[172] Figured in Molinier’s L’Emaillerie, Paris, 1891.
[173] Figured in Schlumberger’s Nicephorus Phocas.
[174] See Ongania, Il Tesoro, Fig. 33 and p. 102.
[175] Riant, Ex. Sac. C.P., vol. ii., p. 213.
[176] Paspates, Byzantinae Meletae, p. 285.
[177] Des Dépouilles Religieuses enlevées à Constantinople au xiii siècle par les Latins, 1875, and the fuller work, Exuviae Sacrae Constantinopolitanae, 1877.
[178] Soc. Orient Latin. Séries Géog., vol. v.
[179] Alluded to on a single page of MS. in the British Museum (Cott. Claud. iv.)
[180] In the reign of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, see Ceremonies, vol. ii., ch. xv.
[181] The French translation has Diakonikon: Riant, in Exuv. Sacrae, C.P. says “smaller sanctuary:” the Anon. says skeuophylakium.
[182] This must be the same as Robert de Clari’s “buhotiaous” fastened to the ring of the great door of S. Sophia.
[183] I.e., the iconoclasts, of whom a number of stories are told by the Russian pilgrims.
[184] See this story in Golden Legend, “Exaltation of the Cross.”
[185] Lazarus was a martyr in the cause of image-worship. See Bayet, L’art Byzantin.
[186] Cedrenus, ii., p. 609. Irene gave a cross “distinguished for its pearls”: Theo. Cont., p. 703.
[187] Ongania, Il Tesoro di San Marco, pp. 57, 59. Rohault de Fleury, La Messe.
[188] Exuviae Sacrae Constantinopolitanae.
[190] Theoph. Contin., ed. Bonn, p. 211.
[191] Ibid., Life of Basil, ch. 79.
[192] La Messe, vol. vi., p. 78.
[193] See fig. in Byz. Zeitschrift, 1893, p. 142.
[194] In the figure 18 the attachment for the chain is shown at A, the chain of monograms is taken from Rossi, B shows the provision for the chains in the last example (Fig. 17), where there is a slight mistake, the alternate piercings in the rim being crosses as here shown.
[195] Adapted from a photographic view in A. Riley’s Mountain of the Monks.
[196] Du Cange.
[197] Lib. iii. This was at Milan.
[198] For this and other lamps see especially La Messe and Il Tesoro.
[199] A. Riley, Mountain of the Monks.
[200] P. 154.
[201] Constantinopolis und aer Bosporus, vol. i., pp. 36-44.
[202] The images were restored in S. Sophia on the 19th of February. Pagi. Critica in Universos Annales Baronii, vol. iii., p. 587.
[203] Goar’s Euchologium, 1647, p. 560.
[204] Cons. Porph. Life of Basil, ch. 79.
[205] Leo Diaconus, ed. Bonn, p. 176.
[206] Du Cange, S. Sophia, § 35.
[207] Paspates, Byzantinae Meletae.
[208] Pachymeres, ed. Bonn, i., p. 172.
[209] Hist. Byzan., ed. Bonn, p. 273.
[210] Ed. Bonn, lib. iv., p. 29.
[211] Nicephorus Gregoras, p. 749.
[212] Cantacuz., ed. Bonn, p. 30.
[213] Compare Tozer’s Turkey, i. 97. He says Constantinople is still constantly called “the City” all over the Levant.
[214] Gyllius reports a similar story.
[215] Wright’s Early Travels in Palestine.
[216] “Constantine, the last emperor of the Greeks.”
[217] Brit. Mus. MSS. Add. 6,417.
[218] Salzenberg, Altchristliche Baudenkmale.
[219] Relation d’un Voyage de Constantinople, 1680.
[220] MS. Harl., 3,408.
[221] From Originum Rerumque Constantinopolitarium, variis auctoribus, manipulus, F. Franciscus Combefis, Paris, 1664. The same anonymous description is also given by Banduri, Imperium Orientale, ed. 1711, vol. i.
[222] Evidently meant for lower aisles.
[223] If this interpretation can be accepted for στοαί.
[224] Bricks stamped with long inscriptions of this kind were frequently used: one from Sirmium is mentioned in Byzantinische Zeitschrift for 1894, p. 222: “O Lord Christ, help this city, keep off the Avars and guard Romania and him who writes this, Amen.”
[225] This may mean the thickness of the marble wall lining in some places gilt—if it has a meaning.
[226] σειζαὶ, a network, studded with jewels, suspended from processional crosses, and from the sides of crowns, see Fig. 15.
[227] Reading ἐπὶ for ἀντί.
[228] βοτρυιδόν, “like bunches of grapes.”
[229] φίνες, Graecised form of the Latin fines.
[230] Quoted in Ibn Batuta, Orient. Trans. Socy.
[231] Du Cange, notes on Bondelmontius.
[232] Glycas, Annalium, Pars V., ed. Bonn, p. 498.
[233] Du Cange, op. cit.
