Find of Ancient City Could Alter Notions of Biblical David

Overlooking the verdant Valley of Elah, where the Bible says David toppled Goliath, archaeologists are unearthing a 3,000-year-old fortified city that could reshape views of the period when David ruled over the Israelites.

The site is Khirbet Qeiyafa, a five-acre site where excavations are being led by Yosef Garfinkel of Hebrew University. It is being recognized as an important site that can possibly yield additional archaeological evidence for the elusive period in which David was King of Israel. Among the finds uncovered at the site so far are an ostracon (piece of pottery that has been written on) with five lines of Hebrew text and burned olive pits which have been carbon-dated to the period 1050-970 B.C.

The 10th century B.C. is the most controversial period in biblical archaeology because it is then, according to the Old Testament, that David united the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, setting the stage for his son Solomon to build his great temple and rule over a vast area from the Nile to the Euphrates Rivers.

While the C-14 dating of the olive pits may not seem that important to the average reader, it is actually quite significant. It places, for instance, the occupation of the site (which “was in use for only a short period, perhaps 20 years, and then destroyed”) directly within the period in which most chronologies place David’s reign. Along with the presence of what may be the oldest known example of Hebrew writing, the site’s location on the main road into Jerusalem, settlement typical of Israelite/Judean cities, and the distinction between pottery found here and that uncovered at the nearby (7 miles) Philistine city of Gath, some archaeologists are optimistic that Khirbet Qeiyafa may prove to have played a role in the Davidic conflict between Israel and the Philistines.

Not all archaeologists are as optimistic, however, as is the case with Israel Finkelstein, prominent proponent of the “low chronology” (low chronologists tend to date the reigns of David and Solomon closer to 900 B.C., rather than 1000 B.C.) and one who minimizes the historical legitimacy of the Biblical narrative (Finkelstein rejects the idea that David and Solomon were kings in the usual sense, and more like tribal chieftans). He says, for instance:

So there is a late 10th-century fortified structure there. I don’t believe that any archaeologist can revolutionize our entire understanding of Judah and Jerusalem by a single site. It doesn’t work that way. This is a cumulative discipline.

The site has yet to be extensively excavated, and only time will tell what may be found.

For more information, check out this NY Times article: Find of Ancient City Could Alter Notions of Biblical David.

Popularity: 1%