Ancient Synagogues in Galilee: Their Religious and Cultural Setting

Author(s): Eric M. Meyers

Source: The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Spring, 1980), pp. 97-108
Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3209628 .
Accessed: 30/06/2014 11:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Biblical Archaeologist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Introduction
The institution of the synagogue is
surely one of the most significant of
the achievements of ancient Judaic
civilization. Not only did the syna-
gogue directly influence the genesis
of sacred architecture in both the
Christian and Islamic traditions, but
more importantly for the Jewish
tradition, it provided the logical
successor to the Temple in Jeru-
salem. For classical Judaism, there-
fore, the synagogue becomes the
vehicle whereby the religion and
community of the Jewish people are
transported to other parts of Pales-
tine and to the Diaspora. There is
a genuine sense in which nascent
rabbinism or early Pharisaism could
well be called "synagogue Judaism."
While we know a great deal
about the synagogue buildings of the
Talmudic period (after 200 C.E.),
there is a marked lack of archeo-
logical evidence for synagogue
structures in the more formulative
stage of classical or synagogue
Judaism prior to 200 C.E. Nonethe-
less, it is fair to say that despite the
presence of such archeological data,
the synagogue as a social and
religious institution already was
developing. As a center of prayer
and worship (beth tefillah), as a
center of study (beth midrash), and
as a center for communal assembly
(beth knesset), the synagogue in its
inception was not dependent on
externals of any kind. Indeed, the
meager archeological data of this
formative period is in direct contrast
to the picture we derive from the
literary tradition, especially Josephus
and the New Testament. John
Wilkinson has recently proposed that
there were 365 synagogues in the
Jerusalem of the late Second Temple
(Wilkinson 1976: 76-77), but these
surely are nothing more than
"meeting places." It is important to
emphasize, therefore, that previous
scholarship on ancient synagogues,
as well as present scholarship,
focuses primarily upon the later
post-200 C.E. period with few
exceptions. The aim of the present
study is to show how earlier
researches on the subject of ancient
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
Palestinian synagogues created a
developmental typology which has
led to a somewhat mistaken
understanding of various cultural
and religious currents in the
Talmudic period.
This earlier scholarly tendency
may be illustrated best in the
writings of the late M. Avi-Yonah,
who categorized the variety of
synagogue types and proposed the
following chronology and typology:
1) the Galilean, or basilical,
synagogue is the oldest of all
Palestinian synagogues; 2) the
broadhouse represents a transitional
phase in the development of the
synagogue and reflects a time when
greater efforts were expended to fix
a permanent place for the ark; 3)
the apsidal building represents the
final stage of development in which
the worshipper enters opposite the
orienting wall which points to
Jerusalem and faces directly the
sacred Torah Shrine (Avi-Yonah
1973a: 29-43).
Early and Recent Researches
Thirty-five years ago the late
Herbert Gordon May undertook
Ancient Synagogues to summarize the subject of "Syna-
in Galilee: gogues in Palestine" in the pages of
this journal (1944: 1). He began his
Their Religious insightful and important article with
these words:
and
Both Christian church and Moham-
Cultural Setting medan mosque, in their origins, were
indebted to the synagogue. Occasion-
ally we find that synagogueshave been
Eric M. Meyers transformedinto churchesandmosques.
At Gerasain Transjordana synagogue
The synagogue, one of the
wasrebuiltas a church,andat Eshtemoa,
most important institutions south of Hebron,one was turnedinto a
of Judaic life, has been an mosque.The NewTestamentrecordsthe
importance of the synagogue in the
object of scholar/l investi- beginningsof Christianity.Because of
decades. In recent these things, and becauseof the signifi-
gation.for
several of these cance of the synagoguein ancientand
years,
structuresfrom an early' modern Judaism, there is a natural
interest in the earliest synagoguedis-
period have been unearthed coveries.
by archeologists, revealing
facts and artifacts that Professor May wrote with a
contribute significantly to characteristicenthusiasm, but on
this occasion he was reflecting the
our knowledge of life and scholarly excitement that greeted the
worship among ancient Jews. then "recent"discoveries in Palestine
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 97
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
at Beth Shecarim (Sheikh Abreiq) in Sidon1
%1
western Galilee, Eshtemoca in the
Judean desert, el-Hammeh on the
Yarmuk, Beth Alpha near Beth-shan, Jea
or
j
-.ENLARGEMENT....
and Jericho in the Jordan Valley, and
in the Diaspora at Dura-Europas on ,I
the middle Euphrates. To this very day
these sites would be features in any list
of the most important archeological Sa.
discoveries of Roman and Byzantine A FAT
Palestine and Syria. But those were the , *AKKO
achievements of another time and --"a,"
another era in scholarship. Since that N ~.
time the entire archeological enterprise -

has been transformed, and the study of I'-,, .fit' , .

