Teteriatnikov's Argumentative Analysis

Throughout the reading, Teteriatnikov argues that Justinian’s and Theodora’s panels at San Vitale show the gender difference through their illusionistic locations in the painting and their actual locations in the church. Further, she states that the panels are made to ensure the resurrection and the eternal life of the imperial couple and their accompanying courtiers.
In her argument about the gender differentiation in locations, Teteriatnikov uses a number of persuasive sources. An analysis of the architectural setting in the apse solidly presents the locations of the two panels and shows their relations in the space. It demonstrates that the two panels are placed in different locations. Also, the article uses Benedictis’s study in sixth-century Roman churches to claim that only noble men could view Justinian’s panel clearly, while only noble women could view Theodora’s clearly. Teteriatnikov claims that placing noble men at the head of the congregation was a custom in Roman churches in the Early Christian period and the early Middle Ages. Therefore, churches in Ravenna would have similar placement of men and women as other Roman churches did, if not exactly the …show more content…
She states that Justinian’s procession is shown near the central door of the church. Since the background of Justinian’s panel does not indicate a specific location, Teteriatnikov uses Book of Ceremonies to indicate the location of the emperor’s procession. Nevertheless, according to the footnotes, the source is from The Great Entrance in the book, while the procession in the panel takes place in The Little Entrance. The article does not show the relations between the two ceremonies. Neither does it explain why the source can solidly support the argument. Therefore, Teteriatnikov’s argument about the location of the emperor’s procession is not so