Sepphoris

Transliterated Name	Source	Name
Sepphoris	Ancient Greek	Σεπφωρίς
Tzipori	Hebrew	צִפּוֹרִי
Kitron	Hebrew
Rakkath	Hebrew
Saffuriya	Arabic	صفورية
Eirenopolis	Greek
Autocratoris	Greek	Αὐτοκρατορίδα
Diocaesarea	Greek	διοκαισαρεία
Le Saphorie	Crusader

Identification and History

Identification and History from Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

from Zeev Weiss in Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Ancient Sepphoris is clearly identified with the ruined village of Safuriyye, the present-day Moshav Zippori. The site overlooks the Beth Netofa Valley in the central Lower Galilee, about 5 km (3 mi.) northwest of Nazareth (map reference 176.239). Sepphoris is first mentioned by Josephus in connection with the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (Antiq. XIII, 338), but a few remains from the Iron Age II found here attest to an earlier settlement. In the Hasmonean period, Sepphoris was probably the administrative center of the whole of Galilee. In around 57-55 BCE, the Roman proconsul Gabinius made Sepphoris the capital of the district of Galilee (Antiq. XIV, 91; War I, 170). Sepphoris submitted to Herod, who attacked the city during a snowstorm in 3 7 BCE (Antiq. XIV, 414; War I, 304 ). After Herod's death, the Romans conquered thecityin the "warofVarus" and sold its inhabitants into slavery (Antiq. XVII, 289; War II, 68). With the partition of Herod's king dom, Sepphoris was granted to his son Antipas, who resided here until he founded Tiberias and made it the new capital of Galilee. Antipas fortified Sepphoris and changed its name to Autocratoris, according to Josephus (Antiq. XVIII, 27). During the First Jewish Revolt against Rome, the inhabitants of Sepphoris sided with Vespasian, surrendered their city to him (War III, 30-34), and struck coins in his honor as the "peace maker" (ειρηνοποιος). After the destruction of the Temple, the priestly family of Jedaiah settled in Sepphoris. During Trajan's reign, coins were minted here by the Jewish local government; the words "Emperor Trajan gave" were stamped on them. During the reign of Hadrian, the "old government" of Sepphoris - the Jewish local city government (Mishnah, Qid. 4:5) - was abolished, a gentile administration was appointed, and probably, at the same time, the name of the city was changed to Diocaesarea (Διοκαισαρεια, the city of Zeus and of the emperor). Yet, after Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi and the Sanhedrin established their seat here for seventeen years before the rabbi's death, at the end of the second century (J.T., Kil. 9:4, 32b), the local government of the city was once more turned over to a Jewish town council. Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi redacted the Mishnah in Sepphoris. At the beginning of the third century, the minting of coins by the Jews was renewed here; the coins were stamped "Covenant of friendship and mutual aid between the holy council and the senate of the Roman people."

Sepphoris is mentioned many times in Talmudic literature and was known throughout its existence as a Jewish city. In the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods many scholars lived here; the best known are rabbis Halafta, Ele'azar ben 'Azariah, and Jose ben Halafta. The seat of the Sanhedrin was also in Sepphoris until it was moved by Rabbi Yohanan to Tiberias in the time of Rabbi Judah Nesiah, the grandson of Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. During the reign of Emperor Constantine, a certain Josephus the Apostate tried in vain to erect a church here (Epiph., Haer. 30, 4~12). In the reign of Constantius II, the Jewish revolt against Gallus Caesar, led by Patricius, began in Sepphoris (351 CE). The Roman troops garrisoned in the city were disarmed, and the rebels gained control. The Roman commander Ursicinus succeeded in crushing the revolt, but, in spite of the reports of the Christian sources (Jerome, Chron., Olymp. 282; Socrates, HE II, 33; Sozomenos, HE IV, 7), he failed to level the city. In a letter sent by Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, mention is made of an earthquake that struck Palestine in 363, making special note of the total destruction of Sepphoris. The town was later partly restored and continued to be a Jewish city until the fifth century; in the sixth century, however, it had a Christian community, headed by a bishop. Bishops ofSepphoris participated in the synods of Jerusalem in 518 and 536. In Crusader times, Sepphoris (Le Sephorie) was a city and fortress in the province of Galilee. Remains of a Crusader church and fortress still stand at the site. In the eighteenth century, the governor of Galilee, Dhahir el-'Amr, refortified it.

Brief History from Meyers et al. (1992)

from Meyers et al. (1992:10-18)

The rich historical legacy of Sepphoris is linked with its central geographical location and the diversity of its inhabitants. Substantial quantities of Iron Age II potsherds uncovered at the site indicate that Sepphoris was settled by the seventh or sixth century B.C.E.. On the basis of the many black Attic-ware sherds discovered there, as well as a beautiful animal-shaped rhyton and a drinking goblet of the Persian period, it can be assumed that, by the mid-fifth century or slightly later, there was a small settlement at Sepphoris, , perhaps the residency of a military garrison which was stationed there. In this respect it is noteworthy to mention that a small tell, just east of the spring of Sepphoris, is listed (following preliminary surveys) as belonging to the Persian period.

Josephus, the well-known first century Jewish historian, provides the earliest literary attestation of Sepphoris (Antiquities 13.2.5). He first mentions the site in reference to Ptolemy Lathyrus's unsuccessful attempt (ca. 100 B.C.E.) to capture the city during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus, one of the most important Hasmonean kings (103-76 B.C.E.). Numerous Hasmonean coins found during excavation, including coins of Jannaeus, together with other late Hellenistic artifacts and traces of architecture, lend credibility to Josephus's statement that Sepphoris was already a major Galilean stronghold in the first century. He calls it "the strongest city of Galilee" (War 2.5.10f.).

The Jewish population of Sepphoris goes back at least to Hellenistic times, and perhaps to as early as the Persian period. Sepphoris was apparently the home town of many priests, some of whom even served as high priests in the Jerusalem Temple.

Sepphoris became a city of prominence in Roman times when in 57 B.C.E. Gabinius, proconsul of Syria, divided the Jewish territory into five administrative districts or councils, called synedria. At that time he made Sepphoris the Galilean center of one of the councils (War 1.170 and Antiquities 14.91).

Interesting circumstances surround Sepphoris's occupation by Herod, in 40 B.C.E. (Antiquities 17.271). Both Antigonus, the last Hasmonean king (Antiquities 14.413), and Herod the Great used Sepphoris as a secure staging platform from which to launch their Galilean careers. For all intents and purposes, Sepphoris had already become the capital of the Galilee by that time.

During the riots that broke out after Herod's death in 4 B.C.E., a Galilean rebel named Judas attacked Sepphoris in an attempt to get arms; the city was so well fortified that the attempt failed. Varus, the legate of Syria, is said to have destroyed the city in retaliation and to have sold its inhabitants into slavery (Antiquities 17.271 and War 2.56)..

Sepphoris was presumably enlarged and/or rebuilt by Herod Antipas who, in the early first century C.E. according to Josephus, made the city the "ornament of all Galilee" (Antiquities 18.2.1). Antipas called the city "Autokratis," which possibly indicates its role as a capital city with self-autonomy.

Although it lost some of its prestige when Antipas shifted his northern base to Tiberias in 54 C.E., Sepphoris again became the capital of Galilee and a prestigious city under the procurator Felix, when he transferred it to the territory of Agrippa II (on the eve of the First Revolt against Rome). On that occasion, Felix renewed the jurisdictional authority of Sepphoris and moved the royal bank and the archives of important documents from Tiberias to that city (Life 38).

The unique stance taken by the inhabitants of Sepphoris during the First War against Rome (66-70 C.E.) may shed additional light on the nature of its population in the first century. The city is reported by Josephus to have taken a pacifistic position, with its citizens unwilling to oppose Rome. Josephus contends that he led two separate attacks against the recalcitrant Sepphoreans. The coins minted at Sepphoris in the year 67/68 C.E. bear the legend Eirenopolis, "City of Peace." Josephus (War 3.30-32) reports the following:

From Antioch Vespasian pushed on to Ptolemais [Acco]. At this city he was met by the inhabitants of Sepphoris in the Galilee, the only people of the province who displayed pacific sentiments. For, with an eye to their own security and a sense of the power of Rome, they had already, before the coming of Vespasian, given pledges to Caesennius Gallus, received his assurance of protection, and admitted a Roman garrison; now they offered a cordial welcome to the commander-in-chief, and promised their active support against their countrymen.

The fact that the name Vespasian appears on the Sepphoris coins only one year before he became emperor tends to corroborate Josephus's claims of the pro-Roman stance assumed by the local population. The inhabitants of Sepphoris apparently added the future emperor's name to the coin legend on their own initiative and not on the orders of any high official. A similar action was undertaken by the officials of Caesarea Maritima, who also put Vespasian's name on their coin mints in anticipation of his ascent to the throne.

The Sepphoreans' desire to cooperate with Rome is mentioned numerous times by Josephus, who himself adopted a similar position after giving up his Galilean military command in nearby Jotapata in 68 C.E. The refusal of the Sepphoreans to become directly involved in the rebellion that was brewing perhaps reflects the aristocratic bent of the city, which included landowners and priests. Other Galileans strongly disapproved of the accommodations made by Sepphoris, and also by Josephus, to Roman rule. None of this, however, undermined the strong loyalties to Judaism that all of the concerned parties shared.

The population of the Galilee in general was undoubtedly undergoing change after the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E., and more than that, following the Second War against Rome (132-135 C.E.) — the Bar Kochba War - when refugees from the south moved north, some of them to Sepphoris. Unfortunately, the role played by the once pacifistic Sepphoreans in the Bar Kochba War is obscure, since the part taken by any Galileans in this war is far from being clear.

The priestly clan of Jedaiah is believed to have relocated in Sepphoris (after the latter war), although the influence of such a group on the local leadership is not evident in the immediate, post-destruction period.

Nevertheless, the large priestly community at Sepphoris, associated with one particular priestly course (mishmar), lent a further degree of authority to the Jewish community here.

The form of the pagan Roman presence at Sepphoris can be fairly well understood. It is probable that, until the reign of Hadrian (117-139 C.E.), the Galilee was predominantly Jewish in character. In Hadrian's time, however, either as a result of the Bar Kochba War or for other reasons, the ancient government of Sepphoris - in all likelihood the local Jewish governmental body — was abolished and a gentile administration installed. At this time the city became known as "Diocaesarea," i.e., city of Zeus (Dio) and the emperor. Hadrian adopted the title Zeus Olympus and a Capitoline temple was apparently built at the site. That these changes occurred during Hadrian's reign is indicated by the discovery of a milestone from Sepphoris bearing the legend "Diocaesarea" and dating to 130 C.E. The milestone was located on the road from Acco to Tiberias. At this time, however, Roman soldiers of the Sixth Legion were stationed in the Galilee at nearby Legio (modem Lejjun), the northern border of which corresponded to the southern border of Sepphoris-Diocaesarea.

Nevertheless, the fact that Sepphoris's name is replaced by a pagan one — "Diocaesarea" - at this time reflects the growing pagan influence in the region in general and at Sepphoris in particular. After two exhausting wars with the Jews, the Romans were determined to tighten their grip on the population of the Galilee and succeeded in doing so through a policy of urbanization. Changing the city name to "Diocaesarea" thus appears to correspond with the broader political aims of the Roman Empire, which attempted to attain greater control of the local community by constructing buildings, installing local Roman administrators, and by generally adopting a more visible presence.

Judeo-Roman coins continued to be minted at Sepphoris for most of the period between the two wars, but coins bearing the title "Diocaesarea" first appeared under Antoninus Pius (138-161 C.E.). Although there is a fifteen-year cessation of coinage right before the Second Revolt, such a gap is not necessarily related to the existence of rebellious factions in Sepphoris.

Sepphoris became the focal point and center of Jewish life and learning during the seventeen years that the Patriarch Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nasi (Judah the Prince) resided in the city (ca. 200-217 C.E.). During this time the Sanhedrin, or judicial seat of authority, was moved there. It was probably at Sepphoris that Rabbi Judah completed his work on the codification and redaction of the Mishnah, the centerpiece of the Talmud and basis of all Jewish learning to come.

In addition to his leadership role in the field of scholarship, Rabbi Judah was a central figure in contemporary Palestinian politics. His position in the Roman Empire was such that rabbinic literature depicts him as a friend of the Roman emperor — perhaps Antoninus Pius, but more probably Caracalla (also known as Antoninus), who reigned from 198 to 217 C.E. At this time a coin of Sepphoris, already known as Diocaesarea, provides astonishing testimony to a treaty of friendship between the Roman Senate and the Sepphoris Council or boule, the official governing bodies representing the two peoples. The inscription on the coins of Caracalla are a variation on the following: "Diocaesarea the Holy City, City of Shelter, Autonomous, Loyal, (a treaty of) friendship and alliance between the Holy Council and the Senate of the Roman people."

The interpretation of the coins of Caracalla minted in Sepphoris tends to support the historicity of the talmudic accounts that idealized a relationship between Rabbi Judah and the Roman emperor. The combination of literary, archaeological, and numismatic evidence, while not unique in ancient history, lends great credence to the talmudic view that several members, and possibly a majority, of the Council of Sepphoris were Jewish in the time of Rabbi Judah. This may be the only instance of such Jewish political involvement in ancient Eretz Israel in that period. All of this underscores the important economic and political role of Sepphoris in the third century C.E.

Given the likelihood that Rabbi Judah could actually have been an acquaintance of the Roman emperor and that Jews served on the Council of the municipality in his time, possibly even constituting a majority, the prominence of Sepphoris in Jewish history in the Middle-Late Roman period is not surprising. The rabbinic legends surely preserve idealized and exaggerated statements about the Patriarch and Caracalla. In fact, they depict Rabbi Judah as being wise as Solomon and as one before whom the emperor humbled himself. Yet all the talmudic accounts, while perhaps lacking in historical accuracy, certainly attest to Rabbi Judah's skills and political acumen in a time of growing Jewish influence in Palestine.

Rabbi Judah's presence and activity in Sepphoris attracted many sages from nearby regions and also from Babylon. Noted among them are Rabbi Natan Halevi, Rabbi Yosi Bar-Yehuda, Rabbi Shimeon Ben Elazar and Rabbi Shimeon Ben Mansi. Following the completion of the Mishna and the death of Rabbi Judah, it is recounted that a rabbi returned to Babylon, bringing Rabbi Judah's Mishna to the Babylonians. Sepphoris's reputation as a center of Jewish learning did not cease with the death of Rabbi Judah and the subsequent removal of the Sanhedrin to Tiberias. Indeed, both cities retained their reputations as seats of noted rabbinic authorities throughout the rabbinic period. Indeed, with the exception of Jerusalem, no cities in ancient Palestine are mentioned more often in rabbinic literature than Sepphoris and Tiberias.

Among the sages who remained in Sepphoris, despite the Sanhedrin's move to Tiberias, were Rabbi Chiyeh Bar-Abba and Rabbi Elazar Ben-Pedat. Other famous talmudic scholars, such as Rabbi Yochanan Nafcha and Rabbi Shimeon Ben-Lakish, now settled in Sepphoris.

The fact that so many sages lived in Sepphoris caused an increase in the number of synagogues and "batei-midrash" (study houses) in this city. The Jerusalem Talmud tells of the day of Rabbi Judah's death as follows;

"Rabbi Yehuda Ha-Nasi was dying at Zippori... It was the eve of the Sabbath and the inhabitants of all the cities assembled for the mourning over Rabbi. They set his body down in eighteen synagogues and then conveyed him to Beit Shearim" (Tal. Yer. Kil. 89.32).

Several of these synagogues are even familiar to us by names such as the "Synagogue of the Gofneans" (the synagogue apparently founded by refugees from the city of Gofna in northern Judea) or the "Synagogue of the Babylonian Jews at Sepphoris." In reference to the latter synagogue, we learn that Rabbi Judah used to sit and study the Torah at its front. Further evidence of the synagogues comes from a Greek inscription, found at Sepphoris, which mentions "the well known head of the synagogue of the people of Tyre."

In addition to the synagogues at Sepphoris, there were also "batei-midrash" (study-houses) in which the sages studied Torah and expounded it before the public. It is told, for example, that Rabbi Chanina built a Beit Midrash at Sepphoris with his own money, and it is further told that Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Shimeon Ben-Lakish met to discuss a certain problem at the Beit Midrash of Rabbi Minaya.

Sepphoris may also have been home to a group of minim or Judeo-Christians (who later apparently merged with the Christian community). A few second century Jewish sources mention a certain person, named Jacob (who is unknown in later Christian sources), coming from the nearby village of Sichnin; Jacob is said to have discussed Jesus, in Sepphoris, with Rabbi Eliezar (a notable sage of the second century), and to have healed the sick in Jesus' name. The ’ Church Father Eusebius, however, by the third century, does not mention any "Christians" at Sepphoris.

Thus far, neither clear relevant archaeological evidence nor sufficient historical references throw much light on the existence of a Christian community at Sepphoris during the fourth century C.E. One reference, dated to early in the fourth century, mentions a Jewish convert (to Christianity) from Tiberias named Justus (earlier identified by the name Josephus), who gained permission to build a church at Sepphoris. This source seems to be reliable; but without other external literary or archaeological evidence for any fourth century church, it is difficult to verify. There is no doubt, though, that the Christian population of Galilee in general was growing rapidly in the periods before and after the legalization of Christianity in the Roman Empire in 313 C.E. by Constantine and its subsequent adoption as the state religion by Theodosius the Great. Sepphoris, however, seems to have maintained its dominant Jewish character through all this period.

By the mid-fourth century, during the reign of Constantius II (337-361 C.E.), Sepphoris is reported to be the center of anti-Roman feelings in its opposition to the local rule of Gallus Caesar. The precise details of the so-called Gallus Revolt (351-352) are difficult to reconstruct. Sepphoris was devastated at about this time; but the cause was more likely a natural catastrophe, namely the great earthquake of 363 C.E., which put an end to the glories of the Roman occupation of the city. Indeed, the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time.

Sepphoris was soon rebuilt and probably continued to exist as a flourishing center also during the Byzantine period. Both archaeological as well as historical data provide evidence for this period. In the fifth and sixth centuries the city was the seat of a bishopric, whose bishops participated in at least two ecumenical councils. One of the historical sources mentions the fact that a bishop of Sepphoris attended the Council of Chalcedon in 451 C.E. To this period, perhaps, belongs the origin of the tradition that Joachim and Anna (the parents of Mary, mother of Jesus) were residents of Sepphoris. This belief, which has support in the patristic literature, is still upheld in the Roman Catholic Church. (In 1985 the sisters of the Catholic orphanage located today at Sepphoris organized a celebration to commemorate the 2000th anniversary of the birth of Mary.) Archaeological data also attest to the continuation of urban life at Sepphoris even in the Early Arabic period.

Although the history of medieval Christianity at Sepphoris remains unclear, the well-preserved Crusader Church of Saint Anne, which still stands in its early Gothic splendor, provides eloquent testimony to the importance of Sepphoris in Christian history.

In sum, the literary sources richly document the existence of varied communities living at Sepphoris, side by side with the prominent Jewish community, during the Roman and Byzantine periods. Archaeology, however has illuminated only the Jewish and pagan (Roman) presence until the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth centuries C.E., when archaeology and literary sources combine to present a picture of Christians existing alongside a dominant Jewish population and a strong Roman presence. The literary sources point to Sepphoris's continued leadership in the political, economic, and religious affairs of its region. Archaeological evidence has now confirmed that picture and has provided important new discoveries, which shed light on this period of great change and cultural development. That literary, spiritual, and religious creativity could have occurred in a flourishing oriental city is not surprising. That it occurred in the Jewish community at the very pinnacle of achievement alongside a lively paganism replete with a theater and a large villa with a splendid mosaic and grand banquet hall is testimony to the urban setting as a catalyst for a constructive symbiosis in late antiquity.

Exploration And Excavation

from Zeev Weiss in Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Excavations were first carried out at Sepphoris in the early 1930s under the direction of L. Waterman of the University of Michigan. Two sections were cut to the east and west of the fortress (see below). About fifty years later, work was resumed by two separate expeditions. The first, begun in 1983 under the direction of J.P. Strange of the University of Tampa, Florida, conducted a survey of the buildings, cisterns, and burial systems across the site. The second expedition, begun in 1985, is a joint project of Duke University, North Carolina, and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, under the direction of E. M. Meyers, E. Netzer, and C. Meyers, and from 1990, under the direction of Netzer and Z. Weiss from the Hebrew University at Jerusalem. This expedition concentrated on the summit of the site and the area surrounding it. In 1975-1985 a survey of the site's aqueducts was conducted by Z. Zuck; the results were published in a separate report. Since then, a few burial systems have either been excavated or surveyed, along with isolated remains, shedding light on the city's history.

Maps, Aerial Views, Plans, Illustrations, Cross-Sections, and Photos

Maps

Location Map from

Location Map

Strange et al. (2006)

Strange et al. (2006)
Gallus Revolt Location

Gallus Revolt Location Map

Nathanson (1986)

Map from Nathanson (1986)

Aerial Views

Aerial View of Sepphoris

Aerial View of Sepphoris

click on image to open a high resolution magnifiable image in a new tab AVRANGR - Wikipedia - CC BY-SA 4.0

from wikipedia
Annotated Satellite View

Annotated Satellite View of Sepphoris and surroundings

Used with permission from from BibleWalks.com

of Sepphoris and surroundings from BibleWalks.com
Sepphoris in Google Earth

Sepphoris

click on image to explore this site on a new tab in Google Earth
Sepphoris on govmap.gov.il

Sepphoris

click on image to explore this site on a new tab in govmap.gov.il

Plans

Site Plans

Site Plan from Nagy et al. (1996)

from Nagy et al. (1996)

Site Plan of Excavations at Sepphoris

Nagy et al. (1996)

Site Plans from Meyers et al. (1992) and Stern et al. (1993)

Normal Size

Site Plan from

Plan of the site showing location of excavated areas and of major features (theater, citadel, villa with mosaic)

Meyers et al. (1992)

Meyers et al. (1992)
Site Plan from

Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations.

Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Magnified

Site Plan from

Plan of the site showing location of excavated areas and of major features (theater, citadel, villa with mosaic)

Meyers et al. (1992)

Meyers et al. (1992)
Site Plan from

Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations.

Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Area Plans

Eastern Side of Acropolis (Theater, Citadel, Mosaic Building and Storehouse)

Normal Size

Fig. 10 Plan of the
Fig. 10

Plan of the eastern side of the acropolis showing:
1. The Citadel
2. The Theater
3. The Dionysos Mosaic Building
4. The Storehouse
Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)
eastern side of the acropolis from Nagy et al. (1996)

Magnified

Fig. 10 Plan of the
Fig. 10

Plan of the eastern side of the acropolis showing:
1. The Citadel
2. The Theater
3. The Dionysos Mosaic Building
4. The Storehouse
Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)
eastern side of the acropolis from Nagy et al. (1996)

Residential Area on Western Side of the Acropolis

Normal Size

Plan of residential

Plan of residential area on western side of the acropolis. A major east-west road runs across the northern edge of this domestic area, which was inhabited continually from Hellenistic times (ca. 100 B.C.E.) to the Byzantine era (seventh century C.E.).

Meyers et al. (1992)

area on western side of the acropolis from Meyers et al. (1992)

Magnified

Plan of residential

Plan of residential area on western side of the acropolis. A major east-west road runs across the northern edge of this domestic area, which was inhabited continually from Hellenistic times (ca. 100 B.C.E.) to the Byzantine era (seventh century C.E.).

Meyers et al. (1992)

area on western side of the acropolis from Meyers et al. (1992)

Roman Villa aka Villa with Mosaic aka Dionysos mosaic building

Normal Size

Fig. 46 Plan of the

Fig. 46

Plan of the Dionysos mosaic building showing the location of the triclinium (reception hall) mosaic, near the top center of the plan.

Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

Dionysos mosaic building from Nagy et al. (1996)
Plan of villa with

Plan of villa with mosaic floor. A peristyle courtyard, with reflecting pool, is situated to the south of the triclinium (banquet hall). Various rooms, some with plain or geometric mosaic floors, surround the central banquet room.

Meyers et al. (1992)

mosaic floor from Meyers et al. (1992)

Magnified

Fig. 46 Plan of the

Fig. 46

Plan of the Dionysos mosaic building showing the location of the triclinium (reception hall) mosaic, near the top center of the plan.

Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

Dionysos mosaic building from Nagy et al. (1996)
Plan of villa with

Plan of villa with mosaic floor. A peristyle courtyard, with reflecting pool, is situated to the south of the triclinium (banquet hall). Various rooms, some with plain or geometric mosaic floors, surround the central banquet room.

Meyers et al. (1992)

mosaic floor from Meyers et al. (1992)

Nile Building

Normal Size

Fig. 32 Plan of the

Fig. 32

Plan of the fifth-century C.E. Nile festival building.

Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

fifth-century C.E. Nile festival building from Nagy et al. (1996)

Magnified

Fig. 32 Plan of the

Fig. 32

Plan of the fifth-century C.E. Nile festival building.

Courtesy: The Hebrew University Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

fifth-century C.E. Nile festival building from Nagy et al. (1996)

Field I Excavation Squares of USF (University of South Florida) Excavations - Strange et. al. (2006)

Normal Size

Fig. 1.01 Field I

Fig. 1.01

Field I Squares with Dates excavated

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.03 USF Excavation

Fig. 6.03

Waterman's finds with USF Squares

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares superimposed on Waterman's excavations from the 1930s from Strange et al. (2006)

Magnified

Fig. 1.01 Field I

Fig. 1.01

Field I Squares with Dates excavated

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.03 USF Excavation

Fig. 6.03

Waterman's finds with USF Squares

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares superimposed on Waterman's excavations from the 1930s from Strange et al. (2006)

Citadel aka Tower aka Fort

Normal Size

Fig. 4.01 Location of

Fig. 4.01

Location of Squares 1-3 and Tower

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares 1-3 and Tower from Strange et al. (2006)

Magnified

Fig. 4.01 Location of

Fig. 4.01

Location of Squares 1-3 and Tower

Strange et al. (2006)

Squares 1-3 and Tower from Strange et al. (2006)

Basilica (aka a Villa ?)

Normal Size

Fig. 2 The Basilica

Fig. 2

The Basilica

Waterman et al. (1937)

from Waterman et al. (1937)

Magnified

Fig. 2 The Basilica

Fig. 2

The Basilica

Waterman et al. (1937)

from Waterman et al. (1937)

Theater

Normal Size

The Theater (restored)

The Theater (restored)

Waterman et al. (1937)

from Waterman et al. (1937)

Magnified

The Theater (restored)

The Theater (restored)

Waterman et al. (1937)

from Waterman et al. (1937)

Illustrations

Normal Size

Illustration of public

Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right).

Meyers et al. (1992)

area fo the city from Meyers et al. (1992)
Fig. 52 Reconstruction

Fig. 52

Reconstruction of the eastern basilical building, showing the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (main north-south street).

Courtesy: University of South Florida Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

of the eastern basilical building from Nagy et al. (1996)

Magnified

Illustration of public

Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right).

Meyers et al. (1992)

area fo the city from Meyers et al. (1992)
Fig. 52 Reconstruction

Fig. 52

Reconstruction of the eastern basilical building, showing the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (main north-south street).

Courtesy: University of South Florida Expedition

Nagy et al. (1996)

of the eastern basilical building from Nagy et al. (1996)

Cross-Sections

Normal Size

Fig. 4.03 Square I.1,

Fig. 4.03

Square I.12, Southeast Balk

JW: Layers 1024 and 1025 are mid 4th century CE destruction layers

Strange et al. (2006)

Southeast Balk showing 1024 and 1025 destruction layers from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.08 Square I.12,

Fig. 6.08

Square I.12, North Balk

Strange et al. (2006)

North Balk from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.09 Square I.12,

Fig. 6.09

Square I.12, East Balk

Strange et al. (2006)

East Balk from Strange et al. (2006)

Magnified

Fig. 4.03 Square I.1,

Fig. 4.03

Square I.12, Southeast Balk

JW: Layers 1024 and 1025 are mid 4th century CE destruction layers

Strange et al. (2006)

Southeast Balk showing 1024 and 1025 destruction layers from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.08 Square I.12,

Fig. 6.08

Square I.12, North Balk

Strange et al. (2006)

North Balk from Strange et al. (2006)
Fig. 6.09 Square I.12,

Fig. 6.09

Square I.12, East Balk

Strange et al. (2006)

East Balk from Strange et al. (2006)

Photos

Normal Size

Photo of citadel from

The citadel, or fort, of Sepphoris is the most prominent structure on the site today and can be seen from as far away as Nazareth, several miles to the east. Its foundations may date to the Byzantine period, but it has been rebuilt many times. Most of the present cornerstones are rubble filed Roman sarcophagi that were probably incorporated into the building in Byzantine or Crusader times. The most recent rebuilding took place in the late nineteenth century, when Abdul Hamid (1816-1909) had the structure rebuilt for use as a schoolhouse. It was used as such by the local Arab villagers until the 1948 war.

Meyers et al. (1992)

Meyers et al. (1992)
Fig. 9 Photo of citadel

Fig. 9

The Roman theater against the backdrop of the Crusader/ Ottoman citadel on the summit of the Sepphoris acropolis. Constructed at the end of the first century C.E. or later, the theater could seat around 4,500 spectators.

Photo: Ehud Netzer

Nagy et al. (1996)

and theater from Nagy et al. (1996)

Magnified

Photo of citadel from

The citadel, or fort, of Sepphoris is the most prominent structure on the site today and can be seen from as far away as Nazareth, several miles to the east. Its foundations may date to the Byzantine period, but it has been rebuilt many times. Most of the present cornerstones are rubble filed Roman sarcophagi that were probably incorporated into the building in Byzantine or Crusader times. The most recent rebuilding took place in the late nineteenth century, when Abdul Hamid (1816-1909) had the structure rebuilt for use as a schoolhouse. It was used as such by the local Arab villagers until the 1948 war.

Meyers et al. (1992)

Meyers et al. (1992)
Fig. 9 Photo of citadel

Fig. 9

The Roman theater against the backdrop of the Crusader/ Ottoman citadel on the summit of the Sepphoris acropolis. Constructed at the end of the first century C.E. or later, the theater could seat around 4,500 spectators.

Photo: Ehud Netzer

Nagy et al. (1996)

and theater from Nagy et al. (1996)

Phasing

Tel 'Ein Zippori - Iron and Bronze Age

from Carol Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:17)

Strata at Tel 'Ein Zippori

Nagy et al. (1996)

Villa

from Strange et al. (2006)

Table 3

Proposed Phases of the Villa

Strange et al. (2006)

363 CE Earthquake

Discussion

Two destructions were visited upon Sepphoris in the middle of the 4th century CE. In 351-352 CE, Sepphoris was at the epicenter of the Gallus Revolt. According to several ancient authors including Jerome, Socrates Scholasticus, and Sozomen, the city was burned, razed to the foundations, or destroyed ( Strange et al., 2006:22-23). A little over a decade later, the city was destroyed or damaged by an earthquake. In a letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem, we can read that the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) was overthrown by the northern 363 CE Cyril Quake.

Meyers et al. (1992:17) suggested that mid-4th century CE rebuilding evidence in Sepphoris was largely due to the 363 CE Cyril Quake while adding that the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time. Strange et al. (2006:63), however, suggested that destruction debris in the cavea of the theater was deliberately placed there during the cleanup which followed the city's destruction/damage stemming from the Gallus Revolt. Strange et al. (2006:122) opined that while it is theoretically possible that the earthquake of 363 C.E. destroyed the Villa, it is not likely, for the simple reason that no one repaired the Villa or rebuilt it, nor did excavation reveal smashed stones or walls that were thrown down. Strange et al. (2006:122) added that all of the rooms that we probed were filled with erosion and deliberate fill. Strange et al. (2006:47) also proposed that the Tower (aka the Citadel) was constructed in the mid-4th century CE after domestic structures on the summit were destroyed due to the Gallus Revolt.

In the excavation report of Strange et al. (2006), several mid 4th century CE destruction layers were encountered. For example:

In Square I.12 of Field I, Strange et al. (2006:80) identified L12016, a thick [50-78 cm.] layer of soil with charcoal and ash which marked the destruction of the Villa [JW:Another Villa?]. Strange et al. (2006) used coin evidence to produce a terminus post quem of 355-361 CE for L12016.
Strange et al. (2006:98) found traces of destruction in the east balk of Square I.10.
Strange et al. (2006:122) assigned abandonment and/or damage and/or destruction of the villa to Phase 4 and dated this phase to between 351 and 361 C.E., judging from the stratigraphy and the coins.
In Square I.1 adjacent to the Tower (aka the Citadel), Strange et al. (2006:47) found what may be two destruction layers - Locus 1025 which contained ash and charcoal evidently from a 4th century fire and Locus 1024 on top of Locus 1025. Locus 1024 was a 30 cm. thick destruction layer, dark with ash, and containing potsherds from the Early Roman through the Late Roman periods.

Waterman et al. (1937) also reports ~mid-4th century CE destruction evidence which, they speculate, could have been caused by the Gallus Revolt although the northern Cyril Quake could also have been fully or partly responsible for this evidence.

Waterman et al. (1937:30 n. 52) reports that that large architectural fragments belonging to the masonry of the theater were found at various depths nearer the top of Cistern No. 8. Waterman et al. (1937:30) surmised that these fragments were caused by a mid 4th century CE destruction due to an abundance of Byzantine sherds and a lack of post Byzantine sherds in Cistern No. 8.

Waterman et al. (1937:30-31) found evidence of burning, a disturbed and overturned floor, uncharred human remains, and an uncharred pickaxe in Room 10. The 8-10 cm. thick burned layer was also found a good distance to the north of this room (Room 10), near the theater, [and] in the debris immediately south of it.

Although Waterman et al. (1937), Meyers et al. (1992), and Strange et al. (2006) differed in their interpretations about the cause of destruction, the letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem strongly suggests that, at the least, seismic collapse occurred in some parts of the site.

JW: The Villa of Meyers et al. (1992) and the Villa(s) of Strange et al. (2006) may not be the same Villa.

References

Meyers et al. (1992)

from Meyers et al. (1992:16-17)

Sepphoris may also have been home to a group of minim or Judeo-Christians (who later apparently merged with the Christian community). A few second century Jewish sources mention a certain person, named Jacob (who is unknown in later Christian sources), coming from the nearby village of Sichnin; Jacob is said to have discussed Jesus, in Sepphoris, with Rabbi Eliezar (a notable sage of the second century), and to have healed the sick in Jesus' name. The ’ Church Father Eusebius, however, by the third century, does not mention any "Christians" at Sepphoris.

Thus far, neither clear relevant archaeological evidence nor sufficient historical references throw much light on the existence of a Christian community at Sepphoris during the fourth century C.E. One reference, dated to early in the fourth century, mentions a Jewish convert (to Christianity) from Tiberias named Justus (earlier identified by the name Josephus), who gained permission to build a church at Sepphoris. This source seems to be reliable; but without other external literary or archaeological evidence for any fourth century church, it is difficult to verify. There is no doubt, though, that the Christian population of Galilee in general was growing rapidly in the periods before and after the legalization of Christianity in the Roman Empire in 313 C.E. by Constantine and its subsequent adoption as the state religion by Theodosius the Great. Sepphoris, however, seems to have maintained its dominant Jewish character through all this period.

By the mid-fourth century, during the reign of Constantius II (337-361 C.E.), Sepphoris is reported to be the center of anti-Roman feelings in its opposition to the local rule of Gallus Caesar. The precise details of the so-called Gallus Revolt (351-352) are difficult to reconstruct. Sepphoris was devastated at about this time; but the cause was more likely a natural catastrophe, namely the great earthquake of 363 C.E., which put an end to the glories of the Roman occupation of the city. Indeed, the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time.

Sepphoris was soon rebuilt and probably continued to exist as a flourishing center also during the Byzantine period. Both archaeological as well as historical data provide evidence for this period. In the fifth and sixth centuries the city was the seat of a bishopric, whose bishops participated in at least two ecumenical councils. One of the historical sources mentions the fact that a bishop of Sepphoris attended the Council of Chalcedon in 451 C.E. To this period, perhaps, belongs the origin of the tradition that Joachim and Anna (the parents of Mary, mother of Jesus) were residents of Sepphoris. This belief, which has support in the patristic literature, is still upheld in the Roman Catholic Church. (In 1985 the sisters of the Catholic orphanage located today at Sepphoris organized a celebration to commemorate the 2000th anniversary of the birth of Mary.) Archaeological data also attest to the continuation of urban life at Sepphoris even in the Early Arabic period.

Although the history of medieval Christianity at Sepphoris remains unclear, the well-preserved Crusader Church of Saint Anne, which still stands in its early Gothic splendor, provides eloquent testimony to the importance of Sepphoris in Christian history.

In sum, the literary sources richly document the existence of varied communities living at Sepphoris, side by side with the prominent Jewish community, during the Roman and Byzantine periods. Archaeology, however has illuminated only the Jewish and pagan (Roman) presence until the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth centuries C.E., when archaeology and literary sources combine to present a picture of Christians existing alongside a dominant Jewish population and a strong Roman presence. The literary sources point to Sepphoris's continued leadership in the political, economic, and religious affairs of its region. Archaeological evidence has now confirmed that picture and has provided important new discoveries, which shed light on this period of great change and cultural development. That literary, spiritual, and religious creativity could have occurred in a flourishing oriental city is not surprising. That it occurred in the Jewish community at the very pinnacle of achievement alongside a lively paganism replete with a theater and a large villa with a splendid mosaic and grand banquet hall is testimony to the urban setting as a catalyst for a constructive symbiosis in late antiquity.

Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Identification and History

from Zeev Weiss in Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Ancient Sepphoris is clearly identified with the ruined village of Safuriyye, the present-day Moshav Zippori. The site overlooks the Beth Netofa Valley in the central Lower Galilee, about 5 km (3 mi.) northwest of Nazareth (map reference 176.239). Sepphoris is first mentioned by Josephus in connection with the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (Antiq. XIII, 338), but a few remains from the Iron Age II found here attest to an earlier settlement. In the Hasmonean period, Sepphoris was probably the administrative center of the whole of Galilee. In around 57-55 BCE, the Roman proconsul Gabinius made Sepphoris the capital of the district of Galilee (Antiq. XIV, 91; War I, 170). Sepphoris submitted to Herod, who attacked the city during a snowstorm in 3 7 BCE (Antiq. XIV, 414; War I, 304 ). After Herod's death, the Romans conquered thecityin the "warofVarus" and sold its inhabitants into slavery (Antiq. XVII, 289; War II, 68). With the partition of Herod's king dom, Sepphoris was granted to his son Antipas, who resided here until he founded Tiberias and made it the new capital of Galilee. Antipas fortified Sepphoris and changed its name to Autocratoris, according to Josephus (Antiq. XVIII, 27). During the First Jewish Revolt against Rome, the inhabitants of Sepphoris sided with Vespasian, surrendered their city to him (War III, 30-34), and struck coins in his honor as the "peace maker" (ειρηνοποιος). After the destruction of the Temple, the priestly family of Jedaiah settled in Sepphoris. During Trajan's reign, coins were minted here by the Jewish local government; the words "Emperor Trajan gave" were stamped on them. During the reign of Hadrian, the "old government" of Sepphoris - the Jewish local city government (Mishnah, Qid. 4:5) - was abolished, a gentile administration was appointed, and probably, at the same time, the name of the city was changed to Diocaesarea (Διοκαισαρεια, the city of Zeus and of the emperor). Yet, after Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi and the Sanhedrin established their seat here for seventeen years before the rabbi's death, at the end of the second century (J.T., Kil. 9:4, 32b), the local government of the city was once more turned over to a Jewish town council. Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi redacted the Mishnah in Sepphoris. At the beginning of the third century, the minting of coins by the Jews was renewed here; the coins were stamped "Covenant of friendship and mutual aid between the holy council and the senate of the Roman people."

Sepphoris is mentioned many times in Talmudic literature and was known throughout its existence as a Jewish city. In the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods many scholars lived here; the best known are rabbis Halafta, Ele'azar ben 'Azariah, and Jose ben Halafta. The seat of the Sanhedrin was also in Sepphoris until it was moved by Rabbi Yohanan to Tiberias in the time of Rabbi Judah Nesiah, the grandson of Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. During the reign of Emperor Constantine, a certain Josephus the Apostate tried in vain to erect a church here (Epiph., Haer. 30, 4~12). In the reign of Constantius II, the Jewish revolt against Gallus Caesar, led by Patricius, began in Sepphoris (351 CE). The Roman troops garrisoned in the city were disarmed, and the rebels gained control. The Roman commander Ursicinus succeeded in crushing the revolt, but, in spite of the reports of the Christian sources (Jerome, Chron., Olymp. 282; Socrates, HE II, 33; Sozomenos, HE IV, 7), he failed to level the city. In a letter sent by Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, mention is made of an earthquake that struck Palestine in 363, making special note of the total destruction of Sepphoris. The town was later partly restored and continued to be a Jewish city until the fifth century; in the sixth century, however, it had a Christian community, headed by a bishop. Bishops ofSepphoris participated in the synods of Jerusalem in 518 and 536. In Crusader times, Sepphoris (Le Sephorie) was a city and fortress in the province of Galilee. Remains of a Crusader church and fortress still stand at the site. In the eighteenth century, the governor of Galilee, Dhahir el-'Amr, refortified it.

English Translation of Letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem by Brock (1977)

from Brock (1977)

Translation¹⁴

On how many miracles took place when the Jews received the order to rebuild the Temple, and the signs which occurred in the region of Asia.¹⁵

1¹⁶ The letter, which was sent from the holy Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, concerning the Jews, when they wanted to rebuild the Temple, and (on how) the land was shaken, and mighty prodigies took place, and fire consumed great numbers of them, and many Christians (too) perished.

2 To¹⁷ my beloved brethren, bishops, priests, and deacons of the Church of Christ¹⁸ in revery district : greetings, my brethren.¹⁹ 'The punishment of our Lord²⁰ is sure, and His sentence (ὰποφασις) that He gave concerning the city of the crucifiers is faithful, and with our own eyes we have received a fearful sight²¹ for²² truly did the Apostle say that 'there is nothing greater than the love of God'.²³ Now, while the earth was shaking²⁴ and the entire people suffering²⁵, I have not neglected to write to you about everything that has taken place here.²⁶

3 At the digging of the foundations of Jerusalem, 'which had been ruined because of the killing of its Lord, the land shook considerably²⁷, and there were great²⁸ tremors in the towns²⁹ round about.

4 Now even though the person bringing the letter is slow, nevertheless I shall still write and inform you that we are all well, by the grace of God and the aid of³⁰ prayer. Now I think that you are concerned for us, (and) our minds were tearing us—not only our own, but all our brethren's as well, who are with us, that I should tell you too about what happened amongst us.³¹

5 We have not written to you at length, beyond the earthquake that took place at God's (behest). For many Christians too living in these regions, as well as the majority of the³² Jews, perished at that scourge — and not just in the earthquake, but also as a result of fire and in the heavy³³ rain they had.

