Instant download The roman military base at dura-europos, syria: an archaeological visualization sim

Page 1


The Roman Military Base at Dura-Europos, Syria: An Archaeological Visualization Simon James

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://ebookmass.com/product/the-roman-military-base-at-dura-europos-syria-an-arc haeological-visualization-simon-james/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

The Donkey in Human History: An Archaeological Perspective Peter Mitchell

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-donkey-in-human-history-anarchaeological-perspective-peter-mitchell/

Islamic Finance and Global Capitalism: An Alternative to the Market Economy 1st Edition James Simon Watkins

https://ebookmass.com/product/islamic-finance-and-globalcapitalism-an-alternative-to-the-market-economy-1st-editionjames-simon-watkins/

Erdogan's War: A Strongman's Struggle at Home and in Syria Tol

https://ebookmass.com/product/erdogans-war-a-strongmans-struggleat-home-and-in-syria-tol/

Critics, Compilers, and Commentators: An Introduction to Roman Philology, 200 Bce-800 Ce James Zetzel

https://ebookmass.com/product/critics-compilers-and-commentatorsan-introduction-to-roman-philology-200-bce-800-ce-james-zetzel/

Bicycling for Transportation: An Evidence-Base for Communities Melissa Bopp

https://ebookmass.com/product/bicycling-for-transportation-anevidence-base-for-communities-melissa-bopp/

Military Anthropology: Soldiers, Scholars and Subjects at the Margins of Empire Montgomery Mcfate

https://ebookmass.com/product/military-anthropology-soldiersscholars-and-subjects-at-the-margins-of-empire-montgomery-mcfate/

Cato the Younger: life and death at the end of the Roman republic Cato

https://ebookmass.com/product/cato-the-younger-life-and-death-atthe-end-of-the-roman-republic-cato/

Last Night at the Hollywood Canteen. 1st Edition Sarah James.

https://ebookmass.com/product/last-night-at-the-hollywoodcanteen-1st-edition-sarah-james/

The US-China Military and Defense Relationship during the Obama Presidency 1st ed. Edition James Johnson

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-us-china-military-and-defenserelationship-during-the-obama-presidency-1st-ed-edition-jamesjohnson/

THEROMANMILITARYBASE

ATDURA-EUROPOS,SYRIA

THEROMAN MILITARYBASEAT DURA-EUROPOS, SYRIA

AnArchaeologicalVisualization

SimonJames

Aresearchprojectconductedincollaborationwith LaMissionFranco-Syrienned’Europos-Doura and YaleUniversityArtGallery

Supportedby UniversityofLeicester,theLeverhulmeTrust,theGerdaHenkelStiftung, theBritishAcademy,theSocietyforthePromotionofRoman StudiesandtheSocietyofAntiquariesofLondon

GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom

OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©SimonJames2019

Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin2019 Impression:1

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove

Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer

PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable

LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018958835

ISBN978–0–19–874356–9

Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY

LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.

ForSusanMatheson whosegenerosityandopennesshasmaderesearchonYale’sDuraarchivesorewarding & PierreLeriche whomadethemilitarybaseprojectpossible andevenifwedonotalwaysagree!

PREFACEAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

StudyofremainsascomplexasthoseofDura-Europosmustnecessarilybeacollaborativemultidisciplinaryeffort,involvingarchaeologists,historiansandepigraphers,architectsandancientart specialists,withahostofotherswhosemultipleperspectiveshelpusbuildupafullyrounded pictureofaremarkablemulti-period,multi-culturalancientcity.However,collaborationina largerenterprisestillleavesroomforindividualinitiatives.TemperamentallyIhaveneverfeltany strongdesire,orindeedanymarkedaptitude,toorganizeandlead,asopposedtoparticipatein,an overseasexpedition(althoughsince2015I findmyselfdoingsoinCyprus,andgenerallyenjoying theexperience!).Whilekeyelementsofthepresentprojectconstituteddirectcollaborationswith colleagues(notablythegeophysicalsurveywork),anditwasmadepossiblebythegenerous supportofthelargerFranco-Syrianledprojectteam,mostoftheresearchresembledmyprevious studyoftheportablemartialmaterialculturefromthesiteincomprisingsolitaryeffort.Manyof themostsatisfyingmomentsduringthecourseoftheprojectwereexperiencedonsiteatDura, whenfordaysatatimeIenjoyedthepossiblyuniqueprivilegeofroamingsoloandatwillover sparselypublishedexcavatedandunexcavatedRomanmilitaryremainsequatingtohalftheareaof alegionarybase,ponderingandpursuinganypointofinterestasitarose.Thepleasuresofthis opportunitywerefrequentlymatchedbythe flashesofinsightexperiencedwhilesequesteredin mystudy,surroundedbybooksand files,workingthrougharchivalrecordsincombinationwith thenew fielddata,asIgeneratedbothtextandimagesforthisreport.Moregenerally,aswasthe casewhenwriting DuraFinalReport7 onthemilitaryartefacts,I finditimmenselyproductive andprofoundlysatisfyingtobeabletoundertakearesearchprojectentirelybymyself,fromdata collectionto finalpresentation especiallyintheformofgeneratingmyowninterpretative drawingsasanintegralpartoftheresearchprocess.Isupposethisisinthespiritofthelong traditionofthe ‘lonescholar’ whichhascharacterizedsomuchresearch,notleastontheclassical world.WorkinginthemodernBritishhighereducationsector,inwhichthepressuretofocuson large,bigbudgetcollaborativeresearchprogrammesgrowseverstronger,Iamthereforeacutely awareofhowdeeplyunfashionablethisapproachis.However,Ihopetheresultsofthisproject supportthecaseforcontinueddiversityofapproachestoarchaeologicalresearch,including ‘lone scholarship’ .

Thisvolumewillalsobeseenbysomeasold-fashionedinbeingabig,heavybook.Mycentral justificationforthisisthatitispublishingbasicdata,muchofitforthe firsttime,onalargeareaof afamousandstillintensivelystudiedarchaeologicalsite.Yetitismoregenerallywiththe Zeitgeist inusingdigitaltechnologytocreateit,andthearchivalresourcebehindit.Italsoseeksto innovate oratleast,toassertthevalueofneglectedapproaches inemphasizingsostrongly theroleofthevisualatallstagesofscholarship,fromdatacollectiontopresentation,inan academic fieldstill,inmyview,undulymyopicinits fixationontext.

Asitissuchalargevolume,IshouldaddsomethingonhowIenvisagereadersusingit.Aswith thesubstantialoriginalpublications,Cumont’ s Fouilles andtheYale/FrenchAcademy PreliminaryReports and FinalReports,onlythemostdedicatedDuraresearcherislikelytoreaditfrom covertocover;Ianticipatemanyreaderswilllookattheintroductionandtheconclusions,and pursuethedetailedaspectsofthematerialpresentedwhichinterestthem.Forthesereasons,inthe styleofcontemporarytelevisiondocumentarieswhichprécisthestorylineaftereverycommercial break,thereisadegreeofrepetitionofkeyinformationandargumentstohelporientatereaders dippingintothevolume;apologiestothemarathonreaderifthisirritates,butanyoneemerging fromthelonghaulthroughPartIImayalso finditusefultorecapthewiderpurposesofhaving doneso!

TheprojectwaskindlysupportedbytheUniversityofLeicester,throughgrantingofthe preciousperiodsofleavefromteachingandadministrativedutiesessentialtopermitsustained focusonthetask.IamespeciallygratefultotheLeverhulmeTrustandtheGerdaHenkelStiftung forfundingvitaladditionalresearchleaveatdifferentstagesofthedecade-longproject.Key aspectsofthework,especiallythegeophysicalsurvey,werekindlyfundedbytheBritish Academy,theSocietyofAntiquariesofLondon,andtheSocietyforthePromotionofRoman Studies.

