Ramat Raḥel IV: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010) Stratigraphy and Architecture (Monograph Series of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology) 9781575067483, 157506748X

Citation preview

›''

This volume was authored by Oded Lipschits, a professor of the Ancient Israel Studies program at Tel Aviv University and Director of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. Manfred Oeming is Professor of Old Testament Theology, and the vice president of the College for Jewish Studies at the University of Heidleberg. Yuval Gadot is Professor of Archaeology of Israel in the Second and First Millenniums BCE and chair of the Jacob M. Alkow Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures at Tel Aviv University.

From top to bottom: Three-dimensional reconstruction of the palace in Building Phase III (Roi Albag) A reconstruction of the vegetation in the Ramat Raḥel garden based on pollen analysis (Nirit Kedem) General plan of the site

Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology

Top: Well-preserved niches of the Late Columbarium Bottom: Ariel view of Ramat Raḥel (Skyview)

RAMAT RAḤEL IV ODED LIPSCHITS, MANFRED OEMING AND YUVAL GADOT

This is the first of a three volume final report of the Tel Aviv– Heidelberg Renewed Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 2005−2010. It presents the stratigraphy and architecture of the excavation areas (including portions of the palatial compound, the subterranean columbarium complex and the Late Roman cemetery); site formation of the tell; twentieth century fortifications at the site; and the ancient garden and its water installations. Ramat Raḥel IV will be followed by Ramat Raḥel V and Ramat Raḥel VI.

39

RAMAT RAḤEL IV

The Renewed Excavations of the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Expedition (2005-2010) Stratigraphy and Architecture Oded Lipschits, Manfred Oeming and Yuval Gadot

Monograph Series 39 Tel Aviv University · Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology

RAMAT RAḤEL IV The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010) Stratigraphy and Architecture

TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY SONIA AND MARCO NADLER INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY

MONOGRAPH SERIES NUMBER 39

Executive Editor Editorial Board

Managing Editor Graphic Designer

Israel Finkelstein Avi Gopher Raphael Greenberg Oded Lipschits Guy D. Stiebel Myrna Pollak Noa Evron

RAMAT RAḤEL IV The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010) Stratigraphy and Architecture ODED LIPSCHITS, MANFRED OEMING AND YUVAL GADOT With contributions by Efrat Bocher, Uri Davidovich, Shatil Emmanuilov, Liora Freud, Boaz Gross, Nirit Kedem, Assaf Kleiman, Ido Koch, Nadav Na’aman, Naomi Porat, Roi Porat, Keren Ras, Omer Sergi, Nitsan Shalom and Lisa Yehuda

EISENBRAUNS University Park, Pennsylvania EMERY AND CLAIRE YASS PUBLICATIONS IN ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY Tel Aviv University

Monograph Series under the auspices of the Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lipschitz, Oded, author. | Gadot, Yuval, author. | Oeming, Manfred, author. Title: Ramat-Raḥel IV : The renewed excavations of the Tel-Aviv Heidelberg Expedition (2005-2010) / Oded Lipschits, Manfred Oeming, Yuval Gadot. Description: Winona Lake, Indiana : Eisenbrauns, [2020] | Series: Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series ; 39 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016039920 (print) | ISBN 978-1-57506-748-3 (Cloth) Subjects: LCSH: Ramat Raḥel (Israel) Classification: LCC DS110.R34 L57 2020 (print) | DDC 933/.44—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016039920

© Copyright 2020 by the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Eisenbrauns is an imprint of The Pennsylvania State University Press. The Pennsylvania State University Press is a member of the Association of University Presses. It is the policy of The Pennsylvania State University Press to use acid-​free paper. Publications on uncoated stock satisfy the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences— Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Material, ansi z39.48–1992.

CONTENTS Publications by the Ramat Raḥel Expedition

vii

PREFACE Oded Lipschits, Manfred Oeming and Yuval Gadot

ix

PART I: INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1

STRATEGIC LOCATION AND NATURAL SURROUNDINGS Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

3

CHAPTER 2

THE ANCIENT NAME OF THE SITE Oded Lipschits and Nadav Na’aman

8

CHAPTER 3

HISTORY OF RESEARCH Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

14

CHAPTER 4

THE RENEWED EXCAVATIONS BY THE TEL AVIV– HEIDELBERG EXPEDITION Yuval Gadot, Liora Freud, Manfred Oeming and Oded Lipschits

22

PART II: AREA REPORTS CHAPTER 5

AREAS A1, B1 AND B3 WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE CEMETERY Keren Ras

37

CHAPTER 6

AREA B2 Boaz Gross

69

CHAPTER 7

AREA C1 Nitsan Shalom and Boaz Gross

104

CHAPTER 8

AREA C2 Assaf Kleiman

158

CHAPTER 9

AREA D1 Efrat Bocher and Lisa Yehuda

170

CHAPTER 10

AREA D2 Shatil Emmanuilov

227

CHAPTER 11

AREA D3: COURTYARD 380, THE INNER GATE AND BUILDING 468 Ido Koch

241

CHAPTER 12

AREA D4 Omer Sergi

269

CHAPTER 13

AREA D6 Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

327

CHAPTER 14

SURVEY AND EXCAVATIONS OF SUBTERRANEAN FEATURES BETWEEN AREAS D6 AND C1 Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

354

CHAPTER 15

AREA UG7: THE SOUTHERN COLUMBARIUM Uri Davidovich

375

CHAPTER 16

AREA T: SURVEY AND EXCAVATIONS ON THE WESTERN SLOPE 406 Uri Davidovich and Naomi Porat

PART III: SYNTHESIS CHAPTER 17

SITE FORMATION AT RAMAT RAḤEL: THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY AND CHANGES MADE DURING ITS HISTORY Nirit Kedem, Yuval Gadot and Oded Lipschits

433

CHAPTER 18

THE ANCIENT GARDEN AND ITS WATER INSTALLATIONS Boaz Gross, Yuval Gadot and Oded Lipschits

459

CHAPTER 19

TWENTIETH CENTURY FORTIFICATIONS Efrat Bocher

469

CHAPTER 20

DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION: REEVALUATING THE FIVE EXPEDITIONS TO RAMAT RAḤEL Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

476

LIST OF LOCI

492

PUBLICATIONS BY THE RAMAT RAḤEL EXPEDITION BOOKS Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y., Arubas, B. and Oeming, M. 2017. What Are the Stones Whispering: 3000 Years of Forgotten History at Ramat Raḥel. Winona Lake. Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L. 2016. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959‒1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv.

ARTICLES Aouizerat, T., Gutman, I., Paz, Y., Maeir, A.M., Gadot, Y., Drori, E., Pinkus, A., Schoemann, M., Kaplan, R., BenGedalya, T., Coppenhagen-Glazer, S., Reich, E., Saragovi, A., Lipschits, O., Klutstein, M. and Hazan, O. 2019. Isolation and Characterization of Live Yeast Cells from Vessels as a Tool in Bio-Archaeology. mBio 10: 1–21. e00388-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00388-19. Davidovich, U., Porat, N., Gadot, Y., Avni, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2012. Archaeological Investigations and OSL Dating of Terraces at Ramat Raḥel, Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology 37: 192–208. Farhi, Y. 2009. Roman Imperial Lead Sealing from Ramat Raḥel Excavations. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 170: 295−298. Farhi, Y., Gadot, Y., Davidovich, U. and Lipschits, O. 2010. The Ramat Raḥel Hoard of Tyrian Sheqels. Israel Numismatic Studies 17: 59–76. Fulton, D.N., Gadot, Y., Kleiman, A., Freud, L., Lernau, O. and Lipschits, O. 2015. Feasting in Paradise: Feast Remains from the Iron Age Palace of Ramat Raḥel and their Implications. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 374: 29–48. Gadot, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2008. Ramat Raḥel and the Emeq Rephaim Sites—Links and Interpretations. In: Amit, D. and Stiebel, G.D., eds. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region, Collected Papers, Vol. II. Jerusalem: 88−96 (Hebrew). Gadot, Y., Oeming, M. and Lipschits, O. 2008. Tieferes Verstehen. Erwägungen Zur Epsitemologie der Archäologie am Beispiel der Ausgrabung von Ramat Raḥel (Jerusalem). Trumah 18: 33–55. Gross, B., Gadot, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2013. Excessive Use of Water and the Garden at Ramat Raḥel. In: Steibel, G.D., Peleg-Barkat, O., Ben-Ami, D., Weksler-Bdolah, S. and Gadot, Y., eds.New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region, Collected Papers, Vol. VII. Jerusalem: 110−131 (Hebrew). Gross, B., Gadot, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2014. The Ancient Garden at Ramat Raḥel and its Water Installations. In: Ohlig, C. and Tsuk, T., eds. Cura Aquarum in Israel III. Water in Antiquity. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on the History of Water Management and Hydraulic Engineering in the Mediterranean Region, Israel 14– 20 October 2012. Siegburg: 93–114. Langgut, D., Gadot, Y., and Lipschits, O. 2014. The Earliest Botanical Find for Growing Citron Tree (Heb. ‫ )אתרוג‬in the Land of Israel. Beth-Miqra 59: 38−55 (Hebrew). Langgut, D., Gadot, Y., Porat, N. and Lipschits, O. 2013. Trapped Pollen Reveals the Secrets of Royal Persian Garden at Ramat Raḥel (Jerusalem). Palinology 37: 115−129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2012.736418 Lipschits, O. 2006. Blood in Ramat Raḥel. Etmol 187: 26−28 (Hebrew). Lipschits, O. 2008. Ein Privatsiegelabdruck aus Ramat Raḥel. In: Kottsieper, I., Schmitt, R., and Wörle, J. eds. Berührungspunkte. Studien zur Sozial- und Religionsgeschichte Israels und seiner Umwelt. Festschrift für Rainer Albertz zu seinem 65. Geburtstag (AOAT 350). Münster: 491−498. Lipschits, O. 2011. The Ivory Seal of šlm (Son of) klkl, Discovered at Ramat Raḥel. Israel Exploration Journal 61: 162−170. Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y., Arubas, B. and Oeming, M. 2009. Ramat Raḥel and its Secrets. Qadmoniot 138: 58−77 (Hebrew). vii

Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y., Arubas, B. and Oeming, M. 2011. Palace and Village, Paradise and Oblivion: Unraveling the Riddles of Ramat Raḥel. Near Eastern Archaeology 74: 2–49. Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Langgut, D. 2012. The Riddle of Ramat Raḥel: The Archaeology of a Royal Persian Period Edifice. Transeuphratene 41: 57–79. Lipschits, O. and Na’aman, N. 2011. From ‘Baal Perazim’ to ‘Beth-Haccherem’—On the Ancient Name of RamatRaḥel. Beth-Miqra 56: 65−86 (Hebrew). Lipschits, O., Oeming, M., Gadot, Y., and Arubas, B. 2006. The 2005 Excavation Season in Ramat Raḥel. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations and Surveys in Israel 118. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng. aspx?id=420&mag_id=111 Lipschits, O., Oeming, M., Gadot, Y. and Arubas, B. 2006. Ramat Raḥel 2005. Israel Exploration Journal 56: 227—235. Lipschits, O., Oeming, M., Gadot, Y. and Arubas, B. 2008. The 2006 and 2007 Excavation Seasons at Ramat Raḥel. Israel Exploration Journal 59: 1–20. Lipschits, O., Oeming, M., Gadot, Y. and Vanderhooft, D.S. 2007. Seventeen Newly Excavated YEHUD Stamp Impressions from Ramat Raḥel. Tel Aviv 34: 74–89. Lipschits, O. and Vanderhooft, D.S. 2009. Forty Unpublished yehud Stamp Impressions from Aharoni’s Excavations at Ramat Raḥel. Eretz Israel 29 (Ephraim Stern’s volume): 248−269 (Hebrew). Lipschits, O., and Vanderhooft, D.S., Forthcoming. YEHUD Stamp Impressions from Ramat-Raḥel—an Updated Tabulation. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Lipschits, O., Vanderhooft, D.S., Gadot, Y. and Oeming, M. 2008. Twenty-Four New Yehud Stamp Impressions from the 2007 Excavation Season at Ramat-Raḥel. Maarav 15: 7–25 (Plates on pp. 97–103). Lipschits, O., Vanderhooft, D.S., Gadot, Y. and Oeming, M. 2009. Twenty-Seven New Yehud Stamp Impressions from the 2008 Excavation Season at Ramat-Raḥel. Maarav 16: 7−28. Oeming, M. and Lipschits, O. 2010. Die Geheimnisse von Ramat Raḥel. Welt und Umwelt der Bibel 2: 2−9. Ras, K., Gadot, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2013.Was Shaft Tombs Burial Indeed a Burial Practice of Jewish Common People? A View from Ramat Raḥel. In: Steibel, G.D., Peleg-Barkat, O., Ben-Ami, D., Weksler-Bdolah, S. and Gadot, Y., eds. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region, Collected Papers, Vol. VII. Jerusalem: 243−256 (Hebrew). Richey, M., Vanderhooft, D.S. and Lipschits, O. Forthcoming. Two Private Babylonian Period Stamp Impressions from Ramat Raḥel. Maarav.

viii

PREFACE Oded Lipschits, Manfred Oeming and Yuval Gadot

Ramat Raḥel IV is the first of a three volume final report of the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Renewed Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 2005−2010. Ramat Raḥel V and VI are currently in production. Ramat Raḥel I and II, the first two reports of the Ramat Raḥel excavations, were published by Y. Aharoni and presented preliminary results of his excavations. Ramat Raḥel III was dedicated to the final publication of Aharoni’s excavations and were edited and published by our team. Ramat Raḥel IV presents the stratigraphic and architectural data of the 2005–2010 excavation followed by evaluation and analysis. Ramat Raḥel V will present and study the material culture and Ramat Raḥel VI will focus on the extremely important contents of the Babylonian-Persian Pit found at the site. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel were renewed in 2005 under the auspices of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University in cooperation with the Faculty of Theology of the University of Heidelberg. The excavations were generously sponsored by the Manfred Lautenschläger Stifung. Fieldwork continued until 2010. In 2011 and 2012 small-scale excavations, together with restoration, were undertaken in order to complete research and make the site accessible for visitors. Apart from the writers and editors of the various chapters, this book is the fruit of the labor of many persons who devoted hours upon hours to produce a quality publication. All of them were fully devoted to the project and the authors wish to extend their gratitude to each and every one of them. The authors would first like to note the essential contribution of two individuals, without whose fieldwork and processing of finds this volume would never have seen light. Benjamin Arubas served as the architect of the team and was able to tie between wall stumps and robbing trenches in order to recreate the palace and other public buildings. Benni’s ideas and insights can be found in the stratigraphical analyses of each and every chapter. Liora Freud coordinated the study of the many finds and in her meticulous and careful work enabled the contextualization of the thousands of finds and thereby supply accurate dates and meaning for each layer found at the site. Her work allowed us to bond the chapters of Ramat Raḥel IV with those of Ramat Raḥel V and VI. Photographs used in this book were mostly taken by Pavel (Pasha) Shrago, the photographer of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. Other photos were taken by Oded Lipschits. Aerial photos were taken by Skyview. Yoav Tsur assisted in preparing the photographs for print. The plans and sections were drafted in the field by Benjamin (Benny) Arubas and Shatil Emmanuilov. Shatil also digitized the plans and later prepared them for publication. Some of the plans were prepared by Nurit Rozenfeld. The book was prepared for publication by the publishing team of the Publications Department of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, under the direction of Myrna Pollak. It was designed and laid out by Noa Evron, who also assisted in correcting graphic errors. The manuscript was edited by Nitsan Shalom and Arian Goren. Liora Freud and Yael Hochma assisted with copyediting and proofreading. The locus index was prepared by Noa Rantzer and Rikki (Rivkah) Zallut. Jacquie Zalluda assisted with translations from Hebrew to English. ix

The Ramat Raḥel team was assisted by the specialties of many scholars who came to the field or worked in the labs in order to process and analyze finds from the site. Their contributions will be published in the next two volumes. They include: Yoav Farhi (coins), Tehila Lieberman, Deborah Sandhaus and Itamar Taxel (pottery), Dafna Langgut (pollen and chert remains), Deirdre N. Fulton and Assaf Kleiman (animal bones) and Naomi Porat (OSL dating). Oded Lipschits, Manfred Oeming and Yuval Gadot

x

PART I INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1

STRATEGIC LOCATION AND NATURAL SURROUNDINGS Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

The ancient tell of Ramat Raḥel is located on a prominent peak 818 meters above sea level, midway between Jerusalem and Bethlehem (Fig. 1.1). It is one of the highest mounds in the Jerusalem hinterland and is part of a range that sits to the east of the RephaAdawi, Z. 2013. Jerusalem, Ṣur Bahir (Khirbat Umm Ṭuba). Hadashot Arkheologiyot 125. http://www.hadashotesi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=4380&mag_id=120 Aharoni, Y. 1955. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel. Yedi'ot XIX: 147–174 (Hebrew). Aharoni, Y. 1956. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 1954: Preliminary Report. Israel Exploration Journal 6: 102–111, 137–157. Aharoni, Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Aharoni, Y. 1967. Beth-Haccherem. In: Thomas, D.W., ed. Archaeology and Old Testament Study. Oxford: 171–184. 12

Chapter 2: The Ancient Name of the Site

Aharoni, Y. 1971. Paths and Sites. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Aharoni, Y. 1987. The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography (2nd revised ed.). Philadelphia. Alt, A. 1932. Das Institut im Jahre 1931. Palästina-Jahrbuch 28: 5–47. Avigad, N. and Yadin, Y. 1956. A Genesis Apocryphon. Jerusalem. Avi-Yonah, M. 1963. Historical Geography of the Land of Israel. Jerusalem. Barkay, G. 2006. Royal Palace, Royal Portrait? The Tantalizing Possibilities of Ramat Raḥel. Biblical Archaeology Review 32: 34–44. Fitzmeyer, J.A. 1971. The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1: A Commentary. Rome. Garbini, G. 1961. Sul Nome Antico di Ramat Raḥel. RSO 16: 199–205. Hoffman, Y. 2001. Jeremiah: Introduction and Commentary. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Kallai, Z. 1960 The Northern Boundaries of Judah from the Settlement of the Tribes until the Beginning of the Hasmonean Period. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kallai, Z. 1967. The Tribes of Israel. A Study in the Historical Geography of the Bible. Jerusalem. Kob, K. 1932. Neotopha. Palästinajahrbuch 28: 47–54. Lipschits, O. 2004. The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Jerusalem under Babylonian Rule. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y., Oeming, M. and Arubas, B. 2017. What Are the Stones Whispering? Ramat Raḥel: 3,000 Years of Forgotten History. Winona Lake. Lipschits, O. and Na’aman, N. 2011. From ‘Baal Perazim’ to ‘Beth-Haccherem’—On the Ancient Name of RamatRaḥel. Beth-Miqra 56: 65–86 (Hebrew). Lipschits, O., Sergi, O. and Koch, I. 2010. Royal Judahite Jar Handles: Reconsidering the Chronology of the lmlk Stamp Impressions. Tel Aviv 37: 3–32. Loewenstamm, S.E. 1954. ‘Beth Hakkerem’. Biblical Encyclopedia 2. Jerusalem: 84–85. Maisler (Mazar), B. 1934. Ramat Rachel and Kh. Salah. Qobetz 3: 4–18 (Hebrew). Na’aman, N. 1991. The Kingdom of Judah under Josiah. Tel Aviv 18: 3–71. Na’aman, N. 1999. “Baal Toponyms; Baal-Gad; Baal Hamon; Baal Hazor; Baal Hermon; Baal Judah; Baal Meon; Baal- Perazim; Baal-Shalisha; Baal-Tamar”. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Leiden: 140–141, 144–147, 148–149, 151–152. Na’aman, N. 2001. An Assyrian Residence at Ramat Raḥel? Tel Aviv 28: 260–280. Niesiolowski-Spanò, L. 2005. Where Should One Look for Gideon’s Ophra? Biblica 86: 478–493. Oeming, M. and Lipschits, O. 2010. Die Rätsel von Ramat Raḥel. Welt und Umwelt der Bibel 2: 2–9. Younker, R.W. 1992. Beth-Haccherem. Anchor Bible Dictionary 1: 686–687. Williamson, H.G.M. 1985. Ezra, Nehemiah (World Biblical Commentary 16). Waco.

