The Debate Over the Menorah on the Arch of Titus

The Year: 3831 (Gregorian year 71 CE). The Place: Roman Forum, Rome. Plausibility: Possible fabrication.

On February 9, 1949, Israel's Provisional Council of State decided to adopt the Menorah depicted on the Arch of Titus as the national emblem of the State of Israel. In response, the Chief Rabbi of Israel at the time, Rabbi Isaac Herzog, published an extensive article proving that the Menorah on the Arch is not the Temple Menorah, rekindling the debate about the Menorah's mystery and authenticity.

First, a bit of history: Twelve years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Emperor Domitian decided to dedicate a triumphal arch to his brother Titus, celebrating his victory over the Jews and the suppression of the Great Revolt. The emperor commissioned artists and engineers to meticulously plan the arch, which included reliefs narrating the victory. An ancient Latin inscription on the arch, restored about two hundred years ago, explains: "Descriptions from the Arch of Titus that depict the spoils from Jerusalem".

Indeed, the relief shows defeated and downtrodden Jews carrying the Temple Menorah, the golden altar, and musical instruments from Jerusalem to Rome. The arch stood neglected for centuries and was only fully restored with the rise of Mussolini, the fascist and nationalist leader of Italy. Even today, the arch stands in Rome, narrating the somber story of the Jews conquered by the Romans. For many years, the Jews of Rome refrained from walking beneath this arch.

However, with the arch's newfound prominence, an intense debate emerged among scholars and rabbinical experts regarding the Menorah depicted on it. Is this really how the Temple Menorah looked? Did the artists visually witness the Menorah, or was this an entirely different artifact?

At first glance, it seems quite similar. The Menorah has seven branches and a base reminiscent of the steps on which the High Priest would ascend to tend the lamps. Yet a closer look at the relief reveals several elements that couldn't have been part of the Temple Menorah.

First, Rabbi Herzog argued that during its transit from Jerusalem to Rome, the Menorah's stand broke. The octagonal base seen in the depiction was likely the addition of a Roman-Hellenistic artist, unaware of the Menorah's halachic style, and who constructed something entirely different that bore no resemblance to it. Secondly, the Menorah on the Arch features several animal shapes that not only weren't on the Temple Menorah but were also forbidden. For example, the artist depicted dragons, roaring lions, and sea creatures. Some of these forms are definitive symbols of idolatry. The Mishnah in Tractate Avodah Zarah leaves no room for doubt: "He who finds vessels with sun shapes, moon shapes, or dragon shapes, should throw them into the Dead Sea (i.e., destroy them). Rabbi Yose says, 'grind and scatter them into the wind or cast them into the sea.'" Thus, these kinds of decorations could not have been on the Temple Menorah.

Over the years, various archaeologists attempted to explain the Menorah's appearance as depicted on the arch. Some tried to dispute Rabbi Herzog's conclusions, even suggesting there were multiple Menorahs in conquered Jerusalem. Ultimately, most researchers embraced Rabbi Herzog's clear and substantiated view that although the Menorah may have been seized by the Romans, the model on the Arch of Titus in Rome is far from being the prototype of the Temple Menorah.

Israel's decision to continue using the Roman-Hellenistic Menorah from the Arch of Titus as its official emblem was revealed to be a misguided choice. This Menorah aligns more with idolatry than as a symbol of the Jewish people.