The Lausos Collection

"Excellent Offerings": The Lausos Collection in Constantinople
Author(s): Sarah Guberti Bassett

Source: The Art Bulletin, Vol. 82, No. 1 (Mar., 2000), pp. 6-25
Published by: College Art Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3051362
Accessed: 06-05-2016 12:00 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
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 support@jstor.org.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd., College Art Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Art Bulletin
This content downloaded from 194.27.33.66 on Fri, 06 May 2016 12:00:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
"Excellent Offerings": The Lausos Collection
in Constantinople
Sarah Guberti Bassett
In 324 C.E., the emperor Constantine the Great (r. 324-37) gathering has been sporadic.2 Most references are superficial
founded the city of Constantinople as a new imperial capital and incomplete, and it is only recently that any attempt has
on the site of the old Greco-Roman town of Byzantium. In so been made to consider the gathering synthetically. The first
doing he undertook one of the greatest projects of urban such consideration was made by Antonio Corso as part of a
renewal the ancient world had ever known. City limits were larger project documenting the literary sources of Praxiteles.3
drawn, and an armature of colonnaded streets strung with In an overview of the Byzantine references to the Greek
rich palaces and monumental public gathering places was sculptor, Corso examined the textual documentation for the
imposed upon Byzantium's extant plan. To complete this Lausos gathering and outlined the collection's contents. A
project, the emperor brought famous cult images and com- second study, a joint publication by Cyril Mango, Michael
memorative monuments, antiquities of pre-fourth-century Vickers, and the late E. D. Francis, revisited the issue of the
manufacture, from the cities and sanctuaries of the Roman literary sources and took up the problem of the collection's
Empire to adorn the capital's forums, streets, and public meaning.4 Both studies assumed a private context for the
gathering places. His aim in decorating the major public collection, and Mango, Vickers, and Francis associated it with
spaces of his city in this distinctive manner was didactic. With the excavated remains of a Constantinopolitan palace that has
the installation of these major public collections Constantine been identified with Lausos. In this article I would like both to
drew on time-honored notions about urban beauty and with build on and rethink some of the assumptions that drive these
them the descriptive role of sculpture in public life to shape investigations and to propose a new way of approaching the
the image of his city and define its role within the larger Lausos collection. I shall do so first by examining the literary
context of empire. In settings such as the Hippodrome and and archaeological evidence and then by describing the
the great imperial baths known as the Zeuxippos, the display contents of the collection. I shall then consider the collection
of antiquities culled from the empire's heartland gave the in light of two issues: Roman habits of collecting and the
newly founded capital a patina of age and respectability that ongoing debate between pagans and Christians that was such
not only lent the city an air of beauty but also linked it a defining feature of late fourth- and early fifth-century
ethically and morally to the cultural traditions of the Greco- civilization.
Roman past, thereby illustrating the city's legitimate right to Because of the early date of its destruction, the Lausos
unrivaled imperial status.1 collection is known exclusively from literary sources. Any
The visual tactics initiated by Constantine were embraced account of the gathering must therefore begin with a consid-
by his successors in the later fourth and fifth centuries as eration of the pertinent texts. Two Byzantine sources provide
established collections were augmented and new ones initi- the basic documentation for the gathering, a late eleventh-
ated around the city. Perhaps the best known of any of these century chronicle known as the Synopsis historion by the
later ensembles was the collection amassed in the very early chronicler George Kedrenos and a twelfth-century work by
years of the fifth century by the Constantinopolitan aristocrat John Zonaras, the Epitome historion. Kedrenos and Zonaras
Lausos. Destroyed by fire in 475, this gathering is now known were compilers of a type of historical compendium known as
only through literary sources. For the modern art historian its the universal chronicle. Like most surviving examples of this
destruction represents one of the Greco-Roman world's most genre, both the Synopsis and the Epitome aim to describe a
haunting losses, as the collection was reported to have comprehensive world history. Accordingly, each begins with
included some of the most famous works of Hellenic antiq- an account of the creation and biblical history before turning
uity, the Zeus by Pheidias from the sanctuary at Olympia and to an elaboration of the Greco-Roman past, which in turn
Praxiteles' Aphrodite of Knidos among them. merges with the history of Byzantium. Kedrenos tracked
As the presence of these noteworthy statues suggests, the world history to the year 1057, while Zonaras continued the
Lausos collection was a marvel in a city filled with marvels. record into the twelfth century, concluding with the year
Remarkable for its holdings even in the context of imperial 1118. In both authors' work, materials were compiled and, in
Constantinople, this rich collection was no piecemeal gather- a manner consistent with Byzantine historiographical prac-
ing but a carefully crafted ensemble that relied on antiquities tice, taken over wholesale from earlier sources.5
and the attitudes brought to bear on them by contemporary Kedrenos mentions the Lausos collection in two separate
viewers to mediate a course between the potentially antitheti- passages. The first, Kedrenos A, appears as an insertion in the
cal claims of Hellenic tradition and the new exigencies of text after a description of the death of Theodosios I in 395:
Christian spirituality. It is the aim of this article to describe
how and why this course was charted. Note that in the quarter of Lausos there used to be various
Although the Lausos collection first entered the modern buildings and certain hostels at the place where the
historiographic tradition in the sixteenth century and has [cistern of] Philoxenus ["fond of guests"] provided its
been referred to intermittently since then, treatment of the water, whence its name. There stood there also a statue of
THE LAUSOS COLLECTION IN CONSTANTINOPLE 7
Lindian Athena, four cubits high, of emerald stone, the information derives from a single source contemporary with
work of the sculptors Skyllis and Dipoinos, which Sesostris, the collection and its destruction, a late fifth-century history
tyrant of Egypt, once sent as a gift to Kleoboulos, tyrant of by Malchos of Philadelphia.10 This history, which is preserved
Lindos. Likewise the Knidian Aphrodite of white stone, only in fragments, covered the period from Constantine to
naked, shielding with her hand only her pudenda, a work Anastasios (330-491), devoting particular attention to the
of Praxiteles of Knidos. Also the Samian Hera, a work of reigns of Basiliskos and Zeno, the very period in which the
Lysippos and the Chian Bupalos; a winged Eros holding a Lausos collection was destroyed. As we have seen, Zonaras
bow, brought from Myndos; the ivory Zeus by Pheidias, mentions Malchos as a source for his discussion of the fire in
whom Perikles dedicated at the temple of the Olympians; his passage. Although there is no specific reference to the
the statue representing Chronos, a work of Lysippos, bald destruction of the Lausos statuary in the surviving fragments,
at the back and having hair in front; unicorns, tigresses, there is evidence to indicate that this is just the sort of
vultures, giraffes, an ox-elephant [TravpEXxs], centaurs information that Malchos might well have provided. Con-
and pans.6 sider, for example, the entry dedicated to him in the great
tenth-century compendium the Suda Lexicon:
The second passage, Kedrenos B, refers to the collection as
part of the description of a chain of events following the Malchos of Byzantium, sophist. He wrote a History from
inauguration of the usurper emperor Basiliskos in 475: the reign of Constantine as far as Anastasios in which he
relates rather grandly the events of the time of Zeno and
When he [Basiliskos] had been proclaimed, there oc- Basiliskos and the [destruction by] fire of the Public
curred a conflagration in the City which destroyed its most Library and the statues of the Augustaion and certain
flourishing part. For it started in the middle of the other matters which he laments as in a tragedy.11
Chalkoprateia [Copper Market] and consumed both porti-
coes and everything adjacent to them and the so-called As the passage intimates, Malchos's fame rested in large part
Basilica, in which there was a library that had 120,000 on his description of the fire, a description that is said to have
books. Among these books was a dragon's gut 120 feet long detailed the destruction not only of the library but also of the
upon which Homer's poems, namely the Iliad and the statuary in the public square known as the Augustaion and
Odyssey, were written in gold letters together with the story "certain other matters." Reference to the fate of the Augusta-
of the heroes' deeds. [The fire] also destroyed the porti- ion statuary signals that Malchos was interested in such details
coes on either side of the street Mese and the excellent
as sculpture, and the summing up of the events under the
offerings of Lausos: for many ancient statues were set up rubric of "certain other matters" suggests that the descrip-
there, namely, the famous one of the Aphrodite of Knidos, tion is likely to have mentioned the Lausos collection.12
that of the Samian Hera, that of Lindian Athena made of a
Any doubt about this connection may be dispelled in the
different material which Amasis, king of Egypt, had sent to analysis of Kedrenos A, which also may be linked to Malchos,
the wise Kleobolus, and countless others. The fire ex-
albeit by a different route. Similarities between the content
tended as far as the Forum of the great Constantine, as it is
and phrasing of Kedrenos A and an ekphrastic poem on the
called.7
wonders of Constantinople by the tenth-century courtier
Constantine the Rhodian indicate a source for Kedrenos in
Zonaras refers to the Lausos collection in a single passage
reminiscent of Kedrenos B: the ekphrasis. This association is important, for while Constan-
tine the Rhodian's poem dates to the tenth century, his
A great, consuming conflagration broke out in Constanti- sources also have been established in Malchos.13 Thus, Kedre-
nople, beginning in the Chalkoprateia and spreading to all nos A, like Kedrenos B and Zonaras, should be thought of not
the nearby areas and reducing the public portico and as an eleventh-century fiction but rather as a document based
adjacent buildings to ashes, including the so-called Basilica on sources that are themselves derived from an eyewitness
where there was a library that housed 120,000 books. fifth-century account.14
Among these books was a dragon gut measuring 120 feet By tracking Kedrenos's and Zonaras's sources to their
with the poetry of Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey, common origins in late antiquity, scholars have closed the gap
written in golden letters, which Malchos mentioned in between the destruction of the collection and its description,
writing of the emperors. The fire utterly destroyed this thereby giving the texts a legitimacy that they previously
object and both the splendor in the city's Lausos quarter lacked and transforming them into a valuable source of
and the statues set up there, the Samian Hera, the Lindian information. In a description that is unusually detailed by the
Athena and the Knidian Aphrodite, famous works of art.8 standards of Byzantine historiography, Kedrenos A locates the
gathering and lists its contents, while Kedrenos B and Zonaras
A glance at these passages reveals them as a potentially rich establish the patronage of Lausos together with the date and
source of information; however, because of the chronological circumstances of the collection's destruction.
gap between the destruction of the ensemble and its descrip- Working from this evidence it is possible to reconstruct the
tion, they remain problematic. More than five hundred years contents and appearance of the Lausos collection. As we have
separate the testimony of Kedrenos and Zonaras from the loss seen, Kedrenos A offers the most extensive inventory, begin-
of the Lausos gathering in 475, with the result that their ning with a detailed report on an Athena from the goddess's
observations regarding the collection have often been dis- sanctuary at Lindos on Rhodes.'5 Kedrenos first describes the
missed as fiction.9 Yet analysis of the texts indicates that their statue's general appearance in terms of scale and medium,
8 ART BULLETIN MARCH 2000 VOLUME LXXXII NUMBER 1
statue historically by attributing it to two sculptors, Skyllis and

Dipoinos, and noting that it was a gift made by Sesostris of
Egypt to Kleoboulos of Rhodes. Although Kedrenos B con-
firms an Egyptian origin for the gift, it specifies another
Egyptian king, Amasis, as the donor.
In broad outline this information accords well with what is
known about the Lindian sanctuary. Located on the acropolis

at Lindos, the shrine of Athena is alleged to have been
founded by the mythical king Danaos. Kleoboulos, ruler of
Lindos in the mid-sixth century B.C.E., is said to have refur-
bished this sanctuary by outfitting it with a new temple.
Reference to Kleoboulos is consistent with the attribution to
Skyllis and Dipoinos, two Cretan sculptors who were born

between 580 and 577 B.C.E.17
The conflicting report about patronage is the only mis-
shapen chronological piece in this puzzle; however, the issue
is easily resolved in favor of Amasis. While all of the Egyptian
rulers by the name of Sesostris predate Kleoboulos by centu-
ries, Amasis, who ruled during the sixth century B.C.E., was the
Lindian tyrant's contemporary.18 Moreover, he is known to
have made donations in Hellenic sanctuaries, Lindos in-
cluded. Among the gifts recorded are "two stone images and
a marvelous linen breastplate" at the sanctuary of Athena.19
What was this green statue of Athena? It is clear that this
statue was not the sanctuary's main cult image. That statue, a
jewel-encrusted wooden image of the enthroned goddess, not
only was different in medium but also appears to have been
destroyed when the temple burned in the fourth century
B.C.E.20 Kedrenos's Lindian Athena therefore must have been
a votive offering from the site, as reference to the foreign
source of the gift suggests.
Attribution to Skyllis and Dipoinos coupled with references
to Amasis and Kleoboulos confirm the Lindian Athena as a
work of sixth-century B.C.E. dedication. Egyptian patronage

