Monks and Monasteries in the Negev Desert

LA 45 (1995) 401-450; Pls. 53-58

MONKS AND MONASTERIES IN THE NEGEV DESERT

P. Figueras

This study is a developed version of a paper read at the XVIII InternationalCongress of Byzantine Studies, celebrated in Moscow on August 1991.1 Itsmain purpose is to fill a certain gap existing among scholars, historians andarchaeologists, concerning the monastic history of the Roman province ofThird Palestine, extending from the plain of Beersheva southwards, andincluding the Negev desert, most of the Sinai peninsula and the southernregion of Transjordan.

Indeed, those scholars who, led by an abundant monastic literature, haveengaged in a serious research of the archaeological remains of the ancientPalestinian monks, such as Chariton, Eutymius and Sabas, have not crossedthe limits of the Judean Desert (Vailhé 1889/90; Festugière 1962/63; Hirsch-feld 1991 and 1993; Patrich 1993).2 Others, having tracked the Gaza regionin the steps of Hilarion at Thauatha, Sylvanus at Gerar and Seridos nearMaiumas of Gaza, have come back rather frustrated (Chitty 1966b).

On the other hand, a general updated history of the ancient Church ofPalestine is still to be written, though very good tools are today availableto anybody wishing to engage in such a scholarly adventure.3 The chapterdealing with the southern region, that is, the Negev desert, is consequentlynon-existent,4 and nobody has ever tried to follow the traces of a monasticpresence there. It seems as if monks and monastic founders never had the

1. This study has partly been written in collaboration with Mr. Ofer Katz, a former studentof mine at Ben Gurion University, today member of the Israel Antiquities Authority. I wishto express him my deepest appreciation.

2. For studies made on Palestinian monasticism see the bibliographic references at the endof the present article.

3. See Bagatti 1972; Id. 1971, The Church from the Circumcision, Jerusalem; Meimaris1986; Y. Geiger, “Hitpashtut hannatzrut be Eretz Israel mereshitah ad iemei Iulianos” [Ex-pansion of Christianity in Palestine from its Beginning to Julian’s period], in Y. Tsafrir,ed., 1982, Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Temple to the Muslim Conquest, Jerusa-lem, pp. 218-233 (Hebrew); Z. Rubin, “Hitpashtut hannatzrut be Eretz Israel miemeiIulianos ad tequfat Iustinianos [Expansion of Christianity in Palestine, from Julian to Jus-tinian],” ibid, pp. 234-251 (Hebrew).

4. More than one researcher, however, has recently made valuable efforts in this direction,not only from the point of view of archaeology and urbanism (Shereshevski 1991), but alsofrom the point of view of history and sociology (Rubin 1990).

P. FIGUERAS402

opportunity to cross that extensive desert, although they were well estab-lished around it, in the Gaza region, in the Judean Desert and in the Sinaicomplex.5 The province of Third Palestine enjoyed Church organisation asmuch as any other province in the Roman Empire, and flourishing citiessuch as Petra, its capital, Elusa (Óalutza), Zoar, Phaino (Punon) and Ailapossessed their Episcopal Sees. The presence of monks there is thereforeto be expected almost as a matter of fact. If this, therefore, can be illus-

5. This statement is based on the well-known text of Jerome in his Vita Hilarionis (see be-low, Elusa). The building of the first Christian churches in the towns existing in the Negevin that period could be assigned, in the first place, to the official provision of Christianworship places for the units of the Roman army stationed there since the annexation of theNabatean territories to the Empire in A.D. 106. There is no agreement among scholars aboutthe number, the location and the exact function of those units, that were stationed more inthe towns than in the desert areas (B. Isaac, 1990, The Limits of Empire, Oxford, pp. 132-134; but see P. Figueras, 1992, “The Worship of Athena-Allat in the Decapolis and theNegev,” Aram 4, pp. 173-183 [178-179]).

Fig. 1 General map ofthe monastic sites in theNegev.

MONKS AND MONASTERIES IN THE NEGEV DESERT 403

trated by some literary or archaeological evidence, then we must logicallythink that some kind of relations, and not only purely spiritual ones, ex-isted between those four monastic regional groups, namely the JudeanDesert, the Gaza region, the Sinai mountain and the Negev desert.

It is true that no ancient Church historian left us a particular page withdramatic events having occurred in southern Palestine, but there is enoughmaterial today, both written and archaeological, to allow us to form a real-istic picture of the Negev monasticism. We must admit not only that therewere monks in the Negev since the very beginning of its Christianization,but we can also start recording on the map the spots where some of thecoenobia, laurae, and urban monasteries were situated. We have referencesto abbots, monks and hermits both in the pilgrim records and in local epig-raphy. Some of their names are still written on their tombs, we can visitthe remains of coenobitic monasteries and of churches served by monks,and some hermits’ caves and cells are easily accessible.

Actually, there is also written evidence of relations having existed be-tween monastic centers in the Negev and others outside it. We also knowof some monastic activities such as writing and agriculture. Finally, we canread the names of monks who, representing monastic regional complexesin the Negev, placed their signatures on the protocols of the EcumenicalSynod of Constantinople in 536. This fact alone attests not only to the highdegree of internal organization, but also to the relevance assigned by theChurch authorities to that institution.

In comparison with the importance of their neighbors in the JudeanDesert, the monks from the Negev may have played a very humble role inthe general history of the Church of Palestine. But the picture that we cantrace of their presence and their importance in the general development ofthe region during the Byzantine period is not negligible at all. In the fol-lowing pages we shall proceed to obtain the main lines of that picturethrough a rather systematic and analytic review of the data collected fromboth groups of existing sources, namely literary and archaeological. Thiswill be done following a geographic scheme, arbitrarily set in alphabeticorder and illustrated with photographs, plans and drawings. It will there-fore be much more than a “monastic gazetteer of the Negev,” our purposebeing to offer a working tool. I am well aware of the fact that, in many acase, my interpretation of a given datum and some of my guesses will bereceived with doubt and caution by scholars. But I am no less certain thatsuch criticism will lead to a fruitful discussion and to further research.

The sources used for the building-up of the gazetteer according to well-established criteria, can be listed in the following way:

P. FIGUERAS404

A. Literary sources:1. Acts of Church councils or synods6

2. Patristic writings, including monastic literature7

3. Pilgrims’ records8

4. Local epigraphy9

5. The Nessana papyri10

B. Archaeological sources:1. Caves carved on the walls of a wadi, with Christian symbols11

2. Building complexes including most of the typical elements of acoenobitic monastery and situated far away from any settlement12

3. Great urban basilicas having a complex of rooms around theiratrium or attached to other parts of the building13

4. A complex of caves and rooms around a central chapel, in a spotremote from any other settlement14

6. Signatures of monks from the Third Palestine and from other parts of the country arefound in the Acts of the Ecumenical council gathered by Justinian in Constantinople in 536(Schwartz 1940, 248; see below, Aila). This is a major witness, not only to the existence ofmonks and monasteries in the Negev, but especially to their importance as a well-organizedbody of the Church of Palestine in the sixth century.

7. Their list includes the names of Jerome (Vita Hilarionis, 25, PL 23), John Moschus (Spir-itual Prairie, PG 87/3, 2032: “Abba Victor, hesychastes in the laura of Elusa”), Cyril ofScythopolis (Life of Theognios, trad. Festugière 1963, p. 66: “Abba Paulos, the hesychastesof the city of Elusa”), and the same Paul of Elusa (Life of Theognios, ed. Vailhé, AB 10, 73-118).

8. Like today, the number of Christian visitors to the Negev was very restricted in compari-son with other parts of the country, as no biblical “Holy Places” are there to be venerated.However, many pilgrims crossed this region on their way to Mount Sinai, as the anony-mous Piacenza Pilgrim, who refers to monks and monasteries in the regions of Elusa, MizpeShivta (see below, s.v.) and Zoar, south of the Dead Sea. For a general discussion on theissue of Byzantine pilgrims in the Negev, see Figueras 1995 (in press).

9. To the collected inscriptions from the region published by Alt (1921), we can add a listof new publications about inscriptions from 1. Nessana (G.E. Kirk and C.B. Welles, in Colt1962, 131-197; P. Figueras, “The Inscriptions,” in D. Urman, New Excavations in Nessana,vol. I [in press]). 2. Oboda, Sobata, Mampsis and Elusa (Negev 1981). 3. Beersheva and itsregion (Figueras 1985; id. 1986; Ustinova - Figueras 1995). 4. Ru˙eibeh (Tsafrir 1988). 5.Beersheva, Elusa, Oboda, Sobata, and other places (Figueras 1995a, in press).

10. Discovered in the course of the expeditions conducted by H. D. Colt in 1935-37 (Colt1962), and studied and published by Kraemer (1958).

11. See below, ‘Ein ‘Avdat, Wadi Mu’eille˙ and Mampsis.

12. See below, Tel Masos, Tel ‘Ira.

13. See below, Sobata, Oboda, Ru˙eibeh, Nessana.

14. See below, Mitzpe Shivta.


It will be noticed that the list of monastic sites in the region of our con-cern does not pretend to be exhaustive. Some of them, like a ruin next toTel Sheva, have never been reported as such, though they are commonlyaccepted as having been monasteries. I have preferred to list only those thatare available by some literary support.

Aila (near present ‘Aqaba, map ref. 145.884)

Formal excavations have only recently been started in ancient Aila, theprosperous harbor-city of Nabateans, Romans and Byzantines on the RedSea. It is partly identified with the present ruins of Um-Rashrash, on thenorthernmost point of the Gulf of Eilat or ‘Aqaba, near the Jordanian cityof the same name (Avi-Yonah 1977, s.v.). Nelson Glueck’s expedition tothe ruins of biblical Etzion-Geber also made sporadic finds from the Byz-antine period near the beach. One of them was two sculptured capitals,obviously belonging to one of the local churches. One shows a Roman sol-dier holding a sphere with a cross on it, identified with St. Theodore by anaccompanying inscription (Glueck 1939). The other represents another sol-dier saint in full armor, identified as St. Longinus by an inscription inGreek (ibid.; Taylor 1987, fig. 3).

Another Christian inscription from the area, the tomb-stone of a certainOsedos dated to A.D. 555, was published by Schwabe (1953, 51-55). Fromthe nearby area, Kh. el-Khalde at Wadi el-Yitm, some 25 km to the north-east of Aila, a third Christian inscription was discovered by Glueck (ibid.),witness to the presence of an ancient Christian settlement in that area.

