Erotica in Art


 





" In art, immorality cannot exist.
Art is always sacred"

                                                     August Rodin

 




Greece-Rome



 

Sexuality in Roman Art 100 B.C. to A.D. 250.

Journal of Sex Research  

(by Elizabeth Marer-Banasik)

Looking at Lovemaking: Constructions of Sexuality in Roman Art 100 B.C. to A.D. 250. By John R. Clarke. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998,

John R. Clarke's Looking at Lovemaking is an important addition to scholarly discourse on the subject of sexuality in the Roman world. The book focuses on the visual record of sexual imagery that was produced in Rome and its provinces from 100 B.C. to A.D. 250. Clarke seeks to recover the significance that these sexual images had for ancient Roman viewers by analyzing their imagery and studying the varied environments in which the imagery was displayed. The author is particularly interested in recovering the meaning that these images had for observers such as women and the nonelite members of Roman society, whose viewpoints are not represented in extant written sources.
Another issue is the question of the ancient sources. The authors of the texts were generally men who were members of the Roman elite or those who worked for them. In contrast with the narrow category of authors of the surviving written texts, Clarke sees the visual record as providing a far wider category of evidence for Roman views on sexuality. The visual record was created by artists working for a wide variety of patrons, and was displayed in a wide variety of contexts. Because it was produced for such a varied audience, Clarke believes that visual objects are a much more inclusive record of Roman views on sexuality than written records.

In a book filled with interesting and illuminating analyses, two sections are particularly interesting: the Augustan and early Julio-Claudian periods, and Pompeii in the Neronian and Flavian periods. In the section on the sexual imagery of the Augustan and Julio-Claudian era Clarke uses evidence such as the Warren cup, Arrentine ware, cameo glass, and wall paintings from Rome to reach conclusions about how Romans might have interpreted scenes of male-male and male-female lovemaking.
The book is wide-ranging and contains many areas of interest for the study of sexuality in the ancient world. The author first explores the Greek and Hellenistic periods, which were a source of motifs and models for the later Roman works. This is followed by sections on the Augustan and Julio-Claudian periods, the city of Pompeii in the Neronian and Flavian periods, and works from Italy and the provinces in the first through the third centuries. The evidence that Clark explores includes silver vessels, pottery known as Arrentine ware, wall paintings, lamps, and other objects.Before turning to the imagery, the book opens with a discussion of the author's methodology and the challenges inherent in the study of Roman sexuality and sexual imagery. One of the first issues that confronts the historian is the question of whether sexuality is culturally determined or "constructed" through learned behavior and a set of commonly held beliefs, or if there are universal or "essential" elements to sexuality that would allow the historian to apply twentieth-century concepts such as heterosexuality or homosexuality to the study of Roman sexuality and sexual imagery.
Turning first to male-male imagery, Clarke discusses the Warren cup, Arrentine ceramic bowls, and cameo glass vessels to draw several conclusions. He notes that buyers from a variety of economic levels bought vessels decorated with scenes of male-male lovemaking. Cameo glass could only be bought by the very wealthy, the value of silver is not known with certainty but it was probably used by the upper classes, and Arrentine ware was produced for the mass market. He speculates that both men and women would have used vessels decorated with scenes of male-male lovemaking. The Warren cup, with its fine craftsmanship, would have been admired and appreciated by both sexes. He notes that it is works in silver such as the Warren cup that would have been the inspiration for the mass-produced Arrentine ware. Clarke also sees a certain intimacy and tenderness between the male partners on both the Warren cup and the Arrentine ware that is also seen in scenes of male-female lovemaking. Clarke concludes this section with a discussion of what the Roman viewer might have thought about these scenes of male-male lovemaking.
Clarke next examines scenes of male-female lovemaking, for which his evidence is primarily wall paintings and Arrentine bowls. Clarke turns first to the Farnesina wall paintings, which are high-quality frescos from a villa in Rome. The frescos depict an architectural framework with a large central image below four smaller images. The small images imitate panel paintings, and a number depict scenes of male-female lovemaking. Clarke argues that these small paintings are meant to be decorative and to evoke a collection of Greek artworks. The viewer sees upper-class, leisurely lovemaking in a luxury setting. Scenes of lovemaking are a part of elite decorative choices.
Turning to Arrentine ware, Clarke sees the male-female imagery on the bowls as reflecting upper-class models such as the Farnesina paintings. He does note that explicit sexual activity such as that on the Arrentine bowls is not found in these wall paintings, and may represent the artist offering a choice of imagery to the buyer. But, in spite of the more explicit nature of the Arrentine bowls, the models are found in scenes of "high art" lovemaking such as that found in the frescos. Clarke goes on to discuss the subjective experience of the various viewers of the Arrentine bowls. He sees this imagery, and related Augustan imagery such as the Warren cup and the cameo glass examples, as depicting a fundamentally new representation of lovemaking that focused on a more tender and intimate attitude toward lovemaking.
The second major area that Clarke covers are the wall paintings from Pompeii of the Neronian and Flavian periods (A.D. 54-79). Clarke cites a number of works depicting male-female lovemaking displayed in private houses. He analyzes the imagery, which shows a variety of sexual activities, and reconstructs the placement of the paintings in the houses. Rather than seeing the works as hidden away or as an indication of secluded rooms where sexual activity took place, Clarke argues that the paintings were in rooms associated with the entertaining or reception of guests. Decorating these rooms with scenes of lovemaking would be part of a decorative scheme that reflected the artistic tastes of wealthy Romans such as those who owned the Farnesina villa. Display of scenes of lovemaking was related to the decorative choices of the elite.The next section deals with scenes of lovemaking in public buildings. Particularly interesting are the paintings from the Suburban baths and their interpretation by Clarke. The paintings are eight scenes of lovemaking that become progressively more complex with each scene. These scenes are found in the bath's dressing room that was used by members of both sexes. Because the room was used by both men and women it is important evidence for reconstructing how women would have reacted to the sexual imagery. Clarke speculates that the scenes would have had a comic effect, and that viewers of both sexes and of varied social status would have reacted with laughter to the scenes.
Clarke's analysis outlined above, with its emphasis on reconstructing points of view that are not found in the extant written sources, is a valuable approach that widens the field of investigation into ancient sexuality. Clarke's approach also points out some of the challenges that scholars face in this area. Because there is often no written evidence that can be used to interpret the scenes, Clarke must sometimes attempt to reconstruct what viewers thought on the basis of very subjective interpretations of the evidence.Clarke's book joins a number of recent works that use a theoretical framework to explore Greek and Roman sexuality. These works include the groundbreaking works by Foucault (1978) and Boswell (1980). Other contributors to this field include Fredrick (1995), Richlin (1992), and Koloski-Ostrow and C. Lyons (1997).Looking at Lovemaking is a important addition to this recent theoretical scholarship and contains informative material for a wide variety of readers. The book will certainly prove a useful resource for any reader interested in the study of ancient sexuality.

