Archaeologist finds Jerusalem wall matching biblical story
Archaeologist says 70-meters-long discovery confirms biblical story of King Solomon.
By Nir Hasson Tags: Israel newsA team of Israeli archaeologists has announced the discovery of a massive wall they say dates to the 10th century BCE in Jerusalem's Ophel Park on the slope between the Temple Mount and the village of Silwan. The dig director, Dr. Eilat Mazar, dates the wall according to potsherds found nearby to the period of King Solomon and the major period of construction in Jerusalem in the First Temple period, as described in the Bible.
The dig is a joint project by the Hebrew University, the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Israel Nature and Parks Authority.
Along with the wall, which is 10 meters high and 70 meters long, other structures were found, including a monumental gatehouse and a tower. According to Mazar, the wall is additional proof of the accuracy of the Bible's description of the grandeur of the period of David and Solomon.
According to 1 Kings 3:1, Solomon brought his royal Egyptian wife "into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the Lord, and the wall of Jerusalem round about."
"If we take the type of building and the finds and examine them in the light of what we know from the Bible, it certainly goes together well," Mazar says. "It suits the biblical story and upgrades our ability to propose an association to the wall of Jerusalem that King Solomon built. It's not wise to relate to archaeology without the biblical text. It is very possible that the Bible, like stories of dynasties, preserves a kernel of truth," she says.
The artifacts found near the wall are seen as further proof of its construction during the Israelite period. An inscription found on a fragment of a jug reads "of the overseer of the ba...", which Mazar believes refers to the "overseer of the bakers." Other fragments bear the words "of the king." Clay seals were also found bearing dozens of names.
According to Mazar, the wall, which has been uncovered over the past few months, was built on a very high level in terms of construction and engineering, and was perched on the natural rock scarp in a way that protected the Temple Mount from the east.
"This is the first time a structure has been found that could conform to descriptions of King Solomon's construction in Jerusalem," Mazar says.
The discovery highlights an ongoing scholarly controversy about the nature of the period of David and Solomon. Mazar belongs to a school of thought that finds archaeological underpinnings to the biblical stories and accepts the stories as historical. Other scholars, many from Tel Aviv University, say the Bible represents myths and the political interests of its writers, arguing that the monarchy of David and Solomon was not the regional power the Bible describes. Critics of Mazar, who asked not to be named, said yesterday they very much doubted the accuracy of her connections between the archaeological finds and the Bible. "She often fires an arrow and then marks the target. What she's telling is a myth," a skeptic said.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
The Israelis do not need an excuse to "confiscate" land.Since more land was taken than assigned by the UN as a result of efforts by the Arabs to destroy the Jewish State since the 1948 War of Independence,such keeping of land is legal in international law.But then,when one is dealing with the Jewish State,international flies goes out the window.The Israelis learned early on from the Jordanians that treaties with Arabs can be temporary,such as the rights that they had in Jerusalems's holy sites after the 1948 war, which were denied- yes, denied to Jews and Israelis - to visit them!Jerusalem will continue to be united and Israeli,but open to all faiths.The Arabs will have to get used to that condition.
As regards the Mesopotamian story, I see it as a corruption of the Biblical story. As regards to there being an Adam and Eve...there is genetic evidence that demonstrates that we are all related. Strong evidence of an Adam and Eve. As regard to incest. There was no law against it in the beginning. DNA of people back then would have been far more complete, with far fewer mutations, consequently, probability of genetic problems in resulting kids would have been far far smaller than it would be today if incest occurs. As regards to miracles such as parting the Red sea...as I look at the sky and notice the stars and contemplate the universe...I tend to think it to be quite miraculous. Seven days...why not? Time is relative. Our perception is based on the belief that the speed of light has always been a constant. But, how do we account for the speed of light being the same when the mass of the universe was concentrated at one point? Is not the speed of light affected by mass?
Academic, the Bible is fact. 100%. Keep denying God, see how that works out for you. Do you really think you descended from apes. Beastiality? Or the whole universe was infinitely small and just one day exploded to where we exist on the only rock we could physically survive? Myths.
There are absolutely no Arabic documents in existence which predate the time of Constantine (last I checked, 4th-century AD) where there are many Hebrew, Sanskrit and Paisachi (both the last are ancient languages of Sub-continent, just FYI) documents and inscriptions (stones, potsherds) which do.
