• Fig. 8 DEM of Haluza
  Fig. 8
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Digital elevation model based on drone images and Structure from Motion
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 9 Aerial Image
  Fig. 9
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Aerial image with indications of the geophysical investigations carried out between 2015 and 2018
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  with geophysical survey locations from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 11 Geomagnetic Map
  Fig. 11
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Magnetic map of the city based on the investigations (2015-2018)
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 13 Archaeological
  Fig. 13
  
  Elusa (Haluza). GIS-based map with selected results of the urban survey (2015-2018)
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  survey map from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)

• Fig. 8 DEM of Haluza
  Fig. 8
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Digital elevation model based on drone images and Structure from Motion
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 9 Aerial Image
  Fig. 9
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Aerial image with indications of the geophysical investigations carried out between 2015 and 2018
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  with geophysical survey locations from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 11 Geomagnetic Map
  Fig. 11
  
  Elusa (Haluza). Magnetic map of the city based on the investigations (2015-2018)
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
• Fig. 13 Archaeological
  Fig. 13
  
  Elusa (Haluza). GIS-based map with selected results of the urban survey (2015-2018)
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  survey map from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)

• Fig. 16 Chronological overview
  Fig. 16
  
  Elusa (Haluza), Comprehensive overview of the chronology of the different sondages
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  of sondages from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)

• Fig. 16 Chronological overview
  Fig. 16
  
  Elusa (Haluza), Comprehensive overview of the chronology of the different sondages
  
  Heinzelmann et al. (2023)
  of sondages from Heinzelmann et al. (2023)

• from Heinzelmann et al. (2023:286-288)

The following can be said to summarize Elusa’s development: the location was frequented since the 3rd/2nd c. B.C.E. as indicated by Nabatean pottery finds and radiocarbon dated charcoal remains from different contexts. The nucleus of the city can be assumed to be in the western part, but so far, no structural remains can be associated with this phase. After a clear hiatus in the 1st c. B.C.E. for which no archaeological evidence exists, a remarkably dynamic urbanization process started between the 1st and early 3rd c. C.E. In this period, the city grew rapidly to its maximum extent, soon covering an area of nearly 45 hectares of the Late Antique city. The network of streets seems to have already been largely consolidated in this early phase. The streets were flanked by domestic and public buildings, often built with mudbrick walls. The theatre and the huge bath complex – both the largest known examples of their kind in the Negev region – were built during this period, clearly reflecting the urban character of the city in the Mid-Roman period as well as the strong influence of the Roman-Mediterranean urban culture. On the other hand, characteristic features such as a central public square in the form of a forum/agora with corresponding public buildings and functions are missing. Interestingly, they are substituted by peripheral open spaces, which presumably had primarily economic purposes. Evidence for settlement activities during the later 3rd c. C.E. is scarce, perhaps reflecting the contemporaneous decline of Nabatean trade and several periods of droughts¹⁰⁵.

A second phase of prosperity was closely connected to the successful agricultural use of the Negev in late antiquity. During the 4th and 5th c. C.E., most parts of the city were renewed on a level about 1.5-2.0 m above that of the Early/Mid-Roman phases. Mudbrick structures were systematically levelled and replaced by stone buildings with high quality masonry. At least eight churches were built, one of them possibly a bishop's church and another as part of a possible monastery. These churches were often embellished with high quality decoration in their second phase. In the centre of the city, a huge peristyle building was constructed which was probably used as a kind of emporium. The baths were continuously in use and were also further embellished. The periodical renewal of the street surfaces made with superimposed layers of compressed limestone chippings, which started in the first 1st c. C.E., was replaced around 450 C.E. with a city-wide high-quality stone pavement. This also enabled the large-scale collection of rainwater and its supply to public cisterns. Numerous buildings now appear to have additional porticos in front of their facades, and a continuous colonnaded street is emerged in the centre of the city. Furthermore, in some parts of the city, an elaborate sewer-system managed the wastewater. Many buildings of this period show traces of repeated large-scale destructions and restorations, probably caused by earthquake damages. Remarkably, the theatre was also lavishly renovated in 454/455 C.E. thanks to a private donation.¹⁰⁶ The quick reconstruction on the same foundations demonstrates a high resilience and prosperity of the city during this period. This is also indicated by the quality of the masonry in Elusa, for example in the Late Antique tower houses, as well as in the outstanding decoration of the churches. Vault-mosaics with glass tesserae (some of which feature gold leaf) decorated the churches; their floors were paved with mosaics and opus sectile in differently coloured marble. The emergence of the huge waste mounds all around the city demonstrates an efficiently organized garbage disposal and documents a high sense of community and administration. During the first half of the 6th c. C.E., the urban dynamics seem to slow down: building activities are now restricted to renovations of already existing structures.

The material analyses carried out provide further facets of this apparent phase of prosperity in the early and mid-Byzantine periods. For example, the archaeobotanical investigations document a broad spectrum of crops that indicate intensive agricultural use of the surrounding countryside. High quantities of Gaza wine amphorae, apparently transported empty to Elusa by the caravans returning from the coastal region, confirm that the city — like the other sites of the Negev Highlands — participated intensively in the production and export of wine. At the same time, rare, non-endemic types of wood, probably originating from furniture or small objects, as well as a wide range of imported fish and molluscs prove that Elusa was integrated into a broad trade network in the early and mid-Byzantine period, which reached as far as the Red Sea, Egypt and the Mediterranean. At the same time, the semi-arid desert fringes were used for traditional, presumably semi-nomadic sheep and goat breeding and for hunting gazelles. The diversity and intensity of the agricultural use of the surrounding area must have exerted a high impact and stress on the natural habitat and the available resources. An example is the considerable scarcity of wood for fuel as suggested by the archaeobotanical research, leading to animal dung being apparently used for the daily needs of most households, while the baths were heated with wood — but even there only young trees and bushes were available.