REFERENCES

Boswell, J. (1980). Christianity, social tolerance, and homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality (Vols. 1-3) (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books.Fredrick, D. (1995). Beyond the atrium to Ariadne: Erotic painting and visual pleasures in the Roman house. Classical Antiquity, 14, 266-287.Koloski-Ostrow, A., & Lyons, C. (Eds.). (1997). Naked truths: Women, sexuality and gender in classical art and archaeology. London: Routledge.

Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum was discovered in the ancient cities around the bay of Naples (particularly of Pompeii and Herculaneum) after extensive excavations began in the 18th century. The city was found to be full of erotic art and frescoes, symbols, and inscriptions regarded by its excavators as pornographic. Even many recovered household items had a sexual theme. The ubiquity of such imagery and items indicates that the sexual mores of the ancient Roman culture of the time were much more liberal than most present-day cultures, although much of what might seem to us to be erotic imagery (eg oversized phalluses) was in fact fertility-imagery. This clash of cultures led to an unknown number of discoveries being hidden away again. For example, a wall fresco which depicted Priapus, the ancient god of sex and fertility, with his extremely enlarged penis, was covered with plaster (and, as Schefold explains), even the older reproduction below was locked away "out of prudishness" and only opened on request) and only rediscovered in 1998 due to rainfall.

In 1819, when King Francis I of Naples visited the Pompeii exhibition at the National Museum with his wife and daughter, he was so embarrassed by the erotic artwork that he decided to have it locked away in a secret cabinet, accessible only to "people of mature age and respected morals". Re-opened, closed, re-opened again and then closed again for nearly 100 years, it was briefly made accessible again at the end of the 1960s (the time of the sexual revolution) and was finally re-opened for viewing in 2000. Minors are still only allowed entry to the once secret cabinet in the presence of a guardian or with written permission.


It is unclear whether the images on the walls were advertisements for the services offered or merely intended to heighten the pleasure of the visitors. As previously mentioned, some of the paintings and frescoes became immediately famous because they represented erotic, sometimes explicit, sexual scenes. One of the most curious buildings recovered was in fact a Lupanare (brothel), which had many erotic paintings and graffiti inside. The erotic paintings seem to present an idealised vision of sex at odds with the reality of the function of the lupanare. The Lupanare had 10 rooms (cubicula, 5 per floor), a balcony, and a latrina. It was one of the larger houses, perhaps the largest, but not the only brothel. The town seems to have been oriented to a warm consideration of sensual matters: on a wall of the Basilica (sort of a civil tribunal, thus frequented by many Roman tourists and travelers), an immortal inscription tells the foreigner, If anyone is looking for some tender love in this town, keep in mind that here all the girls are very friendly (loose translation). Other inscriptions reveal some pricing information for various services: Athenais 2 As, Sabina 2 As (CIL IV, 4150), The house slave Logas, 8 As (CIL IV, 5203) or Maritimus licks your vulva for 4 As. He is ready to serve virgins as well. (CIL IV, 8940). The amounts vary from one to two As up to several Sesterces. In the lower price range the service was not more expensive than a loaf of bread. Prostitution was relatively inexpensive for the Roman male but it is important to note that even a low priced prostitute earned more than three times the wages of an unskilled urban laborer. However, it was unlikely a freed woman would enter the profession in hopes for wealth because most women declined in their economic status and standard of living due to demands on their appearance as well as their health. Prostitution was overwhelmingly an urban creation. Within the brothel it is said prostitutes worked in a small room usually with an entrance marked by a patchwork curtain. Sometimes the woman's name and price would be placed above her door. Sex was generally the cheapest in Pompeii, compared to other parts of the Empire. Although an estimation of price is difficult to guess, one should suspect the prostitute's age, appearance, and skill level would play a part in the price. All services were paid for with cash.