handshake motif

The Significance of the Handshake Motif in Classical Funerary ArtAuthor(s): Glenys DaviesReviewed work(s):Source: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 89, No. 4 (Oct., 1985), pp. 627-640Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/504204 .Accessed: 26/01/2012 10:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia

http://www.jstor.org/stable/504204?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

The Significance of the Handshake Motif in Classical

Funerary Art GLENYS DAVIES

(Pls. 68-70)

Abstract The handshake motif was widely used by Greek,

Etruscan and Roman artists in both funerary and non- funerary contexts. This article aims to give a general sur- vey of the motif from Archaic Greece to the late Roman Empire, looking especially at the continuity of its use. The principal aim is to elucidate its meaning in funerary contexts, but to do so its appearance in non-funerary contexts is also considered. Throughout the period considered the handshake had a multiplicity of associations which were exploited by the artists to create an ambiguous meaning. The themes of meeting and parting were persistently associated with the handshake (especially parting from relatives at death, and reunion with ancestors in the Underworld), but various other themes were also related to it, especially marriage, an association that was first made in Greek art but which only became domi- nant in the later Empire.

The handshake motif often appears today in press photographs and commercial logos as a symbolic gesture. Since we may in fact shake hands on a number of rather different occasions-when meeting or welcom-

ing someone, parting from them and making our fare- wells, or when we have come to an agreement and wish to express mutual trust-the exact connotations of the handshake in a particular picture are not imme- diately obvious. Despite this inherent ambiguity the handshake remains a potent symbol.

The same ambiguity would seem to have existed in the classical world, although there, in addition to parting, meeting and agreement, the motif also seems to have had an association with marriage. The present study examines the use of the handshake gesture in a wide range of classical art, Greek, Etruscan and Ro-

man, concentrating on funerary art but with some consideration of the appearance of the motif in non- funerary contexts. Previous scholars have looked at the meaning of the motif in individual categories of funerary monuments, but have not attempted to trace the history of the handshake motif throughout the classical period. As a result they have arrived at different interpretations of the motif at different periods.' The handshake motif was, however, used with a degree of continuity which suggests that, despite changes in emphasis, there was a general meaning which underlies all variations and which continued to be understood. My aim is to re-examine the various contexts in which the motif was used, and to elucidate the associations and meanings it may have had.

DEXIOSIS IN GREEK ART

The best-known and most common use of the handshake motif (dexiosis) in Greek art is on the Athenian grave stelai of the Classical period. How- ever, sporadic scenes with a pair of figures shaking hands had occurred earlier in other, non-funerary, contexts.

The handshake appears in mythological scenes on a number of vases of the Archaic and Classical periods.2 Many such scenes of the late archaic period involve Herakles: he is shown shaking hands with Athena on both black- and red-figure vases (pl. 68, fig. 1),3 where the scene represents the acceptance of Herakles as an equal by the gods, and, in particular, his com- radeship with Athena. Slightly later, as one might expect, the focus switches from Herakles to Theseus. On

SThe fullest treatment of the motif appears in K. Friis Johan- sen, The Attic Grave-Reliefs of the Classical Period (Copenhagen 1951); L. Reekmans, "La 'dextrarum iunctio' dans l'iconographie romaine et palkochr~tienne," Bulletin de l'Institut historique belge de Rome 31 (1958) 23-95 (also in EAA 3 [Rome 1960] 82-85 s.v. dextrarum iunctio); G. Rodenwaldt, "Uber den Stilwandel in der Antoninischen Kunst," AbhPreussAkadWiss 3 (1935) 1-27, esp. 13-17.

2 For a more detailed discussion see G. Neumann, Gesten und Gebiirden in der griechischen Kunst (Berlin 1965) 49-58.

3 BF amphora, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, inv. 97.205, near

the Antimenes Painter (pl. 68, fig. 1): CVA USA 14, 30, pl. 41.2. BF amphora, Munich, Antiken Sammlung, inv. 1556, Lysippides Painter: CVA Germany 37, 47-48, pl. 393; RF amphora, Parma, Museo Nazionale di Antichita, inv. C3, (?)Tyszkiewicz Painter: CVA Italy 45, 3, pl. 1.2. RF amphora in Vatican, Kleophrades Painter: ARV2 182.3; Neumann (supra n. 2) fig. 25. Herakles is also represented shaking hands with the centaur Pholos on two neck amphorae by the Antimenes Painter in the British Museum (B226) and Villa Giulia, Castellani Collection: J.D. Beazley, JHS 47 (1927) 69-70, fig. 5 and pl. 12.

627 American Journal of Archaeology 89 (1985)

628 GLENYS DAVIES [AJA 89

Early Classical red-figure vases Theseus is represented linking right hands with his father, Poseidon,4 again presumably to indicate Theseus' exalted status.

The first use of the motif in an Underworld setting is on a lekythos by the Alkimachos Painter in Berlin5 which depicts Herakles' attempt to rescue Peirithoos from the Underworld. Peirithoos is linked with his would-be rescuer by a right handclasp. Although He- rakles may be attempting to haul Peirithoos to his feet, the taking of right hands seems to me to be given an emphasis that is not required by the narrative.

Around 450 B.C. it seems the motif began to be used in a variety of contexts and could now be applied to ordinary mortals. An important instance occurs on a large krater in New York decorated with a scene set in Hades (pl. 68, fig. 2).6 Among the various traditional inhabitants are an unnamed couple-a woman, still wearing her grave clothes, shaking hands with a young man. The scene is best interpreted as one of greeting7: one of the woman's deceased relatives, or at least one of the inhabitants of Hades, is greeting her as a new arrival. This scene seems to be unique.

A comparatively large group of red-figure vases dating from ca. 450-420 B.C. shows the handshake in a different context, the departure of a warrior.8 The young warrior, often in armor and carrying his military equipment, shakes hands with a young woman or an elderly man, usually with a third figure in atten- dance. The solemn faces of all concerned suggest that the young man is about to go off to war, possibly never to return (pl. 68, fig. 3). These paintings, taken with the Underworld scene on the New York krater, suggest that the handshake could be used in scenes of both parting and greeting in the third quarter of the fifth century B.C.

The gesture was also sometimes used in fifth century vase painting in the context of marriage. A red- figure loutrophoros of ca. 440-420 B.C. in the British Museum,9 for example, has a representation of a handshake between a man and a woman in the presence of two more women, one with a torch, the other adjusting the woman's hair, surely a reference to the marriage ceremony. It has also been suggested that the scene on a volute krater in Boston,1o which appears to show the departure of a warrior, may in fact show Achilles with Deidameia and is a scene with a deliberate double meaning: departure and wedding.

The handshake could also appear in scenes of a more political nature to signify agreement, unity and concord. A well known example of this meaning appears on a stele recording a decree dealing with rela- tions between Athens and Samos." The relief scene above the text shows Attic Athena shaking hands with Samian Hera.

It was on Attic grave stelai and stone vases of the Classical period (late fifth century-317/6 B.C.) that the handclasp was most popular.12 The motif had not been used on Archaic stelai, but was standard in the late fifth and fourth centuries. The more common form of the motif shows one figure sitting and the other standing, but there are also many examples of the handclasp between two standing figures. The gesture was used to link two men, two women, or a man and a woman. Often the two persons involved in the handclasp appear alone, but they can also be accompanied by other figures, presumably relatives and ser- vants, especially in the fourth century.

The interpretation of the handshake in such scenes has long been recognized as an iconographic problem. The scenes themselves give us few hints. The dead are

4 RF column krater, Robinson Collection, (?)Painter of the Harrow Oinochoe: JHS 36 (1916) 132; CVA USA 6, 25-27, pl. 31. RF oinochoe, Yale 143, Painter of the Yale Oinochoe: ARV2 503.25; J.D. Beazley, Attic Red-Figured Vases in American Muse- ums (Cambridge 1918) 61, fig. 39.

5 RF lekythos, Berlin 30038: ARV 2 532.57; Beazley (supra n. 4) 136, fig. 85; Neumann (supra n. 2) 55, fig. 26 a, b; J.P. Barron, JHS 92 (1972) 43, pl. 7e.

6 Krater, New York, Metropolitan Museum, inv. 08.258.21, Nekyia Painter: ARV2 1086.1; G.M.A. Richter and L.F. Hall, Red-Fzgured Athenian Vases in the Metropolitan Museum (New Haven 1936) I.168-71, no. 135; II. pls. 135-37.

7 Friis Johansen (supra n. 1) 158-59, fig. 81. 8 Stamnos, British Museum E448 (pl. 68, fig. 3), Achilles Paint-

er: ARV2 992.65, CVA Great Britain 4, 9, pl. 22.3;JHS34 (1914) pls. 15-16. Bell krater, Vienna, inv. 172: CVA Austria 3, 17-18, pl. 114.4, 5. Amphora, Warsaw, Nat. Mus. inv. 147367, attrib. to Painter of the Louvre Centauromachy: CVA Poland 6, 11-12, pls. 14-17. Lekythos, Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, lent by Dr. F.C. Conybeare, Achilles Painter: ARV2 993.93; JHS 34 (1914) 181, fig. 2; CVA Great Britain 3, 27, pl. 36.1-2. Cup, Berlin, inv. F 2536, Painter of Berlin 2536: CVA Germany 22, 17, pls. 133.4 and 117.2. Amphora, New York, Metropolitan Museum, inv.