ancient synagogues as they relate to ,, --~~.w- , - -

-?
early Christianity and Talmudic Juda- : : .4
ism seems to have come of age. , ,-
Scale: Principal Map 1 ?
For the first time, there exists
today in the scholarly world a
llb u
compendious list of .:,
,..o!?r .. . , ,.
all of the archaeologicaland literary
materialreferringto synagogues,Torah
schools and law courts (seats of the
Sanhedrin) in Israel from the first
century A.D. up until her conquest by Bar'am
Islam in the seventh century A.D.
and Reeg 1977:XXI).
(Hiittenmeister
Sa'sa''0
GushHalave
H. Shema'.
* Dabura
* Katzrin
II
This list has appeared as part of Meiron * * . Dikka
H. Ammudim Korazim
the Tiibinger Atlas project, which
Kfar Kanna Arbel a Umm
embraces the entire ancient Near HussifaBet
('Isfiya)f ppori el-Kanatir Kfar Nahum
Eastern world. Prior to this time the She'arim. 'Tzippori Gader
e Yafia Hammat
most significant original work in this Sumak
Sumak
Mediterranean Hammat T'veriya
field had been done by the German Bet Yerah
team of Heinrich Kohl and Carl /0 Bet Alfa *
Caesarea Bet She'an
Watzinger before World War I (Kohl Rehov*
and Watzinger 1916) and conducted Gerash
on behalf of the Deutsche Orient
Gesellschaft. Kohl and Watzinger,
who mapped and partially uncovered
11 ancient synagogues, followed in
the footsteps of the well-known
American explorer Edward Robinson.' Na'aran
Jericho
the famous French Semitics scholar She'albim
Hulda *
Ernst Renan, and of course the
Jerusalem
ubiquitous British explorers and
surveyors, C. W. Wilson, C. R. Ashqelon
Conder, and H. H. Kitchener. Bet Guvrin
Jewish archeologists, establishing Gaza En Gedi*
the Palestine Exploration Society, Sussiya
embarked on their own survey and a
Eshtamo'a
Ma'on (Nirim)
study of ancient synagogues. The Masada
earliest of these was the work at
Hammath near Tiberias in 1921. The
most important of these projects
dealing with synagogues already had
been reported and published when Above: Topographic map of northern Below:Locationmap of major
May wrote in 1944. The central Palestine, indicating important sites. synagoguesites in Palestine.

98 BIBLICALARCHEOLOGIST/ SPRING 1980

This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Groundplansof majorsynagoguesites,
after Ariel Avi-Yonah.

figure in both the pre- and post-

World War II period was Eliezer
Lippa Sukenik, whose pioneering
work is the cornerstone of all

M.?j
0

M ,
--- J M
modern study and exploration of
ancient synagogues (1934).
The past decade has witnessed
an unprecedented flurry of activity
in Israel, in the West Bank, and on
the Golan Heights. As a result of
this new work, a much-needed
ItI period of scholarly reevaluation in
the field of synagogue studies has
evolved. It was only a few years
ago, before work commenced at the
site of Khirbet Shemac (Teqoca ha-
Galilit) under the aegis of the
American Schools of Oriental
Research (Meyers, Kraabel, and
Strange 1976), that a kind of
scholarly rigidity reigned in the field.
The struggle between Franciscan
excavators of Capernaum and
o 5 0 5 0O
IML-
0
a 0 0 0 M various Israeli archeologists over a
,
late chronology2 (Avi-Yonah 1973b:
EN GEDI GERASA GAZA BET ALFA 43-45) hopefully marks the end of
an era which understood the
evolution of the ancient synagogue
as being characterized by a
developmental typology such as we
have noted above (Avi-Yonah
1973a). Startling new discoveries at
Gamla in the Golan, at Tarichaeae
(Magdala) on the western shore of
the Sea of Galilee, and at Herodium
and Masada in the Judean wilder-
0
SI
5 1 0 5 10 0500
I L I
ness have established that the
M M
MM 51 1 M
earliest synagogues in ancient Pales-
IFAHo .
01
5 .L.
,, tine existed in the Ist century C.E.
The full publication of these
discoveries doubtless will be signifi-
cant for understanding the nature of
the development of the synagogue
building itself. For the later periods
the final publication of the Israeli
discoveries at Susiyah, Eshtemoca,
En-gedi, Rehov, Beth-shan, and
other new sites will further elucidate
a ' many other key issues.
0 5 5

The Basilica
HAMMAT ESHTEMOA KHIRBAT SUSYA JERICHO The major results of earlier archeo-
GADER logical investigations produced a
view of the origin and development

BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 99

This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of the synagogue building which
prevailed until only a few years ago.
This view maintained that a special
type of building or edifice originated
in Galilee sometime in the 2nd-3rd
centuries C.E.and, hence, was called
the "early Galilean" type. This type
is characterized by an elaborate
triple-portal facade which faced
south toward Jerusalem. The floor
of such a structure was thought to
be paved with simple stone slabs. Its
ground plan is basilical, with two
rows of columns running north-
south and often with a transverse
row closing the shorter northern
side. Accordingly, space is divided
into a central nave and two side
aisles. An upper story, or gallery, is
usually assumed to have existed
along these three rows, though it is
a matter of dispute whether or not
it was used exclusively for women in
the ancient period (Safrai 1969).
However, the very existence of a
second story is being questioned
today. The excavators of Caper-
naum, for example, now are
convinced that there was no gallery
whatever at Capernaum and that a
simple shed roof was carried by a
total column height-from base to
capital-of 5 m.
In addition to the above-
mentioned features, there were often
stone benches along the sides for
worshipers. It might be reasonably
conjectured, however, that many
worshippers simply sat on the floor,
as is the customary practice to this
day in a mosque, since there was
never sufficient bench space provided
to utilize most of the interior space
effectively.
In the basilica as in the variant
forms of the ancient synagogue, the
major architectural concern, if not
theological concern, is the wall of
orientation which faces Jerusalem. It
generally is assumed that this, the
most salient and telling feature of
the synagogue, is derived from the
biblical practice of praying toward
Jerusalem (1 Kgs 8:44 parallel
2 Chr 6:34; 1 Kgs 8:48 parallel
2 Chr 6:38; Dan 6:11). This custom
achieves a legal force in the rabbinic
period when it is translated into law
100 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
(U. Ber. 4.8b-c ), but the same All of this presupposes the
principle also seems to have been existence of some kind of Torah
operative in the Ist-century buildings shrine (either portable or perma-
at Masada and Herodium (Foerster nent) on the interior southern
1973: 224-28). (Jerusalem-facing) wall, even though
none has been found in situ; the
evidence at both Meiron and
New discoveries have Capernaum is supportive of such a
establishedthat the earliest theory (Strange 1976: 140-41). At
Beth Shecarim, a novel arrangement
synagogues in Palestine is found in the basilicalike syna-
date to the 1st century gogue excavated there: a raised
C.E. bema, or podium for the reading of
the scrolls, is situated in the back wall
of the nave opposite the three monu-
The principle of sacred orienta- mental doorways which face toward
tion may be observed in the basilical Jerusalem. The building dates from
structure as in the American excava- the second quarter of the 3rd
tions at ancient Meiron (Meyers, century to the middle of the 4th
Strange, and Meyers 1978), where century (Avigad and Mazar 1976:
the triple facade faces south towards 233-34). If, however, the Torah
Jerusalem. Most scholars would shrine might have been portable and
agree that such an instance was wheeled out during services,
corresponds to a time when the ark then we would not expect to find a
was not yet a permanent fixture in trace of it (Kraabel 1974: 438). The
the synagogue but was a portable excavators at Beth Shecarim,
structure which was wheeled out however, noted a significant change
into the main sanctuary during toward the last phase of the building's
worship. The precentor, or reader of history when a Torah shrine was
scripture, would stand before it and relocated on the Jerusalem wall. The
also face Jerusalem. Possible excavator of the En-gedi synagogue
representations of the portable ark also observed a similar shift (Avi-
may be observed in sculpture at Yonah 1973a: 341). Both instances
Capernaum and in mosaic else- tend to suggest a major theological
where (Hachlili 1976: 43-53). In our development sometime in the late
view, the portable ark of the 3rd or early 4th century C.E. when
synagogue harks back to Nathan's public reading of scripture in a
rebuke of David (2 Sam 7:4ff.), worship setting reached a high point.
when the prophet argues poig- Whether or not such a shift can be
nantly in theological terms for a related to external circumstances
movable shrine. affecting the Jewish community,
Both the orientation of the such as the Christianization of the
basilica and the suggested location empire or the reading of scripture
of the ark require the so-called by sectarians, is a matter which
"awkward about-face" of the wor- deserves further study.
shiper. That is, if the Jerusalem The origin of the basilica is
entrances were both functional and generally conceded to be in the
used as the focus of worship, the typical Greco-Roman basilica, possi-
worshipper would have to turn bly mediated to Palestine through
around immediately after entering builders employed by Herod the
the building from the south. The Great. Herod was himself one of the
lack of an entry on the northern, or most notable patrons of Roman
opposite, side necessitates such a building in the entire eastern
turnaround. At Meiron, as well as Mediterranean world. Still others
most other basilical sites, no would suggest that the basilica is
convincing proof of entrances either mediated through Syro-Roman and
on the north, east, or west has yet Nabatean prototypes. In any case,
been found. the synagogue qua basilica is still
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Above:Architect'sreconstructionof Gush
Halavsynagogue.Middle:Block plan of
Gush Halav synagogue.Below:Isometric
reconstructionof Gush Halav synagogue,
looking northwest.

innovative in the sense that it has

adapted a public structure which ...

emphasizes the exterior and has

modified it to suit its own unique
religious purposes.
New discoveries now indicate a
•..
much higher degree of flexibility in
dating all types of synagogues and
attest the simultaneous existence of
one type alongside another. For ??cs
% /.
example, Capernaum, a basilica, is ii::,:
widely regarded as late, or Byzan-
tine, whereas Khirbet Shemac, a
broadhouse, is early. It is our
contention that the only certain way
of dating any ancient building is
through scientific excavation and
scholarly evaluation of the data
which emanate from such excava-
tion. With respect to the general-
ii'--
categories of synagogue buildings, in
addition to the divergencies in
ground plan and internal furnishing 1 ..

already mentioned, present excava-

tions provide even further anom-
O
-
alies so that even a concept of a
standard basilica cannot be main-
tained any longer.
Y) -
The 1977-78 American excava-
tions at the ancient site of Gush
Halav (Giscala) just a few kilometers
north of Meiron (Meyers 1978: 253-
54) reinforce the opinion already
stated that only careful excavation
can provide the answers to serious
questions of dating and typology. In
the jargon of field archeologists, this
site provides a classic example of
the axiom which states that the
answers always lie below. In the
case of Kohl and Watzinger, who
had excavated at Gush Halav during
their survey in the early part of this
century, they clearly did not go far
enough in their work. Their
published plan of Gush Halav
indicates that they erroneously took
what are now clearly storage areas
as the closing, or interior, wall of a
very large square basilica (Kohl and
Watzinger 1916: pl. 15). Our work
at Gush Halav demonstrates the

BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 101

This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Reconstructedsynagogueat Gush Halav,
looking northwest.
errors in the German typological
assumptions and strongly supports
the notion that variety exists even
within the broadly defined category
of "basilical synagogues."
To be sure, the founding of the
Gush Halav synagogue can be dated
to the 3rd century C.E. But the
southern wall, which faces Jerusalem,
has only one entrance, namely, the
one with the down-facing eagle
incised on the underside of its lintel
stone. If a gallery for additional
seating existed, it would have been
on the northern side where the only
other certain entrance to the
building has been found. What is
102 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
"basilical" about this building is its
two rows of four columns running
north-south. It is rectangular only if
we take its newly discovered,
interior, load-bearing walls as
defining the interior space of the
building. Indeed, the interest of this
building lies in the fact that these
interior walls, on the west, north,
and east, demarcate the interior
space of the building and internally
transform a roughly square struc-
ture-originally thought by the
Germans to be the synagogue
interior-into a rectangular basilica.
That is to say, it had a large
corridor on the western side, a
gallery on the north, and a series of
rooms along the eastern side. This is
a unique arrangement in this kind of
building.
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Of major interest also is the
bemna,discovered along the south-
ern wall, which happens to be the
only ashlar wall among all the
exterior walls. The bema dates to
the 4th century, or second phase of
the building's use, and is off-center
in the building, just to the west of
the sole entrance on the Jerusalem-
facing south wall. Among the debris,
however, were found smaller pieces
of architectural fragments that
suggest an aedicula, or Torah shrine,
in conjunction with this bema,
possibly built atop it or perhaps in
still another phase. The discovery of
the bema represents the first of its
kind in the general category of
buildings we call basilical except for
the anomalous situations already
noted at Beth She arim and En-gedi.
 L~l 13 m5
161
I 14 A6
Synogogue I
IZ] r~5#7
1'
3 ?4 #?6 ASl
Synagogue II
New data are thus bringing new
insights. While the material from
Gush Halav alters somewhat the
older views, it underscores the
capacity of an individual religious
community for originality within
certain boundaries. The overall
architectural forms, however im-
mersed within the Greco-Roman
provincial world they may be, reflect
a freedom from rigidity that is
refreshing to the student of Roman
provincial art.
The Broadhouse
The broadhouse synagogue receives
its designation because its wall of
orientation is one of the longer, or
broader, walls as opposed to the
shorter end-wall in the basilica.
Despite the fact that the oldest
known example of this type comes
from Dura Europas and dates from
the first half of the 3rd century C.E.,
this type of building in Palestine
was traditionally thought to be late
(4th century C.E.) and transitional
(that is, between the Roman basilical
and the Byzantine apsidal syna-
gogue). In general, its appearance
seems to coincide with a time when
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
1?7
8
I 2 3
Left: Two phases of Khirbet Shemac
synagogue. Right: Isometric reconstruction
of KhirbetShemacsynagogueshowing
trafficpatterns.
a fixed receptacle for the Torah had
been adopted. Among the known
broadhouse synagogues, however, the
bema is the most widely attested
feature and always is situated on the
Jerusalem-orienting wall. The broad-
house represents one resolution of
the awkward about-face required by
the basilica: the worshiper could
enter as easily through the short
wall (and face the Torah shrine) as
through the long wall opposite the
shrine. Or, the broadhouse simply
may represent an independent
predilection for an architectural type
which already had a lengthy history
in ancient Palestine.
Both solutions find attestation
in the first and only Galilean
broadhouse excavated: at Khirbet
Shemac, just I km south of ancient
Meiron. Conclusive dating of two
major phases of the Khirbet Shemac
broadhouse synagogue to the 3rd
and 4th centuries C.E. once again
forces students of ancient synagogues
to put aside preconceived develop-
mental notions of stages in their
history and study the evidence alone.
Khirbet Shema', while clearly a
broadhouse with orientation in both
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 103
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
stages on the long south wall, differs
from its closest parallels at Susiyah
and Eshtemoca in Judea by having
internal columnation running east-
west, 900 off the wall oriented
toward Jerusalem. None of the
other broadhouse synagogues exca-
vated to date has supporting
columns in the sacred area; rather,
they use radically widened walls to
support their superstructure.3
It should be underscored that in
this discussion the dates arrived at
for the phases and salient features of
the synagogues at Khirbet Shema',
Gush Halav, and Meiron are based
upon the chronological data pro-
vided by "critical loci" recovered
during excavation. In every case
these data synchronize well with the
chronological data recovered from
the rest of the site. They are the
result of careful consideration of all
ceramic and numismatic materials in
conjunction with geological informa-
tion available about ancient earth-
quake patterns in Upper Galilee.
The three sites lie in a region of
intense earthquake activity, from
ancient times until the present. In
fact, the Safed-Gush Halav-Meiron
 area constitutes a major fault line,
in the Safed epicenter (Meyers,
Kraabel, and Strange 1976: 37-39).
While this reality has created untold
damage and suffering through the
years, it has in many ways made
the archeological task easier. At
Khirbet Shemac we were able to
conclude that the first synagogue
building of the second half of the
3rd century C.E. was destroyed
completely in the great earthquake
of 306 C.E. The evidence for the
destruction of Synagogue I at Kirbet
Shemac emerged dramatically in the
course of excavations beneath the
floor in the east end of the second,
or post-306, building; here were
recovered fragments of columns,
capitals, and bases all shattered so
badly that they could be used only
as rubble building material or fill.
The destruction date of the sec-
ond Shemac building can be arrived Above: Reconstructed synagogue at
at with some ease since there is a KhirbetShemac.Note hema in centerof
sharp break in the coin evidence south wall and Study Houseadjoining,
after 408 c.E. Since most 5th-century upper right. Below: View of Khirbet
coins were produced under Arcadius Shemacsynagoguebeforereconstruction,
looking east. Opposite, above: Architect's
and Honorius early in the century, reconstructionof KhirbetShemac
and hence specimens would not synagoguewith Study House at right.
normally be expected, the best Opposite, below: Menorah lintel from
explanation for such a radical break KhirbetShema', northernentrance.
in the coin profile is a sudden
abandonment of the site. This is
further corroborated by the tumbled
and badly shattered debris of
Synagogue II. Dating by the closest
"strong earthquake" after 408 C.E., it
is possible to conclude that the Shemac, we were fortunate enough basic Syro-Palestinian broadhouse
occupation of the entire site-com- to recover a number of coins which temple. In the case of Khirbet
paring all the data from the entire enabled us to conclude that the Shemac, we apparently have a
town-came to an abrupt end in the people at Khirbet Shemac did not "mixed" type, a kind of merger
earthquake of 419 C.E. Scientists of wait long to rebuild their sacred between the Roman basilica-
the Geologic Survey of Israel, who sanctuary but attempted to re- viewing the building east-west with
have just concluded a long-range establish their lives immediately. its two rows of four columns-and
study of the Upper Galilee region, Since the rubble-filled bema dates to the Syro-Palestinian broadhouse-
have studied the pictures of the after 306 and because an earlier viewing the building along the long
destroyed in situ remains of bench runs through it and along the southern-orienting wall. In any
Synagogue II and were able to southern wall, it may be concluded event, it represents a novel adapta-
confirm the direction of the ancient that there was no bema in the 3rd- tion of existing prototypes and gives
fall, which is determined by the fault century building. Fractured remains ample testimony to the ingenuity of
lines recently plotted by them. Their of smaller architectural elements, the designers.
study has also corroborated the however, suggest that a Torah shrine
direction of the Gush Halav collapse probably stood on this wall in the The Apsidal Synagogue
and has enabled us to explain the first structure. The third general category of
extensive repairs done at Meiron in The origin of the broadhouse, synagogue building is the apsidal
the first half of the 4th century C.E. therefore, need not be sought at building, clearly the latest of all
In sectioning, or cutting Dura, in our opinion, but may be types (judging from attested remains
through, the bemnaat Khirbet viewed as being descended from the and inscriptions) with a basilica-

