Theodoric the Great's Palace Church of Christ the Redeemer at Ravenna, the later Sant' Apollinare Nuovo

Daria Glana Tomasztczuk

Art History and Communications Studies McGill University, Montreal

August 2005

A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree ofMaster of Arts

AlI rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage or retrieval systems without the written permission of the author. Daria Olana Tomasztczuk August 2005 Library and Bibliothèque et 1+1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l'édition

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-24926-0 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-24926-0

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans loan, distribute and sell th es es le monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, électronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission.

ln compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privée, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont été enlevés de cette thèse.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. ••• Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ENGLISH FRENCH

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

THESIS INTRODUCTION THEODORIC'S PALACE CHURCH HISTORY CONSTANTINIAN BUILDING PLANS IMPERIAL IMAGERY MOSAICS LITURGICAL USE CONCLUSION

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

ILLUSTRATIONS

NOTES

BIBLIOGRAPHY ABSTRACT

This thesis is an overview of the historical context in which the church of Christ the

Redeemer (Sant' Apollinare Nuovo) in Ravenna, Italy, was erected. It explores the forces responsible for shaping the church at the time of its construction and decoration in the sixth century. The basilica had gained popularity of usage as a model for the Christian Church in the West by this time. This thesis further explores the conclusions put forth by scholars that the basilica was the forum in which the transition of architectural imperial symbolism from the pagan empire to the new

Christian Church took place, that the Church adopted the court ceremony of the emperor for its liturgy, and that the symbolism previously associated with the emperor was transferred to Christ resulting in the identification of the basilica as the throne hall of Christ. A study of the mosaics adoming the nave walls describes the significance of their origins and meaning. RESUME

Cette thèse présente un survol du contexte historique dans lequel l'église de Christ le

Redempteur (Sant' Apollinare Nuovo) à Ravenna en Italie a été construite. Elle explore les forces qui ont influencé sa construction et ses ornementations au sixième siècle. La forme de la basilique a servi de modèle architectural pour l'Église

Chrétienne de l'Ouest de l'époque. Cette thèse explore d'abord les conclusions de certains scientifiques que la basilique fut le forum où se produisit le passage du symbolisme impérial de l'architecture de l'empire païen vers la nouvelle Église chrétienne, puis que l'Église a adopté la cérémonie de l'empereur pour sa liturgie, et que le symbolisme qui était auparavant associé à l'empereur a été transféré vers

Christ, ce qui a résulté en identification de la basilique comme la salle de trône du

Christ. L'étude des mosaïques qui ornent les murs de la nef décrit l'importance de leurs origines et signification. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

1 wish to express my gratitude to Professor Hans Boker, academic supervisor for this thesis, for his invaluable advice, patience, and learned guidance in the field of Early

Christian architecture.

A further debt of gratitude is owed to Inessa Babina for translating the Abstract, as well as to Orest Humenny for his editorial advice and proofreading.

Daria DIana Tomasztczuk Introduction

Conceived of as the Ostrogoth Theodoric the Great's (reigned 493 - 526) palace chapel, the church of Christ the Redeemer in Ravenna, Italy, was a stage upon which the religious and political dramas of the Roman Empire were played out in the sixth century. With its port of Classe on the Adriatic Sea, Ravenna was a strategically important city ever sinee Emperor Honorius (reigned 395-423) chose it in 404 to be the western capital of the Roman Empire. For the next two centuries, during which there was increasing theological and political polarization between East and West, possession of Ravenna represented control over the western half of the Roman

Empire, the most significant region being Rome, which was the seat of the Pope.

The churcR of Christ the Redeemer is a significant architectural marker" in both the history of the Late Roman Empire and of the Early Christian Church. Drawing on the rich heritage of imperial Roman symbolism, Christ the Redeemer's architecture and decoration demonstrate Theodoric's act of self-Iegitimization as mler of the

Western Roman Empire and serve to illustrate the Arian beliefs of the Ostrogothic people, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between Arian, Western and Byzantine religious convictions of that period. Built as part of Theodoric' s palace complex, great attention and expense was lavished on the church's crowning glory, its mosaic decoration, first under Gothic, and subsequently, under Byzantine patronage. Suffused with layers of theological and liturgical meaning, the mosaics continue to inspire the beholder in a personal manner. 2

Theodoric's Palace Church

The exact date of construction of the church of Christ the Redeemer is unknown~ but is often cited as having occurred in the fifth century. Given that Theodoric came to the throne in 493, it follows that construction must have begun at sorne point between then and the year 500. In the ninth century the chronicler AgneUus made note of a dedicatory epigraph located over the windows in the apse which read "King

Theodoric erected this church from its foundations in the name of Our Lord Jesus

ChriSt."l Guiseppe Bovini therefore concludes that the construction of Christ the

Redeemer must have been mostly complete before Theodoric's death in 526, otherwise the name of his successor would have been included in the epigraph. 2

After the faU of Ravenna to Constantinople the church was re-dedicated to St.Martin of Tours, a renowned "Gallic warrior against heresy." 3 In the mid-ninth century it was renamed once again, this time to Sant' ApolHnare Nuovo, because it became the home of the relies of St.ApoUinaris, removed from the basilica of Sant' Apollinare in

Classe in order to protect them from pirates which, due to the church's proximity to the port of Classe, was susceptible to being sacked.4 A crypt was created under the presbytery of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo which consisted of a central corridor and an ambulatory conforming to the circular shape of the apse above.

Archeological data suggests that the church was enclosed by Theodoric's palace on three sides: north, east, and south. Historical documents indicate that the western façade was attached to a porticoed courtyard, an arrangement to be found at St. 3

Peter' s Basilica in Rome, as well as in pre-Constantinian secular imperial basilicas and palace courtyards. As was the case at the Great Palace in Constantinople, the façade of Christ the Redeemer (Fig. 1), and its courtyard, were located to the side of the palace's main entrance called the "Chalke," whicb was what the Iuain entrance to the Great Palace complex in Constantinople was also called.

Theodoric' s Palace was sacked by the forces of the great Byzantine general

Belisarius in 539 and became the Palace of the Exarchs, falling into the hands of the

Lombards not long afterward. The campanile still standing to the right of the church façade was built in approximately the year 1000. The last standing tower of the palace was destroyed in 1295. The building presently located adjacent to the right of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo is of a much later date. The two-storey, sixty-foot long brick structure further along the right, however, is believed to be a remnant wall from Theodoric's Palace. According to Johnson, this is probably a portion of the

Chalke.5 Local historians and inscriptions closer to Theodoric's time have described his palace as "surrounded with porticoes, adomed with the most precious mosaics, divided into several triclinia, surmounted by a tower which was considered one of the most magnificent of the king's buildings, and - surrounded with pleasant and fruitful gardens." 6 Located in front of the church and the Chalke was a large public square cal1ed the Platea Maior and "in its location and function the square at

Ravenna recalls the Augustaion, a square in front of the Great Palace." 7 It is unknown what materials clad the church exterior, although if one is to assume it was compatible with the palace walls, then it must have been decorated in a likewise 4 manner. In the sixteenth century "an elegant marble portico was added to the sober brick front~ presumably to replace the original narthex." 8

The interior of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo exhibits the typical Constantinian basilica arrangement (Fig-~3). It has a central nave flanked by two single side-aisles. An attached portico precedes the church at the western end while an apse, a semi-circle on the interior and polygonal in shape on the exterior, completes the building at the eastern end. Overall, the church is approximately forty-tive meterslong and twenty­ one meters wide. The nave width is approximately twelve meters and both side­ aisles are four meters wide each. There are thirteen bays in the nave accommodating a total of twenty-four marble columns.

Nine window openings are indicated on the south wall of Deichmann's plan of the church. (Fig.2). These follow a sophisticated rhythm where every window opening aligns in an alternating manner with either the center of a structural bay, or with a column. At the west end, the tirst window aligns with the tirst bay, and the last window at the east end aligns with the last bay. On the exterior, these windows are centered between shallow masonry buttresses. In the clerestory above, there are thirteen windows, with each centered on a structural bay below. The smaller number of windows below would have been necessitated by the need for a greater structural masonry mass to withstand the lateral pressure generated by the nave and the upper and lower roofs. The structural simplicity of the south side of the church suggests that this is probably the original construction. 5

On the north side,. there exists a different rhythm set up by the wall openings in their relationship to the interior bays. With the exception of the first and last ones, the remaining five openings align with every second column. Pilasters, not evident on the interior south wall, alternate with the wall openings and are in tum centered on every second column. There is no directly symmetrical relationship between the interior nort~ and sûuth walls, which raise.s the possibility that the north and south walls were either built with a different programme in mind, or that one is original and the other has been altered at sorne later date. The presence of pilasters on the north wall, an unusual element fûr an Early Christian church, suggests that this wall was altered at a much later date.

Drawings and pictures of the interior of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries show that the wall openings on the north side are in fact dûûrs. These dûors would have given access tû the six chambers, probably chapels, of equal size, and one smaller room at the northeast corner of the church.

The ridge of the roûf over the nave rises to an approximate height of twenty meters.

From Friedrich Deichmann's elevation drawing of the church of Sant'Apollinare

Nuovû, .one may deduce that the interior floor to ceiling height in the nave would be approximately sixteen meters, and that the floor to ceiling height in the side aisles would be around seven meters. Therefore the nave height is greater than twice the height of the side-aisles. In 1611 "Cardinal Caetani had the original bare wooden 6 trussed beams of the ceiling covered over by a flat wooden ceiling with rich gilded coffers." 9 It was also at this time that the floor, columns and arches were raised by approximately 1.2 meters due to the rising ground-water level. Compared to its width of tvve1ve meter~, the ratio of the naVe width to the currently restored hdght is the original 3:4. The ceiling in the side-aisles at sorne point attained a flattened barrel-vault. Whether or not the builders intentionally made use of number symbolism in the measurements of proportion in this church building is unknown.

However, numbers were considered to carry meaning in both the ancient and Early

Christian times, increasingly becoming so in the later medieval period. It is therefore worthwhile to make note of the fact that at Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, for example, the overall ratio of three to four in the nave' s cross section is a classical proportion demonstrating balance and beauty. For the Christian, the number three was considered the most sacred, reflecting, among other things, the Holy Trinity, the three day~ Christ lay in hjs tomb, and shared with the pagan the reference to the world's three constituent parts, namely, air, land and water. Furthermore, the pagan

Greco-Roman venerated the triad consisting of the deities Jupiter, Juno, and

Minerva. lO The number four also had significance for both the pagan and the

Christian. It was associated with "the basic divisions of matter, time and space: the four humors of the body, the four winds, the four seasons, the four rivers of paradise, the four cardinal virtues, the four horsemen of the Apocalypse, the four main prophets, and the four evangelists." Il 7

The waIls of the nave at Sant' Apollinare Nuovo are supported by marble columns imported by Theodoric from Constantinople (Fig.4). These are topped by Corinthian capitals, as is the case at St.Peter's Basilica, which allude to the building's imperial connections. The heavy impost blocks sitting atop the capitals~ are carved with Cl: cross at the front and are a common feature in Ravenna. 12 The nave arcade arches are emphasized by a border while the undersides of the arches are decorated with a

Baroque motif.

Three steps elevate the sanctuary in the apse above the floor in the nave. It has undergone a number of changes over the centuries. The half-domed apse, originally decorated with mosaics, collapsed during an earthquake in the eighth century and was rebuilt, only to be remodeled in the sixteenth century. This major re-modelling of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo in the Baroque style extended the apse another two depths of the original, changing the shape of the apse in plan from semi-circular to elliptical.

The church retained its overall Baroque character until 1950 when it was returned in great part to its earlier state. The apse's original fonu, -COIltaining three large, taIl windows, similar to those in the clerestory and side-aisles, was reconstructed, albeit without any indication of the mosaics which once adomed it.

The church interior is well-lit by its large clerestory and lower windows, a total of twenty-two on the south side, and thirteen clerestory windows on the north, aIl of which serve to enliven the impressive mosaics located on the upper nave waIls.

