documenting nabataean royal residences in petra

ERETZ-ISRAELArchaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies

VOLUME THIRTY-ONE

Published by T H E I S R A E L E X P L O R AT I O N S O C I E T Y

in cooperation with THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY, HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM

J E R U S A L E M 2 0 1 5

PUBLICATION OF THIS VOLUME WAS MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE GENEROSITY OF

The Reuben and Edith Hecht TrustThe Leon Levy Foundation

Ethan Grossman, Washington, DCSarah and Avie Arenson

David and Jemima JeselsohnThe Russell Berrie Foundation

Keshet FoundationUfficio Pellegrinaggi — Diocesi di Vicenza (Italia)

Hershel ShanksBiblical Archaeology Society

Franz Philipp Rutzen

ISBN 978-965-221-097-5

© 2015Copyright by the Israel Exploration Society

Layout: A. Pladot

Typesetting: Marzel A.S. — Jerusalem

Printed by: Old City Press, Jerusalem

EHUD NETZERV O L U M E

Editor-in-chief

Zeev Weiss

Editorial board

Joseph Aviram, Eliezer Oren, Oren Gutfeld, Gideon Foerster, Israel Shatzman

Editorial Directors

Hillel Geva, Alan Paris

Hebrew style editing

Efrat Carmon

English style editing

Alan Paris

CONTENTS

Non-Hebrew Section

Preface The Editorial Board ixEhud Netzer — Architect, Archaeologist, Colleague and Friend Eliezer Oren xiiFinding Design with Ehud Netzer, the Architect of Herod’s Building Projects Kathryn Gleason xviBibliography of Works by Ehud Netzer Nira Naveh (see Hebrew section) טזBibliographical abbreviations (see Hebrew section) כו

Andrea M. Berlin Herod, Augustus and the Augusteum at the Paneion 1*Barbara Burrell What Was the Regia in the Roman Theater? 12*James Hamilton Who Claimed Herod was “the Christ”? 29* CharlesworthCasey D. Elledge The Veils of the Second Temple: Architecture and Tradition in the Herodian Sanctuary 40*Kenneth G. Holum The Gods of Sebastos: King Herod’s Harbor Temple at Caesarea Maritima 51*Martha Sharp An Architectural Marvel: The Petra Great Temple 69* JoukowskyNikos Kokkinos Aspects of Jerusalem under Herod 79*Achim Lichtenberger Herod, Zoilos, Philopappos. Multiple Identities in the Graeco-Roman World 110*Jodi Magness The En-Gedi Synagogue Inscription Reconsidered 123*Eric M. Meyers, Further Reflections on Sepphoris and Rome: Numismatics David Hendin and and Archaeology 132* Carol L. MeyersInge Nielsen The Architectural Context of Religious Groups on Delos 141*Renate Rosenthal- Grave Goods and Nabatean Identity: Mampsis and Qasrawet 154* HeginbottomStephan G. Schmid, Documenting Nabatean Royal Residences in Petra 166* Zbigniew T. Fiema, Piotr Bienkowski and Bernhard KolbEnglish summaries of Hebrew articles 182*

Hebrew Section

Asher Altshul Stone Vessels, Ossuaries and King Herod: Changes in Material Culture at the End of the Second Temple Period 1Avner Ecker A Teacher and Students in Herodion 6Dan Bahat “The Fortress Called Baris that Became the Antonia”? 12Chaim Ben-David The Ancient Road from Callirhoe on the Dead Sea to Machaerus — a Built Wide Road of the Second Temple Period 20Doron Ben Ami and The Gaps Close — The Late Hellenistic Period in the City of David 30 Yana TchekhanovetzBezalel Bar-Kochva Flavius Josephus on the Dead Sea: Sources and Information 38 and Stéphanie BinderRachel Bar-Natan The King’s Amici: Publius Vedius Pollio and Herodium 45 and Judith GärtnerHillel Geva Hasmonean Jerusalem in the Light of Archaeology — Notes on Urban Topography 57Yuli Gekht A Synagogue in Central Tiberias 76Joseph Geiger Architects in Ancient Palestine 83Moshe David Herr Criteria of Impurity and Purity in the Planning of Jerusalem in the Legal System of the Judean Desert Sect 88Malka Hershkovitz and Roman Seal Boxes from the Excavations at Masada 96 Shua Amorai-StarkZeev Weiss Buildings for Mass Entertainment in Herodian Jerusalem: Text and Artifactual Remains, Fact or Fiction? 104Naama Vilozny Wall Paintings from the House of Dionysus at Sepphoris — Works by a Local School in the Roman Period 115Shlomit Weksler- The Role of the Temple Mount in the Layout of Aelia Capitolina: Bdolah the Capitolium after All 126Boaz Zissu, Amir Burial Chamber III at Ḥorvat ªEthri — Late Roman Funerary Ganor, Eitan Klein and Iconography 138 Ruth E. Jackson-TalAdam Zertal A Herodian Lighthouse at Alexandrium-Sartaba 144Lihi Habas Architectural and Artistic Changes and Developments in Transjordanian Churches under Islamic Rule 151Rachel Hachlili The Architecture of the “Mourning Enclosure” at the “Goliath Tomb” at Jericho and the Synagogues of the Second Temple Period 165Rina Talgam and Jews, Christians and Minim at the Capernaum Synagogue — Benjamin Arubas a Reevaluation 176

