Byzantine Preservation of Ancient Monuments at Miletus in Caria
201
early Byzantine mores}1 Similarly, nude sculptures and reliefs on the façades of the
Nymphaeum, the Market Gate, and the theatre were treated in this manner, thus rec-
onciling the public presentation of ancient art with Christian morals throughout the
city82 In addition, the theatre came to bear an inscribed invocation to the archangels,
asking for the protection of the city and its inhabitants,83 possibly in relation to the late
Roman and Byzantine city walls that were located beneath the inscription.84 A related
graffito on behalf of two men extended the plea for help to God.85
The highly decorative porch of the serapeion that remained standing throughout
the early Byzantine period and decorated the main gate of the Byzantine city walls
(Fig. 4) was also subjected to Christian scrutiny: the face of a bust of Serapis with a
radiate crown in the centre of the porch’s pediment was erased some time before the
gate collapsed and was eventually buried by sediments in the middle Byzantine period
(Fig. 5).86 Most probably, the erasure was a Christian measure aimed at discrediting
the pagan roots of the building and/or the pagan tradition of cult images that would
have disagreed with the largely aniconic decoration of late antique and early Byzantine
churches at Miletus and in Asia Minor.87
The late Roman Propylon to the east of the Agora may originally have belonged
to a temple of the imperial cult, but its purely ornamental decoration did not require
any deletion. Instead, some cross-inlays and Christian graffiti were added to its door
frames, which may have been related to the Propylon’s new Christian function as
porch of the ‘Great Church’.88
The Christian nature of antiquarian choices in church building (the Corinthian
capitals of the ‘Great Church’ and of St Mary as well as the fluted architraves of St Mi-
chael) is self-evident and poses the question of why Christians should have embraced
antiquarianism. At Miletus, the answer may be sought in the fact that the striking
preservation of intact urbanity that was thus achieved is known to have been a matter
of civic pride,89 and, by the seventh century, distinguished Miletus from most other
Byzantine cities (see below). Accordingly, antiquarianism may have been inspired by
the well-preserved ancient cityscape itself.
81 Schneider (1999), pp. 8-12; Bol (2011), pp. n-12; Dally (2012); Schneider (2012); Dally/Maischberger/
Scholl (2015), pp. 336-338.
82 Dally/Maischberger/Schneider/Scholl (2009), p. 104 fig. 9; p. 105 fig. 10; p. 113 fig. 11; p. 125 fig. 7; p. 126
fig. 9; p. 137 fig. 22; p. 147 fig. 4; p. 152 fig. 9; pp. 180-181 cat. 11; pp. 184-185 cat. 13; pp. 196-197 cat. 19;
pp. 198-199 cat. 20; Bol (2011), p. 11; Niewöhner (2016c), pp. 125-127 fig. 112-116.
83 von Graeve (1997-2006), vol. 2, pp. 127-128 cat. 943; pl. 47 fig. 287; Cline (2011).
84 Niewöhner (2016c), pp. 136-142.
85 von Graeve (1997-2006), vol. 2, p. 127 cat. 942; pl. 49 fig. 301; Niewöhner (2016c), p. 140 n. 256.
86 Niewöhner (2016e).
87 Niewöhner (2014), pp. 263-269; Niewöhner (2016a).
88 Knackfuß (1924), p. 242, fig. 246; p. 245; Niewöhner (2016a), p. 13.
89 Saradi (2006).
201
early Byzantine mores}1 Similarly, nude sculptures and reliefs on the façades of the
Nymphaeum, the Market Gate, and the theatre were treated in this manner, thus rec-
onciling the public presentation of ancient art with Christian morals throughout the
city82 In addition, the theatre came to bear an inscribed invocation to the archangels,
asking for the protection of the city and its inhabitants,83 possibly in relation to the late
Roman and Byzantine city walls that were located beneath the inscription.84 A related
graffito on behalf of two men extended the plea for help to God.85
The highly decorative porch of the serapeion that remained standing throughout
the early Byzantine period and decorated the main gate of the Byzantine city walls
(Fig. 4) was also subjected to Christian scrutiny: the face of a bust of Serapis with a
radiate crown in the centre of the porch’s pediment was erased some time before the
gate collapsed and was eventually buried by sediments in the middle Byzantine period
(Fig. 5).86 Most probably, the erasure was a Christian measure aimed at discrediting
the pagan roots of the building and/or the pagan tradition of cult images that would
have disagreed with the largely aniconic decoration of late antique and early Byzantine
churches at Miletus and in Asia Minor.87
The late Roman Propylon to the east of the Agora may originally have belonged
to a temple of the imperial cult, but its purely ornamental decoration did not require
any deletion. Instead, some cross-inlays and Christian graffiti were added to its door
frames, which may have been related to the Propylon’s new Christian function as
porch of the ‘Great Church’.88
The Christian nature of antiquarian choices in church building (the Corinthian
capitals of the ‘Great Church’ and of St Mary as well as the fluted architraves of St Mi-
chael) is self-evident and poses the question of why Christians should have embraced
antiquarianism. At Miletus, the answer may be sought in the fact that the striking
preservation of intact urbanity that was thus achieved is known to have been a matter
of civic pride,89 and, by the seventh century, distinguished Miletus from most other
Byzantine cities (see below). Accordingly, antiquarianism may have been inspired by
the well-preserved ancient cityscape itself.
81 Schneider (1999), pp. 8-12; Bol (2011), pp. n-12; Dally (2012); Schneider (2012); Dally/Maischberger/
Scholl (2015), pp. 336-338.
82 Dally/Maischberger/Schneider/Scholl (2009), p. 104 fig. 9; p. 105 fig. 10; p. 113 fig. 11; p. 125 fig. 7; p. 126
fig. 9; p. 137 fig. 22; p. 147 fig. 4; p. 152 fig. 9; pp. 180-181 cat. 11; pp. 184-185 cat. 13; pp. 196-197 cat. 19;
pp. 198-199 cat. 20; Bol (2011), p. 11; Niewöhner (2016c), pp. 125-127 fig. 112-116.
83 von Graeve (1997-2006), vol. 2, pp. 127-128 cat. 943; pl. 47 fig. 287; Cline (2011).
84 Niewöhner (2016c), pp. 136-142.
85 von Graeve (1997-2006), vol. 2, p. 127 cat. 942; pl. 49 fig. 301; Niewöhner (2016c), p. 140 n. 256.
86 Niewöhner (2016e).
87 Niewöhner (2014), pp. 263-269; Niewöhner (2016a).
88 Knackfuß (1924), p. 242, fig. 246; p. 245; Niewöhner (2016a), p. 13.
89 Saradi (2006).