DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.71526#0248
the Limestone Massif. This is illustrated by the church of
Herbet Hasan (507 A.D.), the „baptistery“ of Bäbisqä
(ca. 520 A.D.) and the northern church of Deir Setä,
built during the first decades of the sixth Century (pl.
123; 43b. c; 14d-f).
The repertory of forms of Qalcat Simcän and the in-
novations of the church of Beroea are brought together
most notably than in any other church of the Massif in
the two churches of Deir Setä and in the Transept
Church of El Bärä (pl. 13-18; 19-27).
In these churches as in other buildings of the sixth
Century in the Limestone Massif, the form of leaves with
negative drop-shaped patterns is rarely represented (pl.
16 f. 65a. e). On the other hand, variations of negative
triangular patterns and the new form of leaves with
scroll-elements curling upwards and downwards (fig. 2)
are main forms of Capital carving and as such were in-
serted in deliberate contrast with the notched classicaf
forms of acanthus. The interior of the building is cha-
racterized by extreme variety. This effect was achieved by
the juxtaposition of different types of the Corinthian
Capital within a single row of columns and by an in-
creased combination of forms of acanthus contrasting
with each other (pl. 18-27; 48-51).
The new variations of the Corinthian Capital in the
Transept Church at el Bärä - still unknown to the Hallawiya
- leads to a broad association: namely, the Capital with
enveloping arcading and the Capital with a circular upper
zone or kalathos-c^itA (pl. 22—24). This arcade motif is
the common feature of the capitals of the Transept
Church at El Bärä, of the eastern church of Bäqirhä , and
of the door of the so-called baptistery of Bäbisqä (pl.
42-43; 48d). The impost-like form of the capitals upper
part creates a typological link also to the churches of Kefr
Kilä and Bänqusä (60e; 62b; 73c. f). On the other hand,
the kalathos-c^pitdl. had not only been absorbed in the
church of St. Sergios at Dar Qitä (537 A.D.) and in
the east church of Bäqirhä, but was also employed
in domestic architecture (pl. 49e. f; 97; 107a; 119d).
Being one of the principal forms of sixth-century Capital
carving in Syria, its use was widespread and it became
the main form in the Basilica B at Resafa, begun in 518
A.D.
A major part of the Capital forms of the Transept
Church can be found repeated in the church of St. Ste-
phanos at El Bärä (pl. 31. 34), and undoubtedly the
capitals of both churches were executed by the same
workshop. It is all the more surprising to see that the
forms of the mouldings and of the doors are very dif-
ferent (pl. 26-27, 29). This raises the question whether
the two churches were built at different times.
In fact, there are many indications that the two build-
ings were built only some years apart (Transept church
ca. 530 A.D., St. Stephanos ca. 540 A.D.). There are
serious hints that in both churches local workmen
worked together with workmen called from outside.
That means that not the capitals, but the forms of doors
and mouldings of St. Stephanos have to be regarded in
connection with buildings of regional tradition in the
Gebel Zäwiye, while the corresponding forms of the
Transept Church go beyond those known from Apamene
and show similarities with the churches of group I in the
central parts of Antiochene. This means that the chur-
ches of El Bärä, very different in terms of architecture,
are only linked by the workmen producing the capitals.
Only the Transept Church displays urban influence in its
overall arrangement and in all characteristic forms of
architectural sculpture. Not only does this evidence call
attention to the Situation of both fifth-century churches
at El Bärä, in spite of all their differences one can com-
pare the Situation at El Bärä to the Situation of both
churches of Deir Setä and to the churches of Mecez and
Bänqusä.
The capitals of the Hallawiya raised the question,
whether they had been influenced by the architectural
sculpture of Constantinople, since some of the new
features seem related to metropolitan architectural sculpture
(pl. 9). We noted that main forms of Constantinopolitan
carving were imitated or adapted in Syria and Phoenicia
during the sixth Century (pl. 10. 11), i.e., that it is most
likely to assume a general influence of Constantino-
politan forms of decoration. Nonetheless, it is difficult to
identify the prototypes, seeing that the procedure of
Syrian workshops in creating new forms of leaves and
scrolls was basically different from the procedures applied
by the workshops of the Capital. Raising the issue of the
capitals of Kafr Rüma, Madbaca and Qasr ibn War-
dän (563/4 A.D.), which are closely related with those of
El Bärä and Anderm (pl. 35; 51), I once again return to
the question of the relationship with the architectural
decoration of Constantinople, a question I discussed a
long time ago.
It was on the three-zoned capitals of Kafr Rüma and
Qasr ibnWardän and under the clear influence of Con-
stantinopolitan Capital forms that the traditional rings of
leaves of the Corinthian Capital were replaced by scrolls,
rows of meander and other motives. This means that the
Corinthian Capital continued to be in Syrian workshops
the central form for innovation and transformation of
capitals - much longer than was the case in Constan-
tinople, where the process of creating nonclassical com-
binations of Ornaments began in the first decades of the
sixth Century.
The central position of the Corinthian Capital up
to the middle of the sixth Century has to be seen before
the background, that urban workshops in Syria were
acquainted with the main forms of late fifth-century and
sixth-century Constantinopolitan Capital sculpture.
