The story of the Maccabees
Alexander the Great conquered Judea from the Persians in 332 BCE but, after his death, the empire fractured, with Judea coming under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, which stretched from modern-day Turkey through the middle east to northwest India. An aggressively Hellenistic dynasty, the Seleucids forced Greek culture on Judea. As told in the first book of Maccabees, around 174 BCE Antiochus IV sought to unify his kingdom through common religion and culture, and he tried to root out the individualism of the Jews by suppressing Jewish law, rites and practices. He installed idol-worshipping High Priests in the Temple who paid him handsome tributes.
Whilst Antiochus was engaged in a successful war against Egypt, a rumour spread in Jerusalem that a serious accident had befallen Antiochus. Thinking that he was dead, the people rebelled against Menelaus, the corrupt High Priest, who fled. However Antiochus had been commanded by Rome to cease his war and, upon his return to Jerusalem, he gave the order to massacre thousands of Jews. He then enacted a series of harsh decrees: Jewish worship was forbidden, the Torah was confiscated and burned, and observance of the Sabbath, circumcision and kashrut were prohibited as capital offenses―though many brave Jews refused, preferring death. Antiochus was officially called Epiphanes, meaning "the gods’ beloved," but the people called him Epimanes ("madman"), due to his cruelty against them.
Punishment of Antiochus, engraving by Gustave Doré, 1866 [Public domain]
One day, Antiochus’ soldiers arrived in Modi’in where Mattityahu, a respected and elderly priest, lived. They built an altar in the village and demanded that Mattityahu offer sacrifices to the Greek gods. Mattityahu refused, whereupon a Hellenized Jew approached the altar to offer a sacrifice. Mattityahu grabbed his sword and killed him, and his sons and friends fell upon the soldiers, killing many of them and chasing the rest away, before destroying the altar. Knowing what would follow, Mattityahu and his sons and friends fled into the hills of Judea.
In those days arose Mattathias the son of John, the son of Simeon, a priest of the sons of Joarib, from Jerusalem, and dwelt in Modin. And he had five sons, Joannan, called Caddis: Simon; called Thassi: Judas, who was called Maccabeus: Eleazar, called Avaran: and Jonathan, whose surname was Apphus. [1 Maccabees 2:1ff]
They were soon joined by loyal and courageous Jews, forming legions which would ambush enemy detachments and overpower outposts―destroying the pagan altars that were built by order of Antiochus―before returning to their hiding places in the hills. Before his death, Mattityahu called his sons together and urged them to continue to fight. He asked them to follow the counsel of their brother, Shimon the Wise, and be led in battle by their brother Judah the Maccabee. Mattityahu died in 166 BCE.
The Maccabees, Wojciech Stattler, 1842 [National Museum, Kraków, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]
The word, Maccabee, has become synonymous with the band of Jewish freedom fighters but was originally applied only to Judah, who is referred to in early writings as “Judah Maccabee” (Judas Maccabeus in Greek). As to the origin and meaning of the word, Maccabee, there are at least seven possible explanations and etymologies, about which you can read here.
The Maccabees won battle after battle, and returned to Jerusalem to liberate it. They entered the Temple―which Antiochus had desecrated―and cleared it of the idols placed there by Antiochus. Judah and his followers built a new altar, which he dedicated on the twenty-fifth of the month of Kislev, in the year 139 BCE (3622).
Since the golden Menorah had been stolen by Antiochus’ men, the Maccabees made a replacement of cheaper metal. According to the Talmud (Tractate Shabbat, 21a) , when they wanted to light it, they found only a small cruse of pure olive oil bearing the seal of the High Priest, Yochanan. It was sufficient to create light for only one day. Yet by a famous miracle, the oil continued to burn for eight days, until new oil could be prepared. It is in memory of this miracle, our sages appointed these eight days as a holiday of annual thanksgiving and lighting candles: Chanukah.
With their great victory, the Maccabees and their descendants took the throne of Judea. But before long the monarchy was overcome with power grabs and intrigue, with king after king trying to imitate the very same Greeks their ancestors had ousted from the land. Perhaps this was because―coming from the priestly line―they had no right to the throne but should have returned to serve in the Temple, handing the throne to the descendants of King David. But despite this, the Maccabees left us with a powerful and relevant message: that Jews should not cower in the face of tyranny.
