Produced by Bryan Ness, Turgut Dincer and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Million Book Project)
BYZANTINE CHURCHES
IN CONSTANTINOPLE
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
LONDON . BOMBAY . CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK . BOSTON . CHICAGO
DALLAS . SAN FRANCISCO
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.
TORONTO
[Illustration: PLATE I.
MEDIAEVAL MAP OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY BONDELMONTIUS.
_Frontispiece._]
NOTE ON THE MAP OF CONSTANTINOPLE
For the map forming the frontispiece and the following note I am greatly
indebted to Mr. F. W. Hasluck, of the British School at Athens.
The map is taken from the unpublished _Insularium Henrici
Martelli Germani_ (_B.M. Add. MSS._ 15,760) f. 40.
A short note on the MS., which may be dated approximately
1490, is given in the _Annual of the British School at
Athens_, xii. 199.
The map of Constantinople is a derivative of the
Buondelmontius series, which dates from 1420, and forms the
base of all known maps prior to the Conquest.
Buondelmontius' map of Constantinople has been published
from several MSS., varying considerably in legend and other
details:[1] the best account of these publications is to be
found in E. Oberhummer's _Konstantinopel unter Suleiman dem
Grossen_, pp. 18 ff. The map in B.M. _Arundel_, 93, has
since been published in _Annual B.S.A._ xii. pl. i.
In the present map the legends are as follows. Those marked
with a dagger do not occur on hitherto published maps.
Reference is made below to the Paris MS. (best published by Oberhummer,
_loc. cit._), the Venetian (Mordtmann, _Esquisse_, p. 45, Sathas,
[Greek: Mnemeia], iii., frontispiece), and the Vatican (Mordtmann, _loc.
cit._ p. 73).
TRACIE PARS--GALATHA OLIM NVNC PERA--Pera--S.
Dominicus--Arcena--Introitus Euxini Maris.
ASIE MINORIS PARS NVNC TVRCHIA.--TVRCHIA.
Tracie pars--Porta Vlacherne--[Symbol: cross] Ab hec (_sic_)
porta Vlacherne usque ad portam Sancti Demetri 6 M.P. et
centum et decem turres--[Symbol: cross] Porta S.
Iohannis[1]--Porta Chamici[2]--Porta Crescu--Porta
Crescea--[Symbol: cross] Ab hec (_sic_) porta que dicitur
Crescea usque ad portam Sancti Demetri septem M. passuum et
turres centum nonaginta octo. Et ad portam Vlacherne 5 M.
passuum et turres nonaginta sex--Receptaculum
Conticasii[3]-Porta olim palacii Imperatoris--Porta S.
Dimitri--Iudee[4]--Pistarie p.[5]--Messi p.--Cheone
p.[6]--S. Andreas--S. Iohannes de Petra--Hic Constantinus
genuflexus--[Symbol: cross] Ad S. Salvatorem--[Symbol:
cross] Columna Co(n)s?--Hic Iustinianus in equo[7]--Sancta
Sophia--Hippodromus--S. Demetrius--S. Georgius-S.
Lazarus--Domus Pape--Domus S. Constantini--Sanctorum
Apostolorum--Porta antiquissima mire (_sic_) arte
constructa[8]--S. Marta[9]--S. Andreas--S. Iohannes de
Studio--Perleftos.
F. W. H.
[1] S. Romani?
[2] Porta Camidi, _Vat._
[3] Receptaculum fustarum dein Condoscalli, _Par._
[4] Porta Judea, _Par._
[5] Porta Piscarii, _Par._
[6] Porta Lacherne, _Par._, delle Corne, Vat., del Chinigo (i.e.
[Greek: Kynegiou]) in the xvi. cent. Venetian maps.
[7] Theodosius in aequo eneo, _Ven._ In hoc visus imp. Teod. equo
sedens, _Vat._
[8] Porta antiquissima pulcra, _Par._
[9] St. Ma[=m] (as?) _Ven._ Sts. Marcus, _Vat._
BYZANTINE CHURCHES
IN CONSTANTINOPLE
THEIR HISTORY AND ARCHITECTURE
BY
ALEXANDER VAN MILLINGEN, M.A., D.D.
PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, ROBERT COLLEGE, CONSTANTINOPLE
AUTHOR OF 'BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE,' 'CONSTANTINOPLE'
ASSISTED BY
RAMSAY TRAQUAIR, A.R.I.B.A.
LECTURER ON ARCHITECTURE, COLLEGE OF ART, EDINBURGH
W. S. GEORGE, A.R.C.A., AND A. E. HENDERSON, F.S.A.
WITH MAPS, PLANS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON
1912
COPYRIGHT
PREFACE
This volume is a sequel to the work I published, several years ago,
under the title, _Byzantine Constantinople: the Walls of the City, and
adjoining Historical Sites_. In that work the city was viewed, mainly,
as the citadel of the Roman Empire in the East, and the bulwark of
civilization for more than a thousand years. But the city of Constantine
was not only a mighty fortress. It was, moreover, the centre of a great
religious community, which elaborated dogmas, fostered forms of piety,
and controlled an ecclesiastical administration that have left a
profound impression upon the thought and life of mankind. New Rome was a
Holy City. It was crowded with churches, hallowed, it was believed, by
the remains of the apostles, prophets, saints, and martyrs of the
Catholic Church; shrines at which men gathered to worship, from near and
far, as before the gates of heaven. These sanctuaries were, furthermore,
constructed and beautified after a fashion which marks a distinct and
important period in the history of art, and have much to interest the
artist and the architect. We have, consequently, reasons enough to
justify our study of the churches of Byzantine Constantinople.
