The Double-Shell Tetraconch Building at Perge in Pamphylia and the Origin of the

Architectural Genus
Author(s): W. Eugene Kleinbauer
Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers , 1987, Vol. 41, Studies on Art and Archeology in Honor
of Ernst Kitzinger on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday (1987), pp. 277-293
Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1291566

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT
PERGE IN PAMPHYLIA AND THE ORIGIN OF THE
ARCHITECTURAL GENUS*

W. EUGENE KLEINBAUER

About 1955 John B. Ward-Perkins first visited on the other three sides of the central square.2 A
Perge in Pamphylia and examined the ruins broken black-gray granite(?) shaft resting on a base
of a double-shell centralized structure lying in the stood in the east exedra (but not necessarily in its
northwest quarter of the city. His field notes and original position), and fragments of other shafts
sketch plan of the ruins (Fig. 1) make the following were to be seen in the vicinity. Scarce as they are,
observations: "The walls of the central element the visible remains suggest that all four exedrae
consist of two faces of good reused limestone ma-into the ambulatories through segmental
opened
sonry with a concreted core of odd rubble. The screened with a pair of columns. The
openings
outer walls are of rather haphazard piers outer of ma-walls, which are not quite as thick as and are
sonry alternating with stretches of loosely more mor-poorly preserved than the inner ones, may
tared rubble. In other words the breaks in the cen- have closely repeated the tetraconch configuration
tral walls are far less clear and I would not draw of the inner walls, as is suggested in Ward-Perkins'
too many conclusions from the incidence of indi- plan. Yet it should be noted that nothing survives
vidual blocks. There may have been a door at the above ground of the outer south wall. These walls
west end. There obviously was not towards the are coeval with the inner shell, for the same large
east."'
limestone blocks occur. Although the walls of the
When I visited Perge in 1969 I was ablestructure to were repaired at some point, the spolia
confirm what Ward-Perkins had seen. Although used in their construction are original elements. It
the site was heavily overgrown, remains of bothisthe impossible to say whether doors pierced the
inner and outer shells of an aisled tetraconch outer segmental walls to the north and south. The
building were visible; those of the inner walls stood
only evidence of any neighboring structure is the
to a height of ca. 3 m (Fig. 2). Impressively large, so-called palaestra to the south (see below). Finally,
the edifice measured about 33.5 m in length.the Thebuilding was single-storied; galleries did not
central unit measures about 10 m on a side, its cor- the ambulatories.
surmount
ners bounded by powerful angled walls about 1.5
Ward-Perkins' restored plan of the building sug
m in thickness. A very shallow bay separated the
gests that it was covered by a central dome. Al-
eastern exedra from this core; such a bay is though absentthe walls of both shells seem to be thick
enough to withstand the thrusts exerted by a ma-
*The term genus is used in this paper not in any biological sonry dome, the pair of walls at the western end of
sense, implying an orderly development of the species in time
(such a natural progression for tetraconchs is in fact herein de-
the central element is designed differently from
nied), but to refer to a class of buildings marked by the same
salient double-quatrefoil layout. Genus is analogously used by 2A much deeper bay is seen in the "approximate" sketch plan
scholars examining the development of the basilican building in (not drawn to scale) of the inner shell which was published by
the late antique period: see, e.g., R. Krautheimer, "The Con- H. Buchwald, "Western Asia Minor as a Generator of Architec-
stantinian Basilica," DOP 21 (1967), 115-40. Krautheimer also tural Forms in the Byzantine Period: Provincial Back-Wash or
refers to the architectural genus of the double-shell tetraconchs
Dynamic Center of Production?" JOB 34 (1984), 206, fig. 4.
and octaconchs: Three Christian Capitals: Topography and Politics Buchwald visited the site in 1983. For the double-shell concept
(Berkeley, 1983), 86.
'Private correspondence, 1965. used in this paper, see W. L. MacDonald, The Pantheon: Design,
Meaning, and Progeny (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 105.

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 278 W EUGENE KLEINBAUER

that at the eastern end and strikes me as too insub-

laestra, Lanckoronski found evidence only of a
stantial to support a masonry dome. The visible re- peristyle courtyard. Today no remains of any other
mains of the eastern walls appear homogeneous, interior elements are visible.
so that they seem not to have been modified afterApart from the Hellenistic circuit walls, the pa-
the initial construction of the edifice. Hence the
laestra is the earliest dated monument in the city.6
eastern exedra was probably vaulted by a masonry
A bilingual inscription records a dedication to Em-
semidome, though no fragments of a dome or
peror Claudius (or Nero) by C. Iulius Cornutus
other masonry coverings were to be seen at the site
and his wife and freedman.7 The Greek inscrip-
in 1969. Unless the tetraconch was originally hy-tions were placed on the street entrance over the
paethral, the central element may therefore havedoors and windows of the south wall, and the Latin
been covered by a squat masonry tower with on
a the side.8 C. Iulius Cornutus was a member of
wooden roof.3 And perhaps wooden roofs shel-
the cream of Anatolian aristocracy and is asso-
tered the other three exedrae and even the ambu- ciated with other donations of some pretensions.9
latories.
Later, when Emperor Hadrian erected the colon-
The first visitor to publish a plan of the tetra-naded decumanus maximus of the city, the palaestra
conch was Pierre Tr6maux (Fig. 3).4 Although theaffronted it.1?
site may have been less overgrown in his day, his The palaestra is the largest structure recorded
plan of the building, while correctly indicating ainside the city walls. Its south wall extends for 76.2
double-shell layout, is inaccurate in several re- m." That the complex was originally built to func-
spects. It shows a perfectly symmetrical design tion as a palaestra was already questioned by nine-
without the shallow eastern bay recorded in Ward-teenth-century travelers to the site. In Roman ar-
Perkins' plan, as well as a pair of columns not only chitecture a palaestra normally formed part of a
in each of the four inner conchs but also in each of gymnasium, and its sides were taken up by cham-
the outer segmental walls. It also suggests that the bers serving as exercise rooms and school rooms.'2
tetraconch formed one of two structures standing Since remains of such rooms at Perge are wanting,
inside of a large rectangular enclosure which Tr6-
maux terms a "palaestra (?)." While this identifica-6The standard work on Perge remains Lanckoronski, loc. cit.
See also A. M. Mansel and A. Akarca, Pergede kazilar ve Araftir-
tion of the complex has remained problematical
malar: Excavations and Researches at Perge (Ankara, 1949); G. E.
(see below), the tetraconch was not enclosed by, but
Bean, Turkey's Southern Shore: An Archaeological Guide (London,
1968), 45 if; idem, "Perge," in The Princeton Encyclopedia of Clas-
stood outside of, the walls of the palaestra. This
sical Sites, ed. R. Stillwell (Princeton, 1976), 692-93; J. B. Ward-
was first established by K. G. Lanckoronski who Perkins, Roman Imperial Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1981),
visited Perge in the 1880s and who published a
299-302; and the summaries of excavations of selected sites at
Perge by A. M. Mansel, "Bericht uber Ausgrabungen und
plan of the city ruins in 1890 (Fig. 4).5 While
Untersuchungen in Pamphylien," AA (1956), 34-120, esp. 99
Lanckoronski confirmed Tr6maux's observation if; AA (1975), 49-96, esp. 57-96. For a history of the city, see
that the tetraconch was exactly aligned on the cen-A. Pekman, Perge tarihi; History of Perge, Tuirk Kurumu Yayin-
larindan, VII. Seri-64, Antalya B61gesinde Arastirmalar 9,
tral axis of the palaestra, he found that it was situ-
Researches in the Region of Antalya 9 (Ankara, 1973).
ated just to the north of its northern perimeter 7IGRRP2, III, no. 789. C. C. Vermeule, Roman Imperial Art in
wall and was connected to this wall by a flight of
Greece and Asia Minor (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 489, believes
stairs. Today no trace of any such stairs is tothat
be the building, which he identifies as a "gymnasium(?)," may
have originally honored Caligula, "at least on its oldest side."
seen, and Ward-Perkins in litteris doubted that the8This Cornutus also similarly honored Claudius (or Nero) on
tetraconch was physically connected to the palaes-
the epistyle of the West Gate of Perge (CIL, III, 6734).
tra. Concerning the interior disposition of the pa-9For the Cornutus family, see S. Jameson, "Cornutus Tertul-
lus and the Plancii of Perge,"JRS 55 (1965), 54-58; S. Mitchell,
"The Plancii in Asia Minor," JRS 64 (1974), 27-39, esp. 35 ff.
:I thank Stephen Sinos for discussing this problem with me.10Vermeule, op. cit., 489. Exactly how the south wall of the
Like Ward-Perkins, Buchwald, op. cit., 206 note 25, recon-palaestra was connected, if at all, to the colonnaded street has
structs masonry coverings. For a parallel to what I am propos-been established.
not

llLanckoronski, op. cit., figs. 26, 30.The agora (or Mac

ing, see G. H. Forsyth, "Architectural Notes on a Trip through
lum?) near the Hellenistic Gate, excavated in 1970-72, mea-
Cilicia," DOP 11 (1957), 230 f; M. Gough, ed., Alahan: An Early
sures 75.92 x 75.90 m (Mansel, AA [1975], 76).
Christian Monastery in Southern Turkey Based on the Work of Michael
Gough, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Studies and 12For the Roman gymnasium, see J. Delorm6, Gymnasion:
Texts 73 (Toronto, 1985), 112 f.
Etude sur les monuments consacrts tz l'tducation en Grice (des origines
& l'Empire romaine), BEFAR 196 (Paris, 1960), esp. 198, 321, 423,
'P. Trmaux, Exploration archtologique en Asie Mineure (Paris,
1865-68), III, pl. I (of the Perga-Mourtana fasc.). 476; J. Delorm6 and W. Speyer, RAC 97-98 (1984), 155-76, s.v.
5K. G. Lanckoronski, ed., Stiidte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens,"Gymnasium,"
in esp. 173, for the Christian conversion of pagan
collaboration with G. Niemann and E. Petersen (Vienna, 1890), gymnasia. The "palaestra" at Perge is cited in neither of these
I, 43 note 1 and figs. 26, 30. studies.

