Nabataische Architektur: Insbesondere Graber und Tempel.

• Author: Downey, Susan B.
• Position: Book Review

Nabataische Architektur: Insbesondere Graber und Tempel. By EHUD NETZER. Zaberns Bildbander zur Archaologie. Mainz: PHILLIP VON ZABERN, 2003. Pp. 190, illus. [euro]41.

This volume provides a clear, up-to-date survey of Nabataean architecture. The concentration on tombs and temples is justified by the fact that we know little of domestic or civic architecture, but Netzer discusses those elements in the sites where they are preserved, such as Petra, Bosra, and the less well known site of Mamshit in the northern Sinai. One of the merits of this book is the inclusion of material from recent Israeli excavations published in Hebrew, and therefore inaccessible to many scholars.

The book is organized in the following fashion: after a short section on the history and religion of the Nabataeans, there are chapters on the rock-cut graves in Petra and Medain Saleh, temples, urban architecture, and architectonic elements and sculpture. The bibliography appears to be inclusive and up-to-date. The book is profusely illustrated. In addition to excellent photographs, there are maps, line drawings, and plans of buildings, all well done, some in color. One annoyance is that many of the plans lack a north arrow, and the photographs are not all printed with north at the top. This presents problems, especially in the chapter on temples. The orientation of Nabataean temples varies, and I found myself having to analyze the description in order to determine the position of north in individual cases.

A particular merit of Netzer's book is that he presents controversies and differences of opinion when they exist, outlines the different positions, and takes a stand. For example, several scholars have developed typologies of the rock-cut tombs of Petra and Medain Saleh, and these differ both in the organization of the tomb types and in the dating schemes. A number of tombs of Medain Saleh bear dates, but very few do at Petra, and one difference of opinion is whether the same evolution can be assumed for the two sites. Netzer has helpful charts of the tomb types, the numbers of tombs belonging to each type, and a comparative table of the typologies developed by various scholars. Figure 53 graphically illustrates his typology and suggested dating.

Interpretation of temples also varies. Naturally, most are ruined, and differences of opinion exist, particularly with regard to which parts of a given building were roofed. Again, Netzer gives the interpretations...