After the death of Judah the Maccabee in 160 BCE, his brother Simon assumed the position of both high priest and king—establishing the Hasmonean dynasty that ruled over Israel until 40 BCE. In a burial site adjacent to an ancient cistern in Jerusalem, archaeologists have now found evidence to support existing accounts of the war and civil strife that characterized the Hasmonean period. They believe the site dates to the reign of King Alexander Yannai, Simon’s grandson, who ruled from 103-76 BCE and is depicted by the ancient historian Josephus and the Talmud as cruel and ruthless. Amanda Borschel-Dan writes:

“We removed from the pit more than twenty neck vertebrae which were cut by a sword,” said Yossi Nagar, an anthropologist at the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). “In the pit we discovered bodies and body parts of infants and adults, women and men, who were probably victims of a brutal slaughter.” Embryonic bones discovered in the excavation indicate that among victims were even pregnant women. . . .

The reign of Alexander Yannai (or Jannaeus) . . . was marked by court intrigue and seemingly endless military campaigns in which he conquered—and lost—swaths of territory.

It was a time of violent power struggles between the Jewish sects known as the Sadducees and Pharisees, [Alexander Yannai supported the former], which led to a six-year civil war that, according to Josephus, left some 50,000 Jews dead. . . . According to the commentary on the book of Nahum discovered as part of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, after the war’s end Alexander Yannai punished some 800 of his political enemies, sentencing them to crucifixion. Others, such as those discovered in the courtyard [in Jerusalem], were beheaded and dismembered.

During excavations, the archaeologists discovered broken human bones, which were randomly discarded together in a water cistern and covered in ash, rocks, and boulders.

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.