Heritage Developing City: The Archaeological Community Project in Ancient Lod

Published: May 2026

Background

In late 2005, I approached the mayor of Lod, Mr. Benny Regev, and proposed launching a community-archaeological project in the city. The goal was to rehabilitate the Old City of Lod, develop it as a key site on Israel’s tourism map, and carry out this mission in accordance with the principles of community archaeology.

At our meeting in the mayor’s office, we introduced the concept of community archaeology, which was scarcely known in Israel at the time. We emphasized that, based on our experience, community engagement would offer unique added value to the development of the Old City of Lod—particularly given that most residents living nearby suffer from poverty and feel disconnected from institutional structures. Without involving them in the process, we feared that any investment made could be wasted. We also highlighted our belief that developing the Old City into a major tourist destination could be a transformative force, helping lift the city of Lod and its residents out of deep-seated stigma and sparking economic, employment, and infrastructure renewal.

The mayor listened attentively to my words and to those of my colleagues from the Israeli Institute of Archaeology who had joined me. He concluded the meeting by saying, “I’m very impressed with the idea—let me think about it, and I’ll get back to you.”

With extensive experience in these types of encounters, I left the mayor’s office with the distinct sense that we should forget about the project—after all, this is how mayors often politely brush off persistent visionaries with unconventional ideas.

To my surprise, however, the same day, the mayor personally called to inform me that he was indeed interested in advancing the project. Moreover, he appointed Attorney Yair Revivo—then deputy CEO of the municipal economic development company and director of the city’s community center network—as the city’s representative and coordinator for the project. Over the years, we’ve experienced highs and lows: periods of governmental support alongside periods of bureaucratic indifference. Yet throughout, we did not give in to the challenges or the lack of resources, and we never lost sight of our goal—to develop the Old City of Lod as a cornerstone for reshaping the city’s future.

The Tourism Potential of Lod

In its current state, the city of Lod is not considered worthy of inclusion among Israel’s tourist destinations. However, leading tourism experts who have thoroughly examined the city’s potential have concluded that, with significant investment in infrastructure, including the city’s tourist sites, residential neighborhoods near those sites, and access routes to the Old City, Lod could become a major tourism hub in Israel.

Below are several key tourism anchors in the city of Lod:

St. George’s Church – A Greek Orthodox church restored in the late 19th century atop the remains of a large and splendid Crusader-era cathedral. According to the French scholar of the Land of Israel, Charles Clermont-Ganneau, parts of the nearby Al-Omari Mosque structure are in fact remnants preserved from the Byzantine church dedicated to Saint George.

St. George was born in Lod in the 3rd century CE. He later served as an officer in the imperial guard under Emperor Diocletian. However, due to his decision to spread Christianity in defiance of Roman law, he was executed and became one of the most venerated saints in the Christian world. St. George is the patron saint of England—with English kings named after him—as well as of Georgia, which bears his name, and of cities such as Moscow, Turin, and numerous other Christian communities worldwide. His tomb is traditionally located in the subterranean crypt of the church in Lod.

Al-Omari Mosque – A Mamluk-era mosque, whose entrance inscription dates its construction to shortly after the Mamluk conquest of the Holy Land in the 13th century. The mosque contains ancient architectural elements, including walls and a semicircular apse. It also features Corinthian capitals and marble and granite columns, which may be remnants of the former Byzantine church on the site.

The Lod Mosaic – Near Lod’s eastern exit, along Halutz Street, a magnificent 3rd-century CE mosaic was uncovered in 1996 (Avissar 1998; Gorzalczany 2016). Many consider it the finest mosaic discovered in Israel and among the most impressive of its kind worldwide. In recent years, the mosaic has been exhibited in major museums around the globe, drawing countless visitors. Thanks to a generous donation from Shelby White, a museum was built at the mosaic site, and the mosaic floor was returned to its original location. Numerous other high-quality mosaics have been uncovered in the surrounding area, making it, in our humble opinion, a prime candidate for development as the National Mosaic Museum.

Khan al-Hilu – A stone building from the Ottoman period that served as a municipal market and was a central hub of economic activity both for city residents and villagers from nearby areas (Shavit 2018, 2020a). Following preservation and restoration work, the khan could be repurposed as a restaurant, cultural center, tourist shops, and artisan workshops. Management could be entrusted to private entrepreneurs under contractual restrictions that would ensure the preservation of the structure and the appropriateness of its future uses.

