 Thanks very much to the organizers for accepting my paper and thanks to everyone for sticking around till the end here. So I'll get started. Over the course of the last 30 or 40 years, studies examining the Roman economy have shifted from a reliance primarily on textual sources towards a more materially integrative approach. With the result that quantitative archaeological data now plays a central role in analyses focusing on various aspects of the economic system. This paper aims to apply some similarly quantitative techniques to a related, if slightly tangential topic, painted wall decoration in Roman commercial space. Roman cities were awash with commercial activity. Hawkers and peddlers wandered the streets selling their wares, merchants set up temporary stalls along sidewalks and in the porticoes of public buildings, and goods were sold from central markets as well as shops and workshops lining urban thoroughfares. Pompeii, the focus of this study, provides evidence for these activities. Wall paintings depict various informal arrangements such as vendors selling food or merchandise from tents set up near the amphitheater or from wooden tables in the forum. While on the other hand, the structural remains of over 600 purpose-built taberni or shops, I'll use that with air quotes, are scattered across the Pompeian cityscape. While it's unfortunately not possible to examine decorative aspects of the former facilities, which are no longer extant, taberni offer a more promising line of inquiry. Though wall paintings survive less readily on their facades and interiors than, for example, painted decoration located inside houses. There's enough material with which to work to draw some broad conclusions about the nature of commercial wall painting and its general aims. Now it's important to note that in using the Latin term taberni, I'm referring to a very specific architectural form, a single room sometimes linked to a larger property accessible via a wide doorway opening directly onto the street. And while it's true that these spaces were utilized for the sale of food, wine, and other retail products, the material record from Pompeii indicates that they were also home to small-scale manufacturing and craft activities such as metalworking, cobbling, and jewelry production. They also often doubled as residences for the individuals who owned and or worked in them. Given their multifunctional nature then, we must find a way to distinguish the taberni that were used specifically for commercial enterprises. And this can be done by identifying bar counters, an approach that was first employed by Stephen Ellis in the mid-2000s. The presence of a counter confirms that retail activity, typically food service, was taking place in an establishment. Many counters were fitted out with embedded dolia used for the serving of foodstuffs or wine. And in some cases, these dolia were also employed as receptacles for currency, as in the case of the Calpona diva tutiis placidus, where a hoard of over 1,300 bronze coins was discovered when the unit was excavated. Other common architectural features in bars include horrors and braziers, which were positioned behind or next to the counter, as well as a tiered display shelf located near the junction of the counter and wall, where drinking vessels or goods for sale could be presented. Obviously, these types of fixtures further emphasize the commercial character of these properties. Bars also make an excellent case study, because there are a substantial number of them in Pompeii. The precise total varies from survey to survey, but we can safely say that at the time of the Vesuvian eruption, there were between 155 and 160 taberni with bar counters in the city. Again, following Stephen Ellis, as well as Clayton Phant and Ben Russell, who have studied the marble counters, I recognize the presence of 156 bars for the purposes of this paper. Food, service, and drinking establishments in particular relied on appeals to the senses to induce patronage. This is exactly the reason that in most Pompeii in bars, the counter is located next to the threshold, so that the sights, sounds, and smells emanating from the interior of the property spilled out onto the street. This also positioned the barkeep next to the sidewalk, where he or she could display merchandise and aim to attract clientele personally. But the decorative choices made by bar owners with respect to the design of facades and interiors were also aimed at drawing in customers. Although there are a handful of exceptions, the facades of bars in Pompeii were painted utilizing a standardized decorative scheme, in which large monochrome blocks of color were arranged in horizontal bands. A range of colors were employed, but the most common scheme consisted of a high red dado topped with a white upper zone. The height of the dado was variable, and it was sometimes embellished with vertical bands, rectangular panels, or ornamental features, which were produced in an additional color, typically yellow or black. Figural images, if they appeared, were usually located in the upper zone. And what we find on the insides of bars is that the same, or a very similar, pattern is often present. We can see an example of this arrangement in the Calpona di Hermes, on the Via della Bandanza. The remains of red painted plaster, in this case rising to a height of over two meters, are visible on the south and east walls of the bar room. This field is topped with a white upper zone that may represent the start of the mezzanine above. Although the internal decoration of bars tends to be poorly preserved, a quick jaunt down the eastern expanse of the Via de la Bandanza reveals numerous properties with a similar design. Again, the height of the red dado varies, in some cases occupying most of the wall's visual space, but the pattern of white over red is fairly consistent. And indeed, if we extend the analysis to the full range of bars in which the interior decoration has been recorded, we can see that