daniel at sardis

47

he discovery in 1962 of a monumental syna-gogue at Sardis marked a turning point in thearchaeological exploration of the site.

1

Exca-vation of the main hall and its colonnaded forecourtcontinued over the next 10 years, along with conser-vation of its structure and interior decoration, whichincluded an extensive set of floor mosaics, architec-tural sculpture, and wall revetment. The structure’slarge size, associated artifacts, and urban settinghave all contributed to a detailed understanding of thecritical importance of this building, the largest knownsynagogue of late antiquity, and the community thatused it.

2

Inscriptions record the names of over 30donors who helped underwrite the expense of thisgreat project between the fourth and sixth centuries(Robert 1964; Kroll 2001; Cross 2002). To those earlyJews epigraphically attested at the Sardis Synagoguecan now be added the legendary Daniel, whose like-ness formed part of the building’s decoration.

in the company of lions

The image of Daniel accompanied by lions canbe recognized in three fragments of incised marble

found during excavation of the peristyle forecourt.This 18

x

22 m space lies at the east end of the Syn-agogue, next to a colonnaded plaza or street and amajor urban thoroughfare, the Marble Road. Fourporticoes with mosaic floors surrounded a paved courtwith a central fountain (fig. 1). A dazzling variety ofdecorative media covered the walls: painted wallplaster, marble revetment, polychrome opus sectile(

skoutlosis

), and a pilaster arcade with vases, vines,and birds in relief.

3

The plaque with Daniel formedpart of this decorative scheme. The pieces werefound amid signs of burning near floor level in thenortheast corner, together with artifacts dating to theearly seventh century.

4

Not all parts of the Synagogue’s decoration re-ceived immediate attention, owing to the sheer scaleof the excavation. One of the most spectacular dis-coveries of 1962 was a large marble table supportedby legs with eagles in relief, which stood near a pairof addorsed Archaic lions in the west part of the mainhall (fig. 2; Hanfmann and Ramage 1978: 63–65 no.25; 148–49 no. 217). Both creatures have deep rootsin the art of the Mediterranean and Near East, andby late antiquity had acquired special meaning formany Jewish communities (Hachlili 1988: 321–34;1998: 382–88). Similar imagery was found in the

1

The Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, co-sponsored byHarvard and Cornell universities, was begun by G. M. A. Hanf-mann in 1958. See Hanfmann 1983 for an introduction to the siteand early results; more recent discoveries are reviewed in Greene-walt 2006. My thanks to the Sardis Publications Committee forpermission to present this material.

2

Kraabel (1983) assesses the building and its significance.The architecture is summarized in Seager 1983, which anticipateshis forthcoming monograph on the Synagogue.

3

See Kroll 2001: 20–22, 36–40 for inscriptions identifyingdonors who paid for the mosaics, the revetment, and a marble bal-ustrade in the forecourt. Part of the arcade has been reconstructedon the north wall.

4

For published coins from this area, see Bates 1971: nos. 76,99, 174, 199, 775; for metals, see Waldbaum 1983: 87 no. 482,102 no. 600.

Daniel at Sardis

Marcus Rautman

Department of Art History & Archaeology109 Pickard Hall

University of MissouriColumbia, MO 65211

[email protected]

Recently identified among the architectural decoration of the Sardis Synagogue arethree fragments of an incised relief depicting four lions and a standing figure. Com-position, iconography, and style suggest this represents the biblical figure of Danielas understood by a local sculptor in the fifth century. The lack of close comparanda,either Jewish or Christian, reflects the relief’s immediate working environment and theway religious images were perceived outside the artistic mainstream of late antiquity.

T

48 MARCUS RAUTMAN BASOR 358

Fig. 1.

Sardis Synagogue, forecourt, looking southeast.

Fig. 2.

Synagogue, main hall, west end, looking southwest.

2010 DANIEL AT SARDIS 49

hall’s structural ornament, with a striding lion appear-ing in relief on one of the pilaster capitals.

5

A fewyears later, the statue of a large recumbent lion, alsoof Archaic date, was found outside the Synagogue,not far from and looking toward its entrance (Hanf-mann and Ramage 1978: 68, no. 31; returned to placein Hanfmann 1983: fig. 240). All these animals musthave seemed appropriate for a Jewish assembly halllocated in ancient Lydia, to which Antiochus III hadbrought Jewish settlers from Mesopotamia in the latethird century

b.c.e.

and where lions had long been aroyal attribute.

6

Of the large quantity of marble revetment frag-

ments found in the forecourt, several pieces preserv-ing “vigorous sketches of lions” were briefly noted atthe time of excavation (Hanfmann 1963: 46). Threeof the fragments consist of flat slabs of medium fine-grained, light gray marble, 0.014–0.016 m thick, ir-regularly broken, and discolored by fire and weath-ering.

7

Fine parallel lines cover the back surface,while on the front are incised, angular grooves thatgive the impression of confidently drawn lines. Twojoining fragments show four lions, one above theother and facing left (fig. 3). None is complete but allhave powerful bodies and sturdy legs with clawedfeet; one still has his long curling tail. Each head hasa jagged mane, two rounded ears, a single eye, nose,and wide-open jaws with sharp teeth. The third, non-joining piece presents the hindquarters of the lowestanimal with his tail curving gracefully between hislegs (fig. 4). A horizontal groove below the feet fixesthe scene’s lower limit. In its original form, the panelstood more than 0.40 m high, and if reconstructedsymmetrically would have been at least 0.40 m wide(fig. 5).

The four lions face a shared quarry. Crisp linesdefine the angular folds of the long garment worn bya tall standing figure. The figure’s left side survivesto nearly its full height, from a small, curved footbeneath the zigzag hem to an outstretched arm pro-jecting from the top; the missing right arm was prob-ably raised as well. Traces of a curved, branchingform, perhaps fluttering drapery or foliage, survive tothe upper left. Taken together, the fragments presenta frontal, standing figure draped in a long tunic orpallium, menaced by four spirited lions, and holdingin his outstretched hand a scroll.

5

Hanfmann 1963: 44, fig. 34. Another lion was built into apier foundation in the main hall: Hanfmann and Ramage 1978:65–66 no. 26. Two bronze handle attachments in the form of lionheads were found just outside the forecourt: Waldbaum 1983: 76–77 nos. 409–10. Small fragments of other marble lions were dis-covered throughout the complex.

6

Josephus

Ant.

12.3,

ss

148–53; Trebilco 1991: 5–7. For thelion as an attribute of the Archaic kingdom of Lydia, see Hanfmannand Ramage 1978: 20–23; Ratté 1989: 379–81. Synagogue spoliaare discussed recently by Mitten and Scorziello 2008: 145. The des-ignation

phyles Leontion

appears in a mosaic inscription in theforecourt; see Robert 1964: 45–46 no. 6, pl. 5; Trebilco 1991: 44–45; Kroll 2001: 20–21 no. 10, fig. 13; van der Horst 2006: 50–51.

