THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC

Text

The Nile Mosaic is the earliest and most comprehensive example of an Egyptian scene to have survived from the Roman world l, We must, therefore, consider the question of the mosaic's func tion. Why and how did it come to decorate a nymphaeum at Praeneste: did it have a specific religious meaning, in that it showed the blessed land of Isis to her devotees, or was it merely an exotic decoration? This question can actually be applied to the whole genre of Egyptianising scenes in the Roman world and is one on which divergent opinions exist2. In the case of the Nile Mosaic the answer depends, in the first place, on the interpretation of the function of the building in which the mosaic was originally laid. The supposition that the lower complex at Praeneste was part of the sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia naturally led to a religious inter pretation for the Nile Mosaic, since Isis could be identified with Tyche who as Tyche Protogeneia was the Greek counterpart of Fortuna Primigenia ( cf. fig. 97). We have, however, already seen that most probably the lower complex was a group of public buildings on the forum of Praeneste, which had no connection with the real sanctuary of Fortuna above it3. The Nile Mosaic lay in a grotto-nymphaeum attached to a large hall which stood to the right of a basilica-like building. The Fish Mosaic occupied the position of a companion piece, being situated in a similar nym phaeum which was attached to an entrance court erected to the left of the basilica-like building (see fig. 2). Because the floors were under water these grotto-nymphaea would hardly have been suitable for ritual functions4• Notwithstanding the severe damage which it has suffered, we may assume that the Fish Mosaic originally showed no more than a large fishing scene5. Such a marine scene may have alluded to Poseidon as well as to Aphrodite or Isis and Fortuna, so its symbolic value would have had a broad range. Fish and fish ing scenes were popular subjects in general and especially in nymphaea and summer triclinia. It is difficult therefore to attribute THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC 81 any specific religious meaning to the Fish Mosaic6. The two mosaics share the common factor that water plays an essential part in them, notably the Mediterranean sea and the flooded Nile. As such they were appropriate decorations for nymphaea in which a shallow stream of water ran over the mosaics. In the one nymphaeum the spectator who looked into the water saw the sea with fish and fishermen, while in the other he saw the inunda tion of Egypt. The Nile Mosaic was adapted to the nymphaeum in a particularly subtle way. The rocky surface of the backwall, from which water seeped, passed into the rocky landscape of Nubia in the upper part of the mosaic, and from there the Nile sprang and flowed into the inundation scene in the front part7. Furthermore both mosaics depict a large number of animals, fish or fruits, and mankind profiting from these resources, thus illustrating the fertilising power of water. In more than one respect therefore these mosaics were appropriate decorations for a nymphaeum8. In order to be able to ascertain whether it was the function of the Nile Mosaic to convey a specific religious message to the contemporary beholder, we must review the other Nilotic scenes which have been preserved from this early period. The earliest Nilotic scene after the Nile Mosaic is the Nilotic mosaic frieze from the Casa del Fauno at Pompeii, which may be dated to c. 90-80 B.C. (fig. 28)9. This shows only fauna and flora. There is a crocodile, a mongoose and a cobra, while a hippopo tamus raises its head from the water. There are ibises and various kinds of ducks . Flowers and buds of the Indian lotus and other waterplants rise from the water. We have already noted that several details show striking similarities with the Palestrina mosaic and that the respective artists must have used the same or similar models. On the other hand the picture is much simpler than the Nile Mosaic, because it shows no people or buildings. The Nilotic frieze from the Casa del Fauno originally decorated the threshold of the Alexander exedra which looked out on two peristyles and probably served as a summer triclinium. So the frieze's function seems to have been mostly to provide an exotic decoration. Parts of a painted Nilotic frieze have been preserved in the atrium of the Villa dei Misteri at Pompeii. This frieze, which may be dated to c. 70 B.C., ran along the upper part of the four walls and must have been of a considerable length. Regrettably only a few fragments have survived. They show pieces of land in 82 CHAPTER V an expanse of water. On these pieces of land there are sanctuaries, houses, bridges and people. No specific religious ceremonies have been preserved but in other respects the surviving parts of the frieze show a strong resemblance to the scenes in the Palestrina Nile Mosaic in regard to contents and composition. The position of the frieze running along the upper part of the walls, where windows might have been situated, would