Architectural History as Literature: Creswell's Reading and Methods

Authors(s): J. M. Rogers
Source: Muqarnas, Vol. 8, K. A. C. Creswell and His Legacy (1991), pp. 45-54
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1523152
Accessed: 29-03-2016 09:18 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1523152?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

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

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.

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Muqarnas

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 J. M. ROGERS

ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY AS LITERATURE:

CRESWELL'S READING AND METHODS

than to the Umayyad period, which are attributable to

Despite his lack of a conventional higher education,

Creswell's wide reading in the travelers of the later mistranslation of the Arabic sources. This is all the

Middle Ages and the Renaissance and the architectural more remarkable in view of his dependence on the liter-

historians of the nineteenth century, from Ruskin to al accuracy of the early Arab geographers and topo-

Strzygowski and Diez, was a formidable preparation for graphical historians from Ya(qubi and Maqdisi to Ibn

the study of the architecture of Islam. This reflected Jubayr for his historical reconstructions of Umayyad

both the strengths and weaknesses of the conventional and early Abbasid monuments and must owe much to

the fortunate accident that the sources were largely con-

classical education he received at Westminster. To that,

for example, we can probably attribute the care and temporary and largely correct. He had in any case con-

acuteness of his critical appraisals of the Arab geog- siderable help from Arabist colleagues, notably Max

raphers which he read in translation and which are an van Berchem, Gaston Wiet, and Rhyvon Guest, and ob-

essential element in his painstaking reconstructions of viously discussed dubious or unclear points with them

the original form of the great buildings of early Islam. It before committing himself to a particular interpreta-

also doubtless gave him the confidence to tackle modern tion. It is, however, easy to forget the enormous range of

works in French, Italian, and German, though as his Arabic source material which has been available in

weird translation of Herzfeld's glockenformige Kapitellen translation at least since d'Herbelot's Bibliotheque Orien-

at Samarra as "clock-formed," which is still to be found tale, the encyclopedia of Islam of the eighteenth century

in the new edition of his Short Account of Early Muslim Ar- used by Gibbon to such good effect in his Decline and

chitecture, shows he would have done better to make Fall, and which, critically used, can replace the linguis-

more frequent use of a German dictionary. But his en- tic skills which have been so much emphasized in the

thusiasms were limited. Though by the time I knew him more recent teaching of Islamic architectural history.'

his deafness precluded all enjoyment of music he never This is not to deny that had Creswell wished to study

spoke of it and may never have had time for it. And the in detail the monuments of Turkey, Iran, or Central

well-known, and decidedly touching, story in the after-

Asia he would have found his task much more difficult,

in view of the lack of extant detailed topographical his-

math of the Suez fiasco of his recitation of the Tristia,

written by Ovid on the occasion of his eternal banish- tories and the consequent difficulties of separating out

ment from Rome to the Black Sea, while waiting in his fact and fiction in the historical tradition. In my experi-

flat in a poor part of Cairo for the expected decree of ex- ence Creswell tended to ignore the Eastern Caliphate

pulsion to arrive, speaks therefore less for his literary and, while it was for the most part perfectly easy to write

culture (he would have learned it by heart at school) about Umayyads and early Abbasids without reference

than for a taste for the dramatic, to which anyway many

to the Mashriq, he neglected the probability of the influ-

other anecdotes bear witness.

ence of Baghdad as the Abbasid metropolis on Ayyubid

The question certainly arises how far Creswell's ig- and early Mamluk architecture. Similarly his discus-

norance of Oriental languages affected his work. One sion of the evolution of one-, two-, and four- iwan ma-

answer is that while knowledge of unpublished histor- drasas would have been enriched by consideration of

ical sources would certainly have added much of detail, late-twelfth- and thirteenth-century Seljuq Anatolia.

as they made possible, for example, Sauvaget's impor-

He introduced his magnificent library at the Amer-

tant work on the Umayyad Mosque of Medina, it is dif-

ican University in Cairo, of which he regarded himself

ficult to think of cases where Creswell was evidently

the sole proprietor as long as he lived, to me in 1965 as

wrong, as in the dating of the carved wooden consoles of

"my harem." I do not know whether the somewhat dis-

the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem to the Abbasid rather torted allusion to Gibbon's well-known comment on the

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
46 J. M. ROGERS

merely repositories of information, as some modern li-

younger Gordian was unconscious or not: "Twenty-

brarians are inclined to suppose, but are also objects of

two acknowledged concubines, and a library of sixty-

art or history in themselves and require to be treated ac-

two thousand volumes, attested the variety of his in-

cordingly. If Creswell was a bibliophile, he was also a

clinations, and from the productions which he left be-

hind him, it appears that the former as well as the latter

scholar, and the library, if his most precious possession,

was also a tool.

were designed for use rather than ostentation." Not, of

By the time I arrived in Cairo in 1965 Creswell's in-

course, that Creswell shared his extra-curricular activ-

ities, and one could in any case speculate on Gordian's terests had already for some years been turning to bibli-

attitude to his books, but in my own case the corollary ography. It may be that the collection and classification

was that anyone who wished to read in the library was a of titles remove the desire to possess the books them-

selves; but, whatever the case may be, the task of keep-
potential violator.