7

As reconstructed from top to bottom: S62.41:4750 (0.158

x

0.183 m), S62.45:4787 (0.195

x

0.087 m), and S62.62:4871(0.095

x

0.105 m).

Fig. 3.

Incised relief with standing figure and lions (S62.41:4750, S62.45:4787), from the Synagogue forecourt. © Ar-chaeological Exploration of Sardis/Harvard University.


sketching in stone

These three marble fragments, together with othernon-figural pieces found in the forecourt, share a dis-tinctive technical and stylistic approach. All are care-fully and deeply incised to create a kind of flat orlinear relief. The technique has been infrequentlydiscussed as a form of intaglio relief or

Ritzdekor

,a simple but effective way of carving well suited toarchitectural and funerary ornament. In contrast tothe tactile values of classical relief sculpture, the em-phasis on flat, linear patterning is often seen as re-flecting basic changes in the style and perception oflate antique art. Cruder examples approach the levelof graffiti; yet when skillfully employed, the tech-nique can artfully arrange multiple figures in complexsettings. In western Europe, the technique appearsmainly in sarcophagi and funerary reliefs of the highempire and later antiquity.

8

Non-funerary, architec-tural applications are better known in the East. Oneof the best-documented examples was found duringexcavation of the Temple of Zeus at Aizanoi, in

western Phrygia. The walls of the temenos propylonwere originally lined with marble plaques featuringfoliage, animals, and figures in incised relief as wellas in the related champlevé technique, in which thebackground is uniformly recessed. Both decorativemethods were apparently current at the site in thethird century and slightly later.

9

These two well-known relief techniques admit con-siderable stylistic variation, depending on location anddate. Even though locally made, the Sardis plaque

8

Among many examples, see Bovini and Brandenburg 1967:379 no. 912, pl. 144; Hachlili 1998: 304, pls. 6:22–6:37; Chris-tern-Briesenick 2003: 102 no. 196, pl. 51; 298 no. 650, pl. 155.Naumann (1979: 56, fig. 25) suggests an Asia Minor connectionin the funerary relief of Beratius Nikatoras in Rome, coinciden-tally with an incised image of a spirited lion.

9

Naumann 1979: 55–56, fig. 24, pls. 70–71; Niewöhner 2007:130–31, 151–53. Smaller fragments of the two techniques cannotalways be distinguished.

Fig. 5.

Reconstruction of incised relief of standing figureand lions from the Synagogue forecourt (C. S. Alexander).© Archaeological Exploration of Sardis/Harvard University.

Fig. 4.

Incised relief with lion (S62.62:4871), from theSynagogue forecourt. © Archaeological Exploration ofSardis/Harvard University.


clearly reflects an awareness of other artistic media.The sculptor’s main interest plainly lay with the li-ons, who are given the naturalistic proportions, fea-tures, and attitudes seen in contemporary depictionsof wild animals. The greatest number of such imagessurvive in floor mosaics depicting scenes of thearena and the hunt, occasions that occupied an in-creasingly important place in the Roman imagination.Mosaicists soon found that the untidy spontaneity ofanimal combat lent itself to the scattering of figuresacross a blank field, without the need for a unifyingground line or border. Such open, two-dimensionalcompositions apparently originated in the West andspread across the eastern Mediterranean from the latesecond or third century, reaching their greatest pop-ularity in the fifth and early sixth centuries.

10

The li-ons on the Sardis plaque are depicted in a similarway, as naturalistic and lively figures who stand iso-lated on the marble surface, without meaningful re-lationship to each other except to face the drapedfigure. By contrast, the static, frontal presentation ofthe figure draws from a different pictorial tradition,as is apparent in the sharp, angular folds of his gar-ment. The combination of both approaches bringstogether the main stylistic currents of their day.

envisioning tradition

Even in its incomplete state, the Sardis relief canbe seen to present one of the most recognizable bib-lical images of late antiquity: Daniel in the lions’den. Orants and lions are common enough, but whencombined they invariably allude to the figure whosetravails at the Babylonian court are told in the bookof Daniel as it appears in both the Hebrew Bible(

Tanakh

) and the Septuagint.

11

The origin of the textis uncertain, but by the third or second century

b.c.e.

it comprised 12 chapters arranged in two distinctparts: tales of Daniel’s life (1–6), and the first-personrecounting of his prophetic visions (7–12); the Sep-tuagint includes two additional chapters (LXX Daniel

13–14) not in the

Tanakh

. By the late third century

c.e.

, the encounter with lions told in chapter 6 of-fered the main context for identifying Daniel in thevisual arts, from catacomb paintings, loculus slabs,and sarcophagi to floor mosaics, architectural reliefs,jewelry, and domestic crafts. Composition, gesture,and costume vary with purpose, place, and date, butmost images present lions to either side of an orantwith outstretched arms. Visual consistency was es-sential for viewers to grasp the figure’s identity. Onsuch grounds, the Sardis plaque might be recon-structed with several more lions to the left, facing thestanding figure. Looking back to the noncanonicaladditions of Dan 14:31, one might expect to findthree more lions, for a total of seven felines in thisfamous den.

In his recent iconographic survey of Daniel in lateantique art, Reiner Sörries (2005) assembled 337 im-ages from across the artistic spectrum. The earliestexamples date to the late third and early fourth cen-turies and are frontal orants with arms upraised, lessoften outstretched, and rarely lowered. Daniel’s cos-tume ranges from the short tunic of Roman cata-combs to the long-sleeved tunic or dalmatic popularin northern Italy and Pannonia. The idea of heroicnudity seems to have arisen in funerary contexts inearly fourth-century Rome and was most commonthere and in the western provinces. Exotic non-Romanattire, comprising leggings or trousers, closely fittedsleeves, and the soft pointed cap associated withPhrygia and Persia and also worn by Mithras, ap-pears in the eastern Mediterranean in the early fifthcentury. Quickly taken up in Constantinople, this dis-tinctive oriental costume becomes increasingly pop-ular for later fifth- and sixth-century images of theprophet across the late empire (Sörries 2005: 145–51).

Daniel’s feline companions show similar varia-tion in the late third and fourth centuries, when theyusually number two, occasionally four or six, andexceptionally seven. Early lions typically have shaggymanes and long, switching tails. They comport them-selves by lying, crouching, standing, or pouncing, anddisplay varying attitudes of aggression or menace.By the mid-fourth or fifth century, this lively pridehas generally become a pair of docile cats, seated onhaunches with their heads facing or turned back to-ward the prophet.

12

10

Lavin 1963; cf. Kondoleon 1995: 271–314, who argues (pp.288–90) for the earlier diffusion of figured carpets in the East.

