Some remarks on the ConstantinopoÜtan andAnatolia.n influences on tht /yfiddle Byzanti.ne sculpture of eastem Macedonia and westem Thrace.
From the of the Byzantine Empire, the regions of Trtrace and Macedonia were under the politicaJ and culturaJ sphere of Constantinople, the capital of the Empire. The Byzantine architectural monuments preserved in the cities of Thrace and Macedonia - from the 5th to the 15th century - testify to the und.iscussed influences of the capital. Besides the painting and minor arts, the sculpture is one that can gjve us important information about the stylistic developments and daring problems of the monuments to which they belong. Like all artistic productions, so also for sculpture, the school of Constantinople was the dominant one in all the Empire: frorn the Early Byzantine period the wcrk- 1 shops of the capital were the centres for the creation of new decorative and typologicaJ forms. In particular, the workers of Proconnesian and Thassian marble contributed to the creation of the so-called Byzantine impost capital, which is a further transformation of the Roman Corinthian one, with natural designs, made into a more schematic capital. These changes begin and develop in the 5th cenrury to be completely determined in the first of the The naturalistic fonns, which sti11 characterised the Early Byzantine sculpture, d.isappear in rnectieval tirnes. In this period we can see stylised vegetal motifs like Jeaves, quatrefoi1s, palmettes, hybrid scroBs and multishape rosettes, and abstract geometrical designs such as circles, spira1s, squares, triangles, hexagons, octagons, rhombuses, star shapes, knot forms and various crnsses. The forms are usua11y carved on flat or sometime on projecting relief, with figural cornposüions like Christ, the Virgin, saints and the Deisis. These composirions, generally with an 'arabesque' effect, suggest an oriental style of Islamic origin. Middle Byzantine sculpture mater:ial can be collected within the a specific tendency based on iconographic and material sirniJarities. This current coincides with the ascent to the throne of the Macedonian dynasty (867-1064). In this period a renewal is noticed in the Empire. The revival of the economy, of agriculturai and of urban life, also permitted artistic production. In the meantime, with a law that emanated from the ernperor Leo the VI (886-912) - in the beginning of the 1O'h
century - the autonomies of the cities were abolished 1• This caused the transformation of the city from a provinciaJ administrative centre to an ecciesiasticai one. The concept of the 'polis' was associated to the presence ofa bishop: the result of
this is that the main archaeolovcaJ remains are part of the liturcicalC decoraticn of religjous buiJciings such as churches. bishop's paJaces, rnonasteries or pilgrimage
1 G. Ostrogorsky, "Byzantine cities in the Middle Ages", Dumbanon Oaks Papers 13 (l 959), p. 47-66 (65-66). . '
centres. So, most of this material consists of slabs, colonnerres. capitals and parts of ambos, a11 mostly a part of the liturgical furnishings ofa church. 'Wb.ile for the Early Byzantine period the sculptural material is numerous m Turkish Iands, the material of the Middle period becomes scanty because of the Arab raids, and then the Turkish ones, into the eastern provinces of the_ Empire. This continuous danger influenced not only the politica1 and social life, but also artistic production. In Greece and in the Balkans by contrast the phenomenon is the opposüe: we have nurnerous examples of Middle and Late Byzantine material. in this the western part of the Empire, and the most irnportant fact is that this material is mostly connected with dated buildings. In Asia Minor the sculptural materiai has daring
problems 2: unfortunately, because of the uncertain history of Anatolia between the and 12th centuries 3 it has become to make chronological considerarions. Now, far Constantinople the problem is almost similar: we know from the sources that from the 9th century in the capital there were new constructions and the decoration of old buildings. But the destruction of the city by the Crusaders in 1204 and the re-urbanization by the Turks after the conquest of 1453, did not pemrit the survival of most of them. In this context dated Constmtinopoiitan production is
