{
    "type": "FeatureCollection",
    "name": "site",
    "crs": {
        "type": "name",
        "properties": {
            "name": "EPSG:4326"
        }
    },
    "features": [
        {
            "type": "Feature",
            "geometry": {
                "type": "Point",
                "coordinates": [
                    30.554104,
                    25.493538
                ]
            },
            "properties": {
                "id": 17,
                "site_uri": "https:\/\/4care-skos.mf.no\/site\/17",
                "modern_name": "Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if",
                "ancient_name": "",
                "typology": "monastic settlement",
                "date_from": -200,
                "date_to": 660,
                "dating_criteria": "14C; ceramic ware found during the 2021 and 2022 excavation seasons; textual material.",
                "place_names": [
                    {
                        "language": "Arabic",
                        "pl_name": "\u0642\u0635\u0631 \u0639\u064a\u0646 \u0645\u0635\u0637\u0641\u0649 \u0643\u0627\u0634\u0641 | \u062f\u064a\u0631 \u0645\u0635\u0637\u0641\u0649 \u0643\u0627\u0634\u0641"
                    },
                    {
                        "language": "French",
                        "pl_name": "Deir Mustafa Kashef | Deir Moustafa Kachef | Deir Mustapha K\u00e2shef | Qasr Ayn Moustafa Kachef | Qasr Moustafa Kachif"
                    },
                    {
                        "language": "English",
                        "pl_name": "Deir Mustafa Kashif | Ain Mustafa Kashif | Qasr Ayn Mustafa Kashif"
                    }
                ],
                "trismegistos_uri": "https:\/\/www.trismegistos.org\/place\/59094",
                "pleiades_uri": "https:\/\/pleiades.stoa.org\/places\/776168",
                "paths_uri": "https:\/\/atlas.paths-erc.eu\/places\/413",
                "description": "Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101šif (also known as Qa\u1e63r \u02bfAyn Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101šif) occupies the south-west cliff of \u01e6abal al-\u1e6cayr, overlooking the Darb al-Arba\u02bf\u012bn and the valley floor to the west. The complex lies immediately north of the al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t necropolis and in visual and functional proximity to the monastic settlement of Dayr al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t (Ghica 2012: 199). In topographic terms, it is situated ca. 620 m north of the northernmost chapel at al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t, and only a short distance east of Dayr al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t itself. \r\nThe monument is a multi-storey mudbrick structure measuring roughly 27.5 × 23.5 m, with enclosing walls reaching c. 9.8 m in preserved height; several annexed spaces extend to the north and west. From the exterior, the high perimeter walls can appear “fortified”—an impression already noted in early accounts (Lythgoe 1908: 86)—but the internal organisation is characteristic of a large, compartmentalised communal complex, including stacked residential units and circulation corridors. One of its most distinctive features is the second-storey church in the south-east corner, a rare (and presently unique) case in Egypt of a late antique church preserved on an upper level.\r\n \r\nArchitectural articulation and longer-term development\r\nEarlier interpretations proposed that the standing complex developed around an initial, relatively small structure thought to be a Ptolemaic temple (Ghica 2016: 202), followed by a substantially larger addition under the Principate—often described as having an administrative or military function—immediately to the east, possibly sharing a wall with the earlier building (Ghica 2012: 202; 2019: 132 & fig. 9). These hypotheses remain important for understanding the architectural palimpsest, especially because the “nucleus” identified by Müller-Wiener—an east-west succession of vaulted spaces including a room partly cut into the substratum—still appears to preserve an earlier core around which later construction accreted (Müller-Wiener 1963). Recent fieldwork continues to recognise this western vaulted unit as structurally central to the monument’s growth. \r\nAt the same time, the most recent excavation evidence substantially refines the site’s functional and chronological reading. Rather than a late conversion of an earlier secular building into a monastic space, the main building’s principal occupation is now securely monastic already in the fourth century, and the core architectural programme—including liturgical space—belongs to an early stage in the life of the complex.\r\n \r\nMonastic function and fourth-century phasing (new excavation evidence)\r\nExcavations in and beneath the church sector demonstrate that the church and its immediate substructures were integral to early use of the complex. The 2022 season, focused on the second-storey church and the corridor bordering it to the west, revealed a stratigraphy affected by collapse and substantial reworking, yet still sufficiently coherent to isolate early occupational horizons and reconstruct major events. The first attested occupation of the church (“church phase 1”) is associated with contexts and finds that include documentary material (ostraca and wooden tablets; Ghica et al. 2025), and it ended with a fire that caused the collapse of the church’s initial wooden floor. \r\nOn the basis of the excavation sequence and associated chronological modelling, recent work places the construction of the main building (as presently understood in the excavated sector) in the range 360–373 CE and dates the fire\/collapse event to 360–382 CE.  This fire is not merely inferred from deposits: it is also consistent with visible burning traces on walls and with partially burnt archaeological material.\r\nImportantly, the post-fire history of the complex is now more nuanced than earlier summaries allowed. New excavations indicate an interval of pastoral reuse after the fire, implying at least a temporary interruption (or transformation) of monastic life. In room R21—interpreted in its primary phase as an oratory beneath the church—two later-built trough installations, raised thresholds, and a dung layer across the floor point to conversion into a stable.  A comparable horizon appears in the large hall R25, where deposits of dung\/straw and small fire\/charcoal concentrations indicate animal husbandry in a later, temporary occupation following collapse but prior to further major structural failures.\r\nSubsequently, the church underwent a restoration episode (“church phase 2”), including a new floor and wall painting, dated (on present evidence) to 420–533 CE (2σ), indicating a return of the building to a clearly religious\/monastic function after the post-fire pastoral episode. \r\n \r\nCommunal spaces and internal organisation (new evidence)\r\nRecent work also clarifies the internal zoning of the monastery. The large room R25—second in scale only to the church—was initially targeted as a possible refectory, but excavation and architectural reading now favour its identification as an assembly (synaxis) hall, chiefly on account of benches running along the north, south, and west walls.  The same space exhibits pronounced rubefaction on the inner faces of standing walls, plausibly connected to the same fire event that affected the church sector and other parts of the building; the fire horizon is associated with the 360–382 window established for that destructive episode.\r\nMaterial recovered from collapse layers related to the upper storeys above R25 further implies that at least one higher level contained kitchen and\/or dining activity and possibly storage, given the concentration of cooking vessels, containers, wine amphorae, and associated assemblages.\r\n \r\nTexts, community, and regional integration\r\nThe documentary finds from the church sector (ostraca and wooden tablets; Ghica et al. 2025) represent the first published elements of what is interpreted as a developing monastic archive. The texts include evidence for internal hierarchy (e.g., figures presented as leaders\/superiors) and administrative concerns such as taxation, strengthening the interpretation of Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101šif as an organised fourth-century monastic community rather than a loosely religious reuse of older buildings. They also display a prosopographic and administrative links with the documentary landscape of nearby D\u016bš, reinforcing the idea that the monastery participated in broader oasis networks.