6 At the outset, when they wanted to lay the foundations of the Temple on the Sunday previous to the earthquake, there were 'strong winds and storms³⁴, with the result that they were unable to lay the Temple's foundations that day³⁵. It was on that very night that the great earthquake occurred, and we were all³⁶ in the church of the Confessors, engaged in prayer. After this we left to go to the Mount of Olives, which is situated to the east of Jerusalem, where³⁷ our Lord was raised to His glorious³⁸ Father. We went out into the middle of the city, reciting a psalm,³⁹ and we passed⁴⁰ the graves of the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah, and we besought the Lord of the prophets that, through the prayers of His prophets and apostles, His truth might be seen by His worshippers in the face of the audacity of the Jews⁴¹ who had crucified Him

7 Now they⁴² (sc. the Jews), wanting to imitate⁴³ us, were running to the place where their synagogue usually gathered, and they found the synagogue doors closed. They were greatly amazed at what had happened and stood around in silence and fear when suddenly the synagogue doors opened of their own accord, and out of the building there came forth fire, which licked up the majority of them, and most of them collapsed and perished in front of the building. The doors then closed of their own accord, while the whole city looked on at what was happening, and the entire populace, Jew and Christian alike, cried out with one voice, saying 'There is but one God, one Christ, who is victorious' ; and the entire people rushed off and tore down the idols and (pagan) altars that were in the city, glorifying and praising Christ, and confessing that He is the Son of the Living God. And they drove out the demons of the city, and the Jews, and the whole city received the sign of baptism, Jews as well as many pagans, all together, so that we thought that there was not a single person left in the city who had not received the sign (σημειον) or mark (τνπος) of the living Cross in heaven. And it instilled great fear in all.

8 And the entire people thought that, after these signs which our Saviour gave us in His Gospel, the fearful (second) coming of the day of resurrection had arrived. With trembling of great joy we received something of the sign (ημιεὶον) of Christ's crucifixion, and whosoever did not believe in his mind found his clothes openly reprove him, having the mark of the cross stained on them.

9 As for the statue (ἀνδριάς) of Herod which stood in Jerusalem, which the Jews had thrown down in (an act of) supplication (?) (δέησις), the city ran and set it up where it had been standing.

10 Thus we felt compelled to write to you the truth of these matters, that everything that is written about Jerusalem should be established in truth, that 'no stone shall be left in it that will not be upturned'.

11 Now we should like to write down for you the names of the towns which were overthrown : Beit Gubrin—more than half of it ; part of Baishan, the whole of Sebastia and its territory (χωρα), the whole of Nikopolis and its territory (χωρα) ; more than half Lydda and its territory (χωρα) ; about half of Ashqelon, the whole of Antipatris and its territory (χωρα) ; part of Caesarea, more than half Samaria ; part of NSL', a third of Paneas", half of Azotus, part of Gophna, more than half Petra (RQM) ; Hada, a suburb of the city (Jerusalem)—more than half ; Jerusalem more than half. And fire came forth and consumed the teachers of the Jews. Part of Tiberias too, and its territory (χωρα), more than half 'RDQLY' (Areopolis or Archelais^a), the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα), 'Aina d-Gader; Haifa (? ; TAP) flowed with blood for three days ; the whole of Japho (YWPY) perished, (and) part of 'D'NWS.

12 This event took place on Monday at the third hour, and partly at the ninth hour of the night. There was great loss of life here. (It was) on 19 Iyyar of the year 674 of the kingdom of Alexander the Greek. This year the pagan Julian died, and it was he who especially incited the Jews to rebuild the Temple, since he favoured them because they had crucified Christ. Justice overtook this rebel at his death in enemy territory, and in this the sign of the power of the cross was revealed, because he had denied Him who had been hung upon it for the salvation and life of all.

All this that has been briefly written to you took place in actual fact in this way.

Footnotes

14 I translate B ; the main variants of A are given in the footnotes.
15 Letter of Cyril bishop of Jerusalem.
16 A omits § 1.
17 pr. Cyril bishop of Jerusalem.
18 our Lord.
19 in all regions.
20 With (in) our Lord punishment.
21 in our own sight it specifically received it ; greetings !
22 Just as, my brothers.
23 om. of God.
29 shook.
25 world suffered.
26 om. here.
27 the land suffered specifically.
28 om. great.
25 + and cities.
30 + your.
31 seeing that we too, because we (were) there, struggled for ourselves.
32 Not only were we not harmed by the earthquake that took place at God's (behest), but no Christian who was here (was harmed), but many.
33 om. heavy.
34 winds and strong storms.
35 the foundations as they had wanted ; for it was in their mind to lay the Temple's foundations the following day.
36 fled and took refuge in.
37 whence.
38 om. glorious.
39 psalms.
40 + between.
41 those (who).
42 the Jews.
43 The folio of A containing the rest of the letter is lost.

a Guidoboni et. al. (1994) state that there are "palaeographic reasons to suggest that the debated 'RDQLY in Cyril's letter may be a reference to Areopolis rather than Archelais".

Strange et al. (2006)

Chapter 2 - The Site and the History of Investigations

The Site

Non-Jewish Literary Sources

from Strange et al. (2006:22-23)

... One of the formative events of the fourth century C.E. is the Revolt against Gallus Caesar in the middle of the century. The best Hellenic historian of the fourth century’, Ammianus Marcellinus, does not mention the revolt, though he is quite familiar with the reign of Gallus and with Ursicinus (a figure whom the Jewish sources also connect with the revolt).⁷⁰

Therefore, the main source for the Gallus Revolt is the fourth century’ Hellenic writer Aureoles Victor, who is almost contemporary with the events mentioned, writing between 359 and 361. His account mentions that an . . . insurrection of the Jews who had raised up Patricius impiously in the form of a kingdom was suppressed. (Liber de Caesaribus 42).⁷¹ It names an unknown pretender, connects the revolt to no particular city, and goes on to tell us the emperor ordered Gallus’ death because of Gallus’ “murderous nature.” The event should date to 352 or 353 C.E.

It is the fifth century Christian writer, Jerome (386-419), who adds the specification that three Palestinian cities, including Sepphoris, participated:

Gallus crushed the Jews, who murdered the soldiers in the night, seizing arms for the purpose of rebellion, even many thousands of men, even innocent children and their cities of Diocaesarca, Tiberias, and Diospolis and many villages he consigned to flames. (Chron. 238).

It is two outstanding Christian historians of the early fifth century C.E., Socrates Scholasticus (ca. 380-post 439) and Sozomen (his Η. E. written 439-450) who clearly located the center of the revolt at Sepphoris.⁷²

Socrates says:

About the same time there arose another intestine commotion in the East, for the Jews who inhabited Diocacsarea in Palestine took up arms against the Romans, and began to ravage the adjacent places. But Gallus, who was called Constantius, whom the emperor, after creating Caesar, had sent into the East, dispatched an army against them, and completely vanquished them; after which he ordered that their city Diocacsarea should be razed to the foundations. (Hist. Ecc. 2.33)

Sozomen adds details on the end of Gallus.

The Jews of Diocacsarea also overran Palestine and the neighboring territories; they took up arms with the design of shaking off the Roman yoke. On hearing of their insurrection, Gallus Caesar, who was then at Antioch, sent troops against them, defeated them, and destroyed Diocacsarea. Gallus, intoxicated with success, could not bear his prosperity, but aspired to the supreme power, and he slew Magnus, the quaestor, and Domitian, the prefect of the East, because they apprised the emperor of his innovations. The anger of Constantius was excited; and he summoned him to his presence. Gallus did not dare to refuse obedience, and set out on his journey. When, however, he reached the island Elavona he was killed by the emperor’s order; this event occurred in the third year of his consulate, and the seventh of Constantius. (Hist. Ecc. 4.7)

Was there a Jewish revolt under Gallus? Four of the five earliest sources indicate that there was. The three Christian sources (Jerome, Socrates, and Sozomen) indicate that Diocacsarea was one of three cities involved (Jerome) or was itself the center of the revolt (Socrates and Sozomen). Two of the three Christian writers were located in Palestine (Jerome) or familiar with it (Sozomen wrote in Constantinople but was originally from Bethelia near Gaza).⁷³ The notices of the revolt seem genuine enough, and the writers most familiar with Palestine take it as genuine and indicate that Sepphoris was a key “player” and a key “sufferer” in the event. The small number of cities involved, and its unknown cause made it an obscure event to writers not so thoroughly familiar with Palestine. The destruction materials that are found in mid-fourth century loci across our excavation’s fields support such a conclusion.

Although Jerome lived in Bethlehem, he only traveled around the country one brief time upon his arrival in the Holy Land.⁷⁴ Nonetheless he is our source to the effect that Sepphoris (“Seppforine”) received its name Diocacsarea from Antoninus Pius (Liber Locorum 17.14). Yet when he reports that Jonah was buried at Sepphoris (Preface to the Book of Jonas 25.1119), he has likely con fused Jonah and some famous rabbi (perhaps Judah himself).

Palladius (419 C.E.), The Lausiac History, ch. 46, relates the story of Melanie “the Thrice Blessed”, who cared for Orthodox Christians from Egypt whom the Arian emperor Valens (364-378) exiled to some place near Diocacsarea in the late fourth century C.E. This company included six monks and twelve bishops and priests. If the story is indeed historical, then it is arresting to think that being sent to the city territory of Sepphoris was to be in exile during the latter half of the fourth century C.E. We may infer that Sepphoris, a Jewish city, may in fact have been punished as a result of Gallus’ Revolt.⁷⁵ The action of Valens tends to confirm the story in Epiphanius about Count Joseph building churches under Orthodox patronage at Diocacsarea (see above), that is, Valens would have seen Diocacsarea as Orthodox territory, even though Jewish, perhaps also damaged in Gallus’ Revolt.

The leading proponent of an interpretation of these texts which denies that the revolt ever occurred is J. Schaefer.⁷⁶

...

Footnotes

70 Menachem Mor, “Tlte Events of 351-352 in Palestine The Last Revolt Against Rome?” In 'The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of a Colloquium Held at Ancyra in September 1988, edited by D. H. French and C. S. Lightfoot, Part II, British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara Monograph No. 11, BAR International Series 553 (ii), 1989: 335-353.

71 Mor 1989: 337.

72 Johannes Quasten, Patrology, Vol. 3 (Utrecht/Antwerp: Spectrum, 1963): 533 and 535.

73 Quasten, Patrology, 534.

74 J. Wilkenson, “L’Apport de Saint Jerome a la Topographie,” RB 8l (1974): 245 57, esp. 256-57.

75 Palladius: The Lausiac History, translated by Robert T. Meyer. Ancient Christian Writers, 34. London: Longmans, Green and Co. and Westminster: The Newman Press, 1965: 123-25.

76 J. Schaefer, “Der Aufstand gegen Gallus Caesar.” In Tradition and Interpretation in Jewish and Christian Literature: Essays in Honor of Jurgen C. H. Lebram, Studia Post-Biblica 36. ed. J. W. van Henten et al., Leiden: Brill. 1986: 184-201. Schaefer's arguments seem to us to have been effectively met in Barbara Nathanson. 'Jews, Christians, and the Gallus Revolt in Fourth-century Palestine,” BA 49 (1986): 26-36.

Chapter 4 - The “Citadel” Or Tower

Introduction

from Strange et al. (2006:43)

Square 1.1 1983: Probe on north side of the Tower, supervised by Robert Ingraham

Square 1.2 1983: Probe at the northwest corner of the Tower, supervised by John McRay

Square 1.3 1983: Probe 1 m west of 1.2 into occupation levels to bedrock and to four rock cut chambers, supervised by Alice Ingraham

Square 1.3 1985: Excavation inside the four chambers, supervised by C. Thomas McCollough and Robert Ingraham

Square 1.6 1985: Probe to reveal the opening of chamber C205, supervised by C. Thomas McCollough

In his 1931 excavations, Leroy Waterman apparently dug at the northwest corner of the 'Lower but did not leave a clear record of his work in the area. The lone sentence in his Preliminary Report that refers to this activity could not be understood until modern materials were encountered during the excavation of Square I.2 (sec below). The report provides no dimensions for the extent of Waterman’s probe. Yeivin simply says, “This fragment [of an inscribed mortuary urn] was recovered from a deep shaft sunk at the northwest corner of the Crusaders’ Citadel on the summit of the hill.”¹

Waterman engaged in substantial excavations on the east side of the Tower. In his Preliminary Report, Plate V, Fig. 2, one secs a view to the north of that part of his trench S-I, just east of the Tower. In that photograph one can see a wall parallel to the cast wall of the Tower with three cross walls running to the west underneath the Tower.1 2 This single course of stones appears to be of typical Herodian preparation. The stones have drafted margins and trimmed bosses on their east side, suggesting that one is looking at the outside of a building. As much as 50 Roman feet of it appears to be concealed beneath the Tower to the west.³

Yeivin suggested that the stones in the “Citadel” were from a Hasmonean palace, and that this palace was the “old castra” mentioned by the rabbis (M Arakhin 9.6). But the “old castra” was not to be identified with the building found on the east side of the Tower. He described the fragment of that building as seen in Plate V, Fig. 2, as “one outer wall and four thinner partition walls, dividing the inner space into five rooms.” Based on the discovery of a first century lamp inside “room 2” of the building, and of painted stucco fragments “with designs of red pomegranates and green leaves,” Yeivin concluded that the building dated from the first century C.E. and indeed was likely built by Herod Antipas.⁴

Footnotes

1 Yeivin, op. cit., 27.

2 A fourth cross wall may be visible as two Herodian stones in Plate VI, Figs. 1 and 2.

3 The plan of this building was never published by Waterman. It appears in Makhouly’s plan of trench S-H on file in the Israel Antiquities Authority in Jerusalem.

4 Yeivin, “History and Archaeology" in Waterman, Preliminary Report, 28.

Square I.1

from Strange et al. (2006:45-48)

The first square was a 5 x 5 m. plot located directly against the north wall of the Tower. It was not centered on the north wall, but was laid out one meter cast of the cast side of Square 2. Therefore the center of Square 1 lay six meters cast of the northwest corner of the Tower. The entire 5x5 m. square was excavated rather than leaving 1 m. balks on the north and cast sides, the method adopted elsewhere. This provided fully 25 square meters of exposure in this first square. The plan above, together with the final top plan and balk drawing of 1.1 should help the reader follow the narrative description of excavation in this square.

As we have noted, our stratigraphic objective was to expose the full range of deposition against the north side of the Tower and, if possible, to determine the founding date for the building. We also wanted to investigate any other architecture that might remain in this area. Since Waterman showed a large structure emerging from beneath the east wall of the Tower in his trench S-I, it seemed possible that there might be similar structures to be found on the north side as well.

The stratigraphic situation encountered (see Fig. 4.03. Square 1.1, Southeast Balk) was consider ably more complicated than Waterman's notes suggested. Loci 1000 and 1002 appear to be a loosely compacted, modern surface, undoubtedly a schoolyard, since, according to local informants. the building had been used as a school until 1948. The yellowish layer Locus 1007 was likely also part of this schoolyard debris. The contents of these loci included modern materials, among them a Palestinian penny of 1932 found in Locus 1002. These first three loci extended to a depth of about 90 cm. or to an elevation of 289.40 m.

Locus 1008 was the first layer that did not contain any modern materials. The latest potters’ was from the Arab I period although this debris may well represent an occupation layer that should be associated with a later, perhaps medieval, use of the ’lower. The soil contained a great deal of while plaster debris which appeared to be the remains of an unpainted, plastered wall destroyed in antiquity. The debris had apparently been transported over some distance, however, since none of it was in pieces larger than 3 cm. in diameter. This was the first soil layer to be relatively rich in small finds, yielding a Roman provincial coin of the 2nd century, perhaps minted at Neapolis,⁷ nine registered glass fragments, six ceramic stoppers, two lamp fragments, live ceramic water pipe fragments, two iron spikes, and one iron nail.⁸ Fragments of ceramic water pipe, with a diameter of approximately 10 cm. were also found. Like the plaster mentioned above, these apparently have their origin elsewhere.

At an elevation of 288.382 m. a marked change in the contents of the soil was noted. The new layer contained a great deal of ash. The layer was loosely compacted and appeared to be a natural deposition by wind and water. Locus 1018, toward the eastern end of the square contained one badly worn and, therefore, unidentifiable bronze coin,⁹ three ceramic water pipe fragments, three lamp fragments, fragments of two iron spikes and one nail. The soil with less ash, toward the western end of the square, was designated Locus 1014 Five coins were found in this locus, a coin of Probus (276 282 C.E.),¹⁰ a coin of Valentinian II (383 C.E.),¹¹ a coin of Constantinius II (351-361 C.E.),¹² and two unidentifiable coins.¹³ The locus also produced a rich array of small finds, including nine registered glass sherds, a lamp fragment, a ceramic stopper, two fragments of bone pins, a bronze pin, a bronze blade, an iron blade and two iron spikes. The latest pottery from these two loci is Early Byzantine, which is consistent with the evidence from the identifiable coins.

At an elevation of 288.385 several stones appeared. Removal of the last few centimeters of Loci 1014 and 1018 revealed a line of stones which were designated Wall Locus 1013. The layers of soil on either side of this wall were designated Locus 1021 and Locus 1016. This material was more firmly compacted.

The first surface that was hard enough to support walking was Locus 1022, directly upon which accumulated Locus 1021. The surface, Locus 1022, lay at an average elevation of about 287.85 in. A low wall one row of stones wide, Wall Locus 1013, parallel to the face of the Tower and about 1.33 m. from the Tower wall, separated Locus 1021 from its counterpart next to the Tower, or Locus 1010. The latest materials found in these loci were from the Early Byzantine period. The finds in Locus 1021, the accumulation upon Locus 1022, were six glass fragments, two ceramic stoppers, two intact Byzantine lamps, three fragmentary lamps, and one iron nail. Those registered from Locus 1010 included two glass fragments, one lamp top, and two bone pins. The large number of lamps and the bone pins imply that the debris was from settled occupation.

Locus 1022 contained one bronze coin of Constantinus, two ceramic lamp handles, one lamp base with red burnished slip, a ceramic stopper, and a fragment of a water pipe. The pottery was Early Byzantine in date. Locus 1022 appears to have been a second surface upon a lower surface, namely Locus 1011, a substantial layer of plaster that ran throughout the excavated portion of the square at an elevation of 287.550.

Beneath the wall, Wall Locus 1013, and the two accumulations on either side was Locus 1011, a hard floor formed of clay and lime. This layer, at approximately the level of the lowest course of stone of the Tower,¹⁴ was apparently laid as a working surface for the construction of the building. It was so hard when first encountered that die excavation team thought it was ancient cement. This layer was almost devoid of finds, as one might expect of a lime and clay layer. The contents were two lamp fragments, one ceramic stopper, and one iron nail. Beneath Locus 1011 and next to the Tower the lower layer made up for the application of clay and lime layer Locus 1011, designated Locus 1015, was a hard soil, perhaps water-washed, which contained Persian to Early Roman ceramics. This layer contained hardly any artifactual material at all although there was a coin of Gallienus (259 C.E.),¹⁵ one black-slipped Hellenistic lamp top, and one iron spike. We posit that this layer, Locus 1015, was material excavated by the builders of the Roman Tower to form the make-up for clay and lime surface, Locus 1011. Locus 1011 extended the full five meters from the Tower wall.

Two other layers were found beneath Locus 1011 north of Wall Locus 1019. The first was Locus 1024, a 30 cm. thick destruction layer, dark with ash, and containing potsherds from the Early Roman through the Late Roman periods, but few other artifacts, namely one ceramic stopper and two ceramic lamp fragments, one with red slip. Locus 1024 in turn rested upon Locus 1025, a layer black with ash and charcoal from a major conflagration. The ash was evidently from a 4th century fire. This layer contained a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 B.C.E.),¹⁶ two Middle Roman lamp nozzles, two ceramic stoppers, one bone needle, and one fragment of a basalt grinder. Beneath the destruction layer and north of Wall Locus 1019 the team found a heavy layer of stones about 40 cm. thick, designated Locus 1027. To the south, next to the Tower wall, smaller stones on top (Locus 1017) were distinguishable from relatively larger stones beneath (Locus 1023). This seemed to be a result of disturbances by the workmen, since Locus 1017 and Locus 1020 contained Late Roman potsherds, whereas the rocky layer, Locus 1027 contained nothing later than Early Roman potsherds. Furthermore, directly beneath Locus 1020, next to the Tower wall 1012, was a hard, cement-like lens of clay and lime material which contained Early Byzantine potsherds.

The founding of the Tower took place between 286.26 and 286.51 m. in elevation in this square. The foundation layer was tightly compacted soil and rocks, designated Locus 1026. almost devoid of finds, and containing sherds from the Early Roman occupation. The slightness of the foundation was a surprise, as the team anticipated that foundations would be cut into bedrock. No such procedure had been carried out, however. Such a foundation suggests that the builders did not intend that their tower would stand for long.

The second surprise in Square I.1 was the construction of what we originally called the “Citadel wall", or W1012. We had expected the building stones on this side to resemble the huge Herodian stones in the southwest comer of the Tower. The soil layers in Square I.1 concealed about 4.2 m. of this wall, which was constructed of stones with drafted margins and trimmed bosses. The stones in each course range in length from 60 to 100 cm. But the courses averaged only 38 cm. high, ranging in height from a low of 27 cm. to a high of 55 cm. There is a tendency for the stones to be higher toward the foundation. The masons cut these stones with a margin of about 5 cm. on each stone.

