Update - 'David's Palace'

It is interesting to compare this even-handed article in the JPost on the subject with the NY Times' hatchet job (BTW, I think it is a black mark on Israeli academia that Mazar is considered a 'black sheep' for having objected to the destruction of artifacts on the Temple Mount).

I think it is important to be careful with the subject nonetheless. Prof. Reich is right - it will take much more time, including a full excavation of the building and its surroundings, as well as examination of the artifacts, before we can argue whether or not this is really the fabled palace of David.

Nevertheless, the discovery is very important. For years archaeologists have argued whether or not Jerusalem really was a capital city during the tenth century (David and Solomon's time) or simply a 'small village'. The dearth of published pottery from this period seemed to support the nay-sayers. Recently, it was proved that there WAS pottery from this period in various later houses.

The discovery of a building this extensive from the 10th century - even if it is 'only' an administrative building - gives us not only evidence of the importance of the city at the time but also an idea of where the 'nerve center' of Jerusalem was located. So champagne is called for in any event.