Os Mosteiros No Deserto Da Jordania

8/17/2019 Os Mosteiros No Deserto Da Jordania

1/20

LA 46 (1996) 245-264; Pls. 1-4

1. Hirschfeld 1992, 3-5, 76.

THE MONASTERIES OF THE “DESERT OF THE JORDAN”

O. Sion

The final stage of the 1993 archaeological survey of the Kalia region re-

vealed the monastic remains in the “Desert of the Jordan”. The baptism

sites, the arid desert landscape, the friable layers of Lissan marl and the scat-

tered springs drew the monks of the Byzantine period, turning the site into

a center of intense activity. The survey was conducted in 1992-1993 on be-

half of the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria and the Antiquities

Authority. The survey was headed by O. Sion (who also photographed anddrew the plans), assisted by: D. Amar, L. Alon, Y. Golan, Y. Goldman, Y.

Tsionit, Z. Abeles, and S. Amami. In the ninety years that have passed since

it was last researched, the monasticism of the desert of the Jordan was al-

most forgotten; thus, the survey was almost a renewed discovery. Many

passed through the area without noticing the man-made remains, so well do

they blend into the landscape. It took stumbling on the remains of a cell and

collecting potsherds that were scattered around it, to realize that many other

remains were to be found in the site.

The name “Desert of the Jordan” refers to the plain to the east and tothe south of Jericho (Fig. 1). The area is mentioned in the literature of the

pilgrims who passed through it on their way from the baptism sites on the

Jordan to Jericho and Jerusalem. It also appears in the writings of the Judean

desert monks such as: Cyril of Scythopolis and John Moschus1. The land-

scape in this area is flat, except for a scarp following the line of the springs

(from north to south): ‘Ein el-Beida, ‘Ein Hajla, ‘Ein Nargil and ‘Ein Abu

Mahmud. At this scarp the plateau drops down to the reed bush on the Jor-

dan bank, named ez-Zur. A network of small streams flows at the base of

the scarp. The soil consists of thin layers of clay, chalk, gypsum, sand andhuwar pebbles. The concentration of clay in the sediments formed hard lay-

ers that are evident in the landscape. These “steps” prevent drift and allow

the hewing of the rock for building purposes. Nahal Perat (Wadi Qelt), the

largest stream in the area, crosses the northern part of the desert. Its bed is

packed with limestone rocks and its side cliffs are steep. In certain points,

their height reaches twenty meters. This stream is the only one that pours


2/20

O. SION246

Fig. 1 Map of the Jordan Desert and the sites of the monasteries.

into the Jordan river. The watercourses to the south of Nahal Perat, such as

Wadi Ghor el-Murrar, Wadi Muqtal Qattam and Wadi Murrar, do not reach

the Jordan river or the Dead Sea, but rather the large salt deposits north of

the Dead Sea. The only perennial water sources in this area are the Jordan

river and a number of springs, the largest of which is ‘Ein Hajla (Phot. 1).

The aquifer is close to the surface and allows the growth of palm trees,

tamarisks, and poplars (Phot. 2).

The flat landscape and the scant vegetation allowed for free movement

and made road construction unnecessary, thus making the dating of the

paths a very difficult task. Two main roads crossed the Jordan desert

broadwise towards Jericho, one starting at the monastery of John the Bap-

tist (Qasr el-Yahud) and the other at Deir Hajla (Phot. 3). The main length-

wise roads passed at the foot of the cliffs and close to the bank of the

Jordan river.

The monasticism of the desert of the Jordan was the object of attention

by many of the Judean desert researchers such as: Tobler, Guérin, Conder and

Kitchener, Chitty, Meinardus and others. The most important studies describ-


3/20

THE MONASTERIES OF THE “DESERT OF THE JORDAN” 247

ing the remains at the site are due to Féderlin2 and Augustinoviπ (1951).

Vailhé (1898) and Schneider (1938) supplied a detailed historical survey.

