The Structure of a Byzantine Codice Collated by Isabell Winter
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The structure of a Byzantine Codice Collated by Isabell Winter I have set myself a goal to try and recreate a bare bones example from each of the major binding styles. I have used J.A Szirmai's book “The Archaeology of Medieval Bookbinding”, 2007 to assist me in this goal. Too often we have all the information about the cover but not the structure of how the book was bound. The binding itself is often overlooked by researchers who are more often than not more interested in the content of the book rather than its structure. In a general sense I have observed a logical progression of complexity in the way a book is bound thru different time periods and locations. One problem I have come across is that almost anything goes, so it can be hard to define a style to a particular period as it can change so much thru location, time, collectors requests, binders trademarks. There is a lot of ambiguity around what is considered a Byzantine binding, this stems from the a lot of vagueness on the term. If you search byzantine online, the wikipedia listing states: The Byzantine Empire (or Byzantium) was the predominantly Greek-speaking eastern Roman Empire of the Middle Ages, centered around its capital of Constantinople, and ruled by emperors in direct succession to the ancient Roman emperors. It was called the Roman Empire and also Romania (Greek: Ῥωμανία, Rhōmanía) by its inhabitants and neighbours. As the distinction between "Roman Empire" and "Byzantine Empire" is largely a modern convention, it is not possible to assign a date of separation, but an important point is Emperor Constantine I's transfer in 324 of the capital from Nicomedia (in Anatolia) to Byzantium on the Bosphorus, which became Constantinople (alternatively "New Rome"). The Byzantine Empire existed for more than a thousand years (from approximately 306 AD to 1453 AD). During its existence, the Empire remained one of the most powerful economic, cultural, and military forces in Europe, despite setbacks and territorial losses, especially during the Roman–Persian and Byzantine–Arab Wars. The Empire recovered during the Macedonian dynasty, rising again to become a pre-eminent power in the Eastern Mediterranean by the late tenth century, rivaling the Fatimid Caliphate. After 1071, however, much of Asia Minor, the Empire's heartland, was lost to the Seljuk Turks. The Komnenian restoration regained some ground and briefly re-established dominance in the twelfth century, but following the death of Andronikos I Komnenos and the end of the Komnenos dynasty in the late twelfth century the Empire declined again. The Empire received a mortal blow in 1204 by the Fourth Crusade, when it was dissolved and divided into competing Byzantine Greek and Latin realms. Despite the eventual recovery of Constantinople and re-establishment of the Empire in 1261, under the Palaiologan emperors, successive civil wars in the fourteenth century further sapped the Empire's strength. Most of its remaining territory was lost in the Byzantine– Ottoman Wars, culminating in the Fall of Constantinople and its remaining territories to the Muslim Ottoman Empire in the fifteenth century. [extracted 24 Nov 2010]. As the time refereed to as Byzantine covers such a long period and the bookbinding tradition of the realm was not restricted to the mainland with Constantinople (Szirmai), geographical boarders are not really an applicable way to define what is a Byzantine codice. Nor is the time period given by Wikipedia as even with the fall of the empire the bookbinding style continued in a similar way for some time to come. Szimai has therefore considered 'byzantine bindings' based on their structural features: link-stitch sewing on more than two sewing stations, spine lining of cloth extending to the outer face of the boards, smooth back, wooden boards usual with grooved edges and onto the board edges, and fastenings of the peg and strap type. Obviously not all of these features occurred on every binding and as consistantly shown, different regions had different traits. According to Szimai, there are unfortunately due to three main reasons, hardly any original bindings left from the first half of the byzantine millennium, destruction of religious literature on the fall of the byzantine empire, neglect and ignorance of custodians who had no inhibitions about using leaves of ancient manuscripts to cover jam-jars or light the kitchen stove. And finally, latter owners www.isabell.paradise.gen.nz January 2011 Page 1 of 10 who had supposedly unsightly bindings, damaged or undamaged, rebound to fit with the taste of the period. Structure The bookblock or collection of quires (leaves of pages interfolded together) have been observed to consist of parchment and in latter period examples, paper. Evidence of tackets being used is common, with either the holes remaining of this practice (to keep pages together) or small remnants of the thread used to do this. There is some evidence of end pages being used either by the scribe leaving a few blank pages at the beginning and end or by the binder attaching a separate end page (by hooking it around the first and last quire). However there are also examples where there are no end pages and the book goes straight from the wooden board to the first page of text. This would have been individual to each binder/collectors request. Sewing stations were studied on 94 examples, and published by Federici and Houlis (1988). They were found to vary between three – seven, with four being the most common (followed by three and five). Szimai found two distinct pattens for the distribution of the sewing stations with the first being equally distributed along the edge of the spine and the second, also having equal distribution but the change over stations (points at the top and tail of the spine where you change direction) being located approx ½ way in the middle of the final segments. The sewing stations have been observed to have been generated by both methods of punched holes or cuts across the fold. The sewing of these codice's have three main characteristics according to Szimai 1. Link stitch sewing on more than two sewing stations 2. extended type of link stitch resulting in comparatively bulky chains 3. technique of sewing two haves of the bookblock separately and joining afterwards Szimai comments that the reason for sewing a bookblock in two halves is not quite apparent, but suggests that the binder wanted to have an identical and equally sound mode of hinging at either board. I experimented while making this book and attempted to sew it all at once from bottom to top, but noted the hinging loops I was then creating were rather floppy and loose, where as when you started at the board and then moved to the quires, you then looped around the three hinging loop threads which pulled them together giving a tighter appearance and structure. After removing my stitching several times while attempting this I did not join the two halves ½ way, I did so after attaching one quire to the board on one side and 5 on the other side, which is the reason for the joining cord to be near one board rather than in the middle of the spine, as you would expect. www.isabell.paradise.gen.nz January 2011 Page 2 of 10 While there has been research and assumptions made that the most common thread would be linen or hemp there does not appear to be any factual research. Szimai did comment that in his own observations on approximately 20 byzantine bindings the diameter of the thread used varied with some older 9th / 10th century bindings having a diameter of 1.3 – 1.8mm and latter medieval sewing threads seen in southern slavic and greek codices ranged from 0.6 – 1.1mm. Three methods of attachment of boards have been postulated for these bindings by Federici and Houlis, 1988) 1. The binder begins with making the hinging loops on the board at the first station, enters the first quire, exits at the second station where hinging is carried out, and proceeds in the same sequence, thus carrying out board attachment concomitiantly with the sewing and using the same piece of thread 2. Both boards first received a complete set of hinging loops made from sewing thread, then another needle is threaded and the sewing starts, linking the first quire to the prepared hinging loops. 3. The sewing of the bookblook and the making of hinging loops on the boards are carried out independently and in a final step of the operation, boards and bookblock are joined together with two separate lengths of thread. Szimai comments that 1, seems to be the most efficient and used when sewing the two bookblocks as halves and joining, where as 2 and 3 would prove useful during repairs. The lacing path used for anchoring the hinging loops varies quite a bit in examples where it has been noticed. It is important to note however that being able to identify what method has been used in extant examples is difficult as you need to see both the inside and outside of the boards to identify the attachment method, which unless the book is already in a bad state would result in you having to damage the leather cover and heavy fabric lining to observe. www.isabell.paradise.gen.nz January 2011 Page 3 of 10 Example of what the hinging loops look like on the inside of the book when the quires are sewn directly onto the boards. Holes should have been drilled smaller but was experimenting with this book.