FURTHER READING

The bibliography on Pompeii is vast and multilingual. What follows is inevitably selective. It aims to give pointers to explore further the main topics of the book, and directions to some of the more out-of-the-way material I discuss. Where possible, I have included works easily available in English – but sometimes the best, or the only, accounts are in other languages.

General

There are several recent archaeological handbooks and histories of Pompeii. Particularly useful are: J. Berry, The Complete Pompeii (London and New York, 2007); F. Coarelli (ed.), Pompeii (New York, 2002), though the translation from the original Italian is dreadful; A. E. Cooley, Pompeii (London, 2003); J. J. Dobbins and P. W. Foss (ed.), The World of Pompeii (London and New York, 2007); R. Ling, Pompeii: history, life and afterlife (Stroud, 2005); P. Zanker, Pompeii: public and private life (Cambridge, MA, 1998). These often provide further information on the topics I discuss, and I have not usually referred to them specifically in the bibliography that follows. Many of the ancient documents I quote (whether graffiti on the walls or Pliny’s account of the eruption) can be found in A. E. Cooley and M. G. L. Cooley, Pompeii: a sourcebook (London and New York, 2004) – though I have provided my own translations of the Latin, which differ slightly from the Cooleys’. I have only given references here to documents not included in this Sourcebook.

Exhibition catalogues provide some of the best guides to the city. J. Ward-Perkins and A. Claridge (ed.), Pompeii AD79 (Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1976) is still useful. More recent discoveries and up-to-the minute interpretation can be found in A. d’Ambrosio, P. G. Guzzo and M. Mastroberto (ed.), Storie da un’eruzione: Pompei, Ercolano, Oplontis (Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, etc., 2003) – which is available as an abridged English exhibition guide, P. G. Guzzo (ed.), Tales from an Eruption: Pompeii, Herculaneum, Oplontis (Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, etc., 2003). Also important, and lavishly illustrated, are M. Borriello, A. d’Ambrosio, S. de Caro, P. G. Guzzo (ed.), Pompei: abitare sotto il Vesuvio (Ferrara, Palazzo dei Diamanti, 1997) and A. Ciarallo and E. de Carolis (ed.), Homo Faber: natura, scienza e tecnica nell’antica Pompei (Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, 1999), translated as Pompeii: life in a Roman town (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1999). Most recently an important exhibition at the National Gallery of Art in Washington is accompanied by a catalogue edited by C. C. Mattusch, Pompeii and the Roman Villa: Art and Culture around the Bay of Naples (Washington DC, 2008).

A useful website is the site hosted by the archaeological authorities at Pompeii itself (www2.pompeiisites.org). This has an English version and you can search for information on all the major buildings, as well as finding news of recent work in the town (occasionally the Italian version is more up-to-date). A good bibliography, research news (at least up to 2007) and links to e-books concerned with Pompeii can be found at: www.pompeiana.org.

Introduction

The discoveries outside the Nola Gate and the Tomb of Obellius Firmus are fully discussed by S. de Caro, ‘Scavi nell’area fuori Porta Nola a Pompei’, Cronache Pompeiane 5 (1979), 61-101. The story of these and other would-be fugitives are featured in Storie da un’eruzione (Tales from an Eruption), above. Excellent essays on the history of travel and tourism to Pompeii, and on its modern representations in literature and film, are included in V. C. G. Coates and J. L Seydl, Antiquity Recovered: the legacy of Pompeii and Herculaneum (Los Angeles, 2007); a lively account is also given by J. Harris, Pompeii Awakened: a Story of Rediscovery (London, 2007). Primo Levi’s poem (trans. Ruth Feldman) is from his collection, Ad Ora Incerta (Milan, 1984).

The stature of ancient Pompeians and other information derived from their skeletons is discussed by M. Henneberg and R. J. Henneberg, in Homo Faber (above), pp. 51–3, and ‘Reconstructing medical knowledge in ancient Pompeii from the hard evidence of teeth and bones’, in J. Renn and G. Castagnetti (ed.), Homo Faber: studies on nature, technology and science at the time of Pompeii (Rome, 2002), 169–87. The teeth and other physical characteristics of the group found together in the large house (House of Julius Polybius, IX. 13. 1–3) are the subject of M. Henneberg and R. J. Henneberg, ‘Skeletal material from the House of C. Iulius Polybius in Pompei, 79 AD’, in A. Ciarallo and E. de Carolis, La casa di Giulio Polibio: studi interdisciplinari (Pompeii, 2001), 79–91. A definitive study of the skeletons of Pompeii will be E. Lazer, Resurrecting Pompeii (London and New York, 2008). The fisher-boy is discussed by A. Butterworth and R. Laurence, Pompeii: the living city (London, 2005), 207. The ancient tooth polishing recipe is given by the Roman pharmacologist, Scribonius Largus (Compositions, 60).