Féderlin’s map3 was used for decades as the only detailed source of infor-

mation about the remains of cells and monasteries. The level of detail is high and

the mapping shows a good degree of accuracy. In some cases this map is the only

evidence of those findings that were destroyed during the years, mostly as a re-

sult of agricultural activity in the area. A wave of Israeli research of the site be-

gan in the 70s. The first surveyor was P. Bar-Adon (1972) whose team docu-

mented sites in the Judean desert and in the Jericho valley. Y. Hirschfeld and J.

Patrich were next: the former surveyed cells in the surroundings of the monas-

tery of Deir Hajla and the latter carried out an excavation and documented cells

in the area of ‘Ein el-Mahmud4. With our survey we have tried to complete the

picture, using the written sources and the archaeological evidence.

Historical review

The historical sources attest the existence of hermits in the desert of the Jor-

dan as early as the 4th century. They apparently were the first monks in the

area5. Geographically, the desert of the Jordan belongs to a landscape unit

separate from the Judean desert, but the monastic movement there is an inte-

gral part of the Judean desert monasticism. The first communal monastery of the area was founded in the 5th century by the monk Gerasimus, who is con-

sidered the father of the local monasticism, and was named after him. This

period marked the beginning of a time of bloom for the Judean desert monas-

teries, and especially for the monasticism of the desert of the Jordan. The

monastery of Gerasimus included a church, a kitchen, a refectory, storage ar-

eas and a dwelling wing. Gerasimus set strict rules according to which, every

monk was to stay in solitude in his cell for five days a week. The clothing was

plain and needs were reduced to a minimum. Personal belongings were lim-

ited to a rush mat and a bowl for drinking which also served for wetting thepalm leaves. The monks’ diet was based mainly on bread, dates and water.

The monks’ work mostly consisted of making baskets and ropes out of

palm leaves. On Saturdays and Sundays the monks gathered in the core of the

laura, ate cooked food, drank wine and prayed together. In the cells they were

2. Full references in Hirschfeld 1992, 289.

3. Féderlin 1903, 120.

4. Hirschfeld 1991; Patrich - Arubas - Agur 1993.

5. Vita Charitonis 1941, 13,26.


4/20

O. SION248

not allowed to light candles or prepare a warm drink. The cells were con-

stantly left open6. In Gerasimus’ time, the number of monasteries in the area

increased to four. After his death, and particularly during the 6th century, the

pilgrimage movement to Palestine increased, encouraged by the emperorsAnastasius and Justinian. The former built the monastery of John the Baptist

near the Jordan, to which two hostels were added with the help of the latter 7.

In this period about ten new monasteries were established in the area.

The end of the monastic movement, both in the desert of the Jordan and

in the Judean desert, was brought about by the Arab conquest, although the

Muslim occupation was apparently not more violent than the earlier Persian

conquest.

Our survey of the monasteries follows the presumed order of their foun-

dation, based mostly on the historical sources. An attempt has been made tocombine the historical with the archaeological data as reported by the vari-

ous scholars, with reference also to the current state of the sites.

The Laura of Calamon, or “Laura of the Reed Bush” (Site K), was estab-

lished approximately in 450 A.D. The opinions about the location of the core of

the laura vary. Some scholars identified it at Deir Hajla (Marti, Vailhé,

Schneider and Augustinoviπ), while others located it east of the spring. Later in

this article we will discuss the problematic nature of the remains found at Deir

Hajla. About the other site, Féderlin’s report is helpful: “The remains of the

monastery were discovered at a distance of approximately 200 meters from thespring. The remains, among which walls and mosaic tesserae, were found by

the monks of the monastery of John the Baptist in the process of preparing the

ground for planting. Among the remains the central building of the Laura, 30 ×

48 m, is prominent. In the center of the building there was an inner courtyard

where a round water cistern, 7.5 m in diameter, is still preserved. The courtyard

is surrounded by dwelling cells”8. The only remains that have survived today’s

agricultural works are a cistern and potsherds of the Byzantine period.

