Page:A History of Architecture in All Countries Vol 2.djvu/431

Rh Bk. IX. Ch. I. DEFINITION OF THE TERM. 415 therefore be extremely convenient if the terra "Greek architecture" could be used for the style of the Greek Church from that time to the present day. If that term be inadmissible, the term " Sclavonic " might be applied, though only in the sense in which the Gothic style could be designated as Teutonic. Both, however, imply ethnographic dis- tinctions which it would not be easy to sustain. The term "Gothic" happily avoids these, and so would " Greek," but for the danger of its being confounded with "Grecian," which is the proper name for the classical style of the ancient Greeks. If the employment of either of these terms is deemed inadvisable, it will be necessary to divide the style into Old and New Byzantine — the first comprehending the three centuries of transition that elapsed from Constantine to the Persian war of Heraclius and the rise of the Mahomedan jjower, which entirely changed the face of the Eastern Empire, — the second, or Neo-Byzan- tine, including all those forms which were practised in the East from the reap])earance of the style, in or after the 8th century, till it was superseded by the Renaissance. Thus divided, the true, or Old Byzantine, style would be the exact counterpart of the Romanesque. As explained in a former chapter (vol. i. p. 400) that style was a transition from the classical Roman to the styles adopted by the Barbarians, the old style having died out about the age of Gregory the Great (a.d. 600). An exactly similar process went on in the East, and culminated in the erection of Sta. Sophia (a.d. 582-558): the difference being that during this age the Western Empire was in a state of decay, ending in a debacle from which the Gothic style practically emerged only some four centuries later. The Eastern Empire, on the contrary, was during that time progressively forming itself ; and did form a style of its own of singu- lar beauty and perfection, which it left to its Sclavonic successors to use or abuse as their means or tastes dictated. The Western Empire was not in a position to form a style so early, and the creation of one was reserved till after the revival in the 11th century. Though the styles of the East and the West became afterwards so distinctly separate, we must not lose sight of the fact, that during the age of transition (.324-530) no clear line of demarcation can be traced. Constantinople, Rome, and Ravenna were only principal cities of one empire, throughout the whole of which the people were striving simultaneously to convert a Pagan into a Christian style, and working from the same basis with the same materials. Prior to the age of Constantine one style pervaded the whole empire. The buildings at Palmyra, Jerash, or Baalbec, Nice or Merida, are barely distin- tinguishable from those of the capital, and the problem of how the Pagan style could be best converted to Christian uses was the same for all. The consequence is, that if we were at present writing a