Much important recent work has focused on the seismic activity in the region from 62 CE onwards and on the precise stages of the eruption of 79. T. Fröhlich and L. Jacobelli (ed.), Archäologie und Seismologie: la regione vesuviana dal 62 al 79 DC (Munich, 1995) is an important collection of essays on these subjects, some in English. For discussion of the exact date of the eruption, see M. Borgongino and G. Stefani, ‘Intorno alla data dell’eruzione del 79 d. C.’, Rivista di Studi Pompeiani (RStP)10 (1999), 177–215, and G. Stefani, ‘La vera data dell’eruzione’, Archeo 206 (2006), 10–13. Modern scholars have usually (but for no very good reason) followed Tacitus (Annals XV, 22) who places the earlier earthquake in 62, rather than Seneca who places it in 63 (Natural Questions VI, 1–3). The results of ongoing seismic activity at Herculaneum, with associated changes in the coastline, are being explored by the Herculaneum Conservation Project of the British School at Rome (www.bsr.ac.uk/bsr/sub_arch/BSR_Arch_03Herc.htm)

Wartime bomb damage is the subject of a fine study (with dramatic photographs) by L. Garcia y Garcia, Danni di guerra a Pompei: una dolorosa vicenda quasi dimenticata (Rome, 2006). The Africanus graffito from the brothel is (overconfidently) interpreted by J. L. Franklin, ‘Games and a Lupanar: prosopography of a neighbourhood in ancient Pompeii’, Classical Journal 81 (1986), 319–28. The children’s doodles are discussed in A. Koloski Ostrow, The Sarno Bath Complex (Rome, 1990), 59; and the coin impressions by P. M. Allison and F. B. Sear, Casa della Caccia Antica (VII. 4. 48) (Munich, 2002), 83–4. The bed-wetter’s graffito can be found at Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL) IV, 4957. For the intestinal parasites whose eggs were found in house VI. 1. 4, see www.archaeology.org/interactive/pompeii/field/5.html

Chapter 1

Useful archaeological discussion of the pre-Roman history and development of Pompeii, includes: J. Berry (ed.), Unpeeling Pompeii: studies in Region I of Pompeii (Milan, 1998), 17–25; M. Bonghi Jovino (ed.), Ricerche a Pompei: l’insula 5 della Regio VI dalle origini al 79 d.C (Rome, 1984) (the House of the Etruscan Column as the site of a rural shrine, pp. 357–71); P. Carafa, ‘What was Pompeii before 200 BC? Excavations in the House of Joseph II, etc’, in S. E. Bon and R. Jones (ed.), Sequence and Space in Pompeii(Oxford, 1997), 13-31; S. de Caro, ‘Nuove indagini sulle fortificazioni di Pompei’, Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale [Napoli]. Sezione di Archeologia e Storia Antica (AION) 7 (1985), 75–114; M. Fulford and A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Towards a history of pre-Roman Pompeii: excavations beneath the House of Amarantus (I. 9. 11–12), 1995–8’, Papers of the British School at Rome 67 (1999), 37–144 (stressing the early origins of the street plan); S. C. Nappo, ‘Urban transformation at Pompeii in the late 3rd and early 2nd c. BC’, in R. Laurence and A. Wallace-Hadrill (ed.), Domestic Space in the Roman World: Pompeii and beyond (JRA suppl., Portsmouth, RI, 1997), 91–120. R. M. Ammerman, ‘New Evidence for the Worship of Athena at the Doric temple in Pompeii’s Triangular Forum’, Journal of Roman Archaeology (JRA) 17 (2004), 531–6 conveniently summarises recent early finds from the Temple of Minerva and Hercules. The reuse of the terracotta sculptures in the House of the Golden Bracelet (VI. 17 [ins. occ.]. 42) is discussed and illustrated by E. M. Menotti de Lucia, ‘Le terrecotte dell’Insula Occidentalis’ in M. Bonghi Jovino, Artigiani e botteghe nell’Italia preromana: studi sulla coroplastica di area etrusco-laziale-campana (Rome, 1990), 179–246.