The excellent condition of the volumes in his library ing the library up to date was left to Christel Kessler

testifies in any case to the care they received. He was a and myself. Actually, in Creswell's principal fields of in-

great customer of the binders Sangorski and Sutcliffe, terest, Egypt, Syria-Palestine, Spain, the Maghrib, and

and the library is practically an archive of their work Iraq there was little to add, and it was in other areas,

over almost fifty years. At least once a year, Creswell notably Turkey, Iran, and Soviet Central Asia, in

told me, he would have the books off the shelves and which he had never been so interested, where the sheer

treat the leather bindings with a preparation the recipe difficulty of obtaining books without actually going

of which he had obtained from the British Museum. Of there (and often not even then) made acquisitions par-

the rarities esteemed by conventional bibliophiles, the ticularly important; though in Turkey the situation is

library has many, but with the exception of volumes now very much better, in Soviet Russia, Iran, and even

from the library of William Beckford (including, I Italy it is arguably much worse. One feature of the semi-

think, the Langlks edition of the travels of the Chevalier fossilized state of his own library, however, was that it

de Chardin) more by accident, I suspect, than by selec- also contained books which had nothing to do with the

tion. He approached the acquisition of books in the subject. They all date before 1956, when the American

manner of a stamp collector, with a keen appreciation of University bought the library to save it from confisca-

mint condition - some of the folios in his library had tion by the Egyptian government. Some he had certain-

never had their plates unwrapped. It was also some- ly bought: these reflected his political views, which were

times said, by the ignorant or the malicious, that rather far to the right and which in the 1930's had taken the

than sully his own books by reading them he would con- form of enthusiastic approval of the racialist aims of Na-

sult copies in other libraries in Cairo; but there is ample tional Socialism. They were, of course characteristic of

evidence in his marginal notes that he was brought up a certain section of English society at the time. He him-

in the old-fashioned English habit of grangerizing the self made no secret of them, but I have been told that

volumes in his library, and, as anyone who has worked they long cost him the scholarly recognition which only

in Cairo or London will know, one often consults books came in his extreme old age. I could have disapproved,

one already owns in other libraries just because one but it was basically lack of interest on my part which

happens to be there. Like any collector he probably ap- meant that we never spoke of them: it would have been

preciated a bargain, but the pride he took in showing his in more than one sense a dialogue de sourds; but with age

purchase books, which went back to his first interest in his views had certainly become much more moderate.

Islamic architecture, was to point out how the unimag- Other volumes, now rarities and possibly deservedly so,

inable inflation in book prices from the early 1960's on- were of more interest as evidence for the social history of

wards had become an impediment to scholarship: his Cairo under the last decades of British domination.

investment was scholarly, not financial. These included a collection of verse of mawkish religios-

These comments are in place because, whatever per- ity, Christeros by Gayer-Anderson, whose house next to

sonal foibles they reflect, they demonstrate that the Ibn Tulun is now a museum, and a roman q clef by the

scholar was also the collector, a conjunction which is wife of a Norwegian diplomat in Cairo, whose lovers

more common than is sometimes thought in academic had been by her account nasty, British, and numerous.

circles and which was particularly characteristic of It is unlikely, I think, that any of these could have been

Creswell's generation. They are also a reminder that close friends of Creswell's, and Creswell's numerous

books, especially architectural monographs, are not

penciled crisp and disparaging comments in them show

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 CRESWELL'S READING AND METHODS 47

non-Roman work refers to [the] want of elevation [of the

no inclination on his part to frequent their society. He

dome of Haghia Sophia] which goes so badly with its

may have bought them because they were momentarily

great span, together with the dwarfing of the drum, which

subjects of comment; or they may have been ill-judged

produce in the interior such a heavy effect that it seems as

gifts from their authors.2

if it were about to fall on the spectator's head (Rivoira,

One characteristic, though now thoroughly unfash- op. cit. 278). Now in the Pantheon, which Rivoira calls

'this wonderful and superb structure', 'built for all eterni-

ionable, feature ofCreswell's work is its polemically na-

ty', etc. the dome is nearly, but not quite, a complete

tionalistic tone. His attitude towards Egypt and the

hemisphere, that is to say, it is practically the same shape

Egyptians was strongly marked by that condescension

as the dome of Sancta Sophia, and it is placed much lower,

expressed in memoirs by the British ascendancy like

both actually and relatively, for its diameter is 43.20 m

Edward Cecil's odious Leisures of an Egyptian Official, and the height of its springing c. 21.60 m only above the

ground, whereas in Sancta Sophia the corresponding

though he was inconsistent in his generally high opinion

measurements (converted from Salzenberg's Prussian

of his able Egyptian pupils, like Farid Shafici, and in his

feet) are: diam. 32.65 m. height of springing 41.52 m!

often laudatory comments on works by the Egyptian

Comment is superfluous.

Antiquities Service or the Comit6 de Conservation des

Monuments de l'Art Arabe. But it would be entirely

It should be pointed out that Creswell, though savage,

wrong to see Creswell merely as a late product of British

is quite right and that the irritation so forcibly expressed

imperialism, for insofar as nationalism affected his writ-

here is principally aroused by Rivoira's propensity to

ing this was largely in reaction or response to the often

ignore the facts, though that was certainly in part na-

strongly worded nationalism of his foreign colleagues.

tionalistic bias.

One case which particularly struck me was A. von Le

Creswell's nationalism was also the product of a

Coq, whose displeasing account of explorations in Sin-

strongly anti-theoretical bias. Not surprisingly, there-

kiang, Buried Treasures of Chinese Turkestan,3 I also read in

fore, the French, from at least the time of Choisy on-

Creswell's library: this abounds in racialist comments

wards, that is, from the time that the scholar travelers

on explorers of other nations, notably Sir Aurel Stein,

like Melchior de Vogii6, L6on de Laborde, and Hom-

whom he treated simply as commercial competitors. I

maire de Hell gave way to theorizing or generalizing

am sure that Creswell bought it for its subject not its

historians of architecture, came in for strong criticism.

tone, but if one wished to be charitable one could say

French interest in early Muslim architecture through

that Le Coq saw scholarship as a personal pursuit of the

the history of institutions, typified by the important

truth, so that those who disagreed with him were ene-

work of Jean Sauvaget, also aroused his discomfort. I

mies and their nationality became something to be held

do not know whether he found Sauvaget's personality

against them. In that at least Creswell resembled him.

