Talk:Horvat Midras

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SonOfYoutubers talk 03:55, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Stepped pyramid at Horvat Midras, Israel

• ... that a peculiar stepped pyramid at Horvat Midras, Israel, is now believed to be part of a grand Second Temple–era tomb in the Judaean Foothills?

• Source: Gardner, Gregg E.; Peleg-Barkat, Orit (2024). "Conspicuous Construction: New Light on Funerary Monuments in Rural Early Roman Judea from Horvat Midras". Bulletin of the American Society of Overseas Research. 391 (1). doi:10.1086/728460. p. 17. "The recent excavations at Horvat Midras have shed light on the pyramidal funerary monument, including its construction methods and connection to the burial cave to its north... The burial complex and nefesh are an impressive example of a monumental family display tomb from the end of the Second Temple era. Its location in a rural site in the Judean Foothills indicates that grand burial complexes existed not only in Jerusalem and other large cities, but also in these extra-urban regions."

• • ALT1: ... that a stepped pyramid at Horvat Midras, Israel, has been identified as the remnant of a monumental family tomb from Second Temple Judea? Source: Gardner, Gregg E.; Peleg-Barkat, Orit (2024). "Conspicuous Construction: New Light on Funerary Monuments in Rural Early Roman Judea from Horvat Midras". Bulletin of the American Society of Overseas Research. 391 (1). doi:10.1086/728460. p. 17. "The recent excavations at Horvat Midras have shed light on the pyramidal funerary monument, including its construction methods and connection to the burial cave to its north... The burial complex and nefesh are an impressive example of a monumental family display tomb from the end of the Second Temple era. Its location in a rural site in the Judean Foothills indicates that grand burial complexes existed not only in Jerusalem and other large cities, but also in these extra-urban regions."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Paul Among the People

Created by Mariamnei (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

Mariamnei (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - ALT 1 preferred

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: An interesting read! MumphingSquirrel (talk) 21:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Citation style

Hey @רמרום! Thanks so much for your additions to this article, I found them really interesting, and they nicely complement the topic with more recent findings. Could you please make sure to use the correct citation style, though? The article uses the sfn style for footnotes, with the corresponding sources listed in the Bibliography using cite journal and cite book templates. Would you mind fixing your recent edit to align with this format? Thanks a lot! Mariamnei (talk) 07:58, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hil! Thank you very much for your note. Can you please explain this style, is there any wiki guide i can worth with? many thanks!רמרום (talk) 11:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

It's not too hard! I can explain it here in just a few sentences. Do you work with the visual editor or with source code? Mariamnei (talk) 15:49, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

With both, however starting tomorrow, I will be away for 5 days. Please do explain and I will take it from there!רמרום (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Ok! The idea is that footnotes are created using the {{sfn}} template, instead of the regular <ref>. In source editing mode, this takes the author surname(s) (up to 4), the publication year, and the page number, for example: {{sfn|Rogers|2021|p=249}}. In VisualEditor, you can insert an sfn template and fill in the same fields (author name(s), year, and page or pages) using the form.

In the bibliography section, the full reference must be listed using {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, or another appropriate citation template. The author name(s) and year in the full citation must match those used in the {{sfn}} template. This allows Wikipedia to automatically link the short footnote to the corresponding full reference.

If you look at the source code of an article that uses sfn or harv footnotes, you can see how the {{sfn}} citations correspond to the full citations in the bibliography. Let me know if anything is unclear! Mariamnei (talk) 13:59, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Horvat Midras/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Mariamnei (talk · contribs) 08:10, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Michael Aurel (talk · contribs) 05:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Mariamnei. This looks very interesting. I'll hopefully provide my review in the next few days. – Michael Aurel (talk) 05:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Everything here is nicely done, so this will no doubt be smooth sailing:

• Continuous occupation at Horvat Midras is attested from the Hellenistic period until the Hasmonean conquest of Idumaea in the late 2nd century BCE – Hmm. This mostly makes sense, but the 2nd century BC was during the Hellenistic period, so it reads a little oddly (compare with "from the 20th century to the 1960s", for example).

• Right! changed to Continuous occupation at Horvat Midras is attested from the Hellenistic period. Following the Hasmonean conquest of Idumaea in the late 2nd century BCE, the site was briefly abandoned. Hope that's clearer!

• Later in the same century, a cultic complex was established at the site. – I think "cultic complex" might be a little technical for some readers. A link to cult (religious practice) might help, and I think a brief explanation would be good.

• Now linked in both the lead and body. I'll add a brief explanation in the body for clarity. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Following the Muslim conquest, the church remained in use, but its crosses were intentionally plastered over, – As the last explicitly mentioned date was 136 CE, and this is presumably quite some time after that, I'd include some dates for "Muslim conquest".

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Following the 749 earthquake, the church was destroyed, – Was it destroyed after the earthquake, or by the earthquake itself?