At Horvat Bodeda (map ref. 140.890), situated 7 north-west of presentEilat, the remains of a Byzantine complex were found, including a four-roombuilding and a Christian chapel decorated with wall paintings and inscriptions,which, as far as I know, have not yet been published. Given the lonely envi-ronment of those ruins, one can logically think of the presence of a little mon-astery in that spot. This, however, is only a suggestion, because it is clear thatin ancient times the place had been exploited as quarry.

According to Woolley and Lawrence (1914/15, 145), Um-Rashrash wasalso called Ed-Deir, Arabic for “The Monastery.” Actually, no remains of anybig building have so far been indicated by visitors to the spot. If there is anyhistoric reason for that term, we can imagine the remains of a rather smallgroup of monastic cells having later disappeared under the building of theTurkish police station. Burkhardt (1822, 511-512) also pointed out a placecalled Ed-Deir near ‘Aqaba, a small island, which cannot be other than the

P. FIGUERAS406

present Coral Island, wrongly taken by some as ancient Yotabe.15 The onlyruins to be seen today on that island are those of a medieval Arab castle, re-cently excavated and partly restored by the Egyptian authorities.

The most valuable source of information for our knowledge of a mo-nastic presence in Aila comes from the acts of the ConstantinopolitanCouncil gathered by Justinian in A.D. 536 against Anthimus. There, amongthe names of the clergy signing the council’s decisions, we find a certain“John, by God’s mercy priest and monk,” who signs “in the name of allthe monks of Aila in the Third Palestine” (Schwartz 1940, 248).16 This ref-erence is an important evidence to the fact that, not only were there monksin the region, but also that they were of orthodox denomination and suffi-ciently organised as to send a representative to the council. It is true thatthe monasteries of other cities of the Third Palestine sent delegates to thecouncil too,17 but this only confirms, without diminishing it, the importanceof Aila as a monastic center.

A much later source, the so-called Notitia Graeca Episcopatuum, addsan interesting note referring to the bishopric of Aila, saying: “It has underit the monastery of Great Arsenius” (Palmer 1872, 554, 22). We do notknow today where that monastery was situated, but it could only be withinthe jurisdictional radius of Aila’s bishopric, certainly not far from thatcity.18 There is a possibility that it was situated around Mount Sinai. Indeed,we know from John Moschus that a “laura of the Ailanites” (tön Ailiotön)had been founded there in the sixth century by a certain “abbot Antony,”and where “abbot Stephen” was the priest (John Moschus, Spiritual Prai-rie, PG 87, ch. 62-66, 134).

15. Today its is currently assumed that Yotabe or Jotabe should be looked for at today’sStraights of Tiran, near the southern entrance to the Gulf of ‘Aqaba or Eilat.

16. This important reference to the existence of monks and monasteries in Aila and sur-roundings during the Byzantine period has been strangely ignored by all historians and ar-chaeologists concerned by Palestinian monasticism.

17. Thus we not only have twice the signature of “Elias, by God’s mercy deacon and monk,and in the name of the monks of Augustopolis of the Third Palestine” (Schwartz 1940, 51.93), but also the mention of “all archimandrites and monks in the third Palestine” (ibid., 37,40; 51, 29) and “the monks of the monasteries of the three Palestines” (ibid., 25, 33 [35]).

18. It would be wrong to look for historical links between this “great Arsenius” and thewell-known Abbot Arsenius referred to in the Apophtegmata Patrum (PG 65, 71-442), awell-instructed noble man who embraced monastic life in the Egyptian desert in the fourthcentury, of whom many edifying anecdotes are told. In Sobata, one of the Negev towns,and thus nearer to Aila but still too far, the tomb of a “triceblessed Arsenius, monk andpriest” was discovered on the floor of the baptistry chapel in the north church (see below,Sobata).


Relations between the monks of Mt. Sinai and the people of Aila arealso known from other sources. There is not only the fact that Stephen, thebuilder of the Sinai basilica about the mid-sixth century, was from Aila,according to the inscription on one of the roof beams (Sevøenko 1966, 257.262). But a century later, Anastasius, a monk from Sinai, reports on thevisit paid by bishop Sergius of Aila to Abbot Orentius of Sinai at his death-bed (Nau 1902, 71). The same source also tells the story of a famous monkfrom Sinai who summoned one of his spiritual brothers from Aila beforehis death (ibid., 67).

Birosaba (Beersheva, map ref. 130.072)

This city, possibly to be identified with biblical Beersheva despite othermore generalised views, is known from different sources, literary as wellas epigraphic and archaeological, to have existed on the same place in theByzantine period. To the first group belongs: 1) Eusebius’ Onomasticum19

in the fourth century, 2) the records of pseudo-bishop Eucherius20 in thefifth, and 3) the geographic mosaic pavement from Madaba21 in the sixth.Archaeological evidence includes the imposing remains of churches, whoseexistence has been recorded since the Middle Ages.22

Byzantine ruins on the spot were later acknowledged by a number ofwestern scholars, such as Robinson (1838), Seetzen (1855), Abel (1903b),Musil (1907), Woolley and Lawrence (1914/15).23 When the present townof Beersheva was planned by the Ottoman government and the building ac-tivity started at the turn of the century, only a small number of fortuitous

19. This source refers to the town as kome megiste, “a very big village,” in which “a for-tress (phrourion) of soldiers” (Jerome: “praesidium militum Romanorum”) is situated(Klostermann 1904, 50f).

20. Pseudo-Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, who writes some fifty years after Jerome and useshis Latin translation of the Onomasticum, calls Berosaba vicus maximus, i.e. “a very bigvillage, situated twenty miles south of Hebron” (Wilkinson 1977, 54).

21. Avi-Yonah 1954, n. 98.

22. Thus Sir John de Maundeville, A.D. 1322-1365 (ed. T. Wright, 1968, Early Travels inPalestine, New York, p. 160), and L. de Sudheim, A.D. 1338, De itinere Terre Sancte (ed.G. C. Neumann, 1884, Archives de l’Orient Chrétien, Paris, p. 348).

23. Pieces of major historical interest among these occasional finds were the fragmentaryinscriptions today known as “Imperial Decree of Beersheva” (Alt 1921, 4-25), dealing withthe regulation of civil payments to the Roman army. Other inscriptions have more recentlybeen discovered and only partially published (see above, footnote 9).

P. FIGUERAS408

discoveries of church ruins, mosaic pavements, Greek inscriptions, farm in-stallations and necropolises could be rescued for study and publication(Figueras 1982).24

An informal sketch of the ruins of ancient Birosaba was drawn in 1903 byFr. Abel, O.P., during one of his visits to the spot when the building of the newtown had just started (Fig. 2). That sketch indicates a place near the wadi run-ning to the south of the present old city with the name Ed-Deir, “The Monas-tery.” We cannot know, of course, if those were really the ruins of a monastery.But their location, somewhat away from the town and near the wells along thewady that would ensure enough water for a monastic community, conferssome plausibility to the popular identification of those ruins by later genera-tions of local Arabs. More important may be the fragmentary inscription on atomb-stone found in the present city, including, with no clear context, the term“monastery” (Figueras 1985, 20, no. 12; 1994, no. 18c).

As far as formal excavations are concerned, Byzantine Beersheva has notbeen the object of a comprehensive project, but the sporadic digs conductedthere by modern Israeli archaeologists so far, have brought to light importantremains, including also the ruins of two possible monasteries. One is the roomcomplex around the atrium of a rather large basilica (24×15 m) discovered

24. Some of the most important remains from the Byzantine period, such as a monolithcruciform Baptism font and a chancel column inscribed with Hebrew characters, were firstpublished by Woolley and Lawrence (1914-15), but later they were unfortunately lost, prob-ably as a consequence of the First World War.

Fig. 2 Birosaba, Byzantine ruins (Abel 1903a).


in 1948 and excavated in 1967 by Y. Israeli (1967), and which has now to-tally disappeared. It was situated at the present crossing of the Eli Cohen streetand Presidents’ Avenue, north-east of the old city.

In the course of 1991, a residential complex from the Byzantine periodwas discovered and partially excavated in the south of the present city, onthe southern bank of Nahal or Wadi Beersheva. The doubtless Christiancharacter of the rather sumptuous building allows us to think that it couldhave been, at least for a time, the premises of a monastic community. Sofar, no official report of this discovery has seen light, but a Greek epitaphfound there in secondary use is presently being published (Ustinova -Figueras 1995). New excavations in Beersheva are taking place these verydays to the east of the Municipal Market, conducted by the Israel Antiqui-ties Authority under the direction of Mr. Peter Fabian, and the foundationsof a huge cruciform church have been exposed.25

As written evidence of a monastic presence in Birosaba, we may ad-duce the correspondence of Barsanuphius, one of two famous reclusemonks in Seridos’ monastery, between Gaza and Maiumas, in the sixth cen-tury. In no less than six of his two thousand preserved letters “the great oldman” Barsanuphius addressed a certain “Abbot John of Birosaba” who wasliving in the same monastery (Chitty 1966a). The fact that this monk iscalled by the honorary title of aba, “Father,” or “abbot”, generally, thoughnot exclusively, used in that period, as today, to address the Superior of amonastery, possibly indicates that John had been the Superior of a monas-tery in his native town of Beersheva before joining the monastery ofSeridos. From his letters to Barsanuphius it becomes evident that he wasan expert in building, or at least had been appointed supervisor of the build-ing activity in the monastery. We also learn from the letters that he had animpatient character, that was compensated, however, by the humility withwhich he approached his spiritual father asking for counsel.

Elusa (El Khalassa, Óalutza, map ref. 117.056)

The ruins of the ancient city of Elusa, which is indicated in the Peutinger mapon the Jerusalem-Aila road, and in the Madaba Map as a big town, apparentlyfortified with city walls and towers (Avi-Yonah 1944, no. 103, pl. 6), are situ-

25. See a short report of the dig, with a picture of the mosaic found, in Yedi‘ot A˙aronot 31July 1994, p. 10.

P. FIGUERAS410

Fig. 3 Elusa, plan of ruins (Negev 1988, 115).

ated some 20 km south of present Beersheva, in a desert zone, near the so-called “Óalutza sands”. The spot was visited by several travelers in the lastcentury, and was identified with ancient Elusa as early as 1835 by Robinson(1841). The visit to the spot by the Dominican Fathers of the École Bibliquein Jerusalem yielded several Greek inscriptions from the Byzantine period andearlier (Jaussen - Savignac - Vincent 1904).

