Anonymous
re: Jericho
Tue Jun 12, 2018 15:50
50.50.249.60

Pardon my error. The scarabs came from the Necropolis, which is not the city.

//From the pottery and scarabs found at the necropolis, Garstang concluded that its use was continuous from the third millennium BCE until the city's final destruction around 1400 BCE. //

So it is an assumption that that the use of the Necropolis ceased when Joshua destroyed the city. It is also noted that the article you cited allows for the scarabs to be heirloom items, obviously going for a late 12th century date on the Exodus. It seems then that Kenyon's stratigraphic dating and the radiocarbon dates for the mid 16th century BC are two witnesses against the assumption that the Necropolis ceased to be used when the city was destroyed.

  • re: JerichoAnonymous, Tue Jun 12 00:40
    https://books.google.com/books?id=c_tDCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&dq=Garstang+middle+building+scarabs&source=bl&ots=F5x6Pfzd5-&sig=RUYOjjihQeYfoqYyAa3bacSZeVQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwju__jfs83bAhWs64MKHbv... more
    • re: JerichoToby Charles Anderson, Wed Jun 13 15:51
      Hello Anonymous, After giving the link to a page in a book, you concluded. You wrote: "The scarabs come from an administrative palace built later. But there was no city there." That is NOT what your... more
      • re: JerichoAnonymous, Fri Jun 15 09:49
        Toby: My trivial mistake, already conceeded, changes nothing. The necropolis is a separate site from the city. A curse was put on rebuilding the city, but not on continued use of the necropolis. So... more
    • re: Jericho — Anonymous, Tue Jun 12 15:50
    • re: JerichoMarianne Luban, Tue Jun 12 11:43
      Anonymous wrote: "The scarabs come from an administrative palace built later. But there was no city there." I am of the opinion that "Anonymous" is nothing more than a trolling sock-puppet, who... more
Click here to receive daily updates