In the center of the northeast face of the Tower, then, the wall does not resemble a Herodian Tower, or does so only superficially. The stones surely were taken from houses which once stood in the vicinity. The sarcophagi which were used at the corners probably came from the necropolis to the south. They' were likely not moved very' far. Another find to be accounted for are several fragments of ceramic water pipes. A glance at the list of artifact list shows eight registered fragments of ceramic water pipe in Square 1.1. In like fashion four such fragments were found in Square I.2. Since no water installation was found in either square, it raised the question whether a bath lay in the vicinity.

Therefore the sequence of events that can be isolated in Square 1.1 is as follows:

Slight remains of ER to LR domestic occupation upon bedrock.

Thorough LR destruction and burning at this level, including the stripping of all building stone from the area.

The founding of the lower upon closely packed stones and soil from the ER/MR layers. This founding necessitated the cleaning of the LR burn layers away from the immediate area of the foundations.

The laying of a lime and clay layer all around the Tower at the level of the lowest course of stones. The addition of this feature occurred at the same time as the founding of the Tower, practically speaking. The coins are of mid-fourth century and give the latest date for the founding and for construction of the lime and clay layer.¹⁷

The building of the Tower from stones taken from pre-existing structures in the area and using Roman sarcophagi at the corners.

The occupation and use of the Tower continuously from mid-fourth century C.E. until the modern period, when it was last used as a school by the citizens of Saffuriyeh.

No details of the medieval occupation are now apparent in these soundings.

Footnotes

5 Registry number 830212.

8 The word 'spike” is reserved for nails in excess of 18 cm. in length with a shaft diameter of 1.0 1.4 cm

9 Registry number 893977.

10 Registry number 830231.

11 Registry' number 830233.

12 Registry' number 830234.

13 Registry numbers 030232 & 830235.

14 The surface was at an elevation of 287.550.

15 Registry number 830352.

16 Registry number 830424.

17 This destruction, followed by almost immediate reconstruction, marks the horizon between the LR and ByzI periods at this site.

Square I.2

from Strange et al. (2006:48-51)

As our diagram above (p. 2) and the photograph show, this square was situated at the northwest corner of the Tower so that a short balk would cut against both the west and north walls of the Tower and its foundation. Our stratigraphic objective was to expose the range of deposition against the north side of the Tower and, in addition, to attempt to identify the extent of Waterman’s excavation at this corner of the Tower.

Unfortunately Waterman’s excavations seem to have disturbed much of the area encompassed by this square, although in the northeast, Wall Locus 2016 appears to be a continuation of the Wall materials against the foundation of the Tower and Locus 1013 in 1.1. Fortunately, some undisturbed beneath plaster surfaces, still intact, could also be identified.

Material al the surface, Locus 2000. is the same material as that identified as Loci 1001 and 1002 in 1.1 and represents the most recent activity at the site. One coin was recovered from this locus, a coin of the Jewish revolt, struck in Jerusalem ca. 68 C.E.¹⁸ Beneath this, Locus 2001, a yellowish layer (the same as Locus 1007 in I.1), may also be associated with the period when the Tower was in use as a school. Modern materials were found throughout these layers although earlier materials were also recovered, including an unidentifiable bronze coin.¹⁹

In the “northern leg" of this square Locus 2002, is a deep layer, identified as unstratified fill, likely the backfill used to fill Waterman’s probe. The one coin found in this debris was unidentifiable.²⁰ Loci 2005 and 2006, although they contained no pottery later than Byzantine I, also appear to be deliberate debris. The most probable identification of these loci is that they too are comprised material used to backfill Waterman’s probe in this area. These loci yielded a rich array of small glass, ceramic and stone fragments consistent with such fill material. A thick plaster layer was exposed at an elevation of 287.478 at the eastern end of the probe and 287.610 at the western end. Designated Locus 2007, the plaster layer contained 17 identifiable potsherds,²¹ a small piece of marble facing and a ceramic stopper. It is understood to be a working surface associated with the construction of the Tower. The material beneath this plaster surface, Loci 2013, 2020 and 2021 contained no pottery later than Byzantine I and. therefore, provide further information about the date of the founding of the Tower. Locus 2021 provided a quantity of small finds, all consistent with the date established by the pottery. These included a portion of the rim of a glass vessel, 2 lamp fragments, a piece of ceramic pipe, pan of an iron blade, the shafts of 2 spikes and 1 nail and 4 ceramic stoppers. The locus also yielded one bronze coin which was too badlv corroded to be identifiable.²² Loci 2023 and 2024, thin layers of soil lying on bedrock, contained only Early and Middle Roman pottery. Locus 2023 contained one small glass bead. Artifacts in Locus 2024 included a fragment of the nozzle of a Herodian period lamp and two Hellenistic coins, a coin of Alexander Jannaeus (struck in Jerusalem between 103 67, B.C.E.)²³ and a Hasmonean coin, also struck in Jerusalem, that shows traces of a Paleo Hebrew inscription within a wreath.²⁴ Finally, the soil in the crevices of bedrock, beneath the foun dation of the tower, Locus 2025, yielded only Early Roman and earlier pottery.

Stratification in the “western leg’ of the square was similar. After removal of the surface loci (Locus 2000 and Locus 2001) a light-colored, firmly compacted layer was exposed (Locus 2003) beneath which a more loosely compacted, darker soil layer with cobblestones (Locus 2004) was found. Both of these loci contained modern materials and were associated with the latest use of the Tower as a school. Loci 2008 and 2009, beneath 2004, contained small amounts of modern material and are to be identified as material used to backfill Waterman’s probe. In addition to pottery (much of which was from the Arab period) Locus 2009 contained a fragment of a basalt grinder and several glass sherds. At an elevation of 287.563 a hard, plaster-like lime surface was exposed and designated Locus 2018. This surface is at the approximate level of the lowest course of stones of the Tower and is similar to Locus 1011 in Square I.1. It can be identified as a working surface associated with the construction of the Tower. Pottery in and immediately beneath this surface was predominantly Early Roman, although one Late Roman and one Early Byzantine sherd were noted. The locus also yielded a bone pin in good condition. The soil beneath Locus 2018, designated Locus 2019, yielded an abundance of Early and Middle Roman pottery with small amounts of earlier pottery as well (Iron 2C and Late Hellenistic/Hasmonean). The latest pottery, however, was from the Early Byzantine period, confirming our conclusion that the Tower was constructed in the middle of the fourth century following massive destruction of earlier structures. Beneath the foundation on the northwest side of the Tower, still in position in the bedrock, lay four stones, evidently where they had been quarried in the ER period, but never used. Thus there is evidence for quarrying the stone for the ER buildings directly on the summit. Again, in the crevices of bedrock only Early Roman pottery was found.

Our excavation in I.2, limited by the extent of Waterman’s earlier probe, confirms the history that we established on the basis of our excavations in I.1. Following massive destruction in the mid-fourth century, the area at the summit of the hill was cleared to bedrock (although small amounts of early material remained in the crevices of bedrock attesting the earlier occupation) for the construction of the Tower. The Tower was constructed, in part from stone salvaged from earlier structures and in part from stone quarried on site. These events, the destruction and reconstruction mark the horizon between the Late Roman to the Early Byzantine period at this site.

Footnotes

18 Registry number 830002.

19 Registry number 893665.

20 Registry number 893196.

21 8 Early Roman, 4 Middle Roman and 5 Late Roman including 4 imported red wares.

22 Registry number 830291.

23 Registry number 830311.

24 Registry number 830312.

Square I.3

from Strange et al. (2006:51-56)

As noted above, a 5 x 5 m. square, designated I.3 was opened 1 m to the west of I.2 with the north balk in a line with that of I.2 (and a temporary balk in I.1), extending that section significantly. The excavation of this square began in a 2 x 5 m. probe established along the east balk of the square. The purpose of starting with a limited probe was to test the stratification at the summit of the hill in an area that we believed would be undisturbed by Waterman’s excavations in 1931. Although the stratification encountered in this square was complicated, and while, at times, it seemed that we would be frustrated in our attempt to realize this goal, ultimately this square provided us with excellent information about the sequence of human activity at this portion of the site.²⁵

After removing modern surface material (Locus 3000, approximately 5 cm. in depth), the team concentrated its efforts in a 2 m. probe on the eastern side of the square. This allowed both rapid exposure of the stratification and information that would permit a more precise excavation of the remaining 3 m. of the square.

Although careful excavation enabled us to identify subtle differences in color, content and compaction, Loci 3001,²⁶ 3003, 3004, 3005, 3006, and 3008 were all identified as unstratified fill repre senting 20th century activity and disturbance of earlier materials. An array of artifacts was recovered including bone, glass, metal hinges & latches, nails, plaster, roof tile and tesserae. The pottery ranged from Late Hellenistic through Late Byzantine. Locus 3001 produced three coins, a coin of Constantius II dated to 355-261 C.E.,²⁷ a coin of Valentinian II minted in Nicomedia and dated to 364-375 C.E.,²⁸ and a coin of Constantius II dated to 346-361.²⁹ Locus 3004 produced a coin of Constantius II minted in Antioch and dated to 337-341 C.E.³⁰ Locus 3005 produced a coin of Herod Archelaus minted in Jerusalem and dated to 4 B.C.E.-6 C.E.³¹ It first seemed that in spite of our expectations to the contrary, the inclusion of modern materials in these loci suggested that we were once again excavating backfill from Waterman’s excavations. When Locus 3005 was opened in the western portion of the square, however, this conclusion proved to be incorrect. The locus produced two fragments of modern china with production dates of 1932, 1935 and 1936 as well as beer and wine bottles, all too late to be a part of Waterman’s fill. The solution to the puzzle that this presented came in a conversation with a local informant, a man who had lived in Safuria prior to 1918. As we stood al the top of the hill he recalled that during the Second World War British forces had maintained a lookout station in the vicinity where we were excavating. The modern debris was therefore identified a British dump from the 1940’s, a conclusion confirmed by a surface find, a brass button decorated with the British Crown and Rope, bearing the name of the South Stafford Regiment.

Locus 3007, located toward the southern end of the probe, appeared to be the first layer undisturbed my modern activity. The soil was a loosely compacted sand to gravel layer about 35 cm. in depth. Few artifacts were recovered from this layer. There were 2 nails, 1 spike, a lamp fragment with black slip, 1 piece of glass slag and 2 glass sherds. The pollen· recovered ranged from the Persian to the Early Byzantine periods. There were two fourth century coins, a coin of Crispus, minted at Aquilea which can be dated to 317-324³² and one identified only as a fourth century coin.³³ Locus 3010, which produced 2 lamp fragments, two fragments of basalt grinders and the same range of pottery appears to be an extension of 3007 to the north.

Beneath Loci 3007 and 3010, Locus 3011. at the southern end of the probe, Locus 3012, north of 3011 and Locus 3014, at the northern end of the probe were three similar but separable loci comprising the accumulation, by natural and human factors, upon the plaster surface, Locus 3016 to be discussed below. Loci 3011 and 3012 were composed of firmly compacted, slightly moist, sill to gravel size soil. Locus 3014 was composed of gravel and larger stones and was slightly moister, and less firmly compacted, and contained traces of charcoal. Locus 3015 in the north and Locus 3013 in the south arc two small pockets of fine deposition (silt to gravel) directly upon the plaster surface, Locus 3016. In each of these five loci the dominant pottery was from the Roman period with a few sherds from earlier (Persian and Late Hellenistic) and later (Early Byzantine) periods. Our understanding is that, with the exception of Loci 3013 and 3015 which seem to be wind or water laid sediments deposited shortly after the plaster floor went out of use, this material was deliberately deposited as fill in the Early Byzantine period following the construction of the Tower to the East. The artifacts recovered from these loci were consistent with this understanding of the material as deliberate fill and included 5 lamp fragments (in Loci 3011, 3012, 3013 and 3014), nail (Locus 3011), 9 identifiable fragments of glass vessels (Loci 3012, 3014 and 3015), and 3 unidentifiable fragments of limestone artifacts. Only one coin was found, a Roman Provincial coin, otherwise unidentifiable, in Locus 3011.³⁴

As we had expected from discoveries already made in I.1 and I.2, beneath these loci, at an elevation of 287.745 we encountered a plaster surface, designated Locus 3016. This is the same surface identified as Locus 1011 in I.1 and as Loci 2007 (north leg) and 2009 (west leg) in I.2. This surface is identified as a working surface, in use when the Tower was under construction in the middle of the fourth century. When the loci above this surface were removed, exposing Locus 3016 throughout the probe, we cut a section through the plaster, designating this material as Locus 3016.1. The plaster was approximately 20-23 cm. thick, providing a very substantial surface for work on the Tower nearby. This locus yielded 5 Early Roman sherds a small piece of bone and a small fragment of limestone molding.

We then opened the western side of the square in order to bring the entire square into phase. Essentially the stratification was the same as in the eastern half of the square although the disturbance (Loci 3005 and 3006) ran deeper at the western side of the square than it had in the east. In addition to removing Loci 3000, 3001, 3003 3005 and 3006, the contents of which have been described above, three new loci were identified in this fill material, Locus 3017, Locus 3018 and Locus 3024. Locus 3017, composed of sand to gravel sized soil, dry and firmly compacted, was beneath the rocky material of Locus 3006 in the northern portion of the square and above the deepest disturbance, Locus 3029. This locus yielded only potsherds from the Roman period and no identifiable artifacts, although small quantities of charcoal were found. Locus 3024, a soft, rocky fill, yielded potsherds from the Early Roman through the Early Byzantine Periods. Among the artifacts recovered were a fragment of the base of a basalt grinder, a piece of tabun material, a ceramic stopper and one glass handle. Charcoal, plaster, painted plaster, and bone in small pieces were found throughout the debris. Locus 3018, in the southwestern quadrant of the square was below Locus 3003 and above Locus 3007. Dry loosely compacted material, this locus was clearly a part of the recent disturbance of the site. Very little pottery (only 2 sherds from the Middle Roman Period and 2 from the Early Byzantine Period were recovered) and no significant artifacts were found in this locus.

Locus 3021 was a thin (ca. 6 cm.) layer of silt to gravel size soil, moist and firmly compacted beneath Locus 3007 in the southwestern quadrant of the square. The latest pottery in this period was from the Early Byzantine period. This locus appeared to be the first layer on the western side of the square that was undisturbed by modern activity. It yielded only 1 identifiable potsherd (Early Roman) and no artifacts. It appears to be a thin layer of material that accumulated on the surface, Locus 3027, when that surface had gone out of use.

Excavation in the western portion of the square revealed that the plaster surface, Locus 3016, did not extend throughout the 5 x 5 m. probe. Although the surface was found intact from north to south in the eastern portion of the square, it extended from the east balk only 1.7 m at the north balk and 2.7 m. at the south balk. To the west of the plaster, Locus 3027, laid directly on bedrock,³⁵ appeared to be a similar, and contemporary, walking surface. It was a reasonably thick layer (ca. 40 cm.) with a firmly compacted surface. Although pottery from this locus ranged from the Late Hellenistic through the Early Byzantine period, pottery from the Early Byzantine period dominated the assemblage. A spike, 4 nails, a fragment of an iron blade and one glass fragment were also recovered. There was also one bronze coin which could not be identified.³⁶ Like Locus 3016, this surface is identified as one in use when the Tower to the East was under construction.

A disturbance of this surface, Locus 3027, toward the northern end of the square, was evident in the fill material of Locus 3024, Locus 3028³⁷ and Locus 3029, all composed of gravel to large stones. This later Byzantine³⁸ disruption extended all the way to bedrock at the northern edge of the square.

The plaster surface, Locus 3016, was founded directly upon bedrock at only one point in the north of the square. Elsewhere beneath this surface the materials could be confidently dated to the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods.³⁹ The material was clearly debris from the dismantling or destruction of a house (or houses) which once stood here.⁴⁰ The only feature from the earlier period of occupation that seems to have been used by the builders of the Tower was a cistern found close to the southern balk of the square. Locus 3016 was built up to the top of the cistern entry on the east side, which confirms our conclusion that the cistern remained in use during the construction of the Tower to the east.⁴¹

The details of the earlier house, or houses, are difficult to understand. At the lowest level, small depressions in the bedrock indicate that a plastered pool was constructed directly on the bedrock with the small irregularities in the bedrock filled to provide a firm foundation for the pool. The material in this fill, Loci 3040 and 3041 contains only Early and Late Hellenistic material. This was sealed by a plaster dated to the Early Roman period and provides a firm date for the construction of the pool, likely in association with a house or other structure built in the Late Hellenistic period. The remains are too scanty to provide any information about such a structure.

Clear traces of structures dated to the Early Roman period can be seen in the vicinity of the opening to the cistern, Locus 3037.⁴² East of the cistern the plaster surface, Locus 3016, was laid directly upon Locus 3023, which yielded only Early Roman and earlier material (1 Persian and 2 Early Roman potsherds were recovered from this locus. There was also one Early Roman lamp fragment). Locus 3023 appears to be the surface of a courtyard, in use during the Early Roman period, perhaps a renewal of an earlier surface. Locus 3039 laid down in the Late Hellenistic period (contemporary with Loci 30-10 and 3041 mentioned above).

West of the cistern opening, however, fragments of a doorpost and threshold, still in situ were discovered. It is clear that the cistern, and the associated pools, were located in the courtyard of a house built in the Early Roman period, probably where a building of the Late Hellenistic period had stood. Locus 3045. the lens of soil beneath the flat stones lying just northwest of the door post yielded one spike and two coins, both coins of Alexander Jannaeus minted in Jerusalem between 103-76 B.C.E.

The sequence of events that can be reconstructed on the basis of our soundings in I.3 is consistent with what was observed in I.1 and I.2. At the level of bedrock, clear traces of occupation in the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods was found. One or more houses, associated with plastered pools and an adjacent cistern, suggest domestic activity in this area. It seems likely dial these structures remained in use through out the Roman period until they were destroyed in the middle of the fourth century (ca. 350 C.E.). Following that destruction the area at the summit of the hill was prepared for the construction of the Tower. Debris from the destruction was used as a foundation for the working surface (Locus 3016 and Locus 3027) west of the Tower. The strata above these working surfaces has been deeply disturbed in the modern period (perhaps earlier in the northwestern quadrant of this square) and provide little information about the use of the site since the Byzantine period. Surface layers, of course, provide information about the most recent activity at the site.

Footnotes

18 Registry number 830002.

19 Registry number 893665.

20 Registry number 893196.

21 8 Early Roman, 4 Middle Roman and 5 Late Roman including 4 imported red wares.

22 Registry number 830291.

23 Registry number 830311.

24 Registry number 830312.

25 Since this is an important square, providing our best access to undisturbed materials at the summit of Sepphoris, it seems appropriate to discuss the findings in some detail. Became the deposition is complex, we present the drawings of both the East and West Balks as well as the final top plan. The- North and South balks were also drawn and can be made available upon request.

26 Locus 3002 was a small animal burrow in the southwest corner of the probe. It produced no significant pottery or artifacts.

27 Registry number 830042.

28 Registry number 830043.

29 Registry number 830078.

30 Registry number 830040.

31 Registry number 830041.

32 Registry number 830073.

33 Registry number 830072.

34 Registry number 830074.

35 The bedrock surface is extremely irregular and is appreciably higher at the western side of the square than to the east.

36 Registry number 830400.

37 Locus 3028 produced pottery from the Roman and Early Byzantine periods and five coins, only one of which could be identified. Registry number 830401, a coin of Valentinian I, 364-375 C.E. The other coins were registry numbers 830402, 830403, 830404 and 830405.

38 The disturbance is almost certainly later that the construction of the Tower.

39 Only one locus, 3025, contained Middle Roman material, a single potsherd which might well represent an early introduction of a form that became common in the later period. Locus 3030 and Locus 3034 at the north balk contained potsherds from the Lite Hellenistic through the Early Byzantine periods, but here the plaster surface, Locus 3016, had been broken in antiquity. This later material is probably from that localized disturbance.

40 As we will see below, it is likely that the house or houses) were built in the Late Hellenistic or Early Roman period.

41 Therefore into the Early Byzantine period, short!) after the middle of the 4th century.

42 Locus 3037 identifies the stone used to plug the opening to the cistern.

Conclusions About the “Citadel” or Tower

from Strange et al. (2006:62-64)

We can draw several conclusions on the basis of our limited soundings in the vicinity of the Tower at Sepphoris. First, it is clear that there was domestic occupation at the summit of the hill in the Late Hellenistic period, and perhaps earlier. Fragmentary remains of a Late Hellenistic house with its associated cistern (Chamber 205) were found in square I.3. After the destruction of this house, probably by Varus at the end of the 1st century B.C.E., a new house was built, or the old one restored. Two new cisterns, Chambers 201 and 203, were opened for use with this house and its associated pools. This house remained in use throughout the Roman period. In the 2nd century the occupants of the house, utilizing a solution cavity in bedrock, constructed an underground chamber for storage, Chamber 202. Chambers 203 and 205 were incorporated into this complex of underground rooms at this time. The chambers may also have been used as work space. The house was destroyed, surely during the Gallus Revolt, in the middle of the 4th century. When the city was rebuilt, it had a strikingly different character. This destruction and reconstruction marks the end of the Roman period and the beginning of the Byzantine period at Sepphoris.