Archaeological evidence of the presence of monks or monasteries in an-cient Elusa has not appeared so far, neither from the short dig conducted onthat spot in 1938 by H.D. Colt, nor from the excavations undertaken thereby A. Negev in 1973, 1979 and 1980, which exposed only the Nabateantheater and part of the cathedral church (Fig. 3) (Negev 1993). The evidence,however, comes from the Church literature. In the sixth century A.D., JohnMoschos mentions in his famous book Spiritual Prairie a certain Victor,whom he calls “hesychastes - i.e. hermit - in the laura of Elusa” (PG 87/3,2032). Another source, an extensive biography of St. Theognios, bishop ofBitylium in Northern Sinai (Vailhé 1891) has as its author “Abbot Paul ofElusa”, who had succeeded Theognios as superior of his monastery near Je-


rusalem. Paul must have deserved such name after a long stay in one of themonasteries of the most important city, actually the only real city, of theByzantine Negev, and See of the only bishop of the central Negev (Figueras1981, 153; on Elusa see also Mayerson 1983).

A third and more explicit source from the same period are the records ofthe so-called Piacenza Pilgrim, who visited the place about 570 A.D. Thebishop of the city told him about a young lady called Mary, whose husbandhad died on the very night of the wedding. “She bore it with courage, andwithin a week she had set all his slaves free, and given away all his propertyto the poor and to monasteries.” She then disappeared from the city, and wasseen living as a wandering hermit “in the desert across the Jordan,” in the DeadSea region (Wilkinson 1977, 85). The same pilgrim tells us how he and hiscompanions “discovered a monastery of women in those parts, more thansixteen or seventeen of them who were in a desert place, and given food bythe Christians.” They had a donkey at their service, “and they used to givefood to a lion, tame from the time it was a cub” (ibid., 87).

These are for the moment the scarce data that can be collected fromthe sources. There is no doubt that, if a proper excavations program is onceenterprised in the ruins of ancient Elusa, a better picture will be reached ofthe monastic presence in and around the most important of the cities of thecentral Negev.

‘Ein ‘Avdat (map ref. 128.025) (Phot. 1)

This is one of the very few remains of a Byzantine hermitage in the Negevdesert, in contrast with the numerous laurae that are found in narrow can-yons or wadis of the Judean desert. Here we have a small group of fourcaves, partly excavated artificially in the soft limestone rock of the north-ern wall of Nahal Tzin, near the source of ‘Ein ‘Avdat, 60 m above the bedof the wadi and 40 m under the the top of the precipice. Access to the cavesis by narrow steps carved into the rock, apparently by the ancient monks(Phot. 2). These four caves were examined during the survey conducted onthe spot by Z. Meshel and Y. Tsafrir on behalf of the Israel Department ofAntiquities in the seventies (Meshel - Tsafrir s.a.).

Cave No. 1 (Fig. 4): This is a natural cave that was adapted as livingpremises. It has two rooms, measuring 4.5×4.8 m and 1.6×1.5 m respectively.Both the location and the shape of the cave are typical of the Byzantine her-mitages in Palestine. A cross was carved in the rock, above the niche on thewall that was probably used as a cupboard, near the main entrance to the cave.

P. FIGUERAS412

Cave No. 2 (Fig. 5): This cave has only one big room, measuring5.30×5.60 m. Outside the entrance to the cave, a low bench was carvedalong the rock wall (Phot. 3), forming a sort of balcony overlookingthe impressive view (Phot. 4). A short Greek inscription was foundpainted in red on the wall inside the cave, an invocation to SaintTheodore (Fig. 5). The fact that the south church of Oboda or ‘Avdat,some 5 km south of these caves, was dedicated to that same saint, seemsto link the small community of hermits living near ‘Ein ‘Avdat to thecentral monastery, a coenobium, in Oboda (see below, s.v.). Tsafrir raisesthe slight possibility that the man named Zacharia who wrote the in-scription in the cave could be the young man of the same name whowas buried in the floor of the church of Saint Theodore (Negev 1981,29, no. 16; Meshel-Tsafrir, 11).

Cave No. 3 (Fig. 6): This is a one-room cave situated 7 m above Caveno. 2. Excavated in the flat face of the rock, it measures 2.25×6.15 m. Atthe time of its use, access to the cave was made possible through a series

Fig. 4 ‘Ein ‘Avdat, cave no. 1 (Meshel-Tsafrir, Fig. 2).


of small steps dug out of the rock. However, it is possible that the excava-tion of this cave was never completed.

Cave No. 4 (Fig. 7): It is situated 20 m north of Cave no. 2, and it meas-ures 3.50×1.70 m at its maximum. Its height reaches 1.75 m. Two flat sur-faces inside the cave had been purposely cut into the rock to serve asstorage devices. The excavators suggest that this cave was also used askitchen (ibid. p. 17).

Fig. 5 ‘Ein ‘Avdat, cave no. 2 (Meshel-Tsafrir, Fig. 3). Inscription in cave. no.2 (Meshel-Tsafrir, 11, ill. 6).

P. FIGUERAS414

Óorvat Óur (also Khirbet Óora or Óaura, map ref. 143.077)

These ruins, situated about 100 m south-east of the present cross-roads ofthe Hebron-Beersheva and Arad-Tel Aviv roads, were noticed by the Ger-man traveler Seetzen in 1805, the British surveyors Conder and Kitchener(1883, 396-397) and again visited by Woolley and Lawrence (1914/15).The latter pointed out that no traces of a church were visible on the spot.However, evidence of two groups of Byzantine buildings has been reportedin the recent archaeological survey conducted on the spot by Y. Govrin (HA1984, 76; Govrin 1992, 44*-45*.55-60). The first group includes a largebasilica, with an atrium on its west and some rooms around it (21×51 m)(Fig. 8). The second one, situated near the northern walls of the first, is acomplex of rooms and courtsyards built of large flint stones (Fig. 9). Ac-cording to its publisher, this second complex could represent a monastery(Govrin 1992, 58, 2).

Fig. 6 ‘Ein ‘Avdat, cave. no. 3(Meshel-Tsafrir, Fig. 4).

Fig. 7 ‘Ein ‘Avdat, cave. no. 4(Meshel-Tsafrir, Fig. 5).


Fig. 8-9 Óorvat Óur, plans of monastery and church complexes (Govrin 1991,58, 3).

P. FIGUERAS416

26. No archaeological proof can be adduced for the normally accepted identification of an-cient Malatha with the site today called Tel Mal˙ata or Tel el-Mil˙ (map ref. 152.069), 18km west of present Arad. On the other hand, a fragmentary inscription found in ÓorvatKarkur ‘Elit (186 - 082), 7 km north of Beersheva, mentions a certain “Salamanos, priest ofMalath[a]” (Figueras 1985, 39 [no. 31] and 42 [no. 34]).

Óorvat Kuseife (map ref. 155.073)

These important ruins, situated on the road to Arad, represent a big settlementfrom the Byzantine period. As early as in 1901, a church was reported thereby Musil (1908, 18). Mader, who visited the spot in 1911/14, reported thepresence of two other churches, to the south of the first one (Mader 1918, 225).It was A. Ovadiah who suggested that the northern church (Fig. 10) was servedby a monastic community (Ovadiah 1970, 121), although this cannot beproved until real excavations are conducted on the spot. Should this be thecase, it would be another example of monastic churches situated in or verynear to towns, as in Ru˙eibeh, Sobata and Oboda (below, s.v.).

So far there is no way to identify Óorvat Kuseife with one of the townsmentioned in the few literary sources referring to the Negev, though somescholars would like to identify it with the civil settlement of Malatha (Op-pidum Malathis) (Avi-Yonah 1977, 78, s.v. Malatha), which is still a mat-ter of controversy.26

Fig. 10 Óorvat Kuseife, planof church complex (Ovadiah1970, Pl. 51).


Óorvat So’a (Khirbet Sa’wa) (map ref. 148.075) (Fig. 11)

An architectural complex, including a large Byzantine church (19×40 m),is situated on the southern side of a hilltop covered with the ruins of an-cient settlement. The rectangular structure (25×38 m) adjoining the churchfrom the south apparently served as living-quarters. This site, already re-ported by the British survey more than a century ago (Conder - Kitchener1883, 409-410), has been recently surveyed again by Y. Govrin on behalfof the Israel Antiquities Authority (Govrin 1992, *67.97-99), who also pub-lished its schematic plan. In his opinion, that I fully share, this complexwas probably a monastery. Indeed, its situation on the edge of the village,the number of spacious rooms adjoining the church from the south, and adefense tower (8×8 m) from the north, are elements that we find in betterdocumented monasteries, from the Negev as well as from other regions.

Fig. 11 Óorvat So’ah, plan of church complex (Govrin 1991, 98, 1).

P. FIGUERAS418

Mampsis (Kurnub, Mamshit) (map ref. 156.048) (Fig. 12)

The ruins traditionally called Kurnub by the local Arabs were identifiedwith the ancient town called Mampsis in Eusebius’ Onomasticum (8:8) inthe fourth century and numerous sixth century sources such as the MadabaMap (Avi-Yonah 1944, 96), the Nessana Papyri (Kraemer 1958, 124) andothers (Shereshevski 1991, 21-22). In the second century C.E., the geogra-pher Ptolemy (V, 15, 7) recorded that town as Maps. The ruins are situated5 south-east of today’s Dimona, on the eastern side of the Northern Negev.Although visited and surveyed by several scholars, large scale excavationswere not conducted in the site till 1965 by A. Negev. Together with otherparts of the town, such as the city-walls and two big residential buildings,he also excavated the two Byzantine churches, which are probably the old-est ones in the Negev (Negev 1974, 400-404; 1988, 64-82).

Fig. 12 Mampsis (Kurnub, Mamshit), plan of ruins (Negev, New Encyclopediaof Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Mamshit).


The eastern church (Fig. 13). This beautiful building, which also includesa baptistry chapel annexed to its southern wall, has a complex of several roomson its western side and a tower at its north-western angle. The purpose of sucha stronghold in a Parish church, as it certainly was, could not be anything butthe defense of a community of people living in and around it, most probablya monastic community serving in that church. A similar case in the Negev isthe southern church in Oboda (see below, s.v.).

The western church (Fig. 14). This so-called “Nilus Church,” from thename of its main donor, has a residential building attached behind it (Phot.5), that could have, according to the excavator, been the house of that sameman (Negev 1974, 401). Here also, such a residence attached to the churchmay indicate that a monastic community used to live in it. This assumptioncould be confirmed by several crosses on its inner lintels, but this is betterdone by a Greek inscription on the church floor, in front of the sanctuary. In-deed, this inscription mentions a certain “Abba (Greek: TON ABBA) [son] ofZenobios the paramonarios.” 27 Its publisher has translated these words by

Fig. 13 Mampsis, plan of the east church complex (Negev, ibid.).