P. Zanker, Pompeii (above) has been particularly influential in the study of the town in the second century BCE (and in the early years of the Roman colony). The impact on Pompeii of the war with Hannibal is suggested by, among others, Nappo, ‘Urban transformation’ (above). The Alexander Mosaic in the House of the Faun (VI.12.2) is the subject of A Cohen, Alexander Mosaic: stories of victory and defeat (Cambridge, 1996); F. Zevi, ‘Die Casa del Fauno in Pompeji und das Alexandermosaik’,RömischeMitteilungen 105 (1998) 21–65 considers the house as a whole. For the identification of the spoils of Mummius, see A. Martelli, ‘Per una nuova lettura dell’iscrizione Vetter 61 nel contesto del santuario di Apollo a Pompei’, Eutopia 2 (2002), 71–81. Wider issues of ‘Romanisation’ in Italy throughout this period are the theme of A. Wallace-Hadrill, Rome’s Cultural Revolution (Cambridge, 2008).

The siege of Pompeii is documented in F(lavio) and F(erruccio) Russo, 89 A.C. Assedio a Pompei: La dinamica e le tecnologie belliche della conquista sillana di Pompei (Pompeii, 2005). Cicero’s service in the war under Sulla is mentioned by Plutarch, Life of Cicero 3 (though he himself suggests in a speech – Philippic XII, 11, 27 – that he served under the rival general Pompey). The place of the veterans within the physical layout of the city is discussed by J. Andreau, ‘: mais où sont les vétérans de Sylla?’, Revue des Etudes Anciennes 82 (1980), 183–99. F. Zevi, ‘Pompei dalla città sannitica alla colonia sillana: Per un’ interpretazione dei dati archeologici’, in Les élites municipales de l’ Italie péninsulaire des Gracques à Néron (Rome 1996), 125–38. The dating of the Temple of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva to the early years of the colony is suggested by the Pompeii Forum Project (see J. J. Dobbins, ‘The Forum and its dependencies’, in The World of Pompeii (above), 150–83).

For the political tensions between colonists and the earlier Pompeians, see F. Coarelli, ‘Pompei: il foro, le elezioni, e le circoscrizioni elettorali’, AION new series 7 (2000), 87–114; E. Lo Cascio, ‘Pompei dalla città sannitica alla colonia sillana: le vicende istituzionali’, in Les élites municipales, 111–23; H. Mouritsen, Elections, Magistrates and Municipal Elite. Studies in Pompeian Epigraphy (Rome, 1988), 70–89; T. P. Wiseman, ‘Cicero, Pro Sulla 60–61’, Liverpool Classical Monthly 2 (1977), 21–2. The survival of Oscan language is discussed by A. E. Cooley, ‘The survival of Oscan in Roman Pompeii’, in A. E. Cooley (ed.), Becoming Roman, Writing Latin? Literacy and Epigraphy in the Roman West (JRA suppl., Portsmouth, RI, 2002), 77–86. For the Oscan graffito in the brothel, see CIL IV ad 2200.

Pompeian garum reaching Gaul is documented by B. Liou and R. Marichal, ‘Les inscriptions peintes sur l’amphore de l’anse St Gervais à Fos-sur-Mer’, Archaeonautica 2 (1978), 165. A sceptical view of the image of Spartacus is offered by A. van Hooff, ‘Reading the Spartaks fresco without red eyes’, in S. T. A. M. Mols and E. M. Moormann, Omni pede stare: Saggi architettonici e circumvesuviani in memoriam Jos de Waele (Naples, 2005), 251–6. The connections of Nero and Poppaea with the town underlie much of Butterworth and Laurence, Pompeii (above). S. de Caro, in ‘La lucerna d’oro di Pompei: un dono di Nerone a Venus Pompeiana’, in I culti della Campania antica : atti del convegno internazionale di studi in ricordo di Nazarena Valenza Mele (Rome, 1998), 239–44, identifies the very lamp given by ‘Nero’ to Venus. The satiric graffito about Nero’s ‘accountant’ can be found at CIL IV, 8075, and the reference to Suedius Clemens inglorious early career at Tacitus, Histories II, 12. The spread and replication of Augustan imagery (such as the images found in Pompeii) is a major theme of P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus (Ann Arbor, 1989).

Chapter 2

A classic (if somewhat lurid) study of Roman filth is A. Scobie, ‘Slums, sanitation and mortality in the Roman world’, Klio 68 (1986), 399–433. The same topic has been treated more recently in X. D Raventos and V. J. A. Remola, Sordes Urbis: La eliminición de residuos en la ciudad romana (Roma, 2000), with discussion of Antioch by W. Liebeschuetz (51–61) (the volume is fully reviewed by A. Wilson, ‘Detritus, disease and death in the city’, JRA 15 (2002), 478–84). Juvenal’s rant can be found at Satires III, 268–77 (trans. P. Green); Suetonius’ anecdotes are from his Life of Vespasian 5; the admonition to the ‘shitter’ is CIL IV, 6641. The papal visit to Pompeii in 1849 was the subject of an exhibition, with catalogue: Pio IX a Pompei: memorie e testimonianze di un viaggio(Naples, 1987).

