Master Builders of Byzantium (review)

232 Reviews It is afine,learned, succinct argument, countering scholarly opinion that fabliau obscenity is a literary or aesthetic phenomenon; for Muscatine it is social behaviour and he offers a novel context for appreciating it in the linguistic taboos of island communities in the Pacific. It is not a large statement, but there is some sociology and some ethnography, and with it this most urbane medievalist, whose scholarship so often seems like conversation between high-minded, bookish colleagues, perhaps opens up critical discussion to a different set of minds after all. Roger Nicholson Department ofEnglish University of Auckland Ousterhout, Robert, Master Builders of Byzantium, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1999; cloth; pp. viii, 320; 209 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. US$65.00; ISBN 0691005354 Robert Ousterhout claims that: 'discussion of the originality of Byzantine architecture usually begins and ends with Hagia Sophia' (p. 258). His work instead focuses on buildings of the Middle and Late Byzantine eras, dating from 843-1204 and 1261-1453. Previous authors (notably R. Krautheimer, revised ed. with S. Curcic, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, N e w Haven an London, Yale University Press, 1986) sometimes included an overview of Byzantine structures from that time. Whereas most have considered Middle and Late Byzantine architecture from an archaeological, historical or liturgical perspective, Ousterhout looks at Byzantine churches from the point of view of the building techniques used by Byzantine master builders and masons. This book therefore makes a useful contribution to our knowledge of how Middle and Late Byzantine churches were built. After the Triumph of Orthodoxy over Iconoclasm (726-843) there was greater uniformity in Byzantine worship. Monastic influences and a decline in population may have led to the adoption of church buildings, which were small and intimate. While certain parts of the church were essential (the sanctuary, prothesis, diakonikon, naos and narthex), variable features included vaults, dome decorative articulation and added chapels (parekklesia). A number of church types evolved, the most famous being the Cross-in-Square, which rose in pyramidal massing of walls, vaults and domes, adorned with opus sectile marble paneling, fresco and mosaic. Reviews 233 Byzantine architects were really Master Builders, and they were anonymous. A manager (ergolabos) controlled finances and building materials. From sources, such as the tenth-century Book of the Eparch and a few Saints' Lives, Ousterhout examines how workshops (ergasteria) were often set up on a temporary basis. Apprentices were trained in them. They received food and clothing, while learning their trade; and often they were presented with their tools and a payment at the end of the contract. Unskilled labourers also worked in the building industry. There were no preliminary architectural drawings. Instead, a basic outline was laid out using chains, ropes and stones. Builders were experts in 'applied' not pure geometry. Building proportions were modular. Older buildings were modified for new purposes. A dome might transform a nave, as at Kydna in Lycia. Additions were built on to an initial core, as at the Pantokrator Monastery, Istanbul. This process of transformation in several phases can be observed in buildings all over the empire, such as in the Theotokos of Lips and the Chora, Istanbul; St Sophia, Kiev; and Holy Apostles, Thessaloniki. Changes and additions were made in response to new needs, such as providing space for the burial of a monastic founder or patron. Ousterhout has a particularly good discussion of building materials: stone, brick, mortar, ceramic and stone tiles, lead sheeting, glass and ancient spolia. He examines how such items were obtained and set in place. Byzantine manuscript illuminations of the Israelites making bricks in Egypt (Exodus 1:14) illustrate the manufacture ofbricks. Mosaics ofthe Building ofthe Tower of Babel in San Marco, Venice and the Cappella Palatine, Palermo show the preparation of mortar. Lead was used to join architectural members such as columns, bases and capitals, often spolia from earlier buildings. Roofs were made of ceramic (terracotta) tiles, slate and panels of metal. Windows usually consisted of small roundels of 'crown' glass in a frame of stucco, marble or lead. At the Chora and Pantokrator Monasteries in Constantinople traces survive of stained glass. Foundations usually consisted of brick and stone, sometimes reinforced with...