06.1021.116: Richter and Hall (supra n. 6) 1.163-64; II. pl. 128. (By the Lykaon Painter. The warrior is Neoptolemos, bidding farewell to father Antiochos and mother Kalliope.) Pelike, Bonn, Akademisches Kunstmuseum, inv. 76a, school of the Kleophon Painter or manner of the Dinos Painter: CVA Germany 1, 15-16, pl. 14.1 Pelike, Musie de Laon, inv. 371025, (?)Kleophon Painter: CVA France 20, 24, pl. 31.5. See also Neumann (supra n. 2) 56-57.

SBritish Museum GR 1923.1-18.1, by Painter of London 1923: ARV2 1103.1. The image of taking by the hand as a symbol of marriage is also implied by Pindar, Pyth. 9.122. Some vases show not a true handshake but the groom leading the bride by the wrist, e.g., WG pyxis of ca. 470-460 B.C. in the British Museum (GR 1894.7-19.1) and a RF miniature loutrophoros of ca. 425 B.C., also in the British Museum (GR 1910.7-11.1). Neumann (supra n. 2) fig. 28 (lekythos in Berlin), fig. 29 (loutrophoros in Athens, Nat. Mus.).

'o Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, inv. 33.56, Niobid Painter: E. Simon, AJA 67 (1963) 57-59, pl. 11, figs. 7, 8.

" Friis Johansen (supra n. 1) 150-51, fig. 76. Date of decree, 405 B.C.; of stele 403/2 B.C.

12 H. Diepolder, Die attischen Grabreliefs des 5. und 4. Jahrhun- derts v. Chr. (Berlin 1931, Darmstadt 1965) passim; Friis Johan- sen (supra n. 1) passim.

1985] THE HANDSHAKE MOTIF IN CLASSICAL FUNERARY ART 629

not easily distinguishable from the living, and although it seems that in the majority of cases the gesture united someone who was alive at the time of com- mission with someone who was dead, this was not necessarily the case. Moreover, the figures are not placed in a setting that would assign the scene to a specific location, as for example at the tomb or in the Underworld. The various explanations put forward in the older literature, that they show the dead departing from relatives at death, or being reunited with ancestors in the Underworld, or in communion with members of the family at the tomb, have been rejected because they do not adequately explain all occur- rences of dexiosis on the grave stelai. On the other hand, more generalized interpretations seem unsatis- factorily vague for such a specific motif.

The writer who has addressed himself to this problem at greatest length is K. Friis Johansen,13 who proposed that the motif represents the bond that links the living with the dead. He sees this as a hypothetical union taking place in the imagination, not in any particular location. He is less positive about the nature of the union, but he does suggest that the motif evolved from earlier votive reliefs in which the handshake united a larger-than-life hero and his diminutive living worshipper.14 This implies that he thinks that the bond represented by the handshake continued to be in essence the act of worship, even though, as Friis Jo- hansen says, the scenes do not show the specific act of giving offerings at the tomb. There are, however, problems in accepting this suggested link between dexiosis and the worship of the dead. The first is that, although in most cases the handshake linked a living and a dead figure, in a few instances both figures appear to have been dead at the time the stele was set up.'5 Second, if the handshake is simply a visual expression of the cult of the dead, it is surely surprising that it does not occur on white ground lekythoi,'6 where scenes of the living mourning and worshipping the dead are very common.

The interpretation of the scenes on the lekythoi presents its own problems, but the question does seem to have a bearing on our understanding of the dexiosis motif on the stelai. A popular type of scene on white ground lekythoi shows mourners visiting the tomb

with offerings. It is again not clear whether all the figures represented are living, or whether in some cases the dead also appear. If all are living, there is no reason to expect the handshake. But if, as seems likely,"7 in some cases we are shown both living and dead, then the scenes would seem to present a parallel to those on the grave stelai, and the absence of dexiosis is significant. Instead of being linked by the handshake, living and dead on the lekythoi are separated by the tomb monument, hardly aware of each other.

Another difference is in the setting: on the lekythoi a particular place, the tomb, is suggested, and this also implies a particular occasion, whereas on the stelai there is no indication of time or place. The difference is partly a result of the different traditions of vase painting and relief sculpture, but it also means that the lekythoi represent recognizable events, whereas the stelai express general concepts. The tomb scenes on lekythoi may seem rather unspecific, but they are not meant to be ambiguous. Dexiosis scenes, on the other hand, can be interpreted by the viewer in a number of equally valid ways: as parting, reunion or communion, or perhaps in several different ways at once. The motif is ambiguous and flexible.

Lekythoi were used in the cult of the dead as offerings made at the tomb, and it is hardly surprising that they show the living and the dead widely separated from one another, existing in different states and un- able to make contact except through the grave offerings. The stelai had a different purpose. They were intended to be permanent memorials, not just to the individual, but to the whole family. As a result, the distinction between living and dead was minimized, to such an extent that they could be linked as near- equals by the handshake. The handshake may be, as Friis Johansen concludes, a symbol of family unity, but this unity is not achieved through the practice of the funerary cult so much as by the inevitability of each generation following the last into Hades. Ac- cording to such a view, parting from loved ones at death is only temporary, since living and dead will, ultimately, all be reunited in death. Unlike Friis Jo- hansen, I would not reject the possibility that the motif might be interpreted as the dead departing from his living family, or the reunion of the deceased with his

"13 Friis Johansen, (supra n. 1) passim, summarizes previous interpretations as well as giving his own analysis of the motif.

14 Friis Johansen (supra n. 1) 137-39, figs. 70-71. It is possible, however, that a distinction should be made between the gesture of handing over an offering (as in the votive relief, fig. 71) and the genuine handshake (as in the funerary relief, fig. 70).

15 D.C. Kurtz and J. Boardman, Greek Burial Customs (London and Southampton 1971) 140. E.g., grave stele of Hippomachos and Kallias, Piraeus: Diepolder (supra n. 12) pl. 23.

16 D.C. Kurtz, Athenian White Lekythoi (Oxford 1975) 225. In a

few rare instances the figures do make contact with one another: e.g., WG lekythos, Paris, Petit Palais inv. 338: CVA France 15, 33, pl. 34.1-3, where the gesture is more naturally interpreted as that of handing over an offering rather than a true handshake.

17 Kurtz and Boardman, (supra n. 15) 104-105, express caution in identifying both dead and living together in scenes on the lekythoi; M. Robertson, Greek Painting (Geneva 1978) 146 and 149, however, argues that in many cases we can identify living and dead in the same scenes. He cites British Museum D54 and Munich 2798 as examples.


ancestors in the Underworld. I prefer to see it as a flexible motif, not one with a generalized meaning. If a single meaning is to be sought, then I would suggest that it combined both these ideas-which have prece- dents in vase painting-in a concept of family unity somewhat different from that proposed by Friis Jo- hansen. Parting, reunion and communion between living and dead are all aspects of the same concept of family unity.

The handshake was an extremely convenient way of linking the figures represented on a grave stele in a pleasing composition, and for this reason alone it is hardly surprising that it continued to be used on grave monuments of various kinds in the Hellenistic and later periods. It appears on painted loculus slabs at Alexandria, occasionally in South Italian tomb paintings, and on many grave stelai from all over the Hel- lenistic world.'s The gesture was also used to link figures on gravestones from the region of Capua in late Republican and Augustan times, and in early Impe- rial Gaul.'" The handshake was increasingly used to link a male and a female figure, but this was not uni- versal, and the two people concerned were not necessarily man and wife.20 Many of these representations are standardized and give little further evidence about what, if anything, the makers and patrons who commissioned them thought the gesture implied. Occa- sionally there is an indication that more specific meanings of the motif were remembered: the handshake was used in a scene showing the departure of a warrior in a tomb painting at Paestum,2' and it could be employed in conjunction with an inscription that alludes to greeting or parting.22 A more unusual version occurs on a Campanian hydria which has a scene of a young man parting (with a handshake) from a woman. He is about to embark on a ship called the "Ze(v)s

Eowr?)p," and thus the scene seems to be one of

a group in which the handshake is used in representa-

tions of rescue, a theme I shall consider more fully later.23 The handshake was also used in reliefs at Nemrud Dagh to link Herakles with late Hellenistic Commagene kings,24 an indication that the sense of the motif used on late Archaic vases had not been forgotten; here, however, it is the monarch whose status is being enhanced by means of the handclasp with Herakles.

THE HANDSHAKE IN LATE ETRUSCAN FUNERARY

ART (FOURTH TO FIRST CENTURIES B.C.)

The handshake motif occurs on a large number of late Etruscan funerary monuments, particularly ash chests of alabaster, tufa or terracotta, many of them made for the mass market. The motif also occurs on stone sarcophagi of southern Etruria (Tarquinia, Tuscania and Vulci) and occasionally in tomb paintings. Etruscan artists adapted the motif to express a characteristically Etruscan view of the afterlife.

