I think the 1993 discovery of the Tel Dan stela and its "Bayt Daud" ( House of David) has been met with different responses, depending on one's paradigm. It will come up infrequently among more liberal-minded scholars who follow the Copenhagen school of Biblical Studies. The inscription doesn't find a place easily in their scholarship, plain and simple.
The funny part to me is that the more conservative scholars have moved on to something else (I'm thinking of Kenneth Kitchen).
The most energy seems to be expended by scholars in between the extremes, like the William Devers of the world. It's interesting, the development of writing on the inscription has changed from denial and accusations of forgery to the wider variety of views that exist now. The predominent view is moving toward legitimacy and the plain sense translation of the words - "house of david".
I agree. The question is: Did the House of David, however briefly, hold on to a united kingdom of Israel? Or was this all propaganda? Whenever I'm looking into a historical kernel behind a legendary realm I use three criteria to judge the likelihood of of its historicity:
1) Plausibility: It's plausible that a city built on the Dardanelles, in a position to intercept and control major trade routes might grow wealthy, excite the envy and enmity of some of its neighbors and eventually be sacked by them. Thus Troy is plausible. It's implausible that a large Island the size and shape of the state of Colorado, located in the North Atlantic would sink in a single day and night. Thus, Atlantis is implausible. It's plausible that, at a time when Egypt was in a state of decrepitude, and Assyria hadn't yet begun its Iron Age expansion, a pocket empire could briefly hold sway in the Leant. So, the mini-empire of David and Solomon is plausible.
2) Independent attestation. The only ancient source for the myth of Atlantis was Plato. All other writings from ancient time were based on his. Thus, there is no independent attestation that Atlantis existed. Troy, on the other hand is referred to by Homer, Hesiod and, in picture form, by a number of vase painters. One vase from Mykonos, dated to
ca. 800 BCE, depicts the Trojan horse being taken into the city. In addition, we have Hittite diplomatic texts referring to a city that is probably Troy.
3) Archaeological evidence: Zip for Atlantis vs. the nine cities of Troy.
With respect to the existence of David and the House of David, we now have another reference outside the Bible. Likewise, the Tel Dan inscription can be taken as some form of archaeological proof. However, that's only proof of the existence of someone named David and the likelihood that his descendants ruled Judah, but not necessarily Judah and Israel.
