The rising and the existence of plastic and aesthetic surgery in early modern Europe did not have a specific pattern, but was completely different from one nation to another. Colleges of Physicians could only be found in some places in Europe; different Parliaments of Europe's nations did not always elevate being a surgeon to the dignity of a profession, and being a surgeon did not always come with corporate and municipal privileges, or with attractive stipends. Conversely, corporal punishments for treacherous surgeons were ubiquitous. Rhinoplasty falls into the category of what Ambroise Paré named "facial plastic surgery". The technique is a medical source from which many histories derive, one more fascinating than the other: the history of those whose nose was cut off (because of state betrayal, adultery, abjuration, or duelling with swords), the history of those who invented the surgery of nose reconstruction (e.g. SuSruta-samhita or Tagliacozzi?), the history of surgeries kept secret in early modern Europe (e.g. Tropea, Calabria, Leiden, Padua, Paris, Berlin), and so on. Where does the history of Nicolae Milescu the Snub-nosed fall in all of this? How much of this history do the Moldavian Chronicles record? Is there any "scholarly gossip" in the aristocratic and diplomatic environments at Constantinople? What exactly do the British ambassadors learn concerning Rhinoplasty when they meet Milescu? How do we "walk" within these histories, and why should we be interested at all? What is their stike for modernity? Such are the interrogations that this article seeks to provoke; its purpose is to question (and eventually, synchronise) histories, and not exclusively history, both in academic terms but also by reassessing the practical knowledge of the 17th century.