CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
CLARA SPECIAL ISSUE 2020 No. 1
Texture, Colour and Surface Appearance of the
Cividale Stuccoes
Bente Kiilerich
Abstract. The article discusses the material and aesthetic qualities of the female stucco saints in the
Tempietto Longobardo at Cividale del Friuli (c. AD 750). The stuccoes combine two artistic and technical
traditions: marble statuary of antique derivation and figural stucco relief. The surface texture of stucco
differs considerably from that of marble: while marble is shiny, stucco tends to be dull. Since colours
enhanced the visual impact of the saintly figures in the Tempietto, the polychromy – of which only very faint
traces remain – was probably the most important aspect of the sculpture. It is a matter of speculation
whether the viewer would have perceived any physical difference in surface appearance between the painted
stucco and painted stone when seen from a distance. In order to gain an idea of the aesthetic impact of the
reliefs when painted and perhaps gilded, the article presents hypothetical reconstructions of colour based on
the wall paintings preserved in the Tempietto.
Located in the gastaldaga, the seat of the Longobard king’s representative at Cividale del
Friuli (Udine), Sa Maria in Valle, better known as the Tempietto Longobardo, served as a
palatine chapel.1 The dedicatory inscription mentions ‘pies auctores’.2 These ‘pious
founders’ were plausibly the Longobard king, Aistulf (749–756), and his wife Giseltrude.
Upon the death of Aistulf, Giseltrude became a nun. A local tradition has it that a certain
Pertrude, by some scholars identified with Giseltrude, founded the monastery of Sa Maria
in Valle.3 Whatever the case, at least the importance bestowed upon female saints in the
decoration of the chapel, and the marked interest in issues of fashion and design evidenced
in their vestments, may bespeak the presence of a female patron.
1 Main publication L’Orange & Torp 1977–79 (Torp 1977: architecture; L’Orange 1979: sculpture). For
a summary of the research with bibliography, see Torp 2006. I am grateful to Alessandra Quendola and
Luca Villa for giving Hjalmar Torp and me access to the scaffolding that was set up on the west wall in
September 2010. This made it easier to check details and to study and take photographs of the stuccoes
and some of the paintings.
2 Mor 1982.
3 Mor 1977, 255.
1
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 1 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. West wall of aula with the six stucco figures above
painted lunette of Christ in a vine-scroll frame. Photo: Bente Kiilerich 2008 ©.
The Tempietto Longobardo consists of an aula covered by a groin vault and a lower
presbytery covered by three parallel barrel-vaults. The interior of the chapel is lavishly
decorated in various artistic media: architectural sculpture, including spolia, a black and
white opus sectile pavement, wall revetment in marble, wall paintings as well as figural and
ornamental stuccoes (Fig. 1). Fragments prove that, in addition to the six female stuccoes
that flank the window of the west wall of the aula, two further series, each consisting of
three figures, occupied the space between the windows of the north and south walls, thus
giving a total of twelve saints.4 Scattered tesserae indicate that mosaics decorated the vaults
of the presbytery and the aula.
4
Fragments of male or female figures, L’Orange 1979, 16, 23–25.
2
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
The enigmatic stucco saints
With its varied artistic material and media, the decorative programme of the Tempietto is
the outcome of a multi-cultured artistic milieu. The wall paintings follow eastern
iconographical models and are made in a Byzantine style, laid out according to a Byzantine
system of proportions.5 The painters may have fled from Constantinople, which in the
mid-eighth century was under iconoclastic rule, or they may have arrived from a RomanoByzantine centre, such as Rome or Ravenna (Aistulf conquered Ravenna in 751). Still, no
comparable paintings have survived from either place. As for the stuccoes, these are
particularly difficult to account for. In Neon’s Baptistery in Ravenna, stucco reliefs with
traces of polychromy are preserved in the zone between the mosaics and the marble
revetments.6 However, these reliefs, made some three centuries before the Tempietto,
differ considerably in style from the Cividale stuccoes and could therefore hardly have
served as direct ‘models’. The male figures at Ravenna are of varied types with somewhat
awkward proportions. And, whereas the comparatively small prophets in the baptistery
display swirling garment folds suggesting some sort of movement, the female saints at
Cividale are presented in a solemn hieratical stance. They stand as if frozen, devoid of any
possibility for motion. Moreover, the surface treatment also differs considerably: only at
Cividale do we encounter the elaboration of garment details, the varied ornamentation and
the concern with accessories and insignia. The closest comparison to the concept of largescale figures is furnished by the fragmentary single figures of prophets or apostles in high
relief placed under arcades from Vouneuil-sous-Biard, near Poitiers, c. 500. They are,
however, considerably less accomplished than the Cividale stuccoes.7
Stucco was modelled in both the East and West throughout Antiquity and the
Middle Ages, but since no figural works in stucco comparable to those in the Tempietto
survive, we are precluded from reaching a final conclusion with regard to provenance,
workshop organisation and other aspects of production.8 At least, the stucco figures and
open work vine scrolls were made in situ in the Tempietto, and thus can be designated
‘Longobard’ inasmuch as they were produced for Longobard patrons. The name Paganus,
preserved in a graffito in the niche of the central window on the western wall, may refer to
one of the artists. The stuccoes and the paintings are laid out according to a coherent
design and an identical system of proportions with stucco zone and painted zone of equal
height. It has been observed that the stuccoes were applied to the wall before the wall
paintings were executed, as some wall paintings overlap the stucco in places.9 Because of
5 Torp 1984, 92–103; Torp 2006, figs. on pp. 28–30. Torp 2006, 68 proposes the presence of a
Byzantine artist among the painters.