However, starting in the second half of the 6th c. C.E. and continuing into the 7th c. C.E., clear signs of crisis and a gradual urban decline are evident: buildings, including the theatre and the baths, were abandoned or robbed of their decorations and building materials. Often, the entrances to buildings were blocked up. The systematic waste management of the previous period is replaced by local waste dumps in the neighbourhoods and streets. All over the settlement, repairs and conversions of the existing buildings can be observed, some buildings threatening to collapse are secured with retaining walls. A considerable transformation process seems to reshape the settlement's character well before the Arab conquest took place¹⁰⁷. During the conquest, many buildings were already abandoned, while in some parts of the city, settlement activities continued through the 7th c. C.E. Various public buildings like the churches, the peristyle building, the baths as well as some private houses, were purposefully robbed of architectural elements and decor during this period. Only a few new buildings were constructed, often by using spolia, and frequently in the middle of former streets. Particularly noteworthy is that agricultural activities were now conducted inside the boundaries of the former city, as is indicated by wine or oil presses found in two areas. However, it seems questionable as to whether the quantities produced here were still intended for export. The massive decrease of the number of sherds of Gaza wine amphorae from about the mid-6th c. C.E. onwards points to a profound change in the local economy and a marked decline in the exchange of goods. Several factors, whose individual impact require further discussion, may have contributed to this fundamental transformation, including the outbreak of the Justinian plague, the increasing weakness of state structures and growing threats to the external borders, a loss of sales markets, climatic fluctuations or a possible overexploitation of natural resources. All these aspects require further evaluation in future discussions. While the excavation evidence confirms a clearly detectable, though greatly reduced settlement activities in the Umayyad period, only sporadic finds are attested for the early Abbasid period, indicating a final abandonment of the city after the mid of the 8th c. C.E.

• from Heinzelmann et al. (2023:248-249)

the majority of the chronological evidence is based on the ceramic evidence (see below). However, it should be noted that for the Negev region many of the relevant pottery types only give relatively broad timespans, while there are still no reliable chronotypologies for the majority of locally produced wares³⁰. Unfortunately, the local preservation conditions for coins are rather unfavourable. In total, 367 coins were found, of which 223 have been numismatically examined so far, but the proportion of legible coins is less than 30 % (62)³¹. Of these, the vast majority date from the late phases, especially the 4th-6th centuries. To compensate for these dating difficulties, a total of 78 ¹⁴C samples from important contexts have been radiocarbon dated so far in the AMS laboratory of the University of Cologne. A series of OSL samples from early sand layers is still in the process of analysis.

• from Heinzelmann et al. (2023:249)
• Heinzelmann et al. (2023) used a regional chronology system based primarily on ceramic dating in the Negev with the following epoch divisions³²

Period Name	Time Span	Notes by JW
Hellenistic	334-30 B.C.E.	Alexander the Great appears to have fully conquered the Levant no later than 332 BCE.
Early Roman	30 B.C.E. - 106/early 2nd c. C.E.	Augustus became the 1st Roman Emperor after winning the Battle of Actium on 2 September 31 BCE.
Mid Roman	106/early 2nd c. C.E. — 250 C.E.	Rome annexed Arabia Petraea in 106 CE
Late Roman	250-300/350 C.E.
Early Byzantine	300/350-450 C.E.
Mid-Byzantine	450-550 C.E.
Late Byzantine	550-637 C.E.	The Negev appears to have been conquered by 634 CE after the Battle of Dathin - before 637 CE. See Islamic Conquests in the Textual Evidence section of the Sword in the Sky Quake
Early Islamic	637— 8th c. C.E.	The Negev appears to have been conquered by 634 CE after the Battle of Dathin - before 637 CE. See Islamic Conquests in the Textual Evidence section of the Sword in the Sky Quake

• Heinzelmann et al. (2023:239) note that the last literary mention of Elusa found in the Nessana Papyri is dated to the 7th c. C.E. (Kraemer 1958, 33).
• Heinzelmann et al. (2023:241-242) noted that

  Many buildings show destruction patterns that are probably due to earthquakes, however, these were repaired a short time later, maintaining the ground plans. In the late phase, there are also successive reinforcements of the buildings by the addition of revetment walls to the exteriors.

• Heinzelmann et al. (2023:250) noted that

  As early as probably the 2nd or early 3rd c. C.E., the theatre was built in a remarkably peripheral location at the extreme southeastern corner of the city.³⁵
  
  ... Both the theatre and the baths remained in use (with multiple renovations) until the 5th/6th c. C.E.

  Footnotes

  35 Negev 1993a, 380 dated the building to the 1/ c. C.E. without conclusive reasons. Arubas — Goldfus 2008, 1714 corrected this date to not earlier than the 2nd century AD on the basis of their excavations. Basically, a construction in the post-Severan period seems unlikely, which is why a construction date in the 2nd or early 250 c. C.E. seems most plausible.
  
  

• The East Church of Heinzelmann et al. (2023) is the same as the Cathedral of Korjenkov and and Mazor (2005)

• from Negev (1989:132-133)

... Typologically the East Church of Elusa belongs to the same class of churches to which belong the South Church and North Church at Sobata.⁷ Both of these churches are tri-apsidal, with T-shaped chancels, and both side apses in each were dedicated to the cult of martyrs, although the reliquaries were placed within round niches made in the back walls of these apses. In fact, the more regularly planned North Church of Sobata is an almost half-size replica of the Elusa church. ...

• from Negev (1989:135-141)

Lamentably no material has been found during this season’s work at Elusa to date either of the two phases. When stripped of its marble facing and columns, probably not much later than 700 A.D., the building was still in a perfect state of repair. It seems that before despoliation of the building took place, the building was stripped of every movable (reusable) marble object, leaving the Corinthian capitals (Photo 8) and the matching Attic bases only, or a couple of broken column shafts, for which the robbers had no use. The Corinthian capitals, being of the "usual fourth-fifth century style are of no help in dating. This, brings us back, per force, to my original chronological analysis of 1974.