27. This title of paramonarios, frequent in ancient Church epigraphy, does not correspond toa modern one in the Greek Church. Meimaris (1986, 259-260) describes paramonarios’ du-ties as related to the custody and supervision of a church and church properties in the name ofthe local bishop. He could be a priest, a deacon, a clerk of lower rank, or a simple monk.Unfortunately, the inscription in question, as well as the whole mosaic floor of the Nilus churchat Mampsis (Mamshit - Kurnub), have recently (October 1994) been irreparably vandalised.

P. FIGUERAS420

“Abba (son) of Zenobios the warden” (Negev 1981, 71), taking Abba as thename of Zenobios’ son. Both translations are plausible, but the presence ofthe article before the word ABBA seems to be an indication that the latter termis to be understood as the monastic title abbas (simply “Father” better than“abbot”, i.e. Superior of a monastery), very frequent in the monastic epigra-phy of that time, also in the Negev (Meimaris 1986, 235-239). If my inter-pretation is correct, it is easier to consider the western church of Mampsisalso as a church served by a monastic community.

Mitzpe Shivta (Mishrefe) (map ref. 112.036) (Phot. 6-7)

Situated on the edge of a high hill facing an extensive plain, this site in-cludes the ruins of an enclosure wall with a gate on the western side and asmall chapel on the opposite side, around which and on a lower level areliving rooms, natural caves, an open cistern and a well (Phot. 6). Six km tothe east of the plain, the ruins of the town of Sobata or Shivta (see below)appear on the horizon, and from this fact the present name Mitzpe Shivta,i.e. “the observation point (Arab. mishrefe) upon Shivta.” On his visit tothe place in 1871, Palmer identified it as a Roman fortress, and thus alsoMusil in 1901. An opposite view was expressed by Woolley and Lawrence,who saw in it “undoubtedly a monastic establishment, a laura,” basing their

Fig. 14 Mampsis, plan of the west church complex (Negev, ibid.).


Fig. 15 Mitzpe Shivta, general plan of ruins (Baumgarten 1986, 99).

opinion on the local pottery sherds and the building systems (Woolley -Lawrence 1914/15). Wiegand, who had visited the place in 1916, alsothought that it had been a monastery (Wiegand 1920).

An archaeological survey of the ruins was conducted on the spot in1979 by Y. Baumgarten on behalf of the Israel Department of Antiquities,as part of the general survey of the region (Segal 1986, 97-108). It wasfound that the western gate on the wall (Fig. 15) gave entrance to a largeopen space, in the middle of which were the ruins of a stone building meas-uring 12×14.5 m. This building had been interpreted by Woolley and Law-rence as a guest-house or the residence of the Superior of the monastery.Baumgarten did not find enough evidence in the structure of the buildingto determine its original function.

P. FIGUERAS422

The chapel on the eastern side of the open space (Fig. 16) includes a sim-ple prayer hall measuring 18.2×6.6, with an apse on the east 1.9 m deep and aroom annexed to its southern wall, apparently built later than the originalbuilding. This room measures 11.6×4.0 m. White and colored fragments of theplaster once covering the walls and the apse were found on the stone slabs ofthe pavement. The rooms, partly built, partly excavated into the rock (Fig. 17),which can be seen on a lower level than the chapel around the edge of the natu-ral platform, have been interpreted as hermits’ cells by Baumgarten (1986). Asimilar interpretation was given by Woolley and Lawrence (1914/15) to asmall tower situated to the east of the chapel. An arched structure facing eastis probably a prayer cell (Phot. 7). Baumgarten, who dates the site in a gen-eral way to the late Byzantine period on an archaeological basis, suggests see-ing it as the desert inn described c. 570 by the anonymous Piacenza pilgrim,who called it “a fort, the guest-house (xenodochium) of Saint George,” situ-ated twenty miles from Elusa to the south, “which provides something of arefuge for passers-by and gives food for hermits” (Wilkinson 1977, 87).

Fig. 16 Mitzpe Shivta, plan of thechapel (Baumgarten 1986, 101).

Fig. 17 Mizpe Shivta, plan of rock-cut rooms (Baumgarten 1986, 101).


I agree with Baumgarten’s interpretation, not only because the distanceand the character of Mitzpe Shivta’s buildings (monastic and military), co-incide with those of the sixth century Piacenza Pilgrim, but also because it isconfirmed by epigraphic evidence. Indeed, even today the visitor can read,incised on the base of a plastered arch-stone in one of the rooms partly exca-vated into the rock (Phot. 8), a rather long cursive inscription in Greek, start-ing with the words “Oh Lord, the God of Saint George...” It is a prayerwritten by a man who asks for himself, his wife, his daughter and his serv-ants.28 The reference to Saint George certainly indicates that that saint wasthe Patron of the place, and the tenor of the text indicates that the kind of per-son who wrote it was certainly a layman passer-by, not a local monk. Likethe Piacenza Pilgrim, the writer of the inscription was probably on his wayto Mount Sinai, accompanied by his family and servants, and they all took arest in that fort and monastery that “provided them something of a refuge”(Figueras 1995). It is to be observed that soldiers stationed around the sameplace where monks were living, either as hermits in a laura or as membersof a closed community, is not a surprise in the Byzantine period, at leastalong roads that were considered dangerous for private people to walk, as weread in Egeria’s records (Wilkinson 1971).

Mo’eile˙ (map ref. 090-010) (Fig. 18)

This is the name of a place near Qadesh Barne‘a, today on the Egyptianside of the Israel-Egypt border in the central Negev, where a monastic cavewas reported by the Dominican Father Abel (1903b). According to his de-scription and sketch (Fig. 19), the cave included a central room that hadentrances to another three small rooms. Some steps cut into the floor of thecentral room led to an unknown place. The general shape and other detailsof this cave are similar to the monastic cells found in ‘Ein ‘Avdat (above)and many others in the Judean desert and elsewhere. In all probability, thiscave too, carved into the limestone not far from the abundant source of ‘EinEl-Qudeirat, near which agriculture was certainly practiced in ancient times(Bruins 1986, 105-120), had been used by monks in the Byzantine period.We actually know from the Life of Hilarion written by Jerome, that monkslived in the area of Qadesh since the mid-fourth century (Hieron., Vit. Hil.25, PL 23).

28. I hope to publish soon this interesting inscription.

P. FIGUERAS424

Fig. 19 Mo-nastic cavenear WadiMo’eile˙(Abel, 1903a).

Fig. 18 Mapshowing WadiMo’eile˙ andposition ofmonastic cave(Abel 1903b).


Nessana (Nitzana, ‘Auja el-Óafir) (map ref. 097.031) (Fig. 20)

This town, probably founded by the Nabateans in the second century B.C.,is by far the best documented of all Byzantine settlements in the Negev. In-deed, the discovery of an archive of papyri from the sixth and seventh centu-ries C.E. at that site (till then called by the Bedouins ‘Auja el Óafir) by theAmerican Colt Expedition in 1935 (Colt 1962), came to throw light, not onlyon the life of that town, but also of all the Negev and its inhabitants in gen-eral at the edge of the Byzantine period and the first decades of Muslim oc-cupation. However, many other data relevant to our subject were also collectedin Nessana from two sources other than the papyri, namely the inscriptions,some of which were already found before the American expedition (Alt 1921),and the architectural features revealed by the archaeological excavations. Itis to be noted that, since 1987 till the present, a new archaeological dig hasbeen taking place at Nessana under the direction of Dan Urman on behalf ofBen Gurion University of the Negev (Urman 1990).

We can today speak of at least six churches having been built in Nessanain the Byzantine period, to which maybe another should be added, namelythe one reported almost a century ago by Lagrange (1897), because it is notclear whether he describes one of our churches no. 3, 4 or 5 or a different one.He actually describes a basilica he saw on the same plain where those arefound, but the shape and measurements he gives (20×10 m for the church,15×10 m for the atrium) do not correspond to any of those other churches.Our list is as follows:

No. 1, on the acropolis, with the names of St. Sergius and Bacchus (thenorth church) and No. 2, St. Mary Mother of God (the south church), wereexcavated by the American expedition (Colt 1962). No. 3, in the plain, hadbeen described by former visitors, among whom Woolley and Lawrence(1914/15), but was later destroyed because the Turks wanted to transform itinto a guest-house. Nos. 4 and 5 correspond to a double church recently dis-covered and excavated in the plain, some 150 m south of the location of No.3, by the present Israeli expedition (Urman 1990). Finally, No. 6 is the chapelof a small monastery, also recently excavated by the same expedition, on thenorthern slope of the acropolis. For different reasons, as will soon becomeevident, we can be sure that churches no. 1, 3 and 6 were related to monks.

Church no. 1, St. Sergius and Bacchus (Fig. 21). This church, appar-ently the most sumptuous and probably the most important of the town,to which people from numerous villages, towns and cities, including Elusaand Birosaba, used to bring offerings on the feast of the Patron Saints(Kraemer 1958, Pap. 79), was probably served by a community of monks.

P. FIGUERAS426

Fig. 20 Map of Nessana ruins (Woolley-Lawrence 1914/15).

Its Superior is often referred to in papyri and inscriptions with the mo-nastic title of hegoumenos (Kraemer 1958, Pap. 45.1, 46.3, 47.8, 50.4,77.10, 147.1; Colt 1962, nos. 12, 77; see Meimaris 1986, 239-246), eventhough at periods he was a married person.29 In one of the papyri found

29. This apparent incongruency has been noticed by all those who have dealt with Nessana’spapyri and inscriptions. A suggested solution is to consider those hegumenoi as having en-tered the monastic order only after they became widows.


in a room annexed to this church, this church complex is called “the mone(that is, “monastery”30) of St. Sergius” (Kraemer 1958, Pap. 79.25,44).(30)The term monachos, “monk,” occurs four times in the papyri (ibid., Pap.31.23, 90.35, 91.61; see inscription 78 in Colt 1962, 167), and the titleabba, “Father,” no less than fifteen times. One of these references is notto the monks of Nessana but to those of Mount Sinai, with whom theformer apparently held current relations. It has even been suggested toidentify “Father Martyrios” of Mount Sinai, referred to in Pap. 89.23, withan Abbot of the same name, Superior of Mt. Sinai c. A.D. 595 (ibid., pp.254 and 259, n. 23).

