For the past 20 years, a battle has been waged with spades and scientific tracts over just how mighty David and the Israelites were. A string of archaeologists and Bible scholars, building on critical scholarship from the 1970s and '80s, has argued that David and his son Solomon were the product of a literary tradition that at best exaggerated their rule and perhaps fabricated their existence altogether.
For some, the finds at Qeiyafa have tilted the evidence against such skeptical views of the Bible. Garfinkel says his work here bolsters the argument for a regional government at the time of David – with fortified cities, central taxation, international trade, and distinct religious traditions in the Judean hills. He says it refutes the portrayal by other scholars of an agrarian society in which David was nothing more than a "Bedouin sheikh in a tent."
"Before us, there was no evidence of a kingdom of Judah in the 10th century [BC]," says Garfinkel. "And we have changed the picture."
But critics question his methods on the ground and his interpretations in scholarly journals.
The dispute transcends the simple meaning of ancient inscriptions found at Qeiyafa, or the accuracy of carbon-dating tests on olive pits. It highlights the whole dynamic between archaeology and the Bible – whether science can, in fact, help authenticate the Scriptures.
A group of more than 85 scientists have issued a joint rebuttal to a recent U.S....
Kate Adamala had been working on something dangerous.
At her synthetic biology lab, Adamala had been taking...
An ancient and “nearly naked” black hole that astronomers believe may have been created in the.../https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/28/42/284283dd-663b-4e1a-a610-c2b440c84f65/ezgif-34f9a279a9f974.jpg)
Early humans who made some of the oldest known stone tools might have traveled miles to...
