In the preceding pages the principal buildings of Pompeii have been described, and reference has been made to many works of art. We shall now offer a few observations of a more general nature in regard to the remains of architecture, sculpture, and painting.
The different periods in the architectural history of the city have been defined in a previous chapter. The most significant of these, from every point of view, is that which we have called the Tufa Period, which corresponds roughly with the second century B.C. Its importance is chiefly due to the fact that it records for us a phase of architectural development, a style, of which only slight traces are found elsewhere,—in the East. It is the last offshoot of untrammelled Hellenistic art in the field of construction; the architecture of the following period was still derived from Hellenistic sources, but was dominated by Roman conceptions, and received from Rome the impulse that determined the direction of its development. The remains of the Tufa Period at Pompeii furnish materials for a missing chapter in the history of architecture.
As we have seen, the stone preferred in this period for all purposes was the gray tufa. Where used for columns, pilasters, and entablatures, it was covered with stucco; in plain walls it appeared in its natural color. Unfortunately, the covering of stucco is preserved in only a few cases; the best example is presented by an Ionic capital in the first peristyle of the house of the Faun. The stucco was generally white, but color was sometimes employed, as in the Corinthian columns and pilasters of the exedra in the same house, which are painted a deep wine red.
No other period of Pompeian art shows in an equal degree the impress of a single characteristic and self-consistent style, alike in public buildings, temples, and private houses, in the interior decoration as well as in the treatment of exteriors. The wall decoration of the first style is simply the adaptation of tufa construction to decorative use. The motives are identical. The forms are the same, but these naturally appear in a freer handling upon interior walls, the effect being heightened by the use or imitation of slabs of marble of various colors.
This style throughout gives the impression of roominess and largeness. It is monumental, especially when viewed in contrast with the later architecture of Pompeii. No building erected after the city became a Roman colony can be compared, for ample dimensions and spatial effects, with the Basilica. In the same class are the temples of Jupiter and Apollo, with the impressive two-storied colonnades enclosing the areas on which they stand; the contrast with the later temples, as those of Fortuna Augusta and Vespasian, is striking. All the more important houses of this period are monumental in design and proportions, with imposing entrances, large and lofty atriums, and high doors opening upon the atrium; the shops in front also were high, and in two stories.
In point of detail, the architecture of the Tufa Period reveals less of strength and symmetry than its stately proportions and modest material would lead us to expect. The ornamentation is a debased descendant of the Greek. It is characterized by superficial elegance, together with an apparent striving after simplicity and an ill-concealed poverty of form and color. Though the ornamental forms still manifest fine Greek feeling, they lack delicacy of modelling and vigor of expression. They are taken from Greek religious architecture, but all appreciation of the three orders as distinct types, each suited for a different environment, has disappeared. In consequence, we often find a mixture of the orders, a blending of Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian elements; and still more frequently do we meet with a marked departure from the original proportions.
Fig. 249.—Four-faced Ionic capital. Portico of the Forum Triangulare.
Thus in the court of the temple of Apollo and in the first peristyle of the house of the Faun we see Ionic columns supporting a Doric entablature; in the house of the Black Wall, Doric columns with an Ionic entablature. The Doric architrave, contrary to rule, appears divided into two stripes, not only in the colonnade of the Forum, where the stripes represent a difference of material, but also in the house of the Faun, where the architrave is represented as composed of single blocks reaching from column to column (p. 51). In the Palaestra (p. 165), and in many private houses, the Doric column was lengthened, in a way quite out of harmony with the original conception, in order to make it conform to the prevailing desire for height and slender proportions. The shaft nowhere appears with the pronounced entasis and strong diminution characteristic of the type, and the capital has lost the breadth and graceful outline of the Greek Doric.
Fig. 250.—Capital of pilaster. Casa del duca d'Aumale.
The Ionic columns in the cella of the temple of Jupiter (p. 65) are of the Greek type, with volutes on two sides; elsewhere we find only the so-called Roman Ionic, with four volutes, a type that appears in several well defined and pleasing examples. One of these, a capital from the portico at the entrance of the Forum Triangulare, is shown in Fig. 249. The deep incisions of the egg-and-dart pattern, which give the egg almost the appearance of a little ball, is characteristic; it is found only at Pompeii, and there not after the Tufa Period. A still freer handling of the Ionic is seen in the capital of a pilaster in the casa del duca d'Aumale (Fig. 250).
The Corinthian capital appears in the usual forms, but the projecting parts are shallow, on account of the lack of resisting qualities in the stone. The best examples are the capitals of the columns and pilasters of the exedra in the house of the Faun. The workmanship here is fine, the realistic treatment of the acanthus leaves being especially noteworthy. An interesting series of variations from the normal type is seen in the capitals of the pilasters at house entrances; we have already met with a striking example of this series, ornamented with projecting busts of human figures (Fig. 178). The design is often so fantastic that the essential character of the Corinthian capital seems entirely lost sight of.
Fig. 251.—Altar in the court of the temple of Zeus Milichius.
The entablatures of the temples built in the Tufa Period, as of those erected in later times, have all perished. The entablatures of the colonnades, however, are at least in part well preserved in a number of instances, and are of two types, the Doric, characterized by the use of triglyphs, and the Ionic, distinguished by the dentils of the cornice.
Both types are found also in the wall decoration, the first rarely, the second very frequently. On the altar of the temple of Zeus Milichius, which is of tufa coated with stucco, the Doric entablature appears in association with the characteristic decoration of the first style, the imitation of large blocks of marble; on the top are terminal volutes of Ionic origin, as generally upon Roman altars and altar-shaped tombs (Fig. 251). On walls decorated in the first style, however, only Ionic entablatures are seen,—sometimes even twice upon the same wall, as in the example shown in Fig. 122. From this we infer that in the temple construction of the Tufa Period, the simple and elegant Ionic entablature was the prevailing type.
Notwithstanding its free adaption of Greek forms, the Tufa Period availed itself very sparingly of polychrome decoration for architectural members. The stucco of the Ionic capital in the house of the Faun is white; white likewise are most of the capitals of pilasters found in the houses, and also the numerous Ionic cornices on the walls.
There are, nevertheless, scanty traces of the application of color. In the wall decoration of the house of Sallust we find a Doric frieze with the metopes painted red. The frieze under the Ionic cornices on the walls also is usually made prominent with color,—red, yellow, or blue; and a red frieze is seen in the peristyle of the house of the Black Wall, above the pilasters of the garden wall. The lower stripe of the painted architrave in the house of the Faun, already referred to, is yellow.
It seems probable that in some cases color was applied to the projecting figures of the peculiar capitals used in houses; at the time of excavation, traces of coloring were distinctly seen upon those belonging to the alae of the house of Epidius Rufus (p. 309). The exposed capitals at the entrances (Fig. 178), if originally painted, would naturally have lost all traces of the coloring before the destruction of the city, unless it were from time to time renewed. Notwithstanding these exceptions, we must conclude that the stucco coating upon public buildings and temples was generally white, in the case of capitals and cornices as well as of the shafts of columns and outside walls; colors were used to a limited extent, upon friezes and perhaps other parts of entablatures.
The architectural remains of the half century immediately succeeding the Tufa Period, between the founding of the Roman colony at Pompeii and the establishment of the Empire, present nothing specially characteristic outside of the peculiarities of construction mentioned in Chap. 6.
In the earlier years of the Empire, the Pompeians, as Roman subjects everywhere, commenced to build temples and colonnades of marble. The style, which was distinctively Roman, can be studied to better advantage elsewhere; the remains at Pompeii are relatively unimportant, and the chief points of interest have been mentioned in connection with our study of individual buildings.
Fig. 252.—Capitals of columns, showing variations from typical forms.
- A. Ornate Doric, from the house of Sallust.
- B. Modified Corinthian.
- C. Fantastic Corinthian.
The stylistic development of Roman architecture in the next period,—the gradual transition from the simplicity of the Augustan Age to the more elaborate ornamentation of the Flavian Era,—is marked by two opposing tendencies, one conservative, holding to the traditions of marble construction, the other reactionary. The latter tendency manifests itself so strongly at Pompeii that it merits special comment.