have created the impression that the atrium was situated in the Nile Delta rather than on the Bay of Naples. Once again the function of this frieze would seem to have been to serve as an exotic decorationio. Simplified forms of such landscapes appear next in the Second Style, for instance in a triclinium in the villa of P. Fannius Synistor at Boscoreale, which may be dated to c. 50-40 B.C. Here the Egyp tian character is rather vague and the scenes look like general river or coastal landscapes. Moreover, their generic character is enhanced by the use of a monochrome technique of painting. Nevertheless their derivation from Nilotic scenes is betrayed by the abundance of water, by the islands with their shrines, houses and some typically Egyptian features, and by the casual activities of the population: the bringing of offerings, walking, dining, fishing and the likeii. In an oecus in the Villa of Oplontis two such landscapes, this time polychrome, dating from the same period, are represented as pinakes, i.e. panel paintings (fig. 98). These are particularly inter esting because they suggest that also real panel paintings with landscape scenes existedl2. Another kind of Nilotic scene is the pygmy landscape, in which the Egyptian population is depicted as pygmies or dwarfs. A frieze with such scenes, which may be dated to c. 40-30 B.C., was situated on the upper part of the wall of the atrium of the Casa del Toro at PompeiP3. The small part of this frieze which has been preserved shows people in various occupations: travelling, shop ping, and dining, all standard motifs in Nilotic scenes. The land scape has been reduced to a minimum. The people are repre sented as dwarfs. From the same period dates a long frieze with pygmies which decorated the dado of a wall surrounding a peristyle in the Casa dello Scultore at PompeiP4• Here the Nile landscape is more elaborate and includes some buildings, boats etc. The pygmies are shown in hilarious situations, defending themselves against hippopotami and crocodiles. THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC 83 From this period on, the Egyptian population in Nilotic scenes is ever more frequently represented as dwarfs or pygmies. These grotesque figures emphasize the fertility and blissful state of Egypt created by the Nile flood, and epitomise the exotic character of that country in the eyes of the Romans. It is this kind of Nilotic scene which achieved an immense popularity in the Roman world15. From the same period we have a simple marsh scene with ducks and a crocodile in the caldarium of the Casa del Criptoportico at Pompeii. This scene is in the tradition of the Nilotic mosaic frieze from the Casa del Fauno16. Finally two small mosaic emblemata exist at Pompeii which date from the late Republican or early Augustan period. One is set in the floor of the Green Oecus opening onto the peristyle in the Casa del Menan dro, the other decorates the floor of the triclinium of the Casa di Paquius Proculus. Both show pygmies feasting in a cabin boat and a canoe in a Nilotic landscape with a hippopotamus and a croco dile, and in both cases the composition is very similar to the hippopotamus hunting scene in sections 12 and 18 of the Nile Mosaic 16 bis. From the Augustan period onward Nilotic scenes became more numerous, which is only natural since Egypt had been incorpo rated into the Roman Empire in 30 B.C. Because of this funda mental change in the relationship between Rome and Egypt the further development of the genre of Nilotic scenes falls outside our direct interestl7. From this review of Nilotic scenes we see that the Nile Mosaic of Palestrina is not only the earliest but also the most comprehen sive example of its kind. The later examples show different kinds of Nilotic scenes in which only one or other aspect is emphasized. We may distinguish landscapes which show unmistakable Nilotic features, simple landscapes with dwarfs or pygmies, plain river landscapes which are hardly Egyptian in character except for the abundance of water, and aquatic scenes which show mainly Nilotic flora and fauna. Ritual scenes, other than simple offering scenes, are notably absent1B. It appears that, while the Nile Mosaic has a strong descriptive character and offers a wealth of information on Egyptian life and religion, the genre of Nilotic scenes soon diversified into various categories in which either one or other aspect was emphasized. The only things which they all have in common are the Nile flood and its beneficial effects 84 CHAPTER V upon nature and population19. Not one of the examples discussed here shows any specific religious scene. Furthermore, it appears that in Pompeian houses Nilotic· scenes were used indiscrimi nately on walls and floors in all kinds of rooms and spaces. Nor are there indications that any of the houses in question were owned by a devotee of the Egyptian cults2o. Nilotic scenes appear in the same range of situations as other kinds of scenes such as mythological ones21. Considering the variety of Nilotic scenes and their generic character at Pompeii, and the arbitrary way in which they could be used as decorations, it is difficult