Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces Orit Peleg-Barkat Abstract is paper discusses the implications of recent archaeological findings in Judaea, main- ly from the site of Herodium, for our perception of Herod’s architecture and the mul- tiple identities and influences it reflects As a client king of the early Empire, whose construction projects are well-known from both the historical record and the archaeo- logical finds, King Herod serves as a perfect case study for understanding the ways in which local monarchs and client kings in the late Republic and early Empire utilized art and architecture to simultaneously display their image to a varied audience, includ- ing the various groups that comprised their subjects, their peers, as well as their Ro- man patrons e first part of this paper briefly explores different opinions concerning the nature of Herod’s art and architecture and their varied sources of inspiration e second part focuses on the site of Herodium, situated 12 km south of Jerusalem, where excavations led by the Hebrew University have brought remarkable findings to light over the last decades that put a new perspective on our perceptions of Herod’s building program and motivation Introduction Amongst the client kings of the early Roman Empire, Herod, King of Judaea (37– 4 BCE), is unmistakably the best known to scholarship, thanks to the detailed historical testimony of Flavius Josephus 1 and the rich and well-preserved archaeological remains of his immense building program ese remains belong to a large array of sites and 1 Jos BI 1; Jos Ant Iud 14–17 On the complex image of Herod that emerges from Josephus’ text see for example: Landau 2006; Kasher – Witztum 2007; Schwartz 2013; Vermes 2014 e term ‘client-king’ is used here for reasons of convenience For discussion on the client kingdoms of the Lizenziert für Gast am 09.01.2022 um 14:20 Uhr Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces
Mar 28, 2023
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces
Orit Peleg-Barkat
Abstract
This paper discusses the implications of recent archaeological findings in Judaea, main- ly from the site of Herodium, for our perception of Herod’s architecture and the mul- tiple identities and influences it reflects As a client king of the early Empire, whose construction projects are well-known from both the historical record and the archaeo- logical finds, King Herod serves as a perfect case study for understanding the ways in which local monarchs and client kings in the late Republic and early Empire utilized art and architecture to simultaneously display their image to a varied audience, includ- ing the various groups that comprised their subjects, their peers, as well as their Ro- man patrons The first part of this paper briefly explores different opinions concerning the nature of Herod’s art and architecture and their varied sources of inspiration The second part focuses on the site of Herodium, situated 12 km south of Jerusalem, where excavations led by the Hebrew University have brought remarkable findings to light over the last decades that put a new perspective on our perceptions of Herod’s building program and motivation
Introduction
Amongst the client kings of the early Roman Empire, Herod, King of Judaea (37– 4 BCE), is unmistakably the best known to scholarship, thanks to the detailed historical testimony of Flavius Josephus1 and the rich and well-preserved archaeological remains of his immense building program These remains belong to a large array of sites and
1 Jos BI 1; Jos Ant Iud 14–17 On the complex image of Herod that emerges from Josephus’ text see for example: Landau 2006; Kasher – Witztum 2007; Schwartz 2013; Vermes 2014 The term ‘client-king’ is used here for reasons of convenience For discussion on the client kingdoms of the
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat410
structures that were built by Herod within his kingdom, as well as beyond its bound- aries, including entire cities, palace complexes, fortifications and fortresses, temples and temene, theatres and hippodromes, bathhouses, mausolea, harbours, paved streets, and more 2 Several of these buildings, such as the Roman-style bathhouses he incorpo- rated in his palaces, or the buildings for mass entertainment he erected throughout his kingdom, constitute the first appearance of such structures in Judaea 3 In many cases, the exterior and interior decoration of Herod’s building projects, as well as some of the construction techniques and materials used, also demonstrates how the architects and artisans who worked for the king adapted new artistic and architectonic forms and styles that had never been practiced in the region before 4 Although many of these innovations rely on Roman antecedents, others draw their inspiration from various Hellenistic centres, such as Alexandria, Antioch, and the cities of Asia Minor 5
These foreign traits exhibited in Herod’s art and architecture were used as argu- ments in a long-lasting debate among scholars concerning the dominance of Hellenis- tic and Roman influences on Herod’s rule, in an attempt to decipher the riddle of this enigmatic historic figure While some scholars see Herod as a Roman client and attri- bute his buildings to an imitation of Roman models6, others understand him as one of the last in the line of Hellenistic kings, a founder of cities and master builder of royal palaces 7 However, when taking a closer look at the archaeological remains, the picture that emerges is one of a complex and nuanced combination of traits and fashions
