IAA Reports 58/1: Nysa-Scythopolis. The Southern and Severan Theaters. Part 1: The Stratigraphy and Finds 9789654065320, 9789654066198, 9654065320

Citation preview

Architectural elements (photographer, G. Laron).

Architectural elements (photographer, G. Laron).

Architectural elements (photographer, G. Laron).

Architectural elements (photographer, G. Laron).

IAA Reports, No. 58/2 bet she’an archaeological project 1986–2002 Bet SHE’an III, Part 2

nysa-scythopolis: the Southern and severan theaters Part 2: The Architecture gabriel mazor and Walid Atrash

With Contributions by Marc Balouka, Lawrence Belkin, Ariel Berman, Avi Katzin, Tania Meltsen, Débora Sandhaus, Tali Sharvit and Tamar Winter

ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY JERUSALEM 2015

Bet She’an Archaeological Project Publications Israel Antiquities Authority

IAA EXPEDITION DIRECTORS: RACHEL BAR-NATHAN GABRIEL MAZOR

VOL. III: NYSA-SCYTHOPOLIS: THE SOUTHERN AND SEVERAN THEATERS Part 2: The Architecture

IAA Reports Publications of the Israel Antiquities Authority Editor-in-Chief: Judith Ben-Michael Series Editor: Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz Volume Editor: Shelley Sadeh

Front Cover: Aerial view, looking southeast (photographer: G. Laron) Back Cover: Severan Theater scaenae frons (T. Meltsen) Frontispiece: G. Laron, D. Silverman Typesetting, Layout and Cover Design: Ann Buchnick-Abuhav Production: Ann Buchnick-Abuhav Illustrations: Tania Meltsen, Natalia Zak, Irina Berin Printing: Art Plus Ltd., Jerusalem Copyright © 2015, The Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem POB 586, Jerusalem, 91004 ISBN www.antiquities.org.il

In Memoriam

Amir Drori, 1937–2005 Founder and First Director of the Israel Antiquities Authority (1989–2000) Foremost Supporter of the Bet She’an Archaeological Project

Contents

PART 1: THE STRATIGRAPHY AND FINDS (IAA Reports 58/1) ABBREVIATIONS

vi

PREFACE

ix

THE BET SHE’AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROJECT CHRONOLOGICAL CHART

xiii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

1

CHAPTER 2: THE SOUTHERN THEATER

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

9

CHAPTER 3: THE SEVERAN THEATER

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

21

CHAPTER 4: THE POTTERY

Débora Sandhaus and Marc Balouka

189

CHAPTER 5: THE GLASS FINDS

Tamar Winter

207

CHAPTER 6: THE COINS

Ariel Berman

229

CHAPTER 7: ARCHITECTURAL ANALYSIS AND PROPOSED RECONSTRUCTION

Walid Atrash

273

CHAPTER 8: RECONSTRUCTION WORK IN THE SEVERAN THEATER

Lawrence Belkin and Avi Katzin

349

CHAPTER 9: THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS Appendix 9.1: List of the Architectural Elements

Gabriel Mazor

371 583

CHAPTER 10: THREE MARBLE STATUES FROM THE SEVERAN THEATER

Tali Sharvit

613

PART 2: THE ARCHITECTURE (IAA Reports 58/2)

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF LOCI AND BASKETS

625

G. Mazor and W. Atrash, 2015, Bet She’an III/2 (IAA Reports 58/2)

Chapter 7

Architectural Analysis and Proposed R econstruction Walid Atrash

Introduction

History of R esearch

The architectural analysis and proposed reconstruction of the Southern and Severan Theaters in Nysa-Scythopolis presented here is based on the stratigraphic and excavation results and the finds revealed in the excavations of Applebaum in 1960–1962 and the IAA in 1986–2002 (see Chapters 1–6). Prior to the detailed description of the reconstructed theaters, we attempt to present the development of Roman theaters, and their integration into the civic centers of the poleis of the Roman East, as an on-going process of construction and renovation that corresponded with the urban development and prosperity of the cities, from the late first century BCE to the midthird century CE (see Plans 1.1–1.4).

It is generally accepted, as first established by Frézouls half a century ago (Frézouls 1961:65–66) and since then unchallenged, that no Hellenistic polis in Coele Syria possessed a theater prior to the Herodian period. Rather, theaters as aspects of the Greco-Roman cultural and architectural phenomenon were first introduced into the region by King Herod. Historical records and archaeological evidence testify to his having erected theaters in Damascus, Sidon, Caesarea, Jerusalem and Jericho, while the theater in Sepphoris was built either by Herod or his son Herod Antipas (Fuks 1983:125; Weiss 1994; Segal 1995:106). Another theater, presumably built by Herod Antipas, was revealed in Tiberias (Atrash 2012). In the same period, theaters were also constructed throughout the Nabatean realm, and to date three Nabatean auditoria are known: one theater (Hammond 1965) along with two odea (McKenzie 1990:110; Joukowsky 2001) in Petra, a theater in Elusa (Arubas and Goldfus 2008:1713–1714) and another in Sahar (Segal 1995:108). In the Roman period, over 35 theaters were built in most of the Greco-Roman cities (Roman, Jewish and Nabatean) in the eastern provinces of the Roman empire, including three at Nysa-Scythopolis, during the late first century BCE to the mid-third century CE (Segal 1995). Traditionally, scholars researching theater construction in the Roman East have not recognized an organic development in the process, preferring to focus rather on stages. Fuks (1983:125–128), while discussing the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis––with no knowledge of its predecessor, the Southern Theater–– pointed to three stages of theater construction. His first stage includes the theaters built by Herod and his son, Herod Antipas, along with those erected in the Nabatean realm by Hartat IV at Petra and Elusa (4 BCE–27 CE). His second, intermediate stage, dated to the late first–early second centuries CE, includes the southern theater at Gerasa and the theater at Bostra.

Terminology The term ‘theater’ is derived from the Greek theatron and the Latin theatrum (place for seeing, viewing performances) and usually refers to the entire building, although occasionally to the cavea only, as, for instance, in an inscription from the southern theater at Gerasa that recorded the consecration of its ima cavea in 90 CE and referred to it as the theatrum (Pouilloux 1977; 1979). Despite minor misinterpretations, most ancient sources, as well as publications of modern scholars, generally apply the term to the entire theater, while its various parts have well-defined and specific terms in both Greek and Latin (see Plan 3.1). We believe that theater-like complexes should be divided into three types based on cultural function, only the first two of which are relevant to NysaScythopolis. The first group includes urban theaters, like those at Nysa-Scythopolis; the second, odea, which were small roofed auditoria that could also have functioned as bouleuteria; and the third, an assemblage of ceremonial auditoria, often part of asclepia and naumachia complexes (Nielsen 2002), ritual spa centers, or Nabatean ritual and burial centers.

274

Walid Atrash

His third stage, which seems to reflect the peak of the process and dates from the later years of Antoninus Pius to the time of Septimius Severus and Caracalla (c. 150–215 CE), represents a period in which most of the theaters in the region were built. Weiss (1994) defined two main construction stages. The first was marked by Herod’s enterprises at Damascus, Sidon, Caesarea, Jerusalem and Jericho, and later by his son Herod Antipas at Berytus and presumably at Sepphoris. To his second stage, Weiss attributed all other theaters, further divided into substages beginning with the southern theater at Gerasa and the theaters at Philadelphia and Nysa-Scythopolis (Southern Theater) in the first century CE, continuing with the theaters at Gadara and Diocaesarea at the turn of the century, and those at Neapolis, Aelia Capitolina and Caesarea (Stage Two) in the first half of the second century CE. The rest of the theaters in the region are attributed by Weiss to the period between the second half of the second and the first half of the third centuries, when the theater at Caesarea in its second stage was renovated, the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis was built, and the northern odeum at Gerasa was enlarged and converted into a theater. Also in this period, the pulpitum and scaenae frons in the theaters at Philadelphia and Diocaesarea were renovated. Segal (1995:106–124) divided the post-Herodian theaters in the region into three groups. His first group matches Fuks’ second-stage theaters, his second group dates to the Antonine period and includes the theaters at Kanawat, the northern theater at Gerasa and that at Philadelphia, while his third group, dated to the Severan period, includes those of Hammat Gader, Dor, Nysa-Scythopolis, Neapolis, Pella and others. He did not include the Southern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, although it had already been discovered at that time. Magen (2005:91), while discussing the theater at Neapolis, also presented three stages of theater construction. His first stage spans the late first to midsecond centuries CE and includes the theater at Neapolis, which he dates to the first half of the second century CE. His second stage stretches from the mid-second to the early third centuries and includes the theaters at Caesarea (Stage Two), Dor, Nysa-Scythopolis, the northern theater at Gerasa, Philadelphia, and others. His third stage, dated to the third century CE, includes the theaters of Sebaste and Philippopolis. He omitted

the Southern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis with both its phases dated to the first century CE, as well as the Northern Theater, both of which had been discovered by then. Short History of Entertainment Facilities at NysaScythopolis Excavations at Hellenistic Nysa-Scythopolis revealed no evidence of a Hellenistic-period theater on either the Bet She’an mound or at Tel Iztabba. In the early first century CE (Roman II), presumably during the reign of Tiberius, the relatively small Southern Theater with an ima cavea was erected along the southern side of the civic center, south of the first-century CE forum, on the southern edge of the Nahal ‘Amal basin (Phase I; see Plan 1.1). Toward the end of the first century CE, the elevated political status of the city and its increasing economic sources apparently enabled its boule and demos to adorn their city with monumental complexes (Avi-Yonah 1962). The Southern Theater was thus enlarged (Phase II), presumably during the Flavian Dynasty, with the addition of a summa cavea and a two-story-high scaena with an adorned scaenae frons. During the Severan Dynasty (Roman III), a new and larger theater was erected over the former one. The phenomenon of building a larger theater over an earlier one was not uncommon in the region, as, for instance, the southern theater at Gerasa, below which were partly revealed the remains of an earlier theater (Kraeling 1938:19–21). Enlarging existing theaters was also common, as, for instance, the northern theater at Gerasa that was first built as an odeum and later enlarged and converted into a theater in the second century CE (Clark et al. 1986), a change that is attested by several inscriptions. The Northern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis was revealed in several probes by the IAHU expedition, and its hard-limestone architectural elements, including seats, podium elements and some of the scaenae frons entablature elements, were analyzed by Atrash (2006:68–71, 126–138) and dated to the second century CE. This theater was built at the northeastern end of a colonnaded street, into the southwestern slope of Tel Bet She’an and therefore faced southwest, an unusual direction for a theater, which in most cases face north. Its monumental postscaenium was reached

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

from the northern piazza of the colonnaded street via a magnificent propylaeum (see Plan 1.3). The odeum, erected along the southern porticus of the caesareum during the years 130–150 CE, was part of the imperial-cult quadriporticus (Bet She’an I). It was active until the mid-fifth century CE, when it was almost entirely dismantled and later partly built over by the sigma in 507 CE. An odeum as an additional auditorium alongside the existing theaters is known at other cities in the region, such as the northern theater at Gerasa (the first stage), Philadelphia, Petra and, according to Malalas, at Caesarea as well (Levine 1975:23–26; Bet She’an I:207–224). In the mid-fourth century, the hippodrome, first erected to the south of the civic center in the second century, was converted into an amphitheater.

Theater Construction as a R eflection of Urban Development and Prosperity In light of the recent discoveries at Nysa-Scythopolis, re-evaluation of the data suggests that theater construction and renovation represent a continuous process that cannot necessarily be defined by stages. It now seems clear that the Southern Theater at NysaScythopolis, first built during the reign of Tiberius, was later enlarged during the Flavian Dynasty, and finally replaced by a monumental theater during the Severan Dynasty. This process reflects, and corresponds with, the urban growth of Nysa-Scythopolis from a relatively small, but steadily growing polis during the first century, into a large and wealthy metropolis throughout the second–early third centuries CE. This development is clearly evident in the city’s urban plan, and the monumental architectural enterprises constructed during this prosperous period throughout the city in general, and in its civic center in particular (see Chapter 1). A similar process is echoed at Gerasa, in the vast monumental architectural enterprises, including two theaters, that enriched the urban plan during the first–mid-third centuries CE (Kraeling 1938:41–59; Welles 1938; Barghouti 1982; Parapetti 1983–1984; Seigne 1992). Increasing stability in the empire in general, and in the East in particular, was the result of the Augustan policy in the East, the continuous flourishing of the eastern trade network, and the resultant wealthy economies

275

(Rostovtzeff 1932). The first and second centuries CE are considered the Roman Empire’s golden age, characterized by political stability (Pax Romana) and economic prosperity. This period has been termed the ‘Imperial Peace’ by Cooke, Adcock and Charlesworth (1936:606–634), and the ‘High Empire’ by Bowman, Garnsey and Rathbone (2000:679–740). It witnessed the flourishing of the eastern provinces (Mazor 2004:5–12), as well as those of Spain (Vandeput 1997:35–40) and North Africa (Bieber 1961:65–69). Urbanism throughout the empire in general, and the East in particular, achieved unprecedented architectural qualities, as the civic centers of the Greco-Roman poleis everywhere were adorned with monumental complexes, including newly built or renovated theaters (Segal 1997), some of which were lavishly adorned with precious imported marble. The Flavian Dynasty, in particular, witnessed vast construction projects. At Nysa-Scythopolis, the Southern Theater was enlarged and in the civic center at Gerasa, the southern theater was built (Browning 1982:126). At Bostra and Gadara, cities that had reestablished their autonomous political status and practiced minting rights, the monumental complexes included municipal and cultural institutions and theaters (Jones 1971:277–281). Hadrian’s visit to the region in 130 CE, and the systematic political, economic and strategic reorganization of the region that took place during the visit, must have triggered an additional economic boom for all the poleis in the region, as reflected in the monumentalizing of their civic centers in general and the construction or renovation of their theaters in particular (Mazor 2004). It therefore seems clear from the above discussion that the analysis and dating of the theaters in any city in the region, within the framework of each city’s individual development, will probably reveal that their construction or renovation corresponded with the economic, social and political development of the city; thus, theater construction within these cities cannot be arranged into well-defined groups or dated stages. Also, judged by the same criteria, the abrupt cessation of construction of new theaters in the mid-third century CE can be attributed mainly to the economic and political decline at that time, followed only by periodic renovation work on existing theaters.

276

Walid Atrash

Development of the Nysa-Scythopolis Civic Center and the Integration of Its Entertainment Facilities The theater type that was first introduced by Herod to the region, as represented by Phase I of the Southern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, corresponds to the type that gained dominance in the Roman West from the reign of Augustus and was widely adopted throughout the Roman Empire, including in the Roman East (e.g., Caesarea in its first stage, see Frova 1965:57–195; Levine 1975:23–26; Ringel 1975:47–51), although it is difficult to determine whether its origins were in the West or East (Lyttelton 1974:200–2003). The theaters at Nysa-Scythopolis, like almost all the theaters in the Roman East, were built into hillsides, a phenomenon characteristic of theater construction in the region that was rarely adopted in the rest of the Roman Empire and may have been an Herodian innovation. The incorporation of the theaters within the city-plan, as in Nysa-Scythopolis and the various other poleis in the region, clearly indicates their being a crucial component of the monumental development of the civic center and the establishment of Roman urbanplanning koine. Based on the remains of the civic center of NysaScythopolis from the first half of the first century CE (Roman II), one can conclude that by this time the urban plan of the city was already well-established. The civic center evolved around the forum that housed a grand basilica and two temples. The forum was surrounded on all four sides by streets, and along its southern side stood the Southern Theater (see Plan 1.1). The entire civic center was connected by paved streets to the various city gates (see Plan 1.2). This plan, with the forum as its nucleus, has no parallels in the region and was relatively uncommon in the East, and it seems to have been influenced by urban planning trends that originated in the Roman Republican West. The original choice of location for the Southern Theater created planning discrepancies with both the axial line of the forum and the civic center’s street network (see Plan 1.1). The levels of the Southern Theater (-154.50 m) and the forum (-161.30 m) differ by 6.8 m. As both complexes continued to develop independently, the discrepancies were carried into the

later periods as well. The second-century CE civic center and the newly erected Severan Theater did not alter or solve these problems, but to a certain extent even deepened them. The excavations at Nysa-Scythopolis and the research results point to the second–early third centuries CE, from Hadrian’s reign to that of Septimius Severus, as the epoch of architectural flourishing in the city, during which the construction of the various theaters was no doubt an essential part. The odeum was integrated into the southern porticus of the grand caesareum in the first half of the second century CE (Bet She’an I:193– 206). The integration of the Northern Theater into the colonnaded street as part of the monumental urban plan would suggest, according to Mazor, an early or mid-second century CE date for its construction (Bet She’an I:xiii), or a Severan date, according to Atrash (2006:68). Apart from the theaters, the hippodrome was also constructed in the second century CE, to the south of the civic center. Finally, the Southern Theater was dismantled and built over by a new theater during the Severan period. In the mid-fourth century, at a time of decline in economic prosperity, the hippodrome was converted to an amphitheater. In the late fourth century CE, when the forum temples and basilica were dismantled and covered to obtain a higher elevation for the forum, a better integration was achieved between the Severan Theater and the forum. At this time, the southern part of the forum was separated from the main part, and became a wide, irregular, paved piazza that stretched in front of the theater’s facade, and its northeastern corner was adorned with a nymphaeum. The theater’s facade was now well connected to the piazza by a magnificent porticus built of spolia. It seems, therefore, that the renovation of the Southern Theater, and the construction of the odeum, the Northern Theater, and the Severan Theater and its subsequent renovations, indicate, as observed in many other poleis in the region, an organic process of construction and reconstruction. The construction of the theaters and other entertainment facilities, such as the hippodrome, were part of the monumentalization of the civic center and its surroundings, and reflect the city’s wealth, political status, pride and economic capabilities.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

The Southern and Severan Theaters of Nysa-Scythopolis: Architectural Analysis and Proposed R econstruction In his preliminary report, Applebaum distinguished six non-consecutive stages in the architectural development of the Severan Theater, based on the coins and the pottery from various strata (Applebaum 1978:88–95). According to him, the theater went out of use several times for considerable periods of time. He had no knowledge of the earlier Southern Theater, which was revealed years later by the IAA expedition.1 Applebaum’s stages of the Severan Theater are as follows: Stage 1: Construction of the theater during the Severan Dynasty in the late second–early third centuries CE. Stage 2: Theater goes out of use in the late third century CE. Stage 3: Reconstruction stage in the second half of the fourth century CE. Stage 4: Theater goes out of use again in the second half of the fifth century CE. Stage 5: Second reconstruction stage in the early sixth century CE (Justinian I).

277

Stage 6: Theater goes out of use in the early seventh century CE and is destroyed in the earthquake of 749 CE. The renewed excavation of the Severan Theater and the wide-scale excavations of the civic center during the years 1986–2002, followed by extensive research, have resulted in a revised chronological chart outlining the city’s historical events and architectural strata (see the Bet She‘an Archaeological Project Chronological Chart, p. xiii). The discovery of the earlier Southern Theater during renovation works, and a more precise definition of the development of urban planning and the architectural stages of the civic center, have produced a far more detailed and accurate stratigraphic table for the stages of the Southern and Severan Theaters (Table 7.1), and a clearer picture of their relationship with the development of the city in general and the civic center in particular. In the following discussion, the architectural remains of the two phases of the Southern Theater in Stratum 13, and of the Severan Theater constructed in Stratum 12 and its renovations in Strata 11 and 9, as revealed in Applebaum’s excavations and the renewed excavations of the IAA, are analyzed and a reconstruction is proposed. Measurements of most of the architectural elements appear in Appendix 9.1.

Table 7.1. Development Stages of the Southern and Severan Theaters Stratum

Period

Date

Theater Construction–Reconstruction Stages

Southern Theater 13

Roman II

14–37 CE (Tiberius)

Erection of a small theater with an ima cavea adjacent to the southern part of the forum (Southern Theater Phase I)

13

Roman II

c. 80–96 CE (Flavian)

Addition of a summa cavea and enlargement of the scaenae frons of the Southern Theater (Phase II)

Severan Theater 12

Roman III

193–211 CE (Severan)

Contstruction of a new, larger theater over the former

12

Roman III

c. mid-3rd century CE

Addition of a postscaenium and rebuilding of the versurae

11

Roman IV

Post-363 CE earthquake

Reconstruction following the earthquake; removal of collapsed remains of the summa cavea, and reduction of the scaenae frons

9

Byzantine II

6th century CE

Reconstruction work to reduce the media cavea and the scaenae frons; construction of the porticus along the northern facade

8

Byzantine III

7th century CE

Theater goes out of use

7

Arab-Byzantine

659 CE

Partial destruction of the theater in June 7, 659 CE earthquake

6

Umayyad I

Pre-‘Abd al-Malik reform

Partial clearing of collapsed debris

5

Umayyad II

697–749 CE

Establishment of an umayyad pottery workshop within the theater’s premises; destruction of the theater in the January 18, 749 CE earthquake

4

Abbasid/Fatimid

Post-749 CE

Erection of flimsy structures and installations in several vomitoria

2

Late Islamic/Mamluk

1291–1516 CE

Erection of flimsy structures and installations in several vomitoria

278

Walid Atrash

The Southern Theater (Roman II)

trench, while its upper part was constructed in retreating courses, anchored at the corners by courses of headers and stretchers. Over its eastern and western ends, the aditus maximi were constructed, while in the center stood the scaena, of which nothing of the superstructure is preserved, as it was removed during the later construction of the Severan Theater, leaving only the foundation platform. In the northeastern corner of the foundation platform, the foundation of the theater’s circumference wall (W2206; see Plan 2.1), preserved up to ten courses, formed a corner with another foundation wall (W2205) that ran from east to west, which was revealed in several sections reaching a total of 24 m, 7.6 m wide, and preserved to a height of nine courses (Fig. 7.1). The foundation platform created here by the two walls carried the superstructure of the eastern aditus maximus.

Phase I (Plan 7.1)

0

10 m

1

1

The Southern Theater in Phase I was a small theater, one story high, measuring 42 m in diameter and 32 m in depth, and it accommodated c. 1000 seats (Atrash 2006:144–145). Very little of this phase has survived, but based on the few wall remains (see Plan 2.1), the Southern Theater of Phase I can be reconstructed to a certain extent. The cavea that faced north was built against the hillside, its circumference wall erected in a foundation trench hewn into the sloping bedrock. Prior to its construction, a foundation trench was hewn into the northern hillside for the foundations of the scaena and the eastern and western aditus maximi. Here, a large platform was erected to a height of 3.34 m, its lower foundation courses laid into the rock-hewn foundation

1-1 Plan 7.1. Southern Theater: proposed reconstruction of Phase I.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

The circumference wall of the theater was 1.2 m wide and must have been at least 1.4 m higher than the praecinctio level. There were no vomitoria in Phase I and the ima cavea was entered either from the aditus maximi and the orchestra, or from the praecinctio, which was presumably reached by stairs from outside the circumference wall. The early phase of the rear wall of the scaena was the same length as the cavea diameter. At either end, the aditus maximi were covered with sloping barrel vaults of soft-limestone masonry. This was the common plan of Roman theaters in the region at the time, as observed on a larger scale in the Herodian Theater at Caesarea and the Nabatean Theater at Petra (Frova 1965:128– 145; Hammond 1965). As in the Southern Theater, the cavea of the Herodian Theater at Caesarea, based partly upon the hill slope and partly on its ambulacrum, were integrated into the later stage. The proscaenium was built along the northern side of the orchestra and aligned with the northern walls of the aditus maximi. There is no evidence for the existence

Fig. 7.1. Southern Theater: Phase I, foundation platform, looking south.

279

of niches in the proscaenium facade in Phases I or II. During the first century CE, semicircular and square niches became part of the proscaenium decor in theaters in general and in the region in particular (Bieber 1961:167), although the earlier blank facade was still quite common. The number of niches varied and was usually dependent on the diameter of the orchestra. The Herodian Theater at Caesarea had alternating semicircular and square niches in its proscaenium that were plastered and painted (Frova 1965:93–120). In the first century CE, the theater at Sepphoris (Weiss 1994:13–14), the southern theater at Gerasa (Fisher 1938:19–20; Sear 1994:226), and the theaters at Elusa (Negev 1982) and Petra (Hammond 1965:60–65) had a proscaenium with similar semicircular and square niches that were flanked by staircases leading to the pulpitum. On the other hand, the first-century theater at Sebaste had semicircular and square niches (Zayadine 1966:576–580, Fig. 2) without flanking steps, as did the theater at Herculaneum (Maiuri 1959:31–42). Later, during the second-century CE, theaters at Bostra (Brünnow and Domaszewski 1909:47–84, Figs. 928–982, Pls. L, LI) and Pompeii, built during Nero’s reign (Maiuri 1959:26–30), display the same pattern of semicircular and square niches with flanking staircases. Hypothetically, based on the above examples, one could reconstruct the Phase I proscaenium of the Southern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis with alternating semicircular and square niches flanked by two staircases, although there is no surviving evidence for such an arrangement. The pulpitum was 24 m long, 4 m deep, and presumably had a wooden floor. The scaenae frons rear wall, probably of the type with a plain, straight facade, was 1.0–1.2 m wide and had the three customary entrances––the valvae regiae and the hospitalia–– flanked on both sides by the itinera versurarum. Based on what little was found of the architectural elements of Phase I of the Southern Theater, a reconstruction of the scaenae frons columnar facade is impossible. It was presumably adorned with softlimestone columns of the Ionic order and plastered entablature elements, and reached a height of 6.5–6.8 m, which would correspond to the cavea 6.72 m in height (see below). However, the possibility of a basalt, Doricorder facade can also be put forward (see below). The ima cavea of the Southern Theater was 13 m deep, sloped at an angle of 34˚, and was surrounded by a 2.5 m wide praecinctio. It had approximately 14

280

Walid Atrash

seat rows, each row 0.42 m high, to a height of 6.72 m. Between the ima cavea and the orchestra was a podium, similar to the one uncovered in the Herodian theater at Caesarea (Frova 1965:57–195). An unknown number of scalaria divided the ima cavea into cunei, but based on the theater’s dimensions, we can assume there were five scalaria and four cunei (see Plan 7.1). Vitruvius (Architecture V, 6, 2–3) suggested seven scalaria and six cunei in his ideal theater, a setting that is only found in the Herodian theater at Caesarea. In postHerodian theaters, such as the northern (Clark et al. 1986) and southern theaters at Gerasa, and that at Philippopolis (Butler 1903:169–177), there were five scalaria and four cunei in the ima cavea, and the same number is seen in the odea of Antipatris (Kochavi 1989:103–109) and the cult-center theater at Birketein (Kraeling 1938:159– 167, Fig. 2). In smaller odea, as at Kanawat, Pella, and presumably Nysa-Scythopolis, there were four scalaria and three cunei (Bet She’an I:207–224). The aditus maximi were 7.25 m long and c. 2.9 m wide. The southern wall of the eastern aditus maximus (W2190) was erected over the foundation platform (see Plan 2.2: Section 1-1), and stood parallel to W2205. A segment of its original length was uncovered running from west to east, preserved up to the vault’s spring course (see Fig. 2.5). The wall was built of softlimestone masonry and as the courses of its eastern end protruded, it seems that the wall was originally connected to the theater’s circumference wall. Although only a section of the southern wall of the eastern aditus maximus was preserved, and the northern wall was later dismantled, based on the building technique and the diagonal spring course, the original length and width of its barrel vault can be calculated. The barrel vault probably rose in a 7º slope from west to east, 4.51 m high at its eastern end and 3.62 m high at its western end. The southern walls of the aditus maximi were 0.8 m wide, furnished with a diagonally rising banister, and the tribunalia were presumably built over both passages. A unique engineering construction technique was observed in the eastern aditus maximus foundation. The soft-limestone courses of the superstructure were not constructed directly upon the basalt foundations, as in an earthquake they would slide over the rough basalt stones and crumble. Therefore, as an earthquakeresisting technique, the first one or two courses of the superstructure were always constructed of wellcut and dressed basalt stones, followed by the soft-

limestone masonry. This allowed for a certain sliding flexibility essential for withstanding earthquakes by cutting the vertical forces and reducing the impact of horizontal ones. It would seem that the architects in the early first century CE were well experienced in special construction methods for large monuments in earthquake-threatened regions. This unique technique was also observed in second-century CE monuments in the city, such as the northwestern and northeastern city gates (Mazor 2004), the piers of the Harod Bridge, and the foundations of the Severan Theater (see below). The diameter of the horseshoe-shaped orchestra is unclear, as the exact location of the podium of the ima cavea is unknown. Vitruvius (Architecture V, 6, 6) defined the orchestra diameter as being half the scaena length, although in most theaters in the region the orchestra diameter is only about one third to one quarter of the scaena. Its floor could have been plastered as was customary in the Herodian period, and perhaps even painted with a floral design, as observed in the Herodian stage of the theater at Caesarea (Frova 1965:93–120). In all theaters of the post-Herodian period in the region, the orchestra was paved with either limestone or marble slabs. The orchestra may have been surrounded by bisellia, as in the southern theater at Gerasa (Schumacher 1902: Figs. 13–17) and at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975: Fig. 2). In the theaters in this region, no banister separated the cavea from the orchestra, as opposed to the theater at Timgad in North Africa where there was a banister (Lachaux 1979). Phase II (Plan 7.2) During Phase II, the Southern Theater was a mediumsized theater, two stories high, measuring c. 83 m in diameter and 57 m in depth. Remains of the southern walls of both aditus maximus passages (W2191, W2221) were revealed, as well as section of the cavea’s circumference wall (W70727; see Plan 2.1). When the theater was enlarged, a summa cavea was added, and the earlier scaena and its pulpitum, the aditus maximi and, to a certain extent, even the orchestra and ima cavea, were re-planned. Within the hyposcaenium of the Severan Theater, the scaenae frons foundation wall of Phase II (W2109), 3.75 m wide, was revealed parallel to W2205 of Phase I (see Fig. 2.6). Its northern and southern faces were built of roughly cut basalt stones with a core of large basalt stones between them, laid in leveled

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

courses, each course sealed with a layer of smaller stones mixed with mortar. The northern side, set deeper into the bedrock, was preserved to seven courses that rose toward the south against the bedrock slope, reaching the same level as the southern face that was preserved to two courses. The scaena was c. 65 m wide and 9 m deep (Plan 7.2). The space between the earlier foundation platform (W2205) and the later foundation wall (W2109), 3.75 m wide, served as the hyposcaenium, while the proscaenium was erected over the earlier foundations. The scaenae frons in Phase II may have had a central semicircular exedra, resembling those of the postHerodian theater at Caesarea, and that at contemporary Petra (Frova 1965:128–145, Fig. 147; McKenzie 1990:143–144). The ima cavea was 16 m wide and somewhat enlarged, as four seat rows were added. Above it, a c. 12 m wide summa cavea was added, bordered by

0

281

W70617 and W60762 on the north and W70727 on the south. A 1.2 m wide praecinctio separated the ima and summa caveae. The hill slope was further hewn for the summa cavea foundations and its entrance vomitoria. Of the vomitoria, segments of two parallel walls (W70643 and W70644) were exposed (see Plan 2.1), running south to north under the vomitorium wall of the Severan Theater, where they were integrated into the circumference wall (W70727; see Plan 2.4:3). There were probably three vomitoria, an adequate amount that seems to fit the theater’s dimensions. In the Herodian theater at Caesarea there were six, and in the southern theater at Gerasa four, both of which were somewhat larger than the Southern Theater. None of the auditorium seats were revealed, perhaps buried below the compact foundation fills laid by the builders of the Severan Theater, which contained a variety of soft-limestone architectural members, presumably spolia of the Southern Theater.

20 m Plan 7.2. Southern Theater: proposed reconstruction of Phase II.

282

Walid Atrash

Over the Phase I foundation platform, the new superstructure of the enlarged aditus maximi was built, replacing, but not dismantling, those of Phase I, which were simply buried. The new aditus maximi walls stood c. 2 m to the north of the earlier ones, and they were naturally longer and wider to correspond with the larger diameter of the cavea, now granted a summa cavea. The excavation of the eastern aditus maximus revealed a 13.2 m long section of the southern wall (W2191) of Phase II that was built some 0.85 m to the north of the earlier wall (W2190). It rose in stepped courses from west to east and its eastern end terminated in protruding courses indicating that it was connected to the praecinctio foundation wall (W2192; see Plan 2.2, Fig. 2.7). The lower part of W2191 was built of basalt masonry, laid in six courses of headers. The rest of the wall was built of seven soft-limestone courses, which were most probably plastered. The northern face of the wall was well constructed, while its southern, inner face, covered with the cavea foundation core, was irregular. Wall 2191 was not fully preserved, and based on its basalt foundation that gradually rises diagonally eastward, it was covered with a barrel vault like its predecessor. The northern wall of the passage was entirely dismantled when the Severan Theater was built. The preserved part of W2192 must have served as a doorpost for the eastern entrance to the passage. The southern wall (W2221) of the western aditus maximus passage was preserved running east to west under the ima cavea of the Severan Theater, while its northern wall was dismantled when the passage of the Severan Theater was built. Part of the southern wall of the Severan Theater’s aditus maximus had collapsed, thus exposing three limestone-masonry courses of the northern face of the earlier wall. The two southern walls of the Southern Theater’s aditus maximi were constructed in the same method, of the same masonry, and must have had the same dimensions; thus, its plan could be easily reconstructed. Two sections of the summa cavea’s podium wall foundations revealed along its curving route (W70617, W60762) continued the corners attached to the walls of the aditus maximi (W2192, W2221; see Plan 2.1). The foundations of the podium wall, 1.5 m wide and built into a foundation trench, were constructed of two courses of roughly cut, medium-sized basalt masonry with an inner core of small basalt stones without mortar. The superstructure, 1.2–1.4 m wide, was built of wellcut and dressed basalt masonry in its lower courses, and soft-limestone masonry in the upper courses.

The Southern Theater: Summary and Conclusions The enlargement of the Southern Theater in its second phase seems to reflect the gradual increase in the population and the growing prosperity of NysaScythopolis. In its second phase, the theater was still connected to the forum, as these two complexes did not share the same orientation or level. It had no postscaenium and was therefore not approached from the forum, its main entrances being the aditus maximi and the vomitoria. Hypothetically, there may have been a narrow passage along its northern facade, separating it from the forum and providing access to the theater’s aditus maximi from the north. As the two temples of the forum were unrelated to the theater, no cultic or ceremonial functions can be associated with the latter and it seems to have been a regular city theater (Segal 1995:107–111). A similar setting was observed in the southern theater at Gerasa, which stands in close proximity to a contemporary sanctuary (Zeus Temple), but had no cultic or ceremonial relationship with it (Schumacher 1902:141–145). The length of the scaenae frons, which bordered the pulpitum on the north, corresponded to the ima cavea’s diameter. The proscaenium was probably adorned with evenly spaced, alternating semicircular and square niches flanked by staircases. Most of the evidence concerning the architectural nature of the scaenae frons of both Phases I and II comes from scattered, soft-limestone (nari) elements and fragments revealed in fills during the excavations of the cavea and hyposcaenium foundations of the Severan Theater. This rather meager assemblage consists of column drums, capitals of the Ionic and Corinthian orders, and architrave and niche elements. The pilaster capital (see Chapter 9), the only datable element of the assemblage, is attributed to the reign of Tiberius (14–37 CE). It seems that these elements decorated the scaenae frons of the Southern Theater in its first phase. The scaenae frons columnar facade of Phase II was apparently two stories high. The first floor was adorned with a Corinthian order, and the second with an Ionic order. No bases for the column drums of the first-floor order were found. An architrave is the only entablature element of the Corinthian order revealed. If all the missing parts are added, i.e., base, frieze and cornice, the order composition would presumably have reached a height of 6.6–6.8 m. Elements recovered from the

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

second-floor order composition consist of column drums erected over a base, with an Ionic capital and an architrave. Together with the missing parts of the entablature (frieze and cornice), this second-floor order composition would have reached 6.2–6.4 m, for a total height of 12.8–13.2 m. Corinthian pilaster capitals may also have been incorporated into the columnar facade of the second phase. A composition comprised of a first floor in the Corinthian order and a second floor in the Ionic order was relatively common in the first century CE, mainly in the west. Other first-century CE complexes at NysaScythopolis had similar architectural orders executed in soft limestone, such as the basilica (Foerster and Tsafrir 1992:3) and temples (Mazor and Bar-Nathan 1996:8–10) of the forum. All of these complexes had basalt foundation courses and soft-limestone superstructures, which seem to have been plastered. The newly added summa cavea was built partly against the rocky hill slope and partly over the new vomitoria. The ima and summa caveae must have had soft-limestone seats, and the arrangement of the scalaria and cunei of the ima cavea was probably continued into the summa cavea as well. In Phase II, the orchestra was enlarged, and it may have been paved in this stage. The new aditus maximi were constructed of two wide walls erected upon the southern and northern sides of a basalt foundation platform. The passage walls were constructed of soft limestone, presumably plastered, and covered with a sloping barrel vault constructed of soft-limestone masonry. Two types of stone were thus used in the construction of the two phases of the Southern Theater. Basalt originating from the region between Nahal Harod and Nahal Tabor (Nir 1989:49) was used for foundation walls and platforms, while soft limestone (nari), abundant in the eastern Bet She’an Valley (Nir 1989:66), was used for superstructures. The limestone superstructures were set upon one or two flat courses of well-cut and dressed basalt stones, but not bonded, as an earthquake-resisting technique. It seems that all soft-limestone walls and architectural members were plastered, as observed in the well-preserved remains of the first-century CE forum temples, where remains of plaster and painted frescos are discernible on walls (Mazor and Bar-Nathan 1996:8). It would be reasonable to assume that the walls of the scaenae frons and perhaps even the orchestra of the Southern Theater

283

in both phases were plastered and even painted, as observed in the Herodian theater at Caesarea (Frova 1965:93–120; Patrich 2011). It should be noted that the excavation of the forum temples (Mazor and Bar-Nathan 1996) revealed a number of basalt architectural elements of the Doric order reused as spolia in the second-century CE phase of the temples. The homogenous assemblage included a pedestal, four bases, fifteen column drums, two capitals and a lintel. It seems that this Doric order, which certainly dated to the early first century CE or even earlier, reached a height of about 7.5 m. According to its date, it preceded the soft-limestone order of the forum temples and the second phase of the Southern Theater’s scaenae frons. As the original provenance of these basalt architectural elements of the early civic center is obscure, the possibility that they originated in the first phase of the Southern Theater’s scaenae frons should be considered, although no evidence of a relationship with the theater could be established.

The Severan Theater Toward the end of the second and in the early third centuries CE (Stratum 12), a new enlarged theater, 109 m in diameter and 74 m in depth, was superimposed over the earlier one, putting it out of use. Constructed over the same location, it faced north and accommodated about 9800 spectators (Plan 7.3). It was renovated soon after, still within Stratum 12, due to constructional faults. Additional renovations took place in Stratum 11, following the earthquake of 363 CE, and in Stratum 9, when the theater was reduced in size. The following discussion concentrates mainly on the original construction in Stratum 12: the scaena and its various units (with specific emphasis given to reconstruction of the columnar facade of the scaenae frons), the cavea and its units (including the porticus), the aditus maximi and the orchestra. The excavations conducted by Applebaum in 1960– 1963 revealed the collapsed layer of the scaenae frons’ first floor, the result of the earthquake of 749 CE, scattered over the pulpitum and the orchestra. All these architectural elements were removed from the theater by Applebaum to an area north of the theater, where they remained for a quarter of a century. When excavation in the theater was resumed by the IAA expedition, all these elements, supplemented by the newly discovered ones, were transferred to a new area, sorted according

284

Walid Atrash

1

1

0

20 m

1-1

Plan 7.3. Severan Theater (Stratum 12): reconstructed plan.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

to types and materials, and fully recorded. The inventory of scaenae frons elements includes podium elements, pedestals and bases, column shafts of yellow and light gray marble and green cipollino, and red and gray granite, Corinthian capitals, entablature elements, architrave-friezes and cornices of light gray marble, as well as various types of limestone lintels, cornices and archivolt elements. Additional pedestals, bases, column shafts and column drums, capitals and entablature elements of limestone presumably originated from the cavea’s porticus, while richly decorated frieze lintels, consoles and cornices had adorned the postscaenium’s northern facade entrances. Scaena The three-story-high columnar facade of the scaenae frons corresponded in height with the triple division of the cavea (ima, media and summa caveae). The scaenae frons was rectangular in shape and enclosed the pulpitum on three sides (Plan 7.4). It was 92 m long and 13 m wide, flanked on both sides by the

0

285

versurae. In its original plan, the theater had no postscaenium, and the scaenae frons, which served as the theater’s northern facade, was pierced by three entrances––the valvae regiae and the two hospitalia. Shortly after its construction, the theater’s cavea, which was based on the hillside and the remains of the earlier cavea of the Southern Theater, began to slide down the slope due to constructional failure. Evidence of this was witnessed in the walls of the aditus maximi and the scaenae frons podium that had been pressed by the cavea’s weight and thus leaned slightly to the north. In order to avoid further sliding, a postscaenium was added (Plan 7.5: Section 1-1). It was erected upon a basalt-masonry foundation of 18 courses constructed deep into the rocky gorge of Nahal Amal to a depth of 8.5 m, which acted as a huge wedge-shaped foundation. The postscaenium, flanked by newly built versurae, widened the scaena to 23 m. Technically, the scaena can be divided into various units from south to north: proscaenium, pulpitum and hyposcaenium, scaenae frons, versurae and postscaenium (see Plan 3.1).

10 m

Plan 7.4. Severan Theater: original scaena (Stratum 12).

286

Walid Atrash

1

F37

F42 F38 3

5

6

F30

9 10

F32

F31

F36

F35

21 F40

F39 16

22

15

F33

F34

27 28

F43

31 32

F41

1

0

1-1

10 m

0

10 m

Plan 7.5. Severan Theater: scanea.

Proscaenium The proscaenium in its original stage was 38 m long, 1.6 m wide and 1.3 m high, flanked on both sides by the pulpitum staircases (see Plan 7.4). It was adorned with 15 alternating rectangular (8) and semicircular niches (7), including a larger, semicircular niche in the center of the wall that divided it into two symmetrical parts. The niches were lined with marble slabs attached to the soft-limestone walls with bronze nails, and

had decorated marble floors. Some of the floors bore inscriptions. Their upper contours of the niches were covered with marble cornices that protruded c. 0.3 m (see Fig. 9.111). Proscaenia adorned with niches were common in the Roman East and elsewhere in this period, although plain, straight facades were not unusual. The number of niches differed from one theater to the other, a result of the theater’s dimensions (Frova 1965). The arrangement of a proscaenium wall with alternating rectangular

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

and semicircular niches flanked by staircases can be seen in the theaters at Bostra (11; Finsen 1972:79–80), Sebaste (13; Zayadine 1966), and the later phase in the southern theater at Gerasa (12; Sear 1994:226). This design is also known in the West, for example in the theaters at Pompeii (Bieber 1961:173–174) and Miturnae (Ruegg 1988:52–64), both with five niches flanked by staircases built into rectangular niches, and at Ostia (Calza 1927:74–84), with nine niches and staircases built into rectangular niches. In North Africa, at Timgad, Dugga, Djemila, Sabratha (Bieber 1961:202–206) and Carthage (Frézouls 1952:46– 1000), five niches were flanked by narrower staircases inset into rectangular niches, a custom apparently also adopted sporadically in the Roman East, as, for example, at Sepphoris (Weiss 1994:13–14), Elusa (Negev 1982) and Petra (Hammond 1965:60–65). Upper cornices of imported marble or local stone are preserved in several theaters in the Roman East, such as Tiberias (Atrash 2012:85), the eastern theater at Gadara (W. Atrash, pers. obs.), Sebaste (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942: Figs. 24–28; Zayadine 1967–1968), and Neapolis (Magen 2005:107). Thus, it is clear that there was a design concept for proscaenia throughout the Roman world, although the details varied from theater to theater. In the mid-third century CE, when the postscaenium was added and the versurae rebuilt, the proscaenium wall was somewhat shortened, and now had five semicircular and six rectangular alternating niches (see Plan 7.5). Two of the original semicircular niches on either end were partly blocked when the staircases were rebuilt, now with six steps (see Fig. 3.11). The renovated pulpitum staircases that ascended from the aditus maximi were now flanked by podia constructed of three limestone masonry courses with a base and cap molding and an intermediate dado. The outer podia were attached to the walls of the aditus maximi, and the inner to the proscaenium wall. These flanking podia protruded from the proscaenium wall, but once the marble plating of the proscaenium niches was added, the proscaenium and podia faces were aligned. During the following renovation phases (Strata 11, 9), the proscaenium and its flanking staircases were left unchanged. In the Byzantine period (Stratum 9), in the sixth century, the pulpitum flanks were separated from the pulpitum by railings, and additional staircases were constructed in two rectangular niches, as had

287

been done elsewhere in North Africa and the Roman East (see above). The new staircases had five steps that were 0.6 m wide, 0.25 m high and 0.25 m deep, as reported in Applebaum’s field report before being dismantled by him. Pulpitum and Hyposcaenium In Stratum 12, the pulpitum, 55 m long, 8.4 m wide, was entered via the three entrances of the scaenae frons, the valvae regiae and the hospitalia, and from both sides through the itinera versurarum on the east and west. Two wide staircases mounted the pulpitum from the aditus maximi at either end. The pulpitum floor was supported by a system of abutments and arches, constructed within the hyposcaenium, a support system that was altered several times (Strata 11 and 9, see below). In Stratum 12, the pulpitum was floored with wooden planks (Fig. 7.2). In Stratum 9, the pulpitum, now 30 m long, was entered from the valvae regiae, while its flanks were entered from the hospitalia. Staircases separated the flanks from the pulpitum and descended from north to south into the hyposcaenium (see Plan 3.6). In this stage, the pulpitum was paved with limestone slabs, while the central drainage channel was covered with a wooden floor (Fig. 7.3). The hyposcaenium was 53 m long, 5.0–5.2 m wide at its western and eastern ends and 6.0–6.2 m wide in the center. It was enclosed on the east and west by the foundation walls of the versurae, on the north by the scaenae frons foundation, and on the south by the northern foundation walls of the aditus maximi and the proscaenium foundation that stretched between them. The foundation walls of the versurae were constructed of five courses of dressed basalt masonry built into foundation trenches, and they protruded 2.5 m below the superstructure, thereby providing a base for the scaenae frons. The scaenae frons foundation was constructed of eleven basalt-masonry courses. It was capped by a course of flat, limestone slabs, over which the scaenae frons rear wall and podium were erected in an earthquake-resistant construction technique that permitted a certain sliding flexibility (see above, p. 280). The foundation wall narrowed upward in stepped courses that served the abutment system supporting the pulpitum pavement (see below). The southern enclosing wall of the hyposcaenium comprised three segments. At the eastern and western ends, the aditus maximi walls were constructed of large

288

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.2. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of hyposcaenium (below pulpitum floor) containing pilasters and central drainage systems (Stratum 12).

basalt masonry with dressed edges. Over them, the pulpitum staircases were built. The central segment, the foundation wall of the proscaenium, was bisected in the center by the main drainage channel that entered from the orchestra through an arched opening. This segment was constructed of three different stone types: four lower basalt courses, a hard-limestone course that also served as the floor of the proscaenium niches, and the upper part of soft limestone that has recently been fully restored (see Chapter 8). Above the northern face of the hard-limestone course, a line of protruding basalt consoles was integrated into the soft-limestone courses to serve the hyposcaenium’s support system. Within the subterranean space of the hyposcaenium, two parallel rows of abutments were constructed, one over the stepped southern face of the scaenae frons foundation, the other over a wide foundation wall about 0.8 m from the proscaenium foundation with its line of basalt consoles. This abutment system carried the wooden beams that supported the pulpitum’s wooden floor (see Fig. 7.2). This pulpitum support system has parallels in the Roman East in the theaters at Sepphoris (Waterman 1937:11), Antipatris (Segal 1999: Fig.

119), and the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986:209), in all of which, slots were observed in the scaenae frons and proscaenium foundations for insertion of wooden beams. Such a system is also evident in North African theaters such as Timgad, Dugga and Djemila (Bieber 1961:203–205). The level of the hyposcaenium floor, of which nothing is preserved, can be determined by the protruding foundation course of the proscaenium’s inner face, and by the level of the central drainage channel’s covers, which are at the same level (-156.30). Although no remains of staircases that entered the hyposcaenium in its original stage were discovered, their existence can be presumed. While there is no clear evidence for the use of this subterranean space, it is reasonable to assume that it served the actors and performances in some way. Applebaum (1978) assumed that it also contained the curtain mechanism (aulaeum), although no traces of such a device have been found in any theater in the region. In the theaters at Pompeii and Syracuse in Italy, a narrow ditch was discerned in front of the pulpitum that may have served the curtain (Bieber 1961:179–180, 203–206), while in the theaters at Timgad and Dugga in

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

289

Fig. 7.3. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of pulpitum and section through hyposcaenium (Stratum 9).

North Africa, square depressions in the proscaenium’s upper surface may have held a curtain device (Bear 1968:267–274; Brockett 1968:72; Frézouls 1982:381– 382; Brothers 1989:108). At its center, the hyposcaenium is bisected by the main drainage channel (T6), constructed within a subterranean vaulted tunnel that ran from south to north. It was composed of several sections, the southernmost under the orchestra’s pavement, the next part that crossed the hyposcaenium, and two northern parts below the scaenae frons and the postscaenium foundations. It exited the theater from under the northern facade (see Plan 3.11), and drained into the civic center’s cloaca maxima. The vaulted tunnel over the main drainage channel presumably facilitated maintenance of the drainage

system. This tunnel was constructed when the postscaenium was added to the original scaenae frons. The southernmost section of the drainage system was built during the theater’s original construction stage and its walls were found twisted, indicative of the substantial pressure inflicted on that part of the theater’s foundations when the cavea slide occurred. The walls of the northernmost section, added soon after, show no signs of subsequent earthquake damage. The side channel, T1, added in Stratum 11, entered the hyposcaenium from under the western versura and drained into the main drainage channel, T6. Channel T1 was apparently covered with a barrel vault. The channel walls were constructed of basalt stones and its floor was plastered with dark gray mortar.

290

Walid Atrash

In Stratum 9, the hyposcaenium was divided into five sections. In the center ran a 2 m wide passage from south to north, covered with a wooden floor that was borne by square pilasters. Under it ran the main drainage channel. On either side of the channel were identical southern and northern sections. In the two southern sections, the arch system supported the pulpitum’s limestone pavement. Each section contained 28 arches between two parallel walls–– the proscaenium foundation and a wall that was constructed along the hyposcaenium’s central west– east axis (see Fig. 7.3). The northern sections of the hyposcaenium comprised construction cases enclosed by the scaenae frons foundation in the north, the side walls of the central tunnel and the staircases, and the arches’ supporting wall in the south. These cases were filled with compressed soil, over which the pulpitum’s stone pavement was laid. Under the eastern pulpitum flank, Tunnel T7 was constructed as an entrance corridor into the hyposcaenium (see Plan 3.10). It began at the western face of the eastern versura foundation wall, where it was entered via a shaft, and it was roofed with basalt slabs. This corridor, in turn, widened and from that point was covered with a barrel vault slightly lower than the flat roof. It seems that Tunnel T7 was originally longer, and was shortened in Stratum 9 by the construction of the corridor and the entrance shaft. The walls of the tunnel have no foundations and rest upon a layer of hard-limestone collapse, presumably the result of the earthquake of 363 CE, suggesting that the tunnel was first constructed in Stratum 11.

In the central soft-limestone section, erected over two basalt foundation courses, were three entrances–– the valvae regiae in the center, and the hospitalia on either side. The valvae regiae, 3.1 m wide, had hardlimestone door jambs that were integrated into the wall and narrowed the entrance to 2.7 m. The entrance was 5.35 m high and had a lintel made of two side segments, preserved in situ. The two hospitalia were identical, 3.7 m high with a 0.6 m high lintel, and 3.1–3.3 m wide with hard-limestone door jambs that narrowed the entrances to 2.2 and 2.4 m. Attached to the lintels were soft-limestone double arches, the first beginning at the lintel’s lower level, the second 0.4 m higher (preserved in the eastern hospitalia; Fig. 7.4). In the second- and third-floor walls there were probably somewhat smaller, rectangular exedrae vertically aligned with the entrances. The composition of the northern facade of the scaenae frons resembles that of the theater at Orange (Bieber 1961:201).

Scaenae Frons The northern face of the scaenae frons was 89.9 m long. It had nine entrances along its route, three in the soft-limestone central section (52 m long), and three in each of its flanking versurae. Between each entrance was a rectangular, barrel-vaulted exedra, 5.5 m high (see Plans 7.5, 7.6: F38–F41; see also Plan 3.14). The northern walls of the versurae on either side were constructed of basalt masonry and had three entrances. The first entrance led into the arched versura staircase, the second into the postscaenium side corridors that carried barrel vaults, and the third to another staircase that mounted the aditus maximi and entered the summa cavea.

Fig. 7.4. Severan Theater: reconstructed eastern hospitalia, looking south.

F42

F38 15

16 17

0

18 19

10 m

20

21 F40

27

23 24 25 26

22

Plan 7.6. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestal and column numbers.

10 m

11 12 13 14

F39

F33

29

28

F34

30

31

33

32 34

36

8

10

F35

1

7

9

F32

35

4

6

F36

F31

2

3

5

F37

F30

F41

F43

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

291

292

Walid Atrash

The southern face of the scaenae frons rear wall screened the pulpitum on the north and was lined with colorful marble slabs in opus sectile patterns and pierced by semicircular and rectangular niches that housed statues. Its central, soft-limestone section was 58.2 m long, and with the northern walls of the versurae it reached a length of 79.2 m. The wall was 4 m wide, and in front of it was a 2 m wide limestone podium. At either end, the scaenae frons facade turned to the south to adorn the itinera versurarum, also flanked by segments of podia. Five entrances opened into the pulpitum, the valvae regiae in the center, the two hospitalia on either side of the main scaenae frons facade, and the itinera versurarum of the flanking versurae facades (Fig. 7.5). In the center of the scaenae frons, the rear wall curved to create a large semicircular apse, 18.8 m in diameter, with the valvae regiae at its center. The walls on either

side of the apse, 5 m in length, contained semicircular niches at mid-height, 1.3 m in diameter and 0.7 m deep. The walls then retreated by 2.1 m to create two 13 m long rectangular exedrae with the hospitalia at their center. Above both entrances were rectangular niches in the wall. The hospitalia, aligned with the northern walls of the aditus maximi, were clearly visible from the cavea.2 The three-story-high scaenae frons columnar facade was no doubt the most grandiose and richly decorated scenic element of the theater decor (see Back Cover). It was founded upon the podium and connected to the rear wall. The podium, as customary in the western type of scaenae frons facade, was divided along its route into separate podia sections that flanked the five entrances, those on either side of the central entrance larger than those on either side of the secondary entrances. The three floors of the columnar facade consisted of

Fig. 7.5. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of scaenae frons, three-storied columnar composition.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

columns and entablatures of the Corinthian order made of imported marble and granite. The marble pedestals of the first floor, decorated with acanthus leaves in high relief, carried marble bases that were surmounted by alternating red and gray granite column shafts. Marble capitals bore a marble entablature, the frieze was adorned with rich acanthus scrolls inhabited by animals and eroses in hunting scenes, and it was crowned with a marble cornice. The second and third floors repeated the order, and each floor diminished slightly in height (see Fig. 7.5). The facade of the valvae regiae, divided into two floors each with four columns, reached the same height as the three floors of the columnar facade. The protruding and retreating line of the colorful columns and entablatures created a curtain of freestanding columns in front of the colorful opus sectile lined wall in the background. The richly decorated niches in the rear wall were flanked by a small, secondary order of columns carrying a decorated entablature and pediments, and they housed marble statues representing gods and goddesses of the GrecoRoman pantheons, such as Hermes, Aphrodite, Tyche, etc., which were visible in-between the columns. One of these statues was found by Applebaum in the western pulpitum flank where it had presumably fallen from its rectangular niche (Figs. 3.86, 10.1). They were probably all of similar dimensions, and apparently stood in the niches until the early sixth century CE, as indicated by the excavation results. The setting of the three entrances within a semicircular apse in the center and flanking rectangular exedrae resembles those, for instance, in the theaters at Pompeii and Herculaneum in Italy, and Dugga and Djemila in North Africa (Fiechter 1914:100–115). By placing columns at a relatively short distance in front of a wall (0.5 m), they lost their constructional raison d’être and became a decorative facade, retreating and advancing from the line of the wall to achieve a deep perspective and a rich effect of light and shade (MacDonald 1986:183–207). The entire columnar composition created a baroque-style facade, characteristic of second-century CE imperial architecture and a common feature of theater decor, in particular during the Severan Dynasty. This elaborate western-type composition was developed during the late first century BCE (Lyttelton 1974:200–203; Ward-Perkins 1981:260) and rapidly spread throughout the Roman Empire during the first and second centuries CE. In the Roman East, it

293

adorned the theaters at Caesarea (Frova 1965:128–145) and Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975:392–393). In the West, it is seen in the theaters at Corinth, Ferento, Gubbio, Lyons and Merida (Frézouls 1982), Pompeii, Herculaneum and Orange, and Dugga, Djemila (Fiechter 1914:100–115) and Sabratha (Sear 1990b) in North Africa. Proposed Reconstruction of the Scaenae Frons First Floor The following is a detailed reconstruction of the Stratum 12 scaenae frons columnar facade, based on the analysis of its architectural elements, taking into consideration the later renovations. Toward the end of the fourth century CE (Roman IV), as a result of the severe earthquake in 363 CE (Russell 1980), the scaenae frons was reduced in height to two floors and many of its column shafts were replaced by hardlimestone ones, presumably taken from its upper porticus, which was not rebuilt. However, most of its other marble architectural elements were reinstalled. In the latest stage, dated to the early sixth century CE (Byzantine II), when the scaenae frons was reduced to the height of one floor, some of its marble and granite column shafts were replaced by limestone ones, although most of its other components were still those of the original stage. The Stratum 12 scaenae frons elements were comprised of imported light gray marble from the Proconnesian quarries, light yellow marble from Aphrodisias, and gray Troad granite, all from Asia Minor, as well as green cipollino from Carystos in Euboea, Greece, and red Syene granite from Egypt (see below). The original Stratum 12 podium was found in situ, 2.2 m high, constructed of four courses of hardlimestone masonry with profiled base and cap moldings (see Fig. 9.16). The podium followed the outline of the scaenae frons wall, retreating along its semicircular apse and rectangular exedrae and protruding as the flanking podia segments of the entrances. Although the podium was affected by constructional problems shortly after its completion, resulting in a slight lean toward the north, it was not replaced or renovated, and continued to serve the scaenae frons columnar facade throughout its renovation stages, with leveling adjustments achieved by minor cuttings of the lower surfaces of pedestals and bases.

294

Walid Atrash

The scaenae frons columnar facade was erected upon the podium, and its first-floor order composition reached a height of 7.6 m (9.8 m including the podium). The second floor was erected over a 1.4 m high podium, almost corresponding to Vitruvius’ instructions that the podium of the second floor be half the height of that of the first (Architecture V, 6, 6), and its columns and entablature reached a height of 6.05 m (7.45 m including the podium). The third floor reached a height of 5.6 m and was covered by a sloping roof, c. 1.6 m high. Thus, the scaenae frons reached a height of c. 24.8 m, almost the same height as the valvae regiae, whose order composition reached a height of 23.9 m. The first floor of the valvae regiae, including the podia, was 12.9 m high, and its second floor, including its podium and its crowning pediment (c. 1 m), was 11 m high. Together, the entire height of the original scaenae frons in Stratum 12 was approximately the same height as the cavea porticus, 23.5 m (see Fig. 7.5). In Stratum 11, the first and second floors reached a height of 17.25 m opposite the ima and media caveae at a height of 19 m, while in Stratum 9 the scaenae frons was c. 10 m high. The columnar facade had four columns in each floor of the valvae regiae, while the flanking scaenae frons had 32 columns in each of the three floors, for a total of 104 columns (see Fig. 7.5). The valvae regiae columnar facade, erected over the protruding podia, included four red granite columns in its first floor. The entablature they carried encircled both podia and continued along the semicircular apse. The scaenae frons three-storied columnar facade on either side of the valvae regiae consisted of alternating columns of red and dark gray granite. The columns of the valvae regiae first-floor were erected upon light yellow marble bases without pedestals (0.50—0.53 m high; A6244, see Fig. 9.23:1, A6263, A6753), in contrast to the rest of the scaenae frons first-floor columns that stood on adorned pedestals. In the recent reconstruction at the site (Chapter 8), they were regrettably replaced by newly carved hard-limestone bases. Four red granite column shafts were mounted over these bases (7.10–7.15 m high), three of them were preserved (A6272–A6274, see Fig. 9.25:1; see also Fig. 3.44). Field photographs from Applebaum’s excavations indicate that they had collapsed over the pulpitum in front of the valvae regiae. The columns were crowned with light yellow marble capitals of the

Corinthian order, of which one complete capital (1.07 m high; A6183, see Fig. 9.28:1) and fragments of others (A6179+A6217, A6180, A6217) were recovered. The entablature of the valvae regiae consisted of joint architrave-frieze plating slabs and cornices. The entablature connected both pairs of columns standing on the two side podia, and was integrated into the scaenae frons rear wall at a 90˚ angle. The plating slabs (A6044+A6055+A6059+A514+A79, A6045, A6050, A6051+A6054, A6052, A6053, A6056, A6057, A6268, A6472, A6573, A6703, see Figs. 9.58–9.60) were 1.12–1.14 m high and only 0.35 m thick, presumably to save costly marble blocks. Since they were not as thick as the other architrave-frieze elements, they broke easily into small fragments when they collapsed. The valvae regiae crowning cornices were 0.82— 0.88 m high (A25 see Fig. 9.90, A6094, A6095+A6104, A6096–A6098, A6100, A6101, see Fig. 9.88, A6102, A6099+ A6103+ A6106+A6108+A6143, see Fig. 9.89, A6104, A6105, A6107, A6132, A6142, A6144+A6473, A6701). Two of the cornice elements had inner corners and must have belonged to either side of the valvae regiae, while two of the four outer-corner elements were recovered. The podia cornices of the valvae regiae were mounted by a 1.1 m high, hard-limestone masonry podium that resembled the lower podium in its cap and base molding, and carried the second-floor order composition. On the upper podium stood four light yellow marble bases (0.41–0.42 m high; A6227, A6228, A6229, see Fig. 9.23:2, A6230), and upon them were erected four light yellow column shafts reaching a height of 6.24 m (A6389, see Fig. 9.27:1, A6391–A6396, A6416–A6421, A6423, A6425, A6621, A6622), which contrasted with the red granite column shafts and light yellow capitals below. They carried four capitals of light yellow marble (0.81 m high; A6181, A6184, A6185, see Fig. 9.28:2, A90152). Although no architrave-frieze elements or cornices of the second floor were recovered, they can be reconstructed to a height of c. 1 m and 0.45 m respectively. The four columns carried a pediment that was c. 1 m high with a 25˚ angle. It would have resembled the pediments preserved in the theaters at Orange and Lyon in France (Wuilleumier 1940). On either side of the valvae regiae were the two flanking sections of the scaenae frons columnar facade, three floors high (see Fig. 7.5). In the first floor,

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

32 light gray marble pedestals stood on the podium (A6120, A6121, see Fig. 9.17; A6122, A6123+A6131, A6124, see Fig 9.18; A6125+A5126, A6127, see Fig. 9.19; A6128, A6129, A6130, see Fig. 9.20; AX, see Fig. 9.21; A90124). They had a profiled base and cap molding and a convex dado adorned with upright acanthus leaves and acanthus scrolls in high relief on two, three or four sides, while the one or two sides that faced the rear wall were left in their original, crude convex shape. The number of decorated sides was determined by their location on the podium. Pedestals decorated on four sides would have been placed on the podium at outer corners with a 90˚ angle (Column Nos. 4, 11, 26, 33; see Plan 7.6). Pedestals decorated on three sides had a wall behind, corresponding to the hospitalia’s flanking podia and the straight facade sections (Column Nos. 2, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, 22, 24, 25, 29, 30, 35). Pedestals decorated on two sides fit inner corners (Column Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 16, 21, 27, 28, 31, 32, 34, 36). The phenomenon of placing pedestals on a podium is rare in Roman architecture. The only parallels were found in the Hellenistic architectural tradition of Asia Minor. In one reconstruction of the scaenae frons in the theaters at Termassos and Sagalassos, similar pedestals were set upon the podium (Lanckoroski, Niemann and Petersen 1892:161–172, Pls. X, XI, XIII, XIV), although in de Bernardi Ferraro’s reconstruction of the same theaters (de Bernardi Ferraro 1969: Pls. II, VIII), he puts the pedestals on the second floor at Sagalassos, and on the first-floor podium at Termassos. In the theaters at Selge and Kibyra, pedestals were also reconstructed upon a podium (de Bernardi Ferraro 1966: Pls. VIII, XIII). As most of these theaters were not excavated, these proposed reconstructions should be regarded with caution as later, undated renovation stages may be involved. However, it seems that this unusual order composition had its origins in the Hellenistic architectural tradition in the East, where it appeared sporadically during the Roman period, although it was definitely not favored in the West. The connection between the straight facade and the curved apse (Column Nos. 14, 23; see Plan 7.6) created obtuse angles. As square pedestals would either protrude or create problems at the entablature level, this could be solved in two ways: using pentagonal pedestals or round foliated column bases. A foliated column base that matched both the dimensions and the decor pattern was found in the theater’s element

295

inventory and seems to indicate the chosen solution (A6571; see Fig. 9.22). Thus, foliated column bases were presumably set at the connections between the curved apse and the straight facade sections. In some theaters with the same kind of curved apse, where pedestals were not used, the problem still had to be solved at the base level. In the theater at Palmyra, Weigand (1932) proposed reconstructing pentagonal bases at these points. In another reconstruction of the same theater at Palmyra, Browning (1979:145–148) used a round base with no plinth. We believe that here also, a round foliated base should be reconstructed.3 In some structures where obtuse angles were created, as in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis, and at two intersections of colonnaded streets––Valley Street and Silvanus Street, and Palladius Street and Northern Street (see Plan 1.2)––pentagonal pedestals were employed. Also in the round Temple of Venus at Baalbek, with its semicircular exedra-shaped podium, pentagonal pedestals were used at the acute angles, and Lyttelton remarked that the use of such pedestals was unusual (Lyttelton 1974:237–238, Pl. 4). Pentagonal pedestals were also found in both southern gates at Gerasa (Kraeling 1938: Pls. XVI, LXIV, LXV), although their raison d’être was decorative, not constructive. However, the use of round, foliated column bases between the base and the column shaft was a more elegant solution to create a higher, but still-slim column shaft. According to Lyttelton (1974:54–61), this unique architectural solution had its origins in Hellenistic Alexandria, from where it spread and was adopted into Roman imperial architecture in the Roman East and Asia Minor. In Nysa-Scythopolis, in addition to the Severan Theater scaenae frons, it was employed in the western propylaeum of Palladius Street (Atrash 2006: Fig. 102). On the first-floor pedestals of the scaenae frons were bases of light gray marble, the plinths of which matched the pedestal dimensions and their diameters matched the column shafts (0.28—0.34 m high; A6220–6223, A6224, A6225, A6226, A6231–A6235, A6240, A6242, A6243, A6245, A6651, A6652, A6696, A6860, A80137, A100219, A120147). The 32 column shafts erected in the first floor had no anchoring devices attaching them to the bases or the capitals Of the eight red granite column shafts that flanked the hospitalia and itinera versurarum, two complete ones were found (4.73 m high; A1128, A6441), along with fragments of others (A6442–A6449, A6670, A6671).

296

Walid Atrash

The inventory contains five lower parts and three upper parts, which, together with the complete examples, total seven of the eight required column shafts. Apart from the red granite columns that flanked the five entrances, the columnar facade of the first floor consisted of gray granite column shafts. Five complete gray granite column shafts were found (4.66–4.82 m high; A415, A450, A460, A14076, A75507) along with five fragments (A1225, A1507, A64636, A80617, A85541). Of the first-floor, light gray marble capitals, 15 complete and six fragments of others were found (A6160–A6172, A6176, A6196, A6173, A6177, A6187, A6191, A6192, A6197). Most of the architrave-frieze elements of the firstfloor entablature, constructed on a single block, are preserved (A6001–A6006, A6010–A6019, A6022– A6042, A6048, A6149, A6674). In addition, seven frieze elements and their architraves were carved in separate elements (A6020+A6039, A6021+A6267, A6046, A6043+A110107). Over the entrances, the blocks were replaced by thin plating elements. The architrave-friezes of the first-floor entablature, adorned with floral designs and inhabited scrolls, were the most elaborate and richly decorated elements of the order. The entablature followed the line of the podium along the semicircular apse, rectangular exedrae and protruding podia. Each block extended from one capital’s center to the next. While the architrave-frieze elements were originally connected to the rear wall by the wedge elements, in the later renovation stages, when some of the architrave-frieze elements were re-cut and lost their original precise fittings, iron connecting rods were required, a technique that was unnecessary in the original setting. Most of these connecting rods are remarkably well preserved. The original location of each element along the facade was reconstructed here according to its collapsed location based on excavation photographs taken by Applebaum, as well as its type and the connecting iron rods on the upper surfaces. In this reconstruction, the architrave-frieze elements were divided into types according to their proposed location (Fig. 7.6). Six console elements were decorated on three sides (see Fig. 7.6:1), while the fourth side was anchored to the wall. Four of these belonged to the podia flanking the hospitalia (A6002, A6005, A6003, A6004) and two to the itinera versurarum southern podia (A6001, A6006).

Three facade elements had a decorated left-side corner, while the right side was diagonally cut (Fig. 7.6:2; A6031, A6014+A6047, A6033). One facade element had a left-side corner, cut straight to mid-block on the right side and then further diagonally cut (Fig. 7.6:3; A6032). Two facade elements had a right-side corner, with the left side diagonally cut (Fig. 7.6:4; A6025+A6058, A6021+A6267). Three facade elements were straight cut on both sides to mid-block and then diagonally cut inward (Fig. 7.6:5; A6038, A6016, A6028). Five facade elements were diagonally cut outward on the left side and straight cut on the right (Fig. 7.6:6; A6017, A6030, A6029+A6042, A6013, A6019). Three facade elements had a left-side straight cut and a right-side diagonal cut outward (Fig. 7.6:7; A6026, A6034, A6023). Two facade elements had a left-side straight cut to mid-block, then a diagonal cut inward, and a right-side with a corner (Fig. 7.6:8; A6015, A6022). Five concave elements had both sides straight cut to mid-block and then diagonally cut inward. Three of them are regular elements (Fig. 7.6:9; A6011, A6012, A6043+A110107) and two were inserted into the wall on one side (A6036, A6020+A6039). One concave element had both sides straight cut to mid-block and then diagonally cut inward, the right corner decorated (Fig. 7.6:10; A6035). Six were wedge-shaped elements (Fig. 7.6:11; A6027, A6041, A6048, A6040, A6037, A6018). The architrave-friezes and cornices of the first floor were fully recorded and studied and a reconstruction proposal was prepared by the author. In the second phase of the research, the architectural elements were laid out on the ground over a wide area in their actual proposed architrave-frieze reconstruction (see Chapter 8). The following description of the proposed reconstruction begins in the southwestern corner, with Column No. 1, and continues to the southeastern corner, to Column No. 36 (Plans 7.7, 7.8; Figs. 7.7, 7.8). Column No. 1 carried architrave-frieze A6001 (see Fig. 9.41). Its rear end was inserted into the wall and its upper surface was cut by a 5 cm step during the Stratum 11 renovation for better fitting of its cornice. On its right side, the profiled moldings were cut diagonally to meet the next element at a 90˚ angle. Over the

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

297

6

1

7

2

8

3

4

9

5 10

11

Fig. 7.6. Severan Theater: architrave-frieze types.

itinera versurarum, only fragments were found of the architrave-frieze plating slabs. Column No. 2 carried architrave-frieze A6017 (see Fig. 9.42). The element was straight cut on its right side at a 43˚ angle toward the back. The left side was diagonally cut in a 27˚ angle. Its left end was inserted into the wall and it was connected to the itinera versurarum plating slabs by an iron rod (Fig. 7.9). Its right side

was connected to the next element by two connecting iron rods. Column Nos. 2–3 carried architrave-frieze A6031 (see Fig. 9.43). It had a decorated corner on its left side and the left corner was straight for 0.25 m and then cut at an obtuse angle of 138˚ all the way to the back for its connection to A6017 (see Fig. 9.42). Two iron rods connected the two elements and another rod was

A6001

A6017

A6031

1

2

3

A6030

A6027

4

5 A6002

7

0

A6046

A6005

8

9

10

A6026

A6013

11

A6032

A6048

12

A6038

A6015

10 m

13

A6041

A6 03

14

7

Plan 7.7. Severan Theater: western part of scaenae frons, architrave-frieze display.

6

A6029+6042

1 01 A6

12 60

15

A

A6014+6047

60

16

A

36

17

18

298 Walid Atrash

20

20

21 22

3 07 04 101 A6 A1

19

9

A6 0

A6 04

0

5 03

24

A6028

A60 18

25

A6016

A6 033

26

27

A6019

28

A600 3

29

10 m

A6007 A6010 A6024

30

A6 004 A 6049

31

Plan 7.8. Severan Theater: eastern part of scaenae frons, architrave-frieze display.

0

23

A6

A6 03

A6034

A602 5 A 6058

33

32

36

A6863 A6864 A110183 A110184 A110182

A6023

A6021 A6006

A6267

35

34

6022

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

299

300

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.7. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the western architrave-frieze, laid out on the ground.

Fig. 7.9. Severan Theater: reconstruction of connection between architrave-frieze elements A6017 and A6031 over column No. 2.

Fig. 7.8. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the eastern architrave-frieze, laid out on the ground.

found on its right side, which was diagonally cut at a 45˚ angle. Alternative locations for this element over Column Nos. 4–5, Nos. 26–27 or Nos. 33–34 did not fit, as the decorated section was too long. Column Nos. 3–4 carried architrave-frieze A6030 (see Fig. 9.44). Its left side was diagonally cut at a 44˚ angle. Alternative locations over Column Nos. 10–11 or Nos. 32–33 were too long. Its decorated section, 1.75 m long, when added to the corner of the next element that was 0.25 m long, furnished the required

2 m length. The connecting rod on its left side fit perfectly with that of A6031 (see Fig. 9.43), for which a 90˚ angle was created. On its right side were two more connecting rods. Column Nos. 4–5 carried architrave-frieze A6014+A6047 (see Fig. 9.45). It had a left corner and its right side was diagonally cut at a 35˚ angle. The leftside corner was 0.25 m long, cut in the back to a depth of 0.4 m and then at an obtuse angle all the way to the back. Technically, it could have fit Column Nos. 2–3 or Nos. 26–27, although it would have been too short for Nos. 33–34, where the connecting rods would not fit. In the location suggested here, its length fits well, as do its connecting rods on the left side (Fig. 7.10). On its right side, diagonally cut at a 35˚ angle, two additional rods were found, one connecting to the next element,

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

301

Fig. 7.10. Severan Theater: reconstruction of connection between architravefrieze elements A6030 and A6014+A6047 over Column No. 4.

the other to a wedge-shaped element, A6027, at the back (see Fig. 9.79). Column Nos. 5–6 carried architrave-frieze A6029+A6042 (see Fig. 9.46), which was 3.33 m long. Its left and right sides were diagonally cut at a 45˚ angle. It could fit Column Nos. 31–32 or Nos. 27–28 in the eastern part of the scaenae frons, although it was found by Applebaum on the pulpitum’s western side. It would also fit in length over Nos. 9–10, but its sides would not. Thus, the preferable location is over Column Nos. 5–6. The right side was cut to a length of 0.2 m only and then diagonally inward all the way to the back. On this side it connected to A6002 (see Fig. 9.47) at a 90˚ angle, and on the left side it was diagonally connected to A6014+A6047 (see Fig. 9.45). The left-side iron rods connected with the adjacent element and the wedge-shaped element A6027 (see Fig. 9.79). For some reason, the latter was not used in the original stage, and was only later converted into a wedge. As such, its rear end was inserted into the wall, while its front end was cut diagonally at a 50˚ angle. It was inserted over Column No. 5 and its upper iron connecting rods fit both A6014+A6047 and A6029+A6042 (see Figs. 9.45, 9.46). Column No. 7 carried console element A6002 (see Fig. 9.47). A possible alternate location over Column No. 29 was ruled out due to the perfect connection with A6029+A6042 (see Fig. 9.46). The western hospitalia had an architrave-frieze of plating slabs, of which a section was found that continued the entablature over the entrance lintel (A6046; see Fig. 9.48). Column No. 8 carried console element A6005 (see Fig. 9.49), which connected to the hospitalia’s right-side plating element.

Column Nos. 9–10 must have carried an element that was diagonally cut on its right side and straight on its left, and architrave-frieze A6026 matched the requirements (see Fig. 9.50). Architrave-frieze A6034 (see Fig. 9.72) also fit, but it was found on the eastern side of the pulpitum and therefore most probably belonged to Column Nos. 31–32. Column Nos. 10–11 carried architrave-frieze A6013 (see Fig. 9.51), its left side diagonally cut at a 43˚ angle, its right side straight cut to a depth of 0.25 m and then diagonally inward. Two other elements could tentatively fit this location: A6025+A6058 (see Fig. 9.73) was too long, while from A6021+A6267 (see Fig. 9.75) only the frieze was preserved and it was better integrated in the eastern side. A symmetry was recognized in the scaenae frons in which elements with a left corner belonged to the western side, and those with a right corner, such as A6025+A6058 and A6021+A6267, belonged to the eastern side. Two other possible locations for A6013 were also ruled out: Column Nos. 32–33 would have required a right-side corner, and it would have been too long for Column Nos. 3–4. It best fit the current location in both length and corner, as well as the connecting rod on the right side. Column Nos. 11–12–13–14 carried the longest architrave-frieze section on both scaenae frons sides (6.6 m), set above four columns and connected to the valvae regiae exedra (Fig. 7.11). The entablature elements had two corners: the left had a 90˚ angle and the right, which connected with the curved apse, required an obtuse angle. The only element with such a corner on its right side is A6015 (see below). On the left side, A6032 had a left corner (see Fig. 9.52), and

302

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.11. Severan Theater: reconstruction of long architrave-frieze section over Column Nos. 11–14.

Fig. 7.12. Severan Theater: reconstruction of connection between architrave-frieze elements A6032 and A6038 with wedge member A6048 over Column No. 12.

the appropriate cutting on its right side that connected to a wedge element (A6048) and to the adjacent element (Fig. 7.12). The right side was straight cut for 0.24 m and then diagonally cut inward at a 38˚ angle. On the left-side surface were two connecting rods that matched those of A6013 (see Fig. 9.51). On its right side were two additional rods, one connected to the next element, the other to the wedge element (see Fig. 9.81:1). Architrave-frieze A6038 (see Fig. 9.53) was identically cut on both sides, first straight to a depth of 0.23–0.30, then diagonally inward at a 20–40˚ angle.

On its upper surface were two iron connecting rods that fit those of A6032, while the rods on the right side were not preserved. The wedge A6048 had collapsed in this location. Its rear end that was inserted into the wall was straight cut, while its opposite end was wedge shaped. It was placed over Column No. 12 between A6032 and A6038 (see Fig. 7.12). On its upper surface were two iron rods. Architrave-frieze A6015 (see Fig. 9.54), above Column Nos. 13–14, had a rounded, decorated rightside corner that was 0.23 m long, while its left side was straight cut to a depth of 0.2 m and then diagonally at a 52˚ angle. On its upper right surface was a connecting rod and two others on its left side where the wedge element A6041 was inserted (see Fig. 9.80). The rear end of wedge A6041 was straight cut for 0.3 m and then had an inward diagonal cut of 62˚. Its wedgeshaped end was inserted between A6038 and A6015 with a perfect connection, although its upper part was broken, so no remains of connecting rods were found. It seems that it was originally intended to be part of the facade, but at some stage was reused as a wedge element. Column Nos. 14–15 carried A6011 (see Fig. 9.55), its left side was cut diagonally at a 10˚ angle inward, its right side at 30˚. On its upper left surface was an iron connecting rod that attached to A6015 (see Fig. 9.54).

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Column Nos. 15–16 carried A6012 (see Fig. 9.56), its left side straight cut to mid-block and then diagonally inward at 50˚, while its right side was straight cut. On the inner left side of its surface was an iron rod that connected to wedge A6037 (see Fig. 9.81:3), and on the right side were two rods that connected to A6036 (see Fig. 9.57). Wedge A6037 (see Fig. 9.81:3) was decorated on one side. Its rear end, inserted into the wall, had a 70˚ cut, while its opposite end was wedge shaped and inserted between A6011 and A6012 over Column No. 15. Column No. 16 carried A6036 (see Fig. 9.57), its right end inserted into the wall, its left end straight cut. On its upper left surface, two iron rods fit those on A6012. Column No. 21 carried A6039+A6020 (see Fig. 9.61). Here, the architrave and frieze were carved on separate blocks, the frieze block also including the cornice’s lower part. Its left side was inserted into the wall, while its right was straight cut. Column Nos. 21–22. Here also, the architrave and frieze were carved on separate blocks. The architrave element was not found, but it presumably resembled A6039+A6020. The broken frieze element, of which two parts were found (A6043+A110107; see Fig. 9.62), had the cornice’s lower part carved on top. Column Nos. 22–23 carried A6035 (see Fig. 9.63). Although broken on its right side, a small section of its corner was preserved. On its left side it had a straight cut and then an inward diagonal cut at 13˚. Column Nos. 23–24–25 (see Fig. 7.8) carried A6028 (see Fig. 9.64), an unusual composition in which a single element crossed over three columns. Its right end had a straight cut and then an inward diagonal cut at 30˚. Its left end had a straight cut and then an inward diagonal cut at 75˚, with a 0.14 m ledge for wedge A6040 (see Fig. 9.81:2). On its upper surface, on both the right and left sides, were iron rods. Between A6035 and A6028 and above Column No. 23, rested A6040, a wedge element that connected both to the rear wall without connecting rods. It was crudely carved, its rear end, inserted into the wall, was straight cut, while its opposite end was wedge shaped. Column Nos. 25–26 carried an architrave-frieze element with a right corner. One such element is A6025+A6058 (see Fig. 9.73), although, as it was cut diagonally on its left side, it does not fit. Architravefrieze A6016 (see Fig. 9.65) is the only element that would fit, although it had no right-side corner. Both sides had straight cuts, then inward diagonal cuts of

303

Fig. 7.13. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of architrave-frieze elements A6028 and A6016 with wedge A6018.

40˚. According to Applebaum’s photographs, it was found nearby. On both sides of its upper surface were iron rods that fit the adjacent elements. wedge A6018 (see Fig. 9.81:4) was inserted between A6028 and A6016 (column No. 25). its rear end, inserted into the wall, was straight-cut, then diagonally cut inward at 63˚, while the opposite end was wedge shaped. It had three connecting rods (Fig. 7.13). Column Nos. 26–27 carried an architrave-frieze element with a left corner and an outward diagonal cut on its right side. Three such elements were found, two of which were already integrated into the western side (A6031, A6014+A6047, see Figs. 9.43, 9.45). The first was ruled out as it was too long, while the iron rods of the second did not fit. Element A6033 (see Fig. 9.66) fit both the length and the connecting rods. It had a straight, then diagonally cut left corner that connected to A6016. An iron rod on the left fit A6016 (see Fig. 9.65). Column Nos. 27–28 carried architrave-frieze A6019 (see Fig. 9.67), its left side cut diagonally outward and its right side straight. Between A6019 and the following

304

Walid Atrash

A6003 (see Fig. 9.68), a small wedge element must have been inserted, although it was not found. Column No. 29 carried console element A6003 (see Fig. 9.68), its rear end inserted into the wall. Its facade was broken and its two decorated sides were of different lengths. An iron rod on the upper right surface connected to the hospitalia’s plating slab A6024 (see Fig. 9.70). Slab A6024 was not an original part of the entrance plating, but was placed here during Stratum 11, and it was connected by iron rods to both flanking console elements A6003 and A6004+A6049. The original eastern hospitalia plating slabs A6007+A6010 (see Fig. 9.69) were also connected to A6024. Column No. 30 carried console element A6004+A6049 (see Fig. 9.71), whose rear end was inserted into the wall. Its facade was partly broken and repaired during the restoration works. On its upper left surface was an iron rod that connected to the hospitalia’s plating element A6024. Column Nos. 31–32 carried A6034 (see Fig. 9.72), the upper part of its frieze missing. It was cut diagonally outward on the right side and straight on the left. Its length and cuts correspond to this location, and Applebaum’s photographs indicate that it had collapsed

here. On its upper right surface was an iron connecting rod. Column Nos. 32–33 carried A6025+A6058 (see Fig. 9.73) that had a decorated right corner, while its left side was cut diagonally outward. It had iron rods on both sides of its upper surface that fit the adjacent elements perfectly. According to the photographs, it was found in this location, so possible locations over Column Nos. 3–4 or Nos. 10–11 on the western side were ruled out. The architrave-frieze elements were connected over the inner corner (Column No. 32) and outer corner (Column No. 33) with iron bars (Fig. 7.14). Column Nos. 33–34 carried A6022 (see Fig. 9.74), its left-side corner, diagonally cut, connected to A6025+A6058, while the diagonally cut right side connected to A6021+A6267, of which only the frieze was preserved (see Fig. 9.75). Element A6021+A6267, carried by Column No. 35, was cut diagonally outward on its left side and had a decorated, broken right corner. The left-side diagonal cut was adjusted on top and bottom to connect to the adjacent element. Column No. 35 carried A6023 (see Fig. 9.76), which was integrated into the rear wall at its right end, while its left side connected to A6021+A6267. It

Fig. 7.14. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of connections of inner and outer corners of architrave-frieze elements.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

also connected to the itinera versurarum slabs above the entrance’s archivolt. Only fragments of the frieze slabs were found (A6863, A6864, A110182, A110183, A110184, see Fig. 9.77:1–5), and it is clear that they were separate from the architrave. Column No. 36 carried console element A6006 (see Fig. 9.78) that was integrated into the wall. Its left side was connected to the itinera versurarum plating elements. While the architrave-frieze of the scaenae frons first floor was almost completely preserved, some of its figurative reliefs had been deliberately defaced, probably by Byzantine or Islamic iconoclasm. The original composition of the architrave-frieze was slightly altered during its renovation stages (Strata 11, 9), as several elements changed locations and others were re-cut; however, in spite of these renovations, the original composition was remarkably retained. All the architrave-frieze elements, apart from the consoles, had soffit strips on their lower surfaces that did not always fit the intercolumniation. The cornices that crowned the Corinthian order composition of all three floors of the scaenae frons created, together with the architrave-frieze, a richly adorned entablature. The light gray marble cornices of the first-floor were carved of smaller blocks than the architrave-friezes, and it was not necessary to connect them with iron rods as they were held firmly in place by the second-floor podium that was erected over them. Only some of the console elements had iron rods. The cornices protruded from the friezes by 0.3 m and nearly all their elements (51) were found (Plans 7.9, 7.10). The cornice elements were divided into types according to their location (see Figs. 9.91–9.97): Console cornices decorated on three sides (A6111, A6450, A6112+A6114+A6070 = A6114, A6110, A6087, A6113+A6154); Straight cornices straight cut on both sides (A6089, A6065, A6079+A6153, A6119, A6151, A6081, A6063, A6078, A6451); Straight cornices straight cut on the left side (A6069, A6082); Straight cornices straight cut on the right side (A6061+A6066 = A6061, A6068, A6074, A6080); Straight cornices cut diagonally outward on the left side (A6072+A6092, A6073+A6118, A6093+A6109, A6062+A6064, A6115);

305

Straight cornices cut diagonally outward on the right side (A6078+A6672); Straight cornices cut diagonally outward on both sides (A6071+A6088); Straight cornices with an inner corner (A6086+A6067); Straight cornices with an outer corner (A6060, A6075, A6084, A6085, A6090; A6653); Concave cornices (A6083+A6076, A6077, A6478, A6091, A120122, A6146). The proposed reconstruction follows the same order as that of the architrave-friezes, beginning with Column No. 1 in the southwest, to Column No. 36 in the southeast. Column No. 1 carried cornice A6113+A6154 (Fig. 7.15). The cornice was decorated on three sides and had an inner corner, the longer right side of which passed over the plating frieze of the itinera versurarum. Over the southern side of the western itinera versurarum was cornice A6068 connected to A6113+6154. Column Nos. 2–3 carried cornice A6653, which had an outer corner. Column Nos. 3–4 carried cornices A6074 and A6451. The first had its left side diagonally cut. It was discovered close by in the collapsed debris, and therefore probably belongs here. Attached to it on the left was cornice A6451, both sides of which were straight cut. Column Nos. 4–5 carried cornice A6090 (see Fig. 9.93:2) with an outer corner. It was connected to cornice A6086+A6067 (see Fig. 9.94), which had an inner corner. These two connected cornices created two corners, an outer one over Column No. 4 and an inner one over Column No. 5. Their lower surface fit onto frieze A6014+A6047 (see Fig. 9.45). Column Nos. 5–6 carried cornice A6061, with an outer diagonal cut on its right side. Together with cornice A6086+A6067, it created a cornice section that matched frieze A6029+A6042 (see Fig. 9.46). Column No. 7 carried console cornice A6110, decorated on three sides, its left side partly broken. Cornice A6069 rested over the hospitalia frieze A6046. Column No. 8 carried console cornice A6114 that was composed of three parts (see Fig. 9.91:1). The first and second parts were found in the area. The third part (A6112) joined them from the back and had an inner corner on the left side and an inner diagonal cut on the right. Its left inner corner connected to the western hospitalia entablature.

A6068

1

2

A6067

A6090

3 A6074

A6451

A6653

A6113 A6154

4

5

6

A6061

0

8

A6114

9

10

A6093 A6109

11

A6085

A6118 A6073 A6151

12

13

A6079 A6153

10 m

14

Plan 7.9. Severan Theater: western part of scaenae frons, cornice display.

7

A6110

A6069

A6

A6086

08

3 A6 A6861

07 6

15

77

16 A6065

0 A6

17

18

306 Walid Atrash

19 20

21 22

24

25 26

A6075

27

28

A6092 A6072

10 m

30

29

33

32

31 A6111

A6088

A6071

A6450

A6080

Plan 7.10. Severan Theater: eastern part of scaenae frons, cornice display.

0

23

A6082 A6089A6060 A6063

A120122

A6478 A6146

A6081

A6091

A6117 A6150 A6148

36

A6672

A6062 A6078 A6064 A6087

35

34

A6119

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

307

A6084 A6115

308

Walid Atrash

0

2

m

Fig. 7.15. Severan Theater: reconstruction of Column No. 1 and entablature, with cornice A6154.

Column Nos. 9–10 carried cornices A6093 and A6109, connected along a straight cut, and both fit this location in length, height and connection. Column Nos. 10–11 carried cornices A6118+A6073 and A6085 (see Fig. 9.92:2). The first was cut

diagonally on its left side so it fit the connection over Column No. 10 with the previous cornice (A6109). Together with A6085, which had an outer corner, they fit the location over frieze A6013 (see Fig. 9.51). Column Nos. 11–12–13–14 carried a straight facade section that connected with the curved apse to the right of it. It began with cornice A6085 (above) and joined on the right to A6151, A6079 and A6153, all regular cornices cut straight on both sides. Their decorated profiles match, and A6151 was identified in photographs where it had collapsed next to Column Nos. 11–14. Column Nos. 14–15–16 carried concave cornice elements A6861 (see Fig. 9.97:3), A6076+A6083 (see Fig. 9.97:1), A6065 and A6077 (see Fig. 9.97:2). Their connections fit perfectly. Column Nos. 21–22 carried concave cornice elements A6091, A6146, A6478 and A120122. The lower 7 cm of the cornices were integrated into frieze elements A6020+A6039 (see Fig. 9.61) and A6043+A110107 (see Fig. 9.62). Column Nos. 23–24–25–26 carried a straight facade section connected to the semicircular exedra on the left by an outer corner, comprised of cornices A6082, A6063+A6089 (see Fig. 9.96:2), A6060 (see Fig. 9.96:1), a gap of a missing cornice, then A6075 (see Fig. 9.93:1). Their total length was 5.35 m. Some of the cornices were found in this area and could successfully be joined. Column Nos. 26–27 carried cornice A6075, its outer corner attached to A6081 on the right. Column Nos. 27–28 carried cornice A6092+A6072. Column No. 29 carried console element A6450 (see Fig. 9.91:2). Both its decorated sides were diagonally cut. It had an iron connecting rod on top, uncommon in cornice elements. According to Applebaum’s photographs, it was found in front of the eastern hospitalia. Between column Nos. 29 and 30, over the eastern hospitalia, is cornice element A6080. It also had two iron rods on its upper surface, which connected perfectly with those of the two flanking consoles on either side (A6450, A6111). It was found in this area, as indicated by Applebaum’s photographs. Column No. 30 carried console A6111 (see Fig. 9.91:3), its decorated sides diagonally cut to different lengths to fit the connections on either side. Its general dimensions match well the frieze underneath. On the right side of the upper surface was an iron rod that connected with cornice element A6071+A6088 (see below).

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Column Nos. 31–32 carried cornice A6071+A6088 (see Fig. 9.95:1), which was cut diagonally inward on both sides. It included the upper 0.1 m section of the frieze (A6034, see Fig. 9.72), and on its left end was a step that matched frieze A6004+A6049 (see Fig. 9.71). It was found in the area, next to frieze A6034, which it matched both in connection and pattern. Columns Nos. 32–33 carried cornice A6115 that was connected to A6084 over Column No. 33 (see Fig. 9.92:2); A6084 had an outer decorated corner on the right, while A6115 had a diagonal cut on the left. They fit perfectly both the location and the connections. Column Nos. 33–34 carried cornice A6084 and A6119 (see Fig. 9.96:3), the latter vertically cut on both sides. Cornice A6119 fit its location and was found in the area. Column Nos. 34–35 carried cornice A6117+ A6150+A6148 with an outer corner on the right side. It was found in the area. An alternative location over Column Nos. 32–33 was ruled out as they are somewhat too long. Over the eastern itinera versurarum, this cornice was joined to cornices A6672, A6062, A6064 (see Fig. 9.95:2) and A6078 (see Fig. 9.95:3). The last four elements fit their location well. Column No. 36 carried cornice A6087 (see Fig. 9.92:1), with a diagonal cut on its left side and a vertical cut on its right side, which fit both the location and the connections. Order Composition of the Scaenae Frons Second Floor The scaenae frons second floor was rebuilt after the earthquake of 363 CE (Stratum 11) and dismantled in the early sixth century CE (Stratum 9). Like the first floor, the second floor entablature was also composed of imported, light gray marble, green cipollino and gray granite. Over the cornices of the first floor, another podium, 1.4 m high, was erected that spanned the space between the freestanding columnar facade and the rear wall, sealing the firstfloor entablature and anchoring it to the rear wall. The second-floor order was not erected on pedestals and its bases with square plinths were placed directly upon the podium (Fig. 7.16). Of the 32 light gray marble bases of the second floor, 22 were recovered (0.51–0.64 m in diameter, 0.24–0.36 m in height; A6236–A6239, A6241, see Fig. 9.24:2, A6246, A6251, A6650, A31113, A 41155, A60108, A60635, A80122, A80131, A80629, A81102, A100236, A100663, A100674, A100680, A120117).

309

Of the 32 column shafts of the second floor, 14 sections of light gray marble column shafts were found (0.53–0.58 m in diameter, restored column shaft height c. 4.1 m; A6323, A6327, A6329, A6341, A6344, A6345, A6347, A6349, A6350, A6367, A6368, see Fig. 9.27:3, A6369, see Fig. 9.27:2, A6695, A40645), as well as five complete gray granite column shafts (0.54– 0.60 m in diameter, 4.09–4.14 m in height; A1233, A6862, A70619, see Fig. 9.26:2, A80619, A100648) and 15 sections of gray granite shafts (A216, A306, A584, A1216, A1219, A1222, A1224, A1231, A6402, A64014, A65202, A65203, A100618, A100652, A101138). The light gray marble and gray granite columns were most probably alternately placed. The column shafts carried Corinthian capitals of light gray marble, of which twelve complete examples (0.41– 0.47 m in diameter, 0.54–0.60 m in height; A14, A97, see Fig. 9.39:4, A976, see Fig. 9.40:3, A6174, A6175, see Fig. 9.35:1, 2, A6190, see Fig. 9.37:1, A6193, see Fig. 9.35:3, A6194, see Fig. 9.37:2, A80623, see Fig. 9.36:1, A100607, A110122, see Fig. 9.37.3, A110633) and six fragments (A478, A60622, A80153, A80626, see Fig. 9.38:1, A81109, see Fig. 9.36:2, A110650, see Fig. 9.38:3) were discovered. The second-floor architrave-friezes were presumably fluted. Two elements were found (A102, A103, see Fig. 9.83), along with plating elements (A90143, A100162, see Fig. 9.84). The secondfloor cornice (0.27–0.32 m high; A41165, A50606, A120623, A121135, see Fig. 9.99:3, A232, A132, see Fig. 9.100:3, 4) was covered with the thirdfloor podium. The height of the second-floor order, including the podium, reached 7.45 m. Order Composition of the Scaenae Frons Third Floor The scaenae frons third floor collapsed in the earthquake of 363 CE (Stratum 11) and was not rebuilt. Not all the architectural elements of the third-floor order composition were found in the theater, as they were reused during the Byzantine renovation stages of the civic center monuments. The third floor was also constructed of imported stone. The podium was probably c. 0.7 m high (Vitruvius, Architecture V, 6, 6) and had no pedestals on it, the light gray marble bases with a plinth placed directly upon it. Of the 32 bases, 10 were found (0.30–0.43 m in diameter, 0.14–0.21 m in diameter; A31145, A31146, A31147, A31196, A60603, A60634, A100608, A100627, A100633, A100712).

310

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.16. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of scaenae frons three-storied columnar composition.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Three types of column shafts were used, light gray marble, gray granite and green cipollino. Of these, 22 fragments of light gray marble column shafts (A44, A574, A575, A6281, see Fig. 9.27:5, A6303, A6305– A6307, A6321–A6322, A6324–A6326, A6328, A6342, A6343, A6348, A6428, see Fig. 9.27:4, A6690, A6692–A6694), five complete gray granite columns (3.53–3.57 m; A44307, A44322, A65096, A85096, A110114, see Fig. 9.26:3), 43 gray granite fragments (A26, A41, A501, A606, A1021, A1159, A1217, A1218, A1221, A1223, A1226, A1228, A1229, A5590, A6388, A6398–A6401, A6403, A6404, A6413–A6415, A6426, A6427, A6429, A6435–A6437, A26190, A40612, A41164, A64635, A65097, A65098, A61532, A61533, A65179, A65200, A65207, A90103, A91140) and nine fragments of cipollino column shafts of the same height as the complete gray granite columns (A6280, A6282, A6283, A6299–A6302, A6304, A6691) were recovered. Nine light gray marble Corinthian capitals of the third floor were found (0.30–0.53 m high; A574, A631, A632, A665, A976, see Fig. 9.40:3, A65125, A636, A678, A80622, see Fig. 9.39). A few fragments of the entablature elements were identified, as they were reused elsewhere and cut. The architrave-frieze must have been 0.46–0.52 m high, and may have had fluted decor. Seven cornice elements of this order were found in secondary use outside the theater (0.18–0.24 m high; A100, A101, see Fig 9.98, A231, A31189, see Fig. 9.100:1, 2, A31188, A90148, A100127). The height of the third floor, including its podium and the roof, thus reached 5.6 m. a limestone course, c. 0.35 m high, was erected over the third floor cornices. It must have carried the scaenae frons’ sloping tile roof (1.58 m). Materials of the Scaenae Frons and Their Acquisition Stable isotope analysis of the light gray marble (Pearl and Magaritz 1991) indicated that this marble, composing the main bulk of the scaenae frons composition, originated in a single crop from the Proconnesian quarries, and was probably ordered directly from the quarry rather than from a marble yard that would have held blocks originating from numerous crops. Rather smaller, though more costly, amounts of light yellow marble came from Aphrodisias in Asia Minor, gray granite from the Troad quarries in Asia Minor, red granite from Syene in Egypt, and green cipollino from Carystos in Euboea, Greece. The colorful opus sectile plating

311

and the white marble statues of the rear wall decor presumably came from Aphrodisias. This grand scenic composition must have been meticulously planned and ordered, then quarried and carved according to the precise block measurements and inner profiles of the acquisition order. In the case of the architraves, their soffits were also completed in the quarry. As almost no surplus elements were found, the acquisition orders must have been quite accurate. The assemblages were then shipped from the different ports presumably to Caesarea, and transferred by land to Nysa-Scythopolis (Mazor and Atrash, forthcoming), where large workshops of talented artisans carved all of the richly decorated pedestals, bases, capitals, architrave-friezes and cornices of the Corinthian order that composed the magnificent facade. Comparanda and a Short History of Development of the Baroque Scaenae Frons The remarkably rich and elaborate columnar facade of the scaenae frons (see Fig. 7.5) finds close parallels in both the Roman East and West. The two-floor composition of the valvae regiae resembles those erected in the theaters at Caesarea (Levine 1975:25) and Bostra (Frézouls 1952:69–79), while the entire composition of the scaenae frons and its rear wall, constructed of soft limestone and plated with colorful opus sectile geometric patterns in different types of marble, resembles that in the theater at Orange, dated to the reign of Hadrian. This theater also had a twofloor-high columnar facade of the valvae regiae, with alternating granite and marble column shafts and a statue of the emperor in a niche above the entrance. The flanking columnar facades were of three floors, 103 m long and 36 m high (Atrash 2006: Fig. 352). The scaenae frons of the theater at Sabratha, built during the reign of Septimius Severus (200 CE), was also three floors high and had three semicircular exedrae adorning its entrances. These were flanked by columns of alternating white, purple pavonazzetto and green cipollino and gray granite (Bieber 1961:206). In the theater at Leptis Magna, dated to the Severan period, the scaenae frons was three floors high and constructed of marble. On the podium, within the central semicircular apse and the flanking rectangular exedrae of the hospitalia, stood alternating column shafts of white-red breccia and green cipollino (Bieber 1961:206). The scaenae frons of the theater at Palmyra most closely resembles the Severan Theater of Nysa-

312

Walid Atrash

Scythopolis and is also dated to the Severan period. It was 45.26 m long and had a central semicircular apse incorporating the valvae regiae, and two flanking rectangular exedrae incorporating the hospitalia. The scaenae frons was three floors high, flanking the valvae regiae that had a higher columnar facade of four columns (Fourdrin 1989:171–174). The grand scaenae frons composition, characteristic of the baroque style, was achieved by its scenic and richly decorated facade and emphasized by its Corinthian order and its elaborately adorned frieze decor in high relief. The use of light gray and light yellow, red and gray granite and dark green cipollino in alternating sequences granted the facade a remarkably rich and multicolored appearance, while its background wall with colorful opus sectile plating and niches inhabited by marble statues provided the columnar facade with an appropriate background. It was a costly monumental enterprise and as it was the highlight of the theater, it was designed to impress, and no doubt to reflect the importance, wealth and prosperity of the city and its rich citizens, who presumably contributed most of the funds. The rich, elaborate baroque decor of the scenic facade developed out of the simply decorated theaters of the Early Roman period, which became even more ‘overloaded’ during the Severan period, a phenomenon generally termed the ‘Flavian renaissance’. This ‘renaissance’ did not exclude theaters of the eastern provinces in general, and in Syria-Palaestina in particular (Tsafrir 1984:191–193). In the early years of the Roman Empire, new imperial architectural trends were gradually developing throughout the empire, reaching their peak during the second half of the first and the second centuries CE. Widely based on Greek classical traditions, the new imperial architecture tended to be far more innovative. Traditional architectural vocabulary and the familiar orders, in particular the Corinthian so widely favored by Roman architects, as well as Greek ratios of columns and entablature, were faithfully retained in the newly invented assemblages. The Roman architects honored old traditions and respected their familiarity, while exploring new boundaries. For example, the column, traditionally used as a constructional element supporting a roof in Greek temples, facade and porticus, rapidly lost all of

its constructional meaning as its innovative Roman use indicates. The trend of using a variety of different-colored marbles seen in the Severan Theater dominated other columnar facades, such as the far more grandiose example at Miletus (Kleiner 1986:116, Fig. 85). Colored marbles in columnar facades were also used in thermae halls, as in the imperial-cult marble court in the thermae at Sardis (Yegül 1986:152–169), in library facades, as in the library of Celsus at Ephesus (Scherrer 2000:161), and even in arches and city gates (Mazor 2004:183–188). Versurae On either side of the scaena, the floor levels of the versurae corresponded to the floors of the scaenae frons on one side and the three floors of the cavea on the other. Their original plan cannot be restored, as they were renovated in the mid-third century CE, when the postscaenium was added and the scaena somewhat shortened. The renewed versurae and scaena were built upon a foundation platform, 109 m long and 8.5 m wide (see Plans 7.4, 7.5). The rectangular versurae (16 × 13 m), identical in plan, were integrated with the northern walls of the aditus maximi in the south, and with the scaenae frons in the north. The versurae had two passages at ground level, the itinera versurarum, leading to the pulpitum, and the postscaenium side corridors connecting the postscaenium northern corridor with the aditus maximi. The decorated facades of the versurae that faced the pulpitum were integrated into the scaenae frons decor. The itinera versurarum, 16.5 m long, 3.5 m wide, and roofed by vaults, ran parallel to the aditus maximi between the pulpitum at one end and the postscaenium side corridors at the other. On the northern side of the versurae, spiral staircases were constructed within rounded, silo-shaped shafts that were entered through arched entrances (Figs. 7.17– 7.19). These spiral staircases ascended the versurae’s floors and entered the first- and second-floor rooms over the itinera versurarum, and the third-floor room of the porticus level (Fig. 7.19). The rooms over the itinera versurarum were covered with barrel vaults. From these rooms, the media and summa cavea were

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

313

Fig. 7.17. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through versura.

accessed via staircases erected over the aditus maximi vaults that led into the lower and upper praecinctiones. The versurae are therefore the functional passageways between the cavea and the scaena (Fig. 7.18). Over each itinera versurarum were second- and third-floor rooms with arched windows crowned with an architrave-friezes and cornices, overlooking the pulpitum. A staircase in the center of the southern wall of the second- and third-floor rooms, with 11 steps and a sloping, soft-limestone barrel vault, ascended over the aditus maximi vaults to the cavea (Fig. 7.19).

The stairwells housing the spiral staircases were square shaped on the outside and silo shaped on the inside, constructed of basalt masonry. From the entrances in the northern wall, barrel-vaulted corridors of basalt masonry, c. 2 m long, led to the staircases. The inner wall of the spiral staircases was thus shaped as a chimney shaft surrounded by spiral steps, with an outer circular wall. Along the entire height of the central shaft, wedgeshaped windows were installed for light and air, and covered with basalt slabs over which the staircase roof was installed (Fig. 7.19).

314

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.18. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of the media cavea’s northeastern corner and its connection to the versura.

The wedge-shaped steps were integrated into the rounded, inner and outer walls. The staircase roof began at the sixth course of the outer wall and was constructed of similar, wedge-shaped slabs, narrower on the inner side and wider on the outside, laid in sections of differing width that also rose in steps. The customary construction technique of spiral staircases in Roman architecture, in which the upper steps served as the roof for the lower ones, without roof slabs, was not used here, and an intermediate cover was constructed to serve as the roof. Versurae with staircases appear in Roman architecture in two versions: spiral staircases in round towers and square staircases in a square towers. In the theater at Aizanoi in Asia Minor (de Bernardi Ferrero 1970: Pl. XXXVI), spiral staircases were installed within round

towers, as in our case. A square staircase in a square tower with a central square pilaster was the more common type, seen, for instance, in the theaters at Philippopolis in Syria (Coupel and Frézouls 1956:57– 61) and Aspendos in Asia Minor (Bieber 1961:208; de Bernardi Ferrero 1970: Pl. XXXI). Square staircases similar to those at the last two sites were also used in city gates, propylaea, temples and even bathhouses, as in the southwestern corner of the tepidarium in the eastern thermae at Nysa-Scythopolis (Mazor and BarNathan 1994:127–129) and the Temple of Bacchus at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: 77–99). Some scholars link the origin of the square staircase to Nabatean architecture (Negev 1973), although their well-rooted Hellenistic origin seems to predate their appearance in Nabatean architecture (Mazor 2004:165–167).

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

315

Fig. 7.19. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through versura inner staircases.

Postscaenium Shortly after the completion of the theater, presumably around the mid-third century CE, a postscaenium was added to the theater due to constructional problems. The three-storied postscaenium was attached to the rear wall of the scaenae frons by a system of arches and barrel vaults creating northern, eastern and western inner corridors (Figs. 7.20, 7.21). The postscaenium superstructure was constructed upon a basalt foundation platform inserted into a foundation trench cut deep into the sloping rock and

attached to the scaenae frons foundation. In the east, the foundation ended in an obtuse angle, as it was attached to an existing Roman temple (see Plan 3.1) that predated the Severan Theater (Mazor and BarNathan 1996:8–10). The first floor of the postscaenium’s northern facade was divided by three entrances into four symmetrical sections (see Plan 7.5). In between were four rectangular exedrae (F30–F33; see Plan 3.20) constructed of basalt masonry in the lower courses, and soft-limestone in the upper courses. They were roofed by soft-limestone barrel vaults, their entrances carried arches, and the

316

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.20. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of scaena and postscaenium.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

floors were plastered. These exedrae may have served as taverns. Along the southern face of the wall, facing the inner corridor, the four sections held similar rectangular exedrae (F34–F37) with two semicircular exedrae at either end (F42, F43), and these six exedrae may have served as changing rooms for the actors or as equipment storage rooms. Two of the rectangular

317

exedrae, F37, F34, stood opposite the hospitalia, the other two, F36, F35, opposite the exedrae that flanked the valvae regiae (F39, F40). The semicircular exedrae stood opposite the versura staircase entrances. In the second and third floors of the postscaenium, in both the northern and southern facades, these rectangular rooms were repeated in each floor with

Fig. 7.21. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of postscaenium added in Stratum 12.

318

Walid Atrash

arched windows over the entrances. The three floors of arched openings resembled the honeycombed facade of the theater’s circumference wall, which lent the heavy complex a somewhat more airy appearance (see Fig. 7.20). Postscaenium Northern-Facade Entrances The central entrance of the postscaenium, 3.63 m wide, 4.7 m high and 4.1 m deep, had doorposts of hard-limestone masonry that somewhat narrowed the entrance. The walls of the inner passage were built

0

of hard-limestone masonry on the north and basalt masonry on the south. The entrance and the threshold attached to it were paved with limestone slabs and there was a barrel vault over the inner passage. The entrance was adorned with a limestone lintel (A6213, see Fig. 9.7:1), whose frieze was decorated with acanthus scrolls inhabited by floral motifs that resemble those of the scaenae frons. On either side, the lintel was supported by decorated, s-shaped consoles. Over the frieze was a richly decorated cornice, also resembling that of the scaenae frons (Fig. 7.22).

1 m

Fig. 7.22. Severan Theater: reconstruction of central entrance of postscaenium.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

The western and eastern entrances, 3.5 m and 3.36 m wide, had doorposts that somewhat narrowed them. The entrance walls were constructed of limestone masonry on the north, and basalt masonry on the south. The entrances and the thresholds attached to them were paved with large, hard-limestone slabs and the inner passages were covered with barrel vaults. On either side, rectangular sockets were hewn for woodendoor hinges. On the northern face, the entrances had decorated lintels (western, A6212+A6711, see Fig. 9.7:2; eastern, A60116+A6214+A6602, see Fig. 9.7:3) supported by two decorated, s-shaped consoles. The lintel friezes and cornices were richly carved, like those of the central entrance. As all three entrance cornices were preserved, they could be entirely reconstructed. Postscaenium Northern Inner Corridor Between the scaenae frons and the postscaenium, a three-story-high corridor was created, covered with a system of arches and vaults carried by the side walls and protruding pilasters (see Fig. 7.21). The postscaenium’s southern face had eight integrated basalt pilasters located on either side of the central entrance and the exedrae beside the hospitalia, and opposite the versurae staircase corners. Facing them, on the northern face of the scaenae frons, were opposing limestone pilasters, attached to the wall but not integrated into its limestone courses. These pilasters carried the arches that served as constructional ribs for the 2 m high barrel vault, which was intersected by the cross-section barrel vaults of all three entrances and flanking exedrae. Upon it, the second floor of the postscaenium corridor was identical in design and construction, with a barrel vault 7.5 m high. Above the first-floor exedrae and entrances was a second row of vertically aligned exedrae with windows that opened to the north. The third floor was identical, with a barrel vault 5 m high and similar windows. The three floors of the postscaenium reached a total height of 22 m (see Fig. 7.20). Cavea In most theaters of the western type, the audience seats were built over the ambulacra—a sophisticated network of semicircular vaulted passages, several floors high— or in the eastern provinces, partly over a hill slope and partly over a vaulted system of ambulacra divided by vomitoria (see below). The cavea in larger theaters

319

was usually separated into three horizontal sections, the ima, media and summa caveae, which were further divided vertically into wedge-shaped cunei, separated by radial scalaria, and equipped with rows of seats. These terms were referred to by Vitruvius (Architecture V, 6, 3). Ancient sources and inscriptions indicate that the various parts of the cavea were occupied according to status (Sear 2006:2–7). In the Roman East, large theaters with triplesegmented caveae were relatively common, as at Sepphoris (Weiss 1994:13), Bostra (Finsen 1972:3–4), Neapolis (Magen 2005:103) and Philadelphia (elFakharani 1975), in Asia Minor at Ephesus (Scherrer 2000:158–161), and in North Africa at Sabratha and Leptis Magna (Caputo 1959: Pl. 72; Sear 1990a). The cavea of the Severan Theater at NysaScythopolis was three stories high, divided into three horizontal sections––the ima, media and summa caveae––separated by two praecinctiones. The ima and the lower part of the media cavea were built against the hill slope upon the remains of the earlier Southern Theater, while the upper part of the media and the summa cavea were erected upon an elaborate vault system, a construction combination used also at Sepphoris (Waterman 1937:6–12), Hammat Gader (Sukenik 1935:27–30), the western theater at Gadara (Weber 1989), Caesarea (Frova 1965:73–80), Sebaste (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942:57–61), Neapolis (Magen 2005:93–103), the southern theater at Gerasa (Austen and Harrison 1927) and Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975:388). The cavea in the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis was built at a 34˚ angle (see Plan 7.3: Section 1-1), which was the customary angle, also seen in the theaters at Bostra, Neapolis and Philadelphia (Segal 1999:110–114; Atrash 2006:90). Balteus Between the ima cavea and the orchestra stretched the balteus, bordered on one side by the cavea podium and on the other by the backs of the curiale seats (see Fig. 3.92). It was a 1.6 m wide passage paved with large trapezoidal slabs, and was entered through a wide entrance in the center and from both ends. In most places the original pavement was preserved, occasionally replaced by smaller slabs during the Byzantine period; for instance, on its northeastern side a section was repaved with limestone and basalt slabs. The balteus was a common element in Roman theater

320

Walid Atrash

design, and a similar, well-defined balteus bordered on both sides seems to have existed also at Tiberias (Atrash 2006:82) and Neapolis (Magen 2005:116, Plan 21). Ima Cavea The ima cavea had 15 rows of seats. The number of rows varied in theaters in the region, and there were 18 rows in Neapolis, 14 in Gadara, the northern theater at Gerasa and Birketein, 13 in Caesarea, Bostra and Philadelphia, 10 in Petra and 9 in Philippopolis (Atrash 2006:90, n. 252). The seats, carved from a single limestone block, had a profiled cap molding that protruded slightly. At both ends of the cuneus, the seats were separated from the scalaria by a vertical molding (Fig. 7.23; see Plan 3.21: Sections 1-1, 2-2, Fig. 3.96). The seats resembled those of the theater at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975:388), and the seats in the amphitheater at NysaScythopolis, which presumably originally belonged to the hippodrome, although their profiles differ slightly. The upper row in the ima cavea consisted of curiale seats with a high back, presumably reaching a height of c. 0.96 m, although the back was nowhere completely preserved (see Plan 3.21: Section 1-1; see also Fig. 9.119:1). Similar curiale seats were also constructed around the orchestra, where their high backs also served as a banister for the balteus. Curiale seats varied in size in the theaters of the Roman East. In the southern theater at Gerasa, curiale seats had a general height of 0.87 m, and at Philadelphia the seats reached a height of 1.08 m. At Gadara (Atrash 2006:90, n. 255) and Hammat Gader (Sukenik 1935: Fig. 7; Hirschfeld 1987; Sear 1994:225), the curiale seats, each carved from one basalt stone, had a general height of 1.12 m and were presumably carved by the same artisan. At Neapolis, 96 scattered curiale seats were 1.15 m high, and were assumed to have been placed along the praecinctio that bordered the ima cavea (Magen 2005:116–119). In the upper row, the curiale seats on either side of the scalaria had profiled foot moldings, a type of curiale seat that was relatively common in Roman theaters and exedrae with benches. In the Roman East, they were found in the theaters at Bostra (Brünnow and Domaszewski 1909: Figs. 928–982; Finsen 1972), Neapolis (Magen 2005:16–119) and Pella (Smith and Day 1989:26–33), and in Asia Minor at Selge

(de Bernardi Ferrero 1966: Pl. VII), Termessos, Cibyra and Sagalassos (de Bernardi Ferrero 1969: Pls. 11–14, 41–47, 65). Nine scalaria divided the ima cavea into eight cunei. All the scalaria start with a semicircular step in the balteus. The central scalarium ascended along the theater’s central axis, the northeastern and northwestern ones were attached to the aditus maximi, while the other six were evenly spaced, three on each side of the central axis (see Plan 3.21). All nine scalaria were aligned with the axes of the acoustic cells (see below). Every two steps equaled the height of a seat, and the two steps and the seat of alternating sides were carved from a single limestone block, a system that integrated the cuneus seats and scalaria into a solid construction (see Fig 7.23). The banisters that ran along the northwestern and northeastern scalaria (I and IX; see Plan 3.21) were diagonal and sprang from profiled pedestals at the balteus level, which were decorated on their facades with, for example, a human figure (a priest?) in high relief (see Fig. 9.116:3). On the northeastern and northwestern ends of the ima cavea, over the aditus maximi barrel vaults, two tribunalia, flanked by Scalaria I and IX, held four seat rows each (Figs. 7.24, 7.25; see Plan 3.21: Section 2-2, Fig. 3.61). They crowned the walls of the aditus maximi at their entrances into the orchestra. The northern sides of the tribunalia were bordered by sloping banisters with profiled cap moldings. The northern sloping section displayed a depression marking the connection with the rows of seats, thus supplying the data for the reconstruction of the tribunalia rows of seats. In front of the first row was a passage, and along the facade was a horizontal banister (see Fig. 7.25; Fig. 9.116:1). The same arrangement can be seen in the well-preserved theater at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975:388). Both tribunalia collapsed in 749 CE. the eastern one was recently reconstructed when the eastern aditus maximus was rebuilt (see Fig. 3.150; Chapter 8). The scalarium arrangement and the number of cunei in the Severan Theater does not correspond to the design suggested by Vitruvius (Architecture V, 6, 1–3), nor do they match any other theater in the region. In the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986:211) and that at Birketein (McCown 1938:164), the ima cavea had four cunei, while the ima cavea at Gerasa had eight and at Philadelphia nine (el-Fakharani 1975: Fig. 2). It seems that at Nysa-Scythopolis, the asymmetrical

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

0

1

321

m

Fig. 7.23. Severan Theater: isometric section of seat rows and scalaria of ima cavea.

number and locations of the scalaria and cunei were determined by the necessity for an open channel along the axis in front of each acoustic cell for acoustic purposes (see below). In contrast, symmetrical arrangements of scalaria and cunei characterized most of the theaters in the East and West. Asymmetrical settings with no scalaria over the main axis of the cavea were found at Bostra, Sebaste and Philadelphia in the Roman East (Segal 1999: Figs.

