Archaeologists have discovered artifacts on Mount Zion—located near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem—stretching from the 8th century BCE to the period of Ottoman rule. Among other things, they have uncovered a housing complex they believe belonged to the family of the High Priest in the 1st century CE. It contains some familiar objects of Jewish life, including a ritual cup:

The cup . . . was found in four pieces within a fill layer containing 1st-century pottery fragments above a barrel-vaulted ceiling of a mikveh (ritual bath). . . . The inscription on the cup has not yet been completely and definitively translated, but study of the cup and the historical context of its finding suggest that it might have been a ritual-cleansing cup, used for the washing of hands before engaging in liturgical functions. [Excavation director Shimon] Gibson suggests [that] “the discovery of the cup in the area of the upper city of Jerusalem, in which priestly families are known to have resided . . . may hint at the original priestly function that this specific vessel had some 2,000 years ago.”

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.