02x06 - The Legacy of King Solomon: Part 1

[bunniefuu]

What does it all mean?

This is where the archeology has been found.

Hi, how are you?

Look at that.

I need a planter.

A shrine to a bellybutton.

Look at that!

No one gets into this place?

Whoa! Don't take me too far.

Now that's naked archeology.

[theme music]

I'm in Jerusalem, the City of David,

and his son was King Solomon,

the man who built the Temple of God.

Where in the Holy of Holies was the Arc of the Covenant,

the box that once held the Ten Commandments.

He had powers, according to legend.

He had a thousand wives. A thousand wives.

A thousand wives.

Don't even think about it. days a year...

This man was important.

He ruled a United Kingdom of the North and the South.

He was a powerhouse,

at least that's what the Bible tells us.

And now, suddenly, some archaeologists,

some scholars come along and say:

No. It's just a story.

"Not only did he not have a thousand wives,

"he didn't build a Temple.

"Not only didn't he build a Temple,

he built nothing. He is a myth."

I'm on a quest to find out:

what does the archaeology actually tell us.

Is King Solomon myth, or history?

[SIMCHA] The most famous shower scene

of the ancient world is the Biblical story

about King David watching from a rooftop

as Bathsheba was bathing. Why am I telling you this?

Well, because David and Bathsheba

didn't just become lovers, they also conceived a child.

And that child's name was Solomon.

When David eventually d*ed,

the Bible tells us that Solomon was chosen to be king

and quickly gained a reputation for being a bit of a lady's man.

The Bible says he had wives and concubines.

But the first thing I need to find out is

how could one guy manage to have

a thousand women in his life?

So, I'm meeting archaeologist, Professor Gaby Barkay,

to find out whether this portion of Solomon's life

is fact or fantasy.

Let's start on Solomon. How are you on Solomon?

We are good friends.

Ok. Would you come to the conclusion

that he had a thousand wives?

That means he only got to each wife, I figured it out,

it's something like once every three years.

An especially potent gentleman

can have more than one lady per night.

Okay, so once a year. You know, I mean.

You have to bear in mind that these women

were actually diplomatic marriages,

and a diplomatic marriage is a ratification of relations

between two countries.

His wives were Ammonite, Moabite, Hittite,

Egyptian and others.

Isn't he criticized that he brought foreign gods into the city?

He was criticized because of the fact

he built high places for the foreign worship

of his foreign wives on the mountain opposite Jerusalem

[SIMCHA] Here I was thinking all those wives

had something to do with the sexual prowess,

but really they were just the result of

Solomon's political treaties with other countries.

Yet when he started building high-altars for those wives

so that they could pray to their pagan gods,

Solomon fell into God's bad books.

But, you know, I feel for him.

mean, I feel for him.

If you were one of a thousand wives,

and the husband doesn't get to you except

once in three years, he threw them a bone,

a couple of high altars. You know what I mean?

You would too, wouldn't you, like,

if you had a thousand wives

For me one was more than enough.

[SIMCHA] But even though Solomon built pagan altars

and temples, he more than made up for it

by building the First monotheistic Temple

to ever stand in Jerusalem.

And according to the Biblical tradition

Solomon built the temple right here at the same spot

that is now occupied by the Muslim Shrine:

The Dome of the Rock.

So, what better place to look for archaeological evidence

that can prove he really existed?

It was assumed that this is going to be the area

in which the palaces of Solomon would turn up.

But there is nothing here preserved from that time.

Actually, the steps upon which we walk

are from Herodian period.

Which means...?

The Second Temple period.

And they are right on top of bedrock.

So there is no chance of finding anything of those early periods.

[SIMCHA] Solomon' Temple might have stood right here

once upon a time, but after , years of history,

it's hard to be sure.

The Muslim community strictly forbids digging

within their grounds, and the only places one can dig?

There's nothing to find since it's made of pure bedrock.

So, where do I go next to find evidence of King Solomon?

Well, when I look back at his many women

I notice that one of them does stand out:

a famous African Queen who just might've left

some kind of proof that Solomon was more of a man than a myth.

[SIMCHA] I'm looking for evidence for King Solomon,

who the bible says built the st temple of God in Jerusalem,

but so far the evidence isn't adding up.

So, I'm going back into the Bible for clues

and find that it tells of Solomon's relationship

with a beautiful African Queen, named Sheba.