Street signs and finding the way are the subjects of R. Ling, ‘A stranger in town: finding the way in an ancient city’, Greece and Rome 37 (1990), 204–14. The clusters of bars and the ‘hospitality industry’ is discussed by S. J. R. Ellis, ‘The distribution of bars at Pompeii: archaeological, spatial and viewshed analyses’, JRA 17 (2004), 371–84. On zoning (or its absence) and deviant behaviour: R. Laurence, Roman Pompeii: space and society (2nd ed., London and New York, 2007), esp. 82–101; A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Public honour and private shame: the urban texture of Pompeii’, in T. J. Cornell and K. Lomas (ed.), Urban Society in Roman Italy (London, 1995), 39–62. Augustus’ quip about going home for lunch is from Quintilian, Education of the Orator VI, 3, 63. The ‘privatised’ street runs between city blocks I. 6 and I. 7.

All aspects of the water supply are discussed in N. de Haan and G. Jansen (ed.), Cura Aquarum in Campania (Bulletin Antieke Beschaving – Annual Papers in Classical Archaeology, Leiden, 1996). The recent detailed revisions of the chronology of the water supply and aqueduct by C. P. J. Ohlig – De Aquis Pompeio-rum. Das Castellum Aquae in Pompeji: Herkunft, Zuleitung und Verteilung des Wasser (Nijmegen, 2001) is summarised and reviewed in A. Wilson, ‘Water for the Pompeians’, JRA 19 (2006), 501–8. R. Ling, ‘Street fountains and house fronts at Pompeii’, in Mols and Moormann, Omni pede stare (above), 271–6 discusses the house owner taking advantage of a re-positioned fountain. The interruption of supply on the eve of the eruption is documented by S. C. Nappo, ‘L’impianto idrico a Pompei nel 79 d.C.’, in Cura Aquarum, 37–45.

The ground-breaking study of cart ruts was S. Tsujimura, ‘Ruts in Pompeii: the traffic system in the Roman city’, Opuscula Pompeiana 1 (1991), 58–86. Elaborate suggestions of the one-way system can be found in E. E. Poehler, ‘The circulation of traffic in Pompeii’s Regio VI’, JRA 19 (2006), 53–74. Pavements are discussed by C. Saliou, ‘Les trottoirs de Pompéi : une première approche’, Bulletin Antieke Beschaving, 74 (1999), 161–218. S. C. Nappo, ‘Fregio dipinto dal “praedium” di Giulia Felice con rappresentazione del foro di Pompei’, RStP 3 (1989), 79–96 is a complete publication of the Forum scenes. The Roman law mentioning the upkeep of roads is the ‘Table of Heraclea’, translated in M. H. Crawford et al. (ed.), Roman Statutes (London, 1996) Vol. 1, 355–91. Herodas, Mime III describes the ‘over the shoulder’ flogging (a method alluded to also in Cicero, Letters to Friends VII, 25, 1). A translation of Augustus’ adjudication of the Cnidian case can be found in M. G. L. Cooley (ed.), The Age of Augustus(LACTOR 17, London, 2003), 197–8.

Chapter 3

Almost all recent studies of Pompeian domestic architecture refer back to A. Wallace-Hadrill’s classic book, Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum (Princeton, NJ, 1994). Also fundamental, on the use of rooms within the house, is the work of P. M. Allison. Her major study is Pompeian Households: an analysis of the material culture (Los Angeles, 2004), supplemented with an excellent ‘online companion’ at www.stoa.org/projects/ph/home. An important collection of essays is Laurence and Wallace-Hadrill (ed.), Domestic Space in the Roman World (above).

The House of the Tragic Poet (VI. 8. 5) is beautifully reconstructed by N. Wood, The House of the Tragic Poet (London, 1996). The nineteenth-century interested in the house is discussed by S. Hales, ‘Re-casting antiquity: Pompeii and the Crystal Palace’,Arion14 (2006), 99–133. The garden of the House of Julius Polybius (IX.13.1–3) is described in W. F. Jashemski, The Gardens of Pompeii, Herculaneum and the villas destroyed by Vesuvius, Vol 2 (New York, 1993), 240–52; the garden a few doors away (in what is now usually called the House of the Painters at Work, IX. 12) in A. M. Ciarallo, ‘The Garden of the “Casa dei Casti Amanti” (Pompeii, Italy)’, Garden History 21 (1993), 110–16. Petronius’ description of the entrance to Trimalchio’s house is at Satyrica28–9.