Zvi Yavor and The Public Buildings of Gamla 200 Danny SyonEli Yannai and Graves and a Building with Mosaics from the Roman Period at Adi Erlich Lod-Diospolis 210Lee I. Levine Timing and Context: Why Did Jewish Art Flourish in Late Antiquity in Particular? 221Uzi Leibner, Uri The Structure, Date, and Purpose of the Fortification on Mount Davidovich and Nitai 236 Benjamin ArubasShulamit Miller The Late Antique Mosaics of Tiberias: Artistic Trends and Architectural Contexts 247Zvi Uri Maªoz The Augusteum at Paneon-Baniyas 256Arthur Segal and Ehud Netzer’s Contribution to Research on the Herodian Period 262 Shimon DarZeev Safrai The Rural Settlements of the Herodian Dynasty 287Roi Porat, Yakov Who Destroyed “Herod’s Tomb”? 299 Kalman and Rachel ChachyJoseph Patrich and The Stages in the Evolution of the Temple Mount — 305 Marcos Edelcopp a ReassessmentOrit Peleg-Barkat Tradition vs. Innovation in Royal Construction: The Architectural Decoration of the Hasmonaean and Herodian Palaces at the Jericho Valley 325Gideon Foerster The Sarcophagi from the Mausoleum Unearthed at Herodium 342Yoram Tsafrir A Response of a Society under Siege — Further Notes on the Jewish Attitude to Figural Art in the Second Temple Period and following the Temple’s Destruction 352Amos Kloner Idumaea during the Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods: Territory and Caravan Trade Routes 359Silvia Rozenberg On Roman Wall-Painters’ Workshops in Jericho and Herodium 374Samuele Rocca Spatia et Tempora Regis: The Spatial and Temporal Relationship between the Herodian Ruler and His Palaces 386Ronny Reich The Construction and Destruction of Robinson’s Arch 398Yinon Shivtiel Cliff Shelters in the Galilee: The Case of Mt. Arbel-Nitai, the ªAmud Gorge and Akhbara Crag during the Second Temple Period and the Great Revolt 408Daniel R. Schwartz On Herod’s and Josephus’ Building Materials 421Guy Stiebel “Aqua Regis” — Fountains of King Herod the Great 426Ephraim Stern Seals and Seal Impressions in Greco-Roman Style from Tel Dor 445

166*

DOCUMENTING NABATAEAN ROYAL RESIDENCES IN PETRA

Stephan G. SChmid*, ZBigniew T. Fiema*, Piotr Bienkowski** and Bernhard KolB***

*Humboldt-Universität **Independent consultant ***Universität Basel

IntroductionThe impressive contributions of Ehud Netzer at Herodium, Masada and Jericho stimulated schol-arly interest in the residences of the monarchs of the Late Hellenistic-Early Roman period in the Near East. Nabataean Petra is no exception. Two passages in Flavius Josephus (Antiquities 14.4 [16] and War 1.2 [125]) clearly imply that by the mid 1st century BCe, Petra was considered a capital city where their kings resided. In fact, τὰ βασίλεια, used by Josephus, does not only designate a “palace” where the king simply resided but rather implies the existence of entire areas of a city where the royal quarters, administration, cultic installations, etc. were concentrated. This is especially, although not exclusively, true concerning rulers from the eastern Mediterranean and the Near East.1

Such main royal residences seem to follow cer-tain rules. It has been demonstrated2 that within the vast territories of the Seleucid kingdom, with sev-eral royal residences, the basileia quarters usually occupy roughly a quarter of the space of the city: they are built in a location peripheral to the city centre and are surrounded by water (sea, rivers, artificial channels) on at least two sides. Finally, besides the royal residential quarters, they contain administrative and infrastructural installations, sanctuaries, gardens and parks as well as tombs or heroa of the founders of the dynasty and/or the city. These criteria fit not only the basileia of the Seleucid kings as in Antioch and Seleucia, Baby-lon or Aï Khanoum, but apparently also the most famous Hellenistic royal city, Alexandria in Egypt, founded by Alexander the Great and expanded by the Ptolemies.3

Surprisingly, the residences of the Nabataean kings at Petra have hardly been a major focus of modern research.4 Theodor Wiegand proposed calling an area near the Temple of the Winged Lions a “palace,” but without compelling convic-tion.5 Recently, several scholars have proposed that the complex in the centre of Petra, formed by the so-called “Great Temple” and the “Paradeisos” (a luxurious garden and water installation), is part of the Nabataean basileia.6

The International Wādī Farasah Project (IWFP), which is exploring one of Petra’s funeral com-plexes, the so-called Soldier’s Tomb complex in Wādī Farasah East, contributed considerably to the debate on the basileia in Petra.7 The core of the complex is composed of the tomb itself, with its richly decorated façade, banqueting halls and other rooms, all arranged around a peristyle court-yard. The results of this project indicate that the appearance and the functioning of such complexes must be closely related to the luxury architecture of the Hellenistic and Early Roman Mediterra-nean, i.e. to rich villae and palaces. It is therefore logical to assume that the examples of opulent and monumental residences of the Ptolemies, Seleu-cids and Romans would be mirrored not only in the Nabataean funerary architecture but also in the residences of the Nabataean elites, including the royal family. The results of the excavations of the luxurious Nabataean mansion at ez-Zantur in Petra point in the same direction.8 Here, too, elements borrowed from Hellenistic and Roman luxury architecture dominate the layout, function and decoration of the structure and its rooms.

This assumption has been underlined by two

DOCUMENTING NABATAEAN ROYAL RESIDENCES IN PETRA 167*

new fieldwork projects in Petra — the International Umm al-Biyāra Project (IUBP) and the North-Eastern Petra Project (NEPP) (Figs. 1–3). The IUBP carries out survey and excavation9 on top of the mountain of Umm al-Biyāra (“the mother of cisterns”), ca. 1,200 m. asl, which dominates the centre of the Petra Valley. The NEPP documents the high ground in the NE part of the Petra Valley, limited by the Wādī Mūsa depression (south), al-Khubthah massif (east) and the Wādī Mattahah (west–northwest).10

A royal hilltop residenceAlthough not a basileia, in the sense described above, the remains investigated by the IUBP on Umm al-Biyāra can be defined as a spectacular hilltop complex which might have been a royal summer residence. During the survey, several Nabataean buildings were identified (Fig. 4). Their chronological frame ranges — at this point in the research — from the late 1st century BCe to the

Late Roman period, coinciding with major build-ing activities throughout the city centre of Petra.

