DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.55207#0046
36 THE IMPERIAL PORTRAITS OF THE SOUTH GALLERY
her son Constantine VII (913-19) as the personages of our mosaic, the style of which is not of the
beginning of the 10th cent.
33. See G. Schlumberger, L’Epopee Byzantine, iii, Paris, 1905, pp. 342 ff, and E. de Muralt, Essai
de Chronographie Byzantine, i, St. Petersbourg, 1855, PP- 621-3.
34. Michael V as plunderer and profaner of churches, see Michael Attaliotes, Historia, Bonn, p. 15.
35. Matthew of Edessa indicates that during the riot of 1042 battles took place even in the interior of
Haghia Sophia (Chronique, i, Ixiii, trad. E. Dulaurier, Paris, 1863, p. 73, cf. Arisdages of Lasdiverd,
op. cit., ix, p. 54). But according to the Greek historians, who are better informed, the Church was
occupied from the very beginning of the riot by the partisans of Zoe: references in Muralt, op. cit.,
p. 622, and Psellos, Chronographia, pp. 108-9.
36. Two days later, according to Psellos (Chronographia, i, p. 102). According to other historians,
the riot broke out immediately after the proclamation of the act of Zoe’s dethronement. As Psellos
was an eyewitness and indeed a participant in all these events, he should be the more trusted.
37. Psellos, Chronographia, i, p. 100.
38. On the Forum Constantini (Michael Glycas, Annales, iv, Bonn, p. 591). The proclamation of the
sentence was made by the eparch, Alexios the Patrician (Cedrenus, Historiarum Compendium, ii, Bonn,
P- 537).
39. Psellos, Chronographia, i, p. 98.
40. Digesta, xlviii. iv. 1; cf. Th. Mommsen, Abriss des romischen Staatsrechts, p. 540. The Byzantine
jurists repeat the same stipulation: Basilica, xl. xxxvi. 1, and Synopsis Basilicorum, V, xxxiii. 1.
41. Institutes, iv. 18. 3.
42. Ibid.
43. An inequality of penalties corresponding to the status of the culprit was admissible according
to Byzantine law. Persons of humble birth were punished more severely than were those of the noble
class: see, e.g., murderers: Basilica, lx. xxxix. 4, and the Nomocanon of Photius, ix. 26. For a similar
discrimination in Rome: Mommsen, op. cit., pp. 1031 ff.
44. Digesta, xlviii. iv. 1. On the progressively increased severity of the penalty for lese-majeste,
see Mommsen, op. cit., p. 532.
45. Institutes, iv. 18. 3; Basilica, lx. xxxvi, and lx. Ixix. 1.
46. Institutes, iii. 1. 5.
47. Codex Theodosianus, ix. 17.
48. J. Cagnat, Cours d’Epigraphic Latine, 4th ed., pp. 169 ff. A Byzantine example (Justinian II):
A. Schneider, ‘Die ttuAti tou KcAaypou der Landmauer von Konstantinopel’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
xxxviii, 1938, p. 408. In case the persons whose memory had previously been condemned were
rehabilitated, the erased name was again engraved in the inscription (e.g. several inscriptions of Com-
modus). If our hypothesis is correct, Zoe’s head presents an example of restoration of this kind.
49. Collected by Mommsen, op. cit., p. 990. Add—for Byzantium—Chronicon Paschale, Bonn,
p. 701 (Phocas’s portraits burnt), and instances quoted lower.
50. Eusebios, Historia Ecclesiastica, ix. 11 (English translation by C. Cruse, p. 371). The latter pro-
cedure was quicker and perhaps also more humiliating. Cf. numerous Byzantine saints and Gothic
statues from which the heads were broken by the Moslems and by the revolutionaries of 1789. Usually,
as with the portrait of Zoe, the names were preserved. Andronicos Comnenos—who was more subtle
—not only usurped the portraits of his predecessors, but in one case, that of the Regent Xenia, who
was young and pretty, he ordered the modification of the effigy in such a way that she should appear
as an old woman (Nicetas Choniates, Historia, Bonn, p. 433).
51. The difference in style between the heads and the draperies did not disturb them. It is known
that the Russian icon painters divided their work, some making the faces, others the rest of the picture
(D. Rovinskij, Obozrenie ikonopisanija v Rossii do konca XVIII veka, St. Petersburg, 1903, p. 50). The
same thing happened in Byzantium. In the scene of the Last Judgement in Torcello, for instance, the
draperies of the group of Apostles to the right are treated in a very different way from those of
the group to the left, but the heads are everywhere by the same hand. Thus it is evident that in
Torcello there were at least three different artists: two working on the vestments; a third, on the heads.
her son Constantine VII (913-19) as the personages of our mosaic, the style of which is not of the
beginning of the 10th cent.
