Type and Archetype in Late Antique and Byzantine Art and Architecture

Jelena Bogdanović, Ph.D. (2008), Princeton University, is an Associate Professor at Vanderbilt University. Among her authored and edited books are The Framing of Sacred Space: The Canopy and the Byzantine Church (2017) and Icons of Space: Advances in Hierotopy (2021).Ida Sinkević, Ph.D. (1994), Princeton University, is the Arthur J. ’55 and Barbara Rothkopf Professor of Art History at Lafayette College. Her books are The Church of St. Panteleimon at Nerezi (2000) and Knights in Shining Armor (2006).Marina Mihaljević, Ph.D. (2010), Princeton University, is an Assistant Professor of Art and Architectural History at the State University of Novi Pazar, Serbia. Her publications include “Change in Byzantine Architecture” (2012) and “Üçayak: A Forgotten Byzantine Church” (2014).Čedomila Marinković, Ph.D. (2004), University of Belgrade, is an independent researcher from based in Belgrade. Her books include Image of the Completed Building (2007), Jews in Belgrade 1521-1942 (2020), and Synagogues in Vojvodina (2022).

“By focusing attention on historically contextualized case studies that explore concepts of types and archetypes, this volume successfully investigates typology as a scholarly tool used in the study of visual arts and architecture of the late antique and Byzantine contexts.[...] Other valuable considerations highlighted in this publication include questions of meaning, referentiality, and temporality within art and architecture; modes of transfer between archetype and type; issues of scale, flexibility, creativity, and availability of resources; and issues of terminology. [...] This edited volume is beautifully designed and produced with good-quality color images integrated throughout the texts, glossy paper, and footnotes. [...] this is a valuable publication not only for its careful methodological and theoretical considerations of types and archetypes within late antique and Byzantine art, architecture, and visual culture, but also for bringing attention to excellent scholarship that touches on east European topics and contexts." – Alice Isabella Sullivan, Tufts University, in: Slavic Review, 83/4 (2024), 839-841.“An examination of similarities in Byzantine art that transcends the mimetic conception of "type" as mere formal correspondence—combined with an integrative approach to interpreting ecclesiastical structures—has opened the way for a re-evaluation of the relationship between type and archetype. [...] A "type" is defined as a pattern or model, and an "archetype" as its primordial essence, while a clear distinction is drawn between the archetype and the "prototype," the latter understood as a material exemplar. Emphasis is placed on a key conclusion shared by the majority of authors: in the context of Late Antiquity and Byzantium, the relationship between type and archetype is not based on mimetic reproduction, but rather on the partial—and often reduced—transmission of an essential idea. [...] Type and Archetype in Late Antique and Byzantine Art and Architecture represents a significant contribution to the study of the creative principles of Late Antique and Byzantine art and architecture.” – Marka Tomic, in: Zograf 48 (2025), 231-248.