• By the earthquake, fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Other major finds include hiding complexes, rock-cut tombs, columbaria, – I'd include an explanation for "columbaria", as it isn't quite as self-explanatory as the previous terms.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Horvat Midras is located in the central Judaean Lowlands, – This is the first mention in the body, so I'd link this.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• As this is the place they are mentioned in the body, I suggest including links to Adullam Grove Nature Reserve and Jerusalem.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Zissu and Kloner proposed that the name may have been – I'd consider combining the paragraph with the previous one, as both are about the same topic, and bringing them together prevents anyone from momentarily pausing to question whether or not "the name" here refers to "Drusias" from above.

• Agreed, I've combined them now! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• the name may have been given during the reign of Herod the Great (r. 37–4 BCE) – This is perhaps a little picky, but I initially read these dates as 37 to 34 BCE (that is, I assumed the "3" in "34" had been elided), leading to some confusion about the dates of Drusus. Might it be possible write this out in words? (Something like "that is, the period from 37 to 34 BCE" might work, and would avoid the implicit repetition of "reign"). Let me know what you think.

• How about under Herod the Great (r. 37 to 4 BCE)?

• Archaeologist Guy D. Stiebel has raised doubts about this theory, ... both of which undermine the case for a Drusus-related naming. – I think the last phrase can be omitted, as that conclusion is probably implicit.

• Agreed, it's a bit redundant... I've omitted it. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• He links the name to the oak-rich environment of the Judean Foothills – I'd link Shephelah, as that seems to be what we're talking about.

• That's actually the same as the Judaean Lowlands, which we linked in the previous section. So, I'm changing 'Foothills' to 'Lowlands' here for consistency, and the link isn't necessary since it was already done just a section before. I've also added an 'a' to make it 'Judaean' instead of 'Judean' for consistency. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

  Seems a good move to me. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• It has been suggested that Horvat Midras was the hometown of Ben Drusai, – Hmm. Is there a particular reason for the italics?

• Nope, removing them. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Settlement at Horvat Midras likely began in the Late Iron Age or Persian period, – I suggest giving some dates here, as some readers won't know when this was.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• though only pottery sherds have been securely attributed to these early phases. – I'd consider adding a link to sherd here, as some readers might assume this is a typo for "shards".

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• More definitive evidence of occupation appears from the early Hellenistic period through the Hasmonean conquest of Idumaea in the late 2nd century BCE, – I'd include a link and some dates for "Hellenistic period", and a link for "Hasmonean".

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• At this time, it appears to have reached its greatest size, covering about 30 acres, – As the previous sentence ended in "Jewish population", I read the "it" here as referring to that, which I don't think is what we mean. Would "the site" or "the settlement" work, perhaps?

• Better, thanks. Fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• the First Jewish Revolt (66–73 CE) until its destruction during the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132–136 CE), – I'd add links to both of these, as they don't seem to have been mentioned in the body so far.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• A bit pedantic, but the article uses "Judean" some of the time, and "Judaean" on other occasions. It might be worth making this consistent.

• Fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• System #6 links three ancient pits—two of which served as water cisterns—through a network of crawlspaces. – By "System #6", I assume we're talking about one of the four hiding complexes? I think some readers' initial reaction here will be "Hang on, I thought there were only four?" Some slight rephrasing, explicitly describing this as one of the site's hiding complexes, would solve this, I think.

• Oh no, I forgot to mention that these are two of the four systems extensively studied, but out of over 50 found at the site! I rewrote the first sentence to make that clear, and rephrased the numbers a bit. The text now reads: Fifty-six rock-cut underground chambers and hiding complexes were discovered at Horvat Midras, of which four were extensively investigated.[18] These resemble the hundreds of similar systems found beneath Jewish settlements in the Judaean Lowlands.[19] One of the systems, referred to as System #6, links three ancient pits—two of which served as water cisterns—through a network of crawlspaces.[18] Another, System #20, stretches over 100 meters .... Mariamnei (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• System #20 stretches over 100 meters; It contains – Unless this is some sort of American thing I don't know about, there shouldn't be a capital letter after a semicolon.

• Fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• It contains a columbarium, – I'd link and explain this one.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• and two mikva'ot (Jewish ritual baths), – As above, I'd link this.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• sealed in antiquity with a round rolling stone, and the other containing arched loculi (arcosolia). – I'd link Loculus (architecture).

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• In the 2nd century CE, a cultic complex – Similar comment on "cultic complex" as in the lead.

• Made a few tweaks to include a quick explanation and some notes about the population changes in Late Roman and Byzantine times. Check out the diff here: . Mariamnei (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

  Looks good. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• During the Byzantine period (particularly in the 5th and 6th centuries), – This seems to be the first mention in the body, so I'd link this.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• In the 6th century, a church was built within the remains of an earlier basilica, – Is this the same basilica we mentioned in the previous section? If so, I'd specify this.

