1998 paganizam i ranohriscanski mozaici

8/10/2019 1998 Paganizam i Ranohriscanski Mozaici

1/42

LA 48 (1998) 441-482; Pls. 21-30

THE RECONCILIATION OF PAGANISM AND CHRISTIANITY

IN THE EARLY BYZANTINE MOSAIC PAVEMENTS

OF ARABIA AND PALESTINE*

M. W. Merrony

A number of approaches have characterized the study of mosaics in the

eastern provinces of the Roman and Byzantine empire. The cataloguing of

the mosaics of Israel up to 1935 by M. Avi-Yonah,1was continued and ex-

tended up to 1975 by R. Ovadiah and A. Ovadiah.2In both cases, the codi-

fication and classification of iconography represented a somewhat de-constructive approach since these did not take adequate account of broader

issues, such as the diffusion of style or symbolism.

The approach adopted by L. Budde, on the other hand, might be re-

garded as aesthetic.3The stylistic examination of acanthus decoration in

the mosaics of Misis formed the basis for an interpretation that culminated

in their attribution to a workshop in Antioch.4This methodology was su-

perseded by that of C. Dauphin, who codified several stylistic traits on in-

habited scroll pavements and postulated the diffusion of mosaic art from a

number of main centres in the eastern provinces.5

D. Levi, too, examined the development and diffusion of style in the

villa pavements of Antioch but also explored the possible symbolic con-

*Thanks are due to Dr. Julian Raby of the Oriental Institute, Oxford, and to ProfessorClaudine Dauphin of the CNRS, Paris, for their valuable time, academic advice and encour-agement during the preparation of this paper. We are also grateful to Father MichelePiccirillo, OFM, for his kind permission to reproduce several of the plates which appear inthe present article.

1. M. Avi-Yonah, Mosaic Pavements in Palestine, QDAP 2 (1932) 136-181; 3 (1933) 26-72; 4 (1934) 187-193; 5 (1935) 11-30.

2. A. Ovadiah - R. Ovadiah, Mosaic Pavements in Israel, Rome 1987.

3. L. Budde,Antike Mosaiken in Kilikien. I: Frhchristliche Mosaiken in Misis-Mopsuhestia(Beitrge zur kunst des Christlichens Ostens, Band 5), Recklinghausen 1969.

4. A critique of this interpretative methodology is provided by C. Dauphin, A New Methodof Studying Early Byzantine Mosaic Pavements (Coding and Computed Cluster Analysis)with Special Reference to the Levant,Levant8 (1976) 113-149, esp. 113.

5. For an examination of artistic diffusion in the eastern provinces, Dauphin, A NewMethod, 113-145.


2/42


3/42

RECONCILIATION OF PAGANISM AND CHRISTIANITY 443

11. For an overview of the geographical area covered in this paper, Y. Tsafrir - L. Di Segni - J.Green, Tabula Imperii Romani Iudea Palaestina: Eretz Israel in the Hellenistic, Roman andByzantine Periods, Maps and Gazeteer, Jerusalem 1994, fig. 1.

12. Ovadiah - Ovadiah,Mosaic Pavements,are a case in point. The pavements are reviewedfrom a contemporary geographical perspective and no account is taken of the fact that thecatalogued pavements of the Early Byzantine period were scattered across the Provinces ofPhoenicia, Palaestina Prima, Secunda, and Tertia.

13. A brief discussion of this mosaic is provided by C.H. Kraeling, Gerasa: City of theDecapolis, New Haven 1938, 351, pl. lxxxivb.

perspective by examining the pavements of an entire region, province by

province,11 whereas at present pavements are largely studied exclusively

within the confines of modern countries (for instance Israel, Jordan or

Syria), where they were excavated.12The aim of this paper is to addressthe significance of secular and religious iconography in the Early Byzan-

tine period. It should be stressed that we do not aim to attempt a definitive

iconographic interpretation. Rather the material thus approached raises sev-

eral fundamental questions of interpretation.

The religious and secular context: an apparent dichotomy

A principal trend has emerged from our study and has consequentlyformed our interpretative framework. A conspicuous feature is an icono-

graphic dichotomy between ecclesiastical buildings, churches and syna-

gogues, on the one hand, and villaeon the other. In short, the inhabited

vine scroll pavement, an ubiquitous feature particularly of 6th century

churches (in Arabia and Palestine) and synagogues (in Palestine), would

seem to be absent from the villa context. One possible exception to

this can be found at Gerasa in the House on Camp Hill, which contains

a fragmentary pavement. The preserved field is decorated by an inhab-

ited vine rinceau which issues from an amphora. It has been suggestedby C. Kraeling that this pavement belonged to a private house even

though he admits that when the pavement was originally excavated, no

attempt was made to ascertain the extent of the mosaic or to determine

the nature of the structure to which it belonged.13 It should be pointed

out that when observed carefully, the areas encompassed by several

scrolls exhibit reworking, which may suggest iconoclastic activity. This

could lend support to the idea that this mosaic belonged to a religious

building.


4/42

M. W. MERRONY444

14. On the rinceau in the Tiberias baths, Ovadiah - Ovadiah, Mosaic Pavements, 140.Room M at a villa in Jenah, dated to the first half of the 6th century, contains an inhab-ited vine rinceau in its field: M.H. Chhab, Mosaques du Liban, Bulletin du Muse deBeyrouth 14 (1959) 9-189, esp. 53-79, pl. xxix. One such example from Antioch can befound at the House of the Bird Rinceau (upper level), the border of which contains aninhabited vine rinceau dated to the mid-6th century (Levi, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, I,366; II, pl. xcl).

15. M. Piccirillo, The Burnt Palace of Madaba,ADAJ30 (1986) 333-39, fig. 2; Id., TheMosaics of Jordan, 78-79, figs 49-54.

16. A detailed description of the villaand its mosaic, with illustrations, is presented by E.Netzer - Z. Weiss,Zippori, Jerusalem 1994, 30-39.

One certain example of an inhabited vine rinceau decorating a secu-

lar context in Palestine is in hall 69 of the 6th century baths at Tiberias,

and there are certainly examples of the vine rinceau appearing in the villa

context in the provinces of Phoenicia (at Jenah) and Syria (at Antioch)during the 6th century.14However, it is perhaps worth stressing that the

proportion of excavated villae in Arabia and Palestine is low compared

to the number of religious buildings, particularly churches, during that

period. Conversely, at Antioch, where the vine rinceau is present in the

villa context, the proportion of villae is higher. It may well be that fu-

ture excavations will alter the current picture in Arabia and Palestine.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that not one proven instance of the inhab-

ited vine rinceau in the villa context exists in the Provinces of Arabia

and Palestine.This raises the possibility that the inhabited vine rinceau pavement

might be viewed as essentially religious in significance. Nevertheless, we

should not lose sight of the fact that similar kinds of scenes characterize

both religious and secular contexts. For example, hunting and pastoral

scenes, a popular feature of the inhabited vine rinceau pavement, also oc-

cur in villamosaics. At Madaba, for instance, the field of the Burnt Pal-

ace contains hunting and pastoral scenes enclosed within an acanthus

rinceau.15A hunting scene, dated to the 5th century, also characterizes part

of the field in the House of the Nile Festival at Sepphoris in Palestine.16

Thus caution should be exercised in interpreting a religious/secular split

on the presence or absence of the vine rinceau alone. It is therefore desir-

able to seek a particular characteristic trait of iconography which is in-

cluded in, or excluded from, one particular sector. There are two such

examples. The first is the Classical mythological scene, which was typi-

cal of the villa in the period studied but did not occur in a Christian or

Jewish religious context. Examples in Palestine include the villa at Cheikh


5/42


6/42

M. W. MERRONY446

24. A detailed examination of the development of the acanthus and vine rinceau in a vari-ety of artistic media is provided by Levi, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, I, 489-517.

25. The development of the vine and acanthus rinceau in architectural sculpture and mosaicart has been thoroughly examined by C. Dauphin The Development of the InhabitedScroll in Architectural Sculpture and Mosaic Art from Late Imperial Times to the SeventhCentury AD,Levant19 (1987) 183-212.

26. Dauphin, Development, 190, suggests that this is exemplified in the late 1st centuryZliten inhabited acanthus field scrolls and by the frigidariumpavement of the baths at Birel-Caid, near Sousse. See S. Aurigemma,I Mosaici di Zliten, Rome 1926, 205-32, figs 130-145; L. Foucher, Thermes romains des environs dHadrumte, Notes et Documents 1(1958) 5-14; Dcouvertes archologiques Thysdrus en 1960, Notes et Documents 4(1960) 106-107, pls lva-c, lvi, lviiib.

period are those which depict the rural activities of arable, hunting and

pastoral practice, while in the secular context it is the mythological scene.

Since it has been established that religious themes are frequently enmeshed

within a compositional vine rinceau framework, we might also view therinceau as having some kind of inextricable link with its inherent iconog-

raphy. It might thus also prove instructive to examine the development of

the rinceau in the artistic media from the Roman period in relation to cor-

ollary changes in style and floor composition.

