithic settlement.”

• cites [4]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The ʿapîru/ḫa-bi-ru are mentioned in ancient texts from the UR III period to the 20th Egyptian Dynasty, and the term is primarily a sociological designation for "marauding nomads".

“The ʿapîru/ḫa-bi-ru are mentioned in other ancient texts, from the UR III period to the 20th Egyptian Dynasty (roughly 800 years), and the term is primarily a sociological designation for “marauding nomads” (Collins and Holden, 2019, 126) [53].”

• cites Collins and Holden, 2019, 126Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

An earthquake could explain collapsed mudbrick fortification walls but would not necessarily explain the destruction by fire near the city walls unearthed by Garstang.

“While this could explain the collapsed mudbrick fortification walls, it would not necessarily explain the destruction by fire near the city walls unearthed by Garstang.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Kenyon suggested that the actual walls of City IVc, which Garstang believed belonged to the final Canaanite city, were destroyed near the end of the Middle Bronze Age.

“Kenyon (1967, 275) never produced a site-wide stratigraphy for Jericho, but suggested that the actual walls of City IVc, which Garstang believed belonged to the final Canaanite city, were destroyed near the end of the Middle Bronze Age.”

• cites Kenyon (1967, 275)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Nigro attributes the destruction of the walls of Jericho to a powerful earthquake.

“Nigro (2025, 242) [24] attributes the destruction of the walls to a powerful earthquake.”

• cites Nigro (2025, 242)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Nigro dates the destruction of these walls to the latter half of the fourteenth century.

“More specifically, Nigro (2025, 242) [24] dates the destruction of these walls to the latter half of the fourteenth century.”

• cites Nigro (2025, 242) [24]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Garstang believed he found the remains of the Late Bronze walls, but they were constructed in the Early Bronze Age.

“Garstang believed he found the remains of the Late Bronze walls, but they were constructed in the Early Bronze Age (Kenyon 1957, 181;Kenyon and Holland 1981, 2) [6,30,31].”

• cites Kenyon 1957, 181Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kenyon and Holland 1981, 2Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The MB III Cyclopean wall was unseen in the Middle Bronze Age, as it was buried, and its purpose was to support the monumental rubble embankment of the rampart and prevent erosion.

“As previously stated, the MB III Cyclopean wall was unseen in the Middle Bronze Age, as it was buried, and its purpose was to support the monumental rubble embankment of the rampart and prevent erosion (Fiaccavento and Gallo 2020, 240) [44].”

• cites Fiaccavento and Gallo 2020, 240) [44]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The fallen mudbricks discovered by Kenyon belong to the Late Bronze mudbrick superstructure that once stood atop the Cyclopean wall and should be associated with City V.

“Thus, the fallen mudbricks discovered by Kenyon belong to the Late Bronze mudbrick superstructure that once stood atop the Cyclopean wall and should be associated with City V.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Nigro identified these mudbricks as the remains of the Late Bronze fortification system of Sultan V.

“Nigro identified these mudbricks as the remains of the Late Bronze fortification system of Sultan V (2020, 202; 2023, 601).”

• cites Nigro 2020, 202; 2023, 601Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The drought of archaeological evidence at Jericho in the thirteenth century BCE has also been noted by Garstang and Kenyon.

“This drought of archaeological evidence at Jericho in the thirteenth century BCE has also been noted by Garstang (Garstang and Garstang 1948, 126-128) and Kenyon (Kenyon 1957, 262-263) [4,31].”

• cites Garstang and Garstang 1948, 126-128Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kenyon 1957, 262-263Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The archaeological evidence for the destruction of Jericho aligns with the chronology of the conquest narrative and the dating of the Amarna letters.

“Interestingly, the archaeological evidence for the destruction of Jericho aligns with the chronology of the conquest narrative and the dating of the Amarna letters.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The Amarna archive dates to the middle of the fourteenth century BCE.
• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The literal internal chronological data of the biblical conquest narrative can be used as a historical chronological anchor for the destruction of Jericho.

May combine two claims.

The City IVc fortification system consisted of a mudbrick wall farther up the tell and the Cyclopean Wall was buried at that time.

“The City IVc fortification system consisted of a mudbrick wall farther up the tell and Cyclopean Wall was buried at that time.”

May combine two claims.

Comparative assemblages from other Late Bronze sites near Jericho affirm that the pottery from Jericho fits into the LB I-II range and thus belongs to City V.

“Comparative assemblages from other Late Bronze sites near Jericho further affirm that this pottery fits into the LB I-II range, and thus belongs to City V.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Kenyon dated the fallen mudbrick walls in Trench I to the Middle Bronze Age, while Nigro redated them to the Late Bronze Age, associating them with City V, not City IVc.

