Christians and Christianity, Vol. V: Monastery of Martyrius 9789654062565

Citation preview

CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY

MONASTERY OF MARTYRIUS

[I]

[II]

YITZHAK MAGEN

CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY VOLUME V

MONASTERY OF MARTYRIUS

17 Staff Officer of Archaeology — Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria Israel Antiquities Authority Jerusalem 2015

15 7

23

Editor: Ayelet Hashahar Malka

English Translation: Edward Levin and Jill Harish English Style: Janet Barshalev

Typesetting, Design and Production: Keterpress Enterprises, Jerusalem Plates, Maps and Printing by Keterpress Enterprises, Jerusalem

ISBN 978-965-406-256-5

© 2015 Staff Officer of Archaeology — Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in part, in any form without permission from the publisher.

[IV]

This book is dedicated to the memory of my teacher and friend, Prof. Yoram Tsafrir, of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, for his long-standing contribution to the advancement of archaeological research in Israel

[V]

[VI]

CONTENTS Preface 

IX

Abbreviations

XI

Chapter One: Historical and Archaeological Background

1

Chapter Two: Construction Phases

13

Chapter Three: Architectural Remains at the Site

35

Chapter Four: Architectural Elements and Stone Objects

223

Chapter Five: Pottery Vessels

263

Chapter Six: Oil Lamps and Lanterns 

321

Chapter Seven: Byzantine Glass Vessels and Windowpanes

335

Chapter Eight: Metal Artifacts

357

Chapter Nine: Tiles

377

Chapter Ten: Coin Catalogue

383

Gabriela Bijovsky and Ariel Berman

Bibliography

387

[VIII]

Preface During the Byzantine period, a new and previously unknown settlement movement developed and flourished in the Judean Desert and throughout the Land of Israel. Christian monasteries were established in the Judean Desert, in Jerusalem and its environs, and in many other parts of the Land of Israel, and were occupied by pilgrims and monks, most of whom came from the Christian world. Before this period, the Judean Desert was a largely abandoned region, home to nomadic shepherds who followed their flocks from place to place. The Bible portrayed the desert in negative terms: wilderness, wasteland, the land of the shadow of death, etc. In addition to the nomadic inhabitants known as Saracens, the area was filled with dozens of monasteries populated by thousands of monks, who were a major element in the flourishing of Christianity in the Land of Israel. Some of these monks gained important positions in the Christian religious establishment in Jerusalem and in other places. The beginnings of monasticism in the Land of Israel are associated with Hilarion of Thabatha (near Gaza), and Chariton of Iconium, who established monasteries in the first half of the fourth century CE. The first monks lived mostly in hermitages, in caves and rock shelters. Over time, monasteries were built, around which the cave-dwelling hermits congregated. This type of monastery is known as a laura. On Sundays the hermit monks would come to the monastery for prayer and a meal. Another type of monastery is the coenobium, in which monks lived a full communal life. In the fifth and sixth centuries CE, the establishment of monasteries increased dramatically, as did the number of monks living in the Judean Desert. One of the central figures was Euthymius, who was born in Melitene, capital of Armenia (present day Malatia, in central Anatolia) and came to the Holy Land in 406 CE. After years of wandering in the desert, he established a monastery, named after him, identified with the site of Khan el-Aḥmar, located in present-day Mishor Adummim. Cyril of Scythopolis, hagiographer of monastic life in the Judean Desert, tells of two monks who came to the monastery of Euthymius and became his disciples. One of these was Elias, from Provincia Arabia, and the other was Martyrius from Cappadocia. After a while, Martyrius left the monastery and settled in a cave, 4 kilometers to the west, where he established a monastery named after him. He later served in Jerusalem and was appointed Patriarch; and was replaced as head of the monastery of Martyrius by the monk Abba Paul. Researchers in past centuries identified Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ with the monastery of Martyrius, mentioned in the sources, because of their similar sounding names and its proximity to Khan el-Aḥmar. The excavations indeed revealed an inscription on a splendid reddish-colored tombstone: “Tomb of Paul, priest and archimandrite.” In the Life of Euthymius by Cyril of Scythopolis, Paul is named as having headed the monastery of Martyrius. Thus the researchers’ assumption that Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ is the monastery of Martyrius was proven unequivocally. Towards the end of the 1970s, when the town of Maʿale Adummim was being planned, a regional survey was performed and Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ was documented. My predecessor was unable to gauge the size and importance of the site and its potential for tourism, and could not stand up to the town’s developers and planners. He allowed them to surround the site with massive buildings, some with windows just a few meters from the refectory, in which one of the most splendid mosaics was found; and thus the fate of the site was sealed.

[IX]

Instead of being a tourist gem in a flourishing town, the site has become an architectural sore in the urban landscape. Dense construction around the site and the absence of appropriate parking areas have seriously impacted excavations, preservation, and the ability to develop the site for tourism. Despite the difficulties, we began lengthy excavations in 1981 until 1985, and over the years carried out preservation and restoration, and opened the site to the general public. Today the site is maintained by the Israel Nature and Parks Authority. Unfortunately, as a result of massive building around the site, many remains were damaged, particularly the agricultural areas from the Early Islamic period. Many people helped with this project, but the passage of time—an entire generation— has almost certainly resulted in entities and people who took part being overlooked and not mentioned here, for which I apologize. First of all, I would like to thank the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria; and the Israel Antiquities Authority and its director, Mr. Israel Hasson, and Mr. Beni Harpaz, the Chief Financial Officer. I would also like to thank Silvia Krapiwko, as well as the entire staff of the Israel Antiquities Authority for its daily assistance and support to the Judea and Samaria Publications unit. Thanks: to the Maʿale Adummim Municipality, and in particular to the mayor, Mr. Beni Kashriel, for his assistance in developing the tourist sites within the town— the monastery of Martyrius, the monastery of Euthymius, and the Good Samaritan Museum; to the Ministry of Housing and Construction; to Yahel Engineers Project Initiation Ltd.; and to the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, and curator Dudi Mevorach. I would like to thank those who helped with the excavations, restoration of the site, processing the material, and publication: the late Uri Dinur, Dr. Haim Goldfus, Dr. Lev Arie Kapitaikin, Dorit Kirschner, Gavri Banai, Hananya Hizmi, Muhamad Nasser (Abu Issa), Seif el-Din Hadad, Abed Aziz Rejub, Felix Portnov, Pavel Gertopsky, Tanya Slutsky, Anna Tsypin, Miriam Manukian, Leen Ritmeyer and Evi Gassner. Thanks to: Zeʾev Radovan, Shlomi Ammami, Assaf Peretz, Ronny Ben Haim, Lior Shapira, and Avraham Hay, who were responsible for photography; Yael Gorin-Rosen for her assistance with the glass report; Dr. Gabriela Bijovsky and Ariel Berman for identification of the coins; and to Tania Cohen, Dorit Gutreich, and Alina Pikovsky-Yoffe, who assisted with preparation of the material finds for publication. I would also like to express special appreciation to Prof. Rina Talgam, who helped research the mosaics, and to Dr. Leah Di Segni, who read the Greek inscriptions; and also to Keter Enterprises, especially Asaf Ben-Or and Tal Zeidani, and to the English style editor, Janet Barshalev. To conclude, special thanks to: Baruch Yuzefovsky, who helped with the excavations and the publication of the archaeological finds; Netta Mitki, who helped with the editing; Yoav Tzionit, senior curator of the Staff Office for Archaeology in Judea and Samaria, without whom this publication would not have come into being; and to the editor of this book, Ayelet Hashahar Malka, who, with endless persistence, steadfastness, and untiring hard work, has succeeded in bringing this difficult and complex book to publication. May they all be blessed.

Dr. Yitzhak Magen Head of Judea and Samaria Publications

[X]

ABBREVIATIONS AASOR

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

ADAJ

Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan

BAR

Biblical Archaeology Review

BASOR

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

CCSL

Corpus Christianorum Series Latina

DACL

Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie

DOP

Dumbarton Oaks Papers

ESI

Excavations and Surveys in Israel

GCS

Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte, Kirchenväter. Kommission der königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Leipzig.

ḤA

Ḥadashot Arkheologiyot

IAA

Israel Antiquities Authority

IEJ

Israel Exploration Journal

INJ

Israel Numismatic Journal

JPOS

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

JRA

Journal of Roman Archaeology

JSOT

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JSP

Judea and Samaria Publications

JSRF

Judea and Samaria Record Files, in the archive of Staff Officer Archaeology in Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria (unpublished).

LA

Liber Annuus

LCL

Loeb Classical Library

OC

Oriens Christianus

PEFA

Palestine Exploration Fund Annual

PEFQSt

Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement

PEQ

Palestine Exploration Quarterly

PG

Patrologiae cursus completus, Series Graeca

PL

Patrologiae cursus completus, Series Latina

QDAP

Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine

RB

Revue Biblique

ROC

Revue de l’Orient Chrétien

SRF

IAA Archive, British Mandate Scientific Record Files

SWP III

C.R. Conder and H.H. Kitchener, Survey of Western Palestine III: Judea, London 1883.

ZDMG

Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft

ZDPV

Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

[XI]

Herodotus

Herodotus, History (LCL), A.D. Godley (transl.), London 1946.

Itinerarium Itinerarium Burdigalense, P. Geyer and O. Kuntz (eds.), in Itineraria et alia Burdigalense geographica (CCSL 175), Turnhout 1965, pp. 1–26. Itinerarium Egeriae

Itinerarium Egeriae, E. Franceschini and R. Weber (eds.), in Itineraria et alia geographica (CCSL 175), Turnhout 1965, pp. 35–90.

Leimonarion

Joannes Moschus, Pratum spirituale (Leimonarion), J.P. Migne (ed.), PG 87.iii, Paris 1865, cols. 2847–3112.

Life of Abraamius

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of Abraamius, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 273–281.

Life of Cyriacus

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of Cyriacus, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 245–261.

Life of Euthymius

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of Euthymius, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 1–92.

Life of John

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of John the Hesychast, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 220–244.

Life of Sabas

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of Sabas, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 93–219.

Life of Theodosius

Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of Theodosius, in Lives of the Monks of Palestine, R.M. Price (transl.), Kalamazoo, Mich. 1991, pp. 262–268.

M

Mishnah

Pliny, NH

Pliny, Natural History II (LCL), H. Rackham (transl.), London 1942.

Procopius, Buildings

Procopius of Caesarea, Buildings VIII (LCL), H.B. Dewing (transl.), London 1961.

Vita Charitonis

Vita Charitonis, G. Garitte (ed.), “La Vie prémetaphrastique de S. Chariton,” Bulletin de l’Institut Historique Belge de Rome 21 (1941): 16–46.

Vita Constantini

Eusebius, Vita Constantini, I.A. Heikel (ed.), Über das Leben Constantins (GCS 7), Leipzig 1902.

Vita Hilarionis

Hieronymus, Vita sancti Hilarionis eremitae, J.P. Migne (ed.), PL 23, Paris 1883, cols. 29–54.

[XII]

}  

    

    



   

 

!





(



     



       

     

 



 





( 

 

 



 



( 







  



De



ad

Se

a

     









5

 



2.5

  







0













 



Km

Judean Desert monasteries.

!

[XIII]

Maʿale Adummim The monastery of Martyrius is located in the center of modern-day Maʿale Adummim, built at the edge of the Judean Desert, some 7 km east of Jerusalem. The name Maʿale Adummim (the ascent of Adummim) was mentioned twice in the Book of Joshua (15:7; 18:17). This was not the name of a settlement in ancient times; rather it was a geographic point—maʿale (ascent) between the area of the Tribe of Benjamin in the north and that of the Tribe of Judah in the south. The steep ascent is located midway on the ancient road between Jerusalem and Jericho. It was named Adummim because of the characteristic reddish color of the rocks there. At the ascent’s upper end is the site of the Good Samaritan Inn, named after the parable of the Good Samaritan in the New Testament (Luke 10:25–37). In the Second Temple period, a roadside inn was built, as was a palace that was probably erected by Herod. The site continued being settled from the Second Temple period until today. The city of Maʿale Adummim was built at the end of the 1970s, and today is large and lively, with a population of over 40,000. The beginnings of the city of Maʿale Adummim, with the Judean hills in the background.

Historical and Archaeological Background

Chapter One

Historical and Archaeological Background

Cyril of Scythopolis (Beth Shean), who wrote the annals of the fathers of monasticism in the Judean Desert, Martyrius settled in a cave, around which the monastery bearing his name was built. In 473 CE he left there to serve in the “Church of Jerusalem,” that is, the Church of the Anastasis, presently known as the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. In 478–486 CE he served as Patriarch of Jerusalem (Life of Euthymius 32, 51; 42, 62; Life of Sabas 15, 98; 18–19, 103). The site, known as Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ, is located in the center of the present-day city of Maʿale Adummim (ITM 22840/63180); it was excavated intermittently between 1979 and 2006 (Magen and Hizmi 1985; Magen and Talgam 1990; Magen 1993; see also Damati 2002). Covering some 10 dunams, the site is strategically located on a flat hilltop overlooking the Jerusalem–Dead Sea road, and had been surrounded by agricultural areas irrigated with water transported by channels from the numerous cisterns cut in the monastery and its close surroundings (Figs. 1–3). The site was described by various surveyors beginning in the nineteenth century (Tobler 1854: 753–765; Marti 1880: 28–29; SWP III: 121–122; Magen and Finkelstein 1993: 396–397, no. 520). The first to identify Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ with the monastery of Martyrius was the scholar J.P. Van Kasteren (1890: 84–90); this identification was later confirmed by excavations at the site. The monastery is of the coenobium type (Hirschfeld 1992: 33–47). It is composed of two parts: a walled fortified compound (77×64.5 m); and a pilgrim hospice (42×26 m), erected outside the compound, which contained everything needed by Christian pilgrims: stables, residential halls, and a chapel (Fig. 4). In addition to the monastery phases (IIA and IIB), two building phases were discerned at the site: a Roman military structure, prior to the construction of the monastery;

The Christian monastic movement in the Land of Israel began in the Byzantine period in the fourth century CE and continued to the eighth century CE (Vailhé 1900; Leclercq 1929; Chitty 1966; Hirschfeld 1992; Patrich 1995). Hilarion of Thabatha (near Gaza), and Chariton of Iconium (in Asia Minor) were among the founding fathers of the monastic movement in the Land of Israel. Hilarion founded a monastery near Gaza in 330 CE. In that same period Chariton founded three lauras: Pharan in 330 CE, Douka (Deir el-Qurunṭul) in 340 CE, and Souka (the Old Laura) in 345 CE (For Hilarion’s hagiography by Hieronymus, see Vita Hilarionis; see also Bitton-Ashkelony and Kofsky 2006: 8–15. For Chariton’s hagiography, written by an anonymous monk, see Vita Charitonis; see also Di Segni 1990a. For the lauras, see Hirschfeld 1992: 21–24, 228–232). They were followed by Euthymius, who was born in 377 CE in Melitene, capital of Armenia (presentday Malatia, in central Anatolia; Di Segni 2005: 76, note 16). In 406 CE, aged 29, Euthymius made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, and settled near the laura of Pharan (Life of Euthymius 6, 14). In 428 CE he founded a laura, which was converted into a coenobium after his death (Chitty 1928; 1930; 1932; Meimaris 1989; Hirschfeld 1993). He lived a long life, had many disciples, and was one of the most important figures in the history of Judean Desert monasticism (for Euthymius’ hagiography, see Life of Euthymius; see also: Di Segni 2005 18–21, 73–139). Three of his most important pupils were Gabriel, Elias, and Martyrius. Gabriel and Martyrius came from Cappadocia, Elias from Provincia Arabia, established by Trajan in 106 CE (Life of Euthymius 16, 25; 32, 51; for Provincia Arabia, see Tsafrir 1983; 1986). The three initially resided in the monastery of Euthymius (in present-day Mishor Adummim), later establishing monasteries in different locations. According to

[1]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 1. Aerial photograph of Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ, the monastery of Martyrius, view from the north.

Fig. 2. Aerial photograph of Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ, view from the east.

[2]

Historical and Archaeological Background

4

5

7

6

3

2

1

8

9 0

20 m

1. Church 2. “Chapel of the Three Priests” 3. Built cistern 4. Late Roman bathhouse 5. Early Islamic building 6. Kitchen 7. Refectory 8. Stables area 9. Hospice

Fig. 3. General plan of the site.

[3]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 4. Aerial photograph of Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ, the compound and the hospice to its northeast, view from the north.

clearly, by second sight, that they were going to succeed to the see of St. James the Apostle, each in his turn. He used to take them with him to the desert of Coutila and Roubâ on 14 January; they would stay with him there till Palm Sunday, in the company of the famous Gerasimus and the other anchorites, who came each Sunday and partook of the spotless sacrament from the hands of the great Euthymius. Since the cells of the laura were extremely cramped and uncomfortable, the great Euthymius having ordered them to be built this way, after a year Elias went down to Jericho and built himself a cell outside the city, where his holy and celebrated monasteries are now situated, while Martyrius, having found a cave about fifteen stades to the west of the laura, lived in it as a solitary and there with God’s help founded a most celebrated monastery (Life of Euthymius 32).

and an Early Islamic farmhouse, after the monastery’s abandonment. The monastery is first mentioned in the Life of Euthymius, by Cyril of Scythopolis. This composition, written decades after Euthymius’ death, was probably based on writings found in different libraries and in the memoirs of various monks, so that Cyril’s statements should be not be taken at face value. He writes: Two archimandrites left Mount Nitria and journeyed to Palestine. They came to the miracleworking Euthymius, drawn by the report that circulated everywhere about him, and settled with him, each in his own cell. One of them was of Cappadocian stock and called Martyrius, while the other was called Elias and stemmed from Arabia. The mentally enlightened Euthymius took exceedingly to these two and frequently invited them to come and see him, since he foresaw

[4]

Historical and Archaeological Background

Fig. 5. Aerial photograph of Khan el-Aḥmar, the monastery of Euthymius, view from the east.

Martyrius came to the monastery of Euthymius in ca. 457 CE, and left after a while. Cyril relates that after Euthymius’ death in 473 CE, the archbishop Anastasius arrived at the monastery of Euthymius, and after the synaxis, took Martyrius and Elias to Jerusalem and ordained them as priests of the Church of the Anastasis (Life of Euthymius 42, 62). Five years later Martyrius was appointed Patriarch of Jerusalem, filling this post until his death in 486 CE (Life of Euthymius 43, 62). Cyril, in his portrayal of the dedication of the monastery of Euthymius and its transformation from a laura to a coenobium in 482 CE (Fig. 5), also describes the monastery of Martyrius as active, with beasts of burden. He writes:

there had been little rain in the desert itself and the cistern had not received water. May had already begun, and as those with long experience of it know, this desert is scarcely watered even in winter and there was therefore no reasonable expectation of rain. Being totally at a loss, Elias the superior and Fidus the deacon asked Abba Longinus of the lower monastery and Abba Paul, superior of the monastery of Martyrius, to send the animals of both communities, so that, together with the animals of our monastery, they might convey water from Pharan (Life of Euthymius 44, 65; Figs. 6–7). Martyrius, who was already Patriarch of Jerusalem, headed a procession to consecrate the monastery of Euthymius (Life of Euthymius 44, 66). How, then, is the narrative by Cyril connected with the monastery at Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ? A Greek inscription on a magnificent tombstone discovered in the monastery martyrium (the crypt of the monastery abbots), adjoining the church, reads: “Tomb of Paul, priest and archimandrite” (Fig. 8). Paul, according to Cyril, was the archimandrite of the monastery of Martyrius in

The building and decoration of the cenobium [monastery of Euthymius] was completed in only three years, thanks to the number and speed of the builders. The fathers wished to consecrate the church and cenobium on the very day on which the precious remains of our holy father had been translated and placed in the new burial vault. But they were in straits because they had no water;

[5]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

482 CE, when a coenobium built in the monastery of Euthymius replaced the previous laura. When was the monastery of Martyrius built? The amount of time spent by Martyrius in Euthymius’ monastery cannot be determined with certainty. Y. Hirschfeld arbitrarily gives 465 CE as the date for the establishment of Martyrius’ monastery (Hirschfeld 1990: 20); according to this, Martyrius spent some eight years with Euthymius, and an additional eight years in the new monastery that he had founded. Did he build the church and the other parts of the monastery during these eight years? Or were they built between 473 CE and 482 CE, after Martyrius had left and was appointed priest in the Church of the Anastasis? In any event, in 482 CE the monastery existed and contained stables. It could be argued that Martyrius’ high office in Jerusalem enabled him to aid in financing the construction of the monastery that bears his name; but it is unlikely that as a novice he would have succeeded in raising the large sums of money needed for erecting such a magnificent monastery. Based on an architectural analysis of the structure, we suggest

Fig. 6. Water cistern at the monastery of Euthymius.

Fig. 7. ʿEin Fara, the monastery of Pharan, view from the north.

[6]

Historical and Archaeological Background

that Martyrius did not live in a cave at the site, as Cyril proposes, but rather resided in a Roman structure, one of a series of fortresses built in southern Samaria, the southern Hebron Hills, and the Judean desert in the fourth century CE, in the time of Emperor Theodosius I or his son, Emperor Arcadius (Magen 2008a; 2008b). The monastery of Euthymius might too have originally been a Roman structure in which Euthymius settled with his monks. It could hardly be assumed that Martyrius, who according to Cyril had left Euthymius’ monastery because of its cramped living quarters (Di Segni 2005: 112, note 184), would live in a cave in the arid desert, without a water source nearby. There were a number of caves in the monastery of Martyrius, but they were not habitable. It is more plausible that he lived in an already existing Roman military structure, which explains the site’s strategic location on a hill overlooking the desert’s edge and a section of the Jerusalem–Dead Sea road (Har-El 1978; 1980: 138–147; Sion 1991). It is our view that Martyrius settled in a Roman military structure that had been a defense against Saracen penetration from the desert’s edge to settled regions, especially Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity (Fig. 9). The addition of

Fig. 8. Tombstone bearing the name of Paul, abbot of the monastery.

Fig. 9. Aerial photograph of Kh. el-Muraṣṣaṣ, with Jerusalem in the background, view from the east.

[7]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

mentioned by Cyril. He was later appointed abbot (hegemon) of the Nea Church in Jerusalem, which was dedicated in 543 CE (Life of Sabas 86, 193). John the eunuch’s appointment first as abbot of the monastery of Martyrius, and afterwards as abbot of the Nea Church, is surprising. Eunuchs and young, beardless youths were not accepted in lauras because their faces looked feminine and might therefore arouse lascivious thoughts. Euthymius refused to accept the young Sabas to his laura, sending him to a coenobium; and Sabas himself did not accept beardless youths to his monastery. Cyril further tells of monastery abbots who refused to accept eunuchs to their monasteries (Life of Sabas 69). Castration is a sin in Christianity, unless congenital or caused accidentally (Di Segni 2005: 202, note 288). Consequently, it is unclear how John the eunuch attained his standing. An additional archimandrite of the monastery of Martyrius was Genesius, who is mentioned in two inscriptions found in the monastery, one in the church, the other in the refectory. The former inscription reads: “In the days of our pious father Genesius, priest and archimandrite, also this work was done, for the remembrance and rest of our pious (or: blessed) fathers John, John…” The inscription found in the refectory’s east, near its entrance, reads: “In the days of our pious father Genesius, priest and archimandrite, this work too was done, for the salvation of himself and this community in Christ. It was completed on the fourth [day] of the month of March of the first indiction.” The indiction was a period of 15 years between property assessments of the empire’s inhabitants for tax purposes. We know from various sources that the first years of the indiction cycles began in: 522/3, 537/8, 552/3, 567/8, 582/3 CE, etc. The inscriptions were published by L. Di Segni, who, based on paleographic considerations, dates them to 567/8 or 582/3 CE (Di Segni 1990b: 153– 155, 158–159, inscriptions nos. 2, 6). We reject dating the IIB phase of the monastery to the time of Justin II (565–578 CE) or Tiberius II (578–582 CE), and ascribe its construction to 552/3 CE, late in Justinian’s reign (527–565 CE). The re-establishment of the Martyrius monastery corresponds with the general building trend in Justinian’s time. Major building projects, including the construction of large cisterns in many

a massive rolling stone at the monastery entrance in the first phase of its establishment (IIA) demonstrates that the monastery suffered Saracen attacks from the late fifth century CE until its abandonment (Magen 2008b: 242, note 8). Paul was apparently the first archimandrite to succeed the founder, Martyrius. He also filled another position as deputy to Theodosius, who was appointed abbot of all the coenobiums. Cyril relates: …all the monks of the desert, assembling in the presence of Patriarch Sallustius (who was ill) and being of one mind, elected the great Theodosius by unanimous vote archimandrite of the cenobia subject to the holy city, in the place of Gerontius of the monasteries of blessed Melania. They appointed as his deputy the sainted Paul, superior of the monastery of Abba Martyrius (Life of Theodosius 4, 239; Cyril again mentions this in Life of Sabas 30, 115). An additional abbot of the monastery of Martyrius mentioned by Cyril was Domitian (Life of Sabas 83, 188). Judean Desert monasticism underwent a severe religious crisis in the early sixth century CE, with a harsh struggle waged between Christians who supported the teachings of Origen and those who opposed them (Life of Sabas 83–90; Life of Cyriacus 12–14). The Origenist monks succeeded in dominating the Great Laura, known today as Deir Mar Saba (Fig. 10; Life of Sabas 87–88; see also Patrich 1995: 57–107), the laura of Firminus located in Wadi Suweinit (Life of Sabas 83, 188; 89, 197), and the monastery of Martyrius; and disseminated their doctrine to the other Judean Desert monasteries. Domitian, abbot of the monastery of Martyrius, and Theodore Ascidas, from the New Laura led this campaign. It is unknown whether Domitian succeeded Paul as monastery abbot, or whether there was another intervening abbot. Following Justinian’s rise to power, the Byzantine authorities dealt a heavy blow to the Origenists, including Domitian, who was expelled from the Holy Land and appointed head of the church in Galatia. He eventually abandoned his faith, and died in Constantinople as a non-Christian (Life of Sabas 85, 192). John the eunuch was an additional monastery abbot and archimandrite of the monastery of Martyrius

[8]

Historical and Archaeological Background

Fig. 10. Deir Mar Saba, view from the southeast.

[9]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

in 614 CE (Baras 1982); and was finally abandoned during the Arab conquest in 638 CE. It was populated in the Early Islamic period, but not as a Christian religious structure. A pottery jug discovered in one of the monastic cells south of the church contained five coins. The latest coins were dated to the first years of the reign of Heraclius (610–641 CE), prior to the Persian conquest of the Land of Israel: one to 611–613 CE, and the other to 612/613 CE. Of the remaining coins, two are dated to the reign of Justine II, one to 567/568 CE, and the other to 573/574 CE. The final coin is dated to 586/587 CE, during the reign of Mauricius. An additional coin of Heraclius, dated to 613–618 CE, was found in room L227, adjacent to the church, but we should accept the earlier dating (613 CE), one year before the Persian conquest of the Land of Israel. As the monastery’s population consisted mainly of foreigners who had come from other lands in the Byzantine Empire, the monastery was abandoned immediately upon the Arab conquest of the Land of Israel; but there were many monasteries that continued to exist as Christian religious sites even in the Early Islamic period. In the Early Islamic period a farmhouse was built over the monastery ruins. It utilized the numerous cisterns in and around the site and remained active. Some of the cisterns continued to serve the Bedouin population until recently. The monastery might have served as the source for columns, marble pieces, tiles, and tesserae used in the construction of Hisham’s Palace in Jericho. Why one monastery or settlement was abandoned after the Arab conquest of the Land of Israel, while another continued to exist as a Christian site, as can be learned from the iconoclastic destruction conducted following the edict issued by Yazid II in 721 CE (Brooks 1897: 584; Vasiliev 1956; Grabar 1973: 89), is one of the complex issues for which a satisfactory answer has not always been found. A possible explanation may be found in the origin of the monastery or settlement population. Monasteries and settlements with indigenous populations continued, while those with populations from abroad were abandoned. The indigenous populations that had converted to Christianity when it was proclaimed the official religion in the Roman Empire had

monasteries, were undertaken during that period, e.g., the Nea Church in Jerusalem, Mt. Gerizim, Deir Qalʿa, and en-Nebi Samwil (Procopius, Buildings V, 7.16; 8–9). An inscription with the name of Justinian was discovered at Deir Qaʿla (Di Segni 2012). Five additional monks are mentioned in inscriptions unearthed in the monastery. It is unclear why they merited burial in the monastery, with their names written in the mosaics. They were buried not in the martyrium, where the priest and archimandrite Paul was laid to rest, but in another grave; this hints that while they were not among the abbots of the monastery, they made a major contribution to it and were afforded special honor within its bounds. Three priests are mentioned in an inscription in the “Chapel of the Three Priests”: Elpidius, John, and George. They are mentioned a second time, in an inscription in the portico above the cave in the north central wing of the monastery, and it appears that this cave was their burial place. In the church, an inscription speaks of two priests named John, and the question arises if one is the same John mentioned with two other priests in the “Chapel of the Three Priests” and in the portico above the cave. At any rate, the priests mentioned in these inscriptions lived in the late sixth century CE, and the inscriptions are to be attributed to the monastery’s second building phase (IIB; Di Segni 1990b: 153–161, inscriptions nos. 2, 5, 7). The last mention of the monastery in historical sources is found in the Life of Euthymius, describing an event dated to the decade that Cyril spent in the monastery of Euthymius, beginning in 544 CE. Cyril tells of a monk named Paul from the monastery of Martyrius, who came from the village of Tomessus in the first province of Cilicia. Paul, who had stolen funds from the monastery of Martyrius, was brought, sick, to the monastery of Euthymius. The spirit of Euthymius appeared before him. Paul confessed his crime, promised to sin no more, and was cured (Life of Euthymius 50). Paul’s misappropriation of funds might be connected with the extensive renovations conducted in the monastery at the end of the first half of the sixth century CE, when large sums of money were available there to pay for construction expenses. Apparently, the monastery of Martyrius was initially damaged and abandoned, during the Persian conquest

[10]

Historical and Archaeological Background

discovered in the various monasteries and their surroundings. If we assume that over the course of about 170 years, a monastery like that of Martyrius was inhabited at any one time by some 60 people, who in large part had come to the monastery as young adults, then we could expect to find hundreds of graves. We know that burial was permissible within the monastery and that multiple interments in a common grave was a common practice in the monasteries, as seen in the Martyrius monastery’s martyrium. However, the number of burials in the Martyrius monastery was small, and does not reflect the number of monks resident there. While it could be argued that monks were given a simple burial (unmarked earthen graves) around the monastery, no evidence of this has been found. This suggests a considerable movement and constant turnover of the monks; perhaps at an advanced age many left both their monasteries and the Land of Israel, returning to their families and places of origin, and being buried there. During the Persian conquest in 614 CE and the Arab conquest in 638 CE, many monks apparently did this too.

nowhere to flee when the Arab conquest began. They remained on their land, and even flourished under Islamic rule, renovating and building new monasteries and churches. The Samaritans and Jews also remained and flourished. However, priests or monks in the monasteries and settlements who had come from abroad and had families there, almost certainly fled to their countries of origin. There are reports that the Byzantine authorities provided them with boats, allowing them to escape the horrors of the Arab invasion (Levy-Rubin 2006). Many of the monasteries in the southern Hebron Hills, with a mainly local population, continued to exist in the Early Islamic period. By contrast, monasteries close to the Mediterranean coast, in the Judean Desert, or in southern Samaria were abandoned (Magen 2012a: 62–64). Cyril writes that most of the monks came from other lands, only a few being indigenous. There was a large population turnover in the monasteries, with monks, regardless of whether they were foreigners or locals, not living in a particular monastery until their deaths. This is evident from the number of burials

[11]

Construction Phases

Chapter Two

Construction Phases

Hills. Following the discoveries in these areas, we sought to determine if such Roman construction existed at the monastery of Martyrius, as well. Early publications on the site did not mention a construction phase preceding the establishment of the monastery. This phase is difficult to detect at the site, and also in other monasteries, since it is distinguished from the monastery phase solely on the basis of stratigraphic and architectural considerations, such as the type of construction, the dressing of the stones, the plaster, and the mosaic floors, and not on the basis of finds. However, it seems that the entire compound, including the structure outside it that served as a hospice in the Byzantine period, were already built in this phase. The monastery exhibits two phases, IIA and IIB, which were differentiated on the basis of stratigraphic data and on stylistic analysis of the mosaic floors. In phase IIA a small monastery was built on less than half the area of the Roman compound. Phase IIB marked the peak of construction at the site and of the Byzantine monastery. Finally, we will discuss the Early Islamic phase III within the compound. This is a settlement phase in monastic sites that has not been properly distinguished and understood. New excavations revealed that it is present in most of the monasteries in Samaria and Judea (Magen 2008d). The agricultural area surrounding the monastery is ascribed to the Early Islamic period as well, and will be described in detail in the following chapter. The phenomenon of the establishment of monasteries inside structures from earlier periods is important for understanding the history of the monastery’s construction. Viewing the monastery structures in the southern Samaria, in northern Judea, and in southern Hebron Hills, we wonder how the fledgling monastic movement, lacking in means, succeeded in establishing hundreds of

Three main building phases were discerned at the site, in each of which the structure and its function underwent major changes. In the site’s first and last phases (phases I and III), the site did not function as a monastery. In phase I it was a Roman military structure (late fourth–early fifth century CE), and in phase III (Early Islamic period), it functioned as a farmhouse. The monastery phase (phase II) began in the second half of the fifth century CE and ended in the first half of the seventh century CE. This phase is further divided into two subphases: phase IIA, from the second half of the fifth century CE to the first half of the sixth century CE, spanning some 80 years; and phase IIB, which lasted for about 90 years, from the second half of the sixth century CE to the Arab conquest in 638 CE. Each phase of the site will be described separately, emphasizing the main points for understanding the site’s development. This general description will lack the details given and clarified in the description of each area in the following chapter. Many areas were not fully excavated. The beds of the mosaics and stone floors were not always excavated, to avoid damaging the floors, so that the remains of early building construction were not revealed. Duplications and repetitions in the phase and area descriptions are unavoidable, due to the complexity of the compound, its size, and the many changes introduced. We will begin the description of the compound from the stratum of phase I, late fourth–early fifth century CE, which preceded the monastery’s establishment. Due to the massive construction of phases IIA and IIB, only some of the phase I remains were preserved and an understanding of them depends on our understanding of the later construction phases. Military structures from the late fourth–early fifth century CE that preceded the establishment of monasteries have been identified and excavated at many sites, in the southern Samaria, in northern Judea, and in southern Hebron

[13]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

is implausible. If the laura cells of the monastery of Euthymius were cramped and uncomfortable, this would surely have been the case for a cave in a desolate and waterless region. As Cyril wrote his Life of Euthymius about a century after the events described, his narrative of Martyrius’ settling in a cave has a poor, if any, historical foundation. Settlement by monks in the Judean Desert in abandoned structures from earlier periods is well known from both archaeological excavations and historical sources. The monks sought abandoned structures with cisterns that would enable immediate residence. We know of monasteries and churches built in fortresses from the Second Temple period, such as Hyrcania (Castellion), Dok (Douka), Herodion, Marda (Masada), and others. Our research reveals that monks settled in military structures constructed in the late fourth–early fifth century CE. These structures were given to the monks gratis by the authorities. This phenomenon, newly discovered in the archaeology of the Land of Israel, was already known in Syria (Hirschfeld 1992: 49). The briefness of the period between the erection of the fortresses (late fourth–early fifth century CE) and the establishment of the monasteries (beginning in the mid-fifth century CE) precluded a clear archaeological distinction, based on the finds. Fifty years or less is too short a period for a clear archaeological division at any site, especially in the absence of any dramatic historical event that could have influenced and sharpened the division, such as conquest, destruction, and regime change. Moreover, the early phase of the compounds (late fourth–early fifth century CE) yielded meager archaeological finds, since when the army left its camps, they did not leave behind finds, such as pottery or glass vessels, etc. No dramatic change was registered in the architecture and material culture of the Land of Israel from the beginning to the middle of the fifth century CE. The distinction between the early structure and the monastery later established within it could be made more easily for monasteries incorporated in Second Temple period fortresses. In such structures there is a clearer division between the Byzantine and Second Temple period construction and the archaeological finds. Settlement in Roman military structures was convenient for many reasons. First, these stateowned

monasteries of monumental architectural structure, with tremendous cisterns. Furthermore, when considering these monasteries, we are even more puzzled by their location in outlying areas, on remote hills, close to secondary roads, and on hilltops, far from sources of water and settled areas. The intensity of monastery construction in the early phase runs counter to the nature of monasticism and the limited means at the monks’ disposal. More modest monasteries could have been built, and in more convenient locations. Why would it have been necessary to build large monasteries with massive construction that met military standards? How could the monks, fundamentally modest individuals who made do with little in both their diet and way of life, suddenly have needed such monumental and ostentatious construction, which can often clearly be seen as unjustified? An additional question is: who financed the tremendous construction undertakings of nascent monasticism? In the sixth century CE, the extensive construction activity in monasteries was financed by Justinian and his successors; but how are we to explain the construction activity in the early stages of Christianity and of monasticism in the Land of Israel? We attempted to answer some of these questions in two articles on the fortresses and towers in the Hebron Hills, northern Judea, and southern Samaria (Magen 2008a: 206–211; 2008b: 237–241). Contemporary scholars’ assumption that early monks longed for the desert is an after-the-fact attribution; and does not explain the intensity of the monastery construction activity (Hirschfeld 2004). It could hardly be assumed that the monks, many of whom came from settled regions and cities in the west of the Roman Empire, would suddenly want to live in the desert, in hot regions that lacked water and the minimal means of existence. The phenomenon of the establishment of monasteries in Roman military structures is characteristic not only of the areas mentioned above, but also of the monasteries in the Judean Desert. This phenomenon may explain the location of the monastery of Martyrius on a high hill that controls the road between Jerusalem and the northern Dead Sea. As mentioned in the previous chapter, we believe that the report by Cyril, in which Martyrius left the monastery of Euthymius due to serious overcrowding, and dwelt in a cave,

[14]

Construction Phases

247–250). These phenomena are also known from sites in Transjordan (Piccirillo 1987: 405, Tav. 70:1; Hamarneh and Manacorda 1996: 408, Tav. 39, Fig. 14; Al-Zaben 2001: 367, Tav. 28:2–3). Coming to the aid of a monastery that found itself under attack was easier than garrisoning it with tens of soldiers. Thus, populating these military structures with monks aided the Roman army in guarding remote areas no less than it provided the monks with suitable sites for settlement. Significantly, rolling stones were not installed in monasteries established in Samaria and in the interior of the land, with the exception of the monastery at Kh. el-Kiliya, which apparently was exposed to attacks by the Saracens (Magen 2012b). The populating of Roman structures in the Judean Desert began in the first half of the fifth century CE, initiated by the monastic establishment, with the consent and help of the military and ecclesiastical establishments. The Roman authorities transferred fortresses in the Judean Desert, some of which might already have been abandoned at the time, to the monks, who slowly began to populate them. A similar action was taken in Samaria and in the southern Hebron Hills much later, in the sixth century CE, apparently upon the initiative of Justinian after the repression of the Samaritan uprisings. The construction of monasteries in the Judean Desert in the early stages of monasticism could not have been based on donations from the local population, which probably would have preferred building churches for itself rather than investing in remote monasteries. Furthermore, the fact that few churches were built in villages and towns in the first half of the fifth century CE indicates that the Christian population was not large at this time. In addition, in the early phases of the monastic movement, most of the monks came from abroad, and it is unlikely that such close bonds were forged with the local population that the latter would have invested heavily in the establishment of the monasteries. This was probably the case in the later phases of the Byzantine period, as well. In the Byzantine period, we do not find private or monumental public construction in the villages and towns in Judea and Samaria, indicating that the small and poor Christian population could not underwrite the establishment of the first monasteries built in the region. Nor does it seem that the ecclesiastical

structures were given gratis to the monks for settlement. The monasteries were probably established under the state’s aegis, and some were built upon its initiative and with governmental funding (Magen 2012a: 40, note 306). The monasteries were distant from existing settlements, enabling the monks to live a secluded, ascetic life. They were not built on private lands that would have had to be purchased. In most instances, they were protected by a fortified wall and tower. These structures contained an abundance of easily available building stones for erecting churches and dwellings for the monks, as well as large wellconstructed cisterns, necessary for life in the desert. Cyril relates that Euthymius found an old cistern at Marda that he restored and prepared for use (Life of Euthymius 11, 22). In his account of the construction of the monastery of Castellion (El-Mird, Hyrcania), as well, Cyril relates how the monks built a monastery at an abandoned Second Temple period site. The site was purified and cleaned before construction of the monastic cells was begun (Life of Sabas 27, 110–111). Following the Samaritan revolts (Avi-Yonah 1956; Di Segni 2002; Magen 2008e: 51–55) and the reduction in the army’s size in the time of Justinian (Dan 1982: 414), it was worthwhile for the Byzantine authorities, probably compelled to abandon many of the fortresses that had been built, to transfer them to the monks. Additionally, we do not believe that most of the fortresses were in intensive, daily use by the Roman army. The fortresses that provided protection against the Saracens or Samaritans and supervision of crown lands in the fourth century did not have permanent garrisons, and certainly did not contain large military forces (Magen 2008f). The settlement by monks constituted a passive line of defense: any harm to them at the hands of the Saracens on the desert’s edge or the Samaritans in southern Samaria would warn the army and set it into motion. Despite the establishment of the monasteries, the security problems that had led to the construction of the fortresses were not resolved, and even intensified, because the structures now housed a civilian population, incapable of defending itself, rather than a military force. The large number of rolling stones installed in monasteries at the desert’s edge attests to this (Magen 2008a: 183; 2008b: 234–235; 2012c: 215; Magen, Har-Even and Sharukh 2012:

[15]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

opinion, the church was located on the second story of the monastery of Euthymius because the latter was built in a Roman military structure. A church’s establishment on the second story is a known phenomenon in monasteries established in fourth century CE Roman fortresses, e.g., Kh. el-Kiliya and Kh. Deir Samʿan (Magen 2012b: 265–266; 2012d: 29–30). The present church in the monastery of Euthymius was built in the Early Islamic period and renovated in the Crusader period. It is unclear whether it was established in the same location as the Byzantine church. Some of the vaults supporting the church are post-Byzantine. Why were the churches in the monasteries built with a chapel-like plan and on the second story? Was this due to the modesty of the monks, who preferred small and intimate chapels rather than large basilica churches? Or was this a consequence of the sparse resources available? Establishing a basilica church would have required skilled craftsmen, quarrying columns, and their transport to the location, at times over very rough routes, and a great financial investment and construction effort. For some of the monasteries, these explanations might be valid; but for other monasteries, built in Roman compounds, including the monastery of Martyrius, the issue is somewhat more complex, and in most instances is related to the physical constraints of building in an already-existing structure. In monasteries established in Roman military structures, it is understandable why the church was built on the second story, or with a small, single longitudinal hall. In Kh. Deir Samʿan, as a church built in the compound courtyard would have blocked the entrances to the rooms, it was built on the second story. The same is true of the church at Kh. el-Kiliya. In Kh. Umm Deimine, Rujm Jureida, and Qaṣr Khalife, the chapels built in early Roman structures were situated in the structures’ wings, due to those same constraints (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 440–442; Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012a: 410; Magen 2012c: 212). In Deir Qalʿa, the chapel was built in the courtyard: the courtyard was large enough, and construction in one of the wings would have harmed the stability of the outer walls of the entire compound. North of the chapel, an additional chapel was built over an existing structure (Magen and Aizik

establishment or central government were capable of allocating vast sums for erecting monumental structures in remote locations on behalf of a handful of monks. The large monasteries in southern Samaria, the Hebron Hills, and the Judean Desert, e.g., the monastery of Martyrius, began as Roman military structures and were given to the monks, who then populated them. In the Byzantine period the existing structures underwent renovations, whether major or minor, by the monks. A common characteristic of monasteries established in existing structures is the church location and plan. From the late fourth century CE churches were typically basilical in plan, including a central hall, two aisles, a narthex, and sometimes, an atrium. The first basilical churches were built by Constantine and Helena (Vita Constantini III, 25–43; Itinerarium Burdigalense 596, 3–4; 598, 6–7). It might be assumed that the monastery churches would be built along these lines. However, most of the monasteries excavated or surveyed contained churches that were not basilical; rather, they had a chapel-like plan, i.e., a single longitudinal hall with an apse and a narthex. Hirschfeld writes that basilica churches hardly exist in Judean Desert monasteries, in contrast with their large numbers in settlements in the Land of Israel. He reports of the existence of a basilical memorial church at Qaṣr ʿAli, in which Schneider identified the monastery of St. Peter (Hirschfeld 1992: 130; see also Schneider 1934: 221–223). A renewed examination revealed no evidence of a basilica church or a monastery at the site (Magen and Kagan 2012: 309–310, no. 163). At Umm el-ʿAmed, Hirschfeld initially attributed the basilica church discovered there to a monastery. In a later publication he retracted his identification of the site as a monastic complex (Hirschfeld 1985: 86–89, no. 69; 1992: 273, note 19). Although the monastery of Scholarius, on top of Jebel Munṭar, yielded columns possibly belonging to a basilica church, there is no proof that a basilical church was built there (Patrich 1983: 66; 1994: 53–54, no. 43). A large church of this type was only found in the monastery of Euthymius, on the second story, and is to be dated to a late period; this church’s plan in the Byzantine period has not been determined (Chitty 1928; 1930; 1932; Meimaris 1989). In our

[16]

Construction Phases

have expected had the construction of the church and compound been contemporary. The church’s location above a cistern that should have been in the courtyard proves that the phase IIA church was incorporated in an existing structure, and that its location above the cistern was a planning constraint. The gate with a rolling stone, discovered in the south of the compound’s central courtyard, is not related to the outer gates of the compound, and reduces the compound’s area. The Roman compound in which the monastery was built was too large to suit the needs of the small group of monks who settled there in phase IIA. The monks therefore preferred to build the monastery on less than half of the compound area. The church was erected in the east wing of the site to prevent harming the compound’s central courtyard and to allow entry to the rooms. The location of the monastery’s main entrance on its northeast is uncharacteristic of monumental RomanByzantine structures. If the site had been planned from the outset as a monastery, the entrance would probably have been on the west, facing the church facade, not adjoining the back of it. The early gates of the phase I compound are in the southern and eastern walls, and do not relate to the location of the church. Another structure that was not characteristic of other monasteries was unearthed at the site, the bathhouse. Water is precious in the desert, and it can hardly be assumed that the ascetic monks would have built a bathhouse for their physical pleasure. Bathhouses in proximity to churches were found at Mt. Gerizim, Kursi, and at an additional monastery on Mt. Scopus (Magen 2008c: 265–266, Fig. 370; Sudilovsky 2003; Amit, Seligman and Zilberbod 2000). We believe that none of these bathhouses were integral to the Byzantine-Christian phase of those sites. Based on the archaeological and architectural data, we assume that the bathhouse discovered on the west of the compound belonged to the compound’s Roman phase. Based on a renewed analysis of the remains discovered in the monastery of Martyrius, we suggest the existence of a building phase that preceded the establishment of the monastery. This phase is dated to the late fourth–early fifth century CE.

2012: 132–145). Hirschfeld writes of the diversities in structure of the chapels in monasteries: their location, position of the entrance, narthex dimensions, courtyard dimensions, and apse type (Hirschfeld 1992: 112–117, especially Fig. 52). This lack of uniformity was caused by the need to suit the chapel to the existing structure, which varied. In settlements, roadside churches that served travelers, and memorial churches, the churches were usually basilical or octagonal in plan; while in monasteries, chapels or small churches were commonly built on the second story. Unlike plans for a new church, those for churches in most of the monasteries were limited by the architectural constraints of construction in an existing structure, with the consequent need to compromise on the church’s structure and plan. This is an important distinction between monastery churches and other churches that served a larger population. In the monastery of Martyrius a small church was built in phase IIA. The church had the plan of a chapel, as is typical in monasteries established in Roman compounds. The church plan and location were dictated by the above-mentioned considerations for building within an existing compound, i.e., building and financial constraints. In phase IIB the church complex was significantly expanded, while retaining the church plan. In this phase, as a large basilica-plan refectory with columns was built, no technical or financial reason would have prevented construction of a basilica church; nonetheless, the monks preferred to erect one with a single longitudinal hall. The early church’s western section functioned as the narthex of the phase IIB church. The construction of a chapel-like church in phase IIB was not the result of limited financial means, a lack of space, or other, religious reasons; rather it ensued from the desire to retain the early church’s original plan. The monastery of Martyrius contains additional testimonies that the phase IIA monastery was constructed in a previously Roman compound. The church was built in the east wing of the compound. In this phase the church (and similarly, the one built over it in phase IIB) was not built perpendicular to the eastern compound wall, unlike what we would

[17]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Late Fourth–Early Fifth Century CE Roman Compound (Phase I)

of porticoes roofed with arches and vaults, its floor paved in mosaic. The only section of the phase I peristyle and a small section of the courtyard’s stone floor were discovered in the north central wing. The compound contained many cisterns, and the builders of the military compound had hewn many cisterns around it, to water the horses used by the desert patrols. Two large cisterns (L267 and L208) from this phase were discovered, both in the east wing, in the church area. The cisterns’ locations unequivocally prove they were quarried in phase I of the site, before the construction of the churches from phases IIA and IIB and the adjacent phase IIB chapel. Cistern L267 is located under the church. Cisterns were never found under a church or chapel floor unless the cistern preceded them. Cistern L208 and a lower mosaic, made of the large tesserae characteristic of phase I, were found under walls and floors from phases IIA and IIB. The compound’s south wing was not included in the phase IIA monastery, and therefore preserved its phase I structure, except for minor changes introduced in phase IIB. In phase I, a stone quarry was converted into an open pool encompassed by two porticoes roofed by vaults. The portico on the south was paved in mosaic; the other, on the west, was paved in stone slabs and led northward to the bathhouse. Water collected west of the compound was carried to the pool through a subterranean channel. Large halls roofed by arches were built behind the porticoes in the south and west. The wing’s east contained additional halls and a portico paved in mosaic, all roofed by arches on piers; as well as rooms, and courtyards with stone floors. The west wing yielded meager finds from phase I. This was apparently the location of a massive monumental structure, and west of it, the bathhouse. From the bathhouse a stone-paved passageway led to a second portico with a stone-paved floor, west of the pool. This testimony connects the bathhouse with the open pool (Fig. 14). In our opinion, the massive monumental structure defended the compound, as at Deir Qalʿa, and was located in a vulnerable area of the compound. The hospice outside the compound, too, yielded remains from phase I, including mosaics with especially large tesserae, which are characteristic of late fourth–early fifth century CE fortresses.

This phase in the site was only recently identified, during the writing of the final report on the site and in light of the many discoveries in monasteries excavated in Judea and Samaria. The Byzantine and Early Islamic construction fundamentally altered this phase of the compound, and consequently it cannot be fully reconstructed (Fig. 11). All the compound walls were built in phase I. Repairs and changes were made in some of them in phase IIB, mainly in the northwest wing, upon the establishment of the refectory, and in the eastern wall, upon the construction of the gate and stables. The compound walls are of large ashlars, a few of which exhibit precise drafting and a flat or protruding boss (Figs. 12–13). This type of drafting is typical of fortresses and other structures from the late fourth– early fifth century CE. The scarcity of these stones at the monastery of Martyrius is the result of the type of stone quarried at the site, which were hard and easily broken, making it unsuitable for the precise drafting of ashlars. The paving slabs, made of higher quality stone, were quarried outside the compound. The 0.8 mthick compound walls had outer faces of ashlars, and inner faces of small fieldstones bound in cement and coated with a double layer of white plaster. The lower layer was incised with a herringbone pattern, covered with a smooth white layer. This type of plastering continued in the Byzantine period. The foundation courses of the walls on the north and west, more exposed to the rain, were covered in a thick layer of hydraulic plaster to prevent rainwater from penetrating them. Most of the compound walls’ building stones were probably quarried at the site, mainly in the open pool that would eventually become a built cistern (see the discussion of phase IIB). The early, phase I compound apparently had two gates. One gate was set in the eastern wall’s south, close to the stables in the south of the compound that might have belonged to this phase. The other was in the center of the southern wall, and functioned as an entrance for pedestrians. Both gates were blocked in phase IIB. The compound consisted of a central courtyard paved in stone slabs, surrounded by a peristyle consisting

[18]

Construction Phases

0

20 m

Fig. 11. Plan of the Roman compound.

[19]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 12. Compound eastern wall at the beginning of the excavation, view from the east.

Fig. 13. Compound western and southern walls at the beginning of the excavation, view from the southwest.

[20]

Construction Phases

Fig. 14. Reconstruction of the west and southwest wings in phase I.

Fifth Century CE Byzantine Monastery (Phase IIA)

The phase I construction differs from the phases of the Byzantine monastery in many ways: plan; drafting style; precision of laying the paving stones; drainage system; doorposts with fashioned thresholds; mosaics (large tesserae, each more than 3 cm) that are not typical of the Byzantine period; and the type of plaster coating the walls and the cement that bound the stones. The construction in phase I was characterized by straight walls built at right angles; and the phase I structure’s construction was noticeably different from the somewhat careless construction of the Byzantine monastery. In the former, the halls and rooms were large, some roofed with wooden beams over arches; in contrast, in phases IIA and IIB small rooms were constructed. Additionally, the compound’s location had no connection to any holy place, nor was it suitable for solitude, as Cyril claimed; rather, it was built on a high hill that controlled the main road, close to Jerusalem, as well as being close to the edge of the Judean Desert. All these clearly indicate that this was a central military camp; it served a cavalry unit of the Roman army that defended the desert’s edge against Saracen incursions.

In this phase, the monk Martyrius established a monastery in the large Roman military compound constructed some 60 years earlier. When Martyrius and a handful of monks received permission to establish a monastery in the military structure, which was too large for them, they left large parts of the original structure beyond the bounds of the monastery (Fig. 15). A monumental new gate was built in the southern wall of the small compound, and was secured by a rolling stone. Our understanding of the monastery structure in this phase is incomplete. Apparently, it was small, occupying less than half the area of the phase IIB monastery, and included the east wing, the northeast wing, part of the north wing, and the central courtyard. A small apsidal church with a single longitudinal hall was built in the east wing, and rooms were constructed around it. This monastery existed for almost 80 years, and we do not know whether the construction was completed in the days of Martyrius himself or possibly by his successor Paul,

[21]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

20 m

Fig. 15. Plan of the Byzantine monastery in phase IIA.

[22]

Construction Phases

of the monastery, remaining almost in its entirety and in its original shape from phase I. In phase IIB of the monastery, its area was increased, and it now also included the phase I south wing, with changes being introduced, such as the construction of the cistern. These changes, however, did not harm the original plan of this wing. An architectural analysis of the compound definitely proves that phase IIA of the monastery was situated in an existing structure from the first building phase. This structure had been built according to Roman standards and was located on a central travel route; it was not a religious structure (a monastery).

who was revered by the monks in the monastery and was buried there. The new gate was built in the southern inner wall, of east–west orientation, which separated the south wing from the rest of the compound. This wall, not parallel to the walls of the church and of the adjoining chapel, is perpendicular to the outer eastern and western compound walls, which undoubtedly belong to phase I. The track’s dimensions in the southern wall were perfectly suited to the rolling stone that was discovered in the northern gate in the eastern wall; this stone was probably taken from the phase IIA southern wall gate when it fell into disuse in Phase IIB. This gate was blocked when the built cistern was constructed, along with the channel that fed it (Fig. 16). This leads us to the following conclusions, the implications of which are important for understanding the site. In phase IIA a monastery was built in the Roman compound and was considerably smaller than it. The south and west wings were left outside the area

Sixth–Seventh Century CE Byzantine Monastery (Phase IIB) This construction phase is the central one in the history of the monastery. It began in the middle of the sixth century CE, when Genesius was head of the monastery, and ended at the time of the Arab conquest of the

Fig. 16. Monastery gate in phase IIA.

[23]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

changes to the compound in the phase IIA and IIB monastery were made in its north, with the consequent disappearance of most of the phase I construction. The monastery reached its greatest size in phase IIB, when it included the entire area of the phase I compound. The gate in the eastern wall’s south was blocked and a new gate was opened in the wall’s north. The vestibule of the northern gate in the eastern wall, the stables, and the ancillary rooms of the entrance were all built in phase IIB. Some made use of construction from the previous phases, such as the pavement slabs of the southern section of stable L217, which are apparently from phase I, and not in secondary use, like those in the northern section. The church complex, more than any other area, is indicative of the major architectural changes that the compound plan underwent between phase I and phases IIA and IIB. The later church and the chapel adjoining it to the south, and all the structures around the church, were not built perpendicular to the eastern compound wall, nor parallel to the southern wall of the complex (W9, W13), which we maintain also belongs to phase I. The church built in phase IIA was expanded in phase IIB, and a chapel was added on its south. In phase IIB the west of the phase IIA church became the narthex (L209). The entrance hall (L221), probably built in phase IIA, became the crypt in phase IIB. Major changes were introduced in the southeast wing of the church complex, with testimony to three evident building phases. In phase IIB extensive parts of the wing were rebuilt, use being made of construction from phases I and IIA. Changes were made in the walls and entrances, adapting them to the needs of the monastery in this phase. The mosaic floors, some decorated, and remains of walls, were discovered beneath the phase IIB chapel and walls. The compound’s south wing is the most interesting part of the plan, and as mentioned above, its construction differs from that of the north wing. The eastern gate on the south was blocked. This wing contains stables, partly paved with finely matched paving stones (Fig. 20), and a finely paved passageway, only part of which is preserved. Apparently, in phase IIA, upon the establishment of the monastery, or in phase IIB, some of the paving stones in this area were removed to pave the monastery’s north wing (Fig. 21). In phase IIB two chapels were built in the south wing,

Land of Israel, spanning a period of some 90 years. During this phase extensive construction was carried out, including rebuilding the church and building the refectory, the cistern in the southwest wing, and the gate and stables in the northeast wing (Figs. 17–18). We assume that the major construction was conducted in the time of Genesius (mid-sixth century CE) and continued for a number of years. The division between phases IIA and IIB is based on four parameters: (1) architectural analysis of the remains and changes made to the monastery structure; (2) stratification of the remains and their stratigraphic analysis; (3) stylistic analysis of the mosaics and their dating; (4) reduction in the size of the monastery in phase IIA and its expansion in phase IIB. An examination of the compound in phase IIB revealed two fundamental facts worthy of special mention: First, the monastery’s south and north differ in structure and plan. The south wing and part of the west one are built with parallel walls; the large rooms more closely resemble halls; and their entrances, which are not in the center of the room, include thresholds and bolts. The mosaic segments that are preserved are finely matched. The excavations uncovered long porticoes paved in large tesserae, roofed with arches that are characteristic of late fourth–early fifth century CE fortresses. As mentioned, the south wing of the compound was planned and built in phase I; and although it underwent changes in phase IIB, upon the expansion of the monastery, its original plan remained the same. In the north wing, on the other hand, the rooms’ walls are not parallel, and there is no symmetry between the structures and the outer compound walls. The finely fashioned paving stones, imprecisely laid, are patently in secondary use. The passageway that led westward from the northern gate in the eastern wall is not built in a straight line but rather corresponds to the structures built on either side that belong to phases IIA and IIB (Fig. 19). The walls of the church complex are neither parallel nor perpendicular to the outer compound walls, and were apparently built within the phase I compound. Second, it is important to note the presence of walls and mosaics from phase IIA and phase I beneath the building remains of the east wing that were not discovered in the south wing. The majority of

[24]

Construction Phases

L332 L334

L316

L300

L343

L302

L100 L340

L303 L304 L328

L260

L209

L412

L221 L259 L225

L201

L234

0

L200

L217

20 m

L507

L504

Fig. 17. Plan of the Byzantine monastery in phase IIB.

[25]

Fig. 18. Reconstruction of the monastery in phase IIB.

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

[26]

Construction Phases

Fig. 19. Northeast wing and the passageway paved with stone slabs in secondary use that led to the northeast gate of the monastery in phase IIB, view from the west.

Fig. 20. Finely matched paving stones in stable L233 in the south of the monastery, view from the west.

[27]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

If this cistern were original, contemporary with the surrounding floors and structures, the builders would have calculated the level of the arches and vaults in relation to the cistern’s depth and dimensions, and the cistern would not have extended beyond the height of the floors and the portico alongside it. The cistern roof would have been built first, and only afterwards, the structures around it, in accordance with its upper level. How could thousands of building stones have been removed without harming the portico and the paving stones alongside it? Where would those thousands of building stones removed from the cistern have been taken, since the monastery already existed in phase IIA? Answers to questions like these were found at other monasteries built inside fortresses in the late fourth–early fifth century CE, like Deir Qalʿa and Kh. Deir Samʿan. At these two sites some of the quarries were situated close to the site, and others, within the site itself. Some of the quarries became open pools in the Roman period and cisterns in the Byzantine period (Magen and Aizik 2012: 145–148; Magen 2012d: 53, 63). We maintain that the same phenomenon occurred at the monastery of Martyrius. The cistern had originally been a quarry, from which thousands of stones were hewn for the construction of the Roman military compound in phase I. It was then converted into a large, plastered pool, used by the soldiers stationed in the compound; it was surrounded by a peristyle, and a paved portico led from the pool to the bathhouse. The pool was fed by a channel, coated with the early type of hydraulic plaster, which drained runoff water outside the compound. In phase IIA the pool was beyond the bounds of the monastery, therefore filling no function. In phase IIB the pool became a cistern. The channel that fed the pool in phase I was lengthened in phase IIB and fed the built cistern and additional cisterns in the monastery. The refectory and kitchen were built in the northwestern corner of the compound. It is unknown what preceded the refectory’s construction. The kitchen’s level was higher than the refectory’s; apparently, in an early stage the kitchen area was composed of a number of rooms that were later united to form a large hall. A chapel and monastic cells were built in the north wing, some making use of construction from earlier phases. Original remains exist from phase I of the compound: a portico with

Fig. 21. Paving stones in secondary use in the north of the monastery, view from the north.

one in its center and the other in the row of rooms south of the built cistern. In and around the site are numerous cisterns that collected tremendous quantities of water. The construction of a large, well-built cistern in this wing raises the question: why was it necessary to construct this additional cistern at great cost, when cisterns were so plentiful. The channel that fed the cistern was clearly built in phase IIB. It canceled the phase IIA monastery gate, and was built on the finely matching paving stones from phase I. Surprisingly, the cistern’s edges were elevated approx. 0.7 m above the courtyard’s original stone pavement east of the cistern, and some 0.5 m above the portico south of the cistern. This elevation was necessitated when arches and vaults were installed to cover the early pool, after the southern portico (with its mosaic floor), and the stone floor of the courtyard to the east already existed. How would it have been possible to cut such a large cistern (some 22×10×10 m) when the surroundings already existed?

[28]

Construction Phases

and numerous Greek inscriptions that enabled historical, architectural, and artistic research of the Byzantine churches, devoting less attention to the later building phases. Most of the oil presses discovered in monasteries, mainly in surveys, were ascribed to the Byzantine period, when the monastery was active. Some monasteries and settlements continued to exist as Christian, Jewish, or Samaritan sites until the late Umayyad period, while others were settled by farmers. Some cultivated olive trees and produced oil, while others engaged in pottery production, irrigated agriculture, and sheep raising (Magen 2012a: 62–64). The Land of Israel experienced major agricultural growth in the Early Islamic period, the likes of which it had known only during the Second Temple period. There was extensive olive cultivation and oil production which, as noted, was introduced into areas where olives had never been grown before. The springs of Phasaelis, ʿEin el-ʿAuja, ʿEin Duyuk (Naʿaran), Wadi Qelt, and ʿEin es-Sulṭan provided tremendous quantities of water for agriculture and for Hisham’s Palace in Jericho (Amar 2000: 44–45). How are we to understand the agricultural development in monasteries following the Muslim conquest? Many monasteries had been abandoned; each possessed tremendous cisterns that continued to contain large quantities of water. These cisterns attracted new settlers of undetermined origin and religion, whether indigenous or brought as slaves. We assume that the development of agriculture was not at the initiative of a war-weary and recently conquered population, but was imposed by Islamic rulers, especially Caliph Muʿāwiya Ibn Abī Sufyān, founder of the Umayyad dynasty. He promoted agricultural development in the Land of Israel and in many other locations throughout the Islamic world. Iraq, Syria and other regions became agricultural centers of the Islamic empire (Hasson 1982: 329–368; Magen 2008d: 326–327). We are not saying that no agricultural activity, such as vegetable gardens, and especially viticulture and wine production, was conducted in the various monasteries. Almost all of the monasteries in which grapes could be raised, such as those in Samaria, the Benjamin region, the vicinity of Jerusalem, and the southern Hebron Hills, were found to contain winepresses, sometimes improved ones. However,

a mosaic floor, and a peristyle that encompassed the central courtyard. The portico led to the refectory from the east. At a later phase a dedicatory inscription was set in the portico. The inscription referred to the burial cave beneath it, which apparently belonged to the monastery phase at the site.

Seventh–Eighth Century CE Early Islamic Farmhouse (Phase III) In the Early Islamic period, a building consisting of rooms around a central courtyard, used by those engaged in agriculture, was constructed in the west wing of the compound (Fig. 22). Stone channels were cut to carry the water to the cultivated gardens. These channels were discovered inside the monastery, east of the built cistern, installed over the Byzantine remains, and also in the areas surrounding the monastery (Figs. 23–24). What was raised, and the length of the agricultural season, have not been determined. However, most likely, grains or vegetables, not fruit trees, were raised in the monastery of Martyrius, as indicated by the irrigation method and by the thin layer of soil. The work probably took place in winter and spring, with the site being deserted in the summer. Almost every site excavated in the Land of Israel has yielded pottery and other finds from the Early Islamic period. Surveys conducted in the Negev indicate extensive activity there in this period (Haiman 1986: 20*–21*; 1997: 331–334, 338–340; 1999: 11*–12*; Avni 1992: 9*, 18*–20*. See also Avni, Avni and Porat 2009). A comprehensive study of the olive oil industry in Judea and Samaria revealed that most monasteries excavated in northern and southern Samaria and in the Hebron Hills contained Early Islamic oil presses, installed after the monastery had fallen into disuse (Magen 2008d). Furthermore, in the Early Islamic period oil production was initiated in areas previously devoid of olive trees and oil presses, e.g., at the edges of the Hebron Hills. While Early Islamic finds were identified in most of the monasteries, and sometimes published, they were given little attention; nor was a comprehensive study conducted to determine the reason for the presence of Early Islamic remains in monasteries and settlements. The monastery and church excavators apparently concentrated on the magnificent mosaics

[29]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

20 m

Fig. 22. Plan of the Early Islamic farmhouse.

[30]

Construction Phases

Fig. 23. Agricultural area east of the built cistern, view from the east.

Fig. 24. Pool and irrigation channels in the Phase III agricultural area, view from the southeast.

[31]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

place of an existing winepress, or within the church itself, e.g., Kh. el-Maḥma, Ḥ. Tinshemet, Kh. Deir Samʿan and Kh. ʿEin Dab (Magen 2008d: 287–288, 293; 2012d: 20–21; Har-Even 2012: 364; Peleg 2012b: 40–41).

the phenomena of the labor-intensive cultivation of olives and olive oil production were not found in the time of the Byzantine monasteries, but only after these were abandoned in the wake of the Arab conquest. We frequently find that the oil press was established in

Fig. 25. Blossoms at the site and its vicinity after the rain.

[32]

Construction Phases

chosen according to its location and to the quantity of water that could be stored there. In most of the farmhouses, olives were grown and their oil, pressed. Not every monastery abandoned and resettled in the Early Islamic period engaged in agricultural activity. Pottery vessels were produced in en-Nebi Samwil and at Kh. el-Mir in Ramallah. Sheep were raised at Kh. el-Kiliya, where pens were discovered. The monastery of Martyrius region’s climate, sparse rainfall, and shortage of grazing areas create unfavorable conditions for the cultivation of olive trees or raising livestock (Fig. 25). The population that settled in the area in the Early Islamic period was not the nomadic Saracen population, but rather one that understood agriculture and the construction of irrigation channels that could be fed by the plentiful cisterns. The site contained three cisterns, with more than five additional ones in its vicinity. Some of the large cisterns had been built when the compound was established in the late fourth century CE (phase I), and were utilized in phase IIA; while others were built in phase IIB. While vegetables may have been raised for private consumption during the Byzantine period, extensive irrigation agriculture that relied on advanced pools and irrigation channels began in the Umayyad period.