When compared to a similar church interior, such as that of San Francesco in 8

Ravenna (Fig.5), whose interior nave walls are blank, the lightening of the nave walls by the presence of the mosaics is acutely perceptible. Not only do the walls of

Sant'Apollinare's nave appear to be light in weight, but the overall impression of light coloration and spaciousness" further enhanced by the even lighting, recalls the same characteristic in coastal Aegean churches. 13

The significance of the selection of architectural elements is always debatable. Paul

Crossley finds Gunter Bandmann's approach to the iconographical analysis of medieval buildings, in which he attempts "to isolate single and precise 'intended meanings' in the minds of patrons" 14 to be problematic~ saying that Umost medieval buildings are open to widely different interpretations." 15 But in fact, Bandmann's method appears to be a reasonably balanced approach to iconographical analysis which strives to discover the symbolic, allegorical and historical meaning of the monument's architecture. Morphological analysis, in which the dlevelopment of particular architectural forms in buildings is traced backward in time, 16 provides valuable insight into the connection the building under analysis has to certain traditions and values admired by and aspired ta by its patron. For example, kings and emperors, Theodoric among them, wished ta participate in the tradition of Imperium

Romanum 17 and therefore chose architectural elements laden with particular symbolic and historic meaning which would implicate them in that tradition. The other method is the structural analysis in which the appearance of the building in question is dissected and then compared with others. "Like the morphological approach, it could never uncover the symbolic, mythic meaning of the earliest 9 content of the form, but it can clarify the indicative, associative performance of the form within the context of the work of art as a whole." 18

Sant'Apollinare Nuovo's architecture points to various influences and demonstrates the breadth and wealth of knowledge about construction techniques and symbolism accumulated by builders and patrons from aIl reaches of the Roman Empire. The polygonal shape of the apse's exterior, for example, is recognized by Richard

Krautheimer as Aegean, while the brick band running along the exterior length of the building, crossing the butlress pilasters and curving over the arches of the 19 windows at the lower 1evel, points to Syrian influence. The building itself was built of slender bricks in the typical Milanese fashion, while the apse was constructed using clay-fired hoIlow tubes, a feature of southem ltalian and North

African architecture,20 intended to lighten the weight of the dome.

Although the influence of the patron over the shape and building type of the monument he wished to erect was undoubtedly decisive, Bandmann's contention that

"the pre-eminence of the patron over the actual craftsmen" 21 must not be understood as negating the value of the master builder and his workshop. It simply underlines the overriding importance of the expression of the patron's vision in the production of his monument In our case it would he wrong to treat Theodoric as the sole determinant of Christ the Redeemer' s form and decoration. His influence as patron of the church, however, says much about the clarity of his vision and about his ability to express it to the builders. It also speaks volumes about the sophistication of 10 the craftsmen, about their knowledge of architectural form and its associated meaning, about their ability to grasp the essence of the patron's aspirations and about their capability to successfully translate them into architectural form. It also illustrates the qniversality Qf meanings assoc;iated with partic;ul(!,f arc;hitectural elements in buildings erected in the Roman world, and the fluidity with which these elements adapted to variations in a building type. The presence of Aegean, Syrian and Roman elements in Theodoric' s palace church speak of the traditions

Theodoric and the craftsmen had been exposed to and whose forms and meanings they understood intrinsically. These forms had long ago come to be associated certain building types, which served to convey a particular message to the beholder.

History

A history of the Goths was tirst written by Cassiodorus, a Roman aristocrat and trusted advisor to Theodoric the Great, and then a generation later by Jordanes, a

Goth in the service of Theodoric's grandson Athalaric. By tracing Theodoric's lineage back three centuries and giving an account of the adventures of Theodoric's

Amal ancestors~ both authors endeavoured to illustrate that Theodoric and his descendants were veritably royal by birth, thereby asserting Theodoric's full authority to rule over the Romans as their king. Cassiodorus' history of the Goths is now lost. Except for the texts of an Anonymous Valesianus II, who appears to have had access to "numerous chronicles available in Ravenna, ca. 540, ,, 1 the only significant source of historical data on the life and family of Theodoric the Great is 11

Jordanes' mid sixth-century text entitled "De origine actibusque getarum" which is, according to Jordanes himself, an abridged version of Cassiodorus' writings, 2 and a collection of the traditional oral history of the Goths passed down from one generatioQto the next in the form of songs caUed "carmina prisca." 3 A mix oftruth, myth, and fiction, modem historians have determined that Jordanes' indiscriminate collage of the hist6fies 8:f varieus natioos within the Gethic werld indicates that this­ history must have been directed at a Roman audience.4 It was not an attempt to record the true history of the people as much as it was an attempt to formulate, in concrete terms" a distinguished history of a people and their leadc~rs, so that the

Italian population would more easily accept Theodoric's leadership. At the request of the Ostrogothic king, 5 Cassiodorus outlined his royal Amal lineage back fifteen generations to the first hero of all the Goths, Achiulf, in order to establish

Theodoric's singular authority among the various branches of the Gothic people, and to give him credibility as king within the realm of the Roman empire.

According to his biography, Theodoric was born in 454 AD. Named Thiuda-reiks~ which means people-ruler, his name was later changed to Theodoricus by Latin historians.6 At the time of his birth, the Ostrogoths inhabited a province of the

Roman Empire called Pannonnia, in what is now central Europe. Designated

"foederati", the Ostrogoths were considered to be allies of the Emperor in

Constantinople, and could be called UPOQ to act as an auxiliary military force should the need arise. Every male Ostrogoth was a de facto warrior. These foederati were paid annually by the Emperor in order to protect the borders of the Empire from hostile invasions. However, their protection lasted only as long as the payments 12 continued. Whenever relations between them and the Emperor soured, they themselves became a threat to the security of Constantinople and its colonies. It was just after such a rupture in relations between Emperor Leo and the Ostrogothic nation that Theodoric, heir to the Ostrogothic leadership, was sent to Constantinople, aged eight, as a hostage of peace. He spent his formative years, from 461 to 470, at the

Byzantine court of Emperor Leo I, receiving a Greco-Roman education. Thomas

Hodgkin offers the possibility that in 467 the young Theodoric may have witnessed the triumphal entrance of the newly proclaimed Augustus of the West, Emperor

Anthemiu~ as he rode throlJgh the Porta Aurea gate" "a fine triple gateway, the centre arch of which rests on two Corinthian pilasters." 7

The contrast between the permanence, grandeur and order of law in Constantinople and the nomadic, warlike, rural life of the Ostrogothic people would have made a strong impression on Theodoric.8 Having experienced both civil city life and nomadic rural life..- and havin~ seen the positive and negative aspects of each,.

Theodoric was in a position to dream of forming astate from a "sustained vitality of

German and Roman within a controlled setting, in which each onels strengths were preserved and nourished by the other." 9 Having been exposed to both the Roman and Ostrogothic cultures, Theodoric, like the state he later strove to build~ was a product of both worlds and understood the value of employing an approach proper to each culture to attain his goal. As a Goth, he relied on the strength of his own character, his leadership qualities, and his proven abilities as a warrior to persuade his people to follow him in his trek to Italy, and to accept his unique way of ruling 13

the Italian peninsula. As king of the Roman lands, Theodoric adapted to the Roman

system and continued the work of the great emperors of the past, preserving and

building great civic monuments and infrastructures. He revived and strengthened

commerce and civic security, thereby ushering in an era ofprosperity not seen by the

Italian people since Emperor Constantine moved the capital of the Empire to

Constantinople. "The economic condition of Italy, both as to the producers and the

consumers of its food-supplies" for example, "was more prosperous under Theodoric

than it had been for centuries before, or than it was to he for centuries afterwards." 10

When EmpefOr Leo l died in 474, the same year that Theodoric inherited the

leadership of the Ostrogoths from his father, Thiudemir, the new Emperor Zeno's

accession met with many difficulties and he was compelled to calI upon Theodoric's

military assistance. Upon successfully securing Zeno's throne for him, Theodoric

was "rewarded with the digmties of Patrician and Master of the Soldiery ... and

probably about this time he was also adopted as "filius in arma" by the Emperor," 11

which, as 'son-in-arms' obligated Theodoric to defend the Emperor as the need

arose.

At sorne point before 488, an agreement was reached between Emperor Zeno and

Theodoric, which stipulated that Theodoric would take his army and people to Italy,

unseat King Odovacer and rule until Zeno arrived. The vague terms under which

Theodoric agreed to take on this mission served both parties weIl as neither had to

limit their options in advance. The eastem Emperor wished to displace Theodoric 14 from his growmg following among the troublesome consolidated Ostrogothic populations in Illyria, Macedonia and Thrace and thus from his ever-increasing power base at the Emperor's doorstep, where he was always asking for more land and money. For Theodoric, on the other hand, the move to Italy would end his financial dependence on the imperial treasury for the security of his leadership, for if he couldn't solve the economic problems of his retainers his people would probably desert him, and it presented him with an opportunity to establish a permanent kingdom of his own. 12 If we consider that each male Ostrogoth was a warrior, then it would not be unreasonable to say that the whole Ostrogothic nation moved to Italy when Theodoric arrived there with his military force in July of 489_ Wolfram cites estimates of twenty thousand warriors making the journey, calculating that with family members, there must have been about one hundred thousand people on the move. 13 Whether or not these estimates are realistic is irrelevant. The important point is tQat enough Ostrogoths traveled to Italy with Theodoric to remove Odovacer from the throne, and their numbers must have decreased substantially in the East so as to cease to he- a nuisance to the Emperor. 'Fhere was already at- that time- a- Gethle population on the Italian peninsula, having come over earlier with the Gothic king

Odovacer. Thus, when Theodoric defeated Odovacer in 493, slaying him with his sword at a banquet at whjch they were &upposedly to çonfirm their loint rulership of the Italian lands, he consolidated aIl of the Goths under his uncontested authority.

Theodoric's admiration and respect for Roman history, and for its tradition of law and order, manifested itself in practical terms throughout his reign at Ravenna.

Although Milan had become the base of military and economic leadership over the 15 course of many generations, he chose to rule from Ravenna, as the previous

Western Roman emperors had done. However, "to the barbarians, Rome was still the mistress of the world.,,14 Theodoric's visit to Rome in 500, during which he addressed the Senate and atlended chariot races, provided him with the opportunity to see with his own eyes the glory of Rome's past reflected in its architectural wonders. Having had the benefit of seeing both Rome and Constantinople, one of the few emperors to have done so, Theodoric continued to be deeply convinced

"that Rome, not Constantinople, was still the capital.,,15 Theodoric's reign was fairly stable, peaceful" strong and prosperous. He exercised a great amount of influell(~e over his neighbours, gradually taking control over lands outside of Italy as weIl.

After his victory over the Franks in 510, Theodoric held sway over all of ltaty,

Provence, most of Languedoc, and Spain, which he ruled through rus grandson

Amalaric, and he had regained Panonnia. He established a network of influence throughout present-day Europe by marrying bis daughters into the fiUITOunding royal ruling families, namely, the Visigoths, the Burgundians, and the Thuringians. His sister was married into the ruling family of the Vandals, while in the year 495

Theodoric himself married Audefleda, daughter of Childeric and sister to Clovis,

King of the Franks. His nieces, nephews, and grandchiidren ruled as kings and queens of the Thuringians and the Lombards.

Building on the foundation erected by his predecessor Odovacer, Theodoric gained the respect of the native population through his tolerance for their way of life; he continued his predecessor's use of the Roman administrative system and civil 16 service; he relied on two separate para11el justice systems, one for the Goths and another for the Romans. It is recorded that during Theodoric's only visit to Rome, he gave an eloquent oration from the portico of the Senate-house overlooking the

Roman forum,. thus asserting his imperial status" "Recognizing the continuity of his government with that of the Emperors who had preceded him, he promised that with

God's help he would keep inviolate a11 that the Roman Princes in the past had ordained for their people." 16 Although most of the Germanie kingdoms which established themselves in areas once belonging to the Roman Empire conducted their governments "in accordance with the traditions of the Empire and administered mainly by officiaIs trained in the Imperial school," 17 it was Theodoric who adhered most closely and fu11y to the old Roman system of government, showing that, indeed, he was in spirit, if not by blood, a true Roman Emperor. Numerous letters of request that Ravenna received from various kingdoms for waterclocks, harps, and other such innovations of the day, attest to the fact that "the court of Theodorlc was regarded as a centre of light and civilisation by his Teutonic neighbours" 18 which promoted advancements in the arts, trades, agriculture, and the like. For most ofhis thirty-three year reign, Theodoric was considered to be a fair and judicious ruler. It was possible to have recourse to Theodoric himself if satisfaction was not found in the courts of law and, as a result of his wise pronouncements, he C@lll(~ to be regarded as a new king Solomon, with many of his sayings passing on into proverbs among the people. 19 17

In 515 Theodorie married his daughter Amalasuentha to his distant relative, Eutharie, with the plan that Eutharie would beeome king after his death, and that this union would produee heirs to continue the Amal dynasty. "WeIl reported of for bodily vigour anq for statesma.nlike ability," 20 Eutharie met the requirements of both the

Goths and the Romans, and was "part of an overall plan to draw all the royal

Germanie families of the barbarian kingdoms into a network around the Amali line, and thereby to extend Theodorie's peeuliar brand of leadership throughout mueh of the territory of the Western Empire." 21 Eutharic's death in 523 was one of many major blows to Theodorie's dynastie ambitions towards the end of his life. The last seven years of Theodorie's reign wereafflieted withsuspieion, insolence" the murder of family members in the kingdoms belonging to his dynastie network, and his pereeived threat of invasion by foreign powers, aIl eompounded by the problem posed by the laek of an adult male heir to his throne.

