DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44946#0069
II. A. i. Ammonitis.
38
walls at cArak il-Emir. The walls are lower; but their lines are straight, and their
angles are true right angles; it is only the quality of the masonry that differs from
that of the higher terraces. It is not possible to assign a date, either to the quadrated
walls of the upper terraces, or to the cruder coursed masonry of the lower section of
the akropolis. The latter may be of very great antiquity, yet there are no marks
about the crude, almost Cyclopaean, masonry, that characterize it as definitely early
or late. It is almost certainly not of Mohammedan origin: I know of no walls of
this character in all Syria that belong to the mediaeval period, and, indeed the fortified
portion of the akropolis was certainly much smaller in Mohammedan than in Roman
times. It is difficult to know if the Romans ever built retaining walls of this sort;
but we have examples of wall building of this kind at Arak il-Emir, which quite
certainly belong to the Pre-Roman, or Seleukid, period. These crude walls may very
probably belong to the time of Ptolemy’s work at Philadelphia; yet, on the other hand,
they may date back to the days of ancient Rabbath Ammon. The quadrated walls
are probably Roman, though, here again, there are no definite means for determining
whether the work is Roman of the second century A. D., or Hellenistic of the second
century B. C. Certain it is that the well preserved section of the wall at the north
end of the first terrace, was built before the Roman building that stands in ruins
above it; for the building with its peribolos was exactly adjusted to the site as defined
by the walls. Yet one may not assert with assurance that this part of the walls was
constructed immediately before the erection of the edifice above it; for the edifice may
have been planned to conform to the outlines of a platform erected many years before.
There can be no doubt that draughted masonry was employed by Greek builders in
Syria in the second century B. C., and there is abundant proof that it was used by
Roman builders as late as the second century of our era, especially in military con-
structions. In the later military architecture, of the Christian period in Syria, draughted
masonry is generally of a different character, blocks with draughted edges being mixed
with ordinary smooth quadrated blocks, which probably indicates a second use of the
draughted blocks. There are many examples in the Hauran in which a castle or tOAver
of the Antonine period, in draughted masonry, was renovated or rebuilt in the fourth
century with an admixture of smooth blocks.
The Temple k The ruins of the great temple of the akropolis are situated near
the southern end of the uppermost terrace (see map), but its position was not exactly
symmetrical with regard to the walls of the akropolis. The temple did not occupy
the highest part of the first terrace, unless, perhaps, the mound to the north of it, is
composed of ruined buildings of a later period. It stood nearer to the south wall than
to the other walls, and, for this reason, was probably visible from the city immediately
below. The building faced eastward. The plan (Ill. 24) was prostyle, tetrastyle, with
one column on the return on either side; the antae consisted of half columns. The ruins
show conclusive evidence for this reconstruction of the pronaos. The entire front wall of
the podium is in situ together with seven meters of the north wall of the podium,
adjoining the front wall. Upon these walls stand the massive bases of the two middle
columns of the pronaos, and the base of the column on the return on the north side.
1 Capt. Conder published a minute plan of this temple, with a profile of one of the column-bases, cf. Survey of
Eastern Palestine^ p. 32.
38
walls at cArak il-Emir. The walls are lower; but their lines are straight, and their
angles are true right angles; it is only the quality of the masonry that differs from
that of the higher terraces. It is not possible to assign a date, either to the quadrated
walls of the upper terraces, or to the cruder coursed masonry of the lower section of
the akropolis. The latter may be of very great antiquity, yet there are no marks
about the crude, almost Cyclopaean, masonry, that characterize it as definitely early
or late. It is almost certainly not of Mohammedan origin: I know of no walls of
this character in all Syria that belong to the mediaeval period, and, indeed the fortified
portion of the akropolis was certainly much smaller in Mohammedan than in Roman
times. It is difficult to know if the Romans ever built retaining walls of this sort;
but we have examples of wall building of this kind at Arak il-Emir, which quite
certainly belong to the Pre-Roman, or Seleukid, period. These crude walls may very
probably belong to the time of Ptolemy’s work at Philadelphia; yet, on the other hand,
they may date back to the days of ancient Rabbath Ammon. The quadrated walls
are probably Roman, though, here again, there are no definite means for determining
whether the work is Roman of the second century A. D., or Hellenistic of the second
century B. C. Certain it is that the well preserved section of the wall at the north
end of the first terrace, was built before the Roman building that stands in ruins
above it; for the building with its peribolos was exactly adjusted to the site as defined
by the walls. Yet one may not assert with assurance that this part of the walls was
constructed immediately before the erection of the edifice above it; for the edifice may
have been planned to conform to the outlines of a platform erected many years before.
There can be no doubt that draughted masonry was employed by Greek builders in
Syria in the second century B. C., and there is abundant proof that it was used by
Roman builders as late as the second century of our era, especially in military con-
structions. In the later military architecture, of the Christian period in Syria, draughted
masonry is generally of a different character, blocks with draughted edges being mixed
with ordinary smooth quadrated blocks, which probably indicates a second use of the
draughted blocks. There are many examples in the Hauran in which a castle or tOAver
of the Antonine period, in draughted masonry, was renovated or rebuilt in the fourth
century with an admixture of smooth blocks.
The Temple k The ruins of the great temple of the akropolis are situated near
the southern end of the uppermost terrace (see map), but its position was not exactly
symmetrical with regard to the walls of the akropolis. The temple did not occupy
the highest part of the first terrace, unless, perhaps, the mound to the north of it, is
composed of ruined buildings of a later period. It stood nearer to the south wall than
to the other walls, and, for this reason, was probably visible from the city immediately
below. The building faced eastward. The plan (Ill. 24) was prostyle, tetrastyle, with
one column on the return on either side; the antae consisted of half columns. The ruins
show conclusive evidence for this reconstruction of the pronaos. The entire front wall of
the podium is in situ together with seven meters of the north wall of the podium,
adjoining the front wall. Upon these walls stand the massive bases of the two middle
columns of the pronaos, and the base of the column on the return on the north side.
1 Capt. Conder published a minute plan of this temple, with a profile of one of the column-bases, cf. Survey of
Eastern Palestine^ p. 32.