THE OUTSIDE IMAGE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF EXTERNAL ARCHITECTURAL DISPLAY ON MIDDLE BYZANTINE STRUCTURES ON THE BLACK SEA LITTORAL by ROGER STEPHEN SHARP A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham December 2010 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT. This study is concerned with the manner in which Byzantium manifested itself through the exterior of its buildings. The focus is the Black Sea from the ninth century to the eleventh. Three cities are examined. Each had imperial attention: Amastris for imperial defences; Mesembria, a border city and the meeting place for diplomats: Cherson, a strategic outpost and focal point of Byzantine proselytising. There were two forms of external display; one, surface ornament and surface modelling, the other through the arrangement of masses and forms. A more nuanced division can be discerned linked with issues of purpose and audience. The impulse to display the exterior can be traced to building practice at imperial level in the capital in the early ninth century. Surface ornament continued to be linked with the display of secular authority. Display through structure was developed in Cherson and the north Black Sea region to project the presence of Orthodoxy and was closely associated with conversion activity. By the end of the tenth century, through that external presentation, the form of the church building had itself become symbolic. External display can be seen as a vehicle for the expression of regional forms and evidence for the tenacity of local building “dialects”. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am honoured to have been the student of Prof. Leslie Brubaker whose guidance, enthusiasm and support have been vital throughout my period of study. I have been glad to have received academic guidance from many in my journey. I would specifically wish to thank Prof. A. A. Bryer, Prof. Robert Ousterhout, Prof. Adam Rabinowitz, Dr.Eric Ivison, Dr.Renata Henneberg, Dr. Chris Salter and Dr.Larissa Sedikova, Dr. Ruth Macrides, Dr. Archie Dunn, Dr. Dimiter Angelov and Dr. Kallirroe Linardou. I wish to especially thank Prof. Chris Wickham for his assistance in enabling me to join the team from the University of Texas at Austin working at the Preserve of Tauric Chersonesos, Crimea and where, over three years, I gained valuable experience in the assessment of archaeological material and had the opportunity to closely examine a site of vital interest to this study. I have had cause to rely on a number of people for help in translations particularly from Old (and New) Russian and Ukrainian. I thank Kelly Linardou, Olga Nikolaiovna Bean, Muzzy Pandir, Yuliya Miroshnichenko, Evgenia (Jenny) Fomina, Larissa Novitskaya, Hélène Vernis and Teresa Sharp. I thank my son Thomas for his invaluable help in the manipulation of computer images. Lastly, but by no means last, I thank my wife, Teresa for her unstinting support and readiness, over ten years, to forego holidays to places other than those with a Byzantine relevance. CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ABBREVIATIONS Page no. I. INTRODUCTION 1 1. The aim and purpose of the study 1 2. The sources 4 2.1 Chronicles 4 2.2 Hagiography 7 2.3 Manuals and treatises 9 2.4 Correspondences and reports 11 3. Approaches 12 3.1 Identified approaches 13 3.2 The choice of approach 19 4. Scholarship on external display 22 5. The meanings and forms of external display 26 6. External architectural display from a Byzantine perspective 31 6.1 The Vita Basilii 31 6.2 The works of Theophilos 37 7. The period and the region 42 7.1 The Black Sea as a region 42 7.2 The “Sea of the Rum” 45 7.3 The Black Sea cultural links 47 8. The method of approach 50 II THE THREE BLACK SEA CITIES: AMASTRIS, THE NAVAL 53 BASE 1. Pre-medieval Amastris and the city’s geographical position 53 2. Medieval Amastris 56 2.1 Trade 60 2.2 Governance and regulation 62 2.3 The city under attack 63 2.4 Increased ecclesiastical importance 65 2.5 Increased strategic importance 67 3. The medieval monuments of Amastris 69 3.1 The walls 69 3.1.1 General description and layout 69 3.1.2 