THE IDENTIFICATION OF A COMMON MOTIF: TYPOLOGIES OF THE ROSE DERIVED FROM QUATREFOILS IN ROMAN AND RELATED ART ABSTRACT Greek and Roman art abounded with images of plants, including flowers, and their naturalistic representations means that many are readily identifiable. There is a distinctive four-petalled motif which featured prominently in floral decoration, most notably in Hellenistic and Roman art, although it is also spread well beyond the boundaries of the Graeco-Roman world. It is a symmetrical flower comprising four radiating, cordiform (heart-shaped) petals, often interleaved with elongate elements. In polychrome media the petal colour is usually red, pink, or frequently a combination of both, and these petals are often separated by dark green or black elements. An analysis of this flower’s morphological elements reveals it to be a stylised representation of a rose. This study provides a systematic identification of various forms of the rose, including enduring conventions for rose petals and rose buds, and it is organised by typology. It discusses the different morphologies, noting earlier precedents where relevant, and considers the variations and developments in the depiction of the motif. There are also short observations on rose imagery in later Roman and post-Roman art, including its presence in Iranian art. The objective of this typological study is not an exploration of the cultural significance and emblematic values of roses but is intended as a prelude to an exploration of their potential semantic roles in specific contexts in future articles. INTRODUCTION1 The proliferation of plant decoration in late Hellenistic and Roman art is readily apparent in many media. Spectacular examples appear on important monuments, such as the Ara Pacis in Rome, as well as on wall-paintings depicting gardens in Roman villas. Plant decoration is also ubiquitous in the applied arts, especially mosaics, silverware and jewellery. There is often a high degree of botanical realism in these representations, particularly in the details of flower-heads, fruit, nuts including acorns, and leaves. In many instances vegetal motifs were conceived as mere ornament, peripheral to the main function of the artefact on which they appeared. However, in some cases plants fulfilled an emblematic role, with specific iconographies associated with deities: grapes were depicted on objects used in wine consumption, and they were often a reference to the god Bacchus (Greek Dionysos);2 wheat sheaves 1 2 Some of the material discussed here originated in my PhD thesis, SOAS, University of London, 2016. Grapes Bacchus = TO ADD 1 and poppies might be an allusion to Ceres (Greek Demeter),3 goddess of fertility and agriculture; pomegranates might be connected with Persephone, especially when they appeared in funerary contexts.4 Each of these plants features widely in art and they are often easily identified, which contributes to the general acceptance of their iconographical significance. An understanding of the symbolism embodied within a motif contributes not only to our knowledge of the item or context itself but also provides information about the culture which produced or used it. However, in order to explore the emblematic significance of a particular image, it is first necessary to provide a systematic identification of the plant itself. The subject here is a flower of a type which is often downgraded in descriptions as a ‘rosette’. The argument here is that, in reality, many examples of ‘rosettes’ actually represent specific flowers, and their identification might, moreover, reveal more information about the compositions or objects in which they appear. THE FOUR-PETALLED FLOWER (QUATREFOIL) Among the many floral images discernible in the art of the Roman Empire, and indeed beyond its boundaries, is a distinctive quatrefoil. Despite the fact that it appears frequently, it often goes unnoticed or is treated as a generic rosette. Since it is proposed that this motif represented an identifiable plant, there follows a short account of its presence in art, in which the main typologies are defined and analysed, in order to assign it to a specific species. The vast quantity of available material cannot be addressed in one article, therefore the emphasis is on key examples which lend themselves to a credible identification. The first stage of this process is to isolate the primary morphological characteristics. The flower in question consists of four symmetrically-arranged, cordiform (heart-shaped) petals which are interleaved with long, pointed elements, usually converging on a round centre. It appears in diverse artistic contexts and across a wide geography, not only within the Graeco-Roman world, but indeed beyond the limes of the Roman Empire, including eastwards into Asia. For example, a finely sculpted version of this flower features with a second, more elaborate floral motif (an eight-petalled flower with a four-petalled centre) in the void above an ox-skull (bucranium) hung with a fruit-bearing swags comprising pomegranates, apples, grapes and mulberries. This ensemble decorates a frieze which formed part of the elaborate Octagon funerary monument at Ephesus. Fig. 1. This 1st century BCE tomb contained a woman’s body, buried at a 3 4 Ceres = TO ADD Pomegranates = TO ADD 2 time when Ephesus was a thriving part of the Roman empire.5 Festooned bucrania were commonly found on altars and funerary stelae in both the Greek and Roman worlds and were associated with sacrificial funerary practices. The combination of bucranium and quatrefoil appears in other contexts, as noted below. Fig. 1 Frieze of the Octagon monument, Ephesus, 1st century BCE, with a detail of the quatrefoil. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. Author’s photograph. Plant imagery was popular on tombs both in Rome and elsewhere across the empire. Similar quatrefoils form part of the repertoire of vegetal ornament on first century CE funerary monuments in the Levant. A single quatrefoil features between triglyphs in a band of decoration which also included a hexafoil flower rosette within a circle, a schematic grape bunch, and a motif of concentric circles on the façade of a tomb at Maqāti‘Ābūd.6 Two more complex variations of this flower feature alongside other vegetal ornament on lead coffins.7 Fig. 2. Fig. 2 Quatrefoil ornament from lead coffins and a tomb (details), Maqāti‘Ābūd. Author to draw from Avi Yonah, 1981: 70, fig. 25; 247, figs. 3–13, 3–14. These flower-heads are presented in a highly conventionalised manner, no such blooms catch the eye in any field or garden. In the belief that this plant denote a real species, a closer scrutiny of these flowers is required in order to formulate a proposal for their identification. Polychrome representations can provide essentials clues, since colour plays an important role in the identification of flowers. Similar quatrefoils, in which the petals are separated by long elements, may be observed on mosaics, textiles, and even jewellery, and the next stage in this quest is a short review of selected examples in these media. This flower is one of several motifs on a pavement mosaic from Porto Fluviale, Pietra Papa, in Rome, ca.125 CE. The colour of the blooms is notable: the four cordiform petals are deep red, graduating inwards to pale pink tones. These petals alternate with dark green elements which have some red tints. Fig. 3. This mosaic does not in itself provide an immediate identification but defines a colour range which is replicated in other media, above all on textiles. 5 Oberleitner 1978: 95–97. Avi-Yonah 1981: 70, fig. 25 7 Avi-Yonah 1981: 247, fig, 3–13, 3–14. 6 3 Fig. 3 Pavement mosaic (detail), Porto Fluviale, Pietra Papa, Rome, ca. 125 CE. Palazzo Massimo alle Terme, Rome, 124526. Author’s photograph. Relatively few textiles survive from the Roman world, with the exception of those from Egypt which have fared better due to more favourable circumstances of burial in a dry climate. Many are classified as Coptic textiles, they survive in great numbers, often retaining Fig. 4their original hues. Coptic textile, 4th –6th centuries Although dating from the 4th –6th centuries, they frequently included plant whose with motifs open and profiles flowers Louvre Museum. conventions and styles were transmitted from earlier Roman art. Thereand arebud. numerous examples with Author’s photograph. representations of the Roman quatrefoil, but just two will suffice here. Figs. 4 and 5. Fig. 5 Full-faced bloom and profile flower, Coptic textile, 4th –6th centuries. Photo credit: Prof. Michael Fuller, St. Louis Community College. In both examples there are again four cordiform petals coloured red or deep pink fading inwards to paler pink and cream tones. In these cases the petals are separated by a green cross formation which approximates to the dark green elements on the Pietra Papa mosaic flower. Additional botanical forms are presented on both textiles. In Fig. 4, to the left of the putto is the profile image of the flower shown with three lobes denoting petals with flushed red-pink colouring; and below the putto is the profile of a bud. In Fig. 5, the lower plant comprises just a single petal above paired leaves, perhaps denoting the simplified profile of the flower, a convention which is more widely found than the three-lobed version. On many other pieces, single red or pink bi-coloured cordiform petals are seen scattered across the composition. This flower, in its various incarnations, is second only to representations of grapes and vine imagery in the repertoire of vegetal motifs on Coptic textiles. Other versions of this flower which closely replicate its form and colouring appear on colourful jewellery found at the fringes of the Roman Empire. Two pieces of cloisonné jewellery were 4 discovered near Kosika on the Lower Volga river (later 1st century BCE or 1st century CE), in an elite grave which included items of Roman manufacture and Graeco-Roman type imagery. They have much in common with the Roman mosaic flower.8 Fig. 6. Fig. 6 Two brooches from grave I, Kosika, 1st century BCE or CE. Make drawings or seek permission…. This second stage of analysis, exploring colour, enables us to correlate these stylised quatrefoils with more naturalistic sources of floral imagery. The Roman love of plants and horticulture is above all reflected in villa wall-paintings, whereby the beauty of gardens was transported inside the house. In this medium, dozens of plant species are represented with a high degree of botanical accuracy rendering many of them immediately recognisable. 1st At Pompeii, the well-known scene of ‘A bird on a Bamboo Stick’ in the House of the Golden Bracelet (pre-79 CE) offers an immediate solution: the flowers discussed above are roses. Fig 7. On the left-hand side is a rose with cordiform petals and distinctive flushed red-pink colouring; and yellow speckled stamens are indicated at its centre. They grow on characteristically thorny stems and have pinnate leaves. A rosebud grows from the same stem. Elsewhere in the scene, to the left of a fountain, roses with the same colour convention appear in full bloom, in profile and as rosebuds. Fig 8. Fig. 7 Wall painting of a Roman Garden, roses and a bird on a bamboo, House of the Golden Bracelet, Pompeii, 1st century CE. Author’s photograph. Fig. 8 Wall painting of a Roman Garden with fountain and roses, House of the Golden Bracelet, Pompeii, 1st cent. CE. Author’s photograph. 8 Bonora 2005: 142, cat. 98; 143, cat. 99. 5 Furthermore, cordiform petals in red-pink tones are also discernible on a painting at Livia’s villa in Rome, as well as pointed rosebuds depicted in a manner redolent of the example on the Coptic putto textiles. Fig. 9. Fig. 9 Wall-painting of roses, triclinium, Villa Livia, Prima Porta, Rome, ca. 30–20 BCE. Author’s photograph. In sum, the petals of these roses are loosely cordiform and there is a contrast between the outer redpink margin of the petals which fades inwards to a paler pink, and the lightest colouring around the central yellow stamens. This is important as many flower species have single-coloured petals but, as we will see, this flushed colouring is often an identifying characteristic of rose imagery. In the paintings, the full-blown roses are depicted with four petals in the top layer and more rose petals behind them, and as the plant expert Wilhelmina Jashemski noted in relation to the Pompeian roses, it is difficult to assign the exact species.9 Therefore, we can readily extrapolate the identification of these painted garden roses to the red-pink quatrefoils discussed above in mosaics and textiles, and beyond that to similar quatrefoils in monochrome media. Furthermore, notwithstanding Jashemski’s remark, we might venture that the simplified form of the quatrefoil rose with its single layer of petals may, in fact, imitate the form and exaggerate the roseate colouring of wild species roses, such as Rosa canina or Rosa rubiginosa, although, in fact, they have five petals in nature. Fig. 10a. Fig. 10a Full blown flowers of Rosa canina. Royal Horticultural Gardens, Wisley, England 2021. Author’s photograph. Fig. 10b Underside of the rose flower showing the sepals. 