42, 110, 126), at Aspendos and Ephesus in Asia Minor (Bieber 1961:167–220), and at Pompeii and Taormina in Italy and Sicilia. In front of the ima cavea, a podium constructed of two limestone blocks encircled the balteus (see Plan 3.21: Section 1-1), similar to the podia at Bostra (Brünnow and Domaszewski 1909: Figs. 928–982, Pls. L, LI) and Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975: Fig. 2). At Nysa-Scythopolis, the podium was crowned

322

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.24. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of eastern tribunal.

Fig. 7.25. Severan Theater: eastern tribunal after reconstruction, looking east.

323

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

with a cap molding that resembled in profile that of the seats, and was segmented by the nine scalarium entrances that ascended from the balteus. A similar design is seen in the theaters at Sepphoris (Waterman 1937:6–12, Figs. 3–5, Pls. XI–XX), Caesarea (Ringel 1975:73–80), Sebaste (Zayadine 1966) and Neapolis (Magen 2005:98–99). On the surface of the podium, a row of 36 square sockets were set at a distance of 0.13 to 0.15 m from the first row of seats, forming a horseshoe pattern surrounding the orchestra (Plan 7.11). The locations of these sockets were well planned, with an average distance of 2.1 to 2.5 m between them. The sockets continued in a straight line alongside the scaenae

frons podium, the pulpitum and its flanking staircase podia, and on both sides of the valvae regiae. In the aditus maximi, similar sockets were found enclosing the passages on their inner sides. Square wooden poles, c. 2 m high, were apparently installed in them to hold up a strong fence, thus creating closed animal cages to a height of 3.5 m (Fig. 7.26). These sockets were apparently added around the mid-third century CE, when the theater was also used as a provisional amphitheater with removable devices that could be easily set up and taken down, as required (Atrash 2006:92–93). During the Stratum 11 (Roman IV) renovations, following the earthquake of 363 CE, this system went out of use, and an amphitheater was

0

Plan 7.11. Severan Theater: socket system of Roman arena in ima cavea podium and pulpitum.

10 m

324

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.26. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the fence that converted the orchestra into an arena.

erected on the plateau south of the civic center (Tsafrir and Foerster 1997:134, Figs. 17, 18). In the region, sockets of the same type, presumably for this specific purpose, were observed in the theaters at Tiberias (Atrash 2012:84), Neapolis (Magen 2005:104), and the southern theater at Gerasa (Atrash 2006:93). Some scholars assumed that in the eastern provinces there was no conclusive evidence for the use of a theater’s orchestra as an arena, as no podia were higher than 1.5 m, which would have been too low to screen the audience from the beasts (Golvin 1988:239–247; Weiss 1994:72). However, the evidence from the theater at NysaScythopolis suggests that the podium and the pulpitum could have been fenced in to a height of 3.5 m, and the theater used as an active arena (Atrash 2006:92–93). However, it should be noted that evidence for the use of orchestras as arenas does exist in the region, although until now not recognized as such. In the region, sockets

of the same type, presumably for this specific purpose, were observed in the theaters at Tiberias (Atrash 2012:84), the eastern theater at Gadara (Bührig 2009), Capitolias (Jum‘a al-Shami 2005), Neapolis (Magen 2005:104), and in the southern theater at Gerasa (Atrash 2006:93). In Asia Minor, sockets of this kind were observed in the theaters at Troia (Rose 1991), Stobi (Bieber 1961:217) and Philippi (Modona 1960:233; Bieber 1961:17), while in other theaters, such as Priene, Ephesus and Miletus (Atrash 2006:93, No. 269), a c. 2.6 m high podium surrounded the orchestra, probably for the same purpose. These features reflect a multi-purpose system that allowed the use of the auditoria as both theaters and amphitheaters with minor, removable adjustments. Other sockets that were found in seats of the ima cavea (Plans 7.11, 7.12; see also Plan 3.21) served for the securing of the velum with ropes and wooden poles during the Byzantine period (see Chapter 3).

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

0

325

10 m

Plan 7.12. Severan Theater: Byzantine tribunal in the center of the ima cavea and the sockets for its railing, and the Byzantine velum socket system in the ima cavea.

Lower Praecinctio The lower praecinctio ran between the ima and media caveae, bordered by the media cavea podium and the backs of the curiale seats (see Fig. 3.106). It was 1.5 m wide and paved with large limestone slabs laid in the same pattern as those of the balteus (cf. the southern theater at Gerasa, Sear 1994:225). Media Cavea The proposed reconstruction of the media cavea presented here is based on the preserved foundation core, the height of the media cavea podium, the assumed angle of the seats and the location of the first row of seats behind the podium of the media cavea. The media cavea was founded over 19 vomitoria roofed by sloping barrel-vaults, and nine acoustic cells, all covered with a massive foundation core of roughly cut basalt stones set in radiating steps at an approximate angle of 34˚ and held in a dark gray mortar (see Fig. 3.111). The media cavea, 10.4 m wide, was presumably built at the same angle as that of the ima cavea, although its seats were entirely robbed prior to the earthquake of 749 CE. It was divided by nine scalaria into ten cunei (see Plan 7.3), continuing the same design as the ima cavea. According to Vitruvius, there should be six scalaria and seven cunei in the media cavea, each scalarium centered in between those of the ima cavea (Architecture V, 6, 2–3), a plan also not employed in

the theaters at Gadara, Bostra, Caesarea and Sebaste (Segal 1999: Figs. 27, 42, 73, 110). Each cuneus had 15 rows of seats, as in the ima cavea, and those at the northern ends above the tribunalia and connected to the versurae had a rectangular shape (Fig. 7.27). At Gerasa, the media cavea in the northern theater had eight rows and in the southern theater, 15. At Bostra, there were nine rows and at Philadelphia, 14 (Segal 1999: Figs. 42, 92, 100, 128). In front of the podium of the media cavea and in the upper part of the media cavea, the backs of the curiale seats served as the banisters of the lower and upper praecinctiones. The first foundation course of the media cavea was laid into a foundation trench that was cut into the cavea’s foundation core. Its upper level protruded some 0.12 m from the wall face and was integrated into the praecinctio pavement and the thresholds of the vomitoria entrances. The podium wall had a cap molding that protruded c. 0.14 m. The suggested reconstruction of the podium reaches a height of 2.6 m (Figs. 7.28–7.30), as is also the case in the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986: Pls. I– XXXII) and that at Sabratha (Caputo 1959: Pl. 72). In some well-preserved theaters in the East, the podium of the media cavea reaches heights of 2.0 to 2.9 m, as in the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986: Fig. 3), at Bostra (Brünnow and Domaszewski 1909: Figs. 928–982; Finsen 1972:3–7), and at Selge and Sagalassos (de Bernardi Ferrero 1969:41–47).

326

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.27. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of the cavea’s northeastern corner and its connection to the versura.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Fig. 7.28. Severan Theater: media cavea podium with vomitorium entrance and flanking staircases, looking east.

0

1 m

Fig. 7.29. Severan Theater: reconstructed section through media cavea podium, several seat rows and a vomitorium.

327

328

Walid Atrash

Eight vomitorium entrances were installed within the podium of the media cavea, dividing it into nine segments (see Plan 7.3). Flanking each vomitorium entrance were staircases that rose in 12 steps on either side to the media cavea, where they met the scalaria (Figs. 7.30, 7.31). The podium courses and the stairs were well integrated, and within each limestone course two steps were carved, as was observed in the ima cavea’s scalaria (see Fig. 3.108). The rear wall of the podium was connected to the vault of the vomitoria (Fig. 7.32). The vomitoria entrances were narrowed by the limestone door jambs, which carried an arch upon which the entrance lintel rested (see Fig. 7.28). The inner lintels over the staircases flanking the vomitoria entrances had a concave shape, while their outer facade was adorned with a profiled cap molding that extended over the door jambs as well (see Fig. 9.120). The vomitorium entrances and their flanking staircases carried a lintel adorned with the same profiles as those of the praecinctio cap molding, which it continued. Over the staircase entrance, the lintel

and its inner barrel vault functioned as the staircase’s ceiling (see Figs. 7.29, 7.30). Similar vaulted lintel sections over podium staircases are well preserved in the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986:211– 215). The wide podium of the media cavea, the result of the staircases installed within it, resembles those in both the southern (Schumacher 1902: Figs. 13–17) and northern theaters at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986:211–215; Sear 2000). The northern theater was first erected as an odeum and later enlarged into a theater during the second century CE by adding a summa cavea. The high podium with its vomitorium entrances belonged to the original odeum stage, while the podium staircases were integrated in the second stage, when the summa cavea was added. The western theater at Gadara (Weber 1989), the theater at Bostra (Butler 1907: Pl. IV; Finsen 1972: 3–7), the theater at Philippopolis (Coupel and Frézouls 1956:11–19), and both the theater and the odeum at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975: Fig. 2; Almagro 1983: Figs. 22, 24) also had staircases within the media cavea podium, although they were not roofed and their

Fig. 7.30. Severan Theater: reconstruction of media cavea podium with vomitorium entrance and flanking staircases.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

0

1

m

Fig. 7.31. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through staircases within media cavea podium.

Fig. 7.32. Severan Theater: connection of vomitorium vault with rectangular inner entrance, looking west.

329

330

Walid Atrash

vomitorium entrances had no lintels. In Asia Minor, the theater at Sagalassos (de Bernardi Ferrero 1969:44–47) had a similar podium with inner steps. In general, two heights could be distinguished in the media cavea podia of theaters in the East: in theaters with vomitorium entrances furnished with lintels, the podium rose to a height of 2.9 m, while in those without lintels, the podium usually did not surpass 2.5 m. The lintel-furnished type at Nysa-Scythopolis best resembles the northern theater at Gerasa (Clark et al. 1986: Fig. 3) and the western theater at Gadara (Weber 1989). The lower type of podium, in which the vomitorium entrances into the praecinctio had no lintels, was observed in the theaters at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975: Fig. 2), the southern theater at Gerasa (Austen and Harrison 1927: Pls. I, II), and that of Bostra (Segal 1999: Fig. 43). The northern ends of the podium were connected to the versurae in a well-planned setting that has no parallels in other theaters (Fig. 7.33). Elsewhere, the podium of the media cavea was connected to the corners of the versurae in a straight line, while

in our case, the podium did not continue straight northward but retreated inward about 1.2 m, creating a rectangular exedra, 5 m wide, over the vault of the aditus maximi. In the center of this exedra was the vomitorium entrance, without the flanking staircases leading up to the media cavea. Two architectural elements of this entrance were found, representing the lower door jamb and the complete lintel, which had the same profiled molding as all the other vomitorium entrances (see Fig. 9.120). The two exedrae at the northern ends of the media cavea podium created the entrances to the tribunalia of the ima cavea; they were surrounded by a banister and the backs of the curiale seats. Thus, each tribunal was entered either through a 1.2 m wide entrance from the praecinctio, or by a passage under the media cavea that connected to Vomitoria 1 and 19. Similar tribunalia were found in the theaters at Sabratha (Caputo 1959: Pl. 72) and Syracuse (Polacco and Anti 1980), where the ima cavea rows of seats continued over the vaults of the aditus maximi as in our case, and the tribunalia were part of the ima cavea.

Fig. 7.33. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of the cavea and scaena during the Late Roman period (Roman IV).

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Vomitoria Vomitoria were designed to reduce crowd flow in and out of the theater. The Nysa-Scythopolis theater had 19 vomitoria comprising eight sets that led from the outer circumference wall of the theater into the praecinctio between the ima and media caveae and also, via narrow corridors, into nine acoustic cells. The vomitoria were paved with large basalt slabs, some of which were preserved in situ. They were roofed by barrel vaults, most of which were also well preserved, and at the intersections with transverse passages, by cross-section barrel vaults that rested on pendentives at the corners (see Fig. 7.32; see also Fig. 3.23). The vomitoria were arranged in sets: seven double, one triple and two singles, each set connected internally by transverse passages. The irregular arrangement of the end vomitoria was the result of the acoustic-cell system, in which each cell related to an axial scalarium, apart from Cells 1 and 9, which were located south of their associated scalaria. The vomitoria over the aditus maximi (the two singles) were added to the vomitoria on both northern sides, in essence creating irregular sets of three in the northwest and four in the northeast. The vomitoria are described from northwest to northeast. Vomitoria 1/2/3 composed a single set. The northwesternmost Vomitorium 1 ran over the western aditus maximus and led to the tribunal, the central Vomitorium 2 ran through a narrow corridor into an acoustic cell, while Vomitorium 3 led into the praecinctio (Fig. 7.34; see Plans 3.23, 3.24). Vomitorium 1 was intersected twice by transverse passages and reached the tribunal. It rose in the east from its floor at the tribunal level toward the west in three steps. Its sloping barrel-vault roof rose toward the west and intersected with the cross-section barrel vault of the first transverse passage. Over this vault section the seats of the media cavea were erected. The western end of Vomitorium 1 was blocked by a wall equipped with a window. A staircase covered by a barrel vault led from Vomitorium 1 into Vomitorium 2. Vomitorium 2 was also roofed by a barrel vault constructed in rising sections that rose toward the west. The wedge-shaped wall between Vomitoria 1 and 2 (W20) had two entrances, the eastern of which connected the two vomitoria. The vault connecting the passage between Vomitoria 1 and 2 was carried by pendentives at the corners of the passage walls (see Fig. 7.34). It mounted the barrel vault of the

331

western aditus maximus in three steps and reached the level of Vomitorium 1. From there a sloping staircase descended nine steps into the second-floor room of the versura. At the eastern end of Vomitorium 2 was a small entrance that led via a straight corridor into an acoustic cell (see Fig. 7.34). From Vomitorium 2, two entrances connected it with Vomitorium 3, which led into the praecinctio. The barrel vaults of Vomitoria 2 and 3 are reconstructed based on the better-preserved vomitoria. They would have carried three graded sections of barrel vaults that rose to the west, corresponding with the media cavea’s angle, each section higher than the previous one. At the transverse passages, horizontal barrel vaults intersected them. Vomitoria 4–15 were composed of pairs of parallel vomitoria (Fig. 7.35). Both vomitoria of each pair were roofed by three graded sections of barrel vaults constructed of eleven basalt-masonry rows (see Plan 3.25: Sections 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4; Figs. 3.116–3.121). The section of the barrel vault nearest the praecinctio was constructed at a 15˚ slope, the barrel vault of the outer section that reached the ambulacrum had a 10˚ slope, while the mid-section had a 12˚ slope. The right-side vomitorium ran from the theater circumference wall and entered the praecinctio through a rectangular entrance flanked by staircases on both sides that led to the media cavea (see above). The vomitorium walls were constructed of basalt masonry, apart from the limestone praecinctio door jambs and lintels that were integrated into the media cavea podium (see Figs. 7.29, 7.32). The inner and outer barrel-vault sections were connected to the transverse passages from the left vomitorium and the ambulacrum by horizontal barrel vaults carried on pendentives erected at the corners (see Figs. 7.32, 7.36). The left vomitorium ended at a wall in which a small entrance was pierced that led to the left through a narrow corridor at an obtuse angle, into a pear-shaped acoustic cell. Vomitoria 16/17/18 and 19 in the northeast presented a different arrangement. In this set of four vomitoria, vomitorium 19 extended over the eastern aditus maximus, as vomitorium 1. Thus set connected with two acoustic cells, and led into the praecinctio. All four vomitoria were connected by transverse passages (see Fig. 7.18). At the end of Vomitorium 16, a diagonal corridor led to an acoustic cell located to its right and a passage

332

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.34. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of Vomitoria 1/2/3.

connected it to Vomitorium 17. The barrel vault over the transverse passage between Vomitoria 16 and 17 was fully preserved. It was built of ten rows and sprang from the wall’s fifth course. Vomitorium 16 had three graded barrel vaults that rose from west to east. The

passages connecting Vomitoria 16 and 17, and 17 and 18 had cross-section barrel vaults that were connected to the main vomitorium vaults. Vomitoria 17/18/19 resemble Vomitoria 1/2/3 in their layout, dimensions, construction method and vaulting system.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Fig. 7.35. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through Vomitoria 4–15, media and summa caveae.

Fig. 7.36. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through vomitorium connecting passage.

333

334

Walid Atrash

Below the summa cavea, ten vomitoria led from the upper ambulacrum to the upper praecinctio. They were 4.7 m long, covered with sloping barrel vaults that were 2.2 m high in their inner section and 3.5 m high in their outer section (see Fig. 7.35). The vomitorium system was intended to reduce the pressure of audiences entering and exiting the theater; however, the system in the Severan Theater at NysaScythopolis with the integration of acoustic cells is unique in plan and function, with no parallels in other Roman theaters. Similar vomitorium systems, but without acoustic cells or inner corridors, are seen in theaters in the region, for example in the western theater at Gadara (Schumacher 1890:49), at Philippopolis and at Bostra (Segal 1999: Figs. 4, 40). In the theater at Caesarea, the system partly resembles that at NysaScythopolis, with six vomitoria, four of them double, one of each pair leading into the praecinctio, while the other was blocked mid-way (Frova 1965:183–184). In North Africa, in the theaters at Sabratha (Caputo 1959) and Leptis Magna (Caputo 1987), a vomitorium system existed, although their inner plans and functions differed. The theater at Sabratha had as many as 25 vomitoria, evenly placed around the theater’s circumference wall, but only six of them led into the cavea, the rest serving as staircases to the summa cavea (Caputo 1959: Pl. 71). In contrast, in the theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, the staircases to the summa cavea were entered from the circumference wall and had no connection with the vomitorium system (see below). It seems that the vast variation in vomitorium design indicates the latitude granted to theater architects and the consequent versatility of their architectural solutions. Acoustic Cells No less unique were the nine pear-shaped acoustic cells built under the media cavea, behind its podium. The entire division of the cavea segments, both horizontal and vertical, was a result of these unusual cells, which were important enough to influence the inner plan of the cavea as well as the number, location and design of the vomitoria. They were accessed by narrow corridors that were entered from the left-side vomitorium of each pair (see Plan 3.23). Cells 2–8 were approached via a bent corridor that entered on the right side of the acoustic cell, which was located on the axis line of the scalaria, while Cells 1 and 9 had straight corridors and were not aligned with the scalaria.

The pear-shaped cells vary slightly in dimensions (2.7–3.6 m long and 2.4–2.7 m wide), and were constructed of basalt masonry, their walls well integrated with the corridor walls and enclosed in front by the podium wall of the media cavea. The narrow corridor leading to the cell was roofed with basalt slabs and paved with small basalt stones in a dark gray mortar. A step descended to the cell floor, also made of small basalt stones in a gray mortar. The irregular, domeshaped roof of the cell had a higher, rounded part in the rear then sloped diagonally toward the more pointed front of the cell at an angle that matched the slope of the media cavea. At the rear, the roof sprang from the fifth course, and in the front, it was incorporated into the lower three limestone courses of the media cavea’s podium. A window can reasonably be reconstructed over the first course of the media podium, immediately below the spring course of the dome (see Figs. 7.28, 7.35), along the cell’s central axis in line with the scalaria (see Fig. 3.23), and measuring the width of the scalaria. Regretfully, the media cavea podium was not preserved to this height and therefore there is no conclusive evidence for the existence of such windows. In the past it was stated that remains of a window in Cell 8 were observed (Ovadiah and Gomez de Silva 1981– 1982:85–95), although no signs of such were seen by the IAA expedition. The contours of the cells were irregular and the walls were erected upon foundations that in most cases did not match the wall contours, as they ran in straight lines and protruded into the cells. These cells were well preserved on the rear side up to the height of the dome (see Fig. 3.122). Although there is no definitive evidence for such, it can be assumed that the cells were designed to improve the theaters’ acoustics. Over the years, numerous scholars have described and studied the acoustic cells in the Nysa-Scythopolis theater. The British traveler and researcher James Bankes was the first to draw attention to these cells when he visited the site in 1818 and made an accurate plan of the media cavea, its vomitoria and acoustic cells, and associated them with Vitruvius (Segal 1999:51– 52, No. 80, Fig. 52). Irby and Mangles (1823:302), Robinson (1856:328) and Guérin (1874:286), all of whom visited Nysa-Scythopolis and described the Severan Theater in the nineteenth century, assumed that these were acoustic cells in which brass vessels were placed, constructed according to Vitruvius’

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

instructions (Architecture V, 5, 1). Conder and Kitchener (1882:101–104) also prepared a detailed plan of the theater and its unique cells on behalf of the PEF. In their description of the cells, they followed Robinson, Guérin, Irby and Mangles and stated: “the oval recesses half way up [were] intended to contain brass sounding-tubes,” a suggestion that was strangely changed some paragraphs later, where they refer to them as “cages where the wild beasts were no doubt placed.” In his report of his excavations in 1960–1963, Applebaum described them as tholoi, found them difficult to explain and suggested they may have provided entry to the praecinctio and from there, access to the flat platforms built over them for “honoratiores of the peregrini” (Applebaum 1978:86–87). However, the architectural analysis of the cells seems to rule out any entry into the praecinctio. Their corridors were clearly not meant for distinguished guests to squeeze into, the steps leading to the media cavea had no relation to the cells and left no room for platforms over them. Applebaum cited a reference to the cells in the theater at Autun in Gaul, dated to the reign of Vespasian (Applebaum 1978:87, n. 15), although this refers to the media cavea steps, and there was only one cell in that theater. Fuks (1983:135–136) raised various options for the cells’ function but concluded that their purpose remains obscure. Some scholars have argued for the acoustic function attested to by Vitruvius (Ovadiah and Gomez de Silva 1981–1982; Plommer 1983), while others reject this theory as “romantic nonsense” or “… the legendary Vitruvian sounding vessels” (Izenour 1977:39–40). Sear (2006:8–9) devoted a paragraph to the phenomenon in his monumental work analyzing Roman theaters, in which he leans toward an acoustic function for the cells. He relates them to the sloping wooden roof over the stage, remains of which were preserved in the theaters at Bostra in Syria, Arausio in France, and Aspendos in Asia Minor, and the wooden doors in the scaenae frons (valvae regiae, hospitalia and itinera versurarum) in all the theaters, all of which served an acoustic purpose to lend resonance to the actors’ voices. According to Sear (2006:8–9), Onorio Belli, who described a number of theaters in Crete in 1586, mentioned acoustic vases in the theater at Lyttus (see also Falkener 1854:18), while Maufras (1847:5, n. 65) stated that Cuningham noticed nine cavities, 0.49 m wide and 0.65 m apart, in the theater at Saguntum

335

Italy. In the small theater at Nemus Aricinum in North Africa, a number of small, semicircular niches, 0.5 m in diameter, were discerned in the rim of the cavea (Sear 2006:8–9). Sear also mentioned several cases in which amphorae were embedded in niches in the proscaenium or in the tenth row of seats, while terracotta tubes, 0.14 m wide, were installed in the podium facing the audience in the theater at Gioiosa Ionica in Calabria. In the theater at Hippo Regius in North Africa, channels were installed under the pulpitum, inside which were dolia, 1.2 m in diameter (Lachaux 1979:73–77), and in the theater at Nora in Sardinia, four large dolia were observed behind the proscaenium within the hyposcaenium (Pesce 1965:359–365). All of these phenomena may have been designed, according to Sear, to amplify sound. Vitruvius, in dealing with the laws of acoustics and their application in theaters, devoted a chapter to sounding vessels used in theaters (Architecture V, 5), and states: “In accordance with the foregoing investigations on mathematical principles, let bronze vessels (called echeia by the Greeks) be made, proportionate to the size of the theater, and let them be so fashioned that, when touched, they may produce with one another the notes of the fourth, the fifth and so on up to the double octave. Then having constructed niches in between the seats of the theater, let the vessels be arranged in them in accordance with musical laws, in such a way that they nowhere touch the wall, but have a clear space all round them and room over their tops” (Architecture V, 5, 1). He further refers to the location of the niches that accommodated these vessels: “If the theater be of no great size, mark out a horizontal range halfway up and in it construct thirteen arched niches with twelve equal spaces between them” (Architecture V, 5, 2). However, Vitruvius admits that if asked in which theaters these sounding vessels were employed in his time (late first century BCE), “we cannot point to any in Rome” (Architecture V, 5, 2). He further notes that Lucius Mummius brought back to Rome bronze echeia from Corinth in 146 BCE, a statement for which the excavation results of the theater at Corinth did not provide any supporting evidence (Stillwell 1952:2). So one must conclude that in theaters throughout the Roman Empire there are no clear archeological remains of such systems, apart from the well-designed system in the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, and several possible minor devices cited by Sear (above).

336

Walid Atrash

Ambulacrum The lower semicircular ambulacrum, 5.3 m high and 3.3 m wide at floor level, passed between two walls, the inner wall built of 12 basalt-masonry courses, at which point the vault’s spring course was preserved in several places (Figs. 7.37–7.39). The outer wall, together with the summa cavea, collapsed in the earthquake of 363 CE, and they were never rebuilt. The inner wall was divided into 16 sections by the entrances of the 17 vomitoria, and in the center of each of the seven wide sections was a niche (see Fig. 7.37). Each of the lower six courses of the ambulacrum’s inner wall retreated by 0.10–0.14 m from the one below, and from the seventh course they were constructed vertically. This construction technique resulted in the widening of the upper part of the ambulacrum’s wall at barrel-vault level (see Fig. 7.38). The ambulacrum vault sprang from the eleventh course and the remains of the vault courses of both the ambulacrum and the intersecting vomitoria supplied the data for the proposed reconstruction. All the inner vomitorium vaults (under the media cavea) were connected to the ambulacrum vault by half crosssection vaults. The outer sections of the vomitoria (below the summa cavea) were also covered with half-crosssection vaults at their intersections with the ambulacrum vault (see Figs. 7.37, 7.38). At its northwestern end, the ambulacrum vault was also connected to Vomitoria 1/2/3 and 17/18/19 by two cross-section vaults. The upper ambulacrum had the same dimensions as the lower one, and was roofed by a barrel vault and

half-cross-section vaults where it connected with the peripheral rooms and staircase vaults. At its northern ends it was connected to the scaena side corridors. Ten vomitoria should be reconstructed that connected with the upper ambulacrum (see Fig. 7.35) and led to the upper praecinctio of the summa cavea (see Plan 7.3: Section 1-1). Summa Cavea The summa cavea was constructed over the barrel vault of the ambulacrum that intersected the vomitorium vaults, forming cross-section barrel vaults. The seat section had nine seat rows divided by 16 scalaria into 18 cunei. Nine of the scalaria continued the lower ones of the media, while the other seven were set in between (see Plan 7.3; cf. Bostra, Segal 1999: Figs. 40, 42). In front of the summa cavea and bordering the upper praecinctio was a 2.6 m high podium, into which ten vomitoria opened, their entrances flanked by staircases that mounted the summa cavea and were constructed within the podium wall. The upper row comprised the curiale seats, their backs serving as the porticus banister. This composition resembles that of the media cavea in context, dimensions and decor (see Fig 7.35). The design and sloping angle of the seat rows are the same as those observed in the northern theater at Gerasa (Segal 1999:94) and in that of Sabratha (Caputo 1959).

Fig. 7.37. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of vomitoria and ambulacrum barrel-vault connections.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

337

Fig. 7.38. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of the lower ambulacrum.

The Theater’s Semicircular Circumference Wall The semicircular circumference wall of the theater, the ambulacrum’s outer wall, presents a symmetrical, well-balanced, multi-storied facade (see Figs. 7.20, 7.39) that reached a height of 23.49 m including the porticus. The circumference wall had a unique plan of vomitorium entrances and a staircase system constructed within the wall, rather than in the vomitoria as was customary in other theaters (e.g., at Sabratha, see Caputo 1959), making good use of the rows of arched openings in the facade, characteristic of Roman theaters and amphitheaters. In its first floor were the arched entrances of the vomitoria and the staircases, 7.2 m high. Over them, on the second floor, were similar arched openings vertically aligned with the entrances below, 5.3 m high,

and on the third floor were smaller 2 m high windows (see Fig. 7.35 right side). Flanking the staircases of the first floor were 14 rooms with arched entrances, 2.3 m wide and 5 m high, and above them, the secondfloor rooms had similar windows that were 3.6 m high, and on the third floor were niches 1.4 m wide and 3 m high. Over both sides of the niches were the porticus windows, and above them the wall continued 2 m higher to hold the beams that supported a velum (see Figs. 7.35, 7.40). At ground level, the circumference wall was divided into nine units (I–IX) separated by the arched vomitorium entrances (see Fig. 7.39, Plan 3.23). Seven of the units (II–VIII) were similar in shape, consisting of a central staircase flanked by two rooms that opened onto the alley that encircled the outer wall of the theater (see Fig. 7.35). The staircases turned within the

338

Walid Atrash

Fig. 7.39. Severan Theater: semicircular circumference wall and ambulacrum, looking north.

Fig. 7.40. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of section through ambulacra and porticus.

circumference wall to the right and left at a 90˚ angle and ascended to the summa cavea. The northwestern and northeastern units (I, IX) represent a different type of structure. Unit I in the northwest, dismantled during Roman IV, consisted of a room that opened to the west at Vomitorium 1; next to it, at Vomitorium 2, was a staircase that mounted eastward to the summa cavea, while Vomitorium 3 ran into the praecinctio. Although the northeastern unit was dismantled, it may be reconstructed based on preserved foundations revealed under the eastern staircase of Stratum 11, and it apparently resembled that on the northwestern side, with an additional vomitorium. The seven staircases in Units II–VIII had 16 steps that ascended to a landing, from which two staircases of 11 steps turned to either side. These staircases reached a second landing in front of an entrance from which eight additional steps led up to the summa cavea. The staircases were covered with sloping barrel vaults (Fig. 7.40). The 14 rooms on the first floor flanking the seven staircases were roofed by barrel vaults. Similar rooms on the second floor were reached by the staircases at the first landing.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

The third-floor rooms were identical to those of the second-floor, with barrel-vault roofs and a window; on the facade, between the windows, were niches (see Fig. 7.40). There was another set of staircases about 1 m wide to either side of the rooms’ entrances leading up to the porticus on the fourth floor. They would have turned at a 90˚ angle as they rose toward the outer face of the circumference wall, then they would have turned again at a 90˚ angle to either side, in the same design as the lower staircases, to reach the porticus (see Fig. 7.40). The first flights had nine steps, of which the first two may have been built into the upper ambulacrum level. The split staircases had no landings and three steps turned the corner. The second flight had 18 steps to reach the porticus floor through arched entrances. These staircases were roofed by the porticus floor slabs. The three floors of rooms constructed within the theater’s circumference wall were later copied in the postscaenium’s northern facade, which contained the three monumentally decorated entrances (see above). This design, more typical in the West, was the natural outcome of Roman theaters and amphitheaters constructed on a flat terrain, utilizing the multistoried structure of high vaults, passages and arches. It was, however, also applied in the East, despite the fact that in the East, theaters were often built partly over hill slopes, as was the Severan Theater at NysaScythopolis, as well as the theaters at Philippopolis, Gadara and Bostra (Segal 1999: Figs. 7, 28, 43). Porticus In the earthquake of 363 CE, the theater lost its summa cavea along with its crowning porticus, neither of which were restored, and some of the porticus column shafts were reused in the post-363 CE scaenae frons renovation stage in Stratum 11 (Roman IV; see above). The porticus probably resembled those of the theaters at Aspendos (de Bernardi Ferrero 1970: Pl. XXXII) and Sabratha (Caputo 1959: Pl. 72). The porticus, 8.5 m deep, was divided into two parts. In the rear wall were 32 rectangular exedrae (2.0 × 2.8 m), similar to those in the lower part of the circumference wall. in the front, the porticus was 4.4 m wide (see Figs. 7.35, 7.40). The exedrae were 2.7 m apart, and each was roofed by a barrel vault. The rear wall of the porticus rose higher than its roof. It had arched windows, 1.3–1.4 m

339

wide and 2 m high, which continued the pattern of the vertically aligned entrances and windows in the circumference wall. On top of the outer face of the wall was a row of protruding pairs of consoles to hold the wooden poles of the velum––the lower consoles had round recesses, the upper ones were pierced through (see Fig. 7.35). A similar system of consoles is well preserved in the theaters at Aspendos and Sabratha (Graefe 1979:52–53). The 5.65 m high Corinthian colonnade of the porticus had 64 limestone columns, two columns in front of each exedra, erected upon pedestals with a 1.4 m wide intercolumniation. On the northeastern and northwestern ends, the porticus reached the versurae (Atrash 2003). The three-sided pedestals were attached to the backs of the curiale seats. They were surmounted by bases, 0.25 m high with a plinth, column shafts 3.5 m high, and crowned with capitals 0.65 m high. The entablature consisted of an architrave, 0.5 m high, and a plain cornice, 0.25 m high (see Chapter 9 for descriptions). The entire order was thus 5.65 m high and carried a tile roof. Aditus Maximi The aditus maximi were an essential element in every Roman theater, as they architecturally connected the cavea with the scaena (see Figs. 7.25, 7.34). They usually led from both sides into the orchestra and were in most cases covered with sloping barrel vaults, which occasionally rose in steps in accordance with the cavea’s slope. Their inner sections, usually below the cavea and tribunalia, had a steeper slope than the outer sections near the circumference wall, and in some cases they intersected passages connecting the cavea to the versurae. The aditus maximi in the theater of Nysa-Scytholpolis (see Plan 3.33), each 31.15 m long and 3.3 m wide, were roofed by sloping barrel vaults. The walls and vaults of the inner sections were constructed of hardlimestone masonry, while the outer sections were of basalt masonry. The northern walls had two entrances, the smaller one entered the versura passage, while the larger one entered the postscaenium side corridor. In their southern walls were opposing niches, a small one and a larger (see Plan 3.33, Figs. 3.153, 3.154). In the large niche of the eastern aditus maximus was the lower part of a channel opening with a considerable

340

Walid Atrash

amount of travertine coating its wall. Apparently, a spring had been exploited by the theater’s architect to create a nymphaeum within the niche (see Fig. 3.154). A similar phenomenon was observed in the theater at Ephesus, where a nymphaeum was integrated into the postscaenium northern facade (Akurgal 1990:158). The aditus maximi were paved with basalt slabs, beneath which an elaborate drainage system of channels and clay pipes connected to the theater’s central drainage channel in the orchestra (see Plan 3.36). The sections of the southern walls constructed of limestone that sloped toward the orchestra were crowned with a banister that enclosed the ima cavea’s northern scalaria (see Fig. 3.155). The barrel vaults of the aditus maximi were constructed of four sections that differed in height and slope angle, the innermost of limestone masonry and the three outer ones of basalt masonry (see Fig. 3.157). The two entrances into the orchestra had limestone arches with 13 profiled archivolt elements (see Fig. 9.113). Their arches sprang from the fifth course and were adorned with profiled, cap-molded cornices that protruded from the face of the walls. The cornices continued around the corner of the wall’s northern face and reached the scaenae frons’ southern podium (see Fig. 3.155). The first vault section, constructed of eleven limestone masonry rows, was attached to the facade arch at a 20˚ angle, springing from the walls’ seventh course and reaching the tenth course. The second vault section, c. 0.4 m higher than the former, at a 12˚ angle, had nine basalt masonry rows. The third section, of nine basalt masonry rows at a 14˚ angle, was 1.5 m higher than the second. The fourth section, also of nine rows of basalt masonry, at a 5˚ angle, was higher than the former by 0.6 m. The floors of the aditus maximi were laid at the level of the base molding of the pulpitum’s podium staircases (see Fig. 3.171). The excavations revealed differences in floor levels along the passages (see Chapter 3), indicating either a moderate slope or four steps along their route. During Roman IV–Byzantine I (Strata 11–10), floor pavers were periodically repaired or replaced. In Byzantine II (Stratum 9), the eastern aditus maximus was separated from the theater by the construction of a wall at its western end and the closure of the entrance from the north. A black and white geometric mosaic floor was laid in the passage, now defined as a long,

narrow hall whose function in the still-active theater has not been clarified. The Western Staircase of the Aditus Maximi A staircase was built at the southwestern end of the western aditus maximus, leading from the aditus maximus to the ambulacrum (see Plan 3.24, Figs. 3.178–3.180). Its first flight mounted from north to south and reached a landing in front of Vomitorium 2. It then split, one flight turning to the east into the northwestern end of the ambulacrum, while another flight continued southward from the landing to reach the passage along the theater’s circumference wall. This staircase provided additional access from the civic center into the ambulacrum, the vomitoria and the upper levels of the cavea. From its integrated construction with various walls of the theater, it is obvious that it belonged to the theater’s original construction stage. However, it was never completed. The bedrock to the west of it was hewn in preparation, but the enclosing wall of the lower part of the staircase was never built. This corresponds to the uncompleted state of the theater’s northwestern corner, where the ends of the western aditus maximus walls were left with protruding courses (see Fig. 3.167). For some obscure reason, this corner was planned and prepared, but left unfinished. Probes conducted in the area indicated that the foundation courses were not continued any further in this area, and the western street that ran between the theater and the western therma seems to cut the northwestern corner of the theater. This unfinished northwestern corner suggests that the constructional problems shortly after completion of the theater in the mid-third century CE, when the cavea began to slide downhill, occurred before the corner was completed and properly integrated with the street. However, access into the western aditus maximus and its adjoining staircase was fully functional throughout the theater’s long life, until the early seventh century CE. It can be assumed that a similar staircase was constructed in the northeastern corner of the theater with the same function as that in the west, although no evidence of such is preserved. It may have been dismantled prior to the vast changes conducted in that area during Stratum 11, presumably following its collapse during the earthquake of 363 CE. A new circumference wall was built here in Stratum 11

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

and along it a wide staircase (the eastern staircase, see Chapter 3) was erected. It provided convenient access from the east to both the orchestra and the cavea through the eastern aditus maximus on one hand, and the northeastern vomitoria on the other. Orchestra The orchestra, somewhat larger than half a circle, 27 m in diameter and 17.9 m in depth, was entered from the aditus maximi and had the same floor level. It was paved with marble slabs and had three bisellium steps (see Plan 7.3: Section 1-1) that were bordered by a row of curiale seats and divided by three entrances into the balteus, on both sides and in the center. Wide bisellium steps for wooden chairs of honorable citizens were a common component of Roman theaters in the region, as in the theaters at Philadelphia (el-Fakharani 1975:388–394), Shuni (Shenhav 1990:60), Neapolis (Magen 2005:102–103) and the southern theater at Gerasa (Fisher 1938:20). The backs of the curiale seats in our case also served as a banister for the balteus and therefore no extra banister was necessary, as was found in the theaters at Sebaste (Zayadine 1966:578–580, Fig. 3) and Neapolis (Magen 2005:102–103). In the pulpitum’s western flank, an altar was found during Applebaum’s excavations, with a dedication to Dionysus by Germanos (Lifshitz 1970; Applebaum 1978:94–95; Applebaum, Isaac and Landau 1978:139– 140; Fuks 1983:132). The altar may have originated in the orchestra, where it was customary to place altars, as in the theater at Philadelphia (Almagro 1983), as well as at Arelate–Arles in France (Sear 2006:7), Italica and Merida in Spain (Fuchs 1987:146), and Leptis Magna in North Africa. In the theaters at Shuni (Shenhav 1990:60) and Bostra (Segal 1999: Fig. 42), a recess in the center of the orchestra pavement held such an altar, although in both cases the altar was not preserved. Under the orchestra pavement, a network of drainage channels and clay pipes was revealed (see Plan 3.36, Figs. 3.185–3.188). In the center, the main channel (T30604) ran from south to north, continuing under the hyposcaenium and the postscaenium, and exiting the theater at its northern facade, where it connected with the cloaca maxima of the civic center. The channel floor was comprised of small basalt stones held in dark gray mortar, both the floor and walls were plastered, and it was covered with basalt slabs. All other channels and pipes of the orchestra drainage network drained

341

into it, for example, Channels T30601 in the east and T30605 in the west that ran below the proscaenium. The drainage network was well constructed and coated with dark gray mortar and plaster, and over it the orchestra’s marble pavement with its small manholes was laid. A drainage system of this kind must have existed in every theater, as by their nature theaters tended to become large catch basins, which, unless properly drained, would have been flooded by winter rains. In the theater at Caesarea, a drainage channel was uncovered surrounding the orchestra (Frova 1965:86– 88), in the theater at Sepphoris lead pipes were found (Waterman 1937:10), and in the theater at Philadelphia a large drainage channel was discovered in the center of the orchestra (el-Fakharani 1975:390–391).

R enovations Undertaken in the Severan Theater during Strata 11 and 9 The cavea of the theater was reduced in size twice. In 363 CE (Stratum 11) the summa cavea collapsed, leaving partial remains of its outer circumference wall without ambulacrum vaults or staircases, while in Stratum 9 the theater lost its media cavea. In accordance with the reduced cavea, the scaena was twice reduced as well, first to two floors and then to one floor. In Stratum 11, the ima and media caveae continued in use, now approached from the vomitoria, and the cavea’s scalaria (see Fig. 3.111). A new staircase was built at the back, within the ambulacrum area over Unit IV, east of Vomitorium 9, which ascended from the southern rocky hillside into the upper part of the media cavea. It consisted of a large podium (see Plan 3.30, Figs. 3.138, 3.139), upon which a large pilaster was erected that carried a bridge with a staircase constructed over a vault. According to Applebaum’s report (1978), its basalt masonry courses and inner fill contained some limestone architectural elements, presumably of the collapsed upper porticus. Based on several clay figurines that were found around the podium, Applebaum mistakenly interpreted the bridge podium as the remains of a temple, and compared it to temples that were attached to various theaters, mainly in the West (see, e.g., Hanson 1959). Applebaum concluded that it was added to the theater in the Late Roman period, ignoring the Byzantineperiod pottery that was found there according to his own report, and the fact that it was erected within the

342

Walid Atrash

ruined ambulacrum and circumference wall that had collapsed in 363 CE. Also in Stratum 11, the eastern staircase was erected, which led from a new piazza near the northeastern corner of the theater and entered the theater’s cavea via the eastern aditus maximus and the ambulacrum (Fig. 7.41; see Plan 3.32). It was 3 m wide at its northern entrance, near the nymphaeum, widening to 5.3 m at its southern end. It first entered the eastern aditus maximus and then continued south along the new circumference wall. It was composed of ten wide landings alternating with nine pairs of steps constructed of basalt masonry and basalt pavers. At its southern end, it turned at a right angle toward the west, forming an L-shaped staircase. This first mounted westward, and then turned northward at the fifth step. These steps entered the ambulacrum passage and vomitoria in the theater’s circumference wall (for detailed description, see Chapter 3).

In Stratum 9, about a hundred years after NysaScythopolis became the Christianized capital of Provincia Palaestina Secunda, the city gained prominence and wealth, and the Severan Theater seems to have had a final chapter of glory. The theater was reduced in size, as it had by now lost its media cavea, a process that apparently began in the early sixth century CE and accelerated during the sixth to early seventh centuries, finally leaving the media cavea with only its foundation core. The scaenae frons second floor was reduced, but the ima cavea was entirely preserved in Stratum 9; in addition, it was largely unaffected by both the 660 and 749 CE earthquakes, apart from the two northern-end cunei and scalaria that collapsed in the later event. The fact that none of the ima cavea seats were dismantled and that the pulpitum was retained testifies to the active use of the theater as late as the end of the Byzantine period. The nature of this activity is rather obscure, although public gatherings at

Fig. 7.41. Severan Theater: isometric reconstruction of the theater in Stratum 9, with northern porticus and plaza.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

non-theatrical events of either ecclesiastic or municipal nature would be a reasonable assumption. Its reduced size accommodated a far smaller audience (c. 2000). In the early sixth century CE (Stratum 9, see below), a monumental and lavishly adorned tribunal was built in the ima cavea for the governor or bishop, and the pulpitum and hyposcaenium were renovated, while the reduced-in-height but still impressive scaena frons adorned the scaena. The new tribunal was built over Cunei 4 and 5 and Scalarium V, on the central axis of the ima cavea. Applebaum (1963:88), who excavated the tribunal and regretfully entirely dismantled it, stated in a preliminary report that it was apparently surrounded by an iron railing (see Plan 7.12). Four columns with a crowning entablature were presumably erected over the tribunal corners, with an intercolumniation of 1.6–1.9 m. They probably carried a roof, the nature of which was not detailed by Applebaum. Over the balteus, between Cunei 3 and 6, a marble-paved platform was built, presumably with steps on either side ascending from the balteus. In the seats on both sides of the tribunal, sockets for the iron railings can be discerned (see Plan 7.12). In Applebaum’s photographs, a number of architectural elements can be seen scattered around the tribunal’s eastern side, for example an in situ base, and next to it a fallen Corinthian capital. The architectural-element inventory of the theater includes three hard-limestone bases (A6249, 6252, 40610; see Appendix 9.1) and three hard-limestone Corinthian capitals (A6203, see Fig. 9.108:1, A6208, see Fig. 9.108:3, A6210, see Fig. 9.107:1) that presumably originated in this tribunal. The column shafts can be reconstructed as being 4.1 m high. Architrave-frieze elements and cornice fragments were also found by Applebaum. The Corinthian order that surrounded the tribunal would thus have reached a height of c. 6 m. Applebaum (1978) assumed that the tribunal served as a ceremonial focal point for ecclesiastical purposes. A similar tribunal was recently revealed in the theater at Tiberias; during the Byzantine period, the tribunal was erected in the same location as in the Nysa-Scythopolis theater (Atrash 2012:86). It seems that in this late stage (Stratum 9), the ima cavea of the reduced auditorium was shaded with a velum, the wooden beams of which made good use of the original velum sockets along the seat rows (see Plan 7.12). In the northern theater at Gerasa, similar sockets were found, apparently for the same purpose (Clark et al. 1986:215). The use of velum in theaters

343

was common during the Roman and Byzantine periods, although preliminary excavation reports of most theaters regretfully refrain from mentioning any concrete evidence for such (Graefe 1979). During both renovation phases, in Strata 11 and 9, the plan and function of the forum were altered. In the late fourth or early fifth century CE (Stratum 11), the forum temples and basilica were dismantled and the temples were covered with a fill. The forum, stripped of its cultic and state functions, could for the first time be architecturally and functionally connected with the theater. A grand, paved piazza, irregular in shape, was erected in front of the theater’s northern facade. Its northern part was rhomboid, paved with bitumen slabs, and approached from the north by a staircase, 45 m wide, parallel to the theater’s facade. This staircase had two steps in the east and five in the west, corresponding to the levels of the piazza and the theater. Along the theater’s facade, a porticus was built and in front of it ran a new paved street. At the theater’s northeastern corner, over the forum’s eastern temple, another irregular piazza was paved with basalt slabs. This piazza was connected to the theater’s eastern staircase, also erected in Stratum 11. During the Byzantine period (Stratum 9), the civic center was again renovated, and the two thermae were enlarged and refurbished, becoming richly adorned, monumental complexes that advertised the capital’s wealth and importance. In the early sixth century CE, a basalt retaining wall, 29.5 m long, was built along the northeastern side of the theater. It was connected to the eastern end of the eastern aditus maximus’ northern wall and continued northward over the covered forum temple. It separated the relatively low level of the eastern piazza from the theater at a higher level. In the north, it turned westward along the theater’s facade for another 70 m, gradually integrating with the level of the northern piazza and serving as a retaining wall that supported the porticus and the street along the theater’s facade that had been erected in Stratum 11 (see Fig. 7.41). A stylobate wall for the porticus, built along the theater’s facade from reused architectural elements, carried c. 25 columns of the Corinthian order that stood on octagonal pedestals. The hard-limestone order composition was rather eclectic and included spolia of the second and the first half of the third centuries CE, originating from dismantled complexes, perhaps also from the theater. The order composition reached a height of 7.36 m, creating a porticus 72 m long and 4 m wide,

344

Walid Atrash

whose floor was paved with basalt slabs. To the north of the porticus, and bordered by the above-mentioned retaining wall, a basalt-paved street was laid, c. 70 m long and 4 m wide. It opened in the west onto an irregular, basalt-paved piazza, from which Palladius Street extended to the northeast, and another paved street ran westward along the western thermae. Thus, the Severan Theater, with its long lifespan, had to wait until the sixth century CE when architectural

changes were conducted in the civic center, to be wellintegrated into the forum, with a suitable connection to Palladius Street. This renovation stage in Stratum 9 added a monumental new northern facade to the theater, in front of which a spacious, paved piazza was equipped with approaching alleyways, a nymphaeum, and access to a public latrine.

Notes Based on Applebaum’s results, it was argued that the Severan Theater was never completed (Ovadia and Gomez de Silva 1981–1982; Ovadiah and Turnheim 1994:21); however, in light of the later excavations conducted by the IAA expedition, this hypothesis lacks any supporting evidence, and should therefore be rejected. 2 Applebaum (1978:93) assumed that the hospitalia were partly hidden by the walls of the aditus maximi. He argued that the scaenae frons was larger than required by the cavea, and that this indicated a discrepancy in the theater’s basic plan. However, his claim is not validated by the theater’s proportions, nor is it supported by comparison with other 1

theaters. The scaena frons is in proportion to the cavea, as seen, for example, at Palmyra (Frézouls 1982) and Orange (Fiechter 1914:100–115), and represents a well-planned and balanced complex. 3 Other publications of such theaters simply ignored the problem, for instance in the southern theater at Gerasa with its three apses (Schumacher 1902:141–145; Fisher 1938:19–20; Kirkbride 1960; Browning 1982:123–127), and in the theaters at Bostra (Frézouls 1952:69–79), Philadelphia (Butler 1919:47–50; el-Fakharani 1975) and Petra (Hammond 1965:55–65), with similar apses, square bases were reconstructed at the connection points.

R eferences Akurgal E. 1990. Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey: From Prehistoric Times until the End of the Roman Empire. Istanbul. Almagro A. 1983. The Survey of the Roman Monuments of Amman by the Italian Mission in 1930. ADAJ 27:607–639. Applebaum S. 1963. Where Saul and Jonathan Perished: Beth Shean in Israel. The Roman Theatre Revealed and a Greek Statue Discovered. Illustrated London News 16 March 242:380–388 Applebaum S. 1978. The Roman Theatre of Scythopolis. SCI 4:77–103. Applebaum S., Isaac B. and Landau Y.H. 1978. Varia Epigraphica. SCI 4:133–159 Arubas B. and Goldfus H. 2008. Elusa. NEAEHL 5:1713– 1715. Atrash W. 2003. The Scaena Frons of the Roman Theatre in Scythopolis (Bet She’an): Architectural Analysis and

Reconstruction. M.A. thesis. University of Haifa. Haifa (Hebrew). Atrash W. 2006. Entertainment Structures in the Civic Center of Nysa-Scythopolis (Beth-She’an) during the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Ph.D. diss. University of Haifa. Haifa (Hebrew). Atrash W. 2012. The Roman Theater at Tiberias. Qadmoniot 144:79–88 (Hebrew). Austen St. and Harrison B. 1927. Note on the Southern Theatre at Jerash. BASOR 7:98. Avi-Yonah M. 1962. Scythopolis. IEJ 12:123–134. Barghouti A. 1982. Urbanization of Palestine and Jordan in Hellenistic and Roman Times. SHAJ I:209–229. Bear W. 1968. The Roman Stage. London. Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1966. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 1: Cibyra, Selge, Hierapolis (Studi di architettura antica I). Rome.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1969. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 2: Città di Pisidia, Licia e Caria (Studi di architettura antica II). Rome. Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1970. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 3: Città della Troade alla Pamfilia (Studi di architettura antica IV). Rome. Bieber M. 1961. The History of the Greek and Roman Theatre. Princeton. Bowman A.K., Garnsey P. and Rathbone D. 2000. The High Empire, A.D. 70–192. CAH XI. Cambridge. Brockett O.G. 1968. The History of the Theatre. Boston. Brothers A.J. 1989. Buildings for Entertainment. In I.M. Barton ed. Roman Public Buildings. Exeter. Pp. 98–125. Browning I. 1979. Palmyra. London. Browning I. 1982. Jerash and the Decapolis. London. Brünnow R.E. and Domaszewski A.V. 1909. Die Provincia Arabia III. Strasburg. Bührig C. 2009. The ‘Eastern City Area’ of Gadara (Umm Qays): Preliminary Results on the Urban and Functional Structures Between the Hellenistic and Byzantine Periods. SHAJ X:369–376. Butler H.C. 1903. Architecture and Other Arts I–II (PUAES). New York. Butler H.C. 1907. Ancient Architecture in Syria. Sec. A: Southern Syria Part I, Div. II (PUAES). Leiden. Butler H.C. 1919. Syria II, A: Architecture; Southern Syria (2 vols.). Princeton. Calza G. 1927. Il teatro romano di Ostia. Rome. Caputo G. 1959. Il Teatro di Sabratha. Rome. Caputo G. 1987. Il Teatro augusteo di Leptis-Magna––scavo e restauro 1937–1951. Rome. Clark V.A., Bowsher J.M.C., Stewart J.D., Meyer C.M. and Falkner B.K. 1986. The Jerash North Theatre, Architecture and Archaeology 1982–83. In F. Zayadine ed. Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–83. Amman. Pp. 205–302. Conder C.R. and Kitchener H.H. 1882. The Survey of Western Palestine II: Memoirs of the Topography, Orography, Hydrography and Archaeology. London. Cooke S.A, Adcock F.H. and Charlesworth M.P. 1936. The Imperial Peace A.D. 70–192. CAH XI. Cambridge. Coupel P. and Frézouls E. 1956. Le théâtre de Philippopolis en Arabie. Paris. Crowfoot J.W., Kenyon K.M. and Sukenik E.L. 1942. Samaria I: The Buildings. London. el-Fakharani F. 1975. Das Theater von Amman in Jordanien. AA 90:377–403. Falkener E. 1854. A Description of Some Important Theaters and Other Remains in Crete. London. Fiechter E.R. 1914. Die baugeschichtliche entwicklung des antiken Theaters. Munich. Finsen H. 1972. Le levé du théâtre romain à Bosra, Syria. Copenhagen. Fischer M.L. 1998. Marble Studies: Roman Palestine and the Marble Trade (xenia 40). Konstanz. Fisher C.H. 1938. Description of the Site. In C.H. Kraeling ed. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Pp. 11–25. Foerster G. and Tsafrir Y. 1987–1988. Center of Ancient Bet Shean-North. ESI 6:25–43

345

Foerster G. and Tsafrir Y. 1992. The Beth Shean Project City Center-North; Excavations of the Hebrew University Expedition. ESI 11:3–32. Fourdrin J.-P. 1989. La frons scaena du théâtre de Palmyre. Damascus. Frézouls E. 1952. Les théâtres romains de Syrie. AAS 2:46– 100. Frézouls E. 1961. Recherches sur les théâtres de l’Orient syrien II. Syria 38:54–86. Frézouls E. 1982. Aspects de l’histoire architecturale du théâtre romain. ANRW 11:343–441. Frova A. 1965. Scavi di Caesarea Maritima. Milan. Fuchs M. 1987. Untersuchungen zur ausstattung römischer Theater in Italien und den Westprovinzen des Imperium Romanum. Mainz am Rhein. Fuks G. 1983. Greece in Palestine: Beth Shean-Scythopolis. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Golvin J.C. 1988. L’amphithéâtre romain: Essai sur la théorisation de sa forme et de ses fonctions. Paris. Graefe R. 1979. Vela erunt, die zeltdächer der römischer theater ähnlicher anlagen. Mainz am Rhein. Guérin V. 1874. Description géographique, historique et archéologique de la Palestine I–III. Paris. Hammond P.C. 1965. Excavations of the Main Theater at Petra 1961–1962––Final Report. London. Hanson J.A. 1959. Roman Theater Temples (Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology 33). Princeton. Hirschfeld Y. 1987. The History and Town Plan of Hamat Gader. ZDPV 103:101–116. Irby C.L. and Mangles J. 1823. Travels in Egypt and Nubia, Syria and Asia Minor during the Years 1817–1818. London Israeli Y. and Mevorach D. 1992. Roman Sculpture of Greater Beth Shean (Leaflet, Israel Museum). Jerusalem. Izenour G.C. 1977. Theatre Design. New York. Jones A.H.M. 1971. The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces. Oxford. Josephus War. Josephus Flavius. The Jewish War. H.J. Thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge 1927–1928. Joukowsky M.S. 2001. Brown University 2000 Excavations at the Petra Great Temple. ADAJ 45:325–342. Jum‘a al-Shami A. 2005. A New Discovery at Bayt Ras/ Capitolias, Irbid. ADAJ 49:509–520. Kirkbride D. 1960. A Brief Outline of the Reconstruction of the South Theatre at Gerasa. ADAJ 4–5:123–127. Kleiner G. 1986. Das römische Milet. Weisbaden. Kochavi M. 1989. Aphek–Antipatris. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Kraeling C.H. ed. 1938. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Lachaux J.C. 1979. théâtres et amphithéâtres d’Afrique proconsulaire. Aix en Provence. Lanckoronski K. ed.1892. Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens II: Pisidiens. Prag–Vienna–Leipzig. Pp. 161–172. Levine L. 1975. Roman Caesarea: An Archaeological Topographical Study (Qedem 2). Jerusalem. Lifshitz B. 1970. Notes d’épigraphie grecque. ZPE 6:62.

346

Walid Atrash

Lyttelton 1974. Baroque Architecture in Classical Antiquity. London. MacDonald W.L. 1986. The Architecture of the Roman Empire II: An Urban Appraisal. London. Magen Y. 2005. Flavia Neapolis, Shechem in the Roman Period (JSP 11). Jerusalem. Maiuri A. 1959. Pompeii. Rome. Maufras C.L. 1847. L’architecture de Vitruve: Traduction nouvelle. Paris Mazor G. 2004. Free Standing City Gates in the Eastern Provinces during the Roman Imperial Period. Ph.D. diss. Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew; English summary, pp. I–II) Mazor G. and Atrash W. Forthcoming. The Severan Theater of Nysa-Scythopolis: Constructing Its Scaenae Frons in the ‘Marble Style’. Mazor G. and Bar-Nathan R. 1994. Scythopolis––Capital of Palaestina Secunda. Qadmoniot 107–108:117–137 (Hebrew). Mazor G. and Bar-Nathan R. 1996. The Beth She’an Excavations Project—1992–1994, Israel Antiquities Expedition. ESI 17:1–36. McCown C.C. 1938. The Festival Theater at Birketein. In C.H. Kraeling ed. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Pp. 159–167. McKenzie J. 1990. The Architecture of Petra (British Academy Monographs in Archaeology 1). Oxford. Modona A.N. 1960. Gli edifici teatrali greci et romani. Firenze. Negev A. 1973. The Staircase-Tower in Nabatean Architecture. RB 80:364–383. Negev A. 1982. Excavations at Elusa. Qadmoniot 55– 56:122–128 (Hebrew). Nielsen I. 2002. Cultic Theatres and Ritual Drama in Ancient Greece. Proceedings of the Ancient Danish Institute at Athens 3:107–133. Nir D. 1989. Beth-Shean Valley. The Region and Its Changes on the Fringe of the Desert (3rd ed.). Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Ovadiah A. and Gomez de Silva C. 1981–1982. Some Notes on the Roman Theatre of Beth Shean (Scythopolis). SCI 6:85–97. Ovadiah A. and Turnheim Y. 1994. “Peopled” Scrolls in Roman Architectural Decoration in Israel: The Roman Theatre at Beth Shean, Scythopolis (Rivista di archeologia Suppl. 12). Rome. Parapetti R. 1983–1984. Architectural and Urban Space in Roman Gerasa. Mesopotamia 18–19:37–84. Patrich J. 2011. The Herodian Theatre in Caesarea. In Y. Porath, E. Ayalon and A. Izdarechet eds. Caesarea Treasures II. Jerusalem. Pp. 205–210 (Hebrew). Pearl Z. and Magaritz M. 1991. Stable Isotopes and the Roman Marble Trade––Evidence from Scythopolis and Caesarea, Israel. In H.P. Taylor, J.R. O’Neil and I.R. Kaplan eds. Stable Isotope Geochemistry: A Tribute to Samuel Epstein. Tel Aviv. Pp. 295–303. Pesce G. 1965. I risuonatori del teatro romano di Nora. Rome.

Plommer H. 1983. Scythopolis, Caesarea and Vitruvius. Levant 15:132–140. Polacco L. and Anti C. 1980. Il teatro antico di Siracusa. Rimini. Pouilloux J. 1977. Deux inscriptions au théâtre sud de Gérasa. LA 27:246–254. Pouilloux J. 1979. Une troisième dédicace au théâtre sud de Gérasa. LA 29:276–278. Ringel J. 1975. Césarée de Palestine: étude historique et archéologique. Paris. Robinson E. 1856. Later Biblical Researches in Palestine and the Adjacent Regions: a Journal of Travels in the Year 1852. London. Rose C.B. 1991. The Theatre of Ilios. Studia Troica 1:69–78. Rostovtzeff M. 1932. Caravan Cities. Oxford. Ruegg S.D. 1988. Minturnae: Roman River Seaport on the Garigliano River, Italy. Oxford. Russell K.W. 1980. The Earthquake of May 19 A.D. 363. BASOR 238:47–64. Scherrer P. 2000. Ephesus: The New Guide. Istanbul. Schumacher G. 1890. Northern Ajlun––Within the Decapolis. London. Schumacher G. 1902. Dscherasch. ZDPV 25:141–145, 165– 171. Sear F. 1990a. The Theatre at Leptis Magna and the Development of Roman Theatre Design. JRA 3:376–383. Sear F. 1990b. Vitruvius and the Roman Theater Design. AJA 94:249–258. Sear F. 1994. The South Theater at Jerash. ADAJ 40:217–230. Sear F. 2000. Reconstructing the South Theatre at Jerash. ANES 37:3–27. Sear F. 2006. Roman Theatres: An Architectural Study. Oxford. Segal A. 1995. Theatres in Roman Palestine and Provincia Arabia. Leiden. Segal A. 1997. From Function to Monument: Urban Landscapes of Roman Palestine, Syria and Provincia Arabia. Oxford. Segal A. 1999. The History and Architecture of Theaters in Roman Palestine. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Seigne J. 1992. Jérash romaine et byzantine: développement urbain d’une ville provinciale orientale. SHAJ 4:331–341. Shenhav A. 1990. Shuni/Maiumas. Qadmoniot 89–90:58–62 (Hebrew). Smith R.H. and Day L.P. 1989. Pella of the Decapolis II: Final Report on the Wooster Excavations in Area IX––The Civic Complex 1979–1985. Wooster. Stillwell R.C. 1952. Corinth II. Princeton. Sukenik E. 1935. The Ancient Synagogue of El Hammeh. Jerusalem. Tsafrir Y. 1984. Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Temple to the Moslem Conquest II: Archaeology and Art. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Tsafrir Y. and Foerster G. 1997. Urbanism at ScythopolisBeth Shean in the Fourth to Seventh Centuries. DOP 51:85–146.

Chapter 7: Architectural Analysis and Proposed Reconstruction

Vandeput L. 1997. The Architectural Decoration in Roman Asia Minor: A Case Study (Studies in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology I). Leuven. Vitruvius Architecture. Vitruvius. The Ten Books on Architecture. M.H. Morgan transl. New York 1960. Ward-Perkins J.B. 1981. Roman Imperial Architecture. London. Waterman L. 1937. Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavations at Sepphoris, Palestine in 1931. Ann Arbor. Weber T. 1989. Um Qeis-Gadara. In H.D. Homès-Fredericq and J.B. Hennessy eds. Archaeology of Jordan II, 2: Field Reports, sites (L–Z) (Akkadica Supplementum VIII) Leuven. Pp. 597–611. Weigand E. 1932. Die kunstgeschichtliche Stellung der palmyrenischen Architektur. In T. Wiegand ed. Palmyra: Ergebnisse der expeditionen von 1902 und 1917. Berlin. Pp. 151–165.

347

Weiss Z. 1994. Entertainment Culture and Structures for the Masses in Roman Eretz Israel and Their Reflection in Rabbinical Sources. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew) Welles C.B. 1938. The Inscriptions. In C.H. Kraeling ed. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Pp. 335–494. Wiegand T. 1921–1925. Baalbek: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Unterschungen in der Jahren 1898– 1905 I–III. Berlin–Leipzig. Wuilleumier P. 1940. Le théâtre romain d’Autun. Mélange d’études anciennes offerts à George Radet. Paris. Pp. 699–706. Yegül F.K. 1986. The Bath-Gymnasium Complex at Sardis (Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Report 3). Cambridge, Mass. Zayadine F. 1966. Samaria-Sebaste, le théâtre. RB 72:576–580. Zayadine F. 1967–1968. Samaria-Sebaste, Clearance and Excavations. ADAJ 12–13:77–80.

G. Mazor and W. Atrash, 2015, Bet She’an III/2 (IAA Reports 58/2)

Chapter 8

R econstruction Work in the Severan Theater Lawrence Belkin And Avi K atzin

Introduction Early Restoration Work 1960–1963 The theater excavations conducted by Applebaum in 1960–1963 were not accompanied by major preservation or reconstruction works. Only minor repairs were undertaken in the theater during and immediately after these excavations by the architect Max Tan’ee on behalf of the National Parks Authority to ensure the safety of visitors. The originally preserved section of the western aditus maximus and its entrance arch into the orchestra were dismantled down to the level of the springer course to enable the introduction of heavy equipment and trucks to excavate the orchestra and ima cavea. Unfortunately, at the completion of the excavations the vault was not reconstructed and its dismantled stones have since been lost. Along the northern and southern walls of the eastern portion of the western aditus maximus, artificial concrete panels imitating basalt masonry were incorporated by Tan’ee (Fig. 8.1). Further east within the western aditus maximus, where the vault was still essential to prevent the inward collapse of the two sides of the passage, a new section of the vault was constructed using original stones, but with little regard for their original placement. Two massive concrete buttresses were also erected to support the western wall of the western versura (Fig. 8.2), while other, less extensive repairs were made in various locations, such as the eastern hospitalia lintel (see Fig. 3.53).

became attractive, thus emphasizing the need for professional restoration work. In 1987, conservation and restoration works began in earnest in the theater, orchestrated by the architects Lawrence Belkin and Avi Katzin, and the contractor Yonah Davidovitch, alongside the excavations, with the goal of adapting it for modern use. This initial phase of what became a long-running project lasted until May 1989, when the theater was dedicated for public use with a gala concert by the Israeli Philharmonic Orchestra. Within the nine scalaria of the ima cavea, missing stones or portions of stones were replaced with new

Restoration Work 1987–1989 When the Bet She’an Archaeological Project undertook widescale excavations in 1986–2002 in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis, including completion of the theater excavations (see Chapter 1), the importance of the theater within its urban context rapidly emerged. At the same time, regional tourism increased and the possibility of using the theater for performances

Fig. 8.1. Severan Theater: western aditus maximus, reconstruction work in the northern wall, looking northwest.

350

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.2. Severan Theater: western versura, concrete buttresses, looking southeast.

Fig. 8.3. Severan Theater: ima cavea, scalarium and seats before and after restoration, looking southwest.

ones, localized erosion and drainage problems were solved (sometimes with the use of cement-based, inplace casts, and sometimes with stone), and stones that had shifted from their original positions were repositioned (Fig. 8.3). The guiding criterion for repairing stairs was safety, so the intervention was

more extensive than in the area of the seats, where the criterion was comfort. The stone seats were repaired in a one-by-one approach, with the general guideline being that if a bench could be sat upon with a minimal level of comfort, it would not be ‘improved’. As a result, no attempt was made to replace the many

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

351

Fig. 8.4. Severan Theater: ima cavea, restoration of seats, looking southwest.

sections of missing cap molding, and deep cracks between the benches were filled with lime mortar, with no cement (Fig. 8.4), only to the extent required to prevent further erosion and allow the adjacent seating to be functional. A controversial decision (objected to by the archaeologists) was made to reconstruct the edges of the seating adjacent to the scalaria, when necessary, in an unfinished manner that would be visually equivalent to broken or eroded stone. This was done to preserve the overall visual character of the cavea, while still providing effective seating. The restoration team, composed of local trained workers, took the approach that the entire ima cavea was the object being preserved, and repairs within it should be in the character of the whole. The archeological team of the IAA, on the other hand, viewed each individual stone as an object in itself, and therefore objected to the ‘creation of antiquities’, i.e., new stones made to look old. In any case, when the work was completed, the ima cavea appeared relatively unchanged, while most of the functional and safety problems had been resolved (see Fig. 3.94) The vomitoria were in some places unsafe for passage, as the vaults were crumbling at their extremities. These unstable vaults were repaired with a minimum of reconstruction, and there was no attempt to restore the vaults to their original length (Fig. 8.5). Sometimes this

entailed raising the outer walls to provide horizontal stability along the length of the vaults. In other cases, one or more stones were added to complete an arch within the vault. Due to the massiveness of these basalt stones, and the lack of modern quarries of basalt stone, pre-cast, concrete ‘stones’ with exterior basalt aggregate were made on-site and lifted into place by a crane. The technique of casting these stones was the key to their successful appearance. The formwork was lined with polystyrene foam, carefully roughened and shaped by hand, and fine basalt aggregate was glued with water-based adhesive to the foam. In addition, steel filings were included in this exterior aggregate that were intended to rust. The aggregate adhered to the concrete that was poured into the mold, which consisted of basalt sand, aggregate and gray cement. After curing, the remains of the polystyrene foam were easily removed in water. Where the vomitoria vaults were well preserved, all stone connections were filled with lime mortar. In addition to repairing the vomitoria, it was necessary to stabilize the remains of the core of the media cavea, which contained large exposed rocks that could break loose with potentially disastrous results. These rocks were secured with mortar and small stones, vegetation was removed, and the entire surface of the exposed foundation core of the media cavea was selectively

352

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.5. Severan Theater: vomitorium before and after restoration, looking northwest.

grouted with lime mortar to reduce the infiltration of rain water into the structure (see Fig. 3.106). This process was repeated ten years later and should be repeated periodically. The ambulacrum circumference wall that once carried the summa cavea and collapsed in 363 CE (see Chapter 3) consisted of various rooms and staircases of which substantial remains had survived. These were cleaned and fully preserved with minor reconstructions whenever necessary (see Fig. 3.132). After completion of the reconstruction of the cavea and vomitoria, work began on the pulpitum. The

Byzantine II pulpitum of Stratum 9 was originally paved with rectangular limestone slabs over fill layers in its northern part and a wooden floor over short, stubby arches built into the hyposcaenium in its southern part (Fig. 8.6). In our original concept for reconstruction of the pulpitum, this was to be refurbished for modern use. However, the archaeological team elected to excavate the entire pulpitum, and this fragmentary and damaged surface was completely removed. Once the hyposcaenium of the earlier stages (Strata 12, 11) was exposed, it then

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

353

Fig. 8.6. Severan Theater: pulpitum prior to restoration, looking west.

Fig. 8.7. Severan Theater: pulpitum reconstruction, looking northwest.

seemed reasonable to reconstruct a wooden pulpitum, which would be both practical for modern use and similar in appearance to the original Roman pulpitum

of Roman III (Stratum 12; Fig. 8.7; see also Fig. 3.10). We built openings (trapdoors) into the pulpitum along the side facing the orchestra, suggesting the design that

354

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

probably existed in Roman III, to facilitate the raising and lowering of theatrical props. Reconstruction of the pulpitum meant dealing with the problem of the proscaenium, which was achieved after the completion of the pulpitum. The pulpitum had been shortened on both sides when the postscaenium was added (still in Stratum 12), but the center had never been altered. The proscaenium was originally built in the common pattern of alternating rectangular and semicircular niches with a cornice on top, a few segments of which were revealed only after reconstruction work on the proscaenium was completed and therefore they were not incorporated within the reconstruction. The facade of the proscaenium was made of soft, sandy limestone (nari), which is easily cut but unsuitable for exterior use. It was originally faced with marble, fragments of which were found scattered. After considering various options, it was decided to reconstruct the proscaenium in the same soft limestone, retaining whatever existed of the original masony, without adding the marble plating, as the original locations of the fragments were uncertain (Fig. 8.8). The cornice, it was decided, would be made of wood, as an extension of the pulpitum

surface itself, and the proscaenium masonry would be further separated from the wooden cornice by inserting a recessed and blackened concrete layer between the two elements. The wooden cornice was stained darker than the rest of the pulpitum floor to emphasize its architectural separateness (see Fig. 3.11). In the years since this work was completed in 1989, apparent fragments of the proscaenium cornice have come to light, so in the future, when it becomes necessary to replace the wooden floor of the pulpitum, it may be possible to complete the proscaenium cornice in stone. Finally, a 200 amp electrical service was brought to the site, and an electrical shed was erected on the hill above the theater. A major electrical panel was installed in an infrequently accessed corner in one of the vomitoria, and a sub-panel was built under the pulpitum, to which temporary electrical lines could be connected when the theater was to be used for assembly or performances. All the permanent electrical lines involved in the system were laid underground or otherwise hidden from view by utilizing to our advantage the damaged or missing parts of the theater in which these lines could be hidden.

Fig. 8.8. Severan Theater: proscaenium reconstruction, looking north.

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

Anastylosis R econstruction 1990–2002 By 1990, the widening archaeological excavations were beginning to draw attention to other significant urban monuments at the site: the western and eastern thermae, the nymphaeum, the colonnaded streets, the forum, the northern city gates and the various temples. Topographic and historical circumstances conspired to preserve far more of Nysa-Scythopolis than, for example, Caesarea, and the remains being uncovered by the archaeologists were breathtaking. Faced with the possibility that the Nysa-Scythopolis antiquities could rival those of Gerasa in Jordan, and even of Ephesus in Turkey, the Ministry of Tourism was more than willing to fund additional excavations and site development, provided that the work promoted tourism. The ministry believed that the best possible way to enhance the attractiveness of a ruined site is to partially restore it, in accordance with circumstances and budget. As the theater was the largest and best preserved of all the heretofore-excavated monuments in the city’s civic center, and the only one whose excavation was substantially completed, it drew much attention in the years 1990–2002. In l992, a master plan for its restoration was prepared by the Bet She’an Development Committee (see below), and all subsequent work followed these guidelines closely. This plan was generated from a comparison of the remains of the theater as preserved, with its original complete form. Whenever it was deemed that the present remains convey to the uninformed viewer a reasonable and coherent impression of the original appearance of the building, there was judged to be little need for reconstruction. On the other hand, whenever the present remains were inadequate or (especially) misleading, and the collapsed stratum allowed anastylosis, reconstruction was considered as a possible remedy. Other factors that greatly affected the decision to restore various parts of the theater included expense, state of knowledge as to what had been, and location along the probable visitation route. The 1992 restoration master plan proposed emphasizing the northern side of the theater––the scaena––where the collapse of the structure was somewhat more severe. The southern half of the theater, built against the hillside, was better preserved, in some places 7–8 m higher than the best-preserved remains in the north. The effect of this differential deterioration was to convey an impression of a totally enclosed

355

Roman theater of equal height within a well-planned civic center. While a general emphasis was placed on the northern half of the theater, special priority was given to the northeastern corner, primarily for aesthetic reasons: the northeastern corner is directly opposite the main entrance to the theater for most visitors (via Vomitorium 2). By concentrating our efforts at this point, the most effective presentation could be achieved. The imbalance in degree of preservation between the well-preserved south and the more poorly preserved north was particularly problematic in the connection between the cavea and the scaena in the area of the eastern aditus maximus and the northeastern versura. The vault of the western aditus maximus had been taken down during the 1960–1963 excavations, as described above, so that there existed a rift between the scaena and the cavea, as if these two parts of the theater had been separate structures. In the east, the situation was not much better, as the versura stood to less than twice the height of the adjacent eastern aditus maximus. The concentration of efforts in the northeastern corner of the scaena was designed to address this misconception. The 1992 master plan proposed rebuilding the scaenae frons in this corner to the height of the praecinctio separating the ima from the media caveae. This would necessitate the disassembling of the nearly collapsed vault of the eastern aditus maximus, and its reconstruction along with the tribunal adjacent to it on the south. In large measure, the original stones could be used for this work. The plan further proposed heightening the versura of the adjacent scaena by about 6 m, to achieve the height of the reconstructed tribunal and the praecinctio beyond. A model built at the time by the architects elaborately illustrated the intended appearance of the theater’s reconstructed northeastern corner. This commitment to the northeastern corner would also require the rebuilding of the collapsed lintel of the eastern hospitalia, and the vault behind it within the scaenae frons wall, and the heightening of the scaenae frons wall by as much as 6 m. It was further planned to reconstruct the scaenae frons itself to the height of its first floor (about 10 m above the pulpitum). A preliminary survey of the existing architectural fragments indicated that over 95% of the entablature of the first floor was extant. Within the area of the cavea, the master plan called for the addition of seating in the ima cavea where it had

356

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.9. Severan Theater: northeastern collapsed part of the ima cavea, looking east.

collapsed (Scalarium I and Cuneus 1), which would be of direct benefit for presentations (Fig. 8.9). In addition, a small section of the seating in the media cavea would be added for didactic purposes: since most of the media cavea substructure was preserved, but no seats, it seemed reasonable to illustrate the actual (structural) function of this great mound of core construction. One acoustic cell was also reconstructed (see Fig. 7.28) to demonstrate their function. Implementation of the Master Plan 1992–2002 The great size of the theater, c. 10,000 sq m, and its symmetrical design, aided us in the development of a reasonable master plan. This restoration plan, as ambitious as it was, would only alter part of the theater’s superstructure, and as most of the theater units are of repetitive nature, due to symmetry or multiplicity, we felt confident that our reconstruction would leave ample examples of unreconstructed elements for examination by future generations. Most of the analysis for the reconstruction for the acoustic cell and the staircase of the media cavea, for example, was based on measurements of the best-preserved examples of these features elsewhere in the theater (see

Fig. 3.108). The best-preserved examples themselves were not reconstructed. The master plan was discussed, modified and approved in a series of meetings of the Bet She’an Development Committee, a management as well as professional consortium set up specifically to administer what was (correctly) anticipated to be a long-term, extensive preservation, restoration and development project. The first phase of the project undertaken within the framework of the master plan was the reconstruction of the eastern aditus maximus. This was the key, and the foundation, for all future work in the theater’s northeastern corner. The foundations of the entire northeastern corner of the theater had failed during antiquity and the subsidence of the foundation walls had produced an inclination of the upper walls backward to the north and east. This foundation subsidence affected the preserved western sections of the barrel vault that covered the eastern aditus maximus and the resulting tilting of the exposed northern face pulled at the top of the vault, producing an elongation, or flattening, of the vault. Measurements taken prior to intervention showed that the northern side of the vault had sunk about 0.5 m from its original level at its western end (facing the orchestra), and the span of

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

357

Fig. 8.10. Severan Theater: the dismantled eastern aditus maximus, looking east.

the vault at the point of its spring course was more than 0.75 m wider than at the time of its construction. The degree of subsidence of the northern wall was greatest at its western end and became gradually less as one moved eastward. In contrast to the northern side of the vault, the southern side was relatively stable, being firmly attached to the cavea, in which foundation subsidence was not in evidence. In short, in 1992 we were faced with a lopsided, skewed and partially sunken vault in imminent danger of collapse. The eastern part of the eastern aditus maximus had already collapsed in antiquity, and its remains were buried. The area had not been excavated in 1960–1963 due to the danger involved, and would have to be excavated now. After completing documentation of the existing situation, it was suggested that the entire extant barrel vault and a large part of the northern wall of the eastern aditus maximus be disassembled and re-assembled to its original height and width, as known from the stable southern wall. This would enable us to restore the eastern aditus maximus to its proper height relative to the cavea, and subsequently, to restore and extend the seats and stairs of the ima cavea and the tribunal next to the vault. It was fortunate that sufficient evidence for all of the decorative and structural elements involved in this reconstruction were available within the surviving structure and in the collapsed material.

The reconstruction of the eastern aditus maximus was carried out by the contractor. After numbering all of the stones of the barrel vault and the northern wall, and carefully removing them (Fig. 8.10), the archaeological team entered the site and completely excavated the area of the eastern aditus maximus foundations and the portion of the ima cavea that had been buried under the rubble of the collapsed superstructure and seating. Many usable stone seats, steps, stone handrail sections and other architectural members were recovered and re-used in the subsequent reconstruction. In addition, the archaeologists discovered the remains of the Southern Theater, which are described in this report (see Chapters 2 and 7; Figs. 2.5, 7.1). At the same time, the contractor and reconstruction team temporarily reerected the decorated arch of the western entrance of the eastern aditus maximus (which had collapsed in antiquity) within the flat expanse of the orchestra, in order to reconfirm the calculated original width of the eastern aditus maximus, and to accurately carve four new stones needed to replace lost originals (Fig. 8.11). The northern wall of the eastern aditus maximus was then removed down to its foundation, at a depth of c. 5 m below the orchestra floor, and a new concrete foundation, supported by piles, was poured to a level sufficient to correct the ancient subsidence. The northern wall was then rebuilt, using the original stones

358

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.11. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the eastern aditus’ western entrance arch, looking east.

in their original layout (Fig. 8.12). Having restored the northern wall to its original height and distance relative to the unchanged southern wall, it was now possible to rebuild the barrel vault. The vault was also extended eastward, using additional arched stones discovered in the excavation, into an area where it had collapsed in antiquity. At the point where the reconstructed part of the northern wall met its eastward extension (which was not reconstructed), it was necessary to insert several new stones to ‘bridge’ the resulting difference in height. These bridging stones were marked with triangular holes drilled into their face. When the remains of the Southern Theater were discovered during the excavation, it was necessary to alter the reconstruction plans: a sloped concrete roof was designed and built over the Southern Theater’s eastern aditus maximus that was revealed within the ima cavea of the Severan Theater (Fig. 8.13), in order to permit future investigators access to the early remains. An access panel was also installed within the southern wall of the eastern aditus maximus for this purpose. An additional modification to the reconstruction plan was made in the central portion of the eastern aditus maximus, deep within its southern wall, so that the Fig. 8.12. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the northern ► wall of the eastern aditus maximus, looking northeast.

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

359

Fig. 8.13. Severan Theater: the concrete foundation of Cuneus 1 and the sloping ceiling over the remains of the Southern Theater, looking east.

Southern Theater circumference wall that was revealed at that point would remain exposed as well (see Fig. 2.7). None of these alterations compromised in the least the goals of the reconstruction. With the completion of the vault and the concrete roof in the area of the ima cavea, the additional seating and the tribunal were constructed. The details of the tribunal were derived from clues discerned within the surviving structure. Portions of the stone handrail that had surrounded the tribunal were found and used in the reconstruction (see Fig.

3.97). A key piece was the outside corner of the handrail, which established all the relevant heights in two directions, as well as the degree of the slope (Fig. 8.14). The handrail sections from the northern side of the tribunal also had negatives of the seats carved into their sides, which in turn established the pattern of landings and stairs in the original design. The reconstruction works then shifted to the versura stairwell tower in the northeastern corner of the postscaenium. The general plan of action was to

360

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.14. Severan Theater: handrail element of the tribunal.

stabilize and heighten this unit sufficiently to permit the eventual reconstruction of the eight easternmost columns of the scaenae frons with their entablature in its original relationship with the scaenae frons wall behind it. In addition, this corner would be adjoined to the cavea by the construction of the missing secondfloor arch of the versura, completing the planned unification of the cavea and the postscaenium. Within this general framework, the work was planned in three stages: first, the extension upward of the stairwell tower and the versura side of the scaenae frons wall; second, the construction of the second-floor arch of the eastern itinera versurarum, thus connecting it to the scaenae frons eastern hospitalia wall; third, the reconstruction of the eight columns and their entablature, including the portion of the entablature that was embedded over the itinera versurarum (see Fig. 3.10). The third stage required a detailed study of the scaenae frons’ architectural elements. The analysis and reconstruction of the scaenae frons (Stratum 12) is a central element in this excavation report (see Chapter 7), and needs no elaboration here. The work of the team of archaeologists, who fully recorded and analyzed all of the architectural elements, including those discovered by Applebaum and the ones revealed in the current excavations (see Chapter 9), and in particular the research of the authors of this volume (Mazor and Atrash), cannot be underestimated. Due to their work, we can hope that the scaenae frons will eventually be fully reconstructed to the height of its first floor, as projected in the master plan. As the

study of the scaenae frons has widely occupied both architects and archaeologists over time, and it is surely the most thoroughly researched ancient architectural assembly in the country to date, a brief description of the history of its research is appropriate. As mentioned above, the many architectural fragments discovered by Applebaum in the excavations of 1960–1963 were left scattered in the fields to the north of the theater. Applebaum never published a final report, and his preliminary reports were sketchy on the subject of the scaenae frons. They postulated the existence of a three-story scaenae frons, but gave no details. No drawings or photographs of the architectural fragments were published, and no map showing the location of the revealed architectural members within the excavated area was produced, apart from some excavation photographs. In 1986, Marcel Lubash, a registered surveyor, began the investigation of the architectural elements, measuring and drawing some of them. He produced a drawing of a preliminary layout and elevation of the scaenae frons (unpublished), correctly identifying the basic plan of 36 columns on each of the three stories, although misinterpreting the setting of the valvae regiae columnar facade. His solution of the precise location of each element of the entablature also contained many errors, but his work laid a firm foundation for future reconstruction analysis of the theater’s scaenae frons. In 1988, research work was resumed by the architect Amnon Bar-Or and the archaeologist Walid Atrash, under the supervision of the IAA expedition director, Gabriel Mazor, who studied the entire assemblage of the theater’s architectural elements (see Chapter 9). At this time, all architectural elements were moved to a new location, sorted and rearranged in order according to types, and then fully recorded (photographed, drawn and measured). The conditions under which the work was conducted, which included the logistical support of the excavators and their mechanical equipment, enabled a careful physical and stylistic study of all the elements, complete as well as fragmentary, including the related positioning of iron fasteners that anchored the various elements, thus achieving a superior level of accuracy in measurement and analysis. The scaenae frons podium, on which the columns would rest, was surveyed, measured and drawn in detail, and this was instrumental in locating precisely the column centers that determine the pivot points of the entablature. During 1988–1997, Bar-Or,

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

Atrash and Amos prepared their proposals for the reconstruction of the scaenae frons’ layout (Bar-Or and Atrash 1988; Atrash and Bar-Or 1990; Atrash and Amos 1997; see also above, Chapter 7). As a result, it became clear that most of the architectural elements of the first-floor order of the scaenae frons still existed, while much less material remained of the upper two floors (see Chapter 9). The first-floor entablature was laid out on the ground under the supervision of the IAA expedition archaeologists, to test the accuracy of the layout produced in the Bar-Or, Atrash and Amos reports. A flat area of approximately 80 × 140 m (1120 sq m) was paved in asphalt, fenced, and designated a working area for assembly of the entablature. A full-scale drawing of the theater’s podium was incised on the asphalt, and the entablature was assembled in full. For the most part, the solution proposed by Bar-Or, Atrash and Amos proved correct when the scaenae frons entablature was physically restored on the ground, although a few changes and additions were made. The discovery that the Roman IV builders had re-used a few of the architraves in locations other than their original locations complicated the solution. It necessitated the authors’ decision to regard the Stratum 11 layout of the Roman entablature as the period of reference for the restoration project, and yet it

361

proved to be almost identical to the original Stratum 12 layout, with a few minor adjustments. With the results of the scaenae frons research in hand, in 1997 the reconstruction of the northeastern corner of the theater progressed. The northern face of the versurae and the scaenae frons wall were raised to a height of 6 m above the pulpitum floor. This corresponds to the reconstructed height of this wall, based on its existing wall segments further west. A hollow concrete shell was then built 3.5 m higher still (Fig. 8.15). The shell structure was designed to provide the structural backing (scaenae frons wall) for the columns and entablature of the first eight columns of the scaenae frons that would be erected in the final phase of the work. The shell included a concrete floor that spread the weight of this addition as evenly as possible over the existing soft-limestone structure, and as it was hollow, it would be lighter than any solid construction. The floor of the shell also rested on a series of narrow-diameter concrete piles, which were drilled through the core of the existing walls deep into the foundations. This converted the shell into a kind of multi-legged stork, hovering over the stone structure, while transferring little weight onto it. The outer face of the concrete shell was set inward from the original scaenae frons line, to allow finished stone facing on the theater side and rough wall-core facing on the outer side.

Fig. 8.15. Severan Theater: the concrete shell of the scaena’s northeastern corner, looking northeast.

362

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

The 2.2 m high podium, over which columns would be placed, was also repaired (see Fig. 3.42). Missing stones were replaced, large erosion gaps were filled with lime mortar, and a series of horizontal and vertical stainless-steel anchors were drilled through the podium to bind the individual stones together and to anchor the podium securely to its basalt foundation (Fig. 8.16).

Fig. 8.16. Severan Theater: preparing a reconstructed podium section.

The concrete shell and anchors were executed by the contractor Habib Ghandur, who was rapidly developing a specialty in antiquities’ work, while the northern wall of the spiral stairwell tower was built by the local Project Preservation and Reconstruction Team trained by the IAA Preservation Department, which also attended to the upward extension of the spiral staircase within the versura (Fig. 8.17). The staircase is a structure made of basalt stone, which is a relatively hard building material, yet the team handled it and the challenge of the circular geometry with superb results. The extension of the circular staircase was primarily intended to hide the lofty eastern face of the concrete shell, but upon its completion it was apparent that the great height it achieved would eventually also permit visitors to enjoy the finest of vistas over the revealed civic center. Despite the heightening of the spiral staircase, most of the concrete shell was still exposed at this point, and the result was extremely unsightly. It awaited the next phases of work: the reconstruction of the vaults to the south and west of the spiral stairwell tower, and most important, the facing of the shell with stone and the reconstruction of the eight columns and entablature of the columnar composition.

Fig. 8.17. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the eastern versura spiral staircase, looking southwest.

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

In order to reconstruct the vault above the eastern hospitalia of the scaenae frons, it was recommended by the architects to dismantle and reconstruct several courses of soft limestone at the northwestern corner of the entrance passage. This would permit the reconstruction of the large, soft-limestone vault that stood behind the lintel of the eastern hospitalia, the framed opening itself, and the stone core that was planned above the arch (see Fig. 7.4). The planned proposal to reconstruct this vault, as well as the entire proposed northeastern corner reconstruction, was elaborately illustrated in the model constructed following approval of the master plan in 1992 and before the start of reconstruction work. This model was extremely helpful to the architects and archaeologists in visualizing the total picture of what would eventually result from their efforts. In the process of the vault reconstruction, of the original six or so soft-limestone blocks proposed for replacement with new stones in the initial design, four were replaced and two preserved, and the depth of the vault behind the hospitalia was reduced slightly to avoid the weak soft limestone in the corner. In the third stage, attention was turned to the scaenae frons corner: the pedestals, columns and entablature (see Fig. 3.10). The total inventory of column-shaft sections, bases, pedestals and capitals was known. Within the framework of what became known as the

363

‘pilot project’, carried out by the contractor, a single column shaft was reconstructed and set in place, which established the technique and aesthetic principals of column reconstruction to be used henceforth (Fig. 8.18). Reconstructing broken monolithic column shafts is tricky, especially when the columns were originally sculpted with enthasis (a constantly changing diameter that produces a swelling in the center or bottom of the column). It is difficult to establish the true axis of columns that have been broken across a diameter that changes every centimeter, and it is even more difficult to project the axis through column sections that are less than 100% of the original column shaft and therefore separated by empty spaces that must be filled with new or artificial stone. Belkin and the engineer, Avraham Sevilia, designed a workstation consisting of steel carts mounted on railroad tracks, capable of rotating and gliding in three dimensions, while supporting the column fragments in a horizontal position. A variety of tools and techniques were developed for measuring eccentricities, for identifying the column axis and for projecting it through multiple column sections. In addition, methods were devised for accurately drilling and installing stainless-steel reinforcing rods between adjacent fragments without altering their positions, for pouring the structural concrete between distant sections, for connecting bases and pedestals,

Fig. 8.18. Severan Theater: reconstruction of a column shaft.

364

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

for drilling matching holes in the podium, for casting elements based on small fragments, for hoisting columns without damaging reinforcing steel, etc. (Fig. 8.19). The pilot project also established the principal, observed previously in the repair of the podium, that missing stone would be reconstructed with a plasterlike material of similar appearance to stone, applied by

Fig. 8.19. Severan Theater: workstation for column-shaft reconstruction.

trowel onto the reconstructed column after assembly. Some of the technical inspiration for the pilot project, as for instance the column-shaft connection method and restoring missing parts with plaster, came from a study of the reconstruction work conducted at the Trajaneum at Pergamon and the Library of Celsus at Ephesus, Turkey. A cart system on tracks was also used at these two sites for column reconstruction, and although less sophisticated, it pointed the direction for the work at Nysa-Scythopolis. Following the completion of the pilot project, three out of the four large, red-granite columns of the valvae regiae columnar facade were reconstructed and set in place by the contractor. Two of these columns were recovered in full (although broken) during the excavations, and their restoration contributed a monumentality to the theater remains that was previously lacking (Fig. 8.20). With the acquired experience from the pilot project, the reconstruction of the eight columns of the scaenae frons’ northeastern corner, complete with their entablature, could now proceed. It was obvious that eventually the construction of the vaults and arches of the itinera versurarum would have to take place

Fig. 8.20. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the column shafts of the valvae regiae’s columnar facade, looking north.

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

behind the already standing columns and entablature. Because the preliminary work had been thorough and the contractor was experienced, the reconstruction of the eight columns and their entablature went relatively smoothly. The principal concern was how to adapt the new construction to the sloped podium and the tilting walls. These adaptations were done at the pedestal level, either by pouring grout beneath the ancient pedestals, or by fashioning new pedestals with a slightly angled bottom. When the columns were set upright, some small latitude was also left for adjustments to the vertical to be made by eye, rather than by surveying instruments alone. Sometimes it is more important to attend to what our perception tells us rather than what we know to be true (Fig. 8.21). In a complex visual field where very little is truly horizontal or vertical, reconstruction must be sensitive to the effect of optical illusions. Another concern during work in the scaenae frons northeastern corner project was how to align the new stone facing over the concrete shell of the versura wall to the existing basalt wall below (on the pulpitum side). This corner of the theater had been rebuilt shortly after the completion of the theater construction (still within Roman III, Stratum 12), and the walls behind the podium were relatively vertical. Nevertheless, there was some displacement and buckling, especially in the uppermost extant courses of basalt stone, which necessitated casting a concrete beam behind the top course to stabilize it. The concrete tower had been built with an adequate setback from the stone face to permit easy adjustments in the work of plating the concrete with stone. The Roman architects had built the lower courses of the scaenae frons in basalt, with the upper courses in soft-limestone masonry. The entire ensemble was then faced with thin marble sheathing (opus sectile). However, it was chosen not to reconstruct the marble plating, because it was largely missing in the excavated remains. This reconstructed wall was laid out in a perfectly straight line, and completely vertical, despite the fact that this would result in a slight offset between the distorted existing lower wall of basalt and the new addition above it. The heightened portion of the scaenae frons side of the versura walls was mostly above the ancient level of transition from basalt to softlimestone masonry, so soft limestone was needed for the reconstruction. As soft-limestone masonry is easily damaged and difficult to use in thin veneers, a similar stone called ‘Malta’, also a terrestrial, limey sandstone but slightly more compact and wear-resistant, was

365

Fig. 8.21. Severan Theater: reconstruction of the scaenae frons’ northeastern corner, looking northeast.

specially shipped from Malta. It was hoped that the characteristic oxidation staining of soft limestone would also occur to the Malta stone in time. The stones were cut to a width of 10 cm and each facing stone was individually secured to the concrete wall with a stainless-steel rod. The few centimeters between the concrete and the stone were filled with a grout of sand, white cement and a plasticizer, to retard the movement of dissolved salts outward from the concrete shell into the stone facing. Plastering this large area was rejected, as plastering was reserved for the reconstruction of limited areas within otherwise complete elements (such as missing portions of monolithic column shafts). Where entire elements were missing, new stone was used whenever possible. Some exceptions to this did occur. Two of the capitals needed for the reconstruction of the first eight columns were missing. We could have ‘borrowed’ capitals from the material designated for the rest of the scaenae frons reconstruction, but this would hardly

366

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig 8.23. Severan Theater: the reconstructed northeastern corner of the scaenae frons, looking north. Fig. 8.22. Severan Theater: the cast of the Corinthian capital, looking west.

have been correct. Instead, it was decided to prepare two completely new capitals with all of their original detailing, which would provide a glimpse of the original Roman workmanship and beauty that is lacking in most of our damaged architectural fragments after nearly 1400 years in ruins. To prepare new Corinthian capitals of this size in stone was deemed too ambitious an undertaking, and too expensive as well, especially considering that a total of four such capitals would eventually be required for the scaenae frons, and the fact that all scaenae frons capitals were of imported marble. Instead, the finest example among the existing capitals was shipped to a sculptor in Jerusalem who prepared a cast using the best features from the four sides of the capital (Fig. 8.22). Then a plaster ‘positive’ sculpture, and finally a reusable reinforced rubber mold of that ‘positive’, were produced. From this mold, two hollow, glass-reinforced concrete (GRC) capitals were produced. GRC is a thin concrete, some 15 cm thick. After the capitals were placed on the column shafts,

concrete was poured into the hollow core. Pigments were mixed into the GRC to match the color of the original light gray marble. These two capitals are now visible in the on-site reconstruction (Fig. 8.23). The reconstruction of the capitals with all of their original detail was an exception in another way: in most cases the decorative elements of missing stones or portions of stones were only schematically reconstructed. For example, in architraves and friezes only the continuous lines and facets of the entablature profiles were emphasized, with no further decor. These reconstructed portions were composed of an aggregate of white cement, ground stone and sand, and they were hand carved before they were erected. The rough texture was designed to convey from afar the textural sense of the original decorated stones, without imitating decorative elements. Whenever possible, this was done over a structural concrete core, in a similar manner to the reconstruction of missing portions of columns, but when the missing parts were small, the entire repair was done with the filler mixture. In other cases, some smooth plaster repairs in another style and color were

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

367

Fig 8.24. Severan Theater: the reconstructed northeastern corner of the scaenae frons, looking north.

Fig 8.25. Severan Theater: the reconstructed entablature in the northeastern corner.

installed between stones. These were performed after reconstruction by the reconstruction team of the IAA (Figs. 8.24, 8.25). In 2001, the acquiescence of the Israel Antiquities Authority was obtained for the construction of the arches of the itinera versurarum and eastern hospitalia. This would be the element that would link the scaenae

frons with the cavea, and provide a smooth transition from the heightened scaenae frons at the northeastern end to the considerably lower existing wall directly to its west. This work was carried out by the contractor Talal Omar, and was completed in the spring of 2002 (Figs. 8.26, 8.27). The reconstruction of the itinera versurarum arch of the second floor involved a type

368

Lawrence Belkin And Avi Katzin

Fig. 8.26. Severan Theater: the reconstructed eastern versura, looking east.

Fig. 8.27. Severan Theater: the reconstructed eastern hospitalia, looking north.

of work that had not previously been undertaken in the theater. The entablature between Column Nos. 35 and 36 was not freestanding, but engaged as part of the versura wall. Only three small fragments of the original, thin architrave slabs were recovered in the excavations. It was determined that these three fragments should be embedded into the schematic architrave that would be reconstructed in this location, and that the reconstruction would be produced in GRC. The experience with GRC in the production of the new Corinthian capitals had been very good, and the selection of GRC was cost-effective and structurally advantageous. It was felt that the embedding of the three original fragments in the GRC background would be effective visually, and would produce the same affect that the plaster repairs of stone units produces. Thus, a polystyrene form was produced from which the GRC architrave was cast. The form was intentionally roughened to produce a textured surface, although the final results were less textured than anticipated. Following the completion of reconstruction works in the scaenae frons northeastern corner, the eastern

versura, the ima cavea Scalarium I and Cuneus 1 and its adjacent tribunal, and the northeastern part of the media cavea were attended to. The media cavea podium wall, which was preserved to a height of one or two courses along its entire route, was reconstructed of limestone masonry to its full height, including its cap molding based on preserved fragments revealed in Applebaum’s excavation. The reconstructed section included the limestone facade of the vomitorium entrance with its profiled doorposts and lintel. Next to it, the staircase constructed within the podium wall was entirely reconstructed, including its barrel vault composed of a single carved block. Acoustic Cell 9, with its basalt masonry walls and complex shellshaped copula, was also reconstructed, and an assumed window was left in its facade, part of the media cavea podium. Finally, the access staircase and several seat rows were reconstructed over the acoustic cell in the lower northeastern section of the media cavea. This reconstruction made use of new limestone masonry and its main purpose was to add substance and meaning to the preserved basalt stone core of the

Chapter 8: Reconstruction Work in the Severan Theater

media cavea that encircles the theater cavea (see Fig. 7.28). While work on the northeastern corner of the scaenae frons and the eastern versura were being conducted, other restoration works were attended to by the IAA reconstruction team. Both the northern and southern faces of the scaenae frons wall had been constructed of soft limestone that was poorly preserved and crumbled in many places. It underwent an extensive process of grouting and consolidation, a procedure that must be repeated periodically in the future. In addition, the basalt walls of the entire theater complex were consolidated, and Vomitoria 17–19 were partially reconstructed, including the inner (western) parts of their barrel vaults. Finally, the marble entablature of the scaenae frons’ first-floor columnar facade was rearranged along the outer ambulacrum wall in its reconstructed composition, hopefully awaiting restoration in the future.

Future Plans In the future, several additional reconstruction projects are planned. Both flanks of the pulpitum

369

have remained unpaved pending a decision on materials. The western versura is in serious structural distress, and requires work by the IAA Preservation Department. Reconstructions carried out in the 1960s by Max Tan’ee along the western aditus maximus should be modified to better reflect the character of the original monument. In addition, the northern facade of the theater’s postscaenium, with its three large entrances––most of whose architectural members are well preserved (see Figs. 8.7–8.14)––requires attention, since this elevation comprises the principal public exterior facade of the theater. It is also hoped that the first floor of the scaenae frons will be fully reconstructed, a project that was formally approved by the IAA in 1997, at the conclusion of the research effort lead by Bar-Or, Atrash and Amos. All the column shafts of the scaenae frons were reconstructed from the many fragments recovered in the excavations, and placed in storage. As noted above, the remarkably richly adorned entablature of the scaenae frons––the only preserved one in the country––was composed and laid out along the theater’s rear circumference wall and is awaiting reconstruction.

R eferences Atrash W. and Amos E. 1997. The Roman Theater Scaenae Frons: 3rd Interim Report (unpublished IAA internal report). Bet She’an (Hebrew). Atrash W. and Bar-Or A. 1990. The Roman Theater Scaenae Frons: 2nd Interim Report (unpublished IAA internal report). Bet She’an (Hebrew).

Bar-Or A. and Atrash W. 1988. The Roman Theater Scaenae Frons: 1st Interim Report (unpublished IAA internal report). Bet She’an (Hebrew).

G. Mazor and W. Atrash, 2015, Bet She’an III/2 (IAA Reports 58/2)

Chapter 9

The Architectural Elements Gabriel Mazor

Over 1140 architectural elements were found in the area of the theater and the civic center, about two-thirds of them (758; Appendix 9.1: Nos. 6001–6864) by Applebaum, the remainder by the IAA and the IAHU expeditions. Applebaum submitted no detailed records of his work or catalogue of the architectural elements, and thus their exact collapse location is unknown, which is unfortunate as the study of the layer of collapsed elements would surely have provided important data for the reconstruction research. The study of Applebaum’s photographs by the authors did, however, enable the identification of some elements and their collapse location. The vast assemblage of elements revealed by Applebaum was removed from the theater during his excavation and placed haphazardly in the field to the north of the theater, where it remained for over thirty years. Prior to the completion of the theater excavation by the IAA expedition, all of these architectural elements were re-arranged in an organized manner according to type and material, and then fully recorded, drawn and photographed. In addition, further elements recovered by the IAA expedition in the theater and the civic center that were identified as belonging to the Southern or Severan theaters were recorded and added to this assemblage. The entire assemblage of architectural elements was divided by material, order composition and original location, and then assigned to the major units of the Southern and Severan Theaters. A relatively small assemblage of well-preserved soft-limestone elements that presumably belonged to the two phases of the Southern Theater, was recovered during the IAA excavations (see Chapter 2), mostly in foundation fills of the Severan Theater. The elements from the Southern and Severan Theaters are discussed separately.

The Southern Theater Throughout the theater excavations, soft-limestone architectural elements and fragments of many others

were recovered, mainly in foundation fills under the northeastern side of the ima cavea (Cuneus 1 and Scalarium I), and within the hyposcaenium of the Severan Theater (see Chapter 2). These included a number of complete elements, such as column drums, a base, a Corinthian pilaster capital, some Ionic capitals, several architrave elements and segments of an arched niche lintel. All of these elements were presumably part of the scaenae frons decor of the Southern Theater in both Phases I and II of Stratum 13, dated to the first century CE. In addition, architectural elements of soft limestone were found in situ in other complexes of the civic center, as in the basilica and both temples of the forum that were dated to the first century CE based on stratigraphic and epigraphic evidence (see Mazor and Atrash, in prep.). Nysa-Scythopolis was probably visited by Emperor Hadrian during his visit to the East, and participated in the monumentalization process of major poleis of the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire. At that time, the Gilboa Mountain quarries were first exploited, supplying a superb-quality hard limestone for both masonry and architectural elements. As a result, soft limestone was no longer required for the production of architectural elements. It is therefore reasonable to assume that all the soft-limestone elements embedded in the foundation fills of the Severan Theater antedate the new supply of stone dated to the early second century CE and the construction of the Severan Theater. Thus, soft-limestone elements attributed to the decor of the Southern Theater can be dated to the first century CE.

Soft-Limestone Elements Bases Two fragments of bases were found in the fills of the Severan Theater. One is a worn fragment, A175, the dimensions of which could not be verified, and its profiles were poorly preserved. The second example,

372

Gabriel Mazor

A6439 0.50

0.66

Fig. 9.1. Southern Theater: soft-limestone Ionic base and column-shaft section.

A6439, is a base with a section of its attached column drum, 0.66 m high and 0.50 m in diameter (Fig. 9.1). The base, 0.23 m high, has a 0.10 m lower torus, a 4 cm scotia, a 1.5 cm fillet and a 6 cm upper torus. The base is of the Greek-Attic type (Shoe Meritt 1965:301, 1969:191; Amy and Gros 1979:123, n.76), in which the upper and lower tori are separated by a scotia and two fillets. This type of base originated as part of the Ionic order in fifth-century BCE Athens and spread throughout the Hellenistic world and later in the Roman and Byzantine eastern Mediterranean. During the second century BCE, the base reached Italy in a slightly different design that is known to us as the Roman-Attic type. This type of base became dominant in Italy and the western part of the Empire, presumably under the influence of the Etruscan base. The carving of the column drum as an integrated part of the GreekAttic type base characterizes the Ionic order in the region of Coele Syria during the Hellenistic period and the Roman East in the Early Roman period. This type was common at Nysa-Scythopolis, for example in the colonnaded street that preceded Palladius Street and dates to Roman III. A base of this type from Samaria was attributed to the Hellenistic period (Reisner, Fischer and Lyon 1924:163, Fig. 78:3). Similar bases at Masada were dated to the Herodian period (Foerster 1995:99–104). At Nysa-Scythopolis, another base of this type was found in situ in the eastern temple of the forum temenos, where it was dated to the early first century CE (Roman II). The column section is 0.50 m in diameter and has a 1 cm plinth and apophyge, a delicate profile that will also appear later in lower parts of Corinthian column shafts or drums.

Column Drums About ten complete or almost-complete column drums were found by Applebaum reused as building stones in walls of the Severan Theater, or by the IAA expedition in the foundation fills. Apart from A6139, which resembles the column drums of the basilica in the northeastern part of the forum both in diameter (1 m) and nature (composed of four attached quarters), the rest range in diameter between 0.52 and 0.61 m (Fig. 9.2:1–10) and seem to represent a relatively homogeneous group. Soft-limestone column drums, both complete and fragmentary, were frequently found in other parts of the site, mostly in fill layers or in secondary use as building stones (Bet She’an I:130, Fig. 9.1). They were attributed to first-century CE monuments, such as the basilica in the forum (where some of them were found in situ; Tsafrir and Foerster 1997: Plan 27), the temples in the southeastern part of the forum (Mazor and Bar-Nathan 1998:8–10), and presumably the scaenae frons of the Southern Theater. Capitals Five capitals were found, a Corinthian pilaster capital and four complete or fragmentary common Ionic capitals. Corinthian Capital Capital A40630 is a square pilaster (Fig. 9.3) measuring 0.52 × 0.52 m and 0.46 m high. In its lower part it has a 1.5 cm high plinth and a 4 cm high beveled torus. Its calathus is 34 cm high and has a 1 cm lip. The lowerrange leaves of the capital are 13 cm high, slightly over 1/3 of the calathus height, while the upper range is 22 cm, almost 2/3 of the calathus height. The abacus is 4.5 cm high, 1/10 of the capital’s height. The ratio of height to width of the capital is almost 1:1. The capital is carved on three sides and the fourth is vertically cut as it was partly inserted into a wall. The calathus is densely covered with the acanthus leaves and therefore barely visible, and has a pronounced rim. The leaves of the lower range spring from the lower torus band and are widely spread over the bottom of the capital. There are two wide, crude and fleshy leaves on each side that curve gently outward. The lobe rib of each leaf is marked by two parallel

373

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

0.35

7 0.53

4

0.32 0.27

0.61

1

0.29

0.54

2

0.55

0.37

0.34

8

0.54

0.74

9

5 6

3 0.59

0.54

0.52

10 0.59

0.29 0.65 0.23

0.52

Fig. 9.2. Southern Theater: soft-limestone column drums.

A40630

0.46

0.52

Fig. 9.3. Southern Theater: soft-limestone Corinthian pilaster capital.

grooves that widen at the bottom, and the leaves are separated. The upper range of leaves, also wide, round and fleshy with pointed, gently rounded tips, rises behind the lower range and has a central leaf and two side leaves that engulf the capital’s corners with half a leaf on each side. The lobe rib is deeply marked in the corner leaves, less so in the central leaf, and the leaves touch each other. From behind and between the leaves rises a short, triangular cauliculus with a round rim. The calyx has two fleshy schematic leaves that curve in either direction under the helixes and volutes,

and they do not meet. The helixes and volutes spring from within the leaves of the calyx and they separate high above it. The helixes curve into a closed spiral, ending with a knob over the calathus lip and under the abacus, gently resting on the inner leaves of the calyx. The volutes are broken but seem to have been executed in the same manner. Between the helixes rises the stem of the abacus flower in a bow shape that ends in a wide rounded lip. The round, fleshy flower widens above it, although its details are worn. The relatively low, plain abacus, very worn, has two gently profiled bands.

374

Gabriel Mazor

This capital is of the bossenkapitelle type that was relatively common throughout the Roman world and appears in Italy and Greece in the first century CE (Heilmeyer 1970:141). It seems to have its origins in the Hellenistic East (Kautzsch 1936:210), where it first appears in the monumental Hellenistic complex of Araq al-Amir in Jordan (Butler 1919: Ill. 5:2, 3). In Jerusalem, it was found in two places, both dated to the mid-first century CE. The first example is the entrance to the tomb of Queen Helene of Adiabene, the distylosin-antis of which has four such capitals (Fischer 1990:24–25, Pl. 7:38). The queen’s burial in a private tomb in Jerusalem, some distance to the north of the Third Wall, is mentioned by Josephus (Antiquities 20, 4, 3), who states that three stone pyramids were built over the tomb, while Pausanias (Guide to Greece VIII 16, 4) compares the tomb to the Mausoleum of Halikernasos. The tomb was richly decorated with mixed-order components (Kon 1947), a composition that was relatively common in the architectural decor of first-century CE tombs in Jerusalem, such as the Kidron Valley monuments (Avigad 1954). A decorative band of leaves adorns the architrave, while the frieze is of the Doric order with acanthus leaves in its center and a plain Corinthian cornice above. The second example from Jerusalem is a very similar capital found in Area C of the Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1973:199; 1984:151, Pl. 157; Fischer 1990:25–26, Pl. 39) dated to the same period. This capital is taller, well balanced, and seems to be a variation of the Corinthian capital characteristic in the region and throughout the Roman world since the reign of Augustus (Heilmeyer 1970:12). According to Fischer (1990:25–26), the capital in the Jewish Quarter represents, in its inner dimensions and crude display of components, the development of the Corinthian capital at this time as a counter Hellenistic trend to the over-decorated Herodian capitals. The bossenkapitelle type has representatives in Asia Minor, as in the gymnasium at Miletus (Heilmeyer 1973:23, Pl. 31:3) and in the West in the minor architecture at Pompeii and Rome (Ronczewski 1923: Fig. 13), all dated to the Early Roman period. Other similar representatives of the type were found in the Early Roman temples of Syria, as for instance, the temples at Kalat Fakra, Hussan Solieman (a composite capital), Hussan Niha (including pilaster capitals) and Ain Libnaya (Krencker and Zschietzschmann 1938:41–42, 76–77, 127, Figs. 60, 106, 107, 175, 176,

Pl. 82), all of which were dated to the first half of the first century CE. Thus, based on comparison with the dated capitals from Asia Minor and Rome in general and those from the temples in Syria and the capitals from Jerusalem, it would be reasonable to date the bossenkapitelle from the Southern Theater at NysaScythopolis to the first half of the first century CE, presumably within the reign of Tiberius (14–37 CE). After it was replaced in popularity by the classical Corinthian capital, the bossenkapitelle still appeared sporadically in architectural settings dated to the end of the first and the early second centuries CE. For example, the northern city gate at Gerasa, dated by an inscription to 115 CE, was adorned with such capitals, including pilaster capitals (Kraeling 1938:121, Pls. XXIIa, XXIIIc). In Rome, they were found in the forum of Nerva (Freyberger 1990: Pl. 47b), in the forum of Trajan, and as composite capitals in the western and southern entrances of the Colosseum (Heilmeyer 1970: Pl. 50:2; 51:2–6). Scholars seeking the origin of the bossenkapitelle can be divided into two main streams: those who place it within the development of the Corinthian capital during the first to early second centuries CE (Heilmeyer 1970:140), and others who assume that it reflects a Hellenistic tradition influenced by Alexandria (Riegl 1893:56–61, Figs. 14, 17, 18; Ronczewski 1923: Fig. 21) in a post-Augustan era (Schefold 1976:759). Fischer (1990:25–27) rightly combines both views. The capitals from Jerusalem, in their proportions and the display of their inner components, may be considered as representative of the development of the Corinthian capital. However, their architectural setting in the early first century CE, which merges the orders and traditions of both west and east, is unique (Avigad 1954:141). The execution of the leaves in the Egyptian bell capital that adorns the pyramid of the Tomb of Absalom in the Kidron Valley seems to resemble that of our capital and may indicate Egyptian influence. The capitals from Araq al-Amir are of Hellenistic origin and may display Alexandrian influence as early as the second century BCE. They are depicted in the second-style wall paintings in Pompeii, which in turn may have been influenced by Alexandrian architecture as well (Schefold 1976:759). The capitals from Jerusalem do not fit the Vitruvian ideal proportions that were more closely adhered to in the West (Vitruvius, Architecture IV, 1, 11; Heilmeyer 1970:14; Leon 1971:51). The capital from the Southern

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis and those of the Roman temples in Syria, all presumably of the first half of the first century CE, are closer to the Vitruvian proportions. They differ from the Jerusalem examples, conforming to the Hellenistic development of the post-Augustan Corinthian capital as practiced in the region during the first half of the first century CE. Ionic Capitals Four Ionic capitals were found in the theater, mainly in secondary use as building stones and fill components and therefore poorly preserved. Capital A90604 (Fig. 9.4:1) is 0.36 m high, its upper (broken) dimensions

are 0.33 × 0.44 m, and its diameter is 0.33 m. It has an 8 cm high shaft section, an 11 cm high echinus and a 7 cm high abacus. It seems to have had a plain pulvinus with no balteus. Capital A100681 (Fig. 9.4:2) is 0.36 m high, its upper (broken) dimensions are 0.44 × 0.58 m and its diameter is 0.41 m. The shaft section, c. 4 cm high, is broken, the echinus is 0.20 m high, and the worn abacus is 6 cm high. The plain pulvinus has the remains of one volute and a narrow, doubleridged balteus. Capital A40622 (Fig. 9.4:3) is the best preserved. It is 0.44 m high, its upper dimensions are 0.70 × 0.70 m and its diameter is 0.59 m. It has a 10 cm shaft section crowned with a 3 cm plinth, its

A100681

A90604

0.4

5

0.36

1

0.36

0.4

0.33

2

0.44

1

375

A40622

0.44

0.59

3 A620

0.47

0.51

4

Fig. 9.4. Southern Theater: soft-limestone Ionic capitals.

