On Sunday, Turkish diplomatic sources denied allegations by Israeli media that Ankara would give Tel Aviv an artifact known as the "Silwan Inscription" that was transferred to Istanbul from Jerusalem during the Ottoman era.

These sources said that the allegations of Turkey's intention to give Israel the artifact - which was found in Jerusalem in 1880 and at that time Ottoman land - are "false" news.

Israeli media reported that the government asked Turkey several times to grant it the "Sloan Inscription", but Ankara repeatedly refused this.

A news item on the "Times of Israel" website claimed that the Silwan inscription in the Museum of Antiquities in Istanbul is one of the most important ancient Hebrew inscriptions, and that it will be given to Israel, but it also indicated that there is no confirmation from Turkey in this regard.

The Israeli website claimed that the 2,700-year-old inscription represents direct evidence of the Bible's account of the construction of the Tunnel of King Hezekiah (one of the kings of the Kingdom of Judah) in occupied Jerusalem.

An Israeli official was quoted as saying that Turkey agreed to send the inscription in the Istanbul Archeology Museum, claiming that Israel offered to send an important historical and religious piece of value to Turkey that is currently in an Israeli museum, most likely an old candlestick from the days of the Ottoman rule of Palestine, which lasted 5 centuries.

The "Times of Israel" said that the government has tried several times in recent years to secure the return of the inscription, most recently in 2017, when then-Minister of Culture Miri Regev offered to trade him for two elephants for a Turkish zoo, but the offer was rejected.

According to the website, then-President Shimon Peres asked then-Turkish President Abdullah Gul in 2007 to at least lend Israel the inscription so that it would be shown to the public at the country's 70th anniversary celebrations, but this did not happen due to diplomatic tensions over the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also said that in 1998 he offered to exchange Turkish antiquities in Israeli museums for an inscription, but his request was rejected, according to the same source.

The Silwan Inscription found at the end of the 19th century (Getty Images)

Controversial

The texts of the Silwan Inscription did not refer to a date, year, or even one of the kings of the ancient eras, which calls into question the relationship of the inscription to the tunnel referred to in the Biblical “Hezekiah” texts. Researchers in the texts of the Bible and historical inscriptions differed in reading the text and determining its original language, and determining the time period in which It was engraved in it until the time of the intended tunnel was determined, and others suggested that the inscription dates back to the second or third century AD.

In a study by the Israeli “Amaq Shabeh” institution concerned with archeology in Jerusalem, the researchers participating in the study wrote that if a ruler or king had ordered the carving of an inscription glorifying his name, he would have ordered the inscription to be erected at the entrance to the tunnel.

The researchers added, "If we put the biblical story aside for a moment, we find that we are facing a distinguished story, a group of engineers who worked and documented their success away from the eyes of the ruler."

The inscription indicates - according to the researchers - that workers built the tunnel and made sure that it was not seen as a royal project, which makes it difficult to link it to the biblical story, and that writing the text, using the Canaanite from which the Hebrew split, was much easier than using Egyptian hieroglyphics or writing Mesopotamia Cuneiform was popular at that time.

Researchers talk about the issue of “the limits of knowledge of archeology.” The recognition that there are questions to which there are no answers should be clear to the science that is based on the study of remains, which are the product of destruction, disasters, migration and other factors, leaving the archaeologist with scarce remains and perishable materials that cannot withstand the climate Like Old Jerusalem, they demanded that archaeological finds be discussed away from any national, religious or historical directives to study the past objectively.

The report criticized the funding of archaeological excavations by an ideological organization, pointing to the settlement of dozens of houses in the village of Silwan and the site of the ancient holy city by Elad. At the same time, the association supports archaeological research activities in the village at the expense of the professionalism of archaeology.

He also says that archaeological discoveries should not and cannot be used as a means to prove the entitlement of a people or a religious sect in a place, as they tell a complex story independent of what is dictated by traditions and beliefs.

Unhistoric kingdom

Biblical researchers named what they consider ancient Israel the "United Kingdom of Israel" to distinguish it from the two separate kingdoms, "Northern Samaria" and "Southern Judah", while historians and archaeologists, including Professor Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University, denied its historical existence, and sees it as an exaggeration in favor of political and religious propaganda.

Not a single royal building of the supposed early Iron Age (monarchy) of the monarchy, nor a single building worthy of a mayor or a local ruler, nor a relic of the era of a prosperous united kingdom, was discovered in Jerusalem - which is supposed to be a wealthy royal capital full of palaces and temples.

For his part, Ahmed Al-Dabash, a researcher in the history of ancient Palestine, notes - in a previous interview with Al-Jazeera Net - that the most surprising feature in the discourse of Old Testament studies is the absolute silence of the archaeological record of Jerusalem and Palestine, about the establishment of the royal era in the region.

Archaeological researchers have noted that the socio-economic development of Jerusalem and southern Palestine was two and a half centuries later than that of northern Palestine, which cast doubt on the possibility of two states after the division of the united kingdom into two kingdoms, not to mention that Jerusalem would be the capital of the united kingdom in the first place.

Al-Dabash notes that the biblical history movement does not match the geography and coordinates of the region from Iraq to the Levant and Egypt, and that the biblical discourse fabricated its geography, and adds that - according to the historical and archaeological record - the history of the East does not include the United Kingdom and kings presented by the stories of the Torah, and that it is an imaginary world from an ancient time that did not exist on This way has never been in the East, and that there were not enough people to establish a king and no evidence of the existence of an important political force in Palestine capable of uniting many economies and regions.