The Hasuna Olive Factory – A historic structure built by the Hasuna family as a one-of-a-kind traditional factory in Israel (details about the press and its equipment appear in an interview with Abu Rajab Hasuna; Shavit and Rozanes 2015). Most of the original equipment, used for producing olive oil, sesame paste products, and soap, remains in place (Ayalon 1990, 2020; Shavit 2020b; Shehadeh 2020). The Israeli Institute of Archaeology plans to restore the building and its production tools, allowing visitors to experience the traditional manufacturing processes as they were approximately a century ago.

Alongside the restoration of the structure and its machinery, the heritage of the Hasuna family—one of Lod’s oldest families—will be showcased. Among its members were a former mayor and other city dignitaries. In the British Mandate period the Hasuna family maintained strong ties of friendship with Jewish neighbors from nearby towns such as Ben Shemen and Rishon LeZion. They successfully developed their businesses and agricultural holdings thanks to the fruitful dialogue they fostered with their Jewish counterparts (Gissin 2010: 40–42).

The Arches Building – a traditional olive factory with a vaulted ceiling supported by broad piers and cross-vaults. The structure still contains pressing equipment for crushing olives, including a bed-stone and two runner stones. Once restored, the building could also support culture- and tourism-focused initiatives under franchise agreements that guarantee the preservation of the building, public access, and proper use of the space.

Masbanat al-Far (Soap Factory) – a stone building located south of Lod’s municipal market, formerly owned by the al-Far family. The northwestern wing of the building housed an olive press, while the southwestern wing contained a tabun oven, used by many residents beyond the household itself. The eastern wing served as a soap factory producing olive oil-based soap. A second-floor residential section was added later on. After restoration and conservation, the production facilities will be exhibited, while other areas will be leased to private entrepreneurs under contractual agreements to ensure the preservation of the building and appropriate uses of its spaces. A café and shops could be operated on-site to serve both site visitors and market-goers.

The Market – Lod’s market has long been a magnet for thousands of visitors. According to the conceptual development plan for Ancient Lod prepared by the Israeli Institute of Archaeology, the market will be housed in a roofed building with a striking architectural appearance in the form of a Roman forum—hinting at Lod’s glorious Roman past. The building’s central courtyard would serve the market as needed and could also host public events on other days or during evening hours.

Herzog Street – built during the British Mandate period, once served as a central thoroughfare in the city. Today, it is home to two popular restaurants as well as bakeries and various shops. The street will be restored in as authentic a style as possible and transformed into a hub for locals, visitors from across the country, and tourists.

The Synagogues – two synagogues, Sha’arei Shamayim and Yeshu’at Yisrael, stand near St. George’s Church and the Al-Omari Mosque. These synagogues will be restored and integrated into the park area alongside the mosque and church, symbolizing the multicultural and cooperative spirit of the city of Lod.

Open-Air Theater – As part of our conceptual plan, we propose developing an open-air theater that would attract large audiences, primarily local residents but also visitors from elsewhere.

Chicago Community Center – A neighborhood center established in Lod in the late 1980s. According to our plan, the building should be restored and architecturally integrated into the fabric of the Old City. In addition to its ongoing community functions, we recommend establishing a visitor center featuring a museum exhibition on the history of Lod, including local archaeological finds. The auditorium will be renovated and used for multimedia presentations about Lod’s past and present. Most areas of the center will continue to serve the local community.

Open Space – In the surrounding open space, we recommend initiating active archaeological excavations to be conducted for many months each year. These excavations should be carried out by students from Lod’s local school system and nearby communities. Impressive monuments uncovered during these digs will be incorporated into the park. Other areas, once fully excavated, will be covered, and new excavation sites will be opened elsewhere. Unfortunately, the Lod municipality did not accept our program and instead adopted a plan for residential construction over the Old City, a decision that may physically damage the antiquities and prevent the general public from encountering the wonders of the city of Lod for many generations to come.

It is important to emphasize that Lod’s tourism potential extends beyond the visible monuments scattered throughout the city. A review of the city’s rich and illustrious history reveals that, at certain periods, it reached remarkable heights of development. In the Mishnaic period, it was home to numerous study halls, synagogues, bathhouses, and large homes (Rosenfeld 1997, 2024; Schwartz 1989; Schwartz 2015). At that time, it also evolved into a major and important Roman polis. Historical sources suggest that its beauty was on a par with other prominent cities, such as Beit She’an. During this era, Lod was known as Diospolis—the City of God—which is also the name of this journal. The city was a central junction in the imperial Roman road system in the Land of Israel, and its strategic location contributed to its great wealth (Fischer et al., 1996). This is evident in the magnificent Lod Mosaic and the abundance of mosaic floors discovered nearby (Avissar 1998).

During the Byzantine period, Lod experienced renewed prosperity and growth, and residents renamed the city Georgiopolis—City of St. George. On the 6th-century Madaba Map, Lod is depicted as a well-planned city with public buildings and churches.

