King Solomon lives (maybe)! Well, he’s hardly the next Elvis come back from the dead, but it seems archaeologists have found something to say that Solomon actually existed. I can imagine biblical archaeologists salivating over this latest find, a wall dating back to three thousand years ago. If this wall is indeed that old, says Israeli archaeologist Eilat Mazar, it means that Solomon’s centralized kingdom could have existed. It would show “there was a regime capable of carrying out such construction†in Israel.
What does this mean for Jews? Not only does it possibly prove the veracity of some of the Bible, but it gives us a whole new cultural lease on life. King Solomon is one of the most revered figures in the Bible, renowned for his wisdom and many wives. He is also said to have constructed the First Temple, giving the Israelites a place in which they could properly worship G-d. Imagine, if we had something dating back to the original Temple like this wall! It would prove Jews’ residence in Israel from time immemorial beyond a doubt.
More has been found in Jerusalem than just a wall. Jar handles bear the phrase “to the king,†implying a centralized power, said Mazar. If Solomon was capable of building such monumental architecture, then, it is entirely possible that he could build something like the Temple. The image of a truly powerful historical kingdom in Israel glimmers in the distance, something to which modern-day Israel could compare.
But is it wise to be getting hyped up about just one wall? After all, the dating on the wall is far from complete, and, after all, who says it was some king named Solomon that built it? The timing so far seems to be correct, but another centralized king could have built it. The wall discovery seems to corroborate what we see in the Bible, which entrenches us even further in Jewish origins in Israel. I have no doubt that the Jews began there, but this discovery could provoke hostility amongst the Palestinians, who want to claim an earlier origin.
Now, as an Ancient Studies major, by no means am I suggesting that we stop excavating there. I’m all for reconstructing the past. If it eventually leads to finding a king named Solomon, then so be it. But we can’t skip through an archaeological find of this magnitude without considering the consequences. Yes, it might prove that the Bible is true, but, if it is, what does that mean for the Middle East today? Some will wave it in the faces of the Arabs and say, “See! This belongs to us! Now, get out!†Most people won’t, but it brings home the point even more of just how cautious we have to be with making claims about Solomon. All we’ve found is a wonderful find, but it’s just that. A find. Let’s go the route of archaeologists like Mazar, who are reserving judgment until they find more. This is too important of an issue, both biblically and in the modern time, to make unsubstantiated claims.
Indeed, this has already outraged some Palestinians. Two shrines in the West Bank are being included in the Israeli archaeological discoveries, enraging those who think Jerusalem doesn’t belong to the Israelis. I personally think Jerusalem does and should belong to Israel, but it seems like all these Solomon claims have done is anger people when nothing is even proved yet. The media cries out, “Oh, it’s Solomon!” when the archaeologists have said nothing definitive and the dating is incomplete. At this juncture, do we really need to provoke the Palestinians like this? The media should step back, say, “It may be from Solomon’s time,” and not sensationalize this find. It’s important, yes, but is it worth sacrificing Israel?