4 restricted to a few examples • First of all there is the decoration of the church of the monastery built by patrikius Konstantinos Lips in 90'7, which is considered the most rich and fine, sculptural decoration of the MiddJe Byzantine
period5• The decorative repertoire contains motifs sucb as Sassanid palmettes: complicated floral forms; rosettes, peacocks and eagles, al1 finely carved (Fig.1). Some of the marble pieces are ancient spolia reused and in part re-carved. The decoration of the churcb of Lips is the best example of the Constantinopolitan sculptura1 art of the Middle period: it was the origin of the motifs and styles. which
were deveioped in a11 the territories of the Ernpire from the 10th cemury onwards6• Apart from the decoration of the church of Lips, there are a few small exarnples
: C. Barsanti, Scultura anatolica di epoca mediobizantina, ( Milion. Studi e Ricerche d' Arte Bizantina I), Roma 1988,p. 275-306. 3 S. Vryonis, The decline of medieval Hellenism in Asia and the process of Islami::,ation from the eleventh through the century, Berkcley-Los Angeles-London 1971. 4 For Constantinopolitan sculpturc in general: A. Grabar, Sculptures uyzantines du Moven Age. Tl, XT e- X!Ve siecle. (BCA 12), Paris 1976: N. La sculpture byzantine figuree au Musee d'Istanbul, (BIFE-\, 30), Paris 1990; J.-P. Sodini, La sculpture medio-byzantine:le marbre en ersar., et tel qu'en lui-meme, (Constantinople and its Hinterland, ed.C.Mango-G.Dagron), Variorum. i\shgate 1995, p. 239-311. 5 T.Macridy- AH.S. Megaw- C.Mango-J.W.Hawkins, 'Thc monastery of Lips Isa at Istanhul", Durnharton Oa.ks Papers 18 (1964), p. 251-315~ C. Mango- J.W. Hawkins. '"Additional finds at Fenari Isa Camii, Dumbarton Oak.s Papers 22(1 %8), p. T! ss. " üne ex.amp!e of this influence is visible in the church of in Licia: J. Morgansrern, The By::,antine church at and its Mitreilungen Band 29) Tübingen 1983.
2 .., scattered in the city this material is not sufficient to the development of the Middle Byzantine sculpture of Constantinop!e. On the basis of these, it is possible to anal;·se some of the pieces coming from western Thrace and eastem Macedonia: some of them are in situ, located in the dated monuments, while others come from different archaeological sites or are scattered in the countryside that contained the site of the unknown monuments. Fer their close relations with the style of capital, some will be analysed more dose!y. First of all there is the decoration of the monastic church of Theotokos
Kosmosoteira in Pherrai 8 . The church was an imperial foundation founded by the sebastokrator Isaakios Komnenos; third son of the empcror Aleksios I {1081-1118) and it is dated to 1152. The katholikon is a good exarnple of architecture of Constantinople. A large dome surrounded by four smaHer domes at the corners dominates the interior. Four arches support the central dome: two pairs of very slim marble columns support the westem ones. The capita!s on these columns are very richly decorated. The capitals are impost capitals and they have a smaller kalathos and a large abacus, both of them decorated with large leaves of palmettes. \.V1ü1e the capitals on the northem side (Fig. 2) preserve thefr miginal design, the capitals under the southern arch (Fig. 3) present a decoration of a surface with sty1ised leaves surrounding a central medallion made with a tress design. These capitals, it seems, were re-carved. In fact, the earlier carving was changed partly and the design of the little - probably containing a cross ora monogram or even the figure ofa saint - is closer to the ones placed in the parekklesion of the church Khora rebuilt and decorated by Theodoros Metokhites around 1316-1320 9• The decoration of these capitals show similarities to Constantinopolitan works such as the capitals of the naos of the former church of H. Andreas en Krisei in the district of Samatya ( today's Koca Mustafa camii) 10. The church was founded
