The oldest original synagogue building in the Diaspora: the Delos synagogue reconsidered
Hesperia, Fall, 2004 by Monika Trumper
(32.) Contra Binder (1999, p. 301), this certainly does not suggest "that they were accessed from the roof or through a second story that is no longer extant. If this was the case, then the chambers may have served as storage compartments." Similarly White (1987, p. 148), cited by McLean (1996, p. 194), had proposed that the "internal partitions may have served as storage or as structural components for access stairs," but he does not elaborate on what might have been accessed by these stairs, nor does Binder discuss the function of upper-story rooms.
- Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »
Although the elevations in Bruneau (1970, pl. B) are not abundant (at least not for all walls; see Fig. 2, above), it becomes quite clear that many wall crests are on a level similar to that of the pavement in A/B; and that the levels of the floors in the rooms differ markedly, most probably because the original surfaces of the earthen floors were not recognized in the early excavations or because their levels have changed considerably since 1912/1913. There certainly were doorways at ground level between the rooms; they were presumably quite simple, without elaborate thresholds and doorposts, and positioned slightly higher than the doorways in the east wall of rooms A and B. This could be the result of the renovation of this complex in a later phase, one that might have included raising the floor levels. In any case, nothing (staircase, finds, structure) attests the existence of a second story for this complex. Furthermore, in the Delian houses known to have had two stories, the ground-floor rooms are always accessible from the ground floor only, never from above.
It should be noted that the dividing walls of this complex are much more poorly preserved than all the other walls. Were they deliberately demolished, destroyed by fire, or were they made of a perishable material such as earth, which was quite often used in Delos, especially in private architecture? See Delos VIII, p. 241; Delos XXVII, p. 6.
(33.) The D5/D6 space was certainly divided in a later phase. The general layout suggests that rooms D4 and D6 were likewise created at a later time, and that the first plan comprised a large corridor/courtyard, D7, and three rooms of fairly equal size, D1-D3. This cannot be proven with the available data, however.
(34.) Part of the gap extends down to the floor level of room D7 and that of courtyard C east of the south portion of the east wall of D7, and part to the surface level of the thresholds of rooms A and B and the crests of the partition walls of the D-complex. At the lower level it is only 0.40 m wide, at the upper 1.30-1.40 m. North and south of this break, the walls are preserved to a height of ca. 0.90 m above the floor level of the courtyard.
(35.) See Bruneau 1970, pl. E, with plan and elevation.
(36.) Bruneau 1982, p. 497. White (1987, p. 148, n. 63) cites Bruneau's hypothesis as evidence without commenting on the problems or delivering further convincing proof. Like Bruneau, White notices that the east wall bonds with the north and south walls of the large hall; the marble spoil materials are the only signs of remodeling. This is one of the rare cases in which both Bruneau and White willingly acknowledge that a wall, though bonding with neighbors of an earlier phase, was remodeled in a secondary phase, thus giving priority to the differences in wall systems and not, as usual, to the question of bonding. Binder (1999, pp. 299-300) does not discuss these problems, but merely states that the east wall of A/B was rebuilt.