Moreover, the dogmatie dispute between the Roman and the Byzantine Churches" whieh had persisted throughout most of Theodorie's time in power, was finally settled in 519. As a result, the dynamies between the Holy See in Rome, Byzantium, and Ravenna ehanged to Theodorie's disadvantage. While his relations with

Constantinople were frequently strained, Theodorie had always maintained good diplomatie ties with the Papaey in Rome, proteeting it and lending it support when needed. The strength of Theodorie's kingdom had depended mueh on the antagonism between Rome and Constantinople. Now the foeus of Constantinople's energy beeame the elimination of Arianism and the re-establishment of its direct l8 control of the West, for the- sake- 6f the tmity of the Christian- Chureft and 6f the

Roman Empire. With Emperor Justinus' proclamation in 523 that Arianisrn was a heresy and forbidden within the Empire, Theodoric's position came under tire.

Persecutions Qf the Mans in Constantinople brought about forced conversions to

Orthodoxy and the seizure of Arian church property.

The Goths were tirst introduced and converted to Arian Christianity in the fourth century by Bishop Ulfilas who, in writing down the Scriptures for thern under the title of "Apostle of the Goths," 22 eonstrueted the Gothie alphabet, and thus played a key role in- the development of the Gothie language. As a small rninority in a sea of

Italian Catholics, with the seat of the first Apostle, St. Peter, in Rome growing in power and prestige, sorne would argue that the Ostrogoths held on to their Arian beliefs not from religious conviction but for political and social reasons?3 Thus the issue offaith could have been bound to the Ostrogoths' sense of national identity and rnay have served to differentiate the small Gothie nation from the large native Italian population. They may have felt it necessary to preserve this one very distinct aspect of their Gothie identity in order to ensure their survival as a people. Bowever, it was precisely beeause the Arians and the Catholics held so much in common in relation to their faith that the Ostrogoths easily integrated into Roman society.24 In essence there were few differences between the Byzantine, Western, and Arian Church liturgies and practîces. The one fundamental difference which set the Arians apart from the others, in varying degrees, was in their understanding of the relationship between the tirst and second persons of the Boly Trinity, God the Father and Jesus 19

Christ respectively. The Byzantine and Western Churches professed that Christ had always existed as part of the Holy Trinity, whereas the Arians believed that Christ was not the equal of God the Father, and that Christ did not exist before the

Incarnation.

Theodoric sent Pope John with his emlssary, Bishop Ecclesius of Ravenna, to

Constantinople to convince the emperor to stop the persecution of Arians and to reverse his proclamation against them. The Pope's concern at this time, however, was not Arianism, but the rise of Monophysitism in the East, which threatened to tear apart the Christian Church into East and West. Monophysitism had grown out of an overreaction against an earlier heresy called Nestorianism, which claimed that two completely separate beings existed in Christ, the divine person and the human.

Some opponents of this idea strove to emphasize the unity of these two natures in

Christ. Swinging to the other extreme, they suggested that the union of the two natures of Christat the time of the Incarnation resulted in the complete absorption of the human by the divine, giving rise to an altogether unique person with one nature, whose humanity was of a different essence from the rest of humanity. In the East this monophysite view helped foster the image of Christ as a mysterious, awe­ inspiring, all-powerful divine being. The Arian belief, therefore, appeared heretical to the By;z:antines.

Furthermore, during the tirst decade of his reign, Theodoric had uncovered a Gothic conspiracy against him. Hodgkin puts forward the possibility "that this conspiracy 20 indicates the discontent of the old Gothic nobility with the increasing tendency to copy Roman civilisation and to assume Imperial prerogatives which they observed in the king who had once been little more than chief among a band of comrades." 25

Over time there emerged "an ever-stronger yeaming among the upper stratum of the

Roman aristocracy to forge doser politicallinks with Constantinople." 26 Now that the animosity- between- Rome and- Constantioople had abated-, T1leedoIW's-Pf€Garious balance of power derived from playing one off against the other was lost.

Theodoric's orders for the executions of his one-time close friends, the Roman

Patricians Boethius and Symmachus, in the last years of his life, were an attempt to restore order and balance in ms kingdom, and indicate a desperation in knowing that he had ultimately fail€d- t&· "reooeGt the leyalties- attadwd- te- the emperor back through Rome to him." 27 which were essential to the establishment of the kind of independent Gothie Kingdom within the Roman Empire that he had envisioned.

The violence whlch marked the beginning and the end of Theodoric's kingship was not an aberration but rather describes Theodorie's charaeter. He was adamant in maintaining the order he so admired in Roman society. When it was lost, he took measures to re-establish the balance. "In an age of violence and abrupt ends,

Theodorie's inner harshness was respeeted and aeeepted as part of his eharisma. For

Theodoric himself, violence was in the final analysis an aspect of justice. Justice listened and weighed and even bent, but ultimately acted." 28

Theodoric died in 526, having designated ms ten-year old grandson Athalaric as king under his daughter Amalasuntha's regency. Dissatisfied with Alatharic's strict 21 upbringing and Roman education, which focused on intellectual pursuits, he was separated from his mother by the Gothie nobles to be educated in the Gothie tradition, which placed great importance on the development of physical prowess.

This was intended to a110w Alatharie to eam his Gothie subjeets' respect and support. However, the abrupt switch from an extremely sheltered, intellectually­ focused existence to a liberal, physieally-focused one, eaused Athalaric to indulge in excesses of every sort which quickly led to his early death in 534.

Fearing for her safety, Amalasuentha secretly negotiated with Constantinople to hand over power to the Byzantine Emperor in retum for a safe haven. However. her desperation to keep the throne of Italy in her family's possession caused her to conclude an agreement with one of Theodoric's nephews to rule the ltalian peninsula jointly. Notoriously greedy and untrustworthy, Theodahad had been brought before the courts on numerous occasions accused of using underhanded tactics to enlarge his already substantiallandholdings. Theodahad soon imprisoned Amalasuentha and, upon discovering that she had communicated with Emperor Justinian to obtain help, had her killed. This finally gave Emperor Justinian a respectable pretence to invade ltaly in the name of avenging the offended royal Amal family.

Having reigned for a number of years in the name of his oid and ailing uncle,

Emperor Justin, Justinian ascended the Byzantine throne in 527, one year after

Theodoric's death. He continued the old imperial tradition of fostering an image of the emperor as a semi-divine ruler. Among his tasks as Emperor of the Holy 22

Christian Empire was the preservation of the unity of the universal Church.

However~ his efforts to do so by whichever means possible, under the umbrella ofhis ever-increasing Monophysite leanings, threatened to do precisely the opposite.

With the Goths fighting under varioua leaders, the war between them and the

Byzantine army lingered on in various parts of Italy until as late as 561. However

Ravenna feH to the Byzantine forces in 540. In 546 Maximian, an obscure priest from the city of Pola in Istria, who had somehow illustrated to the Emperor his political genius and devotion to the Byzantine cause, was made archbishop of

Ravenna.

Maximian ascended the bishop's chair in a sea of opposition less than two years after

Emperor Justinian condemned the -writings ofthree eastem doctors of the Church, the so-called "Three Chapters," which revived Nestorian ideas once again.

Justinian's reaction, however, effectively called into question the conclusions of the

Council of Chaleeden, and-th€ theology of Pepe Loo- the- Great. MOre6V€f, the

Eroperor elevated the see of Ravenna to an archbishopric (synonymou.s with a metropolit-an see), which set it on a footing equal to the ancient and prestigious sees of Rome and Milan, &S well as to the first bishoprics in Asia Minor. In the fifth century the eastem emperors had increased Ravenna's profile at Milan's expense by turning over five provinces under its jurisdiction to Ravenna. Thus the see of

Ravenna was an old rival to Milan and, as the only bishopric under direct Byzantine influence, it was highly resented by the other Italian provinces. This resentment of 23 special favours being granted to Ravenna by the Byzantine Court, and by the imperial meddling into Church matters, deepened further in 546 when Emperor

Justinian granted the see of Ravenna the title of "Orthodox," in gratitude for having been the oruy see in the West to have accepted the Emperor's decrees in the matter of the Three Chapters without protest. In an attempt to persuade the Pope to agree with his proclamation against the Three Chapters, Emperor Justinian kept Pope Vigilius and the Archbishop of Milan hostages in Constantinople for years. Finally he

8ucceeded in forcing the Pope to do 80 in 548.+9

During this period of unrest, when Byzantine armies were trying with great difficulty to defeat the Goths, who in light of anti-Byzantine sentiment were supported by the ltalian population, and in the absence of the two most important spiritual leaders in the West, in addition to that of a political roler, Archbishop

Maximian became the de facto roler of Italy. Emperor Justinian's confidence in his capabilities was immens~ and it appears that Maximian executed his duties with great success. He oversaw work on San Vitale, Byzantium's showpieœ church in the

West, and he ensured that Theodoric's church of Sant'Apollinare Nuovo took on a

Byzantine character. He wrote extensively on theological, liturgical, and historical matters which later became important reference documents for the medieval period.

Maximian died ·after only ten years at the he1m, and was succeeded by Agnellus, a native of Ravenna. The contrasts between Agnellus and Maximian are many. Maximian was fifty-eight at his death~ Agnellus was close to seventy when appointed Archbishop of Ravenna.

Maximian came from an obscure background, a mere deacon when appointed by

Emperor Justinian to the bishop's chair; Agnellus came from a wealthy, noble family, had already had a full eareer in the military and was a widower before becoming a deacon and then archbishop. While Maximian's tenure was marked by tension and exertion in instituting change in the West on behalf of the Byzantine Emperor,

Agnellus' tenure appears to have been more relaxed. The main reason for these differences was that the political and religious climates had changed. By the time

Agnellus had settled intn his archbishopric, most of Italy had come under the control of Byzantium: the Goths had been defeated, and so the Arian heresy had been eradicated and its Church's property taken over by Constantinople. The controversy over the Three Chapters had also been settled. After the storm had passed, the work to be done bY Agnellus was predominantly diplomatie ln nature, in whiGh peace and harmony between East and West were to be nurtured, as illustrated by Ravenna's warm relations with Rome during his fourteen years as the Archbishop of Ravenna.

Constantinian Building Plans

Christianity did not adopt the pagan religious building as a model for its churches for two reasons. The first reason is the most obvious: an architectural form associated with pagan traditions would be inappropriate for the emerging Christian religion whose beliefs contradicted those of paganism. A visible break with this belief system needed to be made. The second reason is of a more practical nature: the 25

Roman pagan temple was reserved for housing a statue of the deity being honoured as it was believed to be the place of his dwelling. With the deity's statue centrally positioned on the interior, as in the Greek temple, the pagan Roman temple permitted access to its interior only to those priests associated with that particular deity. Public worship was relegated to the front exterior of the building. The rituals of Roman paganism were of an exclusive nature, unlike the Christian liturgical services, which were an inclusive, communal celebration entailing the active participation of hundreds, if not thousands, of persons at any one time. Hence the Christian space requirements called for a monumentally-scaled building. It was, therefore, oruy natural that the Roman basilica should provide the new Christian religion with a prototype.