In the 7th century, following the Muslim conquest of the region, Lod was chosen as the civil capital of Jund Filastin (the administrative district of Palestine). Only three generations later, in 716 CE, neighboring Ramla was founded, intended to serve as a replacement capital, because Lod was perceived as overly Western in character. Researchers of Lod agree that much of the city’s historical wealth remains hidden underground. Once large-scale archaeological excavations are conducted, it is likely that many remains—some monumental in nature—will be uncovered and can be incorporated into the planned tourism park.

Advantages vs. Limitations

Given the city’s overall condition—and particularly that of the Old City—the tourism initiative to develop Ancient Lod faces numerous challenges from the outset. The main limitations are as follows:

• The city suffers from prolonged neglect and a lack of national investment. Infrastructure in the Old City is in poor condition and requires thorough rehabilitation. Considerable change has occurred in recent years, but the condition of the Old City is still far from satisfactory.
• Around 100 residential buildings surround the Old City; most are aging apartment blocks that have been neglected over time. In many of these apartments, low-income residents lack the resources to invest in the appearance of their homes or surroundings.
• The city’s image is poor among both its residents and the general Israeli public. Lod suffers from crime, including serious incidents that frequently make the news, are widely publicized, and damage the city’s image.
• Acts of vandalism are evident in parts of the city. Under current conditions, it is extremely difficult for entrepreneurs and business owners to thrive. The Old City and its vicinity lack the basic conditions for private enterprise.
• Many residents feel alienated from national and municipal authorities.
• The physical, ancient, authentic fabric of the Old City has mostly been destroyed (especially in comparison to nearby Ramla).

Despite these constraints, there are also significant advantages that point to the strong potential for tourism development in the Old City:

• Tourism could serve as a key engine for the image, social, and economic transformation the city desperately needs.
• Lod contains many historical remains, both visible and hidden.
• The city is centrally located near the Tel Aviv metropolitan area, with excellent access and transport options.
• Its proximity to Ben-Gurion International Airport offers strong potential as a first or last stop for visitors. Creative strategic planning could position Lod and its Old City as a supportive hinterland to the airport and a desirable tourism destination on the national map.
• Lod has a large historic area that is mostly vacant and holds strong development potential.
• Several vacant buildings with architectural and historical value exist in the city; many are state-owned and could be transferred to a municipal management company specializing in the development of the Old City.
• Lod lies on the national pilgrimage route. St. George’s Church serves as a major attraction and draw for visitors. Even in its current state, the city receives many Christian pilgrims daily.
• The city hosts a weekly market that draws thousands of shoppers and visitors.
• City leadership has expressed a strong desire to develop tourism in Lod.

Key Elements of the Conceptual Program for Developing the Old City of Lod

The conceptual program for the development of Ancient Lod was prepared in 2008 by a team led by the Israeli Institute of Archaeology, commissioned by the Ministry of Tourism, the Government Tourism Company, and the Municipality of Lod. The team included the late architects Saadia Mandel and Yariv Mandel, tourism consultant Emmanuel Alon, economists Shlomo Bluzer and Tal Tzemach, architect Giora Solar, and archaeologists Dr. Tawfiq Da’adleh and Dr. Yuval Gadot, all under the direction of the author of this paper. During the planning process, the team presented its core ideas to the municipal team, then headed by Ilan Harari, chair of the Appointed Municipal Committee. A wealth of ideas and insights was also contributed by municipal employees.

In addition, the process included an extensive public engagement phase, supported by the Lod Foundation and its founding director, attorney Aviv Wasserman. In a series of meetings with dozens of city representatives—including members of various religious and ethnic communities and neighborhood delegates—the key elements of the plan were presented, and public feedback was gathered.

Below is an outline of the main elements of the program:

The plan is structured around a three-tiered zoning system, moving from the center outward:

• The Archaeological Park – This will be the core of the site, housing most of the monuments and major attractions.
• The Tourist Complex – This area will include the Archaeological Park as well as the middle ring, featuring the Mosaic Museum site, Herzl Street, and other attractions integrated into the urban fabric of the tourist site.
• The Urban Fabric of Old Lod – This broader zone will act as a buffer and access corridor into the main tourist area. While much of the ancient urban texture has been destroyed, some segments are still visible—such as around the Police Square, along Tzahal Street, and in other scattered spots.

The zoning principles were based on identifying public and open spaces available for development, allowing relatively flexible planning, in contrast to privately owned or densely built areas where development would be more challenging.

