Novel Insights About Torah Through Archaeology!

Over the past 20 years I have been closely involved and have become intimately familiar with excavations at the City of David. My particular interest is the Stone Temple at the oldest site, on the eastern slope of Mount Moriah, adjacent to and above En Shemesh (Sun Spring):- Ancient Jerusalem's original water source, which is also known as Gihon. I wrote this to outline the reasons why this  discovery is a phenomena for Torah, Israel and the world.

As exciting as the stream of discoveries has been, nothing has inspired me more than the “aha” moments that enlightened my study and understanding Tanach (24 books of the Bible). With each new discovery there is a certain light that is cast onto often mysterious details.

Take for example the golden bell Eli Shukron discovered in the rainwater channel under the pilgrims road, not far from the Temple Mount. It begged for a new interpretation to describe the adornments on the hem of the High Priests garment. Instead of 36 alternating golden bells, between 36 woven, wool shaped into pomegranates, which has become the mainstream understanding, the golden bell Eli discovered is more likely 1 of 72 pomegranates. The golden, pomegranate shaped bell with internal clapper served as the inner support for an outer purple and blue woven sheaf in colors of the pomegranate. The way we read the holy language of Torah is important, so when Torah says “bell and pomegranate” and after we find these discoveries we obtain new perspectives to interpret and understand the language Torah uses to describe what we now physically see.

Previous followed by New

72 Golden Pomegranate Bells

When I first encountered the Stone Temple I immediately felt its importance, its authenticity and inherent holiness. My first response to David Be'eri and Yehuda Maley (who live in the City of David) was; "If this is what I think it is, you're going to have to move out of your homes". As I got to understand its complexities, I knew the knowledge that had been buried for thousands of years in this time capsule would take time, perhaps decades to unlock its mysteries and understand the magnitude of this discovery. I also discovered that archaeologists report facts, sometimes using language that biases outcomes.

During the early years of our excavations I tried to imagine what it was originally like at a time, when little else existed and few people lived around the mountainside. How did it evolve into the archaeological complexity that remains in their time bound layers? From the outset of our subterranean quest I had a hunch that this was not a Canaanite temple of idolatry, the artifacts that were progressively being revealed left me with no doubt. I needed to explain each of these, but how did so much earth accumulate above it and who knew about it? 

I recently found this amazing 1875 photo looking over the ground under which we were crawling in the video. It shows the extent of burial under thousands of years of accumulated dirt from the natural slope of the mountain. Filip Vukosavović, who led some of the more recent excavations, once told me that on a slope like this if unattended for 5-10 years, the slope and the Stone Temple would have been buried  depending on wind, rain and other natural conditions.

When I arrived on the scene, Eli Shukron and Ronny Reich had recently excavated the double wall of the Spring House construction leading to the valley floor. It arrived immediately adjacent to the springs source. I found it strange that double wall more closely aligned with the south side of the spring rather than directly over it. Therefore, from the Kidron Valley floor, the imposing double wall seemed to be less about dominating over the water source, more like a barrier that blocked north-south passage along the bedrock, while forming a gateway, or entrance into the tunnel system adjacent to and higher than the spring.  

Morning sun shines on En Shemesh (Sun Spring) 

Double Wall

Eli Shukron made a statement shortly after the double wall discovery had been excavated: "This is the citadel of King David, this is the Citadel of Zion, and this is what King David took from the Jebusites".

2 Samuel 5:7-9
וַיִּלְכֹּ֣ד דָּוִ֔ד אֵ֖ת מְצֻדַ֣ת צִיּ֑וֹן הִ֖יא עִ֥יר דָּוִֽד׃
But David captured the stronghold of Zion; (expanded) it is (became) the City of David.

I wandered, where was the "Zion" King David was seeking when he captured its Citadel or Stronghold?

The prophet Samuel goes on to tell that David's men captured the Jebusite water channel, that he stayed in the place they captured and expanded the stronghold or citadel of Zion into the City of David. Therefore, this must be a defining principle for geo-locating the general proximity of Zion. 