First in the East, it appears, men wearied of seeing the ornamental forms of the Greek religious architecture repeated over and over again in every kind of building, and attempted to break away from them entirely. The reaction reached Italy in the earlier years of the Empire, and began to exert an influence upon ornamental forms, especially of domestic architecture, at the time when the third style of wall decoration was coming into vogue.
At Pompeii, this revolt from tradition affected not only the ornamentation of private houses, but also that of public buildings, as the Stabian Baths, and even of temples, as those of Apollo and Isis, rebuilt after the earthquake of the year 63. Greek forms were replaced by fantastic designs of every sort, worked in stucco. The capitals of columns and pilasters retained a semblance of Doric and Corinthian types, but were adorned with motives from many sources; the variety of form and treatment can best be appreciated by inspecting the examples shown in our illustrations (Figs. 242, 253, 254).
Fig. 253.—Capital of pilaster, modified Corinthian type.
The entablatures no longer retained the ancient division of architrave, frieze, and cornice, but were made to represent a single broad stripe, sometimes, however, with a projecting cornice; this stripe was ornamented with stucco reliefs, and was frequently painted in bright colors. Sometimes the decorative theme is taken from a vine, as in the entablature of the portico in front of the temple of Isis (Fig. 80) and that of the peristyle of the house of the Vettii (Fig. 161). In some cases the stripe is divided into vertical sections; the broad sections correspond with the intercolumniations, the narrow ones with the spaces above the columns; and the ornamental design is varied accordingly, as in the palaestra of the Stabian Baths (p. 198), the court of the temple of Apollo (Fig. 31), and the peristyle of the house of the Silver Wedding. In many instances the background is white, frequently part of the details of ornament as well; but colors were freely used, particularly red, blue, and yellow, in all parts of the entablature.
Fig. 254.—Capitals of pilasters, showing free adaptations of the Corinthian type.
The lower third of the columns also was painted a bright red or yellow—a treatment that would have been abhorrent to the taste of the Tufa Period. The desire for variety and brilliancy of color increased, and was more pronounced in the years immediately preceding the eruption than at any previous time.
Consistently with this change in the standard of taste in regard to details, the Pompeians no longer had pleasure in the ample dimensions of the olden time. Houses were not now built with high rooms, great doorways, and lofty columns as in the Tufa Period. The rooms were smaller and lower, and also, we may add, more homelike. But curiously enough, the columns were often made thick as well as short, doubtless in order to afford more space for the display of color on the capitals and the lower part of the shaft.
Roman public and religious architecture in most cities still adhered to the forms of marble construction, a suggestion of which we find in the white walls of the temple of Isis; but the lower third of the columns in the colonnade about this temple was painted red, and the entablature was no doubt ornamented with colored designs, as was that of the temple of Apollo. The best preserved example of this last phase of Pompeian architectural ornamentation is in the semicircular vaulted niche at the right of the Street of Tombs.
Thus we see accomplished at Pompeii, in less than two centuries, a complete revolution in matters of taste, so far as relates to architecture. An entirely new feeling has been developed. The beauty of contour and of symmetrical proportion found in the Greek architecture had no charm for the Pompeian of the later time; its place had been usurped by a different form of beauty, that produced by the use of a variety of brilliant colors in association with forms that were intricate, and often grotesque.
PLATE XI.—ARTEMIS. COPY OF AN ARCHAIC WORK
CHAPTER LIII
SCULPTURE
The open squares and public buildings of Pompeii were peopled with statues. The visitor who walked about the Forum in the years immediately preceding the eruption, saw on all sides the forms of the men of past generations who had rendered service to the city, as well as those of men of his own time.
Besides the five colossal images of emperors and members of the imperial families, places were provided in the Forum for between seventy and eighty life size equestrian statues; and behind each of these was room for a standing figure. Whether all the places were occupied cannot now be determined, but from the sepulchral inscription of Umbricius Scaurus (p. 418) it is clear that as late as the time of Claudius or Nero, there was yet room for another equestrian figure. Statues were placed also in the Forum Triangulare and occasionally at the sides of the streets.
In the portico of the Macellum were twenty-five statues; the sanctuary of the City Lares contained eight, while the portico of the Eumachia building furnished places for twenty-one. But only one of the hundreds of statues erected in honor of worthy citizens has been preserved, that of Holconius Rufus, the rebuilder of the Large Theatre; the figure was dressed in the uniform of a military tribune, and stood on Abbondanza Street near the Stabian Baths. With this should be classed the portrait statues in the temple of Fortuna (p. 131), and those of Octavia (Fig. 38), Marcellus (Fig. 39), and Eumachia.
The statue of Eumachia is an interesting example of the ordinary portrait sculpture of the Early Empire (Fig. 255). The pose is by no means ungraceful, the treatment of the drapery is modest and effective. The tranquil and thoughtful face is somewhat idealized, and without offensive emphasis of details. The statue is not a masterpiece; nevertheless, it gives us a pleasant impression of the lady whose generosity placed the fullers under obligation, and affords an insight into the artistic resources of the city.
A number of portrait statues belonging to sepulchral monuments were found when the tombs east of the Amphitheatre were excavated (Chap. 51). Most of them are of tufa covered with stucco; the rest are of fine-grained limestone. From the aesthetic point of view they are valueless.
Fig. 255.—Statue of the priestess Eumachia.
Sculptured portraits of a different type were set up in private houses. Relatives, freedmen, and even slaves sometimes placed at the rear of the atrium, near the entrance of the tablinum, a herm of the master of the house. At each side of the square pillar supporting the bust, there was usually an arm-like projection (seen on the herm of Cornelius Rufus, Fig. 121), on which garlands were hung upon birthdays and other anniversary occasions. Both the herm of Rufus and that of Vesonius Primus previously mentioned (p. 396) are of marble; the head belonging to the herm of Sorex (p. 176) is of bronze.
The most striking of the portrait herms is that of Lucius Caecilius Jucundus (Fig. 256), which was set up in duplicate, for the sake of symmetrical arrangement, in the atrium of his house on Stabian Street. The pillar is of marble; the dedication reads Genio L[ucii] nostri Felix l[ibertus],—'Felix, freedman, to the Genius of our Lucius.'
Fig. 256.—Portrait herm of Caecilius Jucundus.
The bust, of bronze, is modelled with realistic vigor. There is no attempt to soften the prominent and almost repulsive features by idealization. We see the Pompeian auctioneer just as he was, a shrewd, alert, energetic man, with somewhat of a taste for art, and more for the good things of life,—a man who would bear watching in a financial transaction.
Houses were adorned also with heads and busts of famous men of the past,—poets, philosophers, and statesmen. An extensive collection of historical portraits was discovered at Herculaneum, but Pompeii thus far has not yielded many examples. In a room in one of the houses was found a group of three marble heads, about one half life size, representing Epicurus, Demosthenes, and apparently the Alexandrian poet Callimachus, whose works were particularly valued in the time of the Early Empire. The identification of the third head is not certain, but whether Callimachus or some other poet is intended, the group reveals the direction of the owner's literary tastes; he was interested in philosophy, oratory, and poetry.
Two portrait busts of distinguished men, which evidently belong together, were found in another house, laid one side. In the Naples Museum they bore the names of the Younger Brutus and Pompey, but both identifications are erroneous; the features in neither case agree with the representations upon coins. The faces, as shown by the physiognomy and the treatment of the hair, are those of Romans of the end of the Republic or the beginning of the Empire. Recently a new identification has been proposed which has much in its favor. It rests chiefly upon the resemblance of one of the busts to the mosaic portrait of Virgil, discovered in 1896 at Susa, in Africa. The full, round face of the other agrees very well with what we know of the appearance of Horace. It may be that we have here a pair of poets, the two most prominent of the Augustan Age.
