Misplaced Pages

Bryant G. Wood: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:01, 28 August 2008 editFayssalF (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users43,085 editsm Protected Bryant G. Wood: edit warring (expires 21:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC))← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:32, 7 August 2024 edit undoBeland (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators236,626 edits WP:INFONAT cleanup - omit nationality/citizenship if same as birth country (via WP:JWB
(259 intermediate revisions by 99 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|American archaeologist and Young Earth creationist.}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2020}}
'''Bryant G. Wood''' is a ] and Research Director of the ]. He is known for his 1990 redating of the destruction of Jericho to accord with the biblical chronology of c. 1400 BC - the proposal was later (1995) questioned, and ]'s dating of c. 1550 BC remains the date for the site accepted in the majority of scholarly publications.


{{Infobox scientist
== Biography ==
| name = Bryant G. Wood
| image =
| image_size =
| caption =
| birth_date = {{birth year and age|1936}} <!-- {{Birth date and age|YYYY|MM|DD}} or {{Birth-date and age|Month DD, YYYY}} -->
| birth_place = ], U.S.
| death_date =
| death_place =
| field = ]
| work_institutions = Editor of '']''
| alma_mater = ] (])<br />] (])<br />] (])<br />] (])
| known_for = ''Reassessment of Garstang's and Kenyon's Jericho datings''
| spouse =
| signature =
}}
'''Bryant G. Wood''' (born 1936) is an American ] and ]. Wood is known for arguing that the ] could be accorded with the ] of c. 1400 BC. This date is some 150 years later than the accepted date of c. 1550 BC, first determined by ] and subsequently confirmed with ].<ref name="Jr.2009">{{cite book|first=Robert L.|last=Hubbard, Jr.|title=Joshua|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qz9E8NC409YC&pg=PA203|date=30 August 2009|publisher=Zondervan|isbn=978-0-310-59062-0|pages=203–04|quote=The current scholarly consensus follows the conclusion of Kenyon: Except for a small, short-lived settlement (ca. 1400 B.C.), Jericho was completely uninhabited ca. 1550-1100 B.C.}}</ref>


==Academic career==
Wood attended ], graduating with a B.S. in mechanical engineering, later earning a M.S. in mechanical engineering from ] in Troy NY. He later pursued Biblical and archaeological studies and received an M.A. in Biblical History from the University of Michigan in 1974 and a Ph.D. in Syro-Palestinian archaeology from the University of Toronto in 1985. Wood is a specialist in Canaanite pottery of the Late Bronze Age. He is author of ''The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine: The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages'' (1990), as well as numerous articles on archaeological subjects. In addition, Wood serves as editor of the quarterly publication '']''. Wood attended ], graduating with a B.S. in mechanical engineering, later earning an M.S. in mechanical engineering from ] in ]. He later pursued biblical and archaeological studies and received an M.A. in Biblical History from the ] in 1974 and a PhD in Syro-Palestinian archaeology from the ] in 1985. Wood is a specialist in Canaanite pottery of the ]. He is the author of ''The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine: The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages'' (1990), as well as numerous articles on archaeological subjects. He received international attention for his proposed redating of ancient ], arguing for the historicity of a ] account of the capture of the city by the Israelites. He has also written on the entry of the ] into ] and on the historicity of the Biblical story of ].


He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Near East Archaeological Society.<ref name="biblearchaeology.org">{{Cite web|title=Dr. Bryant G. Wood - Associates for Biblical Research|url=https://biblearchaeology.org/staffabr/4280-dr-bryant-g-wood|access-date=2021-05-27|website=biblearchaeology.org}}</ref>
Wood received international attention for his proposed redating of ancient ], arguing for the historicity of the Biblical account of the capture of the city by the Israelites. He has also written on entry of the ] into ] and on historicity of the Biblical story of ].


==''Bible and Spade'' and other contributions==
== Jericho ==
{{anchor|Bible and Spade}}


