Byzantine Churches in Constantinople Part 28

_To face page 244._]

Paspates[419] agrees so far with this view, but maintains, at the same time, that the building was the church of S. Theodore 'in the district of Sphorakius.' That identification is inadmissible, for beyond all dispute the district of Sphorakius stood close to S. Sophia and not at Vefa Meidan. Muhlmann[420] likewise regards Kilissi Mesjedi as a church of S. Theodore, and identifies it with the church dedicated to that saint in the district of Carbounaria. This is possible, although the Anonymus[421] mentions the Carbounaria before the Anemodoulion and the forum of Taurus (the region of the Turkish War Office), and consequently suggests a position for the Carbounaria much farther to the east than Vefa Meidan. Still the order in which the Anonymus mentions places and monuments cannot be confidently appealed to as coincident with their relative positions.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 81.]

(For other details see Figs. 19, 54.)

To which of the many saints named Theodore in the Greek Calendar this church was actually dedicated is a point open to discussion, but we cannot go far wrong in ascribing it to one of the two most prominent saints of that name, or, as sometimes was the case, to both of them, S.

Theodore the Tiro and S. Theodore the General. The former was a young soldier in the Roman army who was tortured and put to death in 306 for not taking part in the persecution of Christians under Maximian. The latter was a general in the army of Licinius, and won the martyr's crown for refusing to sacrifice to false G.o.ds, and for breaking their images in pieces. He was the t.i.tular saint of the great church in Venice before that honour was bestowed upon S. Mark the Evangelist. His relics were carried to Venice from Constantinople in 1260, and his figure still stands on one of the columns in the Piazzetta of S. Mark, with the attribute of a dragon or a crocodile, symbolic of the false G.o.ds he destroyed.[422]

_Architectural Features_

The church is a good example of the 'four column' type, with an outer and an inner narthex. The former is in five bays, and extends to the north and south, by one bay, beyond the inner narthex and the body of the church. The terminal bays, it would seem, led to cloisters built against the exterior of the northern and southern sides of the building.

Le Noir and Salzenberg[423] show a cloister along the south side of the church, with four columns and an apse at its end. The central bay and the two terminal bays are covered with domes on high drums, without windows. The dome of the central bay has sixteen lobed bays, while its companions have each eight flat ribs. All traces of the mosaics which Salzenberg saw in the central dome have disappeared. On the exterior the three domes are octagonal, decorated with flat niches and angle shafts supporting an arched cornice. The exonarthex deserves special attentions on account of its facade. It is a fine composition of two triple arcades, separated by a solid piece of masonry containing the door. On either side of the door, and on the piers at each end of the facade, are slender flat niches, similar to those which occur in S. Mark's, Venice.

The finely carved capitals of the columns differ in type, the two northern being a variant of the 'melon type,' the pair to the south being Corinthian. They are probably old capitals re-used. Throughout the building are traces of stones from some older building recut or adapted to the present church. Between the columns is a breastwork of carved marble slabs similar in style to those seen in S. Mark's and in S. Fosca, Torcello.[424] The upper part of the facade does not correspond to the composition below it, but follows the divisions of the internal vaulting. It is in five circular-arched bays, each containing an arched window. The infilling is of brick in various patterns. The cornice looks Turkish. While the masonry of the lower portion of the arcade is in alternate courses of one stone and two bricks, that of the upper portion has alternate courses of one stone and three bricks.

Moreover, while the design of the upper portion is determined by the vaulting of the narthex, the lower portion takes a more independent line. These differences may indicate different periods of construction, but we find a similar type of design in other Byzantine buildings, as, for example, in the walls of the palace of the Porphyrogenitus, where the different stories are distinct in design, and do not closely correspond to one another. The outer narthex of S. Theodore may have been built entirely at one time, or its upper story, vaults, and domes may have been added to an already existing lower story. But in any case, notwithstanding all possible adverse criticism, the total effect produced by the facade is pleasing. It presents a noteworthy and successful attempt to relieve the ordinary plainness and heaviness of a Byzantine church exterior, and to give that exterior some grace and beauty. The effect is the more impressive because the narthex is raised considerably above the level of the ground and reached by a flight of steps. 'Taking it altogether,' says Fergusson,[425] 'it is perhaps the most complete and elegant church of its cla.s.s now known to exist in or near the capital, and many of its details are of great beauty and perfection.'

[Ill.u.s.tration: PLATE LXXI.

S. THEODORE. THE CENTRAL DOME, FROM THE SOUTH.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: S. THEODORE. THE WESTERN FAcADE, FROM THE SOUTH.

_To face page 246._]

The esonarthex is in three bays covered with barrel vaults, and terminates at both ends in a shallow niche. The outer arches spring from square b.u.t.tresses. From each bay a door conducts into the church, the central door being set in a marble frame and flanked by two Corinthian columns, which support a bold wall arcade.

