|UFDC Home||myUFDC Home | Help|
1 THE CUSTOMIZATION OF WALL PAINTING DESIGN S IN THE ROMAN DOMUS : A CASE STUDY OF THE TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES OF POMPEII By JOCELYN P. BOIGENZAHN A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTI AL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2012
2 2012 J ocelyn P. Boigenzahn
3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am profoundly grateful to my advisor and committee chair, Dr. Barbara Barletta, for her insightful s upervision and abundant patience. To my advisory committee members, Dr. Mary Ann Eaverly and Dr. Guolong Lai, thank you for sharing your expertise, and helping me to consider and appreciate ancient art and cultures in different and inspiring ways. I also wish to thank Dr. Lea Cline, for her guidance on the seminar paper that became the cornerstone of this thesis. Lastly, thank you to my husband, Nick, and my parents, Thad and Margaret Parker, for being never ending sources of encouragement and support in my academic pursuits, and for always being an enthusiastic audience and sounding board for my explorations. Their support of my passion continues to compel me to find new and interesting ways to encourage current and future generations to learn about anc ient art and cultures.
4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 3 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 6 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 7 C HAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 8 2 BACKGROUND OF THE POMPEIIAN TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES ................................ .... 12 Geography ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 12 Excavation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 13 Scholarship ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 16 Description ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 17 Chronology ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 23 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 26 Th e Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 27 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 30 3 IDENTIF YING THE CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE FRIEZES ....................... 33 General Framework of the Pompeiian Friezes ................................ ................................ .......... 33 The Trojan Cycle Frieze in the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ............. 33 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 37 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 38 Confirmation and Discussion of Scene Identifications ................................ .............................. 40 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 40 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 42 Classification and the Illumination of the Subjects and Compositions of each Frie ze ......... 49 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 50 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 50 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 52 Conclusions on the Di s tincti v e Con t e nt A sse mb l a ges of e a c h Tro j a n C y c le Fr ie ze ................... 54 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 54 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 56 The S a c r a rium F r i e ze from t he Ca s a di S a c e l l o I l i ac o ................................ ....................... 57 4 PHYSICAL CONTEXT AND THE ADAPTATION OF SCENE CONFIGURATIONS TO CREATE UNIFIED VI SUALLY ACCESSIBLE FRIEZES ................................ ..................... 71 Physical context of the Friezes and Potential Effects of Visual Accessibility ............................ 72 The Sacrarium Frieze fro m the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 72 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 73 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the Hous e of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 75
5 Linking Elements and Their Function ................................ ................................ ....................... 77 The Sacrarium Frieze from Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ............................. 77 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 78 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 79 Adapting the Compositions to Compensate for the Effects of the Physical Context ................... 80 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 80 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 82 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 83 5 THE NARR ATIVE FEATURE OF THE POMPEII AN TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES .............. 85 Scholarship on Visual Narrative Methods in ancient Greco Roman Art ................................ .... 85 Comparison of the Pompeiian Trojan Cycle Friezes with ancient Narrative Methods ................ 90 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ......... 91 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 91 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 92 Context and the Application of Reading Techniques to generate Narrative Clarity ................ 96 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ........... 96 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ........................ 98 The Troj an Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus ................................ ....... 100 6 CONCLUSION: THE TAILOR MADE TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES OF POMPEII ............. 104 Lower Iliad ic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio ................................ ....................... 105 Sacrarium Frieze from Casa di Sacello Iliaco ................................ ................................ ......... 108 Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House o f the Cryptoporticus ................................ ..................... 109 A PPENDIX A LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 2 ................................ ................................ .. 115 B LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 3 ................................ ................................ .. 117 C LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 4 ................................ ................................ .. 121 D LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 6 ................................ ................................ .. 122 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 123 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 129
6 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 The Trojan C ycle Frieze Content Framework ................................ ................................ ... 33 3 2 Lower Iliadic Frieze Content Framework ................................ ................................ .......... 37 3 3 Sacrarium Frieze Content Framework ................................ ................................ ............... 39 3 4 Literary References ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 59 3 5 The Trojan Cycle Frieze Scene Comparanda ................................ ................................ .... 64 3 6 Lower I liadic Frieze Scene Comparanda ................................ ................................ ........... 67 3 7 Sacrarium Frieze Scene Comparanda ................................ ................................ ................ 69
7 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts THE CUSTOMIZATION OF WALL PAINTING DESIGN S IN THE ROMAN DOMUS : A CASE STUDY OF THE TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES OF POMPEII By Jocelyn P. Boigenzahn December 2012 Chair: Barbara A. Barletta Major: Art History The frieze design is prominent in public displays of ancient Mediterranean art, but rare in private art. For public officials and rulers, this form offered a visually cohesive, decipherable, and comprehensive way to show large narratives or commemorate great battles on monuments. The frieze design in Roman private wall decoration is only preserved today in a few examples. Three of these are from Pompeii and they display events from the same narrative, the Trojan cycle poems. A systematic formal and structural analysis of content, physical context, visual accessibility, and narrative readability of these friezes uncovers evidence of modifications made to each frieze`s design to fit the room`s function. Using this thematically grouped frieze collection from Pompeii as a case study, this thesis demonstrates the customizable quality of wall paintings, adding to the scholarship on these friezes and the discourse on patron involvement in the formation of wall decoratio n.
8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Art, by tradition, had always been more public than private and used by wealthy patrons or rulers as gifts to the community or the gods, to win public support, promote religious favor, or represent their power. One of the most evident examples of the public to private art transition is the frieze design. Friezes traditionally decorated large scale public monuments or spaces, such as Greek temples, Roman Basilicae, and ancient Near Eastern royal courts. The frieze is an art for m that was best suited to convey a large narrative or a series of related events within a single space. In the throne room of the palace of Ashurnasirpal II at Nimrud, we find one of the earliest examples of the use of the frieze in private/public spaces to decorate and inform viewers about a series of events, either actual or legendary in nature. 1 Other examples found throughout the development of Mediterranean art show friezes used in the same way. Friezes became most prominent on public monuments of A rchaic, Classical, and Hellenistic Greece with the multitude of metope series and Ionic continuous friezes on Greek temples. 2 The Romans also used friezes on public monuments such as the Column of Trajan and the Basilica Aemilia in the Roman Forum, which displayed the Rape of the Sabines frieze. 3 The examples of friezes in public art are too numerous to relay here, however, each is an example of how friezes were an art form for large public display and are found in spaces intended for political commemorat ions or communal religious gatherings. 1 Mehmet Ali. 2010.14 32. The mythology of kingship in Neo Assyrian art Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2 Pedley, John Griffiths. 2007. Greek Art and Archaeology Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall. 3 Ramage, Nancy H., and Andrew Ramage. 2009. Art of the Romans: Romulus to Constantine Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
9 During the Hellenistic and Republican Roman periods, we begin to see the incorporation of art into private homes in both public and private spaces. 4 The preservation of Pompeii has provided scholars with the opportu nity to explore the use private art in the Roman home especially in the form of wall painting decoration The use of the visual frieze in this context is rare and only five examples are known from Pompeii. Three of these preserved friezes depict events from the Trojan cycle and remain in decipherable condition. They are found in three Cryptoporticus, and the House of Octavius Quartio. This case study will examine these three friezes. The aim of this thesis is to explore how painted friezes decorate the public and private spaces of these three Roman homes in Pompeii and how the design has been adapted to function in these spaces. By using three friezes that display even ts from the same narrative, a common element is provided against which the differences between them and adjustments made to their design and display can be noted By examining the chronology, content, orientation, visual configuration, and narrative eleme nts of each frieze`s design, adaptations or unique features can be illuminate d that distinguish each. In these examinations, I will also present and reexamine the findings of previous scholarship. I begin this examination in C hapter 2 by describing the ba ckground of these Trojan cycle friezes, setting them in context geographically, historiographically, and chronologically. I will provide a full description of their physical setting from the excavation findings, examine the previous scholarship on the fri ezes, and determine their chronological placement through relative dating methods. My formal analysis of t hese friezes begins in Chapter 3 with an outline of the 4 Ling, Roger. 1991. 5 8. Roman Painting Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press.
10 general framework of the surviving scenes in each frieze. I will reexamine the subject ident ifications made by Spinazzola to confirm his findings or to suggest new interpretations, where possible From these identified scenes, I will determine the total subject assemblage of each frieze, establishing the sources and types of scenes displayed. In Chapter 4 I will review the physical context of the friezes and their orientation within their rooms Then I will conduct a structural analysis of the scenes, themselves, and the linking elements in their compositions, to illuminate how the scenes are d esigned compositionally to connect each assemblage into a unified visual frieze. From this analysis, I will determine how the linking elements of each frieze are adapted to address its physical context and to enhance its visual accessibility for a viewer. In Chapter 5 I will outline the known methods of narrative depiction from ancient art and their characteristics, and elucidate the differences between these three friezes and the other multi scenic narrative methods. By identifying the differences from the known methods in the narrative characteristics of the friezes, I identify modifications made to them. I will use these narrative feature modifications to determine how they encourage and enhance the readability of each frieze within its context. I wil l conclude in Chapter 6, by reconciling the variant characteristics in the narrative construction, scene configuration, and content assemblage of each frieze with the function of the room it decorates. My aim is to determine if these variants reflect the patron`s motivation to coordinate decoration wi th the room`s social function. If so, these variants may suggest the customization of wall painting by Roman patrons for public or private use in their homes. It is important to note that the customization of wall decoration or wall painting design in
11 wall painting frieze design by a patron in these three Roman houses will be made visible in the four aspects to be explored and evidenced by the changes made to these aspects of the frieze design to fit the functional and physical context of the room it decorates. It is my co ntention that these design changes indicate choices made by the patron during the creation of the decoration. Ultimately, this is the aim of this thesis, to use these three wall painting friezes as examples to add to our understanding of the visual frieze design and its use in ancient art and to provide evidence for the customization of wall painting by Roman patrons for public or private use in their homes.
12 CHAPTER 2 B ACKGROUND OF THE POM PEIIAN TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES Geography The Bay of Naples was one of t he wealthiest shipping ports of Italy at the height of the Roman Empire. However, this bay was a shipping center for the Greeks as early as the 8 th century B C E with the establishment of Pith ekoussai on the island of Ischia 1 Through the 6 th century B. C.E, Greek colonization spread around the coast of the bay, creating cities, such as Cuma e and Herculaneum A rchaeologists also have evidence of Etruscan s ettlements in Nola and Nuceria during the 6 th century located inland in the region around the Bay o f Naples. In the 3 rd century B C E the Bay of Naples came under Roman control through alliances between the Campanian towns and Rome, and ultimately the colonization of the towns by Rome occurred in the 1 st century B.C.E. Pompeii is one of the cities colonized and developed by Rome at this time Pompeii was a large market center for shipping built on a safe and strategic section of the bay located at the mouth of the Sarno River (Figure A 1 ). This allowed Pompeii to both import goods from and export goods to Rome and other areas of the empire as well as inland to other areas of Italy. Pompeii was also one of the largest produce and grain producers for the Campanian region. The volcanic soil around Vesuvius, upon which Pompeii was built, created som e of the most fertile land in all of Italy. The foundation and development of Pompeii is highly debated, but evidence suggests that the city began to develop during the 6 th century B.C.E. and that both Etruscan and Greeks were present in the settlement at this time. 2 Within the city of Pompeii, we find a combination urban 1 Berry, Joanne. 2007. 70. The Complete Pompeii London: Hudson & Thames Ltd. 2 Berry 2007, 72.
13 plan that scholars believe de veloped in stages (Figure A 2 ). B eginning at the Marina gate, in the southwestern corner of the city closest to the Bay of Naples an organic city plan devel oped and spread east to the cardo maximus, Via Stabina, the main artery that runs north and south through the center of Pompeii, and north to the Via della Fortuna, part of the northern decumanus. 3 East beyond the cardo maximus, a Roman re ctilinear grid p lan dominates. T he t wo decumani east/west main streets, are the main paths from the Roman forum into the Street of Abundance. This street acquires its name from t he wealthy houses found along it. 4 of the city following the colonization of Pompeii by Sulla after the Social War, c. 80 30 B.C.E. 5 This is where we find the three houses and friezes for our study. Excavation the director of excavations at Pompeii from 1910 1923. 6 This Nuovi Scavi or new excavation began with the goal of 3 Berry 2007, 70 late 3 rd and early 2 n d Domestic Space in the Roman world: Pompeii and Beyond. Edited by Laurence, R. and Wallace Hadrill, A. 91 120, Portsmouth, RI: Journal of Roman Archaeology; Geertman, Herman. 2008. 82 The W orld of Pompeii Edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Pedar W. Foss, 82 97, London: Routledge. 4 The World of Pompeii Edited by Dobbins, J. J. and Pedar W. Foss, 129 139, London: Routledge; see also, Nappo, Salvatore Ciro. 2008. 348 The World of Pompeii Edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Foss, P.W., 347 372, London: Routledge. 5 Richardson, L. 1988. 154. Pompeii: An Architectural History Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press; see also, Berry 2007, 84 85. 6 Spinazzola, Vittorio. 1953. 1: iii iv. Pompei alla luce degli scavi nuovi di Via dell'Abbondanza (anni 1910 1923) Roma: Libreria della Stato; see also, Foss, Pedar W. 2008. 35. The World of Pompeii edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Pedar W. Foss, 28 38, London: Routledge.
14 from the Roman Forum to the Sarno Gate (Fig ure A 2 ). 7 Spinazzola uncovered 600 meters of this main thoroughfare along Regions 1 and 2, and restored the remains of the house facades al ong both sides of the street that were partially in situ. 8 Spinazzola systematically dug level by level and recorded the contents and construction of each layer of the buildings, revealing for the first time balconies and upper stories. In preceding work excavators frequently removed and and mosaics found on the ground floor. 9 In Spinazzola`s excavation, when the excavators reached attention grabbing faca des, Spinazzola conducted expanded excavation into the total structure of the building. Three of these expanded excavations led to the discovery of the three houses and their special wall decorations under discussion here. After 1923, Spinazzola`s excavat ion was left incomplete due to multiple interruptions. First, World War I broke out, which diverted funds and workers from the excavation. Then the post WWI Fascist regime of Mussolini forced Spinazzola to step down from the directorship. 10 On April 13, 1943, Spinazzola died. The bombing of Milan in August 1943 destroyed all copies of his original excavation records and photographs except for 672 p ages and 26 lithographic plates. 11 n a series of bombings during WWI. The bombing damage was only addressed after the earthqu ake in 1980. However, Regions 1 and 2 remain withou t further excavation even today. 12 7 Ling, Roger. 2005. 165 166. Pompeii: history, life & afterlife Stroud, Gloucestershire: Tempus. 8 Spinazzola 1953. 1: iii i v. 9 Foss 2008, 35. 10 Foss 2008, 35; see also, Ling 2005, 165 166. 11 Spinazzola 1953,1: iii iv. 12 Foss 2008, 35.
15 The large gap of information on this excavation also plays out in scholarship o n the excavations and the buildings discovered during Spinazzola`s campaign. The first full report on this excavation was published in 1953 by Salvatore Aurigemma, Spinazzola`s son in law, after many both premeditated and inadvertent delays. 13 Some of the delays in the publication can be traced to the loss of excavation notes and photographs. Another source of the scholarship gap was that unlike preceding directors Spinazzola excavation reports had been blocked from publication. The Notizie degli Scav i di Antichita regularly published detailed reports from Pompeii beginning in 1876. 14 These abruptly stop in 1910 and do not resume until 1924, with Amadeo Maiuri`s excavation summaries of select houses such as the Villa of the Mysteries. 15 Spinazzola`s re moval from the directorship and the censorship of his excavation reports were a result of the Mussolini regime`s control of excavations in and scholarship on Pompeii and Herculaneum. Aurigemma`s posthumous publication of Spinazzola`s findings in 1953 temp orarily ended this thirty year gap in research. 16 The publication Pompei alla luce degli scavi nuovi di Via dell' Abbondanza i s a three volume work that documents the buildings, frontages and their photos, watercolors and charcoal drawings of the wall paintings in situ and their dislodged fragments from Spinazzola`s excavation records that survived the bombing The first volume has a detailed explanation of the methodology and systematic excavatio n process used to uncover and then reconstruct the facades 13 Spinazzola 1953, 1: vi Pompei alla luce degli AJA 57: 4. 298 300. 14 The World of Pompeii edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Pedar W. Foss, 620 630, London: Routledge. 15 Laidlaw 2008, 629. 16 Spinazzola 1953, 1: iii iv; see also, Ling 2005, 165 166
16 and structures along the street. In a manner similar to excavations that are more recent this publication describes and interprets the findings of the excavation. The second volume has six chapt ers on construction elements, one chapter on the fullery on one chapter tracing the development of facades throughout the history of the Mediterranean region. The second half of this second volume is a large appendix, which describes and examines the content of the Trojan cycle These three houses were some of th o se explored beyond their facades during the excavations ast from the Roman Forum, they are discussed in order, as one would find them traveling east along this str eet from the Forum toward the amphitheater: the Casa di Sacello Iliaco or House of the Iliadic Shrine (I.6.4), then the House of the Cryptoporticus ( I.6.2), and finally the House of Octavius Quartio (II.2. 2), which is the furthest from the Roman Forum. 17 Aurigemma`s discussion of Spinazzola`s excava tion findings from these houses only addresses two of the three mentioned here, the Hous e of the Cryptop orticus (I.6.2) and the House of Octavius Quartio (II.2.2). The third house, the Casa di Sacello Iliaco (I.6.4) was believed, at the time of the excavation and in the later publication, to be a part of the House of the Cryptoporticus (I.6.2). Some subseq uent scholars have made different assertions about these houses since this original publication. These new examinations can change the interpretation of the friezes found in these locations, as will be discussed. Scholarshi p Examinations of these three houses and their friezes have been relatively limited since Spinazzola. Brief mentions of each of the three houses occur within the long standing 17 Spinazzola 1953, 2:871.
17 discussions of Pompeiian house s and wall painting. 18 However, only two scholars since Spinazzola a nd Aurigemm a have examined the friezes in a focused manner. In 1984, Richard Brilliant, in his examination of how visual narrative develops in Etruscan and Roman art, considers all three friezes for their contributions to Roman visual narrative tradition. 19 John Cla rke examines one of the three as a part of his investigation of the dcor of the House of Octavius Quartio as a whole in his 1991 b ook on Roman houses and their decoration. Clarke discusses the oecus` double frieze, noting that they have a particular spat ial orientation that affects how a viewer in the space would experience the two friezes. 20 These post Spinazzola examinations of th e Trojan cycle friezes take the basic content information provided in the appendix and develop a new angle of examination wit h a contextual outline of the physical and chronological background of these houses. This is necessary to set an appropriate structure for the examination of these works. Description The closest house f rom the Roman Forum to the a mphitheater, is the Casa di Sacello Iliaco (I. 6.4) (Fig ure A 3 ), located in the Iliaco and the House of the Cryptoporticus (locate d next to and behind the Cas a di Sacello Iliaco) claimed that they were physically connected. S cholars have now determined that they are 18 Mau, August. 1882. Die Geschichte der dekorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji Lepzig: Berlin; see also, Ling, Roger. 1991. 12 100, 107 108, 111 112. Roman Painting Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, Mass.; Clarke 1991, 31 72; De Vos, Arnold and Mariette. 1982, 138. Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia Roma: G. Laterza. 19 Brilliant, Richard. 1984. 60 65. Visual Narratives: Storytelling in Etruscan and Roman Art, London: Ithaca Press. 20 Clarke 1991, 201 207.
18 separate residences and not physically attached. 21 We therefore will address the two houses separately. The Casa di Sa cello Iliaco is an example of the standard atrium house (domus) as described by Vitruvius. 22 Out f rom the atrium there are rooms that extend on three sides ( F ig ure A 3 ). The atrium is identified by central impluvium and adjacency to the fauces or vestib ulum, the main entry of the house (Fig ure A 4 ). 23 A s the first major room of the standard home, the atrium was where a client would wait to greet the patron each morning to conduct business. 24 This would make the atrium the most public space in the domus. It is in this public location that we find the first Trojan cycle frieze located in a recessed sacrariu m 25 Its location across from the main entrance to the house places this frieze in a public area, which may have affected its design. The sacrarium or s hrine is a small room in the southwest corner of the atrium. 26 In design the sacrarium consists of a vaulted ceiling above three walls that create a three by five foot space. 27 Stucco figural scenes with painted details and backgrounds decorate the upper zone 21 De Vos 1982, 138; see also, RM 91:125 140. 22 Granger, Frank., ed. and trans. 1931. Vitruvius : De Architectura Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press; see also, Rowland, Ingrid D., ed. and trans. 1999. Vitruvius : Ten Books on Architecture Cambridge (London): Cambridge University Press. 23 Granger 1931; see also, Rowland 1999; Wallace Hadrill 1994; Wallace Hadrill, A. 1988. 55 Social Structure of the Roman PBSR 56: 43 97. 24 Clarke 1991, 4; see also, Leach, Eleanor W. 2004. 25 27. The Social Life of Painting in Ancient Rome and on the Bay of Naples Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Wallace Hadrill 1988, 55 56. 25 Strocka 1984,132. 26 Spinazzola 1 953, 2: 871; see also, Schefold 1957, 23; De Vos 1982, 138; Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni. 1990. 1:193 4. Pompei: pitture e mosaici 10 vols. Roma: Istituto della enciclopedia italiana. (PPM.) 27 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 374; see also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4. Brilliant 1984, 60 61.
19 of the walls and the ceiling ( Figures A 5 A 7 ). 28 The vault has a delicately stuccoed series of ornamental medallions, each with a miniature mythological scene in the center. The central medallion has a depiction of Zeus` abduction of Ganymede, which according to the myth occurs on Mount Ida. The lunette on the back wall shows the visit of Selene to Endymion, who is sleeping as the goddess is watching nearby. A n ovolo cornice in relief separates the vault and upper zone of the wall. Below this corn ice is the frieze. Protruding from a blue background along the sides and back wall of the room, this frieze depicts a set of events from Books 22 and 24 of Homer`s Iliad using stucco relief and painted details The major events depicted here are Hector` s departure from Troy f o r battle against Achilles, the battle between Hector and Achilles, Achilles dragging Hector, and the ransom and return of Hector`s body to Priam. 29 The House of the Cryptoporticus, (I. 6. 2) is found only a few doorways to the east a long 8 ). It is a Hellenized Roman domus, an architectural design that developed in the mid 1st century B.C.E. 30 A Hellenized domus consists of the standard atrium house layout as described by Vitruvius, but adds a ground level garden with wrapping peristyle. 31 This house does not fit the architectural description perfectly because here the garden and peristyle are built abov e a subterranean cryptoporticus, which is a sublevel corridor 28 Mielsch, H. 1975. 123. Romische Stuckreliefs Heidelberg, Germany: F.H. Kerle Verlag.; see also Strocka 1984, 126. 29 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 871; see also, Strocka 1984, 131 132. 30 Clarke 1991, 23; see also, Zanker. 1 JdI 94: 460 523. 31 Clarke 1991, 23; see also, Zanker 1979, 468.
20 typically found as part of villa stru ct ures that is used either architecturally to lift the house for better view or functionally to store rural equipment or wine. 32 The cryptoporticus, for which this house is named, served here to create a subterranea n segment of the house (Figures A 8 and A 9 ). 33 The two levels of the house are connected through a set of stairs in the northern wing. 34 The south wall of the northern wing, the west wall of the eastern wing, and the east wall of the western wing are all perforated with apsidal windows providing light to the corridor from the garden above. 35 Based on the layout, one can conclusively claim that the cryptoporticus primarily functioned as a hallway to the bath complex placed alongside and co nnected to the east wing (Figure A 9 ) and for the side str eet ent rance located at the southern end of the west wing. 36 In this complex, a caldarium and tepidarium are followed by the apodyterium and then the frigidarium. 37 Adjacent to the bath complex is a n oecus attached to the southeastern end of the cryptoport icus. Based on the added elements of a sublevel cryptoporticus, the House of the Cryptoporticus finds its best known comparison for architectural format in the Villa of the Mysteries, which employs its cryptoporticus space for the functional needs me ntion ed above (Figures A 10 and A 11 ). 38 32 Granger, Frank., ed. and trans. 1931. Vitruvius : De Architectura Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press; see als o, Rowland, Ingrid D., ed. and trans. 1999. Vitruvius : Ten Books on Architecture Cambridge (London): Cambridge University Press. 33 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 374; see also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 34 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 374. 35 Spinazzola 195 3, 1: 369 374; see also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 36 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 374; see also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 37 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 374; see also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 38 Clarke 1991,193 194.
21 The cryptoporticus has a barrel vaulted ceiling with stucco reliefs in an intricate pattern of squares, hexagons, and rhomboid shapes, which are fi lled with floral motifs (Fig ure A 12 ). 39 The wall decoration of this crypt oporticus possesses a unique painted feature: the use of herms with heads of satyrs and maenads. They punctuate the upper, m iddle and lower zones of the walls of the three corridor wings. These herms are painted with bases that seem to project visually from a lower zone painted with a perspectival meander decoration (Figure A 15 ). 40 In the upper zone, we find the naturalistic depictions of the heads of the maenads and satyrs, executed in a painterly technique with wispy hair subtle shading a nd created wit h realism (Figure A 1 6 ). 41 P ainted herms seem to have been a distinct feature of this house`s painting program. Spinazzola also found fragments of herms punctuating the wall painting scheme in the lower oecus adjacent to the bath complex (Figure A 17 ) 42 In the cryptoporticus, between each of the herm heads is the second frieze that depicts scenes of the events from the T rojan cycle (Figures A 8, A 15, and A 16 ). 43 Th is frieze lined the upper zone o f both walls of all three wings with interruptions by windows door openings, and painted herms. 44 Regrettably, only twenty four scenes of the frieze remain in a condition that can be deciphere d with the aid of labeling inscriptions in Greek. The House of Octavius Quartio (II. 2.2) located on the next block, is farther east along (Fig ure A 19 ). Before the earthquake in 62 C.E. this house was the 39 Spinazzola 19 53, 1:374 375; see also, PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 40 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 41 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 42 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 43 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 44 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63.
