Stability?

The ḥerem of the cities turns control of the territory over to Yahweh, but the order in the land that represents the king’s stable and functioning rule has not yet been established, and indeed is not established until the time of Solomon. This, incidentally, is why David is not allowed to build the victory stele, which is represented by the Jerusalem temple. It is not because the blood of his wars has made him somehow ritually impure; rather, his tumultuous reign is not indicative of the stability, order, and prosperity that the suzerain’s monument should represent (see 1 Kings 5:3). David is the warlord who completes the conquest, but it is Solomon who is appointed regent to preside over Yahweh’s territory as the representative of the established covenant order. But before Yahweh can celebrate the triumph over chaos by erecting his monument, chaos has to be brought under control. The process of replacing the existing chaos with the covenant order is represented by the ḥerem not of the Canaanite cites but of the Canaanite communities, as discussed in proposition sixteen.— The Lost World of the Israelite Conquest, 228–29

<idle musing>
I can see this, and it makes sense to an extent, but I still don't see how the ḥereming of the Canaanite communities isn't genocide—even though they aren't necessarily killed, their culture is destroyed. And with Walton making such strong claims that the Canaanites aren't being judged, that seems contradictory.

Of course, there is always the possibility that I'm wrong. That maybe culture isn't supposed to be preserved. But, as a person whose life has been oriented toward studying the past, I find that thought hard to stomach.
</idle musing>