Galleries

  The Constantinople church of Hagia Sophia or “Holy Wisdom” was built in just 5 years on the orders of Emperor Justinian the Great and solemnly consecrated by Patriarch Menas (536 - 552) on December 27, 537. Known as the “Great Church” (Megale Ekklesia) it is an example of the rare and brilliant solution of combining the two construction principles on a basilica floor plan with a dome. It was the pinnacle of Byzantine architecture and art, as nothing similar or equivalent was created in Byzantium in the following nine centuries.[1] Its architectural and artistic image embodied the Byzantines’ concept of the eternal, unfathomable divine beginnings.

  As an imperial Christian building, Hagia Sophia made Constantinople both the capital of the empire and the center of the Christian world. Later, as a mosque, it embodied the supremacy of Islam and the Ottoman Empire. In both cases, it is a symbol of the will of God.

  The Hagia Sophia has a rectangular floor plan with a narthex, a large central nave and two side aisles. The nave was screened off from the side aisles with colonnades. Above the side aisles and the inner narthex are galleries that create a U-shaped appearance and reinforce the tendency to centralize the huge domed basilica, another characteristic of Byzantine church architecture. Originally, access to the galleries in Hagia Sophia was via four towers with spiral ramps located at the four ends of the church - today only the towers at the north-western and north-eastern corners are still in use. Such towers with ramps are a traditional feature of churches in Constantinople, attested from the middle of the 5th century at the earliest (pic. 4, 4a).

  Galleries are very rarely described in the Byzantine sources, and where they do occur, the information is extremely sparse. In the non-Byzantine descriptions of Hagia Sophia, the galleries are described quite accurately in 1403 by the envoy of the King of Castile, Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo: “[The nave of the church] is surrounded by three large and wide aisles [i.e. galleries] connected to it, so that mass can be heard in all parts of the church. The arches of the naves are of green jasper, and unite their roofs with that of the body of the church [nave][2]; but the summit of the latter rises much higher than that of the naves. <...> The arched roofs of the naves surrounded the dome, except where the high altar stood.... The said arched roofs were ninety paces broad, and four hundred and ten paces round, and they were beautifully inlaid with mosaics”.[3]

  Before him, in 1349, Stefan of Novgorod also claimed that “... we went out of the church through the doors to walk with candles between the walls, as if forming a circle”.[4] According to an anonymous Armenian pilgrim (after ca. 1275 - before 1434), the church of Hadji Sofya “has < 2 > floors ... and on the upper floor there are 64 green columns <... > And on the upper floor there are 40 columns, all made of green marble”.[5]

  The galleries,[6] called “catechoumens” (κατηχούμενα, κατηχούμενεῖα ie. a place reserved for catechumens, “upper rooms” (ὑπερῷα), “colonnades” (στοαί) and, more rarely, “place for women” (γυνακαινίτης)[7] form a corridor located above the narthex and the aisles of the church, usually open to the nave through arcades or colonnades.[8] The lower part of the colonnade is closed by marble slabs with a parapet, the height of which varies between 1.20 and 1.50 cm. This creates a kind of separate lodges in the galleries. (pic. 5, 5a) The panels of the lodges are decorated with reliefs on the front and back, mainly with diamonds and crosses, most of which have been rendered unrecognizable. (pic. 6) The reliefs are not visible from below, as the wooden balustrade protrudes about one meter forward and follows the cornice. (pic 7, 7a) The floor of the galleries is, as Pero Tafour noted in 1437-1438, “made of large stones that are very finely cut and quite magnificent”.[9]

  The western gallery corresponds exactly to the ceiling of the inner narthex and its beveled parts extend along its entire length. (Photo 8) Its central section faces the nave, and the green marble circle set into the floor marks the place of the empress. (pic. 8a) At the south end of the west gallery is a double-leaf door (under no. 46) leading to rooms identified as the “small secreton” (office) of the Patriarchal Palace,[10] located directly above the southwest vestibule (“vestibule of the warriors”) and the adjoining spiral ramp leading down to “a large sekreton” and then to the entrance[11] in the east wall of the “vestibule of the warriors”.[12] (pic. 8b) Fragments of mosaics probably executed in the 70s of the 9th century[13] are preserved there. Their appearance is usually associated with the reign of Justin II (565-574).

  The plan of the south and north galleries resembles the aisles below with some differences. First of all, their colonnades of the exedrae deliberately do not match those of the side aisles below. (pic. 9, 9a, 9b). Next, originally all four main pillars had a tunnel at gallery level, but with the exception of the north-western pillar, all the other tunnels were bricked up during the Ottoman restoration. Last, the northern and southern galleries differs from the side aisles in the much lower height of the arches, which are not like those under and do not have as many mosaics, as well as in the excessive natural light from the large windows and the poor condition of the marble paneling.

