The Palace of Lausus and Nearby Monuments in Constantinople: A Topographical Study

Author(s): Jonathan Bardill

Reviewed work(s):
Source: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 101, No. 1 (Jan., 1997), pp. 67-95
Published by: Archaeological Institute of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/506250 .
Accessed: 15/02/2013 15:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Palace of Lausus and Nearby Monuments in
Constantinople: A Topographical Study
JONATHAN BARDILL
Abstract
The Palace of Lausus in Constantinople is generally
identified with the rotunda and adjoining hall excavated
to the northwestof the Hippodrome by Duyuran in 1951
and Naumann in 1964. An examination of the literary
sources and of neglected archaeological evidence, how-
ever,suggeststhat Lausus'spalace remainsundiscovered,
closer to the Forum of Constantine and on the opposite
side of the Mese. This relocation necessitates a recon-
sideration of the positions of monuments known to have
been close to the palace. We cannot be certain that the
rotunda was built at the same time as the hexagon of
the Palace of Antiochus, despite the fact that both struc-
tures contain similar cramped blocks of ashlar. The
church of St. John in the Diippion cannot have been
founded in the rotunda or adjoining hall, and it prob-
ably stood closer to the Milion and St. Sophia. The "Pal-
atio ritondo di Costantino" of the Braun and Hogen-
berg panorama does not seem to relate to the structures
northwest of the Hippodrome.*
LOCATIONOF THE PALACE OF LAUSUS
In 1939, frescoes depicting the life and martyr-
dom of St. Euphemia were discovered to the north-
west of the Hippodrome in Istanbul. When Schneider
conducted excavations there in the summer and au-
* I wish to thank the British
Academy,Linacre College,
and the Institute of Archaeology in Oxford for their sup-
port; Albrecht Berger, Cyril Mango, and AJA'sanonymous
reviewersfor reading and commenting on earlier versions
of this paper; and Michael Vickers, Dimitris Plantzos, and
IdaJohansen for advice. I am also grateful to Nubar Ham-
partumian and LizJames for permission to reproduce figs.
7 and 8, to the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Is-
tanbul for figs. 3, 9, and 13, to the Master and Fellows of
Trinity College, Cambridge, for fig. 14, to Alison Wilkins
for drawingfigs. 1 and 9, and to Robert Wilkins and Susan
Hurst for preparing the photographs.
The following abbreviations are used:
Guilland R. Guilland, Etudes de topographiede Con-
stantinople byzantine I-II (Berliner by-
zantinistische Arbeiten 37, Berlin
1969).
Mango 1959 C. Mango, The Brazen House: A Study
of the Vestibuleof the Imperial Palace of
Constantinople(Arkaeologisk-kunsthis-
toriske Meddelelser 4.4, Copenhagen
1959).
Mango 1990 C. Mango, Le developpementurbain de Con-
stantinople (IVe-VIIesiecles)2 (Travaux
67
American Journal of Archaeology 101 (1997) 67-95
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
tumn of 1942, he revealed a hexagonal hall preceded
by a semicircular portico (fig. 1).1 During later ex-
cavations by Duyuran in 1951-1952, a column base
bearing the inscription "Of Antiochus the praeposi-
tus" was found in situ in the portico.2 This discov-
ery securely identified the monument as the Palace
of Antiochus, in which a church of St. Euphemia was
later established, probably when relics of the saint
were transferred to Constantinople from Chalcedon
in 680.3 The construction of the palace can be safely
assigned to about 402-439, when the eunuch Anti-
ochus is known to have served in the Great Palace.
Using the stamped bricks recovered during the ex-
cavations in conjunction with the literary sources,
we may suggest that it was probably built after 429.4
A number of literary sources, which are examined
in detail below, suggest that the Palace of Lausus
stood no great distance from the Palace of Antiochus.
When Palladius dedicated his Lausiac History to him
in 420, Lausus was the Grand Chamberlain (praepo-
situs sacri cubiculi) of Theodosius II. By 422, he had
been replaced in the post by one Macrobius, but he
possibly held the position again in 431, when he was
at least recommended for it by Cyril of Alexandria,
et memoires du Centre de recherche
d'histoire et civilisation de Byzance,
Collkge de France Monographies 2,
Paris 1990).
Mango 1993 C. Mango, Studies on Constantinople(Var-
iorum Collected Studies, Aldershot
1993).
'See A.M. Schneider, "Grabung im Bereich des Eu-
phemia-Martyrions zu Konstantinopel,"AA 58 (1943)255-89
for the first discoveries.
2 R. Duyuran, "Second Report on Excavations on the
Site of the New Palace ofJustice at Istanbul,"IstArkMiizYzll
6 (1953) 75.
3 The church of St. Euphemia is said to have been in
-d 'Avt6rtou according to the Synaxarion of Constantinople
(ed. H. Delehaye, 47-49, 811-13). On the date of the trans-
lation of the relics, see A. Berger,"Die Reliquien der Hei-
ligen Euphemia und ihre erste Translationnach Konstan-
tinopel," Hellenika 39 (1988) 311-22.
4The evidence for the length of Antiochus'scareer and
the dating of his palace is discussed by G. Greatrex and
J. Bardill, "Antiochusthe Praepositus, a Persian Eunuch
at the Court of Theodosius II,"DOP50 (1996,forthcoming).
68 JONATHAN BARDILL [AJA 101
? "Mese
?a...c;-
... ......
... -
"
--- it
, " j
"""2
, ..!.

/.??
,s'
:.s? .
IvkL //,
~~~~Rotun d-a ---- - ,
: !
!-4
.. ... 1?\
i '~ ,r,,
XA

'

Ib?
/• .."?~
/'

Palace of : i ~? ' :' -

,: , i., ... . .. ,''

"••.Antiochus
%
it

//00 50 100 Metres

Fig. 1. Plan of the discoveries made at the northwest corner of the Hippodrome in Istanbul between 1939 and 1964. (A.
Wilkins, after W. Muiller-Wiener,Bildlexikon zur Topographie
Istanbuls[Tiibingen 1977] pl. 109)

and perhaps also in 436. A letter from Firmus, bish- porticoes flanking the Mese (or "Middle Street"),6
op of Caesarea, which was probably sent to the Lau- that Lausus displayed the collection of antique stat-
sus with whom we are concerned, refers to his great uary for which he is best known. The assemblage
wealth and large mansion.5 It was here, and near the included an Athena from Lindos by Skyllis and Di-

5 On Lausus, see J.R. Martindale, TheProsopography of
the Later Roman Empire 2: AD 395-527 (Cambridge 1980)
s.v.Lausus, LAVSVS2, and Lausus 3.
6 Cedrenus (Historiarumcompendium,ed. I. Bekker, I, 616)
indicates that statues were displayed in the porticoes along
the Mese:"[Thefire] also destroyed the porticoes on either
side of the street Mese and the excellent offerings of Lau-
sus: for many ancient statues were set up there"(trans.C.
Mango, "The LiteraryEvidence,"in C. Mango,M. Vickers,
and E.D.Francis,"The Palace of Lausus at Constantinople
and Its Collection of Ancient Statues,"Journal of the History
of Collections4 [1992] 91 [Cedrenus B]). A variant text of
the Patria (II, 36 [G], ed. T. Preger, Scriptores originum con-
II) describes the statues as in the pal-
stantinopolitanarum
ace and facing the thoroughfare.

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
poinos, the Knidian Aphrodite of Praxiteles, the Sa-
mian Hera of Boupalos, Lysippos's Eros, Pheidias's
Olympian Zeus, Lysippos's Kairos, and numerous
sculptured beasts. Pheidias's 12.5-m-high statue of
Olympian Zeus was presumably under cover, which
suggests that Lausus's palace was extremely large.7
Vickers and Francis have suggested that Lausus ar-
ranged his statues in a meaningful program: Lysip-
pos's tiny figures of Eros and Kairos were positioned
to Zeus's right and left, respectively, his colossal statue
towering above them. The message, they suggest, was
the power of Virtue over Love and Chance.8
In support of this interpretation, we may refer
to the illustration on folio 6v of the early sixth-
century codex of Dioscorides in Vienna.9 Here, Ani-
cia Juliana is depicted, like the Olympian Zeus, in
a rigid, frontal pose, seated on the sella curulis. The
figures that flank her are identified as personifica-
tions of her virtues: on her right hand sits Magna-
nimity (Myakotwuxita), who holds a large pile of
gold coins to her chest, and on her left sits Prudence
These three figures dwarf a tiny winged
(4p6vroitq).
cupid, who stands toJuliana's right and presents her
with the codex. He, too, represents a facet of her per-
sonality: Desire of the Lover of Building (160oq [T]fj;
DthoKrioOu), the Lover of Building being Juliana
herself. Juliana, inspired by Prudence, takes just a
handful of coins from Magnanimity and scatters them
onto the codex to satisfy her Desire. A female figure
representing the Gratitude of Art ([E6]xa[p]totia teX-
vyv) prostrates herself atJuliana's feet. The position-
ing of the tiny cupid on the right hand of the large,
seated, forward-facing, rigid figure is clearly part of
the same tradition as the composition of statues in
7 M. Vickers and E.D. Francis, "The Arrangement of the
Statues," in Mango et al. (supra n. 6) 93.
8 Vickers and Francis (supra n. 7) 95-96.
9The codex was made for Anicia Juliana to commem-
orate the dedication of her church of the Theotokos at
Honoratoi. Folio 6v is conveniently reproduced in color
in R.M. Harrison, A Templefor Byzantium: The Discovery and
Excavation of AniciaJuliana's Palace-church in Istanbul (Lon-
don 1989) pl. 173.
10EAA 1 (Rome 1958) 394-96, s.v. Anicia Giuliana (C.
Bertelli). The figural arrangement is standard, and the
frame consisting of two large, interlaced squares (inscribed
within a circle) creates an effect similar to traditional archi-
tectural settings. Perhaps the most strikingly similar scene
appears on the famous silver missorium of Theodosius
I, which depicts Theodosius enthroned between Valentin-
ian II and Arcadius, beneath a structure consisting of four
columns supporting an arcuated pediment; see the discus-
sion in S.G. MacCormack, Art and Ceremonyin Late Antiquity
(Berkeley 1981) 214-21. The missorium and the manuscript
illustration have been discussed together by P.C. Berger,
TheInsignia of theNotitia Dignitatum (New York 1981) 175-83.
See also J. Trilling, "Myth and Metaphor at the
Byzantine
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
69
Lausus's palace.Just as Lausus's composition implied
the victory of Virtue over Love and Chance, so in
the manuscript illustration, Juliana's magnanimity
and prudence govern her desire for building.'0
There is a consensus among scholars of Constan-
tinopolitan topography that Lausus's palace is to be
identified with the structures discovered between
Antiochus's hexagonal hall and Divan Yolu (which
follows the course of the ancient Mese). Here, Duy-
uran uncovered a rotunda with a semicircular en-
trance portico," and when Naumann excavated the
area in 1964, an adjoining great hall, 52.5 m long and
12.4 m wide, was revealed (fig. 1).12 In fact, Naumann
was reluctant to conclude that the rotunda and ad-
joining hall were part of the Palace of Lausus,13 and
Janin was also cautious, suggesting that his residence
might have been further to the west.14 Nevertheless,
this identification has gained acceptance in the works
of Krautheimer, Mfiller-Wiener, and Berger.15 In a
recent study of Lausus's collection of antique statu-
ary, Mango has stated, "Though not absolutely cer-
tain, this identification is extremely likely on the ba-
sis of such topographical information as is available
to us"'6The topographical information is slight, but
what little there is, when considered in conjunction
with two neglected archaeological discoveries, would
suggest that the Palace of Lausus was elsewhere, and
is yet to be discovered.
Cistern of Philoxenusand St. Aquilina
The first clue to the location of the palace is pro-
vided by the 11th-century chronicler Cedrenus (His-
toriarum compendium,ed. I. Bekker, I, 564),7 who as-
serts that the Cistern of Philoxenus got its name,
Court: A Literary Approach to the David Plates," Byzantion
48 (1978) 253.
11Duyuran (supra n. 2) 78-80.
12See R. Naumann, "Vorbericht iiber die Ausgrabung-
en zwischen Mese und Antiochus-Palast 1964 in Istanbul"'
IstMitt 15 (1965) 135-48.
13N. Dolunay and R. Naumann, "Untersuchungen zwi-
schen Divan Yolu und Adalet Sarayi 1954," IstArkMiizYzll
11-12 (1964) 137: "Die ursprfingliche Annahme, es k6nnte
sich um einen Teil des hier vermuteten Lausos-Palast han-
deln, der zwischen Philoxenos-Zisterne (Binbirdirek) und
Mese (Divan Yolu) gelegen zu haben scheint, ist kaum zu
begriinden." Cf. Naumann (supra n. 12) 143.
14R. Janin, "Notes de topographie et d'histoire," REByz
23 (1965) 256-57.
15R. Krautheimer, Early Christian and
Byzantine Architec-
ture4 (Harmondsworth 1986) 71, fig. 30; W. Miller-Wiener,
Bildlexikonzur TopographieIstanbuls (Tiibingen 1977) 238-39;
A. Berger, Untersuchungenzu den Patria Konstantinupoleos(Poi-
kila Byzantina 8, Bonn 1988) 286.
16Mango
(supra n. 6) 89.
17Translation in Mango
(supra n. 6) 91 (Cedrenus A).
 D he
Theotokos in
Chalkopratera
Scale of metres s.o

0 50 100 150 200 250 \cC

C.

Senate House

Cistern of Basilca
Philoxenus 1/o
;' ), e YerebatantSarayi

Forum of Constantine
St. Aquilina?[ ,•~.~ Q go
/
Gate? Palace of Lausus Octagon
%
House of Symmachus? O and
St. Theodoreof Sphoracius Patriarchal
Li .Palace?
Cemetery Hypogeum Yolu(Mese or Regia)
Divant

" SS Augusta
Camii
S air
i- Binbirdirek Hesagon

SChalke?
Antiochus Baths of Zeuxippos

04%

Qrb~~IbO`QI

Fig. 2. Plan of the Byzantine remains between the Chalke and the Forum of Constantine. (J. Bardill)

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
meaning "hospitable," because it supplied water to
hostels (4evoSocsia) in tr" Aa6oou, that is, in the im-
mediate vicinity of the Palace of Lausus. The roughly
contemporary Patria Constantinoupoleos(I, 63, 67, ed.
T Preger, Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum
II) asserts that the Cistern of Philoxenus was built
by a magister of that name who was one of the 12 sen-
ators that Constantine the Great brought from Rome
when he founded Constantinople. In recension C
of the Patria, the Cistern of Philoxenus is placed near
the Forum of Constantine (ed. T Preger, 300), and
the Synaxarion of Constantinople refers to a church of
St. Aquilinacv Toigq iXoevou rriloiovtoO(p6pou,that
is, in the vicinity of the Cistern of Philoxenus, close
to the Forum of Constantine (ed. H. Delehaye, 429,
465 [Sa], 748). The texts therefore suggest that both
the Cistern of Philoxenus and the church of St. Aqui-
lina were close to the Forumof Constantine,although
it is unclear on which side of the Mese they lay. The
Palace of Lausus,to which the cistern provided water,
was probablynot very far away.
18 On Constantine'scolumn, see Mango 1993, chs. 2 (=
C. Mango, "Constantinopolitana,"Jd180 [1965] 305-36, but
lacking addendum), 3, and 4 (= C. Mango, "Constantine's
Porphyry Column and the Chapel of St. Constantine,"
Aaer'ov rtlq Xpoanav1K'jq Ap azo)aoy1KjqEraipeia; ser. 4,
10 [1981] 103-10). On Constantine's forum, see Mango 1990,
25-26.
19See E. Mamboury, Istanbul touristique (Istanbul 1951)
61. Mango has argued that the walls often attributed to
Severus had in fact been built much earlier- perhaps before
400 B.C.-- and that they were demolished by Severus in A.D.
193-195/6 and rebuilt along the same course between 240
and 250 (Mango 1990, 13-15).
20 Other remains shown on Mamboury's plan may be
briefly mentioned. The hypogeum was found in 1940 dur-
ing the construction of a hotel, and four stamped bricks
of the sixth century were found in situ (E. Mamboury, brick-
stamp notes [property of Cyril Mango], "Parages du Pr6toire.
Mese"). Other funerary remains were found at the Forum
in 1929-1930 (Mamboury, "Les mystires de la Colonne
Brul6e," HlsEpayu'va roy 0' AzEOvoqS
BvUavrIVoAoY)Ko6V
2vve6piov 1 [Thessaloniki, 12-19 April 1953 (1955)] 275-80)
and in 1963-1964 (N. Firatli, "Short Report on Finds and
Archaeological Activities outside the Museum," IstArkMiiz-
Yzll 11-12 [1964] 207-209; and W. Kleiss, Topographisch-
archdologischer Plan von Istanbul: Verzeichnisder Denkmdler
und Fundorte [Tiibingen 1965] 9, no. 45). See also Mango
1990, 15. The columns to the southwest of Constantine's
column are erroneously labeled as "Arcades chalinariques."
