The allure of myth on Roman sarcophagus reliefs has made them a focus of artistic and academic attention for centuries; it has therefore often proven puzzling to scholars that the Romans apparently abandoned Greek mythology in the funerary sphere (but no further) in the third century ce. Sarcophagi were the main sculptural output of the late empire, and such a radical aesthetic shift must reflect the wider contemporary culture. It is therefore surprising that this monograph is the first to tackle head-on the phenomenon of ‘demythologisation’ (Entmythologisierung), assembling and interrogating the various theories to date, reframing the debate and proposing a unique solution of its own.
A substantial introduction gives an overview of the development and role of mythological imagery on Roman sarcophagi, comparing examples that illustrate the removal of Endymion from bucolic scenes or Hippolytus from the hunt. A. identifies specific mythic narratives as the focus of demythologisation, since generic figures with mythological origins, such as muses, by contrast, survive.
The first five chapters each shine a spotlight on different explanations for the abandonment of myth, carving out the arguments before drilling down into their respective weaknesses. Chapter 1 effectively challenges the idea that a nascent Christianity could have had any significant influence on changing tastes, based on calculations of very low numbers of Christians of higher social status in third-century Rome and their having no need to commission ‘neutral’ demythologised imagery when biblical motifs were available. The argument singles out purchasing power as being the only driver behind imagery choice, when we might also want to consider non-financial influence on tastes (though the statistics may still weigh against this); for example, could reliefs open to a wider audience have appealed to pagan buyers? It may also be too simplistic to assume that Christians would always prefer imagery from the Bible and that ‘only a pagan sculptor could have thought it fitting to add Neptune’ at one end of the earliest example with biblical motifs (p. 68), when elemental personifications of Sol, Luna or Caelus are employed similarly as framing devices for biblical scenes even on late-fourth-century sarcophagi.
Chapter 2 turns to Henning Wrede’s theory of ‘elite retreat’, the idea that the significant rise of generic bucolic imagery in place of specific myths reflects the withdrawal of the upper classes from the city to their countryside villas. A. helpfully shows that, rather than evoking the pastoral, the villa had always represented the agricultural, a topic for which there seems to be little other specific bibliography. The careful examination of what the images show, rather than taking for granted what the genre represents, is a welcome approach.
Chapter 3 considers whether demythologisation represented a response to political crisis. A. correctly points out that the theory does not explain why myth is dropped altogether, rather than turning to more tranquil mythic scenes, though he might perhaps have considered whether the influence of dramatic theatrical stagings of myth (pp. 121–2) allowed for any clear alternative repertoire. Chapter 4 addresses whether any rising populism could explain myth falling out of favour, by discussing in depth the key restriction of iconographical change to the funerary sphere, compared to the flourishing of myth in other domains.
Chapter 5 decouples the link between the earlier abstraction of myth and its ultimate rejection, successfully showing them to be two different impulses, not two stages of the same story. A. draws out contradictory scholarly opinions on the same tropes across different media and time periods, tracing the trend of narrative truncation much earlier and undercutting the historical characterisation of late antique stylistic changes as reflecting disjuncture and degeneration. The chapter convincingly identifies how abstraction could increase semiotic complexity rather than reduce, as with freestanding sculpture, which this mode could evoke, and how Christian typological viewing would develop as its extension.
In Chapter 6, having found no explanation convincing on the existing terms of the debate, A. reconsiders the terms themselves by revisiting the distinction between mythic and non-mythic. He does this in part through novel technical analysis of the tooling used for different genres of sarcophagus imagery, an exciting method that reveals that the drill was increasingly used to distinguish the deceased from all other figures; by comparison, in both function and technique, the mythic appears to have been considered interchangeable with other genres.
In the conclusion A. presents his alternative theory, that what had become problematic about myth (and not only myth) was that it represented the past. The temptation to focus on the trajectory of myth alone misses the wider picture, in which all historically situated figures retreat from view, including specific philosophers retiring in favour of generic. This argument hinges on only two such sarcophagi, but the theory’s strength comes from how it ties in with other contemporary phenomena, in particular the archaeological record, which reflects a growing desire for proximity between living and dead.
Readers may question how far myth represented the Greek past in Roman culture, given the saturation of myth in the present day and persistence beyond the funerary sphere. How exactly did mythic scenes transform from images ‘full of zest for life’ (P. Zanker and B.C. Ewald, Living with Myths: The Imagery of Roman Sarcophagi, trans. J. Slater [2012], p. ix), offering relatable or at least aspirational comparanda in grief, to backward-looking barriers to the bereaved? This development is likened to historical religious rejections of mediatory figures, but how far these are comparable (given that Christians have been ruled out as a significant influence) remains somewhat unclear. If beyond the scope of this study, there is rich ground for further discussion.
After this stimulating hypothesis is wrapped up in a mere eighteen pages, a longer coda allows further reflections on what A. sees as the subsequent revival of myth in Christian imagery. The latter managed to unite the deceased with surrounding figures in a new location of future time, accomplishing what earlier sarcophagi had attempted through the removal of figures of the past. A. is to be commended for resisting the scholarly division of ‘pagan’ and ‘Christian’ sarcophagi, instead usefully considering biblical narratives within the mythic category, comparing the Labours of Hercules with the miracles of Jesus. Nevertheless, the distinction of Christian content as forward-looking from pagan as retrospective would have benefited from further corroboration; Christian reliefs could still convey a sense of biblical characters as part of a prestigious heritage, even aligning them with Aeneas and the Trojans as common Roman ancestors.Footnote 1
A monograph-length study in English is a rarity to be welcomed in the field of sarcophagus studies, and this book offers a vital contribution to the debate around the disappearance of myth, resetting the terms in which it has been framed. A.’s theory is original and intriguing, and appears to shed light on a greater range of monuments and the wider culture than previous attempts, despite some remaining questions. The book takes a refreshing approach to the subject matter in many ways: bestriding typological and religious divisions, challenging some entrenched assumptions about later Roman art, and casting myth’s demise as symptomatic of a positive, active impetus rather than decay.
The book is clear, engaging and accessible (occasionally even conversational), pausing repeatedly to summarise to keep readers on course. The relevance of the subtitle could be questioned: ‘allegory and visual narrative’ does not highlight sufficiently what is distinctive about the volume or its conclusion. The consideration of each theory in turn makes for a clear structure, although this means that evidence must sometimes be redeployed in different chapters, such as the crucial limitation of demythologisation to funerary art. The volume is well illustrated; most photographs appear to have been taken by the author, which is testament to his autopsy of these three-dimensional monuments.
A.’s monograph is important reading for scholars of Roman art and funerary culture, while the deconstruction of previous theories will be particularly useful for students. The book is relevant to those studying third- to fourth-century culture and society, or indeed mythology more generally, since it casts the reception of myth into relief.
