Richard Krautheimer's Description Of Hagia Sophia

645 Words2 Pages

Are eyewitness’ a reliable source in written history? Primary sources in dictated word are direct accounts written in the time period, which that author is referring to. Primary details along with secondary sources, or narrative from a retrospective view, can lead a building into an interesting perspective. A basilica in Istanbul, Turkey, the Hagia Sophia, has primary literature, such as Byzantine court historian Procopius’ description, at the same time having secondary accounts of the building. Architectural historian, Richard Krautheimer gives a critical recollection of the Hagia Sophia, whereas Procopius lends himself to a more decorated description of the Hagia Sophia (H. Sophia). Based in a modern bias, Richard Krautheimer digs deep …show more content…

Sophia. His text shows the perspective, one can assume the Byzantine court had, of Emperor Justinian at the time. Using Krautheimer’s angle to view Procopius’ writing, it is clear Procopius is from a biased frame of mind. When Procopius is talking about H. Sophia, he lends himself to praise Emperor Justinian and the gods for the talent it took to build such a structure, Ibid. He tells a story-like chronicle of the H. Sophia, not to mention he leads the reader to marvel at such feat the emperor completed. Eloquently described, every detail of the H. Sophia is perceived to be beautiful and god-like, which is pointed out by Krautheimer as well but in a materialistic view. Fig 2. shows the broad marble and gold foil, which Krautheimer expands and states that to build such a building would cost one-hundred eighty million US dollars Ibid., 206. In the primary writings of Procopius, he does not allude to any economical proportions like Krautheimer does. Procopius fails to know context of Fig. 2, Istanbul Turkey, Hagia Sophia. Getty Images. 2015. the architecture of the time, that being said he is able to explain the H. Sophia with fresh eyes and a colorful

Open Document