  The low height of the cloister arches and their vaulted shape create the illusion that the galleries appear larger than the aisles. (pic. 10, 10a) The columns supporting the arches in the northern and southern galleries are similar to those in the side aisles, but are shorter and made of white marble.

  Their ornamental mosaic decoration and the simple marble paneling are only preserved in fragments.[14] The space between two columns is filled with a mosaic of stars and other geometric shapes (pic. 11).

  At the eastern end of the south-western exedra is a marble screen with a door leading to its central part. (pic. 12) It takes the form of two pairs of closed false double doors with modeled frames and tracery, and each leaf has five carved rectangular panels with decorative frames and representations of locks, latches and round handles. (pic. 13, 14, 15) Between the two false doors is a real portal, somewhat lower and more elaborately shaped. On the east side of the partition wall, all the panels are decorated with large crosses at human height. (pic. 16) The nature of the carvings on the marble allows us to attribute the “doors” to the 6th century, although, strange as it may seem, the sources reveal nothing about this. For some unknown reason, the partition was named “the gates of heaven and hell”, possibly separating the secular from the spiritual authorities.

  Immediately behind the false partition in the south wall is another door (under no. 48) leading to two rooms, one of which has preserved some mosaics and the other frescoes. They are thought to be chapels. The original mosaic decoration of the temple was, as far as we know, completely non-figurative - just areas of golden cubes with borders of fruit, flowers and geometric ornaments that imitated the effect of shimmering silk.[15] In addition, there were numerous simple circles and probably a huge cross in the central dome. After Justinian, the early history of the mosaics is unclear - they may have been replaced by crosses or destroyed by the Iconoclasts.[16] The history of the mosaics that we know today in Hagia Sophia thus begins with the restoration of Orthodoxy and reaches its peak in the Macedonian dynasty - especially in the time of Basil I (868 - 886) and Constantine VII. In other words, the second half of the 9th century was a time of intensive work by Byzantine artists on the restoration of religious art.

  The mosaic of Emperor Alexander (912 - 913) is preserved in the northern gallery. The mosaic of Emperor Constantine IX Monomachos (1042 - 1055) and Zoe from the middle of the 11th century, which is located on the east wall of the southern gallery, is an example of a mature, complete classical Byzantine style.[17] It recreates different influences a variation, from dogmatic abstraction to humanist illusionism. In the twelfth century, instead of the earlier painterly mosaic solution, the line and closed contour characteristic of the capital masters developed. The graphic and dry execution of the figures can be seen in particular on the mosaic of Hagia Sophia, which shows Emperor John II Komnenos (1118 - 1143) and his wife Irene presenting gifts to the Virgin Mary. The latest in date of the mosaics in the southern gallery is the magnificent Deesis scene with the figures of the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist imploring Christ for the salvation of mankind. It has preserved the main features of a style known as “Palaiologan”, characterized by classical monumentality, three-dimensionality, richness of shading and form.

  The mosaics are also mentioned by some of the foreign visitors to Hagia Sophia. Anthony of Novgorod, for example, mentions that “... in the galleries are painted the patriarchs and all the emperors, as many as were in Constantinople, as well as those who were heretics”.[18] Pero Tafur (1437 - 1438) makes an important statement about them, explaining that these mosaics are placed “a spear’s length from the floor < > Among them are very fine stones, mixed with marble, porphyry and jasper, which are very richly worked.”[19]

  The surviving mosaics were gradually covered over by the Ottoman Turks with paint or plaster until 1931, when Thomas Whittemore and the Byzantine Institute began a systematic investigation, recovery and restoration. This process was extended when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881-1938) ordered the Hagia Sophia to be turned into a museum in 1935.

  On the west side of the eastern buttress and in the floor, directly opposite the mosaic composition Deesis, there is a marble slab (most likely a piece of sarcophagus) with the inscription “HENRICO DANDOLO”. In its present form, the inscription dates from the 19th century and raises many questions that inevitably distance it from authenticity (pic. 17).