uncongenial and became suspicious of his work or

Typical of this assimilation of personal conflict and

whether it was the other way round; alternatively, his

scholarly controversy was the debate "Greece or Iran,"

very dismissive attitude to Sauvaget may result from

in which Creswell, however, took only a marginal part,

Sauvaget's sometimes rather lordly neglect, in the man-

over the extent to which the architecture of late antiqui-

ner of some of his older contemporaries, for matters of

ty and early Islam was influenced more by "Hellenis-

detail. It could well have been that the rumors some-

tic" or "Persian" traditions. This was taken seriously

times heard of Sauvaget's own opinion of Creswell were

all over Europe by scholars between 1890 and the Sec-

the fuel which added violence to his rebukes. One could

ond World War and evoked such heat that it can be seen

argue that Creswell's failure to criticize Monneret de

almost as an aspect of European expansion in the Mid-

Villard's Introduzione allo studio dell' archeologia musulmana5

dle East. One of the more note~worthy figures on this dis-

shows inconsistency here, but it may have appeared too

cussion was G. T. Rivoira, the historian of "Lombar-

late to arouse his interest, at least in print. In any case I

dic" architecture, who could be said to have been

do not think he would have liked Annales if it had been

practically an Italian first and an architectural histori-

brought to his attention. For example, he was also high-

an second. Among Cres well's many sharp and well-

ly critical of Gaston Wiet, to whose historical and epi-

deserved criticisms of his views, one may cite his claims

graphic work he was nevertheless deeply indebted. I

for early occurrences of the pendentive:4

only met Wiet once, at the Congress of Iranian Art and

Archaeology at Tehran in 1968, where I handed to him

Rivoira, in the provocative, arrogant and disparaging

manner so frequent'ly adopted by him when speaking of

the personal invitation of Dr. Sarwat Okasha, then

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
48 J. M. ROGERS

Egyptian Minister of Culture and a great Francophile, blance is per se inconclusive and any claims to the con-

to attend the celebrations of the Millenary of Cairo the trary, diffusionism and a "pernicious practice." But dif-

following year. This Wiet grandly refused, saying to me fusionism is itself spread by diffusion, and though

that it was unthinkable, for all his Cairo friends were Creswell had little sympathy with the grand diffusion-

either in prison or in exile. I had occasion to recount this ism of Strzygowski and Diez, who seem to have seen in-

incident to Creswell on my return to Cairo, and he re-

fluences as entities with lives of their own, rather like the

marked, "Well he never did have many friends." His germs carried by flies which contaminate wherever they

dismissal or disapproval of these scholars extended to may land, there are many other less dramatic, if more

their pupils and, it is fair to say, has often been in- insidious, versions. I suspect that Diez was encouraged

dignantly reciprocated; to their most frequent accusa- in his diffusionism though misinterpreting the frequent

tion, that he was a "mere positivist," I shall return be- resemblance of the arts of often widely separated prov-

low. inces through their common indebtedness to a metro-

It is fair to insist on these aspects ofCreswell's writing politan model without significant interrelations at pro-

to show that the acceptable tone of controversy is not an vincial level: an obvious case is the superficial

absolute matter but has been very different in earlier resemblance of Catalan Romanesque and Armenian

generations. Those who are committed to mealy- painting through their heritage of early Christian and

mouthed book reviews have much to learn from Bar- Byzantine prototypes. But in some other cases there

tol'd's reviews even of works which to us now seem be- may well also be interrelations, and it may be very diffi-

yond reproach. Creswell enjoyed controversy and his cult to establish these and evaluate their relative impor-

opinions were sometimes immoderately expressed, but tance. This difficulty and, for example, Creswell's re-

he was a tiger among tigers and as much the object of marks on Maghribi influence in thirteenth- and

odium archaeologicum, for example, from British col- fourteenth-century Cairo show that diffusionism is te-

leagues like Mortimer Wheeler, as its perpetrator. It nacious and by no means a mere childish error to be cast

has been remarked that he was more indulgent to Ger- off by the mature scholar.

man scholars. Though the supra-nationalistic Arianism Creswell may have thought that his severe view of

or pan-Turanianism of Strzygowski's later works is chronology was protection enough: it is "the spinal co-

equally blind and no less irritating, Creswell generally lumn of history. Dated examples play the same part as

speaks of him with respect - probably because it is do the fixed points of triangulation in the survey of a

Strzygowski's earlier works which he found of relevance country. They form, as it were, a rigid framework on

to the evolution of Islamic architecture. But it would be which all our main conclusions must be based and into

a slander to attribute his approval or disapproval of which all undated examples must be fixed." But he

German scholars to German national politics. His gives less importance to spatial or geographical consis-

championship of Herzfeld was out of respect for his tency. This is particularly evident in his standard para-

work. He certainly played a part in the return of the Sa- graphs on the "architectural origins" of a building or in

marra excavation material seized by the British as his chapters on the evolution of the pendentive and the

spoils of war in the Mesopotamian campaign of 1915, squinch7 where he gives little more than lists of datable

though he once remarked to me that Herzfeld did not occurrences in chronological sequence, not necessarily

show himself particularly grateful for his help. But on geographically interconnected or even culturally con-

many other occasions he expressed his admiration for nected with Islam, but categorizing improvements and

Herzfeld's beautiful draftsmanship and the chapters on refinements, nevertheless, as if the evolution were a uni-

Samarra in the second volume of his Early Muslim Archi- tary homogeneous phenomenon. Thus, whereas his dis-

tecture6 which are as far as the publication of some of tribution map of early squinches shows clear concentra-

those monuments ever reached is a sign of the close tion in Armenia and Iran, like his survey, it cannot

cooperation between them.