Wood serves as editor in chief of the quarterly publication ''Bible and Spade'' (published by the ] organisation Associates for Biblical Research), which describes itself as " Christian Apologetics Ministry Dedicated to Demonstrating the Historical Reliability of the Bible through Archaeological and Biblical Research".<ref>{{cite web |title=Bible and Spade Magazine |url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/publications/bibleandspade.aspx |work=www.biblearchaeology.org |publisher=Associates for Biblical Research |access-date=11 September 2012 |archive-date=28 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190328175751/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/publications/bibleandspade.aspx |url-status=dead }}</ref> The magazine concentrates largely on matters relating to archaeology and Bible history, but also touches on general ] (especially the relationship between science and evangelical religious belief) and Christian devotion.<ref>{{cite web|title=Latest research articles by category|url=https://biblearchaeology.org/research/topics/general-apologetics|publisher=Associates for Biblical Research|access-date=11 September 2012}}</ref> ''Bible and Spade'' is a quarterly ] committed to the use of ] to demonstrate the historical veracity of the ] and ]s.<ref>{{cite web |title=Bible and Spade Magazine |url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/publications/bibleandspade.aspx |work=www.biblearchaeology.org |publisher=Associates for Biblical Research |access-date=11 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121024040940/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/publications/bibleandspade.aspx |archive-date=24 October 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Latest research articles by category|url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/research.aspx|work=Bible Archaeology|publisher=Associates for Biblical Research|access-date=11 September 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121024041122/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/research.aspx|archive-date=24 October 2012|url-status=dead}}</ref> The ] is listed as Wood. The headquarters is in ].
According to the well-known story in the biblical ], Jericho was the first ] city to fall to the ] as they began their conquest of the Promised Land - an event which the Bible's internal chronology places at around 1406 BC. In the 1920s, ] determined, based on two considerations and independently of the biblical chronology, that the destruction of Jericho must have occurred near the end of the Late Bronze Age, that is, about 1400 BC.<ref>Garstang 1931/1978, pp. 52-55. </ref> These two considerations were first that the Late Bronze Age was the time in which large walled cities flourished in Canaan, and archaeology had already determined that this was not true in the centuries after 1400. The second consideration was that a list of Canaanite cites listed in the ] matched the mention of these cities in the annals of pharaohs of Egypt's ], "more particularly in the records covering the hundred years between the conquests of ] and the decline of the Empire under ], 1475-1375."<ref>Ibid., p. 53.</ref> After making these observations, Garstang noted that this happened to be in agreement with the Bible's chronological note in 1 Kings 6:1, but this was entirely secondary as far as he was concerned; in biblical interpretation he followed the doctrines of ], popular in Garstang's day, that theorized that the Bible's historical accounts were written at a much later date than the events described and thus were not completely trustworthy. Later, Garstang's excavations at Jericho in the early 1930s unearthed a destruction layer corresponding to the termination of City IV which was in agreement with the date of ca. 1400 that he had earlier postulated, and which he therefore identified with the biblical story of Joshua. This date was therefore derived by archaeological considerations from Canaan and from Egyptian historical records. It was not derived from the Bible and then imposed on archaeology, as is occasionally stated by those who have not read Garstang's own writings on the subject.


It states its creationist commitment as follows:
It was therefore a shock when ] in the 1950s, using more scientific methods than had been available to Garstang, redated Jericho City IV to 1550 BC and claimed to have found no signs of any habitation at all for the period around 1400 BC. Wood's 1990 reversion of City IV to Garstang's original 1400 BC therefore caused a considerable stir. Wood's arguments, based on on a reanalyis of pottery shards (a method which can provide highly accurate dates in the context of the ancient Near East), stratigraphic considerations, scarab evidence, and a single radiocarbon date, failed to convince some archaeologists, resulting in a controversy that continues to the present day.
*We believe the accounts found in Genesis 1–11 contain factual and real-time, chronology, historical events, places, and persons. This includes the accuracy and real historicity of the persons, ages, and events recorded in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, which may or may not be exhaustive. These records incorporate the accounts of those who were eyewitnesses to the events recorded. We find no biblical, hermeneutical, or exegetical basis to interpret them allegorically, non-historically, or mythically. These accounts do not require knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern literature to be interpreted correctly. We deny that God used erroneous worldviews from ANE mythology to inspire the writing of Genesis 1–11.
* We consider the patriarchal narratives of Genesis 12–50 to be historically accurate in their reporting of chronology, persons, places, events, and cultural customs and background. Further, we believe that the extensive chronological data found in both the Old and New Testaments is historically accurate.<ref>{{cite web|title=Latest research articles by category|url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/research.aspx|work=Bible Archaeology|publisher=Associates for Biblical Research|access-date=11 September 2012}}</ref>
Wood is also a contributor to the '']'', the '']'' and the '']''.


===Jericho and Radiocarbon dating=== ==Jericho==
During a series of excavations from 1930 to 1936 ] found a ] at Jericho corresponding to the termination of City IV which he identified with the biblical story of Joshua and dated to c. 1400 BC.<ref name="WoodO'Brien1986">{{cite book|first1=Leon James|last1=Wood|first2=David|last2=O'Brien|title=A Survey of Israel's History|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CrBerP0thW8C&pg=PA74|year=1986|publisher=Harper Collins|isbn=978-0-310-34770-5|page=74}}</ref> It was therefore a shock when ] in the 1950s, using more scientific methods than had been available to Garstang, redated Jericho City IV to 1550 BC and found no signs of any habitation at all for the period around 1400 BC. Wood's 1990 reversion of City IV to Garstang's original 1400 BC therefore attracted considerable attention. Wood based his belief on the story in the biblical ], Jericho was the first ]ite city to fall to the ] as they began their conquest of the Promised Land - an event which Wood places at around 1406 BC due to his interpretation of ]. In 1999, based on a reanalysis of pottery shards, Wood argued that Jericho could have been captured in the Late Bronze Age by Joshua.<ref name="MillardHoffmeier1994">{{cite book|first1=Alan Ralph|last1=Millard|first2=James Karl|last2=Hoffmeier|first3=David|last3=Weston Baker|title=Faith, Tradition, and History: Old Testament Historiography in Its Near Eastern Context|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qYudy66ymrUC&pg=PA15|year=1994|publisher=Eisenbrauns|isbn=978-0-931464-82-9|page=15}}</ref> Wood and Piotr Bienkowski debated this in the March/April 1990 issue of '']'', with Bienkowski writing:


