{Byzantine Architecture}[2nd March 1991]

[Redbook8:301][19910302:1808e]{Byzantine Architecture}[2nd March 1991]

19910302.1808

[continued]

*‘In architecture the post-and-lintel style in stone, which had been taken over from the Greeks, was already giving place to an architecture of arches, vaults and domes in brick, whereas sculptural ornament was becoming more formal and less naturalistic.** These changes were accelerated in Constantinople partly because of the closer proximity of the city to Asia Minor and Syria, both fertile centres of new artistic ideas that had developed independently of Rome. Indeed, church architecture in these areas progressed very considerably between the 4^th and *** the 6^th centuries, while in the visual arts a style that favoured formality**** and# expression rather than the idealised naturalism of Classical art had begun to find approval at an early date.’

#*

*(c[irca]330[ce]ff)

**[M~?]

***[2048](S~-)M~

****M~

#[sic]

#* – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:] 974

[PostedBlogger09for10102023]

{Change of direction in early Christian churches}[2nd March 1991]

[Redbook8:300][19910302:1808d]{Change of direction in early Christian churches}[2nd March 1991]

19910302.1808

[continued]

‘Those [first Christian basilicas, in Rome]* were, in most cases, halls with five longitudinal aisles, the central one raised and lit directly by windows piercing the high walls. A semicircular protrusion of the wall, or apse, on the short side opposite the entrance, first on the west side but later on the east side,** was covered over with a half-dome vault, while the so-called hall itself usually had a wooden frame roof.’

***

‘The central-plan [Church] building, round, polygonal,**** or cruciform in design, gathered considerable momentum in the West as well as in the East in the course of the 4^th and 5^th centuries.’

#

*[Square brackets per ms, implying insertion]

**(my emphasis)

*** – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:] 972

****(often octagonal)

# – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:] 973

[PostedBlogger08for09102023]

Cycle of Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation (2)][2nd March 1991]

[Redbook8:299-300][19910302:1808c][Cycle of Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation (2)][2nd March 1991]

19910302.1808

[continued]

On left-right polarisation* – in the Roman Empire bridging cycle from c[irca]512bce – c[irca]512ce, the schism of Eastern and Western Empires is dated at 395ce, ie Roman 1024R~.

The vertical equivalent of this in the early days of the Roman Republic is not obvious – perhaps the establishment of Roman hegemony is the closest we can come to it, ending with citizenship being progressively granted to wider and wider categories of peoples, which if my memory is correct occurred in the later years of the Republic** &/or the earlier years of the Empire.***

*[See last previous ts entry but one, [Redbook8:299][19910302:1808]{Cycle of Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation}[2nd March 1991]]

**c[irca] U~****

***c[irca] J~****

****[On the Roman Empire bridging cycle, presumably! PYO?]

[PostedBlogger08102023]

[Roman Spatial Composition][2nd March 1991]

[Redbook8:299][19910302:1808b][Roman Spatial Composition][2nd March 1991]

19910302.1808

[continued]

‘Around the middle of the 1^st century AD,* there was a surge of development of spatial composition.’

**

*[AD=CE]

C(-S~)

(ref [[Redbook8:298][19910227:1458d]{Roman Architecture [continued ][– Design]}[27^th February 1991],] 298 above [– last entry but one])

**E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 13:970

(& see 1^st full para[graph] on [[Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:] p971

[PostedBlogger08for07102023]

{Cycle of Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation}[2nd March 1991]

[Redbook8:299][19910302:1808]{Cycle of Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation}[2nd March 1991]

19910302.1808

There’s some indication – I’m not sure whether I’ve covered this before,* at least not [sic] wholly – that the change between vertical and horizontal polarisation** follows the rotation of a cycle. The Greeks before and during their Classical times*** noted the left-right horizontal polarisation of their world (Dionysus - Apollo); for the early**** and mediaeval# Christians the polarisation was top–bottom, ie vertical, between God and Man;#* our polarisation is definitely left-right,#** eg in political terms during the most recent two centuries#*** – but there are signs that the East-West Left-Right polarisation of the World may be replaced by a North-South polarisation.#****

*[]

**(ref earlier Vols [])

***2048G~-R~ff

****2048C-S~-M~ff

(→A~?)

#[2048U~-A~-J~ff?]

#*[& between God & the Devil?]

#**(ref TS Eliot’s Dissociation of sensibility)

[ref earlier Vol/s []]

#***2048R~-C

#****2048Cff?

