The Church of Sancta Sophia, Constantinople: A Study of Byzantine BuildingLethaby, W. R. (William Richard)
Religion
The Church of Sancta Sophia, Constantinople: A Study of Byzantine Building
Lethaby, W. R. (William Richard)
Ayasofya Müzesi
“The description of the church of S. Sophia as it now appears,”
which forms one of the chapters in Gyllius’ († 1555) _Topography of
Constantinople_, describes the church before the addition of these
three last minarets. It is interesting to note that he remarks how
little the building had been altered, “and it is despoiled of nothing,
except a little of the metal work [mosaic?] which shows itself in
great abundance through the whole church. The Sanctum Sanctorum,
formerly holy and unpolluted, into which the priests only were suffered
to enter, is still standing, though there is nothing remaining of
the jewels and precious stones which adorned it, these having been
plundered by its sacrilegious enemies.” This is later supported
by Grelot,[219] who writes, “It is decorated with everything that
human industry and skill could devise to render the work absolutely
perfect.... I say nothing about the beautiful pictures, the faces of
which have been destroyed by the Turks.” It is clear from Tournefort
(1702) and Lady Mary Montagu (1717) that the mosaics were not wholly
obliterated; the latter writes, “the figures were in no other way
defaced but by the decays of time: for it is absolutely false that the
Turks defaced all the images they found in the city.” On the other
hand, an Italian MS. description of S. Sophia in the British Museum,
written in 1611, says, “The Turks took away all the beautiful work and
covered everything with whitewash.”[220] It is evident from Dr. Covel’s
MS., quoted later, that much was destroyed, defaced, and plastered
over. Dr. Walsh tells us that one of the smaller vaults fell in about
1820, scattering its mosaic over the floor.
§ 2. THE ANONYMOUS ACCOUNT.
We must now examine the description of the church by the writer
generally called the Anonymous of Combefis (otherwise of Banduri or
Lambecius). Codinus, who is believed to have died soon after the
capture of Constantinople by the Turks, has so closely copied the
Anonymous that the accounts differ only in a few minor particulars.
Combefis says that the text of the Anonymous was collated by Lambecius,
“who produced it from the royal archives” with the _Chronography of the
Logothetae_, a tenth-century work to which the same account is added
as a separate treatise. Labarte however considers that it was written
in the eleventh century: Choisy assigns it to the fourteenth, a view
with which we are inclined to agree; but in any case we cannot think it
earlier than the twelfth century.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account