it the following directions for the arrangement of a church:—
"And first, let the building be long, with its head to the east, with its vestries on both sides at the east end; and so it will be like a ship.[1] In the middle let the bishop's chair be placed, and on each side of him let the presbytery sit down; and let the deacons stand near at band, in close and small girt garments, for they are like the mariners and managers of the ship: with regard to these, let the laity sit on the other side, with all quietness and good order. And let the women sit by themselves, they also keeping silence. In the middle let the reader stand upon some high place."[2]
This may be taken as the method followed down to the fourth century. The separation of the clergy from the laity by a screen tended to assimilate the Eucharist still more to the pagan mysteries, and to make it a sacrifice offered by the priest rather than a meal, participation in which by the people is its principal function. Although the Western Church adopted the full sacrificial idea it did not screen off the clergy as that was done in the Eastern Churches; it was content with a slight railing, leaving the officiating minister full in view. Here we have one of the most striking differences between Eastern and Western Churches.
From the time of Constantine to the age of Justinian the Roman style of basilica prevailed. In the sixth century the new order which we know as Byzantine appears, and the rise of it synchronises with the great impulse to church building that was given by the latter emperor. This development may be attributed in part to the influence of Persian architecture on the Greek branch of the empire.[3] But although the stimulus came from the Eastern neighbour, the system itself was a legitimate development of the preceding Roman style. That was not
- ↑ ναός = nave.
- ↑ Apost. Const. ii. 57.
- ↑ Fergusson regards Byzantine architecture as a combination of Roman and Sasanian. See Handbook of Architecture, p. 945.
