The Joys of Hunting

Analyzing the Relationship between the Small Hunt Mosaic of Piazza Armerina in the

Architectural Space of the Hiemale Triclinium

Lillie Ann M. Madali

Dr. Asen Kirin

Art History 4060: Images in Space

Madali 2

The Small Hunt Mosaic

Madali 3

Located on the island of Sicily in the town of Piazza Armerina, Filosofiana or the Roman

Villa of the Casale is known to the world for its extensive architectural complex and its diversity

in pagan late-antique floor mosaics. Archaeologists and art historians attribute this monument to

a member of the rich land-owning senatorial aristocracy who was probably based in Rome and

not Sicily. Built at the foot of Mount Magone, following the contours of the land, the Villa

houses a thermae, guest rooms and private rooms, including a large dining room or peristyle.

Amongst a group of guest rooms situated on the northern side of the peristyle is the room of the

Small Hunt floor mosaic. As it stands amongst the other guest rooms with floor mosaics in

geometric patterns and figurative content, the Small Hunt mosaic is the most impressive of the

guest room complex, highlighting the most important moments of the hunt, among them a scene

of sacrifice to Diana the goddess of hunting, the final banquet scene, men on horse driving stags

into a net, hare hunts and bird hunts with falcons.

As we enter the guest room from the peristyle, we enter a colonnaded chamber measuring

7.30 meters from north to south and 5.90 meters from west to east. The columns of the chamber

are of the Ionic order with an egg and dart motif, dated to the end of the third, or the beginning of

the fourth century. Carandini states that this room “may have been a hiemale triclinium.”1 The

hiemale triclinium is suggested in the “arrangement of the scenes represented in the mosaic [that]

could conform to an arrangement of dining couches.”2 The significance of the representation of

scenes within the mosaic refers to the artist’s composition, concentrating the most complex

scenes on the central vertical axis and the lowest register.3 A triclinium generally refers to the

1 Andrea Carandini, Filosofiana, The Villa at Piazza Armerina: the Image of a Roman Aristocrat at the

Time of Constantine (Palermo: S. F. Flaccovio, 1982) 175. 2 Op. cit., 175.

3 Carandini addresses the particular arrangement of scenes by the African artists.

Around the two scenes of the center and to the two in the bottom, lie the most complex and elaborate

scenes, with the minor scenes revolving around the center. This disposition generates an equilibrium and

the most particular and averse order, which gives them a free and unconventional artistic conception of the

Madali 4

Roman dining table of four sides, with three low couches (lecti) placed around it so as to leave

the fourth side free for the servants.4 In reference to the Small Hunt mosaic, this triclinium

would be arranged so that the lectus medius sat on its north border and the lectus imus and lectus

summus rest on the west and east border, respectively – leaving the lower end open for servants.

Emphasis on the scene of the banquet, as it occupies a large portion of the central latitudinal and

longitudinal axis, implies an arrangement in the furniture of the chamber, with a table or mensa

occupying the center and three low couches placed round, leaving the fourth side free for the

servants . Seeing that a door does not close off the chamber gives this room a public

arrangement, supporting the suppositions of this chamber as a dining room.

The triclinium arrangement is further explained by an analysis of the preservation state.

There are several small gaps throughout the mosaic.5 While the gaps are spread throughout the

mosaic, the segment of the mosaic which contains the most damage is the banquet segment.

Archaeologically speaking, this banquet segment is the area that experienced the most wear and

use with a total of four gaps occupying this area. As the area of the most wear and use, we may

assume that this banquet segment was the center from which those guests who had the chance to

dine here walked through to be seated in their respective couches and this is where the food

would be placed. Furthermore, since the banquet scene has experienced the most wear, we may

also assume that it is this panel that the artist and the patron wished to emphasize, that by

stepping on this panel, the guests may take part in the banquet scene of the floor mosaic.

African centers of production, more to the prevailing taste in the Italian peninsula.

Translation mine, based on Andrea Carandini, "Richerche sullo stile e la cronologia dei mosaici della villa

di Piazza Armerina" Seminario di Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte Greca e Romana dell'Universita di Roma,

(1964): 52. 4 Dictionary of Classical Antiquities, s.v. “triclinium.”

