rob117

David and Solomon : In Search of the Bible's Sacred Kings and the Roots of the Western Tradition

A review by Archaeology Magazine

Anyone read it yet? If so, how was it?

Diogenes the Cynic

The review sounds pretty good. I'll probably buy it this weekend. I'm a little intrigued both by theiir apparent conclusion that David and Solomon (and Saul) were real chieftains as well as by the idea that some of the "anti"- David stories were composed by Northern Kingdom supporters of Saul. I'd like to see what kind of support they have for this hypothesis.

I'll post my review after I read it.

Dean Anderson

Doesn't Friedman argue the same thing from a textual perspective?

I know that he makes those arguments about the varying support for Moses and Aaron in the J vs E texts, and I think he talks about David and Solomon too...

yalla

From the review it seems like we now have "Medianists" to add to the nomenclature.

rob117

Yeah. I never thought "minimalist" was a good term for Finkilstein and Silberman, as the term usually refers to people like Davies and Thomson.

And I see the off-topic argument that had nothing to do with the book was deleted from the thread... which is good I guess...

Anat

I wonder what support they have for David et al being historical people other than the Tel Dan inscription. As for the existence of negative views of divinely chosen kings - isn't that the material Greek tragedies were made of? Heroes that have weak spots that eventually cause their downfall. That doesn't make Hercules or any of the others into a historical person.

Diogenes the Cynic

I bought the book this afternoon. I'll post my thoughts on it after I read it.

rob117

The Mesha stele, if the reconstruction of a missing letter accepted by most researchers is correct.

David is a shady figure no doubt, and much of what the Bible says about him is likely nonhistorical, but the fact that we have two inscriptions that mention him as the founder of a dynasty within 150 years of when he probably lived makes it improbable, in my opinion, that he never existed at all.

The book store (Barnes and Noble) I live near doesn't carry any books about biblical archaeology at all, come to think of it, and the library takes forever to get anything new... Hello amazon.com...

rob117

Well I read the book... very good, IMHO. I'm now something like 80% convinced that Finkelstein's redating of the Iron I in Palestine is correct; he gives a plausible hypothesis as to how the different portions of the David and Solomon story developed- although I disagree with his assertion that the description of Goliath's hoplite armor and the term "seren" must be placed in the context of seventh-century Greek mercenaries (remember, the Philistines themselves were Semiticized Greeks, and these cultural traits are generally seen as remnants of their Greek origin); other than that, his interpretations of the evidence seem very solid.

Also interesting is- contrary to those who label him as a "minimalist"- Finkelstein's own critique of real minimalists like Davies and Thompson.

Ruhan

Does anyone know how Friedman views Finkelstein's work?

Friedman seems to persists with a view of David and Solomon as powerful and wealthy kings, governing a large monarchy, whilst Finkelsein reduces these characters to mere chieftains? It seems to suggest that Friedman is dismissing Finkelsteins' claims?