KITCHENS AND DINING ROOMS AT POMPEII ... - Get a Free Blog

of a neighboring house to the E was originally connected to this house, but this seems unlikely; A.
De Vos (PPM I, 750) believes that garden originally belonged to a separate, small house. There is
controversy in determining when: the entrance was changed, the house was redecorated in the
late 3rd style and the upper floor rooms was added over (a, d). A. De Vos dates the alteration of
the entrance and the repainting to ca. A.D. 35-45, and several minor repairs to the post-
earthquake period. Sutherland, however, noting the numerous repairs, dates the whole
renovation after the earthquake and follows Schefold in describing the program of redecoration
as 'imitation' 3rd style. Sutherland is supported by the fact that the S wall of the cenaculum {g},
constructed of opus craticum, is painted in that 3rd style. Such construction is unlikely to have
survived the shock of the A.D. 62 earthquake, and so was probably constructed (and decorated)
afterwards. 69
The building was ascribed to a certain Niraemius by Della Corte, who posted an electoral
recommendation next to the entrance. Because of the late transformation of room (a) into a
entrance with wide doorways, this room has been identified as a shop. Numerous finds were
made in (a), especially bronze vessels, tools and glass bottles, and terracotta bowls. Maiuri does
not report the elevation of any of these finds, and whether (in the case of the serving vessels) they
were likely to have fallen from the cenaculum DR◊{g} above. In any case, it is not at all certain
what was sold on the premises. Otherwise, the pattern of habitation is clear: front room (a)
offering clear passage from the street to the ground and upper floor rooms, with an atrium (b)
around which bedrooms (d, h, i?), service (KI e, f) and reception, DR•(c), were arranged.
References
PPM I, 730-749; Fröhlich 1991, 252, #L7; Sutherland 1990, 158-159; Rediscovering Pompeii 1990,
172-173, #56; Gassner 1986, 131; CTP IIIA, 12-13; PPP I, 70-72; Bastet & De Vos 1979, 93-94, #60;
Guida 1976, 186; Schefold 1957, 35; Della Corte 1954, 267, #655; Pernice 1938, 107; Maiuri NSc
1929, 379-386.
Data
A) Total area: 145.0 Nodes: 69.2 Connectors: 3.5 Static spaces: 75.5
B) Total # spaces: 8 # Nodes: 2 # Connectors: 1 # Static spaces: 5
C) Area, KI (e): 8.9 Area, DR•(c): 13.6 Length, DR•(c): 3.73 Width, DR•(c): 3.64
Area, DR◊{g}: 17.1 Length, DR◊{g}: 4.79 Width, DR◊{g}: 3.56
69 However, I.10.18 {11}, also with opus craticum walls, has 3rd style decoration; unless it is in imitation, it is
possible that such construction could have survived the earthwuake. A. and M. De Vos (PPM I, 407-409,
750-751) argue that decoration in the neighboring houses I.6.15 and I.7.19 were done in 'imitation' 3rd style
after the A.D. 62 earthquake.
271