9 Jashemski, Meyer 2002: 160. 6 These terms derive from Linnaean classification and flowers and of course were described differently in antiquity. Pliny the Elder (23 or 24 CE – 79 CE) differentiates between two types of roses: the ‘hundred-petalled’ rose; and more relevantly here, the five-petalled wild rose, grown in Campania with a sweeter scent than any garden (i.e. cultivated) rose.10 The wild rose was therefore used in oils, perfumes and unguents. And of course, the rose has long occupied a special place in many cultures, prized for its beauty, its colouring and above all for its scent. This is testified not only in Greek and Roman sources, but also in the Iranian world, not least in the fact that the very word for rose, gul, also denotes a generic flower. The Persian veneration for roses was epitomised later in the famous gulistan, a garden dedicated to roses. Furthermore, with this rose identification in mind, it is proposed that the greenish elements between the petals on the mosaic and textiles images denote the sepals which are prominently visible on rose flowers when they are in bud, and which can also be seen on the underside of the flower when it is in full bloom. In nature these five sepals form the calyx which encloses and protects the unopened rosebud, and then supports the fine petals when the flower emerges, Fig. 10b. Since sepals are only visible on the underside of the flowering rose, they are absent from botanically accurate images of roses in the wall-paintings. Therefore, the depiction of interleaving sepals on the fully opened flower is an artificial convention which, it is suggested, is a means of ensuring that these flowers are readily identifiable as roses. It also adds to the decorative quality of the floral image. The attributes of this conventionalised rose may be summarised in a table. Table I The morphology of the four-petalled and sepalled rose Artistic depictions Botanical accuracy Four petals rather than the five found in nature Incorrect Flowers with cordiform (heart-shaped) petals Correct Petals with flushed colouring, graduating from red or deep pink at the petal margins inwards to the paler pink shades and/or yellow or cream colouring at the centre Correct in broad terms, although exaggerated Presence of sepals Correct, although stylised Sepals interleaved between the petals when viewed face-on Incorrect 10 Pliny, HN: 21.16–18; 18.111. 7 Notwithstanding the fact that we are dealing with a pictorial convention rather than an actual botanical image of a rose, the difference in the number of petals – four in art rather than the five occurring in nature – is an anomaly which demands an explanation. Why did this artificial four-petalled convention develop? Art historian Paul Jacobsthal has written of the ‘ornamental disguise’ which hinders the identification of a plant when it is represented as a stylised image.11 The foregoing analysis and the resulting identification aimed to strip away this disguise, but the question remains: why was botanical accuracy sacrificed and roses were depicted with only four petals? This enigma is embedded in a remark by Rudolf Pfister and Louisa Bellinger, who came close to understanding the quatrefoil rose motif in their observations of a variation which does not have sepals (a type discussed and illustrated below): “It would be natural to assume the flower to be a rose, except this it is regularly represented with four petals while a rose has five. No satisfactory botanical prototype can be found, but speculation is useless, for apparently the number of petals was a matter of convention, not of observation”.12 A justification for this peculiarity is surely found in the versatility of a four-axis motif, since it is easily replicated to create grid-like patterns which can be applied in ornamental settings. Two examples – an inlaid panel and a textile - demonstrate the advantages of the quatrefoil format. The first is opus sectile trellis decoration on a wall at the Domus Tiberiana on the Palatine Hill, Rome (ca. 54–68 CE). Fig. 11. Although the rose flowerheads have just a small amount of pink surrounding their centres, it is nevertheless reassuring that the rosy colouring is present at all considering the technical constraints of the medium. The elongated, dark green sepals connect to delineate a lattice design. A simpler single rose, comprising rounded petals with the palest brown shading at their petal margins, embellish the corners. Fig. 11 Opus sectile panel with trellis ornament (detail), Domus Tiberiana, Palatine Hill, Rome, ca. 54–68 CE, granite, marble and porphyry. Author’s photograph. 11 12 Jacobsthal 1956: 37. Pfister, Bellinger 1945: 8; 39, described as a ‘quatrefoil rose’. 8 The second example comes from beyond the Roman Empire, on an embroidered woollen textile probably manufactured in Bactria (mostly present-day northern Afghanistan and southern Uzbekistan in that era), whose arts in this era drew much of their inspiration from the Mediterranean world. It was discovered even further east, in the richly provisioned tomb of an elite Xiongnu horseman at Noin Ula in present-day Transbaikalia, Mongolia. This burial has a terminus post quem of 2 BCE (based on the presence of an inscribed Chinese lacquer cup) and is likely dated to the 1st century CE. Fig. 12. In this instance, although the colour is faded, the pink outline of the roses’ cordiform petals and a mere hint of graduated hues are still discernible. Fig. 12 Embroidered textile, kurgan VI, Noin Ula, ca. 1st century CE, wool, with a detail of the rose quatrefoil. The Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, MIK176. Author’s photograph. The flowers are junction