All aspects of The House of the Menander (I. 10. 4) and the neighbouring houses in the block have been exhaustively studied and published by R. Ling and others, in several volumes. Particularly relevant are R. Ling, The Insula of the Menander at Pompeii, Vol 1, The Structures (Oxford, 1997) and P. M. Allison, Vol. 3 The Finds, a contextual study (Oxford, 2006). G. Stefani (ed.), Menander: la casa del Menandro di Pompei (Milan, 2003) is a well illustrated exhibition catalogue, featuring finds from the house. The House of Julius Polybius is the subject of Ciarallo and de Carolis (ed.), La casa di Giulio Polibio (above) – which includes an article on the lighting. That house, the House of Venus in a Bikini (I. 11. 6) and the House of the Prince of Naples (VI. 15. 8) are included in Allison’s Pompeian Households.

The wooden furniture from Herculaneum is discussed by S. T. A. M. Mols, Wooden Furniture in Herculaneum: form, technique and function (Amsterdam, 1999). The toilet specialist is G. Jansen, whose work is usefully summarised in G. Jansen, ‘Private toilets at Pompei: appearance and operation’, in Bon and Jones (ed.), Sequence and Space (above), 121–34. Seneca’s anecdote about sponges can be found at Letters LXX, 20. The detritus from Herculaneum is being analysed as part of the British School at Rome’s Herculaneum Conservation Project. The architecture of formal dining, at Pompeii and elsewhere, is discussed in K. M. D. Dunbabin, The Roman Banquet: images of conviviality (Cambridge, 2003).

A good introduction to recent work on the Roman family (including special reference to Pompeian material) is B. Rawson and P. Weaver (ed.), The Roman Family in Italy: status, sentiment, space (Oxford, 1997). The term ‘housefuls’ is advocated by A. Wallace-Hadrill. The instititions of patronage are well discussed in A. Wallace-Hadrill (ed.), Patronage in Ancient Society (London, 1989). Temporal zoning is suggested by Laurence, Roman Pompeii (above), 154–66. The most relevant section of Vitruvius isOn Architecture, VI, 5; the moans of Martial are from his Epigrams X, 100.

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

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

Chapter 4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chapter 5

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

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

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

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

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

Chapter 6

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

The role of women in election campaigns is discussed by F. S. Bernstein, ‘Pompeian Women and the Programmata’, in R. I Curtis (ed.), Studia Pompeiana et classica in honor of Wilhelmina F. Jashemski (New Rochelle, NY, 1988), Vol. 1, 1–18 and L Savunen, ‘Women and elections in Pompeii’, in R. Hawley and B. Levick, Women in Antiquity: new assessments (London, 1995), 194–203. The poster of Taedia Secunda is CIL IV, 7469; the recommendations of the ‘bar maids’ are CIL IV, 7862, 7863, 7864, 7866, 7873.

The classic study of the culture of benefaction in the classical world is P. Veyne, Bread and Circuses: historical sociology and political pluralism (London, 1990). R. P. Duncan-Jones, ‘Who paid for public buildings in Roman cities’, in his Structure and Scale in the Roman Economy (Cambridge, 1990), 174–84 includes material relevant to, if not about, Pompeii (including the role of the financial contributions made by local officials when they entered office). Daily routines are discussed by Laurence, Roman Pompeii(above), 154–66. The Spanish charter can be found at Crawford et al. (ed.), Roman Statutes, vol 1, 393–454. The graffito on the accensus is CIL IV, 1882.

The career of Marcus Holconius Rufus is discussed by J. H. D’Arms, ‘Pompeii and Rome in the Augustan Age and beyond: the eminence of the Gens Holconia’, in Curtis (ed.), Studia Pompeiana et classica, vol. 1, 51–73. His statue is the subject of P. Zanker, ‘Das Bildnis des M. Holconius Rufus’. Archäologischer Anzeiger 1989, 349–61, and his building projects (including their specifically Augustan character) are prominently featured in Zanker’s Pompeii (above). The position of ‘military tribune by popular demand’ is mentioned by Suetonius, Life of Augustus 46.