this is no one-off trend. Across the board, red and white over red are the dominant color choices, appearing in more than three-quarters of the bars in the sample. So it seems that we have a clear continuity between the designs and colors used to decorate the facades of Pompeian bars and those applied to their interiors. This suggests that bar owners and operators were using painted decoration to establish a formal link between the internal space of the bar and the sidewalk or street. With the wide doorway and counterposition against the threshold, the boundary between inside and outside was already blurred, and in good weather the bar's interior became in effect an extension of the street. The design was, no doubt, very useful when trying to encourage pedestrians to stop by for a quick bite to eat or a drink. And this was not the only decorative technique that bar owners employed in an effort to induce patronage. Traditional readings of figural paintings that appear on the facades or internal spaces of Taberni make a stylistic distinction between these images, which are generally referred to as art of plebeia, so plebeian art, and those found in houses, temples, or public buildings, which are viewed as falling in line with the traditions of high or classical art. In practice, this distinction can be reduced to a quite simple duality. Lower-class art is thought to have been generated as part of an Italian tradition, whereas high art is derived from Hellenistic models. In his 1991 book L'Orarien und Fassadenbilde in den Vesuvsdaten, Thomas Frolich argued convincingly that the figural paintings discovered on the facades of Pompeian buildings were not representative of italic painting conventions, but rather in terms of composition and style fell in line with Greek models. For Frolich, these paintings were an authentic expression of popular art that were not connected to a particular social group, but rather intended for the widest possible audience. And this idea, I think, connects to a point that I've already at least tacitly acknowledged here, that paintings and ornamental decor produced for the commercial sphere were functional in a way that Roman domestic art was not. And this is why, for example, we rarely find lofty depictions of mythological scenes loaded with allegory and symbols on Pompeian building facades. In their place was a set of comparatively simplistic images, the meanings of which could be quickly ascertained by their viewership. In terms of their content, these images can be broken down into three broad thematic categories. One, production in merchandise, two, animals, three, deities. For the purpose of this paper, I'm going to leave out the fourth group. These are Loraria paintings, and these have a quite specific religious function. Frolich considered the images of merchandise, which include paintings of finished products, as well as the processes utilized in their production, to be clear examples of advertising. And in certain instances, such as the painting of vessels containing wines and their respective prices discovered on the façade of Calpona 614 at Herculaneum, it's hard to interpret the image any other way. But I would argue that images of animals served a similar, if somewhat less conspicuous, aim. One of the best examples of painted fauna hails from the façade of the Hospitium de Citius, which is located on the eastern side of the winding Vicolo de Lupinare. Immediately opposite Pompey's largest purpose-built brothel. If the brothel was half as popular in antiquity as it is with tourists today, there must have been considerable foot traffic along this street. When the Vicolo de Lupinare was excavated in the mid-19th century, an image flanked by textual de pente, positioned above and below, was discovered on the façade between the bars to entrances. Unfortunately, a copy of this image has not survived, so I've done my best to reconstruct it based on the details provided by the excavators. You can see this is an excellent reconstruction. There were three primary components of the painting, a large red elephant in the center, a yellow snake whining its way around the beast's legs, and a pygmy positioned opposite the elephant's feet. The presence of the elephant in the pygmy in a single image suggested to the excavators that the painting was intended to reflect the property owner's home continent, Africa. When considered in light of the two de pente, however, it seems more likely that the image was not connected to the origins of the owner, but rather to the name of the property itself. The de pente above the image reads, Citius restored the elephant, while below the animal's feet, the second text appeared. In for let here includes a triclinium with three beds and a comfortable something or other, the text breaks off. Thus the de pente suggests that the in was in fact called the elephant and that it had been refurbished by its owner so that it could be rented out to potential lessees. These types of painted for let signs have been found elsewhere in Pompeii and were not an uncommon phenomenon. If this reading of the painting is correct, then the owner of the elephant seems to have been utilizing facade decoration in an attempt to reinforce brand identity, and I use that in big air quotes. In a world without street signs or addresses, this type of branding would have been quite useful. Indeed, there are a number of graffiti found on objects and architecture in Pompeii that offer directions or seek to identify a location in the town, and they do so with considerable difficulty. Displaying paintings of one or more deities on the street frontage was another effective way to reinforce a property's identity. Typically positioned in the vicinity of the shop door and in the upper register, gods and goddesses were connected both with the goings on inside the property, but also with the actions and activities of the street. One of the most popular deities to adorn the facades of Pompeii and Tabernai was a goddess with deep ties to