1

THEODOSIUS II’S CHURCH: HAGIA SOPHIA

Nihat Tekdemir

İstanbul Technical University

History of Architecture

1. INTRODUCTION

This study focuses on the architecture of Hagia Sophia church under the reign of the

emperor Theodosius. The research is conducted in the Bogazici University Library,

the library of German Archaeological Institute, the library of ITÜ and the Yapı Kredi

Sermet Çifter Library and it analyses both the primary and secondary sources about

Hagia Sophia. The articles and the dissertations that can be reached through various

digital databases were also incorporated into this research.

In order to understand second Hagia Sophia this study reviews early Byzantine

church forms and the new discussions triggered by the recent archaeological

excavations and the reasons behind the restoration of Hagia Sophia Church under the

reign of Theodosius. Regarding the sparse material evidence about the architectural

remains of the Theodosian church, the study focuses on the literature and the

discussion about this monumental building before the construction of the Justinianic

church. By focusing on architectural analogies and theories that compare the

Theodosian church and the Justinianic church, the study presents strong material

evidence about the differences and the similarities of these two different phases of

Hagia Sophia.

2

1.1 Political Developments

Some important developments happened during the reign of Emperor Arcadius (395-

408), which lead the construction of the Theodosius Church. Two important

characters were in the centre of the important events who are also played an

important role in Arcadius’ life. One of them was empress Eudoikia, and the other

one was John Chrysostom, the Patriarch of Istanbul. Hagia Sophia Church was not

only the religious centre, but also the political centre. But the social centre was

Hippodrome (Türkoğlu 2002). Those political and social developments include

Hagia Sophia started during the reign of Arcadius and brought chaos to the city.

1.1.1 Ioannes Chrysostomos

John Chrysostom was one of the important characters that influenced the

Christianity, and reached to the rank of a saint was well educated at Antioch. He was

known by his honest personality and his philanthropic life. He heavily criticized the

luxury and extravagantness of palace life during his speeches in Hagia Sophia. He

especially criticized the Empress Aelia Eudoxia’s plans about erecting a silver plated

statue at the palace. He used outrageous statements and when the palace aware of

that he was exiled from the city. Palace’s decision leads tremendous events that

included Hagia Sophia’s fire. In 20 June 404, as a result of a riot, Hagia Sophia, the

Senate buildings and many other buildings were burnt down. Side aisles and the roof

of the main naïve caught fire immediately started to fire. Palladius, a friend of John

Chrysostom, described the incidents dramatically; “As soon as the patriarch left the

church fire inflamed. At the same time guardian angels were also leaving the church

anyway” (Türkoğlu 2002).

1.2 Early Byzantine Churches and Hagia Sophia

It is necessary to study early Byzantine church forms, in order to understand Hagia

Sophia during the reign of Theodosius because the documentation and excavations of

that era is lacking sources. Early Byzantine churches were formed rectangular as in

the Roman basilicas.

The interior space was separated to three naves with two colonnaded lines. The main

nave on the centre was wider and higher when compared to the side naves. At the

east side there was a semi rounded apse, which was slightly overhung to the outer

3

space. On the west side there was a vestibule named narthex, which was reached by

crossing from atrium. At this time the roofs of the basilicas were covered with timber

and roof tiles (Mainstone, 1997).

1.2.1 Construction phases

The first church was known as the Megale Ecclesia (Eyice, 1984). The first phase of

three phased Hagia Sophia was commissioned by Constantius, the son of

Constantine, completed in 360 AD. The church was blessed by Archbishop

Eudoksios. The first church had a basilical plan, single naved and had upper

galleries. There was a baptistery and skeuophylakion located near the church (Freely

and Çakmak, 2005).

Even there were arguments about the construction date of the church that it is

ordered by Constantine, it is indicated that the opening to religious service happened

during the reign of Constantius the son (337-361). Sokrates (380-440) narrates that

the first building was erected by Constantine (337-361). Additionally Chronicon

Pascale quotes that Constantine donated silver and golden objects to the church for

the opening (Türkoğlu, 2002). Moreover Esusebious (260-339), who wrote about the

works of Constantius, did not mention about such a church (Eyice, 1984).

The seconda phase was commissioned by Theodosius II. in 415 AD. The third phase

constituted present Hagia Sophia was commissioned Emperor Justinianus in 537 AD.

4

Figure 1.1: Front to back; Theodosian Basilica, Justinianus’ Hagia Sophia

, and after the dome collapse in 557. (Url-2 http://ukar.ff.cuni.cz).

5

2. THEODOSIUS CHURCH

The restoration of the first Hagia Sophia that was destroyed in 404, was carried out

by Theodosius II. The architect Rufinus was responsible for the repairs and on the

10th of October 415 the church was blessed by Archbishop Atticus and so, opened

for worship once again (Wiener, 2001; Freely ve Çakmak, 2005). Sources reveal that

this church was the cathedral of the capital, just as the latter one. The building was

designed as a basilica with five naves, and an adjoining courtyard lined with

columns. Other architectural structures associated with the second Hagia Sophia

were The Treasury (Skeuphylakion) of which only basement level remains today, the

Olympias Monastery on the west of today’s church, and the Church of St. Nikolaus,

most likely build by Constantius, on the east of today’s church (Diker, 2010).

It is understood that the 2nd

Hagia Sophia was smaller than the one it was later

replaced with later in the 6th century, and was oriented further southwards with a few

degrees difference. Evidence of the work carried out at the church after the fire is

limited. It is not known if parts of the old building were kept and repaired or if the

skeuophylakion was left as it was and the rest was rebuild completely.

There are no inscriptions until the dedication of Theodosius II of the 10 October 415.

This fact brings to mind the idea that either the construction work hold after the fire

was very detailed or the restorations started after a long time from the actual fire.

Another possibility is that the fire didn’t destroy the function of the basilica and the

basilica was still used for worship (Mainstone 1997).

Various excavations in the atrium by A.M. Schneider, in the Skevophylakion by

Feridun Dirimtekin and inside the church excavations by Muzaffer Ramazanoğlu

have been carried out, but new information concerning the old building could not be

discovered.

6

The findings suggest that the long basilica had 5 naves and a wooden pitched roof.

The base of the building did not change during restorations and the entrance was on

the west side with an atrium, which was separated from the corridor by a narthex.

Figure 2.1 Plan of Second Hagia Sophia ( Mainstone, 1997)

The information about the atrium had been collected from the excavation conducted

by A.M. Schneider in 1935. The Theodosius-era church was 2 meters beneath the

current walking surface and the courtyard floor was decorated with mosaics.

The excavation revealed an approximately 5.5 meters of width columned portico and

some parts of the narthex wall. The portico was accessed with five marble steps and

through the imperial gates one entered the narthex of the church. The basilica with 5

naves was behind the narthex. Excavations revealed that the portico in front of the

middle entrance of the narthex was higher than the side portico and had a propylon

and pediment at its façade. This plan was sometimes used for big churches in early

centuries. This is observable at the Lateran and San Paolo Fuori le Mura in Rome,

and also at the Church of Hagios Demetrios in Thessaloniki (Freely and Çakmak,

2005).

The portico relics show that the church is still in its original axis. According to

Thomas Matthews, the western wall dating to 413-415, didn’t provide entrance to the

narthex but to the portico (Mainstone, 1997).

7

Figure 2.2: Scheineder reconstruction of portico (Mainstone,1997).

The pediment carried by four columns is divided by an arch (Freely ve Çakmak,

2005). This architectural feature can also be found in Anatolian cities like

Aphrodisias and Miletos. Another important example of this style can be seen in

Madrid at the Missorium (Mainstone, 1997). It can be dated back to the year 388, to

the reign of Theodosius I.

Excavations weren’t continued towards the east, as a precaution not to damage the

Hagia Sophia today. That is why we do not know the exact size and measurements of

the second Hagia Sophia. Despite this, it is assumed that the structure was about 60

meters in width. Whereas the atrium was measured precisely as 47.60 m X 35.50 m

(Wiener, 2001).

Muzaffer Ramazanoğlu has been doing research in and around the structure since

1946 and has expressed some new opinions about its history. According to

Ramazanoğlu, the inner narthex of the Hagia Sophia today could have been the

middle nave of the 2nd Hagia Sophia; and the exonarthex most probably was part of

the side naves. Also he suggests that the basilica Constantine I. had build was to the

south of Hagia Irene and that Constantius made it larger and shaped it as a three

naved basilica facing north. According to Ramazanoğlu, Theodosius II placed the

new church on top of the south end of the basilica, and so the Justinianus’ church, the

Hagia Sophia we know today, was build on top of its remains. The propylon

discovered in 1935, must have been part of a pagan temple. But Ramazanoğlu hasn’t

8

found much support for these views from the scientific community. Although the

archaeological data obtained from his excavations are very important (Eyice, 1984).

Another significant excavation was executed by Feridun Dirimtekin at the Treasury

(Skeuophylakion) to the north-east. In the Treasury all the artifacts necessary for the

daily religious rituals were stored. The free-standing building has 3 stories and has a

circular plan. By examining the lower floors the first two floors can be dated to the

5th century. The upper floor must have been added in the 6th Century. The lower

floors must originate from the Theodosius Church and the upper floor from the

Justinian-era (Freely ve Çakmak, 2005).

In the excavations archaeologists descended to the bottom of the area, found a cell

type structure, but function of this structure could not be understood. Base of this cell

is covered with especially white and black in patches marbles. The connection door

along the Hagia Sophia had been shut down for a very long time probably because of

an earthquake, and the main door faces south. Connection to the church is yielded

from the main door on the south. This structure’s diameter is 12 meters from ground

floor, 11.50 meters from inside. There are niches on the upper walls. Traces show

that the walls were covered with marble. The area that today we can see the Treasury

Building on it gives a very important clue about the II. Hagia Sophia. It can be said

that the II. Hagia Sophia building was reaching this point, because it is known that

the building belongs to Theodosius II. And it can also be said that II. Hagia Sophia

and Jusitinian’s Hagia Sophia that is still standing today had more or less the same

measurements on the length or there were so little changes (Türkoğlu, 2002).

Figure 2.3: Skeuophylakion (Türkoğlu, 2002)

9

2.1 Sculptures from Theodosius II

In the excavations of 1935 excavators found columns on miscellaneous length, frieze

parts describing the 12 apostles, pediment parts. Corinthian style column heads and

the other findings show architectural style of Theodosius period (Barsanti, 2010).

These findings are being exhibited in the museum garden. It can be seen that

Hellenistic period decorations, which had been used excessively, changed into the

symbols of Christianity like the lamb relief on the frieze (Freely and Çakmak,

2005).

Figure 2.1.1: Part of frieze describing the 12 apostles (Barsanti, 2010).

The marbles used in the architectural sculpture were from Prokenessos. Only one

head of the four heads on the columns of propylon conserved to today. Corinthian

column decorated with acanthus leaves. Two of the half column heads are also

preserved to today. Cippollini marble used in two columns of central portico instead

of Prokenesssos marble (Barsanti, 2010). Three column pedestals are being

conserved on the portico, which are 8 meters long, on the west of the outer narthex of

the church. In addition to this, there is a 4 meters long brick wall reaching to the

west. Seals of the bricks indicate the dates 413-415 (Mainstone, 1997).

10

Figur 2.1.2: Corinthian capital from Theodosian Church (Barsanti, 2010)

3. CONCLUSIUN

Due to the excavation started by Alfons Maria Scheineder from the German

Archaeology Institute in 1935, significant information about the pre-Justinian period

of Hagia Sophia was achieved. Neither during Scheineder period nor the following

period excavation informations are qualified enough to understand Hagia Sophia II.

Hagia Sophia is considered as a rectangular planned building, expanded lenghtwise

with a wooden jerkinhead with reference to the churches of early Byzantium period.

However, with the outcome of the limited excavations, the building is rather 5 nave

with mozaic-based ground atrium and later turned into 4 columned propylion. It’s

also understood that the ground of the church is 2m under ground of present

churches. Researchers widely accepted that the frontiers of Theodosius period Hagia

Sophia was not much different from the today’s Hagia Sophia, even if it happens, it’s

only a slight difference. As a result, to have a better understanding about the pre-

Justinian period of Saint Sophia more excavations and research studies are required.

11

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akgündüz, A., (2005). Üç Devirde Bir Mabed Ayasofya, Osmanlı Araştırmaları

Vakfı, İstanbul.

Barsanti, C., Guiglia, A., (2010). The Sculptures of the Ayasofya Muzesi in Istanbul.

A Short Guide, Ege Yayınları, İstanbul.

Cimok, F., (1995). Hagia Sophia, A Turizm Yayınları, İstanbul.

Diker, H. H., (2010). Belgeler Işığında Ayasofya’nın Geçirdiği Onarımlar, Doktora

Tezi, Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Istanbul,

Turkey.

Eyice, S., (1984). Ayasofya I, Yapı Kredi Yayınları, İstanbul.

Freely J., Çakmak, A. S., (2005). İstanbul’un Bizans Anıtları, Y.K.Y., İstanbul.

Kandemir, İ., (2004). Ulu Mabed Ayasofya, Ekip Matbaa, İstanbul.

Mainstone, R. J., (1997). Hagia Sophia, Architecture, Structure and Liturgy of

Justinian’s Great Church, Thames and Hudson, London

Smith, C., (1987). Cyriacus of Ancona's Seven Drawings of Hagia Sophia, The Art

Bulletin, Vol. 69, No.1, s. 16-32.

Türkoğlu, S., (2002). Ayasofya’nın Öyküsü, Yazıcı Basım Yayıncılık, İzmir.

Url-1<http://www.focusmm.com>, date of obtained: 22.10.2011.

Url-2 <http://romeartlover.tripod.com>, date of obtained: 22.10.2011.

Url-3 <http://ukar.ff.cuni.cz>, date of obtained: 22.10.2011.

Yücel, E., (1986). Ayasofya Müzesi, Akbank Yayınları, İstanbul, 1986.

Wiener, M. W., (2001). İstanbul’un Tarihsel Topograyası, Çev. Ülker Sayın, Yapı

Kredi Yayınları, İstanbul.