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 279

the function of the complex remains inthe

chips in doubt. Its (Fig. 5).17 The tetraconch
vertical joints
size and location clearly indicate that
cannotitbe was a most
associated with the fine marble construc-
important civic building of the early tion empire.'3
that makes itsPos-appearance in Perge under
sibly it created a context for the presentation of the
Hadrian.'8 Nor is its masonry like the rebuilding in
Imperial Cult.'4 brick of the peripteral "tholos" in the center of the
The exact alignment of the tetraconch
so-called agora on the
(or macellum?), near the Hellenis-
tic Gate
central axis of the palaestra suggests that of the
Perge, which Mansel attributes to the
latter
was well preserved and still functioning whenperiod.'9
"early Byzantine" the The absence of clamp
tetraconch was constructed, but the function
or dowel holesof the
in the surviving masonry of the tet-
palaestra may have changed duringraconch
the indicates that the walls were never faced
interval.'5
It may be surmised that if the palaestra
with marbleremained
plaques. Exactly when spolia were in-
a secular complex, even if its exact purpose
troduced was
into the construction of buildings at
altered over the years, then thePerge
tetraconch
has not beenwas established. They occur in Ba-
probably also, at least at the outset,
silica B,aa church
secular or
which Rott dated to the fourth
pagan building. Since the preservedcentury,wallsand of
theythe
are characteristic of the Byzan-
palaestra disclose no trace of Christianization,
tine ruins on the this
acropolis above the palaestra.2?
identification receives some support. ReusedOnmaterials
the other were also incorporated in repairs
hand, any evidence of Christian usage made toofthethe
large site
Baths to the southwest of the
would probably have been eradicated inpossibly
palaestra, more of re-
the early third century A.D.
cent centuries.'6 Quite clearly, excavations are has not been deter-
The date of these repairs
needed to clarify this and other pressing questions
mined. For now, it is reasonable to assume that
about the site. spolia began to be used at Perge no earlier than th
The technique of construction of the tetraconchfourth century, and this may be taken as a tentative
proves that it is not coeval with the palaestra but
terminus post quem for the tetraconch.2'
was erected subsequently. Whereas the palaestra
Do other structures laid out as aisled tetraconchs
provide a clue to the dating and the original func-
walls are constructed of fine dressed limestone ma-
sonry, the walls of the tetraconch incorporate not
only large limestone blocks but also rubble and
'7Lanckoronski, op. cit., 169, no. 41, publishes the fragmen-
reused classical elements, with bricks and brick tary inscription carved on a reused architrave, which was still in
situ in 1969, on the south side of the northeast section of the
inner shell. Three of these pieces measured 1.60, 1.45, and 1.05
ls The Pergaean "palaestra" calls to mind Building M at Side,
m in length and 0.43 m in height. Lanckoronski wondered
a monumental rectangular structure (88.5 x 69.2 m) whether
with a the tetraconch was erected on the site of a destroyed,
peristyle courtyard. Its northeast side comprised three cham-
preexisting building (ibid., 42 f); nothing visible at the site today
bers: a large central hall (a "Kaisersaal") flanked by a bears
pair this
of out.
colonnaded rooms. But see note 14 below.
'8Ward-Perkins, Roman Imperial Architecture, 299 f.
" For the special imperial sites in Asia Minor, often known as'9Mansel, AA (1975), 83, fig. 47. The "tholos" became a
Sebasteion or Kaisereion, see S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power: The
domed church.
Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (Cambridge, 1984), 133-69. 20 H. Rott, Kleinasiastische Denkmidler (Leipzig, 1908), 50 (
That the edifice at Perge had been built as a private Claud- is Basilica N,, in Lanckoronski's city plan, my Fig. 4). Basi
ianum is suggested by F. K. Yeguil, "A Study in Architectural (Lanckoronski's Basilica N,) preserves spolia and is also
Iconography: Kaisersaal and the Imperial Cult," ArtB 64 (1982), by Rott to the 4th century (ibid.), but R. Krautheimer,
19 note 63. Building M at nearby Side, an Antonine structure Christian and Byzantine Architecture, 3d ed. rev. (Harmondsw
(see note 13 above) is another example of an independent por- 1981), 116, fig. 62, places it in the 5th or 6th century, and
ticus building in Asia Minor whose use and purpose are difficult man, op. cit., 99, in the 6th century. For the ruins on the ac
to pin down (ibid.). A. M. Mansel, Side (Ankara, 1978), 169-86,
olis incorporating spolia, see Mansel and Akarca, op. cit.
figs. 184-204, identified Building M as a state agora, and the
figs. 95, 101-2. Impost capitals found here are pre-iconocl
center hall on the northeast side a Kaisersaal (Imperator Salonu).21 For the use of spolia in the structures of the episcopal
Do these buildings hark back to an Italian source? Compare the ace at Side, which has been attributed to the 5th or 6th cent
large, single-shelled circular temple, of unknown dedication see A. M. Mansel, Side. 1947-1966 Yillari Kazilari ve araytir
and late Severan date, at Ostia: C. C. Briggs, "The 'Pantheon'rinin sonuplari, Turk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari, V. Seri-S
Antalya Bolgesinde Arastirmalar 10 (Ankara, 1978), 69,
of '5Changes
Ostia ... ,"inMAAR 8 (1930), 161-69.
the functions of large public Roman buildings 72; B. Brenk, Spaitantike und frithes Christentum (Frank
are well known in Asia Minor and Greece-e.g., the gymnasium 1977), 165, no. 29. Buchwald, loc. cit., rules out a p
complex in the Agora at Athens. Constantinian dating for the Pergaean tetraconch on acc
'6Buchwald, loc. cit., identifies it as a church because of its
of its use of spoils. Cf. F. W. Deichmann, Die Spolien in der s
eastern bay. For early Christianity and the survival of paganismantiken Architektur, SBMtinch, Phil.-hist.Kl. (1975), Heft 6;
in late antique Perge, see Pekman, op. cit., 43 if, 97 ff. I have
"Siule und Ordnung in der frtihchristlichen Architektur,
been unable to consult E. Galanis, 'H f-9yt rig I-I fl pqia(cLg.55 (1940), 114-30, rpr. in his Rom, Ravenna, Konstantinopel
her Osten. Gesammelte Studien zur splitantiken Architektur, Kuns
1v043uX.j oTy 3OXoLktx Xo L i XX.To1 ortLT l oioacL TTG 69XcCcag
Geschichte (Wiesbaden, 1982), 159-86.
i6X.0g, Analecta Vlatadon 40 (Thessaloniki, 1983).

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 280 W EUGENE KLEINBAUER

tion of the building simple at to Perge?

