 Thank you for those three incredibly thought-provoking talks. I have a few questions for each of you, and then I think we should open it up to the audience. Let me see. First one is for Nicole. I was wondering, as you were talking about philosophy from the time about the relationship between art and nature. Sort of provide a fuller context in that area, because one of the things that I kept thinking about, I mean, I think that your argument that was sort of reflecting or even kind of celebrating the urban setting, I was wondering if it was some sort of having the tree in this architectural base was some sort of, maybe I'm just overstating this. I don't know enough about your area. Was it some sort of declaration of the kind of human civilization's triumph over nature? That is a good question for this period. Certainly the Romans liked to exert control over nature. So for example, as example would be, of course, aqueducts, which are essentially the urbanized way to transform a rural water source outside the city into its identity. And in general, we know in terms of their terracing of rural hillsides and their outlining of water features, whether lakes or spring-fed with marble revetment, that there is a sort of overall desire to contain, harness, and regularize nature in a certain way, which I think this plays into very much. There is also the phenomenon of Rus in Urbe, which the recreation, the illusion of the countryside created in the city, which is something that we know was from at least the mid-1st century BC, was a way in which Romans thought about monumental urban planning projects so that any sort of theater or temple precinct or even public building would contain gardens and trees that were incorporated into that setting, obviously in settings that were defined with stone and marble. So I think that this is playing into both of those aspects of Roman culture. The painting that you showed had the column in front of the tree. Yes. Because it seemed, I mean, it was such a celebration of the fact that these architectural forms are coming from nature. Yes, exactly. And this intermingling in painting and in relief, this intermingling of Urbane architectural forms in this country landscape that looks very remote and removed from the city in many ways, is a very dominant feature. What do you make of the, I mean, the fact that the sculpture is argued that the fig tree was probably not some sort of a bronze sculpture, right? But the fact that the Marcia sculpture is on a stand right next to the tree, what's the relationship between those? I mean, it's got to be, you said something about how there's known, kind of known symbolism for that sculpture. But it's so deliberate, that placement. Right, well there, so I think what is happening here is so there's been a lot of debate about what the relationship is between those, the statue and the fig tree, which we don't know, that we have nothing that attests that these were even located. Actually they were not located right next to each other in reality in the forum. They were relatively close to each other. And we don't have any ideological reason to think that they were thought of in unison. But I do think what's happening is that these are two very important forum landmarks that have a very long chronology that have been around by the time of the Anaglipha, at least they are thought of as having been around for 800 some years. So I think that in that way they're connected by the basis attested there, sort of equally long chronologies, in a way, as opposed to a thematic connection between the two. Anda, I have just a really kind of specific iconographic question, actually a couple. On the panel with the ship, what are the figures up on the sails doing? The ship and sail. And then Taiki looking out the window. What do you make of that? Why is she looking out a window? Why is it sort of shuttered? I've said a lot of different things about this, actually. Kirt Bojan has suggested that she's peering out of a window to kind of look down. I do agree in some ways. If you follow her eye line down, she's not actually looking down. She's looking straight out. So she's making contact with us. And I think she is in a very similar way, asserting herself as a patron of the monument. Some have suggested that these kinds of functions of Augustalis, these patron groups, sometimes women were not necessarily allowed if you weren't on the receiving end of the grinder. And so this is how she, in some ways, can assert herself into this biographical moment. I thought that what you were saying about the viewer's participation in the creation of identity was really interesting and about that. Sure. So I think one way to kind of think about this is the fact that this is not just an isolated case of how we would approach and interact with a monument, even on this street in Pompeii. There are various kind of these necropolis streets in the city of Pompeii. I mentioned three of them in my talk. But at the Porta di Ecolana, in particular, there is a monument to a very well-known Pompeii and priestess Mamia. And her tomb is in the shape of a large semicircular bench. And along the back of the bench, there's an inscription relaying her name and her titles. And as you walk down the street, the different pieces of the inscription appear to you. So you can actually read it as you walk by. And so I think there are a lot of things going on. First of all, there's an attempt to kind of reach out to the viewer to sustain your identity, because as I mentioned in the Roman world, one kind of assured way to live on in the afterlife is to be remembered in the memories of the living. And in Roman epitaphs we see all the time, they actually kind of called out to the viewer, hey, come by, come to my tomb, say my name, to kind of re-animate my memory. So I think that's what's going on here. Perpetuate the memory by invoking this kind of walk around in many ways. I think that that leaves a certain openness in the interpretation of the memory. I think so. I think what the ultimate goal was, despite however you want to interpret the memory, is that it is just purely invoked to begin with so that you do live on. But I think it's very clear what she was trying to do and that she is showing, that she can afford this lavish monument built out of marble. It's very ornate and it's outside of a very prominent road in