Again the "Carmagnola"

Author(s): James D. Breckenridge

Source: Gesta, Vol. 20, No. 1, Essays in Honor of Harry Bober (1981), pp. 1-7
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the International Center of Medieval
Art
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/766821 .
Accessed: 28/01/2015 22:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press and International Center of Medieval Art are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Gesta.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Again the C;Carmagnola"
JAMES D. BRECKENRIDGE
NorthwesternUniversity

It is a privilegeas well as a pleasureto contributea set of bronze horses. Like them, the head is almost cer-
briefnote to a volumehonoringHarryBober. For a gen- tainly a part of the loot that was Venice's share of the
eration (more than that, really, but who's counting?) misdirectedFourthCrusadeof 1204.2
Harryhas set an exampleof intenseandintelligentscholar- The head has long been known popularlyas "Car-
ship for all medievaliststo follow. The topic of the pres- magnola,"afterthe nicknameof a condottiere,Francesco
ent paper does not lie within Harry's normal range of Bussare, who was beheadedin the Piazetta on May 5,
interest-wide as that is-but it does have in our mind a 1432.3 That it shouldhave been named after such a vic-
personallink with Harry,and with a nearlyemptyhotel in tim of sternjusticeis not surprising;but it is impossibleto
downtownLexington,Kentucky. determinewhy this particularfelon's name was chosen,
The subjectof this enquiryis a porphyryhead, ap- from the thousandswho have been executedbeneaththat
proximatelylife-size, set into the balustradeat the south- balconyoverthe centuries.
west corner of the exteriorbalcony of the basilica of S. Actual identificationof the head as an artisticrepre-
Marco in Verlice (Fig. 1).1 The head is not far off a sentation,and hence establishmentof its origin and date,
verticalline above the famousporphyrygroupof tetrarchs havebeen the subjectof some controversy,especiallyearly
embeddedin the cornerof the wall of the churchtreasury, in the presentcenturywhen it first became the object of
while its neighboron the balcony is the equally famous scholarlyinterest. One had thoughtthe questionmore or

FIGURE 1. "Carntagnola." Porphyryhead, Venice, 5. Marco. FIGURE 2. "Carmagnola." Profle view from pla*ter ca*t.

1
GESTA XX/I @ The InternationalCenter of Medieval Art 1981

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Iessresolvedin apathyin recentyears,but a new examina- 642; Tiberiusand Heraclius,in 680; JustinianII, in 695;
tion of the hegadfrom the point of view of specialized and Leontius in 698. But only in the case of Justinian
informationhas reviveda long-rejectedidentificationwith 1I did the rulerregainthe throne,makingpossible (if im-
JustinianII, at least on the part of the new researchers. probablein the eyes of many scholars) the creationof a
The fact that the new contributionseems to oSer more porphyryimage showinghim as emperor,yet bearingthe
questionsthan answersis not wholly to its discredit. mutilationwhich had accompaniedhis deposition.10
First, though,we must offer a generaldescriptionof JustinianII, havingsucceededto the thronein 685,
the head (following Delbrueck).4 The head is that of a had been deposed ten years later, and humiliatedin the
beardlessadult male, with short-cuthair, wearinga wide Hippodromeat Constantinopleby "rhinokopia"(cutting
jewelleddiadem. This ornament,togetherwith the use of of his nose, and apparentlyof his ears as well) and "glos-
the materialporphyryitself, makesit a certaintythat the sotomia"(slittingof the tongue).l1 He was then exiled to
head, made in late Roman or Byzantinetimes, must rep- Cherson in the Crimea, whence however he fled to the
resent a person of imperialrank. Head and neck are of steppes and the court of the Khanof the Khazars,whose
one piece, and would have been fixed into a bust or full- daughter he married. With Khazar backing, Justinian
length statue. The hair, which is left rough-surfaced, invaded the Empire and recapturedhis capital a decade
shows traces of light brown paint; the whites of the eyes after he had left it. Leontius,who had overthrownhim,
were also painted, while the recessed pupils presumably and Tiberius Apsimar, who had overthrownLeontius,
held polished stones. (Whetherthe paint traces actually were draggedto the Hippodromeand displayed to the
date from the originalcreationof the work has not been public before being executed no halfway measuresthis
determined.) The entire head is slightly asymmetrical, time!
