This was inspired by the recent controversy of Wendy Doniger's book *The Hindus: An Alternative History" in India. One of the few articles I read about the book that actually went into details about the alleged problems with the book linked to a full compendium of alleged problems (some clearly problematic, some clearly not). One of the major problems the book had was with one of the chapter was the chapter's argument for an Aryan Invasion. I see similar arguments about the lack of consistently destroyed cities in Iron Age Israel, which many scholars consistently see as calling into question the whole of the traditional Exodus narrative (or, more formally, the Book of Joshua). But do we have any archeological evidence of conquest and resettlement of cities? What does this look like? I assume we do. I don't mean the destruction of individual cities, or cities one at a time, but the sort of rapid elite/total displacement through military force assumed by Aryan Invasion/the Book of Joshua.
While we do have some figurative smoking guns like burning layers in forts and settlements, the best evidence for massive invasions is settlement discontinuity. Particularly if new architectural forms are used, this suggests a previous population is no longer involved in constructing buildings and new people now are in charge. Other material culture forms, like pottery or brooches, are also used but are less strong, as unlike houses, these objects can be moved between peoples as well. A necessary criterium for an actual invasion, rather than gradual cultural change, is clear evidence that the change takes place over a very short timespan. A good archaeological example is the Norse takeover of the Northern Isles of Scotland.