Morphological observations

Morphological interest is given to the monument by the housing of the north and south antennae of the cross by differentiating them from the rest of the roof, which mitigates the impression of gravity. The transverse antennae are emphasized by the independent gabled roofs and by the raised polygonal gables on the long facades, which partly externalize the structural character of the building. The church actually has three sides today, since the western side is mostly covered by the later narthex. The interest is concentrated mainly on the south and east sides, as well as on distinguished points, such as the dome, the cornices, the skylights. This is a rule in the morphology of the temples of the Ottoman Empire, because the eastern face has a special, symbolic meaning, while the southern face is in this particular temple the face from which access is made.
In general, the rule of the temples of the Turkish rule of low proportions, small height and indifference to morphological structure on the outside, mainly for a discreet appearance, applies. The temple is characterized by austerity in the composition of the individual sections. The morphological elements in the openings are simple. The octagonal drum of the dome is completely unstructured. The west face, internal today with the addition of the narthex, is varied with the well-known arched recess above the entrance door. At the height of the apron of the niche (prevazi) there is a detail of a rudimentary stone deacon.

In the basic rectangular parallelepiped volume of the building, the horizontal cornice bends on the long sides, forming protrusions on the transverse antennas and on the narrow sides, following the tripartite terminations of their roofs. The cross-shaped windows with multi-colored glass panes are part of a complex geometric shape formed by carved porolites. The dome, which is a Byzantine form par excellence and the leading element in the composition, is preserved here only as a symbol with its low drum and the lack of plastic structure on its faces. The gallery, which is a semi-outdoor space and is a distant memory of Byzantine arched galleries, here becomes low and lacks arches. While until the beginning of the 17th century the temples retain many of the morphological characteristics of the Byzantine models and are distinguished by their harmonious proportions, from the middle of the 17th century onwards they are built with heavy proportions and a simplified system of covering the domes, including under the single roof, the corner apartments and transepts, the eastern and western antennae of the cross, often also the north and south. It is a gradual weakening of the imposition of the morphological elements derived from the Byzantine standards. In the church of Agios Athanasios in Petrotos, those elements that would testify to an attempt at morphological development are absent. The existing morphological solutions are simplified and are far from those of Byzantine architecture. The obsession with tradition is strong, but equally obvious is the inability to maintain Byzantine standards. The Byzantine forms here are altered due to the technical inadequacy of the workshop.

The quality of the typology of the temple does not go hand in hand with the quality of the architectural forms. Looking at the floor plan, we find that there are separate compartments for the transgressions outside the main cruciform square, but the longitudinal domes that cover them are of the same height and a continuation of the longitudinal domes that cover the eastern corner compartments of the cruciform square. The corner compartments are rectangular with an aspect ratio of 3.20 / 2.40 = 1.33, which during the late Ottoman rule leads to the covering with semi-cylinders since the elevated Byzantine cross vaults have been abandoned. Technical inadequacy now leads to the alteration of Byzantine architectural forms.

There are no dividing walls between the breaches and the main Holy Step. In other words, we are dealing with a simplified recollection of the old standards while preserving the basic features of the semi-complex cross-inscribed type. The typological classification in this case is based on the structure of the floor plan and the interior space. The type of semi-complex tetragonal cruciform inscribed which occurs frequently during the Middle Byzantine era mainly in southern Greece in the katholikon of the Monastery of Kaisariani, in Panagia Gorgoepikoos in Athens, in Agios Ioannis Kerion of Mani, in Agios Taxiarchis Haroudas of Mani and in the Andromonastir of Messinia (in which the section of the Sanctuary in front of the niches is so small that the dividing walls are short and there is no communication door), but it is rare during the Turkish occupation, it makes the church of Agios Athanasios in Petrotos Trikala (1804), the second chronologically of the three, known to this day, examples during the post-Byzantine years, with the first being the church of Agios Dimitrios in Chrysafa in Laconia (first quarter of the 16th century)168 and the third being the catholicon of the Paleopanagia monastery in Kynouria (1812)169.

Saint Demetrius in Chrysafa combines mid-Byzantine features, such as the receding of the drums at the ends of the transverse antenna, the clear deletion of the antennae on the facades and the three-sided apses, the four corner apartments housed lower than the antennae of the cross, the fully developed covering of the plumes with modern elements such as the special accentuation of the longitudinal axis. Also, it has a central axis ratio to the sides of 2.11/1, a dome height of 8.50 meters, a dome diameter of 2.60 meters, characteristics that are justified due to the precocity of the monument.

The katholikon of the Paleopanagia monastery in Kynouria quite successfully imitates a mid-Byzantine temple with the clear deletion of the antennae on the roof, the three-sided apses, the fully developed covering of the crests, the ratio of the central axis to the sides 2/1, a dome height of 10.00 meters and a diameter dome 2.80 meters. Here the corner apartments are not differentiated because they are covered under the single gabled roof, which also applies to the roughly contemporary church of Agios Athanasios in Petrotos. In the examined monument the ratio of the central axis to the sides is 1.43/1, small compared to the other two temples, the height of the dome from the floor 7.60 meters, very low, and the diameter 2.15 meters, very small. Here the columns are quite far from the side walls and the reason is the intention to support a dome of small diameter.

In all the cruciform inscribed temples in the prefecture of Trikala of the 19th century, the width of the central aisle is greatly reduced. In our opinion, this is a structural weakness due to the attempt to adapt the type to the new data and the gradual departure from the Byzantine starting points, but not, as has been argued, in the adoption of elements from the three-aisled basilicas and in a fusion of the cruciform inscribed with the three-aisled basilica .

As for the differentiation of the type of domes covering the four corner compartments which start as sections of semi-cylinders and at their end towards the transverse antennas of the cross turn into monastic domes, it is an unusual constructional and typological detail, which is also observed in the monastery’s katholikon of Agia Triada in Desi Trikala. We consider it to be an improvisation of the craftsmen, without any particular intentions to create a new type or a new form.

The reduced heights, the diminution of the dome, the reduction of lighting are a result of the lateness of the season. At the same time, there is the adoption of elements from secular architecture, such as the straight window sills, the sections of the roofs, the use of a supported portico. Agios Athanasios is an interesting example of a provincial cross-inscribed type, one of the many that exist in the plains of the prefecture of Trikala during the late Turkish period, the application of which proves:
a. The search – survival of Byzantine patterns (the Byzantine construction methods have not been forgotten, but are simplified and altered) and the attempt to connect with the past.
b. The relatively good economic situation of the communities.
c. The relative freedoms granted by the Turks during the 10th century.

The low level of technology is clearly visible from the way of construction (negligent, lowly masonry). However, this could not be attributed to the inexperience of the crew, rather to indifference to the details, since on the other hand it is clear that the successful handling of the erection of a difficult building project is evident. After all, the era of the late Turkish occupation is not characterized by the high construction level nor by the careful details. We have the adoption of elements, types and forms from Byzantine architecture with simplifications and alterations of the original models, without this implying a forfeiture of the architecture, but rather an indifference to the performance of old models and a weakening of the Byzantine ways which led to the falsification of the forms and the application of other simpler ones .

Undoubtedly the crew had good vaulting knowledge. The imperfections, some bad workmanship, indifference to details, the poor quality of stonework, the thick mortars, the lack of decorative elements, can be attributed not to ignorance or inexperience but to the focus of interest mainly on the typology of the temple out of respect for tradition, possibly not and in study for the completion of the project.