5 Carandini, Andrea. Filosofiana, The Villa at Piazza Armerina: the Image of a Roman Aristocrat at the

Time of Constantine. Palermo: S. F. Flaccovio, 1982: 178.

Madali 5

Within the triclinium mosaic, twelve segments divide the mosaic, a division guided by

the two most prominent and important scenes of the mosaic located on the central vertical axis:

the scene of the sacrifice to Diana, and the scene of the banquet. The size of these two panels in

relation to the floor mosaic as a whole is significant compositionally and ritually, since the two

events mark the beginning and the end of the hunting ritual. The ten scenes surrounding the

major segments are representative of the hunt in progression. At the top left segment, we see the

beginning of the hunt, where a man leads two leashed dogs into the forest. Beneath this scene

and sharing the same horizontal plane are two hunters carrying a hunted boar within a net tied to

a long stick. Beneath this segment lies a scene that focuses on two hunters who wish to capture

the birds within the tree. Following below lies a scene where two hunting dogs follow prey into a

pile of boulders. At the bottom left corner is a scene where two hunters on horse drive stags into

a largely cast net. At the bottom right corner of the mosaic is a segment in which we see one of

the hunters struggling to save his friend from a wild boar, while another friend above in a small

hill awaits dropping a small boulder. Above this is a hunter on horseback who anticipates

spearing a hare hiding within the bush. On top of this scene, two dogs chase a hare while the

hunter lies in the bushes. Above this segment, a man holds a spear in his left hand and lifts a

dead hare in his right hand. Lastly, at the top right, we see a hunter carrying bags and leading two

hunting dogs to capture a fox.

Within the scene of sacrifice at a countryside shrine, the figures are vigilant of the statue

of Diana, the goddess of the hunt, who stands in contropossto with her right hand reaching for an

arrow from her quiver and her left land holding the bow (Figure 2). She stands on top of a green

cylindrical pedestal that lies behind the cubic base that contains the fire. Placing what appears to

be incense on the fire is a figure with blond hair and an elaborate red tunic, who we might refer

Madali 6

to as the son of the owner of the Villa. Standing to his left is a figure with brown curly hair

wearing a slightly less elaborate green tunic holding his horse steady. To his left we see a young

boy petting one of the hunting dogs. Standing to the right of the blonde figure is a figure in a

plain gold tunic holding a horse, someone we might suspect to be a servant to the blonde figure

since he is standing subordinately to the blonde figure. The horses have lines beneath their

hooves, not to signify shadows, but the movement of the limbs. This denotation of movement is

found among all of the animals and even the human figures of the mosaic to record fast

movement such as jumping or kicking. The artist of this mosaic pays close attention to the detail

of each figure, clearly distinguishing features of the hair, the designs of the tunic, and the

expressions of the face, even defining the muscles of the horse.

At the bottom of the floor mosaic, we see the most charged segments of all the mosaic

since they document key events during this hunting adventure: the huntsmen driving the stag into

a net and the fight between the hunter and the boar. The stag hunt shows a curly brown-haired

figure on a black horse riding next to a damaged spot that we may infer to be the servant wearing

the gold-tunic on horseback (Figure 4). Looking at the stance of the two horses, we can see that

they are running, caught in mid-stride and further emphasized by the thick diagonal lines that

start beneath the hooves of the horses. The huntsmen chase the stags into a widely cast net that

frames the left side of the segment. The artist depicted the stags in detail. In addition to the

shading of the muscles, we see the ribs of the stag at the forefront. There are also highlights on

the antlers of each stag, most beautifully displayed by the foremost stag. This stag also has detail

in the patch of fur beneath its chin, showing the two-toned detail of the coat and paying attention

to the coat’s texture. Its gaze is directed to the huntsman chasing him from behind, as if it were

trying to escape, while the eyes of the stag at the background of the segment are lowered,

Madali 7

gracefully ignorant to the net ahead. Already within the net is another stag, tripping and falling

into the net as one of its hooves fly into mid-air. This is a scene of great action, complimented by

the valor and suspense of the boar hunt beside it.