104 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST , SPRING 1980

This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

10 50 100
I cm.
like interior. The novelty of this
synagogue type (which began in the
5th century C.E. and continued until
the 8th century) lies in the fact that
the apse points in the direction of
Jerusalem and constitutes the focus
of worship. It represents another
resolution to the awkwardness of the
basilical arrangements described
above by enabling the worshiper to
face directly in the sacred direction
by entering from the east, or any
side opposite the Jerusalem Wall. In
this type of structure the apse
usually is separated from the rest of
the sanctuary by a screen and often
serves as the repository for the
Torah shrine and possibly for the
storage of old scrolls.
In many buildings there is a
platform, or bema, within the apse,
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
suggestive of the place where the
reader or precentor stood, along
with the cantor (hazzan), transla-
tors, and elders. In this regard it is
functionally equivalent to the bema
at Khirbet Shemac or Gush Halav,
though in those places there is only
room for the reader of scripture, or
hazzan (t. Sukk. 4.6 and parallels).
The apsidal building provides the
best possible arrangement for
explaining the rabbinic mention of
the elders sitting with their backs
toward Jerusalem, i.e., to the
orienting wall (t. Meg. 4.21).
According to this same rabbinic
source, the only other time when
leaders turned their backs to
Jerusalem was during the recitation
of the priestly blessing by the priests
themselves. In the apsidal struc-
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 105
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ture, perhaps because of Byzantine
strictures against the building of new
synagogues and even limiting repairs
to points of breach, emphasis now is
shifted from the exterior to the
interior. This shift in emphasis, if
indeed such a conclusion is correct,
usually is observed in the colorful
and richly decorated mosaics which
adorn the floors. These mosaics
often consist of depictions of biblical
episodes but sometimes present
borrowed Greek themes as well,
such as the signs of the zodiac
(Hammath Tiberias, Beth-shan, and
others). Often, too, the mosaic
directly in front of the apse
represents the Torah shrine flanked
by the seven-branched candelabra
(Beth Alpha). Parade examples of
the apsidal synagogue may be found
at Maon, Jericho and Gaza, Beth
Alpha, Hammath Tiberias (last
phase), and Hammath Gader.
In summary, one might charac-
terize the state of synagogue studies
as being in flux. New material
has created a healthy climate of
reconsideration and reevaluation. To
be sure, many of the old theories
have foundered, but that is how
those who put them forward would
have had it. While there is no
longer any typological approach to
this subject, the old types still
persist. Today, however, they persist
in startling new variety. Ultimately
when all the new data are published,
we will know far more about the
ancient synagogue than ever before.
Architectural Diversity: Does it
indicate a kind of religious pluralism?
One of the most interesting
derivative aspects of ancient syna-
gogue study is the implication the
multiplicity of types has for the
study of Judaism in the late antique
period. We have suggested elsewhere
that a systematic survey of syna-
gogue sites indicates a kind of clus-
tering by region (Meyers 1976b: 99).
The Upper Galilee seems to be
rather conservative in representa-
tional art and almost totally lacking
in the richly decorated and highly
colored mosaics such as are found
in Lower Galilee and especially in
 Perspectiveand cutawaysection of
KhirbetShemacsynagoguelooking
southwest:Study Hall is at right.
the Jordan Valley. The relatively
meager nature of the art remains
attested in Upper Galilee suggests a
kind of conservatism rather than a
limited repertoire of symbols. The
list of decorative elements is brief,
with eagles and menorahs predomi-
nating. The occasional appearance of
well-executed geometric designs and
other elements of architectural relief
suggests a very real awareness of
Roman provincial art. There is
apparently no strong desire in the
extreme north to break with con-
temporary architectural standards,
though, in general, the level of
execution is not always of the
highest standard. That is to say, the
architectural detail provides the
feeling that one is a bit removed
from the mainstream of imperial
Roman art forms. Yet the quality of
execution of certain individual
features, such as the eagle lintel at
Gush Halav, is very high and
reflects the availability of qualified
artisans in the area.
If a certain conservatism is at
work in the mountains of northern
Galilee, with similar material culture
attested in the Golan, then one is
forced to ponder seriously the impli-
cations of a rich Jewish representa-
tional art in the neighboring Jordan
Rift region. One inference to be
made is that the sponsors of such
art felt few constraints in placing
Helios and the signs of the zodiac in