The handshake gesture was often used to link two standing figures, in many cases identifiable as a man and a woman.25 In the simplest form the scene consists of these two figures in the company of one or more others. These may be human, presumably relatives, and often diminutive figures, children or ser- vants, are included.26 In one example at Volterra, thought to commemorate someone who had held mag- isterial office, the deceased is shown shaking hands with the leader of a procession of officials accompanied by lictors and musicians who, it seems, have all turned out to give him a good send-off.27 In other cases the surrounding figures may be Underworld demons, the awesome Charun and a winged female28 (pl. 68, fig. 4; ill. 1). Quite often the couple shaking hands are in the presence of both Underworld and human figures29: the demons may simply stand patiently beside the couple, but sometimes one of them appears to indicate with an impatient gesture that one

18 B.R. Brown, Ptolemaic Paintings and Mosaics and the Alexan- drian Style (Cambridge, Mass. 1957) nos. 1, 6, 12, 15. Paestan tomb paintings: DialAr n.s. 1 (1979) 46 fig. 27. Grave stele in An- cona: P. Zanker ed., Hellenismus in Mittelitalien (G6ttingen 1976) 169, 210, fig. 74.

19 Campania: L. Forti, "Un Gruppo di Stele del Museo Cam- pano," Memorie dell'Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti di Napoli n.s. 6 (1941) 45-76, nos. 2, 11, 19,21 (between a woman and a boy), 26. Forti, "Stele Capuane," MemAccNapoli n.s. 7 (1942) 301-30, nos. 7, 8, 10, 13 (between two brothers), 16 (between two sisters?), 17, 18, 19, 29. Gaul: E. Esp~randieu, Recueil

genderal des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine 6.1 (Paris 1907) nos. 31, 195, 196, 656.

20 Busts of two women linked by the handshake on a stele in Arles, Musie Lapidaire: Espirandieu (supra n. 19) no. 195. Man and girl, man and boy on Alexandrian loculus slabs: Brown (supra n. 18) nos. 6, 15. Woman and boy, two men, two women on Cap- uan stelai: Forti (supra n. 19) 1941 no. 21; 1942 nos. 13, 16.

21 C. Nicolet, MelRome 74 (1962) 474-77, figs. 1, 5.

22 The grave stele in Ancona (supra n. 18) and a painted loculus slab from Alexandria in the Louvre (RA 1969.2, 276-77, no. 2) have inscriptions ending "Xarpe/Xarpere." Gravestones in Malta and Narbonne are also reported to have had inscriptions that imply parting and reunion, but the inscriptions are now illegible or missing.

23 Hydria from S. Maria Capua Vetere, Karlsruhe Badisches Landesmuseum B2400: CVA Germany 8, 38, pl. 75.1.

24 M.A.R. Colledge, Parthian Art (London 1977) pl. 32.a, b. 25 The handshake is also used to link a standing figure with a

seated one: G. Karte, I rilievi delle urne etrusche 3 (Berlin 1916) pls. 38.3a; 53.17, 18; 55.3; 62.7; 68.9; or a standing figure with another on horseback: 73.9; 87.2.

26 K6rte (supra n. 25) pls. 45.2; 46.4; 58.1. 27 K6rte (supra n. 25) pl. 92.5. R. Brilliant, Gesture and Rank in

Roman Art (New Haven 1963) fig. 1.58. 28 K6rte (supra n. 25) pls. 47.6; 57.7. F. de Ruyt, Charun.

Demon itrusque de la mort (Brussels 1934) no. 27. 29 K6rte (supra n. 25) pls. 46.3; 47.5; 48.8; 50.12.


,- ~\* r;,

~A~VI/X L~ .7) "

C;i

i

7

i ; r

Ill. 1. Etruscan terracotta ash chest, Museo Nazionale Etrusco, Chiusi. (After Korte pl. 57.7)

of the couple is to be taken away.30 In many cases there is no indication of setting, but often the couple shake hands in front of a closed double doorway 31 (as in fig. 4), or across a monument in the shape of a pil- lar,32 or one of the two figures may stand inside an arch,33 and a horse may also be incorporated into the scene.34

The obvious interpretation of such scenes is that they represent the parting of the deceased from his surviving family, and in many instances it would appear to be husband and wife who are taking leave of one another. The demons, if present, are therefore about to escort the dead to the Underworld, and the presence of a servant or demon holding a horse in readiness also alludes to this journey. However, there is also evidence to suggest that the handshake can take place at the other end of the journey, and represents the dead being greeted in the Underworld. This is the implication of the scenes on a series of ash chests (e.g., pl. 68, fig. 5; ill. 2)35 in which a figure accompanied by Cerberus stands outside a door holding out his right hand toward a figure being led up to him by a winged demon. As the stationary figure is accompanied by Cerberus, he must be at the entrance to the Underworld, and the obvious interpretation of the scene is that the demon is bringing a new arrival to the realm of the dead, where he is greeted by one of the residents, possibly one of his own ancestors. Although

their hands do not touch, the handshake is surely implied. It is possible therefore that the more ambiguous scenes (e.g., pl. 68, fig. 4; ill. 1), especially those in which the handshake takes place in front of a door and in the presence of demons, represent the reunion of the dead, and not their leave-taking.

Another representation which would seem to me to bear this interpretation, but whose meaning has been much disputed, is a painting from the Tomba Quer- ciola at Tarquinia. The painting is now, unfortunate- ly, lost, but was recorded in a drawing (pl. 69, fig. 6).36 It showed a handshake between two standing men. The one on the left is bearded and appears static, while the one on the right is younger and strides forward as if to meet the other man, although his face is turned into frontal view. An Etruscan inscription between their heads says "Anes Arunte, son of Velthur, died aged . . ."" It is likely that we have here father and son. A Charun stands behind each figure, but whereas that behind the left-hand figure is at rest, leaning on his mallet as if patiently waiting, the one on the right is advancing, his mallet carried over his shoulder and a curious implement raised in his right hand as if to strike the younger man on the shoulder. Beyond the left-hand Charun was a painted doorway, the entrance to the tomb or to the Underworld.38

Opinions have differed about the significance of this scene. Dennis and de Ruyt39 saw it as a scene of

~ ~ 7 i ~

i-

e? ???~i? r? I ;ts,

>)n

Ill. 2. Etruscan terracotta ash chest, Museo Nazionale Etrusco, Chiusi. (After Korte pl. 57.8)

30 Korte (supra n. 25) pls. 47.6; 48.8; 50.12. 31 Karte (supra n. 25) pl. 57.6, 7. 32 Korte (supra n. 25) pls. 45.2; 46.3; 52.15 (with tomb

monument). 33 Korte (supra n. 25) pl. 56.4, 5. 34 K6rte (supra n. 25) pls. 59.1-62.7. For ship, see pl. 68.1. 35 Korte (supra n. 25) pl. 57.8 and p. 69 fig. 13. 36 The drawing by Carlo Ruspi, now in the German Archaeo-

logical Institute, Rome, was first reproduced in AdI 1866, end paper W. See F. Messerschmidt, "Ein hellenistisches Grabgemilde in Tarquinia," StEtr 3 (1929) 161-70, pl. 28; de Ruyt (supra n. 28) 39-40, no. 32, fig. 14; A. Pfiffig, Religio Etrusca (Graz 1975) 208, fig. 97.

37 CIE 5493. 38 A similar scene has recently been found in tomb no. 5636 at

Tarquinia. There the two main figures extend right hands to one another but their fingers do not touch. They, too, are attended by demons, the one on the left seated in front of a closed door, the one on the right walking with her (?) hand on the man's shoulder as if conducting him. There are two smaller figures in the background. Another painting with a handshake that may represent reunion was also recorded in the Tomba Tartuglia: de Ruyt (supra n. 28) no. 33, fig. 15.

3" G. Dennis, Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria 1 (London 1878) 385. De Ruyt (supra n. 28) 40.


parting, the young son taking leave of his father before he is led away by the demons, the shoulder-tap- ping gesture being an indication that his time is up. Messerschmidt, on the other hand, saw it as a scene of reunion40: the deceased father has come to the entrance of Hades to greet his son, and the demons are watching the reunion. This would explain the patient attitude of the left-hand demon and the more ener-

getic "just arrived" postures of the right-hand figures. The door, too, is placed behind the older man, surely an indication that he is waiting at the gates of the Un- derworld, even though we do not see Cerberus. Ob- viously the scene does not make itself perfectly clear, but considering the parallels between this picture and the relief on the ash chest illustrated in fig. 5, I would agree with Messerschmidt that the scene represents a reunion in the Underworld. If this interpretation of the Tomba Querciola painting is correct, then it is possible that some of the less specific scenes on the ash chests could also be allusions to reunion rather than

parting. Not all the demons tear couples apart-some may be bringing them together again.

The decoration of two sarcophagi may point to a third association for the motif, with marriage. The first, from Vulci, now in Boston, is very well known.41 The couple shaking hands stand in the center of the front, with a procession of male and female figures bearing various objects converging on them. The second, in Volterra,42 I would suggest uses the handshake as one incident in the woman's life, among other scenes showing her growing older and her children growing up. Its position in the sequence suggests that the handshake may represent the actual marriage ceremony, and it is also likely that marriage was the major concept which the handshake was meant to suggest on the Boston sarcophagus.43 It is possible that the same meaning was attached to some of the scenes on the ash chests, particularly those which

included human figures only. Even when demons are present, the gesture may have had the secondary connotation that the couple were married.

