Here's Reuters, and here's AP's report about the discovery in the Ellah Valley of a 3,000-year-old fortified town that was apparently ruled from Jerusalem, 20 km to the north-east. Just about the time when, according to the Bible, King David was ruling a centralized kingdom from Jerusalem. Apparently the townspeople spoke Hebrew.
That would be the real Valley of Ellah, not the bad joke.
The possibility of finding remains from the Iron Age in a land that has in the interval been built and destroyed dozens of times is slim, but the more the archeologists dig, the more they find. And then the politics kick in. My understanding of the issue is that the more they dig the more the broad outlines of the biblical story are confirmed, but there are many people who'd rather it were otherwise. That whole Zionism-is-Colonialism thesis, after all, has to start from the preposition that the Zionists came from somewhere else, as colonialists by definition always do; the possibility that they're coming back from somewhere has to be either disproved or, since it's true and can't be disproved, it must be denigrated.
The denigration can only be done by discounting the heart, body and soul of Judaism, and by forbidding the Jews to define their own identity. It seems to me that such a position should fit comfortably into any reasonable definition of Antisemitism. But of course, this is where the roars of indignation will begin, and anyway, it's a subject for another post, some other day.