'Roman Painting in the Republic and early Empire'

1.The Earliest Evidence 2. 1 From Walls Decorated with Stucco Relief to Painted Walls 2.2 Painting During the first century B.C.: Private and Public Contexts 2.3 Megalography: The Villa at Boscoreale and the Villa of the Mysteries 2.4 Paintings in Sacred Contexts: the late Republican Capitolium of Brescia 2.5 Painting in Provincial Contexts during the late Republican Period: The Gallic and Iberian Provinces 2.6 The Last Examples of late Republican Painting: the Terzigno Villa 2.7 An Exceptional Context: The House of Augustus 2.8 Painting in the Forum of Augustus: The Pictures of Apelles and Painting on Slabs of Marble 2.9 The Paintings in the Villa of the Farnesina 3.1 Myth Enters the House: Painting during the Augustan Period 3.2 Painting during First Imperial Period in Peripheral Areas: The Example of Noricum 3.3 The Villa of Boscotrecase: a “Court” Context? 3.4 The Imperial Villa at Pompeii 3.5 The Mythological Theme in Painting during the First Century A.C. 3.6 Painting in Imperial Contexts: the Domus Transitoria and the Domus Aurea 3.7 Painting in Public Contexts: Herculaneum and Pompeii 3.8 Chronological Data from New Studies 3.9 Painting in Pompeii and Herculaneum: A Comparative Analysis of the Contexts 3.10 Between the Julio-Claudian and the Flavian Eras: Diversification in the Levels of Patronage 4.1 The Painter’s Craft: Organization and Training 4.2 The Usefulness of a Typology: the “Pompeian styles” and Roman Painting The Author attempts to present a history of Roman painting based as far as possible on the social and cultural contexts of which it was part, starting from the earliest evidence represented by painted tombs. Wallpaintings in domestic contexts are then treated. Fundamental innovations in the technique and schemes of decorating walls were indeed created in order to satisfy the growing demand for domestic luxury among the upper classes of Roman society during the late Republican period. Archaeological evidence confront us with comparable phenomena in Italy as well as in some provincial areas, where they present quite similar characteristics and a substantial conformity with regard to the same chronology. Through the use of painted forms and color, an imaginary space is created, which constitutes the true decorative system of the Roman house. In the new stylistic language created in the age of Augustus an important place is occupied by the mythological theme, with its capacity to translate into the interior of the house a climate of commitment to Augustan ideology. Some observations follow about the iconographical variations that we encounter in painting during the first decades of the first century A.C. This may help to clarify the way in which painters altered the schemes of their repertoire in order to adjust to the changed roles that new patrons (who appear in the archaeological record between the late Republican age and the first Imperial age) entrusted to domestic decorations. The wall decorations of the Domus Transitoria and the Domus Aurea show us how the exclusive role that painting had played in the previous decades was gradually reduced in favor of other decorative systems – among which, following wherever possible the model of imperial patronage, wall coverings that made use of precious materials were to play an increasing role, while figural painting was gradually abandoned. In the concluding pages, questions regarding the organization of the painters’ work are treated, along with a brief discussion of role, significance and functioning of Mau typology. The Author presents a history of Roman painting based as far as possible on the social and cultural contexts of which it was part, starting from the earliest evidence represented by painted tombs. Wall paintings in domestic contexts are then treated. Fundamental innovations in the technique and schemes of decorating walls were indeed created in order to satisfy the growing demand for domestic luxury among the upper classes of Roman society during the late Republican period. Through the use of painted forms and color, an imaginary space is created, which constitutes the true decorative system of the Roman house. Archaeological evidence confront us with comparable phenomena in Italy as well as in some provincial areas, where they present quite similar characteristics and a substantial conformity with regard to the same chronology. In the new stylistic language created in the age of Augustus an important place is occupied by the mythological theme, with its capacity to translate into the interior of the house a climate of commitment to Augustan ideology. Some observations follow about the iconographical variations that we encounter in painting during the first decades of the first century A.C. This may help to clarify the way in which painters altered the schemes of their repertoire in order to adjust to the changed roles that new patrons (who appear in the archaeological record between the late Republican age and the first Imperial age) entrusted to domestic decorations. The wall decorations of the Domus Transitoria and the Domus Aurea show us how the exclusive role that painting had played in the previous decades was gradually reduced in favor of other decorative systems – among which, following wherever possible the model of imperial patronage, wall coverings that made use of precious materials were to play an increasing role, while figural painting was gradually abandoned. In the concluding pages, questions regarding the organization of the painters’ work are treated, along with a brief discussion of role, significance and functioning of Mau typology.