22 standard atrium type built in the Samnite period, approximately the late 2 nd century B.C.E. 45 After the earthquake, the owner expanded the house with a grouping of four rooms, on e of which is oecus h The third Trojan frieze is found in this oecus. 46 Along with the additions, the owner walled in the rest of the block behind the house and added a long canal framed by a garden and fruit trees, interspersed with fountains, sculpture, a nympheaum, and an Isis shrine. 47 A garden of this size and the construction of a private canal are unique within the city, however this architectural layout seems similar to the elongated pool and garden feature o f the Villa of the Papyri in Herculaneum (Figure A 20 ). O ecus h positioned on the main public axis of the house with the focal opening facing the long canal and the garden, is clearly the m ost important room in the house because of its orientation with th e gardens and its elab orate decorative schema (Figure A 21 ). 48 This oecus has a decoration that includes painted imitation marble revetment on both the lower and upper zones. Th is marble paneling seems to travel behind the m iddle zone producing the effect that the middle zone is a picture displayed on the wall and not a pa rt of the wall itself (Figures A 23 A 26 ). 49 Below the upper zone of imitation marble revetment are red and gold painted curtains, which create the bor der between the upper and the m i ddle zone. The arrangement of these painted curtains consists of regular raised intervals, with a painted fabric knot marking each interval 45 Nappo 2008, 362 364. 46 Clarke 1991, 23, 201. 47 Clarke 1991, 193 194; see al so, Spinazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 44; Ling 1991,112. 48 Clarke 1991, 194; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 43; Ling 1991,112. 49 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also, Spi nazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 44, 84 98; Brilliant 1984, 62 63; Ling 1991,112.
23 peak. 50 The ir use enhances the image by giving the impression that the decoration of the mi ddle zone is special and jus t revealed to particular guests of the patron. 51 In the m iddle zone of the wall decoration, there is a rare design, found nowhere else in known Roman wall p aintin g: a double frieze (Fig ures A 23 A 26 ). 52 The double frieze is formed of two registers separate d by a painted yellow border. Each of the friezes displays different scenes of mythological and literary events that took place in and around the city of Troy. In t he upper and larger of the two registers, approximately eighty cm tall, a frieze displays scenes from Heracles` expedition to Troy, his death, and his deification. 53 Below this Heraclean frieze in the lower and much smaller register, approximately thirty cm tall, a second frieze displays scenes f rom the Trojan cycle some of which include label ing inscriptions in Latin on a black or dark blue background 54 The lower frieze in t his room will be our focus, because it clearly displays the common subject of this investigation and the upper frieze is severely damaged, whereas the lower frieze remains in decipherable condition. Chronology The dates of these friezes can be determined from a careful and judicious use of methods currently used in Pompeii. The se include architectural forms construction techniques, and decorative styles. When these metho ds are used in combination, they help us to ascertain a timeframe for the creation of each frieze. 50 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 44, 84 98; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 51 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also, Schefold, Karl. 1957. 32 34. Die Wande Pompejis Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co. 52 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 44, 84 98; Brilliant 1984, 62 63; Ling 1991,112. 53 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 973 975; see also, Clarke 1991, 201 205; Brilliant 1984, 62 63; Ling 1991,112. 54 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 976 1008; see also, Clarke 1991, 201 205; Brilliant 1984, 62 63; Ling 1991,112.
24 I t is important to understand how the se methods developed are structured, and their potential shortcomings. The architectural history of Pompeii is based on the development of the Roman house as given by Vitruvius. The foundations of this approach were laid over a century ago by G. Fiorelli and A. Mau. 55 First, they n oted architectural features on existing building plans such as the peristyle described b y Vitruvius. Then, they attached these architectural features to historical events or the styles of wall and floor decoration to create a chronology. 56 The result was to show the development of Pompeii as an urban center and to denote phases of building a dditions within individual buildings. 57 The use of architectural features alone such as the intr oduction of the Greek peristyle, to determine chronology is problematic because some architectural elements are used in construction for hundreds of years with out definitive beginnin g and ending points 58 To narrow the lengthy architectural feature date range s scholars have identified construction techniques utilized in creating these building additions and features. Based on the construction techniques and the approximate dates ea ch were in use, scholars developed a chronology of construction dates for the architectural features and building phases of houses and other buildings in Pompeii However, this method of chronology must also be used with caution since many buildings found in Pompeii were repaired or replaced over many centuries. 59 The construction technique periods are Opus Quadratum (650 B.C.E.) onwards, Opus Africanum (500 B.C.E. onwards), Opus Incertum (c. 200 B.C.E. onwards, Opus 55 Richardson 1988, xvii xviii. 56 Richardson 1988, xvii xviii; see also, Nappo 2008, 348 349. 57 Richardson 1988, xviii The World of Pompeii Edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Foss, P.W. 114 116, London: Routledge. 58 Dobbins, J. J. 1994. 630 AJA 98: 4, 629 694. 59 Dobbins 2008,116.
25 Reticulatum and La tericium (60 B.C.E. onwards), and Opus Vittatum Mixtum (35 C.E. onwards) (Fig ure A 27 ( a g) ) The periods determined by construction technique s create a broad framework in which the developments of architectural features, such as the arrival of the perist yle, can be set. For our examination, the chronologies based on wall painting and stucco are invaluable as they are the two media used to create our friezes. B ased on stylistic changes, August Mau elucidated four styles of wall painting from the late 2 nd century B.C.E. through the eruption of Mount Vesuvius. 60 Later scholars build upon Mau`s observations noting that multiple phases of change occurred within each of the four main style s subdividing the date ranges for each of the stylistic periods The four styles are as follows : First Style (150 80 B.C.E.), Second Style (80 20 B.C.E.), Third S tyle (20 B.C. E. 45 C.E.), and Fo urt h S tyle (40 79 C.E.) 61 Stucco styles develop differently because of where this medium was often employed in Roman buildings; h owever, stucco is described and determined by the same stylistic periods developed for wall paintings. 62 Stylistic chronology of painting and stucco is problematic for a similar reason to the issues with tracing architectural features. Certain styles, suc h as the Fi rst s tyle of wall painting, are found in use at the time of the eruption making it difficult to determine whether the wall`s 60 Clarke 1991, 31; see also, Mau, A. 1882 Geschichte de r Dekorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji. Berlin. 61 The World of Pompeii edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Pedar W. Foss, 302 323, London: Routledge 62 Clar The World of Pompeii Edited by Dobbins, J.J. and Pedar W. Foss, 323 346, London: Routledge; see also Mielsch 1975, 123; see also, Ling 1991, 97.
26 decoration was never changed or if the owner of the house wanted to use this style at a later period for his own reasons 63 Regrettably, no significant alternative method has since been presented to define the chronology of Pompeii in a manner other than those presented here. However, it is through a combination of these methods that we can propose the chronological setti ngs of these friezes. The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco The frieze from the sacrarium in Casa di Sacello Iliaco (I, 6. 4) is e xecute d in stucco relief (Figure A 2 A 7 ). The date of this frieze can be determined by a combination of the decorative style of the stuccowork itself its location on the walls of the sacrarium and the conditions of the wall decoration First, t he application of stucco on the upper zone of a wall did not start until the Fourth Style which would place the appro ximate dates of this frieze between c. 62 C.E. and 79 C.E. 64 This decorative style dating is supported by the state of the sacrarium`s walls. Many houses were repaired after the 62 C.E. earthquake and repainted with the latest style. Strocka, Schefold, a nd De Vos place this frieze in th is post earthquake period because of the unfinished state of the room (F ig ure A 5 ). 65 Below the frieze, the walls are covered with a layer of coarse base plaster only. Therefore, these scholars propose that the ceiling dec oration and frieze of the sacrarium we re started in the early Fourth S tyle after the 62 C.E. earthquake and the wall s were not completed before the eruption in 79 C.E. 66 63 Dwyer, Eugene. 2001. 328 Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians Vol. 60, No. 3, 328 343. 64 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 437 440; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 2: 871 872; PPM 1990, 1:193 194; De Vos 1982, 104. 65 Strocka 1984, 130; see also, De Vos 1982, 105; Schefold 1957, 23. 66 PPM 1990, 1:295.
27 Finally, t here are very few examples of this type of stucco fi gural decoration in Pomp eii. One example that survives comes from the Stabian Baths, where painters made use of a stucco framework of architecture and added figural scenes between the frames (Fig ure A 28 ( a and b ) ). 67 The Stabian Baths continued to be modified up until the erupt ion of Vesuvius in 79 C.E. which sugg ests a comparable date for the s acrarium `s f rieze. 68 Therefore, this evidence places this frieze in the post earthquake restoration period (c. 62 79 C.E.). The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus T he date of the frieze in the House of the Cryptoporticus (I. 6. 2), can be ascertained through a combination of various methods The atrium of the House of the Cryptoporticus was a part of the 2 nd century B.C.E. development of the eastern section of the V nearest to the Via Stabina, the cardo maximus 69 The peristyle and the cryptoporticus addition were created as a unit to adjust for the slope of this section of the subdivision. 70 The construction technique used for the peristyle and cr yptoporticus section of the house is opus incertum, which dates from c. 200 B.C.E. onwards and provides us a very large range of date s for the c onstruction of this addition and its decoration (Fig ure A 29 and A 30 ). 71 The wall painting decoration in the cry ptoporticus and adjacent rooms on the subterranean level can be used to specify the period of the decoration of the cryptoporticus and its frieze The features of the middle zone of the cryptoporticus wall decoration that are most 67 Ling 1991, 76. 68 Ling 1991, 76. 69 Nappo 2008, 347 350; see also, Dickmann, Jens Arne. 1997. 134 Domestic Space in the Roman World: Pompeii and Beyond edited by Laurence, R. and Wallace Hadrill, A. 121 136. Portsmouth, RI: JRA 70 Nappo 2008, 347 350; see also, Dickmann 1997, 134 135. 71 Nappo 2008, 347 350.
28 indicative of its style are the flat panels with painted draped garl ands and columns that separate all three zones (Fig ure A 15 ). 72 Flat paneling and perspectival columns are considered representative of late Second style wall painting (c. 5 0 20 B.C.E.) 73 One example o f Second s tyle wall painting with this panel and column design is the Dionysian Frieze from the Villa of the Mysteries (c. 50 B.C.E.) which has single, pairs, and groups of megalographic figures interacting and standing in front of a red paneled wall on a painted p rojecting podium (Fig ure A 31 ) 74 Another is the Room of the Masks from the House of Augustus on the Palatine Hill in Rome (c. 40 30 B.C.E) which employs columns on a perspectival base in front of red panels in a manner similar to the cryptoporticus walls (Fig ure A 32 ). 75 The decoration of the adjacent frigidarium and lower oecus in the House of the Cryptoporticus also add to our determination of the date f or the underground section and by extension that of the cryptoporticus and its frieze. The frigidari um is decorated with life size architectural structures, which reveal a distant view of a Delphic tripod or an outdoor sanctuary, in part behind curtained pillars (Figure A 33 ). 76 The development of architectural f eatures and mixed perspective in wall pain ting decoration, along with the interest in creating vista views, is considered a hallmark of Second style wall painting, particularly in the second phase (c. 50 20 B.C.E.) 77 This design appears in other locat ions during this time, such as in oecus 1 5 fro m the 72 Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; see also, Ling 1991, 33. 73 Cl arke 1991, 43 50; see also, Ling 1991, 33 34. 74 Ling 1991, 60 61. 75 Ling 1991, 37; see also, Boardman, Jonathan. 2007. 30. Rome: A Cultural History. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books; Kleiner, Fred S. 2010. 73 74. A History of Roman art Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. 76 Ling 1991, 33. 77 Ling 1991, 32.
29 Vill a of Oplontis (Figure A 34 ). 78 Th e lower oecus has a decoration that is very similar to that of the cryptoporticus The walls have yellow panels divided by maenad herms in the middle and upper zones (Figure A 17 ). Between the heads of the maena d herms in the upper zone of the lower oecus decoration, an alternating pinax series of Dionysiac subject and still life scenes rests on an illusionistic cornice. 79 The introduction of the pinax shutter design in the upper zone of wall decorations has been chronological ly dated to the middle to late S econd S tyle, approximately 30 20 B.C.E. 80 The second style decoration found in these adjacent rooms as well as the cryptoporticus` middle zone allows for a late Second Style dating for the cryptoporticus and it s frieze c 40 20 B.C.E. 81 The stuccowork of the c rypt o porticus` ceiling also fits this Second S tyle dating During the Second and Third style s of decoration, stuccowork was found only on ceilings, using a combination of geometric shapes and vegetal ornam entation. 82 The cryptoporticus has a barrel vaulted ceiling with stucco reliefs in an intricate pattern of squares, hexagons, and rhomboid shapes, which are fi lled with floral motifs (Fig ure A 13 ). 83 The ceiling design found in the House of Augustus on the Palatine hill in Rome dated to c. 40 30 B.C.E is comparable to that found in the cryptoporticus indicating that this ceiling decoration style was fashionable during 78 Ling 1991, 34; see also, Strocka, V.M. 2008, 306 stic Decoration: Painting The World of Pompeii Edited by Do bbins, J. J. and P. W. Foss, 302 320, London: Routledge. 79 Ling 1991, 112; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 1:43. 80 Ling 1991, 112. 81 Spinazzola 1953, 1: 369 370; 2: 905 907; se e also, De Vos 1982, 138; PPM 1990, 1:193 4; Beyen, H.G. 1961. 434 438. Die Pompejanische Wanddekoration von zweiten bis zum vierten Stil ii La Hage: Nijhoff. 82 Ling 1991, 42 7, 62 70, 85 97;see also, Mielsch, H. 1975; Strocka 1984, 125 127. 83 Spinazzola 1953, 1:374 377; see also, PPM 1990, 1:193 4.
30 the late Second style (Fig ure A 14 ) 84 Taking these methods of relative dating together, we can develop a creation date of c. 40 20 B.C.E. for the decoration of the cryptoporticus and the Trojan cycle frieze it displays. The Lower Ilia dic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The date of the double frieze f rom oecus h of the House of Octa vius Quartio (II 2. 2) can be revealed through t wo of the chronological methods These are the construction technique of the later oecus h and garden section of the house and the decorative styles of rooms adjacent to this uniquely decorated oecus. The u difficult to place in the stylistic chronology of Pompeiian wall painting. The megalographic Heraclean frieze seems to indicate the Second S tyle, as the only known examples of megalographic friezes i n wall decoration come from this period (c. 80 20 B.C.E.) 85 Yet, the construction technique used in the walls of the garden and the oecus is opus vittatum mixtum which occurs c. 35 C.E. onwards. 86 Ac cordingly, the decoration of oecus h must date to a per iod after c. 35 C.E., in the late Third (c. 35 45 C.E.) or Fourth S tyle (c. 40 79 C.E.) This would mak e the megalographic Heraclean frieze an e xception to the typical Second S tyle dating for this element although, i t is not unreasonable to surmise that t he owner revived this style as m egalographic single scenes do exist in the Pompeiian Fourth s tyle For example, the garde n wall of the House of the Ceii shows a large lion hunting scene in this style 87 Nevertheless, t he Heraclean frieze remains the only frieze of this type dated l ater than the Second 84 Ling 1991, 33, 44, 71 85; see also Spinazzola 1953, 2:904 970; Brilliant 1984, 62 63; Strocka 1984, 127 The World of Pompe ii edited by Dobbins, J. J. and P. W. Foss, 323 335. New York Abingdon: Routledge. 85 Ling 1991, 111 112. 86 Nappo 2008, 362 364. 87 Michel, Dorothea. 1990. 73. Casa dei Cei (I 6, 15) : Hirmer Verlag.
31 S tyle. T he decorations of adjacent rooms need to be examined to determine a painting style for this addition due to the unusual stylistic elements of oecus h The decoration of room f employs the tapestry d esign that develops in the Fourth style (Fig ure A 35 ) The wall is sectioned into flat fields of color that hold individual mythological or genre scenes, bordered with miniature ornamental designs and vertical window like views onto architectural vistas. The architectural vista comes from the Second style where as th e flat wall sections with their miniature ornamenta l borders are remnants of the Third style. A combination of the Third and Second styles is indicative of the Fourth style 88 The decoration of room f is sim ilar to that of triclinium p in the House of the Vettii (Figure A 36 ), which is Fourth style wall painting. 89 Therefore, t he stylistic and construction technique evidence of this section would by extension date oecus h and its Trojan cycle frieze to the post earthquake period of restoration, c. 62 79 C.E 90 T he three friezes under consideration represent different styles and thus periods of execution. T he chronological order determined by these methods places the house s and their friezes in two differ ent periods of Roman decoration frieze, hereafter referred to as the Trojan Cycle Frieze is the earliest of the three, dating to the mid late Second Style c. 40 20 B.C.E. The other two friezes are contemporan eous T he House of Octavius Quartio oecus` frieze and the Casa di Sacello Iliaco sacrarium `s frieze, he reafter referred to as the Lower Iliadic Frieze and the Sacrarium Frieze respectively, are both dated to the Fourth Style c. 62 79 C.E. 88 Ling 1991, 71 85; see also, Strocka 2008, 315 320. 89 Ling 1991, 79 80; see also, Stocka 2008, 315 320. 90 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also Spinazzola 1953, 1:369 370, 2: 973 975; De Vos 1982,138, PPM 1990, 2: 42 44, 84 98; Brilli ant 1984, 62 63.
32 The geograp hical and chronological connections between these three friezes with the contemporane ity of the Lower Iliadic and the Sacrarium Frieze and the adjacency of the Casa di Sacello Iliaco and the House of the Cryptoporticus may suggest communication among these patrons. The level of communication, through visitation or direct consultation with the other patron s is indeterminable. However, we can say that these examples may provide evidence of the transmission of a decorative design or theme between neighbors o r business associate s. How this fit s into this case study will be further explored alongside our other findings. G enerally, t he extent of time between the early and the later friezes may also suggest that th is shared Trojan cycle content was a common sub ject for visual display in Pompeii and although the style and media changed, the general subject remained constant.
33 CHAPTER 3 IDENTIFYING THE CONT ENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE FRIEZES General Framework of the Pompeiian Friezes The Trojan Cycle Frieze in the House of the Cryptoporticus The Trojan Cycle Frieze is the oldest and largest of the three friezes. It traversed the upper zone of eight walls in three wings, creating a strip of scenes measuring approximately 99.13 meters or 325 feet long (Fig ures B 1 B 3). Spinazzola calculated that the total amount of scenes may have ranged between 80 and 85 when it was in its original state, with 19 scenes on the west wall, 8 scenes on the east wall, and 1 scene on the south wall, all in the west wing; 21 scenes on t he north wall and 12 scenes on the south wall of the north wing; 14 scenes on the east wall, 2 scenes on the south wall, and 8 scenes on the west wall of the east wing. 1 Many of these original scene locations are now vacant. Below is a list of all of the scene locations by wall and wing in which scenes were originally found, identifying those scenes which survive with Spinazzola`s id entifications and scene numbers. 2 All vacant scene locations are grouped, when a djacent, and labeled as missing. Table 3 1. The Trojan Cycle Frieze Content Framework Wing and Wall and Scene Location # Spinazzola Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B West wall of West w ing : (moving north) Location 1 4 Missing Missing Missing West wall of West w ing : ( moving north) Location 5 Scene 1 Apollo shooting arrows of the plagu e into the Achaean camp B 4 B 6 1 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 968 970: see also, Ling 1991, 33; Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 2 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 970.
34 Table 3 1. Continued Wing and Wall and Scene Location # Spinazzola Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B West wall of West w ing : (moving north) Location 6 19 Missing Missing Missing North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 1 10 Missing Missing Missing North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 11 Scene 2 Diomedes and Glaucus exchanging weapons B 7 B 10 North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 12 Scene 3 Diomedes fighting Ares with Athena in chariot B 11 B 14 North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 13 Scene 4 Farewell of Hector and Andromache with Astyanax B 15 North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 14 Scene 5 Achaean Council of Princes after the Challenge of Hector (?) B 17 B 18) North wall of the North wing: (moving east) Location 15 21 Missing Missing Missing East wall of the East wing: (moving south) Lo cation 1 4 Missing Missing Missing East wall of the East wing: (moving south) Location 5 Scene 6 The Battle of Hector and the Ajaxes surrounding the Corpse of Patroclus B 19 B 20
35 Table 3 1. Continued Wing and Wall and Scene Location # Spinazzola Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B East wall of the East wing: (moving south) Locations 6 14 Missing Missing Missing South wall of the East wing Location 1 Scene 7 The Transportation of the Body of Patroclus to the Greek Camp B 21 B 24 South wall of the East wing: (moving west) Location 2 Missing Missing Missing West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 1 Scene 8 Thetis in the Forge of Hephaestus receiving the Armor for Achilles B 25 B 26 West wall of the East wi ng: (moving north) Location 2 Scene 9 Achilles mourning at the Bier of Patroclus B 27 B 28 West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 3 Scene 10 Achilles` war cry from the Shore B 29 B 30 West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 4 Sc ene 11 The Return of Briseis is approved by the Assembly B 31 B 34 West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 5 Scene 12 Athena assisting Diomedes in Combat (?) B 35 B 36 West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 6 Scene 13 The Return of Achilles to Battle after the Death of Patroclus, the Death of Polidoros and Hector saved by Apollo B 37 B 39 West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 7 Scene 14 The rescue of Aeneas by Poseidon B 40 B 42
36 Table 3 1. Continued Wing and Wall and Scene Location # Spinazzola Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B West wall of the East wing: (moving north) Location 8 Scene 15 Capture of a Trojan (?) B 43 B 44 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 1 Scene 16 Death of Lycaon at the River Scamander B 45 B 46 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 2 Scene 17 Missing segment of the Frieze (?) with inscriptions for Achilles and Xanthos B 47 B 48 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 3 6 Missing Missing Missing South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 7 Scene 18 Cry of Andromache and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hector B 49 B 50 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 8 Scene 19 Unidentified Woman Mourning (?) B 51 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 9 Scene 20 Achilles sacrificing at the Pyre of Patroclus B 52 B 53 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 10 Scene 21 Funerary Games for Patroclus, the footrace; Ajax falls into Rive r B 54 B 56 South wall of the North wing (moving east) Location 11 12 Missing Missing Missing East wall of the West wing (moving south) Location 1 Scene 22 The Arrival of Penthesileia at Troy, greeted by Priam B 57 B 58
37 Table 3 1. Continued W all and Wing and Scene Location # Spinazzola Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B East wall of the West wing (moving south) Location 2 7 Missing Missing Missing East wall of the West wing (moving south) Location 8 Scene 23 Helen on the wa lls of Troy or Thetis at the Tomb of Achilles (?) B 59 B 60 South w all of the East wing (moving west) Location 1 Scene 24 Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius fleeing the destruction of Troy, guided by Hermes B 61 The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Oct avius Quartio The Lower Iliadic Frieze traverses four walls, with four scenes on the north wall, three on the south wall, five on the east wall, and two on the west wall. 3 Table 3 2. Lower Iliadic Frieze Content Framework Wall location and Direction in ord er Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Label in Appendix B South wall (moving east) Scene 1 Apollo shooting arrows of plague into the Achaean camp B 62 South wall (moving east) Scene 2 Watering Horses (?) B 63 B 64 South wall (moving east) Scene 3 The Gathering of the emissaries, Ajax, Odysseus, and Phoenix B 65 B 66 East wall (moving north) Scene 4 Achilles in front of his tent B 67 B 68 3 Clarke 1991, 201 205; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 2: 976 1008; Brilliant 1984, 62 63.
38 Table 3 2. Continued Wall location and Direction in order Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label Figure Labe l in Appendix B East wall (moving north) Scene 5 Phoenix kneeling before Achilles B 69 B 70 West wall (moving north) Scene 6 Battle below the Wall of the Greek camp B 71 B 78 West wall (moving north) Scene 7 Battle at the Ships, in which Ajax wounds Hec tor B 79 B 80 North wall (moving east) Scene 8 Trojans trying to recover a body (?) B 81 B 82 North wall (moving east) Scene 9 Patroclus dressed in Achilles armor riding the chariot drawn by Xanthos and Balios fighting Trojans B 83 B 85 North wall (mov ing east) Scene 10 Achilles receiving the new armor from Thetis B 86 North wall (moving east) Scene 11 Achilles dragging the body of Hector behind his chariot B 87 B 88 East wall (moving south) Scene 12 Funerary games for Patroclus, chariot race and boxi ng match B 89 B 99 East wall (moving south) Scene 13 Priam visits Achilles to ransom for the body of Hector B 100 B 102 East wall (moving south) Scene 14 Priam and Ideaos watch over the wagon with Hector`s body B 103 B 104 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco The Sacrarium F rieze traverses three walls with five scenes, two on the east, one on the south, and two on the west (Fig ure B 105). The scenes are delineated into subsections (a, b, c, etc. listed below) according to Spinazzol a`s division of the scenes into figure groups. 4 4 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 869; see also, Brillian t 1984, 64 65
39 T able 3 3. Sacrarium Frieze Content Framework Wall location and Direction in order Scene # Spinazzola Scene Label with subdivisions Figure Label in Appendix B East wall (moving south from the doorway) S cene 5 Hector`s body being returned to Troy a) The tent of Achilles with gifts of ransom, b) The mule cart carrying the body of Hector, c) Priam and Hermes leading the mule cart to Troy B 120 B 122 East wall (moving south from the doorway) Scene 1 Hector led by the Goddess Fate to combat Achilles B 106 B 107 South wall (moving west) Scene 2 Hector battles with Achilles a) Hera and Aphrodite assisting the battle from the cliffs of Mt. Olympus, b) Hector advancing on a group of Trojan warriors, c) Hec tor and Achilles in battle, d) A group of Achaean warriors, e)A chariot with two horse team and charioteer awaiting the return of Achilles B 108 B 112 West wall (moving north) Scene 3 Achilles dragging the body of Hector in the dust a) A Trojan warrior em erging from the Gates of Troy, b) A group of Achaean warriors, c) Hector being dragged behind the chariot of Achilles B 113 B 116 West wall (moving north) Scene 4 Priam visits Achilles to ransom for the body of Hector a) A servant carrying a vase out of the Gates of Troy, b) The gifts are unloaded from the mule cart, c) Priam at the feet of Achilles and behind Priam stands Hermes B 117 B 119
40 Confirmation and Discussion of Scene Identifications Most of Spinazzola`s identifications are supported by literary correlation and visual comparison. 5 Those that are questionable are here analyzed and new identifications are presented and confirmed, when possible. In the Trojan Cycle Frieze there are six scenes left unidentified or questionably identified b y Spinazzola. None of th e scenes in the Lower Iliadic F rieze or the Sacrarium Frieze can be considered entirely problematic, other than those already deemed questionable by Spinazzola. Two scenes of the Lower Iliadic Frieze scene 2: Watering Horses (Fig ures B 63 B 64) and scene 8: Trojans trying to recover a Body (Figures B 81 B 82) are unresolved identifications that Spinazzola has left incomplete. 6 We have found no new evidence from which a different identification could be ascertained. Therefore, th ey will remain labeled with Spinazzola`s identifications. Additionally, in the Sacrarium Frieze scene 2 requires re examination. The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco Scene 2 is labeled Hector battles with Achilles (Figures B 108 B 112). 7 Spinazzola divided this scene into five sections and presented identifications for the sections separately. In section (a), two goddesses are depicted, pointing and watching the rest of the scene. The condition of the stucco relief is deteriorated in this section. The head of the goddess on the left is missing and the drapery detailing has become faded over time. In addition, there are no attributes with these women to indicate their identifications. Nevertheless, Spinaz zola labels 5 See tables at the end of this chapter, for literary correlation (3 4) and visual comparanda for each labeled scene in the friezes (3 5, 3 6, and 3 7). Those deemed questionable will have the suggested new identification and its literary co rrelation will be written, below Spinazzola`s interpretation and correlation, in italics in Table 3 4. In Tables 3 5, 3 6, and 3 7, all new interpretations are listed in italics under the Spinazzola interpretation. See references for Literary and Visual examination in the footnotes of Table 3 4 and in the notes at the bottom of Table 3 7, which applies to Tables 3 5 and 3 6. 6 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 917 919. 7 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 878 879.
