The Dextrarum Iunctio on Roman and Early Christian Funerary Monuments

Home , Ceres (mythology), Cincia (gens), Dexiosis, Eyelid pull, Forehead kiss, Head bobble

University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository

Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations

2013-08-09 Marriage or a Multiplicity of Meanings? The Dextrarum Iunctio on Roman and Early Christian Funerary Monuments

Baillargeon, Danielle

Baillargeon, D. (2013). Marriage or a Multiplicity of Meanings? The Dextrarum Iunctio on Roman and Early Christian Funerary Monuments (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/26834 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/869 master thesis

University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

Marriage or a Multiplicity of Meanings? The Dextrarum Iunctio on Roman and Early Christian Funerary Monuments

Danielle Baillargeon

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

DEPARTMENT OF GREEK AND ROMAN STUDIES

CALGARY, ALBERTA

AUGUST, 2013

Abstract

The intent of this study is to assess the validity of the monolithic association between the dextrarum iunctio motif and marriage. Drawing together a catalog of visual, textual and epigraphic evidence, this study will investigate the potential polysemous nature of the motif by utilizing a hybrid methodological framework that incorporates stylistic and compositional analysis with epigraphic evidence. This discussion will be informed by Place Studies, which focuses on the physical context of the motif and the monument. I suggest that the change in the type and the physical location of the monument provided the impetus for changes in the function of the dextrarum iunctio, making it an inherently multivalent motif. The dextrarum iunctio transformed from a motif that served a pragmatic function on Roman funerary reliefs, providing a means to depict relationships and integration into identity groups, to an allegorical motif that is combined with other ornamentation and complementary images on funerary altars and sarcophagi.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. I would also like to acknowledge additional funding received through the Humphrey-McLeod

Award that allowed for research travel. I want to take this opportunity to thank some of the many people who have made this project a reality. I sincerely thank Dr. Lisa Hughes for her guidance and support, but most of all for introducing me to Roman art and inspiring a passion that I will carry with me for the rest of my life. I would also like to thank Dr. Hanne Sigismund-Nielsen and Dr. Anne Moore for sitting on my committee, as well as for providing many opportunities for discussion and development. Thanks also to my brother and sister for all the love and support (and good-hearted teasing) over the years, as well as my partner Kyle, for his constant encouragement and patience with my obsession with 'Roman stuff.' Finally, I would like to thank my parents, my travel companions in Rome, who accompanied me to many, many museums in search of my 'handshakes.' Your love, support, and enthusiasm made this a reality and I am so incredibly happy to have been able share the experience with the two people whose patience has been most tested by the piles of books in the kitchen for the past two years. I am happy to say that you will have your kitchen back.

iii

Contents List of Tables ...... vi List of Figures ...... vii Chapter one: Introduction ...... 1 Chapter two: Literature Review ...... 13 Dextrarum iunctio as history: the ‘wedding’ ...... 13 Dextrarum iunctio as a status indicator: legitimate marriage ...... 19 Dextrarum iunctio as analogy: Concordia ...... 23 Dextrarum iunctio as culturally constituted: familial relations ...... 27 Dextrarum iunctio: a comprehensive approach ...... 29 Chapter three: Methodology ...... 32 Traditional typological analysis: ...... 32 Introduction of the corpus: ...... 35 Methodology: ...... 38 Typologies: ...... 45 Chapter four: Funerary Reliefs ...... 50 Stylistic features and typologies: ...... 50 Epigraphic evidence: ...... 59 Gestural Evidence: ...... 70 Chapter five: Funerary Altars ...... 76 Stylistic and compositional features:...... 76 Gender of figures: ...... 81 Iconographic elements: ...... 83 Gestural: ...... 93 Epigraphic: ...... 99 Chapter six: Sarcophagi ...... 110 Stylistic and compositional elements: ...... 110 Figural composition: ...... 122 Gestural cues: ...... 131

Iconographic program: ...... 143 Chapter seven: Conclusions ...... 153 Bibliography: ...... 158 Figures...... 166 Appendix A:* ...... 198 Appendix B* ...... 250 Appendix C* ...... 256 Appendix D ...... 258

List of Tables

Table 1 Distribution of Commemorative Relationships on Roman Stele Reliefs ...... 61 Table 2 Distribution of Commemorative Relationships on Roman Funerary Altars ...... 100

List of Figures

Figure 1: The Relief of Sextus Magius Turpio from the Cloister of S. Ambrogio in Milan. Early first century CE, marble, 1.03m X 0.88m X 0.31m. Madrid, Museo Civico. Inv. nr. A.O. 9.6625 Source: CIL V, 6036. Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$SM_CIL_05_06036.jpg;$CIL_05_06036.jpg;$CIL_05_ 06036_1.jpg;$CIL_05_06036_2.jpg.]. Figure 2. Roman Sarcophagus depicting the life of a military officer. Second century CE, marble, 0.242m X 0.85m X0.91m. Mantua, Palazzo Ducale. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI neg. 62.126. Figure 3. Sarcophagus fragment from Via Ardeatina in Rome. Mid third century CE, marble, 1.26m X 0.43m. Casale S. Palomba. No Inv. nr. Source: Carola Reinsberg. Berlin: Mann, 2006. Pl. 110 Figure 6. Figure 4. Relief depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two figures. Unknown date, marble. Rome, Palazzo Colonna Garden. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 78.548. Figure 5. Relief with five figures from Villa Casale on Via Appia. 13 BCE to 5 CE, marble, 0.95m X 1.96m. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Inv. nr. 591a I.N. 2431. Source: Diana Kleiner. New York: Garland Publishing, 1977. Figure 87.

Figure 6. Altar of Vernasia Cyclas. First century CE, marble, h. 0.505m. London, British Museum, Townley Collection. Inv.nr. GR 1805.7-3.158 (Sculpture 2379). Source: British Museum.

Figure 7. The Altar of Titus Aquilius Pelorus of unknown provenance. Unknown date, unknown media. Rome. no. Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Sinn_00277.jpg;PH0010794. Figure 8. Fragment of a sarcophagus from Villa Ada depicting 'Pudicitia' type. Mid fourth century CE, marble, 1.94m X 0.58m. Rome, Camp Santo Teutonico. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 85.1839. Figure 9 Sarcophagus fragment with a dextrarum iunctio depicting a "Ceres" type. Late second century CE, marble, 2.21m X 0.87m X 1.02m, Rome. Museo Nazionale. Inv. nr. 310683. Source: Carola Reinsberg. Berlin: Mann, 2006. Plate 112 Figure 1. Figure 10. Annona Sarcophagus found at the Vigna Aquari near Porta Latina. End of the third century CE, marble, 0.208m X 0.86m X 0.90m. Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano Plazzo Massimo. Inv. nr. 40799. Source: DAI B. Malter Mal4.

Figure 11. The Relief of the Fonteii. Late first century BCE, luna Marble, 0.82mX 0.57m X 0.21m. London, British Museum. Inv. Nr. 1973.1-9.1 Source: British Museum.

vii

Figure 12. The Relief of Barneus from S. Giovanni or the Palazzo do Tomasi. Uncertain dating, travertine, 1.40m X 0.70m X 0.35m. Capua, Museo Campano. No Inv. nr. Source: CIL V 6036. Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RECapua_00154.jpg]. Figure 13. Relief of Plania Philemena from Capua. Uncertain dating, travertine, 0.94m X 0.78m X 0.30m, Capua, embedded in the house wall of the house Via dei Cavalieri Seggio 14. No. Inv. Nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 64.679. Fig 14: Relief of the Servilii found in-situ. 30-13 BCE, travertine. Rome, Villa Wolkonsky. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 73.1606.

Figure 15: Relief of Caius Volcacus Amphio from Capua. Uncertain dating, travertine, 1.32m X 0.61m X 0.30m. Capua, embedded in the house on the Via Duomo Nr. 81. No Inv. nr. Source: CIL X, 04420 Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$ECapua_00066.jpg].

Figure 16. The relief of Gratidia Chrite and M. Gratidius Libanus. 13 - 5 CE, marble, 0.68 X 0.90 m. Rome, Musei Vaticani, Museo Pio Clementino, Sala dei Busti. Inv. nr. 592. Source: D- DAI-ROM-96.Vat.2126; D-DAI-ROM-96.Vat.2132. Figure 17. Relief of the Mattei. Early first century CE, marble, 146m X 61m X 0.26m. Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano. Inv. nr. 80728.Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 82.3804. Figure 18. Relief depicting two figures. Antonine, marble, 0.90m X 0.61m X 0.40m. Rome, Italy; Vigna Codini. No Inv. nr. Source: Valentin Kockel. Mainz am Rheim: Phillip von Zabern, 1993. Plate 122d. Figure 19. Funerary Altar depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two figures. 40-50 CE, marble, 0.89m X 0.475m X 0.46m. Rome, Museo Nazionale delle Terme, Room V. Inv. nr. 124514. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 39.814. Figure 20. The Altar of G. Cornelius Philo from Campobello di Mazara. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Palermo, Archaeological Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.751. Figure 21. The Altar of Gaius Domitus Verus. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Villa Albani. No Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CIL_06_16979.jpg]. Figure 22. The Altar of Gaius Iulius Hermes from Rome. Second half of first century CE, marble, 0.36m X 0.465m X 0.29m. Rome, Museo Nazionale delle Terme. Inv. Nr. 297193. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$MC_CIL_06_05326.jpg;$CIL_06_05326.jpg;$M_CIL_ 06_05326.jpg;PH0009350&nr=1]. Figure 23. The Ash Chest of Helius Afinianus. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Berlin, Staatliche Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database

viii

[http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CIL_06_02317.jpg;$Sinn_00522.jpg;PH0010901&nr= 3]. Figure 24. The Altar of Vinicia Tyche from Rome from the Villa Medici. 75-85 CE, marble, 1.21m X 1.02m X 0.75m. Florence, Museo Archeologico, terrazza above giardino. Inv. nr. 13831. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. Soprintendenza Firenze (3 Stk.). Figure 25. Ceres with Portrait Head of a Woman. Hadrianic, marble, unknown measurements. Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Inv. no. 1244/1964. Photo: Foto Kruse (7 Stk.) Inst.Neg.Rom 7109. Figure 26. Sarcophagus depicting a wedding procession from Rome. Second century CE, marble, 2.04m X 0.42m. Vatican Museums, Museo Pio Clementino, Sala Delle Muse. Inv. nr. 268. Source: DAI Alinari 20.167. Figure 27. Sarcophagus fragment presenting a dextrarum iunctio. Late second century CE, preconnesian marble, 0.984m X 0.78m X 0.11m. London, British Museum. Inv. nr. GR 1805.7- 3.143. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 28.3895. Figure 28. Reproduced fragment of a sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio from Isola Sacra. Late second century CE, marble, 2.14m X 0.86m. Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Inv. nr. 1338. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 69.843. Figure 29. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio with male figure capite velato from Rome. 230-240 CE, marble, 2.26m X 0.99m X 1.02m. Munich, Glyptothek. Inv. no. 533. Source: Personal photo. Figure 30. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio and Narcissis from the Villa Albani. 390- 400 CE, marble, 0.41m X 0.53m. Rome, Vatican Museums, Galleria Lapidaria. Inv. nr. 169. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 1024. Figure 31. Early Christian sarcophagus depicting dextrarum iunctio with biblical scenes from the Villa Ludovisi. 320 CE, marble, 2.26m X 1.14m X 1.30m. Vatican Museums, Museo Pio Cristiano. Inv. nr. 26. Source: Personal. Figure 32a and b. Marble sarcophagus featuring a dextrarum iunctio from Ostia. Early fourth century CE, marble, 2.16m X 0.94m X 0.82m. Ostia Antica, near the Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: Personal. Figure 33. Imperial Group as Mars and Venus. Reworked ca.170-175 CE, marble, ca. 120-140 CE. Paris, Louvre. Inv. nr. Ma 1009 (MR 316). Source: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mars_Venus_Louvre_Ma1009.jpg]. Figure 34. Relief depicting a dextrarum iunctio and the Seasons. Third century CE, marble, 2.07m X 0.91m X 0.86m. Pisa, Campo Santo. Inv. nr. A 17. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 34.561; 10293. Figure 35. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio and the Dioscuri. Late fourth century CE, marble, 2.06m X 0.62m X 0.76m. Arles, Musee Lapidaire. Inv. nr. FAN.92.00.2482. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. foto Marburg 42884.

Figure 36. Sarcophagus depicting the rape by the Dioscuri, front, left and right sides. Mid-second century CE, marble, 1.84m X 0.64m X 0.50m. Rome, Musei Vaticani, Galleria dei Candelabri. Inv. nr. 2796. Source: Personal photo.

List of Abbreviations

The standard journal abbreviations set forth by the American Journal of Archaeology shall be used throughout the notes. Any work referred to more than once shall be abbreviated using the author's name and shortened form of the title after the first instance of full citation. The following abbreviations will be used within the catalog found in Appendix A.

Altmann W. Altmann, Die rӧmischen Grabaltäre der Kaiserzeit (New York: Arno Press, 1975, 1905). Amelung I W. Amelung, Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen Museums Vol. 1 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1908). Amelung II W. Amelung, Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen Museums Vol. 2 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1908). Brilliant R. Brilliant. Gesture and Rank in Roman Art: The Use of Gesture to Denote Status in Roman Sculpture and Coinage (New Haven: The Academy, 1963). Buschor E. Buschor, Das hellenistische Bildnis (Munich: Biederstein 1949). Cumont F. Cumont, Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1942). DACL VIII Dictionnaire D'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie (Paris: Letouzey et Ané , 1929). DACL X Dictionnaire D'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1932). Dütschke H. Dütschke, Antike Bildwerke in Oberitalien (Leipzig, W. Engelmann, 1880). Eckert M. Eckert, Capuanische Grabsteine. Vol. 417 (London: British Archaeological Reports, 1988). Felletti Maj B. M. Felletti Maj., Museo Nazionale Romano, ed. Museo Nazionale Romano, (Rome: Libr. dello Stato, 1953). Forti I L. Forti, "Un Gruppo di stele del Museo Campano," Memorie della r. accademia di archeologia, lettere e belle arti 6, XX (1942): 44-76. Forti II L. Forti, "Stele capuane," Memorie della r. accademia di archeologia, lettere e belle arti 6, XX (1942): 300-330. Frederiksen I M. W. Frederiksen, "Republikan Capua, A Social and Economic Study," BSR 27 (1959): 80-125. Frederiksen II M.W. Frederiksen and N. Purcell, Campania (London: British School at Rome, 1984). Frenz I H.G. Frenz, Untersuchungen zu den frühen rӧmischen Grabreliefs (PhD Diss., Universität, Frankfurt am Main, 1977).

Frenz II H. G. Frenz, Rӧmische Grabreliefs in Mittel - und Süditalien (Rome: Bretschneider, 1985). Gabelmann I, H. Gabelmann, "Die Typen der römischen Grabstelen am Rhein," BJb 172, (1972): 65-140. Gerke W. Gerke, Untersuchungen zum rӧmischen Kinderporträt (PhD Diss., Hamburg, 1968). Geyer A. Geyer, "Ikonographische Bemerkungen zum Neapler Brüdersarkophag," JdI 93(1978) 369 note 1; 4; 5. Giuliano A. Giuliano, Catalogo dei ritratti romani del Museo Profano Lateranense. Vol. 10 (Rome: Direzione Generale dei Musei e Gallerie Pontificie, 1957). Goethert F. W. Goethert, Zur kunst der rӧmischen Republik (Berlin: Druck on ar hr ter g.m.b.h., 1931). Goette I H. R. Goette, Studien zu rӧmischen Togadarstellungen (Mainz am Rhein: P. v. Zabern, 1989). Helbig I W. Helbig, Führer durch die offentlich Samnlungen klassischer Altertümer in Rom Vol I (Leipzig: Verlag von Karl Baedeker, 1963). Helbig II W. Helbig, Führer durch die offentlich Samnlungen klassischer Altertümer in Rom Vol II (Leipzig: Verlag von Karl Baedeker, 1966). Helbig III W. Helbig, Führer durch die offentlich Samnlungen klassischer Altertümer in Rom Vol III (Leipzig: Verlag von Karl Baedeker, 1969). Helbig IV W. Helbig, Führer durch die offentlich Samnlungen klassischer Altertümer in Rom Vol IV(Leipzig: Verlag von Karl Baedeker, 1972). Kleiner I D. E. E. Kleiner, "The Great Friezes of the Ara Pacis Augustae," MEFRA 90 (1978): 753-785. Kleiner II D. E. E. Kleiner, "Private Portraiture in the Age of Augustus," in The Age of Augustus, ed. R. Winkes (Providence, R.I.: Center for Old World Archaeology and Art, Brown University, 1985). Kleiner III D. E. E. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture: The Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire (New York: Garland Publishing, 1977). Kleiner IV D. E. E. Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars (Rome : G. Breitschneider, 1987). Koch-Sichtermann G. Koch and H. Sichtermann, Rӧmische Sarkophage (Munich: Beck, 1982). Kockel V. Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und zum Verständnis des spätrepublikanisch- frühkaiserzeitlichen Privatporträts (Beiträge zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur, 12) (Mainz am Rheim: Phillip von Zabern, 1993).

xii

Kranz I P. Kranz, Jahreszeiten-Sarkophage: Entwicklung und Ikonographie des Motivs der vier Jahreszeiten auf kaiserzeitlichen Sarkophagen und Sarkophagdeckeln (Berlin: Mann, 1984). Kranz II P. Kranz, "Zu den Anfängen der stadtrömischen Säulensarkophage, " MDAI(R) LXXXIV (1977): 349-380. LIMC III Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC) III. 1-2 (Zürich: Artemis-Verl,1986). LIMC IV Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC) IV. (Zürich: Artemis-Verl,1988). LIMC V Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC) V (Zürich: Artemis-Verl,1990). LIMC VI Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC) VI (Zürich: Artemis-Verl,1992). Mander J. Mander, Portraits of Children on Roman Funerary Monuments (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013). Matz-Duhn F. Matz and F. von Duhn, Antike Bildwerke in Rom (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1882). MonMatt R. Venuti and G. C. Amaduzzi, Vetera monumenta quae in hortis Caelimontanis et in aedibus Matthaeiorum adservantur: nunc primum in unum collecta et adnotationibus illustrata (Rome: Sumptibus Venantii Monaldini Bibliopolae, 1779). Onomasticon V. De-Vit, Totius Latinitatis Onomasticon (Rome: Typis Aldiniensis, 1887). Pflug H. Pflug, Römische Porträtstelen in Oberitalien: Untersuchungen zur Chronologie, Typologie und Ikonographie (Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1989). Poulsen I V. Poulsen, Les Portraits Romains I (Copenhagen: Glyptothèque Ny Carlsberg, 1962). Poulsen II V. Poulsen, Les Portraits Romains II (Copenhagen: Glyptothèque Ny Carlsberg, 1974). Reekmans L. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio' dans l'Iconographie Romaine et Paleochretienne," BulComm 31 (1958): 69—73, 90. Reinsberg I C. Reinsberg, "Das Hochzeitsopfer - eine Fiktion. Zur Ikonographie der Hochzeitssarkophage," JdI 99 (1984): 291-317. Reinsberg II C. Reinsberg, Senatorensarkophage, RM 102 (1995) 353- 370 Pl.. 90-93. Reinsberg III C. Reinsberg, "Die Verwandlung von Bildnis und Bild. Umgearbeitete Sarkophage," in (Hrsg.), Antike Porträts: zum Gedächtnis von Helga von Heintze, ed. H. v. Steuben (Möhnesee: Bibliopolis, 1999) 247-262. Reinsberg V C. Reinsberg, Vita Romana-Sarkophage, ASR I 3 (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 2006). Rodenwaldt G. Rodenwaldt, Das Relief bei den Griechen (Berlin: Schoetz & Parrhysius, 1923). Rossbach A. Rossbach, Rӧmische Hochzeits und Ehedenkaäler ( Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1871).

xiii

Schultze H. Schultze, Ammen und Pädagogen: Sklavinnen und Sklaven als Erzieher in der antiken Kunst und Gesellschaft (Mainz: P. von Zabern,1998) Solin Arctos 19 H. Solin, "Analecta Epigraphica," Arctos, Acta Phiologica Fennica 19 (1985): 155-216. Solin Arctos 20 H. Solin, "Analecta Epigraphica,." Arctos, Acta Phiologica Fennica 20 (1986): 153-169. Solin Arctos 21 H. Solin, "Analecta Epigraphica," Arctos, Acta Phiologica Fennica 21 (1987): 126-127. Toynbee J. M. C. Toynbee, Death and Burial in the Roman World (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1971). Vessberg O. Vessberg, Studien zur Kunstgeschichte der rӧmischen Republik (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1941). Wrede H. Wrede, Senatorische Sarkophage Roms. Der Beitrag des Senatorenstandes zur römischen Kunst der hohen und späten Kaiserzeit, MAR 29 (Mainz: Von Zabern, 2001). Zadoks A. N. Zadoks and J. Jitta, Ancestral Portraiture in Rome and the Art of the Last Century of the Republic (Amsterdam: N. v. Noord Hollandsche uitgevers-mij., 1932) Zanker I P. Zan er, "Grabreliefs rӧmischer Freigelassener," JDI 90 (1975): 267-315. Zanker II P. Zanker and P. Zanker. "Zur Rezeption des hellenistischen Individualporträts in Rom und in den italischen Städten," Hellenismus in Mittelitalien (1976): 581-619. Zimmer I G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen. Vol. 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982).

xiv

Chapter one: Introduction

This study will investigate whether the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman funerary monuments is synonymous with marriage. The visual motif, a handshake between two figures, labeled the dextrarum iunctio by modern scholars, is one of the most commonly utilized images in Roman art.1 The gesture is ubiquitous on various media: painting,2 numismatic evidence,3 even on monumental architecture,4 symbolizing harmony, concord or agreement.5 From the early to later imperial times, late first century BCE to the fourth century CE, the gesture was commonly found in funerary contexts. Depictions of the motif are noted on rectangular stele decorated with figural motifs and anchored into the ground to mark a burial plot or attached to the wall of a tomb, as well as on richly decorated stone altars and highly ornamented relief sarcophagi used to house the body after death.6 Despite the variation in the contexts and

1The major works focusing specifically on the dextrarum iunctio motif: G. Davis, "The Significance of the Handshake Motif in Classical Funerary Art," AJA 89, 4 (1985): 627-640; D.E.E. Kleiner, "A Portrait Relief of D. Apuleius Carpus and Apuleia Rufina in the Villa Wolkonsky," ArchCl XXX (1978): 246-25; C. Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen aus dem Menschenleben Teil 3. Vita Romana (Berlin: Mann, 2006); R. Stupperich, "Zur Dextrarum Iunctio Auf Frühen Römischen Grabreliefs," Boreas VI (1983): 143-150; C. Walter, "The Dextrarum Junctio of Lepcis Magna in Relationship to the Iconography of Marriage," AntAfr XIV (1979): 271-283. In the Christian context: J.P. Pettorelli, "Peche Originel ou Amour Conjugal? Note sur le Sense des Images d' Adam et Eve sur les Sarcophages Chretiens de l'Antiquite Tardive," Recherches Augustiniennes 30 (1997): 279-334; G. Bovini, "La Scene della 'Dextrarum Iunctio' nell'Arte Cristiana," BullComm 72 (1946-48): 113-14; B. Kötting, "Dextrarum iunctio," in Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, ed. Theodor Klauser et al. (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1957); L. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio' dans l'Iconographie Romaine et Paleochretienne," BIHBelge 31 (1958): 69—73, 90; A. Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits-und Ehedenkmäler (Leipzig: BG Teubner, 1871). 2 Holliday discussed the dextrarum iunctio in the context of painting. P. J. Holliday, The Origins of Roman Historical Commemoration in the Visual Arts (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002). 3 Richard Brilliant discusses the gesture found within the numismatic evidence associated with a number of emperors, but with a specific focus on the Emperor Hadrian. R. Brilliant. Gesture and Rank in Roman Art: The Use of Gesture to Denote Status in Roman Sculpture and Coinage (New Haven: The Academy, 1963), 78, 88, 92, 98, especially 134. 4 See Walter, "The Dextrarum Junctio of Lepcis Magna," 271-283. 5 Brilliant, Gesture and Rank, 88. 6 Toynbee discusses the types of funerary monuments. J.M.C. Toynbee, Death and Burial in the Roman World (Baltimore: University of Maryland, 1971); For the traditional catalogs associated with stele see: H.G. Frenz, Römische Grabreliefs in Mittel- und Süditalien (Rome: Bretschneider, 1985); V. Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und zum Verständnis des spätrepublikanisch-

interpretive meanings associated with the motif in other forms of visual art, within the funerary context, the assumption that a handshake linking a male and a female figure must represent marriage, either historically depicting the moment of marriage7 or an allegorical presentation, remains predominant.8 However, this monolithic interpretation is problematic; such a generalized and standardized interpretation closes the door to further interpretation. This study seeks to investigate and revaluate the traditional scholarship associated with the dextrarum iunctio, in order to test the validity of the association between marriage and the motif, and to investigate the potential for other possible interpretations of the motif.

Underlying my study of the dextrarum iunctio are three themes: the constitution of the dextrarum iunctio as part of a temporally contingent visual vocabulary, the dextrarum iunctio as a means of status transmission and pronouncement within the context of self-presentation, and finally the integration of the motif within the funerary context.

The first theme is the temporally contingent nature of the motif. The dextrarum iunctio depicted on a Roman funerary monument represents a visual cue that was temporally constituted and functioned in a specific cultural context at a specific time. A number of studies embed the analysis of Roman art into the study of the cultural milieu, with a further focus on the multifaceted constitution of social status and identity creation through visual and textual cues.9

The dextrarum iunctio was one of a number of motifs that comprised a repertory of shared visual

frühkaiserzeitlichen Privatporträts (Beiträge zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur, 12) (Mainz am Rheim: Phillip von Zabern, 1993); H. Pflug, Römische Porträtstelen in Oberitalien: Untersuchungen zur Chronologie, Typologie und Ikonographie (Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1989). For funerary altars: W. Altmann, Die römischen Grabaltäre der Kaiserzeit (New York: Arno Press, 1975); D. E. E. Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars with Portraits (Rome: Bretschneider Giorgio, 1987). 7 Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits, 11. 8 Brilliant, Gesture and Rank, 21; Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 81. 9 J. R. Clarke, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: Visual Representation and Non-Elite Viewers in Italy 100 BC- AD 315 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003); J. Elsner, Art and the Roman Viewer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); E. D'Ambra, "The Cult of Virtues and the Funerary Relief of Ulpia Epigone," Latomus 48.2 (1989): 392-400.

vocabularies, which functioned within the context of self-presentation of Roman social status and identity.10 These vocabularies were imbued with meaning by the overarching social and cultural context, and are historically contingent. This suggests that, although there seems to be an overarching universal meaning associated with the motif, the interpretation of the motif is subject to social, cultural and temporal contingencies. The meaning of any depiction of the dextrarum iunctio is predicated upon social and cultural context, the time period in which the monument was commissioned, and the monument type on which it is displayed.

The socially-constructed nature of the motif leads to the second theme: the integration of the motif into the context of self-presentation. The dextrarum iunctio was part of a Roman visual vocabulary and was used to depict, or nuance, identity and status. The commissioners of a monument could use stylistic and compositional variations to transmit specific meanings; that is, they manipulated shared vocabularies, choosing specific motifs to impart an intended meaning upon their viewers. The identity of the deceased was inscribed on the monument through the addition of basic motifs that made status-specific pronouncements. For instance, within the context of self-presentation, sartorial cues alluding to citizenship such as the masculine toga and stola, a slip-like garment worn over top of a female's tunic, indicate the status of the figures as citizens and the female figure, specifically, as a matrona.11 Occupational markers such as the depiction of specific tools, as well as the presentation of various gestures such as the 'Pudicitia,' a female gesture found on Roman statuary and funerary reliefs where a female figure is depicted as raising one arm to the cheek, chin or chest and grasping a fold of fabric from her cloak or

10 Tonio Hӧlsher was interested in discerning a shared semantic system in Roman art. T. Hӧls her, The Language of Images in Roman Art, trans. A. Snodgrass and A. M. Kunzel-Snodgrass (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). Also see: P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus, trans. Alan Shapiro (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990). 11 On clothing and Roman citizenship see: K. Olsen, Dress and the Roman Woman: Self-Presentation and Society (London: Routledge, 2008); J. L. Sebesta, "Symbolism in the Costume of the Roman Women," In The World of Roman Costume, ed. J.L. Sebesta and L. Bonfante (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994), 46-64.

palla, while the other arm is held across her stomach,12 impart upon the viewer an understanding of the social role occupied by the commemorated individual. The dextrarum iunctio functioned within this commemorative context to relay the status and identity of the commemorated individual to the viewer. Traditional scholarship interprets the motif as a visual cue used to show that the couple were legally married or related to each other by a conjugal relationship.13

However, there are a number of variations that indicate the motif was used to commemorate a number of different relationships. For example, a marble figural relief from Milan dating from the early first century CE commemorates Sextus Magius Turpio with a depiction of two male figures linked by dextrarum iunctio (Fig. 1).14 The inscription states that the relief was commissioned by Sextus Magius Licinus for his patron.15 The gesture is combined with other visual cues such as occupational markers and clothing, as well as epigraphic evidence, to impart an understanding of the social status of the depicted individuals to the viewer. The function of the dextrarum iunctio to transmit the status and identity of the individuals engaged in a relationship is integral to the discussion of the nature of the motif itself.

The third theme underlying this study is the centrality of the 'place,' the physical context of the monument, more specifically the funerary context, in the transmission of meaning on Roman funerary art. While some scholars initiated a dialog concerning how individual motifs are combined to construct a specific iconographic meaning on a funerary monument as a

12 The 'Pudicitia' gesture is traditionally considered to represent chastity and modesty in a Roman matron. Brilliant, Gesture and Rank in Roman Art, 45; D. E. E. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture: The Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire (New York: Garland Publishing, 1977); J. L. Sebesta, "Women's Costume and Women's Civic Morality in Augustan Rome," Gender and History 9.3 (1997): 529-41; Olsen, Dress and the Roman Woman, 196. 13 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 23; P. Zanker, "Grabreliefs Römischer Freigelassener," JDAI 90 (1975): 285. 14 Catalog nr. 9. This relief will be discussed in detail in Chapter four 15 CIL X 6036: Sex(tus) Magius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Licin(us) / sibi et Sex(to) Magio Sex(ti) l(iberto) Turpio(ni) / patrono et Basso et Celeri lib(ertis) / testamento fieri ius[s(it)].

whole,16 analysis of the dextrarum iunctio within this iconographic context is lacking.17 Further, the physical positioning of the motif on a monument and the location of the monument in the funerary realm, the cemetery or tomb, has been overlooked in the scholarship. The individuals permitted to view the motif and integration the motif into their interpretive framework of the viewer, is predicated upon how the motif is displayed within the physical and iconographic context. Place Studies, a field of human geography that discusses how people imbue places with meaning, can be used to inform the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio within its physical context. Monuments that include a depiction of the dextrarum iunctio and are situated within a

‘pla e,’ or a ‘spa e in ested with meaning,’18 become constitutive elements for the production of a viewer's conception of, and their integration into, that place. Visualization plays an important role. Viewers navigate a monument, which is embedded in a place, based on visual and symbolic cues; a viewer assimilates these external cues "into the mental structures and the socialization of

nowledge” to understand their relationship between their pla e in so iety and the physi al monument.19 The viewer uses this understanding of the monument and its physical place to conceptualize the social networks in which they are engaged. Thus, the monument and the motif reflect the identity of the commemorated individual, but also play a role in establishing the identity of the collective group that views the monument. The identity of any individual is tied to embodied relations between the individual and other objects and persons that inhabit that

16 R. Brilliant, Visual Narratives: Storytelling in Etruscan and Roman Art (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984); John Clarke discusses the combinations of motifs on the Ara Pacis and how they could be read by non-elite individuals. Clarke, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans, 19-28. 17 Only Carola Reinsberg discusses the dextrarum iunctio as it is presented in combination with other motifs found on Roman biographical sarcophagi. She seeks to understand the dextrarum iunctio motif as integrated into a visual vocabulary that can be used to depict important life events of the commemorated individual, such as scenes of sacrifice, or scenes of religious devotion. Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15-18. 18 T. Cresswell, Place: A Short Introduction (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004), 12. 19 E. C. Relph, Place and Placelessness (London: Pion, 1976), 59.

location.20 These individualized social relationships are integral to the study of the dextrarum iunctio as they posit a multitude of interpretive frameworks that are used by differentiated groups of viewers to interpret the meaning inherent in the motif.

The study of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary monuments has a number of difficulties. First, the term dextrarum iunctio is not found within the literary sources; it is a fully modern term used to describe a specific gesture found in the visual evidence.21 This lack of literary validation makes it difficult to ascertain a definitive interpretation of the motif based on historical sources. This limitation can be mitigated through the use of other sources such as epigraphic evidence. Inscriptions associated with monuments can contain key information allowing the visual representations to be linked to specific individuals and relationships.

However, the use of epigraphic evidence has methodological limitations as well. While some monuments such as the stele reliefs and funerary altars have associated epigraphic evidence, other monument forms, such as sarcophagi, lack inscriptions. Thus, while one can make some definitive interpretive statements based on epigraphic evidence associated with some funerary monuments, these statements are contingent on the type of monument depicting the dextrarum iunctio. These statements cannot be generalized to include relationships portrayed on all monuments containing a dextrarum iunctio.

A second difficulty is the wide geographic area in which monuments presenting the motif are found, as well as the large temporal spread between the earliest and the latest monuments.

Any study of the dextrarum iunctio will necessarily draw on examples originating from a variety

20 J. E. Malpas, Place and Experience: A Philosophical Topography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 152. 21 Susan Treggiari states that the term is solely a modern construction. S. Treggiari, Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), 165. Comprehensive searches in the PHI Classical Latin Texts database for the term dextrarum iunctio return no results, further suggesting the term was not classical in origin.

of locations in Italy and other parts of the empire in order to establish a corpus large enough for analysis. Any conclusions based on such a corpus, however, must take into account the influence of geographic and cultural influences. This study alleviates this difficulty by restricting the geographic origin of the examples. The cataloged examples originate from Italy in general and predominately from the environs of Rome. Further, this study will be restricted temporally to monuments dating from the late first century BCE to the fifth century CE. Dating criteria present further methodological issues. The date associated with the commissioning of a monument is traditionally established through the analysis of sartorial cues, such as the rendering of drapery, and stylistic elements, such as hairstyle. These dating techniques are imprecise and can result in a large degree of variation in dates imposed by scholars. Despite these dating issues, I will rely on the work of Valentin Kockel22 for the dating of stele reliefs, as he provides the most updated and comprehensive typological analysis. For funerary altars, I will follow the dating precedent set by Diana Kleiner.23 Kleiner provides the only modern study of Roman funerary altars that incorporates a dating analysis. Finally, in the realm of sarcophagi, I will follow Carola Reinsberg,24 as her work represents the most comprehensive typological analysis of the motif found on Roman sarcophagi.

Finally, the greatest difficulty for this study is the lack of archaeological and funerary context. Many of the examples under analysis are no longer in situ, having been removed from their physical context in the tomb and placed in museums. With the loss of physical context, a number of lines of inquiry are eliminated. For example, sarcophagi were often situated in a tomb

22 Kockel's dating criteria includes inscriptions, stone material, hairstyle and carving methods. Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 56-61. 23 Kleiner bases her dates on monument form and type. Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 31-32. 24 Reinsberg bases her chronology on monument form. Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 19-60.

with a plaque containing inscriptional information about the deceased.25 By removing the sarcophagus from the original context, valuable inscriptional evidence is lost concerning the deceased, the commemorator, and the status of the individuals involved. Further, the physical placement of a sarcophagus or other funerary monument within the tomb could influence the

‘reading’ and interpretation of the motif. How did the physical position of the monument alter the way in which it was viewed? Was the motif intended to be viewed as integrated into a decorative program in the tomb? By removing the monument from its physical context, the interpretive strategies of the viewer based on physical context become much more difficult to discern and requires a degree of imaginative reconstruction. In order to recreate the funerary context of the motif, I attempt to situate the monuments within contexts for which there is archaeological comparanda. Isola Sacra provides an example of a well-preserved and documented necropolis.26 The location of monuments found within the tombs was meticulously recorded by early scholars. I will use the information about the placement of the monuments within the tombs to extrapolate using my examples to gain an understanding of the potential role of the monument within the 'place' of a necropolis.

Despite these limitations, the monolithic assumption that the dextrarum iunctio is synonymous with marriage can be tested by bringing together a large corpus of visual, epigraphic and other textual evidence and analyzing it through an interpretive framework that incorporates stylistic analysis and methods that integrate the use of the motif into the broader understanding of the use of image in Roman art to transmit meaning within a specific context:

25 Toynbee, Death and Burial, 275. 26 There are difficulties inherent in this approach. The Isola Sacra necropolis is not necessarily representative of all necropolii. However, it remains the best preserved and documented example, and, thus, has the greatest potential for this form of reconstruction. This follows the method used by Lauren Petersen in her book on freedmen in Roman funerary art where she discusses the familia and social structure in the Roman tomb. L. W. Petersen, The Freedmen in Roman Art and Art History (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

here, the funerary context. The reasoning for such an approach is two-fold; first, traditional scholarship focused on the stylistic analysis of visual evidence to create typologies. Such typologies negate any variation and differentiation in the depiction of the motif. By incorporating stylistic analysis in my interpretive framework, variation can be acknowledged and evaluated in relation to the textual evidence. Second, this study gathers a total of 172 examples of the dextrarum iunctio, which are scattered among various catalogs and collections, into one volume for analysis. The corpus includes 78 examples found on 'window' type and stele reliefs,

22 found on Roman funerary altars and 72 examples drawn from sarcophagi. This corpus, the most comprehensive to date in both form and chronology, allows for the comparison of stylistic and compositional elements that show a high degree of variation. This variation implies that, while the dextrarum iunctio shows some degree of compositional standardization, the motif could be modified to alter the meaning which the commissioner of the monument wished to impart upon the viewer. This suggests that the functional nature of the dextrarum iunctio was inherently multivalent; its function and meaning developed and morphed as the motif was used and reused on new funerary media. Its meaning was never static. It could be modified through subtle manipulation of compositional and stylistic elements, and the addition of minute variations in gesture. It was also combined with other images into iconographical programs that altered the iewer’s per eption and interpretation of the motif itself. Thus, the underlying goal of this work is to develop an understanding of how a specific motif is embedded in the repertory of visual images that could be used singly and in combination to commemorate an individual, as well to gain an understanding of how the physical location of the motif functioned as the major constitutive element in deriving an interpretation of a motif that is polysemous by nature.

This thesis will be broken down into seven chapters.

Chapter two will discuss the past scholarship associated with the dextrarum iunctio on

Roman funerary monuments. The bulk of traditional scholarship has focused on analysis of the motif found on Roman sarcophagi; very little scholarship has explored the motif as depicted on

Roman funerary reliefs and funerary altars. I will follow the development of the scholarly discussion of the dextrarum iunctio and suggest that subsequent studies, including this one, must take a more comprehensive approach. Traditional art historic analysis must be combined with epigraphic evidence, but also must take into account the interpretive framework that a viewer must use to decipher the meaning of the motif.

Chapter three will develop the methodology that will be used in this study to evaluate and analyze my catalog of examples. This methodology will be a hybrid that combines traditional stylistic and typological analyses associated with art historical methodologies with a discussion of the epigraphic evidence. The physical context of the monument within the cemetery and tomb, driving the variation in the stylistic and compositional elements, will be incorporated through a discussion of the 'place' in which the motif functions. This chapter will also serve to introduce the corpus under consideration and develop the typological categories that will be used to organize and analyze my catalog of examples. The typological categories are arranged by monument type as a reflection of the different physical spaces in which the monuments were displayed: stele and 'window' reliefs displayed publically, funerary altars found within the tomb complex, and sarcophagi, displayed deep within the tomb. Fundamentally, the change in the physical location of the monument drove the changes in the function of the dextrarum iunctio.

The dextrarum iunctio, constituted as a form of visual vocabulary, transformed from a motif that served a pragmatic function on Roman funerary reliefs, providing a means to depict relationships

and integration into identity groups, to an allegorical motif that is combined with other ornamentation and complementary images.

Chapter four will begin the analysis of the motif on Roman funerary reliefs. Defining reliefs as the first typology, I will analyze the examples found on early imperial funerary reliefs to identify a number of variations in stylistic, compositional and gestural features that call into question the traditional correlation between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage. Using a number of subcategories: stylistic and compositional analysis, gestural analysis, and epigraphic, I will argue that the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio found on early imperial funerary reliefs functioned to indicate a relationship between two individuals, either emotional or contractual, but was not limited to a representation of marriage.

Chapter five will continue the analysis of the motif on Roman funerary altars. The dextrarum iunctio is combined with other motifs, ornamental decoration, and iconographic cues that impart upon the dextrarum iunctio an allegorical rather than a purely pragmatic function, implying the potential for a multiplicity of interpretations based on the combination of decorative elements and visual cues. The motif is used to imply the perpetuity of the relationship beyond the death of the individual and expectations for the afterlife.

Chapter six will further engage with the traditional scholarship, using the hybrid interpretive framework developed for this study to reexamine the standard interpretation of the depictions on Roman sarcophagi. While the stylistic elements tend to associate the motif with marriage in its depictions on Roman sarcophagi, compositional variations within the motif itself function to nuance the intended meaning of the motif. Chapter seven will offer final discussion and conclusions. Appended to the end of the study is the catalog of examples composed of 78

reliefs found on funerary 'window' reliefs and stele, reliefs on 22 funerary altars and 72 examples found on sarcophagi and tables that were used to undertake the epigraphic analysis.

Chapter two: Literature Review

The dominant theme flowing through the traditional scholarship discussing and analyzing the dextrarum iunctio is the undisputed association between the motif and marriage. With few exceptions,27 nearly all scholarship that discussed the motif acknowledged and adhered to this correlation, interpreting the motif either as a portrayal of marriage itself, or the fidelity and concord associated with marriage.28 The bulk of the scholarship centres on sarcophagi as the medium of transmission, to the exclusion of depictions found on stele and funerary altars. This chapter will reveal the four major streams of dialog and the major lines of inquiry used in past scholarship. It will conclude with a discussion of a new approach that takes into account the traditional stylistic analysis but also incorporates epigraphic and gestural analysis.

Dextrarum iunctio as history: the ‘wedding’

The first stream of discussion interprets the dextrarum iunctio as a historical depiction of a wedding ceremony. The traditional association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage can be dated back to the late nineteenth century when art-historical analysis of the motif focused almost exclusively on the identification and stylistic analysis of images appearing on Roman sarcophagi. The first scholar to explicitly state a connection between the marriage ceremony and the motif was August Rossbach in the mid-nineteenth century, who emphasized the role of the dextrarum iunctio within the Roman marriage ceremony. Rossbach drew solely on artistic representations to argue that the handsha e ombined with the figure she named ‘Pronuba’ and a

27 Davis suggests that the dextrarum iunctio was an ambiguous motif that li ely had multiple meanings. Da is, “The ignifi an e of the Handsha e Motif,” 639. This will be de eloped further in the subsequent dis ussion. imilarly Michael Eckert questioned the association with marriage in the context of Roman funerary reliefs from Capua, arguing that the motif was multilayered. M. Eckert, Capuanische Grabsteine: Untersuchungen zu den Grabsteinen Römischer Freigelassener aus Capua. Vol. 417 (Oxford: British Archaeological Reports Ltd, 1988, 69). 28 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 23; Reekmans, "La 'dextrarum iunctio,'" 27-29; Zan er, “Grabreliefs R mis her Freigelassener,” 285.

Cupid figure depicted at the feet of the linked figures, was representative of a Roman marriage ceremony.29 In this context, she argued that the dextrarum iunctio gesture, the clasping of right hands, was an integral aspect of the Roman marriage ceremony and interpreted the dextrarum iunctio in Roman art as the attempt by the artist to represent the historical moment of marriage.

Any sar ophagus ontaining this motif was subsequently labeled a ‘wedding’ type sar ophagus.

Howe er, Rossba h’s laim that the dextrarum iunctio was one of the simplest means available to Roman artists to depict a wedding scene was tenuous at best. Rossbach did not appeal to the textual sources describing the marriage ceremony in her analysis: sources that contradict the explicit association that she established. Indeed, a survey of the literary evidence indicates that a clasping of hands in association with the marriage ceremony is found in a limited number of primary sources dating from the third and fourth centuries CE.30 When the gesture did occur in literature, it was not characterized by the term "dextrarum iunctio."

The earliest association of the joining of hands as part of the Roman marriage ceremony comes from the poet Claudian in the fourth century CE. In his Epithalamium of Palladius and

Celerina, Claudian, having been asked to compose a short song to be performed during the procession of the marriage ceremony of his friend Palladius and Celerina, relates a story of

Venus taking the hand of the bridegroom, and delivering it to that of the bride.31 The text is expli it: the hands being joined are the right hands “dextram…dextramque.” The go erning verb, however, is not iungere, with its connotations of joining or uniting, but rather tradere which has associations with entrusting, delivering and handing over. The verb was probably

29 Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits, 11-12. 30 The most comprehensive study of the Roman marriage ceremony in the Roman literary sources was undertaken by Karen Hersch. K. Hersch, The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 201. A number of shorter articles discuss the Roman wedding: S. Dixon, "The Marriage Alliance in the Roman Elite," Journal of Family History 10, 4 (1985): 353-378; G. Williams, "Some Aspects of Roman Marriage Ceremonies and Ideals," JRS 48, 1/2 (1958): 16-29. For the legal aspects of the Roman marriage eremony see Treggiari’s Roman Marriage. 31 “Tum dextram omplexa iri dextramque puellae tradit et his ultro san it onubia di tis…” Claudian 25.134-135.

chosen to emphasize the transfer of the bride from the father to the new husband. The

Epithalamium fo uses on des ribing the deeds of the young girl’s father before fo using on the attributes of the daughter that he accompanies in procession. The entrusting of right hands and the blessing of Venus represents the culmination of the wedding procession in the literary example. Within the context of Roman law, the marriage procession was central to the legitimacy of the marriage. Treggiari relates a case in which a woman, whose fiancé is absent, is led to the husband’s house in pro ession, ducere uxorem, resulting in a legally binding marriage.32 The verb choice utilized by Claudian, in this example, focuses on the transfer of the bride to the groom33 rather than the actual joining of the hands.

Claudian also relates the joining of hands as part of the marriage ceremony in another set of fescennine verses: the Fescennine Verses in Honour of the Marriage of the Emperor

Honorius. Claudian likens the bond produced by the clasping of hands to the bond between the ivy and the oak tree: it is inseparable.34 Here, Claudian uses the noun iunctis, but makes no specific mention of which hand is being joined; the generic term for hand, manibus, is employed.

Thus, although the importance of the union of hands in the marriage ceremony is emphasized, the description of how the hands are joined is ambiguous. The term dextrarum iunctio as a central feature of the ceremony simply does not appear.

The association between marriage and the term dextrarum iunctio is even more tenuous in Tertullian’s third entury CE wor On the Veiling of Virgins, which calls upon the churches to

32 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 167. 33 I do not wish to imply that this represents a transfer of manus from the father to the husband. Such forms of marriage were rendered obsolete and archaic during the time period under discussion. Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 21. 34 Adspirate novam pectoribus fidem mansuramque facem tradite semsibus. Tam iunctis manibus nectite vincula, quam frondens hedera stringitur aes ulus” Claudian, Fescennine Verses in Honour of the Marriage of the Emperor Honorius IV (XIV). I rely on the translation by Platnauer. M. Platnauer, trans, Claudian, Claudian in Two Volumes. vol 1(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922), 239.

enforce the veiling of women after betrothal. According to Tertullian, the betrothal is brought about through the kiss and right hands: "(then) both in body and in spirit they have mingled with a male, through the kiss and the right hands.”35 Here, there is reference to the betrothal, rather than the marriage ceremony, and an association with right hands, dexteras. The choice of vocabulary leads to a measure of ambiguity; the statement alludes to some form of union with the right hands as central to the betrothal, but is not made explicit through verb use. Again, the term dextrarum iunctio specifically, does not appear.

Further, the term does not appear in the legal record. Treggiari, for instance, sees no literary evidence that the dextrarum iunctio was a central aspect of the Roman marriage ceremony. She states that the clasping of hands is used in a variety of contexts, and that examples of a right handclasp that do appear in the Roman literary sources tend to represent the formation of a treaty or agreement and faithfulness to a pact rather than carrying nuptial connotations.36 Treggiari concludes that the term was used exclusively in reference to depictions of the motif in Roman art.37 Thus, despite the lack of literary evidence confirming the centrality of the right hand grasp, the dextrarum iunctio, in the Roman marriage ceremony, the association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage remained unquestioned as scholars continued to link various depictions of the motif with marriage ceremonies.38

35 “ i ongressio iri mulierem fa it, non tegantur nisi post ipsam nuptiarum passionem -- atquin etiam apud ethnicos velatae ad virum ducuntur --; si autem ad desponsationem velantur, quia et corpore et spiritu masculo mixtae sunt per osculum et dexteras, per quae primum resignarunt pudorem spiritu, per commune conscientiae pignus, quo totam condixerunt confusionem, quanto magis tempus illas velabit, sine quo sponsari non possunt et quo urgente sine sponsalibus irgines desinunt esse!” Tertullian, On the Veiling of Virgins, trans. Rev. S. Thelwall, accessed Jan 21, 2013, http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf04/anf04-09.htm#P545_113997, 11.9. 36 Treggiari looks to one of the most commonly cited examples of a right hand clasp as the hand clasp found in book four of Vergil’s Aeneid o urring between Dido and Aeneas. Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 165. 37 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 165. 38 Lillian Wilson provides an example of a scholar adhering to the assumption that the dextrarum iunctio indicated a wedding. She was one of the earliest scholars to analyze a depiction of a dextrarum iunctio appearing on the ar ofago Dell’annona urrently housed in the Museo Nazionale in Rome. Wilson analyzed the motif stylistically in an attempt to compare the artistic version of a wedding ceremony with the literary description. Wilson concludes that the stylistic elements of the motif as it appears on the sarcophagi do not necessarily adhere to the literary

Louis Reekmans was the second scholar to undertake a comprehensive study of the of the dextrarum iunctio, nearly a entury after Rossba h’s initial study. Drawing on examples discussed by Rossbach, complemented with depictions found on various media such as painting, mosaics, funerary altars and cinerary urns, Reekmans centred his analysis on the creation of typologies and chronologies for the dextrarum iunctio. He traced the stylistic development of the dextrarum iunctio in various forms of media from the first through the seventh centuries CE.

His analysis focused on a number of depictions from various forms of monuments intended for funerary commemoration, but with an analytical focus on sarcophagi, comparing the motifs found on funerary monuments with other forms of visual evidence of dextrarum iunctio. His wide corpus included eight funerary reliefs, 78 sarcophagi, and eight examples of the dextrarum iunctio appearing on numismatic evidence.39 Reekmans reaffirmed the general typological description for dextrarum iunctio scenes established by Rossbach: in its most basic conception, a man and woman turn towards each other and grasp their right hands.40 He also confirmed the

entrality of the ‘Pronuba’ figure that he identifies as the goddess Con ordia through comparison with the numismatic evidence that features the imperial couple in dextrarum iunctio accompanied by the goddess.41 Reekmans used the chronological framework to further analyze the compositional structure of each scene, and its relation to scenes that may accompany it, in order to gain an understanding of the iconographic structure of the monuments. His chronology focuses on sarcophagi type: biographical relief sarcophagi, strigilated, architectural sarcophagi

depictions of the Roman wedding ceremony: the age of the individuals involved and the lack of wedding a outrements lead her to label the depi tion an ‘unusual’ marriage eremony. The ariation from the ‘ideal’ depiction of marriage in the Annona sarcophagus, as well as many other examples, led some scholars to begin to question the marriage interpretation of the motif. L. Wilson, "An Unusual Marriage Scene," MAAR 7 (1929): 173- 176. 39 For the full list, see index of monuments. Ree mans, “La Dextrarum Jun tio," 92-95. 40 Ree mans, “La Dextrarum Jun tio,” 25. 41 Ibid., 35. Richard Brilliant also discusses the depictions of the dextrarum iunctio on numismatic evidence associated with the Emperor Hadrian which depicts the goddess Concordia between Hadrian and Aelius. Brilliant, Gesture and Rank, 134.

and other sarcophagi that do not fit into the three major groupings.42 Reekmans asserts that each category developed chronologically. Within each sequential type, Reekmans identified the compositional and stylistic elements unique to that grouping, such as specific combinations of motifs and images, the appearance of the Pronuba figure, and mythological cycles. He determined that the stylistic elements of the scene changed over time, but that the stylistic cues, such as the singling out of the matrimonial pair compositionally,43 remained relatively stable, allowing the motif to retain a consistent association. Reekmans ultimately posited that, while the stylistic elements transformed, the motif retained an important association with marriage. He argued that, from the late first century BCE to the second century CE, the dextrarum iunctio presented a depiction of an eternal marriage that continued beyond the death of the spouse. By the second century CE, the highly visible presence of the goddess Concordia and the Cupid figure led Reekmans to interpret such examples as depictions of the marriage ceremony itself.

During the time of Hadrian, the dextrarum iunctio became associated with the imperial couple appearing on numismatic evidence and would be accompanied by text that linked the couple with concord or harmony.44 By the third century, the dextrarum iunctio was often complemented by intellectual scenes, such as images of a philosopher, depictions of a Muse, or representations of mythological figures, such as the Seasons or the Dioscuri, that provide allegorical dimensions.45

The motif was finally incorporated into the early Christian visual vocabulary to represent marriage.46 However, despite the broader interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio that Reekmans proposed, the potential for allegorical connotations of marriage rather than a depiction of the

42 Reekmans, “La 'Dextrarum Iun tio,'" 37- 79. 43 Ibid., 88. 44 Ibid., 90. 45 Brilliant, Gesture and Rank, 90. 46 Reekmans discusses the depiction of the motif on a four early Christian sarcophagi. Reekmans, “La 'Dextrarum Iun tio,'” 77-88.

wedding ceremony, the methodology utilized by Reekmans' study was ultimately traditional in its framework. Reekmans sought to create typologies for the dextrarum iunctio and to offer a few tentative interpretations, rather than undertake a systematic analysis that attempted to ascertain a definitive interpretation or interpretations of the motif. The continued association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage became a central assumption for studies analyzing depictions of the motif on stele reliefs and funerary altars.

Dextrarum iunctio as a status indicator: legitimate marriage

Subsequent studies focusing on stele reliefs and funerary altars assumed a correlation between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage based on the scholarship of Rossbach and

Reekmans. The dextrarum iunctio found on funerary altars and stele reliefs was thought to link two individuals engaged in a legitimate marriage.47

The earliest depictions of the motif are found on Roman funerary reliefs dating from the early imperial era.48 Despite the preponderance of examples found on this type of funerary media, very little scholarship has been devoted to the appearance of the motif itself on these monuments. The traditional scholarship focused on the creation of catalogs and typological analysis for the monument type as a whole: funerary reliefs, altars or sarcophagi. It should be noted that the dextrarum iunctio is generally mentioned in passing.49 Diana Kleiner undertook the first major study of Roman funerary reliefs in Roman Group Portraiture. Before her seminal study, analysis of Roman funerary reliefs was piecemeal. No major catalog had been established that collected examples together in one spot. Kleiner focused her analysis on 92 examples of late

47 Zanker is adamant that the dextrarum iunctio links two legitimately married individuals. Zanker, "Grabreliefs," 285. 48 Kleiner uses sartorial cues such as the reproduction of drapery as well as hairstyle and the rendering of age as part of her dating criteria. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 90-100. 49 Kleiner uses it as a means to deciphering social relationships depicted upon portrait reliefs. Frenz and Pflug use the motif as a descriptive element only, not including it in the discussion or typology. Kockel is the only scholar to discuss the dextrarum iunctio in a more comprehensive manner in the context of gesture and attribute.

Republican and early imperial funerary reliefs with portraits. She intended to identify the potential relationships depicted on the funerary reliefs by creating five typological categories based on the type of relationship portrayed.50 She also developed a tentative chronology for the reliefs based on portrait type and hairstyle. In her analytical framework, the dextrarum iunctio functioned as a visual means to designate legitimate marriage, whereby the dextrarum iunctio links a male and female figure to symbolize marriage.51 The discussion focused on 14 examples of funerary reliefs where a male and a female figure are linked by a dextrarum iunctio where she cited past analysis of dextrarum iunctio found on sarcophagi.52 Her interpretation of the motif is problematic as it focuses only on a limited corpus of examples. She does not take into account potential anomalies that contradict the stylistic definition of the dextrarum iunctio such as examples that depict a dextrarum iunctio between two figures of the same sex.

Pflug and Kockel built on the early work of Kleiner and created more comprehensive catalogues of funerary reliefs. Pflug did not incorporate the dextrarum iunctio into his analysis; it appears as a descriptive feature only. In contrast, Kockel set out to look at the iconographical elements associated with funerary reliefs. He discussed the dextrarum iunctio in relation to his typological analysis, taking precedence from Kleiner and Zanker and interpreted the motif as an indication of legal marriage, iusta matrimonia.53 The interpretation was based on the assumption that the dextrarum iunctio functioned on the relief as a status indicator, similar to the use of the toga to indicate citizenship. Legitimate marriage was highly restricted in the Roman world. Only individuals with conubium, or the legal capacity for marriage, could be engaged in a legally

50 Kleiner lays out her typological categories based specifically on the relationship between individuals portrayed. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 22. 51 Ibid., 24. 52 Kleiner focuses on 14 examples of the dextrarum iunctio. These represents Nrs. 13, 18, 28, 31, 34, 60, 65, 68, 80, 85, 87, 90, 92 and 93 in Kleiner's atalog. Kleiner ites Kӧtting as a basis for her interpretation. 53 Kockel, Porträtreliefs Stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 50.

sanctioned marriage producing legitimate offspring.54 In this context, individuals choosing to use a dextrarum iunctio on their funerary monuments advertised their status as Roman citizens, who had the ability to marry. However, using comparison with epigraphic and numismatic evidence, Kockel argued that the motif could also indicate concordia between the spouses and, as such, contained a dual-meaning.55 Despite the fact that both Pflug and Kockel incorporated a number of examples in their catalogs of a dextrarum iunctio between two individuals of the same sex, the examples are not discussed in the analysis and the traditional interpretation of the motif put forth by Kleiner is maintained. Pflug, for instance, includes the relief of Sextus Magius

Licinus in his corpus56 and the relief of Fonteia Eleusis depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two female figures is included by Kockel.57 These examples call into question the association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage, but are excluded in the analysis of both scholars.

Depictions of the motif on Roman funerary altars have been dealt with in a manner similar to reliefs. No study has focused specifically on the analysis of the dextrarum iunctio presented on Roman funerary altars. Traditional scholarship focused on the creation of chronologies and typological analysis; the dextrarum iunctio is mentioned in passing. Walter

Altmann undertook the seminal study of Roman funerary altars. Due to the fact he was interested in creating general typologies for Roman funerary altars, his catalog was not comprehensive. He chose a number of representative examples that became paradigmatic for his typological categories.58 Nine examples of the dextrarum iunctio were included under his typological category of figural reliefs.59 His interpretation of the motif again followed the traditional

54 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 43; J. Gardner, Women in Roman Law and Society (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), 31. 55 Kockel, Porträtreliefs Stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 50. 56 Pflug, Römische Porträtstelen in Oberitalien, 274 Nr. 295 Plate 48, 1. 57 Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 215 Nr. O4 Plate 127c. 58 His catalog included 290 examples of funerary altars which he categorizes into 16 typological categories. 59 Altmann, Die Roemischen Grabaltaere, Nrs. 157, 158, 160, 184, 189, 205, 224, 272, 267-268, Fig. 203.

interpretive pattern, whereby the dextrarum iunctio is interpreted as a depiction of marriage.60

The interpretation is based solely on stylistic elements found on a number of representative examples with no epigraphic or textual evidence taken into account.

Kleiner utilized the corpus established by Altmann in her analysis of Roman funerary altars. She looked at 130 examples that incorporated figural representations of the deceased in an attempt to catalog and discuss the importance of the monuments. She included seven examples depicting a dextrarum iunctio in her discussion.61 These examples varied widely in composition; one example depicted a dextrarum iunctio linking two male figures, while another representation linked a child and an adult male.62 Despite the fact that these examples contradicted the traditional association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage, her interpretation remained steadfast; the gesture represented the most important moment of the wedding ceremony.63 When these anomalies appeared in her analysis, she merely stated that these depictions were unusual and not easily explained.64 Kleiner’s interpretation of the motif is problematic as it was based solely on references to her previous work on Roman funerary reliefs, in which she cited the scholars who compiled the traditional analysis of the motif on Roman sarcophagi.65 The corpus under analysis was limited and anomalies to the standard depiction are dealt with superficially. In order to discuss the dextrarum iunctio comprehensively, a larger corpus of examples must be complied and the interpretive framework used to evaluate these examples has to take into account the anomalies that question the traditional equation with

60 Altmann, Die Roemischen Grabaltaere, 233. 61 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars with Portraits, Nrs. 6, 7, 17, 20, 22, 56 and 73. 62 Ibid., Nrs. 20 and 73 63 Ibid., 105 Nr. 6. She reiterates again on 124. 64 Ibid. She points to the possibility of Greek influence on the development of the motif. The grasping of right hands is found on Greek Stele. They commonly depict a grasping between two individuals of the same sex. For the Greek context see: K. F. Johansen, The Attic Grave Reliefs of the Classical Period (Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard, 1951). 65 For example, while discussing the Altar with Portraits of a man and a woman in Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 104-107 Nr.6, she cites her discussion of the motif in her work Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 23-25. The discussion in Roman Group Portraiture a tually ites only the wor of Kӧtting and Ree mans.

marriage. It must be a framework that engages with the variants rather than attempting to explain them away.

Scholarship related to the dextrarum iunctio as it appears on both reliefs and funerary altars maintains the traditional correlation between the motif and marriage, suggesting the image represents a visualization of legitimate marriage. This interpretation is based on past scholarship that concentrated on depictions of the motif on sarcophagi and ignored examples found on other forms of Roman funerary monuments. The limited nature of the traditional corpus does not take into account examples that could call into question the dominant interpretation of the motif.

Whether the dextrarum iunctio appears on stele or on funerary altars, the interpretation of the motif is predicated upon the traditional scholarship associated with sarcophagi. The result is a consistent, monolithic interpretation associated with legitimate marriage.

Dextrarum iunctio as analogy: Concordia

A third academic discourse envisions the motif as allegorical in nature. Gerhart

Rodenwalt was the first scholar to openly question the equation between the dextrarum iunctio and the historic depiction of a wedding ceremony.66 He hesitated to correlate the dextrarum iunctio with a depiction of the wedding ceremony, finding the stylistic analysis of the motif and the visual message problematic. As noted previously, the lack of literary evidence negates the dextrarum iunctio as a central gesture in the wedding ceremony. Further, the placement of the dextrarum iunctio with other motifs on the same sarcophagus presented the possibility of new interpretations when the dextrarum iunctio was deciphered in relation to the other images. 67 He analyzed a number of 'biographical sarcophagi' that combined visual motifs into a narrative

66 G. Rodenwalt, Űber den Stilwandel in der Antoninischen Kunst (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1935), 1-27 especially 8 and 16. 67 Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15.

believed to depict the life of the deceased.68 Such sarcophagi often combine motifs in a formulaic manner (Fig. 2): a battle scene where the male individual is portrayed in a gesture of victory with the right arm raised; a scene where the Roman aristocratic male dressed in military dress receives a group of kneeling barbarian suppliants; a sacrificial scene, where the bull is being lead to towards a temple by a number of attendants, and the scene of dextrarum iunctio where a male and female figure join right hands. While the traditional interpretation regarded the sarcophagi as a presentation of a series of life events of the deceased akin to a eulogy or biographical narrative, Rodenwalt posited that the motifs selected for these sarcophagi symbolically represented specific virtues that the Roman aristocratic male was expected to cultivate. 69 In this interpretive scheme, the battle scene represented virtus, the scene of supplication represented clementia, the sacrifice represented pietas and the dextrarum iunctio represented concordia or harmony within marriage.70 Rodenwalt’s interpreti e strategy fo used heavily on the symbolic context, or visual message, of the emblematic presentation of motifs, representing an early iconographic interpretative strategy that took into account the artistic context of the motif, rather than relying solely on stylistic and typological analysis of the motif itself.