the city of Pompeii. Thank you. So I am wondering about sort of what you said at the end when you were talking about the Council of Trent and the creation of empathy in the viewer. And if you can talk a little bit more about how that artistic goal or if I don't know, I don't know if you would call it also kind of a political goal relates to medium body. So when you look at a painting of Christ who's clearly suffering the wounds of the passion, the blood running down, the red in eyes I think is a wonderful detail when you really step close to it. You're inspiring them to feel that in a physical embodied sense, which I think adds an even greater layer than just looking at a representation in general, I recognize the scene. I acknowledge what's being communicated to me here. And there's a very different emotional resonance who I see what's happening to this human being. This could happen to me or this has happened to me in some way. Christian and other Venetians were already very interested in interacting with our bodily senses in what they're painting on canvas or previously on panel, which many of them did. They already are thinking about those ways of engaging the viewer and that's sort of entirely separate with even what they're painting. So the way in which they paint is seeking to engage with us. And when you combine that with a subject matter that is intended to directly engage the worshiper, you have this wonderful synergy which turned out to be the direction with which the Catholic Church took. There's always the question whether they were going to say yes or no on sacred images. They ended up doubling down on them. And the Venetians in particular were ready to produce this kind of image that would inspire the viewer and get them invested in what they're seeing. Same that working on slate makes it harder to create that sense of investment because I think it's harder to create the sense of a kind of tactile body. I mean, slate and other than moving on to other materials like marble or a person object, copper, it has, I would say, sort of other interests. It's a collector's object. It becomes an object of fascination but that's never going to be sort of a wide audience that's going to have those objects. So for example, that slate painting was given to one of the most elite patrons of all, the Holy Roman Emperor. So I think an oil on canvas painting, for example, that will be placed in a church will have a much greater audience but Sebastiano Del Piambo did experiment with painting on large slabs of Ardizia that were in church. So it's that question of how do you overcome the sort of the structural boundaries that the medium might impose on you? One of the things I think you can point to is that Titian never painted on slate again. So I think perhaps he did paint on marble once, begrudgingly, because the emperor requested it as a follow-up to the painting that he'd already given him. So those two, after those two, like no more. Back to oil on canvas and he'll stay that way for the remaining quarter century of his career. Do you guys have questions for each other? Comments? There were, I mean, I think this is very interesting, this sort of sequential reading. And certainly as you say, these tombs often say, even say, stop and read me. So they're often invite. But I guess I had two questions. One is I was trying to think of another Comparanda where you're invited to make that sequential progression around. And then the second is I wonder if you could talk to, does it matter if you're leaving the city or coming the city? Because that experience then reverses if you think that plays a role. I definitely think it does. One of the reasons I think that it is kind of that up in that particular way is because most people generally who were leaving the city would have either seen it before or lived there and were in some way familiar with it. So I think what she was trying to do is really grab the attention of people on their way into the city at that time. Well, for those who hadn't seen it for whatever reason before. There's also this notion of, so the closest to the city gate that with the ship and the crew. And that's actually kind of graphically closest to where the port would have been. And the Bicelium similarly is closest to where the theater would have been with the Bicelium. There's both. Yeah, exactly. And then to answer your first question. I don't know that off the top of my head I can think of any kind of one-to-one parallels but I think as I mentioned the example of Mamiya, right? This kind of bench where the inscription slowly unfolds is using a very similar kind of mechanism where you get little bits piece by piece and it kind of invites and inspires the interest of someone to say, oh, what's going on here? I'd like to keep seeing how this is working and finish your walk around it or explore it closer. I wonder if perhaps the painted freezes might provide a comparison where you have to around the room. Yeah, and I think even in the tomb of Priscus I showed one image of the interior of the painting and I think that there's something similar that works there too. Where you have a gladiatorial scene, you have a scene of him in his kind of office in his home and then a service. I think there is also this kind of sense of walking around it and exploring it in that way. Questions from? I wonder if you can say actually both of the Madrid pictures are very small. Bastiano and Antitian? Ari and Michelangelo. Art certainly, certain hierarchies of scale in the sense of obviously a larger painting will attract certain amounts of more attention. Depending on what the function of the painting might be, Bastiano when he sent the painting into Spain that was on slate, it was a very large altarpiece so there's actually a lot of extra danger involved in something so large that could break so easily. One practical reason for Titian to paint a smaller object if he's planning on taking it in Augsburg over the Alps, even if he has seven people to aid him, might make more sense to make something a little smaller that is a little bit more easily safeguarded. That could very plausibly be one solution. Another reason is there's a certain generic size which he's working at different periods in his career but with his particular size for that sort of close up devotional format which invites you to approach. It's not an overwhelming