twelfth century. Of it they say: "We ice. Our authors scout this idea and believe him to be entirely unreliable point out that the horses are much too where he speaks of the former state of small for the position; besides, they the church. He simply gathers the bring forward evidence to show that at legends which had grown up, because one time there were ten buttresses facts were forgotten, and enumerates along this wall. It is also pointed out the relics." They also gather together that some parts of the exterior must the remarks set down by various trav- have been lined with marble, and it is ellers, and the numerous legends mentioned that some of the marble which had clustered round the church plating was seen by Salzenburg. and were quoted from time to time. It is suggested that the Court of the Chapter VIII. refers to the repairs Atrium was paved with marble, and in executed in 1847, but it is mainly occu- the centre stood the fountain; four pied by a paraphrase of the description streams were figured in marble as flowof the church given in Salzenburg's ing away from the centre, one towards great work. We question whether it each side-symbolical of the four was worth while after all to reproduce rivers of paradise and these this here as it is very difficult to follow, their names to the four walks of the even by those acquainted with the cloister. The probable nature and form technicalities, and it is hopeless to of the fountain is discussed in some make anything out of it without having detail, but on this we need not enter. the illustrations of the work at hand to The main approach to the church was refer to. Salzenburg's book stands by from the south side, where stood the itself, plates and text, and we can only Augusteum and the palace. On this think that our authors have included side also stood the great pillar erected the translation of his text in their work by Justinian and bearing a statue of so as to complete their series of En- the emperor on horseback. The arglish renderings of the various authors rangement and position of the courts who have written about the building. and buildings immediately to the south of the church and adjoining it, are so problematical that we need hardly discuss them here.

In Chapter IX. the ancient precincts and external parts of the church are discussed. Reference is made to the Great Palace, the Hippodrome, the Augusteum, the Milion, etc., and their arrangement and form in Justinian's time is touched upon. It might have been better had this discussion followed on in Chapter I., after that of the earlier topography, but our authors have doubtless put it here as leading up to their description of the арproaches and outlying parts of the church.

gave

The remaining three chapters of the book are given up to the technical side of the subject, the discussion of the structural methods, their origins, development and application in the building, the nature and use of the material and the form and arrangement of the decorative detail.

Our authors have a good deal to say on the question of the growth of the Byzantine architecture. We quote the following:

Byzantine architecture was developed by the use of brick in the frankest and fullest manner, especially in domical vaulting. Wide It had

Immediately to the west of the church was the atrium or cloister. This was oblong aud considerable portions of it were in existence as late as 1873. Now only the west side remains -the present exonarthex. been suggested by Fossati and others that the four great buttress piers rising above this side and from which arches stretched across the farther wall, had carried the four bronze horses now in front of the church of St. Mark at Ven

spans were kept in equipoise by other smaller domes. The more concentrated supports were marble monoliths, and the wall and vault surfaces were covered by incrustations of marble slabs and glass mosaic. Directness, and an economy of labor relative to the results obtained, is perhaps the most essential characteristic

of the art both in construction and decora- | 72 feet, when filled up on the inside, were tion in the great period.

no longer visible, and the dome appeared to stand over arches of 100 feet span on north and south, as already on east and west, the transverse dimensions of the church being lessened between these points by some 24 feet.

The building up of the dome from the square plan through pendentives was one of the finest of the Byzantine developments, and they follow this up through early examples to its complete They give plans and sections to perfection as seen in S. Sophia. They dwell on Choisy's enquiry into the prove their case, and argue it out with methods of workmanship and how he great clearness, pointing out, for inpoints out the difference between the stance, that throughout the building, in every Roman and the Byzantine systems; curtain walls are flush with the exother place but this one, the that under the Romans the workman terior. They bring forward S. Sophia, was compulsorily enrolled in associaSalonika, as an example in their favor, tions under State control, while with for there the soffits of the arches show the Byzantine Greeks he had more in the interior. Choisy, who thought individuality, and was recognized more that this building was erected after the as an intelligent power, and had Constantinople church, says that here. his own independent trade guilds. "These associations had a council com-thors quote a recent reading of the inthe error was remedied; but our auposed exclusively of those who, by apprenticeship and trial, had earned the title of masters."

The original form of the church and the details of the alterations made, under Justinian, after the earthquake, are gone into, and our authors bring forward a new theory regarding certain alterations to the filling in of the great north and south arches. They point out that these great arches of seventy-two feet span are as wide as the great piers, viz., fifteen feet eight inches, but that "the semi-circles of wall, each of which contains twelve windows, are now filled in beneath these arches, flush with their inner faces, and the arches therefore do not show to the interior through the decoration;

" and they go on to say:

66

Now Agathias says that at the restoration, after the earthquake in 558, at the north and south arches they brought towards the inside the portion of the building which was on the curve." This, we think, must refer to the filling wall in the arches of 72 feet span, which we suppose was formerly on the exterior, and thus left an upper gallery 12 feet wide and 72 feet long open to the interior. "And they made the arches wider to be in harmony with the others, thus making the equilateral symmetry more perfect. They thus reduced the vast space and formed an oblique design." That is, the arches of

scription on the mosaic there, which

shows that the church was erected in 495. We think that the evidence adduced show clearly that this alterabrought forward and the arguments tion was made as our authors suggest, and that it was not an improvement on the original design. Their theory as to the reason for the change is also a very probable one, viz., that some weakness in the supports of the inner order in the aisles made it essential that, as far ferred forward to the main pillars and as possible, the weight should be trans

arches.