points for a diaper design; and the rose sepals are linked to each other by sspirals, providing a similar axial alignment to the Tiberian panel. Thus, the representation of roses comprising four petals interleaved with sepals is a design-led decision, since they are readily configured to define both vertical and horizontal axes, which is useful both in repeat patterns and more complex designs. Early variations of the quatrefoil and sepalled convention for roses The proposal that sepalled quatrefoils represented roses may be strengthened further by noting several earlier, definitive images of roses which provide specific contextual evidence confirming this identification. The search for the earliest instance of a sepalled quatrefoil rose shown in full bloom takes us to the Catalan town of Rhoda in Girona, Spain whose name also translates as roses. Fig. 13. On a coin dating to around 300 BCE, the rose is depicted with four rounded petals, which are superimposed by strongly-defined, spurred sepals. This is a unique variation but is nevertheless recognisable as a rose. 9 Another early instance of a quatrefoil rose with sepals is found on a 3rd or 2nd century BCE medallion from Taranto, an important jewellery-making centre in southern Italy, Fig. 14. An outsize rose floats between Aphrodite (Roman Venus) and her female attendant in a scene which is replete with the goddess’s characteristic iconography: an Eros sporting a basket on his head, a butterfly, cicada, dolphin, and a cithara. The rose’s association with Aphrodite was well-established and it is given due prominence here,13 thereby providing additional confirmation that the four petal and sepal configuration represents a rose. 3rd –2nd Fig. 13 Coin, Rhoda, Girona, ca. 300 BCE, silver, diam. 20 mm. Museu Nacional d’art de Catalunya, Barcelona, 020491-n. https://www.museunacional.cat/ca/collecci o/dracma-de-rhode/rhode/020491-n Fig. 14 Aphrodite at her toilet, medallion, 3rd –2nd century BCE, silver and gilt-silver, Taranto, 9.3cm diam. British Museum. Image © Trustees of the British Museum. Coins from the island of Rhodes, whose very name derives from roses, are an obvious place to look, Where roses are shown, they exhibit a variety of typologies. In brief, on the some of the earliest coins from 408 BCE until ca. 88 BCE, rose flowerheads were presented in profile on the reverse side of coins.14 Fig. 15. The flower is usually cupped within spurred sepals (in imitation of nature), although with three lobes which denote six petals, perhaps chosen for aesthetic reasons in order to create symmetrical flowerhead. Fig. 15 Reverse of didrachm coin, Rhodes, Caria, ca. 295–280 BCE, (head of Helios on the obverse). ADD reference A version of this triple-lobed profile is seen later in Coptic textiles, Fig 4. Fewer Rhodian coins have image of a full-blown bloom, mostly in the 1st century BCE when roses are variously shown with four, five or even six petals which are not quite heart shaped, and they do not include sepals. PRIMARY VARIATIONS ON THE QUATREFOIL CONVENTION FOR ROSES IN ART 13 14 Pirenne-Delforge 1994: 412. Head 1897: pls. XXXIV, XXXVI–XL. 10 There are several additional versions of the quatrefoil convention used for representations of roses and the first to be considered also reinforces the rose identification Roses with spurred sepals At the eastern end of the Roman empire, the great city of Palmyra was conquered by the Romans in 106 CE. Painted walls and ceilings were dominated by iconography derived from Greek and particularly Roman art. Of interest here are paintings in the hypogeum (underground tomb) of the ‘Three Brothers’ (ca. 160 CE) which was decorated with male and female busts framed within oval medallions. Roses are painted at the corner of each portrait, Fig. 16, as well as either side of the Victory figure who holds up the medallion. Fig. 16 Wall painting with details of one medallion, Tomb of the Three Brothers, Palmyra, ca. 160 CE. Photo credit: Prof. Michael Fuller, St. Louis Community College. They broadly replicate the hues of Roman roses, their petals outlined in red or deep pink, fading inwards to pale pink, and converging on a central circle of indeterminate colour. However, the green sepals are not single elements but have three spurs. Below the main oval frame, roses are painted above winding, prickly stems. These thorn-like prickles are slightly curved, somewhat resembling those seen on the rose species, Rosa rubiginosa, a native plant in West Asia and Europe. Fig. 17. Rosa rubiginosa also has dense multi-spurred sepals, unlike the smoother sepals of the Rosa canina. 11 Fig. 17 Rosa rubiginosa, sweet briar rose, Bilder ur nordens flora, Carl Axel Magnus Lindman, 1901–1905, Stockholm. These Palmyrene roses with multi-spurred sepals also featured in a range of contexts at Dura Europos (in present-day northern Syria), the garrisoned caravan city which was part of the Roman Empire from 165 CE. The most dramatic example of this particular form is the rose’s giant presence in a painting dated to ca. 239 CE. It floats between the tutelary goddesses of Dura and Palmyra in a ritual scene conducted by the Roman tribune Julius Terentius, Commander of the 20th Palmyrene cohort, and attended by his soldiers.15 Fig. 18. Fig. 18 Julius Terentius conducting a ritual, with a detail of the rose quatrefoil, Temple of the Palmyrene Gods, DuraEuropos, ca. 239 CE, paint on plaster. Image courtesy of Yale University, 1931.386 (Public domain). This form of the rose is also present en masse on the coffered ceiling of the synagogue (244–245 CE) – depicted both singly and enclosed within wreaths – again represented with red outlines and spurred green sepals.16 These forty-one roses were the most prolific of all the ceiling motifs, which included fruit and Graeco-Roman imagery.17 This rose convention with spurred sepals circulated beyond the Syrian Levant, appearing in tombs decorated with Graeco-Roman motifs, often part of Christian iconography. Roses both in full bloom 15 Heyn 2011: 222. See Stern 2010: 481, fig. 5 for a photograph of the ceiling; and 485: Table I where they are insightfully listed as ‘rose or flower’; with references to other roses at Dura. 17 See Stern 2010: 484–485. 