13

CHAPTER 3

HISTORY OF RESEARCH Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

EARLY RESEARCH As early as the 19th century, Ramat Raḥel’s immediate surroundings were known for the numerous archaeological remains strewn about. Conrad Schick studied the burial caves in the area (Schick 1878: 13‒15) and Charles Clermont-Ganneau, Archibald Dickie and Frederick Bliss surveyed the area and documented dozens of sites, agricultural facilities and other features (Dickie 1896: 22‒24; Bliss and Dickie 1898: 239; Clermont-Ganneau 1899: 457). Fast (1924) was the first scholar who showed interest in Ramat Raḥel itself. In the fall of 1923 he examined a number of water cisterns and documented apertures carved in the rock which were probably a columbarium. At the end of 1930, while digging a trench to lay a water pipe for the fledgling kibbutz, the members of the Work Battalion found two ossuaries approximately 200 m from the ancient site. As a result Benjamin Maisler (Mazar) and Moshe Stekelis conducted a salvage excavation from January 15 to March 17, 1931 on behalf of the Israel Exploration Society. Maisler (Mazar) and Stekelis exposed a burial cave from the end of the Second Temple period (Fig. 3.1). In it they found additional ossuaries, an embossment ornamented with stone capitals, pottery from the late First Temple period and from the Second Temple period, and lmlk stamped jar handles (for the Maisler and Stekelis excavation results, see: Maisler 1935; Stekelis 1935). At the same time Mazar also investigated the hilltop, where he found ancient artifacts scattered over an area of 160 × 90 m. These included chiseled stones, parts of capitals, broken pillar pieces, broken pottery pieces, cubes of mosaic and worked slates of white marble. He noted a wall in the northern side of the hill and segments of additional walls in the west. Mazar dated most finds to the Roman and Byzantine periods, and others to the Hellenistic period.

AHARONI’S EXCAVATIONS: 1954, 1956, 1959‒1962 In August 1954, prior to the construction of the kibbutz’s water reservoir, a second salvage excavation was conducted, this time at the top of the mound.1 Yohanan Aharoni had completed his doctoral dissertation the year before joining the Hebrew University academic staff. He was invited to manage the Ramat Raḥel excavation on behalf of the Antiquities Department and the Israel Exploration Society. For four consecutive months, August to November 1954, unemployed people were referred by the Ministry of Labor to assist Hebrew University students and staff members working under Aharoni (See Aharoni 1955: 147‒174). The excavation exposed remains of buildings from various periods which included numerous wall segments dated to the Byzantine period. The most important feature was a segment of a casemate wall which measured 35 m in length and was oriented east to west. Foundation trenches enabled the theoretical 1 In the end the reservoir was not built in the location of Aharoni’s salvage excavations, probably due to the quality and grandeur of the casemate wall.

CHAPTER 3: HISTORY OF RESEARCH

Fig. 3.1: Chaim Weizmann, first president of Israel (left), visits the burial cave exposed by Maisler (Mazar) and Stekelis.

reconstruction of wall segments, but the main exposed constructed section was built from hewn stones, dressed and laid in a style resembling the luxurious palace walls of Samaria. To the north of this casemate wall Aharoni identified a large courtyard floor, which was made of a finely crushed limestone layer and covered with fallen stones of similar quality to the uncovered intact section. According to Aharoni, this proved that the exposed feature was the southern wall of a large and luxurious royal late Iron Age complex. Aharoni also discovered a parallel wall segment in the northern part of the site which he identified and marked as this complex’s northern boundary. His plan, published shortly after the excavation, shows that he had already marked and defined the late Iron Age compound’s borders in this initial phase of the excavations. The site’s approximate dimensions were as follows: the width from south to north was 50 m and the length from west to east was 90 m; the total square area measured about 1.1 acres (4.5 dunams). A few finds helped Aharoni understand the importance and the grandeur of the place. Near the intact section of the casemate wall an ornamented stone capital (a “proto-Aeolic” or “proto-Ionic” capital, as Aharoni preferred to name it in the early publications, which we now describe as a volute capital) was exposed. Another capital was found nearby, in secondary usage, integrated into a wall dated to the Persian period. Other finds from this salvage excavation displayed the site’s administrative status and importance during the First and Second Temple periods. In this very first excavation season, Aharoni found and documented 69 stamp impressions on jar handles which were dated from the Iron Age through the Hellenistic period. According to documents we found in Israeli army archives from 1954, the same year that Aharoni began his excavations, the IDF commenced fortifying the hilltop overlooking the kibbutz. During these fortification activities the military bunkers and communication trenches hit ancient remains close to the surface (see Chapter 19).2 A communication trench dug into a wall segment on the northeastern slope 2

In his publications, Aharoni did not directly mention the military’s activities, perhaps out of the prevailing security discretion for this border outpost; merely noting that his excavations in the church took place after the mosaic floor’s discovery in “an incidental excavation.” While cleaning some of the military fortifications here during renewed excavations in 2009, a bunker marked with its construction date, “1954,” was found above the church’s apse.

15

Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

exposed part of a mosaic floor lying directly to its west. Had he continued from this point, Aharoni could have exposed the whole outline of the Byzantine period church as well as a street and a row of buildings located to its south. A few months later, the preliminary salvage excavation report depicted the plan of the church’s outline. Aharoni sought to identify it with the Church of Kathisma. As mentioned above, a variety of evidence from the 5th and 6th centuries showed that the church had been built and operated near where various Christian traditions claimed that Mary, the mother of Jesus, rested on her way to Bethlehem, at a distance of three Roman miles from Jerusalem. The findings from the first excavation season in Ramat Raḥel stirred much scholarly and public excitement. Many years before excavations in the ancient city of Jerusalem, the City of David and the areas of Judah, Samaria and the Judean Desert captivated the public’s attention and imagination, the striking Judahite royal palace’s architecture and ornamentation along with the numerous findings from the Persian “Return to Zion” and Second Temple periods had the same effect. Pursuant to the 1954 excavation season discoveries, tourism development works were initiated and accompanied by a short excavation season in 1956. The results of the 1956 salvage excavations prompted Aharoni to initiate a full excavation expedition, which he successfully launched on behalf of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in cooperation with La-Sapienza–Università di Roma (Figs. 3.2–3.4). The Ministry of Labor referred many unemployed people from Jerusalem and its surroundings as workers, and the IDF sent groups of soldiers and youth from the Gadna (Israel Youth Corps). The university’s own archaeology students and numerous volunteers participated as well. During four excavation seasons conducted between 1959 and 1962, Aharoni identified five strata of settlements, which he dated from the late Iron Age to the beginning of the Early Islamic period.

Fig. 3.2: Pottery restoration in Gan Luria, located at the edge of the excavation area.

16

Chapter 3: History of Research

Fig. 3.3: Cleaning the public bathhouse mosaic floors northeast of the kibbutz water reservoir, 1960 season.

Fig. 3.4: Excavations north of the kibbutz’s water reservoir, 1960 season.

The results were published in two volumes entitled “Preliminary Reports,” which appeared shortly after the excavations were completed (1962, 1964).3 In the reports, Aharoni described the main finds and his general conclusions, while his University of Rome colleagues—Jovanni Garbini, Antonia Chiaska 3 Aharoni 1962; 1964. Shortly before these two volumes were published in Rome, Aharoni’s partners at Sapienza– Università di Roma published a short book in Italian, in which they expressed opinions and reconstructions slightly different from those published by Aharoni. See Monteverdi 1960.

17

Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

and Pasqual Testini—added various discussions, mainly regarding the church, the monastery and the public bathhouse. Only a few finds were fully published with all the details; the pictures were only a representative sample, and the plans were for the most part general reconstructions and adaptations of the field plans. Pursuant to their definition as preliminary summaries, the reports did not include the essential scientific information such as lists of loci, full lists of artifacts, drawn excavation sections showing stratigraphic layers and architecture, architectural plans, etc. Aharoni himself also considered these reports only a platform for useful general summaries (see Lipschits, Gadot and Freud 2016). The importance and the uniqueness of the site, despite the preliminary and partial state of publication, meant that Aharoni’s schematic plans, mainly those of the Iron Age, became a foundation stone, quoted in every discussion about the royal architecture of the period. The nature of the data’s publication, which included the neglected condition and treatment of the finds and their presentation, meant that there were hardly any academic discussions and challenges to the plan, proposed stratigraphy and nature and function of the site in the Kingdom of Judah. It was generally and axiomatically assumed by all that it was the royal palace of the Judahite kings. The research did not address and analyze the placement and function of the site during the Persian period, nor did it consider the implications of it being the site with the largest number of yehud stamped jar handles found in excavations. Discussion was nonexistent regarding the connection between the status of the site during the Persian period relative to its status at the end of the First Temple period; nor was there any consideration of the issue of its fate during the destruction of Jerusalem and its continuing history in the 6th century BCE (the period of the Babylonian exile). Ramat Raḥel III is a comprehensive publication of Aharoni’s excavations that was prepared and published by the team of the Renewed Excavations (Lipschits, Gadot and Freud 2016). The long process of locating the excavation materials, which had become dispersed in archaeological centers throughout the world, their analysis; the reconstruction of Aharoni’s field methodology; the retrieval, interpretation and digitization of the documents he left behind; and finally, the reconstruction of the results of the excavation and its interpretation, was presented in detail in that publication. Following Aharoni’s last excavation season, and after a few more months of excavation conducted by Meir Ben-Dov in the palace’s southwestern corner, the archaeological site sat abandoned from the beginning of 1963 until 1967. During this time Ramat Raḥel continued to be a center of attraction, mainly because of the spectacular view toward unreachable destinations under Jordanian control, such as Bethlehem and Rachel’s Tomb in the south; the Judean Desert and Herodium in the east; and the Old City of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, in the north. After the Six Day War, when all these sites became accessible, the site lost this status. The archaeological site of Ramat Rachel fell into neglect and became merely the backyard of the kibbutz.

BARKAY (1984) AND SOLIMANY (2000‒2002) EXCAVATIONS In 1984, Gabriel Barkay conducted a short excavation season on behalf of Tel Aviv University’s Institute of Archaeology, the Israel Exploration Society and the Israel Antiquities Authority. Its focus was on five areas: (a) one square (4 × 4 m) under the church floor in the northeastern corner; (b) one square from Aharoni’s Stratum Va in the palace’s central courtyard; (c) one square south of the southern casemate wall, adjacent to the kibbutz’s water reservoir; (d) one square on the site’s western slope; and (e) a few squares adjacent to the southwestern corner, where it later became clear that the corner merely penetrated the discarded earth of Aharoni’s excavations (Barkay 2006: 34‒44). At the end of the 1990s, while the site was being turned into an archaeological garden, Gideon Solimany conducted small-scale salvage excavations on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (December 2000, November 2001 and August 2002; Fig. 3.5). Three areas were treated 18

Chapter 3: History of Research

Fig. 3.5: Solimany’s and Barzel’s work areas during their 2000–2002 excavations (Based on Solimany and Barzel 2016: Fig. 44.1)

in preparation for the development and preservation work, which included setting up statues and installing trails: (a) adjacent to the kibbutz’s water reservoir; (b) on the north side of the palace courtyard dated to the Iron Age; and (c) in the northwestern end of the external yard of the palace complex.4 The Ramat Raḥel archaeological garden was inaugurated in 2002, in the presence of the President of Israel (Figs. 3.6–3.7). The site once again became a place where one could wander along trails, look at antiquities and marvel at the open view spread at the foot of the hill in almost every direction. 4 For the excavation summaries, see Solimany and Barzel 2008; 2016.

19

Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot and Manfred Oeming

Fig. 3.6: The cental courtyard, structures to the west and to the north after the site was conserved and turned into an archaeological park (Skyview 2006).

Fig. 3.7 Three replicas of decorated stone capitals positioned by Ran Morin at the western edge of the central courtyard (Oded Lipschits).

20

Chapter 3: History of Research

REFERENCES Aharoni, Y. 1955. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel. Yedi'ot XIX: 147–174 (Hebrew). Aharoni, Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Barkay, G. 2006. Royal Palace, Royal Portrait? The Tantalizing Possibilities of Ramat Raḥel. Biblical Archaeology Review 32: 34–44. Bliss, F.J. and Dickie, A.C. 1898. Excavations of Jerusalem 1894–1897. London. Clermont-Ganneau, C. 1899. Archaeological Researches in Palestine during the Years 1873–1874. London. Dickie, A.C. 1896. Report on Tombs Discovered near Sûr Bahir. PEFQS: 22–24. Fast, T. 1924. Neugefundene Scalensteine. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paläŝtina-Vereins 47: 242–244. Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L. 2016. Raw Material and Sources for the Analysis of Aharoni’s Excavations. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959‒1962), Vol. I. Winona Lake: 15‒25. Maisler (Mazar), B. 1935. Ramat Rachel and Kh. Salah. Qobetz 3: 4–18. Monteverdi, A. 1960. Il Colle di Rachele (Ramat Raḥel)—Missione Archaeologica nel Vicino Oriente. Roma. Schick, C. 1878. Mittheilungen aus Jerusalem. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paläŝtina-Vereins 1: 11–23. Solimany, G. and Barzel, V. 2008. Ramat Raḥel. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations and Surveys in Israel 120. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=793&mag_id=114. Solimany, G. and Barzel, V. 2016. Salvage Excavations 2000–2002. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959‒1962), Vol. I. Winona Lake: 680–711. Stekelis, M. 1935. A Jewish Tomb-Cave at Ramat Rachel. Qobetz 3: 19–40.

21

CHAPTER 4

THE RENEWED EXCAVATIONS BY THE TEL AVIV–HEIDELBERG EXPEDITION Yuval Gadot, Liora Freud, Manfred Oeming and Oded Lipschits

Field work at Ramat Raḥel was renewed in 2004. It included a preliminary underground survey along with small-scale exploratory excavations (2004), followed by six full excavation seasons (2005‒2010; Table 4.1). With the aid of students and volunteers from around the world, large areas were excavated all over and around the site. In some cases, Aharoni’s excavation areas were extended, deepened and explored (Areas C2, D3, D4, D51 and D6; Figs. 4.1–4.3); in other cases, entirely new areas were excavated (Areas A1, B1, B2, B3, C1 (north and south), C42, D1 and D2). In addition, the subterranean spaces, the agricultural facilities in the near environs of the tell, and the terraces on the slopes were comprehensively surveyed and investigated. Table 4.2 presents information regarding the different areas that were excavated by season. The Ramat Raḥel expedition is a result of cooperation between the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University and the Faculty of Theology at Heidelberg University. Thanks to a generous donation, 20 students from Heidelberg were able to join the dig every season. Over the years about 150 German students excavated alongside the core Israeli-German team, and some were even integrated in the ongoing research. Three hundred students and other volunteers from Australia, Argentina, Canada, the United States, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, France, England, Poland, the Czech Republic, Italy, Spain, Tunisia, India, Korea, Japan and many from Israel joined the German-Israeli team:

RAMAT RAḤEL – EXCAVATION STAFF 2005‒2010 Project directors: Oded Lipschits and Manfred Oeming Field director: Yuval Gadot Registrar: Liora Freud Architectural analysis: Benjamin Arubas Measurements: Benjamin Arubas and Shatil Emanuelov (2008‒2010) Administrators: Amitai Achiman (2005‒2007), Carsten Kettering (2007‒2010) Volunteer coordination: Omer Sergi (2005‒2010), Gila Yudkin (2007‒2009) and Keren Ras (2010) Photography: Pavel Shrago

Accompanying Researches Survey of subterranean features: Roi Porat and Uri Davidovich Ceramic analysis (Hellenistic period): Oren Tal Cermaic analysis (Iron and Persian periods): Liora Freud 1 Combined with Area D4 in the publication. 2 Combined with Area B2 in the publication.