6 Pasquini 1999, 26–37, figs 19–37.
7 Sapin (ed.) 2009.
8 L’Orange 1979 discusses local as well as Sasanian decorations in stucco, concluding, 59 that the
Tempietto stuccoes belong to a Romano-Byzantine tradition of the West. Other researchers, for
instance Vaj 2002, has argued for Sasanian influence. For various views, see Pasquini 1999, 84–91.
9 Observation in situ, Torp 1953, 5.
3
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 2 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. West wall of aula, saints ‘D’, ‘E’ and ‘F’. Photo: Elio
Ciol, archive: Hjalmar Torp ©.
the integrated layout, it is reasonable to assume a common workshop. Given that the wallpainters also painted the stuccoes, it is likely that they used the same pigments for both
types of work. A chromatic correlation between the painted and the plastic saints can
therefore be surmised.
4
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
The perception of material:
stucco versus stone
Although the six over life-sized
(c. 1.90 to 2.00 m) female
figures (their identity being unknown, I shall refer to them by
the letters ‘A’ to ‘F’) are neither
free-standing nor worked fully
in the round, the high relief
makes them look like statues
standing with their backs
against the wall (Fig. 2). If the
intention was to present
statues, one may wonder why
stucco rather than stone was
Fig. 3 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Detail of saint ‘B’. employed at Cividale. The
obvious answer is that in the
Photo: Bente Kiilerich 2010 ©.
years around 750, no workshop
in Northern Italy, Rome, Constantinople or elsewhere had the required capacity to provide
newly-manufactured marble sculpture. The manufacture of statues and high relief in
marble had come to an end around 600.10 The carving of marble requires training and
expertise gained through years of practice; it is not a skill that can be revived ad hoc. Thus,
had the patrons at Cividale wanted marble, it would have entailed searching for antique
statues and re-carving them. But such re-carving would also have required considerable
skill. Working in stucco demanded qualified artisans, but it was not the same degree of
highly specialised expertise required as for marble. The lime or gypsum-based plaster was
easier to work, somewhat like fashioning figures of clay.11 Chalk and gypsum were readily
available and were much cheaper than marble.
To some extent, stucco could be a substitute for marble. Seen from a distance a
work in stucco may look not unlike one in stone. But stucco differs considerably from
stone with regard to technique: the working procedure of stone is subtractive, that of
stucco is additive.12 While marble is extremely well-suited to carving sculpture in the round,
the brittle stucco is unsuitable for large-scale statues, as it requires some sort of support. In
large-scale works it will generally be affixed to a background. In the Tempietto, the figures
were worked separately in successive layers of a gypsum-based plaster, with the innermost
layer adhering to the wall. The outer layer was fabricated from a finer, whiter matter than
the innermost core. The top part of each figure, especially the head, stands out from the
Kiilerich 1993, 95–97; Anderson 2016.
Penny 1993, 190–199 presents an overview of the characteristics of stucco. For technical aspects, see
Kühn 1995.
12 For subtracting versus adding as fundamental sculptural practices, see Wittkower 1979, 127.
10
11
5
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
Fig. 4 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Close-up
view of saint ‘C’ showing red on lips and eyes.
Photo: Bente Kiilerich 2010 ©.
B. Kiilerich
ground in higher relief than the body;
a characteristic trait is a slight tilt of
the head. When the figures had been
modelled, surface details, such as the
pearls that line ornamental bands and
insignia, were plastically added and
the patterns on garments were incised
with a pointed instrument (Fig. 3).13
While marble glimmers, plaster tends
to be dull, and the Tempietto saints,
although impressive for their sheer
size and solemn demeanour, lack a
vital element: colour. To brighten the
dull, grainy surface of the stucco, the
figures must have been painted.14 The
use of paint, and perhaps gilding,
would have made for a rich and varied
surface texture.
Colours, gilding and surface aesthetics
In connection with Galla Placidia’s Church of the Holy Cross (Santa Croce) in Ravenna,
erected around the mid-fifth century, Bishop Agnellus (556–570) uses the term gipsea
metalla sculta and metalla gipsea auro, which indicates that stuccoes could be gilded (Liber
pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis. De sancto Iohanne, XX).15 Writing in the ninth century, Hrabanus
Maurus mentions ‘plastice parietum ex gypso effigies signaque exprimere, pingereque coloribus’ (De
Universo XXI, 8), that is the practice of decorating walls with images (effigies) and figures
(signa) in stucco (plastice ex gypso) and painting them with colour.16 Thus there is little doubt
that late antique and medieval stucco was painted and that it may at times have been
gilded.17 A problem concerning the polychromy of stucco from various parts of the world
L’Orange 1979, 27–30. The metal cramps belong to nineteenth-century restorations.