Once a permanent settlement was founded in the Wādī Mūsa Valley, between the rock massifs of al-Khubthah and Umm al-Biyāra, the Nabataean kings realized the importance of Umm al-Biyāra as the cornerstone for active control of the area. A warning and surveillance system was based on a series of watchtowers along the Sharā mountains and around Petra, but most of these do not have direct visual contact with the city centre, while the plateau of Umm al-Biyāra conveniently pro-vided a focal point of observation, from which most of these watchtowers (and the entire city) can be observed (Fig. 2). The strategic importance of Umm al-Biyāra in the consideration of Petra’s rulers would, undoubtedly, translate in terms of its restricted access. Furthermore, while some structures on the western side of the plateau are probably watchtowers,11 the main Nabataean build-ings are on the eastern side, and constructed on

Fig. 1. Aerial view of the centre of Petra (Institut national de l’information géographique et forestière [IGN], modifications S.G. Schmid)

Fig. 2. View of Petra from top of Umm al-Biyara (1 = Wādī Mūsa; 2 = Shara mountains; 3 = South Temple; 4 = NEPP area) (S.G. Schmid)

Fig. 3. View from the top of NEPP Structure 1 towards Umm al-Biyara (left arrow = column standing in situ; right arrow = fallen column of bluish granite) (S.G. Schmid)


the very edge of the rock. They offered a superb view over the city of Petra and were visible from far away (Figs. 2, 3). Therefore, these buildings had a dominant visual impact on all inhabitants of the Petra region. This impression is confirmed by their layout, architecture and decoration. Further-more, the most luxurious buildings on the summit are located slightly below the level of the rock-cut cisterns on the eastern side of the plateau. While the cisterns benefitted from maximum rainwater

catchment, the buildings — through a sophisticated system of gravity-based channels and basins — enjoyed a substantial water-supply, a particularly spectacular achievement considering the climate and the location of the site.

Two structures will be briefly presented here. Structure 26, built at the very edge of a promontory protruding towards the city centre, investigated by Morton in the early 1950s, and interpreted as a Nabataean temple by Bennett,12 is considered

Fig. 4. Plan of structures surveyed on Umm al-Biyara (J. Falkenberg)

170* S.G. SCHMID, Z.T. FIEMA, P. BIENKOWSKI, B. KOLB

by the IUBP to be a part of a more substantial building (Fig. 5). Within the main structure, some original floor slabs are still in situ. In the SE part of that room, a rectangular pillar stands directly on the floor slabs. Perfectly aligned with it, but a few metres to the west, stands an ashlar of similar construction. Within this structure, several frag-ments of Nabataean horned pilaster capitals were found. Therefore, the pilaster capitals are likely to have decorated the back walls of a supposed courtyard or room. The back wall shows a row of pedestals very similar to the pedestals of the teme-nos gate in the Qasr al-Bint area.13 Comparing the ratio between the pedestal and the height of the pilasters, it is probable that the room was up to 5 m. high. In addition to the floor slabs made of local stone, Structure 26 must also have possessed a spectacular and colourful opus sectile decoration. Fragments of slabs carefully cut from yellowish

limestone with small shell inclusions were found, both of rectangular and triangular form, in addi-tion to fragments of marble slabs of white colour or with greenish and bluish veins. Although the construction date of Structure 26 is not certain, the building technique as well as the types of architec-tural members would suggest the second half of the 1st century Ce.

The neighbouring Structure 20 consists of sev-eral rooms (Fig. 6). A small, masonry-built aque-duct, partially cut into the rock, feeds a rectangular water basin on the southern side of the building. Remains of a hypocaust-type floor heating system were discovered in one room built directly on the edge of the rock, in line with the water basin but on a slightly lower level. Additionally, heated air also circulated in the walls of the room, as indicated by the large number of tubuli. While rainwater fills the cisterns during the rainy season, large quantities of fuel for heating the rooms had to be brought up the hill, even if some combustible vegetation grew on top of the mountain. If the conducting of water in buildings located on the highest elevation in the area is itself already a clear luxury feature, heated rooms must be considered an almost provocative flaunting of money and power. The heated room of Structure 20 belongs to a complex bathing installa-tion, attesting to a high quality of living. The con-struction technique and ceramics recovered from intact deposits indicate that the bath complex, at least its nucleus, was likely built in the second half of the 1st century Ce. Additionally, from the hall in Structure 20, mentioned above, visitors had access to two separately constructed bathtubs, a smaller one comfortably fitting one person and a larger one which could accommodate up to three individu-als. These bathtubs seem to belong to a later phase of the building, probably dated within the 2nd century Ce. Clay pipes, inserted into the western wall of the hall, provided water to the bathtubs. A room located behind the bathtubs, and on a slightly lower level, features a shallow water conduit inte-grated into its floor and a 60-cm.-deep evacuation channel, indicating a typical Roman-style multi-seat latrine.14 From the larger of the two bathtubs, a lead pipe embedded into a clay pipe leads into the evacuation channel of the latrine so that the wastewater used in the bathtubs ended up flushing

Fig. 5. View of the large hall (ST 26) on Umm al-Biyara (S.G. Schmid)


the latrine.15 Undoubtedly the best parallels for the bathing installation on Umm al-Biyāra are the hill-top residences built by Herod the Great (40/36–4 BCe), where luxury bathing plays an important role. In Masada, Herodium, Kypros and Machaerus, Roman-style thermae are an outstanding feature.16 Individual bathtubs are common in most of these Herodian structures.

In the wide hall of Structure 20, a massive debris layer containing several fragments of marble stat-ues was unearthed. One of them — a young boy with a jar on his left shoulder — belongs to a well-known type of fountain or basin sculpture (Fig. 7).17 These statues and the related water installa-tions are typical of the luxurious, upper class resi-dences in the Roman Empire. Other fragments of marble sculptures confirm the rich statuary deco-ration of the complex, such as the torso of a boy, approximately 30 cm. high, wearing a feline skin, that may be interpreted as a Herakliskos or a small putto disguised as Herakles. The sculptural decora-tion of the building complex seemingly used stan-dard types of Graeco-Roman sculptures available at the international art market. In this respect the

structures on Umm al-Biyāra remarkably differ from comparable installations within the Herodian territory, where — for obvious reasons — no such figural decoration existed.