suggests further that the figure may well have been one of
Egyptian manufacture, a notion supported by the report of
the characteristically Egyptian hard stone medium. Although
seemingly contradictory, such a picture is not at odds with the
archaeological evidence for the period. Excavation of the
Greek settlement at Naukratis, the first autonomous foreign
settlement permitted in Egypt under pharaonic rule, yielded
a series of sixth-century B.C.E. Greek votive images created in
an Egyptianizing style. Nor were such dedications restricted to
Egypt proper. As fragmentary remains of a black basalt statue
carved in the Egyptian manner and inscribed in Greek from
Kameiros on Rhodes indicate, such offerings were exported
to the Greek sanctuaries as early as the seventh century B.C.E.
The Lindian Athena must have belonged to this tradition;
1 Praxiteles, Aphrodite of Knidos. Vatican Museums (photo: however, beyond a general association with the formal conven-
Scala/Art Resource) tions of late Egyptian and early Archaic sculpture, the
appearance of the statue cannot be reconstructed.2'
Completely different in appearance and nothing like the
noting that it stood at four cubits and was made of "emerald enigma of the Athena was the statue of Aphrodite from
stone." At this height the statue would have measured Knidos (Fig. 1).22 Created by Praxiteles in the mid-fourth
between three and seven feet (one and two meters), depend- century B.C.E. as the main cult image for the Knidian sanctu-
ing on the length of the cubit. The reference to emerald stone ary, this statue was one of the most famous images in the
probably indicates color rather than medium, which suggests ancient world. Its appearance is well known from coin issues
that the statue was carved of green basalt, granite, porphyry, and later copies. The goddess stands naked in a classic
or serpentine.'6 contrapposto pose, her weight carried on her straight right leg,
In addition to describing the Athena, Kedrenos situates the her left leg slightly bent. Her right hand shields her pubic
area, while her left arm is raised at the elbow and her left
hand holds a piece of drapery that falls onto an amphora. Her
head turns toward the right. Kedrenos A confirms knowledge
of the Knidia, describing the figure as an Aphrodite "of white
stone, naked, shielding with her hand only her pudenda, a
work of Praxiteles of Knidos." More succinctly, Kedrenos B
supposes a statue in no need of introduction and refers only
to "the famous one of the Aphrodite of Knidos."
Kedrenos A next lists a statue of Hera from Samos,23 a work
also mentioned in Kedrenos B. Neither text offers informa-
tion about appearance, but Kedrenos A describes the figure as

the work of two sculptors, Lysippos and Bupalos of Chios. This
joint attribution is curious. Lysippos lived in the fourth
century B.C.E. and Bupalos in the latter half of the sixth,24 so
the image could not have been the product of these two
hands unless Lysippos somehow completed or restored a
statue made initially by Bupalos. Alternatively, the joint
attribution may be explained as the result of an error in
textual transmission. Arguing that the name of Lysippos
should be connected with a statue more properly associated
with this sculptor, the next statue in the sequence, an Eros, A.
Frickenhaus assigns the Hera to Bupalos alone.25 Although
the latter is known to have created several cult statues, no
other source credits him with the carving of the Samian Hera.
Manufacture of that image, which was of ivory and gold,26 is
generally given to another early sculptor, Smilis.27 Moreover,
Smilis's statue replaced an aniconic wooden image that was
still in existence in the second century.28 Attribution to
Bupalos therefore suggests that, as in the case of the Lindian
Athena, a votive statue other than the main cult image was
brought to Constantinople. Whatever the case, the image of
2 Attributed to Lysippos, Eros. London, British Museum
Hera should be understood as a sacred representation of
sixth-century B.C.E. manufacture. As with the Lindian Athena,
no specific description is possible.
A statue described as a winged Eros from Myndos follows the height of the statue at about forty-five feet (fourteen
the Hera.29 Uncharacteristically, there is no attribution. Be- meters).35 Kedrenos's description makes no mention of any of
cause of this lacuna, Frickenhaus posited that the text these details except to state that the statue was ivory, an
originally described the figure as being by Lysippos.30 If, as observation that has led to the suggestion that the gold had
seems likely, Lysippos was the sculptor of the Eros, it is been removed from it, possibly in the time of Constantine.36
possible to suggest its general appearance. An Eros attributed Following the Zeus, Kedrenos A documents a second statue
to Lysippos on stylistic grounds is known in several copies, of by Lysippos, which it identifies as Chronos and describes as
which the best-preserved replica is that in the British Museum being bald at the back of the head with a shock of hair in
(Fig. 2).31 Dating from the last quarter of the fourth century front. Although the reference is to Chronos, the explicit
B.C.E.,32 the statue shows a prepubescent youth with tousled description of the figure's coiffure and the Lysippan attribu-
hair and wings sprouting from his back. As in Kedrenos's tion relate the sculpture to that artist's image of Kairos, a
description, the little god holds a large bow out to his right freestanding bronze statue created sometime in the later
side, which he is attempting either to string or unstring. Scant fourth century B.C.E.37 No freestanding versions of this figure
knowledge of ancient Myndos makes it impossible to postu- survive; however, literary sources and relief representations
late a more specific provenance.33 document its appearance. Descriptions characterize the statue
Kedrenos A next mentions the Zeus created by Pheidias for as a running figure with winged feet that moves forward on
the sanctuary at Olympia (Fig. 3), described as an ivory figure tiptoe while carrying a razor. The distinctive coiffure re-
dedicated by Perikles. Although the attribution to Perikles is marked by Kedrenos is also noted.38 Images corresponding to
mistaken, the ivory medium is consistent with details of the this description are known from reliefs and gems, among
statue given in numismatic evidence and ancient literary them a relief in Turin (Fig. 4) showing a winged youth
sources.34 A chryselephantine figure of Zeus sat on a jewel- running along on tiptoe.39 In his left hand he carries a razor,
encrusted throne carrying a small figure of Nike in his left on top of which a scale balances. His right hand tips these
hand, a scepter in his right. Visitors remarked that the statue scales as if to test them. As in the descriptions, the youth is
was enormous and would have broken through the temple bald in back with flowing locks in front.
ceiling had the god chosen to stand, an observation con- Identification of this figure as Chronos (Xp6vos) may be
firmed by the analysis of an epode by Kallimachos that puts explained in the definition of kairos (KocMpos) itself. In its most
3 Reconstruction of Pheidias' Zeus in the

Temple of Zeus, Olympia (from H. Berve
and G. Gruben, Griechische Tempel und
Heiligtumer [Munich: Hirmer, 1961], 123)
4 After Lysippos, Kairos. Turin, Museo

di Arte Greco-Romana (photo: DAI,
Rome)
straightforward interpretation kairos expresses the idea of a there is a shift in meaning as chronos takes on the meaning of
moment within the longer passage of time. Time itself, kairos in certain contexts.40
conceived of as a series of linked but fleeting moments The inventory concludes with a list of animals and half-
merging with one another over a sustained period, is ex- human creatures, noting tigresses, vultures, and giraffes
pressed as chronos. At times, however, the words are used together with mythical unicorns, pans, and centaurs. The
interchangeably, and sometime in the late Hellenistic period passage also refers to an unfamiliar animal known as the
taurelephant (TrcppEXS4tUs). Mango translates the word as

"ox-elephant" and suggests that it might be some kind of
buffalo.41 The sixth-century writer Kosmas Indikopleustes
uses the term to refer to two different animals, a tame Indian
buffalo and a wild Ethiopian one.42 The latter may be
identified as the Cape buffalo and is described by the ancient
naturalist Aelian, who refers to it as the Ethiopian bull, as
being particularly savage.43 Because all the other animals
included in the collection were wild, it is likely that the more
ferocious African animal was intended in this description.
What these various figures were or where they came from is
not immediately clear, as the account makes no effort to
provide any sort of descriptive or historical information.
Because the interest in attribution and provenance that
characterizes the first part of the Kedrenos inventory is
completely missing in this last sentence, it is impossible to
visualize the animals in any but the most generic manner.
Absence of any viable sculptural comparanda makes the task
even more difficult. Although animal statuary was certainly
known and many famous works existed, no statues correspond-
ing to any of the Lausos figures survive or are mentioned in
literary sources. Evidence of extant animal sculpture suggests,
however, that the Lausos statues probably would have been of
Hellenistic or Roman manufacture.44
The pans and centaurs seem less elusive. Although there is
nothing in Kedrenos's report to connect the statues with any
particular historical period, as with the animal statues, the
increasing popularity of such subject matter in the Hellenistic
and Roman age offers a reasonable frame of reference, and
works such as the Centaurs (Fig. 5) in the Musei Capitolini
may give a fair approximation of their appearance.45
A survey of the Lausos collection indicates that there were
at least thirteen statues in the ensemble. Subject matter
included cult images, animals real and fantastic, and a single 5 Centaur. Rome, Musei Capitolini (photo: Alinari/Art
personification. These figures represented a range of styles Resource)
from the early Archaic to the Hellenistic. Variety in scale and
medium was also a feature of the collection's holdings, as inferences. First, association with the Theodosian court in
comparison of the Lindian Athena, the Knidian Aphrodite, general and the high rank of chamberlain in particular
and the Olympian Zeus underscores. What, if anything, was a describe Lausos as a person of power and influence, an
fifth-century Constantinopolitan viewer to make of such a observation seconded by Palladios's description of him as
gathering? "guardian of our holy and revered empire."48 Second, it is
An approach to the answer to this question lies in the clear from the history that bears his name that Lausos was a
understanding of two issues: the identity of the collection's devout Christian. Not only was he the project's patron, but
patron, Lausos, and the display context established for the also in his dedication Palladios characterized his patron as a
gathering. While Kedrenos and Zonaras are silent on the "Noble and Christ-beloved servant of God."''49
subject of the fifth-century reception of the collection, they Identification of Lausos as a high-ranking official at the
do open the door to speculation by naming Lausos as its court of Theodosios II creates a specific context for the
patron. Of that historical figure, little is known. He is interpretation of the collection, whose implications were
described as praepositus sacri cubiculi, or grand chamberlain, at explored by Vickers and Francis. They began by identifying
the court of Theodosios II (402-450), a post he appears to Lausos as Theodosios II's sometime court chamberlain and
have held first around 420. By 422 he was replaced, but there proposing a date for the formation of the collection in the
is evidence to suggest that he was again chamberlain on two early fifth century.50 Further, in agreement with the then-
later occasions, in 431 and in 436.46 prevailing ideas about Constantinopolitan topography, the
In addition to his court service, Lausos is known from his authors associated the gathering with the remains of a palace
patronage of an inspirational religious history, the Lausiac complex on the north side of the Constantinopolitan Hippo-
History. Written by Palladios (ca. 365-425) and dedicated to drome that had been identified as the palace of Lausos.51 This
Lausos in the period when he first held office as chamberlain, structure, a long, multiapsed hall, provided the framework for
the book is a collection of stories about holy men and women their reconstruction of the collection's organization and
of the Egyptian desert.'47 display, a reconstruction that in turn led to an interpretation
While these references are elliptical, they do allow certain based on a Christian reinterpretation of pagan imagery.
Theosokos in St. Erere
he wCha~kpcaieta
0 , W h0 11 ,, 210OAM
Seiale House
Cistern ol f?Baslic
Miloxoenus v A
St. Alqnlna"
Ga? Palace ol LaUusu %- Octagon .phia .

Li 01 ou, o Symachus? St. Tedor SpTt ohorecAs P
Palace?
Pfaetoncum? * PraeIoKruAm?
Cernetey Hypgeum 4 0avn u (Me..IorPOWM
R. Fim A~ Milon
Se AuguslaHon
4Mr Spiral
Bonbordirel Hexagon
Stai
Palace ofChalke? Senate House

