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 |
‘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.
Mezad Hazeva (map reference 1734.0242) was established on a hill adjacent to the southern bank of Nahal Hazeva, close to 'En Haseva in the northern Arabah. Researchers who toured the area in the nineteenth century discovered remains near the spring. A Musil, on a visit to the site in 1902, prepared a sketch of the fortress and determined that its plan was square, each of its sides being about 90 m long, with protruding corner towers. He observed another building, adjoining the fortress on the south, that contained several rooms and the remains of a bathhouse to the east. The fortress was severely damaged in 1930, and its original plan could no longer be discerned. In 1932, the site was visited by F. Frank. Subsequently, A. Alt concluded that the large structure at Hazeva was a Roman fortress. N. Glueck, who visited the site in 1943, was of the opinion that the building was a khan established by the Nabateans that the Romans continued to use. He identified Hazeva with Eiseiba (Εισειβα), which appears on a list of settlements in the Negev and the amount of the annual tax imposed on them by the Byzantine authorities (the so-called Beersheba edict; Alt, GIPT, no. 2). B. Mazar and M. Avi-Yonah, who visited Haz~eva in 1950, found several Iron Age sherds in addition to decorated Nabatean potsherds and sherds from the Roman-Byzantine period. Following this discovery, Y. Aharoni proposed identifying Hazeva with biblical Tamar and Roman Tamara. This view was opposed by B. Rothenberg, who noted that no Roman coins earlier than the fourth century CE had been found at the site; he therefore located Roman Tamara at Mezad Tamar (q.v.).
In 1972, excavations were conducted at Mezad Hazeva under the direction of R. Cohen, on behalf of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums. The excavations were renewed from 1987 to 1990, on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, under Cohen's direction.
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) |
Strata | Date | Period | Findings |
1b | 20th Century AD | Modern | · Aqueduct, well, police station
· Kibbutz Ir-Ovot (1967- 1980s) |
1a |
7th-8th Century AD
|
Early Arab | · Buildings, farm |
2 | 4th-7th Century AD | Byzantine | |
3,4 |
2nd-4th Century AD |
Roman | · Square fortress (46m x 46m) with 4 corner towers
· Caravanserai, Bathhouse
|
5 |
1st Century BC- 1st Century AD
|
Nabatean | · Room with store jars under the Roman fortress |
6 |
7th-6th Century BC |
Late 1st temple | · Fortress
· Cult vessels from Edomite shrine · Four-room house
|
7b
|
8th Century BC | 1st temple | · Immense fortress (casemate wall
100m x 100m, 3 towers) · 4 chambers gate
|
7a
|
9th-8th Century BC |
1st temple | · Fortress (casemate wall 50m x 50m)
· 4 chambers gate
|
8 |
10th Century BC (Solomonic)
|
Unified Kingdom | · square fortress |
Stratum | Period | Approximate Dates | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Early Arab | ||
2 | Roman | 2nd-4th c. CE | Remains of a Roman fortress |
3 | Nabatean | 1st-2nd c. CE | |
4 | Iron Age | Iron Age fortress | |
5 | Iron Age | Iron Age fortress |
Stratum | Period | Approximate Dates | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Late Byzantine and Early Islamic | 6th-7th c. CE | |
2 | Late Roman | 3rd-4th c. CE | Remains of a Roman fortress |
3 | Nabatean and Early Roman | 1st-2nd c. CE | |
4 | Iron Age | 6th-7th c. BCE | |
5 | Iron Age | 8th-9th c. BCE | |
6 | Iron Age | 10th c. BCE |
21. 'Haseva
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.
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 (Fig.s 6, 7). 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.