 

Archaeology confirms that in the few hundred years before the Citadel of Zion became the City of David most people were living along the valley floor around the water at En Shemesh, but they progressively migrated to safety at the the top of the ridge and carried their daily water to the top. Given a population between 200 growing to 1000 people living on top of the ridge, water demands would have kept water carriers busy. 

2 Samuel 5:8

וַיֹּ֨אמֶר דָּוִ֜ד בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֗וּא כׇּל־מַכֵּ֤ה יְבֻסִי֙ וְיִגַּ֣ע בַּצִּנּ֔וֹר וְאֶת־הַפִּסְחִים֙ וְאֶת־הַ֣עִוְרִ֔ים (שנאו) [שְׂנוּאֵ֖י] נֶ֣פֶשׁ דָּוִ֑ד עַל־כֵּן֙ יֹֽאמְר֔וּ עִוֵּ֣ר וּפִסֵּ֔חַ לֹ֥א יָב֖וֹא אֶל־הַבָּֽיִת׃ 

On that occasion David said, “Those who attack the Jebusites shall reach (in) the water channel (TZiNoR) and [strike down] the lame and the blind, who are hateful to David.” That is why they say: “No one who is blind or lame may enter the House.”

The internal water supply route runs through a long dry tunnel, elevated 20 meters above the spring, quarried through the mountain bedrock. It was used to carry water to the end of the tunnel where it was hauled up another 20 meters (see the haul point in the blue box - image below) to the Water Gate that exited closer to the top just north of and above the Stone Temple site. Archaeologists called the tunnel Warrens Shaft System, but its name often leads to an incorrect characterization of the tunnels use. Instead, Tanach teaches us that by commandeering the tunnel, Davids troops gained control of the water supply route, which brought the entire population under David's control.  

Route along dashed (earlier) line dotted line (alternative).

Iron Age King David, must have been compelled to come to this seemingly insignificant hill after he had reigned for 7 years as Judean King in Hebron. So, why did he want to control the lower section of Mount Moriah, before the temple mount summit was incorporated and why did he foresee this would become the nation's capital? Whatever it was, he must have known and been compelled by some previous tradition or cultural history that inspired his decisive actions?

Commentators on Genesis often attribute activities on Mount Moriah, during the post flood, Middle Bronze Age (MBA), to Malchi-Tzedek (considered to be Shem, Noah's son), Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The image below depicts, from the valley, what the discovery made by Eli Shukron in 2010 may have looked like back in the MBA. 

Middle Bronze Age Depiction

In the following video, Eli Shukron details features of the Stone Temple  (its definitely worth watching). 

One of the most inconspicuous features of the Stone Temple is its westerly orientation, which contradicts every other pre-first temple cultic site in Israel. It's important because priests, in all other forms of cultic worship in Israel would face the rising sun when sacrificing on the altar. Therefore, the idol worshippers altar would sit between the priest and the sun. The raised platform of the Stone Temple, on which altars would be constructed from time to time, requires priests turn their backs to the rising sun to make the sacrificial offering. Priests facing west is prescient for Israel's Tabernacle as well as first and second temples that adopted the same practice as was later prescribed by Torah (The Old Testament Bible). 

The room with  the raised platform and liquids channel served as the base for many altars that would have been constructed from local stones gathered at or around the site on the day sacrifice was to be performed. It resembles a highly specific feature extrapolated in the oral teachings of Torah. The Gemara (Zevachim 53b) asked: What is the reason that there was no base on the southeast corner of the altar? The question related to the second temple altar platform, perhaps also considering the first temple. Similarly, in the Stone Temple we see that the southeast corner of the altar platform is 'open' where the others, abutting bedrock walls are 'closed'. The map below was produced by Rashi to demonstrate the Gemara's argument pertaining to the second temple.

