Why was Byzantine art so shit compared to classical Roman art?

Why was Byzantine art so shit compared to classical Roman art?

Definitely a different civilization

>one Empire has 200 years of relative peace and prosperity
>the other is in a near-constant war for survival with multiple enemies on different fronts
gee i wonder why op

Congrats OP, you reworded your post this time and might get some real worthwhile responses this time!

Too many christians and serfs

Lack of available resources and war.

But seriously, some of the Byzantine artwork is gorgeous. The mosaics are severely underrated compared to statues (which I perfectly admit I prefer overall)

It wasnt shit faggot, just underdeveloped, due to your barbarian ancestors chimping out on them.

WE

Byzantine is like the bastard son of Rome with Greek, Slav and Turk shit.

What the fuck kind of autism do we have here?

>Lack of available resources and war.
what is your source?
that make no senses because past civ were always in war

this thread again

this is the shit im talking about, why mods dont deletes threads like this?

Christcucks

The Roman Republic and the Principate were not "always in war." This is fairly rudimentary history. By the time of Julius Caesar, Rome had exhausted itself of any formidable external opponents in the near area barring internal threats of rebellion and squabbling tribes of steppe/snowniggers. They had all the time in the world to jerk off and do all sorts of flowery shit whereas from the get go the Byzantines were contending with a series of unending wars and conflicts with near everyone in the immediate vicinity.

No one's gonna mention the Iconoclasms? The stuff that we have that survived is actually really pretty, but that was from pre-8th century, when things really started going downhill..

Also, IIRC, much of Early Italian Renaissance art and architecture was made by Byzantines that fled the destruction of Constantinople.

>great art
>that hulked out teeny babylet

At least the Byzantines understood proper proportion in their art, even if it tended towards abstraction. Unless that baby was thrown in as a joke, in which case, cheers mate.

When do "byzantines" start to people like you? Those are the four fucking tetrarchs, Constantinople didn't even fucking exist when the tetrarchs ruled.

You don't know what you're talking about. Byzantine art had a mini renaissance once iconoclasm was defeated.

Well it's riding a dolphin, so it is a possibility.

Preferences in art changed.

why does it look more northern european than southern european?

The Portrait of the Tetrarchs was a small decoration on top of some random pillars in Constantinople. Why are you comparing them to the most famous works of Classical Roman art?

It's a Cupid you fucking stupid nigger. Cupid is Venus's son and this is supposed to be a call to Caesar's title as Son of Venus, which would make Augustus and Cupid brothers.

!

This statue is from the dominate, not the Byzantine empire.

Christian dark age.

Hebrew mythology. Not even once.

How come a cupid so shitty looking?

>Christian
but it looks more like northern european pagan art than it does anything middle eastern.

most Byzantine art and treasures were destroyed by mudslimes

>The new Africa shitpost

>implying Rome doesn't get more kino as it goes on

they adopted hebrew mythology and turned into northern forest dwellers

damn