Antiochus~ Baths of Zeuxopos
4 'I&# Gret Palace
6 Plan of Byzantine Constantinople (from Bardill, "The Palace of Lausus and Nearby Monuments in Constantinople," 70)
Mindful of the fact that Lausos was a Christian, they were In terms of subject matter and media, this choice of decora-
troubled by his choice of specifically pagan images for what tion was perfectly in keeping with established modes of late
they believed to have been his private collection of statuary. antique thermal decor, and it is likely that Marina, a woman
Viewing the use of such imagery on the part of a high-ranking known for her Christian piety and acts of public charity, saw
official at Theodosios II's uncompromisingly Christian court no contradiction between her own faith and the selection and
as a potentially loaded act, Vickers and Francis felt that the appreciation of classical subjects in the sensuous environment
of the bath.
only way to explain the collection was in terms of Christian
allegory. Focusing on the cult images, they argued that the Apart from the evidence of the collection, the specific
Lausos ensemble should be understood as a description of the arguments marshaled in support of allegory are both fragmen-
triumph of Virtue over Fortune, with Virtue being embodied tary and anachronistic. In their interpretation of the collec-
in the representation of Eros and Fortune in the figure of tion's overall meaning, the authors concentrate on the two
Kairos. They reinforced this interpretation by positing a figures of Eros and Kairos, with the result that there is no real
display order for the statuary based on its placement within attempt to account for any of the other cult statues, much less
ruins that have been identified with the palace of Lausos.52 the animal images, which are completely ignored. In addi-
Several difficulties bedevil this interpretation. First, al- tion, the interpretative framework used to discuss the images
though the desire to interpret the collection as a cohesive derives not from contemporary late antique sources but
display with deliberate programmatic intent and to place it rather from Renaissance and Baroque interpretations of
within the context of late Roman pagan-Christian rivalry is writings by Ausonius as outlined in an article by Rudolph
correct, the arguments in support of a Christian allegorical Wittkower.55
explanation do not stand up to scrutiny. To begin with, Also problematic is their association of the collection with a
evidence for collecting in Constantinople does not support specific archaeological context. Vickers and Francis recon-
the authors' underlying assumption that devout Christian structed the collection to stand in the ruins of a rotunda and
belief was incompatible with the appreciation of antique adjoining multiapsed hall that have been identified as the
statuary on its own terms. The public tradition of appropria- palace of Lausos. Apart from the fact that none of the
tion and reuse established under Constantine indicates that surviving descriptions mentions a specific palace context,
pagan statuary was displayed in a manner consistent with its recent reconsideration of the evidence pertinent to the
original meaning and that Christian allegorical interpretation identification of these ruins by Jonathan Bardill56 calls this
was simply not an issue.53 A similar approach is evident in the association into question and, with it, the display of images.
private sector. Decoration of a complex in a fifth-century bath The rotunda and hall that have come to be associated with
built for Marina (404-449), the unmarried daughter of the the palace of Lausos were excavated by Rudolf Naumann in
emperor Arkadios (r. 395-408), included mosaic scenes of a 1964.57 The complex stands on a wedge of land at the heart of
marine and mythological nature, statues of river gods, and a late antique Constantinople (Fig. 6, center, with the designa-
relief representing the struggle of the gods and the giants.54 tions "Rotonda" and "Great Hall"). The Hippodrome rose
immediately in front, to the building's south. A second from the market along a colonnaded secondary road connect-
palace, that of the fifth-century eunuch Antiochos, stood next ing to the Mese, the modern :atalregme Sokagi, before
door to the west, and the main Constantinopolitan thorough- spreading west toward the Forum of Constantine, where they
fare, a colonnaded street known as the Mese, ran on an were eventually brought under control.64
east-west axis behind the building. Bardill's relocation of the Lausos Palace has implications
Material remains show three phases of building activity. for the Vickers and Francis interpretation. In their study of
The initial period dates to the fifth century and, more the collection, the authors posit a viewing order that is
specifically, to the Theodosian period, as evidenced by alter- designed to work within the architectural setting of the extant
nating courses of brick and stone that are comparable to the ruins. Further, the meanings that they establish for the
building fabric of the fifth-century landwalls and the Hebdo- individual statues are seen to be enhanced by this sequence.65
mon Palace. Subsequent alterations were made in the later Thus, with the identification of the palace no longer a
fifth and sixth centuries.58 certainty, the display of these statues and the interpretation
Naumann made a tentative identification of the site as the derived from it must be reconsidered.
Lausos Palace, noting, however, that the association was If, as has been previously assumed, the Lausos collection
problematic.59 His instinct to reserve final judgment was can no longer be seen as a Christian courtier's private
seconded by Raymond Janin, who kept open the possibility allegorical vision, how then can it be understood? In the
that the actual palace lay further west along the Mese.60 In absence of the collection itself, Kedrenos A provides a starting
spite of the caution voiced by these early interpreters of the point for interpretation. Analysis of the structure and detail-
evidence, however, the site's identification as the Lausos ing of the inventory reveals not only the contents of the
Palace has come to be taken as a given.61 It is this certainty collection but also a sense of some of the attitudes brought to
that Bardill challenges by reexamining both the texts associ- bear on different types of statuary.
ated with the palace and the monuments connected with it. Of the thirteen images noted, six are described in very
As with the collection itself, knowledge of the palace and its specific terms, while the remaining seven are mentioned only
location derives from Kedrenos A, which describes the Lausos cursorily. The extent to which individual figures are detailed
quarter as being close to the Philoxenos cistern. Identifica- appears to correspond to subject matter: cult images are
tion of this cistern is thus crucial to the location of the palace observed with great precision, while animal statues are given
and the neighborhood to which it lent its name. Since the only brief mention. Corso observed this duality, characteriz-
sixteenth century, that identification has been made with the ing it as a split between famous works of art and minor
underground water-storage facility known as the Binbirdirek figures.66 I would suggest instead that the division is one
cistern. Binbirdirek, which lies to the west of the putative between cult images and animal statues.
Lausos ruins on the south side of the Mese, may be dated to In this division, it is striking that each of the cult images is
the sixth century on the basis of its brickwork. This date, in identified in terms of a specific history that emphasizes
turn, has led to the association with Flavius Theodoros provenance and attribution: the Lindian Athena by Skyllis
Philoxenos, consul of 525.62 and Dipoinos, the Knidian Aphrodite by Praxiteles, the
Identification of Binbirdirek as the Philoxenos cistern Samian Hera by Bupalos, the Myndian Eros by Lysippos, and
lends weight to the identification of the ruins as the palace of the Olympian Zeus by Pheidias. Moreover, because each cult
Lausos. Bardill, however, questions the identification, noting statue was attributed to a particular artist, it was also linked to
first that the initial association between this cistern and a particular historic moment. In complete contrast to this
Philoxenos appears to have hinged on the fact that this was careful and consistent documentation is the virtually anony-
the largest and best-known cistern in the area, and, second, mous presentation of the animal statues. This list is tacked
that the sixth-century date is too late for the context of the onto the end of the sculpture inventory without any elabora-
Lausos discussion. He also points out that there were at least tion. References to individual animals are made in both the
two other cisterns in the area, one of which may be dated to singular and the plural, but there is no precise or consistent
the early fifth century, and hence to the period of Lausos, on numerical specification. This vagueness is underscored by a
the basis of its building fabric. It is this fifth-century structure, complete lack of historical information; although several
an open-air storage facility, the remains of which survive ancient artists were famous for their renditions of animals,
further west along the north side of the Mese, that Bardill not one statue in the Lausos collection is attributed, supplied
identifies as the Philoxenos cistern, associating it not with the with provenance, or in any way described in terms of conven-
sixth-century Philoxenos but with a fifth-century magister tional historical detail.
officiorum (master of the offices) of that name (Fig. 6).63 The stark contrast between the treatment of the cult images
The reidentification and relocation of the Philoxenos and the treatment of the animal statues suggests that these
cistern necessitates a relocation of the palace of Lausos and its two types of images were perceived in very different ways. In
eponymous quarter. If Bardill is correct, and I believe he is, the case of the cult images, the clear and detailed documenta-
the Lausos neighborhood should be placed north of the Mese tion in matters of provenance and attribution appears to have
and to the west in the region adjacent to the Forum of been driven by an antiquarian impulse to set these images
Constantine. This new location also would be consistent with within a historical framework. Each of the cult images derives
references to the palace in tenth-century sources and with the from one of the great Hellenic sanctuaries in the heartland of
path of the 475 fire that began in the Chalkoprateia, or the Greek world. Corso noted a distinct geographic distribu-
Copper Market, an area north of the Mese and to the east. As tion of the figures: the Lindian Athena and the Knidian
reconstructed by Bardill, the flames would have burned south Aphrodite originated in Dorian lands, the Hera and the Eros
in Ionia, and the Zeus and Kairos in the Peloponnesos.67 tion as demonstrated in the accomplishments of individual
There is, further, a sense of the chronological flowering of the artists. In the discussion of sculpture, each of the artists
individual religious centers. Samos and Lindos were two of included in the Lausos ensemble holds a place in Pliny's
the most important centers to develop in eastern Greece developmental outline of history. He characterizes Skyllis and
during the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.E., while Knidos Dipoinos as the first sculptors to achieve fame by sculpturing
came into its own in the fourth century. Olympia, one of the in marble70 and notes that Bupalos followed in their wake.71
great pan-Hellenic sanctuaries, was located in the western He extols Pheidias as an artist who revealed possibilities in the
Greek world and had its floruit in the fifth and fourth sculptural medium which were then taken up and elaborated
centuries. by sculptors such as Praxiteles72 and perfected with the
The association of specific statues with specific places may innovations of Lysippos.73 Underpinning these observations
not have been accidental, for Hellenic cult images, unlike is the sense of the history of the development of style, a belief
their Christian counterparts, had no universal or generic in the universality of naturalism as a stylistic point of refer-
religious function but were uniquely linked to the locus of ence, and a notion of artistic perfectibility.74
their cult. Thus, the specific statue of a specific god or Implicit, too, in Pliny's approach to sculpture is the under-
goddess was associated with a distinct cult, its sanctuary, and a standing of these works in terms of antiquarian retrospection,
unique set of rituals.68 The sense of place as a point of access an emphasis that was perhaps highlighted in the Lausos
to and focus for the sacred informs Pausanias's description of collection itself by the inclusion of sculpture of recognizably
the Greek world, with its enumeration of cities and sanctuar- Greek manufacture. Statues of this early date were a rarity in
ies, their sacred shrines and associated rituals. That this sense the Constantinopolitan world of the fourth and fifth centu-
remained a component in the mapping of the sacred into late ries, where it was far more common to see works of Hellenistic
antiquity is suggested by the itinerary of Egeria. Written in the and Roman manufacture.75 Display of statuary of bona fide
fifth century, her travel diary describes the author'sjourney to ancient manufacture in this collection therefore would have
the holy places of the Christian East. Like Pausanias before confirmed an element of antiquarian interest, an interest that
her, Egeria is interested in documenting places, monuments, dovetailed with the sense of religious history outlined in the
and the rituals associated with them as points of access to the elaboration of provenance.
sacred. Emphasis on typology and provenance in the Lausos It is impossible to say whether or not the Lausos collection
collection may be of a piece with this approach. If so, it is was assembled as a direct response to Pliny, a work that still
possible that it reflects a general understanding of the cult had wide currency in late antiquity. Although the prominent
origins of the collection's holdings and, with it, an awareness display of works by artists championed in the Natural History
of both the religious history and sacred geography of the certainly suggests as much, there is no direct evidence to
Hellenic world.69 connect the book with Lausos or members of his circle. It is,
In a like manner, attribution may have situated these however, clear that the Natural History was read into the fourth
images in terms of artistic tradition. For the reader, identifica- and fifth centuries. Well-known readers included the histo-
tion of a statue with a particular artist may also have linked the rian Ammianus Marcellinus, the Roman senator Symmachus,
image to a discrete historical moment. For the actual viewer of who is reported to have sent a copy to Ausonius, the author
the collection, that same history could have been expressed in Macrobius, and the pharmaceutical writer Sextus Placitus.
the visual language of style. The statues included in the Eusebius, Jerome, and Augustine also mention Pliny. These
collection had been created over a span of three hundred readers and others like them would have known and studied
years: the Athena and the Hera were made in the sixth the book both in the original and, more frequently, through
century B.C.E., the Zeus in the fifth century, and the Aphro- excerpted compilations of thematically related passages.76
dite and the Eros in the fourth century. This chronology It is also possible that a direct connection is not necessary,
would have been given life by the formal and material and that the collection may be understood as a gathering that
differences between the figures. The still abstraction of reflects an approach to the appreciation of ancient sculpture
Bupalos's sixth-century Hera would have stood in marked of which Pliny is simply the best-known exponent. Evidence
contrast to the contrapposto poise of Praxiteles' fourth- from pagan and Christian sources indicates that many of the
century Aphrodite or the dazzling torsion of Lysippos's Eros. points of view espoused in the Natural History were held into
Contrasts in scale and medium such as that between the the late antique period.
Lindian Athena and the Olympian Zeus also would have Consider, for example, the issue of artistic perfectibility, so
contributed to this sense. In these instances the contrasts were much at the center of Pliny's interpretation of the arts in
great and obvious, but the display could not have been general and sculpture in particular. The notion of a progres-
conceived exclusively in such grandiose terms. Juxtaposition sive development of art is a common one that was argued in a
of similar works such as the Athena and the Hera or the variety of ways. Antiquarian authors of the second century like
Aphrodite and the Eros could have invited more subtle Plutarch and Pausanias described an age before art in which
observations of formal similarities and differences. primitive peoples worshiped unformed, aniconic images such
Taken together, the cult images created what may be as rocks and planks. To their way of thinking, this simple age
described as a visual epitome not only of Hellenic religion but preceded a subsequent "age of art," a period in which
also of the history of sculptural form. It is an epitome familiar worship was transformed by the introduction of images
from such ancient writings as Pliny's Natural History. Pliny's art created with aesthetic sense and skill.77 The distinction made
historical discussions describe first the invention of individual here is a broad one between two different categories of
arts and then their inexorable move toward technical perfec- representation, the aniconic and the figural.
The notion of progress implicit in this before-and-after different order, that of the animal kingdom and, by exten-
argument was also a driving force behind more focused sion, the natural world.8' The nature of this natural context is
discussions of painting and sculpture in the "age of art." Pliny suggested by the actual choice of animals. Wild beasts and
is the primary exponent of this point of view, largely because mythological creatures predominate at the expense of domes-
his text survives. As we have seen, his observations about tic animals, and there is an emphasis on origins that are
painting and sculpture focus on the individual works of mysterious or alien. Pedestrian European and Mediterranean
individual artists that somehow can be seen to have advanced wildlife such as the bear or stag is rejected in favor of animals
the cause of better-that is, more convincing--illusionistic such as tigers with origins in the alien turf of Asia and
representation.78 A very similar approach to viewing in sub-Saharan Africa. Other creatures, such as the vulture,82
general and to the understanding of individual images in the cannot be traced to any known place according to contempo-
context of a visual history is documented by the second- rary writings on natural history, which emphasizes their air of
century Christian apologist Athenagoras, who writes: mystery. These alien origins are underscored by the strange
and savage behavior attributed to these animals by the ancient
Eikones were not in use before the discovery of plastic, naturalists.83
graphic, and modeling arts. When came Saurius of Samos, Associations with the alien and the savage also characterize
Crato of Sicyon, Cleanthes of Corinth and the Corinthian contemporary attitudes toward the mythical creatures. The
maid, tracing out shadows was discovered by Saurius, who unicorn was described as terrible and invincible in battle,s4
drew the outline of a horse in the sun; graphic art was and pans and centaurs were similarly understood. In ancient
discovered by Crato, who painted in the outlines of the lore these half-human creatures were representative of wild-
shadows of a man and a woman on a whitened tablet; and life, animal desire, and barbarism. Pan had the power to
coroplastic art was discovered by the Corinthian maid (for induce "panic" terrors among men when roused, while
she fell in love with someone and traced the outline of his centaurs were known for their wild and lustful natures, as
shadow on the wall as he slept; then her father-he made evidenced in stories like that of the battle between the Lapiths
pottery--delighted with so precise a likeness, carved out and the Centaurs or the tale of Herakles and Nessos.85 Thus,
the outline and filled it with clay; the tupos is preserved to while describable, these animals and half-human creatures
this very day in Corinth). After these came Daidalos, are essentially unknowable, mysterious, and unpredictable. As
Theodoros, and Smilis, who went further and discovered such they point to a world operating beyond the confines of
modeling and plastic arts.79 human reason.
How that world might have been perceived is suggested by

