En Haseva

Aerial View of En Haseva

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Biblewalks.com

Names

Transliterated Name	Source	Name
En Haseva	Hebrew
Mezad Hazeva	Hebrew
Ain Husub	Arabic	اين هوسوب
Hosob	German (Musil)
Tamara	Latin
Thamana	Latin
Thamaro
Tamar	Biblical Hebrew

Introduction

‘En Hazeva, situated in the Arava ~38 km. south of the Dead Sea, contains remains from the Late Iron Age I, IIa, and IIb as well as a Roman Fort that appears to be associated with the Diocletianic military build-up in the region (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019). It also has levels of Nabatean, Byzantine, and Early Arab occupation. Identification of the site with Latin Tamara is widely accepted (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019) - perhaps with Biblical Tamar as well. The site was excavated by R. Cohen and Y. Israel between 1987 and 1994-1995 but a final report was not published before Rudolph Cohen passed away in 2006. Tali Erickson-Gini is working on a Final Publication.

Maps and Plans

Maps and Plans

Artist's depiction of the Middle Fortress at En Haseva from Cohen and Yisrael (1995)

The middle fortress (Stratum 5) from the ninth-eighth centuries BCE occupies roughly four times the areal extent of contemporaneous Negev fortresses. Perhaps the site should be regarded as a small administrative city, like the Judean fortified city of Tel Beersheba, rather than a large fortress. Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

Cohen and Yisrael (1995)
Plan of fortresses at En Haseva from Stern et al (1993 v. 2)

Mezad Hazeva: plan of the Roman fortress and the two Iron Age fortresses

Stern et. al. (1993)
Plan of En Haseva from Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Figure 4

The eastern part of the camp, plan

JW: locations

Room 45 - upper right

Wall 785 - mid right

Room 53 - bottom center

Wall W578 - bottom right

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Photos

Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate - photo by Jefferson Williams

Digital Theodolite Shot of Tilted Iron Age Gate Wall at En Hatseva

Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023

Chronology

Stratigraphy

Tentative, modified, and unverified Stratigraphy initially from here whose numbering differs from earlier publications is presented below:

Stratum	Period	Approximate Dates	Comments
1b	Modern	1900-	Aqueduct, well, police station, Kibbutz Ir-Ovot (1967- 1980s) In modern times, the British authorities paved a road across this part of the site. Traces of the road can still be discerned in the upper layers of the balks over the principia (headquarters) of the camp (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019)
1a	Early Islamic	8th - 9th centuries CE	During the Early Islamic period, in the eighth–ninth centuries CE, the bathhouse was reoccupied and converted into domestic quarters, and water channels that led to nearby fields were constructed over the ruins of the camp (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019)
2	Byzantine	4th-7th centuries CE
3	Byzantine ?	4rd-6th centuries CE	Three phases of construction and occupation were identified in the camp (Erickson-Gini 2010:97–99). The camp appears to have been built around the time that the Diocletianic fort was constructed on the tell, in the late third or early fourth century CE. It was devastated in the earthquake of 363 CE, which damaged the bathhouse and the fort as well. The camp was subsequently reconstructed and remained in use until the sometime in the sixth century CE. A second earthquake, in the sixth century CE, appears to have destroyed the second phase of the structure and the bathhouse, and subsequently they were both abandoned (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019)
4	Roman	3rd-4th centuries CE	Three phases of construction and occupation were identified in the camp (Erickson-Gini 2010:97–99). The camp appears to have been built around the time that the Diocletianic fort was constructed on the tell, in the late third or early fourth century CE. It was devastated in the earthquake of 363 CE, which damaged the bathhouse and the fort as well. (Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes, 2019)
5	Nabatean	1st century BCE-1st century CE
6		7th-6th centuries BCE	Fortress apparently concurrent with Edomite Shrine - Stratum 4 of Cohen and Yisrael (1995)
7b		8th century BCE	Fortress
7a	Late Iron Age IIa	9th-8th centuries BCE	The Middle Fortress - Stratum 5 of Cohen and Yisrael (1995)
8	Late Iron Age I	10th century BCE	The Early Fortress - Stratum 6 of Cohen and Yisrael (1995)

The Iron Age in the Southern Levant

Southern Amos Quake - 8th century BCE

Maps and Plans

Artist's depiction of the Middle Fortress at En Haseva from Cohen and Yisrael (1995)

The middle fortress (Stratum 5) from the ninth-eighth centuries BCE occupies roughly four times the areal extent of contemporaneous Negev fortresses. Perhaps the site should be regarded as a small administrative city, like the Judean fortified city of Tel Beersheba, rather than a large fortress. Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

Cohen and Yisrael (1995)

Photos

Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate - photo by Jefferson Williams