376

Gabriel Mazor

echinus is 0.315 m high and its abacus is 0.125 m high. The echinus has a plain pulvinus, the volutes of which are broken, and a 0.15 m wide concave balteus. The abacus is separated by a deep groove into torus and plinth. An additional capital (A620) was found near the theater (Fig. 9.4:4) and its origin is unclear. It is 0.47 m high and 0.51 m in diameter. It has a 0.16 m shaft, a 0.22 m high plain echinus with plain, nonspiral, grooved volutes and an 8 cm abacus. Its plain pulvinus has a 7 cm wide central band. Although of different diameters and with some variations in their balteus, all of these Ionic capitals seem to be of the same plain, undecorated, blocked-out type of capital that was common in the region from the Hellenistic to the Herodian period (Peleg-Barkat 2007:54–55, 143–144). This type was most probably plastered and its decorated elements may have been carved in stucco that was not preserved. However, this does not seem to have been the case with the capitals from the Southern Theater, as none of them, including the Corinthian capital (A40630), bear traces of plaster. This type of Ionic capital was found in the upper terrace of the Northern Palace at Masada, while the lower terrace was adorned with the Corinthian order; both orders were dated to the Herodian period. This type of blocked-out capital, which lacks the ornamental details of the echinus and Ionic cyma, and was usually

decorated with ovoli and framed by astragals, is commonly attributed to the Hellenistic realm (Foerster 1995:120–121, 216–224, and see references there). At Dor it was dated by Garstang to the late Hellenistic period (Garstang 1924: Pls. 1–4). However, Garstang’s date was rejected by the later excavators of the site in favor of the second–third centuries CE (Stern 1991:50), which seems to be rather late for this type. It was also found in pre-Herodian Samaria (Reisner, Fischer and Lyon 1924:163, Fig. 78:1, 2) and the Herodian palace at Jericho (Pritchard 1958:13, Pl. 18:3, 4). In the Southern Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, it seems to have been part of a decor that integrates both Corinthian and Ionic orders, presumably in different floors of the scaenae frons in Phase II, dated to the late first century CE. Architrave Two types of soft-limestone architrave elements were found. The first, A40632 (Fig. 9.5:1) is 0.63 m high, 1.10 m long and 0.38 m wide. It has three graded fasciae of 0.20 m, 0.18 m and 0.13 m, crowned with an ovolo and a broken fillet, both of which are 0.11 m high. The second type, A60613 (Fig. 9.5:2) is 0.39 m high (complete height would be c. 0.45 m) and has two fasciae of 0.15 m and 0.10 m, while the third, c. 5 cm high,is broken. This type is crowned with a

A40632 0.12 0.20 0.63 0.18 0.13 1.10

1

0.38

A60613

0.39

0.38

2

Fig. 9.5. Southern Theater: soft-limestone architraves.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

6 cm cavetto and an 8 cm ovolo and fillet. The plain graded fasciae and the crowning profiles may be the first-century CE forerunners of the well-established, far more richly decorated ‘Syrian sequence’ of the second century CE (Weigand 1914:86–87). Both architrave elements were probably integrated into the two-story high scaenae frons of Phase II, in the late first century CE. Arched Lintel of a Niche Two joining sections of an arched lintel of a niche, A40627+A40628 were found, constructed of soft limestone. The joined lintel is 1.38 m long, 0.61 m high and 0.35 m wide, and has a plain arch at its center that

377

is 0.61 m wide, 0.15 m high and 0.17 m deep (Fig. 9.6). Its facade is decorated with two segments of circles that meet and create a seemingly triangular pattern. The profiles of the circular sections are carved in high relief and consist of a 3.5 cm wide cavetto, a 1 cm fillet and a 7 cm plain ovolo. The area of the inner circle was left plain. The lower face of the lintel that overlaps the arch is decorated above with a 4 cm wide cavetto and an 8 cm wide band of dentils. The dentils are 6 cm wide, 2.5 cm apart, with a deep groove 1 cm wide in the center. They are well executed in high relief and very precise. This type of dentil separated by a groove is known from Herodianperiod cornices (Foerster 1995). All the molded profiles belong to the common entablature repertoire, although their composition is eclectic and non-canonical.

A40627 A40628

0.61

0.35

1.38

Fig. 9.6. Southern Theater: soft-limestone arched-niche lintel.

378

Gabriel Mazor

The closest parallel to this unique architectural element, executed in basalt, was found at Horbat Natur in Upper Galilee (Stepansky 1994:13, Pl. 14). The element was not dated and the site seems to have been occupied during the Roman–Byzantine periods. The niche lintel from the Southern Theater at NysaScythopolis may be considered an early prototype of the second-century CE Syrian pediment that became common in the region during the Roman–Byzantine periods. By its dimensions, the lintel may have decorated a niche, one of several that were presumably set into the rear wall of the Southern Theater’s scaenae frons. Conclusions The assemblage of soft-limestone architectural elements that was recovered in the theater is relatively poor, as most were found in foundation fills excavated in limited probes in a relatively small area of the theater. Their secondary use in the Stratum 12 foundations merely points to the fact that they predate the Severan Theater, and there is no certain evidence that they were part of the Southern Theater entablature. However, in light of their location and the presence of similar architectural elements in other first-century CE monuments in the civic center, such as the basilica and the temples of the forum, it seems plausible. The assemblage does not present a homogeneous order composition, as there are two types of capitals, yet both seem to reflect first-century CE architectural decor. The Corinthian pilaster capital may be of the first half of the first century CE, and the Ionic capitals, in light of their type and dated references, could not date much later. The plain, undecorated architrave elements, although not precisely dateable, seem to correspond in style. The niche element is too unique to provide any valid date, although its grooved dentils resemble the architectural decor of the Herodian period, which would place them within the early first century CE as well. The Corinthian pilaster capital, if indeed originating from the scaenae frons of the Southern Theater, seems to date to the post-Herodian/Augustan period, and therefore would set the date of Phase I of the Southern Theater somewhere during the reign of Tiberius. The architraves and column drums would fit the Corinthian order of the theater in its first phase. If

the second phase of the theater included the addition of a second floor to the cavea and the scaenae frons, as the evidence reflects, the second floor could have been of the Ionic order, as such a composite setting has precedents in the Augustan and post-Augustan periods. The Ionic capitals can then be assigned to the second-floor order composition, as they seem to date somewhat later, presumably in the second half of the first century CE.

The Severan Theater The Severan Theater, dated to the late second–early third centuries CE (Stratum 12), was constructed of two main types of stone, basalt and limestone, both of which originated in the vicinity of Nysa-Scythopolis. The foundations of the complex, its outer walls, its versurae, ambulacrum, vomitoria, aditus maximi and acoustic cells were all constructed of well-cut and dressed basalt masonry, quarried from the basalt plateau to the north of the city. The inner parts of the theater were constructed of limestone masonry that was hewn in the Gilboa quarries to the west of the city. The intensive production line of these quarries began in the early second century CE, and during the second and first half of the third centuries CE they furnished the city with superb-quality, hard white limestone masonry blocks and architectural elements, of which all the monuments in the city in general, and in the civic center in particular, are composed. Such architectural elements were integrated into various units of the theater, for example in arches and decorated profiled cornices in the entrances of the aditus maximi and the praecinctio podium, scalaria and seats, and including curiale seats, the tribunalia and their banisters. The podium of the scaenae frons and the doorposts and lintels of its various entrances—the valvae regiae, hospitalia and itinera versurarum—and the entrances of the postscaenium’s northern facade were all adorned with richly decorated limestone elements. Finally, the porticus that crowned the cavea was also built of limestone. The columnar facade of the three-story high scaenae frons, erected in the Corinthian order, was composed of various types of imported marble, including light gray marble from the quarries of Proconnesos on the Island of Marmara, light yellow marble from the quarries of the Aegean Island of Thasos, gray granite from the Troad

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

quarries in Turkey (marmor troadensis), red granite from Syene (Aswan) in Egypt, and green cipollino from Carystos in Euboea, Greece. Throughout the life span of the theater, as a result of several earthquakes, the scaenae frons was reconstructed in Strata 11 and 9, when new elements in secondary use were added that were not part of its original, Stratum 12, composition. Thus, a substantial number of limestone elements, such as pedestals, bases, column shafts and capitals, were integrated into the scaenae frons’ architectural order composition, replacing original architectural elements of imported marble. During these stages, when the columnar facade was also reduced in height, some of these original marble elements were moved out of the theater and appear as spolia in other monuments of the civic center. Gray and red granite columns, identified by their style and dimensions as originating in the theater, were found in Roman IV and Byzantine II strata in the civic center, for instance in the eastern thermae. Marble elements were reused in Byzantine II complexes and renovations of complexes, such as the colonnades in the palestra of the western thermae and the forum porticus. All of these were identified as part of the theater’s original decor. This vast assemblage of architectural elements thus consists of both local and imported materials. They are all listed in Appendix 9.1, which records their basic data: element number, type, material, state of preservation, general dimensions, excavated location and restoration location in the theater. In the following discussion all architectural elements are analyzed according to order, type, and location in the theater units. Some of the hard-limestone elements were found in situ, while others were revealed in collapse layers or reused as spolia. The analysis of the latter refers first to their original composition and then to their secondary use during the various renovations. The imported elements of light gray and light yellow marble, red and gray granite and cipollino were studied as one group, as they represent the original scaenae frons composition of Stratum 12 dated to Roman III. Some of the marble architectural elements have been previously published in works that deal with specific elements. Fischer published part of the marble capitals in his analysis of Corinthian capitals in the region (Fischer 1979; 1990) and the imperial marble trade (Fischer 1998). Ovadiah and Turnheim published a few of the scaenae frons friezes and

379

cornices in their study of the ‘peopled’-scroll motif in Roman architectural decoration in Israel (Ovadiah and Turnheim 1994; and see criticism by Foerster 1997:557–560). Fischer published photographs of selected capitals, while Turnheim and Ovadiah published drawings of a few elements without scales, and field photographs of others. These works focus on individual elements and therefore lack the comprehensive analysis of the theater, its stratigraphy and architectural reconstruction stages as in the present work. The significance of Fischer’s analysis is in placing the marble capitals within a dated typology and in the context of the marble trade, and therefore his contribution to the dating of the theater’s original order is of great importance. On the other hand, Ovadiah and Turnheim (1994) take the Severan dating of the theater for granted. They note the widespread appearance of the ‘peopled’-scroll motif in Roman imperial architecture during the Severan period in general, and its widespread use in the Syrian architectural sequence in particular. However, references cited were of such a wide range in date that no real contribution was made to the motif’s typological development. In addition, references for the suggested dating of the motif in the theater of Nysa-Scythopolis were inadequate, and thus offer no insights on this topic either. Finally, the ‘peopled’-scroll motif and the floral-scroll motif, both of which decorated the theater’s friezes, were employed elsewhere at the site and in other poleis of the Roman eastern provinces, but these are not dealt with in their work, and they cannot be ignored in a comprehensive study of the motif in the region, such as the present work. The reconstruction works in Strata 11 and 9 resulted in the removal of various elements from their original positioning. In the process, re-cutting and re-adjusting of elements was necessary, and occasionally stainless steel rods were used to affix the new connections. The location of these rods and analysis of the re-cut elements has contributed crucial data for our reconstruction proposals (see Chapter 7). The research of the architectural elements is presented in accordance with the various units of the Severan Theater, beginning with the entrances of the postscaenium’s northern facade, the scaenae frons and the porticus, followed by the proscenium, the pulpitum, the entrances of the aditus maximi and the versurae, the cavea, and other miscellaneous elements.

380

Gabriel Mazor

Entrances of the Postscaenium’s Northern Facade

marble. Decorated console elements flanked all three lintels and carried richly decorated cornices. The entire entablature reached a height of 1.65–1.75 m, consisting of a unified, well-integrated, decorated sequence.

Three monumental entrances adorned the scaena’s northern facade. Their thresholds and the lower courses of their door jambs were preserved in situ. The width of the western entrance is 3.12 m, that of the central, 3.24 m, and that of the eastern, 2.97 m. Their height most probably reached c. 6 m. Among the collapsed debris, most parts of their decorated lintels, flanking consoles and crowning cornices were found, which enabled a complete restoration of their order composition. The lintels were composed of a triplefasciae architrave and a floral-decorated convex frieze, both carved from a single block of local limestone. Joint architrave-frieze elements are relatively common in Roman imperial architecture and they are dominant in the entablatures of a number of monuments at the site, such as the nymphaeum and the imperial altar, the former carved in local limestone, the latter in light gray

Lintels Three architrave-frieze lintel elements were recovered, belonging to the lintels of the three postscaenium entrances. Architrave-frieze lintel A6213 (Figs. 9.7:1; 9.8), broken into three parts, is 4.58 m long (c. 5.5 m with the flanking consoles) and 1.26 m high. Its architrave is of the three-fasciae type (heights 0.25, 0.19 and 0.16 m), separated by 3 cm plain astragals. It is crowned with a plain, undecorated molded profile of a 1 cm astragal, a 2 cm ovolo, a 3 cm cavetto and a 6 cm fillet. Over it is an integrated convex frieze, 0.40 m high, with a rich motif of floral-inhabited scrolls (Fig. 9.8:1–4). Two consoles,

A6213

1.26

4.58

1 A6711

A6212

1.20

1.16

4.40

2

A60116

A6214

A6602

1.17

4.70

3

Fig. 9.7. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, architrave-frieze lintels.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

381

Fig. 9.8. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, details of architrave-frieze A6213.

0.40 m wide and 0.94 m high, adorned with acanthus leaves, flank both ends and support the cornice. Architrave-frieze lintel and console A6212 + A6711 (Fig. 9.7:2; see Fig. 9.10:1), 4.4 m long and 1.16 m high, is broken into three parts and is incomplete. Its right side has the flanking console attached to it, but the left end of the lintel and its flanking console are missing. Based on the frieze motif, the complete lintel with both flanking consoles would reach c. 5.40 m. Its architrave has three fasciae (0.23, 0.18 and 0.14 m), separated by 3 cm plain astragals. It is crowned with a plain, undecorated molded profile of a 2 cm astragal followed by a 2 cm ovolo, a 3 cm cavetto, a 2 cm astragal and a 4 cm fillet. It has an integrated convex frieze, 0.35 m high, of the same floral-inhabited scroll motif. Acanthus-adorned consoles flanked both ends, one of which is still attached. Architrave-frieze lintel A60116 + A6214 + A6602 (Fig. 9.7:3), of which five connecting parts were found, is 4.70 m long (c. 5.50 m with flanking consoles) and 1.17 m high. Its architrave has three fasciae (0.22, 0.18 and 0.14 m) separated by plain, 3 cm astragals. It is crowned with the same plain, undecorated, molded profile as A6212 and has an integrated, convex frieze, 0.41 m high, of the same floral-inhabited scroll motif. Two acanthus-adorned consoles at both ends supported the cornice. Five console elements of the same type were found: A6269 and A70119 are left-side consoles (see Fig. 9.9:1, 2), while A6711, A6270 and A6271 are rightside consoles (see Fig. 9.10:1–3). Discussion of Architraves The plain, undecorated crowning profile of the architraves, composed of an astragal, an ovolo and a cavetto, presents the classical sequence typical of Asia

Minor during the Roman period (Lyttelton 1974:202, 258–259; Vandeput 1997:177–178). In the Roman East it is regarded as the characteristic decor of the ‘Syrian sequence’ (Turnheim 1996:125–126), and it is common at Nysa-Scythopolis in the decor of the limestone architectural elements. In minor variations, it is typical of the secondary entablature at Baalbek, as in the interior and exterior of the Temple of Venus and the interior of the Temple of Bacchus, in both of which an ovolo and cyma reversa crown the architrave (Lyttelton 1974:239). This sequence of profiles with its minor variations is considered to be of western origin, common in Rome (Leon 1971:60, Fig. 1, Pls. 5, 35), from where it spread eastward. An ovolo and cyma reversa as an architrave’s crowning profiles were also observed in the marble architrave elements of the Severan Theater scaenae frons at Nysa-Scythopolis (see below). At other sites in the region, the Asia Minor type of architrave crowning composed of an ovolo and cavetto is less common, mainly in limestone elements and occasionally in marble. At Damascus, in the Temple of Jupiter (Freyberger 1989:72, Fig. 2, Pl. 22b–d), and at Beirut (Lauffray 1944–1945: Fig. 6, Pl. IXb, f) and Bostra (Freyberger 1989: Pl. 11a), the ‘Syrian sequence’ was used in the limestone architrave elements. At Caesarea the architrave sections of the marble architrave-friezes (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:268–279) are crowned with the ‘Syrian sequence’ consisting of an astragal, an ovolo and a cavetto. In the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis and the nymphaeum at Gerasa, both of which were constructed of limestone, the architrave is topped by an ovolo and cavetto, presumably under the influence of Asia Minor, and it appears with a richly decorated frieze (Lyttelton 1974:246–247, Pls. 143, 148). In Asia Minor, the ‘Syrian sequence’ was observed in the scaenae frons of the theater at Ephesus, dated to the late first century CE, in the Southern Market

382

Gabriel Mazor

monumental gate at Miletus, dated to the second century CE, and in the architrave of the Hadrianic gate at Antalya. It was also found in the Temple of Apollo at Didyma, the Temple of Artemis at Magnesia and in most of the monuments at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997). According to Vandeput, during the second century CE this sequence became almost universally common in Asia Minor. Lyttelton (1974:202, No. 70) considered it to be part of the Asia Minor Hellenistic architectural tradition, since it was widely used in Asia Minor from the Hellenistic to the Roman period (Thür 1989:101). Discussion of Friezes All three lintel friezes are decorated with the same floral-inhabited acanthus scrolls in high relief that alternatively encircle petal blossoms or denticulate leaves. Significant variations, both in composition and in the ornamentation design, can be observed between the three friezes. Frieze A6213 (Fig. 9.7:1), presumably of the central entrance, represents the best preserved element. Its decoration, executed over a convex surface, evolves symmetrically from both ends toward the center (Fig. 9.8). The composition of the design depicts acanthus leaves on either end with six scrolls in between. On both ends, the composition begins with two perpendicular acanthus leaves that are widely based. The side leaves envelop the frieze corners in a soft round shape and bow gently inward. The central lobe and mid-lobes have five pointed tips, while the lower lobe that spreads over the bottom has three. All lobe ribs are deeply and widely grooved and have an emphasized, concave shape. Next there is a widely based and spaced complete acanthus leaf with seven lobes, of which the lobe on the right side is wellpreserved. Its central mid-rib and side-lobe ribs turn gently clockwise in a wide bow shape, the deeply cut grooves strongly articulating the thick mid-rib. The central lobe, found broken, turns strongly outward, while the side lobes are widely spaced and the lower lobes spread over the bottom of the frieze. The lower lobes have three tips, while the others have five, and they are all deeply grooved, concave in shape and have pointed tips. Between them rises a four-petal blossom over a thick stem, its rounded fleshy petals connected to the nearby lobe tips by small carved bridges. Some of the lobe tips of the acanthus leaves meet, creating triangles, rhombuses and eyelets. A double-branched leaf emerges from the blossom, its upper part broken.

A third, stylized acanthus leaf emerges from the bottom of the frieze in a wide bow shape, its lobes curving in the same rounded line. Out of the leaf grows a threepetal blossom, from which a double-branched leaf emerges, circling down in both directions to create the first scroll. An additional spiral branch creates the other scrolls. The convention of a trefoil blossom emerging from a curving leaf as the source of the scroll appears alternately upright and inverted. As a result, the finely rounded scrolls appear alternately as well, slightly higher or lower than the central axis line of the frieze. A plain leafless stem that rises from the spiral acanthus leaf, next to the blossom stem, or further along, creates the round inner circle of the scroll. It curves inward and its end becomes the inner blossom or leaf stem. The scrolls are symmetrically inhabited by an alternating motif of a five-petal blossom or a horizontal denticulate leaf. The five-petal blossoms have round, convex, fleshy petals with a central curved disc and knob. The leaf motif has a deeply grooved lobe rib with a pointed concave tip and four fleshy convex side tips. The inner motifs of both types of scroll are connected to the encircling stem by small bridges. There are three scrolls on each side beginning and ending with a blossom and a leaf in between. The spiral acanthus leaves from both ends meet in the center of the frieze in a tangled knot with a central, five-petal blossom rising upward. A similar composition of floral-inhabited scrolls, somewhat richer and executed in marble, is observed in the theater friezes at Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:263–304, Figs. 14, 16, 17, 22). The pattern of scrolls on these friezes depicts most of the same details as the ones described here. The ornamental design over the convex shape of the frieze creates a harmoniously balanced composition that is well separated from its deeply sunken background, although it makes little use of high-relief carving techniques (Avi-Yonah 1950:49–50). Yet its richness, delicate execution and deep carving achieve a three dimensionality, emphasized by a strong lightand-shade effect. The rendering of the acanthus leaves is typical of the style commonly found during the Antonine and Severan periods (Blanckenhagen 1940:90). Also typical of the carving techniques of the Severan period are the small bridges left to join the spiral stem and petal blossoms, and the spurs and lobe tips of the acanthus leaves. The same connecting bridges were observed in the lintel frieze of the temple at Isriye in Syria, dated to the Severan period

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

(Gogräfe 1993: Pl. 3). The design of the engulfing acanthus leaves on both ends of the frieze resembles the lower-range leaves of the Corinthian capital, which influenced some of its expressive patterns that were merged into the composition of the frieze. The high-quality decoration of the frieze is balanced, delicate and well harmonized. The highly qualified artist achieved a remarkable degree of expressive depiction, rendered in a naturalistic and plastic manner. The two lintel friezes of the side entrances differ from the central one in their decor composition, as they begin in the center and evolve symmetrically to either side. Although they share the same basic composition, they differ in components and quality of execution. Frieze A6214 (Fig. 9.7:3) has three widely based, perpendicular acanthus leaves in the center that are 1.05 m wide and take up 25% of the length of the frieze. Their midribs are deeply grooved down to the bottom in straight vertical lines, and the ribs of the outer lobes are slightly bow shaped and lean outward, thus strongly emphasizing the leaves. The widely spread side leaves curve gently to either side in a bow shape, and the central lobe tip of each leaf resembles the pattern of acanthus leaves characteristic of the Corinthian capital. The side lobe has four to five tips and the lower lobe has three. The lobe tips are deeply grooved, concave and pointed. The lower lobe tips touch, creating rhombuses, triangles and eyelets. To the left and right of the three central acanthus leaves, two stylized, bowshaped acanthus leaves grow out of the frieze’s base, then turn clockwise and counter-clockwise to form scrolls on either side. In the originally planned design there were four scrolls on each side. On the left, three complete and half of the fourth are relatively well preserved, while on the right side only the first scroll and part of the second are preserved. The encircling acanthus leaf of the scroll runs stylistically upward in a wide bow shape that spreads out as it descends, accompanied by a five-tipped lobe. Out of the spiral acanthus leaf emerges a plain, slender stem that completes the scroll and returns to meet the acanthus leaf. Next to it emerges a three-petal, inverted blossom. In the next scroll, the acanthus leaf curves underneath the scroll to be completed above by the curving, plain, slender stem in the same manner. In the last two scrolls, as well as on the other side, the same motif repeats itself. This is the classic convention of scrolls that is commonly used in the East (Kohl and Watzinger

383

1916: Figs. 54–56, 58, 59, 62–64). The preserved scrolls are inhabited by six-petal blossoms, except for one that has a three-lobed, denticulate leaf that curves gently down over the convex shape of the frieze. The blossoms have round, convex, fleshy petals that curve around a central knob. The spurs and leaflets of the acanthus leaves are connected to the stem by small carved bridges, which, as mentioned above, is a typical carving technique of the Severan period. The deep relief carving characteristic of A6213 (see Fig. 9.7:1) is seen here as well. The upper surface protrudes above a deep coarse background with no modulation, therefore the pattern lacks a three-dimensional perspective, but still achieves a strong effect of light and shade. Frieze A6212 (Fig. 9.7:2) is composed of three broken parts together with the right integrated console (A6711). Its left side is worn, while its right side is better preserved. Its motif has a central acanthus leaf and its scroll design evolves symmetrically in five scrolls to either side. The scrolls are inhabited by three different designs, one of blossoms and two of denticulate leaves. The central acanthus leaf is mostly broken in its upper part. It seems to be widely based upon the bottom of the frieze with a perpendicular central leaf and deeply emphasized midribs. Its side-lobe ribs are bow shaped and curve gently outward. The lobe tips meet, creating oval eyelets. Two centered acanthus leaves with upright side lobes spring from the bottom of the frieze next to the central leaf to create the scrolls on both sides. They curve in a spiral manner, over and under the scrolls, their lobes turning gently inward, as each scroll with its curving leaf grows from the former, alternately upright or inverted from the axial line of the frieze. A plain slender stem grows from within the leaf to create a spiral that encloses the rest of the scroll, as in A6213. From the end of the stem grows a blossom or leaf. The first scroll contains a ten-petal blossom with pointed, fleshy petals and central grooves. As the petals meet, they occasionally create eyelets, while their tips are connected to the spiral stem by small bridges. In the center is a disc-shaped knob. The next scroll contains a six-petal blossom with convex, rounded, fleshy petals and a central disc. The petals are connected by small bridges and create slitlike eyelets. The third scroll is inhabited by a double blossom with a central knob. The smaller, upper blossom has six separated, almost-square, slightly convex petals. Under it is a larger nine-petal blossom

384

Gabriel Mazor

whose wide petals are stylized, each one divided into two by its contour line. This motif of doublelayered blossoms is unique and has not been found in any other frieze. The last two scrolls are inhabited by similar, double-denticulate leaves, gently curving within the scroll, the first clockwise and the second counter-clockwise, following the spiral movement of the scroll. They have three or four pointed lobes, the partial meetings of which create eyelets. Their lobe tips are all connected to the spiral stem. The ornamentation reflects a high-quality, wellexecuted design by a talented artist highly qualified in the scroll-ornamentation pattern. It is balanced and harmonized and expressively depicted. Threedimensionality is achieved by means of sunken designs, partial relief and deeply shadowed background. The rendering of the leaves by means of deep drilling to create a rich and convex upper layer of leaves emphasized by the shadowing underneath is typical of the ornamentation style of the Antonine and Severan period. The details are delicately and precisely executed, resulting in a naturalistic composition. The three friezes present a harmonized scheme achieved by their similar impressive dimensions and their monumental composition consisting of a triplefasciae-crowned architrave with a carefully planned floral-scroll frieze, as well as volute consoles and a cornice that together reach a height of c.1.65 m. While the scrolls of the central-door frieze evolve from both sides toward the center, in the side doors the ornamentation evolves from the center to either side. The half acanthus leaf, used as the framing design of the scrolls, envelops the frieze corner in a manner that is also depicted over the scaenae frons marble friezes (see below). Since the postscaenium was added some years after the theater construction was completed, it would be reasonable to assume that the lintel-friezes of the new northern facade entrances copied the pattern of the scaenae frons’ marble friezes. A lintel remarkably similar to that of the central entrance, exhibiting the same ornamentation of flanking acanthus leaves and a rich, floral-inhabited scroll design, is seen in the elaborately decorated entrance to the temple at Isriye in Syria (Gogräfe 1993: Pl. 3, Figs. 10a, 11a–c). The acanthus leaf as a framing motif appears widely in floral-inhabited scrolls on friezes at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Figs. 78, 79; with a full leaf next to it as in A6213, cf. II:27, Fig. 57, Pls. 50, 66), in

the Temple Court at Palmyra (Weigand 1932: Pls. 43f, 47, 99), as a complete side leaf in the Temple of Bel (Seyrig, Amy and Will 1975:134), and in the temple at Bziza (Krencker and Zschietzschmann 1938: Pl. 3). In the Great Temple at Damascus, the frieze motif has the side-framing acanthus leaves as well as the central acanthus leaf (Dussaud 1922: Pl. LI; Freyberger 1989: Fig. 24a, b, d, Pls. 2, 3). At Baalbek, the motif of a central leaf was also observed (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pl. 37), where in long friezes it seems to break the intercolumniation motif over the capitals (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Fig. 25). The convention of a trefoil blossom emerging from a curving leaf as the source of the scroll and winding either upward or downward, is characteristic to all three lintel-friezes. It was not observed in the marble friezes of the scaenae frons, although it is relatively common elsewhere at the site, for instance in the nymphaeum and the western propylaeum of Palladius Street. At Baalbek, it is a common convention usually depicted with three- or four-petal blossoms (Wiegand 1921– 1925 I: Pls. 77–79). In the Temple of Bel at Palmyra it is depicted with a four-petal blossom (Seyrig, Amy and Will 1975:133–134, Figs. 1, 5, 9, 11). In the temple frieze at Damascus, the scrolls form on both sides from an upright or inverted, three-petal blossom (Dussaud 1924: Fig. 57). In the temple friezes at Kedesh, the scroll grows from a stylized, curling, three-petal blossom (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 36.2), and in the theater friezes at Caesarea, the same pattern was observed (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Fig. 22). The inhabited-scroll motif, consisting of interlacing and curving, wreath-shaped acanthus leaves, was termed by Riegl (1893:256) as die vollstandige Akanthisirung der intermittirenden wellenranke. The floral-inhabited motif comprises the most common decorative pattern on friezes. The convention of the acanthus scrolls in the three lintel friezes over the northern facade entrances of the theaters differs in type and manner of execution. The scrolls of the central lintel are composed of encircling acanthus leaves, while a slender stem creates an inner circle, as in most of the floral-inhabited scrolls observed at Baalbek and Damascus. On both side entrances, the acanthus leaves encircle either the upper or lower half of the scroll, while a slender stem grows out of the scroll and completes it. This type of scroll pattern is also observed in the frieze in the Temple of Bel at Palmyra (Seyrig, Amy and Will 1975:133–134), and at Kedesh

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

(Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 3.2). The two side lintels, A6212 and A6214, were executed differently, as A6212 seems to be the work of a far more qualified artist––the slender stem curves completely inward in a fine balanced circle, while in A6214 the stem does not complete a full circle, and vanishes under the inner decor of the scroll. The inner floral motifs of the scrolls differ as well. In the central frieze (A6213) and one of the side friezes (A6214) is the common five-petal, plain blossom or a horizontal denticulate leaf, similar to those at Damascus (Dussaud 1924: Fig. 57) and Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 3.2). The motif on the third frieze (A6212) is richer and better executed, with more elaborate floral motifs. Its double-blossom motif is also observed at Baalbek, where it is somewhat more stylized (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pl. 62), while the leaf motif is widely used in the friezes of the Temple of Bel at Palmyra (Seyrig, Amy and Will 1975:134, Fig. 67) and in the theater friezes at Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 14, 16, 17). Differences in the execution of the ornamentation of all three lintel friezes are clearly evident. Both A6212 and A6213 present well-balanced, delicate and accurately executed designs, the work of experienced artists, while A6214 seems to be of lesser quality. Its central motif is too large, covering a large part of the frieze, and consists of three acanthus leaves instead of the customary one. As a result, there is room for fewer scrolls on either side. The design is unbalanced, as the central acanthus leaves are too dominant and heavy, and they overweigh the main motif of the floral scrolls. In most details, lack of accuracy can be observed, and relative proportions between the central acanthus leaves, and their relation to the scrolls, are not maintained. The scrolls are uneven, and their inner motif is neither centered nor properly attached to the inner spiral stem. A number of similar friezes decorated with floralinhabited scrolls were found elsewhere at the site, for instance in the propylaeum of Palladius Street and the nymphaeum. Their ornamental design consists of a composition of elements that is shared by the theater’s lintel friezes, but differs from that of the theater’s scaenae frons marble friezes (see below). Their source of influence may be traced in the tradition-rich center in Baalbek, for example. However, there is no reason to doubt their being the products of local workshops managed by talented artists. The floral-inhabited scroll

385

motif seems to be well rooted in the region, appearing since the Hellenistic period (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:6, 30; Kraus 1953:71; Wegner 1957:12; Turnheim 1994), and rapidly becoming a common architectural ornamentation trend in the Roman Imperial period. Avi-Yonah (1950:49–50) regarded the motif of the floral-inhabited scroll as a continuous development of Hellenistic ornamentation in the region. In his opinion, as it gradually lost its Hellenistic richness and delicacy, it absorbed new techniques and styles arriving from various Roman centers in the west, presumably via Asia Minor, and according to Ovadiah and Turnheim (1994:113), particularly during the Severan period. In light of its substantial appearance at Nysa-Scythopolis, Gerasa and Caesarea, a regional analysis of the scroll design, mainly its floral-inhabited motif, seems to reveal a wide usage as early as the Antonine period. Hachlili (1988: Fig. 7b, c) compares the Herodianperiod technique of the scroll design to the rosette pattern at Alma (Turnheim 1987: Cat. No. 1.1.1, Pl. 1), the lintel from the bathhouse at Masada (Yadin 1966: Ill. 83), the lintel of the Tomb of the Kings in Jerusalem (Kon 1947: Pls. VIIa, IX, X), and the decoration of the garlands on the mask sarcophagus from Bet She’arim (Avigad 1976: Pl. XLV:2). This comparison seems to indicate an evolutionary process that local artisans underwent, as their local traditions and the newly absorbed Roman Imperial trends mingled. The motif used at Nysa-Scythopolis and Gerasa reflects a wide artistic freedom in the execution of details, suggesting various local centers of tradition and influence. Within the monumental architecture of the Roman period, both secular and cultic, the motif of the floral-inhabited scroll is relatively common. At Gerasa it is best presented in the nymphaeum and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Gogräfe 1993: Figs. 17d, 18c). It was also found in the theater at Cyrrhus (Gogräfe 1993: Figs. 17c, 18d), and in cultic monuments at Atil (Freyberger 1989: Fig. 34c; 1993: Fig. 19c, d), Is-Sanamen (Freyberger 1989: Figs. 24c, 33a–d) and in the frieze of the kalybe at Bostra (Freyberger 1989: Fig. 34b). Some remarkable early second-century CE Nabataean representatives of the type were found in the temple at Qasr Rabbah (Glueck 1965:57–58, Pls. 176b, 177a, b) and in the temple at Si (Dunand 1934:66–68, Pls. XXIX, XXX). The appearance of floral-inhabited scrolls in friezes of other monuments in the civic center of NysaScythopolis, such as the nymphaeum, predates those

386

Gabriel Mazor

of the postscaenium’s northern facade entrances and the scaenae frons, and could not have been influenced by them. One can therefore conclude that this motif represents trends in ornamental designs that were already well-practiced at the site and in the region during the second half of the second century CE. They apparently reflect local products of well-established workshops that were practicing the renewal of old Hellenistic traditions for quite some time. While evidence for post-Herodian architectural ornamentation of the first century CE in the Roman East is relatively meager, in Asia Minor a rich, continuous architectural sequence is represented. The motif of the floral-inhabited scroll was first introduced into Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period, although at the time it decorated mainly cyma, and only sporadically friezes, as in the Temple of Artemis at Magnesia on the Maeander (Humann, Kohte and Watzinger 1904:75, Fig. 65; a number of other examples of this period are listed by Rumscheid 1994, I: 291–294). An increased use of the motif on friezes and door lintels was noted by Vandeput from the Early Roman period onward. Vandeput (1997:155–158), in his research of architectural decoration in Roman Asia Minor, presents the site of Sagalassos as a case study. He analyzes the distribution of the floral-inhabited scroll motif at this site as well as other sites in Asia Minor. He found that during the first century CE, the motif adorned the gate of Mazaeus and Mithriadates at Ephesus (Alzinger 1974:96–97, Figs. 128–134), the facade of the theater on the Island of Thasos (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 18.2), the frieze of the Ionic portico at Miletos (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 95.4), the Flavian nymphaeum at Miletos and the Polio Nymphaeum at Ephesus (Hülsen 1919: Pls. 22– 25). In the second century CE, the motif became more common, and during the Hadrianic period it appeared in the Celsus Library and the nearby Temple of Hadrian at Ephesus (Strocka 1978:898), the Temple of Hadrian at Cyzikus (Barattolo 1995:86, Pls. 29, 30) and Hadrian’s gate at Antalia (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 79.1). During the Antonine period, it is seen on the Temple of Antoninus Pius and the nymphaeum north of the Lower Agora at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997: Pls. 28.3–5; 39.1; 40.3), the Agora Gate at Miletos, the Monopteros at Pergamon (Radt 1988:332, Pl. 111:1, 2), the Portico of the Agora at Iasos (Strocka 1981:28–29,

Fig. 51), the South Bath at Perge (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 105.3) and the nymphaeum outside of the city wall at Side (Wegner 1989:161–162). According to Vandeput (1997:157), a change in its execution was witnessed in the second half of the second century CE. In the late second century CE, the motif decorated the nymphaeum at Aspendos (Hörmann 1929:271–272), the Severan Nymphaeum F2 at Perge (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 109.2), the theater at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997: Pls. 51.1–51.2) and the propylaeum of the northeast district at Miletos (Knackfuss 1924:254, Figs. 254, 258). In the early third century CE, it adorned the gate of the bath at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 60.3), the Severan Gate F2 at Perge (Vandeput 1997: Pls. 51.3; 109.2– 3, 51.3, and the Monopteros along the Magnesian road at Ephesus (Koenigs and Radt 1979:348, Pl. 121.3). The same floral-inhabited scrolls also appear in the West, as at Nîmes and Arles (Kraus 1953: Pls. 10, 11), Leptis Magna (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 214) and Adamklissi (Florescu 1965: Fig. 149), as well as at numerous other sites of the Roman Imperial period. Consoles Consoles, or volute-shaped brackets, are usually intended to support door lintels. The ornamentation of the flanking consoles can be treated as part of the frieze decor, as its spiral volutes with their s-shaped acanthus leaves frame the frieze. In the lintel of the central entrance, the console decor continues the pattern of the acanthus leaves on both sides of the frieze; in the side entrances it frames the scrolls as the acanthus motif is placed at the center of the friezes. The console elements were carved of wider and taller masonry blocks, and they were installed into the wall. Five of the six consoles were discovered, four by Applebaum and the fifth by the IAA expedition. Two of the consoles (A6269, A70119) are left-side consoles, while three (A6711, A6270, A6271) are right-side consoles. Console A6269 (Fig. 9.9:1) measures 1.26 × 1.33 × 0.43 m. The double spiral in the console facade is 0.93 m high and 0.40 m wide, and consists of two connected spiral scrolls that roll inward in opposite directions. They differ in size, the upper (0.40 × 0.43 m) larger than the lower (0.33 × 0.39 m). On the facade, two upright, inverted acanthus leaves are depicted. The fleshy acanthus leaves, naturalistically

387

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6711

A6269

1.33

1.16

1.26

1.25

0.79

1

1

A70119

1.33

0.54

A6270

1.26

2

1.20

Fig. 9.9. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, left-side consoles. 1.12

executed in high relief, spread widely, curling over the convex surface as they follow the curve of the scrolls. The lobe ribs are deeply grooved and the fleshy convex lobe with its three tips is deeply carved and well emphasized, and as a result, the lobe tips protrude strongly. The upper, central lobe tip is finely rendered in three dimensions as it curves sharply outward, resembling the depiction of the acanthus leaf on the common Corinthian capital. Some of the side-lobe tips meet, or nearly do, creating deep, elongated eyelets that intensify the light-and-shade effect. On the side of the console, a well-executed volute is depicted. In both lower and upper triangles of the inner spirals of the volutes, a three-petal blossom rises upright, from which four to five stylized leaves emerge as space fillers. The upper blossom was left plain. Console A70119 (Fig. 9.9:2) measures 1.26 × 1.33 × 0.74 m and displays the same motif and dimensions as the previous examples (0.40 × 0.90 m), with spiral volutes well executed in high relief as in A6269, 0.36 m and 0.33 m high. The inner triangle has a schematically rendered blossom that rises inward, with four stemshaped leaves on either side, ending in a spiral. The three stem leaves curl gently in one direction and terminate in spiral circles. In the upper triangle, a degenerate form of the motif can be seen, the upper part cut out in order to emphasize the spiral line of the scrolls.

2

0.56

A6271

0.92

0.91

3

Fig. 9.10. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, right-side consoles.

Console A6711 (Fig. 9.10:1) is a right-side element. Its volutes, adorned by acanthus leaves, are larger in dimension (1.16 × 1.25 × 0.79 m) than those of the lintelfrieze and therefore the console protrudes above and below the frieze. The s-shaped, double-spiral volute, 0.88 m high and 0.40 m wide, is three-dimensionally carved and consists of two connected spiral scrolls that roll inward in opposite directions. They differ in size, the upper (0.38 × 0.42 m) larger than the lower (0.31 × 0.32 m). On the facade, upright acanthus leaves are depicted. The fleshy acanthus leaves are widely spread,

388

Gabriel Mazor

curling over the convex surface as they follow the curve of the scrolls. They resemble the lower-range leaves of the common Corinthian capital, although they are limited by the console width and do not spread. Their central midrib is emphasized by deep vertical grooves that run to the bottom, while the side-lobe ribs curve gently out in a bow shape. The central upper-lobe tip is three-dimensionally rendered and it curves outward as in the Corinthian capital, yet its tip ends in a rounded, artificial knob. Some of the four lobe tips meet, creating triangles and elongated eyelets. The volute spirals on the sides differ in execution. Two curling parallel relief lines with wide, concave spirals terminate in a disc or knob. In the lower scroll, small bridges hold the plain, stem-like spiral. The triangular space in between the spirals contains a stylized leaf with six pointed tips. On the inner face, the spiral volutes form a vertical line along the frieze end and the profiled entrance jamb. On their outer face they form a slightly diagonal line as the console narrows slightly at the bottom (0.35 and 0.31 m high). Console A6270 (Fig. 9.10:2) measures 1.12 × 1.20 × 0.54 m and displays the same ornamentation and the same dimensions (0.40 × 0.90 m) as the previous one A6269, with two different-sized spiral volutes, 0.38 m and 0.31 m high. The spiral scrolls and acanthus leaves are well executed in high relief, as in A6269. In the inner triangle is a schematic blossom that rises inward with four stem-shaped leaves that curve to either side, ending in a spiral. The three stemshaped leaves curl gently in one direction, ending in spiral circles. Console A6271 (Fig. 9.10:3) measures 0.92 × 0.91 × 0.56 m and displays the same motif and dimensions as the previous examples (0.40 × 0.86 m), with two different-sized spiral volutes, 0.37 m and 0.29 m high. Its ornament composition resembles that of A6269. Discussion of Consoles The acanthus leaf of the upper scroll was well preserved in two consoles (A6271, A6270), and its upper lobe curves outward as in the acanthus leaf of the Corinthian capital. The lower one was better preserved in A6270 than in A6271, with the same motif. Both consoles are well executed, their side volutes have well-balanced spirals with parallel, high-relief lines and wide, inner,

concave channels. The acanthus leaves covering both convex surfaces present a natural depiction, intensified by the deep, light-and-shade effect. All five consoles display the same well-planned scheme with the same motifs, while differences in their execution seem to reflect varying degrees of artistic talent. Early types of consoles have a single spiral volute at the bottom, while later ones have two, curving in opposite directions (Robertson 1969:101–102, Fig. 57, Athens, the north door of the Erechtheum). As supporting elements of the entablature, consoles have a structural purpose and are always constructed vertically on either side of the lintels (Strong 1963:76 ff.). In the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, their unusual appearance also serves as a vertical decorative element. Single-volute consoles were placed under the frieze and they have animal protomai perched on top of them, alternately depicting a lion or a bull, joined by hanging garlands. There are five consoles to each intercolumniation and each volute rests on an acanthus leaf. According to Lyttelton (1974:87), the Temple of Jupiter is one of the major surviving monuments that best characterizes the baroque style of the first to second centuries CE, in which consoles in a non-architectonic composition most certainly fit the style. In the same manner, two antithetic consoles, horizontally placed, decorate the door lintel in the Tychaion at Ras Sanamain (Freyberger 1989: Pls. 2, 4). The use of an architectural element in a position that is not functional, is, according to Lyttelton, a typical characteristic of the baroque style. During the first to second centuries CE, consoles used as functional elements were stylistically carved in the Khasne door at Petra (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 74). At Baalbek, functional consoles are common in the entrances of both temple precincts, in the central entrance of the northern city gate, and in the valvae regiae of the theater (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Figs. 4, 5, 28, 50, 60; II: 98, Figs. 8, 50, Pl. 150). At Palmyra, they are found in burial monuments (Weigand 1932: Pls. 28, 33, 43f), in the entrance to the camp of Diocletian (Weigand 1932:47) and in the pteron and propylaeum doors of the Temple of Bel (Weigand 1932: Pls. 77, 79, 98, 99; Seyrig, Amy and Will 1975: Pls. 32, 41, 42, 44, 67). Browning describes door consoles in some of the reconstructions of the monuments of Palmyra, such as the propylaeum, the Temple of Bel and the scaenae frons of the theater (Browning 1979:107, Figs. 110, 116, 119, 147). At Gerasa, consoles were used in

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Parapetti 1989: Pl. VI), at Is-Sanamen they were found in the Tychaion (Butler 1914–1915:318), and at Kedesh in the temple (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:163 ff., Pl. 36). In some of the Syrian temples, consoles were found scattered, as at Der el-Kala, Januh, Bziza and in Temple A at Niha (Krencker and Zschietzschmann 1938:3, Figs. 5, 36, 56, 57, Pls. 3, 55). Remarkably monumental consoles were found still in situ and adorned by protomai in the Severan temple at Isriye (Gogräfe 1993:51, Pl. 3, Fig. 11a–c). In Asia Minor, decorated supporting consoles were found in various temples, such as the Temple of Antoninus Pius at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997:74, Pl. 88.3), which parallel those in the Temple of Dionysus at Pergamon (Koenigs and Radt 1979:339, Pl. 113:5), in the Serapeion at Ephesus (Koenigs and Radt 1979: Pl. 122.2) and in the monumental Hadrianic Temple and the Temple of Artemis at Sardis (Butler 1925: Fig. 38). Supporting consoles were also found in the agora at Perge (Vandeput 1997:74, Fig. 109.1), the Celsus Library at Ephesus (Wilberg et al. 1953: Figs. 37, 38) and the Corinthian order at Termassos (Lanckoronski 1892: Figs. 39, 40). In all of these supporting consoles, only the top volute is commonly covered by an acanthus leaf. In the entrances to the scaenae frons in various theaters of Asia Minor, consoles were found as well, for instance, in the theater at Sagalassos of the late second century CE (Vandeput 1997:110, Pls. 52.2, 3, 53.3, 4), the theater of Nysa, dated around 200 CE (de Bernardi Ferraro 1970: Fig. 118), the theater at Termassos, dated to 175–200 CE (de Bernardi Ferraro 1969: Fig. 33), and the theater at Miletos (Knackfuss 1924: Figs. 249–251). Cornices Some 24 cornice elements that adorned the entrances of the postscaenium’s northern facade were found, some of them among the collapsed porticus in front of the northern facade, while others had been moved in later periods, including three that were revealed by the IAHU expedition in the northern part of the civic center. All cornice elements are of the same type, although further divided based on the ornamentation of their cyma reversa, their quality of execution, and in one case, their dimensions.

389

Type 1 Thirteen Type 1 cornice elements were recorded, most of them relatively well preserved. Ten of them are regular cornice elements—A6460 (Fig. 9.11:1), A208 (Fig. 9.11:2), A6741 (Fig. 9.11:3), A70118 (Fig. 9.11:4), A6454–A6458 and A6461. one is a right corner, A6464 (Fig. 9.12:1), and two are left-corner elements, A207 (Fig. 9.12:2) and A6465. Two types of limestone were observed in the Type 1 elements, presumably originating from different parts of the quarry. The ones executed in reddish-white limestone have slightly diagonal sides for better horizontal construction, while those of white-gray limestone have all sides vertically cut. The cornice bed molding consists of a 7 cm ovolo and a 5 cm dentil band crowned with a plain, 5 cm cyma reversa. Above it is a 7 cm step of ornamented modillions and coffers edged by a 3 cm ovolo. The cornice has a fluted, 5 cm high corona bordered by a 2 cm astragal and crowned with a 16 cm cyma with a floral anthemion and a 2 cm fillet. Type 2 Six Type 2 cornice elements were found, all in an excellent state of preservation. Three of them are regular elements (A822, A1067, A801; Fig. 9.13:1–3), while one is a right corner (A6459; Fig. 9.14:1), and one is a left corner (A03; Fig. 9.14:2). The cornice bed molding consists of a 6 cm ovolo and a 6 cm dentil band crowned with a 5 cm decorated cyma reversa. The consoles have 6 cm high modillions and 22 cm wide coffers edged by a 3 cm ovolo. The cornice has a fluted, 6 cm high corona bordered by a 2 cm astragal crowned with a 14 cm cyma with a floral anthemion and a 3 cm fillet. Type 3 Six Type 3 cornice elements were found: A40616, A6469, A40613 (Fig. 9.15:1–3), A40619, A40618 and A40614. They are all fragments in various states of preservation, high-quality execution reflecting a talented craftsman. The cornice bed molding consists of a 2 cm apophyge, a 5 cm ovolo, and a 7 cm dentil band crowned with a 5 cm decorated cyma reversa. They have 8 cm high modillions and 20 cm wide coffers edged by a 5 cm ovolo. The cornice has a fluted, 6 cm corona bordered by a 3 cm astragal without a cyma, which was presumably carved on a separate stone, of which no element has been found.

390

Gabriel Mazor

A6460

0.82

0.54

0.55

0.18

1.10 1.83

1

A208

0.52

2

0.82

A70118 A6741 0.57 0.52

1.04

4

0.77

3

Fig. 9.11. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, Type 1 regular cornices.

391

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

0.95

A6464

0.50

0.50

0.49

0.70 1.69

1

A207

0.53

0.98

1.57

2

Fig. 9.12. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, Type 1 corner cornices.

392

Gabriel Mazor

A822

0.49

0.83

0.50 1.16

1

0.80

A1067

0.50

0.48 1.15

A801

0.50

2

1.24

3

Fig. 9.13. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, Type 2 regular cornices.

0.72

393

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6459

0.98

1.60

0.51

1.05

1

A03

0.51

0.51 1.18

1.10

1.40

2

Fig. 9.14. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, Type 2 corner cornices.

394

Gabriel Mazor

A40616

A6469

0.42

0.44

0.50 0.67

A40613 0.66

2

0.58

0.40

1 0.44

3

Fig. 9.15. Severan Theater: scaena entrances, Type 3 regular cornices.

Discussion of Cornices In most cases, the ovolo comprises a row of homogenous eggs finely carved in high relief with a lower pointed tip and flat upper part, or occasionally wide, squat eggs that are flattened on top and bottom, presumably the work of a less-skilled artist. The eggs are encircled by widely spaced, crescent-shaped frames or wide, round shells emphasized by an intervening cleavage. Alternating heart-shaped, trefoil blossoms or dart-shaped intermediate motifs, sometimes replaced by rhombuses and almond-shaped leaves, are deeply carved and well spaced between the eggs’ shells, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The egg-and-dart motif is typical of the Antonine period (Blanckenhagen 1940:110), while during the Severan period the dart was increasingly replaced by broad schematic lines or leaves and rhombuses (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Figs. 143, 144). The latter design partially resembles some of the ovolo ornaments found over the scaenae frons marble cornices, although those were better executed (see below). This form of ovolo resembles the motif from the Great Court of the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, dated to the late second century

CE, and that of the interior of the Temple of Venus and the doorframe of the Temple of Bacchus, both of which are dated to the late second or early third century CE (Lyttelton 1974:240, Pl. 78). At Caesarea, it resembles the ovolo on Blocks 1, 8, AI 4, AII 1) and cornice Type C1, which share the same date as those at Baalbek (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 7, 11, 12, 14, 17). At Kedesh, it resembles the ovolo found on Item Nos. 4, 6 and 7 of the temple entablature, which also correspond in date (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 33:1–3). At Gerasa, it resembles the egg shape and casing of the ovolo in the cornices of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis and Hadrian’s gate, the first dated to the mid-second century, the second to 130 CE, although their leaf-like darts are of an earlier type (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 148, 149). The same type of ovolo was also found in some of the buildings at Palmyra, but does not appear outside of Syria. The commonly used egg-and-tongue motif of the Hellenistic period and the first century CE became relatively rare in the region toward the end of the second century CE, and was replaced in Syria by a more elaborate form of egg-and-dart motif. Its origins

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

are dated to the first century BCE, and it continued in several variations throughout the Roman Imperial period (Weigand 1914:51; Wiegand 1921–1925 I:169– 170; Blanckenhagen 1940:110). During the Hadrianic period, the egg-and-leaf motif returned for a while (Strong 1953:148) and was again replaced by the eggand-dart motif (Kähler 1939:70–71). In the later type, the casing of the egg more closely resembles v-shaped brackets that are pointed at the bottom and flat on top, as in Type 3. The dart is sometimes pointed at both ends or replaced by a leaf and a stalk. The carving of the latter leaf motif in an irregular and non-uniform manner was common in the Roman East at the end of the second and early third centuries CE (Lyttelton 1974:70). The dentils (6 × 5 cm) are uniform and well spaced (2–3 cm). The classic relationship between dentils and ovolo of 2:1 is not maintained (Weigand 1924– 1925:174–175), as the dentils are now reduced in size, a change common in Roman architectural decoration during the late second and early third centuries CE (Turnheim 1987:121). During the Antonine and Severan periods, the relationship of both was reversed in favor of the ovolo, as its elements were more strongly emphasized. In the Roman East during the second and third centuries CE, dentils lack the connecting bars that were still common in Asia Minor (Strong 1953:148– 150; Leon 1971:269). In Type 1, the dentils are crowned with a plain cyma reversa that separates the bed molding from the richly decorated modillions and coffers. The undecorated cyma reversa as a plain profile is common in Roman Imperial monumental architecture in the West. In the Roman East, it appears in Item No. 8 at Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:157) and in the Altar Court of the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Pl. 50). In both Types 2 and 3, the decorated cyma reversa is of the ‘Syrian’ type (Weickert 1913:105; termed Buegelkymation by Wegner (1957:52) and classified as Type C by Leon (1971:245–262). It has a cloverarch shape with a central triangular spur that spreads widely on top and is pointed at the bottom, crowned with a central half knob that almost merges with the spur. The double leaf in between is divided by a deep groove into two wing-like petals that spread out symmetrically on both sides, as also seen on cornices at Baalbek (Weigand 1924–1925: Figs. A3a, A3b, the Temple of Jupiter; Figs. A4, A7, A10, the Temple of

395

Bacchus). The design is schematic, losing much of its floral nature and becoming almost geometric. It is widely spaced over a 4–5 cm strip and the central motif of clover arches becomes oblong with a stiff, unrefined shape. The wing-like double leaf overshadows the clover-arch feature of the motif. The carving of the motif is very deep and sharp, a characteristic tendency in the later second century CE (Strong 1953:149), which produces a strong light-and-shade effect. The origin of this ‘Syrian’ type motif of the cyma reversa is most probably Hellenistic (Leon 1971:253), and it spread throughout Syria during the second century CE, presumably influenced by its prominent appearance in the monumental architectural decor at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 II:59, Figs. 21, 29, the Temple of Bacchus; Figs. 67–69, its adyton; Fig. 145, the Temple of Venus). It is also observed in the entablature of the temple at Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:158, Pl. 33, Item Nos. 3, 4, 6, 7), and in cornices of Type C1 at Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:285–288, Figs. 31, 32). At Gerasa, it appears in the nymphaeum and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton 1974:240, 247, Pl. 141). It was not found outside Syria and Arabia. The modillions and coffers are an integral part of Roman Corinthian cornices from the Augustan period onward, and their origins are recorded in the Hellenistic period (Strong 1963:78–79). They are of the regular Syrian oblong type and not the s-shaped type common in Asia Minor (Strong 1963:80), although the latter is occasionally found in the Roman East, evidence of Asia Minor’s artistic influence. Their dimensions are 0.13 × 0.16 m, average 7 cm high, and are well spaced (0.27 m). They were decorated over their lower soffit side with alternating acanthus leaves and stylized palmettes, as was common in the Roman East and Asia Minor during the second–third centuries CE (Lyttelton 1974:269). In A207, a corner cornice of Type 1, there is a diagonal modillion in the corner with a well-planned and finely executed leaf with seven rounded-tip lobes and a wide midrib. This element resembles a cornice fragment from the southern theater at Gerasa (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 150). In A03 of Type 2, the corner modillion was cut off horizontally and it does not carry any decoration. The edging ovolo around the corner was not carved either. The palmette in the next modillion turns in round, open spirals, the lower leaves outward and the upper ones inward. A round knob emerges from the upper spirals. All the modillions are edged by an

396

Gabriel Mazor

ovolo that resembles the one separating the cornice from the frieze in the scaenae frons marble elements in the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolos (see below). The coffers are filled by a variety of floral motives that do not repeat themselves. They include several types of petals, open or closed blossoms, various types of acanthus leaves in different positions, and some types of fruits. All the floral motifs of the modillions and coffers were deeply carved and drilled, and executed in high relief with fleshy, rounded petals and lobes or various fruits. The leaves are relatively broad with wide, deep, midrib channels, all producing a strong light-andshade effect that is common in the region (Weigand 1914:54). The varied repertoire of coffer fillings is also characteristic of the region in the late second and early third centuries CE. According to Strong (1953:137, 142, 147–151), the eclectic and imitative decoration style of the post-Hadrianic period originated in the East and was later brought to Rome by the artists of Asia Minor. The earlier, severe architectural style could not hold its ground for long against the eastern taste for elaborate ornamentation, which was, according to Strong, introduced to Rome through the personal influence of Hadrian. Soffit decoration of modillions with acanthus leaves, palmettes, stylized flowers and branches was relatively common in the Roman East. At Baalbek, for instance, this decoration is widely observed in cornices (Weigand 1914: Pl. 5.1; Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pls. 90, 102, 103; 1923: Fig. 29, Pls. 67, 68). At Gerasa, it was found on the nymphaeum entablature, on the cornices of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, on the scaenae frons of the southern theater and on the monumental Hadrianic gate (Lyttelton 1974:246–247, Pls. 141, 148–150). At Kedesh, it also appears on cornices (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:159, Pls. 34.1–3, 35.1). An ovolo edging modillions is characteristic of all second–third-century CE ornamental design in the Roman East. At Baalbek, in the interior and exterior of the Temple of Bacchus, the interior and exterior of the Temple of Venus, and the main colonnade and curved exedrae of the Great Court, all the modillions are edged by an ovalo (Lyttelton 1974:239). Also at Gerasa, in the nymphaeum, the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis and the monumental Hadrianic gate, all the modillions are edged by an ovolo (Lyttelton 1974:246–247), and the same phenomenon is witnessed at Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:159), Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:285–290) and Damascus (Weigand

1914: Pl. 40). At Nysa-Scythopolis it is the common motif found everywhere in the monuments of the civic center dated to the second century CE. In most second-century CE monuments in Asia Minor, the cornice modillions are also edged by an ovolo, as, for instance, the Market Gate at Miletus dated to 160 CE and the Hadrianic gate at Antalya, while cornice modillions in Rome are commonly edged by a cyma reversa (Lyttelton 1974:258–259). The corona is decorated with broad flutes (5 × 7 cm) that are arched on top and have a semicircular tongue at the bottom; the flutes are separated by deep grooves. This is also a common ornament of the second–third centuries CE in the Roman eastern provinces (Weigand 1914:84). The corona is separated from the cyma by an astragal. The astragal has long, elliptical beads with round or rhomboid reels and almost no string. There is no relationship between the patterns of the corona flutes and the bead-and-reel components of the astragal. The fluted-corona pattern is also observed in the Severan Theater’s scaenae frons marble cornices. It was similarly executed and separated from the cyma by the same type of astragal. The fluted corona is found at Gerasa in the nymphaeum’s upper order and in the cornices of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton 1974:246–247, Pls. 141, 148). In most of the monuments at Baalbek, flutes decorate the corona, as in the interior of the Temple of Bacchus, the interior and exterior of the Temple of Venus, and the main colonnades and curved exedrae of the Great Court, where the fluted corona is separated from the cyma by an astragal (Lyttelton 1974:239). At Kedesh, the corona in entablature Item Nos. 4, 6 and 7 is also fluted and separated from the cyma by an astragal (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:159, Pl. 34). At Caesarea, the Type C1 cornices have a fluted corona separated from the cyma by an astragal (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:287, Figs. 31, 32), and according to Weigand (1914:85, Pl. 40), it is also common in Damascus and Bostra. The fluted corona is a characteristic Roman architectural ornament common at sites in the eastern provinces during the second–third centuries CE (Weigand 1914:83–84). In Rome, it first appears in the Augustan period, presumably influenced by Asia Minor as it continues into the Flavian and Antonine periods. After a short gap, it returns in the Severan period (Strong 1953:148) as part of the enriched entablature of that period. In Asia Minor, the fluted

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

corona usually decorates the frieze, as at Sagalassos, although it does appear sporadically on the corona, as in the Celsus Library at Ephesus and the Temple of Bacchus at Pergamon (Strong 1953: Pl. XXXVI; Vandeput 1997:106, 108). The bordering astragal appears in the region from the mid-second century CE and is typical of the Antonine period (Weigand 1924–1925:172–175; Strong 1953:148). In the marble cornices of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, the reels of the astragal are more rhomboidal (Wegner 1957:49) and more delicately connected to the oval or elliptical beads than at other monuments. In the current cornices, the astragal resembles Type 2 of Turnheim’s typology (Turnheim 1987:37), which is a variant of Type E of Leon’s typology (Leon 1971:271, Pl. 126.4). At Gerasa, it was found in the upper entablature of the nymphaeum, in the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, and in the entablature of the scaenae frons of the southern theater (Lyttelton 1974:247, Pls. 141, 148, 150). At Baalbek, it was common in the Temple of Venus (Wiegand 1921– 1925 II:102–103, Pls. 159, 161, 163). In Asia Minor, the ornament motif of bead and reel was introduced into architectural decor from the late Hadrianic era to the mid-second century CE (Vandeput 1997:149), and it changed gradually from an early to a mature style (Strocka 1981:29). In the second half of the second century CE, the bead becomes slightly longer, as in the Temple of Marcus Aurelius and Comodus at Cremna (Mitchell 1995:108–110). In the theater at Sagalassos, dated to 180–200 CE, the beads are more angular and the reels are considerably wider, resembling the examples in various Severan monuments in Asia Minor (Mansel 1975:65; Yegül 1986:138; Vandeput 1997:150). Over the cyma, an anthemion was carved with varied, alternating groups of well-separated, stylized acanthus leaves occasionally interrupted by palmettes or lotus flowers, all rising from the cyma’s bottom (Riegl 1893:252–257; Weigand 1914:87). Nei-ther the acanthus nor the palmette has a central calyx, as they spread in a fan-shaped pattern. The acanthus has five leaves that adopt the s-shaped profile of the cyma. They are widely based at the bottom, first in a convex shape that becomes concave, and at the top turns gently outward. The lower side leaves curve widely over the bottom, while the upper leaves curve

397

gently in a half circle. They have three rounded lobes and wide, emphasized midribs. Cornices A6464 and A6461 of Type 1 present a variation in the acanthus pattern, with a central, upright leaf with seven wellspaced, pointed lobes and central concave grooves. The palmettes are also widely based and have six leaves that curl gently inward in their lower part and outward in the upper (Strong 1953:129). The leaves are mostly rounded and fleshy and cover the entire cyma. Their s-shape, high relief and deeply cut background grant them a natural appearance with a pronounced light-and-shade effect. This anthemion motif is different from that of the marble cornices of the scaenae frons, which also have an anthemion carved over the cyma. On the marble cornices, the motif has a design of alternating and reversed palmettes and acanthus leaves connected by a bar, and it is considerably richer (see below). The cyma resembles that on the cornices of the temple at Damascus (Weigand 1914: Pl. 40) and in the Temple of Venus and the secondary entablature of the Temple of Bacchus at Baalbek, all three dated to the second half of the second century CE (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Figs. 83, 103; 1923: Pl. 43). At Gerasa, a similar cyma was found in the nymphaeum’s upper entablature, in the scaenae frons of the southern theater, in the monumental Hadrianic gate and in the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, all monuments of the early to mid-second century CE (Lyttelton 1974:247, Pl. 141). At Kedesh, a similar cyma adorns the temple cornices, dated from the end of the second to the early third centuries CE (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 34). This type of cyma is classified in Turnheim’s typology as Type A (1987:70), the commonly used type in the region, while the cyma in the marble cornices of the theaters at Nysa-Scythopolis and Caesarea are of the less-common Type B. In Asia Minor, the anthemion developed an entirely different pattern, based mostly on palmettes, and during the second half of the second century CE, the acanthus-like anthemion is regarded as an evolution of the feingezahnter Akanthus (Rohmann 1995:115– 119). Both acanthus and palmettes were carved in the same way and their differences diminish over time in Asia Minor. This type of anthemion appeared earlier than the Hadrianic period, and was first executed on the cyma of the Celsus Library cornices at Ephesus (Strocka 1988:296; Vandeput 1997:166–167).

398

Gabriel Mazor

Summary of the Entablature of the Postscaenium’s Northern Entrance All the architectural elements that comprise the entablature of the postscaenium’s northern entrances were carved in local limestone originating from the quarries of the Gilboa Mountains, and they were found in a relatively good state of preservation. Their artistic features, consistency, choice of ornament, sequence and syntax represent the ‘Syrian sequence’ of the second to early third centuries CE in the Roman East, termed Typische folge für Syrien by Weigand (1914:86–87). The classical canon of decorated moldings that in the West were usually separated by undecorated profiles was relatively rare in the East. The separating profiles between adjacent ornaments, characteristic of the Roman architectural vocabulary in Asia Minor, were rare in the Roman East, where the traditional local ‘Syrian sequence’ was retained (Weigand 1914:86–87). The first monumental appearance of the crystallized ‘Syrian sequence’ of the Roman period was in the secondary entablature of the temples of Baalbek, in which Lyttelton (1974:222) observed an increasing attention to court interiors, which seems to be a characteristic trend of Roman architectural development during the Imperial period. In spite of the considerably long time range of the various complexes of Baalbek––from Augustus to Antoninus Pius (Robertson 1969:225)––similarities in forms and sequence attest to closely related styles. In the interior entablature of the Temple of Bacchus, the interior and exterior of the Temple of Venus, and the main colonnade and the curved exedrae architraves of the Great Court, the entablatures were always crowned with an ovolo and a cyma reversa. Friezes with floralinhabited acanthus scrolls were always crowned with an ovolo, cornice modillions were edged by an ovolo and the corona was fluted. All of these motifs found their way into the architectural decor at NysaScythopolis. The typical cyma reversa in the monuments of Baalbek, in which the leaf is split in two, was also common in the second-century CE architectural decor at Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis, but is rare outside Syria, as its origins were Hellenistic (Lyttelton 1974:239–241). Characteristic of the entablature decor of the Antonine to Severan periods in Baalbek is the ovolo, in which the dart is occasionally replaced by a small leaf or an abstract squiggle. This pattern

characterizes the ovolo of the entablature of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis as well, and also appears in buildings at Palmyra, but again not outside of Syria. However, some of the other features of the ‘Syrian sequence’ did find their way to other regions, both in the east and west of the Roman Empire, presumably via Asia Minor (Strong and Ward-Perkins 1962:18). Features such as the ovolo crowning the frieze, the cyma reversa above the dentils, the ovolo edging the modillions and the astragal dividing the cyma and corona, all testify to strong links between Baalbek and Asia Minor in the second century CE. On the other hand, the consistent repetition of similar features, rare elsewhere in the Roman Empire, points to the existence of a distinctive local architectural style in the forms of the complexes and their ornamental details at Baalbek (Lyttelton 1974:241). Although displaying some outside influences, mainly from Asia Minor, the formation and development of this local style was first and foremost influenced by the architectural style of the eastern Mediterranean coast, with roots in the Hellenistic period, and during the Roman Imperial period it flourished. The rich architectural style that developed at Baalbek had a profound influence, first on temple construction in Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon (Krencker and Zscietzschmann 1938; Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984), and subsequently on such major urban architectural centers as Gerasa, Nysa-Scythopolis and other poleis in the Roman East. At Gerasa, the architectural decor of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, the nymphaeum, the monumental Hadrianic gate and the scaenae frons of the southern theater bears witness to the regional ‘Syrian sequence’, which was also common at Nysa-Scythopolis. This is expressed in the three-fascia architrave that was divided by astragals and crowned with an ovolo and cavetto. The floral acanthus-scroll motif of the friezes was crowned with an ovolo. The dentils were topped by a cyma reversa of the split-leaf type. Modillions were decorated with acanthus or palmettes and edged by an ovolo, while the fluted corona was separated from the cyma by an astragal, and the cyma had an anthemion of acanthus and palmettes. Thus, it seems obvious that the building style at Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis, which continued during the second and early third centuries CE, was closely related in its ornamental decor to that of Baalbek (Lyttelton 1974:246–247). In contrast, the architectural tradition of Palmyra, although in some

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

ways related to the common ‘Syrian sequence’ of the region, seems to have been independent from other centers in the region, influenced partly by Asia Minor and partly by Alexandria. Set in an isolated oasis with no firm contacts with the Syrian centers of the Roman Imperial period, Palmyra seems to have developed its own original architectural style (Lyttelton 1974:254). At Nysa-Scythopolis, the ‘Syrian sequence’ is best observed in the entrance lintels and entablature of the postscaenium’s northern facade and the scaenae frons of the Severan Theater, although it was relatively common on other monuments of the civic center as well. For example, the entablature of the nymphaeum, the imperial altar, the propylaeum of the northern colonnaded street and Palladius Street, and both the northeastern and northwestern city gates share the same ornamental style, sequence and syntax. All of these monuments were erected during the second century CE, from the Hadrianic and Antonine to Severan periods. The hypothesis that the introduction of marble into the region influenced the development of its architectural-ornamental style (Ward-Perkins 1980:63) seems questionable in light of the above analysis. Marble architecture was first introduced at Nysa-Scythopolis, based on the evidence from the Severan Theater and the imperial altar, in the late second to early third centuries CE, while the ‘Syrian sequence’ was already deeply rooted in the region in general, and in the city in particular, since the late first to early second centuries CE. It may be that talented local artisans, who first trained in the vast workshops of Baalbek, later spread the artistic trends throughout the region. Their intimate acquaintance with the ‘Syrian sequence’ and the typology of its repertoire demonstrates that it was a traditional part of the local architectural ornamental vocabulary, which had taken root in the region long before the marble trade first arrived. The entablature of the postscaenium’s northern entrances displays the local, traditional artistic features characteristic of the region in the second–third centuries CE. The analysis of the ornamental details within the entablature’s components, their typology, the choice of motifs and the technical execution, place it well into the Severan period. Yet it seems that its ornamental design was also influenced by the marble entablature of the theater’s scaenae frons, as the latter was completed prior to the construction of the postscaenium northern facade. This influence, although relatively minor, is

399

reflected mainly in the composition of the scrolls and the use of half acanthus leaves as a frame motif. In all other respects of the sequence typology, the syntax and the vocabulary of the ornamental components, there seems no doubt that the adorning entablature of all three entrances of the postscaenium northern facade was faithful to the local ‘Syrian sequence’ tradition that was so deeply rooted in both the site and the region.

Scaenae Frons The scaenae frons of the ‘Western’ type has a central semicircular exedra flanked by two rectangular ones. Within the triple exedrae, three entrances (valvae regiae and hospitalia) are flanked by projecting podia. The scaenae frons then turns at both ends in a straight angle toward the south in front of the itinera versurarum. The columnar facade, erected over a c. 2 m high podium in the Severan period (Roman III, Stratum 12), was composed of marble columns and a richly decorated entablature of the Corinthian order to a height of two floors in the valvae regiae and three floors on either side. In its original plan, the scaenae frons had 110 columns, 34 in each of the three floors of the scaenae frons and four in each of the two floors of the valvae regiae facade. Soon after the completion of the theater, still within Roman III (Stratum 12), the postscaenium was added and the versurae rebuilt. As a result, the flanking sides of the scaenae frons were slightly altered and its columnar composition was shortened by one column on each side on all three floors. As a result, it lost six columns and the total number of columns was reduced to 104. Alternating red and gray granite, marble and cipollino column shafts mounted upon marble pedestals and bases were crowned with marble capitals and entablature, each floor somewhat shorter in height than the lower one. The theater had a remarkably rich, multi-colored scaenae frons (light gray, light yellow, green, gray and red) constructed of imported marbles. Light gray marble originated from the quarries of Proconnesos on the island of Marmara, light yellow marble from the Island of Thasos, green cipollino from Carystos in Euboea, gray granite from Troad in Asia Minor and red granite from Syene (Aswan) in Egypt. The construction of the postscaenium and the versurae in the mid-third century CE slightly altered the ends of the scaenae frons, which each lost a column, although

400

Gabriel Mazor

it did not change the basic nature or order composition. Toward the end of the fourth century CE (Roman IV, Stratum 11), the theater, including the scaenae frons, was renovated following severe damage inflicted by the earthquake of 363 CE. The cavea and scaenae frons were reduced to two floors, and some of the gray and red granite column shafts were replaced by reused limestone column shafts, presumably from the collapsed porticus. In addition, some of the original marble bases and capitals were replaced as well. Architectural elements of the third-floor decor of the scaenae frons, including some of the gray granite columns, were removed and reused as spolia in various other monuments within the civic center, where they were found during the excavation and identified by their order type and dimensions. The newly integrated architectural elements such as limestone bases, column shafts and capitals, were all spolia of the second century CE. In the early sixth century CE (Byzantine II, Stratum 9), the scaenae frons was once again renovated and reduced in height to one floor. As a result of all of these renovations, the assemblage of architectural elements that resulted when the scaenae frons collapsed in the earthquake of 749 CE was varied, including numerous original marble elements as well as limestone elements. Other original marble elements that were not reintegrated in the scaenae frons in its various renovation stages were reused in other complexes of the civic center as architectural elements, masonry blocks and even in fill layers. In some cases, architectural elements were removed to considerable distances, as, for instance, theater seats, presumably of the summa cavea, were found integrated into the Byzantine city wall. The analysis of the scaenae frons’ architectural elements took into consideration the alternating order compositions during the theater’s renovation phases–– the reuse of spolia on the one hand, and the removal of elements from the theater on the other. Most of the first-floor marble architectural elements (c. 90%) were uncovered in the theater. the assemblage from the second and third floors is far smaller, although still adequate for analysis and restoration purposes. Since only a small portion of the city (c. 15%), and not even the entire civic center, has been fully excavated, further excavations in the future may recover additional marble elements of the original scaenae frons second and third floors, of which only small amounts have so far been revealed.

The assemblage of the original scaenae frons architectural elements will be presented according to its order composition. In the architectural analysis and reconstruction of the theater (see Chapter 7), all three stages of the scaenae frons––the original construction stage and the two renovation stages––are discussed and the location of each element of these three stages is determined based on our research results. Podium The scaenae frons is built of two attached segments, the rear wall and the podium, both of which were found in situ. In the north, the rear wall that supports the columnar facade was constructed of soft-limestone masonry in the center and basalt masonry on both versurae sides, and its southern face was covered with opussectile marble plating of various colors. It is c. 91.5 m long with two flanking wings at either end that are 6 m long. It is pierced by three entrances, the valvae regiae and two hospitalia, and adorned by semicircular and rectangular, marble-lined niches that housed marble statues. On both sides, the wall integrates with the versurae and their two entrances, the itinera versurarum. In front of the scaenae frons wall and the versurae runs a podium. The white limestone podium, uncovered in situ in a perfect state of preservation, is segmented by these five entrances. On both sides of the itinera versurarum, attached podia protrude, while the continuous, integrated podium runs in and out along the contours of the scaenae frons. In the hospitalia, it follows the rectangular niches and in the valvae regiae, the semicircular apse. Both niches and apse are flanked by protruding podia, smaller in the hospitalia and larger in the valvae regiae (see Fig. 3.10). As a result, the scaenae frons podium is divided into six segments of various length and width. Apart from the valvae regiae’s flanking podia, which are about 2.5 m deep, the other podium segments are 1.3–1.5 m wide. The podium is 2.2 m high, built of four masonry blocks (Fig. 9.16): a base molding 0.43 m high, a dado constructed of two blocks 0.62 and 0.56 m high, a cap molding 0.31 m high and an upper block 0.28 m high. The base molding has a 0.22 m plinth, a 2 cm scotia and a 4 cm torus, followed by a 9 cm cyma reversa and a 2 cm upper torus with a 1 cm apophyge. The dado line retreats by 1 cm. The cap molding starts with an 8 cm plinth and a 1 cm apophyge, followed by a 3 cm plain astragal and a 4 cm plain ovolo that is crowned

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

401

Pedestals 0.19

About twelve light gray marble pedestals and fragments of such were found in the theater and they comprise a homogenous group. They are c. 0.90 × 0.90 m and 0.60 m high. They are decorated in high relief by acanthus leaves on their sides and by acanthus scrolls on their facade, while their rear side was left unworked. The profiles are mostly the same, varying slightly in measurements and execution. They all have a lower plinth followed by a cyma recta, and the dado is convex, almost to a torus shape, and decorated with acanthus leaves and scrolls in high relief over one to four sides, and crowned with a cyma recta and a fillet.

0.28

0.31

0.56

2.20

0.62

0.43

Fig. 9.16. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, podium.

with a 5 cm cavetto stepped on both sides, and a 6 cm fillet. Both base and cap moldings protrude some 0.2 m from the dado line. Most of the podium elements were preserved in situ, apart from a few cap-molding blocks that are broken and the molded profiles of the base molding that are relatively worn. A single broken element of the podium was found in the collapse layer (A6582). It is a corner element of the cap molding with a worn, but still identifiable profile. In the restoration work it was restored to its place. The base and cap moldings are of the common type found in the region in general, and at the site in particular, in most cases dated to the second century CE, such as in the imperial altar and the nymphaeum in the civic center. Their profiles resemble those of the podia of the monumental Hadrianic gate at Gerasa (Detweiler 1938: Pl. V.14:8), dated to 130 CE.

Pedestal A6120 (Fig. 9.17:1) is a complete, wellpreserved element with a broken upper corner, decorated on three sides. It has a 0.10 m plinth, a 0.10 m cyma recta, a 0.25 m high dado crowned with a 7 cm cyma recta, and a 5 cm fillet. The decorated panel on the left side is well preserved in high relief, carved over the convex dado. Two acanthus leaves carved over both corners create a frame of two half leaves on both sides that connect, and two complete leaves in between. The midrib of the side leaves engulfs the corner of the pedestal. The lower and mid-lobe turn in a bow shape inward, their lobe ribs marked all the way to the bottom from where the corner leaf springs. Both midribs of the central acanthus leaves are emphasized by deeply carved, parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom where they turn abruptly out to the left and right and lend the leaves, which are based widely on the bottom, a spiral, clockwise and counter-clockwise movement. The central lobes follow the convex profile of the dado and their tips lean out below the crowning profiles of the pedestal. The lobe ribs are deeply grooved in a bow shape that runs all the way to the bottom, lending the lobes a concave shape. Both the lower and midlobes have five pointed tips that are not grooved and therefore almost flat. The lower lobe’s tips and midlobe’s lower tips meet, or almost meet, between both the central leaves and the side leaves, creating rhombuses one on top of the other. The pattern is carved in high relief, and the tips are prominently separated from the background, which was left unworked. The carving is of high quality, delicately executed in high relief that creates a strong light-and-shade effect. The right side is badly worn, apart from the half leaf on the right corner

402

Gabriel Mazor

A6120

Back side

0.59

0.90

0.89

1

A6121

0.61

0.91

0.93

2

Fig. 9.17. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestals.

that is well preserved. From the preserved part one can see that the same pattern is maintained. The decorated panel of the facade is worn, mainly on the right side, yet the pattern of two acanthus scrolls within a frame of half leaves is clear. On the left side, the remains of a round acanthus scroll springs out of a

triple-tipped, denticulated petal blossom, rounding at the bottom next to the framing half leaf. It turns inward in a clockwise spiral and is inhabited by the worn remnants of a presumably round blossom. The second scroll is entirely worn. Both the framing half leaves and the scrolls create a round, inward movement.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Pedestal A6121 (Fig. 9.17:2) is a complete, but poorly preserved pedestal. It has a 0.12 m plinth and a worn, 8 cm cyma recta. The convex, torus-shaped dado is 0.28 m high, crowned with an 8 cm cyma recta and a 6 cm fillet. It is decorated on three sides, while the fourth was left unworked. The decorated panels of both the left and right sides are worn, although the acanthus-leaf pattern seen in A6120 is repeated. Some of the left-side details indicate a carving of lesser quality than was observed in the former pedestal, although the pattern has the same details. The facade, on the other hand, was somewhat better preserved. On both ends, fleshy acanthus leaves embrace the corners in rounded, convex shapes, and the midrib marks the corner. The lower- and mid-lobe with five tips turn inward in a bow shape, their lobe ribs curving in a round, deep groove to the bottom of the leaf. The tips are mostly broken, but the remains indicate fleshy, pointed tips that are well separated from their crude background. The acanthus scrolls curve upward on both sides from an inverted calyxshaped central motif. The wide and fleshy acanthus scrolls spring out of an inverted calyx emerging from a trefoil blossom. They roll in a clockwise and counterclockwise spiral and are inhabited by four-petaled blossoms with central knobs. The pattern is well balanced, executed in high relief and deeply carved from behind. Pedestal A6122 (Fig. 9.18:1) is a broken pedestal decorated on three sides. It has an 8 cm plinth and an 8 cm cyma recta. The convex, decorated dado is 0.22 m high, crowned with a plain, 3 cm ovolo. The rest of the crowning profile is broken. The decorated panel is broken and worn, although remains of details indicate the same decorated sides as the previous example, with vertically posed acanthus leaves and acanthus scrolls depicted over its facade. Pedestal Segments A6123 + A6131 (Fig. 9.18:2) are two joining fragments of a single pedestal. They have an 8 cm plinth and a 10 cm beveled profile. The 0.22 m convex dado is crowned with several plain bands with separating grooves ending in a 3 cm ovolo and a 7 cm fillet. The only complete side is the back, which was left as it was carved in the quarry. This pedestal has the same basic, strongly convex, roughly chiseled shape of the dado profile prior to its decor carving. On both sides, remains of the framing half acanthus leaves

403

can still be seen on the pedestal’s corners, along with one complete acanthus leaf. Pedestal A6124 (Fig. 9.18:3) is a fragment of which two sides were partly preserved, although one is completely worn. It has a 0.12 m plinth and a 7 cm cyma recta. The convex dado, 0.30 m, is crowned with a 7 cm cyma recta and a 7 cm fillet. The decorative panel of the right side was better preserved. The left framing leaf is entirely broken, while the right is only partly broken and some of its tips are still visible. The two central leaves are fully preserved and they resemble those of A6120 (above). The background is smoothed and the central lobe leans outward, and although broken it reveals two drill holes. Pedestal Segments A6125 + A6126 (Fig. 9.19:1) are two joining parts of a pedestal decorated on three sides, the fourth left unworked. It has a 0.11 m plinth and a 7 cm cyma recta. The strongly convex dado, 0.25 m, is crowned with an 8 cm cyma recta and a 6 cm fillet. The decorated panels of both the left and right sides are well preserved and bear the same pattern in which half leaves frame two central, vertically posed acanthus leaves. They are widely based and their midribs are not as deeply grooved as the previous examples. The upper lobe curves out under the crowning profile. The lower- and mid-lobes with five pointed tips are deeply grooved in a slight s-shape down to the bottom. The s-shaped acanthus leaves emerge upward from the bottom and integrate with the convex shape of the dado. All tips meet, creating rhombuses one on top of the other. Although the high relief of the pattern is somewhat flat, it is deeply carved from behind, creating a lace pattern of two layers. The facade panel is worn and its left side has completely vanished. On the right side, remains of the framing half acanthus leaf and one scroll can still be seen. The details seem to display the same pattern as in A6121 (above). Remains of the inverted calyx from which the scrolls spring are preserved, and in its center a trefoil blossom was carved. The scroll curves in a counter-clockwise spiral and its inner part is worn. Pedestal A6127 (Fig. 9.19:2) is a complete pedestal decorated on three sides in the usual manner. Its lower and upper profiles seem to be of the same height, 0.15 m, although the upper one is mostly broken. In the lower part is a 5 cm fillet and a 10 cm beveled profile.

404

Gabriel Mazor

A6122

0.59

0.52

1

A6131

A6123

A6123

0.60

A6131

0.92

2 A6124

0.67

0.64

0.63

3

Fig. 9.18. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestals.

The decorative panel of the right side is the best preserved. It is framed by two half leaves, whose convex midribs engulf the corners, while the upper, curvedout lobe with two tips is preserved only on the right corner. The deeply grooved lobe rib runs diagonally

to the bottom corner, following the convex shape. The lower- and mid-lobes have four long, delicate, pointed tips. The two central, vertically posed acanthus leaves resemble the previous examples. Both their midribs and lobe ribs are deeply grooved and therefore

405

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6126

A6125

0.60

0.90

0.90

1 A6127

0.62

0.89

0.89

2

Fig. 9.19. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestals.

strongly emphasized. The upper trefoil lobe curves out and is marked by two drill holes. The lower lobe tips meet, creating rhombuses one on top of the other. The central acanthus leaves are widely based, although they emerge straight up and do not create the usual s-shaped pattern. The acanthus leaves are deeply carved in high relief, making use of the pattern’s convex shape. They are deeply carved from behind, almost separated from the background, and the pattern creates a strong lightand-shade effect. The high-quality carving reflects the

ability of an artist who was well acquainted with the pattern’s nuances. The left side was poorly preserved, but seems to be of the same pattern. The facade panel, also poorly preserved, indicates a somewhat different pattern than the usual one. Although the framing half leaves and the central scrolls are maintained, the scrolls are different. The two elliptical scrolls spring from within the framing half leaves, curve over the top and then over the bottom in a wide s-shape, crossing each other in the lower

406

Gabriel Mazor

A6128

0.66

0.86

0.64

1 A6129

0.62

0.87

2 A6130

0.62

0.92

3

Fig. 9.20. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestals.

center. Within the right scroll, the remains of a petal were partly preserved. This exceptional scroll design, known from some limestone friezes at the site, is not in accordance with the rest of the pedestals. This may indicate an artisan who was acquainted with a different scroll pattern than the rest of the artists. Pedestal A6128 (Fig. 9.20:1) is a fragment of a lower corner. Its lower plinth and beveled profile is 0.18 m

high, the convex dado is 0.35 m and the upper profile and fillet are 0.11 m high. The corner acanthus leaf is well preserved, its midrib strongly marked on the corner. The upper lobe curves outward, and its three wide, fleshy, rounded, well-emphasized tips have small bridges between them. The facade is broken and worn, but the remains of one round scroll springing from a central inverted calyx indicate that it was of the same type as A6121.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

407

AX

0.62

0.89

Fig. 9.21. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, pedestal.

Pedestal A6129 (Fig. 9.20:2) is a three-sided pedestal, the upper profile and decorated panels of which are entirely broken. Its unworked rear side is the only one that is well preserved.

that is decorated on all four sides, three with the common acanthus-leaf pattern and the fourth with the acanthus-scroll pattern. The pedestal was drawn from photographs and therefore cannot be further analyzed.

Pedestal A6130 (Fig. 9.20:3) is a fragment of a pedestal with scanty remains of a decorated panel on one side; its rear side was left unworked.

Foliated Column Base A6571 (Fig. 9.22) is a foliated column base of light gray marble, 0.74 m high, with an upper and lower diameter of 0.66 m. It has a 4 cm fillet and a 4 cm beveled profile on both the lower and upper sides, and vertical acanthus leaves in between that are 0.58 m high. The acanthus leaves are widely based and curve outward. They are tall and high, and their midribs are strongly marked by two parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom. Three lobes are carved along their length, each with three serrated tips. Their lobe ribs curve inward in a bow shape and are deeply grooved, while the top lobe curves out. Convex tips along its length are spaced and do not meet. At the

Pedestal AX (Fig. 9.21) is a complete pedestal that was robbed from the site and moved to a villa in Tiberias, whence it later disappeared. Executed in light gray marble, its dimensions and decorated panels indicate that it belonged to the theater. As the pedestal neither appears in Applebaum’s photographs or drawings, nor is it referred to, it may have been removed from the theater, probably in the early 1960s, prior to his excavations. It is the only preserved pedestal

408

Gabriel Mazor

A6571

0.74

0.66

Fig. 9.22. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, foliated column base.

top, under the upper profile, five-petaled leaves open symmetrically to both sides from between the acanthus leaves. The acanthus leaves are deeply carved in high relief against the crude background, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The pattern is well balanced, with precise, high-quality carving demonstrating excellent artistic ability. Although this is not a regular pedestal, it most certainly reflects the decorative pattern of the other pedestals. Additional examples of foliated column bases, carved in limestone, were found in the western propylaeum of Palladius Street, while three marble ones, part of the imperial altar, present a different type of decoration. Discussion of Pedestals The 12 preserved marble pedestals are a small portion of the 30 pedestals that originally adorned the scaenae frons first floor. In Applebaum’s photographs, some of them can be seen still in situ, while others were scattered around. Most of them were found broken and in some cases fragments can be joined. The valvae regiae columnar facade was not mounted on pedestals; at the side corners of the semicircular exedra, foliated column bases (A6571) were placed on bases with an octagonal plinth, as regular square ones could not fit the angle (see Chapter 7). The second and third floors of the scaenae frons were presumably furnished with similar pedestals of smaller size, of which no specimens have been recovered so far.

The pedestals can be divided into three main groups. The first includes pedestals with four decorated panels, adorned with acanthus leaves on three sides and acanthus scrolls on the fourth, facade side. One pedestal of this group, in a perfect state of preservation, was discovered in Tiberias (AX). Of the second group, eight fragments can be joined into six pedestals (A6120, A6121, A6122, A6125+A6126, A6127, A6123+A6131). Three of their sides were decorated, two with acanthus leaves and the third with acanthus scrolls (the facade). The fourth side was left unworked. Of the third group, decorated on two sides––one with acanthus leaves, the other with acanthus scrolls and two left unworked––two elements were found (A6129, A6130). Two other pedestals (A6124, A6128) are too fragmentary to be assigned to a group. The decor of the pedestals is rich and repetitive. It seems that all the pedestals were shipped from the quarry in their crude state on all four sides, while the cap and base moldings had been beveled. Both profiles and panel decor were most probably carved on site. In several cases, the base- or cap-molding profiles were neglected and left beveled. The motifs depicted on the dado obviously followed the decorative pattern of the friezes. Framing acanthus leaves and inhabited acanthus scrolls are the basic elements of the frieze pattern, and they were adopted for the pedestal decor. The sides of the pedestals are always decorated with double acanthus leaves set within framing half leaves, while the facade is adorned with acanthus scrolls within framing half leaves. The scrolls are of a similar pattern and apart from one (A6122), they all spring from a central inverted calyx and curve clockwise and counterclockwise into round scrolls. The few scrolls that are preserved are inhabited by floral motifs. No traces of figures were observed, as in the friezes, although only a third of the original pedestals were found. However, the small size of the scrolls corresponds best with petal blossoms rather than leaping figures. The imperial altar in front of Valley Street, composed of imported marble and cipollino, also had decorated pedestals, one of which is well preserved (Tsafrir and Foerster 1994:98), its flat dado adorned with mythological motifs carved in high relief on four sides: monsters with animal-like foreparts and fish-like tails mounted by Nereids, their mantles billowing in the wind, and cupids carrying wreaths, one of them flanked by two busts––perhaps of Dionysus and an attendant. An akroterion from the same monument was carved on two sides with floral

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

motifs in delicate high relief that consist mainly of acanthus leaves engulfing its corners, and an inner upright acanthus leaf and flower stem on each side. Pedestals with convex, torus-shaped dados, termed ‘pulvinated pedestals’, were not common in the region, although samples of non-decorated pedestals of this type have been found at various sites. For example, one in situ example in the temple at Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Fig. 5, Pl. 32.1) is dated from the second to early third centuries CE, five examples in the Temple of Kore at Sebaste (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942:62, Pl. LIX.3) are dated to the third century CE, and one in the atrium of the Synagogue Church at Gerasa (Crowfoot and Hamilton 1929; Browning 1982: Fig. 130) is presumably in secondary use. In Jerusalem, pulvinated pedestals are exhibited in the Convent of the Sister of Zion (Marie Aline de Sion 1955: Pl. 58) and another one was recently found in the eastern cardo excavations (Peleg-Barkat, forthcoming). Decorated pulvinated pedestals have not been discovered, so far, anywhere else in the Roman East. Decorated pulvinated pedestals, although uncommon, seem to be a non-classical, baroque architectural feature that may be considered a derivation of the foliated column bases richly decorated with acanthus leaves. The foliated column bases were more common in the Roman East during the second century CE, as several were found at Nysa-Scythopolis in the imperial altar (marble) and in the western propylaeum of Palladius Street (limestone). At Gerasa, they were found in both the Hadrianic and southern city gates, dated to 130 CE (Detweiler 1938:73–84; Segal 1997:101, Figs. 110, 131, 154, 155, 157). In the theater at Bostra, a foliated column base decorated with acanthus leaves was placed on a torus decorated with an oak-leaf pattern (Freyberger 1988:19, Pl. 11a). In the scaenae frons of the theater at NysaScythopolis, foliated column bases stood at both corners of the semicircular exedra (A6571). Their decor was thus influenced by the frieze pattern of acanthus leaves and scrolls that adorned the bottom (pedestals) and top (frieze) of the order, lending the composition a balanced and harmonious frame. In the Hellenistic Palazzo delle Colonne at Ptolemais, foliated column bases were found in situ, decorated with alternating lotus and acanthus leaves. Lyttelton (1974:53–60, Pl. 61), who termed them column bases, dated the monument to the late first century BCE or the early first century CE. A similar column base decorated

409

on its lower part by flat acanthus leaves and on its upper part with a section of a fluted column shaft, was found at Araq al-Amir (Will and Larché 1991: Pl. 8B:5). Foliated column bases are found in Asia Minor as well. At Sagalassos, such an element decorated all around with palmettes growing from caules springing from beneath acanthus bushes, served as a statue base in the Honorific Monument on the Lower Agora. This base seems to be of Hellenistic origin and was dated to the Augustan period (Vandeput 1997:41, Pls. 10:1–3; 14:1–4, 15:3). Foliated column bases occasionally decorated podia as well, as in the Trajaneum at Pergamon (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 100.2). Bases A considerable number of marble bases and fragments of such (c. 112), of various dimensions, were recovered in the theater and the civic center. Of these, 37 were found by Applebaum in the theater, 35 by the IAA expedition in the theater and civic center, and about 40 by the IAHU expedition. The 40 bases found by the IAHU expedition were never fully recorded or analyzed, and therefore data on their number, dimensions and diameters are lacking. Some 60% of the marble bases were discovered in secondary use in various monuments of the civic center, such as the thermae and the forum, or used as building stones in walls and water channels. Apart from the scaenae frons of the Severan Theater, only the imperial altar had marble bases. Thus, assigning the marble bases to their original monuments based on dimensions and order composition is relatively easy. The original threestory-high facade of the scaenae frons had 104 bases of various sizes, the two stories of the valvae regiae had 8, and the imperial altar in the civic center had 12. Most of the latter, complete and fragmentary, have been found, all of them constructed in the Corinthian order. Three of the four red granite column shafts of the valvae regiae first-floor facade were found. Their lower diameter is 1 m. Three light gray fragments of marble bases measuring c. 1.10 m in diameter and about 0.52 m in height, correspond to these columns (A6244, Fig. 9.23:1; A6263, A6753). Four light yellow marble bases of smaller dimensions were found by Applebaum, measuring 0.84 m in diameter and 0.41– 0.42 m in height, and these fit the order composition of the valvae regiae’s second-floor facade (A6227, A6228, A6229, Fig. 9.23:2; A6230). They have

410

Gabriel Mazor

A6244

A6229

0.53

1 0.84

0.41

1.12

2

Fig. 9.23. Severan Theater: valvae regiae, bases of the columnar facade, first and second floors.

8–10 cm deep anchoring holes in the center of their upper surfaces, and they bear masonry marks. A complete red granite column shaft of the order composition of the scaenae frons first floor, found in the layer of theater collapse, had a lower diameter of 0.64 m. Other red and gray granite column shafts of the same dimensions from the civic center have a lower diameter of 0.60–0.66 m. Four complete bases and fifteen fragments of others that fit these diameters were recovered by Applebaum; they measure 0.67–0.72 m in diameter, 0.28–0.34 m in height, and their square plinths, 0.84–0.90 m in width (A6220–A6224, Fig. 9.24:1; A6225–A6226, A6231–A6235, A6240, A6242– A6243, A6245, A6651, A6652, A6696, A6860). Eight additional bases of the same type and dimensions, two complete and fragments of others, were found in the civic center by the IAA expedition (A80137, A81102, A100219, A100675, A110628, A120117, A120146, A120147) and presumably originated in the theater. Other red and gray granite and light gray marble column shafts of smaller sizes were reused in secondary renovation stages in the civic center, all with a lower diameter of 0.51–0.64 m. These correspond to the scaenae frons second floor. Seven bases or fragments of bases with these diameters were found by Applebaum

(A6236–A6239, A6241, Fig. 9.24:2; A6246, A6251, A6650); they measure 0.57–0.61 m in diameter and are 0.24–0.30 m high. Thirteen additional light gray marble base fragments were revealed in the civic center (A31113, A41155, A60108, A60635, A80131, A80629, A81102, A100236, A100663, A100674, A100680, A120117); they measure 0.51–0.64 m in diameter and 0.24–0.36 m in height. Gray granite and light gray marble column shafts of a smaller size, with a lower diameter of about 0.30–0.43 m, fit the third-floor order composition of the scaenae frons. A base that corresponds to this diameter was found by Applebaum (A60603), 0.43 m in diameter and 0.14 m in height, and nine additional marble bases were found in the civic center by the IAA (A31145, A31146, A31147, 31196, A80122, Fig. 9.24:3; A100608, A100627, A100633, A100712), 0.40–0.43 m in diameter and 0.14–0.20 m in height. The total of 58 complete marble bases represents c. 60% of the total of 104 bases that were originally part of the scaenae frons’ order composition (27 from the first floor, 20 from the second floor, and 11 from the third floor). Of these, 28 were found in the theater (19, 7, 2 respectively) and 30 in the civic center (8, 13, 9). We can assume that of the 40 marble bases found by

411

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6224

A6241

A80122

0.48 0.89

0.62 0.40 0.52

0.57

0.89

0.24

0.24

0.76

0.32

2

3

1

Fig. 9.24. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, bases of the first and second floors.

the IAHU expedition, an additional relative number of these three size groups would increase the total of the scaenae frons original marble bases to c. 80% Base fragments of the valvae regiae’s first floor are broken and their profiles are worn. They seem to have had a 17 cm plinth, a 13 cm torus, an 8 cm scotia flanked by two 3 cm fillets, and a 9 cm upper torus. The second-floor bases have a 14–15 cm plinth, a 9–11 cm torus, a 6 cm scotia flanked by two 2–3 cm fillet profiles, and a 6–7 cm upper torus. The first-floor bases of the scaenae frons have a 9–13 cm plinth, a 6–10 cm torus, a 5–7 cm scotia flanked by two 2 cm fillets, and a 5–8 cm upper torus. Some bases, e.g., A81102, have a roughly cut octagonal plinth, as they were reused in the porticus that was erected along the northern facade of the postscaenium in the early sixth century CE (Stratum 9). The second-floor bases have an 8–12 cm plinth, a 6–10 cm torus, a 5–6 cm scotia flanked by two 2 cm fillets, and a 5–7 cm upper torus. The third-floor bases have a 5 cm plinth, a 3–4 cm torus, a 3 cm scotia flanked by two 1 cm fillet profiles,

and a 3 cm upper torus. All of these bases are of the Corinthian order, of the Greek-Attic type that was common at the site and elsewhere in the region during the Roman Imperial period. This base form developed in Greece around the fifth century BCE and spread throughout the Greek and Hellenistic world (Shoe Meritt 1969:195, Fig. 2f; Foerster 1995:99–103, Figs. 172, 173). They share a common characteristic––the positioning of the upper torus in relation to the upper fillet of the scotia on the same vertical line (Amy and Gros 1979:123, n. 76, and see bibliography there). This differs from the Roman form of the Attic base (Shoe Meritt 1965:301; 1969:191). Column Shafts The columnar facade of the scaenae frons in its original, Stratum 12 stage was constructed in a colorful composition of light gray and light yellow marble, red and gray granite and green cipollino. The first floor of the valvae regiae facade had four red

412

Gabriel Mazor

granite column shafts. Red granite column shafts also flanked the hospitalia and itinera versurarum. The red granite column shafts were alternated with gray granite column shafts in the first-floor facade of the scaenae frons. The second-floor of the valvae regiae facade had light yellow marble column shafts, while the rest of the scaenae frons in its second and third floors consisted of alternating gray granite, light gray marble and green cipollino column shafts. In the renovation stages of Roman IV (Stratum 11) and Byzantine II (Stratum 9), in which the scaenae frons was twice reduced in height, some of the red and gray granite, gray marble and green cipollino column shafts were replaced by limestone column shafts. In the process, gray granite and gray marble column shafts were removed from the theater and reused in other complexes of the civic center, and they can be identified by their material, size and diameter. The original scaenae frons and valvae regiae had 104 column shafts, of which 12 were of red granite, 48 of gray granite, 32 of light gray marble, 8 of green cipollino and 4 of light yellow marble. About 49 columns, both complete and lower-part sections, and over 50 upper and shaft sections were found. They are all of the Corinthian order with a plinth at the bottom and a torus on top. Red Granite Column Shafts The first floor of the valvae regiae facade had four red granite column shafts, of which three were found (A6272–A6274, Fig. 9.25:1). They measure 7.10–7.16 m high, their lower diameter is 0.98–1.00 m and the upper 0.90–0.91 m. All three were reconstructed in their original location (see Chapter 8). Eight red granite column shafts also flanked the hospitalia and itinera versurarum, of which at least five were fully or partly preserved. Two wellpreserved examples (A6441, Fig. 9.25:2; A1128) are 4.80 and 4.73 m high. Three lower-part sections (A6444, A6442, A6445) range in height between 2.00 and 2.94 m and an upper-part section (A6443) reaches a height of 1.06 m. They all have a lower diameter of 0.64–0.69 m and an upper of 0.56–0.62 m. The remainder are mid-sections of column shafts (A6446, A6670, A6671), the height of which ranges between 0.85 and 1.60 m and the diameter is 0.56–0.61 m. Some of them were recently reconstructed in their original location over the scaenae frons northeastern corner (see Chapter 8).

A6272 0.91 0.83

0.80

0.87

0.84

0.89

0.86

3.80

A6441 0.62 0.54

0.90

0.88

0.91

0.91

7.10 0.58 0.58 4.80

0.92

0.92 3.30

0.61 0.60 0.91

0.93 1.00

1

0.61 0.68

2

Fig. 9.25. Severan Theater: red granite column shafts of the valvae regiae columnar facade and scaenae frons first floor.

Gray Granite Column Shafts Gray granite column shafts were integrated in all three floors and have been found in considerable numbers. Of the scaenae frons first floor that originally had 24 column shafts, five complete shafts were preserved (A460, A450, Fig. 9.26:1; A415, A75507, A14076). Their height ranges between 4.66 and 4.82 m, the lower

413

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A450 0.60

A70619

0.55

0.51 0.46

A110114 0.46 0.41

0.59 0.51 0.51

4.66

0.62

4.16

3.55 0.53

0.59

0.64

1

0.48

0.54

0.50

0.59

0.53

2

3

Fig. 9.26. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, dark gray granite column shafts of the first, second and third floors.

diameter is 0.64–0.70 m, and the upper, 0.60–0.61 m. Two lower sections (A1225, A1507) reach a height of 1.80 m and 4.00 m, and their lower diameter is 0.66 m and 0.73 m, while three upper sections (A64636, A85541, A80617) have a height of 1.74 m and 3.77 m, with an upper diameter of 0.66 m and 0.60 m. These comprise at least nine shafts of the original 24 columns. From the scaenae frons second floor, at least 15 gray granite column shafts are preserved, mostly revealed as spolia in complexes of the civic center. Of these, five complete examples (A70619, Fig. 9.26:2; A80619, A1233, A6862, A100648) have a height of 4.09–4.16 m, a lower diameter of 0.58–0.62 m and an upper of 0.51–0.54 m. Eight lower sections (A216, A584, A1216, A1219, A1224, A1231, A6402, A100618) range in height between 0.67 and 2.81 m, with a lower diameter of 0.53–0.61 m. The height of three upper sections (A306, A64014, A100652) ranges between 0.93 and 1.73 m, with an upper diameter of

0.51–0.56 m. Four mid-sections (A1222, A65202, A65203, A101138) range in height between 0.31 and 1.20 m, with a diameter of 0.49–0.55 m. The largest number of recovered gray granite column shafts (48), both complete and broken sections, originate in the third floor, and represent at least 17 columns. Five complete examples (A65096, A110114, Fig. 9.26:3; A44307, A44322, A85096) range in height from 3.43 to 3.57 m, the lower diameter 0.47–0.53 m and the upper 0.45–0.46 m. Eleven lower sections (A26, A6426, A6413, A6415, A606, A65207, A40612, A501, A1223, A1226, A65200) range in height from 0.38 to 1.82 m, and the lower diameter is 0.47–0.54 m. Eight upper sections (A65132, A1021, A41164, A91140, A1221, A5590, A65179, A1228) range in height from 0.66 to 2.88 m, and their upper diameter is 0.44–0.48 m. Twenty-three mid-shaft sections (A41, A1159, A1217, A1218, A1229, A6388, A6398–A6401, A6403, A6404, A6414, A6427, A6429, A6435–A6437,

414

Gabriel Mazor

A65097, A26190, A65098, A65133, A90103) range in height from 0.35 to 1.90 m, and their diameter, from 0.43 to 0.50 m. Light Yellow Marble Column Shafts The valvae regiae second floor had four light yellow marble column shafts, with a height of 5.72–5.92 m, of which parts of at least three were preserved. These include two upper sections (A6389, Fig. 9.27:1; A6425), the upper diameter of which is 0.71 m, and three lower sections (A6392, A6416, A6421), the lower diameters of which are 0.80–0.82 m. Thirteen mid-shaft segments of various heights (A6391, A6393–A6396, A6417–A6420, A6423, A6621, A6622, A70124) were preserved, their diameter ranging between 0.69 and 0.74 m. Light Gray Marble Column Shafts Segments of light gray marble column shafts of the scaenae frons second and third floors were found broken, and no complete shaft was preserved. Fourteen segments of the second floor (A6323, A6327, A6329,

A6341, A6344, A6345, A6347, A6349, A63450, A6367, A6369, Fig. 9.27:2; A6368, Fig. 9.27:3; A6695, A40645) range in diameter from 0.51 to 0.59 m, and their height varies. Eighteen segments of the third floor (A44, A6303, A6305–A6307, A6321, 06322, A6324–A6326, A6328, A6342, A6343, A6348, A6690, A6692–A6694) range in diameter from 0.46 to 0.53 m. Green Cipollino Column Shafts Sections of green cipollino column shafts seem to reach a height of c. 3.80 m. One upper section (A6428), 1.54 m high, has a 0.47 m diameter, and one lower section (A6281) has a height of 0.90–1.40 m and a diameter of 0.55 m (Fig. 9.27:4, 5). Six mid-sections, some just fragments (A6280, A6283, A6300–A6302, A6304, A6691) have a height of 0.58–1.33 m and their diameter is 0.46–0.49 m. All cipollino column shafts seem to fit the order composition of the scaenae frons third floor, where they alternated with gray granite and light gray marble columns. A number of green cipollino column shafts were found by the IAHU expedition next to the imperial altar, to which they belonged. Marble Capitals

A6389

A6428

A6369

0.71

0.51

0.47

0.63

0.50

0.42

1.05 0.54

0.67

1.54

2

2.51

0.45

A6368

0.69

4

0.55 0.71

1

1.44

A6281 0.47

0.57

0.90

0.54 0.60

3

0.55

5

Fig. 9.27. Severan Theater: (1) marble column shafts of the valvae regiae columnar facade second floor; (2, 3) light gray column shafts of the scaenae frons second floor; and (4, 5) cipollino column shafts of the scaenae frons third floor.

Over 75 light gray marble capitals of the Corinthian order were revealed, a considerable part of the 104 capitals that adorned the three-story-high scaenae frons and two-story valvae regiae facade. Of these, 41 were found by Applebaum in the theater, while the rest were added during the IAA excavations of the civic center. About 30 additional examples were revealed in other complexes excavated by the IAHU expedition. Some 10 of these were of a considerable size, 0.80–0.90 m high and 0.66 m in diameter, belonging to the order composition of the imperial altar that presumably had 12 capitals of this size. The others were not recorded or analyzed by the IAHU expedition, and it is reasonable to assume that they originally belonged to the Severan Theater. Thus, a total of about 95 capitals comprises 91% of the original 104. Of the capitals revealed by Applebaum, about 31 were analyzed by Fischer from the point of view of the development of the Corinthian capital in the region (Fischer 1979; 1990). At that time, the theater was not yet fully excavated by the IAA and the earlier excavation results had not been analyzed, therefore its stratigraphy and architectural analysis were not dealt with in Fischer’s work. During the recent IAA

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

excavations, hundreds of limestone and many marble Corinthian capitals were discovered, significantly increasing the number of capitals that were revealed by Applebaum and researched by Fischer, and expanding our knowledge of the local production of limestone Corinthian capitals at Nysa-Scythopolis during the second to third centuries CE. Although Fischer’s work is still very relevant, the accumulated data now changes some of its conclusions. In Fischer’s work, the marble capitals from the site were analyzed within a larger assemblage of capitals from various sites in Israel, such as Caesarea, Ashqelon, Hippos and Tiberias, and sorted into a number of types that will be referred to in the following analysis. The original scaenae frons of Stratum 12 had 104 marble capitals of the Corinthian order. Of these, eight belonged to the valvae regiae facade, four on the first floor and four on the second, all of them made of light yellow marble and large in size, slightly diminishing in size between the first and second floors. The remaining 96 light gray marble capitals belonged to the three floors of the scaenae frons, 32 capitals each, diminishing in size upward. In the late fourth century CE, as a result of the earthquake of 363 CE (Stratum 11), the scaenae frons was reduced in height to two floors and the total number of capitals was reduced by 32. In the early sixth century CE, during the final renovation stage of the theater (Stratum 9), the scaenae frons was again reduced in height, this time to a single floor and another 32 capitals of the second floor and four of the valvae regiae second floor were removed. This reduction process resulted in the removal of many marble capitals from the theater and their secondary use as spolia in various complexes of the civic center. Valvae Regiae Capitals In the center of the scaenae frons, flanking the entrances of the valvae regiae, a two-story-high facade of the Corinthian order was erected, whose overall height matched that of the three-story-high scaenae frons facade. The central columnar composition consisted of eight columns, with shafts of red granite in the first floor and light yellow marble in the second. Eight capitals of light yellow marble of two size groups adorned the columns, of which seven complete and fragmentary capitals are accounted for, four from the first floor and three from the second.

415

First Floor Capital A6183 (Fig. 9.28:1) Dimensions: H 1.07 m, D 0.73 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.35 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.61 m, calathus: H 0.89 m (rim 3 cm), abacus: H 0.15 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital This light yellow marble capital is relatively high and its components are well spaced and balanced, while the calathus is clearly visible in its upper part. The calathus is smoothly carved and has a strong, wellemphasized and out-folded rim. The lower-range leaves are well spaced and separated as they rise from under the capital’s bottom. Midribs are marked by two deeply cut grooves that run halfway down, while lobe ribs curve in a bow shape all the way to the bottom. The mid-lobe has five tips with a v-shaped groove that do not meet. The upper-range leaves rise high between the separated lower-range leaves. They originate in a well-carved triangular leaf that grows from the calathus between the mid-lobes of the lower-range leaves. The midrib of the upper-range leaves is marked by two deep parallel grooves that run down to the triangular source leaf. Lobe ribs are deeply grooved in a bow shape to halfway down. The mid-lobe has five long, pointed tips, the upper tips longer than the rest, and they bend horizontally and almost meet. As they lean over the other tips, elongated eyelets are formed. The pointed tips have deep v-shaped grooves. Although the acanthus leaf is well carved in its details, it is not separated from its background and there is little shade effect. The cauliculus emerges from behind and over the long, upper tips of the upper-range leaves’ mid-lobes. It has a wide v-shape and a beveled cauliculus rim. The calyx is high (0.22 m) and centered, and its leaves create an inner, elongated eyelet. The inner leaves curve around a laurel-shaped central leaf that is high (0.17 m) and has a central, vertical ridge. Its upper, broken part seems to separate into two leaves. The strong helixes spring out from the calyx and separate above it (the volutes are broken). They are high (0.18 m) and upright, then curve gently in an airy spiral under the calathus rim. They are carved in high relief, with the deep calathus at the back, and have concave faces that do not meet. Between them the worn remains of a winding stem are preserved. The calathus’ folded rim is emphasized, wide and projects outward. The plain abacus has the standard profiles of a scotia, fillet and torus.

416

Gabriel Mazor

A6183

1.07

0.73

1 A6185

0.81

0.60

2

Fig. 9.28. Severan Theater: valvae regiae, Corinthian capitals of the columnar facade, first and second floors.

Capital A6182+A6623 Dimensions: H 1.09 m, D 0.70 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.34 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.58 m, calathus: H 0.94 m, abacus: H 0.15 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital One of the lower-range leaves and the upper-range midlobe’s long, horizontal tips are preserved, and are the

same as in the previous capital. The midrib is marked by deep grooves, and bow-shaped lobe ribs run parallel to the midrib down to the bottom. Upper-range leaves spring from the same triangular source leaf, visible between the well-separated, lower-range leaves. Over the mid-lobe’s long horizontal tips of the upper-range leaves, the remains of the triangular cauliculus can be seen. In the upper part of the capital, fragmentary

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

remains of the centered calyx are preserved with a central leaf and an upward-winding stem. The helixes rise and curve in an airy spiral under the strongly folded calathus rim, and they do not meet. Capital A6179+A6217 Dimensions: H 1.09 m, D 0.76 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.36 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.55 m, calathus: H 0.95 m, abacus: H 0.14 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital The lower-range leaves are well separated and their midribs are marked by deep grooves. The lobes and tips are broken. In the upper-range leaves, the lobe ribs are marked by deeply cut grooves that spring from the broad face of the calathus between the widely spaced, lower-range leaves. The horizontal upper tips of the mid-lobes are better preserved. They are long, pointed and deeply grooved into a v-shape. They spread over the lower tips of the mid-lobe and create triangular eyelets. The carving of the acanthus leaves over the calathus resembles that of A6183 (above). In the upper part of the capital, the calathus is clearly visible, as every component is centered and well separated. The calathus is smoothly carved and its strongly folded rim is 2 cm high. The cauliculus is broken and so is part of the calyx, whose leaves are centered and create an inner, elongated eyelet. The inner leaves curve in a bow shape and connect to a schematic, palmetteshaped central leaf. The helixes curve in a round, airy spiral under the calathus rim, they are well separated and concave in shape due to a deep channel. Between them, a thin stem winds upward and runs under the calathus lip to join the abacus flower, which does not cover the entire height of the abacus. The abacus has the standard profiles of a scotia fillet and torus. Capital A6180 Dimensions: D 0.76 m; calathus (rim 3 cm) This is the upper part of a capital, the calathus of which is smoothly carved and clearly visible within the well-separated components. The helixes are high, centered, and have an inner, elongated eyelet. Their inner leaves curve over a central broken leaf, from which springs a thin, winding stem that starts with a strong rectangular calyx. The stem runs between the well-separated helixes over the calathus rim and joins the abacus flower. The helixes wind in a high, airy spiral and they do not meet. The abacus flower spreads

417

in both directions and covers almost the entire abacus. The abacus has the standard profiles of a scotia fillet and torus. Second Floor Capital A6185 (Fig. 9.28:2) Dimensions: H 0.81 m, D 0.60 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.31 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.46 m, calathus: H 0.66 m, abacus: H 0.16 m Proportions: H:D 1:075; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/5 of capital The calathus, partly visible in the upper part of the capital, is smooth and well carved and has a strongly out-folded rim, 4 cm high. The lower-range leaves spring in a curving line from beneath the capital, and are centered and well separated. The midrib is marked by two deep grooves that run all the way to the bottom of the capital. The lobe ribs have a bow shape and the lower lobe ribs run down to the bottom. The lobes have five pointed tips with a concave, v-shaped surface, and they do not meet. The upper-range leaves grow from the crude surface. The midribs spring from a triangular source leaf and are deeply marked by two parallel grooves all the way to the bottom. The lobe ribs are marked part way down with a bow-shaped groove. The lobes have four pointed, v-shaped tips. The lower tips of the lower lobe meet crudely, and above them the lower tips of the mid-lobe run horizontally, creating an open, geometric space. Although the acanthus leaves are deeply carved in high relief creating a strong threedimensional effect, they are hardly cut from behind and strongly attached to the crude background of the capital. The short, triangular cauliculus springs from above and behind the crude tips of the upper range of the lower lobe. It is divided by a vertical line and has a narrow rim. The calyx is short and wide and rises from within the cauliculus, its tips meeting to create an elongated eyelet. The inner leaves of the cauliculus curve inward, over the upper-range leaf, supporting the helixes, while the outer leaves support the volutes. The cauliculus leaves are carved in high relief and have a flat surface. The helixes and volutes spring from the calyx and separate above it. The well-spaced helixes curve in a flat, open spiral under the calathus lip, and their ends rest within the v-shaped inner leaves of the concave calyx. The volutes curve in the same flat manner under the abacus. The abacus has the standard profiles and carries a heavy, protruding, four-petaled flower.

418

Gabriel Mazor

Capital A6184 Dimensions: H 0.81 m, D 0.60 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.63 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital The lower-range leaves spring from a crude ring at the bottom. The midrib is marked by two deep grooves down to halfway, while the bow-shaped lobe ribs of the mid-lobe continue all the way to the bottom. The upper-range leaves spring from a crude, triangular source leaf that grows from the bottom between lower, well-separated leaves. Their midribs are marked by two parallel grooves that run all the way to the triangular source leaf. The mid-lobe has five pointed, v-shaped tips. The cauliculus is high, triangular in shape and has no rim. The calyx springs outward and spreads open, its leaves meeting to create an elongated eyelet, while its inner leaves curve over the upper-range leaves and do not touch. The helixes and volutes resemble those of the previous capital, as does the abacus, which is somewhat more delicate. The heavy abacus flower is a schematically carved, multi-petaled blossom that is wind-blown clockwise. Capital A6181 Dimensions: H 0.81 m, D 0.61 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.30 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.50 m, calathus: H 0.66 m (rim 3 cm), abacus: H 0.15 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 5/6 of calathus, abacus 1/5 of capital The lower- and upper-range leaves resemble those of the previous capital in most details. There is hardly any cauliculus as it merges with the calyx and the background. The calyx is wide and carved without details or depth, although its inner, elongated eyelet is clear. The volutes are mostly broken and the helixes resemble those of the previous capitals. A thin stem winds upward, over the calathus rim toward the wide, heavy, poorly preserved abacus flower. Discussion of Valvae Regiae Capitals All seven capitals of the valvae regiae facade, of both floors, were carved of light yellow marble. This kind of marble is uncommon at the site, and was used only for the capitals of the valvae regiae and its second-story column shafts. The capitals form two homogenous groups that differ in type and size. The four capitals of

the first floor were classified by Fischer as Type V/Cb, and those of the second floor as Type I/Aa (Fischer 1979:166–168, 203–204, 231–234, Figs. 52, 53, 200, 203, 204; 1990:40, 50, Figs. 43, 44, 174–179). Fischer’s classification of the marble capitals differentiates types by the carving of their lower- and upper-range leaves, and the handling of the acanthus leaf (Types I–VII) and subtypes by the detailed inner components of the upper part (Subtypes A–E:a–c; Fischer 1979:151–165; 1990:37–40). Although these types are generally dated throughout the second century CE, Fischer (1990:48) points to the possible coexistence of some types and subtypes. Type I capitals are dated by Fischer to the early second century CE, and those of Type V to the Severan period (Fischer 1979:258–259). Type V capitals are not considered as an evolutionary outcome of Types I–IV, as Fischer observed no linear development from Type I to Type IV, and under certain circumstances two different types of capitals appear in the same monument as the artists participating in the project were probably trained in different workshops and were influenced by differing trends. As for the inner components, the lower part of Type I capitals, for instance, bears a considerable resemblance to Type II, while the upper part presents characteristic components that are common in almost all the subtypes (A–E:a–c). Therefore, analysis of capitals must focus mainly on the overall assemblage of the capital’s inner components, not just the leaves, and thus a comprehensive dating may be achieved. The lower- and upper-range leaves of all the valvae regiae capitals on first floor are well separated and attached to the calathus as an upper covering. Although carved in high relief, with their upper part curving strongly outward, they are not deeply carved from behind and not separated from their background, thus there is little effect of light and shade. The midribs protrude strongly, while the lobe tips turn diagonally toward the calathus. This distinct tectonic nature of the calathus and the pattern of its covering acanthus leaves may have originated in the schools of Pergamon and Ephesus in Asia Minor, which were active from the reign of Trajan. These schools strongly influenced the production of Corinthian capitals throughout Asia Minor (Heilmeyer 1970:90–91), and in the early second century CE their influence reached Baalbek and Syria (Fischer 1990:40, Type I). The upper-range leaves spring from a triangular source leaf in the lower part of the calathus at the level of the mid-lobe and between

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

the lower-range leaves. This is a feature unique to the Roman East, where it is found in only some of the marble capitals of the theater at Nysa-Scythopolis (cf. Fischer’s Type I/Aa, 1979:166, Fig. 53; 1990:40, Fig. 44). In Asia Minor, this feature was observed in the pilaster capital of Basilica E1 at Sagalassos, dated to the last years of the reign of Hadrian and the early years of Antoninus Pius (Vandeput 1997:172–173, Pls. 36.4, 37.1). In all the valvae regiae capitals, the acanthus leaves are strongly depicted and each of their components is separately carved with deep grooves and eyelets. The lobes have five long, pointed tips deeply grooved into a v-shaped surface. They are well spread, curve strongly, and as they are well spaced they do not touch. The short, crude, triangular-shaped cauliculus resembles that of Fischer’s Type I/Aa (1990:40), dated to the second half of the second century CE, and is found on many of the limestone capitals at the site. In Asia Minor, it is present on the capitals of the Agora at Smyrna, dated to 178 CE, and those of the Tholos along the Magnesian Road at Ephesus, dated to the end of the second century CE (Naumann and Kantar 1950: Pl. 28a; Koenigs and Radt 1979:347–348, Pl. 121:1–2). The calyxes are high, detailed, slightly turned and they create an inner, elongated eyelet (Fischer’s Type I/Aa, 1990:40). This type is characterized by a central, upper leaf, schematically depicted over the upper-range leaves, which supports the calyxes’ inner curving leaves. Unlike the central leaf of the capital from Basilica E1 at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997:172, Pls. 36.4, 37.1), which has several plain lobes, in our case the leaf is depicted as a schematic, tongue-shaped leaf. The upper part of the capital is high, airy and well balanced in contrast to the lower- and upper-range leaves on the one hand, and the somewhat heavy abacus on the other. The capital’s inner proportions are relatively close to those recommended by Vitruvius, which were mainly theoretical but were partly applied during the Severan period (Heilmeyer 1970:41). Fischer’s (1990) Type I/Aa capitals find their best parallels at Sardis (Hirschland 1967: Pls. VI, XXXVI), Leptis Magna (Mercklin 1962: Fig. 720; BianchiBandinelli 1966: Fig. 141; Heilmeyer 1970: Pl. 33, 4), Alexandria (Michalowski 1970: Pl. 69), Rome and Ostia (Heilmeyer 1970: Pl. 31:3, 4), all from the Severan period. They were also found in the temple court at Baalbek, which was presumably completed in the second half of the second century CE (Wiegand 1921–1925 II:121, Pl. 128; Heilmeyer 1970:121, Pl. 33:3).

