Biomystic

I have trouble accepting the notion there was a real David because of one lintel piece bearing the title "House of David" has been found.

The Moab Stone and ancient Canaanite cuniform texts refer to "dawidum", or "chieftains", the plural of "chief". Why couldn't the lintel plate refer to the House of the Chief and that all the "David" stories are Hebrew ideas of what a Great Chief to lead them would be like--stories to rival those of Heracles for example.

As to who the Jerusalemites were worshiping in David's supposed time, judging by the Canaanite god names carried within David's son's, they were still worshiping Shalom as the Evening Star, Venus, which is why Ishtar was also the Queen of Jerusalem at one time. The Song of Solomon is really a love story between Shalom, Evening Star god of peace, and Shulut..(sp) the Morning Star goddess as the Hebrews made pagan gods into Hebrew people to subdue them into service for Jews, e.g. Abraham being Brahma, Sarah being Sarasvati, Canaanite Yamm into Yahweh, Canaanite EL into Yahweh, Solomon being Shalom, Esther and Mordacai being Ishtar and Marduk, some others..

Minimalist

Whenever Fundies go wild claiming that the Tel Dan stele "proves" the bible I like to point out to them that all it "proves" (assuming the translation is correct and for the time being let us assume that it is) is that there was a House of David. Apparently, that form of usage was common as the northern kingdom was known as the House of Omri in Assyrian inscriptions.

Anyway, so we have a king who was of the House of David but the rest of the inscription disputes the biblical account. The inscription indicates that the kings of Israel and Judah died in battle against the Aram-Damascus king (probably Hazael.) The bible invents someone named Jehu to do the deed.

As for the temple, as I recall Finkelstein does not address the issue of "Solomon" building it but clearly by the time of the Babylonian invasion someone had built one. The logical builder would be Hezekiah under whose watch the city of Jerusalem vastly expanded after Israel fell.

lpetrich

It looks like it can be difficult to distinguish fact from fiction in the Biblical accounts of David and Solomon. The Tel Dan inscription does not tell much about him, other than to hint that he had been a rather prominent leader.

However, the same thing can be said of other semilegendary history, like the early history of Rome or the early history of China. Was there a historical Romulus or a historical Yellow Emperor? And if they were legendary, then when did the "real" history start?

And if there was a historical Romulus, was he the son of a god and a virgin?

Actually, Romulus's name is likely symbolic, meaning "The Roman". And Romulus and Remus are likely a version of the reconstructed Indo-European mythical motif of primordial twin brothers called *Mannus and *Yemos (Man and Twin). Mannus sacrified Yemos, dismembered him, and created the familiar Universe from Yemos's dismembered parts.

Romulus doesn't quite do anything similar when he kills Remus, but there are some versions of the Romulus story in which the Roman Senators kill and dismember him. Why dismember him?

Minimalist

Within 50 years of George Washington's death they were telling stories of him

a- throwing a dollar across the Potomac ( there were no "dollars" in his youth)

b- never telling a lie ( he was a military commander....he lied constantly.)


c- standing up in the prow of an overloaded boat crossing a river at night in the winter ( that would be real smart!!!)

Who is to say what kinds of silly legends could have grown up about people living 2,500 years ago?

Biomystic

The first paragraph tells us nothing about the "House of David" inscription. That's my point. Why accept it as referring to a man named "David" when the Moab Stone and Canaanite references to "dawidum", or "Davids" in the plural indicates the word may just stand for chieftains with a singular "David" as referring to the Chief, head honcho, hefe, etc., e.g. "House of the Chief" with no particular chieftain named.

To me, it is significant that the word "chieftains" is used often in the story of David the Tanakh.

I think before any meaningful speculations about a historical David can occur, archeologists and historians need to know exactly what the ancient Canaanite(?) or Aramaic(?) word, "dawidum" meant, the word for chieftains.

Toto

See these previous threads:

"David and Solomon": Finkelstein and Silberman's new book is out

Is Tel Dan a Plant?

Bt Dwd

spamandham

He was dismembered, because the story is probably loosley based on the splitting of Osiris, which is itself likely derived from earlier Mesopotamian lore, ultimately originating in astro/solar theology.

Minimalist

I want to be sure that I am following you, Bio. Are you suggesting that "David" may have evolved into a title similar to "Caesar?"

lpetrich

I mentioned Romulus and Remus because they resemble some mythical motifs known from elsewhere. Romulus was described as Rome's first king; his monarch successors, like Numa Pompilius, are often considered more-or-less legendary figures. They were depicted as culture heroes, inventing various features of Roman society, and their reigns were about 40 years, which seems rather numerological.

If Rome's kings are semilegendary to completely legendary, then the same might also be true of David and Solomon, which are also depicted as culture heroes. David got credited with the Psalms, even though at least one of them, Psalm 137, is rather obviously post-David. And Solomon got credited with several writings:
Ecclesiastes
Song of Solomon
Wisdom of Solomon
Odes of Solomon
Psalms of Solomon
Testament of Solomon

And Josephus noted that some sorcerers claimed that Solomon had invented techniques for driving demons out of people, techniques which they used.

Toto

The current issue of Archeology has an article exploring the historical Romulus - discussed here.