They are evidently the same as those mentioned in Mam-
boury, "Les fouilles byzantines A Istanbul et dans sa ban-
lieue imm6diate aux XIXe et XXe siecles," Byzantion 11
(1936) 254, where they are wrongly described as "sur la
droite de la rue." Mango, misled by this description, con-
cluded that the columns extended westward from the base
of Constantine's column itself (Mango 1993, ch. 4 [see supra
n. 18] 106, 108, fig. 1). Notes of David Talbot Rice in the
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
71
The location of the Forum of Constantine is not
in doubt, for the battered remains of the emperor's
porphyry column still stand (fig. 2).18The forum'is
known to have been circular or oval, but its exact
dimensions are unfortunately unknown. During the
laying of drains in Divan Yolu in 1931, some large
foundations were discovered about 75 m east of the
column. Their identification is open to question,
since Mamboury provided no details of their con-
struction, although he himself believed that they re-
lated to a gate in the pre-Constantinian city walls.19
The location of the discovery is shown on a plan
made by Mamboury, which I publish here for the
first time (fig. 3).2o0If these foundations do indeed
relate to a gate in the ancient walls, the Forum of
Constantine can have extended no more than 75 m
on either side of the column.
Numerous scholars- e.g.,Janin, Naumann, Mfiller-
Wiener, Berger, and Mango2- have followed the
French zoologist and classicist Pierre Gilles (d.
1555)22 in identifying the Cistern of Philoxenus with
Barber Institute, Birmingham University, describe the dis-
covery of part of this colonnade in January 1928. It is re-
corded there that the column bases were identical to some
reused in the nearby Atik Ali Camii. The identifica-
tion of this portico poses somePapa problems. At first sight it
would appear to form part of the colonnade that flanked
the Mese on the south side. It is unlikely, however, that
the colonnades bordering the Mese would have continued
through the middle of the forum. Mamboury's plan sug-
gests that the interaxial span of the columns was about
2.5 m, whereas WE. Betsch, The History, Production and Dis-
tribution of the Late Antique Capital in Constantinople (Diss.
Univ. of Pennsylvania 1977) 174 has suggested that the col-
umns of the Mese were as much as 5 m apart. In this con-
text, note also the remains of sixth-century shops discov-
ered by Naumann (supra n. 12) 145-46 beside the Mese,
and two short sections of wall found near the fountain
of Atik Ali Camii that may also be associated with
such shops: Papa
Mamboury, "La nouvelle citerne byzantine de
Tchifte Serail," Byzantion 11 (1936) pl. 17.
21Janin (supra n. 14) 257; and R. Janin, Constantinople
byzantine: Developpement urbain et repertoire topographique2
(Paris 1964) 207-208 (although rightly noting another can-
didate, the first alternative discussed infra); Miiller-Wiener
(supra n. 15) 280, pl. 263; Dolunay and Naumann (supra
n. 13) 137; Naumann (supra n. 12) fig. 5; Berger (supra n.
15) 617; Mango (supra n. 6) 90; and C. Mango, "The Water
Supply of Constantinople," in C. Mango, G. Dagron, and
G. Greatrex eds., Constantinople and Its Hinterland (Society
for the Promotion of Byzantine Studies Publications 3,
Aldershot 1995) 16.
22 P. Gilles, De
topographia et de illius an-
Constantinopoleos
tiquitatibus libri quatuor (Lyons 1561) 131-32 (trans. J. Ball,
The Antiquities of Constantinople [London 1729] 162-63).
Gilles's identification was not based on any superior knowl-
edge. Gilles also knew a smaller cistern to the west discussed
infra.
 . . . . . . . . .

........

. . . . . .
............................

..................
wzI

Air-

Fig. 3. E. Mamboury's plan of discoveries made near the Column of Constantine. (Deutsches Archiiologisches Institut, Ist

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
the subterranean Cistern of One Thousand and One
Columns (Binbirdirek), which measures 64.0 x 56.4
m and is located about 200 m east of the Column
of Constantine, on the south side of the Mese, and
immediately to the west of the Palace of Antiochus
(fig. 2). The undecorated basket capitals and the ma-
sons' marks in this cistern suggest a sixth-century
date (although the few brickstamps that have so far
been published appear to date to the fifth cen-
tury).23 For this reason, it has been suggested that
the man after whom the cistern was named was per-
haps Flavius Theodorus Philoxenus, consul of 525.24
The Binbirdirek cistern is generally identified with
the Cistern of Philoxenus simply because it is the
best-known cistern beside the Mese. It is a signifi-
cant, though neglected, fact that there are at least
two other cisterns in this region.
The first is a subterranean cistern located west of
Binbirdirek, between Boyaci Ahmet Sokagi and Pi-
yerloti Caddesi (fig. 3).25 It is substantially smaller
than the Binbirdirek, measuring 42.5 x 25 m inter-
nally. It contains 32 columns with Corinthian capitals
and high impost blocks. The capitals do not appear
to have been reused, and both they and the cistern
have been dated to the first quarter of the fifth cen-
tury.26 This cistern does not seem to be mentioned
in the literary sources.
23The earliest firmly dated basket capitals are the
highly decorated ones from the church of St. Polyeuktos
of 518-527 (R.M. Harrison, Excavations at Saraphane in Is-
tanbul1 [Washington,D.C.1986]417).Forthe masons'marks,
see K. Wulzinger,"DieSteinmetzzeichen der Bin-bir-direk,"
BZ 22 (1913) 459-73. Six identical or similar marks have
been noted in sixth-centurymonuments: EW.Deichmann,
Ravenna: Hauptstadt des spdtantiken Abendlandes.Kommentar
2 (Wiesbaden 1976) 206-30.
Bau-
For the brickstamps,see K.Wulzinger,Byzantinische
denkmaler zu Konstantinopel: Auf der Seraispitze, die Nea, das
Tekfur-Seraiund das Zisternenproblem(Mittelmeer-Linder und
Orient, SammlungKunstwissenschaftlicherStudien 1,Han-
over 1925)38. Mamboury(supran. 19) 256 once mentioned
brickstamps dating between the mid-fifth and the early
sixth century and suggested that these could be used for
dating the cistern. From his notes, however,it seems that
all the bricks were associated with remains outside the cis-
tern in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Klodfarer Cad-
desi, Piyerloti Caddesi, and Dostluk Yurdu Sokagi. The
same remainswere apparentlynoted by C.Emereau,"Notes
sur les origines et la formation de Constantinople: Les
grands centres historiques de la ville,"RA 1925, 1-25 (as
indicated by Kleiss [supran. 20] 7, no. 10,but not by Milller-
Wiener [supra n. 15] 283, pl. 321). Emereau, who was fol-
lowed byJanin (supra n. 21) 19 and plan II (= Mango 1990,
fig. 3), wrongly identified these walls with part of the Sev-
eran fortifications (on which, supra n. 19).
24Berger (supra n. 15) 617; Mango (supra n. 6) 90;
Mango (supra n. 21) 16. On this personality, see Martin-
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
73
The second cistern was apparently open to the
air, and located to the northwest of Binbirdirek, on
the northern side of the Mese (fig. 2).27 Part of its
eastern wall can still be seen on the west side of Ba-
biali Caddesi (fig. 4). It was first published by J.B.
Ward-Perkins in a well-known study of Early Byzan-
tine masonry styles, where it was suggested that it
might be a section of the fortifications of Severus.28
Later excavations showed it to be the eastern wall
of a huge cistern.29 This wall was traced for 90 m,
and the interior was excavated to a depth of 14 m
from the top of the surviving walls, without the bot-
tom being reached. The cistern was therefore sub-
stantially larger than Binbirdirek. The bricks
(340-370 mm square x 40-50 mm thick) are ar-
ranged in bands of about five courses (ca. 0.35 m high)
that alternate with bands of mortared rubble (ca.
1.04 m high) faced with around seven courses of
small, squared, limestone blocks (ca. 200-250 mm
long x 120-150 mm high).30 Alternating bands of
brick and stone were probably in use in Constantin-
ople in the late fourth century, for parts of the ter-
race walls near the Forum of Theodosius I, which
was inaugurated in 393 (ed. L. Dindorf, Chron.Pasch.
565), were of stone-faced, mortared rubble with brick
bands five courses high.31 But it is the masonry of
the Land Walls (completed by April 413)32 that ap-
dale (supra n. 5) s.v. Philoxenus 8.
25 It appears in Miiller-Wiener(supra n. 15) pl. 321, cis-
tern F713;and in Kleiss (supra n. 20) 10, no. 73. For descrip-
tions, see P. Forchheimer and J. Strzygowski, Die byzanti-
nischen Wasserbehdltervon Konstantinopel.Beitrdgezur Geschichte
der byzantinischenBaukunst und zur Topographievon Konstan-
tinopel (Byzantinische Denkmaler 2, Vienna 1893) 60-61,
210; and K. Wulzinger, "Byzantinische Substruktionsbauten
Konstantinopels," AA 28 (1913) 388-90 (the brickstamp in
fig. 15 appears to date to the fifth century). This cistern
was known to Gilles (supra n. 22) 131-32 (= trans. Ball
162-63).
26Betsch (supra n. 20) 50-59,
figs. 2-6.
27 Miller-Wiener (supra n. 15) 283,
pl. 321, cistern F7/7
but omitted on 232, pl. 263.
28J.B. Ward-Perkins, "Notes on the Structure and Build-
ing Methods of Early Byzantine Architecture," in D. Talbot
Rice ed., The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors:Second
Report (Edinburgh 1958) 62-63.
29 N. Firatli, "Recent
Important Finds in Istanbul," Ist-
ArkMiizYzll 15-16 (1969) 192-93, figs. 4-6.
30 The measurements were taken by Ernest Mamboury
on 21 August 1936 and are recorded in a notebook in the
Deutsches Archiologisches Institut in Istanbul.
31See Miiller-Wiener (supra n. 15) 260-61 with area D
(label omitted) on pl. 294.
32The completion of the Land Walls is indicated by the
words extructus est and completoopere in Codex Theodosianus
15.1.5. C. Pharr's translation is inaccurate, suggesting that
the wall had not been completed when the decree was made.
 74 JONATHAN BARDILL
.... . ........
....................!
Fig. 4. Eastern wall of the Cistern of Philoxenus on Bablili Caddesi. (Photo J. Bardill)
proximates most closely what can be seen in the wall
of the cistern. Typical fifth-century work in the for-
tifications consists of bands of stone about 1.5 m high
(10 courses) alternating with bands of brick about
0.42 m high (five courses), which penetrate right
through the core.33 The technique continued to be
used in Constantinople until at least the middle of
the fifth century. In Stoudios's basilica of St. John
(ca. 450),34 the brick bands are similar in height (five
courses 0.43-0.44 m) to those in the Land Walls but
occur more than twice as frequently, thus substan-
See P. Speck, "DerMauerbau in 60 Tagen,"in H.-G.Beck
ed., Studien zur FriihgeschichteKonstantinopels (Miscellanea
Byzantina Monacensia 14, Munich 1973) 135-43. Mango
1990, 49 has recently alleged that the walls were not com-
pletely finished until about the middle of the fifth century.
3Ward-Perkins(supra n. 28) 66; C. Foss, "Constanti-
nople," in Foss and D. Winfield, Byzantine Fortifications,an
Introduction(Pretoria1986)52-53, 75 styles[A],[B],and [Cl].
34 For the date of the construction of St. John, see U.
Peschlow,"DieJohanneskirchedes Studios in Istanbul:Be-
richtfiber diejiingsten Untersuchungsergebnisse,"Jahrbuch
der OsterreichischenByzantinistik 32.4 (1982) 429-34; and
Mango 1993, Addenda p. 6. Prof. Peschlow generously al-
lowed me to see drawings of the stamped bricks that he
recovered from the church.
5 Ward-Perkins (supra n. 28) 70-71.
36Mango 1993, Addenda p. 4.
7 T.E Mathews, The Early Churchesof Constantinople:Ar-
chitectureand Liturgy(London 1971) 28, pls. 17, 19-20. For
the greenstone, see E Dirimtekin, "LeSkevophylakionde
Sainte-Sophie,"REByz19 (1961) 390-400, pls. 1-4.
38
We have far too few closely dated Constantinopoli-
tan monuments in this period to determine whether there
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
iii ....
tially reducing the amount of stone used in the fac-
ing (each stone band consists of three courses, 0.60
m high).35 The church of the Theotokos in the
Chalkoprateia (Copper Market), which is possibly
to be ascribed to Verina (ca. 457-484) rather than
to Pulcheria (ca. 414-453),36 is built wholly of brick
(10 brick courses to 0.91 m; mortar beds 0.055 m
thick) upon two courses of greenstone blocks.37 By
the sixth century, pure brick masonry with occasional
courses of greenstone had become the norm in
Constantinople.38 This cistern can therefore be
was a tendency for the proportion of stone to brick to be
reduced as the fifth century progressed. The large pro-
portion of stone in the Land Wallsmay be an exceptional
case in the early fifth century, and indeed, already in the
second church of St. Sophia, which was dedicated on 10
October 415 and was therefore a contemporary of the Land
Walls (Chron.Pasch. 572), the proportion of stone to brick
was much less than in the Land Walls and St.John of Stou-
dios (stone bands 0.52 m high [three courses], brick bands
0.56 m high [six courses]); see Ward-Perkins (supra n. 28)
64. The wall behind the propylaeum of the second church
of St. Sophia is certainly contemporary with the propy-
laeum and does not relate to the first church of Constan-
tius. Mathews (supra n. 37) 16 incorrectly states that the
wall is of "pure brick masonry" and is "quite different from
the alternation of brick and stone in the Land Walls which
we have come to accept as characteristically Theodosian."
For sixth-century brick with occasional courses of green-
stone, see Harrison (supra n. 23) pls. 30, 39, 71-73 (St. Poly-
euktos); Mathews (supra n. 37) pl. 26 (SS. Sergius and Bac-
chus); Ward-Perkins (supra n. 28) 71-72; and R. Mainstone,
Hagia Sophia: Architecture,Structure and Liturgy ofJustinian's
GreatChurch(London 1988)67-70, esp. 68,pl. 84 (St.Sophia);
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
placed with a degree of certainty in the first half
of the fifth century. It is possible that it is to be iden-
tified with the Cisterna Theodosiana,which, according
to the Notitia urbis Constantinopolitanae (VI, 8, ed. O.
Seeck, Notitia Dignitatum) compiled ca. 423-427, ex-
isted in Region Five (north of the Mese and east of
the Forum of Constantine).39 If so, our cistern would
have to have been constructed before 427. In the
woodcut of ca. 1530-1550 ascribed to the Venetian
cartographer Giovanni Andrea Vavassore (fig. 5), and
in that published in G. Braun and E Hogenberg's
Civitates orbis terrarum of 1572 (fig. 6), both derived
from a lost original of ca. 1480, the overgrown cis-
tern can perhaps be seen immediately below (or east
of) Constantine's column, on the right hand (or
north) side of the Mese.40
Despite current scholarly opinion, the Binbirdi-
rek Cistern, which is about 200 m east of the Col-
umn of Constantine, can hardly be identified with
the Cistern of Philoxenus, which is said to have been
near the Forum. For this reason, Strzygowski and
Guilland rightly rejected the identification,41 al-
though the latter provided no justification for his
suggestion that the Cistern of Philoxenus was in fact
to the north of the Mese, nor for his assertion that
the Palace of Lausus was to the south.42 Both of the
cisterns we have mentioned are closer to the Forum
of Constantine than the Binbirdirek cistern and are,
U. Peschlow,Die Irenenkirche in Istanbul:Untersuchungen zur
Architektur (IstMitt-BH18,Tiibingen 1977) 215-23 with fold-
ers (St. Eirene); S. Casson, PreliminaryReportupon the Ex-
cavationsCarriedOut in the Hippodrome of Constantinoplein
1927 on behalfof the BritishAcademy(London 1928) 20-21,
with figs. 30-31; and Casson, SecondReportupon the Exca-
vations CarriedOut in and near the Hippodrome of Constanti-
noplein 1928 on behalfofthe BritishAcademy(London 1929)
6-7 (Baths of Zeuxippos). This technique is attested under
Justinian by Procopius (ed. H.B. Dewing, Aed. 1.2).
39For the date of the Notitia, see Speck (supra n. 32)
144-50. Marcellinus Comes (ed. T Mommsen, in trans. B.
