Pompeii (61 page)

Koloski Ostrow,
The Sarno Bath Complex
(above) discusses the layout of the accommodation there. F. Pirson explores the rental properties of the
Insula
Arriana Polliana (VI. 6) and of the Estate of Julia Felix (II. 4. 2) in Laurence and Wallace Hadrill (ed.),
Domestic Space
, 165–81. L. H. Petersen offers a positive account of the House of Octavius Quartio in
The Freedman in Roman Art and Art History
(Cambridge, 2006), 129–36, in contrast to the sniffier approach of Zanker,
Pompeii
(above), 145–56 (who uses the name Loreius Tiburtinus for the house). The most comprehensive published material on the House of Fabius Rufus can be found in M. Aoyagi and U. Pappalardo (ed.),
Pompei (Regiones VI-VII). Insula Occidentalis. Volume I Tokyo-Pompei
(Naples, 2006). Seneca’s comments on the baths are in
Letters
LVI. Renting from the first of July is referred to by Petronius,
Satyrica
38; Trimalchio’s insult to his wife is at
Satyrica
74. Cicero’s views on garden features can be found at
On the Laws
II, 2;
Letters to his brother Quintus III, 7, 7; to Atticus
, I, 16, 18. For ‘I wish I could be a ring ...’, see E. Courtney,
Musa Lapidaria: a selection of Latin verse inscriptions
(Atlanta, Georgia, 1995), 82–3.

The most ambitious attempt to tie the houses of Pompeii to particular individuals is that of M. della Corte,
Case ed Abitanti di Pompei
(3rd ed., Naples, 1965), criticised by Mouritsen,
Elections, Magistrates and Municipal Elite
(above), 9–27, and P. M. Allison, ‘Placing individuals: Pompeian epigraphy in context’,
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology
14 (2001), 53–74 (raising doubts on the ownership of the House of the Vettii). The state of the Bar of Amarantus in 79 CE is the subject of J. Berry, ‘The conditions of domestic life in Pompeii in AD 79: a case study of Houses 11 and 12, Insula 9, Region 1’,
Papers of the British School at Rome
52 (1997), 103–25; the graffiti from the property is discussed by A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Scratching the surface: a case study of domestic graffiti at Pompeii’, in M. Corbier and J.-P. Guilhembet (ed.),
L’écriture
dans la maison romaine
(Paris, forthcoming). Domestic fulleries are explored by M. Flohr, ‘The domestic
fullonicae
of Pompeii’, in M. Cole, M. Flohr and E. Poehler (ed.),
Pompeii: cultural standards, practical needs
(forthcoming). The door plaque of Lucius Satrius Rufus and its context is described in
Notizie degli Scavi
1933, 322–3; the crimes of Ladicula and Atimetus are recorded at
CIL
IV, 4776 and 10231.

Chapter 4

The paintings of Pompeii have attracted scholarly attention since the moment of the town’s rediscovery. Still useful on all aspects, from technique to mythological images, is R. Ling,
Roman Painting
(Cambridge, 1991). Several books by J. R. Clarke have explored different themes of painting at Pompeii and elsewhere:
Looking at Lovemaking: constructions of sexuality in Roman art, 100 BC – AD 250
(Berkeley etc., 1998);
Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: visual representation and non-elite viewers in Italy, 100 BC – AD 315
(Berkeley, etc., 2003);
Looking at Laughter: humor, power and transgression in Roman visual culture, 100 BC – AD 250
(Berkeley etc., 2008). A number of the paintings featured in this chapter (including the ‘Judgement of Solomon’, various paintings from the House of the Vettii and from the baths in the House of the Menander) are more fully discussed by Clarke.

The paintings (and painters) of the House of the Painters at Work are the subject of a series of articles by its excavator, A. Varone, including a brief article in English, ‘New finds in Pompeii. The excavation of two buildings in Via dell’Abbondanza’,
Apollo
, July 1993, 8–12. See also ‘Scavo lungo via dell’Abbondanza’,
RStP
3 (1989), 231–8; ‘Attività dell’Ufficio Scavi 1990’,
RStP
4 (1990), 201–11; ‘L’organizzazione del lavoro di una bottega di decoratori: le evidenze dal recente scavo pompeiano lungo via dell’Abbondanza’, in E. M. Moormann (ed.),
Mani di pittori e botteghe pittoriche nel mondo romano
(
Mededeel-ingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome
54 (1995), 124–36. The ‘painters’ workshop’ is discussed by M. Tuffreau-Libre, ‘Les pots à couleur de Pompéi: premiers résultats’,
RStP
10 (1999), 63–70. The most determined (if not always convincing) attempt to identify different ‘hands’ is L. Richardson,
A Catalog of Identifiable Figure Painters of Ancient Pompeii, Herculaneum and Stabiae
(Baltimore, 2000). The entirely implausible identification of a South Italian artist at Fish-bourne is suggested by B.W. Cunliffe,
Fishbourne: a Roman palace and its garden
(London, 1971), 117.