Taken at face value most of the epitaphs found in the churches of the Negev postdate A.D. 541. The only plausible reason for this is that it simply indicates that the commencement of burial in the churches of the Negev as an accepted practice does not antedate the winter months of that year, when the terrible pestilence broke out at Pelusium, and swept across the whole of the Mediterranean world.⁹ On the other hand building inscriptions are extremely rare, and hardly any of these may be assigned to either building.¹⁰

In the 1974 study published in the Revue Biblique, I suggested to date the early phase of church building in the Negev to about 350-450 A.D., based on the seemingly frail historic evidence of the nascence and growth of the Christian Church at Elusa, supported by the firmer evidence of Mampsis.¹¹ The excavations in the North Church at Sobata, carried out in 1984-1985, finally clinches the whole issue.

In 1974, I expressed hope that further excavations at Elusa would help to better understand the history of church architecture in the Negev. Indeed, looking closer at what we then named "Phase I", we may now divide it into — two or even three sub-phases. Obviously, the churches of the earlier phase at Mampsis and Elusa, my proven reconstruction of the earlier phase of the North Church at Sobata, as well as the South Church at Sobata, all belong to a well developed and well .defined type of building, of an almost identical type of sanctuary. However, does this plan reflect the very beginning of Christian church architecture in the Negev? How do the Nerth Church of Oboda and the North Church at Nessana fit into this plan?

The North Church at Oboda has an incomplete basilical plan (Fig. 1). It has one apse, with a room only to the south of the apse. To the north, where we would have expected another room, an entrance led to an open courtyard. Both room and entrance to the courtyard were outside of the area of the chancel screen and therefore quite certainly played no role in the ritual. If this church had a prothesis room at all, this must have been in a room located to the south of the southern aisle or to the south of the atrium.

The cutting off of the sides of the bema formed a chancel of an unusual type, T-shaped with short arms. Each of these arms was separated from the main bema by means of an additional thinner chancel screen on either side. This small space was quite certainly allocated to the cult of martyrs. This identification is supported by the discovery of the sunken foundation of a small one-legged table at each of the separated spaces, and by the discovery in the debris elsewhere in the basilica of a matching leg on which the names were inscribed of Elijah and John. A matching marble offering table was discovered on which the names of donors were engraved, a small marble sarcophagus shaped reliquary was also found.

The situation in the North Church at Nessana (Fig. 2) is not as clear as at Oboda. However, the plan of this church too indicates severe deficiencies in planning. The single apse is barely connected with the back wall of the building, leaving amorphic spaces at either side of the apse. From the plan published by the excavators of this church¹² it is not at all clear whether these ill-defined spaces served as martyria, or whether the martyria were located in Room 14 and 16, as suggested by the excavators. Whichever the case, the rich epigraphical finds and the discovery of a small marble sarcophagus-type reliquary in this church leaves no doubt that it was dedicated as a martyrium.

Common to both the North Church of Oboda and the North Church of Nessana is that the relics were not placed in rectangular rooms flanking the apse but — at least at Oboda — in annexes to the bema itself. This arrangement, which we did not find repeated in the Negev, could mark a phase of searching for a new place to be allocated for the sacred relics. If this indeed is the case, then both of these churches represent an earlier phase than the more developed plans of the churches at Mampsis, Elusa and Sobata.

Elusa was the only polis in the whole region of the central Negev, serving also as the seat of clerical administration. It also must have been the centre of architectural church planning. Should this be the case then the East Church must represent a well developed type of mono-apsidal basilica, not necessarily the earliest on the site. I have identified the locations of four or five additional churches in various parts of the immense area over which the city of Elusa spread during the Byzantine period. Only when these other buildings are investigated, may we hope for a firmer chronology of the early development of churches in the central Negev.

Assuming that church architecture began to develop in the central Negev at about 350 A.D. I propose, quite arbitrarily, the following dates for the first two sub-phases of the mono-apsidal church:

• Ia - 350 or earlier - 400 A.D.
• Ib - 400-450 A.D.

The South Church of Oboda (Fig. 7), which is identified by a funerary inscription of 541 A.D. as the Martyrium of St. Theodore, should be placed at the end of the line of development of Type I. In the original 1974 study I tended to place this church with Type II because of the two rather deep apse-like niches in the back walls of the rectangular rooms that flank the main apse. Before attempting to date this building let us first review its constructional history, which is connected in some ways to that of the South and North Churches of Sobata, or rather to their conversion into triapsidal basilicae, which we name Phase II.

A decisive factor in determining this phase is the dating of a series of earthquakes, one or more of which shattered numerous buildings in some of the towns of the central Negev. Although literary evidence is scarce, there is ample archaeological evidence that testifies to these disasters. At Oboda the entire length of the old southern Nabatean retaining wall was thrust outwards, and for this reason it had to be supported by a heavy, slanting supporting wall. Similarly much damage was caused to a massive tower of the Nabatean period, identified in July 1989 as the temple of Obodas (?), which in the Late Roman - early Byzantine period was incorporated in the citadel occupying the eastern half of the acropolis hill. Most of the damage was caused to the western and southern walls of the temple, and for this reason these too had to be supported by still heavier stone taluses, blocking the original entrance to the temple on the southern wall. It is against this talus that the South Church was built. Similar damage was also caused to some of the nearby buildings in the so-called Roman Quarter south of the temple. We may thus place the date of the earthquake between the end of the third century A.D., when the latest building in this quarter was constructed, and A.D. 541, when the Martyrium of St. Theodore was already being used as a burial ground.

