The cave is a natural, triangular cave (c. 5 × 8 m, height 4.5 m; Fig. 3) and was completely excavated. The cave floor was stepped and found on it were accumulations of earth and stones that had collapsed from the ceiling (L105–L107). The triangular outline of the cave and its stepped floor are characteristic of caves that developed along a fissure in which rocks from its ceiling and floor became detached over the years. Between the rocks on the floor of the cave were at least two nesting layers of predatory birds (Fig. 4), in which a variety of organic matter was found, including pieces of cured hide such as a leather water bag (Fig. 5), cloth, cordage and date and olive pits, most of which date to the Early Roman period (Sukenik, below), as well as several fragments of pottery vessels that are also from the Early Roman period. The pottery vessels in the cave included a fragment of a juglet from the Early Roman period (Fig. 6); a similar juglet was discovered in the Teomim Cave, used as a refuge cave during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (Zissu et al. 2009:419, Pl. 2:11). No distinct habitation level was discovered in the cave. Approximately 4–6 m east of the cave, below the rock ledge that leads to it, were two natural hollows (L109, L110) in the rock, where there were abandoned nests of predatory birds.
 
The nesting remains in the cave are indicative of prolonged activity by the predatory birds there. It is difficult to know with certainty if the finds that were discovered in the cave were brought there by the birds while gathering organic material to line the nest, or by a person who used the cave as a refuge and hid there during the Roman period. Indeed, some of the finds in the cave, including the date and olive pits, and fragments of pottery vessels, are generally not used by predatory birds for nest building, and it is therefore apparent that the cave served as a hiding refuge for Jews, probably residents of the nearby settlement at ‘En Gedi who escaped from the Romans during the Bar Kokhba Revolt. It is possible that after the cave was used as a hiding refuge, if only for a brief period, predatory birds returned there to nest and used the objects left behind for building their nests. If this hypothesis is correct, this cave joins the other refuge caves in the Judean Desert cliffs where Jews fled during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (Eshel 1998), and in particular the refuge caves that were documented in the cliffs in the eastern part of Nahal ʽArugot (Porat, Eshel and Frumkin 2009).
 
Organic Artifacts
Naama Sukenik
 
Numerous organic artifacts, including leather, textiles, cordage, fruit pits and parts of plants and branches, were discovered in the excavation of the cave. Sorting and packing of the finds was done in the laboratories of the Israel Antiquities Authority and several of the textiles underwent conservation treatment. An examination of the finds revealed that the majority were collected to build the nests in the cave. The finds include many recent items, including pieces of Arabic newspapers, pages with a caption on the Dead Sea hotels and more recent textiles that were used to pad the nest in the cave, indicating that the nest was used until recently. Most of the textile pieces postdate the year 1700, based on the dense weaving, similar to that of industrial machines and the dying technique, which is uncharacteristic of ancient periods. Nevertheless, some of the textiles are ancient. A number of the artifacts in the cave cannot be dated without C14 analysis, such as pieces of unworked hide that are probably the remains of animal meat brought as food by the predatory birds, and parts of plants and branches. Many date and olive pits were found in the cave, but it is difficult to know if they were brought there by animals or man. Two items that were discovered in the cave are indicative of a human presence—a leather bag (IAA No. 2015-9161, below) and a wooden stick, the end of which is worked (length 0.42 m; IAA No. 854450); because of their size, it is unlikely they were brought there by predatory birds or other animals. The important ancient organic finds that were discovered in the cave are described below.
 
