Tel Hatzor is the largest tel in Israel, covering 220 acres and split into an upper city (acropolis), which was surrounded by fortification walls in ancient times, and a lower city, which was surrounded by a rampart with an earth embankment. The tel contains around 20 different layers or cities.
Hatzor was first settled in the Early Bronze Age (3500-2000 BCE), but very little is known about that first settlement. In the 18th century BCE the Canaanites founded Hatzor as a major city on the trade route to Babylon around the Fertile Crescent. The city grew in size to 20,000 people, covering both the upper and lower city levels, and was considered to be the most powerful city in Canaan up until 1200 BCE. Cuneiform letters found in the archives Mari, Syria attest to this, as do letters in Tel El-Amarna in Egypt (wherein the king of Hatzor is called "King" but the kings of other Canaanite cities are called "Prince").
In Joshua 11 we are told that Jabin, the king of Hatzor, gathered a coalition of other kings and went out to fight Joshua and the Israelites. Joshua defeated this army and, according to verse 11, "burned Hatzor with fire." The current excavators at Hatzor have uncovered, in the last 10 years or so, a Late Bronze Age palace complex that was destroyed by fire. The debate about this palace centers around the question of who could have destroyed it. The Canannites are not a likely candidate because there were no other Canaanite city-states powerful enough to take on Hatzor at that time. The Egyptians are rejected because the Egyptian idols found on the site are all defaced. The Philistines are rejected because there is no Philistine pottery in or around the site. The only group left is the Israelites. The excavators date this palace and its destruction to 1250-1240 BCE, and relate it to Joshua's destruction of Hatzor.
However, not all archaeologists agree with this assessment. The two major opinions on this topic are actually opinions on the timing of the Exodus and the Conquest of Canaan. 1 Kings 6:1 is a pivotal verse in this discussion. In that verse, we are told that 480 years passed between the Exodus and the building of the Beit Hamikdash in the fourth year of Solomon's reign. We can date the building of the Beit Hamikdash, based on extrabiblical sources, to 966 BCE. So, if this passage is taken literally, the Exodus occurred around 1440 BCE and the Conquest began around 1400 BCE. This is the early dating sequence.
Scholars who accept the early date point to another layer at Hatzor that falls around 1400 that was also destroyed by fire. The later layer (the palace spoken of earlier), which was destroyed around 1250 BCE, is then related to the second destruction of Hatzor we are told of in Judges 4-5 under Deborah and Barak. One issue some scholars take with this early dating is that the name of the king of Hatzor mentioned in both Joshua and Judges is "Jabin" (in Hebrew, יבין "Yabin"). This is interpreted by those scholars as a reference to the same king, meaning that authors of Joshua and Judges are telling the same story and the writer of Joshua was mistaken. However, the Mari archives contain Akkadian cuneiform tablets dating to the earliest part of the Middle Bronze Age (pre-Exodus by any account) that mention the king of Hatzor, calling him "Ibni Adu". Ibni in Akkadian is equivalent to Yabin in Hebrew. Cuneiform tablets found at Hatzor itself also speak of Ibni, King of Hatzor. So, early-date scholars say that the name "Jabin" is a dynastic name that was used by kings in Hatzor for many, many years.
One problem with all of the dating sequences is that the various dates and times given in the Scriptures do not line up exactly. In some cases, a literal interpretation of the dates and times adds up to more than 500 years between the Exodus and the Beit Hamikdash, which contradicts the statement in 1 Kings 6:1. Late-date scholars point to these discrepancies as proof of the inability to use the early date sequence. In addition, those scholars also point to the large number of settlements that appear in the hill country around 1250 or later. These settlements have traditionally been associated with the influx of Israelites into the land, but the dating of the settlements is thought to be problematic for a 1400 BCE (early date) Conquest. In addition, the Merneptha Stela, the earliest extrabiblical mention of "Israel" as a collective entity, is dated to around 1250 BCE, and the determinative pictograph used in conjunction with "Israel" implies a socioethnic entity, not a city-state. Some scholars interpret this determinative to mean that "Israel" was nomadic and not a settled people, thus pointing to a later Conquest date.
So, that is the historical debate. Personally, I follow the early dating sequence. The evidence for that sequence is stronger in my mind, plus it does not require the rejection of the timing given in 1 Kings 6:1 or a symbolic interpretation of most other dates given in the Scriptures. As for the new settlements cropping up, I can easily see those being the result of less war, i.e., the initial Conquest was completed and the Israelites were finally able to settle down a bit and begin to increase in numbers. However, the accounts of the peoples' experiences in Judges show that there were still conflicts and issues with the Canaanites and with outside forces during this period, which could account for slightly more nomadic settlement groups than powerful city-states. Regarding the Merneptha Stela, I must say that the fact that Israel even shows up on a list of the conquests of an Egyptian king says that the people were a force to be reckoned with. If they were not worthy opponents there would be no reason to mention them in your victory stela. Israel was settled over a long period of time that culminated in the conquests of Saul and David and the political annexations of Solomon. While Joshua and the Judges were able to defeat the Canaanites, they were unable to completely kick them out of the land. That is why Hatzor was rebuilt after Joshua destroyed it and why Deborah and Barak had to destroy it again.
Okay, to finish up the history, the Israelites settled in Hatzor during the time of Solomon, who built a fortress there (see 1 Kings 9:15). That fortress occupied only the acropolis of the city, not the lower section, and Hatzor was never more powerful than it was under the rule of the Canaanites. The city was destroyed a few times during the Assyrian wars with the Northern tribes, and after its final destruction in 732 BCE under the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III, the site only hosted citadels and minor buildings until it was finally abandoned in the 2nd century BCE.
Well, if you are still with me, I hope this little history discussion has been helpful in giving you a glimpse into the complexities surrounding the study of this time period. The challenge is great, but the impact on our understanding of where we come from is greater.
If you are interested in finding out more about this time period, I suggest you read my paper entitled "The Hebrews", which I wrote for a world history course in college.
