by David Warmflash

Created on: July 14, 2009   Last Updated: July 21, 2009

For most of us, the very mention of King Solomon, son of Bathsheba, evokes images of a glamorous kingdom and a glamorous era, which the Hebrew Bible portrays as a golden age for ancient Israel, after which the kingdom broke up, leading to a sharp decline in social and economic conditions. We recount tales, like the visit of a beautiful, Sabean queen, the construction of a great temple, and an empire extending from Etzion Gever (modem Eilat) to the Euphrates. Sitting upon its throne, was a wise monarch, who boasted some 700 wives, 300 concubines, who was known by the kings of neighboring lands, and who, in spite of some disagreements with the governors and people of the "northern tribes", employed his wisdom to guide northerners and southerners under a single throne that was based in Jerusalem during the later half of the 10th century B.C.E.

In recent years, however, archaeologists and historians of the ancient Near East have been debating the question of whether or not an historical King Solomon actually reigned over a united kingdom of two peoples, who, according to the Books of Kings, divided politically, only after the ascent of Solomon's son, Prince Rehobam, to the Jerusalem throne. Also contested, in a fascinating analysis by the biblical historian, Professor Baruch Halpern, of Penn State, is a claim made by the Bible -and which I (and perhaps many of you) questioned to the frustration of certain teachers in the Jewish school that I attended as a child- that Solomon was a son of David, the proceeding king.

Leading the argument against the existence of a united monarchy ruled from Jerusalem is Tel Aviv University's, Professor Israel Finkelstein. He is opposed by William Dever (formerly of the University of Arizona), and several others, including Halpern. For the last several decades, the debate has centered on the dating of a few archeological sites, especially the gate structures in three fortress cities whose construction the Bible credits to Solomon. None of these scholars, by the way, believes that Solomon's wealth and reach has not been exaggerated by the biblical writers and editors. The debate is about whether the kingdoms of Samaria and Judah were united in the 10th century B.C.E. under a single king who ruled from the south -meaning Judah, and namely Jerusalem.

The debate involves characteristics of pottery shards, carbon dating of wood from beams that once supported palaces, fortresses and other structures, coordination of excavated layers

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next Page >>