41 these two goddess es Hera and Aphrodite. 8 A literar y correlation for the subject of this scene suggests another potential identity for one of the g oddesses which may fit the overall subject of the scene better than Spinazzol a`s identifications. T he event being displayed in this scene, the battle between Achilles and Hector, would fit better, if one of these goddesses were Athena instead of Hera or Aphrodite. Her presence in the scene draws a parallel with the event in which the gods discuss the fate of Hecto r and Athena protest s against Zeus preceding the battle. 9 It is in this event that Athena launches from the craggy peaks of Olympus, which is represented in section ( a ) by the rock outcropping upon which the goddesses are seated. This explains the presence and acti on of the second goddess who is pointing directly at the running figure, identified as Hector by Spinazzola. If one of the goddesses is Athena, as we suggest, and if the running figure in section ( b ) of this scene is Hector moving towards the center of th e scene and his battle with Achilles, as Spinazzola suggested, we might have more than just the battle between Achilles and Hector depicted in this scene. Instead, the scene may display a condensed series of events, including two that precede the battle an d one that follows the death of Hector. In the poem, Achilles chases Hector around the walls of Troy three times before the battle commences. 10 The battle finally starts after Athena interjects, appearing to Hector as a fellow son of Priam, Deiphobus, and deceivingly emboldens him to turn and face Achilles. 11 The first warrior figure in section (b) may be a representation of Athena`s catalytic interjection as Deiphobus because he is in the group of 8 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 878 879. 9 Homer, 1990. Bk. 22: ll. 201 223. Il iad Translated by Robert Fagle. New York, NY: Penguin Books.; note all lines taken from translation are Fagle`s line numbers. 10 Iliad Bk. 22: ll. 171 200. 11 Iliad Bk. 22: ll. 270 293.
42 warriors that Hector is running toward and he faces and re aches out to Hector as t he latter approaches. T he scene also includes the figure that Spinazzola labels as Achilles in section (d) ch arging past the group of warriors toward the center battle scene. Spinazzola had not suggested a link between these two s ymmetrically placed figures of the running Hector and the charging Achilles, however we offer that they represent the result of Athena`s interjection, with both heroes coming together to meet in the battle that is seen in section (c). Finally, section (e) offers a glimpse at an event that follows the battle. In this far right section, we see a chariot and horse team awaiting the return of Achilles. This final group may be a reference to Achilles dragging the body of Hector behind his chariot, which occur s after Hector`s death, and is depicted in the next scene in this frieze. 12 T he presence of Athena and of Deiphobus as the first Trojan, and the symmetrical composition of the secondary Hector and Achilles figures, altogether suggest that the subject of thi s scene is more than just the bat tle between Hector and Achilles, but rather The Events around the Battle of Hector and Achilles Although this multi event concept f or this scene was instigated by Spinazzola`s identification of the second Hecto r and Achil les pair. O ur additional identification s of Athena Deiphobus and our observation s regarding the orientation of the second ary pairing illuminates elements of this multi content scene that allude to events occurr ing before and after the central battle The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus The first of the scenes from the Trojan Cycle Frieze that has a questionable identification is scene 5: The Meeting of the Achaean Princes after the Challenge of Hector (Figures B 17 B 12 Iliad Bk. 22: ll. 465 467.
43 18). 13 In this scene, we have five Greek inscriptions translated from left to right, 14 Three of these inscriptions are easily recognizable as Diomedes, Nestor, and Ajax. The first inscription could be Menela us incorrectly spelled and the fifth inscription cannot be directly connected to a principal character in the Iliad The label suggested by Spinazzola connects this scene to the meeting at the beginning of Book 7 in w hich the warriors chose who would batt le Hector. It is based on the three recognizable names of men who were major contenders for the duel, as well as the scene`s proximity to the Hector and Andromache scene from the end of Book 6. 15 Howe another identification for this gathering of warriors that would make more sense with the figures named in the scene. Thrasymedes, a son of Nestor, is not describ ed as present at the gathering in Book 7. However, he is named explicitly as a part of an assembly in Book 10, during which the council plans the night raid on the Trojan camp. 16 If Thrasymedes is identified here, the scene more likely depicts the gathering in B ook 10 and the label should be changed to The Meeting of Achaean warriors to plan the Night Raid Scene 12 is the second scene whose identification seems questionable. It is damaged and only a few figures can be discerned in its remains (Figures B 35 B 3 6). 17 Spinazzola labels this scene Athena assisting Diomedes in Combat He identified the figure of Athena as the last individual in the scene next to the herm partition. There are n o inscriptions to aid the 13 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 917 919. 14 In th e inscriptions, the letters in [brackets] are suggested by Spinazzola to complete the identifiable labels. 15 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 917 919; see also, Iliad, Bk. 7: ll. 183 201. 16 Iliad, Bk. 10: ll. 267 303. 17 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 933 934.
44 identification of Athena or the other four hea ds that remain, nor an inscription for Diomedes However, the one near complete figure in the far right end of the scene is dressed in a long chiton costume, standing with a shield, a helmet, and a spear. These objects can be seen as attributes, identify ing this figure as the goddess Athena. 18 In addition, b ased on its location in the frieze, we can conclude that it likely w as a depiction of an event described in either Book 19 or 20 of the Iliad There are two mentions of Athena in the books, one near t he end of Book 19 and the other near the beginning of Book 20. 19 In the former, Athena having her support of Achilles questioned by Zeus in a council of the gods. In the latter Athena attends another council of the gods and descends to the battlefield wi th Hera, where she lets out a war cry from the ramparts of the Greek camp to gather the army Based on literary correlation, two potential interpretations are feasible. One is Athe na in a council meeting of the g ods ; the other is Athena in a cou ncil of t he g ods, preparing to join the Achaeans in B attle Each of these identifications for the scene is plausible based on the gathered composition of the heads in the scene. However, there is no way to determine which may be correct because of the extensive d amage and lack of inscriptions. Scene 15 is the third questionably labeled scene in the Trojan Cycle Frieze Spinazzola identifies this scene imprecisely as the Capture of a Trojan (Figures B 43 B 44). 20 The scene is whole but the paint is faded so that o nly the outlines and dark under painting of the figures are visible. Only one inscription below remains. Spinazzola concluded that this inscription gave the name of a Trojan nobleman and he supported this by the 18 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 933 934. 19 Iliad Bk. 19: ll. 402 421; Bk. 20: ll. 5 90. 20 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 937 938.
45 costume of the figure. 21 Due to the faded condition of the scene, we cannot verify the costume of the figure ; however, we can retranslate the inscription designation This confirms that the warrior is detaining the central ( faded ) figure beside him, above the inscription. However, this does not tell us who the warrior is and why the figure is being captured nor does Spinazzola offer this information in his identification. Based on this scene`s position between scene 14, The rescue of Aeneas by Poseidon and scene 16, The Death of Lycaon at the River Scamander it seems that the event being depicted occurred either at the end of Book 20 or at the beginning of Book 21. There are similarities between this scene and the description of the capture of Trojan warriors by Achilles from the begi nning of Book 21. 22 Achilles vowed to capture and sacrifice 12 Trojan wa rriors at the pyre of Patroclus as he was mourning at Patroclus` bier, an event depicted in scene 9 of this frieze. The sacrifice of these warriors is completed in scene 20 Achilles sacrificing at the pyre of Patroclus Therefore, if what we see in this scene is the completion of capture of this last prisoner, then a more complete identification of this scene might be Achilles capturing a Trojan warrior for S ac rifice This identification both fully identifies the event depicted in this scene and illustrates its thematic connection with scenes 9 and 20. Scene 17 is the fourth in the Trojan Cycle Frieze left unclearly identified by Spinazzola Most of this scen e is missing, which makes his inability to provide identification understandable. All that remains is a set of two in scriptions at the bottom, which Achilles, and Xanthos (Figures B 47 B 48). 23 Spinazzola labeled this scene Missing Section of the 21 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 937 938. 22 Iliad Bk. 21: ll. 29 32. 23 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 940 941.
46 Frieze, with inscriptions for Achilles and Xanthos He thus did not attempt to s uggest possible identifications. Although we cannot o ffer an identification because of the scene`s condition, we can suggest a set of potential subjects for this scene. Clearly, the inscriptions indicate that the scene depicted an event that principally involved Achilles and his horses Xanthos and Balios. O nly Xanthos is labeled here, but the horses are described in the poem as a pair thus, we can safely assume that Balios was also present in the scene 24 The subject of scene 17 can be one of two events. Its adjacency to scene 16 The Death of Lycaon at the River Scamander and location before scene 20, Achilles sacrificing at the pyre of Patroclus on the south wall, indicate that the event would be drawn from within Books 20 22 The i nscriptions in the scene indicate the presence of A chilles and his chariot team, which are found only twice in this set of books 25 The two possible identifications for this scene are Achilles preparing to return to Battle or Achilles dragging the Body of Hector Based on the preceding scene, we have already progressed in the l iterature beyond Book 19 This leads us to conclude that scene 17 may have been a part of the events around the death of Hector and that we would have seen a depiction of the dragging of the body of Hector Scene 19 is the fifth scene Spinazzola left unid entified. This partial scene is labeled, An Unidentifiable Woman Mourning (Fig ure B 51). 26 In the scene, we see a woman seated alone with a veil covering her head and her left hand up to her face. Spinazzola does not suggest any individual subject for th is scene and this is again understandable due to the lack of inscriptions and damage. However, we may be able to determine possible identifications, based on the 24 Iliad Bk.16: II. 173 184, p repping horse team for Patroclus` 503. Achilles berating his horses, 25 Iliad Bk. 19: ll. 463 472, 503; B k. 22: ll. 465 476. 26 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 945 946.
47 physical proximit y to scene 17, discussed above If the content identification of scene 17 a s Achilles dragging the Body of Hector is plausible, then the subject of scene 19 would logically come from events that took place after Hector`s death in Book 22. 27 The other nearby scenes may help us to narrow the possible identifications from the many e vents of Book 23 and Book 24 that this scene might depict. Scene 18, which directly precedes scene 19 on the south wall of the north wing, is labeled The Cry of Andromache and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hector (Figures B 49 B 50 ) 28 This scene is prob lematic as Spinazzola rightly pointed out, because the event depicted chronologically would not have occurred in the Iliad In the Iliad, the only reference to the tomb of Hector is a few lines at the end of the poem describing its construction 29 We will come back to question this event`s location in the frieze later. For now it is possible to draw a thematic link between the postures of the unidentified woman in scene 19 and Andromache`s mourning at the tomb of Hector in scene 18. The two scenes that f ollow scene 19 are 20 and 21 Achilles sacrificing at the Pyre of Patroclus ( Figures B 52 B 53) and the Footrace at the Funerary Games of Patroclus (F igures B 54 B 56) The events of these scenes both correlate with events from Book 23 of the Iliad The refore, the unidentified scene located amidst the se three literary correlated scenes would either come from the end of Book 22 or somewhere in Book 23 T he ambiguity of scene 19 makes it difficult to determine with confi dence that this event took place bef ore the funeral of Patroclus events in scenes 20 and 21 or whether it can be found in the Iliad at all. Nevertheless, a fter the death of Hector and before the events of the funeral of Patroclus, the Iliad describes the reactions of Hecuba and Andromache t o th e death of Hector. If 27 Iliad Bk. 22: ll. 478 480; ll. 505 513. 28 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 943 945; see also, Iliad, Bk. 24: 931 941. 29 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 943 945; see also, Iliad, Bk. 24: 931 941.
48 scene 18 shows the mourning of Andromache then it is not unreasonable that scene 19 may show the mourning of Hecuba. Although there is no direct reference in the Iliad to Hecuba seated veiled and weeping for her lost son, it is possible that the artist wanted to include a scene of Hecuba beside the one of Andromache at the tomb of Hector to emphasize that Hector`s death was a climatic and defining moment in the Iliad At the end of Book 22, the lines describe Hecuba shedding her veil, wailin g, tearing her hair in grief, and leading the women of Troy in a chant of sorrow. 30 Whether she is seated at this mo ment is not defined in the text. Nevertheless, it is clear from the description that her response in the Iliad is far more hys terical than the event depicted in scene 19. Much like the event in scene 18, scene 19 may be devised by the conjecture that this would logically be part of Hecuba`s response to Hector`s death. It is also possible that this scene will correlate with a ve rsion of the Iliad or another poem of the Trojan cycle that is not preserved today The reason or source for this scene may thus be undeterminable However, we can tentatively suggest that Hecuba mourning the Death of Hector is a clear label for this sce ne, based on the con tents of the surrounding scenes, its proximity to scene 18, with which it seems to share a similar theme and posture of mourning and the logical occurrence of this response by Hecuba at this point in the narrative Scene 23 is the fina l scene where we found the identification presented by Spinazzola to be uncertain. This scene is labeled as either Thetis seated in front of the burial mound of Achilles or Helen sitting on the walls of Troy (Figures B 59 B 60). 31 All that remains of this scene has been reconstructed in drawings. A woman is seated looking toward the right, where there is a mound of dirt and reeds. From what survives in the scene, there is not enough to determine the identification, but the location may help. 30 Iliad Bk. 22, 477 506. 31 Spina zzola 1953, 2: 950 952.
49 This scene is the second to last that survives in this frieze and it is located in the southeastern corner of the west wing on the east wall. The only other scene that remains on this wall is located near the corner of this wall and the south wall of the north wing It shows the arrival of Penthesileia in Troy, which is the first scene described in the Aethiopis 32 The last scene of the frieze is scene 24, Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius fleeing from Troy, with the guidance of Hermes which originally took up the en tire southern wall of the west wing. Based on the location of scene 23 at the end of this wall, which begins with the first event known to be in the Aethiopis it is likely from the same poem. Thus it is probable that this scene portrays Thetis seated in front of the burial mound of Achilles as one of the other known events from the poem. Classification and the Illumination of the Subjects and Compositions of each Frieze Comparison with the corpus of ancient art depictions for Trojan cycle events, allows for classification of the subjects and composition types in these friezes, further illuminating the bjects will be placed into two categories (standard or rare). The amounts of corresponding comp aranda identify each subject category. 33 By identifying the content of the preserved scenes in these friezes, categorizing the subjects in this way, and outlining the amount of each subject type found in each frieze, we can begin to understand the content assemblages of each frieze and discuss how each presents a different collective visual illustration of Trojan cycle literary narrative. 32 Nagy 2003; see also Apollodorus 1921, Epitome 5.5.1 7. 33 Understanding that the Trojan cycle was a well known and very popular source for visual subjects, an abridged table of comparanda is found following this chapter to demons trate the categorization of each scene. See Tables 3 5, 3 6, and 3 7; Those shown in the tables are limited by their compositional similarity to the frieze scene. Although the tables are narrowed by this limitation to make it more manageable, those scenes found in our friezes with more comparanda than the table can provide will be considered standard by default, because the total amount of comparanda for these scenes without these limitations is too large to display here.
50 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus In the Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoport icus, scenes that may be classified as rare make up the largest gro up of subject types, numbering 2 1 34 Most of these scenes have either no parallels or less than four preserved in ancient art For a few of these scenes, there are comparanda that have bee n identified as the same subject, but there is not enough evidence to prove their identification. Only three of the scenes that survive in this frieze depict standard subjects. Those scenes are 4, 6, and 13. Of these three scenes, the composition of sce ne 4 is very different from its comparanda. The Farewell of Hector and Andromache with Astyanax is a tri figure composition that is not known before this depiction and it is found in only two other depictions in ancient art that were created after this fr ieze, one is now lost and the other of which is fro m the Domus Aurea in Rome (Figures B 15 and B 16). Based on the distribution of these categories, the number of rare scenes is proportionately larger than the number of standard scenes in the Trojan Cycle Frieze Of course, we must recognize that only approximately a third of all the original scenes in the frieze are preserved. It is reason able to assume that many of those that are now missing were more likely standard than rare especially because many w ell known and standard events that are considered climactic in the literary narrative are missing and would have likely been included. The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio In the Lower Iliadic Frieze the largest group of subjects i s again those classified as rare. Nine scenes from this frieze, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, and 14, have no or only a couple preserved comparanda each. Finally only three of the remaining five scenes can be considered standard, scenes 10, 11, and 13. The n umber of rare scenes thus again outnumbers the standard. For this 34 Please refer to Tables 3 1, 3 2, and 3 3, for content scene titles in chapter 3, and for corresponding images see Appendix B.
51 frieze, it is a true proportional difference: all of the scenes are preserved in location, and only two scenes out of 14 are unidentifiable (2 and 8) One scene in the Lower Iliadic Frieze scene 1: Apollo shooting arrows in the Achaean camp can be considered rare and distinct Because this subject is also found in the Trojan Cycle F rieze, neither scene is truly one of a kind (Fig ures B 4 B 6 and B 62). However, the compositions of these respective scenes are different enough to be conside red distinctive They each show the subject generally, but they show different aspects of the event. The scene from the Trojan Cycle Frieze shows the priest Chryses praying to the god Apollo to begin r aining down arrows of plague upon the Achaean camp. Instead the Lower Iliadic scene shows the effects of this prayer, in which figures lay on the ground, presumably dead, and others help comrades run away from Apollo and his deadly arrows. These two depi ctions of Apollo`s plague on the Achaean camp are uncommon to the corpus of Trojan cycle depictions. There are no known depictions of this event previously in Roman or even Greek art. 35 The uniqueness of this subject deserves more exploration than the sco pe of this thesis allows. However, for our current endeavor its presence in both the Lower Iliadic Frieze and the Trojan Cycle Frieze displaying two different compositions and aspects of the same literary event reinforces the kind of unusual elements foun d in these friezes. 35 A f ter l o o k i ng t h r o u g h the f o l l o w i ng pri n ci p a l s o u rc es t h a t d e scr i be or p r o vi d e i m a g es of T r o j an c y c l e d e p i c t i o n s t h e r e i s n o m e n t i on of a n y c o m p a r a n da f or t h i s A p o l l o sc e n e; s e e L e x i c on I c o n o g r a p hi c u m M y t h o l o g i ae C l a ss i c ae ( L I MC ) 1981. A p oll o 1. Zu r i c h: A r te m i s .; P a u l y A u g u s t F r i e d r i c h vo n a n d G e o r g W i ss o w a. 1 8 9 3 V o l 1. P a ul y s re a l en cyc l op a d ie de r c l a ss i sc he n A lt e r t um s wi ss en sc ha f t S t ut t g art: J B M e t zl er; B ea zl e y J .D. 1 9 7 4 A t t i c Red F i g u r e V a s e P a i nt e r s L o n d o n: T h a m es a nd Hu d s o n .; B e a z l e y J D. 1 9 7 8 A t t i c Bl a c k f i g u r e V a s e P a i n t er s N e w Y or k : Hac k er Art B o o k s ; B e a z l e y J D 1 9 7 1. P ar a li p o m e n a: a d d i t i o n s to A t t i c b l a c k f i g u r e va se p a i nt e r s a nd t o A tt i c re d f i g ure v a s e p a i n t ers ( s e c o n d e d i t i o n ) O x f ord: C l ar e n d o n P r e ss .; B r o m m e r F r a n k 1 9 8 0. Go tt e r s age n in V a s en li s t e n M ar b urg: N. G El w ert; B r o m m er, F r a n k 1 9 7 3. V a s e n li s t en z ur g r i e c h i sc h e n H e l d e n s ag e M a r b u r g: N G El w ert
52 The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco The scenes in the Sacrarium Frieze are very different fro m those found in the other two. Three fifths of the subjects found in this frieze are standard and commonly depicted in ancie nt Trojan cycle art, scenes 1, 3, and 4. Scene 1: Hector led by the Goddess Fate to combat Achilles is considered a standard subject, but here it is compositionally different from other depictions of this event. In this scene, Priam, Hecuba, and Andromac he are depicted upon the ramparts, where in most other depictions of this subject, mostly found on Greek vases, these figures are outside the walls bid ding farewell to Hector (Figures B 106 and B 107). 36 Scene 5: Hector`s body being returned to Troy is rar e, as there are no other known depictions of this sub ject in Gr eek or Roman art (Figures B 120 B 122). Scenes 2, 3, and 4 are considered standard subjects based on their identifications. Unlike scenes 3 and 4, scene 2 is compositionally different from ot her depictions of its subject, and as discussed, the scene shows much more than the original identification indicates. Scene 2 is currently labeled Hector battles with Achilles, which we suggested changing to The Events around the Battle of Hector and Ach illes (Figures B 108 B 1 22 ) 37 As we noted t h is sc en e s ho w s a small s e r i e s o f e v en ts f r o m B oo k 2 2 d isp l a y e d a s a mu lt i f a c e t e d dep icti o n t h a t t a k e s u p th e en ti r e ba ck w a ll o f t h e S a c r a r i u m Fr i e z e T h is s c en e is v e ry d if fe re n t f r o m p r e c ed i n g c ompa r an d a o f t h is s ub ject i n its c o m p o siti o n It s ho w s no t on ly th e c e n tral e v en t o f t h e b a t t le b e t w ee n t h e t w o he r o e s, bu t a l s o e l e m e n ts t ha t r e f e r to e v en ts t h a t p re c ed e an d s u cc e e d t h e ba t t l e itself, in this case, literarily and visually. 38 In sum, the rare and sta ndard scenes noted in each frieze create three distinct content assemblages. However, before we continue to examine the differences in their displays, it is 36 S ee T a bl e 3 7 f or b r i ef d escr i pt i o n s of c o m p a r a n d a 37 S p i n az z o l a 1 9 5 3 2 : 8 7 8 8 7 9 38 See Table 3 5, 3 6, and 3 7 for comp aranda examples; see also, LIMC 1981, Achilles 1: 558 583.
53 important to note some shared contents in the friezes. Each of the frieze s shares one or two stan dard subject scenes that are displayed in another frieze with a similar, yet slightly different composition. This is most notable in two sets of repeated subjects between the friezes. T he f irst s t an d a rd su b j e ct s e t is f o un d in a ll three f ri e z e s, t h e d ragg ing o f t h e bod y of H e c t o r by A c h i ll e s, in sc e ne 3 of t h e S a cr a ri u m f ri e z e in s c en e 1 1 in t he L o w e r Ilia d ic Frie z e an d i n s c en e 17 b y m y s u gg e st e d id en t i f ica t i on of t h e T roj a n C y cle Frie z e T h e co m p o sitio n s of the d ragging of Hec to r scen e s in t h e L o w e r Ili ad ic an d S a cr a ri u m f ri e z e s a re si m il a r in th e ir d e p icti o n of t h e main e v en t but d i f f e r in s e co n d a ry e leme n ts, s u ch a s t h e s e t t ing a nd m in o r f i g u r e s. U n like in t h e se s c ene s w h ich h a v e f i g u res p r e s e r v ed a s me nti o n ed s c e ne 17 i n T rojan C y cle F r ie z e on ly po ss e ss e s t w o inscri p ti on s, of Ac h illes an d X a nt ho s a n d f r o m the ir i d e n t i f ica t i on s in t h is sc e ne a nd its loc a ti o n in t he f ri e z e w e s u gg e st e d t h is sta n d a rd s ub j e ct f o r scene 1 7 T he s e c on d s ub j e ct that is re pea t e d i n t he t w o of t h e f ri e z e s is P r i v isit to Ac h illes to ra n s o m f o r t h e bod y of H e c t o r, f o u nd in s c en e 4 in t h e Sa cr a rium Fri e z e an d sce n e 1 3 of the L o w e r Ili ad ic Frie z e A g a in, w e s e e in t he s e sce ne s t ha t t he co mpo sit i o n is g ene rally i den tic a l, b u t on e e l e me nt is d i f fe rent. In sc e ne 4, H e r m e s is dep ic t e d a cc o m p a n y ing P ri a m on th is v isit a ti on T h is diff e re n ce b et w ee n t he fig u res in ea ch sc ene t h ou gh it ma y n o t ch an ge t h e t o t a l c o mpo sit i ona l s i m il a riti e s be t w ee n t h e sc ene s, s t ill s ho ws a n ot ab le change be t w e e n t h e d ispl a y of t he s am e e v en t. T he si m il a riti e s a nd d i f fe re n c e s be t w ee n t he c om p o sition a l d ispl a y s of t h e se t w o s ha red s t a n da rd s ub j e cts f o u n d i n e i t he r t w o o r all t h r e e of the f ri e z e s m a y i nd icate t h e u se of p a t te rn b o o ks by th e pa tr o n s a n d a rtis t s in t he cre a t i o n of t h e f ri e z e s Al t h o u gh it is no t f o c u s of t h is e x a m in a t i on t h is sh a red c on te n t an d the ir on ly sli g h tly d i f f e ri n g c om p o sitio n s m a y p r ov ide
54 i n si g h t in t o t he possible u se of pa t t e rn b oo ks in t h e cr ea ti o n of w a ll de c o r a ti o n in Po mpe ii, e sp e cially in f i g u ral sc ene s th a t sh a re a t h eme 39 Conclusions on the Di s tincti v e Con t e nt A sse mb l a ges of e a c h Tro j a n C y c le Fr ie ze Although each of these friezes exhibits events from the same literary anthology, the events, the order of display, and the amount of rare subjects from the narrative t hey present to the viewer varies. When we look at these components for each frieze, we can see that each one not only presents a distinct ive survey of the Trojan Cycle. The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus As discussed, the Trojan Cycle F rieze is the largest of the three and de spite the loss of two thirds of its content, one can reconstruct from what remains the manner in which this frieze presented the events of the Trojan cycle. From the subjects of the surviving scenes and the t otal size of this frieze, it likely displayed both subject classifications The amount of rare scenes calls attention to the simultaneously broad reach and in depth approach to the literary nar rative in the frieze`s design. The subjects of this frieze al so come fr om more than one of the Trojan c ycle poems. This frieze has scenes not only from the Iliad but also from the Aethiopis and the Iliou Persis The s e sources are shown in scene 22: the Arrival of Penthesileia (Figures B 57 B 58) and scene 23: The tis seated in front of the burial mound of Achilles (Fig ures B 59 B 60) from the Aethiopis S cene 24: Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius, escaping Troy, with the guidance of Hermes (Fig ure B 61) comes from the Iliou Persis From the positions of the numbered scenes, six of the eight 39 T he p a tt e r n b o ok c o n c e p t o f art i s t i c cr e a t i on was pro p o s ed b y K arl S c h e f o l d, f r om h i s s tu di es of Ro m an s ar c o p h a g i d e c or a t i o n It h a s si n c e b e en a d o p t ed i nto Ro m an wa l l p a i n t i n g stu d y a nd i s s u p p o r t e d b y L i n g a n d A l li s o n a m o n g o t h e rs For m ore i n f or m at i on o n t h i s t h e o r y s ee S c h e f o l d, K 1 9 7 6 B il de r b u c he r a ls V o r l age n r o m i sc he r Sa r k ophag e Ro m e: E c o l e F r a n c a i s e de Ro m e; A l l i s o n P e n e l o p e, 1 9 9 5 a i n ter W o r ks h o p s or De c orator T e a m s 9 8 1 0 9. M e d e d l i n g en v an h et N e d e r l a n ds Inst i t u t te Ro m e 5 4 ; L i ng 1 9 9 1 2 17 2 2 0.