Croke) states that in 407 a very large cistern was built next
to the porphyrycolumn in the Forumof Constantine.Since
it was clearly in Region Six and subterranean (subplateae
transitumor "underthe street-crossing"),it cannot be iden-
tified with the cistern beside Babiali Caddesi, which was
in Region Five and above ground. For platea designating
the Mese, see R. Guilland, "LaMese ou Regia. 'H M'onl,
~l'Plyia," in Actesdu VIe Congresdes etudesbyzantines(Paris
1948) 2 (1951) (reprinted in Guilland II, 69-79) 177.Janin
(supran. 21) 210 is certainly correct in suggesting that Mar-
cellinus cannot be referring to the YerebatanSarayi,which
was constructed by Justinian. Krautheimer (supra n. 15)
238 ascribes the YerebatanSarayi to the fifth century, pre-
sumably on the basis of the 98 acanthus capitals. C. Mango,
however,explains these as "outdatedbuilder'sstock"(Byzan-
tineArchitecture[Historyof WorldArchitecture,Milan 1978]
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
75
therefore, better candidates for the Cistern of Phi-
loxenus. For memory of it to have been preserved
in our texts, Philoxenus's cistern must have been a
large and, probably, highly visible structure, which
suggests that it should be identified with the cistern
west of Babiili Caddesi. Since the structural tech-
nique suggests a construction date in the first half
of the fifth century, and since the Notitia may indi-
cate a date before 427, it cannot have been built by
Flavius Theodorus Philoxenus, consul of 525. The
individual who ordered its construction may rather
have been the magister officorumnamed Philoxenus
who is attested in the first half of the fifth century.43
This would agree nicely with the assertion of the
Patria (I, 63) that the cistern was built by a magister
named Philoxenus, even though the same text places
him in the fourth century rather than the fifth. The
Cistern of Philoxenus was therefore located north
of the Mese, and west of Babiili Caddesi, and the
church of St. Aquilina, which is known to have stood
close to both the cistern and the Forum of Constan-
tine, may have been located between the two of
them.44
Street Leading from the Mese to the Copper Market
The second clue to the location of the Palace of
Lausus is provided by Constantine Porphyrogenitus's
10th-century Book of Ceremonies.It is recorded there
68). More recently, Betsch (supra n. 20) 134, 233-34 has
suggested that the capitals are in fact Justinianic.
40 On the Vavassorewoodcut, see
Mango 1990, 9; C.L.
Striker,"The 'Coliseo de Spiriti' in Constantinople,"in O.
Feld and U. Peschlow eds., Studienzurspdtantikenundbyzan-
tinischen Kunst (EW Deichmanngewidmet) 1 (Rbmisch-
GermanischesZentralmuseumForschungsinstitutffir Vor-
und FruihgeschichteMonographien10.1,Bonn 1986) 14-15;
and for a systematicdiscussion of the monuments depicted,
A. Berger, "Zursogenannten Stadtansicht des Vavassore,"
IstMitt44 (1994) 329-55 (where this cistern is not noted).
41 Forchheimer and Strzygowski (supra n. 25) 170-71;
and R. Guilland, "LePalais de Lausus,"Hellenika17 (1962)
(reprinted in Guilland II, 32-35) 99.
42Berger (supra n. 15) 617-18 retains the generally ac-
cepted identification of the Binbirdirek with the Cistern
of Philoxenus, but realizes that rtd <Ptlo?vou must have
applied to an area extending as far as the Forum of Con-
stantine to account for the church of St. Aquilina being
described as AvroiK0toSivou r•hloiov To0 (p6pou. He fails,
however,to account for the cistern itself being described
by the Patriaas near the Forum of Constantine (ed. Preger,
300).
43See Martindale (supra n. 5) s.v.Philoxenus 2.
44 R.Janin, La giographieecclesiastique de l'empirebyzantin
1:LesiegedeConstantinople 3. Lesegliseset lesmonasteres (Paris
1969) 17, however,places St. Aquilina to the south of the
Mese.
 it

?r l1
r

wig

'd?

rsit
I w~,3?
t

44b

rr

Fig. 5. Detail of G.A. Vavassore's panorama of Constantinople (ca. 1530-1550), looking west from the Hippodrome and St. Sophia, dow
of Constantine. Arrow indicates cistern on Babiali Caddesi.

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 &JLP
IC' ;L

lb %Q~ti
?~r ?? ???40
.. Mb
sepav? .
?? . Sf ;S ~P410 -???--r~
r qp

?? Y zMb
cf~p51r
a a "so
lk
00 %b 40.~.) OP.
??r
~ r?~ ,?. 31rI 4.o ??

"Wo
.,dd?

Fig. 6. Detail of G. Braun and E Hogenberg's panorama of Constantinople (Civitates orbis terrarum, 1572), looking west from the Hippodr
Mese toward the Column of Constantine. Arrow indicates cistern on Babiali Caddesi.

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
78 JONATHAN BARDILL
(I, 39 [30], ed. A. Vogt) that during the Feast of the
Annunciation, the imperial procession made its way
from St. Sophia to the Forum of Constantine by
way of the Milion45 and the Mese. Returning from
the Forum, the cortege passed down the Mese as far
as zrI Aaaoou and then turned left into the nearby
portico that led to the narthex of the church of the
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia (Copper Market).
Fortunately, the ruins of this church have been found
immediately to the northwest of St. Sophia (fig. 2).46
In bad weather, the cortege went to and from the
Forum of Constantine under cover of the portico
flanking the Mese, and the ceremony was conducted
inside the Senate House. Since Cedrenus (I, 565) tells
us that the Senate House was on the north side of
the Forum, it is likely that the company used the
portico on the north side of the Mese. On the return
journey, we are told that the emperor and his reti-
nue passed down the same portico as far as rdt
Aaaoou, where they turned toward the Copper Mar-
ket. The most natural deduction from the Book of
Ceremoniesis that the Palace of Lausus was located
to the east of the Forum of Constantine, on the north
side of the Mese, beside the turn leading to the Cop-
45
On the Milion, see Mango 1959, 47-48, 174-79. The
colossal columns in the Augustaion discussed by Mango
are depicted in a Turkish illustration of 1586. See G. Ne-
cipoglu, "TheLife of an Imperial Monument:Hagia Sophia
after Byzantium,"in R. Mark and A. Qakmak eds., Hagia
Sophiafrom theAge ofJustinian to the Present (Cambridge 1992)
fig. 115 (black-and-white);and M. And, Istanbulin the 16th
Century: The City, the Palace, Daily Life (Istanbul 1994) 42
(color). The tall stone structure west of the four columns
is, I presume, the water tower built on the site ofJustinian's
equestrian statue that is described by Gilles. The illustra-
tion suggests that the columns did not relate to the Milion,
since the Milion stood to the west of the Augustaion. I am
grateful to Cyril Mango for bringing this illustration to
my attention. Remains in the vicinity of the Milion are
shown on the plans in E. Mamboury, "Un nouvel element
pour la topographie de l'antique Byzance," AA 49 (1934)
57-58; A.M. Schneider, Byzanz: Vorarbeitenzur Topographie
und Archiologie der Stadt (IstForsch8, 1936) pl. 10 (by Mam-
boury); C. Mango, "Le Diippion. Etude historique et top-
ographique,"REByz8 (1950) folder opposite p. 160;Mango
1959, figs. 36-38 (and described on pp. 184-88 by Mam-
boury); W. Kleiss, "Neue Befunde zur Chalkopratenkirche
in Istanbul," IstMitt 15 (1965) 150, fig. 1; and N. Firatli and
T Ergil, "The 'Milion' Sounding," IstArkMiizYzll15-16 (1969)
199-212. These remains are not shown in Milller-Wiener
(supra n. 15) pl. 263, although the sounding by Firatli and
Ergil is noted on p. 216 and some walls are shown on pl.
323. Some unpublished photographs of Firatli's sounding
are to be found in the Sarachane archive of R. Martin
Harrison, which is now stored in the Institute of Archaeol-
ogy, Oxford (neg. nos. 4/2/7-23). Further finds made in the
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
per Market. This conclusion was reached long ago
by Bieliaev, and the merits of his case were seen by
Bury.47 Guilland, however, inferred from this text
that the Palace was on the south side of the Mese,
opposite the street leading to the Copper Market.48
One piece of topographical evidence, however, led
Bury to doubt that the Palace of Lausus might be
to the north of the Mese. According to the Synaxa-
rion, the church of St. Euphemia was ?v ToiS'Avt6bXou
Kai ntjaoiov t OvAa6aoou, that is, in Antiochus's pal-
ace or its vicinity, close to Lausus's palace or its vi-
cinity (47-49, 811-13). This evidence constitutes
one of the chief reasons for accepting the identifica-
tion of the ruins immediately north of the hexagonal
hall of Antiochus's palace as the Palace of Lausus.
But the degree of proximity that can be deduced
from these words is uncertain. It must be pointed
out that two areas of the city are referred to as rtd
'AvTt6Xou.The first, which is mentioned here, was
beside the Hippodrome, and the second was on the
Golden Horn. The second is also referred to in
the Synaxarion (ed. Delehaye, 191), since the church
of St. Elissaios was located there.49 It seems likely,
then, that the words zhiraiov 0roi Aaaoou were re-
area in 1926 are noted by E Dirimtekin, "The Milion (Mi-
liurum, Aureum) [sic]," AyasofyaMiizesi Yzllz4z8 (1969) 47.
46 See Kleiss (supra n. 45); W. Kleiss, "Grabungen im Be-
reich der Chalkopratenkirche in Istanbul 1965," IstMitt 16
(1966) 217-40; and Mathews (supra n. 37) 28-33. The iden-
tification of the ruins cannot be doubted, since we know
that the relics of Zacharias were kept in the crypt of the
chapel of St. James near the church's atrium, and since
C. Mango, "Notes on Byzantine Monuments," DOP 23-24
(1970) 369-72 (reprinted in Mango 1993, ch. 16, with ad-
dendum) reports a fresco showing the slaying of Zacharias
in the octagonal substructures north of the atrium of the
church. Mango 1993, Addenda p. 4 rejects the sources at-
tributing the church to Pulcheria, and ascribes it to Ve-
rina. The remains of the terrace wall between the church
and Yerebatan Sarayi were discovered during the construc-
tion of a house on the upper terrace beside Salkims6giit
Sokagi in August 1934. Part of the retaining wall and a
barrel vault were destroyed. The vault was divided into
rooms lit by windows that overlooked the church (Mam-
boury, brickstamp notes, "Edifice entourant la citerne bas-
ilique." See also Mamboury 1936 [supra n. 20] 274).
47J.B. Bury, "The Nika Riot,"JHS 17 (1897) 112-13.
48Guilland (supra n. 41) 33.
49See Janin (supra n. 21) 310-11; and Janin (supra n.
44) 110-11. It has been suggested that Seyh Murad Mes-
cidi may be St. Elissaios (E.A. Ivison, "The Seyh Murad
Mescidi at Constantinople," BSA 85 [1990] 87). St. Elias was
also in this area, however: seeJanin (supra n. 44) 137-38;
and K.N. Ciggaar, "Une description de Constantinople tra-
duite par un pelerin anglais," REByz 34 (1976) 211-67 (an
earlier version of the anonymous description of Constan-
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
quired to differentiate "t 'Avrt6Xou beside the Hip-
podrome from rat 'Avrt6Xou on the Golden Horn.
The Synaxarion therefore indicates little about the
precise location of the Palace of Lausus, except that
it was much closer to the Palace of Antiochus beside
the Hippodrome than it was to r•i 'Avrit6ou on the
Golden Horn. One is certainly not justified in infer-
ring from this indication that the Palace of Lausus
was right beside the Palace of Antiochus, although
it must have been very close.
Further evidence, the interpretation of which is
more problematic, may corroborate what I have de-
duced above. According to Cedrenus (I, 616) and Zo-
naras (Epitomaehistoriarum, ed. T. Biittner-Wobst, III,
130-31),50 the fire of 475 started in the Copper Mar-
ket, consumed two porticoes, the Basilica with its
library, the porticoes on either side of the Mese, the
Palace of Lausus with its collection of statues, and
the Forum of Constantine. Clearly the fire spread
southwest from the Copper Market, consuming both
the Basilica, which can be located with certainty
above the Yerebatan Sarayi cistern (fig. 2),51 and, ap-
parently, the portico-lined street linking the Copper
Market to the Mese.52 When the flames had reached
the Mese, they were fanned westward to the Forum
of Constantine, and in the process destroyed Lausus's
collection of statues. If this interpretation is correct,
the Palace of Lausus was located to the west of the
tinople than that published by Mercati in 1936). We read
(43): In locoAntiochi in via Blachernes est aecclesia sancti Heliae
prophetae, et est in ipsa de melote eius.
50 Mango (supra n. 6) has shown that Cedrenus and Zo-
naras were here drawing ultimately on Malchus.
51Mango 1959, 48-51 and A. Cameron, "Theodorus
Tptaonapxor,"GRBS 17 (1976) 269-86 (reprinted with ad-
ditional note in A. Cameron, Literature and Society in the
Early Byzantine World [Variorum Collected Studies, Lon-
don 1985] ch. 16). The Basilica Stoa already existed in Re-
gion Four by ca. 425 (Notitia V, 8, p. 176.24-27). Just two
years after the fire of 475, the Basilica Stoa was restored
by one Illos (John of Antioch fr. 211 = FHG 618). For the
construction of the cistern below "the central court of
the basilica of Illos" in 528, which required the destruction
of the southwest portico of the Basilica, see Procop. Aed.
1.11.12-15; Malalas, Chronographia,ed. L. Dindorf, 435-36;
Theophanes, Chronographia,ed. C. de Boor, anno mundi 6020,
176.24-27; Chron. Pasch. 619; and Cedrenus, I, 645. Illos is
also mentioned at Chron. Pasch. 622, where a reference to
the Basilica Stoa must have dropped out (judging by com-
parison with Theophanes, A.M. 6024, 181.27-30 and Ced-
renus, I, 647, on which see Mango 1993, Addenda p. 1).
He is also known to have built a church of St. John the
Baptist close to the Palace of Antiochus (Patria III, 33, 211;
and Ciggaar [supra n. 49] 257 [16]). It appears to have been
on the south side of the Mese.
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
79
street linking the Mese to the Copper Market, and
to the east of the Forum of Constantine. Guilland,
however, attempted to argue from these accounts that
the Palace of Lausus was close to the Basilica and
its library, and on the south side of the Mese.53
It should by now be clear that if the position of
the street leading from the Mese to the Copper Mar-
ket can be established, this will have important im-
plications for the location of the Palace of Lausus.
Berger once attempted to reconstruct the early street
system of Constantinople on a grid of rectangles mea-
suring about 130 x 120 m aligned with the axis of
the Hippodrome. He assumed that the street men-
tioned in the Book of Ceremoniesthat linked the Cop-
per Market and the Mese (his street E) would have
passed right next to the atrium of the church of
the Theotokos and close to the northwest flank of the
Yerebatan Sarayi, thus intersecting the Mese oppo-
site the great hall discovered by Naumann (assumed
by Berger to be the Palace of Lausus).54 However,
two modern streets-Alay Ko6kii Caddesi and the
more easterly section of Qatalgegme Sokagi - are al-
most perpendicular to the axis of the Yerebatan Sa-
rayi, of the church of the Theotokos in the Copper
Market, and roughly parallel to the axis of the Hippo-
drome and the ancient streets that must have flanked
it (fig. 2).55 These roads may therefore still follow
the original line of the Byzantine street linking the
52 R. Guilland, "LaBasilique, la Bibliotheque et I'Octo-
gone"' Melanges d'histoire litteraire et de bibliographie offertsci
Jean Bonnerot (Paris 1954) (reprinted in Guilland II, 3-13)
n. 35 plausibly suggested that the two porticoes belonged
to the street linking the Mese to the Copper Market. North-
east winds are common in Constantinople (cf. Mango 1959,
56, n. 128).
53Guilland (supra n. 41) 98-99.
54 A. Berger, "Die Altstadt von Byzanz in der vorjustin-
ianischer Zeit," Poikila Byzantina 6 (1987) 18.
55A street running down the western flank of the cir-
cus was discovered during the excavations northwest of
the Hippodrome. See Naumann (supra n. 12) 135; and
Berger (supra n. 54) 29, street D. The street that was dis-
covered by Schneider in front of the atrium of the Theodo-
sian St. Sophia (A.M. Schneider, Die Grabung im Westhof
der Sophienkirchezu Istanbul [IstForsch 12, 1941] 4 and plan
1) is perhaps part of the same one found behind the Is-
tanbul Archaeological Museum (Miller-Wiener [supra n.
15] 50). Albrecht Berger has suggested to me that the ruins
behind the museum may relate to the Baths of Alexander.
The street may have continued along the eastern flank of
the Hippodrome; see Berger (supra n. 54) 29, street A. The
substructures on Cemal Nadir Sokagi, which probably date
to the sixth century in their earliest phase, also share the
same axis. Since the Binbirdirek and the two lesser-known
cisterns close to it share the same alignment, it is possible
80 JONATHAN BARDILL
Mese and the Copper Market. If so, Berger's street
E would have to be shifted about 50 m further west
and would have intersected the Mese about 30 m
west of the apse of the great hall discovered by
Naumann.
Some important archaeological finds made in Qa-
talgegme Sokagi during the laying of Istanbul's drain-
age system in April 1929 help to support this sug-
gestion. Macridy reports the discovery of three
aligned column bases, apparently in situ, on a marble
stylobate, with an interaxial span of about 2.38 m.