The existence of gardens in monasteries is mentioned in the historical sources. Cyril tells of a garden in the monastery of Euthymius (Life of Euthymius 15, 24), and mentions an additional one in the Life of Cyriacus (16, 232): “This lion is my faithful servant here, guarding my herbs from the wild goats.” Clearly, then, these were not extensive cultivated areas, like those found in the monastery of Martyrius, but small vegetable beds that did not require intensive labor. Joannes Moschus writes that the monks of the monastery of Marda had a garden, distant from the laura, where a gardener lived and tended the vegetables (Leimonarion CLVIII.3025). Although the monks cultivated small vegetable gardens that supplied their personal needs and those of the monastery, and cultivated grapes for wine, an important component of their nutrition and the liturgy, they cannot be described as having being engaged in agriculture. It can hardly be assumed that the especially limited quantities of water in the parched areas of the Judean Desert, that also had to provide for the monks’ needs in drought years, would have been wasted on agricultural crops. The situation changed in the Early Islamic period. The monasteries were turned into farmhouses, and most of the water was now earmarked for crop irrigation. The type of produce in any given farmhouse was probably

[33]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Chapter Three

Architectural Remains at the Site

32–33). The vestibule floor was of leveled bedrock, the natural depressions of which were filled with paving stones or white tesserae (Fig. 34). The vestibule walls, preserved to a height of two to three courses, are of well-dressed stones. The vestibule roof was supported by three arches borne on piers, arranged from north to south, some bearing traces of white plaster. Partially preserved built and plastered troughs were discovered in the northern (W31) and southern (W20) walls. In the west of the vestibule and along its northern wall is a shallow channel that carried water spilled by drinking animals to outside the monastery. Southeast of the vestibule is a narrow room, L210, measuring 6×3 m, with a bedrock floor in which a rolling stone was set. The room’s eastern wall is part of the monastery compound wall. The room’s west is bounded by W18, its south, by W1 (which is also the wall of the phase IIB church apse). In the room’s south, two 1 m-wide stone steps led to a corridor that had provided access to a complex of rooms in the south, but was blocked upon construction of the church apse; thus the corridor date to phase IIA. Adjacent to W202 is a square stone basin, 0.97×0.97×0.61 m, with a rounded depression, 0.65 m in diameter and 0.53 m deep (L264). A hole in the basin bottom is connected to a lead drainpipe (Fig. 35). An additional installation in this room consists of a stone slab measuring 0.5×0.35 m; in its center, a drain hole, 0.2 m in diameter, is closed by a stopper. West of room L210 is room L212, 4.7×4.2 m, reached by a step in the vestibule (Fig. 36). Unlike the entrances in most of the monastery rooms, room L212’s 0.8 m-wide entrance had neither a threshold nor doorposts for a wooden door. Its walls are preserved to a height of three courses, with the exception of the northern wall (W20), of which only one course remains. The walls’ outer faces are of ashlar, their inner faces, of small bonded stones covered in a layer

The site has been divided into areas (Figs. 26–27): Area I. Northeast Wing; Area II. East Wing; Area III. Southeast Wing; Area IV. Southwest Wing; Area V. West Wing; Area VI. Northwest Wing; Area VII. North Central Wing; Area VIII. Central Courtyard of the Compound; Area IX. Hospice; Area X. Umayyad Agricultural Area. The changes made in each area will be described according to building phase.

Area I: Northeast Wing (Figs. 28–29) The main entrance to the site in phase IIB was through the north gate in the eastern compound wall (W202). A stone-paved open area with stone benches preceded the 1.85 m-wide gate, which was built of two massive doorposts (Fig. 30). The monolithic southern doorpost is preserved to a height of 1.3 m. Two stones of the northern doorpost are preserved to a height of 1.1 m. The monolithic stepped threshold, 0.5 m wide, contains two sockets with a door pivot of iron encased in lead. It is assumed that the door was wooden and double winged. Two rectangular depressions in the threshold’s center served as bolt sockets. A rolling stone (2.75 m in diameter) that moved along a rockcut track between the compound wall and a 2 m-long inner wall was installed (W170; Fig. 31). The latter had two faces of well-worked stones to support the rolling stone. A depression cut at the end of the track accommodated a brake for blocking the rolling stone when the gate was open. A rolling stone would always be located inside the entrance, behind a wooden door. This one was initially used in the gate installed in the southern wall of the phase IIA monastery (W92); in phase IIB, when the monastery expanded, the rolling stone was transferred to the north gate in the eastern compound wall. The gate leads to vestibule L213, 8.4×3.8 m, which in turn leads to an open inner courtyard (L230; Figs.

[35]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

V

VI

IV

VIII VII

III II I

20 m

0

IX

I.

Northeast wing

II.

East wing

III.

Southeast wing

IV.

Southwest wing

V.

West wing

VI.

Northwest wing

VII. North central wing VIII. Central courtyard IX.

Hospice

Fig. 26. General plan of the site by area division.

[36]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

and is 0.4 m deep. The northern niche was partially preserved, measuring 0.87 m wide and 0.4 m deep. The room’s floor is of coarse white tesserae, 64 tesserae per sq. dm. A depression for water drainage, also paved in mosaic, was found in the floor’s northeastern corner. A stone slab floor was paved along the southern wall, the reason for which has not been determined. The mosaic floor abuts the room’s walls and the stone slabs in three horizontal rows, except in the northwest,

of coarse plaster in a herringbone pattern and then with a layer of white plaster. The southern wall (W2) is mostly of ashlars with marginal drafting, except in its east, which is built of small bonded stones and is part of the church apse wall. The southern of the two arch-bearing piers supporting the room’s ceiling is preserved. In the eastern wall (W18), two niches coated in white plaster in a herringbone pattern are preserved. The southern niche measures 0.6×0.5 m,

Fig. 27. Aerial photograph of the site, view from the east.

[37]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

should be dated to this phase. With the exception of room L242, the entrance levels are higher than that of the courtyard. A paved passageway (L228) leads from this courtyard to the monastery central courtyard, on the west (Fig. 38). The floor of courtyard L230 is of well-dressed stone slabs, paved in a north–south orientation. Their imprecise installation indicates they were in secondary use, having been dismantled elsewhere in the monastery. In some sections of the

where it is not preserved. A large broken stone lintel was found in the room. The room adjoins the church wall, apparently postdating it. The vestibule leads to an open courtyard (L230) that measures 15.5×6.5 m. Entrances from the latter lead to two large stables, L217 and L219, to a smaller one, L241, and to rooms L216 and L242 (Fig. 37). The proximity of the north gate, the gate of the IIB phase monastery, to the stables suggests that the stables, too,

L264 W202

W202

L217

499.87

W170

L215 500.67

L210

L213

W31

W54

500.19

W18

500.07

W55 L212 W20

W203

L262 500.45

W30

W2

W19

W33

500.32 500.45

L265

L219

L216

L230 W23

W32

500.36

W34

W45

W24 W44

L244

L241

W46

L240

L227

L228

500.81

W172

L242

W43

W42

L243

W41

L220

W25

0

Fig. 28. Detailed plan of the northeast wing.

[38]

500.67

5

m

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 29. Northeast wing, view from the west.

Fig. 30. Northern gate in the eastern wall, view from the west.

[39]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

courtyard, mainly in the south, the paving stones were incorporated into the bedrock, which had been dressed and smoothed. In the courtyard’s center is a square pier, with an adjoining rock-cut trough (L265), measuring 0.8×0.65×0.52 m and 0.3 m deep (Fig. 39).

The trough’s inside is covered with red plaster and there is a depression in its base. Room L216, south of the courtyard, measures 6×3 m. Its walls, all of dressed plastered stones, are preserved to a height of three to four courses, except for the northern wall, which is preserved to only one to two courses (Fig. 40). The room’s 0.85 m-wide entrance lacks a threshold and doorposts. An additional entrance in the southern wall (W2) that led to the church was blocked in a later stage. The room is paved in a coarse white mosaic, 36 tesserae per sq. dm, which is only partially preserved. The floor abuts the walls, except for the northern one (W23), in three horizontal rows. Along the western wall (W24) are a small basin and a bench. Another bench, which jutted out toward the courtyard, was constructed along the southern and eastern walls (W2 and W19, respectively). The northern wall cuts the mosaic floor, postdating it, and is built in part over the western bench. A layer of plaster with a herringbone pattern

Fig. 31. Rolling stone at the northern gate in the eastern wall.

Fig. 32. Vestibule L213, view from the west.

[40]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 33. Reconstruction of vestibule L213.

Fig. 34. Natural depressions in the leveled bedrock that were filled with paving stones or tesserae.

[41]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

remained on the wall. No arch-bearing piers that would have supported a roof were discovered. Apparently, at some stage there was a large open space here—paved in tesserae and in paving stones that had belonged to the inner courtyard—with benches along its sides. When the space was divided by W23, a bench facing the courtyard was built along the entire length of the wall (Fig. 41). West of this room is room L227, some 7×4 m. The room was entered from passageway L228 through a 1 m-wide entrance with a stepped threshold and doorposts, the eastern one of which is preserved. The threshold is elevated some 0.15 m above courtyard level. An additional entrance in the southern wall (W2) leads to the church (Fig. 42). The room’s walls were preserved to a height of three to four courses, except for the northern wall (W172), of which only one course remained. The walls consist of outer faces of ashlars and inner faces of small stones and plaster, with the exception of the north of the eastern wall (W24), which is built entirely of ashlars. In the center of the room two arch-bearing piers for supporting the ceiling, east–west in orientation, were discovered. A rounded plastered niche, 0.52 m wide and 0.3 m deep,

Fig. 35. Basin L264 in room L210, view from the northwest.

Fig. 36. Room L212, view from the northeast.

[42]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 37. Courtyard L230 with surrounding rooms and stables, view from the southwest.

with a stone slab base, is preserved in the eastern wall. A rectangular plastered niche, 0.6 m wide and 0.4 m deep, with a stone slab base, was found opposite it, in the western wall (W25). The room is paved in a coarse white mosaic floor that abuts the room’s walls in two to three horizontal rows, except in the northern wall, where the wall’s plaster layer extended, partly covering the mosaic floor. This floor is not uniform: medium-sized tesserae are used in its south, large tesserae in its north. The two sections are separated by two horizontal rows of large white tesserae. Mosaic repairs are evident around the piers. The mosaic floor in the room’s northwestern corner was covered with stone slabs laid over small stones bound with cement. The mosaic had been repaired in its south, where the floor abuts the elevation. Signs of fire were found on the floor in the southeastern corner. We assume that there were two stages in the room: in the first, the room was divided into two by a wall. The two rows of horizontal tesserae probably indicate the wall’s location. The southern room was connected to the church. In the second stage, the wall was removed,

Fig. 38. Passageway L228, view from the west.

[43]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 39. Trough L265 in the center of courtyard L230, view from the south.

Fig. 40. Room L216, view from the northeast.

[44]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 41. Room L216 in the last stage, view from the north. Note the bench facing the courtyard.

0.13 m above courtyard level. The walls, preserved to a height of two to four courses, consist of an outer face of ashlars and an inner face of small stones bound in cement. Extending the length of the stable, down its center, is a row of piers that bore six arches to support the roof (a similar row of piers bearing arches that would have borne a ceiling was found in the southeastern hall (L234) of the compound; see Fig. 125). A barrel-vaulted roof could not have been constructed over the arches that ran along the length of the structure, because of the substantial distance between them. We do not maintain that this would have been impossible, since the roof of the built cistern in the southwestern compound was constructed in this manner. However, in stable L217, the thickness of the western wall (W30)—some 0.72 m—would have prohibited the erection of a structure with vaults; this was also the case in hall L234. Apparently, stable L217 and hall L234 were roofed with wooden beams

creating a single room. The two piers were added to support the roof. A staircase east of the room led to a second story, above rooms L216 and L227. The 1.05 m-wide staircase had 10 steps and rose to a height of at least 2 m; only 3 steps were preserved. In the courtyard floor, next to the staircase, round depressions for inserting a railing were discovered (see Fig. 41). An additional staircase, south–north in orientation, was found next to the southwestern corner of stable L217. It led to an upper story above the stable; the lower stairs protruded into the vestibule. The 1.2 m-wide staircase was some 5.3 m long. Six out of some fourteen stairs were preserved. Each stair was 0.35 m wide (Fig. 43). An entrance led from the courtyard to stable L217, measuring 17×5.7 m, situated in the northeastern corner of the compound. The 1.5 m-wide entrance has a stepped threshold with a socket, and is raised approx.

[45]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

laid over the arches. The roof-supporting arches could not have supported a residential second story, so the broad stairs were likely built to provide quick access to the roof, which provided a lookout over the monastery entrance. Mangers were found in three of the stable walls; the finely fashioned ones in the southern wall (W31) are 0.8 m wide and 0.45 m high (Fig. 44). The manger bottoms are lined with stones. The mangers in the western wall, 0.7 m wide, are higher (0.82 m); their bottoms are not preserved. Only manger remnants were discovered along the eastern wall (W202). Rings and hooks to which the animals were tied are embedded in lead-filled holes above the manger rims (Fig. 45). The stable floor, paved in closely fitted stone slabs, is divided into two parts: the one in the south appears to be the original floor, preserved from construction phase I; while that in the north, of smaller stone slabs

Fig. 42. Opening in room L227 leading to the church, view from the northeast.

Fig. 43. Staircase to the second story above stable L217, view from the southwest.

[46]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 44. Manger along W31 in stable L217, view from the northeast.

courses, have two faces: one ashlar built, the other, of small stones bound in cement. In the eastern and western walls, the ashlar face is toward the stable. Traces of plaster with a herringbone pattern were preserved on the northern wall (W32), between which and the compound wall (W203) a gutter was installed.

in secondary use, was laid in phase IIB, when the stables were built. The mangers installed in the south either cut or were built over the phase I floor. In the floor’s south is a shallow, cut upper channel, typical of open courtyards, that carried runoff water outside the structure, suggesting that in phase I the area was stone paved and roofless, a sort of open courtyard. In phase III a room (L215) measuring 4×3.6 m was built in the stable’s southeastern corner (Fig. 46). The walls, built over the stable floor, consisted of one ashlar-built face, and another of small stones and earth. Access to the room was provided by a 0.8 m-wide entrance set in the western wall (W55). West of this stable is an additional one (L219), measuring 6.7×6.5 m and paved with stone slabs, some in secondary use (Fig. 47). Its 1.1 m-wide entrance has a threshold stone with a depression for a door pivot, and doorposts with bolt sockets. The threshold is elevated some 0.13 m above courtyard level. Two piers, in the centers of the stable’s eastern (W30) and western (W34) walls, supported the arch that bore the roof. The walls, preserved to a height of three to four

Fig. 45. Ring and hooks above the manger rims in stable L217.

[47]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 46. Stable L217 and room L215, the latter built in phase III, view from the west.

Fig. 47. Stable L219, view from the south.

[48]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

room L240, which functioned as a guardroom and opens to passageway L228. Two building stages are evident in rooms L241 and L242, both in phase IIB. In the first stage these rooms were a single hall, measuring 5×4.2 m, with an arch in its center; the two piers that supported the arch were discovered. In the second stage the hall was divided into two by W42 (Fig. 48). Room L242, measuring 4.2×1.5 m, was reached by a 1 m-wide entrance that was paved in a stone slab and lacked doorposts. The western wall (W46) is preserved to a height of four to five courses and has two faces: the inner one, in the direction of the room, of medium-sized fieldstones bound in cement; and the outer one, of worked stones. A plastered rectangular niche, 0.84 m wide and 0.45 m deep, is set in the wall, 0.23 m from the floor. Most of the northern wall (W41) is preserved to a height of three courses. Its inner face is of worked stones, its outer face of fieldstones; there

The water from the roofs of this and the adjoining stable (L217) were drained through an opening in the northern compound wall to the gutter. Water from the compound passed through a channel to a cistern located north of the compound. An additional channel carried water to a settling pit in the courtyard, close to the entrance. A remnant of a ceramic drainpipe was found sunken in the floor. Built mangers were found along the eastern and part of the western wall. The eastern manger, 0.9 m high and 0.8 m wide, has a stone-lined bottom. Remnants of metal hooks for hitching the animals were found on the manger’s rim. The western manger, 0.85 m high and 0.8 m wide, was partially preserved. This stable was apparently used for tall beasts of burden, perhaps horses or camels, while the other stable (L217) primarily served mules and donkeys. Three rooms were discovered west of the courtyard: L241 and L242, which open into the courtyard, and

Fig. 48. Rooms L241 and L242, view from the east.

[49]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

in its west; in its east, only the wall foundation remains. The room’s floor is of plaster. Two archbearing piers were discovered in the room. A layer of white plaster remained on the northern wall (W43); and on the western wall (W46), a plaster layer with a herringbone pattern is preserved. A bench lined with four flat stone slabs with a raised headrest, measuring 1.55×0.77 m and 0.6 m high, was built in the northwestern corner. A niche with traces of plaster, 0.6 m wide and 0.3 m deep, was set in the western wall above the bench. Two additional benches on the outer side of W44 flank the entrance. The built benches are covered with stone slabs and plastered. The bench on the right of the entrance has no headrest, measures 1.7×0.7 m, and is 0.45 m high. The bench on the left, with a headrest inscribed with a cross, measures 1.6×0.8 m and is 0.4 m high (Fig. 49). The room functioned as a guard room, overlooking the monastery gate.

are plaster remains on part of the wall. The southern wall (W42), preserved to a height of two courses, is built of fieldstones of different sizes. The floor is paved in irregularly shaped stone slabs. Stable L241, 4.2×2.9 m, has a 0.7 m-wide entrance set in its eastern wall (W45). The entrance, elevated some 0.11 m above courtyard level, is devoid of doorposts or a threshold. The stable’s walls are built of large and medium-sized fieldstones, some worked. The stable is paved in irregular stone slabs. A manger, of which only the first course is preserved, was discovered along the southern wall (W43). An additional manger might have been built along the northern wall (W42). South of the stable is room L240, measuring 4.2×2.8 m, and a 1 m-wide entrance with a stone threshold raised some 0.15 m above courtyard level. The entrance is situated in the southern wall (W44), which is preserved to a height of one course

Fig. 49. Bench with a headrest inscribed with a cross, on the left of the entrance to room L240, view from the south.

[50]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Area II: East Wing

The Church Complex

The wing, 32×25 m, is situated in the east of the site, between two gates. It contains the church complex and many service rooms and monastic cells. The church complex includes the church, a martyrium (burial hall) on the church’s north, and on its south, a chapel. It is situated obliquely to the compound’s eastern wall and the wall bounding the wing to the south (W9, W13), and was clearly incorporated into an existing compound. The wing underwent extensive changes from one phase to the next, with clear testimony to the existence of two monastery phases, IIA and IIB, and apparently also remains from phase I, based on both a stratigraphic examination and an archaeological and stylistic analysis (Figs. 50–55).

The church was established in phase IIA and expanded in phase IIB. The phase IIB church consists of: a martyrium (L221) from phase IIA, with a crypt for the monastery abbots; a narthex (L209), which is a remnant from the phase IIA church hall; and a prayer hall (L200). The church has two main entrances, one from the north through the martyrium, and the other, from the south. Chapel L201 was added to the church on its south. The martyrium (L221), measuring 8.4×8.2 m, is paved in several colorful mosaic carpets. Two small rooms, L222 and L223, adjoin it on the west (Fig. 56). It has two entrances, one from the northern passageway (L228), and the other, from the central

Fig. 50. East wing, view from the southwest.

[51]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 51. East wing, view from the west.

Fig. 52. East wing, view from the northwest.

[52]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e 2 2

500.13

500.13 L203 L203

L745 L745 L746 L746

L732 L732

L212 L212

499.90 499.90

W20 W20

L749 L749 L743 L743

L216 500.67 L216

L722 L722 L723 L723

W23 W23

500.67

L200 L200

L229 L229

500.06 500.06

L204 L204

W12 W12

500.49 500.49

L206 L206

500.64 500.64

W7 W7

L225 L225

L221 L221

501.14 501.14

501.19 501.19

W16 W16

W4 W4

L266 L266

L209 L209

501.14 501.14

W5 W5 L267 L267

5 5m m

Fig. 53. Detailed plan of the east wing.

[53]

2 2

W3 W3

W2 W2

L223 L223 W27 W27

L423 L423

L239 L239

L424 L424 501.52 501.52

W75 W75 L421 L421 W76 W76 L420 L420 L725 L725

W78 W78

L419 L419

W81 W81 L417 L417 501.12 L418 L418

WW 1313

W14 W14 L422 L422

WW 7777

L237 L237

WW 7474

W17 W17 W15 W15

W25 W25

500.67 500.67

501.12

W8 W8 0 0

500.69 500.69

W7 W7 9 9

500.81 500.81

WW 2929

500.12

500.66 500.66

WW 2626

W172 W172

L268 L268 W11 W11 500.12

500.42 500.42

L205 L205

L238 L238

0 0

500.02 L202 L202

500.56 500.56

L227 L227

W28 W28 L222 L222

L208 L208

L201 L201

W24 W24

501.37 501.37

1 1

500.02

501.29 501.29

W2 W2

W19 W19

499.89 499.89

499.99 499.99

W3 W3

1 1

W6 W6

L207 L207

WW 9 9

W18 W18

500.40 500.40

W10 W10

L210 L210

W202 W202

W1 W1 L214 L214

W8 W8

L264 L264

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1-1

502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 W20 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W2

L200

W3

L212

L201

L732

W8 L202 W10 L207

L229

L208

2-2

503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W5

W4 L209

L200

L722 L723

L749 L732 L743

L745 L746

W202

L214

L267

Fig. 54. Sections of the church complex.

courses, have an outer face of ashlars and an inner one of small stones bound in cement. The walls, coated in reddish plaster, are decorated with partially preserved frescoes in red, black, and orange (Fig. 57). A square pier was discovered in the center of the hall, and arch-bearing piers were found along the walls. The martyrium was probably roofed with cruciform arches. Benches coated in reddish hydraulic plaster were installed along the eastern (W25), southern (W2), and northern (W26) walls. The eastern bench was probably installed when the mosaics were laid, while those on the north and south were installed after the mosaics were in place. The latter benches were

courtyard on its west. The broad, open entrances (the northern one, 3.2 m wide, the western one, 3 m), which could not have been closed by doors, are somewhat reminiscent of a church narthex with an open facade. The entrances, like the hall itself, belong to the phase IIA monastery. The martyrium in phase IIA might have functioned as the church’s narthex, despite the fact that it is situated north of the church, and not on its west, like most narthexes. In the early northern church at Shiloh, too, the narthex is situated north of the church (Magen and Aharonovich 2012: 165–167). The hall walls, preserved to a height of two to three

[54]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 55. Reconstruction of the church complex in phase IIB.

Small stone slabs surrounding the tombstone enabled entry to the crypt for additional burials, apparently of the monastery abbots. The remains of 10 skeletons were found in the crypt, which was apparently cut and installed after the hall had been paved, as the mosaic floor was damaged in the process and does not relate to the crypt (for the anthropological report by J. Zias, see JSRF L-567). In the hall’s east and west are two large carpets, the eastern one measuring 4.81×3.43 m, the western one, 4.74×2.82 m; both are decorated with geometric patterns. The eastern carpet (Fig. 61) is surrounded by a frame composed of a row of black tesserae, two rows of white, two of black, one of white, and one of black. The carpet field is decorated with a grid of diamonds formed of schematic flowers placed side by side to form diagonal strips. Each of the diamond’s

apparently installed with the crypt, when the hall was dedicated to the memory of the monastery abbots. The hall is paved with five mosaic carpets of different size and ornamentation (Fig. 58). A crypt was hewn into the floor in the southeast of the hall, which had been covered with a mosaic carpet; a tombstone was placed over the crypt opening, of finely worked red stone, 90 cm long and 77 cm wide. A cross between two palm fronds and an inscription that mentions Paul, the monastery archimandrite, were carved on the tombstone (Figs. 59–60). The inscription reads: Θήκη Παύλου πρεσβυτέρου καὶ ἀρχιμανδρίτου. Tomb of Paul, priest and archimandrite The inscription is dated to the late fifth or early sixth century CE (Di Segni 1990b: 153, inscription no. 1).

[55]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 56. Martyrium and the rooms to the west, view from the northwest.

Fig. 57. Remains of colorful frescoes in the martyrium.

[56]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

and triangular units by strips of concave red diamonds and of elongated black leaves. Three strips of concave diamonds divide the carpet into six squares, each further divided by diagonal strips of leaves into four triangles. The carpet was laid using 45 tesserae per sq. dm. The carpet decorating the southwest of the hall measures 2.06×1.82 m (Fig. 63). Its frame consists of three rows of white tesserae, two of black, two of white, and one of red. The carpet field pattern is of rosettes with four oval red leaves surrounded by a black outline. The adjoining rosettes form squat circles, in the center of which are a cross pattern of five black tesserae. The carpet was laid using 55–75 tesserae per sq. dm. A diagonally laid white mosaic separates the four above-described mosaics. The southeastern carpet was installed in front of Paul’s tombstone. Measuring 1.05×1 m, it is set in a frame of red tesserae (Fig. 64). The carpet field is simply decorated with a central cruciform composed of a floral motif and inward-facing schematic flowers

sides consists of three flowers facing three more, together forming a crossed interface at the diamond’s angle. In the center of each diamond four flowers face the diamond’s sides. The carpet was laid using 45 tesserae per sq. dm. The western carpet is enclosed in a simple frame of two rows of black tesserae, two of white, and one of black. As in the preceding carpet, the carpet field is decorated with a grid of diamonds formed of schematic flower buds. In the center of each diamond, instead of cruciform flowers there is an additional diamond that consists of a row of black tesserae that surrounds a row of red, in the center of which are four white tesserae and a red one. The carpet was laid using 55–75 tesserae per sq. dm. Three mosaic carpets were laid along the southern wall. The central one measures 2.28×1.5 m (Fig. 62). Its frame consists of two rows of white tesserae, two rows of black, and one of white. The carpet field decoration consists of scales subdivided into square

Fig. 58. Martyrium mosaic floor, view from the south.

[57]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

in its corners. A narrow white strip surrounded by a row of red tesserae was laid to its north. The carpet, laid using 45 tesserae per sq. dm, was incorporated into the already existing mosaic at a later stage. Somewhat carelessly executed, it was apparently contemporaneous with the installation of the crypt and of the tombstone over it. In the mosaic floor east of this carpet, a large round oil lamp (31.5×11 cm) is depicted that hangs from three chains connected by a ring. Its body is of black tesserae, the red tesserae above it apparently representing a flame (Fig. 65). This lamp is meant to depict a metal and glass vessel, an example of which was unearthed in the martyrium and in other rooms at the site (see Pls. 41–  42, 50; 51: 1–  2). The oil lamp, like the late carpet, was incorporated in the original mosaic floor after the crypt’s installation. The mosaics in this hall belong to the monastery’s early group of mosaics, most of which were discovered in the church area and date to the late fifth century CE. Paul’s tombstone was laid after the mosaic’s installation; it has not been definitively determined whether the tombstone was laid in late phase IIA or in phase IIB. Based on the mosaic laid next to it, we

Fig. 59. Tombstone of Paul the monastery archimandrite, in the martyrium.

0

Fig. 60. Tombstone inscription.

[58]

10 cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

surmise that it was placed there in phase IIB, possibly late in this phase. West of the martyrium are two small rooms that share exterior W28. Room L222 measures 2.4×1.63 m and is paved in mosaic. A 0.8 m-wide entrance with a stepped threshold provided access from the burial hall. An additional, 0.7 m-wide entrance was set in the center of the northern wall (W29). The lower part of the outer wall is coated in hydraulic plaster to protect it from water that flowed to the east of the central courtyard. The room’s walls, preserved to a height of one course, are of dressed stones bearing traces of plaster. The eastern wall is of ashlars. The mosaic floor, preserved in its entirety, is decorated with geometrical and floral motifs (Fig. 66). The mosaic border is of diagonally laid white tesserae. The frame consists of two rows of black tesserae, two rows of white, and one of black, followed by a red zigzag strip outlined in black. The carpet field is of white tesserae, laid in diagonal rows in a herringbone pattern. In the center of the carpet are two rows, each containing

00

00

4040 cm cm

Fig. 61. Eastern mosaic carpet in the martyrium.

[59]

11 cm cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

20 cm

Fig. 62. Central mosaic carpet along the southern wall in the martyrium.

[60]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0 0

50 50cm cm

Fig. 63. Western mosaic carpet along the southern wall in the martyrium.

[61]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 64. Eastern mosaic carpet along the southern wall in the martyrium.

Fig. 65. Depiction of an oil lamp in the mosaic carpet in the martyrium.

[62]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

Fig. 66. Mosaic carpet in room L222.

20 cm

abutting the narthex. The space between W27 and W28 was blocked to form a single wall. South of the martyrium is the narthex (L209), a rectangular hall measuring 6.6×4.2 m. We have called it the narthex, even though it does not exhibit the characteristic narthex plan. In phase IIA it was an integral part of the early church prayer hall. In phase IIB the church was expanded to the east, and the narthex, established in the west of the early church, was expanded further to the west (Figs. 68–69). Two entrances led to the narthex: one from the north, set in W2, was 1.2 m wide, with doorposts and a stepped threshold with a door pivot socket hewn on either side, and a rectangular bolt socket in its center. Mosaic repairs are evident around the threshold, and the entrance might have been rebuilt or repaired upon the expansion of the church. The second entrance, from the south, was set in W3; it was

seven buds in black, red, and white. The carpet was laid using 49 tesserae per sq. dm. To the south is room L223, measuring 2.2×0.8 m, with a plaster floor. The room was apparently entered from the martyrium. Dozens of tiles were found in the room, which was probably a storeroom (Fig. 67). Traces of plaster were found on the southern wall (W2). The western wall (W27) is built of an outer face of large stones coated in a thick layer of plaster, and an inner face, of small stones bound by cement. A plastered channel (L266), 0.2 m wide and 0.15 m deep, between W27 and W28, carried water to the cistern (L267) in the central courtyard. W27 apparently dated to phase IIA; its lower part was coated with hydraulic plaster to protect it from water that flowed to the east of the courtyard. Room L222 was built in phase IIB, when the church was expanded to the west. A new wall (W28) was built west of W27,

[63]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 67. An orderly stack of tiles found in storeroom L223.

Fig. 68. Narthex, view from the west.

[64]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 69. Narthex, view from the southeast.

narthex, bounded to the west by W5, built in phase IIB, extended the church area. A plastered bench runs along the entire length of the wall, continuing along a section of the northern (W2) and southern (W3) walls, which were rebuilt in phase IIB on the line of the early church walls. The bench along the southern wall partially covers a depressed round water drain paved with tesserae, part of the early church floor. A 0.8 m-wide mosaic strip with red and black buds was laid between the bench and the early mosaic carpet (see, Fig. 68). This addition, from phase IIB, is coarser than the early mosaic floor, and indicates the location of the early church’s western wall. The narthex mosaic floor is a remnant of the early church. It is decorated with a carpet encompassed by a broad frame of round medallions with depictions of various birds and additional elements in their centers. The birds depicted in the north and south of the frame faced those leaving the church, in contrast with the

0.9 m wide and had neither a threshold nor doorposts. At the entrance’s east is a lead pipe and nearby, a hewn channel; these were used to drain water from the narthex. A monumental 2 m-wide entrance set in W4 leads from the narthex to the church hall. The entrance has doorposts and a monolithic stepped threshold with a square pivot socket cut on either side, and three square bolt sockets in its center. Evidence of fire on the doorposts of the church entrance indicates the burning of the massive wooden entrance doors (Fig. 70). This probably occurred during the Persian conquest in 614 CE or the Arab conquest in 638 CE. The narthex walls are of dressed stones, except for the northern wall (W2), which is of ashlar construction. Traces of plaster with a herringbone pattern were found on the walls. W4, built in phase IIB, bounded the narthex to the east, separating it from the church hall. This massive, 1.9 m-wide wall cut the mosaic carpet that covered the entire early church floor. The

[65]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 70. Church entrance, northern doorpost with fire marks.

bird of the francolinus genus, a sapling with small red fruits, a bird holding some small object in its beak, a remnant of an additional, unidentified bird (Fig. 75), three medallions not preserved and, in the last medallion, a bird leg. Three of the four medallions in the southern row survived in their entirety. The easternmost medallion contains a round yellowish fruit; the following one, a cruciform flower; the depiction in the next medallion, which was only partly preserved, might have portrayed a basket filled with fruit; the westernmost medallion contains some kind of bird (Fig. 76). Between the medallion frame and the central field is a zigzag strip, followed by a thin strip of black tesserae. The main pattern is created by vine scrolls with leaves and grape clusters that emanate from an amphora in the mosaic’s center (Figs. 77–78). The medallions, fashioned of vine scrolls containing various animals, are placed in horizontal lines, with five medallions in each line. An ibex is depicted in the medallion on either side of the amphora; the one on the north is preserved in its entirety (Fig. 79). The medallions on the extreme north and south are not preserved. In the row above the amphora, the

central mosaic carpet, which is oriented toward the prayer hall (Fig. 71). The length–width ratio of this mosaic, compared to mosaics decorated with a similar pattern at other sites, confirms our assumption that the mosaic revealed in the narthex is only part of a much longer mosaic floor that covered the entire area of the early church. The carpet mosaic edges were formed of diagonally set white tesserae. Along the narthex walls and the main carpet frame were three horizontally set rows of tesserae. The frame surrounding the mosaic carpet consists of a strip, about 0.6 m wide, of medallions that are linked to each other and to the frame surrounding them by two alternating bands, one red and white and the other green and white. They are decorated with birds and fruits (Fig. 72). Three of the four medallions in the frame’s north survived in their entirety. The easternmost medallion contains a portrayal of some yellowish fruit (Fig. 73). The next one was not preserved, and the two additional medallions depict two standing hens facing each other (Fig. 74). In the west are four complete medallions and remnants of five more. From north to south we see depictions of a cluster of grapes, a

[66]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

depiction in the central medallion was not preserved, while those of the long-tailed bird in the medallions on either side of it, were preserved. In the two extreme medallions a rabbit is nibbling a cluster of grapes

0

(Fig. 80). The medallions were filled with tendrils, vine leaves, and clusters of grapes. As the mosaic is cut by the wall of the church hall, without regard for the animal depictions, it patently preceded the

40 cm

Fig. 71. Narthex mosaic carpet.

[67]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 72. Section of the narthex mosaic carpet frame adorned with medallions containing animals and fruit.

animal depictions. The mosaic was coarsely repaired in a later phase, but there had been no iconoclastic defacement; thus, the monastery most probably did not continue to function as a Christian site in the Umayyad period, and was abandoned after the Arab conquest. As mentioned above, the ratio between the mosaic’s length and width teaches that the mosaic was long, covering the entire area of the phase IIA church hall. The sounding pit conducted in the church hall under the phase IIB mosaic floor did not yield remains of an earlier mosaic (L723), and those who laid the phase IIB mosaic apparently removed the entire earlier mosaic; and excluding the western section, no trace was left of the floors of the early church or apse. The stratigraphic and stylistic data indicate that the narthex mosaic is early, belonging to phase IIA of the monastery (second half of the fifth century CE; Magen and Talgam 1990: 110–114, 120–122). The prayer hall (L200), belonging entirely to phase IIB, consists of a single longitudinal hall over the early church (Fig. 81). Like the church in the monastery of Martyrius, most churches in the monasteries in Judea and Samaria were not basilicas. The prayer hall measures 25.8×6.6 m. Its unusual disproportional dimensions are apparently the result of some architectural constraint. The chancel floor is some 0.3 m higher than that of the prayer hall, and was probably separated from it by a chancel screen, which is not preserved.

Fig. 73. Medallion adorned with fruit in the north of the mosaic carpet frame.

phase IIB church. The mosaic’s colors consist of two shades of red, ocher, light brown, two shades of green, white, gray, and black. The artist used 60–70 tesserae per sq. dm in general, and 110 tesserae per sq. dm in the

[68]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 74. Medallions adorned with hens in the north of the mosaic carpet frame.

large, finely dressed ashlars, measuring 0.4×0.65 m, and partly of fieldstones. It is preserved to a height of three courses, a layer of white plaster remaining on the first course. The east of the wall, added upon the expansion of the church, was of small fieldstones; it was coated with a layer of plaster in a herringbone pattern and then with an additional, smooth layer. The herringbone pattern enabled the absorption and reinforcement of the upper layer. Two courses in the west of the church’s southern wall are preserved; each course is 0.4 m high, with two faces of large worked stones and a fill of small stones and cement. The east of the southern wall is of dressed stones, each 0.5–0.6 m long, coated with colored plaster and decorated with red frescoes. As stated above, in phase IIB the church was extended eastward, significantly expanding its size. The apse, built over the remains of earlier construction, is 5.4 m wide and 3.2 m deep. Built of ashlars in secondary use, only one course is preserved, over a fill of small fieldstones bound with cement. The apse abuts the compound’s eastern wall. The early phase IIA church apse is not preserved; its stones were discovered in the debris of the late church bema foundations (L743).

There were five entrances to the prayer hall: the main entrance from the narthex; two in the northern wall (W2); and two in the southern one (W3). One entrance in the northern wall, 1.1 m-wide, with doorposts without sockets or a threshold stone, was reached by two steps from room L216; the upper step was 0.15 m high, the lower one, 0.2 m. On the latter, traces of plaster were found. The entrance led directly to the main entrance of the compound and the stables area. It probably had a wooden frame with a door, as it is unlikely that there would be free passage from this area to the church hall. This entrance was blocked at some stage in phase IIB. An additional 1.2 m-wide entrance in the northern wall, with traces of plaster on its sides, led to room L227. As this entrance lacked doorposts and sockets, a wooden door could not have been installed there. A 1.1 m-wide entrance in the southern wall led to the chapel (L201). The other entrance in this wall is narrow (0.78 m wide), and provided access to hall L225. Traces of plaster were discovered on this entrance’s sides and floor. These two entrances too could not have been closed with a wooden door. The church’s northern wall was built partly of

[69]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0 0 0 00 000 0 0 00

1 1 1 1 11

2 2 2 2 22

3 3 3 3 33

4 4 4 4 44

5 5 5 5 Fig. 75. Medallions in the west of the mosaic carpet frame, 55 adorned with birds and fruits: (1) a cluster of grapes,

(2) a francolinus bird, (3) a sapling with red fruits, (4) a bird holding some object, (5) an unidentified bird.

[70]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

A few mosaic remnants of the late church chancel, and part of a step leading to it, survived. No remains of chancel screen posts or panels were unearthed in situ. The sounding conducted beneath the apse revealed the continuation of the corridor, which led from the northeast wing, through room L210, to the complex of rooms to the south. This corridor (L214) was filled in phase IIB, the church apse built over it (Fig. 82). The sounding conducted in the chancel area, in the east of the church, revealed, beneath a thin plaster layer, a 0.2 m-thick layer of small stones and plaster (L749) that served as the bedding of mosaic. Beneath this is the stone debris (L743) of the early apse of the phase IIA church, used in the foundation of the church’s eastward extension. Some of the stones were covered in frescoes. Tile fragments were found in the debris, as well. Under the debris is a white plaster floor that preceded phase IIB of the church, and possibly

Fig. 76. Medallion adorned with a bird on the south of the mosaic carpet frame.

Fig. 77. Narthex mosaic carpet field adorned with medallions made of vine scrolls and containing various animals.

[71]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 78. Amphora in the center of the narthex mosaic carpet field.

Fig. 80. Rabbit nibbling a cluster of grapes in a medallion in the narthex mosaic carpet field.

Fig. 79. Ibex in a medallion north of the amphora in the narthex mosaic carpet field.

also phase IIA, belonging to phase I; a coin from the first half of the fifth century was found (L745; see p. 383, no.4). Below this floor is a 0.25 m-thick stratum of soil (L746; Fig. 54, section 2–2). The prayer hall, excluding the apse, is 22.7 m long, and paved in a large colorful mosaic (Fig. 83). A rectangular panel bearing a dedicatory inscription was laid in the eastern end of the hall floor, in front of the chancel, which was paved in mosaic. The mosaic floors are partially preserved: a small section of the apse mosaic and a number of fragments from the hall carpet. However, the bedding layer of the hall floor remained, bearing signs of the outline inscribed by the artist in the soft plaster before the mosaic was laid. At the edges of the mosaic carpet, diagonally laid white tesserae form a herringbone pattern, whose center is emphasized by a repeating pattern of schematic buds. The mosaic carpet is surrounded by a 0.6 m-wide frame, formed of two wave crests, one facing inward and the other outward, with a guilloche between them. The carpet field decoration is composed of pairs of elongated hexagons ending in intertwined concave strips that form circles, octagons, and diamonds (Fig. 84). One of the hexagons in each pair has color gradations from black to light gray, then to ocher, white, pink, and finally, to red. The diagonally laid tesserae create a snakeskin effect. The other hexagon in the pair consists of a guilloche strip, composed of two entwined wavy strips. One strip changes color

[72]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

(Fig. 90), a rabbit nibbling a grape cluster (Fig. 91), a fish head with a hook in its mouth (Fig. 92), an elephant head (Fig. 93), a bird leg, the body of a partridge (Fig. 94), and possibly also a barn owl (Fig. 95). Two medallions were decorated with a “harmony circle” (Fig. 96). The artist had 17 colors at his disposal, and used from 70 tesserae per sq. dm in the carpet edges to 100–140 tesserae per sq. dm in the animal depictions. The smallest tesserae in the mosaic were used in the “harmony circle,” with 210–240 tesserae per sq. dm. The mosaic bedding is composed of six to eight layers, between each of which is a thin layer of tesserae fragment waste. A dedicatory inscription, apparently in a tabula ansata, of which only a fragment measuring 1.45×0.41 m is preserved, was discovered at the eastern end of the hall (Fig. 97). Framed by two rows of black tesserae, the three lines of the inscription, written in letters of black tesserae, are each separated by a row of white tesserae. The letters are, on average, 9 cm high; the frame is 40 cm high. The inscription reads:

from ocher to light yellow and white, and the other, from black to gray to white (Fig. 85). The octagons formed between the hexagons, and the circles formed at their concave ends, contained animals and complex geometric patterns, while the diamonds in the space between them were decorated with braided intertwined strips with meander patterns or with continuous colorful zigzag lines. The animals set in the medallions are surrounded with a zigzag frame, while those in the octagons are surrounded by a strip, formed of rows of colorful tesserae. The carpet frame cuts the central decoration and forms semicircles adorned with a conch pattern at the edges and corners of the mosaic carpet (Fig. 86). The outline in the plaster layer enabled the reconstruction of thirty pairs of intertwined hexagons arranged in 10 rows of three pairs each. Fragments of only 13 of the medallions and octagons remain; 11 are populated with animal figures, e.g., a duck sitting on a swamp plant (Fig. 87), a yellow and brown rooster (Fig. 88), a donkey in dark colors and white (Fig. 89), remains of an octopus

[᾽Επὶ τοῦ ὁσίου πατρὸς ἡμῶ]ṿ Γενεσίου πρεσβ(υτέρου) κ(αὶ) ἀρχιμ(ανδρίτου) ἐγένετο] [καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον ὑπὲρ μ]ṿήμης καὶ ἀναπαύσεω-[ς …] [τῶν ὁσίων οг μακαρίων πατέρων ἡμ]ῶν᾽ Ιωάννου (καὶ)᾽Ιωάִ-[ννου…] In the days of our pious father Genesius, priest and archimandrite, also this work was done, for the remembrance and rest... of our pious (or: blessed) fathers John, John... of major construction in the monastery, therefore, undoubtedly belongs to this period, and was carried out under the supervision of Genesius. In addition to Genesius, two individuals named John are mentioned. A similar name appears in an inscription in the “Chapel of the Three Priests” (L412), in the southeast wing, and in the inscription above the cave in the north central wing (L328). Chapel L201 adjacent to the church is similar in plan to it, but of smaller dimensions (14.5×4.7 m). Rectangular in shape, it has a single apse, and its floor level is some 0.3 m lower than that of the church (Figs. 98–99). Two distinct building phases were discovered in the chapel, with two mosaic floors, one over the other.

This inscription, and that found in the refectory (L301), mention the archimandrite Genesius, who was responsible for the construction of the second phase of the monastery in the mid-sixth century CE (see p. 164). Genesius is not known from the historical sources. There is no information concerning the monastery after 544 CE (Di Segni 1990b: 153–155, inscription no. 2). Cyril tells of a monk “grievously troubled by an impure spirit” who had moved from the monastery of Martyrius to that of Euthymius, having stolen funds from the former (Life of Euthymius 50). This monk’s embezzlement might be related to extensive construction activity conducted in the monastery at that time and ending years later, most probably in 552/3 CE. The phase

[73]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 81. Late church from phase IIB, view from the west.

[74]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 82. Sounding in the church apse, view from the southeast. Note corridor L214 that led from the northeast wing, and the stone debris of the early apse, both from phase IIA.

The chapel has two entrances, one leading to the church (see above), and the other, 0.8 m wide and close to the southwestern corner, leading to an open corridor (L205). The southern wall (W8) is partially preserved; on its east, only the foundation remains, and its west is preserved to a height of three courses. The wall is built of fieldstones that are up to 0.5 m in length. Its inner face is coated in a thick layer of plaster, preserved to a height of 0.45 m. Its outer face is coated with two layers of plaster: the lower layer, 1 cm-thick white plaster incised with a herringbone pattern to hold the upper layer, was preserved to a height of 0.6 m; the upper layer, 2 cm thick, is of coarse white-gray plaster with gravel. The western wall (W7), common to corridor L205, room L206, and hall L225, is plastered and has two niches, one facing the chapel. The northern wall (W3) has four niches: the easternmost and largest of the niches, at floor level, is 1.5 m wide and 0.4 m deep, and has traces of white plaster; west of it is a niche, 0.3 m wide, 0.4 m deep, and 0.62 m above the floor; to its west is a niche, 0.85 m wide, 0.4 m deep, and 0.2 m above the floor; the westernmost niche, 0.65 m wide, 0.45 m deep, and 0.45 m above the floor, has traces of plaster. The apse, 3.75 m wide and 2.2 m deep, is preserved to a height of one course. The apse was separated from the prayer hall by chancel screen panels, whose impression was left in the floor.

0 0

1

m

1 Fig. 83. Illustration of the mosaic carpet from the late church m prayer hall.

[75]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 85. Color gradation of the hexagon in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 84. Segment of the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 86. Conch pattern at the edge of the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 87. Duck sitting on a swamp plant in a medallion in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

[76]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 88. Body of a rooster in an octagon in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 89. Donkey in an octagon in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

[77]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 90. Remains of an octopus in a medallion in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 91. Rabbit nibbling a grape cluster in an octagon in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 92. Fish head with a hook in its mouth in a medallion in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

[78]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 93. Elephant head in an octagon in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 94. Body of a partridge in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

[79]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 95. Remains of a barn owl in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

Fig. 96. “Harmony circle” medallions in the prayer hall mosaic carpet.

[80]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

20 cm

Fig. 97. Dedicatory inscription in the church prayer hall.

pattern, and its center bears a repeating pattern of buds. Three horizontally laid rows of tesserae mark the mosaic borders abutting the wall. The carpet frame consists of a pattern of palmettes in alternating white and black. The base of each white palmette was filled with red tesserae (Fig. 101). The frame is outlined by two rows of black tesserae with two rows of white in between. The carpet field is decorated with a series of scales, subdivided into squares and triangles by strips of concave diamonds and ones of elongated leaves. A four-line dedicatory inscription in a tabula ansata was found, only two fragments of the text surviving (Figs. 102). The tabula ansata handles, only one of which survived, were decorated with a double volute that produced a heart-shaped pattern alongside which a three-colored diamond is set. Each line of the

On the apse’s north is a pier that had borne an arch that helped support the domed ceiling. Opposite this pier, on the apse’s south and adjacent to W8, remains of an additional pier were found. The chapel floor is paved in a mosaic surrounded by a 0.35 m-wide frame. Fragments of an undecipherable inscription were discovered at the foot of the bema, in a tabula ansata. The space between the chancel screen panels was ornamented with a simple intertwined pattern, while the chancel area was decorated with a large rectangular panel and a semicircular mosaic, both within a single frame (Fig. 100). Of the mosaic carpet that decorated the chapel hall only the edges, parts of the frame, and fragments of the pattern decorating the carpet field remain. The chancel carpet was better preserved. At the edges of the prayer hall mosaic carpet the tesserae were laid diagonally in a herringbone

[81]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The edges of the bema mosaic are of white tesserae laid diagonally in a herringbone pattern and densely decorated with buds. The chancel mosaic is enclosed by a frame of ocher beads and reels in a black strip that is consists of two rows of white tesserae bordered on either side by a row of black. The rectangular bema panel consists of brown hearts, each surrounded by three to five rows of white tesserae. Between the hearts are small flowers of turquoise-gray tesserae. The apse mosaic carpet is divided from that of the bema by strips of beads and reels, and the edges of the apse are paved with diagonally laid white tesserae ornamented with schematic buds. The artists used tesserae of six colors to produce the mosaic: red, black, white, turquoise-gray, ocher, and brown; employing 72–82 tesserae per sq. dm. The sounding conducted in the mosaic revealed that the mosaic bedding consisted of a layer of soil fill, a layer of pebbles, and a layer of mortar mixed with ashes, over which is a thin layer of plaster in which the tesserae were laid. This mosaic belongs to phase IIB. Some 0.5 m underneath the chapel’s upper mosaic we uncovered the mosaic floors of a hall and of a courtyard, preserved in their entirety (L229; Fig. 103). The walls of the hall, which measures 6.45×3.25 m, were totally dismantled. Three rows of tesserae along the northern wall (W3) attest to the early line of the room’s wall, which was actually the southern wall of the phase IIA church. The mosaic has broad edges of diagonally laid white tesserae that form a herringbone pattern, the center of which is emphasized with schematic buds. The simple mosaic carpet frame consists of two rows of white tesserae and two rows of black. The carpet field is decorated with a grid of diamonds formed of five rows of diagonally laid tesserae. At the center of each diamond is a threecolored diamond. The carpet was laid using 56 tesserae per sq. dm. This mosaic belongs to phase IIA. A 1.2 m-wide entrance, paved in mosaic, led from the room’s south to a courtyard paved in especially large white tesserae, with 15–20 tesserae per sq. dm. Use of tesserae of this size is characteristic of Late Roman period courtyard floors discovered in Samaria and Judea (Magen 2012d: 13, 23; Magen and Aizik 2012: 120, 126, 128; Har-Even and Shapira 2012: 334).

Fig. 98. Chapel L201, view from the west.

inscription was separated from the next by two rows of white tesserae. The first line of the inscription begins with a decoration of palm fronds. The 10 cm-high letters are similar in shape to those of the inscription in the church. The inscription’s very few remaining words do not allow its decipherment: ҅  Υπὲρ … … … … εω ...  πατρὸς …  πατ …  ηγ … Di Segni, who attempted to reconstruct it, suggested that both the chapel and the inscription are dedicated to the memory of Martyrius, who founded the monastery, but whose name is not memorialized at the site. However, as she stresses, her reconstruction is speculative (Di Segni 1990b: 155–156, inscription no. 3). The pattern decorating the space between the chancel screen panels is of two intertwined oval rings.

[82]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

W202 W202

W6

W6

500.40

500.40

L207

500.82

500.13

L207

500.82

L203

499.99 499.99

499.89 499.89

L268 L208

L208

W10 L202

L229

500.02

500.12

L202

L229 L204

W9

500.02

W10

W11

W8

500.06 500.42

500.42

W3

W3

W8

500.06

L205

W W12

L205 L201 500.49

L201

500.66 500.66

L206 500.64

500.64

W7 W7

0 0

3

m

Fig. 99. Detailed plan of chapel L201 and the rooms to the south.

[83]

3

m

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

50

Fig. 100. Illustration of the chancel mosaic floor.cm

0

50

cm

The chapel, like the church, was built at an oblique angle to the eastern compound wall and to hall L225, as well as to the row of southern rooms and to the southern wall (W9) of the wing. Its northern wall is shared with the eastern addition of the late church southern wall. Two construction phases are evident in the western wall. Based on its style, the upper mosaic floor belongs to phase IIB; and it abuts the chapel walls. Repairs from a later stage are evident in the north of the mosaic floor. The lower mosaic floor’s style dates it to phase IIA. The chapel’s mosaic floors and walls, like those in the church, reveal two distinct building phases of the monastery; they also suggest an early phase (phase I), that continues underneath the entire wing.

Fig. 101. Section of the chapel mosaic frame adorned with palmettes.

[84]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

40 cm

Fig. 102. Dedicatory inscription fragment in the chapel.

Fig. 103. Mosaic floors from early phases under chapel L201.

[85]

0

40 cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The Service Rooms and Monastic Cells

of the east wing. The entrance, installed in phase IIB, is paved with a stone slab and has doorposts with bolt sockets. An entrance in the hall’s northern wall (W3) leads to the church. W3, also the church’s southern wall, cuts the hall’s eastern wall, consequently allowing us to assume that it postdates it. The eastern wall (W7), shared with the chapel, is preserved in its north to a height of 0.8 m, and in its south, to a height of 0.3 m. The wall is built of two faces, one, of fieldstones, measuring 0.6×0.4 m, bound with cement, and the other, facing the chapel, of ashlars measuring 0.6×0.5 m, bound by small fieldstones, and with two 2–3 cm-thick layers of plaster, that were preserved. Its southern section, facing the hall, was covered with two layers of 1.5 cm-thick white plaster. The wall has two niches: one facing the hall, 0.6 m wide, 0.4 m deep, and 0.65 m above the floor; and the other, facing the chapel, 0.7 m wide, 0.5 m deep, and some 0.6 m above the floor. A ceramic pipe, apparently a remnant of a drainpipe, was found sunken in the wall.

A large complex containing halls and rooms was unearthed south of the church, and two defined building phases of the monastery were discovered there, as in the church: phases IIA and IIB; and we assume there are remains from phase I as well. Hall L225, an integral part of the church, is connected to the monastic cells in the southwest of the wing. Measuring 9.52×3.2 m and paved in mosaic, it seems to have had a tile-covered gabled roof (Fig. 104). Its floor level is some 0.3 m lower than that of the church. Two distinct building phases were discovered in the hall, which was oblique to the phase IIB church and chapel, and appears to have preceded them. The hall was, however, built at a right angle to the southern wall of the wing (W9, W13). The hall’s southern wall (W13), built of fieldstones bound with cement, is preserved to a height of 0.8 m in its east, and 0.4 m in its west. A narrow (0.65 m) entrance in the wall leads to a paved passageway south

Fig. 104. Hall L225 and the adjacent rooms, view from the south.

[86]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

carpet field is decorated with a series of intertwined rectangles that form a frame for a panel that might have been ornamented with vine scrolls and animals. Each rectangle is formed of two bands, one light gray and white, the other, red and white. The two types of bands intertwine in such a way that each rectangular frame is divided into four parts, in which gray and red appear alternately. A diamond is set in the center of each rectangle. A bird, whose head is turned backward, is preserved in the mosaic; it was rendered in gray, pink, red, brown, and a bit of white. The bird in the panel stands next to what seemingly is a vine scroll from which a cluster of grapes hangs (Fig. 107). The mosaic is laid with 70–110 tesserae per sq. dm. The edges of the southern mosaic resemble those of the northern carpet, but the buds that emphasize the center of the herringbone pattern are reversed. Buds form a cross pattern in the corners (Figs. 108– 109). The carpet frame is composed of three rows of horizontally laid white tesserae, two rows of black, two of white, and two additional rows of black. The main pattern consists of a grid of diamonds made of two rows of black tesserae. The mosaic’s southwestern corner is composed of a flower bud diamond pattern, of red tesserae. In the center of each diamond is either a flower with a cross made of buds or a diamond. The half diamonds at the carpet frame’s edge are ornamented with a bud that points inward. Here, the mosaic was laid using 64–72 tesserae per sq. dm. In the center of the hall is a rectangular mosaic, closely flanked on either side by a rectangular carpet decorated with buds (Fig. 110). These carpets exhibit different workmanship, and are a late addition from phase IIB; they impinge on the central carpet frame. The rectangular mosaic consists of two rectangles, each containing a diamond. The right triangles thus formed at the corners are decorated with concentric triangles. In the center of the western diamond is a circle divided into four sections from which two volutes and two oval motifs emerge. In the eastern diamond, of similar decoration, the circle is divided into eight sections, from which four volutes emanate. The pattern formed is of two diamonds inside rectangles, with similar ornamentation but different colors. One diamond has a white background, the other one, red. The carpet was laid using 72–90 tesserae per sq. dm.

The western wall (W14, W17), preserved to a height of one to two courses, is built of fieldstones with a fill, and traces of plaster remained on part of the lower course. The wall’s south (W14) is aligned with the mosaic, unlike its northern, diagonal expansion (W17), which was apparently built at an angle to the church wall to enable installation of the church entrance. The wall’s northern section is late, built in phase IIB. A 0.75 m-wide entrance in the north of the western wall leads to room L237. A niche in the center of the wall, 0.83 m wide, 0.4 m deep, and 0.23 m above the floor, has a stone slab base. The niche’s back wall, of large stones bound by a fill of fieldstones, is abutted by the plaster floor of the passageway from the west (L423). The niche was blocked in a later phase. A 0.75 m-wide entrance with a stone slab base that too was blocked in a later phase, is located close to the wall’s southwestern corner, 0.32 m above the floor. The structural changes in the room’s walls and the two layers of plaster indicate that the hall preceded the establishment of the chapel and the expansion of the church in phase IIB. It also indicates that the hall’s walls and parts of the mosaic floor belonged to phase IIA. The hall is decorated with three mosaic carpets, the northernmost and largest of which measures 4.33×2.22 m. The southernmost carpet, of geometric design, measures 2.17×2.16 m. The carpet between the two above-mentioned ones is narrow and rectangular (1.83×0.76 m), its short sides facing the longitudinal walls of the hall. On either side of it is a small carpet decorated with a simple pattern, apparently a late addition. The two southern carpets are preserved in their entirety, while the northern mosaic suffered severe damage, preventing its certain reconstruction (Figs. 105–106). A comparison of the mosaics shows that the northern one differs from the two others in stone type and ornamentation, and is apparently later. A rectangular section of mosaic that looks like part of a dismantled wall covering had been inlaid between the northern carpet and the one south of it. The northern carpet’s edges are of diagonally laid white tesserae that form a herringbone pattern, the center of which is emphasized with buds. The buds in the corners are arranged in a cross pattern. The edges abut the walls in three rows of horizontally set white tesserae. The carpet frame is composed of a narrow black strip followed by red zigzag strips. The main

[87]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 105. Hall L225 mosaic floor, view from the north.

[88]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

Fig. 106. Illustration of the northern mosaic carpet in hall L225.

Fig. 107. Bird depiction in the northern mosaic carpet in hall L225.

50 cm

0

50 cm

Fig. 108. Southern and central mosaic carpets in hall L225, view from the north.

[89]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

20 20cm cm

0 0

Fig. 109. Illustration of the southern mosaic carpet in hall L225.

which abuts the church wall. Two building phases can be distinguished along the length of the western wall, which abuts the mosaic floor. The structural changes in the walls and the opening of entrances in phase IIB indicate that the hall underwent dramatic changes between phases IIA and IIB. A row of rooms that open to a long corridor (L205) were uncovered south of the chapel (Fig. 111). Corridor L205 provided access to rooms L206, L204, and L203. It is 15 m long, 3.4 m wide in its east, and 1.8 m wide in its west. The corridor’s northern

The mosaics in the hall’s south differ from the one in its north. The mosaics were initially dated to the late group of phase IIB mosaics (Magen and Talgam 1990: 121) but in light of a re-evaluation and understanding of the structural changes in the hall, we ascribe the northern carpet, which resembles the church hall mosaic, to phase IIB, and the southern ones, to phase IIA. In phase IIA a wall had stood north of the southern mosaics; it was dismantled in phase IIB, so that a single hall was created. Late repairs are evident in the north of the mosaic floor,

[90]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

20 cm

Fig. 110. Central mosaic carpet in hall L225.

(L208) that was apparently hewn in phase I and continued in use in phase IIA of the monastery. A mosaic floor around the cistern opening was laid using large white tesserae, 15–20 per sq. dm. The floor level is some 0.4 m lower than that of the corridor (Fig. 112). In our opinion, this floor, which is the continuation of the courtyard floor discovered under the chapel, belongs to phase IIA and perhaps even to phase I (see Fig. 99). It has not been determined whether the cistern continued in use in phase IIB, or whether the upper mosaic floor abuts the cistern opening, since the floor was not preserved. Apparently, in phase IIB the floor of open corridor L205 inclined eastward, draining rainwater from the rooms towards the cistern. The phase I–IIA cistern was fed by a channel from a settling pit southeast of it that measured 1×1×0.46 m. The settling pit received its water from a built and

longitudinal wall (W8), also the chapel wall, is late; it was built over an earlier mosaic, apparently from phase I. The wall was built at an oblique angle to the compound’s eastern outer wall, clearly indicating its construction in phase IIB. The corridor’s southern wall (W10) is parallel to W9, and is shared by the row of rooms next to the southern wall of the wing; these rooms were in use in phase IIA, and possibly even in phase I. The corridor is paved with a mosaic carpet; the east of the mosaic was not preserved. The carpet, measuring 13×1.5 m, is composed of a diamond grid. The grid lines consist of two lines of red tesserae with a row of white in between. At the center of each diamond is another one set in a white background. The carpet was laid using large tesserae, 36–39 per sq. dm. The tesserae size might indicate that the corridor was unroofed. The mosaic carpet is dated to phase IIB. In the corridor’s east is an opening to a cistern

[91]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 111. Hall L205 and rooms south of chapel L201, view from the west.

covered in plaster. The plaster on the inner face was preserved to a height of 0.6–0.75 m. The 0.95 m-wide entrance in W9 leads from the outer passageway to the south of room L206. The northern wall (W10), common to rooms L203 and L204, is 0.75 m thick, and has two faces. The one facing the corridor is of ashlar, while that facing the rooms is of fieldstone, and covered in a layer of white plaster. The west of W10, which bounds room L206 on the north, is 0.45 m thick. It is later, and was built over the phase IIB mosaic. The eastern room (L203) measures 3.8×2.6 m and has a mosaic floor. It abuts the phase I outer compound wall on its east, and the wing’s southern wall on its south. The 0.5 m-thick wall (W11) separating this room from room L204, built over an early mosaic floor from either phase IIA or phase I, is preserved to a height of two courses. It is built of large fieldstones and coated with white plaster. Apparently, rooms

plastered subterranean channel, draining runoff water that flowed in the passageway adjoining the wing’s outer southern wall. An additional channel had been built on the lower mosaic floor to convey surplus water outside the compound’s eastern wall, most likely to solve flooding of the open courtyard. The threshold and floor of room L203 were elevated some 0.3 m above the lower mosaic floor so that the room would not be inundated in times of flooding. Close to the cistern are two late stone-cut troughs, brought after the monastery’s abandonment. One measures 0.84×0.5×0.55 m, and is 0.3 m deep; the other, irregular in shape, has dimensions of 0.65×0.5×0.55 m, and is 0.15 m deep. South of the corridor are rooms, L203, L204, and L206, which apparently functioned as monastic cells (Fig. 113). These rooms are adjacent to the wing’s southern wall (W9), which has two faces. The outer face is of ashlar; the inner one is of fieldstone, and

[92]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 112. Cistern L208, view from the west.

m-wide entrance, without a threshold or doorposts, in the west of its northern wall. The room’s western wall (W12), which separated it from room L206, is preserved to a height of two courses. The foundation courses are of long stones (1 m long and 0.5 m high), over which are courses of fieldstones. Two layers of white plaster coat the walls. The room is connected to L206 by a 0.9 m-wide entrance, blocked in a later phase. Room L206, measuring 5.6×2.6 m, is paved in a colorful mosaic. The room has two entrances: one, 0.9 m wide, leads to corridor L205; and the other provides access to the passageway outside the southern wall of the east wing. The repairs in the mosaic floor in the entrances clearly indicate that the latter were installed in the last phase of the structure. Close to the southern wall is a depression in the mosaic through which water

L203 and L204 were originally a single hall that was then divided into two monastic cells. Access to the room was provided by a 0.7 m-wide entrance in the northern wall. The room’s mosaic floor, laid using 36 tesserae per sq. dm, abuts the southern and northern walls. The mosaic floor was not preserved in the center of the room, enabling excavation of this section. An early subterranean channel (L268) was revealed that carried water from the passageway outside the east wing’s southern wall to cistern L208. The channel, 0.2 m deep and 0.2 m wide, is coated with the hydraulic plaster characteristic of the early phase, and is covered with stone slabs measuring 0.85×0.3 m. Room L204 measures 4.2×2.7 m; its mosaic floor, laid using large tesserae, 25–37 per sq. dm, abuts the room’s walls, except for the eastern wall, which is built over it. Access to the room was provided by a 0.7

[93]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 113. Hall L205 and the rooms to its south, view from the west.

row of black, a zigzag strip, and a guilloche strip of two ribbons, one red and white, the other, black and white. The carpet field is decorated with interlaced circles and squares in red, black, and ocher, bounded on one side by a row of white tesserae. The squares’ corners are ornamented with buds facing inwards at a diagonal. In the center of each circle is a cruciform pattern formed of four buds of the type found in the squares’ corners. The space between the circle and the adjacent squares is decorated with buds facing inwards at a diagonal. The mosaic was laid using 60–80 tesserae per sq. dm, while the careless repair in the northern part was made with larger tesserae of a yellowish color. Small monastic cells were built next to the narthex’s southern entrance, on the southwest of the church. Most of this construction belongs to phase IIB. The

drained outside. The northern wall (W10) contains a niche, 0.7 m wide and 0.5 m deep. This wall cuts the mosaic floor, and the resulting space between the early mosaic and the wall was repaired with a coarse mosaic. This clearly indicates that the wall postdates the mosaic. Assuming that the mosaic carpet was situated in the center of the first stage of the room, and that the carpet’s distance from the eastern and western walls was equal, it is probable that the mosaic carpet was equidistant from the southern and northern walls. Thus, in phase IIA, to which the mosaic floor belongs, the room must have measured 4.5×4 m, with a colorful mosaic in its center. The edges of the mosaic were of white tesserae laid diagonally in a herringbone pattern, the center of which is emphasized by schematic buds. The mosaic’s frame consists of three rows of white tesserae and a

[94]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 114. Monastic cells next to the narthex’s southern entrance, view from the west.

secondary use. Paving stones, probably in secondary use, were laid west of the entrance. This entrance was roofed by an arch of north–south orientation, whose north is incorporated in the narthex wall, its south resting on a pier. An additional entrance, 2.5 m wide, provides access from a passageway on the south (L424). Its paving stones are in secondary use.

monastic cells adjoin the southern wall of the wing (W13, W80; Fig. 114). L238, the southern vestibule of the narthex and the early church from phase IIA, measures 5.7×2.8 m (Fig. 115). It has two broad entrances. One, 2.7 m wide, in the west, from the central courtyard, is reached by a large stone step, apparently a lintel in

[95]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

and flooded them. Also, although the vestibule was roofed, it was open on its west and south. The fact that the early mosaic abuts the eastern wall of the vestibule proves that this room, too, originally belonged to phase IIA of the monastery, and underwent changes in phase IIB. Room L237 is south of the church, east of the narthex vestibule, and west of room L225. The room has two entrances: one, as noted, from hall L225, and the other, 0.8 m wide, from the south, blocked in a later phase. The western and southern walls (W15 and W16), preserved to a height of two to three courses, are of small and medium-sized stones bound in cement, with traces of plaster on them. The room has a plaster floor. A sounding conducted along the northern and eastern walls revealed that the floor is raised some 0.25 m above the bedrock. Remains of a

The entrance had been roofed by an arch, east–west in orientation, on piers. The vestibule floor (3×2 m) is of large white tesserae, suitable for an open structure. It abuts the southern wall of the narthex, the eastern wall common with room L237, and the step to the west. Passageway pavement L424, in contrast, clearly rests on the mosaic floor, postdating it. A lead pipe, 6 cm in diameter, under the mosaic, channeled excess water outside the narthex, in a southerly direction. To lay the pipe, a line, approx. 0.2 m wide, was cut in the vestibule’s mosaic floor; after its installation the floor was repaired with different mosaic tesserae. A shallow channel cut in the southeastern corner of the narthex conveyed runoff water to the lead pipe. Apparently, after the installation of the mosaic floor, it became evident that rainwater entered both the vestibule and the narthex from the courtyard, which was higher,

Fig. 115. Vestibule L238, view from the south.

