Alexandra Widdowson CL3AP – Greek and Roman Painting3300 words28/04/2014

“What does the treatment of the mythological scenes in the House of the Tragic Poet’s atrium reveal about the Roman owner’s moral and behavioural ideals?”

The House of the Tragic Poet was discovered during Bonucci’s

excavations of Pompeii in 1824.1 The deadly ash emitted from

Vesuvius in 79 AD had preserved many of the House of the Tragic

Poet’s detailed frescoes and mosaics, rendered in what Mau defined

as the 4th Pompeian style2.

The atrium originally contained six mythological paintings, with two

on each of the South, East and West walls. They are renowned for

their beauty and realism, unlike earlier styles reviled by

Vitruvius, who described the unrealistic inclusion of

embellishments, such as mythical creatures and reeds acting as

columns, as “monstrosities.”3 As atriums were utilised as public as

well as private spheres, they were often lavishly decorated with

numerous frescoes in a display of wealth and culture. Indeed, the

grandeur of the paintings in the House of the Tragic Poet are

1 Bonucci 1828: 105-1152 For more on the 4 Pompeian styles of Mau, see Anderson 1987: 3-11, Ling 1991: 101-129, and Lydakis 2001:265 3 Vitruvius 7.5.3-4

1

incongruous with the building’s small size, suggesting the owner

intended to convey his affluence predominantly through his art.

I have approached this essay on the basis that the paintings depict:

Hera and Zeus’ marriage on Mt. Ida (fig.7), and Aphrodite in the

Judgement of Paris on the South wall (fig.9); Helen and Paris

leaving for Troy (fig.10), and Achilles and Briseis being separated

on the East wall (fig.4); and Poseidon abducting Amphitrite (fig.8),

and Agamemnon and the Wrath of Achilles on the West wall (fig.12).

Although three of the atrium’s paintings were removed to the Naples

Museum, the remaining frescoes have been ravaged by time and the

elements. As such, a great deal of scholarly interpretation of the

damaged three frescoes is based on descriptions and sketches by the

initial archaeologists. This essay will similarly employ these

reconstructions of the damaged paintings by Raoul-Rochette4, Gell5

and Morelli6, as well as the surviving frescoes.

Morality was a fundamental aspect of Imperial Roman society.

Langlands defines the Latin concept of mores as “…behaviour and

codes of behaviour – custom or convention, and then more generally,

4 Raoul-Rochette 1828.5 Gell 1835: 142-178; 95-122; the reconstruction of the atrium: pl. xxxvii, 96-996 Morelli: 44, 188-190.

2

ways of behaving, moral conduct, morality.”7 Thus, these deeply

entrenched codes of behaviour reflected the moral beliefs of

Imperial Rome. Morality was considered by many to be crucial to both

Rome and the individual; it could “greatly benefit a community and

simultaneously enhance the reputation of the virtuous individual.”8

Although we have little information about the owners, the paintings

themselves are a reflection of their moral beliefs. The Roman

veneration of Greek culture meant that many paintings were inspired

by Greek originals, such as the Pompeian copy of Apelles’ Aphrodite

Anadyomene (fig.1). However, Gazda criticises the simplistic label

of “Roman copy after a Greek original”9, which “directs us as

viewers to look through and beyond the work of the Roman period… in

search of its putative lost model.”10 As Ling states, by the early

Imperial age, painting had “emerged from its Greek roots and forged

an independent character for itself.”11 Although Roman fresco

painters used pattern-books containing prototypes of well-known

Greek originals, these were basic outlines, and so permitted patrons

and artists to produce paintings with individual details.12 The

patron, most likely the authoritative paterfamilias, would have been the

primary influence on the content and style of the paintings.

