The Ruins of AI

I want to start by clarifying that I am not willing to question the archaeological consensus on the dating of Et-Tell. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think it plays a role in the history of AI that confirms The Bible as reliable history. 

Ai is first mentioned when Abraham comes there, and it seems to be already called Ai which means Heap or Ruin. That’s uncertain because Genesis does use anachronistic place names, but when the newer name is because of something The Israelites or Patriarchs of some Biblical protagonist did we are told what the older name is in the account of the renaming, Dan was originally Laish or Leshem and Bethel was originally Luz.  If Ai was only ever called a Heap because of Joshua 7-8 then Joshua 7-8 would record the older name. But it isn’t, it’s the valley not the city that is given a new name, Achor, no older name is given for it, but I can believe a valley went unnamed for a long time, not a city.

The destruction of Et-Tell and creation of that Heap of stones so many jumped to wanting to identify with Joshua 7-8 is actually dated to around 2400 BC.  I have a post arguing for an early Isin-Larsa period for Genesis 14 which would be around 2100-1950 BC, but even with the older chronologies I’ve considered with a Maxmailist view of when to start the 430 years with the oldest theoretical date for The Exodus, since there was only 330 years from the bright of Abraham to the death of Joseph in my understanding of Genesis chronology, Abraham was still born after 2400 BC. 

So that Heap was already there to be called a Heap when Abraham first came there at 75 in Genesis 12. 

This is where the fact that other sites for AI have been proposed comes in. It’s possible the name does in fact refer to more than one Tell in this general area. In Genesis Ai is never called a City, just Ai. In Joshua it’s possible that just as Bethel refers to both the Altar that Jacob built and the nearby city, that Ai too refers to both the Heap and a city near the Heap.

After Joshua destroyed the city of Ai in chapter 7 and 8 another Heap of Stones was created. There were now two Heaps. 

Ai/Hai does not appear as a city or place name anywhere during the descriptions of the tribal allotment in chapters 15-21. But in chapter 21:22 when listing cities given to the Kohathite clans of the Levites in the territory allotted to Ephraim there is one called Kibzaim, which means Double heap.

I have another post proving the Shiloh Tabernacle wasn’t in the city currently traditionally identified with Shiloh but is the site of Abraham and Jacob’s Altars between Luz and Ai, Bethel. And that included arguing one of these Kohathite cities should be East of that Tabernacle since the children of Korah were Kohathies and they’re supposed to be keepers of the Gate of The Tabernacle which means they should be East of it. 

This also means a third city area could have been founded. Making at least three of the proposed Tells identified with Ai relevant. 

What I’m undecided on is which of the other potential Ai candidates play which roles in my hypothesis. 

Only Et-Tell has its own Wikipedia page. So it’s hard for a lay person to research what Archeologists think about any of these independent of their Biblical Identifications. 

As someone who is an Inherentist and even a Literalist on a lot of things it’s controversial to be literalist about, I still consider Biblical Dates to be flexible.  To me Kathleen Kenyon’s date for the Destruction of Jericho is perfectly compatible with a Biblical timeline that trusts what Paul said in Acts 13. So I’m looking for an AI candidate destroyed at the same time as Jericho Archeologically for the city of Joshua 7-8.

Khirbet Haiyan is interesting as a very early candidate before Et-Tell was settled on. But it seems neither it nor Khirbet el-Khudra had any Middle or Late Bronze occupation. Some have argued Haiyan is specifically the much later Benjamite Ai from around the time of the Captivity. 

Khirbet Nisya has a heap of stones that look right. But I then learned it’s tied to an alternate Bethel location. 

As of my beginning to write this it is only really Khirbet el-Maqatir I have an idea of where it is relevant to Et-Tell and Bethel since it’s laid out in Expedition Bible’s sloppy video on the Problem of Ai..For some reason they think Maqatir is located too far south to qualify as still East of Bethel yet their own depiction of the layout looks to me like it perfectly is still East of Bethel and closer to it. 

From what I can gather, the pottery evidence as el-Maqatir is the same as at Jericho, meaning its destruction was at the same time as Jericho’s whenever that was. It’s just that unlike Jericho no one but proponents who disagree with the mainstream view of Jericho’s Archeology are talking about it. So Google’s AI overview is going to wind up quoting a website saying Maqatir has a Late Bronze rather than Middle Bronze destruction layer. 

The alternate Bethel site linked to Nisya is also supported by some Maqatir supporters. And what I learned I didn’t even realize before is that the Expedition Bible guy’s really strict definition of what it means to be East of some other place doesn’t line up perfectly for Et-Tell and Beiten either. 

The arguments made about the Roman Mile Stones better fitting Al-Bireh as where Eusebisu and Jerome said Bethel was are compelling. Also since Bethel is supposed to mark the North-South border of Benjamin and Ephraim I am starting to think Beitin is too far north. And it looks too far east to be west of the main road going from Jerusalem to Shechem.

Part of that debate is whether Bethel and Beth-Aven are separate locations, they seem to be Joshua 7-8, in which the name of Beitin works as coming from Beth-Aven way better then Beth-El. 

But let’s leave that aside and return to el-Maqatir.

Expedition Bible’s attempt to refute it being Ai include comparing its proposed Western Gate to the Solomonic Gates at Hazor, Gezer and Megiddo, not very honest.