Or ? another possibility ? the town of Jerusalem was founded in the beginning of the 9th century BC, and Solomon and David had nothing to do with it.
Jerusalem in the 10th / 9th centuries BC
City of the Kings
In the year 598 BC, the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar marched against Jerusalem. In his chronicles, he proudly states: "In the seventh year, the month of Kislev, the King of Akkad [Nebuchadnezzar] mustered his troops, marched to Hatti-land [Syria] and encamped against the city of Judah, and on the second day of the month of Adar, he seized the city and captured the king."1 The Babylonians conquered Jerusalem and carried the elite off to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar appointed a vassal king, loyal to his house. When after eleven years Zedekiah rebelled, Nebuchadnezzar marched again, and this time he completely destroyed Jerusalem.
In those years, Jerusalem was a thriving city. Its 5-7 meters wide city walls encompassed an area of 40-50 hectares. It was by far the largest city of the region. The second most important city in Israel, Ekron, was 20 hectares large, while most other towns were only 6 hectares in size. Jerusalem boasted beautiful palaces and large mansions for the king and his court, while the rich traders and artisans lived in well laid-out city quarters. On the highest hill stood the magnificent temple dedicated to the God of Israel. An extensive system of tunnels and channels provided drinking water to the population of about 10,000 souls. The city grew rich from the trade in grain and olive oil, while all kinds of luxury goods were imported: wooden furniture from Syria, ivory from Mesopotamia, and wine from Greece.2
Much is known about this city and the social and economic position of its inhabitants, precisely because of the destruction King Nebuchadnezzar wrought. Archaeologists, always fond of destruction layers, have been able to date the construction of the city walls, most houses and some water systems to the 8th century BC. This was the time the city expanded and reached the size and importance which made Nebuchadnezzar call it the city of Judah. But when was this city founded? How did it develop into this economic metropolis? That is much more difficult to ascertain.
The Earlier Remains
the buildings destroyed by the Babylonians were older remains. These
buildings represent the first phase of the town and date roughly to the
beginning of the Iron II period, the 10th and 9th centuries BC.
From this first phase of the town several large buildings and fortifications have been excavated, all on the eastern slope of the southeastern hill. This hill is also called the City of David or Ophel.
1) Most conspicuous is
what is commonly called the "stepped stone structure." Elements of it
were already discovered by the British archaeologists
who called it the Jebusite Ramp.3
Some scholars maintain that this stepped stone structure dates from the Iron Age I period (1200-1000 BC), and that it already had gone out of use in the 10th/9th century.6 However, their opinion is based on only the small probe Yigal Shiloh excavated in the structure. Kathleen Kenyon excavated a much larger part of the stepped stone structure and could thus gain a better insight in its extension, construction method and date. She found that the stepped stone structure could definitively be dated to the beginning of the Iron II period. It went out of use somewhere in the 8th century when a five meters wide city wall was built lower down the slope of the hill. This wall overtook the defensive function of the stepped stone structure. A residential area was then constructed over the stepped stone structure in the 7th century BC.
2) A small part of a casemate wall was discovered on top of the hill. It links with the stepped stone structure. The wall was five meters wide and ran in northern direction. It may have been part of a small fortified building located on top of the hill. Or it may have been a town wall, connecting this part of the town with the citadel excavated at the foot of the temple mount ? see below.
3) Just south of the temple mount an imposing citadel was found. Mazar & Mazar published a four-chambered entrance gate (building B), whose dimensions were almost identical to those of palace gate 1567 in Megiddo.7 Adjacent to this gate, a building "of royal character" (building D) was excavated. The first phase of both buildings was dated to the 9th centuries BC, although admittedly the dating evidence was very scant. Sadly enough only a small part of this citadel could be excavated, as it was partly hidden under the later Herodian terrace wall. The combination of ashlar wall (see below), four-chambered gate, and royal building indicate the presence of an important complex there.
4) Building elements normally used for public buildings were found as well. Near the above mentioned citadel a fragment of a wall built of large ashlars was excavated by Kenyon and published by Mazar & Mazar as wall 4.8 And near the base of the stepped stone structure ashlars were found in a tumble, coming from a building that had once crowned this structure.9 Here too the largest proto-aeolic capital of ancient Israel was found, dated by Shiloh to the 9th century BC.10
Dating the earlier remains
Buildings are generally dated on the basis of the pottery fragments found directly on their floors or in the debris on the floors. Sometimes the architecture of the building can be compared to similar buildings elsewhere. Inscriptions or well-dated small finds can be of help too. In the case of the 10th and 9th centuries BC, the situation is very complicated. In the past, buildings or architectural phases were assigned to the 10th century BC because they were assumed to have been built by King Solomon. A case in point is the 6-chambered gate. These gates were found at Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer. Based on biblical texts Yigal Yadin proposed a dating for these gates in the 2nd half of the 10th century BC. These gates then became a hallmark of that period. Thus, if a 6-chambered gate was discovered at another site, this gate and the other buildings associated with it were dated to the 10th century BC as well. The (supposedly) 10th century pottery found at Megiddo became a dating tool for other sites.
Many scholars in the past have criticized this way of dating, as it is based on an uncritical reading of the Bible and a mixing of archaeological and biblical sources. However, it is difficult to find a better way of dating. There are no fixed points in this period. Hardly any inscriptions have been found in ancient Israel from the 10th and the 1st half of the 9th centuries BC.11 Egyptian and Mesopotamian sources are silent too, no easily recognizable imports were found and C14-dates are too broad to distinguish between the 10th and the 9th centuries. Lately, the dating of pottery and buildings to the 10th century BC has become the focus of a serious controversy among archaeologist. Some propose to down date the whole complex to the 9th century BC (the "low chronology"), others maintain that the 10th century is right, at least for certain parts of the complex.12
The buildings and associated pottery found in Jerusalem do not shed any light on this problem. First of all, little pottery has been found on the floors of the buildings; most pottery (little as it is) comes from mixed contexts. This makes it hard to establish a pottery chronology for this period. Secondly, the Jerusalem pottery differs from the pottery of Megiddo. It is possible that it is older or younger than the Megiddo pottery. More likely, it belongs to a (slightly) different technical tradition.13 All this makes it difficult to date this pottery very precisely. Therefore, I have assigned this phase very generally to the 10th/9th century BC.
| Page 2 |
(back)6J. Cahill, Jerusalem at the Time of the United Moanrchy: The Archaeological Evidence. In: A.G. Vaughn and A.E. Killebrew (eds.), Jerusalem in Bible and Archaeology: The First Temple Period. 2003 (Society of Biblical Literature symposium series, no. 18).
(back)7E. Mazar and B. Mazar, 1989, Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount - the Ophel of biblical Jerusalem (Qedem 29; Jerusalem: The Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem).
| Page 2 |