Location of ancient Modi’in
The Maccabees were buried near to their home town of Modi’im also called Modi’in, in an unusual and magnificent tomb complex described both in the book of Maccabees and in Josephus’ The Antiquities of the Jews.
And when [Tryphon] came near to Bascama he slew Jonathan, who was buried there. 24 Afterward Tryphon returned and went into his own land. 25 Then sent Simon, and took the bones of Jonathan his brother, and buried them in Modin, the city of his fathers. 26 And all Israel made great lamentation for him, and bewailed him many days. 27 Simon also built a monument upon the sepulchre of his father and his brethren, and raised it aloft to the sight, with hewn stone behind and before. 28 Moreover he set up seven pyramids, one against another, for his father, and his mother, and his four brethren. 29 And in these he made cunning devices, about the which he set great pillars, and upon the pillars he made all their armour for a perpetual memory, and by the armour ships carved, that they might be seen of all that sail on the sea. 30 This is the sepulchre which he made at Modin, and it standeth yet unto this day. [1 Maccabees 13:23ff]
Though the original Hebrew text of the book of Maccabees has been lost, its existence is attested by Origen of Alexandria, an early Christian scholar, St Jerome and others.
…Simon sent some to the city Basca to bring away his brother’s bones; and buried them in their own city, Modin. And all the people made great lamentation over him. Simon also erected a very large monument for his father, and his brethren, of white and polished stone; and raised it a great height, and so as to be seen a long way off: and made cloisters about it, and set up pillars, which were of one stone apiece. A work it was wonderful to see. Moreover he built seven pyramids also, for his parents, and his brethren, one for each of them: which were made very surprizing, both for their largeness, and beauty: and which have been preserved to this day. And we know that it was Simon who bestowed so much zeal about the burial of Jonathan, and the building of these monuments for his relations. [The Antiquities of the Jews (XIII:6)]
A fanciful imagining of the Maccabees' tomb: octagonal building, with arched openings, surrounded by six pyramids; vignette for the second part of Finé de Brianville's 'Histoire sacrée en tableaux' (Paris: Charles de Sercy, 1670 or 1671). c.1670/71 Etching, British Museum [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)]
The church fathers Eusebius and Hieronymus also describe Modi‘in and the Maccabean tomb, which also appears on the Madaba Map of the sixth century CE. We know from historical sources that Modi‘in was situated close to Lod (Diospolis), on the main road leading from the Shephelah up to Jerusalem.
An area heavy with rock-cut tombs just north of highway 443, in Ben Shemen forest, near the modern city of Modi’in, has for over a century been considered the graves of the Maccabees, and thus a popular pilgrimage for many at Chanukah especially. The site remains signposted as such from the main road, despite the fact that the twenty stone tombs cut deep into the rock are not―as described in either of the above quotations―monumental, visible from the sea, or in the form of seven pyramids, and was decorated with reliefs showing weapons and ships. All the evidence of recent archaeological work points to the fact that these graves are of Christians and pagans of the Byzantine period―about 500 years later than the days of the Maccabees. The misidentification is mainly because of the Arabic name of the site, Qubur el-Yahud, meaning “tombs of the Jews,” and because the site is just west of the Arab village of al-Midya, which seems to echo the name of the ancient hometown of the Maccabees. Modern al-Midya itself is just north of its ancient site, Ras al-Midya, where pottery from the iron age and later periods has been found. Conder and Kitchener―in their Survey of Western Palestine―considered that al-Midya “would appear to be ancient Modin.” In any case, both ancient Modi’in and the Maccabean tombs were in this area, and the name al-Midya and the epithet Qubur el-Yahud no doubt reflect this inherited knowledge.