The monastery of Gerasimus – Deir Hajla or Qasr Hajla (Site M) was

established ca. 455 A.D. Guérin, who visited the place 120 years ago, de-

scribes a decayed monastery and a ruined church within. Remains of paint-

ings and inscriptions were found among the ruins. Guérin dated the monastery

to the Crusader period on the basis of its pointed arches9. Others, such as

6. Hirschfeld 1991, 419-423.

7. See references in Hirschfeld 1992, 62.

8. Féderlin 1903, 120.

9. Guérin 1874, 53-56.


5/20


Conder, Kitchener and Schneider viewed this building as the continuation of

the original Byzantine monastery. A detailed description of the medieval re-

mains can be found in the works of Guérin and Conder and Kitchener 10.

Féderlin suggested to locate the Byzantine building 350 m east of the currentlocation of the monastery11, since the earliest remains found on the site and in

its immediate surroundings are from the Middle Ages, and the area closest to

the monastery does not contain Byzantine material. It is therefore unlikely

that there may have been a Byzantine monastery on the spot. At the site sug-

gested by Féderlin a ruin was found, dating from the Byzantine period, the

size of a large monastic cell.

The monasteries of Elias – one of them known as “Monastery of the Eu-

nuchs” – at Khirbet Mafjar and Tell Mafjar (Sites C and D) were built by Elias

in 465 A.D. They are located near the main road between Deir Hajla and Jeri-cho. The sites were extensively surveyed by various scholars and a summary

of their findings is brought by Y. Hirschfeld12. Besides the sites themselves,

two Byzantine cells also survived: one approximately 80 m east of Khirbet

Mafjar (Fig. 2) and the other about 60 m to the north-east. In his map, Féderlin

marks five cells.

The monastery of John the Baptist – Qasr el-Yahud or “Castle of the Jew”

(Site N; Phot. 4) – was built at the end of the 5th century or the beginning of

10. Guérin 1874; Conder - Kitchener 1883, 53-56.

11. Féderlin 1903, 134-148.

12. Hirschfeld 1990, 22-23.

Fig. 2 The remains of a monastic cell east of Khirbet Mafjar.


6/20

O. SION250

the 6th, in the place where, according to the Christian tradition, Jesus was

baptized. The site was extensively studied by Guérin, Clermont-Ganneau,

Conder and Kitchener from the archaeological point of view, and by Marti,

Vailhé, Augustinoviπ and Meinardus on the historical aspects13. Guérin de-scribed a ruined monastery, surrounded by a wall; among the ruins he identi-

fied fallen arches and a chapel with an apsis to the east. Guérin believed that

above the chapel a church had been built of zhich the bases of a few pillars

and portions of walls survived. An ancient reservoir was surveyed in the west-

ern fringes of the ruins. Many pilgrims had visited the site and left their mark,

mainly in the form of crosses engraved on the walls. Since the 12th century

the monastery was rebuilt on the remains of the original building. A survey

of the area revealed an abundance of Byzantine sherds in the debris around

the monastery. Near it, there is a Byzantine aqueduct (Phot. 4) in a west to eastdirection coming from an unknown source.

Another monastery was discovered near the church of Galgala, en-Nitle

or Tell Jaljul (Site E). The land at the site is plowed and thus nothing has

survived but a few stones, sherds, a small artificial cavity, and perhaps a

reservoir. When the monastery was surveyed about 90 years ago14, it was

surrounded by a wall, sections of which were preserved to a height of 9 m.

Seventeen monastic cells were scattered around. The excavations conducted

during the years 1949-1951 by Baramki15 could not ascertain whether the

remains belonged to a church. The period of activity at the site was dated fromthe 4th to the 9th century. Hirschfeld concluded from the excavation findings

that there had been a monastery attached to a church of the Byzantine

Period16.

These are six of the best known and most important monasteries of the

desert of the Jordan. Féderlin added to them a list of seven monasteries that

were not previously known, which he also identified. All are dated to the 6th

century. They are the monastery of the Towers, the monastery of Peter, the

monastery of the Aeliotes, Soubiba of the Syrians, Soubiba of the Bessians,

Penthucla and Chorembe. The monastery of the Towers was surveyed by P.

Bar-Adon, but all the rest were forgotten. The impression we formed from the

survey is that the first five were indeed monasteries, while the remaining two,

Chorembe and Penthucla, are only ruined monastic cells.