Local organisations in Pompeii are discussed by W. van Andringa, ‘Autels de carrefour, organisation vicinale et rapports de voisinage à Pompéi’, RStP II (2000), 47–86. The role of the Augustales in the wider imperial context is the subject of S. E. Ostrow, ‘The Augustales in the Augustan scheme’, in K. A. Raaflaub and M. Toher, Between Republic and Empire: Interpretations of Augustus and his Principate (Berkeley etc., 1990), 364–79 – who also discusses their history in the Bay of Naples in ‘Augustales along the Bay of Naples: a case for their early growth’, Historia 34 (1985), 64–101. The elusive evidence from Pompeii is introduced by Petersen, The Freedman (above), 57–83 (with a discussion of the rebuilding of the temple of Isis by Numerius Popidius Celsinus, pp. 52–3). The idea of the Eumachia building being a cloth workers hall was strongly advocated by W. O. Moeller, The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii (Leiden, 1976); the possibility that it was used as a slave market is floated by E. Fentress, ‘On the block:catastae,chalcidica and cryptae in early imperial Italy’, JRA 18 (2005), 220–34.

Chapter 7

Roman dining in general has been the subject of many recent studies. In addition to Dunbabin, The Roman Banquet (above), a good collection of esssays, exploring various aspects of dining is W. J. Slater, Dining in a Classical Context (Ann Arbor, 1991). Pompeian images of drinking and dining in the House of the Chaste Lovers (IX. 12. 6) and elsewhere are discussed by Clarke, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans, (above), 228–33 (focussing on how far the paintings represent distinctively Greek conventions of drinking and eating) and M. B. Roller, Dining Posture in Ancient Rome: bodies, values and status (Princeton, NJ, 2006), 45–84 and 139–53. The House of the Menander treasure is catalogued in K. S. Painter, The Insula of the Menander at Pompeii, Vol. 4, The Silver Treasure(Oxford, 2001). The connections between death and dining are explored by K. Dunbabin, ‘Sic erimus cuncti ... The skeleton in Graeco-Roman Art’, Jahrbuch des deutschen archäolgischen Instituts 101 (1986), 185–255, and summarised in The Roman Banquet. The tomb painting of silver is from the (widely illustrated) tomb of Vestorius Primus. The bronze statue from the House of Julius Polybius is illustrated in d’Ambrosio, Guzzo and Mastroberto, Storie da un’eruzione (above), 424 and in Boriello et al., Pompei: abitare sotto il Vesuvio (above), 231. The nutrition of the poor is well discussed by P. Garnsey, Food and Society in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge, 1999). For animal bones from the House of the Vestals, see www.archaeology.org/interactive/pompeii/field/5.html. The dormouse jar is described by Varro, On Agriculture III, 15. A dormouse recipe is given by Apicius, On Cookery, VII, 9; his ‘casserole of anchovy without the anchovy’ is described at IV, 2, 12. Trimalchio’s banquet features in Petronius’ Satyrica, 26–78; Elagabalus’ dinners in Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Life of Elagabalus 19, 25. Plutarch’s Table Talk is a mine of curious information on Greek and Roman dining customs. Pliny’s dining arrangements are described in Letters V, 6.

Pompeian bars and their menus are surveyed by S. J. R. Ellis, ‘The Pompeian Bar: archaeology and the role of food and drink outlets in an ancient community’, Food and History 2 (2004), 41–58, J. Packer, ‘Inns at Pompeii: a short survey’, Cronache Pompeiane4 (1978), 5–53. An exhibition in 2005 gathered together most of the finds from the bar on the Via dell’ Abbondanza, published as Cibi e sapori a Pompei e dintorni (Naples, 2005), 115–28 (with an excellent discussion). The paintings in the Inn of Salvius and in the Bar in the Via di Mercurio are featured in Clarke, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans (above), 160–70, 134–6 and in Looking at Laughter (above), 205–9. Horace’s remarks are at Epistles I, 14, 21–2, Juvenal’s at Satires VIII, 171–6. The legislation of Nero and Vespasian is recorded at Dio Cassius, Histories LXII, 14, 2; LXV, 10, 3. Pliny’s discussion of Falernian is at Natural History XIV, 62.