Asacknowledgedabove,theprojectwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithouttheactivesupportof manypeople,thedirectparticipationofothersinthe field,andinputfrommanymorethrough discussions.IamespeciallygratefultomyformerstudentandnowvaluedcollaboratorDr JenniferBaird,onwhoseownworkIhavedrawnheavily,regardingboththesiteandtheYale archive.Shewasanimmensehelpindiscussingremainsofthemilitaryhousingonsite,andinthe conductofsurvey,withtwootherCanadians,herhusbandandmycolleagueDrDanStewart,and ourmutualfriendBenGourleyfortheTotalStationwork.TheestimableKrisStruttfromthe UniversityofSouthamptonwithhisassistantsundertooktheinvaluablegeophysics.Andabsolutelycriticalwasthehospitalityof,andinteractionwith,ourFrench,Syrian,andothercolleagues of laMissionFranco-Syrienned’Europos-Doura,aboveallPierreLeriche,whowelcomedtheBrits andCanadianswarmly,ifsometimesinclinedtotease lessujetsdeSaGracieuseMajestébritannique!MFSEDgenerouslyaccommodatedandfedus,andarrangedouraccesstothesitewiththe Syrianauthorities fundamentalcontributions.

EquallyvitalwastheroleoftheDepartmentofAncientArtatYaleUniversityArtGallery.The projectwasbasedonbringingtogetherdirectobservationsatthesitewiththerecordsoftheYale/ FrenchAcademyexcavations,forwhichfullaccesstotheoldexpeditionarchivewasalsoessential. Thiswaswarmlygranted.LisaBrodyandMeganDoyoncontinuedYUAG’sadmirabletradition ofnotsimplyallowingscholarsaccesstothearchive,butalsogivingtheirtimetohelpactively, followingthepracticesetbySusanMathesonfromwhichIhadsogreatlybenefitedduringmy previousDuraproject.

IwouldalsoliketoexpressmygratitudetootherDurascholarsfordiscussionsandanswersto questionsonamyriadofmatters,especiallyTedKaizer,LucindaDirven,andGaëlleCoqueugniot.ChristophBenechkindlygrantedpermissionformetousehismagnetometrydata, andthanksareduetoMartinSterryandNicholeSheldrickforadviceregardingsatelliteimagery. ThanksalsotoMartinMillett,asever,forencouragement,andformanyyearsagointroducingme totheSiretquote.

Thefollowingalsokindlyprovidedvariousreferences:JaneAinsworth,MarkusGschwind, RobMatthew,AnnaWalas,and,fortheJeffersonquote,DiarmaidWalshe.

IwouldalsoliketothankDavidBreeze,IanHaynes,andJenniferBairdforkindlyundertaking theoneroustaskofreadingthedraftofthisbook,providinginvaluablefeedback,andsavingme fromerrors;ofcourse,theydonotnecessarilyagreewiththeviewsexpressed.

SUMMARY

TheancientcityofDura-Europos(Salhiyeh),overlookingtheEuphratesineasternSyria,hasfora centuryprovidedourmostvividwindowintolifeintheArsacidParthianandRomanMiddle East.ThisHellenisticmilitarycolonygrewunderArsacidhegemonyintoamodesttownwitha Greek-speakingrulingclassbutlargelyAramaic-speakingpopulation,and AD c.165passedinto theRomanorbituntilitsdestructionandabandonment c.256asaresultofaSasaniansiege.The sitewasneverreoccupied,makingitsentiretyreadilyaccessibletoarchaeologicalexplanation followingitsidenti ficationin1920.Discoveriesduringlarge-scaleexcavationsbetweentheWorld Wars,notablypapyri,inscriptions,andthewall-paintingsoftemples,anearlychurchand Synagogue,madethesitefamous.DuraalsoaccommodatedaRomanimperialgarrison,which carvedoutalargemilitarybaseinthenorthernpartofthetown.Muchofthiswasrevealedinthe 1930s,butitwasneversystematicallystudiedorpublished.Believedtohaveoccupiedaquarterof thewalledareaofthecity,themilitarybasewasclearlyanimportantpartofthestoryofDurain its final,Romanera.Italsoconstitutestheonlysubstantiallyexploredexampleofamajorclassof RomanmilitarysiteofthePrincipate:urbancantonments,verydifferentfromthefamiliar ‘playingcard’ fortsofEurope.Researchandpublicationofthebasethereforeofferedtheprospect ofmakingcontributionstotheunderstandingofDuraandtheRomanMiddleEast,andmore generallytoRomanmilitarystudies.

Thepresentwriterconductedanarchaeologicalprojecttoinvestigatethemilitarybase,involving fieldworkatthesite(2005–10)conductedincollaborationwith laMissionFranco-Syrienne d’Europos-Doura (whichundertookrenewedresearchandconservationworkfrom1986to2011), andwithYaleUniversityArtGallerywhichholdsthearchiveofthemajorpre–WorldWarII excavations.Theprojectbecameanexerciseinvisualarchaeology,andthestudyofspaceand movement.

Dura’smilitarybaseprovedtobeevenlargerthantheoriginalexcavatorsrealized.Anotherkey conclusionwasthatmuchofitwascreatedsigni ficantlyearlierthanhasbeenthought.Itwasnot, ashasbeencommonlyaccepted,acreationoftheyearsaround AD 210,andsoafeatureonlyofthe secondhalfofDura’sRomanperiod;ithadgrownlargedecadesbeforethis.Aparallelstudyof thecompositionandsizeofthegarrisonbasedonthetextualevidencecomestothesame conclusion thattheRomanmilitarypresencegrewlargeinthelatersecondcentury,notthe earlythird.Theseconclusionshaveimportantimplicationsforthepoliticalhistoryofthecity, whichhasbeenarguedtohaveseenaPalmyreneprotectorateinthelatersecondcentury,a hypothesisnowlookinglesstenable.

Anotherimportantoutcomeoftheprojectisidenti ficationofanothermajor,hithertounrecognizeddemographiccomponentatRomanDura:largenumbersofmilitarydependents servantsandfamilymembers comprisingtherestofan ‘extendedmilitarycommunity’.Much morethanabodyofsoldiers,theRomanmilitaryandmilitary-relatedpresencewaseffectivelya citywithinacity.Suchanewperspectivehaswide-rangingsocialandeconomicimplications.

AllthisimpliesthattheRomanmilitarypresenceexertedanevengreaterinfluenceonlifein Durathanhasbeenrealized.Previouscommentatorshavevariouslyrepresenteditaseverything fromabrutalmilitaryoccupationthrottlingthelifeoutofthecity,toanewengineofeconomic growthandprosperity,leadingtowardsintegrationofsoldiersandciviliansinthedecadesbefore thecity’sdestruction.Dura’sremarkablecombinationofarchaeologicalandtextualevidence constitutesperhapsthebestcasestudywehaveformilitary–civilianrelationsfromtheRoman provinces,offeringtheprospectofmorenuancedinterpretationsofwhathappenedduringthe coexistenceofthecity’stwocommunities.ThenewpictureofDuraofferedinthepresentwork exploresthecomplexitiesofboththehosturbansocietyandtheextendedmilitarycommunity, envisagingshiftingpatternsofinteractionwithbothwinnersandlosersatalllevels,againstthe

widerbackgroundofimperialpoliticsandwars,whichwouldultimatelysnuffoutthecity entirely.

ThatitispossibleatalltoconductthisstudyisaconsequenceofthetragicdestructionofDura inwarbetweentheRomanandSasanianempires,leadingtopermanentabandonmentofthesite. DuringthecourseoftheSyriancivilwarwhicheruptedin2011,theruinsofthecityandits adjacentnecropolisfellvictimtosystematiclootingonanindustrialscaleamountingtothesecond destructionofDura.ThisassaultontheheritageofSyriaandthewiderworldplacesgreater urgencyontheneedtopublish,andsosecureforthefuture,theknowledgeweholdona remarkableancientcityinmuseums,archives,andprojectrecords.Thepresentworkconstitutes acontributiontothatwidereffort.