16 12 with spurred sepals and as profile images appear in many tombs dated to around the 4th century CE, in Mediterranean Turkey including at Nicaea, Sardis and Ephesus;18 and in Bulgaria, Serbia19 and Crimea, thereby providing evidence of the dissemination of these particular rose typologies across a considerable area. Again, they usually have cordiform petals with two-tone colouring. Within this vast amount of material, just two examples from the 4th century are provided here, illustrating the shared iconography in which roses play a prominent part. The first is a Christian tomb found on the property of N. I. Tur in southwest Chersonesos (in present-day Crimea), which had long been in the sphere of Graeco-Roman influence. Christianity had been established across the Crimean Peninsular during the third century CE. The early bishops may have come from Jerusalem, and Michael Rostovtzeff has suggested that their arrival resulted in a revival of decorative wall-painting strongly influenced by Syrian and Palestinian art.20 Fig. 19 shows a wall-painting from above an altar table, in which paired peacocks hold a leafy garland in their beaks. Single rose-heads with two-toned petals interleaved with spurred sepals appear above the festoon and flanking the birds. These roses with their spurred sepals, so similar to the Palmyrene and Durene roses cited above, are a small testimony to this eastern influence. Fig. 19 Wall painting, tomb 1912 on the property of N. I. Tur, Chersonesos, 4th century CE. Drawing by the author from Rostovtzeff, revised Schiltz 2004, 599 or 477: fig. 88. Confronted peacocks and roses are often combined, and a differently configured composition appears in the vaulted pagan tomb of a high-ranking Roman nobleman in the legionary settlement at Durostorum (present-day Silistra, Bulgaria).21 The walls are painted with a procession of servants bringing clothing to their master, below a painted vaulted ceiling. In the lunette at the rear of the tomb, sprigs of roses with two-toned, single cordiform profile flowers which are cupped by sepals, form the meadow backdrop to peacocks drinking from a kantharos, Fig. 20. In addition, on the trompe l’oeil coffered ceiling, roses appear in two guises: as sprigs of meadow type roses alongside animals and birds, and as simple full-blown roses with double-spurred sepals. 18 For example, Valeva 2001: 170, fig. 11, 180, fig. 32 (Nicaea); 176: fig 23 (Sardia), fig 24 (Ephesus). For example, Valeva 2001: 172, fig. 17 (Sofia-Serdica, Bulgaria); 180, fig. 34 (Philippolis, Bulgaria); 174, fig. 18 (Brestovik, Serbia) 182: figs 36, 37 (Vimacium, Serbia). 20 Rostovtzeff 1919: 153. 21 Atanasov 2009. 19 13 Fig. 20 Wall painting, tomb of a military dignitary, Durostorum (Silistra), with details of two types of roses, 4th century CE. Request to use image in Atasanov 2009. Julia Valeva has correlated the architectural perspective of this Silistra tomb with the aforementioned Three Brothers hypogeum at Palmyra since both tombs have similar vaulted constructions, and we note that these full-blown roses at Silistra are a variation of the triple-spur sepalled roses at the Three Brothers tomb shown in Fig. 16.22 Roses in their various typologies proliferated in later Christian art, as typified by a 5th century tomb mosaic at Clypea (in present-day Tunisia) in which rose plants erupt from an urn and also grow among peacocks and other birds in a scene dominated by paradisiacal iconography.23 Although the symbolism of such imagery is not the purpose of this study, in anticipation of a future article on potential emblematic values of the rose, it is likely relevant that peacocks were considered to be an explicit reference to Christian paradise. Furthermore, sepalled roses appeared on textiles at this date, both in Egypt as noted above, and also in Byzantine imperial contexts. These include the red-pink roses on a splendid golden silk cloak worn by an attendant of Empress Theodora in the wall mosaic in the Basilica of San Vitale, Ravenna, dated to 547 CE; and luxurious furnishings, as shown by the rose-covered curtains hung from Theodoric’s palace on a fine mosaic in the 6th century church of St Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna.24 Non-sepalled roses with cordiform petals Having established that the distinctive two-toned red-pink colouring of rose petals – alluding to the flushed appearance of roses in nature – is a dominant aspect enabling the plant’s identification, we consider a further category of roses which conform to the anomalous four-petalled convention but lack sepals. Among the many examples available, just two polychrome media are cited here, and in both cases the flowers exhibit this graduated colouring. 22 Valeva 2001: 170–171. Khader 2003: cat. 383. 24 ADD references. 23 14 Roses were a popular motif on Roman mosaics, appearing both in decoration surrounding the emblema as well as within the main field itself. For example, on a pavement from a villa near the Casali di S Basilio on the via Nomentana in Rome, unsepalled rose flower-heads are framed within a band of ornament, alternating with a different quatrefoil motif. Fig. 21. Fig. 21 Roman mosaic pavement, Rome, from a villa near Casale di S. Basilio on the via Nomentana, 1st century CE. Check museum. Author’s photograph. Unsepalled roses also appear on textiles, including a remarkable mid-3rd century tapestry fragment from Dura Europos, comprising a repeat pattern of boldly coloured rose flowerheads, representing a different typology to the sepalled roses in the Terentius and synagogue paintings. Fig. 22. This simplified form may have arisen from the technical complexities of the woven medium. Fig. 22 Tapestry fragment (detail), mid-3rd century CE, wool,. Dura-Europos, Pfister, Bellinger 1945, frontispiece. Although on occasion quatrefoil motifs of this kind may have represented generic flowers without any thought of a particular species, when the characteristic colouring is present they surely represented roses. Quatrefoils with rounded petals Further to these examples, we might suggest that quatrefoil flowers with rounded rather than cordiform petals sometimes represented roses, especially in cases where: sepals are present; or where the petals exhibit characteristic red-pink colouring; or when there is contextual evidence. 