From the 2nd century BC onward, the Roman world imported a new Hellenism, far more intellectualized, far more contemplative, and far more utilised for the Gods. The phenomenon was defined by the Romans themselves as “asiatica luxuria” (Asian luxury), the irresistible desire to exhibit private luxury, which possessed the upper class at the time of conquests in the East, in imitation of the living standards of the Hellenistic courts.(1)

For Roman men, changing the heavy and voluminous Italic “toga” into a graceful Greek mantle, “pallium” (i.e., the “himation”) was an extraordinary action which indicated luxuriant laxity and moral decadence. The men who dared to wear the “pallium” or the “chlamys” in public,  generally did so with specific intentions, such as the famous pro-Hellenic Scipio Africanus Major or the emperor Hadrian. The power of attire in the construction of identity was so strong, that the Romans defined themselves as the “gens togata” (“toga-wearing people”), and their theatrical art was named as a “fabula togata” to distinguish it from the Greek “palliata”.

If for men their image was strongly bi-polarized, oscillating between “toga” and “pallium”, for women, the situation was quite different. From the late Republic period until late antiquity, the attire of the upper-class Roman woman was practically the same as worn in  the eastern Greek Mediterranean. Only the names of the two main clothing items changed: the first, the long tunic, was quite similar to the Greek “chiton”,  the Roman tunic also being sewn along the sides; the second, the rectangular mantle around the upper part of the body, “palla” or “pallium”, was identical to the Greek “himation”.     Luxury accessories – such as a Greek-gold belt, “zona”, a cloth woven in silk from the Isle of Cos, a Greek sandal like the “diabathron” – stood out as exotic and deserved the comments of Roman writers. Just as perfumes and cosmetics, also the most luxurious items in transparent, coloured silk, were part of a global Mediterranean trade. The “mitre” is an interesting case of cultural fusion: originally a Middle Eastern turban, it was later adopted in the archaic age by Greek women as a headband tied around the hair. In Rome, the “mitre”  represented Greek refinement, but it could also be synonymous with prostitution. Even silk, the most luxurious of all fabrics, was further embellished with Greek expressions by the Romans, to denote the quality. While Chinese silk fabrics were called “sericae vestes”, the types produced in the Mediterranean by local insect species had the name of “vestes bombycinae” and, deriving from the place of production on the island of Cos, “Coes vestes”.

Likewise, the finest colors often kept the Greek name, such as the different shades of purple: the two-colored  “dibapha”, the “Tyrianthina” (from Tyro), as well as  “ianthina” and “amethystina”, or “thalassina”.The Pompeian woman, depending on her financial resources and social status, may have had a series of objects from the most distant corners of the empire in her jewelry and make-up case. In reality, however, only in a few houses in Pompeii, have archaeologists found large collections of ointments.

Although many of the luxuries and refinements coveted by the Roman women were of oriental origin – gems from India, silk from China (“sericae vestes”), pearls (“elenchi”, “stalagmi”) from the Red Sea, perfumes from Arabia (“diapasmata” and “hedysmata”) – most of their names and methods of use were adopted by way of the “filter” of the Greek world.(2)

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Gioacchino Francesco La Torre, Sicilia e Magna Grecia, Editori Laterza, 2011, pag. 234
2. Ria Berg “Attrarre” in Massimo Osanna e Carlo Rescigno, “Pompei e i Greci”, Electa 2017, pp. 218

For further info about our Pompeii and Herculanem private tour

3. The third and final phase, as can be seen today from the long stretch of walls between “Porta Ercolano” and “Porta Vesuvio”, has three walls containing two embankments  preserved in excellent condition. The flat topped layer of earth between the first two walls was used as a walkway, as was the top of the second embankment (also probably flat but raised higher than the previous one). The remaining part of the second embankment, which is lower towards the interior of the city, served mainly to strengthen the fortification. The third and last wall, in addition to containing the thrust of the second embankment, also delimited the route of a road that, at least in this area of ​​the city, skirted the city walls. Along the stretch of walls between “Porta Ercolano” and “Porta Vesuvio”, three of the original twelve rectangular towers (named clockwise, XII, XI and X) are well preserved, and near the “Porta Ercolano”,  the remains of a monumental staircase which served to reach the levels of the flat walkways, is found.

To understand why the walls were completely rebuilt several times in Pompeii , we must refer to Poliorcetics, which is the art of besieging and conquering fortified cities. Military technology and technology (in general)  changed over the centuries. While the city walls in “pappamonte” stone initially offered effective defense to the city, from the end of the IV and the beginning of the third century BC, a new fortification was built. This was necessary due to change in the strategies of attack and defense of the cities. In the Archaic age in the Greek world, the technique of the siege of the city was adopted with the aim of isolating it from its territory and forcing it to surrender due to lack of food resources or due to the exhaustion of the war arsenal. The only alternative to break the pressure of the enemy siege was to leave the (refuge of the ) city walls and face an open battle. To defend itself from the besiegers a particularly powerful fortification was not necessary since  the function of the city walls was to separate and to protect the population from the besiegers. In the IV century C., with the development of war strategies supported by scientific research and the publication of treatises dedicated to machines and the methods of attack and defense of cities, the old fortifications became obsolete. Thanks to the use of increasingly efficient war machines (as catapults), the new Poliorcetics allowed besiegers to assault and conquer cities by destroying walls and gates. The fortifications thus acquired ever greater importance, not only because defensive measures suitable to frustrate the destructive potential of hostile weapons of war were needed, but also because they had to be set up in such a way as to accommodate  throwing weapons of various types, to counterattack  pressure from the besiegers.

Excerpt from:  Marco Fabbri, Difendersi, in Massimo Osanna e Carlo Rescigno, Pompei e i Greci, Electa, 2017, pp. 268-271

For further info about our guided tour of Pompeii