Israeli archaeologists recently announced the discovery of a fishing hook from the vicinity of Ashkelon, dating roughly to the time before Abraham would have come to Canaan. The Jerusalem Post reports:

The hook is 6.5 cm long and 4 cm wide, and according to the co-director of the excavation, Yael Abadi-Reiss, this makes it suitable for hunting sharks as long as two or three meters, or large tuna fish.

“More ancient fishhooks found previously were made of bone and were much smaller than this one. The use of copper began in the Chalcolithic period, and it is fascinating to discover that this technological innovation was applied in antiquity to the production of fishhooks for fishermen along the Mediterranean coast,” she added. The Chalcolithic period refers to the period of time between 2500 BCE and 2200 BCE, during which the first simple tools made of copper and gold appeared.

During this era, large villages were established around Ashkelon, whose economy was based on the pasturing of sheep, goats, and cattle; the cultivation of wheat, barley, and legumes; and the tending of fruit orchards—all industries that are still alive and thriving to this day.

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.