A discussion on the complex nature of Herod’s art and architecture appears already in the fifth volume of the final report of the excavations at Masada, published in 1995 by Gideon Foerster The volume contains a detailed study of the architectural layouts
late Republic and early Empire see: Braund 1984; Sullivan 1990; Paltiel 1991; Jacobson 2001; Roller 2003; Crighton 2009; Kaizer – Facella 2010; Kropp 2013
2 For a thorough survey and discussion of Herod’s construction projects see Netzer 2006 For an updated survey of Herod’s palaces see Netzer 2018 For further discussions on Herod’s building program and the ideology it reflects, see Roller 1998; Lichtenberger 1999; Japp 2000; Richardson – Fisher 2018
3 On Herod’s bathhouses, see Netzer 1999 For a summarizing updated discussion on Herod’s enter- tainment buildings, see Weiss 2014, 11–55
4 E g , the use of pedestals, plinths for column bases, ‘normal’ Corinthian capitals, acanthus scroll friezes, modillion cornices, ‘coffer-style’ stucco decoration etc , see Rozenberg 2006; Japp 2007; Peleg and Rozenberg 2008; Peleg-Barkat 2014
5 Clearly, by the time of Herod Roman visual culture was considerably influenced by Hellenistic art, as can be seen for example in some of the temples built in Italy during the late Republic (e g the Round Temple in the Forum Boarium, Rome; Stamper 2005, 68–74), the First Pompeian style that originates in the Hellenistic Masonry Style (Bruno 1969: 305–317), etc Still, Roman mosaics and wall decorations in this period develop independent traits and in the days of Augustus a clear Ro- man architectural style evolves (Zanker 1990, 79–100) Therefore, despite common characteristics, it is yet possible to distinguish between Roman and Hellenistic styles in art and architecture and the distinctive impact each had on Herodian art and architecture
6 E g , Gleason 1996; Geiger 1997; Roller 1998; Lee 2003; Tsafrir 2003; Paout 2015 7 E g , Turnheim 1998; Günther 2007; Lichtenberger 2009; Larson 2011; Gruen 2016: 383–395
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 411
of Herod’s buildings at the site, the stone and stucco architectural elements, along with wall paintings and mosaic floors In this volume, Foerster demonstrates, for example, the complex nature of the architectural decoration of Masada, which is carved in a clear local style but within the Hellenistic tradition, and yet still reflects the consider- able influence of contemporary Roman architecture 8 According to Foerster, the co- existence of the two traditions – the eastern/Hellenistic and western/Roman one – is not surprising, since it was in Herod’s days that Roman art and architecture were first introduced into Judaea, and not enough time had passed to allow for a real synthesis of the two traditions 9
Nevertheless, this simultaneity of multiple styles is far from unique to Herod’s realm Throughout the Mediterranean, from late Republican and Augustan Rome in the West to Commagene in the East and Alexandria in the south, we encounter build- ings with architectural layouts and decorations that were defined by various scholars as cases of hybrid styles or eclecticism10 and recently and more precisely by Miguel John Versluys as bricolage In his recent book on Commagene, in which its most famous site – Nemrud Da – presents one of the clearest cases of coexistence of several tradi- tions in local art and architecture, Versluys describes the Antiochan style of Comma- gene as “a juxtaposition and blending of discrete elements suggestive of different cul- tural traditions within a single, new style as the result of a conscious appropriation ”11 This definition suits the Herodian style of architecture very well, too Herod’s building program, like that of Antiochus I, mostly draws from an existing repertoire of elements and its uniqueness lies in the specific choices of elements and the original way in which these elements are combined and recomposed (see below)
It should be remembered, however, that more than two trends or fashions played a significant role in the design of Herod’s architecture and art, and that some of the elements that comprise Herod’s building program go beyond Hellenistic and Roman models Hasmonaean antecedents, local and eastern traditions, as well as Herod’s own personal taste and preferences, clearly had a substantial impact on his construction
8 See: Foerster 1995; Foerster 1996 Thus, for example, the Corinthian capitals from Masada find their closest parallels in Italy, while the blocked-out friezes are characteristic of the Hellenistic architecture of the Aegean Other features of the architectural decoration in Masada find their closest parallels in Nabataean sites This complex picture of coexistence of several cultural tra- ditions corresponds well with Foerster’s study on the wall paintings and mosaic floors found at the site; Both multi-color Hellenistic style mosaic floors and monochrome over-all design Roman floors appear at Masada The wall decorations adorning its buildings mainly conform to the second Pompeian Style, but with many cases of incorporation of orthostat panels painted with imitation of alabaster, that are typical of Alexandrian wall decorations See also Rozenberg 2008, 283–424