Returning to these rock-cut tombs, they are described in detail by Conder and Kitchener:
The tombs are shafts, with loculi below, one each side, and are closed by huge blocks of stone; they are sunk in the face of the rock, and south of them is a scarp parallel to the line in which they lie, 5 feet high, and about 75 feet east and west. At the west end the scarp turns southwards, and here there seems to be a tomb of another description; two doors in the scarp, one leading north, one west, being visible, now blocked up. About 30 paces north of the scarp is a wine-press, and near it three more rock-sunk tombs, making 21 in all; three others exist further east. The winepress consists of a flat area with two troughs, communicating, one 2½ feet square, the second lower one 4½ feet square and 3 feet deep; there are rock-cut steps by this press, which is cut in a prominent piece of rock. […] These sepulchres…are comparatively small, the loculi about 5 feet 6 inches long, the stones above not more than 6 feet 6 inches, and about 2 feet thick. Most of these stones are pushed off. One tomb is larger, and of a different kind; it is situate west of the group of four, and the stone is still in situ. On the east side of the shaft are three steps, on the west a door leading down to a chamber, with five loculi. With regard to these tombs, it must be observed that in all cases where rock-sunk tombs bear any indication of date they are Christian, and apparently not much earlier than the twelfth century.
An open (left) and a still closed (centre) grave. Right: the winepress described by Conder and Kitcheer.
The larger tomb, with three steps (left) and a door leading down to a chamber with five loculi (right), noted by Conder & Kitchener
However none of this broke the established tradition, which was reinforced when, in 1909, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi explored the area and wrote about al-Midya as Modi’in and Qubur el-Yahud as the Maccabean graves, following which teachers and students at the Hebrew Gymnasium began the tradition of pilgrimages to “the tombs of the Maccabees” on Chanukah, the site becoming a national symbol for the Jews. Starting in 1944, members of the Young Maccabees movement led a torch race on Chanukah, which began at the site and was relayed by runners throughout Israel. After the establishment of the State of Israel, the president would light the Chanukah candelabrum in his residence from that torch.
21st Young Maccabees' Torch Relay
Although these rock-cut tombs are clearly not the Maccabean graves, there is some evidence that the actual site may be just to the north at Horvat HaGardi (“ruins of the weaver,” named after Yohanan HaGardi, son of Matityahu), a relatively new name from the 1950s or 60s for the ruins known by the Arabs as Sheikh Gharbâwi Abu Subhha.
Map of the various sites [Israel Antiquities Authority]
The ruin consists of two sites: the tomb of Sheikh Gharbawi and, eighteen metres to its north, the remains of a “magnificent structure,” which the local villagers refer to as al-Qala‘a (the fortress). Lieutenant Claude Reignier Conder gave the following account of the place and its tombs in 1873, in the Survey of Western Palestine’s Quarterly Statement:
[Al-Midya] is a large Arab village, standing on a hill, and defended on the north, south and west by a deep valley. Immediately south of the present town is a round eminence with steep and regularly sloping sides [Ras al-Midya], suggesting immediately an ancient site, but showing nothing in the way of ruins except a few stone heaps amongst the olives which cover its summit. The ground on the west side of the deep Wady, which has the modern name Wady Mulaki, is, however, much higher, and closes in the view of the sea. It is here, about 1 mile west of the village, that the Kabur el Yehud, or "Tombs of the Jews," were found, close to a modern white tomb-house, with a spreading tree beside it, the resting-place of Sheikh Gharbawi Abu Subhha. My survey and plans give the necessary details, and I will only add a few observations to explain them. The sepulchres, which are fast disappearing, seem to have been seven in number, probably all of one size, lying approximately east and west, and enclosed by one wall about 5 feet thick. This is well preserved on the east and west, but has disappeared—or was removed by M. Guerin—on the north and south. Of the walls of partition, however, only one can be well traced, consisting of stones well dressed, laid with continuous horizontal and irregularly broken vertical joints, without any trace of drafting, and varying from 2 feet to 5 feet in length, their other dimensions being about 2 feet.
The most northern is the only one of the chambers which is sufficiently preserved for examination, and differs entirely from any sepulchral or other monument I have as yet seen in the country. It consists of a chamber open on the north, nearly 8 feet high, 6 feet from east to west, and 5 feet from north to south. Its only remarkable feature is a cornice, the profile of which is a quarter circle, which is evidently intended to support a greater overlying weight than that of the flat slabs some 6 feet long which roof the chamber in. The floor was also of flags supported by a narrow ledge on all sides; these having been removed, the tomb itself could be seen below, a square vault of equal size with the chamber, and apparently 3 feet 6 inches deep, though the debris which had filled it on one side may have prevented my sinking down to the floor itself.
