227NOTES AND NEWS

Zabala to a range within the first centuryBCE and the first century CEo While thefunction of the various buildings remainsunknown, as does the nature of the Romansettlement on the site, it is possible thatthe site might have functioned as a smallagricultural village, most probably con-nected with the larger Roman city at BethShean (Scythopolis).

Taxel (pottery analysis) and S. Pavel (pho-

tography).

The Excavations (fig. 1)Five main areas were chosen for excava-tion. The areas were selected on the basisof our research questions and goals (seedetails below). Remains dating from theByzantine and Roman periods (strata IIIand II of Aharoni's excavation) werefound in all five areas. We also foundsmall remains dating from the Iron Age II,sherds and seal impressions dating fromthe Persian and Hellenistic periods, andcoins dating from the Hellenistic, Roman,Byzantine and Abbasid periods.

SUSAN L. COHEN

Ramat Rabel, 2005

The first season of the renewed excavationsat Ramat Ral:lel was conducted duringJuly-August 2005 (license nos. G-19/2004,G-17/2005). The expedition is directed byOded Lipschits@d Manfred Oeming underthe auspices of the Institute of Archaeologyof Tel Aviv University, and the Theological

Seminary (Wissenschaftlich- TheologischesSeminar) and the Faculty for Jewish Studies(Hochschule flir jiidische Studien) at Hei-delberg University. A total of 180 volunteersparticipated in our three-week-long season,including 20 students from Heidelberg Uni-versity. Two students from Tunisia and astudent from Indonesia also took part. Anumber of German and British volunteerswere recruited by the German research teamArbeitsgruppe flir Biblische Archiiologie(Wort+Wissen). Other volunteers camefrom the U.S., Canada, Germany, England,France, Finland, the Czech Republic, Po-land and Israel.

The excavation team included Y. Gadot(field director), B. Arubas (stratigraphicalanalysis and surveying), G Cinamon (assis-tant field director), L. Freud (registration),D. Davis (assistance in registration), N.Shimon, V. Zlatkovski, L. Marom, G.Margalit, B. Babaiev and S. Zach (area su-pervisors), A. Achiman (administration), O.Sergey (team coordinator), P. van der Veen(academic program), Y:-Pharhi (coins), I.

Area A (fig. 2)This area is located in the north-easternp'artof the site, adjacent to tJIe .Ln..e;.ofth~outer wall, as reconstructed by Aharoni(fig. 1). T~ excavation area borders onareas previously excavated by Y. Aharoniin 1962 and by G. Barkay in 1984.Aharoni assumed that the eastern fortifi-cation wall of the outer court is to befound in this locality, where it approachesthe casemate wall of the inner palace.These two features were dated by Aharonito the later part of the Iron Age II (stratumVA). The aim of the re-excavation was toverify the existence of the presumed outerwall at that location, to re-examine thestratigraphic and chronological relation-ship between the outer court and the pal-ace to the south, and to try to reacharchitectural remains of the early Iron IIsettlement, for which there has-been littleevidence until now.

In the western part of the area we dugthrough a modem fill, down to the flat-tened bedrock consisting of soft whitechalk (fig. 3). The flattening of the rockseems to be artificial and the Nari coatingwas missing. Twelve quarried tombs werefound, all but one aligned on a north-

228 NOTES AND NEWS

north-east to south-south-west axis. Thetombs are rectangular (on average:1.9x6 m.). Since they were not excavated,we cannot date them with any precision. Itis possible that the cemetery formed partof the Byzantine complex in the sixth-seventh centuries CE (stratum II), but it ismore likely that it was part of the earliersettlement, dating from the late Late Ro-man period fourth century, stratum III).The tombs were carved out of the rock af-ter it was artificially flattened; hence, thiswork presumably pre-dated the cemetery.

In the eastern part of the area we un-covered wall segments and a plastereddrainage canal incorporated in the bed-rock. Since fhis area had previously beenexcavated by Aharoni and the results wereunpublished, we were unable to date there-exposed features. The plastered canalforms part of an installation that did notsurvive. The quality of the plaster sug-gests that the installation dates from ear-lier than the Hellenistic period. Byzantinepottery was found in the foundationtrenches of the segmented walls. dating

229NOTES AND NEWS

Fig. 2. Plan of area A

BCE, has not been found. Neither did wefind remains of an early Iron Age settle-ment. This runs counter to Aharoni's in-terpretation, although it is still too early to

the walls to the Byzantine period orlater.

The presumed eastern fortificationwall, dating from the seventh century

230 NOTES AND NEWS

Fig. 3. Area A: flattened bedrock and quarried tombs

present firm conclusions. Broadening thearea next season to the west and north willhelp us conclude if this area formed partof a built outer court, if it was indeed forti-fled, and whether an earlier Iron Age set-

#

tlement existed here.

