DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0046
16 NORTHERN CENTRAL SYRIA AND THE HAURAN
of the Djebel Hauran, quite the opposite of those in the region east of the Orontes
from the standpoint of construction, were built upon a transverse system of supports,
being subdivided by cross-walls (Fig. i) not over three meters apart, pierced with
arches — broad, high arches over the central nave and low arches in two stories over
the side aisles. The crowns of the upper-story arches of the side aisles were carried
up to the level of the crown of the great middle arches, and the transverse and side
walls were of equal height. A roof of stone slabs was laid from one transverse wall to
the other; this was perfectly flat and was undoubtedly provided with a covering of
beaten clay such as is used in the houses of the present inhabitants. The ancient houses
were built upon a system similar to that employed in the basilicas, arches supporting
flat slabs of stone being used for roofs and intermediate floors. Many of the houses
still inhabited are of ancient construction, and the newer structures are patterned after
the old model.
In view of these facts it is interesting to notice that in the volcanic country of the
north, where basalt was again the only building stone to be had, the building system
adopted was not the transverse arcuated style of the Hauran, but the longitudinal
system of arches of the limestone region farther west; and that, while piers built of
small stones were occasionally employed, columns of several drums are more fre-
quently found. This system, of course, necessitated the use of wooden roofs, as we
have already described.
It will thus be seen that the kind of stone available had only a slight effect upon
the constructional principles evolved by these Syrian builders under Greco-Roman
tutelage. The presence or absence of wood was undoubtedly more formative, but
racial conditions and considerations of foreign influence would seem to have had still
greater effect. The Arabic influence, which was strongest in the Hauran, seems to
have produced one form of architecture, which classic training could alter only in
minor details; while the Aramaic influence in countries where Syriac was spoken
produced a different form, which was more deeply influenced by clas'sic art.
Differences of equal importance were found in the ornament of the various districts.
That of the classic period in the north is almost entirely confined to the use of simple
moldings, though there are examples of friezes ornamented with bucrania and
garlands. The ornament of the same era in the south is extremely rich, abounding
in vegetable forms, rinceaux, meanders, and moldings carved with the egg and dart,
the guilloche, and a variety of classic patterns, although the basalt in which they are
executed was much harder to carve than the limestone of the north. In the Christian
period the order is reversed, for after the fourth century the ornament of buildings of
all kinds in the north grows even richer than that of the classic period in the south.
Vegetable and geometrical forms are found in the greatest profusion in the carving,
while the Christian architecture of the south is almost devoid of carving and poor
even in moldings.
of the Djebel Hauran, quite the opposite of those in the region east of the Orontes
from the standpoint of construction, were built upon a transverse system of supports,
being subdivided by cross-walls (Fig. i) not over three meters apart, pierced with
arches — broad, high arches over the central nave and low arches in two stories over
the side aisles. The crowns of the upper-story arches of the side aisles were carried
up to the level of the crown of the great middle arches, and the transverse and side
walls were of equal height. A roof of stone slabs was laid from one transverse wall to
the other; this was perfectly flat and was undoubtedly provided with a covering of
beaten clay such as is used in the houses of the present inhabitants. The ancient houses
were built upon a system similar to that employed in the basilicas, arches supporting
flat slabs of stone being used for roofs and intermediate floors. Many of the houses
still inhabited are of ancient construction, and the newer structures are patterned after
the old model.
In view of these facts it is interesting to notice that in the volcanic country of the
north, where basalt was again the only building stone to be had, the building system
adopted was not the transverse arcuated style of the Hauran, but the longitudinal
system of arches of the limestone region farther west; and that, while piers built of
small stones were occasionally employed, columns of several drums are more fre-
quently found. This system, of course, necessitated the use of wooden roofs, as we
have already described.
It will thus be seen that the kind of stone available had only a slight effect upon
the constructional principles evolved by these Syrian builders under Greco-Roman
tutelage. The presence or absence of wood was undoubtedly more formative, but
racial conditions and considerations of foreign influence would seem to have had still
greater effect. The Arabic influence, which was strongest in the Hauran, seems to
have produced one form of architecture, which classic training could alter only in
minor details; while the Aramaic influence in countries where Syriac was spoken
produced a different form, which was more deeply influenced by clas'sic art.
Differences of equal importance were found in the ornament of the various districts.
That of the classic period in the north is almost entirely confined to the use of simple
moldings, though there are examples of friezes ornamented with bucrania and
garlands. The ornament of the same era in the south is extremely rich, abounding
in vegetable forms, rinceaux, meanders, and moldings carved with the egg and dart,
the guilloche, and a variety of classic patterns, although the basalt in which they are
executed was much harder to carve than the limestone of the north. In the Christian
period the order is reversed, for after the fourth century the ornament of buildings of
all kinds in the north grows even richer than that of the classic period in the south.
Vegetable and geometrical forms are found in the greatest profusion in the carving,
while the Christian architecture of the south is almost devoid of carving and poor
even in moldings.