9 Foerster 1993, 61 Nielsen 1994, 181–208 also acknowledges a combination of Hellenistic and Ro- man influences on the architectural design of Herod’s palaces Nevertheless, she maintains that Roman influence becomes more dominant with time
10 E g , Colledge 1987, 14; Freyberger 1998; Kopsacheili 2011 11 Versluys 2017, 206
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat412
projects The buildings Herod erected serve as a reflection of the many faces of the King himself – a Jewish king of Idumean (on his father side) and Nabatean (on his mother side) descent, ruling under the patronage of Rome over a heterogeneous population that included both Jews and non-Jews, in a region that had been dominated by great Hellenistic monarchs up until then This paper seeks to demonstrate the multi-faceted character of Herod’s art and architecture, based on the site he erected and named after himself – Herodium
In recent years, ongoing archaeological excavations at Herodium (fig 1), led by the Hebrew University, exposed a mausoleum that was identified by the excavators as the king’s final resting place12, as well as a small theatre with a beautifully decorated royal box, including pictures with vistas and human figures, unprecedented in Herod’s other construction projects 13 These two finds, along with other new discoveries at Herodi-
12 Netzer et al 2010; Porat et al 2015a 13 Rozenberg 2014; Rozenberg 2017
Fig. 1 An aerial photograph of the site of Herodium, showing the Mountain Palace-Fortress, the structures on the NE slop, as well as Lower Herodium (© The Herodium Expedition in
Memory of Ehud Netzer, The Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Photo: Tatspit)
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 413
um,14 have led to a drastic change in our understanding of the site, in particular, and Herod’s architecture in general The many changes to the plan of the complex15 clearly reflect Herod’s own personal choice and attest to his state of mind during the latest years of his reign, which are so vividly described in dark colours by Josephus
The Many Faces of King Herod
Several archaeologists and historians, including Duane Roller, Yoram Tsafrir, Lee I Levine and Kathrin Gleason16, emphasize the architectural features in Herod’s build- ings that show a clear Roman influence and discuss how Herod’s visits to Rome in 40 and 18 BCE and the buildings that he had seen there affected his constructions in Judaea In their view, the Roman influence on Herod’s building program went beyond what would suffice to satisfy his Roman patrons Namely, Herod used his construction projects to manifest his close connection with Augustus and Rome, not just in direct ways, such as the establishment of temples to the emperor-cult in Samaria\Sebaste17, Caesarea Mari tima18, and Paneion19, or the naming of cities, buildings or parts of build- ings after the emperor or other members of the Imperial family20, but also in several indirect ways, by introducing specifically Roman types of buildings and Roman forms of decoration into his kingdom For example, in many of his buildings, construction techniques that are explicitly Roman are utilized, the most prominent example being the use of opus reticulatum in Jericho, Jerusalem, and Paneion 21 Use of genuine Ro- man materials is also well-attested, such as pozzolana for hydraulic concrete used in the construction of the harbour of Caesarea Maritima22, or the cinnabar – apparently
14 In particular, the finding of a winery inside the mountain palace-fortress and a 16 m-high-corridor leading into that palace that was eventually filled and sealed and not put into use (see below)
15 Porat et al 2016 16 Levine 1980, 54; Roller 1998, 90–117; Tsafrir 2003, 93–104 Gleason 1996, for example focuses on the
close link between Herod’s palace in Caesarea Maritima and the buildings for mass entertainment at the site She suggests that the complex erected in the campus Martius by Pompey that included his famous theater, as well as his own residence had inspired Herod, as well as the linkage between Augustus’ house on the palatine and the Circus Maximus at its foot
17 Jos BI 1,403; Jos Ant Iud 15,296–298; Reisner et al 1924, 46–50 170–180; Crowfoot et al 1942, 123–135; Netzer 2006, 85–89
18 Jos BI 1,414; Jos Ant Iud 15,339; Kahn 1996; Netzer 2006, 103–106; Holum 2015 19 Jos BI 1,404–406; Jos Ant Iud 15,363–364 There are three different identifications for the loca-
tion of this temple, see Netzer 2006, 218–222; Overman – Schowalter 2011; Berlin 2015 20 E g , the Antonia citadel named after Marc Antony, Caesarea (and its harbor Sebastos) and Sebaste
named after Augustus, Livias after Livia, Agrippias after Marcus Agrippa, a lighthouse at the Cae- sarea’s harbor was named after Drusus, and so forth (Lichtenberger 2009, 45–47)
21 Netzer 2006, 314–315 There is also a small patch of an opus reticulatum wall that is preserved in Caesarea Maritima’s promontory palace, but probably post-Herodian in date (Lichtenberger 2009, 50 n 38)
22 Hohfelder et al 2007; Votruba 2007
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat414