complex or from Twenty-two
complex to simple. The
such double-shell edifices securely dated are
examples known throug
prove that no linear pat-
the Mediterranean basin and beyond.
tern of development marks their formsThey
in time. In are
corded in Italy (at Milan size, theand
presence at
or absence
Canosa of galleries
inaboveApu
in Greece and the Balkans (at Athens, Lake Och- their ambulatories, the method of construction
rid, Perushtitsa, and Adrianople), in Egypt (two at and roofing, whether vaulted in masonry or cov-
Abu Mina), in Syria and Mesopotamia (at Seleucia ered with timber roofs, the form of their interior
Pieria, Apamea, Bosra, Aleppo, Rusafa, Akdegir- and exterior decoration, they exhibit no Darwin-
men Htiytik, and Amida), the south coast of Asia ian-like evolution. Other genera in late Antiquity
Minor (Corycus), in Armenia (at Zvartcnocc, Bana and Byzantium, such as the aisled basilica or cross-
[Banac], and IBhani), and in Soviet Azerbajdian (at in-square church, also fail to appear chronologi-
Lekit).22 The salient features of some of these ex- cally in a predictable manner. Suffice it to draw
amples are known with certainty, those of others attention to the importance of local conditions re-
only from reconstructions. Still, all belong to the shaping the configuration of an imported model.
same architectural genus. In all of these buildings In adapting a prototype to a new foundation, local
the central core of the edifice was square (or ob- officials had to take cognizance of local require-
long), its corners marked off by L-shaped piers, ments, resources, and other capabilities. These
with an exedra of columns or piers springing out- factors altered the prototype so fundamentally as
ward from the center of each of the four sides. (In to obfuscate a visible association between exemplar
the examples in the Balkans, the eastern exedra is and "copy." Moreover, even in late Antiquity, as to-
replaced by an apse opening directly off the core.) day, architects would have wanted to express them-
Ambulatories envelop this quatrefoil core on three selves in the redesigning of models. Such a process
or four sides, and they are enclosed by perimeter of adaptation is historically documented in late
walls which are either straight or echo the shape of Antiquity in, say, the foundation of the Holy Sep-
the quatrefoil core. Galleries are either present or ulcher compound at Jerusalem, where Emperor
wanting. And the auxiliary chambers attached to Constantine, while supplying the funds and his
the main body of the building vary widely, depend- imperial office probably the plan (see below), left it
ing upon local needs and practices. to the local bishop, Macarius, to work out the de-
Methodologically it is wrongheaded to compare tails, such as the liturgical disposition of the com-
the arrangement of the characteristic formal ele- pound.24 A related process was surely at work in
the numerous medieval "copies" of the Anastasis
ments of these buildings for the purpose of trying
to establish the date of any one of them.23 Al- Rotunda at Jerusalem which, as Richard Kraut-
though these buildings are members of a distinc- heimer demonstrated long ago, bear little formal
tive architectural genus, they did not evolve from relationship to their distinguished prototype.25
We may wonder for what reason or reasons the
aisled tetraconch edifices were built. With one pos-
2 I published a map of these sites in DOP 27 (1973), fig. 17,
opp. 113. Plans of most of these buildings are conveniently pub- sible exception, all recorded examples of this ge-
lished by P. Grossmann, "Die zweischaligen sp~itantiken Vier- nus were definitely erected as church buildings.26
konchenbauten in Agypten und ihre Beziehung zu den
gleichartigen Bauten in Europe und Kleinasien," in Das rbmisch-
2 See p. 289 below.
byzantinische Agypten. Akten des Internationalen Symposions 26.-30. 2SR. Krautheimer, "Introduction to an 'Iconography of
September 1978 in Trier (Mainz, 1983), fig. 3. The aisled tetra-
conch at Lin on Lake Ochrid in Albania has been published Medieval Architecture',"JWarb 5 (1942), 1-33, rpr. in his Studies
only in part. Evidently it resembles quite closely the tetraconch in Early Christian, Medieval and Renaissance Art (New York, 1969),
on the Yugoslavian side of the lake, even though it is termed a 115 if, with Postscript.
basilica in Albanian reports. See note 26 below. For a prelimi- 26For the purposes of the Syrian examples, see my paper
nary excavation report on the tetraconch at Akdegirmen Hu- "The Origin and Functions of the Aisled Tetraconch Churches
in Syria and Northern Mesopotamia," DOP 27 (1973), 89-114;
ytik, near the Euphrates in southeastern Turkey, see H. Can-
demir and J. Wagner, "Christliche Mosaiken in der nordlichen and M. M. Mango, "The Architecture of the Syriac Churches,"
Euphratesia," in Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens: Fest- in Architecture of the Eastern Churches, ed. J. M. Hornus (Birming-
ham, 1981), 13-26. For those of the examples in Armenia, see
schrift filr Friedrich Karl D6rner zum 65. Geburtstag am 28. Februar
1976, ed. S. Sahin, E. Schwertheim, and J. Wagner (Leiden, my paper "Zvart'nots and the Origins of Christian Architecture
1978), I, 205 if, text fig. 1 (plan), pls. LXXIV-LXXIx; H. Hellen- in Armenia," ArtB 54 (1972), 245-62. The partially excavated
kemper, "Kirchen und Kloster in der ndrdlichen Euphratesia," tetraconch at Akdegirmen Htiyiak is attributed to the first half
op. cit., 407; and note 26 below. For Canosa, see note 26 below. of the 5th century on the grounds of the style of its floor mo-
23Compare the remarks in my review of J. Morganstern, The saics, but no documentation is provided for this attribution
Byzantine Church at Dereagzi and Its Decoration (Tubingen, 1983), (Candemir and Wagner, loc. cit.). Yet coins dating from the
in AJA 90 (1986), 141. reigns of Emperors Anastasius, Maurice, and Phocas were

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 N>

0 5 10

Iappm. Vmetres

1. Perge, tetraconch, sketch plan (pl

2. Perge, tetraconch, view of ruins towar

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Cl

U, 0
coo
C-
I-

-4>

$-

,,,N1,, VN\111111I//1% C -~

bC

t ,:t~d/ll~iii~tltii ....... i. i~ ....,,__.? / i !? ?

.TEA

is.."..-
'V
I-. -
Hz

*: 7. . ?. ..,
I-.

V ~

tO

coo

.L .
rn..
C

N\
CC)

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
5. Perge, tetraconch, inner shell, detail (1969)

, . M. 1971

6. Athens, Stoa and Lib

plan and section (plan:

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 8]"o

. F.M

8. Jerusalem, Basilica and Anastasis Rotunda on

Golgotha, plan of fourth-century remains and
later additions (after V. C. Corbo, II Santo
Sepolcro di Gerusalemme [Jerusalem, 1982],
pl. 3)
40 1O
.... 10 10
0 0

7.Milan, Church of S. Lo
fourth century

9. Rome,
Bezold, S.
DieCostanza, plan after
kirchliche Baukunst G. Dehio and G. v.
des Abendlandes:

Historische und systematisch dargestellt [Stuttgart, 1887], I I0 2

010 20 30 M
Atlas, I, 1, pl. 8, 1)

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 285

The exception is the double-shellcavation has not, however,

quatrefoil inside established the exact
date ofLibrary
the complex known as the Stoa and the tetraconch.
ofA Em-
large statue of Herculius,
peror Hadrian at Athens, whose prefect of Illyricumhas
function in 408-412,
re- was erected by
mained highly controversial (Fig.Plutarch, sophistA
6).27 and head of the Neo-Platonic
recent
Academy at Athens, just to the left of the single
discovery has eliminated the controversy.
propylon
Excavations carried out at the site byentrance
Johnof the Stoa and Library. It now
Tray-
los in 1980 and published only inclear
seems 1986 revealed
that this statue is unrelated to the con-

the beginnings of walls of a colonnaded

struction of the atrium,
tetraconch.3? The Stoa and Librar
well bonded in with the original walls
complex had ofbeenthedestroyed by the Herulians in
267 and
narthex of the tetraconch and thus was not rehabilitated
coeval with it.28 for over a century.
These important findings demonstrate conclu- 1980 suggested that
Excavations at the site before
the peristyle
sively that this building was originally of the
laid outcomplex
as a was rebuilt with new
church, and thus set aside once and for all earlier columns on tall bases at the same time that the

chambers at the east end of the whole complex

arguments by Travlos himself and others that it
were remodeled and the tetraconch itself was
was built as a secular monument.29 The 1980 ex-
erected.3' Sherds attributed to the late fourth
tury have been found in the fill between the
found at the site (ibid., 206). I prefer to hold the dating of this
gated rectangular pool decorating the central
monument in abeyance. The excavators identify it as a church
(ibid.). For the aisled tetraconch at Lin on the Albanian side ofcourtyard of the Hadrianic complex and the foun-
Lake Ochrid, I am unaware of any final publication, but prelim- dations of the tetraconch, thus suggesting a termi-
inary studies of this edifice prove that it was a church, that it
must have been modeled on the aisled tetraconch on the Yu-
nus post quem of ca. A.D. 400 for the tetraconch.32
goslavian side of Lake Ochrid, and that the same mosaic work-
shop executed the tessellated pavements for both theselished the tetraconch, he identified it as a secular edifice: 'Ava-
build-
ings, probably in the second quarter of the 6th century. See A. ?v BL[3Lobijx TOo 'AbQtaUvof, HactXT.'AQy. 'Et.,
oxctpctL
Ducellier, "Dernibres d6couvertes sur des sites albanais du 41-63, but subsequently he reverted to an ecclesi-
1950 (1951),
moyen age," Archeologia 78 (January 1975), 35-45; Ruth Ellen
astical foundation: HoIeoboo.txt 'EgXtotg uiy 'Afhqvey (Ath-
Kolarik, The Floor Mosaics of Stobi and Their Balkan Context, Diss. 139 note 2; repeated in XQtoLuavLxat 'AOijval, in
ens, 1960),
(Harvard University, 1981 [1982]), 454-57, with references to
O11oxE1oxt) xat 0txhx EyxJxhoXattl&a 1 (Athens, 1962), 727,
earlier publications. For the original ecclesiastical function ofin RBK 1 (1966), 364 f, fig. 5. In 1971 he readopted
and again
the still insufficiently published tetraconch at Canosa, his
seeoriginal
G. M. identification of the building as secular (Pictorial Dic-
Castelfranchi Falla, "Le principale fasi architettoniche del San
tionary, 244).
Leucio di Canosa di Puglia," Commentari 1-2 (1976), 30
3-8; R.
An inscription (IG 12 4224) on the left side of the entrance
Moreno Cassano, "Mosaici paleocristiani di Puglia," Mdlanges de complex records the erection of the statue. See
to the whole
J. 277
l'Ecole Franpaise de Rome, Sirie Antiquiti, 88, no. 1 (1976), R. Martindale,
if, PLRE, II: A.D. 395-527 (Cambridge, 1980),
esp. 292 ff and figs. 52-54, for plans suggesting four 545, s.v. "Herculius 2." For Plutarch, ibid., 893, s.v. "Plutarchus
building
periods dating as early as the 6th century. I am grateful 2." The togratitude of the Athenian sophist to Herculius is re-
Franco Schettini, the original excavator of S. Leucio, for allow-
corded elsewhere. The sophist Apronianus also erected a statue
ing me to inspect the remains in 1965. of Herculius in front of the Stoa and Library of Hadrian: IG 112
27 For the Stoa and Library, see J. Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary
4225; Martindale, PLRE, II, 124, s.v. "Apronianus 1." Cf. IG 112
of Ancient Athens (New York, 1971), 244-52, with earlier 4227 bibli-
for another statue of the prefect on the Acropolis of the
ography. Recently, T. L. Shear, Jr., "Athens: From City-State to
city. Although the inscription mentioning Herculius was noted
Provincial Town," Hesp 50 (1981), 356-407, esp. 374-77, hasop. cit., 64, its relationship to the rebuilding of the
by Sisson,
argued that at the outset Emperor Hadrian founded Stoa the and
com- Library and the construction of the tetraconch was
plex as an imperial forum, a great public square provided firstwith
pointed out by Travlos, 'Avaoxaqat, 44, 54-56. In a re-
gardens, a long pool down the center of the garden, the viewwhole
of this article, P. Lemerle rejected this relationship (REB
embellished with statuary and other works of art, and 13 equipped
[1955], 224). Travlos' original identification of the tetraconch
with a suite of rooms commanding the east end, the center one edifice was subsequently upheld with persuasive ar-
as a secular
of which was a library, those flanking it lecture halls.guments
Excava-by A. Frantz, "Herculius in Athens: Pagan or Chris-
tions in 1969 resulted in the clearing of the east end of the com-
tian?" Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses fiir christliche Ar-
plex and established that the northeastern room housed a the- Trier 5-11 September 1965, Studi di Antichith Cristiana
chidologie,
ater: Travlos, op. cit., 579. Shear also believes that the 27
complex
(Vatican City-Berlin, 1969), I, 527-29; idem, "From Pagan-
was modeled specifically upon the Templum Pacis of ism Emperor
to Christianity in the Temples of Athens," DOP 19 (1965),
Vespasian at Rome. 192 note 30, 196 notes 53-54; idem, "Honors to a Librarian,"
Hesp 35
28J. Travlos, T6 retedxoyxo otxo86tpta Ifig Bt[3XLoaipxifg Too(1966), 379 f. In private correspondence dated 14 Sep-
'AbLUavoi3, etkXla nt~x eg Fe6pytov E. Mubovdv (Athens, tember 1986 Miss Frantz, aware of the recent excavation bring-
1986), I, 343 ff. I am most grateful to Miss Alison Frantz for the atrium of the building, now believes that Her-
ing to light
bringing this publication to my attention and for providing me
culius' activities were confined to the Library.
with a photocopy of it. 31Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary, 244. For the early 5th-century
29It was first identified as a church in what remains the
A.D.fun-
column bases in the east peristyle of the complex, see
damental publication on the site: M. A. Sisson, "TheFrantz,
Stoa ofHesp 35 (1966), 379 f, pl. 91. For the west end of the
Hadrian at Athens," PBSR 11 (1929), 50 ff. G. A. Soteriou,
complex,At
where columns were found as spolia belonging to the
reconditioning of the complex ca. 400-410, see ArchRep for
XQtoTLtavtxat e3at Tijg 9eooaxlag xat at QLactkLOXQLOrtaVLxat
1982-83, no. 29 (1983), 9.
Baot.tx&a iig 'EXXdbog, 'AQX.'Eq., 1929 (1931), 173-74, also 'Avuox aat, 49 note 1.
32Travlos,
identified the tetraconch as a church. When J. Travlos first pub-