55 walls had depictions of Iliadic events and the east and south wall of the west wing had depictions of events from the Aethiopis and the Iliou Persis. Despite the large scope of the narrative covered in this frieze, the events depi cted are not just a general survey of the most well known or standard sub jects. Surprisingly, most of the scenes that survive are rare scenes of often overlooked events F rom the Iliad one may cite scene 15: Achilles Capturing a Trojan Prisoner for sacr ifice (F igures B 43 B 44), scene 1: Apollo shooting arrows of Plague into the Achaean camp (Figures B 4 B 6) and scene 5: The Meeting of Achaean warriors to plan the Night Raid (Figures B 17 B 18). Therefore, this frieze stands out for more than just its sheer size and scope; it also displayed events, on present evidence, that were rarely if ever chosen for depiction. The order in which these subjects are displayed is also atypical. The overall flow of the frieze seems to follow the order of the narr ative as a whole. Some sections seem to follow the books exactly even w h en intervening detailed events that are normally skipped are interjected, such as scenes 9, 10, and 11 or 15 and 16. Yet more often, we find that within a single frieze section, the order seems to be confused, where two events from the same book are switched with the later event shown before the earlier one, such as scenes 2 and 3 or 8 and 9 or 13 and 14. In addition, for some adjacent scenes, the succeeding scene in the pair may ju mp more than one book, such as scenes 4 and 5 or in the scene series 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21. The scene series of 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 brings to light a rather unexpected and unexplained skip in the narrative sequence. As mentioned, scene 17 could be of Achilles dragging the Body of Hector scene 18 is The Cry of Andromache and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hector ( Figures B 49 B 50) 19 may be Hecuba mourning the Death of Hector ( Fig ure B 51) and then 20 and 21 are Achilles sacrificing at the Pyre of Patroclus ( Figures B 52 B 53) and the Footrace at the Funerary Games of Patroclus (F igures B 54 B 56) respectively. As
56 mentioned, the content of scene s 18 and 19 are not definitively found in the Iliad and thus our identifications are tentative. Never theless, each of the identification s for 18 and 19 are based on logical correlations to the progre ssion of the narrative and the character s responses to the clima c ti c event of Hector`s death, which narratively took place before the event shown in the 17 2 1 scene ser ies. The event in scene 18, however, provides evidence that it would logically follow the description of Hector`s tomb in the last lines of the Iliad T he insertion of scene 18 in this scene series is a clear example of disjo inted sequencing i n this frieze, as its location in the series is i llogical because it would have succeeded the Book 23 ev ent s shown in scenes 20 and 21 The awkward sequence of this multi scene series on the south wall of the n orth wing and other frieze sections such as w ith scenes 4 and 5 seem to suggest that the intent was not to show the events in the exact order, but just to display them in general. When we look at the physical context and the scene compositions of this frieze, we may be able to reconcile the generall y correct overall progression with the se irregular subsections. The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The Lower Iliadic Frieze is made up of a collection of subjects from throughout the Iliad This frieze presents a general survey o f the prominent events of the Iliad with standard subjects such as the ransom of the body of Hector. Some of the rarely depicted subjects in this frieze are the two battles, fully described in the Iliad one at the wall of the Achaean camp and the other at the ships. In part of the frieze, scenes 3, 4, and 5, we have an interesting feature: a combination of minor events placed together in order of occurrence, whic h together show a major event: scene 3: The gathering of the emissaries Ajax, Odysseus, and Phoenix (Figures B 65 B 66) scene 4: Achilles in front of his tent (Figures B 67 B 68), and then scene 5: Phoenix kneeling before
57 Achilles (Figures B 69 B 70). Each of these subjects is a part of the larger event of the embassy visitation to Achil les in Book 9. These three scenes and their compositions are rare in ancient art, but when they are placed together, they sho w a standard subject in Trojan c ycle art: the embassy to Achilles. Overall, the scenes of this frieze are presented in the order of the events from the poem, but the progression of the events is not clearly laid out without understanding the orientation of the frieze. There are clear jumps from Book 1 to Book 9 then from Book 9 to 12, 13, then to 16, 18, then 22, 23, and finally 2 4, but these jumps are sequential and orderly. This will become clear when we look at the physical context and scene co mpo s itions of this frieze. The combination of standard subjects and this cluster of rare s ub jec t s t h a t c om b ine i n to a s t a nda r d s u b ject cl e a r l y i nd ica te d t ha t t h e a ss e mb la g e o f s u b jec t s o f t h is f r i e z e i s a lso d istinc t i v e I t p res en ts a g e n e ral s u r v e y o f ma j o r e v en ts o f t h e Ili a d w ith a s pe c i a l la y ou t t h a t is s e qu e n ti a l bu t d ict a t e d b y its o r i en t a ti o n The S a c r a rium F r i e ze from t he Ca s a di S a c e l l o I l i ac o The Sacrarium Frieze, as mentioned, is very short compared to the other Pompeiian Trojan cycle friezes The subjects of the scenes draw exclusively from two books, 22 and 24 from the end of the Iliad Although the scope of the literary na rrative covered in this frieze is limited, the amount of detail provided in the construction of each scene, especially in scene 2, is noteworthy. The order of the events is clearly sequential The content collection of this frieze shows a small sample of the well known subjects, most of which are constructed as the artistic tradition dictates, and others that are standard in subject but displayed in new compositions. In sum, each of these friezes has different groupings, different schemes of order, and bo th shared and unique subjects. These present various scopes of the Trojan cycle literary narrative After examining the scenes and the unique features that make up the total content constructions
58 for these three different friezes, we can continue to expl ore how these assemblages of subjects and compositions have been adapted to fit into their physical context, to create connectivity, and to form a unified visual frieze
59 Table 3 4 Literary References 1 Litera ry Reference Subject of Scene Fri eze and Scene Number* Iliad, Bk. 1: ll. 28 37; 38 70 Apollo shooting arrows of Plague upon the Achaean camp Trojan Cycle Frieze (Cryptoporticus) (1) Iliad, Bk. 1: ll. 432 464 Apollo shooting arrows of Plague upon the Achaean Camp Lower Iliadic Frieze ( House of Octavius Quartio) (1) Iliad, Bk. 1: ll. 581 586 or Iliad Bk. 9 ll. 194 Achilles seated before his tent Lower Iliadic Frieze (4) Iliad, Bk. 5: ll. 964 997 Diomedes and Athena in chariot against Ares Trojan Cycle Frieze (3) Iliad, Bk. 6: ll. 137 282 Diomedes and Glaucus exchange weapons Trojan C ycle Frieze (2) Iliad, Bk. 6: ll. 435 631 Farewell of Hector and Andromache with Astyanax Trojan C ycle Frieze (4) Iliad, Bk. 7: ll. 183 201 Iliad Bk. 10 267 303 Council of Achaean Princes after th e Challenge of Hector or Council of Achaean warriors, planning the night raid on the Trojan Camp Trojan C ycle Frieze (5) 1 References: Apollodorus. 1997. T he Library Transl. Hard, Robin. Oxford World`s Classics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.; Dionysus of Halicarnassus, 1937. Roman Antiquities, I Trans. Earnest Cary, Loeb Classical Library. Harvard University Press. Cambridge. Mass. 144 215; Hesiod, Hom eric Hymns, Epic Cycle, Homerica. Translated by Evelyn White, H G. Loeb Classical Library Volume 57. London: William Heinemann, 1914; Homer, Iliad 1990. trans, Robert Fagle. New York, NY: Penguin Books; Proclus's Summary of the Epic Cycle Omitting the Telegony. Translated by Gregory Nagy http://www.stoa.org/hopper/text.jsp?doc=Stoa: text:2003.01.0004; West, Martin L. 2003. Greek Epic Fragments: From the seventh to the fifth centuries BC. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. *Only two scenes are not included on this chart and they are Watering Horses and the Trojans trying to recover a Body from the Lower Iliadic Frieze, because no reasonable literary correlation can be determined for them.
60 Table 3 4. Continued Literary Reference Subject of Scene Frieze and Scene Number* Iliad, Bk. 9 ll. 552 756 Phoenix at the knees of Achilles Lower Iliadic Frieze (5) Iliad, Bk. 12: ll. 485 547, or a general battle scene Battle at the Ramparts (Lycaons and Dardans noted in inscriptions) Lower Iliadic Frieze (6) Iliad, Bk. 13: ll. 226 231 Ajax and Hector: Battle at the ship s Lower Iliadic Frieze (7) Iliad, Bk. 16: ll. 151 156; 173 184; 466 473 Patroclus charges into Battle Lower Iliadic Frieze (9) Iliad, Bk. 17: ll. 1 8;130 140 Battle for the body of Patroclus with Hector Trojan Cycle Frieze (6) Iliad, Bk. 18: ll. 821 838 Returning the body of Patroclus to the Greek Camps (Ajax and Ajax) Trojan Cycle Frieze (7) Iliad, Bk. 18: ll. 270 275; 367 369 Achilles mourning for Patroclus at his bier Trojan Cycle Frieze (9) Iliad, Bk. 18: ll. 430 719 Thetis in the forge of Hephaestus Trojan Cycle Frieze (8) Iliad, Bk. 19: ll. 3 33 Thetis presenting Achilles with the new armor Lower Iliadic Frieze (10) Iliad, Bk. 19: 34 58 Unidentified three figure grouping or from the Shore Trojan Cycle Frieze (10) Iliad, Bk. 19: ll. 230 233; 285 293 Return of Briseis is approved by the Assembly Trojan Cycle Frieze (11)
61 Table 3 4. Continued Literary Reference Subject of Scene Frieze and Scene Number* No Correlation Iliad, Bk. 19: 402 42 1 Iliad, Bk. 20: 5 90 Athena assis ting Diomedes in battle or Athena in the council meeting of the Gods or Athena talking to the gods then going to help the Greeks in battle Trojan Cycle Frieze (12) Iliad, Bk. 20: ll. 347 356 Poseidon saves Aeneas from A chilles Trojan Cycle Frieze (14) Iliad, Bk. 20: ll. 463 503 Death of Polydorus and Hector saved by Apollo Trojan Cycle Frieze (13) Iliad, Bk. 21: ll. 29 32 Capture of a Trojan or Achilles captures a Trojan Prisoner for Sacrifices Trojan Cycle Frieze (15) Iliad, Bk. 21: ll. 38 155; 238 349 Death of Lycaon by the banks of the Xanthus/ Scamander River Trojan Cycle Frieze (16) Iliad, Bk. 22: ll. 38 90; 93 107 Hector leaving Troy to battle with Achilles escorted by Fate, Priam, Hecuba and Astyanax wa tching from the walls of Troy Sacrarium Frieze (Casa di Sacello Iliaco)(1) Iliad, Bk. 22: ll. 201 223; 270 293; 245 247; 171 200; 321 389; 465 467 Battle between Achilles and Hector (sections a, b, c, and d) 2 or The Event s around the Batt le of Hector and Achilles Sacrarium Frieze (2) Iliad, Bk. 22: ll. 465 467; 23: 12 29 Achilles dragging the Body of Hector behind his chariot (sections a, b, and c) Sacrarium Frieze (3) Iliad, Bk. 22: ll. 465 467 Achilles dragging the Body of Hector b ehind his chariot Lower Iliadic Frieze (11) 2 See List of ep isodes in Chapter 2 for more information of subsections in this scene and others.
62 Table 3 4. Continued Literary Reference Subject of Scene Frieze and Scene Number* No Correlation given by Spinazzola Iliad, Bk. 22: ll. 465 467 Missing Section of the Frieze with Inscripti ons (ACHILLES and XANTHOS) or Achilles dragging Hector behind his chariot Trojan Cycle Frieze (17) No Correlation found in Iliad Unidentified Woman with her veiled or Hecuba mourning the death of Hector Trojan Cycle Frieze (19) Iliad, Bk. 24 or sometime after the end of the Iliad The cry of Andromache and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hector Trojan Cycle Frieze (18) Iliad, Bk. 23: ll. 195 201; 221 230; 289 292 Achilles sacrificing at the Tomb of Patroclus Trojan Cycle Frieze (20) Iliad, Bk. 23: ll 327 329; 498 500; 733 736 Funeral Games for Patroclus, Patroclus on a bier, chariot races, and boxing match Lower Iliadic Frieze (12) Iliad, Bk. 23: ll. 823 860 Funeral Games for Patroclus, Foot race between Odysseus and Ajax, Ajax falls into River Trojan Cycle Frieze (21) Iliad, Bk. 24: ll. 202 223; 313 330; 540 548; 559 562; 647 654; Achilles and Priam, Ransom for the body of Hector Lower Iliadic Frieze (13) Iliad, Bk. 24: ll. 202 223; 313 330; 540 548; 559 562; 647 654; Achilles and Priam, Ran som for the body of Hector, with Hermes Sacrarium Frieze (4) Iliad, Bk. 24: ll. 313 330; 810 830 Ideaos and Priam guarding the body of Hector in a wagon Lower Iliadic Frieze (14) Iliad, Bk. 24: ll. 810 830; 840 843 Return of Hector to Troy, escorted by Hermes (sections a, b, and c) Sacrarium Frieze (5)
63 Table 3 4. Continued Literary Reference Subject of Scene Frieze and Scene Number* The Aethiopis Proclus, Chrestomathia, ii Scholiast on Homer ll. xxiv. 804. Arrival of Penthesileia a t the gates of Troy Trojan Cycle Frieze (22) The Aethiopis Proclus, Chrestomathia, ii Apollonius Ep. 5.1 Helen on the wall of Troy or Thetis mourning at the Tomb of Achilles Trojan Cycle Frieze (23) Iliou Persis Apollonius Ep. 5.21 Proclus Account #4 Virgil, Aeneid Bk. 2: ll. 705 729 Dionysus of Halicarnassus Bk.1: ll. 144 215. Aeneas fleeing with Anchises and Ascanius from Troy, being guided by Hermes, (not noted in the Aeneid or in the Roman Antiquities) Trojan Cycle Frieze (24)
64 Table 3 5. The Tr ojan Cycle Frieze Scene Comparanda Scene # and location Trojan Cycle Frieze (House of the Cryptoporticus) Comparanda 1 Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 West wall of west wing Scene 1 Apollo Shooting arrows upon the A chaeans with th e priest, Chryses, in a wagon praying to the god. Only comparanda found is the same scene, with a different composition from the House of Octavius Quartio Lower Iliadic Frieze. North wall of north wing Scene 2 Diomedes and the exchange of weapons wit h Glaucus Calyx Krater, New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, Cerveteri, Attic, 500 490 BCE20. Calyx crater, Attic rf. New York, MMA 08.258.58. From Cerveteri. ARV 185, 36: Kleophrades P.: Para 340; Richter/Hall pl s 12. 13; Boardman, J., AntK 19, 1976, 15 18 pl. I, I. 2. 500 490 B. C. E. side B: Two warriors. One places his hand on his head and holds a helmet; the other (D.?) turns back to him and holds out a sword. Boardman suggests that the gesture on B indicates Glaukos' dismay; and that the wea pons held out on B, suggests the exchange. North wall of north wing Scene 3 The Battle between Diomedes (Assisted by Athena) versus Ares No comp a randa found East wall of east wing Scene 4 Andromache`s Farewell to Hector Andromache standing righ t near to Hektor, who, helmet, left foot raised, Astyanax is on his left thigh. Tabulae Iliaca Relief now lost Mural. Rome, Domus Aurea. Borda, M., La Romana pittura(1958) 223 (with fig.) Spinazzola, oc 8, II 916; Wiege F., "Das Goldene Haus of Nero," J rf/28, 1913.214 fig. 3 67 and 6 feet. 21; Wirth, F., Romischer Wandmalerei (1934) pi. 8 b. 1st Century CE On the left, Hektor, standing, front, pike in the right hand, left hand resting on a shield, is ready to leave, a child in the arms of his nurse, with his arms outstretched. In the doorway of a palace, right, a woman of larger size is probably Andromache, followed by a smaller character, a half erased, probably a servant. East wall of east wing Scene 5 A Council meeting of the Achaean Princes after the challenge of Hector or The Council of Achaean Warriors, planning the night raid on the Trojan camp Inscip: Ajax, Menesteos, Diomedes; names Nestor and Thrasymedes, partly lost. Red figure Attic Skyphos, Cerverti from Vienna Kunsthistoricmuse u m; 500 to 450 B.C.E. provides general composition similarites, but no evidence of specific event shown. Friis Johnasen p. 271 East wall of east wing Scene 6 Combat with Hector over the Body of Patroclus: Inscrip: Ajax, Ajax, and Hector. Black f igure Attic band Cup, six century BCE, Beazley ABV, 675 No. 2 Friis Johnasen, Fig. 79, 256 12 c. now lost, date uncertain, remains only in reconstructed drawing. Two groups of three helmeted warriors and an archer move towards each other. between them is a figure lying twisted profile and frontal on the ground. Two inscriptions are found, EKTOP and AIAS. Ajax pictured with his Boeotian shield an identifiable attribute. Black Figure Calyx krater by Exekias, from the Acropolis North slope, Athens. Beazley, ABV 145, No. 19. Hesperia 1937, 469 sqq. and Hesperia 1956, 345 sqq. Friis Johnasen fig. 80 pg 195; 256;12 d. Two groups of three fully armed warriors fight for a dead body, lies stretched between them; inscription (PATPOKLOS, EKTOP) and Ajax identified b y his Boeotian shield Capitoline Iliadic Frieze panel rho (P) without inscriptions, seems to show the battle for the body of the fallen Patroclus, Sadurska South wall of the east wing Scene 7 Transportation of the Body of Patro clus Inscrip: Aja x, Patroclus, Ajax Capitoline Iliadic Frieze, panel rho (P) seems to show the loading of Patroclus into a chariot by two warriors. No inscriptions, Sadurska Red figure calyx krater ca. 500, by a Pezzino group painter from Agrigento, no inscriptions, Woodfa rd, Susan. 1983. The Trojan War in Ancient Art. p. 77: Fig. 70;shows the suspended body being carried similar compositionally to the frieze scene
65 Table 3 5. Continued. Scene # and location Trojan Cycle Frieze (House of the Cryptoportic us) Comparanda 1 Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 West wall of the east wing Scene 8 Thetis in the forge of Hephaestus Pompeii IX.5.1 3 Casa di Achilles, 4th style Panel paintings of Hephestus giving Thetis the armor for Achilles Tabula Capito lina Iliaca. Rome, Capitol, Sadurska, 26 and pi. I. 1st century B.C. E On the sigma side panel on the right side, we see Thetis and an attendant watching a group of figures forge the shield for Achilles. West wall of the east wing Scene 9 Achill es mourning at the bier of Patroclus Tabula Capitolina Iliaca. Ro me, Capitol, Sadurska, 26 and pl I. 1st century B.C. E On the sigma side panel on the left side, we see Achilles seated beside the bier of Patroclus with an attendant watching and a wom an behind the bier praying with her arms raised (possibly Briseis ). Similar to the first part, where Achilles is seated beside the covered corpse of Patroclus on the bier from the Funerary Games scene E# 12 from the House of Octavius Quarto. West wall o f the east wing Scene 10 Unidentified three figure grouping or Achilles` cry from the Shore No comparanda found West wall of the east wing Scene 11 The Return of Briseis to Achilles is approved by the Assembly. No comparanda found, scenes of Briseis being taken away from Achilles tent are very common, but her return to Achilles by Agamemnon is unique. West wall of the east wing Scene 12 Athena assisting Diomedes in Battle or Athena in the council meeting of the Gods or Athena talking to the Gods and preparing to leave and help the Greeks in Battle No comparanda found West wall of the east wing Scene 13 The Return of Achilles to the Battle after the death of Patroclus, the death of Polidoro, and Hector saved by Apollo Tabul a Iliaca. Rome, Mus. Cap. Sadurska, Tables 27 pl. L (or P. Iphition). Early Empire. Right Frieze 5 from the top (marked Y), 3 and 4. Characters from the Left: Achilles ( I n script .), and a Trojan attacking. The identification of Polidoros is based on t he alleged pleading for mercy by a Trojan (Sadurska) and then Polidoros was hit from behind. West wall of the east wing Scene 14 Aeneas is saved from Achilles by Poseidon Tabula Iliaca. Rome, Mus. Cap. Sadurska, Tables 27 pl. L (Polidoros or Iphit ion). Early Empire. Right panel (marked Y), Characters from the Left: Poseidon and unlabeled figure then Achilles ( in scri pt .), and attacking a Trojan Sadurska believes that this Poseidon coming to rescue Aeneas (the unlabeled figure) from Achilles 542 Achilles Homeric cup. Berlin 30535th Robert, 65 66 Plate 5, i; Bulas, Figure 60; sense, cup 78 MB 7 (with references) Figure 3, 2 2nd Century BC Here it is shown how the Poseidon Aeneas, who threatened to subject the Achilles in battle, remove d (see lit on the subject. Sources). Poseidon (with trident) has lifted the armed men Aeneas (inscription) in order to get him off the battlefield. He stands over against the armed Achilles (inscription), he does with his spear or an attacking gesture towa rds Aeneas. Poseidon with his raised right hand commands probably the Achilles. Night to comply with the eyes of Achilles, and pour around the same time, so that Achilles does not notice the disappearance of Aeneas. The reed bushes right of Poseidon even b elongs to the next scene (cf. A. Lycaon 551). West wall of the east wing Scene 15 Capture of a Trojan or Achilles capturing a Trojan warrior for sacrifice No Comparanda Found
66 Table 3 5. Continued. Scene # and location Trojan Cycle Frieze (House of the Cryptoporticus) Comparanda 1 Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 South wall of the north wing Scene 16 Killing of Lycaon, Priam's youngest son, and the banks of the Scamander River Achilles 553: Capitoline Iliadic Frieze Simi lar composition, arrangement with central figures, Sadurska id`s as death of Polidoros, not Lycaon Achilles 550: Column krater red figure Apulian, British Museum, old catalogue # 173; Attributed to the Prisoner Painter; ca. 380 370B.C.E. found in Ita ly, Basilicata A young man pleading to a warrior, to the right is a bound prisoner, and on the left is another warrior with a sword. But most scholars identify with the supplicant figure as Penthesileia instead of Lycaon. Lowenstam 2008, As Witnessed by Images, fig 63. p117. Achilles 551: Homeric cup. Berlin 30535th Robert, 65 66 Plate 5, i; Bulas, 118 119; Weitzmann, Figure 44; sense Becher78 MB 7 (with references) Figure 3, 2 2. century. BC Shown are various Iliad battle. The right of to Aeneas episod e (Achilles 542) following scene displays the inscription on the left side mentioned Scamander sitting next to reeds. Before his Fight two warriors, one of which is left completely naked, but armed with helmet, shield and sword. It seems as if he rushes ou t behind the Scamander, is therefore from the river. Is his fully armed enemy reliably detected as Achilles. After 21 Book of the Iliad for the Trojans is the name Lykaon or Asteropaios (21, 161 2 02) into account. As for Robert, but the name still has a K A inscription preserved. Could it be, Lykaon. Notwithstanding the Iliad is not shown here Lykaon imploring such as a prayer to Achilles for his life. South wall of the north wing Scene 18 The cry of Andromeda and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hector T abula Capitolina Iliaca. Rome, Capitol, Sadurska, 26 and pi. I. 1st century B.C. E In the central panel, we have a group of figures on the left side of the panel, around a building that is labeled by inscription as the Tomb of Hector, and one of those figures is Andromache (inscription) South wall of the north wing Scene 19 Unidentified Woman seated with her head veiled or Hecuba mourning the death of Hector No comparanda found South wall of the north wing Scene 20 Achilles sacrificing at th e funeral pyre of Patroclus Volute krater, Pugliese. Naples H 3254th From Canosa. South Italian vase, ca. 330, The famous Patroklos krater shows in the middle of the three zones with the sacrifice of the captured Trojans at the funeral pyre of Patroclus b y Achilles. Tabulae Iliaca C Achilles burning Patroclus on a pyre. No prisoners of war pictured however. South wall of the north wing Scene 21 The Games at the tomb of Patroclus. The foot race: Ajax is tripped by Athena and Odyesseus wins the race and takes t he Krater Prize. No comparanda found East wall of the west wing Scene 22 Amazon Penthesilae arrives in Troy and greeted by Priam Penthesilae first arrives in Greek art in the 6th century B.C.E. and for the most part until later (Hellentistic and Ro man) Art she was depicted at the moment or just after she is killed in battle with Achilles Tabulae Iliaca, Ti pl. X Sadurska, now lost, shows Penthesilei arriving and greeted by three figures, probably Priam, Hecuba, and Cassandra. Oxford, Mus Ashmolean R 285. Homeric cup. With scenes from the Iliad and the Aethiopis, including Penthesilae arrival and greeted by Priam of Troy at the Grave of Hector with inscriptions East wall of the west wing Scene 23 Helen sitting on the Walls of Troy or Thetis seated before the burial mound of Achilles No comparanda found South wall of west wing Scene 24 Aeneas, Anchises and Ascanius, led by Hermes, Fleeing from Troy. Iliaca Tabula Capitolina. 48 Cf. Horsfall, o.c. 94, 26 48 pl. 2. Aeneas. out the Scaean gates with Askanios holding his hand, carrying Anchises on his shoulder standing before Hermes Calyx krater. Ferrara, Mus. 2995 Arch. Spina. Beazley, ARV 601, 18: Painter of Niobe, CVA, Ferrara plate. 16 (1660); Alfieri / Arias / Hirmer, pin plat e. 37, the Schauenburg, 181 n. 54; Brommer, Vasenlisten #38982, 450 B.C. Aeneas with Anchises on his back, Ilioupersis. AE, Segesta, 1st century. C.E. SNG Mnchen 872, SNG Cambridge 1152; BMC Sicily 137 No. 59 61; Schauenburg i, 184; Galinsky, Fig. 4 9; Fuchs, Figs. 13 15. Aeneas. with Anchises on his shoulder and a sword in his hand. Mixing bowl (calyx krater) with scenes from the fall of Troy. Greek, Early Classical Period, about 470 460 B.C. Altamura Painter. Attic ceramic, Red Figure. Iliupersis : Aeneas carrying his father Anchises. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
67 Table 3 6. Lower Iliadic Frieze Scene Comparanda Wall Location and Scene # Lower Iliadic Frieze (House of Octavius Quartio) Comparanda #1 Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 Comparanda 5 South wall; SW Corner Scene 1 Apollo shooting plague causing arrows into the Greek camp Only comparanda found is the same subject, but a different composition in the Trojan Cycle Frieze South wall; SE Corner Scene 2 Watering Hors es, severely damaged No comparanda found Scene 3 Ulysses, Ajax the Greater, and Phoenix going to negotiate with Achilles. Shows the three armed envoy. Clay lamp. Berlin (East) 6030 TC Heres, G., The Roman lamps pictured in the Berlin Antikensamml ung / WNG (1972) No 619 Odysseus with his legs crossed over one another, leaning with the left hand on a stick, and Achilles seated across from him. Bronze tripod stand. Olympia, Mus. B 3600. From Olympia. 625 600 BC. Walking to Odysseus and Ajax. Phoenix as a messenger (long hair, beard, caduceus). Attic Hydra: Embassy to Achilles 450 400 B.C. Red Figure, no inscriptions East wall; SE Corner Scene 4 Achilles in front of his tent seated on a rock with unnamed attendant. Calyx krater, Fr At hens, Agora Beazley, ARV 185, 39: Kleophrades painters, In order to 480/470 BC One side of the crater showed itself in the closed, seated A., who pressed a hand to his head and looks at the ground. Again, he is completely in his cloak. Beazley, 340 par a 39 and 46. Scene 5 Phoenix at Achilles feet: Phoenix kneeling before Achilles No comparanda found West wall Scene 6 Combat below the wall of the Greek camp Psykter Amphora, Inscription Painter ca. 475 450 B.C.E, General battle between Gr eeks and Trojans, inscriptions for Diomedes, three others, but unclear. Scene 7 Combat near the ships; Ajax wounds Hector Painting in Ephesos, Lost. Paus. V, 19, 2 Hitzig Blumner commentary; Kalliphon potential artists, Paus attributes to the Archaic period Tabula Capitolina Iliaca. Rome, Capitol, Sala delle Colombe 83. Sadurska, 26 and pi. i. 1st century B.C. E On the third sideband battle near the vessel, several Trojans are fighting on land. Right, Ajax can be recognized by his position, at the prow of a ship. and his actions: he covers his shield, a companion (Teucer?) crouching near him. Gem. Hanover K 645. AGD Hannover No. 965, Furtwangler, AG III 23 3. 1st Century AD On the prow of a ship to the right, Ajax with shield fighting nea r hidden behind the rim of the vessel. North wall Scene 8 Trojans try to recover the body of a casualty severely damaged No comparanda found Scene 9 Patroclus, dressed in Achilles` armor and riding a chariot drawn by Xanthos and Balios, fightin g the Trojans Amphora Attic, National Federation in Zurich, Coll. Ros. ABV 147, 4 Exekias, Para 61, Exekias (Bloesch) Moore. Mr. B., AJA 86. 1982, 578 581 feet. 76. 540 530 BC. AD Patroclus leading Achilles` team of horses, when the horse Balios is injured.