originating from the Imperial mercury mines in Spain – that was used as red pigment for the wall decorations of his third palace in Jericho 23 Herod introduced new forms of buildings into Judaea that had no antecedents in this region, such as Roman theatres24 and Roman bathhouses 25 He also made extensive use of domes and vaults in his con- structions, in a scale unprecedented in Judaea The king introduced new forms of deco- ration into local architecture, which are explicitly Roman, such as opus sectile floors26, Pompeian style wall decoration27, modillion cornices28, and stucco ceilings in the ‘cof- fer style’29, providing some of the first examples of such Roman traits in the East
Scholars’ opinions differ with regard to Herod’s motivation for relying so heavily on Roman forms of art and architecture While some scholars maintain that it was just another way for Herod to manifest his political submission to Rome, Lee I Levine ar- gues for the king’s sincere appreciation of the Roman culture and an acknowledgment of its superiority 30 Erich S Gruen emphasizes the impact that these structures had on the local population of his kingdom as the major motivation for Herod’s vast building activity The gleaming new cities, temples, and structures carrying the names of Ro- man leaders advertised Herod’s links to the Emperor in the West to his subjects 31 A fourth possibility is that Herod was competing against his peers – contemporary client kings and major Greek cities – who also went out of their way to honour Augustus by establishing festivals and monuments in his name Probably, each of these four motiva- tions played a role in Herod’s big scheme when devising his building projects
However, not all scholars see Rome and Roman architecture as the dominant fac- tor behind Herod’s building program Scholars, such as Yehudit Turnheim, Achim Lich tenberger, and Kathryn Larson32 trace Hellenistic prototypes and antecedents for Herod’s buildings and decorations in Alexandria, Antioch and elsewhere in the Hel- lenistic realm Lichtenberger suggests that when Herod chose to use explicitly Roman
23 Rozenberg 2008, 263–267 24 Netzer 2006, 277–281; Weiss 2014, 11–55 25 Netzer 1999; 2006, 255–258 26 Snyder – Avraham 2013 27 Rozenberg 2013 28 E g , Peleg-Barkat – Chachy 2015, 326–330 This type of cornice does not appear in Judaea prior to
Herod’s reign, but becomes very common and popular immediately after it was introduced into Judaea in Herod’s construction projects
29 Peleg – Rozenberg 2008, 497–514 30 Levine 1987, 4 31 Gruen 2016, 387 32 Turnheim 1998; Lichtenberger 2009 See also criticism on Roller’s emphasis on Roman models for
Herod’s building projects in Burrell – Netzer 1999 Larson 2011 replies to Gleason 1996 and shows that the linkage between the king’s palace complex and structures for mass entertainment and sports, such as theaters and hippodromes, had already existed in Hellenistic cities, such as Alexan- dria, Antioch and Vergina Therefore, these Hellenistic cities could have more easily served as a source of inspiration for a similar relation that Herod’s architects devised in Caesarea Maritima, as is reflected in the city plan
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 415
materials, building methods, and forms of art and architecture, it was not due to their Roman character, but because of their high quality, expense, and because they were trendy His ability to acquire such luxuries is interpreted by him, therefore, as an ex- pression of his Hellenistic-style royalty Or in the words of Lichtenberger: “[…]Ro- manization in Herod’s kingdom was not a goal of Herodian policy, but the result of Herod’s claim to be a Hellenistic king ”33
But, as Miguel John Versluys has rightly put it in his book on Commagene, with regard to another client king under Augustus, Juba II, presenting oneself as a Hellen- istic king, while at the same time displaying great loyalty to Augustus and Rome, was not perceived as an inconsistency at the time 34 Namely, Herod could present himself simultaneously as both an independant Hellenistic king, although he was not, and as a Roman client king, which he clearly was, and in this respect, he was not different from any other client king of the early Empire 35
Nevertheless, Herod’s art and architecture are more complex and contain much more than a combination of Roman and Hellenistic models and forms (that some- times appear juxtaposed and sometimes intermingled) 36 At least four more aspects of Herod’s character and identity have substantially influenced the choices he made while devising his building program Without getting into the question of how Herod perceived his own Jewishness37, Herod was surely a king who ruled over a kingdom with a prominent Jewish population Jewish norms and traditions have influenced many aspects of his constructions, such as his enormous investment in the rebuilding of the Temple and the enlargement of the Temple Mount compound38, his avoidance of building pagan temples within the boundaries of his kingdom, other than the tem- ples to the ruler-cult of Augustus, as well as his general avoidance of figural depictions
33 Lichtenberger 2009, 43 34 Versluys 2017, 155 35 A similar approach exists in Adam Kolman Marshak’s well-written book The Many Faces of Herod
