CHAPTER THIRTEEN CONCLUDING REMARKS, COMMENTS, AND OBSERVATIONS. ‘The floor was only part of the general oman tation program of a building, which c frescoes, wall mosaics, liturgical decorations, and furniture. The walls might have heen decorated with biblical scenes or Christian symbols and themes, For example, the apse of St, Catherine in Sinai shows wall mosaies with religious motifs, and wall mosaies decorate the churches of Ravenna, Remains of wall mosaies are found in the Cathe= dral at Madaba, at the Memorial of Moses on Mt, Nebo and in St. Stephen’s church at Umm al-Rasas, plastered walls with paintings of plants, and figures were discovered in many churches in the region (Piccivillo 1989: 337-340). Painted wall decoration and inscriptions painted on the agogue of Rehov ian writers described the pillars were found also at the sy (WVitto 1981: 92). Ch interior decoration of the Gaza churches, which included saints and episodes from the New lament (Waliszewski 2001: 264). Nevertheless, the mosaics location on the Door had a better a chance of surviving than other parts of the build ings. Mosaics had a clear-cut finetion: to pave rooms, halls, and aisles in a great variety of struc- tures. Every mosaic pavement was distinguished by its particular location, the style and features of the images, and the iconographic variety of its depiction and significance. Above all, each mosaic carried different meanings for observers. The on provided a singular quality in its powerful images and its iconography, themes, and representations, which conveyed and revealed the hopes and goals of the contemporary society and their cultural seting The repertoire of the visual imagery decorat- ing the mosaics contains many elements: tradi tional motifs, Classical themes, symbols, biblical ydlay life episodes, representa tions of flora and fanna, the inhabited scrolls, and Nilotic vignettes, Many of these components, ‘omament mosaics in a variety of pagan, Christian, and Jewish structures. However, cert \d deliberately distinctive th scenes and ¢\ n selected nes characterize ‘churches or synagogues. The Torah shrine panel, the zodiae, Jewish symbols and biblical scenes feature exclusively on syna- The cross, rural ‘gogue pavements scenes such as farming, hunting, cor pevsonifications as the symbols of the universe distinguish the church floors. A, Notes on Composition ‘The mosaic pavement, while ‘was also perceived asa floor. The early Byzantine mosaicists produced the pavements fully aware of the practical character of the floors, serving primarily asa surface on which the visitors could ‘walk (Dauphin 1980: 128-131; 1997: 4-5) Almost all the designs of synagogue and church mosaics are made to produce the greatest impact from a single viewpoint at the entrance, with the design seen the right way up, and looking, towards the building’s focal point, In the church thisis the apse and altar at the eastern ends in the synagogue itis the Torah shrine (as an aedicula, niche, or apse) on the Jerusalem-oriented wall. The mosaic usually consisted of an overall design such as the inhabited scroll, or was divided into anels, and compartments. ‘The development of the mosaic pavements in the late 4th-8th centuries features a unity of the n artistic concept, design, all-over compositions, and continuous and re pets with preference for pro- lifie 0 ial designs with the characteristic style of figures. The compositions are vital, vivid, colourful, organized, and natural, with assorted imagery well dispersed and balanced (Dunbabin. 1978: 223-226; 1999: 194-196; Dauphin 1980: 1323; 1997: 5). Some essential traits characterize the mosa ies. These are a plain background, and figures, animals, trees, and buildings frequently rendered in the same size. Naturalistic elements, symme- ry, movement, and figures are detached and patched together. Frequently the composition is adjusted to its content. Some devices of compo- sition bind all fields togethers a strict symmetry,278 the vintage scenes on the inhabited vine scrolls mosaics of the Beth She’an area and the Jordan mosaics. These pavements show the character= istic features of the farming scenes: the vintages gathering the grapes; a porter carrying the basket of grapes; transportation of grapes from the vine yard to the press by a donkey lnaded with baskets; ‘reading the grapes, pressing in the wine press; the flute player and a hare eating grapes (able VIEL, pls. VILI-, figs. VIT-H2). Some of these features are rendered similarly, probably follow- ing a pattern or a convention, The vintager and porter