7 Langlands 2006: 18 Forbis 1996: 919 Gazda 2002: 310 Gazda 2002: 311 Ling 1991: 312 Ling 1991: 129

3

Silberberg-Peirce asserts, “These private works of art reflect the

status, tastes, and social attitudes of the patrons who commissioned

them.”13 As such, the frescoes within the House of the Tragic Poet’s

atrium were also likely to have been commissioned by the owner, thus

revealing intimate details regarding his personal beliefs and

preferences through his thematic choices.14

Wood argues that “As well as being sophisticated status symbols and

designed to give pleasure, the paintings would almost certainly have

been used for instruction.”15 The moral themes apparent in the

paintings’ subjects, which I shall discuss in this essay, suggest

this to be true, reinforced by the way paintings are situated. They

are located in the atrium, an area of the house which functioned as a

public and private sphere. The wall decoration is in what Mau

defined as the 4th Pompeian style16, with individual panels positioned

around the room with gaps in between (fig.3). This style made them

the focus of the room, and Wood suggests that the gaps served to

create the perception that the viewers were “participating in those

events”17, an illusionistic device reminiscent of the Pompeian 2nd

13 Silberberg-Peirce 1993: 2814 (See Fig.2) Stylised depiction of a well-read, intelligent baker and his wife, exemplifies how Pompeian portraiture was used to covey personal details about houses’ owners.15 Wood 1996: 4516 Mau 1882: 46717 Wood 1996: 44

4

style, which increased the paintings’ influence. They are

thematically linked, and arranged to complement and contrast with

one another. The selection of the images was clearly systematic and

deliberate, and thus may imply that the owner intended to

communicate messages. Considering the prevalence of certain themes

in the paintings, such as marriage, stoicism, and modesty, the

intended messages appear to be primarily moralistic.

The Romans held traditional moral ideals for male citizens, known as

the mos maiorum, the “ancestral custom”18, which was thought to be

central to the preservation and wellbeing of Rome. These moral

ideals included concepts such as pietas (duty)19, fides (trust and

faith)20, dignitas and auctoritas (“esteem, rank and influence”)21, and

gravitas (public dignity.)22 I would suggest that some of these values

are visible in the painting of Achilles and Briseis (fig.4).

Particularly evident are the virtues of pietas, defined by Holkeskamp

as “ a sense of duty concerned with moral issues and the maintenance

of good relations with family, friends, ancestors and fellow

citizens as well as with the gods”23, and gravitas, defined as

“dignified appearance… in those political and social situations that18 Holkeskamp 2010: 17-1819 Adkins 2004: 30920 Holkeskamp 2010: 3321 Holkeskamp 2010: 5022 Holkeskamp 2010: 4923 Adkins 2004: 309

5

were visible in public”24, due to the idealistic behaviour of

Achilles when Agamemnon appropriates his prize, Briseis.

This scene, in which Briseis is taken away from Achilles on

Agamemnon’s orders is described in the Iliad:

“… anger came over the son of Peleus. His heart in his shaggy breast was torn in thought,

whether to draw his sharp sword from beside his thigh, break up the assembly, and kill

Agamemnon… Then Achilleus broke in tears, and quickly drew far away from his

companions.”25

The Homeric description of this moment emphasises the anger and

grief of Achilles at the loss of his prize, Briseis. In ancient

Greek paintings such that by the Briseis Painter (fig.5), the

Iliadic scene depicts Achilles, covering his face, overwhelmed with

emotion. However, the House of the Tragic Poet’s painting appears

devoid of grief or anger, the two fundamental emotions in this

pivotal moment. Achilles casually leans back in his seat, casting

over his shoulder towards Briseis a glance that has been described

by some as “sorrowful”26 and “reluctant”27.

However I would suggest that this interpretation is based on

knowledge of Achilles’ reaction from the Iliad rather than the

24 Holkeskamp 2010: 4925 Homer Iliad 1:189-34926 Pappalardo 2008: 17827 Bergmann 1994: 232

6

painting itself. It lacks the expressive emotions of Achilles

described in the Iliad and depicted on Greek vases. Instead, his blank

facial expression and relaxed posture imply absence of emotional

reaction. Yet, the same artist portrays a figure28 in the peristyle’s

Sacrifice of Iphigenia (fig.6), shielding his face out of grief in a

similar manner to the Briseis Painter’s Achilles. This proves that

he was capable of depicting these emotions, but deliberately

deviated from the traditional renderings of the hero in this scene.