  Another thing, on the marble surface (not only on the galleries, but throughout the temple) there are single or linked Greek letters, which are considered to be the “marks”[20] of the stonemasons. (pic. 18) It is known that the craftsmen who worked in the marble quarries of Fr. Prokonnesos had the custom of “signing” their work with visible but discreetly applied signs. The distribution of these signs in the Hagia Sophia helps us to understand “the organizational structure and operational strategies adopted by the workers to shorten construction time and increase labor productivity”.[21]

  In the east wall of the south gallery there is a doorway (now at no. 51) from which a gallery once led through which the imperial procession could enter the temple from the palace without having to go out into the city (pic. 19).[22] The wooden staircase in front of the door is no longer preserved today. It is also noteworthy that two mosaics depicting the emperors - Constantine IX Monomachos and Zoe and next to them John II and his wife Irene - have been preserved here, where the emperors entered the church. The path led pas them to the balustrade, from which one can see the entire interior of the Hagia Sophia. The treatise De Ceremoniis mentions an imperial “metatorion” (μητατώριον) in the southern gallery of Hagia Sophia, which was used by the empress and in some cases also by the emperor.[23] Apparently this particular box was not permanent, but improvised, made of curtains, because there is no trace of it in the southern gallery, unlike the one on the same side, but on the first floor, in the southern aisle.[24]

  According to the traditional view, the upper galleries were considered to be a place for women or used as a means of segregation of genders and social classes.[25]

  However, if we accept the view of scholars such as Thomas Mathews and Robert Taft, then it would be incorrect to state that ‘the galleries were the place of the women exclusively’ or that they “were reserved for the exclusive use of either catechumens or women”.[26] In confirmation, it should be noted that certain sections of these galleries were exclusively reserved for the empress and her female attendants, or for the emperor and his male entourage, while other parts were used, on occasion, for synods of the Church.[27] Although a significant number of imperial rituals took place in the galleries, liturgical activity was insubstantial there.[28] Moreover, some galleries seem to have been used for a bewildering variety of activities, both legitimate and less so.[29] According to Taft during the 14th century the galleries were reserved for the imperial entourage and for noblewomen, while the ordinary laity were in the nave and aisles below.[30] Nevertheless, in the absence of any textual evidence, it is hard to conclude anything pro or contra regarding the presence (or not) of ordinary laity, male or female, in the other galleries.[31] In my view, some support for “pro” comes from the graffiti on the columns, walls and balustrades in the galleries. They seem to provide some evidence for the presence of ordinary people there. The question is whether the graffiti was scratched during a service or not. The answer to this question opens the door to various hypotheses. It is true that a significant proportion of the worshippers had plenty of time to scratch something (intentionally or not) into the marble due to the long services in the church.

  However, such an assumption requires the conclusion that the galleries were accessible to everyone at all times or that the artists themselves were important persons or servants of important persons. While this explanation is quite plausible, it is also possible that the visitor would walk through the empty galleries just to see how large the church was. In so doing, he might succumb to the temptation of scratching his name, following the example of many others before him.

  In other words, the galleries were a traditional element of temple architecture and played the role of additional rooms with a universal purpose.[32]

[1] St. Runciman, Byzantine Style and Civilization, London and New York 1902, 59; Ch. Bayet, Byzantine Art, New York 2009, 30.

[2] The nave is primarily a place where the laity attend the service and they occupy all or only part of it. On this see V. Marinis, Architecture and Ritual in the Churches of Constantinople: Ninth to Fifteenth Centuries, New York 2014, 54.

[3] N. Markov, Kogato vsički pǎtišta vodeha kǎm Konstantinopol, V. Turnovo 2012, 367-369. Before him one can mention the laconic phrases of the French bishop Arculf (c. 680), who says that “[The church is] triple in character, rising up from the very foundations in three walls” and of Bertrandon de la Broquière (1432 - 1433) who mentions that “[The church is] formed of three different parts: one subterraneous, another above the ground, and a third above that.” On this see Markov, Kogato vsički pǎtišta, 21, 428.

[4] Е. Maleto, Antologija hoženij russkih putešestvennikov XII - XV veka, Moskva 2005, 253.

[5] Markov, Kogato vsički pǎtišta, 383-384.

[6] For the galleries of St. Sophia and some of their features, see Th. Mathews, The Early Churches of Constantinople. Architecture and Liturgy, London 1971, 128-129 and R. Mainstone, Hagia Sophia: architecture, structure and liturgy of Justinian’s great church, London 1988, 229-230.

[7] R. Taft (Women at Church in Byzantium: Where, When - and Why? DOP LXII (1998) 31) the term gynaikeion ‘is used to designate areas on the ground floor assigned, presumably, to the women’. V. Маrinis (Architecture and Ritual, 91) points out that the use of ‘the term γυνακαινίτης (‘place of women’) in reference to the galleries was rare’.

