STATIO 20

Excavated: 1914 (GdS 1914, 109 (April 16-18); NSc 1914, 148; Pasqui).
Mosaic: SO IV, 72 nr. 101, tav. 195 (top).
Inscription: CIL XIV S, 4549 nrs. 20a-e.
Date: ---.
Meas. of tesserae: 0.01-0.015-0.02 (SO IV).

Photos and drawings:
  • Front room (dga)
  • Front room (jthb)
  • Front room (kh; 2015)
  • Front room (kh; 2016)
  • Front room (kh; 2016)
  • Front room (gh)
  • Front room (gh)
  • Front room (gh2)
  • Statio 21 + statio 20 (centre + right) (gh2)
  • Depiction (top) (SO IV)
  • Panel B (Cresces) (bt)
  • Panel B (Cresces) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel C' (Simplici) (et)
  • Panel C' (Simplici) (kh; 2016)
  • Panels E and F (geometric motifs) (et)
  • Panels E and F (geometric motifs) (kh; 2016)
  • Panels E and F (geometric motifs) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel E (geometric motif) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel F (geometric motif) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel G (swastika and crater) (Alinari; 1985-1995)
  • Panel G (swastika and crater) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel G (swastika and crater) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel G (swastika) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel G (swastika) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel G (crater) (kh; 2016)
  • Panels H and I (boat) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel H (boat) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel L (dog) (et)
  • Panel L (dog) (kh; 2015)
  • Panel L (dog) (kh; 2016)
  • Panel L (dog) (kh; 2016)

  • Mosaic

    General description

    We may call this the "statio of the mosaic graffiti". It is separated from the front room by a wall. In 1961 Becatti published a photo of the floor of the front room in Scavi di Ostia IV. On the photo the floor is preserved for the most part. It is the only photo I have found of what is clearly the original situation. It is not stated when it was taken. Afterwards the mosaic was sawn into panels that were replaced on a modern background. All panels were replaced in the wrong position: off not by centimeters, but decimeters and even meters. The order of panels was switched. Panels were rotated 90 or 180 degrees. Panels were joined that did not belong together. Also many black and white tesserae in a checkerboard pattern disappeared. The most likely explanation is that the restorers became confused by errors and ambiguity in Finelli's description (see below).

    To see the changes, switch between:
    - Mosaic after excavation
    - Current situation, left part
    - Current situation, right part
    - New location of unrestored panels projected on situation after excavation

    Text and depictions

    A very short description was published by Wickert in the supplement of CIL XIV in 1930. He must have made it in the 1920's. His description follows the restoration. Becatti, even though he published the photo of the original situation after the excavation, also follows the restoration. In other words, the restoration took place before 1930. The situation after the excavation was drawn by M.A. Ricciardi in 1980 (NADIS inv. nr. 5297). In the same year she distinguished phases (NADIS inv. nr. 5298), now using the situation after restoration.

    Panel A: moved up and to the left.
    Running west-east is a black tabula ansata with a white rim and white letters (h. of letters 0.135). Wickert could read AVRE[---] (Aurelius?). Finelli says: "una targa ansata mancante del lato destro con l'iscrizione AV/stellinaECnesso PM ... Sulla stessa linea c'è una barca malfatta filante da est verso ovest". Nearby is an inverted white S.

    Panel B: rotated 90 degrees to the left, moved up and to the left.
    We see an animal moving to the left with a name on the body: CRESCES (Crescens; h. of letters 0.15). Finelli reads "CRESSE?S" and says that this must be read from west to east, which is an error, but coincides with the restoration. The animal is described by Becatti as a winged horse, drawn with white lines on a black background, with a lifted hoof, the head missing. The white patch above the back of the animal is presumably identified as a wing by Becatti. It escapes me why it should be a horse. In the tail (?) are two X's.

    Panel C: this part was filled with solid surfaces by the restorers, mostly black.

    Panel C'.
    In the south-east corner (so top right) is a tabula ansata with the word SIMPLICI (h. of letters 0.21). Finelli reads SIMPIUS. Only SIMP and the last I are certain. Apparently it is the genitivus of the name Simplicius.

    Panel D: moved up.
    Black and white tesserae.

    Panel E: moved up.
    We see a white circle with a black rim, containing two black objects. To the right is a rectangle with black and white lines (part of a boat?).

    Panel F: rotated 180 degrees.
    We see a black circle with a white rim, containing a plus-sign. Above is an object that might be described as the prow of a gondola. Below are a few white lines on a black background. It seems that Finelli sees on panels E and F a boat with raised sails and a main mast.

    Panel G: moved up.
    We see a crater, below that a swastika and to the right perhaps a tiny boat. Finelli mentions three black swastikas on a white background, and a white one on a black background.

    Panel H: moved from top right to bottom left.
    We see a ship with rudder, aligned west-east. This ship may have been misplaced, because Finelli speaks of traces of a ship to the left of panels E and F.

    Panel I: rotated 90 degrees to the left.
    In one corner we see a black-and-white corner of some object, and a curved object in the opposite corner.

    Panel K: rotated 180 degrees, moved from bottom left to bottom centre.
    We see a tabula ansata with the letters URSAV (the A and V a ligature; h. of letters 0.105). A reference to a she-bear? Finelli places this tabula ansata "to the left, to the north" of the dog in panel L, which may have led to the faulty restoration.

    Panel L: moved up and to the right.
    We see a running or jumping black dog, excited or alert, in view of the upright tail, and with an open mouth. Above the dog might be a scorpion that scared the dog. Wickert says that below the dog is a text in a tabula ansata of which the upper part is missing (h. of letters 0.085; no longer recognisable on the photo). Finelli reads PULLINE. Becatti has PVLUNE and writes U for the fourth letter, Wickert μ. Wickert suggests that it is the vocativus of the name of the dog. Perhaps the name is related to pullus, black-grey (Blackie?) or pullus, young animal (Puppy?).


    Masonry

    The rear wall of the back room, to the north of the door, is of opus reticulatum mixtum. The back room has no south wall. Its north wall is set considerably towards the south and is of opus vittatum mixtum B (the model has the wall aligned with the north brick column). The front room is separated from the back room by a wall of opus vittatum mixtum B.

    Between the columns resting on the west end of the front room, a wall supporting the columns can be seen on a photo taken in 1931 (DAI, 1289_B05).


    Interpretation

    Because what we see may truly be called graffiti, the intent of the makers is often not clear. As to the reason why this room was chosen for graffiti: it can hardly be a coincidence that this statio was divided in two parts by a wall. Perhaps it had never been used as an office, but only as a passage to the door in the back wall and then on to the street. In that case it may just have had a simple, white floor.

    The graffiti may well be the work of the restorers of the mosaics in late antiquity (led by a man named Simplicius?).