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 286 W EUGENE KLEINBAUER

The masonry imperialof

construction foundation,
the tetrac
the style of the substantial
polychrome benefaction
mosaics laid in
bulatories, The and
narthex, ecclesiasticalchambers
functions of these compar-adjoi
narthex point anda do
toward not prove
the that the building
first or atsecond
Perge was d
the fifth century.33 also
Inerected
theseas a church;
very only excavations
years, can arou
400-410, a monumental civic
settle its identification. building
The only clue to its original p
suddenly erupted infunction
Athens, is provided by butthe shallow
it bay is inter-
not k
spersed between its edifices,
have included any Christian center space and easternat lea
conch; this bay and the thick walls at its short ends
Agora.-4 Even if the tetraconch was built a
raise the
the middle of the fifth possibility of a masonry
century, as semidome
Travlos over n
this conch and establish
gests,35 it was the earliest church a slightly accentuated
building east-
west axis for the monument.
in the city.36 Prominently situated Perge, too,inside
then, may a
have been a church building. Otherwise it is the
33The rough rubble masonry with occasional horizontal brick
courses is the characteristic manner of construction in early 5th-only known aisled tetraconch that fulfilled a non-
century buildings in Athens: H. A. Thompson, "Athenian Twi- ecclesiastical purpose.
light: A.D. 267-600,"JRS 49 (1959), 68; idem, "Activities in the The identification of the original functions of
Athenian Agora: 1958"' Hesp 28 (1959), 103 f, fig. 1. The mo-
saic pavements compare very closely in my judgment with oth- the aisled tetraconchs is critical for trying to trace
ers in Athens that are dated to the beginning of the 5th century: the archetype of the architectural genus. If these
for example, a fragmentary mosaic in one of the chambers of buildings fulfilled secular and ecclesiastical func-
the old Metroon in the Athenian Agora, which is dated by coins
to just after the reign of Emperors Arcadius and Honorius tions alike, attempts to identify the archetype
(395-408): see H. A. Thompson, "Buildings in the West Side might prove futile or lead to sheer guesswork. If
of the Agora," Hesp 6 (1937), 198 f, figs. 121-22; M. Spiro, Crit- they were all church buildings, however, then their
ical Corpus of the Mosaic Pavements on the Greek Mainland, Fourth/
Sixth Centuries with Architectural Surveys (New York, 1978), I, 1- archetype might also have well been an ecclesiasti-
5, pl. 4. Accepting a relationship between Herculius and the cal monument. But did these buildings reflect a
foundation of the tetraconch, Spiro dates the mosaic pavements
single archetype or two or more prototypes? A
of the latter to the first decade of the 5th century (ibid., 14-26,
esp. 15, pls. 10-23). unique archetype may be assumed because the
3"Thompson, "Athenian Twilight," 61 if, esp. 66 if; Travlos, aisled tetraconch structure, with or without galler-
Pictorial Dictionary, 3, 191, 233, 352, 538, 553; Frantz, "From ies, is too highly specialized in design to have
Paganism to Christianity," 196; H. A. Thompson and R. E.
Wycherly, The Agora of Athens: The History, Shape and Uses of an arisen spontaneously and independently in such
Ancient City Center, The Athenian Agora, vol. 14 (Princeton, diverse parts of the empire.8 This is an assump-
1972), 210 if. tion which I want to stress; the ensuing discussion
:5Travlos, T6 ieed6xoyo, 346, without discussion. Still at- is predicated upon it.
tributing the rehabilitation of the Stoa and Library to Herculius
ca. 408-12, Travlos must be assuming that a few decades Since all known aisled tetraconchs (with the pos-
elapsed after that rehabilitation before the site was occupied by sible exception of Perge) were built to serve as
Christians for a new church building. A mid-5th-century date
for the tetraconch is also proposed by J. Christern, in B. Brenk, church buildings, it may be asked whether the ar-
chetype
Spdttantike und frilhes Christentum, Propylien Kunstgeschichte, of this genus was also an ecclesiastical
Suppl. 1 (Frankfurt, 1977), 173, 183, without discussion. monument.
Since Surely a pagan archetype may be
it is hard to believe that two sophists would have erected statues
ruled
on the entrance wall of a complex functioning as a church, the
out of consideration, for church officials
tetraconch must have been erected subsequent to the tenurewould ofhave objected to it on religious grounds. A
Herculius. A date between 412 and the mid-century remains
quite possible, since Christianity seems to have been the major-
ity religion in Athens already in the lifetime of Theagenes, a
37Writing before the 1980 excavation in front of the tetr
native of Athens and wealthy Christian benefactor of the conch,
Neo- C. Delvoye, L'art byzantin (Paris, 1967), 67, and D.
Platonic Academy who flourished in mid-century: Damascius,Bernardi Ferrero, "L'edificio nell'interno della cosiddetto b
blioteca
Leben des Philosophen Isidoros, ed. R. Asmus (Leipzig, 1911), 93. di Adriano ad Atene," CorsiRav 22 (1975), 171-88, es
For Theagenes, see Martindale, PLRE, II, 1063, s.v. "Thea-182 if, both believe that Aelia Eudocia (Athenais), the daught
of the
genes." Indeed, Herculius was probably a Christian himself: see Athenian sophist Leontius, who married Emperor The
W. E. Kaegi, "The Fifth-Century Twilight of Byzantine dosius
Pagan- II in 421, founded the building as a church, a point
view for which neither writer offered a shred of evidence. I
ism," C1Med 27 (1966), 265.
terestingly, however, the Christian basilica by the Ilissos in Ath
6 For evidence of early Christian church buildings in Athens,
consult E. P. Blegen, in AJA 50 (1946), 373 f; Travlos, ens
RBKis1commonly attributed to this empress (Frantz, "From P
ganism
(1966), 349 if, s.v. "Athen"; T. E. Gregory, "The Christian As- to Christianity," 194), and she certainly founded t
original church of St. Polyeuktos at Constantinople: Antholo
klepieion in Athens," Abstracts of Papers, Ninth Annual Byzantine
Studies Conference, Duke University (Durham, 1983), 39-40;graeca,
J. M. I, 10. Travlos himself once attributed the tetraconch
Emperors Arcadius and Honorius ("Athen," 364).
Spieser, "La christianisation des sanctuaires pa'ens en Gr&e,"
38On this point I concur completely with J. B. Ward-Perkin
in Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtiimern, Internationalen
"The
Symposion in Olympia vom 10. bis 12. Oktober 1974, Deutsches Ar-Italian Element in Late Roman and Early Medieval Ar
chiologisches Institut, Abteilung Athen (Ttibingen,chitecture,"
1976), ProcBrAc 33 (1947), 15 (I cite the separately print
310-11. offprint).

