Synagogue Of Dura Europos
34 44 '51 "N 40 43' 38" E / 34.7474, 40.7272
The synagogue of Dura Europos is a building of Jewish worship in the City Hellenistic and Roman of Dura Europos in the province of Syria. This is one of the most important monuments in the study of Jewish art in the ancient world. Succeeding the first building of the second half of the second century , the synagogue was rebuilt about 244 - 245 and has a set of murals figurative single to date. The willful destruction, but luckily only partial, of the building during the work of fortifying the city in anticipation of an attack Sasanian in 256 had resulted in the preservation of much of the painted decoration. The destruction of the city at the end of the siege that followed and the deportation of the population by the Persians put an end to the occupation of the site, which explains its remarkable state of preservation until the first archaeological excavations. They intervened in the French mandate between 1921 and 1933 and saw the complete release of the remains of the synagogue. The frescoes were deposited at the National Museum in Damascus that they are one of the masterpieces of the collection.
The presence of a Jewish community at Dura-Europos far above the construction of the synagogue. More generally, the cities of Mesopotamia have flourishing Jewish communities, whose members descend both exiles time Nebuchadnezzar II as refugees of Jewish-Roman wars under Vespasian and Hadrian. The Jewish diaspora has in the kingdom Parthian and Sassanian an official representative, the exilarch necessarily descent from David. The towns of Sura and Nehardea harbor Talmudic academies whose fame may even exceed those of Palestine, with the respective influence of Abba Arika (Rav) and Rabbi Shila .
The architecture of the synagogue buildings successive
The synagogue is a building belonging to the island of Dura Europos L7 (see map-cons) The city is indeed organized since its development by the Seleucids according to a plan hippodamian islets regular rectangular (35 x 70 m) that archaeologists have arbitrarily numbered for reference more conveniently. This island is located in the North-South front row for entering the city, and the second row east-west north of decumanus maximus : it is bordered to the west by the street along the wall between the towers 19 and 20, respectively, on the other sides by the streets to the east, 2 south and 4 north. This, originally, a city block up to ten separate units (designated by the letters A through I on the map below) , one of which was devoted to needs of the Jewish community and turned into a place of worship. This peripheral location in the city as the modesty of the first building are often used as an argument to emphasize the small size of the community . At the option of expansion and rebuilding necessitated by its development, the synagogue grew to become the central core and the most important building of a small Jewish quarter. The last condition of the building, with its famous frescoes, is thus the second phase of the second synagogue to occupy the place.
From the private dwelling place of worship
The original house
The first synagogue was originally a private house of moderate size (21.50 x 15.50 m) in the center of Block L7, opening on its western facade to the street wall . The construction of this house is contemporary with its neighbors A and B, and goes back to the last period of occupation Parthian , about 50 - 150 AD. AD , when urbanization affects the final part of the site although the grid pattern was designed from the second century BC. AD , much of the islands remain undeveloped then bounded up to the end of the Hellenistic period . The original plan of the house, to the extent that it can be restored despite the profound changes brought by the later phases of construction, is consistent with the local architectural style home: the rooms are arranged around a central courtyard open, almost square (6.55 x 6.5 m), which leads to the access corridor (3 ) to the street wall . The eastern side is occupied by two rectangular pieces, 4 and 5: Part 4 (6.85 x 4.15 m) has a low bench continues (0.22 m high with a width of 0.49 m) short all along the walls and center block for probably the basis for a brazier . This is probably the diwan , the dining room of the house. She communicates by a door to the second part Eastern (5), which is presumably an auxiliary space. The south side and west are probably occupied by two other parts, dimensions and function undetermined . Many houses have a floor in Doura - for example, the remains of a staircase are visible in the monthly Home At the same block L27 - but no evidence to that effect was found for thereof.
The first synagogue
Shortly after the return of Doura Europos under Roman control, between 165 and 200 AD. AD about this remarkable little house is remodeled to meet the needs of the Jewish religion: the first synagogue . This operation takes place without modifying the surface of the housing unit, whose outer walls are kept, and a substantial portion of domestic origin. To account for the enhancement of the street level of the wall, the hallway floor 3 is raised on a floor and provided with steps beyond the threshold of the door and a small staircase at the opposite end, to cross the hilly (1.75 m) between the two levels of occupation . The central courtyard is paved with tiles but preserved and provided on the north and east sides of a small portico of five columns. Both stylobates continue in the northeast corner of the frame to form the sides of a small square pool that is established. The eastern side of the house is not substantially altered, unlike parts of South and West, where the spaces are properly installed community: the west wing of the house is transformed into a large hall square, slightly irregular (10.65 to 10.85 x 4.60 to 5.30 m) whose floor is made of gravel and rubble of plaster on a dirt embankment, raised by 0.48 m compared with that of the court. This is the assembly hall of the community, the worship space from the synagogue, as evidenced by its development, particularly on the west wall, one that indicates the direction of Jerusalem : the room is oblong . A shoal of mud bricks covered with a plaster with a height ranging from 0.22 to 0.45 m, is installed against the walls of the room on all four sides. It is on the west side that reached its maximum height when it is built in stone and provided with a footrest. At the center of the room, a hole filled with plaster (0.82 x 0.86 m) indicates the presence of a facility later removed.
Fragment baluster of gypsum and different kind of bank on the west side suggest that this place, probably in the middle of the wall was a shrine which serves as a Holy Ark , a receptacle for the scrolls of the Torah . This facility could be a late addition, contemporary redevelopment attested in the center of the room . By analogy with the synagogue later, a semi-circular niche carved into the wall is often returned to complete this device . However, some doubt about this. The installation appears to have been too small to house the entire text or only Torah. One hypothesis is that the aedicule or even the niche served only to expose the eyes of the faithful some rolls and not keep them permanently. The rolls were kept in a wooden chest that the inscriptions of the synagogue later refer to as the real "holy ark" (in Hebrew Aron haqqode) while the niche and aedicule were called "home of the Ark" (ILO Aron) . If the Ark of the first synagogue of Dura Europos is real, it is the oldest archaeologically attested in the Diaspora as the land of Israel , and it precedes even the rabbinical standards in this regard . So as the first synagogue where the wall with this facility is oriented toward Jerusalem.
The room walls are adorned with two painted on three horizontal registers. These are, from bottom to top, an imitation of a marble plinth veined yellow ocher and green (0.87 m high), a middle register (1.38 m high) composed of a series of rectangular panels containing geometric patterns (diamonds with disk in the center) - we find a similar setting, this time in marble on the walls of the synagogue at Sardis - and finally, in the upper zone, a simple white plaster. The maximum (about 4.90 m high ) is an imitation of a painted ceiling formwork, decorated blue signs bearing rosettes of gilded stucco at the center and bordered by black lines, red and white .
The south wall of room 2 is pierced by two doors, one center, the main (1.50 m wide), opening onto the courtyard, while the other, in the southeast corner, more close (1 m) results in Exhibit 7, on the south side of the house. Poorly known, this piece measures about 3.75 x 3.90 m, and is distinguished also by the low benches (0.25 m high) that flank its sides. It opens wide the courtyard on the north by a bay surmounted by an arc . Its walls are of painted geometric and floral while the ceiling is a fresco imitating the trellis of a garden . The function of the piece remains speculative: the original hypothesis that this is an assembly hall for women , which have been separated from men in worship, is now rejected lack of parallels in other synagogues, the oldest . It could be a coin as the sacristy of the local auxiliary assembly hall , which may have been kept sacred texts: as such, we note that several graffiti Aramaic have been found in the rubble of the room, carrying some formulas for celebrating the memories of people (all men), may be regular users of this space .
The rest of the house does not seem to have undergone substantial changes of plan, especially for parts 4 and 5, which retain their function as a reception room, and probably belong to the residential portion of the building, the use of official synagogue .
The concession by a wealthy individual in a private home to be redeveloped into a building of worship is a phenomenon well attested in the Jewish diaspora. In fact, the vast majority of the oldest synagogues known by archaeologists, with the exception of those of Sardis and Ostia , are cases of domestic buildings: this is the case at Priene , Delos , or yet the synagogue Stobi. In the mid-third century to Stobi , an honorary inscription commemorates in fact the donation made by Tiberius Claudius Polycharmos part of his house to serve as a "holy place" (topos hagios) reserved for Jewish worship, while it retains the rest (the floor) as the family home. It is likely that the local community already met with him before, but this act of donation is the move from a single host to that of benefactor and patron of the community, provided with an honorary title "father of the synagogue" (pater tes Synagogue), even though there is also a religious leader - the inscription called "patriarch" . An act is certainly comparable to the origin of the synagogue at Dura-Europos, but the name of this benefactor is lost .
The second synagogue
The development of the city in general, and especially the Jewish community, perhaps augmented by refugees from the kingdom by Sassanid Ardashir I. makes the first synagogue inadequate to the needs of Jewish worship from the early third century. The building is rebuilt and enlarged and connected to the house next door to the east (H) which becomes an addiction, before receiving, in two steps, the painted decoration that made him famous .
Rebuilding the synagogue
The main objective of the operation is building a new assembly hall at the site of the former, but considerably larger. It involves the complete destruction of the interior walls of the building above, the disappearance of residential areas that had been preserved during the transformation of the original house into a synagogue, and especially a change of access and internal circulation. The west and north exterior walls are felled to make room on the same path, with thicker walls (1.04 m) and highest (up to 7 m) which support the ceiling formwork covering the major new rectangular room (13.65 x 7.68 m for the interior dimensions 15.47 x 9.76 m for external dimensions) , . It now occupies almost half the total area of the building. Two wooden doors with double doors opening inwards are arranged in the east wall, one at the center, one south, and permit access to the room from the courtyard.
In the middle of the west wall or near the axis of the main door is carved a niche semi-circular (1.51 x 0.83 m), monumentalized by a facade of two columns supporting a masonry arch, preceded two steps. The columns are covered with a painted plaster imitating marble while the upper part of the recess receives a stucco decoration in the shape of conch, also painted. The niche decorated and takes the shape of a dome and serves as a holy ark for the Torah, keeping the location of that which already existed in the first synagogue . This type of shrine is particularly common in the religious architecture of the Middle East: it occurs in the temples to house the cult statue. At Dura-Europos Similarly, it is found in the temple of Bel in mithraeum where it houses the relief of worship Mithra tauroctonous , and finally in the domus ecclesiae Christian above the baptismal font where he managed a fresco of the Good Shepherd . In one of the synagogue, a graffiti of two lines in Aramaic on the facade preserves the names of two craftsmen who made at least in part: "Martin has done the work (paintings) to the niche of cabinet (Aron bit), . A low bench, covered with a masonry plaster, two terraces (0.40 m wide, 0.20 to 0.47 m high), goes around the room along the walls: it is estimated it could accommodate 60 to 65 people, probably more than double the first synagogue . Immediately north of the central niche, it is redesigned in a second time with the construction of a massive five steps, which supports the seat of the former dignitaries or more generally of the synagogue. This testimony of a redesign of the interior of the room intersects observations on the ground: the original level of plaster mixed with gravel, installed on an embankment of 0.30 m covering the inside of the first synagogue, is turn covered with a bed of sand and a preparatory ground similar to the first but more polished. Several holes of varying size, arranged in this soil, probably reflect the installation of various furniture accessories: lamps, supporting elements may be a platform ( bema ) to the south bank of the dome .
The great hall is covered with a ceiling formwork, built from two east-west girders underpinning beams south-north . The intervals are filled with nearly 450 square terracotta tiles (0.41 m square, 0.045 m thick ) attached to the clay, of which 234 were found in the rubble of the monument . These tiles, locally produced, are overwhelmingly a decorative painting - characters or personifications, animals like snakes or dolphins, symbols astralogiques whose zodiacal sign of Pisces, Capricorn or Sagittarius, flowers or fruit - but six of of them have an inscription in Aramaic or Greek on the foundation of the building (see below). The decor is thus presented as a trellis for the garden inside and belongs to a very common type at Dura-Europos: it is found particularly in the House of Scribes of the same block as the synagogue L7 .
The court's new building is shifted eastward relative to the previous building. It is also enlarged to the entire remaining space in the eastern half of the lot, and provided on its north side, west and south, a triple portico ft, six columns of masonry in all. The columns with a diameter of 0.96 m at the base to a height estimated at 5.50 to 6 m, based on a foundation of gypsum and are crowned with capitals of the same material. A pond is located in the northwest corner of the court , probably for ritual ablutions. The court itself was a place for discussion and for the education of children. .
The annexation of the housing H and the input change
The removal of the access corridor (3) and the only gateway to the first synagogue necessitates the development of a new attack, this time from the street in front of the block is. A door is pierced in the center of the party wall with the house H is the house which is thus itself reorganized and attached . The plan of this dwelling, roughly rectangular (25.70 to 27 x 17.75 to 18.50 m) differs substantially from the normal models, perhaps precisely because of its annexation to the synagogue. The entrance door on the street has led to two successive vestibules (H1 and H2) which opens on two separate but related courses through a door. The first (H3) in the north led to two other pieces (H4 and H5), one of which serves as a vestibule to the synagogue is in the southwest corner of this room that is equipped door giving access the court with porticoes of the synagogue. A flight of steps can overcome the height difference (0.60 m) between the two units, and a bench installed in front of the door, against the west wall of the room. The second court (H9) provides access to other parts of the house, including the largest (H8) is likely to act as an andron. The housing H is thus separated into two distinct functional units: it serves as an entrance to the synagogue through the rooms H1-H3-H4, and storage alongside a residential function for the dignitaries of the synagogue , as steward, hazzan or the Old. It is also likely that the residential rooms used to house Jewish travelers crossing .
The housing H is not alone in being concerned by the development of the synagogue. Almost the entire island would become a real Jewish Quarter, including the various housing units were connected by private crossings, so as to facilitate the implementation of religious restrictions on travel during the Sabbath . Houses B, C and D are part of the package , but not the house A, known as "House of Roman scribes," which is used to house soldiers of the garrison. It is likely that the main character mentioned by the inscriptions of the founding of the synagogue, Samuel has lived in one of these mansions - H it would therefore partly sacrificed to the expansion of the synagogue , or C which is also affected but to a lesser extent, by this operation .
. Tile 1, in Greek: "Samuel, son of idaeus, priest (Presbyteros) of the Jews, built . This first Samuel was the owner of the original house to be granted transformed into a synagogue or one of the houses (C?) affected by the reconstruction . The transaction date is given by the Aramaic inscription as 556 A in the computation of the Seleucid era, ie 244 - 245 AD. This date is probably the end of construction of the building but not the development that has seen then several decorative. The debate among historians has focused on the role of second Samuel, son of Saphar, which the Greek inscription 2 appears to give equal importance - with the use of the same verb ktizein, "building" within the meaning of "base" to describe its action - that of Samuel in the Old building of the synagogue. The mention of this in the first second Samuel Aramaic inscription, as co-lead the project alongside the former leads us to reject this hypothesis and to read the Greek inscription on 2 as decoration and not rebuild the synagogue. . Like the two names given by graffiti Aramaic of the ciborium (see above), three (or four?) Other persons appointed by the third Greek inscription, would be those of participants in the reconstruction and decoration of the second synagogue.
