A Re-Examination of the Sources of Inspiration of Ethiopian Concentric Prayer Houses: Tracing an Architectural Concept from the Roman and Byzantine East to Islamic and Crusader Jerusalem to Solomonic Ethiopia

Abstract

During the first millennium of Christian presence in Ethiopia (from the fourth century), church architecture was first in accordance with, and later partially based on, the basilica plan. Circa the early sixteenth century, a new and unique church plan appeared, circular, concentric, and with a square sanctuary, and became the dominant church plan in the northwestern Ethiopian Highlands. This church plan has been referred to in scholarship as an innovation, and its sources of inspiration have not yet been definitively established. In this article, I will argue that this plan is a culmination of a process with roots in the Late Antique and Medieval Holy Land, by which the concentric prayer house plan came to be associated with the Jerusalem Temple. This process transcended religious boundaries and is expressed in the religious architecture of three monotheistic religious traditions.

1. Introduction: The Sudden Appearance of a Unique Church Plan

Christianity was first established in the Late Antique kingdom of Aksum (in modern-day northern Ethiopia and Eritrea) in the fourth century, with the conversion of this kingdom’s ruler and elite. By the sixth century, it had become well established throughout this kingdom’s core regions, a process reflected in the construction of churches in several Aksumite sites.1 Aksumite church architecture was based on the basilica plan, the most prominent church plan of the Late Antique Roman–Byzantine world.2 This is not surprising considering the many connections, ecclesiastic, commercial, and political, between this kingdom and the Byzantine realm. Christianity persisted in Ethiopia after the seventh–eighth century decline of the Aksumite kingdom, and throughout the Middle Ages, several types of church plans developed in the Ethiopian Highlands, almost all based, to varying extents, on their basilical predecessors.3

In the early sixteenth century, a new church plan was introduced that would revolutionize Ethiopian church architecture—rather than a quadrangular, basilica structure oriented to the east, this type of church was concentric, oriented inwards. It comprises a central, square sanctuary surrounded by two concentric aisles, with the exterior of the structure either circular or octagonal (Figure 1 and Figure 2).4 The significance of this architectural revolution is reflected in Marilyn Heldman’s (2003, p. 739) assertion that “the distinctive centralized sanctuary arrangement appears to be an independent invention and is unique to Ethiopia. Considering the erudition of Ethiopian religious leaders and their respect for ecclesiastic tradition, this plan is likely to have been a bold innovation, supported by well informed patrons”.

In this article, we will endeavor to understand how and why this bold innovation came into being, gradually replacing its basilica-based predecessors as the most common type of church in the northern, and especially northwestern, Ethiopian Highlands. We will start by discussing the chronology of its appearance and reviewing the different suggestions offered so far regarding its sources of inspiration. We will then examine the history and symbolism of the concentric prayer house plan in the Late Antique and Medieval Holy Land and argue that this symbolism is key to understanding the unique architecture of concentric Ethiopian prayer houses.

1.1. The Concentric Ethiopian Church Plan: An Overview of Past Research

While Ethiopian churches in general, and Ethiopian church architecture in particular, have seen considerable research, past studies have tended to focus on Aksumite churches and their early medieval successors, as well as on the impressive church compound of Lalibäla, reaching its apex in the twelfth–thirteenth century.5 Much of the research on later, concentric Ethiopian churches has been art historical in nature, focusing on the artistic decoration of such churches, their individual history, and the objects kept in the church compounds.6 A few studies examine the architecture of these churches in detail and attempt to trace their origins. Notable among them are the studies of Fritsch (2018), Heldman (1992, 2003), di Salvo (1999), and Pérès (2006). The main suggestions raised in these studies regarding the sources of inspiration for the concentric Ethiopian church plan will be briefly reviewed below.