The stylobate was about 2.50 m below modern
ground level, and it and the bases rose to a combined
height of 1.20 m.56 The bases are shown clearly in
a photograph taken by W. Sender (fig. 7). Many
marble architectural fragments were also found:
cornices, architraves, and capitals. One section of
cornice was sketched in Macridy's brief report. It has
recently been illustrated in a catalogue of figured
Byzantine sculpture in the Istanbul Archaeological
Museum, where its provenance and date of entry into
the museum are said to be unknown.57 The cornice
was dated by Macridy to the end of the fifth century
and by Firatli to the second half of the fifth or the
first half of the sixth century. A date at the begin-
ning of the fifth century should not, perhaps, be ruled
out, for blocks from the monumental entrance to
the atrium of the second St. Sophia, which was ded-
icated in 415 under Theodosius II (Chron.Pasch. 572),
display similar sharply cut acanthus, designs between
modillions, and palmette chains.58 One of Sender's
photographs shows two fragmentary capitals among
the debris (fig. 8). Both- one of which displays soft
that BabiAliCaddesi indicates the position of an ancient
street running in the same direction. Such a street would
replace Berger (supra n. 54) 29, street E
56 T. Macridy in M. Schede, "Archiologische Funde:
Tiirkei,"AA 44 (1929) 357-58.
57See N. Firatll, La sculpture byzantinefigurie au Musie
archiologique d'Istanbul(Paris 1990) 133-34, pl. 83 (no. 263).
58sFor comparativematerial, see Schneider (supra n. 55)
pls. 2.1, 14.1, 21.1-2, 22.1-3, and 27.1.
59The upturned capital on the right shows soft acan-
thus. Cf. Schneider (supra n. 55) pls. 12.2 and 25.2-3. In
the opinion of Betsch (supran. 20) 189-93, this type (which
he calls crowded acanthus) was produced only between
400 and 425. The fragmentary capital lying upon the cor-
nice block displays mask acanthus. Cf. Schneider (supra
n. 55) pls. 14.2 and 15-16. The Deutsches Archiologisches
Institut in Istanbul has a number of photographsby Sender
of these discoveries (negs. 2243-2253, 2680, and two other
prints).
60Schneider (supra n. 45) 92, no. 9.
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
acanthus (which Betsch believes to have been pro-
duced only between ca. 400 and 425), and the other
of which has mask acanthus-are similar to those
from St. Sophia.59 The former, at least, is clearly too
small to have been associated with the bases, which
must have supported massive columns about 0.70 m
in diameter at the foot.
According to Macridy, the discoveries in Qa-
talgegme Sokagi were made near former prisons, and
it was possible to enlarge the trench cut for the drains
only because there was a small square at a road junc-
tion. Schneider's archaeological plan of the city in-
dicates that the discovery was made at the junction
of Qatalgegme Sokagi and Ba? Musahip Sokagi,60
whereas Kleiss's revised version puts the findspot fur-
ther to the northeast, at the junction of Qatalgegme
Sokagi and Molla Fenari Sokagi.61 Berger, who lo-
cated the column bases according to Schneider's plan,
believed that they related to an otherwise unattested
street (his street F) to the west of, and parallel to,
the street leading to the Copper Market (his street
E).62It is surprising that the discoveries were omit-
ted from the plans in the standard topographical
dictionary of the city by Mfiller-Wiener,63 since his
copy of a sketch made by Mamboury at the time of
the excavation is in the Deutsches Archiiologisches
Institut in Istanbul, and this confirms that Kleiss's
topographical plan shows the correct location of
the column bases (fig. 9).64 The three bases have
roughly the same northeast-southwest orientation
as Alay K6okii Caddesi and the more easterly half
of Qatalgegme Sokagi, which provides strong sup-
port for the suggestion that these modern streets
61Kleiss (supra n. 20) 7, no. 9.
62Berger (supra n. 54) 18, n. 42.
63The discoveries should appear in Miiller-Wiener
(supra n. 15) pl. 263 (p. 232) and in pl. 321 (p. 283).
64 In response to my query about the location of the
prisons mentioned by Macridy,Cyril Mango kindly exam-
ined the detailed street map of ca. 1920 made for insur-
ance companies by one Pervitich, where they are shown
near thejunction with Molla FenariSokagl.A sketchamong
Mamboury'spapers on brickstamps ("TerrainVague en
face du Bilyiik Zaptiye")shows a shaded area in this loca-
tion but does not indicate the nature of the remains dis-
covered. On the same plan, Mambouryrecorded two par-
allel walls on the west side of Ticarethane Sokagi in which
he found twobricksbearingfifth-centurystamps.The walls
are described, and the brickstampsrecorded on two sheets
in the archiveheaded "Edificede la RueTicarethane."Mam-
boury also suggested that the nearbyTurkishbath (Aci ha-
mam) was built on Byzantine remains.
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE 81

Also::::::

Mai.
i::
ji :?::::
?~?
:?
i:? :i

. ..
:_:::::i:.7
.
777.
-.~::::::MIT,~
..
:::::40,5A
air::;::

i;:::.
:-:?
__. ........:
::
:-Y::::::Ili;86~ri~i~i` ...
iiiiii-i
'.ii-i~i~~a~il::-...
-ii~~ii~i~i~~i~:i'::ii~jii~i'
~ ...~::? ....

... ..
.
IS 4
1i~:::
...
..-
`:':~j:i:
iig ::: iiiliij~_:j~iijj:i
i~~iij
oft-~:_~:::---'~:::: :'::::---:-
:::i?
-iCB'iii~i:
k~i~ii~l~
i:?...................8:i
i'iiiiii~iiiiii'ilr~ii"Nibs.ll
X,
?i-ii::i:i~iiii iiiiiiiti
i
.......
UAW;s
M
PT::::: iii~i
............-:: i?: :
::::::i~?:'~-::::::: I ~ L?I_- --lrrx?il:://:::::::/
::::::-/:::::j/j/:~:::/:,:

Fig. 7. Column bases found in Qatal;e?me in 1929. (Photo W. Sender, David Talbot Rice Archive, Barber
Institute, Birmingham University) Sokagl

P';:::-?::--:'
i::':::::':::::-
...........ii-i
-:i~~i-i-:iiii(i~i~aiti:':::::'
~.-i--'X--i-'-5~
-::::::-::--:::::---:;:--::
111
X~II Alk
~:~:.IX::ii~i--i-~jeij-~:i;~_i
1~~11~-1-
V
.11::::i:::::::::':
e:i
li:iilii'ii
iiii;i;i-;~i--i-'
PO'i-?_;--_::
:::
::ii~iiii-iiiiiiiiii~Ilk:
Wiii~ii
1Aili~--i-::i:i::i:: 'i:ii~i~~~~
2Eiiii~i

?~va?. -ai?'--mv.

Fig. 8. Capitals and cornice in the excavation in Gatalgegme Sokagl in 1929. (Photo W. Sender, David Talbot Rice
Archive, Barber Institute, Birmingham University)

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A B

Molla
250Fenari
Camii

0.70 - 1.20
1 035- 0.965
-1.11 0.955
0.865- 0.91
0.83

1
0.165- 0•12

--N
310

*;3 ?Ci il

0 10

Fig. 9. Plan of the discoveries made in Qatalgegme Sokagi in 1929. (W. Miiller-Wiener,after E. Mamboury, redrawn by A. Wilkins, cou
Institut, Istanbul)

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
still follow the path of the Byzantine colonnaded way
leading from the Mese to the Copper Market. Indeed,
Mamboury, Schneider, and Kleiss all associated the
remains with the portico-lined street leading to
the Copper Market or with the facade of a monu-
mental building that opened onto that street.65 A
very tentative proposal for the identification of the
building to which this facade belonged is made be-
low. If, leaving the Copper Market, the street con-
tinued the same course downhill toward the Golden
Horn, it would have passed close to the Strategion
and would have reached the shore at the east end
of the Neorion and Prosphorion harbors.66
Conclusion
I therefore propose that the open cistern west of
Babi^ili Caddesi, which is probably depicted in the
panoramas of Vavassore and Braun and Hogenberg,
is the Cistern of Philoxenus, and that it was built
by the magister officorumPhiloxenus in the fifth cen-
tury. It is probably also the Cisterna Theodosiana of
the Notitia, and, if so, must have been built before
427, under Theodosius II (408-450). I also suggest
that Alay K6okii Caddesi and the more easterly half
of atalgegme Sokagi indicate the approximate align-
ment of the ancient colonnaded street linking the
Mese and the Copper Market. The indications in
our literary sources as to the location of the Palace
of Lausus would be best satisfied by placing it on
the north side of the Mese, between the cistern and
the colonnaded street. The church of St. Aquilina
may also be located on the north side of the street,
between the cistern and the Forum of Constantine.
65Mamboury 1936 (supra n. 20) 254; Schneider
(supra
n. 45) 92, no. 9; Kleiss (supra n. 45) 167.
66See Mdiller-Wiener
(supra n. 15) pl. 600. Albrecht
Berger has suggested to me that the street may have desig-
nated the border between Regions Four and Five. It was
presumably the street that led to the Strategion. Mango
has suggested that the Strategion may have been located
near the main post office in Sirkeci (Mango 1990, 70). If
this is correct, there would presumably have been a street
leading westward from the colonnaded way to the Strat-
egion (Mango 1990, 71, not alluding to the Qatalgegme re-
mains, but nevertheless retracting his hypothetical street
on plan II). Berger, however, has suggested to me that the
Strategion (in Region Five) might now be shifted further
east, closer to the colonnaded street and the Topkapi Sa-
ray walls. Alternatively, a street following the alignment
of Babidli Caddesi (see above, n. 55) may have passed close
to Mango's proposed location for the Strategion.
67 P. Speck, Die kaiserliche Universitdt von
Konstantinopel
(ByzArch 14, Munich 1974) 92-107. The limits of the Au-
gustaion have been discussed by Mango 1959, 42-47, whose
account must now be supplemented: see E Dirimtekin, "The
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
83
PALACE OF LAUSUS IN RELATION
TO NEARBY MONUMENTS
Only a very few of the monuments known to have
existed in Constantinople can be placed on the
map with absolute certainty, and as a result the re-
mainder can be located only in general terms, ac-
cording to their proximity to these known points.
The relocation of a single monument whose position
was formerly considered fixed inevitably necessitates
a reconsideration of the distribution of nearby mon-
uments. In a number of accounts, the Palace of Lau-
sus is mentioned in association with monuments the
exact locations of which elude us. Before consider-
ing these accounts, however, it is convenient to dis-
cuss the location of the Octagon.
Speck has argued that the Octagon should be iden-
tified with the Temple of Tyche and also with the
gate erected by Theodore in the Basilica, and that
the Octagon cum temple cum gate was located along
the southeast side of the Basilica, close to the Au-
gustaion and the Milion.67 Cameron, however, has
shown that these were three distinct monuments, and
that Speck's argument for locating them all south-
east of the Basilica is unacceptable.68 Where, then,
was the Octagon? The Patria tells us that the Octa-
gon was "near the Basilica" (III, 31), and Theodore
Lector indicates that it was beside the Mese (ed. G.C.
Hansen, Epitome 404).69 Bury, unfortunately, did not
realize that the Octagon was beside the Mese, and
placed it west of the Basilica, along the road leading
to the Copper Market.70 The Octagon is not men-
tioned among the buildings destroyed in the fire of
475, which spread southwestward from the Copper
Augusteum," AyasofyaMiizesi Yzlliz 8 (1969) 32-33, 80 (dis-
covery in 1962 of a colonnade 4.75 m inside the southern
wall of the enclosure of St. Sophia, terminating 1.80 m from
the western wall of the enclosure; on attested columns in
this area, see supra n. 45); and S. Eyice, "Sur l'archeologie
de l'edifice dit 'Arslanhane' et de ses environs," IstArkMiiz-
Yzll 11-12 (1964) 141-46, pls. 4-6 (walls toward east end
of Augustaion discovered in 1937; cf. Mango 1959, 42 with
n. 36). During the laying of drains south of St. Sophia in
November 1935, a mass of masonry was discovered stand-
ing to about 1 m above the ancient ground level. This was
located on the immediate right upon leaving the precinct
of St. Sophia by the south gate, not far from an iron in-
spection cover over the drains. Mamboury identified the
remains with the base of the equestrian statue ofJustinian
(Mamboury, brickstamp notes, "Le Forum Augusteon. La
Colonne de Justinien" and "Augusteon").
68 Cameron (supra n. 51) 271-73.
69 Cf Theophanes
A.M. 5967, 121.8-11. The significance
of Theodore Lector is noted in Mango 1959, 49, n. 69.
70 Bury
(supra n. 47) 117-18.
84 JONATHAN BARDILL
Market, in the process damaging the Basilica and,
apparently, the colonnaded street leading to the Mese
(Cedrenus, I, 616; Zonaras, III, 130-31).71 This omis-
sion may not be significant, but if it is, it follows that
the Octagon should be sought to the south of the
Basilica, where it would have been protected from
the flames by the large, open courtyard of the Ba-
silica itself.
There is some further evidence that may support
this conclusion. According to the ChroniconPaschale
(622), the fire of Friday, 16 January 532, began at
the Praetorium of the Praetorian Prefect72 and was
spread by a north wind to the Baths of Alexander,
the Hospice of Eubulus, St. Eirene, the Hospice of
Samson, and the porch of the Basilica.73 It does not
seem to have been appreciated that the fire could
not have spread to the Basilica directly from the Hos-
pice of Samson, which can be located with certainty
between St. Sophia and St. Eirene (fig. 2).74 But St.
Sophia, which we would expect to have provided the
bridge, had already burned on the night of 14 Jan-
uary or on 15 January (Chron. Pasch. 621-22), when
the Chalke, the portico of the scholarii, protectores,
and candidati, the Augustaion, and the nearby Sen-
ate House had also been destroyed.75 Theophanes
(Chronographia, ed. C. de Boor, anno mundi 6024,
184.24-27) is the only author who apparently links
71 The
possible significance of the omission of the Oc-
tagon in accounts of this fire was noted by Guilland (supra
n. 52) 106-107.
72For the Praetorium of the Praetorian Prefect, see
Mango 1993,Addenda pp. 1-2. There were three Praetoria
in Constantinople (Mango 1990, 71). Unfortunately, Bury
(supra n. 47) 113-14, 116 confuses them. We are perhaps
to conclude from Theophanes'failure to mention the burn-
ing of the Praetorian Prefecture north of St. Eirene that
he did not know of it and that this ignorance in part ex-
plains his reorganization of the order of the burning of
the various buildings. On the Praetorium near the Portico
of Domninus, which is attested in 395 but was shortly after-
wardreplacedby the churchof the FortyMartyrs,see Berger
(supra n. 15) 310, 319-21, 442-44.
73On the Baths of Alexander, see supra n. 55. There is
no doubt that a reference to the porch of the Basilica must
be restored to the text of the ChroniconPaschale,judging
by comparison with Theophanes, A.M. 6024, 181.27-30
and Cedrenus, I, 647. See Mango 1993,Addenda p. 1. Guil-
land (supra n. 52) 101 incorrectly states that Cedrenus is
the only author who mentions the porch of the Basilica,
and unnecessarily suggests that the reference is in fact to
the Senate House in the Augustaion.
74Procop. Aed. 1.2.14-15. For remains in this area pos-
sibly relating to the hospice, see Peschlow (supra n. 38)
140-205.
75Malalas(474-75), who wrongly mentions these build-
ings on 13January (when only the Praetorium of the City
Prefect burned), is, however, reliable concerning the fire
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
the burning of St. Sophia with the fire of Friday, 16
January, but this may result from the author's desire
to resolve such topographical inconsistencies by re-
organizing the order of events.76 If the porch of the
Basilica was indeed ignited by a fire spreading from
the Hospice of Samson, then we would have to con-
clude that the porch was on the northeast or south-
east side of the Basilica, and that the Octagon was,
as it had been in 475, protected from the flames to
the south of the Basilica, since it was not destroyed
until 17January (Chron.Pasch. 622-23). As far as we
know, the Basilica was not damaged further on 17
January, when the fire spread from the Octagon west-
ward down the Mese (Chron. Pasch. 622-23), which
may also indicate that the Octagon was on the south
side of the Basilica.77
We may now turn to the accounts that mention
the Palace of Lausus in relation to nearby monu-
ments. It is recorded that in a riot during the reign
of Phocas (602-610), "the Mese was burnt from the
palace of Lausus, and the praetorium of the city pre-
fect, as far as the Treasury opposite the Forum of
Constantine of blessed memory" (Chron. Pasch.
695).78 This passage led Mango and Janin to write
that the Praetorium was between and almost equi-
distant from the Palace of Lausus and the Forum
of Constantine.79 But the text might equally suggest
at the Hippodrome, which he links with events that Chron.
Pasch.621 places on 14January(wherethe day ends at
fipt;
&ca~tpac). This Senate House was east of the Augustaion,
and to be distinguished from that north of the Forum of
Constantine (Mango 1959, 56-60).
76Theophanes'information that 5 years, 11 months, and
10 days had passed when Justinian'snew church was ded-
icated on 27 December 537 (A.M. 6030) would suggest a
date of Fridayor Saturday,16-17 January,for the destruc-
tion of St. Sophia (depending on whether the day of de-
struction itself was being counted). But we cannot be cer-
tain that this time span was not calculated on the basis
of an erroneous date for the destruction. The date of the
dedication seems to be reliable (cf. MarcellinusComes A.D.
537).