The Book of Kings tells us

that when the Queen of Sheba heard of Solomon's wisdom,

she came to visit him and to ask him hard questions.

But what's amazing is that this story

doesn't just come from the Bible,

it's also recorded from the Queen of Sheba's perspective

in an Ancient Ethiopian text called the Kebra Negast.

[SIMCHA] And right here in downtown Jerusalem,

the Ethiopian Orthodox Church commemorates

the relationship between Solomon and Sheba to this day.

So I'm meeting up with Father Gabre Sellassie

to find out more about this tradition.

We're interested in King Solomon.

And the Ethiopian Church has a special tradition

with respect to King Solomon.

Could you explain to me what that is

with Queen of Sheba?

King Solomon was the wisest.

She heard of his wisdom.

Oh so she was here six months?

Six months. And she return with her baby

She came without a baby,

but met King Solomon and she went back with a baby.

In Ethiopia. And he was the first king, right?

He was the son of Solomon and Sheba.

And how do we know this story in the Ethiopian tradition?

Where do we get this story from?

[SIMCHA] The Kebra Nagast not only tells us

that Solomon and Sheba had a son together,

it also tells us that the son's name was Melenik,

the first King of Ethiopia.

And it tells us that Solomon gave

the Arc of the Covenant to Melenik for safe keeping.

Ethiopian tradition maintains that the Ark is still in Ethiopia

to this day, kept under lock and key in a church

in the city of Aksum.

The Ark of the Covenant is in Ethiopia?

Can I see?

Why not?

It's the holiest thing.

So that's why I want to see it.

Secretly, secretly.

Secret. It's sacred and secret in a church.

In Askum?

[SIMCHA] Despite my attempts,

the good Father wouldn't agree to take me to Ethiopia

and show me the Arc of the Covenant...

But one thing's sure: King Solomon is a central figure

in Ethiopian religion and history.

And here in the chapel, they have a painting

that depicts Solomon's meeting with the Queen of Sheba.

I want to show you Naked Archaeology in action.

Everybody come over here. Now, look at this.

The Queen of Sheba and King Solomon.

There's the Queen of Sheba. She's renowned for her beauty.

Absolutely.

Correct? There's King Solomon.

He looks a little Prussian in this painting,

but he's wearing a Star of David so we know he's Jewish.

Yeah, yeah, sure.

Now, you tell me. Everybody else sees King Solomon.

I'm looking over there and I see two Hassids from Crown Heights.

That's right. Straight from Crown Heights.

Straight from Crown Heights. New York.

How did they get there? That's Naked Archaeology.

[SIMCHA] Even though there's no hard evidence

of Solomon's meeting with Sheba,

or some paternity test that

proves Melenik was Solomon's son,

it's important to remember that Ethiopia converted to Judaism,

and their history books tell us that they did so

after the Queen of Sheba visited King Solomon in Jerusalem.

This kind of living tradition from people as far away as Ethiopia,

tells me Solomon can't just be some kind of myth

that made it into the Bible.

Now all I have to do is prove it.

And for that I'm going to need some archaeology

that says without a doubt "Solomon was here."

[SIMCHA] I'm searching for proof

that King Solomon was a real historical figure.

The Bible says he built the first Temple in Jerusalem,

but I went to the area where the Temple

was supposed to have been

and couldn't find a single scrap of evidence for it.

Then I looked up Solomon's old girlfriends,

and even though I did uncover a strong tradition

involving the Queen of Sheba,

it isn't exactly what I would call an archaeological slam-dunk.

A map- Oh no it's this way.

[SIMCHA] But maybe there's another approach

The Bible says Solomon built up several cities

throughout ancient Israel.

One of the cities mentioned by name is Megiddo.

So if Solomon really was the King that the Bible says he was

then it would make sense that he would have left behind

some kind of monumental architecture.

[sIMCHA] Back in the s

a team of archaeologists from Chicago

found monumental architecture:

a set of gates that they dated to the Century BCE

and immediately identified as Solomon's.

In fact, there's even a sign here

that says it's a Solomonic Gate.

But that assessment is now under att*ck

from a new wave of archaeologists

who minimize the accuracy of the Biblical narrative.

One of them is Professor Norma Franklin

and she says that the sign they posted is a little misleading.

This is the Chicago School, right? They were working...