The multilingual character inscriptions attest to the diversity of the original members of the community, its cosmopolitan character. The use of the word " proselytizing "to describe an important figure in the reconstruction also seems to refer to practices of recruitment into the component non-Jewish majority in the city. The expansion of the synagogue, the transfer of its entry on a street more bandwidth, adaptation to its development as for its architectural design elements of the local pagan traditions are all signs of the greater visibility of the Jewish community or at least its most prominent members in the city .
The deliberate destruction of the synagogue is involved in preparations to resist the Roman siege of Sassanid 256 : The synagogue has thus existed a decade during which she has long been in the works. The second phase of the painted decoration have indeed been made only from 250 - 251 , and for its size, should be completed only recently when the seat. It is therefore exceptional circumstances - a scene almost nine buried in a single massive infilling - that explain the preservation of painted decoration in excellent condition.
The decoration of the second synagogue
Organization of the painted decoration of the second synagogue: the assembly hall to the east. The irregular black line indicates the height of the walls remain. The colored areas are the only ones to wear a painted decoration in the first phase. Unlike the painted decoration of the first synagogue completely destroyed in the reconstruction of 244-245 and which we can only give a sketch from the fragments of painted plaster found among the rubble, the frescoes of the great hall of the second synagogue were largely retained by the building of the embankment wall. The Western Wall, the largest in the arrangement of the synagogue because it indicates the direction of Jerusalem and includes the dome of the holy ark, saw its decor and almost completely preserved - only the southwest corner has suffered ( see diagram cons). The north and south walls have meanwhile been removed from uneven height and increasing from west to east, according to the profile of the slope of the embankment: the frescoes are lost for about half. The wall is, finally, was demolished over the greater part of his elevation. It only retains the lower part of the decor.
The first phase of setting
The initial draft of the synagogue decoration is limited to painting the ceiling and architectural elements that are the corner pilasters and architrave, and the dome, the niche and the portion of the western wall surmounting.
The recess of the holy ark
Ark of the synagogue. The interior of the recess in the west wall is divided into three sections: the shell decorating the top is arched painted blue and light green. The middle register is a solid blue color, while the lower register is divided into five rectangular panels, two identical pairs, in imitation of inlaid marble . The underside of the bow carries a garland of flowers and fruits (pomegranates, grapes, pine cones) in red, black, yellow and green ribbons separated into seven distinct fields, repeat of a pattern common Hellenistic . It's rapprochement with the decoration of the first synagogue, which leads to these paintings dating from the first phase of the second synagogue. The columns are decorated with a herringbone pattern suggesting red and yellow marble.
The extrados of the arch and spandrels to form a blue field, but is split into three by the central motif, a facade of temple Greco-Roman tetrastyle golden yellow color to evoke the golden columns are topped with Egyptian capitals supporting an architrave molded, but no pediment. At the center of the facade opens a double-door framed by two columns supporting an architrave and a round arch decorated with a conch. The facade is very similar to that shown on the right of tetradrachms money struck at the rebellion of Bar Kokhba , contained the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple of Jerusalem - the arch is at Dura-Europos replaced by the door. For this reason, the most common interpretation is that of a representation of the Temple of Jerusalem, either in a symbolic and schematic image , or using a traditional image of the Temple of Herod (where the Ark was not more), expressing the desire to see the rebuilt . In the left spandrel panel are painted three symbols Jews worship the same golden color, a menorah , an etrog ( citron ) and lulav (green branch and closed a date palm ). The menorah is the most common iconographic symbol in the synagogues of the Diaspora and is on a wide variety of media (murals, mosaics, reliefs, graffiti, etc.).. Representation on the niche of the Torah in Doura is probably the oldest dated example of such images in the Diaspora .
Silver tetradrachm of Bar Kokhba (132-135). It differs significantly in its design of two other menoroth narrative present in the frescoes of the second phase: the seven arms rest on a tripod golden balls connected by a band decorated with a rosette and are themselves made of golden balls and support seven oil lamps. The importance of this symbol is reinforced by its size that dwarfs even that of the neighboring temple. The menorah recalls the Temple, the citron and the lulav evoke the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot) , the etrog and the lulav is part of four species of the ritual of this feast of pilgrimage where Jews ascended to the Temple of Jerusalem. Commonly found as the shofar , which also recalls the ceremonies at the Temple of Jerusalem ( Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur ), and a shovel to incense , to complement these general evocations of religion: the case for example on a relief the synagogue of Ostia , on the fresco of the arcosolium IV Villa Torlonia , or on funds cups Roman (see cons).
Jewish ritual objects on a background of Roman goblet, II century AD. AD They are absent here , paving the way for more accurate interpretations of this combination iconography: the shofar was deliberately replaced by an equivalent "mystical", the scene of the sacrifice of Isaac , or rather the "ligature Isaac (the QAHBE ) in the right spandrel .
This pattern expected to become popular in Jewish art Christian art as in its oldest known representation here, which remains unique in several respects . Despite a composition made somewhat awkward by the lack of space has forced the painter to superimpose the various elements of the biblical story, the scene is in effect immediately identifiable: it is the sacrifice by Abraham of his son Isaac, who was arrested in last moment by God to replace it with a hammer ( Gen. xxii, 1-19). Abraham is shown from behind wearing a himation White, a tunic , brown boots, and holding the sacrificial knife in his right hand . He faces the altar consists of a molded base, which is extended the small figure of Isaac on bundles. The Hand of God emerges from the depths above the altar to stop Abraham. The ram is shown under the latter, quietly tied to a tree. The final element in the upper right is a tent at the entrance of which stands, also back, a little character.
The identification of this last detail is problematic because it does not appear in the biblical narrative, unless we see one of two attendants accompanying Abraham and left behind him at the time of sacrifice - which has little meaning or iconographic parallel . Other commentators saw Isaac after divine intervention , Abraham near the tent high for the Feast of Tabernacles , or Ishmael in reference to some rabbinical texts, to name only the main proposals . But the most satisfactory hypothesis comes from a rapprochement with E. Goodenough with a fresco much later ( fifth century - the sixth century ) of the funeral chapel of El Baghawat in Egypt : the sacrifice is represented with a spectator in the background, a woman identified by a registration as Sarah , according to a Jewish legend claiming that Satan Sarah carried on the place of sacrifice to make her suffer .
Sacrifice of Conon, Temple of Bel at Dura-Europos. The presence of this character is not the only detail which differs from the biblical narrative fresco: the Hand of God replaces the angel of the text to appear divine intervention, the ram has not taken the horns in a bush but it is tied to a tree. Some of these changes are reflected in subsequent representations of the episode, but others have few equivalents: Isaac here unattached and lying on the pyre of the altar, is more frequently found bound and knelt before the altar - for example on the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus (see cons). Especially, only the Hand of God and the ram are shown in profile on the fresco of Dura, the other characters turn their backs to the viewer.
This portrayal of the protagonists back to the scene, unique in its kind, has been interpreted in various ways. The most obvious, perhaps, is that the characters are turned to the Hand of God, so as to emphasize that divine revelation, but this is not the case in other comparable instances, certainly later. It also goes against the principles of art composition douren, high impact Palmyrean , which dominates the frontal. The economy of biblical narrative is not sufficient to explain this particular iconography. According to H. Kessler , this posture could first show the desire to avoid any drift allegedly idolatrous too iconic figures in this particularly sacred space of the synagogue. Specifically to the use symbols (the temple, ritual objects) to decorate the aedicule reflect a keen awareness of the sacred nature of the architectural form of the same dome: it was indeed used in the temples of the neighboring synagogue to house cult images. The lack of iconic imagery in the place where she was the most anticipated in the worship space would be indicative of the nature of the God of the Jews, and the relationship between them . Similarly the representation of the sacrifice of Isaac could be seen as a negative echo scenes from pagan sacrifice in temples contained dourens relatives, like the Temple of Bel , where a mural depicts the Conon priest sacrificing to his gods (see cons ): the sacrificial gesture interrupted Abraham, as symbols of worship in the left spandrel panel, the statement would mean the rejection of blood sacrifice as the first manifestation of Jewish beliefs .
H. Kessler, however, read the above representation of the sacrifice of Isaac fully developed as a replacement of the shofar, and a first step towards a narrative art that finds its expression in the second stage decor. The liturgical function is to remind God's promise to Abraham by God on Mount Moriah ( Gen. xxii, 16-18 ): the role of this figuration of the QAHBE would therefore affirm the historicity of that promise and confirm its validity, despite the claims of early Christianity, for whom the coming of Christ fulfilled the promise and so has nullified the covenant between God and Abraham's descendants. The gold of the Temple over the Torah gives an eschatological value: so that this time and it symbolizes the messianic fulfillment yet to come to the divine promise . For R. Hachlili , the uniqueness of the representation of the sacrifice of Isaac in Doura distinguishes both Jewish and a few other instances especially the many Christian representations of this theme. It shows the fundamental difference of symbolic interpretation of this episode behind the various iconographic models: for the Jews, the QAHBE is a symbol of life, belief in divine assistance and renewal of the Alliance, which justifies the prominent place given to the pattern in the synagogue for Christians, however, the sacrifice of Isaac is primarily a foreshadowing of the crucifixion of Christ , which explains the popularity of this theme in funerary art of the catacombs.
While the sacrifice of Isaac is represented as a narrative scene, its significance is primarily symbolic, because of its association with the two major symbols of worship that are the menorah and the Temple on the front of the niche . These three major elements of decor are more bound by their common location on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, both the site of the sacrifice of Isaac and the Temple of Solomon in the messianic vision created by the combination of these symbols is on Mount Moriah, a privileged place of the divine presence, which is the big gathering of the end of time .
The mural above the niche
The center of the west wall above the ark, is the only one to receive a painted decoration in the first phase of development: then covered during the redecoration of the synagogue, this mural is only partially conserved. It is therefore subject to debate and interpretation remains the most controversial .
Central panel of the west wall with the various stages of decoration layers: the vineyard of the Lord and the blessings of Jacob. The central motif is a large vine with solitary trunk , from which arise many branches filled with leaves and tendrils green, and perhaps enhanced with stucco embossed rosettes . Two secondary motifs are arranged either side of the trunk: the left, a backless seat on which is placed a large oval object , probably a cushion supporting a spherical object, while another round object rests earth, perhaps a foot rest , right, two lions rampant golden yellows clashed and serve to support a table top, which parallels can be found on Mesopotamian seals . These two objects are identified respectively with a backless throne and ceremonial table .
The vine is a very popular decorative motif in ancient art, particularly in relation to religion Dionysian. She also appeared on many Jewish monuments, including the Temple of Jerusalem : according to Flavius Josephus , the great gate of the Temple rebuilt by Herod is decorated with a golden vine with hanging clusters , found also on Jewish coins. The pattern is then repeated in many synagogues. The vine symbolizes life and ecstasy, fertility and regeneration, the relationship of God to his people . In Isaiah (v. 1-7) , the vineyard of the Lord is the people of Israel . The great vine of the synagogue is often interpreted as the Tree of Life , itself perhaps a symbol of the Garden of Eden : its association with a throne and a table then evoke a messianic banquet given by David in Garden of Eden .
The vines in the vineyard of Doura are distinguished by their absence, however, clusters. Kessler pulls it impossible to represent the Tree of Life usual and it offers an alternative interpretation, eschatological one, the pattern , based on two passages from the prophets Isaiah (iv, 2) and Zechariah (viii, 12) that connect the fruiting of the vine to the coming of the Messiah. Moreover, the massive vine and its branches may recall the biblical metaphor of the Messiah as "branch" or "just shoot" (in Hebrew, tsemach) of the tree of David, present in Jeremiah (xxiii, 5) or still in Zechariah (vi, 12) . The absence of fruit therefore has a value that changes the messianic symbol that is the vine. It is reinforced by the other two symbols associated with the empty throne and table.
The image of the empty throne, prepared in anticipation of an absent king or future, is also common in ancient pagan iconography, especially to represent the empty throne of Alexander as a passage from Diodorus of Sicily (xviii, 60, 6) . In the Jewish context, it is the heavenly throne, prepared for a "real judge" in the tent of King David ( Isaiah, xvi, 5 ), then resumed an eschatological symbol in Christian art with the pattern of htimasie , awaiting the return of Christ at the Second Parousia.
Under this interpretation, the table of lions to the right of the vine is, rather than the table of a messianic banquet, to accommodate the display scrolls of the Torah that the Messiah will explain to the faithful, according to Genesis Rabbah . The decor of the table feline strengthen this messianic tone. The empty table is another symbol of the expectation of the Messiah, as opposed to the display supports an open Bible found in Christian art to signify that the Messiah came and he brought his people a New Testament .
All of this first mural incorporates familiar and iconographic elements of pagan art to transform the perspective of a Jewish eschatological. The Midrash of the Alphabet Akiva ben Joseph associates in the same comment the throne of the Messiah in the Garden of Eden, his preaching a "new Torah", ie all elements in the fresco of Doura, which would have been inspired by an older text . In general, the painted decoration of the synagogue at this early stage shows the influence of midrashic literature. This first composition is essentially non-figurative, despite the representation of the QAHBE - the conventions used to make it a "symbol narrative" instead of an actual narrative scene. But it is a first step towards the adoption of a figurative art that finds its expression in the frescoes of the synagogue after .
The frescoes of the second phase
Organization of the painted decoration of the second synagogue, second phase: the narrative panels. The painted decoration of the synagogue was completely taken about six years after its construction, about 250 , and the four walls of the assembly hall completely covered with frescoes to a height nearly seven meters. The paintings are divided into five horizontal registers of unequal height, with three episodes are devoted to biblical narrative: on the surface preserved, there were 58 different scenes covering 28 separate panels, combining some more scenes. which would correspond to 60% of the original program . The existence of extensive frescoes decorating the hall of worship is not in itself an innovation of the synagogue, their own organization in horizontal registers bunk which is found in the palaces Assyrian antiquity: places of worship pagan neighbors have Doura Europos such sets, whether the temple of Zeus Theos , that of Mithras or above the temple of Bel. The size of its overall condition and, first, its unique place in Jewish art, which make these frescoes of the second phase exceptional .
The lower register, immediately above the banquettes, is a strip of 0.70 m tall decorated with small rectangular panels, the upper register, under the ceiling, is not retained but is a trompe-l ' eye molded architraves supported by pilasters painted the corners of the room. The three registers median, those with the narrative panels, have been designated, from top to bottom with the letters A, B and C and panels numbered for easy referencing (see diagram cons) . Their respective height is 1.10 m (A), 1.50 m (B) and 1.30 m (C) .
The central west wall murals
It is on the west wall murals that are best kept as the wall is parallel to the wall, and only separated by the width of the street: it was therefore found in the greater thickness of the embankment, and was almost fully covered. Only signs in the upper south-west were partly (WA2) or completely (WA1) destroyed. The organization of the panels on the wall below a certain symmetry - with a slight shift towards the south - on both sides of the central axis that is the niche of the Torah .
The central panels: initial alterations
Because of the existence of the Ark and its role in the cult, the scenery panels which surmount acquires a special significance: it is reflected somehow in the attention that is given by sponsors and implementers of the decor, as they are repainted twice, according to a timeline that is not always clear . Initially, the original pattern is retained but new pictorial elements are added and alter its meaning. In a second step, this composition is changed again, and the space divided into two symmetrical panels themselves framed by four vertical panels side, making the transition with registers A and B .