altarpiece with many images. It's sort of a one-on-one connection and I think it adds in the sense that there are none of the torturers of the passion, for example, depicted. It really is just you and the figure of Christ making it that small invites that sort of personal attention which then enhances that sort of embodied experience as you appreciate the sort of tactile qualities of what you're seeing. Three to follow up. Past majority. Well, for the negative reactions you can read my dissertation for one thing. Part, you know, there's a certain, there's the company Lismo in the sense of here's a Venetian in Rome. He paints very differently from the way we paint. He doesn't have the sculptural bodies that Michelangelo even in his painted forms would prefer. So Titian is really, he's acting, he's on enemy turf to a certain extent which is one reason I think it's very interesting when you see him pushing his open brushwork even further as if to say, I am a Venetian. This is how we do it. I will not, you know, adopt as Sebastiano did moving to Rome. Titian adopted a bit more of a Roman style means of painting. Titian absolutely, you know, hewed to his own artistic ideals. So I think there was a lot of that sense of ego tied up in it and also Vasari's entire project was to valorize his tradition, his way of painting that Michelangelo was his avatar. Titian did not fit neatly into that box but nor could he ignore him because he's looking at an artist who has so highly elevated the position of artist. He's, you know, been ennobled by the Holy Roman Emperor. He has to give him his accolades but one of the things I think he does very interestingly is that he hems him into the box of portraiture as a way of saying he couldn't quite hack it in the big leagues with religious painting, with mythology, he didn't do so well and here's Michelangelo to back me up on this and say that it was poorly done. But you know, he did really well in this one other thing which happens to be the genre that princes the world over had always wanted the most of. He tries to have it both ways in that sense. I wanna address my question, a single question to that is, have you considered the role of? Yes, so on the relief, we don't know much about the color on the anaglypha because of, but it's very likely that there was, whether it was as bright as some of the modern reconstructions you see of painting but certainly I think paint could have been both identify the emperor statue group of the Alimenta relief as a statue. I think that might have been necessary to differentiate that group from the other emperor addressing the crowd from the speaker's rostra. And similarly it would have, yeah, I would love to have known what the color said about the, and the statue. I can't think of, I think that the, if we have so much, as you saw actually on Amanda's monument, we have so much, so many monuments that have that, have something vegetal on them, whether it's a freeze, vegetation included as a living tree in a sacro idyllic scene. I tend to think that the tree, like sculptural appearance would have been as a tree, you know, green and brown. Other than that, we don't know. I can tell in any of the records that I've looked at, there is no mention of it having been painted. That is not to say, though, that it necessarily wouldn't have been painted. Christ had it been painted, I think. Probably would have just served to kind of highlight some of the finer details that you can't see up close when it's just kind of this plain white, so perhaps some of the kind of tassels that I saw on that double width bench would have been highlighted further. But yeah, it's a great question. I am not sure where exactly I stand on it, just because there isn't really much out there. I think it definitely would have made it pop a lot more. And I actually thought of another response to your question as another example of something where we might see this. So I mentioned Penelope Davis really briefly in my talk. And her concept is that monuments in Rome were used to kind of similarly inspire viewers to move around the particular monument to, in her case, to reenact a funerary ritual. So one of her main examples is the column of Trajan, right, it has this kind of spiraling freeze and you kind of walk around it to look up to see what's going on. And she's arguing that what that's doing is having people ritually circle the monument as this kind of D'Cercio ritual. And so I think that's another example of when the iconography really encourages you to move around and read in kind of a spiritual manner. Although yours are so much more visible than that would have been. For Michelle? Very long. I'm talking to imagine, but it's interesting that there is this dichotomy between something that's fragile when being moved and then as soon as you can get it in place, you have something that could theoretically last forever. One of the things I find very interesting, if you go to the Museo de Capitumonte, you will find many unfinished late paintings by Sebastiano showing that collectors retained these objects even when they were not complete. So that suggested that even if something had happened to Titian's paintings, they wouldn't have kept it somewhere. And yet within a century, it's just completely vanished. So my suggestion being that one of the causes of deterioration might not have been the most obvious being a physical breakage, but what if from experimenting with a brand new technology, the application simply didn't go on correctly, the painting could have just simply deteriorated on its own as Titian had recently had happened in Venice, a double frustration if that's in case, and that's in fact the case. But Slate paintings I think attracted certain painters for that reason, that they allowed them to participate in this sort of... But I think one of the reasons you don't find them achieving immortality in use is because the possibilities of canvas and or fresco wind up being just so much more practical in many ways. A rigorous, intellectual question at all, but just a sort of personal, maybe more emotional question for you. What's it like to, as an art historian, to work on something that you can't... Well, it's a challenge. In my dissertation, I do talk about many paintings that do exist, but since I was trying to cover the paintings that Titian executed in Rome, like in here