The Story
Professor Talks Roman Erotic Art
On November 17th, the Classical Studies Department presented its first Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) sponsored lecture, “The Cultural Messages of Roman Erotic Sculpture” presented by Professor Elizabeth Hartman, Vice President of the Williamsburg Society of AIA, in which Hartman discussed several works of Roman erotic sculptures and their possible implications about Roman culture.
Professor John Donahue started the event off by giving some background about the sponsor. He explained that the AIA is the largest organization devoted to the study of archaeology in North America with over 200,000 members in the United States, Canada and Europe. As stated on their website, the AIA “exists to promote archaeological inquiry and public understanding of the material record of the human past worldwide.” Donahue also mentioned how becoming a member of the organization could be useful to students interested in the field of archaeology through information about current projects, a subscription to the AIA’s magazine, Archaeology, and possible scholarships. When speaking about the program, Hartman was quick to assure students that the AIA is “constantly rejuvenating itself, [so it’s] not just old-folksy archeologists.”
Donahue then introduced Hartman, a Brown University graduate who received her Ph.D. from Columbia University. Before beginning her lecture, Hartman warned that her slideshow contained graphic images that would be considered “X-rated.” She then launched into her discussion. First she described how these erotic sculptures pose a problem for modern interpreters because it is hard to say if the erotic genre existed in antiquity and the artwork is too sophisticated to be the equivalent of modern day pornography. Hartman then posited that domestic spheres in which these pieces are found might give a clue to the purpose of these sculptures.
Hartman then explored what “erotic” would mean to Romans, explaining that it referred to “love” except when describing someone. In those instances, it might mean “sexy.” She also explained the possible origins of erotic sculpture, progressing from a hesitancy to adopt the Greek practice of nude hero sculptures to the sculptures in the Imperial Period when, as Hartman says, “all such shyness has vanished.”
These sculptures graphically depict sex acts or the interruption of sex acts in which one character is still aroused. Sometimes these depictions included elements of bestiality, when one character would be an animal or at least part animal. The majority of Hartman’s lecture was spent looking at particular examples of these types of sculptures, including a series of sculptures featuring a satyr and a hermaphrodite, the Munich sculpture, the Herculean Group, the Piggy Back Group, and a series depicting Leda and Jupiter disguised as a swan.
After highlighting the various important artistic factors of these pieces, Hartman then began to discuss the significance of where these sculptures were found. Although one might expect erotic sculptures to turn up in the bedroom, most of these sculptures were found in more public areas of the house. However, she stressed that it was important to note that these sculptures were not found in places any more public than a personal house. This differs greatly from the Romans’ Greek predecessors. Unlike Greeks, who placed a sculpture from the Piggy Back Group on the roof of a public building Greece, the Romans put the same piece in the garden of a private home. One of the sculptures from the Herculean Group, which depicts the god Pan having sex with a goat, flanked the pool in a villa where it could easily be seen from the dining area of the house.
Hartman suggests that the reason these erotic sculptures are in the domestic sphere is to potentially stimulate philosophical discourses about sex, desire, and the control of these or the shame that should be associated with them. It would be especially important to have these thoughts in people’s minds during Roman dinner parties, which were known for their flirtatious and sexually charged environments. Furthermore, these erotic sculptures could be admonitory, particularly the ones showing the sexually aggressive satyrs. Romans would be reminded of the unattractiveness of these creatures and adjust their behavior to avoid being like them.
After the presentation, Hartman took questions from audience members. Most of the questions were about other Greek or Roman art pieces that the audience was curious to know how they fit in with Hartman’s theories.
When asked what the most important point to take away from the lecture was, Hartman replied that it is that these Roman erotic sculptures “aren’t just trivial.”