Frequently the gardens of the peristyles, as those of the houses of the Vettii and of Lucretius, were profusely adorned with sculptures of all kinds. We find in them statuettes, herms, small figures of animals, and diminutive groups. Figures derived from the myths of the bacchic cycle, Bacchus, Silenus, satyrs, and bacchantes, are particularly common. The artistic value is slight; among the best examples is the double bust, with Bacchus on one side and a bacchante on the other, found in the garden of the house of the Vettii (Fig. 257).
Fig. 257.—Double bust, Bacchus and bacchante. Garden of the house of the Vettii.
Characteristic among these sculptures are the figures designed for the adornment of fountains; a number of them are exhibited in the Museum at Naples. Bacchic figures are met with most frequently. A good example is the marble Silenus in the garden of the house of Lucretius; the water spurts from the opening in the wineskin which the old man carries. The design of the small bronze satyr in the peristyle of the house of the Centenary is more pleasing; an opening in the wineskin, held under the left arm, cast a jet against the outstretched right hand in such a way that the water was thrown back upon the satyr's body.
Fountains were adorned also with genre groups and animal forms. We have already noticed the two bronze groups in the peristyle of the house of the Vettii, each representing a boy holding a duck, from the bill of which sprang a jet of water (Fig. 162). The largest collection of animal forms was about the basin in the middle peristyle of the house of the Citharist; it comprised two dogs, a boar, a lion, a deer, and a snake, each throwing a jet into the basin below. The fountain jets, however, were not in all cases so closely related to the ornamental pieces. A number of those in the house of the Vettii sprang from lead pipes near the figures. The familiar bronze statue of the seated fisherman, in the Naples Museum, belonged to a fountain, in which the jet was thrown forward, not from the figure, but from the mouth of a mask projecting from the stump on which the fisherman sits.
Of the statues of divinities set up for worship in the temples, there are unfortunately but few remains. The most important fragment is the head of Jupiter, discussed in a previous chapter (Fig. 22). Three wretched terra cotta statues of the gods of the Capitol were found, as we have seen, in the temple of Zeus Milichius; and mention has been made also of the herms and other specimens of sculpture in the courts of the temples of Apollo and Isis, and in the palaestra. More numerous than any other class of sculptures, however, are the small bronze images of tutelary divinities preserved in the domestic shrines. These are of interest rather from the light which they shed on the practices of domestic worship than from their excellence as works of art, and it seems unnecessary to add anything here to what has already been said in regard to them in the chapter dealing with the arrangements of the Pompeian house. But occasionally there were large domestic shrines, in which statues of merit were placed; among these are two worthy of mention.
In the corner of a garden belonging to a house in the first Region (I. ii. 17) is a shrine faced with white marble, in which was a small marble statue of Aphrodite, partly supported by a figure commonly identified as Hope, Spes. The carving is in no way remarkable, but the statue is of interest on account of the well preserved coloring applied to the eyes, hair, and dress. The group is now in the Naples Museum.
A more important example, from the aesthetic point of view, is the statue of Artemis, of one half life size, shown in Plate XI. It was found in a house near the Amphitheatre which was excavated in 1760 and covered up again. It is a careful copy, made in the time of Augustus, of a Greek masterpiece produced in the period of the Persian Wars. The original was probably the Artemis Laphria mentioned by Pausanias. This was a work of Menaechmus and Soedas, two sculptors of Naupactus. Previous to the battle of Actium it stood in a sanctuary in Calydon, whence it was removed by Augustus, who presented it to the colony founded by him at Patras.
The goddess appears in this statue as a huntress, moving forward with a firm but light step; the bow in the left hand has disappeared. The copyist was remarkably successful in impressing upon his work the gracious and pleasing character of the original; the later archaic Greek art, in spite of its conventions, is full of human feeling. The copy preserved also the coloring of the model; but the tinting of the Roman colorist was probably less delicate than that of the Greek limner who added the polychrome decoration to the marble original. The hair was yellow. The pupils of the eyes were brown, the eyelashes and eyebrows black. The rosettes of the diadem were yellow, and the border of the outer garment was richly variegated in tints of yellow, rose color, and white. Traces of rose-colored stripes are visible also about the openings of the sleeves, on the edge of the mantle at the neck, and on the border of the chiton.
Besides the bronze statues of Apollo and Artemis already mentioned (pp. 88, 352), four others of those found at Pompeii are worthy of more than passing notice,—the dancing satyr from which the house of the Faun received its name, the small Silenus used as a standard for a vase, the so-called Narcissus and the Ephebus found in 1900.
Fig. 258.—Dancing Faun. Bronze statuette, now in the Naples Museum.
The dancing satyr is shown in Fig. 258. It was found lying on the floor of the atrium in the house of the Faun, but the pedestal could not be identified. The figure is instinct with rhythmic motion. Every muscle of the satyr's sinewy frame is in tension as he moves forward in the dance, snapping his fingers to keep time; the pose is a marvel of skill. The unhuman character of the half-brute is indicated by the horns projecting from the forehead, and the pointed ears. The face, marked by low cunning, offers no suggestion of lofty thought or moral sense. We have here the personification of unalloyed physical enjoyment. The satyr, unvexed by any care or qualm of conscience, is intoxicated with the joy of free movement, and dances on and on, unwearied, with perfect ease and grace.
Muscular tension is skilfully indicated in the Silenus, who stands holding above his head with his left hand a round frame, in which, as shown by the fragments, a vase of colored glass was standing at the time of the eruption. The head, crowned with ivy, leans forward and to the right, and the right hand is moved away from the body in the effort to balance the weight supported by the left. The frame is awkwardly designed to represent a snake. The thick-set figure of Silenus is about sixteen inches high. This bronze was discovered in 1864, in the house of Popidius Priscus (VII. ii. 20).
Fig. 259.—Listening Dionysus, wrongly identified as Narcissus. Bronze statuette in the Naples Museum.
The third of the bronzes mentioned is also a statuette, about two feet high (Fig. 259). It was found in 1863 in a house of the seventh Region (VII. xii. 21). The figure is that of a youth of remarkable beauty. The face wears an expression of childlike innocence and pleasure. The head leans forward in the attitude of listening; the index finger of the right hand is extended, and the graceful pose is that of one who catches the almost inaudible sound of a distant voice.
The name Narcissus, given to the figure by Fiorelli immediately upon its discovery, is surely wrong; that unhappy youth did not reciprocate the love of the nymph Echo, and could not have been imagined with so cheerful a face. The figure has also been called Pan, from a myth in which Pan and Echo appear together; but the characteristic attributes are lacking, and the rough god of the shepherds would not have been represented in so lithe and graceful a form.
This beautiful youth, with an ivy crown upon his head and elaborate coverings for the feet, and with the skin of a doe hanging over his shoulder, is none other than Dionysus himself. The mirthful god of the vine is not playing with his panther—the base is too small to have been designed for two figures, and the attitude of listening is not consistent with this interpretation. The youthful divinity has fixed his attention upon some distant sound,—the cries of the bacchantes upon some mountain height, or the laughter of naiads in a shady glen.
Of unusual interest is the bronze statue of an ephebus, discovered in November, 1900, outside the city on the north side, about a hundred paces from the Vesuvius Gate; it was laid away in an upper room of a house presenting nothing else worthy of note. It is apparently a Greek original, and is of three-quarters life size (Fig. 260).
The statue represents a youth about fourteen years of age, of slender but well-developed form, and finely chiselled features. Advancing with firm but graceful step, he rests the right foot, and is bringing the left foot forward. In his right hand, extended, he carried some object—a branch, it may be, or a crown, which was to be laid upon an altar; the eye naturally follows the movement of the hand.
Especially effective is the rhythmic movement of the body. The right thigh, sustained by the resting foot, is carried slightly forward; the chest on the left side swings back, while in consequence of the extension of the right hand the shoulders remain horizontal. Notwithstanding the felicity of the pose, it must be confessed that the modelling as a whole is somewhat lacking in vigor, the treatment of details being superficial.
Fig. 260.—Bronze youth. Naples Museum.