[96]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

on the room’s west, led to a narrow passageway that led southward beyond the east wing. The room and the passageway are separated by a row of narrow, low stones and a stone screen adjoining them on the east; there might have been an additional wooden partition. The passageway and entrance might have been created after the cell already existed. A sounding pit conducted under the passageway floor revealed a north–south channel (L725), of fieldstones bound in cement, coated with hydraulic plaster. This channel was apparently connected with the one beneath the narthex vestibule. West of the paved narrow passageway is an additional cell (L419) measuring 2.9×2.3 m, entered from the north. This 0.6 m-wide entrance has a threshold. The northern wall (W79), of medium-sized fieldstones, contains a rounded niche, 0.65 m wide, 0.45 m deep, whose base is 0.15 m lower than the cell floor; the niche’s ceiling consists of an 8 cm-thick stone slab. The niche and wall are coated in white plaster. The eastern wall (W78), of medium-sized fieldstones, is preserved to a height of 0.7 m; a layer of white plaster coating is preserved to a height of 0.5 m. The southern wall (W80) is preserved to a height of 1 m. Along the wall is a bench, 0.7 m wide and 0.3 m high, covered in tiles and plaster. The western wall (W81), built of different-sized fieldstones, is preserved to a height of 0.8 m. The room’s floor is of plaster, with stone slabs beneath the plaster in its northeastern corner. A jug with coins was discovered in the niche (see p. 385, nos. 19–23). Room L419 is adjoined on the west by room L417 (4.3×3.5 m) with a built round kiln, 2.1 m in diameter. The kiln floor was covered in stone slabs, and its walls are of different-sized fieldstones. The space between the walls and kiln sides was filled with soil and small stones. It has not been determined whether the kiln was built in the room from the outset, or incorporated later; it might have been a lime kiln, used in the Early Islamic period.

bench, built of fieldstones and preserved to a height of 10–20 cm, were discovered along the southern wall. In the room a bronze incense shovel was found (see Pl. 52). South of the vestibule is a passageway (L423, L424) that provided access to the monastic cells and to the second story above room L237. Four steps of the 0.9 m-wide staircase that ascended to the second story are preserved. The passageway is paved in stone slabs. Its east is paved partly with stone slabs in secondary use and partly with a thick layer of plaster. The passageway is divided by later walls. Cell L422 lies south of the passageway and west of hall L225. The cell measures 2.75×2.05 m and was accessed by a 10 cm-high step and a 0.72 mwide entrance. The latter, with neither a threshold nor doorposts, is situated in the east of the room’s northern wall (W74). The wall, preserved to a height of three courses of fieldstones, contains a niche whose stone slab base is 0.4 m from the floor. The southern wall (W13), preserved to a height of 1.1 m, is built of small fieldstones with larger stones over them, and coated with well-preserved gray plaster. The eastern wall (W14) contains an entrance. An installation built of stone slabs, probably an oven, 0.55 m wide and 0.45 deep, was discovered in the southwestern corner. The floor was paved in a thick layer of gray cement containing small stones. An additional cell (L421), measuring 2.26×1.88 m, has a 0.7 m-wide entrance without a threshold or doorposts in the east of the northern wall (W77). The walls, of medium-sized fieldstones, are coated with white plaster. The eastern wall (W75), plastered in a herringbone pattern, has a rectangular niche, 0.75 m wide and 0.25 m deep. In the southern wall (W13) there is a rounded niche, and an additional niche in the northern one. The floor is paved in a coarse layer of plaster with incorporated stone slabs. To the west is an additional monastic cell (L420), 3.9×2.67 m, paved in a thick layer of plaster. A 0.9 m-wide entrance without a threshold or doorposts,

[97]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area III: Southeast Wing

eastern compound wall (W202), is 2.5 m wide (Fig. 120). It consists of two ashlar doorposts, of which only the southern one is preserved, to a height of two courses. The stepped threshold, of three stones, has a door pivot socket in each of its corners. No bolt sockets were uncovered. The entrance had a doublewinged wooden door. The compound’s southern wall (W201) apparently contained an additional phase I gate (see pp. 123–124). The gate in W202 provides access to a paved vestibule (L218), 4.7×2.5 m, whose roof was supported by arches on piers, of which only a single pier remained on the vestibule’s south. A surplus channel (L269), discovered under the vestibule floor, continued to the southeastern corner of room L231, south of the vestibule. The unplastered channel, 0.4 m deep and wide, connected with the channel that passed beneath room L203 in the east wing. In phase III the channel was covered in stone slabs in secondary use, their unworked sides facing upward (Fig. 121).

The southeast wing contains a long passageway, halls, and large rooms whose entrances, with doorposts and dressed thresholds, could be closed with wooden doors and bolts; some of its floors are paved with large tesserae. The straight, parallel walls of the halls are perpendicular to the compound’s outer walls. This wing is similar in plan and construction to the southwest wing, but differs from the wings in the compound’s north, where the rooms’ walls are not parallel and there is no symmetry between the structures and the other compound walls. The remains in the southeast wing belong to phases I, IIB, and III. In phase IIA the monastery area was reduced, the southeast wing becoming outside of its bounds (Figs. 116–119). One of the two early gates of the phase I compound, which was later blocked in phase IIB, was discovered in this wing. The gate, situated in the south of the

Fig. 116. Southeast wing and the complex of rooms south of the church, view from the northwest.

[98]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 117. Southeast wing, view from the west.

floor level. The entrance is located in the western wall (W61), which has two faces and is preserved to a height of two courses. The face toward the courtyard is of ashlars coated in a layer of plaster, patches of which remain; and the other face is of small stones. The wall facing the courtyard contains a plastered 0.55 m-wide niche, blocked in a later phase with small stones. The northern (W60) and southern (W62) walls are preserved to a height of one course. W60 has an outer face of dressed stones, and an inner one of small stones. The outer face of W62 is of dressed stone, the inner one, of small fieldstones bound with cement. The room’s floor was of stone slabs, apparently in secondary use, laid in a north–south orientation; these were partially preserved. Close to the room’s northwestern corner a round depression, 0.14 m in diameter and 1 cm deep, had been cut in one of the paving slabs, with a channel, 0.4 m long and 3 cm deep, leading from it. Beneath the floor is channel L269. The room’s roofing was not determined, nor is the room’s function clear. Stone slab pavements

A passageway paved in finely fitted stone slabs led from the vestibule to the courtyards to its south (Fig. 122). The floors of the latter were similarly paved with well-fitted slabs that were integrated with those in the passageway. The vestibule led to a square courtyard (L235), measuring 6×5 m and roofed by arches. Both piers of the western arch remain: the one on the south is adjacent to W62, the other, to the east wing’s southern wall (W9). In the south of the partially preserved stone slab floor is an open rock-cut channel over stone slabs in secondary use (L443). This channel is the continuation of the north–south one that exits to the east through a hole in the southwestern pier. The roofed courtyard leads westward to a central open courtyard (L432), room L231, and stable L233 to its south (Fig. 123). The eastern wall of room L231, measuring 3×4.5 m, is the compound wall. Access to the room was provided by a 1.1 m-wide entrance, of which both doorposts and a threshold that contained a pivot socket for a wooden door are preserved. The threshold is elevated some 4 cm above the room’s

[99]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

W202 L218

L269

499.27

499.86

L233

L231

W60

499.95

W61

499.82

W62

L235

L443

W65

W9

L234

W63

500.27

L436

500.25

L232

499.48

W69

W68

L251

L432

L437

W177 500.41

499.91

L427

W13

L431 500.21

L425

L430

L435 L433 W71

W72

L434

L428

L444

500.67

L426 W73

W83 500.81

L725

W84

500.68

L412

W86

W80

L416

L429

W85

W81 501.12

L406

L414

501.52

L415

501.50

L411

L407

501.22

0

5

m

501.12

W64/1

W64/2

W93

Fig. 118. Detailed plan of the southeast wing.

[100]

W201

W67

W66

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 119. Reconstruction of the southeast wing in phase IIB.

were generally used for courtyards and stables. Although mangers were discovered in the stables in the northeast of the site and in stable L233, none was discovered here; but there might have been one in the missing section of pavement close to the eastern wall. A stable (L233) measuring 9.7×5.5 m was revealed south of room L231. It was entered through a 1.1 m-wide entrance in the room’s northern wall (W62). The entrance has doorposts and a stepped, elevated threshold with a pivot socket. The stable’s western wall (W63) is preserved to a height of two to three courses of ashlars. The southern wall (W65) is preserved in its west to a height of two courses, and in its east, to one course. It has two faces: the one toward the stable, of ashlars; the other, toward L234, of fieldstones and cement. The eastern wall is the compound wall. The stable roof was supported by three north–south arches borne on piers; the piers were preserved, except for the eastern-most ones, of which only the foundations

remained. The stable was paved in dressed stone slabs, with an average size of 0.8×0.5 m, arranged in straight rows of north–south orientation. The stone slabs were mostly closely fitted and seemingly from the original phase I floor, with the rest in secondary use. There are mangers along three of the stable walls. A stone manger, 0.45 m high, some 0.55 m wide, and 0.18 m deep adjoins the western wall; its rim is of a 0.16 m-wide stone, and its foundation, of small stones. Remains of built mangers were found in the northern and southern walls. Adjacent to the eastern wall there is no stone pavement. This area might have contained mangers that were removed. The dating of these two rooms is uncertain. The paving stones and some of the building stones, the entrance doorposts, and the thresholds undoubtedly belong to phase I, but changes in the construction conducted in phase IIB, as well, are evident. These might be stables that belong to phase I.

[101]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 120. Southeastern entrance to the compound, view from the west.

Courtyard L432 is an open courtyard, around which are a series of rooms and the “Chapel of the Three Priests”. The open courtyard was paved in stone slabs, most of which did not survive; it joined additional open courtyards with similar floors. It connected in the west with courtyard L407, which continued in the direction of the built cistern, and in the south, with courtyard L430, thus producing a paved open area. Rooms L427, L436, and L437 are located west of stable L233 and north of hall L234. The stone slabs on which they are built are a continuation of the floor of open courtyard L432. Room L436 is a corridor, open to the north, which measures 7.5×2.5 m. Its western wall (W69), only partially preserved, is of small fieldstones bound with cement. The eastern

wall (W63) is shared with stable L233. The corridor is paved with well-fitted stone slabs laid in a north– south orientation. To the west are rooms L437 and L427, which have a common northern wall (W68), preserved to a height of one course. This wall consists of an outer face of dressed stones and an inner one, toward the rooms, of small stones and cement; it has two arch-bearing piers, one in its center, and the other, at its western end. The southern wall (W65) is shared by hall L234 and stable L233. At the eastern end of room L437, 2.6×2.5 m, are two piers bearing an arch. The western wall (W177), built opposite the pier in the center of the northern wall, contains an entrance to room L427, and is preserved

[102]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 121. Channel L269 covered in stone slabs in secondary use in vestibule L218 and room L231, view from the west.

to a height of two courses. W177 is later than the southern and northern walls. Room L427, 3×2.5 m, is closed in the west by W66, partially preserved to a height of two courses. Rooms L427, L436, and L437, apparently initially a single roofed corridor (Fig. 124), were later divided by W177, with W66 being built to the west. Courtyard L430 is an open inner courtyard measuring 5.5×4.5 m. Apparently, in phase I it was paved in stone slabs; only the section to the east that abuts W67, and an additional section in the courtyard’s southwestern corner, was preserved. In the northwestern corner a square basin (L444) was found sunk in the ground. The installation, 0.78×0.78 m, contains a conical depression with maximal dimensions of 0.54 m in diameter and 0.42 m in depth (see Fig. 296). An entrance led from the courtyard to rectangular hall L234, measuring 18.6×8 m, the eastern and southern walls of which are compound walls. Its northern wall (W65) is common to stable L233 and to rooms L436, L437 and L427 (Fig. 125). The western wall (W67) is built directly on the bedrock; its outer face, toward the courtyard, is of ashlars, its inner face, of fieldstones. The 1.7 m-wide hall entrance, situated in this wall, consists of two threshold stones; the doorposts are not preserved. The threshold, elevated 0.12 m above the courtyard floor, contains a round socket, 9 cm in diameter and 4 cm deep, on either side, with a bolt socket in its center. Three stairs descend from the threshold to the hall, whose floor is of beaten

Fig. 122. Vestibule L218 after reconstruction, and the passageway leading west from the southeastern gate, view from the east.

earth. The soundings conducted in the hall floor were excavated to the bedrock and revealed no remains of a pavement. The hall might initially have been paved with stone slabs, removed in phase IIB for use elsewhere in the monastery. Six piers were installed, 2.5 m apart, along the length of the hall, in its center. The three piers on the east are preserved to a height of one course, and those on the west, to two courses. The thinness of the hall walls hints that it was not roofed with vaults, but with wooden beams laid from north to south over the arches, similar to stable L217 in the northeast wing. The hall probably originally belonged to phase I and continued in use in phase IIB. West of hall L234 are two small rooms, L435 and L428, which open to the courtyard. Room L435 measures 3×2 m, and has a narrow (0.62 m wide) entrance, of which two doorposts and a threshold are preserved. The threshold is elevated some 0.25 m above the courtyard floor. The entrance is located in the northern wall (W72), which is built of two faces.

[103]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 123. Room L231 and stable L233, view from the northeast.

The outer face, toward the courtyard, is of ashlars, the inner face, of fieldstones. The western wall (W71) is of small fieldstones. The southern wall (W201) is the compound wall, and the eastern wall (W67) is shared with hall L234. The walls are preserved to a height of one course. In a later phase a channel coated with red plaster (L433), dated to phase IIB, drained water from the roofs of this room, adjoining room L428, and hall L234, to outside the compound. The space between the channel and the western wall was paved with two rows of stones in secondary use, including a threshold stone. Room L428, measuring 3×2.8 m, has a narrow (0.82 m wide) entrance, with surviving doorposts and a threshold elevated some 0.16 m above the courtyard floor level (Fig. 126). Here, too, the walls are preserved to a height of one course. The western wall (W73) is of ashlars and fieldstones. The room is paved in a white mosaic, laid using 25 large tesserae per sq. dm. The mosaic abuts all the room’s walls, except for the southern one, where the mosaic is not

preserved. The room most likely belongs to phase I. West of room L428 is a large inner courtyard (L406), measuring 12.5×8.5 m, that adjoins the compound walls on its south. The courtyard presents two construction phases. Three entrances, two of which were blocked in phase IIB, led to the inner courtyard. Of the entrance from courtyard L430 on the east, one doorpost remained. An additional entrance with doorposts, from the west, is 0.9 m wide. Of the 1.6 m-wide entrance from the north, two threshold stones survived, without pivot sockets. The courtyard walls, except for the compound wall, were preserved to a height of one to two courses. The northern wall (W86) is 8.7 m long and 1.4 m thick; its west is not preserved. The wall has two faces: one toward the courtyard, of coarsely dressed stones; and the other, of small and medium-sized stones. In a later phase the wall was thickened for its entire length with mediumsized fieldstones. This addition was built on the paving slabs and blocked the northern entrance. The western wall (W64/1), of ashlars, is a late addition, built on the

[104]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 124. Early stage corridor from before the establishment of rooms L427, L436 and L437, view from the north.

paving stones of the inner courtyard; it adjoined W93 on its east and blocked the western entrance. Piers were installed along the length of the center of the courtyard. Three of them were unearthed: one adjacent to the eastern wall, another in the west of the courtyard, and the third, incorporated in later W64/1. The entire inner courtyard was paved with closely fitted stone slabs, some apparently removed in phase IIB to pave the north of the monastery. A shallow 0.19 m-wide channel extended eastward from the courtyard’s center toward a stone with a fashioned drain hole, through which the water flowed southward toward a plastered channel (L429), some 0.3 m wide and covered with slabs, that carried it beyond the compound (Fig. 127). The north of the courtyard was covered, while its south was open. This paved inner courtyard belonged to phase I, and underwent change in phase IIB. North of the inner courtyard is a rectangular portico (L411) with a mosaic floor; open to the north, and apparently also to the west, it measured 6.8×2.5 m. As was noted above, an additional entrance in the

southern wall (W86) that led to the inner courtyard was blocked in a later phase. North of the portico is an open courtyard (L407), east of which is the “Chapel of the Three Priests” (L412). The portico walls are preserved to a height of one course. The especially thick western wall (W64/2), of ashlar construction, with a fill of fieldstones and cement, was built over the portico mosaic floor and on the paving stones of courtyard L407. Wall W64/2, built in phase III, served to bound the agricultural area established there. It is the northern continuation of W64/1, which most likely belongs to phase IIB. The foundations of four piers were discovered, the fourth of which was incorporated in the late western wall; and the portico facade probably consisted of three arches that supported a wooden roof. The mosaic floor, composed of especially large tesserae that resemble those used in fourth century CE Roman mosaics, abuts the eastern and southern walls in three horizontal rows of white tesserae, and is cut on the west by W64/2. The mosaic frame consists of five rows of tesserae: one

[105]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 125. Hall L234 and the rooms to its north, view from the northwest.

Fig. 126. Room L428, view from the southeast.

[106]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 127. Fashioned drain hole and channel L429, through which the water flowed out of the compound, view from the south.

row of white, one, of black, two, of white, and a row of black. The mosaic’s carpet field is decorated with black diamonds arranged in rows. The mosaic was laid using 16 tesserae per sq. dm. Twenty tesserae per sq. dm were used in the frame. Based on its tesserae size and structure, we may surmise that the portico, before the changes introduced into it, belonged to phase I.

The “Chapel of the Three Priests” Chapel L412, located in the center of the south of the monastery, measures 6.7×4.8 m (Figs. 128–129). It underwent a number of building phases. The 0.95 m-wide entrance is in the chapel’s east, near its southeastern corner. The doorposts are preserved to a height of one course. The threshold is composed of three stone slabs on which two round pivot sockets and a rectangular bolt socket were installed. Outside

the chapel entrance we uncovered an area measuring 1.7×1.5 m, paved in stone slabs (Fig. 130); along with a 1.15×0.95 m square installation coated with white plaster and reinforced by small fieldstones. The installation on the paved area was placed there in a later phase, and blocked the entrance. The chapel’s partially preserved, 0.7 m-thick eastern wall (W83) has two faces: an inner face of small fieldstones bounded by a layer of small stones that held the layer of white plaster that is preserved to a height of 0.45 m above the floor; and an outer face, of ashlars. The wall contains a small apse, 1 m wide and 0.7 m deep, also coated in a layer of white plaster and built over the chapel mosaic floor. The apse was incorporated into the wall in a later stage. The apse was flanked by two relatively small, decorative semicircular columns, coated in gray cement and then in white plaster. Only the base of the southern column survived, while the northern column, 0.16 m in diameter, which stands on a rectangular cement base, is preserved to a height of 0.6 m (Fig. 131). The semicircular columns might have been topped by decorative Corinthian capitals made of stucco. The apse mosaic floor exhibits a strip of three rows of large white tesserae, laid using 36 tesserae per sq. dm, which differ from the chapel mosaic in both type and size. This strip marks the line of the wall that was breached and the subsequent completion of the mosaic. At the foot of the apse is a rectangular depression that damaged the central carpet frame; apparently the damage was caused by the base of a stone table placed there afterwards. The alter table base was found in situ. The apse is also flanked by two piers, each measuring 0.6×0.4 m, that abut the mosaic floor, and whose white plaster is partially preserved. The partially preserved 0.6 m-thick northern wall (W84) is built of large fieldstones and an inner face of smaller fieldstones bound in cement and coated with several layers of white plaster. A 0.95 m-wide entrance was revealed on its western end, with a threshold stone that contained a socket. The entrance threshold, elevated 0.35 m above the chapel floor, was reached by a 17 cm-high step, installed over the chapel floor. This entrance was probably breached after the eastern entrance had been blocked. The 0.6 m-thick western wall (W85) is shared with portico L411. Built of small and medium-sized

[107]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 128. “Chapel of the Three Priests,” view from the west.

Fig. 129. Reconstruction of the “Chapel of the Three Priests.”

[108]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

fieldstones, its inner face is of small stones coated with a thick layer of white plaster. Two piers adjoin the wall; two dressed stones of the southern pier survived, measuring 0.6×0.5 m, as well as one stone, of similar size, of the northern pier. The southern wall’s (W86) inner face, like the other chapel walls, is plastered. East of the chapel a second story was reached by an ashlar staircase, of which a single course is preserved.

Fig. 130. East entrance to the “Chapel of the Three Priests” and the paved area in front, view from the east. Left of the entrance is basin L444.

The chapel, paved in a mosaic preserved in its entirety, abuts the hall walls (Fig. 132). The mosaic edges are of diagonally laid rows of tesserae forming a herringbone pattern, with its center highlighted by a row of schematic flower buds. The mosaic floor’s corners are ornamented with cross-shaped blossoms. The 0.5 m-wide mosaic frame is of black and white tesserae fashioned as a sort of double meander. The frame encompasses two panels. The western panel consists of interlaced circles. These are a variation of the refectory mosaic. It is formed of circles, each composed of four pointed oval units, in ocher and white and in black and white. In the center of each oval unit is a diamond pattern in red, black, and white. A reddish and white wavy strip surrounds the circles. The eastern panel consists of a dedicatory inscription set in a tabula ansata laid opposite the apse, and flanked by a circle interlace on its south and interlace stripes enclosed in a square on its north (Fig. 133). Each line of the four line inscription is separated by two rows of white tesserae with a row of red tesserae in between. The tabula handles were symmetrically embellished with three trichromatic interlaced strips; this same type of strip forms the square to the north of the tabula. The strip’s colors are gradated from dark gray to greenish gray, light

Fig. 131. “Chapel of the Three Priests” apse.

[109]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

1 m

Fig. 132. “Chapel of the Three Priests” mosaic floor.

[110]

0

1 m

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

40 cm

Fig. 133. Dedicatory inscription in the “Chapel of the Three Priests.”

gray, and white; from ocher to mustard yellow and white; and from red to pink and white. The mosaic edges consisted of relatively large tesserae, 30 tesserae per sq. dm; 42–58 tesserae per sq. dm were used in the main circles and the depiction of the frame, and 100 tesserae per sq. dm in the interlaces, circles, and dedicatory inscription. The dedicatory inscription begins and ends with a palm frond. It reads: Κ(ύρι)ε ὁ Θ(εὸ)ς ἡμῶν μνήσθητι ἐν τῆ βασιλείᾳ σου᾽ Ελπιδίου᾽ Ιωάννου Γεωργίου τῶν πρεσβ(υτέρων) κ(αὶ) πάσης τῆς ἐν Χ(ριστ)ῷ συνοδίας. O Lord our God, remember in Thy kingdom Elpidius, John and George the priests, and all their community in Christ

The mosaic floor belongs to the phase IIB mosaics. The central refectory, hospice chapel, and “Chapel of the Three Priests” mosaics greatly resemble each other. They apparently were executed by the same artist, and all are to be dated to the second half of the sixth century CE (Di Segni 1990b: 159–160, inscription no. 7). The “Chapel of the Three Priests” was installed in phase IIB within an early structure from phase I. The early structure had a second story, and faced the open courtyard (L432) and the southeastern gate. Several changes were instituted in the structure in phase IIB. First, the mosaic floor was laid and the room probably functioned as a memorial room. In a later stage, the room was converted into a chapel, with the construction of the apse and the entrance from the north.

[111]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area IV: Southwest Wing In this wing remains were discovered from three building phases identified at the site: phases I, IIB, and III. The clearest phase I remains of the compound that were neither harmed nor changed during the existence of the monastery were discovered here. In phase IIA this wing, like the southeast wing, fell into disuse, leaving it almost unaltered. The minor changes made in phase IIB preserved its original plan (Figs. 134 –136). A built cistern beneath an open courtyard was found in the center of the complex. South of the cistern is a portico paved in mosaic, and to its west, a portico, paved in well-fitted stone slabs. Arch-bearing piers were discovered in both portico facades facing the cistern. The porticos led to adjoining large rooms and halls. East of the cistern is a large courtyard paved in well-fitted stone slabs (Fig. 137). The style and type of construction in this wing and in the one to

its east differ from those in the rest of the monastery. This raised many questions, and only after the identification of the phase I remains were we able to resolve the difficult and problematic issues relating to this complex. The built cistern is the central architectural element in this wing, and an important stratigraphical point for understanding the wing’s building phases, and possibly those of the compound as a whole. It clearly belongs to phase IIB and is part of the extensive construction activity at the site in the middle of the sixth century CE. The construction of this large cistern at tremendous financial cost, despite the existence of many other cisterns, is not surprising, since even small monasteries contained large cisterns. The cistern measures 18.2×10.7 m and 9.4 m in depth (Fig. 138). Four square piers, measuring 1.3×0.8 m, were installed along the cistern. These piers supported arches that in turn supported a wall, from which two vaults were installed along the length of the cistern.

Fig. 134. Southwest wing, view from the northeast.

[112]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

2

W200

L103 503.48

W106

L102

L101

W109

502.97

W107

W108

L104

W105

503.65

W104

W104 503.47

L105

L106 502.85

503.25

502.78

L107 502.72

W98

L108

W97

W103

W102

L100

W101

L114

502.40

L109

W201

502.46

W100 L110

1

1

502.35

W99

W95

W90

L400 L404

W88

501.88

L401

L408

W93

501.81

W64/2

W64/1

Fig. 135. Detailed plan of the southwest wing.

0

[113]

5 m

2

L403

W92

L409

L410

L113

W94

501.70

W89

502.27

L402

W91

502.22

W96 502.18

L112 L111

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1-1 W98 504 503 502 501 500 499

00 00 00 00 00 00

L114

L100

W103

L107

L110

W201

2-2

383 503 502 501 500 499 498

00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W200 W64/2

L401

L113

L402

W96

L100

L105

L101 W104

Fig. 136. Sections of the southwest wing.

In plan and construction, the cistern is reminiscent of the cistern in the monastery of Euthymius, and both were apparently established in the same period by the same planners (Fig. 139). Above the cistern is an open courtyard (L100) with a mosaic floor, 18.8×13.5 m, laid using large white tesserae, 25 per sq. dm. The mosaic is preserved mainly in the courtyard’s northwestern corner. The rim of the cistern’s ceiling to the east was some 0.9 m above the paved courtyard level (L113), and to the south, 0.4 m above the portico mosaic level (L107). The eastern cistern wall (W96) was built of a single course of especially large (about 1 m long), partially worked stones, possibly in secondary use. A cross had been found inscribed on one of the stones. The wall was built over the paving stones of

the eastern courtyard, postdating it. A 1.2 m-wide entrance reached by two steps, together 0.5 m high and fashioned from a single stone, was set in the center of the wall, leading to courtyard L100. An opening to the runoff channel is set in the wall. North of the cistern, a channel (L114), 0.4 m wide and 0.5 m deep, fed the cistern runoff water from the large rock plateau west of the compound (Fig. 140). Rectangular paving slabs measuring 0.6×0.4 m were laid at the base of the channel, which had mostly been coated with a 2 cm-thick layer of reddish plaster. The channel passes under the mosaic floor of hall L101 west of the cistern and under the stone slab-paved portico (L105), without damaging either. It then turns north and continues along the northern wall of the cistern, from which a 0.4 m-deep channel branches off to the

[114]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

south for 2.6 m to feed the cistern. At the channels’ junction are grooves in which barriers, apparently of wooden slats, could be placed to regulate water flow (Fig. 141). Once the cistern was full, the channel feeding it was closed, and the water continued to flow eastward to a small pool (L404) measuring 1.8×1.3 m, from which a rock-cut channel carried the water northeast to cistern L267, located beneath the narthex. An additional channel exited the pool, carrying runoff water outside the compound through an opening in the threshold of the southeastern gate. The cistern had four openings in its ceiling, over which large stones were laid in a later period. It should be mentioned that until recently, the cistern continued in use by the Bedouins. A channel from the north fed

the cistern though its northwestern opening (0.6×0.5 m), over which a stone, 1.2 m in diameter, was placed. From the northeastern opening, 0.9×0.8 m, there was a channel for surplus water, 0.2 m deep, ca. 02 wide, and 2.2 m long that conveyed excess water outside the cistern to the above-mentioned channel (L114). An additional opening, 0.75×0.57 m, in the southeastern corner, led excess water to a plastered channel, 3.7 m long and 0.2 m deep, and then through an opening under the cistern’s eastern wall (W96). This additional channel prevented overflow from the cistern to the portico and the surrounding halls. The channel that fed the cistern from the north is cardinal for understanding the various phases in this wing. Northeast of the channel, in wall W92, a gate

Fig. 137. Built cistern and halls in the southwest wing, view from the east.

[115]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 138. Phase IIB built cistern.

[116]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 139. Built cistern at the monastery of Euthymius.

[117]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

with a track for a rolling stone was discovered. This was the southern gate of the reduced monastery compound in phase IIA. With the installation of the channel, the gate was blocked and coated with plaster, as was the wall in which the gate was set;

this wall functioned in phase IIB as a side of the channel (Fig. 142). The above-mentioned channel, which began west of the compound and ran toward the east, then turned north, continuing along the north of the cistern. Why did the channel turn northward, rather than being installed in a straight line from west to east? The sounding conducted showed that the channel was coated in two types of plaster. The first channel section, which ran from west to east, was coated with gray-white plaster, while the section that turned northward was coated with a reddish plaster with pebbles, which was characteristic of phase IIB of the monastery. This indicates there were two phases of the channel. In phase I, a short tunnel fed an early pool; when the cistern was built in phase IIB the channel was extended, continuing along the entire length of the cistern’s northern side and feeding it. The early tunnel opening was probably blocked by the construction of the cistern ceiling. Additional testimony to the presence of a pool that preceded the

Fig. 140. Chancel L114, view from the east.

Fig. 141. Grooves for barriers at the channel junction to regulate water flow to the built cistern.

Fig. 142. Monastery gate from phase IIA that was blocked and functioned as a side of channel L114 in phase IIB, view from the west.

[118]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

cistern is the fact that its rims were raised above the levels of the southern portico and the eastern courtyard because of the construction of the arches and vaults. The cistern was built in phase IIB within the alreadyexisting building complex; the pool that preceded the establishment of the cistern could belong only to phase I, since in phase IIA the entire southern area was beyond the monastery’s bounds. The existence of a pool in phase I, before the installation of the cistern, answers several questions that arose in the course of the excavation, such as: Why was the cistern built there? A cistern could have been built outside the monastery without harming the existing structures; and why is it built, and not cut in the bedrock, like the other cisterns? The level of the bedrock on which the cistern rests is high, and a large cistern could have been cut into it without building tremendous arches and vaults as roofing, with the accompanying great expense. Based on the cistern’s volume (2,000 cu. m), it would have been necessary to excavate some 10,000 stones, each with an average size of 0.5×0.5×0.5 m. This complex operation, entailing the excavation of stones and their removal from the cistern, would have damaged the portico and the surrounding stone floors, as well as additional parts of the monastery, and have required a great deal of manpower and a place to which all those stones could be transported. In phase I, a plastered pool here collected water from the area west of the compound. The stones excavated for the pool’s construction provided thousands of building stones for the erection of the compound. The pool was connected to the bathhouse in the west wing by a paved portico (L105; see chapter two, Fig. 14). In phase IIA the pool was outside the monastery, and no changes were introduced in it; in phase IIB the pool was turned into a built cistern, and the short channel that fed the cistern was extended north of it. When the cistern was full, the channel carried the overflow to other cisterns at the site. Construction of the cistern’s ceiling necessitated elevating its walls above the levels of the portico to the south and of the courtyard stone floor to the east; therefore the portico’s stylobate was raised and the cistern’s east wall was built over the stone floor. In phase III the area east of the cistern (L113, L400, L401, L408) was converted to agricultural use.

Measuring 15×8 m, the area was bounded on the east by an especially thick wall (W64/1, W64/2) that had its beginnings in phase IIB. In the northeast, adjoining the cistern is a shallow pool (L402), of stones and tiles, measuring 3.5×1.8 m, that was coated with reddish plaster. Two rows of irrigation channels, built of stones, some in secondary use (such as chancel screen columns) ran along the length of the agricultural area. The channels were precisely leveled (Fig. 143). The area was irrigated with water drawn in buckets from the cistern and poured into the shallow pool, from which the water continued through channels. As water flowed, openings in the stone segments’ sides enabled it to seep uniformly into all the garden beds, irrigating the plants there. Similar channels were discovered around the site, mainly to the north. South of the cistern is a built portico (L107) measuring 21.3×2.2 m, the northern facade of which is built of seven arch-bearing piers on a stylobate (W98); the easternmost pier is not preserved. Its floor inclined eastward (Fig. 144). In phase I the portico was open to the pool, and in phase IIB, to the courtyard installed above the cistern. The stylobate was raised by 0.5 m as a result of the construction of the cistern ceiling and the courtyard above it, thus attesting that the construction of the piers and portico preceded that of the cistern. The piers, preserved to a height of two courses, measure 0.6×0.6 m, and stand 2.5 m apart. The southern portico wall (W103) is mostly preserved to a height of one course, with its western part preserved to a height of two to three courses. This wall, coated in white plaster, has two faces: an outer one of ashlars, and an inner one of fieldstones. It contains entrances to the rooms and halls to the south. The portico, paved in a white mosaic of especially large tesserae, was preserved in its entirety; we ascribe it to phase I, in contrast to the initial date (Magen and Talgam 1990: 144, 147). The mosaic edge is laid with three horizontal rows of tesserae followed by diagonally laid rows. The mosaic frame consists of five rows of tesserae: a row of white, a row of black, two rows of white, and one of black. The mosaic carpet is decorated with flower buds that face west, arranged in five rows of buds and two rows of half buds. The mosaic, in black, red, and yellowish-white, is laid using large tesserae, 20 per sq. dm, and 14 tesserae per sq. dm at the edges.

[119]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 143. Agricultural area from phase III, east of the built cistern, view from the northeast.

Portico L105, west of the cistern, measures 14.5×2.3 m, and is paved with closely fitted stone slabs. As this portico is some 0.4 m higher than the southern one, two steps lead to it from the south. In light of a reexamination of the west wing, the discovery of the phase I bathhouse, and the identification of the phase I massive structure north of the cistern, we realized that portico L105 continued northward to the bathhouse, where sections of the continuation of the pavement were discovered (see p. 130). The portico has five piers that bore four arches, with the southernmost pier common to portico L107. Two piers measuring ca. 0.6×0.55 m, 2.5 m apart, remained in situ. No evidence of a portico on the east of the cistern was found, despite its presence being likely in light of the porticos to the west and south. The courtyard floor (L113) apparently extended to the side of the pool in

phase I. The pool’s north bordered the southern wall of the phase I massive structure. South and west of the porticos that encompassed the cistern, a row of rooms built in phase I and renovated in phase IIB was discovered. Portico L107 provided access to a chapel (L106, L108) and to rooms L109 and L110, which adjoin the compound’s southern wall (W201; Figs. 145–146). The chapel, measuring 12.8×4.8 m, was formed in phase IIB, by joining together two phase I rooms; it consisted of an apse and an elevated bema (L108) and a hall (L106). The 1.08 m-wide chapel entrance had two round pivot sockets, 7 cm in diameter, and a hewn square bolt socket in the threshold. The chapel’s western wall (W106) is preserved to a height of 0.8 m. Its inner face is of ashlars, 0.5×0.4 m in size, coated with a plaster layer; and its outer face is

[120]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 144. Portico L107, view from the east.

of fieldstones, also with traces of plaster. The eastern wall (W101) is of two ashlar faces. It is 2 m thick, and is preserved to a height of one course. The apse, 2.5 m wide and 1.38 m deep, bearing traces of plaster, was set in this wall. The bema was elevated 0.5 m above the hall floor, from which it was separated by chancel screens consisting of limestone posts and panels (see

Fig. 285: 2– 4). The wall delimiting the bema to the west (W102) rests directly on the bedrock; in the early phase the wall divided the hall into two rooms. The bema was paved in stone or marble slabs that left their impressions in the floor. The 7.7 m-long hall (L106) is paved in a white mosaic that abuts the room’s walls and the bema.

[121]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 145. Portico L107 and the chapel to its south at the beginning of the excavation, view from the west.

Repairs are evident in the mosaic. The hall was initially roofed with arches supported by piers installed in the room’s southern and northern walls; with their removal in phase IIB the resulting spaces in the floor were filled with mosaic tesserae. The sounding conducted under the bema revealed a pier built on the bedrock close to the southern wall, and an additional pier next to the northern wall, thus attesting that arches roofed this part, too, and were removed upon the establishment of the chapel, which exhibits two distinct building phases. In phase I there probably were two separate rooms: a longitudinal hall (L106) with a mosaic floor and an entrance in the northwest; and a room (L108), whose entrance and manner of pavement have not been determined. Both rooms were roofed with arches. In phase IIB the rooms were united to form a chapel, which was then covered with a gabled roof of wooden slabs and tiles. East of the chapel is a room (L109) measuring 4.8×4.7 m, with a 1 m-wide entrance that has two round

sockets, 6 cm in diameter in its threshhold. The room is paved in diagonally laid rows of white mosaic, with a broad (0.6 m wide) frame of rows of white tesserae laid horizontally. Black and red tesserae were randomly incorporated within the frame. The mosaic frame appears along the room’s walls, except on its east, possibly because wall W100, separating rooms L109 and L110, was built over the mosaic there. The wall, built of large stones and preserved to a height of one course, incorporated two piers, the northern of which is preserved. The room’s mosaic contains numerous repairs, including where two additional piers were removed in phase IIB and replaced by mosaic flooring. The broad mosaic frame along the walls might also be a repair. In the northeastern corner is a depression for water drainage, 0.3 m in diameter and 6 cm deep, paved in mosaic. The room’s floor is 0.5 m lower than that of the chapel, and it appears that the room’s floor, like that of the southern portico, is inclined eastward. To the east is room L110, 4.7×2.3 m, paved with

[122]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

stone slabs in secondary use. The room’s entrance was not discovered, nor was the reason for the room being paved in stone slabs. Apparently, rooms L109 and L110 were initially a single hall, with two arches in its center. In the second stage the hall was divided into two rooms, and the arches were removed. East of the room is a barrel vault (L111), 4.9 m long, 2 m wide and 1.4 m high, of finely dressed ashlars, 0.45 m long, bound with gray cement (Fig. 147). Above the vault was a stone floor, only the north of which is preserved (L112). The vault, built in a cavity that was either natural or cut, constituted the foundation for the floor of the room above it. In phase I, the room apparently functioned as a vestibule of the compound gate. The vault contained four openings, two on the north and two on the south. An additional opening was discovered in the southern wall, which is compound wall W201. The openings drained water

from the upper floor, and when the vault was full, the water drained through the opening in the southern wall. The eastern vestibule wall (W90), of ashlars and cement, is preserved to a height of three courses. The western wall (W99), preserved to a height of one course, is of large, unworked stones and rests on the leveled bedrock. The vestibule was roofed with a vault. Two piers supporting an arch on the north of the room were preserved. The stone slab floor unearthed in the north probably continued for the entire length of the gate’s vestibule. Nothing remains of this gate, which faced the gate built in the southern wall (W92) of the phase IIA monastery and was blocked in a later stage. We surmise that the Roman phase I compound had two gates: the more southern one in the eastern compound wall, and the other, in the center of the southern compound wall. The phase IIA monastery might thus have had two systems of gates: an outer

Fig. 146. Portico L107 and the rooms adjoining the compound’s southern wall, view from the northeast.

[123]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 147. Barrel vault L111, view from the northwest.

system in the compound’s walls, and an inner gate with a rolling stone in the monastery’s south. East of the gate’s vestibule are two rooms, L408 and L409, which were also built in phase I and underwent changes in phases IIB and III. These rooms have a common western wall (W90) that is partially shared with the gate’s vestibule (Fig. 148). Room L408 is an entrance room, measuring 4.8×4.8 m, with a colorful mosaic floor. In its northern wall (W95), built between two piers, is a 3.2 m-wide opening whose floor was of stone slabs, some 10 cm higher than the room’s floor level. The opening was blocked in phase III by a wall built of ashlars in secondary use. The irrigation channel, of stone segments, that began at L401 to the north (see above), passed through the wall. The eastern wall (W93), of ashlar construction, is preserved to a height of one course, with remaining doorposts and a 0.9 m-wide entrance; two steps descend to the inner courtyard (L406). A rectangular socket is cut in the lower step,

as well as a bolt socket in the center of this step. The entrance was blocked by the construction of wall W64/1. The southern wall (W88) contains an entrance to room L409. Room L408’s mosaic floor is preserved in its entirety and abuts its walls. The mosaic edges consist of three horizontal rows of tesserae, followed by diagonally laid rows, whose center is emphasized with diamonds. The mosaic’s frame is identical to that in the southern portico, and its carpet is ornamented in the same manner: twelve rows of flower buds and two rows of half flower buds facing north. The mosaic is black, red, and yellowish-white, laid using 20 tesserae per sq. dm. South of the entrance is room L409, measuring 3.6×3 m, with a mosaic floor. The room’s entrance is from the north, through W88, which exhibits two distinct building stages. All that remains of the first stage is the lower course, which is built of large ashlars. In a later stage, a wall of small ashlars in secondary use, fieldstones, and cement was built over and adjoining it. Under the later stage of the wall, the 0.95 m-wide threshold stone of an entrance, with a pivot socket on its west, is preserved. The later wall rests on the mosaic floor. Almost nothing remains of the eastern wall (W89), except for the first course, with patches of plaster. The sounding (L410) opened east of the room uncovered the outer face of wall W89, built of small stones and earth, and the foundation of the southern compound wall, along with the outer face of the later wall, W64/1. The mosaic floor abuts the room’s walls, except for the northern one. Its edges consist of three horizontal rows of tesserae. The mosaic carpet, in which diagonally laid tesserae create a herringbone pattern, lacks an additional frame. Two rows of flower buds alternate with two rows of diamonds across the entire width of the mosaic, laid using 25 black, red, and yellow-white tesserae per sq. dm. West of the cistern, beyond the portico (L105), three rooms were discovered: L101 and L102, which in effect are a single hall, L103, and L104. The northwestern hall (L101, L102), 8.5×4.9 m, has a mosaic floor, installed over the early water channel that initially fed the pool, and afterwards, the built cistern (Fig. 149). The hall exhibits three building phases. Access to the hall is provided by a 0.9 m-wide entrance in the eastern wall (W104). Its threshold, built of two

[124]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 148. Rooms L408 and L409, view from the north.

stones, has two pivot sockets. It is elevated some 0.3 m above the portico floor. The hall’s mosaic floor abuts the threshold. An additional entrance was opened in the south of the wall at a later stage (see below). Two definite building stages are evident in the eastern wall. Remains of the earlier stage consist of a single course with two faces, an outer face of ashlars and an inner one of small fieldstones, with an intervening fill of earth. The mosaic floor abuts this course. In the later stage, the wall’s upper courses were built of dressed stones; this wall is common to room L103. The northern wall (W109), built of precisely fitted ashlars, is preserved to a height of two courses. Of the southern wall (W107), the outer lower course, of ashlar construction, is preserved, with only the foundation course remaining on the side facing the hall. The hall yielded two pairs of arch-bearing piers, with only one of the piers remaining from those in the eastern wall. As the northern pier in the western wall was built above the water channel, it was constructed

with a wide stone at its base, unlike the other piers. A square depression with an average size of 13×11 cm and a depth of 6 cm was cut in the piers at the mosaic floor level and served for installing a wooden beam to reinforce the pier. The hall is paved with a mosaic that abuts the walls and piers. At the edges are three horizontal rows of tesserae followed by three diagonal rows that form a herringbone pattern, emphasized by diamond patterns. The carpet is surrounded by a simple frame consisting of a row of white tesserae, a row of black, two rows of white, and a row of black. The carpet field, like its edges, is decorated with diamonds. The mosaic, in white, black, and light red, was laid using 22 tesserae per sq. dm. A number of repairs were made in it along the channel, close to the northwestern pier. The mosaic was destroyed along the north of the eastern wall, stone slabs laid in its place. In the last stage, W105, of small fieldstones, was built between the two southern piers, resting on and postdating the mosaic

[125]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 149. Northwestern hall (L101, L102), view from the south.

floor. This wall divided the hall into two rooms. The southern entrance opened in the eastern wall in this stage, providing access to room L102, which measures 4.9×2.5 m. The level of the 0.7 m-wide entrance is some 0.3 m above that of the portico, L105. A large stone slab is incorporated in the mosaic floor in L102, in front of the entrance. A stone step was built, on the stone floor of portico L105, in front of the entrance to room L101. Three building phases are evident in this hall. The mosaic laid over the early water channel was probably from phase I. In phase IIB changes were introduced in the ceiling, when the arch-bearing piers were built. In phase III a wall was built, dividing the hall into rooms L101 and L102. Room L103, measuring 4.9×4.6 m is paved with 0.5×0.4 m stone slabs in secondary use. Some of the walls were of dressed stones, others, of ashlars. The southern wall (W108), of ashlar construction, rests

on the bedrock and is preserved to a height of 0.8 m; and an adjacent pier remains, as well. The eastern wall (W104) is preserved in this part to a height of one course: 0.4 m. The northern wall (W107) is shared by room L102. Hall L104, measuring 8×4.9 m, is located in the southwestern corner of the compound. Its northern wall (W108) is shared with room L103, its eastern wall (W106), with the chapel (L106). A 1.3 m-wide entrance at the northern end of the eastern wall led to portico L107. The entrance has a threshold built of two stones with sockets for door pivots. In the western and eastern walls, four ashlar piers that had borne arches were preserved to a height of 0.7 m. The room’s floor is not preserved, and only the bedrock came to light. In a later phase, probably during the Early Islamic period, bases, capitals, and a table were concentrated in this room, apparently to be used in other sites.

[126]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Area V: West Wing Construction remnants from phases I, II, and III were discerned in this wing, which is situated between the kitchen and refectory to the north, and the built cistern to the south. Most of the construction remains in this area belong to phase III, the Early Islamic period. Although the paucity of finds uncovered in this area hindered stratigraphic differentiation, a massive structure was apparently built here in phase I. No construction remains of the phase IIA monastery were identified, as this area, like the southern one, lay beyond the area of the monastery in this phase. Finds from phase IIB, present throughout the compound, were also absent from most of this area, and it is unclear whether this had been an open area, or had contained structures that were damaged by the Phase III construction. In a building that consisted primarily of rooms around a central courtyard, constructed in the Early Islamic period, use was made of building stones from the monastery and of Christian elements, such as a baptismal font with a carved cross, etc. (Figs. 150–151).

The Massive Structure and Bathhouse Prior to the Monastery Based on the meager finds and a stratigraphic analysis of this and the southern areas, we concluded that in the late fourth–early fifth century CE a large massive structure, most likely a tower, and a bathhouse to its west stood here; the structure was separated by a passageway from the bathhouse. The massive structure’s estimated dimensions were 20 m (from north to south) ×17.5 m (from east to west). Almost completely dismantled, extensive use was made of its stones in phases IIA and IIB. It was not rare for an internal tower or fortified structure to be built within such a large compound, and similar instances were found in other sites where Roman fortresses were transformed into Christian monasteries. In Deir Qalʿa, the tower was built first, the compound walls later joined to it (Magen and Aizik 2012: 111–121). The massive structure’s location in the compound’s west is significant, since this was the compound’s weakest

Fig. 150. West wing, view from the northeast.

[127]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

L335

W175

W119

L332

L351

L711 L331 L713

W120

W123

W128

L101

W109

L336

L721

L333

W121

W122

W200

L317

L316

L334 W118

W147

L337

L339 L318 W148

L340

W117

L342

W126

L341

L319

L343

W115

W97

W114

W127

W116

W125

W124

W149

L105

L320

L345

W113

L712

W179

W112

L322 L321

L327

L346 W111

W129

0

Fig. 151. Detailed plan of the west wing.

[128]

5

m

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

point. The bedrock dropped sharply on three sides of the compound, and only a broad area to the west, higher than the compound level, had to be under surveillance. Furthermore, the road between Jerusalem and the Judean desert and Dead Sea passed here, so that every caravan passing below the compound could be seen and identified by those in the fortified structure. Anyone wanting to enter the compound had to circumvent it to enter through the gates in the east and south. The massive structure had been dismantled, and the remains included the wall that bounded the structure to the south (W97) and the remains of walls in the east and north. These enabled us to determine the general outline of the structure’s area, but not its details. Was this a building with a central courtyard surrounded by rooms, or some other form of structure? No indications were found that could clarify matters. The southern wall, preserved for its entire length, 17.5 m, is 1 m thick. It is built of two faces of large, finely dressed ashlars and a fill of small stones bonded

Fig. 152. Wall W97 from phase I, view from the northeast.

in cement (Fig. 152). The wall rests on a well-built foundation set precisely over the leveled bedrock. The entire length of the foundation is thickly coated with the gray-white waterproof plaster that is characteristic of the early stages of the compound. Wall W109, also from phase I, is the continuation of wall W97 to the west. An opening between these walls allows passage from the southwest wing to the bathhouse. W109 and the north of the western compound wall (W200) form a corner, indicating that these walls were contemporaneous, and preceded the south of the western compound wall and the entire row of rooms adjoining it. Room L101 is south of wall W109. The side of W109 facing the room’s interior is of ashlars, in contrast with the room’s other walls, whose inner face is of small fieldstones and cement (see Fig. 149). Channel L114, which fed the built cistern under courtyard L100 and continued along its entire length, was installed over the plaster that protected the foundation of the southern wall (W97), thus attesting that the phase IIB channel was built after the wall already stood. Nothing remains of the eastern wall of the massive structure, except for the southeastern corner and the cut line along the bedrock that marks the location of the dismantled wall. The floor covering the wall’s line, partially preserved, is paved in stone slabs in secondary use that had formed part of the phase IIB monastery central courtyard floor. The northern wall, too, was completely dismantled. A rock-cut line was discerned in the bedrock along lane L316 and L327, over which the wall was apparently built. South of L327, sections of white mosaic laid using 12–16 tesserae per sq. dm were unearthed, as well as remnants of built foundations and a threshold (L322). The location of the 1 m-long threshold follows the line of the dismantled northern wall. Wall W116, east–west in orientation, belongs to the phase III structure, and was built over the mosaic and the wall foundations in L322 (Fig. 153). We surmise that L322 is a remnant of the massive structure and marks its entrance. The western wall of the massive structure, W148, is some 19 m long. It was dismantled, except for six stones, which are preserved for 2 m, in situ, and the southwestern corner. The presence of the line cut in the bedrock, along which is a thick layer of

[129]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 153. Wall W116 from the phase III structure built over the phase I wall foundations, view from the east.

plaster, enabled the reconstruction of the wall’s path (Fig. 154). The plaster, preserved to a length of approx. 9 m, covered the wall’s foundation, as in the structure’s southern wall, and prevented seepage. The cut line ends in the north, 0.5 m above the level of L316, and was part of the northwestern corner of the massive structure. In this corner is a settling pit, cut into the bedrock, that collected rainwater that then ran west through channel L351. Wall W116 is built over this corner. A remnant of a pier apparently belonging to the early building was discovered east of the southern part of the line of W148. Remains of a floor of finely fitted original stone slabs

are preserved west of the line of W148. They apparently were part of a passageway (L339), some 13×2.2 m, of identical width to portico L105 in the compound’s south. The passageway was probably the northward continuation of L105; it has not been determined whether or not the opening between them had a door. This passageway led to corridor L334, which was part of the bathhouse, and together with portico L105, connected the bathhouse with the large pool. The passageway continued to the north and was connected with lane L316 by a number of steps, which although not preserved, left an impression in the bedrock. Underneath the steps a rock-cut,

[130]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 154. Reconstruction of the massive structure’s dismantled western wall W148 and the passageway to its west, view from the south.

plastered channel connected in the north with channel L351, carrying water from the passageway to outside the compound. The former channel continued in use in phase IIB. Under the passageway paving stones is a rock-cut channel, coated with red plaster, in which a ceramic pipe is installed. The channel adjoins W148, and to the north joins the channel under the stairs. The channel carried water from the structure’s roof to north of the structure (lane L316). This channel, as well, continued in phase IIB.

The Bathhouse Of all the discoveries at the site, the bathhouse was the most surprising and of greatest interest. No other bathhouse had been discovered in monasteries in the Judean Desert and in the Hebron hills, nor, to the best

of our knowledge, are there literary testimonies of them. Furthermore, there were very few bathhouses in either the urban or the rural settlements in the Land of Israel in the Byzantine period. One was uncovered in a monastery or hospice in the east of Mt. Scopus, on the main Jerusalem–Jericho road; the excavators suggest dating it to the seventh century CE (Amit, Seligman and Zilberbod 2000: 97).The bathhouse there is located behind the monastery, and seems not to be an integral part of the Christian structure. As the final report has not been published, we cannot opine whether the bathhouse preceded the Christian structure or, as the excavators believe, belongs to the seventh century CE. A bathhouse discovered at Mt. Gerizim in a Late Roman structure close to the church compound preceded the latter (Magen 2008c:

[131]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

265–266). A Late Roman bathhouse discovered at Kursi was built close to the Byzantine monastery and, according to the excavators, was meant for use by Christian pilgrims. It had its beginnings in the third and fourth centuries CE, and was built in accordance with a Roman plan (Sudilovsky 2003). Nothing was further from the monastic way of life than the use of a bathhouse to indulge the body, and therefore it could hardly be assumed that one was established to meet the needs of the monks in the monastery of Martyrius. Had it been built outside the monastery, close to the hospice, we might surmise its use by pilgrims visiting the monastery; but its construction near the refectory and kitchen, distant even from the monks’ residential quarters, is puzzling. Operating a bathhouse required large quantities of water, and it is improbable that the monks would waste precious water for bathhouse use. It would also have been necessary to gather and bring large quantities of wood from the arid desert region to heat the water for the caldarium in the bathhouse. An army, however,

would have had an auxiliary corps that could supply the wood; thus the bathhouse might have been built in phase I. In phase IIA this entire area was outside the monastery, and in phase III rooms were built on it. The bathhouse might have continued in use in phase IIB for other purposes; due to its proximity to the refectory and kitchen, the praefurnium might have been converted for baking and cooking. The bathhouse, approx. 13×5 m, adjoined the western compound wall, west of passageway L339. It comprised a corridor (L334) that led to an entranceway (L333) to the caldarium (L332). North of the latter is the praefurnium (L713). The lower part of the bathhouse is rock cut (Figs. 155–157). The bathhouse corridor (L334), entered from the east, measures 7×2 m. The 1 m-wide entrance has a threshold and lacks doorposts. The corridor walls, partially preserved to one course, are of large dressed stones built over the leveled bedrock. The eastern wall (W147) is not uniform; its south is 1.3 m wide,

Fig. 155. Bathhouse, view from the south.

[132]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e 2 L711

W116 L721

L713

W128

L342

W148

W147

W120

W200

L332 L334

L333

1

L339

W121

1 W149

W125

W123

2

5

0

m

1-1

505 00 504 00

W200

503 00

W120 L332

L333

W147 L339

L334

W148

502 00 501 00 2-2 505 00 504 00

W128

W121

W116

503 00 502 00

L711 L713

L332

501 00

Fig. 156. Detailed plan and sections of the bathhouse.

[133]

L333

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 157. Bathhouse, view from the northwest.

its north, narrower (approx. 0.7 m). The north of the western wall (W120) is rounded and survived only to its foundation. A ceramic drainage pipe that ran along it was discovered. This part of the wall is the outer side of a separate cell in the caldarium. The colorful mosaic corridor floor measures 4.25×1.28 m. The partially preserved mosaic carpet abuts the eastern and western walls; the carpet edges, of white tesserae, are only partially preserved in the south. The frame consists of two rows of black tesserae that bound two rows of white. The carpet field is decorated with alternating hearts and flower buds arranged in five rows and two rows of half hearts that face south. In the carpet’s south is a diamond surrounded by flower buds (Figs. 158–159). The carpet is of black, turquoise, gray, brick red, pink, and yellow-white tesserae. The mosaic was laid using 90–100 tesserae per sq. dm, except for the edge near the diamond. The southern edge is of larger tesserae, with some 50 tesserae per sq. dm. The mosaic was initially dated to the late group of phase IIB mosaics (Magen and

Talgam 1990: 144, 147), but in light of a re-evaluation and understanding of the site’s stratigraphy we ascribe it to phase I. Three rock-cut steps, 2.3 m wide, descend from the corridor to a floor leading to the caldarium. The steps are part of the entranceway (L333), which measures 3×1.3 m, and is separated from the caldarium by two piers (the lower parts of which are rock cut, the upper parts, built), that bore an arch (Fig. 160). The caldarium (L332) measures 6×2 m. In its northeast is a rounded cell, some 1 m in diameter, probably the private cell of some important individual. The lower parts of the room’s walls are rock cut, while their upper part are built. Only one course in the eastern (W120) and northern (W128) walls is preserved. The room’s floor is not preserved. It was laid above the heating system (hypocaust), which rested in turn on small pillars of ceramic tiles with thick layers of mortar in between. The caldarium floor was about 1 m higher than the rock-cut hypocaust floor, attested by a rock-cut step in the western wall. Ceramic pipes

[134]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 158. Remains of the corridor L334 mosaic floor.

(tubuli) were incorporated in the walls to carry warm air from the hypocaust to the caldarium. These pipes are preserved in the walls of the rounded cell (Figs. 161–162). An entrance in the caldarium’s northern wall led to the praefurnium, with a raised rock-cut channel passing through the entrance conducting hot air from the furnace to the hypocaust system. This channel was blocked with small stones in phase IIB

[135]

0

50

cm

Fig. 159. Illustration of the corridor L334 mosaic carpet.

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 160. Piers separating bathhouse entranceway L333 from the caldarium, view from the north.

Fig. 161. Tubuli in the caldarium, view from the west.

Fig. 162. Remains of the hypocaust system, view from the west.

[136]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

or phase III. The praefurnium (L713) is 5 m wide (Fig. 163). Its northern wall was dismantled, except for a rock-cut line along the bedrock that marks the location of the dismantled wall; its length is estimated to be some 5.5 m. The cut line abuts the rock-cut bottom of compound wall W200. The juncture of the

line to the north with the rock-cut wall to the west denotes the northwestern corner of the bathhouse. An entrance with doorposts led from the caldarium to the praefurnium. The furnace, in the northwest of the room, is built of bricks, three rows of which have survived (L721). East of the furnace are traces of a

Fig. 163. Bathhouse praefurnium, view from the north.

[137]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

built, 15 cm-high elevation composed of basalt stones and bricks, over which gray plaster was poured; this is the bedding of a stone slab floor built in a later stage, probably phase II. Only the north of this floor is preserved. W116 was built over the floor in phase III. The bedrock of the room is leveled and bears fire marks and a layer of ash from the furnace. In the east of the room, two rock-cut channels drained northward, outside the room, to channel L351. The first of these channels, covered by stone slabs, drained corridor L334, while the other, which contained a ceramic pipe, received water from the passageway, through a channel that passed under the steps (see above). South of the bathhouse are two rooms, L335 and L336. Many changes were introduced in room L335 in late periods (see below). Due to its proximity to the bathhouse, it might have served as a service room or dressing room. The bathhouse, built in a rough and rudimentary fashion, does not follow the style of Roman bathhouses, nor does its construction resemble that

characteristic of phase IIB. The bathhouse’s closeness to the pool, its apparent disuse in phase IIB, and the passageway that led from it to portico L105, led us to surmise that the bathhouse was built in phase I, perhaps serving the Roman soldiers who populated the compound.

The Monastery Phase The identification of phase IIB in this area is most problematic, and we do not know how the area appeared in this phase. The southeastern room (L345) is the only one that can definitely be dated to phase IIB. In addition, we attribute to this phase a few remains in the courtyard and rooms. A rock-cut courtyard (L343) in the center of the phase III structure contains various remains of unclear nature. In its north are rock-cut depressions, approx. 0.25 m-long, that form a circle, 4.5 m in diameter (Fig. 164). These depressions were made to prevent work animals from slipping while moving a

Fig. 164. Courtyard L343, view from the north. Note the rock-cut depressions that form a circle.

[138]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 165. Installation L712 that fell into disuse when the farmhouse was built.

rotary installation. This circle was interrupted in the north by the construction of W114 and rooms L319 and L320 in phase III, when the installation fell into disuse. Similar depressions were found around oil press crushing basins. Since we cannot assume the existence of an oil press in the monastery of Martyrius, where olive trees were not cultivated, and because these depressions were made prior to the Early Islamic period construction, the installation was apparently a large millstone installation, used to grind wheat or barley. Its proximity to the kitchen alludes to its use for grinding flour for bread. An installation of this type was costly and difficult to produce, and was most likely stolen after the monastery’s abandonment. A remnant of a furnace (L342) was discovered southwest of this installation. The furnace is round, 1 m in diameter, and of brick construction; it might have been used for baking. Another possibility is that the bread was baked in what was previously the bathhouse caldarium. East of the grinding installation are two

adjoining installations, partly cut in the bedrock. One, preserved in its entirety (L712), measures 1.2×0.6 m; its walls are built of small fieldstones bonded with gray cement, the inner face coated with waterproof plaster preserved to a height of 15 cm (Fig. 165). Isolated remains of plaster that coated the walls of the other basin remain. The basins fell into disuse when W112 and rooms L321 and L346 were built over them in the east, in phase III. A finely made limestone baptismal font bearing a carved cross was found in the courtyard (see Fig. 294). Southeast of the courtyard is a room (L345) paved in mosaic, whose western bounds are unclear, due to the changes introduced in phase III. The room is 5 m wide, its estimated length, 5.5 m. Its walls are preserved to a height of 1.1 m and are covered with a thick (approx. 8 cm) coat of plaster, preserved to a height of 0.75 m. The southern wall (W97) is a remnant from the early phase I structure. The eastern wall (W129) is built of an outer face of dressed stones,

[139]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

between which are small fieldstones, while its inner face is of small stones. The northern wall (W113), of small and medium-sized fieldstones, forms a corner at its junction with the eastern wall, and is therefore contemporaneous with it. A semicircular plastered niche about 0.6 m in diameter, and of undetermined nature, was found in this corner. Although the niche faces east, this is probably not a remnant of a chapel. The room is paved in white mosaic, laid using 36–42 tesserae per sq. dm. The mosaic abuts the southern, eastern, and northern walls with three horizontal rows of tesserae. We could not determine how far the mosaic extended to the west, leaving the boundaries of the room on this side unclear. West of the mosaic are paving stones in secondary use. The mosaic does not abut these with horizontal rows of tesserae, with the exception of a repair made in its north; additional repairs are also evident in the mosaic’s edges. We assume that the mosaic floor preceded the stone pavement. A massive wall (W112) that bounded the room to the west was built over the mosaic floor in phase III. The entrance from this phase was not unearthed, but it may be assumed to have been located in the west. The questions of how the room was roofed and its function remain unanswered. The walls of the phase III structure and the rooms it contained were built over the stone floor in the south, west, and north of the structure. The paving stones, in secondary use, were imprecisely laid, and we assume that they belong to phase IIB. Additionally, the excavation uncovered mosaic floors in the northeast that, too, preceded the phase III walls. It is unclear if these mosaics belong to phase IIB or to phase I.

The Early Islamic Farmhouse A rectangular structure was erected of stones in secondary use, among which are chancel screen columns, marble fragments, and additional architectural elements that were incorporated in the construction (see Fig. 150). Unlike in other parts of the monastery, the building’s rooms were not plastered, nor did they have plaster or mosaic floors. The structure, measuring 17 m from south to north and 21.5 m from west to east, consists of

a courtyard around which are dwelling rooms. It is bounded to the west by the compound wall, and to the south, by the broad phase I walls (W97, W109). In the Early Islamic phase, an entrance was opened in the southern wall (W97) to connect the building with the open courtyard over the built cistern. Passage was afforded through room L345, while the phase I passage connecting passageway L339 with portico L105 to the south, was blocked by the construction of W124 (see below). The structure is bounded in the east by W111 and W129 of room L345. The latter, as was noted, bounded phase IIB room L345. W111, of dressed stones and medium-sized fieldstones, and the northern wall, W116, meet to form a corner, and are therefore contemporaneous. W116 is built of an outer face of very large dressed stones and an inner one of fieldstones of differing sizes, some of them worked stones. An inscription written in Arabic letters appears on one of the stones in the wall’s outer face; the inscription is late and is barely decipherable. A row of small rooms (L337, L340, and L341) is built on the south side of the building, over the remains of the phase IIB floor. Room 345 was reduced in size and separated from room L341 by W112, which is common with the eastern row of rooms. The building was entered through room L345, measuring 5×3.5 m. The room has two entrances: one from the south, 0.75 m wide and elevated some 0.25 m above the floor level of the room itself; and an additional raised entrance in the western wall (W112). This 0.6 m-wide entrance led to room L341. The 0.87 m-thick western wall, of large fieldstones, is unplastered. Built over the mosaic floor, it is preserved to a height of one to two courses. Room L341, measuring 5×2.7 m, was entered from the courtyard through a wide entrance (1.3 m) with a stepped threshold in the northern wall (W127). A section of the room was paved in stone slabs that were partly preserved in its center. The slabs are well-fitted in the east of the stone slab section; in the west, the slabs are smaller and partly fitted. The east of the room’s floor is paved in a mosaic that was part of the floor of L345 in phase IIB. The northern wall, of dressed stones, is preserved to a height of one course. The western wall (W126), preserved to a height of three to four courses, had two faces: an inner one of dressed stones and an outer one of small fieldstones.

[140]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

The wall was dismantled during the excavation. These walls rest on the stone floor, postdating it. In the center of the room and adjoining the southern wall is a remnant of an early wall, preserved for a length of 0.7 m. The room yielded a round stone basin, 0.68 m in diameter and 0.37 m high, with two proximate cut holes (see Fig. 299). Room L340, west of room L341 has maximal dimensions of 2.6×2.3 m. Its walls are preserved to a height of three to four courses; their outer faces are of dressed stones, their inner faces, of small fieldstones. The walls were partly dismantled during the excavation. The western wall (W124) blocks the early passage and adjoins the southwestern corner of the phase I structure. The location of the room’s entrance has not been determined. The room’s floor is of leveled bedrock, paved with stone slabs that are not preserved in their entirety. The stone slabs might have been incorporated with the elevated bedrock. The eastern (W126) and northern (W125) walls rest on the stone floor, postdating it. This row of rooms contains an additional room (L337), measuring 3.5×2.4 m, entered from room L336 through a 0.75 m-wide elevated entrance in the western wall (W123) that was later blocked. The inner faces of the room’s walls are of dressed stones, the outer faces of small fieldstones, except for the northern wall (W125), whose faces are reversed. The room is paved in stone slabs, preserved only in its west. The western wall, built on the stone floor, postdates it. In the northeastern corner is a stone installation in which a rectangular threshold stone in secondary use, 0.69×0.44×0.2 m, is incorporated. In the stone’s center is a round depression, 0.3 m in diameter, and in two of its corners, a rectangular one (see Fig. 303). An additional installation, which adjoins the northwestern corner, consists of four stone slabs arranged in a semicircle. Signs of fire are evident on the eastern wall, and charcoal was found in the southeastern corner. The west of the building in this phase is more difficult to define, as only two distinct rooms remain, L335 and L336. Partially preserved rooms are built over the bathhouse. Walls of large worked stones canceled the caldarium and praefurnium, and in this phase the bathhouse fell into disuse. Room L336, in the southwestern corner of the

building, 3.8×2 m, is paved in stone slabs. Its southern and western walls are from phase I, and are especially thick, unlike the room’s other walls. The eastern wall (W123), preserved to a height of two courses, is 0.7 m thick; its outer face is of dressed stones, and the face inside the room is of small fieldstones. This wall rests on the room’s slab floor, which it postdates. The 0.8 m-thick northern wall (W122), preserved to a height of one course, is of two faces of worked stones and an earthen fill. The wall continues eastward exceeding the room’s boundary and the stone floor abuts it. The eastern wall’s second course was built over the northern wall, thus postdating it. A square depression cut in one of the stone slabs close to the room’s northeastern corner indicates that some of the stone slabs were in secondary use. The entrance leading to room L337 was blocked with small fieldstones in a later phase. Room L335, located north of room L336, measures 2.7×1.8 m and is paved in stone slabs. The 0.8 m-wide entrance is in the room’s east, with a single doorpost to the south and a threshold of three stones. Before the entrance is a sort of step, made of a stone slab 1.15 m long and 0.16 m thick, with a cut depression. The room adjoins the western compound wall. The eastern wall (W120), preserved to a height of two to three courses, is of dressed stones bounded with fieldstones; these courses are built over the early, phase I course. This wall continued northward and blocked the stairs to the bathhouse. A 0.7×0.5 m paving stone that belongs to the floor abuts the southern wall (W122). The room’s original northern wall did not survive, and apparently was completely dismantled. Only a line cut in the bedrock marks where the wall once stood. In an early stage, this wall might have separated the bathhouse entranceway (L333) from room L335. In a later phase a massive wall (approx. 1 m thick) was built, of which two courses of worked stones remain (W121). The northern wall abuts the western and eastern ones, and was built over the stone slabs; it partially blocked the entrance and reduced the area of the room which now measured 1.8×0.8 m. The outline of room L335 in its early stages has not been determined. We assume that in the first phase it might have belonged to the bathhouse, as a service room, possibly a cloakroom. A room measuring 3.5×2 m is built mostly over

[141]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

the entranceway (L333) to what was the bathhouse. To the east, W120 blocked the entrance to the bathhouse. A 0.75 m-wide entrance with a threshold of three stones (similar to that in the entrance to room L335), was set in the wall. The room was bounded by W121 in the south. W175, on the room’s north, has two faces, one of very large stones, and the other, of small fieldstones. The wall blocks the entrance to the bathhouse caldarium (L332). Above the caldarium another room was built whose dimensions are unclear; the walls were partly preserved and the location of the room’s entrance was not determined. Part of W120 bounded the room to the east, and W175 bounded it to the south. The passage between L332 and the praefurnium (L713) was blocked with stones, some of them, large. A large room (L317 and L331) measuring 5×3 m was built in the building’s northwestern corner. A low wall (W119) was built in its center. In phase I this was the location of the opening of the furnace used to heat the bathhouse hypocaust. Access to the room was through a narrow (0.7 m wide) entrance in the eastern wall (W118). This wall, built of large stones, is preserved to a height of two courses. The room was paved in stone slabs that are not preserved in their entirety. The pavement was laid on an earth fill (L711). A stone floor, probably belonging to phase IIB, was found beneath the earthen layer in the north of the room. On the north of the building is a row of wellpreserved rooms (L318, L319, and L320), established over the remains of the early stone floor, and entered from the courtyard. Room L318, 3.5×3.5 m, is built on the steps that led from the paved passageway to outside the massive structure in phase I. The eastern wall (W117), preserved to a height of three courses, is built of worked stones with small fieldstones in the interstices. The southern wall (W114) is of worked stones, some in secondary use, the interstices filled with small fieldstones; it is shared with rooms L319 and L320. In room L318 the wall is not preserved, except for two courses in its east. The room’s earthen floor was laid over a leveled layer of fill beneath which is the underlying cut line of the early massive structure wall. In the northwestern corner a built stone installation adjoins the walls; its southeastern side is

rounded. Fragments of a large pithos were found next to it. The installation is preserved to a height of two courses. To the east is an additional room (L319) measuring 3.5×2.15 m, paved in irregular stone slabs in secondary use. The floor meets the bedrock to the south, forming a sort of step for the entrance. There is an ashen layer on the floor. The 0.9 m-wide entrance, is some 0.35 m higher than the courtyard, had doorposts, the eastern of which is preserved. The room’s walls postdate the stone floor, and are preserved to a height of three courses; their outer faces are of worked stones, their inner ones of medium-sized fieldstones. In the room’s center is a monolithic square basin measuring 0.92×0.52 m, with a maximal height and depth of 0.40 m and 0.26 m, respectively (see Fig. 298). There are two holes in the sides of the basin: one, 10 cm in diameter, in the center of the long side; and the other, smaller one, 5 cm in diameter, in the short side. Room L320 measures 3.4×3.15 m and has a bedrock floor that incorporates a number of stone slabs. A narrow (0.80 m wide) entrance with doorposts led to the courtyard, which is 0.25 m lower than the entrance. An additional 0.7 m-wide entrance with doorposts in the eastern wall (W112) led to room L321. The room’s walls, preserved to a height of three courses, are of worked stones, the interstices filled with small fieldstones. The southern wall (W114) incorporated a finely made stone baptismal font bearing a carved cross, attesting the construction of the building’s walls with stones in secondary use in the Early Islamic period, after the monastery was abandoned (Figs. 166–167). In the building’s east is a longitudinal hall divided into two: L321 and L346. The northeastern room, L321, measures 5.1×2.75 m, and is entered from room L320. The room’s walls are preserved to a height of two to three courses, with the exception of the southern wall (W179), of which one course survived. The room is paved in a mosaic, laid using 20–30 tesserae per sq. dm, which preceded the establishment of the phase III building. Only fragments of the mosaic are preserved and it is unclear whether the mosaic belongs to phase I or phase IIB. The mosaic section in the north ends in two horizontal rows, possibly indicating the existence of an early wall that was dismantled.