CONTENTS

ListofIllustrations xv

ListofTable xxix

ListofPlates xxxi

ListofAbbreviations xxxv

Conventions xxxvii

SiteRecording:AreaLabellingSystem xxxix

TerminologyfortheSite,itsStructures,Features,andAreas xli

PARTIPERSPECTIVESONDURA-EUROPOS

1.TheBigPicture3 IntroductionandOverview3 TheSignificanceofDura-Europos10 RomanBaseandGarrison:KeyAspectsofDura’sLaterHistory13

2.ProjectContext:DuraResearch,PastandPresent26 RediscoveryandExploration26

3.DevelopingaNewPerspectiveonDura’sMilitaryBase32 ProjectBackground32 Oppressionvs Concordia?ConceptualizingaNewStudyofGarrison, Base,andCity33 Remit,ResearchAims,andObjectivesoftheStudy34 FormationProcessesofSiteandRecord:A ‘PompeiioftheSyrianDesert’?35 TheEvidence:Site,andNatureofExcavationRecord37 MethodologyandExecution:AVisualApproach41

4.ZoomingIn:Rome,theMiddleEuphrates,andDura49 HistoricalSetting:WorldEmpiresandaModestCity49 MaterialRealities:NaturalandHumanEnvironment55

PARTIITHEBASEPORTRAYED

ExtentoftheBase61

5.ThePlateauZoneWestofGSt63

TheTempleofBêl(‘TempleofthePalmyreneGods’ or ‘Temple ofZeus’)inJ9,anditsPlaza63 ‘HouseofthePrefect’,J1-A66

TheTempleofArtemisAzzanathkonaanditsMilitary Compound,E770

The principia (‘Praetorium’),E778

Changesto10thSt:The ‘ViaPrincipalis’ ThatNeverWas90

TheE3BathandE4 palaestra Complex93

TheGreatE4House:FromHQtoDefensiveStrongpoint103 TheF3Bath109

TheAmphitheatre,F3118

Probable Horrea inJ6andJ5125

TheMithraeum,J7125

The ‘CampWall’ 130

MilitaryHousingWofGSt135

MilitaryHousingSofthe Principia:E8135

MilitaryHousingEandSEofthe Principia:E6andE5143

MilitaryHousingWofthe Principia:J1toJ4144

MilitaryHousingalongtheCityWallinJ7145

MilitaryHousingalongtheCityWallinJ8andK7152

MilitaryHousingontheSSideof8thSt:K7,K5,K3,F7,andF5153

6.ThePlateauZoneEastofGSt157

TheRomanPalace(‘Palaceofthe DuxRipae’),BlocksX3/X5157

TheX7 ‘Dolicheneum’ 177

TheX9Temple182

MilitaryHousingEofGSt183

MilitaryHousinginX7183

MilitaryHousingNof10thStandtheRomanPalace:E1,E9,X5,X7, X9,X10186

MilitaryHousingSof10thStandtheRomanPalace:E2,F1,X8, ‘X1–X4’ , and ‘X6’ 186

7.TheWadiZone: Campus,Citadel,andC3Bath188

MilitaryEnclosurebetweenCitadelandWadiEdgeinA1188

TheMilitary Campus Zone190

The ‘TempleoftheRomanArchers’,A1190

TheMilitaryZeusTemple(‘CitadelZeusTemple’),A1195

TheMilitary Campus,A1-A2196

TheCitadel199

TheCitadelinRomanTimes:MoreMilitaryHousing202

MilitaryOccupationaroundtheCitadelinB2206

TheSouthernLimitoftheBase:B4andLowerMainStreet?211

8.MilitaryPresencearoundandbeyondtheBaseArea212

TheC3Bath212 M7Bath221

L4:AMilitary-RelatedFacility?226

SoldiersandMilitaryDependantsResidentoutsidetheBaseArea227

CityWalls:Gates,Curtain,Towers,andStairs230

PARTIIIANEWPICTUREOF GARRISON,BASE,ANDCITY

PreviewofMainConclusionsaboutBaseandGarrisonCommunity239

9.WhoLivedandWorkedintheBase?241 WhattheTextualRecordTellsUsabouttheGarrison241 TheNatureandExtentoftheTextualRecordfortheGarrison241 TextualEvidenceforMilitaryFormationsatDura242 Discussion:AttestedResidentFormations244 GarrisonChronology:TheEstablishedView248 GarrisonDevelopment:ANewModel249 FurtherUnnoticedThousands?An ‘ExtendedMilitaryCommunity’ 250

10.WhatandWhere?RevisedOverviewofBaseExtent256 TheMilitaryQuarter orThird?TheBaseasNowSeen256

11.When?NewOutlineofDevelopmentandChronology259 EpigraphicEvidenceforBaseChronology259 ArchaeologicalRelationsandSequences:RelativeChronology260 DevelopmentoftheBaseoverTime264

12.WhyWastheBaseWhereItWas,andAsItWas?270 WhyTwoInitialNuclei?270 WhyNo ‘StandardRomanCastrametation’?271 IrregularityoftheBase: ‘OrientalLaxity’ orSoundMilitaryTradition?272

13.HowDidtheBaseWork?275 FacilitatingandOrganizingLife:Layout275 SurveillanceandControl276 CanWeLocateContingentstoSpecificZones?278 HowWasAccommodationOrganized?279 SupplyandProduction280 TheDailyRoundandLongerCycles282 Administration,Training,Ceremonial,andReligiousRites283 Religion:ShrinesandTemples283 Amenities284 ‘Missing’ orUnlocatedComponents284

14.ImpactofGarrisonandBaseontheCity286 MilitaryDominationofBothUrbanSpaceandTime286 CriticalDetailsintheBigPicture:SignsofMilitaryConsideration forCivilDura287 ShadesofLightandDark293 TheComingofRome297 ImperialGarrison OrCitywithinaCity?298

LISTOFILLUSTRATIONS

1.1.LayoutofDura-Europos:topR,blocksandstreetlabels,withtrueNand thesiteNusedinthetext;bottomL,importantstructuresinthemilitary baseandciviltown. 4

1.Mithraeum

2.TempleofBêl

3. ‘HouseofthePrefect’

4.TempleofAzzanthkona

5. principia

6.E3bath

7.X9Temple

8. ‘Dolicheneum’

9.RomanPalace

10.F3bath/amphitheatre

11. ‘TempleoftheRomanArchers’

12.MilitaryZeusTemple

13.CitadelPalace

14.TempleofZeusTheos

15.C3bath

16. Strategeion (RedoubtPalace)

17.TempleofZeusMegistos

18.HouseofLysias

19.TempleofArtemis

20.TempleofAtargatis

21.TempleoftheGaddé

22.TempleofAphlad

23.TempleofZeusKyrios

24.Christianbuilding

25.M7bath

26. ‘HouseoftheRomanScribes’

27.Synagogue

28.TempleofAdonis

1.2.AerialviewfromtheNW,showingDurainitssettingofplateau,Euphrates cliffs,andwadiswithMesopotamiatotheL.FrenchAirForce,29March 1939. 5

1.3.ViewofDurafromtheNW(orsiteN),withthemilitarybasezoneinthe foreground.TakenbytheFrenchAirForceaftertheendoftheYale excavationcampaign,probablyin1939.

5

1.4.AerialviewofDurafromtheNE,takenbytheFrenchAirForceinthe late1930s. 6

1.5.DurafromtheS,FrenchAirForce,1932. 6

1.6.AreconstructionofDuraintheRomanerafromtheSE,asitwas understoodinthemid-twentiethcentury,byN.C.Andrews.Known andexcavatedstructuresarepickedoutinheavierlineandhatching.This finedrawingisneverthelessnowknowntocontaininaccuracies,e.g.with respecttothemilitarypartoftheinnerwadi. 7

1.7.ThecampandhorselinesoftheBritishimperialIndiantroopswho revealedtheidentityofDura-Europosin1920.Theywereunwittingly bivouackedontheexercisegroundoftheRomanmilitarybase. 7

1.8.Excavationtechnique:locallyhiredworkmenandboysusingshovels, baskets,andminingcarsonrails:diggingthemiddlegateoftheCitadel. 7

1.9.FranzCumont(L)andMikhailRostovtzeffintheMithraeumatDura soonafteritsdiscovery. 8

1.10.PierreLericheintheHouseofLysiasin2010. 9

1.11.ThelocationofDura-EuroposontheMiddleEuphrates,downstream oftheconfluenceofthemajortributary,theKhabur.Top,Durainrelation toimportantcitiesoftheregion.Itlayroughlyhalf-waybetweenthegreat HellenisticcitiesofAntiochandSeleuciaontheTigris,andtheParthian royalcapitalofCtesiphon.Italsolaybetweentheotherfamoussteppe citiesofPalmyraandHatra.Bottom,itssettingadjacenttoawideand fertilestretchoftheEuphratesvalleyandlowerKhabur(darkergrey). AlongtheriversweredottedsmallersettlementsandRomanmilitary stationsmentionedinthetexts(e.g.BecchufraynandAppadana)and/or knownarchaeologically(e.g.Qreiye).Groundabove300mshownin lightergrey. 11

1.12.MosaicofaerialphotographsofDuratakenbytheFrenchAirForcein March1936. 14

1.13.Pearson’ s fifth-seasoncentralbaseplan,archivedrawingE7N.1, anexampleofaninkedarchivaldrawingpreparedonsiteatDura, buttoo finelydetailedforpublicationatanynormalpagesize. 15

1.14.ReducedtracingofPearson’sarchiveplanofthecentralbasearea, reproducedas PR5,plateIII. 16

1.15.DurafromacrosstheEuphrates,showingtheheightofthecliffsandthe differenceinlevelsbetweenplateauandlowertown. 17

2.1.SomeofthekeystaffoftheYale/FrenchAcademyexpedition.Toprow, thethreesuccessivesitedirectors.a.MauricePillet(withwalkingstick), seenwithpartofthethird-seasonexcavationteam.b.ClarkHopkins,with hisdaughterMary-Sue.HiswifeSusanHopkinswasakeyteammember, butextremelycamera-shy.c.FrankBrown.d.ArchitectHenryPearson, dismantlingthesynagoguepaintings.e.MargaretCrosby.f.Robertdu MesnilduBuisson,usingaplanetableandalidade.