The development of the inhabited acanthus and vine scroll

The use of the rinceau in artistic media can be traced back to the Hellenisticperiod. Levi has demonstrated that the rinceau derives from the Hellenistic

garland with fruit, grapes and vine leaves entwined with a ribbon associated

with theatrical masks usually set in the corners. Examples of this kind in ar-

chitectural sculpture may be found in the theatre at Pergamon (2nd century

BC) and subsequently in Hellenistic and Roman sarcophagi.24Dauphin points

out that the garland was the most frequently used motif in mosaic art for

emblemaframes on floors and walls from the first decade of the 1st century

BC to the end of the 3rd century AD.25Between the late 3rd and early 6th

centuries, the garland was superseded by the scroll in sculpted friezes and onmosaic panels and borders. It is possible to plot a major compositional change

in the nature of inhabited scroll fields of mosaic pavements in North Africa

and the East respectively in the period between the 1st and 3rd, and the 4th to

the 7th centuries. This is essentially characterized by a transition from a loose

exuberance (where, for example, animals are separated from each other by

vine stems and tree branches spread haphazardly across the surface)26to an


7/42


27. As manifest in a variety of 5th and 6th-century examples of inhabited scroll pavementsin the Levant.

28. I. Lavin, Antioch Hunting Mosaics and Their Sources, Dumbarton Oaks Papers17(1963) 179-287, esp. 187.

29. A detailed treatment of the Alexander Mosaic, with numerous illustrations, is presentedby A. Cohen, The Alexander Mosaic. Stories of Victories and Defeat, Cambridge 1997.

30. G. Gullini,I Mosaici di Palestrina, Rome 1956; H.P. LOrange - P.J. Nordhagen,Mo-saics, London 1966, pl. 5; Cohen, The Alexander Mosaic, figs 51-59.

31. The development of mosaic composition throughout the Roman period has been exam-ined by K.M.D. Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa: Studies in Iconographyand Patronage, Oxford 1978, esp. 1-11.

increasing organisation of the pavement; and in the formalization of the pat-

terns created by the scrolls (where the rinceau itself became highly

geometricized, tightly framing its iconographic subject matter).27

The development of style and floor composition

The apparent compositional shift from naturalism to schematization in

the rinceau is paralleled by a second discernible stylistic change. In the

Hellenistic period, the composition of floor mosaics emphasized realism.

This was facilitated by the development of emblemata, panels composed

of stone and glass fragments, often imitating the style of actual paint-

ings, set into an ornamental framework designed to enhance them. Thistype of floor arrangement has been aptly described by I. Lavin as being

treated much like a wall on which a picture is hung - a neutral ground

cut through by an illusionistic hole.28Two examples of the emblematype

par excellence are the Alexander mosaic from Pompeii29 and the Nile

mosaic from Palestrina.30 Both pavements successfully created a sense

of three-dimensional realism which was achieved in large measure by

the successful rendering of recession, depth and perspective - traits which

are difficult to produce on the flat medium of a floor surface and re-

quire considerable expenditure of artistic skill, time and economic re-sources.

Mosaics thus tended towards abstractness and stylisation. As a conse-

quence, in many parts of the empire the subsequent history of mosaics in

the Roman period may be seen as a variety of attempts to break away from

the limitations inherent in the traditional concept.31 This was traced by

Lavin in examining the formal changes in North African hunting pavements


8/42

M. W. MERRONY448

32. A detailed study of the development of floor composition in North African mosaic pave-ments is provided by Lavin, Antioch Hunting Mosaics, esp. 204-244.

33. A thorough examination of the development of composition, particularly of Levantinepavements is presented by C. Dauphin, Carpets of Stone: the Graeco-Roman Legacy inthe Levant, Classics Ireland4 (1997) 1-33.

during the 3rd and 4th centuries.32One of Lavins main observations was

that North African mosaicists repeatedly approached the floor area as a

consistent unit, and that this conception manifested itself in a variety of

compositional types that served to retain the integrity of the floors surfacewhile covering more or less uniformly the entire area of the pavement.

Essentially, the first indications of a departure from the traditional concepts

in the Near East was apparent at Antioch in the 4th century. Pavements

became characterized by large uniform patterns which spread out over the

whole surface and developed into repeat patterns and trellises or grid

designs which were most reminiscent of textiles and evidently popular in

the provinces of Syria and Palestine from the 5th century onwards.33This

basic transition from three-dimensional realism to two-dimensional ab-

stractness in mosaic art might well provide a reasonable explanation for thepopularity of the acanthus and vine rinceau in the 5th, and particularly the

6th, centuries. Both motifs lent themselves particularly well to forming

scrolls on the floor area in a geometricized manner, while at the same time

providing an appropriate two-dimensional artistic solution.

The iconography of inhabited scroll pavements

As suggested above, arable, hunting and pastoral scenes were repetitive andcharacteristic features of 5th and 6th century pavements.

The arable scene

The arable scene depicted the vine harvest and its associated activities such

as the transportation of grapes from the vineyard and their subsequent

pressing and treading, often to the accompaniment of a flute player. A sec-

ond kind of scene involved the presentation of what appears to be a fruit

harvest to a central personification. A third and rarer type sometimes por-

trayed a man engaged in the activity of pomegranate harvesting (Fig. 4).


9/42


34. L. Foucher, Dcouvertes archologiques Thysdrus en 1960,Notes et Documents4

(1961) 27-29, pls xi-xii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 117, n. 28, 180-1;pls 106, 180; M. Blanchard-Leme - M. Ennafer - H. Slim - M. Slim, Floor Mosaics fromTunisia, London 1996, 104-105; figs 69 and 70.

35. E. Albertini, Bulletin Archologique du Comit des Travaux, 1921, lxxx-lxxxii, pl. I;Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 115, pl. 105.

36. J. Lassus, LArchologie algrienne,Libyca7 (1959) 257-269, figs 28-36; Dunbabin,The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 116, pls D, 107-8.

37. W. Oakeshott, The Mosaics of Rome from the third to the fourteenth centuries, London1967, pl. 38.

38. M. Piccirillo - E. Alliata, Umm al-Rasas Mayfaah. I: Gli scavi del complesso di SantoStefano, Jerusalem 1994, large plan.

Frequently these scenes were linked with personifications of the months

and/or personifications of the Four Seasons. The kind of arable scene de-

picted in the Levantine religious pavements had its antecedents earlier in

the Roman period, notably in North African villa mosaics. A pavementfrom the House of Silenus at El-Djem (ca.260-280), for example, depicts

putti harvesting grapes amid the branches of the vine, performing seem-

ingly acrobatic feats in order to reach the large bunches of grapes.34There

are also a number of vintaging scenes from Cherchel. For example, a frag-

mentary pavement from the Cherchel Museum (ca.200-220) depicts men

treading grapes in a wine-press while the wine runs through spouts into two

large dolia.35In another example (ca.375-425), figures are also portrayed

treading grapes in a winepress on one side of the pavement while the juice

runs out through a spout into a doliumbeneath. Along two of the other sidesmen cut grapes and carry them in large baskets; one, who is stirring the

juice in a large dolium, is approached by another carrying a hare and a

pruning knife. On the remaining side are two scenes, one of which shows

an ox-cart carrying off the grapes in a vat.36A similar kind of scene had

been depicted at an earlier date on the vault of the church of Sta Costanza

in Rome (325-350).37

The last three examples in particular prefigure the later Levantine har-

vesting scenes. One is reminded, for instance, of a scene from a pavement

in the 8th century Church of St Stephen at Umm al-Rasas in Arabia, whichshows men picking and treading grapes, the juice of which flows into a

dolium.38In the Roman period, the vintaging scene was frequently directly

associated in the same pavement with some element of the Dionysiac scene

and thus could be regarded as symbolical of one of the cults principal char-

acteristics: wine and drunkeness. These associations will be examined in

some detail below.


10/42

M. W. MERRONY450

Personifications of the Earth, the Four Seasons and the Labours

of the Months

Personifications of the Earth, G, appear frequently in mosaics of Arabiaand Palestine, for example in the Upper Chapel of the Priest John (Fig. 5) 39

and the Church of St George (Fig. 3) at Khirbet el-Mukhayyat and the villa

at Beit Guvrin. In all cases, the figure is labelled by an inscription in Greek

Earth, and is associated with the Seasons. In each example Earth is de-

picted as a bust of a woman carrying fruits in the end of her cloak.40The

same stance is taken by the personification of the month of March on the

mosaic from Hall A in the Monastery of Lady Mary at Beth Shean,41and

by the full-length figures of the Four Seasons in the mosaic from Room 1

of the 4th century Constantinian Villa at Antioch.42On this occasion eachSeason holds a different element of floral produce: Spring - flowers, Sum-

mer - wheat, Autumn - fruits, and Winter - olives.

The various attitudes of the different allegories and the produce which

they purvey are part of a long tradition in the Classical period. Levi has

suggested, for example, that the personifications of the Four Seasons have

their antecedents earlier than the 4th century BC in the Horai, a group of

female deities each of whom presided over a different Season although they

were all shown in a similar attitude.43M. Hanfmann has noted that, in the

archaic and Classical art of Greece, the seasons are usually shown in fullfigures and participate in some mythological scene; in Roman art they ap-

pear as isolated figures and in Late Roman art they appear as isolated

busts.44In the Roman period, scenes of the Four Seasons were an ubiqui-

tous feature of the villacontext.45It has been suggested that the inclusion

39. For detailed treatments of this floor, Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, ch. 2, p. 34,fig. 4; ch. 3, esp. pp. 49-55, pls 8-13; M. Piccirillo, La cappella del Prete Giovanni diKhirbet el-Mukhayyat (villagio di Nebo),LA38 (1988) 297-312, esp. 300, pl. 1; Id., The

Mosaics of Jordan, 166-175, figs 216-175.