the Great (Marshak 2015), which discusses Herod as being simultaneously a client king under Marc Antony and Augustus and a Hellenistic king (as well as a successor to the Hasmonaeans and king of the Jews)
36 An example for this can be seen in the mosaic floors that decorated Herod’s palaces; the palaces were decorated by both Hellenistic style mosaics with a central colourful decorative motif sur- rounded by various borders, and monochrome mosaics with an overall pattern according to the prevailing Italian fashion Then again, some mosaics show a unique combination of the Hellenistic emblema-type design with a monochrome Roman style repetitive pattern in the emblema (central panel; Rozenberg 2013, 204–209)
37 See, for example, Kokkinos 1998, 86–139 and Fuks 2002, who portray Herod as a pragmatic Hel- lenized king, who was ready to break the Jewish law to achieve his goals, versus Regev 2010, who claims that despite being an enthusiast agent of the Greco-Roman culture, Herod maintained his native Jewish identity
38 Jos BI 1,401;…
Orit Peleg-Barkat
Abstract
This paper discusses the implications of recent archaeological findings in Judaea, main- ly from the site of Herodium, for our perception of Herod’s architecture and the mul- tiple identities and influences it reflects As a client king of the early Empire, whose construction projects are well-known from both the historical record and the archaeo- logical finds, King Herod serves as a perfect case study for understanding the ways in which local monarchs and client kings in the late Republic and early Empire utilized art and architecture to simultaneously display their image to a varied audience, includ- ing the various groups that comprised their subjects, their peers, as well as their Ro- man patrons The first part of this paper briefly explores different opinions concerning the nature of Herod’s art and architecture and their varied sources of inspiration The second part focuses on the site of Herodium, situated 12 km south of Jerusalem, where excavations led by the Hebrew University have brought remarkable findings to light over the last decades that put a new perspective on our perceptions of Herod’s building program and motivation
Introduction
Amongst the client kings of the early Roman Empire, Herod, King of Judaea (37– 4 BCE), is unmistakably the best known to scholarship, thanks to the detailed historical testimony of Flavius Josephus1 and the rich and well-preserved archaeological remains of his immense building program These remains belong to a large array of sites and
1 Jos BI 1; Jos Ant Iud 14–17 On the complex image of Herod that emerges from Josephus’ text see for example: Landau 2006; Kasher – Witztum 2007; Schwartz 2013; Vermes 2014 The term ‘client-king’ is used here for reasons of convenience For discussion on the client kingdoms of the
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat410
structures that were built by Herod within his kingdom, as well as beyond its bound- aries, including entire cities, palace complexes, fortifications and fortresses, temples and temene, theatres and hippodromes, bathhouses, mausolea, harbours, paved streets, and more 2 Several of these buildings, such as the Roman-style bathhouses he incorpo- rated in his palaces, or the buildings for mass entertainment he erected throughout his kingdom, constitute the first appearance of such structures in Judaea 3 In many cases, the exterior and interior decoration of Herod’s building projects, as well as some of the construction techniques and materials used, also demonstrates how the architects and artisans who worked for the king adapted new artistic and architectonic forms and styles that had never been practiced in the region before 4 Although many of these innovations rely on Roman antecedents, others draw their inspiration from various Hellenistic centres, such as Alexandria, Antioch, and the cities of Asia Minor 5
These foreign traits exhibited in Herod’s art and architecture were used as argu- ments in a long-lasting debate among scholars concerning the dominance of Hellenis- tic and Roman influences on Herod’s rule, in an attempt to decipher the riddle of this enigmatic historic figure While some scholars see Herod as a Roman client and attri- bute his buildings to an imitation of Roman models6, others understand him as one of the last in the line of Hellenistic kings, a founder of cities and master builder of royal palaces 7 However, when taking a closer look at the archaeological remains, the picture that emerges is one of a complex and nuanced combination of traits and fashions
A discussion on the complex nature of Herod’s art and architecture appears already in the fifth volume of the final report of the excavations at Masada, published in 1995 by Gideon Foerster The volume contains a detailed study of the architectural layouts
late Republic and early Empire see: Braund 1984; Sullivan 1990; Paltiel 1991; Jacobson 2001; Roller 2003; Crighton 2009; Kaizer – Facella 2010; Kropp 2013
2 For a thorough survey and discussion of Herod’s construction projects see Netzer 2006 For an updated survey of Herod’s palaces see Netzer 2018 For further discussions on Herod’s building program and the ideology it reflects, see Roller 1998; Lichtenberger 1999; Japp 2000; Richardson – Fisher 2018