indicatingthat it was intended to be seen slightly from Having reached this identificationby a process of
the left of frontality. elimination,Delbrueckwent on to make a case for the
The sculptureis in a generallygood stateof preserva- possibility of surgical reconstructionof the lost nose,
tion, except for a chip out of the centraljewel of the di- rather than its replacementby a gold substituteas re-
adem, and a gouge in the front section of the nose. The corded by the chroniclerAgnellus of distant Ravenna.1'
nose itself is the most remarkablefeature of the head, Such a "rhinoplasty"was not within the capabilitiesof
since it has an extremelyflat profile,withoutsigns of any Byzantinesurgeonsso far as we know, but it had been a
furtherdamagethan the gouge in its front surface;nor minorspecialtyamongthe surgeonsof muchearlierIndia,
does it have the mashed and flattenedappearanceof a beingdescribedin the writingsof Sushruta(who compiled
brokennose (Fig. 2 ) . his treatise in the sixth or fifth century B.C.) .13 Del-
Whenfirstpublished,the headwas considereda work brueck'simplicittheory,then, was that JustinianII could
of the late Empire,most probablyfromthe fourthcentury. havecome into contactwith a surgeonof such accomplish-
Sir MartinConwayhazardeda guess that the Carmagnola ments throughhis travelson the steppes and at the court
head might fit the headless chlamateporphyrytorso in of the Khazars,whose contactshad indeedbecome wide-
Ravenna,5but comparisonof the actualdimensionsof the spread.l4
two was enough to show this to be impossible.6A com- The first and strongestrebuttalto Delbrueck'ssur-
parabledate was suggestedby Wulff,who consideredthe gical theory came from a Danish scholar, J.L. Heiberg,
head an exampleof the "AlexandrianSchool"of porphyry who was skeptical on stylistic grounds, but whose chief
sculpture,executedfor one of the successorsof Constan- argumentsfocused on the medicalhypothesis:
tine the Great.7
It would have been a miserableclod of a sur-
In the meantime,however,a more radicalapproach geon who was unable to make the nose look more
was taken by RichardDelbrueck,who took note of the like a real nose than it does on the [statue]. How
curious conformationof the nose, concludingthat this,
and why did the surgeon make sharp edges on the
as far as it extended,had the shape of a normalnose, not
side and especially at the tip? And why would he
a broken one; it simply terminatedtoo soon. One (or
have been so malicious as to sew the openingsbe-
possiblytwo, he thought)smallmarkon the undersurface
neath together and leave only one small slit which
above the lip might then be an indication of special
furtheraltersthe alararea?15
breathingapparatusarrangedafter the amputationof a
normalnose.8 Pursuingthis strangeclue, Delbrueckwas The text of Sushrutais quite explicitthat two small tubes
led to seek an emperoror caesar of the early Byzantine shouldbe insertedinto the nostrilsto preservethe breath-
Empire whose nose had been excised. The possibilities ing mechanism the same system,Majno notes, used to-
all lie within the seventh century, during the Heraclian dayfor the sameoperation.1n)
Dynasty (which seems to have introducedmutilationinto At least as fatal, in our view, was Heiberg'sfurther
the Byzantinesystemof legal sanctions9): Heraclonas,in argumentthat, whatevertheir limitations,Byzantinesur-

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
geons ( or public executioners) would have had more to have been purposelymade, and not the result of
sense, in a denasification,than to cut off the nose parallel poorworkmanshipor laterdamage."4
to the face, as illustratedby the Carmagnola,since that
We should note that our own examinationof the
would have requireda long and bloody performancein
head in situ, made a]mostthirtyyearsago, did not suggest
the Hippodromebefore the impatientmob; the operation to us irregularities,much less scarification,of the flesh
involves sawing throughthe bone of the upper nose. It
surfaces. We were much concernedat that time with the
would have been far easier and equally disfiguring-to tactilequalitiesof the stone, and found the mainflesh sur-
cut diagonally through the tip of the nose where only faces uniformly smooth and undulating. We did, of
cartilageis present,and one strokeof a sharpblade would course, find a differenceon the front surface of the con-
do the job. troversialnose, whichseemedless highlypo]ished,slightly
What Heiberg suggestedwas that the markson the
granular,in fact. This struck us as in conformitywith
under-surfaceof the nose cited by Delbrueckwere not Heiberg'stheoryof an old repair,meantto make a dam-
indicationsof a breathingtube, but only remainsof the
aged face presentablewithout going to the drastic steps
undercuttingdone when the head was first shaped; and
required to remove all traces of damage of the sort
that the flattenednose was one which had been damaged
evidenton the nose andthe jewel.")