The definition of the Archaeological Park relied on the density of monumental structures in the area and the possibilities of movement between tourist nodes. The spatial distribution of archaeological remains was also a key consideration. Planning principles addressed issues of both vehicular and pedestrian access. Urban planners noted that the development of Route 40 as a bypass road for Lod inadvertently contributed to the city’s economic decline. The planning team expressed concern that focusing solely on the Mosaic Museum—located at the city entrance near Route 40—might result in tourists visiting only the museum and then continuing on their way without entering the city itself.

For this reason, it was recommended to limit parking near the museum and instead provide parking within the center of the Old City. Enhancing access routes and developing additional points of interest within the city are expected to encourage tourists to explore the entire Old City in addition to visiting the museum.

Another key principle was integrating the tourist site with the broader urban area. The plan recommends rehabilitating the residential neighborhoods surrounding the Old City while attempting to preserve the local social fabric. It is widely understood that tourism development often leads to gentrification, displacing long-time residents and replacing them with more affluent newcomers. Such processes have occurred recently in Jaffa. However, implementing the plan with awareness of the value of preserving the existing community can help enable at least some residents to remain and thrive.

Additionally, it was decided that the tourist site would not be closed off, but would instead serve, first and foremost, as a space for local residents to enjoy recreation, leisure, and cultural activities.

Vision of the Program

• Transforming Lod into a national tourism hub
• Using tourism to elevate the city’s status:
  • As a destination with internationally significant attractions
  • As a city rich in archaeological treasures
  • As a city of the three monotheistic religions
• Emphasizing community involvement in the process and fostering local pride

Key Principles for Implementation

• Involving the local community at all stages, from planning through execution to ongoing management
• Promoting social preservation alongside physical conservation
• Establishing a dedicated company for the development and ongoing management of Old Lod, which will be entrusted with assets for enhancement and revenue generation to fund its operations
• Leveraging the plan as a catalyst for economic, employment, and social transformation in the city of Lod
• Executing preservation, restoration, and development activities according to international tourism standards
• Integrating the tourism park into the urban fabric so that it first and foremost serves the residents of Lod
• Designing the archaeological park as a dynamic site with ongoing excavations conducted throughout much of the year

As noted above, the program described above was not accepted by the municipality.

Community Archaeology Around the World

Community archaeology first emerged in the late 20th century. Compared to mainstream archaeology, which has been active for about 150 years, this is a young field still in search of its identity. Various scholars have attempted to define community archaeology.

Trigger defined community archaeology as one that “involves communities in the planning and execution of research projects that concern them” (Trigger 2007:260). Marshall described it as: “projects in which the community plays a central role in interpreting the finds” (Marshall 2002:212). According to Pardoe (1992:139), the foundational principle of community archaeology is the assumption that better research is achieved when interpreting the past is based on multiple, diverse voices, without compromising the scientific principles of archaeology.

Moser et al. (2002:220) define community archaeology as post-colonial, emphasizing the fact that until this approach emerged, nearly all archaeological research into world cultures was conducted by scholars of European descent, many representing colonial powers that had ruled the lands being studied. In other cases, researchers operated in sovereign nations, yet with an unmistakably colonial attitude.

Greer (1995, 1996) asserted that community archaeology should be interactive, not reactive. In the past, academic researchers would set the research agenda, and communities might respond to it. According to Greer, the communities under study should help define that agenda. The goal of community archaeology is to empower communities by contributing to the shaping of their local identity (Greer 1995:231).

Faulkner contrasted traditional archaeology as conservative and elitist, calling community archaeology—based on his experience at the Sedgeford site—”archaeology from below,” driven by representatives of the community (Faulkner 2000:22). His project was based on a system with minimal hierarchy, where volunteers with basic training led field research and artifact processing. Faulkner reviewed 300 rescue excavations conducted in London in the 1970s and 1980s, concluding that institutional mechanisms in England restricted archaeological research to a closed and rigid group of professionals who often blocked non-institutional research initiatives (ibid., pp. 23–24).

In the United States, the roots of community archaeology trace back to pioneering projects. For example, in the early 1970s, a project was conducted in the Zuni village in New Mexico (Anyon and Ferguson 1995). Another pioneering effort was the Ozette archaeological project in Washington State, also in the 1970s. This may have been the first comprehensive example of community archaeology. There, members of the Makah tribe invited archaeologist Daugherty to excavate with them remains of a village buried by mudslides. At the project’s conclusion, a museum was established to showcase the tribe’s heritage as revealed by the research. A traditional home was reconstructed, and numerous exhibits and publications were produced in full cooperation with the tribe (Samuels and Daugherty 1991:1–27).