27

2.2.ExcavationsunderwayontheYaleexpedition.LocallyrecruitedArab workmendiggingwithshovels,withtheearthremovedinbasketsto miningtrucksonnarrow-gaugerailtracks. 28

3.1.Organicpreservationinthewesternramparts:L,afragmentofRoman textileexposedinthemud-brickglacisofTower15in2005;R,reedsin thestructureoftheHellenisticmud-brickcurtainwallbehindBlockJ7.

3.2.SchematicelevationofthewesterndefencesbyTower19:a. mortared-rubblefoundationsand floorofhousebackingontoWallSt; b.mud-bricksuperstructureofbuilding;c.accumulatedlevelsinWallSt; d.Hellenisticmasonrycitywall;e.mud-brickanti-siegeglacis; f.mud-brickrevetmentstohousewalldesignedtohelpretaing.;g.infilling ofWallSttocreateadeepanti-siegerampart;h.extensionoframpart toshoreupb./f./g.,andtopermiteasyaccesstoentirerampartwalk during fighting;i.reinforcementofglacis.

3.3.TheDuraarchiveatYale:a.theoriginal1930s filingcabinetsandnew drawersatWestCampus,2016;b.archivednegatives;c.nitratenegatives fromthesixthseason;d.examplephoto filecard,withprintofimageB87 andnotes;e.adrawerof ‘locus files’,ofcollatednotesandphotosofeach majorstructureortopic;f.examplesofsiterecordcards,relatingtotheM7 bathandtheE8 ‘barracks’,fromthelocus files;g.theplanchestsoflarge drawingsandartwork.

38

39

40

3.4.KrisStruttundertakingmagnetometrysurveyin2007. 42

3.5.L,BenGourley,JenBaird,andDanStewartconductingTotalStation surveyin2008forBaird’shousingprojectandthemilitarybase research.R,theauthorworkinginthe principia in2010. 43

4.1.StructuraldetailsoftheHouseofLysiasinblockD1.Theexceptionally largeandopulentresidenceofDura’srulingdynasty,itsconstruction neverthelessexemplifiesbasicfeaturesofDurenearchitecture,namely mortared-rubblesubstructuresusuallywithmud-bricksuperstructures, thewholethenplastered.Largerslabsofworkedgypsumwereusedfor thresholdsanddoor-frames. 57

4.2.SchematicdiagramofDureneroofconstruction,fromanarchivedrawing. 57

5.1.GeneralplanoftheNWplateauzoneofthebase,fromthecitywall facingtheopensteppeintheW,tothelineofESt.(Excavatedareas notdistinguished.)

64

5.2.AnexampleofaplanfromtheYaleDuraarchive:oneofPearson’ s drawingsoftheTempleofBêlandTower2,the ‘ToweroftheArchers’ . 65

5.3.Planofthe ‘HouseofthePrefect’,J1-A,andadjacentstructuresin DSt,basedonarchiveplanE7N1andresurvey.Roofedareapicked outindarkergrey. 67

5.4.The ‘HouseofthePrefect’,J1-A,appearsinarchivalphotographsonly asabackgrounddetail.Top,seenfromtheEinshotsoftheTempleof Azzanathkonacombinedinphotomosaic;andbottom,anincomplete viewfromtheW.

68

5.5.GeneralplanoftheheartofthemilitarybasebetweenDandGSts, comprisinginE7the principia (withthepartiallytaken-overTempleof Azzanathkonabehind),thewidenedstretchof10thStlinkingitwithFSt, themainapproachfromthecentreofthecity,andtheE3/E4bathing facility.Unexcavatedareasareshowninwhite,importantmagnetic anomaliesinblockE5outlinedingrey. 71

5.6.PlanoftheTempleofArtemisAzzanathkonaandenvirons,basedon archivalplansandnewsurvey. 72

5.7.N–Ssection/elevationoftheTempleofArtemisAzzanathkona byDetweiler. 73

5.8.E–Wsection/elevationoftheTempleofArtemisAzzanathkona byDetweiler. 74

5.9.PhotomosaicofthetempleofAzzanathkonafromtheE,withnaos D3atcentre.Theroomsofthemilitarycompoundarebeyondit,onits LandRsides.TheJ1houseisbeyondthetemple,withtheTemple ofBêlintheRbackground. 74

5.10.Tentativereconstructionofthemoreprominentimagesandtextsonthe wallsofE7-W14;schematic,nottoscale.Therear,Nwallwaslargely missingonexcavation. 77

5.11.EarlySeveraninscriptionfromroomW12inthemilitarycompound oftheTempleofAzzanthkona(no.561). 78

5.12.Planofthe principia andsurroundingstructures,basedonarchival plansandnewsurvey. 79

5.13.The principia inthe fifthseason,before(top)andduringexcavation (bottom).Thetall fingerofmasonryontheupstandingwallappearsto havefallenbetweenphotographs. 80

5.14. Principia N–SelevationdrawingbyDetweiler. 81

5.15. Principia E–WelevationdrawingsbyDetweiler. 82

5.16.Detailsofconstructioninthe principia aroundtheSEcornerofroom6, soonafterexcavation(top)andin2008(bottom).L,thepeculiarcomposite constructionofsidewalls,withmasonryandbrickstructureinfilledwith mudbricklacedwithtimbers,whichhaddecayedleavingvoids.TopR, partofapiercedstonescreenacrosstheentrancestill insitu. 82

5.17.Inscription577fromthe Principia,attesting LegioIIICyrenaica. 83

5.18.Fallenplasterfromthe principia cross-hallceilingshowingreed impressions.Scale300mm. 83

5.19. Principia Etribunal. 84

5.20.Detailofscreenatentrancetoroom6. 84

5.21.Thenewlyexcavated principia forecourt,withtheendoftheNcolonnade of10thStcolonnadeinforegroundandroomsontheformerlineof EStatright. 84

5.22.a.ReconstructiondrawingoffragmentsE598a–cofanaltarfoundinthe principia court,fromanarchive filecard.Theindicatedscalesuggestsitwas just250mmtall,witha ‘3½cmdepression’ inthetop.b.Archive file-card drawingofthebaseofasimilaraltar(E793)fromthesmallshrineE7-19. c.Archive file-carddrawingofafragmentarystatuettefromshrineE7-19 (E792). 85

5.23.Inscription560fromthe principia 86

5.24.Portico18and(R)shrine19ontheaxisof10thSttotheSfront ofthe principia. 87

5.25.Plinthinthe principia cross-hall,bearinginscriptions. 88

5.26.ProposedsequenceofreorganizationofE7causedbyconstructionofthe principia:a.hypotheticaloriginalarrangement,withtwotemplesboth co-optingEStastheirEfrontage.Asseeninthe190s,withtheearly militarycompoundcreatedattherearoftheTempleofAzzanathkona; b.howthe principia,associatedconstructions,and10thStwideningrelated tothefootprintoftheearlierSsanctuaryinE7,ofwhichafragmentwas preservedintact;c.howthisnewarrangementpreservedbutreconfigured theSsanctuary,withwidened10thStservinganancillaryroleparalleling thatoftheapproachtothelessdrasticallyremodelledTempleof Azzanathkona.