Top right map shows tribal boundary for Judah and Benjamin

Notice the liquids channel runs east from the southeast corner. This appears to follow the description from the vision of Ezekiel 47:1 " I was led back to the entrance of the temple, and I found that water was issuing from below the platform of the temple—eastward, since the temple faced east—but the water was running out at the south of the altar, under the south wall of the temple."

Southeast corner with no base intersects boundary from
En Rogel at En Shemesh and out to the desert

Map by Ronny Reich.

Here we have another prescient example, in archaeology that predates the first temple by 600+ years, of a practice that was later recorded in Torah and practised by the nation of Israel. In Kabbalah, southeast represents the Divine confluence of Kindness and Mercy described in ancient Biblical theology. But, there is much more in this place of worship that obeys traditional Jewish laws antithetical to the structures of cultic idol worship. The images below show the remnant of an olive oil press that was once used to extract oil from crushed olives and to keep the oil in its pure state, connected to the bedrock. This is not a production press which would flow the pressed oil out of the bedrock cavity into vats. Here the oil was scooped out in stone vessels to maintain purity and used on the altar or for anointment.  

The next set of images of the room that was used for processing slaughtered animals demonstrates (from left to right) that small animals were tethered to the edge of the bedrock wall. According to Torah law, animals for slaughter must be no younger than 8 days and must be unblemished, therefore young animals are more likely to meet the unblemished condition, which would explain why the location to tether animals was made under adult knee height. 

To process animal offerings water must also be available, in the very least, to wash the bloody bedrock after slaughter and preparation. Initially this water may have been carried from the spring up the eastern facing slope, in front (east) of the Stone Temple, as evidenced by the carbon dating of a wall (image below). The lower sections were dated to between 1820 and 1750 BCE which overlaps the time that Abraham (according to Codex Judaica) summarized in biblical chronology: 

Biblical Date 1948 Abraham (son of Terach) was born. -1813 BCE

Biblical Date 2018 THE COVENANT (BRIT BEIN HABETARIM) WITH ABRAHAM. -1743 BCE

Biblical Date 2048 Abraham circumcised himself and his son Yishmael. -1713 BCE

Without any in-situ artifacts, other than the matzevah or standing stone, the entire complex could not be accurately dated. Therefore, the archaeologists referred to Cambridge University and Weizmann Institute to carbon date organic matter from mortar in walls, ash layers on the bedrock and a water channel at the rear of the Stone Temple, that once provided water to priests serving in the temple. The next video outlines the uncanny overlap of the samples found in the water channel samples with Biblical Jacob.

Biblical Date 2185 Jacob went to Charan. -1576 BCE

Biblical Date 2192 Jacob married Leah and Rachel. -1569 BCE

Biblical Date 2205 Jacob left Charan. -1556 BCE

Biblical Date 2208 Benjamin was born. -1553 BCE

Biblical Date 2216 Joseph was sold. -1545 BCE

Biblical Date 2238 JACOB (AND HIS FAMILY) WENT TO EGYPT. -1523 BCE

The context of the Stone Temple continued to develop for me to the point that it became overwhelmingly clear this was the main temple the patriarchs frequented including where Jacob experienced his famous “stairway to heaven” dream and set the matzevah or standing stone to make a covenant with God. 

Almost 1000 years after Isaac and Jacob, when the eastern defensive wall of King Uzziah was excavated, it became clear that the flimsy matzevah that was purposely surrounded by soft sand had been preserved. Around 2700 BCE the entire Stone Temple complex that had been completely buried under the natural accumulation of sand and debris, probably resembled the 1875 photo. 

Eastern Defensive Wall

The wall builders, seeking a solid bedrock foundation for their massive wall probed the soft sand penetrating the voids of the Stone Temple rooms below. When they eventually built their significant defensive wall in front of the matzevah and over the bedrock of the Stone Temple rooms, they understood this holy artifact needed special care. A bulla (royal seal) found in front (east) of the Stone Temple with the name “Meshulam” indicates that a royal instruction was unsealed at the site of the wall construction.