419

The lower- and upper-range leaves and the wellseparated acanthus leaves of the Type I/Aa capitals of the second floor resemble those of the first floor Type V/Cb in most details, with a few exceptions. The mid-lobe of the upper-range leaves has two crude tips, which, unlike those of Type V/Cb, do meet. The cauliculus that springs from the calathus is the same. The calyx is not as high and is slightly more spread out, but still creates the same elongated eyelet. The inner proportions of the capital are slightly different and the upper-range leaves cover 70% of the calathus’ height. Since the capitals of the second floor are about 0.25 m shorter than those of the first floor, their upper components are more compressed. The central upper leaf exists and the inner leaves of the calyx support the helixes. Both the helixes and volutes are not as airy and spiral as in Type V/Cb, although they are similar in carving and do not meet. As in Type V/Cb, the stem of the abacus flower is in between the helixes and volutes, and it has the same heavy abacus with the standard profiles. Fischer attributes the tectonic nature of Type V/Cb to the Pergamon-Ephesus schools of artisans in Asia Minor (Fischer 1990:40) and claims that it reflects the beginning of Imperial architectural influence in the region; the Trajaneum at Pergamon seems to represent its early prototype (Pergamon 1912–1937:31; Weigand 1924–1925:91; Strong 1953:131–133; Heilmeyer 1970:88–92; Leon 1971:236–237; Gruben 1976:434– 435). The new imperial architecture, originating in the West in the Augustan era, emerged in the Roman East on a wide scale during the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian and reached its peak in the Severan period, in which imperial baroque architectural trends attained remarkable achievements, as at Nysa-Scythopolis. The Severan marble capitals of the valvae regiae columnar facade, although differing slightly in details from each other and therefore seemingly representing two different types (I and V), are actually a single group dateable to the Severan period, in which various earlier tends are merged. The artists, familiar with the early second-century CE style of capitals of Asia Minor––the Pergamon and Ephesus schools (Type V/ Cb) and the local Hellenistic tradition (Type I/Aa)–– combined components of a traditional composed style along with new influences and trends in the late second to early third centuries CE. Variations between the capitals of the first and second floors could derive from differences in proportions or may reflect the work

420

Gabriel Mazor

of two differently influenced artisans as there is no question that the capitals of both floors were executed from imported marble of the same shipment and within the same time range.

Scaenae Frons First Floor Twenty-eight capitals and fragments of the scaenae frons first floor were found in the theater, mostly by Applebaum. They are all of light gray marble and share the same dimensions. Their height varies (0.63–0.70 m), as does their diameter (0.50–0.54 m). Although they all belong to one order and were presumably executed in the same building phase, there are variations within the group, and they can be divided into several types. As the capitals from Nysa-Scyth theater do not correspond exactly to Fischer’s types (see below), we have divided them into Types A and B to facilitate the discussion. Type A Capital A180118 (Fig. 9.29:1) Dimensions: H 0.65 m, D 0.54 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.20 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.34 m, calathus: H 0.60 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 4 cm Proportions: H:D 1:078; lower- and upper-range leaves 1/2 of calathus, abacus 1/16 of capital This well-preserved capital is finely balanced in its lower and upper ranges of acanthus leaves and the components of the calathus. These proportions are not the usual ones of 2/3 (see below), and as a result, the upper part of the capital is airy and the calathus is clearly visible in the background. These characteristics are more common on capitals dating to the early second century, rather than the far more eclectic nature of the capitals of the late second–early third centuries CE. The abacus is thinner, which further adds to the balanced and lighter appearance of the capital. The lower-range leaves are widely based on a ring, have a gentle s-shape and are well separated. Their midrib is marked by two deep grooves that run parallel to the bottom, accompanied by bow-shaped lobe ribs. The acanthus leaves are fragmented, deeply carved from behind, and their fleshy tips are v-shaped and grooved. The mid-lobe has four long, pointed tips and only the lower ones meet. The upper-range leaves spring from a coarsely carved calathus, from behind and between the lower-range leaves. The midribs are

grooved to halfway down and only incised down to the bottom, with no triangular source. The lower tips of the mid-lobe gently meet over the lower, out-folded leaves. The cauliculus is schematically rendered as a coarse, rimless column. The calyx is rich and has long, fleshy tips that meet and form elongated eyelets. The inner tips curve gently inward, high above the central leaf of the upper range, and they hold the stem of the abacus flower. The helixes and volutes separate over the calyx. The helixes are high and round, with fine, airy spirals, and they meet, while the stem winds behind the spirals. The high volutes are well preserved, with airy spirals and a central knob in between. The abacus is thin and profiled, and its flower is of the double-leaf type that spreads to both sides. Capital A6168 (Fig. 9.29:2) Dimensions: H 0.67 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.39 m, calathus: H 0.58 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 9 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital The calathus is barely visible. The lower-range leaves are well separated and spaced. They spring from a 2 cm high ring around the base of the capital, and curve upward in a gentle s-shape. The midribs are marked by two deep parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom. The lobe ribs curve in a bow shape and run, parallel to the midrib, all the way to the bottom. The mid-lobe has four short tips with deep v-shaped grooves. Only the lower lobe tips meet at the bottom of the capital. The upper lobe curves strongly outward. The upper-range leaves spring from a triangular source leaf located in the mid-lobe of the lower-range leaves, although the central mid-line runs all the way to the bottom. The midribs are marked by two parallel grooves down to the level of the upper lobe of the lower-range leaves. The background between the lower-range leaves is well carved with well smoothed, incised ridges. The mid-lobes are crudely carved with no details and their lower tips meet. A short, triangular, barely visible cauliculus springs from above and behind the mid-lobes. The calyxes are short and centered, creating elongated eyelets, and their inner leaves curve strongly over the upper-range leaves and support the helixes. A tongue-shaped schematic leaf serves as the source of the stem that winds upward over the calathus rim toward the abacus flower. The helixes and volutes separate within the calyx. The helixes are

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A180118

0.65

0.54

1 A6168

0.67

0.50

2 A6170

0.70

0.52

3

Fig. 9.29. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type A.

421

422

Gabriel Mazor

well separated and curve in a flat, airy spiral that ends with a knob. They have a wide, flat, slightly concave shape. The volutes are almost entirely broken. The abacus has the standard profiles and carries a regular, but poorly preserved flower. Capital A6170 (Fig. 9.29:3) Dimensions: H 0.70 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.24 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.39 m, calathus: H 0.58 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.12 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This capital resembles the previous one in most details. The central, tongue-shaped leaf between the inner curving leaves of the calyx is smaller and pointed, and there is no stem. The helixes are flat, airy, and curve inward in an open spiral. They are well separated and their concave face is better marked. The well-preserved volutes are strong, wide, and have a concave face. The abacus has the standard profiles, and the remains of an eight-petaled flower are visible over the entire width of the abacus. Capital A6169 (Fig. 9.30:1) Dimensions: H 0.68 m, D 0.54 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.57 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower- and upper-range leaves resemble those of the previous ones. The upper-range leaves spring from the bottom of the capital, between the well-separated lower-range leaves with no triangular source leaf, and the midrib is crudely carved down to the bottom. The calyx is not centered, as in the other examples, but spreads widely, creating elongated eyelets. The helixes are short, compressed, and create a tight spiral ending in a small round hole. They do not meet and there is no stem. The volutes are broken, but they also seem to be compressed. The abacus is broken as well. Capital A6172 (Fig. 9.30:2) Dimensions: H 0.68 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.23 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.57 m (rim 2 cm), abacus (broken) Proportions: H:D 1:073; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus The lower-range leaves are carved like those of the previous example, except for the lower tips of the lower

lobe that touch, while the rest are separated and well spaced. The upper-range leaves spring from behind the lower range at mid-height, their midribs are marked by two deeply cut, parallel grooves down to mid-height, and their lower part was left unworked. The mid-lobes were also left crude, and they meet to create a triangle. The cauliculus is somewhat higher, springing from the calathus behind the mid-lobe’s crude tips. The calyxes are spread out, forming long, deeply cut, elongated eyelets, their inner leaves curve in a gentle bow shape and do not reach down to the upper-range leaves. From between the helixes rises a straight stem. The helixes and volutes are broken, as is the abacus. Capital A6162 (Fig. 9.30:3) Dimensions: H 0.63 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.24 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.53 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves are separated and well spaced and the calathus is visible between the leaves. The execution of both the lower- and upper-range leaves is like that of the previous capital, as is the upper part, although somewhat worn and broken. The midrib of the lower-range leaves is marked by deep grooves halfway down, while the lobe ribs curve in a bow shape and are deeply marked all the way to the bottom. The mid-lobes have three tips. The separated helixes are connected by a bar. Capital A90152 Dimensions: H 0.75 m, D 0.60 m (broken and worn); lower-range leaves: H 0.31 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.45 m, calathus: H 0.64 m (rim ? cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The column-shaped cauliculi have strong rims and spring from the partly visible calathus. The inner tips of the calyx create elongated eyelets. The helixes are flat, they do not have a spiral shape, and they meet gently. The acanthus leaves are very worn, although they seem to resemble those in the previous capitals. The capital’s upper components are mostly broken. Capital A243 Lower fragment of a capital: D 0.54 m; lower-range leaves are well separated and between them, the triangular shape of an upper-range leaf can be seen.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

423

A6169

0.68

0.54

1 A6172

0.68

0.50

2 A6162

0.63

0.52

3

Fig. 9.30. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type A.

Analysis of Type A Capitals All Type A capitals of the first floor correspond to Type II/Da–b of Fischer’s classification (Fischer 1979:174– 178, 182, Figs. 68–74; 1990:41–43). Although in

general they reflect a direct continuation of Fischer’s Type I, according to Fischer they indicate a new trend that began with the marble artisans of the Island of Thasos in Asia Minor in the mid-second century CE.

424

Gabriel Mazor

The separated and well-spaced leaves characteristic of the Pergamon–Ephesus schools of the first half of the second century CE are retained, although some changes in the carving of the acanthus leaf can be seen. The upper-range leaves are marked by deep grooves down to halfway, and the rest of the leaf’s stem is left crude between the separated lower-range leaves. In one case (A6168), the source, which is a triangular leaf, is kept, while in the others it disappears entirely. Lower-range lobe tips partly cover the area, and while they do not meet, they throw the background into shade and create extra depth. The midrib, lobe ribs and the tips are deeply cut, and, as a result, the general appearance of the acanthus leaf is somewhat more segmented. The acanthus is deeply carved from behind, well separated from the background, creating a stronger light-and-shade effect. Deeply cut eyelets and lobe ribs running in various directions further emphasize this effect. The cauliculus is in the shape of a short triangle and the calyx gradually develops and spreads outward. The helixes and volutes lack space and are more compressed. The abacus is still heavy, lending a compressed feeling to the upper part of the capital. Capital A180118 is an exception, with well-balanced proportions. Type A capitals seem to be the forerunner of the Corinthian capital that soon after became the most common capital of the Roman Imperial East during the second–third centuries CE (Weigand 1914:35–91). From the Island of Thasos, they spread throughout Asia Minor (Fischer 1990:41–43, Figs. 59–63). In the Roman East, the Type A capital is found in the theaters of both Nysa-Scythopolis and Caesarea. Type B Capital A6196 (Fig. 9.31:1) Dimensions: H 0.68 m, D 0.54 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.27 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.44 m, calathus: H 0.56 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.12 m Proportions: H:D 1:075; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves are less separated and spaced in comparison to the Type A capitals, while the lower- and mid-lobe tips tend to meet. The acanthus leaf is widely based and rises in an s-shape. The midrib is marked by two deep parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom. The lobe ribs curve in a bow shape and also run to the bottom. The mid-lobe has four pointed tips, carved in a v-shape. The first two tips of the lower- and

mid-lobes gently meet, creating a triangle, a rectangle and a rhombus, one on top of the other, accompanied by elongated eyelets between the tips. The lobes and tips are deeply carved from behind in high relief, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The upper lobe leans strongly outward. The upper-range leaves spring from the calathus at mid-height from behind the mid-lobe tips of the lower-range leaves. The midrib is marked by two deep parallel grooves that do not continue down to the capital’s bottom, and the lobe ribs curve gently down to the same level. The lower lobe tips meet in a crude pattern and the mid-lobe has four tips. The cauliculus is shaped as a short triangle that springs from the calathus behind the mid-lobe tips of the upper range. The calyx is widely spread with an inner, elongated eyelet, and its inner leaves curve in over the upper-range leaves and support the helixes. The helixes and volutes separate within the calyx and are relatively compressed. The helixes turn in a flat, open spiral under the calathus lip and do not meet, while the volutes are flatly carved under the abacus, supported by the richly decorated calyx leaf. Neither have channels on their surface. The abacus is heavy and has the standard profiles. The abacus flower, a multi-petaled blossom, leans strongly outward and has no stem. Capital A70152 (Fig. 9.31:2) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.47 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.34 m, calathus: H 0.55 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This capital resembles the previous example, although the lower- and mid-lobe tips of the lower-range leaves meet more strongly. The short, triangular cauliculus has a beveled rim and the calyxes are more centered. The helixes have a shallow channel. The upper part of the capital is airy and smooth, and a well-carved calathus can be seen in the background. Capital A6160 (Fig. 9.31:3) Dimensions: H 0.65 m, D 0.51 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.27 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.55 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This capital resembles A6196 (above). The lowerrange leaves spring from a 3 cm high ring on the bottom of the capital, while the upper-range leaves rise

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6196

0.68

0.54

1

A70152

0.66

0.47

2

A6160

0.65

0.51

3

Fig. 9.31. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type B.

425

426

Gabriel Mazor

neatly from the calathus at mid-height. The cauliculus has a short column shape and the calyxes are centered. On the base of the capital are mason marks: EY A. Capital A6163 (Fig. 9.32:1) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.53 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.27 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.55 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The design resembles that of A6196. The lower- and mid-lobe tips of the lower-range leaves meet and form two rhombuses, a rectangle and a rhombus, one on top of the other. Both the lower- and upperrange leaves are executed in high relief, while their background is deeply carved from behind, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The upper part of the capital is compressed and therefore the helixes and volutes are flattened. The helixes are well spaced and connected by a bar. A four-petaled abacus flower leans strongly outward. On the base of the capital is a mason mark: WP Capital A6171 (Fig. 9.32:2) Dimensions: H 0.70 m, D 0.48 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.26 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.38 m, calathus: H 0.58 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.12 m Proportions: H:D 1:068; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower- and upper-range leaves are similar to those of A6196. The upper part is high and more airy and the calathus is clearly visible. The calyxes are high and centered, and the helixes are flat, creating an open spiral, and they almost meet. The heavy abacus has the standard profiles and the abacus flower is of the triplelobed leaf type, which has a short stem. On the base of the capital is a mason mark: NE Capital A6176 (Fig. 9.32:3) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.56 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.11 m Proportions: H:D 1:078; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This capital resembles A6196, although its lower- and upper-range leaves are higher and the upper part of the

capital is more compressed and less airy. The abacus flower is of the triple-lobed leaf type. Capital A6161 (Fig. 9.33:1) Dimensions: H 0.67 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.57 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:074; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital This capital resembles A6196, but its upper part is higher and airy and the calathus is more clearly visible. The calyxes are high and centered, and the helixes and volutes are compressed; the helixes meet. Capital A6166 (Fig. 9.33:2) Dimensions: H 0.64 m, D 0.51 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.26 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.54 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower- and upper-range leaves are well carved, as in A6196, and deeply cut from behind. Each lobe has long pointed tips that are well executed. The calyxes are slightly spread, while the helixes and volutes (broken) are relatively compressed. Capital A6165 (Fig. 9.33:3) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.26 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.41 m, calathus: H 0.56 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:078; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital Both the lower- and upper-range leaves are well separated from the calathus. The cauliculus has a column shape and a rim and springs from behind the touching tips of the lobes. The helixes are flat and separate within the calyx, creating an airy, open spiral, and they do not meet. Capital A6191 (Fig. 9.33:4) Dimensions: H 0.67 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.56 m (rim 2 cm), abacus (broken) Proportions: H:D 1:077; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus The lower- and upper-range leaves are executed as in all the Type B capitals. A calyx and traces of a helix indicate the same type. The rest of the capital is broken.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6163

0.66

0.53

1

A6171

0.70

0.48

2

A6176

0.66

0.52

3

Fig. 9.32. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type B.

427

428

A6161

A6166

A6161

A6166

0.67

0.64

0.67

0.64

0.50

0.51

0.50

0.51

1

2

1

2

A6165

A6191

A6165

A6191

0.66

0.67

0.66

0.67

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

3

4

3

4

Fig. 9.33. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type B.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Capital A6197 (Fig. 9.34:1) Lower part of a capital: H 0.38 m, D 0.54 m; lowerrange leaves: H 0.38 m Most of the acanthus leaves are well preserved and they indicate the type. The fragmented acanthus leaves are deeply carved, both on the surface and behind. They are well separated from the calathus and create a strong light-and-shade effect. The midribs and lobe ribs are marked by deep grooves.

429

The lobe tips, deeply channeled into a v-shape, are long, delicate and pointed, creating elongated eyelets. The tips gently touch and create a geometric pattern characteristic of Type B. Capital A80153 This is a section of a capital sliced vertically (0.58 m in height, c. 0.48 m in diameter), its lower- and upperrange leaves and helixes typical of Type B.

A6167

A6197

1 2 A6173 A6164

3 4 A6177

5

Fig. 9.34. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of first floor, Type B.

430

Gabriel Mazor

Capital A6167 (Fig. 9.34:2) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.26 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.55 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:078; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital This capital is worn and broken, but seems to conform to Type B. Capital A6164 (Fig. 9.34:3) Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.53 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.26 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.40 m, calathus: H 0.57 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 9 cm Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital Although the capital is worn, its preserved components indicate that it is Type B. Capital A6195 This is the upper part of a worn capital that seems to conform to Type B. Capital A6189 This is a fragment of a capital that conforms to Type B. Capital A6187+6192 Two possibly joining parts of a capital that conforms to Type B. Capital A6173 (Fig. 9.34:4) A broken capital, of which most of the upper part is preserved. According to its dimensions, helixes and abacus flower, it seems to conform to Type B. Capital A6177 (Fig. 9.34:5) Dimensions: H 0.68 m, D 0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.27 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.42 m, calathus: H 0.56 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.12 m Proportions: H:D 1:076; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital Most of the capital’s lower part is worn or broken, but its upper components resemble those of Type B. The helixes curve in airy spirals, meet and end in a knob. Analysis of Type B Capitals Type B capitals resemble Fischer’s Type III/Dc, which is by far the largest group of marble capitals in Fischer’s typology (58 capitals, c. 20% of all the marble capitals). Eleven of them are from Nysa-

Scythopolis, the remainder originate in Caesarea, Ashqelon and Hippos (Fischer 1979:196–200, Pls. 87–144; 1990:44–45, Figs. 76–123). this type also represents the largest group (24) in the assemblage of marble capitals from the Severan Theater. Other examples of this type made of limestone were found at the site in great numbers. It seems to have been the most common capital in this region from the reign of Marcus Aurelius to that of Septimius Severus, presumably coinciding with the peak of monumental urban architecture in the region. The general H:D proportions of 1:0.75–1:0.80, and its inner proportions grant this type a certain heaviness. The lower- and upper-range leaves cover some 3/4 of the calathus’ height, and they leave far too little space for the rest of the components, which are therefore compressed. The heavy abacus, with its standard profiles of a scotia, fillet and torus, adds to the heavy, compressed effect. The lower-range leaves spring from the bottom of the capital or its ring, and their lobe ribs are grooved all the way down. The upper-range leaves are marked halfway down, as they are set between the separated leaves of the lower range. The acanthus leaf is deeply carved and well executed in high relief on both its surface and background. The midribs and lobe ribs are marked by deep grooves. The lobes have four long, pointed tips with a deep channel that lends them a wide v-shape. They curve gently, beginning as a diagonal, then a bow shape, to an almost horizontal line, thus creating a fan effect with gentle eyelets in between. As the tips gently touch, they create triangles, rectangles and rhombuses in the lowerand mid-lobe area of the lower-range leaves (Fischer 1990:43). Although most of the capital is covered with the lower- and upper-range leaves, an airy effect is still achieved, reminiscent of the earlier Types I and II, and a forerunner of the Type IV capitals, in which a lace effect is achieved (Nauman and Kantar 1950:108). The acanthus leaf, although still representing the type common in Asia Minor, already depicts the fragmented nature that characterizes the Syrian acanthus pattern of the second century CE. Deeply cut from behind, the acanthus leaf seems to be almost separate from the calathus and, together with other elements, lends the capital a rich, strong light-and-shade effect. In these two regions, the Roman East and Asia Minor, this style of acanthus leaf derives from the Hellenistic tradition, and thus appears and flourishes in the second half of the second century CE.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

The cauliculus is short and triangular in shape, and the calyx is relatively thick. They are centered or spread out, and create the same elongated eyelets known from earlier types. The compressed helixes and volutes separate either within the calyx or immediately over it. The flattened helixes lean over the inner calyx leaves and lack the round, spiral appearance. They are usually open, end in a knob, and do not meet, and sometimes they are connected by a bar. The abacus flowers, of the usual types, either lack the stem or sometimes have a short reminder of one. Both the Roman East and Asia Minor were no doubt major centers for the development of Roman Imperial architecture, in which this particular type of capital appeared and became the most common one (Heilmeyer 1970:93). Architectural urban centers in the Roman East where large building enterprises took place, such as Baalbek, Nysa-Scythopolis, Gerasa and others, were the obvious places for artists from both regions to meet, mingle and influence each other. This type of capital appears in the second half of the second century CE in Asia Minor, the result of the wide distribution of the work of the Thasos school of art, and from there it spread to the Roman East. At Gerasa, it crowns the columns of the Temple of Artemis in the mid-second century, and sometime earlier the attached columns of the Hadrianic city gate (Kraeling 1938:77, Pls. XXVIII:b, X:b). At Bostra of mid-second century CE date, this type of capital was used in the nymphaeum (Weigand 1924–1925: Fig. 9) and at Baalbek, it is relatively well represented (Weigand 1924–1925:93, 121, Pl. 128; Heilmeyer 1970: Pl. 33.3). In Nysa-Scythopolis, this type of capital was found throughout the site; it became the most common limestone capital in the mid-second century CE complexes, and later, during the Severan period, it was executed in marble, presumably by the same artists. Second Floor Twelve capitals and fragments of others from the scaenae frons second floor were found, mostly in secondary use in the civic center. They are identified by their type, dimensions and the light gray marble from which they were executed. Type A The scaenae frons Type A capital of the second floor resembles those of the first floor, with minor differences in the upper details (see above).

431

Capital A6174 (Fig. 9.35:1) Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.41 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.20 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.32 m, calathus: H 0.46 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:073; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/5 of capital This is a Type II/Db capital in Fischer’s classification (Fischer 1990:42). The lower-range leaves spring in an s-shape from a ring at the bottom of the capital, and they are separated and well spaced. The midrib is marked by deep parallel grooves that run halfway down, while the lobe ribs curve in a bow shape and run down to the bottom. The lower lobe has four tips, three of which meet, creating crude triangles. The midlobe has four pointed, deeply carved tips that do not meet. The acanthus leaf is well executed, segmented by grooves and eyelets, deeply carved from behind, and almost separated from the calathus. The upper range-leaves spring from between the lower-range leaves, their midribs marked by parallel grooves down to the height of the mid-lobe of the lower-range leaves. Further down, the strong midrib springs from a crude source leaf. The lower lobe tips crudely meet and over them, the long, pointed lower tips of the mid-lobe lean horizontally. In between them, a short, triangular cauliculus rises from the calathus. The calyx is not high, but well spread with an inner, elongated eyelet. Its inner leaves support the helixes and meet over the upper-range leaves. The helixes and volutes are compressed for lack of space. They separate within the calyx. The helixes curve in a flat, open spiral, as do the volutes, which end in a knob. The heavy abacus has the standard profiles, and the abacus flower is broken. Type B The six Type B capitals of the scaenae frons second floor resemble those of the first floor (above). Capital A6175 (Fig. 9.35:2) Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.42 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.20 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.30 m, calathus: H 0.46 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 0.10 m Proportions: H:D 1:075; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This is a Type III/Dc capital in Fischer’s classification (Fischer 1990:45). The lower- and upper-range leaves are typical of the type, and the lobe tips of the lower range, as they meet, create a rectangle and two rhombuses one on top of the

432

Gabriel Mazor

Capital A6193 (Fig. 9.35:3) Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.45 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.30 m, calathus: H 0.49 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 7 cm Proportions: H:D 1:075; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital The lower- and upper-range leaves are less separated than in the previous example, their lower- and mid-

other. The upper mid-lobes turn horizontally and meet, hiding the springing cauliculus behind them. The calyxes are high and centered and their inner leaves support the helixes. The capital’s upper part is airy, and the calathus is clearly visible. The helixes curve in a wide, airy spiral and do not meet. The heavy abacus has the standard profiles and an abacus flower.

A6174

0.56

0.41

1

A6175

0.56

0.42

2 A6193

0.56

0.45

3

Fig. 9.35. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of second floor, (1) Type A and (2, 3) Type B.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

lobe tips meet to create a deep geometric pattern. The lower midrib is marked all the way to the bottom. The upper-range leaves are marked to halfway. The midlobes have three tips. The upper tips of the mid-lobe of the upper-range leaves are long and meet horizontally. From behind the short, triangular cauliculus spring the calyxes. The calyxes are well spread, creating an elongated eyelet. The helixes are flat and open and they meet. The abacus is slightly lighter than in the previous capital.

433

The lower-range leaves are widely based over the capital’s base, although less separated than in the previous examples. The midrib is marked by two parallel grooves down to halfway, while the lobe ribs curve in a gentle bow shape down to the bottom. The lower- and mid-lobe tips meet, creating a geometric pattern. The mid-lobes have four long, pointed tips. The acanthus leaf is wide and fan shaped, its details well carved, and its tips have a deep channel. The composition is deeply carved from behind, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The midrib of the upper-range leaves is marked by parallel grooves to the height of the mid-lobe of the lower-range leaves. The lobe ribs and the lower lobes remain crude. The long, pointed, upper tips of the mid-lobe meet horizontally and cover the short, triangular cauliculus that has a beveled rim. The calyxes are short and well spread, with an inner, elongated eyelet. The helixes and volutes separate above

Capital A80623 (Fig. 9.36:1) Dimensions: H 0.58 m, D 0.47 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.33 m, calathus: H 0.49 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital

A80623

0.58

0.47

1

A81109

0.23

0.45

2

Fig. 9.36. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of second floor, Type B.

434

Gabriel Mazor

Proportions: H:D 1:1; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This capital resembles A80623 (above).

the calyxes. The helixes curve in a flat, open spiral and meet. As they are supported by the inner leaves of the calyx, small connecting bridges were left, a characteristic feature of the Severan period. The abacus is heavy and has the standard profiles, and its flower is broken.

Type C Capital A6190 (Fig. 9.37:1) Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.40 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.33 m, calathus: H 0.45 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 9 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital This is a Type IV/Cb capital of Fischer’s classification (Fischer1990:47). The lower- and upper-range leaves are executed as those of A6193. The lobes have three tips and over the upper-range leaf a central, split tongue meets the inner leaves of the calyx. The cauliculus is slightly higher than that of A6193 and the calyxes are well spread.

Capital A81109 (Fig. 9.36:2) This is the lower part of a capital (D 0.45 m), and the lower-range leaves (H 0.23 m) seem to conform to Type B. Capital A6188 Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.45 m Most details are worn. Capital A100640 Dimensions: H 0.51 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.19 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.30 m, calathus: H 0.39 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 8 cm

A6190

A6194

1

2 A110122

0.61

0.43

3

Fig. 9.37. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of second floor, Type C.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Capital A6194 (Fig. 9.37:2) Dimensions: H 0.56 m, D 0.41 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.33 m, calathus: H 0.47 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 9 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves are widely based and fan shaped. The midribs are deeply marked to halfway and the lobe ribs curve gently in a bow shape all the way to the bottom. The midrib of the upper-range leaves is marked to halfway, to where the mid-lobe meets the tips of the lower-range leaves. The mid-lobe has three tips that meet to create a geometric pattern. The lobe tips of the upper range do not meet, and they create an open window from where the cauliculus springs. The acanthus leaves are deeply carved in all details on both the surface and behind, creating a strong lightand-shade effect. The calyxes are not high, and they spread, creating an inner, elongated eyelet. The inner leaves reach a tongue-shaped central leaf. The helixes and volutes are flat and spring from within the calyx, then curve in a wide, open spiral. The abacus is slightly less heavy than in the previous capitals, and it has the standard profiles and an abacus flower.

435

Capital A110122 (Fig. 9.37:3) Dimensions: H 0.61 m, D 0.43 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.25 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.36 m, calathus: H 0.53 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital The lower-range leaves are widely based on a ring and have a wide, fan shape. A strongly marked midrib reaches to halfway, while bow-shaped lobe ribs run all the way to the bottom ring. The mid-lobe tips are long, pointy and fleshy, and meet to create triangles. The calathus is barely visible and the upper-range leaves spring from behind it and are well separated from the background. The cauliculus rises high from between widely spaced leaves, and has a marked rim. The calyxes are high, centered, and create an elongated eyelet as they meet. The helixes and volutes are broken, and from the relatively heavy abacus only a small part remains.

1979:207–213; 1990:46–47). The lower-range leaves are widely based, less separated than Type III, and as they spread over the bottom of the capital they achieve a full fan effect. The lower- and mid-lobe tips meet and the geometric pattern of triangles, rectangles and rhombuses is completed. In the upper-range leaves, the mid-lobe tips create a rectangular window that is open on top. The Type C capitals were first produced by the artists of the island of Thasos and those of Miletos and Smyrna during the Antonine period (Nauman and Kantar 1950:108), and they crowned the porticus column shafts of the Thycheion at Olba in the mid-second century CE (Keil and Wilhelm 1931:48, 56, Figs. 75–77, 80–83; Heilmeyer 1970: Pl. 39:5, 6). The segmented nature of the acanthus leaf observed in those capitals of Asia Minor presents a strong Syrian influence. It had its origins in the Hellenistic period, and found its way from the Roman East to the major sites in Asia Minor. On the other hand, major Syrian architectural centers such as Baalbek, Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis were in turn influenced by Asia Minor’s workshops, and artistic trends from Asia Minor and Syria tended to mingle (Fischer 1990:46). Capitals of the decumanus at Palmyra resemble those of the Temple of Artemis at Gerasa (Weigand 1932: Fig. 180; Kraeling 1938: Pl. XXVIII:b), both sharing the influences of Asia Minor and the Syrian fragmented type of acanthus leaf. The capitals of the northern theater and southern tetrapilon at Gerasa, dated to the early third century CE (Welles 1938:406, Inscription 68; Kraeling 1938:105, Pl. XVIII:b) also represent this type. Other capitals of this type were found at Philadelphia and Kanawat (Fischer 1990:47), in Egypt at Alexandria (Michalowski 1970: Pls. 63, 68) and in North Africa in the theater and forum at Leptis Magna (Bianchi Bandinelli 1966: Fig. 141), all dated to the early third century CE. Marble capitals of Type C were found in the theaters of Nysa-Scythopolis and Caesarea, and one example was uncovered at Samaria, which strangely enough happens to be the only marble capital at the site––all the rest being of limestone (Fischer 1990:47, Figs. 153–164)––and most probably originated elsewhere. It is the most common capital at Nysa-Scythopolis, mostly executed in limestone, alongside the marble capitals of the theater’s scaenae frons.

Analysis of Type C Capitals Type C capitals, classified by Fischer as Type IV/ Cb, bear an acanthus leaf with a full fan shape, and he considers them to be a development of Type III (Fischer

Type D Type D capitals resemble the larger capitals of the valvae regiae first floor facade, although executed in smaller dimensions (see above).

436

Gabriel Mazor

A100650

A80626

0.50

0.58

2

0.44

1

Fig. 9.38. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of second floor, Type D.

Capital A80626 (Fig. 9.38:1) Dimensions: H 0.58 m, D 0.44; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.36 m, calathus: H 0.52 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 7 cm Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital This is a Type V/Cb capital of Fischer’ classification (Fischer 1990:49). The lower-range leaves are widely spaced and their midribs are deeply marked all the way to the bottom. The mid-lobes have four short, pointed tips that do not meet. The midrib of the upperrange leaves runs down to halfway, while the crude continuation of the leaves runs to the bottom of the capital. The mid-lobes meet under the cauliculus, which is considerably higher and has a beveled rim. The calyxes are high and centered, and create an inner, elongated eyelet. The inner leaves curve toward a central leaf and support the helixes. The central leaf has a split tongue shape at the bottom and an acanthus leaf leans out on top. The helixes and volutes separate over the calyx. The helixes, almost hidden by the leaves, have a round, airy spiral with a central knob, and do not meet. The abacus is somewhat more delicate and has the standard profiles and an abacus flower. Capital A100650 (Fig. 9.38:2) Dimensions: H 0.50 m, D (broken); lower-range leaves: H 0.17 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.30 m, calathus: H 0.42 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D ?; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital

The lower- and upper-range leaves are worn but the central, tongue-shaped leaf that supports the helixes can be seen. The calyxes are centered, springing from a strong cauliculus rim, and create an inner, elongated eyelet. The helixes are compressed and do not meet as they lean heavily over the central leaf. The abacus is heavy and adds to the compressed nature of the capitals. Capital A90641 Dimensions: H 0.52 m, D (broken); lower-range leaves: H 0.19 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.32 m, calathus: H 0.38 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 9 cm Proportions: H:D ?; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital Third Floor Nine or ten possible candidates for the third floor capitals were found, two in the IAA expedition area (A80622, A65125) and eight in that of the IAHU (A97, A574, A631, A632, A636, A665, A678, A976). Their diameter varies (0.30–0.38 m), as does their height (0.30–0.42 m). They can be divided into Types A–C. Type A Capital A678 (Fig. 9.39:1) Dimensions: H 0.23 m, D 0.29 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m This is a Type I or II capital of Fischer’ classification (Fischer 1990:40–41), of which only the lower part has survived. The lower-range leaves are well

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

437

A80622

A678

0.30

0.23

0.29

1

0.30

2 A97

A636

0.42

0.57

0.37

3 0.44

4

Fig. 9.39. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of third floor, (1) Type A and (2–4) Type B.

spread and widely based on the bottom ring. The acanthus leaf has seven tips on each side, the midlobe has four. The tips are relatively separate and the calathus is visible in the background. The midrib runs halfway down, while the lobe ribs run all the way to the bottom. The tips are fleshy and pointed with a v-shaped midrib, and they cover the entire area. Although they are not as deeply cut from behind as compared to others, they achieve a three-dimensional pattern with a strong light-and-shade effect. Most of the upper-range leaves are broken, apart from one leaf that suggests the midrib ran down to the level of the lower-range leaf’s upper lobe. The midrib is further marked by parallel incisions between the spaced lobe tips of the lower-range leaves all the way to the bottom. This Type A capital resembles those found in the valvae regiae’s second floor (see above). Type B All the Type B capitals of the scaenae frons third floor resemble those of the first and second floors of the same type (see above).

Capital A80622 (Fig. 9.39:2) Dimensions: H 0.30 m (originally c. 0.42 m high), D 0.30 m; lower-range leaves: H 6.5 cm (originally 0.18 m high), upper-range leaves: H 0.17 m (originally 0.28 m high), calathus: H 0.24 m (originally 0.35 m; rim 1 cm), abacus: H 6 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital This is a Type IIIDc capital of Fischer’s classification (Fischer 1990:47), which was presumably partly reduced in size when reused. Most of the lower-range leaves had been cut off. The midrib of the upper-range leaves runs down halfway between the upper lobes of the lower-range leaves. The lower tips meet, creating a rectangle. The cauliculi are short and strong, with no rim, and they spring from the calathus that is barely visible. The calyxes are short, centered, and create elongated eyelets, and their crude, inner leaves meet. There is hardly any space left for the capital’s upper components. The helixes do not meet and the volutes are extremely compressed under the heavy abacus. the remains of a flower with no stem can be seen over the abacus.

438

Gabriel Mazor

Capital A636 (Fig. 9.39:3) Dimensions: H 0.42 m (c. 0.50 m with abacus), D 0.37 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.20 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.32 m, calathus: H 0.42 m (rim 1 cm), abacus (broken) Proportions: H:D 1:074; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus The lower-range leaves with an s-shaped pattern are high and centered, with a fan-like shape. The midrib runs down halfway, while the lobe ribs run all the way to the bottom. The central lobe has four tips that touch, creating triangles and rhombuses. The fleshy, pointed tips have a v-shaped groove and are deeply cut, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The midrib of the upper-range leaves is deeply marked and runs halfway down, and the lower tips touch. The cauliculi are short and strong, and spring from behind the tips of the barely visible calathus. The calyxes are high and their inner leaves touch. The upper part of the capital is broken. Capital A97 (second or third floor; Fig. 9.39:4) Dimensions: H 0.57 m, D 0.44 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.23 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.36 m, calathus: H 0.50 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 6 cm Proportions: H:D 1:077; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/9 of capital The lower-range leaves are widely spread, segmented, and deeply separated from the background. The midribs are marked to halfway down, while the lobe ribs run parallel all the way down. The lobes have four tips and they meet, forming eyelets and rhombuses in a lacy pattern that creates a strong light-and-shade effect. The upper-range leaves are also widely spread, their lower tips meet, and the calathus is barely visible. There is no cauliculus, and the high, centered calyx springs from the calathus and creates an inner, elongated eyelet. The inner tips meet. The helixes and volutes spring from over the calyx. The helixes are round and airy and do not meet, while the volutes are flat and delicate. The abacus has the standard profiles and a high, flat abacus flower. This capital is well executed, balanced and delicately depicted. Type C All the Type C capitals of the scaenae frons third floor clearly resemble those of the first and second floors of the same type (see above).

Capital A665 (Fig. 9.40:1) Dimensions: H 0.51 m, D 0.37 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.32 m, calathus: H 0.42 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D 1:077; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/9 of capital This is a Type IVCb capital of Fischer’s classification (Fischer 1990:47). The lower-range leaves are centered and fan shaped. The midrib runs halfway down and the lobe ribs run all the way to the bottom. All the long, pointed tips meet, creating triangles, rhombuses and inner, elongated eyelets. The midribs of the upperrange leaves run down to the level of the upper tips of the mid-lobe of the lower range. The cauliculi are short, strong and v-shaped, and they spring from the calathus. The calyxes are centered, and where they meet, they create an inner, slot-like eyelet; their inner tips touch a central, tongue-shaped leaf. The helixes and volutes separate over the calyx, and the relatively compressed helixes curve in an airy spiral and do not meet. The abacus is heavy and has an abacus flower with no stem. Capital A574 (Fig. 9.40:2) Dimensions: H 0.53 m, D 0.36 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.34 m, calathus: H 0.46 m (rim 1.5 cm), abacus: H 5 cm Proportions: H:D 1:068; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/10 of capital Capital A976 (Fig. 9.40:3) Dimensions: H 0.52 m, D 0.40 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.35 m, calathus: H 0.44 m (rim 1.5 cm), abacus: H 6.5 cm Proportions: H:D 1:076; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital Capital A631 (Fig.9.40:4) Dimensions: H 0.42 m, D 0.32 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.195 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.30 m, calathus: H 0.40 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: H 3.5 cm Proportions: H:D 1:076; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/12 of capital Capital A632 (Fig. 9.40:5) Dimensions: H 0.51 m, D 0.36 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.24 m, upper-range leaves: H 0.34 m, calathus: H 0.44 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: H 8 cm Proportions: H:D 1:07; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

439

A574

A665

0.51

0.53

0.37

0.36

1

2

A976 A631

0.52 0.42

0.40

0.32

4

3 A632

0.51

0.36

5

Fig. 9.40. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, capitals of third floor, Type C.

The last four capitals, A574, A976, A631 and A632, are similar in dimensions, proportions and execution. Their lower-range leaves are widely spread, quite segmented, and deeply separated from the background. The midrib is deeply grooved to halfway down, while the lobe ribs run parallel all the way to the bottom. The mid-lobe has four long, pointed tips that meet, creating a geometric pattern of triangles, rhombuses and rectangles, one on top of the other, and elongated eyelets. The capitals have a lace-like coverage that creates a strong light-

and-shade effect. The upper-range leaves spring from behind the lower leaves, their midrib is marked down to halfway, their lower tips meet gently, and the calathus is barely visible. From the cauliculus, only the strong rim is visible. The calyxes are not as high as in A665, A574 and A976, but somewhat higher than in A631, although they all are quite centered and all have inner, elongated eyelets. The coarsely depicted inner leaves meet over a central leaf. In all cases apart from A631, the central leaf is tongue shaped and schematic,

440

Gabriel Mazor

while A631 has a three-tipped, calyx-shaped leaf. The helixes are flattened and do not meet. The abacus has the standard profiles and a flower over its upper part. Discussion of the Scaenae Frons Marble Capitals Of the 96 marble capitals that adorned the columnar facade of the scaenae frons in Stratum 12, 47 capitals were positively identified. Each of the scaenae frons floors had 32 columns, of which 28 capitals of the first floor, 9 of the second and 10 of the third were found, all made of marble from the quarries of Proconnesos. There are, however, significant variations among the capitals. According to Fischer’s (1990) classification, the capitals of the scaenae frons first floor were defined as either Type II/Da–b or Type III/Dc, those of the second floor as Type II/Db, III/Dc, IV/Cb or V/Cb, and those of the third floor as Type I/Aa–II/Db, III/Dc or IV/Cb. While not all the capitals of the scaenae frons were found, one can safely assume that the remaining 49, some of which are certainly among the marble capitals found by the IAHU but not fully recorded, are of the same types. The types of marble capitals of the Corinthian order were dated by Fischer as follows: Type I Hadrianic, Type II Hadrian to Antoninus Pius, Type III Antoninus Pius to Marcus Aurelius, Type IV Marcus Aurelius to Septimius Severus, and Type V Severan (Fischer 1990:55). It should be noted that the classification of the marble Corinthian capitals presented above, according to Types A, B and C, is firmly dated to the construction of the Severan Theater. Thus, while some of the types, and mainly the components, correspond to Fischer’s classifications, others do not. Most of the building enterprises constructed in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis took place during the second century CE, apart from the first-century CE monuments such as the forum, its basilica and temples, and the Southern Theater. The monumental construction of the civic center began in the Hadrianic period, presumably initiated by Hadrian’s building policy in the East and accelerated by his visit to the region. City gates, the general layout of the colonnaded streets and, as a result, the crystallization of the city plan and the construction of the caesareum (Bet She’an I:21–70) are dated to the years 130–150 CE. They were followed by further monumental enterprises during the Antonine period, a process that reached its peak in the Severan period, when the Severan Theater was built.

The city of Nysa-Scythopolis must have witnessed the establishment of large artisan workshops during the second century, in the city and in its nearby quarries that manufactured, among other architectural elements, hundreds of Corinthian capitals. By the late second and early third centuries CE, in the Severan period, NysaScythopolis had achieved a significant artistic capability in Imperial architecture. The local workshops, well practiced in the production of Corinthian capitals, were able to adapt to new substances, such as the imported marbles. The enterprises of the Severan period witnessed a rich revival of long-established local traditions expressed in the newly carved marble capitals. The handling of the deeply separated acanthus leaf, as well as its depiction over the barely exposed calathus in both the lower- and upper-range leaves, no doubt reflects local tradition; so also the degenerated form of the cauliculus and its location, springing from the calathus behind the lower adjoining tips of the upper-range leaves. The centered calyx with its elongated eyelet, with or without an additional central, schematic, tongue-shaped leaf, also has earlier origins at the site and in the region. The marble capitals from the Severan theater at NysaScythopolis, with their general proportions of height to diameter, as well as their inner proportions, have wellestablished earlier precedents in the limestone capitals produced at the site. However, the heavy abacus, as well as the generally heavy appearance of the marble capitals, seems to be a new feature introduced to the region in the Severan period. In most of the marble capitals, apart from the tall capitals of the valvae regiae, the lower- and upper-range leaves left insufficient space for the upper components. The helixes and volutes are not carved in round airy spirals, but are relatively flat and compressed. As a result, the upper part of the capital seems to be compressed and unbalanced, which significantly adds to the sense of heaviness. In all other respects, the marble Corinthian capitals of the scaenae frons represent the Severan-period revival, which was no doubt based on the rich tradition of local production of capitals in the city established during the previous fifty years. The capitals of the scaenae frons bear witness to the unique and richly decorated baroque-oriented style of architectural decor developed in the Severan period. In some of their ornamented components and their composition, these capitals represent a vivid renaissance of Augustan and Trajanic to Hadrianic neoclassicism, along with a strong Flavian illusionism (Blanckenhagen

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

1940:90–91; Bianchi-Bandinelli 1966:179, 184, 257– 260), the origins of which may be traced to Asia Minor. However, deeply rooted regional Hellenistic traditions that developed in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire, mainly the fragmented Syrian type of acanthus leaf, the capital’s inner proportions, and the patterns of some components, merged into the Corinthian capital of the Severan period, as seen in the Nysa-Scythopolis scaenae frons (Ward-Perkins 1948:64–71). Architrave-Friezes About 46 complete marble architrave-frieze elements and over 50 parts of others were found in the theater, most of them by Applebaum and some by the IAA expedition, the majority of them scattered over the pulpitum and orchestra in the collapse layer from the 749 CE earthquake. They apparently represent the scaenae frons of the theater in its latest stage (Stratum 9), when it was reconstructed in the early sixth century CE with a single floor. Although this was the second reconstruction (the first took place in the late fourth to early fifth centuries CE, in Stratum 11), and a considerable period of time after its original construction in the late second to early third centuries CE (Stratum 12), the Stratum 9 restoration reused all the original architrave-frieze elements. As the scaenae frons was partly damaged by the earthquake of 363 CE, some adjustments had been made at that time, and joining with iron bars was required, as evidenced by secondary carving and new iron-bar joints, although most of the elements were reused in their original setting. The scaenae frons of the Severan Theater is of the western curvilinear type, with a columnar facade that follows the contours of its three recesses (two rectangular and one semicircular exedrae) and projects over the podium that flanks its five entrances: the valvae regiae, hospitalia and western and eastern itinera versurarum. The entablature of the scaenae frons consists of architrave-frieze and cornice elements that differ in shape, which establishes their location within the composition. Ornamented profiles were found on various faces of each entablature element in accordance with its specific location. Architravefrieze elements were originally cut at both ends or at the back to fit over capitals, and these original cuttings can be distinguished from the secondary carving that was required by later adjustments and sometimes

441

relocation. Architrave-frieze elements are presented below according to their location in the composition (see Figs. 7.7, 7.8). The Scaenae Frons West-Side Architrave-Friezes The scaenae frons entablature of the Corinthian order consists of two marble blocks, the lower comprising a joint architrave-frieze carved in a single block, while the upper block carries the cornice. Architravefrieze elements are c. 0.94 m high––comprising the architrave c. 0.58 m high and the frieze c. 0.36 m high. The three fasciae of the architrave (I, II, III) are separated by the canonical astragals and crowned with an ovolo, an anthemion and a taenia. The frieze is decorated with a convex, ornamented register of acanthus scrolls (‘peopled scrolls’) inhabited mainly by animals and eroses (putti). The scaenae frons facade represents a complete composition, although the scenes in the frieze register are not continuous, each element depicting a hunting narrative that is not continued in the next element. The frieze elements are analyzed here as a sequence from west to east (see Figs. 7.7, 7.8). Architrave-Frieze A6001 (Fig. 9.41) General dimensions: L 1.88 m, H 0.94 m, W 0.73 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.12, 0.73, 1.33 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 17 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.19, 0.73, 1.15 m, H 0.35 m The architrave profiles continue around the corners of the element and cover the three decorated sides. Small differences in execution may indicate that several artisans worked on the same block. The architrave is divided into three fasciae by astragals of elongated beads with round edges and pairs of globular, or occasionally rhomboid reels, deeply cut between each pair. The astragal terminates at both ends in an uncut, elongated bead that may be indicative of the carving process, in which the long beads were carved first along the entire length of the astragal, then divided by cutting the bead to its desired length and carving its separating reels. The fasciae were smoothed and slightly trimmed with a toothed chisel and not polished. The architrave is crowned with an ovolo, an anthemion and a taenia. The ovolo has globular ‘eggs’ slightly compressed at

442

Gabriel Mazor

A6001

0.94

1.88

0.73

Fig. 9.41. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6001.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

the top, with widely separated ‘shells’ that touch the adjoining tongues at their center. The intermediate members are simply globular or rhomboid shaped, rather than tongue or leaf shaped as expected of the pattern. The wide separation between the main components and the schematic intermediate members presents a pattern in which the unity of the canonical components is almost entirely lost to stylization. The anthemion consists of triple-tipped acanthus leaves that originate from within well-spaced, alternating pairs of up- and down-turned leaves joined together by a rounded linking bar. As the leaves interlace on the top and bottom, they create a continuous winding, trailing pattern. The leaves are stylized, fleshy and pointed, occasionally with slightly grooved midribs, while the background is deeply cut, creating a naturalistic light-and-shade effect. The ovolo and anthemion end abruptly with a flat strip at the end of the architrave, which was inserted into the wall and therefore left undecorated. A 5 cm taenia separates the architrave from the convex frieze decorated with inhabited acanthus scrolls. In the upper part of the frieze, an 0.80 m long, 6 cm deep step was cut, or more likely straightened after being broken, to fit a matching plinth, and the edge of the step is rounded. As a result, the inhabitedscroll motif on the facade and both sides is missing its upper part. The frieze composition on both the left and right sides is similar, consisting of a single elliptical, inhabited scroll with an animal leaping out toward the console’s facade where a figure appears in a central medallion, all framed by upright acanthus leaves. On the left side, the pattern begins with a complete, upright, slightly diagonal acanthus leaf that is widely based on the bottom. Its bow-shaped midrib, defined by two parallel grooves, leans to the right. It has six lobes, each with three pointed or rounded fleshy tips and a bow-shaped central midrib marked by a single groove, while its upper right tip folds forward. The tips of the lobe meet to create elongated eyelets. The acanthus leaf is deeply carved from behind on the convex background, lending it a three-dimensional effect. On the right end, another complete acanthus leaf of the same type engulfs the corner with half a leaf on each side. Its upper part is missing and only two lobes with three pointed tips are preserved, carved in the same technique. Both leaves create a frame for the inner scroll motif. The scroll, elliptical in shape, is only preserved in its lower two thirds, while its upper

443

enclosing leaf was cut in the later renovation stage (Stratum 11 or 9). One acanthus leaf springs from the bottom of the frieze, to the right of the left framing leaf. It curves up clockwise, in a flat bow-shape, ending in a fleshy, triple-tipped lobe. A second leaf springs from behind and separates into two. Its right, shorter segment has two tips that curve over the bottom, while its longer left segment rests gently on the bottom and encloses the elliptical scroll. Its three up-turned lobes each have three pointed tips and their midribs are marked by a single groove. Within the scroll is a bow-shaped offshoot with a four-petal blossom from which the forequarters of a hound spring to the right. The hound, naturalistically rendered, leaps out with forelegs and head outstretched, but does not extend outside of the scroll. The rounded body is muscled with grooved skin creases on its back, and on the outstretched neck are possible traces of a collar. The body was naturalistically carved with a toothed chisel, the combing indicating muscles, body curves and hair. The nose is raised, the jaw partly open and the tongue is lolling out. The arrow-shaped eye is deeply carved with no pupil, its lower line and the open jaw defining the square nose. The animal probably had upright ears that were cut off with the upper part of the body. The bony forelegs are stretched forward, and the right leg emerging from the shoulder muscle is depicted in high relief, while the left is more flatly rendered in the background, but still well carved. The bony paws have three digits. The right side of this element is partly broken. The two framing acanthus leaves are the same as the leaves on the left side. The upper lobe of the right-hand leaf that is folded forward is better preserved, with its three rounded tips gently resting on the left lobe, and it has a deeply cut, bow-shaped midrib. The acanthus leaf that encircles the scroll springs from behind the upper third of the right-hand framing leaf, and curves counterclockwise in an elliptical form. It is more naturalistically rendered than the one depicted on the left side. From the first two lobes of the leaf springs a triple-lobed leaf. As the elliptical scroll leaf curves down, a three-tipped lobe turns in and another turns out as space fillers. The lower leaf rests gently on the bottom and ends with two upright, triple-tipped lobes, the first curving around the scroll and the second as a space filler. Although the same motif and technique were used on both scrolls, differences in composition planning, rendering of the acanthus leaf, and the

444

Gabriel Mazor

execution technique are detectable, presumably indicating different artisans. From a three-petal blossom with no stem, carved with small, inner connecting bridges, an animal half emerges from the scroll, springing to the left, apparently a galloping horse. The rounded body, high neck and outstretched head are carved in high relief in a continuous, curving line, and skin and muscles are clearly rendered. The flattened-back ear is worn, but its imprint is clear. A rounded eye is defined by two deep grooves, and the nose and mouth are rounded and schematically rendered. Bony forelegs stretch forward, the left in high relief, partly broken, the right well carved in the background. The hoofs are schematic with no details. The console facade is framed by well-executed but poorly preserved half acanthus leaves that engulf the corners. In the center, framed by the acanthus leaves, a worn Medusa head appears en face. The

schematic, oval-shaped face, strongly outlined by bordering grooves, has a wrinkled forehead and a short, broad neck. The deep, flat, almond-shaped eyes are wider where they join the nose bridge, with pointed corners at the temples. The wide, fleshy nose has creases on both sides and the rounded cheeks are well carved. The closed mouth with just the lower lip depicted is flatly carved and worn, and the strong, rounded chin is not naturalistic. Two crescentshaped horns spring out from the level of the ears, while two long coils of hair hang schematically on either side and separate at the bottom, presumably depicting intertwining curls and snakes, and there is a central curl on the forehead. In comparison to the rendering of the acanthus leaves and the leaping animals on the sides of the frieze, the Medusa head is far less naturalistic, presumably executed by an artisan inexperienced in the sculpting of the human face in frontal pose.

A6017

0.92

1.54

Fig. 9.42. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze wedge block A6017.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Architrave-Frieze A6017 (Fig. 9.42) General dimensions: L 1.54 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.72 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.83 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 2.5 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 10 cm Soffit: H 0.79 m Frieze dimensions: L 0.65 m, H 0.34 m This architrave-frieze element reflects the condition in which it arrived from the quarry, with its architrave completely carved, presumably in the quarry, and its frieze unworked. It was apparently used in the original construction stage as a wedge block and later integrated into the scaenae frons facade during the Roman IV restoration in Stratum 11. It was diagonally cut on both ends in order to join with the elements on either side, and it was anchored to them with iron bars that are observed at three points on its upper surface. It stands to reason that in Stratum 11, or later in Stratum 9, there were no craftsmen capable of carving the frieze of the replaced element, and it was therefore left crude. The architrave profiles on the other hand were completed, and judging by their style and execution, they fit the pattern of the original composition of Stratum 12. This indicates that these two features were carved by different artists, the first in the quarry and the second at the site. The decorative architrave profiles of the astragal, ovolo and anthemion resemble in design and method of execution those of A6001. The left end was cut at a later date and based on the soffit that was cut on the right end, it seems that it was cut on that side as well. The soffit is convex and decorated with a continuous band of triple-petal blossoms, each springing from within the preceding blossom. It is bordered by a frame of the crescent-ended, Miletian type. Its carving is deep and precisely executed in high relief. On the lower surface of this element, the remains of two additional connecting iron bars were observed. Architrave-Frieze A6031 (Fig. 9.43) General dimensions: L 2.68 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.70 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.25, 0.25 m, H 0.57 cm Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 2.5 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Soffit: L 1.25 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.10, 0.40 m, H 0.35 m

445

The architrave profiles continued along the frieze around the element’s left corner. The astragal and ovolo were rendered as in A6001. The anthemion is of the type with alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves and a linking bar. The upright leaves have two small, upper tips, and three to four wider pointed tips below with incised ribs. As they spread out in both directions in a wide, s-shaped pattern and touch the others, a trailing effect is achieved. The down-turned leaves have two outspread tips that act as space fillers. The pattern is carved in high relief and cut deeply from behind, granting a rich but delicate, naturalistic, threedimensional effect. On the right end, the element is diagonally cut in order to create an inner corner with the next element (A6030). All the architrave profiles continue around the left corner of the element and are depicted on its narrow left face as well. On the left end, where it joins the next element (A6017), the profiles are cut in a straight vertical line. The soffit in the center of the architrave is decorated with a stylized trailing-branch motif set within a Miletian-type frame. It begins at the center with two antithetic, out-turned, spiral-shaped branches connected by an elongated reel. The fleshy, leafy branch winds up and down, each spiral ending with an inner knob. The rendering of the motif on the convex surface in high relief lends it a naturalistic, three-dimensional effect. On both sides, the remains of iron connecting rods are observed. Similar remains of iron connecting rods exist on the upper surface with the mason mark BI in the center. All iron bars are part of the restoration stage, as they were necessary after the adjustments and recutting of the elements. The narrow left side of the frieze is decorated with two acanthus leaves that engulf the corners. On the left end is half a leaf with three lobes, each lobe with three to four tips. The other half of the leaf was not executed as there is a joint here with the next frieze element (A6017). On the right end, two lower lobes each have three tips preserved. The tips are fleshy, long and pointed, their midrib marked by a ridge, and the lower tips of the two leaves meet to create two triangles one on top of the other. Between the upper meeting tips, elongated eyelets are created. The field between the two acanthus leaves was left plain and unworked. The long frieze begins on the left with a half acanthus leaf that engulfs the left corner. Its three preserved lobes spring from the bottom, and they have three to

446

Gabriel Mazor

A6031

0.92

2.68

0.70

Fig. 9.43. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6031.

four long, fleshy, pointed tips, their midribs marked by a ridge. The upper lobe was broken and just its imprint is left. Next to it, widely based on the bottom, a complete acanthus leaf rises diagonally to the right with seven lobes, each with three to four tips, executed in the same manner as the preceding leaf. The three tips of the upper lobe lean gently over the next lobe. The midrib is marked by two deep grooves. From the lower

left lobe rises another double-lobed leaf, from which a central stem curves in a bow-shape to the left with a rope pattern above it. This additional leaf fills the space in the empty field created by the diagonal position of the main acanthus leaf. On the right end, another seven-lobed acanthus leaf stands upright in a more rigid pose than the former, and its midrib is marked by two deep, parallel grooves. Its

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

three to four lobe tips are similar to the former, and so is the gently folded upper lobe that leans to the right. To the left of it rises a schematically depicted, doublelobed leaf leaning gently over the scroll in an s-shape. It springs from midair and does not integrate within the leaf pattern. The acanthus leaves on this side are more deeply carved from behind than those of the left, almost entirely disconnected from the background, and the background is much darker. The motif of the acanthus leaves on both ends, although not well balanced, creates a frame for the central motif that is well suited to the length of the frieze. Emerging from within the petaled blossoms are two animals in a heraldic pose, leaning over a kantharos. The acanthus leaf that encircles the left, oval-shaped scroll springs from low behind the complete left leaf, rising in a gentle bow shape with triple-tipped lobes on either side of its strong midrib. It then turns in an s-shape over the top of the scroll and disappears behind the back of the animal. The naturalistic rendering in high relief of the fleshy leaf clearly defines all its features. The scroll is not enclosed, but left open on its upper and right sides. The acanthus leaf reappears from the background and rests gently on the bottom, and it does not close the scroll on the left. The animal leans out to the right from a five-petal blossom connected by small bridges, as are most of the acanthus tips. On the right side of the kantharos a similar leaf rises in a rounded shape with all its tips pointing inward to form the right scroll. Its depiction is not as naturalistic as the left scroll, and its execution is somewhat sloppier. It disappears behind the animal’s back, leaving the scroll open, and it reappears at the bottom. The same type of animal in the same pose emerges to the left from a six-petal blossom. The two animals lean over a metal kantharos that has a heavy, triple-stepped base, a fluted body, a neck decorated with white dots, and presumably two handles. A triple-tipped stem winds up from inside it. Both animals seem to be either smelling or drinking. The animals are mostly broken and not easily identified. They seem to be predators of the cat family and resemble, in their muscular bodies, long necks and heavy paws, panthers or tigers. The two sides of the frieze are not balanced and display differences in rendering and artistic ability. The left side is more naturalistic and has a flowing inner movement, while the right side is considerably more rigid and schematic. Most of the pointed tips and petaled blossoms on the right side are connected by small bridges, and drill

447

holes were left at the connections of all the lobe tips, a technical feature that is not observed on the left side of the frieze. Architrave-Frieze A6030 (Fig. 9.44) General dimensions: L 2.17 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.69 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.81 m, H 0.58 m. Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 7.5 cm Soffit: L 1.45 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.90 m, H 0.35 m The astragals that separate the three fasciae, the crowning taenia, anthemion and ovolo are the same as in A6001. All the ovolo shells are connected to the intermediate rhomboid tongues by small bridges. A 6 cm high fillet ledge separates the architrave’s crowning from the frieze. The soffit comprises a garland of fleshy, alternating pairs or three laurel leaves emerging at both ends from a semicircular blossom. The pattern runs toward a centered, four-petal rosette and is set within a crescent-ended, Miletian-type frame. From the frieze-framing acanthus leaves only the right leaf is well preserved. An upright acanthus leaf with triple lobes is widely based on the bottom of the frieze and turns inward in a bow-shape. Its midrib is marked by two deep grooves, while the lobe ribs are marked by a single deep, v-shaped groove. The lobes have three to four long, pointed, fleshy tips that meet and create elongated eyelets marked by drill holes. Two additional acanthus leaves spring from mid height and interlace, creating alternating oval and round scrolls. Each leaf has an offshoot that curls down, while the main leaf, with pointed lobe tips hanging down, surrounds the first scroll. As it curves down in an s-shape toward the second scroll, a heavy lobe hangs over the interlaced leaves with another curling offshoot. A calyx-shaped, four-tipped blossom hangs down, and four fruits or seeds are suspended from it over the bottom of the frieze. The blossom curves around the bottom of the second scroll, its tips pointing inward, and turns up again in a high, interlaced knot toward the third, oval scroll and again to the fourth. In between the scrolls, triple-petal blossoms and calyxshaped leaves with three fruits or seeds hang down. The acanthus leaf that creates each scroll disappears behind the animal that inhabits the scroll, then reappears and surrounds the bottom of the scroll. Alternating animals and eroses inhabit the scrolls.

448

Gabriel Mazor

A6030

0.92

2.17

Fig. 9.44. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6030.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

In the first scroll on the right, from within a foliated, six-petal blossom springs what appears to be a stylized, relatively heavy and well-preserved lion. The heavily muscled, well-polished body half turns to the left, while its almost-square head faces forward. The face is grotesque and unnatural. It has a wide forehead, bulky eyebrows and rounded, laid-back ears. The almondshaped eyes with well-defined eyeballs and drilled pupils are deeply carved. The wide nose is partly broken and the rectangular mouth is open. The stylized mane hangs down over the side of the face. The left foreleg is partly broken but the right leg in the background is well preserved with a detailed, triple-digit paw. The scroll following to the left is inhabited by an eros in a frontal pose, his legs turned toward the right. The right leg emerges from a triple-petal blossom outside the scroll, while the left is hidden behind the acanthus scroll. His left hand holds a shield, his right throws a spear, and his loins are coarsely depicted. The relatively large head is worn, apart from the curly hairstyle that hangs on both sides, with drill holes in its pattern. The stylized eros seems to hunt the lion on the right. The third scroll to the left is inhabited by a worn animal, presumably a cow, which almost fully emerges from the scroll toward the right, while its head is turned backward. Although broken, the head still preserves its general contours and ears. The forelegs are depicted in a galloping position, while the rear legs are only hinted at. The lower belly and udders of the cow hang heavily downward. The scroll on the left is inhabited by another, presumably winged eros, in the same attacking pose as the former. The naked body is curved and muscled, and seems to be polished. He stands in a frontal pose, slightly turned to the right, while his legs turn to the left. His right leg rises from a petaled blossom inside the scroll, his left is partly hidden within the scroll. His left hand holds a shield and his right grasps a spear. The relatively large head has a worn oval face with heavy curls hanging on either side. A stylized, feather-like, grooved feature under his right hand may be a wing. The inhabited scrolls were precisely rendered in detail and deeply carved from behind, occasionally almost detached from the background, granting a strong lightand-shade effect. Animals and eroses appear in pairs that apparently represent two separate hunting scenes, rather than a connected narrative within the frieze. The figures are considerably large in relation to their scrolls

449

and their heads are exaggerated in proportion, either purposely rendered so for effect, or, more likely, the result of a less-qualified artist. Architrave-Frieze A6014+6047 (Fig. 9.45) General dimensions: L 2.36 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.73 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.24 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 4.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 17 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.25 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.20 m, H 0.35 m Two joining parts of a straight-facade architrave-frieze element with a poorly preserved, decorated, left-side corner. In a later reconstruction stage it was diagonally cut and three iron connecting rods were installed in both its upper and lower surfaces. The astragal and ovolo were rendered with the same patterns as in A6001, although the beads are somewhat more elliptical and the reels are either rhomboid or disc shaped. The anthemion is more elaborate, the pattern consisting of separate, alternating up-and down-turned acanthus leaves as in A6031, although it is more richly detailed. Pairs of upright leaves tied by linking bars comprise the pattern. Four pointed tips in a lily-shaped pattern spread in either direction in the upper part, while in the lower part a rounded stem with two flanking acanthus leaves spreads widely in a rounded fan shape in both directions. The acanthus leaves consist of three tripletipped lobes and a central incised midrib. In between are space fillers of down-turned leaves linked by a bar, each bunch consisting of four rounded, double-tipped leaves that spread in both directions, with a rounded fruit in the center. The rendering of the anthemion pattern is naturalistic and carved in three-dimensional high relief. The acanthus leaves are fleshy, broad and deeply carved from behind, creating a strong light-andshade effect. Although the pattern is not connected or interlaced as in A6001, it achieves a trailing effect that is far more elaborate, detailed and naturalistic. The soffit has a centralized, interlaced guilloche motif set within a rectangular, crescent-ended frame. The frieze is well balanced with two pairs of inhabited scrolls on either side of a central protome. The scrolls are framed by two upright, half acanthus leaves. As the left-side corner was diagonally broken, the left leaf, which engulfs the corner of the frieze, is

450

Gabriel Mazor

A6047

A6014

0.92

2.36

0.73

Fig. 9.45. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6014+A6047.

broken, and only its lower part remains (cf. A6031). The right-side leaf, which was diagonally cut in a later reconstruction stage, is partly preserved. It has four

triple-tipped lobes on its side and a forward-folded lobe on top. The tips are short, fleshy and pointed, and the midribs are marked by a shallow groove. Each pair

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

of scrolls is defined by a single winding acanthus leaf that springs from behind the upright framing half leaf at base level. The leaf then encircles the first round scroll counterclockwise, with all lobe tips pointing down, and then returns clockwise to encircle the next scroll with its lobe tips turned upward. As a result, a continuous spiral pattern is created. A double lobe with four tips hangs down between the scrolls, while from the bottom rise four triangular fruits or seeds. The left side pair of scrolls was executed with the same pattern. In the center of the frieze is a broken protome in a frontal pose, the head turned slightly to the right, as the neck wrinkles clearly indicate. Side locks are separated from the face and their preserved imprints depict grapes and leaves. Next to the side locks are what seem to be two pine cones that might indicate thyrsoi. The figure wears a hairy animal skin fastened on the left shoulder, the upper part of the skin folded to imitate the adjacent acanthus-leaf motif. The animal skin was carved with small rounded incisions to indicate hair, in the same manner as the animal in the right-side inhabited scroll. On the shoulders of the protome lie two wide bands (a leather diadem?). The arms partly disappear in the lower part of the protome. Based on the grapes and the thyrsoi, it can be assumed that the protome depicts Dionysus. The scrolls on the left side of the frieze depict a hunting scene with an animal confronted by an eros. In the left scroll, an animal leaps to the right out of a blossom. A muscled body, a short neck and a round face with one pointed ear are preserved, with no inner details. The forelegs rest upon the scroll. The strong digits of the left paw are well preserved. This animal seems to be a predator of the cat family, presumably a panther. Confronting it in the next scroll is an eros depicted in a three-quarter-turned pose, his back facing the observer. The spine line is depicted by a groove. His legs, half sunken within the scroll, turn toward the left. The left leg is bent forward and to the left, while the right is stretched backward, and the buttocks are defined. The eros is holding a shield in his left hand and the right is bent forward and hidden. A Medusa face (5 × 4 cm) is depicted on the shield in high relief and in full detail, the forehead and temples framed by curling hair or snakes. The eyes are shut, the nose is large and wide and the closed, well-defined mouth is framed by upper and lower lips and a strong chin. The scrolls on the right side of the frieze are inhabited by two confronting animals. In the left, oval scroll, a deer springs to the right from a four-petal blossom, in

451

which connecting bridges and drill holes can be seen. The head is broken, but the forelegs of a hoofed animal are clearly visible. In the right-side scroll, a horse springs to the left from a three-petal blossom, its poorly preserved head and rounded neck turned backward. The muscled body, skin and short hair are depicted by small, round cuts of a pointed chisel in the same fashion as those used for the animal skin worn by the central protome of Dionysus. The forelegs are depicted in a galloping motion; the left is broken but the right clearly depicts the hoof. The two scenes in the frieze present heraldic poses, creating an antithetic design on either side of the central protome. Architrave-Frieze A6029+6042 (Fig. 9.46) General dimensions: L 3.33 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.67 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.80 m, H 0.56 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.95 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.80 m, H 0.35 m Two joining parts of a poorly preserved architravefrieze element were readjusted in the Stratum 11 reconstruction stage, as both ends were diagonally cut. The astragal and ovolo of the architrave are the same as A6001, although their execution slightly differs. The astragal beads are more oval and the reels are narrower and disc shaped or rhomboid. The ovolo has smaller, irregular ‘eggs’ with well-separated shells and rhomboid tongues. The anthemion is worn along most of its length, although the surviving parts indicate a version of the usual separated, alternating up- and down-turned acanthus-leaf motif. The acanthus leaves originate in a double-lobed leaf joined by a linking bar, as in A6031. The leaves wind in either direction in a free design, not as systematic and repetitive as in other elements. The rendering of the acanthus leaves varies along the pattern, from naturalistic to somewhat schematic. Although carved by a freer hand, it is deep and well cut from behind, presenting a rich pattern with a strong light-and-shade effect. On the left side a palmette was inserted. The non-centered soffit is composed of a threedimensional guilloche in high relief, sunken deeply within a Miletian-type frame. The winding ornament has button-like bosses at regular intervals in the center of each guilloche motif. Three iron connecting rods

452

Gabriel Mazor

A6029

A6042

0.92

3.33

0.67

Fig. 9.46. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6029+A6042.

were found on the lower surface of the element and two on the upper. The long frieze is slightly unbalanced, displaying a relative freedom of depiction. It has a central kantharos motif flanked by three scrolls on either side. Worn and broken, the details are fragmentary and difficult to identify. Both ends of the frieze were cut, removing the typical frame of upright, half acanthus leaves it may have had. There seems to have been ample space for such on the left side, but not on the right, unless the element was originally longer. Although this is not indicated by the decorated architrave profiles, it is perhaps hinted at by the non-centralized soffit. The first scroll on the left is the best preserved, an elaborate, delicately rendered pattern. It seems to be of the spiral type of scroll motif with enclosing leaf and offshoots, although the leaf’s point of origin was cut away. The lobes of the leaf are fleshy and well rendered with a deep midrib and three long, pointed tips. Evidence of drill work is visible. Leaves are depicted in high relief, deeply cut from behind, lending the scroll a rich light-and-shade effect. In between the scrolls, the lobes of the acanthus leaf are well spread in

a harmonious pattern as space fillers. The leaf winds along the bottom and then encircles the next scroll. Worn and partly broken on top, the continuation of the leaf becomes considerably more rigid, schematic and less elaborated. The central kantharos motif seems to be integrated into the scroll pattern, as the offshoot leaves partly encircle it at the bottom. The scene on the right end is unusual and apparently lacks the framing scroll. The left scroll is inhabited by a lioness crouching and facing right, its head turned partly to the front. The muscled body and long neck are preserved, while only the imprint of the head has survived, although the upright ear and open jaw with lolling tongue are clear. The forelegs are in a resting pose, the predator’s right paw clearly depicted. The predator does not appear to be leaping in an aggressive manner, but rather crouching lazily within the scroll. The figure in the next scroll to the right seems to be a large hoofed animal in an unusual sitting pose, its upper body turned to the front. Its rear legs are apparently folded beneath, while the well-preserved forelegs stretch forward. From its head, it could be a cow or a bull. The third scroll seems

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

to be inhabited by either a large sea bird or a creature of mythological nature, which is also depicted in a strange sitting position. Its back is covered with lumps resembling a turtle shell (or wing feathers?), and its right leg has a long, duck-like foot. The upper part of the figure is entirely broken. Although all three figures turn to the right, there seems to be no relationship between them, and no hunting narrative or implied threat is observed. The three animals remain well within their separate scrolls, peaceful and detached rather than leaping out. At the center of the frieze, the familiar kantharos is depicted, although it is not of the usual type. This kantharos has a heavy base, a rounded body, a wide, upright neck and two high, partly broken handles. On either side, the worn remains of two birds in heraldic pose can be discerned, their legs standing next to the kantharos. The upper parts of both birds are completely broken and cannot be identified. On the right side of the frieze are two inhabited scrolls, in which the animals turn to the left. Within the first scroll on the right, next to the kantharos, is a comparatively small animal with a rounded body, short paws and a small outstretched head. Only a scanty imprint of the animal remains, and it may be a turtle. In the next scroll to the right crouches another small animal, its forelegs and head stretched foreword. Apart from its right leg, the animal is almost completely broken, but its imprint suggests a rabbit. The third scene on the right is not depicted in the canonical order of the frieze. Firstly, it is not contained within a scroll, and secondly, there are two animals within the scene instead of the customary one. Although considerably worn, the scene seems to depict a lion attacking another animal. The body of the lion was cut off, leaving only its head and left foreleg in a leaping pose toward the left. The outlines of the head are relatively clear and the mane on the left side of the head is preserved. The predator’s teeth seem to be deeply sunken into its prey, and its left paw is holding down the prey. The prey is crouched in the same left-ward direction, only its forepart visible as the rest is hidden by the pouncing lion. The large, heavy body is forced down over its kneeling forelegs, of which the left one with its bulky hoof is preserved. The head of the animal leans forward as the lion holds down its neck. Based on its dimensions and the hoof, it may be a bull. Over its head rises a winding stem that ends in two triplepetal blossoms running in both directions. At the top of

453

the scene, the imprint of a down-turned acanthus leaf is vaguely visible, and below the scene and on its left there is definitely no scroll. The freedom of artistic depiction is clear in the acanthus-scroll depictions and in the rest of the inhabited-scroll motifs. All the animals, apart from the right pair, were rendered within the scrolls, and none of them leaps or springs out. All the animals are posed in a heraldic pattern facing the central kantharos that is flanked by two heraldic-posed birds, an unusual addition not found in any other section of the scaenae frons frieze. The final scene on the right side of the element that presents two animals engaged in a struggle instead of the customary one, not within a scroll, is another motif not found elsewhere within the entire frieze. Although partly broken and worn, this frieze element clearly indicates a very naturalistic work with well-defined and rendered features, presumably executed by a very capable artist, who obviously did not conform to the relatively strict pre-planned conventions. Architrave-Frieze A6002 (Fig. 9.47) General dimensions: L 1.82 m, H 0.85–0.92 m, W 0.72 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.13, 0.62, 1.08 m, H 0.50 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 14.5 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.10, 0.72, 1.10 m, H 0.34 m This architrave is decorated on three sides, and all the decorated profiles continue around the corners. The astragal and ovolo are of the common types (see A6001). On the left side, the profiles end in a stepped joint with the next element. In the astragal, the left corner is marked by a rounded reel, in the ovolo by a rounded intermediate tongue. The anthemion is of the alternating up- and down-turned, trailing acanthus-leaf pattern held by linking bars. In the upper part, the long, pointed tips turn in two directions, while the lower leaves of the triple-tipped lobes wind in two directions and create the trailing effect. In between are downturned double lobes held by a linking bar that spread on the top and bottom in two long tips. The well-balanced pattern continues with fleshy leaves rendered in high relief on a deeply carved background. The right and facade sides, which carry the same ornamentation, are slightly different in rendering than the left side, and it seems that the various sides were executed by different artisans (see below).

454

Gabriel Mazor

The frieze has different scenes on its various sides. The left and right sides are similar, depicting inhabited scrolls, while the facade bears the face of Oceanus. As observed in A6001, the upper part of the frieze was cut off in a reconstruction stage, and therefore the upper part of the scrolls is missing. The left side of the frieze is framed by two poorly preserved, upright half acanthus leaves that seem to be of the same type as in A6001. The encircling leaf of the oval-shaped, inhabited scroll starts at the bottom, next to the left half leaf, with a vertical, slightly diagonal, double-lobed leaf with three pointed tips. The midribs are marked by a single groove. From between them a wide stem winds upward and was cut off with the upper part of the scroll. It then circles down with an offshoot lobe to the right as a space filler. Along the bottom, all the leaf tips turn upward. On the left side of the scroll, a thick stem winds up and has a triple-petal blossom attached to it. What seem to be the worn remains of a hound emerge out of the scroll, its head facing right,

its tongue lolling out and its forelegs resting on the foliated scroll. On the right side of the frieze, the framing leaves are better preserved, although the animal in the scroll is broken. Two upright, half acanthus leaves that frame the frieze are well preserved. The left leaf has four triple-tipped lobes with deeply marked midribs. The leaf is fleshy, well depicted in three-dimensional high relief, with a deeply carved background. The long, pointed and delicate tips meet to create elongated eyelets. The half leaf on the right side has three lobes with three to four long, pointed tips. The scroll’s encircling leaf springs from behind the lower, fourtipped lobe and it has a triple-tipped offshoot lobe on the left. As the offshoot meets the inner blossom, a rhomboid eyelet is created. The leaf curves upward and another offshoot curves to the right. The upper part of the scroll was cut off. On the left side, the leaf curves inward together with another, slightly diagonal, downturned, two-lobed leaf with three tips in its upper lobe

A6002

0.92

1.82

0.72

Fig. 9.47. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6002.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

and five in its lower. This fleshy, space-filling leaf is richly and delicately rendered. Its midribs are marked by single grooves and its pointed tips meet to create an elongated eyelet. The scroll’s encircling leaf turns to the right along the bottom of the frieze, and all its tips are up-turned. The scroll is oval and relatively long. Its triple-petal blossom is depicted in the acanthusleaf manner, with three pointed tips in each lobe and grooved midribs. Out of the blossom, a poorly preserved animal springs to the left. The upper part of the animal, presumably a horse or goat, is broken, leaving part of a rounded, somewhat heavy body and long, bony, outstretched forelegs. On the right side, the motif is well modeled, delicate, naturalistic and expressive. If one compares the two sides of the frieze, it seems that two artisans of differing artistic capability were involved. The right side and the facade are the work of a relatively talented artisan, while the left side is of lesser quality. The facade of the frieze is framed by upright, half acanthus leaves, the right one better preserved. It has three triple-tipped side lobes, the tips fleshy and pointed and the midribs marked by grooves. These leaves, which engulf the corners of the frieze, are rendered in high relief and deeply carved from behind. In the center, the head of Oceanus is depicted in frontal view, his hair, mustache and beard rendered as acanthus leaves, acanthus leaves hang down on either side of his temple, and his face is beautifully integrated within the floral motif. The triple-tipped lobes are rounded and fleshy. They are half turned and very realistic. The upper parts of the head and hairstyle are missing, as the upper part of the frieze was cut off at a later stage. Deeply marked eyelids frame schematic, almond-shaped eyes with exaggerated pupils and

455

heavy eyebrows. The broad, strong nose is broken. The mustache extends back to the sides of the cheek and down to the beard, depicted by three to four round- or pointed-tipped lobes. In the tips of the beard, drill holes are visible. The lower and upper lips represent an open mouth that resembles the eye pattern. The hairs of the mustache and beard were delicately depicted with a toothed chisel in rounded, downward lines. The face is naturalistic and three-dimensional, which is further emphasized by the deep undercutting of the hair that lends the face a strong light-and-shade effect. The same artistic capability is observed on the left side of the frieze, presumably indicating that both are the work of the same talented artist. Architrave-Frieze A6046 (Fig. 9.48) General dimensions: L 1.01 m, H 0.39 m, W 0.55 m Architrave dimensions: H~0.21 m, L~0.60 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H~7 cm Frieze dimensions: H 0.32 m Left section of an architrave-frieze element, measuring 1 m long from an original c. 3.50 m long element that adorned the lintel of the western hospitalia. Its complete dimensions correspond to those of the architrave-frieze of the eastern hospitalia (see below A6007–6010, 6024) that was entirely preserved. The left end is terminated by a straight vertical cut, while the right end was cut diagonally at a later stage to adjoin the next frieze segment. The architrave is almost entirely broken away from its crowning profile. The architrave has the same ovolo type as A6001, crowned with an anthemion of spiral acanthus leaves. The pattern is of the type with double, separated, upturned leaves held by linking bars with no intermediate,

A6046

0.55

1.01

Fig. 9.48. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6046.

456

Gabriel Mazor

down-turned leaves. They have wide, rounded, fleshy lobes with three pointed tips and grooved midribs in high relief, and were deeply carved from behind, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. Although the leaves are not connected, a trailing effect is achieved. Above the architrave is a strongly protruding taenia crowned with a profile with a rope motif. The convex frieze is adorned by the inhabited-scroll pattern. The upper part with the scrolls’ enclosing leaves was cut off. The double acanthus leaf that forms the scrolls springs from between the two scrolls and separates them. It encircles the scrolls and spreads over the bottom, where the two parts of the leaves end in stylized, triple-tipped lobes. The left, round scroll is inhabited by a winged eros, his lower part turned to the right, his left leg bent forward within the foliated scroll, and his right leg stretched backward, the foot stepping on the rope pattern of the taenia outside the scroll. The upper part of his body faces front with arms spread wide, his left hand holds the scroll’s inner stem and his right hand is poorly preserved. Two wings can be seen behind his arms, the right with a feather pattern carved on it. The head is worn and partly cut, although it seems to be turning to the left. Within the right, oval scroll, an animal leaps to the left from a triple-petal blossom, the head and forequarters in a galloping pose. The worn head appears to be that of a predator of the cat family, presumably a lioness, depicted with tongue lolling out. The winged eros and the animal are presented in heraldic pose, confronting each other, although the winged eros is not in an attacking pose. The eros is depicted differently from most of the other eroses carved along the frieze, usually in hunting pose, and therefore this apparently reflects a somewhat different scene. The customary framing acanthus leaf on the left side, which seems to be the left terminus segment of the entrance lintel of the frieze, was not found (cf. A6024, presumably located in the same place in the eastern hospitalia lintel, which also has no framing acanthus leaf). Architrave-Frieze A6005 (Fig. 9.49) General dimensions: L 1.79 m, H 0.90 m, W 0.73 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.15, 0.45–0.60, 1.20–1.40 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4.5 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 17 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.00, 0.73, 1.20 m, H 0.34 m

The architrave profiles are decorated with the same astragal and ovolo types as in A6001, crowned with an acanthus-leaf anthemion. The winding leaves are of the type with spreading, double up- and downturned leaves held by linking bars and depicted in a trailing pattern. The same, similarly executed pattern runs along the architrave’s three sides. On the left side, the astragal and ovolo turn at a 90˚ angle in retreating steps to meet the profiles of the next architrave. On the right side, both astragals profiles continue further, beyond the point of connection with the next element. The left and right sides of the frieze are decorated with acanthus scrolls inhabited by animals leaping forward and flanked by framing leaves. On the facade of the frieze is a human face. The left side of the frieze is framed by upright, half acanthus leaves, the left one well preserved. It has three side lobes with three to four pointed tips and a forward-folded tip on top. As the tips meet they create triangular eyelets. The lobes are fleshy with a grooved midrib, and are deeply carved from behind. The right leaf, which engulfs the corner of the frieze, is worn and only its lower lobe tips are visible. The acanthus leaf that encircles the scroll springs from the bottom left, next to the framing half leaf. It rises diagonally with single- and double-tipped offshoots on both sides, and encircles the top of the scroll clockwise. Unlike other console elements (A6001, A6002), the upper part of this example was not cut off. The leaf encircles the scroll down to the bottom and ends in three stylized, triple-tipped lobes that gently rise at the ends. The offshoots and terminating lobes are very delicate and naturalistically depicted in high relief, emphasizing the effect of light and shade. Out of a triple-petal blossom, an animal leaps to the right. The rounded forequarters, a long neck and a long, square head are poorly preserved. Remains of two ears and presumably hair can still be seen, and the forelegs are strong and bony. It appears to be a hound or a predator of the cat family. The right side of the frieze was most probably framed by two upright, half acanthus leaves, the left one engulfing the corner of the frieze, the rest broken. Between the leaves are two scrolls, instead of the one depicted on the left side and on both sides of A6001 and A6002. The origin of the acanthus leaves has not survived, but they must have sprung from the bottom on either side. They wind up in a half circle and interlace with their tips pointed down. They turn

457

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6005

0.90

1.79

0.73

Fig. 9.49. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6005.

458

Gabriel Mazor

toward the bottom with their upper lobes ending in stylized tips. All the lobes have three pointed tips. The design is delicate, naturalistic and deeply carved as on the left side of the frieze; both sides were most certainly carved by a talented artisan. From the slightly twisted, four-petal inner blossoms of the left scroll, a galloping horse leaps to the left. It has a rounded, muscled body with a long neck and a pointed (broken) head, and up-held forelegs with well-depicted hoofs. The body and legs were combed with a toothed chisel to depict short hair. From a partly preserved, four-petal blossom in the next scroll, an animal leaps to the left, depicted with a strong, heavy body, a short neck, a long head and a square mouth and nose, perhaps representing a wild boar. Its forelegs, although shorter than those of the horse, have the same kind of hoofs. Remains of combing on the right foreleg indicating skin and hair are similar in their depiction to the previous animal. On the facade of the frieze, most of the motif is broken or worn, and only the frame of upright, half acanthus leaves engulfing both corners survives. In between are the scanty remains of an elliptical female face with a short neck and winding, curly hair on either side. The schematic, poorly depicted outlines of the face and the rendering technique resemble those of the Medusa in A6001, and it may be a duplication of that motif. Architrave-Frieze A6026 (Fig. 9.50) General dimensions: L 1.52 m, H 0.93 m, W 0.70 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.51 m, H 0.59 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 5.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.07 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.51 m, H 0.33 m The architrave profiles are ornamented by the same astragal and ovolo types as A6001, though the astragal reels have more of a disc shape. In the later reconstruction stage of Stratum 11, the element was roughly cut on its right side, leaving the lower astragal continuing all the way to the right. The anthemion, of which only a small segment is preserved, is decorated with a continuous stylized, up- and down-turned pattern of trailing acanthus leaves with no linking bars. The elaborate leaves are delicately rendered with three lobes bearing four round or pointed tips that curve gently over the top and bottom, overlapping each other. As the tips meet, they create eyelets of

different shapes. The leaves are fleshy, rendered in high relief and deeply carved from behind, creating a three-dimensional pattern with a strong light-andshade effect. The continuous up and down motion of the leaves creates a spiral trailing pattern. The taenia is crowned with a band of rope pattern. The soffit, complete on the right side and broken on the left, is adorned with a guilloche pattern. The interlaced design of wide, ridged bands with central knobs rendered in high relief is sunken within a rectangular, double-profiled, crescent-ended frame. Originally, the frieze was entirely decorated, but during the Stratum 11 reconstruction stage it was roughly cut and lost the right-side scroll and framing acanthus leaf. It was also cut diagonally on its left side, which originally was also probably longer. In its current state of preservation, two scrolls remain on the left end and the scanty remains of a third scroll and its framing leaf can be seen on the right end. only three side lobes of the right flanking leaf are preserved, each with four rounded, fleshy tips and grooved midribs, apparently an upright, half acanthus leaf. On the left side, the frieze begins with a scroll without a flanking leaf. The spiral acanthus leaves that compose the scrolls seem to continue leftward as if there was at least one more scroll. Since the customary acanthus leaf from which the scroll motif starts is not preserved, it can be assumed that this was cut off as well (see the broken left side of the soffit). The scroll motif was created by a continuous interlaced acanthus leaf that originated on the left side of the frieze, presumably next to the flanking, upright acanthus leaf. The leaf runs down from the upper (broken) left corner of the frieze, interlaces with another leaf and curves down to the bottom of the scroll with three triple-tipped lobes. It is very naturalistic, with a down-turned offshoot and a curling bud that springs from a stylized calyx. The leaf then curves up and interlaces again between the scrolls with another up-turned bud, and encloses the next scroll on top. Its lobes were rendered in a downward pattern, while another triple-tipped offshoot lobe emerges to the right. The offshoot lobe curves down, interlaces once again with another leaf and continues to the central scroll. As the leaf turns around, it curves over the central scroll’s bottom, its lobe tips up-turned. It interlaces between the scrolls, encircles the upper part of the first scroll, and continues on the lower left corner of the frieze, presumably toward the central scroll. Within

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

459

A6026

0.93

1.52

0.70

Fig. 9.50. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6026.

the scrolls, offshoot stems are connected to the petaled blossoms, from which animals spring. The left scroll has a rounded, four-petal blossom, while the right has an almost-complete circle of a multi-petal blossom. In both cases the unusual petaled blossoms differ from those found on most of the frieze elements. The two animals that inhabit the scrolls face each other, interacting peacefully with no implied violence. The left one, facing right, has small, cylindricalshaped forequarters and a small, upheld head with a narrow nose, a mouth and two large, erect ears with folded ends. Its forelegs are worn, but seem to be in a crouching pose. The animal may be a small hound(?). The central scroll is inhabited by a small animal, facing left. Its small, dumpy body springs from the almost completely circular, petaled blossom and on its back is a scale-like pattern. It has no neck, and the eye, sniffing nose and mouth point slightly up. The small forelegs with emphasized paws rest on the foliated petals.

Although worn, the pattern of the scrolls and their animals present a high degree of naturalism, delicacy and sensitive execution, presumably the high-quality rendering of a qualified and talented artisan. Architrave-Frieze A6013 (Fig. 9.51) General dimensions: L 2.30 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.71 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.70 m, H 0.56 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 4.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Soffit: L 1.45 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.65 m, H 0.35 m The architrave fasciae are separated by schematic astragals, the globular beads of which are short and elliptical, while the reels are irregular, either disc shaped or rhomboid. The execution of the pattern thus reflects a careless rendering. The ovolo is of the usual type, although it is also poorly executed with

460

Gabriel Mazor

A6013

0.92

2.30

Fig. 9.51. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6013.

mostly rhomboid and several triple-leaf, lily-shaped intermediates. The anthemion is ornamented with separated, alternating up- and down-turned double acanthus leaves held by narrow linking bars. The upturned leaves have two lower lobes, depicted on both sides in closed spirals, a contribution to the motif that is not observed elsewhere. The triple-tipped lobes create a continuous spiral pattern with a trailing effect, although they are not connected. Depicted in high relief and deeply carved from behind, they present a strong light-and-shade effect. The taenia is crowned with a rope pattern. The remains of two iron connecting rods are observed on the upper surface of the element and a mason mark reading ΚΑΙ ΗΚΙΡ was incised in the surface. The soffit is of the garland type with stylized, v-shaped leaves running in a rhythmic pattern in both directions

from a central, four-petal rosette, within a Miletiantype, double-profiled frame. On the frieze are four inhabited scrolls flanked on the left by upright acanthus leaves. The right-side scroll is partly broken with no flanking leaf, as that was depicted on the left-side corner of the next frieze element (A6032), which continued the pattern. The left-side framing leaves are fully preserved. Unlike the customary half leaf, here there are two partly overlapping half leaves. This may be the result of a poorly planned division of the frieze, which became unbalanced by moving the right flanking leaf to the next frieze element. The two upright, half leaves have three side lobes, each with four fleshy tips and a grooved midrib. The upper lobe tips curve foreword. The leaves are widely based on the bottom of the frieze, their partly turned midrib marked by two deep

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

parallel grooves. Most of their tips are connected by small bridges and meet to create elongated eyelets. The acanthus leaves are fleshy, rendered in high relief and deeply cut from behind. Their overlapping pattern and half-turned position adds a natural, three-dimensional effect. The acanthus leaf encircling the first scroll springs from within the vertical leaf’s lower lobe. As it rises to encircle the scroll, an offshoot leaf with three lobes with three pointed tips runs to the left. The encircling leaf is schematically rendered and ends with an elaborate, triple-tipped lobe. Its intersection with the second and third scroll is not interlaced, as another offshoot leaf runs to the right to encircle those scrolls. The central leaves of the scrolls interlace and all the tips turn inward. The fourth scroll is not interlaced either with the previous scroll and has a separate encircling leaf. Between the scrolls, offshoots with double lobes of two or three tips, all schematic in depiction, were used as space fillers. All the scrolls are round and of equal size. The left scroll is presumably inhabited by an eros, the other three by animals. They are all poorly preserved and broken, therefore difficult to identify. The eros in the left scroll is seen from the back, standing within a triple-petal blossom, his legs sunken in the blossom up to his hips. His body seems to be depicted in a backward-leaning pose and his arms are spread. The left hand apparently holds a shield, while the right is bent forward (cf. A6014, A6046). The head is completely broken and no features remain, although it is reasonable to assume that he faced right, toward the animal he attacks. The animal, presumably a predator of the cat family––perhaps a lion due to its heavy forequarters––leaps out of a triple-tipped petal blossom toward the left. The rounded body has a bulky neck with the head stretched forward and forelegs in charging pose. The next two scrolls are quite poorly preserved. From multi-petal blossoms, two crouching animals emerge to the right. In both cases the body is completely cut off, leaving only strong hairy forelegs. The heads may be leaning forward over the legs. The animal on the left, with a strong foreleg and paw, may be a tiger or panther. The rightmost scroll is inhabited by an animal with rounded forequarters and strong forelegs. As the broken state of the right-side scroll prevents identification, this could be either a second predator or its prey.

461

Architrave-Frieze A6032 (Fig. 9.52) General dimensions: L 2.28, 0.32 m, H 0.95 m, W 0.66 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.20, 0.28 m, H 0.56 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 3.5 cm, anthemion H 7 cm, ovolo H 5.5 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Soffit: L 1.52 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.20, 0.25 m, H 0.35 m The architrave is decorated on its facade and concave left side, on which all the ornamented profiles continue. The astragal and ovolo are of the regular type, although the reels of the astragal are disc shaped and the intermediate tongues of the ovolo are very slender. The poorly preserved anthemion is of the same type as in A6013, although it is considerably more detailed and elaborate. On the upper surface of the element are the remains of four iron connecting rods. The soffit is ornamented with an interlaced guilloche pattern with central knobs, equally centered within a crescent-ended frame. The sunken pattern is delicately rendered in high relief. Although this frieze element seems to be complete, the soffit was cut off on its right side. The frieze covers the facade and the left side. Three acanthus scrolls were depicted, flanked by upright framing acanthus leaves. The left side of the frieze bears an upright leaf that engulfs the corner, its left side connecting with the adjoining frieze element (A6013), its right side framing the frieze. Both framing acanthus leaves have three triple-tipped lobes and a strongly ridged, convex midrib on the corner. Next to the framing leaf on the right, a complete acanthus leaf is widely based on the bottom of the frieze and leans slightly to the right. It is rich, fleshy and naturalistic. It has six lobes with three to four pointed tips, which meet to create elongated, triangular eyelets. The scrolls are freely rendered and interlaced, and although poorly preserved, they still reveal their highquality execution and three-dimensional, naturalistic rendering. The acanthus leaf that encircles the first scroll on the left clockwise, springs from a point next to the framing leaf and its tips turn inward. It ends with a leaf, while an offshoot encircles the second scroll counterclockwise. An offshoot originating from within the upright framing leaf on the right interlaces with the third scroll, which it encircles clockwise. In between the scrolls, offshoot lobes on the top and bottom function as space fillers.

462

Gabriel Mazor

A6032

0.93

0.66

2.28

Fig. 9.52. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6032.

The animals that inhabit the scrolls were almost entirely destroyed and therefore difficult to identify. In the left scroll, what appears to be a wild boar leaps toward the right from a three- or four-petal blossom. Its forequarters are round and there is no neck. The long, pointed nose sniffs at the leaf. The right foreleg rests on the scroll leaf. The next scroll is inhabited by what may

be an elephant sitting within a petal blossom, turning to the right, its forelegs resting on the scroll. Its head and trunk rise from the heavy body. Confronting the elephant in the next scroll is a predator, presumably a lion, which emerges from a petal blossom toward the left. Its forequarters are heavily muscled and its neck is barely visible. The large head turns forward and the left foreleg

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

463

A6038

0.93

2.06

0.62

Fig. 9.53. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6038.

rests on the leaf. The predator is not in an attacking pose, but leans forward peacefully. All three animals, if correctly identified, are ill proportioned and unnatural in comparison to each other, as they are all depicted within the scrolls and more or less the same size. Architrave-Frieze A6038 (Fig. 9.53) General dimensions: L 2.06 m, H 0.93 m, W 0.62 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.96 m, H 0.59 m Profile dimensions: taenia, anthemion and ovolo are entirely worn, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.45 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.98 m, H 0.35 m An architrave-frieze element assembled from three broken and worn parts. The architrave has the same type of astragal as A6001, with relatively wellpreserved rhomboid or disc-shaped reels and elliptical beads, and presumably the same type of crowning profiles, although no remains of the taenia, anthemion and ovolo are preserved. The remains of two iron connecting rods are observed on the upper surface.

The soffit is ornamented by a trailing-branch design sunken within a profiled, Miletian-type frame. The symmetrical pattern begins on both sides with a double-petal blossom. The trailing branch springs from the top left and the bottom right. Along the pattern, each airy and rounded spiral emerges from the former, alternatively from top or bottom, and terminates with a knob. In the center, two spirals meet, curving in opposite directions. The sunken pattern was rendered in high relief, deeply carved, and achieves a delicate, three-dimensional effect. The frieze is almost entirely worn. From the scanty remains it seems to have had four scrolls, presumably within a framing motif of upright, half acanthus leaves. Each pair of scrolls is interlaced, with the left leaf curving clockwise and the right leaf counterclockwise. Between the scrolls, offshoot lobes were carved on the top and bottom. In the first scroll on the left, remains of an eros facing right can be seen, standing within the foliated scroll and presumably in an attacking pose. From the second scroll an animal leaps out to the left and confronts the eros. Its forequarters are

464

Gabriel Mazor

Profile dimensions: taenia H 4.5 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 4.5 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Frieze dimensions: L ~1.92 m, H 0.36 m This architrave-frieze element has a concave right side cut at an obtuse angle that marks the beginning of the central semicircular exedra of the scaenae frons. The facade decor continues onto the right side. The architrave’s fasciae are separated by astragals of the regular type with reels that are more slender and rhomboid in comparison to the usual almostround ones. The pattern is deeply carved and gives a relatively strong light-and-shade effect. The ovolo is not of the common type, as its tongues were replaced by triple-petal blossoms. The shells are separated from the smaller, rather elliptical, pear-shaped eggs that are attached at the top and pointed at bottom. The motif is far more balanced and delicate, less schematic and heavy than the usual type depicted on most of the architrave elements. The anthemion is also of a

strong and round, there is hardly any neck, and the head turns frontward. The head seems to depict a predator, presumably a bear. Slight traces of a deeply carved, v-shaped eye, a thin, closed mouth and a square nose are visible, and the ears seem to be laid back. Remains of forelegs, mainly the left, rest on the scroll leaf. The next scroll is almost entirely worn, although the remains of a triple-petal blossom indicate that the animal (or eros, see below) turned to the right. Within the fourth scroll, only the remains of a threepetal blossom are preserved, indicating that the animal turned to the left. The remains are inadequate in the two right-side scrolls to identify the animals, although it seems that the scrolls were planned in a generally antithetic design, in which each pair consists of an eros and an animal confronting each other in heraldic pose. Architrave-Frieze A6015 (Fig. 9.54) General dimensions: L 2.25, 0.20 m, H 0.94 m, W 0.68 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.25, 0.20 m, H 0.57 m

A6015

0.94

2.25

Fig. 9.54. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6015.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

different type, consisting of separated, alternating upturned double acanthus leaves and open palmettes. The double acanthus leaves have lower rounded tips and rounded, triple-tipped lobes above, and they spread in both directions. The palmettes have two lower spiral tips and a central pattern of open, triple leaves. The acanthus and palmette leaves are not connected by the customary linking bar. The protruding taenia is crowned with a rope pattern. On the upper surface of the element are remains of three connecting iron bars. The soffit, not centralized, has a flat guilloche design within a simple profiled frame. A mason mark of the letter Δ was carved above it. The right-side of the frieze is broken and presumably held an upright acanthus leaf that engulfed the obtuse corner. There is no flanking leaf on the left side, as this was depicted on the previous frieze element (A6038). The frieze has four scrolls composed of two interlacing acanthus leaves. The leaf curves around the first scroll from the left with no originating point. It interlaces with another leaf, and curves over the second scroll, then interlaces again with the other leaf, with a poorly rendered interlacing, and encircles the third and the fourth scrolls. From the right side, the counter leaf springs from within a blossom and encloses the scrolls in the opposite directions. At the interlacing points, various types of offshoots––with single rounded tips, double lobes and stems––act as space fillers. The acanthus leaves that form the scrolls are rich, fleshy and relatively naturalistic in their depiction. Carved in high relief and well separated from their background, they achieve a three-dimensional pattern with a strong effect of light and shade. In the pairs of inhabited scrolls the motifs are related. The first scroll from the left is inhabited by an eros attacking an animal in the next scroll. The eros stands within the foliated scroll in a combat posture with outstretched legs, the right leg in the back, its foot pointing forward, the left bent forward, the body half turned to the right. He holds a shield in his left hand, and the right is bent and raised, apparently holding a spear, which is broken. The head is turned toward the animal within the next scroll that leaps from a foliated blossom toward the warrior. Its forequarters are heavy, muscled and rounded, with no visible neck, its head is facing forward and lowered in a charging position. Its forelegs are buried within the foliated blossom. It seems to be a predator of the cat family.

465

The second pair of scrolls has the same composition, with an eros confronting a charging animal. The figure of the eros is mostly broken, although its imprint reveals a similar stance. The legs are set slightly apart within the petaled blossom, the right leg stretched backward, the left bent forward. The torso is turned to the right with outstretched arms. It may have been armed in the same manner with a shield and spear. The head is almost entirely worn, although it is reasonable to assume that it turned to the right. The next scroll is inhabited by an animal leaping toward the left from a petaled blossom. The forequarters are round, heavy and muscled, there is hardly any neck, and the head is round. A v-shaped eye is visible and the nose and mouth are rounded. The left foreleg is broken, the right leg is strong with a heavy paw. The general features suggest a predator of some kind, perhaps a lioness. Both pairs of scrolls retain a heraldic composition of a generally antithetic stance. Although poorly preserved, and presumably deliberately mutilated, the narrative seems to have been well depicted in high relief with deep under carving. The figures are delicately depicted with an emphasized, naturalistic motion that is far from rigid. The quality of the rendering, observed especially in the acanthus leaves and also in the figures, is the work of a well-qualified artisan. The unusual rendering of the architrave profiles, which do not resemble the standard motifs, suggests an artist qualified in different patterns. Architrave-Frieze A6011 (Fig. 9.55) General dimensions: L 2.14 m, H 0.95 m, W 0.72 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.14 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4.5 cm, anthemion H 5.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H11.5 cm, fascia III H9 cm Soffit: L1.54 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.14 m, H 0.37 m On the right side of the architrave, a 0.18 m long segment was left unfinished, the pre-carved astragal profiles left as long beads that were not further separated, which may be indicative of the carving process––the pattern was first incised with a pointed tool and not completed. Toward the left, the astragals and ovolo are of the regular type with rhomboid reels in the astragal and intermediate tongues in the ovolo. The anthemion is of the alternating up- and downturned, spiral acanthus leaves in a trailing pattern. A vertical, lily-shaped, triple leaf connected by a narrow

466

Gabriel Mazor

linking bar is stylistically posed. Its curving, tripletipped leaves gently curve to either side, ending with up- and down-turned, open spiral tips to create the trailing pattern. Both the up- and down-turned leaves are delicately integrated in perfect harmony, without space fillers. The perfectly rendered, canonical anthemion is well balanced, carved in high relief, and achieves a natural, three-dimensional effect. At both ends, the profile of the anthemion was first carved into a convex strip, then its details were added. Both ends start and end with up-turned, half-lily-shaped leaves, to be continued later if required by the architrave’s dimensions. On the right side, the motif begins, presumably in error, with a palmette, immediately corrected by the acanthus-leaf motif. Remains of iron bars are observed on the left side of the top and bottom surfaces.

The soffit is adorned with a non-centered, deeply carved, stylized garland within a crescent-ended frame. The broad, fleshy, double leaves of the blossom pattern advance inward from either end and enclose a fivepetal rosette in the center. The right side of both the architrave and the frieze seem to indicate that this element was not completed (the left side is broken). As it is part of a continuous pattern it should have been carved along its entire length, flanked by half acanthus leaves on both sides. However, it was definitely used in the original stage and later in both reconstructions. The frieze seems to have had four inhabited scrolls, one of which (the first on the left) is entirely broken, apart from some slight traces of its encircling leaf. The right side of the frieze was left unworked, with no flanking upright, half acanthus leaf.

A6011

0.95

2.14

Fig. 9.55. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave frieze element A6011.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

467

scroll, presumably an ox or bull, leaps to the left from a triple-tipped petal blossom. Its body is long, rounded and heavy, folds in the skin indicating a slightly turned body. The head is entirely broken. The forelegs are depicted in an active, galloping stance, rather than the usual schematic, forward-stretched pose, and the right leg has a heavy cloven hoof, exaggerated in size. The consecutive pairs of scrolls, of which the first on the left is broken, are set in heraldic pose. As the second pair consists of an eros confronting a beast, it is reasonable to assume that the broken scroll on the left also contained an eros confronting the lioness in the second scroll, creating a repetitive, duplicate narrative. The figures are all large and balanced within the scroll, although not realistic in their relative proportions. They are rendered in naturalistic detail and relatively expressive in their constrained movement and energy.

Since the left side is broken, its original pattern is unclear. The acanthus-leaf motif is not interlaced as it extends downward and counterclockwise to encircle the second scroll with in-turned tips. An offshoot leaf curves clockwise, encircling the third and fourth scrolls. The acanthus leaf is fleshy and carved in high relief. The three lobe tips are pointed and deeply carved from behind, lending the motif a strong lightand-shade effect. The ends of the tips are connected by small bridges, and some drill holes were left at the joints. Where the scrolls interlace, offshoot blossoms act as space fillers. The second elliptical scroll contains a predator leaping to the left from a four-petal blossom. Its forequarters are rounded, muscled, and rise diagonally upward. The animal has a long neck, a square firm head, small rounded ears, a drilled eye and a rounded nose. The chin is also rounded, the mouth is open and the tongue is lolling out. The broken left foreleg is raised, and the right one is strong, bony, and ends in a detailed paw. The cat-like predator seems to be either a lioness or a leopard. The third scroll is inhabited by an eros in combat pose confronting the animal in the fourth scroll. The lower part of his body is half turned to the right, the left leg is bent forward within the leaf, the right stretches backward and the foot turns to the left. The torso is depicted in a frontal pose with outstretched arms. The left hand holds a shield, while the right holds an unidentified object (a spear?). Behind the left arm are traces of feathered wings. The worn, faceless head is framed by long, curly hair. The animal in the fourth

Architrave-Frieze A6012 (Fig. 9.56) General dimensions: L 1.78 m, H 0.94 m, W 0.72 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.70 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12.5 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Soffit: L 0.97 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.60 m, H 0.35 m The well-preserved astragal and ovolo profiles of the architrave are of the regular types. The anthemion is of the separated, up-turned acanthus-leaf type, stylized, schematic, and less meticulously executed than other examples and therefore lacking the rich and naturalistic

A6012

0.94

1.78

Fig. 9.56. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6012.

468

Gabriel Mazor

predator of the cat family. The right-side scroll is inhabited by an animal with a slender, muscled body, a high neck and a long, pointed head. The forelegs are depicted in a galloping stance, and it may be a horse. As the three animals that inhabit the scrolls turn in the same direction, a rhythmic parade-like composition is created.

three-dimensional effect. Pairs of up-turned, singleor double-tipped leaves tied by a linking bar at equal intervals create a repetitive trailing rhythm. Remains of several iron connecting rods are observed on top, and on the back side a narrow ledge was cut. The soffit is decorated with a two-strand guilloche with central knobs set in a poorly carved, crescent-ended frame. The frieze is worn at both ends and on the top. The right side seems to have had a framing, upright, half acanthus leaf, while the terminating pattern on the left side is unclear, as there is inadequate space for such a leaf. In the frieze there are three elliptical inhabited scrolls poorly preserved in their upper parts. The encircling acanthus leaf of the scrolls springs from the right from within a triple-petal blossom and surrounds the first scroll on the right. It interlaces with another acanthus leaf at the second and third scrolls, curves around them and then returns to the right. Where the leaf interlaces, offshoots act as space fillers. The acanthus leaf is wide, fleshy and deeply carved from behind. The double or triple tips of the lobes are rounded or pointed, connected by small bridges, and have grooved midribs. The pattern has plasticity and a strong light-and-shade effect. In all three scrolls, animals are depicted leaping to the left from petaled blossoms, their forequarters facing left. The left-side scroll contains a small animal with a wide neck and short forelegs; its right leg is detailed in the background. In the central scroll are the forequarters and rounded head of an animal. The strong, long and bony forelegs and the paw may indicate a

Architrave-Frieze A6036 (Fig. 9.57) General dimensions: L 2.13 m, H 0.93 m, W 0.77 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.43 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4.5 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 2 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.40 m, H 0.35 m The profiles of the architrave are decorated with the common types of astragal and ovolo. The anthemion is of the separated, up-turned acanthus-leaf motif. The main components of the pattern are two or three leaves with upright single tips, the lower triple-tipped, spiral-shaped leaves not joined by linking bars. The leaves curving up the side touch to create a continuous, stylized, trailing pattern. The leaves are fleshy and deeply carved from behind. All the decorated architrave profiles end abruptly, and do not continue onto the right third of the element, which was left in its unworked state, apart from the anthemion that does continue all the way to the right. The frieze decor does not continue onto the right part of the element, which remains in its unworked state. The upper part of the frieze was broken and

A6036

0.93

2.13

Fig. 9.57. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6036.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

only the lower parts of two scrolls are preserved. The preserved acanthus leaf that encircles the scrolls on the bottom is well depicted with triple-tipped lobes and offshoot leaves. The pattern is rendered in high relief and the leaves are fleshy and deeply carved from behind. The two elliptical scrolls are inhabited by unidentified, poorly preserved animals whose positions cannot be established. Scant remains may indicate an eros and an animal confronting each other in a heraldic pose. Both scrolls were apparently flanked by upright, half acanthus leaves. On the left side of the frieze, the remains of the lower three tips can be seen, while on the right side the remains of a fleshy leaf are preserved and there is obviously ample space for such a flanking pattern. The Valvae Regiae Entablature The columnar facade of the valvae regiae was flanked by two podia carrying four columns that bear a separate entablature 2.5 m higher than the scaenae frons firstfloor entablature. The architrave-frieze elements of the valvae regiae consist of thinner slabs attached to the back wall’s masonry by connecting rods and they follow the contours of the projecting podia and recessed exedra. About 31 architrave-frieze slab fragments and two corner elements were identified, comprising c. 8 m of the entire length of 17.2 m, within which a few possible connections between the slabs were observed. Architrave-frieze slabs of the valvae regiae facade As none of the architrave-frieze slabs were preserved in their entirety, their general dimensions can only be calculated. General dimensions: L 17.2 m, H 1.15 m, W 0.35 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.70 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 12 cm, rope profile H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 18–20 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 13–15 cm, fascia III H 10–11 cm Frieze dimensions: H 0.45 m Architrave-Frieze A6045 (Fig. 9.58:2) A well-preserved architrave-frieze element from the left side of the exedra (L 1.24 m, H 1.14 m). The architrave has the three customary fasciae, although they are somewhat higher than those of the scaenae

469

frons sections to the west and east of the valvae regiae. They are separated by astragals with c. 8 cm long beads with rounded ends and elliptical reels with small connecting strings. The architrave is not crowned with the common ovolo but with a rope band, which runs under a cyma recta profile. The anthemion has alternating, up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves, both held by long linking bars. The palmettes are widely based on the bottom, and consist of seven leaves. The lower, short, spiral-shaped leaves at the level of the bar continue the next spiral acanthus leaves, creating a trailing pattern. Above them, a vertical leaf is flanked by pairs of s-shaped, in-turned spiral leaves. The widely based acanthus leaf has two lower, in-turned spiral-shaped leaves that spring at its bar level in both directions in a wide, rounded, s-shaped pattern and connect to the next palmette. Above them is a long, pointed lobe tip, flanked by long, pointed triple-tipped lobes with incised midribs. The pattern is well balanced, delicately executed and carved naturalistically in high relief, and it is deeply cut from behind, lending it a three-dimensionality and a strong light-and-shade effect. The frieze is richly decorated with blossom-inhabited acanthus scrolls. The scrolls are encircled by richly depicted acanthus leaves with three triple-tipped lobes with incised midribs, each leaf springing out of the previous leaf. Between the scrolls, offshoot leaves of the same nature meet with wide, curving, intersecting stems. Within the scroll, an inner circle is created by a stem, within which is a fleshy, six-petal blossom with an inner three-petal blossom, both with rounded tips and incised midribs. The tips are connected by small bridges, creating a few elongated eyelets. The pattern is relatively rich and freely depicted. It is carved in high relief and well cut from behind, granting the motif its three dimensionality and strong light-and-shade effect. The high-quality rendering was presumably the work of a well-trained artisan. Architrave-Frieze A6703 (Fig. 9.58:1) A complete architrave-frieze element from the rightside of the exedra (L 0.80 m, H 1.14 m, W 0.36 m). The architrave profiles have the common ornaments, although differently executed. The reels of the astragal are somewhat hexagonal and the strings are more emphasized. The architrave is crowned with the same anthemion as in A6045, although its linking bars are lower. The rendering quality is far better than the other

470

Gabriel Mazor

examples, as the leaves are more rounded, depicted in high relief and have more deeply incised midribs, resulting in a greater three-dimensional effect. The frieze has the same scroll motif as A6045, although it is considerably richer and more freely rendered. The scroll is encircled by a similar acanthus leaf with in-turned tips that is far more emphasized by its pointed tips, deeply incised midribs and high-relief carving. The tips meet with small bridges creating several eyelets. From the main encircling leaf, a stem emerges to encircle the scrolls’ inner circle. It ends with a rich, in-turned, upright, double-lobed leaf with three tips and a deeply incised midrib. From a thin stem

arises a spherical fruit. Between the scrolls are upright offshoot leaves that spread widely in both directions. Although the basic pattern is retained, this frieze presents a much freer rendition by the hand of a skilled artisan. Architrave-Frieze A6051+A6054 (Fig. 9.58:3) Two joining fragments of the crowning anthemion of the architrave and the frieze (L 0.50 m, H 0.72 m). The frieze has a rich, encircling acanthus leaf, its lobes with three pointed tips. The tips are connected by small bridges and create small eyelets executed in high relief and deeply cut from behind. The single scroll’s inner

A6703

A6045

1.14

0.80

0.36

1.24

1

2

A6051+A6054

A6044+A6055+A6059+A514+A79

0.72

1.12 0.50

3

0.65

4

Fig. 9.58. Severan Theater: valvae regiae, architrave-frieze elements A6703, A6045, A6051+A6054, A6044+A6055+A6059+A514+A79.