40. Illustrated in L.H. Vincent, Une Villa grco-romaine Beit Jibrin, Chronique,RB31(1922) 259-281, pls viii-x.

41. Fitzgerald, The Sixth Century Monastery, frontispiece.

42. Levi,Antioch Mosaic Pavements, II, pl. liii.

43. Levi,Antioch Mosaic Pavements, II, 230-236.

44. M.A. Hanfmann, The Seasons Sarcophagus, I, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1951, 75.

45. A detailed treatment of the Seasons mosaics of North Africa is provided by D. Parrish,The Seasons Mosaics of Roman North Africa, Rome 1984. Also Blanchard-Leme et alii,Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, ch. 2, pp. 37-64, figs 12-34.


11/42


46. Blanchard-Leme et alii, Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 37.

47. Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, 100-101.

48. A detailed discussion of calendar mosaics is also presented in G. Akerstrm-Hougen,The Calendar and Hunting Mosaics of the Villa of the Falconer in Argos .A Study in EarlyByzantine Iconography,Stockholm 1974; for the calendar mosaic at Carthage, p. 143, fig.80.

49. M. Avi-Yonah, Mosaic Pavements at El Hammam, Beisan, QDAP 5 (1935) 11-30,pls xv and xvi.

50. See note 40.

51. Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, 277, pls 47 and 50.

52. Akerstrm-Hougen, The Calendar, 72.

of the Four Seasons had a two-fold underlying rationale.46 Firstly, they

evoked cyclical time with its rhythmic phases corresponding to the perio-

dicity of nature (and thus of agricultural cycles), and emphasized the per-

petual renewal of the people whom the countryside supported. Secondly,the inclusion of the Four Seasons in art was an important staple of imperial

propaganda: the seasonal renewal of nature was seen as guaranteeing the

renewal of the empire. According to this concept, social disorder and war

were seen as a threat both to the imperial regime and the harmony and sta-

bility of nature and society which depended upon it.

Saller and Bagatti viewed the origins of Gin a similar vein to those of

the Four Seasons.47They suggested that this personification was related to

the Classical type of abundance, as exemplified on a statue from the

Torlonia museum in Rome. This is a full-length figure holding fruits in alength of cloth. Similarly, the Labours of the Months known from a number

of mosaics in the Roman period, depicted figures with a similar attitude to

the personifications discussed above and presumably developed out of a par-

allel tradition. One of the earliest known examples in mosaic art is from a

villaat Carthage dated to between the 2nd and the 4th centuries AD, 48but

the earliest popular liturgical calendar goes back to the 1st or 2nd century BC

and is preserved in a bas-relief which currently decorates a wall of the Lesser

Metropolitan Church, Hagios Eleutherios, in Athens. Two examples from 6th

century Palestine come from Beth Shean, namely the mosaic of the monthsin the narthex of a funerary chapel at El-Hammam,49and the Monastery of

Lady Mary (ca.550-600).50Another example is provided by the Church of

Elias, Mary and Soreg at Gerasa (ca.550).51Such calendars traditionally

portrayed allegorical and religious cycles and official events, but it has been

suggested that by the Early Byzantine period profane themes such as sym-

bols of agriculture, husbandry and hunting tended to predominate.52


12/42

M. W. MERRONY452

53. P. Gauckler, Inventaire des mosaques de la Gaule et de lAfrique. II: AfriqueProconsulaire (Tunisie), Paris 1910, 64 and plate; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman NorthAfrica, 49, pl. 22.

54. P. Gauckler, Le Domaine des Laberii Uthina,Monuments et Mmoires publis parlAcadmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Fondation Piot, III (1896) 177-299, pls. xx-xxii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 61, pl. 44; Blanchard-Leme et alii,Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 112, fig 74.

55. A.D. Trendall, The Shellal Mosaic, Melbourne 1973, pl. i.

56. A. Carandini - A. Ricci - A. De Vos, Filosofiana, the Villa at Piazza Armerina: theimage of a Roman Aristocrat at the time of Constantine, II, Palermo 1982, pls xxvii-xxxi.

57. Levi,Antioch Mosaic Pavements, I, 237-244, fig. 86; II, pls liia and b.

The hunting scene

Two basic types of hunting scene are found in the Early Byzantine pave-

ments of Arabia and Palestine, namely the chase and what has been re-garded as the big-game hunt. The chase was a popular theme in Roman

mosaics. In North African mosaics, it occurs, for example, in the form of

the hare hunt as in the Maison de la Chasse Courre at El Djem (ca.250),53

and in the Maison des Laberii at Oudna (275-325).54The hare hunt was also

a conspicuous feature of 6th century mosaics in the Levant. In Arabia, for

instance, it appears in the Church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius

(Fig. 6), while in Palestine it is depicted on the pavement of the Church of

Shellal (Fig. 7).55

From a very early date, the representation of the big-game hunt was oneof the most frequent in the repertory of ancient mosaics. It generally fell

into two main types. The first tended to depict human and animal combat,

often assumed to reflect the hunting activities of the patron responsible for

the commissioning of the mosaic. The second portrayed the capture and

transportation of big-game animals for public spectacle, such as the Great

Hunt from the villa of Piazza Armerina in Sicily.56 In this example, the

capture and transportation of beasts for public display were treated on a

particularly vast scale.

Levi has presented a convincing argument in which he suggested that anumber of motifs from generic hunting scenes derived from ancient repre-

sentations of mythological episodes, including that of the Calydonian Hunt

(Fig. 8).57 He contended that through time, they tended to loose their

mythological aspect and gain more of a symbolical value. In this vein it

has been suggested by K. Dunbabin that in the Roman period the hunting

scene of the urban villa context essentially reflected the activities of the


13/42


patron on his rural estate.58The popularity of this scene was thus viewed

as a desire to glorify the patron by showing his possessions and his favour-

ite activities in a purely materialistic fashion. A similar argument has been

espoused by M. Ennafer, who cites the example of the pavement depictingthe estate of Lord Julius (ca. 375-400).59Ennafer draws attention to the

fact that the composition is centred on the presentation of the villa, which,

on account of its massive character and imposing proportions, constitutes a

symbol of the magnificence of the landowner who commissioned the work.

The various agricultural scenes grouped around the central villaare simi-

larly designed to satisfy the landowners desire for show. Among these are

a hunting scene, which, it is argued, is essentially incorporated to suggest

the brave pursuits (virtus) of the patron.

It may be reasonably demonstrated that 6th century Levantine pave-ments derived their subject matter from the same sources as their Roman

predecessors. The Calydonian Hunt was frequently depicted on Roman sar-

cophagi, as well as on mosaic pavements, notably the Constantinian Villa

at Antioch (Fig. 8). In the myth of the Calydonian Hunt, Artemis, principal

goddess of the Hunt, had sent the Calydonian boar to devastate the coun-

tryside of the Northern Peloponnese. At the head of a gathering of heroes

from all over Greece, Meleager killed the boar and gave its skin to Atalanta

with whom he was enamoured.60 In the 4th century scene from the

Constantinian Villa, Meleager is depicted violently bent forward in antici-pation of combat, thrusting his probolium against the boar at an oblique

angle. Before him, Atalanta, whose body is bent parallel to that of

Meleager, is depicted shooting an arrow against a lion. Levi has pointed

out that this last action is a variation on the original myth in which Atalanta

was preparing to shoot at the boar. Another variation can be found in a

mosaic from a villanear Leptis Magna. On this occasion Atalanta shoots

an arrow from the back of a rearing horse.61 On a silver dish from the

Brummer Collection of Medieval Art, two lion hunters are depicted, a male

on foot shooting an arrow and a female on a rearing horse brandishing a

58. Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 35-36.

59. M. Ennafer has examined the rle of hunting and other rural scenes as reflecting theprestige of the villapatron in Blanchard-Leme et alii, Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 167-187; on the Lord Julius mosaic, pp. 169-170, figs 120 and 121.

60. Diodorus Siculus, 4. 34. 2-4, translated by C.H. Oldfather, London - Cambridge, Mas-sachusetts 1961; Ovid, Metamorphoses 8. 270, translated by F. Bomer, Heidelberg 1978.Dauphin, Carpets of Stone, 9, provides a concise account of this myth.

61. P. Romanelli,Leptis Magna, Rome 1925, 50, figs 78-80.


14/42

M. W. MERRONY454

spear against the lion at an oblique angle.62 In both this example and the

scene from the Constantinian Villa, the lion stricken by the arrow is de-

picted biting the arrow which has wounded it.

Thus, several permutations of the Calydonian Hunt existed in the vari-ous artistic media of the Roman period. This point is significant as regards

the variations of 6th century hunting scenes and their Classical antecedents.

Several sites on Mount Nebo serve to illustrate the point. The Church of

the Deacon Thomas is one such example (Fig. 4).63A medallion depicts an

archer firing an arrow at a stricken lion who seems to be gnawing at an

arrow, while another medallion encloses a scene of a combat between a

hunter with aprobolium, and a lion. On the nave pavement in the Church

of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius (Fig. 6), the latter scene is repeated,

this time the lion being substituted by a bear. In the Church of St George(Fig. 3), a mounted archer is depicted firing at a stricken lion, which also

gnaws at an arrow.

A number of hunting scenes are also apparent in the Old Diakonikon

Baptistery on Mount Nebo.64This pavement is arranged in four horizontal

registers. In the top row, two separate scenes of hunters are engaged in

combat with a lion and lioness respectively. In the second row two sepa-

rate scenes depict mounted horsemen slaying a bear and a boar respec-

tively. These scenes are a recurring theme in 6th century Arabia. They

occur, for example, at Madaba in the field of the Burnt Palace and in theborder of the Hippolytus Hall (Fig. 1), while at Amman, in the Chapel of

Khirbat al-Kursi, the field also depicts a hunter with a spear combating a

lion.65Likewise, at Beth Shean in Palestine, similar scenes are discernible.