13. See references in Hirschfeld 1992, 293-294.

14. Féderlin 1903, 309-310.

15. Baramki 1949-1951.

16. Hirschfeld 1990, 50-51.


7/20


The monastery of the Towers (Site L in Fig. 1; Phot. 5)

The monastery was extensively surveyed by Féderlin17 and Augustinoviπ18,

and its ground plan was supplied by P. Bar-Adon19. The survey revealed re-mains scattered on an area of three dunam. Near the northern wall there is a

large water cistern. The size and the central location of this monastery among

the laurae and the hermit cells in the desert of the Jordan are indications of its

importance.

Monastery north of Wadi Mughar (Site B)

The site is located north of Wadi Mughar and of the ancient road leadingfrom Deir Hajla to the southern outskirts of the city of Jericho. The remains

were surveyed in the 50s by Augustinoviπ who tentatively identified the

site as a monastery20. The ruins extend on an area of 2.4 dunam and were

preserved to a height of 1.5 m. Heads of walls, mosaic tesserae and a large

quantity of sherds were found scattered on surface. In the western part of

the site there is a reservoir 5.5 m in diameter and 5.6 m deep at least (Phot.

6). It is carefully built with stones and sherds and coated with several lay-

ers of plaster in the fashion of the cisterns in the Judean desert monaster-

ies. Similar cisterns were surveyed in the monastery of Jabel Muntar andin Khirbet Handoma21. Another reservoir, 8.5 m in diameter (outer measure)

and at least 2.2 m deep, was discovered approximately 200 m north of the

site. The latter may have been covered with a roof leaning on three pairs of

arches. The remains of an aqueduct made of pebbles coated with plaster

connect the reservoir to the ruins of the monastery. Beside this, many

sherds, fragments of glass, a disjoined mosaic pavements and a sundial (?)

were also discovered on the site. Approximately 150 m south, in the bed of

Wadi Mughar, three artificial mounds containing pebbles and many pot-

sherds were observed – possibly the remains of three cells that served the

hermits of the monastery.

17. Féderlin 1903, 180-182.

18. Augustinoviπ 1951, 112.

19. Bar-Adon 1972, 116-117, site number 74 B, fig. 7.

20. Augustinoviπ 1951, 182-183.

21. Sion 1992, 282-283.


8/20

O. SION252

Soubiba of the Syrians (Site F in Fig. 1)

This monastery is located on the northern bank of Nahal Perat. It was identi-

fied by Féderlin22 with “Soubiba of the Syrians”, a monastery mentioned byJohn Moschus23. The site spreads on a flat area of 1.8 dunam. Remains of

walls, architectural elements and mosaic tesserae are scattered about the site.

To the west, a water cistern with an adjoining mosaic floor was identified. The

ruins of two buildings, made of local materials, were found on the southern

bank of Nahal Perat, 250 and 500 m from the site. Presumably they were

dwellings of hermits.

The laura of the Aeliotes (Site G in Fig. 1)

This site is located north of Nahal Perat, in an area rich in ruins, whose func-

tion cannot easily be ascertained owing to their deteriorated state. Féderlin de-

scribed a laura with seven cells, a core and a hostel24. In his opinion, the

enclosure located 250 m to the north-east of the monastery is nothing but a

khan. In addition to these findings, he mentions a large agricultural estate

measuring 130 × 60 m, and an aqueduct, which is marked on the maps as “re-

mains of a Roman road”. A notable contribution to the survey of the Judean

desert and valley of Jericho was made by P. Bar-Adon with a description of the finds and the drawing of plans. According to him, the aqueduct is a road

and the khan a Roman fort25. The estate and the water cistern were not de-

scribed by Bar-Adon and possibly at the time of his survey they no longer

existed. On the other hand, Bar-Adon noticed another fort, located south of

the road26.