King David of Israel, fresco in the center of the upper register of the west wall. The upper register, above the tree of the original decor, a group receives first appeared, consisting of three characters: the center, a man sitting on a throne, dressed as a prince of Iran , with a kaftan and trousers embroidered , and whose head, lost, was probably covered with a curved cap similar to figures comparable to other panels (eg Ahasuerus panel WC2) , on both sides of the throne, taking up two men standing, wearing a Greek, a chiton and a himation. Clothing and poses the central character describe him as a royal figure, authority, assisted by two counselors. This king who has replaced the shaft of the Act beyond the niche itself as a messianic figure, referring to the prophecy of the blessing of Jacob in Genesis (XLIX, 10):
"The scepter will not escape to Judah, nor the authority to his descendants, until the advent of Shilo which people will obey. "
The messianic character of this passage is accentuated in the Targum Onkelos :
Kings do not miss those of the house of Judah, nor the scribes, teachers of the law among the son of her son, until the coming of the Messiah King who owns royalty and who to submit all kingdoms. " ,
It is identified either in historic King David or King Messiah promised in the prophecy, the interpretation adopted by many commentators . Both assumptions are consistent with the only change in the lower register in this first step, the addition of a great lion (it occupies almost a third of the space), shown in profile, facing left: the general opinion, this is the Lion of Judah , symbol of the tribe from which the Messiah will be from the same passage from Genesis (XLIX, 9):
"You're a young lion, Judah, when you come back, O my son, with your capture. "
K. Weitzman noted that the Greek costume of the two secondary characters contrasts with that of the king's advisers, other scenes, and in fact corresponds to the holding of the prophets . He concludes that if the king immediately evokes the historical figure of David, in a narrative interpretation of this scene that he prefers, the only two contemporary prophets may be represented are Samuel and Nathan. H. Kessler, who in turn favors the hypothesis of eschatological King-Messiah, in fact the figures related to the rebuilding of the Temple, a necessary condition for the coming of the Messiah: it would be portraits of Joshua son of Yehotsadak and Zerubbabel who rebuilt the Temple after the return from Babylon , or the prophets Zechariah and Haggai .
The central panels: second rearrangements
This first mural was later amended and re-revised: the royal party is kept higher and increased, while being clearly separated from the bottom. This is largely erased by applying a coating red vine-tree and the flanking objects disappear, only the lion is preserved.
David Orpheus
t = "" src = "http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/DSC00355_-_Orfeo_ 28epoca_romana%%% 29_-_Foto_G._Dall 27Orto.jpg/200px-DSC00355_-_Orfeo_% 28epoca_romana %% 29_-_Foto_G._Dall 27Orto.jpg "width =" 200 "height =" 212 "class =" thumbimage "/> Orpheus charming the animals Roman mosaic from Palermo. On this new darker background, and thus better given the rest of the decor of the room is painted in the upper left corner of the lower register a musician seated, holding a lyre , and wearing the usual Iranian royal costume, with a Phrygian cap . This pattern of the young prince charming oriental animals of his music is very common in ancient art: it is that of Orpheus , which is taken later in Christian art as a foreshadowing of Christ. The musician of Doura has been generally interpreted as an adaptation of pagan Orpheus motif to represent King David playing the lyre accompanied by singing psalms, perhaps in reference to Psalm contained in II Samuel (XXII ) , or to Psalm 32 (17) . The pattern is not unique, it is found on a mosaic floor of a synagogue in Gaza in the sixth century , provided with a caption that identifies the Hebrew musician like David.
Christ-Orpheus in the catacomb of St. Marcellin. There is debate among commentators on the significance of this loan iconographic and his loyalty to the pagan model. E. Goodenough draws important conclusions in effect making the composite figure of David / Orpheus a deliberate quotation of the mystic Orphic Hellenistic as a stage of mystical ascent that should lead to the contemplation of the celestial triad in the upper register . But the existence of animals on the mural has been questioned, except that of the lion, the eagle would merely be a decorative element in the back of the throne, the duck and the monkey would be too inventive interpretations by a very fresco damaged . It was also noted that there is no figure comparable to Orpheus in the Jewish legends . The general context of the panel does not call into question the identification of this figure to David, but the use of iconographic pattern of Orpheus would not have understood religious group, according Hachlili : it would simply adopting a common pattern of the musician and delightful animals, adapted to the figure of David, king musician, whose piety is stressed.
David keeping his flock by playing the harp, the Paris Psalter (tenth century). H. Kessler also points out that David as the author of psalms found in the illuminated Byzantine as that of the Psalter of Paris . This does not imply that Christ-Orpheus, whose meaning is itself debated, is derived from the David-Orpheus whose synagogue of Dura provides the first example: the oldest frescoes in the catacombs on this ground it contemporary iconographic and borrowing could be done in parallel. The very fact that the story of Orpheus is not derived from the Hebrew Bible, and therefore can not be in itself carries a meaning Judeo-Christian argues in this direction.
Blessings of Jacob
The bottom panel receives two new symmetrical scenes, depicting a man lying on a couch, while various people are standing around him. Both are drawn from Genesis (XLVIII-XLIX) , respectively, representing Jacob blessing his grandchildren son (right) and his son (left) . According to the Bible, when Jacob had spent seventeen years in Egypt, he fell ill. His son Joseph learner visited him to present his two son Ephraim and Manasseh. Jacob adopted them to give them a rank equal to his own son. He blessed them, using the right hand for Ephraim, indicating a preference on Manasseh unexpected, although it was the elder of two brothers, and despite the opposition of Joseph ( Gen., XLVIII, 18-19 ) . The painter of the fresco met this crucial detail of the story by depicting Joseph trying to oppose the gesture of blessing of his father, whose two arms are crossed so that it can actually bless Ephraim with his right hand. He has instead taken liberties with the story on minor points to the direction of the story: the dying patriarch is depicted as a youngish man with thick hair black, but not sitting on the extended layer - which evokes a bed banquet - and leaning on a cushion. He is dressed in a Greek himation, while Joseph is wearing a Persian court dress . The two brothers are depicted as young boys who turn their backs on their grandfather to face the viewer: the frontal character is a typical characteristic of dourennes frescoes, and reflects an influence Palmyrean.
In vis--vis the first blessing, we find, on the left side panel, the second blessing given by Jacob, this time to his son ( Gen., XLIX, 1-18 ). The patriarch will take the same position and is surrounded by his twelve son placed behind the layer, in two groups of six tightly packed, on both sides of the head of their father, who turned their backs : although the meaning of the scene does not doubt, it should be noted that there is no communication between the characters, because their frontal representation. The same contrast in dress that is also another blessing from the father, dressed in the Greek and son dressed in Oriental. These two scenes reinforce the themes already developed messianic because the blessings of Jacob are the foundation of all the Messianic prophecies, beginning with Shilo .
David, King of Israel
The upper center panel is changed in the same direction. The trio composed by the king and his two companions, are added two rows of figures standing in front of both sides of the original group - seven on the lower level, under the throne, and five or six on the top row, very damaged. These two (or three) new characters, all dressed in Persian costume, representing, assuming the most widespread, the twelve tribes of Israel. C. Kraeling interprets the number 13 which he manages to include two half-tribes, both those son of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, which were adopted by Jacob to replace their father, according to the story depicted in the lower register . Shilo's prophecy (Gen. XLIX, 10) announced by these two scenes, then, finds fulfillment in the historical figure of King David of Israel. The fresco depicts so as K. Weitzmann a historical episode, the proclamation of David as king by the tribes of Israel gathered at Hebron ( II Samuel, V ) . The portion of the King-Messiah of the fresco initial scene narrative would follow the general logic of the second phase of the painted decoration of the synagogue, which landed several scenes of this type. Other interpretations have been proposed, offering to recognize other biblical episodes, but none has emerged .
The vertical side panels
Panel II: Moses and the Burning Bush. The central panels are framed in the first reshuffle by four vertical panels that reinforce the importance of the central field of the fresco. There are four full-length portraits of historical figures, witnesses their life or work of the central message of the scene . All four are dressed identically, a chiton and a himation white, along the lines of "philosopher" Greek. These are not just portraits, however: in each case, some accessories can be linked to a particular episode of the biblical narrative. It is therefore abbreviated narrative scenes . This provision of narrow framing and panels offsetting a central composition is common in ancient art, especially in the Pompeian style late. It is found for example in the last state of Doura Europos mithraeum with figures of Zarathustra and Ostanes enthroned on the pillars on either side of the niche cult .
Panel I: Moses and the Burning Bush
The upper right side panel (in the register A) is without doubt Moses before the burning bush ( Exodus, III ). While watching over the flock of his father-in on Mount Horeb , Moses saw God appeared to him in a bush burning without being consumed. Hiding her face for fear of watching God, Moses takes off his shoes on the instructions of respect for the sacred soil on which it stands. God then instructs him to lead his people out of Egypt. This episode theophanic crucial is reduced by the painter at a minimum: there are no mountains or herd, but only a bush in flames over which Moses stretched out his hand. His boots (of caligae rusticae) are placed before him. In the upper left hand of God is open to Moses is a left hand, the right to appear symmetrically in panel II . She comes out of the sky, a black arc ending the upper end of the panel that accentuates his resemblance to a statue niche. The expressionless face of Moses is as framed in a rectangular field that produces the same effect. One can also see in this pictorial artifice an attempt to emphasize the special status of the character in a way similar to haloes later squares used in Christian art to distinguish the living saints .
Panel II: Moses receiving the Tablets of the Law
The upper left side panel (also in register A) is retained only two-thirds: the upper part with the head of the character represented is destroyed. Man is represented by three quarters, operating movement to the right that requires the existence of an element lost in the upper right corner of the composition. He receives or gives a white rectangular object he holds in his outstretched hands . The man is barefoot, his boots put to him. This last item led some commentators to identify the subject of the confrontation scene between Joshua , the successor of Moses and the angel himself as the "head of the army of the Lord," whose appearance heralds the help God for taking Jericho ( Joshua, V, 13 ). It is indeed the only episode of the biblical narrative with that of the burning bush, where a character must explicitly remove their shoes. In a less anecdotal, the assumption of Joshua based on an overall reading of the four vertical panels, highlighting the difficulty that Moses could be represented twice in this way . Because the most common interpretation is that of Moses receiving the Tablets of the Law , an event mentioned three times in the book of Exodus ( XXIV, 12-18 , XXXI, 18 ; XXXIV ). In comparison with Byzantine illuminations that differentiate the three episodes K. Weitzmann believes that the mural is the second of Doura, where Moses received the Tablets effectively . The shoes retail for some incongruous absent because of the biblical text, can be explained by association with the burning bush episode that takes place in one location. The two scenes are also sometimes represented together in Christian art, as in St. Catherine's Monastery in Sinai.
Panel III: Prophet showing a roller (Ezra or Jeremiah)
In register B, the right side panel is distinguished by high technical quality of his portrait of a prophet, viewed from the front, reading or displaying a large volumen it is widely held up to his abdomen.
Panel III: Ezra or Jeremiah. Laying up the character with the body weight resting on his right leg, gives a slight contrapposto who betrays the influence of a plastic model to be found in the classical statuary. Well adapted to local tastes by introducing a certain rigidity in the expression pattern and modified by the open roll, the model is still recognizable . The head is framed by a square similar to those observed in the other two side panels (I and IV) where the bust is kept: it must serve as a sign of distinction. At the foot of the prophet, in the left corner of the panel is shown an object mounted on two feet, rounded to the upper surface and covered with a red veil: it recognizes in general the Ark of the Covenant , but C. Kraeling sees this as a simple chest rolls, in agreement with its identification of the character .
The interpretation of this panel is in fact highly debatable. C. Kraeling, following R. du Mesnil du Buisson, said that the prophet is shown reading the Act - although the painter has figured lines of text on the front of the viewer's visible roll - and to look for an episode of a public reading particularly important in the biblical narrative. He dismisses the passage of Exodus where Moses reads the Book of the Covenant ( Exodus XXIV, 7 ), for reasons of consistency between the four panels , and proposes to recognize Ezra in this figure: the return of the Jews of Babylon , the scribe collects the people before the Water Gate in Jerusalem and makes her reading of the Law ( Neh. VIII ) to recall the bonds. The figure of the scribe Ezra was very prestigious in the middle of the Babylonian diaspora, because of the pride felt by members that have played one of their key role in this renewal of the knowledge of the Act. The representation of Ezra prominently in a synagogue on the borders of Mesopotamia would not seem strange in this context .
K. Weitzmann argues that the character does not read the roll but exhibits open and subject to its feet was the usual form of the Ark of the Covenant: it depends on this element, which does not fit the story Ezra, we must seek the identity of the prophet. Now the only prophet associated with the Ark is Jeremiah , the Second Book of Maccabees :
"We read the same writings how the Prophet, upon an order from God, made him carry the tabernacle and the ark, and he went and climbed the mountain that Moses and when he contemplated the inheritance of God. Once there, Jeremiah found a home-like cave, and he laid the tabernacle and the ark and the altar of incense, and blocked the entrance. ( II Maccabees II, 4 ) "
Jeremiah and Moses in the spandrels above the opposite of Isaac at San Vitale in Ravenna. For H. Kessler, the veil covering the Ark of the mural could be an allusion to the theme of the Ark hidden and forgotten . As for the exhibition of the scroll of the Law, it can according to K. Weitzmann and H. Kessler referred to another passage about Jeremiah:
"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I make with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new covenant, which will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to pull them out of Egypt. ( Jer. XXXI, 31 ) "
The roll would be the symbol of the New Covenant, and the idea that the Messiah will preach a new Torah in this messianic texts such as the Ecclesiastes Rabbah (XI, 1):
The advantage of the additional passage of Jeremiah in the iconographic context douren is that it refers to the covenant concluded with Moses, episode already represented in the synagogue, in panel II. Jeremiah reading is the equivalent of Moses receiving the Old Covenant, this association later in Christian art, as in San Vitale in Ravenna. The choice of Jeremiah seems doubly justified in view of an iconographic program linking the four figures of the prophet.
Panel IV: Prophet in the heavens (Abraham, Moses or Isaiah?)
The fourth side panel to the left of the fresco in the central register B, is the last portrait of prophet, performing no less controversial than the last. The man in Greek costume this time is a hoary old man, standing, hands crossed before him, and hidden by the skirts of his himation. He stands in the sky depicted above his head with a white bow on which stand the astral symbols of the sun, seven stars and moon, respectively from left to right . A rectangular panel is the head coach of the Prophet, as portraits I and III, the difference here is filled with a deep black that contrasts sharply with the white hair of the portrait .