the town and the region, Venus Pompeiana. This version of Venus differs dramatically from the traditional presentations of the goddess, in which she is portrayed nude and reclining, often in an aquatic context, as we can see here in a painting from the Casa de la Venera in Conquilia. But unlike the scantily clad goddess of love, Venus Pompeiana stands erect, fully clothed in a dark blue or purple pallium, and is accompanied by her son, Eros, who holds a mirror. She wears either a golden diadem or the turtid crown of polyatic deities. In her left hand, she grasps the top of an upturned rudder, which is thought to reflect Pompeii's connections to the sea. And indeed, the link between the goddess and seafaring is made plain in an image found on the facade of the Casa de Lesbianus, which depicts a ship carrying a handful of sailors with Venus at the wheel, as it were putting her rudder to good use. This particular localized version of Venus can be traced at least as far back as the installation of the Roman colony in Pompeii in ADBC. While Venus Pompeiana represented a good option for bar keeps and shop owners looking to make a mark amongst locals, those aiming for universal recognition opted for the streetscape's most popular deity, Mercury. Indeed, images of Mercury make up more than one quarter of all painted representations of deities discovered on the facades of Pompeii in buildings, and he accounts for more than half of those decorating bars and shops. Given Mercury's role as the guardian of commerce and trade, his popularity in and around retail environments seems entirely appropriate. By placing his image on the facade or inside a shop, the message to prospective patrons was clear. The property was under the divine protection of a god that ensured the financial prosperity of retailers and customers alike. Mercury is typically depicted carrying his caduquias or staff in one hand and marsupium or money purse in the other, although in some cases, presumably those aiming to reinforce his pecuniary aspects, he carries marsupia in both hands. And then there's another consistent feature of Mercury's appearance, movement. In nearly every facade painting in which he appears, the god is walking or running towards the entrance of the property, as if encouraging passersby to follow him inside. With respect to the images of deities, I think it's particularly important to emphasize the connection between content and context. There's a relatively small group of goddesses and other mythological figures that decorated the facades of Pompeii and bars, and only a handful of these appear with any regularity. In his 2003 book, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans, John Clark suggested that paintings of Mercury, Venus Pompeiana, Fortuna, and other deities linked to commerce and good luck were appropriate for the decoration of shops and industrial facilities because they delivered a message that the viewer was already expecting, that the proper gods were being celebrated and propitiated. And I think this notion ties back in with the concept of commercial wall decoration as uniquely functional, in a way quite different to paintings located in other spatial contexts. While it's true that the images of deities represent less obvious forms of advertising than paintings of production or the saleable goods themselves, if Mercury at Alie were indeed expected to appear, then fulfilling that expectation was perhaps another means of encouraging potential customers to patronize the property. A quick survey of the deities that appear on the inside of Pompeii and houses confirms the specialized nature of commercial gods and goddesses. This data is taken from Giuseppe Fiorelli's report on the excavations conducted at Pompeii between 1861 and 1872, which represents one of the very few attempts to offer a quantitative overview of the content depicted in domestic wall paintings. Here you can see the zones that were explored during this period, which cover an area of approximately 72,000 square meters or roughly 8.8% of the city's excavated topography. Fiorelli records 349 individual divine figures, some of which he groups together in pairs or as part of broader mythological narratives, for example the Trojan cycle. What's immediately clear from this table, however, is the near total absence of the deities that typically appear in façade painting. Mercury, Venus Pompeiana, and Fortuna, for example, appear only one time each, and Minerva, another popular façade goddess, is nowhere to be found. Now admittedly, this is only a sample of Pompeii domestic wall painting, and Fiorelli's methods, which were advanced for the time, might not meet today's scientific standards. Nonetheless, when considered in comparison to the very different results obtained from a similar survey conducted on the figural images that decorate Pompeii façades, it's hard to ignore the overall trend. A relatively small set of deities appeared on the outsides of buildings, and the most popular in this group had closed associations with industry or commerce. Given that 60 of the 82 scenes depicting these gods and goddesses hailed from bars or from Tibetanai, the connection between façade deities and commercial properties is fairly well-defined. Now these are admittedly quite preliminary results, and the complicated and incomplete nature of the data sets that I'm employing means that further analysis of the available evidence is certainly required. Examinations of other forms of media utilized inside bars, such as the paintings, marble cladding, and sculpture applied to bar counters, the design of loraria and other shrines, as well as internal figural images, are necessary before more definitive conclusions about the differences between commercial and non-commercial art can be drawn. But what those caveats clearly stated, I think that the results presented here suggest that a quantitative approach to the study of Pompeii and commercial decoration does at least offer some promise. Thanks very much.