Overview and Technical Description
The Zoe panel was rediscoved in July 1934 and work began in August by the Byzantine Institute led by Thomas Whittemore and a group of eleven craftsmen.
Originally the panel was a square 2.40 meters widea nd 2.44 meters high. A strip of the mosaic, 35cm. in height, extending across the lower part, is now missing. Above this more tessellae are gone, exposing sections of the setting bed, and there are breaks in the mosaics surrounding the three heads, and in both Constantine inscriptions. These breaks strike an incongruous note and create a vital disorder in the picture. Indeed, scrutiny reveals the fact that all the existing heads have been substituted for earlier ones and that the ensuing tonal discord has rendered the original compostion displastic and fragmentary.
The Zoe panel is surrounded by a marble cove moulding, serving not only its purpose as a frame but as a transistion from the panel to the marble face of the wall. The background is formed of horozontal rows of small gold tessellae. Silver cubes, so freely used in mosaic backgrounds of the sixth, ninth and tenth centuries, does not appear here. The general surface of the mosaic is not limited to one plane, but is slighly wavy, thus creating subtle and varied reflections of light which give rise to color vibration and atmosphere.
The seated figure of Christ, considerable larger that that of the Emperor and Empress, dominates the standing figures beside it by its size, its dignity, and the depth of the blue in His vestments. These contributary figures lend emphasis to this domination by the slight inclination of the body, the turning of the head, the direction of the eyes, and the gesture of the offering of the gifts. Even the jewels of the imperial robes reappear on the book of the Gospels on on the throne in this progressive ordering of matter, which reaches through the hand of Christ a focal point in the beholder.
The face of Christ is in the palest flesh-tinted marble, His eyes are violet and light brown hair, parted in the middle, falls wavy to the back of the neck with three small locks on the brow. The moustashe and beard are darker in tone than the hair. The cruciform halo is outlined in deep red. Christ's right hand is raised in blessin and He is clad in a blue chiton and himation. The chiton is dorned with a wide gold clavus. Both vestments give the impression of being of soft wool, with shades from light amethyst to black violet. The blue glass with which they are wrought, however, because of its complete lack of air-holes, has not the luminosity of ninth and tenth century glass used to represent the dye and weave of garments of the figures in the Narthex and Vestibule. Christ's throne is a palace throne of great splendor; He sits on a blue-green cushion with ends capped in rossettes in sealing-wax red and light olive-green. The feet of Christ rest on a circular foot-stool of gold lined with red, only traces of which remain.
The emperor is offering Christ the traditional apokombiom, his gift of a purse of gold coins. His face is round and ruddy. The emperor wears the stemma, a circlet of giold encrusted with jewels and pearls. The prependulia hanging fron the crown are strings of pearls. His nimbus is outlined in blue. Cosnatntine is vested in the imperil chiton, divitisson and loros. The vestments are made of glass mosic, except for the pearls and the centers of the red gems. His inscription reads Constantine, in Christ the God, Autocrat, faithful King of the Romans, Monomachos.
The Byzantine scholar and author Natalia Teteriatnikov believes the money bag in the hands of the Emperor is a unique iconographic feature and commemorates the ongoing ritual of the distribution of thiry pounds of gold coin to the clergy of Hagia Sophia on Holy Saturday. She believes the scroll is not a chrysobull but a list of the clerics and the amount they were to receive from the donation.
The figure of the Empress Zoes is much shorter. She holds a scroll of parchment enumerating imperail donantions to the Great Chrch. She has a plump face with a heavy nose, full brow and large yellow-gray eyes. Her rosebud painted mouth is small and her chin hs a semi-circular cleft. Her hair seen below the crown is light brown. Her face has been made up like a doll, which reflects her famous and persistant persuit of youth. Here in realistic portraiture is the doting, still popular old Empress without single wrinkle in her face in spite of her nearly 70 years.
The Empress wears a crown called a modiolos. On either side hang prependulia, which are composed of beryls and garnets separated by pearls. The ear ring of the Empress is a circle of pearls. She is dressed in full Byzantine court attire, clad in chiton, divitission, loros and shoulder piece. A part of the setting bed of the garments can still be seen and we can see the original fresco used by the mosaicist as a guide to setting the cubes. Above the head of the empress are three lines of inscriptions made in black-violet tessellae; they read - Zoe, the most pious Augusta.
Dating of the Zoe Panel
The mosaic was created during the reign of the Empress - Austa Zoe who reigned in Constantinople from 1028-50. Zoe was married three tmes. Her first husband ws Romanos III Argyros (1028-34); the second was Michael IV the Paphlagonian 1041-2 and after the short reign of her adopted son, Michael V Kalaphates (1041-42), she married Constantine XI Monomachos (1042-55).
Although the head of this mosaic is of Constantine, the rest of the figure was intended to represent either Romanos or Michael. The former of these two emperors seems to be more probable. Therefore the original mosaic dates from between 1028 and 1034.
The reason for the substitution of Constantine's head and name for that of Romanos could be one of three reasons. One, Zoe wanted to update the mosaic to feature her third, last husband and at the same time wanted her own portrait updated, perhaps to make it more pleasing, for her head - and that of Christ was replaced at the same time.
The alternate supposition may, on the contrary, be upheld by certain facts. On the 18th of April 1042 the nephew and successor of Michael IV, Michael V, who had attained the throne through Zoe's devotion, banished his adopted mother to the Island of Prinkipo. On the next day sentence of exile was proclaimed. What followed is well known: a popular revolt supported by Norman mercenaries; the proclaimation of Zoe and her sister Theodora as co-empresses; the resistance, flight, and death of Michael; and finally, two months later, the marriage of Zoe with Constantine Monomachos.
The alteration of this mosaic may be considered in the light of these events. We may presume that it was Michael V who, after Zoe's departure from the city, destroyed the effigy of the fallen empress. The portrait of Romanus III would then have been replaced by that of Constantine after mid-June 1042, when Zoe, reinstated and once again married, restored her own portrait. If this is true, the decisive event which deterimed the the alterations in the mosaic took place in the last days of Michael V's reign.
It hardly seems possible that the image of the empress should have been disfigured during the riots that followed the proclamation of her exile. To be sure Michael and his partisans hated her violently, and judging by what we know of the sacrileges committed by them from, we can assume that the sanctity of the place woukd not have restrained them from destroying her likeness, but from the very outset of the struggle, the Great Church was probably occupied by supporters of the exiled empress. Thus, the figure could have been mutilated only between the 18th and 20th of April, that is between the dethronement of Zoe and the first disturbances which followed this event two days later. In this case, Michael's action would not have been thata of a man taking vengeance onthe image of an enemy in a moment of anger. Indeed, the destruction of Zoe's portrait whould hve done deliberately and with an air of legality. Such an attitude on the part of Michael is more probable in that all his actions against the empress he showed himself - and for and for an obvious reason - exceptionally circumspect in regard to the law. The sentence of exile, to become effective, was approved by the Senate, and afterwards proclaimed by an official. Seldom had the Byzantine usurpers surrounded themselves with such scrupulous procedure.
But neither of the two historical interpretations suggest explains the supersession of one head of Christ by another. No satisfactory explanation of this change is forthcoming, unless it is tentatively assumed that the artist drawing new portraits of Zoe and Constantine supplanted the head of Christ with a new creation in the interests of the unity of the painting.
This explanation may be supported by the fact that the cubes in the faces are relatively larger than those in the hands and even those in the vestments, proving that the original mosaic heads were of finer workmanship.
The previous text has been edited from The Mosaics of Hagia Sophia at Istanbul, Third Prelimary Report, Work Done in 1935-1938, which was published in 1942.