[142]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 166. Baptismal font bearing a carved cross in secondary use in wall W114, view from the south.

This section is the continuation of the mosaic section in L322, over which the northern wall (W116) was built. The eastern mosaic section over which the eastern wall (W111) was built is the continuation of the mosaic in the central courtyard to the east. South of room L321 is L346, which measures 5×3 m, and whose floor is of bedrock and of stone slabs in secondary use. Here, too, is a mosaic section on which the eastern wall stood. A 0.7 m-wide entrance with doorposts that led from the courtyard (L343) to the southern end of the room was blocked in a later stage by a staircase adjacent to the southern wall (W112). The room contained a stone-covered channel that carried water to the central courtyard located east of the building.

Fig. 167. Baptismal font after removing from wall W114.

[143]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area VI: Northwest Wing The northwest wing, the refectory complex, is one of the largest and most impressive structures to be uncovered in the Judean Desert monasteries and in all the Land of Israel, and its plan is unique in its architectural innovativeness. It contains a vestibule, a refectory, and a kitchen, as the numerous finds discovered in the complex indicated (Figs. 168–169). Communal life in a coenobium monastery, with its large number of monks but meager resources, compelled the abbots to manage the monastery carefully and economically. Each monastery had an oikonomos (household manager), a cook, and a baker. While in laura monasteries and isolated monastic cells, where the monks, frequently responsible for their own food, made do with the scant food found in the fields (Rubin 1982: 35–38), in coenobiums, the abbot provided basic food for the monks living there. Thus there were consequent differences in

nutrition and eating habits between the two types of monasteries. The coenobium, unlike the laura, generally had a refectory; common meals were generally served after church prayers (Chitty 1966: 25, note 79; Hirschfeld 1992: 80–81, 190–191). On occasion this coenobium practice also extended to monks living in cells around a laura, who would come to the monastery on Saturdays to participate in the prayer service and communal meal with the abbots (Di Segni 2005: 46). The refectory, in addition to providing meals, also provided a venue for gatherings for studying religious texts that could be conducted outside the church, the latter too limited in size to contain all the monks and monastery visitors. The size and central location of the monastery on the Jerusalem–Jericho road, and its proximity to Jerusalem and to all the Judean Desert monasteries made it a convenient location for meetings between desert monks and members of Jerusalem’s religious establishment.

Fig. 168. Northwest wing at the beginning of the excavation, view from the east.

[144]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 169. Northwest wing, view from the south.

Cyril relates that Paul, the archimandrite of the monastery of Martyrius, was appointed second to Theodosius, and together with Sabas they headed the coenobia in the Judean Desert (Life of Sabas 30). In light of Paul’s position, we surmise that the phase IIA monastery was the venue for assemblies and meetings of the abbots of the Judean Desert monasteries. This tradition continued in phase IIB, as attested by the stables and refectory complex. The historical sources attest to the great importance ascribed to the common meal in the monastery refectory and help explain the considerable investment made in constructing the refectory in the monastery of Martyrius. A special individual was appointed to be in charge of the refectory (Life of Euthymius 48, 69). Cyril tells that Euthymius forbade talking during prayer and in the refectory (Life of Euthymius 9, 18). He further relates that the deacon Fidus, who was responsible for transforming the monastery of Euthymius from a laura to a coenobium, turned the old church into a refectory, over which he built a new church (Life of Euthymius 43, 64).

The refectory complex was composed of a number of units: the central hall (L301, L302)—a large basilica-like structure; the kitchen (L300), having two stories; the vestibule (L303); and an east–west lane paved in mosaic, south of the complex (L316, L327), from which a roofed corridor with a mosaic floor (L315) led to the refectory (Figs. 170–172). Unequivocal stratigraphic points enable us to date the refectory complex’s building phases. Based on the dated inscription discovered in the mosaic floor, the refectory was built during phase IIB, in the time of Genesius (mid-sixth century CE); and consequently, the vestibule mosaic, too, was laid in this period. An earlier mosaic was uncovered beneath this one, and the walls apparently underwent changes. Repairs were made in the kitchen, with changes also apparent in the paved lane to the south, such as the blocking of the passage to corridor L315. The question arises whether some of the building stages discerned here can be attributed to phase I. Entrance to the refectory complex was through the northwest of the northern portico (L309), which

[145]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s W200

2 L315

2

L351

W200

L315

L351 L316 L316

L353 502.37

L353

1

1 502.37

W116 W116

1

501.26

1

L350 501.26

L350 L312

L300

W142

L322 L322

L302

W203 W203

W142 2

L302 L300

W141 W141

2

W143 W143

L312

502.68

L327

502.68

L327

L354 L354 W140

L301

W140

L301

502.12

W139 W139

L325 L325

502.12

L705 L705

W138

502.28

W138 502.28

L303 501.64

L303 W135

502.08

0 0

5 m

L309

5 m

Fig. 170. Detailed plan of the northwest wing.

[146]

W137 W137

L309 502.08

501.64 W136

W135 W134

W136

L306

502.52

L304 L304

W134 L308 L306

501.46

502.52

L308 501.46

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

1-1

504 00 503 00

W203

502 00 501 00 500 00 499 00

502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 W20 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W2

L200

W141

L212 L302

W3

L201 L300

L732

W116

W143 W8 L202 W10 L316 L207

L229

L208

Fig. 171. Section of the refectory and kitchen.

2-2

503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W5

W4 L209

L200

L722 L723

L749 L732 L743

L745 L746 L267

Fig. 172. Reconstruction of the refectory complex.

[147]

W202

L214

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

connected the church complex in the east with the refectory (Fig. 173). Access to L309 was also through the northwestern corner (L325) of the central courtyard, which was paved in stone slabs, in secondary use, laid in a north–south orientation. Next to the pavement, outside and along the kitchen wall (W140), is a shallow 0.2 m-wide channel built from stone segments. Water from the kitchen’s roof drained into a plastered drainage pit, which was partially preserved, and then poured freely into the central courtyard, where it drained into an additional channel (L705) that carried it to cistern L267 under the narthex. Along the northern portico, to the south, are finely fitted paving stones with a shallow channel cut into them that brought runoff water from the portico roof to the drainage pit to the east. This type of shallow upper channel is characteristic of construction in phase I (see stable L217 in the northeast wing, and

courtyard L406 in the southeast wing). We believe that this section of the floor, as well as parts of the northern portico, paved in mosaic, belong to phase I, and that they underwent changes in phase IIB (see below). Portico L309 is bounded in the south by a sort of stylobate consisting of three stone slabs bounded by two bases of arch-bearing piers, the piers 2.3 m apart. A step ascends to the portico. To the west is a bench, 2.8×0.4×0.4 m, a continuation of the one installed in the vestibule. Opposite the bench to the east is a staircase, 1.3 m wide, of which four steps are preserved; we estimate that it extended to a height of some 3 m. Close to it, on the south, is a rock-cut round depression in which a stair railing had been set. The staircase led to the roof of vestibule L303 and to that of hall L304, east of it. Portico L309, of white mosaic, was laid using 25–30 tesserae per sq. dm; in it a rainwater drainage opening

Fig. 173. Entrance to the refectory complex, view from the south.

[148]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

was installed, from which a channel, cut in phase IIB crossed the central courtyard, bringing water to cistern L267. Near the staircase is a large medallion, measuring 1.3 m in diameter, of interlaced circles in red, black, and white, encompassed by a white frame bounded inside and out by a row of black tesserae. The medallion was laid using 25 tesserae per sq. dm (Fig. 174). Repairs and changes were made. The floor abuts the bench, staircase, southernmost step, and the northernmost step that bounds the mosaic floor of the vestibule. Some of the repairs were made using colorful tesserae. North of the medallion are two horizontal rows of white tesserae, indication of a repair made to the mosaic. Signs of fire were found on the floor. The floor along with the drainage system incorporated in it, was installed in phase IIB, upon the construction of the refectory complex. This drainage system, along with the one discovered in L325, replaced the earlier one from phase I, which was installed in the stone pavement in the courtyard outside the portico. The size and splendor of the refectory, with its stunning mosaics and magnificent architectural structure, markedly contrast with its simple, narrow entrance, which does not allude to the structure’s grandeur.

0

30

cm

Fig. 174. Illustration of the medallion in portico L309.

The vestibule (L303) is an irregular rectangular 11 m-long hall. It is 4.8 m wide in its south, and 3.6 m in its north (Fig. 175). The south contains two archbearing piers, indicating that the hall was entered through an arch; the absence of additional piers in the continuation of the hall itself indicates that it had a sloping tiled roof. A broad entrance (1.5 m wide) set in W138 led from the vestibule to the refectory. The entrance has a 0.6 m-wide step in the form of a semicircular stone slab, with flanking rectangular stone slabs. The southern slab has a socket for a door pivot. A 0.11 m-wide channel underneath the entrance carried water from the refectory to the channel underneath the vestibule toward the central courtyard. This channel drained water accumulated from washing the refectory floor. W138 is preserved to a height of three courses. The wall is built of two faces, the one facing the vestibule built of ashlars, some in secondary use, and that facing the refectory, of fieldstones bound with cement and coated with plaster. The eastern wall (W135, W136), common to hall L304, is built of large fieldstones and is covered with a plastered layer of small stones bound with cement. The northern part of the wall was thickened and is 1.5 m thick, preserved to a height of four courses (W135); while from the center southward, the wall s is about 0.7 m thick, and preserved to a height of two to three courses (W136). W135 was thickened in phase IIB to enable the construction of a very wide gutter (L306, L307, L308) that drained water from the refectory roof to outside the compound, most likely to a cistern north of it. The northern wall is the compound wall (W203). The inside of the hall was encompassed by a stone bench, 0.45 m wide and 0.4 m high, coated with hydraulic plaster to prevent staining the monks’ clothing. The vestibule is paved in three rectangular mosaic carpets: two large ones extending the length of the hall, and a small one opposite the refectory entrance. The southern carpet measures 5.6×2.17 m; its frame is composed of two rows of white tesserae bounded on either side by a row of black. The carpet is composed of a diamond grid. The grid lines consist of two lines of red tesserae with a row of white in between. At the center of each diamond is a small diamond, formed of 13 tesserae in three different colors (Fig. 176). The northern, white carpet, 4.25×1.7 m, is of diagonally laid tesserae. It is decorated with schematic

[149]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 175. Vestibule L303, view from the south.

flower buds arranged in nine rows, two of which are of half buds. The edges of the mosaic, similarly arranged, are embellished with flower buds of a slightly different type, and the frame consists of two rows of red tesserae with a row of white in between. Opposite the refectory entrance is a colorful rectangular mosaic, 1.4×0.6 m, containing a diamond whose apexes touch the sides of the rectangle; colorful

interlaced patterns adorn the diamond’s center. The two right triangles formed at the northern corners are decorated, similar to the northern carpet, with ten tiny flowers, while the decoration of the two triangles on the south, corresponding to that of the southern mosaic carpet, consists of eight tiny diamonds (Fig. 177). The interlaced patterns are of the same coloration as the carpets between the columns in

[150]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

00

30 30cm cm

Fig. 177. Illustration of the mosaic carpet opposite the refectory entrance in vestibule L303.

00

50 50 cm cm

Fig. 176. Illustration of the southern mosaic carpet in vestibule L303.

the refectory (see Figs. 195–201). The mosaic floor in the remainder of the vestibule is of white, black, and gray tesserae. The interlacing diamond pattern, employing a range of colors, is the finest part of the mosaic floor, laid using 100 tesserae per sq. dm, while the remainder of the mosaic was laid using 30–35 tesserae per sq. dm. A white mosaic with tesserae of similar size to those in the kitchen, laid using 36–42 tesserae per sq. dm, was unearthed beneath the colorful mosaic, at the northern end of the vestibule. A fashioned depression was found in it that drained water from the early mosaic floor outside. The lower mosaic, partially uncovered, was probably entirely white. The back entrance to the refectory was through a long roofed corridor (L315), 6.7 m long and 1.8 m wide, located west of the kitchen. The corridor was entered from the south by a step. Along the western compound wall (W200) is a rock-cut bench, 0.3 m wide, and 0.7 m high, coated with hydraulic plaster, that runs along the corridor. Of the eastern wall, only the foundation, which is actually the leveled bedrock, remains. The corridor is paved in a white mosaic that

[151]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

abuts the bench and eastern wall and was laid using 35–40 tesserae per sq. dm. The step to the south rests on the mosaic floor; the latter was found strewn with colorful mosaic sections that had fallen from the upper story over L300. The corridor entrance from the south was blocked in a later stage by the wall that rests on the mosaic floor of the lane leading to the corridor. The lane to the south (L316, L327) is bounded on the west by the outer compound wall (W200), on the north by the kitchen wall (W143), and on the south by phase III W116, which is part of the Muslim building partially built over the bathhouse (Fig. 178). The lane’s floor is not uniform, and consists alternately of bedrock, a mosaic floor with large white tesserae, and stone slabs in secondary use (in the southwestern corner). In phase IIB this lane provided access to the kitchen through two entrances in the northern wall and, as was mentioned above, also to the refectory. The west of the lane (L316) is bounded to the east by a later 1.1 m-thick wall (W142), built of stones

Fig. 178. Lane (L316, L327) south of the refectory, view from the west.

in secondary use and preserved to a height of two courses. Part of the wall is built over the bedrock, and the rest, over the foundation of an early wall and over well-fitted stone slabs. The slabs, laid where the early wall ends, are apparently a remnant of an early floor. Cutting marks are evident along the bedrock to the north and south, apparently for channeling water that flowed from east to west prior to the construction of wall W142. The lane, most likely already in use in phase I, joined the lane bounding the early Roman massive structure to the west and led to the bathhouse. The west of wall W116 rests on the stone floor and on two hewn channels, one of which belongs to the bathhouse from phase I. The channels drain into a single channel (L351), covered with stone slabs, which carries the water beyond the compound. A rock-cut cellar with maximal dimensions of 14×2.5×2 m (L350) is located in the north of L316, under the lane (Fig. 179). It was entered down a ladder through a squarish entrance, each side 1.2 m long. In the cellar’s west are built stone walls, with arches of stones bound by cement that supported a vault. Half-arches were built in the narrow entrance area. Rectangular depressions for wooden beams used when installing the arches flank the southern and northern walls. The roof of the cellar’s east was of bedrock. This part is more roughly hewn than its west, and the cellar’s walls are not straight. Only the west of the cellar is plastered. The east was probably an expansion from a later stage, and the cellar was probably used for storing wine and food. Above the cellar is a mosaic floor, laid using especially large tesserae, 25–30 per sq. dm. The floor abuts the northern wall, the compound wall, the stone floor, and the bedrock to the east. Three areas where the mosaic floor does not abut the northern wall likely indicate the location of three installations, of which nothing remains. These squarish installations, each approx. 0.8×0.4 m, stood some 0.6 m apart. The mosaic floor abuts them with three horizontal rows of tesserae, partially preserved. The western installation yielded a remnant of a pottery gutter, 0.7 m in diameter, from which two channels branch out: one to the west, beyond the compound; and the other, to the south, joining the channel covered in stone slabs (L351). Repairs were made to the mosaic along where the channel beneath it went west. The channels apparently

[152]

500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W20

L201

L212 L732

W8 L202 W10 L207

L229

L208

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

2-2

503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

W5

L316

W4 L209

L722 L723

L200 L350

L749 L732 L743

L745 L746

L267

Fig. 179. Section of the cellar under lane L316.

drained wash water from the upper story, carrying it outside through a pottery pipe. The installations’ proximity to the kitchen indicates they might have been used for cooking; the kitchen entrance is east of the installations, in the northern wall. East of L316 is a segment of white mosaic floor that is the eastward continuation of the lane (L327). An additional entrance in this part led to the kitchen. To the south, L322 is partially rock cut, and partially built on foundations of walls that preceded the Islamicperiod structure and probably date to phase I (see p. 129). The mosaic floor abuts the kitchen wall with two to three parallel rows, the foundations of the phase I walls, and the early stone floor under W142. The mosaic’s boundaries to the east and southeast are unclear. In the east, the mosaic is cut by five horizontal rows of tesserae laid from north to south, that possibly mark a wall that stood there in an earlier stage. To the southeast is an upper channel, paved in mosaic and with evident repairs that apparently extended to the central courtyard. The kitchen (L300), 20.7×6 m, adjoins the refectory to the south. It has a mosaic floor, and is roofed with a north–south vault borne on seven arches, with an additional arch above corridor L315 (Figs. 180–181). The second arch from the east was discovered fallen in its entirety, and five fallen arch stones were uncovered from the first arch on the west. The arches were supported by piers, discovered along the northern and southern walls. The southern wall (W143) is built on the leveled bedrock. The west of it is constructed of fieldstones bound with cement, while its east is of large irregular stones with small stones in its interstices. Two entrances were set in the wall: the eastern one was 1.4 m wide; the western one, 0.9 m-wide, had

a threshold constructed of stone slabs. The western entrance was found without doorposts, while in the eastern entrance, a single doorpost came to light. The mosaic floor abuts the western entrance with three horizontal rows of tesserae, but not the eastern one, thus attesting that the latter entrance was opened in a later stage. The northern wall (W141), partially preserved to a height of two to three courses, has two faces: the one toward the refectory, of medium-sized fieldstones; and to the one toward the kitchen, of small fieldstones. The face of the eastern wall (W140) toward the courtyard is of dressed stones. The kitchen walls were plastered. No wall was found on the hall’s west or in its northwestern corner, and the hall mosaic ends at the plaster layers of the refectory in the north and of corridor L315 in the west. Through the northwestern corner, food and drink were served to those in the refectory. A large marble table, which had apparently rested on a wooden frame, was discovered near the opening facing the refectory. The hall is paved in a white mosaic, laid using large tesserae, 30 per sq. dm. On the west and east of the hall, this mosaic is cut, respectively, by three and five horizontal rows of tesserae, the significance of which has not been determined. The white kitchen mosaic includes a colorful mosaic carpet, 1.97×1.92 m, installed facing the late southeastern kitchen entrance; it might have been incorporated in phase IIB into the earlier stage white mosaic (Fig. 182). The mosaic frame consists of three rows of white tesserae and a 10 cm-wide colored frame of two rows of black, followed by five rows of tesserae in white, light orange, pink, red, white, and black. The carpet is composed of eight medallions formed of vine scrolls that issue from an amphora in the center of the first row of medallions.

[153]

W202

L214

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 180. Kitchen and refectory halls, view from the east.

The medallions, arranged in three rows, are adorned with grape clusters, leaves, and tendrils. The central medallion is decorated with a partridge and a grape cluster. The space between the medallions and close to the frame is filled with grape leaves, tendrils, and grape clusters. The mosaic floor contains a limited number of colors, but each one has a number of hues. The edges were laid using large tesserae, 30 per sq. dm; the frame, amphora, clusters, and partridge tail were laid using 56–80 tesserae per sq. dm; while for the partridge’s body and head, 144 tesserae per sq. dm were used. In the center of the eastern wall is an installation (L354), probably a storage chest, of which two stone slabs, 0.5×0.3 m and 8 cm thick, survived (Fig. 183). The installation’s outside is of small stones, under which is a platform, also of small stones. Each side of the installation measures 0.6×0.45 m and is 0.25 m thick. The installation was completely coated

in white plaster. An intact jug was found inside the installation. Another installation (L312) adjoins the southern wall, between the southwestern entrance and the pier east of it. The northern side of the installation is rounded. The installation measures ca. 1.7×1.1 m and is entirely coated with white plaster. It contained a pithos jar, 0.75 m in diameter, whose sides, 12–20 cm thick, are of fieldstones incorporated in plaster. An installation (L353) in the southern wall was adjoined to the second pier from the west using fieldstones and cement. The installation itself consists of an upright cylindrical stone, 0.55 m high and 0.49 m in diameter, with a sort of depression cut in its upper part. The stone is thickly coated in white plaster. The second story, above the kitchen, was paved in a colorful mosaic, the remains of which were discovered on the kitchen’s white mosaic floor, along with the threshold of a door found above the fallen

[154]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 181. Kitchen hall, view from the east.

arch to the east, thus suggesting that the upper story consisted of rooms separated by entrances. Many vessels from the second story were also found in the debris of the kitchen hall (Fig. 184). The staircase to the second story was not discovered. Two colorful mosaic floor segments, found 2.7 m apart, measure 1.3×0.95 m and 1.4×0.7 m (Fig. 185). At the mosaic’s

edges, diagonal rows of tesserae form a herringbone pattern, whose center is emphasized by a row of small patterns of four black tesserae flanking a central red tessera. The mosaic’s frame is composed of a guilloche flanked by zigzag strips. An additional strip of black outlines the entire frame. The mosaic field exhibits a grid pattern of diamonds formed of

[155]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

00

2020cm cm

Fig. 182. Kitchen hall mosaic carpet.

[156]

13

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 183. Installation L354, view from the south.

Fig. 184. Vessels from the second story found in the debris of the kitchen hall.

[157]

0 0

20 20cm cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0 0

20 20cm cm

Fig. 185. Fragments of the second story mosaic floor, found in the kitchen hall.

diagonal strips of black and red schematic buds. In the center of each diamond is a cruciform flower design. Although only three basic colors were used to produce the mosaic (laid using 80 tesserae per sq. dm), the tesserae and craftsmanship employed in its making were of high quality. The refectory (L301, L302) is the finest construction of the last phase of the monastery, and therefore it was only natural that the dedicatory inscription of the entire enterprise be placed here (Figs. 186–187). According to the inscription, the refectory was built in the sixth century CE, in the time of Genesius, which was the third phase of the site, phase IIB. The hall, located in the monastery’s northwestern corner, measures 26.5×12 m. The hall’s outer walls are the compound walls (W200, W203), of large ashlar construction (some 0.8–1 m long). The inner faces of the hall walls are of fieldstones bound in cement and plastered. The basilica-like structure of the refectory consists of a nave and two aisles, separated by two rows of seven columns on bases; most of the column bases were found in situ. Some of the capitals came to light, but the columns themselves were apparently looted. The nave measures 26×4.7 m; the southern aisle is 2.6 m wide, the northern one, 3 m. Two pairs of arch-bearing piers had stood adjacent to the eastern (W138) and western (W200) walls of the refectory; only one of those in the western wall survived. The hall had a sloping tiled roof. As noted above, the hall had two entrances: the central, broad entrance in the eastern wall, where the apse would have been; and an additional, back entrance in the southwestern corner, near which a large lintel stone, measuring 1.2×0.5×0.25 m, was discovered. The hall was lined with benches. A bench, 0.3 m high with a maximal width of 0.45 m, was discovered along the northern wall (W203). Similar benches were discovered along the southern wall (W141) as well as along the eastern one, on either side of the entrance. The bench along the north of the western wall does not extend for the wall’s entire length; it ends in a pier on its south. The benches have a double coat of grayreddish plaster, as white-gray plaster of the type on the hall’s walls would have stained the clothing of those dining in the hall. The walls are decorated with red, orange, yellow, and green frescoes, and red inscriptions (Figs. 188–189).

[158]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 186. Refectory hall, view from the east.

Fig. 187. Refectory hall, view from the northwest.

[159]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 188. Fragments of colorful frescoes found in the refectory hall.

[160]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 189. Fragments of inscriptions found in the refectory hall.

[161]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

Fig. 190. Illustration of the mosaic carpets in the refectory hall.

[162]

1

m

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 191. Interlaced medallion and a dedicatory inscription found opposite the refectory entrance, view from the west.

The entire refectory is paved in colorful mosaic carpets arranged according to the architectural division. A large carpet of intertwined pattern fills the nave, and the two aisles are decorated with carpets bearing a simple pattern (Fig. 190). The intercolumnal spaces contain rectangular carpets whose dimensions are the width of the column bases and the length of the spaces between them, except for the spaces between the pair of western columns and the hall wall, which were embellished with intertwined medallions; the northern one is well preserved, while the southern one did not survive. At the eastern end of the nave carpet is a tabula ansata with a dedicatory inscription to the abbot, and mentioning the completion date of the construction work. Opposite the entrance and close to the inscription is a medallion, in the center of which is a heart facing those entering the hall (Figs. 191–192).

0

20 cm

Fig. 192. Interlaced medallion with a heart in its center.

[163]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The nave mosaic carpet, 24×4 m, has a 0.48 m-wide frame that surrounds the mosaic field and dedicatory inscription; it is composed of different colored strips bounded by two rows of white tesserae and a row of black tesserae on either side of the white ones. The mosaic field is composed of a recurring pattern of a central circle whose frame is intertwined with four pointed oval units whose outline forms an inner circle. In the inner circle is a cross pattern of diagonally set tesserae. The geometric motifs are interlaced with each other and with the carpet frame, which is fashioned of three-colored strips: red, white, and orange; ocher, beige, and white; or black, gray, and white. These strips are arranged so that the intertwined circles and ovals become intertwined Maltese crosses. At the eastern end of the nave mosaic is the inscription, in a tabula ansata that measures 0.75×0.3 m (Fig. 193). The inscription, which could be read by those facing east, reads: ᾽Επὶ τοῦ ὁσίου πατρὸς ἡμῶν Γενεσίου πρεσβυτέρου κ(αὶ) ἀρχιμανδρίτου ἐγένετο κ(αὶ) τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον ὑπὲρ τε˜ς σωτηρίας αὑτοῦ κ(αὶ) τῆς ἐν Χ(ριστ)ῷ συνοδίας αὐτοῦ. ᾽Ετελιώθι δ᾽ ἐν μηνὶ Μαρτίῳ ἰνδ(ικτιῶνος) ά .

In the days of our pious father Genesius, priest and archimandrite, this work too was done, for the salvation of himself and this community in Christ. It was completed on the fourth (day) of the month of March of the first indiction. The first year of the indiction, when the monastery renovation could have been conducted, fell in the years 552/3 CE, 567/8 CE, and 582/3 CE (Di Segni 1990b: 158–159, inscription no. 6). It is our opinion that this construction is to be dated to 552/3 CE, in the time of Justinian I. Each of the aisles is decorated in a white mosaic carpet, laid with diagonally set rows of tesserae to form a herringbone pattern, and whose center is emphasized by schematic flower buds. The southern carpet is decorated with schematic flower buds, arranged in four rows of buds, and two rows of half buds; and the northern one comprises schematic flower buds, arranged in five rows of buds and two rows of half buds. The carpets are surrounded by a frame of two rows of white tesserae bounded by a row of black on either side. The space between the framed mosaic and the walls is similarly embellished. Between the columns are 14 rectangular carpets, measuring 2.7×0.75 m each, and two medallions

0

40 cm

Fig. 193. Dedicatory inscription bearing the name of Genesius, in the refectory hall.

[164]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0 0

20 20cm cm

Fig. 194. Illustration of the interlaced medallion at the western end of the north intercolumniation row.

(Fig. 194). They exhibit a great diversity of color, and each carpet is different and distinct in its decoration details. In terms of composition, they can be divided into five types: (1) a carpet with a lozenge containing various interlaces and whose apexes touch the frame (Figs. 195–196); (2) a carpet divided into two, with a lozenge whose apexes touch the frame on one side and an interlaced circle on the other (Fig. 197); (3) a carpet containing two lozenges whose apexes touch the frame (Fig. 198); (4) a carpet with an interlaced circle in its center flanked by lozenges, the apexes of which touch the frame (Figs. 199–200); and (5) a carpet with an interlaced lozenge in its center flanked by circles touching the frame (Fig. 201). The triangles formed at the edges of the lozenges are adorned with colorful zigzag lines or with a diagonal chessboard pattern with flower buds and tiny lozenges. The lozenge in the panel between the fourth and fifth columns to the east in the southern row of columns is exceptional in its decoration of colored squares. To avoid empty space between columns where the mosaic carpet was small, interlaced or diamond decorations were inlaid. The artist used many colors. The fine mosaics were laid using 110–120 tesserae per sq. dm, the central mosaic, 50 tesserae per sq. dm, and the aisle carpets, 30 tesserae per sq. dm.

Many finds and architectural items were discovered in the refectory complex. Most of the column bases remained in situ. The refectory also yielded four stylized capitals and several column fragments some of which might have come from the second story (see Figs. 258–261, 266); as well as arch stones, a doorpost, piers, stone slabs, glass window fragments. Hundreds of vessels were discovered in the complex; this was one of the largest concentrations of pottery in the monastery. These vessels include wine glasses, plates, large storage vessels, cooking vessels, large marble serving platters (Fig. 202), a round bitumen table top with depressions for cups (Fig. 203), and bronze vessels. Eggshells were found in one of the cooking pots. The structure of the refectory and kitchen, and of the second story above the latter, raise complex questions. The refectory and vestibule had a capacity of hundreds of people; what, then, was the function of the second story above the kitchen, with its colorful mosaic floor? Another issue is the absence of a proper staircase to the second story. One unanswered question is what preceded the refectory in phase I. The vestibule mosaic exhibited two stages, one preceding the refectory’s establishment; thus, this part of the compound predated the refectory, but its function is unclear. The northwestern area’s outer walls are of especially large stones; it has not been determined whether they were built during the establishment of the refectory, or in an earlier phase. A comparison with two additional coenobium monasteries, Kh. ed-Deir and the monastery of Theognius, shows that the construction of the two monasteries’ refectories resembles that of the kitchen in the monastery of Martyrius. The hall in the Kh. edDeir monastery measures 27.5×6.3 m; above it is a second story, borne on seven arches; it had a colorful mosaic floor that collapsed and was discovered on the lower level. The lower story contained cooking and baking installations (Hirschfeld 1999: 62–80). The monastery of Theognius contained a rectangular refectory, 22×6.5 m, with a roof supported by six arches (Corbo 1955: 151–155).

[165]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a

b

c Fig. 195. Rectangular carpets composed of lozenges, in the north intercolumniation row.

[166]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

a

b

c 0

20 cm

[167]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a

b

c Fig. 196. Rectangular carpets composed of lozenges, in the south intercolumniation row.

[168]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

a

b

c 0 0

[169]

20 20 cm cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a

b

c Fig. 197. Rectangular carpets with a lozenge on one side and an interlaced circle on the other, in the north intercolumniation row.

[170]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

cm 20

0

cm 20

0

20 cm

a

b

c

[171]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a

b Fig. 198. Rectangular carpets containing two lozenges, the upper one from the north intercolumniation row, and the lower one from the south intercolumniation row.

Fig. 199. Rectangular carpet with an interlaced circle in its center flanked by lozenges, in the south intercolumniation row.

[172]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

a

b 00

20 20 cm cm

0

20 cm

[173]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 200. Rectangular carpet with an interlaced circle in its center flanked by lozenges, in the south intercolumniation row.

Fig. 201. A rectangular carpet with an interlaced lozenge in its center flanked by circles, in the south intercolumniation row.

[174]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

cm 20

0

20 cm

0 0

20 20cm cm

[175]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 202. Marble table and pottery vessels from the refectory complex.

Fig. 203. Bituminous table with depressions for cups from the refectory hall.

[176]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Area VII: North Central Wing The north central wing connects the church and the stable area to its north with the refectory. It can be divided into a number of units, each having a different function. The wing’s central unit consists of a portico with a dedicatory inscription, under which is a burial cave. Next to the portico is a small chapel that might have been related to the burial rites. North of the chapel is a residential unit through which the burial cave below could be entered. East of the residential unit are stables and a hall, the latter paved in mosaic and apparently serving monastery guests who ate a meal in the refectory. This wing yielded remains from all the phases identified in the site; the complex underwent major changes, with clear evidence of the last phase of the monastery (IIB) and remains from phase I (Figs. 204–207).

The portico (L309, L311, L328, L260) on the wing’s south, measuring some 20×2.7 m, was roofed with arches and paved in mosaic, with two drainage pits set in the floor (Figs. 208–209). It apparently underwent numerous changes after being built in phase I, and continued in use in phases IIA and IIB. In phase IIB it functioned as a passageway between the church and refectory. An arcade running west to east was built on either side of the portico. The portico was probably roofed by wooden beams laid over the arches. On the south, eight piers were found, six in situ; they were preserved to a height of one to two courses. The eastern pier was built over an earlier, narrower one. Rectangular, finely arranged stones between the columns constituted a sort of stylobate, connecting the central courtyard, paved in stone slabs, and the portico, paved in mosaic. Piers were found on the portico’s north, only

Fig. 204. North central wing, view from the southwest.

[177]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 205. North central wing, view from the west. Note the proximity to the stable area and the church complex.

Fig. 206. North central wing, view from the northeast.

[178]

L325

502.28

502.08

501.64

L309

L303

W135

501.48

L307

L311

W137

L304

502.52

501.46

Fig. 207. Detailed plan of the north central wing.

W138

L306

W134 W136

W173

W133

L328

L329

L314

W59

L305

501.16

1

W39

L247

501.50

L261

501.10

L252

L258

L260

501.37

W51

L257

W58

500.89

L248

500.68

W38

L228

501.24

L254

500.96

L246

L245

500.64

W57

W50

L308

W174

W40 W53 W52

W37

W48

500.97

L271

W26

W47

L259

W49

500.84

500.50

500.04

0

L220

L240

W43

L241

W42

L242

W41

W44

L243 L270

W36 500.80

W35 L272

500.41

L244

500.27

W46

W203

5

m

W34

W45

500.69

W130

W132 W131

[179]

W25

1

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

L325

502.28

502.0

501.64

L309

L303

W135 W138

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 209. Square drainage hole in the floor of the northern portico.

Fig. 208. Northern portico (L311, L328, L260), view from the west.

four piers and the foundation of an additional two remaining in situ. Some of these piers are not parallel to those on the portico’s south, and apparently are late, belonging to phase IIB, as can be determined with certainty regarding the piers in the west of the portico (see below). Walls were incorporated between the piers; only a rock-cut line marking the location of the walls was preserved. Remnants of a finely fitted stone slab floor of the compound’s central courtyard are preserved along the south of the portico. A shallow channel cut in the paving stones carried water from the portico roof from the west to a finely fashioned settling pit (Fig. 210), and from there to the cistern (L267) under the church narthex. The paving stones abut the portico stylobate. The precise installation

Fig. 210. A channel and drainage holes south of the northern portico.

[180]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

of the paving stones and the channel cut into them indicate they should be attributed to phase I. The west of the portico (L309) provided access to the vestibule (L303) of the refectory that was built in phase IIB. Changes were made to adapt it to the new refectory complex. As noted above (Area VI), to the west is a bench, a continuation of the one installed in the vestibule. Facing the bench to the east is a staircase, four steps of which are preserved. The staircase partially blocked the entrance to hall L304, and led to the roof of the hall and of vestibule L303 to its west. This section of the portico was paved in white mosaic, an opening in which led rainwater to a channel, cut in phase IIB, that crossed the central courtyard and brought the water to cistern L267. Near the staircase is a mosaic floor with a large medallion enclosed by a white frame. Repairs and changes were made in the floor, some with the use of colorful tesserae. The mosaic floor abuts the bench, the staircase, and the stylobate on the south. Signs of fire were found on the floor, which was installed in phase IIB upon the construction of the refectory complex. The eastward continuation of the portico (L311, L328, L260) contains a mosaic measuring 13.7×2.7 m,

laid using 25 large tesserae per sq. dm. The mosaic edges are of three horizontal rows of tesserae followed by diagonal rows that form a herringbone pattern, embellished at set intervals with squares. The mosaic frame is composed of two rows of black tesserae, with two rows of white in between. The mosaic carpet is decorated with five rows of large flower buds and two rows of half flower buds. In form, decoration, and the manner in which the tesserae are laid, the mosaic carpet resembles the mosaic of portico L107 in the southwest wing, ascribed to phase I; leading us to surmise that this mosaic, too, belongs to the same phase. One row of tesserae between the west of the portico (L309) and its center (L311), a sort of mosaic seam, apparently connected the early and late carpets. The east of the portico slopes slightly, its edge some 0.2 m lower than the rest of the portico, forming a sort of ramp that connects with the passage to its east (L254); on its south, this passage joins the main passageway (L228), which extends westward from the northwest gate. The decorated mosaic carpet was cut in this part, and repaired with large white and black tesserae, 12 tesserae per sq. dm (Fig. 211). This might indicate that the mosaic was dismantled and lowered,

Fig. 211. Eastern part of the northern portico that was lowered to the level of passage L254, view from the east.

[181]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

and that the ramp was installed to reach the level of passage L254, the latter built in phase IIB, of paving stones in secondary use (see below). We assume that in an earlier phase the portico continued eastward, joining a portico on the east that was razed upon the construction of the church in phases IIA and IIB. In the center of the portico an inscription is incorporated in the early mosaic; the surrounding flower buds do not interface with the inscription. Laid directly over the burial cave, the inscription apparently marked the last resting place of the three priests listed in it (Fig. 212). The inscription, set in a tabula ansata that measures 2.25×1.12 m, is encompassed by a frame of two rows of black tesserae with two rows of white in between (Fig. 213). The five-line inscription is of letters, ca. 10 cm high, of black tesserae; the lines are separated by a line of red tesserae. The bottom line of the text is completely unpreserved; and although the first four lines also suffered partial damage, they are decipherable. A mosaic segment around the lower part of the inscription was repaired in a later stage. The inscription was written carelessly, and its script is

inferior to that in the other inscriptions in the church and refectory. The letters were laid using 90 tesserae per sq. dm, the background, 45 tesserae per sq. dm. The text begins with a decoration of palm fronds, and reads as follows (Di Segni 1990b: 157–158, inscription no. 5): Μνή[σθητι Κ(ύρι)ε ἐν] τῆִ βασιλείᾳ σου ᾽Ελ[πιδίου᾽ Ιωά]ννου Γεωργίου τῶ[ν πρεσβ(υτέρων) καὶ τ]ῶν λοιπῶν πρ(εσβυτέρ)ων τῶ[ν ἐνθαῦ]τα κειμένων ὧν [γινωׂ σκεις τά ὁνόματα] O Lord, remember in Thy kingdom Elpidius, John (and) George the priests, and the other priests who rest here, whose names Thou Knowest. The three priests mentioned here also appear in the inscription in chapel L412, which was built in their memory (see Area III). Both inscriptions emphasize that these three important priests contributed greatly to the monastery and were possibly buried there. Additional priests were buried there as well, but not

Fig. 212. Dedicatory inscription in the portico mosaic floor above the burial cave, view from the south.

[182]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

40 cm

0

Fig. 213. Dedicatory inscription set in a tabula ansata, above the burial cave.

abbots, who were probably interred in the martyrium (L221), which contains Paul’s tombstone. The three priests’ functions and contribution to the monastery, which merited having a chapel named after them and a dedicatory burial cave inscription made in their honor, have not been determined; nor do we know if they were involved in the major renovation of the monastery conducted in the time of the archimandrite Genesius, or filled some post afterwards. Only the

similar mosaic motifs in the refectory and hospice might connect the renovation with the “Chapel of the Three Priests.” In addition, it has not been determined whether the chapel was established during their lifetimes or after their deaths. In phase III the portico no longer provided access to the refectory. W52 and W131, of medium-sized stones with smallsized stones and earth in between, were built over the portico’s mosaic floor.

[183]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 214. Chapel (L258, L329), view from the west.

North of this portico is a chapel (L258, L329), which is 10.6 m long and as wide as the portico, 2.7 m (Fig. 214). The construction of its roof has not been determined; it might have been constructed of wooden beams and tiles. The apse to the east, 1.4 m wide and 0.6 m deep, and built of small stones, is preserved to a height of three courses; it is coated with a layer of white plaster. The chapel hall is paved in mosaic, while the apse is paved in stone slabs. The apse wall (W50) is built over the stone slab floor, which might have been part of an early floor cut by the later passage L254. The northern wall (W51) contained a narrow, 0.8 m-wide entrance, without doorposts, that led to the vestibule (L252) of the residential unit before being blocked in a later stage. W51’s inner face, directed toward the chapel, is of worked stones, while its outer face is of medium-sized fieldstones bound in cement. The east of the wall is preserved to a height of one course, with hardly anything remaining of its west. There was additional access to the portico from the

south. The mosaic floor and the portico were probably separated by arch-bearing piers incorporated in a built wall, of which only a sort of foundation trench (L261) between the chapel and the portico remains. The inner face of the western chapel wall (W132) directed toward the chapel, was of worked stones, its outer face, of fieldstones; only one course remains. The ca. 10 m-long mosaic floor, laid using 36–42 tesserae per sq. dm, abuts the chapel walls and the apse floor with four horizontal rows of tesserae. The chapel’s mosaic floor differs from that of the phase I portico, which consisted of large tesserae. In phase III the chapel was divided by W52, which was built on the mosaic floor and also cut the portico. West of the chapel is hall L304, which adjoins the refectory vestibule (L303). Measuring 10.7×4.5 m, hall L304 has a mosaic floor and exhibits a number of building phases (Fig. 215). The early southern wall (W137), of ashlar construction, separates the hall from the portico; for the most part only its rock-cut foundation is preserved. The portico’s early mosaic carpet ends in three horizontal rows of tesserae that abut the wall’s remaining infrastructure, as well as the pier to its east. The hall’s eastern wall consists of W130 and W132. W130, common to room L314, through which the burial cave is entered. Built of two faces, one of dressed stones and the other, of fieldstones bound in cement, it is preserved to a height of two courses. The south of the wall contains a repair that incorporated a lintel in secondary use with a cross in its center (see Fig. 272). W132 was built upon the construction of the chapel in phase IIB. W132 is narrower than W130, which apparently precedes it and belongs to phase IIA; its inner face is of fieldstones. The western wall (W136) is common to vestibule L303. The hall’s entrance, not located but probably in the southern wall, connected the hall and the portico. The hall was mostly paved in white mosaic that had been incorporated into the cut and leveled bedrock floor. The north of the mosaic floor was laid using 20–25 tesserae per sq. dm, while its south was laid using 40 tesserae per sq. dm. Five horizontal rows of tesserae span the room’s width, separating the floor’s north and south. The mosaic also bears evidence of repairs. It partially abuts the eastern and western walls and the rock-cut floor. The south of the hall floor

[184]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 215. Hall L304, view from the south.

contains four double depressions, two small and two large. We presume that these depressions held wooden beams that were part of a wooden pavilion. It has not been determined whether the latter was related to the phase IIA or IIB burial cave, or belonged to phase I. Changes were introduced in the hall in phase IIB, when the refectory was built. A large gutter (L306, L307, L308), ca. 0.4 m wide, was installed in the north of the hall, draining the water from the roofs of the refectory, the kitchen, and the rooms to the east. Three walls (W133, W134, W173) built in this phase served as sides of the gutter. The walls, each ca. 1.2 m thick, are of large plastered stones that rest on the mosaic floor, therefore postdating it. A plastered channel led from the gutter to the large cistern north of the compound. From this we learn that the hall, like the lower mosaic of L303 (see Area VI), preceded the refectory, which is dated to the mid-sixth century CE (phase IIB). Based on the early portico mosaic that abuts the infrastructure of W137, we assume that halls L303 and L304 were established in phase I, were in use and possibly even paved in mosaic in phase IIA, and continued in use in phase IIB, when they underwent

changes due to the establishment of the refectory. North of the chapel is a residential complex, entered from passage L254, consisting of a vestibule and several rooms. The complex in its final form belongs to phase IIB (Fig. 216). The room entrances were without doorposts (except for that in room L248), and were coated with a thick layer of reddish plaster, which is characteristic of the construction in that period. Isolated remains attest to the existence of phases I and IIA in this complex. The vestibule (L252) was accessed from a 2.4 mwide arched entrance, of which two piers were preserved. The entrance threshold was of two long stone slabs in secondary use, one of which had a bolt socket. The room, measuring 3.7×2.7 m, provided access to rooms L247, L248, and L257. Its mosaic floor, laid using 49 tesserae per sq. dm, abuts the room’s walls and its entrance threshold in the east with three horizontal rows of tesserae. A narrow entrance in its southern wall (W51) leads to the chapel. This entrance, 0.34 m above the room’s floor level, thus postdating it, was breached in phase IIB, upon the establishment of the chapel, before being blocked in a

[185]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 216. Residential complex in the north central wing, view from the southeast.

later stage. The northern wall (W58), built of dressed stones bound with cement, has three entrances leading to rooms to the north (L247 and L248). The western wall (W174) is barely preserved; for the most part, only its foundation remains. An entrance set in the wall led to room L257. Room L257 is narrow, measuring 2.7×1.5 m; it had a 0.7 m-wide entrance without doorposts in its east. Its floor is coated with a thick layer of plaster, which is characteristic of the monastic cells. The southern wall (W51) is shared with the chapel. Its western wall (W53), preserved to a height of two courses, is built of large worked stones bound with cement. One of these stones is a 1.3 m-long threshold stone in secondary use. An additional narrow entrance from the north led to room L248. North of vestibule L252 is a narrow, corridor-like room, L247 (5.3×1.5 m), which abuts the compound wall (W203) to the north. Its walls, preserved to a height of three courses, are of large dressed stones with traces of plaster. The room has two entrances: the one from the south (1 m wide) is without doorposts and has a threshold stone that forms a step; and the one from the north, 0.8 m-wide, led to room L248 and

was later blocked with fieldstones when the corridor became a monastic cell. The room’s floor, of white mosaic, laid using 42–49 tesserae per sq. dm, abuts all the room’s walls and the step in the southern entrance with three horizontal rows of tesserae. Hall L248, located west of room L247, abuts the compound wall to the north, as well. The hall, 5.25×3.5 m, is built of dressed stones coated with a layer of white plaster. The eastern wall (W39) is preserved to a height of three courses, with a niche (0.45 m wide and 0.5 m deep) of stone slabs in its south, 0.5 m above the floor. Its bottom of white plaster, the niche is divided in two by a horizontal stone slab. The western wall (W40), which is common with hall L305, is preserved to a height of three courses. The north of the wall is narrower than its south and contains a blocked entrance. The hall has a mosaic floor, laid using 30 white tesserae per sq. dm, which abuts all the room’s walls with three horizontal rows of tesserae, including the narrow part of the western wall. In the center of the room is a 0.8 m-wide repair of the mosaic, demarked by two horizontal rows of tesserae on either side. A corridor might have led from room L247 to room L305, with the repair marking an earlier wall that had been removed.

[186]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

The hall has four entrances, possibly not all in use at the same time. The southern wall (W58) has two entrances; the western, earlier one (0.7 m wide) has doorposts and a stepped threshold stone, and could be closed with a wooden door. Additionally, it is located at the end of the room, characteristic of the phase I entrances. If this is a phase I entrance, the room itself might originally have belonged to this phase. The entrance is abutted by three horizontal rows of tesserae. The 0.85 m-wide eastern entrance, raised 0.2 m above floor level, was breached in a later stage, a stone slab being incorporated as a sort of threshold. The eastern and western walls each contain an entrance that was blocked in some stage, perhaps when the passageway between rooms L247 and L305 was cancelled. An additional hall (L305), 5.3×3.7 m, is located west of hall L248. Its walls, preserved to a height of two to three courses, are built of one face of dressed stones and the other of fieldstones bound by cement, and bear traces of plaster. The northern wall is the

compound wall; built in its western end is a gutter and a settling pool, cast from cement, that carried water from the roofs to outside the monastery (apparently to the cistern on the north, outside the compound). In the eastern wall (W40) is a square, plastered niche, 0.5 m wide and deep, and 0.55 m above the floor. In the niche’s northern wall is a stone with two grooves cut across its width. There is an additional niche, 0.6 m wide, at the northern end of the western wall (W130). This wall, shared with hall L304, preceded the refectory’s construction. At the western end of the southern wall (W59), preserved to a height of one course, is a 0.9 m-wide entrance that led to room L314; its threshold was raised above the hall’s floor. Hall L305 has a white mosaic floor, laid using 30–35 tesserae per sq. dm, which abuts the room’s walls and the settling pool with three horizontal rows of tesserae. Room L314, through which the burial cave was entered, measures 3.6×3.2 m; the room’s entrance was on the north (Fig. 217). The eastern wall (W53)

Fig. 217. Room L314 and room L305 to its north, view from the southwest.

[187]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

is shared with room L257, the western wall (W130), with hall L304. All that remains of the southern wall are two stones that formed a corner with W130; thus these two walls are contemporaneous. The room’s floor is not preserved, except for a white mosaic section in the northwest corner that alludes to the west of the room being paved in mosaic. The stairs descending from this side of the room were built above a semivault that rested on the bedrock. The vault, built in Roman style, resembles the one in the south wing (see Fig. 147). Only the lower steps of the staircase are preserved, but an impression of the rest is visible in the plaster of the burial cave (Figs. 218–219). The semi-vault and staircase were apparently built in phase I. The burial cave was coated with white, non-hydraulic plaster. It contained the remains of skeletons, some of children under the age of six months. We attribute the children’s interments to a later stage, after the site had been abandoned; they possibly were laid there by Bedouins who lived at the site until recently (for the anthropological report by J. Zias, see JSRF L-567).The cave’s not having been coated with hydraulic plaster rules out the possibility

of its use as a cistern. The inscription in the portico above the cave attests that the cave served as the monastery’s burial cave. Remains of an arch that jutted out from the eastern wall were found in the southeast of the room, opposite the cave entrance; the arch was probably built to support the roof and prevent water from entering the cave. A plastered opening over the southern end of the cave, created in a later stage, damaged the inscription and the frame that encompassed the portico mosaic. The cave was apparently in use in phase I, became a burial cave in phase IIA, and continued in use in phase IIB, when the inscription in memory of the three priests was installed. The east of the wing contains a number of rooms for non-residential use, two of which were patently used as stables (L244 and L245; Fig. 220). This part, built in its entirety in phase IIB, contained almost no remains from preceding phases. It is connected to the central passageway (L228), which led to the north gate in the eastern compound wall through a 2.7 m-wide passage paved in stone slabs (L254). The latter ran from south to north for a distance of 11 m, and its floor

Fig. 218. Staircase leading to the burial cave, coated with white, non-hydraulic plaster.

[188]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

1-1

387 00 386 00

W203

L328

L329

385 00 384 00 383 00 382 00

219. Section of the burial cave.

level was some 0.3 m lower than that of the portico. It was roofed by means of three arches that extended from east to west and were supported by piers; the central pier in the east is preserved to a height of three courses. The passage then turns eastward (L246), toward the stables and rooms. This part of the passage measures 4.5×2.7 m. Its paving stones, carelessly laid, seem to be in secondary use. Some bear an engraved grid, and might have been game boards. At the eastern end of L246 an open channel coated in reddish plaster (L271), with a maximal width of 0.8 m, crossed stable L244 and carried the water northward, beyond the compound. The channel was fed by water that flowed in the passage, as well as from a channel whose beginning was not determined, which passed under the floor of the passage. Additionally, plaster traces south of the channel attest to the presence of a gutter of the hall L259 roof, through which the water flowed to channel L271. The channel, that apparently carried surplus water, served several purposes, such as washing the animals; it took over the function of an earlier channel (see below, L243). East of the passage, between the stable area and the church complex, is a large hall (L259), which clearly belongs to phase IIB. With maximal dimensions of 7.4×3.6 m, it is paved with a mosaic carpet, with an additional one at its entrance (Fig. 221). The 1.1 m-wide entrance in the hall’s west is built like most of the phase IIB entrances, without doorposts or a threshold for a wooden door. The hall’s roof was supported by two arches that spanned the hall from east to west. The arches’ piers were discovered in situ,

and tiles were uncovered in the room. The hall’s walls, except for the eastern one (W46), have two faces of fieldstone bound with cement. W46 has two faces: the one toward the hall of worked stones, the other, of medium-sized fieldstones bound with cement. This wall is common to rooms L243, L242, stable L241, and guard room L240, in the northeast of the site. The hall’s walls were coated with a layer of white plaster over which are frescoes in red and black. Remains of a fresco were discovered on the southern wall (W47), which is preserved to a height of two courses. The wall’s outer face, directed to passageway L228, is thickly coated with plaster, as is the outer face of the western wall (W48), which is preserved to a height of four courses and faces passage L254. The south of the western wall recedes to form a 1 m-wide niche. The niche is coated with white plaster and its floor is paved in a semicircular stone, along which a narrow rock-cut channel. In the center of the niche a marble column remained in situ (Fig. 222). The column apparently supported a marble bowl, a sort of labrum, known from the Roman period, and the likes of which, from the Byzantine period, was discovered at Mt. Gerizim (Magen 2008c: 260, Fig. 355). Monks and visitors washed their hands in this bowl before entering the church or refectory. The hall is paved in a mosaic that abuts the hall’s walls with between three and five rows of tesserae, which is rare in mosaic floors. At the edges of the central carpet, diagonal rows of white mosaic form a herringbone pattern. Close to the frame of the central carpet, the white mosaic is embellished with

[189]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 220. East section of the north central wing, view from the north.

recurring schematic flower buds. The carpet frame is of two rows of white tesserae laid between two black rows. It encloses a diamond net of red tesserae, with a four-leaf flower in each diamond. The carpet was laid using 33 tesserae per sq. dm. The room’s threshold is paved in a rectangular mosaic carpet, its frame composed of two rows of black tesserae with two rows of red in between. In the middle of the carpet is a wreath of interlaced buds; in its center is a two-shaded ring. On either side of the wreath is an indented stepped diamond. The mosaic floor, executed in black, red, and white, was laid using 45 tesserae per sq. dm (Fig. 223). Room L243, northeast of hall L259, measures 5×1.6 m, and has a 0.95 m-wide entrance in its west, with a threshold and doorposts, preserved to a height of 1.5 m. An additional narrow entrance without doorposts in the east of the room leads to room L220 (Fig. 224). The western wall (W46), like the northern one (W35), is built of large dressed stones that are preserved to a height of three to four courses. The southern wall (W41) is shared with room L242, the eastern wall (W34), with stable L219. These

walls were covered with ceramic tiles and red plaster. The room was paved in irregular stone slabs that abut, on the east and south, an open channel (L270) that drains water to the east. This channel, which might have begun in passage L246, was some 0.15 m wide and coated with the hydraulic plaster. An additional channel (L272), 0.1 m wide, was built beneath the room’s floor in phase IIB, when the room was constructed. It began in passage L246 and continued beneath the entrance threshold, apparently draining water toward the stables; it fell into disuse when surplus water channel L271 was constructed in the passage. The room’s function has not been determined. We initially thought the room might have been the monastery latrine, but its structure does not resemble Roman or Byzantine latrines like those uncovered at Mt. Gerizim (Magen 2008c: 256–257). Its function might have been related to the monastery’s animals. Room L220, 5.2×2.1 m, is situated between stables L219 to the east and L244 to the west; it adjoins the outside wall of the compound to the north (W203), and was entered from the south. The western wall (W36), preserved to a height of four courses, is built

[190]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 221. Hall L259, view from the west.

0 0

10

4

cm

cm

Fig. 222. Marble column for supporting a labrum, found in the center of a plastered niche; and their reconstruction.

[191]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0

20

cm

Fig. 223. Mosaic carpet ornamenting the entrance to hall L259, view from the west.

of large fieldstones bound with a fill of small stones and cement. The southern wall (W35) bears traces of plaster. The room has an earthen floor. Two large stone slabs were found close to the northern wall, in one of which a sort of shallow channel is hewn. Two additional stone slabs are laid along the width of the room to the south. The function of these stone slabs, apparently in secondary use, is unclear. Similar stone slabs appear in additional rooms of the complex, at times close to the mosaic floor. The room’s function was apparently non-residential, and in some stage its entrance was blocked.

West of L220 is stable L244, measuring 6.3×5.5 m, with a broad entrance (2.2 m wide) in the south that could not be closed (see above, Fig. 220). The stable walls, of large dressed stones bound with a fill of small fieldstones and cement, are preserved to a height of two to four courses. Adjacent to the southern wall is a pier, and opposite it, next to the northern wall (W203), is the remnant of an additional pier. The piers are located on the east of the stable. As a single arch could not have borne the weight of this stable’s ceiling, the arch apparently bore wooden beams that roofed the stable, similar to stable L217. A built manger, 0.66 m

[192]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

high and 0.77 m wide, adjoins the western wall (W37) for its entire length. The manger bottom is paved in stone. An elevated surface, 1 m above the floor and 0.7 m wide, built of large stones and bearing traces of plaster, was found alongside the eastern wall. This was apparently the foundation for an additional row of mangers. On its west, the stable is paved with stones in secondary use; some of the stones were incised with grooves to prevent the animals from slipping. The manger was built over the stone pavement; the latter’s bedding, of small stones and white plaster, remains on the east of the stable. Channel L271, 0.25 m wide and 0.2 m deep, runs along the center of the stable was covered in stone slabs. The traces of hydraulic plaster discovered adjoining the west of the northern wall might be a remnant of a channel that was blocked and fell into disuse upon the construction of channel L271. The stable is crossed by the foundation of a wall located between channel L271 and the piers; the stable might have been divided into two in the earlier stage. West of this stable is another one (L245), measuring 5.3×2.8 m. Its walls, preserved to a height of two to three courses, are built of large stones bound with a fill of small fieldstones and cement. The 1.3 m-wide

entrance in the southern wall (W57), preserved to a height of 1 m, has two steps, each 0.15 m high, a threshold, and two doorposts. The passage’s pavement (L246) covers the threshold, and is therefore later. The stable is paved with irregular stone slabs in secondary use; the pavement is not preserved along the eastern wall (W37). Adjoining this wall and close to the entrance are two courses of large stones with traces of plaster, apparently built to reinforce the wall. The western wall (W38) is shared with room L247. Adjoining the wall is a 0.65 m-wide, 0.75 m-high manger, whose bottom is not preserved. The manger, built over the floor, is constructed of two rows of stones that have traces of gray plaster. The changes introduced in phase IIB in the north central wing drastically altered the structures of the earlier phase. Only the portico and a few remains survived from phase I. The need for large stables in both the northeast and southeast of the site is similarly unclear. The large stables might have served monastery visitors, while the stables in the north were for the monastery’s beasts of burden, and possibly also to hold the sheep and cattle to be slaughtered to provide sustenance for the monks.

Fig. 224. Room L243, room L220 to its north, and stable L244, view from the southeast.

[193]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area VIII: Central Courtyard of the Compound The central courtyard dates from phase I of the compound, but underwent major changes in phases IIA, IIB, and III. In its last phase, the central courtyard measured 28.7×23 m (Figs. 225–226). Due to the natural inclination of the bedrock, the courtyard’s west is 0.8 m higher than its east. The two main phase I compound cisterns were situated on the east of the site to receive the runoff water from the courtyard and surrounding rooms. One cistern (L267) is located on the east of the courtyard, the other (L208), on the east of the compound (see Fig. 53). The courtyard floor consists mainly of leveled bedrock, unlike the numerous courtyards in the compound that were paved. Its paved part was

preserved primarily in the courtyard’s corners and periphery. The excavated areas of the courtyard yielded a pavement bedding comprised of fieldstones of various sizes bound in cement, laid on the bedrock, indicating that the courtyard had been paved with stone slabs that were removed in the different building phases (Fig. 227). The differences in the size and quality of the stone slabs and in their installation in the various pavement segments discovered in the courtyard indicated that the changes were made in different phases. Segments of finely fitted stone slabs are preserved along almost the entire length of the courtyard’s north. A broad, shallow channel cut into the paving stones carried water from the portico’s roof eastward to an underground channel, and from there to channel L266, which ran from north to south. Channel L266,

Fig. 225. Aerial photograph of the site, view from the east. Note the central courtyard.

[194]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

L343

L320

L712

L114

W97

W129

L321

W116

L345

W179

L100

W113

W112

L322 L300

L327

L346 W111

L438 1

L325

L714

L439

L708 W110 L440 L706 L440 L441

L309

1

W92

L404

L355

L705

L311

L442 L719

L328

L418 W80 L266

L267

L407

L222 L260 L228

L209 0

1-1 504 00 503 00

W92 L440

W97

W110 L708

L706

L714

502 00 501 00

Fig. 226. Detailed plan of the central courtyard and a section of the phase IIA gate.

[195]

L706

5

m

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 227. Leveled bedrock and stone pavement in secondary use in the central courtyard, view from the north.

part of which passes underneath the paving stones in the preserved section in the northeast corner of the courtyard, carried the water to cistern L267, over which the early church, and later, the narthex (L209) of the phase IIB church, were built. The channel fell into disuse in phase IIB, when the church expanded westward and room L222 was built close to the martyrium (L221). Therefore, the pavement segments and channels described above, as well as cistern L267, belong to phase I, prior to the erection of the church complex (Fig. 228). In addition, sections of well-fitted stone slabs, also from phase I, are preserved west of the martyrium. The east of the courtyard was changed as a result of the establishment of the church and the martyrium. Irregularly set stone slabs in secondary use are preserved north of the cistern, along the walls of the narthex and of room L222. A section of the stone pavement that led to the narthex, to the rooms south

of the church, and to the monastery’s south wing was discovered in the southeast corner of the courtyard. This pavement, of stone slabs in secondary use, is contemporaneous with the construction done in this part of the courtyard in phase IIB. The rock-cut plastered channel brought the overflow from cistern L267 to the southeast wing, passing in part under the southern vestibule of the narthex. Remains of a rounded rock-cut installation (L719) were found some 2 m from cistern L267. The installation is 0.41 m in diameter and 0.19 m deep. At the center of its bottom a square, 0.14×0.14 m and 4 cm deep, was cut (Fig. 229). The installation might have been a settling pit. Based on the locations of cistern L267 and of channel L266, which had fallen into disuse, it seems that the phase I courtyard was reduced on the east by more than a meter. We assume that in phase I the paving stones abutted a mosaic-paved portico, as in the north of the courtyard, and that this portico was removed upon construction of the church complex. In the later phases, additional channels were cut in the courtyard for carrying water to cistern L267. Two were cut from northwest to southeast. One of them, channel L355, which was rock cut and covered with stone slabs, carried water beneath the mosaic floor in the west of the north portico, continuing to the courtyard. The drainage outlet, installed in the mosaic, from which the channel began, undoubtedly belongs to phase IIB; the southward continuation of the channel was not uncovered. The other channel (L705), rock cut and covered with stone slabs, contains a pipe, of connected ceramic sections, encompassed by a layer of gray plaster mixed with ceramic sherds (Fig. 230). The channel carried water from the northwest of the courtyard, which was paved in stone slabs, some in secondary use (L325); these slabs were laid contemporaneously with the construction of the refectory and kitchen, in phase IIB. Some of the water that flowed in this channel came from the shallow channel east of the kitchen that drained its roof. An additional cut channel, which ran from southwest to east, brought water from a small pool (L404) to cistern L267. The courtyard’s west changed over time. A few remains of the monastery and of the phase that preceded it are preserved. In phase I, the courtyard

[196]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 228. Fitted stone slab pavement from phase I along the courtyard’s northeast, view from the west.

was bounded on the west by a massive structure; the latter was completely razed during construction of the monastery, except for its southeast corner, which bounds the courtyard and the rock-cut line of the wall. Remains of stone and mosaic floors, some possibly belonging to phase I, were found in this area of the courtyard. There might have been a portico here, as on the courtyard’s north (Fig. 231). In phase IIA a wall was built from south to north (W110) that bounded the monastery of this phase. The wall was dismantled upon the expansion of the monastery in phase IIB (see below). Room L345 is the only phase IIB room on this side of the courtyard that was preserved, and in this phase, the central courtyard probably extended to the west. In phase III an Umayyad farmhouse was built on most of this area, which was devoid of construction at the time. The farmhouse’s eastern wall (W111) stood over sections of earlier mosaics; it is unclear whether these floors were from phase I or from phase IIB. Three rows of one mosaic section abut the stone floor, and also form a corner with one of the paving stones. The southwest of this mosaic section ends in a horizontal row of tesserae.

The courtyard’s south is better defined than its west. In phase I it was bordered by a plastered pool, and in phase IIB, by a built cistern and courtyard L100. On its southeast, the central courtyard connected with courtyard L407 in the southeast wing. In phase IIA, with the establishment of the monastery, the compound area was reduced; and a wall and a gate, protected by a rolling stone, were built at the southern edge of the courtyard. In later phases room L438 was built. Remains of walls that had been built over paving stones or mosaics were found in this area of the courtyard; it is unclear whether these walls and floors were from phase IIB or from phase III. Room L438 adjoins room L345 on the west. Signs of fire were found on their common wall (W129). The southern wall was built at the foot of channel L114, which fed the phase IIB central cistern beneath courtyard L100. The wall is built on a remnant of a phase I wall (W97). The later courses of the southern wall are built with the face toward the room of large dressed stones, the other face, of fieldstones and earth. The eastern wall is not preserved, except for one course, of which four fieldstones survived. The course

[197]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 229. Rock-cut installation L719.

rests on a thin layer of terra rosa over the bedrock. The northern wall is not preserved. A 0.3 m-thick bedding of small fieldstones and cement that rested on the bedrock was found. This bedding might be that of mosaic floors from earlier phases. The room’s entrance was not determined, nor how the stone and mosaic floors in the room were related to each other. A remnant of a white mosaic carpet, 1.5×1.2 m, laid using 36–42 tesserae per sq. dm was found in the northeast of the L438. The carpet abuts the stone slab floor in a single horizontal row to its east. Stone slabs were also discovered north of the mosaic, but how the two are related is unclear. Stone slabs were also found abutting the room’s western wall. These slabs are higher than the mosaic carpet. Apparently, this room was built in phase III. East of room L438 is the continuation of the courtyard (L439). The courtyard’s floor in this section was rock cut and leveled, depressions being filled with paving stones. To the south wall W178 was built and functioned as a side of channel L114. The wall, 1.8 m long, abuts wall W110 to the east. W178’s inner face is of large dressed stones; and its outer face, directed toward the channel, is of fieldstones and earth, bound with cement. During excavations, the wall was dismantled in its east (L708) and west (L714), except for a small section. This late wall was built over and blocked the phase I passageway between

Fig. 230. Channel L705 containing ceramic pipes, view from the northwest.

the courtyard and the pool. Only a bedding of gray cement over the leveled bedrock remains of the oncepaved passageway (Fig. 232). All that remains of wall W110 is its foundation, consisting of small stones and earth laid directly on the leveled bedrock, and an ashlar, which forms a corner with the southern wall (W92). W110 and W92 belong to phase IIA. Segments of stone slab and mosaic floors were discovered in the southeast of the courtyard (L440, L441, L442). No remains of south–north walls were found, preventing us from determining whether in phases IIB and III this area housed rooms or was part of the central courtyard (Fig. 233). Part of a floor, of stone slabs in secondary use, begins beyond L439 and continues eastward. On the

[198]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 231. Remains of a pier in the courtyard’s west, possibly part of a phase I portico.

floor’s south is a finely built 0.8 m-thick wall (W92); its outer, southern face consists of large stones, its inner, northern face, of small stones and cement. The lower courses of the wall preceded the stone slab floor. In a later phase the wall was thickened by some 0.4 m with small and medium-sized stones and earth. Part of this augmentation rests on the stone slab floor. In addition to the stone floor, L442 also contains a segment of white mosaic floor, of which three horizontal rows of tesserae abut the late courses of W92. A late east–west wall, of which one course is preserved, rests on stone and mosaic floor segments. The wall, of worked stones, might have been the side of a manger. West of the mosaic segment is the rockcut channel mention above, covered in stone slabs, which brought water from pool L404 to cistern L267. Pool L404, situated south of W92 and fed by channel L114, is part of the water system built in phase IIB. The late floor in L440 was removed and the locus southwest, excavated. Beneath the floor, northeast of the built cistern corner, is 2 cm-thick layer of gray plaster, and beneath it, a 10 cm fill of red-brown soil (L706). Under the fill is a phase IIB white plaster floor (Fig. 234). Beneath this floor are the remains of a gate, at the foot of which is a track for a rolling

stone, attesting that here was an exterior gate to the monastery (Fig. 235). The 1.6 m-wide, stepped, hewn threshold has two rectangular holes and a bolt socket. The gate had a double-winged door. The two doorposts are preserved to a height of one course. The walls on either side of the gate are of large ashlars, with interstices of small stones bound with cement. The hewn rolling stone track measures 2.8×0.45 m, and would have suited the rolling stone found in the north gate in the eastern wall of the phase IIB monastery. The phase IIA gate was blocked and fell into disuse in phase IIB when channel L114 was built; and its rolling stone was apparently moved to the phase IIB gate. Wall W92 continues westward for 2 m from the gate’s western doorpost, forming a corner with W110. It has a plastered foundation, as was typical of the outer walls of structures and compounds. This was probably the southwest corner of the phase IIA monastery. Soundings conducted to the north did not reveal remains of W110, which bounds the monastery on the west, and was probably removed in its entirety in phase IIB, when part of the courtyard was repaved. It has not been determined how this wall joined the northern compound wall.

