Did the city of Ai exist after Joshua destroyed it?

Answer 1

Perhaps yes as it is seemingly more likely today than before. Just like any science of man, there is always 'trial and error' and the site thought to be Joshua's city of Ai was destroyed circa 2400-2300 and laid abandoned in the Middle to Late Bronze age. So this site usually associated with Joshua could not be the biblical site mentioned if you put any stock in the biblical account.

Interestingly, a site under work since 1979 is revealing a strong candidate for Joshua's Ai. The name of the site is Khirbet el-Maqatir. Recently a fortress that dates to the time of Joshua has be dug up and there is evidence that it was burned by fire circa 1400 B.C., which is the time The Bible tells us in Joshua 8.

On the surface everything in the area matches exactly with what we read in the Bible. There are details given about an ambush force being hidden on the west, a hill to the north, and various details that are given in Joshua 7 and 8 that match perfectly with this site and the area around it. The discovery team of archaeologist feel quite strongly that they have found the site of Joshua's Ai.

As already mentioned, the name Ai means "the ruin" in Hebrew, and the Arabic name et-Tell site also means "the ruin" inferring this to be the origin of the name. It appears then that when this little fortress was built one kilometer to the west, that same name was applied.

Not a unique tradition because there are other ruins in the area of the et-Tell site that have retained that same name, Ai, in the modern Arabic name - about a half-dozen or so other sites in the vicinity have maintained that name and were occupied in various periods. This then seems to be another major breakthrough giving evidence to support Joshua 7 and 8, as Jericho and Ai were the two problems that secular scholars always pointed to saying, "Oh, look, we've got the Archaeology here that disproves the Bible. Therefore there was no conquest." Now this team believes they have solved those problems now. They have the evidence to show that, yes, there was a conquest. It is just a matter of time and acceptance by the community at large.

Answer 2

No, the city of Ai did not exist after the time of Joshua. In fact it had not even existed for eight centuries before the Bible says that Joshua conquered it, having been abandoned in ruins around 2200 BCE. The very name Ai means 'Ruins', the name eventually given to the site by the Hebrew people because they never knew its old name and only ever knew it literally as ruins. Archaeologists say that Ai was not conquered or destroyed by the Israelites. This is supported by evidence that other cities, supposedly conquered by Joshua, were not conquered in a unified invasion in the Late Bronze Age.

'Biblical archaeologists' have turned their attention elsewhere, recognising that if the generally accepted site for Ai (Et-Tell) was in ruins throughout the Late Bronze Age, they must conjure up another location that might be the real Ai. The Associates for Biblical Research favour Khirbet el-Maqatier, which does show evidence of occupation in the Late Bronze Age. However David P. Livingston, who founded Associates for Biblical Research in 1969 and directed it for 25 years, says Khirbet el-Maqatier meets none of the Biblical geographical descriptions of the surrounding areas as noted in Scripture, as well as none of those for the description of Joshua's Battle of Ai. He favours Khirbet Nisya as a possible alternative site for Ai.

There is so little evidence for either Khirbet el-Maqatier or Khirbet Nisya as the site of Ai, that they must, at least for now, be dismissed as the correct site. However, should either of them one day turn out to be where Ai once stood, we can then establish its history during the Israelite period.