Untitled

146
designated groups IV and V. The difference in
the composition is possibly connected to or a
result of the geographic distribution (see Tables
VI.1, 2; Dauphin 1976a: 121-122). Groups I-III
are found mainly in Palaestina, with only one
in Arabia, whereas compositions IV and V are
located chiefly in Jordan, in the Gerasa and
Madaba regions, and in coastal Phoenicia, with
three in Israel, two in the Beth She"an region and
one in Caesarea. The inhabited scroll designs are
sparsely used in Syria and frequently on small
surfaces (Donceel-Voûte 1995: 99).
Groups IV and V are usually laid out randomly
in the general geometric composition with no logic
in the arrangement of the themes; this contrasts
with the symmetrical design of groups I-III. The
composition in groups IV and V is developed
horizontally, as distinct from the vertical composition
of groups I-III. The vine trellis issues out of
an amphora or sometimes an acanthus leaf in the
centre of the bottom row, flanked by birds or animals
(group IV), or from amphorae or acanthus
leaves in the corners of the composition (group
V); they form medallions inhabited with objects,
animals, and human figures. Hunting, vintage and
pastoral scenes appear only on mosaics of groups
IV and V; scenes usually fill no more than two
medallions. There is a lack of proportion; the
spaces are equally filled, human figures, birds,
and beasts are of equal size so that they may be
squeezed into one medallion. It seems quite clear
that the artists’ aim was not to copy nature. On
the inhabited scroll pavements some motifs are of
frequent use, such as the bird-in-cage, a bird of
prey, and baskets, as well as less common animals,
a lioness with her cub, an elephant, and a giraffe.
These motifs are not exclusive to the inhabited
scroll mosaics; some occur in other types of mosaic
floors, earlier or contemporary.
Although the inhabited scroll composition
appears in Jewish and Christian art, it might have
carried entirely different meanings, corresponding
to the significance and form of the architectural
building, the community needs, and the faith
and the time it was designed for. The appearance
of the inhabited scrolls in both synagogue
and church contexts might imply that its designs
and motifs are simply decorative; it also indicates
that mosaicists worked for Christian and Jewish
patrons alike. The significance of each motif is
difficult to determine, although it may be postulated
that certain combinations of motifs which
recur in synagogues or churches may have been
chapter six
preferred by the Jewish or Christian communities.
The same perhaps applies regarding the animals,
especially the rare ones such as the elephant, the
bear, and the buffalo, which occur on the Ma#on,
Gaza, and Beth She"an synagogue floors.
Certain motifs might have had special meaning
or significance for certain groups of people (Dauphin
1978b). For example, Jews could have commissioned
work with a request for motifs such as
the menorah, or other patterns, which held special
significance, as in the composition of the Ma#on
and Beth She"an synagogues floors. It is important
to emphasize that Jewish inhabited scroll mosaics
are distinctive for two reasons: first, because of
the addition of Jewish symbols to the composition
in the synagogues of Ma#on and Beth She"an;
second, because no human figures are depicted in
the medallions, although genre and vintage scenes
are seen in many of the church mosaics.
The details of the pavement, in the general
composition of the floor, the individual patterns,
and motifs, were probably taken from pattern or
model books according to individual or communal
taste (see Chap. XII). This can be inferred from
the uniformity of, and similarity in composition
and motif. However, as the individual styles are
obviously dissimilar, various artists and workshops
must have produced the mosaics in different parts
of the country. Also, certain combinations of the
recurring motifs might have been preferred by
the Jewish or the Christian community without
specific significance attached to them. The motifs
and the repeated elements and scenes in mosaics
usually rendered similarly evidently cannot
be associated with particular compositions or
schools. They seem to indicate individual choice
from a common source or pattern books by the
craftsmen and donors; the difference in style in
each mosaic is due to the individual style and
ability of the mosaicist.
The differences in the content of the scrolls are
also remarkable. Human figures and everyday
life scenes are absent from groups I-III except
at Be"er Shem#a and Petra. The geographic
regions seem to indicate different preferences by
the population. Whereas in the Land of Israel
the most popular and common inhabited scroll
pavement design for synagogues and churches are
from groups I-III, with their symmetrical layout,
containing objects and animals, the Beth She"an
region and the Christian pavements in Jordan are
asymmetrical, including, in addition to animals
and objects, human figures rendered in scenes of