As L’Orange 1979, 30, acknowledged: ‘Manca tuttavia il tocco finale: il colore.’ (‘the final touch
colour is missing’) without, however, entering into a discussion of potential hues. Pro polychromy:
Casadio et al. 1995, 48; Becherini et al. 2016, 375. Already Toesca 1927, 792, suggested that colour
might have covered the stuccoes.
15 Pavan 1980; Pasquini 1999, 24–26. Metallum (µεταλλον) indicates a metal, gold, silver, iron etc. The
term metalla is also used about gold and glass mosaics, suggesting luminous and shining substances in
general.
16 L’Orange 1979, 37; Kiilerich 2008, 10.
17 Möller 1995 presents later examples from Erfurt and Halberstadt, showing the continual practice of
colouring stucco.
13
14
6
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 5 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Wall painting, Christ and archangels, west wall. Photo:
Bente Kiilerich 2008 ©.
is that most pigments have faded. Moreover, in the instances when stuccoes do show vivid
colour, this has often turned out to be the result of modern restoration.18
It may be surprising that, except for red on lips of ‘B’, red on lips, irises and
eyebrows of ‘C’ (Fig. 4), purple on eyebrows of ‘D’ and some residue of blue as background for the vine scrolls in the zone below, there are no visible traces of colour on the
Cividale stuccoes.19 Residue of paint might be expected to be found not least in the depth
of folds.20 Still, the lack of colour traces may be explained by the fate of the stuccoes over
the years. After an earthquake in 1222, the interior of the chapel was open to the air until
See, e.g. from the Seljuk period, Heidemann et al. 2014, also addressing the issue of authenticity.
Colour is well-preserved on many Gandhara stuccoes, e.g. Bussagli 1996, figs on pages 28, 39, 68, 69,
82, 274, 337. Again, the paint has often been touched-up in recent times.
19 L’Orange 1979, 30, refers to the colours. Faint traces of red were visible from the scaffolding in 2010.
20 For instance, in some large-scaled, twelfth-century figures from Arles-sur-Tech in France, blue is
clearly visible in the depth of folds, Palazzo-Bertholon 2009, 291, fig. 1.
18
7
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
1242, during which time it was subject to degradation from humidity. Rain and snow may
cause paint layers to detach from the plaster. Furthermore, in the thirteenth century, some
of the original wall paintings were painted over with totally new motifs (the later paintings
were removed in the 1950s). The Longobard stuccoes may similarly have been judged oldfashioned and either left to decay on their own or given a heavy make-over in the form of
surface abrasion. In more recent times, restorations and interventions were carried out in
1860 and again in the years between 1902 and 1915. During these interventions, the badly
damaged saint ‘F’ at the far right was almost totally redone and some amount of
retouching was applied to all six statues.21 Thus, it is perhaps not all that surprising that
practically no traces of colour can be seen with the naked eye.22
Because of the lack of physical traces, the reconstruction of potential polychromy is bound
to be hypothetical. In order to suggest colours for the Tempietto saints we may take
recourse in written sources and archaeological and art historical material.23 Since the main
parts of the surfaces to be covered consist of garments, remains of textiles as well as
represented dress items furnish important comparative material.24 If the wall-painters were
also in charge of painting the stuccoes, the pigments in the paintings are of special
importance as they indicate chromatic preferences.
The wall paintings in the Tempietto
Paintings are preserved in the zone below the stuccoes: in the lunette on the west wall
Christ is flanked by the archangels Michael and Gabriel (cf. Fig. 1); the damaged lunette on
the north wall depicts the Virgin and Child, similarly flanked by the archangels. In the
lateral fields are single figures of male saints: a bishop and a soldier martyr (south), two
soldier martyrs (west) and two more military saints (north); the one to the left of the
lunette is inscribed Sanctus Hadrianus. All are presented frontally. Except for the bishop,
they are dressed in tunic and chlamys (cloak) and carry either cross or martyr’s crown. In
some instances, there are still remains of a painted architectural setting that provides a
backdrop for the saint.25
For detailed descriptions of the interventions, see Foramitti 2008. The reference to the refashioning
of the ornaments on the garments in 1860, (‘a tutte le statue vennero rimessi gli ornamenti deperiti nelle
vesti’, p. 99) may include a potential removal of paint, in accordance with a ‘classicistic’ aesthetic. For
their physical condition today, cf. Becherini et al. 2016.
22 In autumn 2010 samples of the stucco decoration were sent to a laboratory in Venice to be examined
for potential remains of pigments. Unfortunately, the results of the tests have to the best of my
knowledge never been published. (In email correspondence, November 2011, Lorenzo Lazzarini, head
of the Venice laboratory informed me that he was not allowed to reveal the results of the tests prior to
the forthcoming publication by Luca Villa).
