Ellie - Perhaps I should have said "art style" indicator instead of "cultural indicator"
I can only speak for myself in this case, but here's my take on it:
For the figures you showed here, I got between 4.1 and 6.1 heads measured in the same way I measured the nymphs. They are a bit less consistent, but especially the priest (4.4 heads) would fit right in proportion wise
My guess is that the faces are given emphasis because these scenes would be viewed from a distance, and they are quite dramatic- not just saints standing around.
By the way, the best match I found so far is in the Zodiac of BNF Lat. 7028. The Gemini are completely in line with VM proportions.
I can only speak for myself in this case, but here's my take on it:
- As we have seen in the lion thread, the distinctions between Europe/non-Europe and Ancient/Medieval are not always as strict as we may think. Medieval Europeans used plenty of older, foreign imagery.
- Apart from that, there can be convergent evolution.
- The fact that it indicates a style or cultural aspect does not mean that it points to a specific one. Big heads are found in European art, in Carolingian manuscripts, in Coptic art, Roman, Persian, African, Bactrian...
- It's not just big heads - it's the consistent division of the body in four roughly equal parts marked by chin, navel and knee. Like Searcher found out, these are apparently the proportions of a one-year-old.
For the figures you showed here, I got between 4.1 and 6.1 heads measured in the same way I measured the nymphs. They are a bit less consistent, but especially the priest (4.4 heads) would fit right in proportion wise
My guess is that the faces are given emphasis because these scenes would be viewed from a distance, and they are quite dramatic- not just saints standing around.
By the way, the best match I found so far is in the Zodiac of BNF Lat. 7028. The Gemini are completely in line with VM proportions.