15 We have examples of this in the quatrefoils depicted in banquet scenes at Dura Europos. In a late second century CE painting on the south wall of room 6, the main living area, house W, block M7, large rose quatrefoils with rounded petals feature below swags and between reclining male diners in one picture.25 Fig. 23. Fig. 23 Banquet scene, left-hand side of panel, and a detail of one figure, south wall, M7-W6, Dura-Europos, paint on plaster, 194 CE. YUAG 1938-5999.1174. Images with the kind consent of Prof. Michael Fuller, St. Louis Community College. These figures are separated from a scene of a horseman shooting arrows at onagers, by both a seated woman and a winged Cupid leaning on a downturned torch presumably indicating a postmortem context. Although the petals are rounded rather than cordiform, they are painted with the characteristic combination of deep pink at the outer edge toning inwards to pale pink, and they are separated by spurred sepals similar to the types seen in the Terentius and Synagogue ceiling paintings. So, we may confidently propose that they are roses. A second banquet scene appears on the west wall of the same house, with three named revellers flanked by servants. Quatrefoils with rounded petals but no sepals are painted in the same position between the male figures.26 In this case I am unable to find a colour photograph, but I would expect that the petals are pink toned. Again, these must be roses. Having established that simple quatrefoils without sepals but with distinctive red-pink colouring likely represents roses, then we may wonder how early this convention developed within the history of art. This identification, based on these key features, prompts an intriguing possibility, that the earliest incarnation of two-toned roses with rounded petals was in fact many centuries previously, in Bronze Age Greece. In a fragmentary wall-painting at Xeste 3, Akrotiri in Thera (present-day Santorini) dated to around 1550 BCE, a woman is depicted wearing a lily-sprigged costume. In the lower half of the painting there is a bouquet containing putative roses which have four rounded pink petals with a thick red outline at the outer edge in red, and a yellow centre.27 Fig. 24. In addition, 25 Also shown in black-and-white images in Perkins 1973: fig 26, although the sepals are omitted from the drawing. Confusingly, a black-and-white drawing of this scene incorrectly shows the rose petals interleaved with sepals. Perkins 1973: pl. 25. 27 Roses played an important part in another Late Bronze Age Aegean culture. Linear B texts from Pylos mention the rose, wo-do-we, which was one of the primary ingredients for steeping in olive oil, creating a solution which was used for medicinal, perfume and other purposes. Cuyler 2012: 658. 26 16 four-petalled flowers with red margins appear in the garland of flowers draped across her shoulder. These latter roses are painted onto the yellow ground of the garland draped across the woman’s shoulders and the yellow background shows through, rendering the petals red and yellow-tinged pink. Fig. 24 Wall painting, Xeste 3, room 3b, first floor, Akrotiri, Thira, ca. 1550 BCE. Author’s photograph. If the four-petalled pictorial convention for roses actually emerged in the Greek Bronze Age, subsequent quatrefoils in Greek art may also represent roses – for example, on Greek vases where the absence of naturalistic colouring deprives us of important evidence. This proposal must remain as unresolved speculation for the time-being. In addition, as mentioned above, context can offer clues of potential rose imagery, and one such instance of simple four-petalled roses is observable in the pre-Roman era, in the famous tomb paintings ornamenting the Thracian vaulted beehive tomb of Kosmatka at Kazanlak, dating to the 4th century BCE.28 The walls are painted with horsemen, a charioteer and a royal funerary banquet. The entire scene is surrounded by festooned bucrania alternating with four-petalled flowers whose outer petals are rounded rather than cordiform. Fig. 25. Fig. 25 Detail of wall painting, tomb of Kosmatka, near Kazanlak. Finish reference… They have red and, surprisingly perhaps, blue petals, with a yellow circular centre. No flower has alternating red and blue petals, and on that basis we might dismiss this a generic rosette. On the other hand, since this flower is combined with bucrania, a configuration later seen in a funerary 28 Zhikova 1975. 17 ensemble in the Octagon tomb, this raises the possibility that this curious flower might also be a rose. The incidence of blue petals is not confined to the Kazanlak roses since they feature on quatrefoils in a range of circumstances; just two examples are given here. At the earlier end of the geographical and chronological scale, on might wonder whether the red and blue quatrefoils on a textile from the nomadic burial site at Pazyryk in the Siberian Altai represent roses. Fig. 26. Fig. 26 Quatrefoils on a saddlecloth (detail), kurgan V, Pazyryk, ca. 252–238 BCE, felted wool, flowers 3.5 cm approximately. The Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg 1687/98. Author’s Photograph. And then, at the more recent end of our timeline, we note the examples of blue-coloured petals on rose quatrefoils on Sasanian textiles. Single cordiforms Finally, we consider briefly the presence of cordiform motifs. In monochrome media the default identification is that of ivy-leaves, whose juvenile foliage on actual plants is sometimes heartshaped. However, in some polychrome media cordiforms are depicted with the typical red-pink colouring discussed above. The cordiforms sometimes grow on stalks, as seen in the Silistra painting, Fig. 20, or they sit upon leaves, as seen in the Coptic putto textile which doubtless represents the condensed image of a rose plant represented in profile. Fig. 5. Interestingly, prolific quantities of these single cordiforms appear at Kerch, on the fluctuating border of the Roman Empire at the far end of Crimean Peninsular from Chersonesos. They featured on wall-paintings which deployed imagery from Graeco-Roman art, in 1st–4th centuries CE tombs.29 This region had been colonised by the Greeks in the 7th century BCE, and it had long possessed a population consisting of non-Greek ‘barbarian’ people with nomadic origins who had migrated from Eurasian steppes. These ‘barbarians’ were buried in the burial chambers. 