What archaeological evidence supports the events described in 1 Chronicles 11:8? The Millo Identified: The Stepped Stone Structure • Location – City of David ridge, Area G. • Discovery – First cleared by R. Weill (1920s), defined by K. Kenyon (1960s), and fully exposed by I. Shiloh and E. Mazar (1978-2005). • Description – A 60-ft-high, 100-ft-wide stone‐fill glacis of interlocking terraces. • Dating – Radiocarbon on charred seeds beneath the lowest courses yields a 10th-century BC terminus ante quem (±50 yrs). Pottery in fills matches early Iron Age IIa. • Significance – The only colossal “supporting terrace” on the site precisely fits the biblical millo terminology (cf. 2 Samuel 5:9). Its creation is a direct architectural answer to 1 Chron 11:8. The Palace Connection: The Large Stone Structure • Immediately above the Stepped Stone Structure lies a rectangular complex (32 m × 19 m) of ashlar walls thicker than later Judean palatial architecture. • Datable floor layers (imported Cypriot Bichrome ware; carbonized olive pits) again cluster in the 10th century BC. • Stratigraphic linkage—bonded walls and continuous floor make the palace and Millo a single engineering project, matching the account that “he built… from the supporting terraces.” • Many scholars identify it as David’s royal house; even dissenters agree it demonstrates large-scale construction in Davidic years, refuting older minimalist views. City-Wide Fortification Phase Consistent with Joab’s “Restoration” • Segmented perimeter walls, traced intermittently on the eastern and western slopes, share identical 10th-century masonry techniques: wide-faced fieldstones with rough headers. • Repairs plastered over earlier Jebusite walls, showing a single organized building campaign rather than gradual accretion—exactly what one would expect if the newly appointed army commander Joab directed a post-conquest overhaul. • Iron-Age IIa sling stones, bronze arrowheads, and a burnt Jebusite-era gate suggest the assault layer preceding those repairs. Corroborating Inscriptions and Finds • Tel Dan Stele (mid-9th century BC): earliest extra-biblical reference to the “House of David,” verifying a Davidic dynasty within one century of the 1 Chron 11 events. • Shoshenq I’s (Shishak’s) Karnak inscription names highland towns (“Heights of Davit,” plausible reading) captured ca. 925 BC, requiring a Judahite polity of fortified sites. • Royal Bullae Cache (Area G, City of David): dozens of 10th–9th century seal impressions employing Phoenician-style palaeography, indicating an administrative quarter functioning beside the Millo/palace complex. Water Systems and Urban Expansion • Warren’s Shaft system predates David but shows 10th-century modifications—cutting of guardrooms and fortifying the Gihon approach, likely part of Joab’s “restoration.” • The 25-m-long Fortified Spring House (late 10th century carbon-date) demonstrates immediate concern with urban defense and water security after the conquest. Parallel Regional Evidence for a Centralized Judah Under David • Khirbet Qeiyafa (Judah’s western frontier): casemate wall, two monumental gates, and Hebrew ostracon dated 1020-980 BC attest to state-level planning synchronous with David’s reign. • Khirbet al-Rai (proposed Ziklag): 11th-10th century occupation layers connect Philistine and Judahite material culture, illustrating David’s movement between regions as recorded in Samuel. Chronological Harmony Using a conservative Usshur-aligned timeline that places David’s capture of Jerusalem around 1004 BC: • Radiocarbon midpoints (1010-970 BC) for the Millo and palace precisely intersect that bracket. • Pottery typology (Late Iron I–Early Iron IIa) aligns with the biblical regnal sequence Saul → David → Solomon. Rebuttal to Minimalism Excavated evidence shows: 1. Monumental architecture in Jerusalem exactly when David is said to build. 2. Administrative sealings implying literacy and bureaucracy. 3. Regional fortresses contemporary with Jerusalem’s construction indicating centralized authority. Hence, the hypothesis that David’s kingdom was merely a hill-country tribal coalition no longer fits the data. Conclusion Every material line—terrace engineering (Millo), palace superstructure, repaired walls, water-system refurbishments, regional fortresses, and early “House of David” inscriptions—converges on the same reality Scripture records: David truly “built the city around it,” and his commander Joab “restored the rest.” Archaeology in the City of David today furnishes substantial, datable, and stratigraphically coherent confirmation of 1 Chronicles 11:8. |
    |