The epigraphic evidence is also impressive. Besides the above saidhegoumenos that occurs several times, there is an interesting graffito includ-ing a long list of eight saints, seven “Fathers” and three “Mothers” (Colt 1962,no. 38, pp. 151-152), some of them well-known Egyptian monks, others whohad been famous in Palestine, while others belonged to the western Church.The list was possibly used as a sort of a calendar, as suggested by its pub-lishers (Colt, ibid.). The list in question is as follows:

30. Mone is actually a synonym for monasterion and other Greek terms meaning monastery.

31. Cf. Meimaris 1986, 236, no. 1177.

This is not the right place to comment on this list, but it is obvious thatmonks and nuns, some very famous, others less, were very familiar toThaleleus, the man from Nessana, possibly himself a monk, who wrote iton the plastered voussoir stone.31

Church no. 3. The evidence on the monastic attachments of this church,the remains of which were reported by early visitors and today unfortu-nately destroyed (above), come particularly not only from the contents ofan inscription, but also from the buildings surrounding it. Indeed, as the

“Saint Mark”“Saint Bliphimus”“Saint Manicus”“Saint Ambrose”“Saint Isidore”“Saint Nonius”“Saint Pamphilus”“Father Romanus”“Father Manalas”

“Father Cyril”“Father Zenobius”“Father Chariton”“Father Samur”“Father Sabinus”“Father Germanus”“Our Mother Anna”“Our Mother Martha (lit. Mathra)”“Our Mother Pheste”

P. FIGUERAS428

Fig. 21 Nessana, plan and section of SS. Sergius and Bacchus church andmonastery (church no. 1) (Colt 1962, Pl. LXIII).

plan shows, the church (17.5×9 m) had a spacious atrium (12.7×18.5 m) tothe west, a rectangular hall in the north, and a room complex in the south.The latter was probably a monastery, as already suggested by Woolley andLawrence (1914/15).


The Greek inscription on the mosaic floor of the church was alreadypublished by Huntington (1911) and reproduced by Woolley and Lawrence(1914/15) and also by Kirk and Welles (Colt 1962). Its dedicatory textcomes as a surprise in more than one aspect: “For the salvation of the do-nors Sergius, ex-assesor and monk, Palut his sister, and John, deacon, herson, and member of the city council of the metropolis Emesa. In the year496, fifth indiction-year, the 20th of month Gorpiaios” (September 7, A.D.609).32 It is plausible to think that those people, members of a rich familyfrom the remote Syrian city of Emesa (today Homs), founded a monasteryin Nessana on the occasion of their visit to the town. Their presence thereis explained by the pilgrim movement to Mount Sinai through the Negevdesert (Figueras 1995). The first person mentioned is now a monk, after heretired from his lucrative job as a lawyer in Emesa, but a monk that is le-gally able to dispose of his fortune, so as to offer, together with his sisterand nephew, such a gift as the foundation of a monastery with its church.It could be that he himself, with or without his sister and nephew, had de-cided to live permanently in Nessana. At least we can imagine that they allspent enough time in the town or surroundings as to see the completion anddedication of their rich foundation.

Church No. 6 (Phot. 9).33 Undoubtedly, this complex of a small chapel sur-rounded by rooms and a square atrium with its cistern can only be interpretedas a coenobium or the premises of a small closed monastic community. Its lo-cation is north of the complex of St. Sergius and Bacchus, on the slope of theacropolis hill. The huge well near the upper church is actually situated betweenboth monastic complexes and could be used by both communities. The monas-tery seems to have been built according to a well-drafted and regular plan.

Should one be allowed to speculate about this multiplication of monas-teries in Nessana, we could come to the conclusion that one of them, prob-ably the one referred to here, might be a nunnery, a monastery of women.This suggestion could be supported by the presence of the Greek wordmatronikia (“women quarters”?) in one of the Nessana papyri (Kraemer1958, Pap. 79.29,31,62).34 The existence of monasteries of women in the

32. This is according to the Arabic or Elusa era. Ovadiah prefers to interpret it of the era ofGaza. In the latter case, the year would be 435 C.E.

33. I thank my colleague Dr. Dan Urman for kindly allowing me to make use of the photoand to report on his discovery, still unpublished.

34. It should be observed that term is only a guess by the publishers of the corrupted text ofPap. 79, which actually only reads m[ ].

P. FIGUERAS430

Byzantine Negev is well attested to by the already quoted text of thePiacenza Pilgrim, who visited one of them near Elusa.35

Summarizing all the available data about Nessana in the last period of itsexistence from before and after the Muslim conquest, that occurred about A.D.634, we obtain the general picture of a rich civil center in the Negev, with arather strong economy based not only on agriculture and trade, but also onwhat would today be called “Christian tourism” (Figueras 1995b). It is pos-sible that even the civil administration was in the hands of the Church au-thorities, and these were particularly linked to monastic institutions. Not bychance, the most important papyri were found in the premises of the monas-tery of St. Sergius (and Bacchus), whose Head held the monastic title ofhegoumenos. The letters addressed by the Muslim governor of Gaza to “thepeople of Nessana” (Kraemer 1958, Pap. 73) actually arrived in the hands ofthat powerful person. Not by chance either, such literary pages as those ofthe Latin poet Vergil, together with fragments of a Latin-Greek dictionary,were found there. Two interesting writing tablets were discovered there also,still holding their wax layer with some words scratched on it by a young stu-dent. Such interesting features in the archaeological records preserved in thatNessana monastery are better explained if we just consider it as being thecultural center of the town, which certainly included a boys-school as well.If this could be proved, we would have in Nessana a kind of monasticism moreakin to the ideals of St. Basil of Cappadocia than to those of St. Pachomiusin Egypt or St. Chariton in the Judean desert, that is, monks involved in suchsocial activities as organized education, not living a life only of prayer andcontemplation but combined with some manual work.

On the other hand, it is also very probable that monks from the Nessanaarea were involved in agricultural and commercial activities. The evidencecomes from the papyri referring to the plot of land of a certain “Victor, sonof the Very Honorable Sergius Aladias, monk” (Kraemer 1958, Pap. 31.23-24; see also Pap. 90.35 and 91.61). As a matter of fact, it had usually beenadmitted by scholars that agriculture had been practiced by monks in Pal-estine in the Byzantine period, as the archaeological records show.36 Buthere we have it written in a sixth century document.

35. See above, s.v.

36. A case in point for the Negev region is the wine-press near the north church of Sobata(see below, s.v.). In the north of Israel, evidence of organized and sophisticated agriculturalactivity by monks of the Byzantine period has also been discovered (C. Dauphin, 1979, “AMonastery Farm from the Early Byzantine Period at Shlomi,” Qadmoniot 12 (45), 25-29,Hebrew; Id., “A Byzantine Ecclesiastical Farm at Shlomi,” in Tsafrir 1993, 43-48).


Oboda (Eboda, ‘Abdeh, ‘Avdat) (map ref. 128.022) (Fig. 22)

The present ruins of ‘Avdat, situated in the central Negev on the Beersheva -Eilat road (Fig. 23), represent the ancient town of Oboda of the Peutinger Map(Phot. 10) and Eboda of the Nessana Papyri (Kramer 1958, Pap. 39.2,13).These names, which the Arabs preserved under the form of ‘Abdeh (Jaussen- Savignac - Vincent 1904), certainly correspond to that of the Nabatean kingObodas (39-9 B.C.), who was considered to have been the founder of thetown, in which, according to Stephen of Byzanz, he was also buried. Appar-ently in the fifth century (Negev 1974, 403), the first (or north) church wasbuilt in the area of an ancient Nabatean temple on the acropolis. Later on, andprobably following the construction of the huge fortress in the sixth centurywith its little chapel, another (the south) church was built on the acropolis (Fig.24). On the basis of coins and inscriptions, its excavator, A. Negev, assumedthat the entire town with its two churches were destroyed by the Muslims in636 (Negev 1974, 414), but this is today much doubted.37 Actually, the firstChristian inscription from the south church of Oboda dates from 550 and thelast one from 617 (Negev 1981, 29 and 37).

37. According to the results of more recent excavations, the destruction of the town in theseventh century is probably to be assigned to an earthquake that took place in 631.

Fig. 22 Map of Oboda (after ‘Eini 1986, [‘Avdat] 6).

P. FIGUERAS432

Evidence of a monasticpresence in Oboda comesfrom two sources, namely ar-chitecture and epigraphy,both from the south church.This church (Fig. 24), in ba-silical style (21×12.6 m) andhaving two chapels for theveneration of relics, to thenorth and the south of thecentral apse, has an epitaph ofthe pavement of the churchcalling it “Martyrium of St.Theodore” (Negev 1981,30).38 The almost square atri-um (15×14 m) to the westernside of the basilica, surround-ed by several rooms on threeof its sides (Phot. 11), proba-bly had an upper story. Thisfeature and the remains of atower on the south-west corner of the same atrium seem to point to the pres-ence of a monastic community, as was recognised by its excavators (Ovadi-ah 1970, 25). As already said, this could be the central coenobium to whichthe hermits from the laura of ‘Ein ‘Avdat (above) were connected.

One of the five epitaphs on the pavement of this church complex wasfound in the portico of the atrium, and it refers to a certain “Father (GreekABBAC) Kapito, the presbyter, (son) of Erasinos,” who died on September22, 617 C.E. (Negev 1981, 36-37). As said above (Mampsis), the title ABBACwas much used, though not exclusively, by monastic superiors (Meimaris1986, 235-236), and it is quite natural to see it applied to a priest who couldhave been the Superior of the monastery in which he was buried.

A last hint to the relations between Oboda and the monastic worldcomes from another inscription, this time written in cursive letters in redcolor on the shoulder of a very large pottery container, a pithos.39

38. Beside the already mentioned graffito on the so-called Saints’ Cave on the slope of theacropolis, another invocation to the same Saint was found in the south church inscribed ona fragment of chancel screen (Negev 1982, 31, no. 31).

39. The pithos was unfortunately smashed to pieces, but it can today be seen, restored, inthe small restaurant at the foot of ‘Avdat, next to the parking place.

Fig. 23 Map of the ‘Avdat region, showing geo-graphic relation between Oboda and the monasticcaves of ‘Ein ‘Avdat (after ‘Eini 1986, [‘Avdat] 5).


According to its publisher, it was “found in situ in the building to thewest of the acropolis,” and the text on it reads: “+ O Lord assist. To thedeacon Germanus, (sent) by the geron Theodosius” (Negev 1981, 43-44).The last two words are important. Indeed, Theodosius, the geron or “old

Fig. 24 Oboda, plan of churches and monastery complex (Ovadiah [Levant 1], 124).