properly answer the question how the form came to be

How far was Creswell a diffusionist? and how far did

adopted in the architecture of Islam or of southern Eu-

his reading encourage him in this? Certainly, the close

rope in the High Middle Ages. In more extended sur-

resemblance he remarked between the plans of the

veys the very term "architectural origins" seems to beg

Great Mosque of al-Zahir Baybars in Cairo and the

the question. How to demonstrate, for example, his as-

Great Mosque of Mayyafariqin/Silvan in southeastern sertion that the mosques of al-Hakim and of Baybars I

Turkey is qualified by the observation that the resem-

in Cairo are both directly descended from the Fatimid

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 CRESWELL'S READING AND METHODS 49

mosque at Mahdiyya? On the face of it the latter can at nomic catastrophes like depressions or galloping in-

best be an indirect descendant. flation, which were arguably even greater forces for dis-

If Creswell's sequential approach to architectural persion and of which these same historians were well

evolution is to escape the charge of diffusionism it must aware. In fact refugees are a wasteful, even improbable,

presuppose a high degree of cultural or geographical means of transporting expertise and style, because of

continuity. I am tempted to wonder here whether his their inability to communicate, and because they may

unqualified equation of origins with precursors may not take forever to find their feet in their new refuge in the

have been a product of his long residence in Cairo. For face of opposition from craftsmen already entrenched in

Cairo, like Oxford, has had a notoriously cosmocentric the patronage system. In the case of the mosque of Bay-

outlook, and as a matter of fact the historical devel- bars I in Cairo Creswell invokes Ayyubid suzerainty

opment of Cairene architecture has been very largely over the Artuqid principality of Mayyafariqin in the

endogenous, as the two volumes of The Muslim Architec- early thirteenth century, Cairo's attraction as the Ayyu-

ture of Egypt demonstrate. The strength of the indige- bid metropolis, the disaster of the Mongol invasions,

nous Cairene tradition is rather odd, in view both of the and the destruction wrought by Jalal al-Din Khwa-

international message of Islam and later of the interna- razmshah's troops in Upper Mesopotamia as grounds

tional claims of the Fatimid da'wa, and it brings up a dif- for the reuse of its plan. The last factor he somewhat

ficulty in the means of diffusion to which Creswell com- overstates, but it must be said that the reuse of a plan

mitted himself, the movement of craftsmen. In The would be much better explained by the summoning of

Muslim Architecture of Egypt8 he gives a list of buildings craftsmen from Mayyafariqin, notjust a casual refugee,

erected by migrant craftsmen. It is rather short for the and that the most effective way for a craftsman to find

several centuries it covers, it tends to assume that (amal work abroad was in the suite of a prominent amir, or

in building inscriptions exclusively designates the ar- perhaps an envoy, as did the poets, painters, and di-

chitect, and it overvalues the importance of nisbas as an vines who came to Istanbul from Tabriz, Baghdad, and

index of training; but it could, admittedly, be much ex- Cairo in the sixteenth century, for that gave them at

panded. However, the aesthetic and historical impor-

once an introduction at court and the ear of the power-

tance of these buildings has been very variable, and it ful.9

almost looks as if Creswell is attracted to the idea that The inherent disadvantage of the catastrophe theory

architects are inherently vagrant. This vagrancy theory is that it is relative to our often extremely scanty knowl-

is then reinforced by what one may describe as the "ca- edge. Our catastrophes are not necessarily those of the

tastrophe theory" of architectural change, where major

Umayyads and early Abbasids, nor, unfortunately, are

architectural innovations can be attributed to the emi-

they the only ones there were. Moreover, since the

gration or deportation of craftsmen which inevitably events are easily identifiable, but the influences often

followed major invasions or changes in ruling dynasties.

much less so, the theory tends to see influences where

In Creswell's defense it must be said that he has not

there are none, or to warp the way in which they were

been by any means the only holder of this theory and

realized and generally to ignore influence by reaction.

that the Near and Middle East over the period 700 to
For deportations can have entirely unpredictable re-

1500 have been abundantly rich in catastrophes. It is

sults. The notorious case of the craftsmen deported by

superficially convenient and simple, and though as an

Tamerlane from the cities he sacked and, according to

explanation it leaves much to be desired, it is by no

his chroniclers, set to work on his buildings in Samar-

means outmoded. Arthur Lane's invocation of the fall of

qand, but where evidence for their participation is neg-

the Fatimid Caliphate to explain the collapse of Fatimid

ligible, has recently led Claus-Peter Haase'o to suggest

lusterwares and their appearance in Syria and Iran still

that they were merely a topos: Tamerlane, or his chron-

appears to be fairly generally believed, in spite of the

iclers, saw it as proper for a world conqueror to claim

chronological difficulties, the absence of historical doc-

that his monuments, not merely the booty which financ-

umentation, and the objections of common sense, es them, were the fruits of his conquests. Craftsman-

though no one would now pretend that the Ottoman

ship, moreover, is generally relative to technique and

conquest of Egypt in 1516-17 led to the disappearance

materials. Where the materials are too different the

of the arts and crafts in Egypt, and here the dramatic

craftsman will be impotent. Even where they are much

claims of the later Mamluk historians can be decisively

the same, experience of Ottoman conscription (siirgiin)

rejected. Interestingly Creswell generally ignores eco-

for work on major imperial projects suggests that indi-

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
50 J. M. ROGERS

viduality of craftsmanship and local peculiarities of

entirely neglect early Persian monuments, his relatively

style often played an insignificant role, so that the infrequent recourse to Persian parallels could have been

craftsmen's origins were irrelevant to the resulting partly a response to the difficulty of obtaining data from