Here the author upholds the distinction between an age the one context in which such creatures would have been
before and after art and then, like Pliny, goes on to describe familiar to the Roman viewer, the staged animal shows, or
the stages by which the arts were first discovered and then venationes, that were so prominent a part of amphitheater and
perfected by the innovations of certain individuals. circus entertainment.86 Here all manner of wild and exotic
That similar approaches were familiar in late antiquity is creatures, tigresses, giraffes, and wild birds among them, were
evident from the testimony of the fourth-century philosopher sent out for slaughter in combats and artificial hunts. Al-
and rhetorician Themistius, who wrote, "Before Daidalos, not though first and foremost a crowd pleaser, the venationes also
only were herms worked in rectangular form, but also all the had a didactic intent: there was a lesson to be learned in the
rest of andriantes [statues]. Daidalos, because he was the first display and slaughter of wild beasts. In their wild and alien
to separate the two feet of agalmata [statue] was thought to nature, these animals were the embodiment of all that was
make living things.""80 Like Athenagoras in the second cen- uncivilized and, therefore, of barbarian irrationality and
tury and Pliny in the first, Themistius believed in a primitive evil.87 The ability to marshal the resources for the capture of
age before art that was left behind with the invention of these dangerous creatures and to control their presentation
figural representation by Daedalus. As well, he is able to point in the amphitheater was a way to give tangible expression to
to certain inventions, specifically, the separation of feet, that the wealth, prowess, and far-reaching moral authority of the
put representation on the road to the conquest of naturalistic imperial house.88 In a very real sense the venationes were the
illusion, which allows artists to create "living things." Thus, quintessential metaphor for the balance between order and
from the first century through the fourth, there appears a chaos.
sustained tendency to understand the history of representa- That this particular image had broad appeal is apparent
tional art in terms of a development toward mimetic perfec- from its use in contexts far removed from the amphitheater.
tion that is propelled by the inventive force of individual The appearance of hunt scenes and representations of animal
artists and their techniques. combats in domestic floor mosaics from settings as geographi-
What of the animal statues? If the detail lavished on the cally remote and chronologically separated as the second-
account of the cult images can be said to have shaped an century House of Dionysos at Paphos on Cyprus and the
interpretation of this group within the framework of a human unnamed fourth-century villa at Piazza Armerina in Sicily
history that was defined in terms of sacred geography and suggests not only the enduring popularity of the theme but
aesthetic chronology, then the corresponding absence of also the extent to which this subject was an expression of the
such description in the treatment of the animal statues could civilizing force of Rome with which the prosperous upper
well have set these images outside that particular construct. classes identified.89
Without the identifying flags of sacred provenance or artistic A similar appreciation of animal imagery was carried over
attribution, the animal statues took their place within a into the period of the late empire, as demonstrated by the
7 Great Palace mosaic. Istanbul, Mosaic

