Deir Mar Jirys - CHOZIBA

Vertical tabs

Source of knowledge
Archaeological remains
Surveyed site
Surveyors: 
NameDate
Conder and Kitchener
1871-1877
Marti
1880
Schneider
1930
Meinardus
1964-65
Meimaris
Patrich
1987-88
Patrich, Arubas and Agur
1988-89
History: 
The development of the monastery of Choziba was gradual. In its early phase, the site was consecutively occupied by five hermits of Syrian origin: Promos, Elias, Gannaeus, Aias and Zenon (Anthony of Choziba, Miraculae beatae virginis Mariae in Choziba 5). The five founders constructed a chapel and a second structure that served as a burial place. Towards the end of the fifth century, the monastery became a coenobium, was expanded and new structures were built by John of Thebes (Vailhé 1899: 526-527). The monastery functioned as a composite monastery containing a cenobitic core and a lauritic part, consisting of cells dispersed over the cliffs some 1.5 km east of the core. During the Persian invasion the monastery was abandoned, some monks and their abbot crossing the Jordan into Arabia. Other monks of the monastery found refuge at the monastery of Calamon, while others hid in caves. Sometime later the monks returned and the monastery resumed its existence. The monastery continued to function into the middle ages although the cells of the laura were abandoned in the Early Islamic period, probably due to security issues. In the late nineteenth century, the monastery was rebuilt and is still functioning today. One or two of the cells of the laura were also in use in the twentieth century.
State of certainty: 
Archaeologically and Literarily definitive
Architectural evolution
General outline: 
Five Syrian monks (consecutively) established a hermitage, a dwelling in a cave, a chapel and a burial structure.
Dating material: 

Literary (see Literary Sources)

Phase date
Century: 
5th c.
Within century: 
Early
General outline: 
The laura became a composite monastery, i.e. a coenobium with hermits living alongside of it, during the time of John of Thebes (ca. 480 CE). Conder and Kitchener identified an entrance hall, a chapel, dwelling cells and a hewn burial cell (which may have been from the first phase). Cell no. 5 consisted of poorly built remains inside the cave but no additional construction on the outside. It was suggested by Patrich (1990: 209) that this cell represents an earlier, short stage in the development of the monastic settlement.
Dating material: 

Literary (see Literary Sources)

Phase date
Century: 
5th c.
Within century: 
Second half
General outline: 
During the Persian invasion in 614 CE the monastery was abandoned for some time after which it was restored but the cells remained abandoned.
Dating material: 

Literary (see Literary Sources); Survey of the cells.

Phase date
Century: 
7th c.
Within century: 
First half
General outline: 
The monastery continued in use throughout the medieval period.
Dating material: 

Literary (see Literary Sources)

Phase date
Century: 
12th c.
Within century: 
Late
Post Arab conquest history: 
Modified
Post conquest history comments: 
The monastery continued in use in the medieval period although the cells were abandoned after the Persian invasion. In the modern era the monastery was rebuilt and some of the cells were used for short periods of time.