It is seen that the number of name replacements far outweigh the cases where the earlier and later names occur together, 26 to 8.
Hoffmeier argues that when editorial updating of a placename occurs in the Hebrew Bible, the earlier name is given, followed by an editorial gloss stating the later name.
Since that is not the case with the name Rameses, no editorial updating has occurred and therefore it must be a contemporary name.
If one chooses to utilize the LXX reading of 1 Kgs 6:1, the exodus still falls in the 15th century BC, not the 13th century. He is correct in saying that scholars who have abandoned the 13th century date have embraced a non-historic interpretation of the exodus-conquest narrative.
I nowhere implied that “scholars are moving to the early date.” My point is, and here we must speak of evidence for the conquest, that scholars have abandoned the 13th century model because it is clear that the archaeological evidence does not support a 13th century model.