A severe earthquake afflicted Sobata still more. At the same time both mono-apsidal churches of Sobata suffered a great deal of damage. The South Church (Fig. 5) was surrounded on all four sides by a high talus. It is highly likely that the transformation of this building from a mono-apsidal basilica into a tri-apsidal one took place at the time when the whole building underwent a complete remodeling. Yet, it is not certain whether this transformation is a direct outcome of the earthquake. The constructional history of the North Church (Fig. 4) is much the same, but outer buildings which were added after the earthquake indeed help in determining the various phases. Originally the mono-apsidal basilica had no additional chapels on the south. When the building suffered severe damage by the earthquake, it was completely surrounded by very high stone taluses on all sides, except on the eastern half of the southern wall of the basilica, where two strongly built chapels with apses and domes were constructed, taking the place of the talus as a support for the shattered southern wall. The repair of the first phase of the church, which was made after the earthquake marked the beginning of the second phase. This too has now been firmly dated by a coin of Justinian (527-538 A.D.) which was found in the intentionally made fill in the room behind the southern apse. The change from the mono-apsidal to tri-apsidal plan must have taken place at this time.

The epigraphic evidence of Sobata may help in attaining a close as possible date both for the earthquake and for the subsequent reconstruction of the North Church¹³. One of these inscriptions, that of 506 A.D., is clearly a dedicatory inscription of a very important building, which justified the participation of a vicarius, a man of the highest rank, in the dedication of this building. This inscription was not found in situ. However, there is no question about the inscription of A.D. 512, in which year the mosaic floor of one of the added chapels was dedicated by a bishop and the local clergy. It is thus safe to assume that the whole remodeling of the North Church began in the first decade of the sixth century.

The second half of the fifth century A.D. was one of tectonic unrest¹⁴. Severe earthquakes were recorded in the years 447, 498, and 502 A.D. The two latter dates would be highly probable dates for the destruction of the South and North Churches of Sobata, their total remodeling, and their rebuilding as tri-apsidal basilicae, and thus the beginning of Phase II.

The South Church of Oboda (Fig. 7) is in no way a tri-apsidal basilica. The two niches in the back walls of the rooms flanking the central apse were built about one metre above the floor of the room. The niches within the new apses were made to house reliquaria at the South and North Churches at Sobata. With this, the similarity between the church of Oboda and those of Sobata ends. The South Church of Oboda has never been modified. It is possible that the earthquake of 447 A.D., which, according to the sources, was even stronger than those of the turn of the century was the one which affected Oboda, while the new South Church, where the Martyrium of St. Theodore is, was dedicated about A.D. 450. It is indeed a mono-apsidal basilica, and thus belongs to Phase I. However, because of the presence of the niches in the flanking rooms, which introduced a new idea in the housing of reliquaries, I would assign it to Phase Ic.

Is it possible to divide Phase II into sub-types? At the moment we can assign to Phase II the South and North Churches of Sobata (Figs. 8, 9) and the East Church of Elusa (Fig. 10) in their final stages. There is indeed a difference in the planning of the sanctuaries in each of these towns. Whereas at Elusa the reliquary was placed on a small table just behind the chancel screen of the southern apsis, at Sobata the chancel screen was brought as close as possible to the niches built into the side apses, where the relics rested in small reliquaries, just as in the South Church at Oboda. As logic is not always a good counselor, I shall refrain for the present from claiming which type is earlier than the other.

Phase III. When I published my previous study there were only two churches which pertained to the purely tri-apsidal type of basilica: the South Church of Nessana (Fig. 12) and the Central Church at Sobata (Fig. 11), both of which were planned as tri-apsidal buildings from the beginning. Neither of these buildings bore any indications that they contained martyria, although the South Church of Nessana was dedicated to Virgin Mary, Mother of God. As one of the columns found in the South Church of Nessana had a dedication of 610 A.D., I tended to see in this type of basilica the latest phase in Christian architecture in the central Negev.

However, matters seemed complicated with the excavation of a new large tri-apsidal basilica at Ruheiba. This building has been excavated in the late 1970’s by Y. Tsafrir, and no report had been published at the time this study was made, i.e., eight years ago. The construction of the building was dated according to a funerary inscription to the 460’s-470’s, and although it typologically belongs to our Phase III, it antedates the South Church of Nessana by about a century and a half, and probably antedates the Central Church of Sobata by a century or so. However, Tsafrir’s dating of the northern church at Ruheiba is inconclusive¹⁵.

As a terminus ante quem for the construction of the church a burial inscription of A.D. 488 is taken. This date is of great significance. Although church construction in the Negev goes back to about the middle of the fourth century, it is not before the fifth century that Christian epigraphy begins, yet very sparingly: two burial inscriptions (A.D. 464 and 475) at Nessana, a building inscription in an annex to the South Church at Sobata (A.D. 415 or 435), and the present text. Like the funerary inscriptions of Nessana, this too is of a cleric, honoured by the title of makarios. On account of this inscription, the author assumes that the church was built approximately in the years 460-470. This is methodologically wrong. At Oboda and other places it has already been proven that funerary inscriptions shed very little light, if any, on the dates of the foundation of churches. The northern church at Rehovot actually pertains to the first one hundred years of church building in the Negev.

As far as constructional phases in the history of the church are concerned, the author assigns to the initial phase the construction of the whole church complex with minor modifications. To the second phase is assigned the construction of the revetment, by which it was supported. The revetment, or glacis, is of a similar type common to other sites in the Negev. This phenomenon of construction figures prominently in the North Church and South Church at Sobata. In the discussion of this matter, Tsafrir does not relate the construction of these revetment walls with the renewal of burial in the church in A.D. 508. However, a date in the first decade of the sixth century is very significant, since on September 30, 505 the inauguration took place of an important building at Sobata — perhaps the renovation of the North Church — probably previously destroyed by a fierce earthquake, and subsequently supported by similar “revetment walls”. Could it be that the calamity which affected Sobata, also necessitated the consolidation of the walls of the church at Rehovot? In order to learn the archaeological history of the northern church a section was made just below the synthronon in the central apse — not a very sensitive location — and it was found to be built above the natural bedrock. No similar sections were made in the more archaeologically sensitive side apses. In those churches, as the North Church at Oboda, the constructional changes took place not in the central apse but rather in the lateral rooms. Only sections made here will determine whether the northern church of Rehovot is a fifth century triapsidal church, as Tsafrir suggest, or is it indeed a later one, as all other triapsidal churches in the central Negev.