The 4th century reconstruction at Sepphoris began almost immediately as debris from the destruction of the houses and other structures at the summit of Sepphoris was cleared to bedrock. Most of the debris was deposited in the cavea of the theater⁶⁹ however some of it was deposited in Chamber 201 and in the staircase leading into Chamber 202, both of which remained open at the time. After clearing the area at the summit of the hill, the 4th century workmen laid the foundation of the Tower directly upon Early Roman quarrying in bedrock. The foundation was made up of closely packed stones no larger than 30 cm. in diameter. As we have seen, the latest pottery and coins found in and among the stones of the foundation were mid-fourth century, confirming our date for the founding of the Tower. Traces of the Hellenistic and Early Roman occupation, however, remained in crevices of bedrock as our excavation in squares I.1 and I.2 show.⁷⁰

At the top of the foundation of the Tower, the level of the first course of hewn stone, the builders constructed a working surface composed of a thick, cement-like layer of compacted earth and lime, very like plaster, that was found throughout our soundings in the vicinity of the Tower. The material beneath this surface was consistently debris from the Late Roman period. The amount of lime included in this layer suggests that it was intended to withstand the winter rains and protect the foundation of the Tower while the upper courses were being built. Indeed, this working surface very slightly laps up onto to the bottom course of stone to provide this protection. This layer, then, was the working surface upon which the workmen stood as they erected the Tower and dismantled other structures in the vicinity. The lower courses of the Tower were built with stones resembling Herodian masonry, especially at the southwest corner. This suggests that the builders reused stones from earlier structures, including those built in the 1st century (i.e., the Herodian period). Further evidence of this reuse of stone from earlier buildings can be seen in the remains of the pool in square I.3. There stones were carefully removed leaving the plaster which had been laid upon them standing to a height of several centimeters.

In conclusion, our excavations indicate that, contrary to the view widely held by Waterman and others that the structure is a Crusader Citadel, the Tower is Byzantine. It was built in the middle of the 4th century. The building measures ca. 15 m. on each side. The size suggests that it is a tower rather than a citadel or fortress — thus the nomenclature that we have employed in this report. It seems likely that a staging area for military activity surrounded the Tower. A retaining wall was built and the cavea of the theater filled to provide this level surface surrounding the Tower⁷¹.

Finally, although the evidence for this is largely architectural and not archaeological, it is reasonable to suggest that the Tower was rebuilt at least twice (if not more often) upon remains of the 4th century building. The use of sarcophagi laid in header and stretcher fashion at the four corners in the upper courses of the building (and several other architectural details) suggests reconstruction in the Crusader period. Finally, the top of the building (now a second story) seems to have been built in the 19th century, perhaps to continue the use of this structure as a public building. As we know, in the mid-twentieth century the building was in use as a school.

Footnotes

69 This evidence will be presented more fully in our next report which will be devoted to the theater at Sepphoris.

70 Although the area at the summit of the hill, when· the Tower wxs built, was cleared to bedrock, the clearing operation was progressively less thorough with distance from the Tower. As one moves down the slope of the hill, away from the Tower, more remains of structures from the Hellenistic and Roman periods are found in situ.

71 The evidence for this will be presented in our report on the theater.

Chapter 6 - The Villa

Introduction

from Strange et al. (2006:71)

After the successes in excavation in 1983 and in 1985, it seemed appropriate to launch a full investigation and test in 1986 of the area northwest of the Tower, namely, within Waterman’s Trench S-H. Waterman believed that he had exposed the remains of a Christian basilica with a square, rock-cut apse and a rock-cut baptistery (fig. 6.01). He also thought that the columns on the mosaic floor defined two aisles and a nave of the putative basilica¹.

Goals for this area included both the reassessment of Waterman’s interpretation of the structures exposed in 1931 and a closer examination of the stratigraphy. Waterman had not reported any stratigraphy within the “basilica.” Our excavations concentrated on the south end of Waterman’s trench so as to stay reasonably close to our previous excavations. In the south end of S2, there fore, wo set out four 5x5 meter squares, namely, numbers 7-10. We also eventually expanded our trench to the west (Squares I.11, I.12, and I.15) and south (Square I.13) in order to provide access to related, undisturbed materials and to allow examination of the adjacent structures.

Our final conclusion was that Waterman’s structure was not a basilica but an elaborate house or villa with a colonnaded inner courtyard. Shmuel Yeivin reported that an unknown conversant foresaw this conclusion.² Avi-Yonah inferred the same in 1975.³

Footnotes

1 Leroy Waterman, ct al., Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavations at Sepphoris/Diocaesarea, Palestine in 1931. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1937.

2 Ditto..

3 Michael Avi-Yonah, “Sepphoris" in the Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Eds. M. Avi-Yonah and Ephraim Stern (4 vols.; Jerusalem, 1975-77 . IV, 1051 1055.

Excavations in Square I.12

from Strange et al. (2006:80-81)

... Λ thick layer of soil with charcoal and ash marks the destruction of the Villa. This is L12016, which is 50-78 cm. thick upon the flagstone pavement 12032. The top of the destruction layer is at elevation 284.77. This layer contained a large number ol finds, including four coins, three of which are 4th century C.E. bronzes. The latest of these was an issue of Constantius II dated 355-361,¹⁰ which gives us a terminus of the destruction.

This burn layer also contained five lamp fragments, two ceramic stoppers, five glass fragments nine iron nails, one bronze disc, a bronze cosmetic tool, and a bone tool fragment. These are finds characteristic of domestic occupation, as were the finds in LI2015. It is possible that the iron nails suggest the presence of wooden frameworks in the courtyard, perhaps for temporary shade.

Footnotes

10 Registry No. R872412.

Excavations in Square I.8

from Strange et al. (2006:98-99)

... There are also traces of destruction visible in the east balk of Square 1.10. For example, one can see an ash and clay layer lying on bedrock, on the stub of wall 10010. Furthermore LI0009 appears to be rubble and stone that may be remains of wall destroyed from cut bedrock foundation 10010, that is, a second destroyed wall. Wall 10008 is most likely a trace of the east wall of the Villa, whereas wall 10010 and perhaps the fall, L10009 are surely remnants of the northeast wall of the tiny room which contained Waterman’s “baptistery.”

Conclusion: The Phasing of the Villa

Phase 3

from Strange et al. (2006:121)

Table 3

Proposed Phases of the Villa

Strange et al. (2006)

Phase 3 began with renovation and changes within the building in the early second century C.E. Chamber 219. the chamber with bench and niche, was fashioned from the earlier, larger chamber by building the heavy wall that divides C219 from its northern neighbor. C219 underwent intensive use through the third century C.E., if not the early fourth. Since the staircase down from Square I was blocked, it follows that access to this and other chambers moved from the staircase to other means. Perhaps this is when the west wall of C216 was broken through to C217. These and other changes (see square by square analysis above) may be related to the changes in chamber 203 under Square I.3. This chamber was changed to dry storage about the same time. Phase 3 ends in mid-fourth century.

Phase 4

from Strange et al. (2006:121-122)

Table 3

Proposed Phases of the Villa

Strange et al. (2006)

Phase 4 began with the abandonment of the villa, its burning, its dismantling by squatters, and finally its filling, which accounts for its disappearance. The abandonment appears not to have been sudden. The items associated with daily life were not simply smashed violently, as in warfare. On the contrary, most appear to have been taken at leisure, either by the occupants or by others who were not in a hurry. The only intact pottery vessels were lamps in the underground chambers.

The abandonment of the villa was followed by reconfiguration of space by squatters in Square I.12 and a burning, visible as Locus 12016 in Square I.12. After the burn someone began dismantling the walls, perhaps for building stones for another structure. The workers simply lifted the stones from their settings, not breaking them. In other words, there were no scatters of crumbled building stones on the floors associated with the rooms. Therefore the Villa was not smashed, but dismantled. The dismantling was not complete, as the last two or three courses of stones usually were in position in our squares. This is also true of the area as depicted in Waterman’s Preliminary Report. Pl. 3, where the walls in the photo do not exceed three courses in height.

Phase 4 must lie between 351 and 361 C.E., judging from the stratigraphy and the coins. While it is theoretically possible that the earthquake of 363 C.E. destroyed the Villa, it is not likely, for the simple reason that no one repaired the Villa or rebuilt it, nor did excavation reveal smashed stones or walls that were thrown down. In fact, all of the rooms that we probed were filled with erosion and deliberate fill. It appears that it was still possible for visitors to enter the underground chambers, which now began to fill with erosion from the surface. Visitors left more or less intact 4th century lamps on top the eroded debris when they left. Phase 4 ends with the filling in of the Villa, and presumably the entire 90 by 190 m. at the top surrounded by a wall that cut across the cavea of the theater.

Phase 5

from Strange et al. (2006:122)

Table 3

Proposed Phases of the Villa

Strange et al. (2006)

Phase 5 was the period of Byzantine use wherein the fill increased substantially. There are no coherent structures to associate with this period. In the area of the villa there were a series of thick lime and clays layers that provided walking surfaces. The lime increased the alkalinity of these surfaces and controlled the growth of weeds and grass.

The most likely use is for some kind of military occupation, given the notice in the Notitzia Dignitatum. Phase 5 appears to last from 360 to the end of the 6th century C.E.

Waterman et al. (1937)

II. Historical and Archaeological Notes

Later Settlements and Remains

from Waterman et al. (1937:29-34)

... The second building, which was probably erected by Herod Antipas at the time when he rebuilt Sepphoris as a capital fit for his residence, was the theater, fully described in the architectural report.⁵⁰ There is no other period in the history of the town when the erection of a similar building was likely, whereas Herod Antipas tried, no doubt, to ape, on his own small scale, the large program of public buildings initiated by his father. Hasmonean coins, especially those of Alexander Jannaeus, found in the debris just above the floor of the orchestra make this hypothesis all the more plausible⁵¹.

Since cistern No. 8, which was still partly open at the time of the destruction of the theater,⁵² contains a large amount of Byzantine, but not later, sherds, one must conclude that, at the latest, the theater was destroyed early in the Byzantine period. A confirmation of this suggestion may be seen in a few badly ruined walls found over the lowest tiers of seats at a great depth from the present surface of the ground (not much above the seats). The construction of the latter somewhat resembles that of the later phase of the rooms in trench S II⁵³ . These rooms seem to belong to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. It follows, therefore, that the theater was likely to have been destroyed some time during the first half of the fourth century A.D., perhaps during the sack of the city under Gallus (351 A.D.).

A human touch was added to the impressive remains of the theater by the finding of a whole decorated bone hairpin and a fragment of a thin gold-sheet chain, in different places near the entrances to the vomitoria. One can almost visualize the despair of the ladies of the period who chanced to lose part of their jewelry in the surging crowd as it milled around the entrances while going into or coming out of the theater.

Some traces of stratification were found in the few odd rooms that came to light in the long and narrow continuation of the trench S I south of the fort. The time at the disposal of the expedition did not allow a thorough exploration (down to bedrock) of this part of the trench; the work will be finished when the excavations are resumed. However, in one room (Room 10) were uncovered three successive mosaic floors. It is worth mentioning that the remains of the lowest were found greatly disturbed and large sections of it were lying upside down. This may have been done by the artisans who laid the second mosaic, though it is difficult to imagine for what purpose, unless they were treasure hunting. The second mosaic was laid some 20 cm. above the lowest one, and was composed of small, delicate black tesserae (basalt?). With the lowest mosaic or, more probably, with the second, were associated signs of some disaster. The southern part of this room and the whole adjoining room on the east were full of ashes, indicating a conflagration on a larger scale (these were not ashes of any ordinary household fires). On a level with the ashes were found a human skull, a sacrum, and a thigh bone and near by a large iron pickaxe (none of these finds exhibited any signs of having been charred). Should one associate these remains with a violent death brought about by the pickaxe? That the fire was not merely local to that part of a house is suggested by a streak of burned remains, found a good distance to the north of this room (Room 10), near the theater, in the debris immediately south of it. The streak was some 8—10 cm. thick and about 1 m. below the modern surface of the ground. Above this streak was uncovered a fragment of a rough wall, with a short length of an artificial water channel running over the wall. One is rather inclined to associate the burning with the sack of the city under Gallus in 351 A.D.

The third and uppermost mosaic floor in Room 10 consists of plain, large, almost square tesserae of yellowish limestone typical of the Byzantine house in Palestine. One may assume, therefore, that this latest phase dates to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. After this date the summit seems to have been abandoned until the Crusaders built their fort. This, in its turn, was also ruined, apparently soon after the Crusades, and remained deserted until the eighteenth century A.D., when the fort was rebuilt, probably by Zahiru-l-'Umar. To this period should also be ascribed the ruins of a crude fortification wall built round the edges of the more or less flat area on the summit (Pl. II, Fig. 1, of preceding article). This wall was uncovered in trench S I, near its top part. It seems to be connected with parts of a similar wall to be seen above ground on the eastern limit of the school grounds.

The trench opened in the northwest corner of the summit (S II) revealed remains of a large building, a part of which was wholly cleared down to bedrock. The main part of the building is a tripartite basilica, consisting of a central nave and two parallel narrow aisles all running from west to east. These are preceded on the west by an elongated narthex (?) and surrounded on the north and the south by several small rooms⁵⁴. It has been suggested that the building was merely a large villa; but the presence of the basilica and an apse in the eastern wall, coupled with a rock-cut baptismal font (?), indicates a church rather than a lay building (see "Architecture and Topography,” pp. 4-6). The rooms to the south and the north may have been occupied by the clergy in attendance (and one may consider the entire building a monastery).⁵⁵

These outer rooms were not very large. Many bear traces of plaster on the walls; some are even whitewashed, but there are no indications of painted decorations (even in other contemporary rooms). This may be due merely to the fact that the people were too poor to afford such decorations; on the other hand, it is possible that painted mural decorations went out of use in the Christian-Byzantine period. Especially small were the service rooms. Several of these had rock-cut caverns or holes underneath their floors. In many cases these were doubtless intended to serve as water cisterns. They were rendered impervious to water by a thick layer of coarse plaster applied to the floor and the walls. It was done in order to prevent the accumulated water from percolating and seeping away through the porous limestone rock. Nearly all these underground cisterns had rock-cut steps leading down into them; the steps were there to facilitate the approach to the water when it was low and also to permit the cleaning of the cisterns before the start of the rainy season.⁵⁶ In several cases, where the rock-roof either collapsed or was considered not safe enough, the cisterns were vaulted over with stone masonry consisting of parallel courses of wedge-shaped voussoir stones evenly rounded on the top and on the base, with small pebbles and sherds inserted in the interstices between the blocks. O£ the two observed examples (one in S I and the other in S II) one was definitely built of sandstone blocks.. Other rock-cut hollows under the rooms were apparently used as storage cellars.⁵⁷ Such seems to have been the use of a hollow, No. 15, under Room 2 8 in the "church” complex. From this cellar there were recovered a large number of small household objects (Pl. I, Fig. 2), including a group of bone hairpins, one with a bronze-sheet head, a bone kohl stick, two bone ointment spoons, and a bone needle.⁵⁸ It also produced several whole pots and a pottery censer (?), with red wash over buff ware and with a round and shallow pan and a long, flat handle. From various rooms of the same building came a pair of plain glass bangles, bone hairpins, a bone knife handle, a medium-sized shallow basalt basin on three legs and a central support (Pl. I, Fig. 1), probably intended to hold a water jar, a bronze key ring, fragments of a carved ivory (?) plaque representing an athlete, and a conical "pawn” of green glass (possibly a weight).

The pottery and the majority of the decipherable coins from this building belong to the Byzantine period (fourth century A.D. and later), so that the standing ruins of this complex seem to belong to the latest occupation of the summit⁵⁹. The building, however, shows definite traces of an earlier phase⁶⁰. This may be contemporaneous with the second or even the first period of occupation in Room 10,⁶¹ for in Room 30 there were sherds of ware imitating the terra sigillata products of the first century A.D., while in the area west of Room 28 was found a pot dated by the authorities of the Palestine Museum in the first—second centuries A.D.

One can also hazard a guess at the date of the destruction of this building. The architectural remains (shafts and capitals of the columns, parts of the masonry, and the like) all seem to be fallen in one line running east-west. Now a similar state of things was found by Dr. Sukenik in the synagogue at Bet-’Alpha. From this fact he very shrewdly inferred that the synagogue seems to have been ruined during one of the twenty earthquakes that shook this part of Palestine during the sixth century A.D.⁶² Is it not probable that one of these also caused the destruction of the latest layer of occupation on the summit of the hill at Sepphoris? It was after this, apparently, that the place began to dwindle and to lose all its importance.

Among other finds of the season the following are worthy of mention: some bone spindle whorls, glass-paste insets for rings, imitating precious or semiprecious stones, a gold earring in the shape of a small oval shield supported on the back by a wire loop hook, some bronze and iron finger rings, bronze bracelets, loaf-shaped round bone or ivory "pawns,” some bone dice, a single iron arrowhead, iron and lead models of axe heads, a bronze staple for fixing broken pottery, toggles, stoppers, and weights.

Footnotes

50 See pp. 6—12, above.

51 [The presence of coins of Alexander Jannaeus near the floor of the theater deserves further comment. That the theater was in existence in the reign of Herod Antipas there can scarcely be a doubt. However, there arc several considerations that favor his father as the original builder of the theater. The facts that the city did not resist Herod, and that he later made it a military depot, and very possibly built a palace there (cf. Josephus, Bel. Jud. I, 16, 2; II, 4, 1; Case, Jesus, p. 203), and also that Herod had the reputation of being a theater builder (Josephus, Ant. Jud. XV, 8, 1) arc all favorable to his candidacy. If this proves to be correct, it is highly probable that Herod Antipas enlarged and glorified the structure. The evidence of an earlier phase of wooden floor beams beneath the theater stage (sec ’’Architecture and Topography,” p. 11) favors such an hypothesis. Two things emerge as very certain. First, it is scarcely possible under the circumstances to place the theater later than Herod Antipas. Second, it is equally impossible to think of locating it earlier than Herod the Great, since no Hasmonean Jew could be conceived of as builder of a theater. The coins of Alexander Jannaeus found in the theater pit may thus be explained as among the lowest debris excavated when the theater was built, and hence among the first to be washed into it when it fell into ruin. This debris that must have been washed down into the theater had a maximum depth of about twenty feet. L.W.]

52 In it were found at various depths (nearer the top of the cistern) nine large architectural fragments belonging to the masonry of the theater. See p. 4, above.

53 See p. 32, below.

54 For a detailed description see pp. 4-6, above.

55 [The season’s work was obliged to close before all the rooms adjoining the basilica could be cleared, and hence the ground plan of the whole complex is incomplete and cannot be used for exact comparisons. Nevertheless, an examination of the ground plan of Syrian churches and monasteries from the fourth to the sixth centuries A.D. reveals striking analogies (cf. H. C. Butler, Early Churches in Syria [1929], pp. 18, 46, 86), and strongly suggests that our basilica was very probably part of a larger monastic building. L.W.]

56 Cisterns below houses are still in use in modern Arab houses. See T. Canaan, The Palestinian Arab House.

57 Such cellars were a quite common feature of the Hellenistic and Roman house in the Near East. Cf., c.g., A. E. R. Boak and E. E. Petersen, Karanis: Topographical and Architectural Report of Excavations during the Seasons 1924—28 (Ann Arbor, 1931), p. 10 and Plans III A—B (sections); B. P. Grenfell, S. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth, Fayoum Towns and Their Papyri (London, 1900), p. 39; and S. Yeivin, Domestic Architecture in Fayyitm Villages of the Roman Period, Chap. IV (to be published soon).

58 Though this lot of objects also constitutes a perfect group of funerary equipment (see p. 22, above), it is difficult to believe that this hollow was originally a tomb, since the objects in themselves are largely of late types, and we have already seen that the late custom absolutely forbids burials within the limits of the inhabited city.

59 Contemporaneous with the top layer of occupation in Room 10; see p. 00, above.

60 See pp. 4-5, above.

61 See p. 30, above.

62 See E. L. Sukenik, The Ancient Synagogue of Bet-Alpha, p. 58.

Nagy et al. (1996)

The History of Sepphoris and the Archaeological Evidence

Hellenistic and Roman Sepphoris The Archaeological Evidence

from Weiss and Netzer in Nagy et al. (1996:29)

...It is still difficult to summarize the urban structure of the acropolis at the end of the Hellenistic period and the beginning of the Roman era because important parts of it have not yet been exposed, but the evidence of intensive construction revealed thus far indicates a continuity of settlement from the Hellenistic period up to the Early Arab period. The layout of houses and narrow streets on the western summit was maintained, without any significant changes, until the earthquake of 363 C.E. This densely built-up western area had a predominantly residential character. The average house measured 15 x 15 meters and included several rooms built around an inner courtyard that was not much larger than the rooms themselves. Houses were accessed via alleys that apparently were parallel and perpendicular to each other, their general direction being dictated by the topography. An east-west street paved with stone slabs was built along the northern edge of the acropolis. There are also signs of a drainage channel that would have run under the road or a parallel street, along its southern edge. Nonetheless, the general impression is that in the earliest stages of occupation the acropolis lacked a well-planned layout.

The Residential Quarter on the Western Summit

from Hoglund and Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:41, 42)

... The subsequent Middle Roman period (135-250 C.E.) is one of the more elusive periods of occupation in the residential quarter. Several areas, including a sealed-off cistern, have provided an extensive collection of domestic housewares unparalleled in Galilee, yet little associated architecture has been found.That few of the structures in the residential quarter may be dated to this period — undoubtedly a substantial occupational era in the city’s history — is a seeming anomaly that is the result both of elaborate rebuilding conducted in the fourth century and of the destruction caused by the earthquake of 363 C.E. This conclusion is based in part on the fact that the Early and Late Roman levels, but not the Middle Roman level, are well preserved. The magnificent building with Dionysos mosaic on the eastern summit, which can be firmly dated to the early third century C.E., is suggestive of more extensive building activities in this period.

...The Late Roman phase of the residential quarter ended decisively with the earthquake of 363 C.E., as evidenced by the extensive tumble of wall stones and other building elements encountered in every Late Roman living space. Coins as well as ceramic materials recovered on the floors of these structures provide a certain date for this destruction. This major earthquake, which left almost no major city of the Near East untouched, must have been devastating for the inhabitants of Sepphoris.

