The Tel Dan Inscription: The First Historical Evidence of King David from the Bible
Tel Dan inscription references the “House of David”
The fragmentary Tel Dan stela, containing the Tel Dan inscription (or “House of David” inscription) provided the first historical evidence of King David from the Bible. The Aramean king who erected the stela in the mid-eighth century B.C. claims to have defeated the “king of Israel” and the “king of the House of David.” Photo: The Israel Museum, Jerusalem/Israel Antiquities Authority (photograph by Meidad Suchowolski).
Few modern Biblical archaeology discoveries have caused as much excitement as the Tel Dan inscription—writing on a ninth-century B.C. stone slab (or stela) that furnished the first historical evidence of King David from the Bible.
The Tel Dan inscription, or “House of David” inscription, was discovered in 1993 at the site of Tel Dan in northern Israel in an excavation directed by Israeli archaeologist Avraham Biran.
The broken and fragmentary inscription commemorates the victory of an Aramean king over his two southern neighbors: the “king of Israel” and the “king of the House of David.” In the carefully incised text written in neat Aramaic characters, the Aramean king boasts that he, under the divine guidance of the god Hadad, vanquished several thousand Israelite and Judahite horsemen and charioteers before personally dispatching both of his royal opponents. Unfortunately, the recovered fragments of the “House of David” inscription do not preserve the names of the specific kings involved in this brutal encounter, but most scholars believe the stela recounts a campaign of Hazael of Damascus in which he defeated both Jehoram of Israel and Ahaziah of Judah.
FREE ebook: Ten Top Biblical Archaeology Discoveries. Finds like the Pool of Siloam in Israel, where the Gospel of John says Jesus miraculously restored sight to a blind man.
What made the Tel Dan inscription one of the most exciting Biblical archaeology discoveries for scholars and the broader public was its unprecedented reference to the “House of David.” The stela’s fragmented inscription, first read and translated by the renowned epigrapher Joseph Naveh, proved that King David from the Bible was a genuine historical figure and not simply the fantastic literary creation of later Biblical writers and editors. Perhaps more important, the stela, set up by one of ancient Israel’s fiercest enemies more than a century after David’s death, still recognized David as the founder of the kingdom of Judah.
The “House of David” inscription had its skeptics, however, especially the so-called Biblical minimalists, who attempted to dismiss the “House of David” reading as implausible and even sensationalistic. In a famous BAR article, Philip Davies argued that the Hebrew term bytdwd referred to a specific place (akin to bytlhm for Bethlehem) rather than the ancestral dynasty of David. Such skepticism aside, however, most Biblical scholars and archaeologists readily accepted that the Tel Dan stela had supplied the first concrete proof of a historical King David from the Bible, making it one of the top Biblical archaeology discoveries reported in BAR.
Even though the “House of David” inscription has confirmed the essential historicity of King David from the Bible, scholars have reached little consensus about the nature and extent of his rule. Was David the great king of Biblical lore who founded his royal capital at Jerusalem and established an Israelite kingdom? Or was David a ruler of only a tribal chiefdom, as Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University contends? Questions like these often arise from Biblical archaeology discoveries and lie at the heart of the complex relationships among archaeology, history and the Bible.
Based on “Issue 200: Ten Top Discoveries,” Biblical Archaeology Review, July/August September/October 2009.
Related reading in Bible History Daily
All-Access members, read more in the BAS Library
“House of David” Built on Sand: The Sins of the Biblical Maximizers
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
This Bible History Daily feature was originally published in 2011.
Related Posts
Must-Read Free eBooks
Want more Bible history?
Sign up to receive our email newsletter and never miss an update.
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Become an All-Access Member to explore the Bible's rich history. Get Biblical Archaeology Review in print, full online access, and FREE online talks. Plus, enjoy special Travel/Study discounts. Don't miss out—begin your journey today!
Some may consider it the King of Israel Yehu (3055-3083) Stele
Either way as far as the Kingdom of David (2884-2924 anno-mundi) see our findings in ‘David’s Kingdom of Taita’
David’s ‘Kingdom of Taita’, David is Taita! https://www.academia.edu/45103741/Davids_Kingdom_of_Taita_David_is_Taita_ via @academia
in volume III of the Pearlman YeC Torah Discovery Chronology aka Bible Chronology untying a knot.
The consensus that Hazael was the author of the Tel Dan Inscription cannot be sustained. The academy continues to turn a blind eye to the remains of an extra letter that is plainly there on Fragment A, and which overturns the reading proposed by Biran and Naveh. I have written about this at length in my book, “The Tel Dan Inscription” (T&T Clark, 2003), an article (“Setting the Record Straight: What Are We Making of the Tel Dan Inscription,” in JSS 2006), and summarised on my blog (withmeagrepowers.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/the-extra-letter-on-the-tel-dan-inscription/.
The Tel Dan Inscription was written c. 796 BC by Hazael’s son, Bar Hadad, in response to the victories of Jehoash, King of Israel. It preserves mention of Jerusalem as the “House of David,” which is best explained as an appellation arising from an actual historical David. It is not about Hazael taking credit for the coup of Jehu in Israel.
interesting, for context Holy Temple I 2928-3338
Kings of Israel:
Yehu 3055-3083
Yehoachaz 3083-3100
Yehoash 3100-3116
What seems probable based on Biblical and archaeological material is that “King David” was essentially an Iron-age extortionist who may have raided or collected tribute from the area hypothesized to be the “Davidic Empire”, but only “ruled” a small hill-country polity.
Actually what is based on “biblical material” (if one studies it) is that David was anointed King over Israel, and the other “archaeological material”, just lends proof of it!