In 1995 additional C14 measurements were made on previously recovered samples from Jericho's City IV. The analysis of these samples was not made specifically to test the controversy surrounding Wood's dating, but were an effort to establish an independent radiocarbon chronology for Near Eastern archaeology (the existing chronology, initally established by William F. Albright in the 1930s, is based largely on changes in pottery types); the results were published by Bruins and van der Plicht (Radiocarbon 37:2,1995), who concluded that "the fortified Bronze Age city at Tell es-Sultan (Jericho City IV) was not destroyed by ca.1400 BC, as Wood (1990) suggested." <ref></ref><ref>Bruins & van der Plicht, 1995, p218</ref> <blockquote>Wood has attempted to redate the destruction of Jericho City IV from the end of the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1550 B.C.) to the end of the Late Bronze I (c. 1400 BC). He has put forward four lines of argument to support his conclusion. Not a single one of these arguments can stand up to scrutiny. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to confirm Kathleen Kenyon's dating of City IV to the Middle Bronze Age. Wood's attempt to equate the destruction of City IV with the Israelite conquest of Jericho must therefore be rejected.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/bryantwood.php|title=Is Bryant Wood's chronology of Jericho valid?|website=www.biblicalchronologist.org}}</ref></blockquote>


Wood responded that he had produced evidence to back his argument, and that any counter-claims should also be backed by fresh evidence.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2015-08-24|title=Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski Is Wrong on All Counts|url=https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/16/5/2|access-date=2021-05-27|website=The BAS Library|language=en}}</ref> In 1995 new evidence became available in the form of charred cereal grains from the City IV destruction layer. Radiocarbon dating of these grains showed that Jericho City IV was destroyed "during the late 17th or the 16th century BC", in line with Kenyon's findings, and that "the fortified Bronze Age city at Tell es-Sultan was not destroyed by ca.1400 BC, as Wood suggested".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.radiocarbon.org/Journal/v37n2/Abstracts/213.html |title=Bruins and Van Der Plicht, "Tell Es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of Short- Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal Samples From the End of the Middle Bronze Age", ''Radiocarbon'' Volume 37, Number 2, 1995. (Note: The article gives dates BP, "before present", meaning before 1950.) |access-date=20 September 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080907184608/http://www.radiocarbon.org/Journal/v37n2/Abstracts/213.html |archive-date=7 September 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Wood responded to the newer evidence in an article for the ''Bible and Spade'' magazine, concluding that he still held to the date ca. 1400 B.C. based on pottery finds.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2012/03/28/Dating-Jerichos-Destruction-Bienkowski-is-Wrong-on-All-Counts.aspx |title=Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski is Wrong on All Counts |access-date=23 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120702002544/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2012/03/28/Dating-Jerichos-Destruction-Bienkowski-is-Wrong-on-All-Counts.aspx |archive-date=2 July 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Wood also argues<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/08/Carbon-14-Dating-at-Jericho.aspx |title=Carbon 14 Dating at Jericho |access-date=26 March 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140712151650/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/08/Carbon-14-Dating-at-Jericho.aspx |archive-date=12 July 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> that the discrepancy is part of the ongoing dispute between Egyptologists and radiocarbon experts that centers around the ]. Kenyon's date is consensually accepted by mainstream archaeologists.<ref name="Jr.2009"/> ] dismissed Wood's theories stating: "Of course, for some, that only made the Biblical story more miraculous than ever—Joshua destroyed a city that wasn't even there!"<ref>{{cite book|last1=Dever|first1=William G.|title=Recent Archeological Discoveries and Biblical Research|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ab7_GFJ-dKQC&q=Dever+Joshua+destroyed+even+there&pg=PA47|access-date=2013-01-07|year=1990|orig-year=1989|publisher=University of Washington Press|location=US|isbn=0-295-97261-0|page=47|chapter=2. The Israelite Settlement in Canaan. New Archeological Models|quote=(Of course, for some, that only made the Biblical story more miraculous than ever—Joshua destroyed a city that wasn't even there!)}}</ref> According to Ann E. Killebrew, "Most scholars today accept that the majority of the conquest narratives in the book of Joshua are devoid of historical reality".<ref name="Killebrew2005">{{cite book|first=Ann E.|last=Killebrew|title=Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel, 1300–1100 B.C.E.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VtAmmwapfVAC&pg=PA186+|year=2005|publisher=Society of Biblical Lit|isbn=978-1-58983-097-4|pages=186}}</ref>
However, the weighted average C14 date of the short-lived grains was 3306 ± 7 BP.<ref>Abstract for Bruins and van der Plicht available </ref> When calibrated using the current version of OxCal 4.0, this produces a 2-sigma age range (95% probability) of 1620-1530 BC. This date is difficult to reconcile with the Late Bronze I ceramics found by both Garstang and Kenyon (cooking pots with an internal lip and round-sided bowls with concentric painted rings inside, in particular), and the existence of 20 different layers recorded by Kenyon between the beginning of the MBIIc (Phase 32, c. 1650 BC) and the last phase of City IV.<ref>Wood (1990), 52.</ref> Since the Late Bronze I is dated from about 1550 to 1400 BC by most scholars, the archaeological evidence for this pottery found by both Garstang and Kenyon argues for dating the end of Jericho City IV later than supported by the C<sup>14</sup> data, that is, in LBI rather than in MBIIc.