Museum (photo: Erich Lessing/Art
Resource)
sixth-century peristyle mosaic from the Great Palace at tion of these different types of statuary was to make a
Constantinople. In a vast mosaic covering approximately fundamentally negative statement about cult images. Such a
20,000 square feet (1,872 square meters), scenes of bucolic statement had been anticipated by Constantine's biographer,
harmony and sylvan bliss are punctuated by violent episodes Eusebius of Caesarea, who explained the emperor's use of
in which all manner of wild animals are shown attacking cult images and votive offerings in the city's urban decor as a
domestic animals, each other, and men. Leopards attack way to humiliate pagan images.92 In the context of the Lausos
antelope in one section. In another a griffin devours a lizard. collection, it is possible that a similarly negative impact was
Next to this grizzly pair, in complete antithesis, a young boy sought. In fact, emphasis on provenance and attribution may
plays with a puppy. Elsewhere an eagle attacks a snake (Fig. 7), have contributed to this impulse, for as Christian iconoclastic
while goats lounge to one side, deer wander, and a hunter writing indicates, the ability to recognize sacred images as the
brandishes his spear. As in other contexts, the presence of works of individual artists undermines their sanctity by mak-
wild animals in this mosaic suggests the menace of alien, ing them the outgrowth not of divine creation but of human
uncivilized forces in need of the control offered by the craft. Consider, for example, the comments of Athenagoras:
imperial house.90
The wild animals also may have been understood in a So short, then, is the time since [the introduction of]
different, but related, sense as apotropaia. Because of their eikones and the making of eidola that it is possible to name
threatening aspect, representations of these creatures were the craftsman of each god. Endoios, a disciple of Daedalos,
often used to ward off evil. This was the case in the Hippo- made that of Artemis in Ephesos and the old one of Athena
drome, for example, where animals such as the hyena, from olive-wood (or rather of Athela; for she is Athela, the
notorious as a trickster and killer of men, were displayed with unsuckled, as those ... the more mystical sense ...) and
such equally nefarious half-human creatures as sphinxes. the Seated Athena. The Pythian is the work of Theodoros
Captured and harnessed in a civilized setting, their own dark and Telecles, and the Delian and the Artemis were the
powers were turned loose against the very forces that had craftsmanship of Tectaeos and Angelion. The Hera in
spawned them, thereby keeping other evil spirits at bay.91 Samos and in Argos are the works of Smilis (and the rest of
The animals, pans, and centaurs in the Lausos collection the eidola of Pheidias). The Aphrodite in Knidos is another
may have evoked an idea of Nature in its most unruly and work of Praxiteles, the Asclepius in Epidauros is the work
threatening aspect. Redolent of the irrational and the uncon- of Pheidias. To put it in a word, not one of them eludes
trolled, these alien, outright barbarous images stood cheek by identification as the work of a man. If, then, they are gods
jowl with some of the most refined and noble creations of the why were they not so from the beginning? Why are they
Hellenic past. Comparison must have been inevitable as art more recent than those who have made them? Why did
confronted nature and the civilized faced the barbarous. they need human craftsmanship for their existence? They
Given the increasingly Christian tenor of the later Roman are earth, stones, matter, and futile craftsmanship.93
Empire and Lausos's own religious persuasion, it is not
unreasonable to suppose that one point behind thejuxtaposi- The comparative display of two ostensibly different classes of
images also may have helped to underscore a negative view of Lysippos's personification is thought to have been created
the cult statuary. Juxtaposition of great images from the great to give visual life to this concept and with it the sculptor's own
sanctuaries with anonymous statues of animals may have been ideas about artistic excellence. The statue's unique form
intended to draw attention to similarities between the two demonstrated the role of and the relationship among the
groups and in so doing to denigrate the cult statues by elements of proportion, movement, and accuracy of detail in
ascribing to them characteristics of beasts. Early Christian successful artistic creation. Because these issues were so
antipagan rhetoric is heavily iconoclastic in slant, and in it fundamental to the Lysippan aesthetic achievement, the
images are condemned for two reasons: an inherently inani- statue is thought to have stood outside the sculptor's work-
mate nature that in no way corresponds to or captures the shop as an advertisement for his own artistic concerns.99
sense of the divine, and the potential for these lifeless objects The inclusion of the statue Kairos in the Lausos collection
to become harmful by housing demons that might take up may well have been intended to recall and highlight the
residence in their dead cores.94 It was this inanimate quality particular meaning of the word kairos as congruence. How-
that was particularly troubling to the Christian apologists. As ever, instead of illustrating the particular achievement of a
lifeless objects devoid of soul or sense, cult images were particular artist, it seems likely that the statue stood as the
condemned on the grounds that they could neither feel nor embodiment of a more general application of the idea of
see nor hear. The inability to speak completed the lack of congruence to a range of visual experience.
sensation. This lack of language was perhaps the most In conjunction with the cult statues, the display of Kairos
damning element of all. In the Greco-Roman world the may have called attention to the formal history outlined in
refined mastery of speech and rhetoric was a sure index of that series of images. Individually, each statue was representa-
cultivation and civility.95 Conversely, failure to achieve such tive of a different kind of aesthetic congruence, some more
rhetorical proficiency was an index of barbarism and, by successful than others, according to the standards indicated
extension, primitivism, a characteristic shared by children, by authors such as Pliny and his followers. Collectively, the
foreigners, and animals.96 Classed with the mute, cult statues, group thus may have demonstrated the changing nature of
which were often described in the same category as animals, the idea of congruence over time and the move on the part of
were thus open to ridicule and derision. the Greek artists toward an imitation of nature that described
Built in to this polemical comparison was the safety valve of physical form and the intangible energies that enlivened it in
the apotropaia. The same beasts that invited comparison with a perfected state.
the cult images also might defend the city and its inhabitants The emphasis on aesthetic issues contingent on the pres-
against the demons that, given half a chance, were sure to take ence of Kairos may also have been intended to transform the
up residence in these discredited statues. sense of what these images were. Kairos made the great
While the bald-faced denigration of idols may well have images of Hellenic cult the subject not of religious veneration
been a factor in the organization of the collection, it is also but of aesthetic contemplation, thereby denying their cult
possible that much more was intended in this careful selec- nature and affirming their status as works of art.
tion and display of statuary, an idea supported by the The emphasis on formal issues created by the interaction
inclusion of the last statue in the group, the Lysippan Kairos. between Kairos and the cult statues also may have colored the
Kairos is the only statue in the Lausos collection that is viewing of the animal ensemble. In this group, where no
iconographically distinct from either of the two major sculp- formal aesthetic history was described, the aim, as has been
ture groups. Although documented in detail with the cult suggested, was to describe an untamed state of nature. The
images, the statue, properly speaking, is not a devotional brute energy of this natural world was the antithesis of refined
image but a personification. As such it is also distinct from the kairos. Seen in conjunction with the animal statues, the statue
animal group. In this capacity the figure serves as an ideal Kairos thus may have underscored the very absence of
mediator between the collection's two major sculpture congruence and the aesthetic mediation that produces it in
groups,97 a role implicit in the definition of kairos itself. the natural world. This absence stood in contrast to its
As noted above, the general meaning of kairos is bound up overwhelming presence in the cult statue group, with the
with the definition of time and the sense of the moment. An result that the animal statues took their place in the aesthetic
aspect of this definition was the notion of opportunity, a order. Untouched by the refining force of kairos, wild nature
connection expressed in the figure's unique coiffure, whose and its savage denizens were shown in their original, unper-
particular combination of long forelock and rear baldness fected state. In a society for which the principle of idealized
suggested the need to seize the moment as it arrives, not after naturalism was an acknowledged aesthetic category, this
it passes. This sense of the moment also lends the word a emphasis may well have described nature as the source for
secondary meaning, which can be defined as congruence, the artistic invention.
essential element in the creation and definition of beauty. Kairos thus pulled the raw stuff of animal imagery into
Plutarch described this aspect of kairos in the following league with the perfected artistry of the cult statues by making
passage of the Moralia: "Now in every piece of work beauty is both statue groups the subject of aesthetic meditation. This
achieved through many numbers coming into a congruence emphasis on problems of art and artistic creation forced the
(kairos) under some system of proportion and harmony, contemplation of the relationship, at once contradictory and
whereas ugliness is immediately ready to spring into being if complementary, between the natural and the man-made, the
only one chance element be omitted or added out of place."98 imperfect and the perfect object.
Kairos is therefore the state in which all of the elements that These issues may have been emphasized in the actual
form a work of art are perfectly balanced to create beauty. disposition of the statuary. Evidence for display is, however,
negligible. While it may be possible, as suggested by Francis religion. The systematic suppression of pagan cult and reli-
and Vickers, that the Kedrenos A inventory reflects a display gious culture is documented in the Theodosian Code.1'03 First
order, comparison of this passage with Kedrenos B, which published in 438 during the reign of Theodosios II (405-50),
mentions only three of the cult images, and these in a this corpus of Roman law preserves a series of fourth- and
different sequence, suggests that no hard and fast order fifth-century edicts that curb pagan religious practice. Al-
should be understood. though they attempt to regulate everything from sacrifice to
That the Lausos collection was at all bound up with issues of cult administration, these laws are particularly interesting for
art and artistic creation should come as no surprise. In the their legislation regarding temples and sanctuaries. Five laws
sense that Roman collectors had long since demonstrated an issued between 382 and 435 are preserved in the code. Each
interest in and sensitivity to the formal issues inherent in the confirms the illegality of sacrifice and calls for the closing of
creation and exhibit of works of art, the collection's formal the temples as sites of worship. Provisions for the fate of
and thematic emphasis falls well within the established norms temple buildings and their contents also are made. Solutions
of artistic appreciation. The invited comparison between vary in the case of buildings. In some instances, the edicts
images of early and late date, or the juxtaposition of natural enjoin the preservation of the temples.104 In others, they insist
images with those man-made creatures of pure artifice recall on their destruction.105 No such ambivalence occurs, how-
the kind of tactics used by collectors from as early as the ever, with respect to sculpture. Although cult images are
second century. This was the case, for example, in the display recognized as the fons et origo of superstition and error in a
of four statues, two each from the Claudian and Hadrianic manner consistent with the iconoclastic discussion outlined
periods, in a second-century house in Rome. The statues, above, the legislation is unequivocal about saving them.
which include a heroically nude male, a replica of Praxiteles' Theodosian Code 16.10.15 stipulates the general preserva-
Resting Satyr, and two representations of Scopas's rendition of tion of the "ornaments of public works," and 16.10.18
the personification of Desire, the Pothos, one of first-century, decrees the supervised removal of images from temples by
the other of second-century date, were set up in pairs to either qualified "office staff."
side of two doorways along the central axis of the house. This Given the belief in their corrupting potential, it is not
exhibit of iconographically unrelated subjects aimed to high- immediately clear why or how these images could be recon-
light the formal similarities and differences between the ciled to a new Christian order that simultaneously feared and
individual figures and encouraged the aesthetic study and derided sculpture. That there was any effort at all to preserve
appreciation of the series as a whole.100 cult statues bespeaks the status of sculpture in the later
At the same time that it corresponds to established display Roman world. Sculpture was the great medium of public
principles, the emphasis on aesthetic appreciation in the expression in the cities and sanctuaries of the Roman Empire,
Lausos collection seems an anomaly in the particular context an attitude expressed in the adornment of Constantinople
of Constantinople. Although the use of antiquities in urban itself. It was the descriptive vehicle that gave life to and
decor was well established by the end of the fourth century, documented the history of a place. Accomplishments were
comparison of the Lausos collection's emphasis on religion commemorated, allegiances expressed, and piety demon-
and aesthetics with other Constantinopolitan gatherings sug- strated with the dedication and maintenance of a vast range of
gests a very different sort of display. In the Hippodrome, for public monuments. This public display of statuary shaped the
example, statuary was marshaled to depict Constantinople as image of a city and gave visual life to its own claims to
the New Rome. Monuments from the old Rome, such as the importance and prestige.106 In addition, this distinctive use of
she-wolf with Romulus and Remus, were brought to the circus sculpture meant that statuary itself was emblematic as a
as part of a display designed to recreate the image of the old medium of Hellenic tradition.
capital in the new. Inclusion of other monuments, such as the In a culture that defined itself so completely through the
Serpent Column from Delphi, described how Constantinople expressive medium of sculpture, the problem thus became
not only rivaled but surpassed the status of Rome. Evidence one of reconciling the claims of Greco-Roman tradition with
from other public areas signals a similar preoccupation with the exigencies of Christian piety. An approach to this problem
imperial ideology and propaganda.101 Given this tradition, of reconciliation is indicated in Theodosian Code 16.10.8.
the emphasis on religion and aesthetics in the Lausos en- Issued at Constantinople in December 382, the edict provides
semble, two subjects seemingly at odds with the established for the fate of a temple in the eastern city of Edessa as follows:
concerns of public life, appears difficult to understand.
Contemporary sources confirm, however, that by the end of By the authority of the public council We decree that the
the fourth century these seemingly anomalous issues were at temple shall be continually open that was formerly dedi-
the heart of public debate about the relationship between cated to the assemblage of throngs of people and now also
traditional Hellenic religion and the new faith, Christianity. is for the common use of the people, and in which images
The formation of the Lausos collection occurred against a are reported to have been placed which must be measured
backdrop of increasing religious authoritarianism on the part by the value of their art rather than by their divinity; We do
of the Theodosian house.102 Although Constantine had been not permit any divine imperial response that was surrepti-
the first emperor to accord Christianity legal status, it was not tiously obtained to prejudice this situation. In order that
until 380, during the reign of Theodosios I (379-95), that the this temple may be seen by the assemblages of the city and
new faith was proclaimed the official state religion. This by frequent crowds, Your Experience shall preserve all
declaration was part of an ongoing legislative and administra- celebrations of festivities, and by the authority of Our
tive campaign designed to put the last match to Hellenic divine imperial response, you shall permit the temple to be
open, but in such a way that the performance of sacrifices been underscored by its location. As we have seen, Bardill's
forbidden therein may not be supposed to be permitted interpretation of the archaeological and literary evidence
under the pretext of such access to the temple.107 places the Lausos quarter north of the Mese and immediately
to the east of the Forum of Constantine. It does not, however,
What is interesting in the decree is the insistence that the give a precise location for the palace or suggest how the
temple images be "measured by the value of their art rather statuary was displayed. Indeed, Bardill accepts the notion that
than by their divinity." In other words, viewers are exhorted to the collection was a private one, shown internally. There is,
see and understand these ancient statues not as religious however, no reason to assume such a context, as neither of the
images but as works of art. relevant texts makes any mention of a palace location.
The emphasis on art and aesthetics in the Lausos collection Kedrenos A notes only that the Lausos collection was dis-
and the religious images to which it is applied is of a piece played in the Lausos quarter near the cistern of Philoxenus.
with this legislative approach to the Christianization of the Kedrenos B is equally silent on the issue of a palace context,
empire. In a display that was a visual corollary to the legal stating only that the fire "destroyed the porticoes on either
language of the law code, the collection sought a way around side of the street Mese and the excellent offerings of Lausos."
the impasse between the revered institutions of Greco-Roman Far from describing an interior display, the mention of the
tradition and the upstart demands of the new religion by statuary in the same breath as the Mese porticoes suggests
exhorting the viewer to reject the claims of religious history that the collection may well have been shown outside in a
and consider statuary as art.108 As public policy this exhorta- portico along the city's main thoroughfare.
tion was shrewd, for the recommendation could be directed
If this was the case, the implications of such a setting are
to Christian and pagan alike. Emphasis on the aesthetic profound. Removal of the statuary from the enclosed, interior
appeal of cult images neutralized their sacred qualities and in environment of a palace to which access would have been
so doing made them legitimate objects of profane aesthetic limited to the exterior world of the city street would have set
contemplation for the Christian viewer. For the pagan tradi- the Lausos collection squarely in the realm of the public and
tionalist this same recommendation offered the chance to
in so doing underscored the official aspects of the collection's
rethink attitudes toward statuary and, with it, the very nature imagery. Significantly, a setting for the collection in one of the
of religious belief. Consider, for example, the words of the porticoes flanking the premier Constantinopolitan thorough-
fifth-century Christian author Prudentius to a predominately fare would have linked the gathering to a long tradition of
pagan Roman Senate: portico display that had its origins in the late Republican and
early Imperial age.110
You should give up your childish festivals, The great Roman porticoes derived their luster from the
your laughable rites, your fame of the statuary they displayed.111 The earliest and
shrines unworthy of so great an empire. perhaps the best known of these gatherings was the Porticus
Oh noble Romans, wash your marble statues wet Metelli, later the Porticus Octaviae. Donated to the city of
with dripping spatters of gore- Rome in about 146 B.C.E. by Quintus Caecilius Metellus, the
let these statues, the works of great portico was outfited with no less splendid a piece than
craftsmen, stand undefiled; Lysippos's multifigured equestrian tribute to Alexander the
let them become the most beautiful adornments
Great and his cavalrymen, the Granikos Monument, a work
of our native city-may no brought by Metellus to the capital as plunder in the wake of
depraved purpose taint these works of art, no his eastern campaigns. Other famous works of Greek sculp-
longer in the service of evil.109 ture subsequently joined the Lysippan statue, among them
figures of Artemis and Askleipios by Kephisodotos and the
Written at the same time as the formation of the Lausos Eros by Praxiteles from Thespiae. Prized for their status as
display, this passage captures the spirit of the Constantinopoli- original autograph works of Greek art, these images stood as
tan collection. In language that draws on the same associa- witnesses to the civilizing power of Rome.112
tions between childishness, ignorance, and barbarism that Because the Lausos collection may well have continued this
were at work in the Lausos ensemble, Prudentius urges the tradition, the question inevitably arises as to whether the
great senatorial families of pagan Rome to abandon "childish images displayed in Constantinople were originals or copies.
festivals" and appreciate statues not for their sacred but for The culture of copying that was so defining a feature of
their aesthetic qualities. Underpinning this appeal to the Roman artistic experience might suggest that the Constanti-
beautiful is the unstated belief that this approach is the only nopolitan images were replicas, as would questions about the
correct one for those who would be seen as civilized and feasibility of transporting such fragile and delicate works as
refined. It is a dazzling apology, and in it Prudentius walks a the Olympian Zeus from Greece to Constantinople. At the
fine line. On the one hand, he is unstinting in his criticism of same time, however, several factors point to the likelihood
pagan religion. On the other hand, himself a member of a that they were originals. First of all, the account in Kedrenos A
power elite that defined itself and all that was worthy in terms makes it clear that these statues were prized for the same star
of the standards of classical culture, he is eager to reconcile quality as the statuary in Rome, a star quality that in large part
the old with the new. He does so in the realm of the aesthetic, derived from and depended on their status as originals. Given
guided by the same sentiments that contributed to the the interest in particular statues, any difficulty surrounding
formation of the Lausos collection. the transport and subsequent display of individual works
The official nature of the collection's message must have could have been overcome. In addition, evidence indicates
that copies of cult images proved the exception rather than meant to be seen in the open, being displayed instead in the
the rule.113 The language of the texts also argues for the inner sancta of temples where limited viewing access was a
collection of originals. References are specific and particular, defining feature of their sanctity.117 Contemporary Christian
describing details of pose and medium in ways that ring true. writings confirm this sense of degradation by noting that
Finally, the historical moment of the collection's formation removal of a statue from its sanctuary resulted in automatic
makes it very possible that it contained originals. The early deconsecration.11s Ripped from their sanctuaries, deprived of
fifth century was an optimum time for assembling such a their altars, and paraded openly as art, these spoils were
collection. With the closure of the temples sacred property indeed "excellent offerings," great cultural treasures that
reverted to the imperial fisc, providing a man like Lausos with gave ample evidence of the Christian triumph over Hellenic
seemingly limitless resources.114 superstition, and thus stood as witnesses to the success of
What Lausos would have drawn on in the formation of his Theodosian religious policy.
collection was a notion of collecting and public display that As this play on the idea of spoils and conquest suggests, the
had first been established in the expansionist age of the Lausos collection was less likely to have been conceived as a
Roman Republic. The great Roman porticoes displayed Christian allegory than as a display designed to express the
statuary that had been brought from the cities of the Greek nuts and bolts of imperial policy regarding some of the most
east in the wake of the military campaigns that had drawn the potent symbols of Hellenic civilization, cult images. This
Hellenic world into the political and administrative orbit of public agenda would have put the collection in line with the
Rome. Thus, this statuary amassed at Rome was as much other great Constantinopolitan gatherings. Like the displays
plunder as it was art, with the difference that statuary was not in the Hippodrome and the Baths of Zeuxippos before it, the
war booty in the conventional sense of captured arms, but Lausos ensemble used ancient statuary for the pragmatic end
rather spoils whose real value lay in their symbolic impor- of describing an imperial ideology.
tance. While the capture and transport of booty such as arms, At the same time, however, this collection charted new
precious metals, livestock, and slaves were largely undertaken ground. Whereas the earlier collections used plundered
for financial reasons, symbolic value also was acknowledged. antiquities with a sure hand to describe cultural continuity
Spoils illustrated the riches of a conquered nation better than with the Greco-Roman past, the Lausos collection expressed
any possible description, thereby offering proof that a cam- the discomfort of rupture and the longing for reconciliation.
paign had been worth the undertaking. Even more impor- With the display of cult images as spoils, the Lausos collection
tant, however, was the very act of possession: ownership gave visual life to the imperial house's intent to wipe out
demonstrated dominion. The control of resources implicit in pagan cult and, with it, some of the Greco-Roman world's
the display of booty also signified absolute regulatory power longest-lived and most prestigious cultural institutions. At the
over public life. In the case of works of art, the more same time, however, the proposed aesthetic interpretation of
ephemeral issues of civic pride and cultural identity were these images expressed an antiquarian regard for the past and
often at stake."5 This was the case, for example, in the display a profound desire to preserve it, if only in a denatured state.
of the Herakles Trihesperos on the Roman Capitol. Made by Writ large in these contradictory impulses is the conundrum
Lysippos in the fourth century B.C.E., the statue, which was a of the later Roman world: a society that defined the civilized
colossal bronze, had stood on the acropolis at Tarentum, in purely philhellenic terms had embraced a religion at odds
where it was both the focus and the emblem of the city's pride. with many, if not all, of the fundamental precepts of Greco-
In 209 B.C.E., when the city fell to Fabius Maximus and his Roman tradition. The problem was thus one of reconciling
army, the Herakles was taken off as a spoil.116 This removal to these two opposing cultures.
Rome in the wake of the city's conquest was no idle act of The Lausos collection could have achieved this reconcilia-
plunder. Indeed, Fabius Maximus must have been aware that tion in two ways. First, the emphasis on the selection and
the transport of the Herakles to Rome would cap the display of truly ancient monuments of bona fide Greek
Tarentine sense of humiliation and degradation. It was pedigree may well have established an antiquarian context for
tantamount to dragging the city away in chains. Conversely, at this religious and potentially volatile discussion that estab-
Rome, the display of the statue in the capital's historic heart lished a break between the pagan past and the Christian
would have proclaimed the reality of Roman expansion and present. Not one of the named cult statues on display was less
the force of its dominion. than seven hundred years old, and some of them, such as the
If I am correct and the Lausos collection was indeed a Samian Hera, must have approached one thousand. All of
public gathering, the reuse of statuary by Theodosios's them were famous, but in the context of contemporary
chamberlain should probably be seen in much the same light. religious practice it is clear that, for all their venerability, cult
Like the statuary in the great Roman porticoes, these images statues other than these would have evoked far more powerful
could be understood as spoils. As we have seen, the Lindian devotional responses on the part of contemporary pagan
Athena, the Samian Hera, the Knidian Aphrodite, the Olym- worshipers.119 Thus, this religious policy statement could have
pian Zeus, and the Myndian Eros were all images plundered been interpreted in a context removed from the pricklier
from the great sanctuaries of the Hellenic world. Just as the issues of contemporary religious piety to a stage in the
Herakles Trihesperos described the capture and submission recognizable but distant past.
of Tarentum and its population, so these uprooted images Second, to the distance established between past and
embodied the notion of pagan religious defeat. The humilia- present by the actual antiquity of the sculpture, the collection
tion embodied in this defeat must have been compounded by added the emphasis on aesthetic issues. This appeal for
the fact of public exposure. Most cult images were never aesthetic appreciation is interesting in that it implies an
8 Theodosian obelisk base,