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 287

secular archetype remains conceivable, especially

until the sixth century.40 In the East Mediter-
if it were associated with the person ofthe
ranean, on a other
Christian
hand, galleries occur in ba-
emperor. In this case the transfer silicanof
andthe building
central-plan buildings alike from the
type from the realm of secular architecture to earlier fourth century on. The original, fourth-
church building would have to have been based on century Hagia Sophia at Constantinople was a
a set of relevant or plausible factors. In my judg- basilica which contained galleries, and basilican
ment it is far more likely that the ultimate source churches of the following century in the imperial
of the double-shell tetraconch edifices was a city featured them as a rule.4' But they were not
church building, and a church building of greatto that locality. The Constantinian basil-
confined
prominence that would have been known through-
ica and perhaps the original Anastasis Rotunda of
out a wide geographical area, from Milan totheAlex-
Holy Sepulcher compound at Jerusalem were
andria and to the Tigris. Further, the formal layout
laid out with galleries.42 Galleries were definitely
of the archetype would have to have borne close
present in the central-plan cathedral at Antioch in
resemblance to the aisled tetraconch edifices. It Syria, first planned in 327 (see below). Even the
would have been a double-shell central plan struc- second preserved example in Italy of a church
ture sharing the salient architectural lines of the with galleries, S. Vitale at Ravenna, is widely be-
aisled tetraconchs, with the exception of ancillary lieved to reflect an East Mediterranean model, in
chambers.
all probability a Constantinopolitan building, as is
When and where might such a double-shell suggested by the churches of SS. Sergius and Bac-
tetraconch have been erected? First, no known chus and St. John in the Hebdomon.43 Thus, the
historical reasons exist to believe that any of the
preserved aisled tetraconchs served as the foun-
* For galleries, consult F. W. Deichmann, in RAC 2 (1959),
tainhead for the other examples. A distinct and255-64, s.v. "Empore"; C. Delvoye, in RBK 2 (1971), 129-44,
now destroyed monument may therefore be safely s.v. "Empore"; J. Christern, "Emporenkirchen in Nordafrika,"
assumed. Since it must have been erected before Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses filr christliche Archiaologie
(above, note 30), I, 407-25; B. Schellewald, "Zur Typologie,
the earliest datable aisled tetraconch that is pre-
Entwicklung und Funktion von Oberraumen in Syrien, Arme-
served, it is logical to launch a search for the miss-
nien und Byzanz,"JbAC 27/28 (1984/85), 171-218. While galler-
ing archetype by examining the earliest datable ies occur in many imperial foundations of the 4th century, they
ex-
are not exclusive to them. The only other example of a church
ample, S. Lorenzo at Milan (Fig. 7). Although with
thegalleries in the Latin West that antedates the 6th century is
exact date of this well-known church has not been the north church of the double cathedral at Trier, as remodeled
established, all current studies devoted to this in the time of Emperor Gratian, about 380. This remodeled
church, in effect, a double-shell square edifice, bears a striking
question concur that the building was erected dur- resemblance in this and other salient aspects to S. Lorenzo at
ing the second half of the fourth century; andMilan a which, possibly, influenced its remodeling: see Krauthei-
number of scholars suspect that it may well havemer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture (above, note 20),
been an imperial foundation.9 A significant por- 90, fig. 42; W. Eugene Kleinbauer, "'Aedita in turribus'": The
Superstructure of the Early Christian Church of S. Lorenzo in
tion of the original structure still survives, though
Milan," Gesta 15 (1976), 6-7, for the derivation of the remod-
eled church from S. Lorenzo at Milan.
the church was remodeled in the Romanesque pe-
" See, most recently, Krautheimer, Three Christian Capitals, 50
riod and again during the later sixteenth century. if, for a reconstruction of the 4th-century Hagia Sophia with
So far as it can be envisaged, the original, fourth-galleries. Though its date of foundation is not securely estab-
century layout of the church was a competent ar- lished, it may have been planned as early as 335-337: Kraut-
heimer, "Constantinian Basilica," 133 note 61. But see H. G.
chitectural organism, high in imagination and so-
Beck, "Constantinople: The Rise of a New Capital in the East,"
phistication, perhaps the best designed building
in Age of Spirituality: A Symposium, ed. K. Weitzmann (Princeton,
that is known to us from the century. But it is not 1980), 29 (attribution to Constantius). For galleries in other pre-
iconoclastic churches in the imperial city, see T. F Mathews, The
great architecture; in fact, it is a derivative build-
Early Churches of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy (Univer-
ing. For example, it possessed galleries, a major
sity Park, 1971), 22 f, passim; and the works cited in note 40
above.
design element that is otherwise unknown in Italy
'2Krautheimer,
62 (the Early Christian
basilica at Jerusalem), and(Anastasis
490 note 11 Byzantine Architectures ..,
Rotunda);
Deichmann, "Empore," 1260; Delvoye, "Empore," 1341.
39See, most recently, R. Krautheimer, Three Christian Capitals: Krautheimer, "Constantinian Basilica," 133 note 60, suggested
Topography and Politics (Berkeley, 1983), 81-92, with citations of that the Constantinian church of the Nativity at Bethlehem pos-
earlier publications. Here Krautheimer dates the church to the sibly featured galleries, though no evidence attests to their pres-
years between 375-376 and 378, and argues that it had imperial ence.

backing and was erected as the cathedral of the anti-Nicene fac-

' F. W. Deichmann, Ravenna: Haupstadt des splitan
tion at Milan. F. W. Deichmann, Einfithrung in die christliche Ar- landes. Kommentar, 2. Teil (Wiesbaden, 1976), 83
chidologie (Darmstadt, 1983), 246, also thinks that the church was analysis of the derivation of S. Vitale from Cons
"possibly an imperial foundation." its formal relationship to other double-shell tetra