These projects were treated more as Cultural Resource Management (CRM) efforts than academic scientific endeavors (Marshall 2002:213). Today, community archaeology holds academic standing in many countries. Indiana University in the U.S. offers a PhD program, University College London (UCL) operates the Center for Applied Public Interest Archaeology (CAPI), which offers a Master’s in Community Archaeology. Other institutions around the world offer programs for advanced studies and research in community archaeology, including The Universities of Chester, York, and Leicester in the UK. The Universities of Washington and California, Santa Cruz, in the USA, and Flinders University in Australia.

The first signs of the community-based approach in Australian archaeology appeared in 1975 in the newsletter of the Australian Archaeological Association (Crawford 1975; Golson 1975; Lampert 1975; Moore 1975). In the early years, interaction between researchers and communities in Australia was largely driven by legal requirements to coordinate heritage site research with the relevant local communities. At that stage, most researchers complied with the law but made little effort to truly involve communities in the research.

Later, researchers began to deepen and formalize these relationships, especially in studies focused on Australia’s prehistory and pre-colonial eras (Greer et al. 2002:266).

There are numerous models for managing community archaeology. Some projects are led by academics from developed nations working at developing sites and communities. For example, the Qusier project in Egypt involved an Australian research team managing a community initiative focused on a Roman-period site. In Cambodia, the Banteay Kdei project was led by researchers from Sophia University in Japan. It included educational activities, a community-run antiquities museum, and cultural programming in underprivileged communities. The project’s heritage work helped empower the local population around the World Heritage Site with its ancient temples (Marui 2010).

Some communities participate in projects based on their geographic residence, even if the culture being studied is not part of their own heritage. Conversely, some projects involve communities researching their ancestral heritage, even if they no longer reside near the site.

Various publications on community archaeology projects highlight one of the field’s most significant achievements: facilitating reconciliation, reducing polarization, and mitigating social hostility. Moss and Wasson describe a research project on the destruction of the indigenous village Chet-less-chun-dunn and its inhabitants in 1856 by a unit of 34 white Americans (Moss and Wasson 1998). The research was conducted in full partnership with the tribe’s descendants, who—like many other communities—had previously felt ignored by researchers. What made this project particularly notable was the involvement of descendants of the village’s destroyers, creating a meaningful encounter between both sides of the historical conflict.

Tully (2007) presents community archaeology as diverse and still undefined in terms of methodology. She bases her attempt to establish a coherent framework for the field on the Quseir project in Egypt, located on the Red Sea coast, south of the city of Hurghada. Ancient Quseir served as a port during both the Roman and Mamluk periods. The excavation in Quseir was directed by Peacock, who invited Stephanie Moser and her colleagues to incorporate a community initiative into the excavation project (Moser et al. 2002). The project was inspired by earlier efforts in Australia, and it eventually gained wide exposure and significant support—more than any other project in the field.

In her paper, Tully draws on the extensive publications related to the Quseir project’s methodology and compares it to six other projects. Based on this review, Tully concludes that a broad definition of community archaeology can be formulated, allowing it to be recognized as a scientific discipline. Establishing a defined methodology will help secure the field’s academic legitimacy. From the premise that the community should be involved in the entire process—including the interpretation and presentation of findings—community museology emerged, involving communities in museum planning, design, management, and education.

Tully (2007:162–165) outlines detailed definitions of the working methodology of community archaeology. These are based on the key criteria defined by Moser and her colleagues (Moser et al. 2002:229–242).

Aitken and Simpson (2005) describe a project at Shoreditch Park that illustrates how community archaeology can connect polarized groups within a community through shared exploration of heritage.

Numerous studies conducted around the world point to heritage preservation and the development of heritage sites as a central driver of economic-touristic development. Today, it is widely recognized that community archaeology should not be seen merely as an expression of academic curiosity, but rather as a catalyst for social and economic processes within communities.

Timothy emphasizes that more than 50% of global tourism today is related to cultural heritage activities, including historical sites, museums, and more (Timothy 2014:30). The world of tourism is undergoing significant changes. The modern tourist is more educated and seeks a unique, authentic, and active experience at heritage sites (ibid: 33). Research shows that the heritage tourist tends to be more educated than tourists who visit other types of sites, has a higher income, is generally older, and tends to spend a longer average time at each site (Herbert et al. 1989).

One of the characteristics of heritage tourists is their tendency to revisit such sites and to plan their vacations in a way that includes visits to heritage destinations (Stebbins 1996). In recent years, there has been a growing demand for heritage sites that are not necessarily monumental but that enable direct engagement with the culture of local populations in various domains. For example, there is a growing trend in the cultivation of culinary heritage, which contributes to the economic empowerment of communities, the development of local pride, and the shaping of national or ethnic identity (Holtzman 2006; Timothy and Ron 2013). Gould highlights the fact that heritage preservation and economic planning do not rely on similar modes of thinking, planning, or measurement. He also warns of the ethical challenges involved in seeking economic development through heritage sites. Nevertheless, he states that in 2012, for the first time in history, over one billion tourists traveled internationally (Gould 2014:5). This compels an encounter between the worlds of economy and heritage. In an era where many traditional industries are being outsourced to developing countries with lower labor costs, tourism in general—and especially heritage tourism, which cannot be substituted with a plane ticket—becomes a unique economic anchor, particularly in developed countries.