471

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

circle contains a rounded, fleshy stem that ends in wide lobes, some of which are not preserved. Architrave-Frieze A6044+A6055+A6059+A514+A79 (Fig. 9.58:4) An architrave-frieze element comprised of five fragments (L 0.65 m, H 1.12 m). The architrave profiles resemble those of A6045 and are crowned with a rope pattern. The anthemion resembles that of A6703, and the scroll motif of the frieze resembles that of A6045. A complete scroll is preserved, encircled by richly depicted acanthus leaves that emerge from within each other, with triple-tipped lobes and incised midribs. The inner circle, created by a stem, contains a fourpetal rosette with a central knob. Drill holes can be

observed in both the inner and outer circles, and small bridges connect the tips to form eyelets. To the right, an acanthus leaf creates a floral pattern that resembles a cornucopia, diagonally wrapped by floral bands. It is crowned with a leaf with six pointed tips. Freely interlaced stems are depicted within the acanthus leaf and around the cornucopia. Architrave-Frieze A6268 (Fig. 9.59:1) A broken section of an architrave crowned with an anthemion and a fragment of a frieze (L 0.80 m, H 0.64 m). The pattern of the anthemion is of separated palmettes and acanthus leaves that do not interlace, thus losing the spiral trailing effect. The frieze contains one scroll that is encircled by a rich acanthus leaf.

A6268

0.41

0.06 0.11 0.03 0.80

1 A6053

A6056

0.40 0.69 0.56

3 1.27

A6573

0.38

0.62

2

4

Fig. 9.59. Severan Theater: valvae regiae, architrave-frieze elements A6268, A6053, A6056, A6573.

472

Gabriel Mazor

Long elegant lobes with two or three long, pointed tips emerge from within the leaf to create the elaborate scroll. Stems interlace around and behind the leaf. The inner circle is freely rendered. A stem forms part of a circle and ends in a double leaf with two or three tripletipped lobes.

scroll is freely rendered with a rounded stem ending in a leaf. Architrave-Frieze A6056 (Fig. 9.59:3) A frieze and anthemion fragment (L 0.56 m, H 0.40 m). The anthemion is of the common type, as in A6045. From the frieze, only a fragment of the acanthusleaf scroll is preserved. The rope profile below the frieze leans to the right rather than the left as in most fragments.

Architrave-Frieze A6053 (Fig. 9.59:2) A left-side fragment of a frieze with a poorly preserved anthemion and rope profile (L 1.27 m, H 0.69 m). The frieze begins on the left with a downturned, diagonally posed floral pattern that resembles the cornucopia motif with incised, diagonally wrapped ribbons. From a triple-petal blossom emerge three upright, s-shaped, fleshy palmette leaves that end with a spiral and frame the left side of the frieze. The acanthus-leaf scroll is not rounded, although it is richly depicted, like that in A6268. On top and within the pattern, several fleshy stems wind in and out, and the one that interlaces with the cornucopia motif ends in an elaborate acanthus leaf. The inner circle of the

Architrave-Frieze A6573 (Fig. 9.59:4) A frieze fragment (L 0.62 m, H 0.38 m) decorated with a floral pattern of the cornucopia motif wrapped by a stem and bud with an acanthus leaf on the left, and a scroll inhabited by a five-petal rosette with an inner knob on the right. Architrave-Frieze A6057 (Fig. 9.60:1) A fragment of a frieze with acanthus-leaf scrolls and interlaced stems (L 0.47 m, H 0.22 m).

A6057

A6052

0.22

0.32 0.47

1

0.97

A6472

2

0.24

0.56

0.80

3

A6050

0.58

0.72

4

Fig. 9.60. Severan Theater: valvae regiae, architrave-frieze elements A6057, A6052, A6472, A6050.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Architrave-Frieze A6052 (Fig. 9.60:2) A fragment of an anthemion and a rope profile (L 0.97 m, H 0.32 m). The anthemion resembles that in A6045, although the acanthus leaf on the left side is depicted differently. The fleshy, pointed leaf was carved from behind, creating a lacy design. This is a unique design, not repeated on the current anthemion profile or anywhere else, representing a singular initiative by an artisan, or a mistake. In the rest of the pattern, drill work and small bridges can be seen. The rope pattern has repetitive, deep diagonal channels at every third band. A small segment of fascia I was preserved as well. Architrave-Frieze A6472 (Fig. 9.60:3) A fragment of an anthemion, upper fascia and rope profile (L 0.80 m, H 0.56 m). The anthemion is of the up-turned palmette type with a linking bar and downturned acanthus. The rope pattern runs from opposite directions and meets in the middle. Architrave-Frieze A6050 (Fig. 9.60:4) A fragment of an anthemion and fascia I with its astragal (L 0.72 m, H 0.58 m). The astragal is of the common type with slender, rhomboid reels. The rope pattern leans to the right as in A6056, and has a deep channel every third band. The anthemion is of the regular type, as in A6045. Architrave-Frieze A100145 A fragment of an anthemion and a rope pattern (L 0.46 m, H 0.27 m, W 0.30 m). The anthemion is of the alternating, up-turned palmettes and downturned acanthus leaves tied by linking bars, which are connected to form a trailing-branch effect. The palmette has a central tip flanked by two pairs of inturned, s-shaped leaves and lower spirals. The acanthus leaf has a central tip and is flanked by two other leaves, of which the lower one curves outward and creates a trailing pattern. Architrave-Frieze A100164 An architrave fragment (L 0.32 m, H 0.17 m, W 0.23 m) with fascia I (H 0.20 m) and its astragal (H 3 cm). Architrave-Frieze A100166 An architrave fragment (L 0.37 m, H 0.38 m, W 0.12 m) with fascia I (H 0.20 m), its astragal (H 3 cm), fascia II (H 0.12 m), its astragal (H 3 cm) and fascia III (H 9 cm).

473

Architrave-Frieze A70107 An architrave fragment (L 0.71 m, H 0.30 m, W 0.22 m) with fascia II (H 0.19 m), its astragal (H 3 cm) and fascia III (H 7.5 cm). Architrave-Frieze A100167 An architrave fragment (L 0.40 m, H 0.34 m, W 9 cm) with fascia I (H 0.18 m), its astragal (H 3 cm) and fascia II (H 0.12 m). Architrave-Frieze A40605 The right-side corner of an architrave (L 0.44 m, H 0.49 m, W 8 cm) with fascia I (H 0.185 m), its astragal (H 3 cm), fascia II (H 0.145 m), its astragal (H 3 cm) and fascia III (H 0.105 m). Architrave-Frieze A100143 An architrave fragment (L 0.48 m, H 0.34 m, W 9 cm) with fascia A (0.18 m), its astragal (H 3.5 cm) and fascia II (H 0.12 m). Architrave-Frieze A121129 An architrave fragment (L 0.63 m, H 0.24 m, W 0.15 m) with fascia II (0.12 m), its astragal (H 3 cm) and fascia III (H ~5 cm). Mason marks: L, B Architrave-Frieze A90174 An architrave fragment (L 0.55 m, H 0.45 m, W 0.12 m) with fascia I (0.23 m), its astragal (H 3.5 cm) and fascia II (H 0.185 m). Mason mark: E Scaenae Frons East-Side Architrave-Friezes Architrave-Frieze A6020+A6039 (Fig. 9.61) General dimensions: L 2.15, 1.69 m, H 0.73, 0.34 m, W 0.60 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.58 m (+ 0.12 m of frieze), L 1.40 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 6.5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.69 m, H 0.35 m Cornice profiles: ovolo H 3 cm, dentils H 5 cm Two separate parts compose a concave architravefrieze element. The architrave carries an additional 0.12 m segment of the frieze, while the frieze carries an additional 8 cm segment of the cornice. Apart from this unique composition, the frieze was also produced from a different, pinkish-yellow marble. The unusual

474

Gabriel Mazor

composition is uncommon in the first floor of the scaenae frons entablature, and only appears in two other elements (A6021, A6043). The architrave’s fasciae are separated by the common astragals with rhomboid reels, crowned with an ovolo with pear-shaped eggs, well-spaced shells and diamond-shaped tongues. The anthemion is of the separated, alternating up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves without linking bars. The palmettes have a vertical, pointed leaf flanked by s-shaped, in-turned, spiral leaves. The acanthus leaves have vertical, pointed tips flanked by double-tipped lobes that curve out, with a lower, rounded tip that spreads over the bottom. The pattern is stylized, rigid and schematic, and the components are well separated, just touching slightly at the edges, and as they are not interlaced, the trailing effect is lacking. The anthemion was carved in high relief with a deep background, the leaves are rounded and fleshy, and although it lacks three-dimensionality, there is some light-and-shade

effect. The pattern is well balanced, delicate and accurate, and although schematic, it is well rendered. The frieze is not of the common architrave-frieze motif and seems to be a readjusted composition, presumably the result of breakage or production problems, perhaps an ill-fitted, quarry-manufactured block. The architrave bears the lower part of the scroll pattern in which the encircling acanthus wreath indicates three scrolls. As the upper part was either broken, or the block was not high enough, an additional element was added, carved from a different type of marble. This element bears the rest of the upper frieze as well as the lower ovolo and dentil profiles of the cornice, which is also an uncommon composition in the scaenae frons order, in which all the cornices were executed as separate elements. Although bearing the scroll pattern, its scrolls are considerably longer and it projects beyond the architrave on the left side. In the reconstruction stage of Stratum 11, this left side of the block was cut inward in order to fit the new connection,

1.69

A6020 0.34

A6039

0.73

2.15

Fig. 9.61. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6020+A6039.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

and must have been originally somewhat longer, i.e., the same length as the upper part of the frieze. The frieze has three elliptical scrolls encircled by richly rendered acanthus leaves. There are no indications that the scrolls were flanked by upright, half acanthus leaves as common in most elements. The first encircling acanthus leaf starts from the left as it grows from a fleshy leaf and curves over the top of the first scroll with its triple-tipped lobes turned inward. A fleshy leaf fills the area between the scrolls. Between the second and third scrolls, a large, fleshy, vertical, double-tipped lobe is the source of their encircling acanthus leaf. A double leaf rises up, tied by a wide ribbon, and spreads to either side to encircle the upper part of both scrolls. The lower part of the acanthus leaf separates from the upper part. On the left it encloses the left scroll in a freely rendered, in-curving movement. On the right it springs from the bottom of the vertical source leaf and spreads in both directions. The two ends meet between the mid and left scrolls, and then encircle the right scroll. The lobes have deep, v-shaped midribs and the tips are pointed and connected by small bridges to create elongated eyelets. Although the frieze is rendered over two different blocks, and does not depict the usual scroll pattern with its encircling acanthus leaves, it integrates perfectly. Its design is well adjusted, although in comparison to the usual scroll pattern it is more freely executed in higher relief. It is rich, delicate, accurately executed and deeply carved from behind for a three-dimensional effect. If it replaced a complete architrave-frieze element of the original composition, it must have been produced shortly after, as despite some freedom in depiction, it is still faithful to the original. It may have been part of the original manufacturing process, presumably the result of accidental breakage. Within the scrolls are three animals posed in a heraldic composition. Two predatory felines on either side are stalking their prey within the central scroll. On the left, a lion does not leap from the usual petaled blossom, but bends toward the right, its forequarters forming a crude, schematic, crescent-shaped bulk. Its muscled body and strong neck crouch low over its forelegs, its head pointed forward in the pose of a predator focusing on its prey. The right ear is drawn backward, the eye is schematically drilled. The jaws are partly open showing teeth. The right foreleg extends forward with a heavy paw. The depiction is natural and expresses both restrained movement and intense concentration. Within the right scroll, another predator, presumably

475

a leopard, is also stalking its prey. It leans toward the left, its forequarters leaping out of a poorly preserved, petaled blossom. The muscled body, short neck and strong rounded head stretch forward, the left ear drawn backward, the eye wide open and jaws agape. Stylized hair curls are depicted under its ear. The left foreleg is worn, but seems to extend forward, showing a heavy paw. The pose is similar to that of the left predator—a highly concentrated predator focusing on its prey. Between them is the prey, presumably a bull or cow. Its forequarters leap out of a crude, crescent-shaped mass with no details. It hunches on the ground, its long neck leaning over its outstretched forelegs. The animal faces to the left, but its head with rounded mouth and nose is turned to the right, looking over its back, its ears pointing back to the left. The well-balanced composition seems to present a prey confronting predators on both sides. The prey is not depicted in an attack pose, but rather on the defense, heavily crouched on the ground and seemingly already beaten, frightfully awaiting its fate. Both the composition and the well-detailed animals are highly naturalistic, and the artist demonstrates a keen talent for observation and perception, and an impressive ability to express the restrained energy and movement in this very expressive scene. Architrave-Frieze A6043+A110107 (Fig. 9.62) Frieze dimensions: L 1.70 m, H 0.23 m, W 0.62 m Cornice profiles: ovolo H 3.5 cm, dentils H 4.5 cm Two broken, joining parts of a concave frieze element like A6020, of which the architrave section is missing from the inventory, but probably resembled A6039. The frieze has three and a half wide, elliptical scrolls, of which the lower encircling acanthus leaf is lacking, as it must have been depicted on a separate architrave element. Between the left and central scrolls rises a wide, fleshy stem with two round fruits. Out of the stem, an acanthus leaf spreads over the scrolls to both sides, with a double-tipped lobe in between. The stem’s acanthus leaf encircles both the central and right scrolls and its ends meet in between but do not interlace. The same composition reappears between the third and fourth scrolls. Some of the lobe tips of the leaf are schematically rendered, fleshy and rounded, while others are more natural and pointed. The entire composition is heavy and lacks delicacy. The leaves are fleshy, three-dimensional and deeply carved from behind, so the pattern, although schematic and unnatural, is granted a strong light-and-shade effect.

476

Gabriel Mazor

A110107

A6043

0.23 1.70

Fig. 9.62. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6043+A110107.

The three complete scrolls are inhabited by hounds leaping to the right, while the fourth, which is entirely worn, presumably shared the same composition. Within the left scroll a hound leaps out from a petaled blossom. Its forequarters are round and muscled, its head outstretched as its (broken) forelegs must also have been. The head leans down, the right ear is laid back, and the eye is well rendered with an eyebrow and an elliptical pupil. The nose is sniffing, the mouth is partly open and the tongue is lolling out. In the next scroll, the animal leaps from a triple-petal blossom and although poorly preserved apart from the ear, it also seems to be a hound. In the third scroll another hound leaps from a four-petal blossom that engulfs the back of the animal, with only a small part of the body, the long neck and the down-turned head exposed. The right ear overlaps the eye, indicating a different kind of dog. The nose is sniffing and the mouth is open with one tooth visible. The strong, bony forelegs are resting on the scroll. These three hounds are part of a hunting scene in which they are seemingly chasing an imaginary prey on the right side. The animals are stylized, yet rendered in high relief that grants them a naturalistic, threedimensional effect. Above the frieze is the common type of ovolo, the egg shells less separated and slightly rounded, with intermediate rhomboid tongues. This is followed by the usual pattern of dentils, part of the crowning cornice. Architrave-Frieze A6035 (Fig. 9.63) General dimensions: L 2.35 m, H 0.94 m, W 0.71 m

Architrave dimensions: L 2.35, 0.17 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 0.98 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.35, 0.17 m, H 0.35 m A concave architrave-frieze element from the right side of the exedra with its right side that turns at a 120˚ angle. The architrave has the common decorated profiles, which are quite worn. The lower profiles of fasciae and astragals continue onto the right side, which is partly broken. The soffit is decorated with a guilloche pattern within a double-profiled, Miletiantype frame. The frieze has almost entirely disappeared on the left side, and is partly broken on the right. The scroll pattern is worn beyond recognition, including the upright, half acanthus leaves that flanked the scrolls, for which there is ample space. Scant remains of two scrolls on the left side seem to be inhabited by two predators, presumably of the cat family, which leap from foliated blossoms in a heraldic pose, flanking a kantharos. Both animals have heavy forequarters, a short neck and a rounded head with a seemingly open mouth. The forelegs with heavy hoofs touch the kantharos, while the animals drink from it. There is sufficient space for two more scrolls on the right side, where the remains of interlaced acanthus leaves are poorly preserved. Architrave-Frieze A6028 (Fig. 9.64) General dimensions: L 3.75 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.69 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.56 m.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6035

0.94

2.35

Fig. 9.63. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6035.

A6028

0.92

3.75

Fig. 9.64. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6028.

Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm

Soffit: L 3.20 m Frieze dimensions: H 0.36 m

477

478

Gabriel Mazor

The fully preserved architrave has the common astragal and ovolo profiles. The anthemion is of the type with alternating, up- and down-turned, fleshy acanthus leaves with incised midribs held by a unique, double linking bar that surrounds the leaf in a ring. The lower four tips of the lobe spread to both sides in a wide, s-shaped spiral with two long, pointed tips and a central, short, rounded tip in the upper lobe. The acanthus leaves spread widely to either side, and a continuous trailing pattern is created that is delicate, balanced and rendered in high quality. It is carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, granting it a strong three-dimensional effect. The soffit is of the guilloche type, deeply rendered within a double-profiled, Miletian-type frame. On the bottom surface are remains of two iron bars at both ends. The frieze consists of six inhabited scrolls that are divided into two groups by an upright acanthus leaf, with flanking leaves at either end. On the left side, a diagonally posed, five-lobed leaf is widely based on the bottom. Four short, pointed-tipped lobes spread in both directions, and the upper lobe curves gently forward. All the lobes have incised midribs and their tips are connected by small bridges creating elongated eyelets of different shapes. Two parallel grooves emphasize the leaf’s midrib. The lobes are fleshy, partly turned and carved in high relief against a deep background. On the right side, a half leaf stands upright with three side lobes of three to four elegantly pointed tips, and the upper lobe is folded over. The leaf’s grooved midrib, aligned with the frieze’s end, is strongly emphasized, while the lobes’ midribs are incised. The upright leaf in the center of the frieze is broken and most of its details are lost apart from various stems and offshoot lobes that turn toward it. It was mistakenly interpreted as the remains of an eros by Ovadiah and Turnheim (1994:31). The usual central motifs between scrolls that are customary in the scaenae frons friezes are acanthus leaves, a kantharos and in one instance a protome of Dionysus, but never an eros, which always inhabits a scroll. The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaf is of the continuous, interlacing type. It springs from behind the mid-lobe of the left-end leaf and encircles all three elliptical scrolls of the left side. At intersections of scrolls, gently woven stems with end lobes are used as space fillers. On the right side, the encircling leaf is more freely interlaced, with no continuous trailing line.

The acanthus leaf is very detailed and carved in high relief with deep cutting behind it––almost disconnected from its background. The lobes are rounded, and the pointed tips are connected with small bridges, creating different-shaped eyelets. The pattern is delicate and naturalistic with a deep, three-dimensional effect. One can observe differences between the scroll motifs on either side, presumably indicating two different artisans. All six scrolls are inhabited by poorly preserved animals, two sets of three arranged in an antithetic composition. On the left side, an animal, presumably a predator of the cat family, leaps to the right from two four-petaled blossoms. The pattern is unusual as it spreads to both sides from a central, bow-shaped midrib. The tips are rounded on one side and pointed on the other, connected by small bridges to create round eyelets. The animal has heavy forequarters, a strong, muscled neck and a large head, and one laidback ear can be identified. The mouth seems to be open and the tongue lolling out. Strong, bony forelegs with heavy paws can be seen. Within the next scroll rests the prey, presumably a sheep or hunting dog. It leaps out of a blossom with four triple-tipped petals that is elegant and naturalistic in its depiction. The body leaps forward in an almost-frontal pose, the forelegs and head turned to the right. The forequarters are squat and the neck is short. The delicate, pointed head has a pointed, upright ear, a drilled eye and a small nose. The forelegs are depicted in proper perspective as the animal turns to the right, both hoofs are visible, and the anatomy is detailed and accurate. The third scroll is inhabited by a larger animal, presumably a cow. The forequarters emerge from a blossom with four tripletipped petals, very delicate and natural in depiction. The lobes are well balanced, with three pointed tips and incised midribs. The animal’s body is rounded and heavy, there is hardly any neck, the head is large and square in shape. A laid-back ear is visible. The forelegs are bent as if grasping for a foothold. The second group of scrolls begins with a predator, presumably a lioness or leopard, within the rightmost scroll. It leaps to the left from a blossom with four pointed, triple-tipped petals of the same kind. The animal has a heavy, muscled body with incised skin wrinkles, a short neck and a large head that points straight forward, the nose erect and the jaws half open. The forelegs with heavy paws are outstretched. The predator is posed in a leaping attack, the tense, charging

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

energy well expressed. The next scroll contains the prey, presumably a cow. It leaps to the left from the same type of four-petal blossom. The forequarters are rounded and heavy, the head is turned backward, the ear erect and the mouth partly open in full awareness of the leaping predator. The forelegs are depicted in a galloping stance with a full, rounded chest between them. Here, too, the contained movement, the awareness of danger and the desperate attempt to get away are well depicted in a highly naturalistic, expressive manner. The third scroll from the right is inhabited by an animal that is difficult to identify. It emerges to the left from a petaled blossom. It has a small, rounded body, no neck, and a pointed head that is slightly turned to the right. The short left foreleg is turned inward, the other is outstretched. The animal seems to crouch peacefully rather than leap, with no awareness of the predator behind it, as it looks curiously aside. The interplay of movement and perspective is expressive. It would seem that the artist who rendered these right-

479

side scrolls was not the one who executed the left-side group. He achieves far more realistic results, due to his familiarity with the anatomy of the animals and their movements, and his greater ability to compose a highly expressive and impressive scene. Architrave-Frieze A6016 (Fig. 9.65) General dimensions: L 1.79 m, H 0.94 m, W 0.70 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 5.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Soffit: L 1.04 m Frieze dimensions: H 0.33 m The astragal and ovolo of the architrave are of the common type with rounded or rhomboid reels. On the left end, the ovolo and anthemion are simply incised and not fully executed along a 0.17 m segment. The anthemion is schematic and stylized, of the type with separated, alternating up-turned palmettes and

A6016

0.94

1.79

Fig. 9.65. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element 6016.

480

Gabriel Mazor

down-turned acanthus leaves with no linking bars. The palmettes have a central leaf, flanked by pairs of stylized, s-shaped leaves that are freely depicted. The acanthus leaves have a central leaf flanked by long and short side leaves that are also stylized. The pattern is not interlaced and it lacks the usual trailing effect. It is stylized, rigid, schematic and far from naturalistic, although it is carved in high relief with its fleshy leaves deeply cut from behind. The frieze has two inhabited scrolls in a heraldic pose on either side of a central palmette and framed at both ends by acanthus leaves. On the left side, the upright, half acanthus leaf is preserved in its lower, two- or three-tipped lobes, the pointed, connected tips in high relief. The leaf on the right side is better preserved and more elaborate in its depiction. It has two triple-tipped lobes with a deeply grooved midrib. The tips are fleshy, pointed and connected by small bridges. The central palmette motif has a main trunk-shaped, upright leaf flanked by outspread, spiral-shaped leaves diminishing in size upward. The pattern is schematic, fleshy and carved in high relief. The scrolls’ acanthus leaves spring from within the flanking acanthus leaves on either side, and run into the palmette’s lower part, while they partly encircle the upper parts of the scrolls but do not continue on both sides or below. The animal leaps out of an acanthus leaf with three pointed tips that seemingly continue the scroll, although they are not part of the scroll. The scroll leaves are depicted in high relief, deeply cut from behind to create a strong lightand-shade effect. The tips are connected by bridges, creating different-shaped eyelets. Within the scrolls, two badly defaced animals, both presumably predators of the cat family, face the central palmette motif in heraldic pose. In the left scroll, a leopard or panther leaping to the right has a rounded body, a long neck, a square head and a laid-back ear. The forelegs are long, strong and bony with heavy paws. The right scroll contains a leaping animal, presumably a lioness, turned to the left. It has a heavy body, a shorter neck and a similar square-shaped head. The forelegs are long and strong with heavy paws. Both predators seem to be stalking their prey and are depicted with expressive realism in a naturalistic pose of contained strength and tense, restrained motion. The composition is somewhat different from the usual ones, and seems to represent a much freer artistic attitude, although it still remains within the frieze’s general scheme.

Architrave-Frieze A6033 (Fig. 9.66) General dimensions: L 2.33, 0.48 m, H 0.91 m, W 0.73 m Architrave dimensions L 2.12, 0.40 m, H 0.60 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.13 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.20, 0.40 m, H 0.36 m An architrave-frieze with a left corner. The fasciae are separated by an astragal with shorter elliptical beads than the common ones, and slender, rhomboid, disc-shaped reels. The ovolo has round eggs and wide, separated egg shells. The stylized, triple-petal blossoms, occasionally diamond-shaped tongues and in one place a free acanthus leaf, replace the usual schematic, intermediate tongues. The anthemion is of the type with alternating up- and down-turned, trailing acanthus leaves. The main pattern is created by detailed up-turned leaves held by a linking bar, with two upper, divided leaves and lower spiral leaves that spread out in three pointed, triple-tipped lobes. The downturned leaves, of the same type but less elaborate, are used as space fillers. The tips of all the leaves gently touch, creating a rhythmic trailing pattern and forming elongated eyelets. The pattern is carved in high relief, the fleshy leaves deeply cut from behind, the light-andshade effect lending it a rich, natural appearance. The soffit is of the elaborate ivy-leaf pattern set within a Miletian-type frame. Individual ivy leaves within rounded-stem scrolls create a continuous linked pattern, carved in high relief with a natural rhythm and realistic depiction. On the lower surface of the element, the remains of two iron connecting rods are evident. The frieze contains two pairs of scrolls with a central floral motif separating them, and flanking acanthus leaves. On the left side are two upright half acanthus leaves, each with two side lobes of three to five pointed tips, and an upper, forward-folded lobe. The left leaf engulfs the frieze corner. The midrib is strongly emphasized by two deep, parallel grooves and the midrib that aligns with the corner. The other half of the leaf frames the frieze on its left corner. It has three four-tipped side lobes and an upper, forward-folded lobe. A similar half leaf, although poorly preserved, frames the frieze on the right side. The acanthus leaves are carved in high relief, deeply cut from behind, and have wide fleshy lobes. Each pair of scrolls is individually encircled by an interlaced acanthus leaf. On the left, the leaf springs

A6033

0.91

0.73

2.33

Fig. 9.66. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6033.

482

Gabriel Mazor

from the lower lobe of the framing half leaf. It encircles a somewhat rounded scroll and an elliptical one. The scrolls are linked, not interlaced, with an upper offshoot blossom and a down-turned stem with a triple-petal blossom. The right-side scrolls have the same pattern, although they are more interlaced. Between the two scrolls are two offshoot leaves in the lower level, and above them stems tangle with two petaled blossoms and long, pointed, stylized, inward-folded buds. The scrolls’ floral design and blossoms are delicately carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind. The three-dimensional composition is naturalistic, rich and delicate in its details, and rendered in high quality by a fine artisan. The left pair of scrolls is inhabited by an eros confronting an animal, both of which are poorly preserved. The eros turns to the right, its right leg stretched backward, outside the scroll, with a large exaggerated foot turned to the right. The left leg is bent forward and hidden by a leaf. The torso is depicted in frontal view with the right arm stretched out to the back, while the left arm is bent. No weapon or shield depictions are preserved. The head is half turned to the right, with scanty remains of curly hair. The eros attacks a feline predator––presumably a leopard or panther–– that inhabits the next scroll and leaps toward the left from a multi-petal blossom. The long, muscled body almost leaps out of the blossom in an attacking pose, the right leg depicted in the rear, behind the acanthus leaf. The animal has a long neck and a head pointed down with upright ears. The forelegs are outstretched with strong paws. The right pair of scrolls is inhabited by two poorly preserved animals that emerge to the right. The left scroll’s inhabitant was broken off and a fragment of it was found by Applebaum. The fragment (0.28 × 0.22 m) depicts the upper part of a finely rendered hound that fits perfectly in the broken space. The forequarters of the hound are covered with stylized curly hair neatly carved as small tufts and a collar dotted with metal buttons is around its neck. The long ears are laid back and the lower curls hang over the neck. A large, diamond-shaped eye has a naturalistic pupil and under it the lower cheek is gently rounded. The nose is long and round, the jaws partly open showing teeth and a tongue. The forelegs, with fingered paws, are outstretched. The hound seems to be part of a hunting scene, stalking and closely observing its prey.

The depiction of the hound is highly realistic in its three-dimensional composition, delicate and accurate in its detailed and precise rendering, carved in high relief with fine perspective. The expressive, constrained movement and high tension almost bring the hunting scene to life. This perfectly preserved frieze fragment indicates the high quality of the animals and eroses carved on all the frieze elements, the narrative details of which are not well preserved. Applebaum does not mention the findspot of the fragment, although it was most probably detached from the frieze when it collapsed in 749 CE. Within the next scroll, the animal being chased by the hound is poorly preserved and difficult to identify. It seems to be a small animal with a rounded body, a small pointed head and elongated, laid-back ears, presumably another hound. It leaps to the right from a triple-petal blossom, its forelegs outstretched and its head leaning over them as if hiding. Both related scenes within the two pairs of scrolls have separate narratives. Architrave-Frieze A6019 (Fig. 9.67) General dimensions: L 2.52 m, H 0.79 m, W 0.75 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.02 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 4.5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.65 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.95 m, H 0.22 m The architrave is decorated with the common astragal and ovolo. The reels are elongated and the beads are round or elongated. The ovolo eggs are round with wellseparated shells and intermediate rhomboid tongues. The anthemion comprises separated, alternating upand down-turned palmettes and acanthus leaves with no linking bars. The palmettes have a central leaf flanked by pairs of s-shaped, in-turned leaves. The acanthus leaves have a central tip flanked by two outturned leaves. The pattern is rigid, schematic, and has no trailing effect. It is fleshy, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, thus granting a strong lightand-shade effect. The centered soffit is ornamented with a stylized, schematic guilloche with central knobs, sunken within a crescent-ended frame. The upper part of the frieze was cut off and the upper enclosing leaves of the scrolls are lacking, as well as the upper part of the animals. There are four elliptical scrolls flanked by upright, half acanthus leaves. The

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

483

A6019

0.79

2.52

Fig. 9.67. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6019.

leaf on the left side is not preserved, that on the right is well preserved. It is a wide, three-lobed leaf with pointed tips and a deeply incised midrib. The encircling leaves of the scrolls spring from within the flanking half leaves. They encircle the upper part of the scrolls with offshoots that run along the bottom. The scrolls are interlaced at the center with wide, fleshy stems, apart from the left and right scrolls that do not interlace and have a wide, down-turned leaf with five pointed tips and a double-tipped, offshoot leaf as a space filler. The rightside pair of scrolls is encircled by a leaf at the bottom,

while the left-side pair is not encircled at the bottom. The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaves are fleshy, carved in high relief and well cut from behind, but stylized, schematically rendered and not naturalistic. The composition of the scrolls and the animals is well balanced and symmetrical, and the narrative has an antithetic setting in which the two pairs of animals on either side face the center of the frieze. From the left scroll, a bull emerges from a schematically rendered, petaled blossom. Its heavy, rounded body turns to the right, while its head faces front. On the chest are stylized

484

Gabriel Mazor

curls. The head is large, triangular in shape, and leans down over its forelegs. The high forehead and thick eyebrows overshadow the eyes, and two bow-shaped horns and curling hair are seen on both sides. The nose is wide and rounded, and the half-open jaws show teeth and a lolling tongue. The right foreleg is long, strong and bony with a heavy hoof. The next scroll of the left pair is inhabited by a cow in the same pose. The heavy, rounded forequarters emerge toward the right from a triple-petal blossom. Folds of skin are incised on the chest, the head faces front and leans slightly down. It has a wide forehead, well-carved eyes and outstretched, pointed ears. The nose and mouth are broken. The two right-side scrolls are inhabited by hounds facing left that are very similar in their depiction, apart from small details. They emerge from wide, schematic, three-petal, crescent-like blossoms. The forequarters are cylindrical in shape and convey muscle and volume. Skin folds are depicted on the neck. The head and rounded nose are pointed forward. The hound on the left has elliptical, laid-back ears and heavy cheeks, and its mouth is closed. The hound on the right has ears hanging down, heavy eyebrows and curls falling down beside rounded checks. The jaws are partly open with a lolling tongue. The left foreleg is strong and bony, and the details of the paw are emphasized. The antithetic composition of the two pairs of scrolls does not represent a shared narrative. The bull and cow on the left side rest peacefully with their heads upon their hoofs, unaware of the hounds. The hounds, on the other hand, while not in a hunting pose, are ready to pounce forward. The animals are depicted delicately and naturalistically in three-dimensional poses, with realistic anatomical details. They convey a high degree of expressiveness, the work of a well-qualified artisan who favored a tendency for over-sized and detailed heads. The anatomy and realistic poses reflect an observant eye that seems to have been familiar with the animals. Both the scrolls and the animals were carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, lending the frieze a strong light-and-shade effect. Architrave-Frieze A6003 (Fig. 9.68) General dimensions: L 1.61 m, H 0.93 m, W 0.74 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.75, 0.60, 0.95 m, H 0.60 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 4.5 cm, fascia I H 13 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 0.60, 0.95 m, H 0.31–0.33 m

The decorated architrave profiles are partly preserved in small sections on the three sides of this console element. The common astragals separating the fasciae have shorter and rounder beads and thinner, elliptical reels than the usual. The ovolo has pearshaped eggs that are flat on top and pointed on the bottom, wide-spread shells and stylized, elliptical tongues. The anthemion is an uncommon type with up-turned acanthus leaves and intermediate trailing acanthus leaves. The main acanthus leaves have five out-curving lobes with three single tips and two double tips. The intermediate trailing leaves with inner, airy, s-shaped spirals spring from above as space fillers, creating a winding, continuous trailing motif. The pattern is carved in high relief, well cut from behind with a fairly high degree of three-dimensional depth. The frieze is worn on both sides and broken on its facade. On the left side, neither of the flanking, upright half acanthus leaves is preserved. Two scrolls interlace and are inhabited by confronting animals. The encircling leaves of the scrolls spring from both sides, apparently from within the missing flanking leaves. They curve around the scrolls, interlace in a delicate pattern, and have four lobes with three to five pointed tips and incised midribs. Apart from the interlaced leaves, the rest of the scrolls are schematic and freely rendered. From within the left scroll an animal, presumably a horse, gallops out from a four-petal blossom, the forequarters and head turned to the right. The foreleg is poised over the leaf and the high neck and head are held upright. As the animal is almost entirely broken, no other details can be discerned. Within the right scroll, another animal, presumably a predator of the cat family, leaps to the left, apparently from a foliated blossom that is broken. Little of the animal is preserved apart from a rounded, muscled body, a long neck, a pointed upraised head, and forelegs with strong paws. The right-side frieze is poorly preserved, its left part entirely broken, although on the right end the flanking leaf is seen. It has three- or four-tipped side lobes. The scroll has a schematic encircling leaf that springs from within the flanking leaf’s mid-lobe. Scant remains on its left indicate the existence of another scroll that is entirely broken. The surviving scroll is inhabited by an unidentified animal leaping to the left from a four-petal blossom. Its rounded forequarters,

485

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6003

Top

Left face

Front

0.93

1.61

0.74 Right face

Fig. 9.68. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6003.

rounded head and foreleg are all of relatively small dimensions, presumably indicating a small animal such as a dog. The broken facade must have had the usual upright half acanthus leaves engulfing its corners and flanking the side faces, as observed on other console elements (A6001, A6002).

Architrave-frieze A6007–6010 (Fig. 9.69) General dimensions: L 2.57 m, H 0.90 m, W 0.34 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 14 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Frieze dimensions: L 2.57 m, H 0.31 m

486

Gabriel Mazor

A6007

A6008

A6009

A6010

0.90

2.57

Fig. 9.69. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, eastern hospitalia architrave-frieze elements A6007–A6010.

This is the architrave-frieze element of the eastern hospitalia, of which four adjoining fragments were recovered; the rest were apparently lost. The architrave fasciae are separated by the common type of astragals, although the beads are shorter than the common oval or elliptical ones, and the reels are rhomboid and considerably more slender. The ovolo has pear-shaped eggs connected on top by small bridges, and the shells are spread open and thinner in profile. The intermediate tongues are slender and rhomboid-shaped with deeply carved, smaller inner tongues and occasional triple-petal blossoms. The anthemion is of the type with up-turned acanthus leaves with a separate, intermediate, s-shaped, trailing branch. The up-turned acanthus leaves have a central tip and two pairs of sideways, double-tipped lobes. The stylized trailing branch, also found on several soffit ornaments, is composed of up- and down-turned spirals. The pattern has a continuous, trailing-branch effect. It is not carved in high relief, hardly cut from behind, and thus presents a stylized, flat, non-plastic effect. The length of the architrave-frieze with all four fragments still lacks a 1.30 m long segment of its original 3.90 m length. This missing segment was

replaced during the Stratum 11 reconstruction stage by A6024 (see below). The preserved segment is flanked by upright acanthus leaves. The left side of the frieze starts with a widely based, half acanthus leaf, and another half leaf presumably appeared on the missing segment of the frieze’s right side. It has three tripletipped side lobes and a forward-folded lobe. The tips are pointed and the midribs are emphasized by parallel grooves. The lobe-ribs are defined by deep, v-shaped grooves. Next to the half acanthus leaf is a complete, widely based leaf with three pointed-tipped lobes and one forward-folded lobe. In between the two leaves, at the top, is a small, triple-lobed leaf. On the right side, a complete leaf rises from the corner, leaning slightly to the left. It has three pointed-tipped lobes on each side and one forward-folded lobe. The midrib is marked by parallel grooves, while the lobe-ribs have deep, v-shaped grooves. The tips are connected by small bridges creating variously shaped eyelets. The acanthus leaves are fleshy, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind to the point that they are nearly disconnected from the background, thus lending the composition a strong three-dimensional effect.

487

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

There are three elliptical, almost rectangular scrolls created by two acanthus leaves that spring from the two flanking leaves and do not interlace. They are schematically rendered, fleshy, and deeply carved from behind, but lack the plastic, natural depiction of the usual framing leaves and were presumably executed by a different artisan. In the left-side scroll, an animal, presumably a predator of the cat family, leaps to the right from a triple-petal blossom. It is poorly preserved and only heavy, rounded forequarters, a thick neck and a strong foreleg with an emphasized paw are visible. The next scroll, also poorly preserved, contains the prey, which leaps to the left from a four-petal blossom. The large body and foreleg, the lack of a neck and the possible trunk on the left may indicate an elephant. In the right-side scroll, another animal, presumably a feline predator––a leopard or panther––leaps to the left from a six-petal blossom. Strong, rounded forequarters, a thick neck and a pointed nose are depicted over strong muscled outstretched forelegs with heavy paws. An eye and two skin folds are preserved. The two side predators are stalking the prey in the middle with constrained movement and tension, which, despite the scanty remains, are well expressed. If the prey is an elephant, then it is ill proportioned in comparison to the size of the attacking predators. Architrave-Frieze A6024 (Fig. 9.70) General dimensions: L 1.29, 0.39 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.67 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.29, 0.30 m, H 0.58 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 4.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 9.5 cm Soffit: L 0.55 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.29, 0.39 m, H 0.34 m This architrave-frieze element with a decorated rightside corner was shortened during a reconstruction stage and placed next to A6007–A6010 on the eastern hospitalia. The architrave has the common astragal type with round and rhomboid beads. The ovolo has intermediate rhomboid tongues and occasional triple-lobe leaves. The anthemion is of the separated, alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves held by linking bars. The lower, winding, triple-tipped leaves with airy, spiral ends create a trailing-branch effect. The pattern is gently rendered in high relief and deeply cut from behind, creating a strong light-andshade effect.

A6024

0.92

1.29

Fig. 9.70. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6024.

The soffit, cut in half when the element was shortened, is of the triple-petal, running-blossom type, carved within a double-profiled, crescent-ended frame. On the upper surface of the architrave-frieze element are the remains of three iron connecting rods. The element’s left end was cut through a scroll, while on the right side it ends with framing acanthus leaves. A leaf engulfs the corner, half depicted on the frieze facade and half on the right side. Both halves have three triple-tipped lobes with the emphasized midrib aligned with the corner. Next to it, a complete leaf is widely based on the bottom, leaning slightly to the left. It has three lobes on each side with three or four pointed tips and a grooved midrib. The tips are fleshy, the lobes marked with deep, v-shaped midribs, and the pattern is carved in high relief. The two surviving scrolls of the original frieze are encircled by a leaf pattern that emerges from the cut-off scroll on the left side of the frieze. It encircles the two round scrolls and interlaces between them with offshoot blossoms as a space filler. The lobe tips are connected by small bridges, creating eyelets of different sizes. The leaf pattern is naturalistic and gently depicted, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, achieving high-quality three-dimensionality and a realistic effect. The two scrolls are inhabited by animals leaping to the right from six-petal blossoms. In the left scroll, a round imprint of a body with two short forelegs can be seen, while in the right scroll only a round imprint with no details has survived. The scant remains prevent identification of the animals.

488

Gabriel Mazor

A6049

A6004

Top

Front

Left face

0.92

0.76

1.82

A6004

A6049

Right face

Fig. 9.71. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6004+A6049.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Architrave-Frieze A6004+A6049 (Fig. 9.71) General dimensions: L 1.82 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.76 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.30, 0.75, 1.10 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 7.5 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 13 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Frieze dimensions: L 1.03/0.40/1.30 m The fasciae are separated by the common type of astragals with elongated reels and slender elliptical beads. The ovolo has rounded eggs and well-separated shells with an intermediate pattern varying between elliptical, rhomboid and triple-blossom darts. The anthemion is of the type with separated, alternating up-turned acanthus leaves and down-turned palmettes with no linking bars. The palmettes have a central tip flanked by a pair of out-turned spiral tips. The acanthus leaves have a central tip with two pairs of out-turned, double-tipped lobes. The pattern is rigid, stylized and well separated, with no trailing effect. All the architrave profiles are carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, thus granting a strong light-and-shade effect. The left side of the frieze is poorly preserved, the right side somewhat better, although partly broken, and the facade is completely worn. The frieze begins on the left side with an upright, half leaf, the midrib integrated into the unworked stone. It has three long, side lobes with three pointed tips and an upper, forward-folded lobe. The tips are long and fleshy, with ridged midribs and rounded knobs at their separation points. As they meet, elongated eyelets are created. Only half a scroll is preserved, its encircling leaf springing from within the flanking mid-lobe. A stem curves around the scroll from below and connects to a triple-petal blossom from which an animal––of which no trace remains––seems to spring to the right. On the right side of the frieze, both the flanking, upright half leaves are entirely broken. Two oval, inhabited scrolls present a heraldic composition flanking a central kantharos. The acanthus leaves spring from both sides of the frieze and encircle the scrolls. As the kantharos is also encircled, the entire composition is elegantly contained within a floral frame of long, pointed-tipped leaves. The tips are fleshy with a deep, central, v-shaped groove. The rounded stems touch four-petal blossoms from which the animals spring. The kantharos in the center is of the common type. Of all the kantharos depictions, this is the best preserved. It has a triple-stepped base narrowing upward, a rounded body with wide shoulders and a high neck.

489

It is vertically ribbed, perhaps depicting a metal kantharos. Three high, s-shaped handles are visible, all with pierced, round eyelets on top and bottom. Two identical animals, presumably feline predators, lean over the kantharos in a drinking pose. The forequarters are long, rounded and muscled, the necks thick, and the rounded heads hang down. Strong, bony forelegs with heavy paws stretch forward. The animals convey a realistic sense of movement. The broken facade must have had a motif similar to examples described earlier––two upright, half acanthus leaves flanking a frontally depicted face (cf. Medusa and Oceanus in A6001, A6002). The composition is balanced, conveying an atmosphere of serenity and peaceful harmony depicted in high relief and deeply cut from behind, lending the composition a plastic, three-dimensional, realistic and quite expressive effect. Architrave-Frieze A6034 (Fig. 9.72) General dimensions: L 2.77 m, H 0.87 m, W 0.54 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.45 m, H 0.59 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 5 cm, fascia I H 15.5 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8.5 cm Soffit: L 1.87 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.21 m, H 0.28 m The architrave fasciae are separated by the customary astragals with long beads and round reels. The ovolo has round schematic eggs, wide shells and intermediate rhomboid tongues. The anthemion is of the type with separated, alternating up-turned palmettes and downturned acanthus leaves with no linking bars. The palmettes have a central vertical tip and two flanking pairs of s-shaped leaves that terminate in in-turned, lower and upper spirals. The acanthus leaves have a central pointed tip and two out-turned, double-tipped lobes. The pattern is rigid, schematic and stylized in its fleshy leaf depiction, and lacks the continuous trailing effect and any naturalistic refinement. The soffit is of the stylized trailing-branch type set within a Miletian-type frame, and runs from both ends to meet in the center. The trailing-branch pattern is created by separate winding, spiral-shaped offshoots that appear to be linked. The remains of several iron connecting rods are observed on the element’s lower and upper surfaces. The frieze is well preserved, although the upper part was cut off, thus the upper encircling leaf of the scrolls

490

Gabriel Mazor

A6034

0.87

2.77

Fig. 9.72. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6034.

is missing. The frieze is flanked by two upright, half acanthus leaves, of which only scant traces can be seen on the left side and somewhat better-preserved remains on the right side. It seems to be of the common type with three side lobes with three pointed tips. Four wide, elliptical scrolls are encircled by two trailing acanthus leaves that spring from the flanking upright leaves. They interlace with offshoot blossoms in between the scrolls as space fillers. Rounded stems are connected to the petaled blossoms. The interlaced pattern of leaves with three-tipped lobes, rounded stems and offshoot blossoms comprises the center of the composition. Two pairs of animals inhabit the scrolls, posed in an antithetic composition in which both pairs face the central, interlaced floral pattern. The best-preserved animal, a spotted leopard, inhabits the left-side scroll. It leaps to the right from a four-petal blossom. The strong, round, muscled forequarters, the thick neck and the head lowered over the forelegs create a bow-shaped upper contour. The body, neck and right foreleg are spotted with incised circles, depicting––in a somewhat stylized manner––the leopard’s spotted hide. Its head is quite detailed. Leaf-like ears with inner channels stand erect, and curly hair hangs from the cheeks in

a stylized fashion. The forehead is high, the eyebrows emphasized, and the slit-like eyes are half closed. The nose is broken off and the lower jaw is partly open, showing teeth. The right foreleg, long, strong and bony, has a very detailed paw with pads and claws. The leopard is stalking its prey in a tense, expressive pose, its energy and movement constrained as it prepares to leap. This well-preserved leopard once again enables us a glimpse of the high-quality and talented rendering of the animals in the frieze, most of which have been partly or completely lost. The next scroll contains a horse galloping to the right from a petaled blossom. Its forequarters and neck create a continuous line, while the head is lowered and thrown strongly forward. Of the nose and mouth, only contour lines survive, but they seem to depict a horse. The right foreleg has a well-depicted hoof. Although it is poorly preserved, the animal’s beautiful and expressive rendering is still discernible, presenting a natural pose that contains all the tension and motion of a galloping horse. The two partly preserved, right-side scrolls seem to depict another pair of animals in a similar hunting scene. The animal in the rightmost scroll leaps to the

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

left from a triple-petal blossom. The forequarters and chest are round with a long, muscled neck thrown forward, and the head is lowered over the paw. The jaws seem to be partly open in a stylized and schematic rendering, and curly hair hangs down from the neck. The long, strong, bony right foreleg has the same detailed paw as the spotted leopard, with pads and claws, and seems to indicate a feline predator. As the fully preserved foreleg has no spots, it is reasonable to assume that this animal represents a lioness, also stalking its prey in a tensed pose. The prey inhabits the next scroll and seems to be a horse. It gallops to the left from the scroll’s encircling leaf, rather than from the customary inner petaled blossom, presumably due to lack of space. The forequarters are strong and muscled, and the right shoulder is well rendered. The neck is stretched forward, the head bent slightly down and forward in a galloping pose, and the poorly preserved, bony right foreleg is thrust forward. The animal’s naturalistic pose expresses tension, motion and energy. The entire frieze is harmoniously balanced, presenting a high-quality artistic rendering of a realistic, natural and expressive composition. Architrave-Frieze A6025+A6058 (Fig. 9.73) General dimensions: L 2.44, 0.48 m, H 0.93 m, W 0.74 m Architrave dimensions: L 2.00, 0.48 m, H 0.55 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11.5 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Soffit: L 1.33 m Frieze dimensions: L 2.00, 0.48 m, H 0.38 m The architrave has the customary fasciae-separating astragals with round reels. The ovolo has rounded eggs, well-separated shells and intermediate, rhomboid tongues. The anthemion is of the separated, alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves with linking bars. The segmented leaf has upright, pointed, outturned tips and a trailing pattern at the bottom. The pattern is carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, presenting a delicately rendered, realistic and naturalistic depiction of a three-dimensional trailing composition. The soffit is of the garland type, set within a crescentended, doubled-profiled, Miletian-type frame. The pattern consists of three to four fleshy, pointed leaves carved on the convex surface from both ends toward the central, four-petal rosette that has a central knob and drill holes. It is delicately rendered in high relief,

491

and sunken within an elaborate frame, lending it a realistic, three-dimensional effect. Three connecting rods are observed on the upper surface. The frieze is almost entirely preserved apart from the right-side scroll. It consists of three inhabited scrolls flanked by upright acanthus leaves. On the left side, an upright, half acanthus leaf has three side lobes with five long, pointed tips. The tips are fleshy, rounded and occasionally connected by small bridges. On the right side, an upright acanthus leaf engulfs the corner of the frieze, half on the right side of the frieze and half on the facade. On the short facade side, another upright, half leaf frames the composition. Both halves have three side lobes with five pointed tips. The tips connect to create variously shaped eyelets. On the right side of the facade, next to the half leaf, another complete acanthus leaf was depicted, leaning slightly to the left. All the lobes are fleshy and rounded, with deeply grooved midribs. Two trailing, interlaced acanthus leaves encircle the three scrolls. They originate on both sides, from within the mid-lobe of the upright leaf. The scrolls are elliptical, well balanced and encircled in gentle harmony by the fleshy leaf and stem, all the tips inturned. Tendrils wind in and out and petaled blossoms act as space fillers. The pointed tips are connected by small bridges, creating eyelets, and drill holes are visible. The entire floral composition of flanking, upright leaves and scroll-encircling leaves is carved in high relief at various levels, and deeply cut from behind. The well-depicted pattern is gentle, delicate and naturalistic, lending the frieze a deep, threedimensional effect. Two inhabited scrolls, apart from the broken right one, are well preserved. The left-side scroll contains a griffin leaping to the right from within stylized pairs of five-petal blossoms. The body is partly hidden by the griffin’s right wing, thus enhancing the threedimensional effect. The somewhat schematic wing has a fleshy crescent shape with deeply incised feathers. The left wing is seen in the background. Between them is the griffin’s neck with a stylized, foliated hairstyle. The head is slightly turned to the right and therefore both erect, pointed ears with leaf-shaped inner grooves are visible. Two horns rise between the ears. The eyes are naturalistic, with high eyebrows, oval-shaped pupils and deep inner corners. The nose is round and emphasized and the jaw with raised lips is agape. The thick, bony forelegs have long hoofs.

492

Gabriel Mazor

The next scroll is inhabited by a leopard that leaps to the right from a double, four-petal blossom. The forequarters are heavy, the well-emphasized muscles visible through its hide. The neck is partly turned, depicting the tensed muscles, and the left ear is erect. The long head, turned backward to watch the griffin, has a small drilled eye and a partly open jaw. Both forelegs and heavy paws rest peacefully on the stem, the long digits and claws rendered in details. The last scroll on the right contains a camel, of which

A6025

most of the body and neck are worn, and only the head and left leg are preserved. The animal emerges to the left from a foliated blossom as do the two other animals. The head is long and leans downward. High eyebrows are detailed, and a protruding right eye with a deeply drilled pupil was perhaps filled with an inlay. The nose is long, bony and ridged with well-depicted nostrils. The rounded mouth with thin lips is strongly defined. The long left foreleg is thin and bony.

A6058

0.93

2.44

0.74

Fig. 9.73. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6025+A6058.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

493

separated, alternating up-turned palmettes and downturned acanthus leaves with no linking bars, which do not interlace into a trailing pattern. The soffit is of the guilloche type with a central knob, set within a crescent-ended, double-profiled frame. On the lower and upper surfaces of the left side are remains of two iron connecting rods. The frieze has four round scrolls flanked by upright acanthus leaves. Of the left-side leaf, only scant remains of the side-lobe tips can be seen, while the right-side leaf is entirely preserved. The upright acanthus leaf is not as widely based as usual, although the lower lobes give such an impression. It has three six-tipped lobes that spread in both directions. The tips are pointed and elegantly rendered with the upper lobe tips folded forward. As the tips meet, eyelets of different shapes are created. The midrib and lobe-ribs are incised and the leaf is fleshy, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind. The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaves originate from within the framing, upright leaves and they interlace between the scrolls. Unlike the common scroll pattern, here there is an inner spiral leaf that continues into the petaled blossom from which the animal springs. As a result, the inner pattern is far more integrated and harmonious, and forms an almostcomplete inner circle with out-turned tips. The lobe tips are fleshy and pointed, and most are connected by small bridges to create different-shaped eyelets. The petaled blossoms, mostly with three tips, are delicately rendered. The alternating up- and downturned offshoots are elaborate, with triangular-shaped

The detailed rendering of all three animals, either mythological or real, reveals close observation and artistic capability. The animals’ customary, pre-planned pose within the scrolls presented the talented artist with a challenge to create an expressive composition. A triple-scroll composition is by nature asymmetrical, elsewhere solved by a parade presentation in which the three animals leap in the same direction. Here, the solution is somewhat more sophisticated, as the animals on either side are posed in an antithetical stance, while the central animal’s body faces in one direction and the head in the other. The rendering of both the floral motif and the animals is rich and elaborate, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, resulting in a three-dimensional pattern with a strong light-andshade effect. This frieze is the work of a talented, wellqualified artist who was a good observer of nature and its profound expressiveness. Architrave-Frieze A6022 (Fig. 9.74) General dimensions: L 2.32 m, H 0.96 m, W 0.67 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.69 m, H 0.55 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4.5 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.25 m. Frieze dimensions: L 1.88 m, H 0.37 m The architrave’s fasciae are separated by the customary astragals and although poorly preserved, they seem to be of the common type, as is the ovolo. The anthemion is entirely worn except for a small segment indicating

A6022

0.96

2.32

Fig. 9.74. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6022.

494

Gabriel Mazor

leaves and blossoms that fill the empty spaces between the interlaced scrolls. The pattern is naturalistic, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, which grant it a rich, three-dimensional effect. The frieze consists of four inhabited scrolls with small animals in an antithetic composition in which the pairs on either side confront each other. As a result of the unusual scroll pattern, the animals do not leap out to either side but crouch in a semi-frontal or semiprofiled pose. They are smaller than the usual animals, their forelegs shorter and their bodies rounded and contained within the foliated blossoms. Their unusual pose required a significantly higher relief than usual. Regretfully, all four animals were broken beyond recognition, but it is clear that they differ from the customary animal repertoire of the other frieze elements. Frieze A6021+A6267 (Fig. 9.75) Frieze dimensions: L 2.50 m, H 0.34 m, W 0.65 m The frieze is broken on its right side, and the left-side scroll was partly cut, presumably in the later, Stratum 11 reconstruction stage. Originally there must have been four scrolls arranged in an antithetic, heraldic composition with a central leaf. The large elliptical scrolls are encircled from above by a fleshy acanthus leaf with triple-tipped lobes that curves down between each pair of scrolls. The leaf is naturalistic and elegantly carved in high relief with pointed tips and deeply grooved midribs. The scrolls are not encircled at the bottom. In the center, two gently in-curved leaves are attached to the forelegs of the heraldically posed animals, seemingly continuing the scrolls. Springing out of these leaves are two stylized, in-turned spiral leaves that create a central heart-shaped motif, which is highly decorative and in perfect harmony with its flanking scrolls.

Both sides of the balanced composition have a pair of animals facing center in an antithetical pose. On the left, the broken first scroll contains an animal, presumably a feline predator, which leaps to the right. A strong, rounded, muscled body and a thick neck is followed by a broken head, of which only a small, almond-shaped ear survives. A heavy foreleg with a broken paw stretches forward. The predator is depicted as stalking its prey. The next scroll contains the prey, which seems to be a mountain goat (ibex). It springs to the right from the scroll’s leaf, rather than the customary petaled blossom. The animal is running from the hunting predator. Its strong, rounded body has well-expressed muscles that reflect tense movement. The neck is wide and short, followed by a broken head of which only the contours remain. Stylized, diagonally ribbed horns curve backward to meet the erect ears. Under the ear, stylized hair curls are depicted. The head bends down and has a round nose and mouth. The right foreleg is outstretched, slightly bent, with a long hoof. The animal is expressively depicted. The right pair of scrolls contains two animals in a similar composition. The broken right scroll is inhabited by an animal that leaps to the left, of which only the head survives, stretched forward and slightly lowered, with jaws open showing teeth. The slit-shaped eyes are partly closed, with elliptical pupils and heavy eyebrows. The neck is wide and the long, hairy cheek is partly covered by an ear. The animal, presumably a predator of the cat family, stalks its prey and is ready to leap. In the next scroll the prey, presumably a rhinoceros, leaps to the left, but not from the customary petaled blossom. The large, muscled shoulder is followed by a long, wide neck, a high forehead and a hairy chin. The mouth and nose are square and a central, short, pointed horn is depicted at the end of the nose. The left foreleg is long, strong and bony with a long hoof,

A6021

A6267

0.34

2.50

Fig. 9.75. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6021+A6267.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

while the right foreleg is depicted in the background. The animal is posed as if fearfully galloping away from the pursuing predator. The scroll’s heraldic composition has a balanced harmony. Although poorly preserved, the animals seem to be naturalistically rendered and apparently display a close observation of nature and a highly expressive style. The scroll’s freely depicted encircling acanthus leaves and in particular its balanced central motif, as well as the animals, are carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind. The realistic, detailed and harmonious composition has a strong three-dimensional effect. Architrave-Frieze A6023 (Fig. 9.76) General dimensions: L 1.30 m, H 0.91 m, W 0.69 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.95 m, H 0.59 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 5.5 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 12.5 cm, fascia III H 9.5 cm Soffit: L 0.39 m Frieze dimensions: L 0.93 m, H 0.30 m The architrave fasciae are separated by the common astragal with rhomboid reels. The ovolo has the usual pattern of intermediate rhomboid tongues. The anthemion is of the alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves with linking bars. The winding, tripletipped lobes connect to create a trailing composition. On the right side, the architrave profiles are stepped where they connect to the next architrave-frieze element (of the eastern itinera versurarum). The soffit has a central rosette flanked by double petaled blossoms set within a crescent-ended, Miletian-type frame.

495

The frieze presents a complete, uncut, well-preserved segment with a single scroll flanked by upright acanthus leaves. On the left side is half a leaf with three side lobes bearing five or six tips. The upper lobe is folded forward. The midrib is marked by two parallel grooves, and the bow-shaped lobe-ribs are incised. On the right side, a complete upright leaf leans slightly to the left. It has five lobes with four pointed tips, the upper one folded forward. The scroll’s encircling acanthus leaf springs from the upper left side and encircles the scroll clockwise with in-turned tips and offshoot blossoms. At the end, a round stem connects to the inner petaled blossom. The floral pattern is fleshy and carved in high relief, deeply cut from behind to the point that it is almost disconnected. The tips are joined by small bridges, creating variously shaped eyelets, and drill holes are visible. Within the scroll, an almost-perfectly preserved mountain goat (ibex) leaps to the right from a triple-petal blossom. The forequarters are round and muscled and the neck and head curve down in a gentle bow shape. Long, rounded horns, diagonally ribbed and pointed, emerge from a bulky forehead with stylized hair curls behind the head. Heavy eyebrows form a diagonally shaped eye with a deep, inner corner and an almond-shaped pupil. The lower cheeks are rounded, the nose has a drilled nostril and the mouth is marked by a groove. The right foreleg is broken, but the curling hairs on the shoulder are clear, and the left foreleg is seen in the background. The goat is depicted in a running pose, and its features are so naturalistically carved in high

A6023

0.91

1.30

Fig. 9.76. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6023.

496

Gabriel Mazor

relief that the animal seems to be alive, conveying movement and concealed inner tension. Both the floral design and the animal motifs are granted an impressive and expressive three-dimensional effect by the high relief and the high-quality rendering. There is no doubt that this frieze segment was executed by a talented artisan with a superb eye for details and perspective.

Architrave-Frieze A6863, A6864 (Fig. 9.77:1, 2) General dimensions: L 0.41, 0.44 m, H 0.50 m, W 0.08 m Profile dimensions: A6863—fascia I H 20 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 15 cm, fascia III H 10 cm; A6864— fascia I H 18.5 cm, astragal H 4.5 cm, fascia II H 13.5 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia III H 10.5 cm These two architrave plating slabs are 8 cm thick and have different-sized profiles that vary slightly

A6864

A6863

0.50

0.50

0.44

0.08

0.41

1

A110183

0.08

2

A110184

0.60

0.57

0.08

0.53

0.10

0.50

3

4

A110182

0.27 0.05

0.55

5

Fig. 9.77. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, itinera versurarum architrave elements A6863, A6864, A110183, A110184, A110182.

497

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

in the fasciae and astragals, so they may belong to two different plating sets, integrated over the western and eastern itinera versurarum. A6863 has a rightend corner upon which the profiles are carved as well, so it must have been the architrave’s right-side element. The adjoining crowning profiles and frieze elements, obviously executed on separate slabs, were not found, so their type and style are unknown. The order of the entablature, as indicated by the architrave’s inner dimensions, is higher than the usual one, and apparently resembles the architrave-frieze of the valvae regiae. The frieze here was presumably decorated with a floral-inhabited motif, as are the other entrance friezes. Archivolt A110183, 110184 (Fig. 9.77:3, 4) Architrave dimensions: L 0.53, 0.50 m, H 0.60, 0.57 m, W 8, 10 cm Profile dimensions: fascia I H 20, 22 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 17/15 cm, astragal H 4 cm, fascia III H 12/11 cm

These archivolt profiles have the customary astragal without an ovolo or anthemion, which were presumably carved on a separate section. Mason marks: Δ IKΔ Architrave A110182 (Fig. 9.77:5) Dimensions: L 0.55 m, H 0.27 m, W 5 cm This is an architrave plating element with a decorated anthemion comprising a 10.5 cm high trailing-branch pattern with up- and down-turned spirals, offshoots, and two to three intermediate petaled blossoms. On the right side, the pattern spreads in both directions from an interlaced source. Holes for iron connecting rods are visible on the upper surface. Architrave-Frieze A6006 (Fig. 9.78) General dimensions: L 1.77 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.85 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.05, 0.65, 1.15 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 6 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 5 cm, fascia I H 16, 13.5 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 0.96, 0.84, 1.03 m, H 0.34 m

A6006

0.92

1.77

0.85

Fig. 9.78. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console architrave-frieze element A6006.

498

Gabriel Mazor

The architrave fasciae are separated by the common astragals with long, pre-cut beads at both ends. The ovolo has slender, leaf-like, intermediate tongues. The anthemion is of the type with separated, alternating upturned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves. The left side of the frieze has an upright half leaf with four lobes having three pointed tips and two having single tips, all with incised midribs. The single, wide scroll is almost rectangular, encircled by a schematic leaf with fleshy, pointed tips and a stem connected to the inner blossom. From a triple-tipped blossom a worn animal leaps to the right. The forequarters are large, the neck is long and the remains of a foreleg are visible. No details are preserved, although the contours and large size suggest a predator of the cat family. The right end of the scroll and the corner-engulfing acanthus leaf are entirely worn. The right-side frieze bears the same composition as the left side. Of the framing leaf, only the right half is preserved, with two fleshy, triple-tipped lobes. The tips are pointed and the midribs are deeply incised. The single wide scroll is almost rectangular in shape, encircled by a leaf with in-turned tips and offshoot petaled blossoms. From a petaled blossom, an animal leaps to the left, its details barely discernible. The round, muscled body, long, wide neck and strong forelegs and

paws partially hidden within the encircling acanthusleaf tips, suggest a predator of the cat family. The facade is also completely worn with no remains of the frieze or anthemion. It can be assumed that it included two upright, half acanthus leaves framing a frontal-face depiction (cf. A6001, A6002). Wedge Elements Architrave-Frieze Elements Reused in Stratum 11 Restoration Stage as Wedges Two examples of architrave-frieze elements were converted for use as wedge blocks in the Stratum 11 reconstruction. Their original location is unknown. Architrave-Frieze A6027 (Fig. 9.79) General dimensions: L 1.87 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.74 m Architrave dimensions: L 1.40 m, H 0.36 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 5 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III 9 cm Soffit: L 0.52 m Frieze dimensions: L 1.35 m, H 0.34 m The architrave fasciae are separated by the common astragals with elongated beads and rhomboid reels,

A6027

0.92

1.87

Fig. 9.79. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6027.

499

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

crowned with the customary ovolo. The anthemion is of the alternating up-turned, winding acanthus leaves and down-turned, separated intermediate leaves held by linking bars. The acanthus leaves have a central tip flanked by two thin, horizontally spreading tips. From the bottom, two fleshy pairs of triple-tipped lobes spread to either side, gently curling upward. The downturned leaves are of the double-tipped type, replaced in one instance by a stylized, four-leafed palmette. The pattern has a trailing rhythm. The frieze has two oval scrolls framed by upright, half acanthus leaves. On the left side are three side lobes, each with five long, pointed tips, a ridged midrib and lobe-ribs. The upper lobe folds gently to the right. Where the tips meet, they form triangular eyelets. A similar half leaf, partly broken, frames the scrolls on the right side. Each scroll is separately encircled by a leaf that springs from within the upright leaf and curves around the scroll, its tips in-turned, ending with a winding stem. Between the two scrolls, two interlaced leaves with long, incised ribs spread in a bow shape in both directions. Above them, stems spring to either side from two identical double-leafed blossoms, and integrate with lobes bearing two, four or five tips that emerge from the scrolls’ leaves. Below, two symmetrically posed, slit-open pea pods, with the fruit exposed, frame the central pattern. The floral design of framing leaves, the scroll-encircling leaves, and the stylized central pattern are delicately rendered in perfectly balanced harmony. The patterns are carved in high relief, deeply cut from behind, and small connecting bridges are visible. The leaves are fleshy with ridged or gently incised ribs. This composition is a high-quality rendering of a very naturalistic, three-dimensional pattern executed by a qualified artisan. The scrolls are inhabited by animals flanking the central floral pattern in a heraldic pose. From within the left scroll, the rounded, muscled forequarters of a large, heavy animal, presumably a cow, emerges to the right from a four-petal blossom. The neck is long, wide and heavy, the worn, triangular head with erect, pointed ears turns forward, and the right foreleg is bent, its hoof hidden behind a leaf. From within the right scroll, a horse leaps to the left from a four-petal blossom. It is completely broken, and can only be identified by its contours. The horse has a rounded body, a high, diagonally posed neck, and a somewhat lowered head depicted in a three-quarter

frontal view. The thin, bony forelegs have emphasized hoofs. Both animals, although facing each other in their heraldic pose, look foreward in a peaceful composition that is harmonious and well balanced. Architrave-Frieze A6041 (Fig. 9.80) General dimensions: L 1.30 m, H 0.91 m, W 0.70 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.66 m, H 0.55 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 4 cm, anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 3 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 8 cm Frieze dimensions: L 0.67 m, H 0.35 m The architrave fasciae and the ovolo are separated by the common astragals that are poorly preserved. The anthemion is entirely worn. This element was diagonally cut on its right side leaving only the frieze-framing, upright acanthus leaf on the left side. The complete leaf leans slightly to the left. It has three five-tipped lobes on both sides of a midrib defined by two deep parallel grooves, and an upper forward-folded lobe. Next to it, a thin stem with side leaves winds upward. To the left of it is another upright acanthus leaf of the same type, its right side broken. This is an unusual, relatively elaborate framing pattern that does not appear on any other frieze, presumably the result of empty space that had to be filled. The acanthus leaves are fleshy with emphasized ribs and rounded tips. The pattern is neiher carved in high relief nor cut from behind; therefore, it appears flat, stylized and unnatural.

A6041

0.91

1.30

Fig. 9.80. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze element A6041.

500

Gabriel Mazor

Wedge Blocks These blocks remained in their quarry state and were used as wedge blocks in both the original Stratum 12 construction stage and in the reconstruction stage of Stratum 11, except for A6017, which was a quarrystate block reused in the scaenae frons entablature in Stratum 11 (see above, Fig. 9.42).

Architrave-Frieze A6048 (Fig. 9.81:1) General dimensions: L 1.26 m, H 0.98 m, W 0.74 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.66 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 11.5 cm, anthemion H 10 cm, ovolo H 6 cm, fascia I H 19 cm, fascia II H 14 cm, fascia III H 6 cm Soffit: L 0.32 m Frieze dimensions: H 0.31 m A6040

A6048

0.74

0.98 0.68

2

0.74

1

A6037

0.91

0.67

1.34

3 A6018

0.92

1.35

4

0.70

Fig. 9.81. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze wedge elements A6048, A6040, A6037, A6018.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

This architrave-frieze element is still in the quarry state in which it was shipped, with the profiles only coarsely cut. Although its general dimensions fit the usual architrave-frieze type, its fasciae and crowning strip are considerably higher, and the frieze is unusually low. This was originally a console element, which was obviously different from other console elements and was not used in the original stage of the scaenae frons, as all the required console elements are accounted for. It remained as surplus and presumably served as a wedge element in both the original and the reconstruction stages, for which a stepped ledge was cut on its right side, and the frieze strip was partly cut. In addition to its different inner dimensions, this unique element also has a soffit, which is not customary in other console elements. The short soffit is decorated with a central, four-petal rosette flanked by two-lobed leaves within a crescent-ended frame. This unsuitable element, which may have been shipped from the quarry by mistake, serves as evidence that the soffit patterns were originally carved in the quarry prior to shipping. It is also important evidence concerning the state of preparation in the quarry before shipment to the site. Architrave-Frieze A6040 (Fig. 9.81:2) General dimensions: L 1.54 m, H 0.74 m, W 0.68 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.36 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 4.5 cm, ovolo H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm Frieze dimensions: H 0.38 m This architrave-frieze element is incomplete, as both fasciae II and III and the separating astragals are missing. The upper astragal is of the common type, and both the crowning ovolo and the anthemion are partly carved according to the customary profiles, although neither was completed, while the frieze is not carved at all. Apparently, this shipped block was not of the standard type. It was therefore re-cut and used as a wedge element, presumably in the original construction stage of Stratum 12. Architrave-Frieze A6037 (Fig. 9.81:3) General dimensions: L 1.34 m, H 0.91 m, W 0.67 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.80 m, H 0.56 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 15 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 12 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 1.05 m Frieze dimensions: L 0.67 m, H 0.34 m

501

This architrave-frieze element was originally longer on its left side, as the soffit and the wedge cuttings indicate. Only the architrave decorations were completed. The fasciae are separated by the common astragals with rhomboid reels and crowned with the customary ovolo with rounded eggs, well-separated shells, and intermediate rhomboid tongues. The anthemion is of the separated, up-turned and down-turned acanthus leaf with linking bars. Wide, fleshy, five-tipped leaves touch alternately on the top and bottom of the pattern, creating a trailing pattern. Intermediate, triple-tipped leaves are placed in between. The pattern is carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, with a strong light-and-shade effect. The soffit was cut off on its left side. It is of the trailing-branch type composed of segmented, s-shaped spiral leaves rising from each other with central knobs. On the right side, the pattern springs from a three-petal rosette and has another two-petal rosette in the center. The soffit pattern is deeply carved and set within a crescent-ended frame. The block was shipped with the architrave and soffit details having been carved in the quarry, but the frieze remained in its coarse, undecorated state and was not completed at the site. Architrave-Frieze A6018 (Fig. 9.81:4) General dimensions: L 1.35 m, H 0.92 m, W 0.70 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.95 m, H 0.57 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5 cm, anthemion H 5 cm, ovolo H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia II H 11 cm, fascia III H 9 cm Soffit: L 0.72 m Frieze dimensions: L 0.88 m, H 0.35 m This architrave-frieze element, like the previous example, is in its quarry state with carved architrave profiles and soffit decor, but the frieze left unworked. The architrave has the regular astragals separating the fasciae and is crowned with the customary ovolo. The anthemion is of the type with separated, downturned acanthus leaves and an intermediate tripleleaf pattern, all with linking bars. The leaves touch to create a trailing pattern. The architrave profiles are of the same type and execution as those of A6037. The soffit has a long, crescent-ended frame, although the decorated profile is short and only covers the center of the frame, leaving empty spaces at both ends. It has a continuous pattern of central, four-petal rosettes with flanking, v-shaped double leaves. For some reason, this architrave-frieze element was not completed and

502

Gabriel Mazor

was used in the original construction stage as a wedge block, as evidenced by the wedge-shaped cut on its left side. Varia Console Architrave A6158 (Fig. 9.82:1) General dimensions: L 1.02 m, H 0.58 m, W 0.55 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 5.5, anthemion H 10.5 cm, astragal H 3.5 cm, fascia I H 16 cm, fascia II H 18.5 cm This console architrave element has two fasciae on three sides, of which the lower is slightly larger in height than the upper. They do not match the customary three fasciae that diminish in height on all other console elements. The fasciae are separated by an astragal of short, oval beads and round reels, which is rendered differently than the common one. The architrave is crowned with another, similar astragal rather than the customary ovolo. The anthemion is relatively high and although worn, it seems to have been decorated with a floral design of up- and down-turned acanthus leaves. This element was found in the theater and although its general dimensions fit those of the scaenae frons’ architrave dimensions, its inner dimensions and profiles do not and it has no frieze. Frieze A6209 General dimensions: L 0.88 m, H 0.43 m, W 0.55 m A broken and worn fragment showing scant remains of a scroll-encircling acanthus leaf and an unidentified animal springing to the left from within a five-petal blossom. Architraves A09 and A024 (Fig. 9.82:2, 3) General dimensions: A09—0.66 m, H 0.30 m, W 0.14 m Profile dimensions: A09—anthemion H 4 cm, ovolo H 4 cm, fascia I H 8 cm, astragal H 3 cm, fascia II H 3 cm, fascia III H 2 cm General dimensions: A024—L 0.47 m, H 0.14 m, W 0.29 m Profile dimensions: A024—fascia H 13 cm, astragal H 2 cm Most of the latrine seats from the eastern thermae were cut from reused architectural elements of light gray marble, presumably from the theater’s scaenae frons third-floor entablature. The flat, re-cut surface has beveled edges. Occasionally, traces of the decorated profiles remain on the bottom, attesting to their original function, two of which were recorded as representatives of the phenomenon.

Architrave element A09 has fasciae separated by the common type of astragals with hexagonal beads and rhomboid reels, and is crowned with a common ovolo with diamond-shaped tongues that are partly cut on top. no remains were preserved from the anthemion. Element A024 has different inner proportions, and its astragal is of the common type with elongated beads and rhomboid reels. Frieze A70113 (Fig. 9.82:4) General dimensions: L 1.17 m, H 0.18 m, W 0.60 m On the right side of the fragment, the upper part of an upright, framing acanthus leaf with three lobes with three pointed tips and a deeply grooved midrib can be seen. In the corner, the forward-folded upper lobe is preserved. Next to it, the beginning of the scroll’s encircling acanthus leaf has also survived. Architrave-Frieze A60617 (Fig. 9.82:5) General dimensions: L 1.17 m, H 0.45 m, W 0.30 m Soffit: L 0.81 m The soffit, broken at both ends, is of the guilloche type with double, interlaced bands and central knobs, carved in convex high relief and set within a profiled frame. Frieze A110129 (Fig. 9.82:6) General dimensions: L 0.33 m, H 0.38 m This left-side fragment of a frieze element has a complete, upright framing acanthus leaf. The leaf has two lobes with three pointed tips and deeply grooved midribs and lobe ribs. Frieze A01 (Fig. 9.82:7) This fragment of the head of a sheep facing to the right, presumably from an inhabited scroll, was photographed by Applebaum and since lost. The head is rounded with stylized hair curls on the neck, an almond-shaped eye and an emphasized eyebrow. The nose is rounded and the mouth is defined by a straight groove. A long, pointed ear with an inner groove is laid back, encircled by a spiral-shaped horn. Architrave-Frieze A6631 (Fig. 9.82:8) General dimensions: L 0.67 m, H 0.52 m, W 0.22 m Profile dimensions: taenia H 7 cm, anthemion H 6 cm, ovolo H 4 cm Frieze dimensions: H 0.35 m A left-side fragment of an architrave-frieze element. The anthemion is of the separated, alternating up- and

503

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

down-turned acanthus leaves with no linking bars. The motif is stylized, schematic and relatively flat. The ovolo is of the common type. On the left side of the frieze are framing leaves comprising an upright,

half leaf and a section of the next complete leaf. The left leaf has two five-tipped side lobes and a marked midrib. The next leaf also has two side lobes, the upper one folded forward.

A6158

A024

A09 0.29

0.58

0.44

0.30

0.6 6

3

2

1

A60617

A70113

0.45 0.60

1.17

5 1.17 0.18

4

A6631

A01 A110129

0.52

0.33

6

0.67

7

8

A100145 A6754 0.27

0.46

0.46

9

10

Fig. 9.82. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, architrave-frieze fragments A6158, A09, A024, A70113, A60617, A110129, A01, A6631, A6754, A100145.

504

Gabriel Mazor

Fluted Architrave-Frieze Elements

Frieze A6657 General dimensions: L 0.58 m, H 0.35 m, W 0.29 m A worn frieze fragment with traces of a scroll.

Four architrave-frieze elements of a smaller order than those of the first floor, measuring 0.46–0.52 m high, have fluted friezes. None of them was found in the theater, and they were all reused in later Roman IV or Byzantine II complexes. They were executed in light gray marble, as was the first-floor entablature of the theater’s scaenae frons. One of them is a complete console element of the same shape as those of the scaenae frons first floor, and its length and width dimensions match that order. Thus, it could easily have fit the scaenae frons’ second or third floor entablature. Although the frieze is not of the inhabited-acanthusscroll design, this could have been replaced in the second and third floors by an entirely different pattern.

Frieze A6754 (Fig. 9.82:9) General dimensions: L 0.46 m, H 0.16 m, W 0.50 m A left-side fragment from a frieze larger than the scaenae frons friezes. It has an upright, framing acanthus leaf with two-, three- or five-tipped side lobes with incised lobe-ribs and small eyelets. Architrave A100145 (Fig. 9.82:10) General dimensions: L 0.46 m, H 0.27 m, W 0.30 m A fragment of an architrave anthemion with alternating up-turned acanthus leaves and down-turned palmettes with a rope pattern above it.

A102

0.46

1.17

1

A103

0.52

0.38

0.66

2

Fig. 9.83. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, fluted architrave-frieze elements A102, A103.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Architrave-Frieze A102 (Fig. 9.83:1) General dimensions: L 1.17 m, H 0.46 m, W 0.44 m Architrave dimensions: H 0.28 m, decorated section L 0.88 m Architrave profile dimensions: fascia I H 7 cm, fascia II H 5 cm, fascia III H 2 cm, astragal H 3 cm, cymatium H 5.5 cm, fillet H 2.5 cm. Frieze dimensions: H 18 m, L 0.81 m Frieze profile dimensions: flutes H 13.5 cm, lower fillet H 2 cm, upper fillet H 3.5 cm A console element. The astragals have long hexagonal beads and rhomboid reels. The cymatium, completely worn, rests on a cyma recta profile. The flutes are 8 cm wide with thin dividing grooves and a lower rounded tongue. In between them, triangular filler leaves hang from the upper edge of the molding.

Architrave-Frieze A103 (Fig. 9.83:2) General dimensions: L 0.66 m, H 0.52 m, W 0.38 m Architrave dimensions: L 0.68 m, H 0.28 m, W 0.39 m Profile dimensions: fascia I H 7 cm, fascia II H 5 cm, fascia III H 3 cm, astragal H 3 cm, cymatium H 5.5 cm, fillet H 2.5 cm. Frieze: H 0.24, decorated section L 0.50 m H 0.20 m Profile dimensions: flutes H 13.5 cm, lower fillet H 3 cm, upper fillet H 3.5 cm Soffit: L 0.33 m An architrave-frieze element broken on both ends. The astragals have hexagonal and elliptical beads and rhomboid reels. The fluted frieze is bordered by 2 cm lower and upper fillets. The flutes are of the same type as in the previous element, although somewhat higher. On the bottom

A100162

0.51

0.28

505

0.63

1 A90143

0.46

0.27 0.49

2

Fig. 9.84. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, fluted architravefrieze elements A100162, A90143.

506

Gabriel Mazor

surface are the remains of a soffit with a pattern of laurel leaves set in a crescent-ended, double-profiled, Miletian-type frame, a type also found on architraves of the scaenae frons first floor. Architrave-Frieze A100162 (Fig. 9.84:1) General dimensions: L 0.63 m, H 0.51 m, W 0.28 m Architrave: H 0.28 m Frieze: H 0.22 m L 0.51 m Profile dimensions: flutes H 16 cm, lower fillet H 2.5 cm, upper fillet H 3.5 cm A section of an entrance plating slab. The architrave profiles were not carved. It has two rectangular sockets for iron connecting rods. The frieze has the same fluting pattern as A102. Architrave-Frieze A90143 (Fig. 9.84:2) General dimensions: L 0.49 m, H 0.46 m, W0.27 m Architrave: H 0.32 m Frieze: H ~0.13 m A section of an entrance plating slab. The architrave shows scant remains of two astragals, three fasciae and a broken crown. The broken frieze preserves the lower part of the same fluted pattern as A102. Discussion of Architrave-Friezes The scaenae frons of the Severan Theater is of the sotermed ‘Western Type’, which has a complex setting–– the facade running in and out to create semicircular and rectangular exedrae at its main entrances (Segal 1995:24–25). The architrave-frieze is therefore comprised of individual blocks including protruding consoles and inner, rounded elements. The architravefrieze of the two hospitalia continues the facade of the scaenae frons, while the entablature of the valvae regiae is a considerably higher composition. Some 46 complete architrave-frieze elements and numerous fragments from the scaenae frons first-floor entablature, including the valvae regiae, and about ten from the second and third floors were identified, all of the Corinthian order. The architraves of the first floor have three fasciae (I, II, III), which differ slightly in their heights (I = 15–17 cm, II = 11–12 cm, III = 8–9 cm). The fasciae heights of the entrance-plating slabs also differ: hospitalia (I = 14 cm, II = 12 cm, II = 8 cm), valvae regiae (I = 18–20 cm, II = 13–15 cm, III = 10–11 cm), itinera versurarum (I = 19–20 cm, II = 14–15 cm, III = 10 cm) and archivolt (I = 20–22 cm, II = 15–17 cm,

III = 11–12 cm). All the fasciae were smoothed with a toothed chisel and unpolished. They are separated by astragals and crowned with an ovolo (2.5–4 cm), an anthemion (4–6 cm) and a taenia (4–6 cm). On the lower surface of the element, a soffit was carved. The frieze (carved on a c. 0.35 m high convex surface) is not a continuous narrative, but segmented, each element depicting a separate acanthus-scroll scene, separated and framed by upright acanthus leaves. Astragal The astragals that separate the fasciae are 3–3.5 cm high. Their bead-and-reel pattern has either short (5 cm) oval or elliptical beads, or the more common, longer (6–7.5 cm) beads that are hexagonal at the ends. The intermediate reels range in shape from round to rhomboid, occasionally a slender disc shape. The components of the pattern are connected by a string of linking bridges. The pattern is deeply cut from behind and rendered in high relief on the stepped profiles and therefore, although not protruding, it is three dimensional with a strong light-and-shade effect. The astragals run along the facade and occasionally continue onto the right or left side when it follows the contours of an obtuse corner element. On console elements, they run along all three sides. If the element was not cut or broken, the astragals have a stepped termination that joins the decor of the adjacent element. This bead-and-reel pattern, of classical-Greek origin, evolved gradually in the western and eastern parts of the Roman Empire from the mid-second century CE onward. The beads become longer and hexagonal at the ends, while the reels become more rhomboid and occasionally round (Wegner 1957:49), resembling Turnheim’s Type I astragals (Turnheim 1987:36–37). The original function of the profile as a separating feature between the architrave’s fasciae is lost (see Leon 1971:126, 129–131, Figs. 33:4; 34:4; Type A) and it is now sunken into the steps separating the fasciae. Turnheim’s Type 1 astragal is common at NysaScythopolis, and is the characteristic pattern on all the marble architrave elements of the Severan Theater and the imperial cult altar of the same date. In limestone, the pattern is best represented in the architraves of the nymphaeum, the western propylaeum in Palladius Street and the northern propylaeum in Northern Street, all dated to the mid- or late second century CE (G. Mazor, pers. obs.).

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

At Caesarea, the same type of astragal characterizes the theater’s marble architrave-friezes (e.g., Blocks AI.4, 8, AII.1) dated to the Severan period (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:264, 275, 292, Figs. 7, 14, 16, 17). As all the astragal profiles of the marble architraves at both Nysa-Scythopolis and Caesarea were executed in the quarries of Proconnessos, the origins of this developed pattern in Asia Minor would not be surprising. The less common use of the rope pattern as a fasciae-separating profile, also executed in the quarries, is regarded as a local Asia Minor pattern (see below). In the scaenae frons marble architraves of Nysa-Scythopolis, the rope pattern was not used as a fasciae-separating band, but occasionally appears as part of the crowning decor. In Asia Minor the same astragal pattern (Turnheim’s Type 1) is quite common in the first to second centuries. Astragals with longer beads and intermediate discshaped reels first appear in the Temple of Augustus at Antioch in Pisidia (Robinson 1924: Figs. 24, 26), while the Flavian fountain house next to the Pollio Nymphaeum at Miletus has rhomboid-shaped reels and oval beads in the astragal of its architrave (Bammer 1978–1980: Fig. 8). It seems that the rich Flavian astragal tradition of the western part of the empire did not have a counterpart in contemporary Asia Minor (Blanckenhagen 1940: Pls. 5–10; Wegner 1957:48– 49; Leon 1971:271–272, Pls. 33, 34) and only after Hadrian’ reign was it widely accepted. According to Vandeput (1997:149), during the reign of Hadrian the pattern underwent a diversification of treatment in Asia Minor, the beads becoming more elongated, globular or oval, or long and hexagonal at the ends, and according to Wegner (1957:49), they were set between pairs of slender, rhomboid, or occasionally round reels. From the mid-second century CE onward, this pattern becomes the most common at most of the Asia Minor sites (Strocka 1981:29). Strocka (1978:895–896) assumed that the diverse patterns first reached Asia Minor from the west during Hadrian’s reign under the architectural influence of Rome, presumably imported by artisans returning to Asia Minor from large building projects in the Imperial capital. Lyttelton (1974:255–272), on the other hand, emphasizes its Hellenistic origins in Asia Minor. The astragal’s evolution thus continued in Asia Minor, according to Vandeput, during the second half of the second century CE, as the new features of elongated, hexagonal beads and rhomboid reels are also found in monuments at Sagalassos, such as the theater

507

(180–200 CE) and the gate near the baths, dated to 200–225 CE (Vandeput 1997:150), as well as in the Severan monuments at Perge, such as the propylaeum, Nymphaeum F2 and the gate (Mansel 1975; Yegül 1986:138). In North Africa, this new pattern is best represented in the Severan-period constructions at Leptis Magna, such as the basilica, the nymphaeum, the forum and the cornices of the Capitolium’s flanking temple (Lyttelton 1974:293–296, Pls. 220– 222, 226). These examples were presumably a result of western influence, and were cited by Lyttelton to strengthen her arguments as to the western origins of the Severan architecture at Leptis Magna, in relation to an earlier discussion between Picard (1969:30 ff.) and Ward-Perkins (1948:72, 1951; Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:42–43). Ovolo The architrave of the scaenae frons is crowned with an ovolo and an anthemion, while in the architrave of the valvae regiae the ovolo is replaced by a rope pattern. The profile of the ovolo is usually 3–4 cm high and decorated with an egg-and-tongue motif. The ‘egg’ is either round or pear shaped, flattened on the top and pointed on the bottom, and the eggs are usually connected by a small bridge. Crescent-shaped, relatively thick, framing ‘shells’ are widely spaced and connected to the intermediate, tongue-shaped leaves that can also be rhomboid or round. Occasionally, triple-petal or lilyshaped blossoms were integrated, and in one case even a free-style acanthus leaf, indicating a certain freedom of depiction among artists. The pattern is carved in high relief, with a deeply cut background that grants it three dimensionality and a strong light-and-shade effect. The schematic, rigid carving of the separate features of the pattern is notable in the round or almost-round shape of the egg, the widely spaced shells, and the preference for schematic intermediate elements. Together with the rather careless execution, this results in a non-classic composition. It seems that by this stage, the canonical pattern has lost its delicacy, its naturalism and its plasticity, and has become repetitious, stylized and extremely rigid. The small differences in the renderings of various elements have no significant influence on the pattern’s composition and should be viewed as random nuances resulting from the many artisans employed in such a vast project. They in no way indicate different

508

Gabriel Mazor

workshops or origins of the artisans, let alone a chronological difference. These ornamented, crowning ovolo and anthemion profiles of the architrave are seen at numerous sites in the Roman East during the second to early third centuries CE and are termed by Weigand (1914:86– 87) the ‘Syrian sequence’ (Typische für Syrien). The sequence was discussed in detail by Turnheim (1987:111–115; 1996:127–133). It is known in the secondary entablatures at Baalbek, such as the entablature of the square exedra in the Temple of Jupiter, in the outer walls of the Temple of Bacchus, and the entablature of the pronaos and inner and outer entablatures of the Temple of Venus (Wiegand 1921– 1925 I: Pl. 102; II: Figs. 10, 24, 26, 27–29, 54, 55, 142, 154). It is common at Gerasa, for instance, in the propylaeum and nymphaeum (Lyttelton 1974:141, 149), and also becomes popular at Damascus and Bostra (Weigand 1914: Fig. 40, Pl. IV). In contrast, the characteristic sequence that crowns the architrave in Asia Minor is somewhat different and consists of an astragal, an ovolo and a cavetto with a floral ornament (Lyttelton 1974:202, 264). This kind of sequence is found in the Roman East in the marble architraves at Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 11, 12, Blocks AI.8, AI.1), which seems to indicate the influence, or actual work, of Asia Minor artisans producing marble architraves in the quarry of Proconnesos. Whether due to early influences from Asia Minor, or local Hellenistic tradition, the egg-and-tongue becomes the most common ovolo motif, and the canonical decorative motif of the so-called ‘Syrian Sequence’. During the second and third centuries CE it underwent changes. The wide separation between the ‘egg’ and the ‘shell’ and the connection of the ‘shell’ to the intermediate element altered the original inner balance and harmony. The intermediate element receives substance and volume and varies between rhomboid, round and triple-leaf shapes, as seen in different elements, and sometimes even within the same element. The origins of the Ionic cyma egg-and-tongue decorations have been widely discussed by various scholars in the framework of research on the Corinthian ovolo (Weigand 1914:40–42; Ebert 1922:2464–2469; Wegner 1957:55–56; Leon 1971:244–245, 265). They differ in opinion regarding the motif’s Hellenistic origins (Rumscheid 1994:253–258) and its early

appearances in Asia Minor (Vandeput 1997:143–147) and Syria (Turnheim 1987:25–32; 1996:122–138). At Nysa-Scythopolis, the egg and-tongue motif is commonly found in complexes dated to the second half of the second century CE, executed in marble as well as in limestone, and defined as Type D1 in Turnheim’s typology (Turnheim 1987:30). At Caesarea, most of the marble elements of the theater’s scaenae frons have the same pattern (e.g., Block AI.4), with an additional astragal, as was common in Asia Minor (Blocks AI.8, AII.1 and others; Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:263–284, Figs. 7, 11, 16). At Gerasa, it is also common, usually equipped with a tripleleaf intermediate element, as in the nymphaeum, the Hadrianic arch and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton1974: Pls. 141, 148, 149), all dated within the second century CE. In Asia Minor, the egg-and-tongue motif has its origins in the Augustan period, when it became relatively common. It continued to be used into the reign of Tiberius (Ebert 1922:2467; Lambrechts et al. 1972:167), when the separation of the components took place (Weigand 1914:41). Although the eggand-dart motif rose in popularity in the West from the Julio-Claudian or Flavian period (Weigand 1914:51; Waelkens 1987:124), it was not as popular in the East at that time, only becoming so from the reign of Trajan onward (Vandeput 1997:144). The egg-and-dart motif is always well carved and deeply cut from behind, and as the components are well separated and rigid, a strong light-and-shade effect is achieved. During the second century CE, the egg-and-tongue motif, second in popularity to the egg-and-dart motif, gained priority, while the use of the egg-and-dart motif gradually diminished during the Antonine period and had more or less disappeared by the Severan period. Rope Pattern On the architrave elements of the valvae regiae, a rope pattern replaces the egg-and-tongue ovolo, a pattern composed of continuous diagonal ridges (Type A of Turnheim’s typology [1987:53]). In some elements, deep grooves are seen at every fourth interval. The diagonal pattern is usually oriented to the left, apart from a few examples of the reverse. The pattern originated in Asia Minor (Leon 1971:276; Ward-Perkins 1981:317) and was quite rare in the West. In the Roman East, it first appeared in the Tomb of

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Absalom in Jerusalem (Durm 1910: Fig. 833) and later at Samaria (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942:35, Pl. 85:1, 2). It is present in part of the corkscrew-like horizontal molding at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pl. 60), and was noted on a cornice in the Temples of Jupiter and Bacchus (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Figs. 14, 15D), both dated to the second century CE. On the later, Severan-period architrave-friezes at Caesarea, this pattern separates the first and second fasciae (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:297, n.15, Figs. 40–44) and it seems to reflect the influence of Asia Minor in the region. In Asia Minor the rope pattern is observed as early as the reign of Tiberius in the Sebasteion at Pessinus, bordering a garland frieze (Waelkens 1986:58–59). At Side, on a niche entablature in Building M, it was dated to the second half of the second century CE (Wegner 1989:163), and it also appears on the entablature of the gate at Hierapolis, dedicated in 211–212 CE (de Bernardi Ferraro 1966:59–67). Anthemion The cyma recta was adorned with a rich floral anthemion carved on its profile. It is 4–6 cm high and followed by a ledge-shaped taenia that separates it from the convex frieze. The patterns can be classified into six types, four of which are variations of the acanthus-leaf pattern, while the other two integrate additional floral motifs into this basic pattern, such as the palmette and the trailing branch. Type 1: Alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves with linking bars in a continuous trailing pattern. This is the most common type, consisting of two tripletipped acanthus leaves tied by a bar. The leaves spread widely in both directions, and wind alternatively from top or bottom in an s-shape that creates a trailing pattern. Between these leaves, two long, pointed tips spread sideways in horizontal and occasionally airy spirals. The pattern varies between richly detailed and naturalistic (A6011, Fig. 9.85:1) and schematic and rigid (A6001, Fig. 9.41). Occasionally, the linking bar is omitted (A6033, Fig. 9.66) and the double leaves were simply attached. In the richer examples, the pattern is depicted in high relief and deeply carved from behind. It is relatively detailed, each pointed tip precisely carved with different-shaped eyelets in between. The result is a rich, three-dimensional, naturalistic pattern with a pronounced light-and-shade

509

effect. The various qualities of the relief seem to reflect the differing artistic capabilities of the craftsmen. Type 2: Separated, alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves with linking bars create a trailing effect (A6031, Fig. 9.85:2). This type is a variation of the former in which up- and down-turned acanthus leaves are not linked in a trailing pattern, but only give the impression of a trailing effect (A6014, Fig. 9.85:3). The up-turned, sideways spreading, triple-tipped leaves comprise the main feature, while two smaller leaves with long pointed tips comprise an intermediate space filler. The tips of the main leaves touch the lower leaves of the space fillers, lending a trailing effect to the entire pattern. This type varies in its execution, like the previous type, between richer, more elaborate and naturalistic depictions (see Fig 9.85:2), and schematic, rigid ones (see Fig. 9.85:3). Differences in degree of relief as well as depth of background carving create both flat depictions and three-dimensional patterns with strong light-and-shade effects. Type 3: A continuous pattern of separated, up-turned acanthus leaves with or without linking bars creates a trailing effect. This type also varies between rich, elaborate and schematic, rigid patterns (A6046, Fig. 9.85:4; A6012, Fig. 9.85:5; A6036, Fig. 9.85:6). Type 4: A continuous pattern of separated, down-turned acanthus leaves with linking bars creates a trailing effect. This type seems to be a variation of the former that was executed on only a few elements (A6037, Fig. 9.85:7). Type 5: A continuous pattern of separated, down-turned acanthus leaves with no linking bars and intermediate, spiral trailing branches. The acanthus motif has two winding, double-tipped leaves with incised midribs that spread along the bottom and two long, pointed tips that spread along the top, flanking a vertical stem. From among the leaves spring the intermediate, trailing branches with offshoots. Both sides of the trailing branches meet in airy spirals. The pattern is stylized and not as naturalistic as the other types. Yet it is delicate and precise in depiction, and its high relief and deep background carving lend it a three-dimensional effect. This type is unique and was found on a single console element (A6003, Fig. 9.85:8) and on an architrave element of the eastern hospitalia (A6007, Fig. 9.69).

510

Gabriel Mazor

Type 6: Separated, alternating up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves with or without linking bars (A6019, A6045, Fig. 9.85:9). Two widely spread acanthus leaves with triple-tipped lobes wind to either side, with long, pointed, spiral-shaped lower tips

spreading sideways and a short, central tip, connected by a double linking bar. The palmette, of the closed type, has a central vertical leaf, two flanking, s-shaped, in-turned leaves and two other flanking, s-shaped, inturned leaves that terminate at the bottom in closed,

A6011

Type 1

A6031 Type 2

A6014

A6046

Type 3

A6012

A6036

Type 4

A6037

Type 5

A6003

Type 6

A6045

Fig. 9.85. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, anthemion Types 1–6.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

airy spiral offshoots. The pattern is widely based and spread out. A somewhat trailing effect is granted by intermediate, diagonally posed, triple-tipped acanthus leaves. This type is best represented in various fragments of the valvae regiae architrave-frieze (see Fig. 9.58:1, 2, 4). Its depiction is rich, precise and detailed, and therefore naturalistic. It is rendered in high relief, deeply carved from behind, and achieves a rich, delicate three dimensionality and a strong lightand-shade effect. When it appears on architrave-frieze elements, this pattern is far more schematic and rigid. It loses two of the four flanking leaves in the palmette motif, the intermediate acanthus leaf with its seemingly trailing pattern, and the linking bars (A6019, Fig. 9.67). In these cases, both the acanthus leaf and the palmette are more separated and there is no continuous trailing rhythm to the pattern. It is flatly depicted and the background is not as deeply carved, therefore it has no three-dimensional effect. Analysis of the Anthemion. The vast diversity of the anthemion patterns is observed on the scaenae frons cornices as well (see below). Types 1–4 appear on both limestone and marble elements in other monuments at the site, such as the western propylaeum in Palladius Street and the imperial cult altar, both of the Severan period. The diversity of the pattern is not surprising due to the vast construction projects in the civic center during the second century CE, which must have involved a considerable number of artisans, who naturally differed in their styles, traditions and expertise (see discussion of scroll pattern below). Type 5 is unique in its one instance at the Severan theater. At Caesarea, the alternating up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves of Type 6 are depicted on cornice cymae, regarded by Turnheim and Ovadiah as Type CI (1996:285–287, Fig. 32), and on architrave cyma, regarded by Turnheim as Type B (1987:72–74). While at Caesarea only these two anthemion patterns appear, in the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis they are far more varied (Types 1–6). The anthemion was originally a floral ornament of Archaic Greek origin with alternating palmettes and lotus leaves (Riegl 1893:181; Robertson 1969:380), which was enriched in the Classical period with trailing acanthus leaves (Boardman et al. 1966:25); occasionally, the lotus and sometimes the palmette were replaced by an acanthus leaf (Petrie 1930: Pl. XIV). The anthemion pattern of alternating palmettes

511

and lotus flowers of various types with linking bars and interlacing, s-shaped acanthus leaves (the latter has its origin in the Hellenistic period; Rumscheid 1994:289) was greatly enriched during the Imperial period (Waelkens 1986:50). It was already common in the cyma decoration in Asia Minor during the early Imperial period (Vandeput 1997:164). Elaborate palmettes and acanthus leaves with minor differences became more standardized––presumably the evolution of the feingezahnter Akanthus (‘fine perforated acanthus’; Rohmann 1995:115–119)––and were common from the mid-second century CE onward. The earliest example of an elaborately worked anthemion of palmettes, still with lotus flowers, appears in the Celsus Library at Ephesus, presumably influenced by a western trend (Strocka 1988:296). Shortly after, anthemia with acanthus leaves were introduced, as in the northern shrine and nymphaeum of the upper agora and the theater at Sagalassos, all dated to the second half of the second century CE (Vandeput 1997:166– 169). According to Vandeput, the pattern was also found in the nymphaeum at Aspendos, the theater at Side and the nymphaeum at Perge, these, too, dating to the second half of the second century CE. During the Severan period, the pattern became very popular. Variations of the pattern are more refined during the Severan period, as in the marble court of the bathgymnasium at Sardis, dated by inscription to 211– 212 CE, and the propylaeum at Miletus (Vandeput 1997:166–169), dated to the early third century CE. Soffit Most of the architrave-frieze elements have soffit profiles carved into their lower surface. No soffit profiles were found on the console elements or on the five main entrance lintels, i.e., the valvae regiae, the western and eastern hospitalia and the western and eastern itinera versurarum (cf. Caesarea, where soffit profiles were found on console elements as well; Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 28, 29). According to the classical canon, centered soffit profiles adorn intercolumniation architraves seen from below, yet in the theater architraves they are seldom centered. Soffits were presumably carved in the elements’ lower surfaces while still in the quarry. As the architravefrieze elements were adjusted and integrated, first during the original construction stage in Stratum 12, and then readjusted again later during the reconstruction

512

Gabriel Mazor

stage in Stratum 11, the blocks were often shortened on one or both ends, which would obviously affect the location of the soffit bands. Ornamented soffit profiles originated during the Hellenistic period, when they first comprised a plain, simple band centered in the under side of the architrave between two columns. Eventually, the plain band was decorated, and it later became an ornamented part of the entablature in the vocabulary of architectural decor of the Roman period (Wegner 1978–1980: 92–93). It was now a convex ornament sunken into an oblong, plain-profiled, double frame with crescent-shaped ends. This crescent-shaped soffit frame of the Miletian type spread throughout the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire during the second and third centuries CE (Wegner 1957:31). The width of the soffit, usually varying from 1/4 to 1/3 of the element’s width (Wegner 1957:43; 1978–1980:103), was retained fairly well in the Severan Theater, as the soffit width averages 1/3 of the element width. The soffit patterns of the theater’s scaenae frons can be divided into six types, of which one is geometric in nature and the others floral. All the soffit patterns were presumably carved in the quarry prior to shipping; therefore, the style of the pattern would belong to the architectural-ornamentation vocabulary of Asia Minor of the Roman period. As these patterns have been found in architrave-friezes in the Roman East, executed in local limestone, it is obvious that they reached the region in other manners as well. Type 1: The most common pattern is the geometric guilloche, a continuous, interlaced, spiral band that creates round loops with a central knob (A6014, Fig. 9.86:1). The band is either wide and convex, or thin and flat, creating a tight or loose, stylized effect. In one case (A6026, Fig. 9.50), double interlaced bands form elliptical loops with inner knobs. This type of pattern appears mainly on long elements, in one instance (A6028, Fig. 9.64) reaching a length of 3 m. The convex examples are sunken within a plain, doubleprofiled, crescent-ended frame. A wide diversity of rendering is observed, varying from flat, stylized and schematic to more naturalistic high relief, and deeply cut from behind to emphasize the three-dimensional effect. It seems certain that this wide diversity should be attributed to differing levels of talent among the artisans.

The guilloche pattern has its origins in the East, first appearing on decorated pottery, terracotta plating, wall paintings and mosaic floors (Ovadiah 1980). In architectural decor in Asia Minor it was first used on the torus of the Erechteun bases (421–406 BCE; Robertson 1969: Pl. V), the torus of the bases of the Hellenistic Temple of Apollo at Didyma (c. 300 BCE; Akurgal 1978:226, Fig. 70), and the theater at Miletus (Krauss 1974: Pls. 69, 70). In Rome it decorated the soffit in a double band during the period that spans from the reign of Augustus to that of Trajan (Wegner 1957:42, Pls. 19ab, 22b; Leon 1971:279, Pls. 7, 71, Types A, B). The appearance of the guilloche pattern in the Roman East was researched by Turnheim (1987:60–64). The guilloche as a soffit pattern is rare at Caesarea, found on only one marble block (AIII.8) within a decorated profiled frame (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:284, Pl. 30). In Syria of the second century CE, an elaborate guilloche with central rosettes adorned the Tychaion at as-Sanamain (Freyberger 1988: Pl. 1.39:a, c). At Baalbek, it was found in the Temple of Venus (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pl. 1.67, 68). In the mosaic floors of Antioch, the guilloche is commonly used as a border pattern, as in the atrium house, the drinkingcontest mosaic, the house of the calendar, the house of the Bacchic Thiasos, and in various others (Levi 1947: Pls. I.a, V.b, VII.c). In Asia Minor during the Imperial period the guilloche pattern was less popular than richer floral designs, yet it is found at a number of sites of this period, ranging from the reign of Augustus to the early third century CE (Wegner 1978–1980). At Miletus, it appears in Augustan monuments such as the bouleuterion tomb and the Ionic hall, at Side in the forum dated to the second half of the second century CE, and at Perge in the forum and gate complex, both dated to the second century CE (Wegner 1978–1980:104). At Aspendos, the guilloche pattern is found in the theater dated to 161–168 CE and at Termassos in the Corinthian temple and the theater, both dated to late second century CE. In Laodicea it is dated to the early third century CE (Wegner 1978–1980:100–102). At Sagalassos, it was found in Temple B of the second half of the second century CE along with four other examples. The southwestern gate of the lower forum and the Honorific Monument I of the upper forum at Sagalassos have the same simple guilloche pattern in their soffit, while in the nymphaeum of the upper forum and the Temple of

513

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6014 0.73

Type 1

2.36

0.62

A6038

Type 2

2.06

0.69

A6030

Type 3

2.17

0.72

A6011

Type 4

2.14

A6023

0.69

Type 5

1.30

0.73

A6033

Type 6

2.33

Fig. 9.86. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, soffit Types 1–6.

514

Gabriel Mazor

Antoninus Pius, the pattern is more elaborate. All of these date to the second century CE (Vandeput 1997: Figs. 11:3, 23:2, 27:4, 45:5). Type 2: The second most common soffit pattern is the trailing branch, which has numerous stylized variations. Basically it is an antithetic pattern of two spiral trailing branches that originate on either side and meet in the center. It also appears as up- and downturned, s-shaped, airy spiral branches (A6038, Fig. 9.86:2), or as a continuous branch, sometimes with double-tipped offshoots (A6034, Fig. 9.72), and in one case a double trailing branch forming knob-inhabited scrolls at both ends (A6031, Fig. 9.43). The branches originate from twigs (A6016, Fig. 9.65) or three-petal blossoms located at both ends (A6037, Fig. 9.81:3, A6038 Fig. 9.53). They usually meet in the center in up-turned, touching spirals, with an exceptional down-turned example (A6016, Fig 9.65), occasionally with an intermediate leaf in between (A6031, Fig. 9.43; A6037, Fig. 9.81:3). The pattern is sunken within a single- or double-profiled frame. Its depiction varies from flat, rigid and schematic to stylized and naturalistic. Due to its repetitive, s-shaped trailing branch, a geometric pattern is created, occasionally interrupted by offshoot leaves. The better-executed patterns are usually rendered in high relief, deeply cut in the background, and have a rich, three-dimensional effect. This pattern first appeared relatively early in Mycenaean and Greek art (Riegl 1893:113, Figs. 50, 52, 66, 76), as well as on painted pottery (Ovadiah 1980:163). The pattern is also found on architraves, replacing the common anthemia of Type 5 in the theater and nymphaeum at Nysa-Scythopolis. At Gerasa it decorated architrave cymae from the first century CE, as in the Temple of Zeus and later in the nymphaeum and propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, both dating to the middle or second half of the second century CE (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 141, 143, 148). At Caesarea it was a favored soffit pattern of the second century CE (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:284, Figs. 8, 9, Blocks AI.3, AI.5, AII.4; Fig. 18A, Blocks AIII.1, 4; Fig. 29, Blocks AIII.6, 7), some within a triangular frame (Turnheim 1987:101–102). The central entrance jamb of the temple at Kedesh, dated to the second half of the second century or early third century CE, has the pattern depicted on the cavetto (Fisher, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:161–162, Pl. 29:2).

In Asia Minor, the trailing-branch pattern adorned the soffits in the entablatures of the tetrapylon at Aphrodisias and the nymphaeum at Sagalassos (Vandeput 1997: Pls. 45:3, 76:3), both of the midsecond century CE, and of the nymphaeum at Miletus dated to the reign of Trajan (Wegner 1957:33, Fig. 3). At a number of other sites dated from the late first to early third centuries CE, variations of the trailingbranch pattern are seen (Wegner 1978–1980:104). For example, at Sardis several soffit patterns with vine tendrils and rope-bordered profiles were found in the bath-gymnasium’s marble court (Yegül 1986: Figs. 149, 163). Type 3: This pattern, consisting of a garland of laurel leaves, is found on a few elements with minor variations. Triple-tipped laurel leaves, long or short, rigidly horizontal or gently curving, spring from within each other to create the main pattern on a convex surface (A6030, Fig. 9.86:3). The leaves originate in a geometric pattern at either end of the frame (A6024, Fig. 9.70), from a rounded blossom (A6017, Fig. 9.42), or from a triple bud (A6030, Fig. 9.86:3), and run toward a central, four-petal rosette. In all cases the soffit pattern is deeply set within a double-profiled, Miletiantype frame. The pattern is carved on a convex surface and therefore creates a strong, three-dimensional effect. The detailed tips are depicted either in high or flat relief, resulting in a plastic and realistic, or a flat and rigid appearance. At Palmyra, an elaborate soffit pattern of oak leaves and acorns is carved on the colonnade frieze next to the Temple of Bel. This pattern of oak leaves and acorns is common on frieze elements in the city, as in a niche pediment frieze in the camp of Diocletian, on arch friezes in the monumental arch and the arch at the junction of the colonnaded streets (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 121, 164, 165,167), all dated to the second century CE. At Kedesh, the pattern is found above the second fascia of the southern entrance lintel of the temple (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:152, Pl. 30:2). At Caesarea, the carving of the theater’s console elements was not completed, but their soffits were, and include patterns of a garland of laurel leaves or buds, as in Block AIII.3 (Turnheim 1996:281, Fig. 28). In Asia Minor, this pattern made its first appearance as early as the Hellenistic period, as in the Temple of Apollo at Didyma on both base profiles and pier capitals (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 35, 37). During the

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Imperial period, it decorated Trajan’s nymphaeum and propylaeum at Miletus and Hadrian’s temple at Ephesus (Wegner 1957: Fig. 3; 1978–1980: Fig. 14:a, b). At Sagalassos, it is found in the theater, in the soffit of the nymphaeum of the upper agora, the propylaeum of the sanctuary of Antoninus Pius and the honorific monument of the upper agora, all dated to the second century CE (Vandeput 1997: Pls. 11:2; 34:3; 45:1; 55:1–4). In the marble court of the bath-gymnasium at Sardis, this pattern is comprised of oak and laurel leaves (Yegül 1986: Figs. 146, 147, 163, 165; for further comparisons, see Wegner 1978–1980:104). In the Roman West, a pattern with additional buds adorns the soffit of Trajan’s forum in Rome, and a double pattern in the soffit of the dome at Pisa. At Terracina, a double pattern of acanthus leaves is found (Wegner 1957: Pls. 11b, 20b, 27b). Type 4: This pattern is a variation of the previous one, with a garland of laurel leaves in an antithetic pattern (A6011, Fig. 9.86:4). Long, pointed, v-shaped tips originate in a short stem and emerge from each other to form a repetitive pattern running from both ends towards a central, four-petal rosette. As discussed in Type 3, the same pattern appears in Asia Minor with a wide variety of leaf motifs set within a plain, oblong, double-profiled, Miletian-type frame. Architravefrieze A6018 (Fig. 9.81:4) bears a garland soffit located in the center with two pairs of leaves on either side of a stylized, four-petal rosette, while the frame is considerably longer. On both sides, the coarse, convexshaped strip had been prepared for the rendering of the continuous repetitive garland, although for some reason it was not completed. The garland, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, has a stylized, naturalistic appearance with a strong, three-dimensional effect. Type 5: This pattern is a small variation of Type 4, in which a centralized, four-petal rosette is flanked by double tips leaves (A6023, Fig. 9.86:5). In contrast to the in-turned tips of Type 4, these turn outward. The pattern is set within a small, rectangular, doubleprofiled, crescent-ended frame. Type 6: One example of a soffit presenting a scroll motif inhabited by ivy leaves was discovered (A6033, Fig. 9.86:6). It comprises a continuous pattern in which a stem creates repetitive, interlaced, stylized scrolls. Within each scroll, from a small offshoot stem

515

precisely placed at the same spot, springs a large ivy leaf that fills the entire scroll. The delicate pattern is deeply set within a double-profiled, Miletian-type frame. It is rendered on a convex profile in high relief, thus granting a strong three-dimensional effect. The pattern is naturalistic and reflects the work of a talented artist. The scroll motif inhabited by ivy leaves has its origins in the Hellenistic period in Asia Minor, mainly in small art objects and mosaic floors. In architectural decor, it first decorated cyma profiles. During the Imperial period in the East, it became a common frieze decoration, though not as common as in soffits. The ivy-leaf scroll gained popularity in the Roman East during the Imperial period on entablatures, mainly on friezes (Vandeput 1997:155). At Palmyra, such a pattern adorns one of the entablature moldings in the Temple of Bel and the jamb of the monumental arch, where a double-scroll pattern is depicted; both monuments are of the second century CE (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 111, 154). At Baalbek, it adorns the peristyle ceiling of the Temple of Bacchus of the second half of the second century CE (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 123), and at Petra, the door of the Khasne and the capitals of the arched gate, both dated to the late first–early second centuries CE (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 74, 75). It also decorates a door jamb of the temple at Atil, Syria, dated to the second century CE (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 50). As a soffit ornament, varying kinds of the basic scroll pattern––although not similar to the one from Nysa-Scythopolis––were used in Asia Minor; for example, at Ephesus in the Celsus Library of the early second century CE, in the Capito thermae at Miletus of mid-second century CE date (Wegner 1978–1980:92, 96, Figs. 3, 8) and in the bath-gymnasium at Sardis, dated to the second century CE (Yegül 1986: Fig. 163). Vandeput (1997: Pls. 45:4; 76:3) presents two other similar examples of this pattern from the tetrapylon at Aphrodisias and the nymphaeum of the upper agora at Sagalassos. In both cases, different kinds of leaves inhabit the stem scrolls, and the latter exhibits many drill holes within the leaves. Frieze The frieze does not reflect a continuous narrative along its route, but rather each segment contains groupings of inhabited acanthus scrolls with their own narrative, separated and framed by upright acanthus leaves.

