Khirbet Khureitun - CHARITON; SOUKA; OLD LAURA

Vertical tabs

Monastery name, type, category

Site Name:

Khirbet Khureitun

Identification:

The remains surveyed in Wadi Khureitun have been positively identified with the laura of Souka founded ca. 345 CE by Chariton. From the sixth century, it was also known by the name "The Old Laura". Among the first to describe and identify the site were Tobler, Guérin, and Conder and Kitchener of the SWP. An extensive survey of the site by Hirschfeld confirmed the identification, including the "Hanging Cave of Chariton". The identification of the ruins in Wadi Khureitun with the old laura is based on evidence from several sources: literary (see Literary sources section), the archaeological evidence and preservation of the name. This identification is accepted by all scholars.

Monastery name:

CHARITON; SOUKA; OLD LAURA

Monastery type:

Laura

Monastery category:

Desert

Source of sacredness:

Founder's Tomb

Location

Coordinates, ITM system:

22,259.00

61,719.00

Coordinates, ICS system:

17,259.00

11,719.00

Geographical region:

Judean Desert

Provincial affiliation:

Palaestina I

Bishopric:

Jerusalem

Topographical location:

On the western bank of Wadi Khureitun, spread out over the cliffs.

Soils:

Rocky limestone

Distance from nearest bishop-seat:

ca. 15 km (Jerusalem)

Distance from nearest settlement:

ca. 3 km (Thecoa)

Distance from Roman roads:

ca. 3 km east of the road passing through Thecoa.

Source of knowledge

HideLiterary sources

Text number	Summary
1	Founding of the Old Laura, ca. AD 345.
2	Chariton settles in a cave, "the hanging place of St. Chariton".
3	Mention of the cells at the laura of Souka, from a life of a 5th cent. Sabaite monk by a contemporary writer.
4	Sabas’ rebellious monks make their way to the laura of Souka but are refused admittance, AD 506.
5	Cyriacus moves to the laura of Souka and stays there for forty years, AD 485-525.
6	Cyriacus returns from Sousakim to the laura of Souka, AD 542.
7	Cyriacus lives his last years in the cave of Chariton, AD 555-557.
8	Mention of the monastery of holy Chariton to the south of Bethlehem, from an 8th cent. guidebook for pilgrims.
9	Mention of the Old Laura and Chariton's tomb among the inventory of monks in the Judean Desert, from an official report ordered in AD 808.

Archaeological remains

Surveyed site

Surveyors:

Name	Date
Tobler	1854
Guérin	1868-1869
Conder and Kitchener	1871-1877
Hirschfeld	1984
Hirschfeld	1988-1989

History:

The laura was founded ca. 345 CE by Chariton, named originally SUOKA. The name OLD LAURA may have come about in the sixth century to distinguish it from the NEW LAURA founded south of Thecoa. The first mention of the name MONASTERY OF CHARITON is by Epiphanius Monachus in the early eighth century. The "Hanging Cave" of Chariton, located about 800 m south of the laura's core, became a memorial to Chariton and a pilgrimage site. The monk Cyriac lived in it for a while around the end of the fifth century (Cyril,V. Cyr.). From the sources it is known that the core of the laura, in addition to the church, had a bakery, an infirmary, a guesthouse and storerooms. In the ninth century, for security reasons, the core area was enclosed in walls and the cells were abandoned. The monastery continued to function into the Crusader period. It was still active during the visit of the Russian abbot Daniel in 1106 and was described by Joanes Phocas in 1185. After that it was abandoned, the monks' cells and the cisterns becoming dwellings in the Mameluk period.

Bibliograpy:

Robinson, E. and Smith, E., 1841	II: 174-75
Tobler, T., 1854	509-10
Guérin, V., 1868-1880	III: 133-39
Marti, K., 1880	37-40
Conder, C. R. and Kitchener, H. H., 1883	409
Schick, C. and Benzinger, I., 1896	176
Vailhé, S., 1900	13-14
Abel, F. M., 1938	II: 471
Strobel, A., 1967	46-63
Bagatti, B., 1971	336-345
Avi-Yonah, M., 1976	98
Wilkinson, J., 1977
Hirschfeld, Y., 1985	53-58
Hirschfeld, Y., 1988	270-72
Hirschfeld, Y., 1989	205-312
Hirschfeld, Y. , 1990	8-12
Di Segni, L., 1990	5-46
Patrich, J., 1994	45-52
Tsafrir, Y., Di Segni, L. and Green, J., 1994	236
Patrich, J., 1995	1-9
Hirschfeld, Y., 2000	315-62
Hirschfeld, Y., 2002	428-437
Patrich, J., 2011	205-18
Magen, Y. and Kagan, E. D., 2012	147-48