• from Negev (1989:141-142)

The described division of churches in the central Negev into three typological phases is based on the assumption that these typological differences came about from changing preferences in the performance of the cult of martyrs and the presentation of the sacred relics to the worshipers. The following phases have been observed:

Phase	Description
Ia	Mono-apsidal, rudimentary planning of the spaces at the sides of the apse. T-shaped chancel, reliquaries placed on one-legged tables at the cross arms of the T at Oboda. The position of the reliquary in the North Church at Nessana (c. 350–400 A.D.) is not clear.
Ib	Mono-apsidal, two rectangular rooms are regularly disconnected from the main chancel, reliquaries were placed above or beneath a small table at the back of the side rooms: Mampsis East Church, Elusa East Church, Sobata South and North Churches, (c. 400–450 A.D.).
Ic	Mono-apsidal as above. Chancel as above. Reliquaries placed in containers in niches built into the back wall of the side rooms. Oboda South Church, (c. 450–500 A.D. ?).
II	Originally mono-apsidal, converted into tri-apsidal basilicae, chancel as above, reliquaries placed as above: (Sobata South and North Churches); or just behind the chancel screen of the southern apse, on a one-legged table: Elusa East Church, (c. 500 A.D.).
III	Tri-apsidal, chancel differently arranged, no relics: Nessana South Church, Sobata Central Church, (early seventh century).

The excavations at Elusa, in their initial stages, show that the information at our disposal is still far from complete. At the moment we are familiar with the plans of only ten churches (2 at Oboda and a chapel; 2 at Mampsis; 3 at Sobata; 2 at Nessana and 1 at Elusa). Earlier researchers observed two or three more churches in the town of Nessana, three at Ruheiba, four or five at Elusa. Another is known at Horvat Saadoit (Kh. Sa‘adi, between Elusa and Ruheiba, possibly Saudanon of the Nessana papyri), and yet another is possibly located in a village at Wadi Qatun southwest of Oboda. This would add eleven or thirteen churches to these already excavated and the number may still be higher when all the churches of Elusa are unearthed. It is this gap in our knowledge which calls for special caution when attempting to make any definite typological or chronological division of the churches of the central Negev.

• from Negev (1981:60-61)

Chapter 2 - Sobota (Shivta, Esbeita) A North Church III Chapel

66. Mosaic pavement. Tho inscription, two lines long. was written along the western border. The mosaic pavement has been cleared again by Professor M. Avi-Yonah.¹⁹⁴. There is no record of the excavations at the chapel in the DAM.

1. Επί τον άγιοω[τάτον ε]πιοχόπον θωμα έγέν[ετ]ο τον[το] το
          ξργον ξπιμελεία

2. 'Ιωανν(ον)ι πρεο[βυτέρου] του λαμπρ(οτάτου) 'Ιψαννου βιχαρ(ίου)
          μ(ηνί) Δ(α)εσίου ίνδ(ιχτιωνος) ι'

This work has been completed under the most holy Bishop, Thomas, lender the charge of John, priest, and of the most illustrious John, vicar, in the month of Daesius, in the 10th indiction-year.

No bishop by the name of Thomas is mentioned in the papyri of Nessana. Thomas was quite certainly not a resident of Sobata, and could have come from Elusa, Casa, Caesarea. Alexandria, An­tioch or any other large Christian centre, which could have con­tributed towards the expenses of laying of the mosaic floor.

There are two possibilities of dating this inscription. Assuming that the building inscription no. 75, of 505 C.E. (see below) was meant to commemorate the completion of construction of the North Church, and that the construction of the chapel took place only a short time afterwards, the closest 10th indiction-year to that event will fall on May 617 C.E. The order of events would then be as follows: the dedication of the North Church (basilica, atrium and monastery) in 505 C.E. and the subsequent dedication of the baptis­ try and chapel ten years later. While this construction took place the original entrance to the southern aisle of the basilica was bloked. If this order of events is accepted then the vicar mentioned in inscription no. 66 is one and the same as Flaying John son of Stephan of inscription no. 75.

The other possibility is to connect vicar John of inscription no. 66 with another vicar, also named John, a resident of Sobata one century later. A minor son of this man, Abraamios, died at 612 C.F. (inscription no. 57). Ile was the first man to be buried in the baptistry, and the only layman to have been buried there. If we assume that burial in the baptistry commenced a short while after its dedication the 10th indiction-year in this case would fall in May 607 C.E..

I prefer however the first date, for it seems strange that such a large church complex would be without an adjoining baptistry right from the beginning.

• from Negev (1981:65-66)

Chapter 2 - Sobota (Shivta, Esbeita) A North Church III Chapel

75. Location not stated, Marked 'XII P.H. 30'. Not registered in the DAM. no photograph. only copy in file.

     ✚ Συν θεω. 'Εγενε-
     τω τουτω τώ εργον
     έπί τών λαμπρω-
     τάτων πριωρων

4. χαί επι Φλ(ανίου) 'Ιωάννου Στεφ(άνου)
     βιχαριου ινδ(ιχτιώνος) γ' μηνί 'Γπερβ(ερεταίου)
     ιγ' του ετους Γ ✚

✝ With the help of God this work has been completed in the times of the most illustrious prioron and in the time of Flavius John (son) of Stephan the vicar, in the 3rd indiction-year, on the 13th of the month of Hyperberetaius, in the year 400 ✝

Hyperberetaius 13, A.E. 400 = Ind. 3 = September 30, 505 C.E. The nearest third indiction year to 505 C.E. falls in 509/10 C.E., whereas in 505/06 C.E. falls the 14th indiction year. We have no way to chek whether this mistake was made by the engraver of the inscription, or by the reader from the stone.

