Ernst Kitzinger writes about the overall picture of the mostic and the depth of it, whereas, Thomas Mathews points out the Christ and the aspects that make him heavenly or Christ like. Both make very valid points and describe all aspects that I can completely agree with. However, if I was to appreciate one article more it would have to be Ernst Kitzinger. This is due to him focusing more on the overall painting rather that just one specific detail of the mosaic. Whichever view I appreciate more is irrelevant, however, because they both do a great job of pointing out very important aspects of the
Ernst Kitzinger writes about the overall picture of the mostic and the depth of it, whereas, Thomas Mathews points out the Christ and the aspects that make him heavenly or Christ like. Both make very valid points and describe all aspects that I can completely agree with. However, if I was to appreciate one article more it would have to be Ernst Kitzinger. This is due to him focusing more on the overall painting rather that just one specific detail of the mosaic. Whichever view I appreciate more is irrelevant, however, because they both do a great job of pointing out very important aspects of the