Abbreviation for Journals and Series

State of certainty:

Archaeologically and Literarily definitive

General description

State of preservation/which parts were uncovered:

The remains have been extensively surveyed but not excavated, with the exception of the "Hanging cave of Chariton". The site contains some remains that have been preserved to an impressive height. The core of the laura was built on two levels. The lower level contained most of the structures. Remains on the upper level contain a few walls and a fragment of white mosaic in situ. In the cliff that separates the two levels are some caves and rock shelters. The structures of the lower level form two blocks. The buildings are supported by massive retaining walls, forming a framework to hold huge quantities of soil that made up the platform on which the structures were built. The northeastern block protrudes 5-6 m above the level of the slope. Its total length is 9 m and its walls are preserved to a maximum height of 2.5 m. The central block is larger and more complex. It is some 20 m long and its retaining walls are preserved to 4-5 m. Part of the southern tower remains to an impressive height.

Illustrative material:

Illustrative_material

Photos

Chariton- the reservoir "Bir el-'Uneiziya" (Hirschfeld 1992:63, Fig. 32).

`The lower part of the "Hanging Cave" (Hirschfeld 2000: 232)

Figures

Plan of the monastery's core (Hirschfeld 2000: 327, fig 5 ).

Proposed reconstruction of northern tower (Hirschfeld 2000: 329, fig. 8).

Chariton- map of the laura (Hirschfeld 1990: 32)

General description

Paths:

Two paths lead to the monastery. One descends from Bethlehem and a second reaches it from the direction of Tekoa. The cells and other parts of the laura were connected by a system of paths.

Enclosing walls:

A total area of 2000 m² were enclosed within walls constructed at a later stage of the monastery's existence, probably due to insecurity. The walls descended from the northern tower. The western wall survives to a height of 1.5 m. It is 1m thick, built of relatively large stones on the outside and smaller ones inside. There are seams between the walls and towers indicating that the walls were built later than towers (apparently 9th c.). The walls enclose the core of the Byzantine period laura.

Gate/s:

The entrance gate in the later phase was apparently in the center of the northern wall, between the north and east towers. This is the place where the path ends, indicating the location of the gate, although the gate did not survive.

Tower/s:

The core of the laura is surrounded by three massive towers. The northern tower is rectangular, 11.4 x 15.4 m. It is preserved to height of 4 m, the core of the walls of all the structures contain large quantities of cement. The ground and first floors were roofed with barrel vaults. In the foundations of the northern wall is a rock hewn cistern (2.6 x 4 x 3 deep) it is fed by a drain from the roof of the tower. The tower had two stories on the southwestern side and at least three on the northeastern side. The southern tower is preserved to its full height (6 m), it is 6.4 x 9.5 m in the northern wing with one story, and two stories in the southern wing. The eastern tower has a cistern (2.5 x 2.8 m) roofed with a stone vault in its foundations. Only the western part of the tower survived.

Churche/s:

The core contained at least one church (Abbot Daniel mentioned two). the church itself did not survive, its existence is indicated by finds: a fragment of a chancel screen post and a grooved stone base for a chancel screen panel. The post is limestone (0.20 x 0.20 m). The base is also of limestone (0.45 x 0.20 m 0.28 m high).

Dwellings:

Remains of 39 cells were identified. They are scattered over an area 700 m from north to south, 150 m east to west, a total of 105 dunams (105,000 m²). Most of the cells are simple one room structures. Cisterns were built in the foundations of many (31 cells, 87%). The cisterns were built with a double purpose: to level the ground for building the cell and to store water. Some of the small plots contain additional cisterns. The cells are connected by a network of paths. The distance between the individual cells increases with the distance from the core. Most are concentrated on the slope southwest of the core, where the average distance is 20 m. Between the farther cells, the distance reaches 60 m and more. Many of the cells stand to a height of 1-2 m or more. About 75% are quadrangle, 3 are round and 7 are oval. The area contains many karstic caves but these were not used. Some of the cells are small (less than 5 m²), some are larger (over 40 and 60 m²). More than 50% of the cells have an area of 20-25 m², inclusive of walls that are generally 0.7 m thick. The average living space for each monk was therefore 14-16 m².