There would seem to be, therefore, reasonable evidence for all three interpretations of the handshake motif in Etruscan funerary art: as a gesture of parting, reunion and marriage. No one of these interpretations is a sufficient explanation by itself of all the various instances of the motif. Again it seems that the gesture had a multiplicity of associations which are not mutually exclusive but complement one another. Parting in this world implies reunion with ancestors in the next, and it is the strength of family ties (especially the bond of marriage?) that helps to close the gulf between the living and the dead. Despite the presence of the Etruscan demons, the meaning of the motif is not radically different from that proposed for the Greek grave stelai.

DEXTRARM•I ILJNCTIO ON ROMAN FUNERARY

RELIEFS OF THE EARLY EMPIRE

The handshake motif (now dextrarum iunctio) continued to be popular in funerary contexts in Ro- man art of the early Empire, but whereas on Greek and Etruscan monuments the gesture was often used to link two figures of the same sex, on Roman reliefs it was normal for the motif to link a man and a woman.

Consequently, several commentators have interpreted the gesture as signifying that the couple concerned were married to one another, or even, in some cases, that it alluded to the marriage ceremony itself.44 As we have seen, the gesture could be used in this way in both Greek and Etruscan art, but such a meaning was comparatively rare. Others, however, have suggested that although such figures may be marriage partners, the scene could also be seen as a representation of the moment of parting on the death of one partner, and an allusion to the continued fidelity of the couple to one another after death.45 This interpretation would sug-

40 Messerschmidt (supra n. 36) 163. 41 R. Herbig, Die jiingeretruskischen Steinsarkophage (Berlin

1952) 13-14, no. 5, pl. 40.a-d. O. Brendel, Etruscan Art (Har- mondsworth 1978) 381-82, fig. 293.

42 Volterra, Museo Guarnacci 123; Karte (supra n. 25) pl. 54.19. Herbig (supra n. 41) 86, no. 260, pl. 85. K6rte assumes that the female figures are not meant to be the same woman, but surely this is the most likely explanation of these scenes.

43 Brendel (supra n. 41) suggests that the scene may have had a double meaning, alluding to both parting and marriage, since the man seems elderly and carries a stick-associated with travelling-- and the gifts could be either tomb gifts or wedding presents. L. Bon- fante, "Etruscan Couples and their Aristocratic Society," Women's Studies 8 (1981) 160-61, discusses the interpretation of this sarcophagus, but does not attempt to resolve its ambiguities.

44 P. Zanker, "Grabreliefs rdmischer Freigelassener," Jdl 90

(1975) 267-315, esp. 288, n. 83. D.E.E. Kleiner, Roman Group Portraiture: the Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire (New York and London 1977) ch. 2, esp. 23-25. B. Haar-

lov, The Half-Open Door. A Common Symbolic Motif Within Ro- man Sepulchral Sculpture (Odense 1977), esp. 46. This interpretation was recently re-asserted by R. Stupperich, "Zur dextrarum iunctio auf fruihen r6mischen Grabreliefs," Boreas 6 (1983) 143-50. The idea that the motif might be a representation of the marriage ceremony itself is found in the older literature, e.g., W. Altmann, Die rimischen Grabaltiire der Kaiserzeit (Berlin 1905) 233-34.

45 This view is taken especially by Reekmans (supra n. 1) 27-30, and also by P. Romanelli, Le Arti 20 (1942) 165, and T. Campa- nile, BullComm 50 (1922) 60, in their publications of specific monuments. Kleiner, (supra n. 44) 23, explicitly denies that the gesture denotes leave-taking on the portrait reliefs, although elsewhere (D.


gest there was some continuity of meaning with Greek and Etruscan funerary art, although such scholars have placed rather less emphasis on the concept of reunion in the afterlife.46

The dextrarum iunctio was used on two types of

sculptured funerary monuments made in Rome in the early Empire. The first is a series of reliefs of the Au- gustan period, recently published by D. Kleiner,47 which were designed to be set into the facade of a family tomb. Occasionally they show full-length figures, but the more usual form consists of a row of portrait busts represented from the mid-chest upward. These portraits are in frontal view, and so the handshake gesture tends to look stiff and unnatural. The two portraits linked by the handshake may be alone or accompanied by the portraits of other adults or children. In all the cases detailed by Kleiner the two figures linked in this way are a man and a woman, but on a relief in the British Museum48 the handshake links the portrait busts of two women (pl. 69, fig. 7).

The second group of monuments consists of ash chests and grave altars of the first and early second centuries A.C. These are elaborately decorated monuments designed to commemorate one or more persons, and, in the case of the ash chests, to contain their cre- mated remains. Usually the dextrarum iunctio is used as a central motif49: the salient features of such scenes are that the two figures stand close together, turned slightly toward one another, and clasp right hands as in a modern handshake. In all but one of these monuments the figures appear to be a man and a woman. Either or both may hold an object in the left hand, the man a scroll, and the woman a fruit (apple or pome- granate); one of them may rest his/her free hand on the other's shoulder. The scene may be presented

without any setting, the figures standing on a ground- line or ledge against a plain background (pl. 69, fig. 8),s5o or the couple can stand inside an aedicula, a ped- iment raised on columns or other decorative supports (pl. 69, fig. 9),51 or inside a doorway, between the leaves of an open double door (pl. 70, fig. 10).52 Other monuments show the couple joining hands over a small altar,53 or, in one case, with the attributes of Dionysus and Ariadne.54

In both types of monument the gesture usually links a man and a woman. For this reason it would seem reasonable to infer that the Roman stonemason used it as a symbol for marriage, a convenient way of indicating the relationship between the two figures. This would be an especially useful device where the portraits of a number of people were represented together.55 A closer look at the reliefs and the accompanying inscriptions, however, shows that although the handshake sometimes links marriage partners, it did not always do so.

The most striking anomalies are two pieces which show not a man and a woman linking hands, but two people of the same sex. The first is the relief in the British Museum with the portraits of two women (pl. 69, fig. 7). The inscription56 placed below the figures identifies them as Fonteia Eleusis and Fonteia Hele- na, both freedwomen. The relief was subsequently re- cut to represent the more normal form of the motif, that is between a man and a woman,57 but the handshake itself appears to be an original feature of the relief. Fonteia Eleusis may have been the mother of Helena, but we are told no more about them than that they were given their freedom by a (presumably the same) woman.58 The other monument is an ash chest in the Vatican, with a relief that clearly shows two

Kleiner, "A Portrait Relief of D. Apuleius Carpus and Apuleia Rufina in the Villa Wolkonsky," ArchCl 30 [1978] 246-51) she interprets the motif on a specific relief as alluding to the belief that marital bonds were not dissolved by death, and on the death of the surviving spouse the pair would be reunited for eternity. See also D.E.E. Kleiner and F.S. Kleiner, "The Apotheosis of Antoninus and Faustina," RendPontAcc 51-52 (1978-1980) 389-400.

46 A. Bruhl, Liber Pater (Paris 1953) 322, considers reunion as well as parting a possible explanation of the motif.

47 Kleiner (supra n. 44) nos. 13, 18, 28, 31,34, 60 ,65, 68, 80, 85, 87, 90, 92 and fig. 93.

48 S. Walker and A. Burnett, "A Relief with Portraits of Two

Freedwomen," Augustus. Handlist of the Exhibition and Supple- mentary Studies (British Museum Occasional Paper 16, London 1981) 43-47.

49 TWO pieces use the motif in a minor role: it appears on the lid of the ash chest of Varia Amoeba linking two small portrait busts, and on the altar of P. Vitellius Successus as part of a "banquet" scene. Altmann (supra n. 44) 156, no. 189; 192, no. 259.

so Grave altar of Ti. Claudius Dionysius, Vatican Museums (pl. 69, fig. 8): Altmann (supra n. 44) 193, no. 261; 234, fig. 188. See also: Altmann 107, no. 97; 108, no. 100; 144, no. 158, fig. 118; 171,

no. 224; 233-34. RendLincei 10 (1955) 273-75, fig. 18. 51 Ash chest of Vernasia Cyclas, British Museum (pl. 69, fig. 9):

Altmann (supra n. 44) 113-14, no. 106. See also: Altmann 153-54, no. 184, fig. 126; Reekmans (supra n. 1) 30 n. 1; G. Koch and H. Sichtermann, Romische Sarkophage (Munich 1982) fig. 41; AA 1941, 551-54, figs. 86-89.

52 Ash chest of Vestricius Hyginus and Vestricia Hetera, Galleria delle Statue, Vatican Museums, (pl. 70, fig. 10): Altmann (supra n. 44) 162, no. 204, fig. 132. See also: Altmann 57, no. 14; 145, no. 159; 153, no. 183; 171, no. 224; 133-34. Koch and Sichtermann (supra n. 51) fig. 48.

53 Altmann (supra n. 44) 171, no. 224; 194-95, no. 34, pl. 22; 233-34.

54 Altmann (supra n. 44) 267, figs. 203, 203a. ss Kleiner (supra n. 44) nos. 87 and 92 both present portraits of

five persons, two of whom are linked by the handshake. 56 CIL VI.18524. 57 The recutting is thought to be antique (Constantinian) by

Susan Walker (supra n. 48) 44. For a different view of this relief, see Stupperich (supra n. 44) 145-49.