After the wall construction was completed Jerusalem was challenged by the Assyrian army and around 100 years later the city was destroyed by the Babylonian Army and all its people were forced into exile. The city lay empty for more than 70 years and the eastern slope was abandoned. Neglected, natural sand, dirt and debris covered the Stone Temple, the defensive wall, the double wall and En Shemesh, the spring. It lay buried until the spring was excavated during the second temple construction because the waters that flowed from the spring kept running through the lower water tunnel that King Hezekiah built and it filled the recently excavated Shiloh or Siloam Pool at the southern end of ancient Jerusalem, The City of David.

As I have described, The Stone Temple discovery is completely consistent with Biblical heritage and with Jewish practices that have continued through millennia. The sacred site of patriarchal worship is the likely reason that inspired King David to move his kingdom, but we now know, from the carbon dated samples, he did not find the Zion he was seeking. Instead he built a personal altar on the summit of Mount Moriah and declared it the national altar. 

Now that we have found David’s Zion what would the patriarchs and David want of us and absent any other definitive altar location can we revert to the original?

Flippant Evidence In Jerusalem's Rock-Cut-Rooms

Probability of overlap with Jacob is +90%

Recently a paper published in conjunction with Weizmann Institute and Israel Antiquities Authority uncharacteristically stated: “Thus, several seeds from an ash layer found below a thin wall in Area U (Room 19040), indicate a 9th century BC date for the construction of this room and adjacent structures, as well as the hewing of a series of rock-cut rooms to which the architectural remains were connected based on stratigraphic observations (SI Appendix, Figs. S18 and S20). Also dating to this century in Area U was a collapsed refuse of building materials, uncovered in Room 17063, built directly on top of the bedrock (RTD 9180, Fig. 2 and SI Appendix, Figs. S4, S9, and S12).”

After Joe Uziel discovered the Iron Age fragments on the north eastern wall of the Spring Tower, he has carefully and consistently argued that Iron Age findings in stratigraphic layers bias the entire area, including Area U. Now he chose this opportunity to boldly, almost flippantly state "as well as the hewing of a series of rock-cut rooms" inferring that the rock-cut-rooms should also assume this Iron Age date. Not so fast Joe, here I present the most pertinent facts related to the strata and dating of the rock-cut-rooms, which you seem to ignore. 

With this information you can consider whether the last use of the rock-cut-rooms should be dated to the Iron Age (IA) or the Middle Bronze (MB) Age? I will only present the most relevant, critical, carbon dated samples, that were found closest to bedrock. 

Click to enlarge color coded image 

Sample IA RTD 9180 was found in a small pit (south) in a room and MB RTD 9181 on the northern end in a 5 cm ash layer just above the upper bedrock surface of Area-U, the ridge west of the rock-cut-rooms (in the pink rectangle). MB RTD 10293 and RTD 9965, were also found in Area U, but importantly these were located below the level of the upper bedrock surface, in soft soil, under a man-made plaster layer in a water channel that ran into rock-cut-rooms 1 and 5. MB RTD 10191, the oldest MB sample, was found under leveling rocks that were used to stabilize the wall of Room 1948. IA RTD 11362, furthest to the north, was found in a 5 cm ash layer and is the oldest of the IA samples found in that excavation.

Anecdotally notice the IA samples RTD 9180 and RTD 11362 are found on the south-north extremities of rock-cut rooms and are adjacent, whereas MB samples RTD 10293, RTD 9965, RTD 9181 and RTD 10191 are aligned east-west, to the functional, bedrock layers of the rock-cut-rooms.

For this discussion, there is little point paying attention to stratigraphic layers above these samples because they reflect the earliest possible dates the rock-cut-rooms were used, which is the fact that must still be established. I'm appealing to Joe to clarify these important, perhaps critical points because these rock-cut-rooms are extremely sensitive and these low lying stratigraphic samples potentially align with Israel's forefathers or even earlier Biblical figures and it deserves to be treated accordingly. 