P. FIGUERAS434

man”40 here referred to, could be the famous Saint Theodosius, koino-biarch or Father of all the monasteries of the Holy Land since 492, whofounded the monastery till today called Mar Dosios, near Bethlehem. Ofcourse, we have no right to identify the two names, but one must admitthat it would be a little strange that two monks of the same name livingin Palestine about the same time, were honored with the same title.Anyway, the sending of a big pithos, probably full of oil or wine, wassent by a venerable monk by name Theodosius, who was certainlyendowed with powerful administrative authority, to a deacon in Oboda,who could be the economus or administrator of a monastic comunity inthat remote town of the Negev.

We cannot exclude the possibility that, at a certain period at least, thehouse-caves that can be seen on the western slope of the acropolis were onceinhabited by monks. This would explain the crosses and other Christian sym-bols decorating some of the walls, among which there is a rough drawing ofa saint soldier, probably representing St. Theodore, according to the graffitiaccompanying it (Negev 1981, Pl. 16, Phot. 37).

Concerning the presence of nuns in Oboda, there is only a light hint inthe epitaph, already published by Alt (1921, no. 114), of a woman that was“virgin of God” (Greek: parthene [sic!] Theou). Such an epithet seems tome to refer to a consecrated virgin, and not just to a woman that happenedto die before she got married, as other cases must certainly be interpreted.41

Ru˙eibeh (Re˙ovot ha-Negev) (map ref. 108.048)

This Byzantine town of the Negev was known to all the visiting scholarsof the last century and beginning of the present one. Despite the similarityof the Arabic name Ru˙eibeh to the town of Re˙ovot mentioned in the Bi-ble (Gen 26:22), there seems to be no connection between both places, asarchaeology does not support it. In 1975, 1976, 1979 and 1986 excavationswere conducted at the site by T. Tsafrir (partly in collaboration with R.Rosenthal-Hegginbottom), who suggested identifying the place with

40. Here in Genitive form, gerontos. “Old Man” was a monastic honorary title given to cer-tain venerable monks (see Meimaris 1986, 239), such as Barsanuphius (above, Birosaba).

41. One case is in Oboda (Negev 1981, 44: “... and his daughter virgin”), another one in Elusa(Alt 1921, no. 44: “the virgin Sosanna”). In Oboda we also find a boy “who died unmarried”(eteleutesen agamos), being only “17 years and seven months old” (Negev 1981, 29).


Bertheiba, a Byzantine toponym referred to in Papyrus 79 of Nessana(Kraemer 1958; Tsafrir 1993, 295).

Four churches were discovered in the town, in the north-west, thecenter, the east and the south. The one in the center had been described byWoolley and Lawrence (1914/15) as being attached to a monastery and akhan, but the presence of a monastery has not been supported by the exca-vations (Tsafrir 1993, 294-302). On the other hand, the north church, whichhas also been excavated, though not entirely, is certainly a monasterychurch, as its excavator has proved (Tsafrir 1988). This church, a three-absidal basilica (Fig. 25), is situated some 100 m outside the built area ofthe town, and it measures 24.80×13.10 m. Its special feature, an interestingcrypt measuring 3.4×4.3 m was discovered below the presbytery and thenave, apparently for the veneration of some important relics. The access toit was provided by a flight of steps on each side. The existence of this cryptis evidence of the frequency of visitors to the town and the church, whichmost probably is explained by the fact that Ru˙eibeh lay on the road con-necting Elusa with Nessana, one of the pilgrim routes finally leading toMount Sinai (Figueras 1995b, map).

Assistance to pilgrims in this particular church was assured by the pres-ence of monks. Indeed, around the southern wall of the atrium, the excava-

Fig. 25 Ru˙eibeh, plan of north church and monastery (Tsafrir 1993).

P. FIGUERAS436

tions cleared some rooms, particularly a long and spacious one containinga long narrow table, that was interpreted as the dining-room of the monas-tery (Tsafrir 1993, 300). It is not clear whether these rooms and those prob-ably existing in the unexcavated area on the northern side of the atrium hadan upper story, as was the case in the north church of Sobata (here below).A cistern in the middle of the courtyard collected rain water from the roofsof church and monastery for the maintenance of its dwellers. It must bepointed out that the inscriptions found so far in Ru˙eibeh do not confirmthe presence of monks in the town.

Sobata (Sobota, Sbeita, Shivta) (map ref. 114.032) (Fig. 26)

This town was probably built by the Nabateans towards the first centuryC.E., and survived the Muslim conquest up to the eighth or ninth century.Its location may owe more to agricultural than to commercial criteria, be-ing as it is remote from the normal trade routes (see Fig. 1).

Its impressive ruins calledthe attention of many visitors,among them Palmer in 1870,Musil in 1901, and Jaussen, Sa-vignac and Vincent, who discov-ered the three churches and anumber of inscriptions, in 1905.A good plan of Sobota was pro-duced by Woolley and Lawrencein 1914/15. The American-Brit-ish Colt expedition worked onthe spot in 1934-36, but the re-sults of this excavation werenever published. Then it was theturn of Avi-Yonah and Negev in1958-60, but no reports werepublished then either. The northchurch was again surveyed andstudied by Negev and R.Rosenthal in 1978 (Rosenthal-Hegginbottom 1982).

The monastic presence inSobata is an established fact,

Fig. 26 Sobata, plan of the town showingsouth, central and north churches and sur-rounding buildings (after ‘Eini 1986, [Shivta] 6).


Fig. 27 Sobata, north church and monastery complex (Woolley - Lawrence 1914/15).

supported by epigraphy as well as by architectural criteria, as will hope-fully be shown in the following report on the three churches. It is indeedvery possible that all three, and not only the north one, were monasticchurches.

North church (Fig. 27). As Shereshevski (1991, 75) points out, this wasthe only church in Sobata “built on the periphery of the site, without the

P. FIGUERAS438

constraints or limitations of abuilt-up area surrounding it.”It is a whole complex of build-ings, including a three-absidalbasilica facing east (19×12 m),a spacious atrium surroundedby rooms in the west (Fig. 28),a chapel attached to the south-ern wall of the basilica, and abaptistry chapel to its south.The rooms around the atriuminclude a long hall to the west(probably a dining room), andsmaller rooms to the south, allcovered with arches whichonce supported an upper story.The northern gallery of theatrium is paved with mosaic,and a flight of steps led to itsroof, which was the floor ofthe second story. Attached tothe eastern wall of the atriunand close to its southern en-trance, one can see a high stone-bed (Phot. 12), which might have servedthe monk responsible for the reception of guests and pilgrims.

Many details of the building around the atrium, today collapsed (ex-cept for its outer, reinforced walls, standing up to a height of 5 meters), ledmost scholars to accept that it had been built to be a monastery. Otherspeculations, such as the interpretation of the small square in the middle ofthe atrium as being the basis of a column, a memorial to a holy monk whohad once been lived as stylite in the neighborhood of Sobata (Rosenthal-Higgenbottom 1981, 232) have no supporting evidence.

Epigraphy seems to strengthen the monastic character of this church.Indeed, a tomb in the baptistry is that of “thrice-blessed Arsenius (son)of Abraamios, monk and priest,” who died on the 4th of January, 630

Fig. 28 Sobata, isometric reconstruction ofnorth church and monastery (Rosenthal-Hegginbottom, 1982, Plan 4).

42. As pointed out above (Aila), there is probably no relation between this Arsenius and anotherapparently famous monk of the same name who had his monastery within the jurisdictional areaof the bishop of Aila (Palmer 1871, 554, 22). Yet it is interesting to realize that, in the epitaph ofour monk Arsenius of Sobata, his memory is praised with such solemn expressions as “laid inChrist, resting among saints, thrice-blessed Arsenius... monk and priest” (Negev 1981, 56-57).


C.E.42 Another one in the atrium of the church is that of a son of AbbotThemos, who died on the 1st of April, 644 C.E. (Negev 1981, 52-52).43

Outside the church, a series of workshops have been interpreted asbelonging to the local monastic community (Segal 1986). This is espe-cially true of the wine press that, contrary to usual, has no compart-ments around the threshing pavement.44 If this was true, we would havea community of monks that were partly engaged in agriculture and partlyin the service of the Christian pilgrims and visitors, who were certainlyfrequent in this church, judging by the presence of the baptistry, theriches of its internal decorations, and the transformation of the initialpastophoria or side-rooms into relic chapels (Margalit 1987).45

Central church (Fig. 29). All scholars agree that this is the most re-cent of the three churches of the town. It is a three-absidal basilica (c.17×14 m), built when the street in front of it was already in existence,and a three-arched porch connects the two. A previously existing cisternhas its mouth inside the church. The latter is immediately connected to acomplex of spacious buildings built around three small courtyards on itssouthern and eastern sides. One of them is currently called “the Gover-nor’s House,” only because it includes a high square tower (Segal 1986).I would rather call the complex a community building, a monastery. Per-haps it had not been built with this purpose, but its sumptuous entrance,with Christian symbols decorating the lintel of the main gate (Phot. 13),seems to indicate that, in the course of time, probably when the churchwas built, it had been transformed into one. The existence of towers, built

43. Abba is a title mostly applied to monks. It is frequent in the monastic literature to seemonks having sons, as we realized in the case of the hegoumenoi at Nessana (above, s.v.).Another well-known case is that of Nilus, the monk of Sinai whose young son Theodulos,who was living with him in a hermitage, was once abducted by a group of Saracens andsold in the market of Sobata (PG 79, 674-683; see Mayerson 1963, 161).

44. Indeed, in all the other wine-presses in the Negev there are compartments around thethreading area (‘Eini 1986, [Har ha-negev] 13) apparently to allow a previous inspection ofthe weight and quality of the grapes brought by each family to the common press, so as toreceive the right payment or the appropriate quantity of wine produced. That previous in-spection was purposeless if the grapes to be pressed were brought from vineyards belong-ing to one and the same community.

45. These were characteristics of the pilgrim churches, and so we have to interpret many ofthe churches in the Byzantine Negev, as they were visited by pilgrims on their way to orfrom Mount Sinai (Figueras 1995). As for the north church of Sobata, it has been specu-lated by some to be the xenodochium or “inn of Saint George” mentioned by the PiacenzaPilgrim. We have already seen that this identification is no more probable, after the discov-ery of the invocation to the “God of St. George” in Mitzpe Shivta (above).

P. FIGUERAS440

as shelters for the community in case of danger, is well known in ancientmonastic architecture.46

No epigraphic evidence for the presence of monks in this central churchhas been preserved. Actually, only a short inscription on a abacus of stonecapital, an invocation to St. Stephen, was published with relation to thischurch (Negev 1981, 62, no. 70).

