Perhaps Apuleius at the end of his Metamorphoses was right, that at Rome in the Isaeum Campense, at least in his time, not Isis but Osiris was the highest god.1 This was not, apparently, true for the Isaeum at Pompeii.2 Here, clearly, Isis is represented as the predominant divinity. The situation is similar to that at Kenchreai, the southern port of Corinth, where Lucius, Apuleius’ hero, is first initiated into the mysteries of Isis. Even there, in the procession with the vessel of Nile water, Osiris is referred to as the highest divinity.3 But at Rome, Lucius is told that the higher initiation is that to Osiris:
vesperaque, quam dies insequebatur Iduum Decembrium, sacrosanctam istam civitatem accedo…. novum mirumque plane comperior … magni dei deumque summi parentis invicti Osiris necdum sacris inlustratum. (Met. 11.26-27 [Griffiths 1975: 287-288])4
On the following evening, on the twelfth of December I reached that sacrosanct city [Rome]…. But I made a new and clearly amazing discovery … I had not been initiated into the mysteries of the great god and supreme father of the gods, the unconquerable Osiris.
Finally, he learns that even one initiation to Osiris is not sufficient, but that he, and his pocketbook, must endure another. Possibly Lucius’ final initiation was to both gods, Isis and Osiris, but afterward he has a vision of Osiris alone, suggesting that even this initiation was to Osiris.5
In Italy, the Isis religion in the early empire seems to have been becoming more and more Osirian and funerary, thus confirming Apuleius’ depiction of activities in the temple at Rome. It is not that contemporary Isiacs had a morbid outlook on life.6 Rather, they believed in a happy afterlife through their devotion to the “Egyptian gods.”7 Devotion to Osiris in Rome probably paralleled that in Greco-Roman Egypt, where the dead tried to assimilate themselves to Osiris. Eventually the Temple of Serapis (Osiris) on the Quirinal, if the general view is correct, would dwarf that of Isis down below in the Campus Martius.8 So the mysterious words of the title of this study, “who protects her brother Osiris,” are meant to indicate the predominance of Isis at Pompeii, in contrast to Rome. When Vesuvius erupted, Isis was still on top, even if Osiris was showing signs of resurrection and might eventually triumph in the capital city.
Until a few years ago, it was quite difficult to study the Isaeum at Pompeii. The publication of the temple excavation and its finds was very incomplete, and one had to be content with rather murky illustrations of the frescoes. Then, in 1992, the temple was recreated in the rooms of the National Archaeological Museum of Naples for a special exhibit. The exhibit was accompanied by a stimulating, if at times unreliable, catalogue (Alla ricerca di Iside) with excellent color reproductions of many of the frescoes. A giornata di studio, also held at the museum, resulted in published contributions by some of Italy’s (and France’s) most brilliant and imaginative scholars.9 More recently and more soberly, Valeria Sampaolo has published the architectural and pictorial content of the Isaeum for the official publication, Pompei: Pitture e mosaici.10 Then, in 2000, Nicole Blanc, Hélène Eristov, and Myriam Fincker presented their revolutionary analysis of the architectural features of the temple, in the course of which they rejected many of the previous theories about its construction and reconstruction.11 Still lacking is an official publication of the statues and artifacts, many of which are Egyptian or Egyptianizing, though these were treated briefly in the 1992 catalogue. One can thus obtain a reasonably accurate picture of the relative worship of Isis and Osiris in the Isaeum at the time of the destruction that preserved it. A “picture” or a “look” is correct, because what we have is really only what we see.
The French authors mentioned above bulldozed two previous theories. The first was the supposition that a temple existed on the site in the late Republican period. The second was that, as the inscription says, after the earthquake in 62 CE, the temple was built from scratch (a fundamento res-tituit).12 After the earthquake, according to these authors, relatively minor changes were made, primarily consisting of new painting and stucco work, most of which was done in the Fourth Pompeian Style. Their argument is based on the need to fit the temple into the space left by the theater on the south, the type of brickwork employed, the presence of stucco found underneath a later layer of stucco, motifs in the decoration, stylobates and capitals, the type of façade with two wings, of mosaics under the later pavement, of furnishings for the temple, and the inscription of M. Lucretius Rufus in the Sacrarium. All these elements seem to point to an Augustan date.13 The portico had to be entirely rebuilt, and the painting is primarily in the Fourth Style, but evidently the earlier painting and stucco design was in part used for the inner side of the arches of the Ekklesiasterion, a “pastiche of the Second Style executed in the Fourth Style.” If true, the architecture of the Isaeum primarily represents the Augustan period, the sculpture is primarily Julio-Claudian, centered probably on Claudius, and the painting and stucco work is mostly late Neronian.