L. 2-3. Unluckily the location in which this important inscrip­tion was found is not known, so that we can only guess as to which building it could have referred. This inscription is the earliest found at Sobata. If the absence of members of the clergy in inscrip­tion no. 75 is not accidental, than the dedication could have been of a secular building. Assuming that this inscription is only half of a larger dedicatory inscription, it could have likewise commemorated the construction of a church, perhaps the North Church itself. Whichever is the case, it must have been a very important building, so as to justify the participation of the highest officials of the pro­vincial administration in its dedication.

For a commentary on the rank and the titles see note to index (p. 88-94).

75a. In one of the churches of Sbaita the Frs. Sailer and Bagatti were shown by members of the Colt Expedition a mosaic with the names of the four rivers of the Paradise,

Φισών
Γεών
Τίγρις
Ευφρατης

The personification of the rivers was found, in the region, also at Madaba in the chapel of St Theodore^201a.

• from Negev (1989:132-133)

... Typologically the East Church of Elusa belongs to the same class of churches to which belong the South Church and North Church at Sobata.⁷ Both of these churches are tri-apsidal, with T-shaped chancels, and both side apses in each were dedicated to the cult of martyrs, although the reliquaries were placed within round niches made in the back walls of these apses. In fact, the more regularly planned North Church of Sobata is an almost half-size replica of the Elusa church. ...

• from Negev (1989:135-141)

Lamentably no material has been found during this season’s work at Elusa to date either of the two phases. When stripped of its marble facing and columns, probably not much later than 700 A.D., the building was still in a perfect state of repair. It seems that before despoliation of the building took place, the building was stripped of every movable (reusable) marble object, leaving the Corinthian capitals (Photo 8) and the matching Attic bases only, or a couple of broken column shafts, for which the robbers had no use. The Corinthian capitals, being of the "usual fourth-fifth century style are of no help in dating. This, brings us back, per force, to my original chronological analysis of 1974.

Taken at face value most of the epitaphs found in the churches of the Negev postdate A.D. 541. The only plausible reason for this is that it simply indicates that the commencement of burial in the churches of the Negev as an accepted practice does not antedate the winter months of that year, when the terrible pestilence broke out at Pelusium, and swept across the whole of the Mediterranean world.⁹ On the other hand building inscriptions are extremely rare, and hardly any of these may be assigned to either building.¹⁰

In the 1974 study published in the Revue Biblique, I suggested to date the early phase of church building in the Negev to about 350-450 A.D., based on the seemingly frail historic evidence of the nascence and growth of the Christian Church at Elusa, supported by the firmer evidence of Mampsis.¹¹ The excavations in the North Church at Sobata, carried out in 1984-1985, finally clinches the whole issue.

In 1974, I expressed hope that further excavations at Elusa would help to better understand the history of church architecture in the Negev. Indeed, looking closer at what we then named "Phase I", we may now divide it into — two or even three sub-phases. Obviously, the churches of the earlier phase at Mampsis and Elusa, my proven reconstruction of the earlier phase of the North Church at Sobata, as well as the South Church at Sobata, all belong to a well developed and well .defined type of building, of an almost identical type of sanctuary. However, does this plan reflect the very beginning of Christian church architecture in the Negev? How do the Nerth Church of Oboda and the North Church at Nessana fit into this plan?

The North Church at Oboda has an incomplete basilical plan (Fig. 1). It has one apse, with a room only to the south of the apse. To the north, where we would have expected another room, an entrance led to an open courtyard. Both room and entrance to the courtyard were outside of the area of the chancel screen and therefore quite certainly played no role in the ritual. If this church had a prothesis room at all, this must have been in a room located to the south of the southern aisle or to the south of the atrium.

The cutting off of the sides of the bema formed a chancel of an unusual type, T-shaped with short arms. Each of these arms was separated from the main bema by means of an additional thinner chancel screen on either side. This small space was quite certainly allocated to the cult of martyrs. This identification is supported by the discovery of the sunken foundation of a small one-legged table at each of the separated spaces, and by the discovery in the debris elsewhere in the basilica of a matching leg on which the names were inscribed of Elijah and John. A matching marble offering table was discovered on which the names of donors were engraved, a small marble sarcophagus shaped reliquary was also found.

The situation in the North Church at Nessana (Fig. 2) is not as clear as at Oboda. However, the plan of this church too indicates severe deficiencies in planning. The single apse is barely connected with the back wall of the building, leaving amorphic spaces at either side of the apse. From the plan published by the excavators of this church¹² it is not at all clear whether these ill-defined spaces served as martyria, or whether the martyria were located in Room 14 and 16, as suggested by the excavators. Whichever the case, the rich epigraphical finds and the discovery of a small marble sarcophagus-type reliquary in this church leaves no doubt that it was dedicated as a martyrium.

Common to both the North Church of Oboda and the North Church of Nessana is that the relics were not placed in rectangular rooms flanking the apse but — at least at Oboda — in annexes to the bema itself. This arrangement, which we did not find repeated in the Negev, could mark a phase of searching for a new place to be allocated for the sacred relics. If this indeed is the case, then both of these churches represent an earlier phase than the more developed plans of the churches at Mampsis, Elusa and Sobata.

Elusa was the only polis in the whole region of the central Negev, serving also as the seat of clerical administration. It also must have been the centre of architectural church planning. Should this be the case then the East Church must represent a well developed type of mono-apsidal basilica, not necessarily the earliest on the site. I have identified the locations of four or five additional churches in various parts of the immense area over which the city of Elusa spread during the Byzantine period. Only when these other buildings are investigated, may we hope for a firmer chronology of the early development of churches in the central Negev.