89

5.27.FoundationsofthearchacrossFStatthe10thStjunction.Top,seenfrom theN,withcolumnbasesandpartofthestylobateof10thSt’ s Ncolonnadeintheforeground.Bottom,thefoundationsfromtheS,with theoriginalpiersonthelineof10thSt’sScolonnadeintheforeground,and E3bathRbackground. 92

5.28.ThearchacrossFStatthe10thStjunction,inrelationtosurrounding structures,includingthe10thStcolonnades,thechangeindirection ofFSt,andtheE3bath.

5.29.PlanoftheE3bath,basedprimarilyonDetweiler’s1937resurveyand plan(Neg.Y589),plusdirectobservationsandTSsurveypoints.Thewall

92

tonesfollowDetweiler,distinguishingthebrick/concretebathblockfrom thesurroundingmortared-rubblestructures,wallswithmud-brick superstructure.

5.30.Detweiler’selevationsoftheE3bath.

5.31.a.PanoramaoftheE3bathfromtheSin2010,andarchiveimages:b. roomFfromtheEandc.fromtheW,showingtheexposed flooringofan earlierbathonadifferentalignment;d.theWendofroom1,showingthe plunge(backL)andwalled-uppassagetoC(backR);e.theNsideofroom 2,showing tubuli,theapse,andcollapsed floorwithtracesofmarbleslabs; f.roomClookingWtowardstheapsidalpool;g.viewfromroom2,with Nfurnace fluebottomR,throughdoortoroom3andontoC;h. fragmentsof figuralwallpaintingsfromroomA.

5.32.L,planoftheE3bathhypocaustsystemandR,thewatersupply/drainage system,basedonDetweiler’s1937drawings,plusdirectobservationsand TSsurveypoints.Inthisscheme,Detweilerappearsheretohaveconflated twoseparateandsuccessivedrainsystems.

5.33.NcorneroftheE3aqueduct,withdetailoftumbledsuperstructure showingtilecourseandbeddingforanotheronwhathadbeenitsupper surface.

5.34.Fragmentofnichewhichmayhavebeenpartofthestructuresurrounding theNW praefurnium (centre)oftheE3bath.

5.35.TheEsideoftheNWplateaubaseenclosure,asitwas AD c.212before theamphitheatrereplacedtheF3bath.Itcomprisedtwobathing establishments,eachwitha palaestra ononesideandserviceyardwith fuelstoreandash-dumpontheother,mirror-imagedeithersideofthe largeE4house.

5.36.ThedevelopmentoftheE3/E4bathcomplex:a.approximate arrangementofsmallinitialestablishmentonthecitygridalignment;b.the later,larger,angledbathhouseblocking10thStwithaqueduct,and palaestra inE4.ThewatermainalongDStwasthenlaidaroundthislarger complex,before:c.roomE3-Bwasextendedoverit,blockingGStaswell. OntheW,10thStwaswidenedanditsNcolonnadebuiltupagainstbath andaqueduct.

5.37.PlanoftheE4houseafterBaird’sdrawing,Knox’spublishedplan,and Detweiler’ssurvey.(WiththankstoJenniferBaird.)Thedarkergrey connotesroofedspacesaroundthetwoopencourts.

94

95

96

98

99

100

101

102

104

5.38.TheE4houseonexcavation:a.theviewfromlobby5tocorridor20 (notethe ‘cooler’),withthestableblockinthebackground;b.court14 lookingNE,withdrainsintocentralcistern,exposedearlierfoundationat backedgeofcourt,andentranceto23(R);c.afragmentofpebble ‘mosaic’ flooringfallenfromtheupperstorey(scaleunknown);d.room33fromthe SE,withhypocaustandpainteddécor;e.E4-23fragmentarypainting, probablyofamilitarysacrifice,room23(reproducedretrogradein PR6, pl.XL,4). 106

5.39.a.ViewofE4fromtheSWin2010.b.door32-29withnicheinSwall. c.Blockingofdoor22/36withRoman firedbricks,seenfromtheS.

5.40.PlanofF3bathandtheamphitheatrewhichsucceededit,showing inferredstructureofbath palaestra andlaterarena.BasedonVanKnox

107

surveyanddrawing, PR6,pl.III,withcorrections.Tonesreproduce distinctionsmadebyKnox.Tilingschematicallyrepresented. 110

5.41.F3bathhypocaustandhydraulicplans,after PR6,pl.III.Artworklost, nitratenegativedecayed,survivingonlyinanarchiveprint. 111

5.42.ReconstructedelevationofF3bath,lookingN.Thisconflates frigidarium phases.DrawingbyKnox,publishedin PR6,pl.III.Artworklost,nitrate negativedecayed,survivingonlyinanarchiveprint. 111

5.43.TheF3bathin2010:a.fromtheSWandb.fromtheEwith amphitheatrearenaatR;c.the caldarium fromtheNE. 113

5.44.PaintingofNikeorVictoryfromtheF3bath. 114

5.45.ArchivephotosofF3bathcourt/frigidarium underexcavation. a.Ceramicpipesinfallenfragmentofthefrigidariumarcade;b.pipes usedasbenchsupports;c.thelineofthepipedmainexcavatedbeneath thetile floor;d. frigidarium watersupplypipesagainstthewallofthe heatedsuite;e.,f.closerviews. 115

5.46.InterpretiveplanoftheNhalfofblockF3,showingtheamphitheatre layout.Thearenageometryisindicated,andreconstructedseatingarcs projectedindarkergrey. 119

5.47.Theamphitheatrein2008fromtheE(above),andfromtheNW (below)in2010. 120

5.48.Theamphitheatrearenaafterexcavation:a.theNhalfofthearea, showingitsW-orientatedentranceand(backL)itsouterwall.Muchofthe silt fillingthearenaisseenstill insitu;b.interioroftheShalfofthearena, showingitsdoubleEgates;c&d.thetophalfofthearena ‘wall’ canbe seenheretocompriseunexcavatedsiltsabovetheremainingstone foundation,left insitu bytheexcavators.Collapsefromtheactualwall intothearenaisseenherebytheWarenagate. 121

5.49.ReconstructedS–NsectionofamphitheatreatGSt,showingproposed structureanchoredintotheSwallofthegreatE4house,carrying seatingover10thSt. 122

5.50.DrawingofagraffitoshowinggladiatorsfoundinblockC7. 124

5.51.Pearson’sinkedplanoftheMithraeumasexcavated,publishedas PR7/8, fig.30. 126

5.52.TheMithraeumunderexcavation,beforeremovalofthepaintings. NotetheplanetableatR. 126

5.53.The ‘EarlyMithraeum’ asreconstructedbytheYaleexpedition(note wallsbetweenitandthecitydefences),withceilingplansoftheEarly, Middle,andLatephasesofthetemple.DrawingbyHenryPearson, publishedas PR7/8, fig.32. 127

5.54.The firstMithrasrelief, AD 169. 128

5.55.Inscription847,commemorating ‘restoration’ oftheMithraeumin AD 209–10. 128

5.56.ColumnwithdipintiandgraffitiintheMithraeum. 129

5.57.Thelineofthecampwallafterexcavation,seenfromthecitywallby Tower21lookingE.Intheforeground,thewallcanclearlybeseenbuilt throughtheroomsformingtheSrangesofhousesK5-A(largelyexcavated inthecentreoftheimage)andK5-B(Lforeground,mostlyunexcavated andcoveredwithspoil).BeyondthesehousesandBSt,thewallcanbe seencontinuingtoDSt.

130

5.58.OriginofthecampwallagainstthecitywallbyTower21.L,theragged brokenstubofthecampwallisvisibleemergingfromthefurthestpierof thesubsequentlybuiltcitywallaccessstair.Notethebeamholeinthe cornerofTower21behind,ataboutthesameheightasthetopofthecamp wallstub.R,thebaseofthewallstairpier(L)andofthecampwall(R)after partialremovalofboth,andsectioningofthefoundationofthelatter.The campwallwasclearlybuilt first,rightuptothecitywall.Thestairwasthen builtinlargerbricks,aftermorethanametreofdeposithadaccumulated againstthecampwall.

5.59.PlanandcorrectedphotographicelevationoftheareaaroundTower21, andtheoriginpointofthecampwall.BasedonDetweiler’sarchivesketch planandmeasurements,observationsin2005–10,andarchive photographs.