As far as Egyptomania goes in the Age of Augustus, one might recall the Obelisk of the Solarium at the present Piazza Montecitorio, the obelisks and Egyptian decoration of the Mausoleum of Augustus, the frescoes of the Aula Isiaca on the Palatine, and those of the Villa Romana Farnesina, which perhaps belonged to Agrippa and Julia, the daughter of Augustus. The Isaeum at Pompeii would have originally, then, fit into the religious, social, and political currents of the Augustan age. The official desire of Augustus’ reign to glorify his Egyptian victory evidently left an opening both for wealthy Romans to adorn their homes with chic Egyptian and Alexandrian décor and for the cult to flourish, in spite of its apparently foreign and non-Roman character. The presentation of Egyptian motifs in the Isaeum, however, contrasts with the chic, arty, architectonic, and less religious style of those in the Villa Farnesina and the Aula Isiaca.14
The Isaeum at Pompeii, then, contrasts with the Isaeum Campense in Rome, which belongs primarily to the age of Domitian.15 Domitian had abundant reason to exalt Osiris over Isis. His father Vespasian had received a divine prediction in the Sarapeion at Alexandria that he would rule over the world. At the very end of Apuleius’ Metamorphoses, the hero (and the reader) is surprised to find that Osiris seems to be the principal god in the Isaeum Campense. The dramatic date of the Metamorphoses is about 170 CE. Perhaps Osiris’ supremacy there was the situation at Rome already in Domitian’s day. The important “Serapaeum” part of the Isaeum Campense, the large apse structure at the south, seems to date to his reign, or at least that of Hadrian. Even before Domitian, Nero, a descendant of Marcus Antonius (Mark Antony), famous for his association with Egypt, had his wife, Poppaea Sabina, embalmed.16 Possibly Nero or Poppaea, like the owners of the Greco-Roman mummy cases recovered from Egypt, seriously hoped to become, after death, “like” Osiris, gaining immortality and a blessed afterlife.17
At Pompeii, Isis clearly is represented as the more prominent divinity. Possibly the major cult statues were of Isis and Serapis, but of these, only the head belonging to what may be the cult statue of Isis has survived.18 One can easily find Isis in the temple. Along the prominent arched wall of the west portico on the extreme left, we find a statue of Aphrodite Anadyomene. The statue evidently represents the interpretatio graeca of Isis, whereas Isis with the ankh on the extreme right seems to be an archaizing Hellenistic form of the goddess.19 Finding Osiris is more difficult. At the back, outside wall of the cella of the temple, a statue of a youthful Dionysus, a god often identified with Osiris, appeared in a niche.20 Its placement at the west end of the temple, a primary symbolic direction of Osiris, is probably significant. A remembrance of Osiris would also be an ushabti (a small mummified figure), which, though small in size, was put in a special niche in a prominent place in the “Sacrarium.”21 A small decorative piece, moreover, called a “bearded Dionysos” in the catalogue, is in fact an “Osiris/Dionysus.”22
The frescoes also reflect the relative positions of Isis and Osiris.23 These were newly painted after the earthquake. However, the odd placement of some quadretti (small, rectangular insert paintings) breaking up the wall design in the temple suggests that the worshipers, who found it difficult to part with the old paintings, had them reproduced awkwardly in this way.24 If so, one could probably presume that the central paintings in the triptychs might also have belonged to the earlier painting program. Significantly, too, the central panels of the triptychs seem to belong to an older, statuary style of painting, contrasting with the dreamy, impressionistic style of the flanking Nilescapes.25 There were three painted triptychs in the “Ekklesiasterion.” Of these, the central panels of only two have survived. These two, in illusionist frames, meant to represent paintings on wood, are extremely important, depicting episodes in the life of Io — that is, scenes of salvation and liberation. In the first, Hermes (Mercury) is about to slay Argos, the custodian of Io, who, through the machinations of Hera (Juno), is to be transformed into a cow (Fig. 12.1). In the second, Isis appears in the company of her sister, Nephthys, Hermanubis (a combination of Hermes and Anubis), and her son, Harpokrates. Io, supported by a personified Nile, is to be restored from bestial form and savage persecution, and returned to civilized society (Fig. 12.2).