[234] Hopf, Chroniques Gréco-Romanes, Berlin, 1873, p. 67.
[235] Altchristliche Baudenkmale von Constantinopel, published by the Prussian Government, Berlin 1854, with metrical version of the Silentiary’s poem by Dr. Körtum.
[236] Salzenberg here suggests that these formerly supported equestrian statues. See his plates ix.-xii. and compare our fig. 29.
[237] Salz. xx., figs. 9 and 10.
[238] All dimensions in this chapter are in Prussian feet, 100 of which = 103 English.
[239] See Salz., plate vi.
[240] Salz., plate vii.
[241] Salz., plates vii., viii., and illustration of stairs in text.
[242] Salz., plate vi.
[243] Ibid., plate xx.
[244] Only a short time was allowed to Salzenberg for its examination. He was convinced it was not a baptistery, but gives no reasons.
[245] Salz., plate xviii., figs. 9, 13.
[246] Salz., plate vi.
[247] Salz., plate vii.
[248] Salz., plate vi.
[249] Salz., plates vi., x.
[250] It is probable, writes Salzenberg, that originally the buttress masses reached only up to the roof of the gynaeceum, level with the springing of the great arches; as Cedrenus describes how Justinian, at the restoration after the fall of the dome, made outside the building, in the neighbourhood of the main piers, above the roof of the gynaeceum four staircases, “cochleas” which reached up to the dome “to strengthen the vaulting.” Theophanes also speaks of new piers which Justinian erected to strengthen the dome. The circumstances mentioned by Procopius seem to indicate that the abutments of the great arches were not sufficient. See our chap. x., § 1, for another interpretation.
[251] These Salzenberg thought later additions, “for the stone projections are not bonded to the piers, and the Silentiary says columns stood in these positions.” We do not so interpret the lines of the poem, and, although Choisy here follows Salzenberg, it is impossible to see, if there were additions subsequent to the completion of the building, how it is that the perfectly symmetrical disposition of the marble panelling shows no disturbance, and the beautiful carved cornice which mitres round these projections has had no additions made to it (our Fig. 47). The straight joints, which Choisy in another place specially notes as a method of Byzantine building, were here most wisely applied; for on one side the great pier was of stone, and on the other the buttress pier is of brick.
[252] Salzenberg conjectures from Agathias that these arches were a later addition made when the dome was restored by Justinian. But without them, as he remarks, there would not have been originally a square base for the circle of the dome. See explanation of original form, p. 210.
[253] Salzenberg assumes from Paulus that “the dome was surmounted by a cross”: the cross was of mosaic inside.
[254] See Salz., plate x. The right-hand side is a section through one of the domical vaults, and the left through the barrel-vault which connects two domical vaults. The plans, plates vi. and vii., and the section plate xi., show how close some of the columns stand to the piers, to which they are joined by small barrel-vaults, intersecting the domical vaulting.
[255] A mistake for vertical circles; the large number of cisterns where the vaults are uncovered make this certain. See our p. 221.
[256] Salz., plate xxiv.
[257] Salz., plate xxiii.
[258] See figure in Salzenberg’s text.
[259] Salz., plate xi.
[260] Preparation for the gold.
[261] Salzenberg’s plate xv., fig. 6. The inclination of the sides of that shown is much exaggerated, if in any case it exists.
[262] Salz., plate xvi., fig. 1, 5.
[263] Plate xvi., figs. 5, 6.
[264] Salz., plate xvii., figs. 12 and 13. Fig. 14 gives the base, fig. 2 a complete column.
[265] Salz., plate xv., figs. 7, 8.
[266] See Salz., plate xv., figs. 1, 4, 5 for lower cornice; plate xvi., 2 and 3 for upper, figs. 3, 4 for dome cornice, fig. 9 aisle cornice. This last, says Salzenberg, “is mended in many places with gypsum, and comes from an earlier building.” We do not know what earlier building could have furnished a quarter of the quantity used in S. Sophia. Is it possible that the whole of it is of gypsum? (See our chapter xii.) The marble skirtings are shown on plates xv. and xvi.
[267] In a note Salzenberg draws attention to Paulus speaking of eight windows in this wall, and conjectures that instead of the five upper windows there was one large opening here.
[268] Salz., plate xx., fig. 4. Fig. 6 is a capital that was found on one of the four parapet posts, and removed at the “restoration”; fig. 7 was not found in S. Sophia; fig. 8 was an isolated capital in north aisle; figs. 9-11 show upper mouldings to the piers of the propylaeum.
[269] Salz., plate xx., fig. 12 shows the underside of the beam in the middle of the west gynaeceum; fig. 15 is the side, and fig. 16 the underside of one in the south gynaeceum; figs. 13 and 14, one in the north gynaeceum.
[270] Salz., plate xiv.
[271] Plate xvii., figs. 1-7.
[272] See Salz., plate xvii. Fig. 3 is the upper capital, fig. 4 the lower, figs. 5 and 6 the base, and fig. 7 the under side of the architrave. Figs. 8, 9, 10 are details of large west window.