building. In general, one may say, the effectiveness of the historians or archaeological surveys, though his

immigrant craftsmen presupposes certain structures of conviction of their tangential importance to his studies

the building trades and the organization of large-scale would have been paramount. But the debate on the

building works for which Creswell never argues and for Dome of the Rock to which Oleg Grabar has devoted so

which there is little or no evidence in the historians. For much attention, the reasons for the form it took, its sym-

an engineer-draftsman in fact he seems to have been cu- bolism, and its meaning for the Umayyads and later

riously uninterested in the process of how buildings Muslim cultures which have tended to occupy the fore-

were put up in these circumstances or the works coor- front of early Muslim architectural history over the past

dinated. twenty-five years has been dependent upon Creswell's

In Fatimid and Mamluk Egypt, as in Umayyad Sy- description of the monument and its historical explica-

ria, Creswell is in any case inclined to see local tradition tion, where the discussion of its symbolism is related ex-

as paramount and the activity of immigrant or refugee clusively to its status as the chronological successor to

craftsmen the exception. If one asks why this should the Temple of Solomon.

have been so, I expect that he would have answered, as It is right to insist on the primacy ofCreswell's survey

he was perfectly entitled to do, that it was a given fact."

of the monuments, for it can, I think, exist on its own,

The notion that the persistence of tradition might have whereas symbolism and functional explanations are not

ulterior explanations, symbolic or functional, did not

alternatives but presuppose it. That he ignored them is

really interest him. The political importance of Da-

not in itself grounds for accusing him of being a posi-

mascus to the Umayyad Caliphate largely explains the

tivist, for he certainly used physical description to sit-

continuing importance of Syria and of Syrian craftsmen

uate a monument in its cultural context. His conclusion

in the subsequent architectural history of Islam, despite

- on the basis of its classicizing features, like the setting

the political decline of Syria under the early Abbasids.

out of the plan, the gilding of the outer covering of the

It is a matter of observation that not all cultures have

wooden dome, the window grilles, the marble revet-

built well in stone and that stone architecture is inher-

ment, etc. - that the Dome of the Rock combined Ro-

ently conservative. The diffusion of Syrian forms in late

man, Byzantine, and Syrian elements, to the extent that

antiquity through discriminating patronage to Con-

it was a Syrian building with (provincial) Byzantine

stantinople, Ravenna, Egypt, and Anatolia (another

mosaic decoration and was thus on a par with the

stone culture, but geographically more on the periph-

Umayyad administration and the coinage - whether

ery) was above all determined by materials and tech-

or not it is right - is a concise estimate of its importance

niques, and the limits of this diffusion are shown by the

in Umayyad culture and of the place of Umayyad cul-

evident differences in the architecture of Arabia Petraea ture in early Islam.'2

and the Yemen. Creswell's concentration upon Syria in

Few would care to read Creswell's great volumes

his listing of "architectural origins" is thus no caprice.

from end to end; nor was this intended, for the chapters

Once away from precise physical details his method

are mostly monographs and stand remarkably well on

was less sure. Till his work attracted the patronage of

their own. Even then, however, the sheer abundance of

King Fuad and later King Farouk his means were se-
factual material may bewilder the inexperienced reader

verely limited, and he could not afford to travel to the

till he grasps the system in its presentation and under-

same extent in Persia, India, and Anatolia (in 1932 in

stands its encyclopedic scope. How many times has a

the course of a field trip in southeast Turkey he was put

chapter which has been so often studied that it can ap-

under house arrest by the governor of Diyarbekir, and

parently yield no more given yet another significant de-

his revenge was never to return there, a factor which

tail to stimulate inquiry on another tack. Creswell cer-

may be of some importance in his later account of the

tainly believed in the validity of complete physical

three Fatimid gates of Cairo), and his use of blanket

description as an essential basis for architectural history

concepts like "the theory of Persian influence in Fait-

and in this he was surely right: Russian Central Asia

imid architecture" reflects the not always well informed

and even Anatolia still suffer from never having had

enthusiasm for the arts and architecture of Persia of the

their Creswell.'3 But to conclude, as did some of his

contributors to A Survey ofPersian Art. Though he did not

French critics, that complete physical description was

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 CRESWELL'S READING AND METHODS 51

all there was to his method is to travesty his work. He and hypothesis as such, but to show how easily without

learned from the example of his admired friend and the greatest care for the evidence speculation can be-

mentor Max van Berchem that architectural history is come chimerical.

the biography of great buildings and as such a worthy Creswell's conception of architectural history as

activity in itself, not a mere preliminary to grander theo- biography certainly evolved as he wrote, as a compari-

ries of evolution, though obviously it need not preclude son of his treatment of the Dome of the Rock, the Umay-

them. Like human biographies it involves tracing the yad Mosque at Damascus, and the mosque of al-Azhar

lineaments of the building, its pedigree, its heritage, and in Cairo clearly shows. For the later history of the Dome

its legacy, and these are not just matter of factual obser- of the Rock, at least as far as non-structural works are

vation but matters of connoisseurship and historical concerned, one must still have recourse to Richmond's'6

judgment. One may see this in Creswell's criticisms of monograph, and in the case of the Umayyad Mosque he

Nasir-i Khusraw's misleading statements on the plan leaves a gap between the important restorations of Ma-

of the Dome of the Rock, which he analyzes in the light likshah in the late eleventh century and the late nine-

of his own experiences of the serious errors in the works teenth century. In the case of al-Azhar, in contrast, the

of professional artists in Cairo like Luigi Mayer, Pascal major changes and additions to it from its foundation in