The pyramid which once surmounted each of these chambers has entirely disappeared; its only traces were the supporting cornice on the interior, and the sunk centre of the upper side of the roofing slabs, which were raised about 6 inches round their edge for a breadth of 1 foot to 1 foot 6 inches. The base of the pyramid must have been a square of 8 feet or 9 feet wide (it is not possible to determine it exactly), and the height would therefore probably have been 15 feet, or at most 20 feet. Of the mosaic pavement to the tomb, and of the ornaments of its walls, I was not able to find a single trace.
The surrounding cloister has also been destroyed, but on the north and west a few courses of a well-built wall were visible in parts, parallel to the sides of the tomb, about 20 paces from its outer wall. Within this enclosure was a choked-up cistern, and without, farther down the hill, a rough cave 22 paces by 14, used as a cattle stable, and full of soft mud.
Immediately north of the tomb are remains of later buildings of small rough masonry with pointed arches. They are ruined houses, according to the account of natives of the spot.
Top: Tomb of Sheikh Gharbâwi Abu Subhha; bottom: the “magnificent structure,” which the local villagers refer to as al-Qala‘a (the fortress)
But prior to the Survey of Palestine, in 1866, Father Emmanuel Forner, Latin Vicar of Bethlehem had already identified the name and site of al-Midya with Modi’in of the Maccabees. Forner published his idea in the French newspaper Le Monde, based on the phonetic similarity of the names and the proximity of the village to Lod, as other historical sources had suggested. Following this, the French archaeologist, Victor Guérin, visited the village of al-Midya in 1870. After questioning the village elders he concentrated his researches on the ridge opposite the village, at the three sites of Qubur el-Yahud, Khirbat el-Hummam, and Khirbat Sheikh el-Gharbâwi. He excavated the Sheikh Gharbawi site, as Conder mentions above. In his Géographique Historique et Archéologique de la Palestine, volume 2, Samarie, of 1875, he wrote:
The whole plan of the edifice revealed itself to me. It was built east and west, and seven sepulchral chambers built side by side, of cut stones, and each containing a grave cut in the rock, the bottom of which was inlaid with mosaic work, were surmounted by a series of seven pyramids arranged in the same line, and standing each on the roof of its own chamber. The rectangle, 91 feet long and 15 feet 6 inches broad, formed by these pyramids, was itself surrounded by a porch sustained on the monolithic columns decorated in the manner described in the Book of Maccabees. […] Great was my joy when presently, searching about among the ruins of the Mussulman houses near the edifice, I found ten fragments of monolithic columns, all with the same diameter—viz., 1 foot 6 inches. Here were the remains of the colonnade... At sunset I found in another grave cut in the rock a few scattered bones. […] This tomb was 35 feet west of the first. [...] At daybreak I found that I could see very plainly the ships in the port of Jaffa; consequently, one could see from Jaffa the great mausoleum on this hill, with its seven pyramids and its portico.
Guérin was informed by an old inhabitant of al-Midya that all the ruins nearby—Qubur el-Yahud, Khirbat el-Hummam, and Khirbat Sheikh el-Gharbâwi—formed part of one old town called the Khirbat el-Midieh and that, as for the little village called Midieh, the people themselves called it el Minieh.
A heap of stones at Khirbet el-Hummam
Clermont-Ganneau, another French archaeologist, also decided to solve the conundrum of the tomb. In September 1871, he conducted a six-day excavation in the structure; to date, his work is the most comprehensive done at the site and the excavation report is supplemented with informative drawings and plans. Some of which I reproduce here. Clermont-Ganneau revealed an impressive rectangular structure built of fine, precisely-fitting ashlars―aligned east-west―with four built chambers which do not communicate with each other, whose doorways are set in the northern side. The eastern chamber―which Guérin had exposed and believed was topped with a pyramid―was an exceptionally well-constructed square with four corner pillars whose bases were hewn in the bedrock, supporting a roof of very large stone slabs that rested on shaped cornices, and apparently bore the weight of a second story; however Clermont-Ganneau was doubtful if this was a pyramid. He found burial troughs which were either rock-hewn or built along the walls of the chamber, except for the northern side, which had a rectangular opening of fine construction, covered with a semicircular arch. He found sections of mosaic pavement of small tesserae in the floor of the vestibule and burial chamber. The colourful mosaic in the bottom of the eastern burial trough was adorned with a bearing a crux immissa motif that Clermont-Ganneau believed did not predate the fifth century CE.