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 288 W EUGENE KLEINBAUER

presence of gaean
galleries in tetraconch may antedate the
S. Lorenzo at earliest
Milan pre-
to an eastern model for the church.44 served Syrian example does not exclude such a
derivation, because the type may have existed in
If the galleries of this church attest to a source
Syria at an earlier date. In fact, some years ago I
in the East, does its double-shell configuration also
point in that direction? The only other pre- argued that the preserved examples in Syria and
northern Mesopotamia all go back to a single pro-
iconoclastic example of this genus in Italy, or any-
where else in the Latin West for that matter, is the
totype of early date in that region.48 That proto-
big church ruin known as S. Leucio at Canosa type
in was identified as the cathedral at Antioch.
Apulia. While the excavations at S. Leucio have notThis church was planned by Emperor Constantine
been properly published, preliminary studies sug- the Great in 327 and was dedicated at an encaenia
summoned by his son Emperor Constantius in
gest that this building was first laid out nearly two
centuries after S. Lorenzo.45 All other examples of341.49 From the outset it functioned as the cathe-
dral and principal congregational church of the
this genus are situated to the east of Italy and sug-
capital of Syria and, toward the end of the fourth
gest that the archetype might be located in the East
Mediterranean as well. century, as the patriarchal church of Oriens, a
supra-metropolis claiming supremacy over all of
The largest concentration of such buildings oc-
the vast ecclesiastical jurisdiction.50 Thus, it would
curs in Syria and northern Mesopotamia, and they
date from the second half of the fifth century have
and provided a natural, if not spontaneous,
model
the sixth.46 This fact recently led H. Buchwald to for other cathedrals and metropolitan
churches
conjecture that the source of the Pergaean tetra- under its direct jurisdiction. Unfortu-
nately,
conch was Syrian.47 The possibility that the Per- the layout of the Antiochian cathedral can-
not be ascertained in all of its essential details.
Since excavations at Antioch have failed to uncover
taconchs. For the church in the Hebdomon, see Mathews, Early the ruins of the church, our knowledge of it de-
Churches, 55-61; W. Kleiss, "Bemerkungen zur Kirche Johan- pends on literary sources, especially Eusebius. Eu-
nes des Taufers in Istanbul-Bakirkdy (Hebdomon), Mansel'e Ar-
magan: Milanges Mansel, Turk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari, Dizi sebius informs us that the church was two-storied,
VII-Sa. 60 (Ankara, 1974), I, 207-19. See, however, J. Eber- and he seems to tell us that it was double-shelled:
solt, Sanctuaires de Byzance: Recherches sur les anciens trisors des xtiixhp bb rK Ew myTE xcti Xcvt ayEw xway iwm twv
iglises de Constantinople (Paris, 1921), 83, where a basilican layout
is suggested on the basis of a literary source. For important ob- cLJ8t ctEcXO1 JTepLeootTtohVov (Vita Constantini
servations on the topography of the church, see C. Mango, in
BZ 68 (1975), 390-91.
III, 50).5' But his account of the shape of the
building-he terms it 6xtd~ebog-is to my mind
"This point has often been made: see, e.g., Ward-Perkins,
"Italian Element," 13 (of separate reprint); Krautheimer, Early open to interpretation. Other commentators on
this passage have believed that 6xtdebgog refers to
Christian and Byzantine Architecture3 .ev., 85-86; Deichmann, Ra-
venna, 83; idem, Einfiihrung, 246. For the masons building the
an octagon and have reconstructed the building as
church, see W. Eugene Kleinbauer, "Toward a Dating of San
Lorenzo at Milan: Masonry and Building Methods of Milanese octagonal in shape, reminiscent of the churches of
Roman and Early Christian Architecture,' ArtL 13 (1968), 1 if, SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Constantinople and S.
esp. 16-17. For a different interpretation of the masons, con- Vitale at Ravenna.52 But Eusebius does not specify
sult S. Lewis, "San Lorenzo Revisited: A Theodosian Palace
Church at Milan," JSAH 32 (1973), 201 f.
'5See note 26 above.
gungen zur Entstehung der Kuppelbasilika, DenkWien 139 (Vienna,
'6Kleinbauer, "Origin and Functions," 89 ff. 1979), For a85-86,
slightlypl. 31, fig. 2, as demonstrated by Buchwald, loc.
modified plan of the edifice at Seleucia Pieria,cit.see Brenk, op.
cit., 225, fig. 56 (by J. Lassus). Excavations at Bosra have led to
8 Kleinbauer,Bacco
new findings: see S. Cerulli, "La cattedrale dei Ss. Sergio, "Origin and Functions," 108 ff.
e Leonzio a Bosra," FR 109-10 (1975), 163-86, fig. 9 (new '9 Ibid., 111. For the pertinent historical documentation, G.
Downey, A History of Antioch in Syria from Seleucus to the Arab Con-
plan); G. Gualandi, "Una cittfi caravaniera della Siria meridio-
nale: Bosra romana e la recente esplorazione archeologia nella quest (Princeton, 1961), 342 if, passim; F. W. Deichmann, "Das
cattedrale dei Ss. Sergio, Bacco e Leonzio," op. cit., 187-239. Oktogon von Antiocheia: Heroon-Martyrion, Palastkirche oder
For recent observations on the church of the el cAdhra at Kathedral?" BZ 65 (1972), 40-56, rpr. in his Rom, Ravenna, Kon-
stantinopel, Naher Osten (above, note 21), 783-99.
Amida, see G. Bell, The Churches and Monasteries of the Tur cAbdin,
with an introduction and notes by M. M. Mango (London, 5oKleinbauer, "Origin and Functions," 109-10.
1982), 24 if, 107 if, figs. 14, 51, pls. 13-24; M. C. Mundell, 5 Ibid., 111, citing the full Greek texts by Eusebius.
"The Sixth Century Sculpture of the Monastery of Deir Za 52See, e.g., W. Dynes, "The First Christian Palace Church
cFaran in Mesopotamia," Actes du XVe Congrks InternationalType," Marsyas 11 (1962-64), 1-9. H. A. Drake, In Praise of Con-
stantine: A Historical Study and New Translation of Eusebius' Tricen-
d'Etudes Byzantines, Athines-Septembre 1976, II. Art et archeologie,
Communications B (Athens, 1981), 510-28. nial Orations (Berkeley, 1976), 101, translated Eusebius' account
of the church in Triakontaeterikos 9, 15 as having an "eight-walled
7 Buchwald, loc. cit. I find no direct link between the tetra-
conch at Perge and the Tomb Church extra muros at Corycus, plan." The aisled tetraconchs at, say, Bosra and Adrianople,
which has been incorrectly restored by G. Stanzl, Liingsbau undmake it clear that a quatrefoil inner shell can be enclosed by an
Zentralbau als Grundthemen der frilhchristlichen Architektur: Uberle-outer shell of a completely different shape.

This content downloaded from

fff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 289

whether 6xtdebgog refers to the inner shell, thewere both dedicated to Christ, they dif-
at Antioch
outer shell, or even some other conspicuous
feredfea-
functionally: the Rotunda was both a me-
ture of the edifice. It is not at all certain that he morial building commemorating the site of Christ's
saw a building with eight sides. This uncertainty burial and his resurrection and the most important
notwithstanding, all of us agree that the church pilgrimage church in late Antiquity. Yet both
was a central-plan, double-shell edifice with galler-
double-shell buildings were Constantinian foun-
ies above the lower story. Thus, as early as 327, dations,
in with their plans drawn up possibly within
the capital of Syria, a building embodying the
a year of each other.
double-shell concept, be it tetraconch or octa- Earlier Roman provincial architecture in Pales-
conch, was designed, and it was planned with di-tine fails to provide a possible source for the plan
rect imperial sponsorship. of the Anastasis Rotunda.57 Surely the design of
Such a reconstruction of the cathedral at Anti- the edifice was imported, either by the architect
och is not required to establish the existence of the
Zenobius or by Eustathius, a presbyter from Con-
double-shell concept as early as the reign of Con-stantinople, either (or both) of whom was in all
stantine. Two other edifices founded by Constan- probability dispatched by Constantine's imperial
tine, or by members of his house, prove that this architectural offices at Constantinople, and per-
building type existed by the middle of the fourth haps as an essential part of the emperor's religious
century-that is, before S. Lorenzo at Milan was policy with special reference to promoting the
planned. The first, and perhaps the earlier of the
unity of Christendom.58 Although he was still per-
two, is the Anastasis Rotunda of the Holy Sepul- ipatetic in the 320s, Constantine is known to have
cher compound at Jerusalem.53 The Anastasis was been in Constantinople in 326, and again in the
a huge rotunda 33.70 m in diameter, which com- following year.59 Yet his presence would not have
prised an irregularly shaped circular center space
been required for the drawing up of architectural
(19.5 m in diameter) defined by supports and sur-plans, which would have been left in the hands of
rounded by ambulatories, with semicircular nichesan appropriate imperial office.60
in the west, north, and south sides of the thick pe-
rimeter wall (Fig. 8). Thus it was a double-shell
building. Perhaps the main (east) facade wastine
a Architecture3 .... 490 note 11; E. D. Hunt, Holy Land Pilgrim-
age in the Later Roman Empire AD 312-460 (Oxford, 1982), 11-
straight wall pierced by openings. (The cathedral
12.

at Antioch also apparently featured a reverse 57Deichmann, "Empore," 1260; Brenk, op. cit., 192. The
solid ashlar construction is, of course, rooted in local Palestinian
alignment.54) That galleries surmounted the am-
practice.
bulatories is possible but not certain; and originally
5For the problem of the exact responsibilities of Zenobius
a wood dome probably crowned the edifice.55 and Eustathius, see C. Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire,
Planned under Constantine, possibly as early312-1453
as (Englewood Cliffs, 1972), 14 note 37; Krautheimer,

326, it was apparently under construction before

Early Christian
that the Holy and Byzantine
Sepulcher Architecture3
compound, .... 62, Jerusalem,"
the "New 67. For the thesis
as
his death in 337 and seems to have been in use by
Eusebius terms it, was founded by Constantine as an essential
piece of his religious policy, see W Telfer, "Constantine's Holy
ca. 350.56 Although the Rotunda and the cathedral
Land Plan," Studia patristica 1 (1957), 696-700. Cf. R. Mac-
Mullen, Constantine (New York, 1969), 108-10.
59T. D. Barnes, The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine
For the excavated remains, see V. C. Corbo, II Santo Sepolcro
(Cambridge, Mass., 1982), 76, who suspects that from 324 to
di Gerusalemme. Aspetti archeologici dalle origini al periodi cruciato,
330 Constantine's principal residence was at Nicomedia, and
Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio major, no. 29 (Je- from 330 to 337 at Constantinople. Cf. note 81 below. Both
rusalem, 1982), 68 if, pl. 3, where it is argued on the basis Deichmann,
of "Empore," 1260, and Brenk, loc. cit., maintain that
physical remains that the Rotunda was begun and completed the plans for the Holy Sepulcher arrived from the imperial ate-
under Constantine the Great in a single campaign: ".. . un solo
lier at Constantinople. This is denied by R. Krautheimer, "Con-
stantine's Church Foundations," Akten des VII. Internationalen
programma di HE,
5'Theodoret construzione.., in un solo tempo"
V, 35 (ed. Parmentier, (p. 51).
338, 2) mentions an
Kongresses filr christliche Archilologie (above, note 30), 241, who
agora in front of the Antiochian cathedral, and his account sug-
believes that Eustathius transmitted the plan of the Holy Sep-
gests that the church stood on the eastern side of the square.ulcher basilica to Constantinople.
5Galleries in the original edifice are accepted by Corbo, 60 Noliterary sources refer to an "architectural office" in the
op. cit., 79; Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architec-
imperial capital, so that its existence is hypothetical. Surely,
ture, .ev, 78 and fig. 27B; Brenk, op. cit., 192. however, Constantine had created such an office at least for the
56The compound may have been planned as early as 326
new streets and secular buildings in the city. See C. Mango,
(F. W. Deichmann, "Die Architektur des konstantinischen Zeit-"The Development of Constantinople as an Urban Centre, 17th
alters," in his Rom, Ravenna, Konstantinopel, Naher Osten, 121).
International Byzantine Congress, Major Papers, Dumbarton Oaks/
No secure evidence proves how early the rotunda was planned Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., August 3-8, 1986 (New
or construction began, but Bishop Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech.,
XVIII, 33 implies that by 350 there was a separate church Rochelle, N.Y., 1986), 117 ff. The earliest reference to the trans-
mittal of architectural plans or designs from one center to an-
around the Tomb. See Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzan-
other in the late antique world is Mark the Deacon's Life of Por-