==Khirbet el-Maqatir==
Previously, these radiocarbon dates for Jericho City IV persuaded many scholars as conclusive evidence in favor of Kenyon’s date of 1550 BC, vs. the later Garstang/Wood date of about 1400 BC. But in recent years there has been considerable controversy regarding the interpretation of radiocarbon data, particularly as to the disagreement of radiocarbon dating with accepted dates for ancient near eastern civilizations. An aspect of this controversy that is relevant to the dating of Jericho City IV is the current debate over the time of the Thera (]) volcanic eruption at the end of the Minoan age, an eruption that spewed pumice and ash as far away as Egypt. Pottery that was well known to Egyptologists from its presence in Egypt and the Levant was found under the pumice layers on Thera, as were pieces of wood and leaves that could be used in giving a radiocarbon date to the catastrophe. The disagreement between these two methods of dating (pottery or stratigraphic vs. radiocarbon) has produced an enormous amount of literature.<ref> A recent overview can be found in Bietak and Höflmayer, pp. 13-23.</ref> A 2006 article in ''Science'' magazine summarizes the controversy as follows: “Those who rely on dates from pottery styles and Egyptian inscriptions put the event at roughly 1500 B.C.E., whereas radiocarbon experts have consistently dated it between 100 and 150 years earlier.”<ref>"New Carbon Dates Support Revised History of Ancient Mediterranean," ''Science'' 312 (28 April 2006) p. 508).</ref> Whereas the physical scientists are sure that their measurements are correct in dating the Santorini eruption to between 1660 and 1600 BC within 95% confidence levels, Egyptologists have largely refused to accept these dates because it would require moving the dates for Egypt's ] about 150 years earlier than is currently accepted. The ''Science'' article quotes ] as follows: ""I am not impressed," says Egyptologist Manfred Bietak of the University of Vienna in Austria, who prefers to rely on detailed Egyptian records for the same period . . . Bietak and others have argued that radiocarbon dating is not infallible and that the earlier date for the Thera eruption is contradicted by excavations in Egypt and on Thera itself."<ref>ibid., pp. 508, 509.</ref>
Wood directed excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir,<ref>{{Cite journal|first1=Gary A.|last1=Byers|first2=Dr. Scott|last2=Stripling|last3=Wood|first3=Bryant|date=2016|title=Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: the 2009–2011 Seasons|journal=Judea and Samaria Research Studies|volume=25|issue=2|pages=71–72}}</ref> a city which he and his associates contend may be the biblical city of ].<ref>The " Problem " of Ai in Joshua 7–8: Solved after Forty Years of Excavation in the West Bank of Israel. Scott Stripling, Mark Hassler. https://www.academia.edu/3080985/The_Problem_of_Ai_in_Joshua_7_8_Solved_after_Forty_Years_of_Excavation_in_the_West_Bank_of_Israel</ref> (The traditional location of Ai, ], was excavated most recently by ] and was found to have been abandoned during the entirety of the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages.) Khirbet el-Maqatir has produced pottery of the Early Bronze, Middle Bronze, Late Bronze I, Iron Age I, late Hellenistic/early Roman, and Byzantine periods. Based on initial finds, including a small Late Bronze I fortress that was destroyed by fire - some two centuries earlier than the date usually considered for the events of ] - their "preliminary conclusion is that the LB I fortress meets the Biblical requirements to be tentatively identified as the fortress ], referred to in ]–]."<ref>Wood (2000), 29.</ref> They see a nearby ] as the hiding place of the Israelites before the ambush, and they have found that the fortress had a gate. These points fit the limited and commonplace topographic details ascribed to Ai in the Bible.


This identification has not gained acceptance.<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Mullins|author-first1=Robert|editor1-last= Levy |editor1-first= Thomas E.|editor2-last=Schneider|editor2-first=Thomas|editor3-last= Propp|editor3-first= William H.C.|title= Israel's Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience |date= 2015 |publisher= Springer|isbn= 978-331904767-6 |page= 519|chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=xpe1BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA519 |access-date= 26 January 2017|chapter= The Emergence of Israel in Retrospect}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Hawkins |first1= Ralph |title= How Israel Became a People |date=2015 |publisher= Abingdon |isbn= 978-1-42675487-6 |page= 109|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=7QU7GFNe7nsC&pg=PT156 |access-date= 26 January 2017}}</ref> The present-day consensus is that there never was an Israelite conquest of Canaan.<ref name= Coote>{{cite book |last1= Coote |first1= Robert B. |chapter= Conquest: Biblical narrative |editor1-last= Freedman |editor1-first= David Noel |editor2-last= Myers |editor2-first= Allen C. |title= Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible |year= 2000 |publisher= Eerdmans |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=qRtUqxkB7wkC&pg=PA275 |page=275 |isbn= 978-905356503-2}}</ref><ref name=cornell2001>{{cite web |last=Herzog |first=Ze'ev |author-link=Ze'ev Herzog |publisher=] |title= Deconstructing the walls of Jericho |website= lib1.library.cornell.edu |date=29 October 1999 |url= http://lib1.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/jerques.htm |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20011110114548/http://lib1.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/jerques.htm |archive-date=10 November 2001 |url-status= dead |access-date=9 February 2019}}</ref>
If Bietak and the other Egyptologists are right, then radiocarbon dates taken from the approximate middle of the second millennium BC will consistently yield results that are from 100 to 150 years too early. This would mean that the radiocarbon dates cited above for Jericho City IV should be moved down that amount of time. Instead of supporting the Kenyon date of 1550 BC for the end of City IV, the adjusted radiocarbon dates would then support, within their probability of error, the Garstang/Wood date of around 1400 BC.