This intentional deficiency of emotion indicates that the Roman

artist intended to portray Achilles as stoic and tolerant of his

fate. Rather than raging and grieving, he appears calm and accepting

of Agamemnon’s will, a reaction far more consistent with the Roman

perceptions of ideal behaviour. In controlling his emotions, he

conforms to gravitas, and in accepting the king’s decision, Achilles

fulfils the moral ideal of pietas. Thus the artist altered the

traditionally Greek hero Achilles, recasting him as a Roman hero,

akin to the protagonist of the Aeneid.29

28 Although not conclusively identifiable due to the character’s covered face, Mau 1899: 320, Bergmann 1994: 234-235, and Balch 2008:91, all maintain that the grieving character on the left depicts Agamemnon, while the older character on the right is Calchas, the seer. See also: Casa di Modestus’ fresco of Iphigenia at Aulis, also seemingly depicting a grieving, draped Agamemnon.29 Gury 1986: 427-489 also remarks upon the Romanisation of Achilles, specifically, the way in which the theme of the shield of Achilles from Iliad Book 18 is altered in Roman art to include astrological symbolism; seealso Gazda 1995: 121-126 for Roman emulation and adaptation of ancient Greek themes in sculpture.

7

Aeneas was a hero intended to embody a number of virtues30, including

the same virtues the House of the Tragic of Poet’s Achilles

demonstrates: pietas and gravitas. Virgil’s epic aimed to perpetuate

Augustus’ ideal behaviours for Romans, restoring Rome’s moral

philosophy.31 Perhaps then, the House of the Tragic Poet’s Achilles

was portrayed as calmly accepting fate and authority, in order to

emulate the gravitas of the Virgilian hero. According to King, the

Aeneid’s “Homeric allusion and direct reference to Achilles

establishes Achillean passion as the diametric opposite of Roman

pietas…”32 The references to Achilles in the Aeneid displays the Roman

rejection of the passion that the Homeric Achilles embodied, and so

a transformation of his character, instead corresponding more with

the Aeneid’s hero, thus succeeds in “…fusing Augustan ideals with

contradictory Homeric values…”33

As Ling states, the 1st century was a cultural unification of Greek

inspiration and Roman innovations, ultimately “expressing an

essentially Roman outlook”34. This painting of a quintessential Greek

hero, combined with the attributes of a Roman hero, would certainly

correspond with the painting style as well as the cultural attitudes

of the time. The presence of the Romanised scene demonstrates the

30 See Hritzu 1944: 27-29 and Moseley 1925: 387-400 for discussion of Aeneasas an idealised heroic character.31 Grebe 2004: 3532 King 1982:3133 King 1982: 3134 Ling 1991: 3

8

wide-spread influence of Augustus’ political agendas through

artistic trends. The owner’s decision to modify this scene, creating

a Roman hero from a traditionally Greek one, may have been merely

habitual conforming to a cultural trend. Yet arguably, it could been

evidence that he was a supporter of Augustus’ political movement to

encourage pietas and gravitas in the citizens of Rome.

The atrium’s paintings also communicate feminine moral ideals.

Silberberg-Peirce suggests that some Roman women’s entitlement to

property makes it possible that some wall paintings “…were

commissioned by women and therefore will reveal a female vision.”35

However, I would argue that the moral ideals conveyed in these

frescoes, instead suggests that they were commissioned by a male

patron, with the intention of communicating to female viewers

appropriate feminine moral behaviour.

The female gaze, in which female characters such as Hera (fig.7) and

Amphitrite (fig.8) directly face out of the paintings, looking into

the eyes of the viewer, draws attention, and implies that they are

important figures in the scenes. The meeting of eyes has long been

considered one of the most effective ways of forming an intimate

connection with another36, and so their stares immediately creates an

35 Silberberg-Peirce 1993: 2836 Blondell 2013: 5

9

interaction with the viewer, helping to communicate their moral

messages.

One dominant Roman moral value exhibited in the atrium is that of

marriage. As Kalavrezon states, in the early Empire “Motherhood was

a woman’s most esteemed function, and the caring of children her

highest priority.”37 Augustus moral reforms of 18 BC led to the

introduction of lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus, a law which “assessed

heavier taxes on unmarried men and women without husbands, and…

offered rewards for marriage and childbearing”38 in an attempt to

encourage procreation amongst the upper-classes and restore in the

Roman people a sense of moral responsibility. Mothers such as

Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi and Aurelia, mother of Julius Caesar

were glorified for their achievements in raising their children39,

displaying the reverence of maternal dedication. Marriage was

considered inseparable from motherhood, with terms such as matrona

(honourable married woman), deriving from mater (mother)40, and so

marriage was considered by many in the 1st century AD as crucial to

the perpetuation of Rome.