[199]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

W92 extends eastward from the eastern doorpost for some 7.5 m. Its lower part is coated with a thick layer of hydraulic plaster, preventing rainwater from seeping under the wall. This wall, which was built in phase IIA, breaks the continuity of

Fig. 232. Section of wall W178 that blocked the phase I passageway to the pool, view from the north.

the courtyard floors in the south wings and the phase I central courtyard floor. The wall continues eastward and, in this phase, connects with a section of a phase I wall (W9, W13) that continued to function in the monastery phases and bounded the early structures in the south of the east wing. In phase IIB, upon the expansion of the monastery, the east of the wall was dismantled to enable passage between the south wings and the courtyard. The phase I central courtyard was paved with finely fitted stone slabs, and this floor probably served in phase IIA, as well. In phase IIB the paving stones were removed from most of its area, and were used to pave the stables in the north wings, the passageway that led from the northeast gate to the courtyard, and the hospice. Paving stones in secondary use that were found in the courtyard are directly connected to the construction additions made in the monastery in phases IIB. Some of the paving stones might have been taken for secondary use from the courtyard after the monastery had fallen into disuse.

Fig. 233. Stone pavement in the southeast of the courtyard, view from the northeast.

[200]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 234. Phase IIB white plaster floor.

Fig. 235. Phase IIA monastery gate, view from the north.

[201]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area IX: Hospice In the Byzantine period the Judean Desert, Jericho, and the Jordan River attracted many of the pilgrims who visited the Land of Israel. The establishment and development of Christian holy sites and the construction of dozens of monasteries in the Judean Desert made the desert accessible to many believers, some of whom remained and joined the various monasteries. The monastery of Martyrius probably played a central role in hosting the pilgrims who came to the Holy Land. Its location made it a meeting place between the desert monks and the Jerusalem ecclesiastical establishment. The monastery’s numerous stables, its large refectory and accompanying kitchen, the church, the many chapels, and the large hospice outside the monastery all attest to it being a center for many visitors (Figs. 236–237). Christian historical sources, especially Cyril, tell of

numerous hospices in the Judean Desert monasteries. Monastery hospices were not built exclusively next to the monasteries; they were also established in the main cities that attracted pilgrims, like Jerusalem and Jericho. The hospices were intended to expand the network of ties between the monasteries and the numerous pilgrims, and to absorb potential monks who arrived in the Holy Land. The hospice played an important role in the monasteries’ tradition of extending hospitality, and hospice guests received their services gratis. Some pilgrims contributed generously for the maintenance of the monasteries, while others preferred to remain, and settle in one. The laura of Souka in Tekoa had a hospice in Jerusalem that was sold to the monastery of Euthymius for 200 solidi (Life of Cyriacus 7, 226). When the priest and monk Abraamius arrived in the Holy Land he initially stayed in one of the monastery hospices (Life of Abraamius 3, 245). Sabas built a hospice for the benefit of monks who came from abroad, and also

Fig. 236. Hospice, view from the northwest.

[202]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 237. Hospice, view from the west.

bought cells in Jerusalem that he converted into a hospice for his laura. He also acquired two hospices for the monastery of Castellion, one in Jerusalem and the other in Jericho (Life of Sabas 31, 116). Each hospice had a guest-master, who sometimes also served as cook. John, bishop of the city of Colonia in Armenia, left his high office and came to the Great Laura (Deir Mar Saba) in the Judean Desert, where he assumed the position of the monastery’s guestmaster and cook (Life of John 6, 206). In another instance, Cyril tells of the monk James, who was guest-master of the hospice of the Great Laura (Life of Sabas 40, 130–131). Based on the biography of James, the hospice of the Great Laura was apparently established outside the monastery so it would not disturb the monks living in the monastery itself. The stream of visitors to the monastery was contrary to the idea of monasticism, which was founded on seclusion from other people. The erection of hospices outside

monasteries was a compromise between the monks’ ascetic worldview and the need to accommodate Christians on their travels throughout the Holy Land. Outside the Alahan Monastery in southern Anatolia were a hospice, located close to the monastery entrance gate, and a basilica church used by the visiting pilgrims (Gough 1967: 37). This is somewhat reminiscent of the location of the Martyrius monastery hospice, which also included a chapel. The Martyrius monastery hospice was established outside it, near its northeast corner. It was an irregular structure whose length ranged between 32.5 and 40 m, and its width, between 20 and 27 m. The hospice is divided into three main units, each with a different function. The central unit is a large chapel; surrounding it are halls and rooms; and stables are located to the chapel’s west (Figs. 238–239). The main access to both the hospice and compound as a whole was from the southeast. While the monastery had a single

[203]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s 497.66

2

16

W

L500 16 W

497.31

3 497.50

0

16

W

1

16

W

497.71 497.48

1

15

W

16

W

498.31

L501

7

498.16

L502 497.57

497.37

498.24

497.66

L504a

8

15

W

498.23

17

W

L503

6

L504b

W 8

16

498.22

L505

498.61

488.89

W

499.85

W1

L506

7

W

4 15

15

9

15

W

498.16

499.83

498.25

498.23

L508

498.77

5

15

W

60

L507

L513

498.74

W

2 15

W

3

15

W

L515

6

15

L510

W 4 16

66

W1

W202 L509

65

W1

L512 499.38

W203

51

W1

7

W16

W150

L511

Fig. 238. Detailed plan of the hospice.

[204]

0

5

m

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 239. Reconstruction of the hospice.

entrance for both people and livestock, the hospice had separate entrances, one to the residential rooms and chapel and another to the stables. The hospice is oblique to the monastery compound. The former’s chapel is oriented 34 degrees to the northeast rather than due east, as is usual in churches. This might indicate that the hospice was built prior to the chapel’s establishment, possibly in phase I.

The Stables Stable L512, on the north, measures 13.4×3.5 m (Fig. 240). It was most probably roofed with wooden beams, since no traces of piers were found. The stable had a beaten earth floor, while the walls’ foundation stones were built directly on the bedrock. The walls, of dressed stones most likely in secondary use, are

[205]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 240. Stable L512, view from the northeast.

preserved to a height of one course, except for the southern wall (W151 and W164), of which two to three courses remain. The hall was entered from courtyard L509 to the south, through a 1.1 m-wide entrance that lacked doorposts and a threshold. Two mangers flanked the entrance. The manger along W151 is 9 m long, 0.75 m wide, and 0.5 m high; the manger along W164 is 3.15 m long, 0.75 m wide, and 0.5 m high. East of the stable is hall L513, which was extensively damaged during construction of the modern-day structures around the site. The hall’s southern wall (W160) is preserved for its entire length, the western wall (W166), only partially; of the eastern and northern walls, only the foundations remain. The hall floor, not preserved except for a mosaic segment in the southeast corner, abuts the walls with three horizontal rows of tesserae. The mosaic’s pebble bedding remained, but was heavily damaged. A channel in the hall fed water from the

hospice roofs to a large cistern cut north of and lower than the compound, which also received runoff water from the refectory roof. Channel L515, which began at the northwest corner in a settling pit, continued northeast along the northern wall. The sides of the 0.7 m-wide, 0.6 m-deep built channel are coated with 1 cm-thick plaster. Its structure and dimensions are similar to those of the channels that drained the refectory roof in the northern compound wall. This channel also received water from a channel in the northeast, but that channel is not preserved in its entirety. The water drained into the cistern through a 0.3 m-wide, 0.45 m-deep channel that ran from south to north, and whose sides were coated with 1 cm-thick plaster. South of stable L512 is a large courtyard (L509), used as an open stable. This simply shaped courtyard had maximal dimensions of 16.5×10.5 m, with a beaten earth floor directly over the bedrock. The courtyard was bounded on the south by the northern

[206]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

compound wall (W203). The courtyard walls, preserved to a height of two to three courses, are built of dressed fieldstones, probably in secondary use. W153, which extends eastward from the northeast corner of the compound, separated this courtyard from courtyard L510 to its south (Fig. 241). The wall has a 1.1 m-wide entrance that connected these courtyards. A mostly destroyed built manger, 10.5×0.7 m, was discovered along W203 for a distance of 10.5 m. The western wall (W150) is 6.9 m long and 1.65 m thick. West of the wall, outside it, is a drainage channel (L511) that emerges from the gutter of stable L219 in the northeast of the compound. This channel, 0.26 m wide and 0.24 m deep, is plastered and covered with stone slabs; it led runoff water from the stables in the northeast of the compound to the large cistern north of the compound. Courtyard L510, of irregular shape (maximal dimensions: 11×7.5 m), led to the monastery, and is bounded on the west by the eastern compound wall (W202). Its walls were built of dressed fieldstones.

There is a 0.15 m-high addition of small stones and cement along the lower part of the northern (W153) and eastern (W152) walls. The courtyard floor was of leveled bedrock, natural depressions being filled with small fieldstones embedded in white plaster. A remnant of an approx. 8 m-long manger was found in the south of the courtyard, adjacent to wall W155. Courtyards L510 and L509 are of different construction than the rest of the hospice. They and the mangers they contained apparently postdated the establishment of the hospice, and were meant to solve the shortage of space for livestock, thus attesting to the extensive activity in the hospice in the Byzantine period. An additional stable (L507) is located on the west of the central hospice structure and forms an integral part of it. The stable, 17.3×3.75 m, is finely built and paved with stone slabs (Fig. 242). Access to this stable was provided by a 1.4 m-wide entrance with doorposts and a stepped threshold in the western wall (W152).

Fig. 241. Courtyards L512 and L510, view from the northeast.

[207]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 242. Stable L507, view from the southeast.

The stable is paved in stone slabs finely laid in 34 rows, for the most part with six to seven slabs (0.8 m long and 0.5–0.6 m wide) in each row. A number of larger slabs, 1–1.5 m long, were also discovered. The floor is preserved in its entirety, except for the southwest corner. A manger of worked stones, whose bottom is not preserved, was found along the entire length of the western wall. The manger is 15.5 m long, 0.7 m wide, and 0.5 m high. A total of 22 of the manger stones were discovered. As there are no traces of arch-bearing piers, we assume that the stable was roofed with wooden beams.

The Chapel The large church and four chapels discovered in the monastery of Martyrius provided ample space for accommodating pilgrims who passed through the monastery. Nonetheless, the monks preferred to build a separate chapel outside the monastery for their many visitors. Determined to maintain their privacy,

they apparently did not allow visitors to pray within the monastery confines. The chapel (L504), measuring 11×8.3 m, is divided into two by a pair of arches and different mosaic carpets (Fig. 243). The chapel walls, which rest on the bedrock, are built of dressed stones preserved to a height of two courses, some 1 m high. Like most of the monastery compound walls, the chapel walls have two faces, one of large stones, the other of smaller stones bound with cement. The inner walls were covered with two coats of plaster: the first, 2.5 cm thick, of coarse gray plaster with grits; then the 1 cm-thick upper coat of white plaster. The mosaic floor abuts the walls with three horizontal rows of white tesserae. The chapel’s 1.1 m-wide main entrance, with fashioned doorposts and a threshold, was situated in the southern wall (W157). The stepped threshold is 0.53 m wide with depressions in each corner for door pivots and a rectangular bolt socket in its center. Four adjoining dressed stones at the foot of the entrance to the south served as a step (Fig. 244).

[208]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

Fig. 243. Chapel L504, view from the northwest.

Fig. 244. Southern entrance to chapel L504, view from the southeast.

[209]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Fig. 245. Entrances leading from halls L505 and L506 to chapel L504, view from the northwest.

In addition to the central entrance, the excavations uncovered two entrances in the northern wall (W168) that led to the halls (Fig. 245). Arch-bearing piers were set in the chapel walls, with a broad square pier in the center bearing cruciform arches. This arch type, found also in the martyrium (L221), is extremely rare. Only one pier is preserved in the eastern wall (W158); all that remains of the other piers is their impression on the mosaic floor. The bema and apse in the southeast of the chapel comprise a single unit that was installed later. The apse extends into room L501 to the east, which precedes it (see below). The bema measures 3×1.7 m, and the apse, 2×1.8 m. Built of gray cement with stones, they are elevated some 0.4 m above the prayer hall floor (Fig. 246). The hall mosaic floor abuts the chancel with three horizontal rows of tesserae, and is paved with two mosaic carpets. The mosaics’ broad edges are comprised of diagonally set white tesserae decorated at set intervals with schematic flower buds. The southern mosaic in the prayer hall measures 5.38×3.55 m (Fig. 247). The mosaic carpet and frame are identical to the ones in the refectory; they were apparently made at the same time by the same artisans. The mosaic frame, 0.44–0.46 m wide, consists of

Fig. 246. Southern mosaic carpet and the chancel mosaic in chapel L504, view from the west.

[210]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

0

40 cm

Fig. 247. Chapel L504 southern mosaic carpet.

[211]

20 cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

interlaced strips in black, blue, and white, and in red, yellow, and white, bounded by two rows of white tesserae and a row of black tesserae on either side of the white ones. The carpet field contains a recurrent pattern composed of central circle whose frame is intertwined with four pointed oval units that form inner circles. In the center of the inner circles is a cross pattern (Fig. 248). Four interlaced motifs were set at the corners of the carpet field. The two eastern motifs are circular, the two western ones, rectangular. The rectangular motifs consist of an interlaced band in different colors, with cruciform flower buds in the center of the northern rectangle (Fig. 249). The two eastern motifs consist of an interlaced band, with a leaf in the center of the northern interlacing, and cruciform flower buds in the center of the southern one (Fig. 250). A tabula ansata measuring 3.2×0.6 m is set between the carpet and the bema. There is a flower bud design in place of the inscription that a tabula ansata would usually contain. The reason for this is unclear. The edges of the mosaic carpet were laid using 50 tesserae per sq. dm, as was the interlacing in its corners. The carpet field is more delicate, with 80 tesserae per sq. dm. The apse mosaic floor is white with reddish flower buds and squares; these decorations also encompass the bema mosaic, the buds forming crosses in the

corners. In the center of the bema is a mosaic carpet, 1.7×1.1 m, surrounded by a frame composed of a row of dentils, a row of white tesserae, two rows of black, two of white, and one row of black (Fig. 251). The carpet pattern is composed of red rosettes formed of four oval leaves outlined in black that interlace, forming a continuing pattern. A small diamond is set in the center of squat-shaped circles, which are formed by the halves of two adjacent rosettes. The bema and apse mosaics are the finest in the chapel, laid using 100 tesserae per sq. dm. The north of the chapel hall (L504b) is decorated with a simpler mosaic carpet, measuring 6.4×3.55 m. Its edges resemble those of the mosaic to its south: diagonal rows of white tesserae with flower buds emphasizing the center. The carpet frame is formed of two rows of black tesserae with two rows of white in between. The carpet field is embellished with a grid of black diamonds; in the center of each diamond is a red flower formed of five tesserae. The carpet was laid using 30 tesserae per sq. dm. The hall exhibits two building phases; in the first, the hall has neither a chapel nor an apse, while in the second, the apse and bema were installed, the hall becoming a chapel. In this second phase the room was paved with the various mosaic carpets that are dated to phase IIB.

Fig. 248. Recurrent circle pattern from the chapel southern mosaic carpet field.

[212]

20 cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

20 cm

20 cm

Fig. 249. Interlaced rectangular motifs set in the western edge of the chapel southern mosaic.

[213]

0

0

0 0 0

20 20 cm 20 cm cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0 0 0

20 20 cm 20 cm cm

Fig. 250. Interlaced rectangular motifs set in the eastern edge of the southern mosaic.

[214]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

0

Fig. 251. Chapel L504 apse and bema mosaic floor.

[215]

0

50 cm

50 cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The Halls and Rooms for Pilgrims Two halls (L505 and L506) are connected to the chapel on the north, their only entrance being through it (Fig. 252). This raises the question of whether they belonged to the chapel, or provided a place for the visiting pilgrims to rest and sleep. Hall L505, some 8.3×3.5 m, was paved in mosaic. To the south, in the center of the wall, is a 0.8 m-wide entrance, with no preparations for a door. The hall’s walls are preserved to a height of one to two courses. Their outer faces are of ashlar-like dressed stones, their inner faces, of small stones bound in cement, with the exception of the eastern wall (W158), whose inner face is of dressed stones. Its northern wall (W160) is not perpendicular to the western (W159) and eastern walls, and thus the hall is an irregular rectangle. The

continuation of the wall in hall L506 is similarly not perpendicular to the western and eastern walls. The walls were coated in white plaster, and the hall was paved with a simple mosaic carpet measuring 6.8×2.2 m. The mosaic’s edges end in three horizontal rows of white tesserae that abut the walls. Next, there are diagonal rows of tesserae laid in a herringbone pattern whose center is emphasized by flower buds similar to those in the hospice chapel. Close to the hall entrance the mosaic is embellished with a dentate square set between two flower buds. The entrance’s threshold is decorated with a cross formed of buds. The mosaic carpet is encompassed by a frame composed of two horizontal rows of white tesserae that enclose a row of black. The carpet field is embellished with a series of flower buds, of the type used in its edges. It was laid using 30 tesserae per sq. dm.

Fig. 252. Halls L505 and L506, view from the southeast.

[216]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

In the floor, a depressed band, 0.4 m wide and 6.5 m long, running from northwest to southeast, is visible; it is a remnant of a channel that begins in the western wall. This hall’s mosaic has elements and motifs similar to that in the chapel, and both were installed together. On the west is hall L506 that too opens to the chapel hall. This hall measures approx. 9.3×4 m; its northern wall (W160) is not perpendicular to its eastern (W159) and western (W154) ones. The 0.8 m-wide entrance is located at the end of the southern wall (W168), which is characteristic of the phase I rooms and halls in the site. The entrance has a stepped threshold of drafted stone with a rectangular depression for a door pivot, and two ashlar doorposts, only the western one preserved. The walls, coated in a layer of white plaster, are preserved to a height of two courses of ashlars and dressed stones. The hall’s diagonally set mosaic floor was laid using especially large tesserae, 16 per sq. dm, with three horizontal rows abutting the hall’s walls and entrance threshold. The size of these tesserae is typical of the phase I mosaic floors. The room’s corners slope slightly toward the center of the room, where there is a 0.2×0.2 m opening that connects to a drainage channel in the eastern wall. The hall might initially have belonged to a phase I structure. West of the chapel is hall L508, measuring 12.6×11.8 m. Its 0.65 m-wide entrance was set in the hall’s southern wall (W157), near the western corner. South of the entrance is a stone slab, and next to it, the impression left by a slab that abutted the wall and was removed in some stage. The hall’s walls, 0.7 m thick, built of large dressed stones, are preserved to a height of one to two courses. The western wall (W156) differs from the hall’s other walls. Especially thick (1.2 m), it is built of two faces of dressed stones and ashlars, with a fill of small fieldstones in the interstices. This wall, like the west of the northern wall (W155), rests on the leveled bedrock, which constitutes the first course. Two courses of the eastern wall (W154) are preserved in its south. Traces of white plaster were found on the southern and western walls. The hall’s mosaic floor abuts the walls with three horizontal rows of tesserae, laid using 25 tesserae per sq. dm. The east of the mosaic was damaged by the channel that was installed or repaired, apparently after the floor had

Fig. 253. Plastered channel that damaged the mosaic floor of hall L508.

been laid. The plastered channel, 0.23 m wide and 0.2 m deep, which ran from northwest to southeast, was covered by stone slabs laid above the mosaic floor level (Fig. 253). It passed under the southern wall, which it apparently predates. Its nature and the reason for its construction have not been determined; it might have drained stable L510. East of the chapel is room L501, measuring 4.7×4.2 m, with a mosaic floor, laid using rough large tesserae, some 15–20 per sq. dm; the tesserae size is reminiscent of that used in the open courtyards of the Late Roman period. The 1.1 m-wide entrance in the southern wall has a threshold made of a 0.42 m-wide stepped stone that contains a depression for the door pivot and rectangular bolt sockets. The walls of the room, preserved to a height of two courses, are built of an outer face of large fieldstones and an inner face of smaller stones bound by cement. The southern

[217]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

(W157) and western (W158) walls are common to the chapel. No wall was discovered to the north, except for two stones that abut the eastern wall (W161). The mosaic floor abuts the southern wall and the entrance threshold with three horizontal rows of tesserae. The mosaic floor is not preserved in its north and close to the eastern wall, except for a section abutting the eastern wall close to the north corner. Close to the center of the room, sections of black tesserae are randomly incorporated, in what was most likely a repair. The chapel apse is built into room L501, and it is evident that the room preceded the chapel’s construction, with consequent changes introduced in the room’s western wall. The mosaic ends in a semicircle that bounds the apse. The semicircle is patently a repair, thus showing that the apse was built in a second phase. Two basket capitals came to light in the room (Fig. 254). North of room L501 is hall L503, measuring 14.3×4.3 m. The hall walls, like those of the other rooms in the hospice, are built of an outer face of large stones, and an inner one of smaller stones bound with cement. The northern (W176) and eastern (W161)

walls are only partially preserved. A single course of the northern wall remains, discovered under stone rubble. The eastern wall is not of uniform shape. The center of the wall is 1.3 m thick, while its northern and southern continuations (L501) are thinner, reaching a width of only 0.7–0.8 m. Two piers, and possibly a remnant of a third, over which the wall was built in a later stage, are clearly visible in its lower course. As noted, the southern wall was not preserved except for two stones. No entrances to the hall were found, but there likely was one from the south. The floor was of beaten earth over the leveled bedrock. This might have been a large courtyard. East of L503 is an additional hall (L502), which suffered severe damage during the course of the construction of the modern-day structures around the site, and its boundaries are unclear; its estimated dimensions were 14.3×4 m. Its floor was of beaten earth over the leveled bedrock. This hall might have been a large courtyard, like L503. The courtyard’s 1.1 m-wide entrance was in W160, which bounded the hospice to the east. Only the south of the wall remains,

Fig. 254. Basket capitals found on either side of the chapel apse in room L501, view from the east.

[218]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

preserved to a height of two courses; its outer face was of dressed stones, its inner face, of small fieldstones. The southern wall (W163), built of large fieldstones, was destroyed, except for its lower course, which was found under the rubble of large and mediumsized fieldstones. The northern wall is not preserved. As noted above, piers were found in the lower course of wall W161, which is common to courtyard L503. The two courtyards might have been a single unit in an earlier phase that was separated in phase IIB into two (L502, L503). The courtyard possibly served as a place for storing and preparing food for the pilgrims. The entrance to the courtyards was separate from the stables, residential halls, and chapel. In the southeast corner of the hospice is a room (L500) measuring 4.7×4.1 m, with a narrow, 0.8 m-wide entrance in its eastern wall (W162). The entrance has a stepped threshold containing a socket for a door pivot, leading to the room. The walls of the room are preserved to a height of one course, except for the western wall (W161), of which two courses are preserved. The room’s white mosaic floor, laid using 12–16 tesserae per sq. dm, abutted the southern and eastern walls with three horizontal rows of tesserae. The mosaic also abutted the western wall, but only its south. The mosaic is not preserved in its entirety in the north of the room, and was probably damaged by the stone collapse. A remnant of a single horizontal row of tesserae attests that the mosaic most probably abutted the northern wall as well. The room’s rough mosaic suggests that it, like L501, is a remnant of an earlier, phase I structure. This was probably a guardroom that provided a view of the pilgrim traffic and of all who entered the monastery, those entering the pilgrim hospice and the monastery coming from the southeast. It is noteworthy that arch-bearing piers were not discovered in any of the above Byzantine period rooms, with the exception of the chapel; and apparently all the halls, including the stables, were roofed with wooden beams. The hospice and its chapel are oriented 34 degrees northward instead of facing directly east, as was characteristic for churches. If the hospice and chapel were planned together, what prevented them from facing precisely eastward, as does the monastery church (L200)? A comparison of the chapel’s mosaic pattern with

the refectory’s and with that of the “Chapel of the Three Priests” clearly indicates that the former was installed in phase IIB (sixth century CE). Additionally, a stage that preceded the chapel is evident in the hall itself and in additional rooms. This leads us to ask, what was the early stage of the hospice? A number of answers might be suggested: 1. The hospice was established over the remains of phase I construction. It is not surprising that some structure from phase I was to be found outside the large Roman compound, since this phenomenon is present elsewhere, as well. Some of the hospice’s walls were built precisely and perpendicular to each other; and the white mosaic floors in rooms L500 and L501 and in hall L506, made of the large tesserae typical of the phase I mosaic floors, possibly allude to the existence of some structure that was turned into a hospice in phase IIB or earlier. 2. The hospice was originally built with neither a chapel nor an apse, but only as a large hall to receive guests (L504), and therefore, initially, there was no need to orient the structure in an eastward direction. The apse and its bema are a later addition in the pilgrims’ reception hall, and therefore they could not be constructed with an eastern orientation. 3. The construction of the hospice was dictated by the area’s topography. We do not have a precise picture of the preservation of the bedrock in this area, due to modern construction around the site. It is evident, however, that the compound was not built on a spacious bedrock surface. The ground dropped steeply to the east and north of the hospice, which was built on a bedrock formation that determined, from the outset, the direction of its construction. Testimony to this is evident in the channel in hall L513 that drained the hospice roof; the rainwater was channeled northward to a large cistern dug north of the compound. The same is true of the channels of the refectory and stables in the compound, which also ran northward to the same cistern. Thus, it is obvious that the bedrock level in the north and east of the compound, beyond the refectory and hospice, was lower. This, in turn, imposed restraints on the size, location, and orientation of the area on which the hospice was established. It is also possible that all three explanations for the unusual location of the hospice and chapel are correct.

[219]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Area X: Umayyad Agricultural Area Agricultural areas, irrigated by pools and wellbuilt rock-cut irrigation channels, came to light in and around the site (Fig. 255). E. Damati, who excavated and published the irrigated gardens outside the monastery of Martyrius, dated them to the Byzantine period (Damati 1989; 2002). This dating was not based on archaeological data such as finds, ceramic vessels, coins, and the like, but rather on the conjecture that if they were discovered around the monastery, they should be attributed to the Byzantine period. However, when the entire site was excavated, agricultural areas were discovered within the monastery, close to the cistern. These areas had been watered by use of rock-cut and built channels and a pool, identical to those found outside the monastery. These areas and the channels, however, were installed over the remnants of the Byzantine monastery, together with the farmhouse structure that made use of the numerous cisterns at the site, some of which continued to serve the Bedouin until recently (see Area V), and were patently built after the monastery had fallen into disuse. These testimonies and the copious data collected over the course of time from other sites taught us that the transformation of the monastery of Martyrius into a farmhouse occurred in the Early Islamic period. The monastery is located in an arid area whose annual precipitation is 250–300 ml. Three terraced gardens were found around it, with irrigation systems identical to those inside the monastery. The gardens around the site were published by Damati with only a description, and without the finds .* Damati divides the agricultural areas into three parts: the upper garden, in the southeast corner of the monastery; the eastern garden, located some 300 m east of the monastery; and the southern garden, south of the monastery. The upper garden adjoins the southeast corner of the monastery. It is L-shaped, with a large cistern in its center that stored runoff water (an estimated 2,000 cu. m) from the monastery

* We wish to thank Emanuel Damati for allowing us to use previously published material from his excavation.

roofs. South of the cistern is a small pool (measuring 1.5×1.2 m), which elevated the water level. Two built channels, of stone segments, the remains of which were discovered in situ, carried water from the pool to two levels of the garden, which extended over some 2.5 dunams. The southern garden, the largest of the three, is south of the monastery, in a ravine. Two large stonecut cisterns at the top of the garden, with an estimated storage capacity of about 15,000 cu. m, received runoff water from the western spur, whose drainage area was some 50 dunams. The garden terraces extended the entire width of the ravine. They were leveled with layers of dark terra rossa earth. It is surmised that two main channels extended from the cisterns along the fences at the edge of the terraces; from them, water was conducted to channels built across the width of the terraces. A number of stone segments from these channels were found in situ. Holes for releasing water were located at set intervals in the channels. Pools to elevate the water were not needed, since the relatively steep incline of the lengthwise channels enabled water to flow directly from the cisterns to the vegetable beds. The total garden area was some 7.5 dunams. The upper terraces were wide, the lower ones progressively narrower, according to the ravine’s topography. The eastern garden, the most complete of the three, is about one dunam in size, 55 m long and 25 to 35 m wide. It is surrounded by a massive stone fence. The garden is composed of three cultivated terraces that run from west to east. It is situated at the top of a small saddle on the southern slope of the spur. The garden, well planned, makes excellent use of the topography. To form plots of land suitable for agricultural use, terra rossa soil removed from between the stones on the spur was laid in the agricultural area. The flatness of the saddle allowed the area to be leveled relatively easily, and indeed, the uppermost terrace of this garden is built on the line of the water shed of the spur. The upper terrace is some 48 m long, its width ranging from 6 to 20 m. The middle terrace, 0.8 m lower than the upper one, is about 50 m long and 2.5 to 8 m wide. The lower terrace, 0.8 m lower than the middle terrace, is 43 m long and some 7 m wide at its center. The lower cultivated terrace is bounded by the garden’s massive southern fence wall (38 m long,

[220]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l R e m a i n s at t h e S i t e

m

}

!

m

m

m

East garden

m

m

Monastery complex pool

Hospice

! !

!

Upper garden

m

m ! !

South garden

m

Runoff channel Built channel Hewn channel ! 0

50

100 M

Cistern

Fig. 255. General plan of the irrigated gardens around the site, based on plan published by E. Damati (2002: 439, Fig. 1).

up to 1.3 m wide), built of large stones. Remains of a rectangular structure, measuring about 9×2 m, were uncovered at the western end of the garden, close to a cistern. The structure’s floor was coated in a type of plaster that was untypical of pools; thus the structure was apparently a service or storage room used by those working in the garden. Water for the garden was supplied by the rock-cut cistern in the garden’s west. Two channels diverted runoff water from the spur to the cistern, which held an estimated 1,500 cu. m. There were three small pools in the area, each one watering a separate

cultivated terrace. All the pools were built using the same construction technique. Their walls were built of small fieldstones bound with mortar and coated with plaster inside and out. The plaster on the inner side of the pool consists of a few layers, the last one containing a large quantity of crushed pottery, giving it a reddish coloration. This type of plaster is characteristic of late Byzantine and Umayyad irrigation systems. Water flowed through a hole in the bottom of the pool to square stone basins and from there to irrigation channels. The first pool is situated on the garden’s west,

[221]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

near the cistern. A 0.6 m-high stone base measuring 2.4×1.8 m was preserved. The pool was elevated to raise the water pressure, enabling water to flow to the far end of the upper terrace. Remains of a blocked lead pipe were discovered in the pool’s eastern wall. The second pool, measuring 1.5×1 m, with its sides reaching a height of some 0.4 m, was built at the center of the middle garden terrace. The pool’s small capacity (some 1.2 cu. m) corresponds to the size of the irrigated area. Water flowed from the pool in two ways: through a lead pipe to a small stone basin (40×30 cm) adjoining the pool, with a hole in its east through which the water reached the irrigation channel; and over the south of the pool. The third pool, the largest of the three, measures 2.8×2.2 m and ca. 1.8 m deep, with a total capacity of some 8 cu. m. The water flowed through a leaden hole into a small stone basin next to the pool’s southwest corner, and from there, through two long channels. All of the irrigation channels were of hard limestone segments, a narrow groove running down their entire lengths. The stone segments are usually 0.5 m wide, 0.3–0.4 m high, and 0.6–1.5 m long. The segments’ upper surfaces are finely worked, their lower ones remaining rough. The grooves cut in the segments are 15 cm wide and ca. 10 cm deep. In addition to the grooves, apertures were cut in the channels at intervals of 1.5 m for watering the garden. Apertures on only one side attest to irrigation on one side of the channel, while apertures on opposite sides teach of irrigation on both sides. In addition to the built channels, sections of rock-cut ones remain. The remains at the site enable the identification of eight irrigation channels in the garden area. Channel no. 1 was the main transverse channel of the garden, and it began in the eastern side of the first pool. A few segments remain of it, built on a line that follows the northeastern corner of the pool. Channel no. 2 is a longitudinal channel that branches off from the main transverse one. Two segments, together some 3 m long, remain of it to the east. This channel probably also fed the second pool. East of the basin, the beginning of an additional longitudinal channel can be identified that was added north of the first pool. Channel no. 3, a longitudinal channel, was built beneath the level of the upper terrace. Six of the stone segments remained in situ. The channel’s course

can be reconstructed with certainty up to the eastern garden wall. Channel no. 4, a transverse channel, begins at the second pool. All of its segments were looted, only the traces of their location remaining visible in the plastered foundation. This channel, some 6 m long, had two functions: irrigating the middle terrace; and bringing water to channel no. 5, a longitudinal channel built on the middle terrace. Most of its stones were found overturned, in situ. Transverse channel no. 6, its west, of rock-cut sections, branches off from channel no. 5. It fed the third pool and continued westward. Longitudinal channel no. 7 was fed from the third pool, and is preserved to a length of some 14 m. Longitudinal channel no. 8 was also fed from the third pool. Its course runs parallel to that of channel no. 7, approx. 1.5 m south of it. The channel is preserved to a length of 27 m. The two latter channels clearly continued to the east. All of the irrigation system’s important elements were preserved in the eastern garden, enabling the reconstruction of the irrigation method. The first pool was filled, and from it, the two others, from which water flowed to the channels. The vegetable beds were irrigated by flooding, indicated by the apertures cut in either one or both sides of the channels. Some channels, as mentioned above, had apertures on only one side. Initially, it was surmised that the garden was a single unit belonging to a single period. However, details discovered in the course of excavations raised doubts about this. Some data indicate the existence of different phases of the system’s use. A number of rock-cut channels were identified in the upper terrace. These channels might initially have drained runoff water directly into the garden. Underneath the first pool is the base of an earlier pool, from which a small channel ran to the southwest. Likewise, a number of changes in the pools’ exit holes are visible, some of which had been blocked; and stone basins were added to the existing ones. In light of the discovery of irrigated agricultural areas within the compound that patently postdate the monastery and resemble the irrigated agricultural terraces outside the compound, we believe that the agricultural system described above should be ascribed to the Early Islamic period.

[222]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

Chapter Four

Architectural ElEMENTS and Stone Objects

Most of the architectural finds discovered at the site belong to the Byzantine period, phases IIA and IIB, and it is not always possible to differentiate between them. Well fashioned basket capitals from the hospice were discovered; and capitals revealed in the refectory were all stylized differently, despite their having been installed in the same building. Relatively few columns and bases were found, mostly of limestone, and the others were apparently robbed in the Early Islamic period. The chancel screens and posts ​​were of hard limestone, except for one chancel screen and post of marble, which may belong to phase IIA. In addition, a marble slab with a dedicatory Greek inscription was found that had probably been attached to one of the screens. Marble altar tables were found; and dining tables, platters, and a table of bituminous limestone were found in the refectory. Baptismal fonts with crosses were discovered, as well as basins, some of which belong to the Early Islamic period. Building stones with crosses were revealed, as well as paving stones with drainage holes, some of the latter from phase I, when the complex was built. In addition, two sundials were found, as well as a Twelve Men’s Morris game engraved in stone. It should be noted that despite being one of the major monasteries built in the Judean Desert, the monastery of Martyrius is decorated, like many other monasteries, with extreme modesty, in both the fashioning and the quality of the stone—with minimal marble elements. Modesty in architecture as well as in additional areas in the monks’ lives, was carefully maintained.

Capitals In the Byzantine period, apparently in the late fifth and sixth to seventh century CE, the fashioning of capitals underwent a fundamental change. In the

Hellenistic, Roman, and early Byzantine periods, capitals followed a set order. Capitals of a certain type resembled one another, although a single structure might have incorporated capitals of Doric, Ionic, or Corinthian style. In the late Byzantine period, the architectural approach to fashioning capitals changed: no capital was similar to another, even in the same site or structure. In addition, at times there was a difference in the type of stone used to construct the capital. The late Byzantine period was marked by a sharp decline in building quality in general, and capitals, too, were affected. The deterioration in the quality of the capitals’ fashioning was part of the decline in architecture and construction, which had many causes, including a shortage of skilled craftsmen, and a lack of economic resources, mainly for the construction of monasteries. There were exceptions to this general trend, and quite a few churches, mainly in the late fifth century CE, exhibited the uniform use of Corinthian capitals. The above reasons, however, are insufficient to explain the multiple styles in the capitals and their lack of uniformity, even in the same church. This trend was characteristic in Transjordan, as well, and was not limited to the Land of Israel. Often, it is evident that the stylized capitals are based on the Doric, Ionic, or Corinthian order. However, in the Byzantine period, the capitals are different from the classical Ionic or Corinthian capitals. Sometimes decorative elements were taken from the classical capitals, e.g., volutes or leaves, but various changes were made. Their style is reminiscent of the classical source, but they are fashioned in a very different manner. The workmanship is rough and the outlines, imprecise; and they are not of quality stone. In most instances, a cross is carved in one or more sides of the capital. Basket capitals are an additional innovation from this period, the likes of which have not been found from earlier periods.

[223]

Fig_2 M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Two basket capitals were discovered in the hospice, close to the apse (L501). The columns that bore them were probably looted in an early period. The two capitals, of hard reddish limestone, are similarly fashioned, with almost identical dimensions. The lower part of each is decorated with a rope design, over which a crisscross braided basket is depicted. The upper part is embellished with leaves, and in the center is a Maltese cross. 1. Basket capital with a Maltese cross in a wreath. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.87 m, lower diameter 0.48 m, height 0.73 m (Fig. 256). 2. Basket capital with a Maltese cross in a round frame that is adorned with a surrounding dentil pattern. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.84 m, lower diameter 0.47 m, height 0.70 m (Fig. 257). Similar basket capitals are known from various Byzantine sites; ones identical to those discovered at the monastery of Martyrius have not been uncovered to the present. Basket capitals were found, for example, in Jerusalem (Kautzsch 1936: Taf. 46:797; 47:801– 802) and in Nazareth (Bagatti 1984: Tav. 55:2). In the scholarly literature, a capital whose lower part is not braided and basket-like, but is decorated with leaves, is also called a “basket capital.” They are included in this category because their lower part resembles a

0

basket, and not always because of their ornamentation. Such basket capitals were discovered at Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: Tav. 33, Foto 99), Madaba (Piccirillo 1981: Tav. 95, Foto 59), and Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 510, nos. 121a–c). Additionally, differently fashioned capitals were found in the monastery of Martyrius. 3. A stylized limestone capital, discovered in the refectory (L302). The lower part of the capital has a leaf decoration, and the upper part, volutes. Three sides are embellished with different ornamentations: one with a cross and an ivy leaf; another, with a projecting vertical rectangle; and the last with a schematic volute. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.55 m, lower diameter 0.33 m, height, 0.40 m (Fig. 258). 4. A stylized limestone capital discovered in the refectory (L302). The lower part of the capital has a leaf decoration, the upper part, volutes. There are different ornamentations on three sides: one depicts a horseshoe; another, a cross; and the third is a projecting vertical rectangle. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.57 m, lower diameter 0.32 m, height 0.45 m (Fig. 259). 5. A stylized limestone capital found in the refectory (L302). The lower part of the capital has a leaf decoration, the upper part, volutes. Each of its four sides is fashioned differently, with: an amphora,

10

Fig. 256. Basket capital found in the hospice.

[224]

cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

a

0

10

b cm

Fig. 257. Basket capital found in the hospice.

a rosette, an ivy leaf, and crosses on several sides. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.59 m, lower diameter 0.36 m, height 0.44 m (Fig. 260). 6. A stylized limestone capital discovered in the refectory (L302). The lower part of the capital has a leaf decoration, the upper part volutes. Each of its four sides is fashioned differently: one, with a semicircular decoration, two others with ivy leaves, and there are crosses on several sides. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.63 m, lower diameter 0.40 m, height 0.42 m (Fig. 261).

7. A stylized limestone capital discovered in room L104, where a heap of capitals were found that had been prepared to be looted from the site. One side of the capital depicts a cross, and another, a lotus flower. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.40 m, lower diameter 0.31 m, height 0.38 m (Fig. 262). 8. A stylized limestone capital discovered in room L104. There were lotus flower depictions on each of its sides. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.45 m, lower diameter 0.34 m, height 0.37 m (Fig. 263:1). 9. A stylized limestone capital discovered in room

[225]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

aa

bb

cc

0 0

20 20 cm cm

Fig. 258. Stylized capital found in the refectory.

[226]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

a a

b b

c c

Fig. 259. Stylized capital found in the refectory.

0 0

20 20 cm cm

[227]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a a

b b

c c

Fig. 260. Stylized capital found in the refectory.

0 0

20 cm 20 cm

[228]

d d

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

a a

b b

c c

Fig. 261. Stylized capital found in the refectory.

0 0

20 20cm cm

[229]

d d

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

a

b 00

10 10 cm cm

Fig. 262. Stylized capital found in room L104.

L104. Each side has a similar embellishment: a schematic floral motif that resembles a lotus flower. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.47 m, lower diameter 0.34 m, height 0.37 m (Fig. 263:2). Capitals 7 to 9 are of similar dimensions, and apparently stood in the same chapel. 10. A smooth reddish limestone capital found on the surface. A cross is carved on one side, and on the

other, a cross and a depiction of leaves, also roughly carved. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.43 m, lower diameter 0.32 m, height 0.26 m (Fig. 264). 11. A roughly fashioned limestone Corinthian capital, discovered in the refectory entrance (vestibule L303). Dimensions: upper diameter 0.45 m, lower diameter 0.27 m, height 0.37 m (Fig. 265). Differently fashioned stylized capitals were found

[230]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

1 1

2 0

10

0

10

cm

2

cm

Fig. 263. Stylized capitals found in room L104.

at many sites. A few examples of such capitals were found at: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: Tav. 48, Foto 155–158); Maʿin (Vaccarini 1989: Tav. 47–68, Figs. 3–24; Tav. 69–72, Fotos 3–19); Kh. Deir Samʿan (Magen 2012d: Pls. 1–2); Kh. Abu Rish (Magen and Baruch 2012: 192, Fig. 10); Kh. Umm Deimine (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 459–460, Figs. 32–33); and Kh. Istabul (Peleg and Batz 2012: 316, Figs. 17–18).

Corinthian capitals were unearthed at: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1995: Tav. 30, Foto 89); Kursi (Tzaferis 1983: 9, Fig. 2, Pl. III:2); Halutza (Negev 1989: Tav. 18, Foto 8); Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 510, no. 122); and Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 2002: 181, Fig. 31); see also Rough 1989: Tav. 9–11, Figs. 1–10; Tav. 13–14, Figs. 15–20. Corinthian capitals in churches earlier than the sixth century CE

[231]

fig 8

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

b

a 0

10 cm

0

10 cm

Fig. 264. Capital with carved crosses.

Fig. 265. Corinthian capital found in the vestibule to the refectory.

[232]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

were found at: Mt. Gerizim (Magen 2008c: 261, Fig. 358); Shiloh, in the basilica church (Dadon 2012: 225) and the Northern Church (Magen and Aharonovich 2012: 200, Fig. 57:4); Beit ʿAnun (Magen 2012e: 133, Fig. 22); etc. For a discussion of the development of Corinthian capitals in the Land of Israel, see Fisher 1979.

Columns and Bases Chapels were usually installed in monasteries, which had a relatively small number of inhabitants, while basilica churches were established in settlements or as memorial churches and churches for wayfarers or pilgrims, which enabled large numbers of worshipers to participate in the services. The construction of chapels rather than basilica churches in monasteries was also due to the lack of space within the area of the monastery, which had often been established in a preexisting late-fourth century CE Roman structure that limited the planning options. Very few columns and bases were found in monasteries. Constructing a chapel did not require installing columns to separate the nave from the aisles and support the ceiling, as was common in basilica churches. The chapels were smaller and narrower, enabling them to be covered by a gabled roof that was supported by the lengthwise walls. Thus, the installation of chapels in monasteries established in remote regions, at times without easy access, eliminated the need to transport columns and bases for long distances, thereby saving much expense and effort. Another reason for the scarcity of columns and bases found in the churches was the massive looting of stone from churches and Christian sites conducted in the Early Islamic Period, mainly for the construction of mosques. The southwestern room (L104) of the monastery of Martyrius yielded capitals that had been readied for transfer to some other location, and Hisham’s Palace in Jericho contained columns whose carved crosses had not been removed that were looted from Christian churches. Mention should also be made of the numerous mosques and sheikhs’ tombs that were built over Byzantine churches or that made secondary use of stones from such churches, a very prevalent practice in Judea and Samaria to the present.

All places of prayer in the monastery of Martyrius were built using a chapel plan, while the especially large refectory was built with a basilica plan, which is unique among the monasteries discovered in the Land of Israel. Most of the refectory columns were looted in antiquity, leaving only the bases and capitals; this is also the case in the pilgrim hospice established adjacent to the monastery. Despite the small number of column fragments in the refectory that were not looted, a discrepancy in the fashioning of some of the columns is evident. Not all the columns and bases are represented here.

Columns 1. Hard limestone column fragment discovered in the refectory (L302). The lower part of the column is separated from the column by a groove. Dimensions: diameter 0.35 m, preserved height 1.18 m (Fig. 266:1). 2. Hard limestone column fragment discovered in the refectory (L302). A ridge is carved in the lower part of the column. Dimensions: diameter 0.32 m, preserved height 0.65 m (Fig. 266:2). 3. Hard limestone column fragment discovered in the refectory (L302). Two protruding ridges are carved in the lower part of the column. Dimensions: diameter 0.28 m, preserved height 0.62 m (Fig. 266:3). 4. Hard limestone column fragment discovered in the refectory (L302). A ridge is carved in the lower part of the column. Dimensions: diameter 0.28 m, preserved height 1.0 m (Fig. 266:4). 5. Black hard stone column fragment, spiral shaped, discovered in portico L105. Dimensions: diameter 18 cm, preserved height 0.84 m. It was apparently part of the liturgical furniture of the church (Fig. 267:1). 6. Hard limestone column fragment, made from a single stone, together with the base, discovered in courtyard L343 of the farmhouse in the west of the site. It probably belonged to the bema of one of the chapels on the south or east of the site. Dimensions: diameter 0.20 m, rectangular base, 0.32×0.23 m, preserved height, 0.60 m (Fig. 267:2).

Bases The bases, like the columns, were fashioned differently, and are of various sizes. All are of limestone, but the type of stone and its quality differ

[233]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 1

3 3

2 2 0 0

4 4

40 40cm cm

Fig. 266. Illustration of column fragments found in the refectory.

0 2

1

0

20 cm cm

Fig. 267. Column fragments.

[234]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

1 1

2 2

3 3

5 5

4 4

Fig. 268. Column bases.

0 0

20 cm 20 cm

[235]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2 0

20 cm

Fig. 269. Grooved column bases.

from one base to the next. It has not been determined whether the difference in the bases’ styles ensues from when they were fashioned, or whether this is due to the difference in the structures in which they were located. In either case, it seems that like in the columns, the difference is expressed in the disregard for design in a specific order and in the careless execution that is characteristic of architectural fashioning in the late Byzantine period, in contrast with that of the preceding periods.

1. Column base, square at the bottom and round at the upper part. The base, discovered in courtyard L343 of the farmhouse in the west of the site, possibly belonged to the upper story of the refectory complex. Dimensions: 0.39×0.39 m, height 0.25 m, upper diameter 0.30 m (Fig. 268:1). 2. Hard limestone column base, square at the bottom and round at the upper part, discovered in situ in the refectory (L302). The base is finely fashioned and precisely crafted. Dimensions: 0.60×0.60 m, height

[236]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

0.27 m, upper diameter 0.43 m. A groove runs around the upper part of the base (Fig. 268:2). 3. Hard limestone column base, square at the bottom and round at the upper part, discovered in situ in the refectory (L302). The base has an especially elevated platform. Dimensions: 0.42×0.42 m, height 0.42 m, upper diameter 0.34 m (Fig. 268:3). 4. Limestone column base of inferior quality, square at the bottom and round at the upper part, discovered in the hospice chapel (L504). A Maltese cross is carved on the base. Dimensions: 0.50×0.50 m, height 0.25 m, upper diameter 0.33 m (Fig. 268:4). 5. Roughly fashioned round limestone base, discovered in the farmhouse in the west of the site, adjacent to furnace L342. Dimensions: upper diameter 0.20 m, lower diameter 0.24 m, height 11 cm (Fig. 268:5). 6. Limestone base, discovered in the kitchen (L300), apparently in secondary use. The base is square at the bottom and round at the upper part, with groove on either side. Dimensions: 0.50×0.50 m, height 0.50 m, upper diameter 0.36 m (Fig. 269:1). 7. Limestone base, square at the bottom and round at the upper part, with groove on either side; discovered in the “Chapel of the Three Priests” (L412). Dimensions: 0.50×0.50 m, height 0.50 m, upper diameter 0.36 m (Fig. 269:2). Bases, 6 and 7, are of identical shape and dimensions, and were almost certainly installed in the same structure. Grooved columns were installed above (not discovered at the site, but known from different sites). The groove was probably carved in a later period to install a partition between the two columns. At times the church bema was expanded and the bases of the columns adjacent to the bema were grooved for the installation of chancel screens.

Building Stones with Carved Crosses The carving of crosses on lintels, building stones, capitals, columns, bases, baptism fonts, chancel screens, and other items was quite common in Byzantine monasteries and churches. This phenomenon might have been intended to avoid depicting crosses on church mosaic floors in the late Byzantine period, so as not to step on them.

Notwithstanding this, crosses were found on the mosaic floors in several monasteries. Many small crosses, as a recurring ornament, were discovered in the mosaic floor from the early phase of the church at Beit ʿAnun (fifth century CE; Magen 2012e: 134– 135, Figs. 23, 25). Large crosses were discovered in the mosaic floors at: Qaṣr Khalife (Magen 2012c: 212, Fig. 14); Kh. Deir Samʿan (Magen 2012d: 24, Fig. 22; 39, Fig. 41); and Kh. Umm Deimine (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 455–456, Figs. 26–27). Deir Samʿan was one of the monasteries replete with cross carvings (Magen 2012d: 72–76, Pls. 5–9). Limestone ashlars with carved crosses were discovered at the site of the monastery of Martyrius: 1. Cross carved on a rectangular ashlar, discovered on the surface. Dimensions: 0.40×0.35 m (Fig. 270:1). 2. Cross carved on a rectangular ashlar, discovered on the surface in the area of the southwestern wing. The lower corner of the stone is broken. Dimensions: 0.62×0.46 m (Fig. 270:2). 3. Cross and a depiction of leaves on a rectangular ashlar, discovered on the surface. Dimensions: 0.70×0.30 m (Fig. 270:3). 4. Cross on a rectangular ashlar, discovered on the surface. Dimensions: 0.60×0.30 m (Fig. 270:4). 5. Rounded limestone window featuring a cross with a rectangular extension incorporated into the construction. A similar architectural item was found in a church on Mt. Gerizim (Magen 2008c: 260, Fig. 356). Dimensions: diameter 0.57 m, height (including the extension) 0.75 m (Fig. 271). 6. A stone lintel in secondary use was found in room L304, incorporated in wall W130 from the second Byzantine phase of the monastery (Fig. 272). The lintel, of hard limestone, is decorated with crosses. In the middle of the lintel is a cross in a circle and four ivy leaf depictions. There are small crosses at the corners of the lintel, and each of the lower crosses is surrounded by a carved semicircle with a leaf at either end. Dimensions: 1.93×0.65 m, height 0.62 m. Similar lintels came to light at: the Church of Leoni in Umm al-Rasas-Kastron Mefaa (Piccirillo 1992: Tav. 5, Foto 11); the Church of San Paolo in Umm al-Rasas-Kastron Mefaa (Piccirillo 1997: Tav. 27, Foto 13; Tav. 28, Foto 14); and the Church of St. Sergius at Nitl in Madaba (Piccirillo 2001: Tav. 20, Foto 29).

[237]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 0

10 cm

0

2

4

3 0

20 cm

Fig. 270. Ashlar stones with carved crosses.

[238]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

0

20 cm

0

20 cm

Fig. 271. Round window featuring a cross.

00

40 40cm cm

Fig. 272. Stone lintel in secondary use, decorated with crosses, found incorporated in wall W130.

Channel Drainage Holes Paving stones with drainage holes having round or square covers were discovered in the north central wing and the southern area, close to the “Chapel of the Three Priests”: 1. Round stone fragment. Dimensions: estimated outer diameter 0.70 m. In its center is a hole, an 0 estimated diameter, 0.20 m (Fig.40cm 273:1). 2. Square stone. Dimensions: 0.67×0.62 m, height

17 cm. In its center is a 0.27×0.27 m hole (Fig. 273:2). 3. Square stone. Dimensions: 0.57×0.53 m, height 14 cm. In its center is a 0.24×0.24 m hole (Fig. 273:3). 4. Square stone. Dimensions: 0.50×0.41 m, height 14 cm. In its center is a 15.7 cm diameter hole (Fig. 273:4). 5. Square stone. Dimensions: 0.42×0.40 m, height 14 cm. In its center is a 11.4 cm diameter hole (Fig. 273:5). 6. Paving stone with a rosette-like drainage hole, discovered in the inner courtyard L406 in the southeastern wing. The stone has a shallow channel

[239]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 1

2

3

2

3

4

5 5

4 0

20 cm 20 cm

0

Fig. 273. Illustration of channel drainage holes.

[240]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

0

20 cm

Fig. 274. Paving stone with a rosette-like drainage hole.

for rainwater. Dimensions: 0.95×0.72 m, height 18 cm (Fig. 274). A similar drainage hole was found in Kh. ed-Deir; see Hirschfeld 1999: 45, Fig. 64.

Chancel Posts and Screens Chancel posts and screens were unearthed at almost all the sites that contained a church or chapel. Jewish and Samaritan synagogues, as well, revealed the presence of a chancel around the bema, as in Kh. Samara (Magen 2008g: 151). It is noteworthy that the complete marble items had already been looted in antiquity, for use in mosques, sheikhs’ tombs, and as markers for Muslim graves. In all the churches and chapels, the eastern end of the nave contained a semicircular apse, whether external or internal, and a bema, which was usually higher than the nave and aisles. A number of steps ascended to the bema, which was used by the officiating priests. The bema, containing an altar table that was often over a reliquary that held the bones or remains of saints, was separated from the nave and

aisles by a surrounding partition, the chancel screen, composed of posts and screens. This screen prevented the entry of individuals during prayers, except for the officiating bishop, deacons, and priests. The chancel screen was of marble or limestone. Chancel posts, also of marble or limestone, were placed at different intervals between the screens, the latter attached to the posts by grooves along their lengths. Some of the screens and posts were produced locally from imported marble blocks; at times, however, they came ready to be installed. Others were produced locally, of local limestone. Most of the marble screens were probably fashioned in the Land of Israel, so they would correspond to the dimensions of the bema and the intercolumnar spaces, both of which were not identical in every church. The chancel posts were fashioned with concentric rectangular frames or with some floral ornamentation. The upper part of the post was dome shaped, sometimes pointed. On occasion a cross was carved in the dome; within the former, a metal cross of bronze or some precious material was inlaid. Sometimes all that remains are the holes of the nails that held a cross.

[241]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The intercolumnar chancel screens were embellished with a wide range of designs: rosettes, faunal patterns, etc., in most instances with a cross in the center. There are screens with a central cross laid over three protuberances that symbolize Golgotha, Jesus’ burial place. Most of the posts and screens in the monastery are of limestone (a few are of marble). According to the evidence at the site, not all the chapels had chancel screens; there were chancel screens in the church, in the chapel to its south, and in the chapel south of the built cistern. The marble chancel posts and screens revealed in the monastery of Martyrius probably belong to the first phase of the Byzantine monastery (fifth to early sixth century CE), while those of limestone are from the second phase (mid-sixth to seventh century CE).

Chancel Posts 1. A fragment of a carelessly carved marble chancel post, discovered in the church (L200). The front is decorated with circles containing diamonds, the back, with carved rectangular forms; and there is a groove on either side for inserting the chancel screen. The post, topped by a dome, is smaller than the other posts at the site. Dimensions: 18×15 cm, preserved to a height of 0.60 m (Fig. 275).

0

2. A broken limestone chancel post, discovered on the surface in the southwestern wing, probably belonged to the chapel south of the built cistern (L106, L108). It is topped by a dome that is not preserved, with rectangular carvings in front and a groove on either side for chancel screens. Dimensions: 0.32×0.24 m, preserved to a height of 0.90 m, estimated height (with dome) 1.11 m (Fig. 276). 3. A hard limestone chancel post, discovered on the surface in the southwestern wing. Topped by a dome with a carved cross in its center, within which a metal cross was inlaid. Rectangles are carved in front, and there is a groove on the column’s side for a chancel screen. Dimensions: 0.25×0.22 m, height 1.06 m (Fig. 277). 4. A broken hard limestone chancel post, discovered on the surface. The post, without a dome, is embellished by rectangles carved in the front, and a groove on either side for chancel screens. Dimensions: 0.30×0.24 m, height 0.72 m (Fig. 278). It most probably was originally used in the chapel south of the built cistern. 5. A hard limestone chancel post, discovered on the surface in the southwestern wing. The post, lacking a dome, is embellished with carved rectangles on the front and has a groove on its side for a chancel screen. Dimensions: 0.30×0.24 m, height 0.72 m (Fig. 279:1).

20 cm

Fig. 275. Marble chancel post found in the church.

0

Fig. 276. Chancel post.

[242]

20 cm 0 0

20 20cm cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

11

2 0

0

20 cm

20 cm 0

20 cm

Fig. 277. Chancel post with3a cross carved in the dome. 0

10 cm

22

1 0

20 cm

0

20 cm

Fig. 279. Chancel posts.

0

Fig. 278. Chancel post. 3

0

20 cm 0

20

cm

It was apparently originally used in the chapel south of the built cistern. 6. A white limestone broken chancel post, discovered on the surface in the southwestern wing, near the chapel south of the built cistern. The front is embellished with carved rectangles; a groove on the side is for a chancel

10 cm

screen. This post, too, had a dome that is not preserved. Dimensions: 0.30×0.24 m, height 0.90 m (Fig. 279:2). Chancel posts were found, for example, at: Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 504, nos. 84–86, 95–98); Mapsis (Negev 1988: 101, Photos 113–115; 104, Photo 127; 105, Fig. 11), Rehovot in the Negev (Patrich 1988: 124, Ill. 190), Kh. Beit Sila (Batz 2012: 384, Fig. 14:3); Kh. Ẓur (Batz and Sharukh 2012: 20, Fig. 23); the Byzantine church at ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 367, Fig. 45:3), and the church at Ostrakine in northern Sinai (Habas 2013: 1066, Fig. 13).

[243]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Chancel Screens 1. A narrow, long marble slab (broken in two), ca. 1 m long and 17 cm wide, with a Greek dedicatory inscription was discovered in portico L105 in the southwestern wing, close to the chapel (L106, L108) near the built cistern (Fig. 280). Its lower part is fashioned diagonally and roughly carved, in contrast with the smooth upper part. The groove in the center of the lower part resembles the chancel post grooves. No similar item was found among the chancel posts and screens in dozens of churches uncovered in and outside the Land of Israel. This led us to conclude that this was a way of memorializing donors to the monastery church after the marble chancel screen was in place. At times dedications were inscribed on chancel screens. Here, however, it was feared that carving with a chisel on the screen would undermine the chancel screen structure, or smash the screen. It was therefore decided to memorialize the name on a marble slab installed on one of the screens close to the bema entrance. Such a slab, like the posts, was attached to the screen by means of a groove and

bonding material (Fig. 281). The inscription was roughly carved with a chisel, with letters about 4 cm high. Only the upper part of the inscription is preserved (Di Segni 1990: 156–157, no. 4): [Prosjorὰ  ʼ Αnto]nίnαϛ kαὶ AÛxenίo. Offering of Antonina(?) and Auxentius 2. A marble chancel screen, probably in secondary use, discovered in portico L107 in the southwestern wing. The screen is semicircular, with a cross carved in its center within which a metal cross was inlaid (Fig. 282). 3. Three hard limestone chancel screen fragments, discovered in the southeast of the central courtyard (L418), near the church. The size of the chancel screens is unclear; they probably belonged to the second phase church. A cross in a circle was apparently carved in the center of the screen (Fig. 283). 4. Two marble chancel screen fragments with carved decorations, discovered in hall L234, in the southeastern wing (Fig. 284).

00

20 20 cm cm

Fig. 280. Marble slab with Greek dedicatory inscription, probably installed on a chancel screen.

[244]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

Fig. 281. Reconstruction of the marble slab with the dedicatory inscription attached to a screen.

0 0

40 10 cm cm

Fig. 282. Marble chancel screen with a carved cross, that was previously inlaid with metal. 0

[245]

1

cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s 2

1

0

0

11

22

33

0

Fig. 283. Chancel screen fragments.

0

0

2

3 0

10 cm

1

1

3 0

10 cm

0

0

10 10 cm cm

Fig. 284. Marble chancel screen fragments.

[246]

0

10 cm

2

2

4

cm

20 cm

10 cm

4

cm

20 cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

1

0 3

2

0

5 4

7

6

0

10 cm

Fig. 285. Chancel screen fragments.

[247]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

5. A hard limestone chancel screen fragment, discovered in passageway L228 in the northeastern wing. Greek letters are inscribed on the fragment (Fig. 285:1). 6. Hard limestone chancel screen fragments, discovered in the bema (L108) of the chapel south of the built cistern (Fig. 285:2–4). 7. A hard limestone chancel screen fragment, discovered in room L102, west of the built cistern; probably belong to the chapel south of the latter (Fig. 285:5). 8. Hard limestone chancel screen fragments discovered in the farmhouse rooms in the west of the site (L317, L337); probably belong to the chapel south of the built cistern (Fig. 285:6–7). Chancel screens were discovered at many sites. The following are a few examples: Rehovot in the Negev (Patrich 1988: 110–113, Pl. VIII, Ills. 165– 170; 122, Ill. 186); Mapsis (Negev 1988: 93, Fig. 9:198); Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 1990: 362–363, Figs. 14–19); Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 514, 517, 520, nos.136–138); Kh. ed-Deir (Habas 1999: 126, Pl. 3); Ḥ. Bata (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 42); Kh. Beit Sila (Batz 2012: 384, Fig. 14:1–2); the Northern Church at Shiloh (Magen and Aharonovich 2012: 202, Fig. 59:2); the Byzantine church at ʿAnab elKabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 367, Fig. 45:1–2); Kh. Istabul (Peleg and Batz 2012: 317, Fig. 21); Kh. Ẓur (Batz and Sharukh 2012: 19, Figs. 21– 22); Kh. el-Laṭaṭin (Greenfeld 2012: 426, Fig. 15); and the church at Ostrakine in northern Sinai (Habas 2013: 1066–1067, Figs. 14–18).

Altar Tables The altar table is part of the liturgical furniture of the Mass conducted in the church. The wine goblet and Communion wafer platter were placed on this table, which was situated on the bema, close to the apse. At times an additional small table stood on the bema, for worshipers’ donations and offerings. The altar table was usually square with a surrounding frame, and stood on four colonnettes on a marble base, below which a reliquarium was usually located. The colonettes were thin, with a square base and a stylized capital. Some tables stood on a massive stone base with square sockets in its corners for receiving the colonnettes. The table was usually of marble, but some were of limestone. A number of altar table elements were discovered scattered in the site: 1. A corner of a marble rectangular altar tabletop with a raised frame, discovered in room L340 of the farmhouse in the west of the site, 11 cm thick (Fig. 286).

Tables Byzantine churches and chapels contained rectangular altar tables modeled after the showbread table in the Temple. In addition to these rectangular altar tables, the churches and chapels also yielded round and semicircular tables. In the monastery of Martyrius the latter were of marble, limestone, or bitumen, and were found in the refectory alongside bowls and platters, also of marble. We may also assume the existence of wood, bronze, silver, or gold-plated altar tables and dining tables, mentioned in the early Christian sources.

0

0

10 cm

20

Fig. 286. Illustration of marble altar tabletop cm corner.

[248]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

2. A rectangular limestone altar table base with a raised frame was discovered in situ in the apse of the “Chapel of the Three Priests” (L412). Dimensions: 1.0×0.50 m, 10 cm thick. The table base was found in situ. Beneath the base is a rectangular depression that damaged the central carpet frame of the mosaic carpet. The altar was probably of wood or bronze (Fig. 287). Similar altar tables were discovered at many sites, including: Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 488, nos. 56–58; 490, nos. 59–62); Rehovot in the Negev (Patrich 1998: 128–129, Ills. 198–199); Kh. Beit Sila (Batz 2012: 385, Figs. 15–16), and Ostrakine (Habas 2013: 1065, Fig. 8); a limestone altar table was found in Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 1990: 360, Fig. 10). 3. A white marble colonnette fragment with a stylized capital, found on the surface. It probably belonged to the church altar table. Dimensions: diameter 9.2 cm, preserved height 0.67 m (Fig. 288:1). 4. A white marble colonnette fragment with a square base, found on the surface. The capital is not preserved. Dimensions: diameter 10 cm, preserved height 0.62 m (Fig. 288:2). Altar table colonnettes were found at various sites, such as: Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 479, nos. 21–29); Kh. ed-Deir (Habas 1999: 120, Pl. 1:5–7); Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 2002: 183, Figs. 39–40); Kh. Beit Sila (Batz 2012: 382, Fig. 12; 385, Fig. 17); the Northern Church at Shiloh (Magen and Aharonovich 2012: 202, Fig. 59:1); Kh. Umm Deimine (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 463, Fig. 35:2–3); and the Byzantine church at ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 368, Fig. 46:1–3).

Fig. 287. Altar table base discovered in situ in the apse of the “Chapel of the Three Priests.”

1

1

2

2

0

0

20 20cm

cm

Fig. 288. Fragments of marble colonnettes.

Dining Tables and Platters The largest refectory unearthed to the present in the Land of Israel, and in the Christian world as a whole, was discovered in the monastery of Martyrius. Numerous pottery vessels, marble tables, and platters were found in the kitchen alongside the refectory. The discovery of round and sigma-shaped tables in the refectory complex indicates they were used mainly for meals, and not as altar tables. In Kh. edDeir a fragment of a marble tabletop was found on the refectory floor. The fragment had fallen from the upper story (Habas 1999: 124, Pl. 2). Three tables were found in the refectory (L302): 1. A sigma-shaped white marble tabletop, with raised frame. Dimensions: 1.08×1.02 m, and 6 cm thick; the sunken surface, 0.94×0.90 m (Fig. 289:1). 2. A sigma-shaped white marble tabletop, with a broad frame that surrounded a depressed center. Dimensions: 1.20×1.14 m, and 5 cm thick; frame width 15 cm; and sunken surface, 0.90×0.84 m (Fig. 289:2).

[249]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

3. A polylobed round black bitumen tabletop with eight round depressions around a raised round frame in the center. The round depressions were probably for wineglasses. Dimensions: diameter 0.90 m, and 3 cm thick (Fig. 290). Similar sigma-shaped and polylobed sigma tables, of marble, limestone, or bitumen, were discovered in: Mt. Nebo (Saller 1941: Pl. 126:1–8; Acconci 1998: 492, nos. 63–65; 547, Pl. V:7; for square polylobed tables, see Acconci 1998: 494, no. 67); the church at lower Herodium (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 74, above); and Tell Masos in the eastern Negev (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 74, below; Bagatti 2002: Pl. 23:6).

