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.