131

132

5.60.L,themainSroomofhouseK5-A,seenfromtheSW,withthemass ofthecampwallrunningthroughit.Gelin’sexcavationisbottomL,where mud-brickcoursingisvisible.R,viewalongthestretchofcampwallbuilt withinthemainroomofK5withGelin’sexcavationintheforeground,and thepointoforiginofthecampwallinthedistance,justLofTower21. 132

5.61.TheendofthecampwallatDStasexcavatedin2005.Thegreymud brickofthewallwasvisibleacrossK1andacrosstheWpartofDSt,but notovertheEsideofthestreet,whilea sondage insidetheadjacentF7 buildingconfirmeditdidnotcontinuefurther.OntheWsideofDSt,red mudbricksandrubblesuggestedalaterebuildofthewall,whiletipsfrom asheafofwooden-shaftedartilleryboltsappeartoattestalaststandinside thebasearea. 134

5.62.ThestashofartilleryboltsbythecampwallatDSt,2005. 134

5.63.PlanofblockE8basedonBaird’sresurveyedplot,withadditional informationfromBrown’snotebooksandYUAGarchivedrawings:the originalpencilsitedrawing(probablybyDetweiler,numberedbyBrown), interpretivetracingsofthecivilandmilitaryphases(annotatedbyBrown), andunpublishedinkedversion(byDetweiler). 137

5.64.Sketchplansofthetwocasualtiesofthefallofthecityfoundinblock E8,fromBrown’snotebooks.ThebodyinE8-80isapparentlyaRoman soldier;thelabelnotes ‘fragg.ofmailcuirass’.ThatinE8-18, ‘Skeleton ofyouthorgirlwithskullstovein mouthopenwide’,wasprobably asoldier’sfamilymember.(seePlateXVIII) 138

5.65.BaseofanovenincourtE8-54shownwithBrown’ssketchbook drawingofanovenofthesametypeinE8-7. 140

5.66.OriginalacetatetracingofwallpaintingofMelpomene,Museof Tragedy,fromE8-12. 141

5.67.Centre,themilitarybuildingsofblockJ7seenfromtheNintenthseason, showingtheshallownessoftheremainsontheEside(L),andthe considerableheightofsomeontheW,preservedbyencasinginthelate rampart.Top,roughlythesameviewin2007showingthedegreeof erosion.Bottom,detailofthetenth-seasonphotoshowingtheinnerface ofthecitywallwithniches,apparentplasteringofroomwalls,androws ofbeamholesattestingabuttingbuildings.TheMithraeumisat(a);room J7-23at(b). 146

5.68.PlanofthemilitarystructuresinJ7,basedonPearson’sarchivalplan correctedto fitthemodernsurveyofthecitydefences,andwith additions.Hatchingindicatespre-militaryphasefoundations. 147

5.69.PlanofthemilitarybuildingswithphotomosaicofcorrectedYalearchival imageryshowingtheinsideofthecitywallwithitsnichesandtimber sockets.Areaswithout1930scoveragesupplementedwithnewimagery oftheerodedsurfacetakenin2008. 148

5.70.PlanofarchaeologicalfeatureswithinthelineofWallStaroundTowers 22and21,includingbuildingplans,theoriginpointofthecampwalland latecity-wallaccessstairs;withphotomosaicwallelevationandschematic reconstructedelevationofthecampwallandstair.Thephotographyis mainly2008imagery. 152

5.71.CivilhousingconvertedtomilitaryaccommodationinK5.Top,plan basedontheonlyarchivedrawing,Detweiler’spreparatorysurveyforthe citymap,withextensivecorrectionsfromthe2005resurveyandplan,plus Figs1.12and5.57.Below,reconstructedelevationsofK5-Aasacivilian house,and(bottom)inits finalformafterconversiontomilitaryuseand constructionofthecampwall.

6.1.GeneralplanoftheplateaubaseareaEofGStinthefarNcornerofthe city,andofthezonearoundthecriticalHSt/8thSt/WadiAscentRoad junction.ThecircleWoftheRomanPalacemarkstheobservedpositionof alowmound,perhapsrepresentingastructureontheboundaryofthe additionalenclosureidentifiedbesidethePalace.

6.2.TheRomanPalacecomplex,includingpartoftheapparentadditional serviceyardforitsbathX5totheW.

6.3.TheRomanPalacefromtheS,afterexcavation(top)andin2010.

6.4.Anearly-third-century-stylegold fibulasetwithadarkgreenstone intagliodepictingNarcissus,88mmhigh,foundjustoutsidethePalace.

6.5.Detweiler’selevationofthePalace.Thelineoftheclifffacade(L)was probablyincorrect.

6.6.ThenewlyexcavatedRomanPalace:a.theapseofroom2;b.viewalong loggia62;c.apse21withwallpainting;d.room11givingaccesstothe bath,withholesinthe floorforinsetpotteryvessels.

6.7.DetailsofairphotosoftheriverfrontagearoundtheRomanPalace, verticalandoblique.TheseimagesshowthequarriedverticalfaceSofthe siteofthePalace,includingtherock-cutfoundationofthesquaretower5a (L).Thecourseofthecliff-topcitywallnearTower5(R)isclear.Below thePalacesite,solidstrataemergingfromthescreepart-waydownthe slopeindicatethatthiswas,inRomantimesastoday,asteepsloperather thanverticalface.Top,proposedreconstructionofthelineofthe Hellenisticwallcircuitonthisstretch.

6.8.Centre,thecitywallrunningSfromTower5towardstheRomanPalace (themoundofitsbathisontheskyline,withthepiersofloggia62onthe cliffedgebeyond,andtheCitadelinthedistance).Herethecitywallisseen builtonastratumofgypsumwellbelowtheleveloftheplateausurface whichhadalreadycollapsedwhenitwasbuilt.Thespacebehindwas filled intoplateaulevel.BeyondthePalace,thesquare,rock-cutbaseofwall tower5aisseenprojectingatL.

154

158

159

160

161

162

162

164

165

6.9.SchematicreconstructionofthelateHellenisticcitydefencesbetweenthe Citadel(L)andTower5(R).Exceptperhapsastretchofhigherwalling aroundTower5tofoilinfiltrationfromtheNwadi,allofthiswas constructedonprojectingstrataatlevelswellbelowplateaulevel,thespace behindinfilledtocreateaterraceneedingnomorethanaparapetabovethe 40mrivercliffdrop.However,thesomewhatmorevulnerablesloping re-entrantbelowthesiteofthefutureRomanPalacewasdominatedbythe massiveTower5a. 166

6.10.TheSwadi,showinghowthesideofthewadiwasquarriedintoavertical defensiveface,herewitharock-cutprojectingbaseforthemasonry superstructureformingTower12.AtL,spoiltipsfromYale’sexcavations. 166

6.11.Theunusualconstructiontechniqueusedinroom28oftheRoman Palace:L,itsNwall,showingthemasonryconstructionwithcavities originally filledwithmudbrickoradobetotheoutside;R,theexteriorof itsSwallinroom29,showingmortarcastsoftimberlacingwhichtiedthe compositestructuretogether. 168

6.12.TheRomanPalaceriversiderangefromtheW,withthemasonry superstructureoftheapsidalroom2prominentatthecentre,andone oftheremainingpiersofloggia62seenontheveryedgeofthecliff. 169

6.13.Sculptureplinthaxialtoroom28. 170

6.14.DetailplanoftheRomanPalacebath. 172

6.15.TheRomanPalacebath:a.theterminalapseoffrigidarium55,andb. apsidalpool68,in2010;c.plungein65,d.latrine44,ande.corridor42 soonafterexcavation. 172

6.16.ThestateofthePalacebathsin2008,withlatrine44intheforeground andthelongapsidalroom55beyond. 173

6.17.PlanofX7showingthetempleintheSWcorneroftheblock,surrounded bymilitaryaccommodation.Notetheoff-gridoriginalstreetlines, especiallyIStreet,whereaccommodationforsoldierswasextendedonto theWhalfoftheIStcarriageway,RoomX7–34wassubsequentlypartly demolishedtomakewayforthecornerofRomanPalaceforecourt58, positionedtoblockIStentirely. 177

6.18.Detweiler’ssections/elevationsoftheX7 ‘Dolicheneum’ . 178

6.19.TheX7 ‘Dolicheneum’,showingcourt4fromtheSW. 179

6.20.TwooftheDolichenusaltarsfromoutsidetheX7temple.L,Inscription 970of AD 211.R,Inscription972of251–3.Nottosamescale. 180