at an early date, and repolishedfor reuse. He suggested
The highly articulatedforehead of the Carmagnola
that this mighthave taken place as late as the time of the
does not seem to us to give the impressionof a scarred
head's installationon the balustradeof S. Marco. Hei-
and restitchedskin (althoughon such a topic it is difficult
berg's own choice of a date and identificationwas with
to argueagainstthe opinionof surgeons). In any case the
JustinianI, not II, in the sixth century, just before the
conformationof the archedeyebrowsand mouldedfore-
exhaustion of the Mons Porphyriusin the Sinai.1
head masses is found on other, less sophisticatedsculp-
This attack did not cause Delbrueckto abandonhis
tures from Asia Minor which have recentlybeen redated
identification;he repeated it in his corpus of porphyry
to the sixth century.'>}The most impressivecomparisons
sculpture,even while citing the Danish article.18In later
are amongthe heads found at Ephesuswhich are now in
years he sought to link still other works of art to the the Museum at SelJcuk,' whose foreheadshave the same
obscurebut fascinatingJustinianII.19 In Antike Porphyr- active pattern of modelling,in similarlysymmetricpat-
rerke. he also listed the dissent of the Americancollab- terns.2
orators, Hayford Peirce and Royall Tyler, who twice The focus of expressionin the scowlingbrow, here
assertedthat the head, insteadof being as early as Justin- so close to patternization,may easily be traced back to
ian II, was in fact later. Its style and plastic conception, already stylized examples of Ephesian sculptureof the
they felt, were medievalratherthan Roman, and the head fifth century.98The system of patterningthe forehead is
must then date from the tenth century,as almostthe only not unknownin the West, either, for it may be seen Oll
piece of sculpturein the round survivingfrom so late a the faces of the donors in the apse mosaic of S. Vitale;25)
periodin Byzantineart. They even hazardedthe name of an earlierexampleis to be found on the uniquegold coin
the emperorwhom it mightrepresent: the youthfulBasil of Theodoricfound at Sinigaglia.30It is, in fact, in the
II Bulgaroktonos(975-1025 ) .9° numismaticevidence that the identificationof the Car-
In any case, althoughthe head continuesto be cited magnola'headitselfcan be decided.
in currentcompendiaof late antiquesculpture,2lthe ques- On the one hand,the coin portraitsbelie any possible
tion of the curious nose has been ignored until very re- identificationof the porphyry head with Justinian II.