Identifiable phases and sequencing 71 3.1.3 The decorative elements 74 3.1.4 Dating 76 3.1.4.1 Persian raiding 76 3.1.4.2 Arab raids 76 3.1.4.3 Dating first phase construction 79 3.1.4.4 Subsequent events 83 3.1.4.4.1 The Arab threat 83 3.1.4.4.2 Rus’ raiding 85 3.1.4.5 Dating the intermediate phases 87 3.2 The churches 89 3.2.1 Fatih Camii 90 3.2.1.1 The general masonry 91 3.2.1.2 Elements of display 92 3.2.2 Kilise Mescidi 93 3.2.2.1 General masonry 94 3.2.2.2 External display 94 3.2.3 Dating of the churches 95 3.2.3.1 Foundation form 97 3.2.3.2 Masonry and embellishment 102 Historical context and external display 114 III THE THREE BLACK SEA CITIES: MESEMBRIA, THE BORDER 118 CITY 1. Pre-ninth-century Mesembria 118 2. Mesembria and the Bulgars 124 3. The ninth- and tenth-century monuments of Mesembria 132 3.1 The walls 132 3.2 The churches 135 3.2.1 St. John the Baptist 135 3.2.2 St. Stephen (or the New Metropolis) 141 3.3 The dating of the churches 148 3.3.1 St. John the Baptist 148 3.3.1.1 Surface embellishment 155 3.3.1.2 Façade modelling 161 3.3.1.3 A proposed dating 172 3.3.2 St. Stephen 184 3.3.2.1 Idiosyncrasies of the structure 184 3.3.2.2 Dating and historical context 192 Historical context and external display 197 IV THE THREE BLACK SEA CITIES: CHERSON, THE IMPERIAL OUTPOST 202 1. Pre-medieval Cherson 202 1.1 Original settlement and geographical position 202 1.2 Early Christian Cherson 205 2. Cherson in the ninth and tenth centuries 210 2.1 Changes in north Black Sea power structures 210 2.2 Cherson as strategic centre 215 2.2.1 Early warning role 215 2.2.2 Protection of naphtha wells 216 2.2.3 Garrison and naval base 216 2.3 Trading centre 217 2.4 The polyglot city 220 2.5 Centre for imperial evangelism 222 3. Ninth- and tenth-century monuments of Cherson 225 3.1 Phases of building 226 3.2 Identifying middle Byzantine structures 227 3.3 The issue of external display 233 3.3.1 The Church in the Citadel 237 3.3.2 The Basilica within the Basilica 239 3.3.3 Cruciform domed church (No.9) 247 3.3.4 The Five Apsed Church 250 3.3.4.1 General form and purpose 250 3.3.4.2 Dating the structure 252 3.4 Summary 255 3.5 Cherson and the architecture of conversion 257 3.5.1 Alania 260 3.5.2 Abasgia 267 3.6 Summary 270 4. Sv. Sophia, Kiev 271 5. The church as symbol 275 V THE THREE BLACK SEA CITIES: REVIEW OF THE 278 MONUMENTS 1. Typological division 278 2. The origin and initial purpose of external display 281 3. The purposes of external display in our period 286 4. Lines of influence 288 A final word 293 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Sv. Sophia, Kiev ca. 1651 Page 29 2. Black Sea Region Following page 42 3. Church plans: Cherson, Amastris and Mesembria Following page 52 4. Amastris Following page 53 5. Amastris. Bedesten Following page 53 6. Amastris. Bedesten Following page 53 7. Amastris. Inner and outer city walls Following page 70 8. Amsatris. Lighthouse and associated building Following page 70 9. Amastris. Wall; facings and core Following page 70 10. Amastris. Walls; core detail Following page 70 11. Amastris. Tower G Following page 72 12. Amastris. Boz Tepe south gate Following page 72 13. Amastris. Boz Tepe south gate. Detail of spolia Following page 72 14. Amastris. Lighthouse Following page 73 15. Amastris. Tower G. Detail of spolia Following page 73 16. Amastris. Tower G, spolia on west face Following page 73 17. Amastris. West outer gate Following page 75 18. Amastris. Curtain wall between Towers D and E Following page 75 19. Amastris. Fatih Camii. Apse Following page 89 20. Amastris. Kilise Mescidi. Apse Following page 89 21. Amastris. Fatih Camii. Masonry; north wall from the west Following page 91 22. Amastris. Fatih Camii. West facade Following page 91 23. Amastris. Fatih Camii. Detail of apse opus reticulatum Following page 92 24. Amastris. Fatih Camii. South wall at upper east Following page 92 25. Amastris. Fatih Camii. Lintel over west entrance Following page 93 26. Amastris. Fatih Camii. North wall. Spoil lintel Following page 93 27. Amastris. Fatih Camii. South façade Following page 93 28. Amastris. Fatih Camii. Detail of medallion Following page 93 29.