Carola Reinsberg drew on the work of Rodenwalt in her study that analyzed images of the ‘Vita Romana’ found on Roman biographi al sar ophagi. Reinsberg’s study was an attempt to e aluate the appropriateness of the label ‘wedding sar ophagi’ for a ategory defined only by the presence of the dextrarum iunctio, whether presented as a central image or in combination with others. Reinsberg found the categorization problematic. She argued that there are a number

68 Rodenwalt, Űber den Stilwandel, 1-27. Natalie Kampen discusses the development of biographical narration found on Roman funerary art. She argues that compositional schemes were transformed through time reflecting a change in narrative style. N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 (1981): 49. 69 Rodenwalt, Űber den Stilwandel, 1-27, especially 8 and 16. 70 Kampen, "Biographical Narration," 85.

of examples that portray a couple in a compositionally similar manner to the dextrarum iunctio yet are not included in Rossbach's or Reekmans' traditional catalogues.71 She offered a number of examples where there was no dextrarum iunctio gesture but the individuals were still assumed to be at a wedding. In some cases the spouses are in two separate frames or separated by architectural ornamentation but still have connotations of marriage, while others depict a male and female figure that are flanked by attendants in a composition similar to the paradigmatic dextrarum iunctio, but are not connected by a handshake gesture.72 To that end, Reinsberg established her catalogue of Roman marble sarcophagi from the first to the early fifth century CE to include scenes of dextrarum iunctio among other scenes from everyday life. Her catalogue included 169 sarcophagi, with 64 examples that specifically present a dextrarum iunctio.

Reinsberg was further interested in how the dextrarum iunctio was integrated into the compositional schemes of biographical sarcophagi, how the motif was combined with other motifs, and how the combinations influenced the interpretation of the visual program. She created a preliminary typology to facilitate the study of the scenes by dividing her analysis into stylistic analysis with the intention of creating a chronology and a typological analysis that sought to identify the motifs appearing on the sarcophagi and categorize them into three core groups: sarcophagi that combine motifs of the military commander with a wedding; sarcophagi with the traditional dextrarum iunctio wedding scene; and sarcophagi depicting the magistrate and the orans, a figure she argues as similar in typological and iconographic elements.73

Reinsberg’s examination of the various arrangements led her to conclude that the association between dextrarum iunctio and marriage was not definitive. While some examples contained stylistic features that did seem to indicate that a wedding ceremony, many examples lacked the

71 Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15. 72 Ibid., 15. 73 Ibid., 17.

paradigmatic characteristics of a ‘wedding’ sar ophagi. Reinsberg followed Rodenwalt in interpreting the dextrarum iunctio as a representation of concord within marriage, concluding that the iconographic importance of the presentation of motifs on biographical sarcophagi was their function: transmitting essential Roman values such as concordia to the viewer.

Reinsberg’s analysis, although influential for its fo us on the i onographi interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio in the context of biographical sarcophagi, has methodological issues.

Due to the large number of depictions of the dextrarum iunctio appearing on many forms of

Roman funerary art, Reinsberg restricted her analysis to scenes appearing on Roman sarcophagi.

The dextrarum iunctio commonly appears on Roman funerary altars and stele reliefs, and these scenes often differ stylistically from the depictions on Roman sarcophagi. Such anomalies call into question the traditional association with marriage and point to the potential polysemous nature of the dextrarum iunctio. Reinsberg further restricts her analysis to 'biographical sarcophagi,' excluding all examples of dextrarum iunctio that appear on mythological sarcophagi. Scenes of dextrarum iunctio appear in conjunction with myths such as the narrative of Alcestis and Laodamia-Protesilaus, among others. These alternate depictions of a dextrarum iunctio found on mythological sarcophagi may extend the connotations of the scene beyond that of marriage as such depictions can have associations with reward, union of lovers and partings.74

These variants must be included in any thorough study of the motif. Thus, although Reinsberg was able to refute the ubiquitous association between the dextrarum iunctio and the wedding ceremony, her select corpus of examples excluded the anomalies that could illuminate potential new interpretations.

74 Da ies, “The ignifi an e of the Handsha e," 635.

Dextrarum iunctio as culturally constituted: familial relations

A final stream of discussion suggests the meaning behind the dextrarum iunctio is more complex than the monolithic equation with marriage. Glenys Davis was one of the few recent scholars to take an interest in the study of the dextrarum iunctio and question the previously unanimous association between marriage and the motif. Davis represented the first scholar to recognize the relationship of the dextrarum iunctio to similar gestures found on Greek and

Etruscan funerary monuments, and the need to emphasize the importance of the cultural

onstitution of artisti motifs. Da is tra ed the de elopment of the ‘handsha e’ representation through Greek, Etruscan and Roman art and attempted to discern a common theme inherent in the iterations. Building on the catalogue that Reinsberg established for Roman sarcophagi, Davis incorporated evidence from Athenian grave stele, mythological scenes that appear on vases, as well as on Etruscan funerary monuments and Roman sarcophagi, ash chests and grave altars.

Her discussion of the trajectory of the scholarship focused on the motif in Greek art was innovative methodologically. While some scholars use the examples found within the Greek context as comparanda for their study of Roman instances,75 Davis was the first scholar to include a more comprehensive discussion of the motif in the Greek material. She concluded, after a discussion of Greek, Etruscan and Roman examples, that, although the meaning associated with the dextrarum iunctio is culturally constituted and, as such, dynamic when examined over time, there remains an underlying continuity in meaning.76 The depictions of dextrarum iunctio on Greek stele between individuals of the same or opposite sex represented

75 Kleiner, for example, points out the correlation between the dextrarum iunctio and the Greek iterations when she examines a funerary altar depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures. Such discussions suggest that the gesture linking two individuals of the same sex was common in the Greek context, but do not extend the analysis beyond that point. Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 201-202. 76 Davis, “The ignifi an e of the Handsha e,” 627.

‘partings, reunion or ommunion;’77 a deceased relative could be greeted in the afterlife, or the decreased could be parting from the living. The dextrarum iunctio appearing on Etruscan funerary monuments linking two standing individuals in the company of other characters could also carry the three connotations: departure, reunion, and marriage.78 Davis introduced a number of Roman monument types that she used in her analysis. She incorporated stele reliefs and funerary altars depicting a dextrarum iunctio into her corpus.79 She chose twelve representative examples to illustrate her points. However, the bulk of the analysis fell upon depictions of the motif on Roman funerary altars. Of the three Roman examples that were specifically discussed, two of the monuments were funerary altars while a further nine ash chests or funerary altars were noted in citation.80 She did not discuss any stylistic or compositional elements of the motif that may be unique to funerary altars, creating a sense of stylistic standardization that may not exist across all stele reliefs and funerary altars.

Based on the analysis of funerary altars, Davis argued that the Roman depictions of dextrarum iunctio were exceptional in relation to their Greek and Etruscan precedents as scenes of Roman dextrarum iunctio were, nearly exclusively, between two individuals of the opposite sex.81 This fact alone led scholars to easily equate scenes of Roman dextrarum iunctio with scenes of marriage. Davis refuted this assumption by utilizing inscriptional evidence. There were instances where an inscription associated with a depiction of dextrarum iunctio informed the viewer that the two people depicted were not married.82 Noteworthy is the fa t that Da is’ study represented the first analysis of dextrarum iunctio to include epigraphic evidence within

77 Davis, “The ignifi an e of the Handsha e,” 630. 78 Ibid. 79 Ibid., 633. 80 The ash chest of Quintus Flavius Crito, the ash chest of Sextus Allidius Symphorus are the two examples discussed in detail. Ibid., 634. 81 Ibid.,” 633. 82 Ibid., 634.

her analysis of the gesture. By including other forms of evidence, Davis refuted the assumption that the dextrarum iunctio must always represent marriage. However, her use of epigraphic evidence is somewhat superficial. For example, she pointed to the example of the funerary altar of Quintus Flavius Crito which depicts a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures.83 She noted that the inscription indicates the monument was established to commemorate the relationship between a father and a son. She then asserted that there are a number of inscriptions that explicitly state a familial relationship rather than a conjugal one. While there are a number of examples that explicitly reference a familial relationship, there are also, in fact, a large number of examples found on funerary reliefs and altars that indicates a patronage relationship.84 These relationships are not taken into account in her analysis. Instead, Davis concluded that the dextrarum iunctio represents a visual manifestation of familial relationships.

Dextrarum iunctio: a comprehensive approach

Any modern study of the dextrarum iunctio must take a comprehensive approach. While early scholarship easily accepted the equation between dextrarum iunctio and depictions of marriage, scholars such as Reinsberg and Davis have shown the identification to be tentative at best. This study seeks to contribute to the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio by offering a series of alternative interpretations utilizing, in part, the traditional stylistic and typological techniques of analysis, which are crucial for analyzing compositional changes within the motif.

However, this study goes beyond past analyses by expanding the traditional corpus of dextrarum iunctio examples appearing on Roman biographical sarcophagi to include instances found on

Roman funerary altars and stele reliefs. While the traditional scholarship provides a basis for departure, my study seeks to compile a catalogue of examples drawn from both mythological and

83 Davis, “The ignifi an e of the Handsha e,” 634. 84 See discussion in Chapter four.

biographical sarcophagi, previously unpublished and undocumented. Examples of the dextrarum iunctio found on mythological sarcophagi offer the potential for alternate interpretations of the motif, as the rich literary tradition associated with Greco-Roman myth provides a basis of comparison between the use of the handshake in the literary context and the meaning of the handshake found on artistic media. Further, other forms of funerary monuments, such as stele and funerary altars, which feature a dextrarum iunctio, will be incorporated into the catalogue; the first time that images of dextrarum iunctio found on various forms of funerary monuments will be gathered in a comprehensive manner.85 Funerary reliefs, ash chests and altars offer depictions of the motif that show variation from the paradigmatic version defined by Rossbach and found on Roman sarcophagi. This variation can offer the potential for new interpretations.

The motif could allude to different legal or familial relationships. The addition of reliefs that include the dextrarum iunctio in combination with epigraphic evidence potentially opens new avenues of study. Epigraphic analysis can provide information about the relationship between the individuals portrayed. My study will incorporate such examples into the analytical framework, to ensure a comprehensive investigation of all potential interpretations of the motif.

In part, my study will utilize Glenys Da is’ analyti al method that fo uses on the de elopment of the motif over a range of artistic media, temporal and cultural bounds. It will centre analytically on the cultural construction of the motif and the meaning ascribed to it. Rather than focusing on ascertaining consistent underlying themes, this study seeks to analyze the significance of variations found within the motif itself and how these deviations offer the potential for alternate

85 Additional short studies on the dextrarum iunctio on funerary monuments have tended to focus on a few paradigmati examples. ee L. L. Lo en “Conjugal Con ordia: Marriage and Marital Ideals on Roman Funerary Monuments,” in Ancient Marriage in Myth and Reality, ed. L. L. Loven and A. Stromberg (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010), 204-220; G. Da is, “Viewer, I Married Him: Marriage and the Freedwoman in Rome,” in Ancient Marriage in Myth and Reality, ed. L. L. Loven and A. Stromberg (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010), 184-203.

readings. Thus, while stylistic analysis remains crucial for understanding the chronology and compositional development of the dextrarum iunctio, in order to analyze the significance of the variations, new interpretational methods developed within the field of art history concentrating on the iconography or meaning of the motif and the viewer perception of the motif, need to be incorporated. The next chapter will detail the methodological framework that my study will use to analyze the dextrarum iunctio motif.

Chapter three: Methodology

This section will begin with a short discussion of past typological analyses devoted to the dextrarum iunctio. Traditional categorization focused on the dextrarum iunctio as it appeared on isolated monument types. These have included: funerary reliefs, altars and sarcophagi. In what follows, I will introduce a comprehensive corpus of examples under discussion, develop the hybrid methodology that I will use to analyze the catalog, and outline the three typological categories that will provide a basis for my analysis. The typological categories are ultimately based on monument type: representations on stele and 'window' reliefs, funerary altars and sarcophagi. They are presented to highlight the transformation of the function of the dextrarum iunctio. As a form of visual vocabulary, the motif served a pragmatic function on Roman funerary reliefs, providing a means to depict relationships and integration into identity groups.

As the dextrarum iunctio began to appear on funerary altars and sarcophagi, it gained an allegorical function through its combination with other ornamentation and complementary images.

Traditional typological analysis:

As mentioned in Chapter one, two main studies have fueled our understanding of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman sarcophagi. The two seminal works of Reekmans and Reinsberg established the traditional typological categories and associated analyses.86 In the first work by

Reekmans, the typological categories were used to evaluate the composition of the dextrarum iunctio as it appears on Roman and early Christian funerary monuments, but with a specific focus on sarcophagi. He combined a discussion of chronological development with iconographic

86 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio;' Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen. See Chapter two, 17-19 and 24-26.

analysis. The sarcophagi are first divided according to the chronological development of three main types: biographical relief, strigilated, and architectural. He then looked at combinations of motifs that appear on these biographical sarcophagi to create a series of subcategories: the dextrarum iunctio and nuptial scenes; the dextrarum iunctio with occupational scenes; the dextrarum iunctio and military scenes; the dextrarum iunctio and allegorical scenes; the dextrarum iunctio and intellectual scenes; and the dextrarum iunctio and mythological scenes.87

Reekmans' typological categories were ultimately problematic. The classification created a false sense of stylistic standardization. The groupings, for example, do not take into account the variation found within the motif itself. In contrast, Reekmans focused on comparing iconographical composition and combinations of motifs rather than considering compositional differences. Differences in the figural composition, stylistic elements and even differences within the gesture itself were minimized in his analysis.

In the second work devoted to sarcophagi, Reinsberg provided an alternate set of typologies.88 Her analytical framework discussed three iconographical groupings: sarcophagi featuring episodes of the life of a military man, those combining representations of marriage and sacrifice, and, finally, those that show men as magistrates and women as orans, an image of piety.89 Each example in her corpus was classified into its associated iconographic grouping and discussed in two sections; in the first, she focuses on the stylistic development and explication of chronologies. In the second, she turns to iconographic considerations. Ultimately, Reinsberg was interested in how the dextrarum iunctio was imparted with an allegorical meaning that could be combined with other motifs to depict a series of virtues that Romans were expected to emulate.

87 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio'," 39-46. 88 Reinsberg sets out her typologies in the introduction of her work. Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15-18. 89 Ibid.,16.

She was not concerned with creating a typological analysis of the motif per se. In part, she drew precedence from Reekmans in defining her stylistic description of the dextrarum iunctio, but her analysis did not focus on the development of the motif.90 Although I will take precedence from the work of Reekmans and Reinsberg, ultimately, my typological analysis will differ from the previous scholarship.

Traditional typological analysis has a number of issues which I will attempt to address in my framework. A number of examples incorporated into the traditional catalogs include variants that do not easily lend themselves to typological categorization. Reekmans attempted to subvert this difficulty by creating a chronology that focused upon the type of sarcophagus on which the motif appears.91 However, such a typology tends to create a false sense of unity that negates variation in the motif. Stylistic analysis of variation within the motif focused on the figures deemed integral to the compositional definition of the dextrarum iunctio. For instance,

Reekmans, in particular, focused on the transition of the Pronuba (or Concordia), the figure that embraces the male and female figure.92 Other stylistic variations within the motif received little comment. New typological categories developed in this study will account for variation within the motif, not just variation in the mode of presentation. Further, the dextrarum iunctio appears on a number of funerary monuments, not just Roman sarcophagi. The first element of my methodological framework is an expanded corpus of examples on which my analysis will be

90 Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15. 91 Reekmans develops an overarching chronology based on sarcophagi-type. He identifies biographical relief, strigilated, and architectural sarcophagi as his main typological categories. Each category is further divided into a number of subcategories based on iconographic or compositional elements. See Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio'," 39-88. 92 Reekmans discusses the identity of the figure in his preliminary discussions. He identifies the figure as the goddess Concordia based on comparison with numismatic evidence. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio'," 31-37. In his typological discussion of third to fifth century CE sarcophagi, he uses the presence or absence of the figure to establish his subcategories. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio'," 60-88.

based. This collection incorporates examples of the dextrarum iunctio from other forms of funerary monuments, not just sarcophagi.

Introduction of the corpus:

Traditional studies of the dextrarum iunctio focused on the depictions of the motif on

Roman funerary sarcophagi. However, despite the focus of scholars on a specific media-type, the dextrarum iunctio appears regularly on other types of funerary monuments. The motif is also found on stele and funerary altars. Examples of the dextrarum iunctio presented on these monuments have not been compiled into one volume. One aim of this study is to collect instances of the dextrarum iunctio found on monuments across all forms of funerary relief in one location into a comprehensive corpus for analysis.

To this end, this study draws together 172 examples of the dextrarum iunctio found on

Roman and early Christian funerary monuments dating from the early first to the fifth centuries

CE. The three monument types included in the corpus are roughly chronological: stele and

'window' reliefs, funerary altars and sarcophagi. Funerary reliefs are generally the earliest group of monuments, dating from the late first century BCE to the early first century CE.93 However, the later Augustan examples of reliefs overlap with the earliest examples of Roman funerary altars dating from the Tiberian period, 14 to 37 CE.94 The majority of figured funerary altars were produced in the Hadrianic and Antonine periods, but continued to appear until the late fourth century.95 Similarly, the earliest biographical sarcophagi depicting the dextrarum iunctio start to emerge in the late second century CE.96 The ornately carved sarcophagi continue to be produced through the fourth century CE. Again, these dates merge with those of Roman

93 Kliener, Roman Group Portraiture, 6. 94 Kliener, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 32. 95 Ibid. 96 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 37.

funerary altars. Thus, although the bulk of the monuments generally follow a chronological development through monument type, reliefs dating from the first century BCE to the first century CE, altars produced during the first and second century CE, and sarcophagi, predominately dating after the second century CE, examples of all three monuments can be produced that illustrate the simultaneous overlap. Thus, although I group the monuments by form for ease of analysis and suggest a degree of chronological development, the limitations of such an approach must be acknowledged.

The sculptural and epigraphic evidence utilized in this analysis was compiled during a study of the relevant scholarship for the dextrarum iunctio. The examples derive from scholarly works discussing the dextrarum iunctio on Roman sarcophagi, complemented with examples found in catalogues documenting the iconographic development of Roman funerary reliefs and altars.97 My corpus includes 72 examples of the motif found on sarcophagi. The expanded corpus of sarcophagi is complemented by 7898 examples found on stele and 'window' reliefs, and

2299 examples found on funerary altars. The evidence for funerary reliefs is derived from

Kleiner, who notes iterations of the dextrarum iunctio on a series of 14 Augustan funerary reliefs.100 In addition, this study will introduce 65 examples of Roman funerary reliefs from the scholarship of Frenz, Kockel and Pflug: each with three, 23, and 13 examples respectively. The discussion of the dextrarum iunctio will also extend to include 22 examples of the motif found on funerary altars. Again, Kleiner provides the seminal modern study of Roman funerary altars

97 I also traveled to Italy to physically inspect and photograph a number of examples of both sarcophagi and funerary reliefs and altars. Where I was not able to assess the examples in-person, I rely on photographs from a variety of sources. Where it is possible, I have collected and studied a number of different photographs in order to analyze and evaluate the elements of gesture, sartorial cues and iconographic context. While physical examination of the examples is ideal, and I have tried to do so where possible, photographic evidence provides the only means for discussion for a number of examples. The limitations inherent in the use of photographic evidence are acknowledged. 98 See my catalog. Nrs. 1-78. 99 See my catalog. Nrs. 79-100. 100 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 203-250. Nrs. 13, 18, 28, 31, 34, 60, 65, 68, 80, 85, 87, 90, 92 and 93.

with portraits. She compiled a catalogue of 130 examples, nine of which included depictions of a dextrarum iunctio.101 Davis takes funerary altars as her major analytical category in her work that tracks the development of the dextrarum iunctio from Greek through the Etruscan eras. She discusses four examples of Roman funerary altars, introducing one example of a funerary altar depicting a dextrarum iunctio that was not included by Kleiner.102 My corpus brings together the nine examples found in Kleiner, four found in Davis, nine found in Altmann and two unpublished examples found through a search in the Clauss-Slaby epigraphic database.103 I also utilized Arachne, the central object-database of the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) in order to access the DAI photo database.104 These examples are compiled into a catalog found in

Appendix A. The catalog is organized into three sections: stele and 'window' reliefs, funerary altars and sarcophagi. Each entry provides the following information where available: photo reference numbers, current location, provenance, material, measurements, inscription, and date.

Finally, I have attempted to include comprehensive bibliographic information for each example.

This expanded corpus and detailed catalog provides an ideal foundation on which to base my analysis.

101 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Monuments, Nrs. 6, 7, 9, 17, 20, 22, 56 and 73. Kleiner's examples derive from the work of Altmann. Altmann compiled the earliest corpus of Roman funerary alters. His study was not a comprehensive catalogue of examples but rather represented a select survey of examples of many types of Roman funerary altars organized by ornamentation. Examples of dextrarum iunctio on funerary altars were included in his discussion of figured reliefs. For examples from Altmann, see Nrs.79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 88, 89, 93 and 94 in my catalog. 102 Davis, "The Significance of the Handshake motif," 633 Fig. 10. Ash chest of Vestricius Hygenus and Vestricia Hetera. 103 See Nrs.86 and 87. CIL VI, 9973 (p 3471, 3896) = D 07573 = CSIR-GB-03-04, 00020, Epigraphische Datenbank Clauss-Slaby, accessed June 6, 2013, http://www.manfredclauss.de/ and CIL VI, 10709, Epigraphische Datenbank Clauss-Slaby, accessed June 6, 2013, http://www.manfredclauss.de/ 104 iDAI.Images Arachne, accessed June 25, 2012, http://arachne.uni-koeln.de/drupal/.

Methodology:

The methodological framework that I will use to examine the collected data is a hybrid that includes three components: stylistic and compositional elements and typological analysis, as well as epigraphic analysis embedded within a discussion of the physical context of the monuments.

The comprehensive data that I have collected will be analyzed based on stylistic and compositional features to develop typologies more reflective of the evidence. To this end, I seek methodological precedence from the work of Janet Huskinson and Michael Koortbojian on the presentation of women on Roman sarcophagi and the development of mythic narratives on mythological sarcophagi respectively.105 Huskinson, focusing on the depictions of women on

Roman sarcophagi, combines stylistic analysis with a discussion of how the formal elements contribute to the visualization and conventionalization of feminine social virtues. Huskinson links stylistic and compositional features to underlying qualities expected of elite women.106

Koortbojian's approach to stylistic and formal analysis is similar to Hus inson’s. Koorbojian is interested in how mythological subjects and their associated narratives were visualized on

Roman sarcophagi.107 The methodology identifies the stylistic and formal elements that are utilized to create the depiction, and then analyzes the standard motifs in an attempt to identify new interpretations and connotations of the imagery. Koortbojian finds that the stylistic and formal composition of the narrative motifs is central to the interpretation of the mythic cycles, as

105 J. Huskinson, "Representing Women on Roman Sarcophagi," in The Material Culture of Sex, Procreation and Marriage in Pre-Modern Europe, ed. A. McCann and K. R. Encarnacion (New York: Palgrave, 2002); M. Koortbojian, Myth, Meaning and Memory on Roman Sarcophagi (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1995), accessed Feb. 28, 2013, [http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft4199n900/]. 106 Huskinson, "Representing Women on Roman Sarcophagi," 11. 107 Koortbojian discusses the visual programs in relation to the myth of Adonis. See: Koortbojian, Myth, Meaning and Memory, Adonis tale, The force of analogy section, paragraph 3.

it allows the viewer to recognize and understand the myth depicted.108 Conventionalized types, recognizable by their formal elements, were used to suggest certain abstract relationships and ideas. An understanding of the stylistic elements of the conventionalized form and the variants is required in order to discern the underlying analogy.

I will apply these methodologies to my corpus to establish a repertory of conventionalized examples of the motif, as well as identify a number of variants from the paradigm depicting a handshake between a male and female figure.109 For example, there are a number of funerary reliefs and altars that depict a dextrarum iunctio between two individuals of the same sex.110 These variants call into question the correlation between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage. The existence of such anomalies suggests that the motif functions to depict a number of different relationships. Further, compositional cues suggest that the interpretations of the dextrarum iunctio can be nuanced even further. There is a degree of variation in the number of auxiliary figures that are included in the depiction of the motif. Funerary reliefs can depict up to three subsidiary figures in addition to the figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio.111 In contrast, depictions of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars minimize the number of auxiliary figures to create a standardized composition linking two figures. The lack of auxiliary figures on many examples suggests the conventionalization of form. The inclusion or exclusion of subsidiary figures alters the interpretive potential of the motif, hinting at the polysemous nature of the dextrarum iunctio.

The visual depiction of the motif will then be correlated with the epigraphic evidence.

The expanded corpus offers the possibility of epigraphic analysis, as 51 examples of funerary

108 Koortbojian, Myth, Meaning and Memory, Adonis tale, the repertory of images. 109 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 25. 110 See Nrs. 9, 27, 54, 59, 62, 67 and 71. 111 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 6.

stele and 20 examples of funerary altars include epigraphic evidence providing, at the very least, the identity of the individuals portrayed. Some epitaphs present additional facts such as information about the individual commemorated, their profession or age at death, the commissioner of the monument, as well as the relationship between commissioner and commemorated individual. An analysis of epigraphic evidence allows for a comparison between the visual depiction of a dextrarum iunctio and the relationships established in the inscription. I have gathered 51 inscriptions associated with the motif through a search of the Clauss-Slaby epigraphic database.112 I sought examples where the epigraphic evidence can be correlated with associated depictions of dextrarum iunctio. Using the inscriptional evidence, I will evaluate the types of relationships that exist between the commemorator and commemorated individual. For example, the relief commemorating Sextus Magius Turpio, which will be discussed in detail in

Chapter four, depicts a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures.113 The associated epigraphic evidence suggests that Licinus was the freedman of Turpio, implying a patronage relationship existed between the two men and was commemorated by the monument.

Specifically, I am interested in examples where the visual depiction does not follow the paradigmatic definitions of the dextrarum iunctio. The epigraphic evidence will be used to evaluate the form of relationship that the motif is used to visually represent.

The use of epigraphic evidence in this study does have some inherent limitations. While epigraphic evidence is relatively profuse for funerary reliefs and funerary altars, only three examples of sarcophagi include an extant inscription.114 The inscriptions were often inscribed

112 See note 103 for Clauss-Slaby database citation. 113 See Chapter four, 62-67. See also Nr. 9 in Appendix A. 114 See Nrs. 104, 166, 185 and 186.

upon a plaque and affixed to a wall near a sarcophagus.115 In most cases, when the sarcophagus was moved to a museum, the associated inscription was lost. However, one interesting epitaph associated with a dextrarum iunctio depicted on a sarcophagus is currently housed in the Casale di S. Palomba.116

D M / M AUR CRISPINO / FILIO EQ R / VIXIT ANNIS XXIIII / AELIA AHRODITE / MATER ET SIBI AE 1974 132

The inscription states that Aelia Aphrodite commissioned the sarcophagus for herself, sibi, and her son, Marcus Aurelius Crispinus. Coupled with a representation of a dextrarum iunctio, the inscription suggests the two people depicted are likely mother and son.117 This inscription provides a hint of an interpretational alternative to marriage, but given the small number of extant inscriptions, it is impossible to make a generalized statement concerning the use of the motif to suggest relationships other than marriage. However, when discussing stele reliefs and funerary altars, the epigraphic evidence will be used as a means of explicating the types of relationships that are associated with a depiction of the dextrarum iunctio.

The ultimate goal of the stylistic and compositional analysis is to tease out the variations of the motif, to discuss how the variants are relevant to past and present interpretive analyses and to correlate and corroborate the findings through the use of epigraphic evidence where available.

By establishing a repertory of dextrarum iunctio images, the stylistic and compositional elements

115 M. Carroll, Spirits of the Dead: Roman Funerary Commemoration in Western Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 14. 116 See Nrs. 163. 117 This is in contrast to the three other inscriptions. In the three inscriptions, the dextrarum iunctio is explicitly stated to link two individuals with one of the individuals characterized as a coniugi, or spouse. CIL V 2390; CIL V 31953; AE 1975 66.

can be discussed within the context of the socio-culturally constituted visualization of virtue and role expectation as it pertains to commemoration and in relation to epigraphic evidence.

In order to analyze the repertory of depictions conventionalized in a specifically constituted context, I will draw on the scholarly discourse of Place Studies, a methodological framework that pays special attention to the physical context in which meaning is constituted.

Place Studies as a scholastic discussion developed in the 1960's from the conversations of human geographers fo using on the interplay of ‘pla e,’ both physi al and so ial, and the de elopment of human identity.118 The fundamental question revolved around the relationship between place and human capacity to produce and consume meaning. Thus, the study of the meaning associated with the dextrarum iunctio requires a discussion of the function of the monument, on which the motif is presented, within the context of the cemetery and the tomb. The physical context of most of the monuments within this corpus has been lost over time, but comparison with other examples of similar monuments in well-documented complexes, such as those found at Isola

Sacra, provides the potential for reconstruction.119 To locate the dextrarum iunctio within the tomb complex, I will use work of Lauren Petersen, who suggests a reconstruction of a Roman cemetery and tomb space.120 I will then look at the function of the monument within the context, and suggest how stylistic and compositional elements would function to transmit meaning. For example, stele reliefs are generally embedded in the sides of tombs, although some could be

118 The first major work devoted to Place Studies was undertaken by Yi-Fu Tuan in which he attempts to systematize the study of place into a series of conceptual frames akin to heuristic categories that lead discussion of place and experience. Yi-Fu Tuan, Space and Place: the Perspective of Experience (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977), 7. Other major works on Place Studies followed. See: E. S. Casey, Getting Back into Place: Toward a Renewed Understanding of the Place-World (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2009); Cresswell, Place: A Short Introduction; Malpas, Place and Experience; Relph, Place and Placelessness. 119 The Isola Sacra Project associated with the website Ostia-Antica.org provides a photo database and archaeological records for 100 of the tombs. The Isola Sacra Project, Ostia-Antica.org, accessed May 11, 2013, http://www.ostia-antica.org/valkvisuals/html/intro_verklaring.htm. 120 Petersen, The Freedmen in Roman Art, 184-226.

displayed as standalone monuments.121 This physical location within the place of the necropolis or cemetery was integral for defining who were the intended viewers of the monument and how the differences in compositional elements, gesture and inscription could be interpreted by a

Roman viewer. The majority of individuals viewing the monument would be anonymous viewers, in that they would have no previous relationship with the individuals portrayed. In this context, the dextrarum iunctio serves, first and foremost, a pragmatic function. On stele reliefs that depict a number of figures, the motif is used in a generic sense to establish relationships between individuals to an anonymous viewer. The dextrarum iunctio allows the viewer to discern primary individuals within a crowded figural composition and those who are subsidiary to the overall interpretation. Gestural and sartorial cues all work to organize the viewers understanding of the individuals involved. The function is pragmatic and generalized, because the images themselves are necessarily generalized in relation to the viewer.

Depictions of the motif found on funerary altars and sarcophagi, in contrast, are constituted within a very different physical context. Funerary altars were often placed within the tomb complex themselves, although there are examples where an altar could be used to delineate the boundary of the tomb complex.122 The dextrarum iunctio found on this monument-type no longer functions in a solely pragmatic sense. The majority of individuals viewing the monument would have experience, perhaps very distant, of the individual portrayed. The viewer is no longer anonymous, but a family member, friend, freedman, or slave. Removing the predominately pragmatic function of the dextrarum iunctio allows commemorators to combine images and visual cues to portray a wider variety of relationships and guide the viewer's understanding. Artists could further guide the interpretation of the viewer by integrating

121 Toynbee, Death and Burial, 245. 122 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 22-25 especially 24.

iconographic elements into the depiction of the motif. I suggest that attributes associated with the figures become central to the function of the motif as it takes on an allegorical meaning. This allegorical meaning is inherent in the physical space of the tomb and the viewers who frequent it.

The viewers do not require that the monument spell out the relationship between the two individuals, as they would already understand the relationship being portrayed; rather, the figural composition, gesture and attributes combine to characterize the nature of the relationship.

Further, sarcophagi, placed predominately within the tomb itself,123 embedded the monuments within physical space of the tomb, but also placed them within a repetitive ritual context. Yearly rituals, such as those associated with the Parentalia and Feralia, represent a continuous authentication and re-validation of the past. The individuals viewing the monument and engaging in the rituals would have certain knowledge of the individual portrayed, but as the temporal gap between the death of the deceased, the commissioning of the monument and the contemporary performance of rituals widened, the immediate knowledge and experience of the individual is lost. The individualized representation of the deceased becomes less immediate for the understanding of the motif. The commemoration of the deceased as an individual becomes part of the commemoration of all ancestors during Parentalia.124 I suggest that the commissioner of any monument would choose motifs that would be meaningful for the depiction of the individualized deceased, but would remain meaningful as the identity of the deceased was subsumed by the generalized identity of the ancestor. For example, as I discuss in further detail below, the dextrarum iunctio found on a biographical sarcophagi, such as the paradigm example

123 I am making the assumption that this is normative practice for most Roman sarcophagi, while acknowledging that there are cases where the sarcophagi were housed outside of the tomb. Toynbee, Death and Burial, 270. 124 For a discussion of the Parentalia, see Fanny Dolasky. F. Dolans y, “Honouring the Family Dead on the Parentalia: Ceremony, pe ta le, and Memory,” Phoenix 65, 1-2 (2011):125-157.

of a second century CE marble sarcophagus from Mantova (Fig. 2),125 may have been included by the commissioner as a representation of the marriage of the deceased, one of the central life events of the individual. As time goes on and the narrative of the life of the deceased fades from the experience of the viewer, the identity of the individual becomes equated with the ancestors.

The motif may then take on an allegorical function. For example, the motif may represent the virtues of the ancestors that the descendents are expected to honour and emulate. The meaning of the motif may change to reflect the change in context.

I propose that the transition in physical context of the monument ultimately provides the impetus for the changes in the stylistic and compositional elements of the dextrarum iunctio. The stylistic, compositional, and inscriptional elements must be viewed together as mutually constitutive elements contributing to the commemorative strategy for the individual and their relationships. The mode and efficacy of this strategy is a direct reflection of the physical context in which the monuments are embedded; that is, the design of the commemorative monument, the visual vocabulary used and how it was presented, relates to how the monument is displayed within the funerary complex.

Typologies:

Having embedded the study of the motif in an interpretative framework drawn from Place

Studies, my typological categories will be based on monument type and general physical location. Having collected my data, I categorize the corpus into three typologies based on monument type: stele reliefs, funerary altars and sarcophagi. Variations in compositional and gestural cues found in each category will provide the basis for subcategories that highlight the function of the motif.

125 Nr. 116.

The first typological category is comprised of Roman stele and 'window' reliefs. The variation inherent within the motif found on these reliefs provides the basis for my analysis of stylistic and compositional elements. My typological subcategories will focus on variation found within the gesture itself. Two variations on the motif emerge: dextrarum iunctio resembling a

'hand clasp' and dextrarum iunctio resembling as a ‘handsha e’.

I will classify the first variant as a 'hand clasp' dextrarum iunctio (Fig. 4). This type appears on 30 examples of funerary stele.126 Two figures, generally a male and a female, are linked by a grasping of right hands. Compositionally, the right arms bend upwards at right angles; the palms are held together, the thumbs are intertwined while the other fingers wrap around the lower part of the hand, near the wrist. I will designate this variation as a 'hand grasp' in order to distinguish it from the second variant of the motif, which closely resembles the modern conception of a handshake (Fig. 5). This variation appears on 16 examples of funerary reliefs that make up this corpus.127 The figures are depicted frontally. The right arm of the figure on the left reaches over their body to grasp the right hand of the opposing figure. The dextrarum iunctio is reated by a true ‘handsha e:’ the female and male figures grasp so that their fingers wrap around the hand.

The depiction of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars tends to be more standardized than the depictions on Roman funerary stele and 'window' reliefs. Whereas representations of the dextrarum iunctio found on funerary reliefs tend to present a number of figures, the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars portray only two linked figures.

Two forms of gesture found in the depiction of the motif on Roman funeral altars are incorporated into subcategories. The first category presents the dextrarum iunctio as a

126 See Nrs. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 26, 27, 30, 38, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 64, 67, 69, 70, 72 and 75. 127 See Nrs. 4, 21, 22, 26, 27, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 43, 45, 47, 67, 69 and 71.

handshake linking a male and female figure where the female figure takes on a distinctive pose

(Fig. 6). The female is depicted in three-quarter view standing with her weight on her left leg and her right leg bent, imparting a sense of movement to the motif. She often holds an attribute such as a pomegranate in her right hand.128 The focus of this category is a gesture that imbues the motif with dynamicity.

A second subcategory includes the dextrarum iunctio combined with other gestures, such as the placing of the left hand on the shoulder of the other figure or the placing of the left hand on the cheek of the opposite figure (Fig. 7). This gesture can be performed by either a male or female figure, but is limited to a figure depicted on the viewer's left.

The final typological category analyzed in this study is the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman biographical sarcophagi dating from the late first to the fifth centuries CE.129

Interestingly, the dextrarum iunctio appearing on sarcophagi show the greatest variation in the stylistic features within the motif itself, despite the fact that the figural composition of the motif remains more standard: the dextrarum iunctio links a male and female figure nearly exclusively.

The variation in the case of sarcophagi is not found within the gesture itself but rather in the stylistic features associated with the figures. Three subcategories based on female gesture attempt to incorporate the variations: dextrarum iunctio with a female gesturing in the 'Pudicita' pose (Fig. 8), a 'Ceres' pose (Fig. 9) variant and one that draws from depictions of Mars and

Venus (Fig. 10).

There are 14 depictions of the dextrarum iunctio that draw on the "Pudicitia" pose found in Roman portrait statuary.130 The veiled female figure is dressed in a tunic and wrapped in a palla. Her left hand grasps her veil and pulls it up, appearing in the process of pulling it over her

128 For a discussion of the pomegranate on Roman funerary altars, see Chapter six, 90-93. 129 I will use the dating precedents set out by Carola Reinsberg focusing on sartorial cues and hairstyle. 130 See Nrs. 114, 119, 125, 126, 129, 131, 133, 135, 137, 139, 140, 142, 159 and 162.

face. The gesture resembles the 'Pudicitia' statuary type where the female figure is in the process of covering her face, and suggests a context of mourning and grief. 131

The second and third gesture types are drawn from the context of commemorative portrait statuary. The 'Ceres-pose' comprises a veiled female figure wrapped in a palla standing with her weight on her left leg and with her right bent, holding a swath of wheat at her side with her left hand. 132 Her right hand is modified to engage in a dextrarum iunctio. The 'Ceres pose' is found in 29 examples of dextrarum iunctio.133 Many of the examples do not depict the woman holding a swath of wheat; instead the hand merely falls to her side or grasps at her palla.

Nonetheless, the pose, with or without the swath of wheat, becomes a symbolically potent body type suggesting an allegorical function of the motif within the context of honourific portraiture.134

The final gestural subcategory is also drawn from portrait statuary. Representations of the grouping of Venus and Mars figures on Roman portraiture often depict Venus with her left hand placed on the shoulder of Mars while her right hand is placed on his chest. The depictions found on two examples of sarcophagi follow this paradigm with the female figure placing her hand on the shoulder of the male figure.135 However, depictions found on Roman funerary sarcophagi are modified to allow the right hands of both figures to engage in dextrarum iunctio.

Traditional scholarship established categories that subsumed variation within typologies focused on stylistic elements presented on one monument type. The goal of my typological

131 This gesture will be analyzed in more detail in Chapter seven, See Chapter seven, 132-135 for analysis and bibliography. 132 A. Alexandridis, "Neutral Bodies? Female Portrait Statue Types from the Late Republic to the Second Century CE," in Material Culture and Social Identities in the Ancient World, ed. S. Hales and T. Hodos (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 268. 133 See Nrs.104, 109, 110, 113, 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 123, 130, 133, 135, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 and 148. 134 See Chapter seven, 136-140. 135 There are four examples. See Nrs. 108 and 138.

analysis is to bring the variation inherent in the motif to forefront of the discussion. My typological categories are informed by the interpretive framework of Place Studies and focus on monument type. The transformation in the physical context of the monument, its 'place,' drives the changes in stylistic and compositional elements found within the typological categories. In this way, the categories are more reflective of the variation inherent in the motif and provide a basis for my analysis of the dextrarum iunctio in the subsequent chapters.

This chapter introduced my corpus of examples and laid out the methodological framework that I will use to analyze my catalog. My framework is a hybrid that will draw on stylistic, compositional and epigraphic analysis informed by Place Studies. I will analyze the stylistic and formal elements of the dextrarum iunctio to establish a repertory of images, providing a basis for a typological analysis of the motif. The three typological categories will allow variation within the motif to be discerned and analyzed rather than marginalized and overlooked, while taking into account the importance of monument type in the development of the motif. It is monument type and physical location that drive the changes in stylistic and compositional cues, transforming the function of the motif from purely pragmatic to allegorical.

The following chapter begins the analysis of the first typological category, Roman funerary reliefs, using the analytical framework developed in Chapter three.

Chapter four: Funerary Reliefs

This chapter investigates the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio on figural reliefs carved on Roman stele and 'window' reliefs. The figured reliefs present individualized portraits of two to five individuals. 'Window' reliefs tend to orientate the bust-length portraits horizontally within a frame, creating the sense of individuals looking out of a window.136 Stele reliefs can include bust-length or full-length portraits that are generally orientated vertically; the reliefs tend to be taller than they are wide. Both forms present examples of the dextrarum iunctio. I will look first at the stylistic and compositional variations found in the dextrarum iunctio, such as variations in the gender of figures, which call into question the close correlation between the motif and marriage. Visual evidence drawn from my corpus indicates that the motif functioned pragmatically as part of a commemorative strategy that served to visually delineate and define relationships between presented individuals. Select epigraphic evidence provides textual confirmation of the relationships portrayed. Finally, I will discuss variations and manipulations in the dextrarum iunctio that served to transmit status messages to the viewer. The dextrarum iunctio functioned on funerary reliefs to represent the integral social relationships in which the commemorated individuals were engaged, as well as to provide clues as to how the commemorator conceived of this relationship within the wider community of the living and the dead.

Stylistic features and typologies:

Funerary reliefs share various stylistic and compositional features that were intended to individuate images of the deceased and delineate the important social relationships in which the individuals portrayed were engaged. The artists had a number of compositional and stylistic

136 Zanker, "Grabreliefs," 272-273.

tools at their disposal that enabled them to portray a myriad of social relationships. As well, they had the potential to nuance the depiction of these relationships through slight variations in compositional features. For example, the motif could be used to link individuals of the same sex, guiding the interpretation of the viewer away from an association with marriage.

The gender of the figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio is central to the interpretation of the motif as signifying marriage. The traditional interpretation depends upon a specific compositional archetype utilized by scholars such as Zanker, and followed by Kleiner and

Kockel.137 The motif is considered standard in its depiction, a handshake exclusively linking a male and a female figure. Zanker posited a singular interpretation for the dextrarum iunctio based on this composition; the motif was a visual manifestation of legitimate marriage.138

Kleiner and Kockel followed Zanker's lead, suggesting the dextrarum iunctio represents marriage, specifically iusta matrimonia.139 Turning to the visual sources, the majority of the depictions of the dextrarum iunctio are used to link a male and a female figure on funerary reliefs. From a corpus of 78 examples of the dextrarum iunctio, 69 examples do link a male and a female figure. There are, however, seven examples, two bust-length and five full-length portrait reliefs, or approximately nine percent of the entire corpus, that depict a dextrarum iunctio between two individuals of the same sex.140 Traditional discussion tends to focus on a small corpus of bust-length reliefs, predominately 'window' reliefs,141 and does not take into account

137 Zanker,"Grabreliefs," 285; Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 50; Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 24. 138 Zanker,"Grabreliefs," 285. 139 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 23. Kleiner goes so far as to state that on Roman funerary reliefs "only men and women clasp hands." 140 Nrs. 9, 27, 54, 59, 62, 67 and 71. I am using raw data percentage data. 141 Frenz includes only 6 examples of the dextrarum iunctio in general found on bust-length reliefs. Pflug incorporates 10 bust-length and 2 full-length portraits. Kockel includes 21 examples of bust-length reliefs and only one example of a full length portrait relief. Thus, the majority of the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio focuses on the depictions found on bust-length reliefs.

the variants, most of which are found on full-length reliefs.142 These exceptional examples are important to include in the discussion as they contradict the traditional and exclusive interpretation of the motif. They provide evidence that the traditional interpretation of the motif as representing legitimate marriage is too specific and must be generalized to include a number of different relationships. Most importantly, the variants provide compositional cues that can help elucidate the relationship portrayed.

One example that has entered the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio on funerary monuments is the relief of Fonteia Eleusis, dating from the first century BCE, currently housed in the British Museum (Fig. 11).143 The relief depicts two female figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio. An aged female figure on the left with highly masculine features turns towards a female figure on the right. Her age is reflected in physiognomic features that include a high brow with deep wrinkle lines, high cheek bones, sunken cheeks, thin lips and lines on her neck. The figure on the right reflects a younger countenance as her face shows only slight age lines. She wears a tunic and a palla that wraps around her left shoulder. Her right hand reaches to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, while her left hand is held at chest height with the index finger and thumb extended in a pointing gesture. An inscription provides the identity of the individuals portrayed: underneath the figure on the left, the name Fonteia Eleusis and Fonteia Helena, underneath the figure on the right.144 Walker provides the inscription and the translation.145

142Kockel, Pflug and Frenz include the two bust-length variants in their catalogs but do not incorporate the examples into their short discussion of the dextrarum iunctio. See Nrs. 9 and 27 for bibliography. 143 See Nr. 27. For the most comprehensive discussion of the relief see S. Walker and A. Burnett, Augustus: Handlist of the Exhibition (London: British Museum Publications, 1981): 43-47. 144 This inscription was also expanded and translated in the Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic database. This is the expansion provided: Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Eleusis h(aec) o(llae?) dat(ae) a Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Helena 145 For this expansion and translation, I rely on Walker.

Fonteia G(aiae) l(iberta) Eleusis h(uic?) olla data Fonteia G(aiae) l(iberta) Helena.

Fonteia Eleusis, freedwoman of Gaia. The burial urn granted to her. Fonteia Helena, freedwoman of Gaia.146

Their names indicate that the two women are freedwomen from the gens Fonteii. The figure

Fonteia Eleusis received reworking in the first century CE and was given masculine features and a wedding ring on her right ring finger.147 There has been significant discussion about the reworking of the figure. Stupperich argues that the relief was originally intended to depict a male and a female figure and, thus, does not disturb the paradigm of dextrarum iunctio as marriage.148

Walker argues that such an interpretation does not explain the inscription, which dates from the

Republican era. I tend to agree with Walker that the original relief did depict a dextrarum iunctio between two female figures because of the early date of the inscription. Moreover, the folds of the tunic on the reworked figures still resemble the clothing of the female figure on the right and it is still possible to see the veil that the figure once wore.149 In addition, there are sufficient examples where the dextrarum iunctio links two individuals of the same sex, indicating that the representation in this relief is not anomalous.

The use of the motif to link female figures negates its interpretation as solely a manifestation of legal marriage and points to a generalized iconographical function. Walker has posited two plausible relationships linking the two women. She argues that the relief could

146 Walker, Augustus, 43-44. 147 Susan Walker discusses the reworking. Walker, Augustus, 43-44. 148 Stupperich, "Zur Dextrarum Iunctio," 146-147. Stuperich believes that the relief was reworked to look like two females linked by a dextrarum iunctio. He argues that the original relief was likely a dextrarum iunctio motif between a male and a female figure and thus does not contradict the traditional interpretive paradigm. Walker argues that this scenario is unlikely. The remodelling was undertaken in the 1st century: the figure on the left was made to resemble a male and a wedding ring was added. However, this does not explain the presence of the Republican era inscription that refers to two female figures. I tend to agree that this monument originally depicted two women. 149 Walker, Augustus, 43-44.

depict a mother-daughter relationship or a relationship based on religious association.150 The two women differ in age by about a generation, and their names indicate they were freed from the same familia, lending plausibility to the interpretation of a mother-daughter relationship. The dextrarum iunctio could be included to allude to filial obligations associated with the familial relationships, such as the duty to undertake proper burial for family members.151 The handshake could commemorate the fulfillment of the familial obligations through the erection of a permanent monument. If the women were not related and were merely freed women from the same familia, the handshake could still carry connotations of obligation. It is not unlikely that freed woman without family would employ another freed person, with whom they had a relationship, to undertake the burial obligations that would normally be undertaken by a family member.152 The dextrarum iunctio, in this case, could represent the contractual relationship between the two women akin to a filial relationship.

Alternately, the women's names also show common religious roots. The names Eleusis and Helena both have associations with the Eleusian mysteries.153 The relationship could represent one of attachment via religious affiliation. Definitive identification of the relationship between the women, however, is speculation. The only conclusive statement is that the motif is used to represent an emotional relationship or social attachment between the women. The central focus on the relationship implied by the use of the dextrarum iunctio is compounded by the overall figural composition of relief, mediated by gestural cues that guide the eyes of the viewer.

150 For the familial relationship hypothesis see Walker, Augustus, 44. For the religious relationship see M.R. D'Angelo, "Woman Partners in the New Testament," Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 6, 1 (1990): 70. 151 J. Gardner, "Legal Stumbling Blocks for Lower Class Families in Rome," in The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007), 35-36. 152 There are a number of examples in the epigraphic sources that indicate burial rites and other associated obligations could be performed by an heir that was not necessarily from the immediate family of the deceased. Carroll, Spirits of the Dead, 185. 153 D'Angelo, "Women Partners," 70.

The gaze of the figure on the left is intently focused on the figure on the right. If the viewer begins by looking at the left figure, they are invited to follow the gaze of the figure who is intently focused on the opposing figure on the right. The figure on the right engages the gaze of the viewer but directs it towards the dextrarum iunctio through the pointing fingers of her left hand. If the viewer engages with the relief from the right, their gaze will be steered to the motif directly by the right figure's pointing fingers. The relief focuses the attention of the viewer on the visual linking of the two individuals. The motif takes on the pragmatic function of visually linking individuals in a relationship that is not nuptial in nature. This example provides the potential for the motif to depict a number of different relationships due to their variance from expected figural composition.

Michael Eckert provides further examples of under-analyzed depictions of the dextrarum iunctio between two figures of the same sex found on full-length portrait stele reliefs originating from Capua.154 The full-length reliefs have a distinct compositional mode in that they are taller than they are wide, dimensions required in order to depict full-length portraits.155 The relief of

Barneus provides a paradigmatic example (Fig.12).156 The travertine relief originating from

Capua and currently housed in the Museo Campano, presents three male figures with a dextrarum iunctio linking two of the figures. The togate male figures, whose portrait features are heavily damaged, are depicted in frontal pose. The left and central male figures are linked by a dextrarum iunctio, while a third figure stands on the right, slightly receded into the background.

The figural composition is tight so that the figures overlap slightly in order to maintain the proportions of the relief. Eckert argues that such a composition presented in combination with

154 See Nrs. 54, 59, 62, 67 and 71. 155 Eckert, Capuanische Grabsteine, 70. 156 See Nrs. 67.

the dextrarum iunctio linking two individuals of the same sex tends to suggest Greek influence: the Greek dexiosis, or handshake, often links two male or two female individuals.157 In order to maintain the close figural composition, the arms of the individuals are elongated, looking unnaturally long when viewed frontally at eye height. However, when viewed from a lower position, they look more natural.

The motif is integral to the meaning that the commemorator intends to transmit to the viewer. The slightly receded third figure focuses the gaze of the viewer on the two left figures linked by the dextrarum iunctio, while maintaining the compositional grouping of three individuals. The three male figures are depicted wearing togas, indicating that they are all citizens.158 Besides acting as visual status signifiers, the folds and drapery of the togas direct the viewer's gaze. The sinus of each toga falls at a different level creating a wave-like sensation when viewed together. The highest point of the wave corresponds to the dextrarum iunctio.

Thus, the composition of the monument directs the gaze of the viewer directly to the motif.

The gender of the figures involved negates the traditional conjugal interpretation and requires an interpretation that is more general. It is certain that the dextrarum iunctio functions to delineate a specific relationship between two of the males. The inscription found on the monument indicates that the three men depicted in the relief were brothers (fratres).159 Thus, the dextrarum iunctio is used in this case to indicate a familial relationship rather than a conjugal

157 Eckert, Capuanische Grabsteine, 69. 158 The seminal work on the toga was undertaken by Wilson. Wilson discusses the role of the toga as a badge of citizenship but also political membership. L. M. Wilson, The Roman Toga (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins Press, 1924), 20; See also: C. Vout, "The Myth of the Toga: Understanding the History of Roman Dress," GaR 43, 2 (1996): 204- 220. 159 CIL X 3875; BARNAEVS SOC/ VICES LIBER SIBI ET/ FRATRIB SUIS V FEC// SALAMA SOCIOR/ VICENS LIBERTATIS/ SER VX ANN XXV// SABBIONI SOC/ VICENS LIBERTA/SERVO. The expansion as found in the Clauss-Slaby database is :Barnaeus soc(iorum) / vices(imae) liber(tatis) sibi et / fratrib(us) suis v(ivus) fec(it) // Salama socior(um) / vice{n}s(imae) libertatis / ser(vo) vix(it) ann(os) XXV // Sabbioni soc(iorum) / vice{n}s(imae) liberta(tis) / servo.

relationship. The Barnaeus relief suggests that the dextrarum iunctio is a multi-functional motif.

The variation in gender of the individuals portrayed highlights multi-layered nature of the dextrarum iunctio.160 The motif can be modified by the artist through compositional variations such as the gender of the figures, but also through the physical arrangement of the figures in order to nuance the meaning transmitted to the viewer.

A final example represents a relief dedicated by a mother to her husband and daughters depicting three female figures with two of the figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio (Fig. 13).161

The limestone relief originates from Capua and is uncertain in date. The relief presents three female figures in frontal view gazing directly at the viewer, although their portrait features are heavily damaged. Each woman wears a tunic and is wrapped in a palla. The two outer figures are linked by a dextrarum iunctio. The female figure on the left stands in frontal view, with her right arm reaching across her body to engage in a dextrarum iunctio with the female figure on the far right. The figure on the right is similarly depicted in frontal stance with her right arm reaching out to engage in the handshake. The third female figure appears between the two outer figures standing in frontal view with her right arm reaching up towards her face. In order to depict the dextrarum iunctio and engage the two outer figures, the artist was forced to elongate the arms of the figures. The hands of the figures, although heavily damaged, are also enlarged.

The eye of the viewer is intended to focus on the dextrarum iunctio linking the two female figures. However, the figural composition of the motif leads the viewer to engage with the three figures as a group. The middle figure, although not linked physically to the other figures, is enclosed between outer the figures, guiding the viewer to understand the motif as ultimately linking the three figures together.

160 Eckert, Capuanische Grabsteine, 69. 161 See Nr. 51.

The composition suggests that the artist intended the motif to highlight the relationship between the three figures. The epigraphic evidence provides the identification of the relationship portrayed: a mother-daughter relationship. 162 The three figures are likely the three women named in the inscription: Plania Philumina, the commemorator, Plania [3] the first daughter identified, and Plania Prima, the second named daughter. The artist used the dextrarum iunctio in this case to commemorate a familial relationship between a mother and her daughters.

Definitive identification of the individuals in the portraits is impossible; we cannot know if the individuals linked by the dextrarum iunctio are mother and daughter, or the two daughters.

Further, it is unknown if the daughters predeceased their mother. If the daughters had already passed away, they would be included in the depiction solely for commemoration. However, if the daughters had not predeceased the mother, they could be represented to display their filial obligations. The daughters would be expected undertake the obligations associated with filial piety, the duties due to parents by children.163 These duties would include the performance of proper burial and associated rites. The mother could have included a dextrarum iunctio, in this context, to symbolize the obligations of pietas and the expectation of the mother that her daughters, perhaps linked by the motif, would carry out these obligations on her behalf. The mother sought to visually depict the relationship and the associated duties using a dextrarum iunctio.

Variation in stylistic and compositional features related to the depiction of gender, played an important role in modifying the interpretational potential of the motif. By manipulating the compositional elements, the artist could control the intended meaning of the motif, using it to

162 CIL X 4289; A PLA NIUS/ PLANIA PHILUMINA FECIT SIBI ET FILIABUS PLANIA.../PLANIAE PRIMAE. The expansion as found in the Clauss-Slaby epigraphic database is as follows: A(ulus) Planius // Plania Philumina fecit sibi et filiabus Plani[ae 3] / [3]s Planiae Primae // O(ssa) h(ic) s(ita) s(unt). 163 Gardner, "Legal Stumbling Blocks," 35-36.

delineate a number of different relationships. These relationships can be confirmed epigraphically, as inscriptional evidence often provides information about the commemorator, the commemorated individual and the relationship that exists between them.

Epigraphic evidence:

Epigraphic evidence can provide further confirmation to corroborate the multivalent nature of the dextrarum iunctio. By combining both textual and visual evidence, it becomes apparent that the motif was used to depict a number of associations, not exclusively conjugal relationships. While marital unions denoted by a dextrarum iunctio are certainly present in the corpus under examination, there are a number of other relationships commemorated with a dextrarum iunctio and an inscription. These relationships could be patronage, familial, even friendship.

The extant epigraphic evidence associated with stele and 'window' reliefs is relatively sparse, but can still aid in the identification of relationships implied in the visual depictions. This study includes 76 examples of funerary reliefs, both bust-length and full-length portrait reliefs,

51 of which include epigraphic evidence. The inscriptions can be found either on the pediments of the relief or inscribed into the frame.

Many of the examples, 22, include only identification of the individual portrayed, a name placed underneath a portrait, such as in an archetypal example from the Villa Wolkowsky

(Fig.14).164 The individualized figures of three males, two females and a child are depicted in bust-length on the relief. A dextrarum iunctio links a male figure occupying the second spot from the left with the female figure on the right. The inscription provides the identity of each

164 Nr. 30.

individual portrayed and their status. The individuals found on the monument are all freed slaves, liberti and libertae, indicated by an "L" in the inscription.165 The relationships between the individuals are not explicitly stated. However, their names indicate that they were manumitted by the same master, Marcus Servilius, whose name they took upon release from servile status.166

The inscription implies that all the individuals portrayed are conliberti, but more specific affiliations are impossible to discern. Kleiner suggests that the relief could depict two married couples, a conlibertus and a child.167 However, if the dextrarum iunctio is used to indicate a conjugal relationship, it would be reasonable to expect two depictions, one for each married couple. The monument could present a family group, but age indications in the portraits seem to indicate that all individuals are similar aged, with the exception of the small child portrayed at the far right of the monument. Three togate male figures are depicted with fuller heads of hair and some naso-labial lines that indicate middle age. The two female figures are depicted unveiled and with a nodus hairstyle, formed when the hair on the top of the head is parted in the middle and combed into a roll on the forehead.168 I suggest that, in this case, the dextrarum iunctio is used to indicate an important but undefined relationship between two of the individuals. The motif appears to be used pragmatically in that it functions to organize the

iewer’s understanding of the indi iduals in this monument, pointing out the individuals around whom the monument is organized.

165 CIL VI 26375: M SERVILIUS/ PHILARCVRVS L// M SERVILIVS/ PHILOSTRATVS L// SERVILIA/ ANATOLE L/FRVGI// SERVILIA/ THAIS L// M SERVILIVS/ MENOPHILVS// LIVINI.../L//. The expansion according to Clauss-Slaby is as follows: M(arcus) Servilius / Philarrus l(ibertus) // M(arcus) Servilius / Philostratus l(ibertus) // Servilia / Anatole l(iberta) / Frugi // Servilia / Thais l(iberta) // M(arcus) Servilius / Menophilus l(ibertus) // Lucini [3] / L[. 166 The slave would take on the nomen and praenomen of their master. For a discussion of Roman naming conventions, see: L. Keppie, Understanding Roman Inscriptions (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 20. 167 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 44. 168 Ibid., 132.

However, many inscriptions provide more than a mere listing of names. In order to use epigraphic evidence to further corroborate the relationships depicted using a dextrarum iunctio, I have collected 51 examples of the motif appearing on Roman funerary reliefs that also include an inscription. Of the 51 instances, I have excluded those that do not indicate a relationship between the two individuals, either naming the commemorator or the commemorated individual.

There are 22 examples that only provide a name with no indication of dedication or identification of the commemorator. However, 29 examples include epigraphic evidence that provides explicit information about the commemoration of 37 explicitly identified individuals (see Appendix B).

Sometimes the relationship is explicitly stated, while in other cases, it can be surmised through an analysis of nomenclature. The data associated with the epigraphic evidence can be found in

Appendix B. Table 1 summarizes the information.

Table 1 Distribution of Commemorative Relationships on Roman Stele Reliefs Relationship Number of Commemorations Percentage (of 37 commemorated individuals) No 10 27 Indication Patron 9 24 Spouse 7 19 Parents 4 11 libertis 2 5 Children 1 3 Conlibertii/ae 1 3 amico 1 3 verna 1 3 siblings 1 3

The distributions found here differ from the overall distributions found in previous epigraphic scholarship.169 Raw data indicates the most common relationship commemorated by a

169 Saller and Shaw provide the first study of commemorated relationships within the epigraphic evidence. R. Saller and B. Shaw, "Tombstones and Roman Family Relations in the Principate: Civilians, Soldiers and Slaves," JRS 74,

dextrarum iunctio is the patronage relationship, at 24% of the inscriptions. The next most common is spousal relationships with 19%. This high percentage dedicated to patrons differs from Hanne Sigismund-Nielsen’s analysis of the relationships found in CIL VI.170 She found only four percent were dedicated to patrons. The high degree of importance placed on the commemoration of spousal relationships is evident in the high percentage found in this corpus.

The commemoration of other familial relationships, parents or children, are relatively low. The low percentage of the inscriptions commemorating parents is unsurprising; previous scholarship indicates the rarity of parental commemoration.171 However, the low percentage of monuments commemorating a child explicitly does differ from previous studies. Sigismund-Nielsen finds that in the CIL VI the commemoration of sons or daughters accounts for 15% of the inscriptions that name a specific relationship.172 These differences become even more significant when the epigraphic evidence is compared with the visual evidence. Now, I will turn to how the epigraphic evidence is linked to the visual depictions of the motif. Due to space considerations, I will only discuss two representative examples in depth: an inscription specifying a patron-client relationship and one describing a conjugal relationship.173

(1984):124-156, especially pages 128-129. Hanne Sigismund-Nielsen provides an analysis of the epithets used by commemorators to describe commemorated individuals. She provides a summary of the distribution of relationships found in CIL VI. H. Sigismund-Nielsen, "Interpreting Epithets in Roman Epitaphs," in The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007), 172. 170 Sigismund-Nielsen, "Interpreting Epithets," 172. Sigismund-Nielsen analyzed every fifth readable epitaph from CIL VI that included information on the commemorated individuals or the dedicator of the inscription. Here analysis is based upon 3,181 epitaphs with 4,509 individual commemorations. 171 This number agrees with the 14% of commemorations made by the lower orders to parents. Saller and Shaw, "Tombstones and Roman Family Relations,"147. 172 Sigismund-Nielsen, "Interpreting Epithets," 172. 173 One of the most interesting examples of a relief is the relief commissioned by Dexsonia Selemio that presents a dextrarum iunctio linking two female figures. The relief is rarely mentioned in secondary literature. The inscription states that Dexsonia Selemio commissioned the monument for herself and her 'most dearest' Philema. I suggest the relief represents the commemoration of a friendship between the two women. See Nr. 59.

The most common relationship commemorated with an inscription and a representation of the dextrarum iunctio is the patron-client relationship.174 The relief of Sextus Magius Licinus, currently housed in Madrid but originating from Milan, dates from the first century CE and provides an example of a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures (Fig.1).175 The travertine relief was commissioned by Sextus Magius Licinus for himself and his patron, Sextus Magius

Turpio. The composition of the motif conforms closely to the model example of a dextrarum iunctio in that the relief depicts two bust-length figures linked by a handshake within a frame surmounted by a pediment ornamented with a Medusa head and a number of tools, a pair of pliers and a hammer. The individualized portrait figures depict two togate males in frontal view linked by a dextrarum iunctio. The male figure on the right holds a scroll in his right hand.176

The inscription provides information about the individuals portrayed:

SEX MAGIVS SEX L LICIN/ SIBI ET SEX MAGIO SEX L TVRPIO/ PATRONO ET BASSO ET CELERI LIB/ TESTAMENTO FIERI IUS CIL V 6036177

The inscription states that Sextus Magius Licinus commissioned this monument for himself, his patron and his sons. Turpio was himself a freed man of a man named Sextus Magius. When

Turpio was manumitted, he took on the praenomen and nomen of his master, Sextus Magius.