Chapter 4: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv–Heidelberg Expedition

Ceramic analysis (Byzantine period – Islamic period): Itamar Taxel Metal detector and numismatics: Yoav Farhi Analysis of ritual baths (MiqvaEtmol 187: 26–28 (Hebrew). Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y., Arubas, B. and Oeming, M. 2011. Palace and Village, Paradise and Oblivion: Unraveling the Riddles of Ramat Raḥel. Near Eastern Archaeology 74: 2–49. Lipschits, O., Oeming, M., Gadot, Y. and Arubas, B. 2006. Ramat Raḥel 2005. Israel Exploration Journal 56: 227‒235. Marom, L. 2010. The Garden and the Water System—Area C1 in Ramat Raḥel Excavations (2005‒2007) (M.A thesis, Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Morin, R. 2005. ‘Creative Preservation’ in the Recently Opened Archaeological Garden at Ramat Rachel, Jerusalem. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 7: 56‒62. Reich, R. 2016. Jewish Ritual Baths (Miqva’ot). In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959‒1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv: 245‒253. Sandhaus, D. Forthcoming. The Late Hellenistic Pottery. In: Lipschits, O., Frued, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. Solimany, G. and Barzel, V. 2008. Ramat Raḥel. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 120. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/ Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=793&mag_id=114 Solimany, G. and Barzel, V. 2016. Salvage Excavations 2000‒2002. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959‒1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv: 679‒701. Spanier, J. and Sasson, A. 2001. Lime Kilns in Eretz-Israel. Jerusalem.

157

CHAPTER 8

AREA C2 Assaf Kleiman

INTRODUCTION Area C2 is located at the highest topographical point of Ramat Raḥel’s natural hill, overlooking the road connecting Jerusalem and Bethlehem (Fig. 8.1). In 1962, Aharoni excavated most of this area as part of Sector AWS1 (Aharoni 1964: 37–38; Gadot et al. 2016), and dated the exposed architectural remains to the Iron Age, Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods (Revised Phases AWS1-1–6). The Renewed Excavations in this area were carried out over the course of four seasons. The main objective of the excavation was to re-expose the architectural elements that Aharoni interpreted as belonging to the western casemate wall of the Iron Age citadel (Revised Phase AWS1-6; Aharoni 1964: 50; Gadot et al. 2016: Table 12.1, Figs. 12.2, 12.4–12.5, 12.7–12.8), and that Reich interpreted as belonging to an Assyrian-style temple (Reich 2003). As the excavation progressed, the boundaries of the area were expanded to the south and to the east in order to understand the connection between the Iron Age architecture and the remains of the royal garden, which were found mostly in Area C1 (see Chapter 7). Our excavations made it clear that Area C2 is located on a man-made cliff that is disconnected from its natural surroundings to the south, west and north by scarps (Figs. 8.2–8.3).1 It follows that the only possible approach to this area was from the east, where the natural topography was maintained, and the surface slopes gently eastwards towards the palatial central courtyard (see Chapter 11). Interestingly, the cement army shooting stations built after 1948 CE are located at the very top of the southern scarp (see Phase C21). This man-made topography remained visible until the 20th century CE (see also the original plan in Aharoni 1964: Fig. 6). Nevertheless, due to the dumping that occurred during Aharoni’s excavation, the landscape was altered again to such an extent that the artificial scarps were no longer apparent.

STRATIGRAPHICAL SYNOPSIS Overall, six phases were identified in Area C2 (Table 8.1; Gadot et al. 2016: Table 12.1). All the exposed walls in this area were built directly on the bedrock, with very little soil coverage or associated ceramic assemblages. In addition, most of the remains found here were not superimposed on one another. Hence, the stratigraphic division to local phases and the chronological scheme presented in this chapter rely more on architectural variation rather than on differences in related ceramic assemblages.

PHASE C2-6 During the Renewed Excavations the Iron II architectural remains discovered by Aharoni (Squares V–X/6–10; Gadot et al. 2016; Fig. 8.2) were successfully re-exposed. However, no clean loci that could be attributed to this phase were found. The exposed architectural remains include three east to west 1 For example, the western scarp between Area C2 and Area C4 stands at 3.9 m.

Chapter 8: Area C2

Fig. 8.1: Location of Area C2 (east and west).

Table 8.1: Area C2: Stratigraphical Sequence Phase

Main Features

Building Phase

Period

Aharoni’s Stratigraphy

C2-1

IDF trenches

-

20th century CE

-

C2-3/2

Structures 12601 and 12602

VIII

Late Byzantine–Early Islamic?

IIb–IIa? (AWS1-2)

C2-3

Vaulted structure (reused Subterranean Space RR10)

VII

Byzantine

IIb (AWS1-2)

C2-4

Tombs 608, 616 and 618

VI

Late Roman

III (AWS1-3)

C2-5

Subterranean Space RR10

V

Late Hellenistic– Early Roman

IVa (AWS1-4?)

C2-6

Iron Age remains

I–III

Iron IIB–C

Vb (–IVb) (AWS1-6/5)

159

Assaf Kleiman



T



T

RR10



T



Fig. 8.2: Area C2 (west) Phases C2-6–C2-4.

walls (Figs. 8.3–8.4): Wh215 (Squares C58, C59, C60 and C80), Wh218 (Squares C78, C79 and C80) and Wh219 (Squares C98, C99 and C100). These walls abut from the west to Wall Wh213 (Squares C120, C100, C80 and C60, Fig. 8.3b).2 Additional parts of Aharoni’s western enclosure wall were unearthed in Squares C57, C77 and C97 (Wall C50; Figs. 8.3b, 8.5).3 This wall is oriented north to south and is parallel to Wall Wh213. It is 5.80 m long and 1.20 m wide. In marked contrast to the construction style of most of the other Iron Age walls identified at the site, Wall C50 and the few wall segments related to it are comprised of fieldstones of varying sizes and shapes. This observation is a key criterion for the dating of the earliest Iron Age architecture in Area C2 (see discussion below). It should also be noted that during the construction of Wall C50 the different elevations of the bedrock were taken into account. In other words, in places where the natural rock was lower, 2 Segments of Wall Wh220 (Square C98) and Wh221 (Squares C118 and C119) were also exposed, but their connection to Wall Wh213 did not survive. 3 Note that in Gadot et al. 2016, this wall is referred to as Wh216.

160

Chapter 8: Area C2

a) C018

b)

C074

C038

C075

C058

C078

C076

C077

C098

C078

C079

C118

C080

C138

D061

T T

Fig. 8.3: (a) Section A-A; (b) Section B-B (see Fig. 8.2).

Fig. 8.4: Wall Wh213 at the end of the 2007 season.

fewer courses were built, and where the bedrock was higher, the natural rock was incorporated into the foundations of the wall. It seems that this construction method was meant to create an even platform (for similar cases in Areas D1 and D2, see Chapters 9 and 10). In literature, this building technique is known to have been employed in order to increase the stability of the wall (Netzer 1992: 17–19). 161

Assaf Kleiman

Fig. 8.5: Wall C50 at the end of the 2005 season, looking north.

Although no contemporaneous floor remains were found during the Renewed Excavations, it can be assumed that the floors were located at a higher elevation than the top of the extant walls (about 819.50 m). Accordingly, Walls C50, Wh213, Wh215, Wh218 and Wh219 should probably be interpreted as the freestanding wall foundations of the actual walls of the compound.4 The only indication of a possible surface was found northwest of Wall C50 in Locus 609 (Square C57, Figs. 8.2, 8.6). This crushed chalk layer should probably be understood as a means of flattening the natural rock so that it could be used as a living surface. Unfortunately, no other evidence was found to support this idea.

REEVALUATING THE DATE OF THE IRON AGE REMAINS The discovery of an artificial scarp located to the north and south of Area C2 called for a reevaluation of the nature and date of the Iron Age remains that Aharoni assumed were part of the western casemate system of the Stratum Va palatial compound (Aharoni 1964: 50; for an alternative proposal, see Reich 2003). As already mentioned, the building technique of Wall C50 is the only criterion that can be used for dating the complex. Considering the fact that almost none of the other Iron Age walls at the site were built in this fashion, and that the structure under discussion resembles certain Iron IIB forts found around Jerusalem (see, for instance, Barkai, Fantalkin and Tal 2002: 52, Fig. 4; Mazar 1990: Fig. 10), it is possible to suggest an earlier date for the structure and to identify it as a tower erected at the highest point of the hill prior 4 In the preliminary reports, it was suggested that a huge flat stone that was found incorporated into Wall Wh213 may have served as a monumental threshold (Lipschits et al. 2009). This suggestion remains plausible, as this was indeed the only direction from which the area could be approached (Figs. 8.1–8.2).

162

Chapter 8: Area C2

Fig. 8.6: Crushed chalk to the west of Wall C50 (Locus 609).

to the construction of the royal compound. Wall C50 and the other walls associated with it should thus be understood as representing the earliest architectural remains at the site (Building Phase I; see Introduction). Surprisingly, no evidence of later Iron Age architecture was found above Wall C50 and its associated walls. Nevertheless, it is improbable that this compound was deserted during Building Phases II and III; the absence of architecture and material culture from these periods is likely to be the result of the proximity of the finds to the modern surface. Moreover, the most logical explanation for the absence of superimposed architecture is that the foundations of the early structure were incorporated into the royal compound of Building Phase II (Aharoni’s Stratum Va; Revised Phase AWS1-4), and probably continued to be used during Building Phase III, until the final destruction of the edifice. Once the southern and northern scarps are taken into account, it is quite clear that the structure continued westwards, and did not constitute part of a casemate wall as reconstructed by Aharoni (1964: Fig. 6). Accordingly, Wall Wh213 should be interpreted as a partition between the palace and the tower designated by Walls Wh215, C50 and Wh221.5 Although this style of architectural planning (i.e., a compound with a projecting structure) is quite rare, somewhat similar examples can be seen in the “western tower” at Tel Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: Pl. 6; for a detailed discussion see Amiran and Dunayevsky 1958: 29–31) and the southwestern tower of Building Phase II at Samaria (Herzog 1997: Fig. 5.22). 5 In fact, Aharoni was the first to suggest that the architectural remains of Sector AWS1 could be understood as a “strong citadel” (Aharoni 1964: 50). Surprisingly, he ultimately rejected this idea in favor of the western casement wall reconstruction.

163

Assaf Kleiman

PHASE C2-5 A subterranean space (hereafter, Subterranean Space RR10), which was cut into the natural rock, is the only clear evidence for the renewal of human activity in Area C2 (Figs. 8.2, 8.7–8.9). Subterranean Space RR10 is 4 m deep and 2.4 m wide. Its southern and northern walls were plastered. It is plausible that the eastern and western walls were originally also constructed this way, and Walls C53 and C54, which were built against the plastered rock-cuts, are a later addition (see Phase C2-3 below). In the plaster on the southern wall it is possible to identify the negative imprint of three stairs that descended into the subterranean space from east to west (Fig. 8.8). These stairs were most likely carved out in a later period (see Phase C2-3), when the space was reused for other purposes. Based on this observation, it could be suggested that Subterranean Space RR10 was originally used as a miqveh (Jewish ritual bath; see Reich, 1990: 62–81), and that it already stopped functioning as such at the end of the 1st century CE (see below). The immersion basin should be reconstructed at the western edge of the installation, while the entrance was to the east. On the southern wall, a unique tree-like design is visible (Fig. 8.9).

RR10

Fig. 8.7: Plan and Section A-A of Subterranean Space RR10 including Walls C53 and C54 (Phases C2-4–C2-3).

164

Chapter 8: Area C2

Fig. 8.8: Subterranean Space RR10, looking south. Possible imprints of steps are seen on the left.

Fig. 8.9: Subterranean Space RR10, looking north. Note that a unique tree-like design is visible on the plaster.

165

Assaf Kleiman

The fact that the space was reused during later periods hinders the dating of its original construction. Consequently, its affiliation with Phase C2-5 and its dating to the Early Roman period are based solely on its interpretation as a miqveh and accepting the common date for these installations. Similar miqvaoEn Ya>el, situated on the southern bank of Naḥal Refaʼim (about 4 km to the west of Ramat Raḥel). The mosaic floor decorated a villa dated to the Late Roman period, probably from the 3rd century CE (Weksler-Bdolah 2007). The geometric pattern of the mosaic floors of the two villas was popular during the Late Roman period and thus they can shed light on the date and function of Phase D4-5. 302

Chapter 12: Area D4

WD509

WD572 15238

WD506 WD549

Fig. 12.39: The mosaic floor of Villa 15162 of Phase D4-5 found below later phase architecture, looking west.

WD509

WD572 WD581

15238 15162

WD566

WD560

15184

15162

WD506

Fig. 12.40: Aerial view of the villa and later walls built on top if it, looking west (Skyview).

303

Omer Sergi

Fig. 12.41: Close up of the mosaic decorated Carpet 15162, looking west. B: Black O: Orange R: Red Blank: White

Fig. 12.42: Drawing of mosaic carpet (Caroline Patteres).

304

Chapter 12: Area D4

WD 50 6

WD509

15238

15184

WD57 2

15162

WD581

WD588

Fig. 12.43: Wall D581, the northern edge of the villa, looking south.

Floor 15162 adjoins the western face of Wall D506, which in Aharoni’s plan is labeled as a wall separating the church’s nave and the main aisle of the narthex (of Phase D4-3). The western face of this wall was covered with a 3 cm thick layer of white plaster. A plastered pier made of one hewn stone/ashlar is attached to the western face of this wall, forming an integral part of Wall D506 (Square A394). As the floor adjoins the pier, it seems that Wall D506 should be attributed to Phase D4-5. It was probably built as part of the large stone podium and was used as the eastern wall of the western structure of the villa. Wall D572 marks the western border of the western structure. Its northern end bonds with Wall D581 to form the northwestern corner of the room (Figs. 12.40, 12.43 and see below). While a second course was found here, for most of its length only the foundation course was exposed. The inner (eastern) face of the wall was made of unhewn fieldstones, covered with thick white plaster similar to that which covered the inner (western) face of Wall D506. This wall runs parallel to Wall D581. Mosaic Floor 15162 (Fig. 12.44) adjoins this plaster and the arrangement of the mosaic stones near the northern end of Wall D572 creates a corner (Fig. 12.45). This is probably the room’s northwestern corner, where Wall D572 did not survive. All this indicates that Wall D572 was the western wall of the western structure built on the podium. Wall D572 continues southwards, farther than the southern end of the mosaic floor, suggesting that the building might have had another southern component that did not survive due to the building activities in Phase D4-3. Wall D581 defines the northern border of the villa’s western structure. This wall was built of hewn limestones that were carved into square blocks with marginal dressing. It was built directly on top of the northern end of the large stone podium (Wall D505), using the podium as its foundation (Fig. 12.43). The western end of Wall D581 bonds with Wall D572 and creates the northwestern corner of the structure. It seems that the northern end of Wall D506 bonds with Wall D581, though the exact connection between these walls could not be clarified, as only one course of Wall D581 survived. This course (directly above the foundation course) was located below mosaic Floor 15162. The floor 305

Omer Sergi

appears to be disturbed at the northern end near Wall D581, and thus the connection between the wall and the floor cannot be determined (Fig. 12.43). However, the fact that Wall D581 bonds with Wall D572 to the west and probably also with Wall D506 to the east, and the fact that mosaic Floor 15162 clearly adjoins with both these walls (Walls D506, D572), indicates that the mosaic floor most likely originally adjoined Wall D581 as well. Installation 15184 (Square A374), probably for collecting liquids, was found inside the western structure (Figs. 12.39–12.40, 12.44). This installation is a square-shaped vat comprised of four walls (Wall D564 in the north, Wall D565 in the east, Wall D566 in the south and Wall D567 in the west) covered with a double layer of thick gray plaster on both the inner and outer faces. The four walls creating this vat extend 40 cm higher and about 70 cm lower than the mosaic floor of the villa. Mosaic Floor 15162 clearly adjoins this installation and thus the vat must have been part of the villa’s structure. The vat was paved with a white mosaic floor, and two stairs adjoining Walls D566 and D567 allowed easy access to the bottom of the vat. In the northwestern corner of the vat, a metal detector identified a metal pipe below the floor, but it was not excavated or exposed during our dig. A second installation was found at the northern end of the room. This installation was semi-dome shaped (diameter 50 cm) and was covered with small white tesserae that constituted a direct continuation of mosaic Floor 15162. The top of this semi-dome was crushed (Fig. 12.45). Its nature and function is not clear and we were unable to find a similar installation at any other relevant/timely corresponding excavated site.

WD549

WD

506

WD560

15162

WD566

5184

Fig. 12.44: Mosaic Floor 15162 of the villa, looking east.

