SUMMARY: Researchers claim they have found the city of Ziklag where David took refuge before becoming king of Israel. The artifacts found at the site counter claims by those who are skeptical of the Bible’s account of the strength and wealth of Israel and Judah in the early periods of that kingdom. However, the link to the city of Ziklag brings up more questions.
Then David said to Achish, “If I have found favor in your eyes, let a place be given me in one of the country towns, that I may dwell there. For why should your servant dwell in the royal city with you?” So that day Achish gave him Ziklag. Therefore Ziklag has belonged to the kings of Judah to this day. And the number of the days that David lived in the country of the Philistines was a year and four months. – 1 Samuel 27:5-7 (ESV)
Archaeological Evidence from Israel Supports the Accuracy of the Bible – But Brings up More Questions
“We have found biblical Ziklag,” a team of Israeli and Australian archaeologists announced in a press release earlier this month. In the biblical account, young David when on the run from King Saul took refuge in the Philistine town of Ziklag with 600 of his men. After David became king, the city would come under the control of Israel.
The ruins were unearthed at a site called Khirbet a-Ra’i, which lays about 25 miles southwest of Jerusalem and 10 miles inland from the coastal city of Ashkelon. An early layer of what has been labeled Philistine finds (from the Iron Age I period), transitioned to artifacts linked to the kingdom Judah. This transition has been dated to around 1,000 BC. If accurate, this would be the time associated with King David.
Many scholars have come to doubt the biblical account of David and Solomon’s united, rich and powerful kingdom. They claim David may have only been a local hilltop chieftain. These recent discoveries would add to the growing list of evidence that show Judah was an organized and strong kingdom much earlier than thought by those who are skeptical. However, questions arise as to whether this really was Ziklag as the excavators propose.
Recent Discoveries at Khirbet a-Ra’i, Israel
(Credit: Excavation expedition to Khirbet a-Ra’i )
The location of Ziklag has never been established despite numerous other sites that have been proposed. The site at Khirbet a-Ra’i has been excavated for seven seasons by a team headed by Prof. Joseph Garfinkel of Hebrew University, Saar Ganor of the Antiquities Authority, and Prof. Dr. Kyle Keimer and Dr. Gil Davis of Macquarie University, in Sydney Australia.
The group now believes they’ve discovered Ziklag at Khirbet al-Rai because it is the only one of the proposed sites where there is evidence of continuous occupation, which transitions from a Philistine to a Judean community in the era of King David.
The site features massive stone structures with ceramics linked to what is termed “Philistine” origin. These include bowls, an oil lamp, and stone and metal artifacts similar to other Philistine cities in the region.
Finding Ziklag. (Credit: Israel Antiquities Authority,YouTube)
An intense fire was found to have destroyed many of the early structures at a time that many intact vessels of Judean style were found. This appears to match the biblical account of an Amalekite raid on Ziklag that resulted in the burning of the town.
Now when David and his men came to Ziklag on the third day, the Amalekites had made a raid against the Negeb and against Ziklag. They had overcome Ziklag and burned it with fire and taken captive the women and all who were in it, both small and great. They killed no one, but carried them off and went their way. – 1 Samuel 30:1-2 (ESV)
The date of the fire layer to around 1000 BC has been arrived at by Carbon 14 tests at the site.
Challenges to the Ziklag Link
Although the finds at Khirbet a-Ra’i are impressive and seem to match the biblical account of Ziklag well, there is nothing at the site that names it as the town of Ziklag. While the researchers and many media outlets (such as Haaretz and Fox News) are promoting that connection, there are several reasons to question the link.
One challenge is that the Bible seems to put Ziklag further to the south. The Book of Joshua lays out the land allotments in the Promised Land for the 12 tribes of Israel. Chapter 15 lists the cities allotted to the tribe of Judah by grouping its cities in different areas. It lists Ziklag in the group to the far south toward the Negev, while the major city of Lachish is listed within a group further north in the lowland plain between the hill country and the Mediterranean Sea. Khirbet a-Ra’i is only about 2 miles from Lachish, casting doubt on the link between it and Ziklag.
The cities belonging to the tribe of the people of Judah in the extreme south, toward the boundary of Edom, were Kabzeel, Eder, Jagur …Ziklag, Madmannah, Sansannah… – Joshua 15:21, 31 (ESV)
And in the lowland, Eshtaol, Zorah, Ashnah …Lachish, Bozkath, Eglon … – Joshua 15:33, 39 (ESV)
On the other hand, a point that could be seen as favoring Ziklag being further north is that 1 Samuel 27 makes it clear that the Philistine King Achish was in Gath, which is in the immediate vicinity of Khirbet a-Ra’i. Achish gave David permission to stay in Ziklag and it is debatable whether he allowed David to stay close by, in order to keep a close watch over his activities, or if David requested to stay in Ziklag because it was far enough away that Achish wouldn’t be able to closely track his activities.
