Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 08-05-2005, 03:03 PM

King David's Palace Is Found, Archaeologist Says

Quote:

An Israeli archaeologist says she has uncovered in East Jerusalem what may be the fabled palace of the biblical King David. Her work has been sponsored by a conservative Israeli research institute and financed by an American Jewish investment banker who would like to prove that Jerusalem was indeed the capital of the Jewish kingdom described in the Bible.

Other scholars are skeptical that the foundation walls discovered by the archaeologist, Eilat Mazar, are David's palace. But they acknowledge that what she has uncovered is rare and important: a major public building from around the 10th century B.C., with pottery shards that date to the time of David and Solomon and a government seal of an official mentioned in the book of Jeremiah.

. . .

Hani Nur el-Din, a Palestinian professor of archaeology at Al Quds University, said he and his colleagues considered biblical archaeology an effort by Israelis "to fit historical evidence into a biblical context." . . .

Even Israeli archaeologists are not so sure that Ms. Mazar has found the palace - the house that Hiram, king of Tyre, built for the victorious king, at least as Samuel 2:5 describes it. It may also be the Fortress of Zion that David conquered from the Jebusites, who ruled Jerusalem before him, or some other structure about which the Bible is silent.

The bulla, (governmental seal) is of Jehucal (or Jucal), son of Shelemiah, son of Shevi - who is mentioned at least twice in the Book of Jeremiah.

The dig, which has cost about $500,000, has been sponsored by Roger Hertog, a New York financier who is vice chairman of Alliance Capital Management and chairman of the board of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, founded as Israel's first "neoconservative think-tank."

another article

Toto · 08-05-2005, 03:39 PM

Another story, without the King David Palace claim:

Royal seal unearthed

Quote:

A royal seal dating to the period of the First Temple has been found in an archeological dig in the City of David, adjacent to the Old City of Jerusalem. The seal’s inscription has the name of Jehudi, son of Shelemiah, one of the top officials in the court of the last Judean king prior to the destruction of the First Temple, King Zedekiah.. . .

. . . . Several years ago, another circa-580 B.C.E. royal seal was found in the same site. It had the name of Gemaryahu, son of Shafan, who is also mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah, and was a top official in the court of King Zedekiah's predecessor, King Yehoyachim.

yalla · 08-05-2005, 07:58 PM

What jumps out at me ,reading all the articles, is that the seal is dated 580bce and that is not the alleged time of Dave.
Somehow, unexplained, the claim is then transferred to the palace being centuries earlier.
What have I missed?

Toto · 08-05-2005, 08:07 PM

The seal is not dated to the time of David. It is the large building which is dated to around the 10th c. BCE. There is actually nothing to connect that building to David except a press release.

yalla · 08-05-2005, 08:57 PM

So at this stage we have nothing?

Toto · 08-05-2005, 09:10 PM

We have a building dating to about when King David would have been King, with some broken pieces of pottery.

Naruto · 08-05-2005, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

We have a building dating to about when King David would have been King, with some broken pieces of pottery.

Well, I'm convinced.

Hey, look at it this way, we went to war in Iraq with less!

yalla · 08-05-2005, 09:56 PM

Just a quicky...T.Thompson "the Mythic Past'' pub. 1999 p.164.."Jerusalem was not known to be occupied during the tenth century [bce]".
It would seem that a building, with pottery, would contradict Thompson's statement and thus be a significant find if correctly dated.

badger3k · 08-06-2005, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

Just a quicky...T.Thompson "the Mythic Past''pub. 1999 p.164.."Jerusalem was not known to be occupied during the tenth century [bce]".
It would seem that a building, with pottery, would contradict Thompson's statement and thus be a significant find if correctly dated.

That's weird - from what I understand, Jerusalem was occupied, but it was a small village. I thought it's occupation went back a few hundred more years. I may not be recalling it correctly, but that claim is just odd.
:huh:

andrewcriddle · 08-07-2005, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by badger3k

That's weird - from what I understand, Jerusalem was occupied, but it was a small village. I thought it's occupation went back a few hundred more years. I may not be recalling it correctly, but that claim is just odd.
:huh:

Jerusalem was certainly occupied in the late Bronze Age.

However, IIUC some 'minimalists' have argued that Jerusalem was abandoned for a period of a century or so in the early Iron Age including the traditional dates of David and Solomon and reoccupied around 900 BCE or slightly later.

Andrew Criddle

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2005, 07:58 PM	#3
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	What jumps out at me ,reading all the articles, is that the seal is dated 580bce and that is not the alleged time of Dave. Somehow, unexplained, the claim is then transferred to the palace being centuries earlier. What have I missed?

08-05-2005, 08:07 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The seal is not dated to the time of David. It is the large building which is dated to around the 10th c. BCE. There is actually nothing to connect that building to David except a press release.

08-05-2005, 08:57 PM	#5
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	So at this stage we have nothing?

08-05-2005, 09:10 PM	#6
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	We have a building dating to about when King David would have been King, with some broken pieces of pottery.

08-05-2005, 09:56 PM	#8
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	Just a quicky...T.Thompson "the Mythic Past'' pub. 1999 p.164.."Jerusalem was not known to be occupied during the tenth century [bce]". It would seem that a building, with pottery, would contradict Thompson's statement and thus be a significant find if correctly dated.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.