77The Chronicon Paschale(622-23) states that the Octa-
gon "is between the Basilica of the Skindressers and the
public portico of the Regia"(the Regia being the section
of the Mese between the Chalke and the Forum of Con-
stantine), but unfortunately the interpretation of this is
uncertain. Guilland (supra n. 52) 105-106 has suggested
that we should understand "betweenthe Basilica, the quar-
ter of the Skindressers and the public portico of the Re-
gia."If so, this too would indicate that the Octagon was
to the south of the Basilica.
78Translation of M. Whitby and M. Whitby, Chronicon
Paschale284-628 AD (TranslatedTexts for Historians 7,
Liverpool 1989).
79Mango (supra n. 45) 156;Janin (supra n. 21) 168.
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
that the Palace of Lausus and the Praetorium were
either beside one another or on opposite sides of
the Mese, and that the fire spread from these two
buildings westward to the Treasury.80Unfortunately,
Theophanes (A.M. 6055, 239.6-10) does not clarify
the situation. His chronicle states that as the new
city prefect, Andrew the ex-logothete, approached
the Praetorium from the Chalke, he was met by the
Green faction at the Palace of Lausus. This seems
to indicate that the Praetorium was further west than
the Palace of Lausus, but equally it would not contra-
dict the suggestion that the two were beside or op-
posite one another. We shall see later that there is
some evidence that a monument other than the Prae-
torium may have stood immediately to the west of
Naumann's great hall. If the Praetorium was south
of the Mese, this may mean that the preferred lo-
cation is close to the Forum of Constantine.81
Two pieces of evidence may suggest that the Prae-
torium was on the south side of the Mese. We know
from Malalas (Chronographia,ed. L. Dindorf, 474) that
it was set alight during the Nika riots on Tuesday,
13January 532. Many nearby monuments, however,
including the Octagon, St. Aquilina, and the Palace
of Lausus, were not destroyed until Saturday, 17Jan-
uary (Chron.Pasch. 622-23; Theophanes A.M. 6024).
Since all three were to the north of the Mese, their
survival would be explained if the Praetorium was
on the opposite side of the street.82 The fire of 475
spread southward from the Copper Market toward
the Mese, damaged the Basilica, and then spread west-
ward along the Mese, destroying Lausus's collection
of statues and stopping only having reached the Fo-
rum of Constantine (Cedrenus, I, 616; Zonaras, III,
130-31). The Praetorium is not listed among the
damaged buildings, which may indicate that it was
on the south side of the Mese.83The accounts of this
fire, however, are possibly not detailed enough for
us to be certain that the omission is significant.
81In their
commentary on the ChroniconPaschale,
Whitby and Whitby (supra n. 78) recognize that this pas-
sage may indicate that the Palace of Lausus was opposite
the Praetorium, but they assume that the former was on
the south side of the Mese (n. 327). They point out that
Mango adduced no evidence for placing the Praetorium
on the south side of the Mese (n. 407). They also place
the Praetorium at the east end of the Mese (ns. 210, 353,
and 407), though without providing any evidence.
81 We know from Constantine
Porphyrogenitus's Book
of Ceremonies (I, 88 [79]) that the Praetorium of the City
Prefect was closer to the Forum of Constantine than to
St.John of the Diippion (which, we shall see, was near the
starting gates of the Hippodrome), for when the emperor
proceeded down the Mese to St. Romanus on Palm Sun-
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
85
The ChroniconPaschale (622-23) describes the dev-
astation during the Nika riots on Saturday, 17 Jan-
uary. Soldiers "set alight the Octagon, and as a result
of this fire the region around St. Theodore near the
house of Sphoracius was burnt, except for the vaulted
building of the holy church. But the entire Portico
of the Silversmiths, and the house of Symmachus,
the former consul ordinarius, and St. Aquilina, as far
as the arch of the other portico of the Forum of Con-
stantine, was burnt." Evidently referring to the same
fire, Theophanes (A.M. 6024, 184.14-17) mentions
the destruction of the Palace of Lausus: "The por-
ticoes from the arch of the Forum to the Chalke were
burned, and also the shops of the silversmiths and
the whole palace of Lausus were destroyed by fire."
The ChroniconPaschale clearly indicates that the fire
spread from the Octagon westward down the Mese
toward the Forum of Constantine. It seems likely,
then, that the burned buildings are listed in a rough
order from east to west along the Mese: Octagon,
St. Theodore of Sphoracius, Portico of the Silver-
smiths, the house of Symmachus, St. Aquilina, Fo-
rum of Constantine. Indeed, we have seen that the
Synaxarion refers to the church of St. Aquilina as be-
ing v Toiq aDtkoEvou nkjloaiov ToO(p6pou (429, 465
[Sa], 748), and the proximity of St. Theodore of
Sphoracius and the Octagon is also suggested by the
Patria (II, 93). In recension C of the Patria (ed. Preger,
292-93), the buildings west of the Milion are listed
in the following order: St. John the Theologian, St.
Theodore of Sphoracius, the Octagon, the Palace
of Lausus, the Forum of Constantine, and the Sen-
ate House. Unfortunately, there is no indication in
either the ChroniconPaschale or the Patria as to which
buildings were to the north of the Mese and which to
the south, although, given that both texts associate
the Octagon and St. Theodore of Sphoracius, it seems
highly likely that the latter, like the former, was on
the north side of the Mese.84 Lydus (Mag. III, 70, ed.
day, he was hailed first by the Blue faction at the Milion,
then by the Greens at St.John, and then again by the Blues
at the Praetorium.
82Theophanes (A.M. 6024, 184.14-17), apparently be-
lieving that the other monuments on the Mese ought to
have been destroyed during the fire at the Praetorium,
conflated the details of the conflagrations of 13 and 17
January.
3 Albrecht
Berger, however, has suggested to me that
the prytaneum that is listed in the Notitia (VI, 9) as
being
in Region Five (north of the Mese) may be the same as
the Praetorium of the City Prefect.
84 Berger (supra n. 15) 282 also places St. Theodore of
Sphoracius on the north side of the Mese.
86 JONATHAN BARDILL [AJA 101

IV- quil two Now.

wo
ON
:sZk
xo?x?: g!R ro,
-q.
'.Z
I M?:x
:e.g qr

.................
io ...
.....
....
M2 .......
At
W-M . film
.........
OW N

5z.
V . NO
.]?X0.A
.. . . . .>
4z.. TA

M?F
.............
gn
. ....
.. ..... .......
. ..............
. . ..... .....................
Or'
II?ji . ..... ..... .
OUT .. ........
...........
WIN
a-is

'hg.
.....
... 'gu ....Malmo ,&V
d1i.All

W11A Nov
Fig. 10. Alternatingbrickand stone in the firstphase of the greathall (exteriorof the east end of the south wall).(PhotoJ.Bardill)

R. Wuensch, trans. A.C. Bandy) states that buildings sibility that the fifth-century monumental facade
on both sides of the Mese were destroyed during the found in Qatalge?me Sokagi relates to the mansion
Nika riots, but has apparently conflated details of of Sphoracius or to the atrium of his church of St.
the various fires. Theodore, which is known to have been magnifi-
We have seen that St. Aquilina was near both the cently rebuilt after a fire, possibly that of 465.86 The
Forum of Constantine and the Cistern of Philoxenus. Patria (II, 93) places the Octagon near the bazaar
Since the ChroniconPaschalementions the destruction of spices and St. Theodore of Sphoracius. Perhaps
of the house of Symmachus before the burning of this bazaar, too, was located in the street leading to
St. Aquilina, we may suggest that the former was be- the Copper Market.87
side or opposite the Palace of Lausus or possibly
that, by the sixth century, the Palace of Lausus had
DATE AND IDENTITY OF THE ROTUNDA
passed into the ownership of Symmachus.85 It may
AND GREAT HALL
also be suggested that the Portico of the Silversmiths,
which was apparently destroyed before the house We may now return to consider the date and iden-
of Symmachus, and was therefore further to the east, tification of the rotunda and great hall to the north-
was located in the colonnaded way leading from the west of the Hippodrome, which can no longer be
Mese to the Copper Market (although it could, of identified with the Palace of Lausus. The longitu-
course, equally have been beside the Mese itself). dinal axis of the great hall is misaligned with that
If so, St. Theodore of Sphoracius and the Octagon of the rotunda (fig. 1),88which may indicate that the
may be placed east of the street leading from the rotunda and hall were squeezed into a plot that was
Mese to the Copper Market. This presents the pos- too small (perhaps after the hexagon had been built),

85Mango (supra n. 6) 90 suggested that Lausus'spalace 87Janin (supra n. 21) 95 asserts that the Portico of the
might have passed into the hands of Flavius Theodorus Silversmiths was between the Forum of Constantine and
Philoxenus. the Palace of Lausus. But this cannot be deduced from
86See C. Mango, "Epigrammeshonorifiques, statues et Chron.Pasch.622-23 and Theophanes, A.M. 6024.
portraitsAByzance,"A(~pptolpa orovNircoffJopdvo 1 (1986) 88Naumann (supra n. 12) 138-39.
(reprinted in Mango 1993, ch. 9) 25-28.

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE 87

i " ri
;

L :r " -F i iiiii'iiiii
'" -- ~
I: _' iiiiiiiiiiiiii&~
~: '? L~il~: ::l`,i-?a~asa~aa~8~1ae~~-~~ :: ~:~i~4%8~g~Q~S~F :-w iia

; ?n , i
::
i ?1.T :
i :f_ 5 -C.. ~gtg~li:
~ b:::. ?''' ~I
.9..'.
j : r_ i:e
~i":;-d _:H:
i:: i:
'I- :j
$
~ 0-i~.--:-_-- I

.r

i: _~:-:-:i:-~~ ~-w--l----::
::::ir
:-i-i:-,::: .:-~~-~"
:-'~~ii~ii - "";
a::::
::~::
iiiii~c~~~ii .::::~::-: -::-:--~
:::-::-::-:r
-~;?i~-iii~_
. iiiiiii:iisf~?_::ii--,i
h:X::-::-:::'::i:
.. :~:.:-::::::::::::::::
''?i-:i:`iiiig""~
-::--.i-
j

Is~aa~.liiiii:i?iiiiiiiiii-iii8?
s;::::-::.i::-::-:i:::::iji:::i:

?-??-;:::
::::
--:-::- :::::
:~ ::::::::-:-;-
-----::~:
Fi:i::: ~~;""::'':-''I:':':'-':~":~I':~:
:::?::::::?::-i:-::-:-:-:-:-:i?:-\:i-?:n ii'ii;lli'iljiiijiii~~i:i
?_--------
-::-_----_
. ....
_.._--:ii:i
:i_-_::
i .-_:i:::_::_i:_-
:-::-:
iiiiiiiiiiiiia-:ilii--i:iiii-:iiiii _-:i:-i--: -:;::-:::::_:-
'i'~_a-r
:-_~?i-F-:::~~-'::i:
:i-;iili:i:::::"
:.i:i::::
i.::?:ii::i?::
'1'`::'"'"-:';-:;---I-I--i-:l'i~i~~-:-:'
----i--:--::_---_-:-i ::::::-:i:::-::j:::?
::::i-,I,:
j--i:i:-i:i:i:?8i:a:-_-:-:-:?:-?
:::::?::
-:: i-~ -------::---:-::---
::--
-:::::::-:j::::::j:::::,i:
~--I:::::
(:::j::
:-?:_:::--:::i-:::_~:-::-:
:::,:::::::::,:,,.
::::::
::,:,::i:-~:-:-:::-
::::?:?
iiili:iii :::::_,:,,:.,:_:_:_:-:-;
.x's-u._i -:::'-:-:--
iiiiiiii~~i:iliili
iiiidi
~i:ii~s~iii::i,-,~i:;~iii-i~~i:i:-i ::?:;::::::~:-:''i--i~o-i:i:::i-i-ii-i-:
_:__:_-
_ :::::::::::-:1.
i:':\::':j::':':':22:i::::::::_i--~~ii-~
-i:--i- :-i~i.ii'i:~~i~i__iji~iiji~jfjii-j-~~j:j
iii~i:iii-i-:iii-iii:iiiiii:iiii
ii-i-ii:--:-
---';:D :-:::::::
: :::::::::
?:::::j::j:?:::::::1:::j::::1: iiEiiiii
iiiiiiiiiii-iiiiii~iiigii:::i
-ii::-i:i
i:_:i-:- :::-.::
::-:_-::
_r ::::-:-:-:-"""~.i:~i:e;i:ii~i:::i
~2~~i-i:-i.~':f'-''-ir-i:-i-i
cii-iiciiiiiiiiii:i~i;iig --:::::::::::::::::::':':---
-i'_ii:i-i-:i5i-ii-i-:iiiiiiiiiii:ii-ii
---'. ::: .. :::2::::i::i::i:::::
:::
.:i::i:?:
?:::::-:::-:
:_-:_:?::iiii_:i:jii~~_iiiii-ii~-,iiBi-~-
iii~ii;iiiiii:isiiiiiii-ii:~~:--:l--::--
~'~'ai!;:?-:i.~-:.ii:qiii:Si?:i::ii:
I__
j~ii___:i::__:i:iii:i~i ?::-l-:::::-a:-,-::::-i-:i-i-i-~:-i~~l
-:i~-_: .~--??:-::;:-:-:::
-::::: : iii-i:--i-::ii:-i-il--:ii--_-i::i;-~:::-
-:::;::::-I:~:---:::
:::::-:::::-:::-:-:::::-::::--:-:::::::: ~_:,-_g: ::::::;:~::-::::-::-:-
:--:::::::::::--;i:iTii::ii,:ii:-::-;:g
'_::_.::~i:_:;i--:::;:?_i:::i:i~ii-
:-i:i:i-iii-i-i:i-i:::i-lii:-:ii:.i-ii?::::::-::::::::::;;::
'i:iiii-_::-i::i::-i-i::-i:_:i:r,~i--i- :-:::-::-:-:
::-----
::::
-:-:i::-::::
::--~-:::: :::::::::::::i:-~:::_
::::
::::---:':v-:-:::-:::::::::::-::::~::::
-::::':::::::::-:::--:_:_~:-::':~:"`
~:::::: ':'E:i-i----~:.
::j:::::_-::il~
::::::-i-ii--:i?--i-i:ilz~i:i;_i;~~illij ::::-?.:::-:-
~::_~-:_i:i-i.-::::l:::
::::-:-~: ::-:
:----::--:
':::
::--?-:-::-I-??~:;:
-:::----:__?:::-::-_::-
_:::-jl~:-:--i:::: :I:~::: -::::j::i

Fig. 11. View of the exterior of the north niche of the hexagonal hall of the Palace of Antiochus. (Photo J. Bardill)

or that the hall was a later addition to the rotunda.89 or 10 courses) (fig. 11).92 This evidence might be
Consideringthe misalignment,and the absence from taken to suggest that the hall is not contemporary
the great hall of the cramped ashlar that occurs in with the hexagon.
the survivinglowerparts of the rotunda, Torelli Lan- Considering that the rotunda and hexagon are
dini has suggested that the hall was a later addi- both constructed in their lower parts of cramped
tion.90The earliest construction phase of the great blocks of limestone, Torelli Landini has suggested
hall displays bands of brick about five courses high that they are contemporary and both the work of
alternatingwith bands of mortaredrubblefaced with Antiochus. The hall, it is argued, was added after
about six courses of small, squaredblocks.The stone Antiochus's property came into imperial hands ca.
bands are about twice as high as the brick bands (fig. 439.93This is an attractive hypothesis, but the struc-
10).91The technique, which is similar to that used tural similarities of the hexagon and rotunda do not
in the Cistern of Philoxenus (fig. 4) and the Land allow us to be certain about their contemporaneity.
Walls, may be ascribed to the fifth century. In Large, carefully cut blocks of gray limestone 0.35-0.50
Antiochus's hexagon, however, the small stone fac- m in height are used for the lower parts of the walls
ing blocks are arranged in bands 0.90 m high (four of the hexagon (fig. 11). These blocks are bound to-
courses), and the brick bands are 0.80 m high (nine gether with iron cramps encased in lead,94 a tech-

89Dolunay and Naumann (supra n. 13) 137:"spiiter,als 92R. Naumann and H. Belting, Die
Euphemia-Kircheam
der grosse Saal angefiigt wurde,"Ward-Perkins(supra n. Hippodrom zu Istanbul und ihre Fresken (IstForsch25, Berlin
28) 69 observed that the hall related to "a different and 1966) 35-36; Torelli Landini (supra n. 90) 18-19.
almost certainly later phase." 93Torelli Landini (supran. 90) 19.For the date at which
90oE. Torelli Landini, "Note sugli scavi a nord-ovest Antiochus entered the clergy, see Greatrex and Bardill
dell'Ippodromo di Istambul (193911964)e loro identifica- (supra n. 4).
zione," Storia dell'arte 68 (1990) 19. 94Naumann and Belting (supra n. 92) 35-36. Ward-
91Naumann (supra n. 12) 139, pl. 39.2. Perkins (supra n. 28) 69 does not mention the cramps.

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
88 JONATHAN BARDILL [AJA 101

4:_
r-:..-:::.
::
:s y"NNE:

....
......
..........
................... I. . ..........
-?&I-: NS:i_:~i-:i _

............::?i i i- -

NMI

-wt:?::
....
........ii .
:.:..
i-i- _:
.---iiii
:--~----
-i:iiiiiiii ~
Y~
. ", .. . .

:~
'~iiiii~:--"
-;-iii-i~-
_~ :::
::::::::
i-
:-i~iiii-M
PAO
RP:~:-:~----ii-,_:':i-ir-ii

mows,::::: -:-:i- :- : i~- i:il~-: - : l-~ :i-?: j .-iL~

: _~: i~:? - .: : : i,--'-.........
-: -': -: -:-'~: i,- .-:? : ': ' : :' .: ai
-: -~i~ i- i~ :- i ._ :? :
_:i~- _: , i ~i:
ii-:-_:ii:i~s~iiiiii~iii..........-: ::-":--. . .~

Md
:.:-...-:::: ::"?":'-. .-i- .
fW

-i i~ia: : 'l-_i - i .: - -i ~ i~:a~ b~iiiii............?:

Fig. 12. Crampedlimestone blocksof the rotundato the north of the hexagonalhall of the Palaceof Antiochus.(PhotoJ.Bardill)

nique that was also employed in the adjacent rotunda sius I at the Forum Tauri (modern Beyazit).6 An-
excavated by Duyuran (fig. 12).95 The similarity in other early use is at the so-called Aqueduct of
the technique does not prove that the two structures Valens,97 which Mango has suggested may in fact be
are contemporary, for Byzantine builders were ex- the Aqueduct of Hadrian.98 The technique con-
tremely conservative. In Constantinople, the use of tinued to be used in the fifth century, when it was
cramped blocks can be traced back to the fourth cen- employed for the construction of the rotunda near
tury in the bases of the monumental arch of Theodo- the Myrelaion (Bodrum Camii).99 In the sixth cen-

95See Duyuran (supra n. 2) 79: "The straight wall [at 97Ward-Perkins (supra n. 28) 65.
the back of the portico] was built with blocks of pale grey 98Mango 1990, 20; Mango (supra n. 21) 12.
limestone containing shells. The blocks were well cut and 99R. Naumann, "Der antike Rundbau beim Myrelaion
carefully united with iron clamps as in the Martyrion[i.e., und der Palast Romanos I. Lekapenos,' IstMitt 16 (1966)
the Palace of Antiochus]. The height of the blocks varies 203 and pl. 39.1. Seven courses of ashlar (ca. 0.40-0.55 m
between 40 and 42 cms. and the length between 80 and high x ca. 1.20-1.50 m long, forming a wall up to 6.10 m
120 cms."Ward-Perkins(supra n. 28) 69 gives a smaller thick) rose to a height of 3.3-3.4 m above the sill of the
height for the blocks: "The circular hall is built of good north door (and hence above the interior floor level).Both
limestone masonry, claw-dressed and laid in mortar in D. Talbot Rice, "Excavationsat Bodrum Camii 1930. The
courses averaging 32 cm. high." MesselExpedition,"Byzantion 8 (1933)167 and Ward-Perkins
96R. Naumann, "NeueBeobachtungen am Theodosius- (supra n. 28) 70 assigned the ashlar to a first phase and
bogen und ForumTauriin Istanbul,"IstMitt26 (1976) 127; the alternating brick and stone to a second. This is un-
Milller-Wiener(supra n. 15) 263, pl. 298. necessary, since the Land Walls and the hexagon of An-

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
tury,100as a result of the reduction in the employ-
ment of stone after the fifth century, the technique
was necessarily restricted to load-bearing piers,101
foundation courses,'02 and cornices.103 Given that
cramped blocks were in continuous use in Constan-
tinople in the Early Byzantine period, the technique
tells us nothing definite about the relative dates of
the rotunda and the hexagonal hall: the rotunda may
have been built as part of Antiochus's palace or it
may not, and it may even have been constructed in
the fourth century rather than the fifth. It should
be noted that in one respect the structures of the
hexagon and rotunda are distinct. Duyuran writes
that the sigma-plan portico of the rotunda "wasbuilt
with courses of yellowish rubble stone and bricks.
There were five rows of bricks, and each course was
42 cms. thick."'04 This is quite different from the
high brick and stone bands used in the upper parts
of the walls of Antiochus's hexagon (fig. 11). The
tiochus show the two techniques in use simultaneously.
The identity of this rotunda is uncertain. C.L. Striker, The
Myrelaion (Bodrum Camii) in Istanbul (Princeton 1986) 7-11
and supra n. 40, 14-15 objects to Naumann's suggestions.
C. Mango, TheArt of the Byzantine Empire,312-1453 (Sources
and Documents in the History of Art, Englewood Cliffs
1972) 46-47 and Mango 1990, 59 suggests that the rotunda
may be the Museum of Muselius, known from the Greek
Anthology 9.799-801 to have been near the Philadelphion,
a square that in Naumann's opinion (209-11) was located
near the Myrelaion. Also known to have been at the My-
relaion is the Chrysokamaron (Patria III, 112), not to be
confused with the Christokamaron at the house of Mousele
(Patria III, 112a). See Berger (supra n. 15) 517, 597. Note
also the foundations of St.John of Stoudios (ca. 450) (Pesch-
low [supra n. 34] 430) and of the pre-Justinianic mauso-
leum at Ephesos (H. H6rmann, DieJohanneskirche [Ephesos
4.3, Vienna 1951] 194, pls. 39.2, 39.3, and 42.1-4).
100G. Hellenkemper Salies, "Die Datierung der Mo-
saiken im GroBen Palast zu Konstantinopel," BJb 187 (1987)
282-83 has wrongly asserted that it is in the Palace of An-
tiochus that the technique makes its last appearance in
Constantinople, and that therefore the courses of cramped
blocks in the Peristyle and Apsed Hall of the Great Palace
should also be assigned to the fifth century.
101St. Sophia: W. Emerson and R.L. Van Nice,
"Hagia
Sophia: The Collapse of the First Dome," Archaeology4 (1951)
101 with fig. 10; M. Ramazanoglu, "Die Baugeschichte der
Sophien-KircheJustinians," Studi bizantini e neoellenici 8 (Atti
dello VIII Congresso internazionale di studi bizantini 2,
1953) figs. 11, and 23-24; Mainstone (supra n. 38) 67, 186,
and pl. 84. Procopius's assertion (Aed. 1.1.51-53; trans.
Mango [supra n. 99] 76) that these blocks were joined to-
gether by pouring molten lead into the interstices must
be a misunderstanding of the use of lead to seal iron cramps
linking the blocks. However, H.B. Dewing (Procopius, vol.
7 [London 1940] 24-25, n. 1);G. Dagron, Constantinopleimag-
inaire: Etudes sur le recueil des "Patria"(Bibliotheque byzan-
tine 8, 1984) 237; Mainstone (supra n. 38) 186; Mango (supra
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
89
differences in the thicknesses of these bands, how-
ever, need not necessarily be indicative of different
periods of construction: different thicknesses of brick
bands were in use during the same period.105 In the
absence of published brickstamps from the rotunda,
its portico, and the great hall, the dates of these struc-
tures relative to the hexagon of Antiochus remain
uncertain, and their identification as another part
of Antiochus's palace, although plausible, cannot be
proved.
ST. JOHN IN THE DIIPPION AND THE MENAGERIES
In his booklet on the urban development of Con-
stantinople, and in a short paper summarizing some
of its conclusions, Mango has asserted that the church
of St. John in the Diippion was founded in the ro-
tunda discovered by Duyuran (which he wrongly
identified as part of the Palace of Lausus).'06 Mango
noted that Pierre Gilles, who explored Constanti-
n. 99) 76, n. 100; C. Mango, "Byzantine Writers on the Fab-
ric of Hagia Sophia," in Mark and Qakmak (supra n. 45)
44; and L.E. Butler, "Hagia Sophia's Nave Cornices as Ele-
ments of Its Design and Structure," in Mark and Qakmak
(supra n. 45) 69, n. 37 have seen it as a muddled descrip-
tion of the sheets of lead discovered at the springing of
arches (Emerson and Van Nice [supra] 100-101, fig. 10; L.
Butler, The Nave Cornices of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul [Diss.
Univ. of Pennsylvania 1989] 36) that are described by Paul
the Silentiary, Description of St. Sophia, lines 476-80 (ed. P.
Friedliinder, trans. Mango [supra n. 99] 83). In support of
the suggestion that Procopius is, in fact, referring to lead-
set cramps is the account of the Diegesis (13, ed. T. Preger,
ScriptoresoriginumConstantinopolitanarum I), a largely fictional
account of the building of St. Sophia of the seventh to ninth
centuries, which describes the use of iron cramps to link
the blocks of the piers.
102 St. Polyeuktos: Harrison (supra n. 23) 21-22, 412-13
(where it is suggested that the cramps were of wood in
this case), pls. 30, 32, and 55; Harrison (supra n. 9) 55, pls.
52 and 59. Basilica beside Kalenderhane Camii: C.L. Striker
and Y.D. Kuban, "Work at Kalenderhane Camii in Istan-
bul: Third and Fourth Preliminary Reports," DOP 25 (1971)
255.
103 Butler, in Mark and Qakmak (supra n. 101) 61-69.
It is possible, although not to my knowledge demonstrable,
that cramps were used to join the blocks of the infrequent
leveling courses of stone in sixth-century brickwork. For
cramping in the sixth century, note also John of Ephesos,
Church History 3.24 (trans. Mango [supra n. 99] 125).
104See Duyuran
(supra n. 2) 79.
105See supra n. 38.
106
Mango 1990, 59, n. 46: "EIglise, dedice d'abord A
saint Phocas et ensuite A saint Jean, rnparie, semble-t-il,
par Romain ler, aurait pu se trouver dans la rotonde con-
vertie, avec acces du c6te de la Mese' C. Mango, "The De-
velopment of Constantinople as an Urban Centre" The 17th
International Byzantine Congress.Main Papers (New York 1986,
reprinted in Mango 1993, ch. 1 with addenda) 127-28. There
90 JONATHAN BARDILL
nople between 1544 and 1550, visited a menagerie
near the Hippodrome that housed lions, and was
informed by the citizens that it had been established
in the church of St. John the Theologian.'07 From
a Turkish text, we also know that a menagerie was
located between the Palace of Ibrahim and
the Firuz Aga Camii. Mango therefore assumed Papa that
the two menageries were identical and argued that
the former church of St.John was located along the
west flank of the Hippodrome, just south of Firuz
Aga Camii, hence on the site of Duyuran's and
Naumann's excavations.08s
Mango also suggested that this menagerie is de-
picted in a Turkish miniature of 1537-1538 by Ma-
trakql Nasuh (fig. 13)109and in a view of 1574 in the
Freshfield Album (fig. 14).110 Both depict the Hippo-
drome from the northwest and show a massive build-
ing close to St. Sophia. From the more detailed rep-
resentation in the Freshfield view, it is clear that
wooden porticoes with single-pitch roofs had been
built up against a marble-reveted brick building that
was falling into disrepair."' In fact, a menagerie
is no textual evidence to indicate a link between St. John
and the Palace of Lausus. Although the Patria(II, 35-36)
contains juxtaposed discussions of the Palace of Lausus
and the church of St. John, this indicates nothing more
than that the two buildings were in the same locality. In
fact, recension C of the Patriamentions the following mon-
uments between the Milion and the Forum of Constan-
tine: St. John the Theologian of Diippion, St. Theodore
of Sphoracius, the Octagon, and the Palace of Lausus (ed.
T Preger, 292). Why discuss the Palace of Lausus quite in-
dependently of St.John if the two were in reality the same
building?
107Gilles (supra n. 22) 124 (= trans. Ball, 153): Constan-
tinopolitani dicunt eam [the church of St. John the Theolo-
gian] esse,ubi iam leonesRegis stabulantur,vicinam Hippodromo,
&foro Cupedinis sito prope Sophiam, olim Augustaeo appellato.
Cf. P. Belon, Les observationsde plusieurs singularitez & choses
memorables,trouveesen Grece,Asie, Iudee, Egypte,Arabie, & au-
tres pays estranges (Paris 1554) 73 ("I1y a un lieu en Con-
stantinoble, ou le grand Turc fait garder des bestes sauvages,
qui est une eglise antique, tout ioignant l'Hippodrome").
108
Mango (supra n. 45) 158-59.
109See the color reproduction in And (supra n. 45)
26-27.
110See the color
reproduction in And (supra n. 45)
58-59. For discussion of other drawings in the Freshfield
Album, see Mango 1993, ch. 2, 305-15.
111The marble revetment is noted by E.H. Freshfield,
"Some Sketches Made in Constantinople in 1574," BZ 30
(1929-1930) 522; and And (supra n. 45) 59. For the earth-
quake, see Mango (supra n. 45) 159.
112Mango 1959, 155 with n. 35; Mango 1990, 59, n. 46.
113There is another view of the Hippodrome from the
west, of the same period, by Pieter Coecke van Aelst
(1502-1550). See EW.H. Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish Etch-
ings and Engravings and Woodcutsca. 1450-1700 4 (Amster-
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
that housed lions near the Hippodrome is known
to have been damaged in an earthquake in 1510.
The edifice is identified as Pars AedificiiS. Sophiae,ubi
nunc leonesservantur ad Hippodromilatus Septentrionale,
which suggests that it was so close to St. Sophia that
the artist considered it to have once belonged to the
church. It clearly stands on the circus's east flank,
a conclusion that is also suggested by the Turkish
miniature, where the building is shown some distance
to the east of the Firuz Aga Camii. It follows that
this menagerie cannot be identified with the menag-
erie south of Firuz Aga Camii mentioned in the Turk-
ish text, as Mango suggested."2 Despite the inaccu-
racies in the two views,"3 the building evidently
stood north of the carceres (starting gates) or close
to the northeast corner of the Hippodrome. Hence,
there were two menageries in this part of the city
in the 15th and 16th centuries, one near St. Sophia,
the other on the opposite side of the Hippodrome,
between the Palace of ibrahim Pa?a and the Firuz
Aga Camii.114The menagerie visited by Gilles could
have been either of these, but given that he describes
dam n.d.) 198-99. Blocks 13 and 14 of the woodcut show,
from north to south, a street leading east, a mosque on
the far (east) side of the Hippodrome, the Obelisk of
Theodosius, the Serpent Column, the Obelisk of Constan-
tine, and the portico of the Sphendone. It should be noted
that in block 12, which depicts a wedding procession, there
is a wooden house with a tower that looks similar to the
wooden structures shown lining the street in the Freshfield
view. There is a complete set of van Aelst's woodcuts in
the Print Room of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.
114There was another menagerie established in the Tek-
fur Sarayi, which the Turks referred to as the Palace of
Constantine. This housed elephants, giraffes, and other
docile creatures. See, e.g., Belon (supra n. 107) 73 ("Lon
veoir les ruines d'un palais moult antique, que le vulguaire
nomme le palais de Constantin. Le Turc y faict nourrir
ses Elephants, & autres bestes doulces");J. von Betzek, Ge-
sandtschaftsreisenach Ungarn und in die TiirkeiimJahre 1564/65
(ed. K. Nehring, Munich 1979) 31; H. Dernschwam, Tage-
buch einer Reise nach Konstantinopel und Kleinasien (1553/55)
(ed. F Babinger, Munich 1923) 53. The division of the sav-
age and docile animals is also suggested in the account
of d'Aramon: "I1y a encore certain lieu ofi l'on monstre
plusieurs bestes sauvages qui sont fort bien gardees et en-
tretenues comme lyons, lyonnes, loups cerviers, loups sauv-
ages, chatz sauvages, lyppartz, onces, asnes sauvages, au-
struches en quantite. En un autre endroict, se void une
certain beste que les ungs appelent un porc marin, les au-
tres boeuf marin .. . En ce lieu mesme, y a deux elephans,
grands merveilleusement." SeeJ. Chesneau, Le voyagedeMon-
sieur d'Aramon Ambassadeur pour le Roy en Levant (ed. C.
Schefer, Recueil de voyages et de documents pour servir
A l'histoire de la geographie 8, Paris 1887) 35-38. The Tek-
fur Sarayi is identified as "Palatio di Costantino" on
Vavassore's panorama.
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE 91
-
W•'. iJ

7~
VA :%•,,i

i d~AL
Ii
....1:

I $~

Fig. 13. Matrakpl Nasuh's view of the Hippodrome, menagerie, and Firuz Aga Camii from the northwest (1537-1538). (Deut-
sches Archiiologisches Institut, Istanbul, neg. KB 02600)

;.:~sp:~~d~:il$L_:
~~ihi'i;ib3iir'''''' ::-i:a:_-'i:j:?iiji?i~~si~bd~Dl~;i~: ~:-::?;:~~:i:::2-::-:-::::-:'j::::::::-i `B~;:*ili~~ ::S:.-X:~ZTii:~ -:i::l:l:~-l:I:~~i:i:-l:--::~-:,iI-:-_:
?L:i:i:-i-i---i--i
i-i-iiiiiiiiiiiii::i::_-
..:..
