Final answer:
The George Mendenhall and Norman Gottwald model for Israel's emergence proposes a gradual settlement and integration of the Hebrews in Canaan around 1200 BCE, rather than a swift military conquest as depicted in the Bible. This theory is supported by archaeological evidence showing no signs of a large-scale conquest.
Step-by-step explanation:
The model for Israel's emergence in the land of Canaan, as proposed by George Mendenhall and Norman Gottwald, which is potentially supported by the story of the Gibeonites in the Book of Joshua, involves a hypothesis that differs from the biblical account of a swift military conquest led by Joshua. Instead, this model suggests a gradual process of settling by the Hebrews in Canaan around 1200 BCE. This period was marked by social upheaval throughout the region, possibly related to the collapse of the Bronze Age. It challenges the narrative of a large, organized migration from Egypt, instead positing that a smaller group of slaves or peasants might have joined existing Canaanite populations, who included groups such as the Hebrews, to establish what became Israel.
Archaeological evidence does not corroborate the large-scale conquest as depicted in the biblical narrative; sites such as Jericho show no signs of destruction correlating with the biblical timeline. The growth of a distinct Hebrew identity in Canaan might have been a more complex mixture of indigenous developments and the integration of disparate groups affected by broader regional turmoil. The story of the Gibeonites, who tricked Joshua into making a peace treaty with them, could be interpreted as illustrating the integration of different peoples within Canaan under a Hebrew identity.
The historical emergence of Israel is interpreted in various ways based on the synthesis of archaeological findings and biblical texts, which show that while some aspects of biblical history can be corroborated, others remain shrouded in myth and religious tradition.