DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.27180#0410
PYRAMID AND TEMPLE
exaggerated brightness, which is increased these days by the
maltreatment of the domes, can never have been to the
advantage of the original decoration. Only the frieze of forty
windows in the main dome is justified both from a practical
and from an ornamental point of view. The openings in the
middle walls spoil the frieze and have a gap-toothed look.
I suspect there has been some patching here. In any case,
an old drawing shows a different arrangement of the windows;
but even this document does not give the original disposition
of the period of Justinian. I cannot imagine that Anthemius
wanted any window-opening in these two lateral walls,
especially if he planned these walls as they stand at present.
On the contrary, the surfaces now pierced with windows
were an ideal field for pictures. If the semicircles carried
boldly designed motifs in mosaic, it would be far easier to
overlook the compromise between round building and
basilica. The pictorial rhythm would be an adequate sub-
stitute for recession, and the dignity of the representation
would justify the plane surfaces. Imagine Christ with the
Apostles on one side, as - for instance - in the apse of SS.
Cosma e Damiano in Rome; and as a pendant on the opposite
side, perhaps a group with the Queen of Heaven, as in S.
Apollinare Nuovo or in the cathedral at Parenzo. There is no
lack of patterns for the pictures. Surfaces so eminently
adaptable are hard to find.
The effect of the arcades is immeasurably better in the
round parts. Here alone at a favourable moment can the eye
of the imagination excuse the loss of the mosaics. Our friend,
the architect, found places in the entrance wall where, by
hiding behind a pillar, you were unable to see the lateral
walls and were only aware of the niches with their domes.
You got the illusion that it went further and that even the
middle of the building was made out of similar sections of
domes. Then the building ceased to look like a luxurious
hall. I won’t go so far as to say it was a church again; but
374
exaggerated brightness, which is increased these days by the
maltreatment of the domes, can never have been to the
advantage of the original decoration. Only the frieze of forty
windows in the main dome is justified both from a practical
and from an ornamental point of view. The openings in the
middle walls spoil the frieze and have a gap-toothed look.
I suspect there has been some patching here. In any case,
an old drawing shows a different arrangement of the windows;
but even this document does not give the original disposition
of the period of Justinian. I cannot imagine that Anthemius
wanted any window-opening in these two lateral walls,
especially if he planned these walls as they stand at present.
On the contrary, the surfaces now pierced with windows
were an ideal field for pictures. If the semicircles carried
boldly designed motifs in mosaic, it would be far easier to
overlook the compromise between round building and
basilica. The pictorial rhythm would be an adequate sub-
stitute for recession, and the dignity of the representation
would justify the plane surfaces. Imagine Christ with the
Apostles on one side, as - for instance - in the apse of SS.
Cosma e Damiano in Rome; and as a pendant on the opposite
side, perhaps a group with the Queen of Heaven, as in S.
Apollinare Nuovo or in the cathedral at Parenzo. There is no
lack of patterns for the pictures. Surfaces so eminently
adaptable are hard to find.
The effect of the arcades is immeasurably better in the
round parts. Here alone at a favourable moment can the eye
of the imagination excuse the loss of the mosaics. Our friend,
the architect, found places in the entrance wall where, by
hiding behind a pillar, you were unable to see the lateral
walls and were only aware of the niches with their domes.
You got the illusion that it went further and that even the
middle of the building was made out of similar sections of
domes. Then the building ceased to look like a luxurious
hall. I won’t go so far as to say it was a church again; but
374