DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0356
324
PAGAN ARCHITECTURE IN THE DJEBEL HAURAN
survived in a small monument of this character, even after a new style had been in-
troduced in temple architecture during the reign of Herod.
The evidence given by the monuments themselves is as follows: the lower por-
tions of the temple and the portico of its temenos, which were certainly built by the
elder Maleichath, are in a style which manifests distinct classic elements; the details
which bear the Greek inscriptions are entirely free from Greek influence, and this
freedom is seen still more in the later monuments of the time of Agrippa II. Now,
what occasioned the change in style between the architecture of the grandfather and
that of the grandson ? May it not have been the change of government effected by
the transfer of the Hauran to the kingdom of Herod ? The fashion of writing Greek
may perhaps have been introduced at the same time; for it is a strange coinci-
dence that the Nabataean inscriptions are found in connection with architectural
details that show Greek influence, while the Greek inscriptions appear upon dis-
tinctly Oriental details.
The most logical solution seems to me to be that the Nabataeans learned their first
lessons in monumental architecture from the Greeks, and during the earliest period
used both languages in their inscriptions; that, while their own power was unchal-
lenged, they built in a style molded upon Greek lines but infused with their own ideas,
and at this time placed Nabataean inscriptions upon their monuments; that with the
rise of the Idumean dynasty a new Oriental style was introduced, different from that of
the Oriental elements of the mixed or second style, and one which found later expres-
sion during the second period of influence of the Idumean dynasty, under Agrippa II.
According to the order outlined above, the first architectural period in the Hauran,
with its distinctly Greek forms and its bilingual inscription, would fall in the reign of
the Nabataean king Aretas III, who took Damascus from Antiochos XII in 84 b.c.,
and reigned until about 60 b.c. The second or mixed style, with its Naba-
taean inscriptions, would belong to the strongest period of Nabatsean influence
in the Hauran, under Malchus II (ca. 50-28 b.c.), during whose sway monuments
seem to have been dated according to the year of his reign : thus, an altar from
Bosra, dated in the eleventh year of “Maliku,” the king, is assigned, by several
scholars, to the year 40 b.c. The third or purely Oriental period would begin
with the rule of Herod the Great in the Hauran, in 23 B.C., and would continue under
the influence of the Idumean dynasty until the end of the first century, broken only
by a short period of Nabatman domination after the death of Herod, under King
Aretas IV, or from 4 b.c. to 40 a.d., when Herod Agrippa I becomes the Roman rep-
resentative in the Hauran.
Suweda. tomb of hamrath. 1 The tomb of Hamrath at Suweda, which is the
first monument described by M. de Vogiie, and the subject of his first plate, has been
1 La Syrie Centrale, Pl. i; also L6on de Laborde, Voyage de la Syrie, Pl. 59, p. 119.
PAGAN ARCHITECTURE IN THE DJEBEL HAURAN
survived in a small monument of this character, even after a new style had been in-
troduced in temple architecture during the reign of Herod.
The evidence given by the monuments themselves is as follows: the lower por-
tions of the temple and the portico of its temenos, which were certainly built by the
elder Maleichath, are in a style which manifests distinct classic elements; the details
which bear the Greek inscriptions are entirely free from Greek influence, and this
freedom is seen still more in the later monuments of the time of Agrippa II. Now,
what occasioned the change in style between the architecture of the grandfather and
that of the grandson ? May it not have been the change of government effected by
the transfer of the Hauran to the kingdom of Herod ? The fashion of writing Greek
may perhaps have been introduced at the same time; for it is a strange coinci-
dence that the Nabataean inscriptions are found in connection with architectural
details that show Greek influence, while the Greek inscriptions appear upon dis-
tinctly Oriental details.
The most logical solution seems to me to be that the Nabataeans learned their first
lessons in monumental architecture from the Greeks, and during the earliest period
used both languages in their inscriptions; that, while their own power was unchal-
lenged, they built in a style molded upon Greek lines but infused with their own ideas,
and at this time placed Nabataean inscriptions upon their monuments; that with the
rise of the Idumean dynasty a new Oriental style was introduced, different from that of
the Oriental elements of the mixed or second style, and one which found later expres-
sion during the second period of influence of the Idumean dynasty, under Agrippa II.
According to the order outlined above, the first architectural period in the Hauran,
with its distinctly Greek forms and its bilingual inscription, would fall in the reign of
the Nabataean king Aretas III, who took Damascus from Antiochos XII in 84 b.c.,
and reigned until about 60 b.c. The second or mixed style, with its Naba-
taean inscriptions, would belong to the strongest period of Nabatsean influence
in the Hauran, under Malchus II (ca. 50-28 b.c.), during whose sway monuments
seem to have been dated according to the year of his reign : thus, an altar from
Bosra, dated in the eleventh year of “Maliku,” the king, is assigned, by several
scholars, to the year 40 b.c. The third or purely Oriental period would begin
with the rule of Herod the Great in the Hauran, in 23 B.C., and would continue under
the influence of the Idumean dynasty until the end of the first century, broken only
by a short period of Nabatman domination after the death of Herod, under King
Aretas IV, or from 4 b.c. to 40 a.d., when Herod Agrippa I becomes the Roman rep-
resentative in the Hauran.
Suweda. tomb of hamrath. 1 The tomb of Hamrath at Suweda, which is the
first monument described by M. de Vogiie, and the subject of his first plate, has been
1 La Syrie Centrale, Pl. i; also L6on de Laborde, Voyage de la Syrie, Pl. 59, p. 119.