Essentially a public meeting hall, the Roman basilica (Fig.6) had evolved into a large covered space with a nave, side aisles and one or more apses of semi-circular or rectangular fo~ in which business and legal transactions would take place,.. and it also served as an informal social meeting locale. Although a secular building, this multifunctional edifice was endowed with sacral overtones. According to Roman law, aIl contractual and legal proceedings were vaHdated by the presence of the emperor. Consequently, there sat on a dais in each basilica a magistrate who served as the emperor's representative. Close by>- the emperor, who long before

Constantine's day had attained divine cult status, was himselfpresent in the form of an effigy, overlooking all of the affairs of the people.! 26

The original St. Peter's basilica in Rome, begun before the year 324 by the first

Christian Roman Emperor, Constantine, was apart from its monumental size, not an impressive building by architectural standards.(Figs.7-9) Yet St. Peter's came to serve as the prototype for church building in the West for many years due to the fact that it was a basilica type located in the prestigious imperial city of Rome, which was also the city inhabited by the Pope, the successor of St. Peter. More importantly, however, was the fact that the basilica housed the remains of Christianity's first

Apostle St. Peter, the "rock" upon which Christ chose to build his Church (Matthew

16: 19), and commemorated the location of his martyrdom. Greatly venerated by

Christians, St. Peter's tomb was the basilica's most significant feature and was the cause of the building's growth in stature. St. Peter's itself was an anomaly in the

West as it was "the only large Constantinian church enclosing the shrine of a martyr,,2 outside of the Holy Land, where such shrines were connected to the events in the life and resurrection of Christ. The practice of enshrining the :cemains of a saint within a church eventually became common, buthad not yet become established.

At times mixing the boisterous with the prayerful in a somewhat chaotic manner, St.

Peter's basilica was both a martyrium and a funerary banqueting hall. The sarcophagi of wealthy families covered the floor of the basilica's nave and side aisles. The families ofthe dead would gather at the site oftheir loved-one's tomb on the anniversary of his death and, according to old Roman custom, a meal would be eaten there. At times the consumption of wine created a festive and noisy 27 atmosphere in the church. In contrast, pilgrims wishing to view the tomb of St.

Peter strove to maintain their reverence as they crowded into the transept. Originally the basilica "had no permanent clergy; mass was celebrated only sporadically for pilgrims' gatherings rather than for a resident congregation." 3

The many activities which took place inside St. Peter' s basilica mark the point of transition from old Roman traditions to new incoming Christian practices. They also highlight the originallack of clarity in the marriage of particular architectural forms inherited from the Roman Imperial culture with the quickly evolving requirements of a Christian church serving more than one purpose.

Drawing on the tradition of the pagan Roman heroa building, which was a mausoleum wherein a deceased person's life and accomplishments were celebrated,

Christian impenal mausQlea, whlch &1so cQmmtlmorated a deceased indlvidu&, were typically central in plan. The church of Santa Costanza in Rome of c.350

(Figs.lO,ll), for example, originally housed the sarcophagus of Constantine's daughter, Constantina, on the central point where the altar now stands. Its origin as a baptistry and subsequent use as a mausoleum demonstrate the popularity of the central plan for both of these uses and point to a theologicallink between the two. In the Early Christian period Easter, the day of Christ's resurrection, was also the common day of Baptism. Baptism was believed to be the death of the individual in the world of sin and his re-birth as a Christian. 28

St. Peter's Basilica, however, strove to join a martyrium, which was commonly a centrally-planned church intended to commemorate the burial place of a saint or martyr, tohouse the saint's relies, or to honour a location associated with the life of

4 Christ, with a «em~tery space in & context whi«h called for liwrgical s~rvic~s to take place within. This resulted in a somewhat awkward conjunction of spatial elements, a situation which eventually worked itself out in the architectural traditions of the Christian Church which followed.

The original St. Peter' s Basilica contained a large, tall nave which was separated from two lower double side-aisles with a colonnade of corinthian columns carrying a large entablature (Figs.8,9). It also contained a continuous transept, inserted between the body of the church and the westem-oriented semi-circular apse. AU of

Constantine's churches were oriented either east, west, or north, the practice of positioning church apses in the east commencing only in the fifth century. The continuous transept was not a common feature of the earliest Western Christian churches, but became so later during the Carolingian period.5

The altar at St. Peter's basilica, situated over the Apostle's tomb, was the main ordering element in the building. Repr~senting the sepulch~r of Christ, the altar h~re was, as became common in most churches, surmounted by a fastigium, "an arched and pedimented lintel colonnade, like that under which the Emperor revealed himself to his subjects at court." 6 Altars were origînally portable furnishings in Early

Christian churches and gradually became a permanent element within the chancel 29 enclosure, the area of the nave near the apse separated from the body of the church by a low screen or railing. The altar' s evocation of an emperor' s throne speaks to the understanding within the Christian Church of Christ as Supreme Judge and King of HeaveQand Barth. The altar, therefore, represents both the tomb of Christ and his throne.

Emperor Constantine marked what was said to be the actual location of Christ' s sepulcher in the Holy Land with the construction of a basilica and martyrium, the

Anastasis Rotunda on Golgotha (Figs.12,13), in Jerusalem. ("Anastasis" is Greek for

"resurrection"). Begun about the year 325 and consecrated in 336, this church may be seen as a paralle1 to St. Peter' s basilica in Rome. As it is here where Christ is believed to have been buried after his crucifixion, and where he rose from the dead three days later, the Anastasis Rotunda church marks the primary altar of Christ.

The sepulcher withln the Anastasis Rotunda was covered by a baldacchlno carried by twelve columns (Fig.14), evoking an image of the twelve Apostles surrounding

Christ. 7 At St. Peter's basilica, the baldacchino erected over the Apostle's tomb served to mark the holiness of the location, to remind the faithful of St Peter' s closeness to Christ, and of the task he was charged with.

Imperial Imagery

The Christian Church organized itself along the lines of the administration of the

Roman Empire, 1 It is agreed among most scholars that as a result, when the church clergy attended the altar during the Liturgy, they inevitably imitated the ceremonies 30 associated with the court of the emperor. This helped establish a connection between

Christian architectural forms and recognized hierarchical structures of authority, and endowed the church building with easily understood imperial meaning in its arrangement of spatial structures and architectural elements. Renee the originally secular Roman basilica offered the Christian basilica the forms and elements it needed to support both its practical and symbolic considerations.

Beginning with the Constantinian basilica, the early Christian church attained a new meaning as a "royal hall and throne hall, which reflects the arrangements of ... the sacred meanings of palace architecture." 2 Echoing the earlier s~cular Roman basilica, in which the magistrate sat in the tribunal as deputy for the Emperor (Fig.6), it appears that "the early Christian (Constantinian) basilica not only meant or represented the throne hall of Christ, but actually was the throne hall of the bishop as deputy of the emperor and Christ." 3

Theodoric's church of Christ the Redeemer resonates well with this idea. As a basilica attached to the Palace of Theodoric, this church not only follows the architectural tradition chosen by Emperor Constantine, but in doing so it proclaims

Theodoric's claim as a legitim~te beir to the imperial throne in the Western Roman

Empire, albeit officially as the Emperor's deputy.

The Basilica of St. John of the Lateran in Rome (Fig.15), dated to between 313 and its consecration in 319, is another church which reinforces the association of the 31

Constantinian basilica with royal meaning in a direct manner, and which most closely resembles the deputy-palace-church relationship found at Ravenna. Donated by Constantine to the Bishop of Rome, namely the Pope, for use as a residence, the

Lateran Palace was considered to be an appropriate abode for (!.Il authority of the high standing to which the emperor had elevated the Pope's position within the

Empire. Upon his removal of the Roman capital to Constantinople in the year 330,

Emperor Constantine left the Pope in charge of Rome as his representative. This arrangement illustrates that from the first endorsement of Christianity by

Constantine" the Church and State came to represent two integral halves in the life of the Christian Roman citizen.

The basilica adjoining the Lateran palace was meant to serve as the cathedral of

Rome. Known as San Giovanni in Laterano, it was a vast structure able to accommodate several thousand faithful. As at St. Peter' s, this basilica was arranged on an east-west axis, and its nave colonnade, eonsisting of Corinthian columns carrying an entablature, was flanked by double side-aisles separated by arcaded colonnades. The nave terminated at the western end with a large apse which could hold more than two hundred members of the clergy. The original building, which was extensively altered in the Baroque period, contained no transept. The "inner aisles continued to the springing of the apse while the outer aisles were each eut short by a low wing. Projecting sideways, these wings may weIl have been repositories for the offerings." 4 A long pathway, delineated by parapets, extended from the chancel, containing the altar, into the nave. The bishop and clergy had seats 32 in the apse which faced a group of sil ver statues, possibly sheltered by a large fastigium. 5 The statues facing the nave, and therefore, the assembled faithful, depicted a seated Christ the Teacher surrounded by his Apostles. Meanwhile, a

Resurrected Christ Enthroned surrounded by four ange1s faced the dergy. Here, once again, the most sacred area of the church was endowed with imperial imagery.

Richard Krautheimer concludes that it is due to its imperial association that the apse came to be oriented in the eastern part of the Christian church. "Christianity, in

Constantinian times, ... changed the conception of deification very little." 6 He suggests that aIl of the symbolism related to the emperor W<:J,S transf~rred to Christ, who was at the center of the new religion. One of these symbols described the emperor as the sun god. Subscribing to the ancient idea that buildings are "like an image of the cosmos whic,1:l is centered on the sun," 7 Christ's throne was located in the eastern part of the church building, where the sun rises to emanate light and warmth onto the world.

Theodoric occupied a place within the church in a manner reminiscent of the

Emperor' s. He was in fact, Emperor of the Western Roman Empire in all but name, dressing in the sacred imperial purple, 8 in imitation of the Roman emperors of the past, duplicating the Emperor in the East. It is not surprising, therefore, that

Theodoric' s church of Christ the Redeemer was situated within the palace complex, as was true for Saint John of the Lateran in Rome and the Great Palace at

Constantinople. In the East, the Patriarch of the Church was seen to be one half of

God, reflecting "the religious aspects of the Godhead," 9 while the Emperor 33 personified the other, secular half of God, namely, earthly power and justice. The

Great Palace at Constantinople, therefore, had come to encompass both the secular and the religious realms of life in architectural terms. Theodoric' 8 arrangement in

Ravenna strove to accomplish the same.

The mosaic of Theodoric's palace, located on the south nave wall at the western entrance to the church of Christ the Redeemer (Fig.16), shows that it was arranged according to the typical Roman palace, and has been compared to Diocletian's

Palace Complex in Split (Fig.17) and to the Palace at Constantinople. While the similarity between the mosaic image of Theodoric's palace and Diocletian's peristyle court (Figs.17-19) at his palace complex has been alluded to by numerous scholars, there is disagreement on how to interpret Theodoric's mosaic. Sorne believe it to be a flatlened version of Diocletian's court. Others, such as Mark

Johnson, refute this theory, pointing to the fact that aIl of the other buildings in the mosaic appear in a regular manner. Therefore the use of a different pictorial system for the depiction of the palace building does not make sense. He, among other scholars, suggests that Theodoric's palace was "in part modeled on the Great Palace of Constantinople." 10

A number of architectural features common to Theodoric' s palace in Ravenna" to the

Great Palace of Constantinople, and to Diocletian's palace at Split: suggest a link between the three. Most striking, and the one most clearly pointing to a continuity of the Roman imperial architectural tradition, is the classical Roman raised portico 34

(Fig.19). A pediment carried by a central arch and two flanking classical post-and­ lintel bays, this arrangement places emphasis on the central axis of the structure.

Within the vocabulary of Roman architecture, such a portico had come to be associated with imperial power. lt was the "gable Qf glorificatiQn" which served to frame the stage upon wbich the emperor made bis appearance to his subjects in the court. Il The triple-arched gateway form commonly used in Roman triumphal arches, such as that of Constantine's Arch in the Roman Forum (Fig.20), found expression in the Christian church. The front portico, or narthex, of the Early

Christianchurch qsually gave access to the building through one large central door, and two smaller doors, one on either side of the central door. As such, this part of the church came to be associated with imperial presence. This connection persevered through the Early Christian period and eventually developed into the westwork structure of the Carolingian period, significantly called a "castellum" by chroniclers of the day. It has been suggested by German scho1ars that indeed

"westworks were associated with the emperors, serving as royal chapels or even audience chambers." 12

The pediment depicted in the Christ the Redeemer mosaic of Theodoric's Palace was described in contemporary documents as having been decorated with a great mosaic in which ~'Theodoric stood, clad in mail, with spear and shield. On his le:ft was a female figure representing the City of Rome, also with a spear in her hand and her head armed with a helmet, while towards his right Ravenna seemed speeding with one foot on the land and the other on the sea" 13 and further illustrates Theodoric' s 35 uninhibited use of traditional imperial architectural form and Roman iconography to magnify and glorify his kingship. This image of Theodoric, as a powerful warrior, roler, and defender of Rome and Ravenna, as the preserver of peace, prosperity and security, does not deviate from the image established by Constantine as the ddender of Christianity. Indeed, Theodoric followed the imperial formula as far as to erect an equestrian statue of himself, which stood on the grounds of his palace complex.