[8] According to Тh. Мathews (The Early Churches, 133) “the original and principal use of the galleries was probably for catechumens”. Until the 7th century, catechumena was the most common term for galleries, but when infant baptism became dominant, it was abandoned. After this century, galleries became uncommon in temple architecture, but reappeared more frequently in Byzantine provincial centers such as Mystra from the 13th century onwards. Cf. Tatft, Women at Church, 58-59 with sources; Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 91.

[9] Markov, Kogato vsički pǎtišta, 447.

[10] A multi-storey building, additionally built next to the southern facade of Hagia Sophia whose gallery led directly into the Patriarchal chambers. Cf. F. Dirimtekin, Le local de Patriarcat à Sainte Sophia, Istanbuler Mitteilungen XIII/XIV (1963-1964) 113-127; C. Mango, The Brazen House. A Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Constantinople, With an Appendix by Ernest Mamboury, Copenhagen 1959, 52-53; R. Van Nice, Saint Sophia in Istanbul. An Architectural Survey, I, Washington 1965, pl. 13; Th. Mathews, The Byzantine Churches of Istanbul. A Photographic Survey, London 1976, 31-34; K. Darck & J. Kostenec, Paul the Silentiary’s description of Hagia Sophia in the Light of new archeological evidence, Byzantinoslavica LXIX/3 (2011) 90. In 1200 Anthony of Novgorod mentions a “cistern” (wells), a “bath” and a “storage” (оgradь) full of fruit and other food supplies in the patriarchal palace. On this see Maleto, Antologija hoženij, 228; R. Cormack & E. J. W. Hawkins, The Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul: The Rooms above the Southwest Vestibule and Ramp, DOP XXXI (1977) 200-202, 247-251; Tatft, Women at Church, 39.

[11] In fact, this is the entrance to the patriarchal palace. For this, see Van Nice, Saint Sophia, pl. 13; Mathews, The Byzantine Churches, 31-34. It is also mentioned by Anthony of Novgorod in 1200 Maleto, Antologija hoženij, 223 “... entrance to the patriarchal palace.”

[12] Darck, Ken & Jan Kostenec, The Byzantine Patriarchate in Constantinople and the Baptistery of the Church of Hagia Sophia, Architectura 36 (2006) 129; K. Darck & J. Kostenec, The Hagia Sophia Project, Istanbul. Fildwork & Projects. Turkey, Bulletin of British Byzantine Studies XXXVI (2010), 56, 58: “The Great sekreton is discovered during the 90s of the 20th century and it was built for receptions or meetings, and the rooms around functioned as offices, service rooms - kitchens, storerooms or lodgings.

[13] Cormack & Hawkins, The Mosaics of St. Sophia, 175-252; C. Mango, Materials for the Study of the Mosaics of St. Sophia in Istanbul, Washington 1962, 38-39, 44-46, 93-96; Darck & Kostenec The Hagia Sophia Project, 64, 66-68.

[14] The arches are covered with a decoration that imitates that of the narthex, which was added during the restoration of 1847-1849. In some places, between the balustrade colonnade and the pair of columns in the central parts of the northern and southern galleries and between the arch and the eastern buttress, there are parts of the original mosaic decoration.

[15] C. Mango, Byzantium. The empire of New Rome, New York 1980, 262.

[16] V. Lihačova, Izkustvoto na Vizantija 4. – 15. vek, Sofija 1987, 49.

[17] V. Lazarev, Vizantijskaja živopisʹ, Moskva 1971, 149-153; V. Lazarev, Istorija vizantijskoj živopisi, Moskva 1986, 75-77; Lihačova, Izkustvoto, 117-118, 123-124, 127-128, 133-134; Bayet, Byzantine Art, 88.

[18] Maleto, Antologija hoženij, 228.

[19] Markov, Kogato vsički pǎtišta, 447.

[20] A. Paribeni, Marble Elements from the Byzantine Water Supply, in: The Sculptures of the Ayasofia Müzesi in Istanbul. A Short Guide, Cl. Barsanti - Al. Guiglia (eds.), Istanbul 2010: 53. Cf. also A. Paribeni, Le sigle dei marmorari e l’organizzazione del cantiere, in: Santa Sofia di Costantinopoli. L’arredo marmoreo della Grande Chiesa giustinianea, (Studi di Antichità Cristiana pubblicati a cura del Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, LX), Al. Guiglia - Cl. Barsanti (eds.), Città del Vaticano 2004, 652-734.

[21] Paribeni, Marble Elements, 114.

[22] Mango, The Brazen House, 69-70, 90-91; Mathews, The Early Churches, 93-94; N. Teteriatnikov, Hagia Sophia: The Two Portraits of the Emperors with Money Bags as a Functional Setting, Arte Medievale 10/2 (1996) 49-52.