Perhaps the theme of the painting inspired Apuleius. In the Metamorphoses, his hero, Lucius, having been transformed into an ass, through Isis is restored to human form?26 By reading the plaintive laments of Lucius, we can appreciate the plight of Io and her liberation by Isis.27 Lucius (Met. 12 [Griffiths 1975: 275]) interprets his release as salvation (salus), and liberation by Isis as one from toils, dangers, and Fortune. Lucius then dedicates himself entirely to the goddess, something of which we have an intimation in the “Io and Isis” (or “Io at Canopus”) painting. Io, and by extension the Isiac worshiper or initiate, not only has been liberated but now is welcomed into the society of the goddess and invited to engage in total dedication to the Egyptian religion, symbolized by Isis, Horos (Harpokrates), Anubis (Hermanubis), Nephthys, and the Nile. The prominence of the Nile and the situla held in Hermanubis’ hand might also be taken as allusions to Osiris. Once again, though, Isis, not Osiris, dominates both the literal and the symbolic dimensions of the painting.
Figure 12.1. Ekklesiasterion: Io, Hermes, and Argos.
Figure 12.2. Ekklesiasterion: Nile, Io, Isis, Hermanubis, Nephthys, and Harpokrates.
The numerous small paintings (quadretti) are primarily meant to evoke the mystery of Egypt and the Nile, but many are suggestive of a tomb of Osiris, in particular that on Bigga, the island next to Philai.28 These, too, with their bird’s-eye perspective and romantic sacro-idyllic landscapes, contrast with the central panels of the triptychs. They are not, however, quite in the same dreamy, sacro-idyllic manner of the Ekklesiasterion Nilescapes. Though the Nilescapes of the Ekklesiasterion are strikingly beautiful, they are subordinated to the central Io panels. In fact, though, the central paintings are slightly smaller than the framing Nilescapes.29 The triptychs, moreover, were given special prominence, since they were partially visible through the arches of the interior court. Once inside the Ekklesiasterion, the viewer had a vicarious experience of the Upper Nile. The “framed” frescoes represent the Dodekaschoinos, a stretch of about sixty kilometers of the Nile in Upper Egypt, south of the first cataract near Philai and before reaching Nubia. This was a “virtual reality” experience of standing on Philai, the site of the greatest Temple of Isis in Egypt, while contemplating the extraordinarily overawing scenery that surrounded it.30
The physical and symbolic directions of the Temple at Philai probably are important for understanding the temples both at Pompeii and at Rome. The Temple at Philai faced south, looking down toward the source of the Nile, whose water was often identified with Osiris. The burial place of Osiris, Bigga (or the Abaton), was primarily to the west. Bigga is a huge island in relation to Philai. Considered to contain the source of the Nile, it projected quite a bit south, thus both west and south of Philai. The Abaton, “where no one shall tread,” with its primarily western orientation, was fitting as the traditional direction of Osiris and the souls of the dead. But since it extended farther south, one might justifiably see it as a symbol of the Nile. As in the quadretti, so in the Ekklesiasterion Nilescapes, an island, imaginary tomb, or temple, together with luxurious vegetation, conveyed a sense of the “numinous.” In a sense, with the possible exception of the “Isis and Osiris Enthroned” painting, all the major frescoes closely associate Isis worship with the water of the Nile.31 Possibly the artists only intended to create atmosphere by depicting the landscape of Upper Egypt. In one, however, we find bulls grazing on a rocky island, beside a temple near which someone is fishing. Is this a farfetched representation, meant to harmonize with the other scenes, of the Sarapieion at Memphis where the Apis bulls were raised, kept, and eventually buried?
Figure 12.3. Portico: Priest with sacred asp.
Close examination of the paintings reveals a chronological or religious order to be followed. As one entered from the outside gate into the portico, one found little representations of Isiac priests and one priestess in the center of the fresco panels (Fig. 12.3). The figures stand out against the bright red wall with almost theatrical backdrops, as though to give them a hieratic quality and religious dignity separating them from everyday reality and ordinary mortals. The figures recall those of the Isiac procession at Kenchreai in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses (11.10 [274]). We might imagine the curious, possibly as their first experience, following these standing figures, as though in processional order, into the temple precinct.32 In Apuleius, the “gods” follow last, among whom is Anubis. Anubis appeared on the far, western, inner wall of the portico. Thus, the progression of the figures was probably understood as beginning at the northeast entrance into the sanctuary, then moving in parallel from north and south walls, until reaching the west side of the portico, which was also the east wall of the Ekklesiasterion.33
Figure 12.4. Isis with the Body of Osiris, Sacrarium.
