Friday, March 1, 2024

Were Thracian tholos tombs distant inheritors of Mycenaean funerary traditions?

Today I noticed the Thracian tomb of Kazanlak is set for inclusion in the National Atlas of Immovable Culture of Bulgaria. (See https://gazettengr.com/thracian-tomb-of-kazanlak-set-for.../ )
The Kazanlak tomb has a beautifully frescoed dome that includes this wonderfully detailed painting of a chariot race.

Detail of a chariot race painted in the dome of the Kazanlak Tomb
image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Psy Guy 


The tomb is part of a large royal Thracian necropolis in the Valley of the Thracian Rulers near their ancient capital of Seuthopolis in a region where more than a thousand tombs of royalty and members of the Thracian aristocracy can be found.
The vaulted-brickwork "beehive" (tholos) monument dates back to the fourth century BCE and has been on the UNESCO protected World Heritage Site list since 1979. The paintings in this small tomb are Bulgaria's best-preserved artistic masterpieces from the Hellenistic period. Although the tomb is not open to the public to preserve the delicate paintings, a full-size exact replica stands nearby for public access.
I asked Gemini if Thracian tholos-style tombs were similar to Greek tholos style tombs and Gemini replied:
There are both similarities and differences in the construction methods of Thracian and Greek tholos tombs. Here's a breakdown:
Similarities:
Overall Shape: Both Thracian and Greek tholos tombs share the distinctive beehive or circular form, creating a large underground chamber.
Corbel Vaulting: The construction technique likely involved corbel vaulting, where each layer of stone slabs leans inwards slightly, gradually creating the domed ceiling.
Dromos (Passage): An entrance passage, known as a dromos, typically leads down to the main chamber in both traditions.
Differences:
Building Materials: Greek tholos tombs often used well-cut and dressed stone blocks, while Thracian tombs might incorporate a wider variety of materials, including local fieldstones alongside cut stones.
False Vaulting: Some Thracian tombs might have employed a "false vault" technique, where large slabs were laid horizontally across the top, distributing the weight rather than using the corbel technique throughout.
Decorative Elements: Greek tholos tombs are sometimes known for their grand entryways and imposing lintels, features less common in Thracian examples.
Additional Points:
Dating: Greek tholos tombs were primarily built during the Mycenaean period (1600-1100 BCE), while Thracian tholos tombs flourished from the 4th to 3rd centuries BCE. This time difference could explain some construction technique variations.
Regional Variations: Both Greek and Thracian regions might have had their own sub-styles within the tholos tomb tradition.
In essence, the Thracians adopted the basic concept of the tholos tomb from the Greek world, but adapted it using their own materials and potentially incorporating some different construction techniques."
I also asked Gemini if beehive-style tholos tombs were used by any other culture around the Mediterranean after the 5th century BCE
and Gemini replied:
"While the peak usage of beehive-style tholos tombs waned after the 5th century BCE, there are some examples of their continued use or influence in specific Mediterranean cultures:
"Etruria (Italy): Though Etruscan civilization was declining by the 5th century BCE, some earlier Etruscan tumulus tombs (burial mounds) incorporated tholos elements, with corbelled chambers beneath the mounds.
"Sardinia (Italy): The Nuragic civilization of Sardinia, active well into the 1st millennium BCE, constructed unique beehive-shaped structures called nuraghe. While not exclusively tombs, some nuraghe might have served funerary purposes.
"Iberia (Spain & Portugal): The tholos tradition continued to a lesser extent in some parts of the Iberian peninsula. The "tholos of Romeral" in Andalusia, Spain, is an example dating to the 3rd century BCE.
"It's important to note that these are not widespread practices and represent more of a continuation or echo of the tholos tradition in specific regions, rather than a dominant form of tomb construction. Considering the expanse of time between the Mycenaeans and the Thracians, however, it makes a person wonder why an architectural tradition from so long ago would have been resurrected unless a Thracian king visited Greece and, seeing an ancient tholos-style tomb, was inspired by it.

As for the obvious Greek influence in the tomb frescos, Gemini points out it is thought Thracian artists may have trained in Greece but ultimately painted Thracian tombs themselves:

"While there's evidence of Greek influence in Thracian tomb art, it's unlikely the Thracians exclusively employed Greek artists. Here's why:
Local Artistic Tradition: Thrace had its own artistic tradition, evident in surviving metalwork and pottery. It's more probable that Thracian artists, familiar with Greek styles through trade or cultural exchange, created the tomb frescoes.
Limited Evidence: We lack clear records of foreign artists working in Thrace specifically for tomb decoration.
However, there are some possibilities:
Guest Artists: There might have been instances where highly skilled Greek artists were invited to work on a Thracian tomb, but this would likely have been for a particularly wealthy or powerful patron.
Thracian Training: Thracian artists could have traveled and trained in Greece, bringing those skills back to their homeland.
Overall, the available evidence suggests Thracian artists were the primary creators of the frescoes, incorporating Greek artistic influences into their own repertoire.