Different aspects of Roman sexuality are helpfully explored in C. Edwards, The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome (Cambridge, 1993), M. B. Skinner, Sexuality in Greek and Roman Culture (Oxford, 2005), C. Williams, Roman Homosexuality: ideologies of masculinity in classical antiquity (Oxford, 1999). Different approaches to the ‘brothel problem’ are taken by T. McGinn, ‘Pompeian brothels and social history’, in Pompeian brothels, Pompeii’s Ancient History, Mirrors and Mysteries, Art and Nature at Oplontis, & the Herculaneum ‘Basilica’ (JRA supp., Portsmouth, RI, 2002) 7–46 and, more cautiously, Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Public honour and private shame’ (above). Wider aspects of Roman prostitution are discussed by T. McGinn, The Economy of Prostitution in the Roman World: a study of social history and the brothel (Ann Arbor, 2004). Detailed studies of the ‘purpose-built’ brothel and its graffiti, include A. Varone, ‘Organizzazione e sfruttamento della prostituzione servile: l’esempio del lupanare di Pompei’, in A. Buonopane and T. Cenerini (ed.) Donna e lavoro nella documentazione epigrafica (Faenza, 2003), 193–215 and an enterprising website from Stanford University, traumwerk.stanford.edu:3455/SeeingThePast/345. The Roman tombstone to the dutiful wife is M. R. Lefkowitz and M. B. Fant, Women’s Life in Greece and Rome (London, 1982), no. 134. The bracelet given by master to slave is illustrated and discussed in d’Ambrosio, Guzzo and Mastroberto (ed.), Storie da un’eruzione, 470, 473–8. Praestina’s lack of affection for Marcellus is displayed at CIL IV, 7679.

A good introduction to modern work on the history, archaeology and culture of Roman bathing is Roman baths and bathing : proceedings of the First International Conference on Roman Baths (JRA supp., Portsmouth, RI, 1999). G. G. Fagan, Bathing in Public in the Roman World (Ann Arbor, 1999) and J. Toner, Leisure and Ancient Rome (Oxford, 1995), 53–64 are both excellent on different aspects of the ancient sociology of bathing (the quip about the ‘hole in the ozone layer’ is Toner’s). F. Yegül, Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge, MA, 1992) surveys the structure of Roman baths, empire wide (including detailed descriptions of the remains at Pompeii). The definitive publication of the Suburban Baths is L. Jacobelli, La pitture erotiche delle terme suburbane di Pompei (Rome, 1995), with useful discussion by Clarke, Looking at Laughter (above), 194–204 and 209–12.

The tombstone hailing ‘wine, sex and baths’ can be found at CIL VI, 15258; the text from Turkey, on a spoon, is CIL III, 12274c. The story of Augustus’ mother is told by Suetonius, Life of Augustus 94; Martial’s squib about the hernia is Epigrams XII, 83; the nasty flogging is described at Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights X, 3; Hadrian’s canny generosity is the subject of an anecdote in the Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Life of Hadrian 17. For the unhygienic aspects, see Martial, Epigrams II, 42 and Celsus, On MedicineV, 26, 28d (though in general Celsus is upbeat about the curative properties of baths). The dual role of the bath manager is mentioned in the Digest of Justinian III, 2, 4, 2.

Chapter 8

Gambling is discussed by N. Purcell, ‘Literate Games: Roman urban society and the game of alea’, Past and Present 147 (1995), 3–37 and J. Toner, Leisure (above), 89–101. The snorting noise is mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus, Histories XIV, 6.

The range of Roman theatre is discussed by R. C. Beacham, The Roman Theatre and its Audience (London, 1991). C. Edwards, The Politics of Immorality (above), 98–136 explores the moral ambiguity of ‘theatrical culture’. Mime and pantomime are the theme of E. Fantham, ‘Mime: the missing link in Roman literary history’, Classical World 82 (1989), 153–63 (whence the nice remark about the ‘Swedish masseuses’) and of E. Hall and R. Wyles (ed.), New Directions in Ancient Pantomime (Oxford, 2008). The career and portraits of Caius Norbanus Sorex are discussed by M. G. Granino Cecere, ‘Nemi: l’erma di C. Norbanus Sorex’, Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 61 (1988–9), 131–51. J. L. Franklin, ‘Pantomimists at Pompeii: Actius Anicetus and his troup’, American Journal of Philology 108 (1987), 95–107 tries to piece together a pantomimist’s company and its fan-club.

The structure of the Amphitheatre at Pompeii is clearly discussed by D. L. Bomgardner, The Story of the Roman Amphitheatre (London and New York, 2000), 39–54 and K. Welch, The Roman Amphitheatre from its origins to the Colosseum (Cambridge, 2007), 192–8. The Pompeian evidence for gladiatorial spectacle and organisation is gathered together and well illustrated in L. Jacobelli, Gladiators at Pompeii (Rome, 2003). K. Hopkins and M. Beard, The Colosseum (London, 2005) cast a slightly sceptical eye on the frequency and lavishness of ordinary gladiatorial shows, especially those outside Rome itself – a view which is reflected here. B. Maiuri, ‘Rilievo gladiatorio di Pompei’, Rendiconti dell’ Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (scienze morali etc.), Series 8, Vol. 2 (1947) 491–510 carefully dissects the relief showing procession, gladiatorial combat and animal fights. The classic passage from Juvenal about the lady and the gladiator is Satires VI, 82–113.

