The fresco was made by Byzantine artists, but commissioned by price Yaroslav, "The wise", of Kiev. It decorated the walls of a private turret in the Church and the hallway leading up to it, where the prince would host nobles. The imperial box, or kathisma, is the only section of the fresco in good condition, but a depiction of a horse race from start to finish was once painted on the walls of the hallway leading to the turret. A fresco of musicians performing for the emperor (a faded organ is depicted in the second), a reconstruction of a fresco at the start of the hallway depicting the races about to start, and a diagram of the hallway can be found here: http://imgur.com/a/nRm2w
An imitation of exotic imperial Roman festivities, the purpose of the fresco was to awe and intimidate Yaroslav's guests while drawing connections between him and the Emperor in Constantinople. This was part of a larger program to remake Kiev as a sort of "Constantinople on the Dnieper", including building multiple monumental churches and a new set of walls, complete with a so called "Golden Gate". Though such an imitation might seem a bit cheap to modern observers, accounts indicate that it served its purpose well. A more detailed explanation of the meaning and purpose of the fresco can be found here.
Great recommendations!
I'd also recommend reading Nicholas of Sion, who is another 6th century saint with a hagiography, and it goes quite in depth into Anatolian village life, including hints of urban vs rural tensions. It is also quite fun - my favourite part of the story is its multi-chapter treatment of how Nicholas and the villagers cut down a demon-possessed tree. It might not be widely available though, but if you can find it, it should be quite useful!
Slightly later is the Life of Theodore of Sykeon, who is also from Anatolia, but slightly later, and active from the late-sixth century to the early-seventh. It is a fantastic source for social and economic history, and the best part is, you can read it here.
To contextualise all these sources, I recommend Peter Sarris' Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian to get a sense of the historiography :)
It works for me but might be reddits fault so try clicking the link from here: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Patterns-of-Flight%3A-Middle-Byzantine-Appropriation-Walker/59f589ab953801982eb5bc322bc804d719a39368
Strategos by Brian Doherty:
https://www.amazon.com/Strategos-Born-Borderlands-1/dp/1493710990
(still working my way through it on Audible)
After some brief Googling, it looks like this book might go over what you're asking about: People and Identity in Ostrogothic Italy, 489–554 I haven't read it myself, so I couldn't give you a review or anything, but it's published by the Cambridge University Press so it's probably at least been academically reviewed before publication.
From the blurb for the book:
>The barbarians of the fifth and sixth centuries were long thought to be races, tribes or ethnic groups who toppled the Roman Empire. This book proposes a new view, through a case study of the Goths of Italy between 489 and 554. The author suggests wholly new ways of understanding barbarian groups and the end of the Western Roman Empire. The book also proposes a complete reinterpretation of the evolution of Christian conceptions of community, and of so-called "Germanic" Arianism.
The book you're looking for is literally called Everyday Life in Byzantium.
It's dated now, but still a good starting point.
Wikipedia has one, showing their relations to other dynasties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_trees_of_the_Byzantine_imperial_dynasties#Komnenid.2C_Angelid.2C_Laskarid_and_Palaiologid_dynasties.2C_1057.E2.80.9359.2C_1081.E2.80.931453
There is this one, not a family tree per se but you can browse down and check the detailed lists of family members and their infos. It even includes the children who died at young age. This link starts with the first known ancestor of the Komnenos Dynasty.
http://www.geni.com/people/Isaac-Komnenos/6000000004680595668
I’ve read The Alexiad. What you say doesn’t exist, and no, Anna did not try to put her husband on the throne. It’s a story that’s the result of sexism by other historians.
Replying just to notify if you happen to read anything about Anna Komnene: she very likely did not try to steal the throne from her brother. Texts saying otherwise rely on a sexist view of history training back to the historian Nick Choniates. It's only recently that the record has been corrected.
You can read more about Anna Komnene, arguably the world's first female historian, here.
Oh yeah, it's perfectly understandable. For whatever reason that particular mosaic just projects an overwhelming aura of confusion and misattribution; even actual academic publications have variably mistaken it for Anna Komnena or the Alexios Komnenos somehow.
There's a lot of downvotes in here. One I want to read from probably my favorite historian is The Lost Capital of Byzantium: The History of Mistra and the Peloponnese by Steven Runciman (this guy's a god).
I've read novels and such but I would have to stick with the book that introduced me, too many decades ago, to Byzantium.