11

The 12 canonical chapters of the book of Daniel appearamong the

Ketuvim

(Writings) of the

Tanakh

. The Septuagint, fol-lowed by Josephus (

Ant

. 10.11.7

s

266), places Daniel among theprophets. By late antiquity, the original Greek translation had beensuperseded by a version attributed by Irenaeus (

Adversus Haereses

3.21.1) to Theodotion of Ephesus. For studies in the complex bib-lical sources and composition of the text, see Collins and Flint2001. The wide-ranging medieval apocrypha are surveyed re-cently by DiTommaso 2005.

12

Sörries (2005: 154–57) stresses chronological and regionalvariation in the number and arrangement of lions, while caution-ing that attitude is more subjectively understood.


This process of visual standardization, while by nomeans uniform across the empire, suggests that theSardis plaque belongs to an early phase of Daniel’siconographic development. The loose-fitting Medi-terranean costume resembles the long-sleeved tunicand pallium seen on fourth-century sarcophagi. Thefigure’s statuesque calm contrasts with the threaten-ing lions, whose number—at least four and possiblyseven or more—is unusual among surviving monu-ments.

13

The lively creatures are caught in activeposes, “vigorous sketches” that reflect the lingeringpictorialism of Hellenistic art. Their vivacious carv-ing and vicious demeanor reflect the sculptor’s clas-sical background and special interest in lions, whoseimages were inescapable at the site.

The improvised nature of the Sardis plaque be-comes clearer when viewed from a regional stand-point. Daniel is first met in western Asia Minor atConstantinople, where Eusebius (

Vita Constantini

3.49) mentions a statue group of “Daniel with his li-ons shaped in bronze and glinting with gold leaf”that was set up at a public fountain (trans. Cameronand Hall 1999: 140). A funerary stele or sarcophagusrelief from the turn of the fifth century presents anorant in Eastern attire, without the company of lionsbut anticipating later images of the prophet in otherways.

14

A more fragmentary relief from the capitalmay preserve part of a lion together with the flyingimage of the prophet Habakkuk, who in the non-canonical additions brings Daniel food during hiscaptivity.

15

Two terracotta lamps from western AsiaMinor pose an orant figure in oriental costume be-tween paired lions: one was recovered from the ceme-tery of the Seven Sleepers at Ephesus, and the othercame from Smyrna to Berlin.

16

The consistency ofthis exotic, eastward-looking image during the fifth

and sixth centuries reflects the broad authority of thecapital and the reach of its cultural influence.

A different regional tradition appears among theslightly later Asia Minor ampullae or pilgrim flasks.These small terracotta vessels, generally 6–8 cm inheight, turn up regularly in the lower Hermus andMeander valleys. Many of these little flasks weredecorated with geometric shapes, crosses, animals, orfigures, and served as protective amulets or

eulogia

when worn or carried by travelers in the sixth andseventh centuries.

17

Four known examples depict onone side a standing figure, usually bearded, who wearsa long garment, holds a codex in his left hand, andis flanked by two small lions. The opposite side ineach case presents a standing figure in military tunicwith spear and trammeled dragon underfoot. Oneof these ampullae came to the Louvre from Smyrna;two more were excavated at Aphrodisias in Caria.The potency of this compressed image apparently re-quired no identifying text or other attribute to berecognized as Daniel, even in the absence of a re-gional pilgrimage venue or other connection with theprophet.

18

Why Daniel would appear on these flasks is un-clear. The makers of figural ampullae normally drewon New Testament sources in depicting Christ, theVirgin, and bust-length saints (Anderson 2004: 83–84). Some examples have figures that are not clearlyidentified but simply hold a book or stand withinan architectural niche. These nonspecific flasks, likeothers with a shell motif or geometric patterns orno visible ornament at all, may have appealed morebroadly to late Roman travelers. The purposely ambig-uous iconography lends itself to multiple interpreta-tions.

19

As a well-known hero to Jews and Christians,Daniel’s presence on this distinctive class of protective

13

Sörries 2005: 154–55. An asymmetrical composition, with-out lions to both sides, would be even stronger evidence for anearly date.

14

Firatli 1990: 62–63 no. 105, pl. 40; cf. 154–55 no. 306,pl. 94 for a more elaborate, sixth-century relief from Thasos. Sim-ilar examples in Antioch, Cyprus, and Ravenna reflect close con-tacts with the capital.

15

LXX Dan 14:33–38; Firatli 1990: 70 no. 120, pl. 44; cf. 96no. 177, pl. 55 for an equally fragmentary image on the border ofa marble table, allegedly from Smyrna but now lost. Might thefluttering detail above Daniel at Sardis belong to Habakkuk?

16

For Ephesus, see Miltner 1937: pl. 3 no. 363; for Berlin, seeWulff 1909: 245 no. 1226, pl. 59; Sörries 2005: 134 no. 312, pl.26. The figural discus suggests a date in the fifth century. The at-tribution to Smyrna refers more accurately to the antiquities mar-ket than to the archaeological provenance.

17

Metzger 1981: 41–54; for excavated examples, see Ander-son 2004: 84–88.

18

Metzger 1981: 46–47 no. 117, fig. 99; Campbell 1988:541–42 nos. 4–5, figs. 4b, 5b; Sörries 2005: 140–41, nos. 325–28 (including an unprovenanced example from a German privatecollection). Anderson’s (2004: 83) more skeptical identificationin some respects underscores the communicative power of theimage alone.

19

Apart from the small diagonal cross of the codex cover,these “Daniel flasks” lack explicit Christian content. For differentviewers, the triumphant, armed figure on the reverse might sug-gest Christ

militans

with the basilisk, saint Demetrius or George,the magical power of Jewish

hasidim

or of Solomon himself; seeDauterman Maguire, Maguire, and Duncan-Flowers 1989: 25–28;Diamond 2003: 254–56. For overlapping concerns of differentaudiences, see Lacerenza 2002; Bohak 2008: 289–90.


amulets suggests that his image, flanked by tamed,even adoring animals, could have reassuring value formembers of both religious communities.

20

One final detail on the ampullae has particularrelevance for the Sardis plaque. The codex held bythe figure on these four flasks appears in no other im-age identifiable as Daniel. The heraldic compositionbroadly resembles other ampullae with orants, includ-ing the well-known Menas flasks from Egypt, andcould be readily adapted by adding two lions.

21

Forwhatever reason, the craftsperson who made theseflasks departs from sixth-century custom in order toassociate Daniel with a document that might repre-sent either his prophecies, the gospels, or both. Thisshort-lived experiment is without precedent, yet re-calls a surprising detail of the Sardis plaque: the scrollheld high by the figure. The pinched shape and shortlines at either end indicate that this is a furled

rotulus

rather than a staff or wand, which is normally wieldedin the right hand.

22

Drawing on earlier Roman tradi-tion, biblical figures in early Christian art often carryrolled scrolls, invariably in the left hand, to under-score the authority under which they act or write.