appear in an almost identical posture and. details; in the transportation of grapes by a loaded donkey, the figure usually leads with one hand and carries a stick in the other. Several different episodes of the grape-treacling scene (pl. VIL) have cither figures treading or a pair of figures treading on either sides of the vine press. The flute player in all cases is rendered in an identi- cal posture, sitting on a basket and holding the flute in both hands (pl. VIL), except for the flute player at Sts. Lot and Procopitis (pl. VLI1). The hare eating grapes is depicted in various postures (ig. VIE-2). ‘Animal chase and combat is illustrated in a ner deriving from traditional pat- h the animals leap towards their prey (pl. VILS, 8), or confront each other as in the 1d mongoose combat (pl. VIL6) or in an vicious assault of beasts on animals (pl. VIL). Hunting scenes are noticeably rendered after aditional models: a hunter on foot isarmed with a lance, which he holds in both hands assaulting the beasts, sometimes he is a soldier holding a shield; a mounted hunter om the right is attacks a beast depicted on the left (pls. VILLI 1-13). The portrayals of the presentation of beasts for public display show different episodes, but they all depict African figures leading the animals (pl. VII15) Pastoral scenes again attest to some conven tional model guiding the mosaicist. The shepherd in the posture of legs crossed, left hand resting on his staff and right hand raised above his head is a common depiction on several of the mosa- ies (pl. VIL-16). Figures leading camels on the Kissufim and Be’er Shem‘a pavements are almost exactly the same in posture and clothing, and scem to be based on the same model; the Petra illustration depicted in three medallions is wholly different (pl. VIL18). The men approaching a tree in a fowling scene on ikon mosaic at Jabaliyah and on the th-century the Sth-centry Diakow: Petra church, though dated to different periods, are quite similar in their rendition, pos- sibly being based on a similar model (pl. VIL1S). On the other hand, every fishing and fishermen’s istration is unique (pl. VIL20), ‘A number of mosaic pavements show tradi- tional themes, which seem to express the artist's g his own interpre= {ation of the customary and recognized scenes amples are some of the hunting and pa episodes at Kissufim, which show unusual scenes of the hunter and the bear, the prancing zebras, the giraffe, and elephant (pl VIL7). The lower mosaic at the Old Diakonikon on Mt, Nebo ilus- tuates a shepherd sitting om a rock watehing his flock (pl. VIL 16i). Some of the zodiae signs at Beth Alpha are unusual, especially Virgo with her red shoes, who sits on a throne, and Aquarins depicted as a figure drawing water from a well with a bucket (pls, 11.8, 10b), ‘The spread of similar mosaics is frequently attributed, albeit with litte evidence, to the exis- tence of central workshops that trained local crafismen, or to itinerant mosaicists (Dunbabin 73). Lavin (1963: 244) suggests that a great number of North Africa schools andl workshops, “though perhaps operating from headquarters in the larger centers, were doubtless itinerant’, Iiner= ant teams of mosaicists who travelled! widely may have practised their craft over a wide area, which would account for the similarity in designs and. pattcrns in different localities. The appearance of like the givaffe and elephant, led by figures in ethnic attire, might indicate motifs produced by travelling mosaicists who were famil- iar with them, or reflect actual incidents in which such figures and animals visited the villages during, celebrations ‘The appearance of Jewish symbols and designs in synagogal and fanerary art attests to the involvement of the Jewish community and the donors in the building and decoration of the reli~ gious structures, They would have heen assisted! by Jewish pattern books, and perhaps also by the artists themselves, when choosing the layout, composition, and motifs to be included in the designs. Whenever the Jewish com to add specifi they would insert Jewish symbols. These sym= bols would have clearly indicated the diffe between the local Jewish and Christian edifices, and emphasized the function of the edifice. The Jewish community would also have availed itself wanted licance to an ornamented floorM1. Nebo. Some scenes evoke the compositions and episodes on the mosaic floor of the Byzan- tine Imperial Palace in Constantinople (Trilling 1989: 41-44). A composition characteristic of some sy gogue nave pavements (figs. II-1-8) is seen at Scheme A). The