The subsequent Byzantine phases (363 - 650 C.E.) of the residential quarter are preserved largely along its southern edge. Buildings constructed after the utter destruction of 363 C.E. were erected at a slightly different (by a few degrees) orientation from the prevailing grid that was used throughout the Roman periods.

... The evidence from the later Byzantine period seems to reflect a gradual transition into the subsequent Early Arabic period (early seventh to the ninth century C.E.), though there are indications of some disruption by burning, perhaps the result of another documented earthquake in the mid-eighth century.

... From the limited evidence it appears that the residential quarter prospered during the latter centuries of the Byzantine and Early Arabic periods and that its inhabitants endured the major cultural shifts that took place around them with relative ease. However, in comparison with the level of both public and private buildings in the lower city' at this time, the western summit did not sustain the quality it had enjoyed in the Roman period. Civic attention focused more on the lower city to the east, and only' parts of the acropolis in the west were renovated after the enormous collapse caused by 363 C.E. earthquake.

The Aqueducts of Sepphoris

from Tsuk in Nagy et al. (1996:48)

... From the time of their construction in the first and second centuries C.E., the Sepphoris aqueducts continued in use throughout the Byzantine period, having been repaired after the earthquake of 363 C.E. However, in the early period of Muslim rule, beginning in the seventh century, the city declined in importance and size, and water apparently stopped flowing in the aqueducts of Sepphoris.

Sepphoris during the Byzantine Period

from Weiss and Netzer in Nagy et al. (1996:81, 82, 86)

Significant structural changes took place in Sepphoris during the second half of the fourth century C.E.¹ Some of these changes were undoubtedly undertaken as a result of damage caused by the massive earthquake of 363 C.E., an event mentioned in a letter attributed to Cyril, a church father in Jerusalem at that time.² The Dionysos mosaic building — so named here for its magnificent mosaic carpet featuring scenes from the Greek god’s life — and many other domiciles on the acropolis were destroyed in this catastrophe. Evidence of the same destruction, but on a smaller scale, was also found in lower Sepphoris, a well-planned expansion of the city limits on a plateau to the east of the acropolis. The city possibly also suffered some damage during the Gallus Revolt of 351 C.E., though Christian sources imply that this revolt brought about destruction in the city.³ In any event, no remains of a fourth-century conflagration indicative of such an uprising have been revealed in the areas exposed either by the Hebrew University expedition or by the Joint Sepphoris Project.

The streets and colonnades that had been laid out east of the summit during the Roman period continued to function during the Byzantine period, but as a result of the 363 earthquake, which devastated other cities in the country as well, significant changes took place in the built-up areas of Sepphoris. Some buildings were renovated; elsewhere new buildings were erected, either on top of the ruins (as was the case in most parts of the Dionysos mosaic building) or in their place.

... A somewhat different situation prevails on the hill’s northern slope, to the northeast of the Roman theater. It appears that houses were built here, directly above domiciles of the Roman period, and that some of the elements of the earlier structures were incorporated into the new ones. One of these new houses contained a large room with a mosaic floor decorated with a geometric design featuring birds and pomegranates. It is difficult to determine the state of the theater during the Byzantine period. Presumably this large, tall building also was damaged, at least partially, in the earthquake of 363 C.E. It appears, however, that the theater continued to be used in the late fourth and the early fifth century but was abandoned later in the Byzantine period, when most of its building stones were looted for other construction projects as well as for the production of lime. The latter possibility is suggested by the discovery, east of the stage, of a limekiln (used for reducing limestone to lime by burning) and, next to it, a group of large stones that had been removed from the theater.

In contrast to the relatively poor state of development of the acropolis in the Byzantine period, the well-planned civic center to the east of the summit, with the cardo (north-south) and the decumanus (east-west) commercial streets at its center, apparently flourished once the earthquake damage had been repaired, as did other areas of the city. The largest and most impressive building from the Early Byzantine period excavated by the Hebrew University expedition lies along the east side of the cardo. It was named the Nile festival building because the mosaic floor in one of its rooms depicts scenes of the Nile River festival celebrated in Egypt.⁴ This edifice, with its several outstanding mosaic floors, was most probably built at the end of the fourth or at the beginning of the fifth century. Buildings from the Roman period, covering an area of about 55 x 50 meters, were demolished in order to clear a space for this structure.

...At its zenith, Byzantine Sepphoris comprised an area of more than 40 hectares and a population of approximately 15,000 to 20,000. Events at the end of the Byzantine period and in the Early Arab period brought an end to the city’s growth and prosperity. Many of the Byzantine buildings uncovered at Sepphoris show clear signs of destruction by fire, a catastrophic event that could be associated with either the Persian occupation or the Arab conquest of the early seventh century, but it is also possible that these structures burned as the result of an earthquake, the exact date of which cannot yet be determined.

Footnotes

1. The information contained herein is based mainly on excavations conducted during the years 1990-96 under the directorship of the authors on behalf of the Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. For previous publications see

Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer, “Two Excavation Seasons at Sepphoris,” Qadmoniot 95-96 (1992): 113-21 (in Hebrew)

Netzer and Weiss, “Byzantine Mosaics at Sepphoris: New Finds,” Israel Museum Journal 10 (1992): 75-80

Netzer and Weiss, “New Mosaic Art from Sepphoris,” Biblical Archaeology Review 18, no. 6 (1992): 36-43

Weiss and Netzer, “Archaeological Finds from the Byzantine Period at Sepphoris,” Michmanim 8 (1995): 75-85 (in Hebrew)

Netzer and Weiss, Zippori (Jerusalem, 1994)

Netzer and Weiss, “New Evidence for Late-Roman and Byzantine Sepphoris,” in The Roman and Byzantine Near East: Some Recent Archaeological Research, ed. John H. Humphrey, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary Series, 14 (Ann Arbor, 1995), 162—76.

Also see our article on Sepphoris in the Roman period in this catalogue.

2. Sebastian P. Brock, “A Letter Attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem on the Rebuilding of the Temple,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental andAfrican Studies 40 (1977): 267-86.

3. For the Christian sources on the Gallus Revolt see Joseph Geiger, “The Gallus Revolt and the Proposal to Rebuild the Temple in the Time of Julianus,” in Eretz Israel fom the Destruction of the Second Temple to the Muslim Conquest, ed. Z. Baras et al. (Jerusalem, 1982), 202—17 (in Hebrew).

4. For a more detailed discussion of this festival and its associated mosaic floor, as well as other mosaics found in this structure, see our article on the Nile festival building in this catalogue.

Sepphoris in the Arab Period

From the Islamic Conquest to the Crusades

The Islamic Conquest

from Ward in Nagy et al. (1996:92)

In 614 C.E. the Persians wrested control of Galilee from the Byzantines. Many towns, including Sepphoris, opened their gates to the Persians without a fight.⁹ Thirteen years later, when they were defeated decisively by the Byzantines in their Mesopotamian heartland, the Persians agreed to return all the land they had conquered. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius returned to Palestine triumphantly, marching through Tiberias to Jerusalem in 629. But his victory was short-lived, as Syria, Palestine, and Egypt would soon be conquered by the new Islamic state.

'Umar ibn al-Khattab became caliph in 634. He appointed four generals to complete the conquest of Syria; one of them “conquered Acre [Akko], Tyre and Sepphoris” and Galilee’s villages,¹⁰ probably in 635. Tiberias was the only city in the area that capitulated peacefully.¹¹ Presumably the inclusion of Sepphoris in the short list of conquered cities rather than in a list of villages indicates that it was still considered a major site at the time of the Islamic conquest and underscores that it was conquered by force: Sepphoris thus did not throw its gates open to the Muslim conquerors as it had to the Persians in 614. This conquest may have involved the total destruction of the town and perhaps was the occasion for seventh-century fire damage apparent in many locations throughout the site.¹² There is no indication of protracted fighting or reconquests, however, or, indeed, any further details of conquest at Sepphoris or at any neighboring locale. The cause or exact date of the fire cannot be established with certainty, and it may have resulted from an earthquake, such as the one that rocked the area just two years before the conquest, or from some other natural or accidental cause, such as the Year of Ashes in 639 C.E., a period marked by extended drought, widespread fires, and especially a deadly plague throughout Palestine.¹³

Footnotes

9. For maps of the Persian-Byzantine wars, noting cities that opened their gates to the Persians, see Haim Beinart, ed., Atlas of Medieval Jewish History (New York, 1992), 18.

10. Al-Baladhurl, Futuh al-Bulddn (Leiden, 1866), 115f For additional sources on the conquest of this region, see Gil, Palestine, 57.

11. As is typical, there is some slight variation in the dates reported by Arab historians; most historians reconstruct the conquest of Galilee to 635. To reconcile the various sources, Fred McGraw Donner, in The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton, 1981), suggests that Damascus and other locales changed hands several times, but he does not suggest this for Galilee. For other sources, see Gil, Palestine, section 56f., and Donner, 112ff.

12. Evidence of fire damage was pointed out to me by Zeev Weiss during a site visit.

13. Other sources date the Year of Ashes a year or two earlier. Donner, Conquests, 152 and 245; 322, n. 286 (mostly on plague). Gil, Palestine, section 74. Theophanes, Chronicle, 35, dates an earthquake to 632/633.

Some Mosaics and Buildings of Sepphoris

The Dionysos Mosaic

from Meyers, Meyers, Netzer, and Weiss in Nagy et al. (1996:111)

The largest and most splendid of the rooms in the palatial Roman building discovered adjacent to the theater is its large reception hall, or triclinium.¹ The grandeur of this room derives from its spaciousness and its airy views of the peristyle (colonnaded) courtyard to the south but especially from the stunning mosaic, about 9.0 meters by 7.0 meters in size, covering its floor. Other rooms in the building contain tessellated floors—some with no design, others with brightly colored floral or geometric patterns — but the triclinium mosaic with its vivid mythological and natural scenes relating to the popular god Dionysos offers exceptional beauty. Laid early in the third century C.E., it remained virtually intact, except for a repair or renovation at its southern end, until the building was destroyed in the fourth century, probably as a result of the earthquake of 363 C.E. ...

Footnotes

1. For further discussion and description ofthe mosaic and its context see the following by Eric M. Meyers, Ehud Netzer, and Carol L. Meyers: “Artistry in Stone: The Mosaics of Ancient Sepphoris,” Biblical Archaeologist 50 (1987): 223-31; “A Mansion in the Sepphoris Acropolis and Its Splendid Mosaic,” Qadmoniot 21 (1988): 87-92 (in Hebrew); and Sepphoris (Winona Lake, 1992). For more about the building itself, see Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer’s article on Sepphoris in the Roman period in this catalogue.

The Eastern Basilical Building

from Strange in Nagy et al. (1996:117)

Since 1987 the University of South Florida Excavations at Sepphoris has excavated a grand building on the east side of the site.¹ The building, about 40 x 60 meters in extent, occupied a single city block, with the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (the north-south commercial street) to the southeast. Unfortunately, some of the history and use of the building at its east end has been obscured by the remains of a bath that was built there in the Byzantine period. Nevertheless, it is clear that the basilical building occupied about 35 x 40 meters of the city block and that its porches occupied 25 x 40 meters of the same block.

The building was founded early in the first century C.E., perhaps as early as the turn of the century. The foundation of the south wall was actually a refounding on a preexisting wall. In this case the lowest course of foundation stones was cut to receive new stones with defined margins, “Herodian” stones. This same type of foundation, with stones dressed in the Herodian style, is visible at the east end of the building in the main facade, which borders on the sidewalk of the cardo. The presence of stones dressed in this fashion from early in the first century suggests that construction of the building may have begun under Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, who, at his death in 4 B.C.E., bequeathed Galilee and Perea to Antipas. The completed structure went out of use and was entirely destroyed about the middle of the fourth century C.E. as a result of the Gallus Revolt against Rome in 351, the earthquake of 363, or both events. ...

Footnotes

1. The University of South Florida team is directed by James F. Strange with associate directors Dennis E. Groh and Thomas R. W. Longstaff, and field director C. Thomas McCollough.

Conclusion

from Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:150)

Like so many of the cities of the Eastern Roman Empire, Sepphoris flourished throughout the Roman and Byzantine periods. For all the observable discontinuity between these periods — especially in ceramics, artistic style, and other aspects of everyday life — there is also enormous continuity. While the conversion of Constantine unleashed new cultural forces that would enable Christianity to take root firmly in the East, and while the so-called Revolt of Gallus (351 C.E.) may have caused a political furor, it was the massive earthquake of 363 C.E. that leveled much of the cities of the East, including Sepphoris. The conviction of the local residents to continue to pursue their lives at Sepphoris is apparent at every turn in the enormous rebuilding and reconfiguration of space that occurred soon thereafter. In some areas the rebuilt city did not compare favorably with its Roman-period precursor, but its glory was recovered soon enough. ...

6th century CE Earthquake

Discussion

Waterman et al. (1937:34) speculated on the demise of a building on the northwest corner of the summit which was exposed in Trench S II and which Waterman et al. (1937:34) suggested may have been a Basilica. Waterman et al. (1937:34) noted that the architectural remains (shafts and capitals of the columns, parts of the masonry, and the like) all seem to be fallen in one line running east-west and suggested that a 6th century CE earthquake may have caused this damage. Waterman et al. (1937:34) noted that similar east-west oriented collapse was discovered at the synagogue at Beit-Alpha. Waterman et al. (1937:31) did not provide dates for the demise of the "basilica" and merely noted that the summit seems to have been abandoned after the 6th century CE and was not occupied again until the Crusaders built a fort on the Summit. Although the synagogue at Beit-Alpha did exhibit east-west oriented collapse which appears to have a seismic origin, the dating of this damage to the 6th century CE is not so precise. The excavator Sukenik (1932) merely provided a terminus post quem of the early 6th century CE for the collapse.

References

Waterman et al. (1937)

II. Historical and Archaeological Notes

Later Settlements and Remains

from Waterman et al. (1937:29-34)

... The second building, which was probably erected by Herod Antipas at the time when he rebuilt Sepphoris as a capital fit for his residence, was the theater, fully described in the architectural report.⁵⁰ There is no other period in the history of the town when the erection of a similar building was likely, whereas Herod Antipas tried, no doubt, to ape, on his own small scale, the large program of public buildings initiated by his father. Hasmonean coins, especially those of Alexander Jannaeus, found in the debris just above the floor of the orchestra make this hypothesis all the more plausible⁵¹.

Since cistern No. 8, which was still partly open at the time of the destruction of the theater,⁵² contains a large amount of Byzantine, but not later, sherds, one must conclude that, at the latest, the theater was destroyed early in the Byzantine period. A confirmation of this suggestion may be seen in a few badly ruined walls found over the lowest tiers of seats at a great depth from the present surface of the ground (not much above the seats). The construction of the latter somewhat resembles that of the later phase of the rooms in trench S II⁵³ . These rooms seem to belong to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. It follows, therefore, that the theater was likely to have been destroyed some time during the first half of the fourth century A.D., perhaps during the sack of the city under Gallus (351 A.D.).

A human touch was added to the impressive remains of the theater by the finding of a whole decorated bone hairpin and a fragment of a thin gold-sheet chain, in different places near the entrances to the vomitoria. One can almost visualize the despair of the ladies of the period who chanced to lose part of their jewelry in the surging crowd as it milled around the entrances while going into or coming out of the theater.

Some traces of stratification were found in the few odd rooms that came to light in the long and narrow continuation of the trench S I south of the fort. The time at the disposal of the expedition did not allow a thorough exploration (down to bedrock) of this part of the trench; the work will be finished when the excavations are resumed. However, in one room (Room 10) were uncovered three successive mosaic floors. It is worth mentioning that the remains of the lowest were found greatly disturbed and large sections of it were lying upside down. This may have been done by the artisans who laid the second mosaic, though it is difficult to imagine for what purpose, unless they were treasure hunting. The second mosaic was laid some 20 cm. above the lowest one, and was composed of small, delicate black tesserae (basalt?). With the lowest mosaic or, more probably, with the second, were associated signs of some disaster. The southern part of this room and the whole adjoining room on the east were full of ashes, indicating a conflagration on a larger scale (these were not ashes of any ordinary household fires). On a level with the ashes were found a human skull, a sacrum, and a thigh bone and near by a large iron pickaxe (none of these finds exhibited any signs of having been charred). Should one associate these remains with a violent death brought about by the pickaxe? That the fire was not merely local to that part of a house is suggested by a streak of burned remains, found a good distance to the north of this room (Room 10), near the theater, in the debris immediately south of it. The streak was some 8—10 cm. thick and about 1 m. below the modern surface of the ground. Above this streak was uncovered a fragment of a rough wall, with a short length of an artificial water channel running over the wall. One is rather inclined to associate the burning with the sack of the city under Gallus in 351 A.D.

The third and uppermost mosaic floor in Room 10 consists of plain, large, almost square tesserae of yellowish limestone typical of the Byzantine house in Palestine. One may assume, therefore, that this latest phase dates to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. After this date the summit seems to have been abandoned until the Crusaders built their fort. This, in its turn, was also ruined, apparently soon after the Crusades, and remained deserted until the eighteenth century A.D., when the fort was rebuilt, probably by Zahiru-l-'Umar. To this period should also be ascribed the ruins of a crude fortification wall built round the edges of the more or less flat area on the summit (Pl. II, Fig. 1, of preceding article). This wall was uncovered in trench S I, near its top part. It seems to be connected with parts of a similar wall to be seen above ground on the eastern limit of the school grounds.

The trench opened in the northwest corner of the summit (S II) revealed remains of a large building, a part of which was wholly cleared down to bedrock. The main part of the building is a tripartite basilica, consisting of a central nave and two parallel narrow aisles all running from west to east. These are preceded on the west by an elongated narthex (?) and surrounded on the north and the south by several small rooms⁵⁴. It has been suggested that the building was merely a large villa; but the presence of the basilica and an apse in the eastern wall, coupled with a rock-cut baptismal font (?), indicates a church rather than a lay building (see "Architecture and Topography,” pp. 4-6). The rooms to the south and the north may have been occupied by the clergy in attendance (and one may consider the entire building a monastery).⁵⁵

These outer rooms were not very large. Many bear traces of plaster on the walls; some are even whitewashed, but there are no indications of painted decorations (even in other contemporary rooms). This may be due merely to the fact that the people were too poor to afford such decorations; on the other hand, it is possible that painted mural decorations went out of use in the Christian-Byzantine period. Especially small were the service rooms. Several of these had rock-cut caverns or holes underneath their floors. In many cases these were doubtless intended to serve as water cisterns. They were rendered impervious to water by a thick layer of coarse plaster applied to the floor and the walls. It was done in order to prevent the accumulated water from percolating and seeping away through the porous limestone rock. Nearly all these underground cisterns had rock-cut steps leading down into them; the steps were there to facilitate the approach to the water when it was low and also to permit the cleaning of the cisterns before the start of the rainy season.⁵⁶ In several cases, where the rock-roof either collapsed or was considered not safe enough, the cisterns were vaulted over with stone masonry consisting of parallel courses of wedge-shaped voussoir stones evenly rounded on the top and on the base, with small pebbles and sherds inserted in the interstices between the blocks. O£ the two observed examples (one in S I and the other in S II) one was definitely built of sandstone blocks.. Other rock-cut hollows under the rooms were apparently used as storage cellars.⁵⁷ Such seems to have been the use of a hollow, No. 15, under Room 2 8 in the "church” complex. From this cellar there were recovered a large number of small household objects (Pl. I, Fig. 2), including a group of bone hairpins, one with a bronze-sheet head, a bone kohl stick, two bone ointment spoons, and a bone needle.⁵⁸ It also produced several whole pots and a pottery censer (?), with red wash over buff ware and with a round and shallow pan and a long, flat handle. From various rooms of the same building came a pair of plain glass bangles, bone hairpins, a bone knife handle, a medium-sized shallow basalt basin on three legs and a central support (Pl. I, Fig. 1), probably intended to hold a water jar, a bronze key ring, fragments of a carved ivory (?) plaque representing an athlete, and a conical "pawn” of green glass (possibly a weight).

The pottery and the majority of the decipherable coins from this building belong to the Byzantine period (fourth century A.D. and later), so that the standing ruins of this complex seem to belong to the latest occupation of the summit⁵⁹. The building, however, shows definite traces of an earlier phase⁶⁰. This may be contemporaneous with the second or even the first period of occupation in Room 10,⁶¹ for in Room 30 there were sherds of ware imitating the terra sigillata products of the first century A.D., while in the area west of Room 28 was found a pot dated by the authorities of the Palestine Museum in the first—second centuries A.D.

One can also hazard a guess at the date of the destruction of this building. The architectural remains (shafts and capitals of the columns, parts of the masonry, and the like) all seem to be fallen in one line running east-west. Now a similar state of things was found by Dr. Sukenik in the synagogue at Bet-’Alpha. From this fact he very shrewdly inferred that the synagogue seems to have been ruined during one of the twenty earthquakes that shook this part of Palestine during the sixth century A.D.⁶² Is it not probable that one of these also caused the destruction of the latest layer of occupation on the summit of the hill at Sepphoris? It was after this, apparently, that the place began to dwindle and to lose all its importance.

Among other finds of the season the following are worthy of mention: some bone spindle whorls, glass-paste insets for rings, imitating precious or semiprecious stones, a gold earring in the shape of a small oval shield supported on the back by a wire loop hook, some bronze and iron finger rings, bronze bracelets, loaf-shaped round bone or ivory "pawns,” some bone dice, a single iron arrowhead, iron and lead models of axe heads, a bronze staple for fixing broken pottery, toggles, stoppers, and weights.