23

From the fourth century, prophets and evangelistsappear regularly with their texts in either scroll orcodex form. Daniel is identifiable in two such in-stances datable to the sixth–seventh centuries: hold-ing an open scroll (with the text of Dan 7:13) in apainted row of prophets at Bawit, and with a furledscroll held close to his body on a canon table page inthe Rabbula Gospels.

24

At Bawit the prophet is pre-

sented in a long white cloak over an embroideredtunic, while in the Rabbula Gospels he wears a redcloak over a short tunic and leggings and a tall mitre.In both cases, Daniel holds a scroll in front of hisbody, appears with the prophet Ezekiel, and is iden-tified by an inscription in an explicitly Christian set-ting. Daniel also sometimes appears with a scrollwhen he meets the dragon of Babylon, an episoderecounted in the noncanonical text of Dan 14:14–27 and depicted mainly on sarcophagi of the mid-fourth century.

25

Other images of Daniel emphasizethe broad, open-handed gesture of prayer and suppli-cation. Like the little flasks, the Sardis plaque em-powers the prophet by returning his text to his veryhand.

image and identity

Beyond its distinctive style and unparalleled ico-nography, the Sardis plaque is an unusual exampleof figural relief in an expressly Jewish setting. TheSynagogue and the forecourt in which it was foundare no less exceptional. The two spaces occupy thesouth palaestra wing of the city’s western Bath-Gymnasium Complex and were identified as a Jew-ish meeting hall on the basis of multiple menorahimages, Torah shrines, and donor inscriptions in Greekand Hebrew.

26

Planning and construction of this hugebuilding apparently spanned several generations inthe late fourth and fifth centuries, with alterations andrepairs continuing significantly later.

27

In the sixthcentury, the forecourt saw extensive renovations:new pipes drained water from the roof and suppliedthe fountain, eroded floor mosaics were patched orreplaced, and a series of champlevé reliefs was ap-plied to the walls. An inscribed marble balustrade

20

Local Jews surely traveled to other regional centers such asAphrodisias (the only certain provenance of Daniel ampullae),whose Jewish community is well known: Kraabel 1983: 180–82;Trebilco 1991; Chaniotis 2008. For glass flasks reflecting “closeproximity and interaction between Jews and Christian pilgrimage”in Jerusalem, see Fine 2005: 157; for amulets and magical gems,see Bohak 2008: 158–65.

21

The connection is particularly close with images of thevirgin martyr Thecla, who appears amid wild beasts on a numberof Menas ampullae (Davis 2001: 114–20, 195–200) and perhapsan Asia Minor flask found at Knidos (Love 1972: 75, pl. 22 fig.32). For the pre-Christian tradition, see Leclercq 1924; Diamond2003: 262.

22

For pinched scrolls, often with articulated ends, see Boviniand Brandenburg 1967: 316–20 nos. 770–72, pls. 121–22; Chris-tern-Briesenick 2003: 37–40 nos. 51, 53, pls. 18–19.

23

Examples range from imperial (Louvre statue of Nero as achild) to mythological (third-century mosaic of Polyhymnia atVichten, Luxembourg). For biblical figures, see Wessel 1966.

24

For chapel 12 at Bawit, see Clédat 1904: 56, pls. 32–33; forfol. 8b [191] in the Rabbula Gospels, see Ceccelli, Furlani, andSalmi 1959: 59, pl. 5:1.

25

Spier 2007: 221–22 nos. 47–48. The Dellys (Algeria) sar-cophagus makes clear Daniel’s association with Christ by pre-senting him in the same pose with a scroll in his left hand;Christern-Briesenick 2003: 274–75 no. 593, pl. 142:1–3.

26

Kraabel 1983; Seager 1983; Kroll 2001; Cross 2002. Thereservations posed by Goodman (1994: 216–20) apply mainly tothe fourth century.

27

Seager (1983: 172–73) sees work beginning on the mainhall around the mid-fourth century. The recent review by Magness(2005) attributes sixth-century coins from the forecourt and eastend of the main hall to the Synagogue’s initial construction ratherthan its renovation and repair. Sixth-century coins, pottery, andlamps were not found under most of the main hall’s floor mosaics,whose geometric repertoire resembles other buildings of the fourthand fifth centuries.


added to the peristyle specifically mentions a cam-paign of

ananeosis

, for which letterforms suggesta later date (Kroll 2001: 15, 38–40). By the earlyseventh century, the Synagogue may no longer havebeen in service, with the main hall abandoned andsmall domestic enclosures occupying the street-sidecorners of the portico. The recovery of the threeDaniel fragments amid the debris of the northeastenclosure suggests that the plaque was originally in-stalled nearby, perhaps on the north or east wall.

28

The Daniel relief belongs to an earlier phase ofthe forecourt and probably dates to the fifth century.Composition, iconography, and style find their clos-est parallels before ca. 500; they contrast, moreover,with the extensive champlevé work that was added inthe sixth century.

29

Decoration underscored the im-portance of this large, attractive space throughoutlate antiquity. The forecourt offered the only accessto the main assembly hall from two important streetsand was well known to area residents as well as theJewish community.

30

The fountain provided an op-portunity for daily refreshment and ritual washing.The sheltered porticoes would have been the scene offormal reception and informal assembly. The discov-ery of many fragments of marble tables suggests thatdining took place here as well.

31

Written sources dem-onstrate that elsewhere such courtyards served as theplace of instruction and perhaps funerary commem-

oration. The small image of Daniel would have suitedboth of these occasions.

32

The exceptional nature of the Sardis relief is under-scored by the absence of other figures in the forecourtand its lack of close parallel in other synagogues.The scarcity of comparanda reflects differing atti-tudes toward the figural arts held by Jewish commu-nities in antiquity, and in modern times as well. Thevisual reticence once ascribed to ancient Judaism isnow seen as a more discriminating and historicallycontingent process that was shaped by local condi-tions and attitudes.

33

In fact, early descriptions ofthe Tabernacle and Temple in Jerusalem mention spe-cific materials and decorative details. Torah shrines,menorahs, and items of Jewish ritual are widelyknown and often represented in the arts of late an-tiquity. Images of birds, lions, and other animals arecommon in late Roman synagogues in Palestine. Afew buildings also preserve figural scenes based onbiblical sources, including two fragmentary examplesof Daniel with his lions.

34

The floor mosaic in theNaºaran synagogue near Jericho once included anorant wearing a long-sleeved garment and inscribed

Daniel, shalom

, between two standing lions.

