In the Bible’s telling, the Israelites, after leaving Egypt, traveled through the Sinai Peninsula into what is now Jordan, and from there entered Canaan from the east. While there is scant archaeological evidence to support this narrative, scholars are divided on what that absence implies; after all, nomads who wandered through an area for a generation or two wouldn’t leave much behind. New excavations, however, may reveal traces of just such evidence, as Philippe Bohstrom and Ruth Schuster write:

[A]rchaeologists are excavating strange ruins previously found in inhospitable parts of the Jordan Valley, hoping to prove or disprove the theory suggested by the late Adam Zertal of Haifa University: that the stone structures found there were erected by the ancient Israelites as they slowly crossed into Canaan 3,200 years ago. Interestingly, if the Israelites did build these structures, they may have done so to shelter not themselves but their livestock. . . .

[A] meticulous survey of 1,000 square miles of the western part of the Valley, headed by Zertal and his team from 1978 onward, found the remains of hundreds of ancient settlements. (One seems to be shaped like a foot, with toes and all.) Of the hundreds, Zertal estimated that about 70 had been erected in the early Iron Age. That is, about 3,200 years ago, which is when the ancient Israelites were said to have been led by the Prophet Joshua from the wilderness to fertile Canaan. . . .

No signs of the builders’ identity have been found thus far. The only reasons to associate the structures in the bitterly inhospitable valley with the ancient Israelites are their location and the estimated timing of their erection. [The current excavation] began with a large and very strange settlement called Khirbet el-Mastarah (loosely translated as “hidden ruins”). While today the only sign of life there is the occasional Bedouin shepherd passing by with his herd, Mastarah seems to have once housed a large Iron Age village. . .

[Oddly], no sign of human habitation was found inside the stone structures, with the exception of grain grinding stones that could have been placed there later, or kept there. [This could be because] the structures were occupied by people for a short time, which fits with the theory of a migratory people taking a break for a decade or two. [Another] possibility is that stone structures were for the animals, while the people themselves, being nomads, lived in tents. . . . Ancient and modern Near Eastern Bedouin . . . also seem to have lived in tents but to have housed their animals in stone compounds—to protect their precious livestock from rustlers.

Israel’s goals of freeing the hostages and defeating Hamas (the latter necessary to prevent further hostage taking) are to some extent contradictory, since Yahya Sinwar, the ruler of the Gaza Strip, will only turn over hostages in exchange for concessions. But Jacob Nagel remains convinced that Jerusalem should continue to pursue both goals:

Only consistent military pressure on Hamas can lead to the hostages’ release, either through negotiation or military operation. There’s little chance of reaching a deal with Hamas using current approaches, including the latest Egyptian proposal. Israeli concessions would only encourage further pressure from Hamas.

There is no incentive for Hamas to agree to a deal, especially since it believes it can achieve its full objectives without one. Unfortunately, many contribute to this belief, mainly from outside of Israel, but also from within.

Recent months saw Israel mistakenly refraining from entering Rafah for several reasons. Initially, the main [reason was to try] to negotiate a deal with Hamas. However, as it became clear that Hamas was uninterested, and its only goal was to return to its situation before October 7—where Hamas and its leadership control Gaza, Israeli forces are out, and there are no changes in the borders—the deal didn’t mature.