Panel IV: Abraham, Moses or Isaiah. Many hypotheses have been advanced to identify that character. The main are: Joshua because he did stop the sun and the moon before the battle of Gibeon ( Joshua X, 12 ); Jacob Bethel because the sun has set when he stops ( Genesis XXVIII, 10 ) after the passage of Abraham when God asked him to count, if possible, the stars, because this will be his seed ( Gen., XV, 5 ) . C. Kraeling rules in favor of this solution because Abraham is, according to tradition, the first man to have had gray hair , but also because the gesture of hands clasped and covered accompanies receiving the promise (the birth Isaac) and God's favor (the Alliance) expressed in the passage from Genesis. Another widespread assumption was that of Moses, defended by E. Goodenough and P. Prigent after a comment by Philo of a passage from Deuteronomy ( XXXII-XXXIII ) - the blessing of Israel by Moses at the end of his life - hence the picture of old - before his ascent to Mount Nebo : hands covered with the man in the presence of the Blessed and his head is already figured into the celestial universe would be the fate of the particular iconography of Moses, through whom God gave His Law to Israel . For P. Prigent as for R. Hachlili , this identification should lead to a preference among the options mentioned for panel III representation of Moses reading the Act: it is indeed surprising that this portrait alone is not Moses. This reading has the advantage of the four portraits Symmetric Moses a single program reinforcing the message of a messianic prophecy proclaimed by the central fresco: the law was given to Moses, become the type of the faithful man who is approached God's promise . E. Goodenough did not hesitate for its part in seeing these four performances of its four stages of Moses' mystical ascent " .
H. Kessler, finally, interprets differently the portrait IV, and insists on a detailed iconographic somewhat neglected by his predecessors. The contrast between the illuminated face of the Prophet (whose shadow on the ground is carefully indicated ) and the dark background of the sky for him is a reference to the passage of Isaiah (LX, 1 and 19 -21) :
"Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord shines on you. "
"This will not be the sun that will shine the day nor the moon that will lend you a reflection of its light: the LORD shall be thine permanent light, and thy God glorious splendor. Your sun will never sleep, never your moon eclipse, for the Lord shall be thine inextinguishable light, and that would be the end of your days of mourning. "
The prophecy repeatedly uses the contrast between light and darkness, day and night to reinforce its central theme, the prediction that Jerusalem will be rebuilt and that the Jews will return in glory. He joined other topics already on the scene, the New Jerusalem, the Temple rebuilt and the Messiah. This proposal also allows to read together the four portraits of the prophet, but see only Moses, but two pairs of associated prophets, Moses (II) and Isaiah (IV) to the left of the central fresco, and Moses (I ) and Jeremiah (III) to his right. According to H. Kessler, the two top panels mosaics (I and II) show the reality of Jewish history, while the two bottom panels (III and IV) emphasize the validity of the Messianic prophecies of redemption . The validity of this hypothesis is confirmed by the recovery of these two couples Graphic (Isaiah / Moses at Burning Bush, Jeremiah reading / Moses receiving the Tablets of the Law) in the curriculum of some Christian churches. The most obvious example is the two mosaics of the choir of San Vitale in Ravenna. The theological significance of this program is necessarily different from Christ the King to replace the Jewish Messiah, but the parallel is significant that there is a tradition whose iconographic and theological frescoes of Dura would be the oldest extant example .
The wall and the question of a unitary
The frescoes of the central western wall can not be considered separately from the rest of the murals that surround them and which were carried out simultaneously with the second phase of the latter. This does not mean necessarily that all such records are painted a single program or unambiguous, although many art historians have attempted, with varying success, to interpret it as meaning . One of the first obstacles that such attempt is the incompleteness of the set, since it lacks a little less than half of the frescoes, those on the east wall and destroyed parts of the north wall and south.
Overview of the topics represented
Identification of scenes and themes of the west wall of the synagogue. Register A is the most corrupt since he was closest to the top of the walls: there are only fragments of scenes relating to the reign of Solomon on the left side of the west wall, crossing the Red Sea by Hebrews led by Moses on the right - by far the best preserved part - and the Dream of Jacob at Bethel on the north wall.
The scenes of the register B, which is kept for his part in two-thirds, contains themes of worship interpreted as the story of the Ark of the Covenant since the consecration of the Tabernacle in the wilderness until his transfer to the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. To the right of the niche, found on the north wall, from right to left, in the sense of reading Hebrew, Anne and Samuel to Shiloh , the capture of the Ark by the Philistines at the battle of Eben Ezer , then on the west wall, the Temple of Dagon and the Ark's departure for Israel, and finally his destination, the Temple of Jerusalem. To the left of the niche, is on the south wall, perhaps transporting the Ark to Jerusalem, the gift of living water in Beer, and the consecration of the Tabernacle with Aaron. Commentators have stressed the frescoes on the narrative or liturgical cycle that represent the different scenes that can be read as two convergent series since its south and north ends toward the center . In this perspective, according to J. Gutmann , the middle register of the Ark biblical narrative is linked to the Ark of the Torah which occupies the center of the west wall, its focal point. The register and take a general sense of affirming the effectiveness of the Torah, as a guarantee of salvation in the messianic future that is the subject of the frescoes plants .
The register C is the only one who survived, at least partially, on the four walls of the assembly hall. As for the register A, it is particularly difficult to detect a logical composition of all, whether narrative or symbolic. But several successive panels are separate cycles identifiable. On the south wall, successive four panels depicting episodes from the life of the prophet Elijah. This cycle of Elijah closes on the west wall with a first panel on the resurrection of the son of the widow. Western scenes are not directly following each other from left to right are the triumph of Mordecai (the institution of Purim ), the anointing of David by Samuel, and finally on the larger panel, the childhood of Moses. The north wall has a large mural continues in several scenes detailing the vision of the prophet Ezekiel about the resurrection of the dead and the return of the ten tribes . Finally, the wall is where the only remaining lower part of the register very damaged, include, to the right of entry (ie the north), Saul and David in the wilderness of SiPh , and left (south) a banquet scene not easily identifiable, perhaps the feast of Belshazzar before the fall of Babylon.
A theme unit?
Identification of themes and scenes of north and south walls of the synagogue. Commentators differ on the frescoes question of the existence of a unitary subject which would account for this motley assemblage at first sight of biblical scenes. Some say that all the frescos meets a common theological: to Andr Grabar , is the commemoration of God's sovereignty on the model of the emperor in the imperial art; for R. Wischnitzer is the messianic theme that unifies the representations of hello, ancestors, prophets and heroes, according to E. Goodenough, finally, it would be an illustration of a Jewish mysticism inspired by the writings of Philo of Alexandria . Other commentators, including R. du Mesnil or C. Kraeling see several ideas represented by the frescoes without distinguishing one single theme. For some, it is the liturgical readings of the synagogue to be used as a guide to understanding these paintings .
If the idea of a unitary subject was therefore not imposed, however, that the frescoes are a given program is much more widely shared. The idea is that at least these seemingly disparate examples should illustrate the divine providence towards the Jewish people despite his tribulations and reaffirm the validity of the covenant with God. The scenes would have been selected based on their particular exemplary to describe this idea already present on the decorative canopy Central . The murals serve to illustrate sermons, to give visual support to the biblical narratives in response to competition from other religions in Doura who were using such images . J. Gutmann, in particular, develops the hypothesis that the murals represent the liturgical prayers, ceremonial objects and concepts that should also be reflected in the ritual takes place mainly on the niche of the Torah and the panels depicting the Temple on the west wall. This interpretation is partly based on the idea that the sources of the frescoes are to be found in the literature Targum and Midrash Palestinian contemporary . He said this is not the biblical account but the liturgical procession that creates the link between the different scenes, which must also be understood as warnings theological or religious propaganda with a messianic tone intended, perhaps, to convert the faithful .
Analysis of a selection panel
The panels of register A
NA 1: The Dream of Jacob at Bethel
Seul un fragment triangulaire subsiste du premier panneau sur le mur nord, correspondant approximativement aux deux tiers de l'image originelle : toute la partie suprieure droite fut en effet dtruite avec la synagogue lors de l'amnagement du remblai dfensif. Sur un fond noir, indiquant une scne nocturne, un homme envelopp dans un himation est allong sur toute la largeur du panneau, visiblement endormi, la tte du ct droit et les pieds du ct gauche. Au-dessus de lui, une grande chelle est incline vers le coin suprieur droit. Deux personnages vtus l'iranienne la gravissent. Seule la partie infrieure du corps du second est conserve. L'identification gnrale de la fresque ne pose pas de difficults : la rapporte comment Jacob , sur la route de Bersabe Haran s'arrte pour la nuit et fait le rve d'une chelle reliant la terre au ciel, sur laquelle montent et descendent des anges ( XXVIII, 10-17 ) . La fresque est fidle dans les dtails au rcit biblique : la tte de Jacob repose sur une masse qui ne peut gure tre que la pierre qu'il prend en guise d'oreiller dans le rcit, et dont il fait plus tard un btyle sacr, renommant par la mme occasion le lieu Bthel.
img alt = "" src = "http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/Catacomb_Via_Latina_Jacob_ladder.jpg/220px-Catacomb_Via_Latina_Jacob_ladder.jpg" width = "220" height = "247" class = "thumbimage" /> Jacob's dream on a fresco in the catacomb of Via Latina, IV century The only uncertainty concerns the identity and number of persons climbing the ladder, and the presence or not of God at the top - as is the case on some occasions this Christian theme, in keeping with the biblical account at the close of a passage from Pirke Rabbi Eliezer , where Jacob's dream is interpreted as an apparition of the four kings of Babylon , the Medes , from Greece and Edom (Rome), in a metaphor 'rise and fall of their kingdoms . This hypothesis does not account for the known presence of two figures only, and the lack of available space to accommodate others, even taking into account the partly destroyed. The number two matches in hand to a tradition Targum assigning two angels guards Jacob . Their appearance is not an obstacle: there is no winged angel on the frescoes of the synagogue because the angels are represented wingless until rather late in the Jewish and early Christian art. They are regarded as male princes of the heavenly and divine court dressed as such. The mural of Jacob's dream in the catacomb of Via Latina takes also the same iconographic model for the angels also representing wingless . On the destroyed part, the prevailing view is that it would simply represent the upper end of the scale, may be pressed against the sky, which could possibly include the Hand of God already present elsewhere on fresco .
The placement of this scene at the northwest corner, near the Western Wall holy, emphasizes its importance: God promises Jacob to give him land and descendants, which is really the founding of Israel .
WA 3: Exit from Egypt
Throughout the northern part of the register A, between the central panels and the northwest corner, is occupied by a single panel, the largest of the entire program. It consists of three successive scenes from right to left, representing the departure from Egypt, the drowning of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea and the crossing by the Israelites ( Exodus VIII 21 - XIV, 30 ) . In each episode of the story dominated by a monumental figure, Moses represented at a level twice that of other characters, he was twice crowned by the Hand of God that gives him inspiration. So him and his role as mediator between God and the Hebrew people that focuses the attention of the painter, on the occasion of the story, easily identifiable elsewhere, the exodus from Egypt .
WA3, scene 1: the flight from Egypt. The first scene takes place in front of the imposing architecture of a fortified city which occupies the right end of the register: in a castellated tower at the end of a monumental wall, opens a double door, gaping, whose lintel is surmounted by an arch decorated with three statues. Both sides are statues Nikai winged, perched on a sphere-like parapets of the Temple in panels WB2 and WB3. The central statue represents a naked man, wearing a helmet, holding in his right hand a long staff or scepter in left hand and a globe . A shower of hail and sparks fell on the wall, before which are shown to the right of the door, two tall columns, one red and one black, each provided with a molded base and a big Corinthian.
For A. Grabar , these elements serve to identify the apex of the statue is the god Baal Zephon: the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (Exodus XIV, 24) indicates that God is planning a shower of hail and burning coals on the city where the Egyptians go in pursuit of the Hebrews. These camped nearby after being guided by Yahweh in the desert in the form of two columns miraculous of cloud (smoke) by day and fire by night ( Exodus XIII, 21-22 ): the architectural columns and dark red the fresco iconography is a symbol used by the painter to reference . Yahweh to the Hebrews then asked to make a detour to camp near the sea, Pi-Hachirot, opposite Baal Zephon. The Targum identifies the city as Tanis , adding that it was the only idol of the country not destroyed by the plagues sent by God, the statue of Baal Zephon (Exodus XIV, 2) . A. Grabar believes that the painter of the fresco has figured this detail to highlight the inability of the pagan deity to oppose the departure of the Hebrews.
WA 3, Scene 1: Dipinto Aramaic ID Moses splitting the sea. This interpretation is rejected by C. Kraeling, for which the iconographic detail is too vague to allow such precision: it connects to the statue of Emperor Pantocrator type into the orbit of world domination, coupled with wins and sees a symbol of character "royal" city : so the city of Pharaoh and the Hebrews left What did not the city's camp at Pi-Hachirot , their last stop before crossing the Red Sea . In this case, the most widely accepted, the rain of hailstones and coals is the seventh of the ten plagues of Egypt (Exodus IX, 18-26), certainly before the departure of the Hebrews from at least several days, but is nevertheless shown to explain and symbolize the same time other scourges. For K. Weizmann, another wound was also represented: an approximate retail iconographic poorly preserved - one or more small creatures on the city wall - representations of the scene later in Byzantine manuscripts, he proposed to recognize the Fourth plague, swarms of horseflies sent to the homes of the Egyptians ( Exodus VIII, 21 ) . This reading of the fresco does not undermine the other hand, the column identification guide to the rampart of Yahweh, though they appear in the composition and associated wounds to both, while being rather wait before the people running: the chronological disorder that results is a characteristic of the entire panel. It follows the artist's desire to increase the details in a small space, even at the expense of narrative cohesion .
To the left of the city, the Hebrew people is represented on, as if he had just left. He is represented as four columns of characters: the lower consists of several superimposed rows of Hebrews in short tunics. Some carry bags (probably the unleavened dough prepared as food: Exodus XII, 34), a character is wearing a cup (maybe a symbol of silverware taken from the Egyptians: Exodus XII, 35-36), another holds a child by the hand (an allusion to the passage of Exodus, XIII, 14) . The second and fourth column from the bottom are composed of soldiers armed with spears and shields. They frame the third column, a row of twelve characters dressed in the Greek and shown from the front, unlike other figures: for C. Kraeling, these are the elders of Israel (Ex. XII, 21), which reflects the number of the tribes . For K. Weitzmann, it is indeed a representation of the Twelve Tribes on, but which is independent on the fresco of the fourth column in the sense that it refers to the Book of Numbers ( X, 14 ) rather than that of the Exodus: it is symmetric representation placed at the left end of the panel, which refers to the same passage .
WA3, scenes 2 and 3: Crossing the Red Sea and drowning the Egyptian army. Before the people he is about to cross the Red Sea, the figure of Moses, represented on a scale "heroic" - occupying almost the entire height of the register - brandished over his head with a stick which he about to hit the waves. It is identified by a titulus between his legs, Dipinto Aramaic in white letters which gives the legend of the scene: "Moses, when he came out of Egypt and split the sea "And the sea immediately figured left of Moses is not currently open but instead of just closing because it is full of Egyptians drowning: it belongs to the second storyboard panel. The open sea, however, is figured in the third table where Moses is again represented in the act of splitting the waves, but this time with his stick down. While C. Kraeling puts on account of lack of space this narrative inconsistency , K. Weitzman notes that despite the text of Dipinto, the first Moses' batter 'should be distinguished from Moses' splitting "of an iconographic point of view: it brings this first type of representations of Moses striking a rock in the desert to do gush of water (Exodus XVII, 6), suggesting that they were able to borrow the image of one of the works of Heracles , cleaning the Augean stables - Hercules is sometimes shown striking a rock in a position similar to that adopted by Moses .
