A Section of the Gezer–Ramla Aqueduct (Qanat Bint Al-Kafir) and a Mamluk-Period Cemetery Near Moshav Yashresh

‘Atiqot 79, 2014 A SECTION OF THE GEZER–RAMLA AQUEDUCT (QANAT BINT AL-KAFIR) AND A MAMLUK-PERIOD CEMETERY NEAR MOSHAV YasHRESH AMIR GORZALCZANY INTRODUCTION Umayyad-period aqueduct between Gezer and Ramla (Fig. 1; Gorzalczany 2011). In For the past sixty years, archaeologists and July and August 2006, a further segment of farmers have been exposing sections of the this aqueduct was uncovered during salvage 186 000 188 000 192 000 194 000 190 000 to Tel Aviv 80 1. Kaplan and Gophna 1950 (see Zelinger and Shmueli 2002:281, Fig. 2) Ramla White 2. Zelinger and Shmueli 2002 Mosque 70 3. Gorzalczany 2011 4. Toueg 2010 648 5. Tsion-Cinamon 2005 648 000 6. Zelinger 2000 000 7. Zelinger and Shmueli 2002 Area A 8. Zelinger and Shmueli 2002 (cemetery) 9. Zelinger 2001 10 11 10. The Excavation Area B 70 11. Tal and Taxel 2008; Gorzalczany 2006; 2008a; 2008d 9 80 Yashresh Mazliah 646 90 646 000 90 000 Road 40 The Aqueduct ovot h to Re 80 8 90 644 100 7 644 000 90 000 6 5 4 3 Na‘an 2 100 110 642 130 642 000 000 Petahya 1 140 to Be’er Sheva‘ Tel Gezer 180 0 2 210 km 192 000 186 000 190 000 188 000 Fig. 1. Location map showing the current excavation areas (10; Areas A, B), the reconstructed course of the aqueduct, the cemetery, and previous excavations and surveys. 214 AMIR GORZALCZANY L105 Area A L110 IV L108 L109 L111 L107 L112 III Area B II m 10.5 I 0 15 m Plan 1. General plan of the excavated areas: the aqueduct (Area B), plan and sections, and the general plan of the cemetery (Areas A and B). excavations carried out south of Ramla and The present excavation (Plan 1; Gorzalczany northeast of Moshav Yashresh (map ref. NIG 2008b) exposed the excellently preserved 18650–66/64729–42; Fig. 1) prior to the paving remains of the aqueduct in Area B. Nine pit of Highway 431.1 It lies within the boundaries graves that can be attributed to the cemetery of an olive-tree grove, known locally as the excavated by Onn (2008) were unearthed— ‘Kakunda Compound’, owned by a well-known seven in Area A and two in Area B (Plans Ramla family of this name. 1–3). Excavations over the years in the area revealed several sections of the aqueduct along THE AQUEDUCT a reconstructed course of 10 km (Gorzalczany 2008c; 2011: Fig. 1, and pp. 196–197 for The Excavation a summary of this work) and remains of The main feature revealed in Area B are the a cemetery, dated to the Mamluk or Early remains of the aqueduct, which was well Ottoman period (Onn 2008).2 preserved (Plans 1, 2; Figs. 2–5), except in THE GEZER–RAMLA AQUEDUCT AND A CEMETERY NEAR MOSHAV YASHRESH 215 IV III I II 0 8 m 82.55 81.55 81.76 81.51 1 81.61 81.48 80.73 82.62 81.29 81.29 I L223 1 L221 L222 81.57 L220 81.26 81.21 82.23 L226 81.42 82.16 81.30 2 81.71 4 L216 II 81.75 81.51 3 3 81.55 L217 80.71 2 81.43 4 L215 82.28 81.71 81.85 6 81.55 82.72 L343 81.44 5 L214 L212 81.55 81.70 81.60 L209 80.49 L213 L210 81.28 82.60 81.00 6 81.81 80.36 III L208 L205 L211 5 81.69 81.69 82.18 80.33 81.38 81.68 81.49 IV L225 81.76 81.32 81.51 81.72 81.38 81.55 1-1 2-2 3-3 4-4 5-5 6-6 0 8 m Plan 2. The aqueduct, plan and sections. 216 AMIR GORZALCZANY Fig. 2. Aerial view of the central segments (II and III) of the aqueduct and Shaft 216; note the olive grove, which badly damaged the channel. Fig. 3. The southern segment (I) of the aqueduct, looking southwest; the cover stones were looted in antiquity. THE GEZER–RAMLA AQUEDUCT AND A CEMETERY NEAR MOSHAV YASHRESH 217 Fig. 4. Aerial view of the northern segment (III–IV) of the aqueduct; note the modern cement wall, which delimited the olive grove. three places where it was damaged by olive- into layers of hamra that overlaid a tamped tree roots and a section that was severed by a dark clay layer of varying thickness (Figs. 6, modern cement wall, which delimited the olive 7). It was built of two parallel walls constructed grove (Figs. 2, 4, 5). of fieldstones and bonding material (width The technical aspects of the aqueduct 0.35–0.40 m) and a plastered channel between were established in Gorzalczany 2011. The them (Plan 2: Section 7–7). In Segment II, a excavation of its section in Area B, recorded as layer of ribbed Byzantine or Early Islamic Segments I–IV, is therefore presented here as potsherds (Fig. 8) was located between the a narrative, with specific details yielded by its stone walls of the aqueduct, overlaid by two full excavation