6.21.TheX7militaryhousingfromtheS,withroom5Lforeground,12atR, andtheRomanPalaceanditsbathsbackgroundR. 184

6.22.Eagle figurines(nos.i748,L,57mmtall,andi745,R,48mmtall)fromthe possibleJupiter/ZeusshrineinX7-5. 186

7.1.GeneralplanoftheCitadelandinnerwadizone. 189

7.2.Top,newplanoftheA1MilitaryTemple.Darkgreydenotestraces ofmud-bricksuperstructureontopofmortared-rubblefoundations. Bottom,profileoftemplepodiumtosamescale. 190

7.3.ArchiveviewfromtheNWtoweroftheCitadel,showingthetemple (Lforeground,facingL)withabuttinghouseA1-Abeyond,withlaneto NCitadelentranceatR.Notefallenpiersinsidethetemple,andtheancient repairindrystoneintheforeground. 191

7.4.a.TheMilitaryTemplelookingacrosstheporchfromtheS.Notelarge socketbelowfootofporticopillar,partofstairstructure;b.thenaveofthe temple,showingtheroofpiers,altar,andstatuenichearea;c.altarand statuenichestructure;d.altarinscriptionH1;e. ‘ablutionniche’ to Lofaltar. 193

7.5.PlasterfriezefromtheMilitaryTemple(Yaleno.1929.374). 193

7.6.StairstothepodiumoftheMilitaryTemple.BottomL,belowscale, remainsofplasteredstairtreadrevealedincleaningin2008. 194

7.7.TheEsideoftheMilitaryTemplepodium,showingtheslopeofthe floorandsuperstructure,andplasterrenderingscoredtoimitateashlar. 194

7.8.TherearpartofthesmallMilitaryZeusTempleexcavatedin2011. 195

7.9.InnerwadizoneshowingtheOttomanroadatL,theCitadelatR,and military campus:a.1930sairphoto,stillshowingthe1920horselines (Fig.1.7);b.samewithmagnetometryresultssuperimposed;c.detailof 2009satelliteimagery(DigitalGlobe,Inc.).Thelastshowsrecentmachine tracksalsopickedupbythemagnetometry;therewasnoroadupthe middleoftheancient campus 197

7.10.Planofthereconstructedextentofthe campus withitsknowntemples, andtheCitadel,witharchivedrawingofelevationofthelatter. 198

7.11.TheCitadel,withthewadi-floor campus zone(L),andblockB2(R). TheC3bath,withtheOttomanroadrunningthroughit,isinthe Rforeground. 199

7.12.TheCitadel,detailsof(L)verticalairphotoof1936,and(R)anundated butslightlylaterone. 200

7.13.DetailofobliqueairphotoshowingtheCitadelandinnerwadifrom theriverside. 200

7.14.TheCitadeldominatingthecentralwadiand campus. 201

7.15.ViewoftheCitadelinteriorfromtheN,showingthesteepinternal slope,andfragmentofplateauwithruinsoftheCitadelPalace. 201

7.16.DetailsofexternalandinternalelevationsoftheNandSendsofthe Citadelsuperstructure,showingsequencesofbeamholesattestingthe pitchedroofofamilitarytemple(a.,right)andupper floorsand flatroofs ofprobablesoldiers’ accommodationinsideandout.(Detailsfromarchive drawings,withtheadditionoftheMilitaryZeusTemplebeamholestoa.) 202

7.17.InterioroftheNendoftheCitadel:L,topofpicture,foundationsand wall-keyingofdemolishedHellenisticinteriorstructuresinsideNgate. Centre,Ngatewithlaterbeamholesaboveit,andcutintothebaseofits vault.R,insidetheNWtower,showinglower,built-injoistsockets,and upperbeamholeslatercutintothewalls.

7.18.TheCitadelinterioratitsSWend.TopL,pre-excavation,showing abandonedArabdry-stonevillagebuildingsontheextantgroundsurface, andtwobeam-socketseriesintheendwall,onenowhangingoverthecliff. TopR,theendwallandtheScornertowerandgatewithmorebeamholes. BottomL,beam-holeseriesvisibleinsidethetower,andapparently representingatwo-storeystructurebuiltagainstitsexterior,notrespecting itsupperdoor.Notealsotheholeshighabovethegate,suggestinga structureuptothreestoreyshigh.BottomR,morebeamholessuggestinga floorturningthegatevaultintoanupperroom.

203

204

7.19.Interiorofthemiddlegate,showingbeamholesinitstympanum(top) correspondingwiththenarrowingofitsportal(below).Thenarrowed doorwasitselflaterinfilled.(Thepipeatthetopwasarelicoftheuseofthe gatevaultbytheYaleexpedition,apparentlyasanablutionroom.) 205

7.20.BuildingsexcavatedbythemiddlegateoftheCitadel. 206

7.21.FragmentofterracottaplaquebearingclassicRomanmilitaryiconography, fromtheCitadel.Itispartofasceneportrayingacavalrymanridingdown andspearingafallenbarbarian(Yale1938.4922:widthc.87mm). 206

7.22.Seriesofbeamholescutin,andwallsbuiltagainst,theCitadelaroundthe twoSEgates:a.theSgate;notetheveryhighrowofbeamsdirectlyover theportal;b.thesamegatefromtheinsideshowingbeamholesinthegate vault,andwallsofexternalbuildingsimpingingontheportal;c.walls constructedimmediatelyoutsidethe ‘middle’ gateappeartobeofnormal Dureneconstructionandappeartobepre-Roman;d.morebeam-hole seriescutintothewallsoftheCitadelaroundandoverthe ‘middle’ gate andtheadjacenttower.

7.23.MilitaryoccupationinferredwithintheSendoftheCitadelandaroundit inblockB2,basedonPearson’splanandAllara’srestudy.Darkergrey indicatesmilitaryroofedstructures.HatchingindicatesbuildingsinB2and B4alsoproposedtohavebeeninmilitaryhands.

7.24.MilitarystructuresaroundtheSendoftheCitadelinblockB2:a.thearea shortlyafterexcavation(theroofedstructureatLwaslabelled ‘police house’ ononeoftheplans);b.blockB2 c.2007;c.viewfromtheCitadel wallontotheNpartofPiazza10showingthepalimpsestofstructures, includingtwokilns.Thesewereburiedundergroundmakeupinthe militaryperiod,thehigherlate floorlevelindicatedbythethreshold betweenS12andcourtyardintheforeground.

207

208

209

8.1.AprovisionalnewplanoftheC3-Abathingestablishmentinitssetting, basedonarchivalphotographsanddrawingsbyBrownandPearson, supplementedbypreliminaryre-examinationandmagnetometrydata. Constructionofthebathrequireddemolitionofasubstantialpartofblock C3,butwaspartofabiggerschemetocreateanopenpublicspacewhere therehadbeenanarrow,twistingmainstreet.Thiswasprobablyalso connectedwiththeelaborateinsetentrance ‘b’ acrossLowerMain SttotheNW. 213

8.2.TheC3-AbathfromtheNin2005,withroom1siltedtogroundlevel andgrass-covered(L),androom2atcentre.OtherbuildingsinC3are visibleterracedintothesteepwadislopebehind,withthe Strategeion on theskylinetopR. 214

8.3.Top,theC3bathfromtheNW(centre),afterexcavationinthesixth season.ItsserviceyardliesunexcavatedtoitsR,andtheOttomanroad runsthroughitonthefarsideoftheexcavatedheatedblock.Inthe foregroundisthewidenedLowerMainSt,andtheelaboratedentrancebto blockB4.Beyondthebathliestheexpeditionhouse.Below,fallenroofing vaultoftheC3bath. 215

8.4.PoolareaatSendof frigidarium F:a.therearwallofthepoolin2010, showingerodedniches,vegetation,andtessellated floorofaroomabove andbehindthepoolweatheringoutofthesection(arrowed);b.Thepool

afterexcavation;c.reverseangleshowingpoolsteps,tiled floor,anddoors to apodyterium A(L)andtopresumed palaestra (R). 216

8.5.C3bath,room1:a.lookingN,showingpartofthemosaic floor,with Ottomanroadbeyond;b.theSendoftheroomshowingplungewithniche stillfullofearthatback,andapparentearlier,blockeddoortoroomFon itsEside;notevaultspringing;c.theplungefromgroundlevel. 217