7 Remains in the complex of Pantokrator, in Pantepoptes and in Kalenderhane camii are not for a complete lecture on medieval sculptural art of the capital. More significant are the later decorations of the church of H. Andre-as en Krisei huilt 1284 circa, of the parekklesion of Theotokos Pammakaristos dated 1310-15 circa the rehuilding of the complex of Khora hy Tht-•odoros Metokhites around J 316-20. These gi\'e us an idea of thc development of the sculptural :m of Constantinople in thc Latc Byzantine period. F. Uspenskij, "Konstantinopol'skij Saraljskij Kodeks Vos'miknizijn", f::,vestija Russkago Archeologiceskago lnstituta v Konstantinopole, !2 (1907). p. 24 s. pi. 1-6; A. Orlandos, " Ta ~1.);0'NTIVa µ:•?TJJJZW. ··, IV (1933), p. 3-29; N. Patterr.on-Sevcenko, Greek- Onhodox Theologica! 29 (1984). p.135-140; S. Sinos, Die Klosterkirche der Kosmosoteira in Bera (Vira). Münich 1986. " M. Dcnnert, klittelhv;:,antinische kapitelle,(Asia Minor Studicn hand 25). fümn 1997, p. 80-84,pl. 3 /l 72a-b; O.Feld. "Zu den Kapitellcn des Tekfur Saray in Istanhul", Jstanbufer ! 9/20 ( ! 969/70), p.359-367, pi. 75/5-6: 0. Hjort," The sculpture of Kariye Camiii", Dumbarton Oaks Papers, :n c 1979). p. 201-289. 1" \V.E. Betsch, The and distribution cf Lale Amique capital in (1Jni\. of Pennsyl\'ania Ph.D. Diss. 1977) Ann Arbor 1979, pp. 94-95, 264-266, 285-286; Le sculturc in fun:ione della di S. Andrea a ()CVHith
3 around 1284 b.> prtncess Thec}Qora Raoule1na~ n!ece of the emper0r ~-f{khael \'TTT
Paleologos (l 259- 1282) 11 • It is known from the sources that in the same place there was a church of t.he 51h century, probably in mins after the Crusader domination. The wido~' princess rebuilt the church with a monastery. 1n constrnction spolia pieces have been used, especially capitals form the 5th-6th centuries. The used on the columns of the western side of the naos (Fig. 4) show a kalathos completely carved with acanthus leaves. These leaves are carved on the surface with no pla..c;:ticity and natura1ism. This type of design is a Middle Byzantine imitation of 6h centuf)' visible in the Justinianic period, especia!!y in the decoration of H. Sophia. The motif of the abakus wrth palmette leaves in particular is connected to another capital from the Constantinopolitan church of Khalkoprateia (Fig. 5), dated to the restoration of the ernperor Basileios I ( 867-886) at the end of the 9th century. and now in the
ArchaeologicaJ Museum of !stanbul 12• A similar motif is repeated in the surviving frames (Fig. 6) of the narthex of the Metamorphosis church in the Princely island of Burgaz (ancient Antigoni), built by the same emperor 1n the case of the leaves with deeply rnark:ed furrows, similarities are to be found in numerous examples dated to between the and 11 th centuries. In the sarne place there is an impost capital (Fig. 7} with a flared shape. It is decorated with stylised leaves arranged at the comers 14• Regarding the motif of the spiny acanthus leaves that cover all the of the kalathos, a similar taste is visible in a capital frorn another Constantinopolitan builcüng: the parekklesion of the church Theotokos Pamrnakaristos dated around 1310- 15. Here the south-westem capital (Fig. 8) of the little chapel is decorated with smaH acanthus leaves that cover ali the kalathos 15• The design with interlaced circle-s containing crosses and floreal motifs is visible on the frame of the dome. Crosses and Ieaves are also on the small capitals of the apse windows. These similarities and the lntemational Congress of Byzantine Studies, Summaries of Communications). Moscow 1991, p. 1252- 53; M. Dcnncrt. op.cit, p. 105-107, pi. 39/216. 11 J. Pargoire, "Constantinop!e, Saint Andre de Crisis". Echos d'Oriem, 13 (!910). p. 84-86; R. Janin. "Lcs Couvent<; secondaries de Psamathia", Eclws d'Oriem, 32 (1933),p. 326-33l; S. Eyice, Son devir mimarisi, /stanbul 1980, p. 7-14. W.E. Betsch, op. ciL, p. 282, fig. 164; M. Dennert, op. p. 66---67, pl. 26/144. 13 R. Janin, La Giographie &clisiastique de l"Empire By::.a.ntin~ Us islises lc.5 des grands byz.antins (Bith_vnie, Latros. Galesios, Trihiumde, Athenes, Thessalonique). Paris 1975, p. 64. A.B. "Alcuni ritrovamenti scultorei da (XTXth Intemational Cong:ress of Byzantinc Studies. Summaries of Communications), Copenhagen l 996, p. 525 ! ; ohservation~ hy same in lslands Survey, ed. E. Publication5 of Latc Antiquity Research Gmup. London 2001,p. 4-5.