58 Walker (supra n. 48) suggests they may be mother and daughter.


men (pl. 70, fig. 11).I5 Although their arms are dam- aged, it seems certain that they were originally linking right hands. The inscription60 states that Iunia Pro- cula set up the monument to her husband, Q. Flavius Crito, and to her son, Q. Flavius Proculus, who was a soldier. The relief would appear to show these two men, since one of them, the younger of the two, is shown to be a soldier by his dress and equipment.

The dextrarum iunctio gesture cannot be a symbol of marriage in either of these reliefs, and indeed an examination of the inscriptions appearing with other handshake reliefs provides little positive support for the view that the marriage bond was the main subject of such scenes. Of the fourteen dextrarum iunctio reliefs cited by Kleiner, seven have no remaining inscription, and an inscription on an eighth is now illegible. None of the other six inscriptions states unequi- vocally that the two figures linked by the dextrarum iunctio were married to each other. In all cases the handshake pair share the same nomen, but this suggests only that they were conliberti, a freedman and a freedwoman of the same household: in fact this is explicitly stated in two cases. It is only an assumption that they were married to one another.6'

Of the ash chests and grave altars decorated with the dextrarum iunctio some do not have inscriptions, or the inscription gives very little information apart from the name of the deceased. Of the remaining fif- teen known to me, four were dedicated by a wife to her husband62 and two by a husband to his wife.63 In one instance64 the monument was commissioned by a man to commemorate both himself and his wife, and another ash chest was dedicated by a son to his parents.65 Sex. Allidius Symphorus had his monument made for himself, his son, his sister, and only finally, his wife.66 Altogether, therefore, there are nine pieces

dedicated in some way to a married couple, and on these it is possible that the scene alludes to marriage. For the remaining six pieces the information given in the inscription either points away from the marriage interpretation, or at best is ambiguous. In two cases, parents dedicated the monument to their children: Aponius Hippias dedicated an ash chest to his daughter who died aged sixteen,'67 and the confused inscriptions on an altar in the Vatican Museums also suggest it was dedicated by parents to their son.68 In the remaining group of four inscriptions, freedmen provide a monument for a fellow freedman69 or patron.70

Thus not all the inscriptions mention marriage, and some specifically state a different relationship (parents and children, freedmen and patrons). In some cases there is no mention of a woman in the inscription: the ash chest of Sex. Caesonius Apollonius was dedicated to him by four of his freedmen and heirs, that of C. Iulius Hermes by a conlibertus, and of Cornelius Philo by his patron. We have to assume therefore either that the person concerned is represented with a woman not mentioned in the inscription (a predeceased wife, for example) or that the scene had a more general symbolic meaning and was not intended to represent the deceased at all (e.g., that it was a symbolic expression of a belief in a life after death), or perhaps that those who bought the monument chose it from stock without considering the rele- vance of the decoration. The motif may well have been interpreted in different ways by the various people who made, commissioned or bought monuments with a dextrarum iunctio scene.

The motif had been inherited from Hellenistic Greek and/or Etruscan traditions, and it could be that Roman sculptors were simply repeating a motif that was by then meaningless. Two factors weigh

9 In the Museo Gregoriano Profano, Vatican Museums. O. Benndorf and R. Schoene, Die antiken Bildwerke des Lateranen- sischen Museums (Leipzig 1867) 92-93, no. 151, pl. 17.3.

60 CIL VI.2911. 6' For freedmen, marriage and the dextrarum iunctio, see Zanker

(supra n. 44) 288 and n. 83; Kleiner (supra n. 44) 24-29. 62 Ash chest of Helius, Berlin: Altmann (supra n. 44) 233-34,

CIL VI.2317. Grave altar of C. Domitius Verus, Villa Albani, Rome: Altmann 171, no. 224, CIL VI.16979. Ash chest ofT. Aqui- lius Pelorus, Broadlands, Hampshire: Altmann 57, no. 14; CIL VI.9973. Ash chest of T. Aelius Felix, Pavlovsk: Koch and Sichter- mann (supra n. 51) fig. 48; CIL VI.10709.

63 Ash chest of Vernasia Cyclas, British Museum (pl. 69, fig. 9): Altmann (supra n. 44) 113-14, no. 106; CIL VI.8769. Ash chest, Galleria delle Statue, Vatican Museums (pl. 70, fig. 10): Altmann 162, no. 204, fig. 132. CIL VI.28639 records an inscription for this monument, now erased, which says it was put up by the freedman Rhamnus to Vestricius Hyginus and Vestricia Hetera. Vestricia Hetera was married to one of the two men, probably to Rhamnus, but the phrasing of the inscription is ambiguous on this point.

64 Grave altar of M. Antonius Asclepiades, Castello Sforzesco, Milan: Altmann (supra n. 44) 159, no. 196; CIL VI.11965.

65 Ash chest of Q. Fabius Echus and Fabia Restituta, Naples Ar- chaeological Museum: Altmann (supra n. 44) 144, no. 157; CIL VI.17522. Dedicated by Ti. Claudius Fabianus.

66 Ash chest of Sex. Allidius Symphorus, Ny Carlsberg Glypto- tek, Copenhagen: Altmann (supra n. 44) 153, no. 183; CIL VI.6828.

67 Ash chest of Apona Felicitas, Pavlovsk: Altmann (supra n. 44) 145, no. 159; CIL VI.12163.

68 Grave altar of Ti. Claudius V(italis?), also known as the altar of Ti. Claudius Philetus, Sala delle Muse, Vatican Museums: Alt- mann (supra n. 44) 267, figs. 203, 203a; CIL VI.15314.

69 Ash chest of C. Iulius Hermes, Museo Nazionale delle Terme, Rome: Altmann (supra n. 44) 153-54, no. 184, fig. 126; CIL VI.5326.

70 Grave altar of Ti. Claudius Dionysius, Museo Gregoriano Profano, Vatican Museums (pl. 69, fig. 8): Altmann (supra n. 44) 193, no. 261, fig. 188; CIL VI.15003. Ash chest of Sex. Caesonius Apollonius, Galleria Lapidaria, Vatican Museums: Altmann 144, no. 158, fig. 118; CIL VI.7525. Ash chest of Cornelius Philo, Ca- thedral of Mazara del Vallo, Sicily: Reekmans (supra n. 1) 30 n. 1; Koch and Sichtermann (supra n. 51) fig. 41.


against this assumption. First is the prominent position in which such scenes are placed on the monuments, and second is the fact that the motif was adapted from the earlier models with the addition of new features. Most significant is the placing of the figures inside an aedicula or open doorway with a pedi- ment above. On Etruscan ash chests the handshake might take place outside or near a door, but placing the couple on the threshold is a specifically Roman adaptation. Whether the doorway represents the entrance to the tomb or Hades, it surely indicates that the couple are on the threshold between this world and the next,"71 and the aedicula, which seems to iso- late them as if in a shrine, possibly performs a similar function. It is impossible to say whether they are parting at death,72 being reunited in the afterlife, or ex- pressing the idea that the strength of their feeling for one another can cross the barrier of death itself. All three interpretations would seem to be equally valid and are foreshadowed in the earlier traditions of the motif. No doubt different observers saw different aspects in the scene.

The presence of the altar in three instances is less easy to explain, but I see no reason to suppose, as some have done, that it refers to the marriage ritual rather than the funerary rites, nor indeed that the scroll often held by the man is to be seen specifically as the tabulae nuptiales: rather it is the usual attribute of a togate figure. In some cases the motif may have been interpreted as alluding above all to the married state, but that was not its only connotation.

From the sculptor's point of view the handshake must have been a useful motif because of its built-in ambiguities. How many connotations the motif may have had in Imperial Rome becomes clearer if we look at its use in other contexts in Roman art.

THE HANDSHAKE MOTIF IN MYTHOLOGICAL SCENES

IN ROMAN ART

Figures linking right hands appear sporadically in non-funerary contexts in Roman art, including representations of mythological episodes. As such scenes

are designed to illustrate stories, it might be hoped that the significance of the handshake would be rea- sonably clear, and that some commonly accepted meaning of the gesture would emerge from them. In fact, however, the motif does not seem to have been used with a consistent meaning in such scenes, although it is possible to detect recurring themes and concepts.

The handshake was sometimes used to link pairs of lovers, and in certain cases would seem to allude to their marriage. Thus in a painting in the house of Lo- reius Tiburtinus at Pompeii73 two rather child-like figures shake hands, the woman veiled as a bride, with a larger male figure in the background. This scene has been variously identified as the marriage of Hesione and Telamon, or (more plausibly?) of Priam and He- cuba. Another painting, also from Pompeii,74 presents Hercules shaking hands with a woman surrounded by figures who may constitute a wedding procession. The handshake also appears twice in the stucco decoration of the "Underground Basilica" in Rome.75 In one instance the figures seem to be generic, illustrating marriage as one of the significant events in the typical human life, but in the other the figures are more likely to belong to the realm of mythology; since the male figure wears a Phrygian cap and carries a pedum, Or- pheus with Eurydice and Paris with Helen have been suggested.76 There is nothing in this scene to suggest that it alludes specifically to marriage: the handshake could as easily be a gesture of parting or simply imply a bond of affection.