Past studies have thoroughly examined available textual, oral, and architectural evidence and compared Ethiopian church architecture and components with church architecture in other regions. But, so far, research on Ethiopian churches, and indeed, on Ethiopian Christianity in general, has focused, for comparative purposes, almost exclusively on Christian communities and culture. In this study, I will demonstrate that additional insight can be gleaned by “bringing into conversation” affiliated aspects of religious architecture and symbolism of non-Christian groups, both in Ethiopia and in the Middle East more broadly.7

1.2. When Did the Concentric Circular Ethiopian Church Plan First Appear?

Attempts to date the initial appearance of the concentric circular church type have been based primarily on textual accounts.8 Fifteenth-century sources feature several descriptions of quadrangular Ethiopian churches, thus indicating that the concentric circular plan had not become widespread at the time.9 The two earliest texts describing churches that can be securely identified with the concentric circular type are the accounts of the Portuguese soldier Miguel de Castanhoso, who was in Ethiopia in the years 1541–1543, and of the Jesuit missionary Manuel de Almeida (1579/80–1646). Castanhoso writes, regarding Ethiopian churches, that they are “round, with a holy place in the center, and all around outside are verandahs” (Whiteway 1902, p. 90). Thus, it seems that this church type was already widespread at the time.

Almeida describes the church dedicated to Mary at Amba Gǝšän as round, with two rows of stone columns inside and a chapel in the center (Beckingham and Huntingford 2016, p. 99). The construction of the church in question was begun by the Solomonic monarch Naʿod (r. 1495–1508) and completed by the Solomonic monarch Lǝbnä Dǝngǝl (r. 1508–1540). Almeida recalls that there was an unsuccessful attempt to burn down the church during the temporary Islamic conquest of the Solomonic Kingdom (1529–1543).10 This implies that the circular church mentioned by him pre-dated this conquest. However, as pointed out by Fritsch (2018, p. 274), an Ethiopian chronicle relates that Amba Gǝšän was destroyed during this conquest, raising the possibility that the church was rebuilt or substantially renovated afterwards (though the church is not explicitly mentioned in this account).11

It should be noted that hand-in-hand with the appearance of the concentric circular church type, pre-existing types of churches continued to be used, and some (such as the churches of Lalibäla mentioned above) continue in use today. It should also be noted that the concentric circular church was not the only concentric church type utilized in Ethiopia. A second type, to which we turn our attention now, is the concentric quadrangular church.

1.3. Concentric Quadrangular Ethiopian Churches

The concentric quadrangular Ethiopian church features a quadrangular prayer hall with a quadrangular sanctuary at its center.12 Different variations of this plan exist. In some variants, a vestibule is built west of the prayer hall. Thus, elements of the structure’s layout are reminiscent of a basilica—a rectangular structure, oriented west-east, with a vestibule (narthex) leading into a prayer hall, while the prayer hall itself is concentric rather than divided into a nave and aisles as in basilica structures. In some cases, the sanctuary is square, while in others, it is rectangular, oriented west–east in accordance with the prayer hall.13

In some cases, prayer halls of pre-existing churches were fitted with a quadrangular central sanctuary, thus converting them into concentric quadrangular churches. One example is the originally basilical church at Asmära, the capital of Eritrea (Krencker 1913, pp. 195–98). A second (Figure 3) is the Great Temple at Yǝḥa, dating from the first millennium BCE, which was probably first converted into a church in Late Antiquity and later fitted with a quadrangular sanctuary.14

Addressing this church type and its development and relationship with the concentric circular type merits a detailed study and is beyond the scope of the present article. Fieldwork, together with a historical study aimed at dating all known examples of early churches with a central sanctuary in Ethiopia, would shed valuable light on the history and chronology of these church types and on the question of which type preceded the other. This question is of central importance for understanding the sources of inspiration of each individual type.

While both church types share a common feature, a quadrangular, central sanctuary, the circular type is a further step away from the basilical heritage of pre-modern Ethiopian church architecture, and hence represents the apex of the “bold innovation” of concentric Ethiopian church architecture. This innovation was not merely a matter of aesthetics. It had a profound impact on how the congregation experiences the liturgy.