23 Kiilerich 2008; Kiilerich 2010; Kiilerich 2015.
24 Kiilerich 2014, 440–444.
25 Colour photographs of the paintings in Torp 2006, pl. 16–23; Torp 2015, figs. 1–8, 12.
21
8
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
The colours of the wall paintings have changed over the centuries. Some pigments have
been subjected to various chemical reactions. Thus, the background, which in certain areas
has turned green, was originally blue. Where pigments have faded, the clothing is now
almost colourless. This means that the visual impression gained now differs considerably
from that of the early medieval period. Working in the Tempietto, Hjalmar Torp recorded
the following colours: ‘red and dark red tending to porphyry or purple, various yellow and
greens, blue, brown and two kinds of white’.26 Pigments from the Christ lunette have
subsequently been attested by chemical analysis as yellow ochre, red ochre, terra verde and
chalk white. The blue is a so-called ‘false blue’, a colour without blue pigments which
appears bluish to the eye.27 Variant purples, such as dark bluish purple and reddish purple,
were achieved by mixing red and false blue and by mixing red and black.28
Christ (in the lunette below the female saintly zone) has long light brown hair. His
tunic is a faded blue; his pallium (mantle) a medium red-violet. This hue is also used for the
clavi (ornamental bands) on the white tunics of the archangels. The archangels’ pallia are
yellow; their wings purplish red (Fig. 5). The Virgin (north lunette) wears a dark red-purple
palla (mantle) and a blue tunic, which in its present degraded state appears closer to green.
The Christ child is dressed in a light blue tunic with a cloak in golden yellow and purple.
His hair is a violet hue; the nimbus is dark blue.29 As in the western lunette, the archangels
wear white tunics with reddish purple clavi and yellow ochre mantles.
The male saints are of particular interest for exemplifying a deliberate use of
chromatic contrast, both within the individual figures and in the variation of colour from
one figure to the next. Yellow ochre is best preserved, whereas some bluish and purplish
hues can only with difficulty be discerned by use of digital zooming. Moving clockwise
from the south-east, the general disposition of main colours for tunic and mantle appears
as follows: on the south wall, the partly preserved bishop wears a white dalmatica (overtunic) with purple clavi, and the martyr wears a blue tunic and yellow chlamys. Turning the
corner onto the west wall, a badly preserved martyr is dressed in yellow, and possibly a
bluish-purple mantle. By contrast the martyr on the right side of the Christ lunette has a
now faded (bluish?) tunic with golden appliqué topped with a chlamys that retains some red.
The martyr Hadrianus on the adjacent north side wears a now faded purplish (?) tunic and
a dark yellow cloak (Fig. 6). Finally, on the north wall stands a martyr dressed in a yellow
tunic and purple cloak. In sum, the general pattern is dialectic, mainly alternating dark and
light, purple and golden yellow. The yellow clothes are usually modelled with a dark
reddish purple that may appear brownish.
26 Torp 1953, 4: ’rosso, e rosso oscuro che passa in rosso porfido o purpureo, differenti colori gialli e
verdi, azzuro, marrone e due specie di bianco’.
27 Cagnana et al. 2004.
28 Cagnana et al. 2004; Kiilerich 2008, 16.
29 Torp 1999, 586.
9
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 6 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Wall painting, two male saints, NW corner. Photo: Bente
Kiilerich 2010 ©.
As far as one can tell, the prevailing clothing colours on the walls are yellow and purple (of
which the reddish hue is better preserved than the bluish hue): a dark red purple for the
Virgin’s palla, a medium red-purple for Christ’s pallium and for the chlamys of the soldier
saint on the north wall. Reddish purple is also used for clavi. In addition to the artists’
obvious interest in chromatic variation, with no two saints being identically dressed, it is
noticeable that the individual parts of the outfits were originally endowed with various
kinds of ornaments: this is still faintly discernible in the yellow border appliqué that lines
the side and hem of one tunic.
It is reasonable to assume that the same artists painted the walls and the stuccoes,
but the modus operandi must have differed in some respects. While modelling and shading
are prevalent in the wall paintings, unshaded colour blocks are more likely for the stuccoes.
Furthermore, in the wall paintings the skin colour for the faces was created using terre verde,
in combination with and on top of which artists painted new coats of skin colour. The
stucco faces already had a three-dimensional, plastic appearance and did not need the same
10
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
degree of modelling. So, the manner of applying paint to the faces of the stucco saints
must have differed from that of the painting of the skin part of the two-dimensional
figures. Plausibly, faces and hands were only given a light sheen to smooth the plaster and
make the female faces lucid. The slight remains of red on lips, iris and eyebrow (if these
traces are indeed original!) may indicate pigments used in combination with other
pigments, or they may have been underpainting for gold.
Reconstructing lost colour
Although many possibilities exist with regard to the clothes of the female saints, certain
principles would have applied. First, the individual sculptures must have been painted with
an eye to the adjacent ones so that the chromatic scheme took account of all six figures.