Ai - Your Time is Up!

City of Ai Discovery (IAA)

Introduction

The conventional identification of biblical Bethel with the modern Arab village of Beitin, approximately 12–13 km north of Jerusalem, has long influenced archaeological and biblical scholarship. Similarly, the city of Ai has traditionally been associated with Et-Tell, located just east of Beitin. However, recent archaeological findings and a reevaluation of biblical geography suggest the need for a reassessment. This proposal centers Bethel at the rock-cut temple site on the eastern slope of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah, corresponding to the Bethel of Jacob's vision in Genesis, and positions Ai east of Ras al-'Amud, adjacent to Bethany (al-‘Azariya) and Jabal Batin al-Hawa.

Part I: Reframing Bethel

1. Bethel of Jacob: Mount Moriah’s Eastern Slope

The rock-cut temple complex on the eastern slope of Mount Moriah, facing the Kidron Valley, has yielded Middle Bronze Age material remains, including cultic features consistent with ritual use. Traditional Jewish sources have long associated Mount Moriah with divine encounters (Genesis 22), and the architecture of the site resembles high places described in the Hebrew Bible. This supports the hypothesis that Jacob’s Bethel, where he dreamed of a ladder to heaven (Genesis 28:10–22), could have been located here rather than 13 km to the north.

2. Confusion Introduced by Beitin

The modern identification of Beitin as Bethel dates to 19th-century explorers such as Edward Robinson. While the phonetic similarity is compelling, the chronological and cultic evidence is less definitive. Beitin shows Iron Age occupation, but the Middle Bronze Age cultic prominence seen at Mount Moriah’s slope is largely absent. This suggests that Beitin may instead be the later Bethel of Jeroboam, where he established a royal shrine with a golden calf (1 Kings 12:28–29), reflecting a secondary and political use of the name Bethel.

Part II: Reconsidering Ai

1. Biblical Ai: East of Bethel

The book of Joshua (7–8) locates Ai east of Bethel. If Bethel is relocated to Mount Moriah’s eastern slope, then Ai must be sought in the adjacent eastern territories — specifically, Silwan, Ras al-‘Amud and its surrounding slopes.

2. Archaeological Evidence from Ras al-'Amud

Two excavation reports published in Israel Antiquities Authority Hadashot provide compelling evidence:

• 2011–2012 Excavation (Report #2181) uncovered occupation layers from the Intermediate and Middle Bronze Ages through the Iron Age, including domestic structures, pottery assemblages, and rock-cut installations.

• 2013 Excavation (Report #3340) revealed Late Bronze and Iron Age agricultural installations and ceramics, indicating sustained settlement.

These findings suggest that the site in Ras al-‘Amud was a continuously occupied, agriculturally productive, and potentially fortified site during the periods relevant to the conquest narratives. The location is 1.3 KM east of Mount Moriah’s Bethel, fulfilling the biblical geographic requirement.

Part III: The Role of Bethany and Jabal Batin al-Hawa

Bethany (al-‘Azariya) and Jabal Batin al-Hawa lie adjacent to Ras al-‘Amud respectively north-east and south-east of the rock-cut temple. This region:

• Preserves ancient routes connecting Jerusalem to Jericho and the Jordan Valley.

• Has archaeological evidence of Bronze and Iron Age occupation.

• Could represent the broader region of Ai, or a confederation of sites described in Joshua 8.

Furthermore, Batin al-Hawa phonetically echoes Beitin, as does the BTN of BeThaNy suggesting possible confusion in later periods between the Bethel of Jacob and that of Jeroboam.

Conclusion

This revised model:

• Centers Jacob’s Bethel at the rock-cut temple on Mount Moriah’s eastern slope.

• Repositions Ai at Ras al-‘Amud, with strong Late Bronze and Iron Age continuity.

• Attributes Beitin to the politically repurposed Bethel of Jeroboam, explaining textual and geographic discrepancies.

