Steven L. Tuck - A History of Roman Art

obsonia

literally spoils or prizes, prepared food as a subject for painting in Hellenistic art.

xenia

guest gifts, a class of paintings described by the Roman architectural author Vitruvius, including provisions such as poultry, eggs, vegetables, fruit, and the like.

To us the subjects of the paintings might seem generic, which they were, and unworthy of comment other than whether they reflected the use of space. We might expect that these food scenes would be found in or around food preparation, storage, or serving areas, notably the latter, perhaps dining rooms. That does not seem to be the case for the Romans, who did not carry the same unspoken expectations of space and use and decoration that we do. The subjects, however, carried connotations of class to a Roman viewer. Pliny the Elder, a contemporary author from the area writing on painters and paintings, notes ( Natural History 37),

1.10Still life paintings, Praedia of Julia Felix, Pompeii, c . 70 CE. Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli. H 28 ¾ in (73 cm).

Photo courtesy Steven L. Tuck.

triclinium

Roman dining room laid out for nine diners reclining on three couches (in Greek: tri cline ) from which the room gets its name.

We must now, however, make some mention of those artists who acquired fame by the pencil in an inferior style of painting. Among these was Piræicus, inferior to few of the painters in skill. I am not sure that he did not do injustice to himself by the choice of his subjects … His subjects were barbers’ shops, cobblers’ stalls, jackasses, eatables, and the like, and to these he was indebted for his epithet of “Ithyparographos,” “Painter of Low Subjects.”

tablinum

a room in the Roman house off the atrium and directly opposite the front door. It was the major formal reception room, used to receive clients and conduct business.

In this digression, Pliny makes it clear that the painter could be skilled, but his subject is inferior and among those low forms was still life. Such a judgment is critically important evidence for us of what the Romans thought of painting and while we are historians of art, not critics of it, that in no way means that we should not be aware of the Roman attitudes towards art. For the Praedia of Julia Felix, the painting subjects provide valuable evidence that the estate was used by non‐elites, perhaps rented for special events or existing as a sort of membership‐only club for Pompeii’s newly wealthy sub‐elite inhabitants, often called the “middle class,” to use a term that perhaps applies better to our world than to theirs. The idea of art as conveying class, status, and social and political rank and pretensions is also clear from tombs. One of the best examples of this, the Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, is also from Pompeii.

paradeisos

a walled park where wild animal hunts took place. A Persian concept adopted by the Greeks after the conquests of Alexander the Great.

The Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, who was buried outside the Vesuvian Gate at Pompeii in 75/76 CE, is decorated with art that encourages our awareness of the theme of personal aggrandizement in Roman public art. The images in the central panels on the inner surfaces of the tomb’s enclosure walls show a range of high status iconography designed to create an identity of the deceased as an important man in Pompeii defined by his public service and connections. The six major panels include a large silver table service of the type found on display in a triclinium, a high status banquet or symposium – likely also taking place in a triclinium , a pair of gladiators, Vestorius Priscus standing in the tablinumof his house – the room where he would receive clients, Priscus seated surrounded by attentive listeners, and a paradeisos. The outdoor scenes of Priscus and an audience and the paradeisos are joined by the pair of gladiators, essentially one of only three episodes outside of his home that represent his political and social status.

1.11Gladiator fresco, Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, Pompeii, 75/76 CE.

Photo courtesy Steven L. Tuck.

The gladiators probably represent one component of a set of games he hosted as aedile (a low level public official) at Pompeii, most likely in the year he died. That panel shows the connections between local elites and games that they sponsored, and demonstrates the close ties between their games and personal identity. Hosting games was as important for a Roman politician as hosting dinners and receiving clients. The use of spectacle imagery in the domestic sphere also reinforces these conclusions about its critical role in projecting personal values and identity. The most common composition is a pair of gladiators engaged in combat as seen in the painting from the Tomb of Vestorius Priscus. The gladiators are almost universally armed and armored in ways that conform to the known categories of gladiators, giving these otherwise generic scenes a specificity that is probably important to the patron or audience. These images seem to represent one of three stages in gladiatorial combat: the initial clash with both combatants on their feet facing each other, an intermediate stage when one combatant is disarmed, on the ground or facing possible defeat, or the conclusion of a bout with the defeated either subdued, wounded and surrendering, or dead.

1.12Silver service fresco, Tomb of Vestorius Priscus, Pompeii, 75/76 CE.

Photo courtesy Steven L. Tuck.

Three of the images are domestic and reinforce Priscus as a host, receiving clients and welcoming guests, while the silver service establishes his pretensions to high status domestic display. As modern viewers of this, we need to be aware that this seemingly circumstantial imagery is, or at least could be, something different than it appears. In the matter of images that convey status, we must remember that they are symbolic, not documentary. There is no evidence that Priscus had a silver service that looked like this, or, if he did, that it was on display in his home. This painting represents that Priscus is the type of person who would have this sort of display. It projects his status, not his ownership, much like the scene of Priscus surrounded by attentive listeners indicates status, but is not thought to reflect any particular episode. The emphasis on the spaces and decor of his home brings us to another issue, that of the place of the home in the Roman elite world. This represents another cultural gulf between ourselves and the Romans.

One of the key issues to understanding Roman art is that of context. While we often divide the world between public and private spaces, with offices and shops as the default public spaces and home the private one, the Roman conception is more complex. In the Roman world high status authors spoke of the distinction between otiumand negotium. Rather than business taking place in offices and private gatherings at home, the situation in the Roman world is that negotium took place in the home as well, but in certain spaces accessible and adjacent to the atrium. A quote from the Roman architectural writer Vitruvius can help make this point clear. Vitruvius, discussing the Roman house in his book De Architectura (6.5.1), notes,