\r\n \r\nLater development, pilgrimage hypothesis, and “fortification” debate (retained with updated context)\r\nBeyond the securely documented fourth-century monastic horizon, the site’s longer development still requires refinement. The earlier hypothesis that modifications to the older core (the putative Ptolemaic structure) in the third–fourth centuries reflect hermitic occupation—argued especially from crosses and from the seemingly self-contained functioning of the nucleus—remains relevant as one possible strand within a more complex sequence (Ghica 2016: 202; 2019: 132). The idea that the monastery later transformed into a pilgrimage locus focused on a founding hermit, inferred partly from annexation patterns near the western entrance and from seventh-century radiocarbon ages obtained in earlier study, remains tentative and still calls for targeted archaeological corroboration (Ghica 2012: 200, 202; 2019 fig. 9). What is no longer in doubt, however, is that the main building was already functioning as a monastery by the fourth century, with one of the earliest archaeologically attested churches in Egypt.\r\nFinally, the impression of fortification—created by the monument’s unusually high external walls—continues to shape debate. Wagner’s proposal that the complex should be understood as a Byzantine fortress rather than a monastic site, specifically the kastron of Hibis (κ\u03acστρα \u1f3bβεως of O. Douch 220, 3; Wagner 1987: 171, 362), has been refuted, with the kastron more convincingly associated with Umm al-\u0120an\u0101’im (Ghica 2012: 201). The defensive appearance of the walls may instead be read as part of a broader late antique repertoire of protective or dissuasive architecture in response to insecurity and incursions (Reddé 1999: 379, 383; Grossmann 2002: 352; Ghica 2012: 200), without negating the building’s overwhelmingly religious and monastic character.",
                "archaeological_research": "The earliest archaeological intervention at Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if is attributable to the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA) expedition in Kharga, but recent archival work has substantially clarified what can and cannot be claimed about this activity. In February 2024, the Kharga archives of the MMA were examined specifically to resolve earlier ambiguities. The archives contain no trace of excavation activity at the site in 1907\u20131908; the photographs from that period appear to be views of the monument rather than documentation of excavations. By contrast, the archival guide includes references indicating that excavation took place in 1931, notably including a group described as \u201cfive inscribed potsherds\u201d (in fact: three Coptic ostraca, one Greek ostracon, and one painted fragment with a bird). These records also help explain the probable findspot of four fragmentary Coptic biblical parchment leaves held by the MMA, whose physical condition (heat-shrink deformation) is consistent with the fire event attested archaeologically at the site, making it likely they were recovered by the MMA team from Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if rather than generically from \u201cKharga\/Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t\u201d (Ghica et al. 2024b, 155\u2013160).\r\nIn 1963, W. M\u00fcller-Wiener published the first detailed architectural study of the complex, proposing that the monument developed out of a rock-cut structure; this remains a foundational contribution for the architectural interpretation of the site.\r\nLater activity by the local inspectorate is reported but partly contradictory. According to Man\u1e63\u016br \u02bfU\u1e6fm\u0101n (former director of the Copto-Islamic Inspectorate in Kharga), local inspectors cleared\/excavated parts of the complex in the late 1980s\/early 1990s (with inconsistencies in the reported dates), focusing especially on the south-west cells (ground and upper level), the Ptolemaic temple\/tomb structure, the tower\/northern sector, the westernmost N\u2013S corridor, and the so-called \u201cOttoman kitchen\u201d to the north; the inspectorate also created the access \u201croad\u201d up the slope. \u02bfU\u1e6fm\u0101n suggested that \u201cmaybe some ostraca and pottery\u201d were found and stored in the inspectorate facility at the Kharga Museum. However, \u02bfA.\u02bfA.