House Of Menander - Essay Journal (houseofmenander) wrote in archaeology, @ 2008-05-13 00:19:00 |
|
|||
Houses in Roman Italy: DOMUS (townhouse and villas)
· Upper class morning meetings of patrons & clients was called the SALUTITIO. This meeting was for lower-class clients to show their political support , in return for financial, political, and legal protection. These meetings showed off the status of the patron to clients and non-clients.
· House layouts of the IDEAL DOMUS (based on the literature of Vitruvius, On Architecture VI.2-5) were designed to frame the paterfamilias and highlight him in the TABLIUNUM, between the ATRIUM and the PERISTYLE. This is called CLASSICALLY FRAMED and allowed the patron to be seen by his clients from the entrance hall: FAUCES. Examples include Casa del Tramezzo di Legno at Herculaneum & House of the Silver Wedding
· It was not only the striking layout that was important, but the decoration of the house was also necessary to properly influence guests; both clients and others. Walls were painted, floors covered in mosaics, gardens landscaped and statues erected in alcoves.
· Four styles of wall painting:
1) FIRST STYLE: dated by Mau 150-90BC: imitates coloured marble blocks of temple architecture. Moulded plaster painted to represent marble. Other faux-marble decorations were pediments, capitals, doorframes. Examples: House of Sallust, House of the Faun.
2) SECOND STYLE: dated by Mau 90-25BC: explained in Vituvius VII.5.2: architectural style, emphasis on reality and illusion. Columns, doors, ledges, gardens all in perspective. Does not use plaster moulding. All effects achieved via illusion. Examples: Villa of the Mysteries, House of the Labyrinth.
3) THIRD STYLE: dated by Mau to 25BC-40AD: explained in Vituvius VII.5.3: perspective lost, details become unrealistic stylisations of columns, etc, which are only thin frames which surround mythological scenes. Sometimes mythological creatures perch on these flimsy frames. Examples: House of Marcus Lucretius Fronto, House of the Ceii
4) FOUTH STYLE: 40AD onwards. A mix of Second and Third styles. Architectural framework is less flimsy, but not realistic. Painted scenes float freely in the middle of large frames. More use of garlands, figures. Examples: House of the Vettii, House of the Menander.
· Mosaics became popular in the 1st century BC. Changes in fashion reflected the changes in styles of wall-painting. Particularly fine mosaics can be seen in the House of the Faun.
1) Early mosaics were “carpets” of simple geometric designs. Later, some had central pieces called EMBLEMA added into the middle of the designs. EMBLEMA were made of irregular mosaic squares in a variety of shades and colours, a technique known as OPUS VERMICULATUM. The ATRIUM of the House of P. Proclus is carpeted by a geometrical mosaic, the centre of each panel containing the figure of a bird.
2) OPUS SECTILE, a later style, was made of cut marble segments sometimes to make only a geometric pattern, sometimes to make a scene.
3) Mosaics would not cover spaces which were to be covered, for instance in bedrooms, where the beds were placed in rectangular niches in the walls; the central space would be mosaic floored, but the niche would not. In dining rooms, often a large boarder would be left around the sides of the walls to allow dining couches to be placed there.
· These decorations allow an educated guess at the wealth and prestige of certain Roman families. Lack in an update of wall decoration could suggest decline of wealth or importance, or the changing use of a room. Perhaps rooms were not redecorated due to the initial expense. Mosaics, however, could be removed and moved to different locations.
· Most rooms did not have set functions. The ATRIUM was in the morning a place for meetings, in the day a place for household chores considering the finds of loom-weights, needles, etc, and in the evening another space for entertaining. A DOMUS might not even remain a DOMUS, should it become necessary to use the house for another purpose. Example: Fullonica of Stephanus
· Light played an important part in the house. Rooms would have large windows, entranceways or lack walls altogether to allow more light, and thus a better view, especially onto gardens and peristyles.
· Gardens were tamed nature- gave the illusion of being wild places, perhaps hinting at sexual freedoms and debauchery, but they were also a simple of Roman authority over nature. Example: House of M. Lucretius
Houses in Roman Italy: INSULAE (apartments)
· INSULAE was the standard accommodation for most middle-class and lower Roman citizens within the capital; however, as populations increased in OSTIA and in other areas, apartment complexes became more common.
· Within Rome they had a reputation for being dangerous, crowded, and unpleasant: Juvenal and Martial. Due to the narrowness of the streets, the lower floors were dark and unpleasant; however, they were usually closer to fountains and sources of fresh water. Water could not be pumped to higher floors, and escaping from these floors in a fire was also difficult. However, because of the better light, these were the apartments more sought after.
· Examples from Rome are hard to understand because of changing use of the sites, adaptions, etc. However, the buildings that survive suggest that shops took the majority of the ground floor, with stairs from the street leading up to higher floors. Example: via Giulio Romano
· Shops, both those on the ground floor of INSULAE and those in DOMUS, seem to have had a half floor, or a mezzanine floor, on which the shop keeper lived. Examples: Herculaneum, House of the Bicentenary.
· Not all INSULAE appear to have been unpleasant dwellings: the House of the Painted Vaults in Ostia had monochrome mosaic floors and painted walls and ceilings, dating from the 2nd Century AD. Although it would have involved the use of a communal kitchen and bathroom facilities, the quality of the decorations suggest this was at least a comfortable form of accommodation.
· The Garden House, Ostia suggest the importance of comfortable living and the desire for such felt by many Romans. This complex, not a mere INSULAE block, but a complex set in a walled garden, was clearly for those Romans who could afford luxury, but not their own DOMUS. The rooms are mosaic floored, painted, surrounded by gardens and have been carefully designed to allow as much light into the rooms as possible. In some instances they seem to attempt to create a DOMUS setting within a apartment, with a series of rooms for entertainment.
· The Garden House also includes several larger apartments, built into the surrounding ‘wall’ of the garden, most notable is the House of the Muses which appears to be highly influenced by DOMUS style houses and the need for the “classically framed” layout achieved by an entrance hall, atrium and peristyle. This house also seems to contain several separate rooms, possibly shops, opening out onto the street beyond the Garden House enclosure.
If you'd like to know more about Roman Interior Decoration and it's importance to Roman society, I'd recommend the following texts:
Berry J., The Complete Pompeii, Thames and Hudson Press, 2007
D’Ambra E., Roman Art, Cambridge University Press, 1988
Wallace-Hardrill, A., Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum, Princeton University Press, 1994
Feel free to ask me something, although I can't guarantee I'll be able to answer!
House of Sullast, Pompeii. Example of First Style decoration. | |
Farnesina Villa, Rome. Second Style | |
Third Style at the House of M. Lucretius Fronto, Pompeii | |
The House of the Vettii,Pompeii Room 'N' Fourth Style decoration | |
"Alexander the Great" mosaic from the House of the Faun | |
Mosaic from the Garden House, Ostia | |
Wall paintings at the Garden House, Ostia | |
Model of the Insulae on via Giulio Romano, Rome, showing the wide entrance ways of shops on the ground floor, and the windows of the mezzanine floor |