The structures and rooms so far exposed indicate a magnificent residence with all the luxury features found in Late Hellenistic–Early Roman architec-ture. Considering the strategic importance of Umm al-Biyāra, stressed above, this was presumably not the residence of an average member of the Naba-taean upper class, especially when compared with the aforementioned Herodian residences. It may be that the building on top of Umm al-Biyāra was in a way a Nabataean “response” to the Herodian hilltop palaces, such as the one on Machaerus and, especially, at Masada.18 The general situation is the same, i.e. the Herodian buildings are located all over the plateau of Masada, and, as on Umm al-Biyāra, there is no common orientation for all buildings. Rather, they form smaller clusters, fol-lowing the topography and with regard to their successive dates of construction. There, too, the most luxurious and at the same time the most pri-vate structures, e.g., the North Palace, are located

Fig. 6. Umm al-Biyarah — view of the bathing installation from E (1 = water tank; 2 = hypocausted area; 3 = huge hall; bathtubs and latrine are located to the right of the hall) (S.G. Schmid)


opposite the main access to the hill. In both cases the structures are deliberately “playing” with vis-ibility, incorporating the splendid panoramic view into the architectural display.

The basileia of the Nabataean kings?Despite the existence of extensive ruined structures at the NEPP site, the area has never been properly documented. In the early 20th century, Brünnow and von Domaszewski briefly reported the discov-ery of a statue and some “ruins” featuring a few wall lines there.19 Alois Musil indicated several buildings on his map of the Petra city centre,20 but these are no more than schematic sketches. Gustaf Dalman devoted an entire chapter to the

area “under el-hubta” but he focussed exclusively on rock-cut structures.21 The most useful informa-tion comes from the explorers of the “Deutsch-Türkische Denkmalschutzkommando”, who recorded several buildings above a structure they interpreted as a small theatre, as well as a large, monumental “room” (ca. 30 m. long) and a lengthy corridor with columns.22

Yet, even with the limited amount of information obtained by the NEPP survey, it appears that most of the criteria recognized as significant in defin-ing basileia may also characterize the NEPP site. A number of large, monumental structures once existed on different terraces of this area that offers a dominant view over the entire city centre and which was clearly visible from almost every place in the Petra Valley (Figs. 2, 3). It should be noted that the Nabataean adaptation of the Wādī Mūsa depression for a permanent settlement between al-Khubthah and Umm al-Biyāra necessitated the construction of a dam and the tunnel diverting the Mūsa stream from the entrance to the Sīq into a side valley (the Wādī Mudhlim) that crosses the Khubthah massif (cf. Fig. 1).23 From there the water flows through the Wādī Mattahah before returning to its original bed in the city centre. As a second result of the diversion project, a separate quarter (in the true sense of the word) of the city emerges at the foot of al-Khubthah, being defined by the Wādī Mattahah, the Wādī Mūsa and the face of al-Khubthah. This arrangement closely resembles that described for the basileia of the Seleucids and the Ptolemies.

The high ground delineated as such measures ca. 250 m. (east–west)×150 m. (north–south). Its northern extremity is occupied by Umm al-Harjal and the eastern by Rujm Umm al-Сunaydiq. An extraordinary feature of this area is the presence of the monumental steps in the NE corner of the site, leading up to al-Khubthah and providing access to the cultic and other installations located there.24 However, at the same time, the steps might have served as an emergency exit from the city, since the top of Jabal al-Khubthah can also be used as a stronghold or an escape route towards the Sīq and Wādī Mūsa. This combination of a monumental aspect with a restricted access is significant as, in order to use these steps, one had to pass through

Fig. 7. Umm al-Biyara; fragmentary marble statue of a boy holding a water jar (S.G. Schmid)


the area that was topographically and architectur-ally separated from the rest of the city centre.25 This means that the people controlling this area had privileged access to and from the city centre.

Further, the area is directly connected to one of the six fresh water aqueducts of Petra, namely the al-Khubthah conduit, which starts in modern Wādī Mūsa. This aqueduct enters the city at the point of the presumed basileia and there meets a huge cistern, collecting the water from a sophis-ticated water catchment system that covers most of al-Khubthah massif.26 These two systems (fresh water aqueduct and runoff water collection) could be used both separately and together. This direct and exclusive access to one of the city’s aqueducts distinguishes the area of the presumed basileia from any other place in the city, including the area of the “South Temple” and “Paradeisos,” which have also been proposed as belonging to the royal palace. While the garden and the Great Temple are provided with water by the Aïn Braq aqueduct,27 they are neither the first nor exclusive users of this supply, the ez-Zantur area being the first.28 It would

seem inconceivable that the royal infrastructure would be a secondary water receiver. This does not exclude the “South Temple” from being a royal structure in general, but not as part of the main res-idence.29 Finally, at the spot where the al-Khubthah massif meets the area of the presumed basileia, the so-called Palace Tomb is located, being the largest and most decorated façade of Petra.30 Ideally, this could be the tomb and/or heroön of the kings of Petra within the basileia, as in other Hellenistic royal quarters.

The dimensions and the architectural decora-tion of the various buildings support the working hypothesis of a royal residence in the area (Fig. 8). At this point in time, there seems to be no common orientation of the buildings, as they follow the topography of the site. This conforms with the various functions which the structures and instal-lations within the basileia had to fulfil. In addition to the densely occupied spots, there are other sec-tors within the NEPP area that seem deprived of significant structures visible on the surface, specifi-cally in the flat NE corner. There, one could expect

Fig. 8. The NEPP area and the main surveyed structures (M. Holappa)


the gardens and water basins as they are known from other palaces, especially from the royal resi-dences of Herod the Great, such as Jericho and Herodium.31 Three most impressive, monumental structures have been documented in detail so far:

Structure 1, ca. 30×20 m., located at the western tip of the area, consists of two major rooms in alignment and abutted on the north by two smaller rooms. Inside one larger room, one column still is standing in situ (left arrow on Fig. 3; Fig. 9), implying that this was a courtyard. In both main rooms, architectural members of different sizes were found, indicating an upper storey in both, a fact supported by stone tumbles of substantial height. It is also clear that some major decorative elements have been reused in a secondary func-tion and location. Directly outside the southern wall of the building, there are several monumental door-jambs with pilasters, decorated with the vine

scrolls motif (Fig. 10). Yet, currently, there is no indication of any door in this wall. So these blocks were either reused or the door was blocked. Also, considering the size of some elements inside or directly outside the building, it seems uncertain how these could have been accommodated in the structure in its extant appearance. Probably, Struc-ture 1 features at least two major occupational

phases and the earlier one could have been ended by a significant disaster. In Phase 1, it was probably a rectangular building consisting of one large hall (currently two major rooms). One entrance was presumably in the eastern wall, flanked by two smaller, tower-like rooms. The external corners were decorated with quarter columns and shallow pilasters. Another door might have been in the southern wall, flanked by the large floral-decorated door-jambs. Surface ceramics and the stylistic dating of architectural elements indicate a date in the 1st century Ce. Elements from the presumed upper storey include fragments of small round capitals and pilaster capitals with floral decoration and acanthus leaves. These closely resemble simi-lar capitals from the “Palazzo delle Colonne” in Ptolemaïs, where they were used for an aedicula façade in the upper storey of the palace.32 The size, organization and architectural features of Structure 1 indicate an outstanding building. Whatever disas-ter affected the early building, the ground plan and the decorative design were evidently changed later. The southern entrance, if it was ever there, was abandoned and the building was divided into two main, extant rooms.Fig. 9. NEPP, Structure 1, column in situ (S.G. Schmid)