33. See G. Schlumberger, L’Epopee Byzantine, iii, Paris, 1905, pp. 342 ff, and E. de Muralt, Essai
de Chronographie Byzantine, i, St. Petersbourg, 1855, PP- 621-3.
34. Michael V as plunderer and profaner of churches, see Michael Attaliotes, Historia, Bonn, p. 15.
35. Matthew of Edessa indicates that during the riot of 1042 battles took place even in the interior of
Haghia Sophia (Chronique, i, Ixiii, trad. E. Dulaurier, Paris, 1863, p. 73, cf. Arisdages of Lasdiverd,
op. cit., ix, p. 54). But according to the Greek historians, who are better informed, the Church was
occupied from the very beginning of the riot by the partisans of Zoe: references in Muralt, op. cit.,
p. 622, and Psellos, Chronographia, pp. 108-9.
36. Two days later, according to Psellos (Chronographia, i, p. 102). According to other historians,
the riot broke out immediately after the proclamation of the act of Zoe’s dethronement. As Psellos
was an eyewitness and indeed a participant in all these events, he should be the more trusted.
37. Psellos, Chronographia, i, p. 100.
38. On the Forum Constantini (Michael Glycas, Annales, iv, Bonn, p. 591). The proclamation of the
sentence was made by the eparch, Alexios the Patrician (Cedrenus, Historiarum Compendium, ii, Bonn,
P- 537).
39. Psellos, Chronographia, i, p. 98.
40. Digesta, xlviii. iv. 1; cf. Th. Mommsen, Abriss des romischen Staatsrechts, p. 540. The Byzantine
jurists repeat the same stipulation: Basilica, xl. xxxvi. 1, and Synopsis Basilicorum, V, xxxiii. 1.
41. Institutes, iv. 18. 3.
42. Ibid.
43. An inequality of penalties corresponding to the status of the culprit was admissible according
to Byzantine law. Persons of humble birth were punished more severely than were those of the noble
class: see, e.g., murderers: Basilica, lx. xxxix. 4, and the Nomocanon of Photius, ix. 26. For a similar
discrimination in Rome: Mommsen, op. cit., pp. 1031 ff.
44. Digesta, xlviii. iv. 1. On the progressively increased severity of the penalty for lese-majeste,
see Mommsen, op. cit., p. 532.
45. Institutes, iv. 18. 3; Basilica, lx. xxxvi, and lx. Ixix. 1.
46. Institutes, iii. 1. 5.
47. Codex Theodosianus, ix. 17.
48. J. Cagnat, Cours d’Epigraphic Latine, 4th ed., pp. 169 ff. A Byzantine example (Justinian II):
A. Schneider, ‘Die ttuAti tou KcAaypou der Landmauer von Konstantinopel’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
xxxviii, 1938, p. 408. In case the persons whose memory had previously been condemned were
rehabilitated, the erased name was again engraved in the inscription (e.g. several inscriptions of Com-
modus). If our hypothesis is correct, Zoe’s head presents an example of restoration of this kind.
49. Collected by Mommsen, op. cit., p. 990. Add—for Byzantium—Chronicon Paschale, Bonn,
p. 701 (Phocas’s portraits burnt), and instances quoted lower.
50. Eusebios, Historia Ecclesiastica, ix. 11 (English translation by C. Cruse, p. 371). The latter pro-
cedure was quicker and perhaps also more humiliating. Cf. numerous Byzantine saints and Gothic
statues from which the heads were broken by the Moslems and by the revolutionaries of 1789. Usually,
as with the portrait of Zoe, the names were preserved. Andronicos Comnenos—who was more subtle
—not only usurped the portraits of his predecessors, but in one case, that of the Regent Xenia, who
was young and pretty, he ordered the modification of the effigy in such a way that she should appear
as an old woman (Nicetas Choniates, Historia, Bonn, p. 433).
51. The difference in style between the heads and the draperies did not disturb them. It is known
that the Russian icon painters divided their work, some making the faces, others the rest of the picture
(D. Rovinskij, Obozrenie ikonopisanija v Rossii do konca XVIII veka, St. Petersburg, 1903, p. 50). The
same thing happened in Byzantium. In the scene of the Last Judgement in Torcello, for instance, the
draperies of the group of Apostles to the right are treated in a very different way from those of
the group to the left, but the heads are everywhere by the same hand. Thus it is evident that in
Torcello there were at least three different artists: two working on the vestments; a third, on the heads.