==Personal life==
Given the present unsettled state of this controversy over radiocarbon dates, it would seem that those who put their confidence in the C<sup>14</sup> method will continue to favor 1550 BC for the destruction of Jericho, whereas those who follow the lead of Bietak and other Egyptologists should be open to the later date, in view of the fact that the required adjustments to C<sup>14</sup> dating favors the Garstang/Wood chronology. Giving priority to the C<sup>14</sup> dates and ignoring the caution expressed by Egyptologists in this matter would also seem to carry with it the necessity of advocating that all dates of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom should be moved back in time by 100 to 150 years.<ref>This is of course the point that Bietak makes and which is succintly expressed in the ''Science'' article cited above. The argument is just as germane to Jericho and Levantine sites as it is to the sites that Bietak has investigated in Egypt. Bietak, of course, is not willing to make such and adjustment.</ref>
Wood is an ]. He supports ] and considers himself a ]. He is married to Faith Wood, and lives in ].<ref name="biblearchaeology.org"/>


==Works==
== Khirbet el-Maqatir ==
===Books===
*{{cite book |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |title=Palestinian Pottery of the Late Bronze Age: an investigation of the terminal LB IIB phase |location=Ottawa |publisher=National Library of Canada |date=1985 |isbn=978-0-3151-8831-0 |oclc=16020443 }}
*{{cite book |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=The Palestinian Evidence for a Thirteenth Century Conquest: an archaeological appraisal |date=1987 |oclc=861056373 }}
*{{cite book |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Egyptian Amphorae of the New Kingdom and Ramesside Period |location=Durham, NC |publisher=American Schools of Oriental Research |date=1987 |oclc=77650066 }}
*{{cite book |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine: the ceramic industry and the diffusion of ceramic style in the Bronze and Iron Ages |series=Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement series |volume=103 |location=Sheffield, England |publisher=JSOT Press for the American Schools of Oriental Research |date=1990 |isbn=978-1-850-75269-1 |oclc=25358621 }}
*{{cite book |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=The Search for Joshua's Ai |series=Critical Issues in Early Israelite History, eds. Richard S. Hess, Gerald A. Klingbeil, and Paul J. Ray |location=Winona Lake, IN|publisher=Eisenbrauns |date=2008 |isbn=978-1-57506-804-6 }}


===Articles===
Wood directs excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir, a city which he contends may be the biblical city of Ai. The traditional location of Ai, ], was excavated most recently by ] and was found to have been abandoned during the entirety of the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages. Khirbet el-Maqatir has produced pottery of the Early Bronze, Middle Bronze, Late Bronze I, Iron Age I, late Hellenistic/early Roman, and Byzantine periods. Based on initial finds, including a small Late Bronze I fortress in areas A, D, E, and G, Wood's "preliminary conclusion is that the LB I fortress meets the Biblical requirements to be tentatively identified as the fortress 'Ai, referred to in Josh. 7-8."<ref>Wood (2000), 29.</ref> Nearby Khirbet Nisya has also been suggested, by excavator David Livingstone, as an alternative location for Ai.
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence |journal=] |volume=16 |issue=2 |date=March 1990 |pages=44–58 }}<ref>{{cite web |title=Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence |date=12 June 2008 |url=http://cojs.org/did_the_israelites_conquer_jericho/ |access-date=29 March 2016 }}</ref>
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski Is Wrong on All Counts |journal=Biblical Archaeology Review |volume=16 |issue=5 |date=September 1990 |pages=45–69 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors? |journal=Biblical Archaeology Review |volume=17 |issue=6 |date=November 1991 |pages=44–52, 89–92 }}<ref>{{cite web|title=The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors?|date=16 June 2008 |url=http://cojs.org/the-philistines-enter-canaan-bryant-g-wood/|access-date=29 March 2016}}</ref>
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=The Walls of Jericho |journal=] |volume=12 |issue=2 |date=Spring 1999 |pages=35–42 }}<ref>{{cite web|title=The Walls of Jericho|url=http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/06/The-Walls-of-Jericho.aspx|access-date=29 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160321181239/http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/06/the-walls-of-jericho.aspx|archive-date=21 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Khirbet el-Maqatir, 1995-1998 |journal=] |volume=50 |issue=1–2 |date=2000 |pages=123–30 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Khirbet el-Maqatir, 1999 |journal=] |volume=50 |issue=3 |date=2000 |pages=249–54 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Khirbet el-Maqatir, 2000 |journal=] |volume=51 |issue=1–2 |date=2001 |pages=246–52 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Digging up Joshua's Ai: The 2009-2010 Seasons at Kh. el-Maqatir |journal=] |volume=24 |issue=1 |date=2011 |pages=10–16 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Wood |author1-first=Bryant G. |author-mask=3 |title=Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: The Infant Jar Burial |journal=] |volume=25 |issue=2 |date=2012 |pages=37–38 }}
*{{cite journal |author1-last=Byers |author1-first=Gary A. |author2-last=Stripling |author2-first=Scott |author3-last=Wood |author3-first=Bryant G. |title=Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: the 2009-2011 Seasons |journal=] |volume=25 |issue=2 |date=2016 |pages=69–109 }}