Digital Theodolite Shot of Tilted Iron Age Gate Wall at En Hatseva

Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023

Cohen and Yisrael (1995) suggested that the Iron Age II "Middle Fortress" was most likely damaged by a mid 8th century BCE earthquake mentioned in the Book of Amos (1:1). The fortress, dated from ceramics to the 8th-9th centuries BCE, suffered final destruction via either human agency or an earthquake. Cohen and Yisrael (1995) dated earthquake damage to ca. 760 BCE relying on historical texts and comparison to archaeoseismic damage at other sites rather than precise archaeological dating from En Haseva and they dated it's final destruction by human agency to ~735 BCE - also based on historical texts. Austin et al (2000) (and apparently others) have suggested that The tilted wall

of En Hatseva was tilted by the Amos Quake although a question remains why the other walls were not tilted. Roberts (2012:187-189) notes that floors were absent in the casemate walls which suggests an alternative theory for the wall tilt - poor construction led to differential subsidence.

Roberts (2012)

from Roberts (2012:187-189)

21. 'Haseva

‘En Haseva (Tamar) stood as a massive 100m x 100m Iron Age fortress (or fortified city) on the southern border of ancient Judah about 35 km south of the Dead Sea. While excavation began in the early 1970’s, it was only in 1987 that the excavations, directed by Rudolph Cohen and Yigal Yisrael, uncovered an Iron Age fortress.135 In Cohen’s 1993 article that updated the discovery of the Iron Age fortress, he also noted that the end of strata 2, the Late Roman Period (third-fourth century CE) could have been due to the earthquake of 363 CE though he did not supply any evidence for his suggestion.¹³⁶ While early on, there was very little pottery to help date the Iron Age strata, more discoveries helped excavators conclude that Stratum 5 was built in the ninth-eighth century rather than a century later as they previously thought. towers at the corners and an offset-inset casemate wall built of dressed stones. These walls surround a large courtyard with a four-room gate near the northeastern corner of the fortress with some storehouses and granaries near an inner courtyard surrounded by casemate walls. An interesting feature of the site is the absence of floors. In both the storehouses and in the casemate walls floors are absent and complete vessels were found in only two of the casemate rooms near the gate and in the granaries.

Regarding the end of Stratum V, the excavators suggest an earthquake, “Based on the destruction debris and its configuration, we believe that the quake mentioned in Amos and Zechariah was responsible for the destruction of…the gate complex…”¹³⁷ They do not list reasons other than the foundation failure associated with the uneven compaction of the substrate.

There is little to evaluate Cohen and Yisrael’s view publication was limited to small reports and Cohen’s untimely death inhibited a full publication of the results though some reevaluation has taken place. For example, Nadav Na’aman has argued that the builders of Stratum V were not Judean kings, but Assyrians in the late eighth century.¹³⁸ Na’aman sees three Assyrian forts in the Negev, at {En Haseva, in Wadi {Aravah near the copper mines, and on the road to the Gulf of Eilat in addition to those at Kadesh Barnea and Tell el-Kheleifeh. Na’aman’s suggestion of a later genesis in the building of {En H¸asΩeva’s fortress would certainly dismiss its fate at the hands of an earthquake though Na’aman does not explain how the Stratum V would have ended.¹³⁹ David Ussishkin approaches stratum 5 from a different perspective, arguing that the casemate wall of the fortress and its monumental gate form the substructure of the complex and not the superstructure.¹⁴⁰ He notes, more surprising, that this conclusion was reached with the excavators during a tour of the site during excavations of the stratum 5 gate. In sum, a superstructure of mostly mudbrick would sit on top of the stone substructure. Usshiskin sees evidence of a similar type of construction at other Iron II locations such as a courtyard gate at Megiddo dating to the VA-IVB Southern Palace as well as the inner gatehouse at Lachish from Level IV-III.¹⁴¹ Ussishkin raises some interesting points about the role of the stone walls and how this could affect earthquake interpretations. The parallel fortresses he provides would argue against Na’aman’s proposal of an Assyrian fortress as well as the date of its construction. All this to say, the fortress remains inconclusive for earthquake damage.

Footnotes

136 Rudolph Cohen, “The Fortress at 'En 'Haseva,” BA 57 (1994): 203-214. On the 363 CE earthquake, see Kenneth W. Russell, “The Earthquake of May 19, A.D. 363,” BASOR 238 (1980): 47–64; Kenneth W. Russell, “The Earthquake Chronology of Palestine and Northwest Arabia from the 2nd Through the Mid-9th Century A.D.,” BASOR 260 (1985): 37–59.

137 Cohen and Yisrael, “The Iron Age Fortreses,” 231. Austin et al., “Amos’s Earthquake,” 661-662, list ‘En Haseva as one of the sites that corroborates evidence of earthquake damage.