The handshake could also be used as a gesture of greeting: thus Io and Isis link right hands in two paintings of Io's arrival in Egypt.77 The handshake also appears in the background of two paintings of the rescue of Andromeda, between Perseus and Andro- meda's father Cepheus.78 There it is perhaps a gesture of thanks and reward. A mosaic in the Villa Al- bani collection represents the similar scene of Hesione being rescued from the sea monster: the handshake is used to link Telamon and Hesione as he hands her down from the rock.79 In two paintings of Jason be-

71 Haarlov (supra n. 44); G. Davies, "The Door Motif in Roman Funerary Sculpture," in H.McK. Blake, T.W. Potter and D.B. Whitehouse eds., British Archaeological Reports 1977: The Lan- caster Seminar (BAR Supplementary Series 41 [i] 1978) 203-20.

72 This interpretation has been associated by Reekmans, (supra n. 1) 28, with the secondary gesture of one of the figures placing his or her left hand on the partner's shoulder. There seems to be little justification for this view.

73 House of Loreius Tiburtinus (also known as the house of D. Octavius Quartio): M. Borda, La pittura romana (Milan 1958) 248; S. Wood, "Alcestis on Roman Sarcophagi," AJA 82 (1978) 499-510, fig. 6.

74 I.S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art (MAAR 22, 1955) 169, fig. 99.

75 G. Bendinelli, "I1 Monumento Sotterraneo di Porta Maggiore in Roma," MonAnt 31 (1926) 672-74, pl. 17.1 and 688-89, pl. 23.2.

76 Paris and Helen have also been identified in a painting from the Domus Aurea: F. Weege, Jdl 28 (1913) 223-25, figs. 68, 69. The arrangement of the figures is similar to that in many handshake scenes, but the two main figures do not appear to link hands.

77 G.M.A. Richter, Ancient Italy (Ann Arbor 1955) figs. 237, 238.

78 Richter (supra n. 77) figs. 241, 242. The handshake is also used on an Etruscan ash chest to express forgiveness (of Daedalus by Minos): Brilliant (supra n. 27) fig. 1.52.

" EAA 3.443, fig. 538.


fore Pelias80 we see Pelias taking the right hand of a woman. The gesture is rather awkward and seems deliberate, but it is hard to see the significance. It is perhaps meant to be ironic, indicating a close relationship between Pelias and one of his daughters who will, ultimately, out of affection for him, cause his death.81

No single meaning of the gesture emerges from these representations. The handshake could be used to link those who are to be married, but this is not true of all the examples cited. A more general theme that may be significant is one of rescue or deliverance. An- dromeda and Hesione are rescued from sea monsters, Orpheus tries to rescue Eurydice from Hades, Io finally finds rest in Egypt. This theme may seem a ten- uous link, but these are not the only examples of the handshake being used in the context of rescue. Men- tion has already been made of the red-figure vase painting of Herakles attempting to rescue Peirithoos from Hades, and of the Campanian hydria with a man about to embark on a ship called the "Ze(v)s'

EoTrrp." On the grave altar of Ti. Claudius V(ita-

lis?)82 the handshake links figures with the attributes of Dionysus and Ariadne. Dionysus was Ariadne's rescuer as well as her lover.

There are several instances of the handshake or scenes with gestures similar to a handshake on mythological sarcophagi of the Antonine period. In the context of the stories of Medea, the rape of the Leucip- pids and the meeting of Mars and Rhea Silvia83 the handshake would appear to denote marriage or a similar bond between the figures concerned: in the case of the Leucippids and Rhea Silvia this union, like Ariadne's, also confers heroic status. A more curious occurrence is on a sarcophagus in Wilton House which illustrates events from the myths of the Eleusi- nian deities. In the center of the front side, seated Ceres and standing Proserpina link right hands. This scene appears chronologically after Proserpina's return from Hades, and the handshake is a gesture of greeting on the reunion of mother and daughter.84

In the case of two other mythological sarcophagi

the position is rather more complex. Both are decorated with myths that tell of the return (however briefly) from the realm of Hades. On the sarcophagus of C. Iunius Euhodus and Metilia Acte in the Vati-

can,85 the handshake is used in the context of the Al- cestis myth to link Admetus and Hercules when he returns Alcestis from Hades. The second sarcophagus, also in the Vatican collection, uses the handshake twice (possibly three times) in the series of episodes that make up the story of Protesilaus and Laoda- meia.86 On the left-hand short side Protesilaus shakes hands with his wife as he leaves her to go to the war from which he will not return. The convention is that of the "departure of the warrior" which we have already seen in Greek vase painting. The scenes on the left-hand section of the front show his shade being conducted by Mercury from Hades for a brief visit to his mourning wife. In the center of the front, the couple stand before an elaborate doorway, and although their hands are now missing, the position of their arms shows that they must have been holding right hands, a scheme similar to that used on some of the earlier Roman ash chests, except that here the door is closed. To the right of this scene the shade of Protesi- laus appears to a reclining Laodameia, and finally returns to Hades.87 The right-hand short side presents some of the traditional sufferers in the Underworld.

The handshake appears to be an important gesture on both sarcophagi, but its exact meaning is hard to define. There does not seem to be a single explanation which would fit its appearance in all instances. On the Protesilaus sarcophagus the handshake is used first in a scene of parting, but the meaning of the second handshake is not so obvious. It is difficult to see how the central scene of the dextrarum iunctio in front of a doorway fits into the narrative, since the chronological sequence of events would proceed more smoothly from left to right without it. Rather it would appear to be an independent episode, possibly intended as a summary of the whole, illustrating the strength of the marriage bond, the poignancy of parting when one of the couple

80so Richter (supra n. 77) figs. 231, 232. 81 It is perhaps significant that one of these daughters was Al-

testis, who is associated with the dextrarum iunctio motif in other

scenes (see below). 82 See supra n. 68. The figures are rather dumpy and child-like,

so there may be some attempt at identifying the figures with the dead child.

83 Medea: C. Robert, Die antiken Sarkophag-Reliefs (Berlin 1890-1919 [hereafter ASR]) II, no. 194. Leucippids: ASR III.2, no. 181. Mars and Rhea Silvia: ASR III.2, no. 193a.

84 F. Baratte, "Le sarcophage de Triptoleme au Mushe du Louvre," RA 1974.2, 271-90, fig.2. On a similar sarcophagus in the Louvre, however, these figures are not linked by a handshake,

but instead Ceres seems to be handing an ear of wheat to Proser- pina. The use of the handshake is all the more interesting in that one of the women on the relief in the British Museum (pl. 69, fig. 7) is named Fonteia Eleusis, and was presumably an initiate of the Eleusinian cult.

"5 Museo Chiaramonti. ASR III.1, 31-33, no. 26. Wood (supra n. 73) passim.

86 Galleria dei Candelabri, Vatican Museums. ASR III.3, 498 no. 423, pl. 132; B. Andreae, Studien zur ramischen Grabkunst (Heidelberg 1963) pl. 30.

87 Protesilaus and Charon may also have been linking right hands in this scene, but their arms are missing and an exact reconstruction is not possible.


dies, and the hope for reunion. In the case of the Euhodus sarcophagus, the similarity of the handshake scene with marriage scenes on contemporary and later sarcophagi has already been pointed out by S. Wood.88 The elements of similarity she points to do exist, but there is one major puzzle-why Admetus shakes hands not with Alcestis but with Hercules. This iunctio recalls the handshake between Perseus and

Cepheus on the Andromeda paintings, and may also be a simple gesture of thanks, or, as Wood suggests, farewell."89 But in view of the fact that Admetus is represented with the features of Euhodus, this handshake may have had yet another connotation, as an indication that Admetus/Euhodus has been elevated to a heroic status equal to that of Hercules.

The handshake was not always seen as an essential iconographic element in either the Alcestis or Protesi- laus myths. Both stories occur in parallel scenes on the anomalous Velletri sarcophagus,90 but the handshake is not used in either. Similarly, in a much later painting in the Via Latina catacomb,91 Alcestis accom- panies Hercules through an archway without taking his hand, even though in a nearby chamber Hercules is shown linking right hands with Minerva92-an interesting revival of an early form of the motif.

There are also sporadic examples of the dextrarum iunctio used to link the deceased with his/her psychopompos,93 as on a wall painting from Isernia94 where the deceased is shown shaking hands with Mercury. The idea that the psychopompos leads the dead to a better life with the dextrarum iunctio is more explicitly stated in a painting in the tomb of Vibia on the Via Latina95: there, a "good angel" leads Vibia by the right hand through an archway to the banquet of the blessed. The handshake may have continued to have a similar connotation in early Christian art: it occurs in a scene of baptism in a painting in the crypt of Lucina,96 and later still a gesture similar to the classical handshake was often used in mediaeval scenes of the harrowing of Hell,97 a deliverance theme par excellence.