The boar hunt scene shows the blonde hunter fighting off a boar that attacked and

wounded one of his fellow huntsmen (Figure 5). Trees frame this segment on the left side with

their color and shading detail on the bark and variation of color and shape of the leaves. On the

right side and at the top of the segment we see a small hill framing not only the segment, but

focusing our attention on the actions of the wild boar. The boar takes up a third of the right half

of the segment. It is a large wild beast with highlighted muscles, a dark, grungy coat, and sharp

teeth stained with the blood of the huntsman below. The wounded huntsman in gold tunic lies on

his side paralyzed by fear and the pain of the bleeding flesh wound on his left thigh. Above him

is a growling hunting dog. The blonde hunter in the red tunic pierces the boar in its side, as the

boar takes hold of the spear with its teeth, and thus, saving his friend from further attack. At the

top, another huntsman prepares to seal the fate of the boar by dropping a small boulder on its

head. To the left of the huntsman, another watches from a safe distance behind the hill. He is

overwhelmed and in awe, with his hand to his forehead.

At the center of the small hunt mosaic, we find the banquet segment, flanked at the sides

by trees that support a red canopy (Figure 3). It is the largest segment of the floor mosaic and it

marks the conclusion of the hunting festivities. The huntsmen are relaxed, the horses are tied to

the tree and the net is hung on top of the tree. Five huntsmen sit beside a fire beneath a dining

tapestry. Upon the fire lies a large bird with its legs bound. They prepare to enjoy their feast and

celebrate the fruits of a successful hunt by drinking cups of wine. A huntsman on the right side

of the fire feeds a hunting dog a treat, while the rest appear to discuss the great events of the

Madali 8

hunt. At the bottom of the segment, it is delineated contextually from the surrounding mosaic by

the figures participating in the banquet festivities: a figure at the far right of the segment is

toasting to the central feasting figures while another appears to be grabbing something from a

basket. The lower left side of the banquet segment is damaged, but we can see the pots

surrounding the empty spot. After witnessing the events of the hunt surrounding this scene, we

understand the significance of this banquet. Juxtaposed to the action of the boar hunt and the stag

hunt, the banquet scene is more relaxed and leisurely.

While the arrangement of the segments in this mosaic does not generate a chronological

order, we find a different hierarchy dominated more by significance than time. The two main

scenes of the advent and conclusion of the hunting ritual dominate the central vertical axis of the

mosaic. Moreover, at the southern side of the mosaic, we see that the two most dramatic events

of the hunt compose completely the southern portion of the mosaic. Surrounding these segments,

we see what occurs amidst these scenes, for example the segment in which the hunters enter with

two hunting dogs, a hunter seeking the birds in a tree or the hunter preparing to spear a hare. The

dominance of the space by major events unites the segments and the composition as a whole by

implying a relationship of major to minor events. At the northern halve of the mosaic, we see a

group of five segments dominated by the sacrifice to Diana. Surrounding this scene, we see

various events ranging in subject from the start of the hunt, to the chasing of the fox. While

uniting the various segments together through implying relationships we also gain a sense of

motion by the contrasting events of calm reflection, like the scene with Diana or the banquet, to

the action and intense movement of the events of the hunt. We see the lines signifying motion in

the leaping animals and swift pace of the hunters and compare them to the seated hunters at the

banquet.

Madali 9

In creating the Small Hunt mosaic of the Villa at Casale in Piazza Armerina, the artist

documents a monumental occasion – a hunting excursion unlike any other. The Small Hunt

mosaic features twelve segments highlighting key scenes from the hunt, namely the sacrifice to

Diana, the banquet scene, the boar hunt and the stag hunt. The artist pays great attention to detail,

by featuring portrait mosaics of the huntsmen, mosaics studying the natural world – the

landscape of the near mountainside, its fauna and the animals that both inhabit the area and those

that are domesticated. Compositionally, the artist successfully unites different aspects of the hunt

through the features of the landscape that relate each segment to each other, and encompassing

the whole mosaic within a double border. Despite the limits of the mosaic form, we see a mosaic

of great skill, effort and detail.

