Having consulted with some of the foremost experts on the subject, Amanda Borschel-Dan details some of the most important archaeological discoveries in the land of Israel. The experts named the tomb of Herod, cutting-edge research using biology and genetics, and, of course, the Dead Sea Scrolls as some of the most significant finds of the past 70 years. Amidst these discoveries, controversies surrounding the correct approach to the Bible have not abated:

“A major debate in the last 40 years is the historicity of the Hebrew Bible,” Yosef Garfinkel, head of the Institute of Archaeology at Hebrew University [said]. In recent decades, there have been several discoveries that could be interpreted as shoring up biblical narratives, several of which were found in Jerusalem’s ancient Old City. The most recent among them was a clay seal impression bearing what could be the name of the prophet Isaiah, discovered by Eilat Mazar in her recently renewed Jerusalem excavations. . . .

Garfinkel [names] several other examples of archaeological evidence in support of the biblical narrative. . . . “A few finds indicate that the Bible indeed bears historical memories,” said Garfinkel, who is directing archaeological expeditions to Khirbet Qeiyafa, Tel Lachish, and Khirbet er-Rai.

Garfinkel said excavations of the fortified city of Khirbet Qeiyafa “indicates urban society in Judah at the time of King David.” A portable shrine found at Khirbet Qeiyafa “indicates royal architecture in Judah at the time of David and Solomon.” According to Garfinkel, “the biblical text described [similar] architecture that was used at that era.” . . .

But foremost among the findings that both Aren Maeir [of Bar-Ilan University] and Garfinkel highlight is the Tel Dan stele discovered in secondary use in 1993 bearing an inscription on a 9th-century-BCE stone slab that mentions “House of David.” The stone and its fragmentary inscription is called by some the “first historical evidence of King David.” . . . While not naming the fabled king specifically, . . . it does recount the victory of an Aramean king over his two southern neighbors: the “king of Israel” and the “king of the House of David.”

If there’s one lesson to be learned from the history of the Israel-Arab conflict, it’s never to be confident that an end is in sight. Ehud Yaari nevertheless—and with all due caution—points to some noteworthy developments:

The absolute primacy of “armed struggle” in Palestinian discourse has discouraged any serious attempt to discuss or plan for a future Palestinian state. Palestinian political literature is devoid of any substantial debate over what kind of a state they aspire to create. What would be its economic, foreign, and social policies?

One significant exception was a seminar held by Hamas in Gaza—under the auspices of the late Yahya Sinwar—prior to October 7, 2023. The main focus of what was described as a brainstorming session was the question of how to deal with the Jews in the land to be liberated. A broad consensus between the participants was reached that most Israeli Jews should be eradicated or expelled while those contributing to Israel’s success in high tech and other critical domains would be forced to serve the new Palestinian authorities.

Yet, the ongoing aftershocks from the ongoing war in Gaza are posing questions among Palestinians concerning the viability of armed struggle. So far this trend is reflected mainly in stormy exchanges on social-media platforms and internal controversies within Hamas. There is mounting criticism leveled at the late Mohammad Deif and Yahya Sinwar for embarking upon an uncoordinated offensive that is resulting in a “Second Nakba”—a repeat of the defeat and mass displacement caused by launching the war in 1948.

To be sure, “armed struggle” is still being preached daily to the Palestinian communities by Iran and Iranian proxies, and at least half the Palestinian public—according to various polls—believe it remains indispensable. But doubts are being heard. We may be reaching a point where the Palestinians will feel compelled to make a choice between the road which led to past failures and an attempt to chart a new route. It will certainly require time and is bound to cause fractures and divisions, perhaps even a violent split, among the Palestinians.