306

15238

Chapter 12: Area D4

Constructional and Decorative Elements from the Villa Found in Secondary Use in Later Building Activities/Phases A number of decorative architectural elements found in secondary use were associated with the villa. These included a column base incorporated in the southern church wall (Wall D507 of Phase D4-3, Fig. 12.9) and a stone pedestal, perhaps an altar (Fig. 12.46). A second column base, found by Aharoni, was integrated into the pavement of the stone path between the church and the annexed building (Phase D4-4), but might also belong to Phase D4-3. In addition, fragments of painted plaster, roof tiles, and a marble object (probably a piece of a large ceremonial bowl) were found in Fill 15282 below Floor 15281 (Squares D33–D13, Phase D4-3, Fig. 12.12). Therefore, the architectural elements found in this fill should be attributed to Phase D4-4 and should be understood as being related to the villa structure. Finally, at the bottom of the apse (of Phase D4-3) a small segment of a hewn stone, apparently Basin 15300, was found (Square A398, Fig. 12.9). This basin is clearly earlier than the apse and should probably be attributed to Phase D4-5 or to the phase of the agricultural installation (D4-4, see below).

PHASE D4-4: AGRICULTURAL INSTALLATIONS (FIGS. 12.8–12.9) In Phase D4-4 of Area D4, when installations were built directly on the decorated floors, the western space of the villa was taken out of its original use. In addition to that, it seems that the villa’s courtyard was also taken out of its original use when several agricultural installations (three vats and at least one lever and screw press), plastered floors and mosaic floors, and several walls were built on large stone Podium 15153 (Phase D4-5), to the east of the villa’s western space. Two clearly different stages of use were detected in each of the agricultural installations excavated. From a stratigraphical point of view, it was impossible to determine whether these installations were contemporaneous with the erection of the large stone podium and thus with the villa (Phase D4-5), or if they were used later (Phase D4-4).

WD572

15238 15162

Fig. 12.45: Wall D572 of Phase D4-5, looking west.

307

Omer Sergi

WD502

WD570

Fig. 12.46: Pedestal stone in secondary use, WD502, WD570, looking north.

However, the ceramic evidence (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming) suggests that the agricultural installations were built around the 6th century BCE, and if so they took the villa’s courtyard out of its original use. Accordingly, they were attributed to Phase D4-4, which is characterized by the alteration of the entire villa complex from its former phase to an agricultural industry area. Vats 276 and 277 in Squares A396–A397 and 255 in Square A397 were discovered by Aharoni (see Gadot and Taxel 2016) and re-cleared during the Renewed Excavations. Each vat was adjoined respectively by Floors 577 (in Squares A397–D17) and 258 (in Squares A396–D16), made of coarsely hewn simple tesserae, that were probably used as a treading surface. These floors were found below Fill 599 supporting the church floor (Phase D4-3/2, Fig. 12.11), indicating that the agricultural industry predates the basilica of the next phase (D4-3). Southwest of the vats, additional walls (Wall D511, Squares D15–D16, Wall D522, Square D15, Wall D524, Squares D36–D16) and several plaster layers were found. Some of these layers were used as floors and some as make-up for mosaic floors (Locus 259, Square A395; Locus 15124, Square D16; Locus 15130, Square D16; Locus 268, Square D15; Locus 274, Square D16; Locus 15090, Square D37 in Fig. 12.8; and Locus 15054, Square D13 in Fig. 12.9, see below). They were all laid directly on top of the large stone podium and were sealed by the floor of the church. Therefore, although the floors and walls do not create a coherent plan, they were all attributed to Phase D4-4, together forming an agricultural production center. At least two different stages of use were observed in the vats and some of the floors (see below), indicating the long period of time during which this agricultural production center functioned (and thus further delaying the date of the construction of the church from the following Phase D4-3 to the 7th and even 8th century CE, and see below). In the earlier stage, liquid from treading Floor 258 was drained into Vat 277, from which it was drained into Vat 276. In the later stage the two drains, together with the sink 308

Chapter 12: Area D4

in Vat 277, were deliberately sealed, and the two vats were used separately. In addition, treading Floor 258 was re-plastered and a lever and screw press installation was built to its west. Several additional installations were built on the floor of the villa’s western structure (Phase D4-4, see below). It is thus possible that the second stage of use observed in the agricultural installations is contemporaneous with the alterations made to the villa. It could also be that the modifications and replastering observed in the installations are independent activities. In any case, the erection of installations in all parts of the villa indicates that it was taken out of its original use and thus they are all attributed to Phase D4-4. The agricultural industry area built on the former villa during this phase fell out of use only when the church was built in the next phase (D4-3).

Agricultural Installations: Vats and the Treading Floor (Fig. 12.9) Easternmost Vat 255 was excavated by Aharoni, but it does not appear in the plans published. This vat was later filled by the kibbutz members who built a terrace above it on which they planted trees. It was re-exposed during the Renewed Excavations in 2007. It was probably part of a structure comprising walls and treading floors, which likely also contained the Vats (276, 277, below). Vat 255 is defined by Walls D517 to the north, D519 to the south, D520 to the east and D518 to the west. It was about 1.5 m deep and its floor was paved with white, coarsely hewn tesserae; it sloped eastward (813.92 m) towards a rounded depression in the southeastern corner (bottom elevation of the depression is 813.68 m). In the northwestern corner, a plaster step was built. The vat’s northern and eastern walls (Walls D517, D520) were built of small to medium-sized fieldstones and the other two walls (Walls D518, D519) were built of medium, perfectly hewn ashlars. All the walls were coated with two layers of thick plaster. A make-up for white mosaic Floor 577 (in Square D17) made of mortar was found southwest of Vat 255. However, only a few of the semi-hewn tesserae embedded in mortar survived. Fill 273 below this make-up was also excavated. Floor 577 adjoins north–south oriented Wall D526 at its east, as well as east–west oriented Wall D527 at its north. This forms the southeastern corner of the structure. The northern and western continuation of the floor is cut by a modern waste dump (Locus 260, postdating Phase D4-1). Still it seems that the floor might also have adjoined the vats excavated by Aharoni (Locus 276, Locus 277). Hence, it appears that all three vats are part of the same structure. Vats 276 and 277 (Squares A396–A397) and adjoining treading Floor 258 were excavated by Aharoni and Testini (see Gadot and Taxel 2016: Fig. 5.5). These vats shared their eastern wall (D513) and western wall (D514) and were separated by additional Wall D515. The walls were plastered and the floors paved with the same type of coarse tesserae stones (the elevation of the floor of Vat 277 was 814.05 m; the elevation of the floor of Vat 276 was 813.75 m). In each of the vats a second stage of use was observed. In Vat 276, the sink-like depression in the southwestern corner (32 cm in diameter) was later sealed. In Vat 277 the mosaic floor was laid after the walls of the vat were constructed. A lead pipe was found sealed below this mosaic floor near the center of partition Wall D515. The pipe was probably used to drain fluids from Vat 276 to Vat 277 during an earlier stage of use. A column (diameter 40 cm, height preserved to 1.25 m; see Gadot and Taxel 2016: Fig. 5.3) was embedded in the center of the mosaic floor of Vat 277. The vat was too small to demand this type of support for a roof; its function, therefore, remains unclear (for a similar find in Moza, see Billig 1996: 81–83). The walls of these two vats (Walls D513, D514, D515, D516) are made of two rows of medium-sized fieldstones and semi-hewn dressed stones. The eastern face of the eastern wall (D513) was built from well-hewn dressed stones. On some of these stones a thick layer of gray plaster was preserved, indicating that the architectural space east of the vats was probably some kind of pool or water reservoir. The other walls were covered with three layers of gray or white plaster; pottery sherds were embedded in the lowest (earliest) plaster layer. An additional plaster layer with embedded pottery sherds was preserved in the lowest meter of western Wall D514. A 60 cm long and 10 cm wide drain was carved in stone (the stone 309

Omer Sergi

measures 65 × 45 cm) and embedded into the center of the uppermost part of western Wall D514. The western part of this drain was embedded into mosaic Floor 258 (see below); the make-up of the floor was preserved only around the drain. Remains of thick plaster in the eastern part of the drain indicate that during a later stage of use it was sealed and taken out of use.

Agricultural Installations: Screw Installation and Floors (Fig. 12.9) A set of at least two different plaster floors and floor make-up (Floor 257 and its make-up 15123, Floors 258 and 259 and their make-up 15124, Squares D15-D16-A395-A396) and a lever and screw press (Square D17) were unearthed west of Vats 276 and 277. Each of these exhibited at least two different stages of use. Mosaic Floor 258 (Squares A395–396) paved with coarsely hewn white tesserae (1.5 × 2 cm) adjoined Wall D514. It was at elevation ca. 815.85 m and sloped some 2–3 cm towards the vats. The tesserae were embedded into a light pink-colored plaster (Locus 259 in Square A395 at 815.77 m and Locus 15124 in Squares A396-D15-D16 at 815.83 m), laid above a layer of pebbles and earth (Locus 15129 in Squares A396–D16). Additional segments of similar plaster (Locus 268 in Square D15 and Locus 274 in Square D16, see below) were found to the south of floors mentioned above, on the southern section of the large stone podium, south of Wall D525 (Phase D4-5). This could indicate that the entire area covered by tesserae embedded in plaster might have extended to the southern edge of the podium. A layer of thick gray plaster covered parts of the mosaic floor and the screw press (Floor 257 in Squares D15–A395, Floor 15123 in Squares D16–A396). Similar plaster was found in the drain channel adjoining Vat 277, suggesting that it represented a second stage of use in the agricultural installations. A wide gap of about 2 m in the mosaic floor around the screw press was filled with a matrix of pebbles and earth (Locus 15140 in Square A395 at 815.95 m), creating a surface in which the screw press was embedded. The screw press was inserted into this surface while intruding (and thus, stratigraphically, postdating) the structure of the large stone podium (Locus 15153 of Phase D4-5). Ash Layer 15165 at the bottom of the installation was probably used as cementing/binding material. Above Surface 15140 pinkish Plaster 15124 and Fill 15129 were found, which were used as the make-up of mosaic Floor 258 (see above). It seems that in order to install the screw press the pebble surface penetrated plaster Floor 15124. This implies that the screw press was inserted during a second stage of use, probably with the changes made to the treading floors described above and Vats 276 and 277. Another small segment of smooth and gray plaster (Locus 15130 in Square D15, 60 cm × 1 m at 815.80 m) was found below pinkish Plaster 15124 in the southern part of Floor 258, adjacent to Wall D511 (see below). Its function is not clear, and it might only indicate the repair and leveling of floors, which is characteristic of this phase. In light of the above, it can be concluded that there were two stages of use in western Vats 276 and 277. In the earlier phase, liquid from treading Floor 258 was drained into Vat 277, from which it was channeled into Vat 276. In the later phase the two drains, together with the sink in Vat 277, were deliberately sealed, and the two vats were used separately. In addition, treading Floor 258 was replastered and a screw installation was built to its west.

Additional Floors and Walls Attributed to the Agricultural Installations (Fig. 12.9) A few segments of plaster floors, together with some segments of walls, were found immediately above the large stone podium (of Phase D4-5) and as a result of stratigraphical considerations should therefore be attributed to Phase D4-4. Only a few fragments of the foundations of these walls were preserved, and these do not form a coherent architectural plan. Therefore, the function of these walls is unclear. East–west oriented Wall D511 (Fig. 12.53) was laid on top of large Phase D4-5 stone Podium 15153 in Squares D15–D16. It was built from semihewn fieldstones. The northern face of this wall was smoothened while the southern face was left irregular. Its function is not quite clear, and it is possible 310

Chapter 12: Area D4

that it was not a wall at all but rather the foundation for a floor. Its surface was made of earth and pebbles (Locus 15038, Fig. 12.53) laid on earth Fill 15037(Fig. 12.9) until it adjoined the southern edge of large stone Podium (Wall D525 of Phase D4-5). Mosaic treading Floor 258, with its plaster make-up (Locus 259, Locus 15124) seems to be laid above and covering Wall D511 (Fig. 12.54), and it is possible that this floor continued to the south above Surface 15038. It therefore seems that Wall D511 fell out of use during the second stage of use of the agricultural installations observed above. A second wall, Wall D522, oriented north–south, was found west of Wall D511. Only two segments of this wall (the northern in Square A375 and the southern in Square D15) were found below Fill 599 of the church floor (Phase D4-3). It is therefore clear that this wall should be attributed to Phase D4-4, but its function and its relation to Wall D511 and/or the large stone podium remains unclear. A third wall, Wall D524 in Square D16, Fig. 12.9, oriented north–south, was found just above the southern edge of large stone Podium Wall D525. It was built of fieldstones, of which only one short course was excavated. It seems that the wall continues to the south, beyond the extent of the large stone podium and below the paved path excavated by Aharoni. Other sections of this wall were not excavated and thus its plan and its relation to the other walls have not been determined. From a stratigraphical point of view, as it was found directly above Wall D525 (Phase D4-5) and below the church floor (Phase D4-3), it should be attributed to Phase D4-4. A pier (Square D16), laid above the surface of earth and Pebbles 15038, north of Wall D524 and south of Wall D511 and above the large stone podium (Wall D525 of Phase D4-5), should also be attributed to this phase. Although the pier is located exactly where we would expect to find the second pier east of the southern aisle of the church (Phase D4-3), this pier has some unique characteristics. It is built of two perfectly hewn ashlar stones laid one on top of the other. The lower one (100 × 82 cm) is larger than the upper one (73 × 72 cm); the latter is adjoined by a segment of pinkish plaster Layer 274. This plaster is sealed below church Floor 582 of Phase D4-3 (see below) and thus should be attributed to an earlier phase (presumably D4-4). The plaster segment is similar in its material and its elevation (815.82 m) to pinkish plaster Floors 259 and 15124 (815.76 m and 815.83 m, respectively) which comprises the makeup of mosaic Floor 258. Thus, it seems that both plaster Segment 274 and the pier which is related to it should be attributed to Phase D4-4. A similar pinkish plaster Floor 268 was found farther to the west in Square D15, at similar elevation (815.78 m) and below the second pier located west of the southern church aisle. However, in this case it is clear that the pier postdates the plaster floor, as it cuts the floor and was installed using cement and binding material (Fig. 12.55). More segments of Floor 268 were found southwest of the western pier (Fig. 12.56). The floor was laid directly on thin earth Fill 15043, which was laid above the large stone podium of Phase D4-5 (Wall D525). On the other hand, Floor 269 is sealed below the church floor of Phase D4-3 (Locus 576) and its fill (Locus 265). This stratigraphical sequence, and the fact that the church pier cuts the floor, indicates that plaster Floor 268 should be attributed to Phase D4-4, and pottery sherds and coins retrieved from it suggest dating its construction to the 6th century CE (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming; Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming). The similarity between the four segments of pinkish plaster floors (Loci 259, 15124, 268, 274) may indicate that they were all part of the same floor that covered the large stone podium of Phase D4-4. Since just north of this area plaster Floor 259 comprised the make-up of mosaic Floor 258, it is possible that this area was also paved with a mosaic floor that did not survive. Additional plaster floors (see below) were found out of any clear stratigraphical context and therefore it is impossible to determine their architectural plan or function. However, they were all found sealed below the church floor of Phase D4-3. As plaster floors are a feature that characterizes the agricultural installations in the area, these floors were also attributed to Phase D4-4. A few small uneven segments of white-gray plaster Floor 15090 were unearthed in Square D37 (Fig. 12.9). Here the plaster floor was poorly preserved and for the most part could only be observed 311

Omer Sergi

in the western section of the square. Also due to poor preservation, the fill below it (Locus 15113) was mixed with the fill from above (Locus 15075), and in some cases it was impossible to differentiate between them. The plaster floor itself was found south of Wall D556, which marks the southern border of the Phase D4-5 large stone podium. It is not clear whether or not the floor adjoins Wall D556, but in any case it represents a structure that was built south of the large stone podium (perhaps a courtyard) and which did not survive. The elevation of all these floor segments is between 815.64–815.85 m (similar to plaster Floors 15130, 15124, 259), which is also the elevation of the floors attributed to the agricultural installations of Phase D4-4. This supports the conclusion that Floor 15090 and Fills 15075 and 15113 should also be attributed to this phase. An additional plaster Floor (15054 in Square D13, Fig. 12.8) was found below the floor of the southern part of church narthex 15044, 15045, 15046 of Phase D4-3 (Fig. 12.12). It was made of grayish white plaster and was uneven (815.67–815.72 m) and badly damaged (probably as a result of a grave having been dug into it during Phase D4-3, Fig. 12.57). The floor was damaged and it was hard to determine its relation to stone structure Wall D549, which took the villa floor out of use during Phase D4-4 (above). The elevation of plaster Floor 15054 and that of structure Wall D549 are similar, and if the two adjoined it would mean that the floor should be attributed to Phase D4-4. On the other hand, if the floor is cut by Wall D549 then the floor should be attributed to Phase D4-5. In any case it is clear that the floor belongs to the stage characterized by the agricultural installations, and that the floor was laid within the borders of the large stone podium, though there are no remains of the podium below the floor (Fig. 12.14).

A Tomb and Robber Trenches (Fig. 12.9) Three flat, square-shaped stones were laid alongside one another in two rows of small stones (Tomb 15310, Square D12). We did not excavate this installation (possibly a tomb), but it appears to be similar to other tombs found in the cemetery west of Area D4 (see Chapter 5) and is therefore likely related to the cemetery. As the other tombs in the cemetery were dated to the Roman period, this tomb was attributed to Phase D4-4. In addition, two segments of what seems to be a robber trench (Locus 15292 in Square D33, Fig. 12.8), cutting the white and dark fills attributed to Phase D4-8 (Locus 15293 in Square D33, Fig. 12.5), yielded pottery sherds from the 1st century CE. Fill 15297 (in Square D12) found north of Tomb 15310 contained a large amount of Iron Age–Hellenistic pottery; but, as it was not fully excavated, the phase to which it belongs could not be determined.

Modifications to the Villa’s Western Structure (Fig. 12.8) During Phase D4-4 several modifications were made to the western structure of the villa that took it out of its original use, and the entire area was restructured to accommodate agricultural installations (see Phase D4-4, above): 1. 2. 3. 4.

