Editing Saul (section)

== Historicity ==
{{Main|Historicity of the Bible}}
The [[The Bible and history|historicity]] of Saul's kingdom is not universally accepted<ref name="finkelstein">{{cite encyclopedia |last=Finkelstein |first=Israel |author-link=Israel Finkelstein |editor1-last=Amit |editor1-first=Yairah |editor2-first=Ehud |editor2-last=Ben Zvi |editor3-last=Finkelstein |editor3-first=Israel |editor4-first=Oded |display-editors=3 |editor4-last=Lipschits |encyclopedia=Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context: A Tribute to Nadav Naʼaman |title=The Last Labayu: King Saul and the Expansion of the First North Israelite Territorial Entity |url=https://www.academia.edu/1070440 |year=2006 |publisher=Eisenbrauns |isbn=978-1-57506-128-3 |pages=171ff |access-date=2 March 2016}}</ref><ref name="David">{{cite book |title=David's Secret Demons: Messiah, Murderer, Traitor, King |author=Baruch Halpern |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |year=2003 |pages=208–211}}</ref> and there is insufficient extra-biblical evidence to verify if the biblical account reflects historical reality.<ref name=Nelson2014>[[Richard D. Nelson|Nelson, Richard D.]] Historical Roots of the Old Testament (1200–63&nbsp;BCE). Volume 13 of Biblical Encyclopedia. Society of Biblical Lit, 2014 {{ISBN|9781628370065}}</ref>{{rp|50ff}} While several scholars believe that the existence of the United Monarchy is corroborated by archaeological evidence, although with considerable theological exaggerations,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dever |first=William G. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=39HoDwAAQBAJ |title=Has Archaeology Buried the Bible? |date=2020-08-18 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-1-4674-5949-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Halpern |first=Baruch |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tn8PG4XfuBAC&q=david+secrets+demons |title=David's Secret Demons: Messiah, Murderer, Traitor, King |date=2003-11-12 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-0-8028-2797-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mazar |first=Amihai |title=Archaeology and the Bible: Reflections on Historical Memory in the Deuteronomistic History |url=https://www.academia.edu/23199258 |journal=Congress Volume Munich 2013 |year=2014 |pages=347–369 |doi=10.1163/9789004281226_015 |isbn=9789004281226}}</ref> others, like [[Israel Finkelstein]], believe it to be a late ideological construct.{{r|finkelstein}}

In the ''Jewish Study Bible'' (2014), [[Oded Lipschits]] states the concept of the United Monarchy should be abandoned,<ref name="lipschits">{{cite book |last1=Lipschits |first1=Oded |editor1-last=Berlin |editor1-first=Adele |editor2-last=Brettler |editor2-first=Marc Zvi |title=The Jewish Study Bible |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-997846-5 |year=2014 |edition=2nd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yErYBAAAQBAJ |chapter=The history of Israel in the biblical period |quote=As this essay will show, however, the premonarchic period long ago became a literary description of the mythological roots, the early beginnings of the nation and the way to describe the right of Israel on its land. The archeological evidence also does not support the existence of a united monarchy under David and Solomon as described in the Bible, so the rubric of “united monarchy” is best abandoned, although it remains useful for discussing how the Bible views the Israelite past. [...] Although the kingdom of Judah is mentioned in some ancient inscriptions, they never suggest that it was part of a unit {{sic|comprised |hide=y|of}} Israel and Judah. There are no extrabiblical indications of a united monarchy called "Israel." |pages=2107–2119}}</ref> while [[Aren Maeir]] highlights the lack of evidence about the United Monarchy.