The second picture is the drowning of the Egyptians. The surface of the Red Sea is made in a vertical perspective, so it occupies the entire height of the register. It introduces a large rupture in the iconographic center of the panel, and it divides into two equal parts and partly symmetrical. So for the sake of obtaining a composition as unified as possible, according to K. Weizmann, the painter of the fresco which has moved logically should have been the last episode of the sequence . The Egyptians are depicted naked or tunic amid blackwater fish. On the left bank of the Sea, Moses is back, lifted his stick simulating the act of letting the waves close . Dipinto says its only a name and it is crowned by the Hand of God, who made a left hand in hand with that of the third stage.
The main feature of the scene is the lack of weapons and horses of the Egyptians, in complete disagreement with the biblical text ( Exodus XIV, 26-28 ), as with the later Christian iconographic tradition: it would be based K. Weitzmann the only known example of representation of unarmed Egyptians. The very fact that the painter has placed the scene in a central position makes it all the more incongruous detail: we expect the representation of chariots and horsemen mentioned in the text or, as is the case for example on the sarcophagus crossing the Red Sea of Arles or the illumination of the Paris Psalter , the figure of Pharaoh, and defeated. This singularity does not affect the identification of the drowned, except for E. Goodenough who sees that the Hebrews were not considered worthy of being saved : this interpretation has not been followed. C. Kraeling suggested instead more successfully to see an allusion to the comment of Esther Rabbah (III, 14) which relates the words of Rabbi Nathan by which the Egyptians were punished were naked when they drowned in the sea .
Early Christian sarcophagus crossing the Red Sea, Arles, late fourth century. The third and final table at the far left panel represents the crossing of the Red Sea by the Hebrews. It is well balanced in its composition with the first: there are many common elements, the heroic figure of Moses identified by an Aramaic inscription ("Moses when he split the sea"), this time taking his stick down , the rows of soldiers, twelve figures of Veterans frontal or Tribes, overcome by the Right Hand of God, to complement the left of the previous table . Unlike the first scene, there is no upper row of Jewish soldiers, because space is occupied by the corresponding standards, comparable to vexilla Roman, kept the figures of mid-level . Representation of the People in motion - the first row of the stage 1 - is also absent and replaced by the waves apart from the Red Sea, where bound many colorful fish. K. Weitzmann seen in both rows a new variant of the image of the Twelve Tribes as stated later, especially in illustrated manuscripts of Cosmas Indicopleustes to illustrate a sample of Numbers. This choice illustrates his view of the importance of this subject for the painter of the Tribes .
A crucial iconographic detail of this scene is the division of the field behind the figure of Moses in twelve parallel horizontal white bands edged blue on the bottom of the sea R. du Mesnil is the first known illustration of a portion of Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (Exodus XIV, 21) that the wind separated the waters into twelve paths corresponding to the Twelve Tribes of Israel . This detail, which subsequently appears on many Byzantine illumination, to confirm that the scene is much the actual passage of the Red Sea by the Hebrews, not another scene like the water of Marah (Exodus XV, 22 - 25). It also shows, with the appearance of the theme of the Twelve Tribes, which is after the Exodus, the painter of the fresco does not just give a literal illustration of the fresco, but takes liberties with the biblical narrative: it the enriches explanations, or homiletic, midrashic origin. The miracle of the Red Sea is regarded as an event involving not only the historical weight of the Hebrews fleeing Egypt, but the Twelve Tribes of the chosen people, among which the viewer is invited to be included. According to P. Prigent, Moses is designated as the central figure in the history of salvation and is saved with the people the true subject of the panel .
WA 1: anointing of King Solomon?
The first panel at the south end (left) of the western wall is lost in three quarters and many commentators have given up trying to identify it: the fact remains that the lower limbs of two groups of male characters. This is sufficient however to give some indication of the attitude of the characters and especially their dress. In particular, the two isolated figures at the right end of the panel are dressed in the costume traditionally attributed the frescoes of the synagogue to the "prophets" for a (short tunic laticlave himation costume and Greek), and kings officials for the other (Persian costume) . The immediate vicinity of the WA panel 2, right, with the theme Solomon receiving the Queen of Sheba , thus leads C. Kraeling to the hypothesis that the topic of the panel is looking into the period of the Hebrew monarchy: it suggests precisely the episode of the anointing of Solomon by the high priest Zadok ( I Kings I, 38-40 ) . K. Weitzmann approves the suggestion, but reviewing the precise identification of the different characters are represented, the prophet Nathan, Solomon and Zadok .
WA 2: Solomon and the Queen of Sheba
Although it is almost as corrupt as the previous one and leaves again see that the lower part of the original composition, the second panel describes a much more certainly identifiable: many accessories, but two Greek inscriptions in fact significantly reduce the range of interpretations. At stage left, two women stand, dressed in ornate robes. They turned to the right panel where we can see a man standing in Persian costume, and two folding chairs (the type of the sella curule or bench, on both sides of a platform decorated with six degrees their ends carved animals (eagles and lions alternate) . The third step is an inscription in Greek capitals, "", which allows no hesitation in making this installation the base of the throne of King Solomon, specifically described in the First Book of Kings ( X, 18-20 ):
"The king made a great throne of ivory and overlaid with pure gold. The throne had six steps, and the upper part of the throne was round behind: and there were arms on either side of the seat, and two lions stood beside the stays and twelve lions stood there on the six degrees, six each side. "
The presence of eagles, unlike the biblical text, can be explained by the Targum Sheni of Esther describes as the royal throne adorned with twelve lions and twelve golden eagles, which belong to the mechanism of elevation of the legendary King on the throne . A complete representation of a throne identical figure in the frescoes of the synagogue on the panel WC 2 (see below) belonging to the cycle of Esther, in line with the tradition of Esther Rabbah (I, 12) which states that Ahasuerus wanted to sit on the throne of Solomon, but it had to be content to manufacture a copy. The representation of the throne of Solomon is directly inspired by the rabbinic literature, which also states that he was only six steps to distinguish, for respect, the divine throne in their seven (Num. XII st , 17):
"The throne of Solomon was six degrees, symbols of the six heavens. Six and not seven, as it is the exclusive prerogative of the Heavenly King no symbol to represent the world. "
A man dressed in the Greek is standing right of the throne and another, also in Greek costume, is seated on the left. An inscription in Greek capitals indicates its function: " , "assessor". These two figures represent in all probability advisors Grand Sanhedrin . Their presence confirms that the scene depicted is a solemn royal audience.
Two episodes of the story of Solomon can therefore match: the Judgement of Solomon ( I Kings III, 16-28 ) or the receipt of the Queen of Sheba ( I Kings X, 1-13 ). A detailed analysis of the costume of the women shows that the closer their dresses of the ladies of the court of Esther and that subtle differences in their ornamentation denote the right one as the mistress and the woman left her like a servant or lady's companion . Their clothing seems therefore that this might exclude prostitutes Judgement of Solomon, and identifies them as the Queen of Sheba (right) and one of her (left). The man standing between them and the throne would then, according to the Targum Sheni, Benaiah, the chief of palace guards. This identification of the scene is the one that best fits the overall context of the panel: to enhance the kingdom of Solomon, a reflection of the divine majesty, here recognized by the visit of a foreign sovereign .
The panels of the register B
Note 2: Anne and child Samuel to Shiloh
The panel is lost over half its surface. There remains an elongated triangular fragment, of which two thirds are occupied by the crenellated wall of a gray-yellow on a dark sky. At the right end of the table - the most damaged - there are the legs of two figures standing side by side, a woman in black boots and pink dress and a young boy, after his small stature, in red pants . The identity of these two figures can be deduced from the presence on the next panel - left in the direction of reading - the capture of the Ark by the Philistines, it is indeed logical to look for the episode in previous events of historical books, for which he would serve as an introduction . So it would be the scene where the pious Anne takes sanctuary at Shiloh Samuel , the child that God gave in answer to his prayers ( I Samuel I, 21-28 ). This would be for the painter to show the faithful the very beginning of the career of a man who played a crucial role as military leader, judge, and king-maker in the history of the Hebrew people. The Targum Pseudo-Jonathan says about the passage from I Samuel II, 1-10 Anne would have prophesied the fate of his son and of Israel, this tradition probably accounts for the presence of this scene among the frescoes of the synagogue, being given the subject of the following panels . Some commentators have proposed to see in the adult character, not Anne, but the high priest and mentor, Samuel, Eli .
NB 1, right: the battle of Eben-Ezer. C. Kraeling also considers that a change in color of the sky above the wall indicates that the upper panel was devoted to the representation of another scene, nightlife: Samuel slept in the sanctuary of Shiloh and awakened by a voice that it believes to be that of Eli but that is other than God who told him the punishment next to the house of Eli ( I Samuel III, 1-14 ) .
Note 1: the battle of Eben Ezer
The longest panel of register B (3.83 m) which has been preserved is one whose subject seems the more challenging . It is divided into two tables. The first, right, represents a battle scene, with two riders battling to start at center, one on a white horse, the other on a black, while the lower and upper registers are occupied by Infantry fighting, trying to turn against one of the participants.
The second picture, left, shows a more peaceful scene: four men dressed in short tunics carry on their shoulders a bier on which the Ark of the Covenant away from the battle. The Arch has the shape of a yellow box with a high domed lid: it is the usual synagogue aron, represented in frescoes on several occasions, with some variation of detail in the decoration . In the foreground before the Ark and the background as if suspended in air by a convention common in the iconographic art of late antiquity, shows three pairs of soldiers escorting the Ark, brandishing swords and Shields .
NB 1, left part: making the Ark at the battle of Eben Ezer. Because of its place in the sequence of panels on the history of the Ark in the register B, the battle can hardly be depicted as that of Eben Ezer , described in the First Book of Samuel ( IV, 1 - 11 ). It brings into effect the realization of the prophecy of Samuel the sanctuary of Shiloh, when the Philistines defeated the Israelites and kill the son of two high priest Eli, who himself died at the news. Seeing that the battle turned to their disadvantage, the Hebrews had brought with them the Ark he considered a true Palladion : it thus falls into the hands of their enemies, who take home, which would be the meaning of the picture left Panel . The loss of the Ark was considered a disaster, national and religious, one of the largest experienced by the Israelites, it may seem surprising that this humiliating episode was included among the subjects of the frescoes of the synagogue. C. Kraeling believes that crucial evidence is precisely the role of these frescoes, the depth of the Jewish faith and understanding of the historical process . P. Prigent attempts to circumvent the problem by offering a somewhat different picture of the left: he said he would represent the arrival of the Ark, made by the Israelites on the battlefield, not the start of the Philistines winners . The scene is less faithfully by him to tell the biblical story to celebrate the Ark, a symbol of God's presence. The hypothesis of C. Kraeling majority remains, disagreement on most often only on certain iconographic details, such as the identity of the holders. And K. Weitzmann considers that the identification of carriers of civilians philistines is unlikely and that, instead of seeing Jewish prisoners .
WB 4: The Ark among the Philistines
WB 4: the Ark and the Temple of Dagon. The WB panel 4 continues the story of the Ark represented on the same register of the north wall. It contains two tables side by side. At right, a Greco-Roman temple portico is shown with its Corinthian columns side brought on the same plane as the pediment of the facade . It is open and lets see inside two bases representing cubic pedestals of statues, altars of worship rather than , surrounding an empty table. In front of the temple, the floor is littered with numerous objects indiscriminately, among which are the sacred vessels, thymiateria , chandeliers, and two statues of the same type, one with a broken foot and another beheaded . The god represented by these statues wearing a costume consisting of an Iranian tunic fastened with a belt at the waist and reaching to her knees, baggy pants, high boots and a soft cloak. The left hand rests at the waist on the hilt of his sword whose scabbard is clearly distinguishable. The right hand holds a long stick, similar to a thyrsus. The portrait seems that of a young man.
At left, the second table panel shows the Ark of the Covenant mounted on a trolley luxuriously decorated and surmounted by a canopy that protects it. The carriage is pulled by a pair of oxen led by two men in suits Iranian and away from the scene of destruction of the temple. In the background, three men dressed in the Greek attend the departure of the carriage .
The episode shown at right is the destruction brought by the ark in the temple of Dagon ( I Samuel V, 2-4 ) relate to the Philistines Azot Ark taken Eben Ezer and place it in the temple Dagon beside the statue of the god. The next day, they find it lying on the ground, intact, before the Ark and put it back in place. The next day the statue fell again but this time his head and his hands are broken. The Philistines then decided to move the Ark to another city, but regardless of where they send it, it brings only devastation. The painter of the synagogue has brought the two episodes on the same fresco and split to do the image of the statue and the basis on which it rested in the temple.
Style and technique of the frescoes
Technique
The frescoes are made in the secco technique, with a binder that was not recognized (egg or gum arabic ). The application surface is a cast of gypsum (a very common rock in the region) rather crude containing many impurities . The painter began by sketching a design on the coated charcoal or a brush: the collection of this pattern is visible for example on the panel where the paint chipped Moses left shows the surface preparation. Maybe after approval of the preliminary drawing by the Sponsor, the colors were applied from the bottom and then get to the major surfaces making up the various reasons. The design details were then added by plotted in darker colors. The color palette used is relatively small: brick red, yellow, pink, brown, green, and black. Dilution or concentration of these basic tones used to obtain additional nuances. This technique does not differ from that seen in the frescoes of the other buildings at Dura Europos .
Composition
From the perspective of the composition, the general impression is that the frescoes obey a overall design, with a strong enough organization symmetrical on both sides of a centerline corresponding to the niche of the Torah and overcoming the frescoes. Episodes of different stories unfold on both sides of this axis is converging toward him, or deviating. It is also likely that the west wall, the most symbolically important and liturgically, was first decorated in three registers, and that they were then extended on the side walls to walk around the room. The existence of a painted one wall in the West in the first phase of the second synagogue, the thematic unity of register B (the story of the Ark), the continuity of certain courses of wall to wall 'autre (le cycle d'lie depuis WC 1 jusqu' SC 4), sont autant d'arguments en faveur de cette hypothse .
Onction de David par Samuel (WC 3) : exemple du hiratisme frontal des personnages des fresques. La division des parois en registres horizontaux distincts est un principe commun dans l'art antique, mais la synagogue se distingue dans la faon de les sparer. D'autres ensembles peints de Doura qui possdent des fresques de composition gnrale comparable ont recours des lments architecturaux, peints ou non, pour distinguer les diffrents registres. Les artistes de la synagogue en utilisant de larges bandes peintes noires comme cadres des registres et des panneaux ont rejet tout effet illusioniste dans l'organisation gnrale des fresques, qui sont ainsi strictement compartimentalises. Cette forte sparation introduite par les cadres est aussi renforce par les variations de la couleur du fond des panneaux : chaque panneau possde en effet son propre fond color qui contribue la fois le distinguer des panneaux voisins et renforcer son unit narrative lorsqu'il comprend plusieurs scnes. Par exemple, le fond des scnes de l' Exode (WA 3) est uniformment jaune, celui du cycle d' Esther et Mardoche (WC 2) uniformment vert .
