A History of Roman Art. Steven L. Tuck
The issue of judging art and its values and class connections is an important topic and one that art historians debate, as did the Romans.
FEMALE PORTRAITURE AND EMBEDDED VALUES
In 1711 in southern Italy workmen digging a well hit a set of ancient statues that were part of the remains of the city of Herculaneum, destroyed by the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE. Two of these have become known as the Large and Small Herculaneum Woman statues. Both of the standing women are dressed in a combination of a dress and mantle, the traditional dress for elite Roman women. The Large Herculaneum Woman has her mantle pulled up to cover her head, a sign of piety. The Small Herculaneum Woman seems to be younger, possibly unmarried, and pulls her mantle around her body in a gesture of modesty.
If these were unique statues, they might not be worth discussing here, but they are not. Far from it. In fact, more than 180 copies or variations of the Large Woman type and 160 of the Small Woman type are now known along with a number of variations in relief on tombstones and sarcophagi. The majority have individualized facial features, some amounting to portraits, indicating that the types were widespread throughout the Roman world. Their popularity derived at least in part from their ability to convey elite female values through the figures’ poses and dress.
1.8 Trebonianus Gallus bronze portrait, 251–253 CE, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. H 95 in (241.3 cm).
Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
1.9a and 1.9b Small Herculaneum Woman Statue, 1st cent. CE, Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, H 71 ¼ in (1.8 m), and Large Herculaneum Woman Statue, 1st cent. CE, Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, H 78 in (1.98 m).
Source: (a) © Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. Photos: Ingrid Geske. (b) Bridgeman Images.
ROMANS JUDGING ROMAN ART: VALUES AND CLASS
On the issue of judging art, its projected values, and the class connections it conveys, we need to avoid bringing our own class values and judgments with us as we examine the art. However, we need to be aware of and take into account ancient Roman class conventions and judgments. For this, the study of the art can be greatly helped by ancient literary sources in which authors comment on the art, its meaning, and contemporary attitudes towards it. Nowhere is that made more explicit than for still life paintings. A property in Pompeii, labeled on the outside in a for rent sign as the Praedia (estate) of Julia Felix, was decorated on the interior with a series of wall paintings. A number of these featured panels of still life scenes in which the images concentrated on food products. But these were food products of two particular types. One of these is obsonia and the other is xenia.
obsonia
literally spoils or prizes, prepared food as a subject for painting in Hellenistic art.
xenia
guest gifts, a class of paintings described by the Roman architectural author Vitruvius, including provisions such as poultry, eggs, vegetables, fruit, and the like.
To us the subjects of the paintings might seem generic, which they were, and unworthy of comment other than whether they reflected the use of space. We might expect that these food scenes would be found in or around food preparation, storage, or serving areas, notably the latter, perhaps dining rooms. That does not seem to be the case for the Romans, who did not carry the same unspoken expectations of space and use and decoration that we do. The subjects, however, carried connotations of class to a Roman viewer. Pliny the Elder, a contemporary author from the area writing on painters and paintings, notes (Natural History 37),
1.10 Still life paintings, Praedia of Julia Felix, Pompeii, c. 70 CE. Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli. H 28 ¾ in (73 cm).
Photo courtesy Steven L. Tuck.
triclinium
Roman dining room laid out for nine diners reclining on three couches (in Greek: tri cline) from which the room gets its name.
We must now, however, make some mention of those artists who acquired fame by the pencil in an inferior style of painting. Among these was Piræicus, inferior to few of the painters in skill. I am not sure that he did not do injustice to himself by the choice of his subjects … His subjects were barbers’ shops, cobblers’ stalls, jackasses, eatables, and the like, and to these he was indebted for his epithet of “Ithyparographos,” “Painter of Low Subjects.”
tablinum
a room in the Roman house off the atrium and directly opposite the front door. It was the major formal reception room, used to receive clients and conduct business.
In this digression, Pliny makes it clear that the painter could be skilled, but his subject is inferior and among those low forms was still life. Such a judgment is critically important evidence for us of what the Romans thought of painting and while we are historians of art, not critics of it, that in no way means that we should not be aware of the Roman attitudes towards art. For the Praedia of Julia Felix, the painting subjects provide valuable evidence that the estate was used by non‐elites, perhaps rented for special events or existing as a sort of membership‐only club for Pompeii’s newly wealthy sub‐elite inhabitants, often called the “middle class,” to use a term that perhaps applies better to our world than to theirs. The idea of art as conveying class, status, and social and political rank and pretensions is also clear from tombs. One of the best examples of this, the Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, is also from Pompeii.
paradeisos
a walled park where wild animal hunts took place. A Persian concept adopted by the Greeks after the conquests of Alexander the Great.
ART, CONTEXT, AND SOCIAL STATUS I: THE TOMB OF VESTORIUS PRISCUS
The Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, who was buried outside the Vesuvian Gate at Pompeii in 75/76 CE, is decorated with art that encourages our awareness of the theme of personal aggrandizement in Roman public art. The images in the central panels on the inner surfaces of the tomb’s enclosure walls show a range of high status iconography designed to create an identity of the deceased as an important man in Pompeii defined by his public service and connections. The six major panels include a large silver table service of the type found on display in a triclinium, a high status banquet or symposium – likely also taking place in a triclinium, a pair of gladiators, Vestorius Priscus standing in the tablinum of his house – the room where he would receive clients, Priscus seated surrounded by attentive listeners, and a paradeisos. The outdoor scenes of Priscus and an audience and the paradeisos are joined by the pair of gladiators, essentially one of only three episodes outside of his home