Second, the colours of the jewelled and pearl-lined garments would have been chosen to
express a high social standing and followed the conventions of late antique and early
Byzantine courtly attire. The cut and design of their garments reflect Italo-Byzantine art
(e.g. San Vitale, Ravenna, Sa Maria Antiqua, Rome). To judge from the few extant
representations in stone and the archaeological evidence, Longobard fashion differed
considerably: While early Byzantine women wore high-belted wide-sleeved dalmatics,
Longobard women had low-set belts and adorned their garments with fibulae; and while
Byzantine ladies wore their hair tied up, the Longobards wore long braids hanging down
over the shoulders.30 Given that the individual outfits comprise several items, the intention
must have been to make each part of the outfit stand out: the more layers of expensive
clothing, the higher the prestige. In all figures, the outer garment leaves a part of the inner
garment visible; this suggests the use of contrasting colours, not unlike the clothing of the
male saints. For the individual dress elements, suggested hues are based on degree of
saliency and contrast effect and the chromatic range is decided from the evidence of
represented clothes and textile remains. The Byzantine predilection for strong colours, as
witnessed in the Theodora mosaic from San Vitale in Ravenna, makes it likely that the
patrons at Cividale wanted an equally lively effect, although not necessarily the exact same
colours as in the mosaic. At least, to be clearly visible, each pigment had to be highly
saturated and set off clearly from the neighbouring areas.31
The figures ‘C’ and ‘D’ (closest to the central window) wear identical garments: an
under-tunic, visible only at the wrists, a dalmatica and a palla, also known as a maphorion,
which covers the head and falls to below the middle of the body. This is identical to the
Virgin’s attire. To distinguish the saints from the Virgin, their garments probably differed
somewhat from her purple palla and blue dalmatica. Both items could have been purple or
in slightly different shades of purple, which is the most common in images of holy women.
Kiilerich 2009; Kiilerich 2014. For an overview of late antique garments, see Harlow 2004. Sculpted
images of Longobard women, Bibliotheca Ambrosiana, Milan, e.g. Priester 2004, fig. on p. 124.
31 In addition to the tentative reconstructions presented in the present article, I refer to Kiilerich 2008;
Kiilerich 2010 and Kiilerich 2015. See also Percivaldi 2015, 72, presenting two of my drawings.
30
11
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Another possibility is a combination of
purple and yellow. In the mosaics of the
cathedral of Euphrasius at Porec, c. 550,
John’s mother Elizabeth is represented
in a yellow mantle and purple tunic. If
depicted in contrasting colours rather
than sharing a single hue, it was easier
to tell the two dress items apart (Fig. 7).
A purple palla and yellow dalmatica is a
combination seen for instance in Sa
Maria Maggiore in Rome.32
The richest attire is worn by
saint ‘A’: tight-sleeved under-tunic,
wide-sleeved tunic, dalmatica, diagonal
dalmatica decorated with floral medallions and a palla thrown over her left
shoulder.33 Thus some five pieces of
clothing are shown. Patterned fabrics
Fig. 7 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Hypo- required the use34 of strong colours for
thetical reconstruction of polychromy on saints the best effect. For saint ‘A’, I have
‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’. Photo: Colour drawing, Bente suggested a red flower on a purple
ground encircled by a golden pearl
Kiilerich 2008 ©.
border, but other combinations are
obviously conceivable, for instance, a silk fragment from Antinoe in Egypt shows a related
design of a red flower, with green and yellow on a blue ground.35 Since ‘A’ is the most
lavishly dressed, her outfit most likely was imperial purple. Both ‘B’ and ‘E’ wear a tightsleeved under-tunic and a wide-sleeved tunic. On top of this ‘B’ displays a dalmatic with
clavi, and ‘E’ one without but with a broader decorated band at the hem. The dalmatica, or
over-tunic, was the standard female dress in Late Antiquity. It came in a variety of colours
and was made of linen, wool or silk. It could be decorated with clavi down the front, with
ornate hemlines, sleeve-bands and collars. The more elaborate the ornaments, the more
expensive the garment, and thus the higher status. It was usually worn with a high-set belt
in a different colour. Having proposed purple as the main colour for four saints, it is
plausible that ‘B’ and ‘E’ wore other hues. In the wall paintings, yellow is prevalent and
Kiilerich 2008, 18, fig. 21.
Originally ‘F’ was presumably dressed in much the same manner, but her apparel is for the main part
restored.
34 Kiilerich 2008, 15, fig. 12, the figure must be corrected with regard to its proper right shoulder: closeup study in 2010 revealed that the shoulder is damaged, and that the Juwelkrage continued here.
35 Martiniani-Reber 1997, no. 53, 106, with colour plate p. 21. The colours have faded.
32
33
12
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 8 San Zeno chapel, Basilica of Sa Prassede, Rome. Sa Prassede. Photo: Marconi, Genova.
Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale, hypothetical reconstruction of saint ‘E’. Colour drawing, Bente
Kiilerich 2008 ©.
in mosaics from Rome and Ravenna, female saints are often dressed in golden garments, a striking example being the procession of holy women in the nave of
Sant’Apollinare Nuovo, c. 560. Closer in time to the Tempietto, saints in Sa Prassede,
Rome, c. 810, don yellow attire (Fig. 8). Since the designs worn by ‘B’ and ‘E’ differ, they
plausibly also differed in colour. This means that if one of these saints wore a yellow tunic
the other may have sported another bright hue. Dalmatics with clavi are often depicted
white with dark bands. In that case, the stucco would have been covered with a layer of
chalk white and polished. White does not mean colourless, as the hue ranges from what
the medieval viewer might have seen as albus, candidus, niveus or lactus. Light yellow, mixed
from ochre and chalk white, or the red ochre used in the wall paintings could also have
been chosen. Finally, although I find purple less probable, it is worth calling attention to
the purple dalmatic with floral clavi worn by the lady next to Theodora in the San Vitale
13
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 9a-d Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Hypothetical reconstruction of polychromy on saint ‘B’:
yellow, white, red and purple versions. Photo: Bente Kiilerich 2010 and colour drawing 2019 ©.
mosaic. In fact, white, yellow, red and purple are all likely hues, which are also attested in
the wall paintings (Fig. 9 a–d).36
A marked colour contrast can be surmised for the ornaments of hemlines and
cuffs. Three different designs are modelled on the hem lines of figures ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘E’ (the
lower part of ‘F’ is not preserved). These intricate, regular-patterned borders would
certainly have stood out in salient hues to convey the impression of rich woven or
embroidered textiles. To give an idea of the range of possibilities, I present some tentative
reconstructions for the border of ‘B’, which sports a comparatively simple stylised vegetal
motif (Fig. 10 a-d), and for the broader border of ‘E’, which displays a more elaborate
design (Fig. 11 a-d). The choices of colour are based on the pigments used in the paintings.
36
For a discussion of analogous material and references, see Kiilerich 2008, with figs 19–21.
14
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 10a-d Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Suggestions of colours for hemline of saint ‘B’. Photo:
Bente Kiilerich 2010 and colour drawing 2019 ©.
Even with a limited palette of four to five basic hues – yellow, red, blue, green, purple –
the potential combinations are more numerous than the hypothetical reconstructions
show. The pearls were certainly white and must have closely followed the schema of the
wall paintings, where white pearls are visible on, for instance, the gospel book held by
Christ and on his nimbus. As for the shoes, these were undoubtedly red, the ubiquitous
choice for high-status footwear in Byzantium.
The objects that were made of gold in real life, namely crosses and crowns, could
have had an application of thin gold foil. Still, artists were able to mimic the effect of gold
in yellow ochre, as it was done in the paintings. Painted imitation of stones in jewelled
collars, crowns and crosses would have provided the female figures with a sense of
opulence.37 The intricate and rich Longobard gold jewellery with inlays in red, green and
One may refer to the practice of painted imitations of stones in crowns in medieval wooden
sculpture, e.g. Kollandsrud 2014, 54, fig. 3 (Virgin from Hedalen, Norway).
37
15
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
fe
Fig. 11a-d Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. Suggestions of colours for hemline of saint ‘E’. Photo:
Bente Kiilerich 2010 and colour drawing 2019 ©.
blue semi-precious stone gives a general idea of a Longobard jewelled aesthetic.38 The
pierced earlobes indicate that the finishing touches would have included the insertion of
earrings. These accessories must have been in a Byzantine style to match the richness of
the garments. Bronze wire with pendants of semi-precious stone or glass, a material used
in the ornamental stuccoes, could give the impression of earrings with precious stones.39
38 For example, a gold leaf cross with inlays in grenadine, lapis lazuli and aquamarine from Cividale, c.
650; Cividale, Museo Archaeologico Nazionale; Menis 1991, fig. 19.
39 For different types of early Byzantine earrings, see Baldini Lippolis 1999, 67–112. Although the
Longobards wore earrings, they were much less common than their favoured type of jewellery, the
fibula.
16
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Fig. 12 Tempietto Longobardo, Cividale. West wall of aula with hypothetical polychromy. Photo:
Colour drawing, Bente Kiilerich 2008 ©.
Saints and relics
In the present article I have focused on technical and material aspects of the stuccoes and
the visual and aesthetic impact of potential colour and gilding. There is little doubt that the
fine attire is influenced by late antique imperial and aristocratic fashion. However, these are
not fashion-shots of Longobard mannequins. The haloes and the crosses and crowns held
by the female figures stress that the ‘ladies of the court’ are saints. At this point it is
pertinent to take into account the religious setting of the images and the liturgical function
of the chapel. The Longobard king, Aistulf, is known to have been an avid collector of
relics. He brought relics (‘sanctorum corpora’) from various parts of the Roman Empire to his
headquarters at Pavia. S. Martino at Pavia, a church of all saints (‘omnium sanctorum’), which
is said to have housed relics of eighteen saints.40 It may be a coincidence, still, with the
original twelve (female) stucco saints and six male painted saints, the holy martyrs in the
40
For the argument, see Torp 2006, 14, 66.