Additionally, two round marble platters were found: 1. Fragment of a platter was revealed in the kitchen (L300). Dimensions: 0.53 m in diameter (Fig. 291:1). 2. Fragment of a platter was revealed in the refectory (L302). Dimensions: 0.50 m in diameter (Fig. 291:2). A marble platter was discovered at Mt. Nebo (Acconci 1998: 496, nos. 75–77) and in the church at ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 368, Fig. 46:5). In ʿEn Gedi, a marble fragment identified as a tabletop had dimensions like those of the platters found in the monastery of Martyrius (Sidi 2007: 557, Fig. 25). 1

1 2

3 0

40 cm

Fig. 289. Marble dining tables found in the refectory.

[250]

2

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s 2

0

3

290. Bitumen dining table found in the refectory. 0

400 cm

2

40 cm

3

40 cm

1 1

2 2 0 0

10 10cm cm

Fig. 291. Illustration of marble platters found in the refectory complex.

Sundials The mishnaic term for sundial is “even shaʿot” (literally, “stone of hours”), and that for the gnomon is “masmer even shaʿot” (“pin of the stone of hours”; M ʿEduyot 3:8; Kelim 12:5). The term for sundial indicates that the latter was of stone. It was only natural that large sundials

would be of stone, since they were generally part of some structure, but it is unclear why the small sundials discovered in Jerusalem and in other locations, too, were of stone. There might have been sundials made of wood or of precious materials that were not preserved. Large sundials are characteristic of sacred sites in which prayers or ritual acts were conducted at set hours.

[251]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

In the Hellenistic and Roman periods, small sundials that might have been used for private needs were uncovered mainly in Jerusalem and at Greek and Roman sites in the Land of Israel and beyond (see Daremberg and Saglio 1904: 256–264; Ben-Layish 1969; Gibbs 1976). Pliny the Elder relates that the Romans received the sundial from the Greeks after the First Punic War, in the middle of the third century BCE (Pliny, NH VII.213–215). Herodotus claims that the Greeks received the sundial from the Babylonians (Herodotus, II.109; Deonna 1938: 187–195, Pl. LXVI–LXVIII). A Hellenistic sundial was revealed at Mt. Gerizim (Magen 2008c: 156, Fig. 281, Pl. XXI). The Temple Mount excavations uncovered a Second Temple period small sundial, of the type also found in the monastery of Martyrius, with a depiction of a menorah (Mazar 1972: 82; Magen 2002: 114, Fig. 3:82). Additional Second Temple period sundials were discovered in the Ophel excavations (Macalister and Duncan 1926: 154– 155, Figs. 144–145), in the Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983: 119:116), and in Ḥilkiya’s palace (Damati 1977: 105–106). Roman sundials were discovered at MédâinṢâleḥ (Jaussen and Savignzac 1909: 303, Fig. 113), in the Roman temple on Mt. Gerizim (Bull 1975), and in Kh. el-Beiyudat (Hizmi 1990: 259, Figs. 19–20). Byzantine sundials, as well, were found in churches and monasteries, e.g., Castellion (El-Mird; Mader 1929: 122–125, Pl. I: Fig.1), Mampsis (Negev 1988: 95–96, Photo 97), Mt. Nebo (Piccirillo 1984: Tav. 30, Foto 14), and Maʿin (Piccirillo 1985: Tav. 77, Foto 43). Two sundials were discovered in the monastery of Martyrius: a simple one and another that is reminiscent of the Second Temple period sundials in Jerusalem and of those from the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods unearthed at other locations. 1. A simple square stone sundial. Dimensions: 0.38×0.24 m, height 0.25 m. A concave semicircle on the front of the stone is divided by grooves into thirteen segments. In the middle is a hole for the gnomon that was probably of iron or bronze, reinforced by lead. The sundial was found in the narthex (L209) of the church (Fig. 292). 2. A sundial with a base; the former is a concave semicircle, and the latter slants outward. Its shape 10 cm resembles that of 0sundials from the Hellenistic and Early Roman period. Dimensions: 0.30×0.31 m, height 0.36 m (Fig. 293). The concave part is divided

0

10

0

10

cm

cm

Fig. 292. Sundial found in the church narthex.

[252]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

0

Fig. 293. Sundial with summer and winter division.

[253]

5 cm

0

5 cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

into 12 segments, separated by an incision, into a summer clock and a winter one. The sundial was discovered in the passageway that led to the stables and rooms in the northern central wing (L246), and probably belonged to the church.

Basins Some of the basins found in the site apparently belong to the Early and Late Islamic periods; some were used as troughs, and not all are represented here. No large baptismal font that might have been used in the baptistery by the priests and monks, and by the pilgrims who came to the monastery and were housed in the hospice, was discovered. This is surprising, but the central baptismal font might have been taken by the inhabitants of the Islamic farmhouse. M. Ben-Pechat (1990: 504, Figs. 15–16) mentions a baptismal font bearing a carved cross that was discovered at the monastery of Martyrius, but not during the excavations. The baptismal font also appears in the Mandatory Archive (IAA  Archive; see SRF 143). 1. A hard limestone square baptismal font, with a trapezoidal depression in its center, discovered in courtyard L343 of the farmhouse in the west of the site. Dimensions: 0.74×0.74 m, height 0.40 m; depression diameter 0.43 m, depth 0.23 m. A cross is carved inside a 0.23 m diameter circle (Fig. 294). 2. A reddish limestone square baptismal font in secondary use was incorporated in wall W114 of the farmhouse structure. Dimensions: 0.75×0.75 m, height 0.40 m. In its center is a depression: diameter 0.48 m, depth 0.25 m. A cross is carved inside a 0.22 m diameter circle (Fig. 295). 3. A hard limestone water basin (L444) was found incorporated and sunken in courtyard L430 close to the “Chapel of the Three Priests.” Dimensions: 0.78×0.78 m. In its center is a depression with maximal dimensions of 0.54 m in diameter and 0.42 m deep, fashioned as a cone (Fig. 296). 4. A hard limestone square water basin (L264), discovered south of the northeastern gate, in room L210 behind the church apse. In its upper part is a square groove for a cover and below, a hole containing

0

10

0

10

0

20 20

20 cm

Fig. 294. Illustration of baptismal font with carved cross.

a lead drainage pipe. Dimensions: 0.97×0.97 m, height 0.61 m; depression diameter 0.65 m, depth 0.53 m (Fig. 297). 5. A rectangular, roughly crafted hard limestone basin, discovered in room L319 of the farmhouse in the west of the site that apparently belongs to the Early Islamic phase. Dimensions: 0.92×0.52 m, maximal height 0.40 m, depth 0.26 m. The basin has two holes, one in its long side, and another at the end of its short side (Fig. 298). 6. A roughly crafted hard limestone round basin, with two holes in its sides. Discovered in room L341 of the farmhouse in the west of the site. Dimensions: diameter 0.68 m, height 0.37 m (Fig. 299).

[254]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s 40 cm 40 cm 40 40 cm cm

0

0 0 0

00

20 cm 0

20 cm

0

20 cm

0 0

20 20cm cm

4

cm 0

4

0

4

0 0

4 4 cm cm

cm

cm

20 cm 20 cm 20 20 cm cm

Fig. 296. Basin L444 sunken in the courtyard close to the “Chapel of the Three Priests.”

Fig. 295. Baptismal font with carved cross in secondary use, found incorporated in wall W114.

[255] 0

20 cm

cm cm cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

0 0 0

0 0 0

20 20 cm 20 cm cm

Fig. 297. Basin L264, found adjacent to the northeastern gate of the monastery.

[256]

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

0

20 cm

0 0 40 Fig. 298. Basin, found in room L319 of the Early Islamic farmhouse. cm

0

0

20 cm

40 cm

0 0

0

20 cm 20 cm

20 cm

40 cm

Fig. 299. Round basin found in room L341 of the Early Islamic farmhouse.

[257]

0

20 cm

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Twelve Men’s Morris Game

16); and at Kokhav Hayarden (Ben-Dov 1975: 106; Saban 2012: 61–62).

This game, quite popular during the Crusader period, already existed in the Roman period, and perhaps even earlier (Saban 1999; 2012: 59–64). A Twelve Men’s Morris game was discovered in the monastery of Martyrius, in the south of the monastery. The game, measuring 0.26×0.22 m, is carved on a 0.53×0.34 m stone. The game consists of three concentric squares connected to each other by four diagonal lines, two vertical lines, and a single horizontal line (Fig. 300). The game, popular in medieval Europe, was given various names by different peoples: an additional version is called “Nine Men’s Morris”; in France it was called “Morelles,” and in Germany, “Mühlspiel.” Such games were found: in the Ophel excavations in Jerusalem (Macalister and Duncan 1926: 131, Pl. XIII:4; 169, Fig. 174); in the Western Wall plaza in Jerusalem (Saban 2012: 61); at Gerar (Petrie 1928: 19, Pl. XLII:7); at Atlit (Johns 1936: Pl. XXV); at Bethany (Saller 1957: 127, Pl. 84:9,

Miscellaneous 1. A hard limestone mold bearing a carved impression with six arms and a groove for pouring metal (probably bronze or iron) was discovered in the kitchen (L300) in secondary use. It might have been used for preparing the leg of some heavy implement, perhaps a candelabrum or table. Dimensions: 0.66×0.53 m, height 0.22 m (Fig. 301). 2. A stone with some carved marking, perhaps the Greek letter ɸ, was discovered on the surface. Dimensions: 0.46×0.33 m, height 17 cm (Fig. 302). 3. A threshold stone in secondary use incorporated into an installation found in room L337 of the farmhouse in the west of the site. In the stone’s center is a round depression, 0.28 m in diameter, and there are two rectangular sockets in its corners. Dimensions: 0.69×0.44 m, height 0.20 m (Fig. 303).

0

5

Fig. 300. Illustration of the Twelve Men’s Morris game.

[258]

cm

A r c h i t e c t u r a l E l E M E N T S an d S t o n e O b j e c t s

00

10 10 cmcm

Fig. 302. Illustrations of stone with carved marking.

0 0 00

20 cm 20 2020 cm cmcm

Fig. 301. Limestone mold for pouring metal, found in the kitchen in secondary use. 0

0

20 cm 20 cm

Fig. 303. Illustration of a threshold stone incorporated into an installation in room L337 of the Early Islamic farmhouse.

[259]

THE FINDS With contributions by Baruch Yuzefovsky

3 0

2

4

Chapter Five

Pottery      Vessels

Hundreds of pottery vessels were discovered at the site, the majority ascribed to the Byzantine period, the site’s main settlement phase. A few finds can be placed in the first phase of the site (fourth to early fifth century CE), and are presented in the chapter on lamps. The site also yielded vessels from the Early Islamic period (the last settlement phase in the site); and a few vessels found from the Mamluk and Ottoman periods attest to use of the site remains, including the cisterns, for temporary settlement after the site’s abandonment. The report presents a representative selection of vessels from the different periods according to chronological and typological division. The report is divided into two sections: one containing vessels from the Byzantine period (Pls. 1–30), and the other, vessels from the Early Islamic and later periods (Pls. 31–32).

Byzantine Period The pottery vessels were found mainly on the monastery floors, and most are to be dated to phase IIB (second half of sixth to first half of seventh century CE). The largest quantity of vessels, including complete ones, was found in the refectory and the adjoining kitchen. Bowls Three different groups of bowls are discernible. One group includes red slip ware, which was discussed in detail by J.W. Hayes, and we accordingly will use his division (Hayes 1972). The bowls in this group are divided into three classes: African Red Slip Ware (ARS), which originated in North Africa; Late Roman C Ware (LRC), which originated in western Asia Minor (Phocaea); and Egyptian Red Slip Ware (ERS), which originated in Egypt. The two additional groups

are rouletted bowls and Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW), which appear in two forms: bowls and cups.

African Red Slip Ware Bowls Three types of bowls from this group were discovered at the monastery. The first type is represented by a heavy knobbed bowl with a stamped decoration in its center (Pl. 1:1). This complete bowl, which belongs to Form ARS 104A, is dated to 530–580 CE (Hayes 1972: 160–166, Fig. 29:2). The decoration depicts a saint with a halo around his head, holding a cross affixed to a long staff in his left hand, while he delivers a blessing with his right. The central figure is flanked by two women’s heads in profile. This stamping belongs to the E (ii) group of decorations, dated to 530–600 CE (Hayes 1972: 222, 227). A bowl of this type was discovered at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 79, Pl. I:5). A complete bowl with a rounded knobbed rim and a low ring base (Pl. 1:2) belongs to the second type. This bowl belongs to Form ARS 104C, dated to the second half of the sixth to the first half of the seventh century CE (Hayes 1972: 160–166, Fig. 30:23). Bowls of this type were found at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 111, Fig. 4:27), Tel Beth Shean (Johnson 2006: 538, 542, Figs. 15.6:111; 15.8:155), and Tel Tanninim (Oren-Paskal 2006: 125, Fig. 109:1). Similar bowls are known from various excavations in Jerusalem (Hayes 1985: 193, Fig. 62:14–16; Magness 1992: 161, Fig. 10:9). The third type comprises heavy knobbed-rim bowls (Pl. 1:3–4), which belongs to Form ARS 105, dated to the late sixth to the first half of the seventh century CE (Hayes 1972: 166–169, Figs. 31:17; 32:16). Bowls of this type were unearthed in Jerusalem (Hayes 1985: 193, Fig. 62:17) and Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 111, Fig. 4:25).

[263]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Late Roman C Ware Bowls The bowls of this group found at the monastery can be divided into six types. The first type comprises a bowl with a tall vertical rim, thickened on the outside to form a narrow flange (Pl. 1:5). The bowl belongs to Form LRC 3C, dated to the second half of the fifth century CE (Hayes 1972: 329–338, Fig. 67:7). Similar bowls came to light in various excavations in Jerusalem (Hayes 1985: 193, Fig. 63:10; Magness 1992: 152, Fig. 5:13; Rapuano 1999: 174, Fig. 3:36; Weksler-Bdolah 2006: 98*, Fig. 3:2–3). The second type comprises a bowl with a vertical rim with overhang at the bottom (Pl. 1:6). The bowl belongs to Form LRC 3E, dated from the end of the fifth to the beginning of the sixth century CE (Hayes 1972: 337–338, Fig. 68:15). Bowls of this type were found in Jerusalem (Hayes 1985: 193, Fig. 63:12; Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 8:8). The third type comprises a bowl with a triangular thickened rim (Pl. 1:7), and belongs to Form LRC 3H, dated to the sixth century CE (Hayes 1972: 338, Fig. 68:28). Bowls of this type were discovered in a dwelling cave in the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 8:7), and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 242, Pl. 8:19–20). The fourth type is a bowl with a triangular thickened rim, concave on its exterior (Pl. 1:8). The bowl belongs to Form LRC 3F or LRC 3H, dated to the sixth century CE. Similar bowls were discovered at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 174, Fig. 3:37). The fifth type comprises a bowl with a low strongly projecting, outwardly rolled vertical rim, whose underside is broad and flattish, with an offset at the junction with the wall (Pl. 1:9). The bowl belongs to Form LRC 3F, dated to the second quarter of the sixth century CE (Hayes 1972: 338, Fig. 69:25). Similar bowls were found in Jerusalem at the northwestern corner of the Old City wall (Weksler-Bdolah 2006: 102*, Fig. 6:2–3), and in Area E of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (Magness 2006: 184, Fig. 7.1:2). The sixth type comprises a bowl with an elongated rim, concave on top, slightly everted, with a small offset at the junction with the wall (Pl. 1:10); it belongs to Form LRC 10C, dated to the first half of the seventh century CE (Hayes 1972: 343–346, Fig. 71:11–14). A bowl of this type was discovered at

Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 5:1). Similar bowls came to light in Jerusalem at the Armenian Garden (Hayes 1985: 193, Fig. 64:17), the northwestern corner of the Old City wall (Weksler-Bdolah 2006: 107*, Fig. 7:1), and at Kh. ʿAdasa (Khalaily and Avissar 2008: 99, Fig. 6:2).

Egyptian Red Slip Ware Bowls Two bowl types from this group were discovered at the monastery. One type comprises three bowls with a rounded rim, slightly rolled on the underside (Pl. 2:1–3), which belongs to Form HH of the ERS A type, dated to the first half of the sixth century CE (Hayes 1972: 394, Fig. 85d). Bowls of this type are very rare in the Land of Israel. Three bowls of ERS A type were found in a structure in Caesarea that is dated to the first half of the seventh century CE (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 112–113, Fig. 5:15–17). The second type comprises a bowl with a knobbed rim (Pl. 2:4), which belongs to the ERS C or “Imitation Late B” type, dated to the seventh century CE (Hayes 1972: 399–401). Similar bowls came to light at Kh. al-Karak (Delougaz and Haines 1960: Pl. 53:3–17), in the Armenian Garden in Jerusalem (Hayes 1985: 194, Fig. 65:7), at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 113, Fig. 5:18), and in the Byzantine stratum at Tel Beth Shean (Johnson 2006: 544–545, 550–551, Figs. 15.9:187–188; 15.13:264).

Rouletted Bowls Rouletted bowls were common in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods in the Jerusalem area (Magness 1993: 153–154). The site yielded only two bowls of this type, which are dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE. One bowl has an everted rim and rouletted decoration on the body (Pl. 2:5). The bowl belongs to Form 2, following J. Magness’s typology, and this type is dated to the sixth century CE (Magness 1993: 187–188). Similar bowls were discovered: at the monastery in Deir Ghazali (Avner 2000: 37*, Fig. 18:5); in a dwelling cave in the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 8:5); in the Byzantine structure in Area XV, south of the Temple Mount (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 86, Pl. I.14:2); in

[264]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Area A in the Jerusalem Jewish Quarter excavations (Magness 2003: 423, Fig. 18.1:7); and at ʿEn Gedi (Amir 2007: 464, Fig. 1:3). It should be emphasized that bowls with rouletted decoration first appeared at the beginning of the Late Roman period. Another bowl with a rounded rim (Pl. 2:6) belongs to the Related Wares group, Form 4, which includes vessels similar in terms of shape and clay to the rouletted bowls, but without decoration; this group is dated to the sixth to the first half of the seventh century CE (Magness 1993: 191–192). A similar bowl was uncovered at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 174, Fig. 3:48).

Fine Byzantine Ware Bowls Vessels of this group are of brown or orange clay, fired at high temperatures, with burnishing on their thin walls, and some are decorated with an incised wavy line. Vessels of this group were unearthed at ʿEn Boqeq (Gichon 1974: 119). The monastery of Martyrius yielded many vessels belonging to this group. We classified the deep bowls by size, as bowls or cups. The largest assemblage was uncovered in the refectory complex, where more than three hundred cups were found.

Fine Byzantine Ware Shallow Bowls Shallow bowls of the FBW type are made of hard fired clay, with a ring base, and are burnished. Magness defines them as Form 2, which she dates to the second half of the seventh to the ninth century CE (Magness 1993: 198). However, finds from the monastery of Martyrius and from a number of additional sites confirm their appearance in the Byzantine period, before the Arab conquest. These bowls can be divided into four types, by rim shape. The first type comprises bowls with a downward tilting descending ledge rim (Pls. 2:7–16; 3). The second type comprises bowls with a flat ledge rim, at times slightly tilting upward or downward (Pl. 4). The third type has a rounded inward rim (Pl. 5:1–4). Bowls of the fourth type have a triangular or straight, grooved inward rim (Pls. 5:5–11; 6). This type also comprises a complete bowl decorated with two bands of an incised wavy pattern between two parallel lines at the bottom of the bowl (Pl. 6:2).

Bowls of this type are known from sixth to seventh century CE assemblages at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 174–176, Fig. 4:62–63), at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 142, Pl. 4:6), and in Ashqelon (Nahshoni 1999: 103*, Fig. 5:1–2).

Fine Byzantine Ware Bowls and Cups The vessels can be divided into two groups, based on diameter: bowls, with a diameter of 16–20 cm (Pl. 7:1–4); and cups, with one of 9–13 cm (Pls. 7:5–26; 8). Most of these vessels have a round or pointed rim, thin walls, and a low ring base, and characteristically appear at Byzantine sites. The vessels are burnished; some are ornamented with an incised line below the rim or on the wall, while the walls of others are scraped with a knife. The vessels are divided into five types, by size, rim form, and body. The first type comprises bowls (Pl. 7:1–4), embellished with an incised wavy line below the rim. The second type comprises cups (Pls. 7:5–26; 8:1–14). Some are decorated with a single wavy line below the rim, or with a double line (Pl. 8:1–14). Some have bands scraped with a knife (Pl. 7:18, 22). Cups of these two types, dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE, were common in Byzantine sites. They were discovered: at the City of David in Jerusalem (Magness 1992: 165, Fig. 12:3); at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 5:8); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 174, Fig. 4:55–56); at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 142, Pl. 4:1–4); in a dwelling cave in the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 126, Fig. 6:1); at Kh. abaliya (Kogan-Zehavi 2000: 71*, Fig. 13:1–3); west of the western wall of the Old City in Jerusalem (Reich and Shukron 2006: 134, Fig. 19:2); and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 272, Pl. 58:1). The third type comprises cups with an upright rim and carination in the middle of the body (Pl. 8:15–18). Cups of this type are usually dated to the Early Islamic period (second half of the seventh to eighth century CE; Magness 1993: 193–194). This type, however, had already begun to appear in the Byzantine period, as apparent from the monastery refectory assemblage. A cup of this type was also found in an assemblage dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE in Ashqelon (Nahshoni 1999: 103*, Fig. 4:1).

[265]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The fourth type comprises cups with an incurved rim (Pl. 8:19–22). Some have a sharply incurved rim, producing a vessel with carination in the upper body (Pl. 8:19–20). Similar cups dated to the Byzantine period were found at the fault scarp south of Qumran (Tal and Oron 2002: 224, Fig. 8:4), Tel Beth Shean (Johnson 2006: 545, Fig. 15.9:190), and ʿEn Gedi (Amir 2007: 464, Fig. 1:1). The other cups have a rounded wall and a flat base (Pl. 8:21–22). This form is typical of the cups defined as Form 1D by Magness, who dates them to the late seventh to early tenth century CE (Magness 1993: 194). Vessels of this type, however, already began to appear in the late sixth to early seventh century CE in Bethany (Saller 1957: Fig. 53:3451). The fifth type comprises a goblet with a ring base. The lower part of such a goblet was discovered at the monastery of Martyrius (Pl. 8:23), and a similar goblet was uncovered at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 174, Fig. 4:61). Basins Three groups of basins were discovered at the monastery. One group includes a basin that served as a strainer and basins that served as funnels. A second group comprises mortaria, and a third includes bowls with an arched rim.

Strainer and Funnels The basins of this group comprise a basin-shaped strainer with a pierced base (Pl. 9:1), and basinshaped funnels with a flaring rim and a loop handle. Each vessel had a funnel in its base. Two funnels of this type were found: one incised with a combed wavy decoration on the rim and body (Pl. 9:2); the other, smaller, with thumb-impressed decoration on the body (Pl. 9:3). Funnels were infrequently found in excavations, possibly due to the difficulty of identifying incomplete vessels. Very few vessels of this type have been published. One was found in a survey conducted at Elusa (Lombardi 1972: 364, Fig. 6:4). An additional complete basin with a funnel from the late Byzantine period was found in the eastern church at Kh. elWaziya (Aviam 2002: 191–192, Fig. 75).

Mortaria Two mortaria were unearthed: one with a triangular rim with a funnel (Pl. 9:4); the other with a ledge rim (Pl. 9:5). A vessel similar to the mortarium in Plate 9:4 was found in the courtyard of the Byzantine tomb at ʿEn Yaʿal, and is dated to the seventh century CE (De Vincenz 2013: 132, Fig. 5:10). Similar basins with an inverted rounded rim, apparently of local manufacture, were unearthed at ʿEn Gedi, in the Byzantine “Marble House” assemblage (De Vincenz 2007: 278, Pls. 62:2; 63:3). A mortarium with a slightly concave rim with an added spout was discovered in a mixed RomanByzantine context at ʿEn Gedi, and is dated to the Byzantine period (De Vincenz 2007: 256, Pl. 26).

Arched-Rim Basins Basins with an arched rim were widespread in the Byzantine period, mainly in and south of the Jerusalem area. Two types of arched-rim basins that are distinguished by rim decoration were discovered in the monastery assemblage. The first type comprises basins, some of which are decorated with wavy combing on the body and rim (Pls. 10; 11:1–8). According to Magness, arched-rim basins without decoration (Form 1) fell into disuse in the sixth century CE, while decorated arched-rim basins (Form 2A) are dated to the sixth to early eighth century CE (Magness 1993: 204–206). Both forms appear in the Byzantine period at the site; thus, the manufacture of basins without decoration continued in the late sixth to early seventh century CE. Basins of both forms were also discovered in assemblages dated to the early seventh century CE in the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 142, Pl. 3:1–8). These basins were found in Jerusalem: in stratum IIA at Ramat Raḥel, dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE (Aharoni 1964: 121–122, Fig. 7:12, 14, 16); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf they belong to Pottery Phase IV, dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE (Rapuano 1999: 176, 184–185, Fig. 5:68–72); in the City of David, dated to the early seventh century CE (Magness 1992: 157–158, Fig. 8:5–6, 16–18). The second type comprises arched-rim basins with a “pie crust” rim (Pl. 11:9–11). Basins of this sort were

[266]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

defined by Magness as Form 2B, and are dated to the sixth to early eighth century CE (Magness 1993: 206). Similar vessels were unearthed in Jerusalem: in the City of David, dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE (Magness 1992: 165, Fig. 12:8); in a dwelling cave on the Mount of Olives, dated to the sixth to early seventh century CE (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 126, Fig. 6:4); and at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf, dated to the early seventh century CE (Rapuano 1999: 176, Fig. 5:73–77). Some were unearthed in the Shepherds’ Field church, close to Bethlehem (Tzaferis 1975: 35, Pl. 17:2). Cooking Vessels The monastery yielded a broad range of cooking vessels, including three types of casseroles and nine types of closed cooking vessels. Additionally, many lids were uncovered in the excavations.

Casserole Lids Lids with a cut rim, ribbed body, and knob handle. Two complete lids were discovered at the monastery: one with a high knob handle (Pl. 13:1), and one with a low knob handle (Pl. 13:2). A lid fragment with a high knob handle came to light as well (Pl. 13:3). In addition to these, lid fragments were found in the rooms and courtyards of the monastery; it is unclear whether they had handles (Pl. 13:4–13). Cooking vessel lids are well known from the Byzantine period. They were found: at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 108–109, Fig. 4:8–10); in the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 140, Pl. 2:8, 10); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 6:93); south of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 90, Pl. I.16:4); and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 248, 272, 275, Pls. 19; 58:5; 60:14).

Cooking Pots

Casseroles The first type comprises casseroles with an internally beveled cut rim beneath which is a pair of horizontal loop handles (Pl. 12:1–5). Casseroles of this type were found at many Byzantine sites: at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 107, Fig. 3:20–21); at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 138, Pl. 2:4–7); and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 247–248, Pl. 17:7, 11–12, 15). The second type comprises casseroles with a beveled rim beneath which is a pair of horizontal loop handles (Pl. 12:6–7). Similar vessels were uncovered at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 107, Fig. 3:23), at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 178–179, Fig. 6:90), and in the Byzantine assemblage in the “Marble House” at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 281, Pl. 64:13). The third type comprises casseroles with a hollow wishbone handle (Pl. 12:8–9). These vessels were identified as frying pans. Cooking vessels of this type were common in the Byzantine period, and are known from many sites: at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 107, Fig. 3:22); in Area W of the Jerusalem Jewish Quarter excavations (Magness 2003: 429, Pl. 18.2:14); and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 248, Pl. 18:1–2).

The cooking pots discovered at the site and dated to the Byzantine period generally belong to Magness’s Form 4B-C (Magness 1993: 219–221). The relatively large number of cooking pots in diverse shapes that were discovered facilitates a more detailed typological division of the group into nine types, distinguished by rim or neck form. The first type comprises globular cooking pots with a rounded outer rim (Pl. 14:1–5). Similar vessels were found: at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 107–108, Fig. 3:24); at Rehovot in the Negev (RosenthalHeginbottom 1988: 90–93, Pl. IV:195); in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 162, Fig. 6:22); at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 138, Pl. 2:2); and in a dwelling cave in the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 126–128, Fig. 6:10). The second type comprises a globular cooking pot with a triangular rim and a swollen lower neck (Pl. 14:6). Cooking pots of this type were found at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 248, Pl. 20:1–2). Globular cooking pots with a triangular rim and a ridge at the base of the neck belong to the third type (Pl. 14:7–11). Pots of this type were found at Magen (Feig 1985: 35–37, Fig. 2:12), in Ashqelon (Nahshoni 1999: 103*, Fig. 5:11), and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 249, Pl. 20:8–11).

[267]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The vessels found in the monastery can be divided into two groups: the first one includes jugs belonging to the FBW type; and the second one includes the other jugs and juglets, which were divided into types based on rim and body shape, and vessel size. In addition to the complete vessels and body sherds, the excavations also uncovered many jug and juglet bases that are not included in the report.

jugs with a triangular folded rim, a high neck with a ridge in its base, and a handle extending from the rim (Pl. 16:1–9). Magness includes jugs of this type in Form 1B, which she dates to the mid-sixth to the beginning of the eighth century CE (Magness 1993: 237). A jug of this type was discovered at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 6:11). Jugs with a triangular or flaring rim, a high neck with a ridge in its base, and a handle extending from rim to shoulder belong to the second type (Pl. 16:10– 13). Similar jugs were found at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 182, Fig. 9:126), and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 276–277, Pl. 60:16). The third type comprises two jugs with a thickened rim, a handle extending from rim to shoulder, and a swollen neck (Pl. 17:1–2). One jug is complete, with a flat base, wavy line decoration, and a spout (Pl. 17:1). The rim and neck of a second jug fragment are preserved (Pl. 17:2). Jugs of this type were discovered at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 182, Fig. 8:119), and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 252, Pl. 25:1). The fourth type comprises jugs with a short ledge rim, a neck with a ridge in its middle, and a handle extending from the ridge (Pl. 17:3–5). A jug of this type was found at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 110, Fig. 4:18). The fifth type comprises jugs with an everted rim, a handle extending from rim to shoulder, and a biconical body (Pl. 17:6–8). Magness defines jugs of this type as Form 1C, and dates them to the midsixth to early eighth century CE (Magness 1993: 237). Such jugs were unearthed: at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 6:12); at the Kh. edDeir monastery (Calderon 1999: 140, Pl. 2:11–14); and in the excavations conducted in the northwestern corner of the Old City wall in Jerusalem (WekslerBdolah 2006: 107*, Fig. 7:16–19). Jugs with an upright trefoil rim, a globular body, and a handle extending from rim to shoulder comprise the sixth type (Pl. 17:9–10). A similar jug, but without a trefoil rim, was found at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 256, Pl. 25:33).

Fine Byzantine Ware Jugs

Various Jugs

The jugs of this group can be divided into six types, based on rim and body shape. The first type comprises

The first type comprises a jug with a trefoil rim and a ribbed neck (Pl. 17:11). The vessel is of similar

The fourth type comprises cooking pots with a thickened rim and a short neck at a sharp angle to the body (Pl. 14:12–15). Vessels of this type were discovered at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 108, Fig. 4:2), Kh. abaliya (Kogan-Zehavi 2000: 75*, Fig. 13:14), and ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 249, Pl. 20:5–7). In the fifth type are cooking pots with a thick rim and a ribbed neck (Pl. 15:1–5). Cooking pots of this type were discovered in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 162, Fig. 6:20–21), at the Kh. edDeir monastery (Calderon 1999: 138, Pl. 2:3), and at Caesarea (Arnon 2008a: 86, 89, Fig. 3:6–7). The sixth type comprises cooking pots with a rounded rim and a slightly swollen neck (Pl. 15:6–7). Similar cooking pots came to light in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 162, Fig. 6:19), and at Kh. elNi ʿana (De Vincenz and Sion 2007: 24, Fig. 2:12). The seventh type comprises a cooking pot with a slightly incurved rim (Pl. 15:8). A similar cooking pot was discovered at Kh. el-Ni ʿana (De Vincenz and Sion 2007: 24, Fig. 2:11). A cooking pot with a triangular rim and a groove in the center of its high neck (Pl. 15:9) belongs to the eighth type. Cooking pots of this type were found at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 178–179, Fig. 6:86), and at Deir Ghazali (Avner 2000: 37*, Fig. 20:6). The ninth type comprises cooking jugs with a globular body, a high and narrow neck, and a spout on the shoulder (Pl. 15:10–11). A jug of this type was unearthed at Ḥ. Gelilot (Calderon 2011: 74*, Fig. 6:23). Jugs and Juglets

[268]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

shape to the sixth type of the FBW jugs, but is of light clay. Jugs of this type at ʿEn Gedi were defined as “Gray jugs,” and were ascribed to local manufacture. A jug of this type was discovered in the “Palm House” at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 253–254, 272–273, Pl. 58:8). The second type comprises jugs with an everted rim, a narrow, long neck, an oval ribbed body with a pair of handles extending from the center of the neck to the shoulder, and an omphalos base (Pl. 18:1–2). A jug of this type was uncovered in the “Halfi House” at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 276, Pl. 61:1). The third type comprises jugs with a triangular folded rim and a high neck with a ridge in its base (Pl. 18:3–4). Jugs of this type are identical to vessels of the first type of FBW jugs (see Pl. 16:1–9), but differ in the type of clay used. The fourth type comprises jugs with a ridge below the rim (Pl. 18:5–6). The fifth type comprises an Antilya jug (Pl. 18:7). Similar jugs, dated to the fifth to seventh centuries CE, were found at Ḥ. ʿAqav (Calderon 2000: 147, Pl. XXV:73–74) and Ḥ. Biẓʿa (Gendelman 2012: 44*, Fig. 4:17–19). The sixth type comprises jugs with a triangular thickened outer rim (Pl. 18:8–9).

Juglets The first type comprises juglets with an upright rim, a ribbed elongated body, and a low omphalos base (Pl. 19:1–3). A vessel of this type was discovered at Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1962: 27, Fig. 17:19). The second type comprises a juglet with an upright rim and a globular body (Pl. 19:4). Juglets of this type were discovered at Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1962: 27, Fig. 17:17). A similar juglet was found at Kh. elNi ʿana (De Vincenz and Sion 2007: 30, Fig. 5:15). A juglet with an everted rim with a ridge below it, an elongated body, and a knob base comprises the third type (Pl. 19:5). Juglets of this type were unearthed at Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1964: 15, Fig. 8:10). The fourth type comprises juglets with a triangular rim, short neck (at times with a strainer), and globular body (Pl. 19:6–8). Similar juglets were uncovered at Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1956: 109, Fig. 5:1–2), the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 142, Pl. 2:18),

and Kh. el-Ni ʿana (De Vincenz and Sion 2007: 30, Fig. 5:14, 16). The fifth type comprises unguentaria (Pl. 19:9–11). Similar juglets were unearthed at Caesarea (AdanBayewitz 1986: 111, Fig. 4:23), and in the excavations conducted in the northwestern corner of the Old City wall in Jerusalem (Weksler-Bdolah 2006: 107*, Fig. 7:21). Amphorae The six imported amphorae (Pl. 20: 1–6) discovered at the monastery belong to four types that were common in the Middle East in the late Byzantine period (sixth to seventh centuries CE). Vessels of this type were discovered at many sites in domestic assemblages, and also in monasteries and churches. Additionally, an unidentified amphora base was unearthed (Pl. 20:7). The first type: Late Roman amphora I, comprises amphorae with a rounded rim, at times with a ridge below it, a long neck, and a pair of handles attached to the neck below the rim. Three amphorae of this type were discovered at the monastery: two have an everted rim (Pl. 20:1–2), and the third has a ridge below the rim (Pl. 20:3). They belong to a type that was widespread in the Middle East, Egypt, and North Africa. Vessels of this type were also discovered in Spain, Italy, England, on the shore of the Black Sea, and in Asia Minor. Its source has not been determined, but it apparently originated in the area of Syria or Cyprus. The type is dated to the early fifth to first half of the seventh century CE (Peacock and Williams 1986: 185–187, Class 44). Amphorae of this type were found in Spain, where they were defined by S.J. Keay as Type LIIIA, dated to the fifth to seventh centuries CE (Keay 1984: 268–278, Figs. 115:2–5; 116). In Kellia in Egypt, amphorae of this type were defined as Type 164, dated to the sixth to seventh centuries CE (Egloff 1977: 112, Pl. 57:4). Numerous amphorae of this type discovered on a seventh century CE sunken ship on the southeastern shore of Turkey were defined as Type 1 (Bass 1982: 155–157, Fig. 8-1). Vessels identical to the first two amphorae were unearthed: in excavations conducted southwest of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: 81, Pl. XIV:29); at Caesarea (Bar-Nathan and

[269]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Adato 1986: 132, Fig. 1:3); at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 86–87, 94, Pl. II:125); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 8:113); in dwelling caves on the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 9:8); and in Area W of the Jerusalem Jewish Quarter excavations (Magness 2003: 427, Pl. 18.2:19). Vessels identical to the third amphora were discovered at Tel Keisan (Landgraf 1980: 82–83, Fig. 26:2). A number of amphorae of this type came to light at Caesarea in the Byzantine structure (AdanBayewitz 1986: 102, 121, Fig. 2:4–5), the northeastern part of the Byzantine city wall (Magness 1995: 134– 135, Fig. 2:1), and in Area LL (Oren-Paskal 2008: 55–56, Fig. 6:24). Vessels of this type were discovered at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 86–87, Pl. III:127, 129–130), in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 162, Fig. 4:15–16, 22), at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 138, Pl. 2:1), and at Ḥ. ʿAqav (Calderon 2000: 106, 132–133, Pls. VII:22; XIX:20). The second type comprises an amphora with a triangular rim and a swollen neck under the rim (Pl. 20:4). An amphora of this type was unearthed in Kellia in Egypt, and is defined as Type 165, dated to the sixth century CE (Egloff 1977: 112, Pl. 57:5). In Caesarea, vessels of this type were dated to the first half of the seventh century CE (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 104–105, Fig. 3:2); and in Jerusalem, a similar vessel is dated to the seventh century CE (Magness 1992: 160–161, Fig. 10:3). An amphora with a rounded inner rim and two handles extending from the neck comprises the third type (Pl. 20:5). The amphora belongs to Class 45 of Peacock and Williams, dated to the late fifth to late sixth century CE (Peacock and Williams 1986: 188– 189, Fig. 107). Amphorae of this type were unearthed at Ḥ. ʿAqav (Calderon 2000: 135, Pl. XX:26) and Tel Shiqmona (Torge and ʿAd 2012: 125, Fig. 21:21). The fourth type comprises an amphora with a triangular folded outer rim (Pl. 20:6). This type originated in North Africa, and vessels of this type first appeared in the fourth to the first half of the fifth century CE (Keay 1984: 184–212, Fig. 78:3). Amphorae of this type were common in northern Sinai during the sixth to early seventh century CE (Oked 1999: 254).

Jars Many different types of jars were found that were common in late Byzantine sites in the Jerusalem area. The jars are divided into five main types. Additionally, pithoi were found that can be divided into three types. The first type comprises bag-shaped jars with a pointed or straight rim, a ridge at the base of the neck, and handles on the shoulder (Pls. 21–22; 23:1–8). Three complete jars of this type were found at the site: two with a pointed rim with a groove for placing a lid (Pls. 21–22); the third has a spout attached to the shoulder (Pl. 23:1). Jars of this type were found: at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 84–85, Pl. II:26); in Beʿer sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 161, Fig. 4:9); at the Kh. edDeir monastery (Calderon 1999: 137, Pl. 1:10); and at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 7:96, 107). The second type comprises bag-shaped jars with a thickened inner rim and a ridge in the base of the neck (Pls. 23:9–16; 24:1–3); and was common in the Byzantine period in the south of the Land of Israel and in Jerusalem. Jars of this type were discovered: in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 161, Fig. 4:8); at Rehovot in the Negev (RosenthalHeginbottom 1988: 84–85, Pl. II:91); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 7:99–102); and at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 135, Pl. 1:6–9). The third type comprises bag-shaped jars with a rounded everted rim, a bulging short neck, and handles on the shoulder (Pl. 24:4–14). These vessels can be attributed to Type 1B at Caesarea (Riley 1975: 26–27). Jars of this type were widespread mainly in the southern part of the Land of Israel and along the coast in the Byzantine period. Some were uncovered: at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 84, Pl. II:90); in Beʾer Sheva (Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: 161, Fig. 4:4); at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 135, Pl. 1:2–3); and south of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 90, Pl. I.16:18–20). A large quantity of these jars was found at Caesarea (Oren-Paskal 2008: 50–53, Fig. 3:5–6; Arnon 2008a: 89, Fig. 3:3). A fourth type comprises bag-shaped jars with an

[270]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

upright rim and a ridge in the base of the neck, of metallic dark clay (Pls. 25; 26:1–5). Jars of this type were common in the Byzantine period, mainly in the north of the Land of Israel—in Galilee and the Jordan Valley. In Caesarea, they were found in assemblages dated to the late sixth to the first half of the seventh century CE (Oren-Paskal 2008: 53, Fig. 4; Arnon 2008a: 89, Fig. 3:4). Jars of this type were unearthed in Jerusalem, south of the Temple Mount (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 87, 90, Pls. I.14:6; I.16:22). A fifth type comprises “Gaza” jars, with a rounded rim, short neck, and a pair of handles from neck to shoulder (Pl. 26:6–13). “Gaza” jars are dated in Caesarea to the fourth to seventh centuries CE (Riley 1975: 27–30, Type 2; Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 98). Similar vessels dated to the late Byzantine period were found in various areas in Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986: 97, Fig. 1:10–11, 14; Arnon 2008a: 89, Fig. 3:2; Oren-Paskal 2008: 49–50, Fig. 2). In Jerusalem they appear at many sites: in the City of David (Magness 1992: 160, Fig. 9:7–8) and south of the Temple Mount (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 91, Pl. I.16:26); as well as at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 7:108). A jar of this type came to light south of Jerusalem, at Umm Leisun (Seligman and Abu Raya 2002: 136, Fig. 10:14). Identical jars were found at Rehovot in the Negev (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1988: 85–86; Pl. II:97), at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 137, Pl. 1:14), and at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 287, Pl. 70:7). Pithoi Large pithoi with a round body, ring base, and wide mouth (Pls. 27–29). The pithoi are distinguished by rim shape. One group includes pithoi with a thick straight or everted rim, while another has a stepped rim. In addition to these vessels, the excavations also yielded two body fragments decorated with carvings that might belong to pithoi (Pl. 29:9–10). The first type comprises pithoi with a thick rim and a decoration of combed bands below the rim (Pls. 27–28; 29:1–3). Similar pithoi with a rounded everted rim were found at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 6:8) and south of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 90, Pl. I.16:25).

The second type comprises pithoi with a stepped everted rim (Pl. 29:4–6); three pithoi of this type came to light at the site. A vessel of this type, with a thumbimpressed decoration on the rim, was discovered at the Kh. ed-Deir monastery (Calderon 1999: 137, Pl. 1:16). Pithoi of this type also were unearthed at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 179, Fig. 7:109), and in a dwelling cave on the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 9:4). A similar vessel was uncovered in the excavations conducted at the northwestern corner of the Old City wall in Jerusalem (Weksler-Bdolah 2006: 107*, Fig. 6:15); and also at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 251, Pl. 23:28). The third type comprises pithoi with an inturned stepped rim (Pl. 29:7–8); two were discovered at the site. One has a rounded inturned rim (Pl. 29:7). Pithoi of this type were found at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 6:7), and in a dwelling cave on the Mount of Olives (Seligman and Abu Raya 2000: 128, Fig. 9:3). The other pithos has an inturned rim with a thickened ridge (Pl. 29:8); a pithos of this type was unearthed at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 151, Fig. 6:9). Similar pithoi came to light at Kh. abaliya (Kogan-Zehavi 2000: 75*, Fig. 13:22) and south of the Temple Mount (Mazar and Peleg 2003: 86, 90, Pl. I.16:24). Pipes Clay pipes were discovered at the monastery. One pipe fragment has a ridge below the rim (Pl. 30:1). Two additional pipes have a larger diameter (Pl. 30: 2–3). These pipes brought water that was collected in the monastery area and from the structures’ roofs to the quarried cisterns.

Umayyad Period A farmhouse was built in the Early Islamic period in the west wing of the abandoned Byzantine monastery. Finds from this structure and from other areas of the site are dated to this relatively short settlement period. Bowls Two types of bowls were found and dated to this period. The first type comprises a bowl with an

[271]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

angular and everted rim (Pl. 31:1–2). A similar bowl was unearthed at Kh. Abu Suwwana, west of Maʿale Adummim (Cohen Finkelstein 1997: 19*, Fig. 2:12). The second type comprises a bowl with a triangular rim (Pl. 31:3). A similar bowl was found at Kh. Abu Suwwana (Cohen Finkelstein 1997: 19*, Fig. 2:4).

of brown clay fired at a high temperature (Pl. 31:10). Similar vessels that are typical of the Umayyad period were produced at Beth Shean; they were dated to the eighth century CE and identified by the excavators as two-handled jugs (Bar-Nathan 2011: 265, 270, Fig. 11.27:4).

Basins

Abbasid Period

Basins with a grooved rim (Pl. 31:4–5). Basins of this type, dated to the Umayyad period, were discovered at ʿEn Gedi (De Vincenz 2007: 259, Pl. 32:3–4). AmphoraE and Jars An amphora and two types of jars that are dated to this period came to light. A red-brown ovoid amphora (Pl. 31:6) was found that apparently originated in Egypt (Watson 1995: 319). In Kellia in Egypt, it was defined as Type 187, dated to 650–730 CE (Egloff 1977: 118, Pl. 60:5). In Pella, such vessels were dated to the second half of the seventh to the first half of the eighth century CE (Walmsley 1995: 661, Fig. 5:1–2; Watson 1995: 319, Fig. 9:3). Amphorae of this type were unearthed in Kursi in an assemblage dated to the late seventh century CE (Tzaferis 1983: 33, Fig. 7:16; Pl. XV:3); and in an eighth-century CE assemblage at Nevé Ur (Shalem 2002: 161, Fig. 10:3). The first type of jars comprises ones with red geometrical decoration. They are fashioned of light red clay with white slip embellished in red (Pl. 31:7– 9). Jars of this type are characteristic of the Umayyad period in Transjordan, and were found in a citadel dated to this period in Amman (Harding 1951: 12, Fig. 3:39, 47, 61–62, 65; Northedge 1992: 143, Fig. 131:4–5). In Pella, they appear in the early eighth to ninth century CE (Walmsley 1995: 661, Fig. 6:2, 5–7). Jars of this type were also found in the Land of Israel. Those found at Kursi were dated to the second half of the seventh century CE (Tzaferis 1983: 34, Fig. 8:6– 8, Pl. XV:6, 8); while those found at Nevé Ur (Shalem 2002: 156, Fig. 8:7–9, 17–18) and at Kh. ʿAdasa in northern Jerusalem (Khalaily and Avissar 2008: 100, Fig. 7:16) are dated to the eighth century CE. The second type comprises bag-shaped jars with a flaring rim with a groove around the upper surface and a tall neck with combed decoration; they were

Basins A basin with a triangular, thickened, inturned rim (Pl. 32:1). Basins of this type were unearthed at Kh. Abu Suwwana (Cohen Finkelstein 1997: 31*, Fig. 2:13) and Kh. Deiran in Reḥovot (Avissar 2007: 92*, 96*, Figs. 1:3; 3:8). Jugs Excavations uncovered a jug funnel of white clay with plastic decoration (Pl. 32:2). Jugs of this type, classified as Ware 20 in the excavations at el-Mefjer, are dated to the ninth to tenth centuries CE (Baramki 1944: 71–72, 74). They appeared in Pella in the early ninth century CE (Walmsley 1995: 668, Fig. 9:5). Jugs of this type were found at Kh. Abu Suwwana, and are dated to the late eighth to early ninth century CE (Cohen Finkelstein 1997: 31*–32*, Fig. 7:4–9). At Nevé Ur, various jugs of this type were dated to the late eighth century CE (Shalem 2002: 161, Fig. 14). Jars Two types of jars are dated to this period. One type comprises a jar with a thickened inner rim (Pl. 32:3); jars of this type found at Yoqneʿam are dated to the Abbasid period (Avissar 1996: 149, Fig. XIII.115:1–3). The second type comprises a jar with a cut rim and a somewhat swollen neck, of light clay (Pl. 32:4). A jar of this type discovered in the Beth Shean valley at Nevé Ur is dated to the eighth century CE (Shalem 2002: 161, Fig. 12:11). Additional jars of this type were found in Pella, with jars possessing a long neck and a stepped sloping body belonging to late variants from the ninth century CE (Walmsley 1995: 661, Fig. 5:4, 6).

[272]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Mamluk and Ottoman Periods The few vessels from the various periods that are presented below indicate the temporary use of the site, mainly of the cisterns, from the thirteenth century to the present. Most of the vessels are classified as belonging to types common in the Mamluk period. Glazed Bowls A bowl with slip-painted decoration (Pl. 32:5). Bowls of this type appeared in the second half of the twelfth century, and were widespread mainly in the Mamluk period (Avissar and Stern 2005: 19, Fig. 7:1–4). Carinated Bowls Bowls of two types were discovered. The first type comprises carinated bowls with an upright rim and a protruding ridge below it (Pl. 32:6–8). Similar bowls with green or yellow-brown glazing were imported from Italy in the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 73–74, Fig. 31:8). Additional similar bowls were found in a thirteenth-century monastery in Haifa (Pringle 1984: 99, Fig. 6:31–32). The second type comprises carinated bowls with an outer everted rim (Pl. 32:9–10). Local bowls of this type are dated to the twelfth to thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 82, Fig. 35:2). Jugs Jugs with a rounded, thickened, inturned rim and a swollen neck (Pl. 32:11–13). Jugs of this type are dated to the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 108–110, Fig. 45:4–5). Jars A jars with a short ledge rim and a high ridged neck (Pl. 32:14). Jars of this type are characteristic of the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 102, Fig. 42:5–10). Smoking Pipe A smoking pipe with a small bowl and a wide base (Pl. 32:15). Smoking pipes of this type were found

at Paneas and are dated to the nineteenth century (Dekkel 2008: 123, 126, 148–150, Figs. 4.11:66; 4.12:67–70).

Summary Most of the pottery finds at the site are dated to the Byzantine period. The largest assemblage of pottery vessels from this period at the site was uncovered in the refectory complex in the northwest wing, on the floors; stratigraphically, they belong to phase IIB. As no pottery finds postdating the Byzantine period were discovered in the refectory (L301, L302), this is a complete assemblage of vessels from a refectory of a Byzantine monastery. The kitchen (L300) yielded a number of ARS and ERS bowls classified as belonging to types characteristic of the late sixth to early seventh century CE. These data enable us to date the assemblage to the end of the Byzantine phase of the site. The monks and monastery visitors took their common meals in the refectory, which was an important focal point in coenobium monasteries. In only a few monasteries, however, were researchers successful in identifying a refectory and isolating its finds. The structure containing both the refectory and the kitchen in the Kh. ed-Deir monastery yielded FBW bowl/cups and jugs, arched-rim basins, cooking vessels, and jars (Calderon 1999). The vessel assemblage in the refectory complex in the monastery of Martyrius comprised serving, cooking, and storage vessels. Despite the large number of finds, the vessels do not exhibit a broad range. They are classified into a number of main types common in the late Byzantine period in the Jerusalem area. About three hundred FBW cups and bowls were used to serve food and drink. It is noteworthy that most of the bowls at the monastery are FBW bowls, with the exception of two rouletted bowls unearthed in the east wing, near the area of the church, and a few imported bowls. Imported vessels are represented in the assemblage by red-slipped bowls of various sorts. The bowls are classified into the types common in the late Byzantine period in all sites in the Middle East. To these we should add the amphorae discovered in lane L316

[273]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

south of the kitchen. Amphorae of this type were used to transport goods, and were revealed at numerous Middle Eastern sites, including in sunken ships. All the basins discovered in the refectory complex are arched-rim basins of different types commonly found at late Byzantine sites in Jerusalem and its surroundings. The mortarium found in lane L316 is exceptional; such basins were widespread in the Roman period, and were also discovered at Byzantine sites. Storage vessels of local manufacture are represented by five jar types. Bag-shaped jars with a thickened rim or a rounded everted rim and a short bulging neck, known as “Southern” jars, were common in the Jerusalem area and the south. Bag-shaped jars of the type widespread in the north were also found. The monastery also yielded “Gaza” jars, used to transport wine and oil, and widespread throughout the Land of Israel. Pithoi used to store dry materials were found that are present in most sites from this period. The jugs also may be included among the storage and serving vessels. Jugs of the FBW type came to light in the kitchen and the area adjoining it to the south. Half of all the cooking vessels at the site were discovered in the refectory complex. Byzantine cooking vessels were found also in the northern rooms (L317, L319, L321) of the Early Islamic farmhouse south of the kitchen, which was built on the phase IIB paved stone floors. The cooking vessels are represented by three types of casseroles and nine types of closed cooking vessels. Unsurprisingly, half the cooking vessels were revealed in the open area south of the kitchen, which probably served for cooking. The second largest Byzantine assemblage was uncovered in the east wing. A jar discovered in the soundings under the mosaic floor of the church (L200; Pl. 29:4) confirms the church’s construction in phase IIB. The same is the case regarding vessels found in the rooms next to the church. Similarly, imported bowls discovered in the wing were classified into types common in the sixth to early seventh century CE. The east wing, which comprises the church complex, service rooms, and monastic cells, yielded a diverse range of vessels. This assemblage can be divided into two groups, based on vessel location. One group comprises vessels unearthed in the church

complex: the church hall and the rooms connected with the church—the narthex (L209), martyrium (L221), chapel (L201), rooms L227 and L237, which apparently were service rooms, and room L223, which served as a storeroom. A red-slipped bowl of the LRC type, FBW bowls, arched-rim basins, an amphora, and a jar were found within the church itself. The narthex contained a bowl and a jug of the FBW type. A rouletted bowl, an FBW bowl, arched-rim basins, and closed cooking vessels were discovered in the martyrium. Room L227 yielded two red-slipped bowls (one of the ASR type, and the other, of the LRC type), a FBW jug and cups, and jars. FBW cups and bowls, casseroles and closed cooking vessels, jugs (some, of the FBW type), an amphora, and a “Gaza” jar were uncovered in room L225. The second group comprises vessels discovered in the monastic cells south of the church and in passageway L424, which separates the cells from the church. Four monastic cells (L419–L422) contained vessels of the FBW type: bowls, cups, and jugs. The cells also yielded various closed cooking vessels, jugs, and juglets. A few vessels were found in L424, as well: a rouletted bowl and a FBW cup. There is a notable difference in the composition of the vessels in the two groups discovered in the wing. Most vessels in the first group are storage or serving vessels, which apparently were used in the Christian rite. Similar assemblages were also found in the churches of other Byzantine monasteries. Thus, the church of the Kh. ed-Deir monastery contained FBW cups and bowls, imported bowls, arched-rim basins, cooking vessels, and jars (Calderon 1999: 135–146). The vessels from the second group, in contrast, belong to the monks’ eating utensils: one or two cups and bowls of local manufacture, a jug, and a closed cooking vessel for food or drink storage. Especially noteworthy is monastic cell L421, which contained two bowls and four cups of the FBW type, two jugs (one of the FBW type), and two cooking vessels. The large quantity and range of the vessels for everyday use found in this cell, in contrast with other cells, indicate the special standing of its occupant. An additional assemblage was discovered in the hospice, which was built beyond the monastery walls and included stables, dormitories, and a chapel. Most of the pottery finds in the hospice were discovered

[274]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

in stable L507, room L508 that adjoins the chapel to the southwest, courtyard L509, and drainage channel L511, next to the courtyard to the west. An imported LRC bowl and FBW bowls, cups and jugs came to light, as well as arched-rim basins, cooking vessels, juglets, a wide range of jars including five local types, and an imported amphora. The hospice apparently provided for all the guests’ needs (food, lodging, religious services), and there was no need for them to enter the monastery itself. The abandonment of the monastery in the late Byzantine period was followed by a short settlement phase in the Early Islamic period. Characteristically Umayyad and Abbasid vessels were found in the rooms of the farmhouse structure. Finds in the site area indicate the utilization of additional spaces within the abandoned monastery in that period. There was continued use of the monastery’s open spaces—the vestibule and courtyard near the northern gate, the central courtyard, the courtyards around the farmhouse structure, and those in the southeast wing. These spaces were used for passage, as access routes to the cisterns, and as agricultural plots. Additionally,

finds from monastic cell L419, south of the church, and from the adjoining passageway (L423) point to the use of these rooms. The finds from this phase represent the vessel types characteristic of the Umayyad and Abbasid periods: bowls and a basin with a grooved rim that are characteristic of local pottery vessels in the Umayyad period in the Land of Israel (second half of the seventh to first half of the eighth century CE). Note should also be taken of the imported vessels discovered at the site that are characteristic of this period. Cave L314 yielded a red ovoid amphora, which apparently originated in Egypt. Amphorae of this type do not appear in Land of Israel and Transjordanian sites before the Umayyad period. A number of jar fragments with red geometric decoration are characteristic of jars manufactured in the early eighth century CE. Special note should be taken of the jug classified as el-Mefjer ware (Pl. 32:2), which began to appear in the second half of the eighth century CE. These finds enable us to date phase III to a relatively short period of time, from the early eighth century CE until the abandonment of the settlement in the late eighth to early ninth century CE.

Pottery vessels from the monastery excavations.

[275]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 1. No.

Type

Locus

1

ARS bowl

300

2

212

3

300

4

Basket

Description Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/3, stamp decoration of saint figure flanked by two women’s heads in profile

2091

Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/3 Red ware 10R 5/6, polished

227

2263

Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/3

300

3120

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

200

2446

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, inside red slip and polish

7

227

2198

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

8

108

10019

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 7/4, red slip

9

507

5005

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 7/4, red slip

10

220

2234

Red ware 2.5 YR 4/6

5 6

LRC bowl

Plate 2. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

ERS bowl

426

4150

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3, gray core

2

300

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

3

306

3088

Red ware 2.5YR 5/8, polishing

4

425

4147

Red ware 10R 6/8, red slip, gray core

424

4039

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, very pale brown slip 10R 8/3, rouletted decoration

221

2166

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, reddish slip

5 6 7

Rouletted bowl FBW bowl

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

8

316

9

300

3331

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/4, red-gray core

10

301

3022

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

11

422

4224

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8, gray core

12

419

10017

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

13

421

4136

Red ware 2.5YR 5/8, dark gray core

14

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

15

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

16

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/4

[276]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 3. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

FBW bowl

507

5005

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3

2

300

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3

3

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

4

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

5

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

6

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

7

300

Reddish yellow ware 5 YR 6/6, gray core

8

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

9

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

10

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

11

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

12

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

13

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

14

225

2224

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

15

412

4031

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

16

101

1035

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

17

200

2023

Reddish yellow ware 5 YR 6/6, gray core

18

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Plate 4. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

FBW bowl

316

3235

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, red-gray core

2

300

3

221

2101

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/4 Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8

4

507

5003

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

5

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

6

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

7

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

8

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

9

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

10

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

11

412

4042

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

12

225

2146

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

13

316

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

[277]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 5. No.

Type

Locus

1

FBW bowl

300

Basket

Description Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

2

300

3

300

3088

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

4

200

5

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

6

300

Light reddish brown ware 7.5YR 6/4

7

421

8

300

9

225

10

300

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

11

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, gray core 2446

4133

Very pale brown ware 10YR 7/3

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3, gray core Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

2224

Light reddish brown ware 7.5YR 6/4, gray core

Plate 6. No.

Type

Locus

1

FBW bowl

300

2

300

3

209

Basket

Description Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6 Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, incised decoration

2047

Reddish gray ware 5YR 5/2

[278]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 7. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

FBW bowl

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

2

211

2061

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, white-gray slip outside, incised decoration

3

417

10016

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, incised decoration

4

509

5018

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, gray core, incised decoration

5

300

3153

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

6

FBW cup

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

7

300

3161

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/4

8

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

9

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

10

300

308

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

11

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

12

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

13

300

308

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

14

301

3009

Yellowish red ware 5YR 5/6

15

316

3291

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

16

316

3280

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

17

314

1018

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

18

225

2224

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core, scraped decoration

19

300

308

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

20

508

5004

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

21

316

3235

Yellowish red ware 5YR 5/6

22

211

2056

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, scraped decoration

23

215

2232

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

24

412

4035

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6, gray core

25

424

4124

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4

26

421

4136

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, gray core

[279]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 8. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

FBW cup

316

3331

Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/3, incised decoration

2

316

3280

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

3

316

4

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

5

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

6

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

7

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

8

225

2224

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core, incised decoration

9

227

2265

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6, incised decoration

10

421

4136

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, gray core, incised decoration

11

421

4136

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, gray core, incised decoration

12

421

4121

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, gray core, incised decoration

13

426

4182

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, gray core, incised decoration

14

426

4182

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/7, gray core, incised decoration

15

300

3161

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, incised decoration

16

300

3161

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, incised decoration

17

300

3161

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, incised decoration

18

419

4093

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3, incised decoration

19

300

3153

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

20

300

3161

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

21

314

10014

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

22

227

2180

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3

317

3219

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/4, red core

23

Goblet

Light red ware 2YR 6/8, incised decoration

Plate 9. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Strainer

316

3236

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/2, gray core, white slip 7.5YR 8/1

2

Funnel

300

3 4 5

Mortarium

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, combed decoration

300

3175

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, pie crust decoration

316

3229

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

212

2026

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

[280]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 10. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Arched-rim basin

507

5005

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/4, combed decoration

2

507

5003

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8, gray core

3

507

5003

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, combed decoration

4

211

2069

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, combed decoration

5

101

1045

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

6

300

7

221

2160

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/3, combed decoration

8

422

4099

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, gray core, combed decoration

9

220

2222

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, red core, combed decoration

10

221

2166

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/4

11

300

3168

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core, combed decoration

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/3

Plate 11. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Arched-rim basin

200

2463

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/2, yellow slip, combed decoration

301

3056

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

3

246

2354

Pink ware 7.5 YR 8/3, combed decoration

4

302

3028

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 7/4, gray core

5

426

4182

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, gray core

6

418

10071

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8, gray core, combed decoration

7

316

3331

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, gray core, combed decoration

8

316

3305

Gray ware 5YR 5/1, red core, combed decoration

9

200

2473

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, white slip, pie crust rim

10

327

3281

Light gray ware 7.5YR 7/1, pink slip 7.5YR 7/4, pie crust rim

11

507

5005

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/3, gray core, pie crust rim

2

Plate 12. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Casserole

316

8529

Dark red ware 2.5YR 3/6

2

415

4057

Very dusky red ware 2.5YR 2.5/2

3

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

4

317

3213

Reddish gray ware 2.5YR 5/1

5

315

3158

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

6

511

5021

Yellowish red ware 5YR 4/6

7

316

3210

Reddish gray ware 2.5YR 5/1

8

Frying pan

225

2146

Red ware 10R 4/6

9

handle

300

3184

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

[281]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 13. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Casserole lid

316

3327

Weak red ware 10R 5/3

2

248

2068

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

3

319

3341

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

4

315

3158

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

5

419

4093

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

6

227

2263

Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/3

7

301

3318

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

8

300

3184

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

9

228

2440

Brown ware 7.5YR 5/2

10

315

3158

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/3

11

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

12

319

3341

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

13

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

Basket

Description

Plate 14. No.

Type

Locus

1

Cooking pot

316

Reddish brown ware 5YR 5/4

2

509

5018

Brown ware 7.5YR 5/2

3

408

4

316

3327

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

5

316

3311

Red ware 2.5YR 5/8

6

316

3301

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

7

300

3197

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

8

300

3167

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

9

221

2141

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/3

10

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

11

300

3195

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

12

225

2217

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

13

421

4136

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

14

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

15

316

3292

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

Red ware 2.5YR 4/4

[282]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 15. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Cooking pot

243

2333

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

2

225

2224

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/3

3

316

3305

Reddish gray ware 2.5YR 5/1

4

421

4136

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

5

230

2380

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/3

6

316

3305

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

7

316

3311

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 4/4

8

204

2468

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4

9

221

2166

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

312

6099

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, black core

316

3331

Red ware 2.5YR 5/8

10

Cooking jug

11

Plate 16. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

FBW jug

300

3186

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

2

440

1088

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, combed decoration

3

440

1088

Light red ware 10R 7/6, combed decoration

4

300

5

231

2170

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

6

316

3391

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core

7

209

2047

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

8

342

9

225

2146

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

10

421

4136

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

11

419

4093

Light red ware 10R 7/6, incised decoration

12

212

2086

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, combed decoration

13

321

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4

[283]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 17. No.

Type

Locus

1

FBW jug

316

Basket

Description Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

2

316

3280

Yellowish red ware 5YR 5/6 with white inclusions

3

227

2188

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

4

316

3380

Red ware 2.5YR 5/8, very pale brown slip 10YR 7/4

5

511

5022

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

6

316

3229

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, black core

7

225

2146

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

8

509

5016

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

9

316

3280

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, red core

10

420

4087

Dark brown ware 7.5YR 3/3

235

2385

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2, gray core with black inclusions

11

Jug

Plate 18. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jug

230

2309

White ware 2.5YR 8/1

2

419

4106

White ware 2.5YR 8/1

3

225

2217

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, pink slip, red core

4

225

2212

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4

5

303

3078

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

6

325

3277

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4, grey core, pie crust rim

7

421

4136

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, pink slip, reddish brown core

8

300

3163

Yellow ware 10YR 7/6

9

300

3163

Very pale brown ware 10YR 7/3

Plate 19. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Juglet

300

3204

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

2

230

2299

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

3

Surface

4

420

4080

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, incised decoration

5

420

4104

Reddish yellow ware 7.5YR 6/6

6

201

2034

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

7

507

5013

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4, red slip

8

300

3120

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

9

412

4031

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

10

307

3109

Reddish brown ware 5YR 4/4, gray slip

11

307

3109

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8

[284]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 20. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Late Roman I amphora

300

3147

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

440

10083

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

225

2478

Pinkish white ware 5YR 8/2

200

2052

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/4, small black inclusions

5

507

5013

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/3

6

316

3229

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, mica

427

4166

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4

2 3 4

7

Amphora

Amphora base

Plate 21. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jar

300

3182

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Plate 22. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jar

300

3132

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Plate 23. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jar

300

3201

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

2

402

4002

Light reddish brown ware 7.5YR 6/4, pink slip 7.5YR 8/3

3

206

2021

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

4

300

5

230

2308

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/3, incised decoration

6

507

5003

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4, gray core

7

302

3074

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

8

509

5018

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

9

315

3173

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, gray core

10

200

2460

Outside reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, inside light red 2.5YR 6/6, gray core

11

412

4042

Light red ware 10R 6/6

12

303

3100

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

13

316

3305

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

14

317

3324

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

15

300

16

509

Very pale brown ware 10YR 7/3, gray core

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8 5016

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/3, red core

[285]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 24. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jar

207

2032

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, gray core

2

300

3305

Very pale brown ware 10YR 7/3, gray core

3

325

3277

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

4

316

3237

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

5

315

3783

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, gray core

6

302

3074

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

7

300

3185

Reddish brown ware 5YR 6/6

8

302

3074

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

9

508

5004

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

10

300

3185

Reddish brown ware 5YR 6/6, red core

11

212

2092

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

12

511

5022

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/8

13

426

4182

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

14

406

4184

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/3

Basket

Description

Plate 25. No.

Type

Locus

1

Jar

300

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

316

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8, white paint

2

Plate 26. No.

Type

Locus

1

Jar

227

Basket

Description Outside light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, inside reddish gray 2.5YR 5/1

2

511

5022

Reddish gray ware 2.5YR 5/1, some small white inclusions, red core

3

234

2443

Brown ware 7.5YR 5/2, reddish gray core

4

325

3257

Pinkish gray ware 5YR 7/2, reddish core

246

2344

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/8

303

3100

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

7

509

5012

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4

8

402

4002

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

9

219

2236

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4

10

427

4166

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR6/4

11

438

10074

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4

12

225

2478

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6

13

426

4182

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, gray core

5 6

Gaza jar

[286]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

Plate 27. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Pithos

300

3186

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

Plate 28. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Pithos

300

3186

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

Plate 29. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Pithos

300

3160

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, inside decoration

2

301

3009

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

3

Surface

4

200

2474

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

5

228

2440

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 7/4, gray core

6

237

2247

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/4, gray core

7

237

2247

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

8

227

2183

Pink ware 5YR 7/3, yellow slip

9

320

6030

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4, incised decoration

10

306

3024

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, incised decoration

Locus

Basket

Description

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, combed decoration

Plate 30. No.

