DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45594#0083
Kasr Ibn Wardan.
43
of the sixth century in Constantinople, Dr. Strzygowski calls attention to this, as the
result of his observation of photographs. He would doubtless have been even more
impressed with the Byzantine character of the construction if he had known that the
vaults of the triforium gallery were not tunnel vaults, but domed cross-vaults, seperated
by arches with broad soffits, like those common in the churches of Constantinople.
This learned writer, however, seems to prefer to trace the origin of these buildings,
the source of the material used in them, and the habitat of the masons employed upon
them, to Antioch rather than to the capital. Nothing whatever remains of the great
churches of Antioch, and practically the only remnants of the architecture of that great
city to be seen to-day are the walls on the mountain and the aqueduct bridges in a
neighbouring valley; neither of these is built of brick. Even the vaults and cisterns,
connected with the fortifications on the mountain top, are made of rough stone laid
in mortar. Had brick been used on an extensive scale in a city so large as Antioch,
such imperishable material as brick of the quality found at Kasr Ibn Wardan would
have been used again and again, and would still be seen in the buildings of the present
occupants of the site; but this is not the case. I have looked in vain for ancient
bricks in the mediaeval and modern architecture of Syria; the only ancient material of
this sort that I have found has been roof tiling, which is now used, not for roofs, but
in ordinary wall building, mixed with other materials. Antioch was situated in the
midst of good quarries, and I am of the opinion that it was a city of stone, and
that the architecture of the city, during the sixth century, is exemplified in that of the
towns in the suburbs, i.e. the Djebel il-Acla, the Djebel Barisha, and the Djebel Sirnan;
for I cannot believe that such a style as that illustrated by the churches of St. Simeon
Stylites at Kalcat Simcan was developed in the suburban towns in the neighborhood
and independently of the style of the metropolis. Kasr Ibn Wardan was located very
differently; if other material than the native basalt was desired for building purposes,
it had to be imported in any circumstances. Brick was the lightest material to transport,
and the easiest to handle. When used with a greater proportion of mortar than of
brick, as it was in this instance, the quantity of material to be imported was further
reduced. If the architect was trained in Byzantine construction, and if Byzantine vaults
and domes were planned for, it was necessary to have the special material that had
made the development of these things possible. It remains only to be known whether
brick makers or the bricks themselves were imported, and I believe it was the latter.
I have not compared the bricks of Kasr Ibn Wardan with those used in Constantin-
ople, side by side; but from a careful examination of the colour and texture of both
separately, and at times only a few weeks apart, the similarity between the two indi-
cates to my mind that they were burnt in the same kilns, or, at least, in exactly similar
kilns, where brick making was a great industry, which it was not at Antioch. I have
not seen the brickwork at Utschajak in Cappadocia, but there, according to Mr. Crow-
foot’s description1 the core of the walls was “built of rubble; stones, and fragments
of white marble appearing at various points, and this rubble was held together by
wooden beams which were carried all round the building at levels 2 metres apart.”
The brick too seems to be of a ruddy colour, while those of Kasr Ibn Wardan are a
rather pale, cream tint. The bricks in both places have about the same dimensions;
' zc.-j. P. 34.
43
of the sixth century in Constantinople, Dr. Strzygowski calls attention to this, as the
result of his observation of photographs. He would doubtless have been even more
impressed with the Byzantine character of the construction if he had known that the
vaults of the triforium gallery were not tunnel vaults, but domed cross-vaults, seperated
by arches with broad soffits, like those common in the churches of Constantinople.
This learned writer, however, seems to prefer to trace the origin of these buildings,
the source of the material used in them, and the habitat of the masons employed upon
them, to Antioch rather than to the capital. Nothing whatever remains of the great
churches of Antioch, and practically the only remnants of the architecture of that great
city to be seen to-day are the walls on the mountain and the aqueduct bridges in a
neighbouring valley; neither of these is built of brick. Even the vaults and cisterns,
connected with the fortifications on the mountain top, are made of rough stone laid
in mortar. Had brick been used on an extensive scale in a city so large as Antioch,
such imperishable material as brick of the quality found at Kasr Ibn Wardan would
have been used again and again, and would still be seen in the buildings of the present
occupants of the site; but this is not the case. I have looked in vain for ancient
bricks in the mediaeval and modern architecture of Syria; the only ancient material of
this sort that I have found has been roof tiling, which is now used, not for roofs, but
in ordinary wall building, mixed with other materials. Antioch was situated in the
midst of good quarries, and I am of the opinion that it was a city of stone, and
that the architecture of the city, during the sixth century, is exemplified in that of the
towns in the suburbs, i.e. the Djebel il-Acla, the Djebel Barisha, and the Djebel Sirnan;
for I cannot believe that such a style as that illustrated by the churches of St. Simeon
Stylites at Kalcat Simcan was developed in the suburban towns in the neighborhood
and independently of the style of the metropolis. Kasr Ibn Wardan was located very
differently; if other material than the native basalt was desired for building purposes,
it had to be imported in any circumstances. Brick was the lightest material to transport,
and the easiest to handle. When used with a greater proportion of mortar than of
brick, as it was in this instance, the quantity of material to be imported was further
reduced. If the architect was trained in Byzantine construction, and if Byzantine vaults
and domes were planned for, it was necessary to have the special material that had
made the development of these things possible. It remains only to be known whether
brick makers or the bricks themselves were imported, and I believe it was the latter.
I have not compared the bricks of Kasr Ibn Wardan with those used in Constantin-
ople, side by side; but from a careful examination of the colour and texture of both
separately, and at times only a few weeks apart, the similarity between the two indi-
cates to my mind that they were burnt in the same kilns, or, at least, in exactly similar
kilns, where brick making was a great industry, which it was not at Antioch. I have
not seen the brickwork at Utschajak in Cappadocia, but there, according to Mr. Crow-
foot’s description1 the core of the walls was “built of rubble; stones, and fragments
of white marble appearing at various points, and this rubble was held together by
wooden beams which were carried all round the building at levels 2 metres apart.”
The brick too seems to be of a ruddy colour, while those of Kasr Ibn Wardan are a
rather pale, cream tint. The bricks in both places have about the same dimensions;
' zc.-j. P. 34.