For instance, in the main hall of the El-Hammam tomb chamber (Fig. 9),66

a hunter is depicted slaying a boar with his probolium, this scene being

62. The Dark Ages, no. 72; Illustrated in Art News, 1937, 10. The Brummer Collection of

Medieval Art is currently displayed in the Duke University Museum of Art, North Caro-lina. See C. Bruzelius - J. Meredith, The Brummer Collection of Medieval Art, Durham -London 1991. The dish itself is unpublished in this work.

63. Piccirillo, Chiese e Mosaici, 216-223; Id., The Mosaics of Jordan, 180-185, pls 252-259, 261-263.

64. M. Piccirillo, Campagna Archeologica nella Basilica di Mos Profeta sul Monte Nebo- Siyagha (1 luglio - 7 settembre 1976), LA26 (1976) 281-318, esp. 299-316, frontispiece,figs 1 and 2; Id., The Mosaics of Jordan, 134-163, pls 165-211.

65. M. Piccirillo - A. Amr, A Chapel at Khirbet el-Kursi - Amman, LA38 (1988) 361-82; Piccirillo, The Mosaics of Jordan, 265, pls 476-479.

66. Dauphin, A New Method, 156, fig. 1.


15/42


repeated in two other medallions. In Room L of the Monastery of Lady

Mary, a man hunting is portrayed in a medallion of the uppermost row.

In these examples, not only the scenes, but also detailed aspects of the

various figures depicted, match those of the Calydonian Hunt and its vari-ants. For example, in each case, the hunter, whether on foot or mounted, is

always depicted on the left facing the hunted animal to the right. The bow

is always held with the left hand of the archer, and the drawing of the string

is always executed with the right hand. In the case of the hunter on foot,

the body is often tilted forward and the proboliumis always held with the

same hand position as in the earlier models. In short, there is every reason

to assume from these examples that the mosaicists of the 6th century Le-

vant were deriving their inspiration from earlier models.

The same appears equally to apply to the other type of big-game hunt de-picted in the 6th century. Traditionally in the Roman period, the capture and

transportation of big-game animals for public spectacle formed a conspicuous

element of the artistic repertory in mosaics. The best example, already men-

tioned, is the Great Hunt in the 4th century villaof Piazza Armerina in Sicily.

The subject matter of this pavement was devoted to the capture of large animals

and their subsequent transportation for use in the imperial circus by the

venatores. This kind of scene might also be assumed to reflect the activities of

the patron, essentially symbolising his wealth and prestige. This tradition would

seem to have been very much alive in a number of later Levantine examples. InArabia, for instance, in the Church of St George on Mount Nebo (Fig. 3), and

at Umm al-Rasas in the Church of the Bishop Sergius (587/88), hunters are

depicted immobilising a bull.67In the bottom row of the Old Diakonikon Bap-

tistery on Mount Nebo, two venatoresare shown leading an ostrich, zebra and

camel away to captivity. Similarly, in the Monastery of Lady Mary at Beth Shean

(Fig. 9), a medallion depicts a man leading a camel by a rope.

The pastoral scene

The origins of the pastoral scene may be traced back to the idyllic-pastoral

repertory of Hellenistic art. In North Africa, this kind of scene occurred in a

set of emblematain the Zliten villa(ca.75-100).68One emblemadepicted

67. Dauphin, A New Method, 370, pl. 366.

68. S. Aurigemma,I Mosaici di Zliten, Rome 1926, 84-97, figs 50-61; Dunbabin, The Mo-saics of Roman North Africa, 109, pl. 95-96.


16/42

M. W. MERRONY456

the care of flocks, with sheep grazing and a goat being milked. Similarly, at

Leptis Magna, in the Villa di Orfeo, a fragmentary panel of the Orpheus

mosaic portrayed a milking shepherd watched by a bearded figure leaning

on his stick, one end of which rested under his armpit (ca.150-200).69Asomewhat later mosaic from Carthage, the Mosaic of Dominus Julius (re-

viewed above), depicted a shepherd seated in front of his hut watching his

flock. This type of scene, akin to the rle of the hunting scene, was designed

to portray an element of rural activity on the villaestate and may also be

regarded as symbolic of the patrons wealth and prestige. The pastoral scene

often accompanied other rural scenes, frequently hunting activity.

Hunting and pastoral scenes were also depicted in juxtaposition on a

villa pavement in Room 21 of the Maison des Laberii atOudna (ca.160-

180).70 The composition is centred on a shepherd leaning on his stick inthe entrance of a hut watching over his goat herd. Above and below him

are two scenes of ploughing, flanked by a pastoral scene and two hunting

scenes. This apparent interrelationship between idyllic and violent scenes

recurs in later Levantine examples and will be discussed below.

In the Provinces of Arabia and Palestine, a number of examples from

the Mount Nebo and Beth Shean areas contain similar scenes to those de-

scribed above. In the Church of the Holy Martyrs Lot and Procopius (Fig.

6), the vine rinceau encloses a shepherd resting on his stick, one end of

which rests under his armpit, as well as two grazing sheep. Likewise theshepherd-with-stick motif is repeated in the Church of the Deacon Thomas

(Fig. 4). Other scenes include grazing goats and sheep. The mosaic pave-

ment of the Upper Chapel of the Priest John also contains a grazing sheep

(Fig. 5), while the third register of the pavement in the Old Diakonikon

Baptistery is dedicated entirely to a shepherd and his flock of sheep and

goats. In Palestine at Beth Shean, the pavement of the main hall at El-

Hammam (Fig. 9) depicts a goat as well as two fleeing sheep.71 In the

Monastery of Lady Mary, a shepherd rests on one foot but his flock is no-

where to be found. The border of the villapavement at Beit Guvrin con-

tains a shepherd holding out his right hand, while a ram is confronted by a

lion in an octagonal medallion of the field.

69. S. Aurigemma, Mosaici della Tripolitania, XX, 52-54, pls. 106-114; Dunbabin, TheMosaics of Roman North Africa, 109.

70. Gauckler, Le Domaine des Laberii, 200, pl. xxii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of RomanNorth Africa, 51, 112, pl. 101; Blanchard-Leme et alii, Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 170,fig. 121.

71. Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, 93.


17/42


Mythological scenes

It was suggested above that the big-game hunt in the Roman period had

firm mythological connotations. Mythological scenesper sewere also ex-tremely popular in the repertory of Roman mosaics, especially Dionysiac

scenes in North Africa and the eastern provinces. Dionysiac figures, nota-

bly dancing satyrs, bacchantes and Bacchic Erotes, had been part of the

general artistic koin from the Hellenistic period onwards. Dunbabin has

suggested that the extensive use of Dionysiac figures for decorative pur-

poses was dictated by contemporary fashion and was not necessarily con-

nected with the Dionysiac cult and mysteries which were a vital religious

force in that period.72Dancing satyrs and bacchantesare often used as fig-

ures devoid of cultic connotations, and were combined or repeated to fillspaces or to supplement other figures or groups. Thus, satyrs were used to

evoke the Seasons on the triclinium-mosaic of the Maison de la Procession

dionysiaque at El-Djem in Tunisia.

Scenes may be divided generally into four main categories. The figure

of the child Dionysus riding upon a tiger or on another other big cat was as-

sociated with scenes depicting the cult of Dionysus as well as with proces-

sions in the gods honour. One such example comes from the Maison de la

Procession dionysiaque at El Djem (ca.240-260).73The second category of

pavements represents the Triumph of Dionysus in which the god rides in hischariot followed by his cortge. An early version of this kind of scene is

found in a pavement from the Maison de lArsenal at Sousse (ca.200-210).

Dionysus is depicted in a chariot, accompanied by a Victory who crowns

him, and is attended by various other companions (such as bacchantesand

satyrs). He wears a leopardskin, carries a thyrsus and his head is crowned by

a wreath of grapes and vine leaves.74Various scenes from the Dionysiac

myths constitute a third but rarer category. One such example comes from

the Maison des Laberii at Oudna. This pavement depicts Dionysius gift of

the vine to Icarius on a panel at the centre of a vine-rinceau pavement with

72. A detailed discussion of the possible significance of Dionysiac scenes in the Romanperiod is provided by Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 173-187.

73. L. Foucher, La Maison de la Procession dionysiaque El Jem, Paris 1963, 52-56, plsxvi- xvii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 176, pl. 176; Blanchard-Lemeet alii, Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 88-89, fig. 57.

74. L. Foucher, Inventaire des mosaques, feuille no. 57 de latlas archologique: Sousse,Tunis 1960, pl. xxiii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa; Blanchard-Leme etalii, Floor Mosaics from Tunisia, 100-101, figs 64 and 65.


18/42

M. W. MERRONY458

75. Gauckler, Le Domaine des Laberii, 208-210, pl. xxi; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Ro-man North Africa, 117 n. 28, 182-183; Blanchard-Leme et alii, Floor Mosaics from Tuni-

sia, 111-113, 115, figs 73 and 74.76. L. Foucher, Dcouvertes archologiques Thysdrus en 1961,Notes et Documents5(1961) 16-19, pls xv-xviii; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 184.

