A year ago, scholars published a transcription of a fragment of papyrus, on which were written in ancient Hebrew the words “Jerusalem,” “king,” and “jars of wine.” A number of experts agreed with these scholars’ conclusion that the fragment was part of a letter dating to the 7th century BCE, a conclusion supported by the radiocarbon dating of the papyrus. Christopher Rollston, however, an expert on ancient Near Eastern epigraphy, concludes that it is a forgery. In part, he bases his argument on the irregular use of what linguists call the “construct form,” which was common in biblical Hebrew but is uncommon in the modern language. He also notes problems with the laboratory evidence:

[I]t is not all that difficult for someone to acquire ancient potsherds, ancient metals, stones of Levantine quarry, small pieces of ancient papyrus, or vellum. Therefore, the antiquity of the medium (e.g., papyrus, vellum, potsherd, or metal) is certainly no guarantee of the dating of the writing on that medium. To put it differently, only the dullest of forgers would forge an inscription on modern papyrus, modern vellum, modern potsherds, or modern metals.

After all, most forgers are quite sharp and they know that laboratory tests are routinely performed, and so the forgers know that it is important for them to use ancient materials from the correct period as their medium. And forgers have produced a fair number of forgeries in the last 40 or 50 years, and this is the way they do it. . . .

There are also additional aspects of the carbon-14 test that deserve scrutiny. Namely, quite a number of people said to me that the papyrus was carbon-dated to the 7th century BCE, and the script is also dated to the 7th century BCE; therefore, they said, that sort of correspondence is very good evidence for the antiquity of the writing. After all, it might be difficult to find a piece of papyrus that was from the 7th century, [as opposed to merely being ancient. However], for carbon-dating materials from antiquity, there is normally a fairly substantial plus or minus range. . . .

[In the case of this papyrus], the carbon dates . . . fell into the Hallstatt Plateau [a period during which it is impossible for radiocarbon dating to yield very precise results], and so all that can actually be said is that this papyrus dates to sometime between 800 and 400 BCE. . . . In other words, there is not some sort of dramatic convergence of the carbon date and the putative date of the script.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.