::-:-:::---:::_s:
;iii:i=i':i;iiiai`:;iiiiiii:lis:?l::-: i?--?iic
,-:i:::i-:,iB-X::;iil_&i~:l:i6iliii~j ?.~,.~
-~'i;i~%iiiiiili-iFif:'aiijlilil i
-i:i-iii:iii~i:i-iiiiiii-iiiijiiiiiiii?-
i-ii:ii::iiiiiiiiiiiii;i-iiiijiii
:li-ili-i-.i:i-iiiiii
i:i:i:i-i:i:i:i-i-i'
::i'iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii-.:
ii:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii?i:i?i:i-iii:i
i:i
i-i.i:iii
ili:i'i:i:i-i-i-i-i-i`-i:i-i:i-i-iiiiiii
ii:_''-''':i:i:ici:i:i-i- i:'ii?i:i?:::?iiiiiiiiiisiiiiil:iiiiiii~
i::-:-_--:-:c-i-ll:li
::i:::::::::::::::
-iiiiiii :::::::::::::I::::::::::::::::::::::,:i:
-~::i::i:il:-l:-:xi-::~
iiii~i:l~'i~~--iiiiii
?i:Xi--Diii-?:liili:.l~ii~jiii~_::i:-:
:i-l:i:-::'j-si:iii:iiiiiiliiiiiii;liiji
':::':'
-:':
:::
-?:::i:i-:i:i-i:
--ia
:;:~~_il~:~:~'-:?::-ili:ii:i-:li.::i-: --:-c;::i::li::ii:ii::i-.:-~-
:i:-:ii::i:-l:-i~i
iiiiiiiiiiiii:ii:ii~iliiiiiii:i
::::::::-~
__::-i::._::-l:-:-i::-:::i:::c,?l?:::_-i- ::_::r::
~ii~i~i~w~~ii~~~~,~: ?:;?:? ?i~--~?CI::!~f"~:D'-i-
~a~a ::::::,,:;,,:,:_:::i:;.:-::
i:.
iiiii-i:ii:l:sr
_i:::::c-::li::-,i::i :'l??i;iiiiiii:i'-'-'i':i:iiiai:,:6'i'ii :;?-~':ii-iliii-liiiii-i-
i::iciii:i:i-i-i:i:i-iii:i-i-isi:i-i:iii
i'i :i?iii:iiiii-i::i:iiiiiii li:l:-:::-i:i:ia:-:,-:,-_-i'.i~ti:"s?i:~iiil~iiii~iiii:il'~ii:~;'-:i~iiiiiiiiiii
'i:-`l:j?:'~;:~a':i'?i:~-~:~E:iiiiiiiiii
i--iii
iiiiiii?iiiiiiiiiii:-~iiiiiiciiiiii?iii; -
iiiiiiiiiiiii:iiiiiiiii.iiiiiii.ili'i' ':-:::
:':-:-:-:::':.:'.:':::':':':::':'::
::::':'
''''''-':'-':'-'-':'''-''':'''$i':':
iii I":'''''''''''-'"'i':'i''':'-
siii:i:-iiiii:iii--i:i-iiiii:iii:iiiii:
i:i?iii-i:i-i:i
iii--
.:::.:
i:i ::::::::'''-'''-''":'-:::-::':::':':::'
;i'iiii-,ii;ilriiiiii'::?i-ii-ii-iiiiii
::. iliiiiiij-ii-iiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ijii:.ii-i:
-:-?--:'~;':-::-
:~::i:~j::i-::~::::::j::i::.::::::j::::: iiiiiiiiiiiii:?j?i:~?_iii;lii::~.:l?:9~;
'i.iii--ii-~li.~.`~~
:i?j:~l~-~:~;.~I~I il:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:-..
:::-:::::i:::i:.:i:i:i:::::i:i:;i:::i:i: 'i'lTlii?ii:iiiii:z~-iiii-i :II
:::::.:.:.:??:.:::::
::::::::-::::
:,,,,:,:,:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii';:ii:iiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:ili;iii:-i-i:i-i-i-ir-r-ili.iii-iii-i:i-i:i.;ii:'i:'?:
ii:iiiiiiii:i'::?;i_::::.ii:i:iiiiiii_
iiisii:ii:i:ii-iiiiiiiiiiii
.iiiiiiiii:iiiiiiiii-iiiiiiiiiii:iii
;i:?il:-~?l:g:i:-i:iliii:ir
i:i-iii:iii:i ijjjiij:iii-jij
iiiliii-iiiiiii
iiiiiii
iiiiiii:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
ii:?-i::::liii(i?iii?ii-iiiiiii'iili:?::
:li
i.i:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
i i?:-::::::-:2:::
:::::::::::::::?:
:::::::::.j.i:iji?iiiiliij:i:iij-i:jliijdi:i?:ilili:i:iiiii!li :::l:?:::::?::i:1:i:I:i:l:ij:i:i:::i:l::
:i:_'i:i:iiil'::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::
:::
::::::::::
:::
:::
:::
::~i::-~:--::---
---:~:-i-:i:l:li:'-'r""'::'::'::':j::::
~''jliii!ii:::::.liiiii
~s6:iis:i~i-'ii:~k~iji:;j:;lj:~iiji--~ I~j~:~::::~,--:i~~;~j~.;;i-i?ii..:~'--:: Bi-~s~as::j:-:?:~-:iw~i?
::::::::::::
::::::: -
:i:::::j-j:::::::::
:::::i::l:::::::::::i
I;:il:i:
l?i..:'~:.-':iiil:iii:.::--:-i
:::::::::::::::::
:::
':::::::::::::
:::
:::':::
:::':
::::
:::
:::
:::::::::::'::::::::::::::::::
i'?'?''i'?-i?.'z'B-~-B;~I::iiii-~i:i::::::'-'''
'''-:-
'-''':-.'-:-'?
:':':':''-'''''''
:'::":'''
'':-':--':-
::.:::':::
:'::':':::':-:':-:.:.:::-:::-':":
?:::::::j::i:ii:-:::i:-
:j::ii:::i: i::l:-l:j:l:::':-l:lB_:l:.i:-li--:::i:l ::.:::.:
:::::::::i:.
-:-::1:::::::::::i:::::::,:?:i::::::::::
.j.;:i'ii:iiiliii:-ii.::-i_::i-i::::i.::
. ::::::i::::::::::r:: I~i-:i-.i~i
~~; ~:i;?~~li:.t~''''';''''''-'''''''''''''~
i:i:i:iii(iiiliii::i:i:ii:iii:
iii
iili::::_:ili:i:i:i__-i:_i???i;':?:'i?'ji'ii-i:iiiiiiiiiiiii:iiiiii
i?iii:iajii:iii:i:i:i-iii:i
i:iiiii:i:i~iiii:ii:i'i:iii:iiliiii:i?
iiiii'iiiiiiiiiiii
iii
ii
iiiHiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iii;ii~ii:-:i:::::-
::::::i:::::
i:l-:,I:-:._i,:?:ii
liiiiii~~;.iijiiijiiiiiiiiiiiia~.i-i-i:i
iiiBii-iiiiiiiiii-i?iiiiiiiiin.iiiiil
i? i:iiiii:iii:i:iiiiii:::i?i'i
-;'''''''''iiiiip_:-i-;iiiiii iiiiiii:iili~iiiiiiiiiiii-ii-:~ii:i
"-?";"; ii:i-i:i-iii-i::i?i--?iiiiiii:iii:iiiii:
iiiiiiiiiiii;iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
~i
--r:
i:-::;i'i::1::::::jl:jj~_i:::j:::::i::~i
e??-ll~l_:,,l~ta?--,,.,?- ;o;r
ic:?i'?ii?l?~??:;?:?: ii'"?i~iiiii:iii;i~'-iil::al:-:-:~i-:l
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiii-iiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiii":::::_:i:::- ::;;:i~~;i~:'i:-_xi:r:~-;:::ii~;_:__
;i:ii?-:'ii:a???-?_~'i.l?i~?''ii:i:::i
..:.::
:iiiiiciiiii:iiiii:::i:::::i:i:i:i:i:ii:
i~i.i?ii~iiiii:.i,,?i~:':.:i::. ::iiiiiiiiiliiiiii;iii:iii:iili:il:ii-ii
-ii~:iiiii::i~~iilai-iidili-ii~i'iiiii
i~i~:i:g~i~--~l~i:i-i--i-i;iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiill?j
:i::-:l;::::::::-:;:?_:- iiiiii:ii:i-iiiii-ii:i3i
:i~~:,~-~:?~~~~g
:::l::.::::i:i::,?:?I:'?:l-:?'','.l~iia
:::::-:::?::::;:::i;::::l:l:~~:l-:-i:_.
a'i;i:~i:i~~i;~:iif~i;i:::-::j::?:.::l: .......... ...,:~i~8-~
:::l:i:_:l::j:
:::::i::iii:::::j:::i:;:~:-.-ifii':i"l?; :::::
siiiiiiiiiiliiiii:iiiiiiiiiie:i::i:ii
ii:.
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:ili:i:iiiii:i~:i:i:i?
':':':-:':':':':::::'::::::::::::::::::
:: :i:i:i:i:::i:i~i:-i:i:i:::i:::::::!i.ziiiiiiiiiiiiil:iiiiili:xii:ii.-iiiiiiiiii .i?i:iijijiiijii-i:i-i:i:::.iiiil:lii?-
~.:-~iii---i-i~iii:?i~i~i i:--i:-i:l-:t?:l:i?:;~~-ii'ii:ti'iiiii".
:?????::-?::?::-~~~?:;:;-:-::-:i":':
~.;;'~.~~~ia~~l:-8iri~-:~~-I-~8~:~
iiilii-i?ii-iiiiiirii?iil:ii-ii-i::::?:
-;~iiiiiiiii':ii::l?' ::? ::;:;:i:iiiii::ii:i:_-':'i:;:'i:.:~i;li:~i:iliiiiiii;::iiiii:i-ii-iii?i'i;'"
Si~i~iiiiii:i:iPii:i':iiii:iii:iii
le~e~g-~ai:IB-
i'''~''~'':ill~"'":~lilii;iiii-l
iiiiIi:iiil:iiiiii:iiBiiii';l'il'l'i:i .iiiiiicisi:iiii,,:i:1::,rl
i-ic;:-iii :i:I::?i:zii:i~~iiii'i:li::Eii:iiiii
::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::.:I:i::::::::::::::::::::::'
':::':':":;:
:::::
l'''''li.'i?;?:'.-.la.':'.:'.I:.:.:.ii-:iiiii?i?aiai?i?ii:i-ii???~i:,,:.,, :-::iiii~iiiiiiisirci~~?.iii
iii
i::::iiiii?ii-iiii
...:-::
ii-ii;iiiiiIi':iiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiaii''?:'.''~'::iiiiiiii.iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;iiii
"'-"';""-"""''""-''~'::;-'i:l'~ i:_i-:iiiiii'i'ii'--jii-.iiiiii
'i:i?iL"?'??~~~l~i~i~~i
iiii'iiiiiirli:iiiiiii;ii-li:-i:iiiiiii iir'i'ii:ijiliii'lili::_iiiii:i:iiiliil:
::::2:::
::::::::::::::
:::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::
...-.::::
::
::::
:::
. ..
i:::::::::
:::::::
:::
:::::::
-'l:;:':i:i-iii:i:i:iii-i:iiiii:iiii :::
:::::
::::::::
iiiiiiii:ii:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ::::1
::
ii::iiiiill?i:i:c:i:i:::::i-i:ri-:i:?ii iiiiiiiiiiiiiaiiiiiii:iij-iiiii:iii
i:i:iiii'ii?.ilii`'i?ii?liiiii?iii;;iii
''''''::;'''''':";'''''''
~::''14f:~~I ::::::::::j::::::::::::::::::
::i:
ii:ii-i--:--:'d',i--:i:i::'-::-_-,'_:-
--in::. :
?:
:?:::::-t::?::::
:::;::iiiiiiijiiiiiiii'iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iigii;i':~il:Fo;l-"-li-I-;-i:::;s-;;:
--i-:;:::::_-:-:
'iii:iiii'iii:iIi'iiiiiiiiiiiiiii':'"''''''''''''"'''''''''''''ii.j.;-
:ii~i:;:-:::::i-
il:-_-::-ili:l
??i-

'i':i.-.~i':~'-i~5i':~:;iiiii.~i'.iiiii
~

:il:::,:::::::::::
':iii:ii-iicil::',i - -iL-
i""
-iii:::i-il:-:i-ii:li
iiiii?:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis:ii ':''-:':-.
-:'::ll-i:8iiiii~~:i:i:i
..i6i-i:~iii:.i
i9`~i:i::::::::-i-~:-j:-:.:a:i?l
:?:_-::n:_:i:::i:il:i:8::;~_:_-:i:l:-i:

s i:;,~sli
::::::::::::::::::
,?-?:iiiIIi;;???:;?~il:?~8:?`t:~l~r?:?~-
iigi~;ii
-"sai~llllllFj?i,;
?~-,:?dlli~~"
?:i:--?::::i:i'i'ii;?'!?lii~:?i:i:iiiii ili;~i~i~~fili~21
-iiiiiii'B:ili-ilGi~iii:iii-;ai:i?li-
::::::::::::::::- :;'''?~--.
:..:..:: :iA~g~LI.
::-:::::::?:':::::-:::-:::::-:::::-:::::
8:::-:::i:;'i:\:1:a:::j::-:::::
i::, ::::i::....
:::;::::::::::i:::::j:::ni,:,i:j::::: ?i?~ :::::::::::::::::::::':::':':':ii:iiii?i
iiiiii~iil-ii---i`i:i?ii:--t;~iii:isi:
i::?:\:::sg-:_:_::::::::j::i:::j::::l::
:i_;::::::
:?-:::--:;::-:: iii:ii?-f;.;iii'i
::::.::::::::--.:~~:i::::(::~ii:liiiii:j 19811-.i?i~ :iiliiiiiii-:iiiiiiiiiiiii'iisil.liii,~
iiiiiii
iiii~iiiii
:~:::::j:::::ii:::I:a:i:-'-':i':::i;:i'S
:;::Bc:':::i:i_~l:lj::::i:li;i:ii:iili:::?i-i:i'i'iiiiizi`iiii;:ii~?.:i:liiiii
'liii-iiiiiiiii:i~iiii'iiiiiiiii::c::::
IZiiiiiil:::::i-:-a;iiil:i:iiil:iii:
?I:i::?:::i:i:i:l:i:i:i:ii
r;:i~:ii:iiiiii?iiiial;:-i:i.i::-i-i
" -:'"`~-'`""''"-;i;:.?r?:L? .I_,;.??*??ri"

Fig. 14. View of the Hippodrome, St. Sophia, and menagerie from the northwest (1574). (Freshfield Album, Trinity College,
Cambridge MS O.17.2 p. 45 [f. 20], courtesy Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge)

This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
92 JONATHAN BARDILL
it as sito prope Sophiam, olim Augustaeo appellato, it is
much more likely that he visited the one depicted
in the two views we have discussed.
If Gilles was correctly informed that the menag-
erie he visited had been founded in the church of
St. John of the Diippion, then the Freshfield and
Matrakgi Nasuh views depict this church. The name
Diippion was given to the area close to the Diippia,
or carceres, of the Hippodrome."115 Here, the em-
peror Phocas (602-610) is said to have built a church
of St. Phocas, which was completed by Heraclius
(610-641) and renamed St. John the Theologian."116
According to the Patria (II, 35 with variant G), the
church stood "at the Milion" or "beyond (or above)
the carceres of the Hippodrome.""'7 Nicetas Chon-
iates (Historia, ed.J.L. van Dieten, 235-38) suggests
that the church overlooked the Milion,"8 and the
Synaxarion (ed. Delehaye, 70, 82, 151, 305-306, 437,
598, 810, 836, 855-56, 866) describes it as "near St.
Sophia." Unfortunately, these indications are in-
sufficient to determine the exact site of the church,
but it would seem that the location suggested by
Mango and Guilland, at the western end of the car-
ceres on the south side of the Mese, is too far from
115
Berger (supra n. 15) 279. Both Berger and Guilland
have suggested that the Hexahippion that is attested un-
der Anastasius (Malalas, 394-95 and Chron. Pasch. 608)
should be identified with the Diippion, and that therefore
the Patria's (at any rate doubtful) etymology of the name
Diippion is certainly wrong. See R. Guilland, "La Premiere
Porte. To spoT'60upov. Le Dihippion. Tb AtinnItov,
't
LEglise de St.-Jean-le-Theologien du Dihippion.
Auntiou. Tou 34
6 dyitoq 'IodwVVrjq Aur•iou," EpetByz 20 (1950) (re-
printed in Guilland I, 393-410).
116Thechurch of St.John contained chapels of St. Pho-
cas and St. Tryphon. See the Synaxarion of Constantinople
70, 836 (St. Phocas) and 150-51, 437 (St. Tryphon).
117 V
T'V vabOV TOD dyiou (kIKai TV T(vO Mt•i(p or ?v TO
v&OsVT&^OV TOuiDrno8poPiou.
u81rt0i0T a'vv
118Choniates' KayKXXO•V
account of the battle of Saturday, 2 May
1182 is translated in Mango 1959, 94-95. Empress Mary's
troops occupied St. Sophia, the Patriarchal Palace, the Au-
gustaion, the Milion, and the otherwise unattested church
of St. Alexius. The emperor's men left the Great Palace
early on Saturday morning, reached St. John in the Diip-
pion apparently without resistance, climbed onto the roof,
and fired down on the enemy outposts at the Milion and
St. Alexius. Guilland (supra n. 115) 37-39 and Mango (supra
n. 45) 156-57 concluded from this that St.John must have
been south of the Mese, for, had it been to the north, the
imperial troops would have had to have crossed enemy lines
and could not have taken the church without a struggle.