When the expedition led by the writer documented the findings on the

site, the remains of the monastery were prominent in sight. Ruins of walls,

segments of a surrounding enclosure and a tower (?) were identified along the

southern and the eastern edges of the site. Drafted stones, mosaic tesserae,

fragments of plaster and many sherds were found in the place. The founda-

tions of a few buildings were identified 15 m to the south-east. Remains of

22. Féderlin 1903, 299.

23. Johannes Moschus, 87, 3.

24. Féderlin 1903, 328.

25. Bar-Adon 1972, 115 c.

26. Bar-Adon 1972, 115 d.


9/20


buildings and sherds of the Byzantine Period were also found in two addi-

tional locations: one, a 10 × 10 m ruin, is approximately 300 m to the west of

the site and it seems to be one of the cells mentioned by Féderlin. The other,

in a state of total deterioration, is located approximately 350 m east of themonastery, just near the road.

Soubiba of the Bessians (Site H in Fig. 1)

This site is located approximately 150 m north of Nahal Perat. It extends over

2.5 dunam and its walls are preserved to an height of 2 m. It is difficult to

follow any contours of walls on the ground, but the excavation of an artificial

canal along the western edge of the site exposed mosaic pavements, walls androoms. The abundant yield of finds includes a large variety of Byzantine pot-

tery, glass and roof tiles. South of the site, in an area stretching down to Nahal

Perat, two cells were uncovered.

The laura of Peter (Site I in Fig. 1)

The laura is located approximately 300 m to the south of Nahal Perat and its

identification as the Laura of Peter, mentioned in John Moschus’ Pratum, is

due to Féderlin. The laura (Fig. 3 and Phot. 7) is rectangular in shape, mea-

suring 26.2 × 24.7 m, with an opening 1.6 m wide in the eastern wall. The

entrance leads into a courtyard, which is surrounded by at least 15 rooms,

each measuring 3.3 × 3.5 to 4 m on average. The north-western and north-

eastern corners are particularly prominent, reaching a height of up to two

meters from the ground level, and it can be assumed that a pair of watchtow-

ers rose here. Near the entrance there is a room measuring 1.5 × 2.8 m (inner

measures) that was presumably used by the gatekeeper. Five meters east of

the eastern wall of the complex there are the foundations of a building mea-

suring 7.5 × 4.65 m. Féderlin believed that this structure served as a chapel27.

Out of four monastic cells noticed by Féderlin in the proximity of the com-

plex, our expedition identified two: one is 40 m north-east of the central struc-

ture and the second, whose foundation (6.4 × 4.9 m) is well preserved, is

approximately 30 m to the south.

27. Féderlin 1903, 133,197.


10/20

O. SION254

Unidentified site (Site J in Fig. 1)

This site is described by Féderlin as an enclosure near the monastery of

“Soubiba of the Bessians”28. It is situated north of Nahal Perat, near to the

modern aqueduct leading south from ‘Ein el-Beida. The site is “hidden” be-cause it is located east of and close to the local mountain ridge. At the center

of the site there is a rectangular building measuring 75 × 50 m, whose walls

are preserved to a height of only 0.2-0.3 m, as a result of intensive looting of

stone for the purpose of house building in Jericho.

The structure has two distinct parts (Fig. 4). The northern section mea-

sures 60 × 50 m. Ten rooms measuring 5 × 3.5 to 5 m are attached to the east-

ern wall of the building. Next to the northern wall of the structure is a room

paved in mosaic, measuring 15 × 7 m. In the middle there are three structures

of similar sizes (13×

7 m), oriented to the east. Possibly one of them servedas a church. Four rooms were surveyed in the western side and three more in

the southern side. A building measuring 13 × 8.5 m is attached to the middle

of the southern wall. The second section of the complex looks like a court-

yard and no remains of building were found in it. Another site, measuring 15

× 15 m – probably a small industrial site – was found approximately 100 m to

the south-west. Abundant refuses of metal slags were found in the debris.

Fig. 3 The plan of the Monastery of Petros.

28. Féderlin 1903, 300.


11/20


Hermit cells in the desert of the Jordan

From the description in the Life of Gerasimus29

the laura of Gerasimus countedabout 70 monastic cells. It can be assumed that by the term “Laura of

Gerasimus” the writer referred to all the cells in the area of the monastery, since

the sources tell us of additional lauras. The survey revealed approximately sev-

enty cells, to which we must add twenty more cells discovered by Féderlin

which do not exist any more. Seventeen cells are scattered around Tell Jajula

(E) and others east of Khirbet Mafjar (C). A full picture points at a total of ap-

proximately 90 cells. The central group includes 44 cells (Fig. 5), which are

scattered on a stretch of approximately 2 km on the south of Nahal Perat (ex-

cept for two) and north of Deir Hajla on a one kilometer wide strip.