174 Out of 51 examples I have complied, 9 examples were dedicated to a patron. This represents approximately 24% of the sample. This number is high in relation to the number of inscriptions that appear on Roman epitaphs dedicated to a patron. In Sigismund-Nielsen's study on Roman epitaphs, 6% of the inscriptions commemorated a patron relationship. Sigismund-Nielsen, "Interpreting epithets," 173. The large number of examples dedicated to a patron and including a depiction of a dextrarum iunctio seems to indicate a potential correlation between the motif and the depiction of patronage relationships. 175 Nr. 9. 176 The scroll is commonly found in the dextrarum iunctio motif found on sarcophagi and funerary altars. However, on Roman funerary reliefs, the scroll in a male's left hand is found only on a small number of examples. See the discussion in Chapter five. 177 The Clauss-Slaby database provides the following expansion: Sex(tus) MagiusSex(ti) l(ibertus) Licin(us) / sibi et Sex(to) Magio Sex(ti) l(iberto) Turpio(ni) / patrono et Basso et Celeri lib(ertis) / testamento fieri ius[s(it)].

Turpio then manumitted Licinus, who also took the praenomen and nomen of his patron, Sextus

Magius. The inscription also mentions two further males, Bassus and Celer, who were the sons of Sextus Magius Licinus. Their names indicate that his sons were slaves as they retain only their cognomen. The correlation between the visual image of two togate men linked by a dextrarum iunctio and the information presented in the inscription indicate that the freedman and the patron mentioned in the inscription are likely the two men depicted in the image.178

The gender of the depicted individuals negates the monolithic association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage. This example indicates that the motif could be used to denote other relationships; the epigraphic evidence is explicit in naming the patron-client relationship between the two individuals. The monument was likely commissioned as a tangible manifestation of the manumission agreement between Turpio and Licinus. Manumission was a complex process and could occur in many ways: the patron could merely declare the slave to be free, he could have the slave registered in the census as a citizen, essentially freeing him of servile status, or he could manumit a slave upon his death in his will.179 It is not clear based on epigraphic or visual evidence the form of manumission Licinus was freed by Turpio; but, at the very least, it can be assumed that a relatively close relationship existed between the two men that led to the possibility of Licinus' manumission.180 The relationship is ultimately contractual, imbued with associated obligations. The client was often required to pay rents to their patron or

178 Although it is possible that the individuals depicted could represent either the two sons of Licinus or a depiction of Licinus himself or a son. I think, based on status hierarchies, it is more likely that the patron and client are the individuals portrayed. 179 Champlin, Final Judgements, 131. 180 Champlin argues that a close emotional relationship could provide impetus for manumission. At the least, there must have been enough of a relationship for Turpio to free Licinus. Champlin, Final Judgements, 132.

even to concede some of their estate to the patron upon their death.181 In addition, occupational links are also implicit in manumission. Many clients would take up the trade of their patrons.182

The iconographical depiction of tools suggests that Licinus and Turpio were engaged in the same profession. The occupations of freed slaves are presented on many monuments as a major constitutive element of identity of the commemorated individual.183 Patronage relationships would also be an important and defining relationship in the social network of the freed slave and would be a relationship that would be commemorated on a funerary relief.

While the dextrarum iunctio specifically does not appear in the literary record associated with manumission, the use of a handshake to indicate an agreement or oath of perpetual obligation is attested in the literary record and could easily be conceived of as an appropriate image to commemorate the agreement and obligations of manumission. In Tacitus's Annals, a pack or agreement is ratified with a joining of right hands, complexi dextras.184 The use of the dextrarum iunctio on the relief of Licinus is understood as a visual manifestation of the manumission agreement. The grasping of right hands depicted on the monument represents a symbol that takes into account connotations of contract and obligation inherent in the agreement of manumission. The importance of hands in the manumission process is evident in the

181 Book III of the Institutes of Gaius discuss the rights of patrons to the estates of their freedmen. The Twelve Tables only allowed the patron access to the estate of the freedman if the freeman died intestate. However, the praetor's edict required that the freedman leave his patron at least one half of his estate. Gaius, Instit., III, 41-43. 182 S. Treggiari, Roman Freedman During the Late Republic (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 87. 183 For the epigraphic and visual evidence of occupations see: S. Joshel, Work, Identity and Legal Status at Rome: A Study of the Occupational Inscriptions (London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1992). N. Kampen, Image and Status: Roman Working Women in Ostia (Berlin, Mann, 1981). There are no English language works comprehensively investigating the depiction of occupational images on Roman funerary monuments. 184 "congressique primo cunctanter, dein complexi dextras apud altaria deum pepigere fraudem inimicorum ulcisci atque ipsi inter se concedere." Tac. Ann. 11.9. I am relying on the translation by Jackson. J.Jackson, trans. Tacitus, Tacitus. The Annals (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1937), 262-263. For a second example see Liv. 23.9.

etymological derivation of the term manumissio, meaning 'sending from the hand.'185 The legal editor Paulus, in the eighth century CE, describes a manumission proceeding adjudicated by a praetor. 186 The patron would hold the head or 'other extremity' of the slave and state that he wished the slave to be free while simultaneously releasing the slave from his grasp. The grasping of right hands is, thus, an appropriate motif for the commemoration of both the relationship between the two individuals, but also the manumission agreement itself. By implication, the use of the motif on the monument extends the relationship between patron and client to continue after manumission. However, by portraying the patron-client relationship as an identity constituting mechanism on the funerary monument, the relationship and the associated obligations are also envisioned to extend in perpetuity after the death of the individuals involved.

The patron-client relationship is just one of a myriad of relationships that the dextrarum iunctio could potentially portray. The second most common relationship type attested in the epigraphic evidence in conjunction with a dextrarum iunctio can be combined into a group of relationships that I will call "familial." These relationships include depictions of a spousal unions, but also relationships between parents and siblings. Among these reliefs, the spousal relationship is the most common, explicitly-stated relationship. The importance of conjugal relationships within the epigraphic record, characterized by the term coniunx or uxor, mirrors the importance placed on spousal relationships in the elite literary sources.187 Cicero records the

185 A. Corbeill, "Gesture in Early Roman Law: Empty Forms or Essential Formalities?" in Body Language in the Greek and Roman Worlds, ed. Douglas Cairns (Swansea, UK: Classical Press of Wales, 2005), 157. 186 Paul. Fest. 159. For the translation see Corbeill, "Gesture in Early Roman Law, " 157 187 Allison Jeppesen-Wigelsworth analyzed the epithets used to describe wives in Roman inscriptions. She suggests that both the term coniunx and uxor can be applied to a wife, though the two terms have different connotations. The term uxor was typically used within the context of public display to describe a woman, who was freeborn, rather than a freed slave or an early generation free-born individual with ties to slavery. The term coniunx, on the other hand, was a more generic term usually, but not exclusively, used to denote a legally married woman. A. Jeppesen-

elite view of the hierarchy of Roman social relationships; conjugal relationships are the most important, and then parent child relationships.188 Brothers and sisters follow parent-child relationships, and finally connections by marriage. Ci ero’s hierar hy mirrors the legal hierarchy associated with wills and testament, although legally women were proscribed from inheriting from her husband's estate.189 However, legal proscriptions were often circumvented through the use of legal legacy or fideicommissum.190 Such hierarchies tend to represent normative, or proscriptive practice of elites, which may not be reflective of the practice of middle-class Romans. While a Roman free-born individual may have a relational hierarchy similar to Ci ero’s, freed slaves would have an entirely different hierarchy. The plethora of commemorations of patronage relationships, could be a result of the large number of monuments erected by freed slaves.191

The relief of Caius Volcacus Amphio from Capua, presenting a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio, is an example of a spousal relationship commemorated through a funerary relief ornamented with individualized portraiture (Fig. 15).192 This unpublished

'window' relief presents two full-length portrait reliefs, surmounted by a pediment ornamented with a flower. The inscription appears on the frame above the figures:

Wigelsworth, A Portrayal of Roman Wives in Literature and Inscriptions (PhD. Diss., University of Calgary, 2010), 230-231. 188 Cicero, De Officiis. 1.17.54. 189 Champlin, Final Judgements, 120. 190 Ibid., 123. 191 Henrik Mouritsen suggests that almost everyone who commissioned a monument or tomb was of a freed slave. The implication is that the 'social profile' was relatively consistent in composition. H. Mouritsen, "Freedmen and Decurions: Epitaphs and Social History in Imperial Italy," JRS 95 (2005): 41. 192 See Nr. 73.

C VOLVAVI NERIA C L C L AMPHIONIS ILIONA O C O H N I S V X S F E C I T

CIL X 4420 [=3865] = ECapua 00066193

The relief was commissioned by Neria Iliona for Gaius Volcacus Amphio. Both individuals were freed slaves from two different familia. The freed status is indicated through their names: the repetition of 'C L' indicates that they were freed by two individuals, both named

Gaius. Gaius Volcacus Amphio was freed by Gaius Volcacus while Neria Iliona was freed by

Gaius Nerius. The two manumitted slaves, Neria Iliona and Gaius Volcacus, then entered into a legitimate marriage; manumission imparted upon them citizenship and conubium, the legal capacity for marriage. This legitimacy is trumpeted by Neria Iliona's use of the term coniunx to characterize her relationship with Gaius Volcacus Amphio. The term coniunx is one of a number of terms used to indicate a legally married spouse.194 The term could carry specific connotations emphasizing the legality of the union, but it could also be included to suggest the union was spouse-like. There exists the potential that the union was legally sanctioned, both individuals are freed slaves and could have conubium or the right to marry, but the inclusion of the term coniunx

193 Clauss-Slaby provides the following expansion: C(ai) Volcaci / C(ai) l(iberti) Amphionis // O(ssa) / h(ic) / s(ita) / s(unt) // Neria C(ai) l(iberta) / Iliona // C/o/n/i/u/x / s(ua) / f/e/c/i/t. 194 Coniunx was used in the literary context as a generic term for a wife. However, in the epigraphic evidence, coniunx seems to be the favored term used to describe a favored wife. Jepessen-Wiglesworth, The Portrayal of Roman Wives, 230.

does not guarantee that the marriage was legal. Neria Iliona may have characterized the relationship in order to emphasize the spousal-like nature of her relationship with Gaius

Volcacus Amphio.

It is evident that, in this context, the dextrarum iunctio depicts a nuptial relationship linking the two individuals. However, I believe a contractual element underlies the interpretation, predicated upon the motif's polysemous nature. The visual pronouncement of legal marriage was likely important to Gaius Volcacus Amphio and Neria Iliona, but the dextrarum iunctio was used to indicate a contractual element in the nuptial association. The marital bond was envisioned as a contractual alliance: at the very least a verbal agreement where the individuals involved expressed their intent to engage in the contract.195 The contractual nature could further extend into the legal context associated with testament. Romans often made provisions for the commissioning of the monument in their wills.196 If one of the figures predeceased the other, the monument could represent a visual commemoration of the successful resolution of the will. In this context, the dextrarum iunctio represents the agreement that one individual will undertake the resolution of the will on the deceased's behalf.

The inscriptional evidence substantiates the interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio as a visual means to link two individuals engaged in a close relationship. These depictions represent conjugal relationships in a number of instances, but this interpretation is not necessarily conclusive with respect to all examples. The existence of representations of the dextrarum iunctio linking same sex couples negates the monolithic association with marriage, and raises the possibility that the motif is multivalent. Turning to the visual evidence, specifically focusing on the subtle variations within gesture of the dextrarum iunctio itself, further nuancing of function is

195 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 54. 196 Carroll, Spirits of the Dead, 86; V. Hope, Roman Death (London: Continuum, 2009), 36.

evident. The motif is used not only to indicate relationships, but also to specify and delineate the way in which the commissioner of the monument envisioned the integration of the commemorated individuals into the greater community.

Gestural Evidence:

Gestural elements found on the figural stele and 'window' reliefs are integral to the interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio. For any visual motif, gesture was the primary method for the transmission of meaning to the viewer. In this way, the funerary monuments are integrated into the theatrical and the oratorical context where gesture was also the primary means of conveying messages. In the oratorical context, gestures could be used to give greater force to an argument.197 In the funerary context, the gestures on funerary art could be utilized to impart specific implications upon the viewer. These gestures are culturally constructed and constituted, and vary depending upon the time, place and even the physical context in which they are displayed.

There are a number of gestural variations found within the dextrarum iunctio corpus.

Standard working definitions of the dextrarum iunctio do not take into account the form of the gesture itself; rather, the dextrarum iunctio is often described merely as a 'clasping of the hands,'198 or a 'handshake.'199 Traditional studies conceive of the dextrarum iunctio as a typological category encompassing a range of gestures that are related based on the linking of right hands.200 Slight nuances and variations in composition are excluded as part of the traditional interpretive frameworks. The association between the motif and marriage derives

197J. Hall, "Cicero and Quintilian on the Oratorical Use of Hand Gestures," CQ 54, 1 (2004): 143. 198 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 23. 199 Davis, "The Significance of the Handshake Motif," 632. 200 Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture; Kockel, Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten, 49-50.

from the gender of the figures engaged in the gesture. The potential for slight variations to lead to alternate interpretations of the motif is not investigated. Further, the use of the term dextrarum iunctio to describe the wide range of gestures obscures inherent variation. The term is a modern designation for a group of related gestures, making it problematic.201

I have identified two specific variations of the dextrarum iunctio depicted on reliefs found on stele-type and 'window' relief funerary monuments. In the first variation, two figures are linked with a gesture that I will designate as a 'hand-grasp.' This gesture differs from the modern conception of a handshake as the right arms of both figures are bent at the elbow and are held at approximately chest height. The right hand of one individual wraps around the wrist of the other figure creating a nearly 90 degree angle. The relief of Gratidia Chrite and M. Gratidius

Libanus provides a paradigm example (Fig. 16).202 The marble relief, dating from the late first century BCE and currently housed in the Museo Pio Clementino, Sala dei Busti, Vatican

Museums, depicts a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio of the 'hand-grasp' type. The early imperial monument203 presents a non-veiled female figure on the left in bust- length relief. She wears a tunic and is wrapped in a palla which conceals her left arm. Her right arm is bent at the elbow and her right hand grasps the hand of the male figure with palms together. The right angles created by the gesture, both at the elbows of the individuals and at the hands, draw the attention of the viewer to the gesture itself. A wave-like shape is created with dextrarum iunctio placed at the highest point. The dextrarum iunctio becomes the main compositional figure of the relief. The figures turn slightly and gaze towards each other. In some examples, the figures are portrayed in near profile, turning and looking directly at each

201 See Chapter two for a discussion of the dextrarum iunctio in the literary context. 202 Nr. 1. This version also appears in Nrs. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 26, 27, 30, 38, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 64, 67, 69, 70, 72 and 75. 203 Kleiner dates this relief to 13 BCE- 5CE. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 215.

other, while linked by a dextrarum iunctio motif.204 The overall composition of the motif is closed; the figures turn towards each other, seemingly ignoring the viewer of the monument.

The physical linking of the figures appears as the most important element of the motif.

This variant of the motif can function pragmatically when there are more than two figures appearing on a monument. In this scenario, this form can be used to delineate relationships between the individuals, either the most important figures or the main relationship depicted on the monument. This organizational function becomes essential when a number of individuals are depicted in the relief. The Mattei relief, currently housed in the Palazzo Altemps, Museo

Nazionale in Rome and dating from the early first century CE, presents three figures: a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio, and a third veiled female figure positioned to the right of the linked couple (Fig. 13).205 The togate male figure on the left is depicted in near frontal view, but turns slightly towards the female figure on the right. His left hand is not visible but his right hand reaches up to engage in a dextrarum iunctio at chest height. The female figure linked by the dextrarum iunctio wears a tunic and a palla draped over her left shoulder. Her left hand reaches up to grab the folds of her palla at her chest, while her right arm is bent at the elbow. The final figure is a veiled female figure that appears at the far right of the monument.

Her palla is drawn up over her head as a veil, but also wraps around her upper body. She is compositionally isolated from the dextrarum iunctio figures, placed at the right side and not linked physically to the others. Further, her gaze differentiates her from the other figures. She does not turn towards the other figures but instead engages the gaze of the viewer directly.

204 See Nr. 13. 205 See Nr. 7.

The dextrarum iunctio, in this example, functions to organize the figures and delineate relationships. I suggest that, in the relief of the Mattei, the dextrarum iunctio is likely used pragmatically to distinguish the living from the deceased. The two individuals who are deceased are linked by the motif and compositionally isolated from the group. The third figure, on the other hand, holds the gaze of the viewer, as if engaging in a dialog. This could indicate a continued integration into the community of the living. The identity of the second female as a living commemorator is further substantiated by sartorial cues. I believe she is represented as veiled to indicate her adherence to the proscriptive norms associated with female behavior in the ritual realm of the funerary context.206 She is, thus, differentiated through her dress, but also alienated physically from the other two individuals. I posit that when an artist wanted to depict a physical separation of the linked individuals from the realm of the living, they chose a variation of the dextrarum iunctio that served to compositionally isolate the individuals from the rest of the figures on the monument. The relief likely depicts a family unit. The isolation of two figures through the dextrarum iunctio suggests that the two figures, probably the parents of the second female figure, were deceased. They are depicted as isolated from the daughter who is still living.

The slight variations in gesture point to the polysemous nature of the motif. The artist could potentially use minute modifications in the dextrarum iunctio to portray different relationships, statuses or degree of integration into an identity group.

The second variation of the dextrarum iunctio closely resembles the modern conception of a handshake. A relief currently housed in Vigna Codini in Rome dating from the mid to late

206 The depiction of the female figure veiled and wearing a palla suggests she could be involved in cultic activities associated with funerary context. Lisa Hughes suggests female veiling was not an overwhelmingly normative practice. She discusses the contexts in which female veiling was expected. L. Hughes, "Unveiling the Veil: Cultic, Status, and Ethnic Representations of Early Imperial Freedwomen," Material Religion: The Journal of Objects, Art and Belief 3, 2 (2007): 228-235. I focused especially on the discussion of cultic contexts.

second century CE, provides an example of the second variant (Fig. 14).207 The marble relief depicts a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio. This variant of the motif differs stylistically from the 'hand-grasp' form. Whereas the 'hand-grasp' is formed when the thumbs of the two figures are intertwined, the palms pressed together and the fingers wrapped around the outer edge of the hand, this variant is created when the thumbs slide past each other, the palms are pressed together and the fingers wrap around the outer edge of the hand near to the wrist. The result is a gesture very closely resembling the modern handshake. In the Vigna

Codini relief, the male and female figures are depicted in near frontal view. The female figure appears on the left and turns slightly towards the male figure on the right, but still engages the gaze of the viewer. The male figure on right gazes directly at the viewer, creating a degree of continuity between the figure and the viewer.

I believe this engagement with the viewer represents greater integration into the group and implies continuity between the deceased and the living. The 'handshake' variation functions to integrate the individual into the community presented visually, but also engage the viewer as part of this community. It is possible that such a motif could be used by commissioners who are still living and want to identify their most important relationship while also implying continued integration into the wider community. A few epigraphic examples illustrate this point. When the individuals are named as deceased in the epigraphic evidence, the 'hand-grasp' is used.208 If the individuals commissioned the monument while living, a 'hand-shake' variant with the figures depicted in frontal view is presented. The relief dedicated to Titus Iunius Amphio and Iunio

Diseto depicts a 'handshake' while the inscription tells us that the monument was commissioned

207 See Nr. 24. 208 See Nr. 12.

while they were still living.209 While the examples presented here are few, there is enough to suggest a further nuancing in the function of the motif. The dextrarum iunctio was used to depict a number of different relationships; the epigraphic evidence bears this out. However, the motif also could function to suggest differing levels of integration into the wider community of the living. The multi-functional and multivalent nature of the dextrarum iunctio is a result of the physical context of the motif: the funerary context. A motif had to be multivalent to be understood by a large number of viewers.

The preceding chapter argued that the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman stele reliefs was a multivalent motif. The dextrarum iunctio functioned to pragmatically present the integral social relationships in which the commemorated individuals were engaged, as well as provided visual clues as to how the commemorator conceived of this relationship within the wider community of the living and the dead. The motif was ultimately used pragmatically to depict and delineate relationships between figures. These relationships are corroborated in the epigraphic evidence. The stylistic and compositional variations inherent in the motif illustrate manipulations made by the artist that alter the meaning of the motif and call into question the close association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage.

The next chapter will investigate the motif as depicted on Roman funerary altars.

209 Nr. 36. Another example is found on the monument dedicated by Caecilia Salutaris to her son. The relief was commissioned while she was still living. The female figure in the depiction turns slightly towards the male figure, but engages the viewer directly. The male figure, who was likely deceased when the monument was commissioned, looks directly at the female figure, seemingly ignorant of the viewer. While the son was isolated from the living community, the artist intentionally depicted Caecilia Salutaris as continuing to engage with the living community. See Nr. 39.

Chapter five: Funerary Altars

Whereas the previous chapter suggested the function of the dextrarum iunctio as it appears on Roman funerary stele and 'window' reliefs was overwhelmingly pragmatic, this chapter will trace the allegorical development of the motif on Roman funerary altars. Funerary altars functioned as cinerary urns, used to hold the cremated remains of the deceased.210 Often highly ornamented, they resembled sacrificial altars in shape. The appearance of the dextrarum iunctio on funerary altars represents a transitional period in its iconographic and interpretive potential. The motif begins to lose its pragmatic function of delineating relationships and takes on an analogous and allegorical meaning, which becomes central to the interpretation of the motif on Roman sarcophagi. The dextrarum iunctio on funerary altars maintains its underlying original function of the depiction of relationships, but changes in compositional elements, such as the increasing standardization of the main and the subsidiary figures, the formulaic use of epigraphic elements to delineate standardized spousal relationships, and the addition of iconographical clues, alter the interpretive potential of the motif by alluding to immortality, the afterlife or separation. This change in composition reflects a transformation in the function associated with the dextrarum iunctio: from the pragmatic to the symbolic.

Stylistic and compositional features:

The stylistic and compositional features of Roman funerary reliefs reveal an increasing standardization of depiction in comparison with the reliefs found in the previous chapter. Stele and 'window' reliefs present an array of variations in composition: bust-length reliefs versus full- length portrait reliefs, few or many subsidiary figures. The figured reliefs found on Roman

210 For a discussion of the funerary altar type, its function and decoration see: Toynbee, Death and Burial, 253-268.

funerary altars, in contrast, tend to be increasingly standardized. Janet Huskinson notes that this form of funerary monument represented a transition from the commemoration of groups to the commemoration of one or two individuals.211 This transition visually manifests in the stylistic and compositional features such as the minimalization of auxiliary figures and the isolation of the motif from other ornamentation.

The figural composition of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars becomes more standardized in comparison with stele and 'window' reliefs. The motif is compositionally isolated from other iconographic elements and the number of figures and their depiction becomes more consistent. The paradigmatic example comes from Rome and is currently held in the

Museo Nazionale delle Terme (Fig.19).212 The ornamented altar, dating from 40 to 50 CE, depicts a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure, who are pictured in full-length portrait. Both figures are depicted wearing the clothing of citizens, a palla on the female figure and a toga on the male figure. Careful attention was paid by the artist to replicate the draping of the clothing on fully rendered lower bodies. The figures both stand with their weight unequally distributed and one leg bent, creating a sense of movement. The representation takes on a more fluid and dynamic character when depicted in full-length portrait as compared to bust-length portrait depictions, which present the head and chest only.

The full-length figures depicted on the monument from the Museo Nazionale stand on a small platform and are framed by two square and ornamented columns surmounted by a triangular pediment. The framing serves to delineate the motif from the iconographical elements found on the same side and the lid of monument: the depiction of a garland trimmed in abundant

211 J. Huskinson, "Constructing Childhood on Roman Funerary Memorials," Hesperia Supplements 41 (2007): 328. 212 See Nr. 80.

fruits and flowers. Further, the dextrarum iunctio is physically isolated from other motifs, though its placement on one side of the monument. It is compositionally isolated through the column pediment structure. Two attendants on the right side with an umbrella, bowl of fruit and garland appear within an aedicula and two attendants appear with a rooster, incense box, patera and pitcher on the left.213 These images are sacrificial in nature and, coupled with the depiction of the maenads, suggest Dionysiac religious associations.214 The isolation of the dextrarum iunctio indicates a potential for the viewer to interpret the motif both in isolation and in combination with other images. This system of 'reading' images in an iconographic manner, as combinations of images, represents an element of continuity between stele and 'window' reliefs and funerary altars.

Many funerary stele were intended to be set into the façade of tombs. The tombs could contain a number of different motifs or many forms of ornamentation.215 The dextrarum iunctio would be compositionally isolated through the framing evident on the stele. However, the motif would be viewed in combination with other images.216 Even if the dextrarum iunctio appeared on a monument that was intended to be free standing, the monument would have been interpreted in relation to other motifs and monuments in its general vicinity. The compositional system found on Roman funerary altars similarly isolates the motif from the other iconographic elements found on the monument. The placement of multiple motifs on the Museo Nazionale altar

213 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 104. 214 Ibid., 106. 215 For example, the funerary complex of the Haterii included a number of individual reliefs and portraits that constituted the overall decorative program. Scholarship tends to analyze each monument separately, but the overall meaning of the program is discerned only when all the reliefs are taken together. One relief shows a funerary monument as a small temple. The second relief depicts a monumental tomb. I suggest that many stele and 'window' reliefs existed in a similar context and must be read 'holistically.' Toynbee, Death and Burial, 132. For the importance of the relief depicting the laying in state see Toynbee, Death and Burial, 44-45. 216 Lauren Petersen discusses the overall iconographic program of the tomb of the Varii. Petersen, The Freedmen in Roman Art, 203-210.

indicates the intention that they be viewed in combination, as a multifaceted unit, similar to the decoration on a tomb. However, the physical isolation of the dextrarum iunctio on the one side of the monument, indicates that the motif is also intended to be considered separately.

The central focus of the altar is the two figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio and the relationship between the individuals. There are no subsidiary figures present in the Museo

Nazionale example. While the dextrarum iunctio found funerary stele and 'window' reliefs could include between two and five figures, either bust-length or full-length portraits, the standard presentation on Roman funerary altars reduces the number of figures to two.217 The lack of subsidiary figures removes the highly pragmatic function of the motif. There is no longer a need to delineate two individuals whose relationship is the most important among the group; rather, the gesture is used to link two individuals who are compositionally isolated in order to bring a focus on the nature of the relationship that exists between the two.

The depiction of the dextrarum iunctio between two full-length figures on funerary altars places the interpretive focus on the representations of the two individuals. The move from bust- length to full-length representations increases the iconographic potential of the motif. The monument focuses both on the gestural cues associated with the dextrarum iunctio as well as on the allegorical depiction of the virtues associated with the individual.218 Sartorial and gestural cues play an increasingly significant role in the depiction of individual merit and status. The female figure is dressed in a tunic covered with a stola219 and wrapped in a palla, dress that suggests the depiction of a Roman matrona; although the lack of the veil renders this interpretation somewhat problematic. The ubiquitous depiction of non-veiled female figures on

217 In all but one example, the dextrarum iunctio depicts two figures. Only Nr. 83 depicts three figures. 218 Huskinson, "Constructing Childhood," 328. 219 Kleiner identifies the buttons of the stola depicted on her upper right arm. Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 105.

Roman funerary altars suggests caution must be taken when associating the depiction with the literary characterizations and the associated virtues of the matrona. I suggest the artists associated with the monument likely intended to depict the virtues associated with a Roman woman despite the lack of veil. The veil is assumed to be integral to the depiction of a Roman matron in literary descriptions.220 However, the descriptions of literary texts are proscriptive in nature and do not necessarily reflect the normative practice.221 The depiction of non-veiled

Roman women found on funerary art imparts the same feminine virtues such as modesty and chastity as well as citizenship and legitimacy.222

The male figure is depicted in a toga, the dress of the male citizen.223 The toga falls in deep folds almost to his ankles. The folds drape around his left shoulder and present a deep sinus. He grasps the folds of his toga at his chest with his right hand, in a gesture synonymous with citizenship. The female figure places her left hand on the right shoulder of the male figure.

This gesture occurs often on Roman altars and will be discussed subsequently. The gesture is often associated with emotion and attachment, indicating the depiction of a relationship marked by emotional intimacy.224 The gesture additionally contributes to the dynamicity inherent in the depiction of the motif. The viewer is presented with a relationship visualized by a dextrarum iunctio, but is also presented with a tableau that alludes to action and movement.

The standardization of figural composition on Roman funerary altars as full-length portrait figures delineated from other images and iconographic elements imparts upon the motif a sense of movement and dynamicity lacking in the representation of the dextrarum iunctio found

220 Sebesta, "Symbolism in the Costume of the Roman Woman," 48. 221 Olsen, Dress and the Roman Woman 41. 222 Sebesta, "Symbolism in the Costume of the Roman Woman," 48; L. Hughes, "Unveiling the Veil," 218-241. 223 See note 158. 224 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 106.

on Roman stele and 'window' reliefs. The interplay of elements denoting continuity between depictions of the motif on stele and altars is also indicated in the gender of figures. The dextrarum iunctio becomes increasingly standardized as predominately linking a male and female figure, but maintains a degree of continuity with stele and 'window' reliefs through the use of same-sex gender depictions. As with the depiction of same-sex couples on Roman stele- type monuments, the representation of the dextrarum iunctio linking two figures of the same sex calls into question the close association with marriage, suggesting the motif was used to delineate a number of different relationships. However, the increasing standardization of the depiction represents a new development in the transformation of the dextrarum iunctio.

Gender of figures:

The presentation of gender is the second of the stylistic and compositional elements that I will consider. The gender of the individuals linked by a dextrarum iunctio on funerary altars becomes more standardized. The majority of the depictions present a male and a female figure linked by their right hands. This standardized figural composition becomes the paradigm for the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman sarcophagi.225 However, a number of examples presenting the dextrarum iunctio between two same-sex figures signify an element of continuity between representations found on stele-type reliefs and funerary altars.226 The marble funerary altar dedicated by Caius Cornelius Glaphyrus to his freedman Gaius Cornelius Philo depicts a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures (Fig. 20).227 The altar, dating from the first century

CE, rarely appears in the secondary sources.228 The main figured relief depicts a dextrarum

225 See Chapter seven for a discussion of the figural composition on Roman sarcophagi. 226 There are three examples of a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures in the corpus under consideration. Nrs. 91, 95 and 96. 227 Nr. 91. 228 See Nr. 91 for bibliography.

iunctio linking a togate male figure standing on the left with a nude male. The portrait features of the togate male are heavily damaged. The male figure on the right appears nude apart from a paludamentum wrapped around his waist. He stands in a contrapposto pose, his weight unevenly distributed and his left leg bent. The sartorial cues indicate status differentiation between the individuals portrayed. The togate male figure is depicted in the dress of the citizen, while the male wrapped in the paludamentum is differentiated through his nudity. The inscriptional evidence substantiates the status differentiation. The monument was commissioned by a patron,

Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus, on behalf of his well-deserving (bene merenti) freedman, Gaius

Cornelius Philo.229 The monument was commissioned to commemorate a relationship of patronage. While definitive identification of the figures is impossible, it is likely that the togate male figure correlates with the figure of Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus, who commissioned the monument for his freed slave. Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus is depicted in the guise of a Roman citizen while Gaius Cornelius Philo is depicted in a heroic nude influenced by the conventions of

Roman statuary.230 The epigraphic evidence provides no indication of the status of Gaius

Cornelius Glaphyrus beyond the trinomia suggestive of citizen status.231 Gaius Cornelius

Glaphyrus was a citizen, but his status as either freeborn or a freed slave himself is not known.

He commissioned a monument to commemorate his manumitted slave, whom he depicts in heroic pose. The choice of heroic pose is significant. Both individuals were entitled to wear the toga. As a manumitted slave Gaius Cornelius Philo gained citizenship and, thus, the right to wear

229 CIL X 7215: D M// C CORNELIO/ PHILONI/ C CORNEILVS GLAPHYR/ PATRONVS L B M F. The Clauss-Slaby database provides the following expansion: D(is) M(anibus) / C(aio) Cornelio / Philoni / C(aius) Cornelius Glaphyr(us) / patronus l(iberto) b(ene) m(erenti) f(ecit). 230 R. Stewart, Statues in Roman Society (New York: Oxford, 2003), 97. See Hallet's work on the Roman nude. C. Hallett, The Roman Nude: Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 BC-AD 300 (Oxford University Press, 2005), especially Chapter five. 231 J. E. Sandys, Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1919), 208.

a toga. The choice to distinguish the figures based on sartorial cues indicates an intention to differentiate the status of the individuals.

Ultimately, the presentation of the dextrarum iunctio in this example follows the standardized figural composition of the motif found on the paradigm example discussed earlier from the Museo Nazionale in that only two figures are presented. The major variation is the gender of the individuals involved. The focus of the monument is on the relationship between the two men linked by the dextrarum iunctio, described in the epigraphic evidence as a patronage relationship. The existence of the asymmetrical relationship is corroborated by the status differentiation implied by sartorial cues.

The choice of the gender of the figures is doubly significant to the discussion of the interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio. On the one hand, the gender of the individuals involved can question the close association between the motif and marriage. However, an innovative stylistic element found on funerary altars is the use of iconographic cues, generally gendered cues, in combination with a dextrarum iunctio, to allude to an allegorical meaning.

Iconographic elements:

The final compositional element that I will discuss is the addition of iconographic cues associated with the figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio that nuance and guide the interpretation of the motif. These iconographic features tend to be gendered, such as the scroll that is specifically associated with a male figure when presented in a scene of dextrarum iunctio on

Roman funerary altars. Such elements are included in the representation of the motif on account of their allegorical potency. They direct the understanding of the viewer by subtle manipulation of the depiction to express concern with the afterlife or separation in this life. Iconographic

elements associated specifically with the figures are ignored or overlooked in traditional typological analysis. The analytical framework of Walter Altmann categorized the altars according to ornamentation: garlands, bucrania, rams, victories, portrait figures and so on.232

Davis also divided her analysis of the altars into typological categories based on decorative elements.233 Her analysis focused on the categorization of iconographic elements, rather than full analysis. The intention was to create a typology, rather than iconographic breakdown of specific motifs. This section will discuss the iconographic elements that are associated with the figures engaged in the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars. I will look at three elements that become central to the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio: the open door, pomegranate and the scroll.

The open door represents a central iconographical element on many Roman funerary altars. Funerary stele and 'window' reliefs, discussed in the previous chapter, tend to delineate figural scenes using framing techniques that create the impression of a number of figures looking out of a window with their arms leaning on the 'sill.'234 On Roman funerary altars, the figural scene is more often differentiated and isolated by either a depiction of an open door or an architectural feature of columns surmounted by a pediment. Of the 22 examples that make up the corpus of Roman funerary altars collected here, five examples depict the figures joined in dextrarum iunctio standing within an open door or architectural edifice.235 The altar dedicated to

Caius Domitus Verus by his spouse Volussia Severa presents a dextrarum iunctio between a

232 Altmann, Die römischen Grabaltäre der Kaiserzeit, 16-17. 233 See her dissertation on the decoration of Roman funerary altars. She divides her discussion of ornamentation into 4 overarching typologies: Representations of Death and Images of Life and Death; Mythological Scenes and Figures; the Animal Kingdom and the Minor Motifs. G.M. Davies, Fashion in the Grave: A Study of the Motifs Used to Decorate the Grave Altars, Ash Chests and Sarcophagi Made in Rome in the Early Empire (To the Mid Second Century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University of London, 1978), 121-327. 234 Zanker, "Grabreliefs," 272-273. 235 For examples with a door, see Nrs. 81, 86, 89 and 90. For examples with an architectural edifice, Nrs. 82, 84, 91 and 92.

male and a female figure (Fig. 21).236 The altar, the dating of which is unknown, is divided into three horizontal registers that are bounded by two pilasters with Corinthian columns at the corners. The upper register presents a decorative frieze depicting dolphins around a number of shells that Davis identifies as mussel shells.237 The middle register displays the inscription while the lower register depicts a figured dextrarum iunctio scene linking a male and a female figure.

The figures stand within a fully open door, the frame of which is surmounted by a triangular pediment ornamented with a wreath and ribbons. The door is a semantically charged motif in

Roman funerary art, the meaning of which evolved over time.238 In its earliest depictions on

Etruscan funerary art, the door symbolizes the entrance to Hades.239 On their funerary altar,

Gaius Domitus Verus and Volussia Severa are depicted standing in front of the entrance into the afterlife. Such scenes suggest separation, as the deceased individual prepares to pass from the earthly realm.240

The typos of entrance into the afterlife is combined with a number of subsidiary motifs that further nuance the interpretation of the open door. The altar of Gaius Domitus Verus combines several iconographic cues. The relief found overtop of the inscription depicts dolphins and mussel shells, and alludes to the journey of the soul to the afterlife. The symbols are

236 See Nr. 89. 237 Davis, Fashion in the Grave, 23 Nr. 59. 238 Ibid., 122-133. Britt Haarløv has produced a comprehensive study focusing on the open door motif in Roman funerary art. B. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door: A Common Symbolic Motif within Roman Sepulchral Sculpture (Odense, Denmark: Odense University Press, 1977), 19-20. 239 Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 15; For a discussion of the development of the typos of the door to the underworld or door to heaven see F. Cumont, Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains (New York: Arno Press, 1975), 39-40. 240 This element of farewell or separation comes out in some scholarship in the realm of sarcophagi. Louis Reekmans believes that when the dextrarum iunctio is depicted with two figures linked by their right hand, and no subsidiary figures, the motif could represent farewell or parting of the figures. However, this element is not emphasized on Roman funerary altars. The major English language corpus of funerary altars written by Kleiner does not include any examples of funerary altars with open-door motifs. Walter Altmann's work, also, does not analyze examples that include doors.

included as to illustrate the triumph of the soul over death.241 Dolphins were believed to carry the souls of the deceased to the land of the heroes.242 The triangular pediment over the door is decorated with a wreath and streaming ribbons. Wreaths made of flowers are associated with sacrificial gifts placed on the altars by relatives.243 Ribbons, lemniskoi, are further associated with the sacrificial context as they originally functioned to secure sacrificial offerings of flowers.244 As the iconography and beliefs associated with the grave sacrifices developed, the image became honorific in connotation and associated with the ideas of virtue. The subsidiary imagery of the relief focuses on the apotheosis of the individual deceased to the gens and the ancestors, as well as the obligations due to them by the living.

A small three-legged altar appears between the dextrarum iunctio figures, an image which also is drawn from sacrificial imagery. Large flames dance from the top of the altar. The inclusion of the object in the representation of the dextrarum iunctio alludes to the sacrifices offered by relatives on behalf of the deceased.245 Such an interpretation may be corroborated in the representation of the female figure; she holds what appears to be a plant prominently in her left hand. This plant may be included as a visual depiction of an offering to the deceased.246

The overall interpretation of the open door motif when combined with the subsidiary motifs is one of individual apotheosis conditional upon the offerings made by relatives that help to mitigate the fate of the deceased.247

241 Haarlov categorizes the subsidiary iconographic motifs into four categories. Dolphins and mussel shells represent images that appear in the category 'symbols of triumph over death.' Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 53. 242 Cumont, Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains, 155 Fig. 4. 243 Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 48. 244 Ibid., 49. 245 Ibid., 32. The presence of a sacrificial altar is not a particularly common attribute of the dextrarum iunctio motif. However, it does appear on two examples on funerary altars. See Nrs. 81 and 83. 246 Davis, Fashion in the Grave, 300. 247 Haarløv follows the development of the motif from this form of personal apotheosis based on individual virtue, to a more generalized expectation of an open afterlife, a general apotheosis that was unconditional and available to all individuals. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 84.

I suggest that a number of examples of Roman funerary altars that depict the dextrarum iunctio within an architectural edifice are drawing upon the same imagery as the open-door motif. A number of altars, such as the marble altar dedicated to Gaius Iulius Hermes, dating from the second half of the first century CE and currently housed in the Museo Nazionale delle

Terme in Rome, depict a dextrarum iunctio that is delineated from the rest of the monument by two columns surmounted by a triangular pediment (Fig. 22). The doors are missing from the architectural edifice, but many of the subsidiary images are carefully rendered, such as a wreath and ribbons on the triangular pediment. A garland hangs from the tops of Corinthian columns found at the corners of the monument. The overall iconographic program focuses on the obsequious performance of sacrificial rituals on behalf of the deceased as they journey from the world of the living to the afterlife. Ultimately, the door or architectural edifice becomes a symbol of this transition.

The open door motif functions on a number of levels in depictions of the dextrarum iunctio. On a pragmatic level, the open door is used stylistically to delineate the figural scene, but it also functions to offer iconographical cues for the interpretation of the motif. Other iconographical cues become associated with specific genders: the pomegranate and the scroll.

The scroll is a specifically male attribute within the corpus under discussion. Male figures found on Roman stele and 'window' reliefs discussed in Chapter four lacked specific iconographical emblems. However, within the context of reliefs found on funerary altars, male figures are regularly presented with iconographic attributes. The marble altar of an uncertain date, commissioned for Helius Afinianus by his wife Sextia Psyche, provides an example (Fig.

23).248 The dextrarum iunctio scene presents a male and a female figure linked by their right hands and standing within an open door. The togate male figure stands on the left in near profile

248 See Nr. 81.

view with his right hand reaching out to grasp the hand of the female figure in dextrarum iunctio.

His left arm is bent at the elbow and is hand holds a scroll prominently at chest height. The scroll is a dominant iconographic element connected with a dextrarum iunctio figure, appearing on seven examples in this corpus.249

When the scroll appears in conjunction with a dextrarum iunctio, it is often interpreted as tabulae nuptiales, documents associated with the marriage ceremony and legal elements of dowry transmission.250 This interpretation is problematic.251 The marriage agreement does not appear to be central to the marriage ceremony itself. Further, the physical form of the tabulae nuptiales documents do not agree with the depiction of a scroll; the term tabulae suggests the marriage contract was found on tablets rather than scrolls.252 Thus, while the scrolls could be allegorical elements that refer to the agreement of marriage and dotal obligations, this interpretation is unlikely.

The presence of scrolls on Roman funerary monuments could be interpreted in a number of ways beyond the traditional conjugal associations. When the scroll appears on a Roman funerary monument in contexts other than the dextrarum iunctio, it is often linked to status promulgation. The scroll in the hand of a togate male is often interpreted as a status indicator of citizenship.253 In some situations, where epigraphic evidence indicates that the commemorated individuals are freed slaves, some scholars interpret the motif as the visual representation of the

249 Nrs. 81,83, 89, 93, 94, 95 and 96. 250 Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 210-211.Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 140, note 72. On other forms of funerary monuments, women are found to hold scrolls. See S.M. Salvadori, Per feminam mors, per feminam vita: Images of Women in the Early Christian Funerary Art of Rome (PhD diss., New York University, 2002). 251 Davis cautions that the scrolls could relate to the funerary rather than the nuptial context. Davis, "The Handshake Motif," 633. For example, the Etruscan incarnation of Charon, the ferry man, is often depicted carrying a scroll. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 15 17n. 252 Davis, "The Handshake Motif," 633. 253 J. Mander, Portraits of Children on Roman Funerary Monuments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 43.

manumission agreement.254 The scroll is included in the depiction as an indicator of the new- found status of the individual. The meaning of the attribute can be further nuanced to present the education and cultural knowledge of the individual depicted or the educational potential of an individual who died prematurely.255 Haarløv classifies the scroll as an iconographic element suggesting the virtues of the individual that qualify the deceased for resurrection.256 The form of funerary monument, the altar, focuses on the individual and their accomplishments and virtues.

In this way, the commemorative function of the monument is a record of all the virtues developed in the earthly life that allowed for the apotheosis of the deceased to a place among the ancestors. In this commemorative context, attributes such as scrolls, musical instruments, and muses all allude to the virtue of knowledge, sapientia.257 Thus, the scroll could function as a status transmitter, imparting upon the viewer the role the individual played in society, but it could also function as a listing of virtues that make that individual worthy to enter the company of the ancestors.

In the funerary context, a third interpretation can emerge: the scroll can represent the will and testament of the deceased.258 I suggest this interpretation is the most appropriate given the funerary context and associated iconography, such as the open door motif and its implication of separation and transition from the earthly world to the next. The scroll maintains the symbolic connotations of citizenship as only citizens were able to draw up a will.259 The last will and testament establishes the lines of succession expected to be followed after the death of the

254 Mander, Portraits of Children, 44. 255 Mander provides a number of examples that depict children with a scroll despite having passed away at an age where they would not be literate. Ibid., 44. 256 Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 50. 257 Ibid., 50. Huskinson also associates the scroll with knowledge. Janet Huskinson, Roman Children's Sarcophagi: Their Decoration and its Social Significance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 69. 258 D'Ambra provides an example of a scene in which a scroll is traditionally designated as a will. E. D'Ambra, "Mourning and the Making of Ancestors in the Testamentum Relief," AJA 99,4 (1995), 668. 259 Champlain, Final Judgements, 42.

individual and makes provision for the proper burial and commemoration of the deceased.260

The implication of the inclusion of the scroll in the scene is the focus on the separation of the individual from their earthly life; the implications of the death of the deceased on continued existence of the living. However, the scroll is combined with iconographic elements that delineate expectations of the afterlife, such as the open door suggesting the transition of the deceased to the afterlife. The Eros figures take on the role of psychopompos, who accompany the deceased to the afterlife, and, finally, the Sphynx is included as an apotropaic element.261

The attributes associated with the motif refer to the transition of the soul to the afterlife, while the scroll alludes to the implications of the death on the lives of the descendents.

The scroll is a multivalent visual attribute that can have a number of different and simultaneous interpretations, such as citizenship, status and culture, as well as allusions to legal elements. The scroll is a specifically male attribute in this context, with connotations of male virtue. The gendered vocabulary of the scroll, however, is matched by the feminine attribute of the pomegranate.

The pomegranate is a dominant female attribute found on Roman funerary altars. It appears in at least eight examples of the dextrarum iunctio on altars originating from Rome.262

The altar dedicated to Vernasia Cyclas presents the pomegranate as the main figural attribute associated with the dextrarum iunctio (Fig. 6).263 The scene appears underneath the inscription,

260 Lisa Hughes discusses the Publilii monument as a visual proclamation of the adherence of the commissioners to legal proceedings. L. Hughes, "The Proclamation of Non-Defective Slaves and the Curule Aediles' Edict," Ancient Society 36 (2006): 240. 261 Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 40. 262 Nrs. 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 92 and 93. The Pomegranate may also appear in example Nr. 95. However, the relief is too damaged to be sure. The positioning of the left arm of the female figure seems to indicate that she is holding an object at waist height, but she could be merely holding her hand at waist height, such as the female figure depicted in the altar for Tiberius Claudius Dionysus, Nr. 94. 263 See Nr. 84.

which provides likely identification for the individuals portrayed: Vernasia Cyclas and Vitalis.264

Vernasia Cyclas is presented on the right, wearing a tunic and wrapped in a palla that drapes over her shoulders and falls behind to her knees. She reaches out with her right hand to engage in the dextrarum iunctio. Her left arm is bent 90 degrees at the elbow and held at waist height.

She holds a small, round object predominately in her hand. This object appears in a number of similar examples and is often identified as either an apple or pomegranate.265 In the context of funerary altars, the pomegranate is identified as a descriptive element only without any further iconographic analysis.266 I suggest the inclusion of various iconographic elements is integral for the interpretation of the motif, not merely a monovalent stylistic addition.

When the pomegranate is found in funerary art, it tends to be interpreted as a symbol of fertility and identified as an appropriate feminine attribute for a motif that is associated with marriage.267 Kantorowicz argues that the pomegranate, because it consists of many seeds contained within the skin, was a symbol of the goddess Concordia, who is often depicted with pomegranates as a visual attribute.268 Other scholarship associates the pomegranate with the goddess Juno. In this case, the fruit is understood to represent love, especially within the conjugal context.269 However, like the scroll, the attribute is multivalent with many interpretations. Most notably, the pomegranate has mythological associations with Proserpina and the goddess Ceres. The most common association is with the myth of the rape and return of

264 CIL VI 8769 (p 3463) = CIL XI 155c: VERNASIAE CYCLADI/ CONIVGI OPTIMAE/ VIX ANN XXVII/ VITALIS AVG L/ SCRIB CVB/ F A P. The Class-Slaby expansion: Vernasiae / Cycladi / coniugi optimae / vix(it) ann(os) XXVII / Vitalis Aug(usti) l(ibertus) / scrib(a) cub(iculariorum) / f(idelissimae) a(mantissimae) p(ientissimae). 265 Davis, "The Handshake Motif," 633. 266 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 131. 267 C. Bonner, "Hades and the Pomegranate Seed (Hymn to Demeter 371-4)," CR 53, 1 (1939): 4. 268 E. Kantorowicz, "On the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection," DOP 14 (1960), 6. 269 O. Seemann, The Mythology of Greece and Rome: With Special Reference to Its Use in Art, trans. G.H. Bianchi (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882), 39.

Proserpina/Persephone.270 The daughter of Ceres/Demeter was kidnapped by Pluto/Hades, the god of the Underworld. In order to keep Persephone in the underworld, Hades presents her with a pomegranate seeds, which she eats. The pomegranate was a potent fertility symbol and, in ancient societies, the very act of a woman eating in the house of a man could be conceived of as a binding marriage ceremony.271 Thus, the act of Persephone or Proserpina eating in the underworld was akin to a wedding ceremony and bound her to the underworld as she becomes the "Bride of Hades."272

While the pomegranate undoubtedly has associations with fertility, sex and marriage in the mythological context, the attribute also has connotations of blood, death and the underworld.273 The centrality of the pomegranate to the Eleusian mysteries implies the association between the symbol and the concept of potential salvation and immortality. The pomegranate is connected with underworld; however, it also provides the possibility for salvation for human kind through the esoteric knowledge of the Eleusian mysteries.274 The chthonic associations of the motif that are being drawn out when it is combined with iconographic elements, such as the garlands and dolphins, that suggest separation of the soul from the body at death. The correlation may be further influenced by precedents in Etruscan funerary art. The pomegranate was also a common element found on Etruscan monuments and

270 Hymn to Demeter, 372-4. 271 Bonner, "Hades and the Pomegranate Seed," 4. 272 E. P. Cueva, "The Art and Myth of Cupid and Psyche," in Veritatis amicitiaeque causa: Essays in Honor of Anna Lydia Motto and John R Clarke, ed. S.N. Byrne and E.P. Cueva (Chicago: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 1999), 64. 273 D. Buitron-Oliver and B. Cohen, "Between Skylla and Penelope: Female Characters of the Odyssey in Archaic and Classical Greek Art," in The Distaff Side: Representing the Female in Homer's Odyssey, ed. B. Cohen (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 33. 274 During this period, the rape of Proserpina was a common motif on Roman sarcophagi. It seems to reflect a growing association between the goddess Ceres and the Eleusian mysteries in the literary sources of the early Empire. B. S. Spaeth, The Roman Goddess Ceres (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996) 27.

seems to have influenced Roman artistic conventions. 275 The fruit appears in tomb paintings, in representations of funerary meals, on vases and even on some jewelry and is often connected with Phersipnei, the Etruscan version of Persephone.276 The inclusion of the pomegranate in the dextrarum iunctio transforms the scene from a monolithic image to a narrative motif that is associated with immortality and the afterlife.

Ultimately, the inclusion of the pomegranate, as well as other figural attributes, function to transform the dextrarum iunctio from a pragmatic indicator of relationships to encompass a complex narrative that alludes to expectations of the afterlife, immortality, the separation of the deceased from the earthly life, and the implications of the death of the individual on the world of the living. The narrative can be enhanced by the inclusion of gestures that nuance the meaning of the dextrarum iunctio.

Gestural:

The development of more complex iconographic scenes in depictions of the dextrarum iunctio is coupled with the formation of gestural paradigms drawn from the world of statuary.

The loss of the pragmatic function of the motif, the pointing out of relationships between individuals, suggests that the motif was taking on an increasingly allegorical function. The careful rendering of portraiture and gestures associated with the figures were intended to contribute to the iconographic message inherent in the dextrarum iunctio. The representations on

Roman funerary altars correspond to a transition between the dextrarum iunctio appearing on stele and 'window' reliefs, which have a pragmatic function, and those found on Roman

275 Candace Carter points to a number of examples of funerary urns dating from the first century BCE that depict women holding pomegranates prominently in their hands. C. Carter, "A Funerary Urn from Volterra," AJA 88, 4 (1984): 542, 276 J. R. Jannot, "The Lotus, Poppy and other Plants in Etruscan Funerary Contexts," Etruscan by Definition; Papers in Honour of Sybille Haynes, MBE. British Museum Research Publication 173 (2009): 81.

sarcophagi, which are highly imbued with allegorical potential. This subsection looks at two gestural categories. The first presents a female pose that resembles the 'Ceres-type' statuary found in imperial art. The representation of the female form as derived from honourific statuary and imbued with symbolic meaning is an innovation in the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio. A second category focuses on a gesture, performed by either a male or a female, where the figure places their hand on the shoulder or cheek of the opposing figure, while they are being linked by a dextrarum iunctio.

The first dominant gestural category focuses on the gesture of the female figure as an example of a pose influenced by female honourific portraiture of the 'Ceres-type.' The paradigmatic and well-documented example is the Altar of Vinicia Tyche currently housed in the

Museo Archeologico in Florence (Fig.24).277 The front of the marble altar dating from 75-85 CE depicts a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure. The female figure stands on the right in near frontal pose with her head turned towards the male figure. Her thick wavy hair is drawn back from her face, fastened at the base of her neck and is not covered by a veil. She wears a tunic gathered under her chest that falls to her feet and a palla that drapes from her left shoulder around her body and over her left forearm. She stands with her weight unequally distributed, her right leg bears her weight while her left leg is held bent and turned inward towards her body. The gesture emphasizes the heavily draped female body, but also imbues the scene with a sense of movement and dynamicity. I suggest this gesture is an early modification of the 'Ceres-type' pose found in Roman statuary. The 'Ceres-type' statue type presents a veiled female figure wearing a tunic and wrapped in a palla (Fig. 25).278 Her palla is wrapped tightly

277 Nr. 93. 278 For a discussion of the 'Ceres-type' see: A. Alexandridis, Die Frauen des Rӧmischen Kaiserhauses: Eine Untersuchung ihrer bildlichen Darstellung von Livia bis Iulia Comna (Mainz am Rhein: Philipp con Zabern, 2004),

around her body, usually enveloping her right elbow, and draped over her left shoulder. Her right hand often holds a swath of poppies and corn ears, driving the identification of the statue type with depictions of the goddess Ceres.279

Statue paradigms such as the 'Ceres-type' were used in honourific and ceremonial portraiture as a means of female commemoration.280 Portrait statues were installed in public areas and viewed in association with other sepulcher forms.281 The ubiquitous nature of the portraits would have made the form easily recognizable by Romans of all classes. Like the

'Large Herculaneum-type' that Trimble discusses, the 'Ceres-type' portrait was an acceptable type for the public representation of Roman women. They were heavily draped and classicizing making it ideal vocabulary for a Roman woman.282 Depictions on Roman funerary altars that draw on the 'Ceres-type' derived from statuary are tapping into a highly developed visual vocabulary associated with the depiction of the female body.

The sense of movement created by the slight bending of the left leg inherent in the

'Ceres-type' portraiture is amplified in some examples by slight modifications of posture that contribute to the dynamicity of the motif. The undated, marble altar of Caius Iulius Hermes currently in the Museo Nazionale in Rome portrays an exaggerated version of the posture (Fig.

22).283 A male and a female figure are linked by a dextrarum iunctio. The female figure takes a

54-57; M. Bieber, Ancient Copies: Contributions to the History of Greek and Roman Art (New York: New York University Press, 1977), 163-173; G. Davis, "Portrait Statues as Models for Gender Roles in Roman Society," in Role Models in the Roman World: Identity and Assimilation, ed. S. Bell and I. L. Housen (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2008), 207-220. 279 Bieber argues that the portrait type was especially reserved for the depiction of priestesses of Ceres. Bieber, Ancient Copies, 163-164; Davis, "Portrait Statues as Models," 211. 280 Trimble discusses the replication and use of the Large Herculaneum statue type, but her findings also reflect the use of the Ceres-type and other representations of women in statuary. J. Trimble, Women and Visual Replication in Roman Imperial Art and Culture (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 37. 281 Ibid., 31. 282 Ibid., 33. 283 See Nr. 82.

'Ceres-type' pose, portrayed in near frontal view with her weight on the right leg and her left leg bent. However, her 'Ceres-type' pose is modified by a slight curve in her posture; she appears to lean forward and slightly to the iewer’s right as if she is in the process of turning around to her left. This stylistic variation appears on a number of funerary altars, but in a less exaggerated form.284

It is my assertion that the honorific portrait depiction coupled with this motion of turning away indicates that motif is also used in this context to represent farewell scenes between two individuals. The association of the motif with scenes of farewell was noted by Reekmans for specific examples appearing on sarcophagi. He argues that in cases where the two figures are compositionally isolated and stylistic elements create a sense of movement, the motif can represent leave-taking.285 This interpretation is validated within the literary record. The handshake is used in a limited number of literary examples to represent either reunion or leave- taking.286 The correlation between the visual depiction and the literary examples suggest an artistic precedence for a leave-taking function of the motif.

This suggestion of farewell can be intensified compositionally with the introduction or inclusion of iconographic motifs. Incidentally, this gestural variation provides the opportunity for the artist to incorporate iconographical elements. The paradigmatic presentation of the

'Ceres-type' statue includes the female figure holding a sprig of poppies or corn ears in her left

284 See the altar of Vernasia Cyclas and the altar of T. Aquilius Pelorus. Nrs. 84 and 85. 285 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,' 27-30. 286 For example Plautus' character Euclio states his worry about leaving on a journey as he dreads the greeting of people who know what he is concealing, that they will stop and shake his hands and ask how he is doing. The term in the Latin is copulantur dextras, meaning literally 'they couple right hands.' Pl. Aul. 1.2. There are also examples in the Greek context. Xenophon discusses Teleutias sailing for home. He suggests that as he travelled home, there was no one among the soldiers that did not grasp his hand. Xen. Hell. 5.1.

hand.287 By modifying the 'Ceres-type,' the artist can depict the female figure holding iconographic objects in her left hand. The use of statuary portraiture, but also the potential use of iconographic cues, allows the artist to nuance or to alter the interpretation of the motif depending upon the cues they choose to incorporate in the depiction.

The second gestural variation can be performed by either a male or a female figure in conjunction with a dextrarum iunctio. This typological category creates compositional unity by having one figure put their left arm on the shoulder of the other figure. The paradigm is found on the marble funerary altar, dating from the mid-first century CE and housed in Museo

Nazionale delle Terme, depicting a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio (Fig.

19). This gesture is always performed by the figure on the left. On the paradigm funerary altar, the female figure is depicted on the left. Her feet are hip width apart and facing forward, but she turns with her upper body to near profile. She looks directly at the male figure. She is dressed in a tunic and wrapped in a palla that drapes over her left shoulder. Her right arm reaches across her body to engage in a dextrarum iunctio, while her left arm reaches towards the male figure and her hand rests on his shoulder. This gestural combination appears to be an innovation on

Roman funerary altars. There are no examples in stele or 'window' reliefs depicting this type and only two sarcophagi present a similar gesture.288

This gesture creates a tighter composition, linking the individuals in two different ways to create a greater sense of grouping. This gesture tends to be interpreted as a visual presentation of emotion suggesting a greater emotional intensity and bond between the individuals.289

287 Davis, "Portrait Statues as Models," 211. 288 Nr. 110. 289 Kleiner, Roman Imperial Funerary Altars, 106.

Epigraphic evidence may corroborate this interpretation.290 Three of the examples that include this gesture in the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio describe the relationship between the commemorator and commemorated individual as a spousal: they are coniugi. The gesture is part of the visual vocabulary available to Roman artists to represent a union between two individuals.291

In addition to representing a conjugal union, the gestural variation can also have connotations associated with farewell. The paradigm is easily discerned. The figure on the left is portrayed in three-quarter to near profile pose, obscuring a large part of their body as well as directing the gaze of the viewer towards the second figure. The figure on the right is always depicted in noticeably three-quarter to near frontal pose. When the figure is a female, they take on a pose that emulates Ceres statuary with modifications already discussed.292 When the figure is male, he takes on the same general pose in that he stands with his weight unevenly distributed and his left leg bent. The figure on the right, the recipient of the linking gesture, is always depicted with their weight unequally distributed and their left leg bent with the knee turned inward. The gesture imbues the scene with a dynamic element. The figures appear to be in the process of separating, as the figure on the left places a hand on the shoulder of the other individual in a last gesture of comfort. In two of the examples that include this gestural variant, the dextrarum iunctio appears within an open door, suggesting the departure of the deceased at death.293 The slight variations in gesture and iconographic attributes suggest the intensity of

290 The three examples with associated epigraphic evidence are not well cited examples of funerary altars. The altar of Titus Aquilius Pelorus is cited by Altmann, but the altar of Titus Aelius Felix and the altar of Gaius Sentus Paezo do not appear in the secondary sources. Nrs. 85, 86 and 92 respectively. 291 Nrs. 80, 85, 86 and 92. 292 Nr. 92. 293 Nrs. 85 and 86.

bond that exists between the two individuals and the eventual disintegration of that union at death.

The choice of gestural variation used to depict the dextrarum iunctio had implications for the interpretive potential of the motif. The transition from the frontal bust-length portrait depictions found on stele and 'window' reliefs to the full-length portraits common on Roman funerary altars reflects the transition of the dextrarum iunctio. The original pragmatic function of delineating relationships between two individuals remains, but the gestural variants become more symbolically potent. The inclusion of variants of the 'Ceres-type' represents a new innovation on funerary altars and alludes to honourific portraiture as well as chthonic elements.

A dextrarum iunctio where one figure places their left hand on the cheek or shoulder of the other suggests an intimate bond that is rent asunder by the death of one of the individuals. The nature of this bond can be discerned by epigraphic evidence, nuanced by the visual presentation.

Epigraphic:

As with stele and 'window' reliefs, epigraphic evidence can offer insights into the intended interpretation of the motif. There are, however, a number of differences between the epigraphic evidence associated with reliefs compared to funerary altars. The inscriptions on altars are much more comprehensive than many of the inscriptions found on stele and 'window' reliefs, where there are a number of examples including inscriptions that provide only a listing of names and basic identification. The inscriptions found on Roman funerary altars, in contrast, provide more information about both the commemorator and deceased. There are 22 examples of funerary reliefs and 20 have associated epigraphic evidence.294 In all but one of the 20 inscriptions, the dedicator or dedicators are named specifically as well as the individual or

294 Nr. 80 lacks associated epigraphic evidence.

individuals commemorated. Most inscriptions either explicitly state the nature of the association between the two individuals, or provide epithets that allow extrapolation of the relationships. The distribution of relationships is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Distribution of Commemorative Relationships on Roman Funerary Altars Relationship Number of Percentage Commemorations (total 25) No 3 12 Indication Patron 4 16 Spouse 13 52 Children 3 12 Parents 1 4 Conlibertii/ae 1 4

The relationships found within the corpus of altars follow the same basic patterns as funerary reliefs. A number of different relationships are dominant in the epigraphic evidence.

Spouses, patrons, parents, children and conliberti/(ae) are explicitly stated as the individual(s) commemorated by the monument (see Appendix C). However, there are a few unique examples: a patron commemorating his client and an example where parents are commemorated that provide further evidence of the multivalent nature of the motif. Rather than a monolithic interpretation of marriage, the motif functions in an allegorical manner to present a number of different affiliations, but relationships that were becoming much more contractual. The epigraphic evidence indicates a degree of continuity between the stele-type reliefs and funerary altars, but it also reflects transition to more standardized depictions and relationships. To complicate the interpretation of the motif even further, there are a number of examples where the visual depictions do not match the presentation of individuals found in the epigraphic evidence.

Two examples occur where the inscription indicates the monument was commissioned by a male to commemorate a male, but the visual depiction presents a dextrarum iunctio between a male

100

and a female figure.295 This incongruence indicates that the motif must be considered as an analogous or symbolic representation of a relationship, rather than a depiction of individualized portraiture.

The epigraphic evidence presents a degree of continuity with the patterns found in the evidence associated with stele-type monuments. For example, the number of patronage relationships found within the corpus is significant. The marble altar of an uncertain date, dedicated to Gaius Cornelius Philo and already discussed in part, presents a variant of the dextrarum iunctio between two male figures, whose identities are corroborated by epigraphic evidence (Fig. 20). The altar is dedicated to the client by his patron, Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus and is not well documented despite the uniqueness in commemoration and visual presentation corroborated by epigraphic evidence.296 The altar is square, highly ornamented and divided into roughly three registers. The outer columns are square in shape and decorated with a vines and flowers, which have been described as arabesque.297 The top register depicts three winged-Eros figures, each holding the ends of two garlands. Over each garland are two faces, which some scholars have identified as gorgon heads.298 However, I suggest the faces actually are representations of theatrical masks, due to their individualized features and facial expressions.