\u1e2a. \u02bfAbd al-\u02bfAz\u012bz (a local inspector involved in the road work) denied that excavations took place, so the scale and exact nature of this intervention remain uncertain (Ghica et al. 2024b, 149\u2013154).\r\nIn the 2000s, the site was revisited by the Institut fran\u00e7ais d\u2019arch\u00e9ologie orientale (IFAO) under V. Ghica for architectural and epigraphic documentation, with field seasons in February, March, and September 2007. The site was then integrated into the South Kharga Oasis Survey (SKOS) framework in December 2008, when brick-straw was sampled from multiple standing walls for radiocarbon dating and surface ceramics were screened; an additional targeted ceramic check was conducted in January 2012.\r\nRenewed systematic work began with the Norwegian-Egyptian mission \/ DEChriM in October\u2013November 2021, combining cleaning and targeted excavation with full-site documentation (photography for a photogrammetric model, AutoCAD mapping, and material study). Work concentrated in the south-west ground-floor zone (including the \u2018temple\u2019\/Ptolemaic structure and adjacent spaces, the lower cells, and connecting corridors). It became clear that several of these areas had already been disturbed by earlier interventions (notably the MMA 1931 work and likely the inspectorate\u2019s clearing), yet significant archaeological material remained in situ (Ghica et al. 2024b).\r\nA major stratigraphic excavation season followed in December 2022 (with continued field operations in 2023), focused on the second-storey church in the south-east corner and the underlying rooms and collapses. The work documented complex construction and destruction sequences, including evidence for a major fire event and subsequent rebuilding phases, supported by stratigraphy and radiocarbon modelling. The 2022 season produced a large body of material, especially written evidence: ceramic ostraca, wooden tablets, numerous papyrus fragments, and parchment (including Lycopolitan Coptic with Galatians 1:8\u20132:2), as well as codicological material such as a papyrus fragment from codex cartonnage (Acts 3:1\u20132) and other remarkable objects (e.g., seal impressions, codex-cover leather) (Ghica et al. 2024a). These discoveries substantially strengthen the case for a 4th-century monastic occupation, continuing into later periods.\r\nIn November 2023, the mission also undertook restoration\/conservation operations requested by the local inspectorate, overseen by Basem Gehad, including stabilisation and protective measures for vulnerable areas.\r\nThe most recent intervention is the 2025 field season (23\u201327 February 2025), which reopened and deepened work in R21 (previously only partly investigated) and initiated excavation\/cleaning in R25, one of the largest internal halls. Clearing in the R21 sector led to identifying additional adjacent spaces (R26 and R27) beneath the church\u2019s liturgical areas; the lowest stratigraphy suggested a later reuse of an oratory space as a stable. In R25, architectural features (notably benches) suggest an assembly (synaxis) hall rather than a refectory, while the collapse-derived ceramic clusters point to food preparation\/dining and storage activities in upper rooms. The 2025 season also included renewed protective works over key rooms and other site-support conservation tasks.\r\nPublication of the excavation results is ongoing; in particular, the Greek and Coptic ostraca from the 2022 season are being edited and published as among the earliest documentary sources for monasticism from the site.",
                "bibliography": "\u2022 Bagnall, R. S. 2001a. \u201cThe Camp of Hibis.\u201d In Essays and Texts in Honour of J. David Thomas, edited by T. Gagos and R. Bagnall, 3-9. Oakville: American Society of Papyrologists.\u2022 Bagnall R. S. 2001b. \u201cA Coptic Graffito from the Valley Building at Deir Mustafa Kashef.\u201d In Essays and Texts in Honour of J. David Thomas, edited by T. Gagos and R. Bagnall, 263. Oakville: American Society of Papyrologists.\u2022 de Bock, W. 1901. Mat\u00e9riaux pour servir \u00e0 l\u02bcarch\u00e9ologie de l\u02bc\u00c9gypte chr\u00e9tienne. 34-37. Saint Petersburg: Eug\u00e9ne Thiele.\u2022 Ghica, V. 2012. \u201cPour une histoire du christianisme dans le d\u00e9sert Occidental d\u2019\u00c9gypte.\u201d Journal des savants 2: 189-280.