cently, when two plastic surgeonsat MassachusettsGen- Withoutarguingthe degreeof physicalresemblanceto be
eral Hospitalbecame intriguedby the possibilitythat the found in coin dies of the late seventh century, we may
sculpturemight in fact exemplify the results of ancient assertthat on all his coin portraits,JustinianII is shown
Indian surgicalpractice.9' It is importantthat they both with a wedge-shaped,triangularface, not the squared,
felt that the appearanceof the porphyryhead is quitecon- blocky visage of the porphyryhead. His hair is full and
sistent with the results of reconstructivesurgery on the swellingbelow the ears, and from the early years of his
nose, in whichin ancientas in moderntimes, skin is taken first reign he wore a moderatebut obvious beard, which
fromthe foreheadand broughtdown from the root of the was very much in evidenceon the coins of the restoration
nose towardthe nostrilsto cover the new structure:23 of 705 (Fig. 3).31 Certainlynone of the coin portraits
The most interestingfeaturesof this stone por- of the second reign show any trace of mutilation. Indeed
trait are the nose and forehead,both of which are the indicationsgiven by the chroniclersof his behavior
not completely smooth and have definite irregular- followinghis exile do not suggest the sort of personality
ities (? scars) suggestinga donor area and a re- whichwould seek to exhibitunnecessarilythe proof of his
cipientsite of an Indianforeheadflap. These appear bitterlyremembereddegradation.3"

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Such an overviewgives added interestto the head,
as it maybe seen as the finestextantspecimenof malepor-
traiturein what seems to have been the last generationof
the antiquesculpturaltradition. After this head of Justin-
ian, and that of Theodora,no three-dimensionalByzan-
tine imperialportraitssurvive. That this is more than just
an accident of preservationis suggestedby the sources,
for the last portraitsculpturesmentionedwith any cer-
tainty are of JustinianI: the famous equestrianon the
columnin the Augustaion,4°and the statue in the Hippo-
drome dedicatedby the PrefectEustathius;41 both relate
to the PersianWar. It is perhapssignificantthat the next
imperial column, erected but unfinished by Justin II,
FIGURE 3. Justinian 11. Gold solidus, Constantinople mittt never receiveda statue since TiberiusII refusedto place
705-706 A.D.
one on it.4' Thereis no convincingevidencethat any fur-
thersculpturalportraitsof livingpersonswere madein the
EastChristianworld.49
Returning to the porphyry head, the closest re- Thus it seems that the generallyacceptedidentifica-
semblanceto its likenesscan be found in the face of Jus- tion and dating of the Carmagnolahead fits well into
tinianthe Great on the massivegold medallion,formerly our conceptual frameworkof sixth-centuryart. Even
in the Louvre,struckto commemoratesome great victory the surgeonsof Boston are almost persuaded-although
of the 530's (Fig. 4).:s:<The crownis of course different: not enoughto abandontheirbasichypothesis:
a matterwhich no longer occasions as much surpriseas
in an earliergeneration.34But the shape of the faces is One furtherinterpretationof the appearanceof
quitesimilar-closer thanone usuallyfindson two Byzan- the head is possible-that the Carmagnalahead is
tine portraitsof the same individualin differentmedia. indeed Justinianthe Great . . . but that Justinian
The flesh, while even fuller on the medallion,follows the Rhinotmetos,in a bizarreeffort to associatehimself
same folds and furrows,and the brow exhibits the same with the Great Justinian (witness [his empress re-
intimidatingscowl. The eyes of the medallionportraitare named] Theodora and other acts of his reigns),
more widely opened, as the diesinkers'conventionsmay actuallyhad his workmengrind down and alter the
have demanded,but samepoucheshangbelow them as on nose to representhis own reconstructednose (so that
the porphyry. If one were to hazarda guess, one might the head would show the unmistakablenosg of Jus-
say that the Carmagnolahead representsthe same person tinianII on the face of JustinianI).44
at a slightlyearlierdate than the medallion. Similarities
have also been suggestedbetweenboth portraitsand that
of Justinianin the S. Vitale apse complex at Ravenna al-
though (as might perhaps be expected) these are less
exact. The folds and wrinklesof the sculpturedforehead
appearon the local personagesin Ravenna,not the Con-
stantinopolitan ones.35
This resemblanceand identificationfirst bruitedby
Heiberg,has won general acceptancein the last genera-
tion. Beginningwith Andreas Rumpf,36the similarities
havebeen recognized,and by now it is possibleto develop
a reasonablypersuasiveview of full-scaleportraiturein the
FIGURE 4. Justinian I. Cast of gold medallion, 36 solidi, Con-
sixth centuryfrom these materials,with the Carmagnola stantinoplemint, 534-5348A.D.