1.4. The Liturgical Implications of the Concentric Plan

In earlier Ethiopian churches, based in part or as a whole on the basilica plan, the sanctuary is commonly located at the eastern end, across from the main entrance. The prayer hall, between this entrance and the sanctuary, afforded a clear view of the sanctuary area, which served as a main focal point of liturgy performance, though not of the sanctuary’s interior, the most sanctified location. In concentric churches, the congregation gathers in parts of the ambulatory surrounding the sanctuary.15 Thus, only part of the congregation can view the entrance to the sanctuary, and many congregants cannot see, but can only hear, parts of the liturgy performed near this entrance. I would, therefore, argue that in concentric churches, the architectural aim shifts to a certain extent from accommodating the laity to accommodating the sacred. The sanctuary literally takes central stage, at the expense of affording the congregation a clear view of the liturgy.16

The replacement of temples by prayer houses in Late Antique and early medieval Europe and the Middle East caused a shift in the purpose of religious structures—these were no longer built primarily to serve the deity but rather to serve the congregation and to facilitate the liturgy. They became “Houses of Prayer” rather than “Houses of God”. Instead of a temple that only priests would enter, in which the literal presence of the deity was believed to reside, with the congregation witnessing the offering of sacrifices in the courtyard, the prayer house was, in most cases, accessible to the laity. Accordingly, the central feature of the prayer house is its prayer hall. In this hall, the laity can take part in the liturgy or witness it from within the structure.

Thus, while the Ethiopian concentric prayer house is very much a “House of Prayer”, it also assumes, to a certain extent, a quality of a “House of God”. This is not only true of Ethiopian Orthodox churches. As I have demonstrated elsewhere, Betä Ǝsraʾel (Ethiopian Jewish) concentric circular prayer houses emulated the Jerusalem Temple to a greater degree than their Christian counterparts (Kribus 2023).

2. Suggestions Regarding the Emergence of the Concentric Ethiopian Church Plan

We now turn to examining the possible sources of inspiration for the concentric circular church plan in an attempt to trace its development and understand its symbolism. As stated above, several suggestions regarding the origin of this plan have been raised in scholarship, the most notable of which are outlined here.

2.1. Ethiopian Domestic Architecture as a Prototype

In the Ethiopian Highlands, especially in the regions west and south of Tǝgray, dwellings are typically built as circular structures.17 Thus, it would make sense that a constructional technique that is familiar to the local population would be utilized to construct prayer houses, especially in rural areas devoid of considerable financial resources needed to build more elaborate churches.18 It should be noted in this regard that there are documented instances of Ethiopian circular dwellings with a square chamber within them (von Lüpke 1913, pp. 34–40; di Salvo 1999, p. 77). This chamber divides the interior space into a main room surrounded by four smaller chambers. Thus, not only the circular concentric walls but also the square sanctuary could, in principle, be modeled after domestic architecture. Rather than asking how the architectural plan comprising a square chamber within a circular structure materialized in Ethiopia, we can ask why it was selected for the construction of prayer houses and what symbolic meanings it was endowed with in these religious structures.

It has been suggested that constructing circular churches, building on local constructional expertise, was an effective way to restore Ethiopia’s Christian institutions in the wake of their destruction during the temporary Islamic conquest of Solomonic Ethiopia (Fritsch 2018, p. 287). It should, however, be noted that Castanhoso’s above-mentioned sojourn to Ethiopia, during which he encountered churches that were “round, with a holy place in the center”, began prior to the end of Islamic rule in the northern Ethiopian Highlands. Hence, the construction of circular churches could very well have intensified following the Islamic conquest but does not seem to have been triggered by it.

2.2. The House of the King as a Source of Inspiration

It goes without saying that in the endeavor to understand the symbolism reflected in a given structure, a first and crucial step is to turn, when possible, to the community that built and utilizes it. The terminology that the community uses to refer to the structure and its different components, as well as the ways in which it understands its symbolic meanings, provide valuable insight into the structure. Granted, concepts and terminology can and do evolve with the passage of time, but just as prayers and other liturgical elements often retain elements of some antiquity, so too does religious terminology.