the heart of their worship area
(Hachlili 1977: 62). While it is quite
possible that some of the scenes
represent a kind of syncretism with
Greco-Roman culture and religion,
the minimalist position suggests a
simple borrowing of motifs and use
within a completely Jewish context.
There is no doubt that Greek is far
better represented in these areas, and
it therefore follows that such
Hellenized Jews would be the first
to commission works of art that
reflected the more cosmopolitan
tastes of the day. The evidence from
106 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST SPRING 1980
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
the catacombs at Beth Shecarim
(Avigad and Mazar 1975: 234-47)
proves conclusively that much of the
rabbinic leadership of the Talmudic
period was deeply Hellenized and
that it saw no basic conflict between
Greek language and culture and
Jewish learning. A growing flirtation
with mysticism and astrology, well
documented in the rabbinic litera-
ture, also may account for this kind
of flexibility. It is no longer
necessary to explain any Judeo-
Hellenic hybrid by recourse to a
kind of illicit mysticism not
sanctioned by the rabbinic authori-
ties, as the late E. R. Goodenough
suggested (1953: 3-32). The mere
presence of the Hammath mosaics in
such a center of Jewish learning as
Tiberias itself suggests that locales of
Jewish learning were no less
Hellenized than Husaifa or Naaran.
In addition to the conservative
tendency in representational art
which characterizes the Upper Gali-
lee, the extreme northern highlands
may be distinguished from Lower
Galilee in other ways as well. A
statistical survey of known inscrip-
tional remains suggests a prevailing
attachment to Hebrew and Aramaic.
though Greek also is known (Meyers
1976a: 97). It is the more Hellenized
southern Galilee which attests to the
widespread use of Greek. Also, there
exists in Upper Galilee and the
Golan a unique ceramic repertoire
that is absent from Judea and only
present in part in Lower Galilee.
Despite the conservative nature of
Upper Galilee, however, the presence
of imported fine wares and an
unusually high incidence of coins
from the port city of Tyre attests to
a highly developed trade network
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
and rather sophisticated material
culture. It is quite clear that many
of these differences may be the
result of the rugged topography of
the Meiron mountain range which
separates the two Galilees, but it
also is clear that those who settled
the Upper Galilee did so with the
express purpose of seeking refuge
from the vast Roman administrative
control network which was so
effective in Lower Galilee and in the
south (Avi-Yonah 1977: 133-35).
So there is great diversity and
discontinuity of sorts between the
two Galilees and between north and
south. There is also, as we have
indicated, great diversity in syna-
gogue types even within a single
region, as we have noted at Khirbet
Shemac, Meiron, and Gush Halav.
To our mind, such diversity within a
region reflects man's perennial need
to differentiate himself from his
closest neighbor. It need not indicate
much more than this, however.
In the case of Gush Halav,
situated deep in the wadi below
the upper city where remnants of
another ancient synagogue have
been found, there is the additional
possibility that one segment of the
community might have been Jewish-
Christian. Indeed, one of the
published tombs from the acropolis
area has been identified recently as
Jewish-Christian (Saunders 1977).
The Italian Franciscans have
maintained for many years that
Gush Halav was an ancient Jewish-
Christian stronghold in Galilee. They
also contend that a multireligious
community existed at Capernaum
where the Christian House of Peter
stands alongside the great syna-
gogue. They further argue the
presence of a Jewish-Christian
community, a view called into
serious question by others (Strange
1977: 67-68). The mere existence,
however, of the kind of data
described here suggested that the
rationale for self-differentiation and
even for site location may be rooted
in a genuine religious pluralism.
Until such time as the subject of
Jewish-Christianity in ancient Pales-
tine achieves a kind of scholarly
control and consensus, however, it
seems that few people would be
prepared to understand such
diversity of material culture in
religious terms.
Loosening the fetters of a rigid
typological understanding of the
synagogue thus can open up new
ways of understanding the Judaism
of Roman and Byzantine Palestine.
Considering blocks of material in
terms of regions enables us to
understand the rich diversity which
must now be associated with a
rabbinic Judaism usually thought of
as "normative" or monochromatic.
In addition to shedding light on the
matter of pluralism, a study of the
material culture of Galilee indicates
a level of culture that points to a
peak of material culture in the late
Roman and Byzantine periods.
It is at this time, ca. 400 C.E.,
that the Palestinian Talmud was
completed. In the west the Babylo-
nian Talmud always has been held