Type

1

Pipe

101

1045

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, gray core, white plaster

2

226

2128

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

3

226

2128

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

[287]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 31. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Bowl

225

2224

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

218

2068

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

426

4150

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

271

2056

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/3, incised decoration

101

1043

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

2 3 4

Basin

5 6

Amphora

314

3346

Reddish brown ware 2.5YR 5/4, gray core 5YR 5/1

7

Jar

320

6037

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/3, white slip with red painting

8

336

6014

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, with red painting

9

419

4093

Light reddish brown ware 5YR 6/3, red geometric painting with dots

10

412

4039

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/3, combed decoration

Plate 32. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Basin

423

4224

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, pale yellow core 2.5Y 7/3, incised decoration

2

Jug

337

6001

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

3

Jar

111

10051

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2, finger indentation decoration

4

221

2166

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

5

Glazed bowl

325

3217

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2, glaze

6

Bowl

108

10003

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

7

108

10003

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

8

300

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

9

300

Very pale brown ware 10YR 8/2

10 11

Jug

12 13

406

4184

Reddish yellow ware 7.5YR 7/6

404

4009

Light reddish brown ware 2.5YR 6/4, with white inclusions

213

2184

Pink ware 7.5YR 7/4

238

2260

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

14

Jar

428

15

Smoking pipe 100

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, pink slip, reddish brown core 10015

Red ware 2.5YR 5/6

[288]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

7

9

10 Plate 1. Red Slip Ware bowls.

0

5

[289]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

9 9

8 8

10 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

14 14

15 15

16 16

0

5

10

0

5

10

Plate 2. Red Slip Ware bowls, rouletted bowls, and Fine Byzantine Ware bowls.

[290]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Plate 3. Fine Byzantine Ware bowls.

18

0

5

[291]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

4 3

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 0

5

Plate 4. Fine Byzantine Ware bowls.

[292]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Plate 5. Fine Byzantine Ware bowls.

0

5

[293]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

0

5

Plate 6. Fine Byzantine Ware bowls.

[294]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

3

2

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

25

26 0

5

Plate 7. Fine Byzantine Ware bowls and cups.

[295]

10

23

24

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

6

7

8

5

4

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

21

20

22

23 Plate 8. Fine Byzantine Ware cups.

0

5

[296]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

5

4 0

5

Plate 9. Strainer, funnels, and mortaria.

[297]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

8

10

11 Plate 10. Basins.

0

5

[298]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

4

5

6 7

8

9

10

11 Plate 11. Basins.

0

5

[299]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

8

Plate 12. Casseroles and a frying pan.

0

5

[300]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1 1

3 3

2 2

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

Plate 13. Casserole lids.

0

5

10

0

5

10

[301]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

3

2

4 1 5

6

7

Plate 14. Cooking pots.

9

8

10

11

12

13

14

15 0

5

[302]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3

1

2

3

4

5

4

5

6

7

8

6

7

8

9 9

10

11

10

11

Plate 15. Cooking pots and cooking jugs.

0

5

10

0

5

10

[303]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

2

3 1

4

5

6

9 7

8

10

12

11

13 Plate 16. Fine Byzantine Ware jugs.

0

5

[304]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

2

1

4

3

6

5

7

8

9

11

10 0

5

Plate 17. Fine Byzantine Ware jugs.

[305]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

3

2

7

6

5

4

8

9

0

5

Plate 18. Jugs.

[306]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

2

3

1

4

8 6

7

10

11

5

9

0

5

Plate 19. Juglets.

[307]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0

5

20 10

Plate 20. Amphorae.

[308]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

1

Plate 21. Jar.

0

5

10

0

5

10

[309]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 0

5

Plate 22. Jar.

[310]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1 0

10

20

3

2

4

7

6

8

5

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 0

5

Plate 23. Jars.

[311]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

3

1 2

4

5

7

6

9

10

11

13

12

14 Plate 24. Jars.

8

0

5

[312]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

0

5

Plate 25. Jars.

[313]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

3

2

5

4

6

9

8 7

10

11

13

12

0

5

Plate 26. Jars.

[314]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1 0

10 5

Plate 27. Pithos.

[315]

20 10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 0

5

10

0

5

10

0

5

10

1 1

Plate 28. Pithos.

[316]

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

2

1 3

4

5

6

7

9

8

Plate 29. Pithoi.

0

5

[317]

10

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

3

2

0

5

Plate 30. Pipes.

[318]

10

P o t t e ry V e s s e l s

1

2

3 4

5

6

8

7

10 9

0

5

Plate 31. Umayyad pottery.

[319]

10

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

1

2

3

4

3

4

5 5 6

7

6

7

8 8

9

10

9

10

11 11

13 14

13 12

14

15 0

1

2

15

12 0

5

10

0

5

10

Plate 32. Abbasid (1–4), Mamluk (5–14) and Ottoman (15) pottery.

[320]

0

1

2

CHAPTER SIX

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

Most of the pottery oil lamps found at the site can be attributed to the Byzantine monastery.* Although the monastery existed for some two hundred years and was populated by hundreds of monks, relatively few lamps were unearthed. Additionally, two lamps belong to a period preceding the monastery’s establishment (phase I, late fourth to early fifth century CE), and the rest are dated to the Early Islamic, Mamluk, and Ottoman periods. Two lantern fragments, apparently belonging to the Byzantine period, were also discovered. The lamp distribution at the site is random, and does not point to some exceptional activity in any specific area of the monastery. The paucity of Byzantine pottery oil lamps in the monastery of Martyrius is also characteristic of additional sites and monasteries from this period. This might be surprising, when we take into account that the population predominantly engaged in prayer, reading, and writing. We assume that monasteries made extensive use of glass oil lamps, some of which were incorporated in chandeliers, and of candelabra, so that pottery oil lamps were hardly in use in the chapels and refectories. Many glass oil lamps and bronze lamp hangers were found in the monastery of Martyrius (see Pls. 41– 43, 50; 51:1–2).

Late-Fourth to Early-Fifth Century CE Lamps

of Israel and were common in the second to fourth centuries CE. In Beth Shean, lamps of this type are generally dated to the third century CE, but they were also discovered in second to fourth century CE assemblages (Hadad 2002: 20, with further references to parallels). A lamp of this type was discovered in Beit Nattif in Cistern I (Baramki 1936: 6, Pl. VI:4); and in Jerusalem, some were found in the Roman tomb of Karm al-Shaikh (Baramki 1932: Pl. XI:6). This lamp fragment apparently belongs to phase I, which preceded the monastery’s establishment. “Samaritan” lamp A “Samaritan” lamp fragment (Pl. 33:2). Mold made, pear shaped, high tongue handle, ring and line decoration around the lamp filling hole. Pear-shaped “Samaritan” lamps appeared in the third and fourth centuries CE, and similar types continued existing in the fifth to seventh centuries CE (Sussman 1983: 85; see also Magen 2008h). The typological distinction between the early and late types is based on the presence of a channel connecting the filling and wick holes, and on the form of the lamp nozzle. Similar lamps were discovered at Kefar ʿAra (Sussman 1976: 98, Pl. XXVII:1) and at Apollonia (Sussman 1983: 73, Pl. 7:48). This lamp fragment, too, is to be attributed to phase I, which preceded the monastery.

Discus lamp

Lamps from the Byzantine Period

A discus lamp fragment (Pl. 33:1). Mold made, round body, ring base, loop decoration. Lamps of this type are characteristic of the Roman period in the Land

Candlestick lamps from this period were discovered at the site. They are mold made, with an elongated pear shape, a ring base, two ridges around the filling hole, and a nozzle decorated with a straight line with three diagonal lines on either side, a motif known as the “palm branch.” These lamps were very common in the Byzantine period.

* We wish to thank Tania Cohen for her assistance with the initial preparation of the lamp assemblage for publication.

[321]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Two groups of lamps of this type were discovered in the monastery, one group bearing an inscription, and the other, not bearing one. Candlestick lamps bearing inscriptions** This group includes three complete lamps, one almost complete, and eight lamp fragments bearing a partial inscription (Pls. 33:3–5; 34). The inscriptions on the complete lamps and on some of the fragments are legible and clear, while on a number of fragments, the inscription is blurred, and difficult to decipher; at times its contains only individual and nonconsecutive letters. A view prevalent in the scholarly literature ascribed the lamps with illegible inscriptions (misformed and upside-down letters, and numerous script directions) to the group of late lamps. The explanation given was that over the course of time the inscriptions lost their original meaning, due to the inscribersʼ unfamiliarity with Greek. E. Nitowski and S. Loffreda opposed this view, and showed that the corruptions expressed intentional symbolism rather than a lack of knowledge (Nitowski 1986: 15–18; Loffreda 1989: 215–229; see also Aharoni 1956: 109). J. Naveh suggested that the writing of letters on the lamp is of magical significance, which would explain the use of individual letters, reversed letters, and the different directions in which they are to be read (Naveh 1988). Loffreda discerned ten reading directions (Loffreda 1990: 476, Fig. 2), and in numerous instances, a single lamp exhibits differently fashioned letters. Four formulaic inscriptions appear on the lamps unearthed at the monastery of Martyrius: 1. “The light of Christ shines for all” 2. “Beautiful lamps” 3. “(Lamp) of St. Elijah” 4. “Shine upon me” The first formula, “The light of Christ shines for all,” might represent a liturgical text. Ch. ClermontGanneau notes that this same formula begins a ceremony known as the “holy fire.” This ceremony is

** We wish to thank Dr. Leah Di Segni, for her assistance with reading the Greek inscriptions.

conducted on Holy Saturday (the day before Easter) in the Greek Orthodox rite, and belongs to the liturgy of St. Basil (Clermont-Ganneau 1898: 486). H. Leclercq rejects Clermont-Ganneauʼs claim, stating that this formulation does not belong to the liturgy of St. Basil, which had come to Jerusalem only in the medieval period (Leclercq 1928: 1110–1111). Leclercq maintains that this formulation is connected to another Byzantine ceremony, conducted on Wednesdays and Fridays during the forty-day Nativity Fast. In this ceremony, the congregation is given Communion wafers consecrated on the preceding Sunday; instead of the consecration formula, other formulas are recited. Among other things, the deacon displays the lit lamp and declares: “The light of Christ shines for all.” Loffreda notes that the ceremony first appears in manuscripts from the ninth to tenth centuries CE, and therefore may not have been practiced during the time of the lampsʼ distribution in the sixth century CE. He proposes that the formulation is unconnected to liturgical ceremonies, but rather was common in popular language (Loffreda 1989: 228–229). J. Magness connects this formulation with the Lychnicon ceremony, conducted on Holy Saturday in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and mentioned by the traveler Egeria in the late fourth century CE (Magness 1989: 845–847; see also Itinerarium Egeriae XXIV.4). In any case, this was apparently an accepted formulation, either part of the liturgy or uttered by Christians in their daily life. The second formula, “beautiful lamps.” It was translated by M. Guarducci as “beautiful lamp.” He ignored the plural form, thereby interpreting the inscription as referring to the actual object itself (Guarducci 1978: 453–454). Loffreda, in contrast, regards the formula as relating to the lamp as a source of blessing, and interprets the inscription “beautiful lamps,” as “sacred lamps” (Loffreda 1989: 223). He attributes the lamps bearing this inscription to the eulogia group—lamps bearing the inscription εὐλογία and connected with the rite of saints. In Byzantine Greek, “eulogium” (blessing) refers to some sort of offering or gift, generally food, which the priest gives his visitors as a mark of religious affiliation. In churches and monasteries, the practice later developed of

[322]

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

distributing to pilgrims provisions or an object, such as a flask of oil, as a memento of their visit to the holy place. Nitowski links this group of lamps to the Lychnicon ceremony mentioned above (Nitowski 1986: 21–22). The third formula contains the name Τοῦ ἁγίου Ἠλία, “St. Elijah,” in the genitive case. According to Loffreda, this formula refers to a hidden subject, namely, the word “eulogia,” so that this lamp is a source of blessing—in this case, from the prophet Elijah (Loffreda 1989: 223). Magness agrees that this refers to the prophet Elijah, and that these lamps originated in the site dedicated to him, Mar Elias, on the road between Jerusalem and Bethlehem (Magness 1989: 848–849). As Elijah was a revered figure in Christianity (Magen 2012a: 31, note 262), it is unreasonable that these lamps belonged to a specific monastery. This is especially so since the Mar Elias monastery, like many others, might have been named after the monastery head, this name being very common among Byzantine monks. The distribution of these lamps was mainly in Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity, leading us to believe that the production center was in Jerusalem, from where they were dispersed by the numerous pilgrims who took this memento with them as a source of blessing from Jerusalem. As mentioned above, the site yielded 12 lamps bearing known formulae inscriptions: An elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 33:3), ring around the lamp wick hole, ring base, and a palm branch decoration on the nozzle. A Greek inscription appears around the filling hole:

ΤΟΩΑΓΙΟΩΗΛΙΑ

ΦΩCXYΦΕΝΙΠΑCΙΝ

ΦΩCXY[…]

Φῶς X(ριστο)ῦ φένι (φαίνει) πᾶσιν

Φῶς X(ριστο)ῦ[…]

The light of Christ shines for all For lamps with this formula, see Loffreda 1989: 79– 80, Tipo A 1.1; 1990: 477, Type A 1.1, with further references to parallels. An elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 33:4), ring around the lamp wick hole, ring base, and a palm branch decoration on the nozzle. A Greek inscription appears around the filling hole:

Το˂ῦ˃ἁγίο˂υ˃Ἠλία (Lamp) of St. Elijah For lamps with this formula, see Loffreda 1989: 128, Tipo C 3.1; 1990: 488, Type C 3.1, with further references to parallels. An elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 33:5), ring around the lamp wick hole, ring base, and a palm branch decoration on the nozzle. A Greek inscription appears around the filling hole: ΛΥΧΝΑΡΙΑΚΑΛΑ Λυχνάρια καλά Beautiful lamps See also Loffreda 1989: 133, Tipo C 6.1; 1990: 489, Type C 6.1, with further references to parallels. An elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:1), ring base, broken wick hole, and a palm branch decoration on the nozzle. A circle flanked by a lunate sign on either side appears on the lamp. Loffreda maintains that the circle represents the letter phi, and the lunates, the letter sigma; taken together, they represent the word φ(ῶ)ς (“light”). See Loffreda 1989: 162, Tipo D 6.4; 1990: 495, Type D 6.4. A fragment of a lamp of this type was found in Beth Shean (Hadad 2002: 66, no. 297). A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:2). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved:

This is part of the formula “The light of Christ shines for all.” See Loffreda 1989: 79–80, Tipo A 1.1; 1990: 477, Type A 1.1. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:3). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: […]ΦΒ

[323]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

This can be seen as an abbreviated form of the formula Φῶς X(ριστο)ῦ φένι πᾶσιν (“The light of Christ shines for all”), with Φ being an abbreviation of φένι, and B, of πᾶσιν, pronounced βάσιν under Arab influence. The mark appearing after the letter Β might be a circle decoration. See Loffreda 1989: 145–146, Tipo D 1.1 or D 1.2; 1990: 492, Type D 1.1 or D 1.2, with further references to parallels. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:4). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: […]+Φ[…] This apparently is an abbreviation of the formula “The light of Christ shines for all,” with the cross representing the word Christ and Φ being an abbreviation of φένι. See Loffreda 1989: 146, Tipo D 1.2; 1990: 492, Type D 1.2. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:5), palm branch decoration on the nozzle, symbol of a ladder alongside the filling hole (a parallel symbol probably appeared on the other side of the filling hole). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: ΦΝΙC[…] φ[ῶς X(ριστο)ῦ φένι πᾶ]σιν The fragment shows the beginning and the end of the formula “The light of Christ shines for all,” that is read clockwise from the letter Φ to the letter Ν, the latter appearing to the right of the Φ. Thus, the word φῶς is split on both sides of the nozzle, with a ladder symbol on either side. According to Loffreda the ladder symbols represent the baptismal steps and the palm branch decoration on the nozzle represents the Tree of Life; see Loffreda 1989: 110, Tipo B 1.2; 1990: 483–484, Type B 1.2 (for the ladder symbols, see Type B 1.1). A lamp of this type was found at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 184, Fig. 10:140). A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:6), with a symbol, apparently of a ladder, alongside the filling hole. Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved, the letter Φ. The lamp apparently resembles the lamp presented in Plate

34:5, with the inscription “The light of Christ shines for all,” with the word φῶς split, and ladder symbols on either side of the nozzle. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:7). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: ΦΤΙΟΠΜ[…] Φ(ώ)τι(σ)όν μ[ε, φώτι(σόν)] This is the part of the formula φ(ώ)τι(σ)όν με, “Shine upon me,” which appears twice on the lamp, from left to right and from right to left. See Loffreda 1989: 138–139, Tipo C 7.3a; 1990: 491, Type C 7.3a, Fig. 6:29. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:8). Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: [.]ΤΙ[…] [Φ]ώτι(σόν), [φώτισόν με] This lamp resembles the lamp presented in Plate 34:7, with the formula “Shine upon me,” which appears twice on the lamp, from left to right and from right to left. A fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 34:9), palm branch decoration on the nozzle, and a small palm frond on either side of the filling hole. Part of a Greek inscription around the filling hole is preserved: a circle represents the letter Φ. This lamp apparently resembles the lamps presented in Plate 34:7–8 with the formula φ(ώ)τι(σ)όν με, “Shine upon me,” written clockwise. A similar fragment was discovered in Beth Shean (Hadad 2002: 66, no. 293). Candlestick lamps without inscriptions The monastery yielded twelve candlestick lamps without inscriptions (Pls. 35; 36:1–8), four of which are complete, and one, almost complete. One lamp is a degenerate version of a candlestick lamp (Pl. 36:8). These lamps are usually characterized by a decoration of diagonal radial lines that encompass the filling hole, instead of an inscription. Some, however, have

[324]

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

other decorative patterns, such as the one presented in Plate 36:1. Candlestick lamps without inscriptions are the most common lamps in the Byzantine period, and are widespread throughout the Land of Israel. These lamps first appeared in the sixth century CE, and continued in use until the late seventh to early eighth century CE (Magness 1993: 251–253, Form 3A and Form B; Shapira and Peleg 2003a: 105). Such lamps were discovered: in stratum II at Ramat Raḥel, dated to the Byzantine period (Aharoni 1962: Figs. 3:22–23; 18:5, 7; 1964: 41, Figs. 10:4; 25:1–7; 26:5); at Kh. Handoma in Mishor Adummim (Sion 1997: 154, Fig. 6:17); at Kh. Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Rapuano 1999: 184, Fig. 10:137–139); at Kh. ed-Deir (Calderon 1999: 145, Figs. 3–5, Pl. 5:1–3); south of the Temple Mount (Shapira and Peleg 2003a: 105, Pl. I.17:7–8; 2003b: 187, Pl. II.4:2–3); and at many more sites. An additional lamp from the Byzantine period unearthed at the monastery is a degenerate version of a candlestick lamp that reflects the transition between the Byzantine and Umayyad periods. This is a fragment of an elongated pear-shaped lamp (Pl. 36:8), mold made, with two ridges around the filling hole, a channel connecting the filling hole with the wick hole, and a diagonal line decoration. This lamp unites the features known from Byzantine candlestick lamps (body and nozzle shape, decoration) with Umayyad lamps (channel connecting the filling and wick holes; see below). Lamps of this type are dated to the late Byzantine period. A lamp of a similar type was discovered in Catacomb 20 in Beth Sheʿarim (Avigad 1976: 190, Pl. LXXI:34). The Schloessinger Collection contains a mold for the upper part of a lamp that is identical to a lamp from the monastery of Martyrius (Rosenthal and Sivan 1978: 165, no. 684). Lamp handles Three molded lamp handles belonging to lamps dated to the Byzantine period were uncovered: two crossshaped handles (Pl. 36:9–10), and one rounded and decorated with a cross (Pl. 36:11). Handles of this type were found at many sites in the Land of Israel, and were decorated with floral, geometric, faunal, and human face patterns. Crossshaped handles, or those decorated with crosses, were

found at Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1964: 41, Fig. 26:12– 13), in Beth Shean (Hadad 2002: 66, nos. 285–286), and in the excavations south of the Temple Mount (Shapira and Peleg 2003a: 105, Pl. I.17:12–14, 16; 2003b: 187–189, Pl. II.4:7).

Lamps from the Umayyad Period The site yielded two types of lamps from the Umayyad period: Early channel-nozzle lamps, apparently of local manufacture, and imported Jerash lamps. Early channel-nozzle lamps Early channel-nozzle lamps are mold made, ovoid in shape, with a ridge, a conical handle, and geometric or floral decoration. Some of these lamps have a channel around the filling and wick holes. Three lamp fragments decorated with a floral pattern were discovered (Pl. 37:1–3), as well as a lamp fragment with a geometric decoration (Pl. 37:4). These lamps are characteristic of the Umayyad period. The lamps with floral or geometric decoration found in Beth Shean were classified as Type 36, and dated to the first half of the eighth century CE (Hadad 2002: 82–95, nos. 374–385, 398–401). Lamps with geometric decoration, some without a channel, were also discovered at Caesarea in stratum VIII, dated to the first half of the eighth century CE (Arnon 2008b: 218, Fig. 14:56–60). A lamp of this type, without a channel, was discovered at the Umayyad farmhouse in the Negev (Haiman 1995: 8, Fig. 8:22). Jerash lamps Jerash lamps are mold made and have a zoomorphic handle attached to the body. Two lamp fragments of this type were found at the site: a nozzle fragment with a characteristic radial design on the rim (Pl. 37:5), and a lamp fragment with a zoomorphic handle (Pl. 37:6). Lamps of this type were discovered at Jerash, which was the center of their production, and are dated to the second half of the seventh century CE (Scholl 1986: 163–165, Fig. 1:5–6). They were also found at Pella, and dated to the first quarter of the eighth century CE (Smith and Day 1989: 114, Pls. 55:6; 60:1).

[325]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

A lamp fragment with a zoomorphic handle also came to light in the Byzantine monastery at Mt. Nebo (Alliata 1990: 460, 462, no. 142). In the Land of Israel, these lamps were discovered mainly in the north, at Capernaum (Bagatti 1964: 267, Fig. 3:5) and Hammat Gader (Coen Uzzielli 1997: 325, Fig. 10, Pl. VI:4–6). Additional lamps of this type were found at Caesarea (Arnon 2008b: 219, Fig. 17:66–71).

Lamps from the Abbasid Period Channel-nozzle lamps Channel-nozzle lamps (Pl. 37:7–10). Mold made, with a ridge, a channel connecting the filling and wick holes, a tongue handle, and floral decoration. Four lamps of this type, one complete and three fragments, were found at the site. Lamps of this type were unearthed: at Beth Shean, classified as Type 37, dated to the Abbasid period (beginning from the late eighth century CE; Hadad 2002: 95–106, nos. 440–448); and at Tiberias, dated from the ninth to mid-tenth century CE (Stacey 2004: 153–157, Figs. 6.8:1–2; 6.9:1–3). At Caesarea, lamps of this type, including those with Arabic inscriptions, were uncovered in strata VI–VII, dated to the Abbasid period (Arnon 2008b: 219–222, Figs. 17:72–76; 19:77–24:132).

Lamps from the Mamluk and Ottoman Periods Ovoid lamp A complete ovoid lamp (Pl. 38:1). Mold made, with a flat base, a high tongue handle, and without decoration. The filling hole is raised, as are the body edges. A few lamps of this type are known in the Land of Israel. In the excavations of the Armenian Garden in Jerusalem, lamps of this type were dated to the Ayyubid period (Tushingham 1985: 96, 106, Figs. 32:22; 34:9–10, 14). In Beth Shean, they were classified as Type 46, and dated to the second half of the thirteenth and fourteenth century (Hadad 2002: 115, nos. 490–493).

Pinched lamps Wheel-made pinched lamps. Two bowl-shaped lamps with pinched walls were found at the site: one is a fragment with a single wick hole (Pl. 38:2); an additional lamp is complete, with four wick holes (Pl. 38:3). Wheel-made pinched lamps first appeared in the Mamluk period, and most were glazed. In the Ottoman period the lamps became bigger, and were unglazed. Pinched lamps with a single wick hole were found in Yoqneʿam; two unglazed ones are dated from the Mamluk to Ottoman periods (Avissar 2005: 82, Fig. 3.3:18). Excavations at the Cardo in the Old City of Jerusalem revealed a lamp with a single wick hole that is dated to the Ottoman period (Avissar 2012: 302, Pl. 10.1:19).

Lanterns Two fragments of pottery lanterns (jug-like vessels) were found at the site. One lantern is pomegranate shaped with a rounded outer rim, without a neck, and with three rectangular windows in its wall (Pl. 38:4). An additional lantern has a rounded rim, small holes, and is decorated with combed bands (Pl. 38:5). These lanterns probably belong to the Byzantine period, although this cannot be determined with certainty. Vessels of this type began to appear in the Byzantine period. Fragments of lanterns dated to this period were discovered in Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam, two of which resemble the decorated fragment unearthed at the monastery of Martyrius (Corbo 1955: 81, Tav. 25, Foto 73). A lantern with small holes, dated to the seventh century CE, was found in the Church of Bishop Marianos at Jerash (Gawlikowski and Musa 1986: 149, Fig. 7:8). Lanterns with a ring handle dated to the fifth to sixth centuries CE were found at Beth Shean (Hadad 2002: 143, nos. 528–529). The production of lanterns of this type continued in the Umayyad period, as well. A number of pottery lanterns dated to the latter period were found at Beth Shean (Hadad 2002: 143, nos. 530–533; Bar-Nathan 2011: 319–321, Fig. 11.55).

[326]

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

Plate 33. No.

Type

Locus

1

Discus lamp

420

2

“Samaritan” lamp

225

3

Candlestick lamp with inscription

4 5

Basket

Description Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

2224

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

227

2167

Pink ware 2.5YR 8/4

242

2320

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

424

4144

Light brown ware 7.5YR 6/4

Plate 34. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Candlestick lamp with inscription

210

2052

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

243

2337

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/8, gray core

3

411

405

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

4

311

3110

Pink ware 5YR 7/4, gray core

5

419

4093

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

6

421

4133

7

Surface

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, gray core

8

Surface

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6, gray core

9

316

5239

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 6/6, gray core

2

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Plate 35. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Candlestick lamp

420

4130

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

2

316

4463

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

3

424

4132

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/3

4

316

3241

Pinkish white ware 7.5YR 8/2

[327]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 36. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Candlestick lamp

225

2368

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

2

225

2217

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

3

225

2129

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

4

300

3030

Pink ware 5YR 8/3, red core

5

300

3207

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

6

Surface

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6

7

Surface

Pink ware 5YR 7/4

8

Pear-shaped lamp

9

Lamp handle

416

4061

Light red ware 2.5YR 7/6, gray core

426

4472

Light gray ware 5YR 7/1

10

426

4465

Light gray ware 5YR 7/8

11

251

2442

Pink ware 7.5YR 8/3

Plate 37. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Early channel-nozzle lamp

407

4019

Gray ware 7.5YR 5/1

101

1101

Pink ware 5YR 8/4, gray core

2 3

406

4068

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

4

114

1050

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6

Jerash lamp

414

4055

Gray ware 7.5YR 5/1, burned

281

2424

Pinkish white ware 5YR, gray core, red slip

Channel-nozzle lamp

314

10013

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

8

317

4183

Light gray ware 10YR 7/2

9

408

4160

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

10

509

5019

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

Locus

Basket

Description

5 6 7

Plate 38. No.

Type

1

Ovoid lamp

314

3349

Light red ware 2.5YR 6/6, yellow outside

2

Pinched lamp

225

2234

Gray ware 5YR 6/1

300

3161

Gray ware 5YR 6/1

406

4059

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

100

1063

Reddish yellow ware 5YR 7/6

3 4 5

Lantern

[328]

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

1

2

3

4

0

1

2

Plate 33. Discus lamp, “Samaritan” lamp, and candlestick lamps with inscription.

[329]

5

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

3

2

5

1

7

6

9

8

0

1

Plate 34. Candlestick lamps with inscription.

[330]

4

2

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

2

1

4

3 0

1

2

Plate 35. Candlestick lamps.

[331]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

2

1

3

6

5

4

7

8

9 Plate 36. Candlestick lamps and lamp handles.

10 0

1

[332]

2

11

Oil Lamps and Lanterns

1

3

2

4

5

6

7

9

8

Plate 37. Umayyad (1–6) and Abbasid (7–10) lamps.

0

1

[333]

10

2

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

3

2 0

4

0

1

2

5

10

Plate 38. Mamluk to Ottoman lamps (1–3) and Byzantine to Umayyad lanterns (4–5).

[334]

5

CHAPTER SEVEN

Byzantine Glass Vessels and Windowpanes

Thousands of glass vessel and windowpane fragments ascribed to the Byzantine period (fifth to seventh centuries CE) were found at the site.* Most of these fragments are relatively large and well preserved. No complete vessels were unearthed. A large portion of the fragments are non-diagnostic body fragments; 92 of the identified fragments are presented typologically. The assemblage, quite uniform, includes vessels characteristic of Byzantine sites, especially of churches and monasteries. Since most of the types represented in the assemblage are widespread, the references to parallels focused, when possible, on a few chosen contemporary Byzantine sites in the Judean and Samarian region in which monasteries or churches were discovered. The references also include parallels from the synagogue at Beth Shean, from the fifth to seventh centuries CE. Most of the vessels in the assemblage are of different hues of bluish-green glass; a few are of olive green, green, or golden brown glass. The most common decorative method consisted of the application of trails, either the same color as the vessel, or blue, turquoise, or brown; a few vessels were decorated by mold blowing, pinching protrusions in the wall of the vessel, or engraving patterns. Bowls Most of the bowls found at the site have an outfolded rim. The site also yielded a few rim fragments of shallow bowls with a vertical rim or of bowls with a flared rim, some decorated with trails.

Bowls with Outfolded Rim Bowls of this type (Pl. 39), which differ from one another in body and rim fold shape, were very common from the Roman through the Early Islamic periods (Pollak 2007: 100). They were discovered at many sites from the Byzantine period, including: Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 89*–91*, Fig. 3:29–30, identified as lamps); Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 201, Fig. 2:17–18); ʿAnab elKabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:1); and Kh. Umm Zaqum (Peleg 2012c: 247, Pl. 3:5, 7, identified as lamps). Numerous outfolded rim fragments were discovered at the monastery of Martyrius, most belonging to deep bowls (Pl. 39:1–8), and a few to shallow bowls (Pl. 39:9). In light of the similar rim shape of the deep bowls and the bowl-shaped lamps with three handles (see below), some of the deep bowl rim fragments might well belong to the lamps of this type. Some of the bowls are decorated with trails of a different color under the rim (Pl. 39:8). Similar bowls were found at Tel Tanninim (Pollak 2006: 164, Fig. 131:50–51).

Shallow Bowls with Vertical Rim Shallow bowls with a vertical rim (Pl. 40:1) were common from the Late Roman to the beginning of the Early Islamic period. Such a bowl was found at Kh. Ṭabaliya, and dated to the late Byzantine period (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 84*, Fig. 2:8).

Bowls with Flared Rim * We wishe to thank Yael Gorin-Rosen for her assistance in the preparation of this report, but are fully responsible for the contents.

A few fragments of bowls with flared rims were found. The rim presented in Plate 40:2 probably belongs to a deep bowl. That in Plate 40:3 apparently represents an

[335]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

embellished version of such a bowl, with an applied blue trail wound a number of times around and beneath the rim. Bowls with similar ornamentation were widespread, and were found in various sites in Israel and Jordan in contexts dated to the fourth to fifth centuries CE, as at Kh. el-Ni ʿana (Gorin-Rosen and Katsnelson 2007: 84–85, Fig. 5:1–3, with further references to parallels).

Engraved Bowl Two fragments of an engraved bowl were found: a body fragment (Pl. 40:4), and a base (Pl. 40:5). The body fragment, of thick high quality glass, is nearly colorless (with a greenish tinge), and seems exceptional in the assemblage at the site. Despite being incomplete, it apparently parallels two better preserved vessels: a bowl or chalice discovered in the excavations at Gerasa (Baur 1938: 505–512, Pl. CXXXIX); and a chalice, held in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection in the United States, that probably originated in Syria (Ross 1962: 81–82, Pls. LIV; LV:C; Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 91). Both are dated to the sixth century CE (Baur 1938: 510– 512; Ross 1962: 81). To the best of our knowledge, no additional Byzantine glass bowls or chalices exhibiting similar ornamentation have been discovered. Comparison with these two vessels enables us to decipher the engraving on the fragment from Martyrius: a cross with short diagonal “rays” diverging from its center, with stars on either side of its upper part (see Baur 1938: 505, Pl. CXXXIX:a; Ross 1962: 81, Pl. LIV:B; Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 91). This might be a reference to the Christian tradition of a vision of a radiant cross in the heavens, symbolized by stars, e.g., the vision revealed to Emperor Constantine that led to his embracing Christianity (Baur 1938: 511). The large cross on the chalice in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection is flanked by two figures in an orant position (Ross 1962: 81, Pl. LIV:B). On the other side of the chalice is a structure that contains a cross and is flanked by two angels (Ross 1962: 81, Pl. LIV:A). The square element visible on the left of the fragment presented in Plate 40:4 might be a representation of a sacred book, like that held by one of the angels. The vessel

from the monastery of Martyrius differs slightly from the Gerasa and Dumbarton Oaks vessels: it has fine diagonal lines rather than a wavy line decoration between two parallel straight lines in the upper part, and it lacks crosshatching within the cross. The base (Pl. 40:5) is made of the same uncommon material as the body fragment, and both were found together. The two apparently belong to the same vessel; thus this is a bowl with a wide base rather than a chalice. It should be noted that the lower part and base of the vessel from Gerasa are missing. Although it was reconstructed as a chalice with a foot, Baur states that it might be a bowl with a flat or convex base (Baur 1938: 506). Chalices and bowls of various materials played a central role in one of Christianity’s most important rites, the Eucharist, and constituted part of every church’s treasury. While it would make sense to interpret the decorated bowls and chalices in Christian scenes as liturgical vessels used in this ceremony (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 85–95), Baur opposes such an interpretation of the vessel from Gerasa, and states that it, and those like it, were for ordinary use, despite the religious nature of their decoration (Baur 1938: 506). Oil Lamps An especially large number of fragments of glass bowl-shaped oil lamps were discovered in the monastery. The lamps can be divided into three types: bowl shaped, with outfolded rim and three handles (Pls. 41–42); bowl shaped, with a hollow cylindrical stem (Pl. 43:1–9); and bowl shaped, with a solid beaded stem (Pl. 43:10). The first two types, represented in large quantities at the site, were very common in the Near East in the fifth to seventh centuries CE, and were generally found in public structures, but also in private dwellings (Gorin-Rosen and Katsnelson 2007: 114).

Bowl-Shaped Oil Lamps with Three Handles The bowl-shaped lamps with an outfolded rim and three handles were meant for hanging (Pl. 41). The most common lamp type in the Byzantine period, they continued in use in the Umayyad period as well

[336]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

Bowl-shaped oil lamps with three handles and a wick tube (from the Church of the Visitation, ʿEin Kerem). A bronze hanger device attached to the lamp (from Evron, Western Galilee). The oil was poured into the tube and the bowl served as a sort of lampshade that dispersed the light (courtesy of Israel Museum, Jerusalem).

(Gorin-Rosen and Katsnelson 2007: 114). The lamps have a concave base, and in most instances, a wick tube was attached to the center of the interior of the bowl base for the oil and wick (Pl. 42). Oil was poured into the tube, which was of small capacity, rather than into the entire bowl, thus providing light for a limited time. In addition to providing stability for the wick, the bowl served as a sort of lampshade that dispersed the light, illuminating the area evenly instead of producing a concentrated, bright, focused light, as in the case of pottery lamps. The lamps were hung from the ceiling by a bronze lamp hanger composed of three narrow plates, chains, and hooks. Rim and base fragments of such lamps were found in most of the sites that contained churches, monasteries, or synagogues from the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods, including: Kh. Siyar elGhanam (Corbo 1955: 75, Fig. 25:5); Beth Shean (Zori 1967: 166, Fig. 11:9–10, identified as bowls); Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Gorin-Rosen 1999: 212, Fig. 2:27); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 91*, Fig. 3:31–33); Deir Ghazali (Gorin-Rosen 2000b: 49*, Fig. 26:8); Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 205, Fig. 2:32, 34–35); Kh. Umm Deimine (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 461, Pl. 7:7–8); and ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:15–17). Many fragments of this type of lamp were found in the monastery of Martyrius (Pls. 41–42), as well as a metal device and chains of the type used for hanging them (see Pls. 50; 51:1–2). Suspended bowlshaped lamps are visible in the mosaic depictions in the monastery (see Fig. 65), as well as in those in the church of John the Baptist at Gerasa (Crowfoot 1931, Pl. VII). At times, the glass bowl of the lamp was of one color, the tube, of another (Pl. 42:7). Rim fragments found with handles different in color than the bowl have not been included in this report. The bowl base presented in Plate 42:10 belongs to a lamp with three handles; the tube connected to its center was found broken. The bases presented in Plate 42:11–14 might belong to such lamps or to ones with three handles and no tube. A similar base, identified as belonging to a lamp (possibly also with a broken tube), was found in Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 207, Fig. 2:40).

[337]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Bowl-Shaped Oil Lamps with Hollow Cylindrical Stem

Reconstruction of chandelier with bowl-shaped lamps with a hollow cylindrical stem. The stem contained the oil and the wick, the bowl served as a sort of lampshade. A metal wick holder stabilized the wick within the lamp.

Bowl-shaped lamps of this type (Pl. 43:1–9) consist of a small bowl and a hollow, narrow cylindrical stem for the oil and wick. In this lamp type, as well, the oil was poured only into the stem, not into the entire vessel. A metal wick holder stabilized the wick. A number of such wick holders were discovered in the monastery (see Pl. 51:3–4). An additional wick holder in an almost complete lamp (Pl. 43:1) was found. The lamps were set in holes in a round bronze frame (polycandela). The latter was hung from the ceiling using three narrow bronze plates, chains, and hooks. As noted above, such a bronze device was found in the monastery of Martyrius (see Pl. 50). Similar chandeliers have been present in churches until modern times (Zori 1967: 162; Cohen 1999: 149). An additional method for hanging bowl-shaped lamps employed a bronze mount affixed directly to the wall (Alliata 1991: Tav. 42, Foto 6). Bowl-shaped lamps with a hollow cylindrical stem were common mainly in the Byzantine period, and continued in use in the Early Islamic period. They were discovered at many sites from the Byzantine period that contained churches, monasteries, or synagogues, e.g.: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: 75, Fig. 25:8); Beth Shean (Zori 1967: 162, Fig. 11:5); Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Gorin-Rosen 1999: 212, Fig. 2:28–29); Kh. ed-Deir (Cohen 1999: 149, Pl. 1:1); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 91*–92*, Fig. 3:34–37); Deir Ghazali (Gorin-Rosen 2000b: 49*, Fig. 26:9); Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 205–206, Fig. 2:36–37); and Kh. Umm Deimine (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 461, Pl. 7:9).

Bowl-Shaped Oil Lamps with Solid Beaded Stem

Reconstruction of a bowl-shaped lamp with a hollow cylindrical stem and a metal mount for affixing to a wall (illustration based on Alliata 1991: Tav. 42, Foto 6).

Bowl-shaped lamps of this type (Pl. 43:10), like the bowl-shaped lamps with a hollow stem, were set in holes in a frame suspended from the ceiling. Unlike them, however, the oil was poured into the bowl itself. Lamps with a solid beaded stem became common in the late Byzantine and Umayyad periods, and large quantities were found at various sites in Israel, Lebanon, and Jordan (Gorin-Rosen 2010: 213), e.g., in the synagogue at Beth Shean (Zori 1967: 162, Fig. 11:1–2).

[338]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

Beakers and Bowl-Cups Beakers with tapering walls, a rounded rim, and a pushed-in base (Pl. 44: 1–2) are known from the Byzantine period, and were used as drinking cups or as lamps (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 87*). Bases from such beakers were found at: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: 76, Fig. 25:14); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 86*–87*, Fig. 2:16–17); and Binyanei haUmmah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 206–207, Fig. 2:38–39). Bowl-cups with a rounded, in most cases inturned, rim and a wide cylindrical body, began appearing in the late Byzantine and Early Islamic periods (GorinRosen 2000a: 84*). A complete cup of this type was discovered at Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: 75, Fig. 25:4). A rim fragment was found at Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 84*, Fig. 2:10). One rim fragment (Pl. 44:3) might belong to such a bowlcup. A rim of this shape, but of smaller diameter (Pl. 44:4), might belong to a cup, a bowl-cup, or a wineglass. Such rims, attributed to different vessels, were discovered at Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 84*, Fig. 2:11) and ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:5). Wineglasses Byzantine wineglasses consisted of a bowl set on a footed base. Their shape reflects a tradition that began in the Roman period and continues to the present (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 84*), and they are glass copies of silver and gold goblets. In addition to the many glass goblets, hundreds of pottery cups came to light in the refectory of the monastery (see Fig. 202). The latter were undoubtedly used as drinking vessels, while the glass goblets could also have functioned as lamps (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 84*) or liturgical vessels (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 84). Wineglasses from the Byzantine and Umayyad periods typically have a rounded rim, incurving at the edge (Pl. 44:5–7; Gorin-Rosen and Winter 2010: 167, note 5, Fig. 2:2–5). Such a wineglass rim was found in Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 203, Fig. 2:19). The most common wineglass base in the Land of Israel and the Near East in the Byzantine period was the hollow ring base (Pl. 44:8–16; Gorin-Rosen and

Illustration of a wineglass with hollow ring base and beaded stem.

Winter 2010: 167). The wineglass stem was either straight (Pl. 44:8–12) or beaded (Pl. 44:13–16). Beaded stems were characteristic of wineglasses in Jerusalem and its vicinity in the late Byzantine period (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 86*). Wineglass base and stem fragments were discovered at numerous Byzantine sites, including: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: 76, Fig. 25:15); Beth Shean (Zori 1967: 162, Fig. 11:11); Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Gorin-Rosen 1999: 211–212, Fig. 2:25–26); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 86*, Fig. 2:14–15); Deir Ghazali (Gorin-Rosen 2000b: 48*–49*, Fig. 26:5–6); Binyanei ha-Ummah (GorinRosen 2005: 203–204, Fig. 2:25–27); ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:7); and Kh. Umm Zaqum (Peleg 2012c: 247, Pl. 3:13). Bottles

Bottles with a Cylindrical or Slightly Tapering Neck Most of the bottle fragments discovered at the monastery can be attributed to a single, large, and diverse group that is well known in the Byzantine period. These bottles are characterized mainly by their neck, which is either cylindrical (Pl. 45:1–5) or slightly tapering (Pl. 45:10–12). The rim is rounded (Pl. 45:1–3, 10–12) or infolded (Pl. 45:4). The body is

[339]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

bulbous (Pl. 45:5–7), piriform, or cylindrical (Pl. 45:9), and the base is concave (Pl. 45:6–9; Gorin-Rosen and Katsnelson 2007: 103–106, 140–143; Katsnelson 1999: 73*–74*). Most of the bottles found at the monastery are plain, but some are embellished with a trail applied around the neck, generally the same color as the vessel (Pl. 45:10–11), or turquoise or blue (not illustrated). Some of the bottles are mold blown. While the mold-blown fragment presented in Plate 45:12 is decorated with horizontal ribbing, most of the moldblown bottles from other sites are embellished with vertical or diagonal ribbing , e.g., a bottle from Kh. Ṭabiliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 87*, Fig. 2:19). Bottles of various types belonging to this group were found at: Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Gorin-Rosen 1999: 208–209, Fig. 1:9–12); Deir Ghazali (Gorin-Rosen 2000b: 48*, Fig. 26:1); Binyanei ha-Ummah (GorinRosen 2005: 204, Fig. 2:31); ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:8–10, 12, 14); and Kh. Umm Zaqum (Peleg 2012c: 247, Pl. 3:9–10).

references to fifth-century CE parallels). Vessels with a trefoil rim (whether rounded or infolded) that were interpreted as juglets were found at Kh. el-Shubeika and dated to the Late Roman to early Byzantine periods (Gorin-Rosen 2002: 309, Fig. 3:19–20). All of these vessels are decorated with trails applied below the rim, while that in Plate 46:6 is plain. A body fragment of a vessel with a globular body embellished by pinching (Pl. 46:7), probably belongs to a bottle. This type of decoration is typical of closed vessels (bottles and jars) from the late Byzantine and Umayyad periods, e.g., that found at Deir Ghazali (Gorin-Rosen 2000b: 48*, Fig. 26:3), but at times it also appeared on open vessels. Two fragments decorated by pinching were found at Kh. Ṭabaliya— one of the rim and body of a cup or wineglass and one of the body of a cup or bottle (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 86*, Fig. 2:12–13). A fragment from Kh. Umm Deimine was identified as belonging to a cup (Magen, Batz and Sharukh 2012: 461, Pl. 7:6).

Bottles with a Wide Flared Neck and Slanting Shoulders

Jugs/Juglets

Fragments presented in Plate 46:1–2, and possibly also in 46:3–4, represent an additional bottle type— with a wide flared neck, a slanting shoulder, and, most likely, a piriform body. A similar bottle, embellished with trails applied around its neck, was discovered at ʿAnab el-Kabir (Magen, Peleg and Sharukh 2012b: 369, Pl. 5:11).

Various Bottles A rim fragment (Pl. 46:5) probably belongs to a bottle with a funnel-shaped mouth and a slightly infolded rim that forms an internal concavity. A similar fragment, embellished with a trail applied under the rim, was found at Ras Abu Maʿaruf, and is dated from the Late Roman to early Byzantine period (Gorin-Rosen 1999: 209–210, Fig. 1:17). A fragment of an infolded and pinched (trefoil) rim (Pl. 46:6) probably belongs to a bottle or jug. No handle remnants were preserved on it. The trefoil rounded rim of a bottle of the type known in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods was found in Ashqelon (Katsnelson and Jackson-Tal 2004: 105, Fig. 2:4, with

A few fragments attributed to jugs or juglets were found at the monastery. A rim fragment of a vessel with a wide cylindrical neck embellished with a dark blue trail on the rim and thin bluish-green trails (the color of the vessel) below it is presented in Plate 46:8. Dark blue remnants of a handle extending from the rim identify the vessel as a jug. High pushed-in hollow ring bases, as in Plate 46:9– 10, were characteristic of jugs, juglets, and beakers in the Late Roman to early Byzantine periods (GorinRosen and Katsnelson 2007: 93; Winter 2010: 148). Such bases were discovered, e.g., at Kh. el-Ni ʿana, including two that closely resemble those in Plate 46:9–10, ascribed to jugs or juglets (Gorin-Rosen and Katsnelson 2007: 135, Fig. 32:5–6; see also Fig. 8:11–13). Windowpanes Two types of windowpanes are present in archaeological finds: square and round. Square windowpanes were produced by casting molten glass into a mold, or by blowing a glass cylinder and then cutting and flattening it. The first technique was used

[340]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

beginning in the first century CE, while the second is known from the fourth century CE, and came into more common use during the Byzantine period. Panes produced by this technique characteristically have one fire-rounded edge, a second edge that is chipped, and two cut edges, which at times were rounded, as well (Meyer 1988: 195; Gorin-Rosen 2005: 208; 2000a: 92*). The round panes, for the most part characterized by an infolded rim, were produced by blowing. They, too, are known beginning from the fourth century CE. Panes of this type became widespread in the late Byzantine and Umayyad periods, and gradually replaced the square panes (Meyer 1988: 195, 207). Windowpanes were first used in public structures such as churches, but beginning in the ninth century CE they began being installed in residential structures as well (Meyer 1988: 209). Fragments of square windowpanes produced by flattening were discovered at many sites from the Byzantine period, including: Kh. ed-Deir (Cohen 1999: 149, Pl. 1:5); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 92*, Fig. 3:38–39); Binyanei ha-Ummah, an

almost complete example (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 208, Fig. 3:44); and Kh. Umm Zaqum (Peleg 2012c: 247, Pl. 3:14). Fragments of round windowpanes with an infolded rim were found at Kh. Ṭabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000a: 92*–93*, Fig. 3:40) and at Binyanei ha-Ummah (Gorin-Rosen 2005: 207–208, Fig. 3:43). Many windowpane fragments were found at the monastery. The decisive majority are from square panes produced by flattening (Pls. 47; 48:1–2), but rims of rounded windowpanes were identified, as well (Pl. 48:3). Many fragments of square panes exhibit the chipping marks typical of panes produced by flattening. Some are noteworthy for their impressive size, which also attests to the size of the windows in which the panes were set. The fragment presented in Plate 47:1, for example, is more than 23 cm long and 15 cm wide, and this is not the full size of the pane. The fragment presented in Plate 47:3, in contrast, represents both the chipped edge and the opposite firerounded edge—this pane was clearly set in a narrow frame, some 10 cm wide.

[341]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 39. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Bowl with outfolded rim

303

3100

Bluish-green

2

303

3100

Bluish-green

3

241

2315

Bluish-green

4

235

2274

Bluish-green

5

236

2465

Bluish-green

6

316

3329

Bluish-green

7

432

4170

Bluish-green

8

412

4020

Bluish-green, brown trails

9

413

4167

Greenish

Plate 40. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Shallow bowl with vertical rim

412

4020

Bluish-green

2

Bowl with flared rim

432

4170

Bluish-green

432

4150

Bluish-green, blue trails

230

2302

Colorless with greenish tinge

230

2302

Colorless with greenish tinge

3 4

Engraved bowl

5

Plate 41. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Bowl-shaped oil lamp with three handles

230

2302

Bluish-green

2

219

2228

Bluish-green

3

230

2302

Light green

4

316

3232

Bluish-green

5

418

4136

Bluish-green

6

220

2245

Bluish-green

7

227

2200

Greenish

8

220

2245

Bluish-green

9

414

4053

Bluish-green

[342]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

Plate 42. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Bowl-shaped oil lamp with three handles

230

2303

Bluish-green

2

240

2280

Bluish-green

3

230

2302

Bluish-green

4

240

2280

Bluish-green

5

230

2302

Bluish-green

6

421

4137

Bluish-green

7

209

2046

Bluish-green bowl, olive green tube

8

432

4170

Bluish-green

9

421

4137

Bluish-green

10

230

2302

Bluish-green

11

230

2319

Greenish

12

230

2302

Bluish-green

13

209

2046

Olive green

14

230

2297

Bluish-green

Locus

Basket

Color

Plate 43. No.

Type

1

2173

Olive green

2

Bowl-shaped oil lamp with hollow 227 cylindrical stem 207

2046

Bluish-green

3

246

2352

Olive green

4

327

3270

Bluish-green

5

316

3313

Bluish-green

6

227

2191

Bluish-green

7

431

4167

Bluish-green

8

249

2359

Green

427

4166

Bluish-green

225

2234

Bluish-green

9 10

Bowl-shaped oil lamp with solid beaded stem

[343]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 44. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Beaker with pushed-in base

300

3119/3170

Bluish-green

2

302

3008

Bluish-green

3

Bowl-cup with inturned rim

316

3220

Bluish-green

4

Cup/bowl-cup/wineglass with inturned rim

209

2046

Golden brown

5

Wineglass with incurving rim

316

3232

Bluish-green

227

2191

Olive green

227

2173

Bluish-green

251

2388

Bluish-green

236

2465

Bluish-green

10

432

4170

Bluish-green

11

431

4167

Bluish-green

12

300

3119/3170

Dark olive green

105

1037

Bluish-green

316

3329

Green/olive green

15

227

2181

Bluish-green

16

230

2302

Light green

6 7 8 9

13 14

Wineglass with hollow ring base and straight stem

Wineglass with hollow ring base and beaded stem

Plate 45. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Bottle with cylindrical or slightly tapering neck

234

2249

Bluish-green

2

316

3313

Bluish-green

3

251

2388

Golden brown

4

302

3066

Bluish-green

5

502

5001

Bluish-green

6

307

3106

Bluish-green

7

230

2297

Bluish-green/green

8

230

2297

Bluish-green

9

230

2319

Bluish-green

10

432

4170

Bluish-green vessel and trails

11

230

2297

Olive green vessel and trails

12

230

2297

Greenish

[344]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

Plate 46. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Bottle with wide flared neck and slanting shoulder

316

3232

Bluish-green

243

2415

Bluish-green

Bottle (?) with wide flared neck and slanting shoulder

225

2234

Bluish-green

227

2173

Bluish-green

5

Bottle with funnel-shaped mouth and internal concavity below the rim

316

3232

Bluish-green

6

Bottle/jug with trefoil rim

225

2234

Bluish-green

7

Bottle (?) decorated by pinching

414

4053

Bluish-green

8

Jug with wide cylindrical neck

427

4166

Bluish-green vessel and thin trails on neck, dark blue handle and thick trail on rim

9

Jug/juglet with high pushed-in hollow ring base

230

2302

Bluish-green

236

2465

Light olive green

2 3 4

10

Plate 47. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Square/rectangular windowpane

W1

3216

Light green

2

412

4043

Bluish-green

3

425

4148

Bluish-green

4

302

3045

Bluish-green

Plate 48. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Color

1

Square/rectangular windowpane

W1

3216

Light green

240

2280

Bluish-green

345

6024

Light bluish-green

2 3

Round windowpane

[345]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

Plate 39. Bowls.

[346]

2

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

1

3

2

5

4

0

1

Plate 40. Bowls.

[347]

2

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Plate 41. Bowl-shaped oil lamps.

0

1

2

[348]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

1

2

3

4

5

6

9 8 7

10

11

13

12 Plate 42. Bowl-shaped oil lamps.

0

1

[349]

14 2

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

3

2

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0

1

2

Plate 43. Bowl-shaped oil lamps.

[350]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

1

2

3

4

5

8

13

7

6

9

10

11

15

14

0

1

2

Plate 44. Beakers, bowl-cups, and wineglasses.

[351]

12

16

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

4 3

2

1

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0

1

2

Plate 45. Bottles.

[352]

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

2 2 1 1

3

4

3

4

5 5

7

6

7

6

8

9

10

8

9

10

0

1

2

0

1

2

Plate 46. Bottles and jugs/juglets.

[353]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

2

1

3

Plate 47. Windowpanes.

4

0

1

[354]

2

B y z a n t i n e G l a s s V e s s e l s a n d W i n d o w pa n e s

1

2

3

0

1

Plate 48. Windowpanes.

[355]

2

CHAPTER EIGHT

Metal    Artifacts

Few metal artifacts were discovered at the monastery of Martyrius, relative to its size. The artifacts unearthed can be divided into a number of groups: lighting devices, incense shovels, domestic vessels (for cooking and serving), structural fittings, inlays, clothing accessories, and jewelry. Jewelry and tools belonging to the Early Islamic period agricultural farmhouse also came to light. The report presents a representative selection of the artifacts. The paucity of metal artifacts discovered in the monastery of Martyrius, as in most monasteries and churches from the Byzantine period, is due to the fact that they could be melted down and reused as raw material. This also explains why they were often looted by the Arab armies and the local population. Lighting Devices The impressive bronze vessels discovered at the site are lighting devices. Due to the singular structure of the churches and chapels, their size, and their few windows, they were dark, day and night. The churches and chapels were illuminated mainly by bronze oil lamps, lampstands, and glass bowl-shaped oil lamps, some set in chandeliers. The lampstand (candelabra) generally consisted of a bronze pole on three legs that mostly resembled lions’ feet. A bronze oil lamp topped the pole (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 107). The chandeliers consisted of a round bronze frame with holes (polycandela) that held bowl-shaped oil lamps consisting of a deep small bowl with a hollow cylindrical stem in its bottom, suspended from three chains. Oil was poured into the stem, from which a wick in a bronze wick holder protruded (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 105, 108–109). An additional type of bowl-shaped oil lamps, suspended from a lamp hanger consisting of three bronze chains, have three handles and a wick

tube containing a wick in a bronze wick holder, in the center of the bowl (Israeli and Mevorah 2000: 106). Some bronze mounts were affixed directly to the wall and bore only a single bowl-shaped lamp (Alliata 1991: 42, Foto 6). It should be noted that bowl-shaped oil lamps, in addition to holding the wick and containing the oil, were also used as a sort of lampshade, dispersing light to a greater distance in the church hall. (For an overview of lighting in the Byzantine period, see Bouras and Parani 2008). The lighting artifacts at the site were uncovered in the east wing of the church complex, except for a bronze lion-foot shaped lampstand leg, discovered in the courtyard east of the “Chapel of the Three Priests.” The leg was filled with lead to stabilize the base of the pole on which a bronze lamp was placed (Pl. 49). A bronze lampstand was discovered at Beth Shean (Fitzgerald 1931: 42, Pl. XXXVII:9). A copper alloy lampstand base with lion-foot shaped legs was found at Sardis (Waldbaum 1983: 105, Pl. 40:617). A copper alloy hearth with legs fashioned like animal feet came to light in the monastery at the Temple Mount excavations (Mazar 2003: 49, Pl. I.9:5). Lamp hangers for chandeliers and for bowl-shaped oil lamps with three handles were discovered. The martyrium yielded a lamp hanger with three bronze arms, apparently part of a chandelier. It was found almost complete, with a dedicatory inscription engraved on one of the arms (Pl. 50). The inscription reads: + Ἁγίου Παμφίλου + Of Saint Pamphilus L. Di Segni, who translated the inscription, suggested that the lamp apparently hung in a chapel or on an altar dedicated to Pamphilus, famous scholar of

[357]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Bronze lampstand with three legs that resemble animal feet, found at the Givʿat Zeʾev site (courtesy of Israel Museum, Jerusalem).

Caesarea and teacher of Eusebius, who was martyred as a Christian in 309 CE. She thought there might be a tenuous connection between the lamp and Martyrius. As patriarch, Martyrius deposited relics of the martyrs

Tarachus, Probus, and Andronicus in the church of the monastery of St. Euthymius (on May 7th, 487 CE; Life of Euthymius 44, 66). It was likely the same Martyrius who founded a chapel dedicated to St. Alexander in a village called Enbigon or Enbiglon, and deposited relics there of the same martyrs, together with those of the martyrs George, Pamphilus and Alexander. The site may have been located near Bethphage (Milik 1960: 565, no. 42; Verhelst 2004: 16, 25, 30, no. 51). The names of the village and chapel, together with the day of deposition, are preserved in the Georgian Calendar of the Church of Jerusalem, under the date September 28th (Garitte 1958: 93, 342). It is conceivable that due to circumstances the chapel was abandoned, and that the relics, as well as some of the furniture, were brought to the monastery of Martyrius, since Martyrius had endowed the chapel with them. Di Segni also suggested that the alpha engraved on the incense shovel (see below) might possibly be connected with the name Alexander: perhaps both shovel and hanger belonged to the same chapel. Chandelier frames were not discovered at the site, but many fragments, belonging to chandeliers, were found of bowl-shaped oil lamps with a hollow cylindrical stem (see Pl. 43:1–9). The site also yielded two bronze chains that were part of additional lamp hangers. One, embellished with a cross, was found in the martyrium (Pl. 51:1), and the other, in hall L225, adjacent to the church on the south (Pl. 51:2). Lamp hangers and lamp hanger chains resembling the finds from the monastery were discovered at: Nessana (Colt 1962: 54, PI. XXII:16, 30); Shavei Zion (Prausnitz 1967: 25, 44, Pl. XVIII:b–c); Nahariya (Edelstein 1984: 103–104, Pl. LXI–LXII); Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 1990: 364–365, Fig. 21; with handles of the glass lamp still hanging); Kh. el-Waziah (Aviam 2003: 46, Fig. 10); as well as at the synagogue at Beth Shean (Zori 1967: 163, Pl. 33:7). Additional objects belonging to the type of lighting devices that consists of bowl-shaped oil lamps are the bronze wick holders that stabilized the wick in the oil container, so it would not be immersed. One end of the wick holder held the wick, the other end set on the lip of the glass vessel (Pl. 51:3–4). The objects were found in room L237, adjacent to the church on the south. Bronze wick holders were found at: Mt. Nebo (Saller 1941: 310, Pl. 135, Fig. 1:8–10; Pl. 137,

[358]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

Fig. 1:5); ʿEin Kerem (Bagatti 1948: 77, Tav. 26, Foto 59:4–6); Nessana (Colt 1962: 54, Pl. XXII:27); Khan el-Aḥmar (Meimaris 1989: 106, Fig. 137); Umm alRasas (Alliata 1991: 402, Fig. 19:28A); the “Hanging Cave” of Chariton (Hirschfeld 2000: 349, Fig. 24); and at Ḥ. Karkur ʿIllit (Nikolsky et al. 2004: 245, Fig. 54:9–10). In addition to lighting devices for inside the churche, the excavations also yielded three bronze objects that are quite rare in metal finds from this period. The first object is a fragment of the side of a lantern, made of a thin, concave bronze plate bearing soot marks, with orderly rows of lozenge-shaped holes (Pl. 51:5). It was found in the church hall. Additional pottery lanterns were discovered in the monastery (see Pl. 38:4–5). Additionally, two bronze handguards for torches were found in room L227, next to the church on the north (Pl. 51:6–7). These finds were almost certainly in extensive use in the Roman and Byzantine periods, mainly by army legions. The monks who walked along the monastery paths at night probably carried torches and bronze and pottery lanterns to light their way. Incense shovels An additional artifact, almost certainly belonging to the church, is a bronze incense shovel decorated with a griffin-like creature and probably attached to a stand, also of bronze. The incense shovel consists of a rectangular plate with an engraved letter A and a small round bowl (Pl. 52). The artifact was found in room L237, adjacent to the church on the south. A similar object, belonging to a chandelier, came to light in the monastery at the Temple Mount excavations (Mazar 2003: 33, Pl. I.4:2). Domestic vessels The vessels that came to light are of bronze, some complete. They include containers, and serving and cooking vessels. Two complete containers were found. One was a cast bronze jug with a spout and a high handle extending from neck to shoulder (Pl. 53:1). It was found in passageway L228, north of the church. Another jug, hammered, has a high neck above which is a band, attached by a chain to the lid.

The vessel’s handle is not preserved (Pl. 53:2). The jug was discovered in a monastic cell, L419, south of the church. A similar hammered jug was discovered at Mt. Nebo (Saller 1941: 313, Pl. 137, Fig. 3); and a comparable Umayyad jug was found at Pella (Smith and Day 1989: 118, Pls. 38:H; 62:9). An additional jug lid decorated with a carved star was unearthed in courtyard L418, south of the church (Pl. 53:3). Different-sized lids also came to light (Pl. 54); some are flat, apparently from cooking vessels (Pl. 54: 1–2). Parts of an embellished serving bowl (Pl. 55:1), strainers (Pl. 55:2–3), and a handle, probably from a container (Pl. 55:4), were also revealed. These assorted vessels were found in and near the kitchen (L300, L316, L325), scattered north of the church (L227), near the stables (L228, L230) and to its south (L238), and in a monastic cell, L421. Structural fittings Most of the metal items incorporated in construction belong to doors (probably wooden). Two iron pivot sockets were discovered from the northeastern entrance gate doors of the monastery (L213; Pl. 56:1–2). Similar pivot sockets were found at Shavei Zion (Prausnitz 1967: 35, Pl. XIX:b) and Kh. el-Bira (Safrai and Dar 1997: 69, Fig. 8); and in the monastery at the Temple Mount excavations (Mazar 2003: 18, photo I.20). Two vertical pivots were discovered in the kitchen: one, of iron covered with a layer of cast lead (Pl. 56:3), which apparently belonged to the kitchen door; and the other, of iron and bronze with cast lead in between (Pl. 56:4). It has not been determined whether the latter functioned as an entrance door pivot, or as a pivot in a piece of furniture. An iron door hinge (Pl. 57:1) came to light in one of the monastery rooms; a similar one was discovered at Pella (Smith and Day 1989: 115, Pl. 57:7, identified as a pivot), and two were discovered at Nabratein (Meyers and Meyers 2009: 344–345, Pls. A:1; C:5). In addition, part of an iron hinge was found in the refectory; it is unclear whether it was used for a door, a window, or a piece of furniture (Pl. 57:2). Similar hinges were unearthed at Sardis (Waldbaum 1983: 64, Pl. 18:255), Pella (Smith and Day 1989: 110, Fig. 31), and Caesarea (Rafael 2008: 440, 456, 462, Figs. 88, 90).

[359]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

The refectory also yielded an iron plate for a door lock (Pl. 57:3). A bronze door handle was discovered in one of the monastery rooms (L103; Pl. 57:4). Three iron door parts were found in a single location in the kitchen: a lock plate, a lock cover for the lock hole, and a ring with a clasp that was apparently the door handle (Pl. 57:5–7). Matching lock plates were found at the Tyropoeon Valley in Jerusalem (Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929: 95, Pl. XIX:16); and at Sardis (Waldbaum 1983: 70, Pl. 23:346–357). An additional iron ring came to light close to the stables in the monastery’s southeastern wing (L427; Pl. 57:8). Such rings, used as handles, for hanging objects, etc., were found at: Meiron (Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981: 149, Pl. 9.3:17–20); Ḥ. Gov (Aviam 2002: 211, Fig. 122:3); at Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 2002: 172, Fig. 55); and at the monastery at the Temple Mount excavations (Mazar 2003: 33, Pl. I.4:4). The excavations also unearthed iron rings attached to an iron clasp reinforced with lead and anchored in the troughs. Such rings were used to tie animals in the stable; and four were found in stable L217, adjoining the northeastern monastery entrance (see Figs. 44–45). This group also includes a thin lead band with a rounded, pierced part in its center (Pl. 57:9), found in room L237, south of the church. Bands of this sort were used to tie and reinforce pipes. Inlays Two decorated plates for inlays were found. The first, in the refectory, is of bronze, engraved in its center with concentric circles, surrounded by four circles, two of them perforated (Pl. 58:1). A key plate for a box, decorated with concentric circles, was discovered at Nessana (Colt 1962: 54, Pl. XXII:14). The second plate, also of bronze, is of cruciform shape, with a hole in its center (Pl. 58:2). Each arm of the cross is engraved with two concentric circles. We assume that the plate, unearthed in the residential unit of the central northern wing, was connected to some architectural item. Similar plates were installed in marble or stone chancel screen columns; see Ḥ. Hesheq (Aviam 2002: 170, Figs. 36–37).

clothing accessories and jewelry A rectangular iron buckle with a tongue was found at the martyrium (Pl. 58:3). Similar buckles came to light at Meiron (Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981: Pl. 9.5:36), and at the Temple Mount excavations (Mazar 2007: 13, Fig. 1.17:1). For an overview of buckles from the sixth to eighth centuries CE, see Eger 2001. A broken bronze fibula was unearthed in one of the stables (L219; Pl. 58:4). A bronze ring depicting, in sunken relief, two figures with a halo, apparently saints, was discovered in room L314, which led to the tomb in the monastery’s northern central wing (Pl. 58:5). Rings with a haloed figure were found at Gezer (Macalister 1911: 374–375, Figs. 193–194; see also Bagatti 2002: 188, Fig. 61) and Nessana (Colt 1962: 53, Pl. XXIII:16). A bronze ring inlaid with reddish glass (Pl. 58:6) and a bronze bracelet fragment decorated with lozenges (Pl. 58:7) were found and dated to the Early Islamic period. A similar silver ring, inlaid with a dark amber semiprecious carnelian, was found at Caesarea. The jewelry assemblage from Caesarea is dated from the fourth century CE to the late medieval period (Patrich and Rafael 2008: 422, 428, Fig. 20). Tools The site’s iron tool assemblage should be ascribed to the Early Islamic farmhouse, even though such tools were also common in earlier periods. Half of a pair of scissors was found (Pl. 59:1). Similar scissors were discovered at Nessana (Colt 1962: 54, Pl. XXII:3) and Gadara (Umm Qeis; Weber 1991: 231, Fig. 3:2). The agricultural tool assemblage includes: a trapezoidal shovel with raised edges and a handle (Pl. 59:2); two adzes, one with a broken handle (Pl. 59:3–4); and two sickles, one complete and only the blade of the other (Pl. 59:5–6). Adzes were found at: Yassi Ada (Katzev 1982: 242, 245, Figs. 11-12:19; 11-13:19); Sardis (Waldbaum 1983: 49, Pl. 11:136); and Jerash (Clark et al. 1986: 268, Pl. XXI:2). Sickle blades were found at Beth Shean (Fitzgerald 1931: 41, Pl. XXXVII:28, 30) and at Pella (Smith and Day 1989: 118, Pl. 62:17).