1·' R. Kautzsch, Kapitellstudien. Beitriige zu einer Geschichte des im vom 4. his ins 7. (Studien zur spatantiken Kunstgeschichte 9), Bcr!in-Lcipzig 1936, p. WQ, pi.40! 672; W.E. Bctsch, op. ciL, p. 286, 169; H. Be!ting-C. Mango- D. Mouriki, Th;: mmaics frocoes of the Mary Pamma.karistos (Fethive Camii) Washington 1978, pl. X.7; M. Dennert.., or. cit., p. l l 8-1 l 9. pl.45/251.
4 leaves are also on the small capitals of the apse windows. These similarities and the different capitaI of the other side - which is still Middle Byzantine - suggests a use of spolia in Paieologean times. Late imitation of this type is visible in the small iconostasis capital from the church of Prangi near Didimotiho, where the Ieaves are
not deeply cut and are very styiised. The church of Prangi is dated to between the 12th- l 3th centuries 16• Still from Kosmosoteira is an interesting capital found outside the church (Fig.
9-10): it is now preserved at the Benaki Museum in Athens17• The overturned pyramid- shaped capital presents the so- called decoration of "panel" capitals, a type of irnpost created in the century and visible in the foundations of the emperor Iustinanos (5'27-
565), but also in later times 18• The sides of this type have the 'panels' that are frarned with simple mouldings containing motifs like crosses, monograms, veget:ai motifs
etc. 19• In the case of the example of Kosmosoteira, the mouidings are. cut with a herring-bone design. On two sides a cross - flanked by spirals and ivy leaves - is visible (aJthough one of the cross has been erased, probably in Turkish times). On the other- sides there is a stylised palmette-tree with fleshy leaves. This capital is very interesting because it brings together the Constantinopolitan styles of the decoration of Lips (in the design of palrnette-tree) as well as more provincial tastes (in the design of the cross with spirals). Similarities -are to be found with the decoration of a MiddJe Byzantine sarcophagus front from Saray 20 in eastern Thrace), and now in the Archaeological Museum of (Fig.11). The cross with double mouJdings, with spirals and ivy leaves, reminds of the ones in the capital. The sarne type of double moulded cross and spirals are on one unpubiished slab from the Museum of Çanakkale (Fig. 12).
16 C. Bakirtzis, La Thrace (330-7453), Tbrace, Secreteriat General de la Region de Macedonie Orientale et de Tbrace 1994,p. 205; M. Dennert, op. cit., p. 107, pi. 39/219. 17 A. Orlandos, art cit.,p. 2J fig. 11; S. Sinos, op. cit, p. 72 9; M. Dennert, op. cit. p. 50-51, pl.19/108. I wish at this point to express my thanks to the Ephoria of Byzantine Antiquities of Kavala and the Benaki Museum of Athens far permitting my study and publication of this capital. Benaki Museum alsa kindly supplied me with the photos used in this article. 18 C. Barsanri, Capitello, area bi::,antina., (Enciclopedia deli' Arte Antica, Secondo Supplemento 1971 - 1994), Roma 1994, vol.I p. 867-873; J.-P. Sodini-C. Barsanti- A.. Guiglia Guidobaldi, La sculpture architecncral en marbre au Vle siecle Constantinopie et dans les regions sous influencE Constantinopolitaine, (Acta xm Congressus Internationalis Archaeologiae Chrisrianae). del Vaticano- Split 1998, p. 301-376. 19 We have many ex.amples of this type - Middle Byzantine- spread throughout the rerritories of Empire. Numerous ones are preserved in Istanbul (Archaeological Museum et al.), in and in Greece. ::o S. Eyice," Trakya'da Bizans devrine ait eserler", Belleten 33 (1969), p. 325-358, fig. 23: O. Feld. "Mittelbyzantinische Sarcophage", Römische Quartalchrift 65 (1970), p. 158-184, pi. 5/b. Fe!d dar.es the sarcophagus to 11 - l century.