Fig. 10. NEPP, Structure 1, sandstone block with the deco-ration of vine leaves (B. Kolb)


Structure 2, ca. 40×30 m., is located in the north-ern part of the NEPP area, roughly parallel to the course of the Wādī Mattahah. Numerous architec-tural blocks found at this site include column drums and door jambs, and an impressive array of decora-tive elements (e.g., triglyph and metope blocks and other decorative elements of entablature) (Figs. 11, 12). Characteristic of Structure 2 is the consistent and unmixed use of architectural decoration. Deco-rative elements seem to follow the same homoge-neous concept datable to the 1st century Ce, and with parallels easily found in the Qasr el-Bint and the villa at ez-Zantur IV. To occupy the prominent spot overlooking the Wādī Mattahah, the building was constructed on a massive substructure. The main façade is located on the northern side (Fig. 13), where two entrances were also located, one of these monumental. The main, central component of the structure is a large, asymmetrical rectangle featuring a colonnade running N–S, which possi-bly turned eastward, having an L-shaped plan (cf. Fig. 11). The colonnade features uniform columns crowned by Nabataean capitals. That room was flanked by two large rooms or spaces. The west-ern room was accessible through a passage in the colonnade. The eastern room, possibly a triclinium or courtyard, had a black-and-white mosaic floor.

Fig. 12. NEPP, Structure 2, a sandstone block with ped-estal and pillar in relief; very similar type known from the Temenos Gate and comparable to finds from Umm

al-Biyara (S.G. Schmid)

Fig. 11. NEPP, Structure 2, the distribution of archi-tectural elements (M. Holappa)


This combination of rooms resembles the represen-tative banqueting halls of the luxurious Nabataean mansion on az-Zantur IV,33 modelled on prototypes provided by Hellenistic palaces,34 also attested in a slightly modified form at Masada.35 The existence of a second story is certain, as exemplified by the different sizes of columns and numerous fragments of architectural decoration of the highest quality. A room south of the monumental staircase con-tains a staircase arranged around the central core, a type popular in the region, including the Hasmo-nean and Herodian palaces.36 The staircase prob-ably provided access to the different levels of the structure. A large room, which stretches along the entire western width of Structure 2 appears to be an open courtyard, seemingly without a colonnade. Several blocks decorated with triglyph and metope indicate that the western wall of that room was a richly decorated façade. That room also yielded a large number of door-jambs, probably from doors located on both sides of the stairway, giving access to lateral rooms on different levels. As opposed to

Structure 1, there is much less evidence for sub-stantial changes, restorations or redefinition of space in Structure 2. If the same disaster as that postulated for Structure 1 also affected Structure 2, either the impact was catastrophic and the building was never restored, or, less likely, the building was restored with a minimum of structural and decora-tive changes.

Structure 3 is situated along the Wādī Mūsa in the south part of the NEPP area (cf. Fig. 8). It is a long, narrow building, constructed on massive substructures built in a chequerboard manner on the steep slope of the Wādī Mūsa. The main struc-ture was built on two levels: a long gangway is located on the higher, rear part of the structure, and a colonnaded hall opening towards the Wādī Mūsa is located on the lower foreground of it. Some of the columns are still standing in situ.37 The clearly representative character of Structure 3 is further underlined by the large number of marble (white and polychrome) slabs of the same types as those

Fig. 13. NEPP, Structure 2, general view of façade wall; view from NW (S.G. Schmid)


reported from Umm al-Biyāra. Structure 3 is an integral component of a larger architectural entity, probably a monumental, representative façade for the eastern part of the NEPP area, facing the Wādī Mūsa, where the main communication axis of the ancient city was located. Furthermore, the area above the main street features clusters of various hydraulic installations, starting from the sector of the Palace Tomb down towards the street, where the theatre-like structure is located.

Even if the interpretation of the NEPP area as the basileia of the Nabataean kings may seem a con-vincing hypothesis, one should carefully review all options and parallels. Official residences of Hel-lenistic kings of the basileia-type display a strong tendency for a rectangular inner structure follow-ing Hippodamean urbanistic concepts.38 This is also true for the official imperial palaces in Rome, the only and short-lived exception being Nero’s attempt to transform parts of the city of Rome into a gigantic pleasure villa.39 Imperial palaces on the Palatine follow a more compact spatial develop-ment, despite their huge size including garden areas.40 Given the manifold parallels between the Nabataean and Herodian luxury architecture, it would be interesting to compare the evidence from the NEPP area with the Herodian main palace in Jerusalem,41 although due to the scarcity of archae-ological evidence, one must depend on Josephus’ description.42 Lichtenberger observed a contrast between Josephus’ description of abundant luxuri-ous complexes, courtyards, gardens and the rela-tively small area (ca. 130×350 m., i.e., ca. 45,500 m.2) which should contain all these structures.43 The Flavian palace on the Palatine in Rome44 pro-vides an interesting comparative observation. In their core, the Flavian structures measure almost exactly 200 m. by 200 m. (= 40,000 m.2), and with the extension of the so-called Domus Severiana, another 6,400 m.2 should be added, arriving at the same area as that calculated for Herod’s palace in Jerusalem. One can easily imagine all structures described by Josephus fitting within such a space if organized in a methodical, rectangular design, just as the Flavian palace in Rome, but not if dispersed across the area, as in Petra.