The outer two Eros-figures stand on chalices that rest on the heads of two sphinxes that turn their

295 Nrs. 82 and 83. 296 I found very little documentation for the motif. Most of the scholarship has focused on the epigraphic analysis. There is only one catalog entry that describes the altar itself. Two scholars seem to have focused on this altar because it appears in a catalog from the 16th century. The scholars argue whether the copies of the inscription were authentic. This is discussed in Epigrafia i numismàtica a l'epistolari d'Antonio Agustín (1551-1563), accessed Jan. 24, 2013, http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A% 2F%2Fwww.tdx.cat%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F10803%2F5551%2Fjcm10de17.pdf%3Fsequence%3D10&ei=i75 uUZO6O4W5igLd44HgDQ&usg=AFQjCNHT8J957W6pDFGy9UVeuZg9GXO58A&sig2=edz5vqmJIJEwb5XwQ XbuoA&bvm=bv.45368065,d.cGE. 297 Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften und der Georg-Augusts-Universitat (Gottingen1865), 443. 298 Ibid., 443.

101

heads towards the figured scene between them. The middle panel contains the inscription.

Below the inscription is a figured scene depicting two full-length male figures delineated by two columns surmounted by a pediment. The togate male figure on the left stands in three quarter view with his toga draped over his left arm, while his right arm extends across his body to engage in a dextrarum iunctio with the second figure. The second figure is also male and appears in the nude apart from a paludamentum wrapped around his waist. The left folds of the paludamentum are draped over his left forearm, while his right hand extends to the dextrarum iunctio. As discussed earlier, the gender of the figures is important as it questions the monolithic association of the motif with marriage. The inscription provides potential identification of the figures:

D M/ C CORNELIO/ PHILONI/ C CORNEILVS GLAPHYR/ PATRONVS L B M F299 CIL X 7215

It is likely that the two figures are the men identified in the inscription: Gaius Cornelius

Philo and Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus. Glaphyrus is characterized in the inscription as the patron.

The name of Gaius Cornelius Philo indicates that he was a slave named Philo, perhaps reflecting his ethnicity or origin. He was eventually manumitted by Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus, whose nomen and praenomen he took.300 Thus, the names of the two men corroborate the patronage relationship between them.

299 The Clauss-Slaby database provides the following expansion: D(is) M(anibus) / C(aio) Cornelio / Philoni / C(aius) Cornelius Glaphyr(us) / patronus l(iberto) b(ene) m(erenti) f(ecit). 300An 18th century scholar argued that there were actually three individuals named in the inscription as the cognomen Glaphyr could refer to a Cappadocian princess. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Nachrichten von der Königl, 443. In this case, the three individuals named were Gaius Cornelius Philo, Gaius Cornelius and Glaphyr. This interpretation was refuted soon after; a basic search in the Clauss-Slaby database indicates that, although not a common cognomen, there are examples where Glaphyrus was used as a male cognomen. See CIL II

102

This altar represents an interesting example of a dextrarum iunctio used by a patron to commemorate his freedman. The commemoration of patronage relationships reflects the pragmatic function found on Roman stele and 'window' reliefs. However, the dextrarum iunctio as it appears on the funerary altar of Caius Cornelius Philo is depicted in combination with other allegorical elements that guide the interpretation of the viewer. Theatrical masks are highly charged iconographical elements that may reflect the cultural interests or knowledge of the commemorated individual.301 Two winged griffins with lion's bodies are arranged in heraldic composition around the motif, providing apotropaic protection for the deceased individual.302

Winged Erotes accompany the soul of the deceased to the afterlife. Two garlands held by the three Erotes suggest honourific sacrifice associated with funerary rituals. Thus, the iconographic cues depicted in combination with the motif suggest that Gaius Cornelius Glaphyrus was concerned with commissioning a honourific monument for his freedman, focusing on his virtues visualized through his honourific depiction with the paludamentum. The patron's concern with the safe journey of the soul of the deceased to the afterlife is suggested by the inclusion of the

Erotes and griffins. Thus, although the pragmatic function of delineating relationships is maintained, the addition of iconographic cues alludes to a specific conception of the relationship.

A large number of examples present a dextrarum iunctio in conjunction with a spousal relationship explicated in the epigraphic evidence. Again this represents a degree of continuity with stele-type reliefs. However, there is a transition in the epigraphic evidence towards a standardization of the relationships associated with a dextrarum iunctio. A majority, 52% of the dextrarum iunctio, were coupled with inscriptional evidence indicating that the relationship

196; CIL VI 12199; CIL XI 4422; CIL XII 633; CIL XII 1968; Conrad 00407 = IGLNovae 00092 = ILBulg 00319 for comparanda. 301 Haarløv suggests that masks could refer to sapientia, but also to the mysteries. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 50. 302 Huskinson, Roman Children's Sarcophagi, 60.

103

between the two individuals was conjugal (Table 2). This is in contrast to the raw data associated with funerary reliefs where only 19% of monuments explicitly indicated the relationship type to be conjugal. This increase in the number of nuptial associations commemorated by a dextrarum iunctio indicates an increasing standardization of the meaning of the motif.

A paradigmatic example appears on the marble altar dedicated to Vernasia Cyclas dating from the first century CE originating from Rome but currently housed in the British Museum

(Fig. 6).303 A dextrarum iunctio linking a male and a female figure is framed with spiral columns topped with a flame. Long garlands of laurel flowers hang down from the tops of the columns. The inscription tablet occupies the centre of the chest, with the dextrarum iunctio appearing underneath. The figures are depicted in full-length relief, framed by two thin columns surmounted by a pediment ornamented with a wreath. The female is depicted in three quarter view wearing a tunic and a palla that wraps around her and is draped over her left shoulder. She holds a pomegranate or egg in her left hand while her right hand extends to the dextrarum iunctio. The togate male is shown in almost full frontal iew. He rea hes for the female figure’s right hand. The inscription provides possible identification of the figures depicted:

VERNASIAE/ CYCLADI/ CONIVGI OPTIMAE/ VIX ANN XXVII/ VITALIS AVG L SCRIB CVB F A P CIL VI 8769

303 Nr. 84. This altar has entered the dis ussion with regard to funerary reliefs and marriage. Da is, “Viewer, I Married Him,” 196-199.

104

The altar is dedicated to Vernasia Cyclas by her husband Vitalis who was a freedman of the imperial house.304 The individualized nature of the portraits makes it likely that the figures depicted correspond to the individuals mentioned. Vernasia Cylcas is described as his legally married wife (coniunx) as well as given a number of epithets (fidelissimae, amantissimae, pientissimae).305 The use of the term coniunx is significant in this context; such a term makes a definitive statement about the nature of the marriage between the individuals. The marriage is conceived of as fully legitimate.306 There were three requirements for a legitimate marriage in

Roman law: the participants must not be too close in relation, be of legal age, and be citizens.

All other marital unions were considered illegitimate, lacking conubium or legal capacity. The use of the term coniunx had specific social and legal connotations: both Vernasia Cyclas and

Vitalis were Roman citizens, engaged in a legal marriage. The ability to undertake the contractual arrangement of marriage would represent a status-defining element for the two freed persons. It is especially important given the informal nature of Roman marriage conventions.

There were no essential features associated with the Roman marriage ceremony. Intention and capacity were the most important elements; one merely had to announce the intention of being married, to be legally married, assuming the individuals had conubium.307 With no material documentation of the marriage, the advertisement of such relationships on funerary monuments was very important as a status pronouncement as well as a legitimatization of that status. The advertisement of their status would be especially important to manumitted slaves. The

304 Vernasia Cyclas could have been a freedwoman; her name indicates that she was at one time a slave, but took the nomen of her master, Vernasii, when she was manumitted. She could also have been a free born woman. 305 It is interesting that pientissimae is used to describe the figure. This epithet is not usually used to describe spouses. This could suggest the formulaic nature of the inscription and may allude to the formulaic nature of the monument as a whole. Sigismund Nielsen, "Interpreting Epithets," 197. 306 Although we cannot put too much emphasis on such a point; there are examples where individuals used the terminology associated with legitimate marriage to represent their relationships even though they did not actually have a legal marriage. 307 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 43 and 54-55.

105

commissioning of a monument could potentially represent the only means through which a manumitted slave could document their marriage. However, it also involved an underlying expression of status. The motif was a complex manifestation of a visual vocabulary used to express the idea of marriage in general, but more specifically an agreement. The result is a dual function on these monuments. The dextrarum iunctio is increasingly used to commemorate a conjugal relationship, but the motif is becoming increasingly allegorical in interpretation. The motif could represent legal marriage, but the iconographic elements indicate the interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio is multi-layered. Chthonic elements such as the pomegranate held by the female figure, combine with flaming torches, wreaths, ribbons and garlands to allude to the funerary context and the separation of the couple at the death of Vernasia.

A final selection of monuments shows the difficulty in comparing epigraphic with visual evidence, but also serves to illustrate how the allegorical function of the motif was quickly developing. I will discuss one of two examples of funerary altars where the visual evidence presented in the motif does not agree with the epigraphic evidence.308 For example, the relief dedicated to Gaius Iulius Hermes by his co-freedman, Gaius Iulius Andronicus, depicts a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure (Fig. 22).309 The marble altar dating from the first century CE, depicts a dextrarum iunctio linking a male and a female figure, framed by spiral fluted columns surmounted by a triangular pediment ornamented with a wreath. A togate male figure stands in three-quarter view with his head facing the viewer. The female figure

308 For the sake of brevity, taking into consideration limitations in space, I will only discuss one of the examples. The other altar dedicated to Sextus Caesonus Apollo, by four freedmen depicts a dextrarum iunctio scene between a male and a female figure. The female figure is flanked by an attendant figure and a burning altar is depicted between the linked figures. The altar appears in the work of Rossbach who claims the monument represents the only extant representation of a wedding sacrifice. Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits-und Ehedenkmäler, 403. I suggest that this monument is not intended to depict a wedding ceremony; rather, the monument takes on an allegorical function suggesting the making of an agreement. The motif was ultimately chosen because of its allegorical meaning. Nr. 83. 309 Nr. 82.

106

stands on the right wearing a tunic and palla. She holds a pomegranate in her left hand while her right hand reaches out to make a dextrarum iunctio. The visual evidence, however, does not agree with the inscription which indicates the monument was dedicated by a male to another male:

DIS MANIBVS C IVLUVS HERMES VIX ANN XXXIIII M V DIES XIIII C IVLIVS ANDRONICVS CONLIBERTVS FEC BENE MERENTI DE SE CIL VI, 5326

The inscription indicates that Gaius Iulius Andronicus commissioned the monument to commemorate his co-freedman, Gaius Iulius Hermes. Both men were slaves of the Iulii family, as they share the same nomen. The cognomens, Andronicus and Hermes may indicate that both men were of Greek ancestry when they entered slavery.310 They were manumitted by their patron Gaius Iulius, whose nomen and praenomen they took. The commissioning of a monument containing the visual representation of a male and female but commemorating two males is puzzling. There are a number of explanations. The female figure could represent the un-named partner of Gaius Iulius Hermes. She would be commemorated visually yet not epigraphi ally. The motif ould represent a lose ‘nuptial’ li e partnership between the men: that is a same-sex marriage. However, again, this interpretation arises based on the assumption that the motif has to be a depiction of marriage.

I propose a third explanation. The motif was chosen for its allegorical meaning alluding to the separation of the individuals at the death of the deceased. The framing of the dextrarum iunctio in an architectural edifice suggests the motif could allude to the separation at death and

310 Keppie, Understanding Roman Inscriptions, 20.

107

the transition of the soul of the deceased to the afterlife. The specific version of the motif was included to refer specifically to the departure of Gaius Iulius Hermes from the earthy sphere after death. The depiction of a male and female figure on the monument could have been more of a pragmatic necessity than a historic indication of the nature of the relationship that existed between the individuals. The monument could have been mass produced with the figures blocked out, requiring only the addition of portrait heads and an inscription.311 It could be the case that Hermes died and Andronicus, as the individual charged with commissioning the monument, was required to look for a ready-made altar. It is likely that, when choosing a monument in this way, he was engaging with the dextrarum iunctio as a multivalent motif used to present a number of different relationships and concepts. The use of the image in a number of different contexts, coupled with the fact that Romans did not reject incongruence between the visual and textual presentation, points to its use as a multivalent motif.

The epigraphic evidence associated with the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars reveals a number of streams of continuity between the motif represented on stele-type monuments and those found on funerary altars. The motif continued to depict a variety of associations ranging from patronage to spousal relationships. However, the function of the motif was becoming more standardized and formulaic; an increasing percentage of examples, corroborated by the epigraphic evidence, show that the motif was being used to depict a spousal relationship. The incongruence between some examples of visual representations and the epigraphic evidence indicates that the motif was becoming increasingly allegorical and chosen specifically for its multivalent nature.

311 For more information on the production of sarcophagi and other funerary monuments see: Toynbee, Death and Burial, 272-273; Carroll, Spirits of the Dead,112-114; B. Russell, "The Roman Sarcophagus 'Industry': A Reconsideration, "in Life, Death and Representation: Some New Work on Roman Sarcophagi, ed. J. Elsner and J. Huskinson (New York: De Gruyter, 2011), 119-147.

108

This chapter discussed the development of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary altars. The depiction of the motif on funerary altars represents a transformation of the function of the motif as compared to the depictions found on stele. The pragmatic function of the motif to delineate relationships was replaced by an increasingly allegorical function. While the depictions retained a degree of continuity between the stele and altars, such as the basic composition of the motif intended to delineate relationships and corroborated by epigraphic evidence, new iconographical features were combined with a more standardized compositional depiction. This depiction included the addition of iconographical clues that indicate an allegorical interpretation focusing on honourific commemoration, the separation of the deceased from their earthly life and a concern for the transition of the soul to the afterlife.

The development of the dextrarum iunctio on funerary altars represented a transitional period between the highly pragmatic function of the motif on funerary stele and 'window' reliefs and the predominantly allegorical function of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman sarcophagi. The next chapter discusses the depictions of the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman sarcophagi as the allegorical function of the image is fully developed and used in a variety of iconographic contexts.

109

Chapter six: Sarcophagi

This chapter will discuss the depiction of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman sarcophagi, stone coffins used to inhume the body of the deceased. These sarcophagi are often elaborately carved and decorated with depictions of scenes ranging from life-events to mythological cycles.312 The dextrarum iunctio on this artistic medium becomes conventionalized and standardized compositionally to represent the Roman couple, a male and a female. However, despite the conventionalized nature of the motif, the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman sarcophagi is a multivalent image; its meaning can be modified through stylistic and compositional means and it can have multiple interpretations. The first part of the chapter will discuss sartorial cues and compositional elements that serve to nuance the meaning of the motif.

The second section will focus on the implications of gestural variation for the interpretation of the motif. Finally, the variation in iconographical context will be considered.

Stylistic and compositional elements:

The dextrarum iunctio presented on Roman sarcophagi is the most standardized type appearing across all forms of Roman funerary monuments. All examples of the motif found on

Roman biographical sarcophagi depict a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure.

The only example that presents a dextrarum iunctio between two male figures is a mythological sarcophagus presenting the myth of Alcestis.313 I propose that the ubiquity of the motif linking a male and a female figure makes it a conventionalized representation of a male-female couple.

However, this does not imply a monolithic interpretation of the motif equated with marriage.

312 See Toynbee, Death and Burial, 270-277. For works focused specifically on sarcophagi, see: Koortbojian, Myth, Meaning and Memory on Roman Sarcophagi; Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen; P. Zanker and B.C. Ewald, Living with Myths: the Imagery of Roman Sarcophagi, trans. J. Slater (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). 313 Nr. 168.

110

The stylistic and compositional elements found on Roman sarcophagi, such as sartorial cues and figural composition, displays a wide range of variation that intimates multivalence despite its standardized form. Sartorial cues function to guide the interpretation of the motif given the multiplicity of potential meanings inherent in the motif. Costume and drapery provide discernible clues that allow the viewer to navigate the image. For example, there are number of female sartorial cues that are integral to the literary depiction of a wedding, veiling being the most dominant. The existence of non-standard veiling of figures, in particular, male veiling, calls into question the close association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage.314

The paradigmatic depiction of a marriage ceremony drawn from literary sources includes several essential elements.315 Sartorial cues associated with the bride play an important role.

The bride wore a tunica recta316 bound by a belt, a cingulum, and her hair was arranged in a hairstyle called the sex crines.317 The hair is parted into six pieces and wound with white woolen bands, known as vittae. The intricate hairstyle is covered with a yellow or red318 veil, the flameum. The veil is considered the most central and recognizable element of the Roman bridal regalia and was the focus of many of the literary representations of a Roman wedding

314 Very little scholarship has address male veiling: F. Glinister, "Veiled and Unveiled: Uncovering Roman Influence in Hellenistic Italy," Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa,ed. M. Gleba and H. Becker (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2009), 193 - 214. There are a few studies Greek veiling practices with respect to the literary context. D. Cairns, "Weeping and Veiling: Grief, Display and Concealment in Ancient Greek Culture," in Tears in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. Thorsten Fӧgen ( erlin: De Gruyter, 2009), 37-57. 315 For the clothing and hairstyle of the bride, see Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 73-114. See also: Sebesta, "Symbolism in the Costume of Roman women," 48. 316 Hersch suggests that the term tunica recta is problematic. There is very little known about the garment. The proposal is that the garment was called recta because it was woven by the bride on an upright loom. There is no way to verify this claim. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 109. 317 Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 73. 318 The colour is said to be luteum, which is an indistinct colour characterization when translated to English. Scholars are not sure the exact colour this term corresponds to. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 96.

111

ceremony.319 The bedecked bride was led in public procession from her house to that of her new husband. Literary descriptions of the procession suggest the presence of a number of attendant figures accompanying the bride on her journey. Child attendants, in particular, are mentioned by the antiquarian sources in relation to the wedding procession.320 Camilli/ae would aid the bride, perhaps holding ritual objects or torches. Further, a number of torch bearers would be present at the festivities. Hersch suggests that even the very allusion to torches was an indication of a wedding.321 There are many literary descriptions of divine torch bearers; however, in the historical sources, there is evidence for both children and adults carrying torches.322 In summary, the integral elements of the wedding ceremony, according to literary depictions, were the presence of torches, attendants and, above all, a heavily veiled bride.

In the corpus under consideration, only one example presents a heavily veiled female figure. The front relief of a sarcophagus, dating from the second century CE and currently housed in the Vatican Museums, depicts a procession of nine figures, including a heavily veiled female figure being led towards a male figure with whom she engages in a dextrarum iunctio

(Fig. 26).323 The dextrarum iunctio proper depicts a female figure on the left. She wears a tunic that falls completely to the ground and is covered in a palla, which is pulled over her head so that her face is not visible. A female attendant stands behind and guides the veiled woman towards the right with her hands on her shoulders. A third female figure stands between the male and female figure drawing them together with her hands on their shoulders. The male figure stands

319 The veil is the most commonly described bridal accoutrement in the works of Antiquarian and later the poets. Hersch suggests the earliest reference to the flammeum comes from Caecilius Statius in his play. It is found in the fragment Gell, 15,15,2,3. See also Catull. 61. 114-115. 320 Festus and Verus both describe the presence of the children. Var. LL 7.34 and Fest. 55L. See Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 159-162. 321 Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 164-165. 322 Catullus suggested that torch bearers were children. Catull. 61.114. Within the historic literary context, Seneca was the most central figure discussing wedding torches. Sen. Oct. 23-24; 153-154. 323 Nr. 116.

112

in near frontal view holding a scroll in his left hand as he reaches for the dextrarum iunctio with his right. He wears a toga that falls to his knees and is in the process of being crowned by an attendant figure. A final bearded male figure sits on a couch and touches the back of the male figure with his right hand while he holds a scroll in his left hand.

I suggest that the presentation of the scene mirrors the paradigmatic representation of a wedding found in the literary tradition and is likely a visual depiction of a wedding scene. The artist has paid specific attention to the presentation of attendant figures in procession. At the far left, a bull is led by two male figures depicted nude from the waist up. Next, four figures move towards the right carrying various objects. The female figure on the very left wears as short tunic that falls to her knees, and carries a square box. A male figure dressed in military clothing carries a pike. A veiled and a non-veiled female figure each carry objects in their hands. The small square objects could suggest the baskets containing spindles carried by the attendants of the bride in the procession.324 The baskets used to transport spindles were visual cues associated with the wedding ceremony that could allude to the domestic sphere, the Eleusian mysteries,325 or the skills and talents that the bride brought to the marriage. The final figure before the dextrarum iunctio is a torch-bearing winged figure. Poets, such as Catullus, describe the god

Hymenaeus as the proverbial wedding torch-bearer, he dances and sings as he waves the wedding torch.326 The depiction of the winged-Eros figure can likely be identified as

Hymenaeus. Thus, the relief depicts the major elements of a wedding ceremony: the veiled female figure, the attendants carrying ritual objects and the presentation of a heavily veiled female figure. The allegorical nature of the depiction, as evidenced in the presentation of the

324 Hersch. The Roman Wedding, 162-163. 325 In the Greek context, the basket could be used to transport bread. The bread was an indirect illusion to grain and the cult of Demeter. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 163. 326 Catull. 61.1-15.

113

Eros figure, is corroborated in the sartorial cues associated with the female figure. However, this paradigmatic presentation of the motif is unique to this depiction and does not reflect other examples. This suggests that the standard interpretation is problematic.

Many examples found in the corpus do not depict a heavily veiled female.327 In general, when a veil is present, the veiling is not heavy and does not obscure the face of the female figure.

Examples depicting a lightly-veiled female are found across all areas of Italy, from north to south. A fragment of a marble sarcophagus relief originating from Rome but currently housed in the British Museum depicts a dextrarum iunctio between a male figure flanked by a second male figure and a female figure (Fig. 27). 328 The male and female figures are embraced by a second veiled female figure. The central dextrarum iunctio female figure is lightly-veiled, with the veil sitting on the top of her head and draping down the sides. Her hair is visible underneath the veil and her portrait features are completely visible. She appears to be middle aged, as deep naso- labial lines and age lines in her neck signify an older individual. The figure wears a tunic that falls to her sandaled feet, and a palla that completely covers her body. She wears the clothing of a Roman matron, and her more aged countenance suggests a depiction of status.329 The appearance of the female figure contrasts with the youthful female figure that embraces the couple. Aged appearance however is problematic to determine given the repaired nature of the many of the examples. The extent of restoration is not immediately evident in many examples.

However, the example does show the non-standard veiling practices inherent in representations of the dextrarum iunctio.

327 See Nrs. 103, 104,106, 108 and 160 for examples of non-veiled. The rest of the catalog with the exception of Nr. 116 already discussed presents lightly-veiled female figures. 328 Nr. 110. 329 The term matrona is used to describe a legally married woman and was recognizable by the stola. Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 7.

114

In a number of reliefs, the female figure appears without a veil.330 Of the 72 sarcophagi collected in this catalogue, 10 examples depict an unveiled female figure. This represents about

13% of the examples. However, most scholarship does not take these variants into account. 331

In an example, currently housed in the Museo Ostiense, a female figure is depicted completely unveiled (Fig. 28). The straight hair of the female figure is parted in the middle and drawn back into a bun secured at the back of her head. She looks directly at the opposing male figure with large round eyes. Her forehead is short and her nose is prominent. Her countenance displays evidence of deep naso-labial lines and other age indications such as sunken eyes and cheeks.

Her upper body is wrapped tightly in a palla and she wears a tunic that falls to her feet. Her right hand emerges out from under the palla to engage in the dextrarum iunctio while her left hand is held at her left side. The lack of veiling in this depiction and the isolation of the motif make it unlikely that the motif represents marriage. If the motif is intended to present merely the analogous representation of marriage, the full veiling of the female figure would be expected, as in the example from the Sala Della Musa, Vatican Museums.332 If the depiction of portraits was integral to the monument, light veiling still provides the idea of veiling while allowing individualized representation. The existence of so many examples of non-veiled females implies that the commissioners or artists were introducing the motif into a different context.

Veiling is a demonstrative act, but it is also a multivalent sartorial cue. Despite the assumed ubiquity of veiling, the use of feminine veiling was indicative of a specific theme and

330 See Nrs. 103, 104,106, 108, 145, 149, 155, 160, 165 and 167. 331 Only Reekmans discusses an example where a female figure is not veiled. He focuses on a sarcophagus copy that originated from Isola Sacra. The scene presents a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure. The male holds a scroll. Reekmans argues that, despite the presence of the scroll, the motif likely represents a scene of farewell. He cites a number of elements in the depiction of the female figure: a countenance of resigned sadness, the lack of veiling, and a contrast between the immobile pose of the female figure and the movement inherent in the pose of the male figure. He argues that all of these points suggest the dextrarum iunctio presents an image of separation. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 30. 332 Nr. 116.

115

associated virtues, such as modesty, and religious association.333 Artists choose veiling as a means of nuancing their depictions and transmitting messages to the viewer. I propose that the depiction of a heavily veiled woman being led in procession towards a male figure likely represents a marriage ceremony, but that a universal application of this association is problematic. The instances of lightly-veiled or unveiled women indicate that the inclusion of veiling was an intentional choice by the commissioner. The practice of depicting women without the veil could reflect the normative practice at the time: women appeared in public both veiled and unveiled.334 The exclusion of the veil indicates a context other than marriage for the motif.

I suggest the depictions of the dextrarum iunctio ultimately function in a honourific context associated with portrait statuary. Such a contextual framework is appropriate for the display and commemoration of female virtue. Well-known individuals could be honoured as benefactors by the commissioning of a statue for display in a public area by clients, associations and communities.335 These images were intended to depict the virtues for which the individual is honoured. Statues were also commissioned in the 'private' sphere for presentation within the tomb.336 In the funerary context, the full statues were used as ornamentation for tombs, but the most common type of portraiture found in the funerary context was carved in relief.337 The

333 Lisa Hughes, "Unveiling the Veil," 235. 334 Ibid. 335 A honourific statue in Pompeii was dedicated to Eumachia by the fullers' guild. D. E. E. Kleiner, "Imperial Women as Patrons of the Arts in the Early Empire," in I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome, ed. D. E. E. Kleiner and S. B. Matheson (New Haven: Yale University Art Gallery, 1996), 33-34. 336 The delineation of private and public is problematic. The tomb context blurred the lines between public and private. These portraits were private commissions but were placed and viewed within public space. Davis, "Portrait Statues," 207. Stewart described private portraiture those images commissioned by individuals who were not part of the imperial elite. Stewart, Statues in Roman Society, 87. 337 Perhaps the most well-known example of portrait statuary associated with the tomb is the tomb of the Baker. Petersen analyses the portraiture in relation to the full iconographic program of the tomb. She uses the example to reconsider the assumption that Eurysace must be a free-slave due to the appearance of portraiture on the tomb. Petersen, The Freedmen in Roman Art, 95-99.

116

intention of the commissioner of a statue in the funerary context was similarly commemorative in nature, intending to transmit the status and virtues of the individuals depicted.

The presentation of women in honourific portraiture used a number of stereotypical body- types as encoded visual vocabulary for status presentation. Three 'types' emerge as particularly appropriate for the presentation of Roman womanhood: the 'Large Herculaneum woman,' the

'Small Herculaneum woman' and the 'Ceres-type.'338 These images depict women wrapped in a palla, the voluminous drapery of which both obscures and hugs the body. The portrait statues were intended to allude to various aspects of Roman womanhood. The sweeping drapery that enhances the feminine form suggests fertility, while at the same time, the heaviness of the drapery implies modesty and chastity.339 Portrait statuary exhibits a language of status promulgation that is intended to transmit to the viewer messages of virtue and ideal womanhood.

Turning to the dextrarum iunctio examples in question, influences from honourific portraiture are evident in the depiction of female body types on Roman sarcophagi and could help explain the inherent variation in veiling. Examples of female statuary types show a similar degree of variance in veiling. For example, some portrait statues depicting the 'small

Herculaneum woman' are depicted with light veiling while others are depicted with no veil.340

The portraits found on sarcophagi are influenced by the depiction in statuary and should be analyzed within the context of honourific portraiture. This implies that the performativity of the images appearing on sarcophagi must be interpreted in the context of replication and

338 Davis discusses the three types. Davis, "Portrait Statues," 215. 339 Ibid.," 216. 340 Davis suggests that the artist could use variations in gesture and veiling in order to nuance the depiction of the stereotypical female body type and impart upon the image a degree of individuality. Ibid., 212.

117

performativity in honourific statuary rather than a visual reproduction of a marriage event.341

This interpretation fits with the commemorative nature of the monuments. While one example does seem to present the marriage ceremony, the lack of veiling on others suggests that the figures are presented in a honourific context not connected with marriage. The depiction of the female figure without a veil or lightly veiled could nuance the meaning of the motif.

Finally, a number of representations present a male figure depicted veiled, capite velato.

The presence of male veiling highlights the problematic nature of the paradigmatic description of the dextrarum iunctio and its conjugal interpretation. There are four examples in this corpus where a veiled male figure is depicted in a dextrarum iunctio.342 The most well-preserved example appears on a third century CE marble sarcophagus currently housed in Munich (Fig 29).

The strigilated sarcophagus depicts a dextrarum iunctio as the central representation.343 The scene is delineated by square fluted columns surmounted by a triangular pediment ornamented with sea creatures blowing trumpets. A veiled togate male figure and a veiled female figure stand in front of a sea shell while engaging in a dextrarum iunctio with their right hands. The male figure holds a scroll in his left hand. The back folds of his toga have been drawn up and over his head as a veil. At his feet stands a small scale Cupid figure holding a torch diagonally with the flames pointed towards the male figure. The Cupid figure is not winged but has the unique braiding of the hair down the middle of his head.344 The veiled female figure stands on

341 A. Alexandridis, "Neutral Bodies? Female Portrait Statue Types from the Late Republic to the Second Century CE," in Material Culture and Social Identities in the Ancient World, ed. S. Hales and T. Hodos (New York: Cambridge University Press, 20130), 259. Alexandridis is interested in the replication of the various body types and how these 'materialized images' represent identity. 342 Nrs. 118, 139, 148 and 163. 343 Nr. 139. 344 Reinsberg suggests the lack of wings suggests an identification of Hymenaeus. I believe the hairstyle makes this identification problematic. Also the large number of depictions of Eros/Cupid on sarcophagi with him standing holding a torch upward suggests the identification as Cupid is more likely. For comparanda see C. C. Schlam, Cupid and Psyche: Apuleius and Monuments (University Park, PA: Scholars Press, 1976).

118

the right in three-quarter pose. Her right arm extends to engage in a dextrarum iunctio with the male figure, while her left hand grasps the folds of her veil and draws it to her left and up towards her face.

The dominant veiling of both individuals calls into question a perceived nuptial context.

Literary descriptions of the marriage ceremony lack a detailed description of the dress of males, but the need for concealment under a veil did not seem to be relevant to the Roman groom.345

The anomalous nature of male veiling within the collected corpus, suggests that the artist was intending a unique interpretation or context.

There were a number of occasions in which male veiling was deemed appropriate.346

Male veiling was expected in religious contexts associated with sacrifice. Livy describes augurs, pontifices and fetial priests as veiled.347 The nuptial context cannot be ruled out completely; an archaic form of marriage, the confarreatio, required the veiling of both bride and groom. 348

However, this comes to us from one source: Servilius Aenead.349 The confarreatio marriage ceremony was conceived of as antiquated even in imperial times, it had fallen from use centuries earlier. The archaic status of the form of marriage was indicated in the vacancy of the post of flamen dialis during imperial times.350 Any individual taking the post was required to be married through a confarreatio ceremony. There were so few patrician families united by this form of

345 Literary sources suggest that the toga of the groom should be clean, but otherwise, there is no evidence to suggest a male marriage costume. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 137. 346 Glinister provides an overview of the literary sources associated with male veiling. Glinister, "Veiled and Unveiled,"195-200. There is also a short overview of male veiling: E. Fantham, "Covering the Head at Rome: Ritual and Gender," in Roman Dress and the Fabrics of Roman Culture, ed. J. Edmondson and A. Keith (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008), 161-162. 347 Livy 1.18; Livy 1.36. See: B. O. Foster, trans, Livy. Book I and II (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1919), 63-65, 131-133. 348 Glinister, "Veiled and Unveiled,"196. 349 Serv. Aea. 4.374. See: Glinister, "Veiled and Unveiled,"196. 350 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 23.

119

marriage that the position sat empty for a period in the early first century CE.351 It is possible that the commissioners of the monument included the veiled male figure in a depiction of the confarreatio, hearkening back to traditional aristocratic values. As the custom is attested in the imperial period, the form of marriage and its sartorial elements, however superannuated, was ostensibly incorporated into the visual vocabulary of marriage and recognizable as such.

I propose, however, that this presentation of the dextrarum iunctio could also be interpreted within the funerary context. Male veiling had a long tradition associated with the theatrical representation of mourning.352 The use of veiling as a demonstrative gesture of grief and suffering commonly occurs in tragedy. Silent veiling could be used in a tableau as an effective visual technique for transmitting expressions of grief and bereavement.353 The playwright Euripides was especially fond of this demonstrative gesture.354 The appearance of a veiled male figure in a few examples suggests that the commissioner or the artist sought to alter or nuance the motif to portray grief and misery at the separation of the couple. The male figure takes on the sartorial cues of mourning. The representation of bereavement is further suggested through comparison with a marble children's sarcophagus that depicts conclamatio of a child. 355

The marble sarcophagus, dating from the early second century CE, originating from Agrigento, and currently housed in the Agrigento Museo Regionale, depicts the deceased child laid on a lectus. A veiled male figure sits near the head of the child. He holds his head in his right hand in a pronounced gesture of mourning. His posture, sinking down into his chair, imparts a sense of

351 Treggiari, Roman Marriage, 24. 352 C. Panayotakis, "Non-verbal Behaviour on the Roman Comic Stage," in Body Language in the Greek and Roman World, ed. D.L. Cairns, (Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 2005), 17. 353 Cairns, "Weeping and Veiling," 46. 354 Iolas (HcId. 602-604) and Polyxena ( Hec. 432-464) are represented with heads veiled. Cairns, "Weeping and veiling," 46. 355 Janet Huskinson, Roman Children's Sarcophagi, 20 Nr. 1.11.

120

deep melancholy. The presentation of the veiled male in a representation of grief provides visual precedence for the use of veiling in Roman art to represent sorrow and loss.

Further iconographic cues in the Munich sarcophagus also suggest a funerary context.

The male figure holds a scroll predominately in this left hand. As discussed in Chapter five, the scroll is itself a polysemous motif, but could be used within the funerary context as a visual depiction of the will and testament.356 Further, the inclusion of the Cupid figure at the feet of the couple symbolizes the journey of the soul to the afterlife. Cupid is often included in funerary art in his role as psychopompos, accompanying the soul to the afterlife.357 The inclusion of male veiling and overall iconographic context presents the dextrarum iunctio as representing the mourning and grief at the death of one of the figures. The two figures very likely represent a married couple. The presence of male veiling could suggest that the figures are linked by a confarreatio marriage. At the same time, the motif could present the implications of the death of one of the figures, the grief and mourning inherent in the separation. The polysemous nature of the motif allows for a multi-layered interpretation that suggests both marriage and death.

Sartorial cues, such as the veiling of figures, call into question the close association of the dextrarum iunctio with marriage. The great variance in the type of female veiling implies a multiplicity in meaning of the motif. Heavy veiling could present marriage whereas the absence of the veil could point to an alternate meaning such as separation. Further, the introduction of male veiling on a number of examples suggests that the motif could be modified to depict male grief. The variation in figural composition also contributes to the polysemous nature of the

356 Chapter five, 87-90. 357 Cumont, Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains, 292.

121

motif. The existence of alternative depictions of certain figures implies that the commissioner could choose specific figures to allude to a particular meaning.

Figural composition:

The figural composition is a second stylistic element that calls into question the monolithic association with marriage. As discussed in Chapter one, the standard literary depiction of marriage includes a male and female figure engaged in dextrarum iunctio with many depictions including at least one subsidiary figure.358 The most-cited example contains two subsidiary figures: a female figure depicted between the couple with her arms over the shoulders of each figure and a small-scale figure at the feet of the couple (Fig. 2).359 The female figure was originally identified as the goddess Juno Pronuba, a figure integral to the literary depiction of a wedding ceremony, or more generally as a 'Pronuba,' a married woman who accompanied the bride to her new husband's home. 360 However, subsequent scholars have preferred the identification of the figure as the goddess Concordia.361 The second small-scale subsidiary figure is traditionally identified as Hymenaeus, a god who played an integral role in the Roman marriage ceremony, although he could also be identified as Eros or Cupid based on stylistic features.362 While his presence is common on Roman biographical sarcophagi, the figure is not

358 Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits, 11-12. Reekmans limits his definition to the most basic elements: a handshake gesture linking a male and female figure. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 25. 359 The sarcophagus from Mantova is the most cited example of a dextrarum iunctio motif. See Nr. 113. 360 The majority of literary references refer to the goddess Juno Pronuba not a generic Pronuba figure. Ovid Epi. 6.43, 6.428; Serv. Aen. 4.59.4, 4.608.10; Verg. Aen. 4.166. 361 Reekmans makes the identification of the goddess Concordia based on comparison with imperial numismatic evidence. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 31-37. Richard Brilliant also makes this identification through comparison with numismatic evidence. See discussion in Chapter two. 362 Hersch discusses the role of Hymenaeus in the literary depictions of weddings. See Hersch, Roman Wedding, 236-239; The earliest scholarship on the dextrarum iunctio identifies the figure as Hymenaeus in an attempt to fit the artistic depictions with the literary descriptions of marriage. Rossbach, Römische Hochzeits, 11-12; Davis also identifies the figure as Hymenaeus. Davis, "The Significance of the Handshake Motif," 89. However, many of the depictions resemble a depiction of Eros rather than Hymenaeus; he is often winged and has the characteristic braid.

122

traditionally integral to the motif. The traditional compositional definition tends to focus on a triad of male-female-Pronuba figures with the possible addition of a fourth subsidiary figure.363

Despite the emphasis on the presence of these auxiliary figures as indicators of a nuptial context, the examples included in this corpus show great variation from the paradigmatic definition. The paradigm example of a dextrarum iunctio appearing on a Roman sarcophagus is currently housed in the Palazzo Ducale in Mantua, Italy.364 The biographical sarcophagus, dating from the second century CE, has become the most citied example of a so-called

‘marriage’ sar ophagus. The sar ophagus depi ts four s enes: a battle, a general offering clemency to a conquered people, a scene of sacrifice and a dextrarum iunctio. As discussed in

Chapter two, such a combination of scenes is thought to depict the four cardinal virtues cultivated by a Roman male citizen.365 In this interpretive framework, the dextrarum iunctio is included as an allegorical depiction of the concord within marriage. The motif depicts a male and a female figure linked by a dextrarum iunctio. The togate male figure stands on the right in near profile view, gazing intently at the female figure on the right. His right arm reaches out to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, while his left hand holds a scroll. The veiled female figure stands on the right, her body draped with a heavy palla. Her right arm extends to engage is a dextrarum iunctio. She looks down towards their hands, drawing the gaze of the viewer towards the gesture.

There are a number of auxiliary figures. Both the male and female figures linked by the dextrarum iunctio are surrounded by attendants. The male figure is flanked by a second togate

363 Reekmans proposes a basic definition of the dextrarum iunctio as a gesture linking a male and a female figure. Subsidiary figures are not integral to the definition, but form the basis of his typological analysis: various typologies are identified based upon the presen e of ertain subsidiary figures, espe ially the “Con ordia” or “Juno Pronuba” figure. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 25. 364 See Nr. 113. 365 See discussion in Chapter two, 23-27.

123

male figure presented in near profile view. His thin curly hair is combined with heavy age lines, deep naso-labial lines, sunken cheeks, and indentations on the neck that indicate he is significantly older than the male figure linked by the dextrarum iunctio. The linked female figure is similarly flanked by a second female figure. This female attendant is not veiled, but her hair is hidden under a headscarf that is pulled back and secured with a band across her head. She wears a tunic that falls from her left shoulder, nearly exposing her left breast, while a palla wraps around her waist and drapes over her left arm. Her left hand lightly touches the arm of the linked female, as if urging her forward. Two further subsidiary figures are found within the motif. A female figure appears between the linked figures, drawing the two together. Her unveiled hair is drawn up and secured with a diadem. She directly engages the viewer with her gaze, although her head is turned slightly towards the male figure. Kampen follows the lead of Reinsberg, identifying her as the goddess Concordia.366 The second subsidiary figure is found at the feet of the linked figures. He stands with his back facing the viewer and his legs in profile but facing towards the right. He holds a torch in his hands, the flames facing the male figure. Again,

Reinsberg identifies the figure as Hymenaeus.367

The figural composition of the motif appears to mimic the expected composition of a scene alluding to marriage. The major constitutive elements are present in the motif: the goddess, the Hymenaeus figure, and the two attendant figures. The image is highly standardized and appears in near identical form on a selection of sarcophagi also dating from the second century CE.368 However, this composition is limited to a five examples. In actuality, when

366 Kampen makes this identification based on comparisons with Antonine numismatic evidence. Kampen, "Biographical Narration," 85. 367 Hersch suggest the identification of the figure as the god Hymenaeus is problematic. There are scant artistic examples that provide definitive depiction of the god. The identification of the god is based on literary depictions and one example of a mosaic. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 260. 368 See Nrs. 108, 109, 115, 137 and 142.

124

many examples of the motif are compiled and compared, there exists wide variation in the depiction of subsidiary figures. Many of the examples do not depict the subsidiary figures while other examples are selective as to which figures they represent. A number of examples do not include the standard auxiliary figures at all. In the corpus under consideration, three scenarios are depicted: the Concordia/Pronuba figure that embraces the male and female figure is absent, or the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure is missing, or both figures could be absent. Due to space considerations, I will focus on two examples. The first example presents Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure as the main subsidiary figure while the second example a non-standard subsidiary figure.369

The first scenario presents the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure as the main subsidiary figure, and is marked by the absence of the Concordia/Pronuba figure. The Concordia figure is the subsidiary figure that most interests scholars. She is ubiquitous in the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman sarcophagi.370 However, despite the importance of the figure in the scholarly discussion, the Concordia figure was present in just over half of the examples that make up the corpus (see Appendix D). A strigilated marble sarcophagus dating from the third century CE currently housed in the Galleria Lapidaria, Vatican Museums presents a dextrarum iunctio where the Concordia/Pronuba figure is absent but the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure is present (Fig. 30).371 The motif is delineated from the geometric pattern of strigils by two

Corinthian columns surmounted by a triangular pediment ornamented by a wreath, sea monsters and theatrical masks. A togate male and a veiled female figure are linked by a dextrarum iunctio

369 I do not have room to discuss all examples . There are also examples where the Pronuba/Concordia figure is present and the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus is absent. This scenario is found in 11 examples. See Nrs. 105, 106, 108, 110, 116, 119, 127, 129, 145, 146 and 159. 370 Louis Reekmans went so far as to base a number of his typological categories on the presence or absence of the Concordia/Pronuba figure. Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 31-37. 371 Nr. 128.

125

within the architectural edifice. At their feet a small-scale winged Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure stands in frontal view holding a burning torch with the flames pointing towards the male figure on the right. The Concordia/Pronuba figure is conspicuously absent. The female and male figures stand close together, creating a tight composition. The right hands of the figures are engaged in the dextrarum iunctio. The left hand of the female figure grasps at the right edge of her palla and draws it across her chest. She holds a fold of her palla between her head and the head of the male figure, filling the space Concordia would usually inhabit. It appears that the artist intentionally omitted Concordia. I suggest that the Concordia figure was removed from the depiction to draw the focus of the viewer to the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure.

The Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure that appears at the feet of the dextrarum iunctio couple can be definitively identified as Cupid rather than the god Hymenaeus. The small-scale figure appears with carefully rendered wings. Further, the characteristic hairstyle with a braid or knot on the top of the head identifies the figure as Cupid.372 Cupid was an extremely common figure within the funerary context. When the figure is found on Roman sarcophagi, the interpretation focuses on his role as psychopompos, who accompanies the deceased to the underworld.373 This interpretation is driven by the funerary context. However, when the figure is found in conjunction with a dextrarum iunctio, the funerary context tends to be ignored and

Cupid takes on associations with marriage, emotion and love.374 The torch carried by Cupid is interpreted to represent the wedding torches that accompany the procession of the bride to the

372 M. George, "Cupid Punished: Reflections on a Roman Genre Scene," in Roman Slavery and Roman Material Culture, ed. M. George (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013), 169. 373 There is scholastic debate about the nature of the motif on Roman funerary monuments. Some scholars argue that the motif could represent mere decorative or ornamental elements; whereas others imbue the motif with deeper religious and allegorical meaning. I tend to agree that the motif has an allegorical meaning, and that, although it can be used in a solely decorative manner, the multivalent nature of the motif leads to a more complex allegorical interpretation. For the allegorical interpretation see: N. Shurmate, Crisis and Conversion in Apuleius' Metamporphoses (Ann Arbor Mi: University of Michigan Press, 1996). 374 For identification of Cupid on sarcophagi see: Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 261.

126

home of the groom during the marriage ceremony.375 I suggest that this example must be read primarily in the funerary context given its position on a monument intended to house the remains of the deceased. The Cupid figure appears in his role as psychopompos. The torch could be a direct allusion to the torches carried during funerals.376 Allegorically, however, the positioning of the torch either with the flame up or down is seen by some scholars to represent the situation of the soul, being in the process of transition.377 The upturned torch represents the journey of the soul to the afterlife. Further, I suggest the architectural edifice within which the figures stand is similar in meaning to the open-door motif discussed in Chapter five in reference to altars.378 The figures stand within liminal space, within the portal to the afterlife. The pose of the male figure, standing in frontal view with a slight bend in his left leg, imbues the motif with a sense of movement. Reekmans asserts that the presentation of the motif with a Cupid figure without the

Concordia/Pronuba figure negates the conjugal interpretation of the motif.379 Rather, the motif is constituted to represent the separation of the deceased from this life: a farewell scene. The couple may well be married, but the interpretation of the motif is intended to focus on the implication of the death of the deceased on the relationship.

The dextrarum iunctio, in this case, does not represent marriage monolithically. The intentional exclusion of the Concordia/Pronuba figure suggests that the dextrarum iunctio must be interpreted in the context of the separation of the soul from earthly life and its journey to the afterlife. The wide range of auxiliary figures found in the dextrarum iunctio is indicative of the choices that commissioners or artists had at their disposal for individualized commemoration.

375 Hersch discusses the torches as polysemous images that could represent both the wedding and the funerary torches. Ultimately, they represent the bookmarks of human life. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 165-166. 376 Toynbee, Death and Burial, 57. 377 Haarløv, The Half-Open Door, 38. 378 See Chapter five, 84-87. 379 Reekmans, "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio,'" 30.

127

Ultimately, the decision to include certain auxiliary figures is the decision of the commissioner.

The commissioner could include all the auxiliary figures integral to the depiction of a wedding, but they could also include only a Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure to impart connotations associated with funerary elements. The commissioner could also include alternate auxiliary figures in order to nuance the interpretation even more. An example that incorporates a Cupid and Psyche grouping in place of the Cupid/Eros/Hymenaeus figure presents a specific conception of the marriage bond between the two individuals.

A fourth century CE marble sarcophagus, currently housed in the Museo Pio Christiano,

Vatican museums, presents a Cupid and Psyche grouping in place of the small scale

Hymenaeus/Cupid figure (Fig. 31). Despite the preponderance of examples of the pair on other sarcophagi,380 this is the only example where the dextrarum iunctio is combined with a depiction of the literary couple.381 The depiction of a dextrarum iunctio is the main figural motif on the strigilated sarcophagus. A male and a female figure are linked by a dextrarum iunctio and are drawn together by a diademed female figure. A partly damaged, winged-Psyche figure appears on the left at the feet of the dextrarum iunctio couple. The figure of Cupid is largely destroyed.

Identification of the figure is made based on comparisons with other representations of the couple, which show Cupid and Psyche standing close together, their bodies turned towards each other and embracing.382 The inclusion of the image shows the intent of the commemorator to guide the interpretation of the dextrarum iunctio; the image points to an allegorical interpretation

380 Schlam argues that the embracing Eros and Psyche are the most distinctive representation of the figures. Schlam, Cupid and Psyche, 9. 381 Of the 72 examples I have catalogued, this is the only example that incorporates the depiction of Eros and Psyche. When an 'Eros' auxiliary figure is incorporated into the motif, only a Cupid figure is depicted. 382 This is based on comparison with other examples. Schlam states that the image of the couple embracing is the most common image of Cupid and Psyche. Schlam, Cupid and Psyche, 5.

128

associated with the myth of Cupid and Psyche that draws from Roman literary precedents and points towards a specific interpretation of the motif.

The tale of Cupid and Psyche is multivalent; there are a number of elements with which early artists and patrons could have engaged. The first focuses on the typos of descent into the underworld and rebirth. Psyche journeys to the underworld in order to retrieve a jewelry box from Proserpina, the Queen of the Underworld. Toscano focuses on Psyche's journey into the underworld, arguing that sexual tension and union was the primary metaphor for overcoming death and decay in the Roman and early Christian mindset.383 Given Toscano's suggestion, I propose that Psyche should be considered a katabatic heroine and complementary to the psychopompos elements of Cupid.

Perhaps the most pragmatic explanation for the popularity of the motif is the promise of immortality that underlies the tale. Konston argues that the conception of Eros depicted in the

Roman novels is marked by a structurally asymmetrical relationship between the protagonists:

Cupid is immortal while Psyche is mortal.384 The marriage of Psyche to Cupid elevates Psyche to immortality; she is taken up to Olympus as the consort of Cupid. This element of apotheosis seems to have been particularly attractive to early Christians and was integrated into Christian belief. The ascent of Psyche to Olympus mirrored the ascent of the soul to heavenly paradise.

Cupid makes Psyche immortal and thus legitimates Psyche's, or the human souls', desire for immortality.

383 M. Toscano, "Love is Hell: Torment, Sex and Redemption the Cupid and Psyche Myth," in Hell and Its Afterlife: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives (Surry, Great Britain: Ashgate Publishing, 2013),10. 384 Toscano argues that is the tension that exists between the two protagonists that offer the ultimate impetus to overcome death. Toscano, "Love is Hell," 19.

129

The conclusion of the tale with the bestowal of immortality on Psyche as a result of marriage constructs a specific conception of the marriage bond. I propose that the motif is included on this sarcophagus to allude to this specific formulation of marriage. It is a marriage that imparts immortality, focusing upon the in-dissolvable nature of the union that exists between the couple. The placement of the Cupid and Psyche figures in relation to the couple joined in the dextrarum iunctio leads the viewer to equate the two couples. The deceased couple is intended to be understood in relation to the Cupid and Psyche tale.385 Compositionally, the inclusion of the Cupid and Psyche figures requires the viewer to connect the motif with marriage, but specifically a marriage which elevates the soul to a higher spiritual plane.386 This equation, ultimately, could serve to provide assurance of the indissolvable nature of the particular marriage union of the individuals involved; the union exists in perpetuity after the death of the individuals involved. As with representations of couples on stele and 'window' reliefs and funerary altars, the contractual nature of the marriage union is highlighted in the depiction. The marriage bond is conceived of as a contract that exists in perpetuity into the afterlife. The character of the bond itself provides the potential of immortality, deciphered through the comparison with the representation of Cupid and Psyche. Thus, although the dextrarum iunctio in this presentation is conceived of as a symbol of marriage, the addition of alternate subsidiary figures suggests a specific nuancing of the nuptial interpretation.

385 The Cupid and Psyche image is often combined with other mythological couples such as Mars and Rhea, or Venus and Mars. Dionysus and Ariadne represent another common couple with which the images are combined. Some scholars see such combinations as the ultimate union of initiation, funeral and apotheosis. Ibid.,18. 386 There is another example that suggests variance of the same compositional theme. A sarcophagus from Mantova presents a small-scale figure in place of the Hymenaeus/Cupid figure. Although Reinberg suggests this figure represents a slave, I suggest that the figure is a child based on the analysis of sartorial cues such as costume, and the addition of child attributes such as a stylus and tablet. The implication is that the motif is a representation of a family group. See Nr. 136.

130

Stylistic and compositional analysis of the motif suggests that the dextrarum iunctio is multivalent in nature. The lack of consistent female veiling calls into question the close association with marriage. The use of male veiling on a number of examples suggests that the motif is used to represent male mourning dress. The figural composition of the motif could be altered to depict a number of different scenarios: from the expectations of the afterlife to the depiction of familial ties and legal succession. The motif can be further nuanced through the use of gestural cues.

Gestural cues:

The female gestures found on sarcophagi are divided into three typological categories.

Traditional analysis has treated the dextrarum iunctio as a single typological category with a standardized iconographic interpretation, eliminating any variations within the gesture itself and creating a false sense of compositional and stylistic unity. My discussion of typological categories seeks to discern variation found within the gesture of the handshake itself, as well as subsidiary gestures made by the female figures, and include it in my typological analysis. The three typological subcategories for the gesture found on Roman sarcophagi are based upon three variations of female gesture. All of the gestural variants are drawn from Roman honourific statuary depicting the female form. The first pose is a modified version of the 'Pudicitia' pose drawn from Roman statuary; the veiled female figure draped in a tunic and palla draws her veil up to shield her face.387 This form of statuary presentation refers to mourning gestures associated with Roman women. The second statue type is the 'Ceres-type,' where a female figure is wrapped in a palla and stands in contraposto pose with her weight on the left leg. She often

387 The major scholarship concerning the Pudicitia: Alexandridis, Die Frauen des Rӧmischen Kaiserhauses; Hughes traces the development of the 'Pudicitia' statuary type. L. Hughes, “The Chaste Roman Matron: Re asting Roman ulpture's Visual Paradigm,” Unpublished arti le. Referen es to Pudicitia appear in Kleiner, but are not discussed in detail. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 162-164.

131

holds a swath of wheat in her hands. This variant again alludes to honourific portraiture, where feminine fecundity is celebrated. The final gestural typology draws from the Mars-Venus statuary groupings popular in the second and third centuries CE.388 This portraiture grouping points to a strictly nuptial-like interpretation of the motif, but alludes to a specific construction of the marriage bond associated with divine love. The gestural variants illustrate the ability of the artist to nuance the depiction of the motif through variations in female gesture.

The first female gestural type that appears in the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary sarcophagi is related to the 'Pudicitia' pose drawn from Roman honourific statuary and indicative of mourning imagery within the funerary context. The paradigmatic example is found on a sarcophagus currently in Ostia Scavi (Fig. 32a).389 This marble sarcophagus dates from the fourth century CE and features a central dextrarum iunctio delineated by fluted Corinthian columns from a motif with two female figures on the left and a corresponding image with two male figures on the right. The dextrarum iunctio presents five figures: two-full sized figures linked by a dextrarum iunctio, a small-scale Eros figure holding a torch, and two small-scale figures flanking the linked couple. The female figure stands on the left in three-quarter pose.

Her head is turned in near profile view facing the male figure. She wears a veil formed when her palla is drawn up and on her head while the edges fall around her body, and she wears a tunic that falls to her ankles in deep folds. While she reaches out with her right hand to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, her left hand draws her veil across her face (Fig. 32b).

388 D. E. E. Kleiner, "Second Century Mythological Portraiture," Latomus 40 (1981):512-544, platesXVIII - XXVII. See also R. Kousser, "Mythological Group Portraits in Antonine Rome: The Performance of Myth," AJA (2007): 673-691. 389 Nr. 140.

132

This gesture is related to the 'Pudicitia' pose ubiquitous in Roman funerary art, and could be seen as a modification of the 'Pudicitia' type:390 a veiled woman dressed in a tunic and wrapped in a palla, standing with one arm across her waist and one arm reaching up to grasp the draping folds of her veil.391 The a-typical presentation found on the Ostia sarcophagus has been modified to allow her right hand to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, instead of resting at her waist. The gesture of the female’s left hand has also been modified; rather than simply grasping at the folds of her veil, she appears in the process of pulling the veil over her face. This variation of the gesture is found on numismatic evidence associated with the goddess Pudicitia.392 This variant also appears on various funerary monuments; for example, a first century CE funerary relief from the Galleria Lapidaria in Arles depicts two female figures.393

This gestural variation is one of the most common variants found on Roman sarcophagi.

While the example drawn from Ostia presents exaggerated versions of the gesture, there are a number of examples that present a modified 'Pudicitia' with a less pronounced gesture; the veil is drawn up by the left hand, but does not entirely obstruct the line of sight between the figures. A sarcophagus from the Galleria Lapidaria, Vatican Museums presents a dextrarum iunctio (Fig.

390 In the Greek tradition, this gesture is known as anakalypsis and has been discussed in detail by Llewellyn-Jones in his chapter focusing on the problems inherent in the study of the iconography of veiling. L. Llewellyn-Jones, Aphrodite’s Tortoise: the Veiled Woman of Ancient Greece (Swansea, Wales: Classical Press of Wales, 2003), 85- 120. Also see S. Blundell, "Clutching at Clothes," in Women's Dress in the Ancient Greek World, ed. Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones (London: Duckworth, 2002), 143-169. 391 This definition is taken from Kleiner's work on Roman funerary reliefs. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture, 162. There is no scholarly consensus as to what constitutes a "Pudicitia" pose. 392 The 'Pudicitia' does not appear in numismatic evidence before the second century CE. The first representation is found on a coins depicting the wife of emperor Trajan on the obverse and a depiction of the altar on the reverse, complemented with the depiction of a female figure drawing away her veil from her face with the left hand as she holds a sceptre in her right. L. Hughes, "The Chaste Roman Matron: Recasting Roman Sculpture's Visual Paradigm,” Unpublished paper, 8-9." 393 Musée de l'Arles et de la Provence antiques FAN92.00.149. The figures turn slightly towards one another while the veiled female on the left reaches up with her left hand to pull the veil out. A very similar gesture is found on a depiction of dextrarum iunctio found on a sarcophagus originating from Mantova, Italy. See Nr. 136. The female figure extends her right hand across her body to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, while her left hand reaches up to pull her veil out and in front of her face.

133

30).394 The female figure stands on the left. Her veil falls around her body nearly covering her upper body entirely. While she reaches down with her right hand to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, her left hand draws the right edge of her veil out and to the right. She holds the folds of the veil predominately near her face, but does not cover her face completely. The result is the visual link between the male and female figures is not disrupted, but the visual dominance of the gesture is maintained.

The motif is traditionally identified as a representation of female modesty and chastity in

Roman funerary art.395 The female figure is represented with the highest feminine virtue. The gesture is, however, a polysemous motif.396 In Greek representations, the gesture can be used to represent marriage in the mythological context. However, in the earthly realm women utilize the gesture in several contexts: in departure scenes, at the tomb side, and in a banquet.397 There are a number of Greek examples in the theatrical context in which veiling is used as a visual technique to express mourning.398 The mourning element of the gesture is highly evident in the Ostia sarcophagus in the gaze of the figures. The drawing up of the veil by the female figure to shield her face disrupts the line of sight between the male and female figures. Her veil shields her view of the male, and would have also obstructed her face from the male figure. The overall impression is one of disruption and liminality as the result of the death of the individual. Even in the example from the Galleria Lapidaria, where the gesture is less pronounced, the visual link is similarly interrupted (Fig. 30). The female figure holds her veil prominently with her left hand.

394 Nr. 128. 395 Brilliant, Gesture and Rankt, 45; Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture; Olsen, Dress and the Roman Woman, 196; J. L. Sebesta, "Women's Costume," 529-41. 396 Lisa Hughes has recently traced the development of the motif from Roman times through the Renaissance. She concludes that pudicitia is not solely the attribution of female chastity, but is a multivalent motif which often in ludes onnotations of mourning. L. Hughes, “The Chaste Roman Matron,” 24. 397 Llewellyn-Jones, Aphrodite’s Tortoise, 103. 398 Cairns, “Weeping and Veiling," 46.

134

Despite the fact that the female figure holds her veil in such a way that it does not disrupt the visual link between the figures, she breaks the link physically by looking downwards towards the

Eros figure at her feet. This downward feminine glance is often interpreted to be a representation of the bashful bride on her wedding day, unwilling to meet the eyes of her husband.399 I suggest that the less pronounced gesture is not intended to indicate the dynamics of a marital relationship, rather it is used to suggest liminality and the severance of the earthly relationship between the two individuals. The less pronounced version of the gesture is potentially used pragmatically. The depiction of the female figure drawing her veil from right to left across her chest negates the ability of the artist to depict the more pronounced version of the gesture and still allow the iewer to see the female’s portrait. If the artist had depi ted the woman drawing her veil across her face, her face would have been completely obstructed. By way of comparison, the Ostia female figure draws her veil from her left shoulder with her left hand, allowing her to pull her veil across her face without completely obstructing her portrait.

By depicting 'Pudicitia' without a full covering of the face, the artist of the Galleria Lapidaria example is able to suggest the same degree of liminality and disruption as a full covering of the face, but still maintain the commemorative portrait features of the individual.

The presentation of the motif with a female figure taking a pose presenting mourning suggests the gesture and pose were included to focus on the impacts of the death of the deceased in the earthly sphere. The commemorator of the monument could choose the gesture as well as iconographic elements, such as the scroll, to indicate the severance of the relationship between the individuals. The second type, in contrast, presents a 'Ceres pose' that is honorific in nature, and alludes to the afterlife and continuity of the relationship.

399 Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 81.

135

The second gestural variant found on examples of sarcophagi is also drawn from honourific portrait statuary. Many examples of the dextrarum iunctio on sarcophagi present a modified 'Ceres pose.' The 'Ceres pose' is the least common on imperial and honorific statuary,400 but appears on 24 examples on Roman sarcophagi.401 The paradigmatic example of the 'Ceres pose' is found on an example currently housed at the Museo Ostiense in Ostia (Fig. 25). This

Hadrianic marble portrait in the round is missing the portrait head, but presents a female figure, wearing a tunic that falls to her sandaled feet and wrapped in a palla. Her palla falls behind her back and is drawn around her right shoulder to envelope her right arm. The edge of the palla is drawn up and over her left shoulder, draping in soft horizontal v-shaped crescents on her stomach. The bottom edge of the palla is drawn up by the left hand, which also holds poppies or an ear of corn. The diagonal folding of the palla provides the identifiable element of the pose while the poppies or ear of corn held402 in her hand allude to the goddess Ceres, with whom the pose is associated.

This pose is replicated nearly exactly in relief on a sarcophagus fragment, currently housed in the British Museum, but originating from Rome (Fig. 27). The fragment contains a depiction of a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure. The female figure stands on the right. She is veiled. Her palla wraps around her body from her right to her left. Her right arm emerges from under the palla to engage in a dextrarum iunctio, but the left edge of her palla is drawn over her shoulder. Her left hand draws the bottom edge of her palla up creating the

400 Bieber suggests that the 'Ceres pose' was used almost exclusively in Imperial art. She argues that the type was reserved solely for noble women and thus was not found on Roman funerary monuments from the lower classes. She suggests the pose exists only upon examples of Roman biographical sarcophagi that commemorate the deeds of important Roman generals or citizens. Bieber, Ancient Copies, 163-164. 401 Nrs. 107, 109, 110, 111, 115, 117, 118,121, 123, 133, 135,142,143,144,145,146,155 and 159. 402 These attributes are associated with the portrait type and provide a means of classification, but they are not exclusive to the type. These attributes and other attributes of Ceres such as the Corona spiciea could be included in other female statuary types to suggest fertility or fecundity. Alexandridis, Die Frauen des Rӧmischen Kaiserhauses, 55-61. Alexandridis, "Neutral Bodies," 268.