design show three rectangular panels: one, usually in front of the Torah shrine, depicts Jewish symbols (Hach 1076: 47-49; 2000: 154; 2001: 59); the central panel has the zodiac design, The third panel at Beth ‘Alpha, and the sixth band at Sepphoris, contain the biblical scene of the Binding of Isaac; Na‘aran and Susiya render the biblical scene of Daniel in the Lions’ Den. This design highlights the importance of the programme-scheme of the panels and their con tent, the significance of each panel, and the ‘of the whole pavement, Characteristic of the synagogue pavements are a recurring pro- gramme, a fixed composition, a stylistic fashion, and consistent icononogtaphy, while church floors are noted for more variety in their designs and subject matter B. Interpretation and Implications Some synagogue pavements delivered more than the evident ornamentation of the structure (see the questions nbabin 1999a: 744) Particular signifi agogue mosaics of Beth ‘Alpha, Beth Shean A, Ha math , Hammath-Gader, Na‘aran, Susiya (Hachlili 1988: 347-354, Scheme A). The scheme, form, and content are identical in all, despite their different dates and locations. The recurring visual images and subject matter enced the reading of the mosaics and augmented, the roles which the decoration of the floor conld perform, The inherent implications of the floor panels were most likely plain to the community ewish symbols commemorated the Jerusalem Temple; the Zodiac calendar ‘was the fiame of the annual y. The biblic il the visual images in- the rescue, and the members: the es now enacted scones referred tion, al life on church pavements indicated a connection with contemporary life, These mosaics 283 \were presumably intendedl(o convey various mes- sages to community members looking at the pave- ments, The scenes could have represented the exalted pursuits of the patrons, or vietory in bat- tles; they might have illustrated the various inhab- itants of land and sea, or embodied the symbol af human life. Some designs or motifs might have Incorporated a deeper level of connotations, per~ haps of symbolic aspect In images containing ci and Psalms alluding to the End of Days, seen in chuvehes andl in the Beth Midrash at the Meroth synagogue, the appropriate biblical reference is purposely located above each particular illus- trated animal pair, hence is direetly addressed the viewers, Inscriptions rendered on large areas of the pavements had farther importance. ‘They were evidently intended to be read, and they expanded the role of the floor decoration, Such an exanaple is the long Halathic text depicted on the Rehov synagogue mosaic, recording the tithes and sev- enth-year produce in many disticts in the Holy Land. Iwas apparently copied from a literary text and had various purposes, among them conveying 1h 1 knowledge and memory of waditio and practices. Another example isthe inscription on the “En Gedi synagogue pavement with the names of earliest people in the world, a lst of the twelve zodiac signs and the twelve months of the year, the names of the three biblical forefathers, and most significantly a curse and a list of four offences for which the town’s community would be held accountable. It was expressly meant to he read by the synagogue population, and abided by (figs. XI-4,5). Some C used the floor as a medium for the written word el Voiite 1988: 465-475: Dunbabin 1999, 44). “The patron/donor played a part in commis- sioning the work and in approving the content and the inscriptions, they had a significant role in the choice of the ornamentation (Dunbabin 1999a: 741-742). Evidence ofthis assumption lies in the location of the donors’ dediatory inserip- tions. At the Sepphoris synagogue they are at the tap af each nave panel (ig. IF-2); mare espe- ally, one inscription isin the cixcular frame of © panel (pl. I val, and, moreover, it was evidently mosaic. The Church of Apostles at Madaba wise has an unustially located dedieatory inserip~ tion, which contains the name of the mosaicist jstian churches also284 (CHAPTER THIRTEEN (Piccirillo 1993: fig. 78): around the central medal- lion with personification of the Sea. It indicates the same contribution by the benefactors, and pethaps by the mosaicist too, in the rendition of osaic. These and other examples designate the choice of ‘olvement of the patrons the subject matter On some synagogue floors dedicatory inser tions record ‘the holy community’ which donated, and contributed the mosaics, This clearly attests, to their involvement in the pavement work, anc perhaps also in the choice of the