In Greece, before it was carried off to Italy, the figure may have been set up as a votive offering in some sanctuary, or have stood in a gymnasium. From indications on the under side of the feet it is clear that the statue, after the manner in vogue in Greece, was mounted on a stone pedestal, being joined to the pedestal with melted lead; the round bronze base found with it is of Italian origin. Probably when it was being transported from Greece the eyes, of marble, became loose in their sockets and fell down into the hollow interior of the statue; they were replaced by glass eyes. The breaking of the right arm, which was severed when found, made possible the recovery of the original eyes, which have now again been set in place.
Insensible to the charm of the figure when seen as the sculptor designed it, the Pompeian owner, deciding to turn it to practical use, converted it into a lampholder. In the right hand was placed a short bar of bronze, to either end of which was fastened a small ornament with a projecting arm, for a hanging lamp; the whole statue was then coated with silver. However barbarous the taste that prompted the transformation, the decorative effect of the silvered statue with its lighted lamps must have been far from unpleasant.
Regarding the place of the statue in relation to the development of Greek sculpture, it is yet too early to speak.
Had the ruins of Pompeii not been systematically searched, after the disaster, for works of art and other objects of value, they would have yielded a far richer store of sculptures. But while the specimens recovered add little to our knowledge of types, they give a new insight into the application of the sculptor's art in antiquity to the beautifying of the surroundings of everyday life.
CHAPTER LIV
PAINTING.—WALL DECORATION
The inner walls of houses and public buildings at Pompeii were plastered, and usually decorated with colors; only storerooms, kitchens, and apartments designed for the use of slaves were left in the white. Outer walls were as a rule plastered, except when built of hewn stone, a kind of construction not employed after the Tufa Period. Stucco was occasionally used on faÇades of ashlar work where special ornamentation seemed to be needed, as at the entrance of the house of the Faun; and in later times, now and then, a front with reticulate or brick facing was left unplastered. Previous to the time of Augustus the stucco coating of outer walls ordinarily remained uncolored. Afterwards color was employed, but only to a limited extent, as in the addition of a dark base to a wall the rest of which remained white.
The painting upon Pompeian walls, as shown by the painstaking investigations of Otto Donner, was fresco, that is, executed in water colors upon the moist stucco of a freshly plastered surface. The method of preparing the wall was less elaborate than that recommended by Vitruvius, who advises the use of seven coats of plaster, first a rough coat, then three of sand mortar and three of stucco made with powdered marble, each coat being finer than the one preceding. In the better rooms, however, we find upon the walls at least one, often several, layers of sand mortar, and one or more coats of marble stucco; the entire thickness of the plastering varies from two to three inches. In unfinished or neglected rooms walls are sometimes found with a single coat of sand mortar. Occasionally powdered brick was used in the stucco as a substitute for marble dust.
Plastering so thick as that ordinarily used must have remained moist for a considerable length of time, much longer than the plastering of our day; yet it could not have retained its moisture long enough to complete the painting of an entire wall as one piece. Walls which are elaborately decorated sometimes show traces of a seam, where a moist section was laid on next to one that had already become partially dry. When the decorative design included pictures, usually the divisions and borders and other decorative elements were finished rapidly while the surface was moist; then a square or round hole was cut where a picture was to be inserted, and filled with fresh stucco, on which the picture was painted. In this way a carefully executed painting could be set in a wall already dry.
In the last years of the city pictures were sometimes painted on the dry surface of a wall that had previously received its decorative framework; some of the figures seen in the middle of the large panels furnish examples of this method of work. A size of some kind must have been used in such cases, but chemical analysis thus far has failed to determine its nature. The distemper painting was much less durable than the fresco, the colors of which became fixed with the hardening of the wall.
Sometimes, as in the house of Lucretius, the place of paintings upon stucco was taken by paintings upon wood, the wooden panels being let into the wall. As these panels were thin and lacked durability, we may perhaps believe that the paintings which they contained were of inferior quality.
The artistic value of Pompeian painting varies from the routine work of indifferent decorators to pictures of genuine merit, such as those found in the house of the Tragic Poet, the house of the Vettii, and the house of Castor and Pollux. Viewed as a whole, the wall decoration has a peculiar interest for us; it not only richly illustrates the application of painting by the ancients to decorative uses, but also affords a striking example of the evolution of decorative designs from simple architectural motives to intricate patterns, in which the scheme of coloring is hardly less complicated than that of the ornamental forms.
The four styles of wall decoration were briefly characterized in the Introduction, in connection with our survey of the periods of construction. It now remains to illustrate these by typical examples and to trace their inner connection. We are here concerned only with the decorative designs, or ornamental framework of the walls; the paintings, which formed the centre of interest in the later styles, are reserved for consideration in a separate chapter.
The development of ancient wall decoration came comparatively late, after the art of painting, in the hands of the Greek masters, had reached and passed its climax. Yet we know almost nothing in regard to the earlier stages. Apparently the system which we find at Pompeii originated in the period following the death of Alexander the Great, and received its impulse of development from the contact of Greece with the Orient. But whatever the origin, from the time to which the earliest specimens at Pompeii belong—the second century B.C.—to the destruction of the city, we can trace an uninterrupted development, which, nevertheless, comes to an end in the latter part of the first century A.D.
The decline is characterized by increasing poverty of design, with feeble imitation of past styles. Just as it is setting in, however, extant examples become rare. Some specimens of the wall decoration of later times, as of the period of the Antonines and the reign of Septimius Severus, are preserved, but they are isolated and not sufficient in number to enable us to follow the stages of the decline. Thus it happens that the only period in the history of ancient wall decoration in regard to which we have the materials for a full and satisfactory study, is the period exemplified in the remains at Pompeii, the chronological sequence of which extends over two centuries.
The oldest houses, those belonging to the Period of the Limestone Atriums (p. 39), have preserved no traces of wall decoration beyond the limited application of white stucco.
The remains of the decoration of the Tufa Period are fairly abundant, and are well preserved on account of the excellent quality of the stucco to which the colors were applied. They belong to the first or Incrustation Style. A good example has already been given, the end wall of a bedroom in the house of the Centaur (Fig. 122); we present here, for more detailed examination, the left wall of the atrium in the house of Sallust (Fig. 261).
Notwithstanding the lack of color in our illustration, the divisions of the wall are plainly seen—a dado, painted yellow; a relatively low middle division, the upper edge of which is set off by a projecting cornice; and an upper part reaching from the first cornice, which appears in three sections on account of the doors, to the second. The surface of the main part of the wall is moulded in stucco to represent slabs or blocks with bevelled edges, which are painted in imitation of different kinds of marble. Above the high double doors opening into rooms connected with the atrium, frames of lattice-work for the admission of air and light have been assumed in our restoration.
The dado in the Incrustation Style is generally treated as a separate member; in rare instances the imitation of marble blocks is extended to the floor. It has a smooth surface and is painted a bright color, usually yellow; there is no suggestion of the practice of later times, which gave a darker color to the base than to the rest of the wall. This independent handling is undoubtedly to be explained as a survival from a previous decorative system, in which the lower part of the wall, as at Tiryns, was protected by a baseboard; the conventional yellow color with which it is painted, as in the case of the lower stripe of the Doric architrave in the house of the Faun (p. 51), is a reminiscence of the use of wood. The upper edge of the dado was ordinarily distinguished by a smooth, narrow projecting band or fillet.
The blocks moulded in slight relief upon the main part of the wall are of different sizes. In our illustration we see first a series of three large slabs, which are painted black. Above these are three narrow blocks of magenta. The rest present a considerable variety of size and color, until we reach those just under the cornice, which again are all of the same shade, magenta.
The cornice in this style is always of the Ionic type, with dentils. In many cases, as that of the bedroom in the house of the Centaur, it serves as an upper border for the decoration, the wall above being unpainted. Sometimes, however, the imitation of marble is carried above the cornice, the wall surface being divided to represent smoothly joined blocks without bevelled edges, or painted in plain masses of color separated by a narrow white stripe, as in the atrium of the house of Sallust. Above these brilliant panels we see in Fig. 261 a second cornice of simple design; the wall between this cornice and the ceiling was left without decoration.