The general structural system is carefully examined, how the dome and semi-domes are sustained, and how the thrusts are resisted or distributed. The forms of the arches are noted and considered, and the methods of the vaulting are discussed and compared with Choisy's explanations. They differ from him on essential points in connection with the setting out of the vaults, and we think that they are right in their contentions, but the points are so very technical that we cannot go into them here. They, however, agree with Choisy in his statement that the chief consideration of the Byzantine builders in the construction of their vaults was to avoid wooden centering, but here again they suggest a simpler

method of arriving at the line of the metrical patterns. At the angles the lap construction than that put forward by shows in the most open way; while it is him. mitred where restored.

question of how far any centering was Having the Corinthian and Ionic capitals used for the great dome is also touched before their eyes, and without forgetting on, and it is suggested that it was dis-or rejecting them, the Byzantine builders invented and developed an entirely fresh pensed with to a great extent, but that for closing in the opening at the top a light centering, resting on the part already built, was used.

With the exception of the marble monoliths with their capitals and bases, the structure of S. Sophia was a huge brick carcase or shell into which were inserted, after the building had had form. These forms are divided by our time to settle down, the marble jambs and lintels of the doors and windows, and to which were applied the thin marble linings of the walls and the mosaic work of the domes and vaults.

The large use made of bronze both | gallery, which bears the name of the in construction and decoration is re-blind doge of Venice, "Henricus Danmarked on, the bronze bands round dolo."

the pillars, the casings to the door- Although we have gone carefully ways, and the linings of the doors through the whole book in considerable themselves. Drawings and descrip- detail, we have been unable to touch tions are given of the decorative treat- on great portions of the wealth of most ment of these bronze doors. The interesting and valuable information outer doors of the south porch are specially discussed, and a corrected version is given of the inscriptions on the panels, which had been incorrectly quoted by Salzenburg. The arrangement of this inscription in the form of monograms is very ingenious, and it is interesting to note that these were deeply engraved into the metal plates and filled in with silver.

which has been brought together in such a comprehensive form at the expense of so much labor and research. The collecting and transcribing into English of all that has been written regarding the great church will alone make the work of extreme value as a book of reference for students; while the part devoted to the structural methods, and the theories brought forward regarding them, having been written by practical architects well qualified to deal with the intricacies of a great building, will always command the attention of those interested in the subject.

The form and manner of the mosaic work is described, and the economical way in which the material was used is commented on, an observation of Boni's being quoted to show how, in the domes, the maximum of effect was gained with the minimum of material. We could have wished, perhaps, that The decorative arrangement and the the translations of the ancient writers iconographic scheme is discussed; had been more complete — although space, however, does not permit of our the essential parts in each case have entering into this subject. It is con- been given to us—and that each had cluded, we think with reason, that none of the figure work belongs to the period previous to the iconoclastic controversy. The Silentiary does not describe it, and he certainly would have done so had it existed. We quote the following: We must, however, draw attention We believe the original scheme of deco-to the want of a proper list of the ration is best accounted for without figures, and even if this were not so, we can hardly believe that in the Patriarchal church, at the door of the palace, figures would have lasted through the reigns of the iconoclastic emperors and patriarchs, as they may well have done in remoter churches where the clergy were on the

other side.

A section is devoted to the clucidation of the ciphers or monograms which are carved on the bosses of the capitals. It is shown very clearly that the bulk of these represent, in pairs, the words "IOVCTINIANOV, BACIAE C," and "OEOAPAC, AVTOVTAC."

The work concludes with a reference to a slab in the paving of the south

been kept entirely separate and distinct, with a commentary on the whole following after with the description and discussion of the church; but our authors have thought otherwise, and we must respect their judgment.

works referred to in the text. This would have enhanced the usefulness of the book, and would also have done away with the necessity for many of the footnote references. Another omission is that of a list and index of the cuts in the text, of which not even references to the pages at which they are to be found scattered throughout the book are given when they are alluded to from time to time. A few more drawings of various parts of the building might also have helped to make many of the descriptions appear clearer. These, however, are points that could be amended in a second edition.

We cannot conclude without express

"I am sure I have heard that be-zines !); and the last I saw of my old fore," said George reflectively. friend was his tall, lithe figure on the has a familiar ring. platform, where he stood waving an let,' by any chance ?" ironical adieu. As the train moved "His intellectual equal," I went on slowly out of the station, I turned to unheedingly. my wife, who was busy getting the rice out of the lace of her dress.