Hide. Many pieces of skin were found, but only two objects were made of worked leather—a water bag and the end of a purse. Despite the difficulty of dating both of these items, they should probably be ascribed to the Roman period based on a comparison of similar items and the dating of other finds in the cave.
1. Water bag (IAA No. 2015-9161; see Fig. 5)—a tanned piece of hide (15.0 × 17.5 cm, 2 mm thick) folded round and made of two layers, parts of which are missing. An animal’s orifice—anus or navel—was observed in the water bag; it was sealed with a circular patch of leather (3.5 × 4.5 cm; Fig. 7) that was sewn on the bag with a thin leather thong.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      This type of closing is typical of water bags, such as those discovered in sites that date to the Roman period, including the Cave of the Letters (Yadin 1963:168: Object 7.68; 96-9104) and ʽEn Rahel (IAA No. 2014-9010). The water bag was designed to hold liquids and therefore, the patch used to seal the opening was also made of leather, to produce a maximum seal. According to Volken, the tanning process of the skin used for water bags did not generally include vegetable tannin, which was commonly employed in the processing of skins, because it greatly reduced the flexibility of the leather. The skin used to make water bags had to be flexible; therefore, the craftsman simply removed the fur, and cured and salted the hide or treated it with oil (Volken 2008:269).
2. End of Leather Purse (IAA No. 2015-9157)—a piece of tanned shrunken leather (4.3 × 5.0 cm, thickness 0.5 mm; Fig. 8) folded in two and tied with a cord made of unidentified plant fiber. It seems that this piece of leather is the tied upper part of a small purse. The skin is much thinner than that of the water bag and thus it presumably was not used for carrying heavy objects but rather for small items such as coins. The word kēs is used in Jewish sources to describe a small purse: “He who steals the purse of his fellow and returned it to him while he was asleep, and he woke up, and lo, his purse is in his hand, if [the victim] recognizes it as his, [the other] is exempt. And if not, he is liable” (Tosefta, Neziqin Baba Qamma 10:15). Similar purses were also found in the Cave of Letters (Yadin 1963:160–162).
 
Textiles. Among the many pieces of fabrics that were cataloged and analyzed, only 13 pieces (Nos. 1–13; Table 1) were dated to ancient periods, based on how the thread was spun, the weaving, the raw material and the design pattern and color. Seven fabrics (1–7) were dated to the Roman period, five of them (1–5) made of linen (Linum usitatissimum L.). The warp and weft threads of the linen fabrics were S-spun in accord with the natural twist of the flax fibers (Yadin 1963:252; Wild 1970:38) and were woven in a simple tabby weave, whereby the number of warp threads is equal to the number of weft threads. The quality of the weave suggests that the weaving was of local manufacture. Numbers 6 and 7 are made of wool. Number 6 is decorated with brown clavus bands (Fig. 9), a decoration characteristic of the tunics worn by men and women in the Roman period (Shamir 2013a:330–333), and was found on textiles at many sites in the country, including the Cave of the Letters (Yadin 1963:226–238), Murabaʽat Cave (Crowfoot and Crowfoot 1961:51–52), Masada (Sheffer and Granger-Taylor 1994:172–173), Abi’or Cave (Sheffer 1999:175) and at sites along the Incense Route, such as ʽEn Rahel (Shamir 1999:92–94) and Mo’a (Shamir 2005:103). The threads of No. 6 were spun to the left (S-spun), as was characteristic of locally produced fabrics (Shamir 1999:100; Sheffer and Granger-Taylor 1994:236). Number 7 is folded in two and is a bordeaux color that has partially faded and changed to a shade of brown (Fig. 10). The threads were Z-spun, an atypical production method in the country (Sheffer and Granger-Taylor 1994:236). In addition, the textile was twill-weaved, a rarity among the textiles discovered in sites in Israel and uncharacteristic of local textile production (Sheffer and Granger-Taylor 1994:237). Therefore, this is presumably an imported textile. Similar fabrics were found, among other places, at the Murabaʽat Cave (Crowfoot and Crowfoot 1961:51–52, 54–55), Masada (Sheffer and Granger-Taylor 1994:166, 237) and Mo’a (Shamir 2005:100); this apparently reflects on trade relations or perhaps, an association with the Roman army (Shamir 2006:214–215).
The remainder of the textiles examined (Nos. 8–13) are cotton. Cotton was used in India as early as the fifth millennium BCE (Zohary, Hopf and Weiss 2012:108), but first appeared in Israel during the Byzantine period, at sites such as ʽEn Boqeq (Sheffer and Tidhar 1991:22–23) and Nizzana (Bellinger 1962), and became commonplace only in the ninth century CE (Amar 1998:40–42; Shamir 2016a, 2016b). Some of the textiles were woven in a simple tabby weave (e.g., No. 8), while others were woven in a warped-face weave, whereby the number of warp threads is greater than the number of weft threads (e.g., No. 10). The warp and weft threads are spun to the right (Z-spun), according to the natural twist of the fiber (Yadin 1963:178). It should be noted that the cotton fabrics whose threads are generally S-twist spun, discovered in the country in the Byzantine period, were imported from Egypt and Nubia (Shamir 2007:86*–87*; Shamir 2013b:59), because cotton was not grown in the country during this period, while Z-spun fabrics originated in India, South Arabia, Iran and Iraq (Mackie 1989, Shamir 2002:23–24). At Nahal Omer, many Z-spun cotton textiles were found, and dated to the Early Islamic period (Baginski and Shamir 1995:23); similar fabrics were unearthed on Coral Island, and date to the thirteenth century CE (Baginski and Shamir 1998:40). A microscopic examination revealed that the dyeing of the colored fabrics (Nos. 8–10) was done after weaving, as is customary with cotton textiles (Shamir 2002:25). Two of the textiles (Nos. 8 and 9) are dyed in a blue shade that was preferred in the Early Islamic period and in the Middle Ages (Shamir and Baginski 2002: 253). Number 10 is decorated with geometric patterns and brocaded with an addition of weft threads (Fig. 11). Two similar textiles were found at Nahal Omer (Baginski and Shamir 1998:23) and Coral Island (Baginski and Shamir 1998:42) and at Murabaʽat Cave (Crowfoot and Crowfoot 1961:61). It was difficult to precisely date Nos. 8–13, although it seems that they are from the Early Islamic period or possibly, even the Middle Ages (ninth–thirteenth centuries CE).
 