Si les 28 panneaux prservs reprsentent environ 59 pisodes du rcit biblique le compte varie selon les identifications retenues par les commentateurs 11 constituent, selon la terminologie de K. Weitzmann , une monoscne tandis que les autres combinent deux scnes ou davantage. Les scnes sont composes de faon strotype. Elles comprennent le ou les personnages ncessaires pour la reprsentation du rcit ainsi que les accessoires et les objets essentiels leur identification ainsi qu' celle de l'action correspondante. Des conventions rigides gouvernent la reprsentation des diffrentes catgories de personnages et d'lments du dcor dans lequel ils sont placs : rois, courtisans, fantassins et cavaliers, mais aussi difices (temples, autels, remparts ou tentes) et objets ( menoroth , thymiateria , etc.) sont figurs de faon rptitive en utilisant des formules gnriques probablement empruntes des catalogues de motifs . Chaque pisode est rendu de faon hiratique, statique. Les figures et les objets sont juxtaposs et ne se fondent pas dans une composition unifie .
Style
Le style des peintures est trs loign la fois du naturalisme de l' a href = "% C3% Art_hell A9nistique" alt = "Hellenistic"> Hellenistic art as descriptive realism of Roman historical reliefs . This detachment of the artist vis--vis the human anatomy is also reflected in the treatment of draped clothing, purely linear or calligraphic, unrelated to the body they enclose.
In this style, marked by repetition and the schematic, the artist must use special tricks to score the importance of a protagonist, so it's the isolation or especially a disproportionate size, which can introduce a hierarchy between the characters - and Samuel 's anointing making David (WC 2). The figures seem to float in space in two dimensions, not directly with their peers or neighbors accessories.
These different characteristics are not unique to the paintings of the synagogue, they found not only in other large paintings of Dura Europos, but even more generally in the art Palmyrene, and even wider Middle East. They even tend to the middle of the third century to gain influence in official art and Roman are some of the main features of the art of late antiquity.
Graphic and written sources of frescos
Fight scenes in the Ambrosian Iliad , V century "We stood together in silence and mute astonishment complete. Someone from there by chance and saw the paintings emerge suddenly from earth would have been surprised. If he was an archaeologist of classical antiquity, knowing how the paintings that have survived from the classical period are few, it would have been even more amazed. But if he were a biblical scholar or a scholar of ancient art, and was told that the building was a synagogue, and that the paintings were of scenes from the Old Testament, he did would have simply not believed. This could not be done, there was absolutely no precedent, and there could be. The Ten Commandments of severe injunction against the manufacture of graven images was sufficient to prove him right. "( Clark Hopkins , referring to the shock of the discovery .)
The discovery of the frescoes of the synagogue caused a shock among epistemological art historians and theologians: the very existence of these paintings at a time as high and in a small provincial town as far away from major centers of contemporary art production seemed to go against everything that was required to set on the aniconism Jewish one hand and the development of Christian art on the other. The size and wealth make even the iconography in effect for the least improbable that it can be an isolated initiative and creation of a purely local. The similarity of the iconographic conventions adopted to illustrate some themes almost contemporary with the frescoes of Christian catacombs Roman or Byzantine illuminations later reinforces this observation: the very impossibility that the frescoes of Dura Europos have been themselves the iconographic sources of Jewish and Christian art arises from the posterior short existence of the monument (less than a decade, clearly established by the inscriptions) and its marginal geographical location. This pictorial whole is therefore the testimony of a literary and artistic tradition that historians have attempted to find from the first years after its discovery, in a particularly rich historical debate and regularly renewed.
The sources of the biblical narrative frescoes
Illuminated Manuscripts
Moses Receiving the Law, Folio 76r of the Ashburnham Pentateuch , VI century One of the most common assumptions about the origin of the frescoes of the synagogue is the existence of Jewish illuminated manuscripts, which the painters of Doura Europos reportedly used as models. The Jews have shown cycles of narrative scrolls Septuagint and other texts in the same way extant illustrated narrative cycles of classical Greek texts, especially of Homer. It's in the diaspora, particularly in Alexandria , the Hellenistic Jews had made these illuminated manuscripts, to make Judaism more appealing to the Gentiles by transforming the biblical epic poems in cycles similar to Greek mythology and illustrated their model . C. Kraeling and supports the close relationship between the biblical narrative and iconography of narrative scenes from the synagogue requires the use of illuminated manuscripts for several reasons: the frescoes depict subjects from specific biblical books, they follow the thread of the narrative Biblical episode by episode, in two cases in particular (I Samuel and Exodus) the story begins with a scene depicting the first chapter of the biblical book . The result for C. Kraeling that most of the images already exist in the form of miniatures in illuminated manuscripts of parts of the Bible. They were then transposed onto the murals that are so because of accidents of history, the earliest form under which they are preserved .
The theory of K. Weitzmann
This assumption is developing particularly brilliant scholarship with the work of K. Weitzmann. It incorporates the work of A. Grabar and E. Kitzinger showing how painters and mosaic artists decorate medieval churches illuminated manuscripts used as models for their compositions. Two examples are well documented: the Ashburnham Pentateuch , dated seventh century , and known in Tours since the ninth century , became the model for the frescoes of the church Saint-Julien in the eleventh century , the Cotton Genesis , an illuminated manuscript of the fifth century was in turn used by the mosaic of the Basilica San Marco in Venice that drew in its approximately 359 subjects from 100 miniature scenes mosaic . The process of transposing the narrative scenes of miniature scale monumental frescoes leads to many changes that K. Weitzmann reduced to a set of ten principles: (1) the selection of scenes from the impossibility of transferring the entire narrative cycle of miniatures (2) changing the format due to the greater stresses of the medium, (3) compression figures to fit on the same portion of the support, (4) the omission of certain items to save space, (5) the addition of details on the contrary, (6) the merger of several new scenes by economy of space, (7) change in the composition of a scene (8) changing iconographic debt to another tradition (9) the stylistic change by adapting to local tastes or contemporary (10) modification provided by the very process that involves the transfer through a medium .
By comparing the frescoes in the synagogue later Christian frescoes, especially the Byzantine illuminations, K. Weizmann confirmed their high similarity and undertakes to demonstrate, panel by panel, that their differences are not accidental but are the logical application of its ten principles of transposition of the illumination in monumental pictorial art. For example, the panel of Moses and the burning bush is of narrative character, despite its superficial resemblance to a simple picture: compared to the treatment of the episode in the Octateuque the Vatican ( gr. 746 , fol. 157r) with two thumbnails corresponding to the two narrative time (burning of bush and loosening to obey God's instructions), the panel applied to the model Doura melting processes, failure and shrinkage of iconographic theme, mainly to reduce the space Narrow allotted on the wall. These images are different according to K. Weitzmann of the iconographic tradition and imply the existence of one or more common models, so prior to the construction of the synagogue in the mid- third century. It recognizes that the existence of a fully illustrated Bible would be impossible in practice, given the large number of thumbnails that already have individual books of illustrated manuscripts which have survived (the Cotton Genesis, the Vienna Genesis , the Pentateuch of 'Ashburnham and Quedlinburg Itala ) so there would be several models or model is limited to a few biblical books. It could be a Octateuque , given the similarities of the frescoes of Dura Octateuques with thumbnails of the Vatican, but it is not certain since the decor, as it is preserved, contains no scenes of books of Joshua , the Judges or Ruth. Other illuminated manuscripts could be involved: for example, the panel of Ezekiel , which is the best example of a purely narrative illustration, where an episode is divided into several phases in quick succession by a process unique to miniature could have been inspired by an illustrated book of Homilies of Gregory Nazianzen : The Codex Parisinus Graecus 510 , dated ninth century could be a remote copy .
Whatever the hypothetical case illustrated in biblical manuscripts, K. Weitzmann believes that art fully developed narrative frescoes of Dura enough to demonstrate their existence. Copies available to the painters of Dura would come from a library of Antioch , the city nearest where the illuminations were copied or simply viewed.
Criticisms of the theory of K. Weitzmann
Sacrifice of Isaac, a mosaic pavement of the synagogue of Beth Alpha, VI century The theory of K. Weizmann was the subject of detailed reviews, because of its very method. R. Hachlili summarizes the main points of disagreement . No illuminated manuscripts dating from the third century , nor even evidence of their hypothetical existence. The oldest manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls , dated between the second century BC. BC and the second century are thus devoid of artwork. It therefore obliges K. Weitzmann, which he readily acknowledges, to use only comparisons with illuminated manuscripts much later. The principle of the illuminated manuscript as a model for a monumental fresco is also attacked as impractical because of the nature and price of these manuscripts. The existence of Jewish narrative cycles illustrated the origin of an iconographic tradition continuing until the medieval period is contradicted by what is known about the subsequent development of painting Jewish themes present in the synagogue Doura are treated very differently when they reappear on the floor mosaics of the synagogue - and the sacrifice of Isaac in the synagogue of Beth Alpha or David / Orpheus in the Synagogue in Gaza. But above all, most narrative episodes dourens have no equivalents in the art of late antiquity synagogue. Conversely, the cycle of Samson developed on the mosaic of the synagogue of Mopsuestia is absent in Doura .
Monumental art as a model
Alternative source of inspiration for painters of the synagogue often contemplated, the decorative programs of other monumental buildings or non-Jews could act as role models. C. Kraeling highlights the importance of contacts, certified by the Numismatic between the Jewish community at Dura Europos and regions of northern Mesopotamia and eastern Syria , namely the Commagene , the Osrohne and Adiabene including local potentates are often favorable to the dynasty of Herod and the Jews in general: for example, Queen Helen of Adiabene and son Izat II convert to Judaism around AD 30. It evokes the possibility that these dynasties have funded the construction and decoration of synagogues in these regions, which could have served as prototypes for the biblical frescoes of Dura . As for the masks and animals of the lower frieze, C. Kraeling them back to another tradition of monumental decoration, home this time, many examples were found in Doura but also throughout the Mediterranean world.
The existence of other hypothetical painted synagogues do not question, for C. Kraeling, the idea of illuminated manuscripts that have been used also and even primarily, from iconographic models. ML Thompson, however, develops this alternative hypothesis in completely reversing the interpretive paradigm of K. Weizmann: From his research on Pompeian frescoes , it recognizes that the repetition of certain motifs implies the existence of models, but argues that they are more limited in scope than full narrative scenes, which allows them to recombine at will to compose original frescoes. It therefore rejects the idea of miniatures as models, it seems, moreover, go against the natural movement patterns of transmission from the art "major" is painting the monumental third century to art " minor "then what illumination : they are, she says, illuminated manuscripts that would draw the monumental frescoes, and not vice versa.
There have been other synagogues to painted walls is partially confirmed by archeology: to Rehov , fragments of frescoes bear floral and geometric designs, and a menorah-shaped tree. Other sites synagogue gave fragments of painted plaster, at Huseifa , Ma'oz Hayyim , Hammath-Tiberias , Beth Alpha and Hammath Rimmon. It is therefore apparent that the mural was a form of decoration prevalent in ancient synagogues. But so far, no such cycle or even painted narrative scene has yet been found .
Cartons and sketchbooks
Whatever the iconographic sources which were used as models (or miniature frescoes), the consensus among historians is that the frescoes of the synagogue are copies, at least partial, other works of art. The question arises therefore of practical arrangements for the copy: even if the originals were works such as portable illuminated manuscripts, the existence of intermediate models is almost inevitable . R. du Mesnil du Buisson The first assumes that painters have used sketchbooks, and C. Kraeling sees them as one of the sources used in addition to the monumental frescos and an illuminated manuscript lost .
Slightly different is the assumption of ML Thompson which proposes to see in these cartoons directories with simple shapes that can be reused in different scenes, as is the case, she said, in the Pompeian painting. R. Hachlili, whose study of the frescoes of the synagogue is distinguished precisely by studying previous iconography of the motifs employed within the scenes rather than their general interpretation, therefore stresses the pictorial forms, iconography suggest that repetitive the use of cartoons and sketch books. The painters of Dura would have had at their disposal sets iconographic conventions they use for selected scenes and extended cycles of biblical scenes in which they could draw their subjects, and modified at will, according to the wishes of the sponsors and technical constraints such as space . This resumption of conventions and the use of stereotypes Graphic allowed to clarify the meaning of the painted scenes. From a technical standpoint, it also allowed the painter to produce quickly a large number of scenes .
WC 2: a scene of stereotypical hearing, the triumph of Mordecai. R. Hachlili found in the existence of short Aramaic inscriptions (9 dipinti) and Greek (3 only) placed on certain scenes of the west wall an argument in favor of this theory. Only three of these entries can not be reduced to a simple name that identifies the figure with which he is, but just comment on the action: the case of the two dipinti crossing the Red Sea (WA panel 3) and registration designating the anointing of David by Samuel (WC 3). These markings appear in all have been added after the completion of the pattern and belong and perhaps not to the original: they are designed to help the viewer identify the figures painted. That's R. Hachlili an indication that the frescoes are not based on a biblical text written and illustrated . Indeed be expected in this case that the entries cite the biblical text - which is not the case. Uncertainty same commentators murals on biblical texts that illustrate specific as it shows that the Bible is not the direct source of inspiration. However, the use of registered entries is best explained the origin of the paintings is a vast repertoire of patterns or scenes ready for reuse in which the artists came later: a panel to another on the same ground and is frequently used to represent different characters or objects - for example, the shape of the throne, posture and dress of the king are the same in Pharaoh's court scenes (WC 4), the Persian King Ahasuerus (WC 2) and King David (central panel) - which implies a source iconographic easily reproducible, and may require assistance for the identification of an entry - in fact, Ahasuerus is appointed by an inscription .
Traditions and midrashic Targum
An important point of agreement between the interpreters of these frescoes is the role of para-biblical traditions. Graphic shows many details that the biblical narrative is not the only source of inspiration for the subjects of the frescoes, but that they incorporate particular elements of the Haggadah. It is very likely that these embellishments Targum and midrashic traditions reflect pre-existing, which come from the middle Palestinian-Babylonian rather than the Egyptian diaspora . Midrashic elements used were already well known to the third century and represent a popular heritage alive, whose base was in fact the text, but who had undergone specific popular oral traditions and stories change. C. Kraeling identifies no fewer than 40 loans and midrashic Targum . For some commentators such as R. Hachlili and A. Wharton, these loans are the real key to the interpretation of the frescoes that he should therefore be understood as illustrations of popular legends, rather than creating images of a set of texts .
The rediscovery of the synagogue
The frescoes of the west wall during release. The first excavations at Dura Europos begin shortly after the chance discovery of frescoes by British soldiers in 1920 , but must be interrupted due to political instability and insecurity in this region. After the revolt Druze in 1925 - in 1926 , a new excavation project was set up jointly by the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-lettres and by Yale University : The first season takes place in 1928 and is followed by nine others, so great is the interest of the results.
Discovery
The discovery of the synagogue took place during the sixth season of excavations Franco-American : in a particularly successful campaign, however, this discovery is by far the largest. Led the field by Clark Hopkins , the mission understands that year Robert du Mesnil du Buisson , the French deputy director, two archaeologists from Yale, F. Brown and Crosby, and an architect, Van V. Knox. They were joined after the discovery of the frescoes by three specialists, E. Bacquet responsible for their removal, Maurice Le Palud that photograph, and L. Cavro running copies of some of them and also participates in the implementation of plans and catalog finds. This small team working on the site of the last week of October 1932 until the end of March 1933. . It has 360 workers, men and boys alike, divided into three teams: this is a significantly higher number than in other years, although the wage remains unchanged, because at the request of the sheikhs and representative of the French military authorities, Colonel Goudouneix, it was decided to lower the wages of workers in order to hire more. The region suffers from the famine after two years of insufficient rain.