29 These tombs are now destroyed but they are illustrated in Rostovtzeff 1913–1914, reissued in 2004. See also Logdancheva et al. 2013. 18 Landscapes with figures and animals were popular subjects, including topically appropriate subjects such as the Rape of Persephone. Many of these landscapes were peppered with cordiform motifs, usually coloured dark pink in the upper half and mid pink below, or alternatively entirely pink. In a tomb discovered in 1872, cordiform roses with leaves and stalks are provide a meadow backdrop to a number of scenes, including a charming painting with a winged, bird-hunting putto and lion. Fig. 27. Fig. 27 Lion and bird hunting putto in a rose landscape, tomb of 1872, Kerch, ca. Rostovtzeff 2013–2014, pls. LXXVI and LXXXI. The Bactrian textile with full-blown roses discovered at Noin Ula was discussed above, and later, from the 3rd or 4th centuries onwards, cordiform rose petals were chosen to decorate clothing. There are three instances on Bactrian wall-paintings. Pink rose petals outlined in red ornament the belted tunic of a trouser-clad male attending a deity identified as Oesho/Shiva on an unprovenanced panel now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Fig 28. Similarly, at Ghulbiyan (present-day northern Afghanistan), one figure wears a belted trouser-suit entirely decorated with red hearts, in a ceremonial scene which has the strong characteristics of Sasanian painting.30 Fig. 29. Fig. 28 Male figure in a rose jacket, and deity, painted panel, probably Bactrian, ca. 3rd century CE, terracotta and gouache, 57.2cm high. Metropolitan Museum, New York (public domain image). Fig. 29 Male attendant in rose trouser suit, wallpainting, Ghulbiyan, Bactria, ca. 4th century CE. Photograph courtesy of Jonathan Lee. 30 Lee, Grenet, 1998: 78. 19 Later still in the region, cordiform rose petals are seen in the form of inverted, two-toned cordiforms which fill the field on a long gown worn by a richly-clad woman on a late 6th or early 7th century wall-painting at Balalyk tepe (present-day Uzbekistan).31 Further east, fragments of 8th century pale yellow samite silk were discovered by Aurel Stein in cave 17, the Magao Grottoes, Dunhuang at the far end of Xinjiang. The ornament consists of staggered bands of red hearts with white dots and either pink or blue tips.32 It is unclear whether this motif migrated eastwards from Bactria or was transmitted via Sasanian art which included different forms of rose imagery within its repertoire including on textiles. Textiles were expensive and easily transportable good, and they were traded along the so-called silk routes, especially between Central Asia and China. SOME BRIEF REMARKS ON SASANIAN AND EARLY ISLAMIC ROSES Roses, usually in two-toned, red-pink hues in polychrome media are widely found in Sasanian art, especially on textiles where they appear as flowerheads – with both sepalled and unsepalled typologies – as well as single cordiform petals. For example, both entire blooms and petals featured on elaborately ornamented costumes at Taq-i Bustan in Kermanshah, Iran.33 Roses also decorated silverware, usually shown among other vegetal ornament,34 and seals.35 Most spectacularly of all, a dense meadow of red and white sepalled roses in a green sward encircles enthroned King Khosro I on the famous cup from the Abbey of St Denis.36 Although they were a relatively common motif, it is difficult to be sure whether these roses appeared directly from interactions with the Roman Empire or were transmitted from Parthian sources. Most Parthian roses took a different form from the multi-spurred Palmyrene and Durene roses above. Simple quatrefoils, with or without sepals, were used in architectural detailing, including among the emblems on terracotta metopes at Old Nisa near Merv (present-day Turkmenistan),37 and on 3rd century CE plaster reliefs at Qal‘eh-i Yazdigird (in present-day Western Iran).38 31 Talbot-Rice 1965: 112, pl. 96. British Library MAS.922, available at: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_MAS-922 33 Illustrated in Fukai, Horiuchi 1984, add plate nos. 34 For example, Gunter, Jett 1992: 128, cat. 17; 174, cat. 28. 35 Brunner 1978: 116, cat. 7a. 36 Wood 2017. 37 Colledge 1977: 97, fig. 41, top right. 38 Keall 1967: 118, fig. 8. 32 20 Art certainly provides evidence for interactions between the Roman and Sasanian worlds. Of particular interest here are the Byzantine floor mosaics at Daphne, near Antioch (on the present-day Turkish border with Syria), dated to the late 5th century CE. Single cordiform roses with sepals are shown floating above outspread wings between confronted ram protomes. In addition, rosebud plants punctuate the spaces between the paired rams. This unusual design forms a border framing a field of symmetrically arranged rosebuds tucked tightly into their sepals.39 Fig 30. Fig. 30 Floor mosaic (detail), House of the Phoenix, Daphne, 5th century CE. Louvre, Paris, MA 3442. Author’s photograph. The ram protome derives from Sasanian art where it appears in many contexts, including on stucco panels and on a well-known silver dish below a banquet scene,40 although as Christine Kondoleon remarks, the ‘path of transmission [between Daphne and the Iranian world] remains unclear’.41 Finally, the quatrefoil rose motif passed into early Islamic elite contexts, reflecting Sasanian influence, as demonstrated by two important textiles from the 8th century. Roses with red-tipped cordiform petals and prominent sepals appear prolifically within pearl roundels in a repeat pattern on the samite silk ‘Marwān’ tiraz, which has been described as of Byzantium or Central Asian origin.42 In addition, roses appeared in two forms in an interlocking pattern of guilloche enclosing pseudo-Senmurvs in the banquet hall at Khirbat-al Mafjar (in the Palestinian West Bank), the palace built for the Umayyad Caliph Hisham. They feature both as highly ornamental sepalled flowerheads within simple roundels, and as overlapping multi-toned rose petals filling guilloche ribbons.43 Both the pseudo-Senmurvs and the roses demonstrate the strong imprint of Sasanian art. In addition, similar roses appear on a painted floor with musicians and a hunting scene, at the Umayyad palace, Qasr al-Hayr al-Gharbi (in present-day Syria).44 However, the rose convention does not appear to 39 Kondoleon 2000: 133–134, cat. 20; she also cites a close variation of this ram protome and rose design on another floor from Daphne, now in the Worcester Art Museum. 