as one of the cornerstones.37Sande'sanalysisof the Car-
magnola in support of this identificationpoints out the
slight archaismswhich had led earlierscholarsto see the
head as a productof the fourthor fifthcentury. In other Aside from the fact that this hypothesisignores the
respectsthe head conforms,with that of Theodorain Mi- gouge damage(which mustantedatethe presentnose sur-
lan,38to a movementaway from the soft, more spheroid face, particularlysince the edges of the gouge meet the
formsof the Ariadnesand Euphemiasof the immediately front surfaceso crisply), it has a certaincharm. On the
previousreigns.39 other hand, it lacks the elegance of the statement by

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Andre Grabarwhich for us summarizesthe historicalsit- maniae Historica, Scriptores Rerum Langobardicunl et Ital-
uationfar more rationally: icarlxmsaec. Vl-lX, Hannover, 1878, 367. The level of accu-
racy of Angellus' information on this period may be judged
Un portraitoHicielde ce genre nous semble im- by the fact that he gives the emperor concerned the name
possiblea Byzance. La mutilationde la tete en por- "Constantine"throughout.
phyredoit donc etre rapporteea cette oeuvreunique- 13. &. Majno, The Healing Hand: Man and Wollsld in the An-
ment et non au personnageportraiture,a moins qu'il cient World, Cambridge,Mass., 1975, 266 and n. 26, 27.
ne s'agisse d'un monumentmutile a l'epoque meme 14. Delbrueck, "Carmagnola,"80-81.
ou l'on C;coupaitle nez" a JustinienII. Mais dans 15. J. L. Heiberg, "En Naese," Tilskleresl: Mannedskriftfor Lit-
ce cas le role oHicieldu portraita du cesser en meme teratllr, Klnst, Sczn1flndssporgsntaal
og almenfattelige vider-
temps que celui de l'empereurdestitue.45 skabelige Skildsinger, Copenhagen, Dec. 1914, 559-560; Del-
brueck's article, "Carmagnola," had been summarized by
Stylisticquestionsaside,we thinkit extremelyunlike- F. Poulsen in the same volume, 485-488.
ly in any epoch, psychologicallyrather than surgically, 16. Majno, Healislg Hand, 291-292. I am particularlygrateful to
that a mutilatedman would seek to have himself por- Dr. John F. Remensnyder not just for drawing my attention
trayed bearing the marks of his disfigurementwhen so to this fascinating book, but for the gift of a copy.
simple an expedientas a false nose was readilyavailable. 17. For porphyry and its history, the basic compendium remains
It would seem that the porphyryhead dubbedCar- that in the introduction to Delbrueck, Antike Porphyrwerke,
l-33. Recent work on the subject is summarized by M. L.
magnolais securelyfixed in an importantplace in the his-
Lucci, "Porfido,"Enciclopedia dell' Arte Antica, Classica e
tory of Byzantine portraiture just as securely as the Orientale, VI, Rome, 1955, 381-384.
head itself is fixed in space. Neverthelessthe romanceof 18. Antike Porpllyrwerke,119.
l'empereur au nez coupe' seems likely to endurebeside it,
19. E.g., the ivory panel showing the conveyance of relics, pre-
and as likely to survive as the porphyrymaterial itself sumably to a new church, in the Treasury of Trier Cathedral
has done.4>; only since the l9th century. The identification is in R. Del-
brueck, Die CoslsulardiptycSlenund verwandte Denkmaler
(Studien zur spatantiken Kunstgeschichte 2), Berlin, l929,
NOTES no. 67, 261. Cf. W. F. Volbach, Elfezlbeinarbeitender Spatan-
1. R. Delbrueck, Antike Porphyrwerke (Studien zur spatantiken tike llnd des friihen Mittelalters (Kataloge vor- und fruh-
Kunstgeschichte6), Berlin'Leipzig, 1932, 119, fig. 48. geschichtlicher Alterthumer 7 ), 3rd ed., Mainz, 1976, no.
143. 95-96 (as Constantinopolitanand of the sixth century).