This is their illustration. They actually-

Here, come over here, come over here, look at this.

It says Megiddo became and Israelite city

sometime in the th, th century BC,

and sometime later a massive wall and a monumental city gate

were built, they called it then a Solomonic Gate.

Didn't they?

First I would like to tell you about the excavation.

How the Chicago team got to this gate.

Okay.

They came here specifically looking for the gate.

The Chicago team?

The Chicago team.

They came here with preconceived ideas.

Find a gate, find Solomon's gate, not anybody's gate.

Not very scientific. -Not very scientific.

[SIMCHA] But I still wasn't convinced.

Just because the archaeologists from Chicago

came here specifically looking for Solomon's gates

doesn't mean that the gates they found

don't belong to Solomon.

Okay, now what I want to understand.

It's not unreasonable for people, they read in the bible,

Solomon built up these cities

Everybody always says, well, if he's such a big sh*t in history,

there should be monumental structures.

It's not unreasonable to look for gates that are monumental,

because that's where you built your monumental structures,

at least, one of the places.

It's totally understandable, given human nature.

If you're gonna show off, that's a good place to do it.

It's a nice place to show off,

and this was one heck of a gate to show off.

How can you be so sure that this is not the th?

I know what's going on here in the th,

I know what's going on here in the th century.

And that's why I know this isn't th.

This is th, not th

You, like, find movie posters, that sort of thing?

Oh yes. We find certain building techniques.

One of the building techniques from the th

that does not appear in the th

is the mixture of field stones and ashlars.

[SIMCHA] Ashlars are a type of masonry:

rectangular blocks cut out of stone,

used in both foundations and facades.

Like the ones found in this city gate.

These ashlars, these stones are expensive.

So when you need them to be load-bearing

you use ashlars.

Where you don't need them use field stones

and this is an important technique for dating.

Why don't you come down and tell me why, so-

Ok.

Here in this gate we have two very clear examples

of building techniques that date to the th Century.

One is the use of ashlars and field stones. Mixed.

We don't have that in the th century

and we definitely don't have it in the th.

Then, you have this, which is a clear reuse of a stone

from an earlier period. It has a place that's cut down.

This is a slightly higher level.

It's also been turned on its side.

It was recessed to hold the next course,

the next building course.

And why is that important in terms of the debate?

If these stones had been taken from an earlier building,

and you're saying that this gate is th century, right,

that means it had to have been taken from a building

that used these sort of techniques

that existed in the th century.

Ah, so you're saying this is used,

this is, this is a reused stone?

Yes.

If it's reused, and if it's Solomon's time,

that means he's using it from an earlier date...

Yes.

And nobody in an earlier date

knew how to make things like this.

It's not a question of knowledge.

They just didn't do it.

They didn't do it.

I love this, 'cause it's actual detective work.

This is detective work.

Don't you just love archaeology?

[SIMCHA] I have to admit I was a bit disappointed

that Norma Franklin thinks this isn't Solomon's gate.

But to cheer me up, she promised to show me

some archaeology that does date to Solomon's time.

Is this th century here?

Down here.

Can I stand here and close my eyes

and you'll bring me something th century?

Yes, yes.

I'll put out my hand.

Both of them perhaps, we'll see.

Both my hands, okay.

Ok. It's only a piece.

I'm very excited Norma.

There you are.

Can I open my eyes?

Yep. I wish I could find you a whole one,

This is a mud brick. All the buildings full of temps-

Are you pulling my leg?

No, of course I'm not pulling your leg.

Why would I do that?

You've taken King Solomon, the builder of the temple.

You know, the three...

What is wrong with mud bricks?

The three big gates, and you've reduced him to this?

You see, I knew you'd be disappointed.

Doesn't the bible say that he built stuff

from giant rock, marble, gold.

This contradicts the biblical narrative.

No, because the people who wrote the bible

knew that the people reading the bible

would have exactly the same problem you have,

no vision regarding mud brick architecture.

So they changed the story?

They changed the story.

I'm trying to have vision here, Norma.

I'm concentrating...

I'm seeing all kinds of wonderful structures.

[SIMCHA] I see Solomon and his temple,

and all of his women,

and the Queen of Sheba? is there too,

and he's building large gates out of marble and gold...

But I just can't seem to reconcile

what the Bible says about King Solomon

with this puny mud brick.