[273] Salz., plate xviii.
[274] Plate xviii., figs. 10-14.
[275] See plates vi. and xi.
[276] Salz., plate iii., fig. 7.
[277] Salz., plate xix.
[278] See Salz., plate ix.
[279] Salz., plate xvi., fig. 4.
[280] Salz., plate xvi.
[281] Salz., plates xxi., xxii. Plate xxii., fig. 1 shows the upper frieze and the panels beneath.
[283] Bury, vol. ii., 202.
[284] J. of Ephesus wrote circa 590, R. Payne Smith’s translation.
[285] See also Rambaud, Revue des Deux Mondes, Aug. 1871.
[286] See plan and view in Strzygowski und Forchheimer, Die Wasserbehälter von Konstantinopel.
[287] Imperium Orientale, p. 664.
[288] See Ancien Plan de Constantinople imprimé entre 1566 et 1574, avec Notes explicatives par Caedicius, 1890.
[289] Ed. 1562, p. 91.
[290] Hakluyt Society, 1859, p. 34.
[291] Migne, S.G. vol. 133, p. 695.
[292] Texier figured in the Revue Archéologique, 1845, a small fountain found near the hippodrome to which it probably formerly belonged.
[293] Nicetas, ed. Bonn, p. 857.
[294] An organ is shown on the sculptured base of the obelisk of Theodosius.
[295] MS. Mus. Brit., Sloane 2742, xvi. c.
[296] Procopius.
[297] Hakluyt Soc., p. 36.
[298] Nuremberg Chronicle.
[299] Constantinopolis Christiana, lib. i., ch. xxiv.
[300] La Syrie Centrale, p. 75.
[301] Ed. Bonn, p. 307 et seq.
[302] Nicetas, p. 733.
[303] Quoted by Buzantios.
[304] Ceremonies, appendix ad lib. i., p. 502.
[305] Ed. Bonn, v., p. 266.
[306] Hakluyt Soc. series.
[307] Anna Comnena also speaks of the houses of the Great Church.
[308] See Curtis, Broken Bits of Byzantium, part 2.
[309] Paspates, p. 40.
[310] See Curtis, Broken Bits of Byz., part 2.
[311] It may be mentioned that an Italian cantharus, or font, of the twelfth century, in the possession of Mr. Brindley, has the Latinised form of the same word in an inscription around its rim which reads
Artificum summus cui nullus in orbe secundus Hunc luterem clarum sollerer sculpsit aquae....
[312] Quoted by Paspates, Byzan. Mel. Note on p. 340.
[313] Lanciani, Pagan and Christ. Rome.
[314] Labarte, Pal. Imp.
[315] Pachymeres de Michael Palaeol., ed. Migne, p. 703. See also Du Cange, S. Sophia, § 22.
[316] Inscriptiones Antiquae totius orbis Romani.
[317] Grelot is vague in regard to it. Banduri understood him to mean that the inscription was on the inner water vessels. The Greek patriarch Constantios accepts it as having belonged to the Phiale. Buzantios wildly says baptistery.
[318] An inscrip. in Baptistery Florence, reads—
EN GIRO TORTE SOL CICLOS ET ROTOR IGNE.
[320] The first, he says, “stands by the entrance to an old Bagno,” it was 4′ 3½″ in diameter. “The second stands in the midst of the cistern in the square court of the supposed St. John’s Church.” This was 2′ 6″ in diameter.
[321] Migne, Pat. Cur. Com. Series Graeca, vol. i.
[322] Euchologium, ed. 1647, p. 463.
[323] Ed. 1647, p. 560.
[324] Relation Nouvelle d’un Voyage de Constantinople.
[326] Curtis, Broken Bits of Byz., Part II.
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . .
[328] See P. D. Kouppas, The Building of Byzantine Churches. Ἑλλην. Φιλολ. Συλλ. παραρ. vol. 20-22, p. 38.
[329] For gold tesserae of second cent. see Bull. Soc. des Ant., 1893, p. 76.
[330] Eastern Palestine Memoirs, 1889, p. 172.
[332] From the Hellenic Society’s supplement to their journal.
[333] See also Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 1894.
[334] The inscription states that the work was done while Paul was archbishop. And—
ΜΗΝΙΝΟΕΜΒΡΙΩΙΝΔΙΚΤΙΟΝΙΤΕΤΑΡΤΗΕΤΟΥϹ ΑΠΟΚΤΙϹΕΩϹΚΟϹΜΟΥϲ̣
The vital numerals were defaced, but there seemed no doubt that the last fragment was a part of S (6000) and as the writer states that there was only room for one more letter, SΔ or 6004 (495) is the only year that will fit the fourth indiction. “The architect Bubroff is about to show that the church was built in the fifth century.”
[335] A book on mechanics (περὶ παραδόξων μηχανημάτων) has been ascribed to Anthemius.
[336] Procopius in Pal. Pilg. Text., p. 48.