|
|
Site |
Width |
Depth |
Passage Width |
Walls -Width |
Walls-Length |
Chamber Depth |
Chamber Width |
| Megiddo IVA |
25.00 |
15.50 |
4.20 |
2.30 |
2.20 |
3.00 |
8.20 |
| Beersheba V |
20.80 |
12.60 |
4.20 |
2.00
|
2.00 |
3.00 |
6.00 |
| Beersheba III |
16.60 |
13.60 |
3.60 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
3.00 |
5.00 |
| Tel Dan |
29.50 |
17.30 |
3.70 |
3.60 |
2.20 |
4.50 |
9.00 |
| Ashdod10 |
16.50 |
13.75 |
4.20 |
1.00 |
1.20 |
2.40 |
3.80 |
| Tell en-Nasbeh |
15.00 |
12.00 |
4.00 |
1.50
|
2.10 |
1.80 |
4.40 |
| Tell el-Kheleifeh |
17.00 |
10.00 |
1.60 |
|
|
2.00 |
4.00 |
| Bethsaida/Geshur |
30.6 |
17.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mudayna on Wadi ath-Thamad |
15.8 |
16.35 |
4.1-4.2 |
1.5-1.65 |
|
2.4 |
3.3 |
| Mudaybi` |
19.7 |
14.5 |
4.1 |
1.65 |
1.65 |
3.50 |
6.70 |
(All measurements in meters)
  We have an entryway that is quite well preserved, with a gatepost
still in place. We have a threshold stone
in situ, and apparently
the threshold stone was of a single stone nearly 4 meters in length
(I have to say apparently, because the northern portion of the
threshold, and the northern outer gate pier hasn’t been excavated.
Nonetheless, the excavated portion of the threshold is 2 ½ meters
long, and .75 m wide.
We also have a bench outside the gatepost; this bench is still
plastered to the gatepost and to the south tower of the gateway.
This season, we discovered the area outside the threshold is paved
with cobblestones. There are a few paving stones inside the
threshold, but only a few. On the outside the entire area from the
threshold stone to the east balk of the square is covered with
paving stones, and the pavement continues into the balk.
  On the last day of excavation in 2001, I began a small probe on
the inside of the gatepost to determine if there was any plaster
where the gatepost bonded to the pier wall. I found no plaster in
this probe, but did discover the gatepost and pier wall were both
sitting on a notched foundation stone. This notched stone may be a
door socket. Unfortunately, I had no time to expand the probe or
fully excavate around this notched stone to determine its function.
This determination will have to await the 2003 season of excavation.
What we do have at Mudaybi` is one of the richest sites for
volute capitals in the Middle East. Only Megiddo and Ramat Rahel in
Israel have more capitals than our site. Of the 40 or so known and
published volute capitals, we have 3 nearly complete, one half, and
a fragment—4 definite and likely 5 capitals. In addition we have 4
(or 5) of the 7 (or 8) now known in Jordan.
  Furthermore, we have what I consider conclusive evidence for the
original position of (at least our) volute capitals in a gate
structure. Volute capital Md-5, excavated in 1997 at Mudaybi`, was
discovered immediately off the pier wall, and still in perfect
alignment with the pier wall. The base of the capital is exactly the
same length as the width of the pier wall, 1.65 m. Apparently the
capital tipped off the wall face down in an earthquake that caused
the collapse of the gate complex.
The numerous lintels we have found all run in an east-west
direction, suggesting they originally spanned the chamber opening
from pier wall to pier wall. In 1999 I found one lintel still
resting on a pier wall, and sufficiently long to span the 3.5 m.
width of the chamber. This lintel was fully excavated in removed
during the 2001 season.
We also have charred remains of wooden beams that run in a
north-south direction in the middle of the gateway. These beams
apparently sat on top of the lintels and spanned the gate entryway.
Samples from 2 of these beams have been dated at the Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory by radiocarbon dating to 2760 BP = 760 B.C.E.
+/- 50 years and 2740 BP = 740 B.C.E. +/- 40 years. These beams thus
provide us not only data for the construction technique at our gate
complex, but also clear evidence for the construction of our gate
complex in the 8th century B.C.E., in the middle of Iron II. This
dating is consistent with the fragments of pottery that have been
recovered from the gate complex. We also have fragments of roofing
material—sun-dried mud with reed impressions. The roof apparently
was made of reeds on top of the wood beams covered with mud.
 Putting all these pieces together, we can reconstruct what our
gate complex looked like to a Moabite entering it in the 8th century
B.C.E. The pier walls are constructed of quite large semi-dressed
stones in header-stretcher construction. At just about eye level or
slightly above (the pier walls are preserved about 1½ m. in height;
the volute capitals would have been on top of these walls), one
would find large carved volute capitals, evidence of the royal
authority at this fortress/outpost. On top of the capitals, at a
height of approximately 2 ½ m. would be large limestone lintels.
Running above one’s head across the gate entryway at a height of 3-3
½ m. would be thick wooden beams above which was a roof or second
story.
One matter still eludes me: why was all the effort invested to
bring the massive stones of the lintels and volute capitals to this
site from a distance of at least several kilometers away? (The
nearest limestone quarry with the fossiliferous limestone used in
the volute capitals is several kilometers away.) Further, if the
purpose of this fortress was just to protect a border between desert
and sown, to prevent incursions into the plateau from the desert,
there was certainly no need for such an elaborate gate complex, so
wide an entry-way and such well-crafted capitals.
It seems we still have an enigma. What we can affirm is that we
have an exceptional gate complex, quite well-preserved. And to steal
an archaeological cliché, “the answers lie below.” The next season
of excavation at Mudaybi` is scheduled for 2003, perhaps then some
additional light will be shed on this enigmatic site and its gate
complex.
 |