17
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Tempietto similarly numbered eighteen. As for the relics that can be imagined to have
been originally present in the chapel, first-hand information as well as physical evidence is
lacking. However, referring to the year 1242, written sources mention that relics were
found under the altar of the Tempietto in a ‘very old reliquary’ (‘capsa multum antiqua’). In
any event, both the three-dimensional female and the two-dimensional male representations of saints reflect a cult of martyrs and must be understood in this connection.
Conclusion
It is uncertain whether the eighth-century viewer perceived the stucco images as gipsea
sculta, sculpted stuccoes, or as statues in the antique tradition, and whether that distinction
mattered at all. If painted, the coarseness of the material would not have been a problem.
In fact, seen from a distance, the viewer would hardly have been able to tell whether the
material under the paint layer was stone or stucco. When estimating the nature of the
polychromy, the very coarseness of the fabric suggests that whereas a fine marble invited a
nuanced and subtle use of pigments, stucco called for opaque paint layers. Based on
analogy, and especially on the pigments used in the Tempietto wall paintings, we have
proposed purple and golden yellow as the main hues, while the ornaments and borders of
the dresses must have been set in strong, contrasting colours. Green is likely to have been
applied as a contrast to red in the textile ornaments. Since the background was probably
blue, this colour must have been confined to ornamental details in the garments.
Variations of white would have been significant both for the many pearl borders and as a
variant hue. In the reconstruction of polychromy, attention must be paid not only to the
individual figure but to the aesthetic impact of the sculpted and painted stuccoes as a
whole (Fig. 12).
By now, the colour has disappeared, leaving the elongated female figures somewhat
ghostlike. Originally, the interplay of colour on surfaces, multi-coloured garments and
gilded crowns and crosses, as well as glass and metal accessories, animated the stuccoes
and made them come alive. By means of polychromy, the figures appeared as convincing
physical presences of female saints. In the palatine chapel, the artists succeeded in
marrying courtly and heavenly splendour.
Bente Kiilerich
Professor, Art History
Dept of linguistic, literary and aesthetic studies
University of Bergen
Pb 7805
N-5020 Bergen
bente.kiilerich@uib.no
18
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Bibliography
Anderson, B. 2016: ‘The Disappearing Imperial Statue. Toward a Social Approach’, in T.
M. Kristensen & B. Poulsen (ed.). The Afterlife of Greek and Roman Sculpture: late antique
responses and practices, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 290-309.
Baldini Lippolis, I. 1999: L’oreficeria nell’impero di Costantinopoli tra IV e VI secolo, Bari:
Edipuglia.
Becherini, F. et al. 2016: ‘Microclimatic Monitoring for the Investigation of the Different
State of Conservation of the Stucco Statues of the Longobard Temple in Cividale del Friuli
(Udine, Italy)’, J. Cult 18: 375-379.
Bussagli, M. 1996: L’art du Gandhãra, Paris: La Pochothèque.
Cagnana, A. et al. 2004: ‘Indagini archeometriche sui materiali da costruzione del
“Tempietto” di Santa Maria in Valle di Cividale del Friuli. I parte : Gli affreschi
altomedievali’, Archeologia dell’architettura 8: 69-87.
Casadio, P. et al. 1995: ‘Zur Stuckdekoration des “Tempietto Longobardo” in Cividale:
Technische und naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungsergebnisse’, in M. Exner (ed.). Stuck
des hohen und frühen Mittelalters, Munich: Lipp Verlag, 37-51.
Danford, R. 2019: ‘Materials, Techniques, and Meanings of the Stucco Reliefs in Cividale
del Friuli’, in M. Bushart, H. Haug & S. Staaschus (ed.). Unzeitgemässe Techniken. Historische
Narrative künstlerischer Verfahren, Vienna: Böhlau, 29-46.
Foramitti, V. 2008: Il Tempietto Longobardo nell’ottocento, Udine: Edizioni del Confine.
Harlow, M. 2004: ‘Female Dress, Third – Sixth Century: The Messages in the Media?’,
Antiquité Tardive 12: 203-215.
Heidemann, S. et al. 2014: ‘The large Audience: Life-sized Stucco Figures of Royal Princes
from the Seljuq Period’, Muqarnas 31: 35-71.
Kiilerich, B. 1993: ‘Sculpture in the round in the Early Byzantine Period: Constantinople
and the East’, in L. Rydén & J.O. Rosenqvist (ed.). Aspects of Late Antiquity and Early
Byzantium, Stockholm: Svenska Forskningsinstitutet Istanbul, 85-97.
Kiilerich, B. 2008: ‘Colour and Context: Reconstructing the Polychromy of the Stucco
Saints in the Tempietto Longobardo at Cividale’, Arte Medievale 7: 9-24.
19
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Kiilerich, B. 2009: ‘Antik mode i langobardisk regi’, Klassisk Forum 1: 38-51.
Kiilerich, B. 2010: ‘The Rhetoric of Materials in the Tempietto Longobardo at Cividale’, in
V. Pace (ed.). L’VIII secolo: un secolo inquieto, Cividale del Friuli: Comune di Cividale, 93-102.
Kiilerich, B. 2014: ‘Attire and Personal Appearance in Byzantium’, in D. Sakel (ed.).
