1PZ2a7xaD

In order to gain access to the Krakowska street, an old tenement
house had to be pulled down. It was replaced by the
new porch of the cathedral, with the new façade, and an adjacent
narrower tenement house. Both elements matched
each other in style and had been designed by Mączyński.
The architect faced a complicated problem since the axis
of the existing cathedral building run a little aslant to the
street, whereas the façade had to be parallel to it [Figs
39 a–b]. The differences in the ground level between the
old part of the church and the street constituted another
problem which the architect had to overcome. The outbreak
of the First World War prevented the project from
being executed in full: only the first bay, the one adjacent to
the nave, and its corridor were completed. The other one,
which would have served as a porch and was supposed to
form the proper façade, was never realised.
As a model to which to adhere in his designs, Mączyński
adopted (probably advocated by the Archbishop) the
principle of Early Christian or Byzantine art, yet with
clearly visible inspirations from traditional Armenian architecture.
It seems that the renovators by all means wanted
to emphasise the eastern traits of the cathedral building,
to imbue it with ‘Oriental’ or ‘exotic’ feeling, so that it was
recognizably different from the Latin (i.e. Roman Catholic)
churches. While the mere architectural forms of the
cathedral make it immediately recognisable as a piece of
Armenian architecture, the stone decoration of Armenian
architecture often employs elements derived from or identical
to analogous motifs in Islamic, Early-Christian or even
Romanesque art. Yet, the particular arrangement of those
popular motifs used by Mączyński leaves no doubt as to the
fact that the architect modelled the decoration of the cathedral
extension precisely on Armenian art, and not, despite
the common repertory of ornamental motifs, on Early-
Christian or Romanesque art. The stone carvings decorating
the interior of the newly built part derive precisely from
Early-Christian art as well as from ornaments copied after
Armenian illuminated manuscripts. Many of the motifs
used by Mączyński can be easily recognised among popular
decorative motifs in Armenian architecture. The subtle but
discernible architectural decoration of the interior of the
new construction reveal that the architect abundantly drew
on the Early Christian, Ravennian-style stone carvings, as
well as the miniatures of the 12 th -century Armenian manuscript
(the so-called Skevra Gospels), kept in the cathedral’ s
treasury [Figs 40–46]. The most conspicuous Armenianstyle
element in the external decoration of the newly built
part is perhaps the three-light window of the organ-loft,
overlooking the backyard to the south of the cathedral. Its
three tall openings are united by a flat, ornamented band
and thus form a kind of ‘triforium’ [Figs 47–50]. This ornamented
band, running along the archivolts of arched windows,
seems to be one of the most characteristic features
of Armenian architectural stonework decoration used by
Mączyński in his designs. Another equally cha racteristic
element borrowed from Armenian stone carving is the disposition
and decoration of the west portal of the extension
(now the main portal of the cathedral). It was given the
form of a broad rectangular opening crowned by a semicircular
arch [Figs 51–55].
The comparison of decorative elements used by Mączyński
with their counterparts in original Armenian stonework
reveals that the architect must have been acquainted
with the latter and quite consciously alluded to them in his
design. Nevertheless, he did not repeat any motifs literally
but rather was inspired by Armenian stone decoration in
general. While the external decoration of the extension: the
portal, window of the organ-loft and an arcade opening to
the backyard on the south – can be described as Armenian,
the motifs used in the interior (balustrade of the organloft
and the interior part of the portal) were drawn from
the carvings on Early-Christian sarcophagi, cancelli and
ivory relief decoration of the first centuries AD. All those
elements, carved in light-grey sandstone, perfectly match
the severity of the squinches in the dome, opening in an
oculus at the top. Also the rather mediocre mural paintings
imitating Ravennian mosaics, which cover the dome, are
very well set against such a stonework background. In his
designs (both for the cathedral and for the neighbouring
tenement house) Mączyński alluded to the above-mentioned
styles but he restricted himself to borrowing only
individual elements from them, singled out of their ‘natural’
context, which he then re-designed in the modernist spirit.
One of the last items to have been altered in the cathedral
interior before the outbreak of war was the vaulting of
the nave. The seventeenth-century barrel vaulting, allegedly
threatening to collapse, was supplanted with a wooden coffered
ceiling resting on prominent gilt consoles, with gilt
decorative rosettes in the spaces between hexagonal cofferings,
designed by Mączyński in 1911 [Figs 58–59]. It is
very ‘heavy’ in appearance, perhaps also too intrusive in the
cathedral’ s interior, so no wonder that it was criticised by
contemporaries. Nevertheless, the ceiling, which resembles
the Spanish Renaissance coffered ceilings formed under
the influence of Islamic art, called artesonado, endows the
nave with an exotic air of the Orient. It bestows on the plain,
mundane even, seventeenth-century architecture the hallmark
of something extraordinary. Once again, it has to be
underscored that any Oriental feature present in the cathedral
was immediately associated with Armenia and alluded
to its art, understood as a cradle of the art that yielded the
cathedral building. In that respect the ceiling was another
455