Clermont-Ganneau―Room 1, view from the corridor toward the burial chamber. Note the cornices and ceiling slabs [Public Domain]
Noting three construction phases, Clermont-Ganneau posited that the first phase was an arcosolium-type burial cave, characteristic of the Byzantine period, hewn in the base of Room 1. Following the removal of the cave’s ceiling, the structure was subsequently enlarged.
Clermont-Ganneau―Plan (top) and elevation (bottom) of the "magnificent structure"
Amit Re'em's reconstruction of the structure exposed by Clermont-Ganneau [Israel Antiquities Authority]
In the wake of his excavations, Clermont-Ganneau resolutely declared that Guérin’s conclusions were rash and that the purpose of the structure was still unknown. It was clear to Clermont-Ganneau that the impressive construction was from the Byzantine period and the nature of the building was Christian. He did not rule out the possibly that unequivocal evidence would be found in time, indicating that the site was the burial place of the Maccabees, and suggested that “this structure was probably built by the Christians to commemorate the burial place of the holy Maccabees.” Indeed he spoke with the inhabitants of al-Midya about the name of their village and the extent to which it covered the surrounding graves and ruins, connecting this with its Talmudic name of Modi’im, as opposed to Modi’in. As he set out in his Archaeological researches in Palestine 1873-1874:
The inhabitants told me that their village was called el Midieh, which they pronounce very nearly Mudieh, and also Munié. The name applies not only to the village properly so called and to the ruin of Khurbet el Midieh, but to the whole group of ruins of el Hammâm and el Lûz. It would then appear from this that the site of the ancient town now represented by el Midieh extended over a vast area of ground comprising three different spots, which formed the more or less contiguous quarters of it. This union of a number of centres of population under a single name would amply account for the Hebrew plural form which appears to lurk beneath the Greek transliterations of the name Modin:—Mωδεειν, Mωδεειμ, Mωδιειν, and which becomes clearly apparent in the Talmudic form מודיעים. This latter is doubtful as regards the ain, but categorical as regards the plural termination îm or în (Aramaic). Modieim, for instance, to take the most likely of these transliterations—that given by Josephus— signifies in reality the Modie's. This, I think, is one more argument to the good in favour of the identity of el Midieh and Modin.
Clermont-Ganneau made a rather grizzly discovery in one of the graves at Qubur el-Yahud:
In another of these tombs I made a small and rather unpleasant find, by no means archaeological in character, to wit, a fresh human corpse. When I say fresh, that is merely my way of putting it. The fellahin told me, without turning a hair, that it was the body of a man who had been assassinated and thrown in there. Let me be thankful for small mercies! The Midieh villagers do not stick at trifles, when once they begin.
Clermont-Ganneau also describes the cultural and other difficulties involved in his work at al-Midya:
On arriving at el Midieh I immediately entered into negotiations with the peasants to begin the excavations. The process was laborious, but at length came to an end, thanks to the intervention of Abu Hanna, who had had dealings with the inhabitants before. We agreed upon the indemnity to be paid to the owners of the ground, and the wages of the workmen. I took on about a score, but had to more than double the number within the next few days in order to satisfy all demands and avoid spiteful opposition. This gang of lazy, clumsy fellows, ill-provided with tools, was extremely difficult to keep going. We had constantly to be at them to get any work out of them. The operations lasted from Saturday the 12th to Friday the 18th of September. I had to be away for two days of this time, being summoned to Jerusalem on important business, and the superintendence of the work devolved entirely upon M. Lecomte, who was admirably seconded by our trusty Abu Hanna. The owner of an old fig-tree that had grown into the interior of the principal chamber remained for some days so deaf to reason, that in order to make him lessen his claims, I diplomatically kept the clearance of that chamber till the last, pretending meanwhile that I had given up the idea. The manoeuvre succeeded, and the fellah, thinking I had made up my mind on the matter, finally consented for a reasonable backsheesh to sacrifice the tree, I fancy there was some superstitious tradition connected with it. In order to get on faster we set light to the tree, and also to the brushwood round it. The flames dislodged an enormous black snake, which had taken up its abode in one of the loculi invaded by the roots of the fig-tree. I had already noticed the presence of this genius loci in the course of the partial excavation that I made in 1871. This time he did not manage to get away, and our men despatched him with their shovels.
