Thirty-five fighters of ההגנה HAʾHAGANA were killed before reaching גוש עציון GUŜ EẐION. Their loss left the communities they sought to reinforce without these men and supplies, and their families without a survivor from the final group who could recount the battle. The day's history must therefore distinguish the established loss from the reconstructed sequence of its last hours.
What happened after dawn?
Lewis and Marco's study reconstructs discovery of the force near Tsurif around 06:00 and firing shortly afterward. The men changed direction and eventually reached the hill known as Daher al-Hajj or Hill 573. Repeated assaults trapped them there. The reconstruction draws on Arab accounts, British officer Hamish Dugan's evidence, terrain and archaeological investigation.1
The full study at event://5708־11־05־ל־heh־killed LAMED explains what can and cannot be established. Its evidence supports a battle culminating in the loss of all thirty-five who continued the march. The exact path of each man, the identity of the last fighter and the time of every death remain less secure.
What were the men trying to carry through?
Their mission followed the 14 January assault on the bloc. They carried reinforcements and supplies, including plasma for wounded people and batteries for communications equipment. They also carried demolition material for an intended offensive task. These details place the mission within the practical defense of communities of עם ישראל AM YISRAʾEL, rather than reducing it to an isolated last stand.2
They had no radio of their own. Once the group was separated from the three men who returned, the leadership could not obtain a continuous report from it. That absence helps explain why rumor and delayed news figure so heavily in the next day's record.
What should not be inferred from the loss?
No evidence here establishes that every man died at the same hour, that all were captured before being killed or that the final fighting can be described entirely from a participant on their side. The loss also does not prove any individual was the last survivor of a family murdered in the Holocaust.
The original orders, full witness accounts and individual records remain important. Keeping their limits visible protects the particular lives and decisions from being replaced by a story that claims more certainty than the evidence provides.
How is this dated?
This is Day 48 of the 599-day civil-date series: 1948-01-16. Its public Ivrit route is 5708-11-05; after local sunset the adjacent Hebrew route is 5708-11-06.
The battle belongs to 16 January 1948, normally 5 Shevat during daylight. The second mission had begun after sunset on 15 January, already the same Hebrew day. Lewis and Marco place the final fighting near twilight, around 17:00; deaths after local sunset would fall on 6 Shevat. The existing event retains its 5 Shevat route while explaining this individual-death boundary. Recovery on 17 January and the arrival of bodies for burial on 18 January are later acts.3
Guided reflections
- How should a battle be reconstructed when none of the final group survived?
- What is lost when the supplies, destination and purpose disappear behind a famous casualty number?
Footnotes
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10761-026-00824-x Discovery, route and final battle reconstruction. ↩
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10761-026-00824-x Mission purpose and equipment; 14 January background. ↩
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10761-026-00824-x Battle, twilight and recovery sequence. ↩