The concentric circular church type is known in Ethiopia as betä nǝguś, i.e., the “House of the King”, and is believed to have been modeled after the round houses of kings and noblemen.19 Other aspects of the prayer house’s terminology will be discussed below. It is notable in this regard that in the Early Solomonic Period, the royal court was, for long periods of time, a mobile court. The royal camp moved from place to place in order to maintain a royal presence in different parts of the realm, to ensure that no one region would need to provide sustenance for such a large population for an extended period of time, and to respond to political and military challenges. At the center of the camp was the king’s tent, surrounded by the various functionaries and military units (Finneran 2007, pp. 254–59; Horvath 1969). Thus, the layout of the camp was concentric. Could this have contributed to the concept of a concentric layout for churches?20

2.3. A Circle as a Symbol

The circular shape has been attributed a symbolic value in numerous contexts and times. Among the themes it symbolized are the world and perfection. Indeed, the circular shape of Ethiopian churches has been compared to both these themes by Ethiopian ecclesiastics.21 It has been suggested that this would have been a factor in selecting the circular shape as an appropriate form for a church. Interpretations in scholarship of the symbolic meaning of the concentric circular church include a meeting between the heavens, embodied by the circle, and the earth, embodied by the square (di Salvo 1999, p. 95; see also Fritsch 2018, pp. 286–87), and an advance towards the sacred, as one moves inwards from circle to circle, from the exterior through the concentric aisles (Pérès 2006, p. 161).

While it is more than likely that the square sanctuary was endowed with symbolism, I would argue that it is less likely that it symbolized the mundane world—the sanctuary is the holiest part of the church, containing the tabot (altar board), which symbolizes the Ark of the Covenant and the Tablets of the Law.22 Hence, it stands to reason that its symbolism would be affiliated with the divine, and not with the mundane. Heldman (1992, p. 234) points out that the square form of the sanctuary in Ethiopian concentric churches corresponds with that of the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem Temple, as outlined in biblical accounts (1 Kings 6:20; 2 Chronicles 3:8). This seems like a more likely source of inspiration, in accordance with other conceptual aspects of Ethiopian Orthodox concentric churches, which stress their affinity with the Jerusalem Temple (see below).23

2.4. Precedents in Nubian Church Architecture

One of the most significant qualities of the concentric circular church is that is concentric—i.e., that the sanctuary is located at its center. Fritsch (2018, pp. 287–92) suggests that the source of inspiration for the central sanctuary can be found in Nubian churches, specifically in the “Cruciform Church” at Dongola, the capital of the Nubian Kingdom of Makuria.24 The construction of the church in question is dated to the ninth century, and it was destroyed during a Mamluk military raid in 1275. At its center is a square chamber, with four columns marking a smaller square within it, surrounding four additional columns which, it has been suggested, supported a ciborium (canopy). At the ends of the northern, western, and southern arms of the cross are doorways, while at the eastern arm of the cross, there is a synthronon (seats for the bishop and clergy), behind which is a closed chamber, under which is a tomb. Prior to the construction of the Cruciform Church, the tomb was incorporated in an earlier, basilica church built on the same spot (Godlewski 2013, pp. 49–52). The excavator, Godlewski (2013, pp. 39–41), identified this chamber as a chapel. Fritsch (2018, pp. 289–90) suggests that this chamber served as a pastophorion,25 while the delimited section at the church’s center, which is the architectural focal point of the church towards which the clergy was oriented while seated, served as the sanctuary and contained the altar. Thus, this church would have contained a central, square sanctuary, a main element of the later concentric Ethiopian churches.26

As pointed out by Fritsch (2018, p. 292), there is a chronological gap between the thirteenth-century destruction of the Cruciform Church at Dongola and the late fifteenth/sixteenth-century appearance of concentric circular churches in Ethiopia. A church that has been seen as a possible forerunner of concentric churches in Ethiopia is the church of Betä Giyorgis (St. George, Figure 4) in the church compound of Lalibäla, which may have been inspired by Nubian precedents (Fritsch 2008, pp. 105–6; 2018, pp. 287–88). This church is cruciform, and hence has a centralized structure, though the sanctuary is located in its eastern arm rather than its center.27 This church certainly represents an important step in the direction of concentric church architecture, but many of the features of the later concentric circular church are not yet reflected in it.