2. Cf. O. Demus, The Church of S. Marco in Venice: History
Architecture Sculptlxre (Dumbarton Oaks Studies VI), To these citations may now be added a fresh suggestion by
Washington, D.C., 1960, 17, 26-28, 113-114, 120-123. S. Spain, "The Translationof Relics Ivory, Trier,"Dumbarton
Oaks Papers, XXXI, 1977, 279-304, that the ivory is not Con-
3. R. Delbrueck, "Carmagnola,"Romische Mitteilungen, XXIX, stantinopolitan but Syro-Palestinian, dating to the second
1914, 71-84, esp. 71. quarterof the seventh century. The event portrayedshe iden-
4. Ibid., 72-75. tifies as the return of the relics of the True Cross to Jerusalem
in 630 by Heraclius, who had just rescued them from the
5. M. Conway, "A Porphyry Statue at Ravenna," Burlington Sassanian Persians. The execution of the ivory Spain would
Magazine, XXII, 1912-1913, 147-153, esp. 148, 153. therefore date before the fall of Jerusalem in turn to the
6. Delbrueck, An tike Porphyrwerke,114. Moslems in 638. Without entering into a detailed analysis
of the Spain hypothesis, it must be noted that this attribution
7. O. Wulff, Altchristliche IlzldbyzantinischeKzlnst I (Handbuch does nothing to narrow our definition of a pre-Iconoclastic
der Kunstwissenschaft), Berlin, 1914, 155. Syro-Palestinian style in ivory carving (or anything else)-
8. Delbrueck, "Carmagnola,"75-80. a matter of considerable interest in recent years. Nor would
the appearance of the imperial protagonist convince a Del-
9. R. S. Lopez, "ByzantineLaw in the Seventh Century and its brueck of the validity of the identification,since the absence
Reception by the Germans and the Arabs," Byzantion, XVI, of a beard conflicts with the evidence of Heraclius' coins,
I942/43, 445-462. On the provocative question of the possi- which clearly show him as bearded from the very outset of
ble relation of disfigurementof portrait sculpture to juridical his reign in 610, and emerging from the Persian campaign in
or politically motivated mutilation of persons, see now 629 with an extraordinarily full and lengthy beard. (Cf.
C. Nylander, "Earless in Nineveh: Who Mutilated 'Sargon's' P. Grierson, Cataloglle of the Bzantine Coins in tlle Dum-
Head?" Anlewica/lJourslal of Arcllaeology, LXXXlV, 1980, barton Oaks Collectiost and in tlte WltittemoreCollection II:
329-333. P/locas to Theodosills 111 602-717, Washington, D.C., pl.
VIII, 1a. 1-23e, 26a-27.)
10. Delbrueck, "Carmagnola,"80-83.
A rguments for suspension of the laws of resemblances-
11. For the political history of the reign, a monograph of sorts is
which are in any case received with less sympathy now than
available: C. Head, Justinian11of Byzantiun7,Madison, Wis., a generation ago in the evaluation of late antique and By-
1972.
zantine art tend to destroy those for the identification of a
12. Andreas Agnellus, Liber Posttifi:calisEcclesiae Raveststatisin particularsubject, it seems to us. If this emperor is Heraclius
vitae 5. Felicis, 137, ed. O. Holder-Egger, Monumenta Ger- in the guise of Constantine, as Spain ultimately proposes

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 (303), reviving another of the old hypotheses; and if he as- fascia costiera istriana da Parenzo a Pola, Bologna, 1974,
sumes the complete appearance of the idealized Constantine, 11-42, figs. 1, 23; on the dating, 11-13.
to the neglect of his own physical characteristics then why
can this not be simply Constantine himself (and the girlish 30. W. Wroth, Cataloglle of the Coins of the Vandals, Ostrogoths
Helena with him, of course) ? Such arguments destroy the and Lombards and of the Empires of Thessalonica, Nicaea
assumptions about provenance in any case. and Trebizond in the British Museum, London, 1911, Fron-
tispiece; see now Gesta, XVIII, 1979, 13, fig. 12.
20. H. Peirce and R. Tyler, Byzantine Art, Paris, 1926, 38; their
reasoning is developed at slightly greater length in idem, 31. Cf.' Grierson, Cataloglle II, pls. XXXVII-XXXIX, XLIII-
"Deux mouvements dans l'art byzantin au 1Oe siecle," XLIV; Grierson, 575-576, divides Class I of 685-687 A.D.
