Talk:Upper Zohar

Site name
I cannot find a single mention online of this site as "זהר עילי" (Zohar Ili - Upper Zoher): all sources refer to the site as "רוגם זוהר" (Rogem Zohar). Do the printed publications cited in the ""References" section support this? If yes, it should be explicitly cited.

הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 00:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've now found that a valid alternate name of Rogem Zohar is Metzad Zohar Ilit "the Upper Zohar Fortress (מצד זוהר עילית&lrm;) apparently to distinguish it from the other Zohar Fortress; see the Hebrew Wikipedia article מצד זוהר, which is about both Zohar Fortresses.
 * הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 01:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * In short, it seems that the English name may be valid, but the Hebrew name is not. It seems that Rogem Zohar is the usual name in Hebrew, though. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) 01:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm changing 'עילי' to 'עילית', that actually corresponds to the one Hebrew reference I used; I should have noticed. 'מצד' I'm leaving out though, the source doesn't use it. Neither two forts mentioned in the Hebrew article, btw, are the fort discussed in this article. Both are nicknamed Mezad Zohar and are down by the Dead Sea. Poliocretes (talk) 06:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

"Economic rather than military reasons"?!
"Economic reasons" suggests either an industry, or trade.

"Military reasons" suggests border protection (defensive), an offensive base, or smth along those lines.

This fortlet (castellum) was, as it seems, either a police fort, or - not addressed explicitly - a caravanserai. If a military detachment fulfilling policing duties was more or less garrisoned there, it should still contain typical military findings. If they accompanied caravans and used it sporadically, less so, but still. If it was a caravanserai (khan), who defended it while caravans stopped there? Their own guards? The findings then would be quite heterogenous.

Whoever read the sources should offer a clearer picture, Magness at least is usually quite clear and articulate in her opinions. Now it's all very nebulous, more questions than answers. An "economic structure/installation" it was clearly not, that's for sure. Maybe a trade protection post garrisoned by a local outfit, or by a detachment under the orders of a local administrator, either permanently stationed there, or only hosed there while accompanying caravans. Arminden (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)