DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0357
PRE-ROMAN PERIOD
325
almost completely demolished since that interesting drawing was made. A few years
ago a Turkish garrison was established at Suweda, and when the barracks were
East wall of tomb of Hamrath at Suw£da.
built, this tomb and other monuments in the vicinity were used as quarries; but
before the tomb had been absolutely leveled with the ground, some friend of the
ancient monuments, an intelligent Turkish officer, as I was told, communicated with
the authorities and saved a portion of the ruin, which may still be identified with
the monument published by M. de Vogiie. If it were not for the admirable Plate 1
in “ La Syrie Centrale ” it woulcl now be impossible to restore the structure, for the
stones of which it was composed were not only thrown down but taken away and
built into walls. Three sides of the tomb were thus demolished; all of the frieze of
triglyphs, with the cornice, and the lower steps of the pyramidal superstructure, which
were in place forty years ago, have perished ; but the one remaining side still shows
five of its original six engaged columns, one with its capital, and the armorial orna-
ments are still preserved in three of the wall spaces between the columns. In the
middle space we fincl the Macedonian helmet with its pendants, to the right of it the
long oval shield, and to the left the tall cuirass with its long flaps. In the middle
space, below the helmet, on the fifth course of stone from the bottom, the Nabataean
inscription is still to be seen; the corresponding Greek inscription on the opposite
side has disappeared. This tomb was built by one Odainath, son of Annel, for his
wife Hamrath. M. de Vogiie places the building of the tomb at the end of the first
century before our era; but the most recent criticism of the text of the Nabataean
inscription 1 has carried the date back to the first half of that century, which may make
the monument contemporaneous with Aretas III, the Nabataean conqueror of
Damascus (ca. 85-60 b.c.).
■ Corpus Inscr. Semit. II, 162.
325
almost completely demolished since that interesting drawing was made. A few years
ago a Turkish garrison was established at Suweda, and when the barracks were
East wall of tomb of Hamrath at Suw£da.
built, this tomb and other monuments in the vicinity were used as quarries; but
before the tomb had been absolutely leveled with the ground, some friend of the
ancient monuments, an intelligent Turkish officer, as I was told, communicated with
the authorities and saved a portion of the ruin, which may still be identified with
the monument published by M. de Vogiie. If it were not for the admirable Plate 1
in “ La Syrie Centrale ” it woulcl now be impossible to restore the structure, for the
stones of which it was composed were not only thrown down but taken away and
built into walls. Three sides of the tomb were thus demolished; all of the frieze of
triglyphs, with the cornice, and the lower steps of the pyramidal superstructure, which
were in place forty years ago, have perished ; but the one remaining side still shows
five of its original six engaged columns, one with its capital, and the armorial orna-
ments are still preserved in three of the wall spaces between the columns. In the
middle space we fincl the Macedonian helmet with its pendants, to the right of it the
long oval shield, and to the left the tall cuirass with its long flaps. In the middle
space, below the helmet, on the fifth course of stone from the bottom, the Nabataean
inscription is still to be seen; the corresponding Greek inscription on the opposite
side has disappeared. This tomb was built by one Odainath, son of Annel, for his
wife Hamrath. M. de Vogiie places the building of the tomb at the end of the first
century before our era; but the most recent criticism of the text of the Nabataean
inscription 1 has carried the date back to the first half of that century, which may make
the monument contemporaneous with Aretas III, the Nabataean conqueror of
Damascus (ca. 85-60 b.c.).
■ Corpus Inscr. Semit. II, 162.