The evidence of the mythological scenes therefore

suggests that there was not a single commonly accepted significance of the handshake, but, rather like our modern handshake, the gesture could be used in a number of situations with a variety of meanings. It is not always possible to tell whether the artist was us- ing the handshake as a significant, meaningful gesture, or simply as a convenient compositional device (as in the scene where Telamon helps Hesione down from the rock); nor is it always easy to distinguish what should be classed as a "handshake scene" (Io and Isis clasp right hands, but they do not stand side by side or opposite one another as in the usual funerary dextrarum iunctio scene). Sometimes the handshake becomes confused with the gesture of leading, which can be very similar to the dextrarum iunctio. But despite these reservations, the gesture in many of the instances cited above appears to be a genuine handshake and the figures are posed in a way that suggests that the handshake was meant to be significant. According to context it could suggest parting, marriage or a similar union, greeting, reunion or gratitude. It could also be used in scenes of liberation from danger, and seems to have been associated with the general theme of rescue and salvation, a theme that underlies some of the non-funerary representations as well as those used to decorate tombs. When used in a funerary context the handshake seems to have been associated especially with Hercules as a rescuing hero, and, to a lesser extent, with Mercury as psychopompos.

THE HANDSHAKE MOTIF IN MILITARY AND

POLITICAL CONTEXTS IN ROMAN ART

The handshake motif was widely used in official contexts, especially on coins."98 The motif emerged as an image of military and political agreement on coins of the Social War and the later Republic,99 and in the early Empire, according to Tacitus,1oo clasped hands were seen as an emblem of friendship and loyalty. The handshake motif was used particularly frequent- ly on coins of the period of upheaval after Nero's death, with legends that refer to Fides or similar con-

88 Wood (supra n. 73) 504-10. 89 Wood (supra n. 73) 503. 9o Andreae (supra n. 86) 34-44. 91 P. du Bourget, Early Christian Painting (London 1965) fig.

111; J. Stevenson, The Catacombs (London 1978) 125, fig. 100. 92 Du Bourget (supra n. 91) fig. 105; Stevenson (supra n. 91) 127,

fig. 102. 93 This motif also occurs in Etruscan art: on a stele in Bologna a

man shakes hands with a winged figure, and human figures also shake hands with demons on late Etruscan ash chests: K6rte (supra n. 25) pl. 44.1; 49.10.

94 Naples Archaeological Museum inv. 9350. " Stevenson (supra n. 91) 120, fig. 96. 96 M. Gough, Origins of Christian Art (London 1973) fig. 42.

" An early example (8th c.) is in the church below S. Clemente in Rome. In later examples, generally in mosaic, Christ does not necessarily use his right hand to haul the chosen from Hell; cf. J. Beck- with, Early Christian and Byzantine Art (Harmondsworth 1970) figs. 199, 203, 220, 272, 279.

98 See P.G. Hamberg, Studies in Roman Imperial Art (Copen- hagen 1945) 21-32, pl. 1; Brilliant (supra n. 27) passim.

" C.H.V. Sutherland, Roman Coins (London 1974) fig. 100; J.P.C. Kent, Roman Coins (London 1978) pl. 14, fig. 47; Brilliant (supra n. 27) 42, 44.

100 Tacitus, Hist. 1.54; 2.8 (dextras, concordiae insignia). See also Ann. 2.58. Claudius was also shown shaking hands with a praeto- rian on an aureus struck to commemorate his accession: Sutherland (supra n. 99) fig. 285.


cepts: FIDES EXERCITUUM, FIDES MILI- TUM, CONSENSUS EXERCITUS, and later (un- der Nerva) CONCORDIA EXERCITUUM.1'1

More significant for our purpose is the gradual adoption of the handshake motif for the public ex-

pression of more private and domestic harmonies.102 At first it was used to link two men of the Imperial family,103 but in the Antonine period it was generally used as a symbol of harmony between the marriage partners of the Imperial house. Reekmans, following Rodenwaldt's original suggestion, published a long list of Imperial couples represented in this way on coins, starting with Hadrian and Sabina.104 Often the Imperial couple is brought together by a female figure who stands between and behind them. Her identity, and the general significance of the motif, are provided by the legend: CONCORDIA(E), often with an addi- tional concept such as FELIX or AETERNA. These scenes are very similar in composition to the dextrarum iunctio groups on Roman sarcophagi of the second and third centuries A.C. and it seems that in these

sarcophagi we can see a fusion of the public, official and private, funerary versions of the motif.

ROMAN SARCOPHAGI: THE DEXTRARUM IbNCTIO AND MARRIAGE

The use of the dextrarum iunctio motif on a small group of sarcophagi of the Antonine period (e.g., in the Palazzo Ducale at Mantua; pl. 70, fig. 12) has been studied quite extensively by several scholars, including G. Rodenwaldt, and, more recently, N.B. Kampen.15os On such sarcophagi the handshake scene is accompanied by others showing a sacrifice, the sub-

mission of barbarians, and a battle or hunting scene. These would seem to have had a dual significance: on the one hand they may allude to actual events in the life of the deceased, but on the other hand they would appear to allude allegorically to the four cardinal vir- tues-the hunt/battle to virtus, sacrifice to pietas, submission to clementia and the dextrarum iunctio to

concordia.106 The dextrarum iunctio episode on these sarcophagi

includes not only the man and woman who are joining hands, but also a stately female figure wearing a dia- dem who stands between and behind them with her hands on their shoulders, and a child with a torch who stands in front of the group. The woman is variously identified as Concordia or Juno Pronuba, the child as Hymenaeus. The intermediary female figure was not present on earlier funerary monuments, but was common on coins illustrating "concordia." It is likely, therefore, that this version of the dextrarum iunctio motif was influenced by official art, and this circum- stance strengthens the view that the scene alluded to concord as one of the attributes of the virtuous man. At the same time the presence of Hymenaeus confirms that the scene alludes to marriage. The ambiguity inherent in the scene seems to have been deliberately exploited, and is illustrated by our inability to decide whether the female figure is Juno Pronuba or Con- cordia. The dextrarum iunctio was not meant to be a realistic representation of the marriage ceremony,107 but it did allude to it, defining the area in which the deceased had demonstrated the virtue of concordia.s08 The biographical purpose,109 though undoubtedly present, is secondary.

1o' Kent (supra n. 99) pl. 62, fig. 219; Sutherland (supra n. 99) figs. 331-32; Hamberg (supra n. 98) 24; Brilliant (supra n. 27) 102-103, fig. 2.121. 102 An early example appears on a Claudian didrachm of Caesa-

rea in Cappadocia, which shows Messalina's children, Britannicus and Octavia, linked by the handshake: Brilliant (supra n. 27) 79.

103 Sestertius of A.D. 80/1 with Domitian and Titus shaking hands with Pietas between them: Brilliant (supra n. 27) 92, fig. 2.93; Reekmans (supra n. 1) fig. 5. To celebrate adoption: an early issue of Hadrian's reign with Trajan and Hadrian shaking hands with the legend ADOPTIO (Hamberg [supra n. 98] 25) and me- dallion of A.D. 137 with Aelius and Hadrian shaking hands, Con- cordia presiding (Kent [supra n. 99] pl. 85, fig. 298; Brilliant [supra n. 27] 134, fig. 3.72). A later example appears on the arch of Septi- mius Severus at Leptis Magna: Brilliant 201, fig. 4.104.

104 Reekmans (supra n. 1) 31-37; A.M. McCann, Roman Sarco- phagi in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York 1978) 128, also cites a coin of Matidia.

05os Rodenwaldt (supra n. 1) esp. 13-17 (on dextrarum iunctio); N. Boymel Kampen, "Biographical Narration in Roman Funerary Art," AJA 85 (1981) 47-58. See also: A. Rossbach, Rimische Hochzeits- und Ehendenkmiiler (Leipzig 1871); P. Barrera, "Sar- cofagi romani con scene della vita privata e militare," Studi Romani 2 (1914) 93-120; E. Feinblatt, "Un sarcofago romano inedito nel museo di Los Angeles," BdA 37 (1952) 193-203; Ryberg (supra n. 74) 163-67, figs. 90-92; McCann (supra n. 104) 124-29. The most

complete examples are in the Palazzo Ducale, Mantua (pl. 70, fig. 12), the Uffizi, Florence, Los Angeles County Museum, and the Louvre (formerly Frascati). 106 This suggestion was originally put forward by Rodenwaldt

(supra n. 105) passim but esp. 6, and has gained general acceptance. 107 Contrast a sarcophagus in the Vatican (Ryberg [supra n. 74]

fig. 94) where emphasis is placed on the marriage (the bulk of the scene is taken up by the dextrarum iunctio, a large Hymenaeus and attendants with gifts) with two sarcophagi, one in the Vatican (Wood [supra n. 73] fig. 4), the other in Leningrad (Kampen [supra n. 105] pl. 11, fig. 20; Ryberg [supra n. 74] fig. 93), where the subject of the scene is the marriage ceremony, but the dextrarum iunctio is not used, and instead the nuptial sacrifice dominates the front.

o10s From the Antonine period onward, the cult of Concord, the harmony of the Imperial house and the marriage of ordinary people were closely bound together as newlyweds were required to per- form a sacrifice in honor of the Imperial couple as a sign of their "concordia": Reekmans (supra n. 1) 35-36; McCann (supra n. 104) 128; Hamberg (supra n. 98) 26, fig. 1.

o109 The wife's life might be celebrated in less prominent parts of the sarcophagus: on the Uffizi and Los Angeles sarcophagi, the right side shows a baby being bathed in the presence of its mother. The lid of the Via Tiburtina sarcophagus (Kampen [supra n. 105] pl. 10, fig. 18) also has a scene of babyhood and education on the wife's side of the central dextrarum iunctio, corresponding to the submission scene on the man's side.