5 The palmette -tree in the style of Constantinopolitan school can stili be found in a capital preserved in the Archaeological Museum of IstanbuI 21 (Fig. 13) as well as in an unpublished one from the Asian shore of Istanbul (Fig. 14). The round and elegant leaves can be compared with the ones on one slab from the above-quoted church of Metamorphosis on the is1and of Antigoni (Fig. 15). The manufacture of the leaves is similar to those on another slab fragrnents (Fig. 16-17) found at the excavations of the substructure near the church of the Myrelaion in 1993
(today's Bodrum Camii) in Istanbul 22• This building -stiII dated with difficu.lty- must have hada consolidation at the time of the church 's construction in the first half of the 10th century. Another fragment of this fine carving of elegant leaves is visible in one beautiful capital preserved in the Museum of Kornetini, originally from
Kosmosoteira23 • The shape of the fleshy leaves reminds of the same ones carved on the frames of the north church of Lips, which is dated ta 907. We can notice here references to the Sassanian motifs and tbe conternporary Islarnic art products. In fact, during the reign of Basileios 1(867-886), antique oriental fashions were very successful. The elegant and fleshly leaves are visible in Kavala on slabs fr~oments reused for a fountain in the garden of the modern church dedicated to the Theotokos (Fig.
18), built around 1950 on the same place of a previous church 24• In this fountain, fragments of Midd]e Byzantine slabs have been used. Only half the pi ece at the centre is preserved: here in fact a big cross with three arrns ending with round forms is visible. At the sides of the vertical of the cross there are visible, inside a circle, a Maltese cross with pearled points and a leafed cross on a pedestal. The irreguiarity of the lateral rnotifs (the Maltese cross is not centrated) is probably an indication of the re-carving of the slab in later tirnes. On both lateral sides of this pi ece there are two fragments showing a palmette inside a heart shape marked with double mouldings. Between these two heart shape motifs a design ofa column is visible. On the right side, the column supports an irnpost capital carved with lines indicating the decoration of Jeaves. On the left side the colurnns are on a base. This means
" 1 M. Dennert, op. cit,p. 91, pi. 35/l 95a. Another similar one is in the second counyard of Palace Museum: H. Tezcan. ve çevresinin Bizans devri arkeolojisi, Jsmnbul l 989, p. 332 fig. 46i.
:::! For both of the fragmentary slabs see; A.B. Un'inedita scultura mediobi::.antina (Actes du Ter Congres IntemationaJ sur Antiochie de Pisid.ie. Collection d'Archeologie et d'Histoire de l'Antiquite of the Universite Lumiere - Lyon 2), Paris 2002, p. 403-413, pi. 9-1 O. A.K. Orlandos, art cit., p. 19 9; R. Kauzsch, op. cit, p. 209; M. Dennert. op. cit., p. 124 pi. ]48/267. 24 I would Iike to thank Mr. N. Roudometoff for the informarion on the modern churches of Kavala. for which it was difficult to find proper studies.
6 that the two lateral pieces origina11y used to form one slab dc(:orated w ith a double column 25 and four heard shaped motifs containing palmettes at the comers. This heart shaped motif containing a palmette design is to be found especial1y on the epist:yliums where a continuing decoration was possible. But a combination of
palrnettes on the four sides of the arms ofa cross is something not so common 26• It is visible in some sculptural examples which show a more simple design (in earlier examples) that later develops into a more elaborate form. This is the case of an impost capital preserved in the Archaeologjcal Museum of Ioannina n_ On one side of the plain and Iarge impost the four-heart-shaped motifs are carved, which with their lateral sides form a thin cross. The palrnette inside, with its fieshly leaves at the sides and the central oval bud, is very si mil ar to the ones of Kavala. The capitals come from the basilica of Glyky, whose later phase is dated to the second half of the 10th century
28• Another example of this design is carved on a_ sarcophagus front from Beroia, dated to between the 11 th -12th centurie?. Here the combination is enclosed inside a double rnoulded circle that interlaces to others. Contemporary to this piece is one slab found in Morovidz near Kocani 30 where, between a gouilloche of circles. a central lozange has the four palmettes insides the heart shaped forms. Later exampies are from H. Orous, Moni Pantocratoros (14th c.) and Arta, church of the Blacheme 31 where the design has became more elaborated and with several other smaII details. On the basis of these cornparisons it is possible to suggest that the pieces of the fountain of Kavala derive from around_ the 11 th -12th centuries by a workshop which was well acquainted with Constantinopolitan works (such as of Lips), because of their carefui and elegant execution.