Cave/s:

Many carstic caves are present in the vicinity. Only a very few of these were actually used by the monks with the exception of the "Hanging cave of Chariton" which served as the founder's seclusion cell and later as a hallowed pilgrimage site. The cave was excavated in 1989. Located about 300 m southeast of Ein en-Natuf, it formed an integral part of the monastery. In front of the Hanging Cave, there is a terrace 18 m long and 2.5-6 m wide, filled with fertile soil and no remains. Hirschfeld suggested that this terrace contained an orchard. Two pools are also found on the terrace. One of these pools may have served as a baptismal font. The cave has two levels, with a chapel in the upper level. The main activity at the site took place in the upper level. The presence of crosses and christograms adds confirmation to the identification of the cave. The choice of the alcove high in the cliff suggests the extreme ascetic tradition of Syria.

Water installations:

The irrigation system consisted of reservoirs, pools and cisterns with channels and clay pipes to lead the water. The system was planned as an integral whole to drain and collect runoff water. At the top of the ravine is a huge constructed reservoir (Bir el-‘Uneiziya= well of the goats). Water was diverted into it by channels. The walls are of hard limestone. Its southern end, facing the ravine is preserved to 3.8 m. the walls are stepped to increase their strength. The reservoir is 14 x 19.4 m . It is fully plastered including the ceiling and could store at least 600 cubic meters of water. At the top of the vaults were 4 openings for drawing water. Most of the cells (87%) of the laura had cisterns, generally constructed above the latter. These provided enough water for drinking and perhaps even for irrigation.

Some seven cisterns were located in the core of the laura, mostly beneath dwelling structures. The cisterns were carved into the bedrock, plastered and roofed with built vaults.

Garden:

Remains of terraces were found on the slope southwest of the core. Two large agricultural terraces were identified. The larger one, 180 m long and 5-25 m wide, is north of the ravine and supported by massive retaining walls along its entire length. A smaller terrace (35 m long and 5-15 m wide) is on the south bank of the ravine. The total area of the gardens is 3000 m² , the gardens were probably worked communally. In addition, 27 of the cells (69%) had garden plots nearby.

Small finds

Small finds:

Category	Description
Pottery	Shards dating to the Byzantine period and a few fragments from Iron Age II were found below the plaster floor in the hanging cave. Fragments of pottery found above the plaster floor were dated to the Byzantine and Early Islamic period.
Metal objects	An iron plasterer's trowel and a small bronze hanger.

Small finds illustrative material:

Illustrative_material

Figures

Detailed description

Dimensions:

Total area (sqm)	Size class
450,000	Large

Structure

Materials applied (walls):

Limestone

Materials applied (roofing):

concrete

Components

Enclosing wall

Border marks

Gate/s:

Tower/s

Monastery church:

Church type	Diakonikon	Link to church section	Church location
unknown
cave

Dwelling type:

cells

caves

Number of stories:

Built paths

Retaining walls

Garden

Agricultural installations:

Terraces [=t]

Water installations:

Cisterns

Channels

Spring

Gutters

Water capacity (minimal) (cubic m):

663

Inscribed crosses

Architectural evolution

Phase 1
Phase 2
Abandonment

General outline:

The laura with its core on two levels and its widespread cells, irrigation and water collection system were constructed in the Byzantine period. As no excavations took place, a more precise dating has not been proposed.

Dating material:

The monastery was founded in the mid fourth century CE (ca. 345), based on literary sources.

Phase date

Century:

4th c.

Within century:

Mid

General outline:

In the Early Islamic period, due to security problems, the cells were abandoned and the core was surrounded by walls, connecting the towers. The monastery was active at least until the 12th century CE, it was reported by the Russian abbot Daniel (1106) and John Phocas (1185) as being walled. Sometime later in the Mamluk period it was deserted.

Dating material:

Architectural and literary evidence.

Phase date

Century:

Other

General outline:

From the literary sources (Abbot Daniel) it is known that the monastery continued to function at least up to the latter part of the 12th c.

Dating material:

Literary.

Phase date

Century:

12th c.

Post Arab conquest history:

Modified

Post conquest history comments:

In the Early Islamic period, due to security problems, the cells were abandoned and the core was surrounded by walls, connecting the towers. The monastery was active at least until the 12th century CE after which it was abandoned. The cells were ruined and the cisterns breached and used as dwellings in Mameluk period.