DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0343
SOURCES AND PERIODS
3 11
I
SOURCES AND PERIODS
HE sources of the architectural styles of the Hauran, like those of the styles of
-L the north, divide into two general categories, the classic and the Oriental. The
classic influence was potent while it lasted, but it disappeared almost completely with
the downfall of paganism. The Oriental sources, while their influence is more marked
and more generally operative in the architecture of the Hauran, are still as much
shrouded in mystery as are the Oriental sources of the “ native ” elements in the archi-
tecture of the north.
The earliest monuments are pre-Roman. In general character and in their details
they are Oriental, with the exception of the tomb at Suweda, as we have already stated.
The inscriptions upon them are in Nabataean characters, while some of the letters^
used as masons’ marks belong to the Safai'tic script, which was in use among peoples
of Arabic origin. 1 The plan and superstructure of one of these pre-Roman buildings,
the great temple 2 of Ba‘al Samin at S!‘, with its outer and inner courts, its inmost
sanctuary, its interior peristyles, and its low recessed portico with flanking towers,
recall those of ancient Babylonia, Assyria, or Egypt, while the plan and superstructure
of another great building with similar details, the temple 3 at Suweda, present a perip-
teros designed upon classic lines, but treated with details almost entirely foreign to the
classic style. Some of these details in both monuments — the inverted capital bases
of the columns, for instance — are as purely Persian as if they had been imported from
Persepolis; but the capitals of these columns and the architrave above them are not
Persian, so far as may be discovered from the remains of Persian architecture, nor are
they Greek. I do not mean that the bases just referred to were necessarily adopted
from Persian architecture : these bases and those of Persepolis may owe their origin to
a common and remote ancestor, or the resemblance may be fortuitous; but these are
the only details in this earliest architecture of the Hauran for which a counterpart may
be found in the existing remains of other known styles. The style of these buildings
is sufficiently unique to deserve a name of its own, and, on account of the inscriptions
containing Nabatsean names found in connection with it, we may call it tentatively the
Nabatsean style.
The Auranitis or Hauran was ceded to the kingdom of Herod the Great in 23 a.d.,
and a change in the architectural style of the buildings of the Hauran is found that
corresponds to this political change. The restorations of the temple at Si‘, executed
under Herod and his successors, fragments of which have been found, present new
1 See Part IV, introduction to Safaitic inscriptions.
2 La Syrie Centrale, Pls. 2-4; text, pp. 31-38.
3 La Syrie Centrale, Pl. 4; text, p. 39.
3 11
I
SOURCES AND PERIODS
HE sources of the architectural styles of the Hauran, like those of the styles of
-L the north, divide into two general categories, the classic and the Oriental. The
classic influence was potent while it lasted, but it disappeared almost completely with
the downfall of paganism. The Oriental sources, while their influence is more marked
and more generally operative in the architecture of the Hauran, are still as much
shrouded in mystery as are the Oriental sources of the “ native ” elements in the archi-
tecture of the north.
The earliest monuments are pre-Roman. In general character and in their details
they are Oriental, with the exception of the tomb at Suweda, as we have already stated.
The inscriptions upon them are in Nabataean characters, while some of the letters^
used as masons’ marks belong to the Safai'tic script, which was in use among peoples
of Arabic origin. 1 The plan and superstructure of one of these pre-Roman buildings,
the great temple 2 of Ba‘al Samin at S!‘, with its outer and inner courts, its inmost
sanctuary, its interior peristyles, and its low recessed portico with flanking towers,
recall those of ancient Babylonia, Assyria, or Egypt, while the plan and superstructure
of another great building with similar details, the temple 3 at Suweda, present a perip-
teros designed upon classic lines, but treated with details almost entirely foreign to the
classic style. Some of these details in both monuments — the inverted capital bases
of the columns, for instance — are as purely Persian as if they had been imported from
Persepolis; but the capitals of these columns and the architrave above them are not
Persian, so far as may be discovered from the remains of Persian architecture, nor are
they Greek. I do not mean that the bases just referred to were necessarily adopted
from Persian architecture : these bases and those of Persepolis may owe their origin to
a common and remote ancestor, or the resemblance may be fortuitous; but these are
the only details in this earliest architecture of the Hauran for which a counterpart may
be found in the existing remains of other known styles. The style of these buildings
is sufficiently unique to deserve a name of its own, and, on account of the inscriptions
containing Nabatsean names found in connection with it, we may call it tentatively the
Nabatsean style.
The Auranitis or Hauran was ceded to the kingdom of Herod the Great in 23 a.d.,
and a change in the architectural style of the buildings of the Hauran is found that
corresponds to this political change. The restorations of the temple at Si‘, executed
under Herod and his successors, fragments of which have been found, present new
1 See Part IV, introduction to Safaitic inscriptions.
2 La Syrie Centrale, Pls. 2-4; text, pp. 31-38.
3 La Syrie Centrale, Pl. 4; text, p. 39.