in higher esteem, for Palestinian
Jewry was thought to be in eclipse
at this time. But in light of the high
level of material culture from the
Byzantine era, it becomes very
difficult to conceive of the Palestine
of this period as having declined in
any sense.
It is possible, however, that
tensions in the 4th century
contributed to some population
movement. Indeed, a recent site
survey of the Galilee-Golan region
suggests a slightly earlier peak for
Lower Galilee, 3rd-4th centuries C.E.,
and a slightly later peak for parts of
Upper Galilee and the Golan, 4th-
5th centuries C.E.. pointing to a
general shift northwest onto the
volcanic highlands of southern Syria
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
as pressures from the Roman in 527 C.E.,when Jews were repressed
imperium seem to mount (Meyers, and ultimately persecuted. Such
Strange, and Groh 1978). It is prosperity is evidenced in the extent
quite probable that such a shift of synagogue- and church-building
in population can be related to despite reported hostilities between
new methods of taxation in kind Jews and Christians in the patristic
as runaway inflation ate away literature (Wilkinson 1977: 179-81).
at the pocketbooks of the Roman The intense building activity and
governors. relative prosperity may be under-
stood also as a result of the new
status-Holy Land-which Palestine
achieved as new wealth and masses
The synagogues indicate a of pilgrims poured into the country
high level of culture and a fromThough a newly Christianized Empire.
one tends to think of
rich religiousdiversity. Palestinian Jewry as being in decline
after Constantine, new archeological
data force us to rethink this
question. For reasons still unknown,
One of the real puzzles yet the Palestinian version of the
to be resolved in the quest to Talmud, compiled around 400 C.E.,
understand the transition between does not signify the end of Jewish
the Roman and Byzantine periods in creativity in the Holy Land, but
Palestine is the role of the revolt rather indicates a high point in both
against Gallus Caesar in 351 C.E. All the material as well as literary
of the 15 or so localities affected by culture of the Jewish people.
this major disruption are located in The Byzantine period similarly
Lower Galilee. There is no evidence marks a high point in the history of
whatever that the Upper Galilean Christianity as it also witnesses an
highlands were affected by this unprecedented program of church
outburst of political fervor. There building in the Holy Land. In our
had been massive attempts on the view, this building activity cannot be
part of Rome to urbanize this part due entirely to imperial efforts
of Palestine. The revolt in the reign during and following the reign of
of Gallus Caesar suggests that such Constantine. Rather, it testifies also
a policy had gone just a bit too far. to the tenacity of the Jewish-
Upper Galilee, which like the Golan Christian church in Palestine.
was not administered in such a In short, the history of Roman-
fashion, did not join in. It is quite Byzantine Palestine is yet to be
possible that Hellenistic inroads were written. It is clear that this will
so great in Lower Galilee at the occur only when literary historians
time of Gallus that they no longer and archeologists join hands in such
were acceptable, and Jews, when an endeavor which will undoubtedly
faced with the right opportunity, shed further light on both church
again sought access to redemptive and synagogue.
media4 in their attempt to achieve
political sovereignty. Upper Galilee's
conservatism and location in the
hinterland could have made joining
this abortive venture quite unneces- Notes
sary, because Upper Galilee had
constituted a sort of refuge area This article was written in August 1977.
since the days of Bar Kochba. 1Americaninvolvementin Palestinianstudies
While the relative calm in the begins with Robinson, who was one of the
founding members of Union Theological Semi-
Eastern Empire was broken briefly
nary. His first visit to the Holy Land resulted in
by the Gallus Revolt, a measure of his pioneering work, Biblical Researches in
prosperity reigned in Palestine until Palestine (1841). Trained as a biblical scholar,
the accession of Emperor Justinian Robinson's explorations on horseback led him to
BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980 107
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 identify and locate many of the premier sites in
Palestine. His greatest contributions to arche-
ology are perhaps his studies in the newly
developing field of historical geography. For a
summary of his career, see Wright (1970: 3-8).
2Around 1973 there was a flurry of excitement
in Israel as the Italian Franciscans announced to
the world that the synagogue site at Capernaum,
mentioned in the New Testament, dated to the
4th-5th centuries C.E. of the Byzantine era.
Excavated by Fathers V. Corbo and S. Loffreda,
the late dating upset many of the older theories
regarding the development of the so-called
Galilean/early or basilical synagogue. James F.
Strange, while subjecting their publications to