In eastem Thrace an irnportant building is the Fatih Camii in Enez, ancient Ainos. The building was built like a church (H.Sophia) in the Middle Byzantine period (probably in the 12th c.) with the addition of an exonartex in the later period 32•
"5 Perhaps this column was the vertical arm ofa cross ora knotted column. An analysis allowed me to see the traces of carving at the centre; it is possible that at that point there were little monograms or other motifs. "" Tt is interesting that this motif is also to be found in a fresco in the towers of the cathe
L~ Athina 1988, p. 26 kaL 12, 136, pi. I 0/a. 30 S. decorarive sculpture in Macedonia V-VT and Xl-Xll c .. Skop_je-Melboume l 996, p. 11 O pi. 89/2. 90/5 . T. Pazaras, op. cit, p. 29 kaL20, pl.!5/b; p. 43 kat 51/g, pi. 38/g.
3" S. Eyice. art ciL at n. 20, p. 348-345; R. Ousterhout, Byzantine church at Enez: problems in twelfth-cenwry architecture", Jahrbuch der 35 ( 1985). p.
...., I In the open portico of the exonanex are used, like spolia, impost capitals from an earlier period (Fig. 19). These capitals show a simple carving style: on the sides are simple leaves and circles containing multi-pointed sta.rs. The motif of an arch containing a cross between stylised trees is an interesting one. The same motif is repeated on an impost capital preserved in the Museum of Komotini that was originally from Pherrai 33• These similarities show again the cornmon trends in this area: the sculptural decoration pieces from Enez and Pherrai with their ciose relationships seem to be the products of workshops that were we!l acquainted with Constantinopolitan styles. we must mention the three capitals preserved in the Archaeoiogical
Museum of Kavala (Fig. 20-21), which come frorn the city of 34• On the main sides there are visible, a big rosette (on one of which is carved the chrismon) with two stylised ivy flowers on stalks 35 and a leafed cross with a triple moulding. This cross has arms ending with double round fonns and it visibk _in numerous Middle Byzantine sculptural pieces such as an impost capital in the Museum of
Bursa36• In western Asia Minor one example is from Philadelphia which was drawn by Lampakes but is now lost 37• Unlike the other analysed pieces, the capitals of Kavala show a low carving almost Iike a design in the surface and are distinguished by provincial workmanship. The stylised leaves have lobes with large flutes and are similar to the ones visibie on
33 M. Dennert, op. cit..,p. 49-50, pi. 19/105-106. 34 I. Kakouris, " B,Ji;a.v-o.va 1-Q..CJVCJvqxc.va arro Ma.kedonika 16 (]976), p. 215-234. The author dates these capitals to the first third of the 11 th century. Considerations on the capitals are in O. Feld, "'Zu den Kapitellen des Tekfur Saray in Istanbul", lstanbuler Mitteilungen I 9/20 (1969-70), p. 359-367, pl.75/3. in this article Feld insists on the capitals being made from Proconnesian marbie and being products of Proconnesian workshops from around the beginning of the I century. A short analysis allowed me to question his theory: first of ali the marble seems to be the one expioited from the quarries around Kavala-Philippi. as is rightly asserted by Kakouris lSee p. 215). His affirmation on the production about the Proconnesian workshops (thus Constantinopolitan) based on the analogies with the rosettes carved on the sarcophagus of Jaroslav in KieY and the one in Ephesus is not sufficient In the case of the piece of Kiev, the petals of the rosette are concave and the one of Ephesus -despite being very similar in the case of carving of the petals- does not have the intemal small rosette. That type of rosette is very common in Middle Byzant:ine time and is often found in different variations. 35 This design is very cornrnon in Middle Byzantine sculpture and it is visible in numerous pieces with smaJI But in Kavala it is visible in a fragment ofa pillar of an iconosrasis preserved inside the citadel (Fig. 24). Here the addition ofa bowl-shaped flower is visible. one in which the central bud is raised. A similar one is to be found on one unpublished slab from the Archaeoiogical Museum of (Fig. 25). On the the same motif is simplified because of the limited space on the comers. 36 A. Grabar. op. ciL, p. 43----44, pl. X/b. n '- \ ,. • ... ,• .,.• G. Lampakes. C°H- c.nm;ct:_c ·,':llf.· Athina 1909. p. -404 220 (frag:mem in thc courtyard of the church of Panagia). Stil! in Philadeiphia. Lampakes records lhe dcsig:n of a Maltese cross very similar to the one on the slab used in the foumain of Kavala (p.38 fi g. 184).