3 On Herod’s bathhouses, see Netzer 1999 For a summarizing updated discussion on Herod’s enter- tainment buildings, see Weiss 2014, 11–55
4 E g , the use of pedestals, plinths for column bases, ‘normal’ Corinthian capitals, acanthus scroll friezes, modillion cornices, ‘coffer-style’ stucco decoration etc , see Rozenberg 2006; Japp 2007; Peleg and Rozenberg 2008; Peleg-Barkat 2014
5 Clearly, by the time of Herod Roman visual culture was considerably influenced by Hellenistic art, as can be seen for example in some of the temples built in Italy during the late Republic (e g the Round Temple in the Forum Boarium, Rome; Stamper 2005, 68–74), the First Pompeian style that originates in the Hellenistic Masonry Style (Bruno 1969: 305–317), etc Still, Roman mosaics and wall decorations in this period develop independent traits and in the days of Augustus a clear Ro- man architectural style evolves (Zanker 1990, 79–100) Therefore, despite common characteristics, it is yet possible to distinguish between Roman and Hellenistic styles in art and architecture and the distinctive impact each had on Herodian art and architecture
6 E g , Gleason 1996; Geiger 1997; Roller 1998; Lee 2003; Tsafrir 2003; Paout 2015 7 E g , Turnheim 1998; Günther 2007; Lichtenberger 2009; Larson 2011; Gruen 2016: 383–395
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 411
of Herod’s buildings at the site, the stone and stucco architectural elements, along with wall paintings and mosaic floors In this volume, Foerster demonstrates, for example, the complex nature of the architectural decoration of Masada, which is carved in a clear local style but within the Hellenistic tradition, and yet still reflects the consider- able influence of contemporary Roman architecture 8 According to Foerster, the co- existence of the two traditions – the eastern/Hellenistic and western/Roman one – is not surprising, since it was in Herod’s days that Roman art and architecture were first introduced into Judaea, and not enough time had passed to allow for a real synthesis of the two traditions 9
Nevertheless, this simultaneity of multiple styles is far from unique to Herod’s realm Throughout the Mediterranean, from late Republican and Augustan Rome in the West to Commagene in the East and Alexandria in the south, we encounter build- ings with architectural layouts and decorations that were defined by various scholars as cases of hybrid styles or eclecticism10 and recently and more precisely by Miguel John Versluys as bricolage In his recent book on Commagene, in which its most famous site – Nemrud Da – presents one of the clearest cases of coexistence of several tradi- tions in local art and architecture, Versluys describes the Antiochan style of Comma- gene as “a juxtaposition and blending of discrete elements suggestive of different cul- tural traditions within a single, new style as the result of a conscious appropriation ”11 This definition suits the Herodian style of architecture very well, too Herod’s building program, like that of Antiochus I, mostly draws from an existing repertoire of elements and its uniqueness lies in the specific choices of elements and the original way in which these elements are combined and recomposed (see below)
It should be remembered, however, that more than two trends or fashions played a significant role in the design of Herod’s architecture and art, and that some of the elements that comprise Herod’s building program go beyond Hellenistic and Roman models Hasmonaean antecedents, local and eastern traditions, as well as Herod’s own personal taste and preferences, clearly had a substantial impact on his construction
8 See: Foerster 1995; Foerster 1996 Thus, for example, the Corinthian capitals from Masada find their closest parallels in Italy, while the blocked-out friezes are characteristic of the Hellenistic architecture of the Aegean Other features of the architectural decoration in Masada find their closest parallels in Nabataean sites This complex picture of coexistence of several cultural tra- ditions corresponds well with Foerster’s study on the wall paintings and mosaic floors found at the site; Both multi-color Hellenistic style mosaic floors and monochrome over-all design Roman floors appear at Masada The wall decorations adorning its buildings mainly conform to the second Pompeian Style, but with many cases of incorporation of orthostat panels painted with imitation of alabaster, that are typical of Alexandrian wall decorations See also Rozenberg 2008, 283–424
9 Foerster 1993, 61 Nielsen 1994, 181–208 also acknowledges a combination of Hellenistic and Ro- man influences on the architectural design of Herod’s palaces Nevertheless, she maintains that Roman influence becomes more dominant with time
10 E g , Colledge 1987, 14; Freyberger 1998; Kopsacheili 2011 11 Versluys 2017, 206
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat412
projects The buildings Herod erected serve as a reflection of the many faces of the King himself – a Jewish king of Idumean (on his father side) and Nabatean (on his mother side) descent, ruling under the patronage of Rome over a heterogeneous population that included both Jews and non-Jews, in a region that had been dominated by great Hellenistic monarchs up until then This paper seeks to demonstrate the multi-faceted character of Herod’s art and architecture, based on the site he erected and named after himself – Herodium
In recent years, ongoing archaeological excavations at Herodium (fig 1), led by the Hebrew University, exposed a mausoleum that was identified by the excavators as the king’s final resting place12, as well as a small theatre with a beautifully decorated royal box, including pictures with vistas and human figures, unprecedented in Herod’s other construction projects 13 These two finds, along with other new discoveries at Herodi-
12 Netzer et al 2010; Porat et al 2015a 13 Rozenberg 2014; Rozenberg 2017
Fig. 1 An aerial photograph of the site of Herodium, showing the Mountain Palace-Fortress, the structures on the NE slop, as well as Lower Herodium (© The Herodium Expedition in
Memory of Ehud Netzer, The Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Photo: Tatspit)
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 413
um,14 have led to a drastic change in our understanding of the site, in particular, and Herod’s architecture in general The many changes to the plan of the complex15 clearly reflect Herod’s own personal choice and attest to his state of mind during the latest years of his reign, which are so vividly described in dark colours by Josephus
The Many Faces of King Herod
Several archaeologists and historians, including Duane Roller, Yoram Tsafrir, Lee I Levine and Kathrin Gleason16, emphasize the architectural features in Herod’s build- ings that show a clear Roman influence and discuss how Herod’s visits to Rome in 40 and 18 BCE and the buildings that he had seen there affected his constructions in Judaea In their view, the Roman influence on Herod’s building program went beyond what would suffice to satisfy his Roman patrons Namely, Herod used his construction projects to manifest his close connection with Augustus and Rome, not just in direct ways, such as the establishment of temples to the emperor-cult in Samaria\Sebaste17, Caesarea Mari tima18, and Paneion19, or the naming of cities, buildings or parts of build- ings after the emperor or other members of the Imperial family20, but also in several indirect ways, by introducing specifically Roman types of buildings and Roman forms of decoration into his kingdom For example, in many of his buildings, construction techniques that are explicitly Roman are utilized, the most prominent example being the use of opus reticulatum in Jericho, Jerusalem, and Paneion 21 Use of genuine Ro- man materials is also well-attested, such as pozzolana for hydraulic concrete used in the construction of the harbour of Caesarea Maritima22, or the cinnabar – apparently
14 In particular, the finding of a winery inside the mountain palace-fortress and a 16 m-high-corridor leading into that palace that was eventually filled and sealed and not put into use (see below)
15 Porat et al 2016 16 Levine 1980, 54; Roller 1998, 90–117; Tsafrir 2003, 93–104 Gleason 1996, for example focuses on the
close link between Herod’s palace in Caesarea Maritima and the buildings for mass entertainment at the site She suggests that the complex erected in the campus Martius by Pompey that included his famous theater, as well as his own residence had inspired Herod, as well as the linkage between Augustus’ house on the palatine and the Circus Maximus at its foot
17 Jos BI 1,403; Jos Ant Iud 15,296–298; Reisner et al 1924, 46–50 170–180; Crowfoot et al 1942, 123–135; Netzer 2006, 85–89
18 Jos BI 1,414; Jos Ant Iud 15,339; Kahn 1996; Netzer 2006, 103–106; Holum 2015 19 Jos BI 1,404–406; Jos Ant Iud 15,363–364 There are three different identifications for the loca-
tion of this temple, see Netzer 2006, 218–222; Overman – Schowalter 2011; Berlin 2015 20 E g , the Antonia citadel named after Marc Antony, Caesarea (and its harbor Sebastos) and Sebaste
named after Augustus, Livias after Livia, Agrippias after Marcus Agrippa, a lighthouse at the Cae- sarea’s harbor was named after Drusus, and so forth (Lichtenberger 2009, 45–47)
21 Netzer 2006, 314–315 There is also a small patch of an opus reticulatum wall that is preserved in Caesarea Maritima’s promontory palace, but probably post-Herodian in date (Lichtenberger 2009, 50 n 38)
22 Hohfelder et al 2007; Votruba 2007
L iz
en zi
Orit Peleg-Barkat414
originating from the Imperial mercury mines in Spain – that was used as red pigment for the wall decorations of his third palace in Jericho 23 Herod introduced new forms of buildings into Judaea that had no antecedents in this region, such as Roman theatres24 and Roman bathhouses 25 He also made extensive use of domes and vaults in his con- structions, in a scale unprecedented in Judaea The king introduced new forms of deco- ration into local architecture, which are explicitly Roman, such as opus sectile floors26, Pompeian style wall decoration27, modillion cornices28, and stucco ceilings in the ‘cof- fer style’29, providing some of the first examples of such Roman traits in the East