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 290 W EUGENE KLEINBAUER

The second examplethe Anastasis

of Rotunda, I submit that the two build-ce
a double-shell
ings share a common
plan building is the mausoleum of Constmodel.63
the daughter Two important imperial
Constantine, of mausolea wereis
which erected
situ
the Via Nomentana at
shortly Rome.6'
before During
that of Constantine: that of the Em- h
owhood and residence at Rome from 337 to 350, press Dowager Helena at Rome and that of Con-
Constantina seems to have built, or possibly re-stantine himself, the church of the Holy Apostles
modeled, a preexisting building, the church of S.at Constantinople. Helena's mausoleum was
Agnese, against whose long south flank the mau-erected on the Via Labicana in the 310s and was
probably intended by Constantine for his own
soleum was erected. Literary or epigraphic evi-
dence fails to provide the specific date of founda- burial before he moved to the East Mediterra-
tion of the mausoleum, but it may have been nean.64 Like S. Costanza, it was appended to a bas-
planned as early as the years 337-350.62 And it ilican church, that of SS. Marcellino e Pietro, but
seems to have been ready to receive Constantina's stood at its west end, communicating with it
body in 354. Far better preserved than the Anas-through a common narthex. It was, however, a
tasis Rotunda, this edifice consists of a circular core
single-shell building, domed, with seven semicir-
surrounded by twelve radially disposed pairs cular of and rectangular niches piercing its perimeter
columns, united by an arcade supporting a high wall. It belongs to a different, older, and more con-
drum with twelve windows, and a dome. A con- servative architectural genus than the double-shell
tinuous barrel-vaulted ambulatory encircles the building type.65 For the Apostoleion at Constanti-
domed center shell and is enclosed by a thick pe- nople we are dependent upon literary sources and
rimeter wall pierced by three large niches on the presumed filiations which Krautheimer and others
cardinal axes and twelve smaller niches in the di- have examined at length.66 So far as can be de-
agonals (Fig. 9). An external peristyle encasingtermined,
the this church, begun before 337, was a
whole is now gone. Although the edifice lackscruciform-shaped
gal- building consisting of a
leries, its plan and elevation are so reminiscent square(?)
of space from which projected four aisled
the slightly earlier Anastasis Rotunda as to suggestor aisleless wings. Later, in 359, the emperor's
a link between the two buildings. The diameters body ofwas relocated in a new mausoleum which his
the inner central spaces are almost the same. The son Constantinus had erected adjacent to the
unmistakable cross-shape indicated by the three Apostoleion.67 Possibly a rotunda, the plan of this
niches in the perimeter wall of the Anastasis sepulcher
Ro- is unrecorded, but on account of its late
tunda is repeated in S. Costanza, not only by date
the it cannot have provided the model for either
three larger niches but also by the fact that thetheAnastasis Rotunda at Jerusalem or the mauso-
arches in the main axes of the center space are
wider and higher than the others; and again those
6 Ibid., for a direct dependence upon the Anastasis Rotunda.
on the longitudinal (north-south) axis, above and
Elsewhere Deichmann emphasizes the revolutionary character
opposite the big niche in the south perimeter wall, of the plan of S. Costanza, when compared to the plans of ear-
are slightly wider and higher than those on the lier centralized buildings at Rome: "Ramische Zentralb
transverse axis, whereas the smaller niches in the Vom Zentralraum zur Zentralbau. Ein Versuch," in his Ro
venna, Konstantinopel, Naher Osten, 47-55.
perimeter wall do not correspond to the arcades.
6 F. W. Deichmann and A. Tschira, "Das Mausoleum der
This cruciform pattern is visible when one enters serin Helena und die Basilika der Heiligen Marcellinus u
the north ambulatory and faces south. If Constan- trus an der Via Labicana vor Rom," JDAI 72 (1957), 44
rpr. in Deichmann, Rom, Ravenna, Konstantinopel, Naher
tina's mausoleum was not modeled directly upon 305-73, with a Postscript on 374; J. Guyon, L. Struiber,
Manacorda, "Recherches autour de la basilique constanti
des Saints Pierre et Marcellin sur la via Labicana Ai Ro
phyry, 78 (trans. Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, 31), which
reports that Empress Eudoxia ca. 402-7 shipped a plan (skari- mausolde et l'enclos du nord de la basilique, "Mdlanges de
phos) to Gaza for the church building replacing the Marneion. Franpaise de Rome, Antiquiti, 93, no. 2 (1981), 999 ff.
65Deichmann, "Architektur des konstantinischen Zeital
61 F. W. Deichmann, Frilhchristliche Kirchen in Rom (Basel,
1948), 25 if, pls. 5-19, plan 4; M. Stettler, "Zur Rekonstruktion 115 f, who traces this type of niched edifice back to ca. A.D
von S. Costanza," RM 58 (1943), 76-86; H. Brandenburg, Roms 66R. Krautheimer, "Zu Konstantins Apostelkirche in
frithchristliche Basiliken des 4. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1979), 93- stantinopel," Mullus: Festschrift Theodor Klauser = JbAC, E
115. zungsband 1 (1964), 224-29; idem, Three Christian Capitals
62 H. Stern, "Les mosaiques de l'6glise de Sainte-Costance A passim. For the older literature, see G. Dagron, Naissance
Rome," DOP 12 (1958), 157-218, esp. 160 if, on the date; R. capitale: Constantinople et ses institutions de 330 & 451 (Paris
Krautheimer, "Mensa-Coemeterium-Martyrium," CahArch 11 401 ff.
(1960), 15-40, esp. 22. Deichmann, "Architektur des konstan- 67Krautheimer, Three Christian Capitals, 60; idem, "Zu Kon-
tinischen Zeitalters," 123, dates it before 350. stantins Apostelkirche," 229.

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 291

leum of Constantina.68 Rather, we may wonder

6 Epxv
whether it reflected their layout by means of a Tdg( x6yxQg).72 It seems likely that this is the
church which Procopius attributes to Emperor Jus-
common source, perhaps in Constantinople itself. tinian I, and which has been reconstructed on the
There is reason to believe that the double-shell basis of quite limited physical remains as a double-
central-plan building existed in fourth-century shell octaconch with galleries. Was Justinian's
Constantinople. Two or three edifices supply the church a restoration rather than a radical transfor-
evidence. The first is the building which was firstmation of the preexisting church?73 Possibly this
identified and described by A. M. Schneider as the relative of the churches of SS. Sergius and Bacchus
martyrium of SS. Karpus and Papylus.69 The iden- at Constantinople and S. Vitale at Ravenna already
tification, though not implausible, is not certain,stood in the later fourth century. The third build-
and definite indication of date other than that af-ing at Constantinople is the mTqdxoyxov toto
forded by the preserved remains is wanting. These &noot6Xov I lah3ov in the Imperial Palace, which
remains consist of the substructures of what ap-Byzantine sources also term a Pentacubiculum
pears to have been a circular church with internal
(IfwvTaxo1touxXeov). It may be envisaged as a
colonnade and ambulatories, and a projecting
centralized structure, with a central core, perhaps
apsed chancel to the east flanked by one (or two) domed, surrounded by four curved exedrae-in
side chambers.70 Schneider attributed these re- other words, a tetraconch. It is said to be a foun-
mains to ca. A.D. 400, but a somewhat earlier date
dation of Emperor Basil I (867-886), but we may
cannot be ruled out of consideration because of
ask whether it too may have been a restoration of
the absence of structures in the imperial city whichan earlier building.74 While the Vita Basilii reveals
can be securely dated well within the fourth cen- that the emperor did construct churches and chap-
tury. A late tradition ascribing the foundation of els de novo in the Great Palace and in other impe-
this building to Helena, while interesting, is with-rial residences, his effort in Constantinople and its
out foundation, and thus was altogther rejected bysuburbs was almost exclusively directed to the re-
Schneider. Whatever its exact date, this buildingpair of damaged churches and the rebuilding
strongly suggests that the double-shell concept wasfrom the ground up of church buildings that had
known at Constantinople no later than the end of entirely collapsed.75 Thus we may wonder whether
the fourth century. While it has been identified as the tetraconch of the Apostle Paul represented the
an early copy of the Anastasis Rotunda at Jerusa- rebuilding of an older church which repeated or
lem, it perhaps actually derives from an earlierechoed the salient lines of the original plan.
model in the imperial capital itself.7' A second Lastly, there are four aisled tetraconchs located
building of this type that may have existed in thein the upper Balkan peninsula: the Hagia Sophia
capital in the same century is the martyrium in theat Adrianople (modern Edirne), the "Red Church"
Hebdomon which Emperor Theodosius I (379-at Perushtitsa, and two unnamed buildings on
395) erected to shelter the head of St. John Pro-Lake Ochrid, all of which have been attributed to
dromos. This edifice is described as a "round
roofed church that has conches" (oTgoyyuX06omyog
72For the Theodosian foundation, Patria Constantinopoleos,
145, text trans. Mango, op. cit., 29, whose translation I cite.
68Was it a niched rotunda, like the mausoleum of Helena at
Rome, or a double-shell building? When Constantine's mauso- 7 For the Justinianic building, Procopius, De aed., I, 8. Com-
pare the remarks by Mathews and Kleiss in note 43 above. On
leum was entered, the visitor stood at the west end of the build-
the reliability of Procopius De aed., see A. Cameron, Procopius
ing and faced the imperial sarcophagus at the east end (G. Dow-
ney, "The Tombs of the Byzantine Emperors at the Church of and the Sixth Century (Berkeley, 1985), 84-112, passim.
the Holy Apostles in Constantinople," JHS 72 [1959], 42 f). A v The literary sources are collected and translated in Mango,
op. cit., 164, 196, 198, 208, (208 note 127, for the reconstruc-
similar arrangement marked S. Costanza at Rome.
69A. M. Schneider, Byzanz, IstForsch 8 (Berlin, 1936), 1-tion mentioned here). A. Frolow, in BByzI 2 (1950), 452 note 1,
believing it to be a tetraconch in plan, wonders whether it had
4. Cf. W. Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls.
been only restored by Basil, and cites a letter of Gregory the
Byzantion-Konstantinupolis-Istanbul bis zum Beginn des 17. Jahrhun-
derts (Tubingen, 1977), 186 f. Great (Epist. IV, 30) to the wife of Emperor Maurice, in which
the empress' request for the translation of relics of Paul to a
7?This layout is conjectured by J. B. Ward-Perkins, "Notes onchurch in his honor in the Imperial Palace at Constantinople is
the Structure and Building Methods of Early Byzantine Archi-
denied. Cf. R. Janin, La glographie ecclisiastique de l'Empire byzan-
tecture," in The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors, Second Re-
tin, Premikre partie, Le si~ge de Constantinople et le patriarcat oecumi-
port, ed. D. T. Rice (Edinburgh, 1958), 69 f.
nique. III, Les iglises et les monasthres, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1969), 393.
Krautheimer,
78, makes Early Christian
this identification, and Byzantine
while S. Eyice, Architecture3
"Les 6glises byzan- .... 75As pointed out by C. Mango, "The Life of St. Andrew the
tines st plan central dIstanbulr" CorsiRav 26 (1979), 140, says Fool Reconsidered," RSBS 2 (1982), 302 (rpr. in his Byzantium
that the edifice had the form of the Anastasis. and Its Image: History and Culture of the Byzantine Empire and Its
Heritage [London, 1984], no. VIII).