516

Gabriel Mazor

Framing Acanthus Leaves There are three types of upright acanthus leaves that frame each segmented frieze element. In most cases, Type 1 or Type 2 appears, occasionally accompanied by Type 3. Type 1: Two half leaves stand upright at either end of the frieze segment, their three lobes with three to five in-turned tips, the upper lobe occasionally folded forward (e.g., A6002, Fig. 9.47). The acanthus leaf is based widely on the bottom of the frieze and has an emphasized, ridged midrib and lobe-ribs marked by bow-shaped grooves. The lobes are fleshy, carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind. The tips are pointed and where they meet, elongated eyelets are created. On the frieze’s convex profile a highrelief depiction with a deep light-and-shade effect is achieved. As a similar half leaf is depicted on the next frieze segment or around the corner, together they form a complete framing leaf and thus create a continuous composition along the scaenae frons facade. Type 2: A complete upright leaf stands at the end with a wide-ridged midrib (e.g., A6028, Fig. 9.64). The leaf leans inward at a 70˚ angle and may be accompanied by a Type 1 half leaf on one side (e.g., A6001, Fig. 9.41). Type 2 appears on all the console elements––on the facade and on both sides. On the console facades they frame a central motif. It is also found on other frieze elements––on the left or right side. Type 3: A complete acanthus leaf is commonly added to either one of the former types (e.g., A6007–A6010, Fig. 9.69). It is either upright or leans slightly inward. The leaf is widely based on the bottom of the frieze with an emphasized, strongly ridged midrib. It has five to seven lobes, two to three on each side and an upper, forward-folded one. The lobes are fleshy with a bowshaped midrib and they have three to five pointed tips. As the tips meet they create variously shaped eyelets. These acanthus leaves are carved in high relief and deeply cut from behind, lending a three dimensionality and a strong light-and-shade effect. They are detailed and naturalistic in their depiction. Differences in their rendering reflect the varying talents of the artisans, although they all stayed well within the standard motif. Type 3 leaves are usually added as space fillers where needed, for example, to an ill-planned composition or

to a pre-planned one, and as such, their appearance is therefore not related to any particular pattern. Discussion of Framing Acanthus Leaves. At NysaScythopolis, the framing acanthus-leaf pattern is characteristic of the scaenae frons marble friezes and was also carved on the marble pedestals. The limestone lintel friezes of the postscaenium facade’s entrances, which are adorned with floral-inhabited acanthus scrolls, are also framed by upright acanthus leaves of the same types (see Fig. 9.7). The pattern is relatively common elsewhere at the site, for example on the friezes of the western propylaeum of Palladius Street, dated to the Severan period. It was already used in complexes of the early half of the second century CE, as in the central temple (hieron or kalybe) facade and in the nymphaeum. Both monuments are dated to the reign of Hadrian or Antoninus Pius (Tsafrir and Foerster 1997:95, 97, Figs. D.14, D.15, Pls. 13, 21). Its appearance on the limestone friezes of various other monuments at Nysa-Scythopolis antedates the marble friezes of the theater and the limestone friezes of the western propylaeum of Palladius Street, both of the Severan period. Upright acanthus leaves as scroll frames or space fillers are found on friezes from Damascus and Isriye (Gogräfe 1993: Pl. 17:a, b, d), dated to the second century CE. At Baalbek it is common on friezes, for instance in the great altar court of the Temple of Jupiter, dated to the second century CE (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pls. 25, 77). At Gerasa, the pattern is commonly dated to the second century CE, when the same three types were carved on limestone friezes. It is depicted on the monumental gate, dated to Hadrian’s visit (130 CE), on the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (150 CE), and on the nymphaeum, dated to 191 CE (Kraeling 1938:42). The pattern is also common in Asia Minor, as in the scaenae frons entablature at Aspendos, dated to 161– 168 CE, where framing acanthus leaves and upright leaves on corners can be observed (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 185). At Perge, Nymphaeum F2 of the late Hadrianic or Antonine period (Vandeput 1997:33–40) has the same framing leaves with floral-inhabited acanthus scrolls (Kramer 1983: Fig. 7). Framing acanthus leaves on friezes are apparently a common pattern of the Corinthian order in the East, presumably of Hellenistic origins, although the motif flourished mainly during the Imperial period.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

It characterizes friezes adorned with both floral- and figure-inhabited acanthus scrolls, best serving as a device to separate long, repetitive friezes into easily observed segments. The use of half acanthus leaves at either end of frieze segments technically joins them together, creating a complete leaf at the connection line to visually harmonize the continuous decorative pattern along the length of the frieze. The figure-inhabited or ‘peopled’ scroll is in its nature a repetitive rather than a continuous narrative. In most cases, only sections of friezes are preserved, rarely an entire composition. The theater frieze at Nysa-Scythopolis is among the few known, completely preserved scaenae frons friezes of its kind (cf. the theater frieze at Perge; Özturk 2009), and therefore provides valuable information on the motif’s technical details as well as its function within the composition. Inhabited Acanthus Scrolls The main decor of the scaenae frons frieze is the pattern of acanthus scrolls inhabited by eroses and animals of various kinds, while the friezes of the valvae regiae, hospitalia and itinera versurarum lintels, as well as those of the postscaenium’s northern facade, were adorned with floral-inhabited scrolls. The motif of the figure-inhabited scrolls was researched and analyzed by Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950), who coined the term ‘peopled scrolls’ in their article that laid the basis for further research of this pattern. Gough (1952), in his analysis of the third-century CE Triumphal Arch at Anavarza, preferred to call them simply ‘inhabited scrolls’. This pattern also appears in mosaic floors at Antioch (Levi 1947:489–517), and since Levi’s pioneering study, it has been widely researched and further examples have been revealed, although these are beyond the scope of the current work. The inhabited acanthus scrolls depicted on the frieze of the scaenae frons at Nysa-Scythopolis are separated by upright, framing acanthus leaves into segments. The scroll designs can be divided into two basic types: Type A is a symmetrical pattern with an even number of scrolls, while Type B is asymmetrical, with an odd number of scrolls. Each type is further divided into subtypes (Fig. 9.87). Subtype A1: Two scrolls, either round or elliptical, in heraldic position flanking a central motif––either a kantharos or a floral motif (Fig. 9.87:A1). The composition advances from either side from within the

517

lower third of the upright, framing half or complete acanthus leaves. The scroll’s leaf curves over the top, clockwise on the left and counterclockwise on the right, and closes the scroll on the bottom (A6031, Fig. 9.43; A6005 right, Fig. 9.49; A6035, Fig. 9.63; A6016, Fig. 9.65; A6003, Fig. 9.68; A6004, Fig. 9.71; A6027 left, Fig. 9.79). In A6016, a side shoot springs from the main scroll leaf towards the central motif. Subtype A2: Two scrolls on each side flanking a central motif (Fig. 9.87:A2), for instance a protome (A6014, Fig. 9.45) or a floral motif (A6033, Fig. 9.66). The scroll-encircling acanthus leaves spring from within the upright, framing half acanthus leaves. They encircle the first scroll over the top with an offshoot closing the scroll at the bottom, while the second scroll is encircled from below and backward toward the center (A6021, Fig. 9.75). Subtype A3: A similar composition to Subtype A2, but with three scrolls on each side (Fig. 9.87:A3), either simply separated (A6028, Fig. 9.64), or flanking a central kantharos (A6029, Fig. 9.46). The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaves spring from within the upright framing acanthus leaves or half leaves. They run along the top of the first scroll, the bottom of the second and the top of the third, with offshoots enclosing the first and second scrolls, while the third scroll is closed by the main s-shaped, trailing acanthus leaf as it turns backward (A6030, Fig. 9.44; A6045, Fig. 9.58:2). The right-side scroll in A6029 (Fig. 9.46) is missing, creating an unusual composition of two animals instead of one rendered without an encircling scroll, a unique depiction not encountered elsewhere in the entire frieze. Subtype A4: Two pairs of scrolls on each side (Fig. 9.87:A4), in the same composition as in Subtype A3, although the scrolls interlace at the center (A6019, Fig. 9.67; A6034, Fig. 9.72). Subtype A5: Two pairs of scrolls on each side that intersect at the center (Fig. 9.87:A5). The scrolls’ encircling, trailing acanthus leaves spring from the upright, framing half or complete acanthus leaves on each side. They encircle the top of the first scroll on each side with an offshoot leaf curving around the bottom. They further encircle the second scroll on the bottom, intersect, and enclose the second scroll of the

518

Gabriel Mazor

A5

A1

A6

B1

A2

B2

A3 B3

B4 A4

Fig. 9.87. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, scroll motifs of Types A and B.

opposite side on top (A6026, Fig. 9.50; A6013, Fig. 9.51; A6015, Fig. 9.54; A6022, Fig. 9.74). Subtype A6: Four scrolls created by alternating up- and down-turned acanthus leaves that spring from the left side and create a trailing pattern (Fig. 9.87:A6), each scroll leaf emerging as an offshoot from the previous one (A6011, Fig. 9.55; A6039, Fig. 9.61). Subtype B1: A single scroll, the encircling acanthus leaf of which springs from the bottom of the right or left framing, upright leaf or half leaf (Fig. 9.87:B1). The leaf turns either

clockwise or counterclockwise over the top of the scroll and then encircles the bottom (A6001, Fig. 9.41; A6002, Fig. 9.47; A6005, Fig. 9.49; A6023, Fig. 9.76; A6006, Fig. 9.78), sometimes with a balancing offshoot at the bottom (A6001 right, Fig. 9.41; A6002 right, Fig. 9.47). Subtype B2: Three scrolls in various patterns. The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaves spring from both sides, either from the lower or upper part of the framing, upright leaf or half leaf (Fig. 9.87:B2), or from one side and turn around at the other end and complete encircling the scrolls on the way back. As

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

they wind in a trailing pattern they intersect twice in between the scrolls, creating elliptical scrolls (A6012, Fig. 9.56; A6036, Fig. 9.57). Subtype B3: The scrolls’ encircling leaves spring from both sides and encircle the scrolls in a trailing pattern (Fig. 9.87:B3; A6025, Fig. 9.73). Subtype B4: The left scroll’s leaf springs from the leftside framing leaf and encircles clockwise. An offshoot encircles the central scroll’s bottom and intersects the third scroll on the top. The right-side scroll leaf springs from the bottom of the framing leaf, intersects and encircles the central scroll on the top (Fig. 9.87:B4). This subtype may be considered as a combination of Subtypes A2 and A5 with an asymmetrical composition (A6032, Fig. 9.52; A6011, Fig. 9.55). Discussion of Inhabited Acanthus Scrolls. Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950:2) distinguished between three basic forms of scrolls inhabited by animals and eroses. Of these, the third form with two interlaced leaves that create ‘a double scroll or medallion scroll’ best fits the scrolls of the Severan Theater’s scaenae frons friezes of the first floor, although various subtypes and variations can be distinguished in the basic form. Symmetrical scroll compositions seem to be the most common, while asymmetrical patterns might indicate an ill-planned and improvised design, reflecting a lack of comprehension of the basic pattern, and usually resulting in somewhat poorer results. The frieze achieves its three dimensionality using three different levels, all of which contribute to the well-integrated pattern. The first level is the convex surface, the second is the deeply carved scroll pattern with its framing acanthus leaves and encircling scroll leaves, and the third is the leaping of the animals. The scrolls’ encircling acanthus leaves are fleshy, detailed and rendered in high relief. All the lobe tips are inturned, apart from continuous offshoots and space fillers. The space fillers usually have additional up- or down-turned leaves. Fruits or buds are occasionally found between scrolls. The trailing acanthus leaves encircle scrolls on the top or bottom, and sometimes seem to rest rigidly with no plasticity. Occasionally, part of the scroll is hidden behind a leaping animal or was not completed, although in most cases the scrolls retain a rounded or elliptical shape. The use of inner stems is uncommon, except in the valvae regiae frieze,

519

where they gently interlace with the scroll’s leaf and coil around it, occasionally resembling a cornucopia. The entire floral pattern is carved in high relief, sometimes so deeply cut from behind that it is almost detached from its background. The usually triple lobe tips are pointed and often create eyelets. Drill work and small connecting bridges are occasionally seen. In most cases the pattern is naturalistic and rich in detail and its three-dimensional rendition results in a strong light-and-shade effect. The acanthus scroll is a relatively common architectural ornament and has a considerably widespread distribution throughout the Roman East. It found its way into architectural decor on pilasters, door lintels and jambs, and mainly on Corinthian friezes. In the Roman East, it is usually found in Roman cities that have their origins in Hellenistic poleis, such as Damascus, Caesarea, Nysa-Scythopolis, Gerasa and Philadelphia, as well as in newly founded Roman cities such as Baalbek and even Nabatean sites such as Petra and Qasr Rabbah. In Baalbek, the acanthus-scroll pattern is found in all three temples, the Temple of Jupiter (Wiegand 1921– 1925 I: Pls. 77–79), the Temple of Bacchus (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Figs. 26, 27, 34, Pls. 8, 24, 27) and the Temple of Venus (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Fig. 163, Pls. 62–66), all dated to the second century CE. In Damascus, the acanthus-scroll pattern is found in the Temple of Jupiter and on the market door, both of the second century CE (Freyberger 1989: Pls. 22, 24a, 24b, 24d, 25a). In Caesarea it decorates the theater friezes of the late second century CE (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 14, 16, 17, 42–45). In Gerasa it was found on the monumental Hadrianic gate, the nymphaeum and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton 1974:141, 148; Browning 1982:108, 146, 156), all dated to the second century CE, and at Philadelphia in the grand temple dated to the late second century CE (Koutsoukou 1997). In Petra, it decorates early secondcentury CE tombs (Lyttelton 1974: Pl.1) and in Qasr Rabbah, a temple dated to the first half of the second century CE (Glueck 1965:56). The pattern has its origins in the Classical Greek and early Hellenistic periods, mainly in paintings and mosaic floors. On architectural elements it became a rich ornamental pattern once it was favored by Roman Imperial architects practicing the Corinthian order, mainly on friezes. In contrast to other types of trailing-branch and vine-trellis patterns, the acanthus

520

Gabriel Mazor

scroll creates a naturalistic, three-dimensional pattern (Turnheim 1994:118, n. 2). In the basic pattern, one or two trailing acanthus leaves emerge from one or both sides and create, while interlacing, round or oval scrolls or medallions that frame floral motifs of flowers, leaves, etc. or, human figures or animals. The first, ‘floral-inhabited’ scrolls have a wide distribution throughout the Roman world (Gough 1952:85–150; Dauphin 1978:10–34), while the second, ‘peopled scrolls’ (Toynbee and Ward-Perkin 1950) or ‘inhabited scrolls’ (Gough 1952) have a more limited distribution. The floral-inhabited scroll pattern first appears in the Roman East in the first century BCE and the first century CE, mainly on funerary monuments, as in Jerusalem (Turnheim 1994:118, nn. 7, 8), and its origin is presumably Hellenistic (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:6, 30; Kraus 1953:71; Wegner 1957:12). It is widely distributed in this region during the Roman Imperial period, at sites such as Palmyra, Baalbek, Kedesh, Caesarea, Nysa-Scythopolis, Gerasa, Philadelphia, etc. It was also popular in Asia Minor and in North Africa. The pattern was common in the Imperial period also in mosaic floors, which were analyzed by Dauphin (1976). The vast excavations conducted in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis over the years have enriched the repertoire of the scroll pattern far beyond its representation in the Severan Theater’s postscaenium northern facade and the scaenae frons. It adorns friezes of the central temple (kalybe), the nymphaeum, the imperial altar and the western propylaeum of Palladius Street. Together with the rich repertoire of the pattern at the large centers of Baalbek, Gerasa, and to a certain extent Caesarea, a far more detailed and comprehensive study of the pattern can be achieved. The acanthus scrolls or medallions, regardless of their inner content––whether ‘peopled’ by human figures or animals, or ‘inhabited’ by floral motifs––present a unique phenomenon with a wide range of types, styles and techniques. The trailing acanthus leaf and its inner circular stem that originates either from an upright leaf or a stylized acanthus calyx depicts the same basic pattern with a number of variations. Small refinements such as the trefoil blossom as a source of scrolls, or fruits, offshoots and even cornucopia-shaped leaves as space fillers, can be found in most depictions, and they do not alter the basic pattern. The scroll pattern was in use throughout the Roman Empire during its entire time span. A detailed analysis of the examples,

which is beyond the scope of this work, would most certainly find minor differences between the regions of the Roman East, Asia Minor and North Africa, between sites, and even between complexes within the same site. Differences would also be evident between patterns of the mid-second century CE and those of the Severan period. However, overall it represents a relatively homogenous phenomenon throughout time and place. It was long argued that the dispersion of the pattern throughout the Roman provinces was the result of the marble trade that originated in the Imperial quarries of Asia Minor (Ward-Perkins 1980:23–67). However, recent research has proved otherwise, as the appearance of the scroll pattern in the East predates the marble trade. It is relatively limited in marble at most sites in the region, and its execution in limestone is far more widespread. The limestone architectural elements of the Corinthian order on which it is carved obviously predate the marble trade, as they appear in the late first and early second centuries CE, long before marble architectural elements were imported to NysaScythopolis, or any other significant site in the region (Turnheim 1994:120). The relatively homogenous variations of the pattern found at numerous sites in the Roman Empire led some scholars to assume the use of a pattern book (Dauphin 1978; Turnheim 1994:121). However, the evidence does not necessarily support this assumption, or at least raises some doubts. In favor of her case, Turnheim presents two limestone friezes from NysaScythopolis, dated to the mid-second century CE, which have the same scroll pattern originating from a three-petal blossom, although executed in mirror images. In her opinion, this could only result from use of a pattern book. Yet there are numerous other variations of these motifs and compositions that do not support her argument, and more likely point to various artists or workshops. A comparative analysis of the patterns of the ‘peopled’ or ‘inhabited’ scroll patterns from sites of the Roman East, Asia Minor and North Africa, would reveal various influences between sites and regions, and the pattern-book solution would most likely turn into a library of pattern books. It seems far more reasonable to assume that it was a deeply rooted Hellenistic tradition and its widespread use developed independently in numerous workshops and centers (Freyberger 1989:85). Artisans working in the main centers of the various regions originated

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

from all over the Roman Empire. They gained their expertise by traveling from one center to the other, absorbing and distributing their skills along the way, and contributing nuances in the basic patterns. In other words, the artisans themselves were the pattern books, creating over time and space an international pattern that in spite of its endless variations, was still strikingly homogenous. Central Motif. Acanthus scrolls occasionally flank a central motif in the symmetrical patterns. These can be classified into three types. Type 1: A floral design, usually a cluster of acanthus leaves (A6016, Fig. 9.65; A6033, Fig. 9.66; A6003 left face, Fig. 9.68; A6027, Fig. 9.79) composed of continuous offshoots from the scroll leaves, creating a delicate, naturalistic, symmetrical design of intertwining stem tips and blossoms. In one case (A6016), a palmette is the central motif, the encircling leaves of the scrolls interlacing at the bottom of the palmette as in the anthemion pattern, and the scrolls are not fully enclosed at the bottom. Type 2: A kantharos, always depicted in the same manner (A6031, Fig. 9.43; A6029, Fig. 9.46; A6035, Fig. 9.63; A6004, Fig. 9.71, right face). It has a solid stepped base, a fluted carinated body, a high, wide neck and three high, s-shaped handles. It presumably represents a metal vessel as can be deduced from its details. The animals in the scrolls on either side are in a drinking pose, apart from A6029, where the motif is flanked by what seems to be two poorly preserved birds with long legs, drinking, without encircling scrolls. Type 3: A protome (A6014, Fig. 9.45) appears in one case as a central motif, apparently depicting the figure of Dionysus, and flanked by two scrolls on each side. To this type can also be added the six console elements (A6001–6006, Figs. 9.41, 9.47, 9.49, 9.68, 9.71, 9.78) that bear protomes on their facades flanked by upright acanthus leaves. Some of the console elements were worn, but two poorly preserved Medusa protomes can still be recognized and one is a well-preserved Oceanus protome. The protomes of Dionysus and Oceanus represent the work of a talented artist, while those of Medusa are poorly rendered by an artist with little knowledge of the human face and anatomy. The identifying details

521

are emphasized: Oceanus has seaweed-like hair and beard depicted with acanthus leaves, Dionysus has a beast-skin garment and grape-shaped hair, and Medusa has curling snake-like hair. Dionysus and Oceanus were finely depicted in high relief, while Medusa is flat and carved in low relief. Composition. The inhabited scrolls along the entire frieze do not comprise a continuous narrative, but are separated into short, unrelated segments by frames of variously-shaped, upright acanthus leaves. Five types of segmented compositions are observed. Type 1: A single inhabited scroll, usually on the left (L) and right (R) sides of the console elements (A6001 R+L, Fig. 9.41; A6002 R+L, Fig. 9.47; A6005 L, Fig. 9.49; A6003 R, Fig. 9.68; A6004 L, Fig. 9.71; A6023, Fig. 9.76, A6006 R+L, Fig. 9.78). The animal, either a hound or a horse, turns toward the console’s facade, on which an unrelated face of Oceanus or Medusa is depicted. Type 2: Two inhabited scrolls flanking a central motif in a heraldic pose. This composition is found on two console elements (A6003 L, Fig. 9.68; A6004 R, Fig. 9.71), as well as on straight facades (A6031, Fig. 9.43; A6036, Fig. 9.57; A6035, Fig. 9.63; A6016, Fig. 9.65; 6027, Fig. 9.79). Type 3: Two heraldically posed and well-balanced figural groups within two pairs of inhabited scrolls present a symmetrical pattern, the two figures on each side facing toward the center (A6032, Fig. 9.52; A6019, Fig. 9.67; A6007–A6010, Fig. 9.69; A6034, Fig. 9.72; A6022, Fig. 9.74; A6021, Fig. 9.75). Exceptional asymmetrical segments of this type were observed on the right side of a console element (A6005 R, Fig. 9.49) and a facade element (A6024, Fig. 9.70), both of which depict two figures facing in the same direction, thus creating an unbalanced composition. Frieze A6025 (Fig. 9.73) is another exceptional example of this type, with three inhabited scrolls in which the animals at either end face the center, while the central figure advances to the right, but its head turns to the left, thus balancing the asymmetrical composition. Frieze A6020 (Fig. 9.61) has an incomplete heraldic setting, as the right-side pair is missing the rightmost scroll (presumably broken or intently cut away in the restoration stage).

522

Gabriel Mazor

Type 4: Two well-balanced groups of three inhabited scrolls in a heraldic pose, in which the figures face toward an emphasized central motif––a floral design or a kantharos. Two elements (A6029+A6042, Fig. 9.46; A6028, Fig. 9.64) present the complete composition, others only half a composition, either the left or right side (A6012, Fig. 9.56; A6043+110107, Fig. 9.62). Frieze A6026 (Fig. 9.50) has three figures in an asymmetric composition, as the two left ones are in an antithetic pose and the third is too worn to establish its position, although this is clearly an unbalanced composition. Type 5: Two heraldically posed pairs of inhabited scrolls, each pair containing two antithetically posed figures. This type has a balanced composition (A6014+A6047, Fig. 9.45; A6038, Fig. 9.53; A6015, Fig. 9.54; A6011, Fig. 9.55) or half a composition (A6046, Fig. 9.48). Others have the same basic composition, but on the right side the two figures do not confront each other, as one seems to chase the other (A6030, Fig. 9.44; A6013, Fig. 9.51; A6033, Fig. 9.66). Figures in Inhabited Scrolls. Over one hundred inhabited scrolls adorn the length of the frieze. apart from the eroses, most of them contain animals that leap to the right or left from a rounded, triple- or multi-petal blossom, occasionally with a rounded stem. Most of the figures broke when the scaenae frons collapsed in earthquakes, are heavily weathered, and many were probably intentionally defaced due to iconoclasm, as in most cases only the figure is mutilated, while the scroll remains almost intact. However, it is questionable whether all of the figural defacement can be attributed to iconoclasm, as some of the figures are well preserved, while fragments of others were found during excavation below the collapsed elements. Others were most probably lost when the orchestra was cleared by heavy equipment. Apart from the few well-preserved figures, the rest are identified based on such features as body shape, head outline and details of forelegs, and sometimes only the species can be proposed. In any case, identification of the animals is often hypothetical or quite impossible. The figural assemblage can be first classified into two major divisions, hunters––either predators or eroses––and prey. Occasionally, peaceful narratives may include examples of both in a non-hunting scene, while in some scenes even small unidentified

animals crouch peacefully in a row, with no specific narrative. Predators are commonly depicted in hunting scenes and over one third of them (36) seem to be of the cat family. Lions can be identified by the shape of the head, the paws, and in several cases by scant remains of a mane, as in A6029 (Fig. 9.46), A6013 (Fig. 9.51), A6032 (Fig. 9.52) and A6020 (Fig. 9.61). Lionesses presumably appear in A6030 (Fig. 9.44), A6029 (Fig. 9.46), A6046 (Fig. 9.48), A6011 (Fig. 9.55), A6012 (Fig. 9.56), A6028 (Fig. 9.64) and A6034 (Fig. 9.72). A well-preserved spotted leopard is depicted in A6034 (Fig. 9.72), and others presumably appear in A6012 (Fig. 9.56), A6020 (Fig. 9.61), A6033 (Fig. 9.66), A6007–A6010 (Fig. 9.69) and A6025 (Fig. 9.73). Panthers may be depicted in A6014 (Fig. 9.45) and A6013 (Fig. 9.51). The rest are simply identified as predators of the cat family, as in A6031 (2×, Fig. 9.43), A6015 (2×, Fig. 9.54), A6012 (Fig. 9.56), A6035 (2×, Fig. 9.63), A6028 (Fig. 9.64), A6003 (2×, Fig. 9.68), A6007–A6010 (Fig. 9.69), A6004 (2×, Fig. 9.71), A6021 (2×, Fig. 9.75) and A6006 (2×, Fig. 9.78). The feline predators are naturalistically rendered, in most cases displaying the artist’s close acquaintance with the predator’s anatomy. The forequarters are heavy, rounded and muscled. The neck is either short and thick in the case of a lion, or somewhat longer and thinner in the case of a lioness, leopard or panther. The head of a lion is short and square, the others are longer and more pointed. In a few cases, details of hair are preserved, for instance the lion’s mane. The leopard’s spotted hide is depicted with round, shallow drill marks. Eyes, when preserved, are naturalistic. Jaws are usually partly open showing teeth, and the tongue lolls out. The forelegs are strong and bony with heavy, emphasized paws. The usual pose is either a charging leap toward the prey, or a tense posture, the body half concealed in ambush––the body arches forward, the head slightly lowered and the forelegs outstretched, paws gripping the ground. It conveys concealed tension and restrained movement. Another predator is presumably a wild boar, which may appear in A6005 (Fig. 9.49 right) and A6032 (Fig. 9.52). It is identified by its shorter head and square nose, although this identification is highly hypothetical. Hounds appear as part of hunting scenes, as in A6001 (Fig. 9.41 left), A6002 (2×, Fig. 9.47 left), A6005 (Fig. 9.49 left), A6026 (Fig. 9.50), A6043 (3×, Fig. 9.62), A6033 (Fig. 9.66), A6019 (2×, Fig. 9.67) and

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6003 (Fig. 9.68 right), usually depicted leaping, with muscled forequarters and a pointed head. The forelegs are outstretched and the ears are either erect or hang down. The jaws are slightly open showing teeth and a lolling tongue. In one well-preserved example, a double collar adorned with iron knobs can be seen around the hound’s neck. Collars on hounds’ necks are a popular feature in high-relief depictions and in mosaic floors, as in the Martyr church at Tel Iztabba (G. Mazor, pers. obs.), indicating a domesticated animal. The hunting hounds are of different types, although their state of preservation makes identification difficult. They are usually depicted in a leaping or charging pose, with the forequarters, head and forelegs projecting forward, full of energy and focused on the target. The rendering is naturalistic, expressive and conveys tension and concealed movement. Hounds are common on console elements associated with a galloping horse. Horses are also common, as in A6001 (Fig. 9.41 right), A6014 (Fig. 9.45), A6002 (Fig. 9.47 left), A6005 (Fig. 9.49 right), A6012 (2×, Fig. 9.56), A6003 (Fig. 9.68 left), A6034 (2×, Fig. 9.72) and A6027 (Fig. 9.79). They have a long, rounded, muscled body, a long neck and an upraised, pointed head, and are always galloping, their long, bony forelegs thrown forward. The ears, if preserved, are erect and the jaws partly open. The muscled body and short hairs are carved with a distinctive toothed chisel. This motif is common on console elements. Among the prey we find cows, as in A6030 (Fig. 9.44), A6029 (Fig. 9.46), A6028 (Fig. 9.64), A6019 (Fig. 9.67) and A6027 (Fig. 9.79), and bulls, as in A6029 (Fig. 9.46), A6011 (Fig. 9.55), A6020 (Fig. 9.61) and A6019 (Fig. 9.67), both with heavy forequarters, a short neck and a square, heavy head. The strong bony forelegs are often well preserved, with heavy, emphasized hoofs. The animal either crouches down in defeat, if hunted, or rests lazily at pasture, unaware of any danger. The heavy body does not display any movement or concealed tension, as is evident in the predators, hounds and horses. Two elephants may perhaps be identified by their bulky body and the long silhouette of a trunk, as in A6032 (Fig. 9.52) and A6007–A6010 (Fig. 9.69), although this identification is far from certain. They appear to be resting within the petaled blossom, their heavy legs supporting their body, while the long trunk is stretched diagonally forward.

523

Two well-depicted examples of mountain goats (ibex) are observed in A6021 (Fig. 9.75) and A6023 (Fig. 9.76), as well as a broken head of a goat in A01 (Fig. 9.82:7). The animals have strong, muscled forequarters with short hair, a long neck and a strong, pointed head. Two rounded horns are clearly evident, and the strong bony forelegs have emphasized hoofs. They are naturalistic and detailed depictions, displaying good knowledge of the animals’ anatomy. In one case, a well-preserved head of a camel is observed, detailed and naturalistic (A6025, see Fig. 9.73), although the rest of the body is broken. In another, a rhinoceros may perhaps be identified (A6021, Fig. 9.75), its central horn depicted above the silhouette of the animal’s head. Frieze A6038 (Fig. 9.53) may carry a depiction of a bear, although its poor state of preservation prevents a positive identification. Frieze A6014 presumably depicts a deer in one of its scrolls (Fig. 9.45) and A6028 a sheep (Fig. 9.64), both figures regretfully ill preserved. Several hypothetical identifications of other animals include a turtle in A6029 (Fig. 9.46) with a bulky depiction of its shell, and two rabbits in A6029 (Fig. 9.46) and A6033 (Fig. 9.66). Large birds seem to be depicted in A6029 (Fig. 9.46), one within a scroll, of which a feathered back and leg are preserved, and two other large, extremely worn birds with long beaks seem to drink from a central kantharos. Mythological animals are represented in a single well-preserved depiction of a griffin leaping out of a foliated blossom in A6025 (Fig. 9.73), its body and wings partly concealed. The head, forelegs and wings are well detailed and very expressive, presumably the work of a gifted artist. The griffin was a common motif in the minor arts during the Hellenistic and Roman periods, but less so in architectural decorations and even rarer in mosaic floors. Its earliest appearance in architectural decoration was in Asia Minor, as at Didyma (Charbonneaux, Martin and Villard 1973: Pl. 24), not related to a scroll pattern. Most scroll-related griffins are found in Rome, and they seem to be rare in the East. In Rome, a griffin appears within an acanthus scroll on a frieze fragment in the Atrium of St. Saba, presumably of Flavian origin (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:15, Pl. XII:1). It is also found on a frieze element from the Trajan forum (Leon 1971: Pl. 21:1–3), and on a Severan-period pilaster from the Grotto of the Vatican, now in the

524

Gabriel Mazor

Museo Petriano (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:21, Pl. XVIII). Eroses occupy a prominent place among the hunters––appearing in ten scrolls––usually fighting some kind of feline predator, as in A6030 (2×, Fig. 9.44), A6014 (Fig. 9.45), A6046 (Fig. 9.48), A6013 (Fig. 9.51), A6038 (Fig. 9.53), A6015 (2×, Fig. 9.54), A6011 (Fig. 9.55) and A6033 (Fig. 9.66). Each eros is presented full body, either in frontal or rear view, half turned in an attack pose. The figure does not emerge from a petaled blossom as all the animals do, but vertically or diagonally fills the entire scroll. One leg is stretched backward, protruding from the scroll, showing its foot, while the other is bent forward within the scroll, partly hidden within the leaves. The legs are short and chubby, like baby legs, the torso half turned toward the predator. The head is relatively large and ill proportioned, and in most cases worn or broken with no details preserved apart from long hair locks, as in A6030 (Fig. 9.44). In A6030 (Fig. 9.44) and A6046 (Fig. 9.48), wings are preserved in the background. The arms are usually outstretched, holding a shield in the left hand and presumably a spear in the right hand, although nowhere fully preserved (A6030). In one case, the well-preserved shield shows a Medusa head in its center, seen from the side (A6014, Fig. 9.45). Eros in an attacking pose is characteristic of warrior depictions in Greek art, as in Aegina, Bassae and Halicarnassus (Ashmole and Beazley 1932: Pls. 191, 205–208; Pollitt 1974: Pl. 5:52). Although most of the eroses are poorly preserved or defaced, they are ill-proportioned and definitely less detailed than the animal depictions, as well as the typical eros figures in other art forms. It would be reasonable to conclude that the artists were less acquainted with human anatomy and body movement than those of animals. Although the eroses’ stance is active, aggressive and dynamic, it is in most cases rigid and less naturalistic than the animals. Inhabited scrolls made their first appearance in the decor of monumental architecture in the Temple of Artemis Leukophryene at Magnesia (Greece) dated to 220 BCE (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:6, Pl. II:2). A soffit from the peristyle of the Temple of Bel at Palmyra dated to 32 CE depicts a winged eros in a hunting scene, holding a bow and marching to the left in pursuit of a galloping horse, his upper body turned with the left leg outside the scroll showing the foot (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:32, Pl. XX:1). A

frieze from the southern temple at Atil (Syria), dated to 151 CE, depicts a deer emerging from a scroll (Butler 1903:343–347; Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:32, Pl. XX:2), while the northern temple facade at Atil of the same date bears various inhabited scrolls with other, rather worn animals (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 50). To the mid-second century CE is also dated a frieze on the western portico of the Temple of Bel at Palmyra (Weigand 1932), decorated with inhabited scrolls. At Baalbek, the frieze over the central door of the Temple of Bacchus has scroll work dating to the second half of the second century CE, with beasts such as bulls and lions leaping from petaled blossoms, and a peacefully posed eros not in a scroll (Weigand 1924–1925:165–196, Fig. 36, Pls. 49–52). This motif appears again on the rear wall of the southern exedra of the forecourt on an inner frieze of a niche in which an eros, this time within a scroll, poses with some beasts such as a lion, a horse and a hound that leap out of petaled blossoms (Weigand 1924–1925: Pls. 43, 135). In both cases, the composition and depiction of the figures resemble that of the Severan Theater friezes at Nysa-Scythopolis. The Temple of Bacchus was added to the original sanctuary in the mid-second century CE and over the next hundred years the monumental forecourt and propylaeum were added (Ward-Perkins 1981:314). A sarcophagus from Sidon, presumably of the second half of the second century CE, now in the British Museum, depicts in its upper register animals in a symmetrical, antithetic composition in scrolls flanking a central floral motif (Robert 1890:129, Fig. 110, Pl. XLV). The museum at Soueida (Arabia) exhibits two fragments of basalt friezes of unknown provenience with scrolls inhabited by a bull, a boar and a crouched beast (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:32). At Kanawat, a fragment of a frieze was found with schematic acanthus scrolls inhabited by two horned heads of animals, presumably dating to the second century CE (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins1950:33, Pl. XXI:2). Two major poleis located in close proximity to NysaScythopolis, Gerasa and Gadara present a common use of the inhabited-scroll motif, both in style and chronology. At Gerasa, the floral-inhabited scroll is relatively common and its appearance is generally dated to the second century CE. Inhabited scrolls containing animals but no eroses are found in the entablature friezes of two monuments: the southern

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

theater, begun in the reign of Domitian and completed during the early years of the second century CE, to which the friezes most probably date (Browning 1982:126), and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis dedicated in 150 CE (Kraeling 1938:52). In both complexes, the acanthus-scroll composition and the poses of the animals resemble those of the Severan Theater friezes at Nysa-Scythopolis, although they seem to be of an earlier date. They differ from those of Nysa-Scythopolis in the larger dimensions of the scrolls and the animals, their half-turned heads seen in frontal view, and the asymmetrical composition. Those of the southern theater are either Flavian or more likely Hadrianic, while those of the propylaeum are Antonine. The friezes of both monuments are of limestone, carved on a considerably higher, more convex profile than those of Nysa-Scythopolis. Apart from a few frieze segments that contain two scrolls, the rest have a single, rounded scroll in each segment. The scrolls are elaborate, with offshoot stems and blossoms in high relief, deeply cut from behind. The animal protomes are heavy and considerably larger than those of the Nysa-Scythopolis theater’s frieze and they protrude significantly from the scroll surface. The forequarters of each animal turn toward the front and this pose increases the three-dimensional effect. They all leap to the left from petaled blossoms. The animals are partly broken and difficult to identify, yet lions, cows, bulls and hounds can be recognized. Two pairs of legs deeply sunken within petaled blossoms that may belong to defaced human figures in a frontal pose are also discernible (G. Mazor, pers. obs.). Several marble friezes of the nymphaeum that flanked the decumanus maximus were recently revealed at Gadara. They depict round, interlaced acanthus scrolls deeply carved in high relief that are inhabited by naturalistic animals such as feline predators and hounds leaping out to the left. Their carving reflects the work of a talented and well-trained artisan (G. Mazor, pers. obs.). At Caesarea, the theater frieze of the second century CE is also decorated with a scroll motif, although it contains a floral design rather than animals or eroses (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996). Finally an inscribed lintel from Bet Guvrin (Eleutheropolis), the provenance and date of which are not clear, has a frieze with inhabited scrolls in a flat, schematic and rigid pattern. Upright, oval scrolls inhabited by eroses holding spears and marching to the right or left alternate with

525

horizontal oval scrolls inhabited by animals such as wild boars, a panther and a lion. The frieze is dated by its architectural design and artistic character to the first half of the fourth century CE (Dagan, Fischer and Tsafrir 1985:29–32, Pl. 8a). From the Nabatean region, two frieze fragments dating to the early second century CE are of note. The first, from Sia, now in the Soueida Museum, depicts a lion emerging from a scroll and the bust of a female figure holding the stem as a central motif (Dunand 1934: Nos. 138, 139, Pls. XXIX, XXX). The other, from Qasr Rabbah, is a frieze from a Nabatean temple that shows a human figure, the forequarters of a lion and a gazelle emerging from acanthus scrolls. At Nysa-Scythopolis, inhabited scrolls, mainly containing floral designs, were relatively popular during the second century CE, as in the entablature of the nymphaeum, presumably dated to the mid-second century CE, and the monumental altar, presumably of the Severan period (G. Foerster, pers. comm.). Acanthus scrolls inhabited by floral designs and leaping animals, including lions, cows, horses and hounds, although without eroses, are seen in friezes of the central temple (kalybe) at the northeastern end of Palladius Street and the northern propylaeum of Northern Street, both of which were excavated by the IAHU, and they may also be of mid-second century CE date. At the southwestern end of Palladius Street, another propylaeum was reconstructed in the late fourth or early fifth century CE. It replaced an earlier one of a different plan with a considerably longer facade. Architectural elements of the earlier frieze were reused in the reconstructed propylaeum, of which 22 frieze elements, depicting scrolls inhabited by floral designs (16) and animals leaping from petaled blossoms (6), were identified. The scroll compositions and the animal depictions resemble those of the Severen Theater friezes and may have been executed in the same workshop and by the same artisans. Technical characteristics of the Severan period, such as the three-dimensional light-and-shade effect of the scroll pattern and its background, which achieves an almost lace-like design, as well as the drill marks and small connecting bridges, seem to indicate a Severan dating. The identified animals, all predators of the cat family, comprise a lion, two lionesses and two or three panthers or leopards. The propylaeum’s frieze segments were carved from reused limestone column drums that were cut at either end to create flat surfaces, while the body

526

Gabriel Mazor

of the column was used as a convex surface for the inhabited-scrolls design. In Asia Minor the inhabited-scroll motif was popular during the second century CE, especially the floral version. Scrolls inhabited by animals and human figures, although less common, are also present. The school of Aphrodisias was no doubt a major center for this rich architectural decor. A pilaster from the Hadrianic bath at the site, now in the Istanbul Museum (Mendel 1914 II: 179–180, No. 493), depicts eroses emerging from petaled blossoms in scrolls and marching to the right or left. The figures are well proportioned and exhibit detailed anatomy. They are not shown in hunting scenes but in peaceful poses. Outside of the inhabited scrolls, hounds and eroses are scattered among the offshoot branches. In their subject matter, composition, technique and exuberance of details, they seem to be prototypes for the patterns that were later found on the pilasters of Leptis Magna, in North Africa (see below). A late second-century CE marble frieze from the gymnasium at Aphrodisias, now in the British Museum, has the same motif, with elaborate scrolls inhabited by eroses and animals in various kinds of activities, flanking a central motif in which a sphinx is depicted clutching the scrolls’ stems (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:35, Pl. XXIII). A frieze from Diokaisareia, presumably of the second century CE, bears scrolls inhabited by animals (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 50). In the theater at Side, dated to the mid-second century CE, the frieze of the upper story depicts animals leaping from elliptical scrolls (Mansel 1962; Ward-Perkins 1980:57; Vandeput 1997: Pl. 115:3). The scaenae frons frieze of the theater at Perge is no doubt the closest comparison to the theater friezes of Nysa-Scythopolis from among the Asia Minor sites. The theater is Hadrianic or slightly later, and was restored in 200 CE (de Bernardi Ferrero 1970:148– 155). Its friezes, either of its original stage or more likely of its later, Severan reconstruction stage, carry the same motif of acanthus scrolls inhabited by hunting eroses and animals (Mansel 1975: Figs. 32, 33; Özturk 2009). The animal repertoire includes lions and lionesses, a wild boar, a goat, a cow and a bear, as well as griffins and sirens from the mythological world. The composition is repetitive in its hunting-scene modules (Ovadiah and Turnheim 1994:121). The southern bath at Perge, dated to Hadrian’s reign, also has a frieze with an inhabited-scroll design and animals leaping from petaled blossoms (Mitchell and Waelkens 1988:56;

Waelkens and Mitchell 1988; Inan 1990; Vandeput 1997: Pl. 105:4). The Roman provinces of North Africa were no less impressive in their monumental architecture, and also here the inhabited-scroll design was widely applied. The vast architectural enterprises conducted in marble by Septimius Severus during the years 193–216 CE at Leptis Magna, the emperor’s birth city, established the inhabited-scroll motif in the ornamentation of the renewed architecture (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:37–41, Pls. XXIV, XXV). A pilaster of the Severan basilica shows animal forequarters leaping from petaled blossoms within intersecting scrolls. Both drill work and connecting bridges, characteristics of the period, are observed in the patterns. The work on the pilaster is attributed by some scholars to artisans from Aphrodisias (Squarciapino 1943:88; Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:38), as it bears a strong resemblance to the architectural decoration of that school. The relief sculpture of the Severan tetrapylon also carries inhabited vine scrolls with winemaking eroses and animal protomes in vertical and horizontal positions. Yet analysis of the earliest appearance of the inhabited-scroll motif at Leptis Magna seems to indicate that it predates the Severan projects and the marble trade. A limestone doorpost from Leptis Magna in secondary use in the Mosque of Sidi el-Fergeani and dated to the late first century CE or, as argued by Toynbee and Ward-Perkins, to the Hadrianic or Antonine period, depicts standing eroses turning to the left within acanthus scrolls (Toynbee and WardPerkins 1950:39, Pl. XXV:1). Picard (1969:103) and Lyttelton (1974:293) assumed that artisans from Aphrodisias were imported for the execution of the Severan projects at Leptis Magna. Yet Lyttelton claims that the inhabited scrolls were the work of craftsmen from Aphrodisias, who were most probably working in North Africa before the Severan period, while Picard finds support for his assumption of the local North African origin of the inhabited-scroll motif in its early appearances in Tripolitania, which predate the reign of Septimius Severus and the marble trade. Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950:40, Pl. XXI.3) were the first to list earlier examples of the motif from various sites in Tripolitania, for example the mausolea of Djebel Nefus and El-Amroni, the Capitolium at Timgad and a sarcophagus from the Timgad Museum, all dated to the early second century CE. At Sabratha, a series of frieze segments depict acanthus scrolls inhabited by beasts

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

and hunting eroses, all leaping from petaled blossoms. They seem to belong to the internal entablature of the cruciform building, and are no earlier than the mid-second century CE (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:43). Human figures are found on frieze elements of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, mainly on console facades, and on one other element (A6014). There, a protome of Dionysus in frontal view, head turned slightly to the right as the folds of the neck skin indicate, is a central motif flanked by inhabited scrolls (Fig. 9.45). An animal-skin garment is fastened on the left shoulder and the poorly preserved face is framed by long, grape-shaped clusters of hair with the ends of a leather diadem falling over both shoulders. In the background, traces of two thyrsoi may be seen. As much as it is tempting to connect the appearance of Dionysus to the Dionysian cults related to theaters in general, it seems that the motif here is purely decorative, devoid of cultic significance (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:2). Yet one should point out that Dionysus was considered the founder (ktistes) of the city (Di Segni 1997) and his birth legend is depicted on city coins (Barkay 2003:111–132). A full-scale statue of him was found in the eastern thermae (Foerster and Tsafrir 1990:52–54) and another protome appears on one of the western propylaeum capitals (Mazor 1987– 1988:24, Photo 13). However, the protome in the frieze of the scaenae frons was adorned with acanthus scrolls, not a trailing vine branch that is usually related to Dionysus. Eroses are engaged in hunting scenes rather than winemaking activities, and apart from the single protome of Dionysus, there is no other evidence of any significant connection between the inhabited scrolls and the Dionysian cult. The appearance of Dionysus in inhabited-scroll motifs elsewhere is relatively rare. Dionysus appears on a relief segment of a pilaster of the Hatrii monument (Italy), dated to the Flavian period and now in the Lateran Museum. The pilaster is adorned with vine scrolls and the full figure of Dionysus carrying a lamp and a thyrsos (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:14, Pl. XIII). A protome of Dionysus within a scroll appears on a frieze in the Syrian temple at Burkush, presumably of the early second century CE (Krencker and Zschietzschmann 1938:237, Fig. 362). Over the central door of the Temple of Bacchus at Baalbek, vine-scroll medallions are inhabited by winemaking eroses and bacchantes (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Pls.

527

LI, LII; Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:33, Pl. XXII:2). On three of the console elements of the NysaScythopolis theater, two Medusa protomes (A6001, Fig. 9.41; A6005, Fig. 9.49) and one of Oceanus (A6002, Fig. 9.47) are framed by upright, half acanthus leaves. Both Medusa faces are poorly preserved. That in A6001 is somewhat clearer, presenting a rigid, oval face and schematically rendered details of the eyes, nose and mouth. Hair curls hang down on either side, interlaced with schematic snakes. The head rests on the shoulder, with no neck. The depiction is flat and far from naturalistic. The Medusa face on the shield held by the eros in A6014, although relatively smaller, is far more naturalistic and expressive. The protome of Oceanus is quite naturalistic with a detailed face carved in high relief. The beard, mustache and hair curls, all depicted as acanthus leaves, are three dimensional and deeply cut from behind. Oceanus appears mysterious as he emerges from within the acanthus leaves in a realistic and expressive pose. It can be assumed that the Medusa depictions were not carved by the same artist who carved the protome of Oceanus. Neither of these motifs is common at the site, with a single appearance of a Medusa mask on a Corinthian capital of mid-second century CE date integrated into the western propylaeum of Palladius Street (Mazor 1987–1988:24, Photograph 14). An architrave soffit from the Forum of Nerva in Rome dedicated in 97 CE shows a Medusa mask in the central medallion of a schematic, yet rich and naturalistic acanthus scroll (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:12, Pl. XII:2). A fragment of a frieze from the Aurelian Temple of the Sun in Rome represents a Severan revival of a Flavian style that depicts acanthus scrolls enveloping male masks with foliated beards and hair. This motif is also reproduced on both Severan arches in Rome and in the Baths of Caracalla (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:22, Pl. XI:3). The Medusa motif has early precedents in the Hellenistic world, and most of its appearances from this period in architectural decoration are from Asia Minor, as in a frieze fragment from Pergamon that depicts a Medusa mask on an aegis surrounded by rinceau (Pergamon 1908: Pl. VII, 2:307, No. 397) and another on the frieze of the Didamaion (Akurgal 1978: Pl. 74:a). The frieze of the small Roman peristyle temple at Side, dated to the second century CE, is decorated with a Medusa, as is the frieze of the

528

Gabriel Mazor

theater (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 193, 194). The frieze of the Temple of Hadrian at Cyzicus also bears a Medusa mask (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 181), as does the frieze of the Temple of Hadrian at Ephesus, in which animals leaping from scrolls flank a Medusa mask as a central motif (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 86:2). The central block of a semicircular fronton in the nymphaeum at Sagalassos, dated to the second century CE, carries a Medusa mask (Vandeput 1997: Pl. 47.2). The cornice of the forum portico at Iasos, dedicated in 135/136 or 138/140 CE (Carratelli 1985; Pagello 1985:148–150; Vandeput 1997: Pl. 91.2), depicts an Oceanus head in its cyma, within foliated acanthus leaves. At Leptis Magna, in North Africa, the Severan Forum spandrels were decorated with a repetitive motif of Medusa masks (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 213). In Syria from the second century CE, a female head adorns the tympanum of the temple at Nebi Safa, and that of the temple at Rahle carries a Medusa mask. The central motif in a scroll pattern from the temple at Burkush depicts a female figure clutching the stems of the scrolls (Krencker and Zschietzschmann 1938:208, Figs. 225, 237, 308, 333, 362). The motif of Medusa masks/heads in a foliated acanthus pattern is popular in mosaic floors as well. At Antioch, both Medusa and Oceanus heads are depicted within scrolls in the floor border of the Judgment of Paris mosaic, as well as in the hunting scene in Room 1 of the Constantine Villa, while figures of Oceanus and Thetis appear in mosaics in the House of the Menander (Levi 1947: Pls. I:b, VII:c, CLIX:b). Central motifs flanked by inhabited scrolls, apart from the protome of Dionysus, were found on other frieze segments of the theater as well, such as the kantharos, floral designs and a palmette. The entablature of the valvae regiae in the theater at Hierapolis, in Asia Minor, dedicated in 211–212 CE, has a kantharos as a central motif (de Bernardi Ferrero 1966:59–67; Vandeput 1997: Pl. 90.1). In the Severan basilica at Leptis Magna, in North Africa, a carved pier with a Dionysian figure carries a kantharos (Lyttelton 1974: Pl. 219). All the animals and eroses that are depicted in the Severen Theater frieze at Nysa-Scythopolis remain within their scrolls, with only forelegs or eros’ right leg protruding. Figures in hunting or attacking scenes have no actual physical contact with each other. The only exception to this rule is A6029+A6042 (Fig. 9.46), in which the right-side scene depicts a lion

attacking a bull that is not within a scroll. The lion grips the bull’s neck in its widely open jaw, holding the prey to the ground with its weight and left claw. The defeated bull crouches upon its forelegs, its head lowered. This exceptional scene appears on the far end of a frieze and although it could have been enclosed within an elliptical scroll, it was left without. Apart from the eroses, which are by nature intentionally ill proportioned, all the other animals are relatively well proportioned, although relative proportions between animals do not exist. Analysis of the Frieze The frieze decorated with a continuous scroll pattern, inhabited either by floral designs of leaves, blossoms and fruits, or by animals and human figures, gained popularity as an architectural ornamentation during the Roman Imperial period, mainly in the second and early third centuries CE. Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950:1–8) seek its origins in the Late Classical Greek and Hellenistic periods, in the minor arts such as metal work, presumably imported from Alexandria in the fourth to third centuries BCE. Preserved specimens of that metal work display foliated scrolls inhabited by human figures or eroses depicted in the chubbybaby style of the Hellenistic period, along with beasts and birds. Local Gaulish workmanship of a later date may have been influenced in the West by the Aretine vessels of metal and ceramics of the late Augustan and Tiberian periods that depict horses and bulls leaping from foliated scrolls (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:4, 9, Pls. II:1, IV:1–3). Two first-century BCE depictions of acanthus scrolls from Pompeii, one in the border of a fish mosaic from the House of the Faun, the second in a painted frieze from the Villa dei Misteri (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:8, Pl. III:3, 4, Nos. 27, 28), represent the motif’s first steps toward becoming an architectural decoration. Third Style wall paintings from Pompeii, in which this motif appears in paintings of an architectural nature, are dated no later than 30 BCE. The work of Vitruvius (Architecture), published after the Battle of Actium in 31 BCE, and before Octavian adopted the title Augustus in 27 BCE, infers that the Third Style came from the eastern provinces and describes it thus: “we now have fresco paintings of monstrosities, rather than truthful representations of definite things. […] and on top of their pediments numerous tender stalks and volutes

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

growing up from their roots and having human figures senselessly seated upon them; sometimes stalks having only half-length figures, sometimes human heads, others with the heads of animals” (Architecture VII 5. 3). Vitruvius criticizes the style as being non-realistic and wonders how “such a slender, flexible thing as a stalk should support a figure perched upon it, or that roots and stalks should produce now flowers and now half-length figures” (Architecture VII 5, 3–5). The motif of the inhabited scrolls enjoyed a widespread popularity throughout the entire Roman Empire. Although it presumably originated in the Hellenistic realm, it became popular in the capital city as well as in the eastern and western provinces, and its roots differ in each and every region. In the West, one can distinguish two main periods in which the motif was represented in monumental architectural decor. It first appears in the Flavian period, mainly in Rome where it is widely seen. Soon after, toward the turn of the century, its use gradually decreases, only to rise again in the so-called ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period (Blanckenhagen 1940). Up to the Flavian period, the use of inhabited scrolls as a decorative pattern in the West in general, and in Rome in particular, seems to have been limited to wall paintings and minor arts. The Flavian period witnessed its first appearance as part of monumental architectural ornamentation. Inhabited scrolls appear in two places on the arch of Titus erected in the early years of Domitian. At both ends of the historical relief, the panels depict schematic acanthus scrolls with horses, lions, bulls and bears leaping from petaled blossoms. The soffit of the architrave on the eastern side of the arch depicts forequarters of bulls, rams and bears springing out of petaled blossoms (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:11, Pls. VII:1, VIII:2). Frieze elements from the aula regia of Domitian’s palace on the Palatine reflect the same pattern, with beasts and eroses depicted within luxuriant acanthus scrolls (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:12, Pl. IX:2). Around the turn of the century, the motif disappears from the field of monumental architecture in the West and begins to appear in minor reliefs, as on sarcophagi, and in minor arts, a process that continues until the ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period. Under Septimius Severus and Caracalla, the practice of using the motif in the decor of monumental architecture was revived, mainly in entablature elements. Frieze fragments from the Aurelian temple of the sun, now in the Museo Nazionale Romano, depict eroses in

529

hunting stance armed with spear and shield, knee deep in acanthus scrolls, attacking beasts leaping from acanthus scrolls and petaled blossoms. The composition resembles that of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis, with eroses posed in a similar manner, although in the former their spears and shields are better preserved (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:22, Pl. XI:1). In the Baths of Caracalla, eroses again confront beasts in the same hunting stance (Toynbee and Ward-Perkins 1950:19, Pl. IX:1). Blanckenhagen (1940:67–68, 90–99) analyzed the Flavian type of inhabited scrolls versus those of the Severan period, and demonstrated the significance of the ‘Flavian Renaissance’. The early Flavian style was a rich, three-dimensional ornamentation with a strong tendency to individual components. The ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period, on the other hand, developed a broad, overall effect in which the contrast between the pattern of figures and inhabited scrolls and the deeply carved, shadowed background played a predominant role. According to Blanckenhagen (1940:96, Pl. XXXIV), the frieze fragments from the Baths of Caracalla have a strong Flavian look, as they directly copy the composition of the Flavian originals, although they depict them in the Severan lacy technique. Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950:19) further commented that the comparison between the patterns in the friezes of the Baths of Caracalla and those of the Flavian Palatine clearly illustrate the range and diversity of the Severan period’s stylistic repertoire. In the East, the evolution of the pattern is somewhat different. The Severan revival of the motif is best represented in Asia Minor, where it continued from the Hellenistic into the Early Roman period. Although the Flavian period marks a growth in its popularity in this region as well as in the West, its appearance does not diminish at the turn of the century, as observed in the West, but continues throughout Hadrian’s reign into the Antonine period. The scaenae frons frieze at Perge, dated either to the theater’s construction stage of the midsecond century CE, or its Severan reconstruction stage, certainly illustrates this point. At Aphrodisias, obviously an influential art center of Asia Minor throughout the Roman Imperial period, the pattern demonstrates a continuous evolution, and this has a strong influence on its use in the provinces of North Africa. The participation of Aphrodisian artisans was obviously not restricted to the Severan reconstruction enterprise at Leptis Magna,

530

Gabriel Mazor

as the pattern was found at other sites in Tripolitania. The influence of Aphrodisia most probably reached Rome as well, and contributed its part to the ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period. It is of little surprise to find the first appearance of the inhabited-scroll motif in Syria in the early firstcentury monuments at Palmyra, whose architectural ornamentation seems to have been strongly influenced by Alexandria. On the other hand, figure-inhabited scrolls are hardly represented in the monumental and long-range temple projects at Baalbek of the first, second and third centuries CE, where the floralinhabited motif is dominant and widely used. The figure-inhabited scroll motif is restricted to secondary entablatures on the grand door lintel and jamb of the Temple of Bacchus, and in wall niches of its forecourt. The construction of the grand enterprises at Baalbek must have begun soon after the Colonia Julia Augusta Felix Heliopolitana was founded in c. 16 BCE. In the mid-second century CE, the Temple of Bacchus was added, while the forecourt and propylaeum of the Temple of Jupiter date to the reign of Caracalla (211–217 CE) and Philip the Arab (244–249 CE). The erection of the Temple of Venus is dated to the early third century CE (Ward-Perkins 1981:314, 320). Apart from sporadic examples of the motif from various sites in the Hauran and the Nabatean realm, it is mainly represented in the Roman East at two central poleis of the Decapolis, Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis, carved in limestone at the former, and limestone and marble at the latter. At both sites, the floral-inhabited scroll is the most common motif, found on entablature friezes of monumental complexes dated to the second century CE, although the figure-inhabited scroll motif is impressively represented in these two cities as well. At Gerasa, it was first depicted on the first-story friezes of the southern theater’s scaenae frons, and later on the propylaeum frieze of the Temple of Artemis. Although most of the monumental complexes erected in the civic center of Gerasa were fully excavated and dated by inscriptions (Welles 1938:355–494), they have not yet been published and the rich and well-dated assemblage of decorated friezes has not been studied. The construction of the southern theater at Gerasa was begun in the reign of Domitian and completed in the early second century CE, during the reign of Trajan (Browning 1982:126). The scaenae frons friezes resemble those of the Flavian style. The figures in the inhabited scrolls are enormous, filling the entire scroll,

their forequarters leaping from the scroll, not from a petaled blossom, while their heads, although defaced, seem to turn in a frontal pose. Their three-dimensional high relief protrudes considerably. The scroll is more flat, rigid and schematically rendered, and lacks the rich naturalistic effect seen in the frieze of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis. The scroll pattern, as opposed to the figures, is not depicted in high relief or deeply undercut; therefore, it lacks the overall lightand-shade effect so characteristic of the Severan revival of the motif. The inhabited-scroll motif appears again in the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, dated to the mid-second century CE (Kraeling 1938:52), where it still shows some of these earlier characteristics. The animals are still larger, although they now leap to the right or left from petaled blossoms. Their heads are not turned to the front in three-dimensional high relief. The acanthus scroll has become richer and more elaborate, although the typical lacey light-and-shade effect of the Severan period is still not achieved, as seen in the frieze of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis. The frieze of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis at Gerasa reflects a more moderate evolutionary process, rather than the so-called ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period so clearly witnessed in the West. The evolutionary process of the inhabited scroll motif of the first half of the second century CE was not completed at Gerasa, as no friezes of this kind were executed during the Severan period. For the completion of the process in this region, one must turn to Gadara, where some marble friezes of the type presumably dating to the Severan period were recently revealed, and to Nysa-Scythopolis, both sites located a short distance to the northwest of Gerasa and evidently closely related to its artistic and cultural realm. At Nysa-Scythopolis, the inhabited-scroll motif is found on the facade friezes of six monumental complexes, the central temple (kalybe) at the northeastern end of Palladius Street, the imperial altar, the nymphaeum, the northern propylaeum of Northern Street, the western propylaeum of Palladius Street and the scaenae frons friezes of the Severan Theater. The first four, excavated by the IAHU expedition. (not yet published), are generally dated to the Antonine period, either to the reign of Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE) or Marcus Aurelius (161–180 CE), although an earlier date around Hadrian’s visit in 130 CE cannot be ruled out. The other two, excavated by the IAA expedition, have been studied and dated to the Severan period.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

If one examines the inhabited-scroll friezes in these monumental complexes of the Hadrianic to Antonine periods, in comparison to those of the Severan period, a linear development of most of the characteristics of the Severan style can be observed. In the earlier works, the animals inhabiting the scrolls are considerably smaller and the relief is less protruding. The three levels of the pattern are well balanced and harmonious: the convex background surface, the acanthus scrolls with the framing, upright acanthus leaves, and the figures in the scrolls. The scroll motif is not yet deeply undercut, and the lacy light-and-shade effect so characteristic of the theater friezes is not yet achieved. Needless to say, the richly detailed relief of the scroll motif, the emphasized drill work and the connecting bridges are not evident either. In conclusion, it is evident that in contrast to the West, the eastern provinces with their well-rooted Hellenistic traditions did not witness the Flavian style and the Severan revival of the inhabitedscroll motif with a dark age in between, but rather a linear, evolutionary process that developed throughout the entire period. It was long argued by Toynbee and Ward-Perkins (1950), in relation to the inhabited-scroll motif at Leptis Magna, that the marble trade from Asia Minor––mainly from Proconnesos––was accompanied by artisans of Asia Minor, predominantly from Aphrodisias. Since the marble blocks used for the theater scaenae frons at Nysa-Scythopolis also came from Proconnesos, the suggestion of a possible involvement of Aphrodisian artisans in the carving of the theater friezes at NysaScythopolis was also raised (Fischer 1998). In an attempt to reevaluate this assumption, several points should be stressed. Firstly, the inhabited-scroll motif was executed in the Roman East in local stone–– limestone, basalt (Kanawat) or sandstone (Nabatean sites such as Qasr Rabbah). Secondly, its evolutionary development process in the region began both at Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis long before the marble trade arrived during the Severan period. Thirdly, although the architectural decor at Gerasa does reflect some influences from Asia Minor on motifs and styles, mainly in the so-called ‘Syrian Sequence’, none are observed in the inhabited-scroll motif, neither at Gerasa nor at Nysa-Scythopolis. The absence of the motif from the main entablatures of the great complexes at Baalbek, considered to be the region’s most important center of architectural influence that channeled well-blended styles from the West and Asia

531

Minor into the local Hellenistic tradition, must be stressed as well. Thus, the accumulated evidence from the Roman East seems to indicate that the motif has deeply rooted origins in the region in an earlier period and its gradual development throughout the Roman Imperial period was based solely on local traditions. Its elaborate maturing and refinement from the late first to early third centuries CE, and mainly during the ‘Flavian Renaissance’ of the Severan period, was not introduced by the marble trade but was the product of local workshops and artistic traditions. Flute Pattern The flute pattern may have adorned the friezes of the second and third floors in the theater’s scaenae frons. It is observed elsewhere at the site, mainly on friezes in the entablature of the northeastern and northwestern city gates, dated to 130–150 CE (Mazor 2004). It is also found in the triple-arched, postscaenium propylaeum of the northern theater, erected at the northeastern end of Palladius Street (Tsafrir and Foerster 1997: Fig. 26). At Baalbek, it decorates the inner-cella friezes of the Temple of Bacchus, dated from the mid-first to the mid-second centuries CE (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: 27, Figs. 48, 49, 52, 63). At Gadara, it decorates the monumental city gate dated to the Severan period (Weber and Hoffmann 1990: Pl. III:2). At Samaria, a fluted frieze fragment was found of uncertain dating and architectural origin, and it may have belonged to the city-gate entablature (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:217, Fig. 145). At Gerasa, fluted friezes are found in the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, and in its eastern piazza (Browning 1982:151, Pl. 85), and on the inner frieze of the western propylaeum, both dated to the mid-second century CE (Browning 1982:156– 158, Figs. 88, 89, 91). In the southern theater, also dated to the mid-second century CE, it decorated the scaenae frons entrance friezes and was found under the pediments as well (Browning 1982:78, Fig. 22). As a frieze decor, the flute pattern was common in Asia Minor from the Hellenistic period, while in the West it was preferred as the corona ornament (Weigand 1914:83–85; Leon 1971:274–275; Thür 1989:102– 105). It was popular on the western coast of Asia Minor, while the sites along the southern coast favored floral-decorated friezes (Vandeput 1997:87). In the Roman period the flute pattern commonly appears in s-shaped profiles, as in the Hadrianic gate at Ephesus

532

Gabriel Mazor

(Thür 1989: Figs. 102, 109), while its straight-profile type gradually disappears (Karagöz, Radt and Rheidt 1986:137–141); however, in the mid-second century CE, both of them were still in use. At Ephesus, a continuous appearance of the flute pattern is seen from the early to late Roman periods. It first appears on the Stierkopfbasilica, dated to the Augustan period (Alzinger 1972–1975:259–260, Fig. 15, 1974:26, 88, Fig. 118; Rumscheid 1994 II: Fig. 44), then on the entablature of the theater’s scaenae frons, dated to 66 CE (Heberdey, Nieman and Wilberg 1912:40–41, Figs. 76, 77), on the upper floor of the Celsus Library, dated to 113–117 CE (Hueber and Strocka 1975: Fig. 8; Strocka 1978:895, Pl. 283:3) and on the second-floor frieze of the Hadrianic gate, dated to 120–130 CE (Thür 1989:109–110, Figs. 79–86). At Sagalassos, the trend continues on the frieze of the theater, dated to 180–200 CE (Vandeput 1997:87–88). Both of these sites furnish well-dated, second-century CE examples of fluted friezes decorating the scaenae frons of the theater (cf. Gerasa’s southern theater), establishing the use of this pattern in second-floor entablatures. The first floor has a different type of frieze ornamentation, as clearly observed at Ephesus in both the gate and the Celsus Library. Assuming that those elements were fully carved at the quarry by local artisans, and not at the site itself, the influence of ornamentation trends in Asia Minor on both the decor and location of these elements in the scaenae frons entablature can be assumed. Cornices Some 126 complete elements and fragments of marble cornices were found, most of them in the theater, others in various complexes within the civic center. Their dimensions fit the Corinthian order of the two floors of the central valvae regiae columnar facade and the entablature of the three floors of the scaenae frons. Valvae Regiae Cornices Two complete corner cornice elements, six complete straight facade cornice elements and 16 fragments of other elements of the valvae regiae were revealed. Complete Corner Elements: A6101 (Fig. 9.88); A6103+A6106+A6108+A6099+A6143 (Fig. 9.89).

Complete Facade Elements: A25 (Fig. 9.90); A6142; A6144+A6473; A6100; A6102; A6107. Fragments of Elements: A6094, the ovolo and dentil profiles are worn; A6479, coffers, crowning corona and cyma may connect to A6094, A6095+A6104, lower part broken, only coffers and crowning corona with cyma preserved; A6096, lower ovolo and corona profiles partly broken; A6097, worn cyma and broken ovolo and dentils; A6098, ovolo and dentils; A6105, broken ovolo and dentils; A6132, worn and broken; A6141, section of cyma, corona and coffers; A6145, upper part; A6147, upper part; A6471; A6475; A6477, cyma section; A6656, dentils and cyma; A100154+100155, joining fragments of ovolo and dentils. The complete facade element A25 (Fig. 9.90) preserves the entire sequence of profiles and assists in their reconstruction. The cornice begins with a 2 cm apophyge and a 1.5 cm step followed by a 13 cm ovolo and 11.5 cm dentils. The dentils (8.0 × 6.5 cm) are 3 cm apart. The cymation comprises a 7 cm high cyma reversa profile. The modillions (20 × 16 cm) are 12.5 cm high bordered by a 4 cm wide ovolo. The coffers are 20 × 14 cm, and the fluted corona is 12 cm high bordered by a 3.5 cm astragal. The cyma is 15 cm high and has a 6 cm high fillet. The ovolo, with naturalistic, pear-shaped eggs, is 9 cm high. The eggs are flat on top and pointed on the bottom, and deeply carved from behind. The crescentshaped flanking shells, also deeply carved, are widely separated (2.5 cm) and emphasized by cleavage, with occasional bridges connected to an intermediate leaf motif. The leaf motif can have a variety of forms: schematic (A6098), wavy diamond shaped (A6143), elaborate trefoil blossom (A6142), and dart shaped (A6475). The dentils are uniform and well spaced, and have no connecting bars. The cymation has a 4 cm high, widely based, stirrup frame in the form of a clover-shaped arch with a central, diagonal spur that is wide on top, pointed on the bottom and has a backward sloping appendage. The stirrup frame is crowned with an elliptical or round, well-emphasized knob and wide shells. In between the frames are intermediate, double-petal, schematic, blossom-shaped fillers with a deeply carved, diagonal or rectangular void that separates them into two symmetrical outspread wings (A6142, A6101, Fig. 9.88; A6105, A6106, A6143, Fig. 9.89). Drill work

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

533

A6101

0.84

1.77

1.80

Fig. 9.88. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, corner cornice element of valvae regiae.

and bridges are occasionally visible (A6475, A6471, A6144). The modillions are slightly s-shaped and have spiral volutes, flatly carved on the sides. On the soffit side, they are decorated with a scale or floral pattern. The scale pattern comprises four rows of two or three pearshaped scales with two half scales at either end; each scale touches the upper row at a deep triangular void. The scales are connected by small bridges (A6100, A6142, A25, Fig. 9.90). The floral pattern comprises a variety of leaf motifs, such as an acanthus leaf, either schematic (A6094, A6101, Fig. 9.88) or detailed (A6100, A6105, A6142), or a palmette, either schematic (A6094, A6099, A6106, Fig. 9.89) or detailed (A6100, A6101, Fig. 9.88; A6105, A6144, A6471). The lower leaves turn downward in spirals, while the upper leaves

either spread out or turn inward in spirals (A6101, Fig. 9.88; A6106, Fig. 9.89). Corner modillions, pentagonal in shape, are occasionally left plain on the soffit side (A6103, Fig. 9.89) or have the floral pattern. The modillions are bordered by an ovolo of round eggs and wide-spread shells. Single eggs are placed diagonally at the outer corners and double elliptical eggs at the inner corners, with a single egg in the middle of each face. There are no intermediate motifs. The coffers are decorated with a variety of floral patterns, for example double-acanthus leaves, each consisting of one or four pointed tips turning to the right (A6142) or left (A6100, A6101, Fig. 9.88; A25, Fig. 9.90). The double leaf springs from the corner and spreads diagonally to both sides, thus covering the entire space. Another pattern consists of a harmonized

534

Gabriel Mazor

A6099

A6143

A6103

0.80

A6143 A6106

A6103

A6099

A6103

A6143

1.80

A6106 A6106

A6108 1.80

A6108

Fig. 9.89. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, corner cornice element of valvae regiae.

and well-balanced calyx-shaped leaf that springs from three round, fruit-shaped inflorescences. It has triple-tipped leaves on both sides and an elongated eyelet (A6141). Other patterns comprise four-petal rosettes with a central knob (A6097, A6099, Fig. 9.89), occasionally with decorative drill work (A6105,

A6479, A6144), five-petal rosettes (A6106, Fig. 9.89; A6147), or a wind-blown, six-petal rosette (A6099, Fig. 9.89). There are two examples of a three-leaf bundle with a central band, the three long, fleshy pointed leaves with a central rib turned to either side and connected by small bridges (A6142, A25, Fig. 9.90).

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

535

A25

0.84

1.20

1.82

Fig. 9.90. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, straight cornice element of valvae regiae.

In another example, a bow-shaped, pointed bud springs from a double-petal blossom, and next to it, on the other side of the corner modillion, is a schematic, s-shaped, pointed bud with no blossom (A6101, Fig. 9.88). Double, overlapping discs of blossoms or fruits with a central s-shaped stem are seen in another coffer (A6106, Fig. 9.89).

Figural motives appear in two elements. A threequarter profile of an old bearded male with a high, bald forehead (Oceanus?) decorates A6101 (Fig. 9.88). He has a deep almond-shaped eye with a heavy eyebrow and a rounded eyeball. The nose is large with wrinkles around it. The mouth is surrounded by a mustache and a beard that covers the cheek as well. The ear has a

536

Gabriel Mazor

schematic s-shape with well-carved inner details. The hair is long and falls backward. The bust is almost rectangular in shape, the elderly features well rendered in high relief. The second example is a frontally depicted grotesque (Gorgon) mask in A6108 (Fig. 9.89). The schematic curly hair hangs over the forehead and welldepicted braids hang down the sides. The face is oval with pronounced eyebrows and wrinkles. The almondshaped eyes, heavy eyebrows and rounded eyeballs are deeply carved, resembling the eye of the previous example. The nose is wide and well emphasized with drilled nostrils. The cheeks are rounded, and the mouth is open and rounded above a defined chin. Although the depiction is flatly carved, it still achieves a strong three-dimensional effect. Based on the technique and details, it seems reasonable to assume that both figural depictions were rendered by the same artist. The corona is decorated with a flute pattern that is 12 cm high, with a 1.5 cm wide frame and a 1 cm wide intermediate groove. The flutes are arched at the top, flat on the bottom, and have inner tongues at the bottom. The corona is bordered by an astragal of elongated, elliptical beads and disc-shaped reels with a connecting string (A6099, Fig. 9.89). Both the corona and the astragal are deeply carved, granting the profiles a strong light-and-shade effect. The cyma is decorated with an anthemion of alternating, up- and down-turned palmettes and acanthus leaves of various types (Types A–D). Type A: Up-turned palmettes with five down-turned acanthus leaves tied with ribbons. The acanthus leaves are long and pointed with a central incised midrib and turn inwards in an s-shaped spiral. At the bottom, the two lower side acanthus leaves that turn out from under the ribbon each have three lobes with two to four tips and deeply grooved, v-shaped midribs, rich and elaborate. Each of these lower side acanthus leaves has a central, long, pointed, dart-shaped lobe and three elaborate lobes on each. Each lobe has 2–4 pointed tips and the entire fan-shaped pattern is widely based. The lower tips curl inward in an airy spiral, and connect at the bottom to the lobe tips of the next acanthus leaf. The connection creates a continuous trailing effect (A6101, Fig. 9.88; A6103+6106, Fig. 9.89; A6104, A6479). In corner cornice elements there is always a palmette on the corner (A6101, Fig. 9.88; A6103, Fig. 9.89) that has five leaves tied with a ribbon.

Type B: This type has the same general motif, although the acanthus leaves are not connected and it lacks the trailing effect (A25, Fig. 9.90; A6096, A6100, A6106, A6108, Fig. 9.89; A6477). Type C: This type is a variation of the first, in which the long, pointed, central tip of the acanthus leaf has two closed spirals on the side and only two lobes on each side (A6099, Fig. 9.89). Type D: In this type, the rhythm of the alternating upturned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves is broken by an additional, freely rendered acanthus leaf, resulting in two down-turned acanthus leaves. The first remains within the pattern’s conventions, while the additional leaf springs from the top in a bow-shape turning to the left. It has a long, pointed, central tip and two lobes on both sides, each with three tips. The midribs have deep, v-shaped grooves (A6142). This pattern is deeply cut in the background and has a delicate s-shape that was accurately executed by talented artists. It is fleshy, naturalistic and rendered in high relief, thus granting it plasticity and a strong, three-dimensional effect. Small, elongated eyelets are created within the acanthus leaf and there is an extensive use of connecting bridges. Scaenae Frons First-Floor Cornices The 73 complete and fragmentary elements of the scaenae frons first-floor cornices are divided into four types according to their location within the order composition. Cornice Types Type A: Console elements: A6114+A6070+A6112 (Fig. 9.91:1); A6450 (Fig. 9.91:2); A6111 (Fig. 9.91:3); A6113+A6154; A6110. Type C: Facade corner elements with ornamented left or right sides: A6087 (Fig. 9.92:1); A6085, A6084 (Fig. 9.92:2, 3); A6075 (Fig. 9.93:1); A6090 (Fig. 9.93:2); A6086+A6067 (Fig. 9.94:1); A6117+A6148+A6150. Type (Fig. (Fig. (Fig.

B: Straight facade elements: A6071+A6088 9.95:1); A6062+A6064 (Fig. 9.95:2); A6078 9.95:3); A6060 (Fig. 9.96:1); A6063+A6089 9.96:2); A6119 (Fig. 9.96:3); A6672; A6065;

537

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6114+A6070+A6112

0.43

1.17

A6450

0.40

1

1.29

1.45

A6111

0.42

1.17

2

1.45

3

Fig. 9.91. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, console cornice elements of first floor.

538

Gabriel Mazor

A6087

0.45

0.97

0.87

1

A6085

A6084

0.92

1.75

1.20

2

3

Fig. 9.92. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, corner cornice elements of first floor.

A6079+A6153; A6151; A6152; A6081; A6451; A6069; A6082; A6061+A6066; A6068; A6074; A6080; A6072+A6092; A6073+A6118; A6093+A6109; A6115; A6653; A40608; A110130; A90106; A100163; A90652; A40619; A80133; A6735; A100220; A100140; A100139; A100126; A100118; A100144; A100156.

Type D: Concave facade elements from the exedra: A6083+A6076 (Fig. 9.97:1); A6077 (Fig. 9.97:2); A6861+A6735 corner and concave (Fig. 9.97:3, 4); A6672; A6478; A6091; A120122; A6146; A6672.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

539

A6090 A6075

2

1

Fig. 9.93. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, corner cornice elements of first floor.

The first-floor cornices are 0.40–0.43 m high and have a similar sequence of profiles to those of the valvae regiae, although they are half as high. The cornice begins with a 3.5 cm high ovolo with no apophyge, followed by 4–4.5 cm high dentils (5 × 3.5 cm). The cymation is 3.5 cm high and is graded on top and bottom. The modillions (12.5 × 10.5 cm) are 4.5 cm high and bordered by a 3 cm high ovolo. Corner modillions are long and pentagonal in shape. The coffers are 12.5 × 9.5 cm. The fluted corona is 6–8 cm high, bordered by a 2.5 cm high astragal and crowned with an 8 cm decorated cyma and a 4.5 cm fillet. The ovolo has round or pear-shaped eggs and widely separated shells with rhomboid-shaped, intermediate leaves. The dentils are well separated by diagonally cut, 3 cm deep grooves with no connecting bars. The cymation has a cyma reversa profile decorated with two, 16 cm wide, flat, bow-shaped leaves that form a frame, with an upper, shallow-carved ball and a diagonal midrib. Between the framing leaves are two-petal flowers, schematically rendered. The pattern is deeply cut in high relief, although rough and schematically rendered. The modillions have lost their s-shape and slope slightly. On the soffit side they are decorated with

various floral patterns, such as a four- to fivepetal leaf with rounded tips and incised ribs, or a palmette comprised of two s-shaped leaves flanking a central upright leaf. Cornice A6111 (Fig. 9.91:3) has two v-shaped leaves one on top of the other with outstretched spirals. The floral pattern can be detailed (A6072) or schematic (A6112, A6110). A scale pattern has two or three rows of diagonal scales (A6063, Fig. 9.96:2; A6079, A6078, Fig. 9.95:3). The modillions are bordered by an ovolo with pear-shaped eggs at the outer corners and double disc-shaped eggs at the inner corners, with a central, intermediate egg. The egg shells are widely separated with no intermediate motif. The coffers are decorated with different floral patterns, most of which are observed on the valvae regiae cornices as well. The acanthus-leaf pattern, which runs diagonally along the coffer, is either elaborate (A6061, A6073, A6080) or schematic. In one case, the leaf pattern of the modillion’s soffit is depicted in a coffer, and has much drill work (A6082). Two double-lobed leaves that spring from each other comprise a common pattern, in most cases schematic. The double disc-shaped blossom or fruit appears in a single case but with a single disc (A6450, Fig. 9.91:2), while the most common motif in the coffers is the four- or five-petal rosette, either

540

Gabriel Mazor

A6067

A6154

2.37

1.05

1.75

1.25

A6086

Fig. 9.94. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, hospitalia cornice elements.

schematic or somewhat more elaborate. The windblown rosette appears as well (A6079). In one example, a five-petal rosette has a stem (A6063, Fig. 9.96:2) and in another, a four-petal rosette has three well-depicted, pointed tips in each petal (A6151). A bud springing from a triple-petal blossom is also found (A6450, Fig. 9.91:2; A6110), and it has several elaborate variations with a four-petal blossom and a double v-shaped bud (A6115, A6672), or a four-petal bud (A6076, Fig. 9.97:1). In one case, three double or triple buds spring from each other (A6154). A new pattern with just a single appearance shows two delicately depicted pomegranates hanging from a bow-shaped stem (A6450, Fig. 9.91:2).

The corona has the customary fluted pattern, bordered by an astragal with long hexagonal beads, rhomboid reels and string-like linking bridges. The anthemion is only preserved in a small number of elements as it is a fragile profile. There are two common pattern types that correspond to Types A and B of the valvae regiae, with some variation in their execution. In both cases the pattern is delicate, naturalistic and deeply carved, creating a strong threedimensional effect. Occasionally a different pattern is depicted on two sides of the same corner or console element (A6450, Fig. 9.91:2).

541

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6071

A6088

0.57

3.05

0.37

1

A6064

A6062 A6078

0.82

0.76

1.28

2.09

2

Fig. 9.95. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, straight cornice elements of first floor.

3

542

Gabriel Mazor

A6060

0.84

1.20

1

0.97 0.34

A6063 1.34

2

A6089

A6119 1.00

0.40

3 1.05

Fig. 9.96. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, straight cornice elements of first floor.

543

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6083

A6076

0.82

A6077

0.96

1.95

1.10

1

2

A6735

A6861 0.19

0.68

0.18 0.37

3

0.68

4

Fig. 9.97. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, concave cornice elements of first floor.

Type A: This most common type has alternating upturned palmettes and elaborate, down-turned acanthus leaves tied with ribbons and connected among themselves, creating a continuous trailing pattern (A6450, Fig. 9.91:2; A6111, Fig. 9.91:3; A6079, A6082, A6061, A6080, A6084, A6090, Fig. 9.93:2). Type B: This type, a variation of Type A, has the same alternating up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves, although far more schematic. The palmette and acanthus leaves have no ribbons and are not linked together (A6113, A6114, Fig. 9.91:1; A6110, A6087, Fig. 9.92:1; A6093, A6085, Fig. 9.92:2; A120122).

Discussion of First-Floor Cornices of both valvae Regiae and scaenae frons While there are differences in size and depiction of the ovolo between the cornices of the valvae regiae and those of the scaenae frons first floor, the pattern is the same, although more accurate and naturalistically rendered on the larger scale. On the smaller scale, the intermediate leaf motif is usually replaced by a schematic rhomboid, although there are some exceptions (A6111, Fig. 9.91:3). The leaf-and- rhombus type of ovolo is found in late second–early thirdcentury CE buildings at Palmyra, though it has some

544

Gabriel Mazor

variations (Weigand 1914:51; 1924–1925:169–170). It is also found at Baalbek (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Figs. 143, 144) in the great court of the Temple of Jupiter, the interior of the Temple of Venus and the doorframe of the Temple of Bacchus, all dated to the late second century (Lyttelton 1974:240, Pl. 78). In the temple at Kedesh, the leaf-and-rhombus motif is seen in the ovolo on Item Nos. 4, 6 and 7, presumably dated to the end of the second or early third century CE (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984: Pl. 33:1–3). At Caesarea, the same motif can be observed in the ovolo carved on Blocks AI4, 8, 1, AII1 and the Type C1 cornice of the late second century CE (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996: Figs. 7, 11, 12, 14, 17). At Gerasa, this type of ovolo is found in the cornices on the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis and on the monumental gate dated to Hadrian’s reign, although their darts are of the earlier leaf type (Lyttelton 1974: Pls. 148, 149). It seems that the egg-and-dart motif, typical of the Antonine period (Blankenhagen 1940:110) was replaced in the Roman East during the Severan period by the leaf-andschematic-rhombus motif, as seen here. The dentils are of the common type found throughout the site and the region. The classical relationship of height of dentils to ovolo of 2:1 (Weigand 1924– 1925:174–175) is no longer retained, as the dentils were reduced in size once the pattern became common in Roman imperial architectural decor of the late second–early third centuries CE (Turnheim 1987:121). During the Antonine period, and in particular during the Severan period, the relationship reversed in favor of the ovolo, and its elements were more strongly emphasized. The ovolo of the cornices of the scaenae frons and valvae regiae is a fine representative of this evolution. As was common in Syria during this period, the dentils lack the connecting bar that was still common in Asia Minor (Strong 1953:148–150; Leon 1971:269). The decor of the cyma reversa profile is of the ‘Syrian type’ (Weickert 1913:105), the Bügelkymation of Wegner (1957:52), or Type C according to Leon’s typology (1971:245–262). The cymation has a wide, flat, clover-shaped arch with a central triangular spur. The clover is crowned with a round knob on the valvae regiae cornices and a half knob that almost merges with the spur in the scaenae frons. In between the clovers is a leaf divided by a triangular groove into two wing-shaped lobes that spread out to both sides (also observed at Baalbek in the Temple of Bacchus and the

Temple of Jupiter, see Weigand 1924–1925: Figs. A3a, A3b, A4, A7, A10). The pattern has lost its naturalistic floral design and become geometric. It is widely spaced and the clover arches of its central motif are stiff, oblong and unrefined. The intermediate divided leaf overshadows the pattern and becomes a dominant element. The carving of the cymation is deep, creating a strong light-and-shade effect. The cymation pattern has its origins in the Hellenistic period (Leon 1971:253) and was widespread in the Roman East throughout the second century CE. In the later second century CE it assumes the characteristic pattern described above, presumably under the influence of the architectural enterprises at Baalbek, as seen in the Temple of Bacchus, its adyton and the Temple of Venus (Wiegand 1921–1925 II:59, Figs. 21, 29, 67–69, 145). It is also found in the entablature of the temple at Kedesh (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:158, Pl. 33, Item Nos. 3, 4, 6, 7) and at Caesarea in cornices of Type C1 (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:285–288, Figs. 31, 32). At Gerasa, this pattern is seen in the nymphaeum and the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton 1974:240, 247, Pl. 141). Modillions and coffers of the scaenae frons cornices are of the common ‘Syrian oblong type’ (Weickert 1913:106), although those of the valvae regiae are slightly s-shaped with incised volutes on the sides and therefore more closely resemble the type that was common in Asia Minor (Strong 1963:80). The Syrian oblong type of modillion is a characteristic part of Roman Corinthian entablatures in the Roman East from the time of Augustus, although it had its origins in Hellenistic architectural decor (Strong 1963:78–79). The soffit of the modillion is decorated with alternating schematic and stylized acanthus leaves, palmettes and double petals, with wide and fleshy leaves that spring schematically from each other. All the variations of this pattern were common in the region and in Asia Minor throughout the second–third centuries CE (Lyttelton 1974:269). The modillions are bordered by a schematic ovolo with no intermediate elements. Floral patterns on the modillions’ soffit are also common in the monuments of Baalbek (Weigand 1914: Pl. 5.1; Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pls. 90, 102, 103; II: Pls. 67, 68). At Kedesh, they adorn the temple cornices (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:159, Pls. 34:1–3, 35:1). At Gerasa, they were found in the nymphaeum entablature, the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, the scaenae frons of the southern theater and the

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Hadrianic gate (Lyttelton 1974:246–247, Pls. 141, 148– 150). The ovolo edging of the modillions characterizes all second–third-century CE Corinthian entablatures in the region. The coffers display a wide variety of patterns, which are basically floral, apart from a few depictions of fruits (pomegranates) and human masks or profiles (similar examples of which are seen in the cornices of the great court of the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, see Lyttelton 1974: Fig. 78). The coffer patterns are depicted in high relief with intensive drill work and emphasized midribs, which are a characteristic feature of the Severan period in entablature decor throughout the region (Weigand 1914:54). The great variety of coffer patterns is also characteristic of the region in the late second–early third centuries CE. According to Strong (1953:137, 142, 147–151), this eclectic, elaborate, ornamented repertoire of the post-Hadrianic period first originated in the East and was adopted by Rome, where the severe architectural style had previously been practiced. It presumably reached Rome through the work of Asia Minor artists. The corona is ornamented with a fluted design, separated from the cyma by an astragal, which is also a common feature in Corinthian entablature cornices in the Roman eastern provinces (Weigand 1914:84). In the monuments at Baalbek, flutes decorate most of the coronas, which are also separated from the cyma by an astragal, as in the interior of the Temple of Bacchus, the interior and exterior of the Temple of Venus, and the main colonnade and curved exedra of the great court (Lyttelton 1974:239). At Damascus and Bostra, the fluted corona was recorded and analyzed by Weigand (1914:85, Pl. 40). At Kedesh, the coronas of Item Nos. 4, 6 and 7 are of the same type, separated from the cyma by an astragal (Fischer, Ovadiah and Roll 1984:159, Pl. 34). At Caesarea, it is seen on Type C1 cornices (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:287, Figs. 31, 32). The fluted corona is found at Gerasa, in the upper order of the nymphaeum and in the cornices of the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis (Lyttelton 1974:246–247, Pl. 141, 148). The astragals in the scaenae frons cornices of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis have long hexagonal beads and rhomboid reels. This type of astragal seems to appear in the region from the Antonine period onward (Weigand 1924–1925:172– 175; Strong 1953:148). It resembles Type 2 of Turnheim’s typology (1987:37), which is a variant of

545

Type E of Leon’s typology (1971:271, Pl. 126:4). At Baalbek, this type is common in the Temple of Venus, considered the latest monument that was built in the temenos (Weigand 1932:102, Figs. 159, 161, 163; Pl. 103). At Gerasa, such astragals decorate the upper entablature of the nymphaeum, the propylaeum of the Temple of Artemis, and the scaenae frons entablature of the southern theater (Lyttelton 1974:247, Pls. 141, 148, 150). The cyma is decorated with floral anthemia of two types. The dominant pattern in most of the marble cornices of the scaenae frons at Nysa-Scythopolis has alternating, up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves tied by ribbons and interlaced into a trailing pattern. The other is basically a variation of the first, probably executed by a less-qualified artisan, which lacks the ribbons and trailing effect. These patterns are not common in the region. Variations are found on the limestone cornices of the postscaenium’s northern facade, although there they mingle with other patterns that are common in the northern region of the eastern provinces, as part of the ‘Syrian sequence’. On the postscaenium’s northern facade, these patterns seem to have been influenced by the scaenae frons cornices, and are therefore later. The variations on the postscaenium, as opposed to those on the scaena frons, are common in other monuments of Nysa-Scythopolis dated from the mid-second century onward, and characterize the patterns found at Baalbek, Gerasa and elsewhere in the region (see above, discussion of postscaenium). The pattern of alternating up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves tied with ribbons is richly depicted. It belong to Type B of Turnheim’s typology (1987:70), and is also found on Type C1 cornices in the theater at Caesarea (Turnheim and Ovadiah 1996:285– 287, Fig. 31). The cyma decor of the scaenae frons cornices in its various combinations of palmettes and acanthus leaves is characteristic of the anthemion decoration of Asia Minor where it had its origins in the Flavian period (Vandeput 1997:159–169). The type of alternating, up-turned palmettes and pendant acanthus leaves with linking ribbons and interlaced leaves is typical of the mixed composition in the Celsus Library at Ephesus of the early second century CE, presumably introduced by artists returning from executing large architectural enterprises in Rome (Strocka 1988:296). It later appears on the door cornices of the Temple of

546

Gabriel Mazor

Antoninus Pius at Sagalassos. The cyma on the cornice of the nymphaeum of the upper agora at Sagalassos, dated to the mid- to second half of the second century CE, has the same floral pattern, deeply separated from the background by drilled channels characteristic of the feingezahnter Akanthus, intended to create a strong light-and-shade effect. A similar pattern was found in the portico of the agora at Perge, dated to mid-second century CE. Closer parallels of the same cyma decor appear on Severan monuments such as the marble court of the bath-gymnasium at Sardis, dated to 211– 212 CE, and the propylaeum in the northern district at Miletos of the early third century CE (Knackfuss 1924:260–263). In North Africa at Leptis Magna, it is not surprising to find the same pattern, considering the strong influence of Asia Minor’s artists on the city, as reflected in the Severan period’s architectural enterprises (Lyttelton 1974:284–297, Fig. 212). Vandeput (1997:168) distinguishes a general development in the anthemion floral pattern, reflected in the increasingly composite design executed in various ways. Thus, it seems that the anthemion pattern introduced into Asia Minor by the later Trajanic artists of the Celsus Library at Ephesus, soon became the characteristic pattern of Asia Minor throughout the second and early third centuries CE. Scaenae Frons Second- and Third-Floor Cornices Although a considerable number of the scaenae frons’ second- and third-floor columns were found, including bases, column shafts and capitals, very few elements of the entablature architrave-friezes and cornices were recovered. A few possible candidates for the third floor’s entablature are decorated with a fluted frieze (see Fig. 9.83), although their attribution to the scaenae frons is hypothetical. Marble cornices and fragments of others, the dimensions of which appear to fit the order of the second and third floors, were discovered in various places in secondary use. However, they do not form a homogenous group, their order composition is uncertain, and their profile sequences present significant discrepancies from those of the first floor. Cornice A100 (Fig. 9.98:1), a straight facade element, begins with a 2 cm ovolo and a 3 cm dentil strip. The dentils (4 × 3 cm) are 3.5 cm apart. Above this is a 2 cm

A100 0.21

0.84

1

0.56

A101 0.24

0.68

0.52

2

Fig. 9.98. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, second- and third-floor cornice elements.

plain cyma recta, followed by 2.5 cm high modillions (6.0 × 5.5 cm) that are bordered by a 1.5 cm high ovolo accompanied by coffers (6.0 × 5.5 cm). The plain corona is 2.5 cm high bordered by a 1.5 cm high rope pattern. The anthemion, 5.5 cm high including its fillet, has a floral ornament. Cornice A101 (Fig. 9.98:2), a straight facade element, has no lower ovolo and starts with a 4 cm dentil strip. The dentils (5.0 × 3.5 cm) are 2 cm apart. The modillions (6.5 × 5.0 cm), 4 cm high and bordered by a 2 cm ovolo, have 8 × 5 cm coffers. The 3 cm corona is plain and bordered by a 1.5 cm high rope pattern. The anthemion, 7 cm high including its fillet, has a floral ornament. Cornice A50606 (Fig. 9.99:1), an inner corner, begins with a 3.5 cm high ovolo followed by a 4 cm high dentil strip. It has no intermediate cyma reversa, as the modillions (6.0 × 3.5 cm wide) appear immediately above the dentils and are edged by a 1.5 cm high ovolo. The plain, 2 cm high corona is crowned with

547

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A50606 A41165 0.20

0.61

0.11 0.26

1

A120623

0.27

2

0.70

A121135 0.13

0.49

0.30

0.30

0.70

0.65

4

3

Fig. 9.99. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, second- and third-floor cornice elements.

an anthemion 12 cm high with a floral ornament. In one of the coffers, a bird is depicted pecking at seeds or grapes. It has short legs, well-rendered wings, an elongated eye, and its head is lowered over the food. The rendering is flat, with somewhat deeper grooves along the contours, and yet the depiction of the bird is naturalistic and lively. Cornice A41165 (Fig. 9.99:2), a small fragment, has modillions bordered by an ovolo and coffers, and a plain 3 cm corona bordered by a 2 cm rope pattern. Cornice A121135 (Fig. 9.99:3), an inner corner, has a 5 cm high ovolo and a 4 cm high dentil strip, while the

rest of the cornice, presumably executed on a separate block, is missing. Cornice A120623 (Fig. 9.99:4), a fragment, was recovered in the eastern thermae latrine, where many re-cut, light gray marble slabs were reused as seats, presumably from scaenae frons third-floor cornices, as some bear remains of decorated moldings on their bottom surface. The profiles begin with a 5 cm ovolo and a 4 cm dentil strip, followed by a 3 cm rope pattern. The modillions, 6 cm high, are bordered by a 2 cm high ovolo and above this is a 2 cm plain corona. It is crowned with scant remains of an astragal, and the cyma is broken.

548

Gabriel Mazor

A31189

A231

0.22

0.24

0.29

0.11

0.44

0.37

2

1

A232

0.32

0.60

0.65

3

A132 0.16

0.19

4 0.28

Figs. 9.100. Severan Theater: scaenae frons, second- and third-floor cornice elements.

Cornice A31189 (Fig. 9.100:1), a fragment of a straight facade element, begins with a 2 cm ovolo and a 3 cm high dentil strip. There is no intermediate cymation and the modillions are 6 cm high and bordered by an ovolo. The rest of the cornice is worn. Cornice A231 (Fig. 9.100:2), a fragment, bears the entire sequence, although worn. The modillions seem to be edged by an ovolo, there is a rope pattern, and the anthemion is decorated with a floral design.

Cornice A232 (Fig. 9.100:3), a fragment, has scant remains of modillions edged by an ovolo and a rope pattern. Cornice A132 (Fig. 9.100:4), a fragment, has a 5 cm high ovolo and 2 cm high rope pattern. Cornice A41162, a fragment, has a 5 cm high ovolo and a 2 cm high rope pattern.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Discussion of Second- and Third-Floor Cornices All of these cornices begin with an ovolo, apart from A101 (Fig. 9.98:2), which may have had its ovolo on the frieze element, as seen in several cases in the firstfloor entablature. The ovolo is of the common type with pear-shaped eggs that are flat on top and pointed at the bottom, with well-separated, crescent-shaped shells. The intermediate motifs are rhomboid in shape. The dentils are well separated with no relation to the ovolo pattern. The cymation, when present, is plain and its profiles vary (cf. Baniyas, where the cyma reversa is also undecorated; Ma’oz 1990: Fig. 2). The modillions are rectangular in shape and have floral patterns on the soffit side that consist of either five s-shaped palmette leaves, or five long, pointed acanthus-leaf tips. They are not naturalistic, but schematic and flatly rendered. The bordering ovolo is of the common type with corner and central eggs and well-spaced shells with no intermediate motifs. The coffers have common motifs such as four-petal rosettes, wind-blown rosettes, diagonal acanthus leaves, and in one case, a bird is depicted pecking at seeds or grapes (A50606, Fig. 9.99:1). The corona, when present, is short, plain, and usually bordered by a rope pattern rather than the customary astragal. The rope pattern corresponds to Type A of Turnheim’s typology (Turnheim1987:53). It appears at Baalbek, in the cornice of the Temple of Jupiter (Wiegand 1921–1925 I: Pl. 60) and the Temple of Bacchus (Wiegand 1921–1925 II: Figs. 14, 15d). At Qasr Rabbah, in cornice elements that present the ‘Syrian sequence’, a rope pattern replaces the usual astragal (Glueck 1965: Pl. 164:a, b). Ward-Perkins (1981:317) notes the rarity of the rope pattern in the West, and its relatively common appearance in the East. The anthemion has a floral pattern of up-turned palmettes and down-turned acanthus leaves. The palmettes (e.g., A50606, Fig. 9.99:1) are widely based with short, inner, spiral-shaped leaves and outer leaves with double spirals that spread widely on the bottom. In the corner is a triple-tipped acanthus leaf with deeply grooved, v-shaped ribs. The pattern is flat, schematic, and lacks its usual three-dimensionality. Drill work is visible. Cornice A101 (Fig. 9.98:2) has intermediate, trailing, s-shaped acanthus leaves that connect the pattern. In this element the up-turned motif is the acanthus, while the down-turned is the palmette, the reverse of the common pattern seen in the anthemion of the first-floor cornices. Cornices A100 (Fig. 9.98:1)

549

and A231 (Fig. 9.100:2) seem to have scant traces of a schematic trailing branch. The use of plain intermediate profiles separating the decorated ones is common in western architectural decor, although it is also found in the East. It is seen in the northwestern city-gate entablature at Nysa-Scythopolis dated to the first half of the second century CE, while it is relatively rare in the rich architectural decor of the Severan period that shows a strong tendency for the elaborate and rich ‘Syrian sequence’ (Lyttelton 1974:229–254; Turnheim 1996:127–133). The smaller, light gray marble cornices of the second and third floors share three characteristics that differ from the scaenae frons’ first-floor cornices: their cymation and corona are undecorated, they vary from the characteristic ‘Syrian sequence’ (Weigand 1914:86–87), and the intermediate astragal is replaced by a rope pattern. It should be stressed that the characteristic ‘Syrian sequence’, so well retained in the first-floor cornices, would also be expected in the second and third floors. Limestone Elements of the Porticus and the Restoration Stages of the Scaenae Frons The summa cavea was originally adorned in its upper part by a semicircular porticus erected in the Corinthian order from limestone elements. As a result of the earthquake of 363 CE (Stratum 11), the theater suffered major damage and the collapsed summa cavea and its surrounding porticus were not rebuilt. At the same time, the scaenae frons was reduced to the height of two floors and some of its marble bases and capitals were replaced by limestone elements, and granite and marble column shafts were replaced by limestone shafts. It seems reasonable to assume that at least some of these limestone elements were taken from the ruined porticus, although there is no definitive evidence for this. The later renovation of the scaenae frons in Stratum 9 added further complexity, as the scaenae frons now lost its second floor and additional elements in the first floor were replaced by limestone architectural elements, the origin of which is obscure. The variety of limestone elements found in secondary use in the theater most certainly indicates more than one complex as their point of origin, and the porticus was certainly one of them. All the limestone architectural elements found within the theater and its close vicinity were therefore analyzed according to

550

Gabriel Mazor

their order components, regardless of their original and secondary use, which is dealt with in the architectural analysis (see Chapter 7). Pedestals The 34 limestone pedestals, some of which may possibly be associated with the porticus, are not all of the same type, but are rather an eclectic assemblage that does not represent a specific dated group. Most of them were tampered with at some point, as, for example, some of the cap moldings were roughly cut off, probably on purpose, and in many cases one side of the pedestal was sawn off. These pedestals have an average height of 0.50 m; the un-sawn examples have average dimensions of 0.65 × 0.65 m, while the sawn ones are c. 0.62 × 0.70 m. The assemblage, comprised of regular four-sided pedestals and threesided pedestals, can be divided into several types and subtypes based on their molding sequence, in which diversities were observed. Type A differs mainly in its plinth profiles, while Types B, C and D are lacking one or more profiles in the cap or base moldings. Types E and F are probably of later date. Subtype A1: Pedestal A6550 (Fig. 9.101:1) is three sided, with a 4 cm lower plinth, a 7 cm cyma reversa and a 1 cm torus. The dado is 28 cm high followed by a 1 cm torus, a 6 cm cyma reversa and a 4 cm plinth. Pedestal A6530 (Fig. 9.101:2) is also three sided, with a 5 cm lower plinth and a 7 cm cyma reversa. The dado is 26 cm high and the 12 cm cap molding is mostly broken. Pedestal A6549 (Fig. 9.101:3) is four sided, with an 11 cm lower plinth, a 3 cm torus, a 7 cm cyma reversa and a 1 cm torus. The dado is 25 cm high followed by a 2 cm torus, a 5 cm cyma reversa and a 5 cm plinth. Subtype A2: Pedestal A90642 (Fig. 9.101:4) is also four sided, with a 21 cm high base molding and 13 cm high cap molding and a 22 cm high dado that shares the same profiles as A6549. Pedestal A6533 (Fig. 9.101:5) is three sided, with a base molding comprised of a 12 cm plinth, a 4 cm torus and an upright 9 cm cyma

reversa and a 1 cm torus. The dado is c. 20 cm high and the cap molding is broken. Pedestal A6542 (Fig. 9.101:6) is three sided, its base molding composed of a 9 cm plinth, a worn torus and a 5 cm cyma reversa. The dado is 28 cm high followed by a 1 cm torus, a 4 cm cyma recta and a 5 cm plinth. Subtype A3: Pedestal A6554 (Fig. 9.102:1) is three sided, and the base and cap moldings each have a 12 cm plinth and a 6 cm cyma recta. The dado is 13 cm high. Subtype B1: Pedestal A6535 (Fig. 9.102:2) is three sided, with a base molding composed of a 16 cm high plinth and a 3 cm torus with a 1 cm grade. The dado is 12 cm high and the 16 cm cap molding resembles that of A6554. Pedestal A6552 (Fig. 9.102:3) is three sided, and the cap and base moldings have a 12 cm and 10 cm plinth and a 6 cm and 8 cm pronounced cyma recta respectively. The dado is 13 cm high. Subtype B2: Pedestal A6537 (Fig. 9.102:4) is four sided, with a base molding composed of a 10 cm plinth, a 5 cm torus and a 4 cm almost-beveled cyma reversa. The dado is 21 cm high, and the cap molding has a 7 cm cyma reversa, a 1 cm torus and a 6 cm plinth. Pedestal A6546 (Fig. 9.102:5) is three sided, its base molding has an 11 cm high plinth, a 1.5 cm torus and a 6.5 cm almost-beveled cyma reversa. The dado is 11 cm high and the 20 cm cap-molding profiles are broken. Pedestal A6536 (Fig. 9.102:6) is regular, with a lower 11 cm plinth, a 3 cm torus and 7 cm cyma recta. The dado is 25 cm high, and the14 cm high cap molding is broken. Pedestal A6551 (Fig. 9.103:1) is three sided, its base molding has a 3 cm plinth and a graded 7 cm cyma recta. The dado is 30 cm high and the cap molding is broken. Type C: Pedestal A6548 (Fig. 9.103:2) is four sided, its base molding has a 5 cm plinth and 7 cm cyma recta with a grading below and a double grading on top. The dado is 13 cm high and the 14 cm cap molding has the same profiles as the base moldings. Pedestal A6539 (Fig. 9.103:3) is four sided, with an 8 cm lower plinth and a 5 cm cyma reversa. The dado is 25 cm high and

551

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6550 Subtype A1

0.73 0.57

0.57 0.72

0.11 0.28 0.50

A6549 Subtype A1

A6530 Subtype A1

0.50

0.12

0.58 0.75

0.12

0.12

0.26

0.25 0.59

012 0.55 0.62

0.57 0.63

1

0.22 0.58

2

A90642 Subtype A2

3

A6533 Subtype A2

A6542 Subtype A2

0.72 0.57

0.61 0.46

0.75

0.13 0.56

0.75

0.10

0.22

0.52

0.33 0.59

0.21 0.46 0.61

0.28

0.14 0.67

0.26

6

4

0.58 0.67

5

Fig. 9.101. Severan Theater: porticus, pedestal Subtypes A1 and A2.

the 12 cm cap molding has the same profiles as the base moldings. Pedestal A6534 (Fig. 9.103:4) is three sided, its base molding has a 9 cm plinth, a 4 cm torus and a 6 cm cyma reversa. The dado is 8 cm high and the 16 cm

cap molding has the same profiles as the base moldings. Pedestal A6553 (Fig. 9.103:5) is three sided, with a worn, 13 cm base molding, a 28 cm high dado and a cap molding with a 7 cm cyma recta and a 2 cm plinth.

552

Gabriel Mazor

A6554 Subtype A3

0.64 0.57

0.63 0.57

0.18 0.49

A6552 Subtype B1

A6535 Subtype B1

0.68 0.60

0.16

0.13 0.48

0.18

0.18

0.12 0.49 0.20

0.13 0.18

0.59 0.63

0.59 0.63

1

0.57 0.61

2

A6537 Subtype B2

3

A6546 Subtype B2

A6536

Subtype B2

0.60 0.64

0.70

0.14

0.14

0.20

0.54 0.21

0.50 0.11

0.19 0.57 0.69

0.60

0.25

0.19

4

0.52 0.64

0.21

5

0.58 0.73

6

Fig. 9.102. Severan Theater: porticus, pedestal Subtypes A3, B1 and B2.

Type D: Pedestal A6540 (Fig. 9.103:6) is four sided, with a 21 cm high dado, while both the base and cap moldings are worn or broken. Pedestal A6543 (Fig. 9.104:1) is three sided, and its base molding has an 11 cm plinth and an 11 cm cyma recta. The dado is 11 cm high and the 17 cm cap molding is broken.

Type E: Pedestal A6547 (Fig. 9.104:2) is four sided, with an 11 cm beveled base and cap molding, and a 29 cm high dado. Pedestal A6689 (Fig. 9.104:3) is three sided, with a 10 cm plinth, a 7 cm beveled profile, a c. 20 cm high dado and a broken, 13 cm cap molding. Pedestal A6541 (Fig. 9.104:4) is four sided, with a

553

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6551 Subtype B2

A6539 Type C

A6548 Type C

0.53

0.74

0.64

0.14

0.50

0.12

0.13 0.43 0.16

0.40

0.50 0.25 0.43

0.10 0.52 0.59

0.55

0.13

2

0.53 0.64

1

3

A6534 Type C

0.68

0.60

0.68 0.60

0.64

0.09

0.15

0.16 0.43

0.08

0.50

0.19 0.60 0.64

A6540 Type D

A6553 Type C

0.28

0.52

0.13

4

0.21

0.16 0.59 0.63

5

0.64

6

Fig. 9.103. Severan Theater: porticus, pedestal Subtype B2 and Types C and D.

lower and upper plinth (18 and 17 cm) and beveled profile (14 cm) in between, with no dado. Pedestal A6629 (Fig. 9.104:5) is broken, with three graded plinth sections (0.65, 0.62, 0.59 m long; 14, 9, 13 cm high).

Type F: Pedestal A6532 (Fig. 9.104:6) is three sided, the base and cap moldings (16 and 15 cm) divided into three plinth strips separated by a 27 cm high dado. Pedestal A6545 (Fig. 9.105:1) is three sided, and its base and cap moldings (23 and 17 cm)

554

Gabriel Mazor

A6543

Type D

0.63 0.55

A6547

Type E

0.11

0.11 0.49 0.22

0.51 0.29

0.50 0.17

0.11

0.59 0.63

0.59 0.63

0.58 0.68

1

A6541

3

2

A6629

Type E

0.60

Type E

0.36

0.49 0.14

A6532

0.13

0.15

0.09

0.27 0.58

0.14

0.18 0.51 0.60

Type F

0.54

0.58 0.52

0.17

Type E

0.64 0.57

0.68 0.58

0.17

A6689

0.62 0.65

0.16

5

0.69

4

6

Fig. 9.104. Severan Theater: porticus, pedestal Types D, E and F.

have a plinth, a torus and a 12 cm dado graded at both ends. Pedestal A90607 (Fig. 9.105:2) is four sided, its base molding has an 18 cm plinth and two torus strips (2 and 3 cm). The dado is 24 cm high and bordered by beveled strips, and the 12 cm cap

molding has graded, beveled 7 cm profiles, and a 5 cm plinth. Pedestal A6625 (Fig. 9.105:3) is four sided; its base and cap moldings (17 and 15 cm high) have a plinth and two torus profiles. The dado is 21 cm high.

555

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

A6545

Type F A90607 Type F

0.64

0.51 0.45

0.12

0.59

0.23

0.15

0.24

0.21 0.53 0.17

0.23 0.45 0.51

0.58 0.60

1

Type F

0.56

0.17 0.52 0.12

A6625

2

0.55 0.56

3

Fig. 9.105. Severan Theater: porticus, pedestal Type F.

Discussion of Limestone Pedestals The different types of limestone pedestals form two main categories, Types A–D and the later Types E and F. Types A–D represent a wide variety of common, Roman-type pedestals dated to the second–third centuries CE. They differ from each other in two ways: one grouping (Subtypes A1, A2, A3, B1; Figs. 9.101, 9.102) has the same set of profiles on both the base and cap molding, which differ in dimensions, mainly in the plinth, while a second grouping (Subtype B2 and Types C and D; Figs. 9.102–9.104) lacks one or two profile strips from either the base or cap molding. The combinations of profiles vary from simple to rich depending on the number of torus bands, the appearance of a cavetto, and the use of either a cyma reversa or cyma recta. All pedestals of Types A–D vary in their profiles, height and dimensions, and these variations seem to represent random assemblages chosen for their average dimensions and height. In the second category, Type E (Fig. 9.104) has a simple beveled profile that was also relatively common at the time, although A6541 (Fig. 9.104:4) is exceptional, and may date to the Byzantine period. Type F uses multiple torus bands and seems to belong to the Byzantine period as well.

Half of these reused pedestals (17) share a single feature––one side was cut off. Although they vary in types, they have average dimensions of 0.62 × 0.70 m and a height of c. 0.50 m. They may have been adjusted for use in the porticus, placed along the row of curiale seats for which they are appropriate in size, and which was located in front of the porticus. However, this hypothesis is problematic as it implies that the original porticus of the Severan period (Stratum 12) was constructed using spolia pedestals taken from earlier constructed monuments of the civic center. Another alternative is that they were used in a reconstruction stage of the porticus that may have occurred after the theater’s original construction, maybe in the mid-third century CE, when the postscaenium was added as a result of constructional faults. Bases Of the 21 limestone bases found in the theater, four of them are complete and four are half bases, while the rest are fragments. Most of them seem to have been deliberately cut and turned into building stones and reused in later walls. In the Severan theater complex constructed in Stratum 12, they were already in

556

Gabriel Mazor

A6559 Type C

A6258 Type A

0.51

A6261 Type B

0.75

0.98 0.07 0.33

0.26

0.59

1.23

0.41

2

0.67 0.18 0.39 0.12

0.60

0.18

0.19

1

A6259 Type B

0.16

0.59

0.09

0.06 0.35 0.30

3

4

A6688 Type C

A6531 Type C

A6628 Type C 0.42

0.41 0.31

0.40

0.37

0.13

5

0.40

6

0.63

7

0.48

Fig. 9.106. Severan Theater: porticus, base Types A, B and C.

secondary use as their material and diverse dimensions indicate. Their diameters point to three original order compositions of c. 1 m, 0.80–0.85 m, and 0.65–0.70 m in height. Some of them were apparently reused in the scaenae frons renovation stages, while others could have been placed elsewhere in the theater or simply used as masonry blocks. Their original complexes are unknown and their use in the theater should be associated with either the summa cavea porticus, or one of the renovation stages, presumably that of Stratum 11. Apart from four square pilaster bases, they are all freestanding, mostly with a square plinth. Their profile moldings separate them into three distinct types. Type A: Bases A6258 (Fig. 9.106:1), A6254, A6260, A6262, A6256, A6699, A6253, A6624.

Type B: Bases A6261 (Fig. 9.106:2), A6249, A6252, A6618, A40610, A40609, A6248, A6259 (Fig. 9.106:3). Both Types A and B are common bases with a square plinth that are found in most of the site’s complexes and date to the second–third centuries CE. The moldings consist of a scotia bordered by fillets and an upper and lower torus. This is the Greek-Attic form (Amy and Gros 1979:123, n. 76, and see bibliography there) that developed in Greece around the fifth century BCE and spread throughout the Greek and Hellenistic world (Shoe Meritt 1969:195, Fig. 2f.; Foerster 1995:99–103, Figs. 172, 173). Characteristic of this form is the positioning of the upper torus on the same vertical line as the upper fillet of the scotia,

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

thus differing from the Roman-Attic form (Shoe Meritt 1965:301; 1969:191). Type A is characterized by an apophyge, while Type B has a shaft section. The lower torus of Type A has a round, semicircular shape, while that of Type B is less emphasized and its profile is smaller, a quarter of a circle. In both types, the relative proportions between the upper and lower torus and fillet were retained. Type A originally carried columns of the Corinthian order, while Type B served the Ionic order. Type C: Bases A6559, A6531, A6628, A6688 (Fig. 9.106:4–7). Type C comprises three fragments of square pilaster bases and an engaged pilaster base. They are all fragments except A6559 (Fig. 9.106:4), which preserves its complete profile molding. They belong to the Greek-Attic form and were apparently of a Corinthian order; two of them have plinths while the others could have had separate plinths. Column Shafts and Drums About 137 segments of limestone column shafts were found in the theater. Of these, 100 are pieces of monolithic column shafts, some of them bottom or top sections of the Corinthian order. The rest are complete or fragmentary column drums, none of which has a profiled molding, and seem to be of the Ionic order. The measurable monolithic column shafts and the column drums can be divided into seven types according to height. They were all used in the theater’s renovation stages as spolia. The considerably high number in Type 2 of monolith column-shaft sections (63) and column drums (20) in comparison to all the others is not surprising, as the dimensions of Type 2 fit the scaenae frons first-floor order when limestone columns replaced the red and black granite columns during the Stratum 11 renovation stage. They may have originated in the summa cavea’s porticus that collapsed in the earthquake of 363 CE. All of them were most probably reused again later in Stratum 9. Type 1: (H 3.6–4.0 m) 9 column shaft sections and 6 column drums. Type 2: (H 4.72–4.79 m) 63 column shaft sections and 20 column drums. Type 3: (H 4.8–5.3 m) 5 column shaft sections. Type 4: (H 5.4–5.8 m) 2 column shaft section.

557

Type 5: (H 5.9–6.7 m) 3 column shaft sections and 2 column drums. Type 6: (H 6.8–7.2 m) 3 column shaft sections and a column drum. Type 7: (H 7.2–8.0 m) 5 column shaft sections and 4 column drums. As Type 2 monolith column shafts were reused in the scaenae frons renovation stages of Strata 11 and 9, they were recently reconstructed with reinforced concrete into 26 columns and covered with plaster. Some of these were re-erected during the scaenae frons reconstruction project (see Chapter 8). Capitals A relatively large assemblage of 26 limestone capitals was found in the theater. Twelve of them are Corinthian capitals that were obviously reused in the scaenae frons reconstruction stages to replace broken marble capitals. It would be reasonable to assume that these were originally part of the summa cavea’s porticus, although no conclusive evidence of this order composition was obtained. On the other hand, in light of the enormous number of limestone capitals recently discovered in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis, they could have originated in any other monument that was dismantled as a result of the earthquake of 363 CE. The remaining 14 capitals are of the Ionic order, which were cut and reused as masonry in later walls. They are mostly worn, unidentified fragments that were never part of the theater order and will only be briefly discussed here. Corinthian Capitals Three fragments of Corinthian capitals were too broken or worn to be classified (A6200, A6528, A6620). Another (A40611) is unique and probably does not belong to the theater’s reconstruction. It is considered a variant together with another capital (A6649) that was found in an unworked state, presumably in the condition it was sent from the quarry, and for some reason never completed. Capital A6210 (Fig. 9.107:1) Dimensions: H 0.54 m, D 0.46 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.23 m, upper: 0.35 m, calathus: 0.48 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: 6 cm Proportions: H:D 1:0.85; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/9 of capital

558

Gabriel Mazor

A6210

A6207 0.05

0.06

0.43

0.54

0.31

0.35

0.17 0.23 0.44

2 1

0.46

A6186 0.09

0.71

0.43

0.21

0.62

3

Fig. 9.107. Severan Theater: porticus, Corinthian capitals.