77. See note 33.

78. A number of examples of Dionysiac pavements in the Levant are reviewed and dis-cussed in Levi,Antioch Mosaic Pavements, I, 40-46, 72-73, fig. 29, 91-104, 141-155, 156-162; II, pls xvi-xxviii, xxix-xxxii and li.

79. J. Balty, La mosaque de Sarrn (Osrhoene), Paris 1990. See also P. Donceel-Vote,Les pavements des glises byzantines de Syrie et du Liban. Dcor, archologie et liturgie,Louvain-la-Neuve 1988, for a more general review and discussion of 6th century Syro-Phoenician mosaic iconography.

vintaging erotes.75Finally, some pavements do not illustrate a narrative epi-

sode: a static Dionysus in bust or full-length, sometimes alone, or with vari-

ous companions, constitutes the focus of the pavement. One such example

is the tricliniumpavement from the Sollertiania Domus, where DionysiosPais riding the leopard appears without any of the attendants who elsewhere

emphasize the initiatory significance of the subject.76

In some cases, Dionysiac scenes are associated with scenes of rural life

in which idyllic and violent themes are juxtaposed. For example, in a pave-

ment from the Maison de Silne at El-Djem, the central compartment of the

pavement depictsputtiand nymph binding a drunken Silenus. In the field

surrounding this compartment, a number of puttiare depicted engaged in

vintaging scenes; running around the periphery of the field are various wild

beasts such as big cats and bears, and at least one pastoral scene.77Likewiseat Oudna, in the Icarius pavement, the Dionysiac scene of the main panel is

associated with a hunting scene in an adjacent panel.

Dionysiac scenes are particularly characteristic of the Levantine villa

in the Roman and Early Byzantine periods. A number of examples are

found at Antioch, including the Houses of the Drunken Dionysus and of

the Bacchic Thiasos, the House of the Triumph of Dionysus (ca.100-200);

the House of Dionysus and Ariadne (ca.190-240); the House of the

Drunken Dionysus (ca. 120-200 and ca. 235-312); and the House of the

Drinking Contest (ca. 193-235).78

Later examples of mythological pave-ments are a rarer phenomenon in Syria. However, one notable exception is

a 6th century reception hall pavement uncovered at Sarrn which consists

of a wide repertory of mythological scenes including the Rape of Europa,

Artemis hunting, Meleager and Atalanta, Dionysus awakening Ariadne, and

an extensive Dionysiac scene.79


19/42


80. Netzer - Weiss,Zippori, 30-39.

81. Rahmani, The Erez Mosaic.

82. A concise description of the mythological aspect of these pavements is given byPiccirillo, The Mosaics of Jordan, 66-80.

83. Piccirillo, Chiese e mosaici, 136-138; Id., The Mosaics of Jordan, 76-77, figs 32, 43and 48.

The Roman period is represented in Palestine by a particularly fine

Dionysiac pavement from the triclinium of a villaat Sepphoris (ca.200-

225).80Various panels depict a number of scenes from the life of Dionysus,

including the bathing of the god at his birth, his upbringing by the nymphsof Mount Nysa, his triumphal procession on his return from India, and his

marriage to Ariadne. Other scenes illustrate various aspects of the

Dionysiac cult, such as the treading of grapes, shepherds, and gift-bearing.

The central panel is devoted to a drinking contest between Dionysus and

Herakles. Two other panels depict Dionysus and Herakles drunk.

Two examples from villaein Early Byzantine Palestine, mentioned ear-

lier, merit further attention. A fragmentary pavement from Erez (ca.450-

500) depicts a procession in which an elephant follows a group of tigers

led on a leash by a man in Phrygian dress. This scene has been plausiblyinterpreted as a variant of the representations of the Indian triumph of

Dionysus.81The second example is a pavement from Cheikh Zuweid dat-

ing from the 4th century onwards. The middle panel of this pavement de-

picts Dionysus sitting in a chariot. In front of him sits an Eros holding the

reins of two centaurs. Behind the chariot of Dionysus grows a vine and near

the chariot a panther drinks the wine that Dionysus is pouring from an

amphora.

Several villaein Madaba in Arabia exhibit mythological pavements.82

In the central panel from the Bacchic Procession (Fig. 2), only two figures(Banche and Satyr), remain of the three original figures which included

Ariadne. A scantily clad Maenad performs a ritual dance in which her left

hand strikes cymbals which are tied to her right foot. Next to her, an

aroused naked satyr with a distended belly and an erect penis holds a stick

in his right hand. Another example, the Mosaic of Achilles, depicts Achil-

les, Patroclus and a young woman named Eubre in its lower register,

while the upper panel portrays the fragmentary remains of a Bacchic pro-

cession in which a satyr playing a flute is followed by a figure wearing a

long tunic.83Another fragmentary panel from an unknown context in the

immediate vicinity depicts a young naked Hercules strangling a lion. A last

example is a pavement from the Hippolytus Hall (Fig. 1), the central and


20/42

M. W. MERRONY460

third panels of which respectively portray the myth of Hippolytus and

Phaedra, and Aphrodite and Adonis. The field is framed by an inhabited

acanthus scroll which contain hunting and pastoral scenes.

A recurring feature among each category of iconographic theme,whether arable, hunting, pastoral, or mythological, is that each would seem

to have a long history, running from Hellenistic times through the Roman

period to the Levantine examples of the Early Byzantine period. A funda-

mental issue still to be addressed, however, is whether these various themes

retained their significance in the secular and religious contexts of Early

Byzantine Arabia and Palestine.

Mythological Scenes in Early Byzantine Mosaic Pavements in the Prov-inces of Arabia and Palestine

It was established above that the presence of mythological scenes, notably

those of Dionysus and his retinue on the mosaic floors of villae, may have

represented a strong pagan religious element in Roman society. One of the

fundamental characteristics of the Early Byzantine period, however, was

the adoption of Christianity as the official State religion. Consequently, the

period saw the addition of mosaic art to a new functional setting the

Church and the emergence of a Christian lite as public and private spon-sors.84Thus, the appearance of traditional pagan scenes in the residences

of Christian patrons requires some explanation. Two lines of inquiry may

be pursued here. Firstly, several scholars have argued that the period when

a number of the villapavements were laid the 6th century corresponded

to the Justinianic era in which art underwent a Classical Renaissance.

Secondly, the mythological scenes of the period may also have taken on a

new significance appropriate to the State religion.

The Justinianic Renaissance

The earlier part of Justinians reign has been viewed as characterized by a

sense of revival and restoration which influenced political events and poli-

cies such as the reconquest of the western provinces, as well as literature

84. M. Whittow, Ruling the Late Roman and Early Byzantine City: a Continuous History,Past and Present129 (1990) 3-29.


21/42


and art.85This view derives in part from a number of contemporary sources,

such as John the Lydian who considered that the emperors excellence was

so great that institutions that have come to ruin in the past are eagerly

awaiting a rebirth by his intervention.86

Piccirillo has argued that the iconography of the Hippolytus mosaic,

which notably depicted the Classical myth of Phaedra and Hippolytus (Fig.

1), can best be explained by the propagandist, ideological, political and

economic movements of the Justinianic reformation and renaissance

which were widely established throughout the empire.87

According to E. Kitzinger, a number of 6th century mosaics clearly

exemplify Classical stylistic traits.88 He points out, for example, that the

mosaics of the Church of San Vitale in Ravenna (ca.550) display a sense

of lushness in contrast to a stark geometry. Moreover, spaces are filled witha rich and naturalistic vegetation instead of being an abstract void. The ten-

dency was also to render the mosaics as self-contained compositional units

reminiscent of the traditional emblema: figures and groups of figures were

thus portrayed in a clearly delimited environment, framing and framed parts

being clearly distinguished and creating a pseudo-emblema according to

Kitzingers terminology.Kitzinger cites the north wing of the transept of

the Church of St Demetrius in Nikopolis in Epirus (ca.525-550) as an ex-

ample of a pseudo-emblemamosaic.89Here, a realistically rendered scene

is enclosed within five framing bands beginning with a bead-and-reel bor-der and a running spiral - Classical framing motifs for emblemata. How-

ever, it is pointed out by Kitzinger that the panel picture, unlike the true

85. A discussion of a revival in the early part of the Justinianic period is provided by A.Cameron, Procopius and the Sixth Century, London 1985, ch. 2, pp. 19-32.

86. J. Lydus,De Magistratibus,II.5.3. The theme of restoration in the Justinianic period isaddressed by M. Maas,Innovation and Restoration in Justinianic Constantinople, PhD the-sis, Berkeley 1982, and by M. Maas, John Lydus and Roman Past;Antiquarianism and

politics in the age of Justinian, London - New York 1992, esp. ch. 6, pp. 83-96.

87. A discussion of the Classical tradition in the mosaics of 6th century Madaba is presentedby Piccirillo, The Mosaics of Jordan, 23-26.

88. A concise analysis of an apparent Classical tradition in a number of 6th century floorand vault mosaics is provided by E. Kitzinger,Byzantine Art in the Making, London1977,81-98.

89. E. Kitzinger, Studies in Late Antique and Early Byzantine Floor Mosaics. I: Mosaicsat Nikopolis,Dumbarton Oaks Papers6 (1951) 81-122, figs 18-19. The return to Classi-cism in the art of the Justinianic period is discussed by E. Kitzinger, The Art of Byzantiumand the Medieval West: Selected Studies by Ernst Kitzinger, Bloomington - London 1976,49-63.


