Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Illustrations
- Introduction: The Sensibility of a Civilization
- Chapter 1 Imaging Christianity in Rome
- Chapter 2 A Question of Style
- Chapter 3 Rome in the Time of Iconoclasm
- Chapter 4 Forms of Separation
- Epilogue: Old St. Peter's as Museum and Microcosm
- Further Reading
- Appendix: Dates of Medieval Roman Monuments
Chapter 1 - Imaging Christianity in Rome
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 March 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Illustrations
- Introduction: The Sensibility of a Civilization
- Chapter 1 Imaging Christianity in Rome
- Chapter 2 A Question of Style
- Chapter 3 Rome in the Time of Iconoclasm
- Chapter 4 Forms of Separation
- Epilogue: Old St. Peter's as Museum and Microcosm
- Further Reading
- Appendix: Dates of Medieval Roman Monuments
Summary
When Constantine selected Byzantion as the capital of the Roman Empire in 324, the city was relatively unknown and certainly not as influential as city-states like Athens or Corinth. Perhaps Constantine wanted a site that was more easily defendable than Rome, perhaps he wanted to highlight the site of his victory over his rival Licinius I, or perhaps he wanted a clean slate upon which his new streets, new forum, enlarged stadium, and three new churches could stand out in a way they might not in the already chockablock city of Rome. What is certain is that the move was not inspired by an attempt to create a rift between the East and the West. Ironically, the name of the city upon which Constantine settled the new capital ultimately did become the source of a distinction between two completely separate cultures made by later sixteenth-century historians—Byzantion became Byzantine. But in the fourth century, the name Byzantion was essentially forgotten, only used by antiquarians. The rest of the community quickly adopted the name Constantinople. Constantine may not have had difficulty with the new name, despite the fact that there was no official decree about the name change. Officially the name was New Rome. It was to act as a balance to the western Rome, as a means of providing stability to the expansive Roman Empire. The new capital had the advantage of being on the sea route from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean and the land route that connected the Persian and Danube frontiers. New Rome would thus be better able to unite the expanse of the empire than the landlocked Rome. Constantinople was a complementary site. It was not supposed to make Rome into a different, discrete, separate, or subsidiary entity.
If later authorities argued about the primacy, one cannot assume that this was a widespread conversation during the fourth century, or one that would have affected the artists of each capital. Documentary evidence does not point to a contentious reception to the founding of Constantinople. Nor does cultural evidence. Visual evidence, the great building programs that Constantine endorsed in both great centres, indicates that the earliest years of this newly Christianized empire were not coloured by a sense of opposition or antagonism.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Byzantine Rome , pp. 15 - 40Publisher: Amsterdam University PressPrint publication year: 2022