Fig. 261.—Wall decoration in the atrium of the house of Sallust. First or Incrustation Style.
This system made no provision for paintings; their place was taken in the general scheme of decoration by elaborate mosaic pictures upon the floor. The taste of the age evidently preferred representations in mosaic; otherwise the painting of pictures upon the walls, which was brought to so high a degree of perfection by Polygnotus and his contemporaries, would not have been abandoned.
The Incrustation Style, as exemplified at Pompeii, is in a secondary stage; it must have been worked out originally in genuine materials, at a time when walls were actually veneered, to a certain height, with slabs of various kinds of marble, cut and arranged to represent ashlar work; above the cornice marking the upper edge of the veneering, the surface was left in the white. The use of different varieties of marble points to an active commercial intercourse between the countries about the Mediterranean Sea, such as first became possible after the conquests of Alexander. So characteristic a style, requiring the use of costly materials, could only have been developed in an important centre of wealth and culture.
In view of all the circumstances, we are probably safe in concluding that the Incrustation Style originated in Alexandria, in the third century B.C. From Alexandria it spread to other cities of the East and West, stucco being used in imitation of marble, where marble could not be procured; scanty remains similar to those at Pompeii, and of approximately the same period—the second century B.C.—have been found at Pergamon, on the island of Delos, and lately in Priene. This style represents for us the wall decoration of the Hellenistic age. It is characterized by the same poverty of form and obvious striving after simplicity which we have noticed in the architecture of the Tufa Period. The projecting cornice above the body of the wall is always of the same type; yet the second century B.C. enjoyed a rich heritage of architectural forms, and lack of variety in this and other details of ornamentation was due, not to dearth of materials, but to the prevailing taste.
The earliest known example of the decoration of the second or Architectural Style, is on the walls of the Small Theatre, which was built soon after 80 B.C. The style remained in vogue till the middle of the reign of Augustus; it may be loosely characterized as the wall decoration of the first century B.C. It shows an interesting development from simpler to richer and more complex forms. The more elaborate and finished designs are not so well exemplified at Pompeii as in Rome, where two beautiful series have been found, both dating from the earlier part of the reign of Augustus. One series is in the so-called house of Livia or Germanicus on the Palatine. The other was found in a house on the right bank of the Tiber, excavated in 1878; the paintings were removed to the new Museo delle Terme. The specimen shown in Plate XII, however, is from a Pompeian wall; the room in which it was found opens off from the peristyle of a house in the fifth Region (V. i. 18).
The oldest walls of the second style closely resemble those of the first, with this characteristic difference: the imitation of marble veneering is no longer produced with the aid of relief; color alone is employed, upon a plane surface, as in the cella of the temple of Jupiter (Fig. 20). The earlier division of the wall into three parts is retained, but the painted cornice, no longer restricted to the dentil type, appears in a variety of forms. The base also is treated with greater freedom. Frequently it is painted in strong projection, as if the rest of the wall above it were further from the eye, while upon the shelf thus formed are painted columns reaching to the ceiling and seemingly in front of the main part of the wall; such columns and pillars, with Corinthian capitals, are seen in Plate XII, at the right and the left.
PLATE XII.—SPECIMEN OF WALL DECORATION. SECOND OR ARCHITECTURAL STYLE
Thus the designs of this style at first comprised only simple elements, a wall made up of painted blocks or panels with a dado painted in projection supporting columns that seemed to carry an architrave on which the ceiling rested; there is an excellent example in the house of the Labyrinth, on the walls of a room at the rear of the garden. But the designs gradually became more complex, partly through the differentiation of the simple elements, partly through the introduction of new motives, until a complete architectural system was developed. This system differs from that of the fourth style, which is also architectural, in that it adheres in the main to actual or possible structural forms, while those of the fourth style are fantastic in their proportions and arrangement.
In this process of development two clearly defined tendencies become manifest, one affecting the treatment of the upper division of the wall, the other the elaboration of a characteristic motive which now first appears, a framework for the principal painting; for architectural designs are well adapted for the display of pictures, and wall paintings now begin to have a prominent place in Pompeian decoration.
The upper division tends more and more to be represented as an open space, behind the plane of projection in which the main part appears. Thus in Plate XII we see on either side a silver vase with fruits and vine leaves, standing on the cornice of the main wall, in the open. Often the upper space is painted blue, as if one caught a glimpse of the sky above the wall; sometimes the outline of a wall further beyond is seen, or columns in the rear connected with those in front by a decorative framework; and not infrequently small architectural designs, in perspective, rest upon the cornice where the vases are shown in our plate. But in all the designs of this style, complex as well as simple, the threefold division of the wall carried over from the first style is retained; very often the distinction between the base, main wall, and upper portion is emphasized by painting them so that they seem to be in three planes of projection.
The ornamental framework for the painting, consistently with the architectural character of the decoration as a whole, is generally conceived as a pavilion projecting from the wall; so in Plate XII, where we see two columns sustaining a roof, upon the front of which winged figures stand, each with a hand extended upward to the entablature of the large pillars at the sides. The design of the pavilion is suggested by that of a shrine, such a shrine as the one in the apse of the sanctuary of the City Lares (Fig. 41).
This conception is here borne out by the subject of the painting, which represents a statue of Dionysus resting, ivy-crowned, with a thyrsus in his left hand; the right hand is thrown gracefully over the head, and at the feet of the god the lifelike figure of a panther is seen. The round high pedestal supporting the group is in the open, and the background affords a charming vista among the trees.
This framing of the principal painting led further to the division of the body of the wall vertically into three sections, a broad central section, included within the outline of the pavilion, and two panels, one at each side. The arrangement is well illustrated in our plate, the side panels of which are adorned with painted statues of tastefully draped figures, one of them holding a lyre. The later styles of decoration retained this symmetrical division of the wall space, which made prominent the picture of greatest interest without detracting from the finish of the decorative setting; but in the fourth style it is often obscured by the intricacy of the designs.
The third style came into vogue during the reign of Augustus, and was prevalent until about 50 A.D.; we shall call it the Ornate Style, from its free use of ornament. It was developed out of the second style in the same way that the second style was developed out of the first; but the transition was not accomplished at Pompeii, which, like the provincial cities of our day, received its fashions from the great centres.
The characteristics of the Ornate Style, as regards both the main design and the ornamentation, may easily be perceived from the example presented in Fig. 263, especially if this is viewed in contrast with the specimen of the preceding style shown in Plate XII. The architectural design has now lost all semblance of real construction. Columns, entablatures, and other members are treated conventionally, as subordinate parts of a decorative scheme; they are, with few exceptions, reduced to narrow bands or stripes of color dividing the surface of the wall. The elaborate border of the central painting suggests a pavilion, yet the projecting base, which in the second style gave this design its significance, is lacking. Hardly less noteworthy is the treatment of the upper portion of the wall. Fanciful architectural forms and various ornaments stand out against a white background, suggestive of the open sky; yet in our example, as often in this style, there is no organic connection between the decoration of the main part of the wall and that of the ceiling.
Every part of the framework of the third style is profusely ornamented. The ornamental system is seen to have a certain affinity with that of Egypt, and Egyptian figures occasionally appear; whence we infer that it was developed in Alexandria. Early in the reign of Augustus, in consequence of the relations with Egypt following the battle of Actium, a new impulse may well have been given to the introduction into Italy of Alexandrian art.
The specimen of the third style shown in Fig. 263 is from the beautiful decoration of the house of Spurius Mesor, portions of which are well preserved. The base of our specimen consists of two parts, a lower border and a broad stripe of black divided into sections of different shapes and sizes by lines of light color. In the small sections ornaments are seen painted in delicate shades, two of them being faces.