Not only did they illicitly conquer E. Jerusalem and steal it from indigenous Jews, but they relentlessly keep seeking way to justify their ongoing theft of land in Jerusalem and thereabouts. They never tire of inventing pretexts to justify stealing land in and around Jslm and keeping the Jews from building in East Jslm. As if the Palestianians ever needed an excuse to impose suffering and delegitimization of Israli Jews. I find it most telling that you cast the Israelis as trying to prevent the Palestianins from making any claim to East Jerusalem.... if it is theirs, why do the Palestinians need to make a claim for it to begin with??
archeologist.People try to negate her which is what I feel Hasson is doing here. Truth is truth.This archeologist is hitting the mark but people are always trying to discredit her by the way this story is written.Thank you for being so transparent Hasson, I wish you could rise above your bias. As someone trained in the field I think th eevidence is enough that no one should dismiss it as myth.What is a myth is the Palestinian arab.Palestinians were always Jews
I certainly believe that the Bible is truth and do not doubt the existence of the wall or the Biblical account of David and Solomon. However, I also know that the Israelis continue to seek ways to justify the confiscation of land, especially in East Jerusalem. The fact that this was found around the village of Silwan will be another excuse the Israelis will use to justify annexing the land and keeping the Palestinians from building or making any claim to East Jerusalem. As if the Israelis have ever needed an excuse to impose suffering and delegitimization of the Palestinian people.
Tel Aviv University has many so-called scholars who have a political agenda to be far left, anti-religion, "politically correct." They can't seem to make a difference between stories about Adam and Eve and the more historically based chronicles of the kings. There are others there at TA U, however, who fight them (especially some of the Russian immigrants, who are not friendly to serving left wing ideologies -- they had their fill of that stultifying stuff back in the USSR).
Ben Jabo- You are correct to doubt that there would be any Arabic shards at a First Temple-era dig. Think of the history involved. Much as Palestinians highlight the possible Canaanite heritage of some Arabs today, the two writing systems are very distinct. Historian- I find it more likely that the Samaritans entered Israel with Joshua and the other Israelites than any other explanation: that's certainly how they explain it.
It is true that this was pre-Arabic - but there are artifacts that are pre-jewish as well - remember we are immigrants here - everyone needs to learn to share - indeed Israel still has Samaritans that trump all of us in land claim - canaanites there are.
I doubt it!!!
It is not about the bible being true or not - it is not meant to be taken literally, for example the story of noah is an old story from Mesopotamia that was adopted to the bible - do you really believe that there was an adam and eve that we all descended from? Incest? Or that the earth was created in 7 days? Or that moses parted the ocean? Come on....
It seems that the so-called critics are terrified of having their identities known. I guess they think they'll be rubbed out by the 'fiery' Mazar. Cowards!
The Tel Aviv University "minimalist" archeologists have no less a political agenda to prove then Dr. Eilat Mazar does, if not greater. The mainstream of scientific thought is somewhere in between the two schools, and is constantly nudged in the "maximalist" direction by new discoveries. But why should the Tel Aviv crowd let physical evidence cloud their contemporary political interpretation of ancient Hebrew history? They may even be forced to exist that a Temple once existed, and that Jews are not all descendants of Khazar converts.
Why should the Bible be seen as containing only a kernel of truth? 20th Century giants like Prof William Foxwell Albright in Johns Hopkins saw a lot more than a kernel of truth in the Bible. Are Israeli academics -- almost a dirty word here in London -- afraid that if the Bible is true they can't be so anti-Jewish?
"Rather, the Biblical account explains what the wall is."
In the spirit of "Az Christl'z zich Yid'n zich", or if the non-Jews do it, it must be kosher for Jews. We, too, have to trash our Sources just as some other academics of other nations like to say "it isn't so". Some Frenchmen are trashing Napoleon, and US historians have been saying their Founding Fathers were not as . . . the canon describes. There is evidence that before the most recent Ice Age, for some reason, there was a whole lot of stuff goin' on that the Humanists of Europe didn't know. What they didn't know, didn't exist, until archeologists discovered it. By that time they couldn't deny it. If they did it was somebody else, not the natives. The thing about Troy was considered a myth until the layer that was identified by the Iliad was discovered as fact. The Aboriginals were proven to have reached Australia 50,000 years ago making them the Founders of that nation. Now, with the evidence we learn in the Land of Israel . . . now I ask you!
Praise the mighty rock where we are safe. Come to worship him with thankful hearts and songs of praise.
"If we take the type of building and the finds and examine them in the light of what we know from the Bible, it certainly goes together well," So, we are using the Bible to show that the wall must date from the time of Solomon, and then we use the wall to prove that Bible is telling the truth about Solomon's building activities and therefore the wall was built by Solomon. This is typical of Maraz's bias, perhaps not surprising then that her interpretations are widely disputed by other archaeologists. As for the wisdom of ignoring the Bible in the interpretion of archaeological findings, I hope she is not using the Masoretic Hebrew canon as her guide, since that canon has a 3 year old King Saul fighting the Philistines and commiting suicide on the battlefield. Quite an achievement for a 3 year old, though undoubtedly true according to Maraz and her wall. Yigael Yadin would have been proud.
The discovery of the wall does not prove the Biblical account. The Bible needs no proof. Rather, the Biblical account explains what the wall is.
I tend to agree with Dr. Eilat Mazar that one must relate the archaeological findings to the stories mentioned in the Bible depicted as they are, and of course much of the narration isn't even particularly pleasant at times so how can it really be just myths? Our present civilization is just as complex in human relations.