The Greek island of Delos is known as the mythical birthplace of Apollo and the location of an ancient oracle. Over 100 years ago, a French archaeologist discovered a structure there built in the 2nd century BCE, and concluded from inscriptions that it was a synagogue. But the case is far from closed, as Brian Schaefer writes:

The inscriptions found on or near [the structure] are not biblical prayers scrawled in Hebrew or Aramaic. That would be too easy. Rather, they reference names that [archaeologists] identified as Jewish (Agathokles and Lysimachos) and contain the word proseuche, which can refer specifically to a Jewish house of prayer—or can be applied more generally as a kind of offering.

If anything, additional inscriptions uncovered in 1979 actually offer explicit evidence of a Samaritan presence. Two of them honor benefactors of the community and begin: “The Israelites on Delos who make first-fruit offerings to Holy Argarizein”—which is a reference to Mount Gerizim, [the center of Samaritan worship].

[Yet the historian Lidia] Matassa is unconvinced that this answers the synagogue question one way or another. She points out that there is no way to know whether the dedications were made by a permanent community or by a passing traveler.

The physical structure of the space offers few clues, since it largely echoes the architecture and design of neighboring buildings. It is, however, found on the eastern shore and has a clear eastern orientation, which is characteristic of many synagogues.

Yesterday, the Iranian foreign minister flew to Geneva to meet with European diplomats. President Trump, meanwhile, indicated that cease-fire negotiations might soon begin with Iran, which would presumably involve Tehran agreeing to make concessions regarding its nuclear program, while Washington pressures Israel to halt its military activities. According to Israeli media, Iran already began putting out feelers to the U.S. earlier this week. Aviram Bellaishe considers the purpose of these overtures:

The regime’s request to return to negotiations stems from the principle of deception and delay that has guided it for decades. Iran wants to extricate itself from a situation of total destruction of its nuclear facilities. It understands that to save the nuclear program, it must stop at a point that would allow it to return to it in the shortest possible time. So long as the negotiation process leads to halting strikes on its military capabilities and preventing the destruction of the nuclear program, and enables the transfer of enriched uranium to a safe location, it can simultaneously create the two tracks in which it specializes—a false facade of negotiations alongside a hidden nuclear race.