The lower-range leaves are centralized and spring from under the capital in a gentle curve. The midribs are emphasized by two parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom. The central grooves of the mid-lobe ribs turn in a bow shape and are also grooved down to the bottom. The mid-lobes have four round tips with pointed ends. The lower-lobe and mid-lobe tips meet to create rhombuses one on top of the other, granting the acanthus leaves a lacy effect that covers the lower range of the capital. The central midrib of the upperrange leaves is marked by a groove down to the lower-

range mid-lobe. The mid-lobe ribs of the upper range curve in a bow shape and their single tip meets the next in a crude arch. No cauliculus or cauliculus rim is visible, and the calyx springs from the crude calathus. It turns slightly toward the volute and its crude central leaves meet to create an elongated eyelet. The helixes and volutes spring from the calyx and separate above it. The helixes turn in a gentle spiral under the calathus rim. The helixes are flat, carved in low relief with no canalis, and they almost touch each other. Two crude lower and upper triangles are created at the helixes’

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

meeting point. The volutes turn gently outward in a bow shape and cross the abacus’ lower line. The volutes, like the helixes, have no canalis and they are supported by acanthus leaves. The capital is crowned with an undecorated abacus. The abacus flower is large and it exceeds the abacus’ height. It is of a four-petal type with a central closed blossom of an oblong shape with no central stem. Capital A6207 (Fig. 9.107:2) Dimensions: H 0.43 m, D 0.44 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.17 m, upper: 0.31 m, calathus: 0.41 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: 5 cm Proportions: H:D 1:1; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital This capital resembles A6210, although it is better executed. The lower-range leaves spring from a crude, 2 cm strip on the bottom, are widely spread, and their midribs are marked by two parallel grooves that run all the way to the bottom. Their mid-lobe ribs curve gently in a bow shape and three of their tips touch, creating rhombuses one on top of the other, thus lending the lower-range leaves a lacy pattern. In the upper-range leaves, both the lower tips of the mid-lobe gently meet. Neither a cauliculus nor a cauliculus rim can be seen, and the calyx springs from behind the meeting tips of the upper-range leaves. The calyx leaves are delicately executed, and their inner tips meet to create an elongated eyelet. The outer tips do not meet above the central leaf of the upper range. The helixes and volutes spring from the calyx and separate high above it. Both the helixes and the volutes resemble those of A6210, although the helixes firmly touch. The abacus flower, a closed, four-petal blossom, gently turns to the right and has a stem running behind the helixes. Capital A6186 (Fig. 9.107:3) Dimensions: H 0.71 m, D 0.62 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m, upper: 0.43 m, calathus: 0.65 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: 9 cm separated into 3 and 6 cm strips Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves are poorly preserved and although both the lower- and upper-range leaves seem to resemble those of the previous capitals, some differences in details are observed. The inner lobe tips of the calyx leaves meet to create two triangles, one on top of the other. Their side leaves, crudely carved, meet above the central leaf of the upper range. The

559

spiral helixes have several inner connecting bridges. The abacus flower, a ten-petal blossom, is depicted on the upper strip of the abacus and its stem curls up and disappears behind the helixes, the calathus rim and the lower strip of the abacus. Capital A6203 (Fig. 9.108:1) Dimensions: H 0.57 m, D 0.44 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.21 m, upper: 0.34 m, calathus: 0.47 m (rim 2 cm), abacus: 9 cm separated into 6/3 cm strips Proportions: H:D 1:078; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/7 of capital The lower-range leaves are centralized and curl up from the bottom, as in A6210 (Fig. 9.107:1). The calyx leaves spring straight up and as their inner lobe tips meet, elongated eyelets are created. The abacus flower is widely spread with a stem that emerges from a crude, round knob at the meeting of the calyx’ side leaves. The helixes and volutes present a considerably tighter spiral pattern than in the previous capitals. Capital A6198 (Fig 9.108:2) Dimensions: H 0.59 m, D 0.50 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.22 m, upper: 0.34 m, calathus 0.51 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: 9 cm separated into 6 and 3 cm strips Proportions: H:D 1:08; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves resemble those of A6210 (Fig. 9.107:1). All the lower-lobe and mid-lobe tips meet, creating five rhombuses one on top of the other, resulting in a lacy pattern. The inner lobes of the calyx meet to create elongated eyelets. The helixes and volutes are wide and heavy and have a convex, beveled shape. The abacus flower is higher than the abacus and its stem rises from a crude rhombus in between roughly carved calyx leaves. Capital A6208 (Fig. 9.108:3) Dimensions: H 0.57 m, D 0.43 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.17 m, upper: 0.31 m, calathus: 0.47 m (rim 1 cm), abacus: 10 cm Proportions: H:D 1:1; lower- and upper-range leaves 2/3 of calathus, abacus 1/6 of capital The lower-range leaves are mostly defaced, although they seem to have been of the same type as those of the previous capitals. The mid-lobe tips of the upperrange leaves meet under the cauliculus rim, which appears in the shape of meeting lobe tips. It seems to be a misinterpretation of the pattern by the artisan. The

560

Gabriel Mazor

A6203 0.09

0.57

0.34 0.21

0.44

1 A6198 0.09

0.59

0.34 0.22

0.50

2 A6208

0.57

0.31 0.17

0.43

3

Fig. 9.108. Severan Theater: porticus, Corinthian capitals.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

calyx’ inner leaves meet to create elongated eyelets. The execution of the helixes resembles those of A6198 (Fig. 9.108:2), and the abacus flower is completely broken. Capital A6216 (Fig. 9.109) Dimensions: H 0.74 m, D 0.80/0.52 m; lower-range leaves: H 0.33 m, upper: 0.50 m, calathus: 0.65 m, abacus: 7 cm Proportions: H:D 1:1/1:065; lower- and upper-range leaves 3/4 of calathus, abacus 1/8 of capital This oval-shaped capital is carved differently on each of its four sides. The lower-range leaves are widely based on the bottom, rising in a curve and well spread. Their midribs are marked by two parallel grooves that run down almost to the bottom. The lobe ribs curve in a bow shape and their wide grooves result in a concave shape. The mid-lobes have five tips, of which the lower ones meet on one side but not on the other. As they meet, they create triangles and rhombuses. The eyelets are deeply drilled but the lobe tips are not carved from behind. The upper-range leaves are more centralized and on one side their mid-lobes were left unworked. Apart from one side where two to three mid-lobe tips meet to create a triangle and a rhombus, the rest are widely spaced and do not meet. The midribs are marked by deep parallel grooves that run down to the lowerrange mid-lobe, then disappear above or behind it. The calathus, which is barely visible, was left unworked and has no rim. On one side, the cauliculus is depicted with a central groove and it leans toward the volutes. On the other side, only the cauliculus rim can be seen, seemingly enveloped by leaves. The calyxes on the wide sides of the capital are richly depicted, while on the narrow sides they are squeezed in, schematic and less detailed. On the wide sides, the calyxes curve out, while on the narrow sides they rise straight up. As their inner leaves meet, they create three triangles, one on top of the other. Their leaves curve gently in above the central leaf of the upper range on the narrow sides of the capital. On the wider sides, the four richly depicted lobe leaves meet under the helixes, while on the narrow sides, a central, five-lobed leaf rises from behind the central leaf of the upper range. The helixes and volutes separate within the calyx. On one wide side of the capital, they are deeply cut, while the rest are all depicted in low relief. The helixes curve gently in a spiral under the abacus. They do not meet, and have round knobs in between. The volutes are mostly

561

worn, but they curve gently under the abacus and are supported by a leaf. The abacus is thin and divided into two equal plain strips by a v-shaped groove. The abacus flower, mostly worn, is of the symmetrical type and curves out to both sides over the entire abacus. This capital mixes patterns and motifs, its execution varies from side to side, and it displays high-quality details. It seems to have been executed, at least in part, by a qualified and talented artist and may have been completed by a less meticulous one. Capital A6620 Dimensions: H 0.64 m, D 1.19 m A fragment of a large capital that was cut and reused as a building stone. A small section of a lower-range leaf envelopes the capital’s bottom with a parallel, deeply grooved midrib and lower lobe tips that do not touch. Capital A6200 A fragment of the lower-range leaves. Only the lower lobes of two of the leaves are preserved. They are long and pointed, deeply carved with concave shapes, and only the lower ones meet. The background is deeply cut and the well-carved cauliculus is visible. Capital A6528 A fragment of the upper part of a capital. The lower part of two meeting helixes can be seen, as well as a section of the calyx’ inner leaves and a curling abacus flower stem that runs up behind the helixes’ meeting point. Capital A6649 Dimensions: H 0.65 m, D 0.40 m This capital was partly cut in a conical shape but not further carved. It seems to be in its raw, quarry state and was never completed. Capital A40611 A fragment of a capital preserving the upper edge of the upper range’s central leaf. On both sides the cauliculus is visible, with a conical column shape and a round, plain rim. The calathus is wide and has a large rim. Both calyxes emerge upright, the pointed concave tips of their densely crowded leaves meet at the center, creating three triangles one on top of the other. The calyx’ inner leaf curves gently under the helix but does not meet. The helixes and (broken) volutes spring from the calyx and separate within the range of the

562

Gabriel Mazor

A6216 0.07

0.74

0.50 0.33

0.80

Fig. 9.109. Severan Theater: porticus, oval Corinthian capital.

0.52

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

calyx. The helixes curve in a spiral pattern under the calathus rim and have inner bridges. They are deeply carved in high relief and have no canalis. The abacus is decorated with flutes on its lower strip and an ovolo on the upper. Half of the abacus flower is preserved. It is a six-petal blossom with a round, central socket and a knob. Its lobes are round and fleshy with a concave shape cut into two by a small groove. The flower stem is strongly carved in high relief and is stylistically depicted. It springs from a central acanthus leaf and has some offshoots. It curls up in between the wellseparated helixes and over the calathus rim. Discussion of Limestone Corinthian Capitals Most of the above-described capitals can be classified as Type III’A or Type III’D of Fischer’s classification of limestone capitals, while two better fit his Type III’B and Type III’C (Fischer 1990:63–64), all dated from the mid-second to the early third centuries CE. Fischer’s typology was based on several capitals from the Severan construction stage at Samaria-Sebaste, the period in which such monumental complexes as the forum, the basilica, the colonnaded street and the stadium were constructed (Watzinger 1935:95; Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942:35–37). At the time of Fischer’s work, the city of Nysa-Scythopolis had not yet been excavated, and apart from the marble capitals of the theater’s scaenae frons, only a few limestone capitals were known to him and integrated into his typology. An early capital that was found on the mound by the American expedition (UME) was dated by him to the early second century CE. Two other capitals from the current group, A6216 (Fig. 9.109) and A6186 (Fig. 9.107:3), were attributed to the aforementioned Types III’B and III’C. Since Fischer’s work was published (Fischer 1990), several hundred Corinthian capitals along with a considerable number of Ionic capitals, all carved in local limestone from the Gilboa quarries, have been discovered in the civic center of Nysa-Scythopolis. Some of these, including the above-described capitals, were found when the theater excavations were resumed and may be added to Fischer’s typology. The decorative components cover the entire calathus and hardly any of it is left visible. The conical shape of the capitals is achieved by its decor rather than its calathus shape. The design of the acanthus leaves is that of the Syrian ‘fragmented’ type (Fischer 1990:63– 64). their Hellenistic origins are firmly rooted in the

563

region. They are carved on the capital in layers that seemingly vanish into the dark background in the upper-range leaves. Each leaf is strongly outlined and precisely divided into lobes and tips. The acanthus leaves are centralized and not as spread out over the bottom as in Fischer’s earlier Types I’–II’ of the early second century CE (Fischer 1990: Figs. 59–62). The midrib is strongly marked all the way down, or almost all the way down to the bottom by two deep parallel grooves in the lower-range leaves, and down to the top of the lower-range central leaf in the upperrange leaves. Lobe ribs curve in a bow shape, and at the bottom they are sometimes carved at a straight angle to the midrib. All the lower tips meet, creating three to four rhombuses one on top of the other in the lower range, and one or two in the upper range. The tips are concave but not as much as in the earlier or western types of capitals. Their lobe ribs are grooved but not deeply drilled, although the lobes are separated from the background and their tips tend to break. In the second century CE, the lobes were emphasized by deep carving into the background, while along their edges and tips they were deeply drilled into a concave surface, granting them plasticity. This technique of drilling appears in our capitals, although with a lesser degree of plasticity. At the end of the second century and into the early third century CE, some of the acanthus-leaf components are becoming flatter and somewhat degenerate (Schlumberger 1933:294). In the oval capital A6216 (Fig. 9.109:2), the cauliculus has vanished entirely, except on one side, where it is well depicted with the customary deep carving. In some capitals, the cauliculus rim is left unworked, in others it is depicted as two meeting tips. The calyxes apparently spring from the calathus, from behind or above the touching lobe tips of the upper-range leaves, which were often crudely executed. The detailed and crowded calyx leaves are divided into two, and their inner tips meet to create either elongated eyelets or two to three triangles, one on top of the other. This kind of calyx seems to have become standardized by the early second century CE (Fischer 1979:269). The type of calyx with an elongated eyelet has its origins in the Hellenistic period in both the East and the West. It is also typical of most of the marble capitals in the eastern and western parts of the Roman Empire, presumably under the influence of Asia Minor since the reign of Trajan (Heilmeyer 1970:68). At Palmyra, the eyelet type was found as early as the second half of the first

564

Gabriel Mazor

century CE (Schlumberger 1933:296–298). The type of calyx that forms triangles first appeared in the West during the Augustan period and it probably originated in Asia Minor (Heilmeyer 1970:36–37). Weigand (1932:155–157) places the origin of the triangle-type calyx in the Hellenistic period, although he states that it became most common in the early second century CE. Since then, this was the typical calyx type in the Syrian region, while the eyelet type was most common in the West. At Nysa-Scythopolis, and other sites in the region, both types appear in limestone capitals, although mostly that with triangles. Fischer (1979:271) assumed that the eyelet type appeared at Nysa-Scythopolis under the influence of marble capitals, but it is found in numerous capitals that are carved of local limestone and originate in complexes dated to the mid-second century CE, long before marble capitals were imported. It seems that Fischer’s assumed influence of Asia Minor in this case may have arrived through Baalbek. The helixes and volutes are flat with no canalis, although their round, spiral shape is well executed. The flat, nonplastic depiction of the components, considered to be typical of the Severan period, had already made its first appearance in the city of Nysa-Scythopolis sometime earlier. In A6186 (Fig. 9.107:3), small bridges were left within the helix, which is also a characteristic of the Severan period that is observed in the theater’s friezes as well. The calyx is usually upright, although in some cases it leans toward the volutes. The helixes’ inner leaves join crudely above the central leaf of the upper range. The calathus rim is grooved and the helixes curl under it. Both helixes meet, except in A6216, where a small ball separates them (see Fig. 9.109:2). The abacus, which in most cases maintains its balanced height (except for the slightly heavier abacus in A6186, A6198 and A6208), is of the customary plain type, common since the first century CE. The multi-petal abacus flower is large, heavy and stylized. The stem winds up behind the helixes and the calathus rim. In some cases it springs out of a crude bud (A6210, A6203, A6198), which is a local trend according to Fischer (1979:296). The capitals of Fischer’s Types III’B and III’C share some of their components with Types III’A and III’D, and therefore they date to the same or a slightly later period. The main difference is in the placement of a five-lobed, central acanthus leaf in between the upperrange central leaf and the connecting helixes. A6216 of Type III’B (see Fig. 9.109) is the only one that displays this feature, and only on one side. Together

with A6186 of Type III’C (see Fig. 9.107:3), with its helix bridges, they represent exceptions to the regular types represented by most of the limestone capitals of the porticus. Fischer included in his research two capitals from the synagogue at Ma‘oz Hayyim, where they definitely represent spolia (Fischer 1979:298–299, Pls. 56, 268, 269). They could have been the product of the NysaScythopolis workshop, or of the Gilboa quarries, whether originally manufactured for the city and later removed and reused in the synagogue, or originally manufactured for another site. A unique component of these two capitals is observed in the lower-range leaves, where the five-tipped lobe is compared by Fischer to similar capitals from Gerasa (Kraeling 1938:406, Pl. CV:a) dated to the early third century CE. This may be evidence of connections between the two centers. Four additional capitals from Samaria-Sebaste are mentioned by Fischer as well (Fischer 1979:299–300), presumably the products of a local workshop of the Severan period. In A6216, the central leaf appears on one side only. On another side, the calyx’ inner leaves, remarkably well executed, lean over and almost cover the central leaf of the upper range, which is also characteristic of the Types III’A–III’D capitals. A bud, from which the abacus-flower stem springs, was found on the capital’s third side. This is a unique pattern in the East, although common in the West since the Augustan revival of the second century CE (Heilmeyer 1970:146, 151; Leon 1971:56–58). In a crude form, it was found in some of the other capitals as well. These characteristics of Types III’A–III’D are the outcome of the evolutionary production process of the Corinthian capital in the region during the second century CE (Weigand 1932:160). They were common in the region from the reign of Marcus Aurelius to that of Septimius Severus. At Samaria-Sebaste, Fischer (1979:297) considered them to be the product of a local workshop. Their widespread appearance at Gerasa and Nysa-Scythopolis points to the existence of large local workshops to service the monumental building enterprises that were conducted at both these poleis during the second and early third centuries CE. These workshops manufactured hundreds of Corinthian capitals, along with richly decorated entablature elements such as friezes and cornices, from the local limestone. These high-quality products were the work of well-trained and qualified craftsmen

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

who had presumably trained at the best architectural centers of the eastern provinces, such as Baalbek. In their newly built workshops at Gerasa and NysaScythopolis, they practiced the deeply rooted Syrian architectural traditions with their Hellenistic origins, at the same time mingling new trends and styles, some of which originated in Asia Minor. Baalbek can be considered a major importer of architectural styles on the one hand, and the guiding agent of local Syrian tradition on the other. The well-established architectural centers of Nysa-Scythopolis and Gerasa, and other poleis of the region, no doubt benefited from both. Ionic Capitals Fourteen complete and fragmentary limestone capitals of the Ionic order where found in the theater, reused as building masonry in later renovation stages (Strata 11, 9) of the theater’s hyposcaenium. As their order does not fit the (Corinthian) order of the main units of the Severan Theater, i.e., the postscaenium, the scaenae frons and the porticus, they obviously were brought from somewhere else in the civic center during the Byzantine period. Since they were found in the theater, we have included them in the theater’s architectural repertoire. According to their decor, they represent two types of Ionic capitals (see below, ‘Discussion of Ionic Capitals). Type A Capital A6572 (Fig. 9.110:1) Dimensions: H 0.47 m, D 0.50 m; shaft section: 0.20 m with 1 cm fillet, echinus: 0.24 m, abacus: 0.57 × 0.57 m, 3 cm Profiles: astragal: 2.5 cm, ovolo 0.13 m, canalis: 3–4 cm The astragal has long elliptical beads and coneshaped reels. The ovolo is carved on a beveled profile that slants down toward the astragal. It has large, pear-shaped eggs and delicate shells with long, pointed, tongue-shaped intermediate leaves. Palmettes spread on the upper corners, delicately springing from within the calyx over the volute with long, pointed, spiral-shaped leaves. The volutes are round and airy, and terminate in a knob-shaped eye. The pulvinus has a side fillet, a plain, goblet shape, a central, double-ringed balteus and a wide, concave-shaped groove in between. The canalis borders the ovolo and carries angle palmettes. The

565

abacus is square and heavy, and has a beveled lower profile and a rounded upper one. Capital A70162 (Fig. 9.110:2) Dimensions: H 0.60 m, D 0.85 m; shaft section: 0.20 m with 2 cm fillet, echinus: 0.35 m, abacus: 0.99 × 0.99 m, 5 cm with 6 cm fillet Profiles: astragal: 3 cm, ovolo: 0.13 m, canalis: 2–3 cm The astragal profile is undecorated. The echinus has a strongly beveled ovolo with large pear-shaped eggs, delicate, well-separated shells and long, elliptical, tongueshaped intermediate leaves with no angle palmettes. The canalis is thin and hardly visible. The volutes, partly broken, are round, airy and spiral shaped. The pulvinus is plain and goblet-shaped with a wide fillet and a central, double-ringed balteus. The heavy abacus has a 5 cm beveled lower profile crowned with a fillet. Type B Capital A6201 (Fig. 9.110:3) Dimensions: H 0.44 m, D 0.46 m; shaft section: 0.10 m with 1 cm fillet, echinus: 0.11 m Profiles: astragal: 2.5 cm, ovolo: 0.13 m, canalis: 3 cm Half a capital, broken and worn. The astragal has short oval beads and rhomboid reels. The echinus is entirely worn with traces of a plain pulvinus and volutes. The canalis is partly preserved, and the heavy abacus has a lower beveled profile and an upper fillet. Capital A6204 (Fig. 9.110:4) Dimensions: H 0.58 m, D 0.76 m; shaft section: 0.19 m with 1 cm fillet Half a relatively large capital. The astragal has short oval beads and rhomboid reels. The echinus is broken. The abacus has a beveled lower profile. Capitals A6205, A6206, A6255, A6519, A6201 Sections of capitals with traces of their profiles, which resemble A6204 in dimensions and type. Capital A29 Dimensions: H 0.66 m, D 0.47; shaft section: 6 cm with 1.5 cm fillet, abacus: 0.59 × 0.59 m, 3 cm Profiles: astragal: 3 cm, ovolo: 0.10 m A worn capital with a plain, beveled astragal and an ovolo. The upper part of the capital is entirely worn, and above the abacus is a heavy masonry section, 0.34 m high.

566

Gabriel Mazor

Type A

A6572

0.47

0.50

1 A70162

0.40 0.60

2

0.85

Type B

A6204

A6201 0.39 0.58

0.34 0.44

0.46

0.76

3

4

Fig. 9.110. Severan Theater: Ionic capitals Types A and B.

Capital A6202 Dimensions: H 0.36 m, D 0.39 m, shaft section 0.15 m with 1 cm fillet, echinus 0.12 m, abacus 0.10 m A poorly preserved capital with a worn echinus and slight traces of its pulvinus, volutes, and a plain ovolo with a thin canalis.

Capital A100110 A pilaster capital with traces of an echinus, an ovolo and a heavy abacus. Capital A40606 A fragment of an echinus’ volute.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Discussion of Ionic Capitals The Type A capitals have horizontal cyma decorations with a bordering astragal and a double-profiled abacus and shaft section. In Bingöl’s classification of the Ionic capitals of Asia Minor, they belong to Types E1, E2 and F, dated to the second century CE (Bingöl 1980:37–40). The angle palmettes have three leaves and match Bingöl’s Palmette Type 248 (Bingöl 1980:34, 42), as seen in the Hadrianic capitals of the colonnaded street at Perge. The Ionic egg-and-tongue cyma decoration in the current examples has its origins in the Hellenistic period and in Asia Minor, and usually characterizes monuments of the Augustan period and the first century CE (Vandeput 1997:143–145), but is still found in early second-century CE Trajanic and Hadrianic monuments. As the egg-and-dart pattern gained popularity from the Trajanic period onward, the egg-and-tongue pattern became second in popularity, and appeared in less-visible parts (Koenigs and Radt 1979:334). During the Antonine period, the use of the egg-and-tongue pattern diminishes considerably until it more or less disappears during the Severan period. Puchstein (1887:22–23) notes a capital from Athens similar to our Type A, dated to Hadrian’s reign. The two Type A capitals that were found in the theater may have originally belonged in Palladius Street, which has similar Type A capitals of the late Hadrianic or early Antonine periods. The Type B capitals are of the blocked-out type that lacks ornamental details on its facade. They have a considerably high shaft segment, crowned with a fillet. The cyma is plain, apart from an astragal of oval beads and rhomboid reels. The scant remains of volutes indicate a plain pulvinus. The abacus is high, its lower part has a beveled profile and it is crowned with a wide fillet. Blocked-out Ionic capitals have a Hellenistic origin, as pointed out by Foerster in his analysis of the blocked-out Ionic capitals from Masada dated to the Herodian period (Foerster 1995:120–123, Figs. 216–224, and see references there; for further analysis of the Ionic capital at Hellenistic and Herodian sites, see Peleg-Barkat 2007). Although the Type B capitals were made of hard limestone and not of the customary soft limestone (nari) characteristic of the first-century CE Southern Theater architectural elements, they do resemble a soft-limestone Ionic capital that was found in the theater (see Figs. 9.1–9.4) and may be of the same order, representing the Southern Theater’s second renovation phase. However, Foerster notes that

567

this type of capital was still common in the second century CE, as new dating of comparable capitals from Dor to the second–third centuries CE indicates (Stern 1991:50; they were originally dated to the Hellenistic period, see Garstang 1924: Pls. 1–4). Porticus Cornice All these cornice elements are of the common plain type dated to the second–early third centuries CE, which were originally part of the entablatures of the colonnaded streets and the forum. They may have been reused in the theater’s porticus entablature. Two types are discerned, based on their profiles. Type A Cornice A6581 is plain, 0.20 m high, crowned with a 0.16 m cyma recta and a 4 cm fillet. Cornices A6589, A6586 and A6590 are plain, 0.24 m high, crowned with a 0.16 m cyma recta and an 8 cm fillet. Cornices A80101 and A80102 are plain, 0.24 m high, crowned with an 0.11 m high graded cyma recta and a 5 cm fillet. Cornice A6588 is 0.29 m high, crowned with a 0.15 m cyma recta and a 4 cm fillet. Cornice A6587 is 0.30 m high, crowned with a 0.12 m cyma recta and a 7 cm fillet. Cornice A6585 is 0.30 m high, crowned with a 0.12 m cyma recta and an 8 cm fillet. Cornice A6576 is 0.36 m high, crowned with a 0.26 m cyma recta and a 0.10 m fillet. Cornices A6609 and A6610 are 0.32 m high, crowned with a 0.17 m cyma recta and a 9 cm fillet. Cornice A6576 is 0.36 m high, crowned with a 0.27 m high cyma recta and a 9 cm high fillet. Cornices A6630 and A6728 are 0.41 m high, crowned with a 0.32 m high cyma recta and a 7 cm fillet. Type B Cornices A6626, A6659, A6583 and A6579 are 0.39 m high, crowned with a graded, 5.5 cm ovolo, a 5 cm cavetto and a 7 cm fillet. Limestone Elements of the Proscaenium Cornice The proscaenium wall, with its alternating rectangular and semicircular niches, was built of soft-limestone (nari) masonry that was covered with marble slabs, and its niches had decorated marble floors that occasionally incorporated inscriptions. The top of the wall was covered with marble slabs with a profiled cornice that conforms to the contours of the rectangular and semicircular niches. A number of pieces of this marble cornice were

568

Gabriel Mazor

found (A6673A–E, Fig. 9.111:A–E) and some of them connect. Long parallel sockets in their upper surfaces indicate that they were joined together with iron rods.

The profile of the cornice is 19 cm high. It begins with a 2 cm grading, followed by a 3 cm plain ovolo, a 3 cm cyma recta and a 1 cm plain astragal, crowned with a

6673/C

0.19

6673/D

6673/A

6673/B

6673/E

Fig. 9.111. Severan Theater: proscaenium, cap molding cornice.

569

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

4 cm plain ovolo and a 5 cm round fillet. An element of this kind was found in situ on the proscaenium wall of the theater at Samaria-Sebaste (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942: Pl. LVIII:1, 2), two segments of similar elements were found in the theater at Flavia Neapolis (Magen 2005:107, Fig. 31:1, 2), and a similar element was reconstructed on the proscaenium wall of the theater at Palmyra (Frezouls 1982:403, Fig. 113), all dated to the second century CE. Recently, a perfectly preserved cap molding of this type, which follows the contour of the niches of the proscaenium wall, was revealed in the theater at Tiberias and presumably dates to the second century CE as well (Atrash 2012:79–88). A similar element was also recently discovered in the eastern theater at Gadara (G. Mazor, pers. obs.). Limestone Elements of the Pulpitum Podia On both sides of the pulpitum, pairs of podia were found in situ, flanking the staircases that mount the pulpitum from the aditus maximi (Fig. 9.112:1). All four podia are 1.30 m high, constructed of three masonry limestone blocks, and include a base molding that is 0.31 m high. The base molding begins with a 13 cm plinth and a 6 cm lower torus, followed by a 9 cm cyma reversa and a 3 cm upper torus. The dado is 0.80 m high and is crowned with a 17 cm cap molding that is broken beyond recognition in all the podia.

Limestone Elements of the Aditus Maximi and Itinera Versurarum Crowning Profile The crowning molding was found on the arch of the aditus maximus’ facade entrance and on the wall of its inner passage. It is 14 cm high, starting with a 2 cm apophyge and followed by a 4 cm torus, a 4 cm graded cavetto and a 4 cm fillet (Fig. 9.112:2). Archivolt The aditus maximi and itinera versurarum were adorned with archivolt elements constructed of vaulted arches of different sizes (Types A and B). Type A of the aditus maximi is 0.80–0.87 m high and can be separated into two subtypes. Subtype A1 comprises regular archivolt elements (A6498, Fig. 9.113:1; A6505, A6510, A6511, A6480, A6490, A6493), while Subtype A2 has a recess on top (A6488, Fig. 9.113:2; A6481, A6482, A6483, A6485, A6486, A6494, A6499, A6508, A6509, A6516, A90184). Both have the same profiles of three fasciae, A6498 Subtype A1 0.70

0.80

0.13

0.50 0.17 0.14

0.39

0.80

1 A6488 Subtype A2 0.61

0.57 1.30 0.80

0.13

2

0.87

0.31 0.14

1

Fig. 9.112. Severan Theater: (1) pulpitum podium; (2) aditus maximi crowning profile.

0.11

0.46

0.80

2

Fig. 9.113. Severan Theater: archivolt Type A.

570

Gabriel Mazor

23 cm, 19 cm, 13 cm high, plainly graded and crowned with a 12 cm cavetto and a 13 cm fillet with a 1 cm, v-shaped horizontal groove. These are the same profiles as in the theater cavea seats (see below), although less protruding. Type B archivolt elements of the itinera versurarum are 0.60/0.76 m high and comprise the same subtypes: Subtype B1 is regular (A6513, Fig. 9.114:1) and Subtype B2 has a recess on top (A6720, Fig. 9.114:2). They have three fasciae of 16 cm, 11 cm, and 9 cm, the lower two separated by a 6 cm cyma reversa, and the upper two by a 3 cm plain astragal. They are both crowned with a 13 cm profile composed of a 6 cm cavetto and a 7 cm fillet with a 1 cm, v-shaped horizontal groove. Some of the archivolt elements were recovered in situ by Applebaum in the western aditus maximus entrance arch. They were dismantled by Applebaum at the time of excavation and although he intended to reconstruct them, this was regretfully never carried out. The eastern aditus maximus vault and entrance arch were found in situ by the IAA expedition, and as they were in danger of collapse, they were dismantled and reconstructed (see Chapter 8).

A6513

Subtype B1

0.45 0.18

0.76

Limestone Elements of the Cavea Podium The semicircular podium in front of the ima cavea encircles the balteus and was found in situ, mostly intact, although its cap molding is quite worn. It was pierced at intervals by the scalaria and therefore constructed of eight segments. Each segment is 1.05 m high and 0.70 m wide, built of two hard-limestone masonry blocks: the lower 0.59 m, the upper 0.46 m high. The upper block is crowned with a 0.20 m high cap molding with a 3 cm cavetto, a 3 cm plain ovolo, a 7 cm cyma recta and a 4 cm graded fillet. The cap molding protrudes 0.15 m from of the podium’s dado (Fig. 9.115). Northern Cuneus Banisters The northern cunei on both sides of the ima cavea, Cunei 1 and 9, were flanked by scalaria and banisters on their northern side. The banister wall runs diagonally along the mounting steps. It then turns horizontally at the tribunal facade and runs diagonally along the mounting tribunal seats. Therefore it has two corners; the first shifts from a diagonal wall to a horizontal, while the second shifts from a horizontal wall to a diagonal. At the balteus, both banisters walls begin with a decorated podium. When both the aditus maximi and the flanking scalaria collapsed, the banister walls went down with them. Most of the limestone banister wall elements were removed and reused as building material elsewhere, and few of them were recovered in the

0.15

0.70 0.30

0.07

0.88

1

0.58

A6720

0.46

Subtype B2

1.05 0.60 0.59

0.51

0.86

2

Fig. 9.114. Severan Theater: archivolt Subtypes B1 and B2.

Fig. 9.115. Severan Theater: cavea podium.

571

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

collapsed material to be used in their reconstruction. The banister wall’s crowning elements are of two kinds, diagonal (A40651, Fig. 9.116:1) and horizontal

(A40651, A40652). They are 0.43–0.45 m wide and have the same profile, executed either diagonally or horizontally. Banister A40649 (Fig. 9.116:2) is a A40651

0.19

1.14

0.46

0.36

1.06

1

0.45

A40649

0.93

0.41

1.01

2 A6555

0.90 0.59

0.34

3

0.54

Fig. 9.116. Severan Theater: banister elements.

0.43

572

Gabriel Mazor

corner element in between a horizontal and a diagonal banister. In its facade is the beginning of a horizontal profile, to the left of which another horizontal banister element would have been attached. On the right side is a diagonal profile that rises at a 33˚ angle. With this corner, it can only belong to the northeastern corner of the northwestern tribunal. Banister crowning elements have an upper molded profile that is not centralized. It comprises an upright, 19 cm wide profile with beveled sides at a 33˚ angle, 6–8 cm high that are stepped at the bottom on both sides and end in a 4–6 cm high cavetto. The northwestern banister pedestal (A6555, Fig. 9.116:3) was found in situ, constructed into the balteus pavement at the beginning of the banister wall. It is 0.90 m high, 0.34 m wide and 0.54 m deep. At the back it has a 0.34 × 0.30 m recess for the first diagonal banister-crowning element that was integrated into it. On the facade, it is decorated as a pedestal with a 9 cm plinth followed by a 5 cm torus and a 5 cm cyma reversa. The 0.40 m high dado has a 2 cm plinth at the bottom and a 1 cm fillet on top. It is crowned with a 6 cm cyma recta and a 6 cm fillet. Above these, a 2 cm plain ovolo and a 2 cm cavetto mark the location of the first crowning element that is 8 cm high with a 33˚ angle. On the dado facade are remains of a bas relief, 0.27 m high that depicts a male figure. He is dressed in a toga, his head is veiled and his clutched fists in front apparently held some unidentified object. The facial features are completely worn, but the round head and veil are still clear. The leg-less body is almond shaped. It seems to represent a priest or a caesar acting as Pontifex Maximus. Parallel examples of podia decorated with human figures in high relief are found in similar locations in the southern theater at Gerasa, and they are quite common in theater decorations elsewhere (G. Mazor, pers. obs.). Eastern Staircase Banister Several banister crowning elements of a different type than those of the cavea were found during the excavations of the eastern staircase and presumably were located on top of its banister wall on the east and south. Banister-crowning element A6526 (Fig. 9.117:1) is a horizontal element, 0.56 m high and 0.23 m wide. Its upper, semicircular profile is 0.21 m in diameter and 8 cm high with 1 cm edges on either side. Banister-crowning element A6527 (Fig. 9.117:2)

A6526 0.08 0.56

0.23

1

0.33

A6527

0.18

0.54

0.53

2

A50612

0.11

0.75

0.30

0.50

0.25

3

Fig. 9.117. Severan Theater: banister elements.

is also a horizontal element, 0.54 m high and 0.18 m wide. Its upper, semicircular profile is also 8 cm high, but without edges. Banister-crowning element A50612 (Fig. 9.117:3) is a diagonal element, 0.75 m high and 0.25 m wide, with a 42º angle. Its profile is evenly beveled on both sides (7 cm), and it has a flat top 0.11 m wide. Cavea Seats Most of the ima cavea seats were preserved in situ, except on the northern sides of Cunei 1 and 9, where the barrel vaults of the eastern and western aditus maximi had collapsed, together with the tribunal seats. Some 15 seats were found in secondary use, mainly in

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

573

A61139 0.14 0.46

0.97

0.15

1

A61107 0.14 0.42

0.57

0.15

0.99

2

A61134 0.14 0.42

1.10

0.15

3

0.53

Fig. 9.118. Severan Theater: cavea seats.

the western thermae, recognized by their profiles and reconstructed in the northeastern part of the ima cavea (see Chapter 8). Several different types of limestone auditorium seats have been found so far at the site. In the Severan Theater and the amphitheater (Bet She’an I:132–134), two different types of seats were found in situ in their caveae and therefore reused seats of both these complexes found elsewhere were easily recognized by their profiles.1 The theater’s cavea seats, both in situ and reconstructed, can be divided into three groups. Regular seats: A40647; A40648; A61105; A61115; A61116; A61123; A61139 (Fig. 9.118:1). Cuneus right-side seats: A61107 (Fig. 9.118:2); A61136; A61137.

Cuneus left-side seats: A51119; A61134 (Fig. 9.118:3); A61135; A61138; A80603. Several broken fragments of eight additional seats were identified by their profile but cannot be assigned to one of these groups. Among the reused theater seats, the considerably large amount of left- and rightside seats (over 50%) as opposed to regular ones can perhaps be explained if we assume that they had been removed from the northern sides of Cunei 1 and 9 shortly after their collapse. All the theater seats, whether found in situ or elsewhere as spolia, are of the same height, 0.42–0.46 m, and have the same crowning profile of a 0.14 m fillet separated by a 1 cm, horizontal v-shaped groove into two (6 and 7 cm) strips, and a 7 cm cavetto. The profile protrudes some 0.14 m from the line of the

574

Gabriel Mazor

which is still in situ, reaches the height of 0.96 m, the back is over 0.50 m high and the seat is 0.88 m wide and 0.78 m deep (Fig. 9.119:1). The curiale seats have the same profile as the rest of the ima cavea seats with no horizontal groove in the protruding fillet. Some of the praecinctio curiale seats have the same vertical enclosing molding on the side that meets the scalaria. These moldings were mostly worn or broken. Seat A6156 (Fig. 9.119:2) has a 0.29 m wide molded stripe under its left-side profile that protrudes some 0.10 m, and depicts a schematic animal paw, similar to that on another seat (A6750). What seems to be a schematic cluster of grapes is seen on A6155 (Fig. 9.119:3). The cluster has a low, bulky shape with a rounded or flattened part below. These carved decorative moldings differ in shape and dimensions. They are 0.19–0.29 m wide and 0.28–0.33 m high, and the surviving examples are poorly preserved. In A6159 (Fig. 9.119:4), the craftsman miscalculated the cluster dimensions, making it 0.49 m high, so that part of it was buried below floor level. Curiale seats are found in many theaters, mainly in Asia Minor. In the theaters at Gadara and Hammat Gader, these seats are well preserved in situ, beautifully

seat. Both the left- and right-side seats are outlined by a protruding vertical molding that is 0.16 m wide, in which the fillet groove is not continued. Next to these protruding strips, the scalarium steps were constructed. Curiale Seats Around the perimeter of the orchestra, also serving as the inner wall of the balteus, a row of curiale seats was constructed, some of which were still in situ. The last row of the ima cavea also has curiale seats, which serve as the praecinctio wall, and many of these were also preserved in situ. In the modern reconstruction of Cuneus 9 and the nearby praecinctio, some curiale seats were restored (see Chapter 8). The curiale seats of both the lower and upper rows differ from the regular seats in that they have a back, none of which were completely preserved. Some seats (A6155, A6156, A6159, A6750) were removed from the theater in one of its restorations (Strata 11 or 9), and were found in the western thermae and restored. They are c. 0.45 m high (back broken) and 0.78 m deep, while their width varies (0.70–0.95 m). The back is 0.16–0.24 m wide, part of the stone block. The best-preserved seat,

0.20

In situ

A6155 0.96 0.09 0.56 0.35 0.15

0.88

1 0.18

0.24

0.12

0.09 0.12 0.78

0.22 0.57

A6156

0.73

3

A6159

0.16

0.13 0.57

0.48 0.12 0.10

0.51

0.29

2

1.67

Fig. 9.119. Severan Theater: curiale seats.

0.72

4

0.34 0.59

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

carved from one basalt block and occasionally decorated in their lower part (G. Mazor, pers. obs.). Praecinctio-Podium Entrance Lintels and Profiled Door Jambs with Steps Elements of a unique type of lintel of the scalarium and vomitorium entrances that pierce the praecinctio podium of the media cavea were found (A6704, A6612, Figs. 9.120, 9.121:1, 2). They frame the entrances of the vomitoria into the praecinctio and at the same time create an inner barrel vault over the steps that ascend within the praecinctio podium to the media cavea on both sides of the vomitorium entrance. On its entrance facade it has an architrave lintel with three graded fasciae (9, 7 and 5 cm) crowned with a 2 cm plain ovolo, a 2 cm cyma recta and a 5 cm torus-shaped fillet. Above it is an 8 cm deep recess that is 14 cm high, and is crowned with a 21 cm high cornice with the same sequence of profiles. In the lintel block A6704, the

575

worn and broken crowning profile starts with a 2 cm plain ovolo presumably followed by a cyma recta and a fillet. The block is 1.18 m wide and has a barrel vault, 0.68 m wide and 0.28 m high inside, as it covers the staircase mounting toward the media cavea. A similar lintel element was reconstructed over Vomitorium 15 and its adjacent staircase (see Chapter 8). In several vomitorium entrances, the lower door-jamb block with two surviving steps was found in situ, such as A6716 (Figs. 9.120, 9.121:4), while others were found scattered, such as A6492 (Fig. 9.121:3). They have three fasciae of 6 cm, 6 cm and 5 cm, the lower two separated by a step and the upper one separated by a 2 cm plain astragal, crowned with a 2 cm ovolo, a 2 cm cyma recta and a 5 cm torus-shaped fillet. All the praecinctio-podium entrance elements, i.e., lintels, door jambs and the crowning cornice of the praecinctio podium, share the same profile sequence of ovolo, cyma recta and fillet that was found on the cavea podium as well.

Fig. 9.120. Severan Theater: podium lintel (A6704) and door jamb and stair blocks (A6716).

576

Gabriel Mazor

A6704

A6612

0.65

2

1 1.18

A6492

0.25

0.20 0.85

50cm

0.31 0.06

0

0.32 0.90 0.11

0.58

3 A6716

1

1. 67

0.6

50cm

93

0.

0.9

3

4 0

Fig. 9.121. Severan Theater: (1, 2) praecinctio podium lintels; (3, 4) door-jamb blocks.

577

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Miscellaneous Limestone Elements Lintels A plain, regular lintel was used in various places in the theater; three examples were found. Lintel A6211 is a complete element, 2.44 m long and 0.69 m high, with three stepped fasciae of 8 cm, 6 cm and 4 cm

(of which the lower one is broken), crowned with a graded 3 cm ovolo and a 6 cm fillet (Fig. 9.122:1). The lintel frieze band is separated by a 7 cm high and a deep recess. The frieze has a 5 cm plain ovolo framed by a 1 cm step and its upper convex part, 0.19 m high, remained uncarved. In its general crowning and convex frieze moldings it resembles lintel profiles of

A6211

0.69

0.68

2.44

1 A6616

0.69

2.07

0.45

2 A6600

0.57

0.57

0.97

3

Fig. 9.122. Severan Theater: lintels.

578

Gabriel Mazor

Door Jambs

the postscaenium northern facade entrances, although the frieze is undecorated. It presumably belongs to one of the vomitorium entrances on the northern side. Lintel A6616 is an almost-complete lintel, 2.07 m long and 0.69 m high, with three fasciae of 0.10 m, 0.11 m and 0.10 m, separated by 2 cm plain astragals (Fig. 9.122:2). Its 0.11 m high crowning molding that starts with a 2 cm plain ovolo, is completely broken. Above it is a 0.22 m high recess, 4 cm deep. On the upper fascia of A6616 are the remains of an inscription: …I KAI [… ] OYTO Π H [….] Lintel A6600 is a right-side corner fragment of a plain regular lintel with three stepped fasciae (16, 13 and 5 cm), which was reused in a later stage as a threshold (Fig. 9.122:3). Another group of lintels presumably belongs to the scaenae frons entrances of the valvae regiae and hospitalia, and they share the same profiles (A6518, A6599, A6604, A6617, A6632, A6681, A6685). Three last members (A6604, A6617 and A6632) were found in situ over the western hospitalia, dismantled by Applebaum for the entrance of heavy equipment and never restored in place.

Four groups of door jambs were distinguished among the theater’s architectural elements. Of these, the first is clearly identified according to elements found in situ in the vomitorium entrances, while the others could not be definitely related to any specific entrance. The three in situ door jambs (A6487, A6489, A6491) have three fasciae of 0.16 m, 0.14 m, 0.12 m, the lower two separated by a 2 cm plain astragal. They are crowned with a 1 cm astragal, a 2 cm ovolo, a 3 cm cyma recta and a 2.5 cm fillet. The remaining door jambs that were not in situ, are destinguished by their profiles and measurements: Several door jambs (A6496, A6497, A6500, A6501, A6506, A6512, A6515, A6517, A6520, A6715) have three fasciae of 0.25 m, 0.20 m and 0.16 m, crowned with a 7 cm plain beveled profile and a 6 cm fillet. Four door jambs (A6219, A6502, A6504, A6514) have three fasciae, 0.48 m, 0.46 m and 0.24 m. These door jambs (A6598, A6632, A6680, A6729, A6731, A6738) are masonry blocks with a recess, and could have served as either a plain jamb, or as plain masonry.

Note 1 Apart from the western thermae, theater seats were integrated into the city wall when it was renovated in the early sixth century CE. Amphitheater seats were integrated as wall masonry in the Crusader fortress, and reused seats of a third type were found as stylobate slabs in the forum and in the western thermae, and identified as odeum seats (Bet She’an I:132–134, Fig. 9.3), their smaller diameter appropriate for a small-scale auditorium. Several other seats of the odeum type

were found scattered or incorporated into later walls in the IAHU expedition area in the northwestern end of Palladius Street, again identified by their profile. Seats of a fourth type were found by the IAHU expedition in Byzantine III to Arab-Byzantine walls along Northern Street, and may have belonged to a fourth auditorium, the Northern Theater, built into the southern slope of the mound at the northeastern end of Palladius Street (Atrash 2006:68–71, 126–138).

R eferences Akurgal E. 1978. Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey: From Prehistoric Times until the End of the Roman Empire. Istanbul. Alzinger W. 1972–1975. Grabungen in Ephesos von 1960– 69 bzw. 1970: Das Regierungsviertel. ÖJh 50:230–299. Alzinger W. 1974. Augusteische Architektur in Ephesos (ÖJh Suppl. 16) (2 vols.). Vienna. Amy R. and Gros P. 1979. La maison carée de Nîmes (Gallia Suppl. 38). Paris.

Ashmole B. and Beazley J.D. 1932. Greek Sculpture and Painting to the End of the Hellenistic Period. Cambridge. Atrash W. 2006. Entertainment Structures in the Civic Center of Nysa-Scythopolis (Beth-She’an) during the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Ph.D. diss. University of Haifa. Haifa (Hebrew). Atrash W. 2012. The Roman Theater at Tiberias. Qadmoniot 144:79–88 (Hebrew).

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Avigad N. 1954. Ancient Monuments in the Kidron Valley. Jerusalem (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 144–146). Avigad N. 1973. Excavations in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem 1971: Third Preliminary Report. IEJ 22:193–200. Avigad N. 1976. Beth Shearim: Report on the Excavations during 1953–1958 III. Jerusalem. Avigad N. 1984. Discovering Jerusalem. Oxford. Avi-Yonah M. 1950. Oriental Elements in the Art of Palestine in the Roman and Byzantine Periods. QDAP 14:49–80. Bammer A. 1978–1980. Elemente flavisch-trajanishe Architekturfassaden aus Ephesos. Öjh 52:67–90. Barattolo A. 1995. The Temple of Hadrian-Zeus at Cyzicus: A New Proposed Reconstruction for a Fresh Architectonic and Ideological Interpretation. (IstMitt 45). Tübingen. Barkay R. 2003. The Coinage of Nysa-Scythopolis (BethShean) (Corpus Nummorum Palaestinesium V). Jerusalem. Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1966. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 1: Cibyra, Selge, Hierapolis (Studi di architettura antica I). Rome. Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1969. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 2: Città di Pisidia, Licia e Caria (Studi di architettura antica II). Rome. Bernardi Ferraro D. de. 1970. Teatri classici in Asia Minor 3: Città della Troade alla Pamfilia (Studi di architettura antica IV). Rome. Bianchi Bandinelli R. 1966. The Buried City: Excavations at Leptis Magna. London. Bingöl O. 1980. Das ionische Normalkapitell in hellenistischer und römischer Zeit in Kleinasien (IstMitt 20). Tübingen. Blanckenhagen P.H. von. 1940. Flavische Architektur und ihre Dekoration untersucht am Nervaforum. Berlin. Boardman J., Dörig J., Fuchs W. and Hirmer M. 1966. The Art and Architecture of Ancient Greece. London. Browning I. 1979. Palmyra. London. Browning I. 1982. Jerash and the Decapolis. London. Butler H.C. 1903. Architecture and Other Arts. New York. Butler H.C. 1914–1915. Ancient Architecture in Syria II, A: Southern Syria. Leiden. Butler H.C. 1919. Syria II, A: Architecture; Southern Syria (2 vols.). Princeton. Butler H.C. 1925. The Temple of Artemis (Sardis II, 1). Leiden. Carratelli G.P. 1985. Le due dediche della stoà orientale. In L. Lachenal ed. Studi su Iasos di Caria: Venticinque anni di scavi delle missione archeologica italiana (Bollettino d’arte Suppl. 31–32). Rome. Pp. 151–154. Charbonneaux R., Matin R. and Villard F. 1973. Hellenistic Art (330–50 BC). London. Crowfoot J.W. and Hamilton R.W. 1929. The Discovery of a Synagogue at Jerash. PEFQSt 62:211–219. Crowfoot J.W., Kenyon K.M. and Sukenik E.L. 1942. Samaria-Sebaste I: The Buildings. London. Dagan Y., Fischer M.L. and Tsafrir Y. 1985. An Inscribed Lintel from Bet Guvrin. IEJ 35:28–34. Dauphin C.M. 1976. A New Method of Studying Early Byzantine Mosaic Pavements: Coding and a Computer

579

Cluster Analysis with Special Reference to the Levant . Levant 8:113–149. Dauphin C.M. 1978. Symbolic or Decorative? The Inhabited Scroll as a Means of Studying Some Early Byzantine Mentalities. Byzantion 48:10–34. Detweiler A.H. 1938. Triumphal Arch. In C.H. Kraeling ed. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Pp. 73–84. Di Segni L. 1997. A Dated Inscription from Beth Shean and the Cult of Dionysos Ktistes in Roman Scythopolis. SCI 16:139–161 Dunand M. 1934. Le Musée de Soueïda: Inscriptions et monuments figurés. Mission archéologique au Djebel Druze (Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 20). Paris. Durm J. 1910. Die Baukunst der Griechen (Handbuch der Architektur 2, 1). Leipzig. Dussaud R. 1922. Le temple de Jupiter Damascénien et ses transformations aux époques chrétienne et musulmane. Syria 3:219–250. Dussaud R. 1924. Fragments d’architrave provenant de Sidon (Musée du Louvre). In Mélanges offerts à M. Gustave Schlumberger à l’occasion du quatre-vingtième anniversaire de sa naissance. Paris. Ebert A. 1922. Kymation. PWRE XI:2462–2474. Fischer M.L. 1979. The Development of the Corinthian Capital in Palestine from Its Beginning until the Constantinian Period. Ph.D. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; English summary, pp. I–XXXVIII). Fischer M.L. 1990. Das korinthische Kapitell im Alten Israel in der hellenistichen und römischen Periode: Studien zur Geschichte der Baudekoration im Nahen Osten. Mainz am Rhein. Fischer M.L. 1998. Marble Studies: Roman Palestine and the Marble Trade (Xenia 40). Konstanz. Fischer M.L., Ovadiah A. and Roll I. 1984. The Roman Temple at Kedesh, Upper Galilee: A Preliminary Study. Tel Aviv 11:146–172. Florescu F.B. 1965. Das Seigesdenkmal von Adamklissi, Tropaeum Traiani. Bonn–Bucharest. Foerster G. 1995. Masada V: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965, Final Reports; Art and Architecture. Jerusalem. Foerster G. 1997. Peopled Scrolls from the Theatre of Beth Shean. A Review of A. Ovadiah and Y. Turnheim, “Peopled” Scrolls in Roman Architectural Decoration in Israel. The Roman Theatre at Beth Shean/Scythopolis. JRA 10:557–560. Foerster G. and Tsafrir Y. 1990. A Statue of Dionysos as a Youth Recently Discovered at Bet-Shean. Qadmoniot 89– 90:52–54 (Hebrew). Freyberger K.S. 1988. Zur Datierung des Theaters in Bosra. DaM 3:17–26. Freyberger K.S. 1989. Untersuchungen zur Baugeschichte des Jupiter-Heiligtums in Damaskus. DaM 4:61–86. Freyberger K.S. 1990. Stadtrömische Kapitelle aus der Zeit von Domitian bis Alexander Severus: Zur Arbeitsweise und Organisation städtrömischer Werkstatten der Kaiserzeit. Mainz am Rhein.

580

Gabriel Mazor

Freyberger K.S. 1993. Der peripteraltemple in Qanawat: Ein arbeitsbericht. DaM 7:63–79. Frézouls E. 1982. Aspects de l’histoire architecturale du théâtre romain. ANRW II, 12, 1:343–441. Garstang J. 1924. Askalan. PEFQst 57:24–35. Glueck N. 1965. Deities and Dolphins: The Story of the Nabataeans. New York. Gogräfe R. 1993. Die Datierung des Tempels von Isriye. DaM 7:45–61. Gough M. 1952. Anazarbus. Anatolian Studies 2:85–150. Gruben G. 1976. Die Tempel der griechen. Munich. Hachlili R. 1988. Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Land of Israel. Leiden. Heberdey R., Niemann G. and Wilberg W. 1912. Das Theater in Ephesos (Forschungen in Ephesos 2). Vienna. Heilmeyer W.-D. 1970. Korinthische Normalkapitelle (MDAIR suppl. 16). Heidelberg. Heilmeyer W.-D. 1973. Zur kunstgeschichtlichen Stellung der Kapitelle. In F. Rakob and W.-D. Heilmeyer. Der Rundtempel am Tiber in Rom. Mainz am Rhein. Pp. 19–31. Hirschland N. 1967. The Head Capitals of Sardis. PBSR 35:12–22. Hörmann H. 1929. Das Nymphäum zu Aspendos. JDAI 44:263–274. Hueber F. and Strocka V.M. 1975. Die Bibliothek des Celsus. Eine Prachtfassade in Ephesos und das problem ihrer wiederaufrichtung. Antike Welt 6:3–14. Hülsen J. 1919. Das Nymphaeum (Milet: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre 1899 I, 5). Berlin. Humann C., Kohte J. and Watzinger C. 1904. Magnesia am Maeander: Bericht über die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen der Jahre 1891–1893. Berlin. Inan J. 1990. Eine hellenistische Tänzerin aus Perge. In Akten des XIII. internationalen Kongresses für klassische Archäologie, Berlin 1988. Mainz am Rhein. Pp. 347–348. Josephus Ant. Josephus Flavius. Jewish Antiquities. H.St.J. Thackerey, R. Marcus and L.H. Feldman eds. and transls. (Loeb Classical Library I–XX). London 1930–1965. Kähler H. 1939. Die römischen Kapitelle des Rheingebietes. Berlin. Karagöz S., Radt W. and Rheidt K. 1986. Ein römischer Grabbau auf dem Niyazitepe bei Pergamon. IstMitt 36:99– 160. Kautzsch R. 1936. Kapitellstudien: Beiträge zu einer Geschichte des spätantiken Kapitells im Osten vom vierten bis ins siebente Jahrhundert. Berlin. Keil J. and Wilhelm A. 1931. Denkmäler aus dem rauhen Kilikien (Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua 3). Manchester. Knackfuss H. 1924. Der Südmarkt und die benachbarten Bauanlagen (Milet: Ergebnisse und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre 1899 I, 7). Berlin. Koenigs W. and Radt W. 1979. Ein kaiserzeitlicher Rundbau in Pergamon. IstMitt 29:317–354. Kohl H. and Watzinger C. 1916. Antike Synagogen in Galilaea. Leipzig. Kon M. 1947. The Tombs of the Kings. Tel Aviv (Hebrew).

Koutsoukou A. 1997. The Great Temple of Amman: The Excavations (ACOR Occasional Papers 3). Amman. Kraeling C.H. ed. 1938. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Kramer J. 1983. Zu einigen Architekturteilen des Grabtempels westlich von Side. BJ 183:145–166. Kraus T. 1953. Pacis: ein Beitrag zur entwicklungsgeschichte der augusteischen ornamentik. Berlin. Krauss F. 1974. Milet und Didyma. Ein Vergleich der Sockelprofilierung an der westlichen Paradoswand des Theaters und den Cellawänden des Appolontempels. In Mélanges Mansel 3. Ankara. Pp. 185–192. Krencker D. and Zschietzschmann W. 1938. Römische Tempel in Syrien. Berlin. Lambrechts P., Strubbe J., Waelkens M. and Stoops G. 1972. Les fouilles de Pessinonte. Le temple. L’Antiquité Classique 41:156–173. Lanckoronski K. ed.1892. Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens II: Pisidiens. Prag–Vienna–Leipzig. Lauffray J. 1944–1945. Forums et monuments de Béryte. BMB 7:13–80. Leon C.F. 1971. Die Bauornamentik des Trajansforums und ihre Stellung in der früh-und mittelkaiserzeitlischem Architekturdekoration Roms. Vienna. Levi D. 1947. Antioch Mosaic Pavements I–II. Princeton. Lyttelton M. 1974. Baroque Architecture in Classical Antiquity. London. Magen Y. 2005. Flavia Neapolis, Shechem in the Roman Period (JSP 11). Jerusalem. Mansel A.M. 1962. Side Tiyatrosu. Belleten 26:45–56. Mansel A.M. 1975. Die Nymphaeen von Perge. IstMitt 25:368–372. Ma‘oz U.Z. 1990. The Praetorium at Musmiye, Again. DOP 44:42–46. Marie Aline de Sion, Soeur. 1955. La forteresse Antonia à Jérusalem et la question du Prétoire. Jerusalem. Mazor G. 1987–1988. The Beth She’an Project. City Center of Ancient Beth She’an—South. ESI 6:10–24. Mazor G. 2004. Free Standing City Gates in the Eastern Provinces during the Roman Imperial Period. Ph.D. diss. Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew; English summary pp. I–II). Mazor G. and Atrash W. In Preparation. Nysa-Scythopolis: The Forum and Forum Temples (IAA Reports). Jerusalem. Mazor G. and Bar-Nathan R. 1994. Scythopolis––Capital of Palaestina Secunda. Qadmoniot 107–108:117–137 (Hebrew). Mazor G. and Bar-Nathan R. 1998. The Bet Shean Excavation Project—1992–1994 Antiquities Authority Expedition. ESI 17:1–36. Mendel G. 1912–1914. Musées impériaux ottomans: Catalogue des sculptures grecques, romaines et byzantines (3 vols.). Constantinople. Mercklin E. von 1962. Antike Figuralkapitelle. Berlin. Michalowski K. 1970. Alexandria. Vienna. Mitchell S. 1995. Cremna in Pisdia: An Ancient City in Peace and in War. London.

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Mitchell S. and Waelkens M. 1988. Cremna and Sagalassus. AnatSt 38:53–65. Naumann R. and Kantar S. 1950. Die Agora von Smyrna. In Kleinasien und Byzanz (IstForsch 17). Berlin. Pp. 64–114. Ovadiah A. 1980. Geometric and Floral Patterns in Ancient Mosaics: A Study of Their Origin in the Mosaics from the Classical Period to the Age of Augustus. Rome. Ovadiah A. and Turnheim Y. 1994. “Peopled” Scrolls in Roman Architectural Decoration in Israel: The Roman Theatre at Beth Shean, Scythopolis (Rivista di archeologia, Suppl. 12). Rome. Özturk A. 2009. Die Architektur der scaenae frons des Theaters in Perge (Denkmäler Antiker Architektur XX). Berlin–New York. Pagello E. 1985. Il foro romano. Considerazioni preliminari. In L. de Lachenal ed. Studi su Iasos di Caria: Venticinque anni di scavi della missione archeologica italiana (Bollettino d’arte, Suppl. 31–32). Rome. Pp.137–150. Parapetti R. 1989. Scavi e restauri italiani nel Sanctuario di Artemide 1984–1987. Syria 66:1–39. Pausanias. Guide to Greece. P. Levi transl. London. 1971. Peleg-Barkat O. 2007. The Herodian Architectural Decoration in Light of the Finds from the Temple Mount Excavations. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem. Peleg-Barkat O. 2013. The Architectural Decoration from the Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho and Cypros. In R. Bar-Nathan and J. Gärtner eds. Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho, Final Reports of the 1973– 1987 Excavations V: The Finds from Jericho and Cypros. Jerusalem. Pp. 235–269. Peleg-Barkat O. Forthcoming. In L. Weksler-Bdolah. Western Wall Plaza Excavations I: The Eastern Cardo (IAA Reports). Jerusalem. Pergamon 1908. Altertümer von Pergamon 1. Berlin. Pergamon 1912–1937. Altertümer von Pergamon 2. Berlin. Petrie F. 1930. Decorative Patterns of the Ancient World. London. Picard G.C. Problèmes de l’art sévérien. In J. Bibauw ed. Hommages à Marcel Renard (Collection Latomus 103). Brussels. Pp. 103–134. Pollitt J.J. 1974. The Ancient View of Greek Art: Criticism, History and Terminology. New Haven. Pritchard J.B. 1958. The Excavation at Herodian Jericho 1951 Conducted by the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem (AASOR XXXII–XXXIII). New Haven. Puchstein I. 1887. Das ionische capitell. Berlin. Radt W. 1988. Pergamon: Geschichte und Bauten, Funde und Erforschung einer antiken Metropole. Cologne. Reisner G.A., Fisher C.S. and Lyon D.G. 1924. Harvard Excavations at Samaria 1908–1910 (2 vols.). Cambridge, Mass. Riegl A. 1893. Stilfragen: Grundlegungen zu einer Geschichte der Ornamentik. Berlin. Robert C. 1890. Die antiken Sarkophag-reliefs: Mythologische Cyklen II. Berlin.

581

Robertson D.M. 1969. Greek and Roman Architecture (2nd ed.). Cambridge. Robinson D.S. 1924. A Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Pisdian Antioch and at Sizma. AJA 28:435–444. Rohmann J. 1995. Einige Bemerkungen zum Ursprung des “feingezahnten Akanthus”. IstMitt 45:109–121. Ronczewski K. 1923. Variantes des chapiteaux romains. Acta Universitatis Latviensis 8:115–171. Rumscheid F. 1994. Untersuchungen zur kleinasiatischen Bauornamentik des hellenismus (Beitrag zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 14). Mainz. Schefold K. 1976. Bilderbücher als Vorlagen römischer Sarkophage. MEFRA 88:759–814. Schlumberger D. 1933. Les formes anciennes du chapiteau corinthien en Syrie, en Palestine et en Arabia. Syria 14:283–317. Segal A. 1997. From Function to Monument: Urban Landscapes of Roman Palestine, Syria and Provincia Arabia. Oxford. Seyrig H., Amy R. and Will E. 1975. Le temple de Bêl à Palmyre (Bibliothèque archéologique et historique LXXXIII) (2 vols). Paris. Shoe Merritt L.T. 1965. Etruscan and Republican Roman Mouldings (MAAR 28). Rome. Shoe Meritt L.T. 1969. The Geographical Distribution of Greek and Roman Ionic Bases. Hesperia 38:186–204. Squarciapino M.F. 1943. La scuola di Afrodisia (Studi e materiali del Museo dell’ Impero Romano 3). Rome. Stepansky Y. 1994. Rosh Pina Map Survey 1992. ESI 14:13– 15. Stern E. 1991. Tel Dor, 1988–1989: Preliminary Report. IEJ 41:46–61. Strocka V.M. 1978. Die frühesten Girlandensarkophge: Zur Kontinuität der Reliefsarkophage in Kleinasien während des Hellenismus und der frühen Kaiserzeit. In S. Sahin, E. Schwertheim and J. Wagner eds. Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens: Festschrift für Friedrich Karl Dörner zum 65. Geburtstag am 28. Februar 1976 (Études préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’empire romain 66, 2). Leiden. Pp. 882–913. Strocka V.M. 1981. Das Markttor von Milet (Winckelmannsprogramm der archäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 128). Berlin. Strocka V.M. 1988. Wechselwirkungen der stadtrömischen und kleinasiatischen Architektur unter Trajan und Hadrian. IstMitt 38:291–307. Strong D. 1953. Late Hadrianic Architectural Ornaments. PBSR 21:118–151. Strong D. 1963. Some Observations on Early Roman Corinthian. JRS 53:73–84. Strong D. and Ward-Perkins J.B. 1962. The Temple of Castor in the Forum Romanum. PBSR 30:1–30. Thür H. 1989. Das Hadrianstor in Ephesos (Forschungen in Ephesos 11.1). Vienna. Toynbee J.M.C. and Ward-Perkins J.B. 1950. Peopled Scrolls: a Hellenistic Motif in Imperial Art. PBSR 18:1–43.

582

Gabriel Mazor

Tsafrir Y. and Foerster G. 1994. The Hebrew University Excavations at Beth-Shean 1980–1994. Qadmoniot 107– 108: 93–116. Tsafrir Y. and Foerster G. 1997. Urbanism at Scythopolis-Bet Shean in the Fourth to Seventh Centuries. DOP 51:85–146. Turnheim Y. 1987. Architectural Decoration in Northern Eretz-Israel in the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Ph.D. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; English summary pp. 1–14). Turnheim Y. 1994. Acanthus Scrolls “Peopled” with Flowers: A Classical Ornament in the Architectural Decoration of Eretz Israel in the Roman and Early Byzantine Periods. Rivista di Archeologia 18:118–125. Turnheim Y. 1996. Formation and Transformation of the Entablature in Northern Eretz Israel and the Golan in the Roman and Byzantine Periods. ZDPV 112:122–138. Turnheim Y. and Ovadiah O. 1996. Miscellaneous Ornamented Architectural Elements in Roman Caesarea. In A. Raban and K.G. Holum eds. Caesarea Maritima: A Retrospective after Two Millennia (Documenta et monumenta Orientis antiqui XXI). Leiden–New York– Cologne. Pp. 262–304. Vandeput L. 1997. The Architectural Decoration in Roman Asia Minor: A Case Study (Studies in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology I). Leuven. Vitruvius Architecture: Vitruvius. The Ten Books on Architecture. M.H. Morgan transl. New York 1960. Waelkens M. 1986. The Imperial Sanctuary at Pessinus: Archaeological, Epigraphical and Numismatical Evidence for its Date and Identification. Epigraphica Anatolica 7:37–73. Waelkens M. 1987. Notes d’architecture sur l’agora et le porticue de Tibère à Aphrodisias de Carie. In Colloque du Centre de recherches archéologiques de l’Université de Lille III, 13 novembre 1985. Paris. Pp. 123–134. Waelkens M. and Mitchell S. 1988. Sagalassus 1987 (VI. Arastirma sonuclari Toplantisi, Ankara 23–27 Mayis 1988). Ankara. Pp. 201–217. Ward-Perkins J.B. 1948. Severan Art and Architecture at Lepcis Magna. JRS 38:59–80. Ward-Perkins J.B. 1951. The Art of the Severan Age in the Light of Tripolitanian Discoveries. Proceedings of the British Academy 37:269–304.

Ward-Perkins J.B. 1980. Nicomedia and the Marble Trade. PBSR 48:23–69. Ward-Perkins J.B. 1981. Roman Imperial Architecture. London. Watzinger C. 1935. Denkmäler Palästinas: Eine Einführung in die Archäologie des Heiligen Landes II: Von der Herrschaft der Assyrer bis zur arabischen Eroberung. Leipzig. Weber T. and Hoffmann A. 1990. Gadara of the Decapolis: Preliminary Report of the 1989 Season at Umm Qeis. ADAJ 34:321–342. Wegner M. 1957. Ornamente kaiserzeitlicher Bauten Roms: Soffitten (Münstersche Forschungen 10). Cologne–Graz. Wegner M. 1978–1980. Soffitten von Ephesos und Asia Minor. Öjh 52:91–107. Wegner M. 1989. Bauschmuk von Side. In N. Basgelen and M. Lugal eds. Festschrift für Jale Inan (Armagan kitaplan dizisi 1). Istanbul. Pp. 161–167. Weickert C. 1913. Das lesbische Kymation: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der antiken Ornamentik. Leipzig. Weigand E. 1914. Baalbek und Rom, die römische Reichskunst in ihrer Entwicklung und Differenzierung. JDAI 29:37–91. Weigand E. 1924–1925. Baalbek. Datierung und kunstgeschichtliche Stellung seiner Bauten. Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 2:77–99, 165–196. Weigand E. 1932. Die Kunstgeschichtliche Stellung der palmyrenischen Architektur. In T. Wiegand ed. Palmyra: Ergebnisse der Expeditionen von 1902 und 1917. Berlin. Pp. 151–165. Welles C.B. 1938. The Inscriptions. In C.H. Kraeling ed. Gerasa: City of the Decapolis. New Haven. Pp. 353–494. Wiegand T. 1921–1925. Baalbek: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Unterschungen in den Jahren 1898– 1905 I–III. Berlin–Leipzig. Wilberg W., Theuer M., Eichler F. and Keil J. 1953. Forschungen in Ephesos V, 1: Die Bibliothek. Vienna. Will E. and Larché F. 1991. Iraq al Amir—Le château du tobiade Hyrcan. Paris. Yadin Y. 1966. Masada: Herod’s Fortress and the Zealots’ Last Stand. New York. Yegül F.K. 1986. The Bath-Gymnasium Complex at Sardis (Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Report 3). Cambridge Mass.

583

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Appendix 9.1: List of the Architectural Elements

This list is arranged in sequence according to element numbers that were assigned over the years by Applebaum, the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University (IAHU), and the IAA. The elements were found in the theater and in other complexes in the civic center during the various excavations that have taken place at the site (‘Excavated Location’). When the specific monument in which the element was found is known, it is noted; if not, only the name of the institute that conducted the excavations is listed. In a few cases, elements were located in a small

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

X

Pedestal

Marble

Complete

01

Frieze animal head

Marble

Broken

03

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

Diameter (m)

museum that existed at the site, since dismantled, and the actual findspots of these elements are unknown. They probably originated in excavations of Applebaum or Tzori (see Chapter 3); these are labeled ‘Museum’. Most of the elements in this list can be attributed to one of the subcomplexes or units in the theater (‘Restoration Location’); however, in a few cases, elements restored in Palladius Street are also included because they originated in the theater. When the specific unit to which they belong is uncertain, they are assigned in general to ‘the theater’.

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

0.60

0.90

0.90

0.51

1.40

1.18

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.21

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.82:7

IAHU

Postscaenium

9.14:2

09

Architrave

Marble

Complete

0.14

0.30

0.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.82:2

024

Architrave

Marble

Complete

0.14

0.29

0.44

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.82:3

1

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.54

0.27

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:1

2

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.55

0.29

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:2

3

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.54

0.37

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:3

4

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.61

0.32

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:4

5

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.59

0.74

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:5

6

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.59

0.65

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:6

7

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.53

0.35

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:7

8

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.54

0.34

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:8

9

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.52

0.29

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:9

10

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.52

0.23

Theater

Southern theater

9.2:10

584

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

11

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.67/0.70

12

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.38

13

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

14

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.44

0.58

15

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.74

0.63

16

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

17

Column

Limestone

Broken

18

Base

Limestone

Broken

19

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.60/0.88

0.40

0.88

0.88

20

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.67/0.77

0.41

0.77

0.77

Theater

Porticus

21

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.75/1.09

0.60

Theater

Porticus

22

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.84

0.66

Theater

Porticus

25

Cornice

Marble

Complete

26

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47/0.49

1.80

27

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.89

0.59

28

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.89

0.57

29

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Complete

0.47

0.66

30

Column

Limestone

Broken

32

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

33

Pilaster capital

Limestone

Complete

34

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

35

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

1.19

Theater

Porticus

0.69

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

0.87

Width (m)

0.95

0.56

Length (m)

0.60

0.74

0.50

0.59

0.84

0.64

1.20 1.20

0.48

1.82

IAHU

Scaenae frons

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1.20

Theater

Porticus

1.27

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Southern theater

Theater

Porticus

0.41

0.64

0.37

0.77

Theater

Porticus

0.50

0.88

0.73

0.78

Theater

Porticus

0.25

0.73

0.44

0.37

0.28

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

36

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.60

0.60

Theater

Porticus

37

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.47

0.58

0.64

Theater

Porticus

38

Column

Marble

Broken

0.24/0.26

0.84

Theater

Scaenae frons

39

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.54

0.73

Theater

Porticus

40

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51/0.53

0.80

Theater

Porticus

41

Column

Granite

Broken

0.51

0.84

Theater

Scaenae frons

42

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.46

Theater

Porticus

43

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

Theater

Porticus

44

Column

Marble

Broken

0.52/0.45

0.47

Theater

Scaenae frons

45

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.46/0.51

1.09

Theater

Porticus

46

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53/0.54

0.93

Theater

Porticus

47

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.47/0.49

0.72

Theater

Porticus

48

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.70

Theater

Porticus

49

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.68

Theater

Porticus

50

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.27

Theater

Porticus

0.80

Theater

Porticus

51

Column

Limestone

Broken

53

Archivolt

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.57 0.65

1.20

Theater

Aditus maximus

55

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.85

0.85

Theater

Porticus

Fig. No.

9.90

585

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

58

Pedestal

Limestone

59

Pedestal

Limestone

60

Capital

Limestone

Complete

97

Capital

Marble

Complete

100

Cornice

Marble

Broken

Diameter (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Broken

Theater

Porticus

Complete

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.39:4

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.98:1

0.44

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

0.57 0.21

0.56

0.84

Fig. No.

101

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.26

0.52

0.68

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.98:2

102

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.46

0.44

0.117

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.83:1

103

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.38

0.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.83:1 9.100:4

132

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.16

0.19

0.28

IAHU

Scaenae frons

175

Base

Softlimestone

Broken

0.38

0.22

0.43

Theater

Southern theater

207

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.53

0.98

1.57

Palladius

Postscaenium

9.12:2

208

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.82

0.91

Palladius

Postscaenium

9.11:2

215

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.48

0.80

Palladius

Scaenae frons

216

Column

Granite

Broken

0.52

1.82

Palladius

Scaenae frons

231

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.24

0.37

0.11

Palladius

Scaenae frons

9.100:2

232

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.32

0.65

0.60

Palladius

Scaenae frons

9.100:3

241

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.35

0.20

0.46

Palladius

Porticus

242

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.22

0.07

0.24

Palladius

Scaenae frons

243

Capital

Marble

Broken

Palladius

Scaenae frons

244

Base

Marble

Broken

0.14

Palladius

Scaenae frons

246

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.35

Palladius

Porticus

306

Column

Granite

Broken

0.56

1.73

IAHU

Scaenae frons

415

Column

Granite

Complete

0.61/0.67

4.76

IAHU

Scaenae frons

450

Column

Granite

Complete

0.55/0.59

4.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

460

Column

Granite

Complete

0.60/0.67

4.70

IAHU

Scaenae frons

476

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.53

0.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

478

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.44

0.40

IAHU

Scaenae frons

501

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44/0.46

0.92

IAHU

Scaenae frons

574

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.36

0.53

IAHU

Scaenae frons

575

Column

Marble

Complete

0.42

0.62

IAHU

Scaenae frons

584

Column

Granite

Broken

0.59

1.39

IAHU

Scaenae frons

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Theater

Southern theater

9.4:4

0.54 0.32 0.35

9.26:1

9.40:2

606

Column

Granite

Broken

0.50

0.74

620

Capital Ionic

Softlimestone

Broken

0.51

0.47

631

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.32

0.42

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.40:4

632

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.36

0.51

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.40:5

636

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.37

0.42

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.39:3

665

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.37

0.51

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.40:1

678

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.29

0.23

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.39:1

741

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.68

IAHU

Scaenae frons

801

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.72

1.24

IAHU

Postscaenium

9.13:3

822

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.83

1.16

IAHU

Postscaenium

9.13:1

0.52

0.58

586

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

976

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.40

1021

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47

1067

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

1126

Column

Granite

Broken

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

0.52

IAHU

Scaenae frons

9.40:3

0.82

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1128

Column

Granite

Complete

0.56/0.65

1159

Column

Granite

Broken

1216

Column

Granite

Broken

1217

Column

Granite

1218

Column

1219

Column

1221 1222

0.50

Width (m)

0.80

Length (m)

1.15

IAHU

Postscaenium

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.13:2

4.70

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.49

1.16

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.56

2.16

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Broken

0.49

0.35

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Granite

Broken

0.47

1.45

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Granite

Broken

0.52/0.59

1.47

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Column

Granite

Broken

0.48/0.48

2.88

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Column

Granite

Broken

0.58/0.60

3.77

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1223

Column

Granite

Broken

0.49/0.52

2.15

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1224

Column

Granite

Broken

0.52/0.54

1.60

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1225

Column

Granite

Broken

0.61/0.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1226

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44

0.73

IAHU

Scaenae frons

1228

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47

2.84

Museum

Scaenae frons

1229

Column

Granite

Broken

0.41/0.42

1.80

Museum

Scaenae frons

1231

Column

Granite

Broken

0.59

1.90

Museum

Scaenae frons

1232

Column

Granite

Broken

0.58

2.68

Museum

Scaenae frons

1233

Column

Granite

Complete

0.52/0.58

4.14

Museum

Scaenae frons

1507

Column

Granite

Broken

0.73

4.00

IAHU

Scaenae frons

5590

Column

Granite

Broken

0.50

1.41

IAHU

Scaenae frons

6001

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.94

0.73

1.88

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.41

6002

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.72

1.82

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.47

6003

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.93

0.74

1.61

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.68

6004+ 6049

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.76

1.82

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.71

6005

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.90

0.73

1.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.49

6006

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.85

1.77

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.78

6007+ 6010

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.90

0.34

2.57

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.69

6011

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.95

0.72

2.14

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.55

6012

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.94

0.72

1.78

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.56

6013

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.71

2.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.51

6014+ 6047

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.73

2.36

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.45

6015

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.94

0.68

2.25

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.54

6016

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.94

0.70

1.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.65

587

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

6017

Architravefrieze

Marble

6018

Architravefrieze

6019

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

Complete

0.92

0.72

1.54

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.42

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.70

1.35

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.81:4

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.79

0.75

2.52

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.67

6020+ 6039

Frieze

Marble

Complete

0.73

0.60

2.15

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.61

6021+ 6267

Frieze

Marble

Complete

0.34

0.65

2.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.75

6022

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.96

0.67

2.32

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.74

6023

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.91

0.69

1.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.76

6024

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.92

0.67

1.29/0.39

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.70

6025+ 6058

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.93

0.74

2.44

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.73

6026

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.93

0.70

1.52

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.50

6027

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.74

1.87

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.79

6028

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.69

3.75

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.64

6029+ 6042

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.92

0.67

3.33

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.46

6030

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.69

2.17

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.44

6031

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.92

0.70

2.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.43

6032

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.93

0.66

2.28

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.52

6033

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.91

0.73

2.33

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.66

6034

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.87

0.54

2.77

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.72

6035

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.94

0.71

2.35

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.63

6036

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.93

0.77

2.13

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.57

6037

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.91

0.67

1.34

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.81:3

6038

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.93

0.62

2.06

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.53

6039

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.73

0.60

2.15

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.61

6040

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.74

0.68

1.54

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.81:2

6041

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.91

0.70

1.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.80

6042

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.90

0.73

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

588

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

6043+ 110107

Architravefrieze

Marble

6044+ 6055+ 6059+ 514+79

Architravefrieze slab

6045

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

Complete

0.23

0.62

1.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.62

Marble

Broken

1.12

0.65

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.58:4

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

1.14

0.36

1.24

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.58:2

6046

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

0.55

0.39

1.01

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.48

6048

Architravefrieze

Marble

Complete

0.98

0.74

1.26

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.81:1

6050

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.58

0.32

0.72

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.60:4

6051+ 6054

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

0.72

0.18

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.58:3

6052

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.32

0.24

0.97

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.60:2

6053

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.69

0.32

0.127

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.59:2

6056

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.26

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.59:3

6057

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.22

0.20

0.47

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.60:1

6060

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

0.84

1.20

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.96:1

6061+ 6066

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.93

2.25

Theater

Scaenae frons

6062+ 6064

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.42

0.82

2.09

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.95:2

6063+ 6089

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.34

0.97

1.34

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.96:2

6065

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.44

0.87

0.29

Theater

Scaenae frons

6068

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.44

0.70

0.81

Theater

Scaenae frons

6069

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

0.75

1.44

Theater

Scaenae frons

6071+ 6088

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.37

0.57

3.05

Theater

Scaenae frons

6072+ 6092

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.41

0.80

2.40

Theater

Scaenae frons

6073+ 6118

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.41

0.94

1.42

Theater

Scaenae frons

6074

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

0.94

0.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.95:1

6075

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.41

0.78

1.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.93:1

6077

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.42

0.96

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.97:2 9.95:3

6078

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.76

1.28

Theater

Scaenae frons

6079+ 6153

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.99

2.34

Theater

Scaenae frons

6080

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.41

0.94

1.65

Theater

Scaenae frons

6081

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.72

1.34

Theater

Scaenae frons

6082

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.42

0.96

1.21

Theater

Scaenae frons

6083+ 6076

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.82/0.78

1.95

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.97:1

6085+ 6084

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.42

0.92

2.95

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.92:2, 3

589

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

6086+ 6067

Cornice

Marble

Broken

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

0.41

1.75

2.37

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.94:1 9.92:1

6087

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.45

0.87

0.97

Theater

Scaenae frons

6089

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.32

0.95

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

6090

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.44

0.63

1.26

Theater

Scaenae frons

6091

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.35

0.99

0.55

Theater

Scaenae frons

6093+ 6109

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

0.88

1.84

Theater

Scaenae frons

6094

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.84

0.66

0.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

6095+ 6104

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.60

1.13

1.12

Theater

Scaenae frons

6096

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.51

0.87

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

6097

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.53

0.85

0.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

6098

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.25

0.58

0.86

Theater

Scaenae frons

6100

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.86

1.20

1.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

6101

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.84

1.77

1.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

6102

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.85

1.30

1.20

Theater

Scaenae frons

6103+ 6106+ 6108+ 6099+ 6143

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.80

1.80

1.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.65

0.93

1.00

Theater

Scaenae frons

6104

Cornice

Marble

Broken

6105

Cornice

Marble

Broken

6107

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.84

0.83

1.48

Theater

Scaenae frons

6110

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.46

1.12

1.27

Theater

Scaenae frons

6111

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.42

1.17

1.45

Theater

Scaenae frons

6113+ 6154

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.42

1.34

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

6114+ 6070+ 6112

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.43

1.17

0.73

Theater

Scaenae frons

6115

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.41

0.88

0.73

Theater

Scaenae frons

6117+ 6148+ 6150

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.26

0.59 0.65 0.52

2.33

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.93:2

9.88 9.89

9.91:3

9.91:1

6119

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

1.00

1.05

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.96:3

6120

Pedestal

Marble

Complete

0.59

0.89

0.90

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.17:1

6121

Pedestal

Marble

Complete

0.61

0.91

6122

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.59

6123+ 6131

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.60

6124

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

6125+ 6126

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.93

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.17:2

0.52

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.18:1

0.48

0.92

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.18:2

0.63

0.64

0.67

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.18:3

0.60

0.90

0.90

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.19:1

6127

Pedestal

Marble

Complete

0.62

0.89

0.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.19:2

6128

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.64

0.66

0.86

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.20:1

6129

Pedestal

Marble

Complete

0.62

0.87

0.92

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.20:2

6130

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.62

0.92

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.20:3

590

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

6132

Cornice

Marble

Broken

6133

Base

Basalt

6135

Column drum

6137

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.75

0.32

0.98

Theater

Scaenae frons

Complete

0.70/0.97

0.57

Theater

?

Limestone

Complete

0.86

0.92

Theater

Porticus

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.70

1.06

Theater

Porticus

6138

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.34

Theater

Porticus

6139

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

1.00

0.54

Theater

Southern theater

6140

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.37

0.39

0.65

Theater

Porticus

6141

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.65

0.36

Theater

Scaenae frons

6142

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.84

1.24

1.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

6144+ 6473

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.86

0.82

1.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6145

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.43

0.34

0.61

Theater

Scaenae frons

6146

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.35

0.60

0.57

Theater

Scaenae frons

6147

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.25

0.41

0.37

Theater

Scaenae frons

6149

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.59

0.26

1.47

Theater

Scaenae frons

Fig. No.

6151

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.42

0.92

1.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

6152

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.21

0.128

0.35

Theater

Scaenae frons

6155

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.57

0.73

Theater

Cavea

9.119:3 9.119:2

6156

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.48

0.51

1.67

Theater

Cavea

6157

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

0.45

0.90

0.90

Theater

Cavea

6158

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.58

0.55

1.02

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.82:1

6159

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.57

0.59

0.72

Theater

Cavea

9.119:4

6160

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.51

0.65

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.31:3

6161

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.50

0.67

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.33:1

6162

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.63

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.30:3

6163

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.53

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.32:1

6164

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.53

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.34:3

6165

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.33:3

6166

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.51

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.33:2

6167

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.50

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.34:2

6168

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.50

0.67

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.29:2

6169

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.54

0.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.30:1

6170

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.29:3

6171

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.48

0.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.32:2

6172

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.50

0.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.30:2

6173

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.48

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.34:4

6174

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.41

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.35:1

6175

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.42

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.35:2

6176

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.32:3

6177

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.34:5

6179+ 6217

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.76

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

591

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

6180

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.76

6181

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.61

6182+ 6623

Capital

Marble

Broken

6183

Capital

Marble

6184

Capital

6185

Capital

6186 6187+ 6192

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.54

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.81

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.70

1.09

Theater

Scaenae frons

Complete

0.73

1.07

Theater

Scaenae frons

Marble

Complete

0.60

0.81

Theater

Scaenae frons

Marble

Complete

0.60

0.81

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.28:2

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.62

0.71

Theater

Porticus

9.107:3

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

6188

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.45

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

6189

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.34

Theater

Scaenae frons

6190

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.37:1

6191

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.67

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.33:4

6192

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.38

Theater

Scaenae frons

6193

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.45

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.35:3

6194

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.41

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.37:2

6195

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.55

Theater

Scaenae frons

6196

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.54

0.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.31:1

6197

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.54

0.38

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.34:1

6198

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.59

Theater

Porticus

9.108:2

6199

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.90

0.90

Theater

Porticus

6200

Capital

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

6201

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

0.46

0.44

Theater

Porticus

6202

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Complete

0.39

0.36

Theater

Porticus

6203

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.44

0.57

Theater

Tribunal

9.108:1

6204

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

0.76

0.58

Theater

Palladius

9.110:4

6205

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Palladius

6206

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Palladius

6207

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.44

0.43

Theater

Porticus

9.107:2

6208

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.57

Theater

Tribunal

9.108:3

6209

Frieze

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Tribunal

9.107:1

Theater

Cavea

9.122:1

0.60

0.43 0.46

Width (m)

0.48

Length (m)

0.78

0.55

0.88

69.0

68.0

2.44

1.12

0.54

Fig. No.

9.28:1

9.110:3

6210

Capital

Limestone

Complete

6211

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

6212

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

1.16

4.40

Theater

Postscaenium

9.7:2

6213

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

1.26

4.58

Theater

Postscaenium

9.7:1; 9.8

6214+ 6602+ 60116

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

1.17

4.70

Theater

Postscaenium

9.7:3

6215

Capital

Limestone

Broken

0.78

Theater

Porticus

6216

Capital

Limestone

Complete

6217

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.74 0.76

0.42

0.52

0.80

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.109

592 Element No.

Gabriel Mazor

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

6219

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

6220

Base

Marble

Broken

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.42

0.58

1.04

Theater

Theater

0.71

0.34

0.65

0.69

Theater

Scaenae frons

6221

Base

Marble

Broken

0.68

0.34

0.45

0.83

Theater

Scaenae frons

6222

Base

Marble

Broken

0.76

0.34

0.56

0.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

6223

Base

Marble

Broken

0.70

0.34

0.65

0.90

Theater

Scaenae frons

6224

Base

Marble

Complete

0.76

0.32

0.89

0.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

6225

Base

Marble

Broken

0.66

0.35

0.70

0.83

Theater

Scaenae frons

6226

Base

Marble

Broken

0.73

0.35

0.81

0.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

6227

Base

Marble

Complete

0.84

0.42

1.10

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

6228

Base

Marble

Complete

0.85

0.42

1.08

1.08

Theater

Scaenae frons

6229

Base

Marble

Complete

0.84

0.41

1.12

1.12

Theater

Scaenae frons

6230

Base

Marble

Complete

0.85

0.42

1.12

1.12

Theater

Scaenae frons

6231

Base

Marble

Complete

0.66

0.30

0.72

0.72

Theater

Scaenae frons

6232

Base

Marble

Complete

0.64

0.30

0.78

0.78

Theater

Scaenae frons

6233

Base

Marble

Broken

0.72

0.31

0.67

0.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

6234

Base

Marble

Broken

0.64

0.30

0.54

0.75

Theater

Scaenae frons

6235

Base

Marble

Broken

0.64

0.37

0.66

0.68

Theater

Scaenae frons

6236

Base

Marble

Broken

0.61

0.28

0.53

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

6237

Base

Marble

Broken

0.60

0.36

0.46

0.59

Theater

Scaenae frons

6238

Base

Marble

Broken

0.58

0.27

0.48

0.55

Theater

Scaenae frons

6239

Base

Marble

Broken

0.60

0.32

0.45

0.53

Theater

Scaenae frons

6240

Base

Marble

Broken

0.73

0.31

0.62

0.62

Theater

Scaenae frons

6241

Base

Marble

Broken

0.57

0.24

0.40

0.48

Theater

Scaenae frons

6242

Base

Marble

Complete

0.72

0.33

0.88

0.88

Theater

Scaenae frons

6243

Base

Marble

Broken

0.68

0.36

0.54

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

6244

Base

Marble

Broken

1.10

0.53

0.41

0.69

Theater

Scaenae frons

6245

Base

Marble

Broken

0.67

0.31

0.77

0.82

Theater

Scaenae frons

6246

Base

Marble

Broken

0.53

0.28

0.63

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

6247

Frieze

Marble

Broken

6248

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.86

0.39

0.60

1.06

Theater

Porticus

6249

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.62

0.33

0.70

0.70

Theater

Tribunal

Fig. No.

9.24:1

4.23:2

9.24:2

9.23:1

6251

Base

Marble

Broken

0.57

0.29

0.59

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

6252

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.62

0.43

0.79

0.79

Theater

Tribunal

6253

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.34

0.38

0.77

Theater

Porticus

6254

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.84

0.59

Theater

Porticus

6255

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Complete

0.47

0.66

Theater

Porticus

6256

Base

Limestone

Broken

1.10

0.50

0.61

Theater

Porticus

6257

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.43

Theater

Porticus

6258

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.75

0.59

0.59

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.106:1

6259

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.41

0.39

0.59

0.59

Theater

Porticus

4106:3

0.49

0.42

6260

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.80

0.58

0.72

0.80

Theater

Porticus

6261

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.98

0.60

1.34

1.34

Theater

Porticus

6262

Base

Limestone

Broken

1.02

0.45

0.25

0.75

Theater

Porticus

6263

Base

Marble

Complete

1.11

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.106:2

593

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m) 0.80

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

6264

Base

Marble

Broken

0.34

0.52

0.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6265

Architravefrieze

Limestone

Broken

0.67

0.51

1.20

Theater

Tribunal

6266

Architravefrieze

Limestone

Broken

0.66

0.53

1.49

Theater

Tribunal

6268

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.61

0.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

Fig. No.

9.59:1

6269

Console

Limestone

Complete

1.26

0.43

1.33

Theater

Postscaenium

9.9:1

6270

Console

Limestone

Complete

1.20

1.12

0.54

Theater

Postscaenium

9.10:2

6271

Console

Limestone

Complete

0.92

0.91

0.56

Theater

Postscaenium

9.10:3

6272

Column

Granite

Complete

0.91/1.00

7.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.25:1

6273

Column

Granite

Complete

0.90/1.00

7.16

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.90/0.98

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Cavea

6274

Column

Granite

Complete

6275

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

7.15

6276

Capital

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

6277

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.39

0.29

Theater

Porticus

6280

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.46

0.97

Theater

Scaenae frons

6281

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.47/0.48

0.90

Theater

Scaenae frons

6282

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.47

1.40

Theater

Scaenae frons

6283

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.47

1.03

Theater

Scaenae frons

6284

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.60

0.38

Theater

Porticus

6285

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.76

0.55

Theater

Porticus

6286

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.64

Theater

Porticus

6287

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56

Theater

Porticus

6288

Column

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

6289

Column

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

6290

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.45

0.78

Theater

Porticus

6291

Column

Limestone

Broken

1.00

0.86

Theater

Porticus

6292

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.64/0.66

2.35

Theater

Porticus

6293

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.60/0.67

1.92

Theater

Porticus

6294

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.68/0.70

1.23

Theater

Porticus

6295

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.72

0.94

Theater

Porticus

6296

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.67

Theater

Porticus

6297

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.61

Theater

Porticus

6298

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.35

Theater

Porticus

6299

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.44/0.47

1.33

Theater

Scaenae frons

6300

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.48/0.49

1.52

Theater

Scaenae frons

6301

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.43

0.96

Theater

Scaenae frons

6302

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.88

Theater

Scaenae frons

6303

Column

Marble

Broken

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

6304

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

6305

Column

Marble

Broken

1.37

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.52

0.90

0.44 0.44/0.46

0.92

0.115

9.27:5

594

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

6306

Column

Marble

Broken

0.43/0.44

6307

Column

Marble

Broken

0.45/0.50

6308

Column

Limestone

Broken

6309

Column

Limestone

Broken

6310

Column

Limestone

6311

Column

6312

Column

6313

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

1.52

Theater

Scaenae frons

1.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.54/0.53

0.94

Theater

Porticus

0.51

0.81

Theater

Porticus

Broken

0.50

1.17

Theater

Porticus

Limestone

Broken

0.52/0.54

0.87

Theater

Porticus

Limestone

Broken

0.55/0.57

2.27

Theater

Porticus

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.54/0.50

1.37

Theater

Porticus

6314

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53/0.59

2.45

Theater

Porticus

6315

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.88

Theater

Porticus

6316

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.95

Theater

Porticus

6317

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.78

Theater

Porticus

6318

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51/0.53

0.79

Theater

Porticus

6319

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.92

Theater

Porticus

6320

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

1.02

Theater

Porticus

6321

Column

Marble

Broken

0.35

0.48

Theater

Scaenae frons

6322

Column

Marble

Broken

0.51

0.86

Theater

Scaenae frons

6323

Column

Marble

Broken

0.53/0.52

1.28

Theater

Scaenae frons

6324

Column

Marble

Broken

0.48

0.96

Theater

Scaenae frons

6325

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.61

Theater

Scaenae frons

6326

Column

Marble

Broken

0.49

0.53

Theater

Scaenae frons

6327

Column

Marble

Broken

0.52/0.50

1.07

Theater

Scaenae frons

6328

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50

1.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

6329

Column

Marble

Broken

0.52

1.15

Theater

Scaenae frons

6330

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.55

0.67

Theater

Porticus

6331

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

1.06

Theater

Porticus

6332

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.89

Theater

Porticus

6333

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53/0.46

2.35

Theater

Porticus

6334

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53/0.57

2.26

Theater

Porticus

6335

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.55/0.57

2.23

Theater

Porticus

6336

Column

Limestone

Broken

48/50

0.92

Theater

Porticus

6337

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

1.12

Theater

Porticus

6338

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.58/0.53

1.59

Theater

Porticus

6339

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

1.06

Theater

Porticus

6340

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.56

Theater

Porticus

6341

Column

Marble

Broken

0.53

0.62

Theater

Scaenae frons

6342

Column

Marble

Broken

0.47

1.20

Theater

Scaenae frons

6343

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.79

Theater

Scaenae frons

6344

Column

Marble

Broken

0.56/0.57

0.87

Theater

Scaenae frons

6345

Column

Marble

Broken

0.53/0.54

1.20

Theater

Scaenae frons

6346

Column

Marble

Broken

0.75

0.28

Theater

Scaenae frons

6347

Column

Marble

Broken

0.54/0.56

0.98

Theater

Scaenae frons

6348

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50/0.51

0.76

Theater

Scaenae frons

6349

Column

Marble

Broken

0.55

0.86

Theater

Scaenae frons

Fig. No.

595

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

6350

Column

Marble

Broken

0.53/0.52

6351

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.96

6352

Column

Limestone

Broken

6353

Column

Limestone

Broken

6354

Column

Limestone

6355

Column

6356

Column

6357

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

0.87

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.59

Theater

Porticus

0.49

0.49

Theater

Porticus

0.50/0.52

0.79

Theater

Porticus

Broken

0.50

0.53

Theater

Porticus

Limestone

Broken

0.48

1.06

Theater

Porticus

Limestone

Broken

0.50

1.21

Theater

Porticus

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.52/0.55

1.25

Theater

Porticus

6358

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51/0.57

1.99

Theater

Porticus

6359

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56/0.49

2.06

Theater

Porticus

6361

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.47/0.49

1.06

Theater

Porticus

6362

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48

0.92

Theater

Porticus

6363

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.43/0.45

1.21

Theater

Porticus

6364

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.44/0.46

0.82

Theater

Porticus

6365

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.45/0.47

0.80

Theater

Porticus

6366

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.96

0.58

Theater

Porticus

6367

Column

Marble

Broken

0.53/0.50

1.24

Theater

Scaenae frons

6368

Column

Granite

Broken

0.55/0.54

1.44

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.27:3

6369

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50/0.54

1.05

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.27:2

6370

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.82/0.87

2.58

Theater

Porticus

6371

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.85

1.72

Theater

Porticus

6372

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.90

0.57

Theater

Porticus

6373

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.97

1.12

Theater

Porticus

6374

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.46/0.47

0.65

Theater

Porticus

6375

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.39

0.79

Theater

Porticus

6376

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.45/0.44

0.61

Theater

Porticus

6377

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48/0.50

0.90

Theater

Porticus

6378

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48

0.88

Theater

Porticus

6379

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.49

1.19

Theater

Porticus

6380

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50/0.51

1.21

Theater

Porticus

6381

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50/0.57

1.78

Theater

Porticus

6382

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51/0.53

1.55

Theater

Porticus

6383

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53

1.07

Theater

Porticus

6384

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.93

Theater

Porticus

6385

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.99

Theater

Porticus

6386

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.68

Theater

Porticus

6387

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.47/0.49

1.10

Theater

Porticus

6388

Column

Granite

Broken

0.46

0.43

Theater

Scaenae frons

6389

Column

Marble

Broken

0.71/0.63

2.51

Theater

Scaenae frons

6390

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.70

2.00

Theater

Porticus

6391

Column

Marble

Broken

0.72/0.73

1.06

Theater

Scaenae frons

6392

Column

Marble

Broken

0.73/0.69

1.15

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.27:1

596

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

6393

Column

Marble

Broken

0.73

6394

Column

Marble

Broken

0.73/0.74

6395

Column

Marble

Broken

6396

Column

Marble

Broken

6398

Column

Granite

6399

Column

6400

Column

6401

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.46

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.98

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.73/0.74

0.73

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.69

0.93

Theater

Scaenae frons

Broken

0.47

0.62

Theater

Scaenae frons

Granite

Broken

0.49

0.84

Theater

Scaenae frons

Granite

Broken

0.44

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44

0.61

Theater

Scaenae frons

6402

Column

Granite

Broken

0.55

0.67

Theater

Scaenae frons

6403

Column

Granite

Broken

0.43

0.82

Theater

Scaenae frons

6404

Column

Granite

Broken

0.45/0.47

1.25

Theater

Scaenae frons

6405

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.90

Theater

Porticus

6406

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48

1.04

Theater

Porticus

6407

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50/0.57

1.16

Theater

Porticus

6408

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.51/0.53

1.11

Theater

Porticus

6409

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.70

Theater

Porticus

6410

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.45/0.47

0.76

Theater

Porticus

6411

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.46/0.42

0.89

Theater

Porticus

6412

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.51

0.86

Theater

Porticus

6413

Column

Granite

Broken

0.52

0.77

Theater

Scaenae frons

6414

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47/0.50

1.11

Theater

Scaenae frons

6415

Column

Granite

Broken

0.51

1.12

Theater

Scaenae frons

6416

Column

Marble

Broken

0.70

0.74

Theater

Scaenae frons

6417

Column

Marble

Broken

0.76/0.73

1.18

Theater

Scaenae frons

6418

Column

Marble

Broken

0.72/0.73

1.26

Theater

Scaenae frons

6419

Column

Marble

Broken

0.74

0.95

Theater

Scaenae frons

6420

Column

Marble

Broken

0.73

0.45

Theater

Scaenae frons

6421

Column

Marble

Broken

0.77

0.18

Theater

Scaenae frons

6422

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.73

0.45

Theater

Porticus

6423

Column

Marble

Broken

0.72

1.63

Theater

Scaenae frons

6424

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.72/0.73

0.74

Theater

Porticus

6425

Column

Marble

Broken

0.68/0.67

1.40

Theater

Scaenae frons

6426

Column

Granite

Broken

0.51

1.21

Theater

Scaenae frons

6427

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44/0.43

1.14

Theater

Scaenae frons

6428

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.42/0.45

1.54

Theater

Scaenae frons

6429

Column

Granite

Broken

0.45/0.47

0.72

Theater

Scaenae frons

6430

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.46/0.49

1.24

Theater

Porticus

6431

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48/0.50

1.22

Theater

Porticus

6432

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.44/0.48

1.07

Theater

Porticus

6433

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.47/0.50

1.29

Theater

Porticus

6434

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.50/0.52

1.84

Theater

Porticus

Fig. No.

9.27:4

597

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

6435

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44/0.49

6436

Column

Granite

Broken

0.43/0.46

6437

Column

Granite

Broken

6438

Column

Limestone

Broken

6439

Base and column

Softlimestone

6440

Column drum

6441 6442

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

1.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

1.23

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.44/0.45

0.46

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.60/0.48

0.65

Theater

Porticus

Complete

0.50

0.66

Theater

Southern theater

Limestone

Complete

0.97

1.10

Theater

Porticus

Column

Granite

Complete

0.62/0.68

4.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

Column

Granite

Broken

0.66

2.42

Theater

Scaenae frons

6443

Column

Granite

Broken

0.61

1.06

Theater

Scaenae frons

6444

Column

Granite

Broken

0.64

2.94

Theater

Scaenae frons

6445

Column

Granite

Broken

0.69

2.00

Theater

Scaenae frons

6446

Column

Granite

Broken

0.57/0.61

1.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6447

Column

Granite

Broken

0.60

0.85

Theater

Scaenae frons

6448

Column

Granite

Broken

0.56

1.41

Theater

Scaenae frons

6449

Column

Granite

Broken

0.57/0.59

1.20

Theater

Scaenae frons

6450

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.40

1.29

1.45

Theater

Scaenae frons

6451

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

0.89

0.37

Theater

Scaenae frons

6453

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.36

0.62

1.00

Theater

Postscaenium

6454

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.57

1.70

0.66

Theater

Postscaenium

6455

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.50

1.69

0.64

Theater

Postscaenium

6456

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.55

1.67

0.91

Theater

Postscaenium

6457

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.91

1.64

Theater

Postscaenium

6458

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.52

1.26

0.90

Theater

Postscaenium

Fig. No.

9.1

9.25:2

9.91:2

6459

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.51

0.98

1.60

Theater

Postscaenium

9.14:1

6460

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.54

0.82

1.83

Theater

Postscaenium

9.11:1

6461

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.53

1.01

0.87

Theater

Postscaenium

6462

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.34

0.51

0.55

Theater

Postscaenium

6463

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.25

0.99

0.66

Theater

Postscaenium

6464

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.95

1.69

Theater

Postscaenium

6465

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.53

1.65

0.96

Theater

Postscaenium

6466

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.87

0.72

Theater

Postscaenium

6467

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.40

0.79

0.47

Theater

Postscaenium

6468

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.35

0.42

1.20

Theater

Postscaenium

6469

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.42

0.66

0.50

Theater

Postscaenium

6471

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.34

0.57

0.88

Theater

Scaenae frons

6472

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

0.56

0.39

0.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

6474

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.31

0.50

0.37

Theater

Postscaenium

6475

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.23

0.34

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

6477

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.30

0.38

0.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6478

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.32

0.47

0.55

Theater

Scaenae frons

6479

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

6480

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.80

0.56/0.41

Theater

Aditus maximus

6481

Archivolt

Limestone

Broken

0.83

0.59/0.44

Theater

Aditus maximus

9.12:1

9.15:2 9.60:3

598

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

6482

Archivolt

Limestone

6483

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

1.00

Complete

0.96

6484

Archivolt

6485

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

Limestone

Complete

6486

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

6487

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.59

0.60

6488

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.80

0.61/0.46

6489

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.55

0.72

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.67/50

Theater

Aditus maximus

0.63/0.40

Theater

Aditus maximus

0.77

0.59/0.45

Theater

Aditus maximus

0.86

0.65/0.47

Theater

Aditus maximus

0.91

0.55/0.42

Theater

Aditus maximus

0.72 1.09

Theater

Theater

Theater

Aditus maximus

Theater

Theater

Theater

Aditus maximus

Theater

Theater

6490

Archivolt

Limestone

Broken

0.67

0.58/0.47

6491

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.60

0.66

0.81

6492

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.58

0.90

0.85

Theater

Cavea

6493

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.76

0.60/0.47

Theater

Aditus maximus

6494

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.91

0.59/0.41

Theater

Aditus maximus

6496

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.67

1.14

1.08

Theater

Theater

6497

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.70

0.65

0.97

Theater

Theater

6498

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.80

0.50/0.70

Theater

Aditus maximus

6499

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.90

0.51/0.42

Theater

Aditus maximus

6500

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.60

0.76

Theater

Theater

1.16

6501

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.67

0.91

0.90

Theater

Theater

6502

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.42

0.55

1.18

Theater

Theater

6504

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.46

0.56

1.03

Theater

Theater

Theater

Aditus maximus

Theater

Theater

6505

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.76

0.61/0.47

6506

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.63

0.70

6508

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.81

0.60/0.44

Theater

Aditus maximus

6509

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.94

0.62/0.43

Theater

Aditus maximus

6510

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.82

0.58/0.41

Theater

Aditus maximus

Theater

Aditus maximus

Theater

Theater

6511

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.82

0.58/0.41

6512

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.80

0.82

1.42

6513

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.76

0.87

0.45/0.30

Theater

Aditus maximus

6514

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.41

0.55

1.10

Theater

Theater

6515

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.69

0.66

0.84

Theater

Theater

Theater

Aditus maximus

6516

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.95

0.50/0.42

6517

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.62

0.69

0.98

Theater

Theater

6518

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.80

0.67

0.59

Theater

Scaenae frons

6519

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

0.52

Theater

Palladius

6520

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

6521

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.57 0.61

0.67

0.60

1.24

Theater

Theater

Theater

Porticus

Fig. No.

9.113:2

9.120:3

9.113:1

9.114:1

6526

Banister

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.23

0.33

Theater

Eastern staircase

9.117:1

6527

Banister

Limestone

Broken

0.54

0.18

0.53

Theater

Eastern staircase

9.117:2

6528

Capital

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.42

0.52

Theater

Porticus

6530

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.63

0.73

Theater

Porticus

9.101:2

6531

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.31

0.25

0.41

Theater

Porticus

9.106:5

6532

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.58

0.54

0.69

Theater

Porticus

9.104:6

6533

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.67

0.75

Theater

Porticus

9.101:5

599

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

6534

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.64

0.68

Theater

Porticus

9.103:4

6535

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.48

0.63

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.102:2

6536

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.60

0.70

0.73

Theater

Porticus

9.102:6

6537

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.54

0.69

0.69

Theater

Porticus

9.102:4

6538

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.46

0.65

0.80

Theater

Porticus

6539

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.64

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.103:3

6540

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.64

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.103:6

6541

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.60

0.60

Theater

Porticus

9.104:4

6542

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.67

0.72

Theater

Porticus

9.101:6

6543

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.63

0.63

Theater

Porticus

9.104:1

6544

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.73

0.82

Theater

Porticus

6545

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.60

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.105:1

6546

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.64

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.102:5

6547

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.51

0.68

0.68

Theater

Porticus

9.104:2

6548

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.53

0.55

Theater

Porticus

9.103:2

6549

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.75

0.75

Theater

Porticus

9.101:3

6550

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.62

0.72

Theater

Porticus

9.101:1

6551

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.59

0.74

Theater

Porticus

9.103:1

6552

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.61

0.68

Theater

Porticus

9.102:3

6553

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.63

0.68

Theater

Porticus

9.103:5

6554

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.49

0.63

0.63

Theater

Porticus

9.102:1 9.116:3

6555

Banister

Limestone

Complete

0.90

0.34

0.54

Theater

Cavea

6556

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.43

0.72

0.44

Theater

Porticus

6557

Engaged column

Limestone

Broken

0.60

0.79

0.63

Theater

Porticus

6558

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.61

0.66

Theater

Porticus

6559

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.35

0.51

0.67

Theater

Porticus

6560

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.61

0.54

0.68

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

1.36

9.106:4

6561

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.85

0.72

6562

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.94

0.54

0.82

0.55

Theater

Porticus

6563

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.92

0.42

0.56

0.47

Theater

Porticus

6564

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.35

0.70

1.40

Theater

Porticus

6566

Altar

Limestone

Complete

0.90

0.79

0.85

Theater

Theater

6567

Altar

Limestone

Complete

0.55

0.72

0.63

Theater

Theater

6568

Altar

Limestone

Complete

0.46

1.05

0.50

Theater

Theater

6569

Altar

Limestone

Complete

0.73

0.86

Theater

Theater

6570

Altar

Limestone

Complete

Theater

Theater

6571

Foliated column base

Marble

Complete

0.66

0.74

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.22

6572

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.47

Theater

Palladius

9.110:1

6573

Frieze slab

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.59:4

0.94

0.57

0.38

0.62

6576

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.36

0.91

0.76

Theater

Porticus

6577

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.41

0.88

0.64

Theater

Porticus

6578

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.25

0.45

0.98

Theater

Porticus

600 Element No.

Gabriel Mazor

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

6579

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.39

0.48

0.85

Theater

Porticus

6580

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.66

0.79

Theater

Porticus

6581

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.20

0.45

0.73

Theater

Porticus

6582

Podium

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.91

1.10

Theater

Scaenae frons

6583

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.39

0.55

0.82

Theater

Porticus

6584

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.37

0.73

Theater

Porticus

6585

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.30

0.59

0.57

Theater

Porticus

6586

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.24

0.66

0.49

Theater

Porticus

6587

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.30

0.59

0.35

Theater

Porticus

6588

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.29

0.64

0.49

Theater

Porticus

6589

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.24

0.63

0.58

Theater

Porticus

6590

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.24

0.58

0.63

Theater

Porticus

6591

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.37

0.86

0.93

Theater

Porticus

6592

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.37

0.93

0.86

Theater

Porticus

6593

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.38

1.32

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

6595

Column

Limestone

Broken

6597

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.37

0.99 0.38

1.40

Theater

Porticus

6598

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

1.03

0.66

1.70

Theater

Theater

6599

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.94

1.10

2.01

Theater

Scaena frons

6600

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.57

0.57

0.97

Theater

Cavea

6601

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.78

0.49

0.88

Theater

Porticus

6604

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

0.94

1.06

1.86

Theater

Scaenae frons

6605

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

0.38

0.46

1.07

Theater

Porticus

6606

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.36

0.37

0.96

Theater

Porticus

6607

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.40

0.45

1.39

Theater

Porticus

6608

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.37

0.38

0.76

Theater

Porticus

6609

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.32

0.59

0.50

Theater

Porticus

6610

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.32

0.59

0.66

Theater

Porticus

6611

Altar

Limestone

Broken

0.64

0.29

6612

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

0.65

0.40

Theater

Orchestra

Theater

Cavea

9.120:2 9.122:2

6616

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

0.69

0.45

2.07

Theater

Cavea

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.61

1.38

Theater

Scaenae frons

6618

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.37

0.86

0.86

Theater

Porticus

6620

Capital

Limestone

Broken

0.64

Theater

Porticus

6621

Column

Marble

Broken

0.74

1.01

Theater

Scaenae frons

6622

Column

Marble

Broken

0.70

0.71

Theater

Scaenae frons

6623

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.56

Theater

Scaenae frons

6624

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.43

Theater

Porticus

0.38

9.122:3

0.85

6617

0.72

Fig. No.

0.60

6625

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.53

0.56

0.56

Theater

Porticus

6626

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.39

0.49

0.61

Theater

Porticus

6627

Podium

Limestone

Complete

0.36

0.85

0.95

Theater

Theater

6628

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.40

0.40

0.58

Theater

Porticus

9.106:6

6629

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.36

0.58

0.65

Theater

Porticus

9.104:5

6630

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.415

1.42

0.79

Theater

Porticus

6631

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.22

67

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.105:1

9.82:8

601

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

6632

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.93

0.60

61

Theater

Scaenae frons

6633

Balustrade

Limestone

Broken

1.10

0.66

109

Theater

Cavea

6635

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.34

Theater

Porticus

6636

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.51

0.35

Theater

Porticus

6637

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.36

Theater

Porticus

6638

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.24

Theater

Porticus

6639

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.27

Theater

Porticus

6640

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.27

Theater

Porticus

6641

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.26

Theater

Porticus

6642

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.29

Theater

Porticus

6643

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.63

Theater

Porticus

6644

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.53

0.36

Theater

Porticus

6645

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.47/0.54

0.31

Theater

Porticus

6646

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.52

0.32

Theater

Porticus

6647

Column drum

Softlimestone

Broken

0.53

0.33

Theater

Southern theater

6648

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.48

0.58

Theater

Porticus

6649

Capital

Limestone

Complete

0.40

0.65

Theater

Porticus

6650

Base

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.24

0.50

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

6651

Base

Marble

Broken

0.69

0.29

0.60

0.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.67

6652

Base

Marble

Broken

0.34

0.77

0.82

Theater

Scaenae frons

6653

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.43

0.79

1.35

Theater

Scaenae frons

6655

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.47

0.78

0.89

Theater

Scaenae frons

6656

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.22

0.49

0.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6657

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.35

0.29

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

6658

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

Theater

Porticus

6659

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Postscaenium

6660

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56/0.61

2.30

Theater

Porticus

6661

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.60/0.57

0.94

Theater

Porticus

6662

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.58/0.60

1.27

Theater

Porticus

6663

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56/0.58

1.14

Theater

Porticus

6664

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56/0.59

1.37

Theater

Porticus

6665

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.57

0.85

Theater

Porticus

6666

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.60

0.64

Theater

Porticus

6667

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.51

0.92

Theater

Porticus

6668

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.64

0.31

Theater

Porticus

0.45

0.91 0.39

0.48

0.59

Fig. No.

602

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

6670

Column

Granite

Broken

6671

Column

Granite

Broken

6672

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.40

6673A–E

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.19

6674

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.60

6675

Column

Limestone

Broken

6676

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

1.16

6677

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

6678

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.57

Height (m)

Width (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

3.00

Theater

Scaenae frons

1.73

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.78

Length (m)

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Proscaenium

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Porticus

0.85

Theater

Porticus

0.94

Theater

Porticus

0.25

1.04 1.06

6679

Pilaster

Limestone

Broken

1.09

0.71

0.54

Theater

Porticus

6680

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.79

0.52

1.40

Theater

Theater

6681

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.94

0.61

1.02

Theater

Scaenae frons

6682

Pilaster

Limestone

Broken

0.39

1.19

0.61

0.73

Theater

Porticus

6683

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.93

0.60

Theater

Porticus

6684

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.98

0.66

Theater

Porticus

6685

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

0.64

0.89

1.57

Theater

Scaenae frons

6686

Architrave

Limestone

Complete

0.20

0.62

0.63

Theater

Postscaenium

6687

Altar

Limestone

Broken

0.88

0.43

0.34

Theater

Theater

Fig. No.

9.111

6688

Pilaster base

Limestone

Complete

0.37

0.48

0.63

Theater

Porticus

9.106:7

6689

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.63

0.64

Theater

Porticus

9.104:3

6690

Column

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.25

Theater

Scaenae frons

6691

Column

Cipollino

Broken

0.46

0.45

Theater

Scaenae frons

6692

Column

Marble

Broken

0.49

0.90

Theater

Scaenae frons

6693

Column

Marble

Broken

0.46

0.64

Theater

Scaenae frons

6694

Column

Marble

Broken

0.43/0.44

0.60

Theater

Scaenae frons

6695

Column

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.75

Theater

Scaenae frons

6696

Base

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

6698

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.43

Theater

Porticus

1.06

6699

Base

Limestone

Broken

6700

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

6701

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.57

0.70

0.52 0.31

0.25

0.53

Theater

Porticus

0.24

0.37

0.53

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.69

6702

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.69

6703

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

1.14

6704

Lintel

Limestone

Complete

6708

Base

Marble

Broken

0.36

0.65 0.69/1.00

Theater

Porticus

0.80

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.58:1

1.18

Theater

Cavea

9.120:1

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.34

6709

Banister

Limestone

Complete

0.80

0.45

1.29

Theater

Theater

6711

Console

Limestone

Complete

1.16

1.25

0.79

Theater

Postscaenium

6712

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.57

0.95

0.46/0.36

Theater

Cavea

6713

Basin

Softlimestone

Broken

0.37

0.68

0.74

Theater

Hyposcaenium

6715

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.40

0.51

1.03

Theater

Theater

6716

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.61

0.93

1.67

Theater

Cavea

9.10:1

9.120:4

603

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

6717

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

1.00

1.18

0.55

Theater

Cavea

6718

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.54

0.66

0.68

Theater

Porticus

6719

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.76

0.81

Theater

Cavea

6720

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.60

0.58/50.1

Theater

Aditus maximus

6721

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.40

0.91

1.02

Theater

Postscaenium

6722

Jamb

Limestone

Complete

0.41

0.89

1.29

Theater

Theater

6723

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.57

0.70

Theater

Porticus

6724

Column drum

Limestone

Broken

0.55

0.71

Theater

Porticus

6726

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

Theater

Porticus

0.42

0.64

1.09

6727

Threshold

Limestone

Broken

0.59

0.50

1.03

Theater

Aditus maximus

6728

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.415

1.41

0.79

Theater

Porticus

6729

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.98

1.26

Theater

Theater

6731

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.60

0.81

0.91

Theater

Theater

6732

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.59

0.92

0.87

Theater

Theater

6733

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.36

0.39

0.55

Theater

Theater

6734

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.37

0.59

0.45

Theater

Porticus

6735

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.20

0.67

0.68

Theater

Porticus

6736

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.19

0.45

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

6737

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.45

0.90

1.15

Theater

Porticus

6738

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.50

0.99

1.31

Theater

Theater

6739

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.43

0.77

Theater

Porticus

6740

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.53

1.01

Theater

Porticus

6741

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.52

0.77

0.93

Theater

Postscaenium

6743

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.56

0.65

0.66

Theater

Porticus

6745

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.48

0.63

0.63

Theater

Porticus

6748

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.49

0.32

0.56

Theater

Porticus

6749

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

0.55

0.68

0.84

Theater

Cavea

6750

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.86

0.60

0.99

Theater

Cavea

6751

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.77

0.63

Theater

Southern theater

6752

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

0.65

0.72

Theater

Southern theater

6753

Base

Marble

Broken

0.80

0.51

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.60

0.62

6754

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.16

0.50

0.46

Theater

Scaenae frons

6800

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.61

1.35

0.53

Theater

Aditus maximus

6802

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.61

0.97

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

6803

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.61

0.99

0.42

Theater

Aditus maximus

6804

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.61

1.00

0.45

Theater

Aditus maximus

6805

Archivolt

Limestone

Broken

0.63

0.78

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

6806

Archivolt

Limestone

Broken

0.74

0.91

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

6807

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.50

1.07

0.53

Theater

Aditus maximus

6808

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.60

1.18

0.52

Theater

Aditus maximus

6809

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.68

1.08

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

Fig. No.

9.114:2

9.11:3

604 Element No.

Gabriel Mazor

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

6810

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.63

0.85

0.40

Theater

Aditus maximus

6811

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.58

1.13

0.55

Theater

Aditus maximus

6812

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.58

1.14

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

6813

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.67

0.65

0.44

Theater

Aditus maximus

6814

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.73

0.39

Theater

Aditus maximus

6815

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.85

0.43

Theater

Aditus maximus

6816

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.50

0.80

0.38

Theater

Aditus maximus

6817

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.61

1.36

0.43

Theater

Aditus maximus

6818

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.78

0.50

Theater

Aditus maximus

6819

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.66

0.82

0.41

Theater

Aditus maximus

6820

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.66

0.79

0.34

Theater

Aditus maximus

6821

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.85

0.71

0.37

Theater

Aditus maximus

6822

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.67

135

0.42

Theater

Aditus maximus

6823

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.38

0.81

0.73

Theater

Aditus maximus

6824

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.65

0.88

0.45

Theater

Aditus maximus

6825

Voussoir

Limestone

Complete

0.81

1.21

0.37

Theater

Aditus maximus

6826

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.46

0.80

Theater

Cavea

6827

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.47

0.90

Theater

Cavea

6828

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.52

0.86

Theater

Cavea

6829

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.45

0.73

1.18

Theater

Cavea

6830

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.46

0.68

1.05

Theater

Cavea

6838

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.48

0.68

0.88

Theater

Theater

6844

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

0.38

0.74

0.93

Theater

Cavea

6846

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.27

0.61

0.60

Theater

Porticus

6849

Scalarium step

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.86

0.86

Theater

Cavea

6851

Jamb

Limestone

Broken

0.45

0.55

1.55

Theater

Theater

6852

Column

Limestone

Broken

6853

Column

Limestone

Broken

0.56

0.47

0.39

0.45

0.48

Theater

Porticus

0.70

Theater

Porticus Theater

6855

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.83

0.51

Theater

6856

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.58

0.72

0.82

Theater

Theater

6857

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.78

0.77

1.97

Theater

Theater

6858

Lintel

Limestone

Broken

0.58

0.50

0.54

6860

Base

Marble

Broken

6861+ 6735

Cornice

Marble

Broken

6862

Column

Granite

Complete

6863

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.08

6864

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.08

14076

Column

Granite

Broken

0.66

26190

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47

0.54

31113

Base

Marble

Complete

0.52

0.24

0.64

31145

Base

Marble

Complete

0.42

0.14

0.46

0.68

0.54/0.60

Theater

Theater

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.44

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.77:1

0.41

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.77:2

IAHU

Scaenae frons

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.64

Palladius

Scaenae frons

0.46

Palladius

Scaenae frons

0.29 0.12/0.19

0.18/0.68

Fig. No.

0.37/0.68

4.09

9.97:3, 4

605

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

31146

Base

Marble

Complete

0.44

0.16

0.53

0.53

Palladius

Scaenae frons

31147

Base

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.19

0.47

0.47

Palladius

Scaenae frons

31181

Capital

Limestone

Broken

Odeum

Porticus

31185

Base

Limestone

Broken

Odeum

Porticus

31188

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.22

0.27

0.83

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

31189

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.22

0.44

0.29

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

31196

Base

Marble

Complete

0.14

0.40

0.40

Palladius

Scaenae frons

31297

Seat

Limestone

Complete

Western thermae

Scaena cavea

31298

Seat

Limestone

Complete

Western thermae

Cavea

40601

Column

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.81

0.30

0.13

0.40

40602

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.16

0.23

0.29

Theater

Scaenae frons

40603

Frieze

Limestone

Complete

0.55

0.53

0.72

Theater

Theater

40604

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

?