Byzantine Culture. Papers from the Conference ‘Byzantine Days of Istanbul’ May 21–23, 2010,
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 439-451.
Kiilerich, B. 2015: ‘The Polychromy of Longobard Stuccoes’, Exploring the Middle Ages,
Bergen University, November 2015 https://uib.academia.edu/BenteKiilerich.
Kiilerich, B. Forthcoming: Colour in Late Antique Art: an Aesthetic Study of Polychromy and
Mosaics.
Kollandsrud, K. 2014: ‘A Perspective on Medieval Perception of Norwegian Church Art’,
in N.L.W. Streeton & K. Kollandsrud (ed.). Paint and Piety. Collected Essays on Medieval
Painting and Polychrome Sculpture, London: Archeotype, 51-66.
Kühn, H. 1995: ‘Was ist Stuck? Arten – Zusammensetzung – Geschichtliches’, in M.
Exner (ed.). Stuck des hohen und frühen Mittelalters, Munich: Lipp Verlag, 17-24.
L’Orange, H.P. 1979: Il Tempietto longobardo di Cividale, 3. La scultura in stucco e in pietra del
Tempietto, Rome: Bretschneider.
L’Orange, H.P. & H. Torp. 1977/79: Il Tempietto longobardo di Cividale, vols. I–III, Rome:
Bretschneider.
Martiniani-Reber, M. 1997: Textiles et mode sassanides, Paris: Louvre.
Menis, G.C. 1991: Italia longobarda, Venice: Marsilio.
Möller, R. 1995: ‘Zur Farbigkeit mittelalterlicher Stuckplastik’, in M. Exner (ed.). Stuck des
hohen und frühen Mittelalters, Munich: Lipp Verlag, 79-93.
Mor, C.G. 1977: ‘Notizie storiche sul monastero di Santa Maria in Valle’, in Torp (ed.)
1977, 245-256.
Mor, C.G. 1982: ‘La grande iscrizione dipinta del Tempietto Longobardo di Cividale’,
ActaAAHist 8 (2): 95-122.
20
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Palazzo-Bertholon, B. 2009: ‘Le décor de stuc autour de l’an mil: aspects techniques d’une
production artistique disparue’, Les Cahiers de Saint-Michel de Cuxa XL: 285-298.
Pasquini, L. 1999: La decorazione a stucco in Italia fra tardo antico e alto medioevo, Ravenna:
Longo editore.
Pavan, G. 1980: ‘Il problema della decorazione a stucco nelle basiliche ravennati alla luce
degli ultimi ritrovamenti’, XXVII corso di cultura sull’arte ravennate e bizantina 127: 137-165.
Penny, N. 1993: The Materials of Sculpture, Yale: Yale University Press.
Percivaldi, E. 2015: ‘Il Tempietto delle meraviglie’, Medioevo 217: 64-82.
Priester, K. 2004: Geschichte der Langobarden. Gesellschaft – Kultur – Alltagsleben, Stuttgart:
Theiss.
Sapin, C. (ed.) 2009: Les stucs de l’antiquité tardive de Vouneuil-sous-Biard, Paris: CNRS.
Toesca, P. 1927: Storia dell’arte italiana. Il medioevo, vols. II, Turin: Unione tipografica –
editrice torinese.
Torp, H. 1953: ‘Note sugli affreschi più antichi dell’oratorio di S. Maria in Valle à Cividale’,
Atti 2. Congresso internazionale si Studi sull’Alto Medioevo (CISAM), Spoleto: Centro italiano di
studi sull’ alto medioevo, 3-15.
Torp, H. (ed.) 1977: Il Tempietto longobardo di Cividale: L’architettura del Tempietto, Rome:
Bretschneider.
Torp, H. 1984: The Integrating System of Proportion in Byzantine Art, Rome: Bretschneider.
Torp, H. 1999: ‘Una Vergine Hodighitria del periodo iconoclastico nel ‘Tempietto
Longobardo’ di Cividale’, in A. Cadei & A.M. Romanini (ed.). Arte d’occidente. Temi e metodi.
Studi in onore di A. M. Romanini, vol. II, Rome: Edizioni Sintesi Informazione, 583-599.
Torp, H. 2006: Il Tempietto longobardo. La cappella palatina di Cividale, Cividale: Comune di
Cividale.
Torp, H. 2015: ‘Lo sfondo storico-iconografico dell’immagine di Cristo nel Tempietto
Longobardo di Cividale’, ActaAAHist 28 (14): 73-93.
21
CLARA
Special issue 2020 No. 1
B. Kiilerich
Vaj, I. 2002: ‘Il Tempietto di Cividale e gli stucchi omayyadi’, in S. Lusuardi Siena (ed.).
Cividale Longobarda. Materiali per una rilettura archeologica, Milan: I.S.U. Università Cattolica,
175-204.
Wittkower, R. 1979: Sculpture, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
22