On the other hand, parallels between the NEPP

structures and some other types of Roman luxury architecture, namely the imperial villae outside Rome, should also be considered. In particular, Domitian’s villae at Castel Gandolfo and at Sabau-dia45 show the same dispersed organisation, abun-dant use of water installations, stoa-like structures shaping the landscape and theatres or odeia, as witnessed in the NEPP area. The same elements occur in the residence of Nero at Subiaco, which bridges the valley of the Aniene river in a similar way as Herod’s third palace in Jericho.46 The huge villa Pausilypon near Naples, built by P. Vedius Pollio in the late 1st century BCe, later inherited by Augustus, features similar elements.47 There-fore we note the same characteristics in luxurious pleasure villae of otium type at the same time in Italy as in Judaea and, probably slightly later, in Nabataean Petra. Whether there was any kind of developmental dependency (at least between the Italian and Herodian examples), or if all these examples equally drew upon common Hellenistic prototypes, as is often supposed, cannot be easily ascertained since the Hellenistic otium-type resi-dences are hardly known. Until the forthcoming fieldwork changes this perception, it appears that the presumed Nabataean basileia seem to better reflect the spatial organisation of otium structures than the main palaces of the basileia type.

ConclusionsAlthough the conclusions presented here are pre-liminary, they demonstrate a feasible indication of the existence of Nabataean royal residences, spec-tacularly located, and of the design and affluence reserved for the highest level of Nabataean soci-ety. It is not accidental that these two areas utilize not only the most prominent locations, situated at each end of the Petra Valley, but equally feature a potentially defensible character. Future IUBP and NEPP exploration should therefore yield not only a wealth of material culture, but illuminate the patterns of the political geography of Petra in the Nabataean period. Finally, the projects open a new avenue for research in Petra, i.e., the compara-tive study of the Nabataean royal quarters within a larger framework of similar structures in the Hel-lenistic and Roman worlds.


Notes1 As was shown by Funck 1996.2 Held 2002.3 McKenzie 2007: 32–146, especially 66–71; Hoepf-

ner 1999: especially 462–464; Nielsen 1994: 130–133. 280–282.

4 For a recent update and state of research, see Schmid, Bienkowski, Fiema and Kolb 2012.

5 Bachmann, Watzinger and Wiegand 1921: 68–72; Wie-gand also tentatively identified as a palace the building which features a single column commonly known as “Zibb Firaoun,” p. 64.

6 Kropp 2009; Bedal 2003: 171–185; Schluntz 1999: passim.

7 See the reports in the Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan from Vol. 44 (2000) onwards; cf. also Schmid 2009; Project website: www.auac.ch/iwfp.

8 Kolb 2012; Kolb 2007.9 Schmid and Bienkowski 2011; Project website: www.

auac.ch/iubp.10 Project website: www.auac.ch/nepp.11 Kennedy 2013.12 Morton 1956: 30–31; Bennett 1966; 1980: 211.13 McKenzie 1990: 36, 132–134, pl. 55, 56.14 Jansen, Koloski-Ostrow and Moormann 2011; Hobson

2009.15 In Roman public bath installations, latrines are often

found near the frigidaria, where large quantities of water could be conveniently re-used for flushing the toi-lets. See van Vaerenbergh 2011: 78–80 and an example in the large baths of Colonia Ulpia Traiana (Xanten) in Germany: Zieling 2009.

16 On the Herodian hilltop palaces, see Lichtenberger 1999; Roller 1998; Nielsen 1994: 181–208; Netzer 1991. On their bathing installations, see Netzer 1999; Hoss 2005: 45–49.

17 Kapossy 1969: 41–42; some preliminary thoughts can be found in Schmid et al. 2012: 81–82.

18 On Masada, see Netzer 1991; cf. also Ben-Tor 2009.19 Brünnow and Domaszewski 1904: 318–319, nos. 412–415.20 Musil 1907: map following p. 343.21 Dalman 1908: 314–329.22 Bachmann, Watzinger and Wiegand 1921: 32–33; cf.

infra.23 Bellwald 2008: 67–73; Petra National Trust 2004.24 On these see Nehmé 1997: 1035–1036; Lindner et al.

1997; Dalman 1908: 332–336.25 Already Lindner et al. 1997: 182–184 attributed a defen-

sive character to these features.26 Bellwald 2008: 49–53, 87–90; Gunsam 1997.

27 Bellwald 2008: 56–58; Schmid 2008: 110–113; Hübl and Lindner 1997.

28 On the Nabataean houses at az-Zantūr, see Kolb 2012; 2007: 156–158, 163–168; 2003.

29 Schluntz (1999) argues that the “Great Temple” could have been the main audience hall of the Nabataean kings. Although the location of an audience hall in a different sector of the city than the royal residence would be puzzling, there are good arguments for her hypothesis; cf. Schmid 2013.

30 McKenzie 1990: 162–165.31 As compiled in Bedal 2003: 162–183; Luschin 2010:

340–349.32 On similar capitals from Petra, Alexandria and Ptol-

emaïs, see McKenzie 1990; 2007: 80–118.33 Kolb 2012: 235–236; 2007: 167–168; 2003: 234.34 Vössing 2004: 101–102 (critical about the widespread

diffusion); Hoepfner 1996: passim, especially 13–15.35 In building 8 rooms 226, 205 and 212 (Netzer 1991:

195 and plan 2); in the western palace rooms 521 and 458 (Netzer 1991: 145–148 and plan 17); in building 11 rooms 628 and 609 (Netzer 1991: 321–322; in building 12 rooms 662 and 661 (Netzer 1991: 336–338). Ehud Netzer pointed out several common points in the plan-ning and construction of the buildings on Masada, including the combination of such rooms: Netzer 1991: 599–604.

36 Negev 1973.37 Possibly, Structure 3 is the “columned corridor open

towards south that was closed in the Byzantine period” (Bachmann, Watzinger and Wiegand 1921: 33).

38 Cf. above n. 1–3.39 Cf. recently Beste 2012; several entries in Tomei and

Rea 2011; Ball 2003.40 Wulf-Rheidt 2012.41 Other Herodian residences may offer good parallels and

comparisons for single elements of the Nabataean resi-dence on Umm al-Biyara, but they cannot be compared to the NEPP area as a unit, since our working hypoth-esis proposes interpreting the NEPP area as a basileia in the true sense of the word and not as a secondary or pleasure residence.