Footnotes

50 See pp. 6—12, above.

51 [The presence of coins of Alexander Jannaeus near the floor of the theater deserves further comment. That the theater was in existence in the reign of Herod Antipas there can scarcely be a doubt. However, there arc several considerations that favor his father as the original builder of the theater. The facts that the city did not resist Herod, and that he later made it a military depot, and very possibly built a palace there (cf. Josephus, Bel. Jud. I, 16, 2; II, 4, 1; Case, Jesus, p. 203), and also that Herod had the reputation of being a theater builder (Josephus, Ant. Jud. XV, 8, 1) arc all favorable to his candidacy. If this proves to be correct, it is highly probable that Herod Antipas enlarged and glorified the structure. The evidence of an earlier phase of wooden floor beams beneath the theater stage (sec ’’Architecture and Topography,” p. 11) favors such an hypothesis. Two things emerge as very certain. First, it is scarcely possible under the circumstances to place the theater later than Herod Antipas. Second, it is equally impossible to think of locating it earlier than Herod the Great, since no Hasmonean Jew could be conceived of as builder of a theater. The coins of Alexander Jannaeus found in the theater pit may thus be explained as among the lowest debris excavated when the theater was built, and hence among the first to be washed into it when it fell into ruin. This debris that must have been washed down into the theater had a maximum depth of about twenty feet. L.W.]

52 In it were found at various depths (nearer the top of the cistern) nine large architectural fragments belonging to the masonry of the theater. See p. 4, above.

53 See p. 32, below.

54 For a detailed description see pp. 4-6, above.

55 [The season’s work was obliged to close before all the rooms adjoining the basilica could be cleared, and hence the ground plan of the whole complex is incomplete and cannot be used for exact comparisons. Nevertheless, an examination of the ground plan of Syrian churches and monasteries from the fourth to the sixth centuries A.D. reveals striking analogies (cf. H. C. Butler, Early Churches in Syria [1929], pp. 18, 46, 86), and strongly suggests that our basilica was very probably part of a larger monastic building. L.W.]

56 Cisterns below houses are still in use in modern Arab houses. See T. Canaan, The Palestinian Arab House.

57 Such cellars were a quite common feature of the Hellenistic and Roman house in the Near East. Cf., c.g., A. E. R. Boak and E. E. Petersen, Karanis: Topographical and Architectural Report of Excavations during the Seasons 1924—28 (Ann Arbor, 1931), p. 10 and Plans III A—B (sections); B. P. Grenfell, S. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth, Fayoum Towns and Their Papyri (London, 1900), p. 39; and S. Yeivin, Domestic Architecture in Fayyitm Villages of the Roman Period, Chap. IV (to be published soon).

58 Though this lot of objects also constitutes a perfect group of funerary equipment (see p. 22, above), it is difficult to believe that this hollow was originally a tomb, since the objects in themselves are largely of late types, and we have already seen that the late custom absolutely forbids burials within the limits of the inhabited city.

59 Contemporaneous with the top layer of occupation in Room 10; see p. 00, above.

60 See pp. 4-5, above.

61 See p. 30, above.

62 See E. L. Sukenik, The Ancient Synagogue of Bet-Alpha, p. 58.

mid-8th century CE Earthquake (?)

Discussion

Hoglund and Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:42) note that there are indications of some disruption by burning of the residential quarter on the western summit, perhaps the result of another documented earthquake in the mid-eighth century.

References

Nagy et al. (1996)

The History of Sepphoris and the Archaeological Evidence

Hellenistic and Roman Sepphoris The Archaeological Evidence

from Weiss and Netzer in Nagy et al. (1996:29)

...It is still difficult to summarize the urban structure of the acropolis at the end of the Hellenistic period and the beginning of the Roman era because important parts of it have not yet been exposed, but the evidence of intensive construction revealed thus far indicates a continuity of settlement from the Hellenistic period up to the Early Arab period. The layout of houses and narrow streets on the western summit was maintained, without any significant changes, until the earthquake of 363 C.E. This densely built-up western area had a predominantly residential character. The average house measured 15 x 15 meters and included several rooms built around an inner courtyard that was not much larger than the rooms themselves. Houses were accessed via alleys that apparently were parallel and perpendicular to each other, their general direction being dictated by the topography. An east-west street paved with stone slabs was built along the northern edge of the acropolis. There are also signs of a drainage channel that would have run under the road or a parallel street, along its southern edge. Nonetheless, the general impression is that in the earliest stages of occupation the acropolis lacked a well-planned layout.

The Residential Quarter on the Western Summit

from Hoglund and Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:41, 42)

... The subsequent Middle Roman period (135-250 C.E.) is one of the more elusive periods of occupation in the residential quarter. Several areas, including a sealed-off cistern, have provided an extensive collection of domestic housewares unparalleled in Galilee, yet little associated architecture has been found.That few of the structures in the residential quarter may be dated to this period — undoubtedly a substantial occupational era in the city’s history — is a seeming anomaly that is the result both of elaborate rebuilding conducted in the fourth century and of the destruction caused by the earthquake of 363 C.E. This conclusion is based in part on the fact that the Early and Late Roman levels, but not the Middle Roman level, are well preserved. The magnificent building with Dionysos mosaic on the eastern summit, which can be firmly dated to the early third century C.E., is suggestive of more extensive building activities in this period.

...The Late Roman phase of the residential quarter ended decisively with the earthquake of 363 C.E., as evidenced by the extensive tumble of wall stones and other building elements encountered in every Late Roman living space. Coins as well as ceramic materials recovered on the floors of these structures provide a certain date for this destruction. This major earthquake, which left almost no major city of the Near East untouched, must have been devastating for the inhabitants of Sepphoris.

The subsequent Byzantine phases (363 - 650 C.E.) of the residential quarter are preserved largely along its southern edge. Buildings constructed after the utter destruction of 363 C.E. were erected at a slightly different (by a few degrees) orientation from the prevailing grid that was used throughout the Roman periods.

... The evidence from the later Byzantine period seems to reflect a gradual transition into the subsequent Early Arabic period (early seventh to the ninth century C.E.), though there are indications of some disruption by burning, perhaps the result of another documented earthquake in the mid-eighth century.

... From the limited evidence it appears that the residential quarter prospered during the latter centuries of the Byzantine and Early Arabic periods and that its inhabitants endured the major cultural shifts that took place around them with relative ease. However, in comparison with the level of both public and private buildings in the lower city' at this time, the western summit did not sustain the quality it had enjoyed in the Roman period. Civic attention focused more on the lower city to the east, and only' parts of the acropolis in the west were renovated after the enormous collapse caused by 363 C.E. earthquake.

The Aqueducts of Sepphoris

from Tsuk in Nagy et al. (1996:48)

... From the time of their construction in the first and second centuries C.E., the Sepphoris aqueducts continued in use throughout the Byzantine period, having been repaired after the earthquake of 363 C.E. However, in the early period of Muslim rule, beginning in the seventh century, the city declined in importance and size, and water apparently stopped flowing in the aqueducts of Sepphoris.

Sepphoris during the Byzantine Period

from Weiss and Netzer in Nagy et al. (1996:81, 82, 86)

Significant structural changes took place in Sepphoris during the second half of the fourth century C.E.¹ Some of these changes were undoubtedly undertaken as a result of damage caused by the massive earthquake of 363 C.E., an event mentioned in a letter attributed to Cyril, a church father in Jerusalem at that time.² The Dionysos mosaic building — so named here for its magnificent mosaic carpet featuring scenes from the Greek god’s life — and many other domiciles on the acropolis were destroyed in this catastrophe. Evidence of the same destruction, but on a smaller scale, was also found in lower Sepphoris, a well-planned expansion of the city limits on a plateau to the east of the acropolis. The city possibly also suffered some damage during the Gallus Revolt of 351 C.E., though Christian sources imply that this revolt brought about destruction in the city.³ In any event, no remains of a fourth-century conflagration indicative of such an uprising have been revealed in the areas exposed either by the Hebrew University expedition or by the Joint Sepphoris Project.

The streets and colonnades that had been laid out east of the summit during the Roman period continued to function during the Byzantine period, but as a result of the 363 earthquake, which devastated other cities in the country as well, significant changes took place in the built-up areas of Sepphoris. Some buildings were renovated; elsewhere new buildings were erected, either on top of the ruins (as was the case in most parts of the Dionysos mosaic building) or in their place.

... A somewhat different situation prevails on the hill’s northern slope, to the northeast of the Roman theater. It appears that houses were built here, directly above domiciles of the Roman period, and that some of the elements of the earlier structures were incorporated into the new ones. One of these new houses contained a large room with a mosaic floor decorated with a geometric design featuring birds and pomegranates. It is difficult to determine the state of the theater during the Byzantine period. Presumably this large, tall building also was damaged, at least partially, in the earthquake of 363 C.E. It appears, however, that the theater continued to be used in the late fourth and the early fifth century but was abandoned later in the Byzantine period, when most of its building stones were looted for other construction projects as well as for the production of lime. The latter possibility is suggested by the discovery, east of the stage, of a limekiln (used for reducing limestone to lime by burning) and, next to it, a group of large stones that had been removed from the theater.

In contrast to the relatively poor state of development of the acropolis in the Byzantine period, the well-planned civic center to the east of the summit, with the cardo (north-south) and the decumanus (east-west) commercial streets at its center, apparently flourished once the earthquake damage had been repaired, as did other areas of the city. The largest and most impressive building from the Early Byzantine period excavated by the Hebrew University expedition lies along the east side of the cardo. It was named the Nile festival building because the mosaic floor in one of its rooms depicts scenes of the Nile River festival celebrated in Egypt.⁴ This edifice, with its several outstanding mosaic floors, was most probably built at the end of the fourth or at the beginning of the fifth century. Buildings from the Roman period, covering an area of about 55 x 50 meters, were demolished in order to clear a space for this structure.

...At its zenith, Byzantine Sepphoris comprised an area of more than 40 hectares and a population of approximately 15,000 to 20,000. Events at the end of the Byzantine period and in the Early Arab period brought an end to the city’s growth and prosperity. Many of the Byzantine buildings uncovered at Sepphoris show clear signs of destruction by fire, a catastrophic event that could be associated with either the Persian occupation or the Arab conquest of the early seventh century, but it is also possible that these structures burned as the result of an earthquake, the exact date of which cannot yet be determined.

Footnotes

1. The information contained herein is based mainly on excavations conducted during the years 1990-96 under the directorship of the authors on behalf of the Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. For previous publications see

Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer, “Two Excavation Seasons at Sepphoris,” Qadmoniot 95-96 (1992): 113-21 (in Hebrew)

Netzer and Weiss, “Byzantine Mosaics at Sepphoris: New Finds,” Israel Museum Journal 10 (1992): 75-80

Netzer and Weiss, “New Mosaic Art from Sepphoris,” Biblical Archaeology Review 18, no. 6 (1992): 36-43

Weiss and Netzer, “Archaeological Finds from the Byzantine Period at Sepphoris,” Michmanim 8 (1995): 75-85 (in Hebrew)

Netzer and Weiss, Zippori (Jerusalem, 1994)

Netzer and Weiss, “New Evidence for Late-Roman and Byzantine Sepphoris,” in The Roman and Byzantine Near East: Some Recent Archaeological Research, ed. John H. Humphrey, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary Series, 14 (Ann Arbor, 1995), 162—76.

Also see our article on Sepphoris in the Roman period in this catalogue.

2. Sebastian P. Brock, “A Letter Attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem on the Rebuilding of the Temple,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental andAfrican Studies 40 (1977): 267-86.

3. For the Christian sources on the Gallus Revolt see Joseph Geiger, “The Gallus Revolt and the Proposal to Rebuild the Temple in the Time of Julianus,” in Eretz Israel fom the Destruction of the Second Temple to the Muslim Conquest, ed. Z. Baras et al. (Jerusalem, 1982), 202—17 (in Hebrew).

4. For a more detailed discussion of this festival and its associated mosaic floor, as well as other mosaics found in this structure, see our article on the Nile festival building in this catalogue.

Sepphoris in the Arab Period

From the Islamic Conquest to the Crusades

The Islamic Conquest

from Ward in Nagy et al. (1996:92)

In 614 C.E. the Persians wrested control of Galilee from the Byzantines. Many towns, including Sepphoris, opened their gates to the Persians without a fight.⁹ Thirteen years later, when they were defeated decisively by the Byzantines in their Mesopotamian heartland, the Persians agreed to return all the land they had conquered. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius returned to Palestine triumphantly, marching through Tiberias to Jerusalem in 629. But his victory was short-lived, as Syria, Palestine, and Egypt would soon be conquered by the new Islamic state.

'Umar ibn al-Khattab became caliph in 634. He appointed four generals to complete the conquest of Syria; one of them “conquered Acre [Akko], Tyre and Sepphoris” and Galilee’s villages,¹⁰ probably in 635. Tiberias was the only city in the area that capitulated peacefully.¹¹ Presumably the inclusion of Sepphoris in the short list of conquered cities rather than in a list of villages indicates that it was still considered a major site at the time of the Islamic conquest and underscores that it was conquered by force: Sepphoris thus did not throw its gates open to the Muslim conquerors as it had to the Persians in 614. This conquest may have involved the total destruction of the town and perhaps was the occasion for seventh-century fire damage apparent in many locations throughout the site.¹² There is no indication of protracted fighting or reconquests, however, or, indeed, any further details of conquest at Sepphoris or at any neighboring locale. The cause or exact date of the fire cannot be established with certainty, and it may have resulted from an earthquake, such as the one that rocked the area just two years before the conquest, or from some other natural or accidental cause, such as the Year of Ashes in 639 C.E., a period marked by extended drought, widespread fires, and especially a deadly plague throughout Palestine.¹³

Footnotes

9. For maps of the Persian-Byzantine wars, noting cities that opened their gates to the Persians, see Haim Beinart, ed., Atlas of Medieval Jewish History (New York, 1992), 18.

10. Al-Baladhurl, Futuh al-Bulddn (Leiden, 1866), 115f For additional sources on the conquest of this region, see Gil, Palestine, 57.

11. As is typical, there is some slight variation in the dates reported by Arab historians; most historians reconstruct the conquest of Galilee to 635. To reconcile the various sources, Fred McGraw Donner, in The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton, 1981), suggests that Damascus and other locales changed hands several times, but he does not suggest this for Galilee. For other sources, see Gil, Palestine, section 56f., and Donner, 112ff.

12. Evidence of fire damage was pointed out to me by Zeev Weiss during a site visit.

13. Other sources date the Year of Ashes a year or two earlier. Donner, Conquests, 152 and 245; 322, n. 286 (mostly on plague). Gil, Palestine, section 74. Theophanes, Chronicle, 35, dates an earthquake to 632/633.

Some Mosaics and Buildings of Sepphoris

The Dionysos Mosaic

from Meyers, Meyers, Netzer, and Weiss in Nagy et al. (1996:111)

The largest and most splendid of the rooms in the palatial Roman building discovered adjacent to the theater is its large reception hall, or triclinium.¹ The grandeur of this room derives from its spaciousness and its airy views of the peristyle (colonnaded) courtyard to the south but especially from the stunning mosaic, about 9.0 meters by 7.0 meters in size, covering its floor. Other rooms in the building contain tessellated floors—some with no design, others with brightly colored floral or geometric patterns — but the triclinium mosaic with its vivid mythological and natural scenes relating to the popular god Dionysos offers exceptional beauty. Laid early in the third century C.E., it remained virtually intact, except for a repair or renovation at its southern end, until the building was destroyed in the fourth century, probably as a result of the earthquake of 363 C.E. ...

Footnotes

1. For further discussion and description ofthe mosaic and its context see the following by Eric M. Meyers, Ehud Netzer, and Carol L. Meyers: “Artistry in Stone: The Mosaics of Ancient Sepphoris,” Biblical Archaeologist 50 (1987): 223-31; “A Mansion in the Sepphoris Acropolis and Its Splendid Mosaic,” Qadmoniot 21 (1988): 87-92 (in Hebrew); and Sepphoris (Winona Lake, 1992). For more about the building itself, see Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer’s article on Sepphoris in the Roman period in this catalogue.

The Eastern Basilical Building

from Strange in Nagy et al. (1996:117)

Since 1987 the University of South Florida Excavations at Sepphoris has excavated a grand building on the east side of the site.¹ The building, about 40 x 60 meters in extent, occupied a single city block, with the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (the north-south commercial street) to the southeast. Unfortunately, some of the history and use of the building at its east end has been obscured by the remains of a bath that was built there in the Byzantine period. Nevertheless, it is clear that the basilical building occupied about 35 x 40 meters of the city block and that its porches occupied 25 x 40 meters of the same block.

The building was founded early in the first century C.E., perhaps as early as the turn of the century. The foundation of the south wall was actually a refounding on a preexisting wall. In this case the lowest course of foundation stones was cut to receive new stones with defined margins, “Herodian” stones. This same type of foundation, with stones dressed in the Herodian style, is visible at the east end of the building in the main facade, which borders on the sidewalk of the cardo. The presence of stones dressed in this fashion from early in the first century suggests that construction of the building may have begun under Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, who, at his death in 4 B.C.E., bequeathed Galilee and Perea to Antipas. The completed structure went out of use and was entirely destroyed about the middle of the fourth century C.E. as a result of the Gallus Revolt against Rome in 351, the earthquake of 363, or both events. ...

Footnotes

1. The University of South Florida team is directed by James F. Strange with associate directors Dennis E. Groh and Thomas R. W. Longstaff, and field director C. Thomas McCollough.

Conclusion

from Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:150)

Like so many of the cities of the Eastern Roman Empire, Sepphoris flourished throughout the Roman and Byzantine periods. For all the observable discontinuity between these periods — especially in ceramics, artistic style, and other aspects of everyday life — there is also enormous continuity. While the conversion of Constantine unleashed new cultural forces that would enable Christianity to take root firmly in the East, and while the so-called Revolt of Gallus (351 C.E.) may have caused a political furor, it was the massive earthquake of 363 C.E. that leveled much of the cities of the East, including Sepphoris. The conviction of the local residents to continue to pursue their lives at Sepphoris is apparent at every turn in the enormous rebuilding and reconfiguration of space that occurred soon thereafter. In some areas the rebuilt city did not compare favorably with its Roman-period precursor, but its glory was recovered soon enough. ...

