Untitled

iconoclasm on mosaic pavements of synagogues and churches 217
Avi-Yonah (1961: 42) claimed that this ‘aniconic
orthodoxy resumed its way even before the
similar trends prevailed in Islam and in the iconoclastic
tendency at Byzantium... The old fear of
the human image returned…it was now in protest
against and in opposition to the use of images by
the church’. Schick (1995: 182) disagreed, arguing
that figures decorated later synagogue mosaics
such as Beth "Alpha and the mid-7th century
beth midrash at Meroth. However, the Beth "Alpha
pavement is dated to early or mid-6th century,
probably before the restrictions were imposed,
and the Meroth mosaic decorates a side room of
the synagogue, suggested by the excavators to be
a beth midrash, whose ornamentation might have
enjoyed greater leniency.
The few examples of iconoclasm found on
synagogues pavements seem more likely to be
the result of a decision by the specific local community
to ban the display of images. At Susiya
the mosaic was completely renewed with different
geometric designs, while at Na#aran the images
were destroyed and not repaired, which suggests
that the synagogue was no longer in use.
The number of church mosaics in Israel
and Jordan with iconoclastic damage is about
65 (about 11 pavements in Israel) while about
85 mosaics are undamaged (Schick 1995: tables
7, 10-11; Ognibene 1998: 384). In Jordan the
damage to mosaics is concentrated in several
towns where a great number of church mosaics
were damaged, but it also befell church floors
in many other villages: at Gerasa the mosaics of
several churches (seven), at Madaba those of only
a few (four) and at Umm al-Rasas all the pavements
(seven; all repaired). The archaeological
evidence proves that not all churches sustained
iconoclastic damage. All church pavements at
Umm al-Rasas were disfigured but only a few at
Madaba and on Mt. Nebo, while others did not
suffer at all. Though disfiguring animated renditions
on church pavements might have been an
organized campaign, it apparently affected only
certain mosaics, apparently reflecting local occurrences.
The dates of the iconoclastic crises also are
in dispute, though most scholars seem to agree
that the damage was done at the end of the 7th
century or early 8th century. However, some
disfigurements are unusually dated: the Jabaliyah
Diakonikon pavement (dated to 445) shows
disfigurement and crude repair to the human
figures and animals while other images survived
intact (pl. VII.11). On the church pavement at
Jabaliyah, dated to the 8th century, the animals
and birds of the north aisle pavement were disfigured
(Humbert 2000: 121, 123).
The churches of Umm al-Rasas, all of which
suffered at the hands of the iconoclasts, might
indicate two waves of the crisis occurred. All the
pavements were originally decorated with figured
motifs and are dated to the late 6th century
(Bishop Sergius church to 587/8, Priest Wa"il
church to 586, and the Church of the Rivers to
579 or 594). This implies that iconoclastic damage
and crude repair probably occurred some time
in the late 6th or early 7th century, and possibly
was organized by a principal authority. Nevertheless,
in the 8th century St. Stephen’s church was
once again paved with an elaborate figurative
mosaic, which was some time later damaged by
iconoclasts and repaired.
The very small number of synagogue pavements
affected by the iconoclastic crises indicates
that it undoubtedly reflected local cases. The Jews
regarded the synagogue floor as a place to walk
and tread on; the decoration, albeit with meaning
and importance, was not sacred and the local
community tolerated even the hand of God to
be depicted on the Beth "Alpha pavement. They
might even have purposely rendered the biblical
scenes on the pavement to intensify the feeling
that the ornamentation was not sacred and should
not be worshiped.
The iconoclast destruction, primarily churches
of Palaestina and Arabia, and in a few synagogues,
was apparently caused by the status of these
regions as the Holy Land, the land of the Bible,
the cradle of Judaism and Christianity, hence
more susceptible to zealously pious approaches.
The somewhat random destruction of church
pavements, and their repair concurrent with the
notably diverse periods of damage, presumably
indicate that waves of iconophobic actions at different
points in time affected the sites and were the
result of the zeal of select local communities and
their leaders, or possibly of the resident clergy.
The absence of repair to damaged pavements
might have been the result of the local community
leaving, as can be deduced from the careful
disfigurement of the pavements, or due to the
inaction of later occupants.