DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0374
342
PAGAN ARCHITECTURE IN THE DJEBEL HAURAn
artistic fame. Syria had become a center of Greek civilization and of Greek art long
before Rome had put off her Etruscan swaddling-clothes. There are remains of
Seleucid architecture in Damascus which belong almost certainly to the third century
b.c., and the oldest dated building in Syria, the so-called palace of Hyrcanos at
‘Arak el-Emir, immediately south of the Hauran, shows unmistakable signs of classic
influence as early as the second century b.c. It is interesting in this connection to
remember that, at the height of the Roman Empire’s career in the'world of art, the
chief architect of the Emperor Trajan was a Syrian — Apollodoros of Damascus. It
would not have been necessary for Apollodoros to leave his native land to acquire
perfection in his profession ; there was no better school of art in the world at this time
than that of Antioch, and, since the division of the old Seleucid kingdom, Damascus
had begun to be her rival.
These things being so, it will be seen that what we call the “ Roman architecture ”
of the Hauran was not an art that was brought from overseas and transplanted in
new soil, but represented the mere extension of the art of one portion of Syria to
another portion,— from Greek Syria to Semitic Syria,— a process which Rome, with
her wonderful power of organization and amalgamation, accomplished as doubtless
no other power could have done. The classic architecture of Syria earlier than the
second century a.d. may not be called Roman. Even that which dates from the
time of Pompey, and during the reigns of the first five Csesars and of the Flavian
emperors, belongs rather to the old period of Macedonian rule; for during that
period (64 b.c. to 100 a.d.) the Romans themselves were engaged in Helienizing their
own art. Whatever use the Syrians may have made of the classic style before the
year 100, it was adapted from the architecture of the Seleucid kingdom. It was only
after the complete political' Romanizing of these Syrian provinces, and the develop-
ment of Roman commerce in and through them, that the name “ Roman ” could be
applied to the architecture at all, and that more by reason of the personal imperial
influence that may be traced in it than in view of its artistic forms.
It is difficult to tell when the classic style was first revived in the Hauran under
Roman patronage. The earliest monument with an inscription upon it dates from
the reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, in the year 151 a.d. This builcling, with
others in similar style, must be taken as a starting-point for the discussion of the
architecture of the second century, though it is most probable that there are buildings
in the Hauran which antedate it by a few years. There is a predisposition on the
part of the earlier writers upon the subject of Roman architecture in the Hauran, par-
ticularly those who have written books of travel, to speak of it as a debased form of
Roman art. It will be necessary, I think, only to refer to some of the illustrations
which follow to convince students of architecture that the particular style found in
the Hauran, far from being debased, is unusually graceful and beautiful, especially in
its earlier monuments. A glance at such monuments as the little temple at Mu-
PAGAN ARCHITECTURE IN THE DJEBEL HAURAn
artistic fame. Syria had become a center of Greek civilization and of Greek art long
before Rome had put off her Etruscan swaddling-clothes. There are remains of
Seleucid architecture in Damascus which belong almost certainly to the third century
b.c., and the oldest dated building in Syria, the so-called palace of Hyrcanos at
‘Arak el-Emir, immediately south of the Hauran, shows unmistakable signs of classic
influence as early as the second century b.c. It is interesting in this connection to
remember that, at the height of the Roman Empire’s career in the'world of art, the
chief architect of the Emperor Trajan was a Syrian — Apollodoros of Damascus. It
would not have been necessary for Apollodoros to leave his native land to acquire
perfection in his profession ; there was no better school of art in the world at this time
than that of Antioch, and, since the division of the old Seleucid kingdom, Damascus
had begun to be her rival.
These things being so, it will be seen that what we call the “ Roman architecture ”
of the Hauran was not an art that was brought from overseas and transplanted in
new soil, but represented the mere extension of the art of one portion of Syria to
another portion,— from Greek Syria to Semitic Syria,— a process which Rome, with
her wonderful power of organization and amalgamation, accomplished as doubtless
no other power could have done. The classic architecture of Syria earlier than the
second century a.d. may not be called Roman. Even that which dates from the
time of Pompey, and during the reigns of the first five Csesars and of the Flavian
emperors, belongs rather to the old period of Macedonian rule; for during that
period (64 b.c. to 100 a.d.) the Romans themselves were engaged in Helienizing their
own art. Whatever use the Syrians may have made of the classic style before the
year 100, it was adapted from the architecture of the Seleucid kingdom. It was only
after the complete political' Romanizing of these Syrian provinces, and the develop-
ment of Roman commerce in and through them, that the name “ Roman ” could be
applied to the architecture at all, and that more by reason of the personal imperial
influence that may be traced in it than in view of its artistic forms.
It is difficult to tell when the classic style was first revived in the Hauran under
Roman patronage. The earliest monument with an inscription upon it dates from
the reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, in the year 151 a.d. This builcling, with
others in similar style, must be taken as a starting-point for the discussion of the
architecture of the second century, though it is most probable that there are buildings
in the Hauran which antedate it by a few years. There is a predisposition on the
part of the earlier writers upon the subject of Roman architecture in the Hauran, par-
ticularly those who have written books of travel, to speak of it as a debased form of
Roman art. It will be necessary, I think, only to refer to some of the illustrations
which follow to convince students of architecture that the particular style found in
the Hauran, far from being debased, is unusually graceful and beautiful, especially in
its earlier monuments. A glance at such monuments as the little temple at Mu-