“To be clear, Kenyon dated these walls to the Middle Bronze Age; Nigro (2023, 605) [2] has redated them to the Late Bronze Age, associating them with City V, not City IVc as Kenyon did.”

• cites Nigro (2023, 605) [2]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Garstang described the tablet as most similar to the Tell el-Amarna tablets and estimated it most likely dated to the fourteenth century BCE.

“He described it as “most similar to the Tell el-Amarna tablets” and estimated that it most likely dated to the fourteenth century BCE (Garstang 1934, 116, 117) [22].”

• cites Garstang 1934, 116, 117Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The mudbricks from the MB III fortification wall likely disappeared through erosion and/or were recycled for the Late Bronze fortifications.

“Thus, the mudbricks from the MB III fortification wall likely disappeared through erosion and/or were recycled for the Late Bronze fortifications.”

May combine two claims.

According to Nigro, four superimposed fortifications protected the Middle Bronze city: a solid mudbrick wall with rectangular towers in MB I, two successive earthen ramparts with a limestone revetment crowned by a mudbrick wall in MB II, and a rubble rampart supported by triangular terrace-walls and a Cyclopean Wall at its foot in MB III.

“Four superimposed fortifications protected the MB city: a solid mudbrick wall with rectangular towers in MB I (1950-1800 BCE), two successive earthen ramparts with a limestone revetment crowned by a mudbrick wall in MB II (1800-1650 BCE), and a rubble rampart supported by triangular terrace-walls and a Cyclopean Wall at its foot in MB III (1650-1550 BCE).”

• cites Nigro (2020, 1996)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Nigro noted further evidence of destruction of City V by fire, stating that the Late Bronze ended in some kind of conflagration and a fierce destruction.

“In his 2021 ASOR presentation, Nigro (2021, ASOR Presentation Slide 7) [51] noted further evidence of destruction of the City V by fire: “The Late Bronze ended in some kind of conflagration…The Late Bronze Age ends in a fierce destruction, which is, however, not clearly documented, as it was excavated by the first two excavations in a non-reconstruct able way.””

• cites Nigro (2021, ASOR Presentation Slide 7)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Nigro harmonized the findings of previous excavations and clarified the phases of the fortifications at Jericho.

“Nigro has harmonized the findings of the previous excavations and clarified the phases of the fortifications.”

• cites Burke 2008, 275Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

At the time of Jericho City V's destruction, ʿapîru/ḫa-bi-ru are known to have been attacking Canaanite city-states.

“Jericho City V was destroyed during the mid-to-late fourteenth century BCE, at which time ʿapîru/ḫa-bi-ru are known to have been attacking Canaanite city-states, and close to the time the only ancient text describing the fall of the city places its destruction.”

May combine two claims.

The mudbrick wall that collapsed beneath the Cyclopean Wall belongs to City V, as this was the only time the wall stood atop the Cyclopean Wall.

“The mudbrick wall that collapsed beneath the Cyclopean Wall belongs to City V, as this was the only time the wall stood atop the Cyclopean Wall.”

May combine two claims.

Given that City IVc dates to the MB III period, the Late Bronze Age pottery from Jericho is to be associated with City V.

“Given that City IVc dates to the MB III period, as established above, this Late Bronze Age pottery is to be associated with City V.”

May combine two claims.

The coarse fabric and sloppy runs in the painted lattice work decoration indicate that the vessel may be a local imitation and most likely dates to the LB IIA.

“The coarse fabric and sloppy runs in the painted lattice work decoration indicate that it may be a local imitation and most likely dates to the LB IIA.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Leavitt's survey of Late Bronze II sites in the central hill country found that 40.3% were fortified urban sites, and she concluded that fortified urban sites were by far the most common in that region during the Late Bronze Age.

“More recently, however, Abigail Leavitt (2025, 140) conducted a survey analyzing Late Bronze II sites in the central hill country, the area the Israelites initially settled during the conquest, and discovered that 40.3% were fortified, urban sites, 6.0% were cultic sites, 3.0% were enclosures, 22.4% were cemeteries, 19.4% were small ruins, 6.0% were medium ruins, and 3.0% were large ruins.”

• Also stated in: § Evidence for Late Bronze Fortification of City V · boosted

  “She concluded that fortified, urban sites were by far the most common in the central hill country in the Late Bronze Age period.”

• cites Leavitt (2025, 140)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Given that Amenhotep III reigned in the LB IIA period and his scarabs came from an LB IIA context, the scarab can be used to date the occupation of Jericho to the LB IIA period.

“Given that Amenhotep III reigned in the LB IIA period, and his scarabs came from an LB IIA context, the scarab can be used to date the occupation of Jericho to the LB IIA period.”