Hippodrome, Istanbul (photo: Art
Resource)
awareness of and sensitivity to form that we do not usually distinction between the abstract forms contemporaries used
associate with late antiquity and the early Middle Ages.120 In to express the official and the sacred and the mimetic forms
all likelihood intended to defuse any sense or experience of used to achieve the same goals in earlier centuries.121 Linked
the holy, this emphasis proposed a way of looking at and to the actual antiquity of the statues, this emphasis on
thinking about statuary that implicitly acknowledged and different formal values could further have underscored the
explicitly built on an idea of art as mimetic illusionism. As we break between past and present, and in so doing encouraged
have seen, this realist canon was familiar to contemporaries an understanding of these images as art.
from all manner of literary contexts. It was not, however, a The emphasis on illusionism also might have had signifi-
mode of representation that was in the vanguard with respect cance in terms of meaning. Christian iconoclastic writing rails
to contemporary official production, be it sacred or secular. mercilessly against the idea of sacred images, noting that for
The Theodosian obelisk base (ca. 390 C.E.) offers a much all their illusionistic qualities they remain nothing other than
better sense of what this late fourth- and early fifth-century "earth, stones, matter, and futile craftsmanship."122 Funda-
official art was about. Carved on four sides with reliefs mental to this objection was the belief that art could and
depicting members of the imperial house in attendance at the should express a kind of truth and that naturalistic imitation
circus games, the base embodies the abstract, hieratic form was at odds with this notion of truth telling.123 Thus, an
that had become the norm in official works of art by the end emphasis on illusionistic tradition in the cult images of pagan
of the fourth century. Each relief is conceived as a symmetri- antiquity may have been a way to underscore the philosophi-
cally arranged composition in two registers. The south side of cally hollow, indeed, false, premises by which pagan worship-
the obelisk base (Fig. 8) shows the emperor Theodosios I at ers were introduced to the divine.
the center of the upper register with his sons Arkadios arid That such a distinction could have been made is suggested
Honorios beside him and courtiers behind. Theodosios is the by the fact that the subject matter and style of pagan
largest figure in the group. An architectural enframement antiquity's visual traditions survived in the late fourth and
designed to suggest the setting of the imperial box sets this fifth centuries not so much in the official and sacred spheres
central group off from a double rank of courtiers left and for which they were evolved, but rather in the realm of the
right. In the lower register two rows of smaller spectators stare private. The late fourth-century Parabiagio plate (Fig. 9) is
out from the composition, while the still smaller figures of but one example of this phenomenon. In a tondo composi-
dancers and musicians cavort at the feet of the spectators tion, the figures of Kybele and Attis ride in triumphal
behind a low balustrade. Here, symmetry and frontality in the procession, drawn by a quadriga of surging lions and accom-
composition, together with the manipulation of proportion panied by the twirling figures of ecstatic revelers. Figures of
to describe social hierarchies, have become the norm. plenty recline in the exurge below, while divine chariots and
Given the gap between the aesthetic values espoused in late torch-bearing victories traverse the sky above. Evidence of the
imperial official art and the Lausos gathering's emphasis on palace of Marina referred to above indicates that the survival
naturalism, what might a contemporary viewer have been of such imagery was not confined to the context of small-scale
expected to take away from an experience of the collection? I luxury goods, but that the forms and subject matter of pagan
doubt seriously that the gathering was ever intended as a antiquity survived in monumental domestic settings as well.
lesson touting the virtues of mimetic form. Instead, I would Further, as the Christian patronage of Marina suggests, the
like to suggest that the illusionistic development outlined in notion that pagan traditions be legitimized through the veil of
the selection of sculpture was intended to encourage a art appears to have been taken to heart.
9 Silver plate with