Zebra stripe pattern is fully documented by C. C. Goulet, ‘The “Zebra Stripe” design: an investigation of Roman wall-painting in the periphery’,
RStP
12–13 (2001–2), 53–94. A complete compendium of the decoration in the House of the Menander is provided by R. Ling and L. Ling,
The Insula of the Menander at Pompeii, Vol 2, The Decorations
(Oxford, 2005). The conservation of the Villa of the Mysteries frieze, and its various modern interpretations, are the subject of B. Bergmann, ‘Seeing Women in the Villa of the Mysteries: a modern excavation of the Dionysiac murals’, in Coates and Seydl (ed.),
Antiquity Recovered
(above), 230–69.

The classic formulation of the development of the Four Styles is A. Mau,
Geschichte der decorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji
(Berlin, 1882). Problems with its rigid application are raised by Ling,
Roman Painting
71 (the ‘eclectic’ Fourth Style) and Wallace-Hadrill,
Houses and Society
(above), 30 (on the difficulty of distinguishing Third and Fourth Styles). Vitruvius’ reactions are from his
On Architecture
VII, 5, 4.

The influence of function on design is a major theme of Wallace-Hadrill,
Houses and Society
(see p. 28 for the remarks on perspective). Cicero’s views on unsuitable statuary can be found at
Letters to Friends
VII, 23. Information on the relative cost of pigments is given by Pliny,
Natural History
XXXIII, 118 and XXXV, 30. Vitruvius’ ‘scribe’ is mentioned at
On Architecture
VII, 9, 2.

The significance of particular myths on the walls of Pompeii is usefully discussed by B. Bergmann, ‘The Roman House as Memory Theater: the House of the Tragic Poet in Pompeii’,
Art Bulletin
76 (1994), 225–56 and ‘The Pregnant Moment: tragic wives in the Roman interior’, in N. B. Kampen (ed.),
Sexuality in Ancient Art: near East, Egypt, Greece and, Italy
(New York and Cambridge, 1996), 199–218; and by V. Platt, ‘Viewing, Desiring, Believing: confronting the divine in a Pompeian house’,
Art History
25 (2002), 87–112 (on the House of Octavius Quartio).

B. Bergmann, ‘Greek masterpieces and Roman recreative fictions’,
Harvard Studies in Classical Philology
97 (1995), 79–120 is a good discussion of the relationship between Greek ‘originals’ and Roman recreations. The inscription from the façade of the House of Marcus Lucretius Fronto (V.4.a) can be found at
CIL
IV, 6626. ‘Amazement’ at the painting of the old man and his daughter is recorded by Valerius Maximus,
Memorable Deeds and Sayings
V, 4, ext. 1. Timanthes’ Iphigeneia features at Pliny,
Natural History
XXXV, 74 and Cicero,
Orator
74; Achilles on Skyros at Pliny,
Natural History
XXXV, 134. The story of the Roman lady’s reaction to the painting of Hector is told by Plutarch,
Life of Brutus
23. The graffito referring to the painting of Dirce is noted by E. W. Leach, ‘The Punishment of Dirce: a newly discovered painting in the Casa di Giulio Polibio and its significance within the visual tradition’,
Römische
Mitteilungen
93 (1986), 157–82. The fifth-century BCE jug is discussed by F. Zevi and M. L. Lazzarini, ‘Necrocorinthia a Pompei: un’idria bronzea per le gare di Argo’,
Prospettiva
53–6 (1988–9). 33–49.

Chapter 5

An up-to-date starting point for debates on the ancient economy is W. Scheidel, I. Morris and R. Saller (ed.),
The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World
(Cambridge, 2007) – with references to the evidence from the Greenland icecap. A very ‘primitive’ model of the Pompeian economy itself can be found in W. Jongman,
The Economy and Society of Pompeii
(Amsterdam, 1988), with a powerful critique by N. Purcell, in
Classical Review
40 (1990), 111–16.