The importance of marriage and motherhood in Rome therefore makes

the painting of Hera and Zeus’ marriage (fig.7) significant. In

comparison to infamous Iliadic scenes such as The Judgement of Paris37 Kalavrezon 2012: 52138 Dio Cassius History of Rome. 54.16.1-239 Tacitus, Dialogue 2840 Dixon 1988: 71

10

and Helen and Paris leaving for Troy, this scene is somewhat less

depicted in art. Its selection must therefore have been a deliberate

decision by the house’s owner. The scene depicts Zeus grasping a

heavily draped Hera by the wrist. Bergmann suggests Zeus is

persuading his “modest bride to lift her veil and reveal her

face…”41, and states that the scene “…celebrates that liminal passage

in a woman’s life from invisibility to exposure, virginity to

marriage.” Hera’s depiction as a modest bride, reluctant to remove

her veil to her husband, conflicts with the more common depiction of

her in Homeric and Virgilian epic as a formidable, powerful goddess.

This unusual portrayal of Hera was perhaps intended by the owner to

communicate the importance of marriage and motherhood, emphasising

that even the most potent goddess yielded to the Augustan moral laws

regarding matrimony.

Pudicitia was another Roman moral ideal, which, although not

exclusively feminine, was encouraged in women, particularly married

women.42 Although there is no English equivalent of pudicitia, some have

described it as “chastity”43 or “self-respect”44, and Langlands

summarises as “a moral virtue…specifically associated with sex.”45

The importance of pudicitia in Rome is evident from Seneca and Valerius

41 Bergmann 1994: 23242 Langlands 2006: 37-3843 Edwards 1993:4344 Eg. Rackham 1942 in Cicero Part. 8645 Langlands 2006: 31

11

Maximus46 praising it as the “greatest glory”47. Its importance as a

moral virtue is confirmed by its personification as a goddess,

possessing her own shrines and cults.48

The importance of pudicitia in women is apparent in the House of the

Tragic Poet’s painting of Hera and Zeus. Hera, as a young bride,

epitomises pudicitia. Women’s self-control over their sexual behaviour

was also required to be “plain for all to see, so remarkable as to

attract attention” and Hera’s appearance presents her as a chaste

wife. Her body is swathed in heavy drapery, a mantle veiling the top

of her head, and she wears a simple hairstyle. This modest depiction

may therefore have been intended by the owner to influence the

female members of the house, reminding them of the importance of

pudicitia in their lives.

On the other side of the door, opposing demure Hera, however, is the

image of a nude Aphrodite (fig.9). In Roman society, the only women

seen in public nude or semi-nude were prostitutes. They wore

transparent togas, and Petronius49 describes seeing some prostitutes

entirely nude; these women were considered the antithesis of pudicitia.

This depiction of Aphrodite brazen in her nudity, although

recognisable since Praxiteles precisely due to her nudity, may

46 Valerius Maximus Memorable Deeds and Sayings 6.147 Seneca Dialogues and Letters 12.16.448 Langlands 2006: 3749 Petronius Satyricon 1.7

12

nevertheless be seen as undermining the message of modesty and

sexual chastity that the image of Hera promoted.

However, Bergmann suggests that the placement of the two contrasting

scenes was deliberate, arguing that “…the modestly attired Hera and

the alluringly posed Aphrodite visualise the popular Roman topos

that pitted chastity against eroticism.”50 The theme of chastity

conflicting with sexuality permeates throughout the atrium, with the

room’s left side depicting Aphrodite, Amphitrite and Achilles all

nude, whereas on the right side of the room, Hera, Briseis and Helen

are modestly clothed. According to Trimble, “The pairing of images

was a familiar and evocative device in Roman art.”51 He cites as an

example, the panels depicting Castor and Pollux on either side of

the entry hall in the House of the Dioscuri. The subject matter of

the identical mythological twins, as well as the way they mirror one

another’s pose, “emphasise dualism”52.

The pairing of Hera and Aphrodite may therefore be regarded as

another example of this Roman artistic device of thematic and

stylistic duality, but in the House of the Tragic Poet, this duality

is created through contrast rather than similarity. I would

therefore argue that the erotic depiction of Aphrodite, rather than

negating the moral message of pudicitia and marital obligation that

50 Bergmann 1994: 24551 Trimble 2002: 22852 Trimble 2002: 228

13

Hera embodied, was intended by the house’s owner to highlight these

virtues by means of contrast. This duality is also apparent in the

depictions of Achilles, with the Homeric Wrath of Achilles on the

West wall (fig.12) emphasising the virtues of the Virgilian, stoic

Achilles on the East wall.

