Neo-Byzantine architecture
The neo-Byzantine architecture is a style in the historicism that the Byzantine architecture anknüpft. It is classified between the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 20th century. The neo-Byzantine architectural style shaped the appearance of many sacred, but also government and other public buildings not only in countries where Byzantine architecture is part of their identity, such as Russia , Bulgaria , Romania , Serbia , Greece , Italy or Georgia , but also in Germany , Austria , France and Great Britain . This made it a universal artistic theme.
origin
The neo-Byzantine architectural style combines elements of classic Byzantine buildings with national elements. Its features include the preference for domes, the round arch, the banded façade design and the Byzantine capital with a fighter (Byzantine fighter capital) as well as in sacred architecture of the type of the cross-domed church with an inscribed Greek cross . The overall impression is dominated by spherical and cubic vaults such as domes and semi-domes, alongside elements of decorative plastic on pendentives , arcades , columns , capitals, arches, portals, niches and pilaster strips with simple ornaments. A rather compact structure and sparse use of decorative plastic are predominant. Outwardly, the buildings are mostly divided into bases, bodies and niches of arcades as well as decorative portals, moldings and other details from Byzantine art.
Mainly city churches and monasteries, cemeteries, ossuary and large memorial complexes were built in neo-Byzantine style. Furthermore, many secular buildings cite Byzantine architecture, including school buildings, train stations, centers of the Sokol gymnastics movement, stadiums, residences, commercial buildings, embassies, administrations, courts, crematoriums, bridges, chambers of commerce, war veterans and the disabled association centers.
Russia and Eastern Europe
The neo-Byzantine architectural style was widespread early on, especially in Eastern Europe and there in particular in Russia under Tsar Alexander II . Here it was Grigory Grigorievich Gagarin , director of the Imperial Academy, who committed himself to the neo-Byzantine and neo-Russian currents and found many followers. With the reign of Tsar Alexander III. Neo-Byzantine church architecture experienced its most extensive development in terms of quantity and space within the Russian Empire. While in the competition for the Church of the Resurrection in Saint Petersburg 1881-1882 contributions of the neo-Byzantine current had been received most numerous, Alexander III decided. for the design Alfred Parlands, the stylistic preference of national romanticism in Russian Revival certain in the coming years the most. In addition to some foundations paid by the tsarist family, most of the churches were built through donations. In large military garrisons and ports, the “military” churches were established through co-financing from the state, the cadre of officers and donations from the civilian population. While Alexander III. continued to prefer architecture in the Russian Revival, the churches of the neo-Byzantine school flourished in three niche regions. They became the preferred type of construction of the Orthodox priests as well as the military governors in Congress Poland and Lithuania, the southern areas on the Don as well as in the Urals and Siberia at the waypoints of the Trans-Siberian Railway. With Vasily Kosyakov's designs for the neo-Byzantine churches in Saint Petersburg (1888–1898) and Astrakhan (1895–1904) the main features of the Russian variant in the neo-Byzantine style were fully developed. In neo-Byzantine fashion , the St. Vladimir 's Cathedral in Kiev, the St. Nicholas Cathedral in Kronstadt (part of St. Petersburg), the Novy Afon New Athos Monastery (Georgian: ახალი ათონი / Achali Atoni) near Sukhumi were built . The most important building here is the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, built with elements of eclecticism . Until its destruction during the time of the Stalinist Soviet Union, central events in the history of the aristocracy in the Russian Empire are connected with it. Under Juvi Luschkow , the church was rebuilt according to the old plans in the early 2000s.
In the course of the Russian Revolution, many of the architects who had previously worked in Russia emigrated and were able to further develop the style on the territory of Serbia through the support of King Alexander I of Yugoslavia . Fifty churches are ascribed to Wasili Androsow alone in the interwar period.
Balkan countries
After Serbia was ruled by a new dynasty in 1903, which ordered a dynastic church of the Holy Sepulcher in Oplenac in 1909 , the country's further sacred architecture was shaped by this example. In the interwar period, the neo-Byzantine architectural trend grew in representative buildings in the Yugoslav metropolis of Belgrade , where King Alexander I was the most important promoter of neo-Byzantine architecture. Here it was Aleksander Deroko and Momir Korunović as well as among the numerous Russian emigrants in particular Grigorijji Samojlov and Nikola Krasnov (actually Никола́й Петро́вич Красно́в) who came closest to the ideal of a national architecture with their visions from the models of Byzantine culture. The royal palace on the Dedinje, the Church of St. Sava , the St. Mark's Church and the former Sokol "Matica" of today's Stari DIF stand out among the buildings . The Second World War and the Communist seizure of power in Eastern Europe put an end to the further development of neo-Byzantine architecture, which had already lost its popularity in the fourth decade of the twentieth century due to the currents of modernity. After the communist rulers in Yugoslavia allowed Patriarch German to continue building the future cathedral church of the Serbian Orthodox Church in St. Sava Cathedral in 1985, this became a national concern. As a result, the Orthodox Church in Serbia and in other republics of ex-Yugoslavia again had the opportunity to erect sacred buildings in a modernized form of neo-Byzantine architecture. In particular, in Novi Beograd , which is characterized by real socialist abstract block buildings, two more exemplary post-modern neo-Byzantine buildings emerged, which, in their geometric forms, are a result of the mixture of Byzantine aesthetics, Theophil Hansen's regulations of the Vienna School and Russian constructivist methodologies as successful individual achievements in the modern concrete urban landscape. Insert Belgrade: the Church of St. Basil of Ostrog ( Mihailo Mitrović , 1995–2000) and the Church of St. Demetrius of Thessaloniki (Nebojša Popović 1998–2001).