2.5. Emulation of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre has been, for Ethiopian Christians, a source of inspiration and a revered pilgrimage destination, as it has been for Christians throughout the world. The most important focal point of this church is the Tomb of Jesus, located at the center of a concentric structure (Figure 5), the Anastasis (rotunda).28 It has been suggested in the scholarship that the concentric circular Ethiopian church plan was modeled after this layout (Fritsch 2018, pp. 282–86; Pérès 2006; di Salvo 1999, p. 73). I will argue below that while, in my opinion, the Ethiopian concentric circular church is not based directly on the rotunda’s layout, it is inspired by the same architectural concept that served as a prototype for the latter.

2.6. Emulation of the Jerusalem Temple

A source of inspiration frequently mentioned in the literature dealing with Ethiopian churches is the Jerusalem Temple.29 In the past, it was widely accepted in scholarship that the affinity of Ethiopian churches with the Temple was expressed through the former’s tri-part division into an interior sanctuary surrounded by two concentric ambulatories. This division accords, to an extent, with a conceptual division of the church into three sections: a mäqdäs, or sanctuary (the term can refer to a temple, sanctuary, or holy place); a qəddəst, the space outside the sanctuary’s entrance where various aspects of the liturgy are performed and where the laity receives communion (literally ‘the Holy’);30 and a qəne maḫlet, beyond the qəddəst, where church music is performed and to which the laity has regular access.31

Such a tri-part division accords with the tri-part division of the Jerusalem Temple, and the terminology used has striking parallels to that used in the Temple—mäqdäs is equivalent to the Hebrew beit ha-miqdaš, i.e., Temple (in Gǝʿǝz, betä mäqdäs) and qəddəst to the Hebrew qodeš, i.e., Holy, the space adjacent to the Holy of Holies.32 As elaborated elsewhere, the terminology used by the Betä Ǝsraʾel in their concentric circular synagogues is an even closer match to the terminology used with regard to the Jerusalem Temple (Kribus 2023).

The layout of both the First and the Second Jerusalem Temple was, however, considerably different from that of the concentric circular prayer house. The Temple was roughly quadrangular, and its different sections were not concentric but arranged on an east–west axis. Its sanctuary, the Holy of Holies, was at its western end (Patrich 2011; Shapira 2018). Fritsch (2018, pp. 279–82) argues that while a tri-part division of space, an element common to Ethiopian churches, both concentric and non-concentric, can be considered affiliated with the Jerusalem Temple, it is not clear why the concentric plan itself would be considered affiliated with it. This raises the following question: was the concentric circular plan designed to emulate the Temple? And, if so, how did the concentric circular layout come to be identified with that of the Temple? An answer to this question may be found in the Late Antique and Medieval Holy Land, where the concept of the Jerusalem Temple as a concentric structure gradually developed.

3. Concentric Churches in the Late Antique Holy Land

While the basilica plan served as the main prototype for church architecture in the Late Antique Byzantine realm, not all churches in this realm were basilical. One type of church, of significance to the topic at hand, is the concentric (circular or octagonal) church.33 Scholarship has pointed to the inspiration for this type deriving from concentric mausolea structures (burial monuments) in the Roman World, and possibly from concentric structures in additional forms of Roman monumental architecture, such as palace complexes (Patrich 2006a, p. 365; Ward-Perkins 1966). Concentric churches were often built around and in commemoration of a sacred focal point. They thus differed from basilical and basilica-derived churches in that the conceptual and architectural focal point of the church was not a sanctuary at the eastern end but rather the sacred object or place at their center. Some concentric churches featured an apse and bema at their eastern end, thus providing a focal point for liturgy towards the east, comparable to that of basilica churches and differing from and co-existing with the sacred focal point at their center (Patrich 2006a, pp. 365–67).