Mark Johnson contends that the statue stood in the square in front of the church of

Christ the Redeemer and the Chalke in imitation of the equestrian statue of Emperor

Constantine adorning the square in the Great Palace at Constantinople. 14 In his ecclesiastical history of Ravenna, the ninth century chronicler Agnellus described it as "raised on a pyramid six cubits high. Horse and rider were both of brass, "covered with yellow gold," and the king here too had his buckler on his left arm, while on the right, extended, pointed a lance at an invisible foe." 15 In the ninth century the statue was relocated to Charlemagne's palace at Aachen, brought there by the

Emperor who had successfully accomplished Theodoric's ambition ofre-establishing a great western Roman Empire. As Theodoric's political heir, Charlemagne accordingly removed numerous decorations, columns, and mosaics from Theodoric's

Palace, with the consent of the Pope, and installed these in his buildings in Paris,

Ingelheim, and Aachen. 16

It is natural that Theodoric would have looked to Constantinople as a prototype for his palace since it was something he had become familiar with during his ten-year stay in the capital city. However, it was probably chosen as a mode! for his own 36 palace for the reason that it was the most recent potent architectural example of imperial presence of his day. Through its architectural association with the Roman imperial past, Theodoric' s palace stood to partake in the prestige and glory of its architectural heritage.

The original mosaic of Theodoric's palace at the church of Christ the Redeemer displayed Theodoric framed by a classical arcaded portico and surrounded by his court. His image was effaced when the church became Byzantine property. Located at the western end of the south nave wall, this image was linked by the procession of martyrs (Figs.21 ,22) to the image of Christ Enthroned and surrounded by his court of angels located at the opposite eastern end of the wall. This organization of images appears to affirm Constantine's definition of "the imperial court and the powers radiating to the rulers of Christendom from God." 17 Although Theodoric followed in the footsteps of his imperial predecessors, and is counted among the great rulers of the period, Emperors Constantine, Theodosius and lustinian amonR them~ his Arian faith set him apart. This becomes evident when comparing the arclùtectural forms and decorative programmes of Theodoric's church of Christ the Redeemer with its near contemporary, the Hagia Sophia, likely begun in 532 and completed by 537, in

Constantinople (Figs.23,24). A fusion of central and basilican plans, the Hagia

Sophia's architecture supported the increasing Byzantine predisposition toward mystery in the Christian liturgy in its verticality. By the time Emperor Justinian came to the throne, a good part of the eastern mass had become clothed in mystery, gradually becoming more so with the passage of time. The congregation was 37 relegated to a relatively passive experience of an event which they could not fully comprehend. The eventual introduction of the iconostasis in the Byzantine Church, which separated the people from the divine, was a natural development, and came to be one of its defining elements.

The emperor, however, played a more active role in the liturgy, alongside the clergy, close to the center of the proceedings. "Since Constantine's time he had been considered equal to the apostles, and perhaps more than equal." 18 This view of the emperor, which flourished at Constantinople, beginning with Constantine the Great

(r.306-337), was subsequently further promoted by Emperors Theodosius (r.379-

395), and Justinian (r.527-565). Each of these manifested their sacred imperial identity as key actors in God's Plan for the salvation of mankind through their respective church-building programs of impressive proportions, and through their active participation in the shaping of Church laws and selection of individuais for the offices of the clergy.

There is also an emphasis on the vertical at San Vitale in Ravenna (Figs.25-27), a centrally-planned Byzantine church completed under Emperor Justinian in 546~8.

Like the Hagia Sofia in Constantinople, this <:;hurch "was certainly <:;onsid~red as standing within the ambience of the Imperial court: the mosaics in the chancel -

Justinian and Theodora offering gifts" 19 call to mind the role played by the emperor' s effigy in the Roman basilica in the conclusion of business and legal affairs

(Figs.28,29). Far away from the capital of Constantinople, San Vitale was intended 38 to play an important role in reinforcing both the Byzantine presence in Italy and the fact that Ravenna was an integral part of the Roman Empire, as ruled by the Emperor in the East. These mosaics illustrate the Emperor's and Empress's participation in the mass, and they also demonstrate the central role the Emperor played in religious matters. They emphasize the Emperor' s presence, and seem to impress upon the onlooker his identity as a divine ruler and judge, as much Christ' s representative on earth as the bishop. Indeed, the location of the Emperor's image within the most sacred confines of the church's interior, the apse, whose dome is often related to the

"Dome of Heaven," stresses the idea of the Emperor as partaking in, and diffusing of, the majesty and power of Heaven. He is elevated to the same llevel as Christ.

Affixed as permanently to the church as is the image of Christ, the emperor' s image ensures that he will be present at every liturgy.

If indeed "the apse of the basilica is presented as the end of a procession which, beginning from the exterior, leads to the most sacred place, the sanctuary where God is present," 20 then the churches of San Vitale and Christ the Redeemer differ greatly in the dynamics of movement within their walls, in the relationship between the people and Christ, and in their respective presentations of their patrons. Upon entering San Vitale, one's attention is drawn away from the darker areas, the periphery of the church, to the more brightly-lit space occupied by the altar (Fig.30).

The eye is then compelled to look upward and onto the walls of the sanctuary. One feels quite small and inconsequential in this space. Even today, disconnected from 39 the church by culture, history, and perhaps religion, the architecture and mosaics still seem to demand our attention and reverence.

The experience of space and imagery at the church of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo

(Fig.31), originally Christ the Redeemer~ is completely different. Although we are astonished at the magnificence of the nave mosaics above us, we are not left behind to simply take in their majesty. The dynamic motion set up by the two processions of martyrs and virgins beckons us to step into line with them. The twelve columns carrying each of the two nave walls, place emphasis on a linear, horizontal experience of the space. Reinforcin~ the processional movement of the figures in the nave, attention is drawn to the altar, the throne of Christ, in the apse. The emphasis here is, however, placed not on the image of Christ being attended to by his Apostles at his throne, but rather on the action of m.oving t.oward Christ, under the guidance of the saints above, ech.oing the ceremony of the Emperor' s entran(;e into a public space, and of the entrance of the clergy and the Emperor into the church. In contrast to the experience at San Vitale, where one's sense of self is diminished within the space, at Sant' Apollinare Nuovo the opposite occurs: one is made more profoundly aware .of .one's own presence, and of one's place within the space. Standing in the nave, one's sense of self is comparable to that of appearing onstage. Furthermore, the nave mosaics do not demand respect~ as at San Vitale, rather they inspire it~ and they also caU the faithful to join them in the procession of the imitation of Christ. 40

Mosaics

The celebrated splendour of the mosaics situated on the nave walls of the church of

Sant' Apollinare Nuovo is a testament to the influence of Byzantium on this building, as well as to the presence in Ravenna of craftsmen skilled in the eastem art of mosaic decoration. Considering that mosaic images are created by the painstaking process of setting small pieces of coloured stone or glass, called tesserae, in wet cement, the life-like figures found on the walls of Sant'apollinare Nuovo attest to the high quality of the artists employed in the decoration of the church, and to the fact that no expense was spared in its execution. Evidence SlJggests that mosaics also decorated the west entrance wall, .as weIl as the apse. Given this, and the fact that the church was situated within the confines of Theodoric' s palace, the idea that the intended use of Christ the Redeemer was for court ceremonial becomes apparent. 1

The mosrucs adoming the nave are divided into three horizontal zones (Fig.32), who se programme must have been projected by Theodoric. Its installation undoubtedly continued under his Gothic successors, but was altered under the stewardship of the Byzantine Archbishop Maximian and was finally completed under his successor Archbishop Agnellus. It is not known exactly how far the mosaic work had come when the church became the property of Constantinople. It does app~ however, that the work began at the uppermost level and proceeded to the lower second and third levels. The fact that sorne areas in the lowest, and therefore latest, level show clear evidence of alteration suggests that most of the mosaics must have been completed under the Ostrogoths by the time the church had come under the Orthodox demain. Krautheimer dates the proc€ssional mosaics ID about 550, stating that these replaced similar original processions.2 Although the property of the Arian church in Italy was officially and completely confiscated by

Constantinople during Archbishop Agnellust tent;lfe, Ravenna itse1f ha.d long before succumbed to Byzantine forces. If we accept Speiser' s contention that the two processions originally represented Theodoric and his court,J then it would follow that Byzantium would have altered the mosaics to erase Theodoric's presence within the church. Otto von Simson believes that the Sant' Apollinare mosaics, including the one depicting Theodoric in his palace, could have been similar to, and may have even inspired, the offertory procession mosaic at the church of San Vitale in

Ravenna (Figs.28,29) in which the Emperor and Empress make their appearance alongside saints, donors, bishops, and angels.4 At Sant' Apollinare Nuovo "Bishop

Agnellus delicately shifted the emphasis of these mosaics and transformed the largely political imagery into an exposition of the liturgy comparable only to the great mosaic in Sant' Apollinare in Classe," 5 which depicts the Cross, the

Transfiguration, and the titular saint of the church.

Usually "image cycles which decorate the walls of the main nave do not accompany the faithful from the entrance to the sanctuary. On the contrary, they start from the sanctuary and show by this arrangement that aIl is r~counted in the images cornes from God.,,6 However, the situation is somewhat different at the church of

Sant' Apollinare Nuovo wherein the mosaics create a double movement, one proceeding from the sanctuary to the entrance, and the other proceeding from the 42 entrance to the sanctuary.7 The idea that aIl earthly good cornes from Theodoric as

Christ' s deputy is introduced in a manner different from that seen at San Vitale, where the portraits of Emperor Justinian and Empress Theodora, and of members of their court, are located on the wall of the apse, within the sanctuary proper which suggests ''justification and apotheosis of their administration." 8 Concurrently, they are lifted out of temporality and appear to be members of the celestial court.9 Thus the architectural arrangement and mosaic programme at San Vitale serve to articulate the hierarchical theology of the Byzantine East.

At Sant' Apollinare Nuovo..- however, both the architecture and the mosrucs accentuate the horizontality of the Arian theology, in which faith is comprised of pro-active, concrete deeds which propel the faithful forward, closer to God and toward their own salvation in etemity, and is embodied in the example of

Theodoric's rise to power. Rather than placing himself within the sanctuary, above the faithful..- Theodoric placed himself at the head of a procession, with Christ at the head of the procession in the opposite direction, thereby creating a closed circle.

Theodoric leads the procession from the cities of Ravenna and Classe, at the west entrance end of the church toward the City of God, which is the apse at the eastem end. Echoing the liturgical procession below, this motion of the faithful alludes to the concept of the basilica as the golden street of ancient Rome wherein the

Emperor' s subjects assembled to see the Emperor' s appearance at the triple-arched entry to his palace, "a vision of majesty which inspired the representations of the 43

enthroned Christ in the apses of early Christian sanctuaries." 10 At Diocletian' s palace at Split, this street ends in a peristyle court, resembling an open basilica.

In contrast to the Byzantine example, Theodoric placed himself on the same human level as his subjects, yet, his official throne seat at the front of the nave highlighted the fact that he was, like Christ, first among men. This reinforced the Arian concept of Christ as the leader of mankind. While Theodoric associated his status with

Christ, he did not deifY himself as did Emperor Constantine, who planned to be buried in a mausoleum surrounded by twelve columns and the relic:s of the twelve

Apostles. Theodoric presented himself as very much of this world, the dispenser of earthly justice, compassion and prosperity.