In Bulgaria, the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Sofia became important. Erected under the influence of the Russian neo-Byzantine currents, it was for a long time the largest Orthodox church in the Balkan Peninsula.
Central and Western Europe
An important representative of Neo-Byzantineism was the French Pierre Bossan . In Germany, Munich became one of the first centers of neo-Byzantine architecture. Leo von Klenze's Allerheiligen-Hofkirche is based on the Capella Palatina and is the first neo-Byzantine church to be built in Europe. Inspired by this, Ludwig II had the throne room in Neuschwanstein Castle decorated as a domed double chapel in neo-Byzantine style with gold frescoes and marble cladding. In Austrian art, the influence, particularly in paintings by Gustav Klimt such as “ The Kiss ”, is inspired by Byzantine art through abstract gestures and gold backgrounds. Theophil von Hansen also worked as an architect with works in the neo-Byzantine style such as the Greek Church of the Holy Trinity in Vienna. However, Hansen was particularly influential in adopting the round arch style in the imperial architecture of Austria-Hungary for the further development of neo-Byzantine architecture in Central and Southeastern Europe. In addition to the central building of the weapons museum in the Arsenal in Vienna, the Protestant Christ Church in Matzleinsdorf and the former Invalidenhaus in Lemberg are Hansen's most important works in neo-Byzantine style. Neo-Byzantine elements has in Vienna also by Otto Wagner Art Nouveau Church am Steinhof . The main example of Neo-Byzantine architecture in Great Britain is Westminster Cathedral in London. In France, Sacré-Coeur and Saint-Esprit with a dome of 22 m span and a scaled-down, but practically identical basic plan to the Hagia Sophia (hence “la Byzance à Paris”) are important buildings of neo-Byzantine movements.
United States
The largest and most important project of neo-Byzantine models is the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington. It houses the largest mosaic representations in the world.
features
The neo-Byzantine architectural style, just like the classic Byzantine architectural style, is dominated by round arches , vaults and domes . Walls were made with exposed brickwork or stucco decorations , floors were often laid out with mosaic .
Examples
Theophil von Hansen's House of Invalids in Lviv
Otto Wagner's Art Nouveau church at Steinhof in Vienna is also indebted to elements of neo-Byzantine architecture in its formal language, 1907
Živojin Nikolić and Nikola Krasnov, Royal Castle on Dedinje in Belgrade, 1924–1934
Bogdan Nestorović and Aleksandar Deroko, Church of St. Sava, 1935–2004
Nikola Krasnov, pylon 4 of the former King Aleksandar I. Suspension bridge over the Sava, 1930–1934
Aleksandar Deroko, General Elezović's house, 1927
New Byzantine mosaic in the Romanesque apse of the Gothic cathedral of Strasbourg
George's crypt in Oplenac
Teophil von Hansen, central section of the Army History Museum, 1848–1856
The throne room in Neuschwanstein Castle is committed to the representative style of Neo-Byzantine architecture.
St. Mark's Church in Belgrade cites the architecture of the medieval Gračanica monastery church
Nicholas Cathedral in Kronstadt
Outer wall of the French Cemetery in Belgrade, Rajko Tatić 1931
Augusta Victoria in Jerusalem
Christ the King Church (Saarbrücken) , apse mosaic by Radbod Commandeur depicting Christ in the manner of Byzantine rulers with thrones, 1929
_-_Kirche_am_Steinhof_(2).JPG)
_1.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ Aleksandar Kadijević: Byzantine architecture as inspiration for serbian new age architects . Catalog of the SANU on the occasion of the Byzantinological World Congress 2016 and the accompanying exhibition in the Gallery of Sciences and Technology in the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Serbian Committee for Byzantine Studies, Belgrade 2016, ISBN 978-86-7025-694-1 , p. 87.
- ↑ Aleksandar Kadijević: Byzantine architecture as inspiration for serbian new age architects . Catalog of the SANU on the occasion of the Byzantinological World Congress 2016 and the accompanying exhibition in the Gallery of Sciences and Technology in the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Serbian Committee for Byzantine Studies, Belgrade 2016, ISBN 978-86-7025-694-1 , p. 62.
- ↑ Aleksandar Kadijević 2016: Between Artistic Nostalgia and Civilisational Utopia: Byzantine Reminiscences in Serbian Architecture of the 20th Century . Lidija Merenik, Vladimir Simić, Igor Borozan (Eds.) 2016: IMAGINING THE PAST THE RECEPTION OF THE MIDDLE AGES IN SERBIAN ART FROM THE 18TH TO THE 21ST CENTURY. Ljubomir Maksimovic & Jelena Trivan (eds.) 2016: BYZANTINE HERITAGE AND SERBIAN ART I – III. The Serbian National Committee of Byzantine Studies, PE Službeni glasnik, Institute for Byzantine Studies, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Here p. 177 (Academia: PDF)
- ↑ Stefanie Lieb: Review of: JB Bullen: Byzantium Rediscovered. Phaidon Verlag, Berlin 2003. In: Kunstform. 6, No. 3, 2005. arthistoricum.net
- ^ Theophil Hansen - big player in the Viennese construction business Biographical Lexicon of the Austrian Academy
- ↑ Aleksandar Kadijević: Byzantine architecture as inspiration for serbian new age architects . Catalog of the SANU on the occasion of the Byzantinological World Congress 2016 and the accompanying exhibition in the Gallery of Sciences and Technology in the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Serbian Committee for Byzantine Studies, Belgrade 2016, ISBN 978-86-7025-694-1 , pp. 32–35.