The western wall of the villa (Wall D572) fell out of use and a new, much more massive wall (Wall D509, Squares D13-A393-A373) was built to its west, enlarging the villa’s original western structure. Wall D560 (Square A394) was built in the villa’s western structure abutting its decorated mosaic floor, creating two separated spaces. Several installations and stone structures (Locus 15238, Wall D549 in Squares A393–A394) were built in the new parts of the villa’s western structure. The annexed building and a paved path were probably built, separating it from the villa and the agricultural installations.

The main alteration to the villa structure was the addition of Wall D560, which was built directly on Floor 15162 (Figs. 12.9, 12.40, 12.44), and which divided the room into two distinct spaces. The eastern part was built against the plastered pier of Wall D506 (Phase D4-5, Fig. 12.47). Wall D560 was made 312

Chapter 12: Area D4

of small fieldstones, limestone and flint. Its foundation course was made of medium-sized limestone blocks and the actual wall consisted of a pile of fieldstones bound with earth. The top was covered with flattened limestone, likely serving as the foundation of a higher wall or structure that was dismantled with the building of the church’s narthex during Phase D4-3. In the newly created northern space (north of Wall D560), the northwestern corner of the former villa’s western structure (Squares A393–A394, A373–A374), a small structure (Locus 15238, Figs. 12.39– 12.40) was built directly above the room’s mosaic Floor 15162 (Phase D4-5). It was comprised of four walls (Walls D562, D563, D571, D573) built of cube-shaped chalk stones. The walls bonded to one another at 90 degree angles. This small, square-shaped structure (1.3 × 1.3 m) was filled with crushed white lime. The only place a second course of any of the walls survived was in the northwestern corner where Wall D571 bonded with Wall D573, suggesting that this structure had been the base of a superstructure (perhaps for an agricultural installation) that was destroyed when the church narthex was built during Phase D4-3. The northeastern corner of this structure abuts the southwestern corner of Vat 15184 (of Phase D4-5), and a small plastered channel connects them. The channel probably drains liquids from the structure to the vat. A stone lintel (Wall D566, Figs. 12.9, 12.40, 12.44) that was laid on top of the southern wall of Vat 15184 narrowed the opening of the vat. This alteration should also be related to the modification phase, since the lintel was connected to a channel coming from small Structure 15238. In the southern space of the former villa’s western structure (south of Wall D560) small stone Podium Wall D549 (Squares D13-D14-A393-A394, Figs. 12.8, 12.40, 12.44, 12.48) was built. The lower course is made of one row of square-shaped stones laid on top of (casemate) Wall D550 (Phase D4-8), thus raising Wall D549 to the elevation of the villa’s mosaic floor (815.38 m). A second course made of flat stones that were part of Wall D549 (Locus 15227, Square A394) covered the villa’s floor to the north (Fig. 12.49), all the way to the southern face of Wall D560. Plaster Floor 15242 (in Squares D13–D14, A393–A394) was laid on 10 cm thick soil Fill 15244 and covered the southernmost 10 cm of Wall D549. The fill continued some 50 cm south of the wall. This part of the fill was laid directly on the foundation course of Iron Age Wall D550 and reached a height of 20–50 cm above it, leveling plaster Floor 15242

WD506

WD560

Fig. 12.47: Wall D560 (Phase D4-4) built against the plastered face of Wall D506 (Phase D4-5), looking east.

313

Omer Sergi

to the height of stone structure Wall D549 (Fig. 12.50). The plaster floor itself was markedly uneven (815.88–815.91 m), and was damaged or missing on some parts of the fill. It has likely created a surface, perhaps a courtyard. Small stone podium Wall D549 and the plaster Floor 15242 covering it clearly postdate the villa and thus are likely contemporaneous with Wall D560 and small Structure 15238. However, their function or full extent could not be determined.

09

W

WD

D5

506

WD549 WD550

Fig. 12.48: Excavations below the narthex, exposing earlier remains, looking north.

15162

WD549

15162 WD560

15227

15162

Fig. 12.49: Stone structure D549 of Phase D4-4 built on top of mosaic Floor 15162 of Phase D4-5, looking east.

314

Chapter 12: Area D4

Wall D509 and the Western Extension of the Villa’s Western Structure Wall D509 (Figs. 12.8, 12.48, 12.51) is the westernmost wall in the area, and was also used as the western wall of the church during Phase D4-3. It is 80 cm wide and built of coarsely hewn square blocks of limestone. Both the western and eastern faces are coated with three layers of thick plaster. The following points indicate that it was built during Phase D4-4, probably in order to enlarge the western room:

WD509

15242

WD549

WD550

Fig. 12.50: Floor 15242 of Phase D4-4 found below the pebble foundation of the narthex’s mosaic floor, looking northeast.

WD509

WD506

15288

Fig. 12.51: View to the east of Wall D509.

315

Omer Sergi

1.

2.

3.

4.

Church Floor 583 (Phase D4-3, Fig. 12.12) reaches the eastern face of Wall D509. However, the plaster coating the eastern face of the wall continues below the level of the church floor, indicating that the floor postdates the wall. The standard church structure includes an entrance in the longitudinal wall of the narthex. As there is no such entrance in Wall D509, it is reasonable to assume that the church reused Wall D509, which pre-dates it. The plaster coating the western face of Wall D509 carries on from the bottom of the wall westward, creating plaster Floor 15296 (Squares D33–D13). This floor was later cut by a row of stones, transforming it into plastered Channel 15288 (Phase D4-3, Fig. 12.12 and see below). Since this channel connects to a floor attributed to Phase D4-3 (Locus 15281), the plaster coating the wall and creating floor 15296 should be attributed to the previous phase (Fig. 12.52). Wall D588 (Square A373) abuts the western part of northern villa Wall D581 and bonds with Wall D509. Thus it seems that Walls D509 and D588 were built using the villa structure (Fig. 12.43).

According to the above it is clear that Wall D509 predates Phase D4-3 and postdates the erection of the villa (Phase D4-5). It should thus be attributed to Phase D4-4.

The Annexed Building and the Paved Path The annexed building and the paved path (Fig. 12.12) that separates it from the church and agricultural installations was unearthed by Aharoni (see Gadot and Taxel 2016 and further references there) and we were able to reexamine their stratigraphical relation while excavating Square D33. Contrary to Aharoni, we conclude that the path and the annexed building are earlier than Phase D4-3 (Strata IIB, Building Phase VII) to which they were originally attributed, and probably belong to Phase D4-4. A small segment of Wall D587 (Square D33) is probably the western continuation of Wall D536, which was later (Phase D4-3/2) used as the northern wall of the annexed building. This segment comprises the entrance to the villa compound, as it frames the steps going down to the paved path that separates the villa from the annexed building. The wall bonds with Wall D582, which belongs to a cistern excavated

WD509 15288

Fig. 12.52: Wall D509 and Channel 15288 to its north.

316

15281

W

D5

11

Chapter 12: Area D4

15038

Fig. 12.53: Wall D511, looking east.

258

15038

WD511

Fig. 12.54: Wall D511 and its relation with Floor 15038, looking north.

317

Omer Sergi

by Aharoni (1964: Fig. 1) near Room 347. The northwestern terrace wall supporting this cistern is Wall D584, which we excavated as Locus 15301 (Squares D32–D12). Wall D583, a wall added later during Phase D4-3 in order to narrow the passage, adjoins the northern face of Wall D587 and cuts Wall D582 (Fig. 12.8). Therefore, it seems that the annexed building, the paved path, the stepped entrance to this path and the cistern predate Phase D4-3. This, along with the fact that these architectural elements are all related to Wall D509, indicates that they should be attributed to Phase D4-4. Nevertheless, it is also

268

Fig. 12.55: Floor 268 of Phase D4-4 cut by the stone pier of Phase D4-3.

WD525

268

15043

Fig. 12.56: Floor 286 of Phase D4-4 as it cut by the Phase D4-3 pier, looking east.

318

Chapter 12: Area D4

506 WD

15054

WD508

Fig. 12.57: Floor 15054, looking north.

possible that the entrance to the compound was already built with the erection of the large stone podium of Phase D4-5, though this could not be verified during the excavation.

D4-3: THE CHURCH (FIGS. 12.10–12.12) The next phase in the area included the erection of a church. Although the church was already fully excavated by Aharoni and Testini (see Gadot and Taxel 2016), some doubts remained concerning the complete plan of the structure and its function. Our study of this phase, therefore, was focused on completing the plan of the church and excavating its floors in order to better date its construction. The church’s northern wall, which did not survive, was probably comprised of one course of stones built directly on the northern section of the large stone podium of Phase D4-5 (Wall D505). The southern wall (D507) was built of one course of stones, hewed to various levels of quality. It was erected on earth Fill 15120 about 2 m beyond the southern edge of the large stone podium south of Wall D565. The narthex was built against the walls of the villa (D506, D508, D509) and agricultural installations. The apse (Walls D501, D502, D503) was probably inserted into the stone podium and built against its eastern face. The apse walls were made of well-hewn ashlar stones and the interior was probably decorated with frescos, as some of the apse stones were covered with segments of painted plaster. The floor of the church (at elevation ca. 816 m) was made of small tesserae embedded into a plaster laid on a foundation of small pebbles. No indication of painted floor decoration was observed. The foundation was laid on a brown earth fill about 30 cm thick which covered the floors of the villa and the agricultural installations. Below these floors we dug a number of test pits in order to date the construction of the church. The results indicated that the church was erected fairly late in the Byzantine period or early in the Early Islamic period (late 6th or 7th century CE, and see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming). 319

Omer Sergi

Traces of collapse, which appear to mark the point at which the church went out of use, were found at the church compound Entrance 15275 (Square D33) and at the church’s northern wall (D505). Some pottery sherds retrieved from the collapse of the entrance date to the 8th century CE and may indicate that the church collapsed as a result of the 749 CE earthquake. It should be noted that Aharoni documented a “small” destruction comprised of jars thrown into one of the southern rooms (Room 604) of the annexed building (Aharoni 1964: 15). However, we cannot determine whether this is related to the traces of destruction unearthed during the Renewed Excavations. It is possible that they actually postdate the next phase, during which the church structure was used for other purposes (Phase D4-2, see below).

The Church Apse (Fig. 12.11) Three walls (D501, D502, D503) formed the polygonal apse of the church (Squares D18–A398). These were built of well hewn, square-shaped ashlar limestone. The face of each stone was carved with marginal dressing or with a comb-like dressing pattern. Some of the stones in these walls were found piled up above the remaining apse structure and some had remains of colored plaster on them. The stones were arranged in the header and stretcher technique, with small stones and earth binding them. A small probe into the core of the apse (Locus 15280) revealed that it was filled with sandy-yellowish soil covered with unhewn medium-sized chalky stones (Locus 15278, 30–50 cm in length). Inside the soil fill were a few coins, colored plaster pieces, glass and several ribbed pottery sherds, including those from a jug and an oil lamp dated to the mid-6th century CE, thus giving a terminus post quem for the erection of the apse and therefore the entire church (Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming). The apse’s northern wall (D503) seems to cut what is probably the northeastern wall of the large stone podium (Wall D504, Phase D4-5). The apse’s southern wall (Wall D501) leaned against the northern face of earlier Wall D570 (Phase D4-6, see above), and had no clear connection with the southeastern church wall (Wall D500, see below). Several other walls were found that predate the apse, such as parallel Walls D558, D569 and D570 which have been attributed to Phase D4-6. All this indicates that the apse walls were built into an earlier structure from Phase D4-6 and further cut the large stone podium of Phase D45. This use of existing structures may explain the apse’s unusual polygonal shape.

Probes in the Church Floor (Fig. 12.11) In order to date the construction of the church we conducted a few probes into the floors. The mosaic floor of the church was made of white tesserae embedded in plaster. It survived in only a few small sections and was documented by Aharoni (see below). The foundation for the floor was made of small pebbles (Loci 15041 and 576 in Square D15; Locus 15073 in Squares D37–D17; Locus 598 in Square A395; Locus 582 in Square A397) bound with a gray matrix. The pebbles were laid on a 30 cm thick brown earth fill, which was laid on an earlier plaster or mosaic floor of Phase D4-4 (Locus 265 in Squares D15–D16; Locus 599 in Square A395; Locus 15075 in Squares D7–D17; Locus 585 in Square A397). In the pebbled-foundation and in the fills below it we found pottery sherds from the Late Byzantine–Early Islamic period, including an Early Islamic oil lamp (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming) and an Ummayad coin dated to the very late 7th or early 8th century CE (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming). In addition, metal objects and nails were also found. These finds indicate that the church was built late in the Byzantine period or early in the Early Muslim period (Late 6th–8th century CE), and further supports the dating suggested by the finds from the apse (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming).

The Southeastern Part of the Church (Fig. 12.11) During the Renewed Excavations we exposed the entire southeastern wall of the church (D500, Square D37), which was missing from Aharoni’s plans. This wall was built of well hewn ashlar stones, only 320

Chapter 12: Area D4

two courses of which survived (although the lower course is only visible on the eastern face, outside the church). Several segments of the church’s mosaic floor seem to adjoin this wall. A well hewn pier was constructed in the northern part of the wall on its western face, inside the church (Square D17). In addition, we unearthed the southeastern corner of the church (Walls D507 and D500), which Aharoni was unable to excavate due to the modern IDF fortifications (Phase D4-1). A small segment of Wall D507, the church’s southern wall, was excavated and dismantled (Locus 15179, Squares D36–D37). Neither the size of the stones nor the quality with which they were hewn was uniform. Among them was a column base in secondary use (see Phase D4-5). The wall was built on a backfilled robber trench (Phase D4-7, Locus 15181, Squares D17–D37, Fig. 12.5), parts of which may have been used as a foundation trench for Wall D507 (Locus 15120). From this it is clear that while the church utilized the earlier stone podium, in places where the stone podium was missing (south of Wall D556 of Phase D4-5) the church walls were built haphazardly on construction fill.

The Collapse of the Northern Church Wall (Fig. 12.11) The church’s northern wall was probably built much like the southern wall. The one row of stones that survived was originally built on the northern edge of the large stone podium (Wall D505, Phase D4-5), but it was mostly found in a collapse north of Wall D505 (beneath modern Fill 15005, Squares A376–A377). Within this collapse a few pieces of roof tiles and glass from the church windows were found. It is possible that the collapse was the result of natural causes rather than a deliberate human activity (Fig. 12.58).

WD505

Fig. 12.58: Stone collapse north of Wall D505, looking west. The stones probably originated from the wall.

321

Omer Sergi

The Narthex (Fig. 12.12) The church narthex is delineated by Walls D581 and D587 to the north, D509 to the west, D508 to the south and D506 to the east. All of these walls (except for D587) are attributed to Phases D4-5 and D4-4, and were built on the large stone podium. This indicates that the church reused an existing room of the villa from Phase D4-4, raising its floors and transforming it into the narthex. At least two stages of use were observed in the church narthex. In the earliest stage the installations in the western structure of the villa (Locus 15238, Wall D549, Phase D4-4) were probably dismantled. Vat 15184 (of Phase D4-4) was filled and the fill (Locus 15158, Square A374) was laid on the mosaic floor of the villa (Locus 15162), creating a foundation for a new, higher floor. This floor (Locus 580 and its make-up Locus 588 in Square A393, Locus 583 and its make-up Locus 590 in Square A373) was also a mosaic floor, but only small sections of tesserae survived. Pottery retrieved from this floor dates its construction to not before the 6th or even the 7th century BCE (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming), supported also by coins from the floor (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming). The floor adjoined Wall D509 from the east. In most of the area only the pebble floor foundation (Locus 15044 in Squares D13–D14; Locus 15117 in Squares A373–A374; Locus 15125 in Squares A393–A394) embedded in plaster (Locus 15122 in Squares A393A394-A373-A374) remained. Wall D560, which divided the villa’s structure into northern and southern compartments in Phase D4-4, was probably still in use, dividing the narthex room in a similar way. This is clear from the fact that there was a difference between the floor foundations found north of Wall D560 and south of it. The foundation north of the wall was made of small pebbles (Locus 15117), while the foundation south of the wall was made of medium-sized pebbles (Locus 15125). Additionally, there appears to be a difference in the way the surviving parts of the church’s mosaic floor were laid (Fig. 12.59). The fills below the pebbles of the floor foundation showed differences as well. The fill below the small pebbles layer north of Wall D560 was comprised of large pebbles (Locus 15131), sand, and many sherds of pottery (Locus 15132) laid on rubble fill (Locus 15143). South of Wall D560, below the larger pebbles layer, the fill consisted of brown soil (Locus 15146) laid on rubble fill (Loci 15152, 15157). One possible explanation for this difference may be due to the fact that the northern fill was laid on the villa’s mosaic floor (Locus 15162, Phase D4-5) while the southern fill was laid on Structure Wall D549 (Phase D4-4). South of structure Wall D549 the fill

WD509

WD572

15117

15125

Fig. 12.59: The pebble foundation of the narthex floors, looking west. Wall D572 is of Phase D4-5.

322

Chapter 12: Area D4

consisted of only soil and sand (Locus 15045, Squares D13–D14) and was found below the pebbles of the narthex floor foundation (Locus 15044). Below this fill was a plaster floor (Locus 15054 of Phase D4-4). This fill represented the latest construction of floors in the narthex, since at some stage two tombs with secondary burials (Tomb 15077 and Tomb 15081, below) were dug into the narthex’s foundations. The tombs were then sealed by the pebble layer as well as the overlaying mosaic floor described above. Pottery sherds retrieved from these fills are dated to the 8th century BCE, and thus indicate that the church was still in use in the Early Abbasid period (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming). During the later stage of use, Wall D560 was removed and the northern and southern spaces were united into one room. On the mosaic floor (Loci 580 and 583) was a stone bench (Wall D510 in Squares A393–A373, Fig. 12.12), abutting the eastern face of Wall D509. It seems that it was only during this stage that the space was used as a narthex. It remains unclear whether the earlier stage was contemporaneous with the church and—if it was—what function this space served.