68 Table 3 6. Continued. Wall Location and Scene # Lower Iliadic Frieze (House of Octavius Quartio) Comparanda #1 Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 Comparanda 5 Scene 10 Achilles receiving armor from Thetis Two handled jar (neck amphora) depicting the arming of Achilles. Archaic Period, about 550 B.C. By the Camtar Painter. Attic ceramic, Black Figure. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Inscriptions: "Achilleus," "Thetis," "Kumatothea," "Neoptoleme," "Panope". Scene 11 A chilles drags Hector`s body in the dust The inscription, Automedon directs the chariot of Achilles. Achilles not quite complete. It is important to recognize, however, that his spear in his hand and just turns around to the body of Hector trailing, tether ed to the cha riot. From Inscription, Hector has only the last two letters surviving. Fragmentary Hydria. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 63rd 473rd Beazley, para 164, 3 ibis: Leagros group; Vermeule, 35 52 Fig. i; Friis Johansen, 149 Iliad Fig. 55:265 B 18 h ; Stahler, No. 15 S. 59th 61st 69 and Fig 12; CVA Boston 2 PL 82 (916), Schefold, SB II, 233 fig 3 12; Childs, 62, PL 30, 3 To 510. B.C. a truncated four horse team with Automedon as a charioteer. Hector's corpse is tied by the foot to the chariot. Achi lles himself is just jumping onto the wagon. The hero turns toward a building nearby, where in the wailing parents of Hector are. Lekythos. Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Mus., Former Hope Coll. Beazley, ABF378, 259: Leagros group; Bulas, Figure 8: Friis Johan sen, Iliad 145 Fig 53, 265 B i 8 i; To 510 BC the horses of Achilles driven by Automedon, dragging the body of Hector by the foot. Achilles running over the dead alongside the moving chariot In the background, the tomb of Patroclus. Localities are a combination of the battlefield at Troy and grave of Patroclus. Lekythos. Krakow, Mus. Czartoryski 1245th Beazley, ABV 380, 291: Leagros group; reel, ABL 196, 2: Friis Johansen, Iliad 148 Figure 54; 265 B 18 i:, CVA Krakow Plate 6 (60) from 2; Beazley, VP ol 5 ; Bulas, Figure 9; Vermeule, 42 Figure 11; Stahler, No. 9 S. 57th 59th 62nd 68 and Fig 13 At 510 BC Achilles jumping onto the wagon steered by Automedon with Hector trailing. Iris comes from the right to stop the chariot by divine order. Rome, Cap itoline. Mus. Jahn / Michaelis, op cit 433, No. 47, PI 23 i; Sadurska, aO, 27, Plate I.; Helbig4 II No. 1266 (Simon): Early Roman Empire. In the 10th Frieze on the right hand side, Achilles with his galloping horse team and drags the body of Hector behind him. Inscriptions: Achilles, Hector, then repeated. East wall; NE Corner Scene 12 Games in honor of Patroclus, Patroclus on bier, chariot race and boxing match depicted The second register from the top on the Francois Vase Achilles and Automedon, an d Diomedes are named, near a group of chariots in a race, a tripod is seen this was one of the prizes for the games, on the side above the wedding of Peleus and Thetis race and Patroclus on a pyre 1st Century B.C.E. Scene 13 Priam at Achilles` feet to ransom Hector`s body Sacrarium Frieze of Priam and Achilles and the Ransom of Hector has similar characters, but the compositions of the scene are opposite. An Attic Red Figure Skyphos Attributed to the Brygos Painter the Trojan King Priam's Embassy to Achilles to Return the Body of his Son, Hector Terracotta, ca. 490 B.C.E., Attributed to the Brygos Painter Torus foot. The elderly King Priam of Troy begs Achilles for the return of the body of his son, the Prince Hec tor. The king's beard and hair are set off in white. Following him are three servants, each bearing gifts for Achilles. Achilles, nude but for a diaphanous garment, reclines upon an elaborate couch, his armor hangs triumphantly above his head after being r ipped off of Hector's lifeless body. Lekythos 224 Edinburgh L379th Edinburgh painter, ABL 217, 19; Beazley, JD, BSR 11, 1929 11 Figure 6; Bulas, Figure 13; Friis Johansen, Iliad 131 Figure 44 525 to 475 the tent of Achilles, The Trojan king approac hing with outstretched hands begging. He follows a young man with lots of presents. On the ground is Hector's corpse clothed. Behind the couch a woman with a pot, probably Briseis. Amphora. Kassel T674 From Vulci. Beazley, para 56, I 3: E group ; CVA Kassel Taf I 21 (1701) 2; Lullies, R., Antke 7, 1964, 82 89, PI 26 27, 1 2; To 540/30 BC Achilles has his right hand well on the floor beside the table located at Hector's body back. The white haired Priam points with both hands on his dead son, a s he was going in such underscore the concern of his visit. The woman behind the mourning Priam has pulled the cloak over her head, could be the mother Hecuba, however Lullies indentifies her as Briseis. Amphora. Toledo, Mus. 72nd of Art 54th CVA Toledo i Plate 4 (784) i. 5 (785) i: Rycroft painter. At 5 20 / 1 o BC The bearded, long haired Achilles (in his hand a phial) superimposed on the couch and looks ahead to Priam, begging pleading with outstretched hands to release the body of his son lying on the ground Far left Hermes, who led the Trojan king to the tent of Peleus. Briseis is behind Achilles with a pot. On the wall hanging weapons.
69 Table 3 7. Sacrarium Frieze Scene Comparanda Scene # and location Sacrarium Frieze (Casa di Sacello Iliaco ) Comparanda #1 or Notes Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 Comparanda 5 East wall second position from door Scene 1 Hector led by the Goddess Fate to combat Achilles. Priam and two other figures observe the de parture from the city walls. Hydria, Attic rf. Cambridge, Fitz. Mus. GR 5.1961. ARV2 605, 63: Niobid P ; Nicholls, 1961/62, 52 no. 19 figs. 10 11. c. 460 B.C.E Patroclus (inscr.), draped in a himation, is seated at 1. handle. He gazes downward and hol ds a walking stick with his raised r. hand. Before him a woman with a phial and oinochoe (Andromache?) and two departing warriors with a horse. Possibly the departure of Hector Amphora, Attic rf. Vatican, Mus. Greg. Etr. 16570. From Vulci. ARV2 1036, i: Hector P.; Add2 318; Boardman, ARFH II fig. 140. 450 440 B.C. Unusual frontal P. (inscr.) stands at 1., wearing a long decorated chiton and a himation, with a staff in his r. hand and his 1. wiping his eye. White hair and beard and a fillet around his head. At r. Hekabe (inscr.) pours a libation for Hektor (inscr.) in the center who holds a phiale. Oinochoe, Attic rf. Once Basel market. MuM Auktion 34, 1967* no. 174 pl. 59. C. 430 B. C. Hektor (inscr.) standing in center looking to r. at a bea rded man draped in a himation and holding a scepter (Priam?). At far 1. A woman pouring a libation, Andromache (inscr.). Bronze relief from a chariot, known as Tensa Capitolina. Rome. Pal. Cons. Reinach, RepRcl I 378, IV. C. A. D. 300. At upper r. on ramparts of Troy, P. with Hekabe watching Hektor felled by Achilles' spear. South Wall Scene 2 The combat between Hector and Achilles (Sect. 1)Hera and Aphrodite observe the Battle, as (Sect. 2)Hectors running toward a group Trojans t he first one in the group c ould be Athena in the disguise, the warrior seems to encourage Hector and Scene (Sect.3) Hector fighting Achilles with a group of warriors on looking (Sect.4) the chariot of Achilles with driver and horses just standing nearb y the fight Three parts of these scene are unique, the god and goddess normally found in this scene are Apollo and Athena, not Aphrodite and Hera. Athena may have been in disguise but his/her presence is this scene is not overtly apparent. The addition of the chariot to the battle scene is most likely a foreshadowing element to carry on the frieze, as these two elements are not often found in panel scenes, or in the same scene on vases. Amphora vase Boston 01.8026. From Orvieto. Beazley, Amasis painter; Karouzou, S., The Amasis Painter (1956) 21 32 No. 24, PI 36 37; Schefold SBII 310th 1 232 Figure 23 530/520 BC On the left a fleeing warrior with spear and sword, but without the shield. He looks back to a warrior pursuing him (probably Achilles), wh o is equipped with a splendid Boeotian shield. Although no name labels are given. It is safe to guess that this is Hector, who at the sight of Achilles takes flight. In this way, both revolve around the walls of Troy three times, indicating to the fate of the balance in hand of Zeus, the death of Hector. Volute. From Cerveteri. Beazley. ARV2 206th 132: Berlin painters, Beazley, JD, London, Brit. Mus. E 468th,. approx. 490 BC In the picture on the left neck Achilles (inscription) of the Athena standing behind him, driven on by a lance in his hand off Hector. Hector (inscription) still hold the lance in his hand, but is already wounded, and seems to collapse backwards. On the right Athena and Achilles, on the left Hector and Apollo in the way d emonstratively holding an arrow going up, foreshadows the death of Achilles. Cup. Vatican H 545th From Vulci. Beazley, ARV2 449, 2: Type of Duris, Robert, 8 Figure 9 10: Reinach, RepVases II 101, 6 7; Friis Johansen, Iliad 216th 262, I7e f. 480. B.C.E Both sides of the outer cup showing the duel. Achilles on the left starts again with the sword on the collapsing Hector Hector's spear is broken in just the one picture Apollo with an arrow on the right and Athena on the left. Tabula Iliaca Rome, Capit oline. Mus. Jahn / Michaelis, op cit 433, No. 46, Plate I. 23; SadurskaTaf. I; Helbig4 II No. 1266 (Simon). Early Empire. See 543 In the 10/X Frieze shows the two scenes between Achilles and Hector. 1) On the far left is Hector in the gate, the on e does not escape In front of the gate to the left we see Achilles lunging at Hector. 2) In the adjoining scene Achilles has already defeated Hector. West wall second position from door Scene 3 Achilles pulling the corpse of Hector in the dust Hydria. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 63rd 473rd Beazley, para 164, 3 ibis: Leagros group; Vermeule, 35 52 Fig. i; Friis Johansen, 149 Iliad Fig. 55:265 B 18 h; To 510. B.C. a truncated four horse team with Automedon as a charioteer. Hector's corpse is tied by the foot to the chariot. Achilles himself is just jumping onto the wagon. The hero turns toward a building nearby, where in the wailing parents of Hector are. Lekythos. Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Mus., Former Hope Coll. Beazley, ABF378, 259: Lea gros group; Bulas, Figure 8: Friis Johansen, Iliad 145 Fig 53, 265 B i 8 i; To 510 BC the horses of Achilles driven by Automedon, dragging the body of Hector by the foot. Achilles running over the dead alongside the moving chariot In the background, the tomb of Patroclus. Localities are a combination of the battlefield at Troy and grave of Patroclus. Lekythos. Krakow, Mus. Czartoryski 1245th Beazley, ABV 380, 291: Leagros group; reel, ABL 196, 2: Friis Johansen, Iliad 148 Figure 54; 265 B 18 i:, CVA Krakow Plate 6 (60) from 2; Beazley, VPol 5 ; Bulas, Figure 9; Vermeule, 42 Figure 11; Stahler, No. 9 S. 57th 59th 62nd 68 and Fig 13 At 510 BC Achilles jumping onto the wagon steered by Automedon with Hector trailing. Iris comes from the right to sto p the chariot by divine order. Rome, Capitoline. Mus. Jahn / Michaelis, op cit 433, No. 47, PI 23 i; Sadurska, aO, 27, Plate I.; Helbig4 II No. 1266 (Simon): Early Roman Empire. In the 10th Frieze on the right hand side, Achilles with his galloping horse team and drags the body of Hector behind him. Inscriptions: Achilles, Hector, then repeated. Lekythos. Naples, Mus. Naz. H 2746 Beazley, ABV 378, 258: Leagros group; reel, ABL 51; ML III 2 (1902 09) 3223 Figure 13; Friis Johansen, Iliad, 144, 265 B 18k; ca.510 BCE Automedon steers the runaway team, as Achilles is running nearby with Hector dragged behind chariot, near the tomb of Patroclus
70 Table 3 7. Continued. Scene # and location Sacrarium Frieze (Casa di Sacello Iliaco) Comparanda #1 or Notes Comparanda 2 Comparanda 3 Comparanda 4 Comparanda 5 West wall first position from door Scene 4 Priam brings a ransom to Achilles for the body of Hector, A servant of Troy outside the gates of Troy with a pot on his should ers, The gifts are unloaded from wagon with mules 4.c) Priam at the feet of Achilles with Hermes supporting Priam; Achilles in his chair, and Priam kneels on the ground and both hands stretched out in front before him, completely covered in the his cloak. In the background Hermes stands beside Priam. House of Octavius Quarto, Iliadic Frieze of Priam and Achilles and the Ransom of Hector has similar characters, but the composition of the scene are opposite. An Attic Red Figure Skyphos Attributed to the Br ygos Painter, the Trojan King Priam's Embassy to Achilles to Return the Body of his Son, Hector Terracotta, ca. 490 B.C.E., Attributed to the Brygos Painter Torus foot. The elderly King Priam of Troy begs Achilles for the return of the body of his son, th e Prince Hector. The king's beard and hair are set off in white. Following him are three servants, each bearing gifts for Achilles. Achilles, nude but for a diaphanous garment, reclines upon an elaborate couch, his armor hangs triumphantly above his head a fter being ripped off of Hector's lifeless body. Lekythos 224 Edinburgh L379th Edinburgh painter, ABL 217, 19; Beazley, JD, BSR 11, 1929 11 Figure 6; Bulas, Figure 13; Friis Johansen, Iliad 131 Figure 44 525 to 475 the tent of Achilles, The Trojan king approaching with outstretched hands begging. He follows a young man with lots of presents. On the ground is Hector's corpse clothed. Behind the couch a woman with a pot, probably Briseis. Amphora. Kassel T674 From Vulci. Beazley, para 56, I 3: E group; CVA Kassel Taf I 21 (1701) 2; Lullies, R., Antke 7, 1964, 82 89, PI 26 27, 1 2; To 540/30 BC Achilles has his right hand well on the floor beside the table located at Hector's body back. The white haired Priam points with both hands on his dead son, as he was going in such underscore the concern of his visit. The woman behind the mourning Priam has pulled the cloak over her head, could be the mother Hecuba, however Lullies interprets her as Briseis. Amphora. Toledo, Mus. 72nd of Art 54th CVA Toledo i Plate 4 (784) i. 5 (785) i: Rycroft painter. At 5 20 / 1 o BC The bearded, long haired Achilles (in his hand a phial) superimposed on the couch and looks ahead to Priam, begging pleading with outstretched hands to release the body of his son lying on the ground Far left Hermes, who led the Trojan king to the tent of Peleus. Briseis is behind Achilles with a pot. On the wall hanging weapons. East wall first position from door way Scene 5 Hector's body is transported to Troy, Hermes leds Priam and the mule cart with the body of Hector. No comparanda Notes: Comparanda reference and detail information found in Tables 3 5, 3 6 and 3 7 come from a compilation of information from the following references. Beazley, J. D. 1974. Attic Re d Figure Vase Painters. London: Thames and Hudson. __________ 1978. Attic Black figure Vase Painters. New York: Hacker Art Books. __________. 1971. Paralipomena: additions to Attic black figure vase painters and to Attic red figure vase painter. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Brommer Frank 1980 Marburg: N.G. Elwert. _____________. 1973. Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldensage. Marburg: N.G. Elwert. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae ( LIMC ). 1981 : Artemis. Pauly August Friedrich von and Georg Wissowa 1893 Paulys real Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler.
71 CHAPTER 4 P HYSICAL CONTEXT AND THE ADAPTATION OF SC ENE CONFIGURATIONS T O CREATE UNIFIED VISUA LLY AC CESSIBLE FRIEZES In order to understand the total construction of the friezes, their function, and their capacity to co mmunicate the Trojan c ycle narrative through their distinctive assemblages, we must examine the physical context and their visual configu rations. We will apply elements of the structural analysis method developed by Mark Stansbury accessibility of the friezes as interconnected works of art. 1 I n his examination of the lev els of narration in Greek vases, S tansbury structural analysis method from s emiotics that outlines two major areas in which narration is developed in an image, the macrostructure and the microstructure. 2 T his section of our examination will employ the macrostructure a na lysis of this methodology. The macrostructur e consists of two elements in the construction of friezes: the physical context and the configuration of a visual image. 3 The physical context for Stansbury meant how a vase was viewed, i.e. at what distance from the individual or in what setting it was used. 4 In our case, it is the spatial orientation of the frieze in the room. This requires looking again at some of the setting information introduced in the background for the essential details abo ut each frieze`s orientation in its room, such as its location on the walls and how each is to be followed through the room in narrative order. 1 Stansbury 14. Pictorial Narrative in Ancient Greek Art New York: Cambridge University Press. 2 Stansbury 14, 70 71, 79. 3 Sta nsbury 74. 4 Stansbury 74.
72 The second part of the macrostructure addresses how the configuration of a n image is developed to be visually ac cessible 5 Stansbury part of the macrostructure in regards to singular image compositions. 6 In our case, we are looking not at the compositions of the individual frieze scenes, but those elements found in the scene s as a group which connect the individual parts into a unified visual frieze. U ltimately, by identifying these two macrostructure constructions and h ow the physical context affect s the visual accessibility of the frieze, we can determine how the spatial orientation and scene configuration have been adapted to address the context and enhance th e accessibil ity of each frieze`s content Physical context of the Friezes and Potential Effects of Visual Accessibility Each of the physical contexts for these thre e friezes is differen t, since the rooms vary in size, decoration, and function, a ll of which may change how a room is visited and experienced. These factors impact the frieze`s ability to be seen by a viewer The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco The sacrarium or shrine in the Casa di Sacello Iliaco, as already mentione d, is a small, recessed three by five foot room in the southwest co rner of the atrium of the house. 7 The size of this room clearly limits the length of the frieze. In order of the literary narrative, the frieze starts in the center of the east wall with scene 1, and moves right with scene 2 on the south wall or back wall of the sacrarium. From here, it turns the corner to continue on the west wall with scenes 3 and 4 side by side. Scene 5 is located in the space between the doorframe on the east wall and the start of scene 1 (Figure C 1) Based on its narrative order, the orientation of this frieze is clearly affected by the room`s construction. The frieze only occupies th ree walls 5 Stansbury 82. 6 Stansbury 7 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 871; see also, Schefold 1957, 23; De Vos 1982, 138.
73 Therefore, the orientation of this frieze create s the need for clear linking elements to follow the events in the right direction. The frieze decorates the top of the wall just below the cornice of the barrel vaulted ceiling. 8 The f rieze is only 25cm tall, but its location at eye level on the wall and its stucco relief form allows for clear viewing of each scene from the adjacent atrium. 9 Because the small recessed shrine is located adjacent to a public space in the house, the frieze would h ave b een viewed from the doorway, unavailable for close inspection 10 It is evident that the size of the room, its three wall construction, and the position from wh ich this frieze could be viewed would affect its scene construction and orientation. The Tro jan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus The Trojan C ycle F rieze`s spatial orientation seems to be rather straight forward compared to that of the other two friezes despite the large size of its room. This frieze traces the events of the Troj an cycle, beginning in the southwest corner of the west wing, going north on the west wall of this wing, then east on the north wall of the northern wing, where it reaches the east wall of the east wing, and then turns to go south. It follows the east wal l of the east wing to the southern wall of the wing, then turns west and then north to follow the west wall of the east wing. After traversing all of the walls of this wing, it returns to the north wing, moving west along the south wall. It completes the circumnavigation of the room by turning south again on the west wall of th e west wing and finally reaches completion on the south wall of this wing. On the surface, it seems to be a very simple matter of following the inner walls from the entrance in 8 De Vos 1982, 138; see also, PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 9 De Vos 1982, 138; see also, PPM 1990, 1:193 4. 10 For physical context images of these friezes beyond those identified specifically by fig. numbers, see Appendix A.
74 the west wing and back again, along the outer walls, however two orientation problems do arise for this frieze because of its location on the walls First, Brilliant points out that the location of the frieze on the wall would not have allowed someone to read or even trace the scenes in order without great eyesight ( Figure C 2 ). 11 The frieze was located approximately 2.8 meters or approx. 9 feet up the walls from the floor. 12 rieze itself would have been approx. 3.5 or 4 feet above the average person`s head. 13 The frieze resides at this consistent height throughout the three wings. As a result, the ability for someone to interpret each scene and trace the order exactly would h ave been difficult. The other physical element that affects how this f rieze would have been traced is that, as mentioned previously, this frieze is punctuated by window vaults on the east wall of the west wing, the south wall of the north wing, and the wes t wall of the east wing The wall decoration of the cryptoporticus seems to emphasize and duplicate these physical breaks, placing the herm partitions just outside where the vaults reached the top of the walls, partitioning the total wall de coration from floor to ceiling cornice These herms divided the walls at approximately the same interval throughout the cryptoporticus. Together the physical and decorative partitions divide the scenes into frieze sections or scene groupings. Along the outer walls, t he window vaults and herm partitions match up and divide the scenes into regular two scene groupings; one 11 Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 12 Brilliant 1984, 62 63. 13 Skeletal Biology of Earlier Human Populations, New York: Pergamon Press. 258 269.