As well as the male and female moral ideals and behaviours that the

frescoes exhibit, I would suggest that the paintings were also

intended to demonstrate the ideals of interaction between the

genders. Although in comparison to Greek women53, Roman women were,

generally speaking, afforded more freedom and legal rights,

nonetheless they were regarded within society as being the weaker

sex and were expected to be deferential towards masculine authority.

This cultural norm of male dominance over women is visible in the

House of the Tragic Poet’s paintings, primarily in the recurring

abduction scenes.

The portrayal of the nymph Amphitrite and Poseidon on the atrium’s

West wall (fig.8) is unequivocally one such abduction scene. The

artist’s portrayal of Helen and Paris on the East wall (fig.10) also

implies an abduction, Helen’s eyes downcast as she follows Paris

aboard the ship that will take them to Troy. Her demeanour exudes

reluctance, suggesting that this version is an abduction, rather 53 Murnaghan 2007: 234

14

than free will.54 The image of Achilles and Briseis (fig.4), too, is

based on masculine dominance and abduction as Briseis a spoil of

war, considered an object of commerce to be traded. Even the image

of Hera and Zeus’ marriage contains elements of masculine

aggression, with Zeus’ authoritative grip upon Hera’s wrist

interpretable as a display of dominance, asserting him to be in

control of her body. Helen, Hera, and Briseis are portrayed standing

and in transition, while their male counterparts are seated,

reinforcing the idea of women being relocated and controlled by men.

In Rome, the term raptus referred primarily to the abduction of a

woman, which may or may not have included sexual assault. Although

in 1st century Rome, both abduction and sexual assault had been

outlawed in the lex Iulia de vi publica and was subsequently considered a

crime55, the concept of violence and domination over women was

nevertheless considered a fundamental aspect to Rome’s history. Livy

recounts how, Rhea Silvia, the legendary mother of Romulus and Remus

claimed to have been abducted and raped by Mars, siring the founder

of Rome; Rome was then populated by the Rape of the Sabine Women56.

As Matthes states, Rhea Silvia’s rape “…highlights not only the

premise that there is often violence at the beginnings but also that

54 For ancient rhetoric on Helen’s free-will vs. abduction, see Gorgias’ Encomium on Helen55 Dixon 2001: 5056 Livy History of Rome 1.11; although Livy refutes her claim that she was raped by Mars.

15

specifically sexual violence may be integral to the Roman

founding.”57 Although Roman writers such as Lucretius58 condemned the

act of rape, nonetheless its prevalence in the founding and

development of Rome meant that rape was considered linked to the

prosperity of Rome. Furthermore, the veneration of Lucretia and Rhea

Silvia’s morality resulted in it becoming associated with feminine

virtue.

As a result of this cultural importance of rape and abduction, Greek

rape myths were heavily appropriated in Roman art, as observable in

the House of the Tragic Poet. These abduction scenes may therefore

be regarded as an acknowledgement of the importance of masculine

authority in Rome. As Fredrick states, although Roman wall paintings

largely consisted of Greek mythological scenes, “…their content is

not usually ‘heroic’. It is erotic, and within the erotic context,

frequently violent: rape is much more common than scenes of epic

battle.”59 Indeed, the peristyle’s depiction of the Sacrifice of

Iphigenia (fig.11) consists of her being dragged, her upper body

nude, which “exposes her sexual vulnerability”60. The subjugation of

women through sexual violence in Roman painting, may, therefore,

Fredrick suggests, be “intimately connected with larger political

57 Matthes 1964: 2658 Lucretius De Rerum Natura 5.96459 Fredrick 1995: 26760 Silberberg-Peirce 1993: 31

16

and social relations of power.”61 Richlin has noted that much of

Roman literature displays satisfaction in the sexual violence

directed at women62, displaying the Roman perception of gender

hierarchy. As such, the house’s owner, although unlikely to be

encouraging literal physical and sexual aggression towards women,

may have employed these well-known mythological scenes as a means of

reinforcing the Roman ideals of gender hierarchy: female

subservience and masculine governance.

Thus, we may discern the owner’s beliefs regarding appropriate moral

behaviour of both genders from the atrium’s paintings. The contents of

the scenes, as well as the way in which they are depicted and

located within the room, reveal these beliefs. The Augustan moral

reforms would have been a major determining factor in the moral

beliefs and ideals of 1st century Pompeians63, and his influence on

matters such as marriage and female sexual chastity is identifiable

in paintings such as Hera and Zeus (fig.7), and Aphrodite (fig.9).