Further excavations, especially at Ras al-‘Amud and the Mount Moriah temple site, could decisively clarify the identities and roles of these ancient places in Israel’s formative history.

Torah In Middle Bronze Age Archaeology

Jewish Male Circumcision At 8 Days Old

Israelite rituals that preceded the Old Testament were transcribed into it and many have been retained through the ages including by today's contemporary Orthodox Jews. For example; post wedding celebrations are held by families and friends each day for seven days, the practice was first described by Jacob's father-in-law. Or male circumcision on the eighth day after birth was instituted by Abraham for his son Isaac. Or the passage of Levite priesthood that continues to be passed from father to son in todays Jewish communities. Each of these rituals began hundreds of years before Moses transcribed the Old Testament. Ongoing practice of Biblical traditions underlie the authenticity of orthodox Judaism. 

One such glaring example relates temple worship and was recently discovered in a stone temple carved in the bedrock of Mount Moriah's eastern slope - we will call this complex Temple Zero since it precedes Jerusalem's First and Second Temple. Carbon dated evidence from the bedrock surface proves that Temple Zero was not used for worship after1535 BCE, at the time Jacobs Family emigrated from the region. The small number of artifacts discovered in Temple Zero and their periods obfuscated clues as too how the site was originally used, but its original Middle Bronze Age, bedrock bound, features strongly relate to Biblical writings, Jewish laws, customs and traditions.

View the videos captured on the recent tour of Temple Zero

The most essential and uniquely Jewish feature, is Temple Zero's western orientation, precisely defined by the altar platform (Room 1 above) and matzevah (room 4). No other Middle Bronze Age cultic structure with a western orientation exists in Israel. All other cults, of this time, faced east to pay homage to the sun. Monotheism, attributed to Abraham and the high priest of Salem, Malchi-Tzedek to whom Abraham tithed, turned against the sun.

More than six hundred years later this orientation found its way into the western facing structure and priestly practices in the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle that Moses built, then into Jerusalem's permanent Temples. Finally synagogues of the world expressed this by facing prayer structures toward the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and priestly services turned their backs to the entrance. The cultic origins of Christianity enshrined the orientation of its priests and altars toward the rising sun in the east and in modern churches priests face toward the entrance. 

Until the temple in Jerusalem is rebuilt, the daily Orthodox ritual is to verbalize the prescribed sacrificial offerings of Jerusalem's temples. However, well before contemporary prayer was instituted, the Book of Leviticus, as evidenced by the 2000 year old burnt Leviticus scroll described sacrificial rites in detail, yet Temple Zero already facilitated many of these. Mostly these sacrificial rites are expounded in Jewish law requiring animals, wine, flour, oil and water. These laws describe that purity was retained only in stone or bedrock vessels. The construct and features of Temple Zero facilitated these rituals hundreds of years before the Leviticus text was transcribed by Moses.

The main elements of Jewish sacrifice includes oil, flour, wine and young domesticated sheep. Only unblemished animals could be sacrificed for the holy altar, this always biased selection to younger animals. Carved low in the bedrock of the room 5 (see below) that was once used to process slaughtered animals for the offering altar, we found a place to tether animals. The tether was low (~30cm) to the ground which supports its primary use for younger, smaller animals. 

Animal tether. Simulated use seen in image below

Olives would have been pressed to protect purity by flowing oil into a bedrock or a stone vessel that was not connected to a pipe or channel, typically used for vollumous production. These features are evident in the oil press (room 2) carved into the bedrock of the mountain. Once pressed oil would have been cupped out of the bedrock vessel into a stone vessel and immediately poured over refined or parched flour and offered with a sacrifice.

Pouring liquids onto corners of the altar included wine, water or blood that once flowed into a liquids channel to a pit or onto dust that was cleared daily and deposited outside the area of the temple. During slaughter blood from the animals neck was captured in a convex based stone vessel. At the base of the altar, a convex vessel would rest in its concave counterpart carved in the bedrock (see Room 1 below) in preparation for sprinkling blood of the sacrificed animal on the altar.  