22/42

M. W. MERRONY462

emblema of the Roman period, respected the integrity of the floor; the

matrix remaining basically intact. In a similar vein, Dauphin regards the

ecclesiastical pavement at Shelomi as representing a conscious return to

Roman principles, this pavement exemplifying the so-called pseudo-emblema.90This particular pavement contains a central geometric motif

incorporating trompe loeileffects of receding planes and surfaces which

provided a focus for a highly organised matrix of motifs.

While it might seem reasonable to suppose that the various mythologi-

cal scenes encountered in the Levantine context are indeed the product of

conscious artistic classicism, a number of problems are inherent to this the-

sis. According to A. Cameron, the concept of artistic classicism as a clearly

defined characteristic of the period is questionable since the dating of a

number of individual works assigned to the period is uncertain.91 ThePantokrator in the church of the Monastery of St Catherine at Sinai, has

been dated by Weitzmann to the Justinianic period on stylistic criteria,92but

by Kitzinger to ca.700.93The mosaic pavement of the Great Palace of the

Byzantine emperors in Constantinople provides another example of a simi-

lar dilemma.

It has been noted by J. Trilling, that both stylistically and thematically

this pavement bears a considerable resemblance to a hunting mosaic from

the Villa of the Triclinos at Apamea in Syria dated to the Justinianic pe-

riod.94

However, Trilling has persuasively argued that the Great Palacepavement belongs to the reign of Heraclius (610-641), a period which is

also characterized by a major Classical revival. We might also consider L.

Rodleys suggestion that the reign of Justinian in particular was the period

in which the formal and stylistic developments of the early Christian cen-

turies matured, producing a Byzantine art and architecture that acknowl-

90. C. Dauphin, Une mosaique de la Renaissance justinienne en Galile occidentale, inR. Ling (ed.), Fifth International Colloquium on Ancient Mosaics, Journal of Roman Ar-

chaeology Supplementary Series 9, Part 2 (1995) 101-112, figs 1-6.91. Cameron, Procopius, 19-20.

92. K. Weitzmann, The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai: the Icons. I: Fromthe Sixth to the Tenth Centuries, Princeton 1976, B1; K. Weitzmann (ed.), Age of Spiritual-ity. Late Antique and Early Christian Art, Third to Seventh Century, New York 1979, 527-528.

93. Kitzinger,Byzantine Art, 120, fig. 177.

94. A detailed discussion of the problems inherent to the dating of the Great Palace pave-ment is offered by J. Trilling, The Soul of the Empire: Style and meaning in the MosaicPavement of the Byzantine Imperial Palace in Constantinople, Dumbarton Oaks Papers43 (1989) 27-72, esp. 36-54, pls A-D, figs 1-40, main plan 57.


23/42


edged - but was now largely independent of - its Roman origins. 95Indeed,

he points out that the church architecture of Constantinople, notably Sta

Sophia, Sts Sergius and Bacchus and St Polyeuktos anticipated the ornate

domed buildings with complex interior spaces that were to become charac-teristic of later Byzantine ecclesiastical architecture. In the artistic sphere,

too, he emphasizes that there was also a discernible weakening of links

with the Classical past as manifest in the continued decline of free-stand-

ing statuary, portraiture and naturalism in general.

To return more specifically to the Levantine context, chronological and

stylistic problems should also be taken into account. Dauphin has stated

that the Dionysiac processions at Erez and Cheikh Zuweid ... witness fur-

ther to the forceful resurgence of Classical iconographic themes.96A par-

ticularly fine example of a Dionysiac pavement at Sepphoris in Palestinehas been dated to the 3rd century. The Erez pavement has been dated to ca.

450-500. A post Constantinian date has been ascribed to the pavement at

Cheikh Zuweid on stylistic grounds, which could place it anywhere be-

tween the 4th and mid-7th century. Thus there is no evidence that either of

the last two examples date to the Justinianic period. The three pavements

may well be indicative of a continuity with a sudden flowering (rather than

of a resurgence) of Classical iconographic themes. As regards style, it is

widely accepted that between the mid-2nd and mid-4th centuries, figural

iconography was generally characterized by a transition from a plastic to alinear rendition, and together with this recessive trend, depth and perspec-

tive gave way to abstractness.97Thus, in order to prove the hypothesis of a

conscious return to Classicism a greater number of examples than those

available should exhibit plasticity and realism. This is clearly not the case.

A. Ovadiah and R. Ovadiah have said of the Cheikh Zuweid pavement:

Dori Levi rightly dates ... this mosaic to the reign of Constantine at the

earliest. The phenomenon of a free composition with flat two-dimensional

figures and no ground line or background but seeming rather to float in

space, is encountered in Israel and beyond from this period on.98 The

95. A concise discussion of the artistic style and influences of the sixth century, particu-larly of the Justinianic period, is presented by L. Rodley, Byzantine Art and Architecture:An Introduction,Cambridge 1994, 111-114.

96. Dauphin Carpets of Stone, 25-26.

97. Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 35-36, discusses stylistic changethrough the Roman period. Likewise, stylistic change in artistic media of the Roman periodis discussed by LOrange - Nordhagen,Mosaics, 3-6.

98. Ovadiah and Ovadiah,Mosaic Pavements, 154.


24/42

M. W. MERRONY464

Madaba examples would also seem to follow a similar pattern: stylistically,

the figures exhibit clear traits of linearity, with an essentially abstract back-

ground (Figs 1 and 2).

How may these pavements be reconciled with isolated cases dated se-curely to the Justinianic period and clearly exhibiting a stylistic Classicism?

A reasonable solution to this contention is perhaps provided by Rodley who

suggests that artistic production in the Empire in the 6th century was multi-

faceted, with craftsmanship of high quality available in several important

centres as well as the capital, offering a range of styles to suit patrons with

various tastes.99In short then, continuity of iconographic themes as well as

a flowering of artistic Classicism may best explain the presence of Classi-

cal mythological scenes in the Early Byzantine villacontext, rather than an

empire-wide artistic Renaissance. However, the presence of pagan themesin the villaeof the Christian lite still requires some explanation.

Pagan mythological themes in the villacontext of the Christian patron

a paradox?

It was noted above that in the Roman period, the choice of Dionysiac

scenes in mosaic floor art need not necessarily have had any religious sig-

nificance, but could have simply been a preferred decorative scheme. Thismight also partly explain the apparent paradox of pagan mythological ico-

nography in the residences of the Christian lite in the Early Byzantine

period. However, there is good reason to suppose that a deeper symbolic

meaning underlies these scenes. In order to explore this idea, let us exam-

ine a number of Roman pavements in North Africa.

Above we have shown that the vine, vintaging, and Dionysiac scenes

were clearly associated on some pavements.100Mosaics with similar sub-

ject form a coherent group in the Proconsular province ranging in date from

the mid-2nd to the early 5th century. The vine is arranged in one of two

basic patterns: either as a formal border rinceau, or covering the entire field

with its branches. These field patterns became increasingly geometricized

through time until they were completely assimilated within the formal

rinceau, ultimately resulting in an all-over scroll consisting of a series of

99. Rodley,Byzantine Art, 113.

100. See notes 33 and 74. Dionysiac scenes in North African mosaics are examined byDunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, esp. ch. 10, pp. 173-187.


25/42


linked geometric medallions. The vine tended to spring from kantharoior

from formal clumps of acanthus. In most of these examples, the vine was

directly associated with Dionysus himself, or with figures from the more

limited Dionysiac repertory who occupied the central panels or compart-ments framed by vine at the sides of the pavement. A vine mosaic in a

church at Cherchel represents one of the latest examples of this pattern.101

Another Christian example is provided by the Justinianic basilica at

Sabratha.102Here, the whole floor of the nave is covered by a series of sym-

metrical scrolls which enclose a phoenix, peacocks and a variety of other

bird species.

The North African examples are particularly interesting since it is possi-

ble to plot the course of the vine and its symbolic associations throughout the

Roman and Early Byzantine periods. In Roman villae, the vine was associ-ated with vintaging and Dionysiac scenes, whilst on Early Byzantine Chris-

tian pavements, the vine was essentially used as a compositional device.

It was noted above that the vine rinceau and vintaging scenes decorated

the floors of Early Byzantine churches in Arabia and Palestine, while they

were both absent from the repertory of villae. The mosaic pavements of the

latter were characterized by mythological scenes, frequently those of

Dionysus. An interchange of meaning may have taken place here. In villae,

for example, the Dionysiac scenes may have lost their pagan religious and

mythological significance, but by retaining their symbolic association withwine would have been agreeable to the convictions of the Christian patron.

In other words, Dionysiac scenes would thus have become the secular

counterpart of ecclesiastical vintaging scenes.

Hunting scenes

Mythological iconography was not the only characteristic of the Early Byz-

antine villain Arabia and Palestine. It is thus perhaps appropriate here to

examine and discuss briefly the hunting scene which was also popular in

101. F.G. de Pachtre, Inventaire des mosaques de la Gaule et de lAfrique. III: AfriqueProconsulaire, Numidie, Maurtanie (Algrie), Paris 1911, 435; Dunbabin, The Mosaics ofRoman North Africa, 193.

102. S. Aurigemma, Mosaici della Tripolitania, V, 27-29, pls 19-34, 193, pl. 197; J.B.Ward-Perkins - R.G. Goodchild, The Christian Antiquities of Tripolitania, Archaeologia95 (1953) 1-82; Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa, 193, pl. 197; Maguire,Earth and Ocean, 61-62, figs 70 and 71.


26/42

M. W. MERRONY466

this context in the same period. Three examples merit particular attention.

