A NOTE ON THE ROMAN MOSAIC AT MAGDALA

ON THE SEA OF GALILEE

R. Reich

The discovery in 1986, of the ancient fishermans boat on the shore of the
lake of Galilee,1 drew attention to a Roman Mosaic floor (Fig. 1-2) which
was excavated several years ago in Magdala on the same shore of the lake.2
This mosaic depicts, among other things, a boat with sails. Recently, A.
Raban discussed this mosaic with particular interest in the depicted boat,
which he described extensively, yet devoted only a brief mention to the
other depicted items.3 I would like to present a new interpretation for one
of the depicted items on this mosaic floor. Raban describes the mosaic as
follows: within the border, six slightly stylized items are placed without
any attention to a common direction or relative size.4 The item located at
the upper left corner he sees as: a flower or bud lying on its left side,
placed between two leaves, following the excavators opinion.5
I would like to suggest a different interpretation for the upper left item
as follows: depicted is a group of artifacts connected by a ring of semicircular shape, which is on the right hand side. Both objects which bear the
shape of a crescent, and were interpreted by Raban as leaves, should be interpreted as two strigili (scrapers) of the type used in bath-houses, gymnasia and other places where gymnastics were practiced in the Hellenistic and
Roman periods. These utensils, which were designed as elongated and
curved ladles, were used for scraping off the oil with which the body was
anointed and the dust which adhered to it. Supporting this identification is
the fact that the artist was accurate in portraying these implements since he

1. S. Wachsman, The Excavations of an Ancient Boat in the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret),
(= Atiqot, English series XIX), Jerusalem, 1990.
2. V. Corbo, Piazza e Villa Urbana a Magdala, LA 28 (1978), p. 238, Pl. 76:5, 7. This
mosaic was not included in the recently published corpus: A. Ovadiah R. Ovadiah, Mosaic Pavements in Israel, Roma, 1987, pp. 110-111, No. 186.
3. A. Raban, The Ship from Migdal Nunia, Sefunim (Bulletin) VII (1988), pp. 48-56; J.R.
Steffy S. Wachsmann, The Migdal Mosaic Boat, in: S. Wachsmann (above, n. 1),
pp. 115-118.
4. Ibid., p. 49
5. Corbo (above, note 2).

LA 41 (1991) 455-458; Pls. 57-58

456

R. REICH

depicted each of them as being made of two parallel lines, in accordance

with the shape of real objects of this kind which have handles made of two
parallel stripes of metal.6
The object depicted between the strigili, identified by Raban as a
flower or bud should be identified as an aryballos (ointment bottle), connected by a chain to the ring.7 Another object, not depicted in the mosaic,
was usually included in these sets of bathing objects a patera (pan-shaped
plate),8 into which the oil could be poured for the process of anointing. The
handle of such an object is usually perforated, to facilitate its connecting
on the ring. It is possible that the round object which is seen to the right of
the ring, might be an object of this kind, however, the mosaic is damaged
on its lower part, preventing us from knowing whether a handle was depicted there.
Complete sets of anointing objects were discovered in the Roman realm,
usually including several strigili, an aryballos and a patera, all attached on
a circular, or semi-circular ring (Fig. 3) as in the present case. 9 Similar sets
are also depicted on contemporary mosaics 10 and decorated objects.11

6. On strigili discovered in a Roman tomb in Natanya, see: R. Reich, Archaeological Sites

within the Boundaries of the City of Natanya, in: Sefer Natanya (eds. A. Shmueli
M. Brawer), Tel-Aviv, 1982, p. 106, Fig. 11:17-18 (Hebrew).
On Strigili found in a tomb near Yavneh, see: Hadashot Arkheologiyot 20 (1966), p. 18
(Hebrew). On the opinion that the Jewish population in Eretz-Israel in the Roman
period, practiced occasionally in gymnastics, and therefore it is not impossible that these
objects belonged to the Jewish population of Yavneh, see: S. Libermann, Greek and
Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, Bialik Institute Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, Jerusalem, 1984,
pp. 70-73 (Hebrew).
7. Similar to the Object from Natanya, see: Reich (above, note 6), p. 108, fig. 12.
8. Similar to the object from Nataniya, see: Reich (above, note 6), p. 108, fig. 11:6. It seems
therefore that the identification of a similar object published in: U. Zevulun Y. Olenik,
Function and Design in the Talmudic Period, Tel-Aviv, 1978, Fig. 188, p. 72, should be
corrected accordingly.
9. Cf. a set of objects from Pompeii which were found connected by a ring identical to the
situation depicted on the present mosaic: H. Roux Aime, Herculanum et Pompei, Paris,
1870, Vol. VII, pp. 178-180, Pl. 87. This type of ring is referred to in the Rabbinic literature
as twdrgmh ywlt (Mishnah, Kelim 12, 6) and Tos. Kelim BM 2, 12.
10. On the depiction of three strigili on a semicircular ring like the ring on the present mosaic, depicted on a mosaic from Aquincum, Hungary, see: A. Kiss, Roman Mosaics in Hungary, Budapest, 1973, Pl. V:1. I would like to thank V. Sussman for this and the following
reference on the objects from Delos.
11. On the design of two strigili and an aryballos, in a disposition similar to the one seen on
the present mosaic, see: V. Sussman, Ornamented Jewish Oil-Lamps, Jerusalem, 1982, Nos.
85, 86.

