The Archaeological Museum of Nikopolis is a museum in Nicopolis, in the Preveza regional unit in Epiros. Among its many interesting items on display is a "marble head of Faustina, wife of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who appears to suffer from strabismus." This is the only photo I could find online of this artifact. But I don't believe it's really her. I desperately want to see this artifact from all angles and if anyone has better or different photos of it, please let me know. I'm very interested in the appearance of the chignon that would be on the back of her head. I'm very interested, because IF it were really of the young empress, it might demonstrate that she had strabismus, a disorder in which both eyes do not line up in the same direction. But I don't think it's her on the basis of the hairstyle. The coiffure on the figure in the statue has only four horizontal waves in the hair on each side of the midline part. This hairstyle with the horizontal waves is only compatible with the Beckmann type 3 hairstyle, which I discuss here. Here is a sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens. It is thought to depict Faustina the Younger and illustrates a hairstyle more consistent with that seen on her coins. Portrait head of the empress Faustina the Younger. Thasian marble. Found in Athens. Accession number: 442. National Archaeological Museum of Athens. Athens, Greece. Photo by George E. Koronaios and used by permission. The same sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens. Photo by Giovanni Dall'Orto and used by permission. Here is an aureus depicting her in this hairstyle. Aureus, RIC 503. Künker, Auction 304, lot 1183, 19 March 2018. And here is a denarius from my collection depicting her in this hairstyle as well. Faustina II, AD 147-175. Roman AR denarius, 3.13 g 19 mm. Rome, mid AD 151-mid AD 152. Obv: FAVSTINA AVG ANTONINI AVG PII FIL, bare-headed and draped bust, right (Beckmann type 3 hairstyle). Rev: CONCORDIA, Concordia standing facing, head right, holding skirt and cornucopiae. Refs: RIC 500b(6); BMCRE 1078-79; Cohen/RSC 44; RCV 4703; CRE 163. And a sestertius from my collection. Faustina II, AD 147-175. Roman orichalcum sestertius, 24.00 g, 32.2 mm, 5 h. Rome, mid AD 151-mid AD 152. Obv: FAVSTINA AVG ANTONINI AVG PII FIL, bare-headed and draped bust, right (Beckmann type 3 hairstyle). Rev: VENVS S C, Venus standing left, holding apple and scepter. Refs: RIC 1387b; BMCRE 2168; Cohen 250; RCV --; Strack 1311. The empress has FIVE horizontal waves on this statue and these coins, not four. Moreover, no other statues depict the empress with strabismus. To the best of my knowledge, no ancient sources report she suffered from that eye condition. Another pet peeve -- the curators of the museum date that statue to AD 169-180, but we know on the basis of numismatic evidence that she wore this hairstyle for only an exceptionally brief period in AD 151-152. I don't think it's her.
My guess from a quick wikipedia list of Roman empresses Maybe Lucilla? the statues also show strabismic eyes!
VERY good hypothesis, @JayAg47! Here's Lucilla in her "hairstyle b" as classified by Szaivert. Lucilla, AD 164-169. Roman orichalcum sestertius, 24.10 g, 30.7 mm, 1 h. Rome, AD 166. Obv: LVCILLAE AVG ANTONINI AVG F, bust of Lucilla, draped, right. Rev: IVNONI LVCINAE S C, Juno, seated left on throne, holding flower on extended right hand and swaddled infant in left hand. Refs: RIC 1747; BMCRE 1154-1160; Cohen 37; RCV 5504; MIR 9.
But why are you assuming that every small provincial statue intended to represent an empress, perhaps for display in a private home, would necessarily reproduce her contemporaneous hairstyle accurately? Presumably they were copied from coins or other busts -- not necessarily current ones -- and wouldn't necessarily show her as she was at the time the statue was sculpted. Also, even if the statute was, in fact, intended to represent Faustina II, I don't think it necessarily proves anything about whether she had strabismus. If she did have it, and that fact were widely known throughout the empire to every local sculptor, wouldn't there likely be some reference to it in the surviving literary sources?
To add to @DonnaML 's comment, one also has to remember that representations of Roman royalty were not photographs. They tended to idealize the subject's features. Physical anomalies were typically "corrected." If the eyes are uneven, Occam's Razor should first lead one to suspect the craftsmanship of the sculptor. I like the Lucilla theory.
Agree with you RC. Not only is the hairstyle not hers, the facial structure doesn't appear to be. I think that we all know whoes wife it is but nobody has the "him" to say it: Why even assume it's an empress when it may just be some wealthy Roman's wife? To keep it legal, my latest Faustina, the mom:
I think it's just some unknown patrician lady who adopted the hairstyle that was popular at the time, just as women all over the US adopted the Farrah coiffure in the late 70s or -- as someone of your generation might better relate to, @Ryro -- the Jennifer Aniston hairdo in the late 90s.