Coming back to Conder, after his visit in 1873, with which we started, he returned the next year, accompanied by Charles Tyrwhitt Drake, an English scholar who sketched a reconstruction of the tombs, stated decisively, “In my opinion there is no doubt that these are the tombs of the Maccabees.” At this point, Conder and Guérin quarrelled over the right of claiming who was the first to identify al-Midya with ancient Modi‘in, and who identified the tomb of the Maccabees in the magnificent structure next to the tomb of Sheikh el-Gharbâwi. Conder also advanced serious allegations against Guérin regarding the quality of his excavations.
After this period of nineteenth century interest, the ruins fell into disrepair and were largely forgotten and plundered for building stone by nearby Arab villages. During the War of Independence in 1948, Outpost 219 was established at the site, opposite the Arab Legion, and even today you can see shallow communication trenches west of the sheikh’s tomb, which were dug inside the ruin and brought ancient architectural remains to the surface. Heaps of rubble covered the site, and conifers planted by the Jewish National Fund in the 1950s covered the neglect.
Plaque telling the story of Outpost 219; when I visited it was defaced to be unreadable, whereas this picture shows the plaque only with some grafitti [צילום:ד"ר אבישי טייכר [CC BY 2.5 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons]
Two pioneers in the modern research of the region were the late Y. Pereg and the geographer, Z. Baram. Both loved the area and worked unceasingly to inform the public of how unique and important the place was. Baram, collaborating with the archaeologist Z. Ilan, conducted a small trial excavation to re-locate the structure in 1980, succeeding in partly re-exposing the exterior walls; but after some initial public excitement the site was again forgotten and returned to a state of neglect.
A survey was conducted in 2000, when the ultimately-abandoned route for Highway 45 was planned to cross Horvat Ha-Gardi. This survey documented buildings of dressed stones, architectural elements, including a column fragment, hewn arcosolia tombs and burial caves, some with an entrance shaft and some with a vertical façade, as well as quarries, a square rock-hewn reservoir, circular rock-cut basins and cisterns. Ceramic finds included fragments of pottery vessels from Iron Age II and the Persian, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine and Early Islamic periods.
In 2005, B. Zissu conducted a survey in the three ruins along the ridge, identifying several loculi tombs dating to the end of the Second Temple period and clusters of mostly arcosolia tombs dating to the Byzantine period. At Khirbat Hammam, buildings, architectural elements and potsherds from the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods were documented.
The site was again re-identified, cleaned and re-exposed in 2006, by Amit Re’em of the Israel Antiquities Authority. In the years before this, certain Jewish institutions had placed a gravestone marking the tomb of Mattityahu the Hasmonean inside the sheikh’s tomb. Though much degraded since the time of Guérin and Clermont-Ganneau, with collapsed or now-missing masonry, the structures were found as per their plans and illustrations. Geophysical tests were undertaken within the precincts of the ruin in August 2009, using ground penetrating radar and frequency domain electromagnetism. The test results showed that beneath the tomb of Sheikh Gharbawi there is a large subterranean cavity, whose eastern part is cut by a deep modern trench. The tests in the area between the sheikh’s tomb and the northern embankment also revealed dense architecture and underground cavities that can be divided into three and even four secondary compounds, and it seems that a massive partition wall exists between each of these compounds. Parts of the walls were exposed in tests conducted in 2006. Although the work did not include a proper archaeological excavation, it did show that the dimensions of the structure are much larger―covering an area of 6 dunams―than those revealed by the nineteenth-century scholars. The quality and size of what is clearly a burial construction is uncommon in ancient architecture and unparalleled in the tombs known at Modi‘in and its vicinity, testifying to its importance. Re’em concludes that the structure evidences a tomb of “magnificent splendour, built according to the best Jewish tradition, i.e., a rock-hewn tomb, a patrimony in which changes were made over the course of generations, the Hellenistic tradition, i.e., a built tomb including exedrae and architectural decorations, and the Egyptian tradition, i.e., it was probably covered with a pyramid that marks the ‘nefesh’ or soul.”
The structure has several construction phases, whose dates and nature are still unclear. One of the phases―which includes burial troughs paved with a mosaic adorned with a cross motif, which Clermont-Ganneau originally uncovered―dates to the Byzantine period. Though seemingly precluding that the structure is Maccabean, such a pavement―uncommon in tombs or crypts of this period― indicates that the early Christians sanctified the site. The early Christians and the Crusaders viewed the Maccabees as martyrs and, following the discovery of their tombs, they probably considered the rehabilitation of the tomb as a worthy goal. The construction of the sheikh’s tomb next to the remains of the structure indicates that the Muslims also viewed the site as a holy place.
Re’em points believes that the assertions of Clermont-Ganneau and other scholars deserve to be more thoroughly re-examined. Not only is the size of the site, its plan, location, the nature of its construction and the architectural elements incorporated in it, consistent with the descriptions of the tomb that appear in the Book of Maccabees and in Josephus, but the cluster of names—Khirbat al-Midya, el-Qala‘a, Qubur el-Yahud, Sitt Gharbawi—around the ridge west of Nahal Modi‘in reinforces the theory that this is the region of ancient Modi‘in and the tomb of the Maccabees.
But although modern scholars tend to identify Horvat Ha-Gardi with the Maccabean tombs―or at least with the spot where the grave was marked in the Byzantine period―at this point in time, from a scientific perspective, the identification remains wishful thinking based on circumstantial evidence rather than on clear archaeological findings. So the question remains as to whether this is indeed the site of the Maccabean graves. You can see Re'em speaking on site in the video below.
Modern Modi'in is located near the site of the ancient Modi'in described in the Talmud, though the specific location is uncertain. Though this blog is about the likely grave site of the Maccabees near al-Midya, there are other possible sites. For instance, until the mid-19th century, Christian pilgrims mistakenly identified the Arab village of Suba with the site of Modi'in―Suba is now believed to be the site of ancient Tzova, mentioned in the books of Samuel. In more recent times, during the development of the Buchman neighbourhood on the south-west edge of modern Modi’in, a site including graves, a bathhouse, and a synagogue from the second century BCE was uncovered by archaeologists Alexander Onn and Shlomit Vexler-Bedolah, who believe that this is the site of ancient Modi'in. In their view the Arabic name of the site (Umm el-Umdan, "the mother of pages"), preserved the name of Modi'in, with a slight change.
Another possible site is Khirbat el-Burj or Khirbat Tanturah, an archaeological site on a hill on the eastern edge of modern Modi’in. Located in a dominant position, controlling the main road to Jerusalem via the Beth-Horon ascent, it holds the remains of a Crusader fort on its summit. Its original name, Tantara, was adapted to Tanturah in Arabic and Titura (“brimmed hat”) in Hebrew. Dr Shimon Gibson conducted several excavations at the site during the 1990s, exposing remains from the Israelite period, and many hideouts from the time of the Bar-Kokhba rebellion. He believes that Titura is the location of ancient Modi'in.
Part of a map of the area produced by the Survey of Western Palestine, first published in 1880 by the Committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund, on which is superimposed (in blue) the approximate boundaries of Modi'in in 2006. The green diamonds show three of the theories regarding the location of the ancient city of Modi'in. [Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1609165]
There are a number of monuments near the ruins associated with el-Midya.
The commemmoration site for the fallen in the Modi'in region, both soldiers and civilians, in the War of Independence. The monument, built in 1981 by architect Joseph Asa, echoes the seven pyramids built by Shimon on the tombs of his family
Left: Memorial to Lt Col Ami (Goldy) Gadish Goldstein, IDF pilot, who died 03/10/1973, aged 33. Centre: Memorial to the the Stratocruiser crew who were shot down by a surface-to-air missile by the Egyptians, while on an intelligence mission east of the Suez Canal, 17/09/1971. Right: Memorial to pilot, Lt Col Shmuel Hetz, who fell in the War of Attrition, 18/07/1970, aged 32, west of the Suez Canal, when his plane was hit by an enemy missile