Kybele and Attis
(Parabiagio plate).
Milan, Museo del Brera
(photo: Scala/Art
Resource)
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the collection is Frequently Cited Sources
interesting precisely because of the status it accords the idea
of art. In the Lausos ensemble some of the most venerable
Corso, Antonio, Prassitele: Fonti epigrafiche e letterarie; Vita e opere, vol. 3 (Rome:
images of the pagan past were legitimized and redeemed for Leonardo-DeLuca, 1991).
no other reason than that of artistic merit. At the root of this Donohue, Alice, Xoana and the Origins of Greek Sculpture (Athens, Ga.: Scolar
Press, 1988).
proposal is the sense of art as a mediating force. In the Lausos Elsner, Jas, Art and the Roman Viewer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
collection and for the Theodosian court, art became a balm 1995).
Guberti Bassett, Sarah, "Antiquities in the Hippodrome at Constantinople,"
that offered a way around the impasse between the iconoclas-
Dumbarton Oaks Papers 45 (1991).
tic demands of Christianity and the high regard with which Johnson, Francis P., Lysippos (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1927).
the empire's ruling elite held the traditions of classical Mango, Cyril, Michael Vickers, and E. D. Francis, "The Palace of Lausos at
Constantinople and Its Collection of Ancient Statues," Journal of the History
culture. Here, in the healing realm of the aesthetic, pagan
of Collections 4 (1992): 89-98.
and Christian were invited to meet and to set aside their most
fundamental differences in the joint appreciation of beauty.
Notes
Sarah Guberti Bassett is assistant professor at Wayne State University,
This article has profited from the constructive criticism of Mary-Lyon Dolezal,
where she teaches the history of medieval art and architecture. She is
Brian Madigan, Ann Steiner, and Stephen Zwirn, to whom my thanks are due.
preparing a book on the urban decoration of Constantinople in late I am also grateful for the generous and helpful comments of the anonymous
Art Bulletin readers.
antiquity, a study that concentrates on the reuse of antiquities in
Unless otherwise indicated, translations are mine.
public collections [Department of Art and Art History, Wayne State 1. This article draws on subject matter in my Ph.D. dissertation, "Paene
University, Detroit, Mich. 48202]. Omnium Urbium Nuditate: The Reuse of Antiquities in Constantinople, Fourth
through Sixth Centuries," Bryn Mawr College, 1985. Some of the ideas 10. On Malchos, see Barry Baldwin, "Malchus of Philadelphia," Dumbarton
discussed here were presented at the 17th International Byzantine Congress. Oaks Papers 31 (1977): 91-107; and R. C. Blockley, The Fragmentary Classicising
See The 17th International Byzantine Congress: Abstracts of Short Papers, Dumbarton Historians of the Later Roman Empire, 2 vols. (Liverpool: Francis Cairns,
Oaks, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. (n.p., 1986). 1981-83), vol. 1, 71-85.
On the Constantinopolitan reuse of antiquities, see Gottfried Christian 11. Suda Lexicon M120, quoted in Blockley (as in n. 10), vol. 2, 404-5.
Heyne, "Priscae artis operae quae Constantinopoli extisse memorantur," 12. Mango, in Mango et al., 91.
Comnientationes Scientiarium Gottingensis 2 (1790-91): 3-38; R. M. Dawkins, 13. Ibid., 92.
"Ancient Statues in Medieval Constantinople," Folklore 35 (1924): 209-48; and 14. Ibid.
Cyril Mango, "Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder," Dumbarton Oaks 15. On the Lindian Athena, see Martin Zucker, "Zur dltern griechischen
Papers 17 (1963): 55-75. Kunstgeschichte I: Die angebliche Athenastatue des Dipoinos und Skyllis,"
For the discussion of individual collections and the implications of reuse, Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Paedagogik 135 (1887): 785-91; Christian
see Guberti Bassett, 87-96; idem, "Historiae custos: Sculpture and Tradition in Blinkenberg, L'image d'Athana Lindia (Copenhagen: A. F. Host og Son,
the Baths of Zeuxippos," American Journal of Archaeology 100 (1996): 491-506; 1917-18); E. D. Francis and Michael Vickers, "Green Goddess: A Gift to
and Reinhold Stupperich, "Das Statuenprogramm in den Zeuxippos- Lindos from Amasis of Egypt," AmericanJournal ofArchaeology 88 (1984): 68-69;
Thermen: Uberlegungen zur Beschreibung der Christodorus von Koptos," idem, "Amasis and Lindos," Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 31 (1984):
Istanbuler Mitteilungen 32 (1982): 210-35. 119-30; and Corso, 129-30.
2. The earliest mention is by Pierre Gilles (Petrus Gyllius). See his De 16. Zucker (as in n. 15), 789-90; Francis and Vickers, "Green Goddess" (as
topographia Constantinopoleos et de illius antiquitatibus libri quattuor (Lyons: in n. 15), 68. Corso, 129, believes that Amasis may have chosen the material as
Guillaume Rovillium, 1561; reprint, Athens: Vivliopoleion Note Karavia, a way to make specific reference to Egypt.
1967), 129-32. For the English version, see The Four Books of the Antiquities of 17. Pliny, Historia naturalis 36.9, places their birth in the 50th Olympiad
Constantinople, trans.John Ball (London, 1729; reprint, NewYork: Italica Press, (580-577 B.C.E.).
1988), 121-24. Gilles's discussion is essentially a recapitulation of the 11th- 18. Herodotus 1.30. Sesostris III (ca. 1860 B.C.E.) ruled in the 18th dynasty.
century inventory given by George Kedrenos. Other references to the See Mango et al., 93; and Corso, 129. Francis and Vickers, "Amasis and
collection proceed in the same spirit and include A. Nagl, "Lausos," in Paulys Lindos" (as in n. 15), 121, suggest that Kedrenos's earlier attribution to
Real-Encyclopiidie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart: JB Metzlersche, Sesostris is the result of confusion regarding Herodotus's descriptions of his
1940), supp. 7, 365-66 (hereafter referred to as RE); Rodolphe Guilland, public works projects with those of Amasis. Alternatively, it might be possible
"Etudes sur la topographie de Constantinople byzantine: Le Palais de that the statue was a deliberately archaizing one commissioned by Amasis, a
Lausos," Helleniki 17 (1962): 95-104; idem, Etudes de topographie de Constanti- New Kingdom ruler, to evoke the sense of Sesostris, the Middle Kingdom, and
nople byzantine, vol. 2 (Berlin: Akademie, 1969), 32; and Mango (as in n. 1). the past. A colossal sphinx in the Mus6e du Louvre, Paris, demonstrates a
C. M. Bowra, "Palladas and the Converted Olympians," Byzantinische Zeitschrift similarly archaistic approach to patronage in the New Kingdom. See Biri Fay,
53 (1960): 1-7, associates the collection with the Palatine Anthology 9.528, and "The Louvre Sphinx, A 23," in Kunst des Alten Reiches (Mainz: Philipp von
the late 4th-century struggle between paganism and Christianity. Zabern, 1995), 75-79.
3. Corso, 128-42. 19. Herodotus 2.82. See Zucker (as in n. 15), and Francis and Vickers,
4. Mango et al. "Amasis and Lindos" (as in n. 15), 122-25, for discussion of these statues in the
5. On Kedrenos and Zonaras, see Herbert Hunger, Die hochsprachliche profane context of Egyptian diplomacy. Both articles propose that the two statues were
Literatur derByzantiner, vol. 1 (Munich: Beck, 1978), 393-94, 416-18. of Athena and her Egyptian counterpart, the goddess Neith. Corso, 129-30,
6. George Kedrenos, Synopsis historian, trans. Cyril Mango, in Mango et al., believes that one statue remained in situ until 392, when it was then removed
91; Georgius Cedrenus, Historiarum Compendium, ed. I. Bekker (Bonn: Weber, to Constantinople.
20. See Blinkenberg (as in n. 15), 1-36.
1838-39), vol.TL
tEvoSiXE&i 1, v,
564:'r0ov
"&r'L4 v4)LX6Evos
TroZs Aaibxrov u eavT6OKOLKIpTT
1XoPYEL 'ratWFoLOKLXhO
?8p, vOa TiaXE KLt,
T-q KVXja(Lv. 21. For the material from Naukratis, see W. M. Flinders Petrie, Naukratis,
Part I, 1884-85 (London: Trfibner, 1886), 13, pl. 1.1. For the Kameiros statue,
rLra'o 8 Kat r6 7~ LyaXpla TrTs ALv&Sas 'AOqrlv&s EcpdrIXv VK V iXOouv auapty8ov,u see Steffen Trolle, "An Egyptian Head from Camirus, Rhodes," Acta Archaeo-
Epyov Ki3XXhL8OS KQLi ALWrolvovU Tv dTl atXltaTo1)pyJv, 'TEp rWOTr 8&zpov
logica 49 (1978): 139-50.
WrEpk?iE lE roTrPL s AL~fnrTov Trpavvos KXEopoiXA ~r Aiv8C rupivvw. Kai 1q 22. On the Knidia, see Blinkenberg (as in n. 15); and Christine Havelock,
Kv8oa 'A4po87rl rK XiiO XEUK S, yl}V'1, lVp6wVqv Tlrv OQL T~ L XELPL
rFEPLOrTXXohwroa, py~6v o70 KvLbSov Hpa~toiGXqV'. KQL 4 ~aplCIHpa, Epyov The Athena of Knidos and Her Successors: A Historical Review of the Female Nude in
Greek Art (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995). For a discussion of
Auwar7rovU Kai BotrhaXov oi- XLOv. KaO l EpoIs T76ov `v, rrTEPYr6os,
Mvv66OEv 64LK6PEVOS. KO'; 0 c ELbOU EXExvTLvos; Z is, o1v H EpLKX' &9'Vi09KEv the Constantinopolitan history of the statue, see Corso, 130-31.
Els vE v 'OXhvpXCLV. KOa 76 7T6V Xp6vov pLpoipElvovldqaXpa, "pyov A'Wxrrrrwov, 23. Corso, 131.
24. Pliny, Hist. Nat. 36.11.
7'rrLrOEv piv p 4av X? Kp6v, Ep'rrpoe0v i Kop;V. KL pOLOVOKiWTES KQtt TCYPL8
KQ YI&WES r' ( KaP K qXo'rrap86LXEL1; TOPEXhiS; TE a Kat KiravpOL Kt Have'S;." 25. A. Frickenhaus, "Der Eros von Myndos," Jahrbuch des kaiserlich Deutschen
7. George Kedrenos, Synopsis historian, trans. Cyril Mango, in Mango et al., Archaeologischen Instituts 30 (1915): 127-29.
26. Pausanias 4.30.6.
91; Georgius Cedrenus (as in n. 6), 616: "Troirouv 80 AvyopEvOTv0ros o ovpb&6; 27. Ibid. 5.17.
EPArrplqap6;
pi&r KoT Tr i 6v
T(rv XaXKo'rsparTvl X 6 avO-qp6Troarov
apapEVO; pipOS
atT r'; TE' E IvQX6(A EV804 OELPEv.
tp4x)( Ev KQLt
T,;S oT&'; yp Trq 28. Ibid. 7.4.5.
29. Corso, 131.
T& 'rrpoaUnri w&v'ra, TiTv TE KaOhVOU1Vq9v (3RLXLK V, Ev 9 &'7riKELTO PLPhLOOfjKq 30. See Frickenhaus (as in n. 25); and Johnson, 115, who accepts the idea
ExoVara P bXovs pvpL&8as &88EKa, p O 3W PLbXoCv Ka r6 T To 8p6KovTroS ;rTEpov
unconditionally.
rro8(&v E)K(TOV
'IT\'S KQt ELKOULV,
'c 'O8(wELta, V 9 vyp6tppat,
XpWuoI; j '9 YEYPOppiV
pEdr& T&
KXL700TK79
'Opqpo.v WrroL?PiOpa,
L;UTople Tr
r 7T9s Tv W 31. For the British Museum Eros and a list of other copies, see Johnson,
,qpi)v 7Fp 6ESW;. o VVE4OELP E b KG ? TiS px1; q; T 7'rraXaTCWV 'EKaT~iPOEv 105-7.
32. Opinion on the exact date varies. Charles Picard, Manuel d'archiologie
uTro&S KO 7d0v Aa1ixroU T& KAXXLrTr T vOL rTa0V . rroXX& & Yp rT(;&v apXol'v grecque, vol. 4, La sculpture (Paris: A. Picard, 1963), 536; and Corso, 131, argue
Iyahpdayv aoTr60 bvCpirro, ri 'A4poGrr-qis ~is v Kvl 76b "err pborjov, Ko(tL
that the statue is the result of Lysippos's Asiatic voyages and associate it with
Alexander the Great's siege of Myndos in 333 B.C.E. Johnson, 115, prefers a
"Apatur's o rTv A~yu7trryv 3iaor"XEi; ~ t o4J KhEobosiq ar'irTELXE, KLt, date of ca. 316.
"aOLha pvpi, ''TFE&TFapOE 76 raip KaYi pFiXP 70o Kahoup~ivov 6pov To70
33. On Myndos, see Richard Stillwell, ed., Princeton Encyclopaedia of Classical
plsY ov Kovcravrvov." Sites (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976), 602.
8.Johannes Zonaras, Epitomae Historiarum, ed. Theodorus Biittner-Wobst
34. On the Zeus, see generally Giovanni Becatti, Problemi fidiaci (Milan:
(Bonn: Weber, 1897), vol. 3, 131: "Oi Kpa7rofv7ros EAPFpuprplS Ev
Electa, 1951), 125-40; and Corso, 131-32. For coin evidence, see Gisela
KoITravrvo't6heL YiVE7ro pLUYr7os, EIK 7Tv) XaXKO'rrpaeTOl Qpa&pEvOS KaW
Richter, The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks (New Haven: Yale University
Itr&v7mX 7' "pooEX1 7TofrroL~S vpqEtL s K(X O 'arO7PE)p~X pas, T"s TE Ev 8-W&pouay r
Press, 1970), figs. 647, 650. For primary sources, see Pausanias 5.9.1-5; and
crhar7EL(.v
7Tqy 70roas K(XL
KEKXrqppvqv TaS GrT(L'S
BXULXLK E'LKELppvv;S
V, KGO ' cv KGia OLKOaOpaI,
PL LOOf)Kq,XX& pq1v Ka(
E&ilyYIvE aGrrv
&GiEK(X Strabo, Geography 8.3.30.
35. R. Pfeiffer, "The Measurements of the Zeus at Olympia," Journal of
pvp&aas Pl3y3Xov aTroKELpEvov Ev T17T 0Xo1xra. iv oLs avayp&E7aL ELvaL Hellenic Studies 61 (1941): 1-5.
Ka, 8pdpKOvOS EvTpov, p'JKOUS 1Y Otro8v KO~KXTOV ?.KOULv, NXOv YgYyPypappivc 36. Mango et al., 94-95. This claim derives from an observation in A.H.M.
XPTxroL's ypppaC(L rT 700 'Op qpov 1TOL~1(pa(ra, '7rV TE 'Ihdia& K(X" TTyv Jones, The Later Roman Empire, vol. 2 (1964; reprint, Baltimore:Johns Hopkins
'OrirarLov, oU Kai G MO hXos Ta IrEpL Toirro)v T7v 3pariwv ovyypa66pEvos
pipvqTcL, 0LE p 8 bELPE Si TO ip AKEEvO KOi 7i v1, ? TOE'; AnuovO Tc ; ' ?rr6X'S University Press, 1986), 92. See also Dieter Metzler, "Oekonomische Aspekte
des Religonswandels in der Sp~itantike: Die Enteignung der Heidnischen
lyXaLadv KcL Tx EKEE EvL8puplve 2v( hyayaXp T( s ) TE lqaphis Hp's K(XL 7rs Tempel Seit Konstantin," Hephaistos 3 (1981): 27-40.
Aiv&0cs 'AOlv&s KaiL 7T~s Kvitcs 'Aqpo&T7rls, Tr K(XT& "TyXVIIV 'trEpLP6pqra
37. On the Kairos, see Andrew F. Stewart, "Lysippan Studies I: The Only
d8p)LG pa31(X'a, Ka(
9. Kedrenos's piJXP 70)0
harshest 'F6pov
critic 'riSpapE."
has been Christian Blinkenberg, who scorned Creator of Beauty," American Journal ofArchaeology 82 (1978): 163-71;Johnson,
the notion of the collection's existence and characterized the relevant passage 163-65; and A. B. Cook, Zeus, a Study in Ancient Religion, vol. 2, pt. 2
in the Synopsis as nothing less than "ein Gewebe von Fabeln" (a tissue of lies). (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914), 859-68.
See Blinkenberg, Knidia: Beitrage zur Kenntnis der praxitelischen Aphrodite 38. For the collected primary sources, seeJohnson, 280-87.
(Copenhagen: Levin og Munksgaard, 1933), 32-34. 39. See Stewart (as in n. 37), 164 n. 3, for a list of reliefs and gems.
40. Doro Levi, "I1 kairos attraverso la letteratura Greca," Rendiconti della Real Forum of Constantine that has been identified, although probably errone-
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei: Classe di Scienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche, 5th ously, with various Pheidian Athenas, the Parthenos, the Promachos and the
ser., 32 (1923): 260-80; idem, "Il concetto di kairos e la filosofia di Platone," Lemnia among them. See Andreas Linfert, "Athenen des Pheidias," Athenisches
Rendiconti della Real Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei: Classe di Scienze Morali, Mitteilungen 97 (1982): 63-77; Anthony Cutler, "The De Signis of Nicetas
Storiche e Filologiche, 5th ser., 33 (1924): 7-117; Rudolph Wittkower, "Chance, Choniates: A Reappraisal," American Journal of Archaeology 72 (1968): 113-17;
Time and Virtue," Journal of the Warburg Institute 1 (1937-38): 313-21; and RomilyJenkins, "The Bronze Athena at Byzantium, "Journal of Hellenic Studies
Corso, 133. 67 (1947): 31-33; idem, "Further Evidence Regarding the Bronze Athena at
41. Mango et al., 91. Byzantium," Annual of the British School at Athens 46 (1951): 72-74; W. Gurlitt,
42. Cosmas Indicopleustes, Topographie chritienne, ed. Wanda Wolska-Conus "Die grosse eherne Athena des Pheidias," in Analecta Graeciensia: Festschrift zur
(Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1968), 11.3. 42 Versammlung Deutscher Philologen und Schulmanner in Wien (Vienna, 1893),
43. Aelian, De natura animalium, 17.45. For its identification as the Cape 99-121;J. Fuhrer, "Zur Geschichte des Elagabalius und der Athena Parthenos
buffalo, see George Jennison, Animals for Show and Pleasure in Ancient Rome der Pheidias," Riimische Mitteilungen 7 (1892): 158-65; Otto Jahn, "Athene
(Manchester, Eng.: Manchester University Press, 1937), 36 n. 1. Parthenos, "Archaeologische Zeitung 6 (1848): 239.
44. Corso, 134-35, believed the animals to be models or embalmed A colossal head found during excavation of the Baths of Zeuxippos also has
specimens displayed for their value as curiosities. This hypothesis seems been identified as a work of 5th-century B.C.E. Athenian manufacture. See
unlikely. Stanley Casson, "Les fouilles de l'hippodrome de Constantinople," Gazette des
45. For examples of Hellenistic and Roman centaurs, see Martin Robertson, Beaux Arts 30 (1930): 215-42, esp. 236. All other statuary is certainly of Roman