35

A pos-sible image of Daniel, lost except for the last part ofan inscription ([

Dani

]

el

?), has been suggested in thefloor mosaic of the Susiya synagogue in the hills ofMount Hebron (Hachlili 1988: 295). A stone relieffrom ºEn Samsam, perhaps also from a synagogue,arranges stylized lions to either side of a figure some-times identified as Daniel, although the presence ofa suckling cub and flanking eagles admits other inter-pretation (Hachlili 1988: 321, pl. 88; cf. Fine 2005:93, fig. 38). All of these examples belong to the great

28

Fragments S62.41 and S62.62 were found lying on the floorof this late unit, together with a coin of Phocas (Bates 1971: no.775); see also above, n. 4. Fragment S62.45, recovered a little tothe south, may have been built into the enclosure’s south wall,which could account for the smoothing of one of its broken sides.A smaller fragment (S62.44:4786; 0.055

x

0.086 m) from

beneath

the east portico floor includes zigzags and discontinuous linessuggesting a seated lion. Lack of further detail implies a prelimi-nary sketch that, having served its purpose, was set aside.

29

Similar improvements were made around the same time inthe nearby Marble Court; see Yegül 1986: 16; and for an exampleof cloisonné relief, 144, fig. 377. Having worked closely with thearchitectural decoration, L. J. Majewski (in Hanfmann and Wald-baum 1970: 54–55; cf. 48) attributed the forecourt champlevéreliefs to the sixth century. Similar reliefs were added to thechurch at Seleucia Pieria in north Syria following the earthquakesof 526 and 528; see Boyd 2000.

30

For cautions about overinterpreting intercommunal rela-tions, particularly in the fourth century, see Goodman 1994: 216–21; Rajak 2001: 451.

31

For dining activities in synagogue contexts, see Levine2000: 369–70.

32

The mortuary context of many surviving images may notrepresent the motif ’s wider popularity in early Christian art (Sör-ries 2005: 39, 213). For activities that took place in synagoguecourts, see Levine 2000: 306–11.

33

Among recent reviews of the problem, see Hachlili1998: 237–38; Levine 2000: 200–213; Elsner 2003; Fine 2005:47–52.

34

A fragmentary orant also appears between lions and palmsin a painted, presumably Jewish catacomb at Bet Sheºarim; seeSörries 2005: 60 no. 77. Sivan (2008: 59 n. 29) notes the raritywith which Daniel appears in images and texts.

35

Hachlili 1988: 294–95, fig. 34; Fine 2005: 83–85, 193;Spier 2007: 38 fig. 28. Here Daniel appears on the floor of themain assembly hall, corresponding in place and gesture to theprayer leader. The Naºaran mosaic was discovered by accident in1917 but was published only in 1961.


boom of synagogue construction, encouraged bythe building of churches and the economic benefitsbrought by Christian pilgrimage, that swept Palestinein the fifth and sixth centuries (Levine 2000: 194–231; Milson 2007: 236–42; Sivan 2008).

The Sardis relief reflects the response of a diasporacommunity in a very different cultural setting. Fig-ural decoration is so far unattested among the syna-gogues of western Asia Minor.

36

Images of Danieland his lions, moreover, are scarce among the largernumber of regional churches.

37

The image’s popular-ity in the fourth through sixth centuries centers onfunerary art and personal effects such as clothing,jewelry, tableware, and lamps. While perhaps appro-priate for comforting mourners in the forecourt, theSardis plaque is not obviously liturgical. Style, ico-nography, and intended purpose depart from knownexamples, both Jewish and Christian, and suggest acommission based on local pictorial and literary tra-ditions, the result of a synthetic creative process ratherthan an expressly sectarian undertaking.

Whatever its genesis, the Daniel relief was a uniquepart of the Sardis Synagogue’s visual environment. Itserved its purpose well enough to be displayed fordecades. Yet like most aspects of the building’s deco-ration, the plaque by itself is culturally ambivalentoutside its architectural setting. Fragments of threefreestanding menorahs in bronze and marble, togetherwith several menorah images from the main hall,provide evidence for the Synagogue’s identification,but the meaning of other examples is not alwaysapparent. While a seven-branched lampstand incisedon the wall of a nearby shop may indicate a Jewishresident, a solitary graffito, glass weight, or terra-cotta lamp less clearly denotes its maker, owner, or

setting.

38

The vase and vines represented in the apsefloor mosaic constitute a focal image of the SardisSynagogue and recur in the forecourt floor, yet arefound in other mosaics both public and residential.

39

The enduring popularity of the idea is clear fromits appearance in the forecourt’s champlevé reliefs.Throughout the complex, the intricate geometry ofmosaic floor and opus sectile walls employs a deco-rative repertoire found in houses, porticoes, publicbuildings, and even the late fourth- or early fifth-century church at Sector PN (Hanfmann 1974: 37–40; 1983: fig. 290.) The forecourt’s eye-catchingkantharos fountain refreshed generations of visitorswith a kind of vase known across the social spec-trum.

40

Together with the lions, eagles, and othermonumental spolia in the main hall, these imagesspoke a familiar visual language.

No less than its building, the decoration of theSardis Synagogue raises questions about how reli-gious art was made and perceived in the late Romanprovinces. The flourishing of Palestinian synagoguesin the fourth to sixth centuries has been attributedto a heightened sense of Jewish identity, cultivatedby priests and rabbis, which developed as a system-atic response to an increasingly public Christian pres-ence (Levine and Weiss 2000: 9–14; Fine 2005: 87–97; Milson 2007: 236–42). This interpretive modelof religious competition has been widely discussedin the context of Palestine, but may not as readily ap-ply to all Jewish communities of the diaspora (Elsner2003: 125–27; Ascough 2005; Chaniotis 2008). Theprominence and nature of Judaism in late RomanSardis have been much discussed. By contrast, evi-dence of hegemonic Christianity ca. 400 is relativelyscarce. The two identified churches are small, extra-mural affairs, and the location of the cathedral re-mains unknown (Hanfmann 1983: 192–96). Signs ofthe newly official religion take the form of coded

36

For (non-funerary) material culture of other regional syna-gogues, see Kraabel 1983: 180–82; Trebilco 1991; Fine 1996: 41,fig. 2.16 (Nicaea); 72, pl. 12; 161: nos. 25 (Priene), 26 (withoutprovenance); Pülz and Steskal 2004: 199 n. 2, cf. 205 n. 29 (Ephe-sus); for inscriptions, see Ameling 2004. At Mopsuestia in Cilicia,floor mosaics depicting the Ark of Noah and the story of Samsonmay belong to a synagogue. The index to Hachlili’s (1998) surveyof diaspora art lacks an entry for Daniel.

37

A relief from the Seleucia Pieria church presents a solitaryorant in Persianizing costume (Boyd 2000: 220–23, no. 111). Thelarge rosette on the reverse and a distinctive border shared withother fragments show these to be parts of a sarcophagus displayedon the lower ambulatory wall. Few of the reliefs and architecturalelements cataloged by Sörries (2005: 94–104) can be confidentlyassigned to a church setting.

38

See Fine 2005: 156–57 for Christian use of the menorah.For the graffito, see Crawford 1990: 61, fig. 279; for the glassweight, see Seager 1983: fig. 273; for the lamp, see Greenewalt,Rautman, and Cahill 1987: 62, fig. 7.