Area B (fig. 4)Area B serves as a section of the lowercourt, oriented north-south. The area (onesquare wide and seven squares long) islocated in the northern part of Aharoni'sStratum VA 'outer court' (fig. 1). Area Bwas chosen in order to re-examineAharoni's reconstruction of a northernouter wall supporting an inner fill, whichin turn was designed to create the flat-tened court. Here, as in the case of Area A,we hoped to locate remains of the earlierIron Age II (stratum VB) settlement, andto reconstruct the natural topography ofthe site prior to the first construction.

Immediately below the surface wereached natural bedrock; hence, all the ev-

idence we found of human activity is con-nected to rock cutting. The most recentfeature in the area is along militarytrench, dating from Israel's 1948 War OIIndependence, which damaged earlier re-mains. The trench was backfilled withthousands of pottery sherds and stone ob-jects that had been discarded there byAharoni.

In the !}orthern part of the section, atthe base of the natural slope, we revealeda small part of an Iron Age quarry, similarto the ones located on the western slopes,which were published by Aharoni (1964:52). Our finds confirm Aharoni's andshow that quarrying had been conductedalong the northern slope as well. A smallassemblage of complete pottery vesselswas found inside the quarry, helpingto date it to the late eighth or seventh cen-tury BCE. A stamped jar handle from anunstratified locus, bearing the namescmn , / il'rnN, may also date from this pe-riod. Identical stamp impressions were

231NOTES AND NEWS

\~t.,

,

tl

1.J10;'"' ~

- ',",' ", c :!,

l,g~7 i..,' - '~!!§j

~~

~4~;;;1~:;,~.."'~ ~';

,

~c

;~:~~cJ

found at Mizpa, Lachish and BethShemesh. Another identical stamp im-pression was published after being pur-chased on the antiquities market (Avigadand Sass 1997: 244-245, no. 665).

In the southern part of the section, in-side Aharoni's 'flattened court', we un-covered the face of the bedrock just belowthe modem surface. Here, too, as in areaA, the surface of the rock was artificiallyflattened and the Nari coating was miss-ing. It seems that the practice of flatteningthe natural terrain was carried out in muchof the site.

Nine rock-cut tombs (c. O.6xl.80 m.;fig. 4) have been found, all dating fromthe Late Roman and Byzantine periods.Six of the tombs are aligned north tosouth, and the other three on a north-north-west to south-south-east axis. Thisgroup of tombs should be seen as part ofthe burial field in area A. The tombs werecut into the rock after it was flattened andthe Nan coating was removed.

The northern outer wall was not lo-cated in this section. We have found noevidence of pre-enclosure activities.

t;

I;~"' ~

,,1.-~

;\,-:~:;,...,:~~,~';;"

~~:';:;::::~;~:;";;::;:;:':..

c"' lCl ;:c~. ~

;" "'L' ~ "-

~;:: " :

'::':" - '-C~

Area Cl (fig. 5)Locatedj~ the south-we~t.f!:ro part .of:tbe:.site (fig. 1), area C1 had already been

.,. excavated twice: first by Aharoni, in1963, and then again by Barkay, in 1984.Since neither published the results ofthese excavations, we have no infonna-tion relating to architectural featuresexposed or removed. Ahar'oni assumedthat the south-western comer of the IronAge palace (stratum VA) was locatedhere. A modem statue, by Ran Morin,reconstructing this presumed comer, waserected there, which prevented us frominvestigating under it.

Our excavations have made it clear

In~ Fig. 4. Plan of area B

232 NOTES AND NEWS

Fig. 5. Plan of area C I

The roofed tunnel A was carved intothe floor of pool 3, thus preventing its use.Carv~d into the bedrock, the tunnel wasroofed with large rectangular stone slabs.It had been cleaned in the previous exca-vations, and we only re-cleaned it. It runson an east-west axis for c. 9.20 m., andthen continues to the north for almost4 m., until it is ~locked by a large stoneslab. The tunnel is large enough to allow aperson to walk through quite comfortably.A square opening in the roof of the tunnel,c. 7.5 m. from the eastern end, must havebeen used for the tunnel's maintenance.

It is impossible to date the water sys-tem as of yet. If it is established that thewater system formed part of the Iron Ageinner citadel, the walls believed byAharoni to serve as casemate walls would

that most of this area was devpted in an-tiquity to storing and transpotting water.We have uncovered the remains of fourplastered reservoirs, three plastered drainsand a roofed tunnel conducting water. Itappears so far that the water system hadtwo stages.

The entire zone was hewn out of rockand was lower than the Iron II fort palaceto the north. The reservoir's walls were ofnatural rock, except for a few built walls.The walls were covered with many layersof plaster. Pools I and 2 were higher thanthe other two pools, and plastered chan-nels were used to drain the water from thehigher pools into the lower ones. Thepools form part of a larger complex,which will only be understood when theexcavation is extended in coming years.

233NOTES AND NEWS

~-

p-~ "1~:iifi

--~ ~j ~""

-:.i ~, ,

,;.. j

o-""'~;, ~

\

"i

~

~

--~.

1~c:,::;;~ ~

,..I

Fig. 6. Plan of area C2

in fact belong to pool 2. On top of that, thewater system occupies an area thatspreads inside and outside the recon-structed citadel. Thus, the reconstructionof the inner citadel's comer at this spot, asAharoni believed, would be called intoquestion.

which connected Jerusalem historicallywith the urban centres in the Shephelahand the coastal plain, and over the roadleading to Bethlehem in the 'south. DuringIsrael's 1948 War of Independence, armytrenches and a large bunker were cut intothe bedrock, destroying early remains.

Area C2 is located on the western edgeof Aharoni's excavation (fig. 1). HereAharoni had exposed a wall that, accord-ing to his reconstruction, was the westernboundary wall of the seventh-century pal-ace fort. By renewing the excavation here

Area C2 (fig. 6)Area C2 is located at the highest part ofthe site, on the edge of the spur overlook-ing north, west and south. The spur has acommanding view over Nal.1al Rephaim,

234 NOTES AND NEWS

Area DLocated in the south-eastern part of thesite and immediately to the south of themodern water pool (fig. I), area D was notpreviously excavated. Our aim in excavat-ing this area, which is close to Aharoni'searly Iron casement wall (stratum VB)and his Persian period main wall, is two-fold: I) to reexamine the entire stratigra-phy of the site, as presented by Aharoni,and 2) to uncover Persian and Iron IIremains, which form Ii continuation ofwhat Aharoni found to the east, so that wecan better understand the site in theseperiods. The numerous Yehud stamp-sealsreported by Aharoni to have been foundjust east of area D make it plausible thatthe area was home to an administrativecentre during the Persian and Hellenisticperiods, from which no architecturalremains have been found to date.

Four squares were excavated this sea-son. We were able to discern three build-ing periods, all characterised byimpressive public architecture.

In the northern part of the area we un-covered a stone pavement made of large

#';stone slabs, as well as a number of seg-mented walls. These remains should bedated to the Late Roman period(Aharoni's stratum III) and the Byzantineperiod (str.atum II). An Abbasid coin,found above the pavement, is, as far as wecan tell, the latest coin found at the site,and represents the last phase of humansettlement at the site before its abandon-ment.

In the southern part of the area we un-covered the walls of a large public build-ing (fig. 7). It was found buried under alarge stone collapse, and only part of thefloor was exposed. A large screen stonewas found resting upon the floor. Next to .

it we revealed the top of a plastered instal-lation that was covered by impressivestone slabs and incorporated into the floor.

we aimed to uncover the Iron Age II wallsthat had been exposed by Aharoni, in aneffort to reevaluate their stratigraphic af-filiation and architectural nature. We alsoexpanded the area to the west, in order todetermine the existence of any Iron Ageremains west of the presumed closingwall. In the forthcoming seasons, the areawill be expanded further to the east andsouth, in order to clarify the stratigraphicand architectural relationship between theIron Age fort located here, the palace andcourt located to the east, and the watersystem to the south (area CI).

Three rectangular burials were foundin the western part of the area, cut into thebedrock. Interestingly, the burials are ori:'ented similarly to the burials in areas Aand B. One of them contained a lead case,with two gold earrings and four iron pins.The case was probably used for a childburial.

Earlier remains included the westernclosing wall, partially excavated byAharoni. The wall (WC50), orientedsouth-north, was built of small to mediumfields tones laid on the bedrock in such away as to create a level surface: wherenatural rock projected, it was incorporatedinto the wall, and in other places up tothree courses of stones were laid. We didnot find a floor that can be associated withthe walls. As the bedrock was just below'the surface, it is reasonable to assume thatthe floors were on a higher level and didnot survive. If so, the walls visible todaywould in fact be the subterranean founda-tions. White patches of what seems to becrushed chalk were found smeared on thebedrock - perhaps the foundation of afloor that existed above.

So far, we have not found any Iron IIarchitectural remains west of Aharoni'sclosing wall, and thus have no evidencethat the palace fort continued further tothe west.

NOTES AND NEWS 235

Fig. 1. Area D: walls of large public building

to cast doubt oncthe existence of an outerfortification wall and on the function ofthis court. Finding the water system at thelocation of the presumed south.easternc_Qrner of thej!1D~r_~<:leJ_(Il!~a.q})_~adsus to suggest that this is not the location ofthe comer and that an alternative recon-struction is necessary. The 2005 season isthe first of many, and we are confident thatmuch more information regarding thequestions presented will surface as ourwork progresses.

The limited exposure of the buildingmakes it difficult to date it or to under-stand its nature and plan. We hope to im-prove our understanding of the building intheJorthcomingseason(s), when we ex-pand the excavation area.

Our return to Ramat &aQel is followedby a need to clarify and reexamine Y.Aharoni's reconstruction of the site andmany of his archaeological and historicalconclusions. So far, our reexamination ofthe outer court (areas A and B) had led us

REFERENCES

Aharoni, Y. et al.1964 Excavations at Ramat Rai.zel, 2. Seasons 1961 and 1962, Rome

Avigad, N. and Sass, B.1997 Corpus of West Semitic Stamps Seals, Jerusalem

ODED LIPSCHITS, MANFRED DEMING. YUVAL GADOT. BENI ARUBAS AND GIL~D CINAMON