The cells are spread along the local water sheds at distances of 50-150 m

from each other. A network of paths connects the cells together, and the mod-

erate topography and sparse vegetation allow free access from one place to the

other. The cells were built on a foundation of hard rock – the gypsum “steps”.

Except for three which are hewn in the rock, most of the cells are built of lo-

cal stones that were quarried from the same natural layers of gypsum. The

29. Full references in Patrich - Arubas - Agur 1993, 277.

Fig. 4 The Soubiba of the Bessians – plan.


12/20

O. SION256

Fig. 5 The map of the central group of cells in the Jordan Desert.

quarrying sites from which the stones had been taken were found almost be-

side every single cell. A physical connection between the monasteries and the

cells was not found, even though the location of the monasteries at the fringe


13/20


30. Hirschfeld 1991.

31. Patrich - Arubas - Agur 1993.

of the cells is prominent. It is interesting to note that there were no monastic

cells in the palm grove either in the Byzantine Period or at the time of the new

laura (see below).

The laura of Gerasimus

The laura of Gerasimus is located around the monastery of Deir Hajla and to

the east of it. The laura cells were surveyed and described by Hirschfeld30. In

our survey five additional cells were added (Fig. 6, cells 2, 5, 8, 10 and 11).

Pottery of the Byzantine Period was found in all cells. Except for cell 2 that

was built, all cells were hewn in the soft rock.

Cell 2: The cell measures 4 × 4 m and is located on the bank of WadiNukheil. Potsherds are scattered in a radius of ten meters from its center.

Cell 5: A rock-hewn cell that was partially preserved due to the collaps-

ing of rocks. The surviving internal space measures 2.5 × 2 m. Two niches

were carved in the southern wall of the cell.

Cell 8: The cell is located in the northern side of the wadi, next to a local

waterfall. It measures 6.4 × 3.2 m and it is divided into two rooms. A narrow

corridor leads from the inner room to an exit opening into the river bed.

Niches are carved in all the walls (Phot. 8).

Cells 10-11: These cells have collapsed, but the signs of the hewing, thehollows in the debris and the sherds testify that these were indeed cells.

Additional monastic cells

A group of four collapsed cells was discovered approximately 2 km to the

north of the Dead Sea (map reference 18320 13310). The cells are carved in

the huwar formation, underneath the gypsum layers which create a typical

plateau landscape. The cells are in ruins and all that can be seen is carved

walls and scattered sherds.

On the western side of the road leading to the Dead Sea, Patrich31 found

and excavated a group of four rock-hewn cells and a reservoir (at ‘Ein Abu

Mahmud). Possibly the two groups of cells were connected to form a single

laura.


14/20

O. SION258

Fig. 6 Deir Hajla - monastic cells.

From a concentration of 44 cells, approximately 19 could be measured

and divided into three groups of different sizes (table 1 and Fig. 7). The first

group includes ten cells that can be divided according to their size into two

sub-groups: up to 36 m2 (A1) and between 40 and 65 m2 (A2). The second

group includes five cells measuring 90-120 m2 (B). The third group includes

four large cells measuring 140 m2 and more.

Forty of the 44 cells were built, three hewn in the rock, while the building

of one is unclear. The number of rooms was usually more than one. In some

of the cells an enclosed courtyard can be noticed. The commonest lengths of

the courtyards were 6.5 m, 12.5 m and 16.5 m. The commonest widths range

between 6 × 4.5 and between 9.5 × 10.5 m.


15/20


The “New laura” in ‘Ein Hajla

The end of the 19th century brought a revival to some of the monasteries inthe Judean desert and in the desert of the Jordan, such as the monasteries of

Sabas, St. George, Qarantal, Deir Hajla and Qasr el-Yahud32. This lead to the

refoundation of the laura in the ‘Ein Hajla area. The research of the modern

cells may contribute to the study of the lauras of the Byzantine Period.