Images of the leisurely pursuits of the wealthy, namely hunting, are prevalent in the

visual culture of the Roman Empire in late antiquity. Nothing secures the argument of function

within the rooms housing these floor pavements more than the discovery of the Sevso Treasure

in 1980. Among the findings of the Sevso Treasure is a silver plate that contains a medallion

with a hunting scene, which shares many characteristics with the floor pavements of this era. An

assessment of function within the rooms housing the hunting floor pavements is addressed before

examining the visual evidence stemming from Piazza Armerina, Antioch and the Sevso Treasure.

As the visual culture of the Fourth Century developed the image of the hunt, an association of the

hunt became intertwined with the civic ritual of dining.

What makes the hunting scene so strongly associated with the civic ritual of dining is the

appearance of the image of the hunt and the banquet scene upon the Sevso Treasure Hunting

plate. Fourteen late-Roman silver vessels and the copper cauldron in which they were discovered

Madali 10

compose the Sevso Treasure.6 Among the fourteen silver vessels is a partially gilded silver plate

known as the Hunting Plate. The plate features an outer frieze of hunting scenes in the outer

border band and a hunting scene in the central medallion. The hunting scenes are near exact in

representation of the scenes we see in the Small Hunt of Piazza Armerina. The appearance of the

scene of the hunt in both the Piazza Armerina pavement and the Sevso plate imply the use of the

Sevso plate within a room similar to the room at Piazza Armerina where we find the Small Hunt

floor mosaic.

In the top register of the medallion, we see a stag hunt segment. A male figure on

horseback accompanied with a dog, chases two stags into a largely cast net held by two male

servant figures. This is a reverse mirror image of the Stag Hunt scene in the Small Hunt mosaic

of Piazza Armerina. At the center of the medallion, the banquet segment dominates the hunting

scene. Like the banquet segment of Piazza Armerina’s Small Hunt, we see a tapestry cast over

two trees. Below the tapestry, we see five figures beneath another tapestry, participating in a

feast of bread and fish, or in the case of Piazza Armerina, a bird. Another similarity between the

two images of the banquet is the figure found on our right, extending his hand to feed one of the

hunting dogs. There also appears in both scenes, a male figure directly beneath the tripod with

the fish, lifting his wine chalice his right.

Like the intersection of North and South within the Villa in Piazza Armerina, the

Constantine Villa of Antioch resided in a city known for its intersection of East and West.7 Like

many centers of trade, it is highly likely that the two cities shared aesthetic ideals. The

polychrome rendition of the figures and the striking similarity within each figures’ form to the

6 Marlia Mundell Mango "The Sevso Treasure: Art historical description and inscriptions." Journal of

Roman Archaeology (1994): 11-97. 7 Cleveland Museum of Art, “CMA Exhibition Feature: Antioch: The Lost Ancient City,”

http://www.clevelandart.org/exhibcef/AntiochExhib/html/index.html (accessed October 3, 2007).

Madali 11

Small Hunt floor pavement. Within the Dumbarton Oaks Hunt, although one quarter of this floor

has survived, there lays a tigress springing up diagonally over two small cubs, only to meet a

hunter’s spear and a hunter spearing a boar.8 Among a number of striking similarities with

Piazza Armerina, we see similar depictions of the boar, the striations of the coat, the features of

the face, and even the same pose. Like the boar hunt segment in Piazza Armerina, we see in the

Dumbarton Oaks Hunt’s boar hunt scene, a hunter facing the boar and stabbing the front of the

boar, however, the boar hunt segment in Piazza Armerina is slightly different in context, in that

the hunter stabbing the boar is acting in defense of his wounded colleague. Other similar

compositional techniques include the use of floral or faunal elements dispersed throughout the

mosaic to link the segments of the mosaic together and the use of diagonal lines beneath the

animal’s feet to denote movement. Archaeologists contextually associate the Dumbarton Oaks

Hunt with the three shards of mid-third to fifth-century CE pottery found beneath the pavement.9

Pottery, like the silver ware is another component to the dining ritual.

What makes the Small Hunt significant in its relation to the civic ritual of dining is that it

is the only instance that relates to dining. Comparing the Great Hunt to the Small hunt unveils

the significance of real hunting and the capturing of animals. The difference in the two distinctly

characterizes the space. While the artist depicts the Great Hunt and the Small Hunt similarly, we

see that in hunting for animals or capturing animals for the purpose of entertainment in the circus

differs greatly from the hunting for the purpose of feasting. The combination of the picnic

amongst the segments of the hunt, directly correlate the civic ritual of dining with hunting.