Once inside the Ekklesiasterion, one should have followed the sequence northeast to northwest, northwest to southwest, and southwest to southeast. In the Sacrarium, one follows the same direction, beginning with the north wall and proceeding to the west wall. Only by following this sequence in the Ekklesiasterion will the panel “Io, Hermes, and Argos,” representing Hermes about to slay Argos, come before the liberation of Io by Isis, “Io at Canopus.” Similarly, in the Sacrarium, the “Finding of the Body of Osiris” (Fig. 12.4) comes chronologically before the “Isis and Osiris Enthroned” (Figs. 12.5, 12.6). The south side of the Sacrarium, along with its fresco, had disappeared at the time of the excavation; its subject is unknowable. Moreover, it is difficult to imagine any scene more final than “Isis and Osiris Enthroned.”
Following this order of the paintings, and trusting Sampaolo’s location of them, we arrive at the following sequence. In the Ekklesiasterion, north wall, east panel: “Small Temple in antis and Sacred Portal” (an extremely romantic rocky island with a tree behind a column and a small nautical bird [fisher martin] in the foreground).34 Central panel: “Io, Hermes, and Argos.”35 A cow stands behind Io, who has small horns on her head, an indication that she will be transformed into her bestial form. West panel: “Landscape with Sacred Portal and Ibis,” a scene extremely similar in composition to the panel on the east side, especially in its inclusion of a bird.36 West wall, north panel: “Landscape with Sacred Portal and Curtain.” A standing statue can be seen in a sacred edifice, while bulls are grazing to the right.37 The central panel is missing.38 South panel: “Landscape with Grazing Bulls.” Thematically close to the matching panel, we find a seated statue and a similar enclosure behind the statue, but the proportions are different, and the landscape is more civilized.39 South wall, west side: fresco missing. Central panel: “Io at Canopus,” with Io, the Nile god, Hermanubis, Isis, Nephthys, and Harpokrates.40 West side: “Adoration of the Mummy of Osiris” (also called “Landscape with Ceremony before a Sarcophagus of Osiris”; Fig. 12.7).41 The matching panel is missing. This one is remarkable for the marked centrality of its composition, its representation of a ritual, and its momentary rather than eternal character, contrasting with what we find in the other scenes. The presence of birds in the side panels of the north triptych, however, helps to lead into this picture, for this one, too, is marked by the extraordinary presence of a mysterious bird, not a common habitant of the Nile. This, almost the last painting before entering the Sacrarium, which would receive the least amount of natural light, seems to be especially serious, religious, and mysterious.
Figure 12.5. Sacrarium: Drawing, “Isis and Osiris Enthroned.”
Figure 12.6. Sacrarium: Osiris, “Isis and Osiris Enthroned.”
In this most unusual and striking scene, the artist possibly intended to depict rites at Bigga for the mummy of Osiris.42 Only here do we find a priest performing a ritual. What a mysterious scene! Before a lintel supported by anthropoid sarcophagus slabs stands a coffin with ribbons tied around it.43 A strange, mystical bird with a lotus crown on its head is perched on top of the mummy case. Even today, the scene bears an odd, accidental relationship to the entrance to the real island, and even more so to older photographs of the entrance gate.44 Tucked away in the dim southeast corner of the Ekklesiasterion, difficult to see from the portico, this scene before entering the Sacrarium serves as a transition to the inner sanctum.
The “Adoration” fresco, then, seems to depict more than just numinous and religiously evocative landscape. This does seem to represent the adoration of the mummified Osiris, very possibly on the island Bigga, as filtered through the eyes of Hellenistic-Roman artists. As such, it has some relationship to the procession with the body of Osiris in the Nile Mosaic of Praeneste (Palestrina). The ithyphallic statue, the urn of water, and the falcon/phoenix, besides the mummy case, are evocative, traditional symbols of the resuscitation or resurrection of Osiris.45 The huge, mysterious falcon suggests both the symbolic representation of Osiris or Horos with the falcon and the actual huge falcons imported from Africa and given lavish attention on the Abaton by means of a complicated ritual. One should not exaggerate the painting’s importance. It is in the shadows and is not even the central panel of the triptych. Even so, it must have been just as fascinating for Isiacs two thousand years ago as it is for us today. The fresco also suggests the direction the Egyptian religion in Italy seems to have been taking, moving from primary worship of Isis and interest in this life, toward the funerary aspects of Osiris and the destiny of the deceased in the next life. In an earlier article, perhaps the painting was misunderstood and treated as though the culmination of the viewing experience:
Figure 12.7. Ekklesiasterion: “Adoration of the Mummy.”