Mamboury (supra n. 45) 56-59, however, referring to the
same source, placed St. John's north of the Mese.
119Guilland (supra n. 115); Mango (supra n. 45); Mango
1959, 96, n. 106. Janin (supra n. 44) 266 has questioned
the location. Another piece of evidence, which is difficult
to interpret, should also be mentioned. John Meliodones,
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
the Milion and St. Sophia."9 We can at least be sure
that St. John's was not founded in the rotunda ex-
cavated by Duyuran, since the latter seems to have
fallen into ruins at an early date. The mausolea that
were attached to the hexagonal hall of Antiochus's
palace (fig. 1) were probably built shortly after 680,
when the relics of St. Euphemia were apparently
transferred to Constantinople.120 Since one of these
mausolea was built over the ruins of the rotunda,
the latter can no longer have been standing at the
time. The rotunda was later converted into a cis-
tern. 121 It therefore seems impossible that the
church of St. John, which is known to have been re-
paired as late as 1402, was located in the rotunda.
It also seems unlikely that the church would have
been founded in the great hall discovered by Nau-
mann, whose apse faces west and whose sixth-century
form has been associated with dining halls, such as
the lost Triclinium of the 19 Couches in the Great
Palace and the Consistorium of Leo III in the Lat-
eran Palace at Rome.'22 During the Byzantine
period, this was converted into a cistern, and an ir-
regular polygonal cistern was built between the ro-
tunda and the Mese using the same structural tech-
who restored the church in 1402, was granted as a reward
"all the land opposite stoas of the holy church ... from
the ascending street as far as the public stoa" (7ntavra Tv
TODO Osou vaoO
'oto'rov '6ntov 'TOv 7ttVTIKp' TciVGTov
8tatKsJIVOV. . . wRoToO eivxpM6pou itU pt KI KaTa TfTL
87l0oo0ou OToaq).See E Miklosich andJ. Miller, Acta et dip-
lomatagraecamediiaevisacra etprofana 2 (Venice 1862) 495-96.
The area of land was apparently delimited to the north
or south by the "public stoas" of the Mese, to the east by
the entrance hall of the church, and to the west by the "as-
cending street." One possibility is that the "ascending street"
is the street that led from the Copper Market to the Mese,
and hence that the church of St. John was located to the
north of the Mese and south of the Basilica. This, however,
would require us to believe that John was granted an ex-
tremely large plot of land. Berger (supra n. 15) 279-80 states,
without discussion, that the church was between the car-
ceres and the Mese, and just east of Firuz Aga Camii.
120On the date of the translation, see
Berger (supra
n. 3).
121Naumann and Belting (supra n. 92) 53,
fig. 16.
122Three exedras were added to either side of the fifth-
century apsidal hall using pure brickwork with occasional
leveling courses of stone (Naumann [supra n. 12] 139-42,
pl. 38.3). This technique, as we have seen, appears not to
have emerged until the sixth century. Such halls with niches
have been associated with dining rooms by R. Krautheimer,
"Die Decanneacubita" in W.M. Schumacher ed., Tortulae:
Studien zu altchristlichen und byzantinischen Monumenten
(Romische Quartalschrift fuir christliche Altertumskunde
und Kirchengeschichte, Suppl. 30, Rome 1966) 195-99. Brick
vaulting was added at a later stage (Naumann [supra n.
12] 143-44, figs. 3-4). Later still, the hall and rotunda were
converted into cisterns (Duyuran [supra n. 2] 79; Naumann
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
nique (fig. 1).123 Unless the church stood where the
Firuz Aga Camii was later erected, it was probably
to the north or east of the carceres, closer to the
Milion and St. Sophia, although we cannot be cer-
tain on which side of the Mese it lay.124
St. John's must therefore have stood close to the
site of the menagerie visited by Gilles and shown
in the Freshfield view and in the Turkish miniature.
It is clearly possible that the menagerie was estab-
lished inside the church. The menagerie, however,
despite being a most imposing structure, does not
look very much like a church (although it might be
argued that the church had been set up in a preex-
isting secular building). Furthermore, we cannot take
it for granted that the locals were correct when they
informed Gilles and other visitors that the menag-
erie had been established in a former church of St.
John. A woodcut published in Hartmann Schedel's
Liber chronicarumof 1493 apparently depicts the de-
struction by lightning in 1490 of Basil I's church of
the Nea, which had been converted into a gunpowder
depot by the Turks (fig. 15).125 It shows the view from
the Sea of Marmara across the site of the Great Pal-
ace and Hippodrome toward St. Sophia. A church
[supra n. 12] 144-45). A thick wall constructed using the
recessed brick technique typical of the 11th or 12th cen-
tury was erected across the site of the portico. The remains
of this wall have been traced for about 20 m: see Duyuran
(supra n. 2) 78, n. 5 and pl. 2; Naumann and Belting (supra
n. 92) 17, fig. 1. The wall is not shown on Naumann's plan
(supra n. 12) fig. 1.
123Naumann (supra n. 12) 144-45.
124 It is unclear how much
open ground there was be-
tween the carceres and the Mese. S. Miranda, Les palais des
empereurs byzantins (Mexico City 1965) 58-59 has argued
that the carceres were close to the Mese, since no remains
were found during the erection of the fountain of Kaiser
Wilhelm II (completed in 1898). How far north of the foun-
tain the carceres were in fact located is uncertain. The en-
graving of the Hippodrome by Panvinio (possibly a frag-
ment of the Vavassore panorama [Mango 1990, 9]) shows
no open ground between the carceres and the Mese (al-
though this may not be reliable), and Miranda made the
suggestion that the cochlias found close to the Mese in
1934 (Mamboury [supra n. 45] 52) provided access to the
carceres. (Concerning access to the Hippodrome by means
of the Chalke of the Hippodrome, see Mango 1959, 28.)
It is clear from Naumann's plan (supra n. 12) 147, however,
that extending the Hippodrome so far to the north creates
problems. It has been necessary for Naumann to incor-
porate into the carceres some of the remains discovered
during the British excavations in 1927-1928 (see the two
reports by Casson, supra n. 38) and the remains of two cir-
cular structures found in 1952 (Mango 1959, 20, 184-88).
All of these, however, probably belonged to the Baths of
Zeuxippos. Naumann places the Diippion in the remain-
ing wedge-shaped space south of the Mese. Mango 1959,
38-39 believed that the cochlias related to the Baths of
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
93
of John the Baptist is visible between the Obelisk
of Theodosius I in the Hippodrome and the Col-
umn ofJustinian in the Augustaion.126 We need not
put any faith in the depiction of the architectural
form of the building, for all the churches in the view
are shown in a very similar fashion.'127The bulk of
the building identified as St. John the Baptist sug-
gests that it was probably the same building shown
in the two views we have just discussed.'28 Whether
the artist was correct in believing that the building
had originally been a church dedicated to St. John
is a different matter. It may be noted that St. Eirene
is misidentified as a church of St. John Chrysostom,
since the Turks misinformed visitors to the church
that it contained his tomb.'129It is conceivable that
Gilles and the artist of the Liberchronicarumwoodcut
were similarly misinformed as to the identification
of the Byzantine building that had been turned into
a menagerie. We should therefore be cautious about
using their evidence for locating St. John in the
Diippion. By the beginning of the 17th century, an-
other menagerie had been established, and Mango
has shown that this was probably located in the
church of Christ at the Chalke (the vestibule of
Zeuxippos and has recently made further comments on
the size of the Hippodrome (Mango 1993, ch. 10, 17-18).
Mfiller-Wiener (supra n. 15) 232, pl. 263 located the car-
ceres close to the fountain. Remains of the west flank of
the Hippodrome have been traced no further north than
the fountain; see R. Duyuran, "First Report on Excava-
tions on the Site of the New Palace ofJustice at Istanbul,"
IstArkMiizYzll5 (1952) 35-36, pls. 1, 6-9; Duyuran (supra n. 2)
fig. 2; and Mamboury's plan in Mfiller-Wiener (supra n.
15) 69, pl. 47 (on which a curious change of direction is
shown). Other remains relating to the Hippodrome are
discussed in E. Mamboury and T Wiegand, Die Kaiserpaldste
von Konstantinopel: Zwischen Hippodrom und Marmara-Meer
(Berlin 1934) 39-53. Mamboury's map to accompany this
work appears in Schneider (supra n. 45) pl. 10. Note also
the recent discoveries mentioned in M.-H. Gates, "Archae-
ology in Turkey,"AJA 99 (1995) 250-251.
125See Mango 1959, 180-82.
126 In
1490, the Column of Justinian, although still
standing, no longer carried the equestrian statue that is
shown in the engraving. See C. Mango, "Justinian's Eques-
trian Statue," ArtB 41 (1959) 351-56 (reprinted in Mango
1993, ch. 11) and Mango 1993, ch. 10, p. 6.
127Although it appears to be a rotunda surmounted
with a dome, we cannot equate it with the rotunda dis-
covered by Duyuran and Naumann, since this had prob-
ably fallen into ruin by the seventh century (see above,
p. 92).
128 If it is not the
building known from the Freshfield
Album and the Turkish miniature, then it must be the
church of Christ at the Chalke.
129See the account of Cosimo Comidas de
Carbogano
in V. Ruggieri ed., Descrizione topograficadello stato
presente
di Constantinopoli arricchitadi figure (Rome 1992) 28-29.
94 JONATHAN BARDILL
IN
Jw
!a
Fig. 15. View of the Hippodrome from the southeast in Hartmann Schedel's Liber chronicarum (1493)
the Great Palace). Nevertheless, visitors continued
to be told that it had been founded in a church of
St. John.130
Two other suggestions have been made as to the
original function of the building in which the me-
130Mango 1959, 154-69. The Turkish miniature shows
the menagerie in the church of Christ at the Chalke to
the east of St. Sophia and south of the first gate of the
Topkapi palace (Bib-1 Hfimiyfin). The building shown has
a dome and two or three semidomes, and therefore cor-
responds to the menagerie described by Gugas Indjidjian
(Mango 1959, 160). Mango, however, was cautious, and
pointed out (179-82) that the building might also be iden-
tified with the Nea church of Basil. But the illustration
of the menagerie in the first edition of Indjidjian's work
makes the identification with the church of Christ at the
Chalke practically certain; see Eyice (supra n. 67) 143.
Mango has suggested that the church was a quatrefoil: C.
Mango, "A Note on Panagia Kamariotissa and Some Im-
perial Foundations of the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries
at Constantinople," DOP 27 (1973) 132 (reprinted in Mango
1993, ch. 20 with addendum); and Mango (supra n. 39) 128.
The building in the Turkish miniature that corresponds
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
[AJA 101
Omn
nagerie was founded: the Baths of Zeuxippos13t
(which were located southwest of the Augustaion and
ceased to function as early as the eighth century,
when they were converted into a prison)132 and the
Patriarchal Palace133 (apparently located between
to the menagerie in the Freshfield view is wrongly equated
by Miller-Wiener (supra n. 15) 71, pl. 49, and 81 with the
menagerie in the church of Christ at the Chalke, which
is shown in the Indjidjian illustration. Another example
of the misidentification of a monument in this period is
the Tekfur Sarayi (a Palaiologan building), which was be-
lieved to be the Palace of Constantine (Porphyrogenitus);
see supra n. 114.
131 The identification has been
proposed by WL. Mac-
Donald, "Roman Experimental Design and the Great
Church;' in Mark and Qakmak (supra n. 45) 12, fig. 7 and
accepted by And (supra n. 45) 63. For the location of the
Baths of Zeuxippos, see Mango 1959, 37-42, 184-88. For
the collection of sculpture in the Baths, see most recently
S. Guberti Bassett, "Historiae custos: Sculpture and Tradi-
tion in the Baths of Zeuxippos," AJA 100 (1996) 491-506.
132Mango 1959, 41; Mango 1990, 60.
133The identification has been proposed by Miranda
1997] THE PALACE OF LAUSUS AND NEARBY MONUMENTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE
St. Sophia and the Augustaion and abandoned by
the Patriarch in 1454).134 Of these two possibilities,
the latter must be considered the more likely because
of the Patriarchal Palace's proximity to St. Sophia.
Since, however, we cannot judge from the surviving
views exactly where the menagerie stood, for the time
being the identification of the massive Byzantine
building in which it was established remains an
enigma.
"PALATIO RITONDO DI COSTANTINO
It remains to mention another mysterious mon-
ument in the area under consideration. Braun and
Hogenberg's panorama of 1572 shows, at the north-
west corner of the Hippodrome, a structure identified
as the "Palatio ritondo di Costantino" (fig. 6). The
huge semicircular building, which is concave toward
the Mese, is formed from superimposed arcades
whose arches are flanked by columns on the facade.
The arcade at ground level is hidden by a wooden
portico with a single-pitch roof that has been built
up against it. The same structures can be seen in
the panorama of Vavassore (fig. 5, where the anno-
tation is lacking) and also in the manuscript of Lam-
bert Wyts in Vienna.'35 Berger has recently iden-
tified the ruins (which appear to stand on the site
(supra n. 124) 29-30; and A. Pasadaios, O 7rarplapXt1K6
oycoo1epVlKo6 Op6vov (Thessaloniki 1966) 63-65.
o[KOgrov
We may also note the suggestion made by Freshfield (supra
n. 111) 522 that the building is the church of St. Stephen
of the Hippodrome, on which see Janin (supra n. 44) 474.
134For the location of the Patriarchate between St.
Sophia and the Augustaion, see Mango 1959, 51-56; E Di-
rimtekin, "Le local du Patriarcata Sainte Sophie,"IstMitt
13/14(1963/1964)113-27; and R. Cormack and E.J.WHaw-
kins, "The Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul: The Rooms
above the Southwest Vestibule and Ramp,"DOP 31 (1977)
199-202 (date and identification),247-51 (function).These
rooms must represent only a fraction of the Patriarchal
complex (cf. Mathews[supra n. 37] 101,n. 53). Dirimtekin
(supran. 67) 33 believed that the views discussed here were
useless for determining the location of the Patriarchal
Palace.When he excavatedthe area southwest of St. Sophia
in 1963 and found buildings of the Turkish period, but
no evidence of the Patriarchal Palace, he concluded that
it must have been northwest of St. Sophia. The Palace was
moved to the church of the Holy Apostles in 1454 (Janin
[supra n. 44] 45). See also R. Janin, "Le palais patriarcal
de Constantinople byzantine,"REByz20 (1962) 131-55; and
Pasadaios (supra n. 133) 25-75, pls. 1-3.
This content downloaded on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:45:42 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
95
excavated by Schneider, Duyuran, and Naumann) as
the church of St. Euphemia, which was founded in
the Palace of Antiochus.36 This, however, is unlikely,
for Antiochus's domed hexagonal hall with its sigma-
plan portico concave toward the southwest cannot
have looked anything like the ruins shown.137 The
rotunda excavated by Duyuran would have looked
more like the ruins depicted, but, as we have seen,
it had probably long disappeared by the 16th cen-
tury. If it was located west of the great hall excavated
by Naumann, it would have stood close to where the
street leading to the Copper Marketjoined the Mese,
and close to one of the locations we have proposed
for the Praetorium (which may suggest that the Prae-
torium was not directly opposite the Palace of Lau-
sus, but to the southwest of it). One possibility is that
this exedra was an integral part of the colonnaded
shopping mall that flanked the Mese on its southern
side.'38
INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
36 BEAUMONT STREET
OXFORD OX1 2PG
ENGLAND
JONATHAN.BARDILL@ARCHAEOLOGY.OXFORD.AC.UK
135For a color reproduction of the Wyts
manuscript
illustration, see And (supra n. 45) 57.
136Berger
(supra n. 40) 340.
137See the reconstruction of Antiochus'spalace in Nau-
mann and Belting (supra n. 92) 39, fig. 7.
138Another possibility is that the ruins related to a
theater, amphitheater, or hippodrome. John Sanderson,
who visited Constantinople in 1594, writes: "Atthe end
of this place [the Hippodrome], towardsthe Sofia, ar also
to be seene certayne ruins of a great circle of a theator
which was ther, where the people satt to see the playes
and pastims that ther weare shewed. Nowe it is a place
wherein the lions and other animalls of the Great Turke
ar kept."He goes on immediately afterward to describe
the Binbirdirek cistern, giving the impression that it was
directly below the "theator."See W. Foster ed., The Travels
of John Sanderson in the Levant 1584-1602 with His Autobio-
graphy and Selectionsfrom His Correspondence(The Hakluyt
Society 67, ser. 2, London 1931). It may be, as Mango (supra
n. 45) 158 suggested, that Sanderson's theater was
simply
the ruin of the carceres, as shown in Panvinio'sengraving.
Support for this may be d'Aramofn'sreference to "l'hipo.
drome ... avec la forme de theatre et arene"(Chesneau
[supra n. 114] 29).