If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!


Strongboxes and banks in the Roman Empire

Beautiful image of the recently restored atrium in the House of the Vettii in Pompeii taken just last year by Professor Johannes Eber as displayed by pompeiiinpictures.com. The Vettii brothers' strongbox is encased in glass on the left.

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Looking south-west across atrium towards south ala, in centre, across impluvium towards peristyle courtesy of Johannes Eber

Although strongboxes looked formidable their size and ornamentation could have been somewhat exaggerated to emphasize the wealth of the residents since they were used for temporary storage of valuables and currency needed to operate the household but not protect the residents' accumulated wealth since the primary entrances to a Roman house were open to the passing public. Gemini explains:

"In ancient Rome, both strongboxes and banks were used to store valuables, including currency. However, their specific functions and popularity differed:
Strongboxes:
"Primary use: Primarily used for short-term storage of valuables, especially in domestic settings like the House of the Vettii.
"Currency storage: While Romans did store coins in strongboxes, it was likely for smaller amounts needed for daily use or immediate access.
"Security: Offered a physical barrier against theft and fire, but their level of security varied depending on the materials and construction.
Banks (Mensae)
Primary use: Primarily used for long-term storage of valuables and larger sums of money, especially for wealthier individuals and businesses.
"Currency storage: Banks were the preferred option for storing large amounts of coins and other valuables like precious metals and documents.
"Security: Offered greater security compared to strongboxes due to their often fortified structures and professional management. They might also have had additional safeguards like armed guards and complex record-keeping systems.
Key points:
"Strongboxes were more common for everyday use and smaller amounts, while banks were the preferred option for larger sums and long-term storage.
"The presence of a strongbox in the House of the Vettii suggests they might have kept smaller amounts of currency readily accessible, while their larger wealth would likely have been stored in a bank (mensae) for added security."
If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!


Possible interpretations of depictions of the myth of Leda and the Swan in the House of the Vetti (Pompeii)

I've been working on more images from the House of the Vettii in Pompeii and here are some of those images from contributors to pompeiiinpictures.com. I've been using the latest version of Topaz Gigapixel AI to not only sharpen and denoise the images but double their resolution to make them more suitable for use in research and teaching. Under US copyright law, photographs of two-dimensional public domain art are considered public domain work as well and are recognized as such on Wikimedia Commons. So, these digitally enhanced images have been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons for public use by US authors or those from other countries with similar public domain legislation.

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail of painted figure of Leda and the Swan from center of upper south wall of oecus courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2006 Detail of painting on wall in oecus on south side of atrium courtesy of pompeiiinpictures.com

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2019 Detail from south wall of oecus, on east side of central painting courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2019 Detail of painted decoration from panel on west wall of oecus courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2019 Upper west wall at south end of oecus courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella.

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Central wall painting on south wall showing Dionysus and Ariadne, as well as the fight between Eros and Pann courtesy of Johannes Eber

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Decorative medallion from west wall of oecus at south end courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail from central painting on south wall showing the fight between Eros and Pan courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail from decorative medallion from north end of west wall courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail from upper south wall at west end of oecus courtesy of Klaus Heese.

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail from upper south wall of oecus at east end courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail of Bacchus and Ariadne, from central painting on south wall courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail of figure from upper west wall at south end courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail of painted decoration of oecus courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Detail of painted peacocks from upper west wall at south end courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Looking towards central panel of south wall with painting showing fight between Eros and Pan with painting of Leda and the Swan courtesy of Johannes Eber

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Looking towards upper and middle area of ​​south wall of oecus courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Looking towards upper and middle area of ​​west wall of oecus courtesy of Giuseppe Ciaramella

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Painted figure of Muse Urania, from west end of south wall of oecus courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Upper center of west wall of oecus, detail of painted figure of Zeus courtesy of Klaus Heese

House of the Vettii VI 15,1 Pompeii 2023 Upper south wall of oecus at east end, painted figure of Mercury courtesy of Klaus Heese

These frescos were found in an oecus adjoining the atrium accessed through either entrances VI 15,27 or VI 15,1. Its mythological iconography includes a painting of Leda and the Swan. Gemini suggests possible interpretations of this popular myth:

