So called because of fresco portraying the Greek poet Menander, The House of Menander dominates most of the insula it occupies in the southern quarter of Pompeii. It was a high status residence, combining visible wealth with an exact implementation of the social language of the elite, as expressed through décor and architecture. In contrast, its location and evidence of agricultural activity on the premises, demonstrates the close link between the homes of the elite and their business activities.
The house began in the third century BC as a basic atrium style house. In the second century BC, a central peristyle was added in response to Hellenised fashions, replacing the back hortus previously in vogue. In the first century AD, the house reached its peak. At the time of the eruption of 79AD, a bath house had been added, as well as an entertainment suite and a stable yard and servant’s quarters to the south east of the house.
The house displays makes use of public architectural motifs to make statements of status. In the second century BC, pilasters were added to the entrance of the house. At the same time, engaged columns were added at the entrance of the tablinium. These columns, more usually found in temples and basilicas acted as framing devises at the beginning and end of an important visual axis. Visitors and clients would be left in no doubt about the importance of the individual they visited and petitioned. These motifs were not restricted to the public zone of the house; they are also found in the private areas.
The peristyle garden had by now become the visual nexus of the house, a link between the public and private. It ended the public fauces-atrium-tablinium axis but it was also the focal point for views emphasising status from the dining and reception rooms that surrounded it. For example, from the summer triclinium, the focus was the ancestral shrine. This view was again framed with columns. By highlighting the shrine in such a way, the viewer was being reminded of their host’s long and illustrious pedigree. Even friends and invited guests needed reminding of their place within the social hierarchy.
The house evidently acted as an agricultural unit as well as an elite residence. The stable yard was found to have evidence of carts and agricultural tools. This was not incompatible with the house’s function as an elite residence. What was important was the careful zoning of different functions. Public and private were carefully differentiated. The atrium and tablinium already acted as the owner’s business office. There was no reason why manual activities could not occur in the house, as long as it was away from the public zones. The stable yard was peripheral and the house was close to the rural areas where vines and olives were grown so profitably. The Roman businessman liked to be situated in the hub of economic activity; it was not an advantage to be spatially removed from your interests.
The location of the house emphasises this. It was situated in an area of industry and trade; surrounded by fullers, carpenters and weavers. By the time of the eruption, space around the forum, the centre of business in Pompeii was at a premium. Therefore, there was a movement outwards towards the city limits where space was readily available. The owner of the House of Menander in all probability maximised on this movement of trade. He already dominated his insula spatially. However, it is also likely that he was renting out properties that he had acquired to his clients. Thus his house was a statement of success. It was in a prosperous business area of the city. This and its physical design declared its importance and that of its owner.
Ling, R (1983) ‘The Insula of Menander at Pompeii: Interim Report’. The Antiquaries Journal 63:34-57.
Raper, R A, (1977) ‘The Analysis of Urban Structure’ in D Clarke (ed) Spatial Architecture. London: Academic Press.
Wallace-Hadrill, A (1994) Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum (New Jersey: Princeton University Press.