[PostedBlogger05for06102023]

{Roman Architecture [continued ][– Design]}[27th February 1991]

[Redbook8:298][19910227:1458d]{Roman Architecture [continued ][– Design]}[27^th February 1991]

19910227.1458

[continued]

‘Design. The pervasive Roman predilection was for spatial composition – the organisation of lines, surfaces, masses, and volumes in space.* In this the Romans differed from their predecessors in the ancient Mediterranean world, and, however freely they used the elements of earlier styles, in Rome or in the provinces, they recast them according to their own taste.’

**

*cf left & right side of brain – M~ semicircle = ‘male’ side = spatial manipulation, &c.

** – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:] 966

[& see [Redbook8:299][19910302:1808b][Spatial Composition][2nd March 1991] (next ts entry but one]

[PostedBlogger05102023]

{Roman Architecture}[27th February 1991]

[Redbook8:298][19910227:1458c]{Roman Architecture}[27^th February 1991]

19910227.1458

[continued]

‘Roman architecture was almost as complex as the Roman empire itself; it was influenced by a multitude of geographic, political, economic, social and cultural factors.* The cohesive factor through all the differences was the Roman character, which possessed the talent and felt the necessity to organise** in large and complex terms, politically, architecturally or otherwise.’

***

‘...the beginnings of a more creative phase**** of Roman architecture, in the period of the empire.’

***

*2048G~-R~ff

**2048C-S~

*** – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:965]

****c[ontra] 2048C-S~;

(but Roman 1024Aff)

[continued]

[PostedBlogger03for04102023]

{Hellenistic Architecture [continued]}[27th February 1991]

[Redbook8:297-298][19910227:1458b]{Hellenistic Architecture [continued]}[27^th February 1991]

19910227.1458

[continued]

‘To the established decorative repertory of mo[u]ldings and carved ornament was added a variety of formal and animal forms that enriched the surface decoration of buildings. In the East especially these forms were combined in original ways that, together with compositions that defied the logic of the Classical orders, tended to a style that in many respects anticipates the Baroque.’*

**

*2048R~

[See last previous entry, fn=*]

** – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 13:965]

[PostedBlogger02for03102023]

{Hellenistic Architecture}[27th February 1991]

[Redbook8:297-298][19910227:1458]{Hellenistic Architecture}[27^th February 1991]

19910227.1458

‘Except for the growth of portraiture, however, the mood in the arts during the Hellenistic period* was to intensify and elaborate styles developed by classical Greece. Palatial architecture aimed at effects never contemplated hitherto; and even domestic architecture for the first time had palatial pretensions. Trade and the newly acquired resources of the East opened up new possibilities for the artist, in both materials and inspiration; the results, however, generally tended towards elaboration and grandeur such that the finer qualities of balance and precision characteristic of earlier periods are often difficult to discern in later works.

‘The classic from of the Doric temple was out of favour in the new age, and the few that were built are elaborate in plan and detail, impairing the sober quality of the order. This was an age to appreciate the Ionic and the more flamboyant Corinthian forms....

**

*[ie circa 323bce – circa 30bce]

[2048]R~-C

**E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 13:965

[continued]

[PostedBlogger02102023]

{Ottonian Art [continued (4)]}[24th February 1991]

[Redbook8:296][19910224:2211]{Ottonian Art [continued (4)]}[24^th February 1991]

19910224.2211

[continued]

‘The life-size wooden crucifix figure (Domschatzkammer, Cologne) believed to have been ordered by Archbishop Gero of Cologne (ob. 976) has often been compared to this* engraving, but the Gero Crucifix is a far more powerful image and perhaps the most seminal sculptural creation of the Ottonian period. Christ is suspended from the cross, arms strained, and the severely modeled head falls on his right shoulder. The sagging body twists first one way, then the other, and the sharply drawn loincloth jaggedly contrast with the softly modeled, almost swollen flesh. The thin, twisted legs below are no longer capable of bearing any of the massive weight of the straining body. The harshness of its conception was to be of considerable importance for the next two centuries, and it foreshadows many of the most powerful Romanesque sculptural achievements.’

**

*(on the reverse of the Lothar Cross [at Aachen])

**– E[ncylopaedia of] V[isual] A[rt] 3:559

[A photocopy of an illustration inserted in the ms above this entry, captioned ‘The Gero Crucifix; oak; height of Christ 186cm (73in). Domschatzkammer, Cologne’ is not reproduced in the ts]

[PostedBlogger01102023]