I have been wondering, how did architecture develop, and how was it viewed in the past by the area that was controlled by the Eastern Roman Empire? I'm not just specifically talking about the Empire, but rather the countries that laid within it, those that might be considered Orthodox Countries. (at one point in history)
I've had plenty of art history, mainly on western art and architecture. (That is, ancient greece and rome, then skipping to the renaissance) However, I've been wondering, how did the "East" view architecture from well before Christ to up until the fall of Constantinople?
We know in "western" architecture, that it became much more expressive of the person and what they wanted, much more "free" and artistic. Gradually, one generation rebelled a bit more until technology finally broke the back of "traditional" and "Classical" architecture.
In the East, was the same thing occurring? Or did architecture remain traditional, beautiful and vernacular?
Simply saying, I'm interested because I'm trying to see which way I should go. I see architecture in the "west" as reflecting and effecting religion (as well as vice versa), everything became your own interpretation, your own architecture, your own personal "Christ", your own theology.
I'd like to know if architecture in the "east" went in this direction as well, or if the architecture stayed more traditional and less along the lines of having "artistic/creative freedom".