in three squares (see Figs. 6, 7, layers of hydraulic plaster (L226, L217; 16), and pertinent special features. Plan 2: Section 5–5); the first layer pink, This section of the aqueduct, generally and the second, gray, probably a later repair oriented southwest–northeast, was exposed (Fig. 9; identical to the scenario described along c. 150 m (the width of Road 431, in Gorzalczany 2005; 2008b; 2008e:13; including the planned infrastructure flanking it) 2011:199–200). The channel was covered and to a depth of 1 m below surface. The stone with limestone slabs (average dimensions foundations of the aqueduct were excavated 0.6 × 0.7 m; Plan 2: Sections 5–5, 6–6; Fig. 10), 218 AMIR GORZALCZANY Fig. 6. The northeastern side of the aqueduct, looking north; note the soil layers on which the aqueduct is based. Fig. 5. The northern segment (IV) of the aqueduct, severed by the modern cement wall, looking southwest; note the alluvial clay, which pressed and moved the stones. Fig. 7. The southwestern side of the aqueduct, looking northwest; note the aqueduct’s foundation and the layers on which it is based. THE GEZER–RAMLA AQUEDUCT AND A CEMETERY NEAR MOSHAV YASHRESH 219 Fig. 8. Detail of the plastered channel; note the thick layer of pottery sherds located between the plaster layers and the walls. Fig. 9. Two layers of hydraulic plaster: original and repair, looking southeast. Fig. 10. Well-preserved limestone cover slabs in Segment II, looking southeast. 220 AMIR GORZALCZANY Fig. 11. Cover slabs missing (detail). shifting, especially where it was clayey (Figs. 12, 13). The lack of cover stones probably also contributed to the instability of this section of the aqueduct; a similar phenomenon was discerned in the segment revealed near Kibbutz Na‘an (Gorzalczany 2005; 2011:204). A pair of ex situ cover stones was found close to the southern end of the excavated area (Segment I, L222; Plan 2; Fig. 14). In Segment III, the aqueduct was excavated for a distance of 1.8 m (L212, L213 and L219). It was determined that the aqueduct and channel were narrower in the northernmost square than in the other excavated squares (width of aqueduct 0.9 m; width of channel 0.3 m; depth of channel 0.23–0.30 m vs. overall width 1 m; width of channel 0.35 m; depth of channel 0.8 m; Plan 2: Sections 5–5, 6–6). As in previous excavations, this contraction could be attributed to the pressure Fig. 12. Ground shift due to the clayey soil; note the caused by the clayey soil (Gorzalczany 2011). pressure on the walls of the channel (L218). Two maintenance shafts (L216, L224) were located along the aqueduct. Shaft 216 was in a very good state of preservation (Plan 2: Sections except for the last 20 m in the southwest, where 4–4, 8–8; Figs. 15, 16), while Shaft 224 had the cover stones had probably been looted collapsed (Plan 2: Segment III). The building in antiquity (Figs. 3; 11). The aqueduct was stones were scattered around their original damaged on its southwestern side (especially in location (see Fig. 13). The dimensions of the Segments I [L220–L222] and III [L218, L219, channel and the shafts precluded an adult’s L224]; Plan 2: Section 1–1), due to ground entry through them for cleaning and repair, THE GEZER–RAMLA AQUEDUCT AND A CEMETERY NEAR MOSHAV YASHRESH 221 Fig. 13. Collapsed section of the aqueduct, looking southwest; note the layers of plaster on the wall (L219). Fig. 14. A pair of ex situ cover slabs, Fig. 15. Aerial view of Shaft 216, looking northheast. looking northeast. 222 AMIR GORZALCZANY Fig. 16. Excavation along the well-preserved Shaft 216, looking southeast. but may have allowed that of a child. This is The Rate of Flow (Table 1)3 opposed to the situation observed in manhole The discharge and flow rate of the aqueduct shafts in the aqueduct section near Kibbutz were calculated by means of Manning’s Na‘an, where the size and diameter of the shafts formula, which also takes into account the indeed allowed a person’s entrance so as to effect of the friction of the water on the rough keep the channel clean if needed (Gorzalczany margins of the conduit (Hodge 1992:354–355). 2011:202). As only two maintenance shafts The present calculation of the maximum rate of were discovered, it is not possible to establish flow in the aqueduct is only theoretical and is whether these installations were positioned at based on the data acquired from the excavated fixed or random distances, or pre-situated at squares.

Load more