David and Solomon : in search of the Bible's sacred kings and the roots of the Western tradition

A Finkelstein book will be controversial; let’s establish that up front. And because there exists very little archaeological evidence outside the Bible story of Judah’s first kings, speculation will be a natural result of any such study. We know absolutely nothing from history about Saul and precious little about David and Solomon; in fact, the evidence is so sparse that a few scholars still doubt the existence of all three.

Finkelstein and Silberman don’t doubt, but neither are they able to provide 342 pages of historical analysis. Instead, they trace the legends of these early kings through a thousand years of Hebrew writings, both in and out of the Bible. The earliest folklore and Bible verses about David show him as a bandit show more leader of a small gang of traveling raiders. Later authors portrayed David as a poet and a founder of a great dynasty, as well as a sinner. Solomon’s reputation, as well, grew over time into a shrewd trader and wise sage.

How many of these writings are based on fact, and how many on legend? The authors’ scholarly research and field experience will make you reconsider. show less

These two have gone looking in Israel's Archaeology for evidence that would support the idea that the kingdom of David and Solomon was large, and a serious player in the Ancient Near East. They don't seem to have found much evidence that many ambitious structures were built in the area at the projected time, and coupling that with the lack of diplomatic correspondence that existed with and between other states at the time, the evidence overall is scanty . Not a popular book with the believers in the historical truth of the Bible, I understand. It certainly raises the question of the claims to authenticity of the Books of Samuel and the corresponding parts of Kings and Chronicles.