[360]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

Plate 49. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Lampstand

425

4158

Bronze

Animal-foot shaped leg, formed part of lampstand base. 22.5 cm long; maximal width 5 cm; 4 cm thick

Plate 50. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Lamp hanger

221

2133

Bronze

Lamp hanger consisting of three chains suspended from a hook, each connected to narrow plate ending with hook that fit into the chandelier’s round frame. Greek inscription engraved on one of the plates. Total length ca. 43 cm. Two plates found intact, each 19.5 cm long; maximal width 0.8–0.9 cm; 0.1–0.2 cm thick

Plate 51. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Chain with cross

221

2134

Bronze

Chain with cross, ending with hook. 28 cm long; cross 10 cm long; 6 cm wide. Chain part of lamp hanger

2

Chain with hook

225

Bronze

Chain segment, ending with hook. 11 cm long; ca. 1 cm thick. Apparently part of lamp hanger

3

Wick holder

237

2182

Bronze

Thin narrow band, one end folded like an S, the other, bent. 13.5 cm long; 0.4 cm wide; 0.1 cm thick

4

Wick holder

237

2182

Bronze

Thin narrow band, one end folded like an S, the other, bent. 11 cm long; 0.5 cm wide; 0.1 cm thick

5

Lantern

200

2043

Bronze

Thin, concave, perforated and sooty plate with folded edges. 9 cm long; 7 cm wide. Part of a lantern

6

Handguard for torch

227

2168

Bronze

Flat round plate with hole in center. Diameter 16 cm; hole diameter 3 cm

7

Handguard for torch

227

2152

Bronze

Flat round plate with hole in center. Diameter 16 cm; hole diameter 3 cm

[361]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 52. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Incense shovel

237

2241

Bronze

Rod with round cross section. One end in shape of griffin head. Other end, flat plate with hole for attaching it. Above griffin head, rectangular plate with high edges, and a round bowl. Rectangular plate incised with concentric circles and the letter A. Total length 37.5 cm; rod diameter 1.7 cm; rectangular plate 11 cm long; 7.5 cm wide; 1 cm thick; bowl diameter 6 cm

Plate 53. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Jug

228

2390

Bronze

Cast jug with spout. Globular body, high neck with ridge and ring base. One handle, from shoulder to neck. 23 cm high; body diameter 15 cm; neck diameter 6 cm; base diameter 9 cm; rim diameter 4 cm

2

Jug

419

4140

Bronze

Hammered jug with lid. Squat body, broad shoulder, high neck, and flat base. Lid attached to jug by chain connected to strip around jug’s neck. Handle from shoulder to band missing. Jug 24 cm high; lid 4 cm high; body diameter 16 cm; neck diameter 6 cm; rim diameter 4 cm

3

Jug lid

418

4075

Bronze

Lid with chain. Cylindrical-shaped lid, incised with a sixpointed star. Chain attached to center of lid. Lid diameter 7.8 cm; 4 cm high; chain 13 cm long

Plate 54. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Lid

316

3251

Bronze

Flat lid with loop handle at center. Diameter 30 cm

2

Lid

421

4082

Bronze

Flat lid with raised, folded edges and hole in center for small loop handle. Diameter 19 cm; hole diameter 1 cm

3

Lid

238

2270

Bronze

Small lid with convex center and hole in middle for chain. Diameter 5.3 cm; hole diameter 0.4 cm

4

Lid

325

3317

Bronze

Small flat lid with hole in middle for chain. Diameter 5 cm; hole diameter 0.3 cm

[362]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

Plate 55. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Bowl

300

3133

Bronze

Fragments of cast shallow bowl, ornamented at center with leaves forming a rosette. Estimated diameter 16 cm; 1 cm high

2

Strainer

230

2306

Bronze

Fragment of small, thin, perforated shallow bowl with flat everted rim and a handle. Estimated diameter 7 cm; 0.6 cm high

3

Strainer

227

2264

Bronze

Small, thin, perforated shallow bowl, almost complete. Diameter 5.5 cm; 1.5 cm high

4

Handle

300

3199

Bronze

Semicircular strip with flat, perforated ends and folded edges. Diameter 6 cm; 1 cm wide; 0.4 cm thick

Plate 56. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Pivot socket

213

2058

Iron

Squarish plate with circular depression in center. 15.5 cm long; 13 cm wide; 3 cm thick; depression diameter 11.5 cm

2

Pivot socket

213

2059

Iron

Round plate with circular depression in center. Diameter 13.5 cm; 1.5 cm thick; depression diameter 8 cm

3

Pivot

300

3203

Iron and lead

Hollow tube that penetrates center of circular iron disc cast with layer of lead. Diameter 13.5 cm; 2 cm thick; tube 7 cm long, diameter 2.5 cm

4

Pivot

300

3199

Bronze, iron, and lead

Iron rod that penetrates center of small bronze bowl filled with lead. Diameter 6 cm; 6 cm long

[363]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Plate 57. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Hinge

236

2307

Iron

Two rods attached to a small bowl on one end and to one another by a nail. 19 cm long; bowl diameter 8 cm

2

Hinge

302

3047

Iron

Rectangular plate with remains of three nails and a loop at end. 7 cm long; 3.5 cm wide; 1 cm thick

3

Door lock plate

302

3049

Iron

Rectangular plate with remains of nail at one end and a hook at the other. 18 cm long; 6.5 cm wide; 1 cm thick

4

Handle

103

1050

Bronze

Door handle, concave in center with two broken ends. 14.5 cm long; maximal width 1.8 cm

5

Door lock plate

300

3171

Iron

Rectangular plate with rectangular keyhole and remains of four nails. 10 cm long; 8 cm wide; 0.2 cm thick

6

Lock cover for lock hole

300

3171

Iron

Flat triangular plate with narrow tip curved like a hook, and a nail. 8 cm long; 3.5 cm wide; 0.8 cm thick

7

Functional ring

300

3171

Iron

Ring, round cross section, with attached clasp. Ring diameter 4.5 cm; 1 cm thick

8

Functional ring

427

4165

Iron

Ring, square cross section, with attached clasp. Ring diameter 6 cm; 1 cm thick; clasp 8 cm long

9

Band

237

2182

Lead

Thin, narrow band, round and perforated in middle. Thin lines incised near round part. 12.5 cm long; center 1.8 cm wide; 0.2 cm thick

Plate 58. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Furniture fitting plate

301

3055

Bronze

Rectangular plate with two small nail holes, decorated with engraved concentric circles. 4.5 cm long; 4 cm wide; 0.1 cm thick

2

Maltese cross

253

2386

Bronze

Square plate with hole in center. Each cross arm decorated with two engraved concentric circles. 4.5 cm long; 4.5 cm wide; 0.1 cm thick; hole diameter 0.8 cm

3

Belt buckle

221

Iron

Rectangular buckle with tongue, bent bar attached by nail. 4 cm long; 3 cm wide

4

Fibulae

219

2285

Bronze

Fibula arc incised with stripes along sides, knob with pin at one end and loop for pin at other. Pin missing. 6 cm long; 0.8 cm wide

5

Finger ring

314

3348

Bronze

Broken ring with flat round bezel decorated with two holy figures. Diameter 2 cm; 0.2 cm thick; bezel diameter 1.5 cm

6

Finger ring

Surface

Bronze

Ring with inlaid oval glass set in high frame. Diameter 2 cm; 0.4 cm thick; maximal bead length 1.5 cm

7

Bracelet

101

Bronze

Fragment of bracelet, decorated with lozenges adorned with dots and lines. 0.8 cm wide; 0.4 cm thick

1052

[364]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

Plate 59. No.

Artifact

Locus

Basket

Material

Description

1

Scissors

204

2004

Iron

Part of scissors, triangular blade with straight cutting edge. Narrow, straight handle with broken curved end. 20 cm long; blade 8.5 long; 2.5 cm wide

2

Shovel

422

4120

Iron

Triangular shovel with raised edges. Handle attached to wide side. 22.5 cm long; 10 cm wide; 1.5 cm thick

3

Adze hammer

302

3092

Iron and wood

Iron adze hammer head, with downward curved blade and round handle socket. Blade edge broken. Remains of wooden handle preserved in socket. 29 cm long; 4 cm wide; socket diameter 3 cm

4

Adze

302

3093

Iron

Adze with triangular blade and vertical haft. Blade 16 cm long; 5 cm wide; haft 21 cm long; 4 cm thick

5

Sickle

100

10021

Iron

Curved blade, cutting edge on inner side. Long handle. Blade 14 cm long; 2.5 cm wide; handle 23.5 cm long

6

Sickle

100

10023

Iron

Curved blade. Handle missing. 17 cm long; 3.75 cm wide

[365]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

0

1

2

Plate 49. Lampstand leg.

[366]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

1 1 1

0

Plate 50. Lamp hanger with a dedicatory inscription.

0

2 1

[367]

2

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

00 0

33 3 22 2

44 4 00 0

11 1

22 2

00 0

22 2

44 4

11 122 2

44 4

55 5

66 6

Plate 51. Lamp hanger chains, wick holders, lantern, and handguards for torches.

[368]

77 7

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

11 2

0

0

1

2

Plate 52. Incense shovel.

[369]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

Plate 53. Jugs and jug lid.

0

2

4

[370]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

1

0

2

4

0

1

2

4

3 Plate 54. Lids.

2

[371]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1 1

3 3

2 2

4 4 0 0

1 1

Plate 55. Bowl, strainers, and vessel handle.

[372]

2 2

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

11

22

33 00

22

44

44 00

11

22

Plate 56. Pivots.

[373]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

3

2

1

3

2

1 0

2

4

0

2

4

6 5 4

6

5

4

7

9

7

9

8 8 0

1

2

0

1

2

Plate 57. Hinges, door locks and cover, door handle, functional rings and band.

[374]

M e ta l A rt i fa c t s

1 2

1

2

5 5 4

3

4

3

6 6 0

1

2

0

1

2

7 7

Plate 58. Byzantine (1–5) inlays, buckle, fibula and ring, and Early Islamic period (6–7) ring and bracelet.

[375]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

2 2

1 1

3 3

4 4

5 5

0 0

2 2

Plate 59. Early Islamic-period scissors and agricultural tool.

[376]

4 4

6 6

CHAPTER NINE

Tiles

Tiles began appearing in the architecture of the Land of Israel in the early Roman period, their use peaking in the Byzantine period. They covered the roofs of churches, chapels, and various monastery structures, and were used in private construction. In most of the excavations where Byzantine remains were found, no tiles were reported. There is no way of knowing whether this was due to the absence of tiles, or to their lack of importance in the excavators’ eyes. Most of the published tiles are fragments, usually imprinted with various designs, e.g., a circle, horseshoe, cross, or rosette. On some tiles, the same design appears a number of times, and on others, different designs are combined. It should be emphasized that most of the tiles discovered at the monastery of Martyrius and at other sites were not imprinted. As the various designs were imprinted before the tiles were fired, we must assume that this was done at the workshop. While similar imprints can be found at other sites, there is no uniformity in terms of their size and position on the tile; and their significance is unclear, unlike stamp impressions on tiles and bricks during the Roman period that bore the name and seal of the Roman Tenth Legion (Gutfeld and Nenner-Soriano 2012). At the monastery of Martyrius, relatively many tiles were found, with dozens of complete tiles and fragments scattered around the site. In room L223, a storeroom that adjoined the martyrium, two rows of tiles were found, some whole, and others broken. Two types of tiles were found at the site: flat tegulae, and semi-cylindrical imbrices. The tegulae were of different sizes, on average 0.30×0.40 m, trapezoidal in shape, with raised edges, sometimes inclined inwards, on the long sides (Pls. 60–61). The semi-cylindrical imbrex overlapped the seam between two tegulae, connecting them (Pl. 62). Mortar was widely used for fitting the tiles. We tried estimating how many tiles there likely were

at the monastery of Martyrius. According to the size of the tiles found, nine tegulae and six imbrices would have been needed to cover 1 m² of roof. Thus, the monastery of Martyrius had at least 1,500 m² of tiled roofs over: the church; the martyrium; the five chapels, including that of the hospice; the porticoes; and over the large refectory and kitchen complex. The area of a roof with a 45° incline is 35% greater than that of a flat one. It is estimated that there had to be some 25,000 tiles of either kind. The roof tiles found represent less than half a percent of the total number used for the monastery structures. It is impossible to estimate from the various publications, the quantity of tiles and tile fragments found. We assume that even when there was testimony of large quantities of Byzantine tile fragments, the number found was significantly smaller than it should have been. This raises the question of the disappearance of the tiles from the villages, churches, and very remote monasteries after the Arab conquest. Preserving whole dismantled tiles requires very delicate and cautious work, performed on high, over the wooden construction of the roof; and additionally, in arid areas, the work was done under harsh climatic conditions. It was necessary to detach tiles from their connecting mortar, clean them, prepare them for reuse, and then transport them by donkey and mule on roads that were not easily accessible. If only whole tiles had been taken, it might have been for secondary use. However, there was no report in the many Byzantine excavations of even tile fragments, indicating that even the fragments were repurposed. Across the Land of Israel, after the Arab conquest, hundreds of churches, monasteries and settlements containing hundreds of thousands of tiles stood abandoned. The local population looted everything: tables, chancel posts and screens, building stones, columns and capitals, mosaic tesserae, pottery vessels,

[377]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Tegulae found at the monastery.

stone and glass vessels, and also wooden beams, doors, etc. However, it is surprising that sites were so totally stripped of tiles, especially since dismantling and cleaning them for reuse required skilled workers. We assume that the almost complete absence of tiles at many sites proves their removal was organized on a huge scale, initiated by public officials who built state enterprises during the Umayyad period. The whole tiles were for secondary use, while the fragments were pulverized and added to mortar and hydraulic plaster used to seal cisterns and ponds.

The subject of the tiles has not been fully researched, in particular regarding their place of manufacture during the Byzantine period. The absence of tiles in sites in the Land of Israel also requires in-depth and wide-scale study. In the monastery of Martyrius, in addition to complete, plain tiles, 11 different imprinted designs were found on the two types of tiles: a cross-shaped flower (Pl. 60:1), a cross (Pls. 60:2; 61:4), a cross in a circle (Pls. 61:5; 62:1), a leaf in a circle (Pl. 60:3), a single complete circle (Pls. 61:1; 62:2), two concentric circles (Pls. 61:2; 62:3), two circles side by side (Pl. 61:3), a truncated circle (Pl. 62:4), a sixpetaled flower (Pl. 62:5), two horseshoes (Pl. 62:6), and three triangles (Pl. 62:7). Tiles from the Byzantine period with imprints similar to those found at the monastery of Martyrius were found at a number of sites in Jerusalem and the surrounding area. See: Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: Tav. 26, Foto 74:1, 2, 8); Bethany (Saller 1957: 324, Pl. 130a:4); Ramat Raḥel (Aharoni 1962: 3, Fig. 2:4–5, 7–8); Jerusalem (Vriezen 1994: 255–258, Abb. X.1:16); Deir Ghazali (Avner 2000: 46*, Fig. 24:2, 6–7); Kh. Ṭabaliya (Kogan-Zehavi 2000: 75*, Fig. 13:23); and Kh. Umm Zaqum (Peleg 2012c: Pl. 2:14). For additional examples of imprints on tiles, see: Aharoni 1962: Fig. 2:1, 6; Kogan-Zehavi 2000: Fig. 13:23; Avner 2000: Fig. 24: 1, 3–6; Magen and Baruch 2012: Pl. 2:20; and Magen, Har-Even and Sharukh 2012: 279, Fig. 53. The imprinted designs found on tiles have also been found on lamps; see, e.g., Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Corbo 1955: Tav. 26, Foto 74:7). For roofing techniques and the manufacture of tegula and imbrex tiles, see Vriezen 1995. Tiles of this sort can be seen in frescoes, manuscript illuminations, mosaics, and sarcophagi (Wikander 1989: 193).

[378]

tiles

Plate 60. No.

Type

Locus

1

Roof tile

Basket

Description

223

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of cross-shaped flower

2

223

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of cross

3

223

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of leaf in a circle

Plate 61. No.

Type

Locus

1

Roof tile

223

Basket

Description Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of a single circle

2

412

4039

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of two concentric circles

3

301

3025

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of two circles next to one another

4

511

5021

Pink 7.5YR 8/4, engraved decoration of cross

5

412

4039

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of cross in a circle

Plate 62. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Roof tile

424

4138

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, light brown core, imprint decoration of cross in a circle

2

200

2023

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 8/6, imprint decoration of a single circle

3

225

2271

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of two concentric circles

4

330

3286

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, imprint decoration of truncated circle

5

238

Pinkish white 7.5YR 8/2, reddish core, imprint decoration of flower with six petals

6

200

2023

Pink 7.5YR 8/4, reddish core, imprint decoration of two horseshoes

7

425

4147

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 8/6, imprint decoration of three triangles

[379]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3 0

5

Plate 60. Tegulae with various imprinted designs.

[380]

10

tiles

0

5

10

1

2 3

4

5 0

1

2

Plate 61. Tegulae with various imprinted designs.

[381]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 0

1

Plate 62. Imbrices with various imprinted designs.

[382]

2

[383]

221

251

745

230

3

4*

5

---

1*

2*

Locus

Cat. No.

2312

7046

2389

2095

---

Basket

0.17

0.6

1.15

1.43

2.53

Weight (Gm.)

9

10

12

16

14

Diam. (Mm.)

Axis

Blank.

Obliterated.

[---] Bust r

Reverse

Blank.

Imitation of Vota inscription within wreath.

Obliterated.

LATE ROMAN

‫מלכא אלכסנדרס שנת כה‬ Star within circle of dots.

HASMONEAN Alexander Janneus (103–76 BCE) – prutah

[ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ] ANTIOXOY ΕΥΕΡΓΕΤΟΥ Anchor. Date illegible.

SELEUCID Antiochus VII (138–129 BCE)

[ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Α]ΛΕΞΑΝΔ[ΡΟΥ] Anchor within circle, flanked by date: L – KE (year 25)

Lily.

Obverse

450–550

First half fifth cent.

Fourth cent.

80/79 BCE

134–130 BCE

Date (CE)

Jerusalem

Jerusalem

Mint

The coins are arranged chronologically, according to coin types. All of the coins are bronze, unless otherwise stated. Coins bearing an asterisk have photographs in Plate 63.

Gabriela Bijovsky and Ariel Berman

COIN CATALOGUE

CHAPTER TEN

Bijovsky INJ 14:202, No. 5. Cast.

Bijovsky INJ 14:199, No. 2.

Cf. TJC:209, group K.

Cf. SNG 1 Israel:Pl. 137, No. 2133–2146.

References and Notes

28972

37562

28963

28958

4471

K Nos.

227

9

[384] 6.26

15

4133/2

12.18

14

421

5.88

13

5.38

6.65

14.13

12.82

7.65

4.9

Weight (Gm.)

4.88

2153

---

2160

4133/1

2312

---

Basket

12

227

421

8

11*

230

7

19

---

6*

10

Locus

Cat. No.

23x27

29

24

20

21

23

29

29

25

20

Diam. (Mm.)

M

Same.

in l.: ANNO; date illegible; below: TES

K

r. date: [XII]

K in l.: ANNO; above: Φ+C; to

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: II/II; below: B

dm TibER ImAV]R PP AVG Bust facing, wearing crown, cuirassed and draped, holding globe with cross.

]BERP AVG Bust facing, wearing crown, cuirassed and draped, holding globe with cross.

↑

in l.: ANNO; above:S; to r. date: II?; in exergue: Є

K

Half follis

below: A; in exergue: NIKO

M in l.: ANNO; to r. date: I;

Maurice Tiberius (582–602 CE) – follis

[DN IVSTINVS PP AVG] Justin and Sophia seated facing on double throne.

DN IVSTI[NVS PP AVG] Justin and Sophia seated facing on double throne.

K

in r. field, star; below: A; in exergue: CON

M

Uncertain – follis

flanked by stars; above, cross; below: Δ; in exergue: CON

Justin II (565–578 CE) – half follis

[---] Bust r., diademed, cuirassed and draped.

DN IVSTI–NVS PP AVG Bust r., diademed, cuirassed and draped.

Same.

K in l. field, long cross.

field: punchmark: flower

K in l. field, long cross. In r.

Justin I (518–527 CE) – follis

DN ANA[STASIVS PP AVG] Bust r., diademed, cuirassed and draped.

DN ANASTASIVS PP AVG Bust r., diademed, cuirassed and draped.

Same.

Reverse

BYZANTINE Anastasius I (491–518 CE) – Half follis

Obverse

↓

↓

↓

↓

↑

↑

↓

↓

Axis

583/584 ?

582/583

576/577

568/569

512–538

518–522

512–518

498–507

Date (CE)

Constantinople

Nicomedia

Same

Same

Thessalonica

Constantinople

Constantinople

Constantinople

Constantinople?

Constantinople

Mint

DOC 1:311, No. 47. Overstruck.

DOC 1:323, No. 91.

Same.

DOC 1:220, No. 61.

DOC 1:225, No. 84.

DOC 1:214, No. 47.

Cf. DOC 1:40, No. 8d.

Cf. DOC 1:23, No. 24.

MIBE:87, No. 31.

References and Notes

20986

4467

4470

4469

28965

37352

28962

20987

28970

4468

K Nos.

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

227

200

230

16

17

18

2313

2024

2185

Basket

2.41

1.54

1.85

Weight (Gm.)

16x18

12

17

Diam. (Mm.) ↓

Axis

419

419

419

419

419

19*

20*

21*

[385]

22*

23*

4105

4105

4105

4105

4105

11.78

8.94

12.14

11.15

14.96

29

27

29

30

29

↑

↓

↓

↑

The following coins were found together within a jar.

Locus

Cat. No.

M

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: Ч/III; below: Γ; in exergue: tHEUP′

M

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: Ч; below: B; in exergue: NIKO

DNhE[RACLI [ЧS PERP AVI] Bust facing wearing helmet with plume, cuirassed and draped, holding globe with cross.

DNhRAC[ Bust facing wearing helmet, cuirassed and draped, holding globe with cross.

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: II/I; in exergue: CON

M

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: II?; below: A; in exergue: NIKO

M

Heraclius (610–641 CE) – follis

[dm TI]bER ImAVR PPA Bust facing, wearing crown, cuirassed and draped, holding globe with cross.

Maurice Tiberius (582–602 CE) – follis

Blundered inscription. Justin and Sophia seated facing on double throne.

M

in l.: ANNO; above, cross; to r. date: II/I; below: Є; in exergue: CON

Justin II (565–578 CE) – follis

Uncertain.

Mamluk – fals

‫محمد‬ ‫رسول‬ ‫هللا‬

Umayyad, post-reform – fals

[DN IVSTINVS PP AVG] Justin and Sophia seated facing on double throne.

‫ال هللا ا‬ ‫ال هللا‬ ‫وحده‬

Cross stg. on three steps.

Uncertain.

S

Reverse

Heraclius (610–641 CE) – hexanummium

Obverse

612-613

611-613

586/587

573/574

567/568

13th cent.

Eight cent.

613–618

Date (CE)

Constantinople

Nicomedia

Nicomedia

Antioch

Constantinople

Alexandria

Mint

DOC 2/1:276, No. 71. Overstruck.

DOC 2/1:316, Nos. 154–155.

DOC 1:324, No. 95.

DOC 1:244, No. 156.

DOC 1:205, No. 24.

Doublestruck.

Walker 1956:212, No. 659.

DOC 2/1:340, No. 198.

References and Notes

28968

28967

28966

28969

28972

28961

28960

28964

K Nos.

C O I N C AT A L O G U E

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

1

2

19

20

4

6

21

22

0

1

Plate 63. Coins.

[386]

11

23

Bibliography Acconci A. 1998. “Elements of the Liturgical Furniture,” in M. Piccirillo and E. Alliata (eds.), Mount Nebo New Archaeological Excavations 1967–1997 (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 27), Jerusalem, pp. 468–542. Adan-Bayewitz D. 1986. “The Pottery from the Late Byzantine Building (Stratum 4) and Its Implications,” in L.I. Levine and E. Netzer, Excavations at Caesarea Maritima: 1975, 1976, 1979—Final Report (Qedem 21), Jerusalem, pp. 90–129. Aharoni Y. 1956. “Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 1954. Preliminary Report,” IEJ 6 (2): 102–111. Aharoni Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel. Seasons 1959 and 1960, Roma. Aharoni Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel. Seasons 1961 and 1962, Roma. Alliata E. 1990. “Nuovo Settore del monastero al Monte Nebo-Siyagha,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 427–466. Alliata E. 1991. “Ceramica dal Complesso di Santo Stefano a Umm al-Rasas,” LA 41: 365–422. Al-Zaben S. 2001. “Umm el-Rasas. 2001 Excavations at the Rolling Stone Building,” LA 51: 366–368. Amar Z. 2000. Agricultural Produce in the Land of Israel in the Middle Ages, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Amir R. 2007. “Pottery of the Byzantine Period at the Essene Site (Area H),” in Y. Hirschfeld, En-Gedi Excavations II. Final Report (1996–2002), Jerusalem, pp. 464–465. Amit D., Seligman J. and Zilberbod I. 2000. “Jerusalem, Mount Scopus (East),” ḤA 112: 94–98 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 75*–78*). Arnon Y. 2008a. “Ceramic Assemblages from the Byzantine/Early Islamic Bath,” in K.G. Holum, J.A. Stabler and E.G. Reinhardt (eds.), Caesarea Reports and Studies. Excavations 1995–2007 within the Old City and the Ancient Harbor (BAR International Series 1784), Oxford, pp. 85–102. Arnon Y. 2008b. “The Ceramic Oil Lamps of the Transitional and Medieval Periods (640–1300): A Chronological and Typological Study,” in K.G. Holum, J.A. Stabler and E.G. Reinhardt (eds.), Caesarea Reports and Studies. Excavations 1995–2007 within the Old City and the Ancient Harbor (BAR International Series 1784), Oxford, pp. 213–264. Aviam M. 1990. “Ḥorvath Ḥesheq—A Unique Church in Upper Galilee: Preliminary Report,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology

in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 351–378. Aviam M. 2002. “Five Ecclesiastical Sites in Western Upper Galilee,” in Z. Gal (ed.), Eretz Zafon. Studies in Galilean Archaeology, Jerusalem, pp. 165–218 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 184*–185*). Aviam M. 2003. “Recent Excavations and Surveys of Churches and Monasteries in Western Galilee,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and L.D. Chrupcala (eds.), One Land— Many Cultures (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 41), Jerusalem, pp. 41–59. Avigad N. 1976. Beth Sheʿarim. Report on the Excavations during 1953–1958 III: Catacombs 12–23, Jerusalem. Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem, Tennessee. Avissar M. 1996. “The Medieval Pottery,” in A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali, Yoqneʿam I. The Late Periods (Qedem Reports 3), Jerusalem, pp. 75–172. Avissar M. 2005. Tel Yoqneʿam Excavations on the Acropolis (IAA Reports 25), Jerusalem. Avissar M. 2007. “The Pottery from Stratum 2 at Khirbat Deiran, Reḥovot,” ʿAtiqot 57: 91*–104* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 173–175). Avissar M. 2012. “Pottery from the Early Islamic to the Ottoman Period from the Cardo and the Nea Church,” in O. Gutfeld, Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 V: The Cardo (Area X) and the Nea Church (Areas D and T). Final Report, Jerusalem, pp. 301–345. Avissar M. and Stern E.J. 2005. Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid and Mamluk Periods in Israel (IAA Reports 26), Jerusalem. Avi-Yonah M. 1956. “The Samaritan Revolts against the Byzantine Empire,” Eretz-Israel 4: 127–132 (Hebrew; English summary, p. ix). Avner R. 2000. “Deir Ghazali: A Byzantine Monastery Northeast of Jerusalem,” ʿAtiqot 40: 25*–52* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 160–161). Avni G. 1992. Archaeological Survey of Israel. Map of Har Saggi Northeast (225), Jerusalem. Avni G., Avni Y. and Porat N. 2009. “A New Look at Ancient Agriculture in the Negev,” Cathedra 133: 13–44 (Hebrew). Bagatti B. 1948. Il Santuario Della Visitazione ad ʿAin Karim (Montana Judaeae). Esplorazione Archeologica e Ripristino (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum 5), Jerusalem. Bagatti B. 1964. “Oggetti inediti di Cafarnao,” LA 14: 261–272. Bagatti B. 1984. Gli scavi di Nazaret II: Dal secolo XII ad oggi (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 17), Jerusalem.

[387]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Bagatti B. 2002. Ancient Christian Villages of Judaea and the Negev (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 42), Jerusalem. Bar D. 2008. Fill the Earth. Settlement in Palestine during the Late Roman and Byzantine Periods 135–640 C.E., Jerusalem (Hebrew). Baramki D.C. 1932. “Note on a Cemetery at Karm AlShaikh, Jerusalem,” QDAP 1: 3–5. Baramki D.C. 1936. “Two Roman Cisterns at Beit Nattīf,” QDAP 5: 3–10. Baramki D.C. 1944. “The Pottery from Kh. el-Mefjer,” QDAP 10: 65–103. Baras Z. 1982. “The Persian Conquest and the End of Byzantine Rule,” in Z. Baras, S. Safrai, Y. Tsafrir and M. Stern (eds.), Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Second Temple to the Muslim Conquest I, Jerusalem, pp. 300–349 (Hebrew). Bar-Nathan R. 2011. “The Pottery Corpus,” in R. Bar-Nathan and W. Atrash, Bet Sheʾan II. Baysān: The Theater Pottery Workshop (IAA Reports 48), Jerusalem, pp. 229–343. Bar-Nathan R. and Adato M. 1986. “C. Byzantine Pottery (Stratum 5),” in L.I. Levine and E. Netzer, Excavations at Caesarea Maritima: 1975, 1976, 1979—Final Report (Qedem 21), Jerusalem, pp. 132–136. Bass G.F. 1982. “The Pottery,” in G.F. Bass and F.H. van Doorninck, Yassi Ada I. A Seventh-Century Byzantine Shipwreck, Texas, pp. 155–188. Batz S. 2012. “A Byzantine Church at Khirbet Beit Sila,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 373–408. Batz S. and Sharukh I. 2012. “A Roman Bathhouse and Two Byzantine Churches at Khirbet Ẓur,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 1–36. Baur P.V.C. 1938. “Glassware,” in C.H. Kraeling (ed.), Gerasa, City of the Decapolis, New Haven, Conn., pp. 505–546. Ben-Dov M. 1975. “Crusader Fortresses in Eretz-Israel,” Qadmoniot 8 (32): 102–113 (Hebrew). Ben-Layish D. 1969. “A Survey of Sun-Dials in Israel,” Sefunim III: 70–81. Ben-Pechat M. 1990. “Baptism and Monasticism in the Holy Land: Archaeological and Literary Evidence,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 501–522. Bijovsky G. 2000–2002. “The Currency of the Fifth Century C.E. in Palestine—Some Reflections in the Light of the Numismatic Evidence,” INJ 14: 196–210. Birger R. and Hirschfeld Y. 1988–1989. “Khan elAḥmar—1987,” ESI 7–8: 110. Bitton-Ashkelony B. and Kofsky A. 2006. The Monastic School of Gaza, Leiden.

Bouras L. and Parani M.G. 2008. Lighting in Early Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection Publications 11), Washington, D.C. Brooks E.W. 1897. “A Syriac Chronicle of the Year 846,” ZDMG 51: 569–588. Bull R.J. 1975. “A Tripartite Sundial from Tell er Râs on Mt. Gerizim,” BASOR 219: 29–37. Calderon R. 1999. “The Pottery,” in Y. Hirschfeld, The Early Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet ed-Deir in the Judean Desert: The Excavations in 1981–1987 (Qedem 38), Jerusalem, pp. 135–148. Calderon R. 2000. “Roman and Byzantine Pottery,” in Y. Hirschfeld, Ramat Hanadiv Excavations. Final Report of the 1984–1998 Seasons, Jerusalem, pp. 91–165. Calderon R. 2011. “The Pottery from Ḥorbat Gelilot,” ʿAtiqot 66: 63*–78* (Hebrew; English summary, p. 158). Chitty D.J. 1928. “Two Monasteries in the Wilderness of Judaea,” PEFQSt 61: 134–152. Chitty D.J. 1930. “Excavations at the Monastery of St. Euthymius, 1929,” PEFQSt 63: 43–47, 150–153. Chitty D.J. 1932. “The Monastery of St. Euthymius,” PEFQSt 65: 188–203. Chitty D.J. 1966. The Desert a City. An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Palestinian Monasticism under the Christian Empire, Oxford. Clark V.A., Bowsher J.M.C., Stewart J.D., Meyer C.M. and Falkner B.K. 1986. “The Jerash North Theatre: Architecture and Archaeology 1982–1983,” in F. Zayadine (ed.), Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–1983 I, Amman, pp. 205–302. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1898. “Deux nouveaux Lychnaria grec et arabe,” RB 7: 485–490. Coen Uzzielli T. 1997. “The Oil Lamps,” in Y. Hirschfeld, The Roman Baths of Hammat Gader. Final Report, Jerusalem, pp. 319–346. Cohen E. 1999. “The Glass,” in Y. Hirschfeld, The Early Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet ed-Deir in the Judean Desert: The Excavations in 1981–1987 (Qedem 38), Jerusalem, pp. 149–150. Cohen Finkelstein J. 1997. “The Islamic Pottery from Khirbet Abu Suwwana,” ʿAtiqot 32: 19*–34*. Colt H.D. 1962. Excavations at Nessana (Auja Hafir, Palestine) I, London. Corbo V.C. 1955. Gli scavi di Kh. Siyar el-Ghanam (Campo dei Pastori) e i monasteri dei dintorni (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 11), Jerusalem. Crowfoot J.W. 1931. Churches at Jerash. A Preliminary Report of the Joint Yale–British School Expeditions to Jerash, 1928–1930 (British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, Supplementary Papers 3), London. Crowfoot J.W. and Fitzgerald G.M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley Jerusalem, 1927 (PEFA V), London. Dadon M. 2012. “The ‘Basilica Church’ at Shiloh,”

[388]

Bibliography

in Christians and Christianity in III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 223–234. Damati E. 1977. “The Palace of Hilkiya,” in M. Broshi (ed.), Between Hermon and Sinai; Memorial to Amnon. Studies in the History, Archaeology and Geography of Eretz Israel, Jerusalem, pp. 93–113 (Hebrew). Damati E. 1989. “Irrigated Gardens in the Monastery of Martyrius,” in D. Amit, Y. Hirschfeld and J. Patrich (eds.), The Aqueducts of Ancient Palestine. Collected Essays, Jerusalem, pp. 299–304 (Hebrew). Damati E. 2002. “The Irrigation Systems in the Gardens of the Monastery of St. Martyrius (Maʿale Adummim),” in D. Amit, J. Patrich and Y. Hirschfeld (eds.), The Aqueducts of Israel (JRA Supplementary Series 46), Portsmouth, Rhode Island, pp. 438–443. Dan Y. 1982. “The Byzantine Administration,” in Z. Baras, S. Safrai, Y. Tsafrir and M. Stern (eds.), Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Second Temple to the Muslim Conquest I, Jerusalem, pp. 387–418 (Hebrew). Daremberg C.V. and Saglio E. 1904. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines 3, Paris. Dekkel A. 2008. “The Ottoman Clay Pipes,” in V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, Paneas II: Small Finds and Other Studies (IAA Report 38), Jerusalem, pp. 113–164. Delougaz P. and Haines R. 1960. A Byzantine Church at Khirbat al-Karak, Chicago. Deonna W. 1938. Le Mobilier Délien (Exploration Archéologique de Délos 18), Paris. De Vincenz A. 2007. “The Pottery,” in Y. Hirschfeld, En-Gedi Excavations II. Final Report (1996–2002), Jerusalem, pp. 234–427. De Vincenz A. 2013. “Ceramic Oil Lamps and Vessels from the Burial Cave at ʿEn Yaʿal, Jerusalem,” ʿAtiqot 76: 123–134. De Vincenz A. and Sion O. 2007. “Two Pottery Assemblages from Khirbat el-Ni ʿana,” ʿAtiqot 57: 21–52. Di Segni L. 1990a. “The Life of Chariton,” in V.L. Wimbush (ed.), Ascetic Behavior in Greco-Roman Antiquity: A Sourcebook, Minneapolis, pp. 393–421. Di Segni L. 1990b. “The Monastery of Martyrius at Maʿale Adummim (Khirbet el-Muraṣṣaṣ): the Inscriptions,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 153–164. Di Segni L. 2002. “Samaritan Revolts in Byzantine Palestine,” in E. Stern and H. Eshel (eds.), The Samaritans, Jerusalem, pp. 454–480 (Hebrew). Di Segni L. (transl.), 2005. Cyril of Scythopolis. Lives of the Monks of the Judaean Desert, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Di Segni L. 2012. “Greek Inscription from Deir Qalʿa,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries

in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 157–160. DOC 1: Bellinger A.R. 1966. Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection I: Anastasius I to Maurice, 491– 602, Washington, D.C. DOC 2/1: Grierson P. 1968. Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection 2/1: Phocas and Heraclius (602– 641), Washington, DC. Edelstein G. 1984. “Les objets de bronze,” in C. Dauphin and G. Edelstein, Lʼéglise byzantine de Nahariya (Israël): étude archéologique, Thessaloniki, pp. 99–103. Eger Ch. 2001. “Gürtelschnallen des 6. bis. 8. Jahrhunderts aus der Sammlung des Studium Biblicum Franciscanum,” LA 51: 337–350. Egloff M. 1977. Kellia III. La Poterie Copte, Genève. Elʿad A. 1982. “The Coastal Cities of Palestine during the Early Middle Ages,” The Jerusalem Cathedra 2: 146–167. Feig N. 1985. “Pottery, Glass and Coins from Magen,” BASOR 258: 33–40. Fisher M. 1979. The Development of the Corinthian Capital in Palestine from Its Beginning until the Constantinian Period, Ph.D. diss., Tel Aviv University, (Hebrew). Fitzgerald G.M. 1931. Beth-Shan Excavations 1921–1923. The Arab and Byzantine Levels (Publications of the Palestine Section of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania III), Philadelphia. Garitte G. 1958. Le Calendrier Palestino-Géorgien du Sinaiticus 34 (Xe siècle) (Subsidia hagiographica 30), Bruxelles. Gawlikowski M. and Musa A. 1986. “The Church of Bishop Marianos,” in F. Zayadine (ed.), Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–1983 I, Amman, pp. 137–162. Gendelman P. 2012. “The Pottery from Ḥorbat Biẓʿa,” ʿAtiqot 70: 33*–47*. Gibbs S.L. 1976. Greek and Roman Sundials, New Haven– London. Gichon M. 1974. “Fine Byzantine Wares from the South of Israel,” PEQ 106: 119–139. Gorin-Rosen Y. 1999. “Glass Vessels from Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Pisgat Zeʾev East A),” ʿAtiqot 38: 205–214. Gorin-Rosen Y. 2000a. “The Glass Vessels from Khirbet Ṭabaliya (Givʿat Hamaṭos),” ʿAtiqot 40: 81*–96* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 165–166). Gorin-Rosen Y. 2000b. “Glass Vessels,” in R. Avner, “Deir Ghazali: A Byzantine Monastery Northeast of Jerusalem,” ʿAtiqot 40: 47*–49* (Hebrew). Gorin-Rosen Y. 2002. “Excavations at Khirbet el-Shubeika 1991, 1993. The Glass Vessels,” in Z. Gal (ed.), Eretz Zafon. Studies in Galilean Archaeology, Jerusalem, pp. 288–321 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 186*–187*). Gorin-Rosen Y. 2005. “The Glass,” in B. Arubas and

[389]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

H. Goldfus (eds.), Excavations on the Site of the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei HaʾUma): A Settlement of the Late First to Second Temple Period, the Tenth Legion’s Kilnworks, and a Byzantine Monastic Complex. The Pottery and Other Small Finds (JRA Supplementary Series 60), Portsmouth, Rhode Island, pp. 195–210. Gorin-Rosen Y. 2010. “Glass from Late Byzantine Remains near Shiqmona,” ʿAtiqot 63: 209–218. Gorin-Rosen Y. and Katsnelson N. 2007. “Local Glass Production in the Late Roman–Early Byzantine Periods in Light of the Glass Finds from Khirbat el-Ni ʿana,” ʿAtiqot 57: 73–154. Gorin-Rosen Y. and Winter T. 2010. “Selected Insights into Byzantine Glass in the Holy Land,” in J. Drauschke and D. Keller (eds.), Glass in Byzantium – Production, Usage, Analyses (Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Tagungen 8), Mainz, pp. 165–181. Gough M. 1967. “Alahan Monastery—Fourth Preliminary Report,” Anatolian Studies 17: 37–47. Grabar O. 1973. The Formation of Islamic Art, New Haven– London. Greenfeld U. 2012. “A Byzantine Church at Khirbet elLaṭaṭin,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 417–428. Guarducci M. 1978. Epigrafia greca IV. Epigrafi sacre pagane e cristiane, Roma. Gutfeld O. and Nenner-Soriano R. 2012. “Stamp Impressions of the Legio X Fretensis from the Cardo and the Nea Church,” in O. Gutfeld, Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 V: The Cardo (Area X) and the Nea Church (Areas D and T). Final Report, Jerusalem, pp. 378–392. Habas L. 1999. “The Marble Furniture,” in Y. Hirschfeld, The Early Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet ed-Deir in the Judean Desert: The Excavations in 1981–1987 (Qedem 38), Jerusalem, pp. 119–132. Habas L. 2013. “Cultural Interrelation: Constantinople, Greece, Adriatic Coast, Egypt and Sinai in Light of the Church at Ostrakine in North Sinai,” in L. Bombardieri, A. D’Agostino, G. Guarducci, V. Orsi and S. Valentini (eds.), Soma 2012. Identity and Connectivity: Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Mediterranean Archaeology, Florence, Italy 1–3 March 2012 II (BAR International Series 2581), Oxford, pp. 1057–1067. Hadad S. 2002. The Oil Lamps from The Hebrew University Excavations at Bet Shean (Qedem Reports 4), Jerusalem. Haiman M. 1986. Archaeological Survey of Israel. Map of Har Ḥamran—Southwest (198)10–00, Jerusalem (Hebrew and English). Haiman M. 1995. “An Early Islamic Period Farm at Naḥal Mitnan in the Negev Highlands,” ʿAtiqot 26: 1–13.

Haiman M. 1997. “Agriculture and Nomads on the Edge of the Desert during the Byzantine and Early Arab Periods,” in S. Dar and Z. Safrai (eds.), The Village in Ancient Israel, Tel Aviv, pp. 327–349 (Hebrew). Haiman M. 1999. Archaeological Survey of Israel. Map of Har Ramon (203), Jerusalem (Hebrew and English). Hamarneh B. and Manacorda S. 1996. “Nitl, Excavation Campaign 1996,” LA 46: 407–408. Hamilton R.W. 1934. “Excavations in the Atrium of the Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem,” QDAP 3: 1–8. Harding G.L. 1951. “Excavations on the Citadel, Amman,” ADAJ 1: 7–16. Har-El M. 1978. “The Route of Salt, Sugar and Balsam Caravans in the Judean Desert,” GeoJournal 2 (6): 549–556. Har-El M. 1980. Journeys and Campaigns in Ancient Times, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Har-Even B. 2012. “A Byzantine Monastery and Church at Khirbet el-Maḥma,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 363–372. Har-Even B. and Shapira L. 2012. “A Late Roman Tower and a Byzantine Church in Khirbet Faʿush, Maccabim,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 327–344. Hasson I. 1982. Recherches sur Muʿāwiya Ibn Abī Sufyān. Sa politique tribale, militaire et agraire, Ph.D. diss., The Hebrew University, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Hayes J.W. 1972. Late Roman Pottery, London. Hayes J.W. 1985. “Hellenistic to Byzantine Fine Wares and Derivatives in the Jerusalem Corpus,” in A.D. Tushingham (ed.), Excavations in Jerusalem 1961–1967 I, Jerusalem, pp. 181–196. Hirschfeld Y. 1985. Archaeological Survey of Israel. Map of Herodium (108/2) 17–11, Jerusalem (Hebrew and English). Hirschfeld Y. 1990. “List of the Byzantine Monasteries in the Judean Desert,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 1–90. Hirschfeld Y. 1992. The Judean Desert Monasteries in the Byzantine Period, New Haven–London. Hirschfeld Y. 1993. “Euthymius and His Monastery in the Judean Desert,” LA 43: 339–371. Hirschfeld Y. 1999. The Early Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet ed-Deir in the Judean Desert: The Excavations in 1981–1987 (Qedem 38), Jerusalem. Hirschfeld Y. 2000. “The Monastery of Chariton. Survey and Excavations,” LA 50: 315–362. Hirschfeld Y. 2004. Longing for the Desert. The Dead Sea Valley in the Second Temple Period, Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Hizmi H. 1990. “The Byzantine Church at Khirbet elBeiyûdât: Preliminary Report,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni

[390]

Bibliography

and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 245–264. Hunt E.D. 1982. Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire AD 312–460, Oxford. Israeli Y. and Mevorah D. (eds.), 2000. Cradle of Christianity, Jerusalem. Jaussen J.A. and Savignac R. 1909. Mission archéologique en Arabie I (Mars-Mai 1907). De Jérusalem au Hedjaz Médain-Saleh (Publications de la société française des fouilles archéologiques II), Paris. Johns C.N. 1936. “Excavations at Pilgrims’ Castle, ʿAtlīt (1932– 3); Stables at the South-West of the Suburb,” QDAP 5: 31–60. Johnson B.L. 2006. “The Hellenistic to Early Islamic Period Pottery,” in A. Mazar, Excavations at Tel BethShean 1989–1996 I. From the Late Bronze Age IIB to the Medieval Period, Jerusalem, pp. 523–589. Katsnelson N. 1999. “Glass Vessels from the Painted Tomb at Migdal Ashqelon,” ʿAtiqot 37: 67*–82*. Katsnelson N. and Jackson-Tal R. 2004. “The Glass Vessels from Ashqelon, Semadar Hotel,” ʿAtiqot 48: 99–110. Katzev M.L. 1982. “Iron Objects,” in G.F. Bass and F.H. van Doorninck, Yassi Ada I. A Seventh-Century Byzantine Shipwreck, Texas, pp. 231–265. Kautzsch R. 1936. Kapitellstudien. Beiträge zu einer Geschichte des spätantiken Kapitells im Osten vom Vierten bis ins Siebente Jahrhundert (Studien zur spätantiken Kunstgeschichte 9), Berlin. Keay S.J. 1984. Late Roman Amphorae in the Western Mediterranean. A Typology and Economic Study: The Catalan Evidence (BAR International Series 196i), Oxford. Khalaily H. and Avissar M. 2008. “Khirbat ʿAdasa: A Farmstead of the Umayyad and Mamluk Periods in Northern Jerusalem,” ʿAtiqot 58: 91–122 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 69*–71*). Kogan-Zehavi E. 2000. “Settlement Remains and Tombs at Khirbet Ṭabaliya (Givʿat Hamaṭos),” ʿAtiqot 40: 53*–79* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 162–164). Landgraf J. 1980. “Keisan’s Byzantine Pottery,” in J. Briend and J.-B. Humbert (eds.), Tell Keisan (1971–1976). Une cité phénicienne en Galilée (Orbis biblicus et orientalis, Series Archaeologica 1), Fribourg, pp. 51–88. Leclercq H. 1928. “Lamps,” DACL 8.1: 1086–1221. Leclercq H. 1929. “Laures Palestiniennes,” DACL 8.2: 1961–1988. Levy-Rubin M. 2006. “The Influence of the Muslim Conquest on the Settlement Pattern of Palestine during the Early Muslim Period,” Cathedra 121: 53–78 (Hebrew). Limor O. 1998. Holy Land Travels. Christian Pilgrims in Late Antiquity, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Loffreda S. 1989. Lucerne Bizantine in Terra Santa con Iscrizioni in Greco (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 35), Jerusalem.

Loffreda S. 1990. “The Greek Inscriptions on the Byzantine Lamps from the Holy Land,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 475–500. Lombardi G. 1972. “Khalasa-Elusa nella esplorazione archeologica,” LA 22: 335–368. Macalister R.A.S. 1911. The Excavation of Gezer I: 1902– 1905 and 1907–1909, London. Macalister R.A.S. and Duncan J.G. 1926. Excavations on the Hill of Ophel, Jerusalem, 1923–1925 (PEFA 4), London. Mader A.E. 1929. “Conical Sundial and Ikon Inscription from the Kastellion Monastery on Khirbet el-Merd in the Wilderness of Juda,” JPOS 9: 122–135. Mader A.E. 1957. Mambre. Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im heiligen Bezirk Râmet el-Ḫalîl in Südpalästina 1926– 1928, Freiburg im Breisgau. Magen Y. 1993. The Monastery of Martyrius at Maʿale Adummim. A Guide, Jerusalem. Magen Y. 2002. The Stone Vessel Industry in the Second Temple Period. Excavations at Ḥizma and the Jerusalem Temple Mount (JSP 1), Jerusalem. Magen Y. 2008a. “Late Roman Fortresses and Towers in Southern Samaria and Northern Judea,” in Y. Magen, Judea and Samaria. Researches and Discoveries (JSP 6), Jerusalem, pp. 177–216. Magen Y. 2008b. “Late Roman and Byzantine Towers in the Southern Hebron Hills,” in Y. Magen, Judea and Samaria. Researches and Discoveries (JSP 6), Jerusalem, pp. 217–246. Magen Y. 2008c. Mount Gerizim Excavations II. A Temple City (JSP 8), Jerusalem. Magen Y. 2008d. “Oil Production in the Land of Israel in the Early Islamic Period,” in Y. Magen, Judea and Samaria. Researches and Discoveries (JSP 6), Jerusalem, pp. 257–343. Magen Y. 2008e. “The Samaritans in the Roman and Byzantine Periods,” in Y. Magen, The Samaritans and the Good Samaritan (JSP 7), Jerusalem, pp. 41–62. Magen Y. 2008f. “Crown Lands and Har ha-Melekh,” in Y. Magen, Judea and Samaria. Researches and Discoveries (JSP 6), Jerusalem, pp. 165–176. Magen Y. 2008g. “Samaritan Synagogues,” in Y. Magen, The Samaritans and the Good Samaritan (JSP 7), Jerusalem, pp. 117–180. Magen Y. 2008h. “‘Samaritan’ Oil Lamps,” in Y. Magen, The Samaritans and the Good Samaritan (JSP 7), Jerusalem, pp. 243–248. Magen Y. 2012a. “Christianity in Judea and Samaria in the Byzantine Period,” in Christians and Christianity I. Corpus of Christian Sites in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 13), Jerusalem, pp. 1–92. Magen Y. 2012b. “A Roman Fortress and a Byzantine

[391]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

Monastery at Khirbet el-Kiliya,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 261–296. Magen Y. 2012c. “A Roman Tower and a Byzantine Monastery at Qaṣr Khalife,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 203–226. Magen Y. 2012d. “A Roman Fortress and Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet Deir Samʿan,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 9–106. Magen Y. 2012e. “The Central Church at Beit ʿAnun,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 121–168. Magen Y. and Aharonovich E. 2012. “The Northern Churches at Shiloh,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 161–208. Magen Y. and Aizik N. 2012. “A Late Roman Fortress and a Byzantine Monastery at Deir Qalʿa,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 107–156. Magen Y. and Baruch Y. 2012. “Khirbet Abu Rish” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 185–202. Magen Y., Batz S. and Sharukh I. 2012. “A Roman Military Compound and a Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet Umm Deimine,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 435–482. Magen Y. and Finkelstein I. (eds.), 1993. Archaeological Survey of the Hill Country of Benjamin, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Magen Y., Har-Even B. and Sharukh I. 2012. “A Roman Tower and a Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet el-Qaṣr,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 247–298. Magen Y. and Hizmi H. 1985. “The Monastery of St. Martyrius at Maʿale Adummim,” Qadmoniot 18 (3–4) (71–72): 62–91 (Hebrew). Magen Y. and Kagan E.D. 2012. Christians and Christianity I. Corpus of Christian Sites in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 13), Jerusalem. Magen Y., Peleg Y. and Sharukh I. 2012a. “A Roman Tower and a Byzantine Monastery at Rujm Jureida,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 397–434. Magen Y., Peleg Y. and Sharukh I. 2012b. “A Byzantine Church at ʿAnab el-Kabir,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 331–384. Magen Y. and Talgam R. 1990. “The Monastery of Martyrius at Maʿale Adummim (Khirbet el-Muraṣṣaṣ) and Its Mosaics,” in G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and E. Alliata (eds.),

Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 36), Jerusalem, pp. 91–152. Magness J. 1989. A Typology of the Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery of Jerusalem, Ph.D. diss., Ann Arbor, Mich. Magness J. 1992. “1A.The Byzantine and Islamic Pottery from Areas A2 and G; 1B. The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery from Areas H and K,” in A. de Groot and D.T. Ariel (eds.), Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 III. Stratigraphical, Environmental and Other Reports (Qedem 33), Jerusalem, pp. 149–186. Magness J. 1993. Jerusalem Ceramic Chronology, circa 200– 800 CE (JSOT/ASOR Monograph Series 9), Sheffield. Magness J. 1995. “The Pottery from Area V/4 at Caesarea,” AASOR 52: 133–145. Magness J. 2003. “Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery,” in H. Geva (ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem II: The Finds from Areas A, W, and X-2, Jerusalem, pp. 423–430. Magness J. 2006. “Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery,” in H. Geva (ed.), Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem III: Area E and Other Studies, Jerusalem, pp. 184–191. Marti K. 1880. “Die alten Lauren und Klöster in der Wüste Juda,” ZDPV 3: 1–43. Mazar B. 1972. “Excavations near the Temple Mount,” Qadmoniot 5 (3–4) (19–20): 74–90 (Hebrew). Mazar E. 2003. “Architecture and Stratigraphy of Areas XV and XVII,” in E. Mazar, The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar, Final Reports II. The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43), Jerusalem, pp. 3–85. Mazar E. 2007. “A Byzantine Building in Area XVI,” in E. Mazar, The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968– 1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar, Final Reports III. The Byzantine Period (Qedem 46), Jerusalem, pp. 3–22. Mazar E. and Peleg O. 2003. “The Pottery Assemblage from the Large Byzantine Structure in Area XV,” in E. Mazar, The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem Directed by Benjamin Mazar II. The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43), Jerusalem, pp. 86–103. Meimaris Y.E. 1989. The Monastery of Saint Euthymios the Great at Khan el-Ahmar, in the Wilderness of Judaea: Rescue Excavations and Basic Protection Measures, 1976–1979. Preliminary Report, Athens. Meyer C. 1988. “Glass from the North Theater Byzantine Church, and Soundings at Jerash, Jordan, 1982–1983,” in W.E. Rast (ed.), Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1982–85 (BASOR Supplement 25), pp. 175–222. Meyers E.M. and Meyers C.L. 2009. Meiron Excavation Project IV. Excavations at Ancient Nabratein: Synagogue and Environs, Winona Lake.

[392]

Bibliography

Meyers E.M., Strange J.F. and Meyers C.L. 1981. Meiron Excavation Project III. Excavations at Ancient Meiron, Upper Galilee, Israel 1971–72, 1974–75, 1977, Cambridge. MIBE: Hahn W. 2000. Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire (Anastasius I–Justinian I, 491–565) (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte der Universität Wien 6), Vienna. Milik J.T. 1960. “Sanctuaires chrétiens de Jérusalem à l’époque arabe (VIIe–Xe siècles),” RB 67: 354–367, 550–586. Nahshoni P. 1999. “A Byzantine Site in the Migdal Neighborhood, Ashqelon,” ʿAtiqot 38: 99*–111* (Hebrew; English summary, p. 229). Naveh J. 1988. “Lamp Inscriptions and Inverted Writing,” IEJ 38: 36–43. Negev A. 1988. The Architecture of Mampsis. Final Report II: The Late Roman and Byzantine Periods (Qedem 27), Jerusalem. Negev A. 1989. “The Cathedral of Elusa and the New Typology and Chronology of the Byzantine Churches in the Negev,” LA 39: 129–142. Nikolsky V., Figueras P., Auladell J. and Areal Guerra R. 2004. “Metal Objects,” in P. Figueras (ed.), Ḥorvat Karkur ʿIllit. A Byzantine Cemetery Church in the Northern Negev (Final Report of the Excavations 1989–1995) (Beer-Sheva 16: Beer-Sheva Archaeological Monographs 1), BeerSheva, pp. 237–260. Nitowski E. 1986. The Luchnaria. Inscribed Lamps of the Byzantine Period, Berrien Springs, Mich. Northedge A. 1992. “The Excavations in Areas B, C, and D,” in A. Northedge, Studies on Roman and Islamic ʿAmmān I. History, Site and Architecture (British Academy Monograph in Archaeology 3), Oxford, pp. 139–150. Oked S. 1999. Aspects in Commerce and Trade in North Sinai during the Byzantine Period in the Light of the Evidence of Bowls and Amphorae, Ph.D. diss., Ben Gurion University, Beer-Sheva (Hebrew). Oren-Paskal M. 2006. “The Pottery: Byzantine,” in R.R. Stieglitz, Tel Tanninim. Excavations at Krokodeilon Polis 1996–1999 (American Schools of Oriental Research Archaeological Reports 10), Boston, pp. 125–148. Oren-Paskal M. 2008. “Amphoras from the Abandonment Layer in Area LL (L 1242, 1335),” in K.G. Holum, J.A. Stabler and E.G. Reinhardt (eds.), Caesarea Reports and Studies. Excavations 1995–2007 within the Old City and the Ancient Harbor (BAR International Series 1784), Oxford, pp. 49–58. Patrich J. 1983. “Mar Saba Map,” ESI 2: 65–66. Patrich J. 1988. “Architectural Sculpture and Stone Objects,” in Y. Tsafrir, J. Patrich, R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom, I. Hershkovitz and Y.D. Nevo, Excavations at Rehovot-inthe-Negev I: The Northern Church (Qedem 25), Jerusalem, pp. 97–133.

Patrich J. 1994. Archaeological Survey in Judea and Samaria. Map of Deir Mar Saba (109/7), Jerusalem (Hebrew and English). Patrich J. 1995. Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism. A Comparative Study in Eastern Monasticism, Fourth to Seventh Centuries, Washington, D.C. Patrich J. 1999. “The Church of the Holy Sepulchre: History and Architecture,” in Y. Tsafrir and S. Safrai (eds.), The History of Jerusalem. The Roman and Byzantine Periods (70–638 C.E.), Jerusalem, pp. 353–381 (Hebrew). Patrich J. and Rafael K. 2008. “The Jewelry,” in J. Patrich, Archaeological Excavations at Caesarea Maritima, Areas CC, KK and NN, Final Reports I: The Objects, Jerusalem, pp. 419–431. Peacock D.P.S. and Williams D.F. 1986. Amphorae and the Roman Economy. An Introductory Guide, London–New York. Peleg Y. 2012a. “Iconoclasm in Churches and Synagogues in Judea,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 483–494. Peleg Y. 2012b. “A Byzantine Church at Khirbet ʿEin Dab,” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 37–60. Peleg Y. 2012c. “A Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet Umm Zaqum,” in Christians and Christianity III. Churches and Monasteries in Samaria and Northern Judea (JSP 15), Jerusalem, pp. 235–260. Peleg Y. and Batz S. 2012. “A Byzantine Church at Khirbet Istabul (Aristobulias),” in Christians and Christianity IV. Churches and Monasteries in Judea (JSP 16), Jerusalem, pp. 303–326. Petrie F. 1928. Gerar, London. Piccirillo M. 1981. “La ‘Cattedrale’ di Madaba,” LA 31: 299–322. Piccirillo M. 1984. “Una chiesa nell’wadi ʿAyoun Mousa ai piedi del monte Nebo,” LA 34: 307–318. Piccirillo M. 1985. “Le antichità bizantine di Maʿin e dintorni,” LA 35: 339–364. Piccirillo M. 1987. “L’Abu Bedd sul piazzale di SiyaghaMonte Nebo,” LA 37: 405–406. Piccirillo M. 1992. “La chiesa dei Leoni a Umm al-Rasas– Kastron Mefaa,” LA 42: 199–225. Piccirillo M. 1997. “La chiesa di San Paolo a Umm alRasas–Kastron Mefaa,” LA 47: 375–394. Piccirillo M. 2001. “The Church of St. Sergius at Nitl. A Centre of the Christian Arabs in the Steppe at the Gate of Madaba,” LA 51: 267–284. Pollak R. 2006. “The Glass,” in R.R. Stieglitz, Tel Tanninim. Excavations at Krokodeilon Polis 1996–1999 (American Schools of Oriental Research Archaeological Reports 10), Boston, pp. 155–193. Pollak R. 2007. “Excavations in Marcus Street, Ramla: The Glass Vessels,” Contract Archaeology Reports II (Reports

[393]

M o n a s t e ry o f M a rt y r i u s

and Studies of the Recanati Institute for Maritime Studies), Haifa, pp. 100–133. Prausnitz M.W. 1967. Excavations at Shavei Zion. The Early Christian Church (Monografie di archeologia e dʼarte II), Rome. Pringle D. 1984. “Thirteenth-Century Pottery from the Monastery of St. Mary of Carmel,” Levant 16: 91–111. Rafael K. 2008. “The Metal Objects,” in J. Patrich, Archaeological Excavations at Caesarea Maritima, Areas CC, KK and NN, Final Reports I: The Objects, Jerusalem, pp. 433–469. Rapuano Y. 1999. “The Hellenistic Through Early Islamic Pottery from Ras Abu Maʿaruf (Pisgat Zeʾev East A),” ʿAtiqot 38: 171–203. Reich R. and Shukron E. 2006. “Excavations in the Mamillah Area, Jerusalem: The Medieval Fortifications,” ʿAtiqot 54: 125–152. Richmond E.T. 1936. “Basilica of the Nativity. Discovery of the Remains of an Earlier Church,” QDAP 5: 75–81. Richmond E.T. 1938a. “The Church of the Nativity. The Plan of the Constantinian Church,” QDAP 6: 63–66. Richmond E.T. 1938b. “The Church of the Nativity. The Alterations Carried Out by Justinian,” QDAP 6: 67–72. Riley J.A. 1975. “The Pottery from the First Session of Excavation in the Caesarea Hippodrome,” BASOR 218: 25–63. Rosenthal R. and Sivan R. 1978. Ancient Lamps in the Schloessinger Collection (Qedem 8), Jerusalem. Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 1988. “The Pottery,” in Y. Tsafrir, J. Patrich and R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom, Excavations at Rehovot-in-the-Negev I: The Northern Church (Qedem 25), Jerusalem, pp. 78–96. Ross M.C. 1962. Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection I. Metalwork, Ceramics, Glass, Glyptics, Painting, Washington, D.C. Rough R.H. 1989. “A New Look at the Corinthian Capitals at Capernaum,” LA 39: 119–128. Rubin R. 1982. “The ‘Laura’ Monasteries in the Judean Desert during the Byzantine Period,” Cathedra 23: 25–46 (Hebrew). Saban (Sebbane) M. 1999. “Board Games: A Crusader Pastime,” in S. Rozenberg (ed.), Knights of the Holy Land. The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (Israel Museumʼs Catalogues 422), Jerusalem, pp. 286–291. Saban M. 2012. “Ancient Board Games in the Land of Israel,” Qadmoniot 45 (144): 50–64 (Hebrew). Safrai Z. and Dar S. 1997. “The Estate at Khirbet el-Bireh in the Shephelah of Lod Region,” in Z. Safrai, Y. Friedman and J. Schwartz (eds.), Hikrei Eretz. Studies in the History of the Land of Israel, Jerusalem, pp. 57–107 (Hebrew). Saller S.J. 1941. The Memorial of Moses on Mount Nebo I–II (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum 1), Jerusalem.

Saller S.J. 1957. Excavations at Bethany (1949–1953) (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum 12), Jerusalem. Schneider A.M. 1934. “Zu einigen Kirchenruinen Palästinas (4–6),” OC 31: 219–225. Scholl T. 1986. “The Chronology of Jerash Lamps. A Preliminary Report,” in F. Zayadine (ed.), Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–1983 I, Amman, pp. 163–166. Seligman J. and Abu Raya R. 2000. “Dwelling Caves on the Mount of Olives (Eṭ-Ṭur),” ʿAtiqot 40: 123–138. Seligman J. and Abu Raya R. 2002. “A Byzantine ‘Monastery’ at Khirbet Umm Leisun, Jerusalem,” ʿAtiqot 43: 127–140. Shalem D. 2002. “Nevé Ur—An Early Islamic Period Village in the Bet Sheʾan Valley,” ʿAtiqot 43: 149–176. Shapira L. and Peleg O. 2003a. “Pottery Lamps of the Byzantine Period from Area XV,” in E. Mazar, The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar II. The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43), Jerusalem, pp. 104–108. Shapira L. and Peleg O. 2003b. “Byzantine and Early Islamic Pottery Lamps from the ‘House of the Menorot’ in Area VI,” in E. Mazar, The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar II. The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43), Jerusalem, pp. 187–190. Sidi N. 2007. “Stone Utensils,” in Y. Hirschfeld, En-Gedi Excavations II. Final Report (1996 –2002), Jerusalem, pp. 544–573. Sion O. 1991. “Ancient Road in the Northern Judean Desert,” ESI 10: 125. Sion O. 1997. “Mishor Adummim (Khirbet Handoma),” ʿAtiqot 32: 149–158 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 47*–48*). Smith R.H. and Day L.P. 1989. Pella of the Decapolis II. Final Report on the College of Wooster Excavations in Area IX, the Civic Complex, 1979–1985, Wooster. SNG Israel I: Houghton A. and Spaer A. 1998. Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Israel I. The Arnold Spaer Collection of Seleucid Coins, London. Stacey D. 2004. Excavations at Tiberias, 1973–1974. The Early Islamic Periods (IAA Reports 21), Jerusalem. Sudilovsky J. 2003. “Bathhouse Uncovered at Kursi,” BAR 29 (1): 18. Sussman V. 1976. “A Burial Cave at Kefar ʿAra,” ʿAtiqot 11: 92–101 (English Series). Sussman V. 1983. “The Samaritan Oil Lamps from ApolloniaArsuf,” Tel Aviv 10 (1): 71–96. Tal N. 1997. “Rolling Stones—Evidence of Insecurity during the Byzantine Period,” in Y. Eshel (ed.), Judea and Samaria Research Studies. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting—1996, Kedumim–Ariel, pp. 271–290 (Hebrew; English summary, p. XXV). Tal N. and Oron G. 2002. “Survey and Excavations of Caves along the Fault Escarpment South of Qumran,” ʿAtiqot

[394]

Bibliography

41(1): 221–229 (Hebrew; English summary: ʿAtiqot 41(2): 187–193). TJC: Meshorer Y. 2001. A Treasury of Jewish Coins from the Persian Period to Bar Kochba, Jerusalem–Nyack. Tobler T. 1854. Topographie von Jerusalem und seinen Umgebungen II, Berlin. Torge H. and ʿAd U. 2012. “Late Byzantine Buildings on the Eastern Fringes of Tel Shiqmona,” ʿAtiqot 72: 99–129 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 93*–94*). Tsafrir Y. 1983. “Why Were the Negev, Sinai and Edom Transferred from Provincia Arabia to Provincia Palaestina at the End of the Third Century A.D.?,” Cathedra 30: 35– 56 (Hebrew). Tsafrir Y. 1986. “The Transfer of the Negev, Sinai and Southern Transjordan from Arabia to Palaestina,” IEJ 36: 77–86. Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 I, Jerusalem. Tzaferis V. 1975. “The Archaeological Excavation at Shepherds’ Field,” LA 25: 5–52. Tzaferis V. 1983. The Excavations of Kursi–Gergesa (ʿAtiqot, English Series 16), Jerusalem. Ustinova Y. and Nahshoni P. 1994. “Salvage Excavations in Ramot Nof, Beʾer Sheva,” ʿAtiqot 25: 157–177. Vaccarini G. 1989. “I Capital di Maʿin,” LA 39: 213–242. Vailhé S. 1897–1898a. “Les premiers monastères de la Palestine,” Bessarione 3: 39–58. Vailhé S. 1897–1898b. “Les saints Kozibites,” Échos d’Orient 1: 228–233. Vailhé S. 1898–1899a. “Les monastères de la Palestine,” Bessarione 4: 193–210. Vailhé S. 1898–1899b. “La monastère de Saint Saba,” Échos d’Orient 2: 332–341.‎ Vailhé S. 1900. “Répertoire alphabétique des monastères de Palestine,” ROC 5: 1–81. Van Kasteren J.P. 1890. “Aus der Umgegend von Jerusalem,” ZDPV 13: 76–122.

Vasiliev A.A. 1956. “The Iconoclastic Edict of the Caliph Yazid II, A.D. 721,” DOP 9–10: 25–47. Verhelst S. 2004. “Les lieux de station du lectionnaire de Jérusalem,” Proche-Orient Chrétien 54: 13–70, 247–289. Vriezen K.J.H. 1994. Die Ausgrabungen unter der Erlöserkirche im Muristan, Jerusalem (1970–1974), Wiesbaden. Vriezen K.J.H. 1995. “A Preliminary Study of the Byzantine Roof Tiles (Tegulae and Imbrices) from Areas I and III in Umm Qeis (Jordan),” Leiden University, Department of Pottery Technology, Newsletter 13: 26–40. Waldbaum J.C. 1983. Metalwork from Sardis: The Finds Through 1974 (Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Monograph 8), Cambridge. Walker J. 1956. A Catalogue of the Arab-Byzantine and PostReform Umaiyad Coins (Catalogue of the Muhammadan Coins in the British Museum II), London. Walmsley A. 1995. “Tradition, Innovation, and Imitation in the Material Culture of Islamic Jordan: The First Four Centuries,” Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 5: 657–668. Watson P.M. 1995. “Ceramic Evidence for Egyptian Links with Northern Jordan in the 6th–8th Centuries AD,” in S. Bourke and J.-P. Descoeudres (eds.), Trade, Contact and the Movement of Peoples in the Eastern Mediterranean, Sydney, pp. 303–320. Weber T. 1991. “Gadara of the Decapolis: Preliminary Report on the 1990 Season at Umm Qeis,” ADAJ 35: 223–236. Weksler-Bdolah S. 2006. “The Old City Wall of Jerusalem: The Northwestern Corner,” ʿAtiqot 54: 95*–119* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 163–164). Wikander O. 1989. “Roman and Mediaeval Tile-Roofs, Evidence from Representations,” Opuscula Romana XVII: 191–203. Winter T. 2010. “The Byzantine-Period Glass Vessels from Ḥorbat Roẓeẓ,” ʿAtiqot 62: 145–155. Zori N. 1967. “The Ancient Synagogue at Beth-Shean,” EretzIsrael 8: 149–167 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 73*).

[395]

Reconstruction of the monastery of Martyrius.