The preserved field area of the 6th century Burnt Palace mosaic at Madaba

comprises a series of hunting and pastoral scenes enclosed in six rows of

four acanthus scrolls. A notable feature of these scenes is an apparent di-chotomy between the peacefulness of pastoral scenes and the violence of

human and animal combats.

Another example is the 5th century Nile Festival pavement from

Sepphoris in Palestine.103This pavement is split into two main parts: the

Nile Festival, and hunting scenes. The Nile part of the pavement portrays

the Nile Festival, a theme which has a long tradition in the Roman period.

The Nile itself features depictions of flora and fauna characteristic of the

river in the period. Above the river is a Nilometer, next to which stands a

half-naked personification of Egypt, to which corresponds the personifica-tion of the Nile River, in the opposite corner. Beneath the Nile River, the

festival held in honour of the Nile in flood was depicted twice. The rest of

the lower part of the pavement was devoted to various hunting scenes, this

including a lion devouring an ox, a bear devouring a wild boar, and a pan-

ther attacking a gazelle. A notable feature of this pavement appears to be

once more an apparent dichotomy between, on the one hand, the idyllic,

as manifest by the celebration of the Nile Festival, and the violent, as

represented by the hunting scene below.

A final example is provided by the Hippolytus hall pavement (Fig. 1),where a representation of the Classical myth of Phaedra and Hippolytus in

the field is framed by a border depicting a series of hunting scenes.

The Iconography of Inhabited Scroll pavements in the churches of 6th

century Arabia and Palestine

The iconography of arable, hunting and pastoral scenes on the pavements

of the Early Byzantine churches of Arabia and Palestine developed out of a

long tradition in the Roman period. Some of the allegorical/symbolic as-

pects of these scenes have already been touched upon here. Let us now

assess whether Early Byzantine church pavements bear the same symbol-

ism. The fundamental aspects required to be discussed are the mode of

composition and the various iconographic categories - arable (incorporat-

ing agricultural personifications), hunting and pastoral scenes.

103. Discussed and illustrated in Netzer - Weiss,Zippori, 46-51.


27/42


The iconography of inhabited scroll pavements

In Arabia, these scenes are common to a group of pavements in the Mount

Nebo area (Figs 3, 4, 5 and 6) and include the sites of the Church of theHoly Martyrs Lot and Procopius (557), the Upper Chapel of the Priest John

(565), the Church of St George (535/6) and the Church of the Deacon Tho-

mas (ca.mid-6th century). Similar examples in Palestine include the Mon-

astery of Lady Mary, and the El-Hammam tomb chamber (Fig. 9) at Beth

Shean (dated respectively to 567 and the mid-6th century), the Church of

Shellal (Fig. 7) near Gaza (561-2), the church at Horvat Beer-shema (6th

century)104and the Church at Qam (ca. 550).105

Inhabited scroll pavements are also present in synagogues in the region.

A fine example is the nave pavement from the synagogue at Maon in theNegev (ca. 500-550),106which contains a vine rinceau pavement inhabited

by a number of faunal species and inanimate objects. The significance of

synagogue iconography, however, is beyond the scope of this paper.

Arable scenes

The arable scenes in Early Byzantine ecclesiastical contexts follow the

model of their Roman antecedents, that is the portrayal of the vine harvestand its associated activities such as the transportation of the grapes from

the vineyard and their subsequent pressing and treading. A second kind of

scene involves the presentation of a fruit harvest to a central personifica-

104. D. Gazit - Y. Lender, The Church of St Stephen at Horvat Beer-shema, in Y. Tsafrir(ed.),Ancient Churches Revealed, Jerusalem 1993, 273-276, pls. xvii A-D, xviii A-F. Anothermosaic worth mentioning in the Levant is the vine rinceau pavement from Qabr Hiram inPhoenicia (Fig. 10), published by E. Renan,Mission de Phnicie, Paris 1871, 607-631, pl. 49.A variation on arable, hunting and pastoral themes is represented on the particularly well pre-served 6th-century pavement in the Armenian funerary chapel in Jerusalem (Fig. 11). Schick,PEFQSt(1894), 257; Bliss, PEFQSt(1894), 261. The subject matter of this pavement is pre-dominantly of birds. Oakeshott, The Mosaics of Rome, 62, has suggested that birds were sym-bolic of immortality in Early Byzantine ecclesiastical buildings. Likewise, a similar argumenthas been espoused by Maguire,Earth and Ocean, 60-61. The subject matter would then fitthe function of this context particularly well.

105. F. Tarawneh, Qam Salvage Excavation, Newsletter of the Institute of Archaeologyand Anthropology Yarmouk University9 (1990) 12; Piccirillo, The Mosaics of Jordan, 340,figs 682, 746-750.

106. M. Avi-Yonah, The Ancient Synagogue of Maon (Nirim): E. The Mosaic Pavement,Louis M. Rabinowitz Bulletin III (1960) 25-35, fig. 13, pls iii-viii.


28/42


29/42


The inclusion of the Four Seasons in the artistic sphere was therefore an

important staple of imperial propaganda, the seasonal renewal of nature

guaranteeing the renewal of the empire. While this explanation might well

be appropriate for the pagan villacontext of the Roman period, it could bejustifiably asked why the Four Seasons were included in the decoration of

ecclesiastical buildings. There is good reason to suppose that there was a

basic continuity of the two concepts outlined above. For example, it has

been suggested that the Four Seasons were equated by the Church with the

renewal of spiritual life, and were dedicated to God by special days of fast

and prayer (Ember Days).109When inserted into the Roman liturgical cal-

endar by St Leo the Great (440-61), these were referred to as an already

old tradition.110 Ideological reasons for the inclusion of the Four Seasons

into the religious context could also be considered. In the Church of StGeorge (Fig. 3), for example, the Four Seasons are set into the border pan-

els surrounding the main nave field. In close proximity, at the eastern end

of the nave, the third part of the dedicatory inscription states: At the time

of the most God-beloved bishop John the Holy place was built and finished,

during the consulate of the most illustrious Flavorius, in the month of Dios

of the fourth indiction, for the salvation of Rabbos, economos of the most

holy church, and of N., priest and sacristan of the church of St George.

The inscription emphasizes the patronage of the local lite, possibly the

bishop and/or clergy, while at the same time reducing the rle of the Stateofficials to that of eponyms, thus linking the ruling classes of both city and

State with the seasonal renewal of nature and spirituality.

The Four Seasons might also be represented on inhabited scroll pave-

ments by the various activities depicted. Levi has pointed out that in the

Constantinian Villa at Antioch, for instance, the Four Seasons corresponded

closely to various activities.111Near Winter, for example, who holds an ol-

ive branch, is a scene of a peasant gathering olives. Likewise, O. Pcht has

drawn attention to the somewhat later Tacuinum Sanitatismanuscript, il-

lustrated in Italy in the last quarter of the 14th century, which represents

the Seasons as a particular activity.112Spring takes the form of gentlemen

disporting themselves in the country; Summer, the reaping of corn; Autumn

becomes a vintaging scene; and Winter is portrayed as an old man. How-

109. Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, 102.

110. M. Righetti,Manuale di Storia Liturgica, Milan 1945-1946, 29-33.

111. Levi,Antioch Mosaic Pavements, I, 233.

112. O. Pacht, Early Italian Nature Studies and the Early Calendar Landscape,Journal ofthe Warburg and Courtauld Institutes13 (1950) 37-38.


30/42

M. W. MERRONY470

ever, when a similar type of interpretation is attempted of the inhabited

scroll pavements in the Levant a problem arises. In the Church of St

George, for example, it is difficult to apply a Season to each of the three

main activities (arable, hunting, pastoral), for the simple reason that afourth activity, corresponding to a fourth Season, is not represented.

The Labours of the Months

A similar problem is encountered when an attempt is made to interpret the

subject matter of inhabited scroll pavements as representing the Labours

of the Months. The eastern nave panel of the Church of the Holy Martyrs

Lot and Procopius provides a good example (Fig. 6). It would be logicalto attempt to fit the Twelve Labours of the Months into twelve, or multi-

ples thereof, into the medallions. However, this amounts to a mathemati-

cal impossibility since the pavement contains twenty medallions. Likewise,

the Church of the Deacon Thomas has twenty-one medallions (Fig. 4). The

same problem is also encountered in other examples. The possibility ex-

ists, of course, that the scenes represent the most important Labours of the

Months, such as the vine harvest. This is implausible, however, for a good

reason. At Beth Shean, it is interesting to note that two sites, the Monas-

tery of Lady Mary and El-Hammam, contain separate pavements depict-ing the Labours of the Months and arable, hunting and pastoral scenes. It

is difficult to imagine the mosaicists laying a pavement explicitly repre-

senting the Labours of the Months in one room and going to the trouble

of encoding the same meaning in a pavement in another room of the same

building.

The vine rinceau and its possible religious significance

A number of scholars have argued that the vine had an essentially religious

symbolism in artistic media of the Roman and early Christian period. W.

Oakeshott, for instance, has pointed out that prior to Christianity, the vine

symbol in particular was used to suggest the joys of immortality in the

Dionysiac mystery cults.113Indeed, we have noted earlier that the vine was

often connected with the Dionysiac repertory on North African pavements.

