Tuesday, May 21, 2024
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries
You are viewing: Home > News > Archaeology & History > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Archaeology & History

Lost city has links to biblical King David

By T.K. Randall
May 2, 2018 · Comment icon 5 comments

Did King David actually exist ? Image Credit: PD - Jastrow
The ruins of a city dating back 3,000 years have rekindled the debate over whether King David actually existed.
The city, which was discovered in Judean Shephelah to the east of the Hebron hills, is thought by some archaeologists to be the Canaanite city of Eglon.

Radiocarbon dating carried out on samples taken from the floors and foundations of the settlement have also confirmed that the ruins date back to 1000 BC - the time of the Biblical King David.

"As the excavators themselves confess, this isn't evidence of the existence of David," said Francesca Stavrakopoulou, a professor of ancient religion at the University of Exeter. "It's the Bible that credits David and Solomon with the formation of a kingdom in the land of Canaan, not archaeology."
The discovery has, however, rekindled the debate over whether or not he was a real person.

"We, of course, did not find any artefacts that said 'King David' or 'King Solomon' but we discovered at the site signs of a social transformation the region underwent," said dig director Avraham Faust.

"This seems to indicate that the inspiration or cause for the transformations are to be sought in the highland. The association with David is not based on any archaeological evidence but on circumstantial grounds only."

"Since the source of the change seems to be in the highlands, and since it took place at the time when David was supposed to have existed, the link is plausible."

Source: Breaking Isreal News | Comments (5)




Other news and articles
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #1 Posted by dlh 6 years ago
The professor sounds really desperate to not admit King David or King Solomon existed.  
Comment icon #2 Posted by Essan 6 years ago
They are to Israel what King Arthur is to Britain.   I would expect any archaeologist discovering remains of a Roman fort in southern Scotland or northern England, in use by trained cavalry 100 years after the Romans left Britain, to likewise speculate that it could be connected to the legends of King Arthur, whilst being careful not to suggest it proves he was a real person in himself.
Comment icon #3 Posted by Piney 6 years ago
There is no archaeological proof that they did.....
Comment icon #4 Posted by paperdyer 6 years ago
Seeing that our real human records really only go back to about 1000 A.D. give or take, there are a lot of people and events there are no real evidence of.
Comment icon #5 Posted by DirtyDocMartens 6 years ago
The article repeated an entire paragraph, which for me calls the entire content into question. If a person is that careless with his editing, there's no telling how careless he might be with facts, quotes, etc.


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Top 10 trending mysteries
Recent news and articles