The Four Styles of Pompeian Wall Painting

In 1892 August Mau came up with a classification that broadly categorized four distinctive periods in Pompeian wall art covering about 150-200 years. They called First, Second, Third and Fourth Style respectively. Wall-painting was done in two stages: first, the base layer of plaster was applied to the wall and allowed to set.

Then, the second layer was applied and a basic outline of a pictorial scene might be very gently scratched into this semi-dry layer (sort of like we draw with a pencil first, then colour in the image), followed by thin layers of 'paint' applied with a brush.

The decoration done as the wall plaster was wet, so artists had to work very fast. The 'paint' was actually wall plaster with minerals (like red cinnabar, which is the famous Pompeii Red colour) or things like burned wood (for the colour black) and precious stones for blue (lapis lazuli was ground up for this making blue the most expensive and rarest colour. In less common cases, this process might be done and/or embellished with layers of

Because of the skill required and materials involved, pictorial scenes were expensive and the man hours required were high. Perhaps it is actually quite common to the Peruvian type of painting using natural materials for dye

First Style

The first style is called Incrustation or Masonry style and dated from 150-90BC and was identified by Vitruvius as one made up of colored blocks. It was an illusory style which sought to built up a stucco relief resembling marble and its is likely that this style was imported from Greece. The wall is divided in to zones. At the bottom is the plinth above that the Socle. Orthostats are the large blocks. Then Iosodomic courses and string course and projecting cornice. It is a relief wall built up with stucco and then painted in many colors. Molded details could include pediments, capitals and door frames.

Examples can be found at the House of the Faun, House of Sallust

• 

  First Style found at the House of the Faun

• 

  First Style found at the House of the Faun (Fauces)

• 

  First Style

Second Style

This is also known as the Architectural Style and was dated to 90-25BC. The second style is related to the first style and is also an illusory style with an emphasis on architectural reality. Columns, plinths, ledges and doors were painted as realistically as possible using depth and perspective. Often the painting would draw they eye into the scene through an open window or door to an outside or other scene. It is believed that this style was unique to the Romans and Pompeii and they can be considered to have invested this style.

Examples can be found at the Villa of the Mysteries and the Villa at Oplontis.

Third Style

Mau dated this to the Augustan period of 25BC to 0040AD. This Third Style Wall Painting dispenses with perspectives. Images seem to float rather than occupy a space. Where there is a vista or view painted on the wall it is meant to be seen as a picture painted on the wall rather than a opening out on the world. The pictures have black frames and dispense with elaborate painted projected columns. Third Style seeks to retain the integrity of the wall rather than create an illusion. Red colors are still prevalent and the socle is still present. It is not the same as First Style as it is not a relief or an illusion of marble walls etc. Many of the depictions are mythological.

Famous examples can be found at the House of Marcus Lucretius Fronto and House of Fabius Rufus

Fourth Style

This Intricate style was dated by Mau from 40AD onwards. Vitruvius had only commented on three styles yet Mau added a fourth. It is a combination of styles two and three. Details are not as exacting as in the Second style yet still more realistic than the Third style. You still see the architectural dimensions but you also get the floating panels as if paintings hanging on a wall. Often the style would give hints of buildings and other architectural features in a slightly grainy misty appearance through an opening in the painting. Often these features would dispenses with architectural reality.

famous examples can be found in the House of the Vettii, House of Menander. Some 80% of the walls in Pompeii are painted in style. Its predominance could be a consequence of the rebuilding of Pompeii after the quake.

Conclusions

Mau’s categorization seems to be a useful yardstick rather than a precise measure. The artists were of course were not knowingly trying to conform to a style but the evidence is pretty convincing that the styles evolved over a 150-200 year period driven by fashion and the wealthy Pompeians who were trying to copy the styles the Imperial families were indulging in such as the Second Style Gardenscape at Livia’s Villa. That said, the First Style was an imported Hellenistic style, which I think could / may have been used throughout all Four painting style periods as a way of embellishing the House or Villa. The Second Style, like the First Style is an illusory style but one which has been developed to include perspective and depth and I believe is unique to the Romans at this time At this point I think the categorization becomes a little less convincing. Although the Third Style reverts back to a flatter style of wall painting it becomes apparent that the artists have not forgotten what has gone before and incorporate elements from earlier styles. How do you distinguish a late Second Style painting from an early Third Style? It is surprising that so many houses in Pompeii were painted in the Fourth Style considering it evolved late in the first century AD. Perhaps this is a result of the redecoration that occurred after the quake in 62AD

from the examination of Roman wall painting that we've undertaken a few things can be said and a few points should be stressed:

• The best way to date a house would be stratigraphic excavation (and pot sherds and/or coins found during excavations). This isn’t always possible at Pompeii because of the extent of decoration (particularly mosaic floors). Study of construction techniques is also used to date houses, often in conjunction with excavation and/or wall-painting. Wall-painting styles can provide a chronological framework for the construction of a house or area within a house. But this should be seen as a framework, not as a means of absolute dating.

• Vitruvius was discussing developments in Rome – so maybe his painting styles aren’t relevant to Pompeii and elsewhere, not to mention that his discussion is moralizing more so than descriptive. In addition, from his discussion we identify only 3 styles, not 4 (and in fact some scholars have argued that he is actually describing only 2 styles and that the ‘Third Style’ is just a late version of the Second Style, based on the time at which Vitruvius was writing). The Fourth Style is not described by Vitruvius at all.

• There can be overlap between the Styles. So perhaps the ‘Styles’ are too rigid.
• Many houses have more than one Style of wall-painting in them, which means that there is an overlap in personal taste and fashions as well and in some cases these do not change up to the AD 79 eruption.

• While the Four Styles are a useful tool, they are only a tool.