DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0344
312 DJEBEL HAURAN
styles of ornament. The origin of this Herodian style is a matter about which practi-
cally nothing is known.
Architecture of a purely classic character is represented in the Hauran in two distinct
periods of Roman influence, thc first flourishing in the second century, during the time
of the Antonines ; the second coming in the middle of the third century, when the ac-
cession of an Arab to the imperial throne revived the Roman interest in the land of his
birth. The styles of these two periods are as distinct as possible, within the limits of
classic canons: the earlier style is unmistakable from its resemblance to the architec-
ture of the Antonine emperors throughout the length and breadth of the Roman Em-
pire ; the later style is peculiar, having an individuality of its own.
The advent of Christianity, as a temporal power, found little expression in the archi-
tecture that was designecl to accommodate it; yet the basilical churches of this region
are unique in history, and the domical structures stand by themselves. They are
apparently the creation of native genius, uninfluenced by the domed construction of
the Romans or by that of the Byzantine builders. As will be shown in the following
descriptions, these structures are of the highest interest from the standpoint of con-
struction ; but their builders seem to have given little thought to appearances, for these
monuments are plain to the point of ugliness on the exterior, while the interiors are
bare, dark, and unadorned.
Before taking up the description of the monuments according to the various periods
to which they belong, we may examine in general the methods of construction and of
ornament that were employed in them.
II
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
\S has already been related in the introductory chapter of this book, construction in
Ci the Djebel Hauran was greatly influenced by the material at hand, which consisted
solely of black basalt. No other stone was available, and wood seems to have been
very rare. Nevertheless wood was certainly employed by the pre-Roman builders,
and this must have been imported, unless there were native forests at that time, which
were exhausted before the great mass of buildings in the Djebel Hauran was constructed.
The Roman temples demanded wood for the construction of their roofs, and this
material was forthcoming for a number of them ; but for others, especially the smaller
structures, a compromise was made by which the classic trabeated style was preserved
in the outward aspect, and a native form of construction, in which the transverse arch
was substituted for beams, was employed for the stone roof and its interior supports.
This combination was employed for most of the structures of the third century. With
styles of ornament. The origin of this Herodian style is a matter about which practi-
cally nothing is known.
Architecture of a purely classic character is represented in the Hauran in two distinct
periods of Roman influence, thc first flourishing in the second century, during the time
of the Antonines ; the second coming in the middle of the third century, when the ac-
cession of an Arab to the imperial throne revived the Roman interest in the land of his
birth. The styles of these two periods are as distinct as possible, within the limits of
classic canons: the earlier style is unmistakable from its resemblance to the architec-
ture of the Antonine emperors throughout the length and breadth of the Roman Em-
pire ; the later style is peculiar, having an individuality of its own.
The advent of Christianity, as a temporal power, found little expression in the archi-
tecture that was designecl to accommodate it; yet the basilical churches of this region
are unique in history, and the domical structures stand by themselves. They are
apparently the creation of native genius, uninfluenced by the domed construction of
the Romans or by that of the Byzantine builders. As will be shown in the following
descriptions, these structures are of the highest interest from the standpoint of con-
struction ; but their builders seem to have given little thought to appearances, for these
monuments are plain to the point of ugliness on the exterior, while the interiors are
bare, dark, and unadorned.
Before taking up the description of the monuments according to the various periods
to which they belong, we may examine in general the methods of construction and of
ornament that were employed in them.
II
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
\S has already been related in the introductory chapter of this book, construction in
Ci the Djebel Hauran was greatly influenced by the material at hand, which consisted
solely of black basalt. No other stone was available, and wood seems to have been
very rare. Nevertheless wood was certainly employed by the pre-Roman builders,
and this must have been imported, unless there were native forests at that time, which
were exhausted before the great mass of buildings in the Djebel Hauran was constructed.
The Roman temples demanded wood for the construction of their roofs, and this
material was forthcoming for a number of them ; but for others, especially the smaller
structures, a compromise was made by which the classic trabeated style was preserved
in the outward aspect, and a native form of construction, in which the transverse arch
was substituted for beams, was employed for the stone roof and its interior supports.
This combination was employed for most of the structures of the third century. With