75 scene is found on either side of the window vault, leaving a gap that was filled with a veg etal band on a black background under the windows. 14 Along t he inner walls, the north wall of the north wing, the east wall of the east wing, and the west wall of the west wing, each group is divided only by the herm decorations. Nevertheless, this still causes sectioning, carrying the spatial intervals created by the herms and vaults on the outer walls to the rest of the walls, through the wall decoration`s patterning. These groups are regularly two or three scenes long. Only three exceptions to this program exist: over the door to the lower oecus in the east wi ng, over the door to the side street that runs parallel to and over the interior staircase in the north wing, which connects the cryptoporticus to the rest of the house. In the first two sections, we have grouping s of one or two scenes only, but i n th e last se ction the frieze section is long enough for four scenes, two of which survive. The decorative pattern of this wall clearly places an external order and structure on the frieze, dividing the scenes into group s and creating a visual connection between the scenes through superficial sectioning. The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The most complex spatial orientation is found with the Lower Iliadic Frieze in oecus h The spatial orientat ion of this frieze was examined in detail by John Clarke and we will present a brief summary of his findings here. 15 Clarke points out that the fourteen scenes of this frieze had a very particular reading that was based on the progression of a viewer throu gh the room (Figure C 3) 16 To read the Lower Iliadic Frieze in the order proscribed in the poem, Clarke`s diagram shows that it begins in the southwest corner, goes across the south wall and around the southeast 14 Ling 1991, 33. 15 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7. 16 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7.
76 corner and up to the middle of the east wal l and then jumps to the west wall, beginning again on the north side of the ent rance from the sculpture garden. 17 From here, it traces the north wall, then returns to the east wall from the north and concludes with the last scene stopping in the middle of the east wall. This location is directly across from the entrance to the sculpture garden and contiguous with the fifth scene from the end of the first half of the frieze, before it jumped to the west wall. The frieze is a part of a double decoration, loc ated at approximately hip level below the larger, upper Heraclean frieze. Clarke explains the location on the wall and the disjointed orientation of this frieze as designed to work with the major function of this room as a dining space. Based on our unde rstanding of a Roman dining room, guests and hosts would recline on their left sides upon three couches with their heads facing a central table and their feet toward the north, e ast, and west walls (Figures C 4 and C 5 ). 18 From this, Clarke proposes that t he frieze was located and oriented so that it could be followed with little interruption by the movement of the guest from the entrance to his/her position on the couch and then viewed with little difficulty from the reclined position. 19 A guest would theo retically enter the room via the side door by the sculpture garden, turn south to look at the canal view, then turn east again and finally turn west to find his seat, then north moving toward the couches, finally turning to the east wall again to sit down. As a result, upon entering and being seated in this manner, an individual would see the whole frieze during his route to his seat for dinner. 20 From the couch, the frieze would have been 17 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7. 18 Roller, Matthew B. 2006. 94. Dining posture in ancient Rome: bodies, values, and status Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. 19 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7; see also, Spinazzola 1957, 2: 977 978. 20 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7; see also, Spinazzola 1957, 2: 977 978.
77 at head height, allowing one to lo ok around with little difficulty or neck strain. 21 Although the orientation seems disjointed, it is clear that it was developed to w ork within the use of its physical context, as Clarke suggested. Linking Elements and Their Function To examine the configuration of these friezes, we shoul d focus on the linking elements as key s to the connectivit y between scenes and the unified structure of a frieze. Linking elements are found in two forms. One consists of figural devices such as gestures, suggested motion, and gaze. Through implied and actual lines, these figural devices create an allusion of movement and a suggested direction f or the action in the scene. These figural devices can be utilized to link adjacent scenes by extending and carrying implied lines over partitions. The second fo rm of linking element is repetition with figures which are identified iconographically and landscape elements. The repetition of these elements conveys and form s connection s throughout multiple scenes. Additionally, the repetition of landscape elements can be read in an image as indicating the setting for the scene in the same identifiable location. 22 Both types of linking elements are found in varying amounts in each of the friezes and are used to create connections between adjacent and nonadjacent sce nes. The Sacrarium Frieze from Casa di Sacello Iliaco In the Sacrarium Frieze we find bot h types of linking elements. A djacent and nonadjacent scenes are connected by the use of landscape repetition and figural repetition especially through the gate str ucture, representative of the Gates of Troy, as f ound in scenes 1, 2, 21 Clarke 1991, 204, 206 7; see also, Spinazzola 1957, 2: 977 978. 22 in ArtB. 81:562 577; see also, Steiner, Ann. 2007.10. Reading Greek Vases New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
78 4, and 5 23 Another landscape element the Tent of Achilles creates a second connection between scenes 4 and 5. A column and a suspended piece of fabric, one half of which is found at the end of each scene on either side of the doorframe, form the Tent of Achilles in scenes 4 and 5 This landscape element acts as a visual bridge, linking the two images Figural repetition is used to connect t hree scene sets Scenes 1 and 2 are connec ted through the figure of Hector, scenes 2 and 3 are connected by repetition of the chariot of Achilles and scenes 4 and 5 are connected through the figure of Priam In each case thes e repeated figures link the scenes by their pr esence in each scene. Simultaneously, t wo of the se repeated figures are also oriented to created figural device connections between the adjacent scenes, reinforcing the cohesion of the frieze. The chariot of Achilles form s figural device links with each of its appearance s in t his frieze. In scene 2, this group creates a link through gaze to scene 3, and in scene 3, they create a suggested motion link through the galloping of the chariot team toward scene 4. The repeated figure of Hector is coupled with the goddess Fate in sce ne 1 where this pair creates a similar suggested motion link from scene 1 to 2. The Sacrarium Frieze uses linking elements that often overlap and reinforce the narrative order of the scenes. The Lower Iliadic F rieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The Lower Iliadic F rieze relies more on the repetition of figures and landscape elements than figural devices to connect scenes For non adjacent scenes, figural repetition is the m ajor method of connectivity. Additionally c onnections created by repeated la ndscape elements are found in only one section of the frieze. Unlike in the Sacrarium Frieze, f igural devices are 23 For scenes discussed, please refer to the General Framework of Content in Chapter 3 and for corresponding images, see Appendix B Figures.
79 limited to communicating the activity within individual scenes, and do not perform the interlinking function. A few examples that demonstrat e the linking elements in this frieze and how they function are between scenes 2 and 3, which are adjacent, and between 13 and 5, which are nonadjacent. Scene 2: Watering Horses and Scene 3: The Gathering of the Emissaries, Odysseus, Ajax, and Phoenix (F i gures B 30 and B 31) possess a repeating rock outcropping landscape, which act s as a transitional border between the two scenes, both dividing the scenes v isually and connecting them with landscape repetition that creates a shared setting. 24 T he second set scene 5: Phoenix in front of Achilles and scene 13: Priam visits Achilles to ransom for the body of Hector not only has examples of both figural and landscape repetition but also demonstrate s how figura l devices are not used for connection in this friez e (F igures B 32 and B 33). The figure of Achilles in a similar pose and elements of his tent, although faded, are repeated in both scenes. The se repetition links connect th ese two scenes on the east wall. Also t he implied lines of gaze and motion figur al devices in both scenes are directed toward the seated figure s of Achilles, but these implied lines do not carry o ver to the ir adjacent scene s Instead, t hey reflect back into the scene through the returned gaze of Achilles toward the figures kneeling b efore him. Ther efore, only figure repetition is used in the scenes of the Lower Iliadic Frieze to unify the collection into a frieze. The Trojan Cycle F rieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus Although many scenes are missing in the Trojan Cycle F rieze it may be possible to determine how this massive frieze achieved some form of cohesion by examining how the surviving scenes employ linking elements. From the third of the total scenes that are preserved, 24 Spinazzola 1953, 2: 980 982.
80 we can extrapolate the forms and functions of th e linking elements for the frieze as a whole, especially in those that share a frieze section or a herm partition. In the surviving scenes, the major linking element is the repetition of figures. For example, Achilles is present in scenes 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 20, Thetis is depicted in scenes 9 and 23 Andromache in 4 and 18 and Patroclus is named in 6, 7, and 20. Surprisingly, the use of landscape elements to transition between adjacent scenes, as in the Lower Iliadic F rieze, or the repetition of l andscape elements to connect nonadjacent scenes by setting, as we found in the Sacrarium Frieze do not seem to be used in this frieze in any way. Just as in the Lower Iliadic Frieze the scenes in this frieze seem to use implied lines only to reinforce t he action within the scene, and not to con nect adjacent scenes together. I t seems that there was more focus on defining the separation of these scenes than on forming figural device connections. This leads us to wonder what may be the cause of the lack o f figural links between the scenes, especially those adjacent and sharing a frieze section, where it seems nothing would impede the use of these linking elements. Adapting the Compositions to Compensate for the Effects of the Physical Context We may ask wh at about the physical context of this frieze causes the different amount of linking elements, and how does the physical context affect how one comprehends the scenes as a unified frieze. One issue to consider is the challenges to accessibility created by facets of each physical context. The linking elements will be the key to this examination as they tell us more than just how the scenes join. They can also indicate how the scenes are adapted to fit and work within the physical context to maintain the vi sual accessibility of the friezes. The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus The Trojan Cycle F rieze clearly uses only one type of linking element the repetition of figures. The high loc ation of the frieze on the wall offers an immedi ate impact on viewing these
81 scenes collectively as a frieze and may explain why figural repetition seems to be the only linking element noticeably used. If the scenes were hard to see generally, then identifiable figures could be traced more easi ly then t racing connections made by figural devices. The use of figur e repetition seems to have been enhanced by the addition of inscriptions to the scenes, making the identifi cation of figures easier. However, this does not explain why the figural devices were no t utilized to link scenes within the same frieze section. Scene 14: The rescue of Aeneas by Poseidon and scene 15: (recommended title) Achilles capturing a Trojan warrior for sacrifice share a section, but no landscape elements are used to transition fro m 14 to 15. The figural devices found in these scenes carry and center the action within the se two scenes (Fig ures B 34 and B 35). The strict separation of these scenes, despite their adjacency, seems to indicate that the artist wanted to form visual div isions between them This is an inte resting feature of this frieze and the physical context may explain this unexpected visual separation of adjacent scenes. As we learned in our analysis of the physical context, physical features of the room and decorat ive elements in the overall wall decoration superficially partition this frieze It is physically punctuated by window vaults on three of the eight walls. These physical punctuations are also emphasized by the herms in the wall decoration, which are repe ated on all the walls of the room. These decorative divisions create frieze section s while systematically breaking up the flow of the frieze throughout its layout. This treatment seems to eliminate the need for linking elements for the scenes within ea ch of these sections. When a definitive border is provided by a herm between two scenes, the linking elements are not used to connect those scenes that flank the herms, such as scenes 13 to 14 and 20 to 21. However, within the frieze sections where an exter nal border is not set to separate two or more
82 scenes of the frieze the artist seems to have imposed a visual separation by focusing all figural devices toward the center of each scene and removing all figural link s between the scenes. This visual separat ion of adjacent scenes seems to have been an important piece of this frieze`s configuration as this process occurs in each completely preserved frieze section. This separation seems to be applied between adjacent scenes regardless of the ir composition. F or example, in adjacent scenes with different settings, the figural elements are again directed into the center of each scene, reinforcing the separation already established by the different locations of each scene`s event, as in scenes 8 and 9, 4 and 5, a nd 20 and 21. The external physical and decorative partitioning of this frieze seems to have resulted in a need to define scenes that share a frieze section as separate. The bracketing provided by the herm partitions imposes an external structure that c ol lects the scenes in to units. These sectioned units, on the surface would naturally be seen as connected by topic or theme because of their physical proximity alone. 25 In order to separate these scenes and show them as individual the compositions in the scenes were adapted to create th is separation. As a result, the repetition of figures is the only form of linking element that can be used in this frieze to show connections among the scenes in spite of the physical context. The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The Lower Iliadic F rieze`s unexpected orientation and the function of its room may explain the predominate use of figural repetition and landscape elements for cohesion. Clarke`s exploration points out that the orientation o f this frieze was created to work with the function of the room and its progression is set to be read as a guest moves through the room. Therefore, 25 This can be generally supported by the Law of Proximity in the Gestalts Laws of Groupin g see Ware, Colin. 2000. 181 182. Information visualization: perception for design San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.
83 figure repetition would be important to maintain connectivity throughout the frieze, as on initial en trance and movement in the room the viewer would need to be able to follow the progression quickly and easily. This form of configuration is again supported by the addition of inscriptions to ease identification for the viewer, as in the Trojan Cycle F rie ze. Upon closer inspection, landscape elements are found in only one set of adjacent scenes in this frieze, scenes 2, 3, and 4. These scenes are found together on the south wall and southeast corner of the room, located furthest from the dining couches in the room, which were against the north wall. From a reclined position on the couches, these three scenes would appear to be one large scene. In view of that, the addition of the landscape elements may have been an attempt to create smooth divisions and transitions between the scenes, without obscuring the composition and display of each one `s content. The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco As mentioned, the Sacrarium F rieze uses both types of linking elements. These elements are seen overl apping in some scenes. This leads us to ask, why are there so many connective elements in such a small frieze? The emphasis of connectivity through this overabundance seems to show that the cohesion and a clear direction of movement were important to the configuration of this frieze. This may be a reaction to how this frieze would have been viewed. The physical context of this frieze especially its small height, its length and its recessed sacred location would have made viewing difficult. Its locat ion tells us that this frieze was not intended to be viewed in close proximity. As a result, the configuration of this frieze had to be ad apted to address the distance from the viewer in the atrium. The figural linking elements, especially those of gaze and suggested motion provide a clear sense of direction for the frieze. Remembering that this frieze has an offset starting point, beginning in the middle of the east wal l, the need for clear direction through multiple linki ng elements makes sense. The offset
84 starting point of the frieze would require the artist to show the progression between the scenes and the direction of the events clearly, and the many overlapping linking elements would aid in the comprehension of the frieze`s flow. This progressiv e connectivity is also seen in the layout of the landscape elements. The Tent of Achilles is a clear example of the ad aptation of linking elements to aid in visual cohesion and accessibility The tent is shown in split construction with half in scene 4 a nd the other half in scene 5. This visual modification compensates for the interruption of the door. The tent is split to create a clear transitional element between physical ly separated scenes that maintains the connection between them and aids in the p rogression in spite of the physical space Therefore, how both types of linking elements are used in this frieze seem s to indicate that comprehension and clarity were para mount in its design Both of these macrostructure elements the physical context an d the configuration of a visual image are indicative of the total construction of these friezes. The orientation and location of each frieze in its room and how it is to be followed in narrative order can affect its visual accessibility. In response, the linking elements in each scene co mposition which are used to connect the scenes toget her visually, seem to be adjusted to construct the total visual configuration of the frieze address ing the physical context in each room. In doing so, the linking eleme nts are the components that work to enhance the accessibility of the visual frieze and aid in the comprehension of its content. Each use of the linking element s in these friezes also supports the ability f o r each to portray a narrative.
85 CHAPTER 5 THE NA RRATIVE FEATURE OF T HE POMPEI I AN TROJAN CYCLE FRIE ZES Although these frieze s draw from the same literary and artistic resources, the arrangement of the contents, physical context, and configuration for visual accessibility of each frieze make s each one dis tinctive. By comparing the narrative characteristics in each frieze with the known methods of visual narrative from ancient art, we will be able to determine whether an identified method is employed in any of the friezes and how the narrative characterist ics function. Recognizing the narrative feature of the friezes can add to our understanding of how each was adjusted not only to fit the physical context visually Scholars hip on Visual Narrative Methods in ancient Greco Roman Art A visual narrative can be created in many formats and in many different kinds of media, each capable of conveying a story or event to a viewer. These visual narratives are either condensed into on e scene or composed of many adjacently located scenes Their subjects can be mythological or generic in nature. Many d ecades of scholarship have determined that visual narrative methods evolved through artistic experimentation with combinations of physica l layout subjects, audiences, and scene compositions. According to Weitzmann, Hanfmann, and Stansbury narrative methods developed during the artistic progression of Greek art, developing in Geometric figural scenes and culminating in th e continuous Ionic friezes of the Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic periods. 1 According to Moser and Ogilvie, some of the narrative methods developed by the Greeks were most likely communicated over many years of contact to 1 Stansbury 17; see also, Weitzmann, K. 1947. 12 36. Illustrations in Roll and Codex Princeton NJ: Princeton Univ.; Hanfma AJA 61:1.
86 the Etruscans and Romans thro ugh trade, the colonization of Magna Grecia, and later through the Roman conquest of Greece. 2 These scholars point to the use of these methods alongside echoes of Greek mythology and legends in Etruscan and Roman art as evidence of this transmission. 3 In the 19 th century, the discourse on narrative representation in the ancient world was prompted b y C. Robert s Bild und Lied in which he examined the relationship of storytelling processes between literature and art. In doing so, he identified a set of vi sual narrative strategies or methods used by artists to convey stories in a manner comparable to literature. 4 Subsequently, Wickhoff`s examination traced the transmission of these narrative methods from Roman art to early Christian art, adding to Robert s findings. 5 This transmission to Christian art was most evident for Wickhoff in the illustration of texts, exemplified by the Genesis Bible 6 The exploration of and discourse on pictorial narrative was revived in the 1940s, when it was refocused to explo re the evolution of these methods in Greek and Roman art. This discourse remains a topic of interest in ancient art historical studies today. 2 Moser, Mary E. 1984. Etruscan pottery: the meeting of Greece and Etruria: (exhibition catalogue). Carlisle, PA: Dickinson College: 68 72; see also, Ogilvie, R.M. 1980. 27. Roman literature and Society Totowa, N.J.: Barnes & Noble. 3 Moser 1984, 69; see also, Ogilvie 1980, 27. 4 Stansbury Bild und Lied: archologische Beitrge zur Geschichte der griechischen Heldensage. New York : Arno Press. reprint 1975. For historiography of pictorial narrative, Weitzmann, K. 1947. 12 36.; Meyboom, P.G.P. 1978. 55 Meded 40: 52 74. The Hague, Netherlands.; Shapiro, H.A.1994. 1 10. Myth into Art. Poet and Painter in Classical Greece. Routledge London for general overview. 5 Stansbury 4; see also, Wickhoff, F. 1895. Die Wiener Genesis. (Vienna) Translated by E. Strong, 1900. 6 16. Roman Art. Some of its Principles and their Application to Early Christian Painting. New York: Ma cmillan. 6 Stansbury 16.
87 S cholars have developed eight methods of ancient narrative depiction. Robert developed the three original classi fications, labeled the Complete the Situation and the Cyclical methods. 7 Wickhoff`s examination added the Continuous method to Robert s initial group. 8 Wickhoff separates the Continuous from the Cyclical method by the existence or absence of vis ual bre aks between the scenes in their multi scenic compositions. Friezes that employ the Cyclical method consist of scenes visually divided and tho se without division are Continuous 9 Weitzmann initiated the reexamination of these methods in the 1940s by rede fini ng and relabeling two of Robert s methods in his book, Illustrations in Roll and Codex, in order to elucidate the defining aspects of each narrative method. 10 The Complete method was renamed the Simultaneous method to emphasize its ability to show comp lex stories within a single scene without repeating characters or using multiple settings. This is done by including symbolic elements that allude to preceding and succeeding episodes beyond the main action shown. 11 The Situation method was converted into the Monoscenic method. 12 Scenes using the Monoscenic method display a singular event, with one set of characters, and one setting at one moment in time. A scene using this method is identified by the absence of any details about or hinting at events that precede or succeed the isolated moment or action shown. Weitzmann, like Wickhoff 7 Stansbury 8 Stansbury 16. 9 Stansbury ee also, Wickhoff, F. and E. Strong 1900, 6 16. 10 Stansbury 5; see also, Weitzmann 1947: 12 36. 11 Stansbury 5; see also, Weitzmann 1947, 12 36. 12 Stansbury 5; see also, Weitzmann 1947, 12 36.
88 before him and many scholars after him, searched for defining characteristics to illuminate the unique aspects of these methods. 13 Beyond these four core methods of pictorial narration, later scholars have added four additional classifying methods of narrative depiction. E. Harrison was the first to identify an additiona l method. Harrison classified the method called Progressive 14 It is found in singular scenes in which cha racters do not repeat but a temporal progression is created by the configuration of the scene. J. Hurwit indentified the second method, called the Serial which displays a complete myth in a series of adjacent but divided scenes where characters appear on ly once and the setting and episodes vary and progress throughout the series. 15 H. Shapiro proposed the addition of the Unified method to the list. This method is found in multi scenic works that display events occurring in multiple settings, but all of t he scenes share a single moment in time and the characters only appear once. 16 Most recently, J.B. Connelly introduced the eighth and final method of narrative depiction to the list. Connelly labels this method the Episodic 17 It is a variation of Harriso n`s Progressive method, in that it displays seve ral events 13 Stansbu ry 5; see also, Weitzmann 1947, 12 36; Meyboom 1978, 55 7. 14 Stansbury AJA 87: 2 (Paper Abstract, presented at 8 4 th Annual General American Institute of Archaeology Meeting in Narrative in Greek Art Colloquium) 15 Stansbury The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100 480 B.C. Ithaca N.Y.: Cornell University Press. 16 Stansbury AJA 88:3; Shapiro H.A. 1992. 37 Nicosia, and P. Zamarchi Grassi (eds.) Euphronios. Att i del Seminario Internationale di Studi. Arezzo. 27 28. Maggio 1990. Florence: Edizioni Il Ponte 17 Stansbury 129. In Holliday, P.J. (ed). 1993. Narrative and Event in Ancient Art. New York.: Cambridge University Press.
89 from a larger story where the scenes are adjacent but visually divided, the settings are varied, the characters only appear once, but the episodes progress in an asynchronic order. 18 Over the course of Gre ek a rt, artists developed different ways to adjust visual narratives for media and audience s Scholars have elucidated a standardized set of characteristics with which th ey can identify and categorize a visual narrative method by its basic structur e The characteristics are a) the number of scenes in the work, b) the existence of character repetition, c) the number of episodes or moments in time and d) the number of settings displayed, i.e. environments or locales. 19 These characteristics are used in varying combinations that make up and identify one of the methods of visual n arrative outlined above. For our purposes, we will focus on the identifying characteristics of two of the five multi scenic visual narrative methods. Character repetition f ound in all of our friezes, is the defining characteristic that connects our friezes to the Cyclical and Continuous methods and distinguishes them from the other multi scenic methods. The Cyclical method presents a story through a series or cycle of separa te scenes, often divided by borders or changes in setting, in which characters are repeated. The episodes as well as the settings in each of the scenes vary. 20 As is to be expected in a narrative depiction, the episodes in this method progress forward in time from the first scene to the last. The two well known examples of this method come from Greek art the Heraclean metopes from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia and the Theseus metopes from th e Hephaisteion in the Athenian A gora. 21 According to von Blancken hagen and Meyboom, no examples of Cyclical method works exist in 18 Stansbury 8. 19 Stansbury 20 Stansbury ; see also, Meyboom 1978, 56. 21 Meyboom 1978, 62; see also, Small 1999, 570 fn. 75.
90 Roman art. 22 However, more recently both Brilliant and Clarke in th eir examinations of the Trojan cycle friezes from Pompeii propose that each is an example of the Cyclical method. 23 The Co ntinuous method is created by displaying a narrative in multiple scenes as one continuous composition, linked visually as well as thematically by repetition of characters. 24 Unlike the Cyclical method, where the scenes are visually divided, no divisions ar e used between the scenes of a Continuous method work because a singular continuous landscape setting is applied throughout Although the setting of this method is unified and constant, the episodes are seen to progress forward through the scenes Only o ne example of the Continuous method has been identified in Greek art, the Telephos F rieze from the Altar of Zeus at Pergamum. 25 Conversely von Blanckenhagen has identif ied two Roman examples, t he carved Column of Trajan F rieze in Rome and the painted Odys sey Frieze in the Vatican. 26 Comparison of the Pompeiian Trojan Cycle F riezes with a ncient Narrative Method s Apparent similarities can be seen between the three Pompeiian friezes and the constructions of the Cyclical and Continuous methods. Su perficially, all of the Trojan c ycle friezes can be considered Cyclical They are all multi scenic and have character repetition, variation in setting, phys ical or decorative divisions of scenes, and multiple episodes displayed in an overall progression. However, eac h of the friezes also possesses some characteristics that differ from the standard Cyclical method`s structure 22 83; see also, Meyboom, P.G.P 1978: 62 63. 23 Clarke 1991, 205 206; see also, Brillia nt 1984, 60 63. 24 Stansbury 72. 25 Meyboom 1978 72 ; see also Stewart A 1996 ` s Quest : Narrative and the Telephos Frieze In Dreyfus and Ellen Schraudolph. 39 52.1996. Pergamon: the Telephos frieze from the Great Altar San Francisco, Calif: Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. 26 von Blanckenhagen 1957, 79 81.
91 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus In this frieze, time is presented in a less consistent manner than the temporal pr ogression that identifies the Cyclical method. Although an overall assessment of the Trojan Cycle Frieze is difficult to formulate in its present condition, in general, the progression of events in the frieze is temporally correct. As we discussed in our examination of this frieze`s contents, in more than one of the surviving frieze sections scenes are found to be out of temporal order within individual frieze sections or with adjacent frieze sections. Two examples are the adjacent scenes 4 and 5 where the episode jumps from Book 5 to Book 10 and scenes 8 and 9, where events from Book 18 are displayed in reverse. Although noticeable in places, these occurrences of episode disarray do not seem to affect the overall progression of the narrative in the fri eze. Nevertheless, this inconsistent episode progression diverges from the Continuous as well as the Cyclical method. However, this temporal characteristic is in fact similar to the asynchronic layout that identifies the Episodic narrative method. As a result, this frieze`s narrative method could be an amalgamation of the Cyclical and Episodic methods, employing the character repetition of the Cyclical and the disordered sequencing of the Episodic The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Qua rtio In the Lower Iliadic Frieze, two narrative characteristics are applied differently from what would be seen in the Cyclical method. The first variation is found in the setting. The Cyclical method is identified by the use of different settings in eac h of the scenes in a series of adjacent scenes. In this frieze, all of the scenes have different settings, except for scenes 2, 3, and 4 This section of the frieze in the southeast corner shares the same rocky landscape background. 27 The presence of a u nified setting in a section of adjacent scenes can be an 27 Again, for all scene references, please see the Tables 3 1, 3 2, and 3 3 for content in Chapter 3 and see corresponding images in Ap pendix B, and Table 3 4 for literary references.