Burial Below the Church’s Narthex (Figs. 12.12, 12.14) Two burials were found below the narthex floor (Tomb 15077 in the southern part of Square D14 and Tomb 15081 in the northern part of Square A394). Each of these tombs was made of a few dressed stones arranged in an “N” shape. Inside was a fill of sand mixed with bones and other finds (Locus 15079 in Tomb 15081); the finds included coins and many nails (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming). In the southern tomb the bones of probably three different individuals were found scattered within the fill. Fewer bones were found in the second, northern tomb, which seems to have been used for secondary burials. Both tombs were found below the plaster floor attributed to Phase D4-4 (Locus 15054). However, this floor was not sealed, and it was severely damaged at both its northern and southern ends, just above the two tombs. In addition, a fill of white lime and rubble (Locus 15074) was found directly above the tombs. This fill cuts another fill found below the plaster floor (Locus 15069) and can be seen in the western section (Fig. 12.14) as a diagonal line, indicating that it was dumped there deliberately. In light of this, it seems to us that these secondary burials were dug into the plaster floor Locus 15054 during a later phase, probably at the same time the church narthex was constructed. We have thus attributed the tombs to Phase D4-3. Of course, the possibility that the tombs are earlier cannot be ruled out.

The Entrance to the Church Compound (Fig. 12.12) The construction of the church on the large stone podium of Phase D4-5 and the agricultural installations of Phase D4-4 also involved the narrowing of the entrance to the entire church compound. The evidence for this was found southwest of the church, above the stairs leading to the paved path separating the structure from the annexed building. East–west oriented Wall D583 (Square D33, Fig. 12.12) was erected on the northern face of earlier Wall D587 (of Phase D4-4). WD587 actually forms the westernmost part of the annexed building wall (continuing Wall D536 of Phase D4-4). A carved stone, which appears to be some sort of installation, was inserted on the upper stair north of Wall D583. This, together with the erection of Wall D583, narrowed the entrance leading to the paved path. Beaten earth Floor 15281 (Fig. 12.60) adjoined both the northern face of Wall D583 and the carved stone that narrowed the stairs (the fill under the beaten earth floor is Locus 15282). Sherds found inside this floor suggest a late 6th–early 7th century CE terminus post quem for its construction, further re-affirming the late period in which the church was still in use. These alterations to the entrance of the church compound should be attributed to Phase D4-3, as they clearly postdate earlier construction. In addition, it seems that plaster Floor 15296 covering the western face of Wall D509 (see Phase D4-4, above) was cut by a row of stones that created small Channel 15288. Since Floor Locus 15281 adjoins Channel Locus 15288 (Figs. 12.52, 12.60), the channel should be attributed to Phase D4-3 as well. 323

Omer Sergi

15281

Fig. 12.60: Phase D4-3, Staircase entrance 15281, looking west.

A conglomeration of crushed chalk, broken roof tiles and plaster (Locus 15275) was found above Floor 15281, and appears to have been the result of the collapse of the roof and ceiling of the church. Pottery dated to the 7th–8th centuries CE was found within it, along with glass pieces, beads and a Byzantine stamp impression. This collapse also appears to have entered and sealed Channel 15288. The debris in the channel (Locus 15285) contained an almost complete Fine Byzantine Ware jug dated to the mid-8th century (see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming) and a broken oil lamp decorated with a cross. It seems that this collapse sealed this phase, at least at the entrance to the church. Although another collapse was found next to the church’s northern wall (Wall D505, see above), there are no traces of collapse in other parts of the church or in the annexed building. We are therefore unable to determine whether this collapse marks the end of Phase D4-3 and the termination of the church. The alternative option is that the church went out of use in Phase D4-2, when alterations were made to its structure, and the collapse marks the end of this phase. Moreover, since the collapse of the northern church wall had already been excavated by Aharoni, we were unable to date it and determine whether it was contemporaneous with the collapse at the entrance to the church.

Probes Below the Floor of the Annexed Building (Fig. 12.11) The annexed building includes three rooms built along Wall D536 that runs from east to west (Fig. 12.10). In Aharoni’s plans the rooms are labeled as Rooms 15, 5 and 6. In order to re-examine these rooms we opened irregular excavation squares (D55, D56, D57). The eastern part of the annexed building opened up to the path, the stone pavement of which continued into the room (Locus 15018, Squares D56–D57). The top of Walls D540 and D546 (Phase D4-6, above) was integrated into this stone pavement. The pavement itself was made of flattened stones about 3 cm high, and its make-up consisted of brown earth fill (Locus 15061 in Squares D56–D57, D36–D37) containing Byzantine-Umayyad pottery as well as a coin (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming) Rather than pavement, in the western spaces we found a beaten earth floor (Locus 15006 in Square D56, Locus 15007 in Square D55). It is unclear whether this was the floor that was used in antiquity, or if the pavement simply did not survive here. The floor contained pottery dating from the Iron Age to the Byzantine–Early Islamic periods as well as two coins dated to the Umayyad period in the 8th century CE 324

Chapter 12: Area D4

(see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming; Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming). Two tabuns were also found in this room. The first was in the western space (Locus 15006), and was described by Aharoni (Gadot and Taxel 2016: Fig. 5.1) and the second (Locus 15070) was below the easternmost part of the paved path (Square D37), at the northern entrance to Room 15. Unfortunately it was found smashed, probably disturbed by the modern military bunker (Phase D1-1) built directly above it.

D4-2: ALTERATIONS TO THE CHURCH STRUCTURE (FIGS. 12.11–12.12) To this phase we have attributed the walls inside the church narthex, including a wall that sealed its original entrance. In addition, a kiln (Locus 15257 in Squares D37–D38, Fig. 12.11) was built against the eastern face of the church’s southeastern wall (D500, Phase D4-3), and another wall (D557 in Squares A398–A378) was built against the eastern face of Wall D504 (of Phase D4-5). This construction indicates that the church structure was still in use but served a different function. We cannot be certain that all the elements described below are contemporaneous, but as they all altered the original structure in which they were built they were all attributed to Phase D4-2.

Erection of Walls Wall D557 (Fig. 12.12) was built of large unhewn limestones arranged in a single row, and up to 5 courses were preserved from it. It was attached to the northern face of the church’s (and probably also the stone podium’s) northeastern Wall D504 (Phase D4-5). As Wall D557 also cuts apse Wall D503, it is clear that it postdates both the large stone podium of Phase D4-5 and the church of Phase D4-3. Its function is not clear. Walls D575 and D576, both made of one row of large, semi-hewn limestone blocks, were built in the southwestern corner of the church’s narthex (Squares D13–D14, Fig. 12.12). The southern part of north– south running Wall D575 bonds with the western part of east–west running Wall D576. Both walls were built on the narthex floor (Locus 15044) and were built against Walls D509 and D508 of Phase D4-4 (Wall D575 to the eastern face of Walls D579 and D576 to the northern face of Wall D508). Additionally, Wall D575 blocked the original entrance to the church in Wall D508. While it is clear that the walls postdate the church and were built in order to alter the narthex, their function remains unclear. Kiln 15257 (Fig. 12.31) was built against the eastern face of the church’s southeastern wall (D500, Phase D4-3), and was thus located outside the church structure itself. The kiln was made of carved flat pieces of limestone arranged in a semi-circle against the church wall. The eastern section is cut by the modern military bunker (Phase D4-1). Dark soil (Locus 15254) was found inside the kiln, which did not contain any finds. Fire marks were observed on the eastern face of Wall D500, probably a result of kiln use.

REFERENCES Aharoni, Y. 1956. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 1954. Preliminary Report. Israel Exploration Journal 6: 102–111, 137–157. Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Billig, Y. 1996. Horvat Hamoza. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 15: 81–83. Farhi, Y. Forthcoming. The Coins. In: Lipschits, O., Freud, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. Freud, L. Forthcoming. Iron Age and Persian Period Pottery. In: Lipschits, O., Freud, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. 325

Omer Sergi

Gadot, Y., Freud, L., Tal, O. and Taxel, I. 2016. Sub-Sector ACS2: Squares W–AA/15–22. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959–1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv: 132–173. Gadot, Y. and Tal, O. 2016. Sub-Sector AES2: Squares O–V/24–27. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959–1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv: 66–78. Gadot, Y. and Taxel, I. 2016. Sub-Sector AES1: The Church and the Annexed Building. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959–1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Tel Aviv: 42–65. Taxel, I. Forthcoming. The Pottery from the Late Roman to Early Islamic Periods. In: Lipschits, O., Freud, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. Testini, P. 1962. The “Kathisma” Church and Monastery. In: Aharoni, Y., ed. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome: 73–91. Testini, P. 1964. The Church and Monastery of the Kathisma. In: Aharoni, Y., ed. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome: 101–106. Weksler-Bdolah, S. 2007. Jerusalem, ‘En Ya‘el. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 119. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/ Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=563&mag_id=112

326

CHAPTER 13

AREA D6 Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

INTRODUCTION Area D6 is located on the summit of the hill (Figs. 13.1–13.2). The bedrock in this area, a combination of flint and limestone, is at a noticeably high elevation. One reason for this is that the bedrock here was not curved in antiquity (as was the case in Area D1 to the east and Area C1 to the west). In addition, Aharoni excavated large parts of the area, leaving only the architecture while exposing the bedrock. These conditions led to a high level of disintegration of the remains. Most of the architecture survived only to foundation level. Hence, much of the stratigraphic discussion and reasoning is based on architectural relationships and the relative chronology of the various architectural elements. While Aharoni exposed most of the architecture in this area (Squares D162–D166) in 1954, he documented almost none of it (Gadot and Lipschits 2016: 203). Among his most dramatic finds were the Area D6 worked ashlar stones, in what has since become known as the Southern Casemate Wall, the finest example of worked stone at Ramat Raḥel and in Judah, comparable only to the ashlar construction of Samaria (Aharoni 1956: 138; Yadin 1973: 62 n. 23a; Gadot and Lipschits 2016: 203–208).

PREVIOUS EXCAVATIONS In his earlier publications, Aharoni interpreted his Southern Casemate Wall to be the outer fortification of the entire Iron Age Royal edifice of the site (Aharoni 1956: Fig. 2). He also claimed that the complete fortification system, made up of two parallel east–west orientated walls and six partition walls, was built in one stratigraphic phase equivalent to his Stratum Va (Fig 13.3, Table 13.1). However, careful examination of the material at hand presented us with a stratigraphic dilemma regarding the dating of the construction of the fortification system in this part of Ramat Raḥel (for the entire discussion, see Gadot and Lipschits 2016: 203–208): 1. 2.

3.

4.

Wall Wh89 is markedly different from Wall Wh92 in both style and technique; indeed, there is nothing at all to suggest that Wall Wh89 should be dated to the Iron Age. Partition Walls Wh96 and Wh97 and foundation Trench Wh93 cannot have originated from the same phase. It seems that originally a 2 m thick wall was built inside a foundation trench cutting into the rock. Walls Wh97 and Wh96 were added after the thicker wall was robbed. These walls, as well as Floor 229 which relates to them from the east and Floor 214 from the west, belong to a phase later than foundation Trench Wh93. The threshold incorporated into Wall Wh92 (Room 229, Square D165) seems to be a secondary addition to a previously built wall. This observation leads us to raise the possibility that the inner courtyard (discussed in Chapter 11) was constructed after Wall Wh92 was built. Pool 242, which cuts into the rock in a room located in Squares C179–C180, must belong to a later phase and cannot be part of the original room system.

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

D6

Fig. 13.1: Map of site highlighting the location of Area D6.

Table 13.1: The Stratigraphic Phases of Area D6 Phase Main Features

Building Phase

Period

D6-1 D6-2 D6-3 D6-4

Unclear VIII VII–VIII

Early Islamic I (ACS4-1) Byzantine-Umayyad III/II (ACS4-2) Byzantine III/II (ACS4-3)

VII

Byzantine

III

V IV

Early Roman Hellenistic

IVA (ACS4-4) IVB

I–III

Iron Age

VA (ACS4-5/6)

D6-5 D6-6 D6-7 D6-8

328

Military trench Agricultural installations Modification/continuation of the large building Large public building with columns: Wd-110/130, 119/120, 118/131 System of walls and underground cisterns (Wd111, 112, 113, 115, 121, 131, L-14053, 14111, 14112) Ritual baths and underground installations Modification of the complex adjacent to the central courtyard Ashlar masonry building adjacent to the central courtyard

Aharoni’s Stratigraphy

Chapter 13: Area D6

Fig. 13.2: Aerial view of Area D6 at the the end of 2009 excavation season (Skyview).

Two more excavation operations affected Area D6 prior to the start of the Renewed Excavations. In 1984 G. Barkay excavated one square (D205 in our grid system: Fig. 13.4); the finds from this spot were never reported. In 2000 and 2002 G. Solimani excavated a small probe just east of Aharoni’s excavation area (Solimany and Barzel 2016). Solimani noted two distinct phases. The earliest was dated by him to the Iron Age and was understood to be the continuation of the casemate wall to the east. The second phase was dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods and included a partial rebuilding of the area and reuse of some walls. This phase ended in a “local destruction.” 329

Fig. 13.3: Aharoni’s reconstruction of the Southern Casemate Wall, after Gadot and Lipschits 2016: Fig. 11.4.

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

330

Chapter 13: Area D6

#14082 14085

14061

233 (D6-7)

(D1) 14021

14066

14067

Fig. 13.4: Plan of Phase D6-8.

THE RENEWED EXCAVATIONS Aharoni’s excavation of Area D6 left a blurry picture at best. This encouraged us to initiate a renewed examination of the casemate floors and walls so we could gain a better understanding of the southern casemate system and thus portray a more accurate stratigraphic relationship between the system’s walls and floors. During the Renewed Excavations in the area, the remains that had been exposed in 1954 between Squares D162–D166 were re-cleaned, and the area was expanded southwards to also include Squares D182–D185, D202–D205, D222–D225, D242–D244, D262–D264, and D302–D304. Most of the architectural features in these squares had already been dismantled by Aharoni. It seems that he dismantled features which he dated between the Early Roman and the Early Islamic periods, leaving exposed only features he dated to the Iron Age. It should be noted that some undocumented restoration work was conducted in the area following Aharoni’s 1962 season.

STRATIGRAPHY We discerned eight phases of stratigraphy (Table 13.1). The latest phase (D6-1) is a 1950s military trench that transects the area from north to south, cutting through earlier architecture (see Chapter 19). The second latest stratigraphic anchor is a series of floors that abut a public building (Phases D6-4 and D63) dated, according to coins found within them, to the Byzantine period. The third and earliest anchor 331

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

is the ashlar masonry wall that abuts the central courtyard, dated according to retrieved pottery to the Iron Age (Phase D6-8). While excavating the “casemate system,” we used the architecture as a local grid instead of relying on the grid system of the site. This method allowed us to gain better control over the stratigraphy and gain maximum exposure without harming pre-exposed architecture.

PHASE D6-8 (FIG. 13.4) The stratigraphic anchor in this area is Wall Wh92, the connection of which to the inner courtyard floor was demonstrated in Chapter 11; in a section performed close to the water reservoir, a patch of crushed limestone courtyard Floor 380 was preserved, adjoining the robber trench of Wall Wh92. The floor, in turn, was dated to the late Iron II and associated with Building Phase II. No wall of similar construction technique (ashlar masonry or foundation trench) was documented adjoining Wall Wh92.1 The sole floor with comparable characteristics to the inner courtyard floor (and other floors from the same phase across the site) found south of Wall Wh92 was exposed in Squares D162–D163. Floor 14082, at elevation 818.29, was made of crushed limestone and laid on a fill of dark brown soil with a large number of crushed Iron II pottery vessels (Fill 14085; Figs. 13.5–13.6).2 The floor was found abutting Walls Wh92 and Wh99, and the rock-cut ledge below Wall Wh301. It was superimposed by Floor 233, made of plaster and abutting the same walls (see below, Phase D6-7). We found no additional features that could be associated with Phase D6-8 in this part of the area. Three walls that are located farther to the south were unearthed and associated with Phase D6-8. Wall D52 (Squares D205–D245, Fig. 13.7) is orientated north–south; its southern edge is already in Area D1 (see Chapter 9). The wall is built from long and massive limestone in the header technique. Since no floor was found in relation to this wall, its association with Phase D6-8 is based on its building technique, which resembles that of other Iron Age walls at the site. Bedrock 14066 to the west of Wall D52 in Square D205 is smoothed to elevation 818.67, similar to Bedrock 14021 in Square D185. Although no evidence was found, it could be that they served as foundation for a floor that did not endure. Wall D117 (Square D184; Fig. 13.8) was probably revealed by G. Barkay. It does not appear on any of Aharoni’s published or unpublished plans but was found by us already exposed. The wall is oriented on an east–west axis, built into a well-curved foundation trench. Wall Wh303 of Phase D6-4 was built directly above it (see below). The western part of Wall D117 was damaged by the rock-cut eastern entrance to Phase D6-6 subterranean Space RR9 (see Chapter 14). The eastern part of Wall D117 was damaged by the military trench of Phase D6-1, and thus it is impossible to determine the relationship between this wall and Wall D52. It is clear that Wall D117 is earlier than Phase D6-6; however, due to its earlier exposure and the absence of pottery from its foundation trench, its construction date can only be assumed. It was associated by us to Phase D6-8 based solely on the similarity of its stylistic building technique to other walls from this phase. Wall D125 (Fig. 13.9) was found farther to the southwest in Square D223. It has a single surviving course of four well-hewn stones worked in a style similar to that of the stones comprising Wall D52. The wall was found overridden and superimposed by Phase D6-4, Wall D120. It was associated with Phase D6-8 based mainly on stylistic resemblance to other walls in the area. 1 For the possible location of foundation trenches adjoining Wall Wh92 from the south, see Gadot and Lipschits 2016: 203–208. We excavated none of them. 2 The vessels were primarily found in Locus 14085 (sealed below Floor 14082). Some of the sherds of the vessels were found in loci above Floor 14082 (Loci 14018, 14052). These sherds were probably found on Floor 14082 as a result of poor preservation.