The South-East (SE) corner of the foundation of the First and Second Temple altar drew on a tradition (Zevachim 53b) sourced in the biblical verse that it was in the tribal territory of Judah, the other corners were in Benjamin: “Benjamin is a wolf that tears apart; in the morning he devours the prey, and in the evening he divides the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). Now, based on Ronny Reich's declaration that the Gihon Spring was known as Ein Shemesh, the tradition conclusively followed the altar at Temple Zero. 

These rich features on the bedrock of Temple Zero support the Jewish origins of our pre-Biblical Israelite (Jacob) heritage and are uncannily aligned with the declaration in Deuteronomy 33:4 that:  

תּוֹרָ֥ה צִוָּה־לָ֖נוּ מֹשֶׁ֑ה מוֹרָשָׁ֖ה קְהִלַּ֥ת יַעֲקֹֽב׃ 

The Torah Moses charged us with is the heritage of the congregation of Jacob.

 

Water, Water Everywhere, Will Archaeologists Drink?

The water channel behind rock-cut-rooms
was dated 600 years before King David

On the eastern slopes of Mount Moriah in the City of David, a Middle Bronze Age water system included remnants of a reservoir and a water channel that was carbon dated to 1535 BCE. No other evidence of water supply to rooms of the rock-cut-temple was found, yet despite this some archaeologists still insist that the rock-cut-temple should instead be dated to the Iron Age. 

The evolution of Mount Moriah 

Over simplification and context myopia, distorts academic understanding at this complex, ancient location. However, the video below offers a comprehensive contextual explanation. Before viewing, it's important to illustrate the passage of water as it once flowed to the rooms, more than 3500 years ago  during the Middle Bronze Age (follow the Area U/C map below). 

Room 2 (with tethered animal for slaughter) 

Room 1 (with impression of sacrificial altar on platform)

Water passage. Room 2 (center-foreground)
 Room 1 (upper right-background)

 

Area U water system leading to
 Area C rooms (1 and 2) also in next image

The video explains that the rock-cut-temple was active up until 1500 BCE (Middle Bronze), then buried, out of site until 700 BCE (Iron), exposed at that time, reburied during wall construction and finally excavated 13 years ago. From this Middle Bronze period through the early Iron Age there is an absence of evidence at this installation. 

The next video explains more about the archaeological detail relative to the context of the temple that existed 700 years before the Temple of Solomon on Mount Moriah and why King David never discovered it. 

Jerusalem and Jacob - Calling Archaeology Detectives

Fifty years and tens of millions of dollars have failed to explain 700 years of missing evidence from ancient Jerusalem's eastern slope, at the City of David. The gap perpetuates confusion among archaeologists, who otherwise would prefer to date the significant rock-cut-temple to the Iron Age. You see, between the Middle Bronze (3500 years ago) and Iron Age (2800 years ago) no direct evidence, in the rock-cut-temple, has been discovered and that presents a problem. 

Rock-cut-temple on eastern slope after ground cover was finally cleared in 2023.
The adjacent house, which was built 20 years ago, on compressed ground cover, is now suspended on steel plates with pilons to bedrock

Around the rock-cut-temple, there is undisputed, carbon dated evidence of occupation and Middle Bronze Age use up until 3500 years ago, then +700 years of nothing, and plenty Iron Age evidence after that. The dearth of Iron Age evidence, starting around 2800 years ago, dominates academic papers and influences narratives about the significant rock-cut-temple, yet this evidence gap, that screams the loudest, is ignored by archaeologists. In this case the absence of evidence proves the evidence!

If not for two samples (#9964/5) of organic matter, trapped below and above plaster layers of a man made channel that once fed water into at least the southern-most rock-cut-room, archaeologists would have a more simplified proof of Iron Age origins.

Sample #9964 lay undisturbed, protected by natural ground cover, above the plaster channel for 3500 years. Sample #9965 was protected by the plaster layers of the channel above it. 