92 indicator of the Continuous method of narrative. However, b ecause this setting is only foun d in one portion of this frieze it does not signify that the whole frieze is more aligned with the Continuo us method than the Cyclical T his setting anomaly differentiates this frieze from both of the multi scenic narrative methods and indicates that an intentional adjustment has been made to the narrative features of this section. The second characteristic in the Lower Iliadic Frieze found to be different from the Cyclical method is in the episode progression. Like the Trojan C ycle F rieze, the general progression of the narrative is correct. In accordance with Meyboom`s explanation of the Cyclical method, th e episode changes from scene to scene, progressing forward logically in a fluid manner. 28 In this frieze, there is a speed fluctuation in the episode progression. In scenes, 3, 4, and 5 the larger event of the Embassy to Achilles has been split into three systematic scenes from Book 9 of the Iliad as discussed. However, in the singular event scenes 6, 7, and 9 through 11 the episodes of the narrative speed up, moving from Book 12 to 13 in scenes 6 and 7, and again jumping from Books 16 to 19 to 22 in sc enes 9, 10, and 11. Reverting back to the previous speed, the time progression slows in the last group of scenes 12, 13 and 14, from Books 23 and 24 of the Iliad Although the fluctuation does not generally conflict with the definition of the overall epi sode progression found in the Cyclical method as it is explained, this fluctuation seems to indicate another adjustment made to the narrative features of this frieze. The Sacrarium Frieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaco Lastly, when we compare the narrativ e feature of the Sacrarium Frieze with the Cyclical method four characteristics are found to have application differences. The first is in the use of setting, the second in the narrative progression, the third in the use of character repetition, and 28 Meyboom 1978, 71.
93 the fourth in the use of multiple episodes in one scene. It seems that if all of these characteristics are different from the Cyclical method this frieze should not be associated or compared with the Cyclical method at all. However, the differences presented do not exclude this frieze from being seen generally as Cyclical Beginning with the setting, 4 out of 5 of the scenes in this frieze share the same setting, unlike in the other friezes considered, where the setting is more varied. The two pairs of scen es appearing on the east and west walls are divided by a gate element. As we discussed with the linking elements of this frieze, the landscape elements indicate a shared setting between scenes 1, 3, 4, and 5. This repetition of setting, as with the porti on of the Lower Iliadic Frieze, is more characteristic of the Continuous method than the Cyclical Again, the setting is not found in all of th e scenes of the frieze, thus we cannot connect it to the Continuous method either. Therefore, we can see the se tting characteristic in this frieze as an indicator of deviation from both of these character repetition methods. The second characteristic in this frieze that functions differently from the Cyclical and Continuous methods is the total narrative`s episode progression. It is logical that a multi scenic narrative will lay out the display of a story from beginning to end, and identify the end by some means, either by placement at the end of the wall or by an implied or actual vertical line to indicate that th e action does not progress beyond that point. This is done in the other Pompeiian friezes. The Trojan Cycle Frieze ends with the last scene alone on the southern entrance/exit wall of the west wing, after starting on the west wall of this wing and follow ing all of the other walls in the cryptoporticus. T he Lower Iliadic Frieze ends where scenes 5 and 14 meet on the east wall. The configuration of each scene includes figural linking elements that create implied lines, which reflect the action back into e ach scene, instead of creating visual linkages between
94 the adjacent scenes. In scene 5, Phoenix kneeling before Achilles this is done by the returned gaze of Achilles to Phoenix and in scene 14, Pria m and Ideaos watch over the wagon with Hector`s B ody w ith the positioning of the figure of Ideaos, looking back into the scene at Priam. These r ebounding implied lines halt the progression of the action in each scene from overlapping into its neighbor. Thus, the configurations in these scenes jointly create a stopping point for the narrative, with the last two figures in these scenes placed back to back. In the Sacrarium Frieze, this does not seem to be the case. According to the Iliad the event in scene 5, Hector`s body being returned to Troy is the late st activity depicted in this frieze and scene 1, Hector led by the Goddess Fate to combat Achilles which shows the departure of Hector from Troy to his battle with Achilles is the earliest event depicted. Therefore, it would be logical to believe that something would visually indicate the end of scene 5 and the start of scene 1. These scenes share the east wall; with scene 5 on the left and scene 1 on the right separated by a gate element. This element should, as it does with scenes 3 and 5, divide s cenes 5 and 1 and provide a stopping point that indicates the end of the frieze. Instead, we have the gate and other elements that appear to encourage the viewer to recommence reading the frieze`s narrative. In this confluence of the last and first scenes the landscape element serves multiple functions at once. First, it is a setting indicator and a linking element through shared locality, then it serves to divide the adjacent sc enes, and finally it signifies the origin or destination of the activity in each scene. In this particular case, the element is positioned to be both a destination and an origin of an event, which is not the case between scenes 3 and 4. In scene 5, Hector`s body being returned to Troy, the gate element is employed as the destina tion of Hector`s return. Further, in scene 1, Hector led by the Goddess Fate to combat Achilles the same gate element is
95 used as the origin of Hector`s departure This creates a narrative and visual link between the two scenes, because the same element is a part of both scene`s events. There exist here two other linking elements. In scenes 5 and 1, the artist has created two more links between the first and last scenes through figural orientation and thematic repetition. The figural arrangements and p ostures of Priam and Hermes in scene 5 mimic the orientation and positions of Hector and the Goddess Fate in scene 1. At the same time, the artist also repeats a theme in these pairs. Both pairings show a mortal being led by a deity. This figural layout therefore provides a visual and thematic link, in addition to the functions of the landscape element, creating a visual and narrative transition between these two scenes. In combination, these links work to carry the eye to restart the frieze, instead of defining the end, as expected. In this way, this frieze is visually devel oped to form a continuous cycle and lead the viewer to review the frieze via a blending transition from scene 5 to scene 1. T wo other narrative characteristics that diverge from the Cyclical method in the Sacrarium Frieze are found in scene 2. In this scene, we see character repetition a s well as a series of events and accordingly, more tha n one episode is shown These two narrative characteristics are used here to convey the serie s of events that precede and succeed the central battle scene between Achilles and Hector. In sum, e ach of these friezes has one or more narrative characteristics that seem to be modified derivatives of th ose found in the standard Cyclical narrative method In some cases these derived characteristics are comingle d with identifying characteristics of other multi scenic narrative methods. These modified characteristics represent the adjustments made to the narrative feature of these friezes to enhance thei narrative works are most often undertaken to compensate for their context s As we saw in the
96 linking elements in these friezes, modifications were made to the configuration of the scenes in order to aid in the visual accessibility of the work within the physical setting Accordingly, the se he narrative as it is displayed for a viewer. Effect on the Readability of the Friezes within the Physical Context and the Application of Reading Techniques to generate Narrative Clarity How the narrative method modifications made in these friezes interact with the physical context may provide insight into how and to what extent the narratives they display were intended to be understood by their audiences, as well as what possible reading techniques might be applied to further aid comp rehension The Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The two narrative method modi fications found in the Lower Iliadic Frieze seem to be indicative of a particular kind of readability. In order to follow the fluctuating speed of episode progression, a viewer would need a clear understanding of the narrative`s progressi on in the literat ure. A lthough the events are arranged in the correct order, the ir time speed changes to display rare and well known events, while omitting the intervening events In his examination of this frieze, Clarke connects the frie ze`s special orientation in oecu s h and the unembellished style 29 The epitomized narrative reading technique is characterized by the need for the viewer to supply the links between the individual sce nes and details about the events being displayed that are not provided in the images. As the scenes only provide momentary views of the events with little extra detail aside from a captioned figure name, the viewer would have to rely primarily on 29 Weitzmann 1947, 13.
97 his or her own knowledge of the epic to read each scene and connect the scenes together. 30 This would be needed to follow the orientation of the frieze as one progresses through the room. V iewer participation would therefore also be needed to provide any missing narrative links and allow for the progression of the narrative to be understood regardless of the variations in temporal speed. T he setting anomaly found in the Embassy to Achilles series demonstrates that this narrative reading technique is necessary fo r the viewer to comprehend the content presented. The separation of this larger event into three or perhaps four scenes (2, 3, 4, and 5), would require the viewer to provide the narrative connections between them to understand that they are parts of the l arger event. The setting in this case provides a narrative bridge between these scenes helping the viewer to connect them by their shared background. 31 Thus, these modified narrative characteristics of the Lower Iliadic Frieze affect the clarity of the na rrative differently. The episode progression does not serve to facilitate reading comprehension of the narrative on its own, but when the viewer knows the story and applies the epitomized reading technique it can be understood. The second cha racteristic modification of the shared setting in the Embassy series section aids the comprehension of this se gment of the frieze exclusively. T he clarity of the rest of the frieze is neither increased or decrease by its use in this section. 30 Clarke 1991, 206; see also, Weitzmann 1947, 46. 31 This setting narrative link created by the shared setting provides a connection for scene 2, Watering Horses to th e Embassy series. Regrettably, this scene is vaguely labeled because of its poor condition. If this scene were in better condition, a clearer identification might be deduced through the presence of its narrative link to the Embassy series.
98 The Sacrarium Frieze fro m the Casa di Sacello Iliaco T wo of the four narrative modifications identified in the Sacrarium Frieze affect the clarity of the whole frie ze and the other two only shape the comprehension of one scene The two universally influential modifications of th is frieze both seem to be modified to improve comprehensible reading by creating sm ooth transitions between scenes, which ease s following the narrative throughout. In scene s 5 and 1, a thematic and visual confluence provides the total narrative progressio n with a transition, regardless of the se scenes oppos ing chronological locations in the narrative. The narrative modifications made to these temporally opposite but physically adjacent scenes show th at a smooth progression and continuous reading of the narrative was an important part of how the narrative of this small frieze was designed The setting character istic is used to create an easy to follow narrative progress ion throughout the frieze. It connect s most of the sc enes through shared setting, usin g gate elements for the scenes on the sidewalls and visually splitting the Tent of Achi lles to link the two scenes around the physical obstacle of the doorway. This element also performs a twofold narrative function as the destination of scene 4`s event a nd the origin of scene 5`s event. These two universal narrative modifications together reveal a narrative in a recurrent loop that can be eas il y read ad infinitum. Along with its dissimilarity from the other scenes by setting, scene 2 also exclusively possesses the other two narrative modifications found in this frieze. Its different use of narrative characteristics, its centralize d location on the back wall of the room and its climactic content all show its importance to the frieze`s narrative. As d iscussed, scene 2 is a series of events that displays multiple episodes through indications of prec eding and succeeding events and repeated characters around the core battl e between Achilles and Hector.
99 Both of the modified narrative characteristics found in this scene are necessary to convey its complex multi event narrative. However only one aids a viewer`s comprehension of the scene The use of character repetition helps the viewer separate out the events taking place. The need for a viewer to underst and the series of events as they occur in the Iliad is imperative for a clear reading of this, more than for the other scenes in the frieze. T he other is purely a result of the scene`s configuration and narrative construct where multiple episodes show mo re than one event and are only recognizable through the viewer`s clear understanding of the sequence for this series of events. The intricate visual interlacing of antecedent and resultant events that encircle the central event of the series would require detailed examination and a clear understanding of the correct episode progression. Furthermore the treatment of s cene 2 could be an example of the need for the epitomized narrative reading technique to comprehend this frieze However, the other scenes in this frieze are laid out in a straightforward order with simple configurations that would not require th is reading technique to be understoo d. Ultimately, only t hree of the four modified narrative characteristics of the Sacrarium Frieze are used to impr ove the clarity of the narrative. The two universal characteristics work together to create a fluid never ending narrative loop, that a viewer can easily follow even around the doorway obstacle of this small, three walled room. The setting characteristic also helps to s eparate scene 2 from the others and highlight its climactic value to the narrative. The character repetition within scene 2 helps the viewer parse the intermixed event series and work through the resulting multiple episodes, providing a wa y to unpack this visually complicated focal scene Altogether, these narrative characteristics provide us with an idea of how this frieze was designed to be easily and continuously read by a viewer.
100 The Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoport icus For the Trojan Cycle F rieze, the asynchronic occurrences within the greater temporal progression were the only identifiable modification to the narrative method. In the examination of the visual accessibility for this frieze, we noted that the physic al and decorative elements the location of the frieze on the wall and their effect on the visual configuration are addressed within the co mposition of the scenes themselves. However, the moments of content based asynchronic episode progression in this f rieze identified in this narrative examination and earlier in the content assemblage examination remain at this time unaddressed. When we look at the frieze in its current condition the possibility of forming a thematic linking system or reading techniqu e through character repetition in scene s simultaneously observable by a viewer has mixed potential for solving the se disorder s The ability to see a set of scenes that share characters is hindered by the large size of this frieze, its location on the wall and the layout of the cryptoporticus. However, there are a few examples of scenes that can be seen togeth er, by either near proximity or adjacency and in which thematic links can be formed, some more problematic to the total frieze episode progression t han others. One example that supports a possible thematic link ing system is scenes 20 and 21. They both show two parts of the funerary events for Patroclus. Scene 20 is Achilles sacrificing at the Pyre of Patroclus and scene 21 is Funerary Games for Pa troclus, the footrace; Ajax falls into River These scenes are located on either side of a herm on the western end of the south wall in the north wing. They are close in episodic occurrence and the order of their appearance in the frieze is correct. The se scenes are an example of a comprehensible moment of scene progression and an understandable reading format. However, these clear narrative connections are surprisingly rare in the survi ving scenes of this frieze.
101 Two other adjacent scene sets are thema tically connected, but they are either temporally out of order or do not fit into the episode progression around them. The first set is scene s 2 and 3, which are located in the same frieze section. Each of these scenes s hows a part of the series of event s involving Diomedes in B ook 5 of the Iliad Scene 2 is Diomedes and Glaucus exchanging weapons and scene 3 is Diomede s fighting Ares with Athena in c hariot. The repeated character of Diomedes can connect these scenes as well as their close episodic loca tions in the narrative ; however, they are not displayed in the correct order. Just as we found with the series of Achilles battle scenes on the west wall of the east wing scenes 13, 14, and 15, the events come from the same book or sequential books, but they appear out of order in the frieze. The second set of scenes is equally problematic. Scenes 18 and 19 reside on opposite sides of a herm on the south wall of the north wing. Scene 18 is The Cry of Andromache and little Astyanax at the Tomb of Hecto r and scene 19 was recommended the title Hecuba m ourning the Death of Hector As discussed, these two scenes, though not directly referenced in the Iliad share a thematic connection, as each depict one of the two key women affected by the death of Hector both caugh t in a moment of displaying her response to that event. However, they both are se t apart from the overall episodic progression because of their possible non Iliadic event episodes. In this frieze, two thematically linked pairs of scenes provi de evidence for the difficulty of creating a reading system based on character repetition alone The first pair of scenes is 15 Achilles capturing a Trojan warrior for sacrifice ( by our recommended title ) and 20 (discussed above), Achilles sacrificing at the Pyre of Patroclus. Scene 15 is located on the west wa ll of the east wing and scene 20 is located on the western end of the south wall in the north wing. According to their locations, there is no place that a viewer could feasible stand to perceive t he
102 character or thematic link between these scenes in the same vie w. The second pair is scene 6 The Battle of Hector and the Ajaxes surrounding the Corpse of Patroclus and scene 7 The Transportation of the Body of Patroclus to the Greek c amp Although these scenes are numerically adjacent on our scene list, their actual locations are very distant. These scenes are the only surviving scenes found on the east and south walls of the east wing. Between their locations there is at least ten square feet of wall, and approximately eight, now missing, s cene locations, making these scenes impossible to observe simultaneously from any vantage point. All but one of these scene pairs have shown that readable associations by character repetition or thematic links a re more often than not met with difficulties from the physical context of the Trojan Cycle F rieze. In a number of cases, the asynchronic order is di sruptive of a logical reading flow be tween adjacent or near proximate scenes such as scenes 2 and 3 I n a nother case, a thematically linked set of scenes (18 and 19) seems disconnected from the rest of the frieze around it because their episodes do not fit in the general narrative progression. Finally, the two other thematically linked scene pairs were physi cally impossible to observe simultaneously, inhibiting a ability to read and create a narrative between them, despite links made by the character repetition and identifiable thematic connections from the literature From these surviving examples, it seems as though narrative reading of this frieze as a whole may not have been the intention. Although only a fraction of the total scenes survive s most of those that are found to be thematically connected are either physically distant or sequentially disoriented when they are adjacent. The readability of these three friezes via their narrative method and modifications, the visual accessibility adjustments of their scene configurations, their d ist inctive content assemblages, their wall painting styles, and physical context have all provide d information about
103 the total design of these friezes and how they are tailor made for their spaces even though they share literary and visual resources. Th ese sections of information al together present us wi th a way to theorize about the functional aspects and social mo tivations behind their designs.
104 CHAPTER 6 CONC L U SION: THE TAILOR MADE TROJAN CYCLE FRIEZES OF POMPEII This thesis has systematically analyzed four aspects of the three Pompeiian Trojan Cycle friezes to determine how they have been adjusted for the function of the room in which they reside. These examples were chosen because they are three of only five frieze form designs found in Pompeii and known to exist in situ in all of the Roman homes preserved to the present These friezes are comparatively well preserved and all share the same narrative source, the Trojan cycle. The two friezes excluded from this examination are the Dionysian Fri eze from the Villa of Mysteries and the upper Heraclean Frieze fro m the double frieze decoration of oecus h in the House of Octavius Quartio. Although the latter shares space with one of the friezes discussed, it is in very poor condition, making a full examination problematic. The shared literary and visual source of the three Trojan cycle friezes allowed us to explore the unique and variant aspects of their designs. In turn, I can theorize about the functional purposes of the friezes and how their designs were tailored to fit the social motivations of their patrons a nd the function of the rooms they decorated The unique design features, the visual adjustments, and the narrative modifications seen in each frieze can only be explained by the social function of the rooms or the motivations of their patrons. These adju stments or modifications identify the customization of the wall decoration to fit the function of the space. Identifying the function of these rooms and their perception as public or private requires recognition of a complicated topic. 1 Defining public a nd private spaces and the function of rooms, without evident artifacts, in the Roman domus is a complicated undertaking Some 1 See Wallace H adrill 1988; see also, Wallace Hadrill 1994; Clarke 1991.
105 spaces are easier to define than others. Most scholars agree that a room`s function in the house can be identified by particular architectural forms or by their location along the public axis of the house, as defined by Andrew Wallace Hadrill. For example, the atrium, being adjacent to the main entrance of the house and including two notable architectural forms, the impulvium and compulvium, can be seen as more public than other spaces in the house. For the purpose of this case study, the architectural forms of the room, under discussion and those of adjacent rooms will define the function of the room in question. From this, we c an determine the public or private perception of these rooms, based on their function and that of adjacent rooms. Lower Iliadic Frieze from the House of Octavius Quartio The examination of this frieze revealed a number of distinctive features, some already presented by Clarke in his examination, all of which seem to indicate that this frieze was tailored to be a part of this oe In the examination of the spatial orientation and the physical context of this frieze we confirmed C larke`s interpretation that the unusual orientation of this frieze stemmed from the function of the room and that its progression is organized to be read as a guest moves through to the couches. This special orientation explains the use of figural repetit ion and labeling in the scenes, aiding the identification of the scenes during the progression of the viewer. An other aspect of this frieze that we noted in our examination is the selective location and use of landscape repetition to connect visually and narratively only scenes 2, 3, 4, and 5 ( the recommended title) the Embassy series, but no other scenes in the frieze The special treatment of this section of the frieze can be explained in part by Clarke`s identifi ed spatial orientation and function. Th e unusual narrative visual design and deconstructionalized content of the Embassy series may be linked to the purpose of the room through both the location of the dining couches and the activities of the Roman dining banquet. The landscape linking eleme nts aid the visual
106 accessibility of scenes 2, 3, and 4 from the dining couches on the other side of the room and the unified setting of these friezes helps the viewer read them as a group. The Embassy to Achilles is the visit of three warriors to the tent of Achilles to persuade him to return to battle. Before this visitation, the warriors gathered and then left to go see Achilles as a group, seen in scene 3. When the group of warriors arrives at the tent they find Achilles seated outside, seen in scene 4. During their visit, they partake in a meal and Phoenix, the oldest of the three warriors and a close friend of Achilles, begs Achilles to return to the battle, seen in scene 5. Based on the content and subdivided layout we propose that this scene seri es may be a mythological counterpart for the similar series of events that take place in the actual oecus or dining room. Dinner guests of the owner or host gather in the atrium before dinner. Then the guests travel together into the oecus and move to th eir positions on the couches. Finally, they all speak and converse with the host over a meal. Based on its content and position across from the dining couches in the room, it is possible that the visual and narrative modifications made to this scene seri es are aimed to draw attention to it and the thematic connection between the dining activities taking place in the room and its mythological simile on the wall. shows the need for a reading technique to understand how the narrative of this series fits together as a unit and to follow the narrative progression of the entire frieze. Clarke`s suggested reading technique addresses the episodic fluctuations we uncovered th at disrupt the narrative flow of this frieze as one traces it through its spatial orientation. The episode progression, the use of figural repetition, and the need for the epitomized narrative reading technique to connect the scenes in this frieze all mak e sense in light of the oecus` use as a triclinium for Roman dining banquets.
107 The combination of this reading technique and episodic progression illuminates the artist nt assemblage based on Spinazzola`s identifications showed that it was predomin ately made of standard subjects with only the Embassy series, the two battle scenes and the yet unidentified scenes 2 and 8 as rare and unique additions. Otherwise, this friez e presents a general survey of the prominent events of the Iliad The episode progression and the selective content in this frieze were designed to present the viewer with a series of events that included as many well known scenes as possible. The scenes are shown with limited detail with the intervening events and narrative elements removed, so that the viewer must supply them through this active reading technique. Since this reading technique requires the viewer or attendees of the dinner to contribut e to their interpretation of the frieze, this frieze may have provided a source of intellectually stimulating conversation during the banquet. According to our understanding of the function of a triclinium and the banquets that took place within them, a s ocially significant ritual played out during these dining events in Roman aristocratic homes. 2 Some Latin authors tell us that the nature of the entertainment the host provided for his guests was very important. 3 Typically, we would think about dancers a nd musicians, but it was sometimes as simple as a reading of literary compositions by the host or one of the guests. 4 The need for active reading participation in this frieze reveals that it functioned as more than mere decoration The findings of this e xamination supports Clarke`s conclusion that the owner designed this frieze and probably both parts of the double frieze decoration of the room as a ready made source of entertainment and inspiration for 2 Leach, Eleanor W. 2004. 41 47. 3 Leach, Eleanor W. 2004, 44. 4 Leach, Eleanor W. 2004, 45.
108 discussion for Roman dining banquets taking place he re. Each of the visual, content, narrative, and orientation modifications made to this frieze was customized to enhance this functional aspect. Sacrarium Frieze from Casa di Sacello Iliaco Although the scope of the literary narrative covered in this friez e is limited, the amount of detail provided in the configuration, especially in scene 2, is one of the two distinct features that could be indicative of the functional aspect of this frieze and the social motivations behind its design. The other unique fe ature of this frieze is the overabundance of visual and narrative elements that link the events together, and create a multilayered link between scenes 5 and 1. As a result, this frieze is designed as a narrative in a recurrent loop created to be read wit h ease. Scene 2, with the richness of its configuration and multi event content, shows that this frieze was designed to be examined for some time. Because the frieze`s location in the small sacrarium would not have permitted close inspection, a viewer wou ld have to study the configuration to understand the details, aided only by the use of character repetition. The design of the rest of the frieze and the creation of the infinite narrative loop would have led the viewer back to re examine scene 2 multiple times. The total design of this small, infinitely looped frieze and this intricately detailed central scene can only be explained by the functional aspect it performs in this small sacred room off the house`s atrium. The narrative and visual characterist ics were adapted to maintain accessibility and readability of this small frieze in its offset space, but they also show that it was tailored for public display In this atrium, each morning clients would wait to greet their patron and conduct siness The distinct modifications and configurations of this frieze would be apt to entertain these guests for as long as necessary. Therefore, I propose that the patron tailored this frieze as a form of continual public entertainment for his waiting cl ients.
109 Trojan Cycle Frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus The present condition of the Trojan Cycle Frieze is and will remain an impediment to the verification of any firm conclusions. However, the third example of this theme still permits us to ide ntify the unique and adapted features of its design and to theorize about potential explanations and motivations behind them. We can also speculate on the portions of the frieze now lost. In our examination, we revealed five major unique features that to gether seem to set it apart and indicate that its function in the cryptoporticus was different from that of the other Pompeiian friezes These include its size and the scope of its content, the surviving unique and rare scenes, the asynchronic ordering of sections within an overall correct temporal progression, the unusual and divergent use of linking elements, and the absence of observable thematic connections to correct the ordering and create a narrative reading technique. This frieze is the most exten sive of the three, despite the loss of two thirds of its content From the subjects of the surviving scenes and its total size, it most likely displayed both types of subjects, rare and standard, with the number of rare scenes being far greater than the s tandard. These characteristics alone make this frieze unusual, as they indicate that in its original form, it may have been designed to show elem ents of the entire Trojan c ycle narrative These would include not only the standard and well known scenes, b ut also events that were rarely, if ever depicted in a typical visual display of this literary account. Beyond the uniqueness of its total content, the configuration of this frieze is also very different from the others A precisely ordered, readable nar rative of visual and thematically linked events may not have been the intent of its design or display. Although the events are generally shown in a progression that coincides with the literary narrative, more often than not sections are found asynchronica lly arranged. From our examinations of the visual linking elements and the use of narrative characteristics to create thematic connections, we find that
110 neither feature has been designed to aid in the creation of visual cohesion or a narrative reading tec hnique that reconciles these disordered sections. Instead, the physical features of the room and herm elements of the overall wall decoration, which create the frieze sections through superficial partitioning, may explain the contrary use of linking eleme nts in this frieze. Each of the scene compositions seems to be arranged not to connect the scenes together, but to demarcate them, which is opposite their visual cohesive function in the other friezes. Character and figure repetition were the only method s presented in this frieze to connect the scenes together visually or thematically However, even where these devices were used, the physical locations of the scenes made them unobservable in the same view. Therefore, the findings for each of these unique design features of the Trojan Cycle Frieze suggest that it was created purely as decoration. If it served only for this purpose in the large subterranean hallway, we must ask what motivat ed the patron to display such a large collection of scenes from the entire span of the Trojan c ycle narrative in this visually divided and asynchronically designed upper zone frieze. If we look at the possible function of this hallway, the decoration fo und in the adjacent lower oecus and the development of Roman wall pai nting around this time, we may be able to develop a plausible theory about this frieze`s function and the social motivation behind its design. This cryptoporticus` function as a hallway between the back entrance in the west wing, the main stairway from the ground level of the house in the north wing, and the bath complex and lower oecus in the east wing, presents an interesting question about the public or private perception and function of this room. Its location below the peristyle and deep within the ho use structure may suggest that this space could only have been for the private use of the household. The use of this room to access the private bath complex and adjacent oecus also presents the
111 possibility that the cryptoporticus and these rooms were use d by the patron to entertain special business associates and clients. The lower oecus utilizes the same herm partitioning; however, the design of the upper scenes displayed on an illusionistic cornice. 5 We noted that the pinax shutter design in the upper zone of wall decorations was introduced in the late Second style, ( c. 30 20 B.C.E. ) 6 This design feature, therefore, dates this adjacent room at the end of the c.40 20 B.C.E. date range we determined for the cryptoporticus` decoration. The general development of Roman wall painting at the tim e of the cryptoporticus and the lower oecus coincides with the beginning of the transitional period from the Second t o the Third styles. In this transition, figural scene decoration moves from being in the upper zone or frieze zone, located at the top of the middle zone to becom ing a part of the middle zone. 7 Although there are s ome exceptions to the upper zone locati on of figural decoration in the Second style such as the figures intermingled in architectural vistas schema and the megalographic figures in the middle zone of the Dionysian frieze in Villa of Mysterie s more often than not individual figural scenes are found in the upper or frieze zone of late Second style wall decoration 8 In the first phase of the Third style, figural elements of the decoration begin to transition into miniature panel pictures and the architectural elements, like our herms, become more 5 Ling 1991, 112; see also, Spinazzola 1953, 1:43. 6 Ling 1991, 112. 7 Ling 1991, 112. 8 See Ling 1991 31 42, 101 105 for other examples of the upper zone figural scene in the Second style, and for the exceptions to this general idea.