The discovery in the fifth season of the Christian chapel in one of the neighboring islands of the rampart archaeologists decided to focus their attention on the large mound about ten feet high that stretches all along the fortification, the west side of town. A first surface etching reveals the plan of two large rooms whose walls flush reveal a painted plaster . The findings of previous excavations, including large murals of the temple of Bel and the more modest, but a much greater historical importance of the Christian chapel, can assume the existence of a major building.
The niche of the Ark soon after its discovery. Note the berms on either side indicating the parties have not yet been released. Count du Mesnil du Buisson, who had started working in the south of the citadel, soon transfers his team to devote himself completely: he began to dig at mid-slope, about three feet below the tops of walls recognized. The experience of previous seasons showed that a tempera frescoes of Dura could easily be damaged if they were released too carelessly: the search is not continued into the walls, before which is left a berm of a foot thickness about protecting the scenery possible . We need several days of work and to hollow part of the fill, during which archaeologists have not the slightest indication of the magnitude of the surprise that awaits them. Finally, the last week of November, the day comes from removing the berm. Clark Hopkins left a detailed account of the moment of discovery, when the frescoes emerged sand :
"The signal was given and the best of our diggers cleared the layer of soil that masked the west wall. Like a blanket or a series of covers, the earth fell down and revealed pictures, murals, bright colors, amazing, so fresh they seemed to have been painted a month before (...) The work stopped in the other trenches almost. The expedition members who were not already there were called in haste. It was like a dream! In the infinite space of sky blue and gray, empty desert, a miracle happened, an oasis of paintings out of the earth boring. "
Officials of the search quickly understand the unique character and unlikely discovery, thanks to their Aramaic dipinti confirm that this is a narrative cycle decorating the assembly hall of a synagogue. They therefore proceed with caution enhanced the release of walls: the first season, however they do not pursue the search further, although they demonstrate their frescoes are still far from the ground. They fear that the west wall collapsed under pressure from the embankment of the street wall. They still perform exploratory trench in the center of the room along the west wall that allows them to update the niche of the Torah (see photo cons), they first take a seat honorary : only after having deciphered the inscriptions they realize that the building is a synagogue. The exploratory trench book also painted the ceiling tiles, including restrictions Aramaic inscriptions indicating the responsible and the date of the construction .
The excavation and removal of the frescoes
The cover sheet to protect the frescoes. Only A and B registers are cleared. Given the scope of discovery, using archaeological and French military authorities is sought, and made even easier than R. du Mesnil du Buisson is a reserve captain: he comes in contact with Colonel Goudouneix the French headquarters of Deir ez-Zor , whereby a corrugated iron roof is installed on the synagogue to protect the frescoes. This protection is not only necessary but unfortunately even too late: just over two hours after the release of the central part of the frescoes, the sun had already damaged, and the colors had faded considerably, even before photographs may have to be taken. Previous layers of central panels were also becoming visible transparency blurring the details of the latest paintings, and making it more difficult to interpret . The cover sheet can still save most of the frescoes, despite an incident that saw the fragments out to an assembly in a better light to be washed by rain as sudden and unexpected .
Next experience in the temple of Bel, a protective coating is applied immediately to the frescoes, making them some time to their bright colors, but the effect is only temporary, like water thrown on a mosaic to refresh . R. du Mesnil du Buisson undertakes its part to draw sketches of the murals as and when they release, and thus constitutes a valuable material for the first season. The excavations of the synagogue resumed in October 1933 , the seventh season of excavations Franco-American, with a team largely unchanged from a year earlier. A designer from Yale University, Herbert Jacob Gute , joined the team to produce a copy of the frescoes before they are filed. This task is particularly difficult due to damage and wear of the frescoes in some places: C. Hopkins and R. du Mesnil du Buisson even disagree on some particulars of the grounds . Copies of H. Gute are also crucial for the study of the work as difficult. However, for C. Hopkins, the result is the challenge :
"Many of the details of the original paintings were made clearer on the copies, and where degradation had occurred after the copies had preserved the original lines and colors visible before they fade. A careful study of the fragments, where the original colors were best preserved in their original shades, was of great help to make copies. Today to study the combination of color, detail and design, we found the copies better than the originals. Of course, one complements the other, and both are indispensable. "
Once copied, the frescoes could be tabled. L'architecte de l'expdition, Henry Pearson, se charge de cette tche dlicate, la place du restaurateur du muse du Louvre , mile Bacquet, qui n'a pu se joindre l'expdition cette saison-l . H. Pearson dmonte progressivement les assises de briques crues du mur par la face arrire (ouest) pour renforcer le pltre de gypse sur lequel ont t ralises les fresques par un mortier de chaux arm par un lattis de bois. Les panneaux de fresques ainsi consolids sont ensuite dcoups et dposs . Ils sont immdiatement poss plat sous un chauffadage et photographis tous dans la mme position de faon pouvoir constituer une mosaque photographique de l'ensemble. Les panneaux des registres suprieurs doivent en effet tre dposs avant mme la poursuite de la fouille, de sorte que les fouilleurs n'auront jamais vu la synagogue dans toute sa splendeur, avec l'ensemble du dcor peint encore en place.
Damas ou Yale ?
La question se pose ensuite du devenir de cet ensemble. L'autorisation de fouilles prvoyait que les dcouvertes devaient tre partages part gale entre le gouvernement syrien et l'universit Yale. Les deux parties s'accordaient nanmoins sur la ncessit de conserver ensemble les peintures de chaque difice fouill, et donc de ne pas sparer les peintures de la synagogue. La dcouverte, l'anne suivante, du mithrum lui aussi richement dcor, avait en partie dbloqu la situation en permettant un partage quitable des fresques de Doura, l'ensemble compos par le mithraeum et la chapelle constituant une contrepartie acceptable la synagogue. Dans un premier temps, le directeur gnral des Antiquits de Syrie et du Liban, Henri Seyrig , admettant que des fresques juives ne seraient pas ncessairement populaires en Syrie et que leur installation demanderait un muse la hauteur de leur importance, tombe d'accord avec Michel Rostovtzeff , le directeur gnral du projet Yale pour qu'elles soient accordes l'universit amricaine, tandis que la Syrie garderait les autres fresques et trouvailles de la septime saison .
Alors que les caisses contenant les fresques sont envoyes par camion Beyrouth pour y tre embarques destination des E.-U., l'arrangement est remis en question en mars 1934 par les autorits syriennes qui refusent de signer les autorisations ncessaires. L'affaire prend un tour politique, alors que la rumeur attribue une valeur financire exorbitante aux fresques : les partisans du partage initial sont accuss de brader un trsor national. Le snat syrien finit donc par voter le renversement de l'accord : la Syrie conserve la synagogue et Yale hrite des fresques de la chapelle et du mithraeum . Les inquitudes de C. Hopkins sur le devenir des fresques se rvlent infondes court terme puisque le nouveau muse archologique de Damas est rapidement mis en construction : la synagogue y est intgralement reconstruite, avec la cour pristyle et la salle d'assemble complte, plafond tuiles peintes compris, et inaugure en 1936.
Ironiquement, alors que cette reconstruction est indubitablement la pice matresse des collections du muse, et en justifie elle seule la visite, elle est, pour des raisons politiques, presque cache aux visiteurs depuis plus d'un demi-sicle : ferme clef, elle ncessite l'intervention spciale d'un gardien pour tre ouverte, et son existence est peine mentionne dans les guides touristiques officiels. Mme les professionnels n'obtiennent que rarement la permission de les photographier, ce qui explique le manque de bonnes reproductions photographiques des fresques, qui a pu selon AJ Wharton contribuer modifier la perception de cette uvre. Elle note ce propos :
() cet exemple d'images voiles est plus probablement attribuable aux macropolitiques tatiques. Bien qu'elles restent accessibles sur demande, la prsence des fresques de la synagogue n'est annonce nulle part. Mme dans les guides trangers, la synagogue elle-mme est censure dans le plan des galeries du muse . Il ya de bonnes raisons pour cela. Les Israliens et les Syriens sont en tat de guerre depuis qu'Isral a t introduit en Orient par l'Occident en 1948. Par consquent, la production juive n'est pas clbre en Syrie. "
p> AJ Wharton added, however, that the same inaccessibility of the frescoes may have contributed to their preservation: the frescoes of the Christian chapel located at Yale can be photographed but not seen, in the sense that they retain nothing of the original pigments Notes - Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- White 1990, 93.
- White 1997, 276; Hachlili 1998, 39.
- a and b P. Leriche, "Dura-Europos on the Euphrates" (online)
- The residential blocks of Doura Europos contained an average of eight dwellings of 300 m2 each.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- a , b , c , d , e and f White 1997, 277-281.
- The numbers refer to map below cons.
- Kraeling 1956, 28.
- This restitution is based on the observation plane of the neighboring houses: White 1997, 278.
- The space under the new floor is not filled but turned into a cellar accessed from the South: White 1997, 277.
- Prigent, 1990, 179.
- Kraeling 1956, 320.
- Hachlili 1998, 42. It is shown on the plan.
- White 1997, 279, n. 12. See also E. Meyers, "The Niche In The synagogue at Dura-Europos," BA 47 (1984), 174.
- White 1997, 279, n. 12.
- a , b , c and d Hachlili 1998, 97, fig. III-1.
- It still occurs for example in Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 116.
- Kraeling 1956, 31.
- B. Brooten, Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue, 1982, 126-128.
- E. Goodenough, Jewish symbols, 9, 32-34; White 1997, 281.
- White 1997, 281, note 18.
- Hachlili 1998, 42.
- Runesson 1999, White 1997 cons.
- White 1990, 78-79, 1997, 353-356.
- White 1990, 95.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- a , b and c White 1997, 281-283.
- Hachlili 1998, 43.
- White 1990, 77.
- a , b and c Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 116.
- Du Mesnil du Buisson, "The inclusion of the central niche of the synagogue at Dura-Europos, Syria 40 (1963), 310-316. The has. suggests that Sisa is the same individual as the Sisaeon mentioned in a Greek inscription of the domus ecclesiae of Dura-Europos, where he worked in the baptistery. See also White 1997, 293, note 31.
- Prigent, 1990, 179.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 286.
- White 1997, 286.
- a and b Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 117.
- Hachlili 1998, 44.
- a and b White 1997, 283-285.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- Kraeling 1956, 329; White 1990, 177, note 32.
- Goodenough (9) 1964 28.
- Kraeling 1956, 11. See also White 1990, 97 and 177-178, note 35. White believes that in an intermediate state of reconstruction of the complex, before the annexation of housing H, access to the synagogue was made possible by the housing C, while the back wall of the north portico - which we note that it is thinner than the other - is not yet rebuilt.
- J. Obermann, "Inscribed Tiles From The Dura-Europos Synagogue," Berytus 7 (1942), 89-138; C. Torrey, "Aramaic inscriptions' in Kraeling 1956, 261-276; C. Bradford Welles, 'Greek inscriptions', ibid. 277-282, White 1997, 287.
- adapted French translation of the English translation given by White. Following the inscription gives rise to various interpretations and translations. White 1997, 289-290.
- Their exact nature is difficult to explain. Oddly, the Greek title "Archon" This form of transcription in the Aramaic inscription A is absent in Greek inscriptions. White 1997, 289, note 22.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 292, note 27.
- White 1997, 292-292, notes 26-27.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 286; Sed-Rajna Others 121 and 557.
- Hachlili 1998, 98; Kraeling 1956, 54-56.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 118.
- Hachlili 1998, 360.
- Kraeling 1956, 60.
- Hachlili 1998, 361-362.
- Hachlili 1998, 316.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Hachlili 1998, 318-319, fig. VII-7a.
- Hachlili 1998, 279-280 and pl. VI-15.
- Contra Avi-Yonah in Gutmann 1973, 122, who thinks distinguish traces of that object on some photographs.
- Goodenough 1964 (9), 75.
- Hachlili 1998, 239.
- Hachlili 1998, 100.
- Kraeling 1956, 58.
- Abraham's servants are sometimes represented as the mosaic pavement of the synagogue of Beth Alpha, but are shown in the process of leading the donkey Hachlili 1998, 241, fig. V-2.
- Grabar 1941, 144-146.
- Du Mesnil 1939, 23-27.
- St. Clair, 1986, 116-117.
- See the full references in Hachlili 1998, 239.
- Goodenough 1964 (9), 72-74.
- Hachlili 1998, fig. 146, V-5.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Weitzmann and Kessler Kessler in 1990, 155-157.
- Weitzmann and Kessler Kessler in 1990, 155, footnote 7.
- Kessler, in Weitzmann and Kessler 1990, 156.
- Kessler, in Weitzmann and Kessler 1990, 156-157. See also Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Hachlili 1998, 243.
- The argument is advanced for reasons sometimes differ by several commentators on the scene: Kraeling 1956, 362; Goodenough 1964 (9), 71-77, and Simon 1986, 194-196. See Hachlili 1998, 242, for bibliography on this date.
- Tristan 1996, 284, citing E. Goodenough, Jewish symbols In The Greco-Roman Period, I-III, 1953.
- See the remarks of Goodenough (1964 See also
Bibliography
This logo indicates that the source was used for writing the article. - (In) E. Bickerman, "Symbolism In The Dura Synagogue: A Review Article," The Harvard Theological Review (1965) 127-51;
- Robert du Mesnil du Buisson , "The new discoveries of the Synagogue of Dura-Europos", Revue Biblique (1934) 546-63;
- Robert Du Mesnil du Buisson, The paintings of the synagogue at Dura-Europos 244-256 AD (Paris 1939);
- (In) J. Elsner, "Cultural Resistance and the Visual Image: The Case of Dura Europos," Classical Philology (2001) 269-304;
- (In) J. Elsner, "Archaeologies and Agendas: Reflections on Late Ancient Jewish Art and Early Christian Art", The Journal of Roman Studies (2003) 114-28;
- (In) S. Fine, "Iconoclasm and the Art of Late Antique Palestinian Synagogues," in Levine, Lee I. and Weiss, Ze'ev (ed.), From Dura to Sepphoris: Studies in Jewish Art and Society in Late Antiquity (Portsmouth 2001) 183-94;
- (In) S. Fine Art and Judaism In The Graeco-Roman World: Toward a New Jewish Archaeology (Cambridge University Press 2005);
- (In) E. Garte, "The Theme of Resurrection In The Dura Europos Synagogue Paintings", The Jewish Quarterly Review (1973) 1-15;
- (In) ER Goodenough, Jewish Symbols In The Graeco-Roman Period, Vol. 9-11, Symbolism In The Dura Synagogue (New York 1964);
- A. Grabar , "The theme of religious frescoes in the synagogue of Dura (245-256 AD)", Journal of the History of Religions (1941) 143-92; 5-35;
- (In) J. Gutmann (ed.), The Dura-Europos Synagogue: A Reappraisal (1932-1972) (Missoula 1973).