136

characteristic diagonal line. She also holds a sheath of poppies in her left hand.403 Most examples, however, do not include the poppies.404

The pose alludes to the cult of Ceres, or the Greek Demeter.405 The cult of Ceres had a presence in Rome from Republican times. Dedicated in the late-third century BCE, the cult grew in importance throughout the first century CE.406 Cicero discusses the civic associations of the cult. The priestess of Ceres undertook rituals and rites on behalf of citizens.407 The yearly rite of

Ceres, the sacrum anniversarium Cereris, celebrated by Roman matrons, was attested by

Livy.408 By the late Republic, Ceres' standardized iconography had fully developed, including the depiction of the goddess with the Corona Spicea and an ear of grain.409 The emperor

Augustus himself became an adherent,410 and images of the empress Livia appearing as the goddess were produced in large number on both coins and in statuary. Livia wears either a

Corona Spicea or holds the emblematic poppies or wheat ears in such representations.411

Subsequent empresses continued to present themselves in the guise of Ceres. Antonia, the daughter of Mark Anthony, wife of Drusus and mother to Germanicus and the emperor Claudius,

403 The depiction of the poppies on the sarcophagus is unique. There appears to be no other examples that also include the attribute. However, many of the examples are damaged, some heavily, making it impossible to discern if other attributes were included. There may be other examples of the poppies or other Ceres attributes held by the female figures that are no longer discernible. 404 A sarcophagus from Genoa provides another example of the "Ceres-pose." Tbe depiction presents the characteristic diagonal drapery and body pose, but is lacking the attributes of Ceres, the ears of corn or the poppies. The dextrarum iunctio presents a veiled female figure stands on the right and is presented in frontal view. Her palla is draped around her body. Her right arm emerges from under her palla to engage in the dextrarum iunctio, while her left arm is held at her side. She stands with her weight born on her right leg, while her left leg is bent, mimicking the pose found in Ceres statuary. The bending of the leg and the characteristic folding of the drapery indicates that this depiction was intended to mimic the Ceres statuary type. See Nr. 118. 405 Alexandridis is careful to point out that the pose is not intended to depict the goddess Ceres specifically. There is nothing inherent in the stylistic elements of the pose that relate to depictions of Ceres. The pose was intended only to allude to the goddess through iconographic elements. Alexandridis, Die Frauen des Rӧmischen Kaiserhauses, 55-61. 406 Spaeth, The Roman Goddess Ceres, 11. 407 Cicero Balb. 55 408 Livy 22.56.4. 409 Spaeth, The Roman Goddess Ceres, 16. 410 Seut. Aug. 93. 411 Bieber, Ancient Copies,164.

137

is depicted in the guise of Ceres in a portrait statue now housed in the Louvre.412 She is depicted in the 'Ceres pose,' but she does not hold any attributes of Ceres in her right hand. Other empresses such as Sabina and the niece of Trajan, Matidia, also were portrayed in the 'Ceres- type,' but both carried poppies in their left hand as iconographical cues.413 As the 'Ceres-type' was further adopted in the depiction of women on Roman funerary monuments, the allegorical function of the poppies and swaths of wheat become increasingly important as markers associated with key elements of the cult of Ceres.

I suggest that this pose was chosen by commissioners of the sarcophagi because it could function interpretively on a number of levels. Above all, the pose is honorific in nature. It was chosen by the commemorator because it represented a visually appropriate presentation of the

Roman matron.414 The honorific element fits well with the commemorative nature of the sarcophagus in general. Whether the female figure was the deceased, the wife of the deceased, or perhaps the commemorator, she is being presented as the ideal Roman female citizen. Beiber suggests that the 'Ceres-type' had an even more specific honorific function. She believes that the pose was used exclusively to depict priestesses of Ceres in Rome in honorific art.415 However, the proportionally large number of examples that appear within this corpus, 18 of 72 examples, suggests that the use of the 'Ceres-type' to present a priestess of Ceres is unlikely. Further, many of the examples of the type that appear on Roman biographical sarcophagi are remarkably similar stylistically. Such similarity could suggest the mass production of sarcophagi, where the heads are blocked out and portraits are added by artisans after purchase.416 Such replication negates the suggestion of specialized function. These images had to fulfill a generalized purpose,

412 Bieber, Ancient Copies,164. 413 Ibid.,165. 414 Davis, "Portrait Statues," 210-211. 415 Bieber, Ancient Copies, 163-164. 416 See note 300.

138

which would appeal to many different commissioners. It is likely that the pose had an allegorical function that appealed to a wide range of individual commissioners.

The goddess Ceres had associations with both fertility and liminality.417 She was firmly integrated into a number of different life-course events. Literary depictions of wedding ceremonies necessitated the presence of Ceres; the inclusion of the 'Ceres-type' portraiture alludes to conjugal union that can easily be understood if the dextrarum iunctio is taken to represent marriage, as scholarship has traditionally assumed. Further, the attributes of Ceres reflected her importance in the maintenance of agricultural and human fertility.418 However,

Ceres was also associated with funerary rites and the Eleusinian mysteries, which promised the potential of an afterlife.419 This association with liminality becomes increasingly central to the cult during the imperial era in the form of the mysteries. The rape and return of Ceres' daughter

Proserpina, who was abducted by Pluto to become his wife and Queen of the Underworld, is depicted visually and discussed in reference to the cult.420 The daughter of Ceres was charged with helping to supervise the souls of the deceased in afterlife. Further, Ceres played an important role in funerals.

The chthonic and liminal interpretation of the depiction of a gesture associated with

'Ceres-type' statuary, mirrors the interpretation of the 'Ceres-pose' found on Roman funerary altars.421 The continued use of the pose on Roman sarcophagi in a more standardized form suggests the chthonic allusions driving the interpretation on Roman funerary altars continued to

417 Spaeth discusses the overarching theme of liminality that is associated with Ceres on a number of levels. She looks at the role of Ceres in rites of passage as well as other elements such as prodigies. Spaeth, The Roman Goddess Ceres, 51-79. 418 See Spaeth on the development of the fertility associations of the cult of Ceres in Rome. Ibid.,33-49. 419 Ibid.,21. 420 Ibid.,27. 421 See Chapter five, 94-96.

139

influence the interpretations on sarcophagi. Although the primary iconographic attribute changed from the pomegranate to the poppy or sheath of wheat, or was omitted entirely from the depiction, the underlying chthonic themes are drawn out. The increasing standardization of the depiction of the 'Ceres-type,' with its characteristic folds and drapes, became central to the interpretive potential of the depictions on sarcophagi. The pose itself alluded to honorific portraiture and most Romans would have been familiar with the visual vocabulary. The pose was further able to allude to the goddess Ceres and her association with potential salvation proffered by her cult. While attributes associated with Ceres carried clear connotations of fertility, the chthonic elements were the overarching allegorical constituents. The final typological category is also influenced by imperial portraiture that is synonymous with marriage, but alludes to a specific construction of the marriage bond.

The final gestural type is notable as it has unambiguous associations with a specific conception of a relationship between a male and a female couple. This group of sarcophagi depicts a male and a female figure standing in a pose drawn from depictions of the god and goddess, Mars and Venus.422 The depictions of the divine couple are standard in composition and gesture. A statue group presenting the emperor Hadrian and Annia Lucia as Mars and

Venus, dating from the mid second century CE, provides the paradigm example (Fig. 33). The marble portrait group presents Venus on the left in three-quarter to near-profile view. She is often portrayed as nude from the waist up with a palla wrapped around her waist. In this depiction, she wears a tunic that falls to her feet. Her palla is wrapped around her waist. She places her right hand on the chest of Mars and her left hand on his back or alternately on his right shoulder or arm. Mars appears in the paradigm example in frontal pose and in the nude excepting

422 There are two examples. See Nrs. 108 and 138.

140

his helmet and holder for his sword. He has removed his armor and laid it on what appears to be a tree stump next to him. The left hand of the male figure rests on his sword. The depiction focuses on his divine status and heroic nature.

The gestures associated with this portrait type are replicated in a modified form on a number of sarcophagi. The depictions mimic the gestures associated with the Venus and Mars figures, but are modified to allow the right hands of both figures to engage in dextrarum iunctio.

The paradigmatic example is currently housed in Pisa, Campo Santo (Fig. 34).423 The marble sarcophagus depicts a central dextrarum iunctio combined with depictions of the Seasons and a motif presenting a female figure. The dextrarum iunctio depicts a female figure on the left and a male figure on the right. The portraits of both figures are heavily damaged. The veiled female figure stands in near-profile view wearing a tunic girded under her chest and a palla wrapped around her waist. Her right hand reaches down to engage in a dextrarum iunctio with the male figure. Her left arm reaches behind the figure, and her left hand is probably resting on the back of the male figure, although this is not entirely visible. The male figure similarly mimics the gestures of the Mars figure. He stands in frontal view with one leg bent. Rather than a sword, he grasps a scroll in his right hand. He wears a toga that falls in deep folds to his mid-calf. He is depicted as an educated Roman citizen rather than in the heroic nude. Zanker and Ewald suggest the motif was used on Roman sarcophagi as an abbreviated depiction of martial love.424 I suggest, following Kousser, that the symbolism of the motif is not overwhelmingly associated with marriage, but rather conceives of the bond between the two individuals as emotional and erotic.

423 Nr. 138. 424 Zanker and Ewald, Living with Myths, 195.

141

The presentation of the two figures is allegorically charged, alluding to the union of

Venus and Mars. The myth of Mars and Venus, or Ares and Aphrodite in the Greek, is narrated by Demodo hos in Homer’s Odyssey.425 The goddess Aphrodite is unfaithful to her husband,

Hephaistos. She begins an affair with Ares, but the two were eventually caught by her husband and shamed publically in front of the other Olympian gods. Kousser suggests that the viewer of the Mars-Venus grouping is intended to conceive of the marriage union as one marked by physical and emotional intimacy.426 However, the mythological couple was not married; they were lovers. The dextrarum iunctio, in this case, could represent a linking of a married couple, but the legitimacy of the marriage or the presentation of the couple at the wedding ceremony is subverted by the allusion to emotional and passionate love found within the mythological narrative. The viewer is intended to equate the individualized couple with the mythological couple. However, the bond between them is emotional as compared to conjugal or legal.

The use of these encoded body types and gestures suggests the meaning of the dextrarum iunctio was nuanced and contingent. These elements implied a perception of abstraction where ideal bodies could be combined with individualized features to present abstract conceptions of the relationship between the couple. The relationship could be in the processes of being transformed through separation and grieving. It could be presented honorifically as a means to transmit a multitude of values associated with the feminine and their role in marriage. It could also depict a conception of marriage that is emotional and suggestive. These gestural cues can further be combined with iconographic elements to further nuance the meaning of the dextrarum iunctio.

425 Hom. Od. 8.266-366. 426 Kossier, "Mythological Group Portraits in Antonine Rome," 283.

142

Iconographic program:

The iconographic program into which the dextrarum iunctio is integrated is perhaps the most fundamental element to understand the interpretation of the motif. The dextrarum iunctio can be incorporated into narratives drawn from the biography of the individual, mythology, as well as those drawn from biblical sources. Traditional scholarship tends to focus on biographical sarcophagi that present the motif as part of a narrative of life events. Only recent scholarship of the motif has begun to investigate the various iconographic programs that that incorporate the motif.427 I suggest that the interpretation of the handshake gesture is influenced by the narrative in which the dextrarum iunctio is embedded. The wide variation of iconographical contexts reflects changes in the conception of the body, social interest in individual biography, as well as changing conceptions of the afterlife.

Iconographic analysis of the dextrarum iunctio has focused almost exclusively on biographical sarcophagi. The paradigmatic example is the Mantua biographical sarcophagus that depicts a battle scene, a clementia scene, a scene of sacrifice and finally a dextrarum iunctio.

The sarcophagus, dating from the second century CE, depicts the combination of motifs in unbroken relief (Fig. 2).428 Working from left to right, the sarcophagus depicts a battle scene, a scene of clemency, a scene of sacrifice and, the dextrarum iunctio. As discussed in Chapter two, this combination of motifs is interpreted as analogous to eulogy, representing the major life events of a Roman male or the virtues that a Roman male would be expected to cultivate.429 This interpretation seems most agreeable given the commemorative context of the motif in which individual virtues were celebrated as markers of social status. However, the integration of the

427 See Reinsberg, Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen, 15-18. 428 See Nr. 113. 429 Chapter two, 23-24.

143

dextrarum iunctio into an iconographic context focusing on individual biography only represents nine examples of sarcophagi that depict the dextrarum iunctio.430

Other examples431 integrate the motif into an iconographic program that negates an interpretation of marriage and provides evidence for a wider interpretative margin. A well known Christian example from Arles depicts a series of four motifs delineated by diagonally fluted Corinthian columns surmounted by arches ornamented with vine leaves (Fig. 35).432 The sarcophagus presents two individualized portrait motifs in two central panels and the Dioscuri,

Castor and Pollux, at the sides.

The two motifs presenting individualized portraiture provide the narrative focus of the sarcophagus. The first motif depicts a female figure dressed in a tunic and wrapped in a palla and a male figure who is dressed in a tunic that falls to his knees, and a military mantle, paludamentum, that is fastened at the shoulder. The youthful male figure stands on the left side in near-profile view reaching out with his right arm. The female figure wears an elaborated tiered hairstyle topped with a veil that falls in folds around her. Her round cheeks and strong brow suggest a youthful countenance. She wears a tunic girded at the waist prominently with a belt that features a nodus herculaneus or cingulum.433 The Herculean knot is a central sartorial cue of the Roman marriage ceremony. Sometimes interpreted as a kind of fertility symbol,434 the knot functions in the visual depiction as an iconographic cue alluding to marriage. The figure's left hand rests at her waist and points directly at the knot. The inclusion of the knot and its

430 See Nrs. 105, 106, 107, 109, 113, 114, 115, 146 and 155. 431 See Nrs. 102 and 165. 432 Nr. 103. 433 Hersch,The Roman Wedding, 109. 434 The author Festus is the only literary source that discusses the Herculean knot in the context of marriage. He suggests that the act of untying the knot on the wedding night represented the man's procreative potential. Fest. 55L s. Hersch, The Roman Wedding, 110.

144

dominance is significant. The depiction drapes the palla so that the knot is visible, indicating an intended interpretation. The artist intended the motif to be interpreted as a representation of marriage.435

The second central motif is a dextrarum iunctio that links a female and a male figure.

The togate male figure appears on the left. His thinning straight hair and thick curly beard suggest middle age. The figure reaches with his right hand to engage in a dextrarum iunctio, while his left hand holds a scroll prominently at chest height. The female figure stands on the right in near frontal view. She wears a hairstyle similar to the one found in the marriage scene.

The hair is drawn back and secured with a headdress that is topped with a veil, the drapes of which wrap around the woman's body. Her right hand reaches down to the dextrarum iunctio, while her left hand is held at her hip and makes a pointing gesture.436 Between the two figures stands a capsa, an object used to hold scrolls.

The representation of older figures engaged in the dextrarum iunctio tends to negate the correlation with marriage. The dextrarum iunctio must be read in conjunction with the first motif that likely presents an idealized depiction of a marriage ceremony. It is unlikely that the artist would combine two images that both suggest a marriage ceremony. I suggest the dextrarum iunctio is intended to represent farewell at the death of one of the individuals, and is combined with a motif that presents the marriage ceremony. However, this does not present a representation of the figures at marriage and then the same figures later in life in continuous

435 A similar form of this motif appears on an example from the British museum that depicts a female figure in the regalia of a wedding in combination with a dextrarum iunctio motif. See Nr. 165. 436 Thorsten Fӧgen dis usses the importan e of gestures of the hand. He pro ides an illustration of arious hand gestures and the associated meaning. The gesture made by the female figure suggests audientiam facit. T. Fӧgen, "Sermo corporis: Ancient Reflections on Gestus, Vultus and Vox," in Bodies and Boundaries in Graeco-Roman Antiquity, ed. T. Fӧgen and M. M. Lee (New Yor : de Gruyter, 2009), 31.

145

narrative, the appearance of the same figures in different contexts.437 Stylistic differences indicate that the individuals depicted in the two motifs are different. The first motif presents a male figure with short curly hair while the male figure engaged in the dextrarum iunctio has short, straight hair and a curly beard. This difference in depiction may indicate that the sarcophagus was reused, and the portraits modified. Despite the lack of continuous narrative, the motifs function as individual iconographic elements, but are combined in a way to suggest an overarching iconographic purpose. The first motif presents a depiction of marriage. The second presents two figures at a later stage in life. The lack of auxiliary figures and the dominant depiction of the scroll suggest a legalistic context.438 I advocate that the motif presents the separation of the couple at death. The scroll was included to depict the will of the deceased.

The inclusion of the Dioscuri in the decorative program further nuances the interpretive program, suggesting an afterlife context. The two outside panels each depict one of the twins standing in front of their horses. Both figures are depicted in 'heroic nude:' nude figures depicted with defined models with only a cloak wrapped around their shoulders. The figure on the left is depicted with curly hair. His cloak is fastened on his shoulder and falls behind him. He holds the folds in his left arm. The Dioscuri on the right is also wrapped in a cloak that covers his right hand. His curly hair is covered by a distinctive hat.439 The Dioscuri were envisioned as the protectors of the soul and facilitators its journey to the underworld.440 The inclusion of the mythological figures guides the interpretation of the viewer. The dextrarum iunctio is interpreted

437 Peter H. von Blanckenhagen defines continuous narrative here as when events separated in the time are represented as occurring simultaneously at the same place in the same setting. P.H. von Blanckenhagen, "Narration in Hellenistic and Roman Art," AJA 61, 1 (1957): 78. 438 See discussion of scrolls, Chapter five. 439 F. Benoit, Sarcophages Paleochretiens D'Arles et de Marseille: Fouilles et Monuments Archeologiques en France Metropolitaine (Paris: Centre National de La Recherche Scientifique, 1954), 33. 440 J. M. C. Toynbee, "Monsieur Cumont on Roman Funerary Art," The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 86, 507 (1945): 148, 151-152. See Cumont, Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains, 66.

146

within the context of the severance of earthly relationships and the transmission of the soul to the afterlife.441

A small set of sarcophagi depict the dextrarum iunctio in relation to mythological cycles.442 The depictions of the dextrarum iunctio on mythological sarcophagi highlight the polysemous nature of the motif. I will discuss an example of a mythological sarcophagus depicting the narrative associated with the rape of Phoebe and Hilaeira, the daughters of

Leucippus, by the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux. The second century marble sarcophagus currently housed in the Galleria dei Candelabri, Vatican Museums, depicts the narrative of the myth on the long side of the sarcophagus (Fig. 36).443 The left short side of the sarcophagus depicts a female and a male figure. Presented in three-quarter view, the female figure stands on the left and wears a cloak and a veil. She holds a spear in her left hand, while her right hand rests at her side. The male figure stands on the right. He appears in the nude but with a cloak wrapped around his shoulders. A small Eros figure stands to the right of the male figure holding a torch. The short right side of the sarcophagus depicts a dextrarum iunctio between a male and a female figure. The male figure is depicted in the nude but holding a shield in his left hand. His right hand extends to engage in the dextrarum iunctio. He wears the distinctive hat of the

Dioscuri.444 The veiled female figure reaches for the dextrarum iunctio with her right hand while

441 There are a number of different iconographic contexts that the motif, within which the dextrarum iunctio is integrated. Due to space considerations, I will not be able to discuss the full corpus of examples. I wish to note a number of variants in iconographical context. The motif can be combined with depictions of the Seasons. See Nr. 138. Depictions of Erotes. Nr. 104. The Christian sarcophagus housed at the Pio Cristiano, Vatican Museums provides another example. The dextrarum iunctio is combined with a number of biblical scenes. Nr. 134. 442 I have collected 4 examples of mythological sarcophagi that include a depiction of a dextrarum iunctio. See Nrs. 168, 169, 170, 171 and 172. 443 See Nr. 171. 444 The peleus or conical felt hat associated with the Dioscuri. H. Neilson, "A Terracotta Phallus from Pisa Ship E: More Evidence for the Priapus Deity as Protector of Greek and Roman Navigators," International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 31, 2 (2002): 251.

147

her left hand draws the folds of her veil up to her face I suggest the sides of the sarcophagus depict the two Dioscuri and the daughters of Leucippus.

The rape by the Dioscuri is a popular motif within Roman funerary art, and appears on a number of Roman sarcophagi. The myth narrates the kidnapping and marriage of Pheobe and

Hilaeira, the daughters of Leucippus. The Dioscuri were so inflamed with love for Pheobe and

Hilaeira that they abducted them to be their wives.445 The suitors, to whom the women were engaged, confronted the Dioscuri over the rape. In the battle that followed, one of the Dioscuri and both of the slighted betrothed were killed. The Dioscuri and their wives were then elevated to godhood by Zeus. Zanker and Ewald suggest the myth can represent an allegory for a husband and wife who may inhabit the sarcophagi.446 Ultimately, the myth depicts female weakness and male virtus, making it an appropriate image for a husband and wife. The dextrarum iunctio that appears on the side presents the Dioscuri leading his young wife as a bride.447 However, like many mythic narratives, the rape by the Dioscuri is a multivalent tale that could appeal to commissioners of the sarcophagus on a number of levels. The myth appears to have been popular in part because of the drama and violence inherent in it. North suggests that part of the popularity of the myth relates to the typos of kidnapping.448 He proposes that the kidnapping motif is found within the funerary context to suggest the transition of the soul from the earthly life to the afterlife. The daughters of Leucippus become equated with the goddess

Persephone, who was similarly kidnapped by the god Hades.449 The apotheosis of the figures is

445 Pseudo-Hyginus, Fabulae 80; Pseudo-Apollodorus, Bibliotheca 3. 13. 4. 446 Zanker and Ewald, Living with Myths, 89. 447 Ibid., 88. 448 J. A. North, "Sappho Underground," in Historical and Religious Memory in the Ancient World, ed. B. Dignas and R. R. R. Smith (Oxord: Oxford University Press, 2012),47. 449Zanker and Ewald suggest that the myths can be conflated to an extent and states that the myth could imply that these daughters similarly spend part of the year in Olympus and part of the year in the underworld. Zanker and Ewald, Living with Myths, 89.

148

a central element of the myth. I propose that this is the element that commissioners of the monument were attempting to draw upon, at least in part. All four figures that appear in the myth were divinized by Zeus. In this context, I suggest that the dextrarum iunctio is being used to represent separation and transition of the figures before apotheosis. The female figure stands on the left in a 'Pudicita' pose with her mantle drawn up to her face in a gesture that signifies transition and separation. An Eros figure flanks the female figure. While this figure could allude to a nuptial context,450 he could also appear in his role as psychopomos. The multivalent nature of the motif is highlighted in this example. The myth confirms that the two figures are married, but the overwhelming context is one of apotheosis as a result of the marriage.451

The variation of the iconographic context of the motif is reflective of socio-cultural transformations occurring during the period in question. The overarching social change that coincided with the use of the dextrarum iunctio on iconographically complex sarcophagi was the change in the rhetorical traditions associated with the Second Sophistic. The Second Sophistic represents the writings of a collection of Greek writers who promoted a renewed emphasis on rhetoric and oratory.452 A further element of the Second Sophistic is a change in the conception of the body; the body becomes a heuristic category.453 The discursive construction of the social

450 Zanker and Ewald suggest that this figure is conflated with the god Hymenaeus. Zanker and Ewald, Living with Myths, 89. 451 The depiction of the myth of Laodamia and Protesilaus includes a dextrarum iunctio between the two main figures. The dextrarum iunctio is combined with motifs depicting Protesilaus bidding farewell to his new bride, Laodamia and the shade of Protesilaus being transported to Hades after his death in battle on the right of the dextrarum iunctio. On the right of the dextrarum iunctio, Laodamia lays upon a bed, perhaps a death bed. The final motif depicts Hermes being led to the ferryman Charon. I suggest that the image depicts a married couple, but the ultimate meaning behind the motif is funerary rather than nuptial. The motif is included to represent the couple's separation at death. Nr. 170 452 M. Gleason, Making Men. Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton : Princeton University Press, 1994); T. Whitmarsh, The Second Sophistic (Oxford ; Oxford University Press, 2005); G. Andersen, The Second Sophistic: A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire (London: Routledge, 1993); 453 B. C. Ewald,"Myth and Visual Narrative in the Second Sophistic-A Comparative Approach: Notes on an Attic Hippolytos Sarcophagus in Agrigento," in Life, Death and Representation: Some New Work on Roman Sarcophagi, ed. J. Elsner and J. Huskinson (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011), 263.

149

body is predicated upon the physical body as a constitutive centre. This results in new ideals of social display and bodily presentation that become tangible in the presentation of individual biography on Roman sarcophagi.454 The visual imagery found on the monuments was intended to recount the virtues of the individual, and reflect a new interest in biography and autobiographical literature. The edifying nature of the narration of the deeds of great men was central to the strategies of sophists for the elaboration of moral themes.455 It is not surprising to see the presentation of the life of the individual on a funerary monument akin to the encomium in the rhetorical sphere.456 The dextrarum iunctio functioned within this discourse of self-presentation of virtues. These virtues were defined within the context of biographical sarcophagi, but could also manifest within their presentation on mythological sarcophagi. Within this context the meaning behind the motif is constructed within the discourse of individual apotheosis. Again, the focus of apotheosis is on the defining of virtue. The dextrarum iunctio, is used analogously. The use of the motif in different iconographic contexts is indicative of the varied rhetorical methods and strategies which the orators of the Second Sophistic used to develop conceptions of individual virtue.

I suggest the most central development driving the use of the dextrarum iunctio within a varied iconographic context was the overarching change in presentation mode with the development of the sarcophagi-type monuments. The function of the motif on the monument was directly related to the type of monument and its physical context. The motif found on stele- type monuments was used pragmatically, and was marked by a degree of variation in use. The dextrarum iunctio was used to present relationships, ranging from familial to patron-client. As

454 Ewald, "Myth and Visual Narrative," 263. 455 Andersen, The Second Sophistic, 49. 456 For a short discussion of encomium see: Andersen, The Second Sophistic, 48. For rhetoric in general, see: G. Kennedy, The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300BC to 300AD (Princeton: Princeton Unversity Press, 1972); G. Kennedy, Greek Rhetoric Under Christian Emperors (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983).

150

the motif becomes more standardized, it is incorporated into a conventionalized vocabulary to present specific ideas. In the context of sarcophagi, it represents a vocabulary used to present a couple. The consolidation of conventionalized form allows the motif to be used in a number of contexts without the need for narrative description. Ewald asserts that the depiction of mythological narratives on sarcophagi allows for the transition between the 'real life' of the individual to the symbolic order.457 I propose that conventionalized forms function in the same manner. Standardized forms allow the oscillation between depictions of individualized portrait with underlying symbolic associations. With respect to the dextrarum iunctio, the depiction becomes part of the conventionalized vocabulary for visually presenting a Roman couple. As a conventionalized motif, it can be included in a number of iconographic contexts. The iconographic context drives the development of the specific construction of the relationship between the individuals depicted, the state of the relationship at the time of the depiction, or the hope for the relationship in the afterlife. The conventionalized meaning represents merely one facet of a potential multiplicity of meanings. It is the conventionalized nature of the dextrarum iunctio found on Roman sarcophagi that, somewhat paradoxically, underlies its polysemous nature.

This chapter concludes the discussion of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman funerary monuments by focusing on the depiction of the motif on Roman sarcophagi. The dextrarum iunctio becomes part of the conventionalized vocabulary for the depiction of couples, in part due to is standardized depiction of a gesture linking a male and a female figure. However, the multivalent nature of the motif is evident in the sartorial variants, figural composition and gestural cues that point to interpretive contexts other than marriage. The motif must be

457 Ewald, "Myth and Visual Narrative," 263.

151

understood in a multiplicity of contexts: conjugal, funerary and honourific. The variation in iconographical context is a result of the discursive constructions of body conception and the influence of rhetorical strategies in the constitution, interpretation and transmission of individual virtue. The next chapter will offer final conclusions of this study.

152

Chapter seven: Conclusions

This study has attempted to demonstrate the problematic nature of the monolithic association between the dextrarum iunctio and marriage. The correlation was taken as an assumption by past scholars, who interpreted the motif as either a depiction of the wedding ceremony or representing harmony within marriage. The study of the dextrarum iunctio was traditionally complicated by a number of factors. The lack of historic and literary corroboration for the term itself made it difficult to correlate the gesture with any specific meaning. The earliest studies attempted to link the motif with marriage by appealing to the literary depictions of the wedding ceremony. Stylistic and compositional elements of the motif were 'fit' to the literary depictions of marriage.

Further difficulties were associated with the corpus under analysis. The depiction and functioning of the motif on a variety of monument types has not been given due consideration by past studies. Previous scholarship discussing the dextrarum iunctio focused on the motif as it appears on sarcophagi as the medium of transition. Appearances of the motif on stele, 'window' reliefs and funerary altars were rarely mentioned in the secondary scholarship. When the dextrarum iunctio did appear, the depictions were assumed to represent legal marriage. The cursory nature of past analyses of the motif on other monument forms did not take into account the variation inherent in the motif that suggests a multiplicity in meaning.

Finally, the typological categories established by past scholarship have been problematic.

Traditional typologies tend to minimize variation by grouping the examples into broad categories based on monument type. Sartorial, compositional and gestural elements were incorporated as a means of formal analysis with the intent of creating comprehensive chronologies of the motif on

153

one monument form. Such a method does not allow a comprehensive study of the interpretative potential of the motif.

This study suggested that the type and the physical placement of the monument were, in fact, the integral factors influencing the development of the motif. Sartorial, gestural and compositional changes reflected the transformation of the physical contexts of the different monument forms. Whereas past studies have evaluated the motif as it appears on Roman biographical sarcophagi, this study sought to bring together and analyze the depictions on stele and 'window' reliefs, funerary altars, and Roman sarcophagi, both biographical and mythological.

The comprehensive approach resulted in a corpus of 172 depictions across all monument types.

The examples of the motif included in this study were evaluated using a hybrid methodology that combined the stylistic and compositional analysis of past studies with the development of typological categories in order to understand how variations in composition and stylistic elements revealed the function of the motif on a specific type of funerary monument. The formal analysis was further informed by Place Studies, which focuses on the 'place' of the monument within the cemetery and the tomb.

Depictions of the dextrarum iunctio on Roman stele and 'window' reliefs have been assumed to monolithically represent marriage, specifically legitimate marriage. However, the variations in the stylistic and compositional elements within the motif contradict this interpretation. The gender of the figures linked by the motif has been the predominate means of validating the association between the motif and marriage. The figure was believed to exclusively link a male and a female figure. Examples of the dextrarum iunctio linking two individuals of the same sex were dismissed as anomalous. However, the preponderance of examples, such as the relief of Sextus Magius Licinus presenting a dextrarum iunctio between

154

two male figures, suggests the motif was used to commemorate a number of affiliations or associations: here a patronage relationship. The so called 'anomalous' examples imply that a dextrarum iunctio could be used to represent a number of different relationships. The multi- functional nature of the motif was corroborated by the epigraphic evidence. Many inscriptions explicitly state the relationship that the monument commemorates: these relationships range from friendship to patron-client. Further, artists could use modifications in gestural cues to nuance the meaning of the motif even further. When the artist sought to depict a relationship between two individuals who were both deceased, they would compositionally isolate the figures and link them using a 'hand-grasp.' The figures were isolated from the wider community as they turned and gazed directly at each other. In contrast, in depictions of individuals who were likely living at the time of commission, the dextrarum iunctio takes the form of a 'handshake.' The figures engage the viewer through their intense frontal gaze. The gesture ultimately serves to organize the figures depicted on the relief, but also functions to provide clues as to the integration or isolation of the figures from the community of the living. The motif functions pragmatically as part of a commemorative strategy that serves to visually delineate and define relationships between presented individuals.

When the motif began to appear on Roman funerary altars, the representation of the dextrarum iunctio was fundamentally transformed. The form and function of the motif on Roman funerary altars reflects a period of transition from depictions on stele-type reliefs to sarcophagi.

Despite the increasing standardization of the depictions more closely reflecting representations of the motif on sarcophagi, some stylistic and compositional elements suggest continuity between funerary altars and stele-type monuments. While the majority of examples depict full- length portraits, the framing of the figures in architectonic structures and the isolation of the

155

depictions from other ornamentation, imply a type of 'reading' similar to stele and 'window' reliefs. However, the increasing use of epigraphic formulae coupled with depictions of the dextrarum iunctio to delineate standardized spousal relationships suggests the motif was becoming part of a conventionalized vocabulary for the depiction conjugal relationships. The dextrarum iunctio, however, could be modified through the addition of iconographical clues that alter the interpretive potential of the motif by alluding to immortality, the afterlife or separation.

The motif begins to lose its pragmatic function of delineating relationships and takes on an analogous and allegorical meaning, which becomes central to the interpretation of the motif on

Roman sarcophagi.

The dextrarum iunctio appears in its most standardized form on Roman sarcophagi. The motif becomes part of the conventionalized vocabulary for the depiction of couples, in part due to its uniform depiction linking a male and a female figure. However, the motif was highly allegorical and could be nuanced stylistically and compositionally for use in a number of different contexts. While some sartorial and compositional cues such as the heavy veiling of the female figure in some depictions suggest the marriage ceremony as the intended subject of the motif, variations in the type of veiling suggest the potential of alternative interpretations. When female figures are depicted without a veil, the dextrarum iunctio may be included as a representation of the separation of the couple. The presence of male veiling further suggests a multiplicity of meanings. The veiling of the male figure could suggest the motif represents the archaic confarreatio marriage ceremony. However, male veiling could also suggest a representation of grief. The polysemous nature of the motif allows for the potential of two simultaneous interpretations. Ultimately, the motif could indicate a number of interpretations in a number of different contexts. The motif is found in a number of different iconographical

156

narratives that influence its interpretation. When combined with other motifs in a context of biographical narration, the dextrarum iunctio is analogous to concord within marriage. When the iconographical context presents a narration of mythological cycles, the motif can represent allegorical elements such as the separation of the individuals at death and the potential for individual apotheosis. The changes in iconographical context reflect the changes occurring within the socio-cultural context. The development of biographical narratives on sarcophagi reflects the interest in biography and autobiography influenced by the writings of Second

Sophistic philosophers. The emergence or re-emergence of traditional rhetorical and oratorical strategies during the Second Sophistic resulted in new conceptions of the body and its depiction.

Finally, I suggest that the underlying or driving factor influencing the transition of the motif is the change in presentation mode reflecting the transformation in physical monument type. The dextrarum iunctio found on funerary stele and 'window' reliefs was used pragmatically to point out relationships between individuals. The motif ultimately functioned as an organizational tool. As the motif becomes increasingly standardized on Roman funerary altars and finally on sarcophagi, it becomes part of a visual vocabulary to present specific ideas. The conventionalized form of the motif on Roman sarcophagi allows the motif to function in a number of iconographic contexts, suggesting its polysemous nature. The motif oscillates between an individualized depiction and a discursively constituted symbolic meaning. I suggest that further investigation into the potential polysemous nature of many of the motifs that are assumed to be monolithic in meaning, coupled with a discussion of the mechanisms that allow the transition between conventionalized types and allegorical image, could create greater understanding of the Roman visual vocabulary for representing relationships on funerary monuments.

157

Bibliography:

Primary Sources: Barrett, S., trans. Ovid. Ovid's Epistles. London: T. J.W. Pasham, 1767. Brownson, C. L., trans. Xenophon. Xenophon in Seven Volumes. II. Hellenica Books V-VII. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1921. Foster, B. O, trans. Livy. Book I and II. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press,1919. Frazer, J. G., trans. Apollodorus. The Library. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1921 Grant, M., trans. Hyginus. The Myths of Hyginus. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1960. Griffin, M. T. and E.M. Atkins, trans. Cicero. Cicero On Duties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Harris, S. L. and G. Platzner, trans. Homeric Hymn to Demeter. Classical Mythology: Images and Insights. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. Jackson, J., trans. Tacitus. Tacitus. The Annals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937. Michie, J., trans. Catullus. The Poems of Catullus. London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1969. Murray, A. T., trans. Homer. Homer. The Odyssey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1919. Platnauer, M., trans. Claudian. Claudian in Two Volumes. vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922. Riley, H. T., trans. Plautus. The Comedies of Plautus. London: G. Bell and Sons, 1912. Rolfe, J. C., trans. Suetonius. Seutonius. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Tertullian. On the Veiling of Virgins. Translated by Rev. S. Thelwall. Accessed Jan 21, 2013. http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf04/anf04-09.htm#P545_113997. Watling, E. F., trans. Seneca. Seneca. Four Tragedies and Octavia. London: Penguin, 1966. Williams, T. C., trans. Vergil. Aeneid. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 1910. Yardley, J. C., trans. Livy. Hannibal's War. Books Twenty One to Thirty. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Yonge, C. D., trans. Cicero. The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero. London: George Bell & Sons, 1891. Zulueta, F. de., trans. The Institutes of Gaius. Part I. Text with Critical Notes and Translation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1946.

Secondary Sources: Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften und der Georg-Augusts-Universitat. Gottingen: 1865.

158

Alexandridis, A. Die Frauen des rӧmischen Kaiserhauses: Eine Untersuchung ihrer bildlichen Darstellung von Livia bis Iulia Comna. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp con Zabern, 2004. Alexandridis, A. "Neutral Bodies? Female Portrait Statue Types from the Late Republic to the Second Century CE." In Material Culture and Social Identities in the Ancient World. Edited by S. Hales and T. Hodos. 252-279. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Altmann, W. Die Römischen Grabaltäre der Kaiserzeit. New York: Arno Press, 1975. Andersen, G. The Second Sophistic: A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge, 1993. Bieber, M. Ancient Copies: Contributions to the History of Greek and Roman Art. New York: New York University Press, 1977. Benoit, F. Sarcophages Paléochrétiens D'Arles et de Marseille: Fouilles et Monuments Archéologiques en France Métropolitaine. Paris: Centre National de La Recherche Scientifique, 1954. Blanckenhagen, P. H. von. "Narration in Hellenistic and Roman Art." AJA 61, 1 (1957): 78-83. Blundell, S. "Clutching at Clothes." In Women's Dress in the Ancient Greek World. Edited by L. Llewellyn-Jones. 143-169. London: Duckworth, 2002. Bonner, C. "Hades and the Pomegranate Seed (Hymn to Demeter 371-4)." CR 53, 1 (1939): 3- 4. Bovini, G. "La Scene della 'Dextrarum Iunctio' nell'Arte Cristiana." BullComm 72 (1946—48): 103-117. Brilliant, R. Gesture and Rank in Roman Art: The Use of Gesture to Denote Status in Roman Sculpture and Coinage. New Haven: The Academy, 1963. ______. Visual Narratives: Storytelling in Etruscan and Roman Art. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984. Buitron-Oliver, D. and B. Cohen. "Between Skylla and Penelope: Female Characters of the Odyssey in Archaic and Classical Greek Art." In The Distaff Side: Representing the Female in Homer's Odyssey. Edited by B. Cohen 29-60. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. Cairns, D. L. “Weeping and Veiling: Grief, Display and Con ealment in An ient Gree Culture.” In Tears in the Graeco-Roman World. Edited by T. Fögen. 37-57. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2009. Carroll, M. Spirits of the Dead: Roman Funerary Commemoration in Western Europe. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Carter, C. "A Funerary Urn from Volterra." AJA 88, 4 (1984): 541-545. Casey, E. S. Getting Back into Place: Toward a Renewed Understanding of the Place-World. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2009. Champlin, E. Final Judgments: Duty and Emotions in Roman Wills, 200 B.C. - A.D. 250. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Clarke, J. R. Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: Visual Representation and Non-Elite

159

Viewers in Italy 100BC-AD315. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Corbeill, A. "Gesture in Early Roman Law: Empty Forms or Essential Formalities?" In Body Language in the Greek and Roman Worlds. Edited by D. Cairns. Swansea, UK: Classical Press of Wales, 2005. Cresswell, T. Place: A Short Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. Cueva, E. P. "The Art and Myth of Cupid and Psyche." In Veritatis Amicitiaeque Causa: Essays in Honor of Anna Lydia Motto and John R. Clarke. Edited by S.N. Byrne and E.P. Cueva. 53-69. Chicago: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 1999. Cumont, F. Researches Sur le Symbolism Funéraire des Romains. New York: Arno Press, 1975. D'Ambra, E. "The Cult of Virtues and the Funerary Relief of Ulpia Epigone." Latomus 48, 2 (1989): 392-400. ______. "Mourning and the Making of Ancestors in the Testamentum Relief." AJA 99,4 (1995): 667-681. D'Angelo, M. R. "Woman Partners in the New Testament." Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 6, 1 (1990): 65-86. Davies, G. M. Fashion in the Grave: A Study of the Motifs Used to Decorate the Grave Altars, Ash chests and Sarcophagi Made in Rome in the Early Empire (To the mid Second century A.D.). PhD Dissertation, University of London, 1978. ______. "Portrait Statues as Models for Gender Roles in Roman Society." In Role Models in the Roman World: Identity and Assimilation. Edited by S. Bell and I. L. Housen. 207- 220. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2008. ______. "The Significance of the Handshake Motif in Classical Funerary Art." AJA 89, 4 (1985): 627-640. ______. “Viewer, I Married Him: Marriage and the Freedwoman in Rome.” In Ancient Marriage in Myth and Reality. Edited by L. L. Loven and A. Stromberg, 184-203. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010. Dixon, S. "The Marriage Alliance in the Roman Elite." Journal of Family History 10, 4 (1985): 353-378. Eckert, M. Capuanische Grabsteine: Untersuchungen zu den Grabsteinen römischer Freigelassener aus Capua. Vol. 417. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports Ltd, 1988. Elsner, J. Art and the Roman Viewer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Epigrafia i numismàtica a l'epistolari d'Antonio Agustín (1551-1563) Accessed Jan 21, 2013. [http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0C DEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tdx.cat%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F10803%2F 5551%2Fjcm10de17.pdf%3Fsequence%3D10&ei=i75uUZO6O4W5igLd44HgDQ&usg= AFQjCNHT8J957W6pDFGy9UVeuZg9GXO58A&sig2=edz5vqmJIJEwb5XwQXbuoA &bvm=bv.45368065,d.cGE]. Ewald, B. C. "Myth and Visual Narrative in the Second Sophistic-A Comparative Approach: Notes on an Attic Hippolytos Sarcophagus in Agrigento." In Life, Death and

160

Representation: Some New Work on Roman Sarcophagi. Edited by J. Elsner and J. Huskinson. 261-308. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011. Fantham, E. "Covering the Head at Rome: Ritual and Gender." In Roman Dress and the Fabrics of Roman Culture. Edited by J. Edmondson and A. Keith. 165-171. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. Fӧgen, T. "Sermo Corporis: Ancient Reflections on Gestus, Vultus and Vox." In Bodies and Boundaries in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. Edited by T. Fӧgen and M. M. Lee. 15-44. New York: de Gruyter, 2009. Frenz, H. G. Römische Grabreliefs in Mittel-und Süditalien. Rome: Bretschneider, 1985. Gardner, J. "Legal Stumbling Blocks for Lower Class Families in Rome." In The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space. Edited by B. Rawson and P. Weaver. 35- 54.Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007. ______. Women in Roman Law and Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986. George, M. "Cupid Punished: Reflections on a Roman Genre Scene." In Roman Slavery and Roman Material Culture. Edited by M. George. 158-179. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. Gleason, M. Making Men. Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Glinister, F. "Veiled and Unveiled: Uncovering Roman Influence in Hellenistic Italy." Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion: Studies in Honor of Jean MacIntosh Turfa. M. Gleba and H. Becker. 193 - 214. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2008. Hall, J. "Cicero and Quintilian on the Oratorical Use of Hand Gestures." CQ 54, 1 (2004): 143. Hallett, C. The Roman Nude: Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 BC-AD 300. Oxford University Press, 2005. Haarløv, B. The Half-Open Door: A Common Symbolic Motif within Roman Sepulchral Sculpture. Odense, Denmark: Odense University Press, 1977. Hersch, K. The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Holliday, P. J. The Origins of Roman Historical Commemoration in the Visual Arts. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Holscher, T. The Language of Images in Roman Art. Translated by A. Snodgrass and A. Kunzel- Snodgrass. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Hope, V. Roman Death. London: Continuum, 2009. Hughes, L. “The Chaste Roman Matron: Re asting Roman ulpture's Visual Paradigm.” Unpublished paper. ______. "The Proclamation of Non-Defective Slaves and the Curule Aediles' Edict." Ancient Society 36 (2006): 240. ______. "Unveiling the Veil: Cultic, Status, and Ethnic Representations of Early Imperial Freedwomen." Material Religion: The Journal of Objects, Art and Belief 3, 2 (2007): 228-235.

161

Huskinson, J. "Constructing Childhood on Roman Funerary Memorials." Hesperia Supplements 41 (2007): 328. ______. "Representing Women on Roman Sarcophagi." In The Material Culture of Sex, Procreation and Marriage in Pre-modern Europe. Edited by A. McCann and K. R. Encarnacion. 11-31. New York: Palgrave, 2002. ______. Roman Children's Sarcophagi: Their Decoration and its Social Significance. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. Jannot, J. R."The Lotus, Poppy and other Plants in Etruscan Funerary Contexts." Etruscan by Definition; Papers in Honour of Sybille Haynes, MBE. British Museum Research Publication 173 (2009): 81-86. Jeppesen-Wigelsworth, A. A Portrayal of Roman Wives in Literature and Inscriptions. PhD. Dissertation, University of Calgary, 2010. Johansen, K. F. The Attic Grave Reliefs of the Classical Period. Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard, 1951. Joshel, S. Work, Identity and Legal Status at Rome: A Study of the Occupational Inscriptions. London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1992. Kampen, N. “ iographi al Narration and Roman Funerary Art.” AJA 85, 1 (1981): 47-58. ______. Image and Status: Roman Working Women in Ostia. Berlin, Mann, 1981. Kantorowicz, E. "On the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection." DOP 14 (1960): 1-16. Kennedy, G. The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300BC to 300AD. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. Kennedy, G. Greek Rhetoric Under Christian Emperors. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983. Keppie, L. Understanding Roman Inscriptions. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991. Kleiner, D. E. E. "Imperial Women as Patrons of the Arts in the Early Empire." In I Claudia: Women in Ancient Rome. Edited by D. E. E. Kleiner and S. B. Matheson. 28-41. New Haven: Yale University Art Gallery, 1996. ______. "A Portrait Relief of D. Apuleius Carpus and Apuleia Rufina in the Villa Wolkonsky." ArchCl XXX (1978): 246-251. ______. Roman Group Portraiture: The Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire. New York: Garland Publishing, 1977. ______Roman Imperial Funerary Altars with Portraits. Rome: Bretschneider Giorgio, 1987. ______."Second Century Mythological Portraiture." Latomus 40 (1981): 512-544. Kockel, V. Porträtreliefs stadtrömischen Grabbauten. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und zum Verständnis des spätrepublikanisch-frühkaiserzeitlichen Privatporträts (Beiträge zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur, 12). Mainz am Rheim: Phillip von Zabern, 1993.

162

Koortbojian, M. Myth, Meaning and Memory on Roman Sarcophagi. Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1995. Accessed Feb. 28, 2013. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft4199n900/. Kötting, B. "Dextrarum Iunctio." In Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Edited by Theodor Klauser et al.885-886. Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1957. Kousser, R. "Mythological Group Portraits in Antonine Rome: The Performance of Myth." AJA (2007): 673-691. Llewellyn-Jones, L. Aphrodite’s Tortoise: the Veiled Woman of Ancient Greece. Swansea, Wales: Classical Press of Wales, 2003. Loven, L. L. “Congiugal Con ordia: Marriage and Marital Ideals on Roman Funerary Monuments.” In Ancient Marriage in Myth and Reality. Edited by L. L. Loven and A. Stromberg. 204-220. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010. Malpas, J. E. Place and Experience: A Philosophical Topography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Mander, J. Portraits of Children on Roman Funerary Monuments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Mouritsen, H. "Freedmen and Decurions: Epitaphs and Social History in Imperial Italy." JRS 95 (2005): 38-63. Neilson, H. "A Terracotta Phallus from Pisa Ship E: More Evidence for the Priapus Deity as Protector of Greek and Roman Navigators." International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 31,2 (2002): 248-253. North, J. A. "Sappho Underground." In Historical and Religious Memory in the Ancient World. Edited by B. Dignas and R. R. R. Smith. 37-68. Oxord: Oxford University Press, 2012. Olsen, K. Dress and the Roman Woman: Self-Presentation and Society. London: Routledge, 2008. Panayotakis, C. "Non-verbal Behaviour on the Roman Comic Stage." In Body Language in the Greek and Roman World. Edited by D.L. Cairns. 175-198. Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 2005. Petersen, L. W. The Freedmen in Roman Art and Art History. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pettorelli, J. P."Peche Originel ou Amour Conjugal? Note sur le Sense des Images d' Adam et Eve sur les Sarcophages Chretiens de l'Antiquite Tardive." Recherches Augustiniennes 30 (1997): 279-334. Pflug, H. Römische Porträtstelen in Oberitalien: Untersuchungen zur Chronologie, Typologie und Ikonographie. Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1989. Reekmans, L. "La 'Dextrarum Iunctio' dans l'Iconographie Romaine et Paleochretienne." BIHBelge 31 (1958): 69—73, 90. Reinsberg, C. Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen aus dem Menschenleben Teil 3. Vita Romana. Berlin: Mann, 2006. Relph, E. C. Place and Placelessness. London: Pion, 1976.

163

Rodenwalt, G. Űber den Stilwandel in der antoninischen Kunst. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1935. Rossbach, A. Römische Hochzeits-und Ehedenkmäler. Leipzig: BG Teubner, 1871. Russell, B. "The Roman Sarcophagus 'Industry': A Reconsideration." In Life, Death and Representation: Some New Work on Roman Sarcophagi. Edited by J. Elsner and J. Huskinson. 119-147. New York: De Gruyter, 2011. Saller, R. and B. Shaw. "Tombstones and Roman Family Relations in the Principate: Civilians, Soldiers and Slaves." JRS 74, (1984): 124-156. Salvadori, S. M. Per Feminam Mors, Per Feminam Vita: Images of Women in the Early Christian Funerary Art of Rome. PhD Dissertation, New York University, 2002. Sandys, J. E. Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1919. Schlam, C. C. Cupid and Psyche: Apuleius and Monuments. University Park, PA: Scholars Press, 1976. Sebesta, J. L. "Symbolism in the Costume of the Roman Women." In The World of Roman Costume. Edited by J.L. Sebesta and L. Bonfante. 46-64. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994. _____. "Women's Costume and Women's Civic Morality in Augustan Rome." Gender and History 9.3 (1997): 529-41. Seemann, O. The Mythology of Greece and Rome: With Special Reference to Its Use in Art. Translated by G. H. Bianchi. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882. Shurmate, N. Crisis and Conversion in Apuleius' Metamorphoses. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1996. Sigismund-Nielsen, H. "Interpreting Epithets in Roman Epitaphs." In The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space. Edited by B. Rawson and P. Weaver. 169-204 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007. Spaeth, B. S. The Roman Goddess Ceres. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996. Stewart, P. Statues in Roman Society. New York: Oxford, 2003. Stupperich, R. "Zur Dextrarum Iunctio auf Frühen Römischen Grabrelief." Boreas VI (1983): 143-150. Toscano, M. "Love is Hell: Torment, Sex and Redemption the Cupid and Psyche Myth." In Hell and Its Afterlife: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. Edited by I. Moreira and M. Toscano. 9-28. Surry, Great Britain: Ashgate Publishing, 2013. Toynbee, J.M.C. Death and Burial in the Roman World. Baltimore: University of Maryland, 1971. ______. "Monsieur Cumont on Roman Funerary Art." The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 86, 507 (1945): 148, 151-152. Treggiari, S. Roman Freedman During the Late Republic. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969. Treggiari, S. Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges From the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.

164

Trimble, J. Women and Visual Replication in Roman Imperial Art and Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Tuan, Yi-Fu. Space and Place: the Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977. Vout, C. "The Myth of the Toga: Understanding the History of Roman Dress." GaR 43, 2 (Oct., 1996): 204-220. Walker S. and A. Burnett. Augustus: Handlist of the Exhibition. London: British Museum Publications, 1981. Walter, C. "The Dextrarum Junctio of Lepcis Magna in Relationship to the Iconography of Marriage." AntAfr XIV (1979): 271-283. Whitmarsh, T. The Second Sophistic. Oxford ; Oxford University Press, 2005. Williams, G. "Some Aspects of Roman Marriage Ceremonies and Ideals." JRS 48, 1/2 (1958): 16-29. Wilson, L. "An Unusual Marriage Scene." Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 7 (1929): 173-176. Wilson, L. M. The Roman Toga. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins Press, 1924. Zanker, P. "Grabreliefs Römischer Freigelassener." JDAI 90 (1975): 267-315. ______. The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus. Translated by A. Shapiro. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990. Zanker, P. and B.C. Ewald. Living with Myths: the Imagery of Roman Sarcophagi. Translated by J. Slater. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

165

Figures

Copyrighted Image

166

Copyrighted Image

Figure 2. Roman Sarcophagus depicting the life of a military officer. Second century CE, marble, 0.242m X 0.85m X0.91m. Mantua, Palazzo Ducale. No Inv. Nr. Source: DAI neg. 62.126.

167

Copyrighted Image

Figure 3. Sarcophagus fragment from Via Ardeatina in Rome. Mid-third century CE, marble, 1.26m X 0.43m. Casale S. Palomba. No Inv. nr. Source: Carola Reinsberg. Berlin: Mann, 2006. Plate 110 Figure 6.

168

Copyrighted Image Copyrighted Image

Figure 5. Relief with five figures from Villa Casale on Via Figure 4. Relief depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two Appia. 13BCE to 5 CE, marble, 0.95m X 1.96m. Copenhagen, figures. Unknown date, marble, Rome, Italy. Palazzo Colonna Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Inv. nr. 591a I.N. 2431, Source: Diana Garden. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 78.548. Kleiner, New York: Garland Publishing, 1977. Figure 87.

169

Copyrighted Image Copyrighted Image

Figure 6. Altar of Vernasia Cyclas, Rome. First century CE, Figure 7. The Altar of Titus Aquilius Pelorus of unknown marble, h. 0.505m. London, British Museum, Townley provenance. Unknown media, unknown date, unknown Collection. Inv.nr. GR 1805.7-3.158 (Sculpture 2379). Source: measurements. Rome. No. Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby British Museum. http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Sinn_00277.jpg;PH00 10794.

170

Image Image Image

Figure 8. Fragment of a sarcophagus from Villa Ada depicting 'Pudicitia' type. Mid fourth century CE, marble, Figure 9 Sarcophagus fragment with a Figure 10. Annona Sarcophagus found 1.94m X 0.58m. Rome, Campo Santo dextrarum iunctio depicting a 'Ceres' at the Vigna Aquari near Porta Latina. Teutonico. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI type. Late second century CE, marble, End of the third century CE, marble, Inst. Neg. 85.1839. 2.21m X 0.87m X 1.02m, Rome. 0.208m X 0.86m X 0.90m. Rome, Museo Nazionale. Inv. nr. 310683. Museo Nazionale Romano. Inv. nr. Source: Carola Reinsberg. Berlin: 40799. Source: DAI B. Malter Mal401- Mann, 2006. Plate 112 Figure 1. 02.

171

Copyrighted Image

Figure 11. The Relief of the Fonteii. Late first century BCE, luna Marble, 0.82mX 0.57m X 0.21m. London, British Museum. Inv. Nr. 1973.1-9.1 Source: British Museum.

172

Figure 12. The Relief of Barneus from S. Giovanni or the Palazzo do Tomasi. Uncertain dating, travertine, 1.40m X 0.70m X 0.35m. Capua, Museo Campano. No Inv. nr. Source: CIL V, 6036. Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RECapua_00154.jpg].

173

Copyrighted Image

Figure 13. Relief of Plania Philemena from Capua. Uncertain dating, travertine, 0.94m X 0.78m X 0.30m, Capua, embedded in the house wall of the house Via dei Cavalieri Seggio 14. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 64.679.

174

Fig 14: Relief of the Servilii found in-situ. 30-13 BCE, travertine. Rome, Villa Wolkonsky. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 73.1606.

175

Figure 15: Relief of Caius Volcacus Amphio from Capua. Uncertain dating, travertine, 1.32m X 0.61m X 0.30m. Capua, embedded in the house on the Via Duomo Nr. 81. No Inv. nr. Source: CIL X, 4420 Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$ECapua_00066.jpg].

176

Copyrighted Image Copyrighted Image

Copyrighted Image

Figure 17. Relief of the Mattei. Early first century CE, marble, 146m X 61m X 0.26m. Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano. Inv. nr. 80728.Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 82.3804.

178

Figure 18. Relief depicting two figures. Antonine, marble, 0.90m X 0.61m X 0.40m. Rome, Italy, Vigna Codini. No Inv. nr. Source: Valentin Kockel. Mainz am Rheim: Phillip von Zabern, 1993. Plate 122d.

179

Copyrighted Image

Figure 19. Funerary Altar depicting a dextrarum iunctio between two figures. 40-50 CE, marble, 0.89m X 0.475m X 0.46m. Rome, Museo Nazionale delle Terme, Room V. Inv. nr. 124514. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 39.814.

180

Figure 20. The Altar of G. Cornelius Philo from Campobello di Mazara. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Palermo, Archaeological Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.751.

181

Copyrighted Image

Figure 21. The Altar of Gaius Domitus Verus. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Villa Albani. No Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CIL_06_16979.jpg].

182

Copyrighted Image

Figure 22. The Altar of Gaius Iulius Hermes from Rome. Second half of first century CE, marble, 0.36m X 0.465m X 0.29m. Rome, Museo Nazionale delle Terme. Inv. Nr. 297193. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$MC_CIL_06_05326.jpg;$CIL_06_05326.jpg;$M_CIL_ 06_05326.jpg;PH0009350&nr=1].

183

Copyrighted Image

Figure 23. The Ash Chest of Helius Afinianus. Unknown date, marble, unknown measurements. Berlin, Staatliche Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CIL_06_02317.jpg;$Sinn_00522.jpg;PH0010901&nr= 3].

184

Copyrighted Image

Figure 24. The Altar of Vinicia Tyche from Rome from the Villa Medici. 75-85 CE, marble, 1.21m X 1.02m X 0.75m. Florence, Museo Archeologico, terrazza above giardino. Inv. nr. 13831. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. oA.

185

Copyrighted Image

Figure 25. Ceres with Portrait Head of a Woman. Hadrianic, marble, unknown measurements. Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Inv. no. 1244/1964. Photo: Foto Kruse (7 Stk.) Inst.Neg.Rom 7109.

186

Figure 26. Sarcophagus depicting a wedding procession from Rome. Second century CE, marble, 2.04m X 0.42m. Vatican Museums, Museo Pio Clementino, Sala Delle Muse. Inv. nr. 268. Source: DAI Alinari 20.167.

187

Copyrighted Image

Figure 27. Sarcophagus fragment presenting a dextrarum iunctio. Late second century CE, preconnesian marble, 0.984m X 0.78m X 0.11m. London, British Museum. Inv. nr. GR 1805.7- 3.143. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 28.3895.

188

Copyrighted Image

Figure 28. Reproduced fragment of a sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio from Isola Sacra. Late second century CE, marble, 2.14m X 0.86m. Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Inv. nr. 1338. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 69.843.

189

Copyrighted Image

Figure 29. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio with male figure capite velato from Rome. 230-240 CE, marble, 2.26m X 0.99m X 1.02m. Munich, Glyptothek. Inv. nr. 533. Source: Personal photo.

190

Copyrighted Image

Figure 30. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio and Narcissis from the Villa Albani. 390- 400 CE, marble, 0.41m X 0.53m. Rome, Vatican Museums, Galleria Lapidaria. Inv. nr. 169. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 1024.

191

Copyrighted Image

Figure 31. Early Christian sarcophagus depicting dextrarum iunctio with biblical scenes from the Villa Ludovisi. 320 CE, marble, 2.26m X 1.14m X 1.30m. Vatican Museums, Museo Pio Cristiano. Inv. nr. 26. Source: Personal.

192

Copyrighted Image Copyrighted Image

Figure 32a and b. Marble sarcophagus featuring a dextrarum iunctio from Ostia. Early fourth century CE, marble, 2.16m X 0.94m X 0.82m. Ostia Antica, near the Museum. No Inv. nr. Source: Personal.

193

Figure 33. Imperial Group as Mars and Venus. Reworked ca.170-175 CE, marble, ca. 120-140 CE. Paris, Louvre. Inv. nr. Ma 1009 (MR 316). Source: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mars_Venus_Louvre_Ma1009.jpg].

194

Copyrighted Image

Figure 34. Relief depicting a dextrarum iunctio and the seasons. Third century CE, marble, 2.07m X 0.91m X 0.86m. Pisa, Campo Santo. Inv. nr. A 17. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. 34.561; 10293.

195

Copyrighted Image

Figure 35. Sarcophagus depicting a dextrarum iunctio and the Dioscuri. Late fourth century CE, marble, 2.06m X 0.62m X 0.76m. Arles, Musee Lapidaire. Inv. nr. FAN.92.00.2482. Source: DAI Inst. Neg. foto Marburg 42884.