The Villa at Piazza Armerina was also known as the Villa Filosofiana, signifying a love

of knowledge. It was entitled so for the Villa’s construction which provided the opportunity for

8 Campbell, Sheila. The Mosaics of Antioch. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1988: 70.

9 Op. cit., 70.

Madali 12

the dominus to pursue intellectual interests. In the classical sense, this Villa would be a symbol

of the highest good as discussed in Plato’s Republic.10 According to Plato, among the highest

good was the pursuit of knowledge, but it was not attainable without wealth, as in the case of the

Villa. This sensibility permeates the sociable and thought-provoking layout and the Villa’s

countless mosaics. The subject matter of the Villa mosaics presents an emblem of the good life

for the prestigious wealthy classes as it features privileged activities like hunting, capturing

exotic animals for the circus, and bathing. The skillfully crafted Small Hunt mosaic speaks to

this wealthy lifestyle within the context of the hiemale triclinium.

What makes the hiemale triclinium the best in virtue in terms of its existence as a dining

room, is its position. Hiemale signifies “winter” and wealthy landowners often sectioned areas of

their property according to the season. The hiemale triclinium is a winter dining room located in

the northernmost area of the Villa at Piazza Armerina. This arrangement was common practice in

the Roman Empire since the placement of rooms in the northernmost corner would provide the

most sunlight and thus a warmer and more comfortable dining area. According to the floor plan,

a window is located at the northern side of the hiemale triclinium, providing adequate sunlight

for the civic ritual of dining.

The hiemale triclinium, as a winter dining hall, would not be in use at all times of the

year, and thus the Small Hunt mosaic would be seen in its full splendor for the majority of the

year. The mosaic would still be an object of conversation, as the composition of the scenes

proposes an interaction with the viewer. The composition is not chronological, but rather

hierarchical. In the lowest register, the area located closest to the entrance, we see the segments

of the Small Hunt in which the dominus captures the most impressive animals. We see the

10 Cicero’s translations of Plato’s Republic were made available to the Roman Empire in the early 2

nd

Century.

Madali 13

challenge and the skill of the hunters in that they use tools to capture the stags. We also see the

cleverness of the figures, and the honor and courage of the figures as they valiantly save a

colleague from getting attacked further by the wild boar. Those entering the room are confronted

visually by the most impressive and successful products of the hunt.

Guests enter the hiemale triclinium from the northern end of the peristyle, accessible after

passing through the baths or through the reception hall from which the guests would pay their

respects to the dominus, the gods, or the ancestors. For the viewer standing at the entrance of the

room, the mosaic reads from North to South. The Small Hunt floor mosaic proposes a provoking

composition, at first glance the mosaic lacks order, yet after careful analysis, we see that the

artist arranged the scenes hierarchically. The scenes with the most significance, the sacrifice to

Diana and the banquet scene, lie on the central vertical axis. The scenes with the most action and

movement, the stag hunt and the boar hunt, lie on the southernmost horizontal axis. This

arrangement of scenes creates an upside-down T-shape (Figure 6). Thus, by looking at the Small

Hunt mosaic, we see an abstracted version of the triclinium floor pavements of the second and

third centuries. The contemporary viewer would acknowledge the tradition of the triclinium floor

mosaics, in which the couch alignments were clearly denoted by a plain or geometric frieze

located only on three sides and large enough for the placement of the couches.11 Looking at the

Small Hunt mosaic, the viewers could superimpose what was heavily embedded in the visual

culture of the triclinium floor mosaics – an abstracted triclinium floor mosaic, in which the artist

determined the center of the triclinium arrangement by hierarchically arranging the hunting

segments on the southernmost horizontal axis and the central vertical axis with the banquet scene

11 Looking at the mosaic floor of the Atrium House dining room, we see the triclinium more clearly defined

with a strict three-sided boundary dictated by a geometric-designed frieze. See Kondoleon, Christine.

Antioch the Lost Ancient City. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000: 62.

Madali 14

in the center. This advancement alone is significant to the changes in the trends of visual

representation of the dining room mosaics and also a testament to the significance of the Small

Hunt mosaic in the history of Late Antique floor pavements.

