An Image of Power in Transition: St. George Slaying Diocletian and the War of Images

What is it about?

This essay discusses the mounted image of St. George slaying an emperor within the broader context of how and why early Christian images were transformed and adapted to the early Byzantine religious style. The representational framework of Arthur Danto’s philosophical system is used to tie together the threads of this research. By drawing parallels between changes in contemporary art and culture—often referred to as the modern/post-modern shift—and the transition of the Hellenistic to the Byzantine era, structures common to artistic creation and reception are brought to the fore. The case study presents the history of the depiction of St. George slaying Diocletian, how it emerged in the Caucasus region, and the manner in which it reflects the stylistic changes that took place in in the late antique eastern Roman world. The social, cultural and philosophical ramifications of the shift of high classical art to the early Byzantine style are laid out in terms of art, modes of inquiry, and action-orientation. A theory is presented on what role the image of St. George killing Diocletian may have played in transforming the late antique and early medieval worldview. The final section sketches a philosophical framework that supports the conclusions of this research.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

At some point, we may have found ourselves in a situation in which it seems as if the people with whom we live and work, though we all speak the same tongue, are speaking another language. This reflects the reality that the political divisions we experience in our world today make palpable the different reference systems, or perspectives, that underlie our words. Such a change in reference was evident in the shift from the late antique to the early medieval world. This shift could be noted in the Greek language. It was not so much the words of the language that had changed with the passing of the Hellenistic world; there was a change in how words were used; the point of reference was different. An example of this shift in reference is found in Roman law. The Roman legal code of third-century jurist Ulpian was more or less the same as that of Justinian’s great jurist Tribonian, who reworked sixth-century Roman law. But the orientation, in some cases, was shockingly different. Classicist Clifford Ando writes that torture in the courtroom was allowed under both versions of Roman law. But in the third century, the aim of torture would have been to elicit information. In the sixth century, the purpose would have been to set one right with God. The contrasting action-expectations of third and sixth-century legal practices exhibit a clash of worlds, and it is evident that some versions of these competing worldviews are still in conflict today. Without understanding this contrast, democracies around the world may continue to struggle.