May combine two claims.

Sometime late in the fifteenth century BCE, Jericho was rebuilt as a fortified city, reusing the fortifications from the Middle Bronze City IVc.

“Sometime late in the fifteenth century BCE, Jericho was rebuilt as a fortified city, reusing the fortifications from the Middle Bronze City IVc.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The well-known destruction of City IVc dates to the MB III period.

“While the well-known destruction of City IVc dates to the MB III period, evidence of Late Bronze destruction was discovered by Kenyon in a house in Area H on Spring Hill.”

May combine two claims.

As Nigro noted, Garstang correctly noted the remains of Late Bronze mudbrick walls atop the MB III Cyclopean wall, though he misdated double brick walls further north that were actually Early Bronze walls.

“As Nigro (2023, 602) [2] noted, while Garstang misdated the double brick walls further north, which were actually Early Bronze walls, he did correctly note the remains of the Late Bronze mudbrick walls atop the MB III Cyclopean wall.”

• cites Nigro (2023, 602)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Nigro acknowledged that a drought of archaeological evidence in the last century of the Late Bronze Age, the thirteenth century BCE, has been interpreted as abandonment of the site.

“He has acknowledged that a drought of archaeological evidence in the “last century of the Late Bronze Age [ie. the thirteenth century BCE], during the Ramesside reign of Egypt” has been interpreted as abandonment of the site (Nigro 2019, 150) [3].”

• cites Nigro 2019, 150Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Nigro dates the destruction of the walls to the second half of the fourteenth century BCE.

“Nigro dates the destruction of the walls to the second half of the fourteenth century BCE.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The Amarna texts provide a valuable contemporary witness to the kinds of social upheaval that led to the emergence of new populations in the highlands during the Late Bronze Age.

“The Amarna texts provide a valuable contemporary witness to the kinds of social upheaval that led to the emergence of new populations in the highlands during the Late Bronze Age.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Kenyon dated the destruction of the Canaanite house she excavated to the fourteenth century BCE.

“Similarly, Kenyon dated the destruction of the Canaanite house she excavated to the fourteenth century BCE.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Fiaccavento and Gallo note that the rampart protecting the MB III city was constructed over the remains of the MB II lower city at the southern end of the tell.

“Fiaccavento and Gallo (2020, 241) [44] note that the rampart protecting the MB III city was constructed over the remains of the MB II lower city at the southern end of the tell:”

• cites Fiaccavento and Gallo (2020, 241)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

In summary, the pottery from the tell fits within the LB IB/IIA horizon, and the comparables from nearby Tall el-Hammam and Shiloh indicate that Jericho was occupied primarily in the LB IIA period.

“In summary, the pottery from the tell clearly fits within the LB IB/IIA horizon, and the comparables from nearby tall el-Hammam and Shiloh indicate that Jericho was occupied primarily in the LB IIA period.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Using the 1:3 ratio of estimating an ancient wall's height given the width of the base, the Late Bronze wall at Jericho stood to a maximum height of 6m (19 ft).

“Using the well-known 1:3 ratio of estimating an ancient wall's height given the width of the base, the Late Bronze wall at Jericho stood to a maximum height of 6m (19 ft), taking the fragile nature of mudbricks into consideration (Leen Ritmeyer 2025, Personal Communication).”

• cites Leen Ritmeyer 2025, Personal CommunicationNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Recycling of old mudbricks leads to consistency in mudbrick composition between time periods, which can make dating difficult.

“Recycling of old mudbricks leads to consistency in mudbrick composition between time periods (Rosenberg et al. 2020) [49], which can make dating difficult.”

• cites Rosenberg et al. 2020) [49]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

One partial translation of the tablet reads "...older?S[o]n of Ta[g]atuka...".

“One partial translation reads, “...older?S[o]n of Ta[g]atuka...” (Horowitz and Oshima 2006, 96) [42].”

• cites Horowitz and Oshima 2006, 96Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Interpreted literally, the Masoretic Text reading "480th year" and the Septuagint reading "440th year" place the beginning of the conquest at approximately 1406 BCE and 1366 BCE, respectively.

“Interpreted literally, these readings place the beginning of the conquest at approximately 1406 BCE and 1366 BCE, respectively.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Nigro summarizes that the discovery of an administrative tablet dating from the Amarna period is substantial evidence in favor of the existence of a palace and a city during the fourteenth century BCE.

“Nigro (2020, 202) [7] summarizes: “The discovery by Garstang of an administrative tablet dating from the same [Amarna] period…is a substantial piece of evidence in favor of the existence of a palace and a city during the fourteenth century BCE.””

• cites Nigro (2020, 202)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.