A History of Greek Art, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), manufacture. See Guberti Bassett, 1996 (as in n. 1).
608; and Wolfgang Helbig, Fiihrer durch die oeffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer 76. See W. Kroll, "Plinius, Nachleben," RE, vol. 40, 430-32; J. Sillig, "Uber
Altertumer in Rom, 4th ed., vol. 2 (Tilbingen: Ernst Wasmuth, 1963), 203-4. das Ansehen der Naturgeschichte des Plinius im Mittelalter," Allegemeine
46.J. R. Martindale, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, vol. 2 Schulzeitung 9, nos. 52-53 (1833): 409-20; and F. E. Cranz and Paul Oscar
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 660-61; Mango et al., 89, Kristeller, Catalogus translationum et commentariorum: Medieval and Renaissance
93-94, 95; and Jonathan Bardill, "The Palace of Lausus and Nearby Monu- Latin Translations and Commentaries, vol. 4 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Univer-
ments in Constantinople: A Topographical Study," AmericanJournal ofArchaeol- sity of America Press, 1980), 301-2.
ogy 101 (1997): 67-68. 77. Donohue, 195.
47. Palladios, Palladius: The Lausiac History, trans. Robert T. Meyer (London: 78. Pliny, Hist. nat. 35.15-16.
Longmans, Green, 1965). 79. Athenagoras, Legatio 17, quoted in Donohue, 263.
48. Ibid., 18.
80. Themistius, Oration 26.316 a-b, quoted in Donohue, 451.
49. Ibid., 19.
81. For the range of Roman attitudes toward nature, see Mary Beagon,
50. Vickers and Francis, in Mango et al., 95. Contrast Bowra (as in n. 2), 5-6, Roman Nature (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992); and Richard Sorabji, Animal
who dates the formation of the collection to the 380s, and Corso, 129, who
Minds and Human Morals, the Origins of Western Debate (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell
places it after 392. University Press, 1993).
51. For historical summary and references, see Wolfgang Mfiller-Wiener, 82. Aristotle, Historia Animalium 6.5, 8.5, 9.12, remarks on the alien origins
Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls (Tfibingen: Ernst Wasmuth, 1977), 278.
of vultures as well as their mating habits and carnivorous nature.
52. Vickers and Francis, in Mango et al., 96.
83. See, for example, Aelian, De natura animalium 8.1, 17.45.
53. See Guberti Bassett; idem, 1996 (as in n. 1); and Stupperich (as in n. 1).
84. Christian Topography 11.7.
54. Paul Magdalino, "The Bath of Leo the Wise," in Maistor: Classical,
85. On pans, see W. H. Roscher, Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und
Byzantine and Renaissance Studies for Robert Browning, ed. Ann Moffatt (Can-
rdmischen Mythologie (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1897-1902), vol. 3, pt. 1, s.v.
berra: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1984), 225-40; idem, "Pan," 1379-1406.52. For centaurs, see Bethe, "Kentauren," in RE (as in n.
"The Bath of Leo the Wise and the 'Macedonian Renaissance' Revisited:
1), vol. 21, 172-78; and "Kentauren," in Roscher, vol. 2, pt. 2, 1032-88.
Topography, Iconography, Ceremonial, Ideology," Dumbarton Oaks Papers 42
86. See Jennison (as in n. 43); and Roland Auguet, Cruelty and Civilization:
(1988): 97-118; and Cyril Mango, "The Palace of Marina, the Poet Palladas
The Roman Games (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1972), 81-119.
and the Bath of Leo VI," Euphrosynon: Aphieroma ston Manole Chatzedake, vol. 1
87. Katherine Dunbabin, The Mosaics of Roman North Africa (Oxford: Claren-
(Athens: Ekdose tou Tameiou Archaiologikon Poron kai Apallotriose, 1991),
don Press, 1978), 76-77.
321-30.
88. Auguet (as in n. 86), 112-13.
55. Wittkower (as in n. 40) discusses Neoplatonic andJesuit interpretations
89. For Paphos, see Christine Kondoleon, Domestic and Divine: Roman
of early Christian writings in the 16th and 17th centuries.
56. Bardill (as in n. 46). Mosaics in the House of Dionysos (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1994).
For Piazza Armerina, see Andrea Carandini, Andreina Ricci, and Mariette de
57. Necati Dolunay and Rudolf Naumann, "Untersuchungen zwischen
Vos, Filosofiana, la villa di Piazza Armerina: Immagine di un aristocratico romano al
Divan Yolu und Adalet Sarayi 1964, "Istanbul Arkeoloji Miizerleri Yiligi (Annual of
tempo di Costantino (Palermo: S. F. Flaccovio, 1982); Dunbabin (as in n. 87),
the archaeological museums of Istanbul) 11-12 (1964): 136-40; and Rudolf
196-212; and R.J.A. Wilson, Piazza Armerina (London: Granada, 1983). Auguet
Naumann, "Vorbericht fiber die Ausgrabungen zwischen Mese und Antiochus-
(as in n. 86), 115-19, discusses the hunt mosaics in terms of animal
Palast 1964 in Istanbul," IstanbulerMitteilungen 15 (1965): 136-48.
58. Naumann (as in n. 57). acquisition.
59. Dolunay and Naumann (as in n. 57), 137. 90. The bibliography regarding the mosaic is vast and its dating is controver-
60. Raymond Janin, "Notes de topographie et d'histoire," Revue des Etudes sial. Suggestions range from the 5th century to the 7th. For a summary of
Byzantines 23 (1965): 254-57. arguments, see James Trilling, "The Soul of Empire: Style and Meaning in the
61. See Mfiller-Wiener (as in n. 51) for commentary and bibliography.
Mosaic Pavement of the Byzantine Imperial Palace in Constantinople,"
62. Bardill (as in n. 46), 73. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 43 (1989): 27-71. More recently, see the summary
63. Ibid., 73-75. report on the exploration and preservation of the mosaic by Werner Jobst,
64. Ibid., 75-83. Behcet Erdal, and Christian Gurtner, Istanbul: The Great Palace Mosaic (Istan-
65. Vickers and Francis, in Mango et al., 95-96. bul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayinlari, 1997), in which the date is set between 485
66. Corso, 129. and 550. Trilling interprets the mosaic's complex combination of natural
67. Ibid. images as a metaphor for the struggle between the civilized and the
uncivilized.
68. Elsner, 214-15; and Karim W. Arafat, Pausanias' Greece (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1996), 11. 91. On the use of animals as apotropaia, see Guberti Bassett, 89. On the
69. On Pausanias, see Christian Habicht, Pausanias' Guide to Ancient Greece hyena and its characteristics, see Aelian, De nat. an. 6.14, 7.22; O. Keller, Thiere
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Elsner, 125-55, and Arafat (as des classischen Alterthums (Innsbruck: Wagner'sche Universitfits-Buchhandlung,
in n. 68). On Egeria, see John Wilkinson, Itinerarium Egeriae: Egeria's Travels to 1887), 156-57; and idem, Die Antike Tierwelt, vol. 2 (Leipzig: W. Engelmann,
the Holy Land (Warminster, Eng.: Aris and Phillips, 1981). 1909-13), 89-90.
70. Pliny, Hist. nat. 36.9. 92. Eusebius of Caesarea, Vita Constantini 3.54.
71. Ibid. 36.11. 93. Athenagoras, Legatio 17, quoted in Donohue, 263.
72. Ibid. 36.20-23. 94. See, for example, the remarks in Eusebius, Demonstratio evangelica 6.20,
73. Ibid. 34.63. as cited by Donohue, 306.
74. On Pliny, see Jacob Isager, Pliny on Art and Society (London: Routledge, 95. See, generally, Werner Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, trans.
1991). Gilbert Highet (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1936); and Henri Marrou, A
75. The Constantinopolitan collection of antiquities must have numbered History of Education in Antiquity (London: Duckworth, 1956), 95-100. On the
in the hundreds. Sources specify the names of approximately 125 monuments. role of education and the mastery of rhetoric in late antiquity, see R. A. Kaster,
Hundreds of other statues are mentioned without name. Apart from the Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley:
figures in the Lausos collection, only six other statues can be documented University of California Press, 1988); and Peter Brown, Power and Persuasion in
reliably as Greek. These works include a second statue of Athena from Lindos; Late Antiquity (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992), esp. 35-70.
the Herakles Trihesperos by Lysippos; the Muses of Helicon, and a Zeus from 96. On the equation between muteness, stupidity, and barbarism, see
the sanctuary at Dodona. Other statues may also have been works of Greek Donohue, 122-23. For ancient views regarding speech and animals, see
manufacture, although the evidence is less clear. See esp. an Athena in the Sorabji (as in n. 81), 7-16, 80-86. For remarks by Eusebius on dumb xoana and
irrational animals, see Praeparatio evangelica 1.4.12 a-c, as cited by Donohue, 112. On the Porticus Metelli itself, see J. J. Pollitt, Art of Greece 1400-31
308. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965), 144, 146; idem, Art of Rome 753
97. For the notion of a mediating Kairos, see Abstracts (as in n. 1); and B.C.-337 A.D. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1960), 45, 55, 74, 109;
Mango et al. (as in n. 4). Ernest Nash, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome, vol. 2 (New York: Frederick A.
98. Plutarch, "On Listening to Lectures," 45C, Plutarch's Moralia, trans. F. C. Praeger, 1962), 254; L. Richardson Jr., A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient
Babbit, vol. 1 (London: W. Heinemann, 1927), 242-43. Rome (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 315, 317; and Diane
99. Stewart (as in n. 37), 163, 171. Favro, The Urban Image of Augustan Rome (Cambridge: Cambridge University
100. See Elizabeth Bartmann, "Decor et duplicatio: Pendants in Roman Press, 1996), 100, 170-71.
Sculptural Display," American Journal of Archaeology 92 (1988): 211-25; idem, 113. Ridgway (as in n. 111), chaps. 4, 5, 6. The great and glaring exception
"Sculptural Collecting and Display in the Private Realm," in Roman Art in the to this rule is, of course, the example of the Knidia, which survives in over two
Private Sphere, ed. Elaine Gazda (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,
hundred copies. Ridgway, 76, accounts for the selective phenomenon of
1991), 71-88.
101. See Guberti Bassett.
copying on the basis of subject matter, arguing that cult statues in public
settings and especially gods such as Aphrodite/Venus, with state cults at Rome,
102. Bowra (as in n. 2), 4-7, first considered the collection in this context,
were the images of choice. On the phenomenon of Knidia copying, see
an approach taken up by Mango et al., 93-94, and Corso, 131. On the conflict
Havelock (as in n. 22).
between paganism and Christianity, see Johannes Geffcken, The Last Days of
Greco-Roman Paganism, trans. Sabine MacCormack (Amsterdam: Elsevier/ 114. Bowra (as in n. 2); and Mango et al.
North Holland, 1978); and Frank Trombley, Hellenic Religion and Christianiza- 115. See Marguerite Pape, Griechische Kunstwerke aus Kriegsbeute und ihre
tion c. 370-529, 2 vols. (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994). offentliche Aufstellung in Rom-von der Eroberung von Syrakus bis in Augusteische
103. For a translation, see Clyde Pharr, The Theodosian Code (Princeton: Zeit, University of Hamburg, 1975.
Princeton University Press, 1952). 116. On the removal of the Herakles, see Plutarch, Fabius Maximus 22.6. For
104. Ibid., 16.10.8, 16.10.15, 16.10.18. text and translation, see Plutarch's Lives, vol. 3, trans. Bernadotte Perrin
105. Ibid., 16.10.25. (London: W. Heinemann, 1914-26). The statue was eventually taken to
106. On the role of sculpture in public settings, see George Hanfmann, From Constantinople, where it was set up in the Hippodrome. See Guberti Bassett.
Croesus to Constantine: The Cities of Western Asia Minor and Their Arts in Greek and 117. Elsner, 132-34, 144-50.
Roman Times (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1975), 57-74. 118. See the 4th- and 5th-century church historians Socrates Scholasticus,
107. Quoted in Pharr (as in n. 103). Historia ecclesiastica 1.16, and Sozomen, Historia ecclesiastica 2.5.4.
108. On the Theodosian desire to safeguard the artistic patrimony of the 119. For a general discussion, see Robin Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians
Roman Empire, see Claude Lepelley, "Le mus6e des statues divines: La (NewYork: Viking, 1986), 27-261. The notion of monolithic religious practice
volonte de sauvegarde le patrimoine artistique paien A l'6poque th6odosi- on the part of the pagan communities of the Roman Empire is not valid. Pagan
enne," Cahiers Archiologiques 42 (1994): 5-15. The pursuit of this policy in religion was made up of a wide range of overlapping and coexisting cults and
official sectors was not limited to sculpture. For a similar approach with respect cult practices. There was no single creed or doctrine that constituted pagan
to architecture, see Joseph Alchermes, "Spolia in Roman Cities of the Late religion. State cults existed at the imperial and civic level. Most cults were
Empire: Legislative Rationales and Architectural Reuse," Dumbarton Oaks purely regional and local, as in the case of Egypt and Syria. Others, such as the
Papers 48 (1994): 167-78. Mithras cult, had an international following but were essentially personal in
109. Prudentius, Contra Symmachum 1. 499-505: "deponas iam festa velim
nature and had no public manifestation. Nor were the cults static. New
puerilia, ritus / ridiculos tantoque indigna sacraria regno. / marmora tabenti
practices were introduced and older ones changed with the passage of time.
respergine tincta lavate, / o procures: liceat statuas consistere puras, /
The vitality and variety of religious experience in the later Roman world thus
artificum magnorum opera: haec pulcherrima nostrae / ornamenta fiant
made it likely that although viewers might agree on the antiquity and
patriae, nec decolor usus / in vitium versae monumenta coinquinet artis."
venerability of the Lausos cult images, they might also have a sense of
Translation quoted in Alchermes (as in n. 108), 171. detachment from them.
110. On Roman public collections and their display, see Giovanni Becatti,
"Opere d'Arte Greca nella Roma di Tiberio," Archeologia Classica 25 (1973): 120. See, for example, Hans Belting, Likeness and Presence: A History of the
18-54; Donald Strong, "Roman Museums," in Archaeology in Theory and Practice Image before the Era ofArt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), in which
(New York: Seminar Press, 1973), 247-64; J. J. Pollitt, "The Impact of Greek the possibility for the formal and aesthetic appreciation of images in the
Art on Rome," Transactions of the American Philological Association 108 (1978): premodern period is dismissed.
155-74. 121. For a discussion of style as an element of meaning in late antique art,
111. For a topographical list of Greek statuary and other works of art on see Ernst Kitzinger, Byzantine Art in the Making (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
display in Rome, see Pollitt (as in n. 110), 170-71; and Brunilde S. Ridgway, University Press, 1977); and, most recently, Elsner.
Roman Copies of Greek Sculpture (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 122. Athenagoras (as in n. 93).
1984), 109-11. 123. Elsner, 18.

The Lausos Collection

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

The Lausos Collection

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

"Excellent Offerings": The Lausos Collection in Constantinople

Author(s): Sarah Guberti Bassett

statue historically by attributing it to two sculptors, Skyllis and

known about the Lindian sanctuary. Located on the acropolis

Skyllis and Dipoinos, two Cretan sculptors who were born

work of sixth-century B.C.E. dedication. Egyptian patronage

tion about appearance, but Kedrenos A describes the figure as

3 Reconstruction of Pheidias' Zeus in the

4 After Lysippos, Kairos. Turin, Museo

taurelephant (TrcppEXS4tUs). Mango translates the word as

Theosokos in St. Erere

Ga? Palace ol LaUusu %- Octagon .phia .

Palace ofChalke? Senate House

4 'I&# Gret Palace

How that world might have been perceived is suggested by

7 Great Palace mosaic. Istanbul, Mosaic

8 Theodosian obelisk base,

9 Silver plate with

fundamental differences in the joint appreciation of beauty.

También podría gustarte