III. The Byzantine Renaissance.
The Golden Age of Byzantine Art commences about the beginning of the tenth century, and, roughly speaking, coincides with the rule of the great Macedonian dynasty, a period when the warrior emperors, usurpers or otherwise, kept the invading barbarians at bay.
The Byzantine chroniclers expatiate at great length on the unparalleled luxury of the Court and how the “Sacred Palace” was filled with art treasures; and they also tell us that Constantine VII., Porphrygenitus (911-959), was an enthusiastic amateur, and even employed his “sacred” fingers in carving and painting beautiful objects; it was about the only thing he did do, for the government was entirely taken out of his hands by a series of usurpers who were nominally his colleagues.
Ivory carving was only one small portion of this great stream of decorative work, but an important part, as there was practically no sculpture in stone. In the new basilica at Constantinople were some animals carved on the marble fountains, and a few inferior bas-reliefs have been found in the Crimea and Mount Athos, but the technique is merely an enlargement of the tiny reliefs, with a complete loss of that delicacy and loving finish which is the greatest charm of the ivory craft.
The number of examples of carved ivory during the tenth and eleventh centuries is so great that it is most difficult to make a selection. The Reliquary of the True Cross in the Franciscan Church at Cortona is valuable for comparison with other carvings of the tenth century, for it is dated by an inscription mentioning the Basileus Nicephorus, Conqueror of the Barbarians, who can be no other than Nicephorus Phocas (963-969). The reliquary is divided in the usual manner into four compartments by the arms of the great central crucifix, and owing to the shallowness of the space the figures are not so disproportionately tall as was mostly the case. In the research for dignity and reverence the figures became less and less earthly, the shoulders sloping away to nothing, and a growing tendency crept in to exaggerate the height out of all proportion; also the calm expression on the delicate oval faces grew more and more solemn, till on some of the later ivories it is positively lugubrious. Yet the quiet grace and exquisite dignity of a figure like that of the Virgin on the Harbaville Triptych ([Fig. 17]), is hardly to be found in the finest Italian art. The pose of this figure and that of John the Forerunner, Πρόδρομος, are almost identical with those on the Cortona Reliquary; the Virgin’s gesture of adoration is simple and spontaneous, and it is only when it is repeated by St. John that the balance of the pattern becomes too exact and pains the eye. The figure of Christ, grandly posed on the highbacked throne, is the type of nearly every other representation of the Saviour throughout the whole period (cf. [Fig. 19]) and traces back directly to the Roman official diptychs. The drapery is elegant and well considered, though the folds have a hard flatness in spite of the soft finish of the technique. The features inherit much from the antique, the well-cut brow and deeply set eyes, but the noses have increased in length and have that slight curve at the tip which is so characteristic, and becomes so pronounced, in later Byzantine Art. The fine heads, framed in their rugged mane of hair, are very picturesque, but there is such a strong family likeness among them, that it is quite refreshing to meet a bald forehead like that of St. Paul or St. John Theologus, here represented as an aged man and not as the beardless stripling of Western art. Above all, it is the hands and the well-proportioned muscular feet, which show the power of the real artist escaping from the conventionality of his subject. On the back of the panel he has freed himself entirely from the spell of classical antiquity and drunk deeply of new oriental ideas, creating a most decorative design, illustrating the “Triumph of the Cross,” which rises, ornamented with roses, above the flowering earth, stretching up to the skies, which are thickly covered with stars, and bear the Greek inscription Jesus Christ Victorious. Two tall cypresses, tightly bound by the symbolical vine and by ivy, bow before it, whilst from the ground spring small trees and reeds, among which wild animals run in and out.
A. GIRAUDON PHOTO.][LOUVRE, PARIS
17. TRIPTYCH D’HARBAVILLE
Byzantine, tenth century
The trees may be contrasted with the fruitful olives on the Bargello plaque of the Ascension ([Fig. 18]). The composition of this scene is grand in character, in spite of its small size, and there is great freedom of movement in the lower group, each pose being cleverly characterized; the grouping is scarcely freer in the Italian conception of this subject, and the upraised hand of the apostle on the Virgin’s left is to be seen, centuries later, in the famous “Assumption of the Virgin” by Titian. There are many other plaques with scenic pictures. The elaborate carving of the Death of the Virgin is still fixed to the Bamberg Missal, which belonged to Cunigunda, wife of the Emperor Henry II. (1002-1028). The scene is crowded, and takes place under a richly pierced canopy. Christ holds the Infant Soul of the Virgin, whilst two angels with veiled hands fly down to receive it.
Perhaps the most beautiful of all these pictorial sculptures is a diptych now unfortunately divided. Each leaf has two scenes, the first, representing the Holy Women kneeling before the risen Christ and the Resurrection, is at Dresden, while the other, with the Crucifixion and the Deposition, is in the Provincial Museum at Hanover. The various scenes are treated with much freedom, and the proportions are excellent. It is enough to glance at the appalling length of the two Maries in a twelfth century plaque with the Resurrection (Bargello) to realize how much we have to be thankful for in the earlier periods.
