Biblical Archeology

I've read several books that said the archeological record doesn't support the Israelite invasion of Canaan as portrayed in Joshua. Most recently, I just finished reading The Bible Unearthed. It is a very engaging work with some interesting ideas. It boggles my mind that this insignificant nation produced a book that is now the world's most popular and influential. The authors claim not only was there no Exodus (or at least it didn't happen like it is portrayed in the Torah), but David was only a chieftain of a fairly small tribe and the kingdom of Judah really didn't form until shortly before the time of Josiah.

They concentrate most of their book on describing the Deuteronomist history, so while Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings are covered in depth, they don't say much about the rest of the Old Testament. Of course these are the primary historical books. (Chronicles is basically a re-hash of Kings, written from a post-exilic perspective.)

According to some, the thesis of this book is not widely accepted among archaeologists. Since I am not an archeologist and I don't know anybody who is, I am having a hard time verifying that claim. Is this a claim put out by those who believe in inerrancy only or is their enough evidence that it is supported by a wider group? Does anybody have any good books on the subject that they can recommend?