Such churches are frequently referred to in scholarship as martyria (martyries), a term that commonly refers to churches built to commemorate the burial place or remains of martyrs, though it can also be used more broadly to refer to churches commemorating occurrences of theophany (Avner 2010, p. 32; Ward-Perkins 1966). The Holy Land abounds with holy sites not necessarily connected with burial, and hence several of its concentric churches commemorate these sites rather than martyr remains.34

Two fourth-century examples of commemorative concentric structures are incorporated into basilical church complexes: the above-mentioned rotunda surrounding the tomb of Jesus, part of the complex of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and the octagon, which marked the site of the Nativity in the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem (Patrich 2006a, pp. 364–65). Late Antique concentric churches in the Holy Land not associated with basilica structures include the Church of the Ascension on the Mount of Olives (fourth century, Corbo 1965, pp. 97–114); a round church in Beth She’an (fifth/sixth century, Arav 1989); the octagonal church built over St. Peter’s house in Capernaum (fifth century, Talgam and Arubas 2015); the Church of Mary Theotokos (Figure 6) on Mt. Gerizim (fifth century, Magen 1990); a church in Caesarea (fifth century, Shalev-Hurvitz 2015, pp. 235–51); and the Kathisma Church (Figure 7) on the road connecting Jerusalem and Bethlehem (fifth century, Avner 2010). Thus, the concept of a concentric circular or octagonal church containing and commemorating a holy site was well-established in the Holy Land at the time of its Islamic conquest in 638. But, the link between this type of structure and the Jerusalem Temple had not yet been established.

4. From Bayt al-Maqdis to Templum Domini

Hand in hand with the gradual development of a unique Islamic architectural and artistic tradition, the early years of Islamic rule in the Holy Land saw a substantial degree of continuity of the Byzantine architectural and artistic traditions that had preceded it in the region. Local architects and workers were employed by Islamic authorities, and built upon themes they were familiar with, adapting them to express Islamic concepts. A striking example of this is the construction of a remarkable structure of central importance in Islamic theology and history—the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem (built circa 691–92, Figure 8).

The reasons for the construction of the Dome of the Rock and the multiple messages it was designed to convey have been examined extensively in scholarship and we will, therefore, not repeat all of them here.35 One aspect of the religious symbolism of the Dome of the Rock, and indeed of the entire esplanade on which it was built,36 was its engagement with the esplanade’s and the Rock’s past Israelite heritage. Monotheistic faith in the years prior to the rise of Islam and the legacy of the biblical prophets are considered part of the heritage of the Islamic religion, and the Dome of the Rock expressed this architecturally and conceptually. The rock as the former site of Solomon’s Temple is a recurring theme in Early Islamic tradition (Hillenbrand 2018, pp. 129–32; Kaplony 2009, pp. 105–18), and indeed, the name chosen for the esplanade in the Early Islamic period was Bayt al-Maqdis, literally “the Temple” (compare with the Hebrew beit ha-miqdaš), and al-Bayt al-Muqaddas, literally “the Holy House”. In this way, the Early Islamic Umayyad dynasty, under whose auspices the esplanade was renovated and the Dome of the Rock and the al-Aqṣā mosque built, honored the legacy of the biblical prophets and demonstrated a continuity with it.

As a monument built to honor and commemorate the rock that embodied the biblical heritage of the esplanade, the plan chosen for the Dome of the Rock (Figure 9) was that of a concentric octagonal prayer house. This plan, as we have seen, was the one commonly utilized in the region at the time for structures built above and commemorating a holy place.

Affinity between the Dome of the Rock and the heritage of Solomon’s Temple was not only expressed within the Islamic tradition but rather in all three major Abrahamic religions. For Jews, the Islamic conquest of Jerusalem was a source of messianic hopes. Prior to the Islamic conquest, when the Holy Land was under Christian Byzantine rule, the ruins of the Jerusalem Temple and Temple Mount played a significant role in Christian anti-Jewish polemic. They stood in stark contrast to the numerous monumental Christian churches that dominated the Jerusalem landscape, thus symbolizing the passage of divine favor from Judaism to Christianity. The subordinate status of the Jews was also exemplified by the prohibition of Jews from residing in Jerusalem and the limitations placed on their worship there.37

The early years of Islamic rule in the Holy Land saw a dramatic change in the status of Jews vis-à-vis the Holy City and in the status of the holy site, which was the focal point of Jewish yearning and prayer. Islamic authorities enabled the Jews to return to Jerusalem and establish a neighborhood there. Accounts of the initial uncovering of the Rock relate that the Jews aided the Muslims in locating and uncovering it (Gil 1987). Initially, Jews were allowed to serve in the maintenance of the esplanade, though this right was later reserved solely for Muslims (Gil 1987, pp. 136–38; Kaplony 2009, pp. 109–12).