The large painting presents a mythological scene, but the subject is not clear. The priestess seems to be performing a ceremony of expiation in order to free from the taint of some crime the young man who, with a wreath on his head and a sword, pointed downward, in his right hand, bends over the hind just slain as a sacrifice. The colors are subdued and effective; the painting from the technical point of view is among the best found at Pompeii.
Around the painting are narrow black stripes separated by white lines; in the broader stripe underneath, between the columns, are two light blue birds upon a dull red ground. The small squares in the flat cornice above are of many colors, shades of green, pink, and brown predominating. The broad panels on either side of the painting are of the color often called Pompeian red; they have an ornamented border, and a small winged figure in the centre. The stripe below these shows vases and other ornaments on an orange-yellow ground; that above, interrupted by the cornice over the painting, is black, with various ornaments, as baskets of fruit, sistrums, and geese, painted in neutral colors. Among the ornaments of the upper part of the wall, festoons of leaves, vines, vases, parrots, and griffins can be distinguished, painted in light shades of brown, blue, green, and yellow.
Fig. 263.—Specimen of wall decoration. Third or Ornate Style.
From the house of Spurius Mesor.
The effect of the Ornate Style, with its symmetrical forms and variety of detail, is pleasing; but the free use of neutral tones gives the walls a somewhat cold and formal appearance when we bring into contrast the warm coloring of the next period.
The fourth or Intricate Style first appears about the middle of the first century A.D. It started, as did the third, with the symmetrical division of the wall developed in the second style; it differs from the third in that it always retained a sense of architectural form. The columns are often fluted, as in a specimen in the Naples Museum (Fig. 264). The entablatures and coffered ceilings, light and airy as they often seem, have nevertheless a suggestion of reality; we know that architectural forms are presented, and not mere stripes of color. Yet the difference between the fourth and the second style is no less apparent. In the latter the architectural designs are not inconsistent with real construction; in the former the imagination of the designer had free scope, producing patterns so fantastic and intricate that the fundamental idea at the basis of the wall divisions seems entirely lost sight of at times.
The preference for architectural forms was carried so far that between the large panels of black, red, or yellow, vertical sections of wall were left which were filled with airy structures on a white background; the parts represented as nearest the beholder were painted yellow, those further back were adorned with all the colors of the rainbow, thus forming a kind of color perspective (Fig. 265). The designs of the main part were extended into the upper division, and frequently the whole wall appears as an intricate scaffolding, partially concealed by the large panels; these sometimes have the appearance of tapestries hanging suspended from the scaffolding, and are so treated, as in the case of the curtains shown in Plate XIII. The fundamental conception of the decorative system is lost when the background of the upper part and of the airy scaffoldings is no longer left white, but painted the same color as the rest of the wall, so that the effect of distance and perspective is obscured. Occasionally, also, the architectural framework of the upper portion of the wall has no connection with that of the main part.
Fig. 264.—Specimen of wall decoration. Fourth style.
The ornaments of the fourth style were taken largely from the domain of plastic art. Groups of statuary as well as single figures appear either upon projecting portions of the architectural framework, as in Fig. 264, or in the background. They are frequently painted yellow, suggesting the gilding applied to ancient statues, particularly those of bronze, and present a striking contrast to the masses of strong color in the large panels and the brilliant shades of the architectural designs. They are in harmony with the taste of the period, which, as we have seen, manifested a fondness for ornamentation in stucco relief, the effect of which was heightened by the free use of color.
The large panels contained paintings of various sizes, sometimes copies of masterpieces, more often a simple floating figure or a Cupid; groups are also found, as Cupid and Pysche, or a satyr with a bacchante. The appearance of a picture worked in tapestry is given by a border just inside the framework of the panel, as often in the decoration of the fourth style.
The fourth style cannot have been derived from the third. It is organically related with the second, out of which it was developed by laying stress on precisely that element, the architectural, the suppression of which gave rise to the third style of decoration. The most reasonable explanation of the relations of the four styles, briefly stated, is this:—
The Incrustation Style, a direct offshoot of Hellenistic art, was prevalent in eastern cities, where it was naturally followed by the Architectural Style; this may have been developed at one centre or, in different phases, at different centres contemporaneously.
Fig. 265.—Specimen of wall decoration. Fourth style.
In the middle panel, mythological scene in which Hercules is the principal figure; in each of the panels, a satyr and a bacchante.
At some prominent centre, probably Alexandria, the Architectural Style passed over into the Ornate Style, which was introduced into Italy in the reign of Augustus and remained in vogue till the middle of the first century A.D.
Meanwhile, at some other centre of culture, possibly Antioch, the Architectural Style, by an equally natural course of development, had passed over into the Intricate Style, which was first brought to Pompeii about 50 A.D. and remained in fashion till the destruction of the city.
The earthquake of the year 63 threw down some buildings and made necessary the thorough-going repair of many others. Between that year and 79, more walls were freshly decorated, probably, than in any previous period of equal length in the history of the city. For this reason, examples of decoration in the Intricate Style are much more numerous than might have been expected from the length of time that it was in vogue; they give the prevailing cast to the remains of painting in the ruins, and this style is ordinarily thought of when Pompeian wall decoration is referred to. The complex designs and brilliant colors form a decorative scheme which is often most effective, although the system of the third style reveals a finer and more correct taste.
If no remains of the two earlier styles had survived to modern times, the antecedents and relations of the other two could not possibly be understood. But with the first two in mind, we are able to see clearly how the most complex forms of the later decoration may be reduced, in last analysis, to simple elements. Even in the example of the Intricate Style given in Plate XIII, we find a suggestion of the threefold division of the wall into base, main part, and upper part, which was so prominent in the Incrustation Style; and also an elaborate structural form at the middle of the wall recalling the pavilion framework of the second style, with a symmetrical arrangement of the architectural designs on either side, suggesting the panels at the sides of the principal painting.
The slabs of colored marble in the Incrustation Style are represented by panels for pictures or ornamental forms of all shapes and sizes; and the architectural designs, so simple at the beginning, have by almost imperceptible changes and additions become decorative patterns so varied and intricate that taken by themselves they give no hint of their origin.
PLATE XIII.—SPECIMEN OF WALL DECORATION. FOURTH OR INTRICATE STYLE
CHAPTER LV
THE PAINTINGS
The hanging of pictures upon the walls seems not to have been in vogue at Pompeii during the period to which the remains belong. The system of decoration left no room for framed paintings, and no traces of any such have been discovered. The paintings which have been preserved at Pompeii, not merely the small groups and single figures introduced to enliven the design, but the large compositions as well, all formed a part of the wall decoration.
The number is relatively large. In the catalogue by Helbig, published in 1868, there are nearly two thousand entries, including a few paintings from Herculaneum and other Campanian sites. The supplement compiled by Sogliano in 1879 records more than eight hundred pictures brought to light in the preceding decade. We are probably safe in estimating the whole number of Pompeian paintings still in existence, or known from description, as about thirty-five hundred.
In all this wealth of examples, however, it is not possible to find any evidence of a progressive development either in composition or in technique. There are indeed slight differences, mainly in regard to technical handling and color scheme, which distinguish the paintings found in the decoration of the third style from those of the other two styles in which paintings appear; but, on the other hand, the distinction between those of the second and those of the fourth style is much less marked.
The period from 80 B.C. to 79 A.D. was as little creative in the field of painting as in that of sculpture. No new types appear, no improvements are worked out; the painter, as the sculptor, was an eclectic, who drew upon the creations of the past as suited his fancy, and contented himself with copying or imitating. In the adaptation of paintings to decorative use the artist reproduced either entire compositions or single motives which seemed to answer his purpose. The general preference was for paintings of the Hellenistic age, after the death of Alexander; yet examples of earlier styles are occasionally found, as the Sacrifice of Iphigenia (Fig. 156) and the dramatic scene in which Orestes and Pylades appear before King Thoas (Fig. 182).
New discoveries and the progress of research will sometime, perhaps, make it possible to present a general survey of the Pompeian paintings from the historical and critical point of view. No such comprehensive treatment is yet possible, however, and we must content ourselves with offering a few observations in regard to the distribution of the paintings among the different decorative styles and the classes of subjects represented.