Compared with the triclinium mosaic at Antioch-on-the-Orontes of the early second

century that features the Judgment of Paris, the Small Hunt mosaic shares a similar progression

and hierarchy in iconography. As discussed earlier, the composition of the Small Hunt mosaic is

an abstracted version of the triclinium mosaics of the early second and third centuries. Both

mosaics feature the triclinium program, a T-shape with an encompassing U-shaped composition.

Focusing on the central longitudinal axis of the Antioch triclinium mosaic, we see three major

panels, which include “a scene of the drinking-contest between Hercules and Bacchus, flanked

by the dancing figures of a female and male Bacchant,12” followed by the Judgment of Paris and

above that a group of Adonis and Venus. Each panel is a pictorial representation of the

relationship between immortal gods and mortal human beings. The drinking contest is a lesson in

moderation or sophrosyne as the mortal Hercules challenges Dionysius in a wine drinking

contest. Further north, inverted from the Drinking Contest panel and directly facing the viewer of

the lectus medius, is the Judgment of Paris where we see an intellectual challenge between

mortal and immortal. The lesson of sophrosyne in this instance can be seen in the moment when

the shepherd must choose between the three goddesses, Athena, Hera and Aphrodite; a choice

which essentially translates into man’s struggle between wisdom, power and love respectively.

The final panel, located in close proximity to the lectus medius and positioned so that it may face

the seated guest, is of Adonis and Venus. This couple is an instance in which love proves to be

unsuitable between immortal and mortal, as Adonis is dies before Venus.

12 Morey, Charles. “The Excavation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes” Parnassus, Vol. 7, No. 4 (1935): 9.

Madali 15

Linking the context with the three panels, all of which progress in a hierarchy that

documents the levels of moderation from south to north on the central longitudinal axis. We see

a progression from physical moderation to intellectual moderation, and finally an instance when

immortal and mortal meet at an intersection – an instance of moderation between the

metaphysical realms. In relation with the space of the triclinium we see that this instance is

shown in the closest proximity to the privileged guests seated at the lectus medius. Moreover, the

guest seated at the lectus medius would be looking over the fountain, a symbol of man’s ability

to control the element of water, as if they too have reached the equilibrium between mortal and

god. Looking at the Triclinium of Antioch, we come to understand that the hierarchical structure

is valued more in the triclinium mosaic programs of late antiquity, opposed to narrative or

chronological orders. Much like the hierarchy in the seating of the triclinium, we see this

preference carried out in the artist’s composition of this mosaic. We see this preference in the

Small Hunt Mosaic of Piazza Armerina.

Situated in the context of a proper dining room in a country villa, we recall the leisurely

pursuits of the wealthy. Dunbabin states, “The popularity of the hunting scenes…is certainly

principally to be attributed to the desire to glorify the patron by showing his possessions and his

favorite activities in a purely material way.”13 Hunting for the wealthy in the 3

rd Century Roman

Empire asserts the power of the dominus and his control not only over his villa, but also the

nature around it.14 The Small Hunt mosaic is a testament to the wealth of the dominus. Showing

13

Dunbabin, Katherine M. The Mosaics of Roman North Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978: 64. 14

It is through this stipulation, control over nature and thus control over an empire, that older scholarship

attributed the monument to imperial patrons. Some scholars, including Gentili, even went so far as to

identify specific figures, “Constantius Chlorus as the chief figure in the Small Hunt, and the young

Maxentius as one of his companions…” op. cit., 202; Yet later scholarships by the same authors insist that

if the figures were imperial, then the setting or the walking on the mosaics would be discouraged:

“…there seems to be an a priori improbability in the suggested appearance of the imperial features

at so many places all over the floor. It would be impossible to avoid walking on them; and by the

time of the Tetrarchy the imperial image had taken on a sacred character which would surely

Madali 16

that unlike the Great Hunt, where he is hunting for the purpose of capturing animals to sell to the

circus, but that he can also hunt for pleasure. We can see this visually in the Small Hunt mosaic,

where the dominus and his privileged friends hunt not because they have to eat, but for pleasure.