Community Archaeology in Israel and the “Heritage Developing City” Project in Lod

Archaeology has always held a special status in Israel, particularly among the secular Jewish population—so much so that at certain points it was even referred to as a “national hobby” (Feige 2008). Archaeological activities in the 1950s routinely included the enlistment of hundreds and even thousands of youth to participate in major excavations, such as Yadin’s excavation at Masada. In contrast, among minority populations—such as Haredim (ultra-Orthodox Jews) or Arab citizens of Israel—archaeology was often perceived as an attempt by the majority to impose its own interpretation of the past onto local identities (Feige 2008).

Since the early 2000s, several initiatives have been launched to implement community archaeology projects. Notable among these are the groundbreaking project in Rogem Ganim (Cinamon 2008; Greenberg and Cinamon 2011), the project in Givat Sher, and additional initiatives in communities such as Modi’in (Ilan and Gadot 2010; Paz 2010).

Armed with the insights described above, we began to develop the project in Lod, which today is considered one of the largest community archaeology projects undertaken globally—based on various parameters such as the project’s duration, its visibility within the local community, and the scope of its research (Shavit 2022).

After fifteen years of educational and community engagement work in the city of Lod, we came to the feeling that the “Heritage Developing City” project—with its many partners—has significantly contributed to breaking down barriers and fostering constructive engagement between the city’s diverse communities in general, and between Jewish and Arab residents in particular. Unfortunately, violent clashes that occurred in the city in May 2021 and the events of October 7, 2023, caused significant regression, suspicion, and even hostility between different groups in the city.

Components of the Community-Archaeological Project in Lod

A. Engagement with the Community
From the outset, we have managed the project with the sensitivity required for the city of Lod, a multicultural city whose population includes Jews and Arabs, religious and secular individuals, long-time residents and immigrants from more than seventy different countries. We ensure that our publications and public signage are produced in Hebrew, Arabic, and English.

Special emphasis has been placed on creating a deep and meaningful relationship with many representatives from the Arab community in Lod. Over the years, Arab residents have felt that the municipal leadership and state representatives have not given them due consideration. The need to maintain dialogue with representatives of Arab Lod—like all other communities in the city—stems not only from their role as part of the city’s social fabric, but also from their civil and historical rights. Our approach is that the heritage sites in Lod belong to the community, and the right to be partners in this process cannot be granted or revoked by the project leaders—it simply exists. Moreover, the older Arab population of Lod serves as a disappearing source of testimony regarding the appearance of the city and its important buildings in the first half of the 20th century.

A steering forum, whose members were representatives of Lod’s various neighborhoods and communities, was active in the city for an extended time. Within this forum, the project’s objectives were presented, implementation plans and the overarching vision were discussed, and diverse possibilities for community engagement were explored.

To strengthen ties with the community, we launched a project portal on the Israeli Institute of Archaeology website, which presents most components of the initiative. The portal is currently available in Hebrew, English, and Arabic. The Facebook page of the Israeli Institute of Archaeology frequently reports on developments within the project, and hundreds of Lod residents follow its updates.

As part of our commitment to community connection, we place great emphasis on collaborating with NGOs, organizations, and individuals who share our desire to promote the city of Lod in general, and the Old City in particular. We have been collaborating with the Lod Foundation since its establishment. Staff members of the Israeli Institute of Archaeology regularly present the Old City and our development plans to hundreds of visitors hosted by the Foundation. We also maintain extensive cooperation with the Jindas Association. Together, we submitted a proposal to the European Bank as part of an international competition for urban renewal in Mediterranean countries. The proposal—aimed at restoring the Old City, its surrounding neighborhoods, and an adjacent section of the Ayalon River—won the competition and was approved by representatives of the European Bank. But unfortunately, we were not able to implement the plan for reasons that this is not the platform to detail.

Cooperation with the Community and Educational Initiatives

A collaborative initiative launched with the Naam association is aimed at hosting visitors in the city of Lod and offering them traditional and authentic food prepared by Arab women from the city. The women present embroidered dresses, folk dances, and traditional music. The hosting took place at Khan Hilu, which provided an emotional and unique setting for the event. Additional partnerships have been established with the city’s student union, the Garin Torani (“Torah nucleus”), the pre-military academy, the Chicago Community Center, the Citizens Building Community association, and others.