South church (Fig. 30). Situated to the east of the open pull of the town,possibly the origin of the whole urban center of Sobata, this basilica (19×14.30m) is probably the oldest of the three churches. According to a graffito de-tected on a wall at its entrance attesting to the frequent visits by pilgrims(Figueras 1994, no. 4, Fig. 5), this church was very probably dedicated to St.Stephen. Its only dated inscription, however, is from A.D. 639, being the com-memoration of a new paving of the church under Bishop George and theArchdeacon and economus Peter (Negev 1981, 61). Also here the epigraphydoes not help to see any connection with monks. However, the architectureof the mansion attached to the northern side of the church seems to demandhere also the presence of a small community of church personnel. A singleParish priest with his family would certainly not need such a house.

Knowing the use that is commonly referred only to Augustin of Hippoin North Africa, it is possible that here, and maybe around the centralchurch too, we must be allowed to imagine a group of clergy living to-gether in community of goods and sitting at the same table, rather than acommunity of monks of the traditional kind. Indeed, in the fifth century,besides the very well-known example of Augustin’s clergy, two other casesare known of the same kind of phaenomenon, one around bishop Eusebiusof Vercelli (Ambrosius, Epist 63, I, 7-9), the other much nearer to our re-gion, the case of Melas, the holy bishop of Rhinocorura (today’s El-‘Arish)in North Sinai (Sozomen, Church History, V, 15, PG 67, 1389-90). Theseexamples, apparently, fruit of the spontaneous initiative of inspired peo-ple,47 could have been imitated in other towns as well, such as Sobata. Onthe basis of that historical reality, the scholar has the right to suggest theintepretation of certain archaeological remains along the same line, even ifthere is no literary or epigraphic evidence for it.

46. A case in point in Palestinian monasticism is the tower in the monastery built by Jeromeand Paula in Bethlehem towards the end of the fourth century, where monks and nuns tookshelter during the attack by the Pelagians.

47. The text of Sozomenos concerning Rhinocolura towards the end of the fourth century isconvincing: “The clergy of this church dwell in one house, sit at the same table, and haveeverything in common” (Sozomenos, Church History V, 15, in PG 67, 1389-90


Fig. 29Sobata,central churchand monasterycomplex(Negev 1988,97).

Fig. 30Sobata, southchurch andmonasticcomplex(‘Eini 1986,[Shivta] 10).

P. FIGUERAS442

As a complement to the review of epigraphic and archaeological hints tothe presence of monks in Sobata, I will refer to an ostrakon found by theAmerican expedition in the ruins of Sobata (Meimaris 1986, 253, no. 1267),acknowledging to a certain “Abbot John, son of Victor, lector,” for havingperformed nine parts of his duty in cleaning the cistern. Apart from the inter-esting fact that a member of the clergy, although the low clergy, is seen per-forming compulsory public duty, we realise that here the title “abbot” (lit.ab[b]a, in dat.) cannot but be monastic, because he was not a priest. Moreproblematic is the reference to a certain “Abba Victor, presbyter of Sobata,”who appears among ten other contributors in an account of donations to themonastery of St. Sergius in Nessana (Pap. 79.52; Meimaris 1986, 189).

Summarizing the hints of the monks’ presence in Sobata, let us remem-ber that here, as in most other cases in the Negev, monastic life was of a dif-ferent kind than those of the desert coenobia and laurae so typical of theJudean desert and existing also in some points of the Negev. Relatively smallcommunities of clergy and/or monks lived around Parish churches, dedicatedto the spiritual service of their flocks and also of the numerous pilgrims whoattracted by famous relics and shrines (particularly, though not exclusively,those of the north church). Also in Sobata, as in Nessana, the monks wouldhold the boys-schools and thus maintain the cultural level of the civil com-munity, even though agriculture certainly occupied some of the monks.

Tel ‘Ira (map ref. 148.071) (Phot. 14)

The ruins of a Byzantine monastery were discovered upon the ruins of anIsraelite fortress in this remote site of the north-east Negev desert. The sitewas first surveyed by D. Alon in 1979 and was successively and/or con-temporaneously excavated in several seasons by A. Biran, and I. Beit-Arieh(HA 1979, 33; 1981, 34). The plan of the monastery has never been pub-lished, but it includes a small chapel, a courtyard and several rooms (Phot.14). An inscription, today irreparably damaged, in the fragmentary mosa-ics at the entrance of the chapel, linked it with a special veneration to St.Peter: “Our God has blessed us. Peter has blessed us. Our God.”48

48. I take this opportunity to thank Mr. Nimrod Negev, today a member of the Israel Antiqui-ties Authority, for having called my attention, when he was still my student, to the discovery ofthis unusual Greek text which I copied myself in situ. Except for the “House of Peter” inCapernaum, no other church or chapel seems to have been dedicated to the memory of the Apos-tle Peter in ancient Palestine, but there was one in Rihab, in Transjordan (Meimaris 1986, 105).


The presence of a monastery in such a remote place is a good indica-tion of the kind of life they were pursuing, certainly very similar to mostof the monasteries in the Judean desert. The fact that it had been establishedupon and among the ruins of an ancient city is not surprising, as the ruinsfurnished good stone for the building, and there was plenty water in theold cisterns. The same had occurred in some of the Herodian palaces in Pal-estine (Massada, Herodion, Hyrcania), as in many of the ancient templesin Egypt.

Tel Masos (Khirbet el Meshash) (map ref. 140.069) (Fig. 31)

In a way similar to Tel ‘Ira, Tel Masos monastery was also established closeto the ruins of an ancient Israelite city, whose identification is not yet defi-nitely solved. This city lay on the banks of Nahal Beersheva, and it waspreceded in the same site by other settlements since the Chalcolithic pe-riod. The site was discovered by the Israeli survey headed by the late Y.Aharoni in the sixties. An Israelite city and Byzantine monastery were laterexcavated in 1972-1975 by a German-Israeli expedition, and the resultswere properly published in an extensive two-volume report (Fritz-Kempinski 1983).

The monastery ruins consisted of a building centered around a court-yard (Figs. 32 and 33). The chapel has a rectangular apse. On an angle ofthe same courtyard is a burial crypt with several burial places for more thanone body, on whose stones some graffiti written in Syriac were reported.The identification of this complex of chapel, rooms, courtyard and crypt asa monastery is not a matter of doubt. All the necessary elements for the lifeand maintenance of a monastic community are there. The only doubtfulthing about this place is the interpretation given to it by the excavators, andparticularly by the publisher of Syriac graffiti, the late Paul Maiberger(ibid., p. 158ff). To his mind, those graffiti had been written not in Pales-tinian Syriac characters, but in north Syrian script, the so-called Nestorianwriting. As a result, a whole theory was formed regarding the foundationdate of the building, which should not be dated to the late Byzantine but tothe ‘Ummayad period. Indeed, it was said, it is not thinkable that duringthe rigid Orthodox Byzantine regime, a Nestorian monastery would havebeen allowed to be founded in Palestinian lands. The Muslims would ap-parently have been much more generous and large than the local Christianauthorities. What one can say about this theory is that the presence of someunclear graffiti in Nestorian script (not even Nestorian in contents, as they

P. FIGUERAS444

Fig. 31 Tel Masos, plan of monastery (Fritz-Kempinski 1983).


include only personal names and doubtful words) is certainly not enoughto establish a dating. All the criteria normally taken into consideration fordating the building as Byzantine, such as pottery, are there.49 One mustaccept that, in the moment when all the Christian settlements till then flour-ishing with their churches and institutions, were being abandoned, disman-tled and inconsiderately destroyed all over the Negev, it is almostinconceivable that a new monastery was planned and built, and then occu-pied for about one century, as it is claimed, in such a remote place as TelMasos.

Tel Yeshua’ (Tel es-Sawa) (map ref. 149.076) (Fig. 34)

This site lies some 20 km east of Beersheva, on the road to Arad, and hasbeen identified with a place where a group of Jews settled on their returnfrom the Babilonian exile (Neh 11:26). On the tel, the ruins of a squarebuilding were interpreted by Woolley and Lawrence (1914/15) withoutdoubt as a monastery. The recent survey seems also to confirm this view

Fig. 32-33 Tel Masos, suggested isometric reconstruction of chapel andmonastery (Fritz-Kempinski 1983).

49. This is the authorized opinion of Prof. V. Fritz, excavator of the site and today directorof the German Archaeological Institute in Jerusalem, as expressed to the present writer inprivate communication.

P. FIGUERAS446

Fig. 34 Tel Yeshu’a, plan of the site (Govrin 1991, 89, 2).

(Govrin 1992, 88-89.*61). It had a church on its northern side and a roomcomplex on the south. The church, which had one apse only, was pavedwith white mosaic.


It must be said that this interpretation of the ruins from the Byzantineperiod has not been accepted by more recent archaeologists, who see in thema round Herodian tower among other buildings that were in use during theRoman and Byzantine period. Excavations have not been conducted at thesite, and it is difficult to verify the truth. If Woolley and Lawrence saw thechurch, whose remains could later have been destroyed and dismantled, noth-ing stands against their interpretation. The Herodian tower could easily havebeen included in the monastic complex. Even if part of the building was usedas a fort, the other part could serve as dwellings to a group of monks, as hap-pened in other places, such as Mitzpe Shivta (above).

Summary

Trying now to compare the results obtained with the purposes we had setto us at the start of this study, it is superfluous to point out that there isarchaeological as well as written evidence of the existence of monks andmonasteries in the Byzantine Negev. Rather, I would like to offer the re-sults of this schematic research in a systematic and practical way, gather-ing in a general way the existing data under some significant headings:

1. Monks in Third Palestine in general (literary evidence)2. Monasteries in Third Palestine in general (lit. evid.)3. Hermit’s cave: Wadi Mo’eile˙ (archaeological evidence)4. Laurae:

‘Ein ‘Avdat (arch.)Elusa (lit.)Mitzpe Shivta (arch. + lit. ?)

5. Isolated monasteries:Aila region (lit.)Óorvat Bodeda (arch. ?)Óorvat Kuseife (arch. ?)Óorvat So’a (arch. ?)Tel ‘Ira (arch.)Tel Masos (arch.)Tel Yeshua’ (arch. ?)Elusa region (nuns) (lit.)