The Incrustation Style, as previously remarked, left no place for paintings upon the walls. Nevertheless, in isolated cases, we find a simple pictorial representation upon the surface of one of the blocks painted in imitation of marble, as if the veins of the stone had run into a shape suggestive of an object, as a vase or a bird; in one instance, curiously enough, a wrestling match is outlined, between Hercules and Antaeus. In the Tufa Period the desire for paintings was satisfied by the mosaic pictures upon the floor.
The earlier walls of the second style in this respect resemble those of the first; the examples in the house of the Labyrinth have no paintings. The later walls, however, are rich in pictures, but those of Pompeii are not so abundantly adorned as those in Rome (p. 462). The elaborate painting shown in the pavilion frame in Plate XII is exceptional among the Pompeian remains of this style.
The great majority of the paintings are found upon walls of the third and fourth styles. On the older walls of the third style, as we have seen, the principal painting appears in a frame, the design of which is taken from that of the conventional pavilion of the second style. In later examples the close relation between the picture and the frame is no longer maintained; the frame simply encloses a large panel of uniform color, in the middle of which a relatively small picture is seen. This arrangement was carried over into the fourth style, but the conception of a pavilion frame is entirely lost sight of; the painting is in the middle of a large panel of brilliant color, around which the architectural framework is extended. A Pompeian room well decorated in either of the later styles contained four of these prominent paintings, in case there was no door at the middle of one of the sides; if a door interfered, there were only three.
Paintings were also placed in the divisions of the wall at the right and the left of the central panel. In Plate XII we noticed a single figure on either side of the pavilion, but such additions are rare in the second style. In the third style the side panels are uniformly adorned with paintings. In Fig. 263 the small figure in the middle of the panel at the left is a Cupid; frequently a flying swan is seen, or a landscape lightly sketched in monochrome on the ground of the panel. Sometimes the painting is set off by a separate frame; if this is round, a bust is usually represented. Groups of two figures were preferred for the side panels of the fourth style, the favorite subject being a satyr and a bacchante, as in Fig. 265; these sometimes appear as busts, but are more often represented as floating figures.
Characteristic of the fourth style, in respect to the distribution of paintings, is the use of single figures and simple compositions to add life to the fantastic architectural designs in the upper part of the wall and in the divisions between the large panels. Here we may see satyrs and bacchantes, young girls and solemn-visaged men with implements of sacrifice; the figures appear in great variety of type and subject. Sometimes groups are broken up, and the elements of a mythological scene, as that of Admetus and Alcestis, are distributed as single figures in the architectural framework.
At the time of the eruption the fondness for pictorial representations was increasing, and they were being introduced into every part of the decoration, including the frieze of the main part of the wall, the use of which in this way commenced in the time of the third style (Fig. 263), and the stripe below, between the main part of the wall and the base (Fig. 265); how elaborate this intermediate decoration might become we have already seen in the case of the house of the Vettii.
Frequently in the fourth style the lower part of the architectural framework separating two large panels appears to be closed, as in Plate XIII, by a narrow panel, above which a painting is seen. The pictures found in these places often represent still life. Seafights are also a favorite subject; such may be seen in the temple of Isis, the Macellum, and one of the rooms in the house of the Vettii. Generally on the walls of the fourth style, wherever there is available space, we find small pictures in great variety, the most common being landscapes, simply painted, with the use of few colors.
It is by no means easy to make a satisfactory classification of Pompeian paintings according to subject. Nevertheless, with a few exceptions, they may be roughly grouped in four general classes, mythological paintings, genre paintings, landscapes, and still life. Most of the large and important pictures belong to the first class. The mythological paintings will therefore be discussed at somewhat greater length; the other three classes will require only a brief characterization.
Fig. 266.—A fruit piece, Xenion.
The still-life paintings represent all kinds of meat, fish, fowl, and fruits. According to Vitruvius, this kind of picture was called Xenion. The reason given for the name recalls a curious custom of ancient Greece. When a guest, xenos, was received into a Greek home, says this writer, he was invited to sit at the table for one day. After that provisions were furnished to him uncooked, and he prepared his own meals. A portion of unprepared victuals thus came to be called xenion, 'the stranger's portion,' and the name was afterwards transferred to pictures in which such provisions appear. A fruit piece, now in the Naples Museum, is shown in Fig. 266.
Landscapes are numerous and of all sizes. Occasionally a garden wall of the fourth style is covered with a single large painting, in which villas, gardens, roads, and harbors are realistically presented. Such pictures are of Italian origin; the name of the artist who first painted them is probably Sextus Tadius, but the reading of the passage in which the name occurs (Plin. N. H. XXXV. x. 116) is uncertain.
Common to the third and fourth styles are garden scenes, in which, behind a light barrier, the plants of a garden appear, with birds, statues, and fountains. The finest extant example is in the villa of Livia, at Prima Porta, near Rome.
Fig. 267.—A landscape painting.
Large landscapes sometimes have a place in the principal panels of the walls. These are all of Hellenistic origin, and are found almost without exception in the decoration of the third style. They generally represent a quiet nook of woodland, with high cliffs; in the foreground is a shrine—perhaps more than one—with figures of men sacrificing or coming to offer worship.
The great majority of the landscapes, however, are introduced into various parts of the decoration outside of the large panels, and are quite small. In them we see little shrines or villas by the seaside; a river with a bridge on which a traveller appears crossing the stream; or buildings on an island or peninsula in the edge of a body of water, as in Fig. 267. Often they are simply light sketches; now and then one of these small landscapes is painted in a peculiar tint, as if the scene were represented by moonlight.
Fig. 268.—Group of women, one of whom is sounding two stringed instruments.
The genre paintings are of special importance on account of the light they shed on the life and customs of the ancients. A number have already been described or illustrated in the chapter on the house of the Vettii, and in the part devoted to the trades and occupations. To these we should add the picture of an artist in the house of the Surgeon (Fig. 133), and the scenes from the life of the Forum (Figs. 16, 17).
Here belong also the groups in which figures are seen with a roll of papyrus or a writing tablet, suggestive of literary pursuits, and figures with musical instruments. A group of musicians is shown in Fig. 268, in which are four women, one of whom is tuning a couple of stringed instruments to sound in unison.
In the same class are included two small painted busts not infrequently met with, that of a girl with a writing tablet in her left hand holding the end of a stylus against her lips, as if pondering what to write, and that of a young man with one end of a roll of papyrus, in which he has been reading, under his chin. A Pompeian baker, Publius Paquius Proculus, brought these two ideal busts into one painting, substituting for the faces of the youth and maiden those of himself and his wife (Fig. 269). The portraits are realistic, but the faces are not unattractive; that of Proculus seems more kindly and ingenuous than the face of Caecilius Jucundus (Fig. 256).
Fig. 269.—Paquius Proculus and his wife.
Two ideal painted busts have recently been found, each of a youth with a roll of papyrus. Their chief interest lies in the fact that each roll is provided with a narrow tag or label, of the sort that the Romans called index, on which the names Plato and Homerus can be plainly read. The two types of face well correspond with the trend of taste suggested by the titles: the delicate features and upturned gaze of the one indicate a poetic temperament; the other has a high forehead and an air of meditation, appropriate for a student of philosophy.
The mythological paintings rarely present rapid movement. To the few exceptions belong the two familiar pictures placed opposite each other in the tablinum of the house of Castor and Pollux, Achilles among the daughters of Lycomedes on the island of Scyros, and the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon. Only part of the latter painting is preserved, but both are strong compositions, and are repeated on other walls.
Scenes of combat, the interest of which lies in the display of physical force, are still more infrequently met with, and seem out of harmony with the prevailing taste. Two pictures from Herculaneum represent Hercules putting forth his strength; in one he is struggling with the Nemean lion, in the other carrying the Erymanthian boar. The few paintings of this kind at Pompeii are badly preserved. In two of them Meleager appears, engaged in combat with the boar; in another we see Achilles before the walls of Troy with drawn sword in one hand, with the other grasping by the hair Troilus, an effeminate Trojan youth, attired in Oriental fashion, who mounted on his horse is vainly trying to escape; a fourth represents a combat between a heavy-armed warrior and an Amazon. But such paintings are the more conspicuous by reason of their rarity, and those that have thus far been discovered are all found upon walls of the third style.