Ribbons are tied tightly around the stelai, while those around the “coffin” seem already loosened as though about to fly asunder. The central scene, bathed and highlighted with sunshine, stands out against the misty background of the distant mountains. In such an unreal atmosphere, a sudden, unexpected, and supernatural transition from death to life seems to await Osiris and all who follow his mysteries.46
The Sacrarium seems to have been an “inner sanctum,” the most esoteric room, and here again, Isis appears as the principal, saving divinity. Only a single arch allowed the light to enter, and this could easily have been veiled when required. In the midst of one frescoed wall, a niche (aediculum) contained a small mummified figure (ushabti ) of the sixth to fifth century BCE.47 Inscribed on the figure are verses, typical for an ushabti, taken from the sixth chapter of the Book of the Dead, extolling the power of Osiris.48 There were two large frescoes in the Sacrarium (itself at the southwest corner of the temple area) praising Isis and Osiris. Here the artists filled the walls with animals, attempting in their own way to imitate the Egyptian theriomorphic representations of divinities.49 Continuing in the scheme followed so far, one would begin at the north wall and move on to the west. The right direction is confirmed by the imagined chronology. The fresco on the north side, at the bottom left of which was the ushabti, must have something to do with the recovery of the body of Osiris, while that on the west side represents him as consort of Isis in the underworld. In the Nile Mosaic at Palestrina, we have something similar, a ritual procession with the coffin of Osiris. On the north wall of the Sacrarium, on the other hand, the central figure is Isis, while the square box-like coffin and the bird—falcon or swallow—painted on it indicates either the presence of the body of Osiris or the coffin that will receive the body.50 The scene apparently represents both the finding of the dispersed remains of Osiris’ body on a mythical level, and the annual funeral procession of Osiris in Egypt on a ritual level. This took place in several localities, but the Upper-Nilescapes of the Ekklesiasterion suggest that the creator had the rites at Philai and the Abaton in mind. Some Romans would have actually visited these sites, or at least have had a vicarious experience of them.51 In the Hellenistic and Roman world, the scene would evoke the Inventio Osiridis (“The Finding of Osiris”), one of the principal Isiac festivals.52 The Ariccia Relief possibly depicts this rite in the Isaeum Campense.53 The Sacrarium scene parallels the procession scene in the Nile Mosaic of Palestrina in its funerary aspects, even if presented in a mythical rather than ritualistic way. Like the “Adoration of the Mummy,” the Nile Mosaic scene could represent rites at Bigga. The central event of the Nile Mosaic is this procession, presumably with the new mummy of Osiris, toward a luxurious grove on an island, undoubtedly representing the tomb of Osiris. This annual rite for Osiris was associated with the rising of the Nile each year.54 Surely the Isiacs at Pompeii would see in the “Finding” scene Isis’ care of one after death. In ancient Egyptian belief, rendering the body intact was important for the embalming process and life after death.
The culmination of the viewing process, at least of the frescoes we have, undoubtedly was the west wall of the Sacrarium.55 If desired, it would have been visible through the only entrance into the room, the arch leading from the portico. Significantly, it is situated on the west wall, the traditional direction for the departure of the souls and the principal direction of the Abaton, the tomb of Osiris, in relation to Philai, and the Osirian direction of the temple at Pompeii. Called “Isis and Osiris Enthroned,” the Egyptian divinities are here portrayed as queen and king of the underworld. The composition is similar to what we might expect of a representation of Persephone and Hades/Plouton (also called Thea and Theos) at Eleusis. The snakes and lack of solar imagery in the painting seem to suggest an underworld rather than a celestial paradise, or an imagined Egyptian place of the afterlife.
We find again the exaltation of Isis over Osiris. In the “Finding” scene, Osiris has only a passive role, being carried home in a box. Isis, who is positioned centrally looking at the viewer, dominates the picture. Isis at first sight appears slightly elevated over Osiris, though this is an illusion, but she is seated on a throne. In contrast, Osiris occupies the viewer’s right side, amazingly, and in a quite unorthodox manner for Osiris or Sarapis, is seated on what appears to be a huge rock in the drawing made at the time of discovery. However, after the new cleaning of the painting, this appears to be a kind of padded chair or couch. Though clearly not represented as Dionysus — except possibly for a large staff—or Serapis, he is not immediately recognizable as Osiris. Nonetheless, he wears a lotus, employed by Pompeian artists to represent an Egyptian crown, on top of a strange flat hat (an odd rendering of the polos of Serapis?). Isis’ throne suggests her majesty and greater importance. Perhaps the throne also symbolizes her closer link to the living as a source of succor, whereas the less impressive position of Osiris (reminding one of Demeter’s in some Eleusinian iconography) and the surrounding serpents associate Osiris with the underworld. The cista mystica placed below the representation of the “Finding of Osiris” in the north fresco and the snakes represented in the “Isis and Osiris Enthroned” painting suggest the presence of mysteries to obtain a better portion in the next life. Though Isis appears here primarily as queen of the dead, in Egyptian belief a god had power in all realms of the universe.56 If the Sacrarium is indeed the “inner sanctum,” one can imagine a possible use of the paintings in initiations. The initiates at the end of the ceremony could be brought here, with the sudden illumination of blazing torches, to stand in the presence of the very gods they are to worship here and in the hereafter, gods gazing benevolently upon them and offering them courage in the fearful transition from this life to a more blessed one.57 As Lucius, in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses, reveals of his first initiation, to Isis at Kenchreai, the southern port of Corinth:
nocte media vidi solem candido coruscantem lumine, deos inferos et deos superos accessi coram et adoravi de proxumo. (Met. 11.23 [Griffiths 1975: 285])
In the dead of night I saw the sun gleaming with bright radiance. I approached the gods below and the gods above and worshiped them at close distance.
