DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44946#0097
cAmman {Philadelphia}.
61
the portals are high and spacious, two of them have flat lintels and stilted relieving
arches, and the other, the middle one, has a lintel below a flat segmental arch. The
windows are all roundheaded. The structure is devoid of ornament of any kind. To the
north, or outer face of the wall, near its west end, is attached a tower, or minaret, of
later and poorer workmanship, built in courses 30 to 40 cm. wide, laid in mortar.
The entrance to this tower has been roughly cut through the ancient wall. The great
central portal has been reduced in size by the insertion of new jambs and lintel. The
wall, when mentioned by travellers, has always been considered as Mohammedan work,
and part of the mosque. It has at present no further relation to the mosque, which is
a small structure, and, as I imagine, not very ancient, further than that it bounds one side
of the court before the mosque. The wall itself with its portals and windows was built
to form one side, or the front, of a building; it is not a court-yard wall, and if it
formed the front of an earlier mosque than the present one, as it may have done, the
mosque was, in all likelihood, the one described in the 10th century by Mukaddasi. 1
But even so, the matter of the date of the wall is not settled. It is difficult for me
to believe that the wall is Mohammedan work; the tower, which is square, with a spiral
stair within, and which has round arched windows, is probably Mohammedan from base
to summit, and may be as old as the time of Mukaddasi, 2 or even older; but the
character of the wall seems either very late Roman, or early Christian. The wall might
easily have formed the north side of a large church ; its orientation is far more nearly
correct for a church than that of the so called cathedral, but it is unusual to find one
of the side portals of a church larger than the others. It is quite possible, however,
that the portal was inserted in early Mohammedan times, in the period, let us say, oi
the tower, and that in still later times, its size was reduced by the introduction of new
lintel and jambs. I would reconstruct the wall with but two portals, with one window
where the central portal is, another where the tower stands, and a third at the eastern
end where the wall is broken : this would give the typical side wall of Syrian basilicas.
If the wall is not the wall of an early church it must be the work of Christian ar-
chitects in the earliest period of Muslim architecture in Syria. The later Mohammedan
architecture at "Amman is represented in the arched and vaulted gateway on the
akropolis, published by Dr. Strzygowski3, and beautifully illustrated by Bruno Schultz
in the same publication.
Fragments. The modern town abounds in architectural fragments and bits of
sculpture, built into modern houses or lying in heaps of rubbish; but few of them are
sufficiently well preserved to make a publication of them worth while, and others are
in such positions as to make reproductions of them, in photographs or drawings, quite
impossible. Below the west wall of the akropolis, at the very bottom of the valley,
I found a drum of a large fluted column 1.10 m. in diameter, and a broken Ionic
capital of large scale. These were the only fragments that I saw in Amman that
could possibly be assigned to the Ptolemaic era of the city’s history.
Not far from this spot, in a stable, buried in straw, I was shown an excellent
specimen of relief sculpture in white marble. The subject represents a horseman in
1 Muk., 175; quoted by Yakut, III, 760.
2 To his time probably belongs a short inscription in Kufic characters found in the courtyard of the mosque and to
be published in Div. IV, sec. D.
3 Jahrbuch der Koniglich Preuszischen Kunstsammhmgen^ Band Heft IV (1904) p. 350.
61
the portals are high and spacious, two of them have flat lintels and stilted relieving
arches, and the other, the middle one, has a lintel below a flat segmental arch. The
windows are all roundheaded. The structure is devoid of ornament of any kind. To the
north, or outer face of the wall, near its west end, is attached a tower, or minaret, of
later and poorer workmanship, built in courses 30 to 40 cm. wide, laid in mortar.
The entrance to this tower has been roughly cut through the ancient wall. The great
central portal has been reduced in size by the insertion of new jambs and lintel. The
wall, when mentioned by travellers, has always been considered as Mohammedan work,
and part of the mosque. It has at present no further relation to the mosque, which is
a small structure, and, as I imagine, not very ancient, further than that it bounds one side
of the court before the mosque. The wall itself with its portals and windows was built
to form one side, or the front, of a building; it is not a court-yard wall, and if it
formed the front of an earlier mosque than the present one, as it may have done, the
mosque was, in all likelihood, the one described in the 10th century by Mukaddasi. 1
But even so, the matter of the date of the wall is not settled. It is difficult for me
to believe that the wall is Mohammedan work; the tower, which is square, with a spiral
stair within, and which has round arched windows, is probably Mohammedan from base
to summit, and may be as old as the time of Mukaddasi, 2 or even older; but the
character of the wall seems either very late Roman, or early Christian. The wall might
easily have formed the north side of a large church ; its orientation is far more nearly
correct for a church than that of the so called cathedral, but it is unusual to find one
of the side portals of a church larger than the others. It is quite possible, however,
that the portal was inserted in early Mohammedan times, in the period, let us say, oi
the tower, and that in still later times, its size was reduced by the introduction of new
lintel and jambs. I would reconstruct the wall with but two portals, with one window
where the central portal is, another where the tower stands, and a third at the eastern
end where the wall is broken : this would give the typical side wall of Syrian basilicas.
If the wall is not the wall of an early church it must be the work of Christian ar-
chitects in the earliest period of Muslim architecture in Syria. The later Mohammedan
architecture at "Amman is represented in the arched and vaulted gateway on the
akropolis, published by Dr. Strzygowski3, and beautifully illustrated by Bruno Schultz
in the same publication.
Fragments. The modern town abounds in architectural fragments and bits of
sculpture, built into modern houses or lying in heaps of rubbish; but few of them are
sufficiently well preserved to make a publication of them worth while, and others are
in such positions as to make reproductions of them, in photographs or drawings, quite
impossible. Below the west wall of the akropolis, at the very bottom of the valley,
I found a drum of a large fluted column 1.10 m. in diameter, and a broken Ionic
capital of large scale. These were the only fragments that I saw in Amman that
could possibly be assigned to the Ptolemaic era of the city’s history.
Not far from this spot, in a stable, buried in straw, I was shown an excellent
specimen of relief sculpture in white marble. The subject represents a horseman in
1 Muk., 175; quoted by Yakut, III, 760.
2 To his time probably belongs a short inscription in Kufic characters found in the courtyard of the mosque and to
be published in Div. IV, sec. D.
3 Jahrbuch der Koniglich Preuszischen Kunstsammhmgen^ Band Heft IV (1904) p. 350.