Some approaches to Biblical archaeology can be controversial: Rather than analyzing material evidence in an objective way, many archaeologists involved in this field have been accused of “forcing” the evidence to fit predetermined notions derived from a desire to “confirm” the veracity of the Bible. Archaeologists cannot “prove” that the Bible is “true;” all they can do is to uncover and interpret materials the best they can. Many of the discoveries they make seem to be consistent with Biblical accounts.
10. The Biblical Flood
Many scholars have argued that the source of Biblical Flood story was most likely a great and destructive flood that affected the region of Mesopotamia. If so, then the proportions of such a flood were enhanced by the imagination of the authors of the story.
During the 1928–1929 excavation season in southern Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq), British archaeologist Leonard Woolley uncovered 3 meters (10 ft) of waterborne sediment in the ancient city of Ur. Woolley interpreted this as evidence of the biblical flood. The layer was dated to 4000 to 3500 BC. Similar evidence has been found at many other sites in the region, but not all of them are consistent with the dates of the layer found by Woolley.
Flooding in the Mesopotamian river basin was a frequent phenomenon. Although there is no archaeological evidence in favor of a flood of planetary proportions, there is general support for a catastrophic flood (or several) in Mesopotamia during the dawn of history. These floods could well be the inspiration for the many flood stories in the Mesopotamian tradition and also the Biblical Flood.