196

Copyrighted Copyrighted Image Image

197

Dating:13 BCE to 5 CE (after Kleiner) Appendix A:* Bibliography: *The inscriptions and their expansions Amelung II, 225-226 Nr. 80a Pl. 25. provided in the appendix are drawn from the Helbig I, 295 Nr. 389. Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database. For a Altmann, 199. Vessberg, 272 Pl. 43, 1. full epigraphic study of the inscriptions, the Gerke, 13-14 Nr. R 6; 163. scholar should refer to the original CIL Kleiner III, 234 Nr. 68. entries. Frenz I, 149 Nr. D 17. Kleiner I, 771. Funerary Reliefs: Volpi, 265 Nr. F 5 Pl. 30. 1) Relief of Gratidia Chrite and M. Vessberg, 198; 203. Gratidius Libanus P.L. Williams, "Two Roman Reliefs in Photo: Arch.Fot.Gall.Mus.Vaticani XX-21- Renaissance Disguise," JWCI 4 (1940-41) 34; XX-21-35; XX-21-40 Alinari 6602 47-66. Inst.Neg.Rom 43.468 - 43.470; 76.600 - Buschor, 63. 76.604 Foto Oehler 45/1953/11 ABr 210 ; Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 125 Nr. F 11 Pl. 37e; BrBr 267. 38a-e. Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Museo Pio Clementino, Sala dei Busti. Inv. 3) Relief with two Figures nr. 592. Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 75.2717. Provenance: Italy, Garden of Cardinals Currently Housed: Baranello Alessandro of the Medici, 1580, Palazzo (Campobasso). No Inv. nr. Mattei, 1798-1815 in Paris Provenance: Unknown Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements:0.68m X 0.90 m Measurements: Unknown Inscription: CIL VI 35397; Gratidia Inscription: L. Calidus Eroticus (after M(arci) l(iberta) / Chr[es]te // M(arcus) arachne) Gratidius / Libanus Dating: 2nd quarter, 1st century CE. ( after Dating:13 BCE- 5CE (after Kliener) Frenz) Bibliography: Bibliography: Amelung II, 572-573 Nr. 388. Frenz II, Nr. 124 Pl. 54,1. C. Huelsen, "Die Grabgruppe eines M. Fuhrmann, "Archaologische Grabungen romischen Ehepaares im Vatikan," und Funde in Italien und Libyen," RhM N.F. 68 (1913) 16-21. AA (1935) 582-583 note 23. Kleiner III, 216 Nr. 34. Zanker "Grabreliefs," 288 note 21. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 188-189 Nr. L19 Pl. 103b. d; 104a. b; 105a. 4) Relief with Three Figures Photo:DAI Inst. Neg. 70.2813 2) Relief with three figures Currently Housed: Fondi (Frosinone), Photo: DAI Inst. Neg.43.425 Chiesa di San Francesco. No Inv. nr. Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Provenance: Unknown Galleria Lapidaria XV 80. Inv. nr. 9398. Material: Marble Provenance: Unknown Measurements: Unknown Material: Marble Inscription: None Measurements: 0.75 X 0.96m Dating: end of the Augustan era (after Inscription: Modern Frenz)

198

Bibliography: Material: Marble P. Pensabene, RM 82 (1975) 294 Pl. 101,3. Measurements:146m X 61m X 0.26m Frenz I, 18 Fig. 59. Inscription: None Frenz II, Nr. 37, Pl. 17, 3. Dating: 1st quarter of 1st century CE Mander, 197-198 Nr.168. Bibliography: Zanker II, 600 note 13. V. Picciotti Giornetti in: MusNazRom, Sculture I 2, 260-261 Nr. 51. 5) Relief with Three Figures MonMatt, 75 Pl. 57, 2; Photo:DAI Inst. Neg. 66.2436. Matz-Duhn, 165 Nr. 3842. Currently Housed: Reggio di Calabria, R. Paribeni, BdA 17 (1923/24) 552 note 6. Museo Nazionale. No Inv. nr. R. Paribeni, Le Terme di Diocleziano e il Provenance: Potenza Museo Nazionale Romano (Roma, Material: Limestone La Libreria dello stato, 1932) 70 Nr. Measurements:1.41m X 0.79m X 0.52m 74 Inscription: None Goethert, 38; 41; 48; 49; 51. Dating: Tiberius Zadoks, 71; 72-73; 76 Pl. 18b. Bibliography: O. Vessberg, Konsthistorisk Tidskrift 5 N. Catanuto, Il Museo Nazionale di R. (1936) 21 Fig. 3. (Reggio di Calabria, 1939) 56 Pl. 29, Vessberg 196 Nr. 6; 198-199 Pl. 38, 2. 81. F. Poulsen, Probleme der rӧmischen Frenz I, 17; 1; 66 Fig. 243; 71, 120. Ikonographie (København, Levin & Frenz II, Nr. 55 Pl. 24, 2. Munksgaard, Ejnar Munksgaard, 1937) 22-23 Nr. 6 Fig. 51. 6) Relief with two portraits. D. Dimitrov, BIBulg 13 (1939) 96 Fig. 117. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 78.548; DAI Inst. H. Ingholt, JARCE 2 (1963) 136 Pl. 34, 18. Neg. 79.914. Buschor, 62; 102 Nr. 391. Currently Housed: Rome, Italy. Palazzo Zanker I, 287 Fig. 75. Colonna Garden. No Inv. nr. Kleiner III, 230 Nr. 60. Provenance: Unknown Frenz I, 144 Nr. D 9. Material: Marble S. Walker, Augustus: handlist of the Measurements: 0.80m X0.56mX 0.14m exhibition and supplementary Inscription: The relief is cut into four parts, studies, British Museum two are paired together today. Occasional Paper nr. 16 (London : CIL VI 27542: Phe[3]or L(ucio) Tityro British Museum, 1981) 44. L(uci) l(iberto) L[; Volpi, 254 Nr. E16 Pl. 14. CIL VI 16711: Cyro LL(uciorum) l(iberto) // P. Arndt , W. Amelung and G. Lippold, v(iva) Clar[a] L(uci) l(iberta) [3] Photographische Einzelaufnahmen Dating: Not Available Antiker Sculpturen (1893-1947) Bibliography: (München : Verlagsanstalt für Kunst None und Wissenschaft vormals F. Bruckmann, etc., 1893-1947) Nr. 7) Relief with three figures 3443. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 82.3804 Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 176 Nr. L 1 Pl. 90 a. Currently Housed: Rom, Italien, IT, Museo 92 a. c. d. Nazionale Romano. Inv. nr. 80728. Provenance: Palazzo Mattei (Villa 8) Relief with four portraits Celimontana)

199

Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 42.688 - 42.697; V. Forcella, Le industrie e il commercio a 73.795 - 73.799 Milano sotto i Romani (Milan: Currently Housed: Rome, Mus Naz. Premiato stabilimento tipografico Romano. Inv. nr. 196632. P.B. Bellini, 1901) 84 with note. Provenance: Via Appia H. Gummerus, JdI 28 (1913) 81; 120 Nr. 23. Material: Limestone E. Esperandieu, Les monuments antiques Measurements: 0.59m X 2.355 m X 0.30m figures du Musee Archeologique de Inscription: None Milan (Paris : E. Leroux, 1916) 39- Dating: 13BCE - 5 CE (after Kliener) 40 note 28. Bibliography: A. Calderini, Silloge delle iscrizioni latine V. Picciotti Giornetti in: MusNazRom, della raccolta milanese (Milano, Sculture I 2, 239-240 Nr. 34. Società editrice "Vita e pensiero, " L. Cavnina, AnnInstCorrA 24 (1852) 264 1946) 63 Nr. 47. Nr. 18. A. Sofredi, Epigraphica 16 (1954) 45 note Descrizione, La prima parte della Via 10. Appia dalla Porta Capena a Boville G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen, (Rome: Bertinelli, 1853) I 112; II 17 AF 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982) 16; 30; Fig. 23, 8. 9. 191 Nr. 129 with Fig. Vessberg, 199; 271 Pl. 41, 1. Phlug, 174 Nr. 295 Pl. 48, 1. G.M. De Rossi, Capitolium 43, 9/10 (1968) 312; 314 note 42; 324 Nr. 39. 10) Relief with two figures L. Quilici, La Via Appia da Roma a Boville Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 81.3973 (Roma : Bulzoni, 1977) 60 Fig. 11. Currently Housed: Oderzo, Italien, IT, Kliener III, 241 Nr. 80. Museo Civico di Oderzo. Inv. no. 599. Frenz I, 159 Nr. E28 Pl. 20. Provenance: Unknown Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 114 Nr. E 5 Pl. 26 c. Material: Limestone d. Measurements: 0.48m X 0.65m X 0.16m Inscription: None 9) Grave Relief of Sextus Magius Licinus Dating: Middle of the first century CE. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 75. 850 or Clauss- Bibliography: Slaby Epigraphic Database B. Forlati, Guida del Museo Civico di http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$SM Oderzo (Milan: Pleion, 1958) 42 _CIL_05_06036.jpg;$CIL_05_06036.jpg;$C Nr.49. IL_05_06036_1.jpg;$CIL_05_06036_2.jpg. E. Baggio, et. al., Sculture e Mosaici Currently Housed: Madrid, Civ. Mus. Romani del Museo Civico di Oderzo Arch. Inv. nr. A.O. 9.6625. (Treviso: Marton,1976) 36-40. Nr. 9. Provenance: Milan, Cloister of S. Ambrogio 11) Funerary Relief with two figures Material: Marble Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 59.355 - 59.357 Measurements: 1.03m X 0.88m X 0.31m Currently Housed: Possuoli, Italy Inscription: CIL V 6036 Provenance: Not available Sex(tus) Magius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Licin(us) / Material: Marble sibi et Sex(to) Magio Sex(ti) l(iberto) Measurements: Not available Turpio(ni) / patrono et Basso et Celeri Inscription: Servilia Amphiata lib(ertis) / testamento fieri ius[s(it)] Dating: middle 2nd century CE, Dating: early first century CE Bibliography: Bibliography: None

200

Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 230 Nr. O 68 Pl.. 138a. 12) Relief of the Vettii Matz-Duhn, Nr..3845. Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$M 14) Two-Figured Borderless Relief C_AE_1980_00186.jpg;PH0009315&nr=2]. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 442 Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani. Nazionale Thermenum Mus. Inv. nr.125830 Gall. Chiaramonti XIX 2. Inv. nr. 1477 Provenance: Aguzzano (Via Tiburtina) Provenance: Unknown Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements: 0.90m X 0.91 m Measurements: 0.71m X 0.54m Inscription: NSA-1950-84 = AE 1980, Inscription: None 00186; |(Obitus) L(ucius) Vettius |(mulieris) Dating: Middle Antonine (after Kockel) l(ibertus) Alexand(er) / |(obita) Vettia L(uci) Bibliography: f(ilia) Polla / Vettia L(uci) l(iberta) Amelung I, 642 Nr. 500 Pl. 69. Eleutheris / Vettia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 210 Nr. N 10 Pl. Hospita 125b. Dating: 13 BCE - 5 CE (after Kleiner) Bibliography: 15) Relief with Two Figures V. Picciotti Giornetti and P. Sabbatini Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Tumolesi in: MusNazRom, Sculture [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$IL I 2, 264-265 Nr. 54. LConcordia-01_00044.jpg] Felletti Maj, 84-85. Currently Housed: Portogruaro, Mus. Naz. Gerke, 15-16 Nr R8; 162. Concordiese 131. No Inv. nr. Zanker "Grabreliefs," 294 and note 24. Provenance: Concordia Kliener III, 244 Nr. 85. Material: Limestone (?) Frenz I, 160-161 Nr. E 10. Measurements: 0.47m X 0.71m X 0.31m Kleiner I, 771. Inscription: CIL V 1910 = IRConcor 00069 Frenz II, 75 Fig. 406; 101. = D 07792 = ILLConcordia-01, 00044 = Volpi, 262 Nr. E 39 Pl. 25. Gummerus-01, 00266; D(ecimus) Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 102-103 Nr. C3 Pl. Sempronius / Iucundus / medicus / 17c- e. Ariminiensis / [ Mander, 159 Nr. 4 Fig. 57. Dating: 30-60 CE Bibliography: 13) Relief with Two Figures CIL 05, 01910 Photo: Pflug Currently Housed: Rome Villa Medici 16) Portrait Relief of D. Apuleius Carpus Provenance: Unknown and Apuleia Rufina Material: Marble Photo: Kleiner. Measurements: 0.83 X 0.85 Currently Housed: Villa Wolkonsky. No Inscription: Illegible Inv. nr. Dating: 30-13 BCE Provenance: vigna Sebastiani Lazzarini Bibliography: near the Porta San Paol; acquired by the Kleiner III, 212 Nr. 29. Villa Wolkonsky in the 19th century M. Cagiano de Azevedo, Le antichità di Material: white marble villa Medici (Rome: Libreria dello Measurements: 1.36m X 0.50m X 0.27m stato, 1951 1951) 92F Nr. 163.

201

Inscription: CIL VI 12194; D M/ D. Petronius Q(uinti) f(ilius) Ruus / APVLEIVS. CARPVS/ VIVVS. FACIT. sexvir scr(iba) quin(quennalicius) / Cominia BIBI. ETAPVLE/IAE. RVFINAE. Quarta / C(aius) Tampius Cliens CONIVGI/ ICOMPARABILI. Dating: Tiberian (after Frenz) LIBERISQ/VE. SVIS. LIBERTIS. Bibliography: LIBERATABVS/ QUE. POSTERISQVE. CIL IX, 5190 EORVM Frenz II, Nr. 152 Pl. 64,1. Dating: mid-2nd century CE (after Kleiner) Bibliography: 19) Relief with four figures Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3865. Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 73.750; 73.751; D. Kleiner, "A Portrait Relief of D. 37.1149 Apuleius Carpus and Apuleia Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Rufina in the Villa Wolkonsky," Nazionale Romano - Museo delle Terme, Archaeologia Classica XXX (1978): Chiostro di Michelangelo, Ala III. Inv. nr. 246-251. 126107. Provenance: Esquiline, Columbarium 1875; 17) Relief of the Vettii with four figures moved to museum 1876. Photo:Clauss- Slaby Epigaphic Database Material: limestone [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$EC Measurements: 0.62m X 0.52m X 0.21m apua_00065.jpg] Inscription: None Currently Housed: Capua, Vie dei Principi Dating: 80 CE (after Kockel) Normanni, Nr. 8. No Inv. nr. Bibliography: Provenance: Capua V. Picciotti Giornetti in: MusNaz Rom, Material: Marble (Forti - Travertine) Sculture I 2, 265-266 Nr. 55. Measurements: 1.97m X 0.89m X 0.3m E. Brizio, Pitture e sepolcri scoperti Inscription: CIL X 4402 = ECapua 00065; sull'Esquilino (Rome: Tipografia EDCS-ID: EDCS-19600569; [3] P(ublio) Elzeviriana, 1876) 134 Fig. 3, 11. Vettio P(ubli) l(iberto) Vettiae P(ublio) H.P L'Orange, RM 44 (1929) 174 Fig. 4. Vettio P(ubli) l(iberto) [3] Zadoks, 70. Dating: Augustan (after Frenz) D. Dimitrov, BIBulg 13 (1939) 95 note 115. Bibliography: Vessberg, 185-186 266 Pl. 29, 1. CIL X, 4402 Zanker "Grabreliefs," 289. 291 note 23. Forti II 306 Nr. 15; 327. Kleiner III, 243 Nr. 83. Frenz II, Nr. 43 Pl. 20, 1. Frenz I, 124-125 Nr. A2. Frederiksen I, 99. Kleiner I, 770. D.E.E. Kleiner and F.S Kleiner, BullComm 18) Relief of Q. Petronius with two 87 (1980/81) 133 Pl. 55. portraits H. Gabelmann, JdI 100 (1985) 527. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 1941.135 H. R. Goette, BJb 186 (1986) 154 Nr. II 2. Currently Housed: Ascoli Piceno, Museo Goette I, 112 Nr. A b 105. Archaeologico. No inv. nr. Volpi, 247 Nr. C 4 Pl. 3. Provenance: Formerly in the church of San A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le Emidio Outside of Ascoli. Sculture II (Rome: De Luca, 1981) Material: limestone 265-266 Nr. III 55. Measurements: 0.8 X 1.6m Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 85 Nr. A 3 Pl. 4 a. c. Inscription: CIL IX 5190 = Piceno-As, d. 00004; Mu[3] Repentina / Q(uintus)

202

Inscription: CIL VI 22283; Matellia C(ai) l(iberta) / Chia // Matellia Sp(uri) f(ilia) / Galla // M(arcus) Precilius M(arci) f(ilius) / Pup(inia) Hispanus 20) Relief of the Perenni and Perelii Dating: Middle Augustan (after Kockel) Photo: Kockel Bibliography: Currently Housed:Rome, Antiquario Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3830. Comunale sul Celio. Inv. nr. 6601. Frenz I, 244 Nr. 1. Provenance:Unknown Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 172 Nr. K10 Pl. 87a. Material: Travertine Measurements: 1.03m X 0.66m X 0.26m 23) Relief of Asclepiades with two figures Inscription: CIL I 3016a; M(arcus) Photo: Liverpool N 75-3363 Perenn[ius] C(ai) l(ibertus) / Menopantus / Currently Housed: Ince Blundell, P(ublius) Perelius C(ai) l(ibertus) Großbritannien, GB, Garden Philotaerus / P(ublius) Maelius Sex(ti) Temple/Pantheon. No Inv. nr. l(ibertus) Philomusus // Pere[3] Stratonice / Provenance: Rome, Villa Giustiniani 1789 M(arcus) Perelius M(arci) l(ibertus) Isoc[3] / Material: Marble M(arcus) Fuurius M(arci) l(ibertus) / Measurements: 1.01m X 0.67m Antimacus // in fr(onte) [p(edes)] XVIII / in Inscription: CIL VI 19262; C(aius) Helvius ag(ro) [p(edes) 3] Hermes / patronus // Asclepiades / lib(ertus) Dating: Unknown fecit // Apronia Restituta / coniunx Bibliography: Asclepia(dis) Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 86-87 Nr. A5 Pl. 5a. Dating:Unknown Bibliography: 21) Relief with three figures Blundell, Henry. An account of the statues, Photo: Kockel busts, bass-relieves, cinerary urns, Currently Housed: Rome, Antiquario and other ancient marbles, and Comunale sul Celio. Inv. nr. 7494. paintings, at Ince (Liverpoll: J. Provenance: Unknown McCreery, 1803) 17 Nr. 411. Material: Limestone Engravings and Etchings of the Principal Measurements: 1.40m X 0.63m X 0.40m Statues, Busts, Bass-reliefs, Inscription: None Sepulchral Monuments, Cinerary Dating: 60 CE (Kockel) Urns, etc. in the Collection of Bibliography: Henry Blundell, Esq. at Ince Zanker "Grabreliefs," 288 note 20. (London: Henry Blundell, Ince- Frenz I, 19-20 Fig. 68; 121 Fig. 445. Blundell 1809) Pl. 80, 1. Volpi, 247-248 Nr. D 2 Pl. 4. A. Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 87-88 Nr. A 7 Pl. 5c. Britain (Cambridge: University Press, 1882) 377 Nr. 226. 22) Relief of M. Precilius Hispanus F. Poulsen, Greek and Roman Portraits in Photo: Kockel English Country Houses (Oxford, Currently Housed: Rome, Antiquario Clarendon Press, 1923) 89-90 Nr. 74 Comunale. Inv. Nr. unknown note 18; 74. Provenance: Villa Mattei B. Ashmole, Ancient Marbles at Ince Material: Marble Blundell Hall (Liverpool: The Measurements: 1.24m X 0.65m X 0.16m Gallery, 1961 1929) 88 Nr. 226 Pl. 37.

203

Zanker "Grabreliefs," 271 Fig. 11. Provenance: Villa Mattei Frenz I, 154 Nr. D 25 note 7. Material: Marble Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 207 Nr. N 2 Pl. 121b Measurements: 1.01m X 0.55m X 0.17m 122a. Inscription: None Dating: Hadrianic-Antonine (after Poulsen) 24) Relief with two figures Bibliography: Photo: DAI Inst Neg. A. Reale V. Picciotti Giornetti in: MusNazRome, Currently Housed: Rome, Italy; Vigna Sculture I 2, 250 Nr. 45. Codini MonMatt, 74 Pl. 57, 1. Provenance: Rome Italy near the two Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3841. columbaria R. Paribeni, Le Terme di Diocleziano e il Material: Marble Museo Nazionale Romano (Rome: Measurements: 0.90m X 0.61m X 0.40m La Libreria dello stato, 1932) 71 Nr. Inscription: None 79. Dating: Antonine Goethert, 49. Bibliography: M. Wegner, AA (1938) 323 Fig. 23. G. P. Campana, Di due sepolcri romani H. Jucker, Das Bildnis im Blatterkelch (Roma : Presso Alessandro Monaldi, (Berlin : Akademieverlag,1963) 70 1840) 55 Pl. XP; XIII. Fig. 14. E. Braun, BullInst. (1840) 136-137 K. Parlasca, Mumienportrats und verwandte Nash II; 33. denkmaler (Wiesbaden: Steiner, Zanker "Grabreliefs," 271 Fig. 12. 1966) 96 Fig. 37. Kleiner III, 9-10 note 3 (page 9) G. Grimm, Die romischen Mumienmasken D. Manacorda, StudMisc 22 (1976) 119 Pl. aus Agypten (PhD Diss., Frankfurt, 30. 1974) 68 Fig. 84. Volpi, 271 Nr. I 3 Pl. 37. Zanker "Grabreliefs," 270 Fig. 11. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 211 Nr. N 15 Pl. Frenz I, 174-175 Nr. I 2. 122d. Frenz II, 17 Fig. 99. Volpi, 269-270 Nr. H1 Pl. 35. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 209 Nr. N9 Pl. 123b. 25) Relief fragment with two figures c; 124 Photo: Pflug Currently Housed: Portogruaro, Mus. Naz. 27) Relief of the Fonteiae Concordiese 214. No Inv. nr. Photo: Kockel Provenance: San Giacomo di Portogruaro Photo: London, British Museum Material: Travertine (?) Currently Housed: London; British Measurements: 0.49m X 0.64m X 0.23m Museum. Inv. Nr. 1973.1-9.1 Inscription: None Provenance: Rome, 1848 in London Dating: third quarter of the first century CE Material: Luna Marble Bibliography: Measurements: 0.82mX 0.57m X 0.21m Pflug, 202 Nr. 111 Pl. 22, 1. Inscription: CIL VI 18524 (p 3522) Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Eleusis h(aec) 26) Relief fragment with four figures o(llae?) dat(ae) a Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Photo: Kockel Helena Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Dating: Augustan Nazionale Romano, Chiostro di Bibliography: Michelangelo, Ala III. Inv. nr. 80715.

204

S. Walker, British Museum Occational Currently Housed: Rome, MuseoVaticani, Paper Nr. 16 (1981) 43-44 Nr. 184 Museo Chiaramonti. Inv. nr. 13a = 664 Pl. 3. Provenance: Rome, Via Appia R. Stupperich, Boreas 6 (1983) 143. Material: Travertine G. Davis, AJA 89 (1985) 632 Pl. 69, 7. Measurements: 1.62m X 0.66m Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 215 Nr. O 4 Pl. 127c. Inscription: CIL VI 10808; Hic ini popia in fabrias P(ublius) Ael(ius) 28) Relief with 5 figures Verus ero/gavit HS XXV m(ilia) n(ummum) Photo: Kleiner fec(it) [3] / [3] suis / P(ublius) Ael(ius) Currently Housed: Copenhagen, Ny Verus et Ael(ia) Masnate f(ilii) Ael(ius) Carlsberg Glyptotek. Inv. nr. 591a I.N. 2431 Verus Vero patri f(ecerunt) / Victor Provenance: Rome, Via Appia, Villa Gemellus Casale Dating: Hadrianic (after Kockel), 30-13 Material: Marble BCE (after Kleiner) Measurements: 0.95 X 1.96m Bibliography: Inscription: CIL VI 26421; C(aius) Amelung I, 321-322 Nr. 13a Pl. 32. Servilius / Serviliai l(ibertus) / Philomusus // Altmann, 199. Scaevia / Chreste / Mutilia Servi / l(iberta) Goethert, 43; 45; 70 Fig. 190. Euphrante // Ma(nius) Scaevius / Hospes / Vessberg, 201 Fig. 9. M(arcus) Epidius / Chrestus // Scaevia / M. Beiber, ProcAmPhilSoc 103 (1959) 417. Italia / C(aius) Servilius / Gratus // Ma(nius) Gerke, 11-12 Nr. R 3. Scaevius / Stephanus / L(ucius) Hirrius Zanker "Grabreliefs," 293 note 27. Dating: 13 BCE - 5 CE (after Kleiner) Kleiner III, 241-242 Nr. 81. Bibliography: Frenz I, 159-160 Nr. E 9. Poulsen I, 135 Nr. 115 Pl. 190. Kleiner I, 772. F. Poulsen, Catalogue of ancient sculpture Volpi, 251 Nr. E 7 Pl. 10. in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 132 Nr.G9 Pl. 42c d; (Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydiche 43d. (A. Simmel Kiær), 1951) 410 Nr. Mander, 159-160 Nr. 6. 591a Matz-Duhn, 160 Nr. 3811. 30) Relief of the Servilii, Goethert, 43. Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 73.1606 - 73.1609. Gerke, 12. Currently Housed: Rome, Villa A. Garcia y Bellido, Arte Romano (Madrid: Wolkonsky, in-situ. No Inv. nr. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Provenance: Rome, Villa Wolkonsky, Científicas. Patronato Menéndez y facade of a columbarium Pelayo, 1972) 106 note 111. Material: Travertine Kliener, RGP, 245-246 Nr87. Measurements: 0.64 X 1.99m Frenz I, 163-164 Nr. F 3. Inscription: CIL VI 26375; M(arcus) Frenz II, 23 Fig. 142. Servilius / Philarrus l(ibertus) // Volpi, 260 Nr. E 34 Pl. 22. M(arcus) Servilius / Philostratus l(ibertus) // Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 158-159 Nr. J4 Pl. Servilia / Anatole l(iberta) / Frugi // Servilia 70c. d; 71a-d. / Thais l(iberta) // M(arcus) Servilius / Menophilus l(ibertus) // Lucini [3] / L[ 29) Sepulchral Relief of the Aelii, Dating: 30-13BCE (after Kleiner) Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. INR90.Vat.303 Bibliography: R. Lanciani, BullComm (1881) 137.

205

Altmann, 196 note 156; 198. Provenance: Via delle Vigne Nuove Goethert, 38-39; 46. Material: Marble Vessberg, 201. Measurements: 1.14m X 0.59m A.M. Colini, "Storia e Topografia del Celio Inscription: None nell'Antiquità," MemPontAcc 3, 7 Dating: Unknown (Kockel) (1944) 92f. Pl. 23. Bibliography: Gerke, 12 Nr. R 4. S. Le Pera, L. Petracca, L. Viola and G. Zanker "Grabreliefs," 268-269 note 2; 294- Messineo, Archaeologia Laziale 4 295 note 30; 299-300. (1981) 164 Pl. 34, 4. Kliener, RGP, 250 Nr. 92. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 223 Nr. O 34 Pl. Frenz I, 166 Nr. G1. 134b. Kleiner I, 772. Volpi, 266 Nr. F7 Pl. 31. 33) Grave Relief of Decimus Sempronius Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 130 Nr. G7 Pl. 42a; Iucundus 43a-c. Photo: Pflug Mander, 159 Nr. 5. Currently Housed: Portogruaro, Mus. Naz. Concordiese 131 31) Relief of the Maelii Provenance: Concordia Photo: Raleigh (NC) Museum of Art Material: Unknown Currently Housed: Raleigh, North Carolina Measurements: 0.71m X 0.47m X 0.31m Museum of Art, Inv. nr. 79.1.2 Inscription: CIL V 1910; D(ecimus) Provenance: Unknown Sempronius / Iucundus / medicus / Material: Unknown Ariminiensis / [ Measurements: 1.70m X 0.70m X 0.38m Dating: second half of the 1st century CE Inscription: CIL VI 21802; Sex(tus) (after Pflug) Maelius / Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Salvius / Munatia Bibliography: Cn(aei) l(iberta) / Flora / beneficio / Sex(ti) Pflug, 200 Nr. 106 Pl. 21, 6. Maeli Sex(ti) l(iberti) Antiochi Dating: middle Augustan (after Kockel) 34) Grave Relief of Titus Livius Optatus Bibliography: Photo: Pflug E.P. Bowron. The North Carolina Museum Currently Housed: Padua, Soprintendenza of Art: introduction to the alle Antichita delle Venezie, Via Aquileia 7 Collections (Chapel Hill : Published Inv. nr. 5791 for the North Carolina Museum of Provenance: Altichiero, Art, Raleigh, N.C., by the University Material: Unknown of North Carolina Press, 1983) 58 Measurements: 0.81m X 0.63m X 0.21m with Fig. Inscription: CIL V 2947; M(anius) Ennius Frenz II, 9 Fig. 49. P(ubli) f(ilius) Rufus fecit / honoris causa / Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 168 Nr. K 3 Pl. 82a-c Galenio Q(uinti) l(iberto) Pisidae / Galeniae 83e. Pisidae l(ibertae) / Nysae Dating: first third of the 1st century CE 32) Relief with Two Figures (after Pflug) Photo: Arachne Bestand-Microfiche-D- Bibliography: DAI-ROM-0779_G07.jpg Pflug, 236 Nr. 201 Pl. 30, 4. Currently Housed: Rome Museo Nazionale Romano, Giardino dei Conquecento. Inv. nr. 35) Grave Relief of Titus Fannius 324 673 Donicius

206

Photo: Pflug 38) Relief of the Aiedii Currently Housed: Brescia, Museo Photo: Arachne Bestand-Microfiche-D- Romano MR 2701 DAI-ROM-0770_B01 Provenance: Brescia Currently Housed: Berlin, Stall Museen. Material:Unknown Inv. nr. SK 840 Measurements: 0.97m X 0.54m X 0.25m Provenance: Rome, Via Appia Inscription: CIL V 4601; T(ito) Fannio Material: Marble Ateci / f(ilio) Donicio / Corneliae Measurements: 0.99m X0.64 Contesil[o]/nis f(iliae) Maxumae / M(arcus) Inscription: CIL VI 11284 = CIL 06, 11285 Fannius T(iti) f(ilius) / parentibus v(ivus) = Conze 00840; P(ublius) Aiedius P(ubli) f(ecit) / l(ocus) m(onumenti) p(edes) l(ibertus) / Amphio // Aiedia P(ubli) l(iberta) q(uadratos) XII / Fausta Melio Dating: first half of the first century CE Dating: 30-13 BCE (after Kleiner) (after Pflug) Bibliography: Bibliography: C. Blümel, Kat. Berlin, Rӧmische Bildnisse J. Untermann, BeitrNamF 10 (1959) 136. ( erlin: Verl. f r Kunstwissens haft Pflug, 268 Nr. 280 Pl. 41, 3. 1933) 3 Nr. R. 7 Pl. 4, 1. P. Ducati, Arte in Roma (Bologna: Licinio 36) Grave Relief of Titus Iunius Ampio Cappelli, editore 1938) 131 Pl. 72, 2. Currently Housed: Mailand, Civ. Mus. Vessberg, 203-204; 272 Pl. 43. Arch. A.O. 9.6578 E. Rohde, Grie his he und rӧmis he Kunst Provenance: Mailand, S. Stefano in Brolo in den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin Material: Unknown (Berlin: Henschelverlag, 1968) 119 Measurements: 0.96m X 0.51m X 0.13m Fig. 88. Inscription: CIL V 6025; Viv[is 3] / T(ito) Buschor, 62; 102 Nr. 392. Iunio T(iti) l(iberto) / Ampioni / Iunia T(iti) E.K. Gazda, GettyMusJ I (1974) 72 Fig. 11. l(iberta) Diseto / sibi et patrono suo / fecit Zanker I, 285 Fig. 16; 288. 311. 414 Fig. Dating: 1st half of the 1st century CE (after 51. Pflug) Kleiner III,206 Nr. 18. Bibliography: Frenz I, 135-136 Nr. C 12. Pflug, 280 Nr. 307 Pl. 46, 4. H. Heres , H. Hoffmann and K. Zimmerman, Rӧmische Porträts. Staatliche 37) Relief fragment with two figures Museen Berlin (Berlin : Staatliche Photo: Pflug Museen zu Berlin, Currently Housed: Museo Nazionale Antikensammlung, 1981) 6 Nr.3 Concordiese 214. No Inv.nr. Fig. Provenance: San Giacomo di Portogruaro Volpi, 263 Nr. E 42 Pl.. 26. (1905) Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 149-150 Nr. I1 Pl. Material:Unknown 56d; 62a. b. Measurements: 0.64m X 0.59m X 0.23m Inscription: None 39) Relief of Publius Octavius Successus Dating: last 3rd of the 1st century CE (after Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 73.1666 Pflug) Currently Housed: Museo Nazionale, Bibliography: Naples. No Inv. Nr. G.C. Bertolini, NSc (1906) 424 Fig. 1. Provenance: Capua Pflug, 202 Nr. 111 Pl. 22, 1. Material: Marble Measurements: Not available

207

Inscription: CIL X 3939 = D 06314; Currently Housed: Treviso, Vai Caecilia Salutaris mat(er) / P(ublio) Octavio Calmaggiore 38. No Inv. nr P(ubli) lib(erto) Successo / lic(tori) IIvirali Provenance: Treviso (?) Capuae / CaeCILiae Q(uinti) f(iliae) Salutari Material: Travertine (?) / sibi suisque solo privato / vivi fecerunt Measurements: Height approximately 1m, Dating: Republican (after Frederiksen) other measurements unknown Bibliography: Inscription: None Frederiksen "Capua,"100. Dating: mid 1st century CE (after Pflug) R.G. Lewis, “Ins riptions of Amiternum and Bibliography: Catilina’s Last tand,” Zeitschrift fur L. Coletti, Catalogo delle cose d'arte e di Papyrologie und Epigraphik 74 antichita d'Italia 6. Treviso (Roma: (1988) p.35-36. Libreria dello stato, 1935) 59 Nr. 63. Pflug, 213 Nr. 141 Pl. 22,2. 40) Funerary relief with three figures Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 73.770 - 73.772. 42) Relief with Two Figures Currently Housed: Rom, Italien, IT, Museo Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 81.3947 Nazionale Romano. Inv. nr. 72480. Currently Housed: Museo Civico Provenance: Rome, Via Ostiense 1898 Archeologico Eno Bellis. 623. No Inv. nr. Material: Marble Provenance: Oderzo, Tre Piere Measurements: 0.68m X 0.58m X 0.32m Material: Limestone (?) Inscription: CIL VI 35090 (p 3920) = Measurements: Unknown MNR-01-02, p 254 = Mander 00022; A(uli) Inscription: None Deci Spintheris // A(uli) Deci Felicionis // Dating: mid 1st century CE (after Pflug) Deciae Spendusae Bibliography: Dating: Unknown Pflug, 207 Nr. 124 Pl. 23, 4. Bibliography: V. Picciotti Giornetti and P. Sabbatini 43) Grave Relief with 5 Figures Tumolesi in: MusNazRom, Sculture I Photo: Pflug 2, 252. Nr. 47. Currently Housed: Vienna, Kunsthist. L. Borsari, NSc (1898) 246 Nr. 42. Museum, Neue Berg I1136 R. Paribeni, Le Terme di Diocleziano e il Provenance: Unknown Museo Nazionale Romano (Rome: Material: Uknown La Libreria dello stato, 1932) 72 Nr. Measurements: 1.25m X 0.75m X 0.45m 76. Inscription: None Felletti Maj, 89 Nr. 162. Dating:second thrid of the first century CE Zanker I, 270 Fig. 10. (after Pflug) Frenz I, 186 Nr. K 8. Bibliography: Frenz II, 13 Fig. 60. Pflug, 219 Nr. 160 Pl. 25, 4-6. Volpi, 271 Nr. I 2 Pl. 37. A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le 44) Grave Relief with 5 figures Sculture II (Rome: De Luca, 1981) Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. MuseumsPhoto 7789 252 Nr. 47. Currently Housed: Vienna, Kunsthist. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 190- 191 Nr. L 20 Museum, Neue Berg. Inv. nr. I1136 Taf. 103 a.c; 104 c.d; 105b. Provenance: Unknown Material: Unknown 41) Relief with two-figures Measurements:1.25m X 0.78m X 0.51m Photo: Pflug Inscription: None

208

Dating: middle first Century CE (After D.E.E. Kleiner, "Second-Century Pflug) Mythological Portraiture: Mars and Bibliography: Venus," Latomus 40 (1981): 513 Arachne Nr. 1 Fig. 1 and 2. Gabelmann I, 86 Nr.

45) Grave Relief of Turpilia Tertia and Caius Acutius 47) Grave Relief with a Circus Scene Photo: Pflug Photo: Forschungsarchiv für antike Plastik Currently Housed: Copenhagen, Ny 2208/1-9 Alinari 6381 Anderson 24118 Carlsberg Glypt. 1861 Currently Housed: Rome, Mesei Vaticani, Provenance: Corona, near Aquileia Museo Gregoriano Profano. No. Inv. nr. Material: Travertine Provenance: Kunsthandel (Vescovali, Measurements: 1.58m X 0.78m X 0.27m 1828); Lateran Inscription: AE 1993 749; Turpiliae Material: Marble M(arci) f(iliae) Tertiae / matri // C(aio) Measurements: 1.04m X 0.58m Acutio / C(ai) f(ilio) / patri Inscription: None Dating: Unknown Dating: Unknown Bibliography: Bibliography: F. Poulsen, Catalogue of ancient sculpture O. Benndorf and R. Schone, Die antiken in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek bildwerke des Lateranensischen (Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydiche museums (Leipzig, Breitkopf & (A. Simmel Kiær), 1951),572 Nr. Härtel, 1867 22 Nr. 35. 800 H. Beck, P. C. Bol and M. Bückling, H. Bartels, Studien zum Frauenportrat der Ägypten, Griechenland, Rom. augusteischen Zeit (München, Feder, Abwehr und Berührung. 1962) 44 with commentary 3611. Ausstellungskatalog Frankfurt Gabelmann I, 86 Nr. j Fig. 9. (Tübingen: E. Wasmuth, 2005) 722 Frenz I, 23 Fig. 80; 24-25 Fig. 83; 48 Fig. Nr. 336. 169. Helbig I, Nr. 1010. C. Vermeule, Roman decorative art G. Rodenwaldt, JdI 55 (1940) 12. (Boston: Dept. of Classical Art, F. Sinn, Reliefs, Altäre, Urnen, Museo Museum of Fine Arts 1984) 116 with Gregoriano Profano ex Lateranense. Fig. Katalog der Skulpturen 1, 1, MAR Pflug, Nr. 87 Taf. 20 ,2. 17 (Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1991) Nr. 14. 46) Roman Funerary relief Photo:DAI Inst. Neg. 67.1071 48) Fragment of relief with one figure Currently Housed: Ostia, Museo Ostiense, Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 38.1661; 38.1662; Room VIII. no. 1. Inv. nr. 5 76.302 Provenance: Ostia, central cortile of the Currently Housed: Rome Museo 'case giardino' Nazionale, Thermenum Museum, Inv. nr. Material: Italian Marble 994. Measurements: Unavailable Provenance: Unknown Inscription: None Material: Marble Dating: 140-150 CE (after Kleiner) Measurements: 1.81m X 0.67m Bibliography: Inscription: None

209

Dating: 13 BCE - 5CE after (Kleiner) Material: Unknown Bibliography: Measurements:1.45m X 0.85m X 0.35m L. Nista, MusNazRom, Sculture I 7, 2, 400f. Inscription:CIL X 3978; Publilia / Sex(ti) Nr. XIII 10 l(iberta) Fistia // Sex(to) Publilio Sex(ti) A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le l(iberto) / Truphoni patron(o) suo // L(ucio) Sculture 1, 7. 1 (Rome: De Luca Titio Optato / aurifici 1984) 400 f. Nr.. XIII, 10. Dating: Unknown Kockel, 221 Nr. O 27 Pl. 128 c. Bibliography: Zanker "Grabreliefs," 280, 286-287 Fig. 13. Onomasticon, 62 s.v. Festia Nr. c. Kliener III, 232f. Nr. 65. Forti II, 303 Nr. 6; 215; 318 Fig. 2.327 Pl. Frenz I, 215. III, 3. Kleiner I, 770 note 13. Frederiksen I, 99; 100; 111 Fig. 157. Kleiner I, 110ff. Frederiksen II, 299 Fig. 101. Goette I, 112 Nr. A b 108. Frenz II, 27 Fig. 163, 2.175. Kockel, Porträtreliefs, 228 Nr. O27 Pl. Solin Arctos 19, 165 Fig. 27. 128c. Eckert, 149 Nr. 22; 208 Fig. 22.

49) Grave Relief from the Via Seggio dei 51) Grave Relief of Plania Philumina Cavalieri Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 64.679 Photo: Eckert Currently Housed: Capua, embedded in the Currently Housed: Capua, Museo house wall of the house Via dei Cavalieri Campano. No Inv. nr. Seggio 14 (1986). No Inv. nr. Provenance: Formerly built into a wall of Provenance: Unknown the house Via dei Cavalieri Seggio No.14 Material: Unknown Material: Unknown Measurements: 0.94m X 0.78m X 0.30m Measurements: 1.29m X 0.89m X 0.32m Inscription: CIL X 4289; A(ulus) Planius // Inscription: None Plania Philumina fecit sibi et filiabus Dating: Unknown Plani[ae 3] / [3]s Planiae Primae // O(ssa) Bibliography: h(ic) s(ita) s(unt) Forti II, 307 Nr. 17; 314; 319; 327; Pl. III, Dating: Unknown 1. Bibliography: Frederiksen I, 96 Fig. 3; 99. Forti II, 306 Nr. 16; 316; 318 Fig. 2; 327. Frederiksen II, 288 Fig. 20. Frederiksen "Capua,"99; 100; 119 Fig. 201. G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen, Frederiksen II, 306 Fig. 144. AF 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982) 48 Fig. Eckert, 143 Nr. 13; 202 Fig. 13. 337. Frenz II, 27 Fig. 164, 5.175. 52) Grave Relief of Helena Eckert, 144-145 Nr. 15; 203 Fig. 15. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 74.69 Currently Housed: S. Maria Capua Vetere, 50) Grave Relief of Publius in the garden of the Amphitheatres. No Inv Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database nr. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Provenance: S. Maria Capua Vetere, Via Capua_00163.jpg] Appia Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Material: Unknown Campano. No Inv. nr. Measurements: 1.51m X 0.79m X 0.40m Provenance: Formerly built into a wall of Inscription: CIL X 4415 & 4416; Atthii the house Via dei Cavalieri Seggio No.14 Faustae liber(ti) / L(ucio) Virio Eutycho;

210

M(arco) Visellio / C(ai) f(ilio) Ter(etina) Inscription: CIL X 4105 = ECapua 00056 = Balitori / Atleiae C(ai) f(iliae) / Pollae Mander 00162; Q(uinti) Deciri Q(uinti) Dating: Unknown l(iberti) / Hermiae / Nasonis // Baebiae Bibliography: L(uci) l(ibertae) / Helenae // Q(uinti) Deciri G. Varettoni, NSc (1943) 140 Fig. 1-2. Q(uinti) l(iberti) / Amilc[a]e // Q(uinti) Frederiksen I, 98 Fig. 84; 112 Pl. 21, d. Deciri Q(uinti) l(iberti) / Papiae G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen, Dating: Unknown AF 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982) 216 Nr. Bibliography: 172 Fig. 172. Forti II, 305 Nr. 10; 327. Frederiksen II, 290 Fig. 31. Frederiksen I, 99. Frenz II, 24 Fig. 150 27; Fig. 163, 4.175. Solin Arctos 19, 166 Fig. 131. Eckert, 153-154 Nr. 29; 213 Fig. 29. Eckert, 152-153 Nr. 27; 212 Fig. 27. Mander, 196 Nr. 162. 53)Relief of Equitier Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 74.71 55) Relief of Caesier Currently Housed: S. Maria Capua Vetere, Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database in garden of the Ampitheatre. No Inv. nr. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Provenance: S. Angelo in Formis Capua_00072.jpg] Material:Unknown Currently Housed: Capua. No Inv. Nr. Measurements: 1.61m X 1.20m X 0.35m Provenance: Found in S. Angelo in Formis Inscription: ZPE-101-186 = Epigraphica- Material: Travertine 2002-241 = AE 1989, 00161 = AE 1994, Measurements: 2.00m 1.14m 00428 = AE 2002, +00265; M(arco) Equitio Inscription: CIL X 4053; Rogo te viator ni / M(arci) l(iberto) Primo // M(arco) Equitio / nocias meo[s bono Genio eas] / [Cae]sia M(arci) l(iberto) Hilaro // M(arco) Equitio / L(uci) l(iberta) Muscis sibei et sueis de su[a MM(arcorum) l(iberto) Dardano // Cassiae pecunia] / faciundum curav[it] / L(ucio) M(arci) [l(ibertae?)] / Rufae // Primus Caesio Q(uinti) f(ilio) / Ter(etina) patrono // l(ibertus) patro(no) suo et sibi et su{e}is et / Caesia L(uci) l(iberta) / Muscis // Quarto / P(ublio) Aulio |(mulieris) l(iberto) Secundo vernae / suo // Cl[3] / ver[nae] / su[o] amico fecit Dating: Unknown Dating: Unknown Bibliography: Bibliography: Forti I, 54-55 Nr. 21. Frederiksen II, 287 Pl. 11. Eckert, 148-149 Nr. 21; 207 Fig. 21 Frenz II, 24 Fig. 143; 27 Fig. 165, 10. Eckert, 151-152 Nr. 26; 211 Fig. 26. 56)Grave Relief of Cincia Eleusis Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.1650. 54) Grave Relief of Decirier Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Campano. No Inv. nr. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$EC Provenance: Embedded in the foundation apua_00056.jpg] of the church S. Giovannia a Corte Currently Housed: Capua. No Inv. Nr. Material: Unknown Provenance: Capua, "Cecatiello alla Carita" Measurements: 1.50 m X 0.73m X 0.30m (CIL); Capua 'Vico S. Maria dei Franchi Inscription: CIL X 4074; Cincia Eleusis (Forti) s[ibi et pat]/rono constitu[it] Material: Unknown Dating: Unknown Measurements: 1.30m X 0.95m X 0.25m Bibliography:

211

G. Ianelli, Atti della commissione Terra di Lavoro (Milano, Società conservatrice dei monumenti di storica lombarda, 1876) 56. Terra di Lavoro (Milano, Società Forti I, 50. storica lombarda 1876). Eckert, 147-148 Nr. 20; 206 Fig. 20. Forti II, 308 Nr. 19; 326; 327. Frederiksen I, 99. 59) Grave Relief of Dexsonia Frenz II, 27 Fig. 165, 8.175. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.1641 Eckert, 141-142 Nr. 11; 199 Fig. 11. Currently Housed: Capua Museo Campano. No Inv. nr. 57) Relief of Cornelius Flaccus and Ofillia Provenance: Capua, Strada Vitriera Salvilla Material: Travertine Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Measurements: 1.20m X 0.50m X 0.30m [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Inscription: CIL X 4110 = CIL 01, 01590 Capua_00025.jpg] (p 1009) = ILLRP 00920 = RECapua 00130; Currently Housed: Capua. No Inv.nr. Dexsonia S(e)lemio sibi et / Philemae suae Provenance: Unknown ama[n]tis(s)i{u}mae Material: Travertine Dating: Unknown Measurements: 1.71m X 0.73m Bibliography: Inscription: CIL X 4095: Cn(aeo) Cornelio Frederiksen "Capua,"99 Pl. 21c. Cn(aei) l(iberto) Flacco Ofillia |(mulieris) Solin Arctos 19, 162. l(iberta) Salvilla / sibi et viro Eckert, 165 Nr. 51; 230 Fig. 51. Dating: Unknown Bibliography: 60) Relief of Sextus Furius G. Ianelli, Atti della commissione Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 64. 1858 conservatrice dei monumenti di Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Terra di Lavoro (Milano, Società Campano. No Inv. nr. storica lombarda 1876) 72. Provenance: Capua, iuxta theatrum militum Forti I, 56 Nr. 26. Material: Travertine Eckert, 154-155 Nr. 30; 214 Fig 30. Measurements: 2.02m X 1.12m X 0.30m Inscription: CIL X 4150 = RECapua 58) Relief of Ennius 00136; Sex(tus) Furius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Chilo // sibi et suis [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Dating: Unknown Capua_00141.jpg] Bibliography: Currently Housed: Capua No Inv. nr. Forti II, 304 Nr. 7; 327; Pl. I, 3. Provenance: Found at Capua in the Frederiksen I, 96 Fig. 73; 99; 100. Monastery of the Immaculate Conception Frederiksen II, 288 Fig. 20. Material: Travertine P. Castrén, Ordo Populusque Pompeianus Measurements: 1.80 m X 0.75 m (Roma : Bardi, 1975) 170 Nr. 178. Inscription: CIL X 4122; C(aio) Ennio Frenz II, 24 Fig. 147; 24 Fig. 151; 27 Fig. |(mulieris) l(iberto) Glauco // Ennia C(ai) 165, 3.175. l(iberta) / Philematio lib(erta) d(e) s(uo) fecit Solin Arctos 19, 187. Dating: Unknown Eckert, 150-151 Nr. 24; 209 Fig. 23. Bibliography: G. Ianelli, Atti della commissione 61) Grave Relief of Hordionier conservatrice dei monumenti di

212

Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Capua_00142.jpg] Capua_00143.jpg;$Caro_00070.jpg] Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Campano. No Inv. nr. Campano Provenance: Capua, iuxta theatrum militum Provenance: Found in Capua under the Material: Travertine Mensa Palace in the piazza Landolfo Measurements: 1.80m X 1.05m X 0.35m Material: Travertine Inscription: CIL X 4174 = RECapua Measurements: 1.80 m X 1.10m X 0.36m 00142; Q(uintus) Hordionius Q(uinti) Inscription: CIL X 4370; Titiae C(ai) l(ibertus) /[3]hes Hordionia Q(uinti) l(ibertae) Dorchae Q(uintus) Florius l(iberta) /Philumina Q(uintus) Hordionius / Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Liccaeus Faustae Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Surus Q(uintus) delicium Q(uintus) Florius Q(uinti) Hordio[nius] QQ(uintorum) |(mulieris) l(ibertus) Faustus Q(uintus) Florius l(ibertus) Suavi[s] / sibi et patron[is] o(ssa) Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Liccaeus sibi suisq(ue) h(ic) s(ita) s(unt) fecit O(ssa) h(ic) s(ita) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) Dating:Unknown l(evis) Bibliography: Dating: Unknown Forti II, 304 Nr. 8; 317; 318 Fig. 2; 327. Bibliography: Frederiksen I, 99; 114; 119 Fig. 205. G. Ianelli, Atti della commissione Frederiksen II, 302; 306 Fig. 148. conservatrice dei monumenti di Frenz II, 27 Fig. 165, 175. Terra di Lavoro (Milano, Società Solin Arctos 19, 165 Fig. 27. storica lombarda, 1876) 18-19. Eckert, 151 Nr. 25; 210 Fig. 25. Forti I, 46-47. H. Gummerus, JDI 28 (1913) 83. 62) Grave Relief Frederiksen "Capua," 99; 100; 112 Fig. 162. G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen, Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database AF 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982) 101 Nr. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE 10 Fig. 10. Capua_00155.jpg] P. Castrén, Ordo Populusque Pompeianus Currently Housed: Capua, Museo (Roma : Bardi, 1975) 168 Nr. 170. Campano. No Inv. Nr. Feletti Maj, 244 Fig. 125. Provenance: Unknown Frederiksen II, 300 Fig. 106. Material: Travertine Frenz II, 24 Fig. 148; 27 Fig. 164, 2.175. Measurements: 1.10m X 0.49m X 0.25m Solin Arctos 19, 165 Fig. 30. Inscription: CIL X 4197 = RECapua Solin Arctos 20, 155. 00155; Iunachilia P(ubli) f(ilia) Gal() / sibi Eckert, 145-146 Nr. 17; 204 Fig. 17. et suis // i(n) a(gro) p(edes) II // [ Dating: Unknown 64) Grave Relief of Caecilia Bibliography: Photo: Eckert Onomasticon, 701 s.v. Iunachilia. Currently Housed: S. Maria Capua Vetere. Frederiksen I, 99. No Inv. Nr. Frenz II, 27 Fig. 165, 9.175. Provenance: S. Maria Capua Vetere, Piazza Eckert, 149-150 Nr. 23; 209 Fig. 23. Maggiore Nr. 152 Material: Travertine 63) Relief of Florier Measurements: 1.75m X 0.83m X 0.21m

213

Inscription: CIL X 4374; ]eCILia Secunda Currently Housed: Capua, Museo sibi et C(aio) Toratio et P(ublio) Confuleio Campano. No Inv. nr. Dating: Unknown Provenance: Capua, S. Giovanni or 'nel Bibliography: Palazzo de Tomasi' Forti II, 311 Nr. 31; 316; 324; 327. Material: Travertine Frederiksen I, 99. Measurements: 1.40m X 0.70m X 0.35m Solin Arctos 21, 126. Inscription: CIL X, 3875; Barnaeus Eckert, 158-159 Nr. 38; 221 Fig. 38. soc(iorum) / vices(imae) liber(tatis) sibi et / fratrib(us) suis v(ivus) fec(it) // Salama 65) Grave Relief of T Blasteius socior(um) / vice{n}s(imae) libertatis / Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database ser(vo) vix(it) ann(os) XXV // Sabbioni [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE soc(iorum) / vice{n}s(imae) liberta(tis) / Capua_00076.jpg] servo Currently Housed: Capua, Museo Dating: Unknown Nazionale. No Inv. nr. Bibliography: Provenance: Found at Sant' Angelo in O. Hirschfeld, Die kaiserlichen Formis Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian Material: Travertine (Berlin, 1905) 106 Fig. 4 s.v. Capua. Measurements: 1.80m X 0.95m Forti II, 306 Nr. 13; 317; 326; 327. Inscription: EE-08-01, 00504 = RECapua Frederiksen I, 99; 114; 115. 00076; M(arci) Tili Blastei o(ssa) h(ic) Frederiksen II, 302. s(ita) sunt / Tillia Phsuche(!) de su[o] fecit Frenz II, 27 Fig. 165, 3.175. Dating: Unknown Eckert, 153 Nr. 28; 212 Fig. 28. Bibliography: G. Ianelli, Atti della commissione 68)Grave Relief of Ancharius conservatrice dei monumenti di Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Terra di Lavoro (Milano, Società [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI storica lombarda, 1876) 195. L_10_04008.jpg] Forti I, 53 Nr. 19. Currently Housed: S. Maria Capua Vetere, in the garden of the ampitheatre. No Inv. nr. 66) Grave Relief in Naples Provenance: Unknown Photo:Eckert Material: Travertine Currently Housed: Naples, Museo Measurements: 0.62m X 0.58mX 0.45m Nazionale. No Inv. nr. Inscription: CIL X 4008; Q(uintus) Provenance: Unknown Ancharius / Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Licinus // Material: Limestone Anchariae |(mulieris) l(ibertae) / Baccini / Measurements: 1.30m X 0.90m X 0.35m sibi et co(n)libertae / o(ssa) / h(ic) / s(ita) Inscription: On architrave but illegible s(unt) Dating: Unknown Dating: Unknown Bibliography: Bibliography: Fortii II, 312 Nr. 32; 317; 321; 327. M. Ruggiero, Delgi Scavi di Antichita nelle Frederiksen I, 96 Fig. 73; 99. Provincie di Terraferma (1888) 286. Frederiksen II, 288 Fig. 20. Forti II, 310 Nr. 29; 317; 320; 324; 327; Pl. Eckert, 156-157 Nr. 35; 215 Fig. 35. II, 3. Frederiksen I, 99; 100; 114. 67) Grave Relief of Barneus Frederiksen II, 302. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 38.1268 Eckert, 162-163 Nr. 45; 226 Fig. 45.

214

69) Relief of Lucius Annius Servius Photo: Eckert Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Currently Housed: S. Maria Capua Vetere. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE No Inv. nr. Capua_00147.jpg] Provenance: S. Maria Capua Vetere, Vai Currently Housed: Capua. No Inv. nr. Melorio Nr. 32. Provenance: Unknown Material: Unknown Material: Travertine Measurements: 1.35m X 0.77m Measurements: 1.94m X 0.915 m Inscription: CIL X 04198; Iunia / Urbana Inscription: CIL X 4011; L(ucius) Annius sibi et co(n)iui // M(arcus) Servilius CC(aiorum) l(ibertus) / Servius [3] M(arci) l(ibertus) / Eros / o(ssa) s(ita) s(unt) p[o]rc[inarius(?)] // [3]CT[3]eiae Camu[3] Dating: Unknown Dating: Unknown Bibliography: Bibliography: Forti II, 309 Nr. 25; 325; 327; 329 Fig. 4. Forti I, 50-51 Nr. 12. Frederiksen I, 99. Eckert, 159 Nr. 39; 222 Pl. 39a. 70) Grave Relief of Marcus Titinius Nicephor 73)Grave Relief of Volcacus Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 18.1267 [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$RE Currently Housed: Capua, embedded in the Capua_00150.jpg] house on the Via Duomo Nr. 81, No Inv. nr. Currently Housed: Capua. No Inv.nr. Provenance: Capua, Via Principi dei Provenance: Unknown Langobardi Nr. 12. Material: Unknown Material: Travertine Measurements: Unknown Measurements: 1.32m X 0.61m X 0.30m Inscription: CIL X 3985 = RECapua Inscription: CIL X 4420 = ECapua 00066; 00150; M(arcus) Titinius M(arci) P(ubli) C(ai) Volcaci / C(ai) l(iberti) Amphionis // l(ibertus) Nicepho(r) / marmorarius O(ssa) / h(ic) / s(ita) / s(unt) // Neria C(ai) Dating: Unknown l(iberta) / Iliona // C/o/n/i/u/x / s(ua) / Bibliography: f/e/c/i/t None Dating: Unknown Bibliography: 71) Grave Relief Onomasticon, 327 s.v. Iliona Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Forti II, 307 Nr. 18; 319; 327; 329 Fig. 4. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CE Frederiksen I, 99; 100. Casapulla_00001_1.jpg;$CECasapulla_0000 I. Brock et al., Il Centro Antico di Capua. 1_2.jpg] Metodi di analisi per la Currently Housed: Capua No Inv.nr. pianificazione architettonico- Provenance: Unknown urbanistica (Padova: Marsilio, 1973) Material: Unknown 86 Fig. 82. Measurements: Unknown Eckert, 157 Nr. 36; 219 Pl. 36a. Inscription: CIL X 4187 = CECasapulla 00001; Iucunda Nusia Stati 74) Funerary relief with two figures Dating: Unknown Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 4668. Bibliography: Currently Housed: Reggio Emilia, Italy, CIL X 4187; Museo Nazionale Inv. nr. 150. Provenance: Villa San Maurizio 72) Grave Relief of Servilius Material: Marble

215

Measurements: 2.46m X 1.06m X 0.25m filio / in fr(onte) p(edes) XX in agr(o) Inscription: CIL XI 961; Sibi Pettia Ge et / p(edes) XXX C(aio) Pettio C(ai) l(iberto) Pyladi Dating: last third of the 1st century CE patr / C(aio) Clodio C(ai) l(iberto) (after Pflug) Antiocho marm(orario?) / et Pettiae Bibliography: |(mulieris) l(ibertae) Speratae / in fro(nte) Pflug, 277 -278 Nr. 301 Pl. 46, 1. p(edes) XII / in agr(o) p(edes) XV // et Peiae |(mulieris) l(ibertae) 77) Relief of Ennius with two portraits Dating: Imperial, end of the 1st century. Photo: Frenz Bibliography: Currently Housed: Pontecorvo (Cassino, G. Zimmer, Römische Berufsdarstellungen, Frosinone), Localita Badia, Installed in the AF 12 (Berlin: Mann, 1982) Nr. 91. former sacristiy of the Church of Santa G. Susini, Il lapicida romano: Maria dei Reali. No Inv. nr. Introd.all'epigrafia latina (Bologna Provenance: Pontecorvo 1966) 36 Fig. 2. Material: Limestone O. Giglioli, Mostra degli incisori toscani Measurements: 1.5m X 0.61m, del Seicento (Firenze, F. Le Inscription: AE 1973, 00182; [Se]r(vius) Monnier, 1942) 289 Nr. 6. Ennius / [3 Te]r(etina) q(uaestor) sibi et / [3] H. Gabelman, BJc 179, 1979, 240 with Fig. h(oc) m(onumentum) h(eredem) n(on) 23. [s(equetur)] Pflug, 177 Nr. 56 Pl. 13,1. Dating: Augustan (after Frenz) Bibliography: 75) Grave Relief with 3 figures A. Gianetti, RendLinc 28 (1973)75 Nr. 12 Photo: Personal Pl. 3, 4. Currently Housed: Naples, Museo Frenz II, Nr. 36 Pl. 17, 2. Nazionale. No Inv. nr. Provenance: Unknown 78) Relief with five figures Material: Travertine Photo: Kleiner Measurements: Unknown Currently Housed: Rome, Via di Portico di Inscription: None Ottavia. No Inv. nr. Dating: Not Available Provenance: Rome Via Appia Bibliography: Material: Marble None Measurements: Unavailable Inscription: None 76) Grave Relief of Marcus Cassius Dating: 13 BCE - 5 CE (after Kliener) Oufentina and Atilia Manduilla Bibliography: Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 75.846 Kleiner III, 248 Nr. 90. Currently Housed: Milan, Museo Civico Archeologico Inv. nr. A.O. 9.6623. Funerary Altars: Provenance: Milan, Monastero Maggiore Material: Travertine 79) Ash chest of Q. Fabius Echus and Measurements: 1.16m X 0.61m X 0.24m Fabia Restituta Inscription: CIL V 05985 = Tribu p 303; Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 57.128 V(ivus) f(ecit) / M(arcus) Cassius M(arci) Currently Housed: Naples, Archaeological f(ilius) Ouf(entina) / Cacurius sibi et Atiliae Museum. No Inv. nr. / Manduillae uxori et / M(arco) Cassio Provenance: Unknown Broccho filio / et L(ucio) Cassio Donato Material: Marble

216

Measurements: Unknown Istituto poligrafico dello Stato,1963) Inscription: CIL VI 17522; Q(uinto) Fabio 118-119 Nr. 304 Pl. 62a-b. Echo / et Fabiae Restitutae / Ti(berius) J.M.C. Toynbee, The Art of the Romans Claudius Fabianus / parentibus / bene (London: Praeger, 1965) 95 Fig. 58. merentibus / b(onis) b(ene) Helbig III, 212-213 Nr. 2296. Dating: Unknown M. Honroth, Stadtrӧmische Girlanden Bibliography: (Vienna, sterr. Ar h ologis hes G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study Inst., 1971) 23; 175 Nr. 35 of the motifs used to decorate the Felletti Maj, 318-319; 350 Pl. 61 Fig. 149. grave altars, ash chests and Kranz II, 360 Pl. 163 Fig. I. sarcophagi made in Rome in the A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano, Le early empire (To the mid second sculture I 1 (Rome: de Luca,1979) century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University 260 Nr. 161. of London, 1978), 48. Helbig III, Nr. 2296. Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3873. R. Romanelli, "Due nuove sculture funerarie Altmann, 144, Nr. 157. del Museo Nazionale Romano," Le E. von Mercklin. Antike Figuralkauitelle. Arti 4 (1941-1942) 163 Pl. LII. (Berlin, De Gruyter, 1962) Fig. 1091 S. Aurigemma, The Baths of Diocletian and Nr. 571. the Museo Nazionale Romano, Itinerari dei musei, gallerie e 80) Altar with Portraits of Man and a monumenti d'Italia 78 (Rome: Woman Istituto poligrafico dello Stato,1963) Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 39.814 126 Nr. 304 Pl. 62. Currently Housed: Rome, Museo JMC. Toynbee. The Art of the Romans. Nazionale delle Terme, Room V. Inv. nr. (London: Praeger, 1965) 95 Pl. 58. 124514. Helbig III, 2296. Provenance: Rome M. Honroth, Stadtrӧmische Girlanden Material: Marble (Vienna, sterr. Ar h ologis hes Measurements: 0.89m X 0.475m X 0.46m Inst., 1971) Nr. 35. Inscription: None R. Brilliant. Roman Art (London: Phaidon Dating: 40-50 CE (after Kleiner) 1974) Fig. VI.25. Bibliography: Kleiner IV, 104-107 Nr. 6. 81) Ash chest of Helius H. Fuhrmann, "Archaologische Grabungen Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database und Funde in Italien und Libyen" AA [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI 56 (1941) 547-554 Fig. 86-89. L_06_02317.jpg;$Sinn_00522.jpg;PH00109 R. Romanelli, "Due nuove sculture funerarie 01&nr=3] del Museo Nazionale Romano," Le Currently Housed: Berlin, Staatliche Arti 4 (1941-1942) 163-171 Pl. 51- Museum. No Inv. nr. 52. Provenance: Unknown Reekmans, 29. Material: Marble L. Byvanck-Quarles Van Ufford, BABesch Measurements: Unknown 30 (1960) 86 Fig.7. Inscription: CIL VI 2317; D(is) M(anibus) / S. Aurigemma, The Baths of Diocletian and Helio Afin(iano) / pub(lico) aug(urum) / the Museo Nazionale Romano, Sextia Psyche / coniugi b(ene) m(erenti) de Itinerari dei musei, gallerie e se monumenti d'Italia 78 (Rome: Dating: Not Available

217

Bibliography: (Odense, Denmark: Odense G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study University Press, 1977) 11 Nr. II. of the motifs used to decorate the grave altars, ash chests and 83) Ash altar of Sex. Caesonius sarcophagi made in Rome in the Apollonius early empire (To the mid second Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 998 century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University Currently Housed: Vatican Museums, of London, 1978) 23 Nr. 58. Galleria Lapidaria. No Inv. nr. B. de Montfaucon, L'antiquité expliquée et Provenance: Unknown représentée en figures (Paris, F. Material: Marble Delaulne, 1719) V Pl. CXXIII. Measurements: Unknown Kӧnigliche Museum zu Berlin: Bescreibung Inscription: CIL VI 7525; Dis Manibus / der antiken Skulpturen (Berlin 1981) Sex(ti) Caesoni / Apolloni / v(ixit) a(nnos) Nr. 1125. LXXI posuer(unt) / Callistus / Protogenes / B. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door: A Symmachus / Heracla / heredes lib(erti) / Common Symbolic Motif within patrono b(ene) m(erenti) Roman Sepulchral Sculpture Dating: Unknown (Odense, Denmark: Odense Bibliography: University Press, 1977) 7 Nr. II. Altmann, 141 Nr. 158 Fig. 118. Amelung I, 194-195 Nr. 34 P1. 22. 82) Ash altar of C. Iulius Andronicus Rossbach, 37-39. Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 74.247 - 74.249 Currently Housed: Rome, Museo 84) Grave altar of Vernasia Cyclas Nazionale delle Terme. Inv. Nr. 297193. Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Provenance: Rome [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Si Material: Marble nn_00084.jpg;PH0010722] Measurements: 0.36m X 0.465m X 0.29m Currently Housed: London, British Inscription: CIL VI 5326; Dis Manibus / Museum, Townley Collection Inv.nr. GR C(aius) Iulius Hermes / vix(it) ann(is) 1805.7-3.158 (Sculpture 2379). XXXIIII m(ensibus) V / dieb(us) XIII / Provenance: Rome, Italy C(aius) Iulius Andronicus / conlibertus Material: Marble fec(it) / bene merenti de se Measurements: h. 0.505m Dating: 2nd half of 1st century CE (after Inscription: CIL VI 08769 (p 3463) = CIL Haarløv) . 11, *00155c = Sinn 00084; Vernasiae / Bibliography: Cycladi / coniugi optimae / vix(it) ann(os) G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study XXVII / Vitalis Aug(usti) l(ibertus) / of the motifs used to decorate the scrib(a) cub(iculariorum) / f(idelissimae) grave altars, ash chests and a(mantissimae) p(ientissimae) sarcophagi made in Rome in the Dating: First century CE (after Altmann) early empire (To the mid second Bibliography: century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study of London, 1978) 26 Nr. 66. of the motifs used to decorate the Altmann, 153-154 Nr. 184 Fig. 126. grave altars, ash chests and B. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door: A sarcophagi made in Rome in the Common Symbolic Motif within early empire (To the mid second Roman Sepulchral Sculpture century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University of London, 1978) 25 Nr. 65.

218

Altmann, 113 Nr. 106. CIL 6, 09973.