The uppermost level of mosaics, located above the clerestory windows, presents twenty-si", christologicc;tl scenes, thirteen ou each side, of mü:acles performed by

Christ on the left, and of the Passion of Christ on the right. These mosaics are universally recognized as belonging to the original Arian programme set in place by

Theodoric as indicated by the emphasis placed on Christ' s human dimension. In the Miracle cycle, Christ is depicted as a young, clean-shaven man. In the Passion cycle on the opposite wc;tll, he is portrc;tyed c;tS a suffering bearded man, The çontrc;tst set up between the two images not only adheres to the teachings of the Arian faith, but it equally supports the teaching of the Roman church as illustrated by Pope Leo l's letter to the Council of Chalcedon (451), which established what would become

Catholic dogma. In this letter, which is known as the "Epistola Dogmatica", Pope 44

Leo expounded on the co-existence of two separate natures, the divine and the human, within Christ's person, which act according to their respective qualities and characteristics. This understanding of the second person of the Trinity was widely accepted in the West, and h~d affinity with the Man view of Christ. Both acknowledged Christ's humanity. The church in the East, however, increasingly emphasized the divinity of Christ, virtually denying the human dimension. The

Byzantine church and Emperor preferred to present Christ as king and judge, rather than as a suffering, merciful redemptor of man with which every human being could empathize and could relate to on a, fundamental leve1. This difference between the East and West in their view of Christ points to the essential difference between the two in their approach to the Christian religion and to the exertion of temporal power.

The christological scenes are not so much the telling of the story of Christ' s life as they are a representation of" and serve as a guide to..- the liturgical drama which takes place in the church. Ever present on the walls of the nave, these scenes remind the faithful of the mystery of Christ' s life, death and resurrection occurring within each one of them every time they participate in the Liturgy and they also articulate the notion of the the priest and congregation as actors in this mystical drama. Il Both the

Miracle and Passioascenes illustrate the virtue of faith. Each of the miracle scenes reinforces the idea that faith is at the core of every miracle performed by Christ.

Similarly the passion scenes speak of the mystery of redemption, attained through 45 one's faith, "understood in its ancient, austere sense, which implies assent as well as devotion and surrender" 12 to God.

The christological scenes have been set up in a sophisticated manner wherein a significance is attached10 their placement andorder. In someinstances~a contrast is set up between scenes opposite each other in order to highlight a particular message.

At other times a scene, or a group of scenes taken in together on one wall reinforce the narrative on the facing wall. For exarnple, on the north wall Christ's first miracle, the Miracle at Cana, is situated at the east end of the church, located next to the apse. Its wedding feast subject matter refers 10 the Eucharist. 13 In the transformation of water into wine the miracle heralds the transformation of wine into

Christ's blood, and bread into his body. Facing this scene on the opposite south wall, the Last Supper is depicted, also touching on the subject of the Eucharistie meal, and heralding Christ's Crucifixion.14 In their proximity to the apse these two scenes art} linked together by the altar between them "on which the drarna is enacted that is both sacrifice and heavenly feast." 15

As mentioned earlier, these scenes may he read in either east - west direction. The

Passion cycle begins with the Last Supper near the :;lpse, and ends at the west end with the Incredulity of Thomas. This Easter scene greets ail who enter the church and is especially significant to the catechumens who are preparing to enter into the

Christian farnily. In its allusion to the need for strengthening one's faith in God, it is related to the next two Easter scenes, the Road to Emmaus and the Two Marys at the 46

Sepulchre, and together aIl three scenes allude to the sacrament of Baptism,16 which signaled the entry of an individual into the Christian Church and which, in the Early

Christian period, traditionally took place on the day of Easter. It is possible that a baptismal font may have stood in this area of the church.

On the opposite wall the Miracle cycle begins with the Miracle at Cana, at the eastern end of the church, and terminates at the western end with The Healing of the

Paralytic at Bethesda, which is followed by the Casting out of Devils and the Miracle of Healing Paralytic Man at Capernaum. AlI three of these also relate to the

Baptismal sacrament17 in that each speaks of a fresh new existence made possible through faith in God. The strong connection established between Baptism and Easter throughout both of the christological cycles represents the early Christian's comprehension of the Christian faith, and of the liturgy as an Easter drama in which the faithful join in the martyrdom of Christ. 18

The Miracte and Passion scenes were; however-, not merely nauatives-as-p-ictmes-are thought of today. Since in "that age, language had not yet lost its magical power to create the reality it invoked," 19 these pictures represented a sacred type of reality for the faithful onlooker and, as they aGcompanied the liturgical participant in the nave, acted as visual prayers. Scholars have found a striking resemblance between Miracle scenes depicted at Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, and in the decorative programmes of

Early Christian sarcophagi and catacombs. Moreover, these same Miracle scenes were often mentioned in Early Christian prayers for the dying and the deceased.20 47

The act of sharing in Christ's Passion and in the martyrdom of saints is often described in religious writings as the act of clothing oneself in a white shroud, whieh is what the newly- baptized of the Early Christian period were clothed in upon emerging from the baptismal font. Thus the second and third rows of mosaics further support the connection between Baptism and the Eucharist. The second level depicts "a procession of thirty-two men in white robes, carryins- books and scrolls~ whose identities are not indicated, but who could represent the patriarchs, prophets, apostles and evangelists mentioned in the ancient Greek litanies of the Orthodox church of Ravenna." 21 The third and lowest zone of mosaics, located just above the arcades, aIso depicts two solemn processions of figures c1ad in white robes, one of virgins, on the left (north wall), and martyrs on the right (south wall). These two rows of many figures perpetually moving toward the altar, the focal point in the

Eucharistie celebration, must have instilled in those present an overwhelming sense of being part of a timeless procession of humanity moving toward eternal life. Even today, fifteen centuries later, the waIls of the church continue to delivler the Christian understanding of life as a procession.

On the south wall, the procession oftwenty-five martyrs, carrying thdr crowns, the

Christian symbol of martyrdom, move in the direction of the altar led by St. Martin of Tours, a saint widely known for his battles against heresy. Dressed in a red tuniç, one of only two saints not to be clothed only in white, he leads these figures to an image of Christ Enthroned with Angels.(Fig.22) On the north wall, twenty-two 48 female saints, adomed with golden- accesoofies- and cfowned with diadems-, symbolic of their status as the virgin brides of Christ, are led by St. Euphemia to an image of the Epiphany, namely, the Three Magi paying tribute to the Virgin Mary and Infant

Christ attended by angels (Figs.33,34).

St. Euphemia was martyred at Chalcedon, and it was in the church dedicated to her that the Council of Chalcedon had taken place. Therefore she had come to be associated with the doctrines of that council, one of which was fonnulated by Pope

Leo the Great proclaiming that two distinct natures co-existed in the person of

Christ. This doctrine figured prominently in the Epiphany and was often a topie of

Pope Leo's teachings. Simson draws attention to the fact that in the sixth century, the presents brought by the Magi to the Infant Christ symbolized its victory at

Chalcedon, therefore he believes that St. Euphemia and the scene of the Epiphany were left intact at the church of Christ the Redeemer by the Byzantine archbishop (it is unknown whether Maximian or Agnellus took the decision) as an act of reconciliation between Byzantium and Rome after Byzantium's conquest of Italy?2

As a result, the presence of a mix of saints significant to the Arian, Roman and

Byzantine Churches at Sant' Apollinare Nuovo has transformed this basilica "into a veritable pantheon of Christianity." 23

Liturgical Use

Thomas Mathews writes that descriptions of sorne well-known churches in

Constantinople by commentators from the fifth and sixth centuries indicate that the 49 nave was open to aIl people, and that the only segregation that may have taken place would have been that men and women would have kept to different sides of the church. 1 The magnificence of the entrance of the priests, Bishop and Emperor into the churc~ as described by Math<;iws, echoes the processions of Sant'ApoUinar<;i's mosaics. The pervasive idea which suggests that the Roman liturgical celebration was more open than the Byzantine appears to have been true in later centuries, as illustrated by the eventual appearance of the Byzantine iconostasis, which secluded the holy of holies from the nave and shielded it from generai view. In Theodoric's day, however" the ext<;int of Iaypeople's participation in the liturgy appears to have been similar in the East and in the West. "The lay congregation freely occupied the nave in early Byzantine churches; moreover, they pressed with eagemess about the holiest parts of the church: the sanctuary barrier, ambo, and soIea." 2 This participation, however. had its limits. According to Mathews. the early Roman tradition of the congregation bringing forward br<;iad and win<;i to the çlergy to be used for the Eucharistie sacrifice had, in aIl probability, by this time been supplanted by an elaborate ceremony performed only by the clergy. In the East it had never been practiced. 3

In Constantinople, in the time of Theodoric and Justinian, the Emperor took part in the liturgy only rareLy. When he did, it was a great ceremony to behold. At the beginning he would wait, sitting in the narthex of the church with his entourage, for the Patriarch to arrive in procession with other clergymen. An exchange of greetings would take place, and then, standing before the main door to the nave, called the 50

Royal Door, "candIes in hand, they would make a triple reverence while the

Patriarch said the Prayer of Entry, then the entrance would take place. Together they would traverse the length of the nave, pass by the side of the ambo, and enter the solea, proceeding thus to the Roly Door of the sanctuary." 4 '(he laity enten~d with the Patriarch and clergy, prayingaloud. ( In the Romanchurch, the laity and the lower c1ergy entered the church first and awaited the entrance of the bishop.) The

Emperor would pause at the Roly Door, praying with candie in hand, allowing the

Patriarch to enter the sanctuary. Then he entered to place a gift of gold on the altar, and departed tlu:ough the side door to take his place at his throne seat at the front in the south aisle of the church. The only other time that the Emperor entered the sanctuary was to receive Communion from the Patriarch on a raised platform and, after embracing him, he left through the side door, as he came in, to once again take his throne seat in the aisle.

Earlier on, however, "the Council of Laodicea (ca. 368) allowed none but the sacred ministers to enter and communicate in the sanctuary ... and in a separate canon specifically forbade that women should enter it. The Emperor himself, after

Ambrose's encounter with Theodosius the Great, was allowed in the sanctuary only to present an offering." 5 This enco1Jllte:( ocqur:ced in Milan iu 388, during Emperor

Theodosius's three-year stay in Italy. After having made his offering at the holy table, Theodosius remained in the sanctuary, as he normally did in Constantinople, but was asked to take a seat outside of the "holy place. "The purple," remarked the bishop, "makes princes, but not priests." Ambrose's admonition seems to have had a 51 strong effect, for on ms retum to Constantinople more than three years later,

Theodosius, being invited as usual to continue in the sanctuary, declined to do so," 6 indicating his approval for the western custom. Even though Emperor Theodosius greatly admired Bishop Ambrose, Qne of the early fathers Qf the Church who W(!,s instrumental in shaping the Catholic liturgy, Homes Dudden attributes Theodosius's compliance with the western liturgical tradition as a conformation to lia usage which had been observed by earlier Western emperors and which he himself recognized as more seemly," 7 illustrating once again the des ire of an ambitious roler wishing to identify bimself with the established authority of the traditions of his illustrious predecessors. In terms of the Emperor's participation in the liturgy, therefore, the fourth century liturgie al traditions in the East and West must have differed somewhat. The many councils of the fourth and fifth centuries attest to the attempts that were made for them to resemble each other more close1y, thereby indicating that there must have been other differences as weIl.

The question of the Emperor's place ofhonour in the church during the liturgy, and what shape it took on is answered by another incident between Bishop Ambrose and

Emperor Theodosius which also took place in Milan during Theodosius' three-year stay in Italy. Having had little desired effect on the emperor through his letters,

Bishop Ambrose used the pulpit to publicly admonish Emperor Theodosius in order to press him to reverse a decision the emperor had made concerning the punishment to be exerted on Catholics who bumed down a Jewish synagogue and a Gnostic

Valentinian chapel in Callinicum, lia town of considerable military and commercial 52

importance on the Euphrates." 8 At the conclusion of his sermon, Ambrose

"descended from his throne in the apse and stood before the Emperor." 9 He pressed

Theodosius further, making it clear that he could not proceed with the Eucharistie sacrament until he could persuade Theodosius to change his mind. Einally "the

Emperor, who was seated, gave a nod of assent" 10 Theodosius yielded to Bishop

Ambrose's will in order to avert a political crisis which could have easily developed from a conflict with the prelate, who wielded great influence over the Catholic population.