39

For the apse floor mosaic, see Seager 1983: 170, figs. 260–61; cf. similar motives in mosaics in the Synagogue’s forecourt(between panels W1 and S1); the Bath-Gymnasium (Yegül 1986:fig. 53); the residence at Sector PN (W. C. Kohler in Hanfmann1963: 28); and at other sites.

40

And which would lead imaginative readers of Jerome to rep-resent the

lacus leonis

as a krater; see Sörries 2005: 157.


symbols such as crosses, Christograms, and graffiti.The most emphatic documents are crosses in raisedrelief that are found in public and domestic build-ings.

41

In all cases, the purpose seems to have beenbroadly similar: to avert threatening spirits, to re-inforce walls, to safeguard the supply of water. Sim-ilar concerns were addressed by monograms andsymbols on rings, pendants, and textiles, as well ason plates and lamps used in the home.

42

Much hasbeen lost, of course, yet 50 years of excavation atSardis have produced few representational workswith explicit religious content. Christian figural artmay have been little known before moldmade am-pullae started arriving in the sixth century.

43

In this light, the Sardis plaque appears neitheras a Jewish reaction to Christian art nor as the dif-fusion of a broader iconographic concept, but as anindependent formulation of a basic idea—man withraised hands between beasts—translated into termsthat were locally meaningful (Diamond 2003). Onecan only speculate about the origins of the commis-sion and why Daniel was commemorated in thisway. Certainly a fundamental theme of the Danieltales of chapters 1–6 is the challenge of maintainingreligious identity in a multicultural exilic setting, par-ticularly in the face of a dominant political authority;in this light, Daniel can be seen as a hero of steadfastresistance to a potentially hostile environment (Smith-Christopher 2001: 266–67). By contrast, the visionsrecounted in chapters 7–12 speak to a long traditionof oracles and prophecies among the cities and sanc-tuaries of western Asia. Daniel’s prophetic episodesforeshadow the first-century Book of Revelation,which addresses Sardis among the seven churchesof Asia.

44

The concept of the draped orant was

grounded in ancient attitudes of prayer and piousgreeting; lions, for their part, had been at home herefor a millennium.

45

Their combination on an incisedrelief of the fifth century seems less a response toan established visual tradition than an appeal to theintended audience, a formulation conceived outsidethe main currents of Roman, Constantinopolitan,and Palestinian art. Displayed in the Synagogue’sforecourt, the image of Daniel with his lions wouldhave been broadly intelligible to local inhabitants.

Fundamental social changes during this periodtransformed the making and reception of art acrossthe late empire. Portable media such as jewelry, pil-grim tokens, and moldmade ampullae were essentialto this process. Beginning in the sixth century, theselittle flasks brought compressed, increasingly abstractfigural images to places like Sardis, particularly intothe hands and homes of their residents, where theymet with varying reactions. Remarkably enough, atSardis it is possible to glimpse the next stage of thisvisual dialectic. Across the Palaestra from the Syna-gogue’s forecourt, some 80 m to the north, is a cor-responding court known as LNH 3. Excavation herein 1967 identified several elements of its peristyleand paving, including a stylobate block carved witha complex graffito. The image is crude but striking(fig. 6). To the right stands the shadowy outline of afigure with outstretched arms. Leaping toward himfrom the left is a sharply incised lion, clumsily pro-portioned but with powerful legs and open jaws. Be-tween the two figures rises a spindly cross above acomplicated grill or set of doors—possibly indicat-ing the church that offers protection to this latter-dayDaniel. The graffito is impossible to date closely butlikely was made during the court’s final occupationin the sixth century.

46

Located in a similar publicspace, the architectural counterpart to the Synagogue’sforecourt, this vivid juxtaposing of orant and lionseemingly refers to the earlier plaque while makingexplicit its Christian content. In broader terms, itcoincides with a fundamental shift in visual commu-

41

Christian graffiti are known at the Artemis Temple, BuildingA, and W8 of the Byzantine Shops. Raised crosses have beenfound at Church EA at Sector PN, a vaulted street portico in SectorHOB, houses at Sector MMS, and across the urban surface.

42

Dauterman Maguire, Maguire, and Duncan-Flowers 1989:1–33; for the Sardis evidence, see Hanfmann 1983: 191–96.

43

For example, Waldbaum (1983: 130 no. 833) presents a singlefinger ring coming from a rural tomb. Excavations at other regionalcenters suggest a similar picture. Ecclesiastical writers elsewheremention figural images in tombs, church paintings, and textiles,often in passing or with moralizing intent, but their comments neednot apply to all parts of the late empire.

44

The connection comes full circle in the sixth-century

Chron-icle

of John Malalas (6.9), which puts Daniel into the court of Cyrusthe Great. Naturally, Cyrus consults the prophet about his upcomingcampaign against Croesus; see DiTommaso 2005: 79–80.

45

For a first- or second-century relief of a priestess with out-stretched arms, see Hanfmann and Ramage 1978: 146–47 no. 212;for commemorative stelai, 130 nos. 164–65 (the latter, third- orfourth-century relief was found just east of the Synagogue; an un-published stele, S63.33:5354, comes from the main hall); 172–73nos. 264–65.

46

Yegül 1986: 41, fig. 85. Roueché (2002) discusses contem-porary graffiti at Aphrodisias and Ephesus.


nication, from beholding self-contained narrativeforms to reading increasingly coded meanings—evento the point of rejecting images altogether. The graf-fito’s forceful immediacy preserves the direct, per-sonal response of one nameless participant in thedialogue of art and ideology that was taking placeacross the late empire. The effectiveness of the im-age can be gauged by its critical reception by a stilllater visitor to the court. After days spent resting inthe shaded portico, studying the scene and ponder-ing its significance, he took chisel in hand and care-fully obliterated the figure, leaving behind the lionand cross.

47

The Daniel relief belongs to an earlier, very differ-ent time. For generations, the small, incised plaquewas displayed in the most public part of the Syna-gogue. Open to the street through broad doorwaysand inseparable from its urban milieu, the forecourtwas an architectural showcase whose lavish decora-tion was intended to impress all who came here. Themarble plaque with man and lions offered visitors apowerful image of personal resilience and triumphover peril (Diamond 2003: 253; DiTommaso 2005: 2;Sörries 2005: 213). This potent evocation of faithfulreassurance would have been clear to local residentsbut had special meaning for a diaspora communitythat traced its origins in Lydia back to the third cen-tury

b.c.e.

Seven hundred years later, Daniel’s ap-pearance at Sardis coincides with the last great phaseof one of the oldest and most resilient Jewish com-munities of Asia Minor.

