The only evidence that I am aware of for either is the Tel Dan stele - and even that isn't solid (it's a matter of how the inscription is interpreted).And AFAIK there is no evidence of Jerusalem being capital of a united kingdom of Israel and Judah - the archaeological evidence is that Samaria was a far more important site at the time.

And if you read the article you know that the identification of the building and even the date were uncertain. So it MAY turn out to be significant or it may turn out to have no connection to "David at all.

The pottery only gives the earliest date it could have been constructed: This message has been edited by AdminJar, 08-16-2005 03:17 PM

That "quote" looks like 20th Century English to me. I'd say that it is not even a good fake.,

Way OT. Everybody back in the pool. Please do not reply to this message.

I have made numerous posts to this site (this will be 3903).I have made several posts to this thread (this will be the 5th).Only one of these posts is about your .signature. And that raises a point I had noticed some time before and only mentioned because the issue was already being discussed. And I note that you do not choose to dispute the point.I leave others to draw their own conclusions - both about my interests, and our reasons in asking.This message has been edited by AdminJar, 08-18-2005 12:23 PM