The Book of Samuel: Its Composition, Structure and Significance as ...

THE BOOK OF SAMUEL
Is archaeological research ready for an encompassing summary
of the historical picture of settlements, towns and cities of the
tenth and ninth centuries BCE? Does it have all the necessary data
to determine the non-existence of a polity like the united monarchy?
The answer is that though archaeology has indeed come a
long way since the late nineteenth century CE it still has an immeasurably
long way to go! That does not mean that at this stage archaeologists
should not be allowed to contribute their opinion on
the subject at issue or any other subject. Having said that, one
should caution: in terms of encompassing data, archaeologists may
offer only tentative assessments based upon current preliminary
finds (or the lack thereof). These assessments are of course liable to
be altered in the wake of future research (like all other disciplines).
Unlike the “minimalists,” another group of scholars, called
“maximalists,” have found positive evidence supporting some aspects
of the biblical description of the united monarchy:
(a) The name of David or the House of David is probably
mentioned in three foreign documents: Shishak’s list of conquered
cities (926 BCE), the Mesha stela (the beginning of the second half
of the ninth century BCE) and the Hazael stela (c. 841 BCE). 68
These inscriptions attest that even many decades after his death,
David was well known to neighboring dynasties as a great king and
founder of a dynasty.
(b) The inscription of Shishak delineates his military campaign
in the southern Levant. Some of the names of conquered places are
missing, others are damaged and unreadable; but many have been
identified. 69 All in all, parts of the military itinerary have been reconstructed,
and it is clear that Shishak major strike was directed
against the kingdom of Israel. However, the kingdom of Judah lost
at least some fortified settlements in the Negev, and perhaps even
more in the hill country and the coastal plain, but their names are
missing or unreadable in the inscription. The appearance of Shishak
at Gibeon served as an enormous threat to Jerusalem, and
King Rehoboam had to bribe the Egyptian king extravagantly to
turn away from the kingdom of Judah (1 Kgs 14:25–26; 2 Chr
12:2–12). This attests to significant polities that existed in the attacked
regions, for otherwise why would Shishak bother to cross
68 See Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament, 92–93, 615 (figure
13).
69 For Shishak’s itinerary and campaign, see Y. Aharoni, The Land of the
Bible: A Historical Geography (2nd ed., Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979),
323–330; B. Mazar, The Early Biblical Period, 139–150; Kitchen, On the
Reliability of the Old Testament, 32–34; 496–497; A.F. Rainey and A.S. Notley,
The Sacred Bridge: Carta’s Atlas of the Biblical World (Jerusalem: Carta,
2006), 185–189; A. Lemaire, “Tribute or Looting in Samaria and Jerusalem:
Shoshenq in Jerusalem?” G. Galil, M. Geller and A. Millard (eds),
Homeland and Exile: Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of
Bustenay Oded (VTSup, 130; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2009), 167–177.
25