42 Lichtenberger 1999: 93–98: Netzer 2006: 129–132.43 Lichtenberger 1999: 93. 97–98.44 See for example Wulf-Rheidt 2012; Mar 2009.45 See for example Hesberg 2009; Hesberg 2005; Liverani

2008.46 Mari 2008 with further references.47 Cf. for instance Varriale 2007; Günther 1913.


ReferencesArnold, F., Busch, A. and Haensch, R. (eds.)2012 Orte der Herrschaft. Charakteristika von anti-

ken Machtzentren (Forschungscluster 3. Poli-tische Räume), Rahden.

Bachmann, W., Watzinger, C. and Wiegand, Th.1921 Petra (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen

des Deutsch-Türkischen Denkmalschutz-Kom-mandos, Heft 3), Berlin/Leipzig.

Ball, L.F.2003 The Domus Aurea and the Roman Architectural

Revolution, Cambridge.

Bedal, L.-A.2003 The Petra Pool-Complex. A Hellenistic Parade-

isos in the Nabataean Capital (Results from the Petra “Lower Market” Survey and Excava-tions, 1998), Piscataway NJ.

Bellwald, U.2008 “The Hydraulic Infrastructure of Petra — a

Model for Water Strategies in Arid Lands,” pp. 47–94 in Ohlih, Ch. (ed.), Cura Aquarum in Jordanien. Proceedings of the 13th Inter-national Conference on the History of Water Management and Hydraulic Engineering in the Mediterranean Region, Petra/Amman 31 March–09 April 2007, Siegburg.

Ben-Tor, A.2009 Back to Masada, Jerusalem.

Bennett, C.M.1966 “Fouilles d’Umm el-Biyara. Rapport prélimi-

naire,” Revue Biblique 73, pp. 372–4031980 A Graeco-Nabataean Sanctuary on Umm el

Biyara, ADAJ 24, pp. 209–212.

Beste, H.J.2012 “Betrachtung, Analyse und Überlegungen zur

Wahl des Standorts der Domus Aurea,” pp. 73–79 in Arnold, Busch and Haensch 2012.

Bienkowski, P. (ed.)2011 Umm al-Biyara. Excavations by Crystal-M.

Bennett in Petra 1960–1965, Oxford/Oakville.

Brünnow, R.E. and von Domaszewski, A.1904 Die Provincia Arabia, 1. Die Römerstrasse von

Mâdebâ über Petra und Odruh bis el-Aķaba, Strasbourg.

Coarelli, F. (ed.)2009 Divus Vespasianus. Il bimillenario dei Flavi,

Milan.

Dalman, G.1908 Petra und seine Felsheiligtümer, Leipzig.

De Haan, N.2010 Römische Privatbäder. Entwicklung, Verbrei-

tung, Struktur und sozialer Status, Frankfurt.

Funck, B.1996 “Beobachtungen zum Begriff des Herrscher-

palastes und seiner machtpolitischen Funktion im hellenistischen Raum. Prolegomena zur Typologie der hellenistischen Herrschafts-sprache,” pp. 44–55 in Hoepfner, W. and Brands, G. (eds.), Basileia. Die Paläste der hellenistischen Könige, Mainz.

Gunsam, E.1997 “Die nördliche Hubta-Wasserleitung,” pp. 319–

329 in Lindner, M. (ed.), Petra und das Köni-greich der Nabatäer. Lebensraum, Geschichte und Kultur eines arabischen Volkes der Antike (6th edition), Munich/Bad Windsheim.

Günther R.T.1913 Pausilypon. The Imperial Villa near Naples.

With a Description of the Submerged Foreshore and with Observations on the Tomb of Virgil and on Other Roman Antiquities on Posilipo, Oxford.

Held, W.2002 “Die Residenzstädte der Seleukiden. Babylon,

Seleukeia am Tigris, Ai Khanum, Seleukeia in Pieria, Antiocheia am Orontes,” Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts 117, pp. 217–249.

Hesberg, H.v.2005 “Nutzung und Zurschaustellung von Wasser

in der Domitiansvilla von Castel Gandolfo,” Fragmente der Ausstattung von Brunnen und Wasserkünste, Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts 120, pp. 373–420.

2009 “Le ville imperiali dei Flavi: Albanum Domi-tiani,” pp. 326–333 in Coarelli 2009.

Hobson, B.2009 Latrinae et foricae. Toilets in the Roman World,

London.


Hoepfner, W.1996 “Zum Typus der Basileia und der königli-

chen Andrones,” pp. 1–43 in Hoepfner, W. and Brands, G. (eds), Basileia. Die Paläste der hel-lenistischen Könige, Mainz.

1999 “Alexandria. Die erste griechische Großstadt,” pp. 455–471 in Hoepfner, W. (ed.), Geschichte des Wohnens, I. 5000 v.Chr.–500 n.Chr. Vorge-schichte, Frühgeschichte, Antike, Stuttgart.

Hoss, S.2005 Baths and Bathing. The Culture of Bathing and

the Baths and Thermae in Palestine from the Hasmoneans to the Moslem Conquest, with an Appendix on Jewish Ritual Baths (miqva’ot) (BAR International Series 1346), Oxford.

Hübl, H. and Lindner, M.1997 “Where Pharaoh’s Daughter Got Her Drinking

Water from. The ‘En Braq Conduit to Petra,” ZDPV 113, pp. 61–67.

Jansen, G.C.M., Koloski-Ostrow, A.O. and Moor-mann, E.M. (eds.)2011 Roman Toilets. Their Archaeology and Cul-

tural History (BABesch Supplementa Series 19), Leuven.

Kapossy, B.1969 Brunnenfiguren der hellenistischen und

römischen Zeit, Zurich.

Kennedy, W.2013 “The Hills Have Eyes: GIS-Based Studies on a

Possible Watchtower on Umm al-Biyara,” pp. 271–293 in Mouton and Schmid 2013.

Kolb, B.2003 “Petra — from Tent to Mansion: Living on the

Terraces of Ez-Zantur,” pp. 230–237 in Markoe, G. (ed.), Petra Rediscovered. Lost City of the Nabataeans, New York.