==References== ==Notes==
{{Reflist}} {{Reflist}}


===Bibliography=== ==Bibliography==
*Manfred Bietak and Felix Höflmayer, "Introduction: High and Low Chronology," pp. 13-23 in ''The Synchronization of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millenium B.C. III'', eds. Manfred Bietak and Ernst Czerny, Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschanften, 2007. *Manfred Bietak and Felix Höflmayer, "Introduction: High and Low Chronology," pp.&nbsp;13–23 in ''The Synchronization of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millenium B.C. III'', eds. Manfred Bietak and Ernst Czerny, Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschanften, 2007.
*Bruins & van der Plicht, "Tell es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of Short-Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal Samples from the End of the Middle Bronze Age," ''Radiocarbon'' 37:2, 1995. *Bruins & van der Plicht, "Tell es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of Short-Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal Samples from the End of the Middle Bronze Age," ''Radiocarbon'' 37:2, 1995.
*John Garstang, ''Joshua-Judges'', Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1978 reprint of 1931 edition. *John Garstang, ''Joshua-Judges'', Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1978 reprint of 1931 edition.
*Bryant G. Wood, "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence," '']'' 16(2) (March/April 1990): 44-58.
*Bryant G. Wood, "Dating Jericho’s Destruction: Bienkowski Is Wrong on All Counts, '']'' 16:05, Sep/Oct 1990.
*Bryant G. Wood,"The Walls of Jericho," ''Bible and Spade'' 12:2 (1999), also available ]
*Bryant G. Wood, The Philistines Enter Canaan, '']'' 17:06, Nov/Dec 1991.
*Bryant G. Wood, "Khirbet el-Maqatir, 1995-1998," ''Israel Exploration Journal'' 50 no. 1-2 (2000), 123-30.


==External links== ==External links==
*

*
*
*
* *
*


{{Authority control}}


] {{DEFAULTSORT:Wood, Bryant G.}}
] ]
] ]
] ]
]

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 21:32, 7 August 2024

American archaeologist and Young Earth creationist.

Bryant G. Wood
Born1936 (age 87–88)
Endicott, New York, U.S.
Alma materSyracuse University (BS)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (MS)
University of Michigan (MA)
University of Toronto (PhD)
Known forReassessment of Garstang's and Kenyon's Jericho datings
Scientific career
FieldsArchaeology
InstitutionsEditor of Bible and Spade

Bryant G. Wood (born 1936) is an American biblical archaeologist and Young Earth creationist. Wood is known for arguing that the destruction of Jericho could be accorded with the biblical literalist chronology of c. 1400 BC. This date is some 150 years later than the accepted date of c. 1550 BC, first determined by Kathleen Kenyon and subsequently confirmed with radiocarbon dating.

Academic career

Wood attended Syracuse University, graduating with a B.S. in mechanical engineering, later earning an M.S. in mechanical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York. He later pursued biblical and archaeological studies and received an M.A. in Biblical History from the University of Michigan in 1974 and a PhD in Syro-Palestinian archaeology from the University of Toronto in 1985. Wood is a specialist in Canaanite pottery of the Late Bronze Age. He is the author of The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine: The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages (1990), as well as numerous articles on archaeological subjects. He received international attention for his proposed redating of ancient Jericho, arguing for the historicity of a biblically literalist account of the capture of the city by the Israelites. He has also written on the entry of the Philistines into Canaan and on the historicity of the Biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Near East Archaeological Society.

Bible and Spade and other contributions

Wood serves as editor in chief of the quarterly publication Bible and Spade (published by the inerrantist organisation Associates for Biblical Research), which describes itself as " Christian Apologetics Ministry Dedicated to Demonstrating the Historical Reliability of the Bible through Archaeological and Biblical Research". The magazine concentrates largely on matters relating to archaeology and Bible history, but also touches on general apologetics (especially the relationship between science and evangelical religious belief) and Christian devotion. Bible and Spade is a quarterly magazine committed to the use of archaeology to demonstrate the historical veracity of the Old and New Testaments. The editor-in-chief is listed as Wood. The headquarters is in Akron, PA.

It states its creationist commitment as follows:

  • We believe the accounts found in Genesis 1–11 contain factual and real-time, chronology, historical events, places, and persons. This includes the accuracy and real historicity of the persons, ages, and events recorded in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, which may or may not be exhaustive. These records incorporate the accounts of those who were eyewitnesses to the events recorded. We find no biblical, hermeneutical, or exegetical basis to interpret them allegorically, non-historically, or mythically. These accounts do not require knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern literature to be interpreted correctly. We deny that God used erroneous worldviews from ANE mythology to inspire the writing of Genesis 1–11.
  • We consider the patriarchal narratives of Genesis 12–50 to be historically accurate in their reporting of chronology, persons, places, events, and cultural customs and background. Further, we believe that the extensive chronological data found in both the Old and New Testaments is historically accurate.

Wood is also a contributor to the Biblical Archaeology Review, the Israel Exploration Journal and the Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin.