As Kampen has shown, the biographical content of such schemes was gradually eroded, and the coherent scheme used on the Antonine sarcophagi was frag- mented into a series of emblems, the dextrarum iunctio continuing to be very popular.110 The most common types in the third century are sarcophagi divided up into sections by columns or strigillated panels, the dextrarum iunctio scene usually occupying the central position on the front. As with the Antonine sarcophagi, the couple are always a man and a woman and are usually accompanied by the Concordia/Pronuba figure in the background, Hymenaeus in front. In the outer sections there are often representations of the four Seasons or the Dioscuril': the couple and their marriage are placed in a wider setting, since the Seasons allude to the eternal cycle of life and death, and the Dios- curi to the belief, or hope, that the union will continue after death. Thus the dextrarum iunctio took its place in the complex eschatological symbolism of the late Empire, and passed into Christian iconography.112

During the later second and third centuries, therefore, the dextrarum iunctio was used on Roman sarcophagi in scenes which generally imply that the two people linking right hands were married, but these scenes were designed to illustrate the concord of the married state rather than the marriage ceremony itself. The accompanying motifs on some sarcophagi suggest that the older significance of the motif, alluding to the parting and reunion of loved ones at death, was not forgotten, and the motif could still be used in other media to link couples other than marriage partners, especially the deceased with his/her psychopompos. Nevertheless, it seems to have been official art, perhaps a lost monumental relief, that was the most potent influence affecting the use of the motif on the sarcophagi.

CONCLUSION

The handshake gesture was represented in classical art on a wide variety of objects, in many different contexts, and over a long period of time. On funerary monuments it had a persistent association with the ideas of parting and meeting, especially parting at death and reunion in the afterlife. These are not to be seen as alternative interpretations, but as complemen- tary: throughout the history of the motif this ambig-

uity seems to have been deliberately exploited by the artists concerned. Another important facet of the motif was its association with marriage: the motif ap- peared sporadically in scenes which allude to marriage from the fifth century B.C. onward, and this was to become a major connotation in the latter part of the Imperial period. The motif was also used in scenes that imply apotheosis and salvation, and, particularly in official art, in scenes of concord and agreement.

The handshake emerged as a major funerary motif on classical Athenian grave stelai, but its appearance on these monuments should not be studied in isola- tion. Vase painting of the late Archaic and Classical periods used the motif in a wide variety of contexts: it was associated with the heroes Herakles and Theseus in scenes which imply the granting of status, in scenes in the Underworld and in scenes of marriage and agreement, and particularly in scenes of greeting and parting. In view of this rich array of associations it seems unnecessary to define too closely the "meaning" of the handshake on the grave stelai: it may have been precisely this multiplicity of associations that made the motif such a suitable one for monuments that were generally chosen from stock rather than made to an individual design. But perhaps it was the themes of parting at death and reunion of the family in the afterlife that would have been uppermost.

The handshake seems to have had this dual connotation in late Etruscan funerary art as well, and it was also inherited by the Romans of the early Empire. The Romans saw the motif as particularly appropri- ate for husbands and wives, but clearly other interpretations were still possible. A variant of the motif intro- duced at this time is the dextrarum iunctio inside an open doorway, surely meant to represent the barrier between this world and the next, and designed to stress the hoped-for reunion as well as parting.

In the second century A.C. the dextrarum iunctio motif seems to have gained renewed popularity because of its adoption in official art to illustrate domestic concord in the Imperial family, an extension of its earlier use on coins to express political harmony. The motif then took on a new meaning in funerary art, as it was used to illustrate the virtue of concordia, a virtue that was particularly required in marriage. As a result the motif became more clearly defined and this

110o The beginning of the process can be seen in the sarcophagus in S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura with its rich array of mythological and allegorical figures (Wood [supra n. 73] fig. 3; Ryberg [supra n. 74] fig. 95). See also the Balbinus sarcophagus in the catacombs of Praetextatus (D.E. Strong, Roman Imperial Sculpture [London 1961] fig. 121) and a sarcophagus found on the Via Latina (Kam- pen [supra n. 105] pl. 12, fig. 28; Strong, fig. 127). "' E.g., P.E. Arias, E. Cristiani and E. Gabba, Camposanto Mo-

numentale di Pisa. Le Antichita (Pisa 1977) 109-10, no. A17int., pl. 51.105 (with Seasons); 143-44, no. C14est, pl. 82.172 (with Dioscuri) (both columnar); 110-11, no. A19int., pl. 53.107 (strigillated). 112 Reekmans (supra n. 1) 50-91; G. Bovini,"Le scene della 'dex-

trarum iunctio' nell'arte cristiana," BullComm 62 (1946-1948) 103-17.


definition limited its former rich variety of meaning. With the sarcophagi of the mid- and late Empire the dextrarum iunctio became associated more strongly with marriage, although its other meanings were not completely forgotten.

The handshake, then, was widely used by classical artists as a gesture that had several connotations, and could be used to express a variety of concepts. On occasion, it seems to me, the multiplicity of possible meanings was exploited by the artist to create a conve-

nient ambiguity, and this is why modern scholars have not always been able to agree on an interpretation. The handshake continues to be a popular image today because we too see it as a complex and ambiguous motif.

DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH

16-20o GEORGE SQUARE EDINBURGH EH8 9JZ UNITED KINGDOM

PLATE 68 DAVIES

FIG. I. Attic black-figure amphora, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston 97. 205. Gift of Mrs. Abbot Lawrence in the name of J.W. Paige, 1897. (Courtesy Museum of Fine Arts, Boston)

FIG. 2. Detail of Attic red-figure krater, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 08. 258. 21. Rogers Fund 1908. (Drawing Lindsley F. Hall)

FIG. 3. Detail of Attic red-figure stamnos, British Museum E448. (Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum)

FIG. 4. Etruscan terracotta ash chest, Museo Nazionale Etrusco, Chiusi

FIG. 5. Etruscan terracotta ash chest, Museo Nazionale Etrusco, Chiusi

DAVIES PLATE 69

a '~lij~ r:_

*.6~~~ ?;- a ;r i sr*rrreParnn "1?

i U

..;i ?,1 a?

,

_.. .

% ~;:"i?-

+-~":I .eglAI~PkQ~B~49

;? 1 ~,

~ " ": rr .. e ? P) - ? ~?8~ -

*" c; .' ? ?:

.;i B ? - ? -; ? . ? 1 rlM

?* . :;: -'?i~-'~~.???l?? "15 t u ?, i I -_ ~~f~F~t~a~~~is_ ~:; ???- :;~-;: -?

: .? t :2, rz? I .* " ~

,? ,? ?-6; ~ 1'

"~rxla~ ~~""~ h' 1- " ?~U~I-, b:?, a -i:

i

FIG. 6. Drawing of the Tomba Querciola, Tarquinia, by Carlo Ruspi. (DAI-Rome Neg. 83. 1o96)

i~~~1~1~~3-S: :~:~: :, . ,~,~- ~_~~ _i,:^.,-,: i . . -=--~-,. 3-i__--:

-%i~

i? .P ": .;

r-. :.f % :??-?-

is~l cB L

~d ~I ::(.

??- a

"'

FIG. 7- Funerary relief of Fonteia Eleusis and Fonteia Helena, British Museum. (Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum)

9

FIG. 8. Grave altar of Ti. Claudius Dionysius, Museo Gregoriano Profano, Vatican Museums

?;::: :a:

;- r ~gi~g ~I ~4~P~4~B"8L~ ~B ~i %I Cl~~g

a.

;;?? i;:

.-s

?`:

;?

1~--~

:C

FIG. 9. Ash chest of Vernasia Cyclas, British Museum. (Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum)

PLATE 70O DAVIES

?Ca e :;:: ??~

"-;

s ? ~.?. i ~i?i- "" ~?n-~~:c~ ~

?"~ ;i ~? p

" ~" i ---~- iei.

1

" s~"~ ::~", g

FIG. Io. Ash chest of Vestricius Hyginus and Vestricia Hetera, Galleria delle Statue, Vatican Museums

~Io?c?~A.N~~YGia-FPJEl ~~?;i;-;1~-L~;I~?~n~,cviu

:~~;;--:?~:::. ;:~9~:t 3 f: af)~QI~~ -??:L

i E~as sa. ~:" " i g~ir:!K~ 3VL E I "~pi

;Oi

=.

FIG. I I. Ash chest of Q. Flavius Crito, Museo Gregoriano Profano, Vatican Museums

? ~ -'-~ - F:

_??~:: ;~

~J r

~6:~ a c

*;i I~

; ?

a ii! i-, .?? I --

~s 1 ': "~?1.

::n8~ ~d

-:*

I- Z ?-?, r-

-- r

; i. r

FIG. 1 2. Part of the front of a Roman sarcophagus in the Palazzo Ducale, Mantua. (DAI-Rome Neg. 62. 128)

handshake motif

Documents