40 Gunter, Jett 1992: 205–210, cat. 38. 41 Kondoleon 2000: 133. 42 Moraitou 2012: 238. 43 Ettinghausen 1972: 36–37. 44 Schlumberger 1986: pl. 34. 21 persist in Islamic art beyond this early period. The main typologies used for the representation of roses are summarised below in Table 2. They are (mostly) selected from polychrome media because of the importance of colour. Table 2 Summary of the primary Rose Typologies derived from Quatrefoils Motif What it is Brief Description 1 Rose flowerhead, full-blown bloom Quatrefoil with cordiform petals and sepals 2 Rose flowerhead, full-blown bloom Quatrefoil with cordiform petals and spurred sepals 3 Rose flowerhead, full-blown bloom Quatrefoil with cordiform petals but no sepals 4 Rose flowerhead, full-blown bloom Quatrefoils with rounded petals and sepals Select Variations 22 5 Rose flowerhead, full-blown bloom Simple quatrefoils with rounded petals but no sepals 6 Profile rose Rose with three lobed petals, sepals indicated 7 Profile rose Single cordiformpetal rose plants 8 Rosebuds A red or dark pink tipped bud supported on sepals 0 Single rose petal Single cordiform SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY Atanasov, Georgi 2009. Late Antique tomb in Durostorum-Silistra and its master, Pontica 40: 447– 470. Avi-Yonah, Michael 1981. Art in Ancient Palestine. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University. Brunner, Christopher J. 1978, Sasanian stamp seals in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art. Colledge, Malcolm 1977. Parthian art. London: Elek. Cuyler, Mary Jane 2012. ‘Rose, sage, cyperus and e-ti: the adornment of olive oil at the Palace of Nestor’, in Kosmos: jewellery, adornment and textiles in the Aegean Bronze Age, M. Nosch, R. Laffineur eds. Leuven: Peeters: 655–662. Ettinghausen, Richard 1972. From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic world: three modes of artistic influence. Leiden: Brill. Fukai, Shinji, Kiyoharu Horiuchi 1984. Tāku-i Busutān: II. Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha. Gunter, Ann C., Paul Jett 1992. Ancient Iranian metalwork in the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Freer Gallery of Art. Washington DC: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Freer Gallery of Art. Head, Barclay Vincent 1897. Catalogue of the Greek coins of Caria, Cos and Rhodes. London: Trustees of the British Museum. 23 Heyn, Maura K. 2011. ‘The Terentius Frieze in context’, in Crossroads of Antiquity, Lisa R. Brody and Gail L. Hoffman eds.. Chestnut Hill, Mass.: Boston College Museum of Art. Jacobsthal, Paul 1956. Greek pins and their connexions with Europe and Asia. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Jashemski, Wilhemina, Frederick Meyer 2002. The Natural History of Pompeii. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Khader, Aïcha Ben Abed-Ben 2003. Image in stone: Tunisia in mosaic. Tunis: Ars Latina. Kondoleon, Christine (ed.) 2000. Antioch, the lost ancient city. Princeton: Princeton University Press; Worcester: Worcester Art Gallery. Lee, Jonathan, Frantz Grenet, 1998. New light on the Sasanid painting at Ghulbiyan, Faryab Province, Afghanistan, in South Asian Studies 14: 75–85. Logdancheva, Elena, Yuri Vinogradov, Sergei Schvemberger, Nikolay Borisov, 2013. 3D reconstructions of Cimmerian Bosporus painted crypts. Conference paper: Proceedings of the 2011 international conference on electronic Visualisation and the Arts. Location, 2013. Available at: http://www.bosporuscrypt.ru/content/crypts/crypt_1864.htm Moraitou, Mina 2012. Fragments of the so-called Marwan tiraz, in Byzantium and Islam: age of transition, 7th –9th century, Helen C. Evans, Brandie Ratliff eds.. New York; New Haven: Metropolitan Museum of Art: 238–240, cat. 173A–C. Oberleitner, Wolfgang 1981. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake. Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum. Perkins, Ann 1973. The art of Dura Europos. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Peterson, Sara 2016. Roses, poppies and narcissi: plant iconography at Tillya-tepe and connected cultures across the ancient world. PhD thesis, SOAS, University of London. Available at: https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/26495/ Pfister, Rudolf, Louisa Bellinger, The excavations at Dura-Europos, Final report IV, part II: Textiles. New Haven: Yale University Press. Pirenne-Delforge, Vinciane 1994. L'Aphrodite grecque : contribution à l'étude de ses cultes et de sa personnalité dans le panthéon archaïque et classique. Athènes-Liège: Centre International d'Étude de la Religion Grecque Antique. Pliny (1969). Natural History, Books 20–23; transl. W.H.S. Jones. Cambridge Mass; London: Harvard University Press. Rostovtzeff, Michael 1913-1914. Antīchnaia dekorativnaia zhivopis’ na iugie Rossii. St. Petersburg: Īzdanie Īmperatorskoĭ arkheologīcheskoĭ kommīssiī. Rostovtzeff, Michael 1919. ‘Ancient decorative wall-painting’, The Journal of Hellenic Studies 39: 144–163. 24 Rostovtzeff, Michael, 1913–1914, reissued 2004. La peinture décorative antique en Russie méridionale: Saint-Pétersbourg 1913-1914, sous la direction d'Alix Barbet; avec le concours de Véronique Schiltz; transl. Arlette Fraysse, Andrea Rychtecky. Paris: Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, De Boccard. Schlumberger, Daniel 1986. Qasr el-Heir el Gharbi. Paris: Geuthner. Stern, Karen B. 2010. ‘Mapping devotion in Roman Dura-Europos: a reconsideration of the Synagogue ceiling tiles’, American Journal of Archaeology 114/3 (July): 473–504. Talbot-Rice, Tamara 1965. Ancient arts of Central Asia. New York: Praeger. Valeva, Julia 2001. La Peinture funéraire dans les provinces orientales de L’Empire Romain dans l’antiquité tardive, Hortus Artium Medievalium 7: 167–209. Wood, Rachel 2017. The Khosro cup, in Imagining the Divine: art and the rise of world religions, Jas Elsner, Stefanie Lenk et al eds. Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford: 206–209. Zhikova, Lyudmila 1975. The Kazanluk Tomb: transl. Nevena Zheliazkova. Recklinghausen: Bongers. 25