themes. Exam- ples are the inscriptions on synagogue pavements of Beth ’Alpha, Beth She’an small synagogue, Huseifi, Jericho, Ma‘on (Naveh 1978: nos. 39, 43, 46, 37, 69) and Gerasa (Roth-Gerson 1987: n0.10). The floors of structures were decorated with ‘mosaics. Considering that a floor woud be in full view ofthe building’s owner or by the community, the subject matter and its implicati considered and respected. On the other hand, the fact that the floor would be trodden on had ns had to be to be taken into account also, Accordingly, the choice of themes and vigneties for the mosaic of the synagogue and church pavements carried. great significance. New subject matter and changes in figure compositions are characteristics of early By tine art. The subjects include all-over geometric, floral, and vegetal designs, animal friezes, figure ling hunting, with some allusion to the vnationes of the amphitheatre, an and combat, genre vignettes such as rural activity, topographical themes, personifications, and eal- endar themes, These subjects and themes reflect the interests of opolitan patro who commissioned the pavements (Dunbabin 1978; 223, 227-228; 1999: 299-800) he decorations of synagogues and churches differ in concept and treatment. The iconographic Programmeson the church mosaies greatly diverge from those on synagogue pavements Not much of Christian doctrine is shown on the mosaic pavements, and the recognition of the less significant than those on the synagogue pavements. Waliszewski (2001: 264) comments, “itis clear. how li floor mosaics meant in comparison with the deco mn of the walls and ceilings ‘The main differences in themes ofthe Sth~and 6ih-cen ents of synagogue and church are the following, ‘The synagogue used for nal chase class of cost themes on them was rm ry mosaic pave its decoration revered themes, a variety ofimages, iconography, and symbolism. It took Jewish sym- bols—the menorah, ritual objects, the Ark of the scrolls, and the conch, which acquired greater significance after the destruction of the Jerusalem. Temple in memory of the Temple and its rites ‘The portrayals probably served as actual images. of the ceremonies conducted in the synagogue. The zodiac as a yearly calendar, bibl as part of Jewish tradition and legend, animals, birds, and a few episodes of animal chase also. appear, probably in the community’selear know! cage that they belonged to some general code; the two literary Hebrew and Aramaic inseriptions covering large spaces are rendered im the side narthex (figs. XI-43). Possibly the presentation of the written word on the pavement, in prefer~ ence to the figured designs, might have been the decision of the local community Whereas church mosaics show assorted Vignettes of farming, hunting, personific natural forees, and portraits of donors, only two biblical episodes, of Jonah and Adam, appear con church pavements, Moreover, on synagogue pavements Inman figures appear only in bib cal scenes, with biblical citations consisting only of single words or parts of semtences to explain the scene; the zodiac design does portray the figures for the signs (naked at Ham- ‘math Tiberias) and the seasons, but farming and Jhunting scenes, and portraits of benefactors, were eschewed. Church pavements, by contrast, show exactly the opposite, rendering rural life episodes and portraits of benefactors; bibl avoided. The difference apparently was con- riccted to the clear-ent divergence in perception and attitude to weading on the pavements. The cemph: \gogal art on symbol It have been the result of a ions of images ‘Jews to distinguish their places of worship from those of the Christians (Haebli 1988: 370, 403), The Concept of Neutralization of Tdlatry Mosaic floor decorations include iconographic and symbolic clements, a paradox that needs to be emphasizect; even biblical scenes with a repre sentation of the Hand of God, as in the Binding 1 Beth Alpha (pl. IV.1b), were consid= jects for a floor that was constant of Isai ered fit su trodden on: Toral shrines, menoroth and oth) ritual objects were also deemed suitable for the286, part of the repertory of pattern books used by mosaicists The mosaics give us some indication of the society which created them. The two communi- ties, Jewish and Christian, treated the decora- tion of their edifice floors quite differently. The church pavement desi nd reflect both rural and usban life ne period. The nditions of village activities and hunt- vveal everyday bucolic life of the various r ing episodes inhabitants in the countryside, while the archi- tectural