Jericho

During a series of excavations from 1930 to 1936 John Garstang found a destruction layer at Jericho corresponding to the termination of City IV which he identified with the biblical story of Joshua and dated to c. 1400 BC. It was therefore a shock when Kathleen Kenyon in the 1950s, using more scientific methods than had been available to Garstang, redated Jericho City IV to 1550 BC and found no signs of any habitation at all for the period around 1400 BC. Wood's 1990 reversion of City IV to Garstang's original 1400 BC therefore attracted considerable attention. Wood based his belief on the story in the biblical book of Joshua, Jericho was the first Canaanite city to fall to the Israelites as they began their conquest of the Promised Land - an event which Wood places at around 1406 BC due to his interpretation of 1 Kings 6:1. In 1999, based on a reanalysis of pottery shards, Wood argued that Jericho could have been captured in the Late Bronze Age by Joshua. Wood and Piotr Bienkowski debated this in the March/April 1990 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, with Bienkowski writing:

Wood has attempted to redate the destruction of Jericho City IV from the end of the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1550 B.C.) to the end of the Late Bronze I (c. 1400 BC). He has put forward four lines of argument to support his conclusion. Not a single one of these arguments can stand up to scrutiny. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to confirm Kathleen Kenyon's dating of City IV to the Middle Bronze Age. Wood's attempt to equate the destruction of City IV with the Israelite conquest of Jericho must therefore be rejected.

Wood responded that he had produced evidence to back his argument, and that any counter-claims should also be backed by fresh evidence. In 1995 new evidence became available in the form of charred cereal grains from the City IV destruction layer. Radiocarbon dating of these grains showed that Jericho City IV was destroyed "during the late 17th or the 16th century BC", in line with Kenyon's findings, and that "the fortified Bronze Age city at Tell es-Sultan was not destroyed by ca.1400 BC, as Wood suggested". Wood responded to the newer evidence in an article for the Bible and Spade magazine, concluding that he still held to the date ca. 1400 B.C. based on pottery finds. Wood also argues that the discrepancy is part of the ongoing dispute between Egyptologists and radiocarbon experts that centers around the date of the Thera eruption. Kenyon's date is consensually accepted by mainstream archaeologists. William G. Dever dismissed Wood's theories stating: "Of course, for some, that only made the Biblical story more miraculous than ever—Joshua destroyed a city that wasn't even there!" According to Ann E. Killebrew, "Most scholars today accept that the majority of the conquest narratives in the book of Joshua are devoid of historical reality".

Khirbet el-Maqatir

Wood directed excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir, a city which he and his associates contend may be the biblical city of Ai. (The traditional location of Ai, et-Tell, was excavated most recently by Joseph Callaway and was found to have been abandoned during the entirety of the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages.) Khirbet el-Maqatir has produced pottery of the Early Bronze, Middle Bronze, Late Bronze I, Iron Age I, late Hellenistic/early Roman, and Byzantine periods. Based on initial finds, including a small Late Bronze I fortress that was destroyed by fire - some two centuries earlier than the date usually considered for the events of Book of Joshua - their "preliminary conclusion is that the LB I fortress meets the Biblical requirements to be tentatively identified as the fortress Ai, referred to in Josh. 78." They see a nearby wadi as the hiding place of the Israelites before the ambush, and they have found that the fortress had a gate. These points fit the limited and commonplace topographic details ascribed to Ai in the Bible.

This identification has not gained acceptance. The present-day consensus is that there never was an Israelite conquest of Canaan.

Personal life

Wood is an evangelical Christian. He supports biblical literalism and considers himself a Young Earth creationist. He is married to Faith Wood, and lives in Manheim, Pennsylvania.

Works

Books

  • Wood, Bryant G. (1985). Palestinian Pottery of the Late Bronze Age: an investigation of the terminal LB IIB phase. Ottawa: National Library of Canada. ISBN 978-0-3151-8831-0. OCLC 16020443.
  • ——— (1987). The Palestinian Evidence for a Thirteenth Century Conquest: an archaeological appraisal. OCLC 861056373.
  • ——— (1987). Egyptian Amphorae of the New Kingdom and Ramesside Period. Durham, NC: American Schools of Oriental Research. OCLC 77650066.
  • ——— (1990). The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine: the ceramic industry and the diffusion of ceramic style in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement series. Vol. 103. Sheffield, England: JSOT Press for the American Schools of Oriental Research. ISBN 978-1-850-75269-1. OCLC 25358621.
  • ——— (2008). The Search for Joshua's Ai. Critical Issues in Early Israelite History, eds. Richard S. Hess, Gerald A. Klingbeil, and Paul J. Ray. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-804-6.

Articles

  • ——— (March 1990). "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence". Biblical Archaeology Review. 16 (2): 44–58.
  • ——— (September 1990). "Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski Is Wrong on All Counts". Biblical Archaeology Review. 16 (5): 45–69.
  • ——— (November 1991). "The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors?". Biblical Archaeology Review. 17 (6): 44–52, 89–92.
  • ——— (Spring 1999). "The Walls of Jericho". Bible and Spade. 12 (2): 35–42.
  • ——— (2000). "Khirbet el-Maqatir, 1995-1998". Israel Exploration Journal. 50 (1–2): 123–30.
  • ——— (2000). "Khirbet el-Maqatir, 1999". Israel Exploration Journal. 50 (3): 249–54.
  • ——— (2001). "Khirbet el-Maqatir, 2000". Israel Exploration Journal. 51 (1–2): 246–52.
  • ——— (2011). "Digging up Joshua's Ai: The 2009-2010 Seasons at Kh. el-Maqatir". Bible and Spade. 24 (1): 10–16.
  • ——— (2012). "Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: The Infant Jar Burial". Bible and Spade. 25 (2): 37–38.
  • Byers, Gary A.; Stripling, Scott; Wood, Bryant G. (2016). "Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: the 2009-2011 Seasons". Judea and Samaria Research Studies. 25 (2): 69–109.PDF