Another challenge against the idea of Khirbet a-Ra’i being Ziklag is that David calls it a “country town” (see verses at the top of this article). The remains of massive structures unearthed in the excavation so far don’t lend themselves to being from a rural settlement.
The biblical text also says that David and his band would only live 16 months at Ziklag. The numerous remains of Judean-styled vessels suggest a more extensive occupation by Judean people, perhaps later in Judah’s history.
How do the Finds Relate to the Idea of Time Shifting?
The Judean vessels at Khirbet a-Ra’i look remarkably like the ones discovered at Khirbet Qeiyafa, identified as biblical Sha’arayim, which has also been dated to around 1000 BC (David’s time). Khirbet Qeiyafa has been proposed as one of David’s palaces. Other sites are also producing similar evidence from this era. But did this period, about two centuries into the Iron Age, really take place around the year 1,000 BC?
The problem with these types of links (made in reports and articles in the media) is that the terms “Judean” (or Judahite) and “Davidic” are often conflated. Just because a site has cultural or architectural remains linking it to Judah, does not automatically mean that it comes from the time of King David or the first kings of Judah who followed. Judah existed until 586 BC and evidence related to Judah could potentially come from somewhere else in Judah’s history instead of from the very beginning.
Cities experiencing multiple fires and destructions over time was common, so to peg a destruction layer with one particular event in the Bible should be done with caution. This is especially true of a minor town (like Ziklag) that does not have much of its history referenced in the Bible. Like most towns, Ziklag may have witnessed many battles as the Philistines and Israelites strove for control of areas on their border.
An example of these kinds of conflicts can be seen at the more fully documented site of Gath. Because it was larger, it is more frequently referenced in the Bible. In the approximately 250-year span between the time of David and Judah’s tenth king Uzziah, Gath experienced at least some level of damage at a minimum of five different times. There may also have been other conflicts at Gath that the Bible does not record. To link a particular destruction layer at Gath to the time of David should only be done if the full pattern of evidence supports it.
After this David defeated the Philistines and subdued them, and he took Gath and its villages out of the hand of the Philistines. – 1 Chronicles 18:1
And there was again war at Gath … – 1 Chronicles 20:6 (ESV)
Rehoboam lived in Jerusalem, and he built cities for defense in Judah… Gath, Mareshah, Ziph … – 2 Chronicles 11:5,8
In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, because they had been unfaithful to the LORD, Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem… And he took the fortified cities of Judah and came as far as Jerusalem. – 2 Chronicles 12:2,4
At that time Hazael king of Syria went up and fought against Gath and took it. – 2 Kings 12:17 (ESV) [During the days of Jehoash 8th king of Judah]
[Uzziah] went out and made war against the Philistines and broke through the wall of Gath… – 2 Chronicles 26:6
The main reason to date the destruction layer at Khirbet a-Ra’i to 1000 BC is that this is the standard date applied to the time two centuries into the Iron Age. However, the dates assigned to the early Iron Age are disputed by some scholars. If the dates were off, this would affect how the archaeology aligns with biblical events, because the Bible’s dates come from an independent source.
The standard dates are sometimes supported by Carbon 14 dating, but carbon dating is calibrated to the standard dating model, and the carbon 14 process shows signs of errors.
This leaves standard thinking as the only reason to date the layers as they are. Whether the academic community’s confidence in the standard chronology is justified is another matter, and this question will continue to be debated in future Patterns of Evidence projects. Whatever outcome is ultimately arrived at, it is prudent to take the published archaeological dates with caution.
Khirbet a-Ra’i Supports the Historical Accuracy of the Bible
Whether this site was Ziklag or not, and whether it dates to the time of David or a period somewhat later in history, the findings at Khirbet a-Ra’i offer historical evidence to the account found in the Bible. They join the discoveries at Khirbet Qeiyafa and other sites to show that the kingdom of Judah was a strong and centralized power long before many scholars had believed this was possible.
– Keep Thinking!
TOP PHOTO: Aerial view of the archaeological site at Khirbet a-Ra’i. (Credit: Emil Alagem – Israel Antiquities Authority)