112 ornamental in style, but still provide visual divisions for the total wall decoration. 9 The best example of this figural scheme is found in the white cryptoporticus of the Farnesina villa in Rome dated to c. 20 10 B.C.E ( Figure D 1). This cryptoporticu s (called roo m A ) is decorated with a series of Dionysiac panel pictures with painted frames displayed between a painted colonnade that divides the wall into sections. In room A of the Farnesina villa, the formation of the art gallery design of Roman wall painting has been created through display in the middle available for the ambulatory viewer to observe up close. 10 The Trojan Cycle Frieze may in fact be a predecesso r of the designs found in its ne ighboring lower oecus and room A of the Farnesina villa. The pinax in the oecus ` decoration separates each scene with a flanking pair of shutters. These shutters function in the same way as the combination of the superfici al decorative and physical partitions and the use of linking elements in the frieze sections of the Trojan Cycle Frieze. If the design of the lower oecus was created after that of the cryptoporticus, it may have presented the patron with the opportunity t o perfect the separated series design in the Trojan Cycle Frieze with the pinax element. Therefore, I propose that the unusual features of the Trojan Cycle Frieze, especially the scene separation, the asynchronic disorder, and the lack of a suitable readi ng technique to create a narrative, are actually the result of the patron`s attempt to create a series of panel pictures out of the frieze design, with the aim of exhibiting an extensive art gallery of rare and standard scene subjects 9 Ling 1991, 112. 10 Greece in Rome: influence, integration, resistance edited by Segal, Charles, et. al. 79 120. HSCP 97 Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
113 from the entire Troja n cycle narrative to impress special clients and business associates that the patron invited into this semi private section of his house After exploring my conclusions for each of the friezes individually, it is important to note again the geographical a nd chronological affiliation between them. As mentioned in the background examination, these three friezes are found in three houses located along one road in Pompeii with the Casa di Sacello Iliaco and the House of the Cryptoporticus being adjacent and t he Lower Iliadic and the Sacrarium frieze are contemporaneously dated to the Fourth style. Each of these geographical and chronological associations, which can link all three friezes, may explain the use of this theme in these three houses and could add t o our customization discussion, by suggesting that there most likely was communication among these patrons. The level of communication between patrons is indeterminable but I can suggest that these associations may have been a part of the customization of the friezes. Each of these patrons, if they had seen at least one of the other examples, most likely would not want to have an exact replica of their neighbor`s decoration. Instead, they would keep the general theme and some standard subjects, but they would personalize the content and adjust the design to fit their social and physical context. My examination has added to the understanding o f these three Pompeiian Trojan c ycle friezes by revisiting and confirming the work of Spinazzola and Clarke. I hav e demonstrated how each of these friezes was adjusted to some degree at every level of its design, in the selection of content, its orientation, scene configuration, and narrative method of display. In two of the friezes, these adjustments were aimed to e nhance the visual accessibility and narrative comprehension of the content as a unified visual narrative frieze. In the third frieze, the opposite adjustments were made to deconstruct the content borne narrative and visual cohesion created by
114 the decorati ve and physical partitioning of the total wall decoration. I have thus revealed these friezes to be uniquely customized works of wall painting decoration, showing in them as evidence of the planned customization of wall painting designs by Roman patrons t o suit the requirements of the physical context and the social purpose of the room they adorned.
115 APPENDIX A LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 2 A 1 Map of the Bay of Naples with the Sarno River from the The World of Pompeii. 2008 edited by Dobbins, J.J and P. W. Foss. New York Abingdon: Routledge. pg. xxxii A 2 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm ons/c/cd/PlanPompeji4.jpg Casa di Sacello Iliaco (I, 6. 2) : A 3 Plan of Casa di Sacello Iliaco with sacrarium indicated by arrow from Spinazzola Vol. 1 fig. 302 cropped photo A 4 Setting of Sacrarium in Atrium from www.pompeiiinpictures.com A 5 A 7 Close ups of the Sacrarium from Pompei: Pitture e Mosaici (PPM) and www.pompeiiinpictures.com House of the Cryptoporticus (I, 6. 4): A 8 Plan of the House of Cryptoporticus and Casa di Sacello Iliaco from Spinazzola Vol. 1 fig. 302 A 9 Close up plan of the cryptoporticus from Spinazzola Vol.1 fig.303 A 10 Close up of Bath Complex from Spinazzola Vol. 1 fig. 302 cropped photo A 11 Villa of the Mysteries Plan from E. Brdner, Whnen in der Antike, 1989 A 12 External view of the Villa of the Mysteries from the north http://www.pompei.co.uk A 13 Ceiling stuccowork from the Cryptoporticus, from www.pompeiiinpictures.com A 14 Ceiling stuccowork from the House of Augustus on the Palatine hill in Rome, from www.artstor.org A 15 Reconstruction of total wall decoration in the Cryptoporticus from Spinazzola, Plate XX A 16 Close up image of Satyr Herm, from PPM Vol. 1 pg. 215 A 17 Reconstruction of Lower Oecus/triclinium decoration in House of Cryptoporticus from Spinazzola plate XXI A 18 A 19 Post excavation state and Reconstruction drawing of northern wing from Spinazzola Vol.1figs. 303 304
116 House of Octavius Quarto (II, 2.2): A 20 Plan of the House of Octavius Quartio from Clarke, John R. 1991. The Houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C. A.D. 250, focal room is oecus (h). A 21 Plan of the Villa Papyri from Wallace Hadrill, Andrew.1994. Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum. A 22 Reconstruction Drawing by Spinazzola of the Oecus Plate XCV A 23 A 26 Photos of the Oecus f rom House of Octavius Quarto (23 fr om Canal entrance; 24, 25 and 26 from Sculpture garden or small garden/ peristyle entrance) from www.pompeiiinpictures.com A 27 (a g) (a)Opus Quadartum, (b) Opus Africanum, (c) Opus Incertum, (d) Close up of Opus Incertum, (e)Opus Reticu latum, (f) Opus latericium, (g) Opus Vittatum Mixtum from Berry, Joanne pg. 68 69. A 28 (a and b) Stabian Bath stuccowork from the Palaestra wall with close up from www.pompeiiinpictures.com A 29 Sample of the wall construction exposed in Cryptoporticus, from PPM Vol 1: 203 A 30 Cryptoporticus post excavation with found amphora, leaning against the wall, from PPM Vol. 1: 205 A 31 Dionysius Frieze, Villa of the Mysteries c. 60 30 B.C.E. from www.pompeiiinpictures.com A 32 Room of the Masks, House of Augustus on the Palatine hill in Rome c. 30 B.C.E. from www.artstor.org A 33 Reconstruction of North wall of the Frigid arium (f) in the House of the Cryptoporticus from Kings College London The Skenographia Project www.skenographia.cch.kcl.ac.uk/crypto/2d_reconstruction.html A 34 Villa of Pop paea in Oplontis, oecus room 15 courtesy of Dr. Lea Cline of the Oplontis Project of University of Texas A 35 Room f, in the House of Octavius Quartio from Ling 1991,83 A 36 Triclinium p, in the House of the Vettii, from Ling 1991, 80.
117 APPENDIX B LIST O F ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 3 The Trojan Cycle frieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus : B 1 B 3 Layout of Cryptoporticus and locations of Preserved Scene with Alphabetic labeling, from Spinazzola`s plates LXXXVII, LXXXVIII, LXXXI B 4 B 6 Scene 1, Apol lo shooting arrows upon the Achaean Camp, color image from www.pompeiiinpictures.com and pen and ink from Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 901 903 B 7 B 10 Scene 2, Diomedes exchanging weapons with Glaucus. Spinazzol a Vol. 2, figs. 904 907 B 11 B 14 Scene 3, Diomedes on chariot with the assistance of Athena battling Ares, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 904, 908 910 B 15 Scene 4, Farewell of Hector and Andromache with Astyanax, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 911 914 B 16 Hector a nd Andromache farewell scene from the Domus Aurea, Rome 1 st Century C.E. ,from http://wings.buffalo.edu/AandS/Maecenas/ rome/domus_aurea/ac99x623.html B 17 B 18 Scene 5, a council meeting of the Achaean warriors with Diomedes, Nestor, Ajax, Thrasymedes and an unknown figure or The meeting before the night raid, in book 10 Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 915 918 B 19 B 20 Scene 6, The Battle of Hector and the Ajaxes surrounding the Corpse of Patroclus, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs.919 922 B 21 B 24 Scene 7, Transporting of the body of Patroclus, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 923 925 B 25 B 26 Scene 8, Thetis at the forgery of Hephaestus to retrieve the new armor of Achilles, Spinazzola V ol. 2, figs. 926 928 B 27 B 28 Scene 9, Achilles seated beside the body of Patroclus, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 929 931 B 29 B 30 Scene 10, Unidentified three figure grouping or Achilles War cry from the Shore Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 932 934 B 31 B 34 S cene 11, The return of Briseis to Achilles is approved by the Assembly, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 935 937 B 35 B 36 Scene 12, Athena assisting Diomedes in battle or Athena in the council meeting of the Gods or Athena talking with the gods and preparing to g o help Achilles before he returns to battle, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 938 940
118 B 37 B 39 Scene 13, The Return of Achilles to Battle after the Death of Patroclus, the Death of Polidoros and Hector saved by Apollo, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 938, 939, 941 B 40 B 42 Scene 14, The rescue of Aeneas by Poseidon, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 942 945 B 43 B 44 Scene 15, Capture of a Trojan or Achilles capturing a Trojan warrior for sacrifice Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 946 948 B 45 B 46 Scene 16, the Death of Lycaon at the River Scamander, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 949 951 B 47 B 48 Scene 17, Missing Section of the Frieze, with inscriptions for Achilles and Xanthos or Achilles preparing to return to Battle or Achilles is dragging the Body of Hector behind his chariot Spinaz zola Vol. 2, figs. 952, 953 B 49 B 50 Scene 18, The Cry of Andromeda and the little Astyanax at the tomb of Hector Inscription (Andromache figs. 954 and LIMC Andromache 3 B 51 Scene 19, An Unidentifiable Woman Mourning with a veil on her head, or Hecuba mourning the death of Hector, Spinazzola Vol. 2, fig. 957 B 52 B 53 Scene 20, Achilles sacrificing at the pyre of Patroclus, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 958 960 B 54 B 56 Scene 21, the games at the tomb of Patroclus, with the foot race, during which Ajax is tripped by Athena and Odysseus takes the krater award for the race, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs.961 963 B 57 B 58 Scene 22, the arrival of Penthesileia in Troy from Aethiopis, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 964 967 B 59 B 60 Scene 23, Thetis seated in front of the burial mound of Achilles or Helen sitting on the walls of Troy, possible from the Aethi opis the Little Iliad, or the Iliou Persis Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 968 970 B 61 Scene 23, Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius, led by Hermes, fleeing from Troy from Iliou Persis or the Sack of Ilion or the Aeneid Spinazzola Vol. 2, fig. 971 The Lower Ili adic F rieze from the House of Octavius Quartio : B 62 Scene 1, Apollo shooting arrows of plague upon the Achaean camp, pen and ink reconstruction, Spinazzola Vol. 2, fig. 993. B 63 B 64 Scene 2, Watering Horses, photo and pen and ink reconstruction, Spina zzola Vol. 2 figs. 995 and 996
119 B 65 B 66 Scene 3, The gathering of the Emissaries Ajax, Odysseus and Phoenix, photo and pen and ink reconstruction drawing, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 997 and 998 B 67 B 68 Scene 4, Achilles seated in front of his tent with a n attendant, possibly Patroclus, photo, pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 999 and 1000 B 69 B 70 Scene 5, Phoenix kneeling before Achilles, photo, pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1002 and 1003. B 71 B 78 Scene 6, Battle at the Wall of the Achaea n Camp, photo, pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1006, 1009, 1012 and 1007, 1010, 1013. B 79 B 80 Scene 7, Battle at the Ships, photo, pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1015 and 1016 B 81 B 82 Scene 8, Trojans trying to recover the body of a falle n warrior, photo, pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1019 and 1020. B 83 B 85 Scene 9, Patroclus dressed in the armor of Achilles, driving Achilles` chariot into battle, watercolor, and pen and ink, Spinazzola Vol. 2, Plate XCV and fig. 1023 B 86 Scen e 10, the scene of Thetis ( THETIS) delivering the armor from Hephaestus to Achilles ( ACHILLAS). On the right, two horses one named ( B ADIU [ S]), Spinazzola Vol. 2, fig.1027 B 87 B 88 Scene 11, Achilles and his chariot driver, Automedon (AUTOMEDON) draggin g the body of Hector ([HEKT]OR) behind the chariot, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1028 and 1029. B 89 B 99 Scene 12, Funeral games for Patroclus, Patroclus on a bier, chariot races, and boxing match, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1030 1041. B 100 B 102 Scene 13, P riam visits Achilles to ransom for Hector`s body, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1042 1044. B 103 B 104 Scene 14, Priam and servant Ideaos guarding the body of Hector, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 1045 1046. The Sacrarium Frieze from Casa di Sacello Iliaco : B 1 05 Reconstruction drawing of the entire Sacrarium Frieze, Spinazzola Table XXXV. B 106 B 107 Scene 1, on the southern half of the east wall to the southeastern corner, Hector`s departure from Troy being led by Fate, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs, 871 873 B 10 8 B 112 Scene 2, along the southern/back wall, sacrarium of the Casa di Sacello Iliaco, Hector battles with Achilles, or The Event Series around the Battle of Hector and Achilles, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 874 881
120 B 113 B 116 Scene 3, on the southern hal f of the west wall, the dragging of the body of Hector by Achilles, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs.882 886 B 117 B 119 Scene 4, on the northern half of the west wall, Priam visits Achilles to ransom for Hector`s body, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs.888 893 B 120 B 12 2 Scene 5, on the northern half of the east wall, the return of Priam with the body of Hector to Troy, gate structure is the same as the one found in Scene 1, Spinazzola Vol. 2, figs. 897 900
121 APPENDIX C LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 4 C 1 Sacrarium F rieze from the Casa di Sacello Iliaca, Brilliant 1985, fig.2.5 C 2 Trojan Cycle F rieze from the House of the Cryptoporticus, Location of the frieze, Brilliant 1985, 62 fig. 2.4 C 3 John R. Clarke`s diagram for the reading program for the Oecus of the Hous e of Octavius Quartio; from Clarke 1991, fig. 118 C 4 Reconstructions of the standard Tr iclinium arrangement, from www.novaroma.org/nr/Triclinium
12 2 APPENDIX D LIST OF ART WORKS CITED IN CHAPTER 6 D 1 Vil la Farnesina. Reconstructed model of cryptoporticus A by Victoria I. from Bergmann 1995, pg 120 fig. 13
123 LIST OF REFERENCES Painter Works 109. Mededlingen van het Nederlands Institut te Rome 54. Ang Skeletal Biology of Earlier Human Populations. Edited by Brothwell, D R. 258 269.New York: Pergamon Press. Apollodorus. 1921. The Library Translated by Frazer, Sir James George. Loeb Clas sical Library Vol. 121 and 122. London, William Heinemann Ltd.. Mehmet Ali. 2010. The mythology of kingship in Neo Assyrian art Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Beazley J. D. 1978. Attic Black figure Vase Painters. New York: Hacker Art Books. Beazley, J. D. 1971. Paralipomena: additions to Attic black figure vase painters and to Attic red figure vase painters (second edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press. Greece in Rome: influence, integration, resistance edited by Segal, Cha rles, et. al. 79 120. HSCP 97, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Berry, Joanne. 2007. The Complete Pompeii London: Hudson & Thames Ltd. Beyen, H.G. 1960. Die Pompejanische Wanddekoration von zweiten bis zum vierten Stil II La Hage: Nijhoff. Bi ers, William R. 1992. Art, Artefacts, and Chronology in Classical Archaeology. Approaching the Ancient World. London: Routledge. AJA 61:78 83. Brilliant, Richard. 1984. Visual Narrati ves: Storytelling in Etruscan and Roman Art Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Boardman, Jonathan. 2007. Rome: A Cultural History. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books Borda, Maurizio. 1958. La Pittura Romana. Milano: Societ editrice libraria. Brommer, F rank. 1973. Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldensage Marburg: N.G. Elwert. Brommer, Frank. 1980. Marburg: N.G. Elwert. Burgess, J.S. 2001, The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle Baltimore: Johns Hopkins U niversity Press.
124 Clarke, John R. 1991. The Houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C. A.D. 250 Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press. The World of Pompeii edited by Dobbi ns, J. J. and P. W. Foss, 323 335. New York Abingdon: Routledge. Coarelli, Filippo, and Pio Foglia. 2006. Pompei New York: Barnes & Noble. N arrative and Event in Ancient Art Edited by Holliday, P. J., 88 129. New York.: Cambridge University Press. Davies, Malcolm. 1989, The Greek Epic Cycle. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press. De Vos, Arnold and Mariette. 1982. Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia. Roma: G. Laterza. Dickmann, Jens Domestic Space in the Roman World: Pompeii and Beyond edited by Laurence, R. and A. Wallace Hadrill. 121 136. Portsmouth, RI: JRA Publishing. AJA 98: 629 694. The World of Pompe ii Edited by Do bbins, J.J. and P. W. Foss, 114 116, New York Abingdon: Routledge. Diodorus Siculus. Library of History : Books III VIII. Translated by Oldfather, C. H. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1935. Dwyer, Eugene. 20 343. The World of Pompeii edited by D obbins, J.J. and P. W. Foss, 28 38, New York Abingdon: Routledge. an development of the pre The World of Pompeii Edited by Do bbins, J. J. and P. W. Foss, 82 97, New York Abingdon: Routledge. AJA 71: 353 360 Granger, Frank., ed. and trans. 1931. V itruvius : De Architectura Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press. AJA 61:71 78. AJA 87: 237 8.
125 Hedreen, Guy Michae l. 2001. Capturing Troy : the Narrative Functions of Landscape in Archaic and Early Classical Greek art Ann Arbor, MI.: University of Michigan Press. Dissertation Holliday, P.J. ed. 1993. Narrative and Event in Ancient Art. New York.: Cambridge University Press. ______________. 2002. The Origins of Roman Historical Commemoration in Visual Arts New York : Cambridge University Press. Homer. 1990. Iliad Translated by Robert Fagle. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Hurwit, J.M. 1985. The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100 480 B.C. Ithaca N.Y.: Cornell University Press. Johansen, Friis. 1967. The Iliad in early Greek art Copenhagen: Munksgaard Place. Kleiner, Fred S. 2010. A History of Roman art Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. The World of Pompeii edited by Do bbins, J.J. and P. W. Foss, 620 630, London: Routledge. Leach, Eleanor W. 2004. The Social Life of Painting in Ancient Rome and on the Bay of Naples Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC) 1981 : Artemis. Ling, Roger. 1991. Roman Painting Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press. _________ 2005. Pompeii: history, life & afterlife Stroud, Gloucestershire: Tempus. Lowenstam, S. 2008. As witnessed by images : the Trojan War tr adition in Greek and Etruscan art. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Mau, August. 1882. Die Geschichte der dekorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji Berlin: Lepzig. Meded .40: 52 74. Mielsch, H. 1975. Romis che Stuckreliefs Heidelberg, Germany: F.H. Kerle Verlag. Michel, Dorothea. 1990. Casa dei Cei (I 6, 15) : Hirmer Verlag. Moser, Mary E. 1984. Etruscan pottery: the meeting of Greece and Etruria: [exhibition catalogue] Carlisle, PA: Dickinson College. Nagy G. 2003 Proclus' Summary of the Epic Cycle ( http://www.stoa.org/hopper/text.jsp?doc=Stoa:text:2003.01.0004 ) Accessed October 2012
126 rd and early 2 nd c. Domestic Space in the Roman world: Po mpeii and Beyond. Edited by Laurenc e, R. and A.Wallace Hadrill. 91 120, Portsmouth, RI: Journal of Roman Archaeology The World of Pompeii Edited by Do bbins, J.J. and Foss, P.W., 347 372, London, New York Abingdon: Routledge. Ogilvie, R.M. 1980. Roman L iterature and Society Totowa, N.J.: Barnes & Noble. Pauly, August Friedrich von, an d Georg Wissowa. 1893. 20 vols. Paulys real classischen Altertumswissenschaft Pedley, John G. 2007. Greek Art and Archaeology Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni. 1990. Pompei: pitture e mosaici 10 vols. Roma: Istituto della enciclopedia italiana. (PPM.) Ramage, Nancy H., and Andrew Ramage. 2009. Art of the Ro mans: Romulus to Constantine Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Random House Webster's unabridged dictionary 2001. New York: Random House Reference. Reinach, Salomon. 1922. Repertoire de peintures grecques et romaines ... avec 2720 gravure s ... Paris: E. Leroux. Richardson, L. 1988. Pompeii: An Architectural History Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Robert, Carl 1975. Reprint. Bild und Lied: archologische Beitrge zur Geschichte der griechischen Heldensage. New York : Arno. O riginal edition, Berlin: Weidmann, 1881. Roller, Matthew B. 2006. Dining posture in ancient Rome: bodies, values, and status Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Rowland, Ingrid D., ed. and trans. 1999. Vitruvius : Ten Books on Architecture Cambri dge (London): Cambridge University Press. Sadurska, A. 1964. Les Tables Iliaques Warsaw: Panstwowe Wydawn. Naukowe. Schefold, K. 1952. Pompejanische Malerei: Sinn und Ideengeschichte Basel: Schwabe. _________ 1957. Die Wande Pompejis Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co _________ Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek Vol. 5: 211 224. Uitgeversmaa tschappij C.A.J. Van Dishoeck Bussum: Festschrift.
127 __________ Wort und Bild. Stu dien zur Gegenwart der Antike edited by Schefold, K., E. Berger, and H. Acke rmann. 71 86 Basel : __________. 1976. Rome : Rome and P. Zamarchi Grassi (eds.) Euphronios. Atti del Seminario Internationale di Studi. Arezzo. 27 28. Maggio 1990. 37 38. Florence: Edizioni Il Ponte Originally published in AJA 88 (1991) 3 24. ___________. 1994. Myth into Art. Poet and Painter in Classical Greece. Routledge, London. in ArtB. 81:562 577. Stansbury Pictorial Narrative in Ancient Gree k Art. Cambridge University Press: New York. Steiner, Ann. 2007. Reading Greek Vases. New York: Cambridge University Press. Stewart, A ndrew Ren and Ellen Schraudolph. 39 52. 199 6. Pergamon: the Telephos frieze from the Great Altar San Francisco, Calif: Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler; Beazley, J.D. 1974. Attic Red Figure Vase Painters London: Thames and Hudson. Spinazzola, Vittorio. 1953. Pompei alla luce degli scavi nuovi di Via dell'Abbondanza (anni 1910 1923) 3 vols. Roma: Libreria della Stato. RM 91:125 140. ________. 1984b. in Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Huser in Pompeji I, Tubingen: Verlag Ernst Wasmuth. The World of Pompeii edited by Dobbins, J.J. and P W. Foss, 302 320, New York Abingdon: Routledge. Thompson, Mary Lee. 1991. Programmatic painting in Pompeii: the meaningful combination of Mythological pictures in room decoration Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Dissertation. Wallace PBSR 56: 43 97. ____________________ 1994. Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
128 The W orld of Pompeii edited by Dobbins, J. J. and P. W. Fos s, 279 291. New York Abingdon: Routledge. Ware, Colin. 2000. Information Visualization: Perception for Design San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman. Weitzmann K. 1970. Illustrations in Roll and Codex Princet on, NJ. : Princeton University Press. West, M. L. 2003. Greek epic fragments from the seventh to the fifth centuries BC Cambridge, MA. : Harvard University Press. ld of Pompeii. Edited by Dobbins, J.J. and P.W. Foss, 129 139, New York Abingdon: Routledge. Wickhoff, F. 1900 Reprint. Die Wiener Genesis. (Vienna) Translated by E. Strong. as Roman Art. Some of its Principles and their Application to Early Christian Pai nting. New York: Macmillan. Original edition, Prag: F. Tempsky.1895 Woodford, Susan. 1993. The Trojan War in Ancient art London : Duckworth. Pompei alla luce degli scavi nuovi di Via dell' AJA 57: 4. 298 300. Virgil.1961. Aeneid Translated by Patric Dickinson. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Vitruvius. 1914. De Architectura. Translated by M. H. Morgan, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. JdI 94: 460 523.
129 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jocelyn P. Boigenzahn was born and raised in Tampa, Florida. In 2007 Jocelyn completed her BA in Classical Civilizations with departmental honors from Loyola University of Chicago in Illinois. At the University of Florida, Jocelyn`s research has focused on Greek and Roman vase painting, wall painting, and architectural sculpture, focusing on the representation of warfare and the Homeric poems. Jocelyn plans to continue her education by pursing a PhD i n art history with a focus on the function of visual narrative in ancient Mediterranean art.