85) Ash altar of T. Aquiline! Pelorus 87) Altar of M. Antonius Asclepiades Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Si [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI nn_00277.jpg;PH0010794] L_06_11965_1.jpg;$CIL_06_11965_2.jpg;$ Currently Housed: Broadlands, Hampshire CIL_06_11965_3.jpg] Provenance:Unknown Currently Housed: Rome, museum Material: Marble unknown Measurements: Unknown Provenance: Unknown Inscription: CIL VI 9973; T(ito) Aquilio / Material: Unknown T(iti) l(iberto) Peloro / vestiario de hor(reis) Measurements:Unknown / Volusianis / Plotia Flora / coniug(i) b(ene) Inscription: CIL VI 11965 (p 3509) = CIL merent(i) 06, 34048 = Epigraphica-1953; Dis Dating: Unknown Manib(us) M(arcus) Antonius Asclepiades / Bibliography: Pallantis l(ibertus) fecit sibi et / Iuliae G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study Philumen(a)e / oniu(gi) carissimae // of the motifs used to decorate the Dis Manibus M(arcus) Antonius grave altars, ash chests and Asclepiades / Pallantis l(ibertus) fecit sibi et sarcophagi made in Rome in the / Iuliae Philumen(a)e / coniugi carissimae. early empire (To the mid second Dating:Unknown century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University Bibliography: of London, 1978) 23 Nr. 60. CIL VI 11965. A. Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain (Cambridge: Cambridge 88) Altar of Tiberius Claudius Vitalis Univer Press, 1882) 219 Nr. 8. Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 772; 773 Altmann, 57 Nr. 14. Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, B. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door: A Sala delle Muse. Inv. nr. 313. Common Symbolic Motif within Provenance: attained by Vatican from Roman Sepulchral Sculpture Carlo Napoglione 18th century CE (Odense, Denmark: Odense Material: Marble University Press, 1977) 18 Nr. 11. Measurements: 0.74m X 0.77m X 0.69m Inscription: CIL VI 15314; Ti(berio) 86) The Altar of Titus Aquilius Pelorus Claudio V[ictor]i Antonia[no] / divi Claudi Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database lib(erto) v(ixit) a(nnos) V / Claudia Nebris [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Si mater Claudius Herma pa[ter] / filio nn_00618.jpg;PH0010945&nr=2]. piissi[mo] / fecerunt / Ti(berius) Claudius Currently Housed: Rome,Unknown Philetus p(ater) f(ilio) piissimo / et Claudia Provenance: Unknown Calliste m(ater) sibi et suis p(osteris) Material: Unknown Dating: 60-75 CE (after Kleiner) Measurements: Unknown Bibliography: Inscription: CIL VI 10709 = Sinn 00618; Kleiner IV, 123-125, Nr. 17. D(is) M(anibus) / T(ito) Aelio / Aug(usti) O. Jahn, AZ I(1860) 97 Pl. 141. lib(erto) / Felici / coniugi / b(ene) m(erenti) Altmann, 267-268 Fig. 203-203a. f(ecit) G. Lippold, Skulpturen Des Vaticanischen Dating:Unknown Museums, Band III, 1 (Berlin : De Bibliography:

219

Gruyter, 1936) 58-60 Nr. 5152 Pl. B. de Montfaucon, L'antiquité expliquée et 31-32. représentée en figures (Paris, F. P. Boyance "Le Disque di Brindisi e Delaulne, 1719) V Pl. CXXII. l'apotheose de Semele," REA 44 Altmann, 171 Nr. 224. (1942) 202-203. B. Haarløv, The Half-Open Door: A P. Boyance, "Dionysos et Semele," Common Symbolic Motif within RendPontAcc 38 (1965-1966) 100- Roman Sepulchral Sculpture 101 Fig. 9. (Odense, Denmark: Odense Cumont, 412-413 Fig 84. University Press, 1977) 6, Nr. III. R. Turcan, Les Sarcophages romains à représentations dionysiaques. Essai de chronologie et d'histoire religieuse,BEFAR 210 (Paris: 90) Altar of Varia Amoebis Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database d'Athènes et de Rom, 1966) 369. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Si Helbig I, 63-63 Nr. 81. nn_00299.jpg;PH0010803] T. Ritti, Immagini onomastiche sui Currently Housed: Rome, Museum monumenti sepolcrali di età Unknown. No Inv. nr. imperiale (Roma : Accademia Provenance:Unknown nazionale dei Lincei, 1977) 278-279 Material: Marble Nr. 24 Pl. I Fig. 2. Measurements: Unknown Inscription: CIL VI 28351; Dis Manibus / 89) Grave altar of C. Domitius Verus sacrum / Variae / Amoebe / vix(it) ann(is) Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database XV / mens(i)b(us) IIII / dieb(us) XVIII http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CIL Dating: Unknown _06_16979.jpg Bibliography: Currently Housed: Villa Albani. No Inv. CIL 6, 28351; nr. BullComm 14 (1886), 334. Provenance:Unknown Material: Marble 91) Altar of Gaius Cornelius Philo Measurements: Unknown Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.751 Inscription: CIL VI 16979; C(ai) Domiti Currently Housed: Palermo, C(ai) f(ilii) / Pal(atina) Veri / vix(it) annis Archaeological Museum, No Inv. nr. XXXXII / mensibus VII dieb(us) XII / Provenance: Campobello di Mazara Volussia Severa / coniux marito / optimo et / Material: Marble indulgentissimo Measurements: Unknown Dating: Unknown Inscription: CIL X 7215; D(is) M(anibus) / Bibliography: C(aio) Cornelio / Philoni / C(aius) Cornelius G.M. Davies, Fashion in the grave : A study Glaphyr(us) / patronus l(iberto) b(ene) of the motifs used to decorate the m(erenti) f(ecit) grave altars, ash chests and Dating: Unknown sarcophagi made in Rome in the Bibliography: early empire (To the mid second Reekmans, 30 note 1. century A.D.) (PhD Diss., University Koch-Sichtermann, Nr. 51. Fig. 41. of London, 1978) 23 Nr. 59. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften und

220

der Georg-Augusts-Universitat, Measurements: 1.21m X 1.02m X 0.75m (Gottingen1865) 443; Inscription: CIL VI 28960; D(is) M(anibus) Atti Della Academia Dei Lincei / M(arco) Vinicio / Casto / Vinicia / Anno CCLXXXIII (Roma 1886) Glaphyra / filio bene / merenti // M(arcus) 455; 456-457. Vinicius / Corinthus // Viniciae / Tyche et Epigrafia i numismàtica a l'epistolari sibi fecit // M(arcus) Vinicius Corinthus / d'Antonio Agustín (1551-1563), Viniciae Tyche et sibi fecit // M(arcus) [http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct= Vinicius Corinthus / Viniciae Tyche et sibi j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1& fecit // M(arcus) Vinicius Corinthus / sqi=2&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http Viniciae Tyche et sibi fecit %3A%2F%2Fwww.tdx.cat%2Fbitstr CIL 06, 28960a; Dis Manibus / M(arcus) eam%2Fhandle%2F10803%2F5551 Vinicius Faustus fecit sibi poste/risque suis %2Fjcm10de17.pdf%3Fsequence%3 et M(arco) Vinicio Alci/mo patrono bene D10&ei=i75uUZO6O4W5igLd44Hg merenti / aedic(u)la(m) columbarum IIII DQ&usg=AFQjCNHT8J957W6pDF Dating: 75-85 CE (after Kleiner) Gy9UVeuZg9GXO58A&sig2=edz5 Bibliography: vqmJIJEwb5XwQXbuoA&bvm=bv. Altmann, 272. 45368065,d.cGE]; L. Milani, Il Reale Museo Archeologico di L. A. Muratori, Novus thesaurus veterum Firenze (Florence 1912) 324 Nr. inscriptionum in praecipuis 147 Pl. LVIII. earumdem collectionibus Tomus Mostra augustea della romanita, catalogo Terius (Mediolani MDCCXL) (Roma : C. Colombo, 193) 600 Nr. mdxxxii. 12. Felletti Maj, 319; 350 Pl. LXI Fig. 150. 92) Altar of Caius Sentius Paezo Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database 94) Altar of Tiberius Claudius Dionysius [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=PH0 Photo:Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database 006165;PH0006166;PH0006167] [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI Currently Housed: Museum unknown L_06_15003.jpg] Provenance: Unknown Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Vaticana, Material: Unknown Museo Gregoriano Profano, Section VII. Measurements: Unknown Inv. nr. 9836. Inscription: CIL IX 4832; Dis Man(ibus) / Provenance: Rome, Tor Sapienza C(ai) Senti Paezontis / Sentia Lasciva / Material: Marble coniug(i) suo fec(it) et / sibi vix(it) an(nos) / Measurements: 0.97m X 0.46m X 0.32m XXII Inscription: CIL VI 15003; Diis(!) Manibus Dating: Unknown / Ti(beri) Claudi Dionysi / fecit Claudia Bibliography: Prepontis / patrono bene merenti / sibi et CIL IX 4832. suis / posterisque eorum Dating: 40-50 CE (after Kleiner) 93) Altar of Vinicia Tyche Bibliography: Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. oA Kleiner IV, 107-109 Nr. 7. Currently Housed: Florence, Museo O. Benndorf and R. Schone, Die antiken Archeologico, terrazza above giardino, Inv. bildwerke des Lateranensischen nr. 13831. museums (Leipzig, Breitkopf & Provenance: Rome, Villa Medici, giardino. Härtel, 1867)108 Nr. 184. Material: Marble Altmann, 234 Fig. 188.

221

95) Altar of ]onnlia Delicata Photo: Kleiner Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Vaticani, [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI Museo Gregoriano Profano, Section I. Inv. L_06_33796.jpg] nr. 10533. Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Provenance: Rome, Via Appia between the Nazionale delle Terme, giardino, aiuola II. 4th and 5th milestones. Provenance: Rome, Piazza S. Silvestro, from Material: Marble the Palazzo delle Poste. No Inv. nr. Measurements: 0.91m X 0.74m X 0.605m Material: Marble Inscription: CIL VI 2911; Dis Manibus / Measurements: 0.71m X 0.55m X 0.485m Q(uinto) Flavio Critoni coniugi bene / Inscription: CIL VI 33796 = MNR-01-07- merenti et Q(uinto) Flavio Proculo / militi 01, p 59;[T]onnae Delicatae / coh(ortis) XII urb(anae) |(centuria) / Bassi [Se]verae(?) coniugi piissim(ae) / [pl]ura filio pientissimo / Iunia Procula fecit meritae vix(it) ann(os) XXI / [Ho]sius Dating: 98-117 CE (Kleiner) Aug(usti) l(ibertus) tabularius / Bibliography: [c]ontub(ernali) fecit sibi suisq(ue) lib(ertis) L. Canina, "Topografia della via Appia," / [li]bertab(usque) posterisq(ue) eorum. AdI (1852) 265 Nr. 23. Dating: 50 CE (after Kleiner) L. Canina, La prima parte della via Appia I Bibliography: (Rome: Bertinelli, 1853) 116. NSc. (1879) 322 Nr. 219. O. Benndorf and R.Schone, Die antiken BullComm (1880) 37. bildwerke des Lateranensischen Kleiner IV, 110-111 Nr. 9. museums (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1867) 92-93 Nr. 151 Pl. XVII 96) Altar of Gaius Crixius Secundus Fig. 3. Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$CI 98) Altar of Iulia Saturnina and Gaius L_06_38264.jpg] Sulpicius Clytus Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Photo: Kleiner Capitolini, Museo Capitolino, Galleria di Currently Housed: Copenhagen, Ny Congiunzione, staircase leading to the Carlsberg Glyptotek, no. 797. Inv. nr. 861 Palazzo dei Conservatori. No Inv. nr. Provenance: Rome, Barberini Collection; Provenance: Rome, Via Flaminia; later, Sciarra Collection; later Musei Vaticani, Rome, Antiquario Comunale. Galleria Lapidaria Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements: 1.065m X 0.52m X 0.49m Measurements: Unknown Inscription: CIL VI 38264; Dis Manibus Inscription: CIL VI 20667; D(is) M(anibus) C(aio) Crixio / C(ai) f(ilio) Secundo Crixia / / Iuliae C(ai) f(iliae) Saturninae et / C(aio) Secundina patrono / optimo et coniugi Sulpicio Clyto et / memoriae Iuliae Musari / indulgenti/ssimo bene de se merito. Iulia Heuresis et Sulpicius / Clytus b(ene) Dating:70-80 CE (after Kleiner) m(erenti) fecerunt Bibliography: Dating: Trajanic, 100-110 (after Kleiner) A. Pasqui, NSc (1910) 422. Bibliography: G. Gatti, BullComm (1910) 250. F. Poulsen, Catalogue of Ancient Sculpture Kleiner IV, 20. in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydiche, 97) Altar of Quintus Flavius Crito and 1951) 569-570 Nr. 797. Quintus Flavius Proculus Kleiner IV, 180-181 Nr.56.

222

99) Altar of Publius Vitellius Sucessus 101) Sarcophagus of Cateruius, Photo: Kleiner Photo: DAI Inst. Neg 60.1406. Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Currently Housed: Talentino, Cathedrale. Galleria delle Statue, no. 411 Inv. nr. 546. No Inv. nr. Provenance: Formerly Rome, Collection Provenance: Unknown Mattei (Villa Celimontana). Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements: Unknown Measurements: 0.945m X 0.665m X 0.39m Inscription: Unknown Inscription: CIL VI 29088a; Dis Manibus / Dating: 380-410 CE (after Reekmans) P(ubli) Vitelli Sucessi / Vitellia Cleopatra / Bibliography: uxor bene merenti / fecit R. Garrucci, Storia della arte cristiana nei Dating: 75-100 CE (Kleiner) primi otto secoli della chiesa, (Prato: Bibliography: G. Guasti, 1872-1881) 13-14 Pl. Kleiner IV, 43. 303, 1-3; Pl. 304, 1. E. Gerhard et. al., Beschreibung der Stadt V. Schultze, Archaologische Studien, Rom (Stuttgart: Cotta 1842) 181 Nr. (Wien, W. Braumüller, 1880) 106- 54. 107 Nr. 3. Altmann, 192-193 Nr. 259 Fig. 154. O. Pelka, Altchristliche Ehedenkmaler, Amelung II, 624-626 Nr. 411 Pl. 52. (Strassburg, J.H.E. Heitz 1901) 125 Helbig I, 112 Nr. 146. Nr. 17. Toynbee, 267. J. Wilpert, Sarcofagi (Roma : Pontificio istituto di archeologia cristiana, 100) Ash Altar of Sextus Allidius 1929- 1932), 90, Pl. 72, 73 1. 2; 94, 1; 291 Hymenaeus Pl. II. Photo: Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database M. Lawrence, Art Bull., 10 (1927-8) 11-12. [http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/bilder.php?bild=$Si Fig. 13 and 14. nn_00545.jpg;PH0010914] M. Lawrence, Art Bull., 32 (1932) 174 Nr. Currently Housed: Copenhagen, Ny 99. Carlsberg Glyptotek, Inv.nr.798 A.C. Soper, "The Latin Style on Christian Provenance: Rome Sarcophagi of the Fourth Material: Marble Century," Art Bull., 19 (1937) 167 Measurements: Unknown Nr. 57. Inscription: CIL VI 6828; Sex(tus) Allidius F. Gerke, Die christlichen Sarkophage / Symphor(us) fec(it) / sibi et Sex(to) Allidio der vorkonstantinischen Zeit, ( / Hymenaeo fil(io) / et Allidiae AttiCIL/lae Berlin, W. de Gruyter & Co., 1940) sorori et Al/lidiae Hymnidi / uxori 354 Nr. VII. Dating: 2nd Century CE (after Poulsen) G. Bovini, Bull. Comm. Arch., 72 (1946-8) Bibliography: 112-3. Altmann, 153 Nr. 183 Fig 125. G. Bovini, I sarcofagi paleocristiani; Lawrence, AJA (1958) 276. determinazione della loro F. Poulsen, Catalogue of Ancient Sculpture cronologia mediante l'analisi dei in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek ritratti. (Città del Vaticano, Società (Copenhagen: Nielsen & Lydiche, amici catacombe presso Pontificio 1951) 570 Nr. 798. Istituto di archeologia cristiana, Toynbee, 266. Roma, 1949) 242-5 Fig. 260; 341-2 Nr. 171. Biographical Sarcophagi

223

102) Christian marriage sarcophagus Currently Housed: Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Photo: foto Marburg 42884, D-DAI-ROM- Inv. nr. 1338 60.1709 Provenance: Isola Sacra Currently Housed: Arles, Musee lapidaire. Material: Marble Inv. nr. FAN.92.00.2482 Measurements:2.14m X 0.86m Provenance: France, in the north near St.- Inscription: None Honorat-des-Alyscamps, 1822 Dating: 180 CE (Turcan and Koch. Material: Marble Bibliography: Measurements: 2.06m X 0.62m X 0.76m G. Calza, Necropoli del porto di Roma Inscription: None nell'Isola Sacra( Roma : Libreria Dating: late 4th century CE dello Stato, 1940) 195-7 Fig. 99; Fig Bibliography: 100. B. Christern-Briesenick et al., Repertorium R. Calza, Scavi di Ostia IX, I Ritratti II der christlich-antiken Sarkophage (Roma : Istituto poligrafico dello III. Frankreich, Algerien, Tunesien Stato, Libreria dello Stato, 1978) Nr. (Wiesbaden : Steiner, 2003) 37 Nr. 45 Pl. XXXIV. 51 Pl. 18,1-3. R. Turcan, Les sarcophages romains a representations dionysiaques (Paris, 103) Sarcophagus of Aurelia Eutychia E. de Boccard, 1966) 74, 77; Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 64.2027. M. Honroth, Stadtrӧmische Girlanden Currently Housed: Ferrara, Palazzo (Vienna, sterr. Ar h ologis hes Diamanti. No Inv. nr. Inst., 1971) 61; 90 Nr. 113.' Provenance: Italy, Voghiera P. Krantz, RM 84 (1977) 362; 364 Pl . 164, Material:Marble 1. Measurements:2.435m X 1.10m X 1.22m A.M. McCann, Roman Sarcophagi in the Inscription: CIL V 2390; D(is) M(anibus) // Metropolitan Museum of Art (New Aur(elia) Eutychia / sibi et M(arco) Aurelio York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, / Marin(o) n(atione) Syr(o) veter(ano) / ex 1978), 126 -127 note 161. opt(ione) patr(ono) et marit(o) / Koch-Sichtermann, 224; 230; 232; 260 Nr. pientiss(imo) cum q(uo) v(ixit) ann(os) / 27. XLIII ben(e) m(erenti) viv(a) pos(uit) / iub(ente) patrono ex pec(unia) ipsius / hanc 105) Sarcophagus of Balbinus arc(am) si q(uis) post exc(essum) Photo: D-DAI-ROM-68.948 - 68.957; utro/rumq(ue) ap(eruerit) inf(eret) HS 72.481; 72.483 - 72.487; 73.409 m(ilia) n(ummum) fisco / in f(ronte) .Arch.Fot.Gall.Mus.Vaticani XXXI-16-3; p(edes) XXXX in a(gro) p(edes) XXXX XXXI-16-17; XXXI-16-18; XXXI-16-31; Dating:Unknown XXXI-16-39; XXXI-16-43; XXXI-16-49; Bibliography: XXXI-64-1. H. Gabelmann, Die Werkstattgruppen der Currently Housed: Rome, Italy, oberitalischen Sarkophage (Bonn: Catacombe di Pretestato. No Inv. nr. Habelt, 1973) 216 Nr. 65 Pl. 32-33; Provenance: Not Available Pl. 34, 1-2. Material: Marble Measurements: Not Available 104) Garland Sarcophagus with a Inscription:None Married Couple Dating: third century CE. Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 69.843 - 846 Bibliography:

224

B. Andreae, Sarkophage mit Darstellungen P. Zanker, The Mask of Socrates: the image aus dem Menschenleben. Die of the intellectual in antiquity ( römischen Jagdsarkophage, ASR 1, 2 Berkeley, California: University of (Berlin Mann,1980) 24 Fig. 24; 28- California Press, 1995) 263-264 Fig. 29. 151. Koch-Sichtermann, 101-201 Fig. 100. Wrede, 60; 64; 65 Pl. 15,1. 107) Marriage Sarcophagus Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 73.115 Currently Housed: Frascati, Italy, Villa Parisi. No Inv. nr. 106) Brother’s Sarcophagus Provenance: Villa Parisi or Villa Taverna Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 57.2062; 59.1930 Material: Marble - 59.1935; 71.401 - 71.408; 71.398 - 71.400 Measurements: 2.40m X 1.25m X 1.08m Currently Housed: Naples, Italy, Museo Inscription: None Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli. Inv. Nr. Dating: end of 2nd century CE (190 CE 6603. after Reinsberg) Provenance: Farnese collection Bibliography: Material: Marble Rossbach, 138-139. Measurements: 0.255m X 0.117m J. Overbeck, Hera, Poseidon, Demeter, Inscription: None und Kora (Leipzig, 1873-1878) Nr. Dating: 260 CE 131. Bibliography: O. Benndorf, Wiener Vorlegeblätter für B.C. Ewald, Der Philosoph als Leitbild. archaeologische bungen, 1888, Ikonographische Untersuchungen an mit unterstütsung des K.K. römischen Sarkophagreliefs, (Mainz: Ministeriums für ultus und P. von Zabern, 1999) 200 Nr. G 9. Unterricht (Wien, H lder, 1889) Pl. K. Fittschen, JdI 94 (1979) 589-590. 9, 2 a-c. H. Gabelmann, Antike Audienz- und S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et Tribunalszenen (Darmstadt: romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 46, 1-3. 1984) 177 -178. J. Brendel, Aus deutschen Kolonien im Geyer, 369 note 1; 4; 5. Kutschurganer Gebiet, Goette II, 86; 161 Nr. S 32 Pl. 73,4; 74,2; geschichtliches und volkskundliches 84,3. (Stuttgart, Ausland und Heimat N. Himmelmann, Typologische Verlags-Aktiensgesellschaft, 1930 Untersuchungen an römischen 1930) 206 Nr. 12 Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. G. Rodenwaldt ber den Stilwandel in der Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Mainz (am antoninischen Kunst (Berlin : Verl. Rhein) : Zabern 1973) 9 Pl. 3. der Akad. der Wiss., 1935) 3 Pl. 1. N. Himmelmann-Wildschütz, "Sarkophag Cumont, 447 Fig. 3. eines gallienischen Konsuls," in: D. Levi, ASAtene 24-26 (1946-48) 265 Fig. Festschrift für Friedrich, ed. F. Matz 11, and N. Himmelmann (Mainz: Reekmans, 40 Fig. 3. Zabern, 1962) 111-124. Brilliant, 157-158 Fig. 86 note 3.136. Koch-Sichtermann, 102-103 note 52. N. Himmelmann, Typologische P. Kranz, RM 102 (1995) 393-394. Untersuchungen an römischen C. Reinsberg, RM 102 (1995) 360-361. Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4.

225

Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Mainz (am 108) Annona Sarcophagus Rhein) : Zabern 1973) 8 Pl. 6. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 767 B. Andreae and H. Jung, "Vorläufige Currently Housed: Rome, Museo tabellarische Übersicht über die Nazionale Romano. Inv. no. 40799 Zeitstellung und Provenance:Rome, Vigna Aquari near Werkstattzugehörigkeit von 250 Porta Latina, 1877 römischen Prunksarkophagen des 3. Material: Marble Jhs. n.Chr." AA (1977) S. 434. Measurements: 0.208m X 0.86m X 0.90m L. Ciarlo, Villa Borghese e Frascati Inscription: None (Frascati: Lazio Ieri e Oggi, 1978) 72 Dating: 280CE (after Reinsberg) note S. 51. Bibliography: Geyer, 383 Fig. 84; 385 Fig. 89; 387 Fig. MNR I 8, 1, 46ff. Nr.II 1 Abb. 107 note 7. Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3095. G. Koch, AA (1979) 242 Fig. 70. A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale T. Hӧls her, The Language of Images in Romano. Le Sculture 1, 8. 1 (Roma : Roman Art, trans. Anthony De Luca, 1985) 46 Nr. II 1. Snodgrass and Anne-Marie Kunzel- Helbig III Cat. no. 2122. Snodgrass (Cambridge: Cambridge Koch-Sichtermann, 102; 257 Fig. 102. University Press, 2004) 288-289 note Goette II, 163 Nr. 46 Pl. 77, 1. 2. 21. LIMC V , 486 Nr. 84 s.v. N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and Homonoia.Concordia (T. Hӧls her). Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 P. Kranz, RM 102 (1995) 394 Pl.103. (1981): 51 Pl. 9 note 10. 11. M. Sapelli, Museo Nazionale Romano. Arte Koch-Sichtermann, 99- 100 Fig. 21 Nr. 1; tardoantica in Palazzo Massimo alle 255; 260 Pl. 94. Terme (Milan: Electa, 1998)38 Nr. Reinsberg I, 301 note 6; 308 Fig. 82. 15. LIMC III, 297 Nr. 17 s.v. Clementia (T. Reinsberg IV, 216 Nr. 82 Pl. 67, 1-3. 68, 1- Hӧls her). 3. 69. 123,6. Goette II, 160 Nr. 6 Pl. 71, 3. LIMC V , 485 Nr. 74 s.v. 109)Marriage Sarcophagus Homonoia/Con ordia (T. Hӧls her). Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. Alinari 1308 K. Fittschen, JdI 106 (1991) 300. Currently Housed: Florenz, Italien, F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf Galleria degli Uffizi. Inv. no. 82. stadtrömischen historischen Relief: Provenance: Villa Medici, Rome Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, Material:Marble Funktion und Benennung (Mainz: Measurements: l 2.43m X h 0.94m X Philipp von Zabern, 1995 1995) 96; b1.10m 110 Nr. 38 III. Inscription: None K. R. Krierer, Sieg und Niederlage : Dating:Antonine, 180CE (after Reinsberg) Untersuchungen physiognomischer Bibliography: und mimischer Phänomene in G. A. Mansuelli, Galleria degli Uffizi. Le Kampfdarstellungen der römischen sculture I (Rome: Istituto poligrafico Plastik (Wien : Phoibos, 1995) 195 dello Stato, Libreria dello Stato, Pl. 157; 158, 508. 1958) Nr. 253. Reinsberg III, 253; 259 Pl. 62, 4. 5. Koch-Sichtermann, 99-100; 107-108; 260. Wrede, 21; 23 Pl. 1, 3. Reinsberg IV, 194 Nr. 12 Pl. 1, 4; 9, 3. 4; 10, 1-9; 11, 1. 2; 12, 3-5; 124, 3.

226

W. Amelung, Fürhrer durch die Antiken in Snodgrass and Anne-Marie Kunzel- Florenz (München: F. Bruckmann, Snodgrass (Cambridge: Cambridge 1897) 18 Nr. 18. University Press, 2004), 288 Fig. 22. G.Rodenwalt, G. Űber den Stilwandel in der N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and antoninischen Kunst (Berlin: Walter Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 de Gruyter, 1935) 1ff. (1981) 51 Pl. 8 Fig. 8. S.Riccobono, Capitolium 12 (1937) 577. Koch-Sichtermann, 99-100; 107; 260. Cumont, 477 Fig. 3. Reinsberg I, 308 Fig. 81. M. Borda, Lares. La familiare romana nei LIMC III, 297 Nr. 17 s.v. Clementia (T. documenti archeologici e letterari Hӧls her). (Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia R. Amedick, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ Cristiana, 1947) 29 Fig. 7; 244. Bd. 1. Die Sarkophage mit G. Hartlaub, Zeitschrift für Kunst 4 (1950) Darstellungen aus dem 38 Fig. 40. Menschenleben. 4, Vita privata / G. Becatti, BdA 36 (1951)3 Fig. 4. bearb. von Rita Amedick (Berlin: Mann, 1991) 129 Nr. 49. E.P. Loeffler, ArtB 39 (1957) 1. LIMC VI, 643 Nr. 39 s.v. Moirai (St. di G. A. Mansuelli, Galleria degli Uffizi. Le Angeli). sculture I (Rome: Istituto poligrafico C. Reinsberg Ehe, Hetärentum und dello Stato, Libreria dello Stato, Knabenliebe im antiken 1958) 235 Nr. 253 Fig 253 a-c. Griechenland (München: Beck, Reekmans, 40 Fig. 11. 1993) 141f. P.A. Fevrier, MEFRA 71 (1959) 306 Fig. 4. F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf N. Himmelmann,Sarkophag eines stadtrömischen historischen Reliefs : gallienischen Konsuls, Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, (Mainz : Von Zabern, 1962) 120 Funktion und Benennung (Mainz : Pl. 36, 1 Philipp von Zabern, 1995 1995) 96; Brilliant, 157-158 Fig 3.135. 110 Nr. 38II. H. Marrou, Mousikos aner. Étude sur les S. Dimas, Untersuchungen zur Themenwahl scènes de la vie intellectuelle und Bildgestaltung auf römischen figurant sur les monuments Kindersarkophagen (Münster : funéraires romains (Rome: Scriptorium, 1998) 66f. 98f. "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 1964) Schultze, 57-58; 112 AS5. 39-40 Nr. 12. Reinsberg III, 262-263 Pl. 60, 1-7; 61, 1. E. Panofsky, Grabplastik : Vier Reinsberg IV, 194 Nr. 12 Pl. 1, 4; 9, 3.4; 10, Vorlesungen über ihren 1-9; 11. 1. 2; 12, 3-5; 124, 3. Bedeutungswandel von Alt-Ägypten bis Bernini (Köln : DuMont 110) Fragment of the Front of a Schauberg, 1964) 35 Fig. 97 a-c. Sarcophagus, dextrarum iunctio E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 28.3895. es muss nicht immer Marmor sein: Currently Housed: London, British Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit Museum. Inv. nr. GR 1805.7-3.143 (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 410 Provenance: Townley Collection. Fig. 17 Fig 10 a.b. Purchased by Charles Townley in Rome in T. Hӧls her, The Language of Images in 1774 from sculptor Carlo Albacini. Roman Art, trans. Anthony Material: Marble, likely Preconnesian Measurements: 0.984m X 0.78m X 0.11m

227

Inscription: None E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: Dating: 170-180 CE (after Koch) es muss nicht immer Marmor sein: Bibliography: Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit B. Cavaceppi, Raccolta D'Antiche Statue (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 422 Busti Teste Cognite Ed Altre Fig. 62 Sculture Antiche Scelte Vol I (Roma: Kranz II, 361 Fig. 77. Salomoni,1768) Nr.35. Koch-Sichtermann, 102 Fig. 48. Rossbach,18. Reinsberg I, 291 Fig. 5; 302 Fig. 50. G. von Lucken, Das Alterum 2 (1956), 35. Goette II, 159 Nr. S 1 Pl. 71, 1. Reekmans, 22. Wrede, 47 Fig. 363; 48 Pl. 7, 3. B.F. Cook, The Townley Marbles (London : Reinsberg IV, 204-205 Nr. 39 Pl. 53, 2; 54, Published for the Trustees of the 1-5; 55, 1. 2. British Museum by British Museum Publications, 1985) 20. 112) Sarcophagus of a general and Reinsberg IV,199 Nr. 26 Pl. 63, 1; 124, 6. marriage scene S. Walker, Memorials to the Roman Dead Photo: Foto Oehler 26/1953/6+7 (London : Published for the Trustees Inst.Neg.Rom 42.1180 Inst.Neg.Rom of the British Museum by British 42.1187 Inst.Neg.Rom 42.1136 Museum Publications, 1985) 48-9 Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Fig. 39. Capitolini, Centrale Montemartini. Inv. nr. Walker, Catalog of Roman Sarcofagi, 2785 (London: British Museum Provenance: Rome, Italy, Via Crotone, Publications 1990) Nr. 4 Pl. 2. 1941, Museo Nuovo Capitolino Material: Marble 111) Sarcophagus front with dextrarum Measurements: 0.88m X 1.06m iunctio Inscription: None Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 71,986; G. Fittschen- Dating: middle Antonine, 190 CE (after Badura Fitt69-18-10. Reinsberg) Currently Housed: Orvieto, Italien, IT, Bibliography: Museo dell’ Opera del Duomo. In . no. C. Pietrangeli, Capitolium 18 (1943) 15-16 71.986 note 8. Provenance: Unknown C. Pietrangeli, BCom 72 (1946 - 48) 227 Material: Marble note 24. Measurements:1.94m X 0.71m S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in Inscription:None Roman Art (Rome : American Dating: Antonine, 160 - 170 CE (after Academy in Rome, 1955) 163 Fig. 2. Reinsberg) Wrede, 21 Fig. 70 Pl. 4, 3. Bibliography: Koch-Sichtermann, 102 Fig. 48. L. Fumi, Orvieto. Note storiche e biografiche (Roma : Multigrafica 113) Military Sarcophagus Editrice, 1891) 25 with notes. Photo: DAI neg. 62.126; Alinari 18811 U. Tarchi, L'arte etrusco-romana Currently Housed: Mantua, Italy, Palazzo nell'Umbria e nella Sabina I (Milan: Ducale. No Inv. nr. Fratelli Treves, 1936) Pl. 240. Provenance: Unknown T. Terracina and C.M. Bartella, Orvieto Material: Marble (Orvieto: Orvieto, 1967) note 7. Measurements: 0.242m X 0.85m X0.91m Inscription: None

228

Dating: second century CE, 170CE (after E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: Reinsberg) es muss nicht immer Marmor sein: Bibliography: Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit G. Labus, Museo della Reale Accademia di (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 410. Mantova III (Mantova: Arco e 412. 422 -423 Fig. 64 Fig. 11 b. Negretti, 1837) 301 Pl. 53. Geyer, 372; 387 note 2. Rossbach, 153. A. McCann, Roman sarcophagi in the J. Overbeck, Hera, Poseidon, Demeter, Metropolitan Museum of Art (New und Kora (Leipzig, 1873-1878) Nr. York : The Museum, 1978) 125 Nr. 131. 158. Dütschke, Nr. 643. T. Hӧls her, The Language of Images in O. Benndorf, Wiener Vorlegeblätter für Roman Art, trans. Anthony archaeologische bungen, 1888, Snodgrass and Anne-Marie Kunzel- mit unterstütsung des K.K. Snodgrass (Cambridge: Cambridge Ministeriums für ultus und University Press, 2004) 288-189 note Unterricht (Wien, H lder, 1889) Pl. 23. 1 a-d N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and G.E. Rizzo, RM 21 (1906) 284 Pl. 14, 2. Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et (1981) 51 Pl. 9 note b. 12. 13. romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Koch-Sichtermann, 99-100 Fig. 21; 260 54, 1-4. note 93. A. Levi, Dedalo 7 (1926/27) 222-223 with Kranz I, 27. notes. Reinsberg I, 301. M. Guarducci, BCom 55 (1928) 212 note 2. LIMC III, 619 Nr. 78 s.v. A. Levi, Sculture greche e romane del Dioskuroi/Castores (F. Gury). Palazzo Ducale di Mantova (Roma: LIMC III, 297 Nr. 17 s.v. Clementia (T. Biblioteca d'arte editrice, 1931) 86- Hӧls her). 87 Nr. 186 Pl. 95-98. LIMC IV, 615-616 Nr. 350 s.v. Helios/Sol M. Gütschow, Das Museum der (C. Letta). Prätextat-Katakombe (Citt del Goette II, 159 Nr. 3. Vaticano: Pontificia Accademia LIMC V , 485 Nr. 74 s.v. romana di archeologia, 1938) 56. Homonoia/Concordia (T. Hӧls her). Cumont, 77 Fig. 1E Pl. 3. F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in stadtrömischen historischen Reliefs Roman Art (Rome : American : Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, Academy in Rome, 1955) 163-164 Funktion und Benennung (Mainz : note 90; 96 a. b. Philipp von Zabern, 1995 1995) 73; Reekmans, 30 Fig. 3. 96; 110 Nr. 38 I Pl. 39, 1. H. Kähler, Rom und seine Welt : Bilder K. R. Krierer, Sieg und Niederlage : zur Geschichte und Kultur Untersuchungen physiognomischer (Munich: Bayerischer Schulbuch- und mimischer Phänomene in Verlag, 1960) 319 Pl. 222. Kampfdarstellungen der römischen Brilliant, 157-160 note 3.134. Plastik (Wien : Phoibos, 1995) 192; T. Kraus, "Das rӧmis he Weltrei h," 213 Nr. SII Pl. 158, 507. PropKg 2 (1967) 237 Fig. 229. C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," Mitteilungen des Deutschen

229

Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Reinsberg I, 308 Fig. 81. Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 354 Pl. 86, 2. Goette II, 163 Nr. 55 Pl. 78, 2. Reinsberg III, 253; 259. Pl. 61, 2; 62, 3. R. Amedick, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ D. Grassinger. Die mythologischen Bd. 1. Die Sarkophage mit Sarkophage. Achill bis Amazonen, Darstellungen aus dem ASR 12, 1 (Berlin: Mann, 1999) 82; Menschenleben. 4, Vita privata / 99. bearb. von Rita Amedick (Berlin: Reinsberg IV, 202 Nr. 33 Pl. 1, 2; 4, 1-9; 5, Mann, 1991) 142 Nr. 123. 1. 2; 8, 2.3; 14, 4; 51, 1; 124, 1. C. Reinsberg Ehe, Hetärentum und Knabenliebe im antiken 114) Sarcophagus front depicting a Griechenland (München: Beck, dextrarum iunctio 1993) 141 Pl. 52, 1. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 56.1389. G. F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf Fittschen-Badura Fitt68-79-12 stadtrömischen historischen Reliefs Currently Housed: Poggio A Caiano, Villa : Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, Medicea. No Inv. nr. Funktion und Benennung (Mainz : Provenance: Unknown Philipp von Zabern, 1995) 74; 96; Material: Marble 110 Nr. 38 IV Pl. 39, 2. Measurements: 2.48m X 0.76m X 0.96m C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," Inscription: None Mitteilungen des Deutschen Dating: mid first century CE, 160-170 CE Archäologischen Instituts, Römische (after Reinsberg) Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 354. Pl. 89, 1. Bibliography: 2. A. Gori, In qua appendix postrema adjectis S. Dimas, Untersuchungen zur Themenwahl tabulis 50, laconico Pisano, und Bildgestaltung auf römischen sacrophagis et urnis insignioribus Kindersarkophagen (Münster : anaglypho opere sculptis, quae in Scriptorium, 1998) 66f. 98f. Florentis museis ceterisque per Schultze, 57-58; 113 AS9. Etruriam spectantur ( Florence, D. Grassinger. Die mythologischen 1743) Pl. 34. Sarkophage. Achill bis Amazonen, Rossbach, 147-148. ASR 12, 1 (Berlin: Mann, 1999) 99. R. Fӧrster, AZ 32 (1874) 102. Reinsberg IV, 210 Nr. 61 Pl. 1,1; 2,1. 2; 3, Dütschke, 177-178 Nr. 401. 1-6; 8, 1;9,1;126, 2. O. Wernicke, Handbuch der kirchlichen Kunst-Archäologie des deutschen 115) Sarcophagus Mittelalters/ 2 (Leipzig : Weigel, Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 7003; 57.320 - 57.325 1885 1885) 216 f. Anm. 14 Nr. 10 Alinari 5872 H. Fuhrmann, RM 52 (1937) 262-263 Fig. Currently Housed: Rome, S. Lorenzo 14 Nr. 5. Fuori Le Mura. No Inv. nr Reekmans, 40 -41 Fig. 3. Provenance: Unknown E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: Material: Marble es muss nicht immer Marmor sein: Measurements: 2.05m X 0.40m Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit Inscription: None (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 424 Dating: 360 CE (after Reinsberg) Fig. 70. Bibliography: Fittschen (1979) 592 Anm, 57, Matz-Duhn, Nr. 2245. Koch-Sichtermann, 99; 260.

230

S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et C.A. Boettiger, Die aldobrandinische romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Hochzeit (Dresden: Walther, 1810) 237, 2; 312, 1. 148 f. H.P. L'Orange and A.v.Gerkan, Der E. Brunn Notariatsbuch mit dem spätantike Bildschmuck des allgemeinen Naturrechte und dem Konstantinsbogens (Berlin: de berner'schen Civilrechte, nebst Gruyte 1939) 224 Abb. 63 Anmerkungen und Formularen R. Bianchi Bandinelli, Rom. Das Ende der (Bern: C. A. Jenni, 1844) 191. Antike (München: C.H. Beck, 1971) Rossbach, 94. 66 Fig. 60. R. Schmidt, Dee Hymenaeo et Talasio N. Himmelmann, Typologische (Kiliae: H. Fienoke, 1889) 72 Nr. 3. Untersuchungen an römischen G. Lippold, Skulpturen Des Vaticanischen Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. Museums, Band III, 1 (Berlin : De Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Mainz (am Gruyter, 1936) 79 Nr. 522 Pl. 30. Rhein) : Zabern 1973) 37 Pl. 56b; S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in 57. Roman Art (Rome : American H. Brandenburg, AA (1980) 282. Academy in Rome, 1955) 166 Pl. 59, Koch-Sichtermann, 115 note 131. 94. J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im Reekmans, 38 note 9. römischen Relief: Studien zu Brilliant, 159 Fig. 3.137. standes- und statusbezeichnenden Helbig I, 56 Nr. 72 . Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and 1987) 728 Nr. 183 Fig. 191-193. Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 Reinsberg IV, 225 Nr. 115 Pl. 103, 3. 4. (1981) 56 note 55. Koch-Sichtermann, 99 note 19. 116) Sarcophagus relief with dextrarum Reinsberg I, 302 Fig. 50. iunctio Goette II, 87 Fig. 418; 162 Nr. S 40. Photo: DAI Alinari 20.167. LIMC V , 485 Nr. 76 s.v. Currently Housed: Vatican Museums, Homonoia/Concordia (T. Hӧls her). Museo Pio Clementino, Sala Delle Muse G. Spinola, Il Museo Pio Clementino 2 Inv. nr. 268. (Rom: Città del Vaticano, 1999) 221 Provenance: Rome Nr. 43. Material: Marble Reinsberg IV, 238 Nr. 156 Pl. 52, 1-3; 53, Measurements: 2.04m X 0.42m 1.3. 4; 126, 1. Inscription: None Dating: second century CE, 160 CE (after 117) Sarcophagus with a depiction of Reinsberg) marriage Bibliography: Photo: Inst.Neg.Rom 36.540 G. A. Guattani, Monumenti antichi inediti Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, ovvero notizie sulle antichita e belle Cortile del Belvedere. Inv. nr. 1089 arti dei Roma II (Roma: Nella Provenance: Villa di Papa Giulio Stamperia Pagliarini , 1785) 61 Pl. 2. Material: Marble G. Zoëga, Li bassirilievi antichi di Roma Measurements: 2.05m X 1.00m X 1.05m incisa da T. Piroli colle illustrazioni Inscription: None di G. Zoëga, pubblicati in Roma da Dating: 190 CE (after Reinsberg) P. Piranesi II (Roma: Presso F. Bibliography: Bourlié, 1808) 225.

231

E. Brunn Notariatsbuch mit dem O. Grosso, Genova nell'arte e nella storia allgemeinen Naturrechte und dem (Milano : Alfieri & Lacroix, 1914) berner'schen Civilrechte, nebst Fig. 13. Anmerkungen und Formularen D. Castagna and M.U. Masini, Guida di (Bern: C. A. Jenni, 1844) 86 ff. Genova (Genova: Masini, 1929 Rossbach, 105-106 Nr. 1. 1929) 247. A. Herzog, Stati epithalamium (Silv. I, 2) ; U. Formentini, Storia di Genova dalle denuo ed. adnotatur quaestionesque origini al tempo nostro II. (Milano: adduntur archaeologicae ( Leipzig: Garzanti, 1941 1941) Fig. 42, 2. Typis Breitkopfii et Haertelii, 1881) T.O. de Negri, Storia di Genova (Milano : 33 f. A. Martello, 1968 1968) 100 Fig. 20. H. Brunn, Heinrich Brunn's Kleine C. Dufour Bozzo, Sarcofagi romani a Schriften: gesammelt von Hermann Genova (Genova: Tip. Pagano, 1967) Brunn und Heinrich Bulle (Leipzig: 51 Nr. 27 Pl. 15. B.G. Teubner, 1898) 4. J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im Amelung II, 290 Nr. 102 Pl. 27. römischen Relief: Studien zu S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et standes- und statusbezeichnenden romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., 402, 1-3. 1987) 728 Nr. 182; 315 . E. Reschke R mische Sarkophagkunst Goette II, 162 Nr. 38 Pl. 76, 1. zwischen Gallienus und Constantin Reinsberg IV, 197 Nr. 17 Pl. 70, 1.2; 71, 1; dem Grosse (Berlin: De Gruyter, 120, 1; 125, 3. 1966) 351; 394 Nr. 41. E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: 119) Sarcophagus fragment with a es muss nicht immer Marmor sein: dextrarum iunctio Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit Photo: Reinsberg (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 408 Currently Housed: Rome, Campo Santo ff. Fig. 8 b; 9a.b Teutonico. No Inv. nr. I. Saverkina. R mische Sarkophage in der Provenance: Villa Ada Ermitage (Berlin : Akademie- Material: Marble Verlag, 1979) 40. Measurements: 1.94m X 0.58m Reinsberg I, 291-292 Fig.4 note 2. Inscription: None LIMC V , Nr. 78 s.v. Homonoia/Concordia Dating: 330-350 CE (after Reinsberg) (T. Hӧls her). Bibliography: N. Himmelmann, Uber Hirten-Genre in der 118) Sarcophagus antiken Kunst, AbhDüsseldorf Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 77.436 (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, Currently Housed: Genoa, S. Maria Di 1980) 136. Catello, Battistero. No Inv. nr. Goette II, 163 Nr. 50. Provenance: Unknown Reinsberg IV, 213 Nr. 71 Pl.128, 6. Material: Marble Measurements: 2.22m X 0.98m X 1.07m 120) Sarcophagus relief with dextrarum Inscription: None iunctio Dating: 290-300 CE (after Reinsberg) Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 71.122 Bibliography: Currently Housed: Rome, Villa Giustiniani, Casino Massimo. No Inv. nr. Provenance: Unknown

232

Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements: Unknown Measurements: 2.19m X 0.84m X 0.78m Inscription:None Inscription: None Dating: 350-360 CE (after Reinsberg) Dating: late second century CE, 190-200 Bibliography: CE (after Reinsberg) Reinsberg IV, 231 Nr. 133 Pl. 118, 2. Bibliography: Reekmans, 49 Fig. 2. 121) Sarcophagus E. Panofsky, Tomb sculpture : Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 79.1465 four lectures on its changing aspects Currently Housed: Rigano, Via Flaminia. from ancient Egypt to Bernini (New No Inv. nr. York : Harry N. Abrams1964) 39 Provenance: Unknown Fig. 112. Material: Marble P. E. Arias et al., Camposanto Monumentale Measurements: 2.10m X 0.80m X 0.97m di Pisa. Le Antichità (Pisa: Pacini, Inscription:None 1977) 110 Nr. A 19 int. Pl. 53 Fig. Dating: 180-190 CE (after Reinsberg) 107. Bibliography: Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 88. Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87; 93; 96. Goette II, 160 Nr. 10. Reinsberg I, 310 Fig. 88. Reinsberg IV, 207 Nr. 53 Pl. 111, 2. Goette II, 160 Nr. 11 Pl. 71, 2. Reinsberg IV, 212 Nr. 67 Pl. 29, 1; 30, 3. 4.; 124) Strigilated sarcophagus 32, 3-5; 124, 7. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg.74.759 Currently Housed: Rome, S. Giovanni in 122) Sarcophagus fragment Laterano, Chiostro Nr. 221. No Inv.nr. Photo:DAI Inst. Neg. 74. 864 Provenance: Unknown Currently Housed:Lucca, Museo. Inv. Nr. Material: Marble 247 Measurements: 1.77m X 0.76m Provenance: Unknown Inscription:None Material: Marble Dating: late second century CE, 190-200 Measurements: 0.57m X 0.61m CE (after Reinsberg) Inscription:None Bibliography: Dating: 280-290 CE (after Reinsberg) Reekmans, 49 Fig. 3. Bibliography: Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87. N. Himmelmann, Typologische Kranz I, 35. Untersuchungen an römischen Reinsberg IV, 224 Nr. 112 Pl. 29, 3; 126, 6. Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Mainz (am 125) Fragment of a strigilated Rhein) : Zabern 1973) 42 addendum sarcophagus to 7. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 1932.168 Geyer, 379 Fig. 62. Currently Housed: Rome, S. CeCILia in Goette II, 162 Nr. 45. Trastevere, Museo. No Inv. nr. Provenance: Unknown 123) Season sarcophagus Material: Marble Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 1934.609. Measurements: 1.27m X 0.48m Currently Housed: Pisa, Campo Santo. Inv. Inscription: None nr. A 19 Int. Dating: mid second century CE, 220-240 Provenance: Unknown CE (after Reinsberg)

233

Bibliography: Reekmans, 47-48 Fig. 3; 64 Fig. 4 note 18. Reekmans, 50. E. Reschke R mische Sarkophagkunst Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87; 94. zwischen Gallienus und Constantin Reinsberg IV, 224 Nr. 110 Pl. 117, 4. dem Grosse (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1966) 394 Fig. 65 Nr. 40. Koch-Sichtermann, 98 Fig. 9; 105 Fig. 90. 92. 126) Fragment of a dextrarum iunctio Goette II, 163 Nr. 47. scene B.C. Ewald “ ildungswelt und Bürgerbild. Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 72.3786 Ikonographische Elemente Currently Housed: Rome, Museo magistratischer und bürgerlicher Nazionale Romano, Museo delle Terme/ Repräsentation auf den römischen Thermenmuseum. Inv. nr. 20965. Musen-Philosophensar ophagen”, in Provenance: Unknown Akten des Symposiums ‘125 Jahre Material:Marble Sarkophag- orpus’, Sarkophag- Measurements: 0.46m X 0.23m Studien 1, ed. G. Koch (Mainz: DAI, Inscription: None 1998) 49 Pl.. 23, 2. Dating: late second century CE, 180-190 B.C. Ewald Der Philosoph als Leitbild. CE (after Reinsberg) Ikonographische Untersuchungen an Bibliography: römischen Sarkophagreliefs, 34. A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le Ergänzungsheft Römische Sculture I 10 Bd. 1 (Rome: De Mitteilungen (Mainz: Zabern, 1999) Luca,1995) 70 Nr. 49. 62; 187 F2; 261 Pl. 67, 2; 71. Reinsberg IV, 216 Nr. 81 Pl. 110, 2. Reinsberg IV, 226 Nr. 116 Pl. 105,2; 109,1- 7; 127,5. 127 Marriage Sarcophagus Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 65.262; 65.263 128) Sarcophagus with married couple Currently Housed: Rome. S. Saba, Atrium. and Narcisis. No Inv. nr. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 1024 Provenance: S. Saba Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Material: Marble Galleria Lapidaria. Inv. nr. 169 Measurements: 2.34m X 1.28m X1.30m Provenance: Unknown Inscription: None Material: Marble Dating: early fourth century CE (300-310 Measurements: 2.11m X 0.80m X 0.83m CE after Reinsberg) Inscription: None Bibliography: Dating: third century CE, 220-230 CE (after Rossbach, 171-172. Reinsberg) J. Overbeck, Hera, Poseidon, Demeter, Bibliography: und Kora (Leipzig, 1873-1878) 132. G. A. Riccy, Dell'antico Pago Lemonio in L.M. Wilson, The Roman Toga (Baltimore, oggi Roma-Vecchia: ricerche Johns Hopkins Press, 1924) 76f. Fig. storico-filologische (Rome:Per 40. Fulgoni, 1802) 127 Nr. 79. H. Kähler, Zwei Sockel eines E.Q. Visconti, Museo Pio Clementino VII Triumphbogens im Boboligarten zu (Roma: A. d'Este e G. Capparone, Florenz (Leipzig, W. de Gruyter, 1807) 23-24 Pl. 13. 1936) 29. Gerke, 75f.

234

F. Inghirami, Monumenti etruschi e di altre Dating: third century CE, 220-230 CE (after antichi nazioni VI (Poligrafia Reinsberg) Fiesolana, 1825) Pl. I4. Bibliography: F. Wieseler, Die Nymphe Echo : Matz-Duhn Nr. 3106. eine kunstmythologische Abhandlung Reekmans, 49 Fig. 3. zur Feier des Winckelmannstages R. Calza, Antichità di Villa Doria Pamphilj 1854 (Gӧttingen: Dieteri h, 1854) 25 (Rome: De Luca, 1977) 292 Nr. 364 Fig. 49 Pl. 9. Pl. 200. Amelung II, 288 Nr. 169 Pl. 29. Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87. S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et Goette II, 161 Nr. 22. romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Reinsberg IV, 230 Nr. 128 Pl. 110,8. 409, 3. Reekmans, 50. 131) Sarcophagus relief fragment with Zanker "Grabreliefs," 164-165 note 12. marriage scene H. Sichtermann and G. Koch, Griechische Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 61.722 Mythen auf rӧmischen Sarkophagen Currently Housed: Vescovio, Italy, S. (T bingen : E. Wasmuth, 1975) 47- Salvatore. No Inv. nr. 48. Nr. 45 Pl. 117; 118, 1. Provenance: Unknown H. Sichtermann, AA (1977) 468 Fig. 417. Material: Marble Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 99; 95; 167; Measurements: Not Available 243 Fig. 35; 260. Inscription: None Kranz I, 37 Fig. 169. Dating:late fourth century CE, 320-330 CE Goette II, 161 Nr. 25 Pl. 73, 2. (after Reinsberg) Reinsberg IV, 236 Nr. 150 Pl. 111,3. 111,5. Bibliography: 113,2. 126,9. A. Stegensek, RӧmQSchr 16 (1902) 23-24. DACL VIII , 430 Nr. 4 s.v. Iuno Pronuba 129) Sarcophagus fragment (H. Leclercq) Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 63.2334 G. Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristiani antichi I Currently Housed: Rome, Villa Albani. no (Rome: Pontificio istituto de archeol. Inv. Nr. Cristiana, 1929) 89 Pl. 70, 2. Provenance: Catacombe di S. Sebastiano DACL X, 1904 Nr. 13 notes 7646 s.v. Material: Marble Marriage (H. Leclercq). Measurements:0.41m X 0.53m F. Gerke, Die christlichen Sarkophage der Inscription: None vorkonstantinischen Zeit, (Berlin, Dating: late fourth century CE, 390-400 CE W. de Gruyter & Co., 1940) 75; 253 (after Reinsberg) Nr. 6; 287 Nr. 2; 344 Nr. VII 2. Bibliography: G. Bovini, I sarcofagi paleocristiani; Reinsberg V, 229 Nr. 125 Pl. 118, 3. determinazione della loro cronologia mediante l'analisi dei 130) Fragment of a sarcophagus ritratti. (Città del Vaticano, Società Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 1937.993 amici catacombe presso Pontificio Currently Housed: Rome, Villa Doria Istituto di archeologia cristiana, Pamphilj. Villino della Servitù. No Inv. nr. Roma, 1949) 156 note 155; 295 Nr. Provenance: Unknown 76. Material: Marble Reekmans, 61; 63-63 Fig. 25. Measurements: 0.42m X 0.51m Kranz II, 361-362 Fig. 77. Inscription: None Goette II, 83-84 Nr. S 48 Pl. 77,4.

235

Wrede, 129 -130 Nr. 25 Pl. 19,3. Currently Housed:Vatican Museums, Reinsberg IV, 240 Nr. 164 Pl. 116, 5; 127, Museo Pio Cristiano. Inv. nr. 26. 8. Provenance: Villa Ludovisi Material: Marble 132) Front Relief of Sarcophagus Measurements: 2.26m X 1.14m X 1.30m depicting a dextrarum iunctio Inscription: None Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 73.1843 Dating: fourth century CE, 320 CE (after Currently Housed: Sutri, Palazzo Reinsberg) Comunale. No Inv. nr. Bibliography: Provenance: Unknown P. Testini, Le catacombe e gli antichi Material: Marble cimiteri cristiani in Roma (Bologna Measurements: 2.30m X 0.83m X 1.12m 1967) 328 note 230. Inscription: None H. Brandenburg, RM 86 (1979) 457 Pl. 141 Dating: late second century, 170 CE (after 1.2. Reinsberg) Goette II, 163 Nr. 51 Pl. 77, 3. Bibliography: LIMC V , 486 Nr. 86 s.v. Reekmans, 49-50 note 19. Homonoia/Con ordia (T. Hӧs her). Kranz II, 361-362 Fig. 77. Reinsberg IV, 239 Nr. 157 Pl. 116, 4; 127, Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87. 91. 96. 7. Goette II, 160 Nr. 14 Pl. 72, 3. Reinsberg IV, 233 Nr. 139 Pl. 111, 1; 118, 135) Architectural Sarcophagus 7. 8. Photo: Reinsberg Currently Housed: Pisa, Italien, Campo 133) Fragment of a strigilated Santo. Inv. nr. C 14 est. sarcophagus Provenance:Abbazia S. Zeno Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 78.779 Material: Marble Currently Housed:Vicovaro, S. Antonio. Measurements: 2.19m X 0.97m X 1.01m No Inv. nr. Inscription: None Provenance: Unknown Dating: early third century CE (after Material: Marble Reinsberg) Measurements: Unknown Bibliography: Inscription: None Rossbach, 167-168. Dating: 180-190 CE (after Reinsberg) S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et Bibliography: romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) C.F. Giuliani, Tibur 2, Forma Italiae I3 123, 2-4. (Florence: Olschki, 1966) 70 note 70 Nr. 61. C. Morey, Roman and Christian Sculpture Kranz II, 361-362 Fig. 77. ([Princeton] : American Society for Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 87. the excavation of Sardis, 1924) 58 Goette, 160 Nr. 15. Fig. 103. Reinsberg IV, 240 Nr. 165 Pl. 117, 1. M. Lawrence, Art Bull. 32 (1932) 181 Nr. 37. G. Rodenwaldt, AA (1933) 46. 134) Early Christian Sarcophagus Reekmans, 47-48 Fig. 3 note 17. depicting dextrarum iunctio with biblical E. Reschke R mische Sarkophagkunst scenes zwischen Gallienus und Constantin Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. Anderson 24188 dem Grosse (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1966) 357 Fig. 31; 33; 392 Nr. 36.

236

N. Himmelmann, Typologische Bibliography: Untersuchungen an römischen Repertorium II (1998) 59 Nr. 151 Pl. 62. Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. Jhs. n. Reinsberg IV, 201 Nr. 32 Pl. 127, 9. Chr. (Mainz (am Rhein) : Zabern, 1973) 4 Pl. 9. 137) Portonaccio Sarcophagus P. E. Arias et al., Camposanto Monumentale Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. 38.1712; 61.1400 - di Pisa. Le Antichità (Pisa: Pacini, 61.1410 Foto Oehler 70/1953/10 (5x) ; 1977) 142-144 Nr. C 14 est. 70/1953/11+12 Fittschen-Badura 71/63-66 Kranz II, 373 Fig. 145. Currently Housed: Rome, Museo R. Brilliant, Prospetiva 31 (1982) 8 note 13. Nazionale Romano. Inv. Nr. 112327 Koch-Sichtermann, 77 Fig. 11; 98 Fig. 9; Provenance: Portonaccio, Cave di 103 Fig. 56; 104 Fig. 71. 78; 253 Fig. 7; Pietralata. 255 Fig. 45; 260 Fig. 98. Material: Marble Kranz I, 36-37. Measurements: 2.39m X 0.36m X 1.16m Reinsberg I, 299-300 Fig. 37; 313 Fig. 105. Inscription:None LIMC III, 621 Nr. 97 s.v. Dating:late second century CE, 190-200 CE Dioskuroi/Castores (F. Gury). (after Reinsberg) J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im Bibliography: römischen Relief: Studien zu R. Paribeni, Le Terme di Diocleziano e il standes- und statusbezeichnenden Museo Nazionale Romano (Rome: Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., La Libreria dello stato, 1932) Nr. 8. 1987) 727 Nr. 179. B. Andreae, Motivgeschichtliche Goette II, 160 Nr. 9 Pl. 72, 1. Untersuchungen zu den römischen C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," Schlachtsarkophagen (Berlin, Mann Mitteilungen des Deutschen 1956) 15 Nr. A II 13. Archäologischen Instituts, Römische A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 354; 360 Pl. Sculture 1, 8. 1 (Rome: De Luca 91,2 1985) 177 ff. Nr. IV, 4. Reinsberg III, 250 Pl. 58, 1-4. Helbig III, Nr. 2126. Reinsberg IV, 209 Nr. 57 Pl. 70,3-4. 71,2-5. Koch-Sichtermann, 92; 255; 260 Pl. 76. 72,1-2. 73,1-6. 120,2. 122,1. 125,4. Goette II, 161 Nr. 23 Pl. 73, 1. LIMC V , 485 Nr. 75 s.v. 136) Early Christian Sarcophagus Homonoia/Con ordia (T. Hӧls her). Photo: Mantua, Cathedral of SS. Pietro e R. Amedick, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ Paulo, late 4th century CE Index of Bd. 1. Die Sarkophage mit Christian Art. Darstellungen aus dem [http://ica.princeton.edu/verzar/display.php? Menschenleben. 4, Vita privata / country=Italy&site=40&view=site&page=1 bearb. von Rita Amedick (Berlin: &image=178]. Mann, 1991) 151 Nr. 179. Currently Housed: Mantua, Cathedrale. C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," No Inv. nr. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Provenance: Unknown Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Material: Marble Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 352 Pl. 85, 2; Measurements: 2.30m X 0.93m X 1.15m 86, 1. Inscription:None S. Dimas, Untersuchungen zur Themenwahl Dating: fourth century CE ( around 400 CE und Bildgestaltung auf römischen after Reinsberg)

237

Kindersarkophagen (Münster : A. Furtwängler and P. Wolters, Scriptorium, 1998) 55 f. 98 f. 104. Beschreibung der Glyptothek König Reinsberg IV, 217,Nr. 85 Pl. 8, 4. 5; 13, 3; Ludwig’s I. zu München, 2. Aufl. 24, 3. 4; 26, 7. 8; 126, 5. (München: In kommission bei A. Buchholz, 1910) 347 Nr. 326. 138) Columnar sarcophagus with Goette II, 161 Nr. S 29 Pl. 73, 3. dextrarum iunctio and genii P. Zanker, The Mask of Socrates: the image Photo: DAI Inst.Neg.Rom 34.561 of the intellectual in antiquity ( Currently Housed: Pisa, Italy, Campo Berkeley, California: University of Santo. Inv. nr. A 17 California Press, 1995) 267 Fig. 152. Provenance: Unknown Reinsberg IV, 202- 203 Nr. 35 Pl. 104, 1; Material: Marble 106, 1-4; 108, 2-4; 126, 7. Measurements: 2.07m X 0.91m X 0.86m Inscription: None 140) Architectural sarcophagus with Dating: third century CE (after Reinsberg) dextrarum iunctio Bibliography: Photo: Personal A. Rumpf, AJA 58 (1954) 178. Currently Housed: Ostia Antica, near the C. Andersen, DLZ 76 (1955) 294. Museum No Inv. nr. M. Lawrence, AJA 62 (1958) 287 Pl. 77 Fig. Provenance: Unknown 21. Material: Marble Reekmans, 46-47 note 16. Measurements:2.16m X 0.94m X 0.81m P. E. Arias et al., Camposanto Monumentale Inscription:None di Pisa. Le Antichità (Pisa: Pacini, Dating: early fourth century CE (after 1977) 109 Fig. 105-106 Nr. A 17 Pl. Reinsberg) 51-52. Bibliography: Kranz II, 355 Fig. 44. P. Pensabene, DialA 6 (1972) 340 Fig. 16. Koch-Sichtermann, 77 Fig. 12; 105 Fig. 82. W.v. Sydow, AA (1976) 409 Fig. 51. Kranz I, 187 Nr. 11 Pl. 5, 2; 11,1-5; 85,4. G. Koch, AA (1979) 237 note 42. Goette II, 162 Nr. 37. Koch-Sichtermann, 67-68 Fig. 9; 104 Fig. Reinsberg IV, 207 Nr. 52 Pl. 128,4. 69; 277 Fig. 13. Reinsberg I, 299 Fig. 37. 139) Sarcophagus with a married couple M. Bedello Tata, Archeologia Laziale 7 Photo: personal (1985) 230 Fig. 9. Currently Housed: Munich, Glyptotek. Goette II, 162 Nr. 34 Pl. 75, 1. Inv. nr. 533 Reinsberg IV, 205 Nr. 41 Pl. 96, 2; 99, 1-3; Provenance: Rome (1827) 120, 8; 128, 5. Material: Marble Measurements: 2.26m X 0.99m X 1.02m 141) Architectural sarcophagus with Inscription: None dextrarum iunctio Dating: 230-240 CE Photo: D-DAI-ROM-64.844 Bibliography: Currently Housed:Rome, Museo D. Ahrens, MüJb 19 (1968) 232 Fig. 3. Nazionale. Inv. nr. 124712 B.C. Ewald, Der Philosoph als Leitbild. Provenance:Via Aurelia Ikonographische Untersuchungen an Material: Marble römischen Sarkophagreliefs, RM Measurements: 2.40m X 0.79m Ergh. 34 (Mainz: P. von Zabern, Inscription: None 1999) 186 Nr. F 1.

