DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.55204#0018
12
THE MOSAICS OF THE NARTHEX
gives comparative measurements and indicates the particular features of each
cross, and Table No. II shows the differences in span and rise of each lunette.
The field of each lunette is slightly concave and the gold tessellae are set into
it not vertically, but with their faces inclined at a slight angle. It is certain that
this irregularity was not adopted in order to economize material—there was no
parsimony here; it seems rather that, as far as this deflexion was intentional, the
aim was to secure a sparkling movement of light and a play of colour that
should suggest atmosphere and even ensure for the crosses some appearance of
solidity or relief. No regularity was noticeable in the angle of the inclination
of the tessellae to the vertical plane; they are set more vertically in Lunette F,
less vertically in Lunette C, and the angle is most pronounced in Lunettes A
and B. The exact slope was sometimes fortuitous. It was certainly sometimes
increased, and in some instances it was produced, less by a conspicuous purpose
to create glitter and liveliness in the mosaic fields than by the shrinkage of
plaster during hardening. It is known that plasters used in the construction
of St. Sophia were prepared with different ingredients and that material used
for the preparation was of diverse origins. One effect of these variations
was to produce distinct degrees of contraction and to bring as a consequence
visibly different tilting to the tessellae. The unity of the gold surface of the back-
grounds has been dimmed by the occasional scaling of the tessellae through
atmospheric influences, but where in the original firing the fusing of the golden
membrane was well effected, no loss of the layer of gold ensued. Thus, in
Lunette D, the happy manufacture of the cubes ensured the perfect adhesion
of the gilding to the tessellae, but in the different vaults and lunettes the cubes
have frequently shed their gold surface. In such instances the field is left pitted.
The principles of technique observable throughout the vaults, the cross-
bearing lunettes, and soffits are the same, but the work was executed by many
hands. The mosaicists worked ardently and in accordance with their personal
propensities; some handled the tessellae with far greater care and economy than
others; there are instances where the workman in following his pattern even
assembled the fragments of each broken cube before setting it in its position;
in other places, for example in the vault of Lunette E and of Lunette F, the
artificer set his tessellae in a series of segmented concentric circles. The width
of the joints between the tessellae is not constant in any lunette, and, some-
times, not even in the limited section of a cross. It varies from about one-third
to the total width of a tessella.
Another cause of the difference in aspect of the mosaics is to be sought in the
nature of the cubes themselves. When the vitreous substances from which they
THE MOSAICS OF THE NARTHEX
gives comparative measurements and indicates the particular features of each
cross, and Table No. II shows the differences in span and rise of each lunette.
The field of each lunette is slightly concave and the gold tessellae are set into
it not vertically, but with their faces inclined at a slight angle. It is certain that
this irregularity was not adopted in order to economize material—there was no
parsimony here; it seems rather that, as far as this deflexion was intentional, the
aim was to secure a sparkling movement of light and a play of colour that
should suggest atmosphere and even ensure for the crosses some appearance of
solidity or relief. No regularity was noticeable in the angle of the inclination
of the tessellae to the vertical plane; they are set more vertically in Lunette F,
less vertically in Lunette C, and the angle is most pronounced in Lunettes A
and B. The exact slope was sometimes fortuitous. It was certainly sometimes
increased, and in some instances it was produced, less by a conspicuous purpose
to create glitter and liveliness in the mosaic fields than by the shrinkage of
plaster during hardening. It is known that plasters used in the construction
of St. Sophia were prepared with different ingredients and that material used
for the preparation was of diverse origins. One effect of these variations
was to produce distinct degrees of contraction and to bring as a consequence
visibly different tilting to the tessellae. The unity of the gold surface of the back-
grounds has been dimmed by the occasional scaling of the tessellae through
atmospheric influences, but where in the original firing the fusing of the golden
membrane was well effected, no loss of the layer of gold ensued. Thus, in
Lunette D, the happy manufacture of the cubes ensured the perfect adhesion
of the gilding to the tessellae, but in the different vaults and lunettes the cubes
have frequently shed their gold surface. In such instances the field is left pitted.
The principles of technique observable throughout the vaults, the cross-
bearing lunettes, and soffits are the same, but the work was executed by many
hands. The mosaicists worked ardently and in accordance with their personal
propensities; some handled the tessellae with far greater care and economy than
others; there are instances where the workman in following his pattern even
assembled the fragments of each broken cube before setting it in its position;
in other places, for example in the vault of Lunette E and of Lunette F, the
artificer set his tessellae in a series of segmented concentric circles. The width
of the joints between the tessellae is not constant in any lunette, and, some-
times, not even in the limited section of a cross. It varies from about one-third
to the total width of a tessella.
Another cause of the difference in aspect of the mosaics is to be sought in the
nature of the cubes themselves. When the vitreous substances from which they