DR. H. GRAEVEN PHOTO.][BARGELLO, FLORENCE
18. ASCENSION
Byzantine, eleventh century
There are a large number of triptychs[15] all more or less of the Harbaville school. A fine one at the Louvre of Christ and St. Theodore has lost the second wing, and of another still finer one, only the splendidly carved wings remain, widely separated now, one being in Vienna and the other in the Doge’s Palace at Venice. Several of these little shrines inclose a group of the Virgin and Child, the two most beautiful being in the Episcopal Museums of Utrecht and Liège. Count Strogonoff in his interesting collection at Rome has a particularly fine seated Virgin and Child. The whole pose is most pleasing and the Infant Christ on her knee has a far more childish face than usual, the Holy Child being more often like a little man, raising his hand to bless with exaggerated dignity. But the ineradicable love of ostentation and luxury leads the artist to diminish the importance of a really dignified figure by adding a mass of gigantic and over-decorated accessories, and the legs of the throne are wrought with more exactitude than he bestows on the robe of the central figure.
G. ROSSI PHOTO.][TRIVULZIO COLLECTION, MILAN
19. CHRIST ENTHRONED
Byzantine, eleventh century
There are many other interesting ivories in this fine collection, which even contains one of the lost plaques from the Throne of Maximian. Among them is a noble figure of Christ Teaching which might well correspond to the John Baptist at Liverpool, one of the gems of the Mayer Collection. John bears a roll with the text commencing, “Behold the Lamb of God,” which would refer to the Christ on the opposite leaf of a diptych. The Liverpool Museum also possesses a fine triptych, with Christ on the Cross, the Virgin and St. John. This is a type which seized the imagination of the German people, who constantly repeated it, losing, perhaps, in technique, but gaining in vigour and expression, as will be seen on referring to [Fig. 24].
The plaque in the Cabinet des Médailles of the Bibliothèque nationale, Paris ([Fig. 20]), is a fitting end to an account of the ivories of the Byzantine Renaissance. It represents the Emperor Romanus IV. and the Empress Eudoxia being crowned by Christ. It is doubly interesting, as through its certain date (the Emperor’s reign only lasting four years 1067-1071), we can compare it with earlier work, as the Cortona Reliquary or the Harbaville triptych ([Fig. 17]), and see that after more than a hundred years the art had not changed for better or worse. This plaque is also interesting from its artistic value, which is very high, the figure of Christ being one of the finest in the whole range of Byzantine ivory carving. We can see that the artist was perfectly capable of rendering drapery in a soft and pliant manner, yet the tyranny of the court etiquette compelled him to envelope the Basileus and Basilissa in the stiffest of sheaths, covered with a regular mosaic of jewels; and to pay honour to the Saviour he was obliged to place under His feet that triple platform of hideous device.
A. GIRAUDON PHOTO.][CABINET DES MÉDAILLES,
BIBLIOTHÈQUE NATIONALE, PARIS
20. ROMANUS IV. AND EUDOXIA CROWNED BY CHRIST
Byzantine, eleventh century
“The composition of the figures is not the invention of the painters, but the law of tradition of the Catholic Church.” These are the words of a decree of the Nicene Council in the eighth century, and it is not surprising that these compositions, settled on theological grounds were inclined to be unvarying and hieratic, the wonder is that they have so many artistic qualities. Another bond for the unfortunate artist was a certain work called “A Guide to Painting,” in which minute regulations are laid down for every detail of form and colouring. It does not appear to have been in force till after this period of renaissance, but a strict adherence to these formulæ is, without doubt, the reason why it is practically impossible to tell a nineteenth from a twelfth century mosaic by reference alone to style.
This great stream of art and culture went on uninterruptedly, no matter what were the palace intrigues or the sudden changes of government. One winter night a great cry is raised, the Emperor, the brave general whose glorious campaigns had enabled the city to increase its wealth and commerce a thousandfold, had been slain, foully murdered by order of his wife and his ancient friend. Yet there is no revolt among the people; what is it to them? A few dangerous partizans are killed, and later a few of the hired murderers, and the wife in question, are offered up to the Church in expiation of the usurper’s crime. In the evening Nicephorus Phocas is Emperor, and by the next morning John Zimisces is crowned and reigning in his stead. Both the emperors were good generals, and could keep the barbarians at bay, and, for the matter of that, they were both flagrant usurpers, the rightful sovereigns, Basil and Constantine, being kept half prisoners in the palace, while their so-called colleagues ruled the country; and if freedom from invasion, wealth, and munificent patronage of the arts are signs of good government, then these usurpers were pattern rulers. This was by no means the case with Basil II., who, at the mature age of sixty flung off the tutelage of his colleagues and plunged into a wild career of conquest, earning for himself not only the title of “Destroyer of the Bulgarians,” but the hearty hatred of his subjects at home and in the provinces.
With Basil we must leave the Byzantine Empire, which had reached its apogee of political power and art production. It was centuries before the internal decay made itself felt, but the great edifice never recovered the shock of the invasion and sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1204, and falling bit by bit before the attacks of the Mahometans, finally fell an easy prey to the Seljuk Turks in 1453.