Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 26 June 2019

Abstract and Keywords

Many modern historians and art historians disagree about art and the periphery in the Byzantine Empire. Byzantine writers such as Niketas Choniates argued that Constantinople was the centre of the empire and the driving force from which all else emanated. Meanwhile, Niketas's brother Michael complained of the dullness and ignorance of the provinces. Byzantine art was equated with the art of Constantinople, which was assumed to be of the highest quality and was the most innovative and creative. This view rejects art produced in the periphery—in the provinces of the empire and among its neighbours to the east and west—as inferior and dependent. The debate about centre and periphery had its roots in arguments about the nature and origins of artistic innovation in the Late Antique and Byzantine empires that arose around the year 1900.

Keywords: art, periphery, Byzantine Empire, Constantinople, provinces, centre

Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us.