Q... an unpublished slab (probably the front ofa sarcophagus) from Enez/Ainos (Fig. 22). Here two peacocks with two stylised leaves flank a stylised cypress. What unites these two pieces is a provincial execution, probab1y ofa local workshop of a.round the l 0th -1 1th centuries. These capitals seern to be the product of loca! workshops that were influenced by Constantinopolitan trends, and they are in fact closer to the provincial pieces. The stylised Ieaves that cover the sides of the cross are far from the elegant leaves that are visible on the fragmentary slab of the above-mentioned fountain, which for their carving and fleshly leaves are closer to the Constantinopolitan works such as the decoration of Lips. The comers of the capitals_ are decorated with a motif on interlaced circles containing small crosses and six-pointed stars. This design was common in Byzantine sculpture from the. earlier times. It is visible in the decorations of the capitals, of the epistyliums, of the pillars ete. Still in Kavala there is to be found an unpublished pi ece
(Fig. 23) walled up in the south wall of the church of H. Nikolaos38• This piece is a small fragment (probably of a pillar) and has a decoration of interlaced circles containing four-point stars and ivy flowers. üne is surprised how this alternation is repeated at the corners and the abacus of an impost capital preserved in the
Archaeological Museum of Istanbul 39• There are nurnerous pieces in western Thrace and eastern Macedonia that show close stylistic and iconographic relations to Constantinopolitan and Anatolian products. It is impossible to bring ali the possible cases into this short study. But from this brief analysis we can conclude that the Middle (and also the Late) Byzantine sculpture of western Thrace and eastern Macedonia shows close stylistic and iconographic relations to Constantinopoiitan works. This fact is due alsa to the imperial foundations to which these pieces belonged. Probably artists from the capital or their loca] students worked in the construction of numerous ecclesiastical and civil bui1dings in the region. Oose relations are visible with the pieces coming from the neighbouring areas influenced by the capital, such as eastem Thrace, Bithynia and the
38 The church was until l 9"..-2 the mosque of Ibrahim In the same place, during the Byzantine period, therc was a church dedicated first to the Apostle and then to St Lazaros (information supplied by. Mr. N. Roudometoff). 39 The capital (one of the two) was found during thc construction of the palace of Justicc and it is reported for the time in the AnnuaJ of the Archaeological Museum of Istanbul (Istanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri 9 (1%0) p. 60; C. Barsanti, uAncora sulla lastra con i monogrammi del monaco Giacinto, il prdesunto fondatore della Koimesis di Nicea", Annua.rio dell'lstituto di Storia dell'Arre N.S. l /1981-82 ( l 984), p. 6 2 and footnote 18; T. Zolll Konstantinopels vom 4. bis 6. Jahrhundert n.Chr. (Asia minor Studien band 14), Bonn 1994. p. 100; M. Dennert, op. ciL, p. 43 pi. 14/76. The dating of capitaJ is disputed: Barsanti and Zollt it to the 6'h c. ; for Dennert it cannot be any earlier than the 8 th c. I support this !ast in my opinion the capital belongs to the high Middle period.
9 . '
north-east Aegcan. The sculpture of the Greek rnainland, the an Asnu Bilban YALÇIN lstanbul lJniversity The photos are by the author ( except for n. l - from Macridy n. 9- l O - from Benaki Museum; and n. 22 - from l. Tunay)