\u2022 Ghica, V. 2016. \u201cVecteurs de la christianisation de l\u2019\u00c9gypte au IVe si\u00e8cle \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re des sources arch\u00e9ologiques.\u201d In Acta XVI Congressus Internationalis Archaeologiae Christianae, Rome 22-28.9.2013, edited by Olof Brandt and Gabriele Castiglia, 242. Citt\u00e0 del Vaticano: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana.\u2022 Ghica, V. 2019. \u201cL\u2019arch\u00e9ologie du monachisme \u00e9gyptien au IVe si\u00e8cle: \u00c9tat de la question.\u201d In Nag Hammadi \u00e0 70 ans, qu\u2019avons-nous appris? Nag Hammadi at 70: What Have We Learned? Colloque international, Qu\u00e9bec, Universit\u00e9 Laval, 29-31 mai 2015, edited by Eric Cr\u00e9gheur, Louis Painchaud and Tuomas Rasimus, 131-132. Leuven, Paris, Bristol: Peeters.\u2022 Ghica V. 2025. \u201cChristian Archaeology in Kharga Oasis: Recent Fieldwork\u201d, in C.A. Hope, P.L. Polkowski, J.R. Anderson, L. Kilroe (eds), The Oasis Papers 10: The Land Where the Sun Goes Down - the Archaeology of Egypt's Western Desert. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference of the Dakhleh Oasis Project, Dakhleh Oasis Project Monograph 26, Bicester: Archaeopress, pp. 65-87.\u2022 Ghica, V., M. Abdelaziz 2026. \u201c3D visualisation of fourth-century Christian monuments and archaeological sites of Egypt,\u201d in S. Mainieri, R. Pirelli (eds.), Ancient Egypt, New Technologies. Proceedings of the International Conference, 2nd edition, 5\u20137 July 2023, University of Naples \u2018L\u2019Orientale\u2019, Serie Egittologica 6, Naples: Unior Press, pp. 89-97.\u2022 Ghica, V., M. Elefante, R. Williams, B. Gehad 2024. \u201cThe 2022 and 2023 Field Seasons at Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if (Kharga Oasis).\u201d Analecta Papyrologica\u00a038\/2, 189-248.\u2022 Ghica V., F. Lemaire, M. M\u00fcller 2025. \u201cSome Pieces of a Fourth-Century Monastic Archive of Coptic and Greek Ostraca and Wooden Tablets from Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if.\u201d Analecta Papyrologica 39\/1 (2025), 91-121.\u2022 Ghica, V., R. Williams, B. Gehad, M. Elefante 2024. \u201cThe 2021 excavation season at Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if (Kharga Oasis).\u201d Analecta Papyrologica 37\/1, 149-182.\u2022 Grossmann, P. 2002. Christliche Architektur in \u00c4gypten. Leiden, Boston, Cologne: Brill.\u2022 Lythgoe, A. M. 1908. \u201cThe Egyptian Expedition.\u201d The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, vol. 3, 5 (May): 83-86.\u2022 M\u00fcller-Wiener, W. 1963. \u201cChristliche Monumente im Gebiet von Hibis (el-Kharga).\u201d Mitteilungen des Deutschen Arch\u00e4ologischen Instituts Kairo 19: 121-140.\u2022 Redd\u00e9, M. 1991. \u201cl\u2019ouest du Nil: une fronti\u00e8re sans soldats, des soldats sans fronti\u00e8re.\u201d In Roman Frontier Studies 1989. Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, edited by V.A. Maxfield and M.J. Dobson, 485-493. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.\u2022 Redd\u00e9, M. 1999. \u201cSites militaires romains de l\u2019oasis de Kharga.\u201d Bulletin de l\u2019Institut fran\u00e7ais d\u2019arch\u00e9ologie orientale 99: 377-396.\u2022 Wagner, G. 1987. Les Oasis d\u2019\u00c9gypte \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9poque grecque, romaine et byzantine d\u2019apr\u00e8s les documents grecs: Recherches de papyrologie et d\u2019\u00e9pigraphie grecques. Cairo: Institut fran\u00e7ais d\u2019arch\u00e9ologie orientale.",
                "external_links": [
                    {
                        "text": "MET Database",
                        "url": "https:\/\/www.metmuseum.org\/art\/collection\/search?q=kharga"
                    },
                    {
                        "text": "MET Guide to Records",
                        "url": "https:\/\/libmma.contentdm.oclc.org\/digital\/collection\/p16028coll10\/id\/1140"
                    },
                    {
                        "text": "SKOS",
                        "url": "https:\/\/4care-skos.mf.no\/skos\/155\/"
                    }
                ],
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "author": "Victor Ghica",
                        "year": "2026"
                    },
                    {
                        "author": "Rhiannon Williams",
                        "year": "2024"
                    }
                ]
            }
        }
    ]
}