363 CE Earthquake

Effect	Location	Image(s)	Description
Collapsed Walls Debris	Splendid Villa and perhaps even the adjacent theater Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Plan of villa with mosaic floor. A peristyle courtyard, with reflecting pool, is situated to the south of the triclinium (banquet hall). Various rooms, some with plain or geometric mosaic floors, surround the central banquet room. Meyers et al. (1992)		Sepphoris was devastated at about this time; but the cause was more likely a natural catastrophe, namely the great earthquake of 363 C.E., which put an end to the glories of the Roman occupation of the city. Indeed, the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time. - Meyers et al. (1992:17) The letter, which was sent from the holy Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, concerning the Jews, when they wanted to rebuild the Temple, and (on how) the land was shaken, and mighty prodigies took place, and fire consumed great numbers of them, and many Christians (too) perished. ... Now we should like to write down for you the names of the towns which were overthrown ... the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) - Brock (1977) Phase 4 must lie between 351 and 361 C.E., judging from the stratigraphy and the coins. While it is theoretically possible that the earthquake of 363 C.E. destroyed the Villa, it is not likely, for the simple reason that no one repaired the Villa or rebuilt it, nor did excavation reveal smashed stones or walls that were thrown down. In fact, all of the rooms that we probed were filled with erosion and deliberate fill. It appears that it was still possible for visitors to enter the underground chambers, which now began to fill with erosion from the surface. Visitors left more or less intact 4th century lamps on top the eroded debris when they left. Phase 4 ends with the filling in of the Villa, and presumably the entire 90 by 190 m. at the top surrounded by a wall that cut across the cavea of the theater. - Strange et al. (2006:122) JW: Although Meyers et al. (1992) and Strange et al. (2006) differed in their interpretation of whether debris found in the villa was a result of seismically induced collapse or deliberate fill and erosion, the letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which reported that the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) was overthrown by the northern 363 CE Cyril Quake strongly suggests that even if collapse evidence is not present in the villa, collapse appears to have occurred at other locations in Sepphoris.
Collapsed Walls Debris	Splendid Villa and perhaps even the adjacent theater Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Plan of villa with mosaic floor. A peristyle courtyard, with reflecting pool, is situated to the south of the triclinium (banquet hall). Various rooms, some with plain or geometric mosaic floors, surround the central banquet room. Meyers et al. (1992)		Sepphoris was devastated at about this time; but the cause was more likely a natural catastrophe, namely the great earthquake of 363 C.E., which put an end to the glories of the Roman occupation of the city. Indeed, the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time. - Meyers et al. (1992:17) The letter, which was sent from the holy Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, concerning the Jews, when they wanted to rebuild the Temple, and (on how) the land was shaken, and mighty prodigies took place, and fire consumed great numbers of them, and many Christians (too) perished. ... Now we should like to write down for you the names of the towns which were overthrown ... the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) - Brock (1977) Phase 4 must lie between 351 and 361 C.E., judging from the stratigraphy and the coins. While it is theoretically possible that the earthquake of 363 C.E. destroyed the Villa, it is not likely, for the simple reason that no one repaired the Villa or rebuilt it, nor did excavation reveal smashed stones or walls that were thrown down. In fact, all of the rooms that we probed were filled with erosion and deliberate fill. It appears that it was still possible for visitors to enter the underground chambers, which now began to fill with erosion from the surface. Visitors left more or less intact 4th century lamps on top the eroded debris when they left. Phase 4 ends with the filling in of the Villa, and presumably the entire 90 by 190 m. at the top surrounded by a wall that cut across the cavea of the theater. - Strange et al. (2006:122) The largest and most splendid of the rooms in the palatial Roman building discovered adjacent to the theater is its large reception hall, or triclinium.1 The grandeur of this room derives from its spaciousness and its airy views of the peristyle (colonnaded) courtyard to the south but especially from the stunning mosaic, about 9.0 meters by 7.0 meters in size, covering its floor. Other rooms in the building contain tessellated floors—some with no design, others with brightly colored floral or geometric patterns — but the triclinium mosaic with its vivid mythological and natural scenes relating to the popular god Dionysos offers exceptional beauty. Laid early in the third century C.E., it remained virtually intact, except for a repair or renovation at its southern end, until the building was destroyed in the fourth century, probably as a result of the earthquake of 363 C.E. - Meyers, Meyers, Netzer, and Weiss in Nagy et al. (1996:111) JW: Although Meyers et al. (1992) and Strange et al. (2006) differed in their interpretation of whether debris found in the villa was a result of seismically induced collapse or deliberate fill and erosion, the letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which reported that the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) was overthrown by the northern 363 CE Cyril Quake strongly suggests that even if collapse evidence is not present in the villa, collapse appears to have occurred at other locations in Sepphoris.
Destruction Layer	Square I.12 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)	Fig. 6.08 Square I.12, North Balk Strange et al. (2006) Fig. 6.09 Square I.12, East Balk Strange et al. (2006)	Λ thick layer of soil with charcoal and ash marks the destruction of the Villa. This is L12016, which is 50-78 cm. thick upon the flagstone pavement 12032. The top of the destruction layer is at elevation 284.77. This layer contained a large number ol finds, including four coins, three of which are 4th century C.E. bronzes. The latest of these was an issue of Constantius II dated 355-361, which gives us a terminus of the destruction. This burn layer also contained five lamp fragments, two ceramic stoppers, five glass fragments nine iron nails, one bronze disc, a bronze cosmetic tool, and a bone tool fragment. These are finds characteristic of domestic occupation, as were the finds in L12015. It is possible that the iron nails suggest the presence of wooden frameworks in the courtyard, perhaps for temporary shade. - Strange et al. (2006:80-81)
Collapsed Walls Destruction Layer	East Balk of Square I.10 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		There are also traces of destruction visible in the east balk of Square 1.10. For example, one can see an ash and clay layer lying on bedrock, on the stub of wall 10010. Furthermore LI0009 appears to be rubble and stone that may be remains of wall destroyed from cut bedrock foundation 10010, that is, a second destroyed wall. Wall 10008 is most likely a trace of the east wall of the Villa, whereas wall 10010 and perhaps the fall, L10009 are surely remnants of the northeast wall of the tiny room which contained Waterman’s “baptistery.” - Strange et al. (2006:98-99)
Collapsed Walls? Destruction Layer?	Theater Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) The Theater (restored) Waterman et al. (1937)		Since cistern No. 8, which was still partly open at the time of the destruction of the theater,⁵² contains a large amount of Byzantine, but not later, sherds, one must conclude that, at the latest, the theater was destroyed early in the Byzantine period. A confirmation of this suggestion may be seen in a few badly ruined walls found over the lowest tiers of seats at a great depth from the present surface of the ground (not much above the seats). The construction of the latter somewhat resembles that of the later phase of the rooms in trench S II. These rooms seem to belong to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. It follows, therefore, that the theater was likely to have been destroyed some time during the first half of the fourth century A.D., perhaps during the sack of the city under Gallus (351 A.D.). - Waterman et al. (1937:30)
Fire Human Remains Disturbed Floor	Trench S I south of the Fort and Room 10 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		Some traces of stratification were found in the few odd rooms that came to light in the long and narrow continuation of the trench S I south of the fort. The time at the disposal of the expedition did not allow a thorough exploration (down to bedrock) of this part of the trench; the work will be finished when the excavations are resumed. However, in one room (Room 10) were uncovered three successive mosaic floors. It is worth mentioning that the remains of the lowest were found greatly disturbed and large sections of it were lying upside down. This may have been done by the artisans who laid the second mosaic, though it is difficult to imagine for what purpose, unless they were treasure hunting. The second mosaic was laid some 20 cm. above the lowest one, and was composed of small, delicate black tesserae (basalt?). With the lowest mosaic or, more probably, with the second, were associated signs of some disaster. The southern part of this room and the whole adjoining room on the east were full of ashes, indicating a conflagration on a larger scale (these were not ashes of any ordinary household fires). On a level with the ashes were found a human skull, a sacrum, and a thigh bone and near by a large iron pickaxe (none of these finds exhibited any signs of having been charred). Should one associate these remains with a violent death brought about by the pickaxe? That the fire was not merely local to that part of a house is suggested by a streak of burned remains, found a good distance to the north of this room (Room 10), near the theater, in the debris immediately south of it. The streak was some 8—10 cm. thick and about 1 m. below the modern surface of the ground. Above this streak was uncovered a fragment of a rough wall, with a short length of an artificial water channel running over the wall. One is rather inclined to associate the burning with the sack of the city under Gallus in 351 A.D. - Waterman et al. (1937:30-31)
Collapsed Walls	Residential Quarter on the Western Summit Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Plan of residential area on western side of the acropolis. A major east-west road runs across the northern edge of this domestic area, which was inhabited continually from Hellenistic times (ca. 100 B.C.E.) to the Byzantine era (seventh century C.E.). Meyers et al. (1992)		The Late Roman phase of the residential quarter ended decisively with the earthquake of 363 C.E., as evidenced by the extensive tumble of wall stones and other building elements encountered in every Late Roman living space. Coins as well as ceramic materials recovered on the floors of these structures provide a certain date for this destruction. This major earthquake, which left almost no major city of the Near East untouched, must have been devastating for the inhabitants of Sepphoris. - Hoglund and Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:42)
Collapsed Walls ?	Eastern Basilical Building Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Fig. 52 Reconstruction of the eastern basilical building, showing the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (main north-south street). Courtesy: University of South Florida Expedition Nagy et al. (1996)		Since 1987 the University of South Florida Excavations at Sepphoris has excavated a grand building on the east side of the site. The building, about 40 x 60 meters in extent, occupied a single city block, with the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (the north-south commercial street) to the southeast. ... The completed structure went out of use and was entirely destroyed about the middle of the fourth century C.E. as a result of the Gallus Revolt against Rome in 351, the earthquake of 363, or both events. - Strange in Nagy et al. (1996:117)

6th century CE Earthquake

Effect	Location	Image(s)	Description
Fallen Columns Collapsed Masonry	"Basilica" of Waterman et al. (1937) uncovered in Trench S II Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		One can also hazard a guess at the date of the destruction of this building. The architectural remains (shafts and capitals of the columns, parts of the masonry, and the like) all seem to be fallen in one line running east-west. Now a similar state of things was found by Dr. Sukenik in the synagogue at Bet-’Alpha. From this fact he very shrewdly inferred that the synagogue seems to have been ruined during one of the twenty earthquakes that shook this part of Palestine during the sixth century A.D.⁶² Is it not probable that one of these also caused the destruction of the latest layer of occupation on the summit of the hill at Sepphoris? It was after this, apparently, that the place began to dwindle and to lose all its importance - Waterman et al. (1937:34)

363 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	Location	Image(s)	Description	Intensity
Collapsed Walls Debris	Splendid Villa and perhaps even the adjacent theater Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Plan of villa with mosaic floor. A peristyle courtyard, with reflecting pool, is situated to the south of the triclinium (banquet hall). Various rooms, some with plain or geometric mosaic floors, surround the central banquet room. Meyers et al. (1992)		Sepphoris was devastated at about this time; but the cause was more likely a natural catastrophe, namely the great earthquake of 363 C.E., which put an end to the glories of the Roman occupation of the city. Indeed, the splendid villa with its mosaics and perhaps even the adjacent theater, were buried in the collapse and went out of use at this time. - Meyers et al. (1992:17) The letter, which was sent from the holy Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, concerning the Jews, when they wanted to rebuild the Temple, and (on how) the land was shaken, and mighty prodigies took place, and fire consumed great numbers of them, and many Christians (too) perished. ... Now we should like to write down for you the names of the towns which were overthrown ... the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) - Brock (1977) Phase 4 must lie between 351 and 361 C.E., judging from the stratigraphy and the coins. While it is theoretically possible that the earthquake of 363 C.E. destroyed the Villa, it is not likely, for the simple reason that no one repaired the Villa or rebuilt it, nor did excavation reveal smashed stones or walls that were thrown down. In fact, all of the rooms that we probed were filled with erosion and deliberate fill. It appears that it was still possible for visitors to enter the underground chambers, which now began to fill with erosion from the surface. Visitors left more or less intact 4th century lamps on top the eroded debris when they left. Phase 4 ends with the filling in of the Villa, and presumably the entire 90 by 190 m. at the top surrounded by a wall that cut across the cavea of the theater. - Strange et al. (2006:122) The largest and most splendid of the rooms in the palatial Roman building discovered adjacent to the theater is its large reception hall, or triclinium.1 The grandeur of this room derives from its spaciousness and its airy views of the peristyle (colonnaded) courtyard to the south but especially from the stunning mosaic, about 9.0 meters by 7.0 meters in size, covering its floor. Other rooms in the building contain tessellated floors—some with no design, others with brightly colored floral or geometric patterns — but the triclinium mosaic with its vivid mythological and natural scenes relating to the popular god Dionysos offers exceptional beauty. Laid early in the third century C.E., it remained virtually intact, except for a repair or renovation at its southern end, until the building was destroyed in the fourth century, probably as a result of the earthquake of 363 C.E. - Meyers, Meyers, Netzer, and Weiss in Nagy et al. (1996:111) JW: Although Meyers et al. (1992) and Strange et al. (2006) differed in their interpretation of whether debris found in the villa was a result of seismically induced collapse or deliberate fill and erosion, the letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which reported that the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) was overthrown by the northern 363 CE Cyril Quake strongly suggests that even if collapse evidence is not present in the villa, collapse appears to have occurred at other locations in Sepphoris.	VIII+ ?
Destruction Layer	Square I.12 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)	Fig. 6.08 Square I.12, North Balk Strange et al. (2006) Fig. 6.09 Square I.12, East Balk Strange et al. (2006)	Λ thick layer of soil with charcoal and ash marks the destruction of the Villa. This is L12016, which is 50-78 cm. thick upon the flagstone pavement 12032. The top of the destruction layer is at elevation 284.77. This layer contained a large number ol finds, including four coins, three of which are 4th century C.E. bronzes. The latest of these was an issue of Constantius II dated 355-361, which gives us a terminus of the destruction. This burn layer also contained five lamp fragments, two ceramic stoppers, five glass fragments nine iron nails, one bronze disc, a bronze cosmetic tool, and a bone tool fragment. These are finds characteristic of domestic occupation, as were the finds in L12015. It is possible that the iron nails suggest the presence of wooden frameworks in the courtyard, perhaps for temporary shade. - Strange et al. (2006:80-81)	?
Collapsed Walls Destruction Layer	East Balk of Square I.10 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		There are also traces of destruction visible in the east balk of Square 1.10. For example, one can see an ash and clay layer lying on bedrock, on the stub of wall 10010. Furthermore LI0009 appears to be rubble and stone that may be remains of wall destroyed from cut bedrock foundation 10010, that is, a second destroyed wall. Wall 10008 is most likely a trace of the east wall of the Villa, whereas wall 10010 and perhaps the fall, L10009 are surely remnants of the northeast wall of the tiny room which contained Waterman’s “baptistery.” - Strange et al. (2006:98-99)	VIII+ ?
Collapsed Walls? Destruction Layer?	Theater Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) The Theater (restored) Waterman et al. (1937)		Since cistern No. 8, which was still partly open at the time of the destruction of the theater,⁵² contains a large amount of Byzantine, but not later, sherds, one must conclude that, at the latest, the theater was destroyed early in the Byzantine period. A confirmation of this suggestion may be seen in a few badly ruined walls found over the lowest tiers of seats at a great depth from the present surface of the ground (not much above the seats). The construction of the latter somewhat resembles that of the later phase of the rooms in trench S II. These rooms seem to belong to the fourth-sixth centuries A.D. It follows, therefore, that the theater was likely to have been destroyed some time during the first half of the fourth century A.D., perhaps during the sack of the city under Gallus (351 A.D.). - Waterman et al. (1937:30)	VIII+? ?
Fire Human Remains Disturbed Floor? (folded pavements)	Trench S I south of the Fort and Room 10 Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		Some traces of stratification were found in the few odd rooms that came to light in the long and narrow continuation of the trench S I south of the fort. The time at the disposal of the expedition did not allow a thorough exploration (down to bedrock) of this part of the trench; the work will be finished when the excavations are resumed. However, in one room (Room 10) were uncovered three successive mosaic floors. It is worth mentioning that the remains of the lowest were found greatly disturbed and large sections of it were lying upside down. This may have been done by the artisans who laid the second mosaic, though it is difficult to imagine for what purpose, unless they were treasure hunting. The second mosaic was laid some 20 cm. above the lowest one, and was composed of small, delicate black tesserae (basalt?). With the lowest mosaic or, more probably, with the second, were associated signs of some disaster. The southern part of this room and the whole adjoining room on the east were full of ashes, indicating a conflagration on a larger scale (these were not ashes of any ordinary household fires). On a level with the ashes were found a human skull, a sacrum, and a thigh bone and near by a large iron pickaxe (none of these finds exhibited any signs of having been charred). Should one associate these remains with a violent death brought about by the pickaxe? That the fire was not merely local to that part of a house is suggested by a streak of burned remains, found a good distance to the north of this room (Room 10), near the theater, in the debris immediately south of it. The streak was some 8—10 cm. thick and about 1 m. below the modern surface of the ground. Above this streak was uncovered a fragment of a rough wall, with a short length of an artificial water channel running over the wall. One is rather inclined to associate the burning with the sack of the city under Gallus in 351 A.D. - Waterman et al. (1937:30-31)	? ? VI+?
Collapsed Walls	Residential Quarter on the Western Summit Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Plan of residential area on western side of the acropolis. A major east-west road runs across the northern edge of this domestic area, which was inhabited continually from Hellenistic times (ca. 100 B.C.E.) to the Byzantine era (seventh century C.E.). Meyers et al. (1992)		The Late Roman phase of the residential quarter ended decisively with the earthquake of 363 C.E., as evidenced by the extensive tumble of wall stones and other building elements encountered in every Late Roman living space. Coins as well as ceramic materials recovered on the floors of these structures provide a certain date for this destruction. This major earthquake, which left almost no major city of the Near East untouched, must have been devastating for the inhabitants of Sepphoris. - Hoglund and Meyers in Nagy et al. (1996:42)	VIII+
Collapsed Walls ?	Eastern Basilical Building Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Fig. 52 Reconstruction of the eastern basilical building, showing the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (main north-south street). Courtesy: University of South Florida Expedition Nagy et al. (1996)		Since 1987 the University of South Florida Excavations at Sepphoris has excavated a grand building on the east side of the site. The building, about 40 x 60 meters in extent, occupied a single city block, with the main entrance and its four porches opening onto the cardo (the north-south commercial street) to the southeast. ... The completed structure went out of use and was entirely destroyed about the middle of the fourth century C.E. as a result of the Gallus Revolt against Rome in 351, the earthquake of 363, or both events. - Strange in Nagy et al. (1996:117)	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) with the caveat that Meyers et al. (1992) and Strange et al. (2006) differed in their interpretation of whether debris found in the villa was a result of seismically induced collapse or deliberate fill and erosion. Nevertheless, since the letter attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem reported that the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory (χωρα) was overthrown by the northern 363 CE Cyril Quake, even if collapse evidence is not present in the villa, collapse appears to have occurred at other locations in Sepphoris.

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	Location	Image(s)	Description	Intensity
Fallen Columns Collapsed Masonry	"Basilica" of Waterman et al. (1937) uncovered in Trench S II Sepphoris: general plan of the excavations. Stern et al. (1993 v.4) Drawing of public area of the city, showing citadel, theater, and villa with mosaic floor (on right). Meyers et al. (1992) Fig. 6.03 Waterman's finds with USF Squares Strange et al. (2006)		One can also hazard a guess at the date of the destruction of this building. The architectural remains (shafts and capitals of the columns, parts of the masonry, and the like) all seem to be fallen in one line running east-west. Now a similar state of things was found by Dr. Sukenik in the synagogue at Bet-’Alpha. From this fact he very shrewdly inferred that the synagogue seems to have been ruined during one of the twenty earthquakes that shook this part of Palestine during the sixth century A.D.⁶² Is it not probable that one of these also caused the destruction of the latest layer of occupation on the summit of the hill at Sepphoris? It was after this, apparently, that the place began to dwindle and to lose all its importance - Waterman et al. (1937:34)	V+ 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). It should be noted that east-west oriented damage was noted by Waterman et al. (1937:34).

References

Articles and Books

Iamim, A. (2016). The Missing Building(s) at Sepphoris . Israel Exploration Journal, 66(1), 96–113. - at JSTOR

Meyers, E. M., Netzer, E., & Meyers, C. L. (1986). Sepphoris: Ornament of All Galilee . The Biblical Archaeologist, 49(1), 4–19. - at JSTOR

Meyers, E. M., et al. (1992). Sepphoris , Center for Judaic Studies. - can be borrowed with a free account from archive.org

Miller, S. S. (1984) Studies in the History and Traditions of Sepphoris (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 37), Leiden 1984. - can be borrowed with a free account from archive.org

Nagy, Rebecca Martin et al. (1996). Sepphoris in Galilee: Crosscurrents of Culture , North Carolina Museum of Art. - open access at archive.org

Nathanson, B. G. (1986). Jews, Christians, and the Gallus Revolt in Fourth-Century Palestine . The Biblical Archaeologist, 49(1), 26–36. - at JSTOR

Excavation Reports

University of Michigan Excavations (1930s)

Waterman, Leroy, Manasseh, N. E., Yeivin, S., and Bunnell, Catherine S. (1937) Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavations at Sepphoris, Palestine , University of Michigan Press - open access at archive.org

University of South Florida Excavations (1980s)

Strange, J. F., et al. (2006). Excavations at Sepphoris: Volume One: University of South Florida Probes in the Citadel and Villa , Brill.

Hebrew University Excavations (1980s (?) and 1990s)

Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer, “Two Excavation Seasons at Sepphoris,” Qadmoniot 95-96 (1992): 113-21 (in Hebrew)

Websites

Sepphoris at BibleWalks.com

Mosaics of Sepphoris at BibleWalks.com

Zippori Natonal Park Brochure

Saffuriyya at Manar Al-Athir (Oxford University)

Saffuriyya at PalestineRemembered.com

The USF Excavations at Sepphoris at Century One Foundation

Sepphoris Theater at Theatrum.de

Bibliography from Stern et al. (1993 v.4)

Main

L. Waterman et al., Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavations at Sepphoris, Palestine, 1931, Ann Arbor 1937

S. S. Miller, Studies in the History and Traditions of Sepphoris (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 37), Leiden 1984.

Other Studies

C1ermont·Ganneau, CRAIBL (1909), 677-683

M. Avi·Yonah, QDAP 3 (1934), 40

id., IEJ 11 (1961), 184-187

Frey, Corpus, 173-176

H. Seyrig, Numismatic Chronicle Series 6/15 (1955), 157 159

F. W. Boelter, Exploration 3 (I 977), 36-43

Y. Meshorer, Greek Numismatics and Archaeology (M. Thompson Fest.), Wetteren 1979, 159-172

C. M. Kraay, American Numismatic Society Museum Notes 25 (1980), 56-57

J. F. Strange, IEJ 32 (1982), 254-255

34 (1984), 51-52, 269-270

(with R. W. Longstaft) 37 (1987), 278-280

38 (1988), 188-190

(et al.) 39 (1989), 104-106

id., RB91 (1984), 239-241

92 (1985), 429

93 (1986), 252-254

(et al.) 96 (1989), 240-242

id. (and R. W. Longstaft), ESI 4 (1985), 100-102

id. 6 (1987-1988), 97-98

(et al.) 9 (1989-1990), 19-20

Z. Zuck, ibid. 1 (1982), 105-107

9 (1989-1990), 20

A. Druks, ibid. 3 (1984), 97-98

S. S. Miller(Reviews),JQR76(1986), 260-262.-JAOS 107 (1987), 543-544.-IEJ 38 (1988), 283-284

J. McRay, Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 24 (1985), 117-118

E. M. Meyers eta!., IEJ35 (1985), 295-299

37 (1987), 275-278

40 (1990), 219-222

id., BA 49 (1986), 4-19

50 (1987), 223-231

id., ESI 5 (1986), 101-104

6 (1987-1988), 95-97

7-8 (1988 1989), 169-173

id., MdB 57 (1989), 50-51

id., Sepphoris, Winona Lake (in prep.)

Buried History 23 (1987), 64-76

24 (1988), 37

R. A. Batey, JFA 14 (1987), 1-8

B. Schwank, Erbe und Au/trag 63 (1987), 222-225

BAR 14/1 (1988), 3-33

C. L. Meyers, ASOR Newsletter 39/2 (1988), 1-2

D. Stadler, The Digging Stick 5/2 (1988), 3-4

A. Khalbhol, MdB 57 (1989), 53-53

A. Adan·Bayewitz and I. Perlman, IEJ 40 (1990), 153-172

M. T. Boatwright, BA 53 (!990), 190-191

J. Fo1da, ibid. 54 (1991), 88-96.

Wikipedia Pages

Sepphoris

from wikipedia

Nazareth

from wikipedia