But later on, at Rome, he was to be blessed with higher, more important— and more expensive—visions:
Osiris non in alienam quampiam personam reformatus, sed coram suo illo venerando me dignatus adfamine per quietem recipere visus est. (Met. 11.30 [Griffiths 1975: 291])
Osiris himself appeared to me while sleeping at night, not changed into some other person’s form but considering me worthy to approach close to his sacred presence and hear his voice.
At Pompeii, Isis stood helpless as the ashes fell around her, both destroying and preserving her sanctuary, but she was still Supreme.58
1. For my articles on the Osirian background, see Brenk 1999a: 133-143; 1999b: 227-238; 2001: 83-98; 2003a: 291-303; and 2003b: 73-92.
2. Zabkar 1988: 58, citation from Hymn 5:
3. Metamorphoses 11.11 [Griffiths 1975: 275]: summi numinis.
4. See Griffiths 1975: 102-105, 327-330. On the Egyptian concept of the local or immediate divinity being a “supreme” god, see Hornung 1983: 235-237.
5. Griffiths 1975: 337.
6. On the afterlife, see Hornung 1992: 95-115.
7. For widespread devotion in Italy to the funerary Osiris on a popular level, see Capriotti Vittozzi 1999: 131-145.
8. These developments are discussed by S. A. Takács (1995: esp. 74-75, 104130, and 203-207). R. Santangeli Valenzani (1991-92: 7-16, and 1996: 25-26), citing Cassius Dio 76.16.3 (Zonaras), identifies the temple with that of Septimius Severus to Hercules and Dionysus. However, S. Ensoli (1997: 306-322 [314-316]), along with others, continues to attribute the temple to Serapis. A possibility is that Caracalla rededicated the temple of Septimius Severus to Serapis.
9. Adamo Muscettola and De Caro, eds. 1994.
10. Sampaolo 1998: 732-849. This treatment replaces Elia 1942. See also D’Alconzo 2002: 54-61 (59, fig. 31, “Io a Canopo”; fig. 33, “Io, Argo ed Hermes”).
11. Blanc, Eristov, and Fincker 2000: 227-310.
12. For a photo of the inscription, see De Caro 1992: 67, no. 2.1.
13. Blanc, Eristov, and Fincker 2000: 291.
14. See Bragantini and De Vos 1982: e.g., 44-45, 49-50, 52, 58-59, 70, 95, 134135, pls. 37-38; and Iacopi 1997: esp. 16-17. For the Isaeum frescoes, see Sampaolo 1998: 832-833, figs. 197-201; De Caro 1992: 55, nos. 1.57-60.
15. See Lembke 1994a (reviewed by J. Eingartner [1999]); and Ensoli 1998: 407-438. Ensoli (p. 424) wants to attribute the exedra structure to Hadrian — on the basis of statuary, the inscription to Antinous, and architectural elements — seconded by Egelhaaf-Geiser (2000: 181). However, Rabirius, Domitian’s architect for the Palatine, liked fountains, pools, curvilinear lines, and grand heights and space. See Claridge 1998: 134-135; and Cecamore 2002: 230-231.
16. Chioffi 1998: 30-36 (esp. 30-31 and no. 1, 35-36).
17. See, e.g., Brenk 2001.
18. The Serapis statue, and possibly Harpokrates and Anubis in the wing niches of the temple façade, have disappeared. A head of Isis (De Caro 1992: no. 3.3 [inv. no. 6290]), from an acrolith, was found near the entrance of the Ekklesiasterion.