Notes

  1. ^ Hubbard, Jr., Robert L. (30 August 2009). Joshua. Zondervan. pp. 203–04. ISBN 978-0-310-59062-0. The current scholarly consensus follows the conclusion of Kenyon: Except for a small, short-lived settlement (ca. 1400 B.C.), Jericho was completely uninhabited ca. 1550-1100 B.C.
  2. ^ "Dr. Bryant G. Wood - Associates for Biblical Research". biblearchaeology.org. Retrieved 27 May 2021.
  3. "Bible and Spade Magazine". www.biblearchaeology.org. Associates for Biblical Research. Archived from the original on 28 March 2019. Retrieved 11 September 2012.
  4. "Latest research articles by category". Associates for Biblical Research. Retrieved 11 September 2012.
  5. "Bible and Spade Magazine". www.biblearchaeology.org. Associates for Biblical Research. Archived from the original on 24 October 2012. Retrieved 11 September 2012.
  6. "Latest research articles by category". Bible Archaeology. Associates for Biblical Research. Archived from the original on 24 October 2012. Retrieved 11 September 2012.
  7. "Latest research articles by category". Bible Archaeology. Associates for Biblical Research. Retrieved 11 September 2012.
  8. Wood, Leon James; O'Brien, David (1986). A Survey of Israel's History. Harper Collins. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-310-34770-5.
  9. Millard, Alan Ralph; Hoffmeier, James Karl; Weston Baker, David (1994). Faith, Tradition, and History: Old Testament Historiography in Its Near Eastern Context. Eisenbrauns. p. 15. ISBN 978-0-931464-82-9.
  10. "Is Bryant Wood's chronology of Jericho valid?". www.biblicalchronologist.org.
  11. "Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski Is Wrong on All Counts". The BAS Library. 24 August 2015. Retrieved 27 May 2021.
  12. "Bruins and Van Der Plicht, "Tell Es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of Short- Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal Samples From the End of the Middle Bronze Age", Radiocarbon Volume 37, Number 2, 1995. (Note: The article gives dates BP, "before present", meaning before 1950.)". Archived from the original on 7 September 2008. Retrieved 20 September 2008.
  13. "Dating Jericho's Destruction: Bienkowski is Wrong on All Counts". Archived from the original on 2 July 2012. Retrieved 23 July 2012.
  14. "Carbon 14 Dating at Jericho". Archived from the original on 12 July 2014. Retrieved 26 March 2009.
  15. Dever, William G. (1990) . "2. The Israelite Settlement in Canaan. New Archeological Models". Recent Archeological Discoveries and Biblical Research. US: University of Washington Press. p. 47. ISBN 0-295-97261-0. Retrieved 7 January 2013. (Of course, for some, that only made the Biblical story more miraculous than ever—Joshua destroyed a city that wasn't even there!)
  16. Killebrew, Ann E. (2005). Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel, 1300–1100 B.C.E. Society of Biblical Lit. p. 186. ISBN 978-1-58983-097-4.
  17. Byers, Gary A.; Stripling, Dr. Scott; Wood, Bryant (2016). "Excavations at Khirbet el-Maqatir: the 2009–2011 Seasons". Judea and Samaria Research Studies. 25 (2): 71–72.
  18. The " Problem " of Ai in Joshua 7–8: Solved after Forty Years of Excavation in the West Bank of Israel. Scott Stripling, Mark Hassler. https://www.academia.edu/3080985/The_Problem_of_Ai_in_Joshua_7_8_Solved_after_Forty_Years_of_Excavation_in_the_West_Bank_of_Israel
  19. Wood (2000), 29.
  20. Mullins, Robert (2015). "The Emergence of Israel in Retrospect". In Levy, Thomas E.; Schneider, Thomas; Propp, William H.C. (eds.). Israel's Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience. Springer. p. 519. ISBN 978-331904767-6. Retrieved 26 January 2017.
  21. Hawkins, Ralph (2015). How Israel Became a People. Abingdon. p. 109. ISBN 978-1-42675487-6. Retrieved 26 January 2017.
  22. Coote, Robert B. (2000). "Conquest: Biblical narrative". In Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C. (eds.). Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Eerdmans. p. 275. ISBN 978-905356503-2.
  23. Herzog, Ze'ev (29 October 1999). "Deconstructing the walls of Jericho". lib1.library.cornell.edu. Ha'aretz. Archived from the original on 10 November 2001. Retrieved 9 February 2019.
  24. "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence". 12 June 2008. Retrieved 29 March 2016.
  25. "The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors?". 16 June 2008. Retrieved 29 March 2016.
  26. "The Walls of Jericho". Archived from the original on 21 March 2016. Retrieved 29 March 2016.

Bibliography

  • Manfred Bietak and Felix Höflmayer, "Introduction: High and Low Chronology," pp. 13–23 in The Synchronization of Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millenium B.C. III, eds. Manfred Bietak and Ernst Czerny, Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschanften, 2007.
  • Bruins & van der Plicht, "Tell es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of Short-Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal Samples from the End of the Middle Bronze Age," Radiocarbon 37:2, 1995.
  • John Garstang, Joshua-Judges, Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1978 reprint of 1931 edition.

External links

Categories: