Byzantino Slavica Lxix 1 - 2: Revue Internationale Des Études Byzantines

BYZANTINO´
SLAVICA
R E V U E I N T E R N AT I O N A L E
D E S É T U D E S BYZ A N T I N E S
LXIX 2011
1--2
B Y Z A N T I N O S L A V I C A
REVUE INTERNATIONALE DES ÉTUDES BYZANTINES
fondée en 1929
TOME LXIX (2011) 1-2, 3 supplementum
Publiée par
l’Institut slave de l’Académie des sciences de la République Tchèque
sous la direction de
LUBOMÍRA HAVLÍKOVÁ
Comité de rédaction
Petr BALCÁREK, Vlastimil DRBAL, Julie JANČÁRKOVÁ,
Markéta KULHÁNKOVÁ, Kateřina LOUDOVÁ, Pavel MILKO, Štefan PILÁT
Comité international de lecture
Stefan ALBRECHT (Mainz), Michail V. BIBIKOV (Moscou), Růžena DOSTÁLOVÁ (Prague),
Axinia DŽUROVA (Sofia), Simon FRANKLIN (Cambridge), Wolfram HÖRANDNER (Vienne),
Michel KAPLAN (Paris), Taxiarchis KOLIAS (Athènes), Ljubomir MAKSIMOVIĆ (Belgrade),
Paolo ODORICO (Paris), Jonathan SHEPARD (Oxford)
Prière d’adresser toute correspondance, ainsi que les manuscrits, les revues en
échange et les livres pour compte-rendu, à la rédaction de la revue à l’adresse
BYZANTINOSLAVICA
Slovansk˝ ˙stav AV »R, v. v. i.
Valentinská 1, 110 00 Praha 1, »esk· republika
e-mail: byzslav@slu.cas.cz; havlikova@slu.cas.cz
http://www.slu.cas.cz/byzantinoslavica.html
Conditions d’abbonement:
La diffusion en République Tchèque et en République Slovaque est assurée par
EUROSLAVICA – distribuce publikací, e-mail: euroslavica@volny.cz
La diffusion dans tous les autres pays est assurée par
Kubon & Sagner Buchexport-import GmbH, Abonement "Byzantinoslavica",
D-80328 München;
fax: +49(0) 89 54218-218, e-mail: postmaster@kubon-sagner.de
La revue paraît dans la maison d’édition
EUROSLAVICA, Celetná 12, CZ-110 00 Praha 1
ISSN 0007–7712 Registrováno u MK ČR pod č. E 1092
© Slovansk˝ ˙stav AV »R, v. v. i. 2011

B Y Z A N T I N O S L A V I C A
REVUE INTERNATIONALE DES ÉTUDES BYZANTINES
Publiée par
l’Institut slave de l’Académie des sciences de la République Tchèque
sous la direction de
LUBOMÍRA HAVLÍKOVÁ
Comité de rédaction
Petr BALCÁREK, Vlastimil DRBAL, Julie JANČÁRKOVÁ,
Markéta KULHÁNKOVÁ, Kateřina LOUDOVÁ, Pavel MILKO, Štefan PILÁT
Comité international de lecture
Stefan ALBRECHT (Mainz), Michail V. BIBIKOV (Moscou), Růžena DOSTÁLOVÁ (Prague),
Axinia DŽUROVA (Sofia), Simon FRANKLIN (Cambridge), Wolfram HÖRANDNER (Vienne),
Michel KAPLAN (Paris), Taxiarchis KOLIAS (Athènes), Ljubomir MAKSIMOVIĆ (Belgrade),
Paolo ODORICO (Paris), Jonathan SHEPARD (Oxford)
La revue Byzantinoslavica est citée par ERIH et Scopus
LXIX / 1-2
PRAGUE 2011
© Slovanský ústav AV ČR, v. v. i., 2011
T A B L E D E S M A T I È R E S
ET RÉSUMÉS DES ARTICLES
d e l a L X I X ème a n n é e ( 2 0 1 1 / 1 - 2 )
Milada Paulová – 120e anniversaire de sa naissance (L. H a v l í k o v á ) . . . . 9
articles
Alenka CEDILNIK (Ljubljana)
Der römisch-gotische Friedensschluss im Jahre 382 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Adam IZDEBSKI (Warsaw)
The Slavs’ political institutions and the Byzantine policies (ca. 530-650) . . 50
Elena Ene D-VASILESCU (Oxford)
A Face to Face Encounter: The God-Humanity relationship as reflected
in the icons of the Eastern Christian (Orthodox) Church . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Efi RAGIA (Athens)
The geography of the provincial administration of the Byzantine
empire (ca. 600-1200): I. 2. Apothekai of the Balkans and of the
islands of the Aegean Sea (7th-8th c.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Maciej KOKOSZKO ñ Katarzyna GIBEL (£Ûdü)
Photius and Eustathius of Thessalonica on Greek cuisine intricacies,
or a few words on abyrtake (PâõñôÜêç) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Regina KOYCHEVA (Sofia)
Traces de la langue des deux saints égaux aux Apôtres, Cyrille et
Méthode, et leurs élèves (Nouveaux fragments de l’acrostiche du
canon funèbre en ancien bulgare du sixième ton) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Marek MEŠKO (Bratislava – Princeton)
Notes sur la chronologie de la guerre des Byzantins contre les
Petchénègues (1083-1091) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Angeliki PAPAGEORGIOU (Athens)
ïj äc ëýêïé ©ò ÐÝñóáé: The image of the “Turks” in the reign
of John II Komnenos (1118-1143) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149
Ioannis POLEMIS (Athens)
Notes on the Inaugural Oration of the Patriarch Michael
of Anchialos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Elisabeth PILTZ (Uppsala)
King (kralj) Milutin and the Paleologan tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Georgi ATANASOV (Silistra)
Les monastères rupestres le long de la rivière Suha,
dans la région de Dobrudja de Sud . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Jelena BOGDANOVI∆ (Greenville)
Regional Developments in Late Byzantine Architecture
and the Question of “Building Schools”. An Overlooked Case
of the Fourteenth-Century Churches from the Region of Skopje . . . . . 219
Walter K. HANAK (Shepherdstown)
Bucharest ms. No. 1385 and The Tale of Constantinople, 1453:
Some Reconsiderations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
édition critique
ßâîð ĚČËŇĹÍÎÂ (Ńîôč˙)
Ńëŕâ˙íńęčé ďĺðĺâîä Ńëîâŕ Čîŕííŕ Çëŕňîóńňŕ De sancto
hieromartyre Phoca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
comptes-rendus
Procopius Gazaeus. Opuscula rhetorica et oratoria (R. S t e f e c / Wien) . . . . . . . 369
Ph. B. PERRA, FÏ ËÝùí díáíôßïí ôyò ½ìéóåëÞíïõ. FÏ ðñþôïò âåíåôï-ïèùìáíéê’ò ðüëåìïò
êár ½ êáôÜëçøç ôï™ eëëáäéêï™ ÷þñïõ (1463-1479) (R. S t e f e c / Wien) . . . . . . 372
Palimpsestes et éditions de textes: les textes littéraires (R. S t e f e c / Wien) . . . . 374
Greek Manuscripts at Princeton, Sixth to Nineteenth Century. A Descriptive
Catalogue (R. S t e f e c / Wien) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
L’éducation au gouvernement et à la vie. La tradition des „Règles de vie“
de l’antiquité au moyen âge (R. D o s t á l o v á / Praha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
Anthony KALDELLIS, Hellenism in Byzantium. The transformation of Greek Iden-
tity and the Reception of the Classical Tradition (R. D o s t á l o v á / Praha) . 382
Petr BALCÁREK | »eskÈ zemÏ a Byzanc. Problematika byzantskÈho umÏlecko-
historickÈho vlivu [Die böhmischen Länder und Byzanz. Problematik
des byzantinischen kunsthistorischen Einflusses] (S. A l b r e c h t / Mainz) . . 384
King or Steward: leadership and diplomacy in late Byzantium. Tonia KIOUSSOPOULOU,
Basileus ê oikonomos: politikê exousia kai ideologia prin tên Alôsê [Basileus
or Oikonomos. Political Authority and Ideology Before the Fall
(of Constantinople)] (E. R u s s e l l / London) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386
Martin DIMNIK – Julijan DOBRINI∆, Medieval Slavic Coinages in the Balkans:
Numismatic History and Catalogue (R. Z a o r a l / Praha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387
notes informatives
Â. ŇÚĎĘÎÂŔ-ÇŔČĚÎÂŔ | “Áúëăŕðč ðîäîě...”. Ęîěčňîďóëčňĺ â ëĺňîďčńíŕňŕ
č čńňîðčîăðŕôńęŕňŕ ňðŕäčöč˙ (M. R a e v / Cambridge) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
Steven RUNCIMAN | The Lost Capital of Byzantium. The History of Mistra
and the Peloponnese (M. K o n e Ë n ˝ / Košice) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
p u b l i c a t i o n s r e ç u e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
l i s t e d e s c o l l a b o r a t e u r s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
résumés des articles
Milada Paulová. To the 120 Paulová’s birthday anniversary

Lubomíra HAVLIKOVÁ (Praha)
Historian and Byzantologist Milada Paulová (1891-1970) devoted her profes-
sional career and scientific work to the history of Southeast Europe, particular-
ly the South Slavic world. She mainly dealt with the modern period (World War
I and Czech-South Slavic relations) and the Middle Ages (the history of
Byzantine Empire). Of great importance in Paulová’s life was her meeting J.
Bidlo, professor of the medieval history at Charles University in Prague. Milada
Paulová defended her habilitation thesis on general history of Eastern Europe
and the Balkans at Prague Philosophical Faculty in 1925 and became the first
female Docent in Czechoslovakia. Ten years later, in 1935 she became the first
extraordinary female Professor and was granted full professorship in 1945 ex
post from 1939. As a Professor of Byzantology at Charles University in Prague,
she wrote many world-renowned studies. As the editor of the journal
Byzantinoslavica, she deserved credit for its post-war revival and its reputation
as an international journal, and also for the Byzantological bibliography that it
included.
Roman-Gothian peace treaty signed in the year 382

Alenka CEDILNIK (Ljubljana)
Dealing with the course of events which led to the peace treaty signed by
Theodosius and the Goths on October 3rd 382, the author seeks to call attention
to the possibilities raised by the available sources but so far left unexamined and
indicates some possible interpretations, which, however, can not be proved with
no more certainty than the prevailing view. It is first of all a question of the
peace treaty offered by Gratianus not only to the Therving group governed by
Fritigern but also to the Greuthungi, Huns and Alans of Alatheus and Saphrax’
group shortly after the crushing defeat suffered by the Roman army in the Battle
of Adrianople, that means as early as 378, of the attack of Alatheus and Saphrax’
group on Athanaric, who was staying with his Thervingi in the Carpathian area,
before the attack of the same group on Pannonia in the spring of 380, and of
the possibility, that the peace treaty signed by Theodosius and the Goths in 382
was concluded not only by the Therving group of Fritigern but also by the
Greuthungi, Huns and Alans of Alatheus and Saphrax’ group.
The Slavs’ political institutions and the Byzantine policies (ca. 530-650)
Adam IZDEBSKI (Warsaw)
The recent ethno-historical research on the Germanic and Slavic political tradi-
tions allowed the author to reconstruct the early Slavs’ political institutions with
the use of the Byzantine sources. The role of the assembly (wiec) and leadership
patterns are discussed. Then, the Byzantine incapability of dealing with the early
Slavs is compared to the Frankish successes. Finally, the implications of histori-
cal genetics for the study of the early Slavs are considered.
A Face to Face Encounter: The God-Humanity relationship as reflected

in the icons of the Eastern Christian (Orthodox) Church
Elena Ene D-VASILESCU (Oxford)
This paper explores the theory of participation expressed by, among others, Ss.
Athanasius (c. 295-373), Basil the Great (c. 330-379), Maximus the Confessor (c. 5
Résumés des articles
580-662) and, in the twentieth century, the theologian Dumitru Stãniloae (1903-
1993). It presents one way in which participation happens, and states that the
fact that God works in the world through His energies carried out by the Holy
Spirit makes possible a ‘face to face encounter’ between Him and humankind.
One way in which this process is concretised in Eastern Orthodox Christianity is
through the practice of honouring icons. The text explains the ‘devices’ active
in the respective liturgical art during this God-humankind encounter. Among
these are the model of Trinitarian love and a compositional technique that pro-
duces in the viewer ‘simultaneity of seeing’.
The geography of the provincial administration of the Byzantine empire

(ca. 600-1200): I. 2. Apothekai of the Balkans and of the islands of the
Aegean Sea (7th-8th c.)
Efi RAGIA (Athens)
This contribution examines the geographic distribution of the warehouses and
vassilika kommerkia of the European provinces of the Empire. In administrative
terms the model that was already in use in Asia Minor was transferred to the
Balkans. The fact that the events had resulted into the collapse of the Later
Roman administrative model in the north Balkans is the apparent reason why
instead of warehouses of provinces there appear to have functioned only ware-
houses of cities. The geographic pattern of the Balkan warehouses indicates that
Byzantium held dominion of the provinces of the south, of Hellas, Crete and of
the province of Nesoi.
Photius and Eustathius of Thessalonica on Greek cuisine intricacies, or a

few words on abyrtake (PPâõñôÜêç)
Maciej KOKOSZKO – Katarzyna GIBEL (Łódź)
The present commentary is aimed at elucidating the terms made use of by
Photius in the entry abyrtake (PâõñôÜêç) included in his Lexicon (ËÝîåùí
óõíáãùãÞ). The authors of the study maintain that abyrtake was a sauce of Medic
(i.e. Persian) origin, which might have been known to the Greeks even before the
6th century but eventually became popular in the 4th BC. It was a luxury dish
consisting of vinegar (—îïò), cress (êÜñäáìïí), garlic (óêüñïäïí), mustard (óßíáðõ),
raisins (óôáößäåò) and salted capers (êÜððÜñéò).
A Trace of the Language of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Equal to the

Apostles, and Their Disciples (Newly Found Fragments of the Acrostic of
the Old Bulgarian Funeral Canon on the Sixth Tone)
Regina KOYCHEVA (Sofia)
The article announces unknown fragments of the acrostic of the Slavonic funer-
al canon found by P. Penkova. These passages are the first actual proof that the
copies of the canon really bear traces of an original (non-translated) Slavonic
chant. The acrostic fragments display both language tendencies young for the
ninth century (when the canon was probably written) and archaic features possi-
bly leading back to the Mission of St. Cyril and St. Method in Great Moravia.
Notes on the Chronology of the Byzantine-Pecheneg War (1083-1091)

Marek MEŠKO (Bratislava – Princeton)
More than a century ago a German scholar K. Dieter published an incentive arti-
cle about the chronology of the Byzantine-Pecheneg war during the reign of the
emperor Alexius I Comnenus. Due to the patchy character of the evidence
6 inherent in the Alexiad written by his daughter Anna Comnena some fifty years
later, a reassessment of this chronology is extremely intricate. With the help of

new evidence (e.g. including research of the astronomical data connected with
the partial solar eclipse in 1087 carried out by K. F. D’Occhiepo), the more like-
ly data of the beginning of this conflict – in 1083 rather than in 1086 – could be
introduced. In addition a more reliable chronology of the events during the
years 1088-1090 (e.g. the well known passage of the count Robert of Flanders)
could be established.
ïj äc ëýêïé ©ò ÐÝñóáé: The image of the “Turks” in the reign of John II

Komnenos (1118-1143)
Angeliki PAPAGEORGIOU (Athens)
The aim of this paper is to study the image of the Turks during the reign of John
II Komnenos. Among the various terms used by the Greek sources to character-
ize the Turks may be found very common ones (e.g. barbarians) as well as one
or two that could be considered unicum for the period in question (such us the
comparison of the Turks to the wolves, which forms the core of the paper). The
author concludes that the image of the Turks was created mainly on the battle-
field and also stemmed from their moral qualities (as perceived by the
Byzantines), qualities that were often portrayed by comparison to animals and
physical phenomena. The image of the Turks is more complete than that of
other peoples; however, despite the existence of a few positive traits that are
mentioned in the sources, the main Byzantine perception of the Turks during
the period in question is clearly negative.
Notes on the Inaugural Oration of the Patriarch Michael of Anchialos

Ioannis POLEMIS (Athens)
A new date for the Inaugural Oration of Michael of Anchialos, published by R.
Browning, is put forward on the basis of a new investigation of the historical
events recorded in the text: the Lecture in question was delivered not in
1165/1167, as scholars had maintained so far, but a short time after 1151. Some
echoes from the works of Philo Judaeus in the text are also detected.
King (kralj) Milutin and the Paleologan tradition

Elisabeth PILTZ (Uppsala)
During the period of kralj Milutin´s reign in Serbia the relations with Byzantium
were very vivid. He married the infant Simonis of five years and was favoured by
emperor Andronikos II Paleologos and especially by his wife, the mother of
Simonis. Important Byzantine artists worked in Serbia and represented Milutin
and his consort as a Byzantine despot with Byzantine insignia. Important were
the legations of Great logothete Theodor Metochites who has written reports of
these events.
Rock Monasteries on the Souha River in the South Dobroudja

Georgi ATANASOV (Silistra)
Within the confines of the Dorostol eparchy south of the Gollesh stronghold and
along the banks of the Souha River was conducted exploration on a colony of
rock monasteries. The center of the monks’ colony is represented by the “Gyaur
Evleri” monastery in proximity to the late-antique castle by the village of Ballick
(the late-antique Adinna), at the foots of which there are well manifested cultur-
al layers from the 5th-6th and 10th c. The big monasteries around Ballick attrib-
uted to the 5th-6th c. are explicitly cynobian with expressive allusions to Syrian
influences in the architectural plans as well as the liturgical performance. Those 7
situated to the north, like Gollesh, Brestnitsa and Onnogur, as well as some to
the south, like the Hittovo monastery, are small cloisters of the skit type related
to the monastic center of “Gyaur Evleri”. There are also some documented her-
mit and recluse cells. The colony was deserted simultaneously with the nearby
castles toward the end of the 6th and fully abandoned in the 7th c. but life in
these parts was revived in the period of the First Bulgarian Kingdom during the
10th c.
Regional Developments in Late Byzantine Architecture and the Question

of “Building Schools”. An Overlooked Case of the Fourteenth-Century
Churches from the Region of Skopje
Jelena BOGDANOVIĆ (Greenville)
The parallel existence of several centers as the generators and recipients of archi-
tectural influence in the wider region of Byzantine Macedonia, such as
Thessaloniki and Ohrid, obscured the significance of the city of Skopje, which
flourished as a short-lived imperial city for almost 50 years (1346-1392). In this
paper a number of post-1330 churches from the region of Skopje, F.Y.R. of
Macedonia ñ St. Nicholas in Ljuboten; the Holy Saviour (later the Presentation of
the Virgin) in KuËeviöte; St. Nicholas in äiöevo; the Assumption of the Virgin in
MatejiË; St. Demetrios at Markov Manastir, in Suöice; Assumption of the Virgin in
Matka; St. Andrew on the Treska; and now ruined churches at DeviË and Modriöte
on the Treska ñ are grouped because of related stylistic features and proportions.
The churches comprise an overlooked paradigmatic ìbuilding schoolî significant
for further understanding of questions of style and building workshops in the
regional developments of Late Byzantine architecture (ca. 1261-1453) and, espe-
cially after the 1330s, marked by a building decline in Constantinople.
Contextualizing this ìbuilding schoolî locates the path of the development of the
so-called ìMorava Schoolî (ca. 1370s-1459), the final phase of Byzantine archi-
tecture, through Skopje.
Bucharest ms. No. 1385 and The Tale of Constantinople, 1453: Some
Reconsiderations
Walter K. HANAK (Shepherdstown)
The Bucharest ms. No. 1385, The Tale of Constantinople, in a number passages
stands in marked contrast to the several Slavonic renditions, the Troitse-Sergiev
Lavra ms. No. 773, Hilandar Slavic ms. 280, and the Chronograph Redaction of
1512. This study contrasts the accounts concerning a patriarch, Justinian, a wife,
and the death of Constantine XI, comparing the similarities and differences
among the passages. The author posits that the Bucharest ms. is a late seven-
teenth-century rendition.
étude critique
The Slavonic Translation of St. John Chrysostom´s Homily De sancto
hieromartyre Phoca
Yavor MILTENOV (Sofia)
The Slavonic version of St. John Chrysostom’s homily De sancto hieromartyre
Phoca (BHG 1537, CPG 4364) emerged in the beginning of the 10th c. in
Bulgaria and came to us in the longer redaction of the Zlatostruy (Chrysorrhoas)
collection. The present study is devoted to a comparison of the witnesses, build-
ing a stemma codicum and identifying the characteristics of the Slavonic arche-
type. Attached, an edition of the Slavonic version (according to seven copies)
8 and parallel Greek text is being included.
Regional Developments in Late
Byzantine Architecture and the
Question of “Building Schools”
An Overlooked Case of the Fourteenth-Century
Churches from the Region of Skopje *
Jelena BOGDANOVI∆ (Greenville)
The question of style has been marginalized in modern scholarship

on architectural history and, in particular, in general studies of Byzantine
architecture, where the chronological-historical approach prevails.1
Though the chronological-historical overview of the architectural her-
itage is documentary and perhaps the most acceptable way of presenting
the plethora of material, it often fails to provide subtle insights into archi-
tectural and functional qualities as well as contextual realities. More than
* This article is an expanded and revised version of papers ìThe Role of Mid-
Fourteenth Century Skopje in the Development of Byzantine Church Archi-
tectureî and ìThe Church of the Assumption of the Virgin at MatejiË. Regional
Re-interpretation of Middle Byzantine Constantinopolitan Architecture in the
Palaeologan Era?î given at the Round Table on Palaeologan Culture organized by
Prof. Elizabeth Jeffereys at Oxford University and at the 29th Annual Byzantine
Studies Conference (now Byzantine Studies Association of North America) in
June and October of 2003, respectively. I benefited from valuable comments from
the audience at these public presentations. My work on regional building schools
started in Prof. Slobodan ∆urËiÊí seminar Late Byzantine Architecture: Questions of
Style and Regionalism at Princeton University in fall 2002. In addition to Prof.
∆urËiÊ, for their support, critical advice, and for sharing with me their biblio-
graphical and photo documentation I also owe debt of gratitude to Dr. Ljubica D.
Popovich, Dr. Ida SinkeviÊ, Dr. Milan Radujko, Dr. Ivan DrpiÊ, Dr. Ljubomir Mila-
noviÊ, Nebojöa StankoviÊ, Dr. Marina MihaljeviÊ, Dr. Jelena Trkulja, Dr. Kate
LaMere, Dr. Duöan DaniloviÊ, Vojislav BogdanoviÊ, Erin Kalish, Joyce Newman,
Dr. Dorothy Muller, Dr. Erguen Lafli, and Linda Ratliff. Any potential mistakes,
however, are unintentional and remain my responsibility.
1 R. KRAUTHEIMER with S. ∆UR»I∆ in a seminal book, Early Christian and Byzantine
Architecture, New Haven-London 1986 [1965] organized the corpus of Byzantine
architecture chronologically-historically, geographically, and typologically. The
approach is encyclopedic and empirical, in its essence descriptive, and often
detached from the particular objects and their artistic context. The architectural
material is usually divided into clearly formulated chronological groups, defined
by historically documented events. The geographical distribution of the monu-
ments and architectural building types re-group the material on a sublevel.
Chapter five, Church Building after Justinian and its integral parts The Cross-Domed
Church, and The Borderlands, Mesopotamia and the Tur Abdin, Egypt and Nubia, The
Balkans, Bulgaria, Armenia and Georgia, illustrate the approach. C. MANGO, Byzan-
tine Architecture, New York 1976 introduces a thematic approach in the two chap-
ters dealing with building materials and techniques and cities, while the essential
parts of the work follow the chronological-historical approach as in Krautheimerís 219
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
a millennium-long Byzantine tradition is often studied through the focus

on a single city, Constantinople. Other centers of architectural produc-
tion, if acknowledged, are considered tangential and provincial. Although
not comprehensive, the contextualized studies of regional architectural
developments, however, can enhance and replenish our understanding of
Byzantine architecture.2 Often hidden under the titles of ìregionalî or
ìbuilding schools,î these alternative approaches are based on stylistic
analysis.3 Regional architectural developments in the Late Byzantine peri-
od are especially revealing because Constantinopolitan architecture never
fully recovered its glory after the Latin occupation (1204-1261).4 After the
book. L. RODLEY, Byzantine Art and Architecture, Cambridge 2001 [1994] organizes
architecture, sculpture, monumental arts, minor arts, and illuminated manu-
scripts chronologically, and concludes about the arts of the given period at the
end of each chapter. Categories such as Armenian art and architecture or By-
zantine ceramics comprise the appendices since they did not fit the general out-
line of the book. For an overview of prevalent typological, functional, symbolic or
ideological, and socio-economic methodological approaches in Byzantine ar-
chitecture see: C. MANGO, Approaches to Byzantine Architecture, Muqarnas 8 (1991)
40-44.
2 While acknowledging flaws in research and need for its improvement, archi-
tectural historians recovered interest in style in Byzantine church architecture:
H. BUCHWALD, Lascarid Architecture, J÷B 28 (1979) 261-296; id., Form, Style and
Meaning in Byzantine Church Architecture, Aldershot ñ Brookfield, Vt. c. 1999;
R. OUSTERHOUT, Constantinople, Bithynia, and Regional Developments in Later Palaeo-
logan Architecture, in: The Twilight of Byzantium, eds. S. ∆urËiÊ ñ D. Mouriki,
Princeton 1991, 75-91; S. ∆UR»I∆, Middle Byzantine Architecture on Cyprus: Provincial
or Regional? Nicosia 2000; id., The Role of Late Byzantine Thessalonike in Church
Architecture in the Balkans, DOP 57 (2003) 65-84. Detailed studies on urban and
artistic life in Constantinople are promising further contributions in stylistic
analysis of Byzantine architecture: P. MAGDALINO, Studies on the History and
Topography of Byzantine Constantinople, Aldershot ñ Brookfield, Vt. 2007; Byzantine
Constantinople: Monuments, Topography and Everyday Life. Papers from the
International Workshop held at Bog¢ aziçi University, Istanbul, 7-10 April 1999,
ed. N. Necipog¢ lu, Leiden ñ Boston 2001; Constantinople and Its Hinterland. Papers
from the Twenty-Seventh Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Oxford, April
1993, eds. C. Mango ñ G. Dagron, Aldershot ñBrookfield, Vt. 1995.
3 Functional, symbolic, iconographic, socio-economic, socio-politic, and other
approaches deriving from disciplines other than art and architectural history
occasionally provide astonishing, but certainly not comprehensive and final
results. Despite encouraging results which these alternative approaches pro-
duced, scholars remain skeptical about fruitful contributions from stylistic analy-
ses of Byzantine arts: A. P. KAZHDAN, Style, in: ODB 3, Oxford 1991, 1970. A par-
ticular problem with the concept of style in studies of Byzantine architecture is
that it is often borrowed from non-Byzantine architecture or from the other arts
and literature. Conclusively, such an approach leads to the untenable assumption
that the styles of Byzantine art and architecture developed simultaneously. The
approach has been predominantly used to determine the date or level of skill
used for a particular group of monuments or parallel development of architec-
ture and monumental painting. See: R. OUSTERHOUT, An Apologia for Byzantine
Architecture, Gesta 35/1 (1996) 21-33; id., Contextualizing the Later Churches of
Constantinople. Suggested Methodologies and a Few Examples, DOP 54 (2000) 241-250.
4 Though surviving Constantinopolitan churches constructed after the
Byzantine re-conquest of 1261 show limited stylistic coherence, it has been pro-
220 posed to group them into those built until 1300 and those built between 1300 and
Regional Developments in Late Byzantine Architecture and the Question...
Fig. 1 Map of the Balkans with the location of civic and artistic centers in the
Late Byzantine period (Drawing J. BogdanoviÊ)
1330s significant construction projects in Constantinople virtually ceased.

Wealthy patrons of architecture who supported the taste for Constan-
tinopolitan ideals were not in Constantinople any more. Royal and aristo-
cratic patrons in the Balkans, who gained their wealth mostly through
trade and the exploitation of local mines, emerged as an elite affluent
enough to build in Constantinopolitan styles. Yet, contested bordering
territories and language barriers often preclude the larger image of
regional architectural developments in the late medieval Balkans.5
Several geographically-related centers existed in the wider region of
Byzantine Macedonia (Fig. 1). Thessaloniki and Ohrid were the genera-
1330: S. ∆UR»I∆, Religious Settings of the Late Byzantine Sphere, in: Byzantium: Faith
and Power (1261-1557), ed. H. C. Evans, New York ñ New Haven 2004, 65-94, with
references to S. EYICE, Son Devir Byzans Mim‚risi. Istanbulída Palaiologosílar Devri
Antilari, Istanbul 1980; J. BOGDANOVI∆, Late Byzantine religious architecture in
Constantinople / ÕóôåñïâõæáíôéíÞ íáïäïìßá óôçí Êùíóôáíôéíïýðïëç, in: Encyclopaedia
of the Hellenic World, Constantinople (2008) URL: <http://kassiani.fhw.gr/
l.aspx?id=10893, with older references.
5 Millet defined various ìregional schoolsî in the Balkans, originally in refer-
ence to painting and then to architecture: G. MILLET, Reserches sur líiconographie de
lí…vangelie, Paris 1916; id., LíÈcole grecque dans líarchitecture byzantine, Paris 1916; id.,
Líancient art serbe. Les Èglises, Paris 1919. With the 19th-century emergence of new
countries in the Balkans, as well as after the latest wars in the late 20th century,
the concept of the ìregional schoolsî was linked with the topic of ìnational
schoolsî and subsequently obscured with notions of national and nationalistic
identities, with aggravating negative overtones. This underestimates the crucial 221
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
tors and recipients of architectural influence, which obscured the signifi-

cance of Skopje, another city in the region located on the road connect-
ing Serbia to the north and Thessaloniki to the south.6 This paper recon-
siders the question of regional developments in Late Byzantine architec-
ture in the Balkans and identifies a number of post-1330 churches from
the region around Skopje, F.Y.R. of Macedonia as an overlooked paradig-
matic ìbuilding school.î
The churches of St. Nicholas in Ljuboten; the Holy Saviour (later the
Presentation of the Virgin) in KuËeviöte; St. Nicholas in äiöevo; the
Assumption of the Virgin in MatejiË; St. Demetrios at Markov Manastir, in
Suöice; Assumption of the Virgin in Matka; St. Andrew on the Treska, and
two small-scale now ruined churches at DeviË and Modriöte on the banks
of the river Treska, have received only sporadic scholarly attention (Tab.
1).7 Often praised for their high-quality paintings, these churches have
recognition of the active processes of architectural achievements as discursive out-

comes between the affluent patrons and workshops. See B. PANTELI∆, The Creation
of Style in Serbian Architecture and Its Political Implications, JSAH 56/1 (1997) 16-41.
6 ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above) 65-84, suggested that
Skopje was major center of regional architectural production after the 1340s.
7 Pre-Second World War archeological and preservation work on the churches
resulted in several scattered articles and reports: P. J. POPOVI∆, Prilog za studiju
stare srpske arhitekture, Starinar 3 (1923) 103-104; é. TATI∆, Arhitektonski spomenici u
Skopskoj Crnoj Gori, GSND 1 (1926) 351-364; id., Arhitektura Sv. Nikole kod Ljubotena,
GSND 2 (1927) 109-124; id., Tragom velike proölosti: Svetogorska pisma i monografske
studije stare srpske arhitekture, Beograd 1929; id., Arhitektonski spomenici u skopskoj
Crnoj Gori ñ Sv. Nikita, GSND 12 (1933) 127-134; id., 1337-1937. Arhitektura i
ûivopis hrama Sv. Nikole, kod sela Ljubotena (Skopska Crna Gora), Skoplje 1937; N.
OKUNEV, Gradja za istoriju srpske umetnosti ñ Crkva Svete Bogorodice ñ MateiË, GSND
7-8 (1930) 89-113; Dj. BOäKOVI∆, Opravka MetejiÊa, GSND 9 (1932) 220-221; id.,
Sruöena je i stara kapela u MetejiÊu, Starinar 14 (1939) 153-156; A. DEROKO, MatejËa,
Starinar 8-9 (1933-1934) 84-89; F. MESESNEL, Stari srpski spomenici, in: Spomenica
dvadestpetogodiönjice oslobodjenja Srbije 1912-1937, ed. A. JovanoviÊ, Skoplje
1937, 361-385; R. LJUBINKOVI∆, Srpski crkveni spomenici u klisuri reke Treske, Skopje
1940.
Since the Second World War, these churches have been examined primarily on
account of their high-quality painting: V. R. PETKOVI∆, Pregled crkvenih spomenika
kroz povesnicu srpskog naroda, Beograd 1950; M. ∆OROVI∆-LJUBINKOVI∆, Crkva Svete
Nedelje nad klisurom Treske i problem njenog datovanja, ZZSK 2/1 (1952) 95-106; A.
DEROKO, Monumentalna i dekorativna arhitektura u srednjevekovnoj Srbiji
[Líarchitecture monumentale et dÈcorative dans la Serbie du Moyen Age] Beograd 1953;
Spomenici za srednovekovnata i ponovata istorija na Makedonija 1, ed. V. Moöin,
Skopje 1975; Z. RASKOLSKA-NIKOLOVSKA, O ktitorskim portretima u crkvi Svete Bogo-
rodice u KuËeviötu, Zograf 16 (1985) 41-54; I. DJORDJEVI∆, Zidno slikarsvo srpske
vlastele u doba NemanjiÊa, Beograd 1994; S. CVETKOVSKI, Za ktitorskata kompozicija od
MatejËe, in: Godishen zbornik na Filozofskiot fakultet na Univerzitetot ÑSv. Kiril i
Metodijì vo Skopje (1996) 525-537; V. J. DJURI∆ ñ G. BABI∆-DJORDJEVI∆, Srpska umet-
nost u srednjem veku II, Beograd 1997; J. PROLOVI∆, Die Kirche des Heiligen Andreas an
der Treska: Geschichte, Architektur und Malerei einer palaiologenzeitlichen Stiftung des ser-
bischen Prinzen Andreas, Wien 1997; E. DIMITROVA, MatejËe, Skopje 2002;
M. RADUJKO, éivopis proËelja i linete juûnog ulaza Svetog Nikole u Ljubotenu, Zograf 32
(2009) 101-116.
The monograph about Markov Manastir published in 1925 remains the only com-
prehensive architectural study of the churches mentioned: L. MIRKOVI∆ ñ é.
222 TATI∆, Markov Manastir, Novi Sad 1925. D. CORNAKOV, Makedonski manastiri
Table 1 Comparative List of ìSkopjeî Churches (J. BOGDANOVI∆)

J
Dateȱ Placeȱ Dedication Donorȱ Planȱ Sectionȱ
1337ȱ Ljubotenȱ/ȱ Sv.ȱNikolaȱȱ Ladyȱ
Bardovciȱȱ ȱ Danicaȱ
SkopskaȱCrnaȱ St.ȱNicholasȱ
Gora,ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ
13kmȱSkopjeȱ
c.ȱ1330Ȭ37ȱ Ku²evišteȱ Holyȱ Ladyȱ
ȱ SkopskaȱCrnaȱ Saviourȱ Marenaȱ
Gora,ȱ ȱ withȱ
ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ Presentationȱ children:ȱ
16kmȱSkopjeȱ ofȱtheȱ Arsen,ȱ
Vladislavaȱ ȱ
Virginȱ
Radoslavȱ
c.ȱ1334ȱȱ Šiševoȱ/ȱNirȱȱ Sv.ȱNikolaȱ KingȱDušan
ȱ Treskaȱ Šiševskiȱ laterȱ
b.1380ȱ SkopskaȱCrnaȱ ȱ KingȱMarko
Gora,ȱ St.ȱNicholasȱ ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ
~1346ȱ Skopjeȱ Vavedenjeȱ Kingȱ ȱ ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ
ȱ
Milutinȱ ȱ ȱ
destr.ȱinȱ Presentationȱ
16thȱc.ȱ ofȱtheȱ
ȱȱȱȱ/ȱȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ
KingȱDušan
Virginȱ
c.ȱ1350ȱ Mateji²ȱ Uspenjeȱ Empressȱ
SkopskaȱCrnaȱ Bogorodiceȱ Jelena,ȱ
Gora,ȱ ȱ ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ Assumptionȱ wifeȱofȱ
ofȱtheȱ Emperorȱ
Virginȱ Dušanȱȱ
ȱ
1346/7ȱ Markovȱ Sv.ȱDimitrije Kingȱ

ȱ Manastirȱ ȱ Vukašinȱ
ȱ Sušiceȱȱ St.ȱ ȱȱȱȱ/ȱȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ Demetriosȱ Kingȱ
c.ȱ1371ȱ
17kmȱSkopjeȱ Markoȱȱ
ȱ
b.ȱ1371ȱ Matkaȱ/ȱ Uspenjeȱ Noblemanȱ

Glumovoȱ Bogorodiceȱ Bojko,ȱsonȱ
Treskaȱ ȱ ofȱladyȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ Assumptionȱ Danicaȱ(cf.ȱ
12kmȱSkopjeȱ ofȱtheȱ Ljuboten)ȱ
Virginȱ
1389ȱ Treskaȱ Sv.ȱAndrejaȱ Princeȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ Andreja,ȱ
18kmȱSkopjeȱ St.ȱAndrewȱ Kingȱ
Marko’sȱ
brotherȱ
?ȱ Devi²,ȱ ȱ Princessȱ
ȱ F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ Deva,ȱȱ
probablyȱ ?ȱ Kingȱ ?
Marko’sȱ
afterȱ1350ȱ
sisterȱ
?ȱ Modrišteȱ ȱ ȱ
ȱ F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ ȱ
probablyȱȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?
afterȱ1350ȱ
223
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 2 Church of the Dormition, GraËanica monastery near Priötina,

1311-1321, southern faÁade and floor plan (S. ∆UR»I∆, GraËanica, King
Milutinís Church and Its Place in Late Byzantine Architecture, University Park ñ
London 1979, Figs. 4, 10)
never been considered as a unique architectural group. KRAUTHEIMER

does not mention any of these churches in his book on Byzantine archi-
tecture, while Mango discusses the churches in MatejiË and Ljuboten as
architecturally unimpressive illustrations of ìseparatist tendencies which
led to the disintegration of the ephemeral ëEmpire of the Serbs and the
Greeksí.î8 A number of architectural historians assessed the architecture
[Macedonian Monasteries], Skopje 1995 provides an overview of the monasteries of

Marko, St. Andrew, and MatejËe within a selected number of other medieval
monasteries in the territories of F.Y.R. of Macedonia. V. KORA∆, Spomenici monu-
mentalne srpske arhitekture XIV veka u Povardarju [Les monuments de líarchitecture serbe
du XIVe siècle dans la région de Povardarje], Beograd 2003 selects churches built by
the Serbian patrons in the region of the river Vardar and examines in great detail
the unique architectural features of the churches in Ljuboten, the Presentation
of the Virgin in KuËeviöte, MatejiË, Markov Manastir in Suöice, and St. Andrew on
the Treska.
8 KRAUTHEIMER, Early (as in note 1 above); MANGO, Byzantine (as in note 1
224 above), 319.
of these churches, however.9 If mentioned within any stylistic group, these

churches have been placed within the so-called ìSerbo-Byzantine school,î
a general classification for the emulation of the art and architecture of
Constantinople by the Serbs introduced by Gabriel MILLET, a pioneer in
Byzantine studies.10 ìSerbo-Byzantine schoolî has been applied ever since
to almost all churches built during the reign of King Stefan Uroö II
Milutin (1282-1321) and his successors. An example of the ìSerbo-
Byzantineî architecture is the church at GraËanica monastery near
Priötina (1311-1321) (Fig. 2).11 As the extension of the ìSerbo-Byzantineî
style, MILLET also defined ìMorava schoolî (ca. 1370s-1459) as a distinctive
national style of medieval Serbian architecture built before the Ottoman
conquest.12 Examples of the ìMoravaî architecture are the churches of St.
Stephen in Kruöevac and of the Ascension at Ravanica, both built by
Prince Stefan Lazar HrebeljanoviÊ (1370-1389). Lavishly decorated in
stone sculpture on the exterior, these churches in the Morava valley are
triconch in plan (Figs. 3-4). MILLET studied geographic locations where tri-
conch churches prevailed and suggested that the developmental path of
Late Byzantine architectural styles in the region should connect Mt. Athos
at the south and the Morava valley on the north, via Skopje.13
MILLETís study of regional schools, thus, emphasized the typological
approach, which remains an important methodological approach for
organizing larger numbers of Byzantine churches. In this paper, however,
the consistent yet unique use of anachronistic stylistic features, along with
common proportions and volumetric relations, defines a new proposed
architectural group, temporarily entitled ìSkopjeî churches. The
ìSkopjeî churches are grouped via four distinct stylistic characteristics: 1)
9 POPOVI∆, Prilog (as in note 7 above) 103-104; OKUNEV, Gradja (as in note 7
above) 89-113; N. MAVRODINOV, Ednokorabnata i krstovidnata crkva po bulgarskite zemi
do kraja na XIV v., Sofija 1931, 108-109; DEROKO, MatejËa (as in note 7 above), 84-
89; id., Monumentalna (as in note 7 above), 181, 189; BOäKOVI∆, Opravka MetejiÊa
(as in note 7 above), 220-221; id., Sruöena je (as in note 7 above), 153-156;
PETKOVI∆, Pregled (as in note 7 above), 184-188; W. SAS-ZALOZIECKY, Die byzantini-
sche Baukunst in den Balkanl‰ndern und ihre Differenzierung unter abendl‰ndischen und
islamischen Mitwirkungen, M¸nchen 1955, 57-58; S. NENADOVI∆, Arhitektura u sred-
njovekovnoj Srbiji, Srpska pravoslavna crkva 1219-1969, Beograd 1969, 88; S. ∆UR»I∆,
Articulation of Church FaÁades during the First Half of the Fourteenth Century, in:
Vizantijska umetnost sredinom XIV veka, ed. S. PetkoviÊ, Beograd 1978, 17-27; id.,
GraËanica, King Milutinís Church and Its Place in Late Byzantine Architecture,
University Park ñ London 1979; id., Architecture in the Byzantine Sphere of Influence
around the Middle of the Fourteenth Century, in: DeËani i vizantijska umetnost sredi-
nom XIV veka, ed. V. J. DjuriÊ, Beograd 1989, 55-68; DIMITROVA, MatejËe (as in
note 7 above); KORA∆, Spomenici (as in note 7 above).
10 MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above) esp. chap. 2 and chap. 3 for-
mulated the ìSchool of Raöka,î the ìSerbo-Byzantine school,î and the ìMorava
schoolî as three large groups of architectural monuments built under the Serbian
domain.
11 ∆UR»I∆, GraËanica (as in note 9 above).
12 MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above), chap. 3 ìLíÈcole de Morava.î
13 MILLET, Líancien art serbe (as in note 5 above), 152-153. 225
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 3 Church of St. Stephen, Kruöevac built by Prince Lazar (Stefan)

HrebeljanoviÊ ca. 1375, western faÁade and triconch floor plan with proportional
analysis (Photo of the faÁade D. DaniloviÊ. Drawing of the floor plan V. RISTI∆,
Lazarica i kruöevaËki grad, Beograd 1989, Fig. 5)
additive and modular design with the gradual clustering of architectural

volumes and the structural use of the ìtriumphal archî tectonics;14
2) stone and brick construction; 3) geometric articulation of the faÁades
through the use of pilasters, stone string courses, and niches on the exte-
rior; and 4) additional decorative features such as the moderate brick
faÁade decoration, the use of architectural sculpture, as well as plastering
and painting of the faÁades in emulation of building techniques. By con-
textualizing the ìSkopjeî churches associated with the ìSerbo-Byzan-
tineî style, this paper investigates the role of the ìSkopjeî churches as the
distinctive precursors of the so-called ìMorava schoolî churches and
14 I borrow the phrase ìtriumphal arch systemî from ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in
226 note 9 above), 17-27.
Fig. 4 Church of the Ascension at Ravanica, built by Prince Lazar (Stefan)

HrebeljanoviÊ ca. 1375, exterior view from the south (S. ∆UR»I∆, GraËanica, King
Milutinís Church and Its Place in Late Byzantine Architecture, University Park ñ
London 1979, Fig. 126)
their significance in the development of Late Byzantine architecture after

the 1330s.
The Architecture of the ìSkopjeî Churches after the 1330s

Founded by the members of the emerging local aristocracy, the
churches of St. Nicholas in Ljuboten and the Presentation of the Virgin in
KuËeviöte represent ìSkopjeî churches in the making (Tab. 1).15 Built in
the 1330s within 15 kms from Skopje, both these small-scale, cross-in-
square churches have approximately the same dimensions ñ 12 m x 7.8 m.
These measurements and design plans associate these churches with some
earlier fourteenth-century small-scale churches in the region. For exam-
ple, St. Nikita at »uËer in Skopska Crna Gora (b.1307) founded by King
Milutin, has dimensions of approximately 11.5 m x 7.65 m.16 The church-
es at »uËer, Ljuboten and KuËeviöte similarly use alternate bands of mul-
15 The church at KuËeviöte was presumably built in the 1320s-30s during the
reign of King Milutinís son, King Stefan Uroö III DeËanski (1321-1331). Aristo-
cratic donors presiding in the area, one Lady Marena with her children Arsen,
Vladislava, and Radoslav supported fresco decoration of the church in 1337. The
church of St. Nicholas was built by a certain Lady Danica by 1337 and painted in
1343-1345. LJUBINKOVI∆, Crkva Svete Nedelje (as in note 7 above), 95-106;
RASKOLSKA-NIKOLOVSKA, O ktitorskim portretima (as in note 7 above), 41-54; TATI∆,
Arhitektura i ûivopis (as in note 7 above); id., Arhitektura Sv. Nikole (as in note 7
above), 109-124; DJORDJEVI∆, Zidno slikarstvo (as in note 7 above), 131-134; 145-
147; RADUJKO, éivopis (as in note 7 above), 101-116.
16 TATI∆, Arhitektonski spomenici (as in note 7 above), 127-134. 227
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 5 Church of St. Nicholas, Ljuboten, 1337, western faÁade (V. KORA∆, Spome-
nici monumentalne srpske arhitekture XIV veka u Povardarju, Beograd 2003, Fig. 9)
tiple courses of brick and stone for massive walls, stilted arched niches
with a broad band of decorative brick patterns above them on the main
apse, and all-brick construction of the dome (Plates 1, 2; fig. 5).
While inheriting some aspects of the earlier local building tradition
under the influence of Thessaloniki, typified by the church of the Holy
Apostles (ca. 1310-1314) (Fig. 6), the ìSkopjeî churches in Ljuboten and
KuËeviöte additionally have seemingly unique features related to their
structural and tectonic integrity.17 By the Late Byzantine period many
churches in the Balkans lost the structural consistency, where exterior
articulation indicated the interior organization of the building.18 Middle
17 ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above), 65-84, has hypothe-
sized that after the 1330s many Thessalonian builders flocked to Serbia. The work
of Thessalonian painters Astrapas (Michael) and Eutychios in the church of St.
Nikita in »uËer is historically proven. References to fresco-painters coming from
Ohrid to decorate churches in the region of Skopje (St. Nicholas at Ljuboten,
Assumption of the Virgin at MatejiË, St. Nicholas äiöevski) reveal established artis-
tic ties between Skopje and other centers in the region. Unfortunately, no histor-
ical data confirms the origin of the building workshops. The indirect data pro-
vides limited information on the subject matter: OKUNEV, Gradja (as in note 7
above), 89-113; P. MILJKOVI∆-PEPEK, Crkvata sv. Nikita vo Skopska Crna Gora kako
istorisko-umetniËki spomenik, in: Spomenici za srednovekovnata i ponovata istorija
na Makedonija 1, ed. V. Moöin, Skopje 1975, 379-386.
18 ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27; id., Religious Settings (as in
228 note 4 above), 65-94; BOGDANOVI∆, Late Byzantine (as in note 4 above).
Fig. 6 Holy Apostles, Thessaloniki ca. 1310-1314, eastern faÁade and floor plan
(E. KOURKOUTIDOU-NIKOLAIDOU ñ A. TOURTA, Wandering in Byzantine Thessaloniki,
Athens 1997, Figs. 139-140)
Byzantine church design reflected the internal disposition of the cross-in-

square unit in elevations via a ìtriumphal arch system.î FaÁades were artic-
ulated with three arches, the central one broader and taller than the lat-
eral two, visible at the same level on all four sides. This design was subse-
quently used in Late Byzantine architecture but, in contrast to Middle
Byzantine design, the exterior wall articulation no longer reflected inter-
nal spatial organization.19 However, ìSkopjeî churches, although built
during the Late Byzantine period, anachronistically and conservatively
employed structural consistency and a ìtriumphal arch systemî that is typ-
ically associated with Middle Byzantine churches epitomized by
Constantinopolitan churches of Christ Pantepoptes (Eski Imaret Camii)
(b. 1087) and churches at the monastery of the Pantokrator (Figs. 7, 8).
The church core of ìSkopjeî church visually resembles a canopy-like struc-
ture consisting of a dome with an elongated drum set on a low prismatic
base, the so-called tambour carrÈ, which frames the structural pendentives
that rise from four columns.20 The exterior pilasters are more-or-less cor-
related with the interior structural space, emphasizing the tectonic quali-
ties of the design (Plates 5, 6, 7). The gradual clustering of architectural
volumes built around a building core and the tectonic integrity of
ìSkopjeî churches built after the 1330s reflect an anachronistic Middle
Byzantine building tradition, here reinterpreted as a regional idiom.
19 About the classical principles of the Middle Byzantine church design and use
in Late Byzantine architecture: ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27.
20 MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above) chap. 3 coined the term tambur
carrÈ. Construction of an elevated dome drum resting on stone columns instead
on piers is an unknown practice in earlier architecture in Byzantine Macedonia,
including both Thessaloniki and Ohrid, and should not be related to these two
building traditions. See: ∆UR»I∆, Architecture in the Byzantine Sphere (as in note 9
above), 55-68. 229
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 7 Christ Pantepoptes (Eski

Imaret Camii), Constantinople, b.
1087, exterior view from the southeast
and floor plan (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ.
Drawing of the floor plan A. VAN
MILINGEN, Byzantine Churches in
Constantinople, London 1912, Fig. 73).
See also Plate 3
Fig. 8 Pantokrator monastery (Zeyrek Camii), Constantinople, ca. 1118-1136,

exterior view from the east and floor plan of the church complex
(Photo J. BogdanoviÊ. Drawing of the floor plan R. OUSTERHOUT,
Master Builders of Byzantium, Princeton 1999, Fig. 78). See also Plate 4
The largest surviving church in the region, which may be understood

as a prototype for a ìSkopjeî church, is the Assumption of the Virgin
(Uspenje Bogorodice) in MatejiË, near Kumanovo in Skopska Crna Gora
(Plate 5).21 The church is associated with ìSerbo-Byzantineî style because
it was built under King Milutinís grandson, King and later Emperor Stefan
Uroö IV Duöan (1331-1355), his Empress Jelena, and their son Stefan Uroö
V (1355-1371). The exact date of the church in MatejiË has not been pre-
served in the surviving historical documents but the church can be tenta-
21 DIMITROVA, MatejËe (as in note 7 above), 39-40 records the lack of the appro-
priate technical documentation and partial conservation and restoration works
230 between 1926 and 1986.
tively dated around 1350.22 The original function of the church remains
unconfirmed, but it almost certainly served as a mausoleum.23 Although
the church at MatejiË lost much of its original appearance through sever-
al reconstructions in the early twentieth century, the basic geometric tec-
tonic principles of the church are still apparent.
22 Predominantly on the basis of its painting, the church has been dated quite
differently ñ from the end of the 13th and beginning of the 14th centuries to var-
ious dates immediately after and before Emperor Duöanís death in 1355. R.
GRUJI∆, Pravoslavna srpska crkva, Beograd 1921, 11 suggested the early 14th-centu-
ry date of the church. Okunev proposed 1356-1357 as years of the fresco painting
of the church according to the white veil that Empress Jelena has in a donorís
composition, which was interpreted as her sorrow for a deceased husband.
Okunevís conclusion about dating the church after 1355 was subsequently adopt-
ed by a number of scholars: ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27;
DEROKO, MatejËa (as in note 7 above), 84-89; BOäKOVI∆, Opravka MetejiÊa (as in
note 7 above), 220-221; OKUNEV, Gradja (as in note 7 above), 89-113. DIMITROVA,
MatejËe (as in note 7 above), 263 dated the fresco painting of the church between
1348 and 1352. In the spring of 1348, after a great wave of the plague had sub-
sided in the Balkans, Emperor Duöan and his family returned to Skopje from Mt.
Athos, where they had been sequestered for over a year. A church fresco showing
the officiating archbishop dressed in polystavrion and accompanied by St. John
Prodromos is providing further insight into the dating of the church. Dimitrova
identified the image with the first Serbian Patriarch Joanikije, who held the seat
of patriarch from 1346 until 1354. CVETKOVSKI, Za ktitorskata (as in note 7 above),
525-537, however, identifies the image with the Archbishop of Skopje Jovan
(John), who was active around 1347-1350. I am grateful to I. DrpiÊ, who is of the
opinion that the fresco represents Archbishop Jovan, for calling my attention to
the dating of the frescoes at MatejiË. In any case, since the walls of the church
should have been left to consolidate at least one working season prior to the
beginning of fresco painting, the construction of the church at MatejiË can be
tentatively dated to around 1350, and possibly to some years earlier.
23 Several 19th-century written accounts mentioned two tombs in the church
interior ñ a large one near the northeast pier, almost in the center of the church
and a smaller one marked by a marble slab with a representation of a double-
headed eagle, located somewhere along the southern wall of the naos. A legend
ascribes the latter tomb to Empress Jelena. P. SRE∆KOVI∆, Grob carice Jelene, putniËke
beleöke, Bratstvo 2 (1888) 125-137, esp. 132 and J. HADûI-VASILJEVI∆, Po kumanovskoj
i skopskoj okolini, Bratstvo 5 (1892) 182-189, esp. 184, 187. Serbian royal tombs
were frequently located in the southwestern corners of mausolea churches, as was
also the case with the tomb of Emperor Duöan in his own mausoleum of the Holy
Archangels (1343-52) near Prizren: S. ∆UR»I∆, Medieval Royal Tombs in the Balkans:
An Aspect of the ëEast or Westí Question, GOTR 29/2 (1984) 175-194. The disposition
of the southern tomb in the church at MatejiË would, therefore, have corre-
sponded to the already established tradition of royal burials in medieval Serbia.
In the 1938-restoration of the church many remains, including a small chapel,
most probably an older Byzantine structure, as well as the original marble floor
were destroyed. This restoration work done without proper technical documen-
tation has eliminated evidence of the mentioned tombs. On the basis of the char-
acteristic funerary conception of its frescoes and a donorsí composition depicting
Emperor Duöan, his Empress Jelena and their son King Uroö, Dimitrova convinc-
ingly suggested that the church at MatejiË was built as the mausoleum and spec-
ulated that it was most probably built for Empress Jelena: DIMITROVA, MatejËe (as
in note 7 above), 267-271. Indeed, although the funerary role of the monumen-
tal church at MatejiË cannot be proven, it is plausible to hypothesize that the
church at MatejiË was built as the mausoleum for the members of Emperor
Duöanís family. 231
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 9 Monastery of Constantine Lips (Fenari Isa Camii), Constantinople, North

Church, 907, South Church, ca. 1280, exterior view from the east and floor plan
(Photo J. BogdanoviÊ. Drawing of the floor plan after A. VAN MILLINGEN,
Byzantine Churches in Constantinople, London 1912, Fig. 44). See also Plate 8
Built as an imperial foundation, this large-scale building by Late

Byzantine standards (23.5 m x 14.5 m) has highly sophisticated five-
domed design. The cross-in-square plan with related ìtriumphal arch sys-
tem,î a traditionally recognized Middle Byzantine stylistic feature, is
applied consistently at MatejiË (Plate 5). The floor plan is organized on a
ìconcentric squareî principle. The church core, formed by the placement
of four stone piers that supported four pendentives upon which rested the
drum crowned by a dome, is in the geometric center of the structure. The
square-like naos area is concentrically placed surrounding the central vol-
ume. This ìdouble squareî geometric principle, known from both
Byzantine Macedonia and Constantinople and exemplified by eleventh-
century churches in Strumica and Christ Pantepoptes, monastic churches
of Constantine Lips (907-the 1280s) and the church of Hagia Aikaterini
in Thessaloniki (possibly ca. 1315) (Plate 3, 8; fig. 10), is even more aus-
terely employed in the church of St. Demetrios at Markov Manastir (Fig.
11). Founded by Emperorís Duöanís noblemen, King Vukaöin MrnjavËeviÊ
(1365-1371) and his son King Marko (1371-1395), who continued to rule
the region of Skopje after Emperorís Duöanís death, the church at Markov
Manastir was erected some time after 1346 and painted by 1371.24
The elongated altar space at MatejiË is the result of connecting the
altar apse with the eastern arm of the inscribed cross by means of an inter-
polated bay. An interpolated bay, a recognized Middle Byzantine
Constantinopolitan feature, is used in the churches at »uËer, Ljuboten,
24 About the church of St. Demetrios at Markov Manastir, its donor inscription
referring to Emperor Duöan and stating the date of the completion of the works:
MIRKOVI∆ ñ TATI∆, Markov (as in note 7 above), N. NOäPAL-NIKULJSKA, Markoviot
manastir ñ monument kako dokument niz istorijata, in: Spomenici za srednovekovna-
232 ta i ponovata istorija na Makedonija 1, ed. V. Moöin, Skopje 1975, 401-415.
Fig. 10 Church of Hagia Aikaterini in Thessaloniki, possibly ca. 1315,

exterior view and floor plan (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ.. Drawing J. BogdanoviÊ
after S. ∆UR»I∆, GraËanica, King Milutinís Church and Its Place in Late Byzantine
Architecture, University Park ñ London 1979, Fig. 107)
and KuËeviöte (Tab. 1). The placement of protruding pilaster strips at

appropriate structural points on both the exterior and interior also
reflects the Middle Byzantine style, but not the Late Byzantine architec-
tural traditions of either Macedonia or Constantinople.25 The same use of
pilasters can be seen in other ìSkopjeî churches, Matka, DeviË, and
Modriöte (Tab. 1). All three churches were presumably built by the local
aristocracy on their estates along the river Treska between the 1350s and
the 1370s. Closer examination reveals the use of pilasters even in the tri-
conch church of St. Andrew on the river Treska, which was built some time
before 1389 (Plate 9). The geometric, presumably structural use of
pilasters is apparent in the Western building traditions of Romanesque
and Proto-Gothic architecture in the Eastern Mediterranean, and this
architectural feature most likely came to the region of Skopje not from
eastern Byzantine domains, but rather from the Adriatic Littoral through
Prizren, another important center of Medieval Serbia and occasionally its
capital.26
At MatejiË the gradual architectural clustering, the defining charac-
teristic of ìSkopjeî churches, is expanded. The two symmetrical domed
side chapels, north and south of the sanctuary are structurally, volumetri-
cally, and proportionally balanced by the two domed bays of the narthex
(Plate 5).27 The layout of the church at MatejiË is, in a way, a ìmodularî
25 ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27.

26 On the significance of building tradition in Prizren influenced by the build-
ing trends on the Adriatic Littoral: V. KORA∆, Graditeljska ökola Pomorja, Beograd
1965, 24-27; ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27; id., Architecture in the
Byzantine Sphere (as in note 9 above), 55-68.
27 On the formal role of the twin-domed narthex in the Late Byzantine period
with its related Constantinopolitan counterparts such as the narthex of the Chora
monastery (Kariye Cammi c. 1316-1321): S. ∆UR»I∆, The Twin-domed Narthex in 233
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 11 Comparative analysis

of the floor plans of MatejiË,
near Kumanovo in Skopska
Crna Gora, ca. 1350 and of
the church of St. Demetrios,
Markov Manastir, Suöice, ca.
after 1346 and before 1371,
floor plan
(Drawing J. BogdanoviÊ)
re-configuration of some earlier schemes of Middle and Late Byzantine

five-domed churches. Lateral chapels and a twin-domed narthex around
the church core form an enveloping ambulatory in a number of earlier
churches in the Balkans, such as at GraËanica monastery near Priötina
(1311-1321) and in the Hagia Aikaterini in Thessaloniki (possibly ca.
1315) (Figs. 2, 10). At MatejiË, the domed compartments attached to the
church core used the Middle Byzantine principles of symmetry and bal-
ance resembling the Constantinopolitan schemes of the north church of
the monastery of Constantine Lips (907) and of the Christ Pantepoptes
(b. 1087) (Figs. 7, 9).28
A similar approach towards initial architectural layout can be identi-
fied in yet another church founded by Emperor Duöan, the Holy
Archangels near Prizren (1343-1352). Built as Emperor Duöanís mau-
soleum, this supposedly five-domed church (Fig. 12) is associated with the
so-called ìRaöka School,î characterized by a blend of Romanesque ele-
ments, notably in the treatment of the gable-tops, fenestration, arcading
and exterior sculptural decoration with Byzantine domes and internal
decoration.29 The formal analysis of the layouts of the two churches at
MatejiË and Prizren reveals that they have essentially the same outline,
Paleologan Architecture, ZRVI 13 (1971) 333-344; id., Architectural Significance of

Subsidiary Chapels in Middle Byzantine Churches, JSAH 36 (1977) 94-110; id.,
GraËanica (as in note 9 above), 76.
28 ∆UR»I∆, Architectural Significance of Subsidiary Chapels (as in note 27 above), 94-
110.
29 S. NENADOVI∆, Duöanova zaduûbina. Manastir svetih arhandjela kod Prizrena,
234 Beograd 1967.
Fig. 12 Church of the Holy

Archangels near Prizren, 1343-1352,
hypothetical reconstruction
(S. ∆UR»I∆, GraËanica, King Milutinís
Church and Its Place in Late Byzantine
Architecture, University Park ñ London
1979, Fig. 125
Fig. 13 Comparative floor plans of

MatejiË, near Kumanovo in Skopska
Crna Gora, ca. 1350 and of the Holy
Archangels near Prizren, 1343-1352.
except that the church of the Holy Archangels also has an exonarthex
(outer narthex) (Fig. 13). The spatial counterpart of the exonarthex of the
Holy Archangels is the narthex at MatejiË, which corresponds to the west-
ernmost half of the western bays of the church of the Holy Archangels, as
if the exonarthex ìenteredî the church and became the narthex.30 The pro-
portionally very shallow narthex at MatejiË, which function is not easily
explainable, tectonically and in its materialization looks like a ìpatchî to
the western faÁade. Therefore, I propose that the narthex at MatejiË was
an afterthought in design, which was better spatially resolved by an
exonarthex at the Holy Archangels near Prizren. These two churches at
MatejiË and Prizren, founded by the same family within related territorial
domains of Medieval Serbia, deserve further analysis.
Closer examination of the five domes at MatejiË reveals important
stylistic characteristics. The twelve-sided drum of the main dome31 and
30 KORA∆, Spomenici (as in note 7 above), 230 reached the same conclusion about
the relation between the exonarthex at the Holy Archangels and the narthex at
MatejiË.
31 The huge twelve-sided drum of the main MatejiË dome is unique among the
surviving ìSkopjeî churches. 235
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
eight-sided drums of the two smaller domes placed over the eastern side
chapels are built in the opus listatum technique with alternating bands of
brick and stone. The opus listatum building technique follows Constanti-
nopolitan imperial architectural vocabulary exemplified by the preserved
Middle Byzantine dome drum of the Vefa Kilise (Plate 5, 10). Engaged
half-colonnettes between double-recessed arches are also made of alter-
nating stone and brick courses. The building technique of the three dome
drums at MatejiË differs from the technique of the two small domes over
the narthex that follow the practice of all-brick dome construction estab-
lished in Thessaloniki in the early decades of the fourteenth century
(Plate 11).32 The building technique of the main and eastern domes typ-
ifies common dome execution in the ìSkopjeî churches. The difference
in building techniques of the western domes from the main and eastern
domes reflects the building phases in the spatial organization of the
church at MatejiË, where the narrow twin-domed narthex was incorporat-
ed into the developing design of the ìSkopjeî churches. Furthermore, the
volume of the narthex, which is slightly shorter than the church core, dis-
torted the classical ìtriumphal archî system of the south and north faÁade
elevations, only partially reflecting the internal disposition of the cross-in-
square unit. This stylistic blend is a product of at least two different build-
ing traditions, one spreading from Constantinople via Thessaloniki and
the other coming from the Adriatic Littoral via Prizren.
Some observations on the design process give further support to such
a hypothesis. Byzantine builders commonly used the so-called ìquadratu-
ra,î a geometric approach to design that utilized a square. A square, delin-
eated by the location of the four columns or piers which support the
major church dome, was a basic design module.33 Expressed numerically,
the quadratura and modular relations used by the Byzantines most often
resulted in the arithmetic proportions of 1:1 and 1:2. The builders of Late
Byzantine churches, including those in Thessaloniki, often used the arith-
metic proportions of 1:2:1. Based on the principal modular measure of
the main dome at MatejiË, I propose that the builders utilized the com-
ñ
plex composition of the geometrical proportional systems 2:3:2 and 1:√ √5
for establishing the internal dimensions of the church plan (Figs. 14 ñ
15).34 The harmonic proportion 2:3:2, based on the combination of the
first four numeric ratios of the harmonic musical scale 1:2:3:4, indicates a
building tradition other than the one that spread from Constantinople via
ñ
Thessaloniki. The proportional systems 2:3:2 and 1:√ √5 were common in
32 ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above), 65-84.

33 R. OUSTERHOUT, Master Builders of Byzantium, Princeton 1999, chap. 3 esp. 58,
75-79, with further references.
34 Potentially, the proportional analysis could have been applied to the vertical
measures of the church. In this paper this is avoided intentionally because it is
more difficult to acquire precise vertical dimensions without appropriate equip-
ment and because the vertical dimensions tend to be distorted by structural and
other deformations, such as the loss of original floor elevation during the pro-
236 longed use of churches.
Fig. 14 ñ 15 Comparative floor plans of MatejiË, near Kumanovo in Skopska

Crna Gora, ca. 1350 and of the Holy Archangels near Prizren, 1343-1352,
proportional analysis (Drawing J. BogdanoviÊ)
thirteenth- and fourteenth-century churches of the Adriatic Littoral, such

as the church of Ss. Sergius and Bachus on the river Bojana.35 Moreover,
the same proportional system seems to have been employed in the church
of the Holy Archangels at Prizren. Later on, the application of these geo-
metrical proportional systems could be detected in some early ìMorava
Schoolî churches, exemplified by the church of St. Stephen in Kruöevac
(Fig. 3), thus indicating the path of the use of harmonic proportional sys-
tems in church design in the western Balkans from the Adriatic Littoral,
via Prizren, Skopje, and towards the northern inland areas.36
ñ
If my hypothesis is correct, then the proportion of 1:√√5 , relative to
the main dome with the inner diameter of approximately 5.2 m, provided
the dimensions for the smaller domes at MatejiË, approximately 2.2-2.3 m
ñ
in diameter, or 2.3 ≈1:√√5 ◊ 5.2 m.37 Moreover, the diameter of these small-
er domes correlates to the domes of some other contemporary churches
35 The church was rebuilt under Stefan Duöanís great-grandmother Queen

Jelena and grandfather, King Milutin in 1290 and 1318 respectively, confirming
long-lasting connections of the Serbian royal family and their foundations in the
wider region: KORA∆, Graditeljska (as in note 26 above), 17-33, 164-169.
36 V. RISTI∆, Lazarica i kruöevaËki grad, Beograd 1989, 35-37.
37 This use of the proportional system should be taken as employed in terms of
geometrical relations, probably set on site, and not as arithmetical or ìscientificî
calculations. Scholars still debate about the architectural training and building
practice of the Byzantine builders and neither suggestion has been proved yet. O.
GRABAR, The Mediation of Ornament, Princeton 1992, 174-178 concluded that our
inability to confirm systematic architectural education in the Mediterranean basin
after the 7th century points to the nonexistence of architectural drawings.
OUSTERHOUT, Master Builders (as in note 33 above), 58 suggested that no archi-
tectural drawings existed. I concur with S. NENADOVI∆, Gradjevinska tehnika u sred-
njevekovnoj Srbiji, Beograd 2003, 46-49 who claimed that preparatory models and
schemes were used within the Byzantine realm. Architectural drawings had been
used in Western Europe and potentially in the Byzantine periphery on the bor-
ders with the West, at least since the 13th century. 237
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 16 Compa-
rative floor plans
of MatejiË, near
Kumanovo in
Skopska Crna Gora,
ca. 1350 and of
church in DeviË,
probably after 1350
(Drawing J.
BogdanoviÊ)
Fig. 17 Comparative
floor plans of MatejiË,
near Kumanovo in
Skopska Crna Gora, ca.
1350 and of St. Nicholas,
äiöevo, 1334, before 1380
in the region. The domes of the churches in äiöevo and DeviË measure 2.1
m and 2.5 m respectively, pointing to the use of similar units of measure.
These basic geometric constructions generated other architectural forms.
The volume of a bay compartment with a small dome at MatejiË corre-
sponds in size and proportions to the small-scale churches in äiöevo and
DeviË, relative to the harmonic proportion 2:3:2. Consequently, a large-
scale ìSkopjeî church such as the one at MatejiË could be perceived as
having been assembled from smaller church-modules, i.e. virtual and real
side chapels, clustered around the main church core (Fig. 16, 17). Such a
hypothesis about the design process postulates that the builders were able
to use proportional, modular, and additive systems of design without typo-
logical restraints, while keeping the structural and formal relationship of
the constitutive elements under control.
The resemblance between the plan designs of the churches at MatejiË
238 and Prizren is once again evident in their measurements and proportions.38
The internal dimensions of the two churches are similar: ~21 m x 12 m for
the church at MatejiË and 24 m x 14 m, excluding the exonarthex, for the
church at Prizren (Fig. 13). The two churches shared the same initial lay-
out, while, I advocate, the difference in absolute measurements resulted
from a different foot dimensions chosen as a measure unit: ~29-30 cm for
the church at MatejiË and ~32 cm for the church at Prizren.39 As has been
already discussed, both churches were probably designed as large-scale five-
domed cross-in-square edifices, with characteristic tectonic external and
internal use of pilaster strips.40 In addition, both had pentagonal apse exte-
riors, and both, most likely, had twelve-sided dome drums.
Apart from similar plans, however, the two churches differed in exe-
cution and stylistic features. The faÁades of the church of the Holy
Archangels were faced in stone. The remnants of architectural sculpture
confirm that the church was built in a manner consistent with the recog-
nizable Romanesque architectural tradition from the Adriatic Littoral
(Plate 12). In contrast, the use of uneven, almost crude, alternating bands
of multiple courses of brick and field stone, coupled with the use of band-
ed voussoirs in the arches at MatejiË, St. Nicholas äiöevski, and other
ìSkopjeî churches (Plates. 5, 6, 9), confirms that the building technique
of ìSkopjeî churches derived from the Byzantine, and more precisely,
from imitation of Constantinopolitan tradition (cf. plate 10).41
The exterior of the altar apse at MatejiË is articulated by four deep
semi-circular niches in emulation of Constantinopolitan practice in the
Late Byzantine period, as can be seen at the south church in the
monastery of Constantine Lips, dedicated to St. John the Forerunner (b.
1282), the Parekklesion of the Pammakaristos complex (c. 1310), and the
Parekklesion of the Chora monastery (c. 1316-1321).42 The churches at
38 V. KORA∆, Smisao gradjenja po uzoru. Primeri u srpskoj arhitekturi XIV veka, ZRVI
41 (2004) 205-212; J. BOGDANOVI∆, The Church of the Assumption of the Virgin at
MatejiË. Regional Re-interpretation of Middle Byzantine Constantinopolitan Architecture
in the Palaeologan Era? in: BSCAbstr 29 (2003) 18-19.
39 The conclusion about the absolute foot dimensions ñ ~29-30 cm for the
church at MatejiË and ~32 cm for the church at Prizren ñ resulted from suggest-
ed proportional relations. Although these approximate measures allude to
Roman (~29.4 cm) and Byzantine imperial feet (31.23 cm), I propose that the
decision on foot dimensions was either made on the site or determined accord-
ing to some kind an ìetalonî measure used by a particular workshop. KORA∆,
Spomenici (as in note 7 above), 229, however, proposes the arithmetic proportions
based on a square, ìquadratura,î as often used in the Byzantine buildings but also
subsequently suggests that the foot dimension used at MatejiË was ~30 cm.
40 ∆UR»I∆, Architecture in the Byzantine Sphere (as in note 9 above), 55-68.
41 BOGDANOVI∆, Church of the Assumption (as in note 38 above), 18-19. The use of
banded voussoirs for arches, a distinctive decorative feature common for post-
1330s Skopje churches, resembles an architectural vocabulary known from con-
temporary churches in Messembria (modern Nessebar, Bulgaria) and from late
13th-century Tekfur Saray in Constantinople. S. ∆UR»I∆, Late Medieval Fortified
Palaces in the Balkans: Security and Survival, Mnimio kai Perivallon 6 (2001) 11-48.
42 ∆UR»I∆, Architecture in the Byzantine Sphere (as in note 9 above), 55-68.
Curiously, such semi-circular niches can be also observed at some churches today 239
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Fig. 18 MatejiË, near Kuma-

novo in Skopska Crna Gora,
ca. 1350, niche in the altar
apse (V. KORA∆, Spomenici mon-
umentalne srpske arhitekture XIV
veka u Povardarju, Beograd
2003, fig. 20)
KuËeviöte and MatejiË have four such niches in their altar apses, though
the niches are employed neither in the upper part of the apse nor in the
bottom-most part of the ìpedestal-likeî segment of the apse, as in
Constantinople (Plates 2, 8, 13, fig. 18). The flatness of the wall surface
below and above the central apsidal facet with windows is closer to the
Thessalonian design in the church of the Holy Apostles (Fig. 6). Two
additional semi-circular niches flank the western entrances of the church-
es at KuËeviöte, DeviË, and Markov Manastir (Plate 14). Similar articula-
tion of the western faÁade is again visible in the church of the Holy
Apostles in Thessaloniki, but this design feature seems to have been wide-
ly used in the Balkans, judging by the western faÁade of the fourteenth-
century churches of the Holy Archangels and Christ Pantokrator in
Messembria (modern Nessebar), on the Black Sea coast in Bulgaria
(Plates 15, 16).43 However, the architectural articulation of the faÁades of
the Holy Apostles in Thessaloniki coupled with the assumption of a
Thessalonian origin for the general plan design for the church at
KuËeviöte, suggests that the use of such niches in the region of Skopje
came directly from Byzantine Macedonia. Semi-circular niches flanking
the western portal also became a recognizable tectonic feature of the
somewhat later ìMorava Schoolî (Fig. 3).
acknowledged as Middle-Byzantine (sic?) churches, including the already men-

tioned church of Christ Pantepoptes. On the possibility that new research and
archeological works may alter the ìfirmlyî established typology and chronology of
churches in Constantinople see: MAGDALINO, Studies (as in note 2 above), xi.
240 43 Field notes J. BogdanoviÊ.
Plate 1 St. Nikita,

»uËer, b. 1307, exte-
rior view from the
southwest (Photo
N. StankoviÊ)
Plate 2 Church of the

Presentation of the Virgin,
KuËeviöte, ca. 1330-1337,
exterior view from the north-
east (Photo N. StankoviÊ) 241
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 3 Christ Pantepoptes (Eski Imaret Camii), Constantinople, b. 1087,

exterior view from the southeast, see also Fig. 9 (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ, Byzantine
Churches in Constantinople, London 1912, Fig. 73)
Plate 4 Pantokrator monastery (Zeyrek Camii), Constantinople, ca. 1118-1136,

exterior view from the east, see also Fig. 10 (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ, Master
242 Builders of Byzantium, Princeton 1999, Fig. 78)
Plate 5 MatejiË, near

Kumanovo in Skopska
Crna Gora, ca. 1350,
exterior view (E.
DIMITROVA, MatejËe,
Skopje 2002, Plate II)
Plate 6 Church of St. Nicholas in äiöevo,

ca. 1334, western faÁade
(Photo in the public domain, author: A.
Grant) 243
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 7 St. Demetrios,

Markov Manastir, Suöice,
after 1346 and before
1371, exterior view from
the southeast (Photo I.
DrpiÊ)
Plate 8 Monastery of Constantine Lips (Fenari Isa Camii), Constantinople,

North Church, 907, South Church, ca. 1280, exterior view from the east (Photo
J. BogdanoviÊ, see also Fig. 14; Byzantine Churches in Constantinople, London
244 1912, Fig. 44)
Plate 9 Church of St. Andrew on the

river Treska, before 1389,
exterior view from the southeast
(Photo N. StankoviÊ)
Plate 10 Vefa Kilise (Molla Gurani), (Church of St. Theodore?), ca. 1000,
exterior view from the south (Photo N. StankoviÊ) 245
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 11 MatejiË, near Kumanovo in

Skopska Crna Gora, ca. 1350,
exterior view from northwest (D.
CORNAKOV, Makedonski manastiri
[Macedonian Monasteries] Skopje 1995)
Plate 12 Holy Archangels near Prizren, 1343-1352

(Photo in the public domain, author: M. JovanoviÊ-MarkoviÊ)
246
Plate 13 Parekklesion of the

Chora monastery,
Constantinople, c. 1316-1321
(Photo J. BogdanoviÊ)
Plate 14 St. Demetrios, Markov Manastir, Suöice, after 1346 and before 1371,
western faÁade (Photo N. StankoviÊ) 247
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 15 Holy Apostles,

Thessaloniki ca. 1310-1314,
western faÁade (A. PAPA-
GIANNOPOULOS, Monuments of
Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki n.d.
Fig. on p. 73)
Plate 16 Church of Christ

Pantokrator, Messembria
(modern Nessebar,
Bulgaria), 14th c, western
248 faÁade (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ)
Plate 17 St. Demetrios, Markov Manastir, Suöice, after 1346 and before 1371,
architectural decoration in ìdog-toothî string course, banded voussoirs, rosette
(Photo I. DrpiÊ)
Plate 18 Mother of God Perivleptos, Ohrid, the 1290s, ìdog-toothî string

courses (Photo I. DrpiÊ) 249
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 19 Church of St. Andrew

on the river Treska,
before 1389,
exterior view from the south,
detail (Photo N. StankoviÊ)
Plate 20 Church of St. Stephen, Kruöevac, ca. 1375, rosette

(Photo D. DaniloviÊ)
250
Plate 21 Church of
Prophetes Elias,
Thessaloniki, ca. the
1360s-70s, exterior
of the sanctuary apse
(Photo I. DrpiÊ)
Plate 22 Church of St. Andrew

on the river Treska, before 1389,
exterior of the sanctuary apse
(Photo N. StankoviÊ) 251
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Plate 23 The Great

Meteoron monastery, late
14th c., refectory
(Photo J. BogdanoviÊ)
Plate 24 The Great Meteoron monastery, late 14th c., segment of the walls
252 (Photo J. BogdanoviÊ)
Fig. 19 St. Demetrios, Markov

Manastir, Suöice, after 1346
and before 1371, string course
(Photo I. DrpiÊ)
The analysis of the secondary architectural articulation of the faÁades

provides further glimpses into Late Byzantine architectural development,
with particular reference to the ìMorava School.î The church of St.
Demetrios at Markov Manastir perhaps best illustrates the connection
between these two ìbuilding schools.î The wall texture of the church of
St. Demetrios at Markov Manastir, similar to other ìSkopjeî churches, is
ìflattened,î marked only by pilasters and arches (Plate 7). Continuous
horizontal stone string courses divide the main wall surface into well-bal-
anced zones. Along with the use of the classical ìtriumphal archî system,
these string courses actually form a ìgrid,î which, as has been demon-
strated, enabled geometrical control of architectural decoration of the
wall surfaces both vertically and horizontally. The same design principle
is also applied in the ìMoravaî churches (Figs. 3, 4).44
String courses consisting of trochilus, torus, and prismatic stone pro-
files had been employed already in the fourteenth-century churches of
Hagia Aikaterini in Thessaloniki and at the katholikon (main church) of
Hilandar monastery, Mt. Athos (possibly 1311-1316).45 A particular stone
string course, consisting of a slab-like top and torus-shaped bottom and
used as a capping of the tall dado zone at Markov Manastir, is a practice
that builders, particularly those working in or around Prizren, could have
acquired from the Adriatic Coast (Plate 12, fig. 19).46 Then again, the use
44 J. TRKULJA, Aesthetics and Symbolism of Late Byzantine Church FaÁades, 1204-1453,
Ph.D. Diss., Princeton University 2004, chap. 1.
45 On the date of Hilandar katholikon: M. MARKOVI∆ ñ W. T. HOSTETTER, Prilog
hronologiji gradnje i oslikavanja hilandarskog katolikona, HilZb 10 (1998) 201-220; M.
»ANAK-MEDI∆, Sto godina prouËavanja arhitekture manastira Hilandara, in: Osam
vekova Hilandara, Beograd 2000, 447-456.
46 Strong connections between Skopje and Prizren under Stefan Duöan were
pondered by ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27. The connections
remained intensive during the reign of King Marko. See J. KALI∆, Srbi u poznom
srednjem veku, Beograd 1994, 14f. 253
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
of the so-called ìdog-toothî string courses made of the same type of bricks
as the main walls at Markov Manastir points to the same design at church
of Mother of God Perivleptos in Ohrid, built by the 1290s, therefore sug-
gesting a possible connection of Skopje with Ohrid building workshops
(Plates 17, 18). The design of the church faÁades at Markov Manastir is
enriched by the use of engaged half-columns. This practice can be traced
to Thessaloniki as in Hagia Aikaterini and farther back to Constantinople
as in the Chora. At Markov Manastir the aesthetically consistent applica-
tion of the secondary architectural features of apparently varied stylistic
origins reminiscent of Thessalonian, Epirote, Constantinopolitan, and
Romanesque paradigms, therefore, matured into an organic mixture of
these older paradigms and generated a new decoration model.
Markov Manastir set the precedent for the subsequent architectural
decoration of the ìMoravaî churches. The remnants of paint on the
faÁades of the church in Markov Manastir suggest that these surfaces were
plastered over and painted (Plate 14).47 This may seem surprising con-
sidering the high quality of execution of the exterior wall surfaces. The
remnants of plaster with painting emulating the cloisonnÈ building tech-
nique and decorative brick patterns have been observed on several other
ìSkopjeî churches, specifically those at MatejiË, Andreaö, and DeviË (Fig.
18, plate 19).48 Since the practice of faÁade painting is a Middle Byzantine
phenomenon, common in Byzantine Macedonia and elsewhere,49 it can
be speculated that all faÁades of ìSkopjeî churches were initially plastered
and painted. Noteworthy is that the faÁades of ìMoravaî churches were
also commonly plastered and painted, imitating building techniques and
decorative checkerboard, cross-stitch, opus reticulatum, or similar brick pat-
terns. These common solutions for faÁade decoration suggest an uninter-
rupted tradition of faÁade painting in Byzantine Macedonia that was
appropriated in Serbian medieval territories.
The carved low-relief architectural decoration recorded in the
church at Ljuboten, where a sculpted rosette may once have existed,
exemplifies the sculpted architectural articulation of the ìSkopjeî church-
es.50 Similar rosettes occur in the churches of St. Nicholas äiöevski,
47 Site reports by Lj. MilanoviÊ and I. DrpiÊ who courteously gave me their
photo documentation.
48 Site reports by S. ∆urËiÊ, who called my attention to the painted faÁades in
the Balkan churches. RADUJKO, éivopis (as in note 7 above), 101-116, discussed the
painting of church faÁades in the region of Macedonia, the tradition attested at
least from the 12th century. See also: F. MESESNEL, Izveötaj o prouËavanju juûne Srbije
na Terenu: Topografske beleöke o nekim crkvenim spomenicima u PoreËu, in: Spomenica
dvadestpetogodiönjice oslobodjenja Srbije 1912-1937, ed. A. JovanoviÊ, Skoplje
1937, 361-385; KORA∆, Spomenici (as in note 7 above), 334 fig. 15, 337 fig. 24.
49 Among the best-known examples are the painted faÁades of the Virgin Eleusa
church in Veljusa, F.Y.R.O.M. dated in 1080. On the phenomenon: ∆UR»I∆,
Middle Byzantine Cyprus (as in note 2 above), 23f, with references.
50 K. PETROV, Pregled na sakralnite spomenici vo Skopje i okolinata od XI do XIX vek.
So osvrt na gramotite, zapisite i natpisite, in: Spomenici za srednovekovnata i pono-
254 vata istorija na Makedonija 1, ed. V. Moöin, Skopje 1975, 75-88.
Fig. 20 Drawing of architectural sculpture, potentially of a rosette

from an unidentified ìSkopjeî church (Drawing G. MILLET,
Líancient arte serbe. Les Èglises, Paris 1919, Fig. on p. 152)
MatejiË, Markov Manastir, Matka, and St. Andrew on the Treska (Fig, 5,
plates 5, 6, 9, 11, 17, 19).51 The central rosettes are often placed high on
the exterior wall surfaces below the central ìtriumphal arch,î reflecting
the classical design principle for the use of round windows, which is not
recorded in Late Byzantine Thessaloniki and Constantinople.52
Remnants of plastic architectural decoration found in Skopje53 possibly
belonged to a rosette from an unidentified ìSkopjeî church (Fig. 20).
Other sculpted decorations, like stone decoration with foliage and pal-
mette motifs, still remain on the lunette over the western portal at Markov
Manastir. Therefore, the sculpted architectural decoration of the
ìSkopjeî churches potentially provides the immediate source for plastic
decoration of later ìMoravaî churches, exemplified by the rosette on the
church of St. Stephan in Kruöevac (Plate 20).54
A comparative analysis of characteristic stylistic features of all men-
tioned ìSkopjeî churches indicates that they belong to the same group
(Tab. 2). The group shows consistent gradual clustering of architectural
51 MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above), figs. 128, 133, 135; KORA∆,
Spomenici (as in note 7 above), 219.
52 The rounded oculus-type brick decoration is visible in the south wall of the
parekklesion of the church of S. Mary Pammakaristos (ca. 1315) in Constantinople.
However, it was placed in the exterior seemingly un-related to the overall wall
articulation and certainly not following its desired central location of ìclassicalî
design principles, just below the arched segment of the wall. J. TRKULJA, Rose
Window: A Feature of Byzantine Architecture? in: BSCAbstr 30 (2004) 107-109, sug-
gests that the use of round oculus windows in Late Byzantine architecture was
widely spread practice, which resulted from increased interest in architectural
styles of Late Antiquity.
53 ∆urËiÊ called my attention to the line drawing of a sculptural decoration, pos-
sibly part of a rosette of unidentified provenance but found in the region of
Skopje and recorded in: MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above), 152.
54 TRKULJA, Aesthetics and Symbolism (as in note 44), 68-73; id., Rose Window (as in
note 52 above), 107-109. 255
256
Table 2 Comparative Analysis of the Paradigmatic Architectural Features of ìSkopjeî Churches (J. BOGDANOVI∆)
Dateȱ Placeȱ Elongatedȱ Domeȱ Stoneȱ HalfȬ Pilastersȱinȱ SemiȬ SemiȬ SemiȬ Stoneȱ Sculptedȱ Plasterȱ
ȱ altarȱspaceȱ executedȱ columnsȱ engagedȱ theȱ circularȱ circularȱ circularȱ stringsȱ architectural andȱ
Churchȱ withȱanȱ inȱopusȱ columnsȱȱ exteriorȱ nichesȱonȱ nichesȱinȱ nichesȱ decorationȱ paintedȱ
dedicationȱ interpolatedȱ listatumȱ andȱ theȱ theȱexteriorȱ elsewhereȱȱ remnantsȱ
bayȱȱ techniqueȱ interiorȱ westernȱ ofȱtheȱapseȱ emulatingȱ
façadeȱȱ buildingȱ
techniqueȱ
1337ȱ Ljubotenȱȱ
St.ȱNicholasȱȱ
Xȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Xȱ ?ȱ
ȱc.1330/37ȱ Ku²evišteȱ
HolyȱSaviour/ȱ
Xȱ ȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ
ȱ Presentationȱofȱ
theȱVirginȱ
c.ȱ1334ȱȱ St.ȱNicholasȱ
b.1380ȱ Šiševskiȱ
ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ?ȱ
~1346ȱ Skopjeȱ
destr.ȱinȱ Presentationȱofȱ
?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ
16thȱc.ȱ theȱVirginȱ
c.ȱ1350ȱ Mateji²ȱ
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Assumptionȱofȱ
Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ Xȱ ȱ Xȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ
theȱVirginȱ
1346/7ȱ Markovȱ
ȱ Manastirȱȱ
Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ
c.ȱ1371ȱ St.ȱDemetriosȱ
b.ȱ1371ȱ Matkaȱȱ
Assumptionȱofȱ
ȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ?ȱ
theȱVirginȱ
1389ȱ Treskaȱ
St.ȱAndrewȱ
ȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ Xȱ
afterȱ Devi²ȱ
1350?ȱ ?ȱ
ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ Xȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ Xȱ
afterȱ Modrišteȱ
1350?ȱ ?ȱ
ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ Xȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ
volumes around the towering canopy-like church core, revealing the high
technical and architectural skills of the builders. Made of stone and brick
with relatively flat wall surfaces, the churches acquired their secondary
articulation through the application of essentially geometric principles
based on symmetry and the structural use of ìtriumphal archî tectonics,
reminiscent of architectural achievements of the classical past. The
pilasters, stone strings, exterior niches and window lunettes with moder-
ate but diversified brick decoration, plastering and painting of the faÁades
in emulation of building techniques, and the accentuated use of low-relief
architectural sculpture and round windows are all recognizable stylistic
features of the group. Simultaneously, some distinctive features illustrate
differences among analyzed ìSkopjeî churches. Above all, there is a typo-
logical inconsistency: cross-in-square ñ five-domed, and single-domed
churches, without or with later built exonartheces ñ and the triconch church
of St. Andrew on the Treska.55 Such a variety of church plans can be par-
tially explained by the proposed ìmodular systemî design process which
allowed structurally the more-or-less consistent application of different
typological systems. Additionally, I would suggest, some differences in
functional requirements of the analyzed churches may have resulted in a
selective presence of certain architectural spaces, and, in particular, of
nartheces.56 Because most of the churches were initially built as aristocrat-
ic endowments and mausolea, only subsequently, if at all, would they have
been appropriated for extensive monastic use, which would require archi-
tecturally well-defined nartheces.57
Skopje as a Building Center

The historical context of the proposed building group illuminates the
question of the ìSkopje building schoolî further. Members of the Serbian
NemanjiÊ dynasty and its aristocracy supported an extensive building pro-
gram in Skopje and its surroundings starting in 1282, when King Milutin
conquered and proclaimed Skopje the capital of the medieval Serbian
State.58 King Milutin donated and built numerous churches in the region:
55 Because of its triconch plan, Millet considered the church of St. Andrew on the
Treska as the example of ìMorava Schoolî church: MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as
in note 5 above), 133. The church of St. Andrew at Treska is potentially among
the youngest buildings in the proposed group, revealing a potentially different
concept, close to Athonite examples. The application of the same stylistic quali-
ties in the faÁade decoration seen in the ìSkopjeî churches, however, connects St.
Andrew on the Treska to the ìSkopjeî group stylistically.
56 On the function of nartheces in the Late Byzantine period: E. HADJITRYPHONOS,
Peristoon in the Late Byzantine Church Architecture (= Meletes 1), Thessalonike 2004.
57 On the similar problem of nartheces in ìMoravaî churches: Dj. STRI»EVI∆,
Hronologija ranih spomenika Moravske ökole, Starinar 5-6 (1956) 115-127. N.
STANKOVI∆í dissertation work in progress, Framing Monastic Ritual: Architecture and
Liturgy of the Byzantine Narthexes on Mount Athos, Princeton, promises further
insight into the questions of nartheces and their function.
58 The Byzantines never recovered Skopje. The fear that Thessaloniki might fall
to the Serbs led Byzantine Emperor Andronicus II Palaeologos (1282-1328) to 257
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
the churches of Ss. Constantine and Helena, St. George, St. John
Prodromos, St. Nicholas on the Serava River, St. Procopius on the Vardar
(Axios) River, and the church of Holy Saviour.59 King Milutinís son, King
Stefan DeËanski founded the church of St. Demetrios in Skopje, where his
second wife Queen Maria Palaeologina, daughter of John Palaeologos,
was entombed. During the economic and cultural prosperity under King
Milutinís grandson, Stefan Duöan, prominent church founders were the
members not only of the ruling family but also of the emerging aristocra-
cy. This resulted in further flourishing of architectural enterprises. After
the death of Emperor Stefan Duöan, architectural development of Skopje
continued under Kings Vukaöin and Marko MrnjavËeviÊ, Prince Lazar
HrebeljanoviÊ, and their nobility.
Skopje, which prospered as the new imperial city for almost 50 years
between 1346 and 1392 when it was lost to the Ottoman Turks, probably
was the center for church architecture in the region.60 Unfortunately,
none of the churches in the city have survived.61 The coronation church
of the Presentation of the Virgin ìTrojeruËica,î (Triherousa, Three-Handed),
potentially the most important church for a better understanding of the
ìSkopjeî paradigm, was destroyed in the sixteenth century.62 This is the
arrange a diplomatic marriage between King Milutin and his daughter Simonis in
1299. Simonisí dowry included all of the Byzantine territories north of the Ohrid-
Prilep-ätip line, including already-lost Skopje. Marital ties with the Palaeologan
dynasty fostered the imperial pretensions of the Serbs and resulted in strong cul-
tural connections with Constantinople. The impregnation of Serbian with
Byzantine culture dominated the policy of Stefan Duöan in the creation of the
ideal of Slavo-Byzantine Empire. G. OSTROGORSKY, History of the Byzantine State,
New Brunswick 1969, 466f; D. M. NICOL, The Last Centuries of Byzantium, 1261-
1453, Cambridge 1993 [1972], 119-120; V. MARKOVI∆, Pravoslavno monaötvo i man-
astiri u srednjevekovnoj Srbiji, Gornji Milanovac 2002 [1920], 23; KALI∆, Srbi (as in
note 44 above), 14f, 32f.
59 On the architecture in the region: Dj. BOäKOVI∆, Problem manastira Sv. Djordja
ñ ëGorgaí na Seravi, Starinar 5-6 (1954-1955) 73-82; A. DEROKO, Srednjovekovni grad
Skoplje ñ S. NENADOVI∆, Konaci manastira Hilandara, Beograd 1971, 10; PETKOVI∆,
Pregled (as in note 7 above); PETROV, Pregled (as in note 50 above), 75-88; KORA∆,
Spomenici (as in note 7 above).
60 The proclamation of the ìEmpire of the Serbs and Greeksî in 1346 was the
most decisive event that took place in the Balkans in the middle of the 14th cen-
tury. On Easter day, King Stefan Duöan was crowned the ìEmperor of the Serbs
and the Greeksî in front of Bulgarian Patriarch Simeon, Archbishop of Ohrid
Nikola, the first Serbian Patriarch Joanikije, and monastic representatives from Mt.
Athos. The event took place in the now lost church of the Presentation of the
Virgin ìTrojeruËicaî in Skopje. On the same occasion the Serbian Orthodox Arch-
Episcopate was raised into the level of a Patriarchate. K. JIRE»EK, Istorija Srba,
Beograd 1952, 222f; S. M. ∆IRKOVI∆, Srbija i carstvo, Glas SANU, Odeljenje istori-
jskih nauka 10 (1998); MARKOVI∆, Pravoslavno (as in note 58 above), 23; NICOL, Last
(as in note 58 above), 119-120; OSTROGORSKY, History (as in note 58 above), 490.
61 Destructions of Skopje caused by several major earthquakes, systematic dev-
astation, urban re-shaping and constant rebuilding, resulted in this poor rate of
survival of its 14th-century architecture.
62 On the written testimony to the utmost importance of the TrojeruËica
258 church: PETROV, Pregled (as in note 50 above), 75-88.
main reason why the role of medieval Skopje in the development of Late
Byzantine architecture has been essentially overlooked.
An identification of the key monuments of the ìSkopjeî group and its
place within the development of Late Byzantine architecture cannot be
denied, even though some questions remain unresolved due to lack of
architectural data. Because of the lack of any surviving church in the city
itself, the significance of the ìSkopjeî churches has to be interpolated
through surviving royal and aristocratic foundations on the outskirts of
the city, which were predominantly built as family mausolea. The analyzed
surviving churches in the environs of Skopje built during the reign of
Stefan Duöan (1331-1355) and his immediate successors (1355s-80s) pre-
sent important, although fragmentary, information on the missing
ìSkopjeî churches and suggest their relationship to regional architectur-
al developments during the Late Byzantine period after the 1330s, when
architectural activities ceased in Constantinople,63 and in particular for
the development of ìMoravaî churches north of the Skopje region.
Skopje at its apogee under the reign of Stefan Duöan during the 1331s-
55s, concurrent with a noticeable building decline in Constantinople,
might have played a role similar to early fourteenth-century Thessaloniki
as a locus for intersections of different cultural trends with long-lasting
consequences.64 During the reign of Stefan Duöan, Skopje prospered and
maintained particularly sound relationships with Mt. Athos, Ohrid, and
Constantinople itself. In addition, even though the fourteenth-century
Serbian state, with Skopje as its capital, expanded geographically into the
Byzantine territories, Serbian connections with her Western neighbors
never stopped. The analysis of the architectural features of the ìSkopjeî
churches suggests that Skopje could have attracted the best builders from
various regional centers ñ Thessaloniki, Ohrid, and, above all, Prizren,
which had been in the Serbian territories before and after the conquest
of Skopje. In all probability, the first generation of local builders, trained
in the Thessalonian ìbuilding school,î worked on the churches in
Ljuboten and KuËeviöte. Yet, these churches show not only the influence
of Thessaloniki but also stylistic features unique to the ìSkopjeî paradigm
such as symmetrical ìtriumphal archî tectonics and architectural decora-
tion.
The employment of particular building workshops is crucial for
understanding the distinctiveness of this new ìbuilding school.î Judging
by the quality of execution, well-balanced tectonics, use of building tech-
niques, and architectural decoration, the building group(s), working on
MatejiË and certainly on some other churches in the region were capable
of providing innovative ideas that resulted in the unique combination of
63 BOGDANOVI∆, Late Byzantine (as in note 4 above) with further references.
64 Minting of coins in Skopje during Stefan Duöan confirms the economic pros-
perity and vitality of the city. On the significance of Skopje as civic center:
DEROKO, Skoplje (as in note 59 above), 11; KALI∆, Srbi (as in note 46 above), 32f;
NICOL, Last (as in note 58 above), 119-120; OSTROGORSKY, History (as in note 58
above), 490. 259
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Table 3 Hypothesis About Building Workshops for ìSkopjeî Churches

(J. BOGDANOVI∆)
Dateȱ Placeȱ Dedicationȱ Donorȱ Protomasterȱ/Designȱ Buildersȱ

1337ȱ Ljubotenȱ/ȱ Sv.ȱNikolaȱ LadyȱDanicaȱ Localȱbuilder,ȱ Localȱbuilders,ȱ
Bardovciȱȱ ȱ trainedȱinȱ possiblyȱtheȱ1stȱ
SkopskaȱCrnaȱ Thessalonianȱ generationȱ
St.ȱNicholasȱ
Gora,ȱ
traditionȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ
13kmȱSkopjeȱ
c.ȱ1330Ȭ37ȱ Ku²evišteȱ Sv.ȱSpas/Sv.ȱ LadyȱMarenaȱȱ Builderȱtrainedȱinȱ Localȱbuilders,ȱ
ȱ Skopskaȱ Bogorodicaȱ ȱ Thessalonianȱ possiblyȱtheȱ1stȱ
ȱ CrnaȱGora,ȱ ȱ
withȱchildren:ȱArsen,ȱ traditionȱ generationȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ HolyȱSaviour/ȱ
Vladislava,ȱRadoslav:ȱ
16kmȱSkopjeȱ Presentationȱ exonarthexȱ
ofȱtheȱVirginȱ
c.ȱ1334ȱȱ Šiševoȱ/ȱNirȱȱ Sv.ȱNikolaȱ KingȱDušanȱ Westernȱtraining,ȱ Localȱbuilders,ȱ
ȱ Treskaȱ Šiševskiȱ ȱȱȱȱ/ȱ acquaintedȱwithȱtheȱ possiblyȱtheȱsameȱ
b.1380ȱ Skopskaȱ ȱ KingȱMarkoȱ buildingȱofȱMateji²ȱ whoȱworkedȱonȱ
CrnaȱGora,ȱ
St.ȱNicholasȱ ȱ Mateji²ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ
~1346ȱ Skopjeȱ Vavedenjeȱ KingȱMilutinȱ ȱ ȱ
ȱ ȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱȱȱȱ/ȱȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ
destr.ȱinȱ Presentationȱ
KingȱDušanȱ
16thȱc.ȱ ofȱtheȱVirginȱ
c.ȱ1350ȱ Mateji²ȱ Uspenjeȱ EmpressȱJelenaȱ?ȱ Expertȱacquaintedȱ Localȱbuildersȱ
Skopskaȱ Bogorodiceȱ wifeȱofȱEmperorȱ withȱtheȱbestȱ
CrnaȱGora,ȱ ȱ Dušanȱȱ buildingȱpracticesȱatȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ theȱWesternȱAdriaticȱ
Assumptionȱ
ofȱtheȱVirginȱ Littoralȱandȱwithȱtheȱ
bestȱByzantineȱ
buildingȱidiomsȱ
1346/7ȱ Markovȱ Sv.ȱDimitrijeȱ KingȱVukašinȱ Localȱbuilder,ȱ Localȱandȱpossiblyȱ
ȱ Manastirȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱ/ȱȱ acquaintedȱwithȱtheȱ westernȱbuildersȱ
ȱ Sušiceȱȱ St.ȱ Kingȱ Thessalonianȱandȱ
c.ȱ1371ȱ F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ Demetriosȱ Markoȱȱ Westernȱbuildingȱ
17kmȱSkopjeȱ ȱ traditionȱ
b.ȱ1371ȱ Matkaȱ/ȱ Uspenjeȱ NoblemanȱBojko,ȱȱ Westernȱbuildingȱ Localȱbuildersȱ
Glumovoȱ Bogorodiceȱ sonȱofȱladyȱDanicaȱ traditionȱrelatedȱtoȱ
Treskaȱ ȱ theȱAdriaticȱLittoralȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ
Assumptionȱ
12kmȱSkopjeȱ
ofȱtheȱVirginȱ
1389ȱ Treskaȱ Sv.ȱAndrejaȱ PrinceȱAndreja,ȱȱ Localȱmaster?ȱ Localȱbuildersȱ
F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ȱ KingȱMarko’sȱ
18kmȱSkopjeȱ St.ȱAndrewȱ brotherȱ
ȱ
?ȱ Devi²ȱ ȱ PrincessȱDeva,ȱȱ Westernȱbuildingȱ Localȱbuilders,ȱ
probablyȱ Treskaȱ ȱ KingȱMarko’sȱsisterȱ traditionȱrelatedȱtoȱ possiblyȱtheȱsameȱ
afterȱ1350ȱ F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ ?ȱ theȱAdriaticȱLittoralȱ whoȱworkedȱonȱ
WorkedȱonȱMateji²?ȱ Mateji²ȱ
?ȱ Modrišteȱ ȱ ȱ Westernȱbuildingȱ ȱ
probablyȱ Treskaȱ ?ȱ ?ȱ traditionȱrelatedȱtoȱ ?ȱ
afterȱ1350ȱ F.Y.R.O.M.ȱ theȱAdriaticȱLittoralȱȱ
ȱ
260
architectural features in the proposed ìSkopjeî paradigm (Tab. 3).65