47

For the erasure of a menorah graffito in the Sebasteion atAphrodisias, see Chaniotis 2008: 249, fig. 10; for a large cross su-perimposed on a menorah graffito at Laodicea ad Lycum in south-west Phrygia, see

V

imvek 2006. The intact lion and cross at Sardissuggest this elision was done by someone associated with theChristian community. Compare the careful removal of peacocksfrom the Synagogue apse floor mosaic and the apparent decapita-tion of both table-support eagles, perhaps carried out around thesame time the Daniel relief was taken down from the forecourtwall and reflecting changing attitudes toward representational art

Fig. 6. Graffito in peristyle court of LNH 3, Sardis, Bath-Gymnasium Complex. © Archaeological Exploration of Sardis/Harvard University.

in the later sixth century. These instances are clearly indepen-dent of the rise of iconoclasm in Palestinian synagogues, whichhas been attributed to closer contact with Islam in the eighthcentury.


Ameling, W. 2004 Inscriptiones Judaicae Orientis, Vol. 2: Klein-

asien. Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 99.Tübingen: Siebeck.

Anderson, W. 2004 An Archaeology of Late Antique Pilgrim

Flasks. Anatolian Studies 54: 79–93.Ascough, R. S., ed.

2005 Religious Rivalries and the Struggle for Suc-cess in Sardis and Smyrna. Studies in Chris-tianity and Judaism 14. Waterloo, ON: WilfridLaurier University.

Bates, G. E. 1971 Byzantine Coins. Monograph (Archaeological

Exploration of Sardis) 1. Cambridge, MA: Har-vard University.

Bohak, G. 2008 Ancient Jewish Magic. A History. Cambridge:

Cambridge University.Bovini, G., and Brandenburg, H.

1967 Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage,Vol. 1: Rom und Ostia. Wiesbaden: Steiner.

Boyd, S.2000 The Relief Decoration of the Church Building

at Seleucia Pieria. Pp. 220–23 in Antioch: TheLost Ancient City, by Ch. Kondoleon. Prince-ton: Princeton University.

Cameron, A., and Hall, S. G., trans. 1999 Eusebius, Life of Constantine. Oxford: Oxford

University.Campbell, S. D.

1988 Armchair Pilgrims: Ampullae from Aphrodi-sias in Caria. Mediaeval Studies 50: 539–45.

Ceccelli, C.; Furlani, G.; and Salmi, M., eds.1959 The Rabbula Gospels. Facsimile Edition of the

Miniatures of the Syriac Manuscript Plut. I, 56in the Medicaean-Laurentian Library. Olden:Graf.

Chaniotis, A. C.2008 The Conversion of the Temple of Aphrodite at

Aphrodisias in Context. Pp. 243–73 in FromTemple to Church. Destruction and Renewal ofLocal Cultic Topography in Late Antiquity, eds.J. Hahn, S. Emmel, and U. Gotter. Religions inthe Graeco-Roman World 163. Leiden: Brill.

Christern-Briesenick, B. 2003 Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkoph-

age, Vol. 3: Frankreich, Algerien, Tunesien.Mainz: von Zabern.

Clédat, J.1904 Le monastère et la nécropole de Baouît. Mé-

moires publiés par les members de l’Institut

français d’archéologie orientale du Caire 12.Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.

Collins, J. J., and Flint, P. W., eds.2001 The Book of Daniel: Composition and Recep-

tion. 2 vols. Supplements to Vetus Testamen-tum 83. Leiden: Brill.

Crawford, J. S.1990 The Byzantine Shops at Sardis. Monograph

(Archaeological Exploration of Sardis) 9. Cam-bridge, MA: Harvard University.

Cross, F. M. 2002 The Hebrew Inscriptions from Sardis. Harvard

Theological Review 95: 3–19.Dauterman Maguire, E.; Maguire, H. P.; and Duncan-

Flowers, M. J. 1989 Art and Holy Powers in the Early Christian

House. Illinois Byzantine Studies 2. Urbana:University of Illinois.

Davis, S. J. 2001 The Cult of St. Thecla: A Tradition of Women’s

Piety in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford Univer-sity.

Diamond, E. 2003 Lions, Snakes and Asses: Palestinian Jewish

Holy Men as Masters of the Animal Kingdom.Pp. 251–83 in Jewish Culture and Societyunder the Christian Roman Empire, eds. R.Kalmin and S. Schwartz. InterdisciplinaryStudies in Ancient Culture and Religion 3. Leu-ven: Peeters.

DiTommaso, L.2005 The Book of Daniel and the Apocryphal Daniel

Literature. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseud-epigrapha 20. Leiden: Brill.

Elsner, J. 2003 Archaeologies and Agendas: Reflections on

Late Ancient Jewish Art and Early ChristianArt. Journal of Roman Studies 93: 114–28.

Fine, S.2005 Art and Judaism in the Greco-Roman World:

Toward a New Jewish Archaeology. New York:Cambridge University.

Fine, S., ed. 1996 Sacred Realm: The Emergence of the Syna-

gogue in the Ancient World. New York: OxfordUniversity.

Firatli, N. 1990 La sculpture byzantine figurée au musée

archéologique d’Istanbul. Bibliothèque de l’In-stitut français d’études anatoliennes d’Istanbul30. Paris: Maisonneuve.

references


Goodman, M.1994 Jews and Judaism in the Mediterranean Dias-

pora in the Late-Roman Period: The Limita-tions of Evidence. Journal of MediterraneanStudies 4: 208–24.

Greenewalt, C. H., Jr. 2006 Sardis. Pp. 359–72 in Stadtgrabungen und

Stadtforschung im westlichen Kleinasien: Ge-plantes und Erreichtes: Internationales Sympo-sion 6./7. August 2004 in Bergama (Türkei), ed.W. Radt. Byzas 3. Istanbul: Ege Yayınları.

Greenewalt, C. H., Jr.; Rautman, M. L.; and Cahill, N. D.1987 The Sardis Campaign of 1985. Pp. 55–92 in

Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Exca-vations 1982–1985, ed. W. E. Rast. Bulletin ofthe American Schools of Oriental ResearchSupplement 25. Baltimore: American Schoolsof Oriental Research.

Hachlili, R. 1988 Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the

Land of Israel. Handbuch der Orientalistik7:1:2:B:4. Leiden: Brill.

1998 Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in theDiaspora. Handbuch der Orientalistik 1:35.Leiden: Brill.

Hanfmann, G. M. A. 1963 The Fifth Campaign at Sardis (1962). Bulletin

of the American Schools of Oriental Research170: 1–65.

1974 The Sixteenth Campaign at Sardis (1973).Bulletin of the American Schools of OrientalResearch 215: 31–60.

1983 Sardis from Prehistoric to Roman Times: Re-sults of the Archaeological Exploration ofSardis 1958–1975. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity.

Hanfmannn, G. M. A., and Ramage, N. H.1978 Sculpture from Sardis: The Finds through

1975. Report (Archaeological Exploration ofSardis) 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Hanfmann, G. M. A., and Waldbaum, J. C. 1970 The Eleventh and Twelfth Campaigns at Sardis

(1968, 1969). Bulletin of the American Schoolsof Oriental Research 199: 7–58.