238

Dating:late second century CE, 180 CE S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in (after Reinsberg) Roman Art (Rome : American Bibliography: Academy in Rome, 1955) 163 Fig. 2; S. Aurigemma, The Baths of Diocletian and 165 Fig. 92. the Museo Nazionale Romano, E.P. Loeffler, ArtB 39 (1957), 1-2 notes 1- Itinerari dei musei, gallerie e 6. monumenti d'Italia 78 (Rome: R.P. Wunder, ArtB 39 (1957) 291-292. Istituto poligrafico dello Stato,1963) Reekmans, 40 Fig. 3. 43 Nr. 9. C.C. Vermeule, Berytus 13 (1959) 24. B. Andreae, Sarkophage mit Darstellungen N. Kampen, “ iographi al Narration and aus dem Menschenleben. Die römischen Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 Jagdsarkophage, ASR 1, 2 (Berlin: Mann, (1981) 47 Pl. 7 note 1-3. 1980) 163 Nr. 106 Pl. 51,3. Koch-Sichtermann, 107-108; 260; 631 Fig. N. Himmelmann, Typologische 36. Untersuchungen an römischen Reinsberg I, 308 Fig. 81. Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. Jhs. n. Chr. LIMC III, 297 Nr. 17 s.v. Clementia (T. (1973) 8. 10 Note 64 Pl. 8; Hӧlscher). F. Matz, MM 9, 1968, 308 Pl. 112; Goette II, 159-160 Nr. 5. MNR I 8, 1, 306 ff. Nr. VI 16 Abb, LIMC V , 485 Nr. 74 s.v. Homonoia/ Goette II, 161 Nr. 31. Con ordia (T. Hӧls her). Reinsberg IV, 218 Nr. 87 Pl. 56, 3; 58, 5. 6; R. Amedick, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ 62, 1. 2; 124, 4. Bd. 1. Die Sarkophage mit Darstellungen aus dem 142) Marriage Sarcophagus Menschenleben. 4, Vita privata / Photo: Reinsberg bearb. von Rita Amedick (Berlin: Currently Housed: Los Angeles, County Mann, 1991) 132 Nr. 64. Museum. No Inv. nr. LIMC VI, 643-644 Nr. 40 s.v. Moirai (St. di Provenance:Rome, Villa Bonaparte Angeli). Material: Marble C. Reinsberg Ehe, Hetärentum und Measurements: 2.35m X 1.0m X 0.74m Knabenliebe im antiken Inscription: None Griechenland (München: Beck, Dating: late second century CE, 70-180 CE 1993) 141 Pl. 62, 2. (after Reinsberg) F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf Bibliography: stadtrömischen historischen Reliefs P. Bartoli Admiranda romanarum : Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, antiquitatum ac veteris sculpturae Funktion und Benennung (Mainz : vestigia anaglyphico opere Philipp von Zabern, 1995) 79; 110 elaborata, ex marmoreis Nr. 38. exemplaribus quae Romanae adhuc C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," extant, in Capitolio, aedibus, Mitteilungen des Deutschen hortisque virorum principum ad Archäologischen Instituts, Römische antiquam elegantiam (Romæ: Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 354 Pl. 87, 2. sumptibus, ac typis edita à Ioanne S. Dimas, Untersuchungen zur Themenwahl Iacobo de Rubeis 1693) Fig. 65. und Bildgestaltung auf römischen C. Robert, RM 16 (1901) 226 Fig. Kindersarkophagen (Münster : E. Feinblatt, Bulletin of the Art Division 4 Scriptorium, 1998) 66f. 98f. (1952), 22.

239

Schulze, 57-58; 113 AS8 Pl. 24, 2. Measurements: 0.40m X 0.48m Reinsberg III, 254 Pl. 61, 3. Inscription: None Reinsberg IV, 200 Nr. 29 Pl. 1, 3; 6, 1. 2; 7, Dating: 220-230 CE (after Reinsberg) 1-3; 9, 2; 12, 1. 2; 124, 2. Bibliography: M. McCann, Roman Sarcophagi in the 143) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio Metropolitan Museum of Art (New Currently Housed: Rome, Museo York: Metropolitan Museum of Nazionale. Inv. nr. 310683. Art, 1978) 124-125 Nr. 21 note 157. Provenance: Grottaperfetta in grave P. Kranz, Gnomon 52 (1980) 773- chamber on the Vai dei Granai di Nerva 774. Material: Marble Goette II, 160 Nr. 18. Measurements: 2.21m X 0.87m X 1.02m Reinsberg IV, 204 Nr. 38 Pl. 110, 7; 125,7. Inscription: None Dating: 180-190 CE (after Reinsberg) 146) Sarcophagus fragment Bibliography: Currently Housed: Rome, Palazzo A. Bedini, BCom 92, 2 (1987) 549-250 note Giustiniani, No Inv. nr. 286-288, also in Archeologia a Provenance: Unknown Roma (1990) 89 Nr. 67 with notes. Material: Marble Reinsberg IV, 219 Nr. 89 Pl. 112, 1. 3; 113, Measurements: Not available 5; 118, 4. 6; 124, 9. Inscription: None Dating: late second century CE, 190-200 144) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio CE (after Reinsberg) Photo: Reinsberg Bibliography: Currently Housed: Private Collection. No Galleria Giustiniana del Marchese Vicenzo Inv. nr. Giustiniani II ([Roma, 1640) Pl. 68. Provenance: Unknown P. Bartoli Admiranda romanarum Material: Marble antiquitatum ac veteris sculpturae Measurements: 0.25m X 0.60m vestigia anaglyphico opere Inscription: None elaborata, ex marmoreis Dating: 180-210 CE (after Reinsberg) exemplaribus quae Romanae adhuc Bibliography: extant, in Capitolio, aedibus, W. Rudolph and A. Calinescu, Ancient hortisque virorum principum ad Art from the V. G. Simkhovitch antiquam elegantiam (Romæ: Collection. Indiana Art Museum, sumptibus, ac typis edita à Ioanne (Bloomington : Indiana University Iacobo de Rubeis 1693) Pl. 56. Art Museum in association with Rossbach, 17. Indiana University Press, 1988) 73 C. Robert, HallWPr 20 (1897) 68 Nr. 363. Nr. 49 with Fig. S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et Reinsberg IV, 211 Nr. 64 Pl. 125, 5. romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) 263, 2. 145) Sarcophagus fragment Reekmans, 47-48 Fig. 3. Photo: Reinsberg M. Wegner, Die Musensarkophage: mit 151 Currently Housed: New York, Lichtdrucktafeln, 5 Kunstdrucktafeln Metropolitan Museum of Art. Inv. nr. und 3 Textabbildungen (Berlin: 18.145.52 Mann, 1966) Nr. 166. Provenance: Unknown E. Horster, Ernst Bloch zum 90. Geburtstag: Material: Marble es muss nicht immer Marmor sein:

240

Erbschaft aus Ungleichzeitigkeit Currently Housed: Rome, S. Sabina. No (Berlin: K. Wagenbach, 1975) 414 f. Inv. Nr. note 26 Fig.13b Provenance: S. Sabina Koch-Sichtermann, 105 Fig. 84. Material: Marble L. Guerrini, Xenia 12 (1986) 92 note 36. Measurements: 2.10m X 0.79m Goette II, 160 Nr. 19. Inscription: AE 1999, 00314; Ofilia LIMC V , 485 Nr. 81 s.v. Marcella sibi et Aur(elio) Victori quondam Homonoia/Concordia (T. marito b(ene) m(erenti) Hӧls her). Dating: about 230 CE (after Reinsberg) Reinsberg IV, 222 Nr. 103 Pl. 112, 2; 125, Bibliography: 2. G. Davis, Renaissance, The Sculptured Tombs of the 15th Century in Rome 147) Sarcophagus fragment (London: 1910) 359 Fig. 64. Photo: Reinsberg Reekmans, 49 Fig. 3. Currently Housed: Berlin, Staatliche R. Gallavotti Cavallero, Guide Rionali di Museen, Antikensammlung. Inv. nr. 1987, Roma. Ripa (Rome: Palombi, 1978) 2. 56. 66. Provenance: Villa Rinuccini bei Florenz. B.C. Ewald “ ildungswelt und Bürgerbild. Material: Marble Ikonographische Elemente Measurements: 2.15m X 1.01m X 0.99m magistratischer und bürgerlicher Inscription: None Repräsentation auf den römischen Dating: early third century CE (after Musen-Philosophensar ophagen”, in Reinsberg) Akten des Symposiums ‘125 Jahre Bibliography: Sarkophag- orpus’, Sarkophag- Dütschke, 129 Nr. 316. Studien 1, ed. G. Koch (Mainz: DAI, Ch. Huelsen, Ausonia 7 (1912) 89-90 Nr. 1998) 49 Pl. 24, 3. 92. Reinsberg IV, 226 Nr. 119 Pl. 104, 2; 125, LIMC V , 486 Nr. 83 s.v. 8. Homonoia/Concordia (T. Hӧls her). 149) Sarcophagus Fragment F. Fless, Opferdiener und Kultmusiker auf Photo: Reinsberg stadtrömischen historischen Reliefs: Currently Housed: Rome, Villa Doria Untersuchungen zur Ikonographie, Pamphilj. No Inv. nr. Funktion und Benennung (Mainz : Provenance: Unknown Philipp von Zabern, 1995 1995) 74; Material: Marble 100 Nr. 38 VI. Measurements: Unknown D. Grassinger. Die mythologischen Inscription: None Sarkophage. Achill bis Amazonen, Dating: 240 CE (after Reinsberg) ASR 12, 1 (Berlin: Mann, 1999) 73; Bibliography: 216 Nr. 59 Pl. 46, 4; 52, 1; 53, 1;63, Matz- Duhn, Nr. 3110. 2 .6. Reekmans, 49 Fig. 3. Reinsberg IV, 192 Nr. 6 Pl. 19, 4. 5.; 21, 1- R. Calza, Antichità di Villa Doria Pamphilj 4. 6; 22, 1. 2; 23, 1-3; 125, 6. (Roma : De Luca, 1977) 291 Nr. 363 Pl. 200. 148) Sarcophagus of Ofilia Marcella and Goette II, 161 Nr. 21. Aurelius Victor Reinsberg IV, 230-231 Nr. 130 Pl. 125, 9. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg.

241

150) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio C. Morey, Roman and Christian Sculpture Photo: DAI: Inst.Neg.Rom 38.1176; ([Princeton] : American Society for 38.1180; 75.230 - 75.233 Brogi 5323. the excavation of Sardis, 1924) 30 ff. Currently Housed: Florence, Museo 57 Fig. 102. Dell'Opera Del Duomo. No Inv. nr. M. Lawrence, Art Bull. 32 (1932) 178 Nr. Provenance:Palazzo Riccardi IA 1. Material: Marble G. W. Elderkin, Hesperia 8 (1939) 111- Measurements: 2.38m X 1.17m X 1.24m 112 note 9. Inscription: None Cumont, 84 Fig. 1 Pl. 5. Dating: about 220 CE (after Reinsberg) Reekmans, 47-48 Fig. 3. Bibliography: A. Garcia y Bellido, AEsp 32 (1959) 15. Gori, In qua appendix postrema adjectis R. Turcan, Les Sarcophages romains tabulis 50, laconico Pisano, àreprésentations dionysiaques, essai sacrophagis et urnis insignioribus de chronologie et d'histoire anaglypho opere sculptis, quae in religieuse (Paris, E. de Boccard, Florentis museis ceterisque per 1966) 75. Etruria spectantur (Florence, 1743) M.Lawrence, AJA 72 (1968) 407. Pl. 10. Kranz II, 372. G. Lami, Lezioni di antichità toscane e G. Koch, BJb 180 (1980) 99 Fig. 46. spezialmente della città di Firenze N. Kampen, "Biographical Narration and I (Florence: A. Bonducci, 1766) 143. Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 Rossbach, 170 -171. (1981) 56 Pl. 11 note 21-23. Dütschke, 54-55 Nr. 105. Koch-Sichtermann, 78 Pl. 29. J. Strygowsky, ByzZ 10 (1901) 726. Reinsberg I, 310 Fig. 88. J. Strygowsky, Orient oder Rom (Leipzig: LIMC III, 620 Nr. 90 s.v. J.C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung, Dioskurio/Castores (F. Gury). 1901) 52- 53 note 20. Goette II, 163 Nr. 56. W. Altmann, Architektur und Reinsberg IV, 195 Nr. 13 Pl. 31, 1; 33, 2-4; Ornamentik der antiken 34, 5. 6; 35, 1-3; 46, 1. 2; 126, 8. Sarkophage (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1902) 55- 56 Fig. 19. 151) Architectural Sarcopahgus Th. Reinach, MonPiot 9 (1902) 210; 212 Currently Housed: Art Trade Fig. 3; 214; 216. Provenance:Unknown A. Munoz, Nuovo Bullettino d'archeologia Material:Marble cristiana (1905) 82 Nr. 6 Fig. 1; 96 Measurements:2.18m X 0.99m ff. Inscription: None G. Mendel, L'Arte 9 (1906) 132. Dating: late third century CE, 280-290 CE O. Wulff, Altchristliche und (after Reinsberg) mittelalterliche, byzantinische und Bibliography: italische Bildwerke. 1 Altchristliche Reinsberg IV, 198 Nr. 23 Plf. 115, 6; 117, 6; Bildwerke (Berlin, Reimer,1909) 127, 4. 170. G.E. Rizzo, RM 25( !910) 99. 152) Sarcophagus E. Strong, La scultura romana da Augusto Currently Housed: Palermo, Museo a Constantino II (Firenze : Alinari, Archeologico Regionale. Inv. nr. 609 1926) 99 Pl. 56. Provenance:Unknown Material: Marble

242

Measurements:0.44m X 0.74m römischen Prunksarkophagen des 3. Inscription: None Jhs. n.Chr." AA (1977) S. 434. Dating: late third century CE, 270-280 CE Goette II, 162 Nr. 43 Pl. 76, 3. (after Reinsberg) J. Østergaard, Imperial Rome : Bibliography: catalogue, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek Reinsberg IV, 206 Nr. 45 Pl. 110, 12; 125, (Copenhagen : Ny Carlsberg 10. Glyptotek, 1996) 74 Nr. 31. B.C. Ewald “ ildungswelt und Bürgerbild. Ikonographische Elemente magistratischer und bürgerlicher 153) Sarcophagus Fragment Repräsentation auf den römischen Currently Housed: Copenhagen, Ny Musen-Philosophensar ophagen”, in Carlsberg Glyptotek, Inv. Nr. 1300 Akten des Symposiums ‘125 Jahre Provenance: Unknown Sarkophag- orpus’, Sarkophag- Material: Marble Studien 1, ed. G. Koch (Mainz: DAI, Measurements: 1.68m X 0.98m 1998) Pl. 47, 1. Inscription:None Reinsberg IV, 198 Nr. 22 Pl. 104, 3; 107, 1; Dating: mid third century CE, 280-290 CE 108, 1-9; 123, 2; 127, 2. (after Reinsberg) Bibliography: 154) Sarcophagus of Aurelius Theodorus B. Schulz, JdI 21 (1906) 226. Photo: EA 2100 Inst.Neg.Rom 31.1411 C. Morey, Roman and Christian Sculpture (2x); 38.629 (2x) - 38.638 ([Princeton] : American Society for Currently Housed: Rome, Italy, Villa Ada. the excavation of Sardis, 1924) 57 No Inv. nr. Fig. 101. Provenance: Rome, Collection Cesarini, M. Lawrence, Art Bull. 32 (1932) 179 Nr. then Ludovisi collection 12. Material: Marble F. Poulsen, Katalog over antike Skulpturer Measurements: 1.20, X 2.25m X 1.16m (Copenhagen: [Nielsen & Lydiche Inscription: CIL VI 28358; Varia / (A. Simmelkiær)] 1940) 546 Nr. 790. Octabiana / c(larissima) f(emina) coniugi // Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Billedtavler til suo / innocn/tissimo fecit // D(o)m(ini) kataloget over antike kunstvæker Ar(a)di(?) / Aureli / Theodori (Copenhagen: Vilhelm Trydes emi/nentissimae / memoriae viri / depossio Boghande, 1941) Pl. 68 Nr. 790. die / III Non(as) Iulias Reekmans, 48 Fig. 1. Dating:end of the 3rd century CE, (around K. Fittschen, Untersuchungen zum Beginn 270 CE) der Sagendarstellungen bei den Bibliography: Griechen (Berlin: Hessling, 1969) P. Arndt and W. Amelung, Photographische 307 Fig. 5. Einzelaufnahmen Antiker Sculpturen K. Fittschen, Gnomon 44 (1972) 493. (München, Verlagsanstalt für Kunst H. Keller and J. Kleine, Festschrift für und Wissenschaft vormals F. Gerhard Kleiner (Tübingen: Bruckmann 1893-1947) Nr. 2100. Wasmuth, 1976) 112. Reekmans, 48 Fig. 1; 50; 90 note 20. B. Andreae and H. Jung, "Vorläufige H. Wiegartz, "Kleinasiatische tabellarische Übersicht über die Säulensarkophage," IstForsch 26 Zeitstellung und (1965) 19. Werkstattzugehörigkeit von 250 B. Brenk, IstMitt 18 (1968), 255 Pl. 82.

243

N. Himmelmann, Typologische Currently Housed: Rome, S. Lorenzo Untersuchungen an römischen Fuori le Mura, Chiostro. No Inv. nr. Sarkophagreliefs des 3. und 4. Provenance: S. Lorenzo Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Mainz (am Material: Marble Rhein) : Zabern 1973) 6 Fig. 29. Measurements: Not available H. Kunkel, "Der rӧmis he Genius," 20 RM Inscription: None (1974) 68; 82 Nr. S15 Pl. 27, 2. Dating: late third century CE, 280-290 CE G. Koch, AA 1979, 234 note 27; 327. (after Reinsberg) Koch-Sichtermann, 86 Fig. 21; 104 Fig. 69; Bibliography: 80; 106 Fig. 98. Reekmans, 49 Fig. 3. MNR I 4, 118. 132. 134 Abb. 137. 138 Reinsberg IV, 225 Nr. 114 Pl. 110, 10. Reinsberg I, 300 Fig. 37. A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le 157) Architectural Sarcophagus with Sculture 1, 4 (Rome: De Luca, 1983) dextrarum iunctio 134 ff. Fig. 137. Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. D-DAI-Z-NEG- A. Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano. Le 10299 Sculture 1, 6 (Rome: De Luca 1986) Currently Housed: Portogruaro, Museo 134 Nr. VI, 3a. Nazionale. Inv. nr. 222. J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im Provenance: Unknown römischen Relief: Studien zu Material: Marble standes- und statusbezeichnenden Measurements: 1.85m X 0.93m X 0.75m Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., Inscription: None 1987) 723 Nr. 169. Dating: early fourth century CE, about 310 Goette II, 83-84; 162 Nr. S 35 Pl. 75, 2. CE (after Reinsberg) Koch-Sichtermann, 86 note 21. Bibliography: Matz-Duhn, Nr. 3096. R. Garrucci, Storia della arte cristiana nei Wrede, 121-122 Nr. 10 Pl. 14, 2. primi otto secoli della Chiesa. C. Reinsberg III, 250 Pl. 59, 1-3. Sarcofagi ossia sculture cimiteriali Reinsberg IV, 227 nr. 120 Pl. 115, 1.3. (Prato, G. Guasti, 1879) 90 Pl. 362, 1. 155) Sarcophagus fragment J. Strzygowski, Orient oder Rom: Beiträge Photo: Reinsberg zur Geschichte der Spätantiken und Currently Housed: Rome, Palazzo Frühchristlichen Kunst (Leipzig : Lazzaroni. no Inv. Nr. J.C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung, Provenance: Unknown 1901) 50 Material: Marble W. F. Stohlmann, AJA 25 (1921) 230 note 3. Measurements: 1.75m X 0.87m C. Morey, Roman and Christian Sculpture Inscription: SPONSALITIUM ([Princeton] : American Society for Dating: late third century CE, 280-290 CE the excavation of Sardis, 1924) 51 f. (after Reinsberg) Abb. 93 Bibliography: M. Lawrence, AJA 32 (1928) 421 Fig. 8. Koch-Sichtermann, 77 Fig. 16. M. Lawrence, Art Bull. 32 (1932) 178 Nr. 3. Reinsberg IV, 222 Nr. 104 Pl. 117, 7; 123, Reekmans, 48 Fig. 1; 51 Fig. 2. 7; 128, 2. G. Brusin and P.L. Zovatto, Monumenti romani e cristiani di Julia Concordia 156) Sarcophagus fragment (1960) 46 Fig. 58. Photo: Reinsberg

244

S. Bonazza, Iulia Concordia dall'età Currently Housed: Rome, Italy, romana all'età romana all'etaà Catacombe di Pretestato, Museo. No Inv. nr. moderna (Treviso : Casa editrice Provenance: Unknown I.C.A, 1962) 52. 70 Fig. 73. Material: Marble P.L. Zovatto, Guida del Museo e della citta Measurements: 2.155m X 0.24 m di Portogruaro (Portogruaro : Inscription: None Amministrazione Comunale, 1965) Dating:( 150-70 CE after Fittschen), (150- 32 f. with Commentary. 70/80 after Kock-Sichtermann). P.L. Zovatto, Portogruaro, Museo Bibliography: Nazionale Concordiense. Concordia, T. Brennecke, Kopf und Maske. scavi, battistero (Bologna: Untersuchungen zu den Akroteren an Calderini,1971) 21 Nr. 65-67. Sarkophagdeckeln (PhD Diss., Freie G. Koch, BJb 77 (1977) 269. Univ. Berlin 1970) Nr. 286. Koch-Sichtermann, 104 Fig. 69; 267 Fig. 3. K. Fittschen, JdI 85 (1970) 192 Note 79. J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im M. Gütschow, MemPontAc IV 2 (1938) 44 f. römischen Relief: Studien zu Pl. 1 . standes- und statusbezeichnenden G. M. A. Hanfmann, The Season Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., Sarkophagus at Dumbarton Oaks I-II 1987) 724 Nr. 170. (Cambridge: Cambridge University M. Buora u.a., La scultura nel Friuli Venezia Press, 1951) Nr. 387. Giulia : l'alto medioevo e il Koch-Sichtermann, 98-99; 153-154; 262; romanico(Pordenone: Grafiche 606 note 15 Fig. 173. editoriali artistiche pordenonesi, Kranz I, 253 Nr. 367 Pl. 104,1. 2. 5. 1988) 124 Fig. 1. M. Schmidt, |Der Bader Medeasarkophag," Goette II, 162 Nr. 36 Pl. 75, 3. Mon.Art.Antiqu.3 (1969) 10, 12, 16, P. Croce Da Villa, Antichità Altoadriatiche 45 Note 11 Pl. 29. 29 (1992) 314 Fig. 1. 2. H. Sichtermann and G. Koch, Griechische Mythen auf römischen Sarkophagen 158) Sarcophagus fragment (Tübingen: E. Wasmuth, 1975) Nr. Photo: Personal 31. Currently Housed: Rome, S. Saba. No Inv. nr. 160) Panel from the lid of a sarcophagus: Provenance: Unknown dextrarum iunctio with attendant deities Material: Marble Photo: Reinsberg Measurements: 0.75m X 0.83m Currently Housed: London, British Inscription: None Museum. Inv. nr. GR 1911.4-17.3 Dating: mid third century CE, 250-260 CE Provenance: Unknown (after Reinsberg) Material: Marble, white probably from Bibliography: Ephesus K. Fittschen, Untersuchungen zum Beginn Measurements: 0.50m X 0.24m X 0.04m der Sagendarstellungen bei den Inscription: None Griechen (Berlin: Hessling, 1969) Dating: late second century CE, 170-180 308 Fig. 6. 7. CE (after Reinsberg Reinsberg IV, 226 Nr. 117 Pl. 77, 2. Bibliography: A.H.Smith, JHS 36 (1916) 85 Fig. 15. 159) Season Sarcopahgus Photo: D-DAI-ROM-68.924

245

S. Walker, Catalog of Roman Sarcophagi annis XXIIII / Aelia A[p]hrodite / mater et (London: British Museum sibi. Publications, 1990)17 Nr. 5 Pl. 2; Dating: mid third century CE, around 250 Reinsberg IV, 199-200 Nr. 27 Pl. 100, 3. CE (after Reinsberg) Bibliography: 161) Sarcophagus with sarcrifice R. Amedick, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ Photo: DAI Inst. Neg. D-DAI-ROM-48.21 Bd. 1. Die Sarkophage mit Currently Housed: Rome, Italy, Darstellungen aus dem Catacombe S. Panfilio. No Inv. nr. Menschenleben. 4, Vita privata / Provenance: Catacombe S. Panfilio bearb. von Rita Amedick (Berlin: Material: Stone Mann, 1991) 17; 126 Nr. 33. Measurements: Not Available Reinsberg IV, 193 Nr. 9 Pl. 110, 6. Inscription: None Dating: Not Available 164) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio Bibliography: Photo: Reinsberg None Currently Housed: Rome, Catacombe di S. Panfilo. No Inv. nr. 162) Small motif within strigils Provenance: Unknown Currently Housed: Pisa, S. Paolo a Ripa Material: Marble D'Arno. No Inv. nr. Measurements: Unknown Provenance: Unknown Inscription: AE 1975, 00066; Hic situs est Material: Marble Olympus Antistianus / quod sarcofagum Measurements: 2.42m X 2.34m X 1.15m fecit Octavia Irene / coniugi carissimo et sibi Inscription: None Dating: late second or early third century Dating: mid third century CE, about 250 CE CE, 180-210 CE (after Reinsberg) (after Reinsberg) Bibliography: Bibliography: G. Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristiani antichi II J. Stroszeck, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs/ (Roma, Pontificio istituto de archeol. Bd. 6. Die dekorativen römischen Cristiana, 1932) 9 Fig. 261, 5. Sarkophage. Teil 1, Löwen- Reekmans, 27. Sarkophage : Sarkophage mit Koch-Sichtermann, 277. Löwenköpfen, schreitenden Löwen A. Ferrua, RACr 51 (1975) 32-34 Nr. 4 Fig. und Löwen-Kampfgruppen. (Berlin: 3. Mann, 1998) 110 Nr. 51 Pl. 17, 2 Reinsberg IV, 215 Nr. 78 Pl. 20, 4; 21, 5. Reinsberg IV, 209-210 Nr. 59 Pl. 117, 2. 165) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio 163) Sarcophagus of M. Aurelius Photo: Reinsberg Crispinus and Aelia Aphrodite Currently Housed: Rome, Villa Albani. Currently Housed: Casale S. Palomba. No Galleria della Leda. Inv. Nr. 175, Nr. 170 Inv. nr. Provenance: Unknown Provenance: Via Ardeatina at Rome Material: Marble Material: Marble Measurements: 0.75m X 0.7m Measurements:1.26m X 0.43m Inscription: None Inscription: AE 1974, 00132 Dating: late second century CE, 180-190 D(is) M(anibus) / M(arco) Aur(elio) CE (after Reinsberg) Crispino / filio eq(uiti) R(omano) / vixit Bibliography:

246

Reinsberg IV, 227-228 Nr. 122 Pl. 28, 2. 3; Werkstattzugehörigkeit von 250 44, 1. 3-5. römischen Prunksarkophagen des 3. Jhs. n.Chr." AA (1977) Tab. nach S. 166) Sarcophagus with dextrarum iunctio 434. and Dioscuri M. Bergmann, Studien zum römischen Photo: Reinsberg Porträt des 3. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Currently Housed: Pisa, Camposanto. Inv. (Bonn : Habelt, 1977) 195 Pl. 58, 1. nr. C 14. Kranz II, 373 Fig. 145. Provenance: Unknown N. Kampen, "Biographical Narration and Material: Marble Roman Funerary Art,” AJA 85, 1 Measurements: 2.19m X 0.97m X 1.01 (1981) 56 Pl. 12 note 24. Inscription: None R. Brilliant, Prospettiva 31 (1982) 8 Fig. 13. Dating: 200-210 CE (after Reinsberg) Koch-Sichtermann, 77 Fig. 11; 98 Fig. 9; Bibliography: 103 Fig. 56; 104 Fig. 71; 78; 253 Rossbach, 167-168. Fig. 7; 255 Fig. 45; 260 Fig. 98. C. Morey, Roman and Christian Sculpture Kranz I, 36 -37. ([Princeton] : American Society for Reinsberg I, 299 Fig. 37; 313 Fig. 105. the excavation of Sardis, 1924) 58 LIMC III, 621 Nr. 97 s.v. Fig. 103. Dioskurio/Castories (F. Gury). M. Lawrence, Art Bull. 32 (1932) 181 Nr. J. Ronke Magistratische Repräsentation im 37. römischen Relief: Studien zu G. Rodenwaldt, AA (1933) 46 ff. standes- und statusbezeichnenden H. . hӧnebe , RM 51 (1936) 244 Pl. 34. Szenen (Oxford, England: B.A.R., G. Bovini, MonAnt 39 (1943) 331 Fig. 122. 1987) 727 Nr. 179. 123. 126 Pl. 6, 1. Goette II, 160 Nr. 9 Pl. 72, 1. A. Neppi Modona, Pisae, Forma Italiae VII C. Reinsberg "Senatorensarkophage," 1 (Rome: Palazzo della Farnesina, Mitteilungen des Deutschen 1953) 16. 34. 35. 36. Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Reekmans, 47-48 Fig. 3 note 17. Abteilung 102 ( 1995) 354; 360 Pl. G. Bendinelli in: M. Renard, Hommages à 91, 2. Alberta Grenier I, Collection Reinsberg III, 250 Pl. 58, 1-4. Latomus 58 (1962) 260 Nr. 2 Pl. 57 Reinsberg IV, 209 Nr. 57 Pl. 70, 3.4; 71, 2- Fig. 5. 5; 72, 1. 2; 73, 1-6; 120, 2; 122, 1; E. Reschke R mische Sarkophagkunst 125, 4. zwischen Gallienus und Constantin dem Grosse (Berlin: De Gruyter, 167) Sarcophagus Fragment with a 1966) 4 Pl. 9. dextrarum iunctio K. Fittschen, Meleager-Sarkophag Photo: Reinsberg (Frankfurt am Main: Liebieghaus, Currently Housed:Warsaw, Muzeum 1975) 134 Fig. 3. Narodowe. No Inv. nr. P. E. Arias et al., Camposanto Monumentale Provenance: Unknown di Pisa. Le Antichità (Pisa: Pacini, Material: Marble 1977) 142 Nr. C 14 est Pl. 82-84 Measurements: Unknown Fig. 172-177. Inscription: None B. Andreae and H. Jung, "Vorläufige Dating: early third century CE, 200-210 CE tabellarische Übersicht über die (after Reinsberg) Zeitstellung und Bibliography:

247

A. Greifenhagen, AA (1933) 447 Nr. 14 Fig. ASR 12, 1 (Berlin: Mann, 1999) 227 26. 27. Nr. 76 Pl. 75,2. 78-81. 84,6.7. A. Sadurska, CSIR Pologne I (1972) 41 Nr. Helbig I, Nr. 291. 39 Fig. 33. C. Robert, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs. K-Fittschen, Gnomon 47 (1975) 794. Einzelmythen (Roma, "L'Erma" di Goette II, 161 Nr. 27. Bretschneider, 1897) 31 Nr. 26. Reinsberg IV, 240 Nr. 166 Pl. 113, 1. 3. 169) Sarcophagus with the myth of Pelops Photo: Foto Marburg 180339; 162913; 185535; 185537; 185538 Currently Housed: Paris, France, Musee du Mythological Sarcophagi: Louvre; Inv. nr. MA 974 168) Sarcophagus of C. Iunius Euhodus Provenance: Villa Borghese, 1615, since and of Metilia Acte 1808 in the Louvre Photo: Arch.Fot.Gall.Mus.Vaticani XII-26- Material: Marble 14; XIX-38-27; XX-20-26 bis XX-20-28 Measurements: 2.15m X 0.70m Inst.Neg.Rom 3244; 36.548 - 36.550; 36.560 Inscription: None - 36.566; 72.590 - 72.597 Alinari 41328 Dating: midddle to late third century CE Foto Oehler 40/5+6 (after Koch- Sichtermann) Currently Housed: Rome, Vatikan Bibliography: Museums , Galleria Chiaramonti, I 3. Inv. B. Andreae and H. Jung, "Vorläufige nr. 1195. tabellarische Übersicht über die Provenance: Ostia Zeitstellung und Material: Marble Werkstattzugehörigkeit von 250 Measurements: 2.10m X 0.795m X 0.92m römischen Prunksarkophagen des 3. Inscription: CIL XIV 371; Jhs. n.Chr." AA (1977) 432. D(is) M(anibus) / C(aius) IVNIVS F. Baratte and C. Metzger, Musée du PAL(atina tribu) EVHODVS MAGISTER Louvre. Catalogue des sarcophages Q(uin)Q(uennalis) / COLLEGI FABR(i) en pierre d' époques romaine et TIGN(uarii) OSTIS LVSTRI XXI / FECIT paléochrétienne (Paris: Ministère de SIBI ET METILIAE ACTE SACERDO / TI la culture, Editions de la Réunions M(atri) D(eum) M(agnae) COLON(iae) des musées nationaux, 1985) 104 Nr. OST(iensis) CO(n)IVG(i) SANCTISSIM(e) 42. Dating: 161-170 CE (after Reinsberg) J. Charbonneaux, La sculpture grecque et Bibliography: romaine au Musée du Louvre (Paris: D. Grassinger, Die mythologischen Editions des Musées nationaux,1963) Sarkophage. Achill bis Amazonen, 244 Nr. 974. ASR 12, 1 (Berlin: Mann, 1999), 228. G. Koch, BJb 177 (1977), 252 Note 37. Amelung I, 429 Nr. 179 Pl. 45. Koch-Sichtermann, 174. B. Andreae, Museo Chiaramonti. Musée national du Louvre. Catalogue Bildkatalog der Skulpturen des sommaire des marbres antiques Vatikanischen Museums I, 3 (Berlin ; (Paris, Musées nationaux, 1922) 119 New York : W. de Gruyter, 1995) Pl. Nr. 974. 846 - 851. S. Reinach, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et D. Grassinger, Die mythologischen romains III (Paris: E. Leroux, 1912) Sarkophage. Achill bis Amazonen, 81.1.

248

C. Robert, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs. 172) Fragment depicting Jason and Einzelmythen. Niobiden bis Medea Triptolemos. Ungedeutet, ASR 3, 3 Photo: Personal (Berlin: G. Grote, 1919) 498 Nr. 423 Currently Housed: Rome, Museo Pl. CXXXII; Nr. 327 Pl. 106. Nazionale, Palazzo Altemps, Inv. nr. 8647 170) Sarcophagus depicting myth of Provenance: Ludovisi Collection Laodamia and Protesilaus Material: Luna Marble Photo: personal Measurements: 0.66m X 0.62m X 0.11m Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Inscription: None Galleria dei Candelabri. Inv. no. 2465 Dating: Unknown Provenance:Unknown Material:Marble Bibliography: Measurements:2.05m X 0.67m Museo Nazionale Romano I, 5 (1983) 190 Inscription:None Nr. 81. Dating: Antonine, 160 - 170 CE V. Gaggadis-Robin, Jason et Médée: Bibliography: sur les sarcophages d'époque C. Robert, Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs. impériale (Roma, Italie: Ecole Einzelmythen. Niobiden bis française de Rome, 1994) 100, Nr. Triptolemos. Ungedeutet, ASR 3, 3 (Berlin: G. Grote, 1919) 498 ff Nr. 19, fig. 30. 423 Pl. CXXXII. P. Zanker and B. Ewald, Living with Myths: the imagery of Roman Sarcophagi, trans. J. Slater (Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2012) 94 Nr. 32. Fig. 84.

181) Leukippides Sarcophagus Photo: Personal Currently Housed: Rome, Musei Vaticani, Galleria dei Candelabri, Inv. nr. 2796 Provenance: Rome, House of Messer Fazio Material: Marble Measurements: 1.84m X 0.64m X 0.50m Inscription: None Dating: about 160 CE Bibliography: Helbig I, 451-452 Nr. 575. G. Lippold, Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen Museums (Berlin, Walter De Gruyter,1956) 4439-443 Nr. 35 Koch-Sichtermann, 157 Pl. 176.

249

Appendix B* **The inscriptions and their expansions provided in the appendix are drawn from the Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database. For a full epigraphic study of the inscriptions, the scholar should refer to the original CIL entries.

Catalog Relationships Number CIL Number Inscription Commemorated Gratidia M(arci) l(iberta) / Chr[es]te // M(arcus) Gratidius / 1 CIL VI 35397 Libanus name listing CIL VI 27542 and CIL Phe[3]or L(ucio) Tityro L(uci) l(iberto) L[; Cyro 6 VI 16711 LL(uciorum) l(iberto) // v(iva) Clar[a] L(uci) l(iberta) [3] no relation Sex(tus) Magius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Licin(us) / sibi et Sex(to) Magio Sex(ti) l(iberto) Turpio(ni) / patrono et Basso et Celeri 9 CIL V 6036 lib(ertis) / testamento fieri ius[s(it)] patrono, libertis 11 No CIL Amphiata name listing |(Obitus) L(ucius) Vettius |(mulieris) l(ibertus) Alexand(er) / NSA-1950-84 = AE |(obita) Vettia L(uci) f(ilia) Polla / Vettia L(uci) l(iberta) 12 1980, 00186 Eleutheris / Vettia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Hospita name listing CIL V 1910 = IRConcor 00069 = D 07792 = ILLConcordia-01, 00044 = Gummerus- 15 01, 00266 D(ecimus) Sempronius / Iucundus / medicus / Ariminiensis / [ name listing D M/ D. APVLEIVS. CARPVS/ VIVVS. FACIT. BIBI. ETAPVLE/IAE. RVFINAE. CONIVGI/ ICOMPARABILI. LIBERISQ/VE. SVIS. LIBERTIS. LIBERATABVS/ QUE. coniugi, sibi, libertis, 16 CIL VI 12194 POSTERISQVE. EORVM posteris

250

CIL X 4402 = ECapua 00065; EDCS-ID: [3] P(ublio) Vettio P(ubli) l(iberto) Vettiae P(ublio) Vettio 17 EDCS-19600569 P(ubli) l(iberto) [3] name listing Mu[3] Repentina / Q(uintus) Petronius Q(uinti) f(ilius) CIL IX 5190 = Ruus / sexvir scr(iba) quin(quennalicius) / Cominia 18 Piceno-As, 00004 Quarta / C(aius) Tampius Cliens no relation

M(arcus) Perenn[ius] C(ai) l(ibertus) / Menopantus / P(ublius) Perelius C(ai) l(ibertus) Philotaerus / P(ublius) Maelius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Philomusus // Pere[3] Stratonice / M(arcus) Perelius M(arci) l(ibertus) Isoc[3] / M(arcus) Fuurius M(arci) l(ibertus) / Antimacus // in fr(onte) [p(edes)] XVIII / in ag(ro) [p(edes) 20 CIL I 3016a 3] no relation

Matellia C(ai) l(iberta) / Chia // Matellia Sp(uri) f(ilia) / Galla 22 CIL VI 22283 // M(arcus) PreCILius M(arci) f(ilius) / Pup(inia) Hispanus no relation C(aius) Helvius Hermes / patronus // Asclepiades / lib(ertus) 23 CIL VI 19262 fecit // Apronia Restituta / coniunx Asclepia(dis) patronus, coniunx Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Eleusis h(aec) o(llae?) dat(ae) a 27 CIL VI 18524 Fonteia |(mulieris) l(iberta) Helena name listing C(aius) Servilius / Serviliai l(ibertus) / Philomusus // Scaevia / Chreste / Mutilia Servi / l(iberta) Euphrante // Ma(nius) Scaevius / Hospes / M(arcus) Epidius / Chrestus // Scaevia / Italia / C(aius) Servilius / Gratus // Ma(nius) Scaevius / 28 CIL VI 26421 Stephanus / L(ucius) Hirrius name listing Hic ini popia in fabrias P(ublius) Ael(ius) Verus ero/gavit HS XXV m(ilia) n(ummum) fec(it) [3] / [3] suis / P(ublius) Ael(ius) Verus et Ael(ia) Masnate f(ilii) Ael(ius) 29 CIL VI 10808 Verus Vero patri f(ecerunt) / Victor Gemellus suis, patri

251

M(arcus) Servilius / Philarrus l(ibertus) // M(arcus) Servilius / Philostratus l(ibertus) // Servilia / Anatole l(iberta) / Frugi // Servilia / Thais l(iberta) // M(arcus) Servilius / 30 CIL VI 26375 Menophilus l(ibertus) // Lucini [3] / L[ name listing Sex(tus) Maelius / Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Salvius / Munatia Cn(aei) l(iberta) / Flora / beneficio / Sex(ti) Maeli Sex(ti) l(iberti) 31 CIL VI 21802 Antiochi name listing 33 CIL V 1910 D(ecimus) Sempronius / Iucundus / medicus / Ariminiensis / [ name listing M(anius) Ennius P(ubli) f(ilius) Rufus fecit / honoris causa / Galenio Q(uinti) l(iberto) Pisidae / Galeniae Pisidae l(ibertae) / 34 CIL V 2947 Nysae no relation T(ito) Fannio Ateci / f(ilio) Donicio / Corneliae Contesil[o]/nis f(iliae) Maxumae / M(arcus) Fannius T(iti) f(ilius) / parentibus 35 CIL V 4601 v(ivus) f(ecit) / l(ocus) m(onumenti) p(edes) q(uadratos) XII parentibus Viv[is 3] / T(ito) Iunio T(iti) l(iberto) / Ampioni / Iunia T(iti) 36 CIL V 6025 l(iberta) Diseto / sibi et patrono suo / fecit sibi, patrono CIL VI 11284 = CIL VI 11285 = Conze P(ublius) Aiedius P(ubli) l(ibertus) / Amphio // Aiedia P(ubli) 38 00840 l(iberta) / Fausta Melio no relation CaeCILia Salutaris mat(er) / P(ublio) Octavio P(ubli) lib(erto) CIL X 3939 = D Successo / lic(tori) IIvirali Capuae / CaeCILiae Q(uinti) f(iliae) 39 06314 Salutari / sibi suisque solo privato / vivi fecerunt sibi, no relation CIL VI 35090 (p 3920) = MNR-01-02, A(uli) Deci Spintheris // A(uli) Deci Felicionis // Deciae 40 p 254 = Mander 00022 Spendusae name listing Turpiliae M(arci) f(iliae) Tertiae / matri // C(aio) Acutio / 45 AE 1993 749 C(ai) f(ilio) / patri matri, patri

252

Publilia / Sex(ti) l(iberta) Fistia // Sex(to) Publilio Sex(ti) l(iberto) / Truphoni patron(o) suo // L(ucio) Titio Optato / 50 CIL X 3978 aurifici patrono, no relation A(ulus) Planius // Plania Philumina fecit sibi et filiabus 51 CIL X 4289 Plani[ae 3] / [3]s Planiae Primae // O(ssa) h(ic) s(ita) s(unt) sibi, filiabus Atthii Faustae liber(ti) / L(ucio) Virio Eutycho; M(arco) Visellio / C(ai) f(ilio) Ter(etina) Balitori / Atleiae C(ai) f(iliae) 52 CIL X 4415 & 4416 / Pollae name listing ZPE-101-186 = M(arco) Equitio / M(arci) l(iberto) Primo // M(arco) Equitio / Epigraphica-2002-241 M(arci) l(iberto) Hilaro // M(arco) Equitio / MM(arcorum) = AE 1989, 00161 = l(iberto) Dardano // Cassiae M(arci) [l(ibertae?)] / Rufae // AE 1994, 00428 = AE Primus l(ibertus) patro(no) suo et sibi et su{e}is et / P(ublio) 53 2002, +00265 Aulio |(mulieris) l(iberto) Secundo amico fecit patrono, sibi, amico CIL X 4105 = ECapua Q(uinti) Deciri Q(uinti) l(iberti) / Hermiae / Nasonis // Baebiae 00056 = Mander L(uci) l(ibertae) / Helenae // Q(uinti) Deciri Q(uinti) l(iberti) / 54 00162 Amilc[a]e // Q(uinti) Deciri Q(uinti) l(iberti) / Papiae Rogo te viator ni nocias meo[s bono Genio eas] / [Cae]sia L(uci) l(iberta) Muscis sibei et sueis de su[a pecunia] / faciundum curav[it] / L(ucio) Caesio Q(uinti) f(ilio) / Ter(etina) patrono // Caesia L(uci) l(iberta) / Muscis // Quarto / 55 CIL X 4053 vernae / suo // Cl[3] / ver[nae] / su[o] sibi, patrono, vernae 56 CIL X 4074 Cincia Eleusis s[ibi et pat]/rono constitu[it] sibi, patrono Cn(aeo) Cornelio Cn(aei) l(iberto) Flacco Ofillia |(mulieris) 57 CIL X 4095 l(iberta) Salvilla / sibi et viro sibi, viro C(aio) Ennio |(mulieris) l(iberto) Glauco // Ennia C(ai) 58 CIL X 4122 l(iberta) / Philematio lib(erta) d(e) s(uo) fecit no relation CIL X 4110 = CIL I 1590 (p 1009) = ILLRP 00920 = Dexsonia S(e)lemio sibi et / Philemae suae 59 RECapua 00130 ama[n]tis(s)i{u}mae sibi, suae

253

CIL X 4150 = 60 RECapua 00136 Sex(tus) Furius Sex(ti) l(ibertus) Chilo // sibi et suis no relation, sibi et suis Q(uintus) Hordionius Q(uinti) l(ibertus) /[3]hes Hordionia Q(uinti) l(iberta) /Philumina Q(uintus) Hordionius / Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Surus Q(uintus) Hordio[nius] QQ(uintorum) CIL X 4174 = |(mulieris) l(ibertus) Suavi[s] / sibi et patron[is] o(ssa) h(ic) 61 RECapua 00142 s(ita) s(unt) sibi, patronis CIL X 4197 = Iunachilia P(ubli) f(ilia) Gal() / sibi et suis // i(n) a(gro) p(edes) 62 RECapua 00155 II // [ sibi Titiae C(ai) l(ibertae) Dorchae Q(uintus) Florius Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Liccaeus Faustae delicium Q(uintus) Florius Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Faustus Q(uintus) Florius Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Liccaeus sibi suisq(ue) fecit O(ssa) h(ic) s(ita) s(it) 63 CIL X 4370 t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis) sibi, delicium, 64 CIL X 4374 ]eCILia Secunda sibi et C(aio) Toratio et P(ublio) Confuleio no relation EE-08-01, 00504 = M(arci) Tili Blastei o(ssa) h(ic) s(ita) sunt / Tillia 65 RECapua 00076 Phsuche(!) de su[o] fecit no relation Barnaeus soc(iorum) / vices(imae) liber(tatis) sibi et / fratrib(us) suis v(ivus) fec(it) // Salama socior(um) / vice{n}s(imae) libertatis / ser(vo) vix(it) ann(os) XXV // 67 CIL X 3875 Sabbioni soc(iorum) / vice{n}s(imae) liberta(tis) / servo sibi, fratribus, Q(uintus) Ancharius / Q(uinti) l(ibertus) Licinus // Anchariae |(mulieris) l(ibertae) / Baccini / sibi et co(n)libertae / o(ssa) / 68 CIL X 4008 h(ic) / s(ita) s(unt) sibi, conlibertae L(ucius) Annius CC(aiorum) l(ibertus) / Servius [3] 69 CIL X 4011 p[o]rc[inarius(?)] // [3]CT[3]eiae Camu[3] fragment CIL X 3985 = M(arcus) Titinius M(arci) P(ubli) l(ibertus) Nicepho(r) / 70 RECapua 00150 marmorarius name listing CIL X 4187 = 71 CECasapulla 00001 Iucunda Nusia Stati fragment

254

Iunia / Urbana sibi et co(n)iui // M(arcus) Servilius 72 CIL X 4198 M(arci) l(ibertus) / Eros / o(ssa) s(ita) s(unt) sibi, coniugi C(ai) Volcaci / C(ai) l(iberti) Amphionis // O(ssa) / h(ic) / CIL X 4420 = ECapua s(ita) / s(unt) // Neria C(ai) l(iberta) / Iliona // C/o/n/i/u/x / 73 00066 s(ua) / f/e/c/i/t coniugi Sibi Pettia Ge et / C(aio) Pettio C(ai) l(iberto) Pyladi patr / C(aio) Clodio C(ai) l(iberto) Antiocho marm(orario?) / et Pettiae |(mulieris) l(ibertae) Speratae / in fro(nte) p(edes) XII / in agr(o) p(edes) XV // et Peiae 74 CIL XI 961 |(mulieris) l(ibertae) uxori, filio, filio, V(ivus) f(ecit) / M(arcus) Cassius M(arci) f(ilius) Ouf(entina) / Cacurius sibi et Atiliae / Manduillae uxori et / M(arco) Cassio CIL V 5985 = Tribu p Broccho filio / et L(ucio) Cassio Donato filio / in fr(onte) 76 303 p(edes) XX in agr(o) p(edes) XXX sibi, uxori, filio, filio [Se]r(vius) Ennius / [3 Te]r(etina) q(uaestor) sibi et / [3] h(oc) 77 AE 1973, 00182 m(onumentum) h(eredem) n(on) [s(equetur)] fragment

255

Appendix C* *The inscriptions and their expansions provided in the appendix are drawn from the Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic Database. For a full epigraphic study of the inscriptions, the scholar should refer to the original CIL entries.

Catalog Commemorated number Altar title CIL Inscription Relationships Ash chest of Q. Fabius CIL VI Q(uinto) Fabio Echo / et Fabiae Restitutae / Ti(berius) Claudius Fabianus / parentibus / 79 Echus and Fabia Restituta 17522 bene merentibus / b(onis) b(ene) parentibus Altar with Portraits of Man 80 and a Woman None None CIL VI D(is) M(anibus) / Helio Afin(iano) / pub(lico) aug(urum) / Sextia Psyche / coniugi b(ene) 81 Ash chest of Helius 2317 m(erenti) de se coniugi

Ash chest of Gaius Iulius CIL VI Dis Manibus / C(aius) Iulius Hermes / vix(it) ann(is) XXXIIII m(ensibus) V / dieb(us) XIII 82 Hermes 5326 / C(aius) Iulius Andronicus / conlibertus fec(it) / bene merenti de se conlibertus Ash altar of Sex. Caesonius CIL VI Dis Manibus / Sex(ti) Caesoni / Apolloni / v(ixit) a(nnos) LXXI posuer(unt) / Callistus / 83 Apollonius 7525 Protogenes / Symmachus / Heracla / heredes lib(erti) / patrono b(ene) m(erenti) patrono Grave altar of Vernasia CIL VI Vernasiae / Cycladi / coniugi optimae / vix(it) ann(os) XXVII / Vitalis Aug(usti) l(ibertus) / 84 Cyclas 08769 scrib(a) cub(iculariorum) / f(idelissimae) a(mantissimae) p(ientissimae) coniugi Ash altar of T. Aquiline! CIL VI T(ito) Aquilio / T(iti) l(iberto) Peloro / vestiario de hor(reis) / Volusianis / Plotia Flora / 85 Pelorus 9973 coniug(i) b(ene) merent(i) coniugi The Altar of Titus Aquilius CIL VI D(is) M(anibus) / T(ito) Aelio / Aug(usti) lib(erto) / Felici / coniugi / b(ene) m(erenti) 86 Pelorus 10709 f(ecit) coniugi Dis Manib(us) M(arcus) Antonius Asclepiades / Pallantis l(ibertus) fecit sibi et / Iuliae Altar of M. Antonius CIL VI Philumen(a)e / oniu(gi) carissimae // Dis Manibus M(arcus) Antonius Asclepiades / sibi, coniugi, sibi 87 Asclepiades 11965 Pallantis l(ibertus) fecit sibi et / Iuliae Philumen(a)e / coniugi carissimae. coniugi Ti(berio) Claudio V[ictor]i Antonia[no] / divi Claudi lib(erto) v(ixit) a(nnos) V / Claudia filio, filio, Altar of Tiberius Claudius CIL VI Nebris mater Claudius Herma pa[ter] / filio piissi[mo] / fecerunt / Ti(berius) Claudius sibi(mater) et 88 Vitalis 15314 Philetus p(ater) f(ilio) piissimo / et Claudia Calliste m(ater) sibi et suis p(osteris) suis

256

Grave altar of C. Domitius CIL VI C(ai) Domiti C(ai) f(ilii) / Pal(atina) Veri / vix(it) annis XXXXII / mensibus VII dieb(us) 89 Verus 16979 XII / Volussia Severa / coniux marito / optimo et / indulgentissimo marito CIL VI Dis Manibus / sacrum / Variae / Amoebe / vix(it) ann(is) XV / mens(i)b(us) IIII / dieb(us) 90 Altar of Varia Amoebis 28351 XVIII no relation Altar of Gaius Cornelius CIL VI D(is) M(anibus) / C(aio) Cornelio / Philoni / C(aius) Cornelius Glaphyr(us) / patronus 91 Philo 7215 l(iberto) b(ene) m(erenti) f(ecit) liberto Altar of Caius Sentius CIL IX Dis Man(ibus) / C(ai) Senti Paezontis / Sentia Lasciva / coniug(i) suo fec(it) et / sibi vix(it) 92 Paezo 4832 an(nos) / XXII coniugi D(is) M(anibus) / M(arco) Vinicio / Casto / Vinicia / Glaphyra / filio bene / merenti // M(arcus) Vinicius / Corinthus // Viniciae / Tyche et sibi fecit // M(arcus) Vinicius CIL VI Corinthus / Viniciae Tyche et sibi fecit // M(arcus) Vinicius Corinthus / Viniciae Tyche et filio, no relation, 93 Altar of Vinicia Tyche 28960 sibi fecit // M(arcus) Vinicius Corinthus / Viniciae Tyche et sibi fecit sibi Altar of Tiberius Claudius CIL VI Diis(!) Manibus / Ti(beri) Claudi Dionysi / fecit Claudia Prepontis / patrono bene merenti / 94 Dionysius 15003 sibi et suis / posterisque eorum patrono, sibi [T]onnae Delicatae / [Se]verae(?) coniugi piissim(ae) / [pl]ura meritae vix(it) CIL 6, ann(os) XXI / [Ho]sius Aug(usti) l(ibertus) tabularius / [c]ontub(ernali) fecit sibi suisq(ue) coni, 95 Altar of ]onnlia Delicata 33796 lib(ertis) / [li]bertab(usque) posterisq(ue) eorum. contubernali, sibi Altar of Gaius Crixius CIL 6, Dis Manibus C(aio) Crixio / C(ai) f(ilio) Secundo Crixia / Secundina patrono / optimo et patrono and 96 Secundus 38264 coniugi indulgenti/ssimo bene de se merito. coniugi Altar of Quintus Flavius Crito and Quintus Flavius CIL VI Dis Manibus / Q(uinto) Flavio Critoni coniugi bene / merenti et Q(uinto) Flavio Proculo / 97 Proculus 2911 militi coh(ortis) XII urb(anae) |(centuria) / Bassi filio pientissimo / Iunia Procula fecit coniugi Altar of Iulia Saturnina and CIL VI D(is) M(anibus) / Iuliae C(ai) f(iliae) Saturninae et / C(aio) Sulpicio Clyto et / memoriae no relation, no 98 Gaius Sulpicius Clytus 20667 Iuliae Musari / Iulia Heuresis et Sulpicius / Clytus b(ene) m(erenti) fecerunt relation Altar of Publius Vitellius CIL VI for husband by 99 Sucessus 29088a Dis Manibus / P(ubli) Vitelli Sucessi / Vitellia Cleopatra / uxor bene merenti / fecit uxor Ash Altar of Sextus CIL VI Sex(tus) Allidius / Symphor(us) fec(it) / sibi et Sex(to) Allidio / Hymenaeo fil(io) / et 100 Allidius Hymenaeus 6828 Allidiae AttiCIL/lae sorori et Al/lidiae Hymnidi / uxori sibi, sorori, uxori

257

Appendix D

Catalog Mars- Veiled Veiled Number Sarcophagus Name Currently Housed Date Pudicitia Ceres Venus female male Pronuba Cupid 101 Sarcophagus of Cateruius, Talentino, Cathedrale. No Inv. nr. 380-410 CE X Arles, Musee lapidaire. Inv. nr. Late fourth 102 Christian marriage sarcophagus FAN.92.00.2482 century CE X Sarcophagus of Aurelia 103 Eutychia Ferrara, Palazzo Diamanti. No Inv. nr. Unknown Garland Sarcophagus with a 104 Married Couple Ostia, Museo Ostiense. Inv. nr. 1338 180 CE X X Rome, Italy, Catacombe di Pretestato. Third century 105 Sarcophagus of Balbinus No Inv. nr. CE. X X X Naples, Italy, Museo Archeologico 106 rother’s ar ophagus Nazionale di Napoli. Inv. Nr. 6603 260 CE X X

107 Marriage Sarcophagus Frascati, Italy, Villa Parisi. No Inv. nr. 190 CE X X X X Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano. Inv. 108 Annona Sarcophagus no. 40799 280CE X X Florenz, Italien, Galleria degli Uffizi. 109 Marriage Sarcophagus Inv. no. 82. 180CE X X X X Fragment of the Front of a London, British Museum. Inv. nr. GR 110 Sarcophagus, dextrarum iunctio 1805.7-3.143 170-180 X X X Sarcophagus front with Or ieto, Italien, IT, Museo dell’ Opera 111 dextrarum iunctio del Duomo. Inv. no. 71.986 160 - 170 CE X X X X Sarcophagus of a general and Rome, Musei Capitolini, Centrale 112 marriage scene Montemartini. Inv. nr. 2785 190 CE X Mantua, Italy, Palazzo Ducale. No Inv. 113 Military Sarcophagus nr. 170CE X X X X

258

Sarcophagus front depicting a Poggio A Caiano, Villa Medicea. No 114 dextrarum iunctio Inv. nr. 160-170 CE X X X Rome, S. Lorenzo Fuori Le Mura. No 115 Sarcophagus Inv. nr 360 CE X X X X Vatican Museums, Museo Pio Sarcophagus relief with Clementino, Sala Delle Muse Inv. nr. 116 Dextrarum Iunctio 268. 160 CE X X Sarcophagus with a depiction of Rome, Musei Vaticani, Cortile del 117 marriage Belvedere. Inv. nr. 1089 190 CE X X Genoa, S. Maria Di Catello, Battistero. 118 Sarcophagus No Inv. nr. 290-300 CE X X X Sarcophagus fragment with a Rome, Campo Santo Teutonico. No 119 dextrarum iunctio Inv. nr. 330-350 CE X X X Sarcophagus relief with Rome, Villa Giustiniani, Casino 120 dextrarum iunctio Massimo. No Inv. nr. 350-360 CE X X 121 Sarcophagus Rigano, Via Flaminia. No Inv. nr. 180-190 CE X X X X

122 Sarcophagus fragment Lucca, Museo. Inv. Nr. 247 280-290 CE X X X

123 Season sarcophagus Pisa, Campo Santo. Inv. nr. A 19 Int. 190-200 CE X X X X Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano, 124 Strigilated sarcophagus Chiostro Nr. 221. No Inv.nr. 190-200 CE X X X X Fragment of a strigilated Rome, S. CeCILia in Trastevere, 125 sarcophagus Museo. No Inv. nr. 220-240 CE X Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano, Fragment of a dextrarum iunctio Museo delle Terme/ Thermenmuseum. 126 scene Inv. nr. 20965. 180-190 CE X X X 127 Marriage Sarcophagus Rome. S. Saba, Atrium. No Inv. nr. 300-310 CE X X Sarcophagus with married Rome, Musei Vaticani, Galleria 128 couple and Narcisis. Lapidaria. Inv. nr. 169 220-230 CE X X X

259

129 Sarcophagus fragment Rome, Villa Albani. no Inv. Nr. 390-400 CE X Rome, Villa Doria Pamphilj. Villino 130 Fragment of a sarcophagus della Servitù. No Inv. nr. 220-230 CE X X Sarcophagus relief fragment Vescovio, Italy, S. Salvatore. No Inv. 131 with marriage scene nr. 320-330 CE X X X X Front Relief of Sarcophagus 132 depicting a dextrarum iunctio Sutri, Palazzo Comunale. No Inv. nr. 170 CE X X X Fragment of a strigilated 133 sarcophagus Vicovaro, S. Antonio. No Inv. nr. 180-190 CE X X X Early Christian Sarcophagus depicting dextrarum iunctio Vatican Museums, Museo Pio 134 with biblical scenes Cristiano. Inv. nr. 26. 320 CE X X X Pisa, Italien, Campo Santo. Inv. no. C Early third 135 Architectural Sarcophagus 14 est. century CE X X X X 136 Early Christian Sarcophagus Mantua, Cathedrale 400 CE X X Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano. Inv. 137 Portonaccio Sarcophagus Nr. 112327 190-200 CE X X X X Columnar sarcophagus with Third century 138 dextrarum iunctio and genii Pisa, Italy, Campo Santo. Inv. nr. A 17 CE X Sarcophagus with a married 139 couple Munich, Germany; Inv. no. 533. 230-240 CE X X X X Architectural sarcophagus with Ostia Antica, near the Museum No Inv. Early fourth 140 dextrarum iunctio nr. century CE X X X Architectural sarcophagus with Rome, Museo Nazionale. Inv. nr. 141 dextrarum iunctio 124712 180 CE X X X Los Angeles, County Museum. No Inv. 142 Marriage Sarcophagus nr. 70-180 CE X X X Sarcophagus with dextrarum Rome, Museo Nazionale. Inv. nr. 143 iunctio 310683. 180-190 CE X X X X Sarcophagus with dextrarum 144 iunctio Private Collection. No Inv. nr. 180-210 CE X X

260

New York, Metropolitan Museum of 145 Sarcophagus fragment Art. Inv. nr. 18.145.52 220-230 CE X X X X

146 Sarcophagus fragment Rome, Palazzo Giustiniani, No Inv. nr. 190-200 CE X X X Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Early third 147 Sarcophagus fragment Antikensammlung. Inv. nr. 1987, century CE X X X Sarcophagus of Ofilia Marcella 148 and Aurelius Victor Rome, S. Sabina. No Inv. Nr. 230 CE X X X X Rome, Villa Doria Pamphilj. No Inv. 149 Sarcophagus Fragment nr. 240 CE X Sarcophagus with dextrarum Florence, Museo Dell'Opera Del 150 iunctio Duomo. No Inv. nr. 220 CE X X 151 Architectural Sarcopahgus Art Trade 280-290 CE Palermo, Museo Archeologico 152 Sarcophagus Regionale. Inv. nr. 609 270-280 CE X X Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, 153 Sarcophagus Fragment Inv. Nr. 1300 280-290 CE X X Sarcophagus of Aurelius 154 Theodorus Rome, Italy, Villa Ada. No Inv. nr. 270 CE X X X 155 Sarcophagus fragment Rome, Palazzo Lazzaroni. no Inv. Nr. 280-290 CE X Rome, S. Lorenzo Fuori le Mura, 156 Sarcophagus fragment Chiostro. No Inv. nr. 280-290 CE Architectural Sarcophagus with Portogruaro, Museo Nazionale. Inv. nr. 157 dextrarum iunctio 222. 310 CE X?

158 Sarcophagus fragment Rome, S. Saba. No Inv. nr 250-260 CE X Rome, Italy, Catacombe di Pretestato, 159 Season Sarcopahgus Museo. No Inv. nr 150-70 CE X X X Panel from the lid of a sarcophagus: dextrarum iunctio London, British Museum. Inv. nr. GR 160 with attendant deities 1911.4-17.3 170-180 CE X X

261

Rome, Italy, Catacombe S. Panfilio. No 161 Sarcophagus with sarcrifice Inv. nr. Unknown X Pisa, S. Paolo a Ripa D'Arno. No Inv. 162 Small motif within strigils nr. 250 CE X X X Sarcophagus of M. Aurelius 163 Crispinus and Aelia Aphrodite Casale S. Palomba. No Inv. nr. 250 CE X X Sarcophagus with dextrarum Rome, Catacombe di S. Panfilo. No 164 iunctio Inv. nr. 180-210 CE X Sarcophagus with dextrarum Rome, Villa Albani. Galleria della 165 iunctio Leda. Inv. Nr. 175, Nr. 170 180-190 CE X X Sarcophagus with dextrarum 166 iunctio and Dioscuri Pisa, Camposanto. Inv. nr. C 14. 200-210 CE X X X X Sarcophagus Fragment with a Warsaw, Muzeum Narodowe, no Inv. 167 dextrarum iunctio nr. 200-210 CE X X

262