Scholars’ opinions differ with regard to Herod’s motivation for relying so heavily on Roman forms of art and architecture While some scholars maintain that it was just another way for Herod to manifest his political submission to Rome, Lee I Levine ar- gues for the king’s sincere appreciation of the Roman culture and an acknowledgment of its superiority 30 Erich S Gruen emphasizes the impact that these structures had on the local population of his kingdom as the major motivation for Herod’s vast building activity The gleaming new cities, temples, and structures carrying the names of Ro- man leaders advertised Herod’s links to the Emperor in the West to his subjects 31 A fourth possibility is that Herod was competing against his peers – contemporary client kings and major Greek cities – who also went out of their way to honour Augustus by establishing festivals and monuments in his name Probably, each of these four motiva- tions played a role in Herod’s big scheme when devising his building projects
However, not all scholars see Rome and Roman architecture as the dominant fac- tor behind Herod’s building program Scholars, such as Yehudit Turnheim, Achim Lich tenberger, and Kathryn Larson32 trace Hellenistic prototypes and antecedents for Herod’s buildings and decorations in Alexandria, Antioch and elsewhere in the Hel- lenistic realm Lichtenberger suggests that when Herod chose to use explicitly Roman
23 Rozenberg 2008, 263–267 24 Netzer 2006, 277–281; Weiss 2014, 11–55 25 Netzer 1999; 2006, 255–258 26 Snyder – Avraham 2013 27 Rozenberg 2013 28 E g , Peleg-Barkat – Chachy 2015, 326–330 This type of cornice does not appear in Judaea prior to
Herod’s reign, but becomes very common and popular immediately after it was introduced into Judaea in Herod’s construction projects
29 Peleg – Rozenberg 2008, 497–514 30 Levine 1987, 4 31 Gruen 2016, 387 32 Turnheim 1998; Lichtenberger 2009 See also criticism on Roller’s emphasis on Roman models for
Herod’s building projects in Burrell – Netzer 1999 Larson 2011 replies to Gleason 1996 and shows that the linkage between the king’s palace complex and structures for mass entertainment and sports, such as theaters and hippodromes, had already existed in Hellenistic cities, such as Alexan- dria, Antioch and Vergina Therefore, these Hellenistic cities could have more easily served as a source of inspiration for a similar relation that Herod’s architects devised in Caesarea Maritima, as is reflected in the city plan
L iz
en zi
Franz Steiner Verlag
Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 415
materials, building methods, and forms of art and architecture, it was not due to their Roman character, but because of their high quality, expense, and because they were trendy His ability to acquire such luxuries is interpreted by him, therefore, as an ex- pression of his Hellenistic-style royalty Or in the words of Lichtenberger: “[…]Ro- manization in Herod’s kingdom was not a goal of Herodian policy, but the result of Herod’s claim to be a Hellenistic king ”33
But, as Miguel John Versluys has rightly put it in his book on Commagene, with regard to another client king under Augustus, Juba II, presenting oneself as a Hellen- istic king, while at the same time displaying great loyalty to Augustus and Rome, was not perceived as an inconsistency at the time 34 Namely, Herod could present himself simultaneously as both an independant Hellenistic king, although he was not, and as a Roman client king, which he clearly was, and in this respect, he was not different from any other client king of the early Empire 35
Nevertheless, Herod’s art and architecture are more complex and contain much more than a combination of Roman and Hellenistic models and forms (that some- times appear juxtaposed and sometimes intermingled) 36 At least four more aspects of Herod’s character and identity have substantially influenced the choices he made while devising his building program Without getting into the question of how Herod perceived his own Jewishness37, Herod was surely a king who ruled over a kingdom with a prominent Jewish population Jewish norms and traditions have influenced many aspects of his constructions, such as his enormous investment in the rebuilding of the Temple and the enlargement of the Temple Mount compound38, his avoidance of building pagan temples within the boundaries of his kingdom, other than the tem- ples to the ruler-cult of Augustus, as well as his general avoidance of figural depictions
33 Lichtenberger 2009, 43 34 Versluys 2017, 155 35 A similar approach exists in Adam Kolman Marshak’s well-written book The Many Faces of Herod
the Great (Marshak 2015), which discusses Herod as being simultaneously a client king under Marc Antony and Augustus and a Hellenistic king (as well as a successor to the Hasmonaeans and king of the Jews)
36 An example for this can be seen in the mosaic floors that decorated Herod’s palaces; the palaces were decorated by both Hellenistic style mosaics with a central colourful decorative motif sur- rounded by various borders, and monochrome mosaics with an overall pattern according to the prevailing Italian fashion Then again, some mosaics show a unique combination of the Hellenistic emblema-type design with a monochrome Roman style repetitive pattern in the emblema (central panel; Rozenberg 2013, 204–209)
37 See, for example, Kokkinos 1998, 86–139 and Fuks 2002, who portray Herod as a pragmatic Hel- lenized king, who was ready to break the Jewish law to achieve his goals, versus Regev 2010, who claims that despite being an enthusiast agent of the Greco-Roman culture, Herod maintained his native Jewish identity
38 Jos BI 1,401;…
Related Documents