The survey of the buildings located in the palm grove east of ‘Ein Hajla

and around it, revealed two major groups. One (Fig. 8: 1-5 and 9) includes

32. Hirschfeld 1992, 237.

Fig. 7 Monastic cells in the Jordan Desert – plan.


16/20

O. SION260

modern structures of three rooms or more whose walls were whitewashed

inside and outside. Most of them had a tabun abutting to a structure 2 m wide

and 2.5 m high. The second group included buildings with only one or two

rooms. These buildings are usually not whitewashed, they do not have tabuns

and they are located around the palm grove. Not a single one was found

within the grove (Fig. 2: 6-8, 11).From the testimony of local monks and of the inhabitants of the area

we learn that the buildings of the first group were used by farmers who

lived there with their families and farmed the land surrounding the springs,

while the buildings of the second group were used by hermits. The distance

between the cells ranges between 50 and 150 m and the size of an average

cell is 23.9 m2 (table 2 and Fig. 9). The cells were built of blocks cut from

the gypsum layers in the area. The walls, whose width varies between 0.5

and 0.3 m, were bound together with locally made mortar and were rarely

whitewashed. The frames of windows and doors were strengthened with

Fig. 8 The New Laura cells.


17/20


Fig. 9 The New Laura cells – plan.


18/20

O. SION262

branches of poplar and tamarisk. The ceiling is made of wood beams, laid

lengthwise and topped with rush mats coated with chalky lime.

Discussion and conclusion

The crowding of the monasteries and hermitages in the desert of the Jordan

makes their identification difficult, since their exact location is not stated in

the historical sources and the excavator ’s spade has not yet dug into them.

Of 14 sites that were identified as monasteries, only in four cases the iden-

tification seems a definite one: the monasteries of Elias in Khirbet Mafjar and

Tell Mafjar (C and D), the monastery near the church of St. John the Baptist

(N) and the church at ‘Ein Nitle, i.e. the church of Galgala (E).No convincing arguments were offered for the identification of site G as

the laura of the Aeliotes. This identification contrasts with the opinions of

Vailhé and Chitty33. Another site, identified by Féderlin with the remains of the

monastery of Chorembe, should be found between the laura of the Aeliotes and

the monastery of Galgala, but it cannot be identified in this area that went

through a great many changes, mainly as a result of agricultural activity.

The core of the laura of Calamon can presumably be identified, as sug-

gested by Féderlin, with the cistern and the decayed remains east of ‘Ein Hajla

(Fig. 1, site K).The lack of Byzantine finds in the area of the modern monastery of ‘Ein

Hajla and around it (M) makes it difficult to accept the assumption that the

monastery of Gerasimus was located there. It also seems that Féderlin’s hy-

pothesis about the core of the Laura of Gerasimus being located 350 m east

of the modern monastery cannot be true, for the finds in that area are identi-

cal to those from the other cells. Therefore, it appears that the monastery of

Gerasimus should be searched for in one of the sites north of the current mon-

astery, perhaps in the closest one, site L. As for the monastery of the Towers,

if we should attempt to conclude which of the surveyed sites offers the most

suitable identification, we would choose site I, identified by Féderlin with the

Laura of Peter, because of the remains of towers which remind us of its name.

Twelve out of the fifteen sites were tentatively identified or at least asso-

ciated to one of the known names of monasteries. The remaining three – the

monastery of Zosimus, Neelkeraba of the Jordan and the laura of Kopratha –

are only known from the hagiographical sources34.

33. Vailhé 1898, 106-116; Chitty 1966, 149.

34. Hirschfeld 1990, 79.


19/20


By the end of the survey of the area, we have achieved a full picture of

the status quaestionis in the issue of the developement of monasticism in the

desert of the Jordan. This picture is based upon the summary of a hundred

years of research in the area and opens the way for the next step in theresearch.

Table 1 The measurements of the monastic cells of the central groups in the

Jordan Desert

Group CellNumber

67

3436101117264244

813151629

9253037

Area(sqm)

31.3631.5035.7526.0064.0056.2556.1252.2048.0045.75

118.75100.00

93.7591.35

114.00248.00156.75189.75142.80

Notes

Base of cell well preservedThe eastern wall is small

Base of cell well preserved

*The cell is partially carved

Center of Laura, smallmonastery?