2007 “Nabataean Private Architecture,” pp. 145–172 in Politis, K.D. (ed.), The World of the Naba-taeans. International Conference “The World of the Herods and the Nabataeans” held at the British Museum, 17–19 April 2001, vol. 2, Stuttgart.

2012 “Nabatäische Wohnarchitektur. Die Ausgrabun-gen der Universität Basel auf dem Hügel ez-Zantur in Petra,” pp. 231–243 in Schmid, S.G. (ed.), Petra. Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung “Petra — Wunder in der Wüste. Auf den Spuren

von J. L. Burckhardt alias Scheich Ibrahim”, Basel.

Kropp, A.J.M.2009 “Nabataean Petra: the Royal Palace and the

Herod Connection,” Boreas 32, pp. 43–59.

Lichtenberger, A.1999 Die Baupolitik Herodes des Großen (Abhan-

dlungen des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 26), Wiesbaden.

Lindner, M., Knauf, E.A., Hübl, J. and Zeitler, J.P.1997 “An Iron Age (Edomite) Occupation of Jabal

al-Khubtha (Petra) and Other Discoveries on the “Mountain of Treachery and Deceit,” ADAJ 41, pp. 177–188.

Liverani, P.2008 “La villa di Domiziano a Castel Gandolfo,” pp.

53–60 in Valenti 2008.

Luschin, E.M.2010 Römische Gartenanlagen. Studien zu Garten-

kunst und Städtebau in der römischen Antike, Vienna.

Mar, R.2009 “La Domus Flavia, utilizzo e funzioni del pala-

zzo di Domiziano,” pp. 250–263 in Coarelli 2009.

Mari, Z.2008 “Il Sublaqueum: la villa di Nerone a Subiaco,”

pp. 43–52 in Valenti 2008.

McKenzie, J.1990 The Architecture of Petra, Oxford.2007 The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt. 300

BC–AD 700, New Haven/London.

Morton, W.H.1956 “Umm el-Biyara,” Biblical Archaeologist 19,

pp. 26–36.

Mouton, M. and Schmid, S.G. (eds.)2013 Men on the Rocks. The Formation of Naba-

taean Petra, Berlin.

Musil, A.1907 Arabia Petraea, II. Edom. Topographischer

Reisebericht, 1. Teil. Vienna.

Negev, A.1973 The Staircase-Tower in Nabataean Architec-

ture, Revue Biblique 80, pp. 364–382.


Nehmé, L.1997 L’espace cultuel de Pétra à l’époque nabatée-

nne, Topoi 7, pp. 1023–1067.

Netzer, E.1991 Masada III. The Buildings. Stratigraphy and

Architecture, Jerusalem.1999 “Herodian Bath-houses,” pp. 45–55 in DeLaine,

J. and Johnston, D.E. (eds.), Roman Baths and Bathing (Journal of Roman Archaeology Sup-plementary Series 37), Portsmouth.

2001 Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho. Final Reports of the 1973–1987 Excavations, I. Stratigraphy and Architecture, Jerusalem.

2006 The Architecture of Herod, the Great Builder. Tubingen.

Nielsen, I.1994 Hellenistic Palaces. Tradition and Renewal.

Aarhus.

Petra National Trust2004 Sīq al-Mudhlim Study Survey, 2002. ADAJ 48,

pp. 117–140.

Roller, D.W.1998 The Building Program of Herod the Great,

Berkeley/Los Angeles.

Schluntz, E.L.1999 From Royal to Public Assembly Space: the

Transformation of the “Great Temple” Com-plex at Petra, Jordan (PhD Dissertation, Brown University, Providence), Ann Arbor.

Schmid, S.G.2008 “Die Wasserversorgung des Wādī Farasa Ost

in Petra,” pp. 95–117 in Ohlig, Ch. (ed.), Cura Aquarum in Jordanien. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the History of Water Management and Hydraulic Engi-neering in the Mediterranean Region, Petra/Amman 31 March–09 April 2007, Siegburg.

2009 “Überlegungen zum Grundriss und zum Funk-tionieren nabatäischer Grabkomplexe in Petra,” ZDPV 125, pp. 139–170.

2011 “Nabataean Structures on Top of Umm al-Biyara,” pp. 127–137 in Bienkowski 2011.

2013 “Foucault and the Nabataeans — or What Space

Has to Do with It,” pp. 251–269 in Mouton and Schmid 2013.

Schmid, S.G. and Bienkowski, P.2011 “The International Umm al-Biyara Proj-

ect (IUBP). Preliminary Report on the 2010 Season,” ADAJ 55, pp. 101–120.

Schmid, S.G., Bienkowski, P., Fiema, Z.T. and Kolb, B.2012 “The Palaces of the Nabataean Kings at Petra,”

pp. 73–98 in Nehmé, L. and Wadeson, L. (eds.), The Nabataeans in Focus: Current Archaeo-logical Research at Petra. Suppl. To the Pro-ceedings of the Seminar of Arabian Studies 42, Oxford.

Tomei, M.A. and Rea, R. (eds.)2011 Nerone. [Mostra Roma 12 aprile–18 settembre

2011], Milan.

Valenti, M. (ed.)2008 Residenze imperiali nel Lazio. Atti della Gior-

nata di Studio, Monte Porzio Catone. 3 aprile 2004, Monte Porzio Catone.

Van Vaerenbergh, J.2011 “Flush Water for Toilets in and near the Baths,”

pp. 78–86 in Jansen, Koloski-Ostrow and Moormann 2011.

Varriale, I.2007 “La villa imperiale di Pausilypon,” pp. 147–165

in Ciariello, R. (ed.), La villa romana, Naples.

Vössing, K.2004 Mensa regia. Das Bankett beim hellenistischen

König und beim römischen Kaiser, Munich/Leipzig.

Wulf-Rheidt, U.2012 “Nutzungsbereiche des flavischen Palastes auf

dem Palatin in Rom,” pp. 97–112 in Arnold, Busch and Haensch 2012.

Zieling, N.2009 “Eine römische Toilettenspülung in den Gros-

sen Thermen der Colonia Ulpia Traiana,” pp. 313–320 in Xantener Berichte. Grabung, Forsc-hung, Präsentation 15, Mainz.

documenting nabataean royal residences in petra

Documents