19. Engraving, in De Caro 1992: 28 (photo, 69), no. 3.8.
20. A statue of Dionysus was found in the sanctuary of Serapis (SS. Crocifisso) at Treia (ancient Trea); see Capriotti Vittozzi 1999: 105, 127, 152. For the two ears, see Blanc, Eristov, and Fincker 2000: 242, fig. 10; cf. Hoffmann 1993: 64. For similar Egyptian ears, see Jørgensen 1998: “Ear Stelae,” 120, no. 40, cat. no. 1016, 1017 (Eighteenth Dynasty, c. 1554-1305 BCE). The ears are meant to entreat the god to respond to prayers.
21. Capriotti Vittozzi (2000: 121-139) suggests that in the “Miniature Villa” at Pompeii, the fountain on the “Nile” seems to represent the tomb of Osiris at Abydos. For the tomb (of Sethos I [Osireion]), see Arnold 1997: tomb 182-183, 239. Romans went to great lengths to obtain statuary from Upper Egypt, such as one of Amasis (c. 565 BCE). See Curto 1985: 30-36.
22. De Caro 1992: 70, no. 3.9, described as the foot of a pilaster supporting a table.
23. For reading religious frescoes, see the illuminating article by Elsner, “Cultural Resistance and the Visual Image: The Case of Dura Europos” (2001: 269304, esp. 276-280).
24. For the scenes of the quadretti, see Versluys 2002: 143-145, no. 061.
25. Sampaolo (in De Caro 1992: 58, no. 1.69) believes the original might be attributable to the fifth-century Athenian painter Nikias. See also Hoffmann 1993: 109-117.
26. Shumate (1996: esp. 50, 62, 325-327) treats Apuleius as serious, but S. J. Harrison (2000: 240, 246-250) and others see Apuleius as ironically depicting a duped Lucius. For the importance of conversion, see Beard, North, and Price 1998: 278-279, 289-291; Liebeschuetz 2000: 984-1008 (1001-1007); and Beck 2000b: 145-181 (177).
27. On this, see Balch 2003: 24-55. Balch examines the depiction of suffering figures in Roman art, in particular Io and Isis in Pompeian painting, as a key to understanding the Roman reception of visual and literary depictions of the sufferings of Christ; see there esp. 27-42, 49-51, and figs. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 11.
28. For the luxurious growth of trees as indicative of the tomb of Osiris, see Koemoth 1994: esp. 135-164, 251-266; Meyboom 1995: 132-135, figs. 80-86. A recent photograph of Bigga with luxurious vegetation near the landing appears in Casini 2001: 195, pl. 203.
29. The side paintings would be about 10 percent larger in size. The “Io at Canopus” panel measures 150 × 137.5 cm.
30. For the Dodekaschoinos, see Locher 1999; and Jackson 2002: 108, map 3. On the temple itself, see Vassilika 1989; Arnold 1999: 190-193, 235-238; R. H. Wilkinson 2000: 213-215; Lloyd 2001: 40-44; Hölbl 2000: 36.
31. Outside of what is probably a Nilometer (“Purgatorium”), water is relatively modest in the complex. In contrast, reflecting pools have been found in the “Isaeum” at Cumae. See Caputo 1998: 245-253. On water in the Villa Hadriana, see Manderscheid 2000: 109-140 (118-129).
32. For the vignettes, see Sampaolo 1998: 740, fig. 9 (north portico, west side), priest with palm, no MNN no., Arditi inventory, no. 1351; 745, fig. 18 (north portico, east side), hierogrammateus, MNN 8925; 759, fig. 41 (east portico, center), zakoros with palm in one hand, grass in another, MNN 8921; 762, fig. 48 (east portico, south side), prophētēs carrying cobra in a rose wreath, palm, MNN 8922; 772, fig. 62 (south portico, east side), priestess with sistrum—the only woman represented — a hierodoulos, MNN 8923; 776, fig. 68 (south portico, west side), spondophoros with situla, MNN 8918; 779, fig. 75 (south portico, west side), lychnophoros, priest with golden lamp like a small boat with a large flame issuing from the middle, MNN 8969; 784, fig. 84 (west portico, south side), priest as Anubis, MNN 8920.
33. The order of the figures can be determined to a large extent from Sampaolo’s location of the paintings (1998: 738-739, 754-755, 758-759, 772, 776, 779, 784). Four of the ten Isiacs described in the procession in Apuleius correspond to the representations of the Isiacs in the portico at Pompeii (about fourteen in all). Not all in Apuleius’ procession are genuine Isiacs.
34. Sampaolo 1998: 826, fig. 189, MNN 8574.
35. Ibid.: 825, fig. 188, MNN 9548.
36. Ibid.: 824, fig. 187, MNN 8575.
37. Ibid.: 841, fig. 213, MNN 8558.
38. Egelhaaf-Geiser (2000: 189) suggests a “Zeus’ Encounter with Io” here, but this would not harmonize with the chronological order of the two extant pictures.