6. Monastery near town:Nessana, church no. 6 (nunnery ?) (arch. + papyri ?)

7. Monastic or clergy communities around churches in towns:

P. FIGUERAS448

Birosaba (arch. + lit. ?)Mampsis, western church (arch. + epigraphy ?)Nessana, church no. 1 (arch. + epigr. + papyri)Nessana, church no. 3 (arch. + epigr.)Ru˙eibeh, north church (arch.)Oboda, south church (arch. + epigr.)Sobata, north church (arch. + epigr.)Sobata, central church (arch.)Sobata, south church (arch.)

8. Terms:“Monastery” (mone) in Nessana (pap.)“Monastery of women” in Elusa region (lit.)“Monastery of women” (matronikia ?) in Nessana (pap.)“Laura” in Elusa (lit.)“Archimandrites” in Third Palestine in general (lit.)“Hegumenos” in Nessana (epigr. + papyri)“Abbas” in Birosaba (lit.), Mampsis (epigr.), Nessana (epigr.+ pap.),

Oboda (epigr.), Sobata (epigr.), Elusa (lit.)“Monk” (monachos) in Nessana (pap.), Sobata (epigr.)“Virgin of God” in Oboda (epigr.)“Solitary” (hesychastes) in Elusa (lit.)“Our Mother” in Nessana (epigr.)“Old Man” (geron) in Oboda (epigr.)

Despite the difficulties of interpretation of some of these data, there isno doubt that, also the Negev desert was heavily populated by monksduring the Christian centuries. They were in great part responsible, notonly for the Christianization of the local population (Elusa), but alsofor its religious and cultural education (Nessana). If some of them livedin absolute separation from secular affairs (‘Ein ‘Avdat, Mo’eile˙), oth-ers were totally involved in the social life of the communities (Nessana).Some lived in remote cenobitic monasteries (Tel ‘Ira, Tel Masos), oth-ers in communities around the church parishes (Sobata, Oboda). Someof them were active in agriculture (Nessana, Sobata), others took careof the pilgrims and passers-by (Nessana, Ru˙eibeh, Mitzpe Shivta,Sobata). Among their rangs there were writers of renown (Elusa), oth-ers had been rich members of famous city-councils (Nessana). There wasa small monastery of poor nuns living on charity in the middle of thedesert (Elusa), but another monastery had become well-known becausea great monk had lived there (Aila).


Let us finally remember that this monasticism, till today unfairly ig-nored by Church historians, was well known to the Church of the sixthcentury, which invited some of its representatives to attend the ecumenicalcouncil at Constantinople in 536.

Pau FiguerasBen Gurion University of the Negev

Bibliographic ReferencesAbel F.-M. 1903a, “Inscriptions grècques de Bersabée,” RB 12, 425.Abel F.-M. 1903b, “La grotte de Moueileh,” RB 12, 600-602, figs., map.Avi-Yonah. M. (ed.) 1944, The Madaba Map, Jerusalem.Avi-Yona M. 1977, Gazetteer of Roman Palestine, Jerusalem.Bagatti. B. 1972, The Church of the Gentiles in Palestine, Jerusalem.Baumgarten Y. 1986, “Mitzpe Shivta,” in Segal 1986, 97-108 (Hebrew).Bruins H.J. 1986, Desert Environment and Agriculture in the Central Negev and Kadesh-

Barnea During Historical Times, Nijkerk.Burkhardt J.L. 1822, Travels in Syria and the Holy Land, London (reprint 1983).Chitty D.J. 1966a (ed.), Barsanuphius and John - Questions and Answers (PO XXX/3),

Paris, pp. 445-617.Chitty D.J. 1966b, The Desert a City. An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Pales-

tinian Monasticism under the Christian Empire, Oxford.Colt H.D. (ed.) 1962, Excavations at Nessana, vol. 1, London.Festugière A.-J. 1962/63, Les Moines d’Orient, III, Paris.Figueras P. 1981, “The Christian History of the Negev and Northern Sinai,” in D.A. Jaeger

(ed.), Christianity in the Holy Land (Studia Oecumenica Hierosolymitana, vol. 1), Je-rusalem, 147-168.

Figueras P. 1982, “Beersheva in the Roman-Byzantine Period,” Boletín de la AsociaciónEspañola de Orientalistas (Madrid), 16, 135-162, with map.

Figueras P. 1985, Byzantine Inscriptions from Beer-sheva and the Negev (Negev MuseumPubl. No. 2), Beersheva.

Figueras P. 1986, “Three Dedicatory Inscriptions from the Beersheva Region,” LA 36, 265-276, Figs. 1-3.

Figueras P. 1987, “Arqueología cristiana en el desierto del Neguev,” Estudios Bíblicos(Madrid) 45, 207-247, with map.

Figueras P. 1995a, “New Inscriptions from the South” (in press).Figueras P. 1995b, “Pilgrims to Sinai in the Byzantine Negev,” in Acts of the XII Interna-

tional Congress of Christian Archaeology, Bonn, with map (in press).Fritz V. - Kempinski A. 1983, Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf Hirbet al-Msas - Tel

Masos 1972-1975, 2 vols., Wiesbaden.Glueck N. 1939, “Exploration in Eastern Palestine,” AASOR 18-19, 1-3.Govrin Y. 1984, Hadashot Arkheologiyot (1984) 76.Govrin Y. 1991, Map of Nahal Yattir (139), Jerusalem.Hirschfeld I. 1989, “Monasteries of the Judean Desert in the Byzantine Period,” Qadmoniot

22 (87-88) 58-87 (Hebrew).Hirschfeld I. 1990, “List of the Byzantine Monasteries in the Judean Desert,” in Christian

Archaeology in the Holy Land. Essays in Honor of V.C. Corbo, Jerusalem, pp. 1-90.Hirschfeld I. 1993, “Monasteries and Churches in the Judean Desert in the Byzantine Pe-

riod,” in Tsafrir 1993, 149-154.Huntington E. 1911, Palestine and Its Transformations, Boston.

P. FIGUERAS450

Israeli Y. 1967, Hadashot Arkheologiyot (1967) 22-23.Jaussen A. - Savignac R. - Vincent H. 1904/1905, “Abdeh (4-9 février 1904),” RB (Nouv.

Sér.) 1, 403-424; ibid. 2, 74-89, 279-298.Jaussen A. - Savignac R. - Vincent H. 1905, “Sbaita,” RB 2, 256-257.Klosterman E. (ed.) 1904, Eusebius, Das Onomastikon der biblischen Ortsnamen, Leipzig.Lagrange M.-J. 1897, “Chronique, IV. De ‘Ain Keseime à Gaza,” RB 6, 612-618 (with plan).Mader A.E. 1918, Altchristliche Basiliken und Lokaltraditionen in Suedjudaea, Paderborn.Margalit S. 1987, “The North Church of Shivta: The Discovery of the First Church,” PEQ

119, 106-121.Mayerson Ph. 1963, “The Desert of Southern Palestine According to Byzantine Sources,”

Proceedings of the American Philological Society, 95, 160-172.Mayerson Ph. 1983, “The City of Elusa in the Literary Sources of the Fourth-Sixth Centu-

ries,” IEJ 33, 247-253.Meimaris Y. E. 1986, Sacred Names, Saints, Martyrs and Church Officials in the Greek

Inscriptions and Papyri Pertaining to the Christian Church of Palestine, Athens.Meshel Z. - Tsafrir Y. (s.a.), Seqer arkheologi b’ein ‘avdat, Midreshet Sde Boqer/Beit Sefer

Sade (Hebrew).Musil A. 1908, Arabia Petraea, II, Edom, Wien.Negev A. 1974, “The Churches of the Central Negev - An Archaeological Survey,” RB 81, 400-422.Negev A. 1981, The Greek Inscriptions from the Negev, Jerusalem.Negev A. 1988, “Harei ha-nebatim ba-negev”, Ariel (Jerusalem) 62-63, 1-157 (Hebrew).Ovadiah A. 1970, Corpus of the Byzantine Churches in the Holy Land, Bonn.Ovadiah A. - Da Silva G. 1981, “Supplement to the Corpus of the Byzantine Churches in

the Holy Land (Part I)”, Levant 13, 200-261.Palmer E.H. 1872, The Desert of the Exodus, Part II, Cambridge.Patrich Y. 1993, “Chapels and Hermitages of St. Sabas’ Monastery,” in Tsafrir 1993, 233-243.Rosenthal-Hegginbottom R. 1982, Die Kirchen von Sobota und die dreiabsiden Kirchen des

Nahen Ostens, Wiesbaden.Robinson E. 1841, Biblical Researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petraea, vol. II, London.Rubin, R. 1990, Ha-negev ke-eretz noshevet [The Negev as Inhabited Country], Jerusalem (Hebrew).Schwabe M. 1953, “A Graeco-Christian Inscription from Aila,” Harvard Theol. Rev., 49-55, pl.Schwartz E. 1939 (ed.), Kyrillos von Scythopolis, Leipzig (Trad. A.-J. Festugière, Les

moines d’Orient 3/3, Les moines de la Palestine, Paris 1963, see 65-67).Schwartz E. 1940 (ed.), Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum, vol. III, Berolini.Segal A. 1986, Shivta, Aspects of a Byzantine Town in the Negev, Haifa (Hebrew).Shereshevski J. 1991, Byzantine Urban Settlements in the Negev Desert, Beersheva.Taylor J. 1987, “A Graffito Depicting John the Baptist in Nazareth?,” PEQ, 142-148, Fig. 3.Tsafrir Y. (ed.) 1982, Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Temple to the Muslim Con-

quest, Jerusalem (Hebrew).Tsafrir Y. 1988, Excavations at Rehovoth in the Negev, Jerusalem.Tsafrir Y. (ed.) 1993, Ancient Churches Revealed, Jerusalem.Ustinova Y. - Figueras P. 1995, “A Byzantine Inscription from Neve Noi, Beersheva,”

‘Atiqot (English Series) (in press).Vailhé S. 1889/90, “Repertoire alphabétique des monastères de Palestine,” Rev. Orient

Chrétien 4, 512-542; 5, 72-292.Vailhé S. 1897/98, “Les premiers monastères de la Palestine,” Bessarione 3 (19-24), pp.

39-58; 209-225; 334-356.Vailhé, S. 1891, “Acta Sancti Theognii Episcopi Betheliae,” Analecta Bollandiana 10, 73-118.Wiegand Th. 1920, Sinai, Berlin.Wilkinson J. 1971, Egeria’s Travels, London.Wilkinson J. 1977, Jerusalem Pilgrims Before the Crusades, Warminster.Woolley C.L. and Lawrence T.E. 1914, The Wilderness of Zin, London.

Documents

Monks and Monasteries in the Negev Desert