Of the immense number of the churches which once filled the city but a
small remnant survives. Earthquakes, fires, pillage, neglect, not to
speak of the facility with which a Byzantine structure could be shorn of
its glory, have swept the vast majority off the face of the earth,
leaving not a rack behind. In most cases even the sites on which they
stood cannot be identified. The places which knew them know them no
more. Scarcely a score of the old churches of the city are left to us,
all with one exception converted into mosques and sadly altered. The
visitor must, therefore, be prepared for disappointment. Age is not
always a crown of glory; nor does change of ownership and adaptation to
different ideas and tastes necessarily conduce to improvement. We are
not looking at flowers in their native clime or in full bloom, but at
flowers in a herbarium so to speak, or left to wither and decay. As we
look upon them we have need of imagination to see in faded colours the
graceful forms and brilliant hues which charmed and delighted the eyes
of men in other days.
In the preparation of this work I have availed myself of the aid
afforded by previous students in the same field of research, and I have
gratefully acknowledged my debt to them whenever there has been occasion
to do so. At the same time this is a fresh study of the subject, and has
been made with the hope of confirming what is true, correcting mistakes,
and gathering additional information. Attention has been given to both
the history and the architecture of these buildings. The materials for
the former are, unfortunately, all too scanty. No continuous records of
any of these churches exist. A few incidents scattered over wide tracts
of time constitute all that can be known. Still, disconnected incidents
though they be, they give us glimpses of the characteristic thoughts
and feelings of a large mass of our humanity during a long period of
history.
The student of the architecture of these churches likewise labours under
serious disadvantages. Turkish colour-wash frequently conceals what is
necessary for a complete survey; while access to the higher parts of a
building by means of scaffolding or ladders is often impossible under
present circumstances. Hence the architect cannot always speak
positively, and must leave many an interesting point in suspense.
Care has been taken to distinguish the original parts of a building from
alterations made in Byzantine days or since the Turkish conquest; while,
by the prominence given to the variety of type which the churches
present, the life and movement observable in Byzantine ecclesiastical
art has been made clear, and the common idea that it was a stereotyped
art has been proved to be without foundation.
Numerous references to the church of S. Sophia occur in the course of
this volume, but the reader will not find that great monument of
Byzantine architectural genius dealt with in the studies here offered.
The obstacles in the way of a proper treatment of that subject proved
insuperable, while the writings of Salzenberg, Lethaby, and Swainson,
and especially the splendid and exhaustive monograph of my friend Mr. E.
M. Antoniadi, seemed to make any attempt of mine in the same direction
superfluous if not presumptuous. The omission will, however, secure one
advantage: the churches actually studied will not be overshadowed by the
grandeur of the 'Great Church,' but will stand clear before the view in
all the light that beats upon them.
I recall gratefully my obligations to the Sultan's Government and to
the late Sir Nicholas O'Conor, British Ambassador at Constantinople, for
permission to make a scientific examination of the churches of the city.
To the present British Ambassador, Sir Gerard Lowther, best thanks are
due for the facilities enjoyed in the study of the church of S. Irene.
I have been exceedingly fortunate in the architects who have given me
the benefit of their professional knowledge and skill in the execution
of my task, and I beg that their share in this work should be recognized
and appreciated as fully as it deserves. To the generosity of the
British School at Athens I am indebted for being able to secure the
services of Mr. Ramsay Traquair, Associate of the Royal Institute of
British Architects and Lecturer on Architecture at the College of Art in
Edinburgh. Mr. Traquair spent three months in Constantinople for the
express purpose of collecting the materials for the plans,
illustrations, and notes he has contributed to this work. The chapter on
Byzantine Architecture is entirely from his pen. He has also described
the architectural features of most of the churches; but I have
occasionally introduced information from other sources, or given my own
personal observations.
I am likewise under deep obligation to Mr. A. E. Henderson, F.S.A., for
the generous kindness with which he has allowed me to reproduce his
masterly plans of the churches of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, S. Mary
Panachrantos, and many of his photographs and drawings of other churches
in the city. I am, moreover, indebted to the Byzantine Research and
Publication Fund for courteous permission to present here some of the
results of the splendid work done by Mr. W. S. George, F.S.A., under
unique circumstances, in the study of the church of S. Irene, and I
thank Mr. George personally for the cordial readiness with which he
consented to allow me even to anticipate his own monograph on that very
interesting fabric. It is impossible to thank Professor Baldwin Brown,
of the University of Edinburgh, enough, for his unfailing kindness
whenever I consulted him in connection with my work. Nor do I forget how
much I owe to J. Meade Falkner, Esq., for kindly undertaking the irksome
task of revising the proofs of the book while going through the press.
I cannot close without calling attention to the brighter day which has
dawned on the students of the antiquities of Constantinople since
constitutional government has been introduced in the Ottoman Empire.
Permission to carry on excavations in the city has been promised me. The
archaeology of New Rome only waits for wealthy patrons to enable it to
reach a position similar to that occupied by archaeological research in
other centres of ancient and mediaeval civilizations. But the monuments
of the olden time are perishable. Of the churches described by Paspates
in his _Byzantine Studies_, published in 1877, nine have either entirely
disappeared or lost more of their original features. It was no part of
wisdom to let the books of the cunning Sibyl become rarer and knowledge
poorer by neglecting to secure all that was obtainable when she made her
first or even her second offer.
ALEXANDER VAN MILLINGEN.
ROBERT COLLEGE, CONSTANTINOPLE.
[Greek: Polis ekklesion galouche, pisteos archege, orthodoxias podege.]
NICETAS CHONIATES.
CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER I
BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE 1