One of the project’s goals is to hold an annual multidisciplinary conference focusing on archaeology, history, and tourism in the city of Lod. Residents of the city will be the primary invitees to the conference.

B. Education
Since 2007, a year-long educational program developed by the Karev Foundation has been implemented in many elementary schools throughout Lod. Students learn about archaeology, archaeological research methods, the history of Lod, and the connection between material culture, the seasons, and traditional holidays, among other topics. In some of the years, an additional program has been introduced, managed by the New Way organization, which focuses on fostering encounters and breaking down barriers between Jewish and Arab children and youth in the city. This program is based on the thorough preparation of teaching staff and students before their meetings. The encounters involve interpersonal interaction led by theater professionals and deliberately avoid engagement with national narratives or political topics. The culmination of both programs was expressed in a student gathering at community archaeological excavations that we have been conducting for more than ten years at the Khan Hilu area in Lod’s Old City (see below). Over five thousand Lod students have participated in these programs, helping to foster an entire generation that is aware of the city’s rich heritage and identifies with the need to develop the Old City as a source of pride and a lever for the city’s overall growth.

Another program we have been running aims to encourage students’ personal responsibility for the quality of life and environment in their city, particularly in the Old City. As part of the program, various schools adopt a monument within the Old City and its immediate surroundings. Guided by staff from the Israeli Institute of Archaeology, students engage in cleaning efforts, uncovering features that have been buried under debris within ancient structures, basic maintenance work, and supportive actions related to professional conservation activities.

“A Second Look” is a program developed by artist and photographer Tamar Avni. It is conducted with the guidance of both Jewish and Arab professionals. Within this framework, teams of teachers from Jewish and Arab schools engage in dialogue through the camera lens. The teachers learn basic photography principles using non-professional cameras, participate in a guided tour of the Old City, and receive explanations about its history and ancient buildings. They then document the city’s daily life, public spaces, and buildings through photography. The presentation of these photographs during the mixed workshop and the discussions surrounding their subjective interpretation serve as tools to bring Jewish and Arab teachers closer together. During the sessions, teachers receive tools for implementing the program with their students, with minimal professional support.

C. Mosaic Center
The Israeli Institute of Archaeology concluded that the historic buildings across the Old City must be restored and reactivated as soon as possible. These structures stand abandoned and neglected, at risk of collapse. In contrast, the lack of educational and communal activity in the Old City allows criminal elements to take over, jeopardizing the potential for proper tourism development. Therefore, we initiated a plan to establish a Mosaic Center – a center for the multicultural heritage of Old Lod. If the necessary resources are found, we will be able to carry out a basic restoration of Khan al-Hilu and operate it as an educational, cultural, touristic, and visitor center, all with very modest means.

D. Vocational Training
With the support of the Lod Employment Bureau and the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labor, we developed a program to train unemployed residents of the city in conservation professions. The field of conservation offers many advantages compared to other professions typically offered to unemployed individuals without a high school education. First, conservation work provides a sense of pride to those engaged in preserving and developing key monuments in the city that are expected to become attractions for all residents. Second, the field trains participants in a wide range of construction-related skills—an industry in high demand for skilled labor with fair wages.

E. The Archaeological Excavation
Since 2007, in partnership with the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology at the Hebrew Union College in Jerusalem, we have conducted an annual archaeological excavation in the heart of the Old City. The excavation is funded by the Morningstar Foundation and is integrated into the school curriculum, supported by the Karev Foundation. Like all our community-based activities, the excavation is managed by a team of archaeologists fluent in both Hebrew and Arabic. While most of the excavation is carried out by school students, groups and individuals from both within and outside Lod also participate. The excavation adheres to the highest scientific standards while simultaneously serving as a tool for educational and values-based empowerment. Findings from the excavation have helped examine the timeline of Khan al-Hilu’s construction and enabled identification of features from its now-lost western wing. These findings provide insights into the layers of the city’s existence before the khan was built. In an additional area, excavated since 2013, a major street axis from the Ottoman period was uncovered in the Old City, which may also have served as a central thoroughfare in earlier times.

Preservation and Restoration

As part of the project, we are making a major effort to preserve the ancient buildings in Lod. These are stone structures built using traditional methods, including lime-based mortar. Many vaulted roof spaces were filled with earth without any binding materials at all. These buildings have not undergone maintenance for about 70 years, and every winter, rainfall washes through the core of the structures and undermines their stability. Additionally, we are witnessing acts of vandalism by bored youths who may not be aware of the significance of these buildings.
Proper restoration of the ancient structures in the Old City of Lod will require budgets amounting to tens of millions of shekels. Until we succeed in securing the necessary funding, we are making great efforts to carry out stabilizing conservation work on most of the buildings in order to halt their deterioration.