is this mention of this one painting that we don't look at. And so of course, when there's maybe 400 extent paintings by Titian to talk about, obviously you're going to sort of pass over the ones where we don't have them anyway. So it is a challenge, but also it's kind of fun. I mean, it becomes a very speculative thing. If the Eche Homo turned up tomorrow and turned out to be on oil on canvas, I would kindly retract everything that I've said today and we would leave the Madrid version as his sole experiment with slate and move on. Hi, thank you. This question actually goes back to the question about color and for Amanda. Actually, I have a couple of questions. As you were talking about color, I was thinking about the format of these reliefs where you have the vegetation framed around the narrative scenes and it got me to thinking about inspiration of other media because it really looks like a textile to me. So is that something that was common, this transfer of compositional formats between media? And the other question I have for you is that you mentioned this idea of a trope of female dedication in funerary monuments and I wondered if you could talk about that more. Actually, survive from this period? I mean, we do know what some textiles would have looked like from what I know about me surviving today. Maybe if I could interject, maybe this is my hobby horse, but certainly we know real garlands were often draped or I think the consensus is that real garlands that were draped along monuments and for various religious occasions and decorated kinds of places that they're sort of permanent renditions of not accurate copies of, but they're alluding to that tradition. Would you? Exactly, I mean, this is a tradition, this kind of a campus association is a tradition that goes back to Greek thought and practice and I think we can see a similar thing going on with even just the kind of form of the monument itself. It's in the shape of an altar, right? In practice, you would often times make offerings to, and so I think by having an altar, which you wouldn't actually have used because it was so high up, it is also a symbolic kind of permanent state of re-invoking these funeral rituals also happening with the garlands. Oh, and for your second question. So one of the things that really originally got me interested in this project is not only Nevillei Taiki's status as a freed woman, a former slave, but also, and I was thinking about commissions of women throughout the city of Pompeii broadly and they're unlike male Pompeian citizens, there was really only so much you could do. Women who were born free could be public priestesses of the city. Of course, you had to be very wealthy to do this. So there weren't that many options aside from these kind of monumental dedications open to women to kind of celebrate themselves. I think this is something that people, especially like Nevillei Taiki, a freed woman who was able to gain wealth jumped on very, very quickly. That said, I think there are also kind of certain parameters in which it was okay to celebrate yourself and your family. There's a great article by Maureen Flory, it's called where women actually looks at the funeral inscriptions of when women's names actually come before their husbands in the inscriptions and there are really two cases in which this happens. The first is when both partners were former slaves and the woman was freed first. Oftentimes this was done if they wanted to have children so that their children would be free because the children took on the staff. And also when the woman was the patron of the monument. So I think she's working within these kinds of difficult confines to really make a statement about herself and transfer memory into Pompeii. I'd like to thank you all so much for your presentations. This is a question for Nicole that touches a little bit on Amanda's topic as well. Free and Marcia sculptures are repeated on each anaglipha. I was wondering what that made you think of them as a spatial connector between those two anaglipha and how that might encourage movement around the whole monument. Right, so this is a kind of, well it's no longer, but it used to be a hot topic. Because if one imagines, so the debate has been, do we imagine the two freezes positioned side by side and that they show a continuous view of one's long side of the forum square? And if they're erected side by side, then do we imagine that the tree and the fig were a sort of visual link that moved you from one to the other? But this is very, this would be a very heavy handed and it would be just to imagine the two sort of like this which would also on the reverse have the pig, sheep and bull facing each other which also doesn't seem to make sense. This doesn't, that doesn't seem a very likely reconstruction. Now some people have said that in fact one relief shows the south side of the forum and the other shows the north side of the forum. So there's sort of a continuous versus opposite view of the forum debate that's happening. I think the more people think that it's just one long view of the forum. And in this case, if we imagine, I show those reconstructions briefly, but it seems that the repetition of the two would indicate that they were not shown side by side but probably opposite and facing away from each other. So that those two did provide a link for you as you saw the two different reliefs. It does seem to suggest that they were, they meant you though to see them as part of the same monument. Now we don't have, we don't know what the other sides would have been. We do know that on the top of the slabs, there are holes that indicate this may have been the base for, the reconstructions I show you show a reuse of this, but it may originally have been the base of a barrier in which iron or metal rods were then inserted. And in fact, Mario Torelli has suggested that the bases were two sides of a four-sided barrier that in fact was erected around the Ficus and the Marcia statue in the forum to protect or one or the other to protect them from encroachment. So that would be an interesting kind of doubling. And then the question of what to make of the repeated pig sheep and bull is a problem, but it does seem to make sense that they would be opposing each other, but it's an open question and it's an interesting. Thank you all, thank you to our speakers. Thank you.