In the exhaustive range of animals that the dominus and his friends hunt in the mosaic, we see in

the banquet scene that they only feast on the bird. Even after, they emphasize a great deal about

the effort used to capture the stags or the risk they took to capture the boar, they are only

depicted in the banquet scene eating a bird. This emphasizes the idea of the dominus hunting, not

because he has to, but because it is a sport. As a sport, the dominus attests his wealth and skill by

showing that he is capable of capturing the greatest game located on the island.

The status of the dominus is depicted also in the relationship of the Small Hunt mosaic

within the space of the hiemale triclinium. This arrangement of the hiemale triclinium, its

relationship to the space of the Villa at Piazza Armerina, and most importantly the execution of

the Small Hunt mosaic, help elevate the status of the dominus. The status of the dominus is

elevated in the sense that he is the master of his environment as seen in the Small Hunt mosaic,

where we see that he is hunting wild animals. Within the placement of the hiemale triclinium, we

see that through the window, we view the Mt. Magore where he would have performed this hunt.

Furthermore, we see that in the place of the most honorable guest within the triclinium

arrangement, they would have a view through the ionic columns and into the peristyle. The

peristyle would be the place of the garden and the fountain, both symbols of the dominus control

over the environment in his ability to cultivate nature within his interior and his ability to control

the element of water within the Villa.

discourage setting it, or the portraits of other members of the imperial family, in places where they

were bound to be trodden under foot.”

Op. cit., 205.

Madali 17

The seating of the triclinium and the tightly enclosed nature of the space of the hiemale

triclinium facilitate interaction between the guests. It was important for guests to demonstrate

their knowledge and share insightful conversation with the dominus in place of providing the

dominus with material gifts. Regarding Figure 1, we see that the couches would face opposite

ends of the chamber, the window overlooking Mt Magore and the opening overlooking the

garden and fountain. This interaction between the guests is in itself a pursuit of knowledge and

further, an example of a virtuous dominus that fulfills the highest form of good within Plato’s

Republic. Plato states that in order to participate in the highest form of good, the pursuit of

knowledge for the sake of the pursuit of knowledge, one would have to be wealthy.15 Clearly, we

may see the wealth of the dominus as portrayed throughout the Villa and specifically within the

actions displayed in the Small Hunt mosaic where we see the artist depict a dominus that hunts

for his own leisure and not for his own survival. If not for this wealth, the dominus would not

have the tools or the means to pursue knowledge. The hiemale triclinium is a place for the civic

ritual of dining and now conversation between distinguished guests, a manifestation of the

dominus achievement of the highest form of good. A conscious placement of the mosaic within

this specific space of the hiemale triclinium that performs this specific ritual and that has a

specific visual relationship with the other spaces of the Villa.

The hiemale triclinium for the dominus would be one of the main areas, other than the

bath, from which the dominus would pursuit intellectual conversation with privileged guests. As

it lies within the Villa Filosofiana, we see that the hiemale triclinium is a microcosm of what the

dominus would hope to portray in terms of the best virtue of dining rooms and therefore, the best

environment that would allow one to achieve the highest good for intellectual pursuits within a

Roman villa. This ideal is further promoted by the status of the image, the Small Hunt floor

15 Plato. The Republic of Plato. New York: The Cooperative Publication Society, 1901: 105.

Madali 18

`pavement, a pavement that surpassed triclinium floor pavements of the time. The progression

and abstraction of the triclinium arrangement speaks to the genius of the artist who took the

hierarchical nature of the triclinium mosaics previous and combined it within the context of

hunting. Redefining the traditional triclinium arrangement further promotes the viewer’s

interaction with an image depicting the civic ritual of dining and the leisurely pursuit of hunting.

The Small Hunt floor pavement and its relationship to the hiemale triclinium of the Villa

Filosofiana’s establishes its purpose as a place conducive to intellectual pursuits.

Madali 19

List of Figures.

Figure 1. Definition of a triclinium.

Figure 2. The Sacrifice to Diana, Small Hunt

Mosaic.

Figure 3. The Banquet Scene, Small Hunt

Mosaic.

Figure 4. The Stag Hunt, Small Hunt

Mosaic.

Figure 5. The Boar Hunt, Small Hunt

Mosaic.

Madali 20

Figure 6. The Triclinium Space on the Small

Hunt Mosaic