Kondoleon, Ch.1995 Domestic and Divine: Roman Mosaics in the

House of Dionysos. Ithaca: Cornell University.Kraabel, A. T.

1983 The Synagogue and the Jewish Community: Im-pact of the Discovery of the Sardis Synagogue.Pp. 178–90 in Sardis from Prehistoric to RomanTimes: Results of the Archaeological Explora-tion of Sardis 1958–1975, by G. M. A. Hanf-mann. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Kroll, J. H. 2001 The Greek Inscriptions of the Sardis Syna-

gogue. Harvard Theological Review 94: 5–127.Lacerenza, G.

2002 Jewish Magicians and Christian Clients in LateAntiquity: The Testimony of Amulets and In-scriptions. Pp. 393–419 in What Athens Has toDo with Jerusalem: Essays on Classical, Jew-ish, and Early Christian Art and Archaeologyin Honor of Gideon Foerster, ed. L. V. Rutgers.Interdisciplinary Studies in Ancient Cultureand Religion 1. Leuven: Peeters.

Lavin, I.1963 The Hunting Mosaics of Antioch and Their

Sources: A Study of Compositional Principlesin the Development of Early Mediaeval Style.Dumbarton Oaks Papers 17: 179–286.

Leclercq, H.1924 Ad bestias. Cols. 449–62 in Dictionnaire

d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie 1, eds.F. Cabrol and H. Leclercq. Paris: Letouzey etAné.

Levine, L. I.2000 The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand

Years. New Haven: Yale University.Levine, L. I., and Weiss, Z., eds.

2000 From Dura to Sepphoris: Studies in Jewish Artand Society in Late Antiquity. Journal of Ro-man Archaeology Supplement 40. Portsmouth,RI: Journal of Roman Archaeology.

Love, I. C. 1972 A Preliminary Report of the Excavations at

Knidos, 1970. American Journal of Archaeol-ogy 76: 61–76.

Magness, J. 2005 The Date of the Sardis Synagogue in Light of

the Numismatic Evidence. American Journal ofArchaeology 109: 443–75.

Metzger, C. 1981 Les ampoules à eulogie du Musée du Louvre.

Notes et documents des musées de France 3.Paris: Ministère de la Culture.

Milson, D.2007 Art and Architecture of the Synagogue in Late

Antique Palestine: In the Shadow of theChurch. Ancient Judaism and Early Christian-ity 65. Leiden: Brill.

Miltner, F.1937 Das Cömeterium der sieben Schläfer. For-

schungen in Ephesos 4/2. Baden: Rohrer.Mitten, D. G., and Scorziello, A. F.

2008 Reappropriating Antiquity: Some Spolia fromthe Synagogue at Sardis. Pp. 135–46 in Lovefor Lydia: A Sardis Annniversary Volume Pre-sented to Crawford H. Greenewalt, Jr., ed.


N. D. Cahill. Report (Archaeological Explora-tion of Sardis) 4. Cambridge, MA: Archaeolog-ical Exploration of Sardis.

Naumann, R. 1979 Der Zeustempel zu Aizanoi. Denkmäler antiker

Architektur 12. Berlin: de Gruyter.Niewöhner, Ph.

2007 Aizanoi, Dokimion und Anatolien: Stadt undLand, Siedlungs- und Steinmetzwesen vomspäteren 4. bis ins 6. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Aiza-noi 1; Archäologische Forschungen 23. Wies-baden: Reichert.

Pülz, A., and Steskal, M. 2004 Zu einer Platte mit jüdischen Symbolen aus

dem Vediusgymnasium in Ephesos. Jahresheftedes Österreichischen archäologischen Institutsin Wien 73: 199–205.

Rajak, T. 2001 Jews, Pagans and Christians in Late Antique

Sardis: Models of Interaction. Pp. 447–62 inThe Jewish Dialogue with Greece and Rome:Studies in Cultural and Social Interaction. Ar-beiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentumsund des Christentums 48. Leiden: Brill.

Ratté, C. 1989 Five Lydian Felines. American Journal of Ar-

chaeology 93: 379–93.Robert, L.

1964 Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes, Fasc. 1: Dé-cret hellénistique de Sardes: Inscriptions de lasynagogue. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique etd’Orient.

Roueché, C. 2002 Images of Performance: New Evidence from

Ephesus. Pp. 254–81 in Greek and Roman Ac-tors: Aspects of an Ancient Profession, eds. P.Easterling and E. Hall. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity.

Seager, A. R.1983 The Synagogue and the Jewish Community:

The Building. Pp. 168–78 in Sardis from Pre-historic to Roman Times: Results of the Archae-ological Exploration of Sardis 1958–1975, byG. M. A. Hanfmann. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity.

Vimvek, C.2006 A Menorah with a Cross Carved on a Column

of Nymphaeum A at Laodicea ad Lycum. Jour-nal of Roman Archaeology 19: 343–46.

Sivan, H. 2008 Palestine in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford

University.Sörries, R.

2005 Daniel in der Löwengrube: Zur Gesetzmäs-sigkeit frühchristlicher Ikonographie. Wies-baden: Reichert.

Smith-Christopher, D.2001 Prayers and Dreams: Power and Diaspora Iden-

tities in the Social Setting of the Daniel Tales.Pp. 266–90 in The Book of Daniel: Composi-tion and Reception, eds. J. J. Collins and P. W.Flint. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 83.Leiden: Brill.

Spier, J.2007 Picturing the Bible. The Earliest Christian Art.

New Haven: Yale University.Trebilco, P. R.

1991 Jewish Communities in Asia Minor. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University.

van der Horst, P. W.2006 The Synagogue of Sardis and Its Inscriptions.

Pp. 43–52 in Jews and Christians in TheirGraeco-Roman Context: Selected Essays onEarly Judaism, Samaritanism, Hellenism, andChristianity, by P. W. van der Horst. Wissen-schaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testa-ment 196. Tübingen: Siebeck.

Waldbaum, J. C.1983 Metalwork from Sardis: The Finds through

1974. Monograph (Archaeological Explora-tion of Sardis) 8. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity.

Wessel, K.1966 Buchrolle. Cols. 784–95 in Reallexikon zur

byzantinischen Kunst, Vol. 1, ed. K. Wessel.Stuttgart: Hiersemann.

Wulff, O.1909 Königliche Museen zu Berlin. Beschreibung

der Bildwerke der christlichen Epochen, Vol. 3:Altchristliche und mittelalterliche byzanti-nische und italienische Bildwerke, Part 1: Alt-christliche Bildwerke. Berlin: Reimer.

Yegül, F. K.1986 The Bath-Gymnasium Complex at Sardis. Re-

port (Archaeological Exploration of Sardis) 3.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

daniel at sardis

Documents