39. Sampaolo 1998: 840, fig. 211, MNN 1265.
40. Ibid.: 837, fig. 206, MNN 9558.
41. Ibid.: 836, fig. 205, MNN 8570.
42. The present restoration of the temple on the island of Agilkia has changed the physical and symbolic relationships. Bigga is now directly south, blocking the previous view down the Nile, and making incongruous the position of Hadrian’s Gate, the landing at the west of the temple.
43. Ribbons tied around tombs and stelai are common in Greek iconography. In Egyptian iconography, they suggest the hieroglyphic sign for divinity or indicate divinity. See, e.g., Hornung 1983: 33-38; 94, pl. 1 (Re-Osiris with a ribbon/sash around his waist). In the background, the artist seems to have introduced a huge, round, Roman-style tomb for Osiris.
44. E.g., Bernand 1969: pl. 7a and b.
45. For Isis as a falcon watching over the mummy (Tomb of Sennejem [Craftsmen’s Graves], Deir el Medina), see, e.g., W. Wulleman et al. 1989: 110; for Osiris in a shrine with pillars and lintel (same tomb), ibid.:111. For the multivalent quality of the bird, and its associations with Osiris, see G. Capriotti Vittozzi 2000: 137-138; and Ciampini 1999: 31-40 (31-35).
46. Brenk 1998: 306-307.
47. Engraving by N. Billy from a drawing of D. Casanova (Sampaolo 1998: 813, fig. 170).
48. D. D’Errico, in De Caro 1992: 79, no. 6.3; 85, no. 7.9., Ushabti of Paefhery-hesu (inv. no. 463), probably from the beginning of the 26th Dynasty (664525 BCE).
49. Coarelli (1994: esp. 123-125) thinks the mosaic room might have been dedicated to Osiris. For the Pompeian fresco and its location, see Sampaolo 1998: 820821, figs. 182-183. “The Finding of Osiris” was on the north side of the Sacrarium (MNN 8564): Sampaolo 1998: 815, fig. 173. For Casanova’s eighteenth-century drawing of the complete scene, see Sampaolo 1998: 822, fig. 182. For Osiris victorious over death and allusions to Osirification in the temple at Pompeii, see M. De Vos (1992: 136-139), who finds a privileged place on the west side. The “Purgatorium,” a Nilometer—symbolic of the Nile and Osiris — according to R. A. Wild (1981: 44-47), however, was on the south. On devotion to Osiris, see Brenk 2001.
50. Sampaolo 1998: 815, fig. 173, MNN 8564.
51. On pilgrimages, see Rutherford 1998: 229-256; Weill Goudchaux 1998: 525-534 (529); Le Bohec 2000: 129-145, esp. 145, noting interest mainly among officers; Maxfield 2000: 407-444 (Syene [Aswan], 410-414); Capriotti Vittozzi 2000.
52. On the Egyptian background to this, see, e.g., Assmann 2001 (= Ägypten: Theologie und Frömmigkeit einer frühen Hochkultur [Stuttgart, 1984]), 125-128. On the Roman context, see Hoffmann 1993: 103-104; and Balch 2003.
53. Lembke 1994a: 174-178, pl. 3.1; and Lembke 1994b: 97-102.
54. On the mosaic, see Meyboom (1995: esp. 132-149), who believes the Serapaeum at Puteoli, and ultimately the library in the Sarapeion at Alexandria, may have offered models for the mosaic (pp. 99, 107). See also Weill Goudchaux 1998; and Versluys and Meyboom 2000: 111-128, esp. 127.
55. Sampaolo 1998: 820, fig. 182, drawing by Casanova; remaining fresco of Osiris, ibid.: 821, fig. 183, MNN 8927; and De Caro 1992: 58, no. 1.71.
56. Hornung 1983: 191-196.
57. For the fresco, see Sampaolo 1998: 820-821, figs. 182-183. One of the earliest scholars to see the fresco identified “Osiris” as a woman; see Hoffmann 1993: 101-102. Hermanubis in the “Io at Canopus” fresco (Sampaolo 1998: fig. 208) also carries a mammiform situla on his arm, but is distinguished by the caduceus. The painting could be seen from the south ambulacrum of the portico.
58. I am very grateful to Giuseppina Capriotti Vittozzi, of the Giunta Centrale per gli Studi Storici, for looking over the article and for her help on Egyptian matters, and also to Christopher Parslow of Wesleyan University for his expertise on the Pompeian material.