Coste, or David Roberts, and that despite the sketches 972 right up to the twentieth century are minutely re-

they actually made on the spot, which Nasir-i Khusraw corded and give a graphic record of the vicissitudes in its

can scarcely have done.'" history which on the institutional side have only recent-

ly attracted the historians. For other monuments ofCai-

The minute biographical approach is particularly re-

ro where Creswell ignores the Ottoman period this

warding in the case of early monuments like the Dome

seems less to have been the characteristic prejudice of

of the Rock and of the Umayyad Mosque in Damas-

Egyptian historians against their "alien" occupation,

cus."5 Is the step-by-step approach to the latter rather

than the poverty of the historical sources available and,

labored? The justification must be that the area since

doubtless, the relatively superficial nature of the chang-

late antiquity and the building since its foundation have

both undergone such radical changes that any historical es they underwent. Lack of available sources and time

must often have precluded treatment of the later periods

study of them demands as detailed a consideration as

possible. Creswell's reliance upon the veracity of the of a building's history, but his achievement at its fullest

represents a striking contrast with architectural histo-

earliest source enables him to disentangle what is

ries of, for example, the Alhambra, which despite the

Umayyad in Ibn Jubayr's account and what was the

work of the Seljuq ruler Malikshah in 1082-83 and to works of the period of Charles V still appear to stop

conclude that Ibn 'Asakir, so long believed to be evi- dead at the Reconquest, as if an author were to abandon

dence for the mosque incorporating a Christian church, a biography because the subject's life took a turn of

which he disapproves.
is on the contrary a neutral piler-up of traditions on

either side, and here actually favors the total demolition Whether or not Creswell would have accepted the

of the earlier church inside the temenos. Creswell's own view that architectural history is merely the biography of

piling up of authorities is perhaps less impressive at a great buildings, he certainly saw it as the essential pre-

second glance, for they are not all independent. His liminary to history from other points of view. But not all

achievement, however, is all the more impressive be- points of view. He was not really interested in symbol-

cause of the wild theories of his contemporaries. Thus of ism, as his discussion of the ornament of the minarets of

Dussaud and of Watzinger and Wulzinger he is obliged the mosque of al-Hakim in Cairo shows.17 Here he cites

to conclude in the Short Account (p. 65), "These two theo- the nineteenth-century French mystagogue Eliphas L6-

ries are alike remarkable for the complete disregard vi (Alphonse Louis Constant) as evidence that the five-

which they exhibit for the evidence not only of Muslim pointed stars on the two minarets are pentagrams, those

and Christian sources but for the architectural evidence on the western minaret with one point up being "good"

as well.... How scholars and archaeologists can bring and those on the northern with two points up being

themselves to believe that a church.., over 136 m. long, "bad," to which he adduces the report that al-Hakim

with one flank entirely open to the courtyard, ever exist-

practiced the black arts, comparing him to Gilles de

ed, really is amazing. No one has been able to cite a Rais and his accomplices, who practiced child murder

for necromantic reasons. Did he think that this scanda-

church in the least resembling it." This is not to suggest

that Creswell had a hatred or mistrust of speculation

lous detail supported his view? For he does nothing

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
52 J. M. ROGERS

more to explain why the stars are pentagrams, why pen- that, he evidently assumed that it was the work of the

same masons. However, not only is the zig-zag molding

tagrams appear on the minarets, why they are not both

good (or both bad), or why the rest of the ornament is dividing the two rows of triangles also standardized (he

not also magical. This untypically weak and inconse- wrongly states that the acanthus fronds are perpendic-

quential argument, which might not unfairly be de- ular to the direction of movement; they are actually par-

scribed as silly, indicates the low importance he accord- allel to the horizontal coursing, which gives them an

ed to the interpretation of motifs. There is, or was, a oddly wind-blown effect): the carving is in similar style,

copy of Eliphas Levi in Creswell's library. Did he come as is the carving of the rosettes in each of the triangular

to see the five-pointed stars as pentagrams on the basis panels. Here one element, what Creswell calls the "ker-

of his reading? or did he buy a copy to follow up a nel" of the rosettes, does change, though some of these

hunch? In any case Levi scarcely deserves Creswell's re- repeat. Whether or not they were done by the craftsmen

spectful description as "the leading 19th century expo- who did the cornice is not quite clear.

nent of occultism." That leaves the most famous element of the facade

While it seems to me that any aspiring historian of Is- decoration, the ground of the triangles, which, tojudge

lamic architecture will find Creswell's method instruc- from lightly carved designs on some of the upper trian-

tive, there are points at which, as in his monograph on gles, were intended to have all-over carving. They fall

Mshatta, 8 his discussion of decoration gives rise to diffi- into various groups with distinct differences in theme,

culties. His chronological account clearly shows the treatment, and technique, and on these grounds Cres-

evolution of scholarly opinion from the 1880's to 1930, well postulates four groups of workmen, responsible re-

from a Sasanian, Lakhmid, or Ghassanid attribution to spectively for panels A-C, D-L, M-T, and U-V. The

its general acceptance as Umayyad, with the irony that characteristic vine leaves of the first two groups were

paralleled by Strzygowski on fragments of carved bone

Josef Strzygowski, whose advocacy persuaded Bode to

put the Mshatta facade on the list of archaeological and ivory from Egypt which he attributed to the Coptic

spoils requested by Kaiser Wilhelm on his visit toJeru- period, before the Muslim conquest of 641, and which

salem in 1898, cannot at the time have known what he also appear on the paneled wooden doors of the church

was asking for. By the time Creswell wrote, the question

of St. Barbara in Old Cairo. Creswell argues,

had been more or less decided, so that he had little more

The fact that these peculiarities are found before Islam in

to do than summarize the debate, but he adds his own

Coptic work, and in Coptic work only, leaves little room

reasons - the scale and grandeur of the conception

for doubt that the vine-decoration cited, as well as the

which put it far beyond the means of a petty ruler; its sit-

vine-foliage and birds in triangles A-L, has been executed

uation in the Belqa steppe which was a favorite Umay-

[my italics] by Coptic craftsmen, conscripted by an all-

powerful Caliph, just as we have seen that they were con-

yad resort; its unfinished state which he attributes to the

scripted for Damascus, Jerusalem and Madina. Yet even

untimely death of al-Walid II; and its evident use of la-

here there is penetration of Persian influence, for in the

bor conscripted from all over the caliphate, a standard

midst of the vine-scrolls are mythical animals taken from

practice under the later Umayyads. As for its decorative

Sasanian art, just as the Sasanian tulip-like motif (a pal-

repertory, he cites many important and previously un- mette tree) occurs in the mosaics of the Dome of the Rock

in the midst of Hellenistic motifs.21

noticed parallels in the mosaics of the Dome of the Rock

which in his view make a pre-eighth-century date im-

possible.
As for the latter two groups, M-T and U-V, Creswell

It is his analysis of the decoration which arouses one's

attributed these to Persian, or possibly Iraqi, craftsmen,

doubts. The profiles of both the cornice and the base

on the basis of various Sasanianizing motifs they con-

moldings have parallels in a series of early Christian tain.

monuments of Urfa and Diyarbekir,19 which leads him

Almost certainly some of the carved bone fragments

to say that the Mshatta profiles were carved by crafts-

published by Strzygowski and illustrated by Creswell

men from Upper Mesopotamia, but who in accordance

are not Coptic and sixth century, but Umayyad and

with Syrian practice angled the cornice, like the cornice

eighth century, so that, if the details are significant, they

of the church of St. Simeon Stylites at Qal'at Simcan, so

testify to an Egyptian, rather than a specifically Coptic,

as to enclose the whole tympanum. The carved deco-

provenance. The parallels between bone or ivory carv-

ration of the cornice and the base molding is also stan-

ing and fine stone carving are no problem for they are

dardized20 and, though he does not suggest who did

characteristic of later Muslim cultures too: quite why

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 CRESWELL'S READING AND METHODS 53

there should be this persistent resemblance of worked the less real the caliph the greater the need for make-

materials which are prima facie unconnected has not believe and for lavish decoration. The salient fact any-

yet been explained. But Creswell's move from the Cop- way is that the stucco decoration is most closely paral-

tic origins of the decoration to the participation ofCopts leled in Baghdad Koran illumination of the early four-

in the workmanship is scarcely admissible. Were that teenth century and then in early-fourteenth-century

the case, we should have had three or possibly four Mamluk Cairene illumination, but not earlier. That

groups working simultaneously on the facade, the ma- strongly suggests a later dating, at least for the deco-

sons from Upper Mesopotamia carving the profiles; the ration, and had Creswell had occasion to embark on its

masons decorating the profile and the carvers executing analysis he might well have altered his conclusions.

the groundwork of the triangles, "Copts" and "Per- These criticisms are not meant to score cheap points

sians." On grounds of economy and sheer efficiency one against Creswell, for, significantly, no one appears to

would be inclined to exclude this out of hand; but why have made much progress in identifying the workmen

should a particular motif speak for the nationality of the at Mshatta or explaining how they worked. We know so

craftsman irrespective of technique or style? The "Per- little of the technical context that the coexistence of dif-

sian" motifs are not treated in a particularly Persian ferent styles represents an intractable problem. In the

way, and it is clear from "Coptic" textiles that the Sasa- case of the mosaics of the Umayyad Mosque in Da-

nians had no monopoly of Sasanian motifs. Technically mascus the latest manual of Islamic art23 concludes that

and stylistically the overall homogeneity of the carving "Muslim patrons impressed themes and manners of

of all panels is more striking than the differences, and if representation upon the mosaicists, whatever their

the craftsmen were of different origins they had more or country of origin." As it happens, this suggestion is dia-

less achieved what Professor Brisch has well called a metrically opposed to Creswell's assumption that

certain common denominator. In any case, one of the craftsmen of different origins worked freely, but when it

criteria for difference upon which Creswell relied, comes to explaining how the result was achieved, it

namely the absence of figural decoration in certain of seems to make no fewer sweeping assumptions. The

the panels, has been convincingly argued to have been Umayyads are particularly unfortunate in that for this

because the triangles in question were directly behind period Western art historians of late antiquity have in

the mihrab niche of the palace mosque. desperation conventionally thrown back their attribu-

Consequently, if Copts did two of the sets of panels, tions of puzzling objects towards Syria (one of those

other "Copts" could easily have done the others; or conceptional conveniences like Ost-Rom, or Zentral-

none of them. Is not Creswell's postulation of so many asien which is as near mythology as makes no matter

different craftsmen in a relatively simple operation a ro-

and which is best signaled by inverted commas) and

mantic extravagance? And does not the presupposition that the material at their disposal is, if anything, even

of designers consciously selecting and combining motifs

more dispersed and heterogeneous. The Western stylis-

of different cultural provenance involve an anachro- tic concept of late antiquity fails therefore to provide a

nism? This unconvincing result suggests that Creswell's yardstick against which Umayyad art can be measured.