Various accounts written by Christians during the Early Islamic period identify the Dome of the Rock with Solomon’s Temple (Berger 2012, pp. 55–73; Griffith-Jones 2018, p. 313). It has been suggested that aspects of the architecture of the late eighth-century Palatine Chapel in Aachen, built by Charlemagne, were inspired by the layout of the Dome of the Rock, utilized to demonstrate affinity with Solomon’s Temple and with Jerusalem more broadly. Such elements include an octagonal layout (which, in the Palatine Chapel, features in the interior), above which is a drum pierced by windows and roofed by a dome (Berger 2012, pp. 56–57; Griffith-Jones 2018, pp. 306–19; Kühnel 1995). Thus, Christian architectural expressions of the concept of the Dome of the Rock as the Temple seem to have preceded the Crusades.

Following the Crusader conquest of Jerusalem in 1099, the Dome of the Rock was converted into a church by the name of Templum Domini, literally “the Temple of the Lord”, which commemorated and was seen as embodying the Jerusalem Temple (Hillenbrand 2018, pp. 138–39). The Templum Domini became one of the two major Christian religious focal points in the city, the other being the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The adjacent al-Aqṣā mosque was referred to as the Templum Solomonis or Palatium Solomonis, “Temple of Solomon” and “Palace of Solomon” respectively, and served first as the residence of the king of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, and later as the headquarters of the Knights Templar (Kedar and Pringle 2009).

The concept of the Dome of the Rock as the Temple was not only a matter of terminology—it was reflected in Christian, Jewish, and Islamic art—the Temple was depicted in the form of the Dome of the Rock in various paintings and illuminations from the eighth century onwards (Berger 2012; Krinsky 1970). Thus, the Dome of the Rock was seen not only as commemorating but also as embodying the Jerusalem Temple.38

5. The Concentric Circular Plan as an Expression of Affinity with the Jerusalem Temple

We return now to the question of why the plan of concentric circular Ethiopian churches would be an expression of affinity with the Temple. Given the widespread concept of affinity between concentric structures and the Temple described above, the answer seems clear. The Solomonic Kingdom maintained diplomatic correspondence and commercial ties with both Christian Europe and the Islamic World (Kelly 2020; Krebs 2021; Wion 2020), as well as a monastic presence in Jerusalem. Pilgrimage from Ethiopia to the Holy Land is a well-known phenomenon in the Middle Ages and Early Modern times (Cerulli 1943; Pedersen 2007). Thus, architectural and artistic concepts prevalent in the West and Middle East, as well as the general characteristics of religious structures in Jerusalem, would not have been unknown in Early Modern Ethiopia.

Without contradicting the suggestions for the emergence of the concentric circular Ethiopian prayer house plan put forward in past scholarship (many of which provide a sound and likely explanation for this phenomenon), I would like to suggest the following: A factor in the adoption of the concentric circular prayer house plan was the prevalent concept that this type of plan indeed embodies the Jerusalem Temple. Granted, the plans of the Dome of the Rock and the concentric memorial churches that preceded it are not direct parallels to that of the Ethiopian concentric circular and octagonal prayer house. But, there is a striking similarity in the general concept—a concentric structure with a religious focal point in the center. In the case of the Dome and of Ethiopian concentric prayer houses (both churches and synagogues), the religious focal point is conceptually, in a way, the same:

The Ethiopian church sanctuary symbolizes the Holy of Holies of the Temple, and accordingly contains the tabot, which symbolizes the Tablets of the Law and the Ark of the Covenant. The Ethiopian synagogue sanctuary is referred to as qəddusä qəddusan or qəddəstä qəddusan, literally “Holy of Holies” (Flad 1869, 42–44; Leslau 1951, xxii) and contains, among other liturgical items, the Orit,39 which, like the Ark of the Covenant, symbolizes the Covenant between God and the Israelites. The Dome of the Rock contains the Rock, which is considered the site of the actual Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem Temple.