Arethuse 4, l927, 134-135. into three groups, on the fourth of which a row of dots have
been added to indicate a sprouting beard. We illustrate a
21. E.g., H.-G. Severin, in W.F. Volbach and J. Lafontaine- solidus of Justinian II, alone, from the year of his restoration
Dosogne, Byzaslz llnd der christliche Osten (Propylaen in 705-706, since this would have been the time of the "Car-
Kunstgeschichte 3 ), Berlin, 1968, no. 105, 206. magnola" head if that were indeed a "realistic" portrait of
22. J.P. Remensnyder,M.D., M.E. Bigelow, and R.M. Goldwyn, him.
M.D., "Justinian II and Carmagnola: A Byzantine Rhino- 32. The most telling anecdote of his desire for bloodthirsty ven-
plasty?" Plastic and Reconstrlletive Sltrgery, LXIII, 1979, geance-whatever its level of historicity is of the episode
19-25. during the escape from Cherson in the autumn of 704, when
23. Majnc>,Healing Hand, figs. 7.23, 7.24, 292-293. Justinian's ship was caught in a severe storm. A servant
named Myaces pleaded with him: "Behold we shall die,
24. Remensnyderand others, "JustinianII and Carmagnola,"24. master! Make a compact with God for your safety, that if
he restores you to the throne, you will not take vengeance
25. Heiberg, "En Naese." Observationof a number of porphyry
upon your enemies." But Justinian angrily replied, "If I
heads suggests that they are subject to breakage different
spare any one of them, may God drown me here!" Theophanis
from that observed on most other sculptural stones. Of
Chro1lograp1lia,ed. C. de Boor, Leipzig, 1883, I, 373-375.
course most heads in any stone have lost their noses; but it
Se t1011 e vero, e ben trovato!
is curious that in the porphyries, the breaks so often extend
i11t0 the bulk of the head, as on the head of Maximianus in Weitzmann,Age, 45-46, no. 44.
the S. Marco group: R. Calza, Ico1l0graNaromana imperiale 33.
While it once seemed possible, to scholars of Delbrueck's
de Carallsio a Giuliano (287-363 d. C.) (Quaderni e Guide di
34.generation,to date other portraits on the basis of the chron-
Archeologia III), Rome, 1972, 55-56, pl. XXII. Whether this
ology of headgear in the coin types (cf. "Carmagnola"),
is actually a characteristicof the structure of the stone can
this has proven impossible as a general rule. Crowns on coins
only be proven by a destructive experiment, but the fact
and those on portraits in other media do not correlate se-
remains that many of the faces of porphyry heads appear
curely enough to provide dating for the latter works. It is
to have been gouged deliberately.
evident that a multiplicity of crowns of various forms was
26. S. Sande, "Zur Portratplastik des sechsten nachchristlichen in use in the imperial regalia, just as Constantine Porphyro-
Jahrhunderts,"Acta ad archaeologiam et artilem historiam genitus' de CerimonEisattests for a later period.
pertinentia lnstitltum Romanum Norvegiae, VI, 1975, 65- 35. Bovini and von Matt, Ravenna, pl. 88. The line of the
106; specifically, figs. 57-58, 59-60, 61, with discussion on eyebrow is slightly angular at the same point as on the
100-103. The second and third heads are listed by J. Inan medallion portrait; but in general the faces of the Constan-
and E. Rosenbaum, Romalt and Early Byzantine Portrait tinopolitan figures in these dedication panels are too softly
Sclllptzlrein Asia Minor, London, 1966, 150-151, nos. 193, modelled to be useful for our purpose.
192, under the hitherto customary fifth-centurydating.