8.6.Mosaic floorinbathC3room1:a.MargaretCrosbyandamalecolleague cleaningandwettingthemosaicpanelsforphotography;b.thethree SpanelsandpartoftheNpanelwithapparentplasterrepair(topL);c. detailofpanel1;d.detailofpanel2;e.detailofpanel3withinscription roundel;f.panel4,roundel,againwithplasterrepaironneareredge. 218

8.7.C3bath,room2:a.lookingW,showingapsewithwindow,andfurnace flue;b.theNsideoftheroomwith floorrobbedexposinghypocaustpilae; c.viewfromWwindowshowingdoorto1;d.detailofapsewithdamaged floorand insitu lowestrowof tubuli. 219

8.8.R,C3bathRoom2lookingEtodoorto1and(R)3;noteremovalof bricksofthe flatdoorarches.L,archivesketchoforiginaldimensionsof oneofthedoors. 220

8.9.C3bathroom3Esideshowing ‘ledge’ (tubuli?)andwallholes. 220

8.10.RectifiedcompositeimageofmosaicpanelsinroomC3-3(Nattop). 221

8.11.ProvisionalnewplanoftheM7bath.IntheabsenceofnewTotal Stationpointsanddetailedresurvey,thisisabest-estimatecompositeof Cavro’ssurvey,andBrown’sreworkingofit,combinedwithKnox’splan ofadjacentstructures,archivalphotographs,and2010photographyand observations.Thedifferentwalltonesreproducedistinctionsmadeby Cavro,buttheirsignificanceisuncertain. 222

8.12.TheM7bath:a.seenfromtheW,itscolonnadedentrancefacingonto MainSt,withacivilhouseinforeground.Takeninthefourthseasonfrom thecitywalljustSofthePalmyreneGate;b.thebath’scolonnadeonMain St,lookingtowardsthePalmyreneGate;c.theSstokehole;d.box fluetiles fromtheheatedsuite. 223

8.13.BathM7,a.largepoolattheendoftheM7bath frigidarium;b.poolat Sendofroom1,showingBrown’slowvaultspringingoverit. 224

8.14.CollageofCavro’sdrawingsoftheM7hypocaustsystem,astracedand reproducedbyBrown(PR 6,pl.IV).Planinvertedandsectionreversedto matchorientationofFig.8.11. 224

8.15.Fragmentofhithertoundescribedgeometricmosaic,patchedand plasteredover,onhypocaust floorofM7bathroom3. 225

8.16.ThetwophasesofconstructioninL4,recordedinthearchivalplan offeaturesvisibleinthesurfaceofthisunexcavatedblock. 226

8.17.Pearson’sarchivaldrawingcomprisingreconstructedelevations,plan, andisometricofstateofpreservationoftheL7-A ‘HouseoftheRoman Scribes’ . 228

8.18.ReconstructionofRoman-eraL7-A ‘HouseoftheRomanScribes’ ; drawingbyHenryPearson. 229

8.19.VaultedRoman-erasuperstructureaboveentrancetoL7-A? ‘Houseof theRomanScribes’,seenfromthecitywallwalk.DrawingbyHenry Pearson. 230

8.20.PlasterceilingpanelfromL7-A ‘HouseoftheRomanScribes’,with portraitofawomanlabelledThaamare.

230

8.21.ThePalmyreneGatein2007:top,externalview.Thefootofthelate anti-siegemud-brickglacisaroundthegatehasbeenreconstructed.Behind it,Lofthegatestructure,partofthewallofthegateforecourtcanbeseen upstanding.Bottom,interiorviewofthegatelookingalongMainSt,with theM7bathatL. 231

8.22.ArchiveplansandelevationsofthePalmyreneGatebyHenryDetweiler, withadditionofextentofforecourtandmainentrancerouteafterGelin etal.1997, fig.33. 232

8.23.VonGerkan’sinterpretationofthedevelopmentofthePalmyrene Gatedesign,drawnbyDetweiler. 233

8.24.InscribedandpaintedmilitarytextsinsidethePalmyreneGate. 233

8.25.MilitaryaltarsandgraffitionthewallsofthePalmyreneGatecarriageway. 234

8.26.AltartoCommodussetupinsidethePalmyreneGate. 235

8.27.InscriptionC3totheTycheofDuraontheNwallofthecarriageway throughthePalmyreneGate.Lettering c.40mmhigh,paintedredon discovery. 235

8.28.ReliefdepictingNemesis,PalmyreneGate. 235

8.29.MainSt,theprincipalcross-citythroughroute,withhypothetical reconstructionofthelostRiverGate.Inset:elevationviewfromacross theriver,showinganapproachrampascendingundertheSEcitywallsand towerstothelevelofthelowertown. 236

9.1.Schematicrepresentationoftheproposeddevelopmentsincomposition, andapproximatescale,oftheRomanimperialgarrisonbasedatDura, throughthe firsthalfoftheRomanperiodandthemajorreorganization around210.Afterarrivalofthelegionarycontingents,garrison compositionseemstoundergonenofurthermajorchangesuntilthe turbulent250s. 251

9.2.Hypotheticalprojectionofthenumbersofmarriedsoldierswithina notionalmilliaryRomanauxiliaryformationofthelatersecondto earlierthirdcenturies AD 253

11.1.Diagramsummarizingobservedsequencesandinferredrelationsbetween structuresandfeaturesofthemilitarybase,againstconventionalDura chronology,withelapsedtimerunningfromtoptobottom(theopposite ofaHarrismatrixrepresentingstratigraphy,butchosentocorrespond withthecomplementarygarrisonchronologydiagram,Fig.9.1).Agreat dealofmilitary-relatedconversionandconstructionactivity,inseveral casesmultiplephases,isidentifiedasantedatingthebuildingcampaignof the210s,attestingpriorexistenceofasubstantialbaseestablishedover earlierdecades. 261

11.2.ThetriumphalarchonthesteppeWofthecity,byDetweiler. 265 11.3.ThehypothesizedtwininitialRomanmilitarynucleiinthecity. 266

12.1.GroundpenetratingradarimageoftheinteriorofthesquareRomanfort ofSeverandate,apparentlywithanannexetotheN,atQreiye(‘Ayyash) ontheEuphrates.ImagerotatedtofacilitatecomparisonwiththeDura baseplans. 271

14.1.SkeletonofanadultmalefoundburiedintheNWtoweroftheCitadel, probablyinthepre-Romanera.Apparentlyanexecutionvictim,hestill hadanoosearoundhisneck. 296

14.2.APalmyrenepriestmakesanofferingtotheGad(guardiandeity)of Dura.FromthePalmyrenesanctuary,theTempleoftheGaddé. 309

14.3.PlanofblockL7showingthedevelopedsynagogueacrossthemiddleof theblock,whichitsharedwiththeRomansoldiersintheHouseofthe Scribes. 310

14.4.ThesynagogueWwallshortlyafteritsexposure.

14.5.DetailofthepaintingsontheWwallofthesynagogue,showingMoses partingtheRedSea,andtheTwelveTribesofIsraelcrossing.TheIsraelites withtheirlongtrousersandovalshieldslookstronglyliketheRoman soldiersofDura,evenmoresoaseachtribeisledbyastandard-bearer holdinga vexillum aloft.

14.6.AxonometricreconstructionbyHenryPearsonoftheChristian building,withvaultedbaptistryatR.

14.7.ApartyofGermanLutheranssingingintheChristianchapel(partly reconstructed)onEasterSunday2001.The figureontheskylinestands onTower17,showingtheproximityofthechapeltoapresumedRoman militarypost.TherewasnothingclandestineabouttheChristian sanctuary.

16.1.Satelliteimageof4November2015,showingDuraafteritsdevastation bylooters(comparePl.VII).(Image(c)GoogleEarthandDigitalGlobe, 2017).

16.2. Aveatquevale? Oneofthefragmentsofpaintingsresemblingthe Terentiusscene,foundbyMFSEDinthenewlyidentifiedMilitaryZeus Templein2011.AmongtheverylastdiscoveriesmadeatthesiteasSyria wasengulfedinwar,theydepict milites ofDura’sgarrisonwithhands raisedinsalute.DoubtlessasintheTerentiusscenetheywerewitnessinga sacrifice,butinthecontextoftheirdiscovery,these figuresappeartobe wavingfarewellasDurafaceditsseconddestruction.

311

312

312

9.1.DatabletextualevidenceforRomanmilitarycontingentsatDura.244

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.