• Changed to say the earlier basilica, instead of an earlier basilica. Hope that's clear now! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Maybe a little picky, but would combining the first two paragraphs in the "Church" section work? The first is quite short.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• One, located just south of the elaborate Second Temple period tomb, – This should be hyphenated, I think.

• Fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Following the Muslim conquest, – As in the lead, I'd consider some dates here.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• After the 749 Galilee earthquake, the church was destroyed, – As in the lead: was this destroyed by the earthquake itself?

• Yes, fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Architectural elements from the earlier complex were reused as spolia, and Abbasid-period domestic pottery – I suggest adding a link for "Abbasid-period".

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Following several centuries of abandonment, Muslims reoccupied the site in the Ayyubid period. – I'd include a link for this.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Under Ayyubid and Mamluk control (13th–15th centuries), – It's worth considering that in the lead we gave the dates as "13th and 14th centuries".

• Actually, the most accurate would be 13th to 16th centuries, as the Ottomans took control in 1517. I've fixed it in both cases. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• The site’s productive phase came to an end in the early Ottoman period, – As in a few places above, I think it'd be ideal to have a link here, and perhaps some dates.

• Per the comment below, I've removed this sentence altogether. It already appears in another form, with dates, where it belongs, in the section on the Ottoman period. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Recorded as Darusiyya in Ottoman tax registers, the settlement fell under Hebron's subdistrict (nahiya), with the 1525/6 census (932 AH), when the villagers also cultivated fields at a place called Bayt Hawran. – Hmm. I'm possibly just missing something here, but the relation of "with the 1525/6 census" to the rest of the sentence isn't clear to me.

• Agree, that was a bit messy. Changed the text to say The site is recorded as Darusiyya in Ottoman tax registers. In the 1525/6 census (932 AH), it was part of the Hebron subdistrict (nahiya), and its villagers also cultivated fields at a place called Bayt Hawran., hope that's clear. Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• ceased functioning as a permanent village, becoming a seasonal settlement ('izbeh) – I think we've already said something very similar in the last sentence of the previous section.

• That's fixed now (I've removed the earlier mention). Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• people using the site in the late 16th or 17th century produced ammunition locally, likely for personal protection. – Hmm. Is Personal protective equipment the right link here? It seems to be about protective clothing, particularly in a modern context.

• You're right, that link isn't fitting. Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• This find also provides evidence how abandoned ancient ruins were reused – "of how", I think.

• Fixed! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• During the later Ottoman period, – I suggest writing "late" Ottoman period, so that it's clear we're talking about a later part of the same Ottoman period. It might also be worth throwing in a link to Late Ottoman period, assuming that's the one we're talking about.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• includes surveys by Victor Guérin in 1868 and the Palestine Exploration Fund – Suggest linking Palestine Exploration Fund.

• Done! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• A 1981 survey documented 56 caves and underground systems carved into the kirton bedrock beneath all parts of the settlement. – What does "kirton" mean?

• That's chalk. Fixed and linked now! Mariamnei (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

As I said, this is very nicely written, and I see nothing substantial standing in the way of a promotion. Looking forward to your responses. I'll hopefully get around to the spot checks and other matters tomorrow. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:45, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

• Thanks so much @Michael Aurel:, for the detailed feedback. I think I've covered all your points. Let me know when we're ready for the next part! Mariamnei (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

  Wonderful. I've performed the spot checks; there are two minor comments you may address if you please, but as far as I'm concerned this is already GA status. I think this is the briefest GA nomination I've been a part of, which is a testament to your lovely work here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:18, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Michael Aurel, thank you so much for your kind words! I really appreciate that!

  Regarding your notes below, I've changed the location section to move it further away from 2b and 3a. When you have a moment, could you let me know if that resolves the concern? And just to make sure I'm not missing anything: does everything else look good to you now? You mention two minor comments, but I see all the other spot checks were fine. Mariamnei (talk) 10:35, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Mariamnei: Excellent, that reworking looks good. The only other comment was that Ganor et al. 2012 doesn't (unless I'm missing it?) mention the theory about Augustus's adopted son. This is truly a non-issue for GA status, though, so I'll promote this now! – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:30, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Marching onwards, here are the spot checks:

• Refs 2b & 3a: All good. The article's wording is perhaps a little close to Dayan, but I realise there are only so many ways to phrase a sentence like this, and two of them are taken up by the cited sources.
• Refs 7b, 3d, 4b: Not sure I see this in Ganor et al. 2012, but the other two citations cover this perfectly fine, so there's no genuine issue here.
• Ref 9: All good.
• Ref 1g: All good.
• Ref 19d: Seems basically fine.
• Ref 30: All good: covered by p. 90.

The sources are clearly all reliable, and are there are no issues with the images or captions. I'll look over your responses to the above prose points, and then I think we can pretty much wrap things up here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 06:56, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.