representations of buileings and a walled city (which appear mainly on church pavements, in Jordan: Piccirillo 1993: 26-37) nly were amieant to represent urban life. Avi-Yonah (1960a:, 23) contends that the influence of the aristocratic classes is featured in the hunter's portrayal as a victorious emperor (pl. VIL. 11-13); the villagers on the other hand are presented by the shepherd (pl. VIL. 16), whose life is sometimes cheered by the flute player or by exotic visitors stuch as the leading his giraffe (pl. VII, 15). Synagogue pavement ornamentation, on the other hand, fea- lures motifs of Jewish symbols, the Jewish yearly calendar, and biblical scenes. [reflects the Jewish, tradition, ritual conventions, and belief while refraining from representing everyday life, The social aspect of the mosaic paveme reflected in the involvement and pa jon of members of the commmnity in the building of the edifice and in the contribution ta its omna- mentation, This is apparent from dhe inscrip- ng frequently the clergy, bishops, priests, and monks at each place. Many of the donors, including women, elearly comtribt the choice of the subject matter selected for the pavements decoration. tions GC. Were the Mosaic Pavements Designs Purely Decorative or Inoested with Symbolism? Scholars deb f¢ what significance can be ap- plied to mosaic compositions and designs which, include recurring motifs of humans, animals, rural episodes, and hunting vignettes. Many of the themes have a secular character, similar 10, the ornamentation of earlier mosaic pavements of Roman villas in North Afvica. To what extent may the mosaic have lost its symbolic dimension and, become purely decorative? Were compositions like the inhabited scrolls invested with symbol ism? Are the depictions allegorical and symbolic, or are they literal, describing various activities of local community? Do the iconographic themes, perform a de amy a religions meaning with a symbolic role? Did the implica~ tions of the mosaic designs change as they moved. fiom the secular to the religious setting? Some scholars maintain the mosaic pavements had a decorative function alone. Others believe that the iconographic themes and compositions, fon mosaics of churches and synagogues of the Byzantine period reflect an iconographic sym- bolic program. Others still hold an intermediate orative fimetion, 01 approach: the mosaics are symbolic as well as decorative (Talgam 2000: 95-98) Biebel (1938: 302-305) and Crowfoot (1941: 40-41) argue Hhat most mosaic pavements are sec= ular, and their popularity was ee to theit highly valted omamentation design. Among the scholars who terpret the com positions and motifs as symbolic are Saller and. Bagatti (1949: 92-98). They maintain that these pavements (with scenes such as pastoral life, fish ing, and boating) represent ordinary local coun tay life, However, they interpret the symbolisin of the vine as allegory: ‘both the the Jews believed that they were the vineyard of the Lord... under His special protection could produce rich spiritual fits’. The mosaies might represent activities taken from real life, indicat- ing a prosperous agricultural community in these areas. Grabar (1968: 53) contends that the vine scroll mosaics, and their content of bucolic life objects, and animals, ‘show how the secular syn bolic image ofa specific landed property becomes in the hands of the Christians the image of the carth in gencral and in particular the ideal land, governed by God’. Evans (1982) relates the Jeru- salem inhabited vine seroll mosaic to early Arme~ istians and nian sources, and associates the birds with the symbolism of resurrection, Picisllo (1989: 338-9 maintains that the ieonogeaphy of the Madat school mosaies reminds the onlooker of the Lord's creation, and the vine especially is comnected with God. Trilling in his assessment of the mosaic of the Great Palace in Gonstantinople provides an nd interpretation of the same subject matter, which appears also in church masaies in Palacstina aud Arabia. He states (1989 58, 66. 