At blue line B (map below) the U (Sample #9964) and X (Sample #9965)

"B" marks the excavation site of organic samples, from above and below the plastered water channel.
Other samples #9181/9962 (top) and building 1948 (right) dated between 1820-1510 BCE. 

Water channel flowed from a reservoir to the bedrock floor.
No evidence of an Iron Age water channel and reservoir has been located 

The barrage of published Iron Age evidence and the inferred dating of the rock-cut-temple is refuted by carbon dated samples at several locations. However, most powerful are #9964 and #9965 two 3500 year old, Middle Bronze Age, organic samples that date the water channel construction and last use. Similar plaster layers, on the bedrock, in the western, rear end of a storage room, present insufficient proof of Iron Age shaping of bed rock. Such plaster remnants, dated to the Iron Age, may have been laid by Iron Age occupiers of the homes constructed above the bedrock.

A solution is not easily forthcoming because absence of evidence is an insufficient academic standard of proof. The water channel remains the strongest proof of use and there is no other evidence of water service to the temple. Unfortunately, +700 years after the water channel was last used, in preparation for construction of the City's eastern defensive wall, the rock-cut-temple was cleared to the bedrock to accommodate the 4 meter wide wall. Immediately west, the water channel was recently traced, running, from the remains of a reservoir (at blue B), underneath Iron Age homes to the southernmost rock-cut-room. However, archaeologists won't confirm that the channels Middle Bronze Age construction is directly linked to construction of the rock-cut-temple. Instead, they promote an alternative, unproven, theory that the water channel was cut (at blue B) by constructors and at the southern rock-cut-room during its Iron Age construction. This hypothesis only exacerbates the absence of an Iron Age water system.

Clearance of the area by Iron Age wall constructors, remains the best explanation for the absence of direct evidence, but what, if any direct evidence, was cleared from the bedrock at that time remains a mystery and whether the rock-cut-temple had been buried under ground cover, for +700 years, before the wall constructors cleared it, remains inconclusive. 

Any suggestion that #9964, and other samples #9181 and #9962 survived, in situ, above ground, for +700 years, while Iron Age Area U and rock-cut-temple was apparently constructed, exposed or in active use is preposterous. More likely the last use of the rock-cut-rooms is also tied to the date of sample #9964 and construction of the rock-cut-rooms dated to sample #9965 sometime between 1615 BCE and 1880 BCE or prior.

Accumulated ground cover concealing the rock-cut-temple site as it was in 2012.
Adjacent house built on compressed ground cover.

Promotion of an academic theory for Iron Age construction of the rock-cut-temple is further refuted by surviving evidence immediately north (#9181 and #9962), of sample #9964 (from the water channel) and east, from below building 1948, dated to 1820 BCE and in mortar 1.2m above bedrock dated to 1605 BCE. These additional samples strongly increase the probability of a Middle Bronze Age origin and suggest that a significant Iron Age construction of the rock-cut-temple would have disrupted at least #9181 and #9962 laying bare on the surface of these excavated areas. 

Academia faces significant challenges in admitting a Middle Bronze Age origin because of Iron Age bias in tangential data and the Biblical alignment to the archaeological last use, defined by at least sample #9964. The period of carbon dating overlaps patriarch Jacob who, Jewish commentators attest stayed briefly on Mount Moriah. According to Biblical chronology Jacob's first encounter on Mount Moriah took place in 1573 BCE. Then, he and his family arrived on Mount Moriah in 1553 BCE and left the region in 1523 BCE. Jacob immigrated to Egypt, where his descendants remained for 250 years before they returned to their ancestral land. The overlapping 100 year use of the water channel (1535 BCE) with time of Jacob makes this discovery remarkable particularly because of its potentially exciting context to the  rock-cut-temple and matzevah found within the temple location. According to the Bible Jacob erected a matzevah at this location (Genesis 35:14).

The matzevah, "standing stone" or anointing pillar at the rock-cut-temple.

The video above tells the comprehensive story.