In the dark, expansive catacombs beneath the streets of Rome one might find any number of oddities and hidden things.  From rats, to too-tight crawlspaces, to the long-dead Romans themselves.  But one thing that one might not expect to find is a nearly two thousand year old Jewish painting of the ark of the covenant.

This painting, which depicts the ark of the covenant (said to contain the law tablets given to Moses by god, along with several other holy instruments) and two menorahs dates back to the third century CE.  A time during which Rome still worshipped their old “pagan” pantheon.  Thus the reason for this drawing’s place in the catacombs.  At that time Judaism was not practiced openly in Rome, and instead it was observed in the darkness of the under-city.  If you look at the painting you will notice that it represents only symbols and ritual objects.  There is no narrative to be found here, nor are any figures depicted (specific or otherwise).

Fast forward two hundred years and you have this:

The mosaic floor of the Beth Alpha Synagogue.  Things in the second image have changed a great deal from those in the first.  For one thing, this mozaic is present in a synagogue, a jewish temple, thus indicating that Judaism was being practiced openly.  True, this open practice was likely due to the fact that the Beth Alpha is located in modern-day Israel, and not Rome, but it’s still a significant difference between this piece and the first, location aside.  Additionally, in the central panel we see a Jewish adaptation of the Greco-Roman zodiac.  Which suggests that in the region where Beth Alpha existed, paganism and judaism enjoyed a much more harmonious coexistence than they did in Rome.  Not only that, but if you look at the bottom panel of the second image you will notice another striking difference.  The bottom panel is a narrative.  It shows the “binding of Isaac”.  Whether this difference (from symbols and ritual objects only to a representation of individuals and stories) was the product of the passage of time or that of the difference in location is hard to say, but it is significant nonetheless.