68 gories of subject ‘matter in the mosaic, and every identifiable scene belongs to at least one of them. The categories ave rural o idilic fife, animal violence and protection (hunting, soldiers combating wild animals; some cre are only thecerepresent combat in the arena), From the way in which these categories are related itis possible to deduce the meaning of the mosaic as a whole “The artist has created an analogue of human soci ery and its relation to the natural world...fights between men and beasts ...embody and symbol- ize the triumph of civilization over nature... The three divisions of the mosaic subject maiter corre= spond quite literally to divisions the personality Asan allegory of human nai The pavements of the churches of the Priest John and of St. George at Khirbat al-Mukhayyat ‘on Mt. Nebo are interpreted by Maguire (1987: 67-72) as representing, the association between heaven and earth; the images appear to show the animal kingdom dominated by men as signs for the created world, Maguire maintains that it is possible for the motifs in any gi to differ among themselves with respect to the density of their meanings. Some motifs could be intended only in their literal sense, others could However it several levels of symbolism is an open question how many, if any, of these meaning, were in the designer's mind when he set the eagle and the caged bird on the central axis of the floor’. He further contends that some mosaics Dring together into one composition portrayals of Barth, of the food she provides, of man’s mas- tery over domestic animals, and of his defenses against wild beasts, and that these images have 1 close parallel in the ninth sermon of St, John Chrysostom’. Thus, ‘like the Chistian comiien- tators, the makers of the moss a in the natural world created by ie 1987: 72) Piccivillo (1989: 337-340) claims that many of the designs on Jordan cliurch mosaic floors, stich asthe seenes of shepherds, farming, hunting, and animal combat, are meant to praise God's cre- ation of the world and commend his grandeur and the superiority of mans the significance of this concept is intensified by such inscriptions as those at the Theotokos Chapel in the Basilica of Moses ‘on Mt. Nebo: ‘O Creator and Maker of all things, Christ onr God...” similar inseription appears around the medallion with a personification of the Sea in the nave of the Church of the Apostles: Lord who has made te heavens aud the earth (Piccirillo 1993: 91, 200), Many of the images and other iconographic elements such as the Paradise, the eagle, the peacocks, and in part lar the Madaba map received a new signi of the Christian faith, Waliszewski (2001 s were defi ivers of 287 contends that the Petra church mosaies may be read at three general levels, On the highest level the mosaies symbolize God's domain, rendering the world’s flora and fauna and man’s work. The seasons could be interpreted as symbols of the world and God’s rule over time. For some scholars, the design intended to be decorative could at times also have a symbolic purpose. Dauphin (1978b: 31-34) is correet in claiming that the ‘readings’, namely interpreta~ tions, of the inhabited! scroll pavements ean be discerned on three different levels. The first is the rural community’ h the pic~ tures of everydlay life that they see. The second is identification by the more cultured cit who recognize the birds, animals, and bum as a representation of God’s creation, and the pavements as a gift of thanks. On the third level the clergy show an alfinity: they might recogni and interpret details in the vine composition as symbols of Christ and the church, She concludes, ‘Neither symbols rent in the inhabited scrolls. It is simply a neutral ther read, understood and interpreted according to the mentality of the onlooker, for the life of artis- tic motifs is far longer than that of their original significance...the inhabited scroll.,.taking on di ferent meanings according to the period, the reli~ gion, the building and the onlooker’. Antique imagery encompassed many levels nificance, in which diff culture, experience, and spirit played a part (Jesnick 1997: 117). Some of the designs convey ideas and relate conception. Merrony (1998: 443) focuses on the significance of religious and secular ico- nography in the early Byzantine period: ‘An iconographic dichotomy between ecclesiastical buildings, churches and synagogues, on the one hand, and villae on the other different iconographic traits exist: mythological scenes are typical ofthe villa but do not oceur in a Christian or Jewish religious context vintage rural and genre scenes appear in churches. andl are absent from the villa context and syna- gogue pavements. Dunbabin (1978: 230-238) holds that some motifs are purely decorative, while several secular episodes might have had Christian sig mains (1999; 198) that the genre nes inserted in the inhabited medallions might sometimes appear aneedotal, ‘but often itis clear that there is a unifying underlying siguificanee The chureh floor becomes an image of the earth, ilentification w nor decoration are He maintains that