Let's just leave this little mud brick.

Little partial mud-brick...

[SIMCAH] But then again, Professor Franklin

isn't the only archaeologist in the phone book.

And Megiddo wasn't the only city

that Solomon was supposed to have built.

The Bible tells us he also built at the city of Hazor.

Maybe I'll have more luck

finding something from Solomon there.

[SIMCHA] I've been looking for evidence of Solomon

and so far archaeologists have only managed

to show me one lousy mud-brick

that can be dated to his reign

back in the th Century BCE.

See I knew you'd be disappointed.

[SIMCHA] So, I'm going back into the Bible,

which tells me Solomon built up another city

and that city is named Hazor.

If there's anything at Hazor that's monumental

and dates to the th BCE

then I might have the proof I need

to say that Solomon was a real historical figure.

So we're on our way to meet Professor Amnon Ben-Tor

who's been the Director of the Hazor excavations

for some years

and see if he's got some answers.

Take us wherever you want and...

What, no, we were talking about the Bible.

A Biblical site.

Okay. So, this is Biblical rubble.

Ah, this is more Biblical than that.

That's more Biblical?

Ya.

Okay let's go look at the Biblical rubble here...

Is this somebody's living room?

No.

What is this?

This is a Solomonic Gate.

A Solomonic gate.

You mean a gate from the time of King Solomon.

Yah.

How does someone know

that this is Solomon and not somebody else?

Everything is chronology.

Everything about archaeology is chronology.

If you cannot assign a date to it,

it's almost meaningless. Alright?

And one of the most important means

to assign a date is pottery typology.

Pottery changes over time.

Pottery changes rather quickly, because it breaks,

because it's cheap to make.

So once it breaks, you make a new one,

and like fashion-

Future archaeologists will be able to tell by...

By modes of cars.

Cars?

By cars. By dresses.

One year the woman all go with short dresses,

another year they go with long dresses.

But then they go to short dresses again.

It confuses future archaeology.

No, no, no. But then you put it together with something else.

Shorter dress, the long dress with this type of car,

the short...it's...

You have to match it all up.

Once this is dated to the th Century,

and it is monumental, it can be in the time of David,

or Solomon.

You cannot tell the difference between the pottery

of David and the pottery of Solomon

because they are both too close and there is no difference.

Since it says in the Bible that it was built by Solomon,

I go with Solomon, and if you want to say it's David

then the burden of proof is on you. Not on me. Okay?

Okay. I get it.

This is it. Three chambers on one side,

three chambers on the other.

[SIMCHA] These gates have chambers

exactly like the gates I just saw at Megiddo.

What you're looking at are the foundations.

It was maybe five meters tall. There were gates.

There were doors. Which were made out of wood.

Giant wooden doors.

Ya.

[SIMCHA] Professor Ben-Tor tells me

that the similarities found between the Megiddo

and the Hatzor gates are no coincidence.

By linking pottery shards and gates,

he says both these gates, and another set of gates

found in the city of Gezer,

all date to the tenth century BCE.

When it says that Solomon built Hatzor,

Megiddo and Gezer and you have

three exactly similar gates at Hatzor,

Megiddo and Gezer. In my mind...

You know what they say in British Common Law.

If it waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck,

it's a duck.

That's what I think.

So the bible says three...

It's a duck.

If it quacks like a duck. It's a duck.

Yep.

You're saying the Bible says King Solomon

built three cities, Hatzor, Magido and Gezer.

All three cities have similar gates-

Quack, quack, quack.

[SIMCHA] If Professor Ben-Tor is right

about the gates found here at Hazor

and they do actually date to the th Century BCE,

then they perfectly fit the Bible's description

of Solomon's building projects perfectly.

Not only that, but they also call into question

whether or not the archaeologists at Megiddo

have dated their gates properly.

But if Norma Franklin and her colleagues are right,

then King Solomon falls right out of the history books.

But then, what else would fall out with him?

King David? The entire Messianic line

all the way down to Jesus? Oh my Godness.

That means Christmas, Hanukah...

I don't even want to think about it.

Luckily there's one more city

that Solomon was supposed to have fortified,

and that city is named Gezer.

Maybe Gezer will be the tie-breaker

that tips the scale in Solomon's favour...

But that journey is going to have to wait until next time,

when I undress a whole new set of clues

about the Biblical King Solomon.