James,. P., 2008. The Alleged ‘Anchor Point’ of 732 BC for the Destruction of Hazor V, Antiguo Oriente 6, 133-180 (original) (raw)

Finkelstein, I. 2000. Hazor XII-XI with an Addendum on Ben-Tor’s Dating of Hazor X-VII, Tel Aviv 27: 231-247.

Tel Aviv , 2000

The history of Hazor in the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age I and the relationship between Hazor and the Iron Age I sites in the Upper Galilee played a major role in the 1950s-1960s dispute over the nature of the 'Israelite Settlement' in Canaan. Yadin (e.g., 1972:131-132; 1979) argued that the destruction of Late Bronze Hazor opened the way to the 'Israelite' settlement in the north and hence interpreted the finds at Hazor as supporting the Albright military conquest theory. Aharoni (1970:262-263; 1979:220-229) argued that settlement activity in the isolated, rugged and wooded Upper Galilee started before the destruction of Hazor and thus interpreted the finds there as supporting Alt's peaceful infiltration theory. Both dated the beginning of the Iron I activity at Hazor no later than the 12th century B.C.E.

Elusive destructions: reconsidering the Hazor Iron Age II sequence and its chronological and historical implications Harel Shochat & Ayelet Gilboa

Levant, 2019

Hazor, a key Iron Age II site in the southern Levant, was excavated by Yigael Yadin in the 1950s and subsequently by Amnon Ben-Tor. The Iron Age II stratigraphic sequence established proved very influential and nearly canonical; it was interpreted as representing periodic building-and-destruction cycles. The three superimposed ‘cities’ thus reconstructed were inter-alia understood to reflect alternating Israelite/Aramean domination in this conflict-prone border area before the final Assyrian destruction in the late 8th century BCE. Here we offer an alternative reconstruction for Hazor’s stratigraphic/architectural development, with repercussions for several chronological and political-historic aspects of the Kingdom of Israel and the greater Levant.