A much larger number of mythological compositions represent a moment of dramatic interest, the artist relying for his effect upon the bearing and facial expression of the persons appearing in the scene. The interest is purely psychological, and several of the pictures that have been preserved give us an exceedingly favorable idea of the ability of ancient painters to express emotion, especially when we remember that these paintings are merely decorative copies of masterpieces the originals of which in most cases had probably never been seen by the workmen who painted the copies on the walls.
Among the more familiar examples is the face of Orestes in the painting found in the house of the Citharist (Fig. 182), and that of Io, watched by Argus, in the Macellum. Emotion is expressed with even greater skill in the face of Io in a painting of the temple of Isis. The goddess welcomes the wanderer to Egypt after her long season of suffering; the traces of the suffering are clearly seen, yet are illumined by the ineffable and serene joy of final deliverance.
One of the most beautiful specimens of ancient painting is a fragment, badly preserved, in the tablinum of the house of Caecilius Jucundus. The composition probably represented Priam turning back toward Troy with the body of Hector, which he had just ransomed. In the fragment, shown in Fig. 270, we see the aged Hecuba, together with a daughter or maidservant, looking with unutterable anguish from an upper window down upon the scene. The gray-haired queen, whose features still retain much of their youthful beauty, gazes upon the dust-stained body of her son with grief too deep for tears.
Fig. 270.—Hecuba with a younger companion looking from an upper window as Priam brings back the body of Hector.
In the majority of paintings the subjects of which are taken from myths the characters are represented either in a relation of rest, not suggestive of intense emotion, or in a lasting situation of dramatic interest, which is devoid of momentary excitement and does not suggest the display of evanescent feeling. The situation is sometimes cheerful, sometimes calculated to arouse sympathy; if the characters were not mythological, the scenes might pass for those of everyday life. Thus we see Narcissus looking at the reflection of his face in a clear spring in the forest; Polyphemus, on the seashore, receiving from the hands of a Cupid a letter sent by Galatea; and Apollo playing on the lyre for Admetus, while the herd grazes around him.
To the same series of cheerful or idyllic pictures belong the Selene hovering over the sleeping Endymion; Paris and Oenone on Mt. Ida, Paris cutting the name of his sweetheart in the bark of a tree; and Perseus with Andromeda looking at the reflection of the head of Medusa in a pool. With these we may class also the representations of Bacchus as he moves along with his rollicking band and suddenly comes upon the sleeping Ariadne; and Hercules with Omphale, sometimes sitting in woman's attire beside her and spinning, sometimes staggering in his cups or lying drunk upon the ground while she stands or sits near him.
Examples of a pathetic situation are equally abundant. We find Aphrodite caring for the wounded Adonis, and Cyparissus grieving over the dead stag. The pathos of the scene, however, is not always so obviously suggested. The familiar painting of Europa represents the maiden playfully sitting upon the bull, which one of her girlish companions is caressing. The situation, from one point of view, is idyllic, yet it brings to mind the unhappy fate of the girl, borne far away from home over the sea to a distant land, and the effect is heightened by giving her a wonderfully beautiful form.
Not infrequently a similar result is produced by placing figures of incongruous type in sharp contrast; so in the oft-repeated composition in which the beautiful Thetis in elegant attire sits in the workshop of Hephaestus, looking at the shield which the rough and grimy smith is finishing for Achilles. In another composition PasiphaË is seen in the shop of Daedalus, who points out the wooden cow; and a similar idea of contrast must have been present in the mind of the artist who painted DanaË after she had been cast ashore in a chest on the island of Seriphus, sitting on the beach with little Perseus in her lap, while two fishermen standing near make inquiry concerning her strange fate.
The symmetrical arrangement of the paintings in a Pompeian room can hardly have failed to influence the choice of compositions for the principal panels, especially in cases in which mythological scenes were to be represented. Sometimes, though not so frequently as might have been expected, pictures were grouped according to subject. We have already noticed the relation of two paintings, in the house of Castor and Pollux, in which Achilles is the principal figure. The first of these, Achilles among the daughters of Lycomedes, is found in a room of another house in a group of three; one of the companion pieces represents Thetis in the smithy of Hephaestus looking at the weapons which are being made for Achilles, while in the other she is seen riding over the sea on a Triton, bringing them to her son. There is another group of three pictures related by subject in a room in the house of the Vettii; they belong to the Theban cycle, and represent the infant Hercules strangling the serpents, the death of Pentheus, and the binding of Dirce.
Similarity of scene and of treatment influenced the selection of paintings for a room much more often than unity of subject. A good illustration is the pair of pictures several times found together, one of which represents Polyphemus on the beach receiving from a Cupid a letter written by Galatea; in the other Aphrodite is seen on the seashore fishing, with Cupids all about her. The suggestion of Love is common to both paintings, but the juxtaposition of the two as counterparts is due to the similarity of scene. Opposite the picture of Europa referred to above, is a Pan playing on his pipe, with nymphs around him; the two pictures, which appear in a room of the third style, from the decorative point of view form an effective pair.
A sleeping room of the same style—though in respect to grouping no difference between the styles is apparent—offers an interesting example of a double group. The four principal paintings form two pairs. In one pair we see, on one side, Hercules in the garden of the Hesperides approaching an altar around which three maidens are standing; on the other, a shrine of Artemis in a forest with three worshippers drawing near, one of whom brings a garland. The two pictures harmonize in the character of the scenery and in the arrangement of the figures.
The effectiveness of the other pair as a decorative counterpart can be seen in our illustrations; the subject of one of the paintings is the fate of the pipes which Athena cast aside (Fig. 271), and of the other the fall of Icarus (Fig. 272).
In the first of the two pictures we have one of the few extant examples of a kind of painting associated with the name of Philostratus, in which different scenes representing the successive stages of an action are united in one composition.
In the foreground at the left sits Athena, with her shield on the ground beside her, playing the double pipe; a nymph in front rising from the surface of a stream holds up a mirror in which the goddess may see her face reflected as she plays.
The next two scenes lie just across the brook. At the foot of the cliff sits the divinity of the country, Phrygia, in which the story of Marsyas is localized. Above, at the left, we see the satyr with a shepherd's crook in his left hand blowing a Pan's pipe; he has not yet espied the pipes thrown away by Athena.
Fig. 271.—Athena's pipes and the fate of Marsyas.
At the right he appears again, near the tree, having found the pipes discarded by the goddess and picked them up. Lastly, in the middle of the background, we see him playing the pipes in the presence of the Muses, who are serving as judges in the contest of skill between the satyr and Apollo.
The final scene with the flaying of Marsyas, which was sometimes represented in sculpture, and appears also in several Pompeian paintings, is here omitted.
The inner connection of the other picture is not so clear. It is perhaps a confused form of a composition in which Icarus, lying on the ground after his fall, was the central figure; the local divinities and natives of the region were looking upon the body of the hapless youth with pity; while Daedalus, hovering in the air above, was trying to find the spot where he had fallen.
Our artist, however, thinking to heighten the effect, represented Icarus as plunging headlong through the air, with the result shown in the illustration; neither Daedalus nor the figures in the foreground seem yet to have become aware of the catastrophe.
Fig. 272.—The fall of Icarus.
We can in no way more appropriately bring to a close our brief survey of the Pompeian paintings than by presenting a reproduction of the scene in which Zeus and Hera appear on Mt. Ida (Fig. 273). This painting has been sufficiently discussed in another connection (pp. 316-317); though preserved in a damaged condition, it clearly represents an original of no slight merit.
Fig. 273.—Zeus and Hera on Mt. Ida.
Wall painting from the house of the Tragic Poet.