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 Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Tilted Wall | Middle Fortress (Stratum 5 of Cohen) Gate![]() ![]() Stern et. al. (1993) ![]() ![]() Cohen and Yisrael (1995) |
![]() ![]() Foundation failure beneath the inside pier of the fortress gate at `En Haseva. Although the Iron Age fortress gate is superbly constructed of well-hewn stones, individual blocks within the pier cracked on several courses as the foundation compacted differentially. The whole pier of the gate now leans northeastward. The excavators of the gate complex associated destruction debris within the gate complex to damage caused by an earthquake, not foundation failure caused by a continuous process of creep. Austin et al (2000) ![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 ![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 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 (see Fig. 5) of En Hatseva was tilted by one of the Amos Quakes 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. |
Seismic Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Collapsed arches | Room 45![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
![]() ![]() Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking west Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) ![]() ![]() Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking east. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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 (Fig.s 6, 7)- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
Debris containing collapsed walls, arches, and roof | Room 53![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) ![]() ![]() Room 53, plan and sections Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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.- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
|
Blocked gatehouse | Original Gatehouse![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
![]() ![]() Wall 578 and the eastern wall of the gatehouse (W595), looking east. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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.- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
Seismic Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Collapsed wall (collapsed to the west) |
western wall of Room 45 (W790)![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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)- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
Seismic Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments | Intensity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Tilted Wall | Middle Fortress (Stratum 5 of Cohen) Gate![]() ![]() Stern et. al. (1993) ![]() ![]() Cohen and Yisrael (1995) |
![]() ![]() Foundation failure beneath the inside pier of the fortress gate at `En Haseva. Although the Iron Age fortress gate is superbly constructed of well-hewn stones, individual blocks within the pier cracked on several courses as the foundation compacted differentially. The whole pier of the gate now leans northeastward. The excavators of the gate complex associated destruction debris within the gate complex to damage caused by an earthquake, not foundation failure caused by a continuous process of creep. Austin et al (2000) ![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 ![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 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 (see Fig. 5) of En Hatseva was tilted by one of the Amos Quakes 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. | VI + |
Seismic Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments | Intensity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Collapsed arches | Room 45![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
![]() ![]() Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking west Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) ![]() ![]() Line of collapsed arches over a layer of ash in Room 45, looking east. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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 (Fig.s 6, 7)- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
VI + |
Debris containing collapsed walls, arches, and roof | Room 53![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) ![]() ![]() Room 53, plan and sections Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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.- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
VIII + |
Seismic Effect | Location | Figure(s) | Comments | Intensity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Collapsed wall (collapsed to the west) |
western wall of Room 45 (W790)![]() ![]() 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) ![]() ![]() Aerial photo of Area E prior to balk removal, looking northwest Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
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)- Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) |
VIII + |
Description | Flight Date | Pilot | Processing | Downloadable Link |
---|---|---|---|---|
Entire Site | 12 Jan. 2023 | Jefferson Williams | ODM - no GCPs | Right Click to download. Then unzip |
Description | Photo | Comments |
---|---|---|
Oblique Aerial Shot of Entire Site |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Cropped Oblique Aerial Shot of Entire Site |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Oblique Aerial Shot of Iron Age Gate |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 Jan. 2023 |
|
Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 6 Jan. 2023 |
|
Tilted Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Theodolite) |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Orientation Measurement (Az = 51°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Compass) |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Tilt Measurement (8.6°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Digital Theodolite) |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Tilt Measurement (7°) of Wall of Iron Age Gate (Clinometer) |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Slumped and Faulted Walls |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
|
Slumped and Faulted Walls (Digital Theodolite) |
![]() ![]() Photo by Jefferson Williams 12 Jan. 2023 |
Aharoni, Y. (1963). "Tamar and the Roads to Elath." Israel Exploration Journal: 30-42.
Aharoni, Y. (1967). "Forerunners of the Limes: Iron Age Fortresses in the Negev." Israel Exploration Journal 17(1): 1-17.
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Cohen R. 1984. Ma‘ale Safir. ESI 2:64–65.
Cohen and Israel (1990) 'En Hazeva Summary Report on Excavations at 'En Hazeva - Excavations and Surveys in Israel Vol.15:110-116 - IAA
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.
Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael (1995) "On the Road to Edom: Discoveries from En Hazeva." Israel Museum Catalogue(370).
Erickson-Gini, T. (2010). Nabataean settlement and self-organized economy in The Central Negev: crisis and renewal, Archaeopress.
Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019), Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Volume 131
Hamai (2016), Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Volume 128
Musil A. 1907. Arabia Petraea II: Edom––Topographischer Reisebericht. Vienna.
Musil, Arabia Petraea 2, 207-208
N. Glueck, AASOR 15 (1935), 17-20
F. Frank, ZDPV 57 (1934), 254.
R. Cohen & Y. Israel, On the Road to Edom: Discoveries from ‘En Hazeva (Israel
Museum, Catalogue 370), Jerusalem 1995
T. Erickson-Gini, Crisis and Renewal: Settlement in the Negev in
the 3rd and 4th Centuries ce, with an Emphasis on the Finds from the New Excavations in Mampsis, Oboda
and Mesad ‘En Hazeva (Ph.D. diss.), Jerusalem (in prep.).
R. Cohen, ESI 10 (1991), 46–47
15 (1996), 110–116 (& Y. Israel)
id., BA 57 (1994), 203–214;
58 (1995), 223–235 (& Y. Israel)
id., BAR 22/4 (1996), 40–51, 65 (& Y. Israel)
P. Beck, TA 23 (1996),
102–114
id., Imagery and Representation, Tel Aviv 2002, 447–459
P. Crocker, BH 32 (1996), 40–51
Z.
Meshel, IEJ 47 (1997), 295–297
M. Bernett & O. Keel, Mond, Stier und Kult am Stadttor: Die Stele von
Betsaida (et-Tell) (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 161), Göttingen 1998, 70–71
W. G. Dever, NEA 61 (1998),
39–52
T. Haettner Blomquist, Gates and Gods: Cults in the City Gates of Iron Age Palestine: An Investigation of the Archaeological and Biblical Sources (Coniectanea Biblica: Old Testament Series 46), Stockholm
1999, 100–104
P. Bienkowski & L.Sedman, Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan,
Sheffield 2001, 310–325
J. Naveh, ‘Atiqot 42 (2001), 197–198
BAR 29/1 (2003), 56
T. Erickson-Gini & Y.
Israel, The Nabateans in the Negev (Reuben and Edith Hecht Museum Catalog 22
ed. R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom), Haifa 2003, 9*–13*.