- (In) J. Gutmann, "The Illustrated Midrash In The Dura Synagogue Paintings: A New Dimension for the Study of Judaism", Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research (1983) 91-104;
- (In) J. Gutmann, "Early Synagogue and Jewish Catacomb Art and Its Relation to Christian Art," Aufstieg und Niedergang der Welt Rmischen II, 21, 2 (Berlin / New York 1984), 1313-1342;
- (In) / Span> J. Gutmann, "The Dura Europos Synagogue Paintings and Their Influence Later one Christian and Jewish Art", Artibus and Historiae (1988) 25-9;
- (In) R. Hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology In The Diaspora (Leiden 1998);
- (In) C. Hopkins, "The Excavations Of The Dura synagogue paintings", in J. Gutman (ed.) The Dura Europos Synagogue: a reassessment (1932-1972), Missoula, 1973, 11-21;
- (In) C. Hopkins, The Discovery of Dura-Europos, B. Goldman (ed.), 1979;
- (In) PC Kelley, "Who Did The Iconoclasm In The Dura Synagogue? "Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (1994) 57-72;
- (In) CH Kraeling , "The Meaning Of The Ezekiel Panel In The Synagogue at Dura," Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research '(1940) 12-8;
- (In) CH Kraeling, The Synagogue, The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report VIII.1 (New Haven 1956);
- (In) D. MacDonald, "Dating the Fall of Dura-Europos" Historia, Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte (1986) 45-68;
- (In) J. Magness, "Heaven on Earth: Helios and the Zodiac Cycle in Ancient Palestinian Synagogues," Dumbarton Oaks Papers (2005) 1-52;
- (In) W. Moon, "Nudity & the Narrative: Observations On The Dura Synagogue Frescoes From The" Journal of the American Academy of Religion (1992) 587-658;
- (In) M. Olin, "" Early Christian Synagogues "and" Jewish Art Historians, "The Discovery of the Synagogue of Dura-Europos," Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft (2000) 7-28;
- P. Prigent, Judaism and the image (Tbingen 1990);
- (In) MI Rostovtzeff, AR Bellinger, C. Hopkins and CB Welles, The Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted By The Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, Preliminary Report of Sixth Season of Work, October 1932-March 1933 (New Haven 1936);
- A. Rousselle, Dura-Europos Research: Issues of acculturation and pagan iconography, Christian and Jewish (ANRT Lille 1993);
- (En) A. Runesson, "The Oldest Original Synagogue Building In The Diaspora: A Response to L. Michael White, "The Harvard Theological Review (1999) 409-33;
- G. Sed Rajna, Z. Amish-Maisels, D. Jarrass, R. Klein, Jewish Art, Citadel & Mazenod (1995);
- (En) A. St. Clair, "The Torah shrine at Dura Europos: A Reevaluation," JAC 29 (1986), 109-117;
- (In) Mary Lee Thompson, "Hypothetical Model of the Dura paintings", in J. Gutman (ed.) The Dura Europos Synagogue: a reassessment (1932-1972), Missoula, 1973, 31-52;
- Fr Tristan, Early Christian images. Symbol to the icon, second century-seventh century (Fayard 1996);
- (In) K. Weitzmann and H. Kessler, The Frescoes Of The Dura Synagogue and Christian Art (Dumbarton Oaks 1990);
- (In) AJ Wharton, "Good and Bad Images from the Synagogue of Dura Europos: Contexts, Subtext, Intertexts', Art History (1994) 1-25.
- (In) SM White, The Social Origins of Christian Architecture, Harvard Theological Studies 42, Johns Hopkins University Press:
- Vol. 1, Building God's House in the Roman World: Architectural Adaptation Among Pagans, Jews and Christians (Valley Forge 1990);
- Vol. 2, Texts and monuments for the Christian Domus Ecclesiae in ITS environment (Valley Forge 1997);
- (In) R. Wischnitzer-Bernstein, "The Samuel Cycle in the Wall Decoration Of The Synagogue at Dura-Europos", Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research (1941) 85-103;
- (In) R. Wischnitzer-Bernstein, The Messianic Themes in The Painting Of The Dura Synagogue (Chicago 1948).
Internal Links
External Links
- (In) Frescoes of the synagogue , EIKON Image Database for Biblical Studies, Yale Divinity School
"The scepter will not escape to Judah, nor the authority to his descendants, until the advent of Shilo which people will obey. "
Kings do not miss those of the house of Judah, nor the scribes, teachers of the law among the son of her son, until the coming of the Messiah King who owns royalty and who to submit all kingdoms. " ,
"You're a young lion, Judah, when you come back, O my son, with your capture. "
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- White 1990, 93.
- White 1997, 276; Hachlili 1998, 39.
- a and b P. Leriche, "Dura-Europos on the Euphrates" (online)
- The residential blocks of Doura Europos contained an average of eight dwellings of 300 m2 each.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- a , b , c , d , e and f White 1997, 277-281.
- The numbers refer to map below cons.
- Kraeling 1956, 28.
- This restitution is based on the observation plane of the neighboring houses: White 1997, 278.
- The space under the new floor is not filled but turned into a cellar accessed from the South: White 1997, 277.
- Prigent, 1990, 179.
- Kraeling 1956, 320.
- Hachlili 1998, 42. It is shown on the plan.
- White 1997, 279, n. 12. See also E. Meyers, "The Niche In The synagogue at Dura-Europos," BA 47 (1984), 174.
- White 1997, 279, n. 12.
- a , b , c and d Hachlili 1998, 97, fig. III-1.
- It still occurs for example in Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 116.
- Kraeling 1956, 31.
- B. Brooten, Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue, 1982, 126-128.
- E. Goodenough, Jewish symbols, 9, 32-34; White 1997, 281.
- White 1997, 281, note 18.
- Hachlili 1998, 42.
- Runesson 1999, White 1997 cons.
- White 1990, 78-79, 1997, 353-356.
- White 1990, 95.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- a , b and c White 1997, 281-283.
- Hachlili 1998, 43.
- White 1990, 77.
- a , b and c Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 116.
- Du Mesnil du Buisson, "The inclusion of the central niche of the synagogue at Dura-Europos, Syria 40 (1963), 310-316. The has. suggests that Sisa is the same individual as the Sisaeon mentioned in a Greek inscription of the domus ecclesiae of Dura-Europos, where he worked in the baptistery. See also White 1997, 293, note 31.
- Prigent, 1990, 179.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 286.
- White 1997, 286.
- a and b Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 117.
- Hachlili 1998, 44.
- a and b White 1997, 283-285.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 115.
- Kraeling 1956, 329; White 1990, 177, note 32.
- Goodenough (9) 1964 28.
- Kraeling 1956, 11. See also White 1990, 97 and 177-178, note 35. White believes that in an intermediate state of reconstruction of the complex, before the annexation of housing H, access to the synagogue was made possible by the housing C, while the back wall of the north portico - which we note that it is thinner than the other - is not yet rebuilt.
- J. Obermann, "Inscribed Tiles From The Dura-Europos Synagogue," Berytus 7 (1942), 89-138; C. Torrey, "Aramaic inscriptions' in Kraeling 1956, 261-276; C. Bradford Welles, 'Greek inscriptions', ibid. 277-282, White 1997, 287.
- adapted French translation of the English translation given by White. Following the inscription gives rise to various interpretations and translations. White 1997, 289-290.
- Their exact nature is difficult to explain. Oddly, the Greek title "Archon" This form of transcription in the Aramaic inscription A is absent in Greek inscriptions. White 1997, 289, note 22.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 292, note 27.
- White 1997, 292-292, notes 26-27.
- White 1990, 97.
- White 1997, 286; Sed-Rajna Others 121 and 557.
- Hachlili 1998, 98; Kraeling 1956, 54-56.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 118.
- Hachlili 1998, 360.
- Kraeling 1956, 60.
- Hachlili 1998, 361-362.
- Hachlili 1998, 316.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Hachlili 1998, 318-319, fig. VII-7a.
- Hachlili 1998, 279-280 and pl. VI-15.
- Contra Avi-Yonah in Gutmann 1973, 122, who thinks distinguish traces of that object on some photographs.
- Goodenough 1964 (9), 75.
- Hachlili 1998, 239.
- Hachlili 1998, 100.
- Kraeling 1956, 58.
- Abraham's servants are sometimes represented as the mosaic pavement of the synagogue of Beth Alpha, but are shown in the process of leading the donkey Hachlili 1998, 241, fig. V-2.
- Grabar 1941, 144-146.
- Du Mesnil 1939, 23-27.
- St. Clair, 1986, 116-117.
- See the full references in Hachlili 1998, 239.
- Goodenough 1964 (9), 72-74.
- Hachlili 1998, fig. 146, V-5.
- Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Weitzmann and Kessler Kessler in 1990, 155-157.
- Weitzmann and Kessler Kessler in 1990, 155, footnote 7.
- Kessler, in Weitzmann and Kessler 1990, 156.
- Kessler, in Weitzmann and Kessler 1990, 156-157. See also Sed-Rajna and Others 1995, 119.
- Hachlili 1998, 243.
- The argument is advanced for reasons sometimes differ by several commentators on the scene: Kraeling 1956, 362; Goodenough 1964 (9), 71-77, and Simon 1986, 194-196. See Hachlili 1998, 242, for bibliography on this date.
- Tristan 1996, 284, citing E. Goodenough, Jewish symbols In The Greco-Roman Period, I-III, 1953.
- See the remarks of Goodenough (1964 See also
Bibliography
This logo indicates that the source was used for writing the article. - (In) E. Bickerman, "Symbolism In The Dura Synagogue: A Review Article," The Harvard Theological Review (1965) 127-51;
- Robert du Mesnil du Buisson , "The new discoveries of the Synagogue of Dura-Europos", Revue Biblique (1934) 546-63;
- Robert Du Mesnil du Buisson, The paintings of the synagogue at Dura-Europos 244-256 AD (Paris 1939);
- (In) J. Elsner, "Cultural Resistance and the Visual Image: The Case of Dura Europos," Classical Philology (2001) 269-304;
- (In) J. Elsner, "Archaeologies and Agendas: Reflections on Late Ancient Jewish Art and Early Christian Art", The Journal of Roman Studies (2003) 114-28;
- (In) S. Fine, "Iconoclasm and the Art of Late Antique Palestinian Synagogues," in Levine, Lee I. and Weiss, Ze'ev (ed.), From Dura to Sepphoris: Studies in Jewish Art and Society in Late Antiquity (Portsmouth 2001) 183-94;
- (In) S. Fine Art and Judaism In The Graeco-Roman World: Toward a New Jewish Archaeology (Cambridge University Press 2005);
- (In) E. Garte, "The Theme of Resurrection In The Dura Europos Synagogue Paintings", The Jewish Quarterly Review (1973) 1-15;
- (In) ER Goodenough, Jewish Symbols In The Graeco-Roman Period, Vol. 9-11, Symbolism In The Dura Synagogue (New York 1964);
- A. Grabar , "The theme of religious frescoes in the synagogue of Dura (245-256 AD)", Journal of the History of Religions (1941) 143-92; 5-35;
- (In) J. Gutmann (ed.), The Dura-Europos Synagogue: A Reappraisal (1932-1972) (Missoula 1973).
- (In) J. Gutmann, "The Illustrated Midrash In The Dura Synagogue Paintings: A New Dimension for the Study of Judaism", Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research (1983) 91-104;
- (In) J. Gutmann, "Early Synagogue and Jewish Catacomb Art and Its Relation to Christian Art," Aufstieg und Niedergang der Welt Rmischen II, 21, 2 (Berlin / New York 1984), 1313-1342;
- (In) / Span> J. Gutmann, "The Dura Europos Synagogue Paintings and Their Influence Later one Christian and Jewish Art", Artibus and Historiae (1988) 25-9;
- (In) R. Hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology In The Diaspora (Leiden 1998);
- (In) C. Hopkins, "The Excavations Of The Dura synagogue paintings", in J. Gutman (ed.) The Dura Europos Synagogue: a reassessment (1932-1972), Missoula, 1973, 11-21;
- (In) C. Hopkins, The Discovery of Dura-Europos, B. Goldman (ed.), 1979;
- (In) PC Kelley, "Who Did The Iconoclasm In The Dura Synagogue? "Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (1994) 57-72;
- (In) CH Kraeling , "The Meaning Of The Ezekiel Panel In The Synagogue at Dura," Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research '(1940) 12-8;
- (In) CH Kraeling, The Synagogue, The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report VIII.1 (New Haven 1956);
- (In) D. MacDonald, "Dating the Fall of Dura-Europos" Historia, Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte (1986) 45-68;
- (In) J. Magness, "Heaven on Earth: Helios and the Zodiac Cycle in Ancient Palestinian Synagogues," Dumbarton Oaks Papers (2005) 1-52;
- (In) W. Moon, "Nudity & the Narrative: Observations On The Dura Synagogue Frescoes From The" Journal of the American Academy of Religion (1992) 587-658;
- (In) M. Olin, "" Early Christian Synagogues "and" Jewish Art Historians, "The Discovery of the Synagogue of Dura-Europos," Marburger Jahrbuch fr Kunstwissenschaft (2000) 7-28;
- P. Prigent, Judaism and the image (Tbingen 1990);
- (In) MI Rostovtzeff, AR Bellinger, C. Hopkins and CB Welles, The Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted By The Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, Preliminary Report of Sixth Season of Work, October 1932-March 1933 (New Haven 1936);
- A. Rousselle, Dura-Europos Research: Issues of acculturation and pagan iconography, Christian and Jewish (ANRT Lille 1993);
- (En) A. Runesson, "The Oldest Original Synagogue Building In The Diaspora: A Response to L. Michael White, "The Harvard Theological Review (1999) 409-33;
- G. Sed Rajna, Z. Amish-Maisels, D. Jarrass, R. Klein, Jewish Art, Citadel & Mazenod (1995);
- (En) A. St. Clair, "The Torah shrine at Dura Europos: A Reevaluation," JAC 29 (1986), 109-117;
- (In) Mary Lee Thompson, "Hypothetical Model of the Dura paintings", in J. Gutman (ed.) The Dura Europos Synagogue: a reassessment (1932-1972), Missoula, 1973, 31-52;
- Fr Tristan, Early Christian images. Symbol to the icon, second century-seventh century (Fayard 1996);
- (In) K. Weitzmann and H. Kessler, The Frescoes Of The Dura Synagogue and Christian Art (Dumbarton Oaks 1990);
- (In) AJ Wharton, "Good and Bad Images from the Synagogue of Dura Europos: Contexts, Subtext, Intertexts', Art History (1994) 1-25.
- (In) SM White, The Social Origins of Christian Architecture, Harvard Theological Studies 42, Johns Hopkins University Press:
- Vol. 1, Building God's House in the Roman World: Architectural Adaptation Among Pagans, Jews and Christians (Valley Forge 1990);
- Vol. 2, Texts and monuments for the Christian Domus Ecclesiae in ITS environment (Valley Forge 1997);
- Vol. 1, Building God's House in the Roman World: Architectural Adaptation Among Pagans, Jews and Christians (Valley Forge 1990);
- (In) R. Wischnitzer-Bernstein, "The Samuel Cycle in the Wall Decoration Of The Synagogue at Dura-Europos", Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research (1941) 85-103;
- (In) R. Wischnitzer-Bernstein, The Messianic Themes in The Painting Of The Dura Synagogue (Chicago 1948).
Internal Links
External Links
- (In) Frescoes of the synagogue , EIKON Image Database for Biblical Studies, Yale Divinity School
Loading ...