Since the Arian liturgy differed little from the Catholic and Orthodox liturgies in

Theodoric's day, it is probable that he would have followed the customs of the

Emperor in church. "Theodoric wore the purple cloth of royalty, decorated with multicolored precious stones" Il and as both an admirer of and perpetuator of

Roman Imperial tradition, he would have undoubtedly submitted to the pomp and circumstance of the grand entrance. In light of the absence of a gallery from which he could watch the proceedings, as later became the norm, and following the

Christian Roman imperial tradition, Theodoric must have had a throne seat facing the apse, at the front of the nave. His throne would have been situated on the south side of the nave, in close proximity to the image of Christ enthroned, situated on the south nave wall above, drawing a connection between Christ and himself. 53

Conclusion

Theodoric's reliance on the rich heritage of meaning attached to imperial architectural forms in his building programme legitimizes his claim to the throne of the capital of the Western Roman Empire. His preservation of the ancient monuments and of the Roman system of govemment serve to enshrine him within the pantheon of great Roman emperors. As a basilica situated on the grounds of

Theodoric the Great's palace compound, the church of Christ the Redeemer implants itself firmly within the continuum of Roman Imperial architecture. Its spatial organization is typically Constantinian thereby indicating the Adan Church's affinity for the Western Church. However, its typically Byzantine mosaic decoration demonstrates the political and artistic influences of Byzantium at work in the city of

Ravenna. The location of Christ the Redeemer in the Entrance Wall of Theodoric's palace suggests that to sorne extent it took as its model the Great Palace in

Constantinople, white the mosaic of Theodoric' s palace, situated on the nave wall inside the church, points also to the design influence of Roman palatial building complexes as, for example, Diocletian's palace at Split. Theodoric's portrait, set within the frame of a triple-arched pedimented gateway in the above-mentioned mosaic, alludes to the church's imperial connection. It recalls the colonnaded

"golden street" concept of Roman culture, in which the emperor was glorified by his people as a deity.

It has been shown that this pagan concept was transferred to the Christian Church wherein the basilica serves as the "golden street" ofthe new religion's deity, namely, 54

Jesus Christ, who is enthroned in the apse at the eastern end of the church, an orientation associated with the sun. This arrangement, along with the Entrance

Procession of the Emperor and clergy at the commencement of the liturgical service, further unders«ores tue patterning of church ceremony on the Roman imperial court ceremonial.

The christological scenes in the nave focus on the humanity of Christ, thus stressing

Arian theology, and highlight the difference between the Arian faith and the

Byzantine faith, which stressed the divinity of Christ. They also describe the content of the liturgy held at the church of Christ the Redeemer, which showed the great emphasis placed on the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist by the early

Christian Church. These were interchangeable in meaning as they both implied life everlasting attained through a kind of death, in imitation of the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. Furthermore, the style and iconography of these mosaics show the influence of early Christian funerary images which held the same mystical power as visual prayers.

The lower mosaic processions of virgins and martyrs speak of the conciliatory tone taken by Byzantium toward the Western Church after the conquest of Ravenna and the elimination of Arianism through the defeat of the Goths in ltaly by

Constantinople. Understood as a procession moving both toward the apse and from the apse, with the cities of Ravenna and Classe at one end and the City of God at the other, the processional mosaics highlight Theodoric's claim to the throne at Ravenna 55 as God-given and therefore legitimate. The linearity and horizontality of the church's space and movement within reinforce the nature of Theodoric's kingship.

Rather than elevating himself above his subjects, as was the case with the Emperor in the East, Theodoric placed himself at t)1e front of his subjects I;!.S their leader, as a man chosen from among them for his exceptional qualities. The mosaics and architectural form of the church of Christ the Redeemer illustrate his belief in the possibilities open to humankind in its struggle for greatness and salvation.

Theodoric' s admiration for human accomplishment, rooted in his Ostrogothic origins, manifested itself in his preservation of the Roman cl.dture. AlI of these served to e1evate him to greatness as a ruler and aided him in his quest to rehabilitate the Roman Empire in the West, a task which was to be finally realized by

Charlemagne almost three centuries later. As part of his legacy, Theodoric's church of Christ the Redeemer (Sant' Apollinare Nuovo) remains to this day an impressive example of the fusion of architectural and decorative elements, originating in different parts of the Roman Empire, which characterized early

Christian architecture in sixth century Ravenna. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig.l Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, façade, from i Altet, The Early Middle Ages: From Late Antiquity to A.D.I000, p.76.

Fig.2 Ravenna, Sant' ApoUinare Nuovo~ plan, from Deichmann, Ravenna: Hauptstadt des Spatantiken Abenlandes Kommentar, 1. Teil; Plananhung, plan 10.

Fig.3 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, south elevation, from Deichmann, Ravenna: Hauptstadt des Spatantiken Abenlandes Kommentar, 1. Teil; Plananhung, plan Il.

Fig.4 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, interior photo, from MacDonald, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, fig.33.

Fig.5 Ravenna, San Francesco, interior photo, from postcard by Kina Italia, Ediz. E. Salbaroli.

Fig. 6 Rome, Basilica Ulpia, reconstruction and plan, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 6-48.

Fig. 7 Rome, St. Peter's Basilica, reconstruction, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 7-6.

Fig. 8 Rome, St. Peter's Basilica, plan, from Stalley, Early Medieval Architecture, fig. 6.

Fig. 9 Rome, St. Peter's Basilica, reconstruction, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 7-4.

Fig. 10 Rome, Santa Costanza, plan, from i Altet, The Early Middle Ages: From Late Antiquity to A.D. 1000, p.35.

Fig.ll Rome, Santa Costanza, interior photo, from MacDonald, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, fig. 16.

Fig.12 Jerusalem, Precinct of the Holy Sepulcher, reconstruction, from MacDonald, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, fig. 9.

Fig.13 Jerusalem, Precinct of the Holy Sepulcher, plan, from Sanderson, Early Christian Buildings: A Graphie Introduction, fig. 33.

Fig.14 Tomb of Christ, detaiI, from Sanderson, Early Christian Buildings: A Graphie Introduction, fig. 32. Fig.15 Rome, St. John of the Lateran, reconstruction, from Krautheimer, Studies in Early Christian, Medieval, and Renaissance Art, fig. 5.

Fig.16 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic of Theodoric's palace, from Stalley, Early Medieval Architecture, figA.

Fig.17 Split, the palace of Emperor Diocletian, reconstruction, from Kostoff, A History of Architecture: Settings and Rituals, fig. Il.18.

Fig.18 Split, the palace of Emperor Diocletian, plan, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 6-76.

Fig.19 Split, the palace of Diocletian, peristyle court, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 6-77.

Fig.20 Rome, Arch of Constantine, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art througb the Âges, fig. 6~89.

Fig.21 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic of Procession of Martyrs, from von Simson, Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna, plate 38.

Fig.22 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic of Christ Enthroned with the Procession of Martyrs, from von Simson, Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna, plate 30.

Fig.23 Constantinople, Hagia Sophia, longitudinal section, from Mango, Byzantine Architecture, fig. 85.

Fig.24 Constantinople, Hagia Sophia, plan, from Rodley, Byzantine Art and Architecture: An introduction, fig. 45.

Fig.25 Ravenna, San Vitale, plan, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 7-33.

Fig.26 Ravenna, San Vitale, e1evation photo, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art Through the Ages, fig. 7-32.

Fig.27 Ravenna, San Vitale, interior photo, from MacDonald, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, fig. 43.

Fig.28 Ravenna, San Vitale, Justinian and Attendants, apse mosaic, from de la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 7-36. Fig.29 Ravenna, San Vitale, Theodora and Attendants, apse mosaic, from De la Croix and Tansey, Art through the Ages, fig. 7-37.

Fig.30 Ravenna, San Vitale, east interior photo, from MacDonald, Early Christian And Byzantine Architecture, fig. 42.

Fig.31 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, view of the nave and original apse, from Mango, Byzantine Architecture, fig. 101.

Fig.32 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic, The Procession ofVirgins, from von Simson, Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna, plate 42.

Fig.33 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic, The Epiphany, from von Simson, Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna, plate 34.

Fig.34 Ravenna, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo, mosaic detail, The Procession of Virgins, from von Sinison, Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna, plate 43. ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Façade of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. o ~ 00 ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 00 00 00 00 o t! ------.,J.._ t 1 - 1 o l

o 5 10 -15 20 2.5 ?>O \--+--+-.-1- -~ 1 t--t--+ -t-T-t - t-+---l--+-+-l --t 1 1- I--+--I----l--++--t-+--l

Fig. 2 Plan ofSant'Apollinare Nuovo.

'-, ---T-- =:::':~-'--..::? , "

o 5 10 15 20 'L5 50 3S W '.5 M ,- -.. • • • t -----t -f--- -j --t- - ,-- - i ---+-----,

Fig. 3 South elevation of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. Fig. 4 Interior view of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo

Fig. 5 Interior view of San Francesco, Ravenna. COLUMN ._-- ~ OF TRAJAN

--ce -~.--_ • --. - • • • • • • .... ~.. .:=2.'~~~. _~~...... ~._. . . . . --"-"-"'-=0:" · .

_ =7~ • • .~_. • ~:.""'~~~i ~:.-=--•• ' --. '. ~-'--. -•• -• • ••

Fig. 6 Reconstruction (above) and plan (below) of the Basilica Ulpia, Rome, c. 112. Fig. 7 Conjectural reconstruction of St. Peter's, Rome. (After K.J.Conant.)

~ Clirl< =4------"

Fig. 8 Plan of St. Peter's, Rome, founded c.321, Shown with ring crypt modification of c.590.

li\,

~_--lt " g-:r Q-~--=..L....r--3._---L...L....:L~_:_~_:_:l

~~= .• =,_. =.'~' ,.~_ ..• ~~" 7 N

;) 2:) :;0 m L==~==~~~~.==~=~' 100

Fig. 9 Reconstruction of St. Peter's, Rome, c.333. - .. .. . • • ~ .. ~- • ., .' , •, i ~ .. 1

.. . - ., ~ • • • • • -- .: • .' •• .,- • •••

Fig. 10 Plan of Santa Costanza, Rome, c.350.

Fig. II Interior view of Santa Costanza, Rome. Fig. 12 Reconstruction of precinct of the Holy Sepulcher/ Anastasis Rotunda, Jerusalem, begun c.326.

Fig. 14 Detail from ivory panel of the Tomb of Christ, c.430-440.

- ~"'.. '" _J._, '.,,1 .... ~ · 1 -J': ...... ". · L...... f : f! :-, .,. ""3· 2 : 4 • " 7 • .J •• : ...... [ r ...... · · · . fi"_-1-- ~. • 1'1 - .,. .. ~ ...... 1 . 5 • 6 jJ l'·~ ...... ~ .18 .. :9 , Ç. ~.I . 7 10 1 :"1 : • 1 • ~: • I-a l­ . '1 : :r I 1 : : 1 1. AMEIULATORY 1 2. ROTUNDA : • 3. LATERAL VESTIBULE .,...... • .. 4. LATERAL VESTIBULE 5 SOUTHERN ATRIUM - 1 6. COURTY ARO OF - :1 ., .~ THE ROTUNDA ~ 7. BAPTISTRY . 8. CHURCH OF GOLGOTHA 12 9. THE CROSS 10. BASILICA OF . CONSTANTINE ...... 11. THE CRY PT ·ir ...... OF ST. HELENA 12. EASTERN ATRIUM ..~ ., .~ ., .... ". ---.... - Fig. 13 " ...... ,...... Plan of the Holy Sepulcher / Anastasis Rotunda, Jerusalem. Fig. 15 Reconstruction of St. John of the Lateran, Rome, 320.

Fig. 16 Mosaic of the palace ofTheodoric, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. Fig. 17 Reconstruction of the palace of Emperor Diocletian, Split, c.300-306.

If:::r.·::~~ll ~ ----'------1 ·~ " · "

, ~ -.'; ~

__'10.:.:1_ .._lI- ...... , l - •• '-.-:::II;"-x'~

"l!(! ,.'IJ{; ! 1

JlJ "0 l "1[·;>;"

Fig. 18 Plan of the palace ofEmperor Diocletian, Split. Fig. 19 CUITent view of peristyle court at the palace of Emperor Diocletian, Split.

Fig. 20 Arch of Constantine, Rome, 312-3 15. Fig. 21 Mosaic of the Procession of Martyrs, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo.