?

?

Theater

Porticus

40605

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.49

0.08

0.44

Theater

Scaenae frons

40606

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Broken

0.31

0.27

Theater

Palladius

Theater

Porticus

40607

Column

Limestone

Broken

40608

Cornice

Marble

Broken

40609

Base

Limestone

Complete

40610

Base

Limestone

Complete

40611

Capital

Limestone

Broken

40612

Column

Granite

Broken

40613

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

40614

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.57

0.97 0.43

0.94

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.78

0.40

0.92

0.92

Theater

Porticus

0.65

0.37

0.87

0.87

0.49

0.46 0.40

0.42

0.44

Theater

Tribunal

Theater

Porticus

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Postscaenium

Theater

Porticus

40615

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

?

?

?

Theater

Porticus

40616

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.67

0.58

Theater

Postscaenium

40617

Frieze

Limestone

Complete

?

?

?

Theater

Postscaenium

40618

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.67

0.80

Theater

Postscaenium

40619

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.41

0.51

0.65

Theater

Postscaenium

40620

Base

Limestone

Complete

0.39

0.49

0.67

Theater

Porticus

40621

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.15

0.32

0.28

Theater

Scaenae frons

40622

Capital Ionic

Softlimestone

Complete

0.44

0.70

0.70

Theater

Southern theater

40623

Podium

Limestone

Complete

0.44

0.73

1.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

40624

Capital

Limestone

Broken

Pottery workshop

Porticus

40625

Capital

Limestone

Broken

Pottery workshop

Porticus

40626

Capital

Limestone

Broken

Pottery workshop

Porticus

40627+ 40628

Architrave

Softlimestone

Complete

0.61

0.35

1.38

Theater

Southern theater

40629

Frieze

Limestone

Broken

0.62

0.35

0.26

Pottery workshop

Postscaenium

0.59

Fig. No.

9.100:1

9.15:3

9.15:1

9.4:3

9.6

606

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

40630

Capital

Softlimestone

40631

Architravefrieze

40632 40633

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

Complete

0.46

0.52

0.52

Theater

Southern theater

9.3

Limestone

Complete

0.61

0.47

0.50

Theater

Postscaenium

Architrave

Softlimestone

Complete

0.63

0.38

1.10

Theater

Southern theater

Architrave

Marble

Broken

0.26

0.44

0.35

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Cavea

1.05

1.09

0.45

Theater

Cavea

40640

Banister

Limestone

Broken

40641

Banister

Limestone

Complete

40642

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.60

0.65

Theater

Porticus

40643

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

0.60

0.32

Theater

Porticus

40644

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

Theater

Porticus

40645

Column

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.53/0.55

1.44

40647

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.57

0.89

Theater

Cavea

40648

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.44

0.57

0.92

Theater

Cavea

40649

Banister

Limestone

Complete

0.93

0.43

1.01

Theater

Cavea

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Cavea

9.5:1

9.116:2

40650

Capital

Marble

Broken

40651

Banister

Limestone

Complete

1.14

0.45

1.06

40652

Banister

Limestone

Complete

1.10

0.45

0.92

Theater

Cavea

40654

Column drum

Softlimestone

Complete

Theater

Southern theater

40655

Column

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

40656

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

Theater

Porticus

41132

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.82

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

41155

Base

Marble

Complete

0.71

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

41162

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.28

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

41164

Column

Granite

Broken

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

41165

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.11

0.20

0.26

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

41167

Seat

Marble

Broken

0.13

0.27

0.47

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

44307

Column

Granite

Complete

0.45/0.52

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.45/0.47

IAHU

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.99:1 9.117:3

44322

Column

Granite

Complete

50606

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.38 0.61

0.29 0.16

0.45

0.54

0.19

0.72

3.57 3.53 0.27

0.61

0.70

50612

Banister

Limestone

Complete

0.75

0.25

0.50

Theater

Eastern staircase

51119

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.44

0.57

0.85

Western thermae

Cavea

0.20

Forum

Porticus

0.68

Forum

Scaenae frons

60102

Base

Limestone

Broken

60108

Base

Marble

Complete

60115

Capital

Marble

Broken

60603

Base

Marble

Broken

0.24 0.54

0.23

0.68 0.38

0.79

Hyposcaenium Scaenae frons

0.27/0.34

0.16

0.23

0.34

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

9.116:1

9.99:2

607

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Fig. No.

60613

Architrave

Softlimestone

Broken

0.39

0.38

0.30

Theater

Southern theater

9.5:2

60617

Architrave

Marble

Broken

60622

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.50

0.45

0.30

1.17

9.82:5

60634

Base

Marble

Broken

0.43

0.20

0.31

60635

Base

Marble

Broken

0.55

0.17

61105

Seat

Limestone

Broken

61107

Seat

Limestone

61115

Seat

61116

Nymphaeum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.36

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.17

0.62

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.43

0.57

1.29

Western thermae

Cavea

Complete

0.42

0.57

0.99

Western thermae

Cavea

Limestone

Complete

0.43

0.57

0.51

Western thermae

Cavea

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.43

0.57

0.95

Western thermae

Cavea

61123

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.42

0.57

0.87

Western thermae

Cavea

61134

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.42

0.53

1.10

Western thermae

Cavea

61135

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.44

0.58

1.23

Western thermae

Cavea

61136

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.45

0.57

0.99

Western thermae

Cavea

61137

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.44

0.74

1.06

Western thermae

Cavea

61138

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.42

0.60

1.04

Western thermae

Cavea

61139

Seat

Limestone

Complete

0.46

0.58

0.97

Western thermae

Cavea

64014

Column

Granite

Broken

0.55/0.52

1.00

IAHU

Scaenae frons

64635

Column

Granite

Broken

0.51/0.49

0.93

IAHU

Scaenae frons

64636

Column

Granite

Broken

0.60

1.01

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65096

Column

Granite

Complete

0.45/0.51

3.56

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65097

Column

Granite

Broken

0.53

1.75

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65098

Column

Granite

Broken

0.43/0.48

1.74

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65125

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.38

0.46

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65132

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47

1.11

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65133

Column

Granite

Broken

0.45/0.47

0.86

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65179

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47/0.49

2.87

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65200

Column

Granite

Broken

0.44/0.47

0.45

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65202

Column

Granite

Broken

0.54

0.90

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65203

Column

Granite

Broken

0.52/0.54

1.20

IAHU

Scaenae frons

65207

Column

Granite

Broken

0.50

0.38

IAHU

Scaenae frons

70105

Cornice

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

70106

Column

Limestone

Broken

Forum

Porticus

70107

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

70108

Column

Limestone

Broken

Forum

Porticus

0.35/0.38 0.30 0.47

0.22

0.71

9.118:2

9.118:3

9.118:1

608

Gabriel Mazor

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

70109

Column drum

Limestone

Complete

70110

Column

Limestone

Complete

70111

Cornice

Marble

Broken

70113

Frieze

Marble

Broken

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

0.55 0.18

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

0.47

0.77

Forum

Porticus

0.75 0.60

0.50

Forum

Porticus

0.40

Forum

Scaenae frons

1.17

Theater

Scaenae frons

Fig. No.

9.82:4

70118

Cornice

Limestone

Complete

0.57

0.54

1.04

Forum

Postscaenium

9.11:4

70119

Console

Limestone

Complete

1.26

0.74

1.33

Forum

Postscaenium

9.9:2

Forum

Aditus maximus

0.36

0.64

70123

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

70124

Column

Marble

Broken

70135

Column

Limestone

Broken

70136

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

Forum

Porticus

70137

Pedestal

Limestone

Broken

Forum

Porticus

70138

Column

Limestone

Broken

Forum

Porticus

Forum

Scaenae frons

Forum

Porticus

Forum

Palladius

0.88

0.53 0.30

0.57

Theater

Scaenae frons

Forum

Porticus

70152

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.47

0.66

70157

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.55

0.22

70162

Capital Ionic

Limestone

Complete

0.85

0.60

70601

Capital

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

70619

Column

Granite

Complete

0.46/0.54

4.16

Theater

Scaenae frons

75507

Column

Granite

Complete

0.60/0.70

4.66

IAHU

Scaenae frons

80101

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.24

Theater

Porticus

80102

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

0.24

Theater

Porticus

80106

Architravefrieze

Limestone

Broken

0.57

80122

Base

Marble

Complete

0.52 0.51

80131

Base

Marble

Complete

80133

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.42

0.24

0.65

(0.65)

0.62

0.60

(0.65)

0.44

Forum

0.62

Sigma

Scaenae frons

0.26

0.70

0.70

Sigma

Scaenae frons

0.36

0.34

0.55

Forum

Scaenae frons

80137

Base

Marble

Broken

0.65

0.33

0.41

0.76

Forum

Scaenae frons

80153

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.48

0.58

0.55

0.35

Forum

Scaenae frons

80172

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.16

0.17

0.41

Sigma

Scaenae frons

80603

Seat

Limestone

Broken

0.20

0.33

0.58

80613

Capital

Marble

Complete

80617

Column

Granite

Broken

0.61

2.47

80619

Column

Granite

Complete

0.52/0.60

4.15

80622

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.30

0.30

80623

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.47

80626

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.44

80629

Base

Marble

Broken

0.59

0.32

0.72

0.72

80632

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.26

0.37

0.51

80643

Capital

Marble

Broken

9.31:2 9.110:2

9.26:2

9.24:3

Nymphaeum

Cavea

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.39:2

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.36:1

0.58

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.38:1

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.42

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

80655

Capital

Marble

Broken

81102

Base

Marble

Broken

0.64

0.30

81109

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.45

0.23

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

85096

Column

Granite

Complete

0.46/0.50

3.56

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.72

0.31

9.36:2

609

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

85541

Column

Granite

Broken

0.66

90103

Column

Granite

Broken

0.47

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

1.74

IAHU

Scaenae frons

0.65

Forum

Scaenae frons

90106

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.29

0.59

0.27

Forum

Scaenae frons

90124

Pedestal

Marble

Broken

0.45

0.36

0.54

Forum

Scaenae frons

90138

Base

Marble

Broken

0.24

Forum

Scaenae frons

90143

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.46

0.27

0.49

Forum

Scaenae frons

90148

Cornice

Marble

Complete

0.16

0.32

0.48

90152

Capital

Marble

Complete

90174

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

90178

Base

Marble

Broken

90268

Cornice

Marble

Broken

90604

Capital Ionic

Softlimestone

Broken

0.60

0.75 0.45

0.33

0.36

0.12

0.44

0.55

0.33

Forum

Scaenae frons

Forum

Scaenae frons

Forum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Forum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Southern theater

9.4:1 9.105:2

90607

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.59

0.51

0.51

Theater

Porticus

90614

Archivolt

Limestone

Complete

0.72

0.29

0.56

Theater

Aditus maximus

90632

Base

Marble

Broken

0.25

0.36

0.66

Theater

Scaenae frons

90636

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

90637

Cornice

Limestone

Broken

Theater

Porticus

90638

Base

Limestone

Broken

0.18

90641

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.52

90642

Pedestal

Limestone

Complete

0.56

90651

Base

Marble

Broken

90652

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.21

0.74

91119

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.18

0.28

91140

Column

Granite

Broken

100110

Pilaster capital

Limestone

Broken

100118

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.21

0.26

100126

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.14

100127

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.18

100128

Cornice

Marble

Broken

100129

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.51

100138

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.16

100139

Cornice

Marble

Broken

100140

Cornice

Marble

100143

Architrave

Marble

0.51

0.30

0.61

Theater

Porticus

Nymphaeum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Porticus

Forum

Scaenae frons

0.47

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.80/0.28

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

Forum

Porticus

0.26

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.17

0.57

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.25

0.39

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.43

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.27

0.53

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

0.26

0.40

0.28

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

Broken

0.25

0.36

0.27

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

Broken

0.34

0.09

0.48

Forum

Scaenae frons

0.44

0.61

0.38

0.66

Fig. No.

9.101:4

610 Element No.

Gabriel Mazor

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

Width (m)

Length (m)

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

100144

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.23

0.35

0.21

Forum

Scaenae frons

100145

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.27

0.30

0.46

Forum

Scaenae frons

100154+ 100155

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.46

0.60

0.26/0.24

Forum

Scaenae frons

100156

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.18

0.32

0.35

Forum

Scaenae frons

100162

Architravefrieze

Marble

Broken

0.51

0.28

0.63

Palladius

Scaenae frons

100163

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.12

0.26

0.43

Forum

Scaenae frons

100164

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.17

0.23

0.32

Forum

Scaenae frons

100166

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.12

0.37

Forum

Scaenae frons

100167

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.34

0.09

0.40

Forum

Scaenae frons

100204

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.28

0.35

0.83

Forum

Scaenae frons

100218

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.25

0.36

0.26

Forum

Scaenae frons

100219

Base

Marble

Complete

0.33

0.86

0.86

Forum

Scaenae frons

0.70

100220

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.41

1.11

0.51

Forum

Scaenae frons

100222

Base

Marble

Broken

0.14

0.27

0.46

Pottery workshop

Scaenae frons

100236

Base

Marble

Broken

0.62

0.28

0.42

0.72

Forum

Scaenae frons

100602

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.26

0.67

100607

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.43

0.52

100608

Base

Marble

Complete

0.37

0.17

0.45

0.45

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Forum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

100618

Column

Granite

Broken

0.59

2.81

100627

Base

Marble

Complete

0.32

0.22

0.45

0.45

Forum

Scaenae frons

100633

Base

Marble

Complete

0.35

0.21

0.45

0.45

Forum

Scaenae frons

100640

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

0.51

0.30

0.40

Nymphaeum

Scaenae frons

100644

Base

Marble

Complete

0.37

0.22

0.45

0.45

Temple

Scaenae frons

100648

Column

Granite

Complete

0.53/0.59

4.16

Theater

Scaenae frons

100650

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.50

Theater

Scaenae frons

100652

Column

Granite

Broken

1.41

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.53

100654

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.45

0.30

100663

Base

Marble

Broken

0.52

0.24

0.49

0.67

100673

Capital

Marble

Broken

0.23

0.17

0.40

Nymphaeum

Scaenae frons

100674

Base

Marble

Broken

0.61

0.29

0.74

0.74

Theater

Scaenae frons

100675

Base

Marble

Broken

0.73/0.86

0.30

0.30

0.40

Theater

Scaenae frons

Fig. No. 9.82:10

9.84:1

9.38:2

100680

Base

Marble

Broken

0.60

0.27

0.70

0.70

Theater

Scaenae frons

100681

Capital Ionic

Softlimestone

Broken

0.41

0.36

0.58

0.44

Theater

Southern theater

100691

Base

Marble

Broken

0.19

0.25

0.74

100711

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.21

0.28

100712

Base

Marble

Complete

0.38

0.21

0.45

Temple

Scaenae frons

101138

Column

Granite

Broken

0.55

0.31

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

110114

Column

Granite

Complete

0.41/0.50

3.55

Forum

Scaenae frons

9.26:3

110122

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.43

0.61

Palladius

Scaenae frons

9.37:3

0.45

Nymphaeum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.4:2

611

Chapter 9: the Architectural Elements

Element No.

Element Type

Material

State of Preservation

Diameter (m)

Height (m)

0.61

0.19

110124

Base

Marble

Broken

110126

Capital

Marble

Broken

Width (m)

Length (m) 0.30

Excavated Location

Restoration Location

Forum

Scaenae frons

Odeum

Scaenae frons

110128

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.20

0.47

Odeum

Scaenae frons

110129

Frieze

Marble

Broken

0.38

0.25

0.33

Odeum

Scaenae frons

110130

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.37

0.38

0.59

Palladius

Scaenae frons

0.48

Fig. No.

9.82:6

110134

Base

Marble

Broken

0.26

0.22

0.43

Forum

Scaenae frons

110182

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.27

0.05

0.55

Forum

Scaenae frons

9.77:5

110183

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.60

0.08

0.53

Forum

Scaenae frons

9.77:3

110184

Architrave slab

Marble

Broken

0.57

0.10

0.50

Forum

Scaenae frons

9.77:4

110614

Column

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

110625

Column

Marble

Broken

Theater

Scaenae frons

110628

Base

Marble

Complete

0.74

0.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

110631

Base

Marble

Complete

0.71/0.90

0.43

Temple

Scaenae frons

110633

Capital

Marble

Complete

0.43

0.51

Theater

Scaenae frons

110638

Capital

Marble

Broken

120117

Base

Marble

Broken

120122

Cornice

Marble

Complete

120146

Base

Marble

Broken

120147

Base

Marble

Broken

0.64 0.23

0.97

0.97 0.70

0.26 0.60

0.28 0.35

0.95

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.73

Palladius

Scaenae frons

0.53

Palladius

Scaenae frons

Palladius

Scaenae frons

Forum

Scaenae frons

Theater

Scaenae frons

0.31 0.28

0.75

120610

Column

Granite

Broken

120622

Seat

Marble

Broken

0.24

0.22

0.48

Theater

Scaenae frons

120623

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.30

0.49

0.30

Theater

Scaenae frons

121129

Architravefrieze slab

Marble

Broken

0.24

0.15

0.63

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

121135

Cornice

Marble

Broken

0.13

0.65

0.70

Western thermae

Scaenae frons

9.99:3

180118

Capital

Marble

Complete

Theater

Scaenae frons

9.29:1

0.54

0.74

0.65

9.99:4

G. Mazor and W. Atrash, 2015, Bet She’an III/2 (IAA Reports 58/2)

Chapter 10

Three marble statues from the Severan Theater Tali Sharvit1

Three marble statues were found during the excavation of the Severan Theater, the first (Hermes) by Applebaum in 1961, and the other two (Aphrodite and Tyche) by the IAA expedition in 1988. The statues of Hermes and Tyche were restored and displayed in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, while the statue of Aphrodite has never been restored, displayed or published. These three impressive marble statues represent what remains of the freestanding sculptural decoration of the Severan Theater at Nysa-Scythopolis.

The Statues The Statue of Hermes (IAA No. 1961–528, IMJ No. 96.168[9569]; Fig. 10.1) This is a white marble statue (1.92 m high, 0.73 m wide, 0.35 m deep) of a young nude male standing upright, his right leg slightly bent. A chlamys is fastened with a fibula on his right shoulder, hangs over his chest and back, and is draped over his left arm. The head is turned slightly to the left, and the hair is short and curly. The nose, mouth and genitals are broken, as are both arms— the right in its upper part, the left below the elbow—and the toes of the right foot. The attachment of the caduceus (one of Hermes’ attributes) is still visible on the left arm. The statue is supported on its left side by a tree trunk and on its right side stands a small ram, of which the head and forelegs are broken. On either side of the pelvis are remains of supports that attached the arms to the body, and another between the shins to stabilize the legs. Traces of red paint are preserved on the eyes and lips. The back of the statue, not meant to be seen, was only roughly carved, the neck support, the buttocks and the tree-trunk support are flat at the end of the marble block, probably the result of a miscalculation by the artist. This statue depicts Hermes as a shepherd accompanied by a small ram (for futher discussion and similar examples, see Burkert 1985:156–159; Siebert 1990; Simon and Baucheness 1992; Jost 1996; Scheid 1996a).

The statue was found broken in three parts (head, body, legs with base) in front of the westernmost niche of the scaenae frons, collapsed within the redsoil foundation layer of the robbed pavement, along with Umayyad II pottery of Stratum 5. Applebaum assumed that it was purposely broken and buried when the theater no longer served its original function (Applebaum 1971:11; 1978:85, No. 11; Atrash 2006: App. 2). It appears that the cutting-off of the nose, mouth and genitals, as well as the decapitation, were intentional, most likely during the Christian era, as seen in other sculptures in the city (Tsafrir and Foerster 1997:128–129). Several interpretations have been put forward as to the statue’s identity, most of which should now be reassessed. Over the years, Applebaum kept returning to the statue and reassessing its identification and dating, unable to establish a firm opinion. For example, he interpreted small fragments of a thin staff found nearby (since lost) as a thyrsus, which led him to initially identify the statue as Dionysus (Applebaum 1961:12). Later on, he variably identified the statue as either Hermes Psychopompos, suggesting that the animal was a griffin, or Apollo, based on a ‘hair knot’ at the nape of the neck (Applebaum 1963; 1971:12– 13). In fact, this odd neck support is known today to be characteristic of Asia Minor sculpture ateliers, and appears on other statues from Nysa-Scythopolis, such as the statue of Dionysus from the eastern thermae (Foerster 2000). Somewhat later, he suggested a similar facial expression to that of statues of Meleager, and then after several years, he identified the statue as a portrait of Ptolemy III (respectively, Applebaum 1971: 13, 1978:85, n. 11, 96–99, App. 2; and see below). Gersht (1982:25–26) preferred to identify the statue as Meleager with a sheep, while Fischer (1998:160, No. 187) first suggested Hermes Psychopompos or Apollo, and then Dionysus accompanied by a sphinx (Bald Romano and Fischer 2009:395), as the woolly fleece of the animal was mistakenly identified as feathers.

614

Tali Sharvit

Fig. 10.1. Hermes (IAA collection; photographs © The Israel Museum: photographer [front and head] N. Slapak; [back] A. Vainer).

Chapter 10: Three marble statues from the Severan Theater

Ovadiah and Mucznik (2009:22) identified the figure as Apollo with a griffin. However, the animal seems to be a ram, as it shows no signs of wings and has a typical ram’s tail. A close parallel is seen in a statue of a ram accompanying Hermes from the theater at Perge, dated to the end of the second century CE (Gärtner 2007:229; Özgür 2010:122–123, No. 53). If the ram in the statue from Nysa-Scythopolis were complete, it would probably resemble the ram statue from the Louvre (Reinach 1965 II:753, No. 2). The ram as Hermes’ attribute relates to his role as the shepherd god, the patron and protector of shepherds and their herds associated with the fertility of herds and pastures, and the father of Pan, the satyr-like god of nature and flocks (Athanassakis 1989:33, 37, 46, 49). Identification of the statue as Hermes is further confirmed by the remains of the entwining snakes of the caduceus (herald’s staff) on his upper left arm. As the messenger of the gods, Hermes carried the caduceus (kerykeion), as seen in many sculptures (Reinach 1965 I: 364, No. 6; 365, No. 4; 368, No. 7; II:173, No. 5; IV:87, No. 2; V:66, No. 2). In some of these examples he is depicted in the same posture as the theater Hermes–– standing upright, his right leg slightly bent, and wearing the chlamys the same way (Reinach 1965 I: 366, No. 2; II:149, No. 4). However, there is no exact parallel to the Hermes statue in all its details. A relatively close parallel dated to the second century CE was found in Troezen, Greece (Despinis 1981:238–244, Pls. 77–86; Siebert 1990:298), although it differs in posture, dress, hat, and the connection with the ram. In the statue from Troezen, Hermes holds the ram upright by its horn in his right hand, presumably leading it to sacrifice. In our case, the ram functions as an attribute and has no specific role in the scene. Three other statues, two of which were revealed in theaters, present close variants. The first is the statue of Hermes from Perge (Gärtner 2007:229; Özgür 2010:122–123, No. 53). Although it differs in details such as posture, chlamys arrangement, wings emerging from the head and the tree-trunk location, the depiction of the ram and its role as an attribute is similar. A ram’s head is also depicted on the caduceus of the statue from Perge, indicating an Anatolian cultural influence, as the ram’s head occasionally appears on altars dedicated to Hermes in Anatolia (Özgür 2010:122). A partly broken statue from the museum at Piraeus, dated to the Hadrianic period, closely resembles the statue from Troezen (Siebert

615

1990:314, No. 299). Finally, a fragment of a statuette from the theater in Amman, dated to the Antonine period, preserves both feet, the tree-trunk support, and part of a ram positioned in a similar manner to that of the Hermes statue from Nysa-Scythopolis (Weber 2002:507, Fig. 148:D–G; Friedland and Tykot 2012:55, Fig. 5). While statues of Hermes as a shepherd are known in the eastern Mediterranean, they are quite rare in SyriaPalaestina. Other depictions of Hermes have been found in the region (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:120– 126, Figs. 202–223), such as a torso and winged head from the odeum in Nysa-Scythopolis (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:121, Fig. XXIX), and a complete statue of Hermes as patron of merchants with a purse in hand from the south of the country (Ashqelon or Gaza; Vermeule and Anderson 1981:11; Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:121, Fig. 202). Hermes is also depicted with a ram on a few gems from the region, on one of which he is wearing a winged hat, holding a caduceus and a purse, and surrounded by a ram, a rooster, a turtle and a scorpion (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:122–123, Fig. 214). Although a considerable number of statues depicting distinguished citizens or emperors in the guise of Hermes have been discovered throughout the Roman world (Maderna 1988:81–117), none of them represents the iconography of Hermes as a shepherd. We can assume, therefore, that the Nysa-Scythopolis statue depicts the god himself rather than a personal portrait. Stylistically, the statue from Nysa-Scythopolis is quite naturalistic, an effect presumably enhanced by color, although some details are more schematized. The square asymmetric facial features and the heavy eyebrows convey an impression of strength and authority. The lips are parted and the sunken eyes are crescent shaped. The smooth skin contrasts with the textured hair parted into locks and the rough texture of the tree-trunk support, although these textures are not clearly refined. The ribs and muscles are exaggerated and somewhat schematic, and the proportions are slightly distorted and too massive, for instance the heavy neck as opposed to the narrow shoulders, and the large feet in relation to the shins. The feet are depicted schematically without toenails or veins, and the toes are separated by simple, continuous drilled lines. Continuous drilled lines were also used to separate other parts of the body, such as the arms from the chest.

616

Tali Sharvit

When Applebaum (1961:13) first unearthed the statue, he assumed that it was a Roman copy of the first century BCE–first century CE, of a Greek masterpiece of the Peloponnesian School influenced by the styles of Polykleitos and Praxiteles of the fifth and fourth centuries BCE. He also compared the pose to that of the statue of Hagias of Lysippus in Delphi (Applebaum 1971:11; Pollitt 1986:176, Fig. 77). The addition of the tree trunk and the leg supports in order to stabilize the posture seems to indicate that it is indeed a Roman copy, probably of an earlier bronze statue. While the body rendering does seem to relate to such canonical creations as the Doryphorus of Polykleitos or the later Hagias of Lysippus, it differs in stance, it is depicted schematically and it lacks natural inner movement. The balanced buttocks and waist do not correspond to the posture of leaning on one foot, and the chest seems flat and lifeless, as do the hair curls depicted as large balls with clear chisel marks. This robust body and frozen posture are far from the delicate body and contrapposto posture of Praxiteles work, comparisons to which emphasize the disproportions and inaccuracies in our statue. It seems to be a Roman rendition that poorly echoes the delicate, naturalistic works of the classical masters of the fifth– fourth centuries BCE and their schools. Somewhat later, Applebaum (1971) came to the conclusion that the head and body of the statue originated in different sources. He suggested that the head belonged to a well-executed work of the first century BCE, reflecting the style of fourth-century BCE masterpieces, or was even the work of Lysippus himself or his school, with sunken eyes resembling those of Scopas’ works. On the other hand, he noted that the shoulders are too narrow for the massive neck and the ratio of head to body is less than 1:7, uncharacteristic of fourth-century BCE creations; therefore, he assumed the body was a later creation. Several years later, he identified the head as a thirdcentury BCE portrait of Ptolemy III (Applebaum 1978:85, n. 11, 96–97, App. 2) that was decapitated when the city was conquered by John Hyrcanus at the end of the second century BCE, while the new body was made in the third century CE (Applebaum 1986). Scholars who studied the statue after him accepted Applebaum’s theory that the head was part of a separate work (e.g., Gersht 1982:25–26, No. 85; Bald Romano and Fischer 2009:395–396; Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:22). However, chemical and mineralogical

analyses conducted on both the head and body indicate that both pieces originated from a single block of marble from Marmara (Pearl 1989:50–51). Furthermore, the color and texture of the marble of both parts are similar, and, as mentioned above, the rear of the neck support, the buttocks and the tree-trunk support all end in the same vertical alignment, marking the end of the marble block. Therefore, in light of the marble analysis, the technical evidence and the stylistic comparisons, it seems logical to conclude that the entire statue––head and body––were part of a single Roman copy in which various artistic trends were integrated, executed by a relatively unskilled artist. The eclecticism displayed in this Roman sculpture results from the adoption of different styles and trends in a single creation. The depiction of the chlamys and its folds resembles that of the Meleager statue from Perge of the second century CE (Özgür 2010:35, No. 10). it is evident on both sculptures, where the fabric rests on the chest, that the drilled grooves of the folds were executed in the same manner, although the drill work in the Perge statue is deeper and the results are more naturalistic. A Hermes statue from Side of the Antonine period (Inan 1975:19–29, Cat. No. 3, Pls. X, XI), resembles this Hermes statue in the anatomic rendering of the strong, slim body with emphasized ribs and muscles, although it is a far more naturalistic and harmonious work by a considerably more skilled artist. No parallels were found for the rounded, stylized hair curls with unpolished chisel marks. They may represent a schematic copy of early classical models, or a motif originating in Hellenistic sculptures, such as those of the Ptolemaic kings in Egypt (Ashton 2001a: Cat. No. 28; Bernhard-Walcher 2001: Cat. No. 26). Side locks similar to those in the Hermes statue are also characteristic of Ptolemaic portraits from the second century BCE (Bothmer 1996:215–218). Both round hair curls and side locks can be seen, for example, in the Hellenistic portrait, presumably of Ptolemy III, and in a coin depicting Ptolemy IV (Helmut 1975: Pl. 30.1; Smith 1988: Pl. 27:6, 7, Cat. No. 37). Two central curls on the forehead, turning to either side, are separated from the others by engraved lines. These may echo the anastole curls of Alexander’s hair, commonly depicted in portraits of Hellenistic kings (Fischer 1989:49, n. 38). A further resemblance to Hellenistic royal portraits, mainly of the Ptolemaic kings, can be observed in the forehead with the high ridge over the eyebrows and the deeply carved depression under the hair

Chapter 10: Three marble statues from the Severan Theater

(Helmut 1975: Pl. 1.2; Ashton 2001b: Cat. No. 155), which may echo the tainia (ribbons) worn on the upper forehead by Hellenistic rulers (Smith 1988:34). Similar features are observed in a Roman basalt copy of the portrait of a Hellenistic king (Smith 1988: Pl. 11:5–6, No. 14). Portraits of Ptolemaic kings depicting the syncretistic Hermes-Thot also share some aspects with our Hermes statue and may also have been a source of influence (Fischer 1989). The resemblance to Ptolemaic kings may explain why Applebaum (see above) identified the head as that of Ptolemy III, in spite of the fact that portraits of this king display a round and fuller face with smaller eyes and heavy eyebrows (Jucker 1975: Pls. 4–6, 9). Based on its style, iconography and parallels, the date of the statue seems to fall within the second half of the second century CE. It would be appropriate to sum up this discussion with some observations made by Perry in her study of the aesthetics of Roman eclecticism (Perry 2005:111–112, 114, 122, 148): Roman eclecticism is sometimes obvious and self-evident, at other times it presents subtler and more sophisticated manifestations. “Its ideal manifestation was a seamless blending of models into one harmonious result,” as no single model was wholly perfect. The Roman viewer was not expected to identify and separate the ingredients, as occasionally the eclectic work created a new type of

617

its own. It is not always immediately apparent whether a certain work of art is eclectic, nor the nature and degree of its eclecticism. The work should therefore be read as simultaneous references to several different types and trends and recognized as a composite artistic work. “Far from being symptomatic of creative failure, eclecticism provided the artist with a strategy for balancing the familiar with the innovative.” The Statue of Aphrodite (Fig. 10.2) This is a nude torso of Aphrodite, the beautiful goddess of love (0.60 m high, 0.44 m wide, 0.22 m deep), carved in white-light gray marble (for further discussion and similar examples, see Fleischer and Jentel 1984; Motte and Pirenne-Delforge 1996; Scheid 1996b; Schmidt 1997). The figure leans slightly forward and to the left, and one can assume that the missing head also turned in the same direction. Remains of two long curls are preserved on the shoulders and a broken rectangular support is attached to the nape of the neck. The left arm is broken at the elbow and the right one in the upper part, and both arms are adorned with bracelets carved in high relief. The goddess is depicted covering her torso with her right hand and her genitals with her left hand, a gesture that resulted in the forward inclination of the body. The position of the broken arms can be

Fig. 10.2. Aphrodite (photographer, G. Laron).

618

Tali Sharvit

reconstructed by clues preserved on the body: the shape of the broken left side of the waist that shows the position of the missing lower left arm, a support on the diaphragm for the right arm, and remains of the righthand fingers resting on the upper left arm. The surface of the arms and the chest is poorly preserved, possibly also a result of intentional mutilation, as the Hermes statue. The statue was found in the eastern aditus maximus (L1316), under the Byzantine I pavement (Stratum 10). This statue belongs to a type that is quite common throughout the Roman world. Since the nineteenth century it has been known as ‘Modest Aphrodite’, or Venus Pudica, and represents the nude goddess chastely covering her naked chest and genitals, a gesture that draws attention to her sexuality (Foerster 2005). Foerster (2005:9–11), in his analysis of a similar, almost-complete statue (head and parts of hands and legs are missing) of a Pudica from the eastern thermae in Nysa-Scythopolis, cites seven basic types of Aphrodite statues, some nude and some partly nude, that developed during the Hellenistic period and were inspired by Praxiteles’ statue of the mid-fourth century BCE, the Knidia (Havelock 1995). The closest parallels to the statue from the NysaScythopolis thermae are the Capitoline Aphrodite, and a close variation, the Medici Aphrodite. These are considered to be the closest parallels of the Knidia type and represent the most common image of the goddess in the Roman world (Havelock 1995:77– 78, Figs. 18, 19). While the Knidia only covers her genitals with her left arm, the Capitoline and Medici Aphrodites use both arms to cover their chest and genitals (Felletti-Maj 1951; see the many examples in Reinach 1965). Common variations of the Pudica include: naked without any attributes; with a dolphin or an eros riding a dolphin, as in the Nysa-Scythopolis Eastern Thermae Aphrodite (Foerster 2005); or with supports such as a stand or an amphora covered with a cloth, a floral stand with an eros, a seahorse or a tree trunk. Another variation is half-naked with a garment covering the lower part of her body, her naked breasts covered in the Pudica gesture. The garment is fastened in the center, covering her genitals and her legs, or leaving her legs exposed, and other arrangements exist with the addition of a dolphin or an eros riding a dolphin as a support. As the lower part of the Aphrodite torso was not found, it could have belonged to any one of these variations.

Scholars classify Aphrodite statues according to body traits or the kind of support used by the sculptor. Foerster (2005:11), for example, attributed the Thermae Aphrodite to the Capitoline Pudica type based on hair-style typology. Ovadiah and Mucznik (2009:10) classified it as the Medici type based on the support type, while Farhi (2011:221, Fig. 1) argued that the Thermae Aphrodite and a similar statue from Acre depicted on a city coin but never recovered, as well as a statue from Perge of the second century CE, all represent an eastern variant of the Capitoline and Medici types differing only in its hair style. Foerster (2005:11) suggested that in light of the striking resemblance between the Thermae Aphrodite and that from Perge, which are also similar in their marble, they were products of the same workshop, either Aphrodisias or Afyon. In fact, the stable-isotope analysis of the marble of the Thermae Aphrodite suggests Aphrodisias as the place of origin (Nissenbaum 2006:16–17). The various details of the Theater Aphrodite resemble details of other replicas of the Pudica type. Bracelets generally adorn one or both arms of the nude Pudica (Kelperi 1993). In the Nysa-Scythopolis Thermae Aphrodite, red-painted armlets appear on both arms, while in the Theater Aphrodite the bracelets are carved in high relief on both arms, as in the Barberini Aphrodite (Boschung 2002:364–367), though in a different pattern. The Barberini statue resembles our Aphrodite also in the way the hair rests on the shoulders. The right-hand fingers of our Aphrodite rest gently on the left arm below the bracelet, indicating that the right arm covered the torso and not the breasts, which were thus left exposed as in the Capitoline Aphrodite (Havelock 1995:74–80, Fig. 18). The diverse details in many Pudica variations that copied Hellenistic prototypes emerging from the Knidia, may have been the result of eclecticism, creativity or personal taste. There is no detail in this Aphrodite that does not appear elsewhere, but it is unique in its harmonized combination. It is well designed, naturalistically rendered in the classical contrapposto posture. the artist successfully depicts a realistic female figure while preserving all the details of the Pudica type. In general, this Theater Aphrodite resembles the Thermae Aphrodite in size and style, so we can suggest a similar origin in the sculptural tradition of southwestern Asia Minor. The differences in details such as breast design, hair style and bracelets could indicate different artists working in the same tradition.

Chapter 10: Three marble statues from the Severan Theater

The Pudica type is relatively widespread in Roman art in Syria-Palaestina, and it appears in statues and figurines, for example, from Baniyas (Friedland 1997:164–170, Figs. 48–51); a submerged site near Haifa (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:12, Fig. VII); Caesarea (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:9, Fig. 7); and ‘En Qerem (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:9, Fig. V). Nysa-Scythopolis has three examples of the type, two from the eastern thermae—both nude statues with eros riding a dolphin (Foerster 2005; one unpublished)— and the one from the theater. On city coins from Acre (mentional above), a statue of the goddess is depicted standing in a structure (Farhi 2011:221, Fig. 1). In Caesarea she also appears on an ivory plaque, a lead tessera and a gem (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:10, 14, Fig. 26). In most of these examples it is possible to establish the date according to stylistic traits, although the place of creation of the work is often unclear. In spite of its incomplete state, the Aphrodite statue seems to fit the second-century classicist period, in which numerous replicas of Pudica were produced throughout the Roman Empire.

No. 194; Fischer 1998:161, No. 189; Barkay 2003:136; Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:191, Fig. 358). Statues with this type of garment and holding a cornucopia are characteristic of the Tyche-Fortuna type (Robertson and Dietrich 1966; Matheson 1994; Pollitt 1994; Purcell 1996; Rausa 1997; Villard 1997). Tyche, the goddess of luck and faith, was very popular on city coins of Nysa-Scythopolis. In some coins she is identified as Dionysus’ nurse, Nysa, and she was worshiped at Nysa-Scythopolis as part of the local myth of Dionysus as the founding god of the city. On these coins, the goddess appears either holding or nursing the infant Dionysus, or receiving him after his birth (Seyrig 1962:210–211; Barkay 2003:133– 136; Friedheim 2003:61; Bald Romano and Fischer 2009:391; Ovadiah and Turnheim 2011:40). The statue is of a relatively common Roman type in which Tyche-Fortuna stands in a frontal posture wearing a long garment and holding a cornucopia in her left hand (Reinach 1965 I:222, Nos. 3, 6; IV:146, Nos. 4, 8; V:111, No. 2; 491, No. 2). A statue from Alexandria, dated to the second century CE (Lichocka

The Statue of Tyche (IAA No. 1991-2093, IMJ No. 91.100 [4801]; Fig. 10.3) This is a statue of a female figure (0.73 m high, 0.46 m wide, 0.29 m deep) in a frontal pose, the head, right arm and legs missing, carved in white–light gray marble. Two long curls rest on her shoulders, and she wears a chiton tied with a ribbon under her breasts. A veil is draped over her left shoulder, wraps diagonally around the back and across her waist and finally hangs over her left forearm. In her left hand she holds a cornucopia with clusters of grapes and other fruits, partially eroded. On the right side of her waist, a connecting support is preserved. The rear side of the statue is roughly carved as it was not meant to be seen. In the center of the broken neck is a hole containing traces of lead and a narrow channel connected to it. This, in addition to pinholes in the neck, right arm and lower body, indicate ancient repairs. Remains of red paint are visible on the chiton ribbon. The statue was found in the eastern aditus maximus, in a Stratum 5 layer of rubble from the 749 CE earthquake (L1236, B1340).2 It has been mentioned in a number of publications (Mazor 1987–1988:21, Photograph 11; Foerster 1993:151, Fig. 7; Mazor and Bar-Nathan 1994:124; Tsafrir and Foerster 1997:129,

619

Fig. 10.3. Tyche (photographer, G. Laron).

620

Tali Sharvit

1997: No. 332; Villard 1997:122, No. 72), shows the same posture, garment, cornucopia shape and location, hand grip, long curly hair on her shoulder, and anatomical features visible through the garment. It seems that both these statues drew inspiration from the same Hellenistic prototype. The Alexandrian Tyche has a globe against her right foot, though the rudder that was probably resting on the globe and held in her right hand is missing. Two statues, currently in Rome and London, present the entire iconography of Tyche holding a cornucopia in her left hand and a rudder in her right hand that rests on a globe next to her right foot. The statue from Rome was found in the Baths of Antoninus Pius at Ostia (its head a later addition), and is presumably a Roman copy of a fourth-century BCE prototype to which the attributes may have been added. The statue from London, the provenance of which is unknown, shares the same characteristics and is probably also a Roman copy of an earlier prototype, dated to the second half of the second century CE (Lichocka 1997:162, Nos. 327, 330; Rausa 1997:127– 128). The cornucopia symbolizes agricultural divinities or personifications of land, regions, rivers or fate, presenting the goddess Tyche as the bringer of prosperity. The rudder symbolizes the guiding of fate, events and history, and the globe––the goddess’ control over the world or the instability of fate (Lichocka 1997:30–36). Although this Tyche’s right arm and body below the thighs are missing, a connecting support on the right hip suggests that the arm was held alongside the body and presumably held a rudder, reflecting Lichocka’s Type IA1 (Lichocka 1997:94), like the statue from Villa Massimo in Rome (Lichocka 1997: No. 326), or Lichocka’s Type IIA1 with a rudder held in the same way and resting on a globe (Lichocka 1997:151). Lichocka (1997:107, 160) remarks that if a connecting support is preserved on the right hip, one can almost certainly assume that the goddess held a rudder either resting on the base or on a globe. The Tyche-Fortuna type has several variants that differ from one another in the arrangement of the veil, the direction of the face, or the addition of attributes such as a wheel. One variant shows the goddess holding a second cornucopia in her right hand (Rausa 1997:92, No. 22). The palm of the hand in our Tyche statue rests on the cornucopia in a distorted version of the common

depiction. The folds of the garment are graphically rendered, and above the breasts two deep, horizontal depressions emphasize the body under the cloth. The chiton, made of a light-weight cloth, appears heavy due to the schematic rendering of its folds. In the Alexandrian Tyche, the chiton has similar folds around the ribbon and breasts, and the veil is emphasized by long, deep drill work. However, in both the Alexandrian and London Tyches, the fine transparent cloth of the garment is more naturalistically rendered, with thin folds that drape delicately, such as the v-shaped folds below the neck. Based on these differences, it seems that our Tyche is a somewhat later creation than those of Alexandria and London. In addition, the statue of Artemis Rospigliosi from Baniyas, dated to the late second–beginning of the third centuries CE, is quite similar in style to the Tyche statue in the folds of the upper garment, the size of the ribbon, the draping of the fabric over the body and around the ribbon and the breasts, and the arrangement of the folds over the belly with the hint of the navel (Friedland 1997:173–180, Fig. 54). Also similar are the small number of folds and the schematic rendering and heavy static shape of the torso. A similar rendition of the cloth appears in the Vatican Tyche, dated to the first half of the third century CE (Lichocka 1997:200, No. 351), in which the folds of the chiton over the right shoulder and the belly are slightly different, but the effect of the ribbon under the breasts, the v-shaped folds under the neck and the deep drill work in the veil are the same. Thus, these stylistic traits date the Tyche statue to the late second or early third century CE. Numerous depictions of Tyche are found in SyriaPalaestina (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:188–200, Figs. 353–380, Color Pls. XLVII–LIV), and many are of the Tyche-Fortuna type, for example a torso of a marble statue found at Caesarea with her holding a double cornucopia in her left hand (Gersht 1984:113), a bronze statuette from Dor (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:191, Fig. 355), on coins from Baniyas and Tiberias (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:192–194, Figs. 363, 364), and on several gems from Caesarea and Castra (Ovadiah and Mucznik 2009:195, Fig. 379:L).

The Origin of the Statues The three statues were probably imported as fully carved products. Chemical and mineralogical analyses

Chapter 10: Three marble statues from the Severan Theater

indicate that the Hermes is made of Proconnesian marble from Marmara (Pearl 1989:50–51). The Aphrodite and the Tyche, both made of white-light gray marble, were not chemically analyzed. As noted above, based on the marble stable-isotope analysis (Nissenbaum 2005:16–17), the NysaScythopolis Eastern Thermae Aphrodite probably came from Aphrodisias. As the Theater Aphrodite resembles the Thermae Aphrodite in size and style, it probably originated in the same region. The stylistic resemblance of the Tyche statue to that of Artemis Rospigliosi from Baniyas, the latter made of marble from the quarries of Usak or Mylasa in Asia Minor (Friedland 1997:180), suggests that it is also a product of one of the Asia Minor ateliers. In fact, Fischer (2009:402, 412) states that the most common marble sources for statues in Roman Palestine in general were Paros, Hymettus/Carrara, Marmara, Afyon/Aphrodisias, Pentelikon and Thasos, the last three comprising the most common marble sources for the statues in Nysa-Scythopolis. The stylistic and technical characteristics of most statues discovered in Syria-Palaestina relate to a number of ateliers in Asia Minor that produced statues of a variety of marbles from different quarries (Friedland 1997:45–47). Sculpture of the first to third centuries CE in Asia Minor represents the uniform ‘Asiatic’ style, which is clearly different from the ‘Greek’ styles (Friedland 1997:52). The Hermes statue reflects the ‘Asiatic’ style in the rendering of the eyes (Friedland 1999:13) and the neck support (Friedland 1997:52–54; Foerster 2000:138). The same neck support can be seen in the Aphrodite statue as well, therefore placing it also within the same ‘Asiatic’ sculptural tradition. During the first to third centuries CE, statue-production centers were active at such major sites as Aphrodisias, Ephesus, Side and Perge, and their close vicinities. The difficulties involved in isolating the specific trends of each center, and the incomplete state of two of the statues, make relating any of the three to a particular atelier from a stylistic point of view problematic, although they are clearly of the ‘Asiatic’ tradition (Friedland 1997:54; Gärtner 2007:279). Some details in the Hermes statue could be related to conventions in Hellenistic royal portraiture, as Asia Minor was one of the centers of such portraits (see, for example, Vermeule 1971:175, Pls. 42–44). This artistic style was later imitated in Roman statues.

621

Statue Assemblages in Theaters Theaters in Syria-Palaestina and Asia Minor were commonly adorned with statues, the subjects usually related to the theater’s main function, but also associated with its other roles in city life, such as a place for assemblies, religious rituals, festivals, processions, etc. (Gärtner 2007:198, 278). Within the assemblage of statues of a theater, ‘ideal’ sculpture (gods and personifications), usually chosen from the local pantheon, comprised 53%, as opposed to 47% of ‘imperial’ and ‘private’ sculpture (imperial family and honorable citizens). On the other hand, in the West, the number of imperial and private statues is considerably higher than the ‘ideal’ sculptures (Fuchs 1987; Gärtner 2007:263–264). In the West, unlike in the East, there was more emphasis on displaying copies of opera nobilia (famous works of Greek sculptors; Gärtner 2007:264). In Asia Minor, personified entities such as the boule or the polis were also represented in statues (Gärtner 2007:264). Four additional Hermes statues have been found in other theaters in the Roman East, at Perge, Ephesus, Amman and Petra (Gärtner 2007:202, 218), and the statues from Perge and Amman are of the same type as our Hermes (Hermes as a shepherd), accompanied by a ram. Aphrodite is less common in the theaters of the East, and the example in the theater at Petra is not of the Pudica type (Gärtner 2007:201–202, No. 499). Tyche is more popular in eastern theaters. In the theater at Perge is a statue of Tyche holding a cornucopia (Gärtner 2007:230, No. 629; Özgür 2010:132–133, No.57), and at Side the lower part of a Tyche statue wearing a himation over a chiton has a globe near her right leg (Gärtner 2007:236, No. 670). At Nysa on the Meander, a partial statue of the goddess was identified by her chiton (Gärtner 2007:242, No. 696). It is interesting that the famous Tyche of Antioch, dated to the Hellenistic period, was also placed near the theater (Broucke 1994:40, n. 35). The Aphrodite and Tyche statues from NysaScythopolis were found without heads, and therefore their identities––whether goddesses or allegorical portraits––remain obscure. Women of the imperial family were often depicted as goddesses and their statues were occasionally placed in the public domain. Portraits of this kind in the image of Aphrodite Pudica are well known (Hallett 2011:201, Pl. 121), as are

622

Tali Sharvit

portraits in the image of Tyche with the cornucopia and rudder (Wrede 1981:233, No. 107; Smith 1994). From the above discussion it is clear that all three statues from Nysa-Scythopolis fit the typical repertoire of statues found in theaters of the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire. However, an assemblage of these specific three gods together is unparalleled, although a combination of Aphrodite and Hermes is found in the theater at Petra, and Hermes and Tyche at Perge (Gärtner 2007:267–272, Tables 1, 2). Thus, the statues from Nysa-Scythopolis attest to a unique assemblage of these three deities, or perhaps incomplete evidence from other theaters. If one seeks a connection between these specific deities and what may have been the narrative of the sculptural program, it is worth considering the relationship between Aphrodite and Hermes and their son (Ovid, Metamorphoses IV, 288–388; Hyginus, Astronomica II, 16), and the cultic

association between Venus Verticordia and Fortuna Virilis in Rome (Schmitt-Pantel 1992:387–388). The sculptures may have been placed in the niches of the scaenae frons in the Severan Theater (at least 18 niches are reconstructed), around the scaena or near the cavea, typical arrangements in theaters (Sturgeon 2004; Gärtner 2007:280; Gersht 2008:511–513). Based on the findspot and state of preservation of the Hermes statue, it seems most likely that it was originally placed in the scaenae frons. In summary, it is difficult to reach any firm conclusions as to the original location of the three statues, the sculptural program or its overall narrative, as only a small fraction of the statue assemblage is preserved and the identities of the others is unknown. These three preserved examples provide a glimpse of the magnificent monumental decoration of the Severan Theater in Nysa-Scythopolis.

Notes 1 I would like to express my gratitude to Rina Talgam, David Mevorach, Gabriel Mazor and Silvia Rozenberg for their guidance, encouragement and useful critiques of this research work. I would also like to thank Walid Atrash, Rachel BarNathan, Moshe Fischer, Achim Lichtenberger, Zeev Weiss,

Lotem Pinchover, Ido Noy, Rachel Caine-Kreinin and Morag Wilhelm for their valuable assistance. 2 Its findspot was originally reported as the eastern versura in a preliminary report (Mazor 1987–1988). Locus 1236 appears in Bet She’an II.

R eferences Applebaum S. 1961. News from the Museum of Archaeology: A Greek Sculpture from Beit-Shean. HA 1:12–13. Applebaum S. 1963. Where Saul and Jonathan Perished: Bet Shean in Israel. The Roman Theatre Revealed and a Greek Statue Discovered. The Illustrated London News 16 March:380–383. Applebaum S. 1971. A Greek Statue from Bet Shean. Museum Haartz Bulletin 13:11–13 (Hebrew). Applebaum S. 1978. The Roman Theater of Scythopolis. SCI 4:77–97. Applebaum S. 1986. The Statue from Bet Shean. The Israel Museum Journal 5:105. Ashton S.A. 2001a. Marble Portrait of Ptolemy IX. In S. Walker and P. Higgs eds. Cleopatra of Egypt from History to Myth. Princeton. P. 61. Ashton S.A. 2001b. Marble Portrait of Ptolemy XII. In S. Walker and P. Higgs eds. Cleopatra of Egypt from History to Myth. Princeton. P. 157.

Athanassakis A. 1989. From the Phallic Cairn to Shepherd God and Divine Herald. Eranos 87:33–49. Atrash W. 2006. Entertainment Structures in the Civic Center of Nysa-Scythopolis (Beth-She’an) during the Roman and Byzantine Periods. Ph.D. diss. University of Haifa. Haifa. Bald Romano I. and Fischer L.M. 2009. Roman Marble and Limestone Sculpture from Bet Shean, Israel. In Les ateliers de sculpture régionaux: technique, styles et iconographie. Actes du Xe Colloque international sur l’art provincial romain, Aix-en-Provence et Arles, 21–23 Mai, 2007. Arles. Pp. 391–400. Barkay R. 2003. The Coinage of Nysa-Scythopolis (Bet Shean) (Corpus Nummorum Palaestinensium 5). Jerusalem. Bernhard-Walcher A. 2001. Basalt Egyptian-Style Portrait of a Queen. In S. Walker and P. Higgs eds. Cleopatra of Egypt from History to Myth. Princeton. P. 60.

Chapter 10: Three marble statues from the Severan Theater

Boschung D. 2002. Die Antikensammlung in Newby Hall: Ein Beispiel englischer Antikenrezeption in 18. Jh. International Journal of the Classical Tradition 8:359– 374. Bothmer B.V. 1996. Hellenistic Elements in Egyptian Sculpture of the Ptolemaic Period. In K. Hamma ed. Alexandria and Alexandrianism: Papers Delivered at a Symposium Organized by the J.P. Getty Museum and Getty Center for the History of Art and Humanities and Held in the Museum, April 22–25. 1993. Malibu, Cal. Pp. 215–230. Broucke P. 1994. Tyche and Fortune of Cities in the Greek and Roman World. In S.B. Matheson ed. An Obsession with Fortune: Tyche in Greek and Roman Art (Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin 1994). New Haven. Pp. 34–49. Burkert W. 1985. Greek Religion. Cambridge, Mass. Despinis G. 1981. Zum Hermes von Troizen. MDAIR 96:238–244. Farhi Y. 2011. The ‘Modest Aphrodite’ from NysaScythopolis (Bet Shean) and Ptolemais (Akko). IEJ 61:217–222. Felletti-Maj B.M. 1951. Aphrodite Pudica. Archeologia Classica 3:33–65. Fischer J. 1989. Ein später Ptolemäer als Hermes-Thot: Neue Beobachtungen am sog. Apion im Württembergischen Landesmuseum Stuttgart. AA 1989:43–55. Fischer L.M. 1998. Marble Studies: Roman Palestine and the Marble Trade, with Contributions by Z. Pearl and T. Grossmark. Konstanz. Fischer L.M. 2009. Sculpture in Roman Palestine. Import and Local Production: An Overview. In V. Gaggadis-Robin, A. Hermary, M. Reddé and C. Sintes eds. Les ateliers de sculpture régionaux: techniques, styles et iconographie. Actes du Xe Colloque international sur l’art provincial romain, Aix-en-Provence et Arles, 21–23 Mai, 2007. Arles. Pp. 401–415. Fleischer R. and Jentel M.-O. 1984. Aphrodite. LIMC 2: 2–166. Foerster G. 1993. The Excavations at Beth-Shean (NysaScythopolis). In A. Biran and J. Aviram eds. Biblical Archaeology Today, 1990: Proceedings of the Second International Congress on Biblical Archaeology Jerusalem, June‒July 1990. Jerusalem. Pp. 147–152. Foerster G. 2000. A Statue of Dionysos from Bet Shean (Nysa Scythopolis). In Agathos daimôn; Mythes et cultes: études d’iconographie en l’honneur de Lilly Kahil (BCH Suppl. 38). Paris. Pp. 135–141. Foerster G. 2005. A Modest Aphrodite from Bet Shean. Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology 4:3–15. Friedheim E. 2003. The Cult of Tyche in the Land of Israel during the Roman Period: A Study in Historical Geography. Jerusalem and Eretz-Israel 1:47–85 (Hebrew). Friedland A.E. 1997. Roman Marble Sculpture from the Levant: The Group from the Sanctuary of Pan at Caesarea Philippi (Panias). Ph.D. diss. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. Friedland A.E. 1999. Greco-Roman Sculpture in the Levant: the Marbles from the Sanctuary of Pan at Caesarea Philippi (Panias). In J.H. Humphrey ed. The Roman and Byzantine

623

Near East 2: Some Recent Archaeological Research (JRA Suppl. Series 31). Portsmouth, R.I. Pp. 7–22. Friedland A.E. and Tykot R.H. 2012. Quarry Origins, Commission, and Import of the Marble Sculptures from the Roman Theater in Philadelphia/Amman, Jordan. In A. Gutiérrez Garcia-M., P. Lapuente Mercadal and I. Rodà de Llanza eds. Interdisciplinary Studies on Ancient Stone: Proceedings of the IX Association for the Study of Marbles and Other Stones in Antiquity (ASMOSIA) Conference (Tarragona 2009). Tarragona. Pp. 52–60. Fuchs M. 1987. Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung römisher Theater in Italien und den Westprovinzen des Imperium Romanum. Mainz. Gärtner J. 2007. The Architectural Sculpture in Roman Public Buildings from the Time of Augustus to the End of the Second Century A.D. in Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Gersht R. 1982. Roman Sculpture in Eretz Israel. M.A. thesis. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Gersht R. 1984. The Tyche of Caesarea Maritime. PEQ 116:110–114. Gersht R. 2008. Caesarean Sculpture in Context. In Y.Z. Eliav, E.A. Friedland and S. Herbart eds. The Sculptural Environment of the Roman Near East––Reflections on Culture, Ideology, and Power. Leuven–Dudley, Mass. Pp. 509–538. Hallett H.C. 2011. The Roman Nude––Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 BC–300 AD. Oxford. Havelock C.M. 1995. The Aphrodite of Knidos and Her Successors, A Historical Review of the Female Nude in Greek Art. Ann Arbor. Helmut K. 1975. Bildnisse der Ptolemäer. Berlin. Hyginus. L’astronomie (Collection des Universités de France, Texte établi et traduit par André Le Boeuffle). Paris 1983. Inan J. 1975. Roman Sculpture in Side. Ankara. Jost M. 1996. Hermes. OCD:690–691. Jucker I. 1975. Zum Bildnis Ptolemaios III Euergetes. Antike Kunst 18.1:17–25. Kelperi E. 1993. Der Schmuck der nackten und halbnackten Aphrodite der spätklassik und der hellenistischen Zeit. Frankfurt. Lichocka B. 1997. L’iconographie de Fortuna dans l’Empire Romain (Ier siècle avant n.è.–IVe siècle de n.è.) (Travaux du Centre d’Archéologie méditerranéenne de l’académie polonaise des Sciences 29). Warsaw. Maderna C. 1988. Iupiter Diomedes und Merkur Vorbilder für römische Bildnisstatuen: Untersuchungen zum römischen statuarischen Idealporträt. Heidelberg. Matheson S.B. 1994. The Goddess Tyche. In S.B. Matheson ed. An Obsession with Fortune: Tyche in Greek and Roman Art (Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin 1994). New Haven. Pp. 18–33. Mazor G. 1987–1988. Bet She’an Project, City Center of Ancient Bet Shean––South. ESI 6:10–24. Mazor G. and Bar-Nathan R. 1994. Scythopolis—Capital of Palaestina Secunda. Qadmoniot 107–108:117–137 (Hebrew).

624

Tali Sharvit

Motte A. and Pirenne-Delforge V. 1996. Aphrodite. OCD: 120. Nissenbaum A. 2005. Appendix A: Stable Isotope Analysis of the Aphrodite Statue. Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology 4:16–17. Ovadiah A. and Mucznik S. 2009. Worshipping the Gods: Art and Cult in Roman Eretz Israel. Leiden. Ovadiah A. and Turnheim Y. 2011. Roman Temples, Shrines and Temene in Israel. Rome. Ovid. Metamorphoses. F.J. Miller transl. (The Loeb Classical Library). London. 1984. Özgür M.E. 2010. Sculptures du Musée d’Antalya. Ankara. Pearl Z. 1989. Archaeological Marble in Israel––Chemical and Mineralogical Analysis. M.Sc. thesis. Weizmann Institute of Science. Rehovot. Perry E. 2005. The Aesthetics of Emulation in the Visual Arts of Ancient Rome. Cambridge. Pollitt J.J. 1986. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge. Pollitt J.J. 1994. An Obsession with Fortuna. In S.B. Matheson ed. An Obsession with Fortune: Tyche in Greek and Roman Art (Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin 1994). New Haven. Pp. 12–17. Purcell N. 1996. Fortuna/Fors. OCD:606. Rausa F. 1997. Fortuna (Tyche-Fortuna). LIMC 8:125–141. Reinach S. 1965. Répertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine I–VI. Rome. Robertson N. and Dietrich B.C. 1996. Tyche. OCD:1566. Scheid J. 1996a. Mercurius. OCD:962. Scheid J. 1996b. Venus. OCD:1587. Schmidt E. 1997. Venus. LIMC 8:192–230. Schmitt-Pantel P. 1992. A History of Women in the West 1: From Ancient Goddesses to Christian Saints. Cambridge, Mass. Seyrig H. 1962. Antiquités syriennes. Syria 39.3–4:193–211.

Siebert G. 1990. Hermes. LIMC 5:285–387. Simon E. and Bauchness G. 1992. Mercurius. LIMC 6:500– 554. Smith A.C. 1994. Queens and Empresses as Goddesses: The Public Role of the Personal Tyche in the Graeco-Roman World. In S.B. Matheson ed. An Obsession with Fortune: Tyche in Greek and Roman Art (Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin 1994). New Haven. Pp. 86–105. Smith R.R.R. 1988. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford. Sturgeon M.C. 2004. Corinth, Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens IX, III: Sculpture, the Assemblage from the Theater. Princeton. Tsafrir Y. and Foerster G. 1997. Urbanism at Scythopolis– Bet Shean in the Fourth to Seventh Centuries. DOP 51:85– 146. Vermeule C.C. 1971. Dated Monuments of Hellenistic and Graeco-Roman Popular Art in Asia Minor: Pontus through Mysia. In D.G. Mitten, J.G. Pedley and J.A. Scott eds. Studies Presented to George M.A. Hanfmann (Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University, Monographs in Art and Archaeology II). Cambridge, Mass. Pp. 169–176. Vermeule C.C. and Anderson K. 1981. Greek and Roman Sculpture in the Holy Land. The Burlington Magazine 123:7–19. Villard L. 1997. Tyche. LIMC 8:115–125. Weber T.M. 2002. Gadara-Umm Qés I: Gadara Decapolitana: Untersuchungen zur Topographie, Geschichte, Architektur und der bildenden Kunst seiner “polis Hellenis” in Ostjordanland (Abhandlungen des deutschen Palästina-Vereins 30). Wiesbaden. Wrede H. 1981. Consecratio in formam deorum: Vergöttliche Privatpersonen in der römischen Kaiserzeit. Mainz am Rhein.

G. Mazor and W. Atrash, 2015, Bet She’an III/2 (IAA Reports 58/2)

Appendix 1

List of Loci and Baskets

‘Locus numbers’ refer to the loci in the Southern and Severan theaters. ‘Description’ defines the nature of the excavated loci. ‘Unit’ refers to the architectural unit, based on the theater terminology (see Chapter 3). ‘elevation numbers’ are preceded by (-), as the site is below sea level; therefore, the numbers rise as the excavation continued deeper. ‘Stratum’ correlates with the Bet She’an Archaeological Project Chronological Chart, p. xiii. Basket numbers are followed by

identification sub-letters: A = architectural elements; B = bone; C = coin; G = glass; H = window glass; J = brick; K = charcoal; L = inscription; M = metal; N = lamp; O = organic sediment; P = pottery; R = roof tiles; S = stone vessel; T = tessera; U = figurine; V = wall mosaic tesserae; X = varia; Z = statue. The pottery basket numbers are followed by field readings: Rom = Roman; Byz = Byzantine; Um = Umayyad; Ab = Abbasid; Mam = Mamluk.

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1002

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T3

-155.20/-155.45

9

1003

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage

-155.20/-155.45

9

5002P (Rom-Byz)

5002G

3.13

1004

Foundation layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage

-155.20/-155.45

10

5003P (Byz I)

5003G

3.13

1005

Alluvium layer above Channel T9

Hyposcaenium, drainage system, Channel T9

-155.94/-156.46

9

5004P (Rom)

3.11 (3)

1006

Alluvium layer above Channel T9 = L1005

Postscaenium, drainage system, Channel T9

-156.59/-156.99

9

5005P (Byz)

3.11 (3)

1007

Accumulation layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

-154.50/-155.00

9

5007P (Byz)

5007C, G, M

3.8

1008

Foundation, fill layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T3

-155.47/-155.64

9

5008P (Byz)

5008C, G

3.9 3.13

1009

Accumulation layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

-154.50/-155.00

9

5009P (Byz)

3.8

1010

Foundation, fill layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T3

-155.64/-156.19

9

5010P (Rom) 5011P (Byz)

3.9 3.13

1011

Yellow travertine layer above Channel T6

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.20/-156.54

11

5012P (Rom-Byz)

1012

Accumulation layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155/49/-155.69

9

5013P (Byz)

3.13

5021C

3.11

3.13

626

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1013

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, drainage system, Channels T8 and T9

-155.91/-155.99

9

5014P (Byz)

1014

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, western section, Channel T2

-154.73/-155.03

9

5015P (Byz)

5015G

3.13 (1-1)

1015

Pipe T5

Hyposcaenium, western section

-154.73/-155.00

9

5017P (Byz)

5017D

3.13 (1-1)

1016

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.69/-156.00

11

5018P (Rom-Byz) 5029P (Rom)

1017

Accumulation layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

-155.03/-155.47

9

5019P (Byz)

5019C

3.8

1018

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.00/-156.25

11

5020P (Rom-Byz) 5023P (Rom)

5020T 5023M, T

3.4

1019

Alluvium layer

Postscaenium, drainage, Channels T8 and T9

-155.94/-156.99

9

5024P (Rom-Byz)

3.11 (3)

1020

Foundation layer over the platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.25/-156.49

11

5025P (Rom-Byz)

3.5

1021

Alluvium, yellow soil layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.54/-156.98

11

5032P (Rom-Byz) 5035P (Rom)

5031C, M

3.11

1022

Alluvium, yellow soil layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.55/-156.75

11

5027P (Rom-Byz)

5027C

3.11

1023

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.59/-156.39

11

5028P (Rom-Byz)

5028C

3.4

1024

Fill layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.20/-153.46

9

5030P (Byz)

5030C

3.8

1025

Alluvium, yellow soil layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.75/-156.94

11

5033P (Rom)

5033C

3.11

1026

Alluvium, yellow soil layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.94/157.41

11

5036P (Rom-Byz)

5036C 5042C 5072C

3.11

1027

Alluvium, yellow soil layer

Hyposcaenium, central passage, Channel T6

-156.78/-157.87

11

5083P (Rom-Byz) 5088P (Rom-Byz)

5088C

3.11

1028

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, western section

-156.15/-156.45

11

50383P (Rom-Byz)

1029

alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, western section

-156.15/-156.45

11

5037P (Rom-Byz) 5039P (Rom-Byz)

1030

Floor foundation

Postscaenium, corridor, Channel T10

-153.10/-153.35

9

1031

Pipe

Postscaenium corridor

-153.35/-153.71

9

5001P (Byz) 5047P (Byz) 5048P (Byz)

5001T 5047D 5048C

3.20

1032

W2060 exposure

Postscaenium corridor

-153.16/-153.29

9

5165P (Byz)

5045O

3.20

3.11 (3)

3.4

3.5 5037G

3.5 3.20

627

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1033

Floor foundation dismantled

Postscaenium corridor

-153.35/-153.74

9

5040P (Byz) 5050P (Byz)

5040C, G

3.20

1034

Fill layer over W2012

Hyposcaenium eastern section

-153.50/-153.55

9

5041P (Rom-Byz)

5041C

3.8

1035

Alluvium layer

Postscaenium drainage, Channels T8 and T9

-153.75/-153.97

9

5043P (Rom-Byz) 5046P (Rom-Byz) 5096P (Rom-Byz)

3.11 (3)

1036

Floor foundation dismantled

Postscaenium corridor

-153.35/-153.73

9

5051P (Byz)

3.20

1037

Floor foundation and T10 dismantled

Postscaenium corridor, Channel T10

-153.74/-154.30

9

5065P (Byz)

3.20

1038

Floor foundation and T10 dismantled = L1037

Postscaenium corridor, Channel T10

-153.74/-154.30

9

1039

Alluvium layer = L1052, L1185

Postscaenium, northern facade wall, probe

-153.85/-150.00

10

5052P (Rom-Um) 5053P (Byz) 5055P (Byz) 5056P (Byz) 5059P (Byz) 5061P (Byz) 5062P (Byz)

5055A, C, G, M 5059C 5062C

3.14

1041

Accumulation layer, W2001 foundation

Hyposcaenium, western section

-155.05/-156.44

9

5057P (Byz) 5058P (Byz)

5057C 5058C

3.8

1042

Alluvium layer = L1045

Orchestra, Channel T30603

-154.25/-154.35

12

1044

Floor foundation dismantled, pipes

Orchestra

-154.70/-154.80

11

1045

Alluvium layer, brick floor

Orchestra, Channel T30603

-154.25/-154.50

12

1046

Pavement foundation, fill layer

Pulpitum

-153.50/-153.78

9

5060P (Byz)

5060A, C, G, M, T

3.7

1048

Pavement foundation, fill layer

Pulpitum

-153.78/-155.23

9

5063P (Byz) 5064P (Byz) 5066P (Rom-Byz) 5069P (Byz) 5074P (Byz) 5077P (Byz) 5078P (Rom-Byz) 5080P (Byz)

5066Z 5069A 5074C 5077C, S 5078C, M 5080C

3.7

1050

Foundation layer over platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, western section

-156.45/-156.51

11

5067P (Byz)

1052

Alluvium layer = L1039, L1185

Postscaenium façade northern wall, probe

-155.00/-155.55

10

5071P (Byz) 5075P (Byz) 5086P (Byz)

5075C 5086C

3.14

1053

Accumulation layer, W2002 foundation

Hyposcaenium western section

-155.00/-156.36

9

5076P (Byz) 5081P (Rom-Byz) 5082P (Rom)

5076C, G 5081C, Z 5082C 5085C

3.8

3.20

3.36 5073P (Rom-Byz)

3.36 3.36

3.5

628

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1054

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium eastern section

-155.93/-157.05

11

5087P (Rom-Byz) 5116P (Rom-Byz) 5118P (Rom-Byz)

5087C 5118G

3.4

1055

Accumulation layer above staircase

Western staircase

-148.50/-150.57

12

5084P (Rom) 5097P (Rom-Byz)

5084C

3.55

1057

Pipes foundation layer = L50623

Orchestra

-154.45/-155.01

11

5101P (Rom-Byz)

5091D 5092D

3.36

1059

Floor foundation

Postscaenium corridor

-153.20/-153.75

9

5108P (Byz)

3.20

1060

Foundation layer

Postscaenium platform

-154.30/-154.75

12

5130P (Rom) 5137P (Rom)

3.20

1061

Alluvium layer

Eastern versura platform

-155.50/-156.40

5

5094P (Byz-Um) 5104P (Byz-Um)

1063

Channel T30601 foundation

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.15/-154.45

12

1065

Alluvium

Orchestra

-154.45/-155.16

12

5105P (Rom-Byz)

5105G

3.36

1066

Accumulation layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium western section

-155.56/-156.16

9

5109P (Rom-Byz) 5110P (Rom-Byz) 5112P (Rom-Byz) 5114P (Rom) 5115P (Rom)

5109C 5112C, D 5115C

3.4

1068

Foundation layer

Postscaenium platform

-153.70/-154.30

12

5117P (Rom)

1069

Alluvium layer

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.30/-154.80

12

5113P (Rom-Byz)

5113C, G, M

3.36

1072

Foundation layer of channel and W2205

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-155.16/-156.42

13

5120P (Rom) 5123P (Rom) 5126P (Rom)

5120G 5123C

2.3

1073

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-153.25/-154.85

9

5121P (Byz) 5124P (Byz) 5128P (Rom-Byz) 5131P (Byz) 5135P (Rom-Byz) 5138P (Rom-Byz) 5141P (Rom-Byz)

5121A, C 5124C, G 5128C, M 5135C 5138A, C 5141A, G

3.8

1074

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-153.25/-154.65

9

5129P (Byz) 5132P (Rom-Byz) 5136P (Rom-Byz) 5139P (Byz) 5142P (Rom-Byz)

5129A 5132A 5142C

3.8

1075

Postscaenium platform foundation

Postscaenium

-154.30/-154.75

12

5143P (Rom)

1077

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-154.50/-155.20

9

5140P (Byz)

5140C

3.8

1079

Floor foundation dismantled

Postscaenium

-154.90/-155.00

9

5145P (Rom) 5162P (Rom)

5145G

3.20

1080

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-154.85/-155.20

9

5144P (Rom-Byz) 5147P (Rom-Byz)

5144C 5147C

3.8

5001G 5094B 5102N 5104C, X

3.16

3.36

3.20

3.20

629

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

1081

Postscaenium platform foundation

Postscaenium

-154.90/-155.25

12

5155P (Rom) 5163P (Rom)

3.20

1082

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.20/-155.71

10

5152P (Rom-Byz)

3.12

1083

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, Channel T1

-155.20/-155.60

10

5156P (Byz) 5158P (Rom-Byz)

1084

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.20/-155.76

10

5151P (Rom-Byz)

3.12

1085

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.20/-155.82

10

5150P (Rom-Byz)

3.12

1086

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.20/-155.80

10

5153P (Rom-Byz)

3.12

1087

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, Channel T1

-155.50/-155.75

10

5157P (Rom-Byz)

1088

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.50/-155.90

10

5159P (Rom-Byz) 5164P (Rom-Byz)

1089

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, Channel T1

-155.60/-155.70

10

5160P (Rom-Byz)

5160K

3.12

1092

Alluvium layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.20/-155.96

9

5216P (Rom-Byz) 5222P (Rom-Byz) 5244P (Rom)

5244M, X 5301C

3.4

1093

Fill layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

-154.84/-155.08

9

5167P (Byz)

1094

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, western section, Channel t2

-154.83/-155.08

9

5169P (Byz)

5169G

3.13 (1-1)

1095

Fill layer, channel foundation

Hyposcaenium, western section, Channel T2

-154.78/-155.08

9

5168P (Byz)

5168C

3.13 (1-1)

1096

Clay pipe

Hyposcaenium, western section, Pipe T5

-155.25/-155.42

9

5170P (Byz)

5170C, D 5221C

3.13 (1-1)

1097

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-153.60/-154.98

9

5171P (Rom-Byz) 5174P (Byz) 5176P (Byz) 5178P (Rom-Byz) 5182P (Rom-Byz) 5184P (Rom-Byz) 5187P (Byz) 5189P (Rom-Byz)

5171C, G, M 5174A 5176C 5182C 5187G 5189G

3.7

1098

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-153.60/-154.60

9

5172P (Rom-Byz) 5175P (Byz) 5177P (Byz) 5179P (Rom-Byz)

5172C, G 5175A 5177C, G

3.7

1099

Alluvium layer

Scaena drainage system, Channel T8

-157.95/-158.15

12

5185P (Rom-Byz)

5180C

3.11

1100

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-154.60/-155.28

9

5181P (Rom-Byz) 5183P (Byz) 5186P (Rom-Byz) 5188P (Rom-Byz)

5181A, C 5186A, M 5188A

3.7

5156G 5158G

5157G

Plan Nos.

3.12

3.12 3.12

3.13 (1-1)

630

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1101

Sealed locus, fill layer, pavement foundation

Pulpitum

-154.98/-155.26

9

5191P (Byz) 5194P (Byz) 5196P (Byz)

1102

Accumulation layer, W2101 exposure

Hyposcaenium, western section

-153.21/-153.60

12

5192P (Rom-Byz) 5195P (Rom-Byz)

5192G 5195C

3.2

1103

Alluvium layer over floor foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.28/-155.68

9

5197P (Rom-Byz)

5197C

3.7

1104

Floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank, Channel T1

-154.20/-155.40

10

5198P (Byz) 5202P (Rom-Byz) 5204P (Byz)

5198C 5204G

3.12 (1-1)

1105

Alluvium layer over the floor foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.26/-155.40

9

5199P (Byz) 5201P (Byz) 5203P (Byz)

5203B

3.7

1107

Alluvium layer

Scaena drainage system, Channel T8

-158.84/-159.55

11

5211P Rom-(Byz) 5213P (Rom-Byz)

5213W

3.11

1108

Alluvium layer over the floor foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.40/-155.70

9

5206P (Rom) 5210P (Rom-Byz)

5206A, C, G

3.7

1109

Foundation layer

Pulpitum, western flank, Channel T1

-155.80/-156.45

10

5207P (Rom-Byz)

5207X

3.12 (1-1)

1110

Alluvium layer over the floor foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.68/-156.06

9

5209P (Rom-Byz) 5212P (Byz)

3.7

1111

Foundation layer

Pulpitum, western flank, Channel T1

-156.45/-156.54

10

5208P (Rom-Byz)

3.12 (1-1)

1112

Alluvium layer, the abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.72/-156.25

11

5214P (Rom-Byz)

3.4

1113

Travertine layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-156.45/-157.54

12

5215P (Rom-Byz) 5217P (Byz) 5224P (Rom) 5226P (Byz) 5233P (Byz) 5237P (Byz) 5313P (Byz)

1114

Alluvium layer over platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-157.07/-158.00

12

5223P (Rom) 5236P (Rom)

1115

Fill layer, W2085, W2086 foundation

Hyposcaenium, western section

-155.42/-155.90

9

5225P (Rom-Byz) 5228P (Byz)

1116

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, Channel T9

-157.90/-159.65

11

5227P (Rom-Byz)

1117

Fill under abutment W2025

Hyposcaenium, western section

-153.98/-155.18

9

5219P (Rom-Byz) 5228P (Rom-Byz)

5219C, X 5228G

3.8

1118

Fill under abutment W2030

Hyposcaenium, western section

-153.76/-155.26

9

5220P (Rom-Byz) 5257P (Rom-Byz)

5220G 5257G

3.8

1119

Fill under abutment W2086

Hyposcaenium western section

-153.90/-155.15

9

5218C

3.8

1120

Fill under abutment W2085

Hyposcaenium, western section

-154.20/-155.04

9

5229A

3.8

1121

W2018 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, central passage

-153.53/-156.50

9

5230P (Rom-Byz) 5242P (Byz)

5230G 5242B

3.7

1122

W2019 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, central passage

-153.30/-156.20

9

5231P (Rom-Byz) 5238P (Byz)

5231a, G, X 5238C, G

3.8

3.7

5215C 5226A 5233A, Z

3.12 (1-1)

2.3 5225A, N 5228C, N

3.8 3.11 (3)

631

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1123

W2012 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, western section

-153.55/-155.00

9

3206P (Byz) 5232P (Rom-Byz) 5234P (Byz) 5235P (Byz) 5240P (Byz)

3206S 5232G 5234C 5235C 5240A 5288C 5289C

3.8

1124

Fill layer between W2109 platform and the scaena foundation W2079

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-158.27/-158.27

13

5243P (Rom)

5243C

2.3

1125

Floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.26/-153.60

9

5241P (Byz) 5245P (Byz) 5249P (Byz) 5253P (Byz) 5254P (Byz)

5254A 5287C

3.8

1126

Foundation layer

Pulpitum, western flank, Channel T1

-154.55/-155.52

10

5246P (Byz) 5250P (Byz) 5260P (Rom-Byz) 5264P (Rom-Byz)

3.12 (1-1)

1127

Alluvium layer

Hyposcaenium, Channel T8

-157.70/-159.40

12

5255P (Rom-Byz)

3.11

1128

Semicircular niche, marble floor

Proscaenium W2046

-153.56/-154.24

12

1129

W2027 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.75/-154.28

9

1130

Fill layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.40/-154.83

1131

Foundation layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

1132

Foundation layer

1133

5248L

3.2

5251P (Byz) 5252P (Byz) 5256P (Byz) 5261P (Byz) 5263P (Byz)

5251G 5252C 5261A 5263A

3.7

9

5259P (Byz) 5262P (Byz) 5262P (Byz)

5259G

3.8

-155.64/-156.42

11

5265P (Byz) 5269P (Byz)

3.5

Pulpitum, western flank, Channel T1

-155.52/-155.72

10

5268P (Byz)

3.12 (1-1)

Accumulation layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.80/-154.35

10

5266P (Byz) 5271P (Rom-Byz) 5285P (Byz)

5271C

3.12

1134

Accumulation layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.60/-154.02

10

5267P (Byz) 5272P (Byz) 5277P (Byz) 5282P (Rom)

5278C

3.12

1135

Fill layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-153.87/-154.03

9

5279P (Byz)

3.8

1136

Accumulation layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.28/-156.25

11

5270P (Rom)

3.4

1137

Accumulation layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.42/-156.72

11

5273P (Rom)

3.4

1138

Foundation layer

Hyposcaenium, western section

-156.72/-157.02

11

5274P (Byz)

3.5

1139

Accumulation layer, abutment foundation

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.50/-157.05

11

5275P (Rom-Byz)

3.4

632

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

1140

Fill layer above platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-157.05/-157.25

12

5280P (Rom)

3.2

1141

Accumulation layer, floor foundation

Pulpitum, western flank

-154.35/-154.64

10

5281P (Byz)

3.12

1142

Fill layer between W2109 platform and postscaenium foundation W2079

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-157.25/-157.90

12

5283P (Rom-Byz) 5286P (Rom)

1143

Fill layer between W2160 and proscaenium W2046

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.42/-156.78

12

5284P (Rom)

1145

Alluvium layer

Orchestra, Channel T30604

-155.22/-157.42

12

5291P (Rom) 5293P (Rom) 5295P (Rom-Byz) 5304P (Rom-Byz) 5308P (Rom-Byz) 5309P (Rom-Byz) 5311P (Rom-Byz) 5312P (Rom-Byz) 5399P (Rom)

5291A, B, C, G, N, X 5293A, C, G, X 5295A, B, C, G, N, X 5304A, G, T 5308A, C, G 5309B, G 5312A, G

3.36 (3-3)

1146

Fill layer, W2131 foundation

Western aditus maximus, probe

-150.57/-151.48

12

5292P (Rom-Byz) 5294P (Rom-Byz)

5292A 5294A

3.35

1147

Fill layer, W2131 foundation

Western aditus maximus, probe

-151.48/-151.60

12

1148

Accumulation layer over channel

Orchestra, Channel T30604

-154.58/-154.65

10

5296P (Rom-Byz) 5305P (Byz) 5306P (Rom-Byz)

5305C, X 5306C

3.36

1149

Foundation layer

Vomitorium 3

-146.49/-146.95

12

5297P (Rom) 5302P (Rom)

5297X

3.24

1153

Basalt slab floor

Vomitorium 8

-146.45/-146.52

12

1154

Alluvium layer

Orchestra, Channel T30605

-154.00/-154.25

12

1156

Fill layer, W2131 foundation

Western aditus maximus, probe

-150.86/-151.46

12

1159

Fill layer, W2131 foundation

Western aditus maximus, probe

-151.46/-151.63

12

5216P (Rom)

3.35

1160

Fill layer inside tunnel

Hyposcaenium, eastern section, Tunnel T7

-155.48/-156.02

9

5323P (Rom-Byz) 5333P (Byz) 5355P (Rom-Byz) 5317P (Byz)

3.10

1163

Fill layer, W2131 foundation

Western aditus maximus, probe

-151.96/-152.84

12

5321P (Rom) 5327P (Rom)

3.35

1164

Waste fill above platform foundation

Postscaenium platform

-153.52/-153.77

5

5325P (Byz) 5336P (Byz-Um) 5337P (Rom-Byz) 5373P (Rom-Byz) 5380P (Byz-Um) 5387P (Byz-Um)

3.16

1166

Clay pipe

Hyposcaenium, eastern section, Pipe T4

-155.00/-155.72

9

5329P (Rom-Byz) 5335P (Byz) 5339P (Byz)

5329D 5335C 5339D

3.13

1168

Fill under abutment W2094

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.72/-156.24

11

5341P (Rom-Byz) 5344P (Rom-Byz) 5345P (Rom-Byz)

5345C

3.4

5286M

Plan Nos.

3.2

3.2

3.35

3.25 5307P (Rom) 5310P (Rom)

3.36 5313G, X

3.35

633

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1169

Fill under abutment W2096

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.61/-156.24

11

5342P (Rom-Byz) 5347P (Rom-Byz)

5342C 5347C

3.4

1171

Fill layer over platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-155.72/-156.20

12

5349P (Rom-Byz) 5351P (Rom-Byz) 5353P (Rom-Byz) 5357P (Rom) 5374P (Rom-Byz)

5349G, L 5351C 5353X 5374A

3.2

1172

Accumulation layer over steps

Eastern staircase

-151.20/-152.79

7

5352P (Byz-Um) 5354P (Byz-Um) 5356P (Byz-Um) 5361P (Byz-Um) 5366P (Byz-Um) 5371P (Byz-Um) 5372P (Byz-Um) 5383P (Byz-Um) 5400P (Byz-Um) 5419P (Byz-Um) 5456P (Byz-Um) 5462P (Byz-Um) 5464P (Byz-Um)

1175

Fill under abutment W2093

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.21/-155.22

9

5363P (Byz)

1176

Fill under abutment W2110

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.04/-156.24

11

5364P (Rom-Byz)

1177

Fill under abutment W2100

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.08/-156.23

11

5365P (Rom-Byz)

1178

Fill under abutment W2148

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.97/-155.59

9

5367P (Byz)

1179

Fill under abutment W2055

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.15/-156.22

11

5368P (Rom)

1180

Alluvium layer over platform W2109

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.24/-157.05

11

5370P (Rom-Byz) 5377P (Rom-Byz) 5384P (Rom-Byz) 5392P (Rom-Byz) 5397P (Rom-Byz) 5401P (Rom-Byz) 5404P (Rom-Byz) 5411P (Rom-Byz) 5418P (Rom-Byz) 5422P (Rom-Byz) 5433P (Rom-Byz) 5441P (Rom-Byz) 5447P (Rom-Byz)

5392A, G 5397C, X 5422G

3.4

1181

Fill under abutment W2054

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.84/-156.22

9

5378P (Rom-Byz) 5378P (Rom-Byz)

5385A, G

3.7

1182

Fill under abutment W2099

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-154.03/-156.00

9

5379P (Rom-Byz) 5389P (Byz) 5405P (Byz) 5410P (Rom-Byz) 5436P (Byz)

5379C 5389C

3.7

1183

Accumulation, light yellow soil

Postscaenium, facade wall, probe

-152.10/-153.20

9

5382P (Byz)

5382G

3.14

3.7 5364C

3.4 3.4

5367C

3.7 3.4

634

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1185

Alluvium layer = L1039, L1052

Postscaenium, facade wall, probe

-155.55/-157.68

10

5391P (Rom-Byz) 5394P (Byz) 5407P (Byz) 5426P (Byz) 5429P (Byz) 5435P (Rom-Byz) 5440P (Byz) 5443P (Byz)

5391A, G 5407G 5426G 5429G

3.14

1186

Accumulation layer and fill

Postscaenium, platform

-153.79/-154.32

5

5395P (Rom-Um) 5398P (Byz-Um)

1187

Fill layer between W2109 platform and the scaena foundation W2079

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.24/-157.20

12

5402P (Rom-Byz) 5437P (Rom) 5442P (Rom)

1188

Accumulation layer over steps

Eastern staircase

-148.70/-150.90

7/5

5408P (Byz-Um) 5417P (Byz-Um) 5420P (Byz-Um) 5424P (Byz-Um) 5430P (Byz-Um) 5444P (Byz-Um)

1189

W2152 foundation layer

Eastern staircase

-150.20/-151.40

11

5412P (Byz) 5421P (Byz) 5425P (Rom-Byz) 5445P (Byz) 5451P (Rom-Byz) 5455P (Rom-Byz) 5463P (Byz) 5473P (Byz) 5473P (Byz) 5486P (Byz) 5493P (Byz) 5496P (Byz)

1190

Fill layer between W2160 and proscaenium W2046

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-156.40/-156.86

12

5413P (Rom) 5423P (Rom)

3.2

1195

Fill layer between W2109 platform and scaena foundation W2079

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-157.20/-157.56

12

5446P (Rom) 5450P (Rom) 5461P (Rom)

3.2

1208

Accumulation layer

Vomitorium 18, east of F9

-145.41/-146.40

2

3006P (Byz-Ab) 3010P (Rom-Ab)

3010G

3.28

1210

Fill layer over W2252

Summa cavea, W2252

-148.25/-149.00

5

3012P (Rom-Um) 3032P (Rom-Um) 3038P (Rom-Um) 3038P (Rom-Um) 3049P (Rom-Um) 3035P (Rom-Um)

3012C 3032M

3.29

1211

Organic deposit layer

Vomitorium 18, F9

-144.44/-144.80

2

3014P (Ab-Mam) 3020P (Ab-Mam) 3031P (Ab-Mam) 3046P (Ab-Mam)

3014G 3031X

3.28

1219

Fill, organic deposit layer

Vomitorium 18, F10

-144.10/-145.90

2

3099P (Ab-Mam) 3106P (Ab-Mam) 3122P (Ab-Mam) 3134P (Um-Mam)

3045C, X 3099C, M, X 3106C, X 3122C 3134C

3.28

3.16 5442C, M

3.2

5412C 5421G 5425C, G 5451C 5486C

3.32

635

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1223

Staircase foundation layer

Vomitorium 18, East of F9

-144.78/-145.98

2

3056P (Um-Mam) 3077P (Um-Mam) 3091P (Um-Mam) 3096P (Um-Mam)

3077N

3.28

1224

Alluvium layer

eastern staircase

-154.19/-155.05

11

3057P (Byz) 3059P (Byz) 3072P (Byz-Um)

3059C

3.32

1225

Fill layer and installation over W2252

Summa cavea, W2252

-149.00/-149.38

10

3062P (Byz) 3070P (Byz) 3076P (Byz) 3084P (Byz)

3062C 3084C

3.29

1226

Sealed locus, pavement foundation layer

Eastern staircase, Probe 1

-151.54/-152.30

11

3064P (Byz) 3071P (Byz)

3071C

3.32

1228

Sealed locus, pavement foundation layer

Eastern staircase, Probe 1

-152.30/-152.82

11

3074P (Byz) 3085P (Rom-Byz)

1235

Accumulation layer over the seats foundation

Ima cavea, eastern tribunal and cuneus

-149.90/-153.19

7

3110P (Rom-Um) 3114P (Byz) 3114P (Byz) 3121P (Byz) 3125P (Rom-Um)

3125C

3.21

1238

Organic deposit layer

Vomitorium 18, F10

-144.73/-146.00

2

3126P (Byz-Mam) 3130P (Um-Mam) 3132P (Mam) 3149P (Um-Mam) 3157P (Um-Mam) 3158P (Mam)

3132C, G 3149C 3161C

3.28

1239

Accumulation layer over the staircase

Vomitorium 18, eastern F9

-146.04/-146.24

2

3127P (Mam)

3.28

1240

Fill layer, seats foundation

Ima cavea, Cuneus 1

-149.86/-153.10

12

3131P (Rom) 3137P (Rom) 3139P (Rom) 3143P (Rom) 3190P (Rom)

2.2, 3.21

1244

W2169 exposure

Vomitorium 18

-145.00/-145.52

12

1249

W2196 dismantled

Eastern aditus maximus

-152.81/-152.89

12

3168P (Rom)

3.33

1250

Ash layer on floor foundation layer

Vomitorium 18, eastern T9

-145.00/-145.70

12

3171P (Um)

3.28

1252

Floor, basalt pavement

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.33/-15385

10

3178P (Byz)

1253

Foundation layer of W2194

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.42/-153.92

13

3181P (Rom)

1255 (See Bet She’an II)

Accumulation of raw clay above reused Byzantine stone floor

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.00/-153.45

5

3184P (Um)

3.32

1236 (See Bet She’an II)

3146Z

3178A

3.28

3.33 2.2

3186C 3201C

636

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

1256

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

Sealed locus, fill layer Eastern aditus under the floor = maximus L60780

-153.97/-154.72

10

1257

Fill removed, W2190 foundation

Eastern aditus maximus

-154.35/-154.56

13

3187P (Rom)

2.3

1258

Floor, basalt pavement

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.00/-153.96

10

3192P (Byz)

3.33

1259

Floor and W2203 dismantled

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.60/-153.96

10

1260

Pavement foundation layer

Eastern aditus maximus

-154.77/-155.00

12

1261

Pavement foundation layer

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.89/-154.22

11

1263

Fill layer between W2109 platform and the scaena foundation W2079

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-157.30/-158.23

12

3203P (Rom)

3.2

1264

Pavement foundation layer

Eastern aditus maximus

-155.00/-155.15

12

3205P (Rom)

3.34

1265

W2082 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.66/-155.46

9

3207P (Byz)

1266

Abutment W2044 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.39/-155.64

11

3208P (Rom-Byz)

3.4

1267

Fill layer along W2205

Eastern aditus maximus

-155.15/-157.15

12

3209P (Rom) 3211P (Rom)

2.3

1269

Abutment W2083 dismantled

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.71/-155.46

11

3214P (Rom)

1270

Staircase dismantled at the eastern end of pulpitum

Hyposcaenium, eastern section

-153.86/-155.46

9

3215P (Byz)

1276

W2214 exposure of the northeastern corner

Postscaenium, exedra (F41)

-153.00/-153.50

2

3252P (Byz-Mam)

3252C

3.16

1279

Podium W2140 dismantled

Scaenae frons

-151.20/-153.60

12

3265P (Rom)

3265N

3.14 3.16

1280

Accumulation layer, W2132, W2137 exposure

Summa cavea

-147.90/-147.80

5

3266P (Byz-Ab) 3275P (Byz-Ab)

3.32

1281

Fill layer, seats foundation

Ima cavea, Cuneus 1

-152.40/-153.00

12

3270P (Rom)

2.2 3.21

1282

Accumulation layer

Summa cavea, R4

-147.91/-148.87

6

3276P (Byz)

3.32

1283

Accumulation layer above the mosaic floor L1340

Eastern aditus maximus

-152.88/-153.33

9

3277P (Byz-Um)

3277C, G

3.33

1290

Accumulation layer over W2137

Summa cavea

-149.60/-149.83

5

3280P (Rom-Byz) 3288P (Byz-Um)

3288G

3.32

1293

Installations, two clay ovens over the floor

Vomitorium 18, F9

-145.14/-145.76

2

3283P (Byz-Mam) 3286P (Rom-Mam) 3289P (Byz-Mam)

3286N 3289G

3.28

1294

Fill layer, floor foundation

Summa cavea, R4

-148.90/-149.13

10

3285P (Byz I)

3285C, G

3.32 (1-1)

3.34

3.33 3198P (Rom)

3.34 3200C

3207S

3214A

3.34

3.7

3.4 3.7

637

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

1296

Remains of steps

Postscaenium, Niche 3

-153.82/-154.39

11

1299

Accumulation layer over staircase

Eastern staircase

-146.70/-147.98

5

1300

Accumulation layer above the eastern versura walls

Eastern versura

-155.12/-155.89

1308

Fill layer above W2252

Summa cavea

1310

Fill layer above Channel T60622

1312

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

3299C, M

3.2

3290P (Byz-Um) 3297P (Byz) 3301P (Byz-Um) 3308P (Byz-Um) 3330P (Byz) 3337P (Byz-Um) 3341P (Byz) 3347P (Byz-Um) 3359P (Byz-Um) 3369P (Byz) 3419P (Byz-Um) 3441P (Byz-Um) 506001P (Byz-Um)

3419A, G

3.32

5

3305P (Um) 3310P (Um) 3313P (Um) 3318P (Byz-Um) 3323P (Byz-Um)

3305G 3310G 3313M, N

3.16

-149.38/-149.45

10

3338P (Byz) 3340P (Byz) 3346P (Byz)

Eastern staircase, Probe 3

-153.30/-153.98

11

3343P (Byz) 3344P (Byz) 3349P (Byz) 3353P (Byz) 3357P (Byz) 3362P (Byz)

3349A

3.32

Accumulation layer over W2252 and floor foundation

Summa cavea and ambulacrum

-149.40/-152.22

10

3355P (Rom-Byz) 3356P (Rom-Byz) 3361P (Byz) 3368P (Byz) 3380P (Rom-Byz) 3385P (Rom-Byz) 3389P (Rom-Byz) 3396P (Rom-Byz)

3356G 3380C 3389G

3.29

1313

Fill layer in Channel T60622

eastern staircase, Probe 3

-153.96/-154.04

11

3364P (Rom-Byz)

1316

Sealed locus, fill layer under the basalt pavement foundation

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.90/-154.94

10

3367P (Rom) 3371P (Rom-Byz) 3381P (Rom-Byz) 3382P (Byz) 3384P (Rom-Byz) 3390P (Rom-Byz) 3395P (Byz) 3397P (Rom-Byz) 3400P (Byz)

1319

Accumulation layer

Eastern staircase

-147.30/-148.05

11

3374P (Byz) 3378P (Byz)

1320

Accumulation layer above the bitumen floor

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.15/-153.60

11/5

3375P (Byz-Um) 3377P (Byz-Um) 3398P (Rom-Um) 3399P (Byz-Um) 3404P (Rom-Um) 3406P (Byz) 3412P (Byz)

3.29

3.32 3371C 3381C, G, Z 3382C 3384C 3390A 3395C 3397C 3400A, C

3.34

3.32 3375C, M 3377C 3398C 3399C, X 3404C 3406C, T 3421C

3.33

638

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

1322

Sealed locus, fill layer under the basalt pavement foundation

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.90/-154.45

10

3383C

3.34

1323

Alluvium layer

Eastern aditus maximus, Channel T40601

-154.94/-155.43

10

3387P (Byz) 3410P (Byz) 506090P (Byz) 506093P (Byz)

3387G, X 506090C, G, M, X 506093C, G

3.34

1324

Accumulation layer

Summa cavea, R5

-147.75/-148.73

10

3388P (Byz) 3392P (Byz)

1332

Accumulation layer above basalt pavement

Western aditus maximus

-153.53/-154.11

9/5

3414P (Byz-Um)

3425C

3.35

1333

Drainage channel exposure

Western aditus maximus

-153.96/-154.48

9

3413P (Rom-Um) 3432P (Byz) 3434P (Byz) 3437P (Byz)

3413A 3415G 3416C 3438N 3439C 3440X

3.35

1338

Drainage channel exposure

Western aditus maximus

-154.06/-154.16

9

3431P (Byz-Um)

3429Z 3430C 3431A, G

3.35

1340

Byzantine mosaic floor and stone pavement

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.30/-153.40

9

506002P (Byz) 506003P (Byz) 506009P (Byz)

506002C, T 506009B

3.33

50602

Fill layer, floor foundation

Summa cavea, R5

-148.73/-149.00

10

506019P (Byz)

50612

W2238 dismantled

Summa cavea, R4, R5

-147.68/-148.88

7

506055P (Byz)

50613

W2236 dismantled

Postscaenium, corridor and eastern versura

-150.89/-152.80

12

506070P (Rom)

50615

W2212 dismantled

Postscaenium, corridor and eastern versura exedra

-151.20/-153.00

5

506071P (Um) 506089P (Byz-Um)

506089C 506114C

50623

floor bedding, pipes = L1057

Orchestra, probe

-154.31/-154.59

11

506109P (Byz)

506103C

3.36

50624

Accumulation layer above the northern part of W2237

Eastern versura

-152.79/-152.75

5

506106N

3.14

50625

Accumulation layer above the eastern versura walls

Eastern versura

-153.09/-153.76

5

506110P (Byz-Um)

506110C

3.16

50628

Channel exposure

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.49/-154.59

12

506135P

506135C

3.36

50635

Alluvium layer in channel = L50653

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.90/-155.24

12

506174P (Rom) 506175P (Rom) 506212P (Rom)

506174C, G 506212G

3.36

50636

Fill, pavement foundation layer

Eastern staircase, Probe 3

-153.30/-153.67

11

506177P (Byz) 506188P (Byz)

506177B, G 506188G

3.32

50637

Installation, accumulation layer

Praecinctio, Probe 1

-146.99/-147.67

4

506192P (Byz-Byz) 506199P (Ab) 506207P (Byz-Um) 506224P (Rom-Ab)

506192G 506199G 506224C, S

3.22 (1)

3.32

3.32 506055G

3.32 3.14 3.16

639

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

50639

Channel W3005 dismantled

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.92/-155.17

12

506194P (Byz) 506209P (Byz)

506194C, G

3.36

50642

Fill layer in Channel T60630

Eastern staircase, Probe 3

-153.67/-154.94

11

506198P (Byz) 506208P (Byz) 506273P (Rom-Byz) 506285P (Rom) 506292P (Rom-Byz) 506293P (Byz) 506297P (Rom-Byz) 506301P (RomRom) 506302P (RomRom) 506303P (Rom-Byz) 506304P (Rom-Byz) 506310P (Byz)

506272D 506273D 506285G 506292D 506301N

3.32

50645

Foundation layer between W2205 and W2046

Orchestra

-155.62/-156.58

13

506213P (Rom) 506222P (Rom) 506229P (Rom)

506222B

2.3

50647

Alluvium layer in the channel

Praecinctio, Probe 3

-146.30/-147.21

12

506227P (Rom-Ab) 506238P (Rom) 506248P (Rom) 506260P (Rom-Ab) 506268P (Rom) 506282P (Rom-Ab)

506234C 506238C 506251C 506268N

3.22 (3)

50648

Late Umayyad remains over postscaenium

Postscaenium

-153.90/-154.20

5

506228C 506253C

3.2

50653

Alluvium layer in channel = L50635

Orchestra, Channel T30601

-154.90/-155.24

12

60601

Tile and brick floor

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.72/-153.82

11

606001P (Byz)

60610

Floor foundation layer

Acoustic Cell 3

-146.58/-146.80

12

606045P (Rom) 606088P (Rom)

60615

Floor foundation dismantled

Acoustic Cell 3

-146.68/-146.90

12

606113P (Rom)

606122A

3.27

60626

Bitumen-floor foundation

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.72/-153.76

11

606190P (Byz) 606216P (Byz)

606190A, B, G, T 606216A, G, R, T

3.33

60634

Clay raw material and W2133 dismantled

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.29/-153.50

12/5

606312P (Um) 606328P (Byz-Um) 606329P (Byz-Um) 606330P (Byz-Um) 606345P (Um)

606324U 606342U 606343U

3.33

60636

W2132 core built of large and mediumsized basalt stones

Eastern aditus maximus

-155.64/-157.05

12

606315P (Rom) 606877P (Rom)

606316B 606877U

2.3

60773

Sealed locus, pavement foundation layer

Eastern staircase, Probe 2

-152.43/-154.36

11

607117P (Byz) 607129P (Byz) 607130P (Byz)

607117A, B, G, T 607128Z

3.32

60774

W2133 dismantled

Eastern aditus maximus

-146.38/-153.84

12

607125P

60776

Fill layer

Eastern staircase, Probe 3

-154.29/-155.05

11

607132P (Rom-Byz)

607132A, B, T

3.32

3.32 606001N, T

3.33 3.27

640

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

60780

Sealed locus, fill layer under floor = L1256

Eastern aditus maximus

-153.70/-154.36

10

607134P (Byz) 607159P (Byz)

607134A, B, C, G, R, T

3.34

60781

Pipe dismantled

Eastern aditus maximus

-154.36/-154.56

11

607135–58D

3.38

70612

Accumulation layer above W2252

Ambulacrum and summa cavea

-146.15/-148.74

10

706148P (Byz) 706149P (Rom) 706505P (Byz) 706525P (Rom-Byz) 706544P (Byz) 706567P (Byz) 706585P (Rom) 706589P (Rom-Byz) 706596P (Byz) 706603P (Rom) 706614P (Byz) 706616P (Rom-Byz) 706618 (Rom-Byz) 706624P (Rom) 706625P (Rom)

706149C, G 706505C, G 706585G, M 706596C, G 706609M 706614C 706616G, N

3.29

70614

Fill layer above W60762

Vomitorium 15

-145.33/-146.62

12

706001P (Rom) 706004P (Rom) 706012P (Rom) 706025P (Rom) 706025P (Rom) 706057P (Rom) 706065P (Rom) 706086P (Rom) 706179P (Rom) 706201P (Byz) 706336P (Rom-Byz) 706363P (Rom) 706364P (Rom) 706375P (Rom) 706376P (Rom) 706387P (Rom-Byz) 706390P (Rom) 706400P (Rom)

706057N 706086A 706179A, C 706363C 706375N 706377N 706387M, N 706388C

2.4

70645

Stone foundation layer

Vomitorium 10

-144.44/-145.86

12

706088P (Rom) 706097P (Rom)

706088R, S 706097N, R

3.27

70650

Fill layer on bedrock

Vomitorium 11

-145.94/-146.53

12

706119P (Rom)

3.27

70651

W70644, W70617 foundation

Vomitorium 11

-146.53/-146.86

13

706117P (Rom) 706130P (Rom) 706209P (Rom)

2.4

70731

Floor foundation, lime layer

Vomitorium 11

-145.92/-146.50

12

706436P (Rom)

3.27

70734

Accumulation layer east of platform W80723

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-153.80/-155.47

5

706507P (Byz) 706561P (Um) 706568P (Um) 706576P (Um) 706595P (Byz-Um)

70753

Stone foundation layer

Vomitorium 11

-146.73/-147.58

12

706546P (Rom)

70754

Fill foundation layer

Praecinctio, Probe 2

-146.30/-146.78

6

706545P (Rom) 706563P (Rom) 706563P (Rom)

706561C 706576C

3.16

3.27 706545M 706607C

3.22 (2)

641

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

70756

Foundation layer above semicircular W70727

Vomitorium 10

-145.81/-146.32

13

706564P (Rom) 706577P (Rom)

80605

Waste layer above the platform

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-154.10/-154.93

5

see Bet She’an II:387

see Bet She’an II:387

80606

Accumulation layer

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-153.61/-153.98

5

806006P (Um) 806012P (Um)

806012C

3.16

80655

Ash layer east of platform W80723

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-154.93/-156.91

5

806148P (Byz) 806157P (Byz) 806161P (Byz) 806166P (Byz) 806175P (Byz) 806189P (Byz-Um) 806191P (Byz) 806201P (Byz-Um) 806234P (Rom-Byz) 806236P (Byz-Um) 806240P (Byz) 806245P (Rom-Byz) 806246P (Byz) 806296P (Byz) 806297P (Byz) 806312P (Byz) 806319P (Byz) 806330P (Byz) 806330P (Byz) 806337P (Byz) 806341P (Byz) 806356P (Byz) 806363P (Byz) 806369P (Byz) 806377P (Byz) 806468P (Byz) 806472P (Byz) 806438P (Byz) 806486P (Byz) 806490P (Byz) 806491P (Byz) 806503P (Byz)

806148A, G 806149S 806157B, G 806161B, G 806166A, G 806189B, F 806201A, G 806234G, T 806237Y 806245B, N 806246A, N 806296C, G 806312C, G 806319B, G 806330A, G 806341C 806356A, B, C, G, M 806377B, G 806468B, G 806438B, G 806491A, G 806503B, G

3.16

80694

Fill layer above platform

80756

Fill layer above platform

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-153.98/-154.81

5

806627P (Byz)

806627N

3.16

2.4

642

Gabriel Mazor and Walid Atrash

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

90609

Ash layer east of platform W80723

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-155.04/-156.88

5

906004P (Byz) 906020P (Byz) 906025P (Byz-Um) 906050P (Byz) 906051P (Um) 906080P (Byz-Um) 906109P (Byz) 906171P (Byz) 906173P (Byz) 906202P (Rom-Um) 906203P (Byz) 906204P (Byz) 906215P (Byz) 906233P (Byz) 906258P (Byz) 906286P (Byz) 906305P (Byz) 906320P (Byz) 906336P (Byz) 906350P (Byz) 906372P (Byz) 906389P (Byz) 906389P (Byz) 906433P (Rom-Byz) 906472P (Byz) 906517P (Rom)

906004G 906050G, M 906080B, G 906109B, G 906171B, G 906172A 906172A 906173B, N 906203G 906215A, G 906230N 906233B 906258B 906263G 906286B, G 906320B, G 906336B, M 906350B 906372G 906389B, M 906418B 906433B 906517M

3.16

90614

Fill layer above platform

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-153.96/-154.44

5

906049P (Byz-Um)

906031D 906032D 906049B 906101C

3.16

90766

Accumulation layer above stone floor

Western aditus maximus

-153.60/-154.13

9/5

906747P (Byz-Um)

906747C, N

3.35

90772

Floor foundation layer

Western aditus maximus

-154.07/-154.24

9

906818P (Rom) 906818P (Rom) 906831P (Rom-Byz)

906818C 906828A, C

3.35

90779

Foundation layer, northern W90759

Postscaenium platform

-155.55/-157.02

12

906837P (Rom) 906853P (Rom) 906860P (Rom) 906892P (Rom) 906903P (Rom) 906909P (Rom) 906919P (Rom) 906945P (Rom) 906961P (Rom) 906982P (Rom) 906995P (Rom) 907006P (Rom) 907017P (Rom) 907053P (Rom) 907116P (Rom)

906961M 906982C

3.16

643

Appendix 1: List of Loci and Baskets

Locus No.

Description

Unit

Upper and Lower Elevation (m)

Stratum

Pottery Basket Nos. and Field Reading

Other Finds Basket Nos.

Plan Nos.

90788

exposure of drainage channels

Western aditus maximus

-154.24/-154.60

9

906843P (Rom) 906881P (Rom-Byz) 906906P (Rom-Byz)

906843C 906881C, G 906882A 906883A 906906C, X 906917Z 906922C 906952C 906973C 906990C

3.35

90825

Floor foundation layer

Western aditus maximus

-154.80/-154.80

9

907035P (Byz)

906915C 907035A

3.35

100610

Foundation trench east of W80723

Eastern versura

-156.17/-157.21

12

1006006P (Rom) 1006017P (Rom) 1006020P (Rom) 1006026P (Rom) 1006096P (Rom) 1006100P (Rom)

1006006M 1006017B, G 1006096F 1006100O

3.16

100642

Foundation layer, channel T60630

Eastern staircase, Probe 3

-156.07/-157.37

11

1106102P (RomByz) 1106113P (Rom) 1106125P (RomByz)

3.32

110690

Accumulation layer

Postscaenium platform and eastern versura

-154.55/-155.51

5

1106332P (Byz-Um) 1106347P (Byz-Um)

3.16

IAA R eports

No. 1 G. Avni and Z. Greenhut, The Akeldama Tombs: Three Burial Caves in the Kidron Valley, Jerusalem, 1996, 129 pp.

No. 16 Y. Goren and P. Fabian, Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site, 2002, 97 pp.

No. 2 E. Braun, Yiftah’el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in Lower Galilee, Israel, 1997, 249 pp.

No. 17 A. Kloner, Maresha Excavations Final Subterranean Complexes 21, 44, 70, 2003, 183 pp.

No. 3 G. Edelstein, I. Milevski and S. Aurant, Villages, Terraces and Stone Mounds: Excavations at Manahat, Jerusalem, 1987– 1989, 1998, 149 pp. No. 4 C. Epstein, The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan, 1998, 352 pp. + plans. hardcover. No. 5 T. Schick, The Cave of the Warrior: A Fourth Millennium Burial in the Judean Desert, 1998, 137 pp. No. 6 R. Cohen, Ancient Settlement of the Central Negev I: The Chalcolithic Period, the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age I (Hebrew, English Summary), 1999, 396 pp. No. 7 R. Hachlili and A. Killebrew, Jericho: The Jewish Cemetery of the Second Temple Period, 1999, 202 pp. No. 8 Z. Gal and Y. Alexandre, Horbat Rosh Zayit: An Iron Age Storage Fort and Village, 2000, 247 pp. No. 9 U. Dahari, Monastic Settlements in South Sinai in the Byzantine Period: The Archaeological Remains, 2000, 250 pp. No. 10 Z. Yeivin, The Synagogue at Korazim: The 1962–1964, 1980–1987 Excavations (Hebrew, English Summary), 2000, 216 pp. No. 11 M. Hartal, The al-Subayba (Nimrod) Fortress: Towers 11 and 9, 2001, 129 pp. No. 12 R. Gonen, Excavations at Efrata: A Burial Ground from the Intermediate and Middle Bronze Ages, 2001, 153 pp. No. 13 E. Eisenberg, A. Gopher and R. Greenberg, Tel Te’o: A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley, 2001, 227 pp.

Report

I:

No. 18 A. Golani, Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site of Qiryat ‘Ata, 2003, 261 pp. No. 19 H. Khalaily and O. Marder, The Neolithic Site of Abu Ghosh: The 1995 Excavations, 2003, 146 pp. No. 20 R. Cohen and R. Cohen-Amin, Ancient Settlement of the Negev Highlands II: The Iron Age and Persian Period (Hebrew, English Summary), 2004, 258 pp. No. 21 D. Stacey, Exavations at Tiberias, 1973–1974: The Early Islamic Periods, 2004, 259 pp. No. 22 Y. Hirschfeld, Excavations at Tiberias, 1989–1994, 2004, 234 pp. No. 23 S. Ben-Arieh, Bronze and Iron Age Tombs at Tell Beit Mirsim, 2004, 212 pp. No. 24 M. Dothan and D. Ben-Shlomo, Ashdod VI: The Excavations of Areas H and K (1968–1969), 2005, 320 pp. No. 25 M. Avissar, Tel Yoqne‘am: Excavations on the Acropolis, 2005, 142 pp. No. 26 M. Avissar and E.J. Stern, Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel, 2005, 187 pp. No. 27 E.C.M. van den Brink and Ram Gophna, Shoham (North), Late Chalcolithic Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel, 2005, 214 pp. No. 28 N. Getzov, The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations, 1994–1995, 2006, 204 pp. No. 29 A.M. Berlin, Gamla I: The Pottery of the Second Temple Period, the Shmarya Gutmann Excavations, 1976–1989, 2006, 181 pp.

No. 14 R. Frankel, N. Getzov, M. Aviam and A. Degani, Settlement Dynamics and Regional Diversity in Ancient Upper Galilee: Archaeological Survey of Upper Galilee, 2001, 175 pp.

No. 30 R. Greenberg, E. Eisenberg, S. Paz and Y. Paz, Bet Yerah: The Early Bronze Age Mound I: Excavation Reports, 1933–1986, 2006, 500 pp.

No. 15 M. Dayagi-Mendels, The Akhziv Cemeteries: The Ben-dor Excavations, 1941–1944, 2002, 176 pp.

No. 31 E. Yannai, ‘En Esur (‘Ein Asawir) I: Excavations at a Protohistoric Site in the Coastal Plain of Israel, 2006, 308 pp.

No. 32 T.J. Barako, Tel Mor: The Moshe Dothan Excavations, 1959–1960, 2007, 276 pp. No. 33 g. mazor and a. najjar, Bet She’an I: nysa-scythopolis: the caesareum and the odeum, 2007, 316 pp. No. 34 R. Cohen and H. Bernick-Greenberg, Kadesh Barnea (Tell el-Qudeirat) 1976–1982, 2007. In 2 parts. Part 1: Text, 410 pp.; Part 2: Plates, Plans and Sections, 332 pp. No. 35 A. Erlich and A. Kloner, Maresha Excavations Final Report II: Hellenistic Terracotta Figurines from the 1989–1996 Seasons, 2008, 208 pp. No. 36 G. Avni, U. Dahari and A. Kloner, The Necropolis of Bet Guvrin—Eleutheropolis, 2008, 238 pp. No. 37 V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, Paneas I: The Roman to Early Islamic Periods: Excavations in Areas A, B, E, F, G and H, 2008, 196 pp. No. 38 V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, Paneas II: Small Finds and Other Studies, 2008, 256 pp. No. 39 Z. Greenhut and A. De Groot, Salvage Excavations at Tel Moza: The Bronze and Iron Age Settlements and Later Occupations, 2009, 363 pp. No. 40 M. Hartal, Paneas IV: The Aqueduct and the Northern Suburbs, 2009, 212 pp. No. 41 N. Getzov, R. Lieberman-Wander, H. Smithline, and D. Syon, Horbat ‘Uza, the 1991 Excavations I: The Early Periods, 2009, 168 pp. No. 42 N. Getzov, D. Avshalom-Gorni, Y. Gorin-Rosen, E.J. Stern, D. Syon, and A. Tatcher, Horbat ‘Uza, the 1991 Excavations II: The Late Periods, 2009, 232 pp. No. 43 J. Seligman, Nahal Haggit: A Roman and Mamluk Farmstead in the Southern Carmel, 2010, 277 pp. No. 44 D. Syon and Z. Yavor, Gamla II: The Architecture, the Shmarya Gutmann Excavations, 1976–1989, 2010, 216 pp. No. 45 A. Kloner, E. Eshel, H.B. Korzakova and G. Finkielsztejn, Maresha Excavations Final Report III: Epigraphic Finds from the 1989–2000 Seasons, 2010, 247 pp. No. 46 Y. Dagan, The Ramat Bet Shemesh Regional Project: The Gazetteer, 2010, 360 pp.

No. 47 Y. Dagan, The Ramat Bet Shemesh Regional Project: Landscape of Settlement: From the Paleolithic to the Ottoman Periods, 2011, 356 pp. No. 48 R. Bar-Nathan and W. Atrash, Bet She’an II: Baysān: The Theater Pottery Workshop, 2011, 411 pp. No. 49 Y. Alexandre, Mary’s Well, Nazareth: The Late Hellenistic to the Ottoman Periods, 2012, 180 pp. No. 50 D. Ben-Shlomo, the azor cemetery: moshe dothan’s excavations, 1958 and 1960, 2012, 238 pp. No. 51/1 E.J. Stern, ‘akko i: the 1991–1998 excavations, the crusader-period pottery, part 1: Text, 2012, 192 pp. No. 51/2 E.J. Stern, ‘akko i: the 1991–1998 excavations, the crusader-period pottery, part 2: plates, 2012, 172 pp. No. 52 D. Ben-Ami, Jerusalem, Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley (Giv‘ati Parking Lot) I, 2013, 396 pp. No. 53 Y. Porath, Caesarea Maritima Volume I: Herod’s Circus and Related Buildings Part I: Architecture and Stratigraphy, 2013, 244 pp. No. 54 R. Greenberg, Bet Yerah, The Early Bronze Age Mound II: Urban Structure and Material Culture, 1933–1986 Excavations, 2014, 316 pp. No. 55 E. Yannai, Y. Nagar, Bet Dagan, Intermediate Bronze Age and Mamluk-Period Cemeteries, 2004–2005 Excavations, 2014, 260 pp. No. 56 D. Syon, Gamla III: The Shmarya Gutmann Excavations 1976–1989, Finds and Studies, Part 1, 2014, 260 pp. No. 57 Y. Porath, Caesarea Maritima I: Herod’s and Related Buildings Part 2: The Finds, 2015, 224 pp.

Circus

No. 58/1. G. Mazor and W. Atrsash, Bet She’an III: nysascythopolis: The Southern and Severan Theaters, Part 1: The Stratigraphy and finds, 2015, 288 pp. No. 58/2. G. Mazor and W. Atrsash, Bet She’an III: nysascythopolis: The Southern and Severan Theaters, Part 2: The Architecture, 2015, 382 pp.