Similarly, his promotion of the masculine virtues such as pietas and

gravitas through Virgil’s Aeneid can also be seen in the depiction of

Achilles as similar to Aeneas. He remains calm and stoic when

Briseis is taken from him, a stark contrast to the volatile Achilles

depicted by Homer. Finally, the House of the Tragic Poet’s owner

61 Fredrick 1995: 26862 Richlin 1992: 158-7963 Ginsberg 2006: 124-126

17

appears to comment on what he considered to be the appropriate

gender norms of women submissive to men, articulating this through

the appropriation of rape myths in his paintings.

Appendix of Images

18

19

and his wife. Pompeii, AD 55–79. ©DeAgostini/SuperStock. Source: http://www.britishmuseum.org/images/portrait_pompeii_304x331_press.j

. Accessed: 28.04.2014.

Fig. 3. Reconstructed three-dimensional model, by Victoria I. View of atrium with painted panels in place (photo: Sam Sweezy). Source: B. Bergmann The Roman House

Fig. 4 Briseis and Achilles. Naples, Archaeological Museum 9105.

The Roman House 1994: fig.16, p.235

explore/highlights/highlight_image.aspx?image=ps300242.jpg&retpage=22704. Accessed 28.04.2014

Fig.1. Aphrodite Anadyomene. 1st century AD. Fresco from Casa di Venus, Pompeii, believed to be copy oforiginal by Apelles. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aphrodite_Anadyom

20

Fig. 7. Hera and Zeus, Naples, Archaeological Museum 9559. Source: B. Bergmann The Roman House as Memory Theatre. 1994:

Fig.8 Amphitrite and Poseidon. Left: painting from the Villa di Carmiano, Stabia, Antiquarium 503; right: Morelli tempera, ADS 263. Source: B. Bergmann The Roman House as Memory Theatre. 1994: fig.25, p.240

Naples, Archaeological Museum 9112, relocated on wall of peristyle. Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/Fresco_Iphigeneia_MAN_Naples.jpg.Accessed: 28.04.2014

21

Fig.10. Helen and Paris. Naples, Archaeological Museum 9108. Source: B. Bergmann The Roman House as Memory Theatre. 1994:

Fig.11. Sacrifice of Iphigenia. Naples, Archaeological Museum 9112, relocated on wall of peristyle. Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm

Fig.9. Aphrodite. From Morelli, ADS 262. Source: B. Bergmann TheRoman House as Memory

Fig.12. Wrath of Achilles. F. Morelli tempera ADS 263; of atrium walls, located on plan inoriginal positions, by VictoriaI. Source: B. Bergmann The

BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Cicero, De Oratore, translated by H.R. Rackham (USA 1942)

Dio Cassius, History of Rome, translated by Lefkowitz and Fant. (USA2005)

Gorgias, Encomium of Helen, in The Greek Sophists, translated by J. Dillon and T. Gergel. (UK 2003)

Homer, The Iliad, translated by Martin Hammond (UK 1987)

Livy, History of Rome, translated by V.M Warrior (USA 2006)

Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 5, translated by D.R Slavitt (UK 2008)

Petronius, Satyricon 1.7, translated by W.C Firebaugh (USA 1922)

Seneca, Dialogues and Letters: Consolation to Helvia, translated by C.D.N Costa (UK 1997)

Tacitus, Dialogue 28, translated by Lefkowitz and Fant. (USA 2005)

Valerius Maximus, Memorable Deeds and Sayings, translated by H.J Walker (USA 2004)

Vitruvius, The Ten Books on Architecture, translated by M.H Morgan. (USA 1914)

Secondary

Adkins, L., Adkins, R. (2004) Handbook to Life in Ancient Rome. New York,

USA.

Anderson, M.L. (1987) Pompeian Frescoes. New York, USA.

Balch, D.L. (2008) Roman Domestic Art and Early House Churches. Tubingen, Germany.

Bergmann, B. (1994) ‘The Roman House as Memory Theater: The House ofthe Tragic Poet in Pompeii’, The Art Bulletin, 76.2: 225-256.

Blondell, R. (2013) Helen of Troy: Beauty, Myth, Devastation. UK.