332

Chapter 13: Area D6

PHASE D6-7 (FIG. 13.10) The transition to Phase D6-7 was marked by alterations made to the architectural layout of Phase D6-8 south of Wall Wh92. One significant alteration was documented in Squares D162–D163: Plaster Floor 14070 (Squares D162–D163) was superimposed over crushed limestone Floor 14082, abutting Walls Wh92 and Wh99 and the rock-cut ledge below Wall Wh301 (Figs. 13.5–13.6). On the floor and its makeup sherds dating to the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods were found.

Fig. 13.5: Looking south at Squares D1612-D163 after Floors 233 and 14082 were excavated.

Fig. 13.6: Section below Floor 233 of Phase D6-7 down to bedrock, looking north.

333

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

Similar plaster floors were found further to the east, between Walls Wh92 and Wh89, separated by several partition Walls Wh90, Wh95, Wh96 and Wh97. As mentioned above, Aharoni interpreted these rooms as part of the southern casemate system of the Iron Age complex, although these partition walls were built in a markedly different technique and are made of stones of varied size that appear to be in secondary usage. In order to verify the nature and date of the different partition walls in this segment of the casemate wall, we created north–south oriented excavated sections in three places (Figs. 13.11–13.13):

Fig. 13.7: Wall WD52 and the flattened bedrock to its west, looking south.

Fig. 13.8: Wall WD117, built of worked stones and founded directly on bedrock, looking south.

334

Chapter 13: Area D6

Fig. 13.9: Wall WD125 of Phase D6-8, built over by Wall WD120 of Phase D6-5, looking east.

#14070 (233)

14078

#14008 (214)

14061

#14006 (229)

#14005 (225)

#224

14066

Fig. 13.10: Plan of Phase D6-7.

335

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

Fig. 13.11: Squares D166 and D165, looking west.

Fig. 13.12: Square D165, looking southwest.

336

Chapter 13: Area D6

Fig. 13.13: Sqaure D165, looking north.

In Square D166 we cut through plaster Floor 224 and its Make-up 14015, which were laid directly on the flint bedrock, and no pottery was found in it. Moreover, Wall Wh90 appears to include only a single stone and a threshold, and this makes it difficult to assess its function. In Square D165 we cut through plaster Floor 225 and Make-up 14010, also laid directly on the flint bedrock, and no pottery was found. West of Wall Wh95, Floor 229 was sectioned and Make-up 14016 was apparently also laid directly on the natural bedrock. We were able to collect several small-sized pottery sherds, but these were not indicative and hence we were limited from reaching any reliable conclusions regarding the possible construction date. Based on the similarity of the plaster floors south of Wall Wh92, we suggest they all belong to the same phase as Floor 233, and are all to be dated to the Hellenistic period. That having been said, Wall Wh89, the assumed southern parallel of Wall Wh92, was apparently built in an even later period. According to Solimany, Wall Wh89 (his Wall 100) was a Late Hellenistic period rebuilding of the Outer Casemate Wall (Wall 105) (Solimany and Barzel 2016: 685). We found that Wall Wh89 had been partly reconstructed using cement sometime after Aharoni’s excavations, and, for the purpose of re-examination, we dismantled this modern reconstruction. It appeared that the stones of Wall Wh89 were laid directly on the rock surface or on the plaster floors (Phase D6-7, below) (Fig. 13.12) and its builders did not cut a foundation trench into the rock as was done for Wall Wh92. We therefore argue that the courses making up Wall Wh89 were built after Phase D6-7, and most probably during the wide building activity during Phase D6-4 (below).3 To the south, several walls were built on smoothed Bedrock Floor 14066 of Phase D6-8. Walls D166 and D142 (Squares D205–D225) were built abutting the western face of Wall D52, practically dividing the surface of the flattened bedrock into two rooms, and thus hypothetically creating the infrastructure for two respective spaces, Loci 14023 and 14067 (Figs. 13.7, 13.14). Wall D128 bonded with the northern 3 Nevertheless, the assumption that Wall Wh89 was built on the location of a previous robbed wall still remains, for the wall is based on a minor small ledge, less than 5 cm high, carved in the bedrock. The ledge may be the last indication of a robbed-out wall built prior to the construction of Wall Wh89 and possibly parallel to Wall Wh92.

337

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

face of Wall D166, possibly connecting in the north with the now missing eastern part of Wall D117 (of Phase D6-8). As was the case of Walls Wh90 and Wh95, a threshold in Wall D128 was visible in secondary use.

PHASE D6-6 (FIG. 13.15) Most of the finds related to Phase D6-6 were rock-cut features. The main architectural unit was a complex of two ritual baths (RR8 and RR9), described in detail in Chapter 14. Round Pit 14205 was located farther to the north in Square D166. It damaged Wall Wh92 of Phase D6-8 and Floor 224 of Phase D6-7 and hence must postdate both phases. Accumulation 14071 inside the pit contained Roman period pottery and stone vessels. It appears that the western segment of Wall Wh92 was also robbed in that period, since Robber-trench 14061 included pottery dating to the Roman period as well. Structure 14204, partly subterranean, was documented by Aharoni (Gadot and Lipschits 2016: 210) and reinvestigated by us. It was a shallow, hewn cave, probably the remnant of a much wider cave whose roof partially collapsed in antiquity. Its narrow opening in a southeast–northwest axis had six stone steps descending from elevation 818.30 to 817.50 and a 105 cm long revetment Wall D122 stretching along the western side of the staircase (Fig. 13.16). Accumulation 14083 found within it was mixed. While the function of this large subterranean space is not clear, its date must be earlier than the construction of Walls Wh305 and D115 of Phase D6-5 (below). Thus, it is tentatively associated with Phase D6-6, though it was possibly also used in later phases. Other activities that are possibly dated to this phase were discerned in the southern sector of the area. This complex of mainly carved installations (Fig. 13.17–13.18) included Installation 14200 in Squares D303– D304, carved in bedrock and measuring 166 cm × 424 cm but only partly exposed. It was plastered but badly damaged by later construction activity, mainly during Phase D6-4 (see below). Accumulation 14194 within the installation included many fieldstones and pottery dating to the Late Byzantine-Early Islamic period (7th–8th centuries CE, see Ramat Raḥel V, Taxel forthcoming), thus providing a terminus post quem for the date in which the installation went out of use. It appears that Installation 14200 was connected in its northern part by a narrow furrow to carved and plastered Installation 14201 in Squares D283/284. Installation 14201

Fig. 13.14: Square D225, looking east.

338

Chapter 13: Area D6

14061 14071

Ug2

14203

Fig. 13.15: Plan of Phase D6-6.

339

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

was 169 cm × 459 cm and was also only partly exposed. It was carved and plastered in a similar fashion to Installation 14200 and was filled by Accumulation 14194 that included Roman and Byzantine pottery. Installation 14200 was apparently further connected by a narrow opening to Installation 14202 (Squares D302/303) to its west. This installation measured 190 cm × 448 cm and was only partly excavated. Its northern, western and southern sides were plastered; the southern side was used as a foundation for Wall D156 of Phase D6-4 (below). Accumulation 14179 within the installation included Byzantine period pottery.

Fig. 13.16: Structure 14204 after re-cleaning, looking north.

Fig. 13.17: Squares D302-D304, looking northeast.

340

Chapter 13: Area D6

North of Installation 14202, carved Depression 14197 was found on smoothed bedrock at elevation 818.15, sloping southwards to Installation 14202. A fourth installation, 14203, was located further north in Square D283. Its connection to the above-described features is still not clear since work came to a halt before any conclusions were reached. It was filled with Accumulation 14187 that included fieldstones and Late Byzantine pottery. All in all, the plastered and carved sides of these installations indicated their original function as cisterns or other water-holding facilities (possibly ritual baths). They were filled with accumulation/fill from construction activity dated to the Late or Early Byzantine periods. Finally, partly exposed Wall D112 in Square D264 may also belong to this phase. This is a double row wall made of fieldstones. Only the top of the wall was exposed. It is probably the sole remains of a building that used to stand on this spot; it was possibly robbed out and its stones used in later phases as part of stone Pavement 14199 (Phase D6-5, below).

PHASE D6-5 (FIG. 13.19) This phase is characterized by a massive building that encompasses most of the area. The building was partly excavated and documented by Aharoni (Gadot and Lipschits 2016: ACS4-3 and ACS4-2). The rectangular structure, 10 m long and ca. 30 m wide (Squares D163–D164, D183–D184, D203–D204, D223–D224, D243–D244, D263–D264 and D283–D284), was renovated and expanded at least twice (Phases D6-4 and D6-3) and was dated to the Byzantine period. Wall D118 to the west (Fig. 13.20), now preserved as a single course that comprised two rows of fieldstones with a pebble fill, was ca. 120 cm wide and 680 cm long, and was partly preserved in Squares D242–D262 at elevation 819.40–819.06 m. Wall Wh302 at the northern end, exposed by Aharoni, probably connected to Wall Wh301; it was robbed-out in an unknown later period. A middle segment, in Squares D203–D203 and D222–D223, collapsed in antiquity and was later replaced by Wall Wh305 of Phase D6-3

Fig. 13.18: Installation 14200, looking west.

341

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

?

14127

Fig. 13.19: Plan of Phase D6-5.

342

Chapter 13: Area D6

(below). Wall D150 in the southern section was disconnected from its continuation in Square D282 by military Trench 14097 of Phase D6-1 (below). This southern sector in Square D282 was severely damaged but the preserved part measured ca. 130 cm wide and ca. 360 cm long at elevation 818.94–818.64 m. Wall D145 was the southern wall of the building. It was composed of two rows of large fieldstones with a fill of pebbles. It was 130 cm wide and ca. 800 cm long and was preserved to an elevation of 819.22–818.50 m in its central part. To the east, Wall D145 was bonded to Wall D144, though the outer face of the corner was missing (Fig. 13.21)

Fig. 13.20: Wall D118 of Phase D6-4 and the two column bases of Phase D6-4, looking north.

Fig. 13.21: Squares D283 and D284, looking west.

343

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

Wall D144 formed part of the building’s eastern side. It was composed of two rows of large fieldstones with a fill of pebbles, 130 cm wide and some 600 cm long. The exposed course of the wall, which ended at the entrance to the building, was at elevation 819.28–818.81 m. The entrance (Fig. 13.22), Locus 14199 in Square D264, was ca. 200 cm wide and was paved with stone slabs at elevation 819 m. The pavement partly used Wall D112 of Phase D6-6. North of the entrance, Wall D165 used a similar construction technique and had a width similar to Wall D144; it was ca. 550 cm long up to the point where it was damaged by military Trench 14097 (Phase D6-1). Wall D165 continued as Wall Wh303, partly damaged by later construction during Phase D6-3. It measured some 600 cm long until the northern sector, which was constructed above Wall D117 of Phase D6-8 and probably bonded with Wall Wh301 until it was removed as part of later activity. The building was divided in the center by a north–south oriented wall, preserved in two separate sections. The southern part, Wall D120 in Squares D224–D244, was preserved in two courses measuring 100 cm in width and 480 cm in length, where it reached the high bedrock and its upper courses were removed. The construction technique and the width of the northern section of Wall D119 was similar to that of Wall D120; it was preserved to a length of some 220 cm. The southeastern portion of the building was better preserved. Stone Pavement 14013, located in Square D244 at elevation 818.90 m, abutted the western face of Wall D165 just north of the entrance. It was covered later during Phase D6-3 by Wall D111 (below) and cut by military Trench 14097 of Phase D6-1. Furthermore, the pavement abutted from the north of two large stone slabs (14112) that covered unexplored Cistern 14206 (Fig. 13.23). Stone Pavement 14013 yielded about 380 coins dated to the late 5th–early 6th century CE, thus indicating a terminus post quem for Phase D6-5 (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming). Another unit, much damaged from later activities, was located in the eastern part of the building. The meager remains found in Square D224 included stone Slabs 14054 at elevation 818.86, which were later covered by Wall D168 of Phase D6-3 (Fig. 13.24).

Fig. 13.22: Squares D263 and D264, looking west.

344

Chapter 13: Area D6

Fig. 13.23: Square D244, looking north.

Fig. 13.24: Stone Slabs 14054 of Phase D6-5, covered by Wall D168 of Phase D6-3, looking north.

PHASE D6-4 (FIG. 13.25) During this phase a modification of the building was made while the main features were still operational. The main change was the construction of a set of column bases, three of which had already been exposed by Aharoni (Walls D132, D133 and D134 in Squares D263–D243), and an additional two or three bases located in the northern part of the structure that were apparently removed at an uncertain point in time. Those columns were probably added in order to strengthen the central axis of the structure in addition to, or instead of, Wall D119/120 of the previous phase. The three preserved bases were constructed as a square-shaped frame measuring 120 cm × 120 cm of medium-sized fieldstones and a fill of cement and smaller stones. Each of these bases was accompanied by a set of 345

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

(Ug12)

14206

14096

14162 14135 14187 #14131

Fig. 13.25: Plan of Phase D6-4.

346

Chapter 13: Area D6

piers attached to its outer walls; each pier measured about 50 cm in width. Generally, a 250 cm wide gap was created between the column bases. Column base Wall D132 was located in Square D263 at elevation 818.83. It was accompanied by Pier D135, attached to Wall D118 from the east, Pier D147 in Square D283, attached to Wall D145 from the north, and Pier D143 in Square D264, attached to Wall D144 from the west (Fig. 13.21). Column base Wall D133 was located in Square D243 at elevation 818.74. It was accompanied by Pier D136 attached to Wall D118 from the east, and Pier D140, which is attached to Wall D165 from the west. Column base Wall D134 was located in Square D243 at elevation 818.92, superimposing Wall D120 (Fig. 13.9); its accompanying piers were damaged by later activities at an unknown point in time. Pavement 14013 from Phase D6-5 in Square D244 was probably still in use. Another unit was located at the corner of Walls D144 and D145 and included crushed limestone Floor 14131 at elevation 818.69 which adjoins both walls as well as Pier D147, where 7th century pottery and coins of a similar date were found. Floor 14131 also adjoins Wall D146, located adjacent to Wall D144 directly to its west at elevation 818.60. Wall D146 included several construction stones and a round installation. It appears that the unit had at least two sub-phases, since it seems that the floor was raised; Floor 14128 was found at elevation 818.85, above Floor 14131 at an elevation of 818.63 (Fig. 13.26). These two floors may correspond to Phases D6-5 and D6-4, respectively, or could be associated with only one of the phases. They were later superimposed by Floor 14123, which probably belonged to Phase D6-3. The modification of the building also included the addition of a southern wing in Squares D282– D284 and D302–D304. Western Wall D153 in Squares D282 and D302 abutted Wall D150 from the north. Wall D153 was made of two rows of fieldstone and was preserved up to three courses at elevation 818 m; it measured ca. 80 cm in width and was preserved to its fullest length of 500 cm. At its southern edge, Wall D153 bonded with Wall D156 in Squares D302–D303. Wall D156 was constructed in a like manner but was partly damaged by military Trench 14097 of Phase D6-1. It was ca. 110 cm wide and 400 cm long and was probably even longer, since it continued into the eastern baulk between Squares D303–D304. Wall D156 was built on top of the southern side of Phase D6-6 subterranean spaces (Fig. 13.18). These spaces were fully filled with stones and accumulation of sediment and pottery sherds. The latest material

Fig. 13.26: Floor 14123 of Phase D6-3 and its relations to surrounding walls, looking south.

347

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

included Byzantine pottery, thus pointing to the terminus post quem of the construction of Wall D156. No floors were found in the southern unit. Pier D158 abutted Wall D156 in Square D303. Its measurements were similar to those of the piers in the northern flank of the building, and it was accompanied by parallel Pier D152 in Square D283, which abutted Wall D145 from the south (Fig. 13.27). Possible third Pier D151 was located further to the east in Square D284, but this area was not fully excavated and thus cannot be fully understood.

PHASE D6-3 (FIG. 13.28) This phase includes yet further modifications made to the building. The reasons for these additional alterations, which include the addition of east–west oriented walls, are not clear. The collapsed northern part of Wall Wh305 of Phase D6-5 was modified and was bound with newly constructed east–west oriented Wall D115 (Fig. 13.29), pointing out that it postdates the massive building of Phases D6-5 and D6-4. Wall Wh305 is made of a single row of large fieldstones on its western face, while a parallel row on its eastern face collapsed. Therefore, its width cannot be estimated. Wall D115 is a double row wall made of fieldstones that extend ca. 285 cm; parts of it were removed during activities at an unknown point in time. Its continuation, Wall D168, was seen in Square D224, where it extended ca. 330 cm while covering stone Pavement 14054 of Phase D6-5. The relationship of Wall D168 to Wall D303 of Phase D6-5 is unknown. The third excavated segment of the wall, Wall D113, runs above Wall D52, extending further to the east into the excavation border (Fig. 13.30). Wall D111 is another east–west wall that extended ca. 200 cm in Square D244. It was constructed in a technique similar to that of Wall D115. It was bounded on the west with Wall D120, though most of this connection was damaged by military Trench 14097 of Phase D6-1; it floated above stone Slabs 14112 and merged with Wall D165 of the previous phases (Fig. 13.31). The construction of Wall D111 created two units east of Wall D165, but only the northern one has been explored. It was only partly exposed but it clearly included the alteration of a portion of Wall D165

Fig. 13.27: Wall D145 of Phase D6-5 and Pier D152 of Phase D6-4 attached to it from the south, looking north.