Community Management Principles of the Project

Project Management
The project is managed directly by the team of the Israeli Institute of Archaeology. We aim to base community involvement on the activity of the professional committees described below.

Professional Committees
Each committee will be chaired by a person elected from among its members. A project team member will assist the chair in managing and guiding the committee. It is recommended to appoint as chair someone with a respected reputation in the committee’s area of work.

Committees will meet several times a year, according to the agenda and requests of the members, subject to the chair’s decision. Once a year, about a month before the general assembly, each committee will submit a written annual activity report to project management.

The professional committees will be obligated by the project leadership to promote issues requiring attention. A committee’s budget must be pre-approved by project management; committees will not have the authority to independently commit to financial expenses. Project management will have the authority to dissolve a non-functioning committee after giving prior warning to the committee’s chair.

Scientific Committee

This committee will be managed by a representative of the Israeli Institute of Archaeology. Professionals from relevant fields, along with interested members of the public, will be invited to join.

The committee will gather archaeological data, ancient historical information, and 20th-century history. It will formulate a position regarding optimal research methods suited to the project’s nature. The committee will plan an annual conference addressing broad topics concerning the history and heritage of the city, as well as its tourism development, and will recommend a publication format for the conference proceedings.

The scientific committee will be responsible for establishing ties with academic institutions in Israel and abroad and for involving them in the project. It will aim to incorporate researchers and graduate students from Lod who are working in relevant fields into the community-archaeological project, in order to provide them with a proper research platform and to enrich the project with a broad range of scholarly perspectives.

Community Committee

This committee will be responsible for involving the community and exposing it to the project through a wide range of channels. It will plan at least one annual ceremony or event designed to draw a large audience from the local population to the site. The goal is to establish these events as part of a tradition and the site’s regular rhythm of activity.

The Community Committee will be responsible for maintaining ongoing contact between the project and the residents. It will seek opportunities to integrate community members into the project, such as city residents with relevant knowledge or skills who can contribute, residents employed in organizations or companies that can support the initiative, or government-funded programs that can be implemented within the project’s framework.

Education Committee

This committee will focus on fostering the relationship between the city’s educational systems and the project. It will work to create a master plan for involving education systems—from kindergartens to academic institutions—in the project. The goal is to develop a multi-year activity plan in collaboration with educators in the local institutions and under the auspices of the municipal education department.

The program should be age-appropriate in its topics, physical requirements, duration, and more. Its highlight should be student participation in archaeological excavations on site.

The committee will also explore opportunities to integrate the project into academic research and teaching programs, as well as into social involvement initiatives, both from institutions and student unions.

Resource Development Committee

This committee’s role is to identify funding sources to advance the project. The guiding principle will be the understanding that the Lod municipality may at most contribute modest amounts, mainly in cases where small investments can unlock larger budgets.

Most of the project’s funding must come from government bodies, state institutions, foundations, the private sector, etc. At times, valuable non-monetary resources such as manpower or equipment can be recruited.

It is recommended that the committee include members skilled in writing funding proposals in both Hebrew and English; speakers of additional languages and representatives of the business sector can also be helpful.

Planning Committee

This committee will oversee the development of conceptual and long-term architectural planning. Specific planning tasks will usually be handled by paid professional consultants.

The committee should include members with experience in architecture, landscape architecture, urban planning, archaeology, conservation, history, tourism, and other relevant fields.

Tourism Committee

This committee will focus on shaping the tourist offerings of the Old City. Members will recommend the development of sites of interest—such as areas with archaeological finds, historical buildings, and more.
In addition, the committee will suggest ideas for high-attendance events to be held in the city.
Members will support the Planning Committee in defining the tourist route, designing different complexes, exhibition spaces, and additional planning elements related to the visitor experience.

Branding, Marketing, and Public Relations Committee

This committee will support the project’s website in showcasing the project’s various activities: planning, education, culture, events, scientific research, tourism, and more.

The committee will advise on branding the project and its key points of interest, and will help distribute information about the project through national and local media, with the support of the municipal spokesperson and the Israeli Institute of Archaeology team.

The committee will aim to recruit media professionals, internet experts, video and still photographers, video editors, and skilled writers to assist in its ongoing work.

Despite announcing our intention to establish the aforementioned steering committees, unfortunately, only a few individuals volunteered to participate, including some from outside the city of Lod. While we believe that community projects should be managed according to this approach, we have regretfully been unable to mobilize local residents toward sustained involvement and commitment.

Bibliography