Measurements(meters)

6.4 × 4.94.5 × 7.06.5 × 5.56.5 × 4.08.0 × 8.07.5 × 7.59.2 × 6.19.0 × 5.86.0 × 8.07.5 × 6.1

12.5 × 9.510.0 × 10.012.5 × 7.510.5 × 8.712.0 × 9.517.6 × 14.116.5 × 9.516.5 × 11.514.0 × 10.2

Number of rooms

12not clear not clear 2 + yard1more than 1not clear not clear not clear 3more than 1more than 1more than 1room + yard7 + yardroom + yard4 + yardmore than 1

* It is possible that there was a courtyard facing north, but it is not clear.

Table 2 The measurements of the monastic cells of the central groups in the

Jordan Desert

CellNumber

678

1011121314

Area(sqm)

16.8120.1625.3041.2519.6028.5014.40

?

NotesMeasurements(meters)

4.1 × 4.14.8 × 4.25.8 × 4.67.5 × 5.54.9 × 4.07.5 × 3.84.5 × 3.2

?

Number of rooms

1122111?

Group

A1

A2

B

C


20/20

O. SION264

References

Augustinoviπ P.A., 1951: Gerico e dintorni, Gerusalemme.Bar-Adon P., 1972: “The Survey in the Judean Desert and Jericho Valley”, in M. Cochavi (ed.),

Judea, Samaria and Golan, Archaeological Survey in the year 5728, Jerusalem, 92-149(Hebrew).

Baramki D.C., 1949-1951: “The Excavations at Khirbet en-Nitla”, in J.L. Kelso - D.C.Baramki (eds.), “Excavations at New Testament Jericho and Khirbet en Nitla”, Annual of the American School of Oriental Research 29-30, 50-52.

Chitty D.J., 1966: The Desert a City, An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian Palestinian Monasticism Under the Christian Empire, Oxford.

Conder C.R. - Kitchener H.H., 1883: The Survey of Western Palestine, III: Judea, London.Féderlin J.L., 1903: “Recherches sur les laures et monastères de la plaine du Jourdain et du

désert de Jérusalem”, La Terre Sainte 20, 117-120; 132-134; 148-150; 180-182; 196-199;299-301; 309-311; 328-331.

Guérin M.V., 1874: Description geographique, historique et arché ologique de la Palestine, I:

Samaria, Paris.Hirschfeld Y., 1990: “List of the Byzantine Monasteries in the Judean Desert”, G.C. Bottini -

L. Di Segni - E. Alliata (eds.), Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land. New Discoveries.Archaeological Essays in Honour of Virgilio C. Corbo, Jerusalem, 1-90.

Hirschfeld Y., 1991: “Gerasimus and his Laura in the Jordan Valley”, Revue Biblique 98, 419-430.

Hirschfeld Y., 1992: The Judean Desert Monasteries in the Byzantine Period , New Haven -London.

Johannes Moschus: Pratum Spirituale (PG 83, 3, cols. 2847-3116).Patrich J. - Arubas B. - Agur B., 1993: “Monastic Cells in the Desert of Gerasimus near the

Jordan”, in F. Manns - E. Alliata (eds.), Early Christianity in Context. Monuments and Documents, Jerusalem 1993, 277-296.

Schneider A.M., 1938: “Das Kalamon-Kloster in der Jerichoeben”, Oriens Christianus 35, 39-43.

Sion O., 1992: “A Mosaic Precinct in Khirbet Handumah”, Liber Annuus 42, 279-287.Vailhé S., 1898: “Les Laures de Saint Gerasime et de Calamon”, Echos d ’Orient 2, 106-119.Vita Charitonis, 1941: G. Garitte (ed.), “La vie pr émétaphrastique de S. Chariton”, Bulletin de

l’ Institut historique Belge de Rome 21, 16-46.

Ofer Sion

Israel Antiquities Authority

Os Mosteiros No Deserto Da Jordania

Documents

Transcript of Os Mosteiros No Deserto Da Jordania