Table 1. Textiles from the cave.
Textile
No.
Locus/
Basket
Reg. No.
Size (cm)
Raw material
Spinning direction
Spinning tightness
Weave
Threads per cm
Color
Comments
1
101/1007
854411
6.65 × 8.00
Linen
S/S
Medium
Tabby
15 × 16
Cream
Numerous pieces
2
101/1007
854454
3 × 7
Linen
S/S
Medium
Tabby
11 × 17
Cream
 
3
104/1011
854392
1.6 × 3.0
Linen
S/S
Medium
Tabby
21 × 30
Light cream
Very delicate and folded
4
101/1007
854410
1.55 × 2.35
Linen
S/S
Loose
Tabby
15 × 16
Brown-cream
Two pieces
5
106/1024
854407
2.55 × 4.80
Linen
S/S
Medium
Tabby
13 × 16
Cream
Numerous pieces
6
107/1037
2015-9159
2.2 × 2.6
Wool
S/S
Medium
Weft-faced
10 × 18
Undyed and brown
Clavus decoration
7
105/1031
2015-9158
2.8 × 6.0
Wool
Z/Z
Medium
Diagonal
8 × 8
Bordeaux- brown
Folded in two; threads not evenly dyed
8
101/1007
854452
2.50 × 2.82
Cotton
Z/Z
Loose
Balanced Tabby
12 × 12
Cream and blue
Some threads are a dyed faded blue; textile dyed after production
9
107/1037
854451
1.75 × 2.00
Cotton
Z/Z
Loose
Balanced Tabby
11 × 11
Blue
Dyeing is uneven; textile dyed after production
10
---
2015-9163
2.5 × 10.0
Cotton
Z/Z
Tight
Warp-faced
22 × 32
Green and cream
Brocaded decoration
11
104/1011
854399
1.5 × 3.0
Cotton
Z/Z
Medium
Balanced Tabby
18 × 18
Light brown
 