[23] Women at Church, 41: “… doubtless in the south gallery right above the emperor’s metatorion in the aisle below (the text does not specify which side the metatorion was on, but it is hardly imaginable for the imperial loge of the cathedral church to have been located in the less honorable north gallery when it could equally well have been on the other side…”. For the imperial metatorion in the eastern part of the south aisle, just to the right of the nave, next to the bema or sanctuary, see Ε. Αντωνιάδου, Έκφρασις της Αγίας Σοφίας :ήτοι μελέτη συνθετική και αναλυτική υπό έποψιν αρχιτεκτονικήν, αρχαιολογικήν και ιστορικήν του πολυθρυλήτου τεμένους Κωνσταντινουπόλεως, T. 2. [Αθήναι] 1908, 214-224; J. Papadopoulos, Le mutatorion des églises byzantines, in: Memorial Louis Petit ( = Archives de l‘Orient Chrétien 1), Paris 1948, 366-368; The Early Churches, 132-133; J. Baldowin, The Urban Character of Christian Worship, the Origin, Development, and Meaning of Stational Liturgy, [Orientalia Christiana Analecta 228], Rome 1987, 177-178; Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 223-226, and figs. 59, 249, 252: Mango, The Brazen House, 64, 72 note 198. For cases in which the emperor was present at the metatorion of the south gallery, see Taft 1998: 41: on the Feast of the Ascension, on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, which is the Sunday after Easter; the imperial retinue was present at the metatorion during the dedication by the patriarch. According to R. Taft (Taft 1998: 42) “though the gallery metatorion is used also by the empress and her entourage this should not be taken as reinforcing the notion that the galleries were the place of the women exclusively. For the emperor and his entourage, all men, are also described as attending liturgy from the galleries in Hagia Sophia….”.

[24] For clues see S. Ivanov, V poiskah Konstantinopolja. Putevoditelʹ po vizantijskomu Stambulu i okrestnostjam, Moskva 2011, 62.

[25] Regarding the different views on the galleries cf. Mathews, The Early Churches, 125-6, 130-133. In Hagia Sophia, as in all the large churches in the East, women and men were segregated for cultural and moral reasons; in most churches, women occupied the north side and men the south side (churches were always oriented to the east). Сf. also Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 230; Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 54. See also Tatft, Women at Church, 57 who even notes a funeral rubric in an eleventh-century codex that calls for the body of the deceased to be placed on the right (south) side of the church if male, and on the left (north) side if female. However, most textual evidence for Hagia Sophia indicates that women occupied both the north and south aisles, with men in the central part of the nave.

[26] See Mathews, The Early Churches, 131 и Tatft, Women at Church, 49, 62; Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 54.

[27] According to Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 92 “it appears that the imperial party did not occupy the whole of a gallery, but rather spaces set apart for such a purpose <…> This would have left the rest of the gallery space for the use of the congregation”. According to the inscription graffiti that mention female names, women occupied the north (the Greek “...Theodora, the famous Patrikia”, “Theodora of Byza” and “Kyra”, the Cyrillic “Govena” - twice and perhaps the Glagolitic “Anna”?) and west galleries (“Dobroslava”). There is not a single graffiti with a female name in the south gallery. For details Cf. Tatft, Women at Church, 42.

[28] We should note that ordinations to the priesthood, loyalty oaths, ecclesiastical synods, miraculous cures, and exorcisms were all administered there. There can be added to this, reference to distributing stipends (roga) of the clergy, to imperial receptions and dinners, to sessions of the ecclesiastical tribunal and meetings of the standing synod, etc. See in particular Tatft, Women at Church, 59. According to Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 93 the galleries had “a variety of other functions, although none appears to have been consistent or widespread”.

[29] Tatft, Women at Church, 59 emphasized that the galleries were employed “for just about every imaginable purpose, legitimate or not, including even temporary lodgings and sexual dalliance”. He also noted that “women and the imperial party attend liturgy in the galleries and have the sacrament brought to them there” and that “oratories and the imperial apartment, refectory, and loge metatorion could all be located there”. Cf. also Mathews, The Early Churches, 133.

[30] Tatft, Women at Church, 56.

[31] This is the conclusion of Taft, Women at Church, 42.

[32] We should note as an example George Pachymeres (d. ca. 1310) who mentions that the “whole people” attended a service in Hagia Sophia from the galleries or in this way the galleries expanded the capacity of a church, especially in cases where the community was very large. Cf. Marinis, Architecture and Ritual, 92.