<ref name="maeir">{{cite book |last1=Maeir |first1=Aren M. |editor1-last=Berlin |editor1-first=Adele |editor2-last=Brettler |editor2-first=Marc Zvi |title=The Jewish Study Bible |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-997846-5 |year=2014 |edition=2nd |page=2125 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yErYBAAAQBAJ |chapter=Archeology and the Hebrew Bible |quote=Archeological evidence for the early stages of the monarchy is minimal at best. [...] In any case, the lack of substantive epigraphic materials from this early stage of the Iron Age II (after 1000&nbsp;BCE), and other extensive archeological evidence, indicate that even if an early united monarchy existed, its level of political and bureaucratic complexity was not as developed as the biblical text suggests. The mention of the “House of David” in the Tel Dan inscription, which dates to the mid/late ninth century&nbsp;BCE, does not prove the existence of an extensive Davidic kingdom in the early tenth century&nbsp;BCE, but does indicate a Judean polity during the ninth century that even then associated its origin with David. [...] Although there is archeological and historical evidence (from extra biblical documents) supporting various events of the monarchical period (esp. the later period) recorded in the Bible, there is little, if any evidence corroborating the biblical depiction of early Israelite or Judean history.}}</ref> However, in his books ''Beyond the Texts'' (2018) and ''Has Archeology Buried the Bible?'' (2020) [[William G. Dever]] has defended the historicity of the United Monarchy, maintaining that the reigns of Saul, David and [[Solomon]] are "reasonably well attested".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dever |first=William G. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=39HoDwAAQBAJ |title=Has Archaeology Buried the Bible? |date=2020-08-18 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-1-4674-5949-5 |quote="Finkelstein's low chronology, never followed by a majority of mainstream scholars, is a house of cards. Yet it is the only reason for attributing our copious tenth-century-BCE archaeological evidence of a united monarchy to the ninth century&nbsp;BCE. Finkelstein himself seems to have doubts. Originally, he insisted that no Judean state emerged until the eighth century&nbsp;BCE. Then it was the ninth century&nbsp;BCE. Eventually he posited a tenth-century-BCE “Saulide polity” with its “hub” at Gibeon—not Jerusalem, and not Solomon, only his predecessor! But there is absolutely no archaeological evidence for such an imaginary kingdom. Finkelstein's radical scenario is clever, but not convincing. It should be ignored. The reigns of Saul, David, and Solomon are reasonably well attested."}}</ref> Similar arguments were advanced by [[Amihai Mazar]] in a 2013 essay, which points toward recent archaeological evidence emerging from excavation sites in Jerusalem by [[Eilat Mazar]] and in [[Khirbet Qeiyafa]] by [[Yosef Garfinkel]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mazar |first=Amihai |title=Archaeology and the Bible: Reflections on Historical Memory in the Deuteronomistic History |url=https://www.academia.edu/23199258 |journal=Congress Volume Munich 2013 |year=2014 |pages=347–369 |doi=10.1163/9789004281226_015 |isbn=9789004281226 |quote="The continuous debate concerning the evaluation of the United Monarchy as an historical entity cannot be resolved unequivocally by archaeology due to the current disagreements among archaeologists regarding the interpretation of the evidence. In my view, when taking into account the combined evidence presented above, as well as in previous papers, we cannot simply deny the existence of such an entity. How to define and explain this state in the tenthcentury is a matter of debate. In previous papers, I explained David's kingdom as a tribal state that emerged at a time of political vacuum in most of the southern Levant, caused by the great weakness of the earlier Canaanite population and the increase in the Israelite population in the highlands. This background, combined with personal qualities and a small but effective military force, may have enabled David to create a substantial political and military power, which may have included large parts of the country."}}</ref> In their book, ''The Bible's First Kings'' (2025), [[Avraham Faust]] and Zev Farber have also defended the existence of the United Monarchy, arguing that archaeological evidence and early biblical traditions attest to its emergence in the 11th-10th centuries BCE.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Bible's First Kings: Uncovering the Story of Saul, David, and Solomon |last1=Faust |first1=Avraham |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2025 |isbn=978-1-009-52633-3 |pages=401ff |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xqCu0AEACAAJ |last2=Farber |first2=Zev I.}}</ref> Archeology seems to confirm that until about 1000&nbsp;BCE, the end of [[Iron Age I]], Israelite society was essentially a society of farmers and stockbreeders, without any truly centralized organization and administration.<ref name="Lemaire" />