"The message conveyed by depictions of the Leda and the Swan myth is complex and multifaceted, and interpretations can vary depending on the specific artwork, historical context, and individual viewer. Here are some potential interpretations:
1. Divine power and seduction: The most straightforward interpretation focuses on the seduction of Leda by Zeus, disguised as a swan. This highlights the irresistible power of gods and their ability to manipulate mortals for their desires, often with consequences.
2. Fate and destiny: Leda's encounter with the swan, often depicted as unexpected and forceful, symbolizes the unpredictable nature of fate and how seemingly random events can have profound consequences.
3. Duality and contrasting forces: The contrasting figures of Leda, a human woman, and the swan, representing the divine, can symbolize the duality of human nature and the conflict between reason and passion, or the earthly and the divine.
4. Beauty and power: Leda's beauty, often emphasized in depictions, can be seen as a source of both admiration and danger, attracting powerful forces with potentially destructive consequences.
5. Fertility and procreation: In some interpretations, the myth is connected to themes of fertility and procreation. Leda's union with the swan results in the birth of Helen of Troy and Castor and Pollux, highlighting the divine origins of powerful figures.
It's important to remember that these are just potential interpretations, and the specific meaning conveyed by individual depictions can be influenced by various factors, including the artist's intent, the cultural context of the artwork, and the viewer's own perspective."
If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!


Thursday, February 22, 2024

The Ara Pacis and local Roman politics

 The Ara Pacis seems to be the target of local Roman politicians who apparently don't appreciate the structure that was erected around it. The article points out that the Ara Pacis was not originally located at its current location but moved there by Mussolini in 1938. Gemini points out that it wasn't just a simple relocation, however.

"Original Location: The Ara Pacis wasn't moved directly from its original location to its current one. Its initial site was in the northeastern corner of the Campus Martius, a large open space in ancient Rome near the Tiber River. This area was roughly north of the current Piazza del Popolo and west of the Mausoleum of Augustus.
"Gradual Burial and Rediscovery: Over time, sediment deposits from the Tiber gradually buried the Ara Pacis. It wasn't until the 16th and 19th centuries that fragments of the monument were rediscovered in various locations around the Campus Martius.
"Reconstruction and Modern Location: In the early 20th century, extensive excavations uncovered more substantial portions of the Ara Pacis. Mussolini then commissioned the reconstruction and reassembly of the monument in a new, purpose-built pavilion designed by architect Vittorio Ballio Morpurgo. This pavilion, near the Mausoleum of Augustus and the Lungotevere in Augusta, is where the Ara Pacis stands today.
"Therefore, it wasn't a simple case of moving from point A to point B. The Ara Pacis was originally located in the Campus Martius, gradually buried over centuries, rediscovered in fragments, and then reconstructed in its current location."
Image: The Ara Pacis with its current enclosure courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Rabax63



If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!


Tuesday, February 20, 2024

Modern misconceptions of Alexander the Great and Hephaestion

 I watched Netflix's docudrama and, like Professor Paul Cartledge in his recent interview (https://www.thecollector.com/paul-cartledge-alexander-the-great-interview/), I thought Netflix overemphasized the possible physical aspects of the relationship between Alexander and Hephaestion as a lead-in to the program. I also thought the program did not really emphasize Alexander's intellectual prowess as it pertained to military strategy, especially in the dramatization of the battle at the Granicus River. Alexander did not charge headlong recklessly into the Persian troops immediately upon arrival as portrayed in the film but carefully deployed his forces with unit commanders selected for their experience with troops armed with specific weapons. According to Arrian of Nicomedia, "After both armies finished their deployment, there was a moment of silence. Alexander then ordered Amyntas, son of Arrhabeus, to attack the Persian left wing with the Companion cavalry squadron of Socrates (now led by Ptolemy, son of Philip) at the front, followed by the Paeonian cavalry, the prodromoi and an unspecified infantry unit. Arrian then gives the impression that Alexander advanced at nearly the same time with the remainder of the right wing and the infantry, but later makes it clear that Alexander's attack came after the troops of Amyntas were pushed back.

The Persians answered the charge of the vanguard with volleys of javelins. Amyntas's force was at a disadvantage because they were severely outnumbered and the Persians were defending higher ground at the top of the bank. The Macedonians suffered losses and retreated towards Alexander, who now attacked with the remaining Companion cavalry of the right wing.
Historian A. M. Devine reasons that the failure of the attack led by Amyntas was not a mistake, but a ruse to draw the Persian cavalry out of formation as they pursued the retreating force of Amyntas into the riverbed. The disruption of the Persian formation would have made them vulnerable to the second attack led by Alexander in person.
Although other historians do not necessarily agree with Devine, Devine's explanation of Alexander's strategy reminded me a lot of Hannibal's tactics at the Battle of Cannae where the appearance of weakness was used to draw the enemy into a vulnerable position.
The docudrama also presented Alexander as a youthful, inexperienced commander when, in fact, Alexander had successfully put down several revolts in the Balkans and Greece after Phillip's assassination to reassert Macedonian authority before embarking on his Persian campaign.

Image: Sculptures of Alexander the Great and Hephaestion that I photographed at the Getty Villa in Malibu, California.


If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!