Carbon dating radiometric dating
David Ussishkin, Israel Finkelstein and others, took the minimalistic course in the research, arguing that the biblical narrative deliberately overestimates the role of David and Solomon and exaggerates the dominance of their kingdom.
David and Solomon were merely local leaders of a tiny kingdom of Judah, that had no real power nor influence in the region. 3: Reconstruction of Jerusalem in the late 10 (Drawing by Leonardo Gurevich.
While debates about the chronology of Jerusalem were surfacing since the beginning of the archaeological research in the city, this time the archaeologists used their ‘judgement day weapon’—Carbon-14.
Radiometric methods are well respected in the archaeological discipline since they provide an absolute dating, which is, usually, not a subject to a debate.
[ Indeed, Reich has a few points that should be considered carefully.
Courtesy of the Elad Foundation and Megalim Institute.) The question of United Monarchy is a bone of contention.
The lack of correlation between the biblical account of the United Monarchy and the very scant material evidence, was often explained by maximalist archaeologists by postulating that in the 10 century Jerusalem that integrates the Spring Tower and the Fortified Corridor with the city in which the Temple of Solomon occupies the Temple Mount (Fig. Thus, in the time that Jerusalem was ruled by the ‘founding fathers’ of the Davidic dynasty, the Gihon Spring was already heavily fortified by a renovated Canaanite complex.
Doubts About Carbon-14 Results Despite the use of natural sciences in the radiocarbon dating, the newly-suggested chronology is not far from being indisputable.
While nobody doubts that the laboratory conducted the examination well, concerns are raised regarding the meaning of the results.Despite much knowledge that had been obtained by archaeologists in the 19 (Drawing by Leonardo Gurevich. It was an integral part of an advanced comprehensive system of fortifications.