12
106/1007
854453
3 × 7
Cotton
Z/Z
Medium
Warp-faced
11 × 16
Cream
 
13
101/1007
854383
4.0 × 6.5
Cotton
Z/Z
Medium
Warp-faced
9 × 13
Light cream
 
 
Cordage. Among the pieces of cordage discovered in the cave are three that predate the year 1700 CE (IAA Nos. 2015-9162, 2015-9164, 854371). The cords are made of date-palm fibers (Phoenix dactylifera), a raw material that was commonly used in the cordage industry. Date-palm trees began to be extensively cultivated in Israel from the fourth century BCE (Safrai 1994:140). Cords 2015-9162 and 2015-9164 are made of two strands twisted together to the left (Z2S), and there is a knot at their ends. The only preserved portion of Cord 854371 is the knot. Similar cords were found at ʽEn Rahel (Shamir 1999:105), Mo’a (Shamir 2005:147) and Masada (Bernic 1994:308–310), and they date to the Roman period. Cords such as these were also discovered in later sites, e.g., at Nahal Omer (Baginski and Shamir 1995:33–34) and on Coral Island (Baginski and Shamir 1998:49), where they are ascribed to the Early Islamic period and the Middle Ages respectively, and therefore it is difficult to date them with certainty.
 
Fruit Pits. Fifty-two date pits and four olive pits were found. Twenty-five of the date pits are elongated (max. length 3.2 cm) and grooved, are a light color and bear signs of gnawing and abrasion (Fig. 12). Similar pits were discovered at other sites, including Nahal ʽArugot and Qatef Jericho (Kislev and Hartman 1998), Har Yishay (Kislev and Simhoni 2009:239) and the Cave of the Pool (Avigad 1960:16). These appear to be ancient date pits (Phoenix dactylifera), but it is difficult to determine if these pits were brought to the cave by man or birds. The rest of the date pits (27) are smaller (max. length 1.45 cm), dark brown and bear no signs of wear, and may have been brought to the cave opening by animals in recent years.
 
Most of the organic matter discovered in the cave was brought to build the nest in recent years. The ancient finds include two leather objects from the Roman period, pieces of textile and cords from the Roman and Early Islamic periods and the Middle Ages, and fruit pits. It is important to note that no textile fragments from the Chalcolithic period were found in the cave, despite the fact that textiles from this period are common discoveries in the Judean Desert caves (see for example, the Cave of the Pool: Avigad 1960:17; the Christmas Cave: Porat 2006:69–70; caves in the northern Judean Desert: Schick 2002), but their absence may be purely coincidental. Apparently, only a few of the artifacts discovered in the cave were brought there by man, and therefore, if a person was present in the cave it was only for a brief period.
 

 
Amar Z. 1998. The Revolution in Textiles in Eretz-Israel and Syria in the Middle Ages. Cathedra 87:37–60 (Hebrew).
 
Avigad N. 1960. Expedition A. BIES 25:13–18 (Hebrew). 
 
Baginski A. and Shamir O. 1995. Textiles, Basketry and Cordage from Nahal Omer. ‘Atiqot 26:21–42.
 
Baginski A. and Shamir O. 1998. Textiles, Basketry and Cordage from Jazirat Faraun (Coral Island). ‘Atiqot 36:39–92.
 
Bellinger L. 1962. Textiles. In D. Colt ed. Excavations at Nessana I. London. Pp. 93–105.
 
Bernic K. 1994. Masada Basketry, Cordage and Related Artifacts. In Y. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada: The Yigael Yadin Excavation 1963–1965; Final Report IV. Jerusalem. Pp. 284–317.
 
Crowfoot G.M. and Crowfoot E. 1961. The Textiles and Basketry. In P. Benoit, J.T. Milik and R. de Vaux eds. Les Grottes de Murabba`ât, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 2. Oxford. Pp. 51–63.
 
Eshel H. 1998. The History of Research and Survey of the Finds of the Refuge Caves. In H. Eshel and D. Amit. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. Tel Aviv. Pp. 23–68 (Hebrew).
 
Kislev M. and Hartman A. 1998. Vegetal Food of the Refugees Who Fled to the Caves at Ketef Jericho. In H. Eshel and D. Amit. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. Tel Aviv. Pp. 153–168 (Hebrew).
 
Kislev M. and Simchoni O. 2009. Reconstruction of the Nutrition of the Refugees Who Fled to the Har Yishai Cave. In H. Eshel and R. Porat eds. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt: Vol. 2. Jerusalem. Pp. 239–253 (Hebrew).
 