For the Solomonic dynasty, which derived its legitimacy, in part, from the tradition of its descent from the biblical King Solomon and Queen of Sheba (HaCohen 2009), designing a church according to a plan that embodied the temple built by this king would have been a powerful image, a visual manifestation of continuity with the biblical monarchy.40 This would perhaps explain why such a bold innovation, to use Heldman’s term, was carried out. Such an innovation would have accorded well with theological concepts prevalent in Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity:

Ethiopian Orthodox Christians see themselves as Israelites and descendants of biblical Israelites—the entourage that, according to the narrative of the Kǝbrä Nägäśt, considered the national epic of Christian Ethiopia, accompanied the son of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba from Jerusalem to Ethiopia.41 The Old Testament is held in high regard by Christian Ethiopian society, and many of its commandments, rejected by other streams of Christianity, are considered binding.42 Thus, it is conceivable that an emulation of the Temple in prayer house architecture would have been seen in Solomonic society as an expression of its affinity with its biblical roots.

As I have demonstrated elsewhere, the Betä Ǝsraʾel, basing themselves on the concentric circular plan, designed their synagogues to emulate the Jerusalem Temple to a greater degree than that of Ethiopian Churches. The terminology of the different sections followed that of the Temple more literally. An altar was built in the synagogue precinct, where sacrifices were offered in accordance with biblical decree. The main entrance to the synagogue and sanctuary were from the east westwards, possibly in emulation of the direction of entrance into the Temple (Kribus 2023). While the chronology of the development of Betä Ǝsraʾel synagogue architecture is not yet known, such a literal emulation of the Temple seems a likely indication that the concentric circular plan was indeed perceived in Ethiopia as being affiliated with it.

6. Conclusions

Just as texts tended to travel from region to region, be translated into different languages, and evolve as they crossed from one cultural or religious realm to another, so too did architecture. Religious architecture is a powerful and expressive medium, which, together with the messages it conveyed, frequently traversed cultural and religious boundaries. All three major Abrahamic religions have roots in the Old Testament, and hence, the concept of the Temple as a central, and in the case of Judaism, the central, religious site resonated with them. This created common ground that facilitated an interplay of architectural and symbolic concepts embodying the Temple. Architectural expressions of affinity with the Temple conveyed affinity with the biblical heritage, with God’s divine promise.

The concept of the Jerusalem Temple as a concentric structure is one that all three major Abrahamic faiths contributed to and that developed and acquired new meanings and variants as it crossed from one realm to another. The Israelite/Jewish concept of the Jerusalem Temple as the religious center, and of the rock as the location of the Holy of Holies, the focal point of this center, coupled with the architecture of Byzantine churches commemorating holy sites, served as the basis for the layout of the Islamic Dome of the Rock, commemorating the biblical Bayt al-Maqdis. This commemoration was understood by members of all three Abrahamic faiths, who came to see the Dome as the embodiment of the Temple and depicted the Temple in its form. Accordingly, churches (and in Ethiopia, also synagogues) that were conceptually modeled after the temple were designed with a concentric circular or octagonal layout, and in Ethiopia, also with a central, square sanctuary, possibly, as suggested by Heldman, modeled after the form of the Holy of Holies as described in biblical accounts. These prayer houses served their patrons and communities to express affinity with the Temple, and by extension, with Jerusalem and the Israelite biblical heritage.

To end with a poetic note, the existence of Jewish, Christian, and Muslim prayer houses all modeled after the same general architectural concept to embody the Temple can be seen as a realization of the biblical verse “for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isaiah 56:7). The history of dynamics between the Abrahamic faiths with regards to the Temple and its Mount is not only one of competition. It is also one of shared inspiration, expressed in architecture and art, honoring common biblical roots.