Assuming that church architecture began to develop in the central Negev at about 350 A.D. I propose, quite arbitrarily, the following dates for the first two sub-phases of the mono-apsidal church:

• Ia - 350 or earlier - 400 A.D.
• Ib - 400-450 A.D.

The South Church of Oboda (Fig. 7), which is identified by a funerary inscription of 541 A.D. as the Martyrium of St. Theodore, should be placed at the end of the line of development of Type I. In the original 1974 study I tended to place this church with Type II because of the two rather deep apse-like niches in the back walls of the rectangular rooms that flank the main apse. Before attempting to date this building let us first review its constructional history, which is connected in some ways to that of the South and North Churches of Sobata, or rather to their conversion into triapsidal basilicae, which we name Phase II.

A decisive factor in determining this phase is the dating of a series of earthquakes, one or more of which shattered numerous buildings in some of the towns of the central Negev. Although literary evidence is scarce, there is ample archaeological evidence that testifies to these disasters. At Oboda the entire length of the old southern Nabatean retaining wall was thrust outwards, and for this reason it had to be supported by a heavy, slanting supporting wall. Similarly much damage was caused to a massive tower of the Nabatean period, identified in July 1989 as the temple of Obodas (?), which in the Late Roman - early Byzantine period was incorporated in the citadel occupying the eastern half of the acropolis hill. Most of the damage was caused to the western and southern walls of the temple, and for this reason these too had to be supported by still heavier stone taluses, blocking the original entrance to the temple on the southern wall. It is against this talus that the South Church was built. Similar damage was also caused to some of the nearby buildings in the so-called Roman Quarter south of the temple. We may thus place the date of the earthquake between the end of the third century A.D., when the latest building in this quarter was constructed, and A.D. 541, when the Martyrium of St. Theodore was already being used as a burial ground.

A severe earthquake afflicted Sobata still more. At the same time both mono-apsidal churches of Sobata suffered a great deal of damage. The South Church (Fig. 5) was surrounded on all four sides by a high talus. It is highly likely that the transformation of this building from a mono-apsidal basilica into a tri-apsidal one took place at the time when the whole building underwent a complete remodeling. Yet, it is not certain whether this transformation is a direct outcome of the earthquake. The constructional history of the North Church (Fig. 4) is much the same, but outer buildings which were added after the earthquake indeed help in determining the various phases. Originally the mono-apsidal basilica had no additional chapels on the south. When the building suffered severe damage by the earthquake, it was completely surrounded by very high stone taluses on all sides, except on the eastern half of the southern wall of the basilica, where two strongly built chapels with apses and domes were constructed, taking the place of the talus as a support for the shattered southern wall. The repair of the first phase of the church, which was made after the earthquake marked the beginning of the second phase. This too has now been firmly dated by a coin of Justinian (527-538 A.D.) which was found in the intentionally made fill in the room behind the southern apse. The change from the mono-apsidal to tri-apsidal plan must have taken place at this time.

The epigraphic evidence of Sobata may help in attaining a close as possible date both for the earthquake and for the subsequent reconstruction of the North Church¹³. One of these inscriptions, that of 506 A.D., is clearly a dedicatory inscription of a very important building, which justified the participation of a vicarius, a man of the highest rank, in the dedication of this building. This inscription was not found in situ. However, there is no question about the inscription of A.D. 512, in which year the mosaic floor of one of the added chapels was dedicated by a bishop and the local clergy. It is thus safe to assume that the whole remodeling of the North Church began in the first decade of the sixth century.

The second half of the fifth century A.D. was one of tectonic unrest¹⁴. Severe earthquakes were recorded in the years 447, 498, and 502 A.D. The two latter dates would be highly probable dates for the destruction of the South and North Churches of Sobata, their total remodeling, and their rebuilding as tri-apsidal basilicae, and thus the beginning of Phase II.

The South Church of Oboda (Fig. 7) is in no way a tri-apsidal basilica. The two niches in the back walls of the rooms flanking the central apse were built about one metre above the floor of the room. The niches within the new apses were made to house reliquaria at the South and North Churches at Sobata. With this, the similarity between the church of Oboda and those of Sobata ends. The South Church of Oboda has never been modified. It is possible that the earthquake of 447 A.D., which, according to the sources, was even stronger than those of the turn of the century was the one which affected Oboda, while the new South Church, where the Martyrium of St. Theodore is, was dedicated about A.D. 450. It is indeed a mono-apsidal basilica, and thus belongs to Phase I. However, because of the presence of the niches in the flanking rooms, which introduced a new idea in the housing of reliquaries, I would assign it to Phase Ic.

Is it possible to divide Phase II into sub-types? At the moment we can assign to Phase II the South and North Churches of Sobata (Figs. 8, 9) and the East Church of Elusa (Fig. 10) in their final stages. There is indeed a difference in the planning of the sanctuaries in each of these towns. Whereas at Elusa the reliquary was placed on a small table just behind the chancel screen of the southern apsis, at Sobata the chancel screen was brought as close as possible to the niches built into the side apses, where the relics rested in small reliquaries, just as in the South Church at Oboda. As logic is not always a good counselor, I shall refrain for the present from claiming which type is earlier than the other.

Phase III. When I published my previous study there were only two churches which pertained to the purely tri-apsidal type of basilica: the South Church of Nessana (Fig. 12) and the Central Church at Sobata (Fig. 11), both of which were planned as tri-apsidal buildings from the beginning. Neither of these buildings bore any indications that they contained martyria, although the South Church of Nessana was dedicated to Virgin Mary, Mother of God. As one of the columns found in the South Church of Nessana had a dedication of 610 A.D., I tended to see in this type of basilica the latest phase in Christian architecture in the central Negev.

