<P> There are five main hypotheses about how to explain the biblical story surrounding Ai in light of archaeological evidence . The first is that the story was created later on; Israelites related it to Joshua because of the fame of his great conquest . The second is that there were people of Bethel inhabiting Ai during the time of the biblical story and they were the ones who were invaded . In a third, Albright combined these two theories to present a hypothesis that the story of the Conquest of Bethel, which was only a mile and a half away from Ai, was later transferred to Ai in order to explain the city and why it was in ruins . Support for this can be found in the Bible, the assumption being that the Bible does not mention the actual capture of Bethel, but might speak of it in memory in Judges 1: 22--26 . Fourth, Callaway has proposed that the city somehow angered the Egyptians (perhaps by rebelling, and attempting to gain independence), and so they destroyed it as punishment . The fifth is that Joshua's Ai is not to be found at et - Tell, but a different location entirely . </P> <P> Most archaeologists support the identification of Ai with et - Tell . Koert van Bekkum writes that "Et - Tell, identified by most scholars with the city of Ai, was not settled between the Early Bronze and Iron Age I. Bryant Wood has proposed Khirbet el - Maqatir, but this has not gained acceptance . </P>

In the northern campaign the town of ai was captured