Fig. 22 Mosaic of Christ Enthroned with the Procession of Martyrs, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. j----_._------

o 5 20 ~-~_·~··m

Fig. 23 Longitudinal section of Hagia Sophia, Constantinople, 537.

1 :'______.J1

Fig. 24 Plan of Hagia Sophia, Constantinople. 10 70 1 Fig. 25 MFT(RS Plan of San Vitale, Ravenna, 526-547.

Fig. 26 Ex-terior elevation of San Vitale, Ravenna. Fig. 27 Interior view of aisle at San Vitale, Ravenna.

Fig. 28 Apse mosaic of Justinian and Attendants, San Vitale, Ravenna. Fig. 29 Apse mosaic of Theodora and Attendants, San Vitale, Ravenna.

Fig. 30 Interior view of apse in the east, San Vitale, Ravenna. Fig. 31 Interior view ofnave and original apse, Sant' ApoIIinare Nuovo, Ravenna. Fig. 32 Nave mosaic of the Procession ofVirgins, Sant'Apollinare Nuovo.

Fig. 33 Nave mosaic of the Epiphany , Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. Fig. 34 Mosaic detail of the Procession ofVirgins, Sant' Apollinare Nuovo. NOTES

Theodoric's Palace Church

1. Bovinî, Giuseppe. Ravenna. p. 77 2. Bovini, p. 77 3. Burns, Thomas S. A History orthe Ostrogoths. p.151 4. Bovini, p.77 5. Johnson, p.83 6. Hodgkin, p. 254 7. Johnson, p.87 8. Bovini, p. 78 9. Bovini, p. 78 10. Hom, Walter and Born, Ernest. The Plan ofSt.Gall: A Study of the Archikcture & Economy of Life in a Paradigmatic Carolingian Monastery. p.119 Il. Hom, Walter and Born, Ernest. The Plan of St.Gall: A Stndy of the Architecture & Economy of Life in a Paradigmatic Carolingian Monastery, p.121 12. Diehl, Charles. Ravenne: Etudes d'Archeologie byzantine. p.28 13. Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. p.196,7 14. Crossley, Paul. '"Medieval architecture andmeaning: the limits oficonography" in The Burlington Magazine. p.117 15. Crossley, p.117 16. Bandmann, Gunter. Early Medieval Architecture as Bearer of Meaning. p.44 17. Bandmann, p.47 18. Bandmann, p. 48 19. Krautheimer, p.197 20. Krautheimer, p.196 21. Bandmann, p. 51

History

1. Burns, Thomas S. A History of the Ostrogoths. p. 67 2. Christensen, Ame Soby. Cassiodorus Jordanes and the History of the Goths: Studies in a Migration Myth. p. 18 3. Christensen, p. 11 4. Christensen, p. 127 5. Christensen, p. 18 6. Hodgkin, Thomas. Theodoric the Goth: The Barbarian Champion of Civilisation, p.33 7. Hodgkin, p. 41 8. Hodgkin, p. 45 9. Burns, p. 17 10. Hodgkin, p.140 Il. Hodgkin, p. 72 12. Wolfratn,-Herwig. History ofthe Goths. p.279 13. Wolfram, p.279 14. Burns, p.67 15. Burns, p.89 16. Hodgkin, p.233 17. Hodgkin, p.148 18. Hodgkin, p. 198 19. Hodgkin, p. 146 20. Hodgkin, p.257 21. Burns, p. 93 22. Hodgkin, p. 179 23. Burns, p. 159 24. von Simson, Otto. G. Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna. p. 19 25. Hodgkin, p.241 26. Burns, p.100 27. Burns, p. 90 28. Burns, p. 79 29. Deanesly, M. A History ofthe Medieval Church 590-1500. p.11

Constantinian Building Plans

1. Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. pp. 41,2 2. Krautheimer, p.60 3. Krautheimer, p.66 4. Stalley, Roger. Early Medieval Architecture. p.65 5. Krautheimer, p.60 6. Krautheimer, pAO 7. Krautheimer, pp. 62,63

Imperial Imagery

1. Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. p. 39 2. Bandmann, Gunter. Early Medieval Architecture as Bearer of Meaning. p.96 3. Bandmann, p.97 4. Krautheimer, p. 48 5. Krautheimer, p.49 6. Krautheimer, p.66 7. Bandmann, p.191

8. Johnson, Mark J. "Toward a History of Theoderic's Building Pro gram" in Dumbarton Oaks Papers. p. 75 9. Krautheimer, p. 229 10. Johnson, p.82 Il. De la Croix, Horst and Tansey, Richard G. A.rt through the A.ges. p. 236 12. Stalley. Roger. Early Medieval Architecture. p.47 13. Hodgkin, Thomas. Theodoric the Goth: The Barbarian Champion of Civilisation. p. 255 14. Johnson, p. 87 15. Hodgkin, p.255 16. Longfellow, William P., editor. A Cyclopaedia ofWorks of Architecture in Italy, Greece, and the Levant. p. 337 17. Burns, Thomas S. A History of the Ostrogoths. p.151 18. Krautheimer. p. 229 19. Krautheimer, p.244 20. Spieser, Jean-Michel. Urban and Religious Spaces in Late Antiquity and Early Byzantium. p. Il

Mosaics

1. Bovini, Giuseppe. Ravenna. p.77 2. Krautheimer, p.198 3. Spieser, Jean-Michel. Urban and Religious Spaces in Late Antiquity and Early Byzantium. p. 12 4. von Simson, Otto G. Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna. p. 82 5. von Simson, p.82 6. Spieser, p. 12 7. Spieser, p. 12 8. von Simson, p. 116 9. von Simson, p. 116 10. von Simson, p. 116 Il. von SimsQn, p. 79 12. von Simson, p. 78 13. von Simson, p. 84 14. von Simson, p. 84 15. von Simson, p. 84 16. von Simson, p. 77 17. von Simson, p.77 18. von Simson, p.77 19. von Simson, p. 80 20. von Simson, p. 79,80 21. von Simson, p. 81 22. von Simson, p. 87 23. von Simson, p.87

Liturgieal Use

1. Mathews, Thomas F. The Early Churehes of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy. p. 4 2. Mathews, }).-125 3. Mathews, p. 125 4. Mathews, p.140 5. Mat~ews, p. 123 6. Thomton, R. St. Ambrose: His Life, Times, and Teaehing. p.79 7. Dudden, F. Homes. The Life and Times of St. Ambrose. p.392 8. Dudden, p.371,2 9. Dudden, p.377,8 10. Dudden, p.378 11. Burns, Thomas S. A History of the Ostrogoths. p. 151 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Angold, Michael. Byzantium: The Bridge from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. London 2001.

Bandmann, Gunter. Early Medieval Architecture as Bearer of Meaning. Trans. by Kendall Wallis. Montreal 2002.

Baynes, Norman & Moss, H. St. L. B., editors. Byzantium: An Introduction to East Roman Civilization. Oxford 1949.

Bovini, Giuseppe. Ravenna. TFans.By Robert Erich WolL New York 197L

Brown, G. Baldwin. From Schola to Cathedral- A Study of Early Christian Architecture and Its Relation to the Life of the Church. Edinburgh 1886.

Bucher, Francois and Toscano, Bruno. "I.C.R.A. Excavates in Spoleto: The Palace of Theoderic(?) in Spoleto" in Gesta vol.l,2,3 1976 reprint.

Burns, Thomas S. The Ostrogoths: Kingship and Society. Wiesbaden 1980.

Burns, Thomas S. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington 1984_

Christensen, Ame Soby. Cassiodorus Jordanes and the History of the Goths: Studies in a Migration Myth. Trans. by Heidi Flegal. Copenhagen 2002.

Crossley, Paul. "Medieval architecture and meaning: the limits of iconography" in The Burlington Magazine February 1988.

Deanesly, M. A History of the Medieval Church 590-1500. i h ed. London 1951.

Deichmann, Friedrich Wilhelm. Ravenna - Hauptstadt des Spatantiken Abendlandes Kommentar, 1. Teil; Plananhung. Weisbaden 1974.

De la Croix, Horst and Tansey, Richard G. Art thrQugh the Ages. 8th ed. New York 1986.

Diehl, Charles. Ravenne: Etudes d'Archeologie byzantine. Paris 1886.

Dix, Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. Glasgow 1949.

Dudden, F. Homes. The Life and Times of St. Ambrose. Vol.2. Oxford 1935. Duschesne, L. Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution. Trans. by M.L. McClure. London 1927.

Geary, Patrick J. The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe. - - Princeton and Oxford 2002.

Hom, Walter and Born, Ernest. The Plan of St. Gall: A Study of the Architecture & Economy of Life in a Paradigmatic Carolingian Monastery. Trans. by Charles W. Jones. Berkeley 1979.

Haldon, John. Byzantium: A History. Stroud and Charleston 2000.

Heather, P.J. Goths and Romans 332-489. Oxford 1991.

Hodgkin, Thomas. Theodoric the Goth: The Barbarian Champion of Civilisation. New York and London 1891. i Altet, Xavier Barral. The Early Middle Ages: From Late Antiquity to A.D. 1000. Cologne 2002.

Jones, A.H.M. Constantine and the Conversion of Europe. London 1948.

Jones, Alexander, editor. The Jerusalem Bible. New York 2000.

Johnson, Mark J. "Toward a History of Theoderic's Building Program" in Dumbarton Oaks Papers no.42 1988.

Kostoff, Spiro. A History of Architecture: Settings and Rituals. New York and Oxford 1985.

Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. Harmondsworth and Baltimore 1975.

Krautheimer, Richard. Studies in Early Christian, Medieval, and Renaissance Art. London 1971.

Longfellow, William P., editor. A Cyclopaedia ofWorks of Architecture in Italy, Greece, and the Levant. New York 1895.

Lowrie, Walter. Monuments of the Early Church. London 1923.

MacDonald, William L. Early Christian & Byzantine Architecture. New York 1962. Mackie,Gillian. Early Christian Chapels in the West: Decoration, Function, and Patronage. Toronto 2003.

Mango, Cyril. Byzantine Architecture. New York 1985.

Mathews, Thomas F. The Early Churches of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy. University Park and London 1971.

Milburn, Robert. Early Christian Art and Architecture. Berkeley and Los Angeles 1988.

Musset, Lucien. The Germanie Invasions: The Making of Europe AD 400-600. Trans. by Edward and Columba James. University Park 1975.

Norwich, John Julius. Byzantium: The Early Centuries. London 1990.

Pierce, James Smith. From Abacus to Zeus: A Handbook of Art History. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs 1987.

Rodley, Lyn. Byzantine Art and Architecture: An Introduction. Cambridge 1994.

Sanderson, Warren. Early Christian Buildings: A Graphie Introduction. Champlain and Montreal 1993.

Satterlee, Craig Alan. Ambrose of Milan's Method of Mystagogical Preaching. Collegeville 2002.

Sieger, Joanne Deane. "Visual Metaphor as Theology: Leo the Great's Sermons on the Incarnation and the Arch Mosaics at S. Maria Maggiore" in Gesta vol.26 no.2 1987.

Smith, E. Baldwin. Architectural Symbolism of Imperial Rome and the Middle Ages. Princeton 1956.

Spieser, Jean-Michel. "The Representation of Christ in the Apses of Early Christian Churches" in Gesta vol. 3 7 nO.1 1998.

Spieser, Jean-Michel. Urban and Religious Spaces in Late Antiquity and Early Byzantium. Aldershot 2001.

Stalley. Roger. Early Medieval Architecture. Oxford 1999.

Tabacco, Giovanni. The Struggle for Power in Medievalltaly: Structures of political rule. Trans. By Rosalind Brown Jensen. Cambridge 1989. Thompson, E.A. Romans and Barbarians: The Decline of the Western Empire. Madison and London 1982.

Thornton, R. St. Ambrose: His Life, Times, and Teaching. London 1879.

von Simson, Otto G~ Sacred Fortress: Byzantine Art and Statecraft in Ravenna. Chicago 1948.

Wand, J.W.C. A History of the Early Church to A.D. 500. 3rd ed. London 1953 reprint..

Ward~Perkins, J.B. Studies in Roman and Early Christian Architecture. London 1994.

Wolfram, Herwig. History orthe Goths. Trans. by Thomas J. Dunlap. Berkeley Los Angeles and London 1988.