Chapter 9

The title of this chapter is taken from K. Hopkins, A World Full of Gods: pagans, Jews and Christians in the Roman empire (London, 1999), which includes an attempt by two imaginary modern time-travellers, returning to the ancient world, to make sense of Pompeian culture and (especially) its religion. The general approach adopted in this chapter (including the model of sacrifice, and of ‘foreign’ cults) inevitably owes a good deal to that of M. Beard, J. North and S. Price, Religions of Rome (Cambridge, 1998), where many of the religious themes raised here can be followed up. The second volume (A Sourcebook) contains most of the ancient literary texts I have quoted or referred to. J. Scheid, Introduction to Roman Religion (Edinburgh, 2003) is also very useful. Horace evokes sacrifice at Odes III, 13.

An excellent overview of the evidence and bibliography for all the various cults, shrines and temples in Pompeii is offered by L. Barnabei, ‘I culti di Pompei: Raccolta critica della documentazione’, in Contributi di Archeologia Vesuviana III (Rome, 2007), 11–88. On the new identification of the Temple of Jupiter Meilichios, F. Marcatelli, ‘Il tempio di Escalapio a Pompei’, in Contributi di Archeologia Vesuviana II (Rome, 2006), 9–76. The sculpture within the Temple of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva is usefully discussed by H.G. Martin, Römische Tempelkultbilder: eine archäologische Untersuchung zur späten Republik (Rome, 1987), 222–4. A different view of Pompeian Venus is offered by J. B. Rives, ‘Venus Genetrix outside Rome’, Phoenix 48 (1994) 294–6. The ferculum of the carpenters is discussed by Clarke, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans (above), 85–7.

Household religion and the Lares are discussed by P. Foss, ‘Watchful Lares. Roman household organization and the rituals of cooking and eating’, in Laurence and Wallace-Hadrill (ed.), Domestic Space in the Roman World (above), 196–218. Lararia are catalogued by G. K. Boyce. Corpus of the Lararia of Pompeii (Rome, 1937), and more recently their paintings are included in T. Fröhlich, Lararien- und Fassadenbilder in den Vesuvstädten Untersuchungen zur ‘volkstümlichen’ pompejanischen Malerei (Mainz, 1991). The ‘Fulgur’ tile is discused by A. Maiuri, ‘“Fulgur conditum” o della scoperta di un bidental a Pompei’, Rendiconti dell’Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti, Napoli, 21 (1941), 55–72. The ‘offerings’ at the House of Amarantus are noted by M. Fulford and A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘The House of Amarantus at Pompeii (I. 9. 11–12): an interim report on survey and excavations in 1995–6’, RStP 7 (1995–96), 77–113. The practices of ancient household religion more generally, including Rome, are the subject of J. Bodel and S. Olyan (ed.), Household and Family Religion in Antiquity (Oxford, 2008).

The implausible concentration of buildings connected with the imperial cult in many modern reconstructions of the Forum is dissected by I. Gradel, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion (Oxford, 2002), 103–8. Other useful essays (though sometimes too eager to see traces of the imperial cult where few or none exist) are contained in A. Small (ed.), Subject and ruler: the cult of the ruling power in clasical antiquity (JRA supp., Portsmouth, RI, 1996).

R. E Witt, Isis in the Graeco-Roman World (London, 1971) is still a useful introduction to the history of Isis in the Roman Empire. The temple of Isis was the subject of a major exhibition in the early 1990s, published as Alla ricerca di Iside: analisi, studi e restauri dell’Iseo pompeiano nel Museo di Napoli (Naples, 1992). Also relevant is E. A. Arslan (ed.) Iside: il mito, il mistero, la magia (Milan, 1997).

Epilogue

I. Morris, Death-ritual and social structure in classical antiquity (Cambridge, 1992) is an overview of burial practice in Greece and Rome. Pompei oltre la vita: nuove testimonianze dalle necropoli (Pompeii, 1998) is the catalogue of an exhibition on Pompeian tombs. Petersen, The Freedman (above), 60–83 discusses tombs of freedmen. On tombs as houses (and the case of Phileros), see A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Housing the dead: the tomb as house in Roman Italy’, in L. Brink and D. Green (ed.) Commemorating the Dead. Texts and Artifacts in Context, (Berlin and New York, 2008), 39–77. The inscription from the tomb of Phileros has been re-examined by E. Rodriguez-Almeida, in Topografia e vita romana: da Augusto a Costan-tino (Rome, 2001), 91–103.

If you find an error please notify us in the comments. Thank you!
Previous
Page
Next
Page