Despite 150 years of intensive archaeological excavation, a definitive picture of Iron Age Jerusalem cannot be drawn. Because the historical record is scant and the archaeological remains are fragmentary, difficult to excavate, and are incompletely published, the many unresolved questions about Jerusalem’s development in the Iron Age have generated, and continue to generate, bitter debates among scholars trying to draw factual conclusions from bodies of evidence that will always be incomplete and subject to change. In addition to long-standing controversies concerning the city’s size, and the location of biblical landmarks such as David’s palace, Solomon’s Temple, and the royal necropolis, significant issues of current debate include: whether the nature of settlement in all phases of the Iron Age can reasonably be reconstructed based on the present record; whether assessment of the city’s development must include reference to earlier and later development activity; and whether Jerusalem can or should serve as a type-site against which archaeological data from other sites is measured. Nevertheless, discoveries of topographical and archaeological features from which Iron Age Jerusalem must be reconstructed can be reviewed and will show that Iron Age Jerusalem includes infrastructural features retained from the Bronze Age, fortifications, underground water systems, a socially stratified population, extramural settlement, burial grounds, and evidence of destruction at the hands of a violent enemy.