Mackie L.W. 1989. Textiles. In W. Kubiak and G.T. Scanlon eds. Fustat Expedition Final Report II: Fustat-C. Winona Lake. Pp. 88–89.
 
Porat R. 2006. Bar Kokhba Refuge Caves in the Area between Ein Gedi and Qumran in Light of the Renewed Research Project in the Judean Desert. M.A. thesis. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew).
 
Porat R., Eshel H. and Frumkin A. 2009. Refuge Caves from the Bar Kokhba Period in Nahal Arugot. In. H. Eshel and R. Porat eds. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt: Vol. 2. Jerusalem. Pp. 267–291 (Hebrew).
 
Safrai Z. 1994. The Economy of Roman Palestine. London–New York.
 
Schick T. 2002. The Early Basketry and Textiles from Caves in the Northern Judean Desert. ‘Atiqot 41:223–239.
 
Shamir O. 1999. Textiles, Basketry and Cordage from ‘En Rahel. ‘Atiqot38:91–124.
 
Shamir O. 2002. Textile Production in Eretz-Israel. Michmanim 16:19–32.
 
Shamir O. 2005. Textiles, Basketry, Cordage and Whorls from Mo’a (Moje Awad). ‘Atiqot 50:99–152.
 
Shamir O. 2006. Textiles in the Land of Israel from the Roman Period till the Early Islamic Period in the Light of the Archaeological Finds. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem.
 
Shamir O. 2007. Pieces of Textile. In E. Kogan-Zehavi. Remains of an Early Islamic Settlement and a Hellenistic (Roman?) Tomb at Khirbat Deiran, Rehovot. ʽAtiqot 57 (Hebrew, pp. 77*–90*; English summary, pp. 170–173).
 
Shamir O. 2013a. Dress, Hellenistic and Roman Periods. In D.M. Master ed. The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology 1:328–336.
 
Shamir O. 2013b. Egyptian and Nubian Textiles from Qasr el-Yahud, 9th century AD. In A. De Moor, C. Fluck, P. Linscheid eds. Textiles, Tools and Techniques of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt and Neighbouring Countries. London. Pp. 49–59.
 
Shamir O. 2016a. Textiles and Fleece from ‘En Marzev. ‘Atiqot 86:11–19.
 
Shamir O. 2016b. Textiles, Cordage and Fleece from ‘En ‘Avrona. ‘Atiqot 86:3–9.
 
Shamir O. and Baginski A. 2002. The Later Textiles, Basketry and Cordage from the Caves in the Northern Judean Desert. ‘Atiqot 41:241–255.
 
Sheffer A. 1998. Bar Kokhba Period Textiles from the Abi’or Cave. In H. Eshel and D. Amit. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. Tel Aviv. Pp. 169–181 (Hebrew).
 
Sheffer A. and Granger-Taylor H. 1994. Textiles from Masada: A Preliminary Selection. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada IV: The Yigael Yadin Excavation 1963–1965. Jerusalem. Pp. 153–256.
 
Sheffer A. and Tidhar A. 1991. The Textiles from the ‘En-Boqeq Excavation in Israel. Textiles History 22:3–46.
 
Volken M. 2008. The Water Bag of Roman Soldiers. JRA 21:265–274.
 
Wild J.P. 1970. Textile Manufacture in the Northern Roman Provinces. Cambridge.
 
Yadin Y. 1963. The Finds from the Bar Kokhba Period in the “Cave of Letters.” (Judean Desert Studies I). Jerusalem.
 
Zissu B., Langford B., Porat R. and Frumkin A. 2009. Finds from the Bar Kokhba Period from the Teomim Cave in the Western Jerusalem Hills. In H. Eshel and R. Porat eds. Refuge Caves of the Bar Kokhba Revolt: Vol. 2. Jerusalem. Pp. 402–422 (Hebrew).
 
Zohary D., Hopf M. and Weiss E. 2012. Domestication of Plants in the Old World. Fourthedition. Oxford.