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
292 W. EUGENE KLEINBAUER

is, however, Their

the late fifth century or the sixth.76 aisleless, very
and bears
lo-no relation what-
cation suggests a possible linkevertoin scale, design, or function to the buildings
Constantinople.
here
Adrianople was the first major under consideration.
staging pointItto was the
a bath building.
west of Constantinople, beingRather than point
located on to thethis prin-
structure as an anteced-
cipal highway from Asia Minorent of
tothethe
double-shell tetraconch, or postulate lost
Balkans.77
The sawtooth bands decoratingexamples
theof such
northa layout, we are reconstructing
facade
the historicaloccurring
of the "Red Church" are a feature record more accurately
in by under-
scoring
Constantinople and suggest a the avant-garde
connection character of the double-
between
shell
this church building and the central building
capital. Suchtype as a complete archi-
a link
can be further established bytectural concept, be it circular,
the vaulting of the a tetraconch,
octaconch,
edifice and by its murals, which have or even
beenhexaconch.
traced Nor does this type
to the imperial city.78 stand alone as an innovative architectural concep-
tion in the here
In sum, the material presented East Mediterranean
demon- in the age of Con-
stantine. Forwas
strates that the double-shell concept example,
knownthe Constantinian
in church
of the as
the later Constantinian period, Nativity
early at Bethlehem
as 326 consisted
or of an octag-
onal structure
327, and that Emperor Constantine featuringspon-
himself an ambulatory round a
sored two buildings embodying circular opening
that fused to onehis
concept; short end of an
aisled basilican
daughter erected a third example. Thestructure,
date a design
andwithout known
imperial patronage of theseprecedent.80
buildings cannot be
merely coincidental: in the last Although
decade a link of
may the
exist between
em-S. Costanza
and theunder
peror's life architects working Anastasis Rotunda, no model-copy rela-
his direct
tionship can
sponsorship employed the concept inbethree
established between the latter and
major
centers specially favored bythe cathedral
him. Wasat Antioch.
theThe archetype must have
genus
therefore a Constantinian innovation? It is not been invented elsewhere. No conclusive evidence
proves that it originated at Constantinople, but
known to have existed in the pre-Constantinian
period, though archeology always has surprises several
in indications point in that direction.8' The
ecclesiastical
store for us. Some specialists have theorized that functions of the Anastasis Rotunda
aisled tetraconchs occurred earlier, and their and the cathedral of Antioch suggest that the ar-
theory might seem to be supported by the recentchetype was a church building at Constantinople.
excavation of a palace or villa at Gamzigrad, which
included a kind of pentacubiculum. Whether this
V. M. it
residence was imperial or official is unclear; Strocka (Mainz, 1982), 485-92, which probes the question
of the function of the complex. For the presumption of a secu-
dates to the end of the third century or thelar,
very
pre-Constantinian tetraconch edifice, see I. Lavin, "The
start of the fourth.79 The tetraconch at Gamzigrad
House of the Lord: Aspects of the Role of Palace Triclinia in
the Architecture of Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages,"
ArtB 44 (1962), 1-27, esp. 21; and, in particular, Krautheimer,
76For three of these buildings, see Grossmann, op. cit.
Early Christian and Byzantine Architectures .ev., 66, 78, 80-82, 240-
43; idem, "Success and Failure in Late Antique Church Plan-
(above, note 22), fig. 3, including a new reconstruction of the
Hagia Sophia at Adrianople. For the fourth, the aisled tetra-ning," in Age of Spirituality (above, note 41), 121-39, esp. 131-
34.
conch at Lin, see note 26 above,
80 Krautheimer, "Constantinian Basilica," 133 note 60, with
77 C. J. Jiretek, Die Heerstrasse von Belgrad nach Constantinopel
earlier bibliography, and fig. 8E. Significantly, the best parallels
und die Balkanpisse (Prague, 1877), 47 f, 99 f, 132 f; V. Beheliev,
to this design are the Constantinian foundations of SS. Mar-
"Bemerkungen uiber die antiken Heerstrassen im Ostteil der
cellino e Pietro at Rome (Krautheimer, "Mensa-Coemeterium-
Balkanhalbinsel," Klio 51 (1969), 483 if.
Martyrium" [above, note 62], 15 if, fig. 5; also see note 64
7For the source of the decorative bands, see P. L. Vocoto-
above) and Old St. Peter's at Rome (Krautheimer, Early Christian
poulos, "The Role of Constantinopolitan Architecture during
the Middle and Late Byzantine Period," Akten des XVI. Interna-
and
mer Byzantine
building a Architecture3
niched rotunda....adjoins
55-60 the
and narthex
figs. 21-22).
of a In the for-
basilica,
tionalen Byzantinistenkongress Wien, 4.-9. Oktober 1981, I/2 (=JOB
in the latter a transept adjoins a basilica.
31/2 [1981]), 571 note 89, fig. 9. For the source of the vaulting,
81The only other East Mediterranean center where the
see Deichmann, Einfiihrung, 261; idem, BZ 52 (1959), 129. For
the murals, see A. Grabar, The Golden Age of Justinian, trans. double-shell
S. concept may have been created is Nicomedia, pos-
sibly Constantine's principal residence in the 320s (see note 59
Gilbert and J. Emmons (New York, 1967), 182. Cf. E Filov, Ge-
schichte der altbulgarischen Kunst (Berlin, 1932), 4.
above). Nicomedia had experienced a building boom under
Diocletian, and the extent of Constantine's building activity
,M. (anak Media, Gamzigrad, kasnoantigka palata: Architektura
there is unrecorded, save for a reference by Eusebius to a big
i prostorni sklop, Saopitenja Republitki zavod za zaltitu spome-
nika kultura SR Srbije (Belgrade, 1978); M. Mirkovid, "Eine and sumptuous church in honor of Christ, "a memorial of vic-
tory over his enemies and the adversaries of God (VC, III, 50,
spatromische befestigte Villa in der Provinz Dacia Ripensis," in
trans. Mango, op. cit., 11). For other churches in the city, see
Palast und Hutte; Beitrage zum Bauen und Wohnen im Altertum von
Archtiologen, Vor- und Frilhgeschichtlern, ed. D. Papenfuss RE
and33 (1936), 491, s.v. "Nikomedeia" by W. Ruge.

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE DOUBLE-SHELL TETRACONCH BUILDING AT PERGE 293

All we can do is wonder whether it was one of the identity, it was an innovative and influential mo
"many places of worship and martyrs' shrines ument of which was conceived at a place and time-
great size and beauty" that Eusebius reports surely between 324 and 326 or 327-that wit-
Em-
peror Constantine built in that city.82 Whatever nessed the
its introduction of a number of novel ar-
chitectural plans and a flurry of building activity to
82Constantine is said to have planned a new imperial palace accommodate the new seat of the government and
and one or more churches dedicated to Christ at Constanti-
the Christian faith in the East, indeed a revolution-
nople, but their arrangements are unrecorded. See C. Mango,
ary
The Brazen House: A Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial and of
Palace decisive period in the history of western
Constantinople, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes architecture.
Selskab,
Arkaeologisk-kunsthistoriske Meddeleser 4, 4 (Copenhagen,
1959); R. Janin, Constantinople byzantine: Dtveloppement urbain et
rtpertoire topographique, 2d ed. (Paris, 1964), 106 if; Dagron, op. Indiana University-Bloomington
cit., 88 f, 92 if; Miuller-Wiener, op. cit., 20, 144. For the refer-
ence to Eusebius see VC, III, 44.

This content downloaded from

80.112.130.90 on Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms