Untitled

252
models. Yet these mythological scenes, although
originating in pagan mythology, enjoyed popularity
in Byzantine secular art with both Jews and
Christians, as proved by other mosaics in the area
(such as the House of Leontis at Beth She"an and
those at Erez, Sheikh Zuweid, and Madaba).
The Nile Festival building is a public structure,
and could be a pagan or even a Christian
or Jewish building, but it affords no clear evidence
as to what kind of community it served.
Archaeological evidence indicates a date in the
early 5th century, although ‘the stylistic analysis
of the mosaics is ambiguous in this regard’ (Weiss
& Talgam 2002: 85).
The excavators believe that the artists who
made the Nile Festival building’s mosaics came
from Alexandria (Weiss & Talgam 2002: 85, note
170). This assumption is based on eight lines of
Greek Inscription I, which was found on the outside
of the west entrance. Di Segni (2002: 91-97)
maintains that it contains a reference to the Nilotic
mosaic and praises the two artists, Procopius (who
may have been the head of the team) and his sonin-law
Patricius (the apprentice) who came from
Alexandria (lines 5-6). Bowersock (2004) suggests
a different reading of the same inscription, for
which he proposes considerable corrections. He
refutes the notion that the inscription is related
to the Nile mosaic, situated four rooms away.
Bowersock interpretation, which seems more persuasive,
is that the Nile Festival building was the
house of the daughter of the governor Procopius
and her husband Absolius Patricius (Bowersock
2004: 766). He further argues that the governor
may be identified as Fl. Theodorus Georgius Procopius
(517/8), who ruled Palaestina Secunda, the
province to which Sepphoris belonged (but see
the replay of Di Segni 2005b). These proposed
changes to the inscription provide an approximate
early 6th-century date for the building’s mosaic
pavements. They also leave unresolved the question
of the artists who created the mosaics, with no
real indication that they came from Alexandria.
The Tabgha Church Mosaic
The Tabgha church pavements are the work of a
great 5th-century master (Avi-Yonah 1960: 34).
The transept’s two panels show Nilotic flora and
fauna (fig. V-2), perhaps employing the traditional
repertory of the earth’s fertility and wealth in a
special design (Dunbabin 1999: 194).
chapter twelve
At Tabgha the Nilotic motifs are distributed
freely over the floor, without a clear plan, although
they convey the impression of some continuity
and relation between the various groups depicted
in the design.
The artist did not depict the flora and birds
realistically but schematically (pls. V.8e-f). He
might have had a representation of a city, of which
he used only a reduced version (Schneider 1937:
61, 69-70). The Tabgha mosaicist was a skilled
craftsman, able to create an original work with
distinctive and unique motifs depicted as spread
out isolated scenes, where some episodes portray
actual events. Schneider suggests that the mosaicist
was a native of one of the great Graeco-
Roman seaboard cities. Pixner (1985: 200, 202)
maintains the Tabgha mosaicist was of Egyptian
origin, on the assumption that the Patriarch
Martyrios, who donated the mosaic pavement,
brought in an Egyptian mosaicist to make the
floor.
The Kissufim Church Mosaic
In St. Elias church at Kissufim (Cohen 1979,
1980) the mosaic in the northern aisle of the
nave and several intercolumnar panels are the
only surviving parts. The aisle composition consists
of ten assorted episodes arranged in parallel
registers, one above the other, surrounded by
a frame of composite guilloche flanked by two
rows of wave design (pl. VII.7; fig. VII-4). Animal
combat and hunting events are shown, as well as
peaceful scenes; the themes in the various panels
do not form a continuous narrative. Each of the
series of horizontal panels renders groupings of
pairs of figures with some sort of ground lines
between the registers. The style of the pavement
is uniform and unique. The unity of the panels is
established by all of them being almost the same
size, with no scene dominating the entire composition.
Two of the intercolumnar panels depict
figurative scenes: two female donors bearing gifts
in one panel (pl. XI.3a) and a camel driver in the
other (pl. VII.18a). All panels have a white background
with no landscape except plants and trees
randomly dispersed. The white tesserae of the
background follow the outline of the figures
The ten narrative panels, described from the
entrance (west), are (pl. VII.7; fig. VII-4): sheep
flanking a tree and peacefully nibbling foliage;
combat of man and bear; a lion attacking a bull;
a hound pursuing an antelope and hare; a hunter