113. Oakeshott, The Mosaics of Rome, 61.


31/42


It has also been contended that the vine had symbolic connotations in

Christian Rome in both Church and Synagogue.114The Constantinian vault

of Sta Costanza in Rome contains an early example of the inhabited vine

scroll mosaic in a Christian context. A. Trendall has suggested that the vinehad an essentially religious significance in church pavements.115Saller and

Bagatti have likewise presented a convincing argument which views the

presence of the vine in Early Byzantine church and synagogue pavements

as symbolical of parables in the Old and New Testaments.116They point out

that Psalm 79:9-16 and Isaiah 5:1-7 state that the Jews and Christians were

the vineyard of the Lord. The vine could also have alluded to John 15:1-7

which states that Christ describes himself as the True Vine.

Maguire has also drawn attention to the religious symbolism of the vine,

which represents Gods people, or Israel, in Psalm 79:8 and in Hosea 10:1,but which is first an image of Christ, and then of His people, in John 15:1-7.

Likewise, he notes that the vineyard represents the people of Israel in the

fifth chapter of Isaiah (5:1-7), but in Christs parable it becomes the King-

dom of God (Matthew 21:33-43).117The vine as a religious symbol is given

further weight by Maguires observation that the vine is sometimes accom-

panied by an inscription which specifies its symbolism. In a Christian tomb

at Ancona, for example, the mosaic displays a vine rinceau which grows

from a central kantharos.At the top of the vine, an inscription paraphrases

Isaiah 5:1: A vineyard has been made beloved, on a hilltop in a fertileplace. Maguire views the choice of this inscription for the mosaic as an in-

dication that in the designers mind the vine stood for Gods people.

While these explanations are indeed plausible, if they are to become

incontrovertible, it is necessary to assess to what extent the vine permeates

the secular context. It should be reiterated here that, from our database, it

is clear the vine characterized both church and synagogue pavements in 6th

century Arabia and Palestine. By contrast, evidence for its presence in non-

religious buildings is scant and contestable, thus lending a considerable

degree of support to the suggestion put forward by Saller and Bagatti that

the vine may be regarded as a fundamentally religious symbol both in this

specific region and specific period.

114. See the argument presented below by Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo.

115. A.D. Trendall, The Shellal Mosaic, Melbourne 1942, 16-21, discusses the vine rinceauon ecclesiastical pavements and its symbolism.

116. Saller - Bagatti, The Town of Nebo, 94-98. For the Old and New Testament sources:Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Oxford 1971.

117. Maguire,Earth and Ocean, 9-10, fig. 2.


32/42

M. W. MERRONY472

The significance of vintaging scenes

Likewise, it is not difficult to envisage the vintaging scene as evoking a

similar symbolical message to that of the vine, since John 15:1-7 states Iam the true vine; ye are the branches. It thus might reasonably be assumed

that the portrayal of vintaging activity is merely a symbolic extension of

the presence of the vine rinceau on religious pavements. However, it should

also be borne in mind that vintaging scenes have been interpreted in other

ways. According to Maguire, for example, vintaging scenes reflected con-

temporary agricultural practice.118 In view of the fact that archaeological

evidence for wine production in late antique Palestine is most abundant,

this theory merits attention. This interpretation, however, poses a number

of difficulties. The vintaging scene in the vault of Sta Costanza might proveto illustrate the point. Two points merit discussion here. Firstly, this har-

vest scene has been interpreted by Oakeshott as symbolical of the end of

one life and the beginning of another.119 This point is certainly plausible

given the funerary context of this particular mosaic. Secondly, this scene

prefigures the Levantine examples by some three hundred years and thus

sets a precedent for subsequent scenes of this nature in mosaic art. The

plausibility of vintaging scenes reflecting contemporary arable practice

depends to a large extent on the degree to which the association between

the artistic and archaeological records may be drawn.Much evidence points to economic prosperity in the Levant during the

5th and 6th centuries, one facet of which would appear to have been a

booming wine trade in Palestine. Evidence for this comes from a number

of surveys and excavations which have revealed numerous wine-presses in

Israel, particularly in the Early Byzantine period. Z. Safrai, for example,

has drawn attention to a large number of wine presses in the archaeologi-

cal record of Roman Palestine;120while in Samaria, S. Dar has examined a

vast number of wine presses in the Roman and Byzantine periods.121Like-

118. Maguire,Earth and Ocean, 71.

119. A similar kind of scene is depicted on the nave pavement of the Church of St Stephenat Umm al-Rasas. The putti are replaced in this case by harvesters who tread grapes:Piccirillo - Alliata, Umm al-Rasas, 145, fig. 35.

120. S. Zafrai, The Economy of Roman Palestine, London - New York 1994, esp. 10, 83,92, 97, 188, 269, 338, 353, figs 27, 42, 43.

121. S. Dar,Landscape and Pattern.An Archaeological Survey of Samaria 800 BCE - 636CE(BAR International Series 308i), I, Oxford 1986, ch. 7, pp. 147-164; (ii), figs 14, 87-93,pls 69-73.


33/42


122. Y. Hirschfeld, Ancient Wine Presses in the Park of Aijalon,IEJ33 (1983) 207-218,figs 1-2, 4-5, 7-9.

123. Y. Hirschfeld - R. Birger-Calderon, Early Roman and Byzantine Estates nearCaesarea,IEJ41 (1991) 81-111, figs 7, 14-16, 27 and 28.

124. P. Watson, Pella Hinterland Survey 1994: Preliminary Report (Site 28 Soundings by

M. OHea),Levant28 (1996) 63-76.125. See note 40.

126. Piccirillo, La cappella del Prete Giovanni, 297-315; Id., The Mosaics of Jordan, 176-177, figs 234-243.

127. M. Piccirillo, Una chiesa nell wadi Ayoun Mousa ai piedi del monte Nebo, LA34(1984) 307-318; M. Piccirillo - E. Alliata, La chiesa del monastero di Kaianos alle AyounMousa sul Monte Nebo, Quaeritur inventus colitur. Studi di Antichit cristiana in onoredi P. Umberto Fasola, Rome1989, 536-586; Piccirillo, The Mosaics of Jordan, 189, pls270-275.

128. For a map of the Mount Nebo area and its rock-cut presses, S.J. Saller, The Memorialof Moses on Mount Nebo, I, Jerusalem 1941, fig. 2.

wise, a variety of wine-presses have been identified in the park of Aijalon

west of Jerusalem by Y. Hirschfeld, including an elaborate installation

which contained vats and a sophisticated wine-pressing mechanism.122

Y.Hirschfeld and R. Bir ger-Calderon have also studied a similar installa-tion in the hinterland of Caesarea which formed part of a villacomplex.123

This contained a number of rooms of an obvious agricultural function, in-

cluding a large vaulted cellar measuring 12.8 by 4 metres. Two farmsteads

(one of which was associated with a wine-press) were discovered in the

course of a survey in the hinterland of Pella in the foothills of the Northern

Jordan valley. In addition, a further 21 wine presses were recorded in the

citys hinterland.124

The Church of Bishop Sergius at Umm al-Rasas (587/88) depicts a

screw-press on a border panel of the nave pavement.125Likewise, the pave-ments in the churches of St George and the Holy Martyrs Lot and

Procopius (Figs 3 and 6) at Khirbet al-Mukhayyat close to Mount Nebo,

depict scenes of agricultural workers operating screw-presses. In close

proximity, harvesting scenes are depicted on the pavements of the Church

of the Deacon Thomas (Fig. 4), the Upper Chapel of the Priest John (Fig.

5), the 5th century Lower Chapel of the Priest John,126and the 6th century

Lower Church of Kaianus.127Of particular significance are the archaeologi-

cal remains of a monastic complex dated to ca.500 on Mount Nebo itself.

Several apparently sophisticated wine-pressing installations were associ-ated with it. A small number of wine-presses were also located in the im-

mediate vicinity of Mount Nebo.128Moreover, it appears that the mosaic


34/42

M. W. MERRONY474

129. The technology of wine-presses during the Early Byzantine period in Palestine is ex-amined in some detail by R. Frankel - S. Avitsur - E. Ayalon, History and Technology ofOlive Oil in the Holy Land, Tel-Aviv 1992, 50-77.

130. F.M. Abel, Gographie de la Palestine, I, Jrusalem 1933, 223.

131. Whittow, Ruling, 3-29.

pavements reflect contemporary technology, since the screw-press is not

known in Palestine before the Early Byzantine period.129 Thus, although

reflecting the contemporary practice of wine harvesting, the vintaging

scene may also have been symbolical in intent.

The hunting scene

We have already established that the two basic types of hunting scenes en-

countered in 5th and 6th century inhabited scroll pavements - the chase and

the big-game hunt - expressed a continuity from their Roman antecedents.

We have also suggested that Roman hunting scenes were symbolical. How-

ever, one fundamental question needs to be addressed: why in the Early Byz-antine period are hunting scenes depicted in the ecclesiastical context? Do

scenes of this kind reflect contemporary hunting activity? That a number of

beasts, such as the lion and leopard depicted in inhabited scroll pavements,

were native to the region during the period, is proven by written sources,

particularly hagiography.130However, this alone does not explain the pres-

ence of such scenes in ecclesiastical buildings. Two possible explanations

connected with symbolism may underlie the presence of hunting scenes in

the religious context. Firstly, it might prove instructive again to examine the

traditional relationship between such scenes in the Roman period and thepatron who commissioned them. The suggestion was put forward above, that

in the Roman period the hunting scene of the urban villaebasically reflected

the activities of their owners on their rural estates. It is generally accepted

that the villawas the urban seat of the hereditary oligarchy of landowners

who constituted the membership of the curia. In the Early Byzantine period,

however, the importance of the curiadiminished to the extent that they were

replaced by a new lite. Citing evidence from the written sources (notably

Saints Lives), M. Wh