However, matters seemed complicated with the excavation of a new large tri-apsidal basilica at Ruheiba. This building has been excavated in the late 1970’s by Y. Tsafrir, and no report had been published at the time this study was made, i.e., eight years ago. The construction of the building was dated according to a funerary inscription to the 460’s-470’s, and although it typologically belongs to our Phase III, it antedates the South Church of Nessana by about a century and a half, and probably antedates the Central Church of Sobata by a century or so. However, Tsafrir’s dating of the northern church at Ruheiba is inconclusive¹⁵.

As a terminus ante quem for the construction of the church a burial inscription of A.D. 488 is taken. This date is of great significance. Although church construction in the Negev goes back to about the middle of the fourth century, it is not before the fifth century that Christian epigraphy begins, yet very sparingly: two burial inscriptions (A.D. 464 and 475) at Nessana, a building inscription in an annex to the South Church at Sobata (A.D. 415 or 435), and the present text. Like the funerary inscriptions of Nessana, this too is of a cleric, honoured by the title of makarios. On account of this inscription, the author assumes that the church was built approximately in the years 460-470. This is methodologically wrong. At Oboda and other places it has already been proven that funerary inscriptions shed very little light, if any, on the dates of the foundation of churches. The northern church at Rehovot actually pertains to the first one hundred years of church building in the Negev.

As far as constructional phases in the history of the church are concerned, the author assigns to the initial phase the construction of the whole church complex with minor modifications. To the second phase is assigned the construction of the revetment, by which it was supported. The revetment, or glacis, is of a similar type common to other sites in the Negev. This phenomenon of construction figures prominently in the North Church and South Church at Sobata. In the discussion of this matter, Tsafrir does not relate the construction of these revetment walls with the renewal of burial in the church in A.D. 508. However, a date in the first decade of the sixth century is very significant, since on September 30, 505 the inauguration took place of an important building at Sobata — perhaps the renovation of the North Church — probably previously destroyed by a fierce earthquake, and subsequently supported by similar “revetment walls”. Could it be that the calamity which affected Sobata, also necessitated the consolidation of the walls of the church at Rehovot? In order to learn the archaeological history of the northern church a section was made just below the synthronon in the central apse — not a very sensitive location — and it was found to be built above the natural bedrock. No similar sections were made in the more archaeologically sensitive side apses. In those churches, as the North Church at Oboda, the constructional changes took place not in the central apse but rather in the lateral rooms. Only sections made here will determine whether the northern church of Rehovot is a fifth century triapsidal church, as Tsafrir suggest, or is it indeed a later one, as all other triapsidal churches in the central Negev.

• from Negev (1989:141-142)

The described division of churches in the central Negev into three typological phases is based on the assumption that these typological differences came about from changing preferences in the performance of the cult of martyrs and the presentation of the sacred relics to the worshipers. The following phases have been observed:

Phase	Description
Ia	Mono-apsidal, rudimentary planning of the spaces at the sides of the apse. T-shaped chancel, reliquaries placed on one-legged tables at the cross arms of the T at Oboda. The position of the reliquary in the North Church at Nessana (c. 350–400 A.D.) is not clear.
Ib	Mono-apsidal, two rectangular rooms are regularly disconnected from the main chancel, reliquaries were placed above or beneath a small table at the back of the side rooms: Mampsis East Church, Elusa East Church, Sobata South and North Churches, (c. 400–450 A.D.).
Ic	Mono-apsidal as above. Chancel as above. Reliquaries placed in containers in niches built into the back wall of the side rooms. Oboda South Church, (c. 450–500 A.D. ?).
II	Originally mono-apsidal, converted into tri-apsidal basilicae, chancel as above, reliquaries placed as above: (Sobata South and North Churches); or just behind the chancel screen of the southern apse, on a one-legged table: Elusa East Church, (c. 500 A.D.).
III	Tri-apsidal, chancel differently arranged, no relics: Nessana South Church, Sobata Central Church, (early seventh century).

The excavations at Elusa, in their initial stages, show that the information at our disposal is still far from complete. At the moment we are familiar with the plans of only ten churches (2 at Oboda and a chapel; 2 at Mampsis; 3 at Sobata; 2 at Nessana and 1 at Elusa). Earlier researchers observed two or three more churches in the town of Nessana, three at Ruheiba, four or five at Elusa. Another is known at Horvat Saadoit (Kh. Sa‘adi, between Elusa and Ruheiba, possibly Saudanon of the Nessana papyri), and yet another is possibly located in a village at Wadi Qatun southwest of Oboda. This would add eleven or thirteen churches to these already excavated and the number may still be higher when all the churches of Elusa are unearthed. It is this gap in our knowledge which calls for special caution when attempting to make any definite typological or chronological division of the churches of the central Negev.

• Figure 4 -              
  Fig. 4 Haluza
  
  A sub-vertical through going joint, cutting two adjacent stones, marked by arrows. At a building NW of the Theater (field station 6)
  
  Korjenkov and Mazor (2005)
  from Korjenkov and Mazor (1999a)
• Figure 10 -              
  Fig. 10 Haluza
  
  Tilting of upper stones of a wall at the Theater
  
  Korjenkov and Mazor (2005)
  from Korjenkov and Mazor (1999a)
• Figure 11 -              
  Fig. 11 Haluza
  
  Arch stones at the Theater placed on the ground in a crescent form
  
  Korjenkov and Mazor (2005)
  from Korjenkov and Mazor (1999a)
• Figure 13 -              
  Fig. 13 Haluza
  
  Collapse of one of the columns of the Cathedral in a NE (45º) direction. Note lead bundle on the surface of the pedestal and traces of lead on the bottom of the fallen column
  
  Korjenkov and Mazor (2005)
  from Korjenkov and Mazor (1999a)
• Figure 15 -              
  Fig. 15 Haluza
  
  Shift of upper stone row of the SW part of the Theater wall
  
  Korjenkov and Mazor (2005)
  from Korjenkov and Mazor (1999a)