Attempted reconstruction of the building process for two crucial endow-
ments by the same family, the churches at MatejiË and of the Holy
Archangels near Prizren, offers further insights into the development of
regional idioms in Byzantine architecture. Favorable economic circum-
stances in medieval Serbia under Stefan Duöan presumably prompted
the engagement of the best available builders for both churches. The fact
that by the early 1350s the same royal family simultaneously finished two
monumental structures with similar plans and proportional and struc-
tural systems suggests that the master builder(s) who laid out the two
churches might have been either the same individual(s) or at least from
the same workshop. Distinctive design features ñ the use of pilaster strips,
ñ
the 1:√ √5 and 2:3:2 proportional systems ñ indicate that the master
builder(s) had training fostered along the Adriatic Littoral. Once he
became an emperor, Stefan Duöan definitely wished to partake in
Byzantine imperial art and commissioned his churches as replicas of the
great imperial predecessors from the city of Constantinople, which
remained the symbol of the empire. Moreover, because Emperor Duöan
spent his youth in the Cosmopolitan monastery of Pantokrator,66 it can
be speculated that he proposed specific Constantinopolitan examples to
his master builder(s). It has already been suggested that the church of
the Holy Archangels in Prizren was built to resemble the south church of
the Pantokrator monastery.67 If not based on the Pantokrator itself,
Emperor Duöanís foundations could have been modeled after some
other illustrious examples from Constantinople.68 The master builder(s)
may even have observed them directly in Constantinople, just as today
architects often travel to learn about famous architectural enterprises.
The Constantinopolitan churches remained crucial throughout the Late
Byzantine period, functioning as models for imperial mausolea and civic
centers elsewhere. Such a hypothesis partially explains why the master
builder(s) of MatejiË at that time used architectural features essential to
Middle Byzantine Constantinopolitan design that were already anachro-
nistic.
65 On thought-provoking questions considering Byzantine architectural prac-

tice, particularly questions of architectural design, building workshops, and mas-
ter builders and their apprentices: S. ∆UR»I∆, ëRenewed from the Very Foundations:í
The Question of the Genesis of the Bogorodica Ljeviöka in Prizren, in: Archaeology in
Architecture: Studies in Honor of Cecil L. Striker, eds. J. J. EMERICK ñ D. M.
DELIYANNIS, Mainz 2005, 23-35.
66 S. ∆IRKOVI∆, Istorija srpskog naroda I, Beograd 1981, 464.
67 V. KORA∆, Sveti Arhandjeli, Duöanov carski mauzolej, Glas SANU, Odeljenje
istorijskih nauka 10 (1998) 191-201.
68 At MatejiË the principles of balance, symmetry, and highly sophisticated cross-
in-square design were complemented by the use of the twelve-sided dome, an
elongated altar space, and a horizontal zone of semi-circular niches in the wall of
the main apse, still recognizable at the churches of the Pantokrator and nearby
Pantepoptes monasteries (Figs. 9-10). 261
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Although the same master builder(s) might have provided basic

schemes for Emperor Duöanís foundations at both MatejiË and Prizren,
different building groups were responsible for their materialization.
Judging by the building technique employed at MatejiË, the masons were
acquainted with Byzantine building practices spreading from Constan-
tinople via Thessaloniki and Byzantine Macedonia to the region of
Skopje. These local building groups were obviously capable of providing
innovative solutions that resulted from unique combinations of paradig-
matic architectural features. The main dome of the MatejiË church, exe-
cuted in the opus listatum technique, and a big oculus, incorporated as a
low-relief rosette in the western tympanum, both anticipated the idiosyn-
cratic elements of the ìMorava School.î Indeed, if we accept the proposed
dating of the church at MatejiË to be around 1350, then the time span
between the 1330s and the 1350s coincides with Stefan Duöanís reign and
corresponds to a single generation of builders that gathered in the region
of Skopje during a major architectural boom. Judging by the building
technique employed, the masons were most likely local builders.
Potentially, the same group(s) of builders also worked on St. Nicholas
äiöevski, founded by King Duöan himself ca. 1334 and finished under King
Marko before 1380, and on the church at DeviË, founded by King Markoís
sister, Princess Deva and roughly dated after 1350. The master builder of
the church at DeviË might even have been an apprentice of the MatejiË
protomaster.69 The architectural accomplishments of this new generation
of builders could have provided the foundations for the development of
the ìMorava Schoolî in the final stage of Byzantine architecture.
After the death of Emperor Stefan Duöan in 1355 and especially after
the 1370s, Skopje underwent a process of steady decline.70 Local building
workshops from Skopje most likely dispersed in search for work. Some of
the workshops potentially moved south. A heavily restored triconch church
of unknown original dedication, today known as Prophetes Elias in
Thessaloniki, was presumably built in the 1360s-70s (Fig. 21).71 Unique
among Late Byzantine Thessalonian churches, this five-domed church
shows the gradual and tectonic architectural clustering of virtually four
smaller ìchurchesî around the main church core, strikingly similar to the
already analyzed five-domed church at MatejiË, and in general to the
architectural clustering of ìSkopjeî churches. The church of Prophetes
Elias has Constantinopolitan features such as a huge sixteen-sided dome,
two rows of niches in the apsidal zone, a stone string course, and a frieze
of pendant triangles below the roof line in the conches (Fig. 9, plates 8,
ñ
69 The use of pilaster strips, proportional system1:√ √5, and consistent propor-
tional and structural reduction of the large scale building into small scale are
common features of both churches at MatejiË and DeviË.
70 See: KALI∆, Srbi (as in note 46 above), 15.
71 T. PAPAZOTOS, The Identification of the Church of ìProfitis Eliasî in Thessaloniki,
DOP 45 (1991) 121-127; ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above),
262 65-84.
Fig. 21 Church of Prophetes Elias, Thessaloniki, ca. the 1360s-70s,

exterior view and floor plan (E. KOURKOUTIDOU-NIKOLAIDOU ñ A. TOURETA,
Wandering in Byzantine Thessaloniki, Athens 1997, Figs. 127-128)
21). The two registers of niches and stone string courses are noticable in
contemporary ìSkopjeî churches and, in particular, in Markov Manastir,
finished by the 1370s (Plate 7). Though significantly smaller in scale, the
triconch St. Andrew on Treska built by the 1380s is another comparable
example of similar concurrent trends in the region of Skopje (Plate 22).
The Great Meteoron monastery in Thessaly, approximately 200 km south-
west of Thessaloniki, was founded by St. Athanasios and the last member
of NemanjiÊ dynasty, king and later monk Ioannis-Ioasaph Uroö
Palaeologos (1370-1373, d. 1387/88).72 Though not studied extensively,
some of the segments of the church and apse facets of the refectory can
be dated to the late fourteenth century. The two buildings exemplify the
stylistic features of the ìSkopjeî churches ñ stone and brick construction,
ìtriumphal archî tectonics seen on the side wall of the church as well as
two rows of niches, with semicircular niches in the second row above the
windows, which were decorated with different brick patterns in the
lunetes of the apse of the refectory (Plates 23, 24).73
Other building groups who worked on the ìSkopjeî churches most
likely traveled north and reached the valley of Morava, where Prince Lazar
HrebeljanoviÊ and some other Serbian nobility moved in front of the
72 Field notes J. BogdanoviÊ. ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2

above), 65-84.
73 ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above), 65-84, focused on the
eastern part of the katholikon presumably the oldest surviving segment of the
church, built in the late 1380s, after the Ottoman conquest of Thessaloniki in
1387, and suggested that the Thessalonian building workshop built its all-brick
eastern dome. However, other architectural segments of the entire monastic
complex as well as patronage point to ìSkopianî and subsequently ìMorava
Schoolî idioms. 263
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
Ottoman threat.74 In that region the so-called ìMorava Schoolî eventual-

ly emerged, according to MILLET, inexplicably.75 ∆UR»I∆, VULOVI∆, and
KORA∆ have considered links between architecture in Prizren and the
ìMorava School.î76 In his study of the origins of ìMoravaî churches,
RISTI∆ included architectural features from some of the proposed
ìSkopjeî churches, although he didnít explicitly emphasize Skopje as a
potential center of influence.77
The stylistic characteristics of the ìSkopjeî churches, with particular
references to MatejiË and Markov Manastir, which matured as a ìtransi-
tionalî type of ìSkopjeî church, suggests that the path of development of
the ìMorava Schoolî was through Skopje. The church at Markov Manastir
is an apparent chronological and architectural prototype for ìMorava
Schoolî churches. Markov Manastir defines the ìSkopje paradigmî of the
mid-1350s with its ìtriumphal archî tectonics, highly-developed geometry,
and strong structural correlations between its interior and exterior. At the
same time, other noticeably ìSkopjeî features of the church at Markov
Manastir ñ sophisticated building techniques in brick and stone, along
with already familiar secondary architectural elements of double stone
string courses, engaged half-colonnettes, semi-circular niches, and paint-
ed and sculpted decorative patterns applied on well-defined surface zones
ñ clearly anticipated new practices that yielded the ìMorava Schoolî man-
ifestation after 1350, recognizable from its exuberant architectural deco-
ration (Figs. 3-4, plate 7).
MILLETís observation that the origins of the ìMorava schoolî typified
by its triconch plan should be sought in the region of Skopje and farther
on Mt. Athos, though essentially correct, deserves a modification.78 The
proposed revision of the typological categories in architecture would
simultaneously explain ìatypical,ì non-triconch Morava churches exempli-
fied by the church of St. Stephen originally dedicated to the Holy
Archangels (?) in the monastery Koporin possibly built around 1405 in
the vicinity of Smederevo (Fig. 22).79 The church founded by Despot
Stefan LazareviÊ (1389-1427), son of Prince Stefan Lazar HrebeljanoviÊ,
74 On the formation of the Serbian state in the Morava valley: KALI∆, Srbi (as in
note 46 above), 15.
75 MILLET, Líancient art serbe (as in note 5 above), 196-198.
76 The churches of the Holy Archangels and St. Nicholas near Prizren, both
Stefan Duöanís foundations with their peculiar combination of Byzantine and
Romanesque characteristics, might have been the starting point for the ìMorava
School.î See: ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27, with references to
earlier studies by VuloviÊ and KoraÊ.
77 V. RISTI∆, Moravska arhitektura, Kruöevac 1996, 64-65, 81-88, 107-108, 144-157
considers Matka, KuËeviöte, MatejiË, and Markov Manastir when discussing the
origins of architectural features of the Morava churches.
78 MILLET, Líancien art serbe (as in note 5 above), 152-153.
79 M. RADUJKO, Koporin, Beograd 2006, 67-112, with references to other single-
naved, non-triconch Morava churches at Jeöevac, RamaÊa, Joöanica, äatronja,
264 Kastaljan, and Slavkovica.
Fig. 22 Church of St. Stefan (Holy Archangels (?)), Koporin monastery

near Smederevska Palanka, ca. 1405, southern faÁade and floor plan
(M. RADUJKO, Koporin, Beograd 2006, Pl. 5 and Fig. 19)
shares all essential stylistic and proportional features of the proposed

ìSkopjeî building group. These examples show that the questions of style
and building workshops can be studied independently of typological and
conceptual questions, which do not always and unquestionably overlap.
The short-term, punctual outbursts of creative efforts by builders to
accomplish the consistent architectural expression of a particular build-
ing program and to please the taste of an elite group of donors, allow the
existence of several centers as generators and recipients of architectural
influence within a given region, and certainly do not indicate a simple lin-
ear path of architectural developments. The eclecticism and choice of
forms from the Byzantine imperial past definitely had an aura of tradition,
but there was also an active process of arriving at certain architectural
265
Jelena BogdanoviÊ
solutions. The stylistic characteristics of churches in the region of Skopje

derived from multiple sources. On one side, Byzantine architectural
developments reached ìSkopjeî churches from Constantinople via geo-
graphically-closer Byzantine Thessaloniki. On the other side, Roma-
nesque and proto-Gothic architectural developments in the Adriatic
Littoral influenced building of churches for the Orthodox rite in Prizren,
another important medieval center geographically and culturally associ-
ated with Skopje. The contextual analysis on the example of ìSkopjeî
churches suggests a more comprehensive understanding of complex
regional architectural developments of ìbuilding schoolsî in the Late
Byzantine period.
The following abbreviations are used in the article:
BSCAbstr Byzantine Studies Conference Abstracts of Papers

DOP Dumbarton Oak Papers
GOTR Greek Orthodox Theological Review
GSND Glasnik Skopskog nauËnog druötva
HilZb Hilandarski zbornik
J÷B Jahrbuch der ÷sterreichischen Byzantinistik
JSAH Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians
ODB Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium 3 vols. (A. Kazhdan,
New York ñ Oxford 1991)
SANU Srpska Akademija nauka i umetnosti
ZRVI Zbornik radova Vizantoloökog instituta
ZZSK Zbornik zaötite spomenika kulture
266

Byzantino Slavica Lxix 1 - 2: Revue Internationale Des Études Byzantines

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Byzantino Slavica Lxix 1 - 2: Revue Internationale Des Études Byzantines

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

BYZANTINO´

ISSN 0007–7712 Registrováno u MK ČR pod č. E 1092

© Slovansk˝ ˙stav AV »R, v. v. i. 2011

La revue Byzantinoslavica est citée par ERIH et Scopus

Milada Paulová – 120e anniversaire de sa naissance (L. H a v l í k o v á ) . . . . 9

Milada Paulová. To the 120 Paulová’s birthday anniversary

Roman-Gothian peace treaty signed in the year 382

A Face to Face Encounter: The God-Humanity relationship as reflected

The geography of the provincial administration of the Byzantine empire

Photius and Eustathius of Thessalonica on Greek cuisine intricacies, or a

A Trace of the Language of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Equal to the

Notes on the Chronology of the Byzantine-Pecheneg War (1083-1091)

later, a reassessment of this chronology is extremely intricate. With the help of

ïj äc ëýêïé ©ò ÐÝñóáé: The image of the “Turks” in the reign of John II

Notes on the Inaugural Oration of the Patriarch Michael of Anchialos

King (kralj) Milutin and the Paleologan tradition

Rock Monasteries on the Souha River in the South Dobroudja

Regional Developments in Late Byzantine Architecture and the Question

Jelena BOGDANOVI∆ (Greenville)

The question of style has been marginalized in modern scholarship

a millennium-long Byzantine tradition is often studied through the focus

1330s significant construction projects in Constantinople virtually ceased.

tors and recipients of architectural influence, which obscured the signifi-

recognition of the active processes of architectural achievements as discursive out-

Table 1 Comparative List of ìSkopjeî Churches (J. BOGDANOVI∆)

1346/7ȱ Markovȱ Sv.ȱDimitrije Kingȱ

b.ȱ1371ȱ Matkaȱ/ȱ Uspenjeȱ Noblemanȱ

Fig. 2 Church of the Dormition, GraËanica monastery near Priötina,

never been considered as a unique architectural group. KRAUTHEIMER

[Macedonian Monasteries], Skopje 1995 provides an overview of the monasteries of

of these churches, however.9 If mentioned within any stylistic group, these

Fig. 3 Church of St. Stephen, Kruöevac built by Prince Lazar (Stefan)

additive and modular design with the gradual clustering of architectural

Fig. 4 Church of the Ascension at Ravanica, built by Prince Lazar (Stefan)

their significance in the development of Late Byzantine architecture after

The Architecture of the ìSkopjeî Churches after the 1330s

Byzantine church design reflected the internal disposition of the cross-in-

Fig. 7 Christ Pantepoptes (Eski

Fig. 8 Pantokrator monastery (Zeyrek Camii), Constantinople, ca. 1118-1136,

The largest surviving church in the region, which may be understood

Fig. 9 Monastery of Constantine Lips (Fenari Isa Camii), Constantinople, North

Built as an imperial foundation, this large-scale building by Late

Fig. 10 Church of Hagia Aikaterini in Thessaloniki, possibly ca. 1315,

and KuËeviöte (Tab. 1). The placement of protruding pilaster strips at

25 ∆UR»I∆, Articulation (as in note 9 above), 17-27.

Fig. 11 Comparative analysis

re-configuration of some earlier schemes of Middle and Late Byzantine

Paleologan Architecture, ZRVI 13 (1971) 333-344; id., Architectural Significance of

Fig. 12 Church of the Holy

Fig. 13 Comparative floor plans of

32 ∆UR»I∆, Late Byzantine Thessalonike (as in note 2 above), 65-84.

Fig. 14 ñ 15 Comparative floor plans of MatejiË, near Kumanovo in Skopska

thirteenth- and fourteenth-century churches of the Adriatic Littoral, such

35 The church was rebuilt under Stefan Duöanís great-grandmother Queen

Fig. 18 MatejiË, near Kuma-

acknowledged as Middle-Byzantine (sic?) churches, including the already men-

Plate 1 St. Nikita,

Plate 2 Church of the

Plate 3 Christ Pantepoptes (Eski Imaret Camii), Constantinople, b. 1087,

Plate 4 Pantokrator monastery (Zeyrek Camii), Constantinople, ca. 1118-1136,

Plate 5 MatejiË, near

Plate 6 Church of St. Nicholas in äiöevo,

Plate 7 St. Demetrios,