138 Nadav Na’aman, “Notes on the Excavation of {Ein HasΩeva,” Qadmoniot 30 (1997): 60 (Hebrew); Nadav Na’aman, “An Assyrian Residence at Ramat RahΩel?,” TA 28 (2001): 260-280.

139 To be fair, stratum 4 dates to the seventh-sixth centuries so a tight sequence is not needed to explain the end of stratum 5 before stratum 4 began.

140 David Ussishkin, “{En H¸asΩeva: On the Gate of the Iron Age II Fortress,” TA 37 (2010): 246-253.

141 David Ussishkin, “The City-Gate Complex: A Synopsis of the Stratigraphy and Architecture,” in The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 22). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 2004), 504–524.

Earthquake from 324 CE to early 6th century CE - possibly Southern Cyril Quake (363 CE)

Maps and Plans

Plan of En Haseva from Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Figure 4

The eastern part of the camp, plan

JW: locations

Room 45 - upper right

Wall 785 - mid right

Room 53 - bottom center

Wall W578 - bottom right

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Coins below collapsed arches in Room 45 provide an apparent terminus post quem of 324 CE while coins above an associated floor date from the first half of the 4th century to the early 6th century CE. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) discussed the 4th century earthquake as follows:

Three phases of construction and occupation were identified in the camp (Erickson-Gini 2010:97–99). The camp appears to have been built around the time that the Diocletianic fort was constructed on the tell, in the late third or early fourth century CE. It was devastated in the earthquake of 363 CE, which damaged the bathhouse and the fort as well. The camp was subsequently reconstructed and remained in use until the sometime in the sixth century CE.

The 2003 Excavation

Room 45

A north–south wall (W785), running through the center of the room was exposed to its full length. The wall was made up of pilasters and collapsed arches over a layer of dark soil and ash (Figs. 6

Figure 6

Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking west

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

, 7

Figure 7

Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking east.

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

). Coins discovered under the arches included a Roman Provincial coin from the third century CE (IAA 97941), coins of Licinius I (320 CE; IAA 97946) and Constantine I (324 CE; IAA 97937), and a Late Roman coin from 324 CE (IAA 97936).

The soil over the Room’s floor (L300/L303) contained coins, mainly from the fourth century CE, attributed to both the first phase of the structure (late third or early fourth century to the earthquake of 363 CE) and its second phase (from 363 CE until the early sixth century CE). These included coins of Arcadius (383 CE; IAA 97942) and Theodosius (379 CE; IAA 97940), as well as several other Late Roman coins of the early fourth century CE (IAA 97939, 97944, 97945, 97947, 97948). A Late Roman coin from 346 CE was recovered on the surface of the site elsewhere in the structure (IAA 97949).

Room 53

According to the 1994–1995 field notes by Y. Kalman, Area E supervisor, Room 53 was filled with collapsed debris, stone slabs that were used for roofing, arch stones and other building stones. The structure probably collapsed in the 363 CE earthquake.

The 2009–2010 Excavations

The wall running down the center of the structure and dividing it into two (W578; Fig. 14)—probably a stylobate or a foundation for a series of arches—appears to have been constructed in the second, post-363 CE phase of the camp. This wall is essentially an extension of W785, running down the center of Room 45. This suggests that the original gatehouse was blocked, probably after it was damaged in the earthquake, and the entrance to the camp was removed to a different location.

6th century CE Earthquake

Maps and Plans

Plan of En Haseva from Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Figure 4

The eastern part of the camp, plan

JW: locations

Room 45 - upper right

Wall 790 - upper right

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) discussed the 6th century earthquake as follows:

The 2003 Excavation

Room 45

Evidence of damage caused by the earthquake that occurred in the sixth century CE was found in the collapse of the western wall of Room 45 (W790); it fell into an open space west of the room (L600). Here, two complete oil lamps were revealed that had apparently sat in a niche in the wall. One belongs to a type that is commonly found in contexts from the first half of the fifth century CE (Fig. 8:1). The other is a Byzantine sandal lamp, commonly found in deposits from the second half of the fifth century CE (Fig. 8:2).

Seismic Effects

Southern Amos Quake - 8th century BCE

Tilted Wall at Fortress Gate

Digital Theodolite Shot of Tilted Iron Age Gate Wall at En Hatseva

Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023

Earthquake from 324 CE to early 6th century CE - possibly Southern Cyril Quake (363 CE)

Room 45 - Collapsed Arches - well dated
Room 53 - filled with collapsed debris, stone slabs that were used for roofing, arch stones and other building stones. - not as well dated
Probable Gatehouse damage

6th century CE Earthquake

Room 45 - Western Wall collapsed to the west

Intensity Estimates

Southern Amos Quake - 8th century BCE

Earthquake Archeological Effects chart

Earthquake Archeological Effects (EAE)

Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

Effect	Description	Intensity
Tilted Wall	Fortress Gate Digital Theodolite Shot of Tilted Iron Age Gate Wall at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023	VI +

The archeoseismic evidence requires a minimum Intensity of VI (6) when using the Earthquake Archeological Effects chart of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224 big pdf).