critical review, has basically accepted the late
dating (1977: 70), though raising many other
substantive issues.
'We have refrained from speaking in detail
about the recent excavations at Eshtemoca by Z.
Yeivin and at Susiyah by S. Gutman, Z. Yeivin,
and E. Netzer because only the most preliminary
reports are yet available in Qadmoniot 5 (1972),
no. 2, an issue devoted entirely to ancient
synagogues. Also included in this special issue are
reports on En-gedi by D. Barag, Y. Porat,
and E. Netzer and on Beth-shan by D. Bahat.
The Israel Exploration Society, however, is
publishing an updated, English language version
of this issue which also will include updated
remarks on Khirbet Shemac by the author. The
publication has been in press since 1977.
4The extent of destruction of Jewish villages
and towns in the times of Gallus is sufficient to
justify speculation that the revolt of the Jews at
this time was a millennial uprising of sorts with
messianic underpinnings.
Bibliography
Avigad, N., and Mazar, B.
1975 Beth Shecarim. Pp. 229-47 in vol. I of
Encyclopedia of Archaeological Ex-
cavations in the Holy Land. Jeru-
salem: Masada.
Avi-Yonah, M.
1973a Ancient Synagogues. Ariel 32: 29-43
(Hebrew).
1973b Editor's Note. Israel Exploration
Journal 23: 43-45.
1977 The Holi' Land. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House.
Foerster, G.
1971 Les Synagogues de Galil&e. Bible et
Terre Sainte 130: 8-15.
1973 The Synagogues at Masada and
Herodium. Eretz Israel 11: 224-28
(Hebrew).
Goodenough, E. R.
1953-69 Jewish Symbols ofthe Greco-Roman
Period. New York: Bollingen.
Groh, D. E.
1977 Galilee and the Eastern Roman
Empire in Late Antiquity. Explor 3:
78-93.
108 BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST / SPRING 1980
This content downloaded from 148.251.80.252 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:48:16 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Hachlili, R. Safrai, S.
1976 The Niche and the Ark in Ancient 1963 Was there a Woman's Gallery in the
Synagogues. Bulletin ofthe American Synagogue? Tarbiz 32: 329-38 (He-
Schools of Oriental Research 223: brew).
43-53. Sailer, S. J.
1977 The Zodiac in Ancient Jewish Art: 1972 Second Revised Catalogue of the
Representation and Significance. Ancient Synagogues of the Holi'
Bulletin of the American Schools of Land. Jerusalem: Franciscan.
Oriental Research 228: 61-77. Saunders, E. W.
Htittenmeister, F., and Reeg, G. 1977 Christian Synagogues and Jewish
1977 Die antiken Siynagogen in Israel. Christianity in Galilee. Explor 3:
Beihefte zum Ttibinger Atlas des 70-78.
Vorderen Orients No. 12/1. Wies- Strange, J. F.
baden: Reichert. 1976 Capernaum. Pp. 140-41 in The Inter-
Kohl, H., and Watzinger, C. preter's Dictionary of the Bible.
1916 Antike Srnagogen in Galilaea. Leip- Supplementary Volume, ed. K. Crim.
zig: Wissenshaftliche Veriffentlich- Nashville: Abingdon.
ung der deutschen Orient-Gesell- 1977 Review Article: The Capernaum and
schaft. Herodian Publications. Bulletin of
Kraabel, A. T. the American Schools of Oriental
1974 Ancient Synagogues. Pp. 436-39 in Research 226: 65-73.
supplemental vol. 16 of New Catholic Sukenik, E. L.
Encyclopedia. 1934 Ancient Synagogues in Palestine and
Loffreda, S. Greece. London: Oxford University.
1973 The Late Chronology of the Syna- Wilkinson, J.
gogue of Capernaum. Israel Explora- 1976 Christian Pilgrims in Jerusalem dur-
tion Journal 23: 37-42. ing the Byzantine Period. Palestine
May, H. G. Exploration 108: 75-101.
1944 Quarterly
Synagogues in Palestine. The Biblical 1977 Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Cru-
Archaeologist 7: 1-20. sades. Warminster, England: Aris
Meyers, E. M. and Phillips.
1976a Synagogue Architecture. Pp. 842-44 Wright, G. E.
in The Interpreter'sDictionariyofthe 1970 The Phenomenon of American Ar-
Bible. Supplementary Volume, ed. K. chaeology in Palestine. Pp. 3-40 in
Crim. Nashville: Abingdon. Near Eastern Archaeology in the
1976b Galilean Regionalism as a Factor in Twentieth in Honor
Historical Reconstruction. Bulletin Century: Essays
of Nelson Glueck, ed. J. A. Sanders.
of the American Schools of Oriental Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Research 221: 93-101.
1977 Gush Halav 1977, Notes and News.
Israel Exploration Journal 27:
253-54.
Meyers, E. M.; Kraabel, A. T.; and Strange, J. F.
1976 Ancient Synagogue Excavations at
Khirhet Shemac, Upper Galilee,
Israel 1970-1972. Annual of the
American Schools of Oriental Re-
search 42. Durham: Duke University.
Meyers, E. M., and Strange, J. F.
1977 Survey in Galilee: 1976. Explor 3:
7-18.
Meyers, E. M.; Strange, J. F.; and Groh, D. E.
1978 The Meiron Excavation Project:
Archeological Survey in Galilee and
Golan, 1976. Bulletin of the Amer-
ican Schools of Oriental Research
230: 1-24.
Meyers, E. M.; Strange, J. F.; and Meyers, C. L.
1978 Second Preliminary Report on the
Excavations at Ancient Meiron.
Annual of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 43: 73-103.
Naveh, J.
1978 On Stone and Mosaic: The Aramaic
and Hebrew Inscriptions from An-
cient Synagogues. Jerusalem: Maca-
riv (Hebrew).