Biblical Archaeology Review

The changes in the Large Stone Structure are paralleled in the changes in the Stepped Stone Structure. Both were, after all, part of the same complex.

Eilat Mazar, The Palace of King David, p. 53.

Reich (Excavating the City of David [p. 266]) suggests that the Large Stone Structure might date to the Middle Bronze Age—400–500 years earlier: “I will not be at all surprised if it turns out that this building actually dates to the Middle Bronze II.” In light of the above, this is very unlikely, if only due to its connection with the Stepped Stone Structure which (and this is accepted by practically all scholars) cannot be earlier than Iron I.

Iron Age IIb and Iron Age IIc follow, taking us down to the Babylonian destruction of 586 B.C.E. Israel Finkelstein’s low chronology would extend Iron Age I to the end of the tenth century B.C.E., in contrast to the conventional (or modified conventional) date which most archaeologists continue to defend, but that debate is irrelevant to the issue here and need not detain us here.

As claimed by some of Eilat Mazar’s critics. Finkelstein, for example, attempted recently to claim that her Iron Age I remains are insignificant, local in nature (less than half a room), and cannot therefore date the entire building. This clearly refutes his claim.

David Ussishkin et al., “Has the Palace of King David Been Found in Jerusalem?” in E. Baruch, A. Levy-Reifer and A. Faust, eds., New Studies on Jerusalem, vol. 13 (Ramat Gan) (2007), [Hebrew], p. 42ff.; Israel Finkelstein et al., “Has King David’s Palace in Jerusalem Been Found?” Tel Aviv 34 (2007), pp. 157–161.

Ronny Reich, Excavating the City of David: Where Jerusalem’s History Began (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and Biblical Archaeology Society, 2011), p. 265.