Earthquake from 324 CE to early 6th century CE - possibly Southern Cyril Quake (363 CE)

Earthquake Archeological Effects chart

Earthquake Archeological Effects (EAE)

Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

Effect	Description	Intensity
Collapsed Arches	Room 45 - Figs. 6 Figure 6 Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking west Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) and 7 Figure 7 Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking east. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) of Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019)	VI +
Collapsed Walls	Based on an earlier excavation report, Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) characterize Room 53 as filled with collapsed debris, stone slabs that were used for roofing, arch stones and other building stones. Note - this archaeoseismic evidence is not as well dated as the Collapsed Arches	VIII +

The archeoseismic evidence requires a minimum Intensity of VIII (8) when using the Earthquake Archeological Effects chart of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224 big pdf).

6th century CE Earthquake

Earthquake Archeological Effects chart

Earthquake Archeological Effects (EAE)

Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224)

Effect	Description	Intensity
Collapsed Walls	Western Wall of Room 45 collapsed to the west	VIII +

The archeoseismic evidence requires a minimum Intensity of VIII (8) when using the Earthquake Archeological Effects chart of Rodríguez-Pascua et al (2013: 221-224 big pdf).

Surveys

Drone Surveys

Description	Flight Date	Pilot	Processing	Downloadable Link
Entire Site	12 Jan. 2023	Jefferson Williams	ODM - no GCPs	Right Click to download. Then unzip

Photos

Orthophoto

Orthophoto of En Haseva

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

From Drone Survey by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023

Long Shots and Drone Shots

Photos
Description	Photo	Comments
Oblique Aerial Shot of Entire Site	Oblique Aerial Shot of entire excavated site of En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Cropped Oblique Aerial Shot of Entire Site	Cropped Oblique Aerial Shot of entire excavated site of En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Oblique Aerial Shot of Iron Age Gate	Oblique Aerial Shot of Iron Age Gate at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 Jan. 2023
Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate	Tilted Iron Age Wall at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 Jan. 2023
Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Theodolite)	Digital Theodolite Shot of Side View Tilted Iron Age Wall at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Orientation Measurement (Az = 51°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Compass)	Orientation Measurement (Az = 51°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Tilt Measurement (8.6°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Theodolite)	Digital Theodolite Measurement of Tilt of 8.6° of Iron Age Wall at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Tilt Measurement (7°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Clinometer)	Tilt Measurement of Tilt of 7° of Iron Age Wall at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Slumped and Faulted Walls	Slumped and Faulted Walls at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023
Slumped and Faulted Walls (Digital Theodolite)	Digital Theodolite Shot of Slumped and Faulted Walls at En Hatseva Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023

Notes and Further Reading

References

Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019), Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Volume 131

Hamai (2016), Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Volume 128

Erickson-Gini, T. (2010). Nabataean settlement and self-organized economy in The Central Negev: crisis and renewal, Archaeopress.

Cohen, R. (1994). "The Fortresses at En Haseva." The Biblical Archaeologist 57(4): 203-214.

Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael (1995). "The Iron Age Fortresses at En Haseva." The Biblical Archaeologist 58(4): 223-235.

Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael (1995). "The Iron Age Fortresses at En Haseva." The Biblical Archaeologist 58(4): 223-235.

Aharoni, Y. (1967). "Forerunners of the Limes: Iron Age Fortresses in the Negev." Israel Exploration Journal 17(1): 1-17.

Cohen and Israel (1990) 'En Hazeva Summary Report on Excavations at 'En Hazeva - Excavations and Surveys in Israel Vol.15:110-116 - IAA

Musil A. 1907. Arabia Petraea II: Edom––Topographischer Reisebericht. Vienna.

Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael "On the Road to Edom: Discoveries from En Hazeva." Israel Museum Catalogue(370).

Aharoni, Y. (1963). "Tamar and the Roads to Elath." Israel Exploration Journal: 30-42.

Cohen R. 1984. Ma‘ale Safir. ESI 2:64–65.

Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael "On the Road to Edom: Discoveries from En Hazeva." Israel Museum Catalogue(370).

Ein Hatzeva-an Israelite Fortress on the Border with Edom - Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Blossoming Rose - Official curators of the Biblical Tamar Park at En Haseva

website with info on En Haseva

En Haseva (aka Biblical Tamar) at biblewalks.com