22

Bonucci, C. (1828) Pompei descritta par Charles Bonucci; ou precis historique des excavations. Naples, Italy.

Dixon, S. (1988) The Roman Mother. London.

Dixon, S. (2001) Reading Roman Women (Essay 4, ‘Rape in Roman Law andMyth’). London, UK.

Earl, D. (1967) The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome. New York, USA.

Edwards, C. (1993) The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge, UK.

Forbis, E. (1996) Municipal Virtues in the Roman Empire: The Evidence of Italian Honorary Inscriptions. Weinsberg, Germany.

Fredrick, D. (1995) ‘Beyond the Atrium to Ariadne: Erotic Painting and Visual Pleasure in the Roman House’, Classical Antiquity, 14.2: 266-288.

Gazda, E.K (2002) ‘Beyond Copying: Artistic Originality and Tradition’, in The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Traditionfrom the Present to Classical Antiquity. Ed. E.K. Gazda. Michigan, USA.

Gazda, E.K. (1995) ‘Roman Sculpture and the Ethos of Emulation: Reconsidering Repetition.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 97:121-156.

Gell, W. (1835) Pompeiana: The Topography, Edifices and Ornaments of Pompeii, the Result of the Excavations since 1819. London, UK.

Gell, W. and Gandy, J.P (1832) Pompeiana: The Topography, Edifices and Ornaments of Pompeii – The Result of Excavations Since 1819. London, UK.

Ginsberg, J. (2006) Representing Agrippina : Constructions of Female Power in the Early Roman Empire. New York, USA.

Grebe, S. (2004) ‘Augustus' Divine Authority and Vergil's "Aeneid"’,Vergilius, 50: 35-62.

Gury, F. (1986) ‘La Forge du Destin’, Melanges de l'tcole Francaise de Rome: Antiquite: 427-89

Holkeskamp, K.J (2010) Reconstructing the Roman Republic: An Ancient Political Culture and Modern Research. Oxford, UK.

23

Hritzu, J.N. (1944) ‘The Ideality of Aeneas’ The Classical Weekly, Vol. 38, No. 4: 27-29.

Kalavrezon, I. (2012) ‘Representations of Women in Late Antiquity and Early Byzantium’ in S.L James and S. Dillon (eds), A Companion to Women in the Ancient World. UK, p. 513 – 523.

King, K. (1982) ‘Foil and Fusion: Homer’s Achilles in Vergil’s Aeneid.’, Materiali e materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici, No. 9: 31-57

Langlands, R. (2006) Sexual Morality in Ancient Rome. New York, USA.

Ling, R. (1991) Roman Painting. Cambridge, UK.

Lydakis, S. (2004) Ancient Greek Painting and its Echoes in Later Art. Los Angeles, USA.

Matthes, M.M (1964) The Rape of Lucretia and the Founding of Republics. Pennsylvania, USA.Mau, A. (1882) Geschichte der decorativen Wandmalerei in Pompeji. Berlin, Germany.

Mau, A. (1899) Pompeii: Its Life and Art. Translated by Kelsey, F.W. New York, USA.

Morelli, F. Pompeii 1748-1980. I tempi della documentazione, exh. cat.,Curia Senatus, ed. I. Bragantini, M. de Vos, F. Parise Badoni, Rome,1981.

Moseley, N. (1925) ‘Pius Aeneas’ The Classical Journal, Vol. 20, No. 7: 387-400.

Pappalardo, U. (2008) The Splendor of Roman Wall Painting. Verona, Italy.

Raoul-Rochette, D. (1928) Choix des monuments inidits. I. Maison du Poete Tragique a Pompei, Paris, France.

Richlin, A. (1992) ‘Reading Ovid’s Rapes’ in Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome, edited by Richlin, A. Oxford, UK. p.158–79.

S. Murnaghan, R.W Bushnell (Ed.). (2005). A Companion to Tragedy. Wiley-

Blackwell.

24

Silberberg-Peirce, S. (1993-94) ‘The Muse Restored: Images of Women in Roman Painting’, Woman's Art Journal, 14.2: 28-36.

Trimble, J. (2002) ‘Greek Myth, Gender, and Social Structure in a Roman House: Two Paintings of Achilles at Pompeii’, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. Supplementary Volumes, in The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to Classical Antiquity, 1: 225-248.

Wood, N. (1996) The House of the Tragic Poet: A Reconstruction (Chapter VIII). London, UK.

25