conception of decorative style was fatally atomistic, and

In the case of Mshatta the obvious comparisons, vine-

it rather looks as though in his later works he sensed this

scroll mosaics like those in Santa Costanza in Rome, the

and avoided the problems raised by decoration. The

Antioch Chalice, the throne of Maximian in Ravenna

magnificent arabesque ornament of the dome of the

(parts of it at least) are actually scarcely better attribut-

mausoleum of the Abbasid caliphs in Cairo22 is, for ex-

ed than Mshatta itself. It is not quite certain what the

ample, drawn and described, but no attempt is made to

reaction would be were the Antioch Chalice or the

establish its provenance. This is here a serious omis-

throne of Maximian to be claimed for Umayyad Syria,

sion, for Creswell's argument for the dating of the mau-

but the possibility is inherently no stranger than the

soleum hinges on the claim that it was for the ambassa-

many attributions to which they have been subjected,

dor of the Abbasid caliph Abu Nadla, who died on 10

often on the flimsiest of evidence. As with Mshatta, if we

Rabi' II 640 (7 October 1242), and that the splendor

knew the identity and provenance of the craftsmen we

was more appropriate to the ambassador ofa real caliph could fit them into that cultural context, but in them-

than to a puppet caliph like Abu'l-CAbbas Ahmad, who selves they do not provide the cultural context into

died on 18Jumada 1 701 (19January 1302), and is also

which their stylistic parallels can be fitted: they are not

buried there. This is rather weak, for one could say that
fixed points, but symptoms of a stylistic evolution over

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
54 J. M. ROGERS

9. Cf. Hanna Sohrweide, "Dichter und Gelehrter aus dem Osten

far too many centuries or too vast an area. But Mshatta,

im Osmanischen Reich (1453-1600)," Der Islam 46 (1970): 263-

now that it is generally agreed to be dated to the reign of

302.

al-Walid II is, unlike the Antioch Chalice, a fixed point

10. "Probleme der Kiinstler-konzentration unter Timur in Zentral-

for the history of style, even if for the moment we know

asien," in Kiinstler und Werkstatt in den orientalischen Gesellschaften,

far too little about it. Here, for once, Umayyad Syria
ed. AlbertJ. Gail (Graz, 1981), pp. 61-73.

11. For example (cf. A Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture [Bei-
provides a fixed point in the history of the late antique

rut, 1958], pp. 210-11), in support of an Abbasid attribution for

and can, or should, be used to explain its development.

the wooden consoles of the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, he ad-

vances "the well known vitality and persistence of Hellenistic art

School of Oriental and African Studies

in Syria, long after its decadence elsewhere. As a result of this,

University of London motifs which might safely be placed in a given century, if found

outside Syria. may well be a century later if found in Syria." The

London, England

consoles are now generally agreed to be Umayyad, but Cres-

well's point is still defensible.

12. One highly curious revivalist feature of its decoration, which

NOTES Creswell first noticed but which does not appear to have evoked

further comment or explanation, is the striking similarity of the

1. Professor Klaus Brisch, for whose comments on a draft of this ar- decoration of the repousse bronze door soffits to that of lead and

ticle I am extremely grateful, has pointed out to me that the stone sarcophagi from Roman Palestine with their characteristic

chronological limit for Early Muslim Architecture was set by the end Bacchic vine scrolls (EMA, 2d ed., vol. 1, pt. 1, pp. 82 ff, 86 ff.; cf.

of Caetani's Annali and that this was very probably a wise deci- N. Avigad, "The Burial Vault of a Nazirite Family on Mount

sion on Creswell's part. Scopus," Israel Exploration Journal 21 (1971): 185-200; idem,

2. Some people of a Victorian cast of mind might regard perusal of "The Tomb of a Nazirite on Mount Scopus," in Jerusalem Re-

such books in someone else's library as an indiscretion, possibly vealed, ed. Y. Yadin (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976),

little less venial than reading their letters and then telling it all. It pp. 66-69).

has always seemed to me in the latter case curiously inconsistent 13. One reason admittedly why he has had so few imitators is that

that such people generally regard it as perfectly proper to read few of them have shared his dogged pertinacity and almost pre-

other people's postcards. So if I am judged I shall plead that ternatural single-mindedness, or have had the time or means to

these few volumes in Creswell's library were his postcards, not concentrate themselves as he did.

his letters. For there is no sign in any of his writings that he ever 14. EMA, 2d ed., 1: 77-78. Rivoira, whose arguments are based on

made use of them. The topic they introduce, however, is relevant Nasir-i Khusraw, he stigmatizes as "both hypercritical and ob-

to his scholarship, namely how far his reading inside and outside tuse, for [he] ignores the teaching of experience in these mat-

the subject (insofar as it existed before he began to write) affected ters."

his methods and his conclusions.

15. Creswell, Short Account, pp. 44-81.

3. A. von Le Coq, Buried Treasures of Chinese Turkestan, trans. Anna 16. E. T. Richmond, The Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem (Oxford, 1924).

Barwell (London, 1928). 17. MAE 1: 104.

4. K. A. C. Creswell, Early Muslim Architecture 1, pt. 2, 2d ed. (Ox- 18. EMA, 2d ed., 1, 2: 578-641.

ford, 1969), pp. 467-68.

19. Cf. E. Herzfeld, "Mschatta, Hira and Badiya," Jahrbuch der

5. Monneret de Villard, Introduzione allo studio dell' archeologia musul- Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 42 (1921): 104-6; 133-46.

mana (Venice: Fondazione Cini, 1966). 20. EMA, 2d ed., 1, 2, figs. 655-56.

6. Creswell, EMA, vol. 2, 1st ed. (Oxford, 1940), pp. 232 ff. 21. Creswell, Short Account, p. 150.

7. EMA, 2d ed., 1, 2: 450-71; EMA, 1st ed., 2: 101-8. 22. MAE 2: 88-94.

8. K. A. C. Creswell, Muslim Architecture of Egypt, vol. 2 (Oxford, 23. Richard Ettinghausen and Oleg Grabar, The Art and Architecture

1956), pp. 163-64.

of Islam, 650-1250 (London: Viking-Pelican, 1987), p. 44.

This content downloaded from 150.214.146.47 on Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:18:04 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms