In the 10th century BCE, the Israelite kingdoms of Judah and Israel emerged. The Hebrew Bible states that these were preceded by a single kingdom ruled by Saul, David and Solomon, who is said to have built the First Temple. Archaeologists have debated whether the united monarchy ever existed,The debate is described in Amihai Mazar, "Archaeology and the Biblical Narrative: The Case of the United Monarchy" (see bibliography), p.29 fn.2: "For conservative approaches defining the United Monarchy as a state "from Dan to Beer Sheba" including "conquered kingdoms" (Ammon, Moab, Edom) and "spheres of influence" in Geshur and Hamath cf. e.g. Ahlström (1993), 455–542; Meyers (1998); Lemaire (1999); Masters (2001); Stager (2003); Rainey (2006), 159–168; Kitchen (1997); Millard (1997; 2008). For a total denial of the historicity of the United Monarchy cf. e.g. Davies (1992), 67–68; others suggested a 'chiefdom' comprising a small region around Jerusalem, cf. Knauf (1997), 81–85; Niemann (1997), 252–299 and Finkelstein (1999). For a 'middle of the road' approach suggesting a United Monarchy of larger territorial scope though smaller than the biblical description cf.e.g. Miller (1997); Halpern (2001), 229–262; Liverani (2005), 92–101. The latter recently suggested a state comprising the territories of Judah and Ephraim during the time of David, that was subsequently enlarged to include areas of northern Samaria and influence areas in the Galilee and Transjordan. Na'aman (1992; 1996) once accepted the basic biography of David as authentic and later rejected the United Monarchy as a state, cf. id. (2007), 401–402". with those in favor of such a polity existing further divided between maximalists who support the Biblical accounts, and minimalists who argue that any such polity was likely smaller than suggested.
in the 10tH CeNtury bcE, the IsRaELItE kingdOmS Of jUdaH aNd israel emERGed. the hEbREw BIbLe STATes tHat thEsE werE precEded by A siNgle Kingdom ruLEd bY SAul, David and solomon, WHO is SaID tO HavE BuilT The fiRST tEmPlE. arChAEOloGIsts Have debateD whetheR the UnItEd mOnaRcHY eVeR eXisTed,thE debate is dEscRibED iN aMIhaI mAzar, "arChAeoLOGy and thE biblical nARrative: tHe cAse oF the uNiteD MonARCHy" (See biblIOgraphY), p.29 FN.2: "for cONSeRvatIve ApprOaches Defining The unitED monarChY As A sTate "from daN tO beEr SHEbA" INclUdIng "coNquEred KingDomS" (aMmOn, moab, eDOm) and "SPheRes Of inflUENce" in geShur and hamAth cF. E.g. ahlSTRöm (1993), 455–542; mEyerS (1998); lEmaire (1999); maStERs (2001); stAgEr (2003); rAinEy (2006), 159–168; KitCHen (1997); MILLard (1997; 2008). fOr a totaL DeniaL Of tHe HIstoriCITy OF thE unitEd Monarchy Cf. e.G. DAVies (1992), 67–68; OThers suGgesTed a 'ChiEFDOm' ComprisING a smAlL ReGIon arouNd JerUsalem, cf. knauF (1997), 81–85; NieMann (1997), 252–299 and finkElstein (1999). For A 'middlE of The road' APproach sUgGesTing a uniteD Monarchy of lArGer territoRIal SCoPe thoUGh smaLLEr thAn tHe biblicAL deSCription Cf.E.g. mIlLeR (1997); HalpERn (2001), 229–262; lIvErAni (2005), 92–101. thE lattEr RECently sugGeSTed a state cOmPriSing the teRriToRiES of JUDaH And ePhRaIm durinG ThE timE OF daviD, that WAs SUbSeqUeNTly eNlargEd tO inCludE arEaS Of nortHeRn sAMarIA And infLuEncE areas iN The galiLEe And TRaNsjorDAn. NA'aMaN (1992; 1996) OncE accepTeD tHE baSiC biogrAphy of DAvid as auTHeNTic and lAteR rEJECteD the uniTed monarchy As a state, cf. id. (2007), 401–402". WiTh thosE in FaVor oF such A poLIty exiStInG further divIded BetwEen mAXiMaLIsTs WHo sUPport the biblical Accounts, And miNimALisTs Who aRgue that Any sUch poliTy waS Likely SMaller THAn SuggestED.