A NOTE ON THE ROMAN MOSAIC AT MAGDALA

457

This interpretation solves the problem of the direction of the depicted

items on the mosaic, since we do not face a flower or bud lying on its left
side, placed between two leaves, but rather a set of objects with no meaning as to the direction in which they were put. We do not see here slightly
stylized items but rather some care devoted to details, as far as this could
have been executed in mosaics, especially in the present one which is made
of rather large stones.
The identification of two other items in the lower right hand side of the
mosaic present no difficulties: a kantharos, and below it a fish holding a
sea weed in its mouth. The kantharos is an object frequently depicted on
mosaics, whether placed on a table in front of diners, or in depiction of stilllife. The fish seems to be not in the water but rather served on the diners
table. Objects of this kind are found e.g. on the mosaics in Antiochia,12
where the Greek inscription KAI U is seen,13 identical to an inscription
found near the presently discussed mosaic.14
Still we remain with the identification of the object on the upper right
hand side of the mosaic. Raban saw here: black disc, behind which are two
containers (wicker vessels?) attached by a pole. Perhaps this is some sort
of device for carrying loads on two sides of a pack-animals back (donkey
or mule). This explanation seems to be unsatisfying, especially due to the
straight shape of the connecting line. It ignores also the round disc on its
left side. For the time being I have no other adequate explanation. Perhaps
these objects represent gaming pieces or musical instruments?15
Raban claimed that the artist intended the ship to be a central motif in
the mosaic; the remaining elements are only secondary, as common in
contemporary mosaics. Actually, one cannot get the impression of this
tendency in the present mosaic. It is sufficient to claim that the artist
intended to depict a model of a boat or a vessel in the shape of a boat, thus
we conclude that all the objects depicted on the mosaic are in fact of the
same order of magnitude, without any preference for a certain object. In
fact, objects in the shape of boats were in use in the Roman period,

12. D. Levi, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, Princeton, 1947, Pls. I:a, VIII:c, XXIII:b, XLII:b.
For the fish, see Pls. XXIV:a, CLII:a.
13. Ibid., Pls. IV:a, c.
14. Ibid., Pls. 10, IV: a, c.
15. See, e. g., the weights hold by the gymnastics on the mosaics from Piazza Armerina in
Sicily: A. Carandini A. Ricci M. de Vos, Filosofiana la Villa di Piazza Armerina,
Palermo, 1982, p. 151, fig. 73, foglio XVII.

458

R. REICH

especially multi-wicked oil lamps (polycandela). A group of these objects

was found e.g. in Delos.16 It is interesting to note that the Rabbinic literature
mentions a boat of pottery srj l hnyps 17 which cannot become impure
as it is not a vessel (a container) although made of pottery.
We have, therefore, a Roman mosaic floor from the type depicting stilllife with a group of objects which seem as if lying upon a table. It is not
impossible that the objects depicted have in fact a common underlying conceptual denominator. Unfortunately, we do not know the precise meaning
of two of the six objects. Assuming they are gaming pieces or musical instruments, it seems that the assemblage could have stood for and expressed
values which the landlord of the house cherished and wished they would
not be wanting, like his livelihood (expressed by the fishing boat by which
he probably made his living); food and beverages, the Roman bath-house
and his time of leisure. It is possible that the nearby inscription, which was
interpreted in Antiochia as possessing apothropaic virtues, was meant to
protect all these assets for the landlord.
Ronny Reich
Israel Antiquities Authority

16. P. Bruneau, Les Lampes, Exploration Archologiques de Dlos, Fasc. XXVI, Paris, 1965,
pp. 107-109, Nos. 4535-4550; The Art of Jordan, Treasures from an Ancient Land, (ed. P.
Bientkowski), Liverpool, 1991, No. 86 Boat-Shaped Lamp from Amman, p. 79.
17. Mishnah, Kelim 2, 3; and see: Y. Brand, Klei Haheres Besiffrut Hatalmud (Ceramics in
Talmudic Literature), Jerusalem, 1953, pp. 385-388 (Hebrew); D. Sperber, who compiled
all the material in the Rabbinic literature which relates to seamanship, does not discuss this
term!; D. Sperber, Nautica Talmudica, Bar Ilan University Press, Ramat-Gan, Brill Leiden,
1986.