348

Chapter 13: Area D6

14204

14208

(Ug11)

Fig. 13.28: Plan of Phase D6-3.

349

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

into Installation 14208, shaped by thin sides to the north, west and south, a stone pavement to the east and a rectangular depression (Fig. 13.32). No indicative material was found in Accumulation 14033 within it. It is not clear how much of Wall D165 to the north was still in use, mostly due to later damages by the military trench.

Fig. 13.29: Walls Wh305 and D115, looking west.

Fig. 13.30: Wall D113 of Phase D6-3 built on top of the flattened bedrock and Wall D52 of Phase D6-8, looking east.

350

Chapter 13: Area D6

Another modification was in the entrance to the old building, where stone Channel 14188 was placed, draining water into Cistern 14111 covered by stone slabs. The southeastern unit of the central space was still in use, with the placement of a new layer of Floor 14123 at elevation 819.27 m (Fig. 13.28).

Fig. 13.31: Wall D111 of Phase D6-3 built on top of the stone slabs of Floor 14112 and merging with Wall D165, looking west.

Fig. 13.32: Installation 14208 of Phase D6-3, looking east.

351

Ido Koch and Nirit Kedem

PHASE D6-2 (FIG. 13.33) This phase is characterized by secondary use of installations and buildings. While the intended function of the building is impossible to determine, it seems that new stone Channel 14110 was built (Square D264) to drain water into Pit 14111. Due to the nature of the architecture during this phase and the sporadic use of former installations, we assume that this area was not fully inhabited, but was used for agriculture (see Chapter 9, Phase D1-1).

Fig. 13.33: Plan of Phases D6-2 and D6-1.

352

Chapter 13: Area D6

PHASE D6-1 (FIG. 13.33) This phase includes 20th century CE IDF military Trench 14097 that cuts through the entire area from northeast to southwest. In the southern part in Square D262, a western branch splits from the main trench towards Area C1 (see Chapter 19).

REFERENCES Aharoni, Y. 1956. Excavations at Ramat Raḥel, 1954. Preliminary Report. Israel Exploration Journal 6: 102–111, 137–157. Farhi, Y. Forthcoming. The Coins. In: Lipschits, O., Freud, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. Gadot, Y. and Lipschits, O. 2016. Sub-sector ACS4: Squares M-R/9-16 and Squares F/13–14. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959– 1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Winona Lake: 203–212. Solimany, G. and Barzel, V. 2016. Salvage Excavations 2000–2002. In: Lipschits, O., Gadot, Y. and Freud, L., eds. Ramat Raḥel III: Final Publication of Yohanan Aharoni’s Excavations (1954, 1959–1962) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 35). Winona Lake: 679–701. Taxel, I. Forthcoming. The Pottery from the Late Roman to Early Islamic Periods. In: Lipschits, O., Freud, L., Oeming, M. and Gadot, Y. Ramat Raḥel V: The Renewed Excavations by the Tel Aviv-Heidelberg Expedition (2005–2010): The Finds (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University). Tel Aviv. Yadin, Y. 1973. The “House of Baal” in Samaria and in Judah. In: Aviram, J., ed. Eretz Shomron. Jerusalem: 52–66 (Hebrew).

353

CHAPTER 14

SURVEY AND EXCAVATIONS OF SUBTERRANEAN FEATURES BETWEEN AREAS D6 AND C1 Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the results of an underground survey conducted as part of the 2006 season between Areas D1-D6 to the east and Area C1 to the west, and of the 2009 season excavations of one of the features—a “twin” ritual bath (miqveh) from the Late Second Temple period. The survey was undertaken by a team from the Israeli Cave Research Center (ICRC), Institute of Earth Sciences, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and was headed by the authors; the excavations were supervised by the first author.1 The survey was supplemented by the documentation of two more subterranean features uncovered in 2008 within Area D6.2 The area between Areas C1 and D1 (Fig. 14.1) is the only portion in the southern half of the site of Ramat Raḥel in which bedrock was not leveled down as part of the massive Late Iron Age-Persian period site modification operations (see Chapter 17). Thus, in all phases of occupation at the site, specifically from the latter half of the Second Temple period onwards, the local population had relatively easy access to bedrock in this area, promoting its exploitation for various purposes. The frequent use of bedrock resulted in badly-damaged, fragmentary, above-ground architecture over most of the area, excluding the large Byzantine–Early Islamic building excavated in Area D6 (Chapter 13, Phases D6-5, D6-4 and D63). Bedrock is generally composed of 1–2 m thick hard calcrete (Nari) formed over the massive chalk of the Menuha Formation; the northern part of the area is covered with reddish, consolidated chert breccia containing erosion products of the Mishash Formation. While most subterranean features exploit the soft chalk below the Nari cap, the northern two (Ug1 and Ug2) are clearly hewn into the chert breccia, a peculiar locational decision given its hardness and angularity. The survey team identified, mapped and described 12 subterranean features, designated Ug1 to Ug12. Two of these openings, Ug5 and Ug7, eventually turned out to belong to one subterranean complex, labeled “the Southern Columbarium,” which was then excavated between 2007 and 2010 (Chapter 15). Ug10, a ritual bath (miqveh) located in the northeastern portion of Area C1, was previously excavated by G. Barkai and was fully published by us in the previous volume (Reich 2016: 246–247). Another ritual bath, Ug2, was initially surveyed and cleaned from recent debris in 2006; in 2008, a second opening was uncovered immediately to its east as part of the excavations of Area D6, leading to another bath excavated in its entirety during the 2009 season (below). Ug3 is a deep, partly-collapsed cavity which was excavated by Aharoni in 1954, and into which a deep foundation of a wall (D131) of Phase D6-5 was inserted; as such, it is discussed in the relevant chapter (see Chapter 13). Other surveyed features include 1 The survey lasted four days, and was assisted by ICRC members M. Avital and A. Amihai. Mapping was conducted using common cave mapping techniques and equipment (Leica Disto D3 laser inclinometer and Silva Ranger 3 prismatic compass). 2 This operation lasted one day during the 2009 season, and was assisted by M. Ullman of the ICRC. Metal detection was done by Y. Farhi.

Chapter 14: Survey and Excavations of Subterranean Features Between Areas D6 and C1

Fig. 14.1: Aerial photo of the surveyed area taken following the 2009 season, indicating the location of the 10 openings surveyed in 2006, as well as two more features surveyed in 2008. Four features (Ug1, Ug2, Ug11 and Ug12) are included within the boundaries of Area D6, excavated during 2008–2009 seasons (see Chapter 13). (Skyview)

three cisterns (Ug1, Ug8, Ug11) and four hewn caves (Ug4, Ug6, Ug9, Ug12) without clear indications as to their original use and date, of which one (Ug6) was cleaned from minimal, “sterile” deposition in 2009. Following is a brief presentation of the surveyed features not discussed in other chapters (divided into cisterns and caves, in numerical order), and a detailed report of the excavation of the “twin” ritual bath Ug2.

SURVEYED FEATURES CISTERNS

Ug1 (Fig. 14.2) A small cistern with a vertical shaft is located at the northern edge of the survey area, just south of Wall D163 of Phases D6-8 and D6-7 (see Chapter 13). The cistern’s mouth is built of one course of dressed Nari blocks. Below it is a cylindrical shaft, 2 m high, hewn into the hard reddish chert breccia (see above). The shaft opens into a typical bell-shaped space which was carved into the soft Senonian chalk. The cistern was coated with hydraulic plaster, laid on top of a foundation layer and containing numerous broken 355

Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

sherds, mostly of jars and cooking vessels, dating to either the Byzantine or Early Islamic periods. The bottom of the cistern is covered by an accumulation of building stones and brown sediment that penetrated into the cistern after it fell into disuse. At one point, a small irregular space was breached in the western part of the cistern, cutting through the plaster; the formation process of this breach is unclear.

Ug8 (Fig. 14.3) A large ancient cistern that was reused in the last century is located a few meters southeast of the Southern Columbarium (see Chapter 15). A 2 m high vertical square shaft provides entrance to the southwestern B

A

A

B

A-A

B-B

Fig. 14.2: Plan and section of Cistern Ug1 (mapping by ICRC).

356

Chapter 14: Survey and Excavations of Subterranean Features Between Areas D6 and C1

corner of the cistern; the shaft is capped by 1–3 courses of dressed Nari stones. Attached to the cistern’s mouth on its northern side is a small square settling basin, 75 × 75 cm in size and 55 cm deep (Fig. 14.4). The shaft is hewn through the Nari capstone; the cistern itself is carved in chalk. The cistern’s groundplan is trapezoidal; it is 4.7 m long, 3.6 m wide along its southern side, and 3 m wide along its northern A

A Section A-A

Fig. 14.3: Plan and section of Cistern Ug8 (mapping by ICRC).

Fig. 14.4: Settling basin and shaft of Cistern Ug8, looking south (photo by Roi Porat).

357

Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

side. Its circumference is covered with a layer of 1 cm thick gray mortar, apparently modern, applied by local Jewish or Arab residents during the last century. The cistern still holds water, though a thick recent dump extends from the base of the shaft into the chamber. The antiquity of the cistern is evident through patches of the original plaster visible in the shaft, comprised of off-white lime-based plaster mixed with crushed sherds; its date cannot be fixed with any certainty.

Ug11 This cistern was found in Area D6 during the 2008 season, when its built head and a drain leading into it, both incorporated in the architectural complex of Phase D6-5, were excavated (Cistern 14111, and see Chapter 13 for figures). The cistern is cut through soft whitish chalk, with many roots penetrating into the space through the cracked host-rock. It is elliptical in plan and has a general bellshaped cross-section. The walls are finely plastered with a three-layer hydraulic plaster covering the entire space below the shaft (Fig. 14.5). The three layers seem to comprise one construction phase, with no signs of repairs, and include: 1) a base layer (1–3 cm) of dark gray, well sorted clayey material tempered with chalk; 2) a second layer (2–4 cm) of the same matrix, in which flat stones and large sherds (up to 15 × 15 cm in size) are embedded; and 3) an upper layer (2–3 cm) of fine reddish plaster composed of crushed sherds (0.1–5 mm in size) mixed into a lime-based plaster. During metal detection, a coin was found inside the second layer (Reg. No. 7718/60); the coin is dated to the 7th century CE (see Ramat Raḥel V, Farhi forthcoming), a date that serves as terminus post-quem for the construction of the cistern. The cistern is filled with an accumulation of up to ca. 2 m below the shaft. The fill contains gray-brown silts and clays, several large, partly-dressed building stones and host-rock erosion products.

Fig. 14.5: Cistern Ug11, looking north. Note the lower, dark gray layer of plaster preserved to the complete height of the space, and large plaster fragment collapsed within the debris below (photo by Roi Porat).

358

Chapter 14: Survey and Excavations of Subterranean Features Between Areas D6 and C1

CAVES

Ug4 (Fig. 14.6) A small hewn cavity with two vertical openings separated by a narrow rock “arch”; the eastern, larger shaft was partly blocked by a trough, measuring 75 × 55 cm (Fig. 14.7). The shafts are hewn within the Nari capstone, while the cavity itself is carved within soft, eroded Senonian chalk. The space is roughly oval, 3.5 m long (east–west) and 2.5 m wide. The floor is covered with light brown sediment and building stones. A higher step is located in the eastern part of the cavity. No plaster was applied to the rock face, and hewing marks are only partially visible. There is no indication as to the original function of the cavity or its date.

Ug6 (Fig. 14.8) A small hewn cave located on a high bedrock step north and above the Southern Columbarium (see Chapter 15). The cave is carved in soft, eroded chalk, while the vertical shaft leading into the cave is cut through harder Nari cover. The shaft was most probably cut in two stages (Fig. 14.9). In the first stage, B

A

A

B

A-A

B-B

Fig. 14.6: Plan and section of Cavity Ug4 (mapping by ICRC).

359

Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

Fig. 14.7: Trough resting on top of the entrance to Cavity Ug4, looking west. A similar trough was found in the large Byzantine complex in Area D6 (see Chapter 13) (photo by Roi Porat).

which is assumed to pre-date the hewing of the cave, a rectangular basin was hewn, measuring 1.3 × 0.7 m and ca. 0.6 m in depth. It was carved using a large chisel/pick, as evident by hewing marks on its eastern face; the floor of the basin was somewhat rounded. At the second stage, the basin was breached through to form a vertical shaft. The shaft is somewhat smaller than the basin; it is 0.95 m in length and 0.37–0.47 m in width. The shaft descends ca. 1.2 m from the basin’s bottom to the bedrock floor of the cave. The shaft leads to the southeastern corner of the cave. The latter was initially shaped rather regularly as a small squarish chamber, measuring approximately 2.1 × 2.2 m. The floor and ceiling are generally horizontal, and the average height of the cave is 1–1.2 m. Due to continuous erosion of the chalky bedrock, the space was gradually enlarged towards the north and west, where low niches were naturally developed; only the southern face retains its original form, as is evident by several observable hewing marks. In 2009, the cave was cleaned from the accumulation which covered its floor. This accumulation is apparently modern, containing many items of garbage mixed with thin brown sediment and several ancient building stones. It is thus possible that the cave was cleared during recent military operations, or even during earlier excavations at the site. No obvious indications as to the function of the cave, or its date, were gathered during this clearance.

Ug9 (Fig. 14.10) An irregular hewn cavity on the southern edge of the surveyed area, southwest of Area D6. The cavity is approached by a narrow, unroofed corridor hewn into the soft chalky bedrock, descending from east to west. Above the hewn part of the corridor are the remains of flimsy walls built of 1–3 courses of fieldstones and re-used, partly-dressed stones. Although the corridor could be ancient, it may also be a modern military trench of the type common to the site (see Chapter 19). The subterranean chamber has an arched entrance, 1.2 m high and 0.8 m wide. The chamber is roughly square (4 × 4 m); it is clear that it was carved with care, as indicated by the remains of hewing marks in the corners, but suffered from 360

Chapter 14: Survey and Excavations of Subterranean Features Between Areas D6 and C1 A

B

B

A

Section A-A

Section B-B

Fig. 14.8: Plan and section of Cave Ug6 (mapping by ICRC).

post-hewing erosion of the rock face. Two niches, partly eroded, are carved in the eastern and northern sides, measuring 0.8 × 0.7 × 0.7 m and 1.2 × 1 × 0.9 m, respectively. The niches are elevated ca. 0.5–0.6 m above the present cave floor, and their function is unclear. Another small alcove, possibly for a lamp, is carved north of the entrance, 0.25 m below the ceiling. A fourth, shallow niche is carved south of the entrance (1.22 × 0.53 m, and only 0.15 m deep). Next to the western side of the chamber there is a blocked vertical shaft in the ceiling, 0.5 m in diameter. No traces of plaster were observed anywhere in the chamber. The function of the cave, and its date, are at present unknown.

Ug12 (Fig. 14.11) This cavity was found in Area D6 during the 2008 season, and designated Locus 14053 (see Chapter 13). Its hewn shaft was partly excavated, exposing the entrance into a side chamber which was left unexcavated. The shaft, cut through the hard Nari, is round and the upper part is relatively narrow (0.75 m in diameter), but widens to 1.2 m at the lower level of excavation. An opening is carved in the lower, eastern side of the shaft, leading to a small rounded chamber (1.5 m in diameter) with an arched cross-section. The debris in this chamber slopes slightly from west to east, and nowhere is its floor exposed; the present height within the chamber is 0.7–0.8 m. The accumulation here is characterized by ceiling erosion products and 361

Uri Davidovich and Roi Porat

Fig. 14.9: Entrance to Cave Ug6, looking west. Note the outline of the original basin and the rough carving of the shaft.

A A

Section A-A

Fig. 14.10: Plan and section of Cave Ug9 (mapping by ICRC).

362

Chapter 14: Survey and Excavations of Subterranean Features Between Areas D6 and C1

Fig. 14.11: The entrance into Ug12 as revealed during the 2008 season of excavations in Area D6, looking north.

gray-brown silts and clays which penetrated through the shaft. No signs of the function of this space were observed; its overall plan is not typical of cisterns, and the absence of plaster remains precludes such an interpretation. It could have served as a cellar or some other kind of a storage facility. It is assigned, rather tentatively, to the large architectural complex of Phases D6-5, D6-4 and D6-3.

SURVEY AND EXCAVATION OF RITUAL BATH UG2 (RR8 AND RR9) This installation consists of three components: ”twin” subterranean basins that comprise a ritual bath (miqveh)—one on the west which was designated RR8 and one on the east which was designated RR9,3 and an exterior, open basin (Figs. 14.12–14.13). All three components are carved in hard reddish chert breccia, which acts as “bedrock” in this area. RR8 was discerned and studied as part of the 2006 survey, and the bath was cleaned to its stepped plastered floor. During this operation, it became apparent that this bath had already been excavated by one of the earlier expeditions to the site, as the meager accumulation found within it consisted of gray-brown sediment, large building stones and contemporary garbage that penetrated into the bath through the bath’s original opening as well as through a new breach in its southwestern corner. However, no documentation of an early exploration of the bath exists in the archival materials related to the site. In 2008, the area surrounding RR8 was cleared as part of the excavation of Area D6 (see Chapter 13), and a second opening was uncovered immediately to the east of RR8, partially blocked by a wall (Wall D123) and almost totally filled with accumulation. In 2009, the newly-revealed space was completely excavated, uncovering a second bath (RR9). In what follows, we describe the ritual bathing complex as studied during the survey and excavation. Following a detailed description of the complex components, we discuss later alterations of the complex and the process by which it was finally abandoned. 3 The miqva