36. A. Rumpf, Stilp1lasender spatantiken Kllnst: Ein Versuch
27. E.g., the heads found in the Theater and now in Vienna, (Arbeitsgemeinschaftfur Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-
Inv. I 835 and I 850: R. Noll, Vonl Altertllm zllm Mittelal- Westfalen, Geisteswissenchaften44), Cologne, 1957, 42.
ter: Spbitantike,A Itchristliche,volkerwanderllngszeitlicheund
frEihmittelalterliche
Denkmaler der Antikensammlu1lg,Kunst- 37. Sande, "Portratplastik,"95-104.
historisches Museum, 2nd ed., Vienna, 1974, 18, nos. A.14, 38. Weitzmann,Age, 33, no. 27.
A.15
39. lbid., 30-32, nos. 24-26.
28. E.g. "Eutropios,"ibid., 18, no. A.13. See now K. Weitzmann,
ed., Age of Spiritleality: Late Antiqlle and Early Christian 40. Procopius, de aed. I, ii, 5-12; cf. C. Mango, Art of the Byzan-
Art, Third to Sevent1 Centllry, New York, 1979, 58, no. 55, tine Empire 312-1453 (Sources & Documents in the History
to which add O. Demus, "GraphischeElemente in der spatan- of Art Series), Englewood Cliffs, 1972, 110-113.
tiken Plastik," Tortlllae: Studien zu altchristlichen Itnd by- 41. A1lthol. graec. XVI, 62-63; cf. Mango, Art, 125-126. When
zantinischen Monllmenten, ed. W.N. Schumacher, Romische Phocas erected a column in 609, there is no indication that
Quartalschrift, 30. Supplementheft, Rome, 1966, 77-81. a statue of any kind was intended for it; Heraclius later added
a cross: Chron. Paschale 698-699, 703; Mango, Art, 130.
29. G. Bovini, L. von Matt, Ravenna, New York, 1971, pls. 81
(S. Vitalis), 83 (Bp. Ecclesius), both with remarkably 42. John of Ephesus, Eccl. hist. III, 24; cf. Mango, Art, 125-126.
knotted brows. Sande, "Portratplastik,"103, also sees anal- When Phocas erected a column in 609, there is no indication
ogies with the faces of the Deacon Claudius and Bishop Eu- that a statue of any kind was intended for it; Heraclius later
frasius in the apse mosaic of the Basilica Eufrasiana in added a cross: C/ron. Pasc/ale 698-699, 703; Mango, Art,
Pored (Parenzo): cf. G. Bovini, Le antichita cristiana della 130.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
43. Cf. Sande, "Portratplastik,"105-6, and our own introduction 46. The phrase, no more than a literal translation of Justinian's
to the portraiture in Weitzmann, Age, 2-7. The story of a Greek sobriquet, was used by C. Diehl, "L'empereurau nez
kneeling statue of Justinian II, together with his wife "the coupe," Choses et gens de Byzance, Paris, 1926, 173-211.
sister of Ibouzeros Gliabanus,"traceable to the eighth-century It is also the title (and subject) of a drama by A. Embiricos,
Parastaseis edited by Th. Preger, Scriptores Originum Con- L'enlperelzrall nez coltpe':Chroniqlzebyzantin en cinq actes,
stantinopolitanarllmI, Leipzig, 1907, 39-40, is so filled with Paris, 1929. While on the topic of vulgarizations, the im-
factual error that it must belong to the accumulation of fan- perishable nature of a false identification such as that of
tastic identificationssuch as those provided for the sculpture the Carmagnola head is demonstrated by its recrudescence,
on the spina of the Hippodrome. as a casually dropped piece of historical reference (in rela-
tion to the porphyry) to "the Emperor Justinian the Nose-
44. Remensnyderand others, "JustinianII and Carmagnola,"24. less," in M. McCarthy, Venice Observed,New York, 1956, 43.
45. I.e., that an official portrait showing mutilation is unthinkable
in the Byzantine state: A. Grabar, L'emperelar dans l'art
byzantin (Publications de la Faculte des Lettres de l'Univer- PllotograpSlcredits: Fig. 1 (Anderson); Fig. 2 (D.A.I, Rome);
site de Strasbourg 75 ), Paris, 1936, 10, n. 3. Fig. 3 (A.N.S., New York); Fig. 4 (Giralldon).

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:17:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions