A Mamluk-Period Settlement and Cemetery at Ge'alya
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
‘Atiqot 86, 2016 A MamLUK-PERIOD SETTLEMENT AND CEMETERY AT GE’ALYA, NEAR YAVNE AMIR GORZALCZANY INTRODUCTION a branch of which passed through Yavne. This particular branch linked the cities of Yavne and During September 2006 and February 2007, Lod (Dorsey 1991:64, Map 1). Stone bridges, salvage excavations were conducted east of attributed to the Mamluk ruler Baybars, still Moshav Ge’alya, between Kefar Gevirol, a stand in Lod and Yavne at both ends of the neighborhood in the southwest of Rehovot, ancient road (Drori 1981:34–35; Taragan and Yavne (map ref. 178129–774/643303–904; 2000:71; Petersen 2001:313–319; Fischer and Fig. 1) in anticipation of development works Taxel 2007:262–263).2 and the expansion of Road 410 (Gorzalczany The excavation site is located atop a low 2009b). The excavations, conducted in four hamra hillock, which encompasses a kurkar areas (A–D), uncovered a cemetery and a (local sandstone) ridge, 2.5 km northeast of habitation site.1 Road 410 lies on the same route Yavne. The site apparently extended on both as the ancient road that led from Jaffa to Gaza, sides of Road 410 and seems to have been part 000 000 176 178 000 646 180 646 000 D 000 Ge’alya 2 C 3 to Rehovot A 4 5 6 Tel Shalaf 7 Road 410 Kefar Gevirol B . avne 644 0 200 644 000 to Y m Rehovot 000 Nahal . Soreq Ge’alya The Excavation Road 410 642 642 000 Mamluk 000 Bridge Tel Yavne 0 2 km 000 180 000 176 000 178 Fig. 1. Location map showing the excavations and the surrounding area. 70 AMIR GORZALCZANY of Khirbat el-Ajjuri and Khirbat ed-Duheisha, to MB II, jars made of a light-colored ware where their northern portions overlap with Tel with handles on the shoulders decorated with Shalaf,3 identified as Eltekeh, one of the Levitic delicate combing. These jars, discovered in the cities in the tribe of Dan mentioned in Joshua northern environs of the site, were described 19:44, 21:23 and in Assyrian documents. as “medieval”, without further details. Tel Shalaf was apparently inhabited from the Results of recent surveys in the area of Kh. Middle Bronze Age until its demise at the end ed-Duheisha corroborate previous descriptions of the First Temple period (sixth century BCE; of the site. Pottery collected from the surface Kaplan 1957:207). dates to MB II, and the Persian, Late Roman, Based on the ceramic finds collected in Byzantine, Umayyad and Ottoman periods. recent surveys, it seems that the earlier ancient Ashlars and remains of structures were remains, from the Bronze Age to the Umayyad documented, as well as coins from the Late period, are located in the southern part of the site Roman, Byzantine and Umayyad periods. and that later, in the post-Umayyad periods, the Expansion peaked during the Byzantine and settlers moved northward (Fischer, Taxel and Umayyad periods, when the site extended over Amit 2008:13–14). After a settlement gap, the an estimated area of 70 dunams (Fischer, Taxel site was apparently reoccupied in the Mamluk and Amit 2008:14). and Ottoman periods, as attested by remains in A Byzantine female burial, dated to the late the northern portion. A similar observation was sixth century CE, was excavated by the author made by Kaplan (1957). in 1994 (Gorzalczany 1997). Recently, Fischer It seems that during most periods, the site and Taxel conducted an extensive survey at the extended along the hill and the alluvial plain site as part of the Map of Yavne Regional Survey that surrounds it. The kurkar hill probed during (Map 75), the results of which, yet unpublished, the excavations served mainly as a cemetery. seem to confirm and reinforce results of earlier Modern development works, as well as observations (Fischer, Taxel and Amit 2008). In agricultural exploitation, severely damaged the 2008, a small-scale excavation was conducted ancient remains. by Jenny Marcus (2010) on behalf of the IAA, which yielded scanty architectural remains History of Research dated to the Mamluk period. The recovery of The site was first mentioned in a report by a menorah fragment from Kh. ed-Duheisha has Jacob Ory in 1934 (IAA Archives, Mandate led researchers to propose the identification of File, Kh. ed-Duheisha). Ory, an inspector the site with Judean Peqi‘in, not to be confused of the Mandate-period Department of with Peqi‘in of the Galilee (Amit 2008:15–16). Antiquities, reported the presence of a In addition, two fragments of an Egyptian number of architectural elements, such as a hieroglyphic inscription were found in Kh. column capital and bases, which suggested ed-Duheisha and nearby al-Qubeiba (Kefar the existence of a public building (Fischer, Gevirol; Goldwasser 1992). Taxel and Amit 2008:13, Fig. 7). A more Several vessels dating to the Late Bronze comprehensive survey carried out by Jacob Age II, which probably originated in the Tel Kaplan documented remains dated to the Shalaf cemetery, were found close to the site Middle Bronze Age II and the Roman and (Gorzalczany and Teksell 2001: Fig. 170). It is Byzantine periods. These finds included noteworthy that explorers of the PEF, during several tombs, marble slabs bearing Greek the Survey of Western Palestine, reported and inscriptions and jar burials, defined by him mapped a well, used by the inhabitants of as “Arabic” (Kaplan 1957:202). The survey the area (Conder and Kitchener 1880: Sheet conducted by Porath and Pipano (Pipano 1985) XVI). We located this well (Fig. 2) during the reported, in addition to tombs clearly dated excavation.4 A MamLUK-PERIOD SETTLEMENT AND CEMETERY AT GE’ALYA 71 #L135 20.38 19.97 L133 L177 20.89 20.84 20.78 B1069 L111 20.73 B1071 20.85 20.82 B1068 20.82 20.76 20.76 12 m Fig. 2. The well, documented by the PEF surveyors, located today within Farm 140, Moshav Ge’alya. 21.87 # L110 21.76 21.57 THE EXCAVATIONS 21.93 Only the western part of the site was excavated. Excavations in the northern part of the site, 2.4 m which falls within the limits of Tel Shalaf, 24.09 24.01 included the area of the tell. Four areas were B1099 24.11 L112 21.75 L114 opened, all located between Road 410 and 24.01 B1098 B1097 the easternmost houses of Moshav Ge’alya. 23.93 24.08 B1104 L134 24.19 24.13 Southern Areas A and B were excavated during 24.23 L127 2006 and northern Areas C and D, in 2007 (see B1035 24.21 B1042 L115 Fig. 1), a total of 30 excavation squares. The 24.02 B1018 tombs that were unearthed were not excavated B1015 B1016 B1017 B1091 24.18 further due to limitations placed on the IAA.5 18 m L116 25.08 25.06 B1100 AREA A (Plan 1) L131 L117 24.77 B1101 L125 25.10 B1044 B1102 This area is located on the northern slopes 24.93 B1103 of the kurkar hill. Five squares were opened, L113 L108 B1043 L118 24.47 uncovering a cemetery dating to the Mamluk 24.87 L123 25.22 24.91 25.05 period. The tomb features were recorded in B1041 L126 detail, but not excavated. Thirteen tombs were 25.09 found, comprising four types. 14 m L128 Type A (Figs. 3–5) 22.65 6 23.27 L130 Type A consists of individual cist burials laid 22.65 out on a general east–west axis, ranging between 60° and 90° relatively to the north (azimuth 0°), for example Tomb 131 (Plan 2; Fig. 4), Tomb L129 L132 27.27 23.24 105 (Plan 3; Fig. 3) and Tomb 127 (Plan 3; 0 2 Fig. 5). As the tombs were not excavated, it is m impossible to say whether the interiors were Plan 1. Area A. 72 AMIR GORZALCZANY 25.08 L125 L116 24.91 B1041 B1043 24.90 25.06 24.93 Tomb 113 24.77 B1044 Tomb 131 B1103 L118 B1102 25.05 L108 24.47 B1101 Fig. 3. Tomb 105 (Type A), covered with complete Tomb 126 B1100 ceramic vessels, looking south. 25.10 Tomb 123 Tomb 117 25.09 25.22 0 2 m Plan 2. Tombs of Types A, B and C in Area A. Tomb 11424.01 Tomb 127 Fig. 4. Tomb 131 (Type A), covered with beehives B1099 and scoop (antilya) vessels, looking southwest. 24.09 B1098 B1097 L112 24.11 B1104 21.75 24.01 24.08 24.19 L134 23.93 Tomb 105 B1035 24.23 24.21 24.13 24.21 23.84 B1042 B1018 B1015 B1017 L115 B1016 B1091 24.18 0 2 m Fig. 5. Tomb 127 (Type A), covered with complete Plan 3. Tombs of Types A and C in Area A. ceramic vessels, looking soutwest. stone lined. Their dimensions average 0.5–0.6 × row—rim/neck to base (Fig. 3). In some cases, 1.5 m. The most outstanding feature of this for example in Tomb 105, up to six vessels were type of cist burial is that whole bag-shaped placed on one tomb. Sometimes, a narrow row jars, placed horizontally side by side with their of pebbles surrounded the jars, encompassing longitudinal axis perpendicular to the long axis the entire tomb. This phenomenon, which was of the grave, were used in place of covering not clearly distinguishable on the surface, was slabs. To make a tighter fit and completely cover clearly visible at other sites, for example at the tombs, they were deposited in an alternating Kafr ‘Ana (Gophna, Taxel and Feldstein 2007).