The estate of the Lucretii Valentes is the subject of M. De’ Spagnolis Conti-cello, ‘Sul rinvenimento della villa e del monumento funerario dei Lucretii Valentes’,
RStP
6 (1993–4), 147–66. The Villa of the Mosaic Columns is discussed by V. Kockel and B. F. Weber, ‘Die Villa delle Colonne a Mosaico in Pompeji’,
Römische Mitteilungen
90 (1983), 51–89 (with
Notizie degli Scavi
1923, 277 for the fourteen person leg iron). S. de Caro,
La villa rustica in località Villa Regina a Boscoreale
(Rome, 1994) is the major publication of the small holding near Boscoreale (fully reviewed by R. Ling, ‘
Villae Rusticae at Boscoreale
’,
JRA
9 (1996), 344–50). Estimates of surplus production in the territory of Pompeii (plus the reference to ‘the old story’) are given by Purcell, in
Classical Review
1990. Pompeii’s wine trade is discussed by A. Tchernia, ‘Il vino: produzione e commercio’, in F. Zevi (ed.)
Pompei 79: raccolta di studi per il decimonono cente-nario dell’eruzione vesuviana
(Naples, 1979), 87–96 and relevant material from the House of the Menander is illustrated in Stefani (ed.),
Menander
(above), 210–23. The
amphorae
in the House of Amarantus are documented in Berry, ‘The conditions of domestic life’ (above). The cargo of pottery table ware is the subject of D. Atkinson, ‘A hoard of Samian Ware from Pompeii’,
Journal of Roman Studies
4 (1914), 27–64. The vineyard near the Amphitheatre is documented by Jashem-ski,
Gardens of Pompeii
(Vol. 2) (above), 89–90; commercial cultivation more generally within the town itself is discussed in the first volume of
Gardens of Pompeii
(New York, 1979), especially 201–88. Commercial flower growing is documented by M. Robinson, ‘Evidence for garden cultivation and the use of bedding-out plants in the peristyle garden of the House of the Greek Epigrams (V. I. 18i) at Pompeii’,
Opuscula Romana
31–2 (2006–7), 155–9. Pompeian cabbages and onions are mentioned by Pliny,
Natural History
XIX, 139–41; Columella,
On Agriculture
X, 135; XII, 10, 1. The problem of metal working is briefly addressed by W. V. Harris, in Scheidel, Morris and Saller (ed.),
Cambridge Economic History
, 532; and in greater detail, and more optimistically, by B. Gralfs,
Metalverarbeitende Produktionsstätten in Pompeji
(Oxford, 1988)

The excavations of the bakery in the House of the Chaste Lovers are described by A. Varone, ‘New findings’ and ‘Scavo lungo Via dell’Abbondanza’ (above). The inscriptions from the property are published by Varone, ‘Iscrizioni parietarie inedite da Pompei’, in G. Paci (ed.)
EPIGRAPHAI: miscellenea epigraphica in onore di Lidio Gasperini
(Tivoli, 2000), vol. 2, 1071–93. The animal skeletons and their housing are assessed by A. Genovese and T. Cocca, ‘Internal organization of an equine stable at Pompeii’,
Anthropozoologica
31 (2000), 119–23; and, through the mitochrondrial DNA, by M. Sica et al. ‘Analysis of Five Ancient Equine Skeletons by Mitochondrial DNA sequencing’,
Ancient Biomolecules
4 (2002), 179–84. A survey of Pompeian bakeries is offered by B. J. Mayeske, ‘Bakers, bakeshops and bread: a social and economic study’, in
Pompeii and the Vesuvian Landscape
(Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC, 1979), 39–58.

J. Andreau,
Les affaires de Monsieur Jucundus
(Rome, 1974) is the major study of the Jucundus tablets. The hierarchy of the witness lists is a major theme of Jongman,
Pompeii
. A low estimate of levels of literacy is made by W. V. Harris,
Ancient Literacy
(Cambridge, MA, 1989). Against this, Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Scratching the Surface’ (above) stresses the importance of everyday reading and writing in trade and craftwork.

Garum
has almost become the modern scholarly monopoly of R. I. Curtis, who discusses the mosaics of Umbricius Scaurus in ‘A Personalised Floor Mosaic from Pompeii’,
American Journal of Archaeology
88 (1984), 557–66; the shop in ‘The
Garum
shop of Pompeii’,
Cronache Pompeiane
5 (1979), 5–23; and the trade more generally in ‘In Defense of Garum;’,
Classical Journal
78 (1983), 232–40.

Chapter
6

The political life of Pompeii (and the character of the electoral notices) is the subject of Mouritsen,
Elections, magistrates and municipal elite
(above). A comprehensive list of known Pompeian families, their members and their political office holding is provided by P. Castrén,
Ordo populusque Pompeianus. Polity and society in Roman Pompeii
(Rome, 1975) – still valuable for its data, despite some of its dubious theories about a ‘crisis’ at Pompeii in the reign of the emperor Claudius. J. L. Franklin,
Pompeii. The Electoral Programmata, Campaigns and Politics, AD 71–79
(Rome, 1980) attempts to reconstruct the electoral campaigns of the last years of the town’s life. His book probably overstated the lack of competition in local elections, and contributed to Jongman’s view, in
Pompeii
(above), that elections were in practice in the control of the
ordo
. This is challenged by H. Mouritsen, ‘A note on Pompeian epigraphy and social structure,
Classica et Mediaevalia
41 (1990), 131–49 – who also challenges the view of particular ‘disorder’ in the politics of the town after the earthquake in ‘Order and Disorder in Later Pompeian Politics’, in
Les élites municipales
(above), 139–44. The voting system and districts of Pompeii, as well as the lay-out of the Forum, are discussed by Coarelli, ‘Pompei: il foro’ (above). The recommendation for Bruttius Balbus is
CIL
IV, 3702; the wake-up call to Trebius and Soterichus is
CIL
IV, 7632.