The drum of the dome is a polygon of twelve sides, and was lighted by the same number of windows. It rests on four columns, which were originally square, but now have large champs at the angles, dying out at top and bottom. Barrel vaults cover the arms of the cross, and dome vaults surmount the chambers at its angles. As in the Pantokrator (p.

235), the eastern arm is pierced by two windows in the vaulting surface.

The central apse is lighted by a triple window, having oblong shafts, circular on their inner and outer faces, and bearing capitals now badly injured. A niche indents the northern, eastern, and southern interior walls of the apsidal chapels. The windows in the northern and southern walls of the church have been built up almost to their full height, leaving only small openings for light at the top. There can be little doubt that they were triple windows with a parapet of carved marble slabs between the shafts. On the exterior the apse shows five sides, and is decorated by an arcade of five arches and an upper tier of five niches. The lateral apses do not project beyond the face of the eastern wall, but are slightly marked out by cutting back the sides and forming angular grooves. Bayet[426] a.s.signs the church to the ninth or tenth century, the age of Leo the Wise and Constantine Porphyrogenitus.

Fergusson[427] is of the same opinion so far as the earlier portions of the building are concerned. But that date is based on the mistaken view that the building is the church of the Theotokos erected by Constantine Lips. Diehl[428] a.s.signs the church to the second half of the eleventh century.

[Ill.u.s.tration: PLATE LXXII.

S. THEODORE. SOUTH CROSS ARM (EXTERIOR), FROM THE SOUTH-EAST.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: S. THEODORE. THE EAST END, FROM THE SOUTH.

_To face page 248._]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 82.--S. THEODORE. PLAN AS GIVEN BY TEXIER.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 83.--S. THEODORE. PART OF SOUTH ELEVATION SHOWING THE SIDE CHAPEL AS GIVEN BY TEXIER.]

In the library of the Royal Inst.i.tute of British Architects, in London, are four volumes of Texier's sketches and drawings of buildings in or near Constantinople. In that collection is found a complete set of drawings of this church, showing a chapel on both the north and south sides of the building, and even giving measurements on the south side. Texier's drawings are unfortunately very inaccurate, so that little trust can be placed in any of them. In addition to the plan of the church an elevation is given, and two sketches covered with indications of elaborate decoration, but evidently quite imaginary. The chapel on the north side is noticed by no other writer, and was probably added by Texier for the sake of symmetry. That on the south side, as shown by him, differs in some respects from Salzenberg. The only thing certain is that a side chapel did exist here.

This church presents a good example of the greater interest taken during the later Byzantine period in the external appearance of a church. To the exterior of the walls and the apses some decoration is now applied.

The dome is raised on a polygonal drum, with shafts at its angles, and an arched cornice over its windows; the roof gains more diversity of form and elevation by the multiplication of domes, by the protrusion of the vaults of the cross arms and of the apses, thus making the outward garb, so to speak, of the building correspond more closely to the figure and proportions of its inner body. In all this we have not yet reached the animation and grace of a Gothic cathedral, nor the stateliness that crowns an imperial mosque; but there is, at all events, a decided advance towards a fuller expression of artistic feeling. (See Plates LXXIV., LXXV.)

[Ill.u.s.tration: PLATE LXXIII.

S. THEODORE. CAPITAL ON THE SOUTHERNMOST COLUMN IN THE FAcADE.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: S. THEODORE. CAPITAL IN THE FAcADE OF THE NARTHEX.

_To face page 250._]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGS. 84 AND 85.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIGS. 86 AND 87.]

[408] _De top. C.P._ iii. c. 6.

[409] _Esq. top._ paragraphs 110, 114, 124, 125.

[410] Banduri, ii. p. 38.

[411] _Ibid._ i. p. 10.

[412] Const. Porphyr, _De cer._ p. 623.

[413] Banduri, iii. pp. 16, 48.

[414] _Ibid._ i. p. 17.

[415] Const. Porphyr, _De cer._ p. 640.

[416] P. 140.

[417] _Itin. russes_, pp. 105-6.

[418] Banduri, i. p. 16; ii. p. 38.

[419] P. 314.

[420] See his paper in the _Mitteilungen des deutschen Excursions-Club, Konstantinopel_, Erstes Heft, 1888.

[421] Banduri, p. 16.

[422] See _The Monastery of St. Luke of Stiris_, p. 61.

[423] _Altchristliche Baudenkmaler von K.P._ plates 34, 35.

[424] Pulgher, _Les Anciennes eglises de C.P._ p. 23.

[425] _History of Architecture_, i. 458.

[426] _L'Art byzantin_, p. 126.

[427] _History of Architecture_, vol. i. p. 458.

[428] _Manuel d'art byzantin_, p. 414.