Talk:Painting in ancient Rome

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Content fork

This article is a clear content fork of the painting sections of Roman art, Pompeian Styles, and other articles, which are all better quality in just about every way. At 73,846 bytes it is probably too long also. It was draftified, then undraftified, but I think it should either be draftified again, or just deleted. It is a paid-for machine translation from the Portuguese wp, one of several done by this editor. Johnbod (talk) 03:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Too long" means parts of this article might be helpfully forked into further articles, not that it should be deleted. This is precisely the namespace for the topic, which is a subtopic of Roman art. "Pompeian Styles" are (a) an entirely obscure term that should be linked as a subtopic from here and (b) entirely limited to analysis of work at Pompeii. Absolutely, the article should be kept and simply improved as needed. — LlywelynII 18:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, are you going to do that? I think not. It's still here, isn't it? By far the largest corpus of surviving Roman painting is from Pompei (with Roman catacombs and Al-Fayum the runners-up), and paintings from elsewhere are very often described in terms of the Pompeian Styles, if of the appropriate date. Johnbod (talk) 00:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for future article expansion

Speaking of improving the article, cursory searching seems to show it doesn't have any treatment of class. Per Pliny, it was noticeable that painting was considered beneath the dignity of an person of station and considered a trade job like carpentry or plumbing.

We probably only need this as a cite

<ref>[[Pliny the Elder|Pliny]], ''[[Natural History (Pliny)|Nat. Hist.]]'', [https://topostext.org/work/153#35.7.1 Book XXXV, Ch. 7.]</ref>

although the entire bibliographic entry for the version ToposText uses could be written out and added to a new bibliography section. Alternatively, a general entry could be created for the Natural History if the bibliography section would have separate lists of ancient and modern sources. He also notes that an equestrian Turpilius from Venetia was an exception to that general rule, the only left-handed painter known to antiquity, and the creator of "beautiful work" in Verona. Cicero also seems to have considered painting infra dig. More at

Toynbee, Jocelyn Mary Catherine (June 1950), "Some Notes on Artists in the Roman World", Latomus, vol. IX, pp. 175–182, JSTOR 41503754.

 — LlywelynII 18:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]