August, 1903.] 



KNOWLEDGE. 



181 



to continued friction. lu some observations of my own I 

 found a similar condition of tlie hair on tlie outer part of 

 the skin, and traced its cause to the person sleeping with 

 legs crossed. In this case there was the additional 

 peculiarity that, whereas some of the hairs had been 

 regularly worn down to the skin surface, others had never 

 succeeded iu emerging from the skin, but had grown to a 

 length of half an inch or more henealh the outer skin, 

 through which they might be seen just below the surface. 

 They could readily be lifted out with a needle point. Can 

 Dr. Kidd suggest a cause for this mode of growth ? Fric- 

 tion alone would hardly account for it, but perhaps 

 pressure plus friction may have forced the hair point to 

 take a right-angled course. 



W. S. Rogers. 



("The particular case referred to liy Mr. Rogers, in 

 which the hairs of the leg were found lying buried under 

 the epidermis instead of projecting at an acute angle, is 

 interesting, but I cannot see why any other force than 

 that of the peculiar pressure exerted is required to account 

 f ( ir the condition. I think friction would tend to prevent 

 rather than favour the position of the hairs. 



My own case is, of course, defective, as there is no 

 evidence, except the man's own testimony, that it existed 

 in early life. It is hardly possible that special friction or 

 pressure could have been affecting for many years the two 

 borders of each hand, and the middle of the dorsum of 

 each be missed out, and the dorsal surfaces of the 

 j)hala,nges also affected. Besides which there were a few 

 stniy normal hairs of full length interspersed with the 

 truui/ated hairs. But the situations where these truncated 

 hairs were found are just those where the accumulated 

 effects of repeated friction through many generations 

 would l)e found, if at all. 



It might be held that some unknown microbic or patho- 

 logical origin could be assigned for the state of the hairs, 

 but this is hardly possible, seeing how long the condition 

 had lasted and that the skm was healthy and clean, and 

 that normal were interspersed with abnormal hairs. 



Walter Kidd.] 

 t;th July, 1903. 



THE CROSS OP S. SOPHIA. 



TO THE EDITORS OK KNOWLEDGE. 



Sirs, — I was abroad during April and did not see Mr. 

 Antoniadi's rejoinder about tlie Cross of S. Sophia until 

 I returned home. Mr. Antoniadi can hardly expect universal 

 credence for his interpretation of the lines of the Silentiary's 

 poem, which were so broken that neither Griife nor Bekker 

 veuturt'd to restore them. Moreover, the fragments quoted 

 bv Mr. Antoniadi (Knowledge, p. 91) do tud state that 

 the crown of the dome was adorned with a picture of 

 Christ in Glory; they only say something al)Out "mosaic" 

 and ■' saving " and " guarding" and " the Saviour of the 

 World." Such words are quite as likely to How from the 

 jK'ii in describing a mosaic Cross as a mosaic Christ. 



The " Painter's Manual " doubtless gives us the later 

 praxis, but I never imagined that it was supposed to reflect 

 the usage of pre-Iconoclastic days. No one doubts that a 

 mosaic of Christ in Glory filled the centre of the dome in 

 1453 (Du Cange, p. 548 ; hethaby and Swaiuson, pp. "278, 

 280), but there is nothing to suggest that this mosaic, or 

 any other of the figure mosaics, is older than the Emperor 

 Basil the Macedonian (8t)7 a.d.). Messrs. Lethaby and 

 Swaiuson may speak for tlu'inselves : "The figan- scheme, 

 so far as it can be traced, I'losely agrees with the Byzantine 

 Manual of Painting; ami the subjects and treatments can 

 be associated with work in other cliurches of the ninth and 



tenth centuries which have iu several cases almost iilentical 

 designs. Altogether, it may be doubted if a single figure 

 belongs to a time anterior tu the Iconoclastic period of the 

 eighth century. We believe the original scheme of decora- 

 tion is best accounted for without figures, and even if this 

 were not so, we can hardly believe that in the Patriarchal 

 Church at the door of the Palace figures would have 

 lasted through the reigns of the Iconoclastic emperors and 

 patriarchs " (p. 280). " It is quite certain from Procopius 

 and the poem of the Silentiary that the vaults of Justinian's 

 church were covered with mosaic. They both descrite the 

 brilliance of the gold glittering surface, but do not mention 

 any figures. In such detailed descriptions this silence goes 

 far to show that there was originally no storied scheme of 

 imagery, like that which the Poet so fully traced out on 

 the curtains and iconostasis " (p. 282). Messrs. Lethaby 

 and Swaiuson then go on to compare the Cross which they 

 understand the Silentiary to describe at the highest point 

 of tlie dome with tlie decoration <jf the well-known tomb 

 of Galla Placidia at Eaveuna, where the dome is covered 

 with blue mosaic sprinkled with golden stars, and at the 

 top is a golden Cross. 



As to the translation of the lines about the ipurizToXiv 

 (rraupov, upon which the whole dispute hangs, I would ask 

 those readers of Knowledge who have not already made 

 up their minds, to consider the general plan of the 

 Silentiary's poem, a plan which I venture to think 

 inconsistent with a reference to an outside cross-. 

 Excluding the 304 lines on the Anibo, the poem on 

 S. Sophia is 1029 lines long. Of these, the first 350 lines 

 are introductory, and speak of the fall of the previous . 

 church and of the solemn inaugiu'ation of the present 

 building on Christmas Day, 563 a.d. The last 109 lines 

 are a panegyric on Justinian. The rest of the work, over 

 550 hexameters iu length, is taken up with a detailed 

 description of the inside of S. Sophia. The poet describes 

 iu turn the Eastern Apses, the Chancel Ai'ch, the West 

 End, the Narthex, the Four Piers that support the Dome, 

 the Pendentives, the Cornice of the Dome, the Dome itself, 

 the North and South Walls, the North and South Aisles, 

 the Gynaecea, the Atrium, the Marbles, the Inlaid Work, 

 the Capitals, the Floor, the Gold Mosaic, the Iconostasis, 

 the Ciborium, the Altar, the Altar Curtains and the 

 Pictures embroidered on them, and, finally, the arrange- 

 ments for Lighting. But not a word is given to the 

 outside. The description of the Lamps ends up with a 

 declaration that the mariner, coming at night to Constan- 

 tinople fnun the .Egcaii Sea, guides his ship not by the 

 stars but by the lights of S. Sophia, shining thz-ough the 

 windows in the lower part of tke Dome.* Yet even here 

 We are dealing with lights inside the church, not with an 

 object placed on the outside. It is therefore wholly 

 improbable that Paulus, while describing the inside of the 

 Dome and comparing it to the vault of heaven, should 

 suddenly pass through the tiles and tell us iu ambiguous 

 language of a cross on the outside of the Dome. Every 

 other oliject mentioned by Paulus is visible from the 

 inside. 



Mr. Antoniadi has failed to bring forward any passage 

 iu which the verl> ypa.<f>uv is used of sculpture or raised 

 metal-work. The word is used of writiiuj or dratcing. in 

 fact of any surface decoration. Thus in the Silentiary's 

 Poem, ii., 232, eypa<)/€ is used of designs made iu marble 

 inlay on the walls. But even granting that the j>rimary 

 meaning of yad'^eiv is " to scratch, to incise," few people 

 would sujipose that when Paulus says " a cross was 

 scratched over the top of the dome " he really means " a 



• Compsire Mr. Aiitoniaili's charming draTring (Knowledgb, 



V- 27). 



