Whatever happened to measured historical investigation? When did it become appropriate to make unsubstantiated claims without blinking? In sum, what evidence is there on the ground at the site to support the claim that the structure is ‘David’s Palace’? Here’s the headline:
Oh really? So there are inscriptions too which the archaeologists have also uncovered in situ which mention David? It’s curious that the report doesn’t mention them. They would seem important…
Royal storerooms were also revealed in the joint archaeological excavation of the Hebrew University and the Israel Antiquities Authority at Khirbet Qeiyafa *** These are the two largest buildings known to have existed in the tenth century BCE in the Kingdom of Judah
Two royal public buildings, the likes of which have not previously been found in the Kingdom of Judah of the tenth century BCE, were uncovered this past year by researchers of the Hebrew University and the Israel Antiquities Authority at Khirbet Qeiyafa – a fortified city in Judah dating to the time of King David and identified with the biblical city of Shaarayim.
One of the buildings is identified by the researchers, Professor Yossi Garfinkel of the Hebrew University and Saar Ganor of the Israel Antiquities Authority, as David’s palace, and the other structure served as an enormous royal storeroom.
The palace and storerooms are evidence of state sponsored construction and an administrative organization during King David’s reign. “This is unequivocal evidence of a kingdom’s existence, which knew to establish administrative centers at strategic points”, the archaeologists say. “To date no palaces have been found that can clearly be ascribed to the early tenth century BCE as we can do now. Khirbet Qeiyafa was probably destroyed in one of the battles that were fought against the Philistines circa 980 BCE. The palace that is now being revealed and the fortified city that was uncovered in recent years are another tier in understanding the beginning of the Kingdom of Judah”.
One could quibble but they’re probably right about the site being some sort of administrative center and it may even be a Judean one. BUT- the linkage to David is purely imaginary. And utterly speculative.