228
Herbet Hasan (507 A.D.), the „baptistery“ of Bäbisqä
(ca. 520 A.D.) and the northern church of Deir Setä,
built during the first decades of the sixth Century (pl.
123; 43b. c; 14d-f).
The repertory of forms of Qalcat Simcän and the in-
novations of the church of Beroea are brought together
most notably than in any other church of the Massif in
the two churches of Deir Setä and in the Transept
Church of El Bärä (pl. 13-18; 19-27).
In these churches as in other buildings of the sixth
Century in the Limestone Massif, the form of leaves with
negative drop-shaped patterns is rarely represented (pl.
16 f. 65a. e). On the other hand, variations of negative
triangular patterns and the new form of leaves with
scroll-elements curling upwards and downwards (fig. 2)
are main forms of Capital carving and as such were in-
serted in deliberate contrast with the notched classicaf
forms of acanthus. The interior of the building is cha-
racterized by extreme variety. This effect was achieved by
the juxtaposition of different types of the Corinthian
Capital within a single row of columns and by an in-
creased combination of forms of acanthus contrasting
with each other (pl. 18-27; 48-51).
The new variations of the Corinthian Capital in the
Transept Church at el Bärä - still unknown to the Hallawiya
- leads to a broad association: namely, the Capital with
enveloping arcading and the Capital with a circular upper
zone or kalathos-c^itA (pl. 22—24). This arcade motif is
the common feature of the capitals of the Transept
Church at El Bärä, of the eastern church of Bäqirhä , and
of the door of the so-called baptistery of Bäbisqä (pl.
42-43; 48d). The impost-like form of the capitals upper
part creates a typological link also to the churches of Kefr
Kilä and Bänqusä (60e; 62b; 73c. f). On the other hand,
the kalathos-c^pitdl. had not only been absorbed in the
church of St. Sergios at Dar Qitä (537 A.D.) and in
the east church of Bäqirhä, but was also employed
in domestic architecture (pl. 49e. f; 97; 107a; 119d).
Being one of the principal forms of sixth-century Capital
carving in Syria, its use was widespread and it became
the main form in the Basilica B at Resafa, begun in 518
A.D.
A major part of the Capital forms of the Transept
Church can be found repeated in the church of St. Ste-
phanos at El Bärä (pl. 31. 34), and undoubtedly the
capitals of both churches were executed by the same
workshop. It is all the more surprising to see that the
forms of the mouldings and of the doors are very dif-
ferent (pl. 26-27, 29). This raises the question whether
the two churches were built at different times.
In fact, there are many indications that the two build-
ings were built only some years apart (Transept church
ca. 530 A.D., St. Stephanos ca. 540 A.D.). There are
serious hints that in both churches local workmen
worked together with workmen called from outside.
That means that not the capitals, but the forms of doors
and mouldings of St. Stephanos have to be regarded in
connection with buildings of regional tradition in the
Gebel Zäwiye, while the corresponding forms of the
Transept Church go beyond those known from Apamene
and show similarities with the churches of group I in the
central parts of Antiochene. This means that the chur-
ches of El Bärä, very different in terms of architecture,
are only linked by the workmen producing the capitals.
Only the Transept Church displays urban influence in its
overall arrangement and in all characteristic forms of
architectural sculpture. Not only does this evidence call
attention to the Situation of both fifth-century churches
at El Bärä, in spite of all their differences one can com-
pare the Situation at El Bärä to the Situation of both
churches of Deir Setä and to the churches of Mecez and
Bänqusä.
The capitals of the Hallawiya raised the question,
whether they had been influenced by the architectural
sculpture of Constantinople, since some of the new
features seem related to metropolitan architectural sculpture
(pl. 9). We noted that main forms of Constantinopolitan
carving were imitated or adapted in Syria and Phoenicia
during the sixth Century (pl. 10. 11), i.e., that it is most
likely to assume a general influence of Constantino-
politan forms of decoration. Nonetheless, it is difficult to
identify the prototypes, seeing that the procedure of
Syrian workshops in creating new forms of leaves and
scrolls was basically different from the procedures applied
by the workshops of the Capital. Raising the issue of the
capitals of Kafr Rüma, Madbaca and Qasr ibn War-
dän (563/4 A.D.), which are closely related with those of
El Bärä and Anderm (pl. 35; 51), I once again return to
the question of the relationship with the architectural
decoration of Constantinople, a question I discussed a
long time ago.
It was on the three-zoned capitals of Kafr Rüma and
Qasr ibnWardän and under the clear influence of Con-
stantinopolitan Capital forms that the traditional rings of
leaves of the Corinthian Capital were replaced by scrolls,
rows of meander and other motives. This means that the
Corinthian Capital continued to be in Syrian workshops
the central form for innovation and transformation of
capitals - much longer than was the case in Constan-
tinople, where the process of creating nonclassical com-
binations of Ornaments began in the first decades of the
sixth Century.
The central position of the Corinthian Capital up
to the middle of the sixth Century has to be seen before
the background, that urban workshops in Syria were
acquainted with the main forms of late fifth-century and
sixth-century Constantinopolitan Capital sculpture.
228