to recognize in them a specific religious meaning or function. It seems more probable that they were a generally suitable form of decoration with an exotic character and suggesting well-being and affluence. The same variety in Nilotic scenes as in the Republican period may be found since the Augustan period, when their number strongly increased. They were especially popular for nymphaea, (summer) triclinia, gardens and the like, where they served to suggest coolness, exoticism and a general sense of well-being22. No Nilotic scenes have been preserved in Rome itself from before the time of Augustus. There are, however, some other examples of the use of Egyptian motifs during the first half of the first century B.C. Egyptian motifs were occasionally used as control-marks on Roman coins. They include the crown of Isis, the sistrum, the lotus flower, hippopotami and crocodiles, pyg mies fighting herons, etc.23. Although these motifs are not in themselves Nilotic scenes, they all occur in Nilotic scenes. The reason for their use is not entirely clear. It has been suggested that they served as a vehicle for veiled religious propaganda for the Egyptian cults. This seems hardly likely, however, given the official character of coins and the fact that the Egyptian cults were still private and the Senate was opposed to them. In general control-marks seem to have been chosen freely and without much thought from all aspects of daily life, including religion24. The exceptional figure of an armed goddess wearing a lotus on her helmet, on a coin of 67 B.C., may perhaps be identified as Fortuna Populi Romani with attributes of Fortuna-Isis-Tyche (see fig. 95)25. These examples of Egyptian motifs from Rome only seem to indicate that the knowledge of things Egyptian must have been fairly common in the city at that time. That would be quite THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC 85 natural considering that Egypt was already, in all but name, completely in the power of Rome 26, The next question is how did the Egyptian scenes come to Italy? Did they come expressly in connection with the cult of Isis and Sarapis or are they just a sign of the growing relationship between Italy and Egypt in general? It is now generally assumed that the Egyptian cults came to Italy along the trade route from Delos, which was the principal emporium of the Eastern Mediter ranean in the second half of the second century B.C.27. From Delos this trade route ran to Puteoli, the principal harbour of Italy, where the first Serapeum on Italian soil had already been established by 105 B.C. From Puteoli the Egyptian cults spread over Campania and Latium, and there were soon Isea in Rome and in Pompeii28• These cults, however, remained private and were viewed with suspicion by the Senate. In general their adherents belonged to the lower classes and were merchants or slaves29. While the Roman senatorial class in general may have been averse to the Egyptian cults, this does not imply that it had no interest in Egypt. Rome had had political interests in Egypt as early as the third century B.C., and after 168, when Popilius Laenas ordered Antiochus IV to retreat from Egypt, it was in fact a Roman protectorate30. From that time on, we know of frequent reciprocal missions and visits. In 164/163 Ptolemy VI Philopator stayed in Rome as a refugee in the house of his compatriot, the Alexandrian Demetrius, the topographus. In the following years several Roman delegations were sent to Alexandria to mediate between Ptolemy VI and Ptolemy VIII. In 140/139 Scipio Aemi lianus travelled with a delegation to inspect the Ptolemaic king dom as far south as Memphis and recognised its potential value if placed under efficient administration. About the same time and perhaps on the same occasion the historian Polybius, who lived in Rome, also visited Egypt. A certain Gnaios, apparently of Italic origin, was even involved in the spice trade on the Somali coast around this time. In 112 B.C. a distinguished Roman, L. Mum mius, visited Egypt, and went to see the sacred crocodiles at Arsinoe. In 116 B.C. a group of Roman visitors even travelled as far south as Philae31. From these examples it appears that in the second century B.C. Egypt became an object of Roman interest, whether political, 86 CHAPTER V commercial or tounst1c. It is probable that Roman visitors took home as souvenirs not only travel-accounts but also objects, including pictures of that fascinating exotic world, just as they brought back Alexandrian men of letters, surgeons, artists and slaves. We have already met Demetrius the topographus, who lived in Rome around 164 B.C. He was probably a painter of topographi cal scenes. Mention may be made also of a certain Serapion, who was active at Rome as a scaenographus, a painter of stage scenery, in the first half of the first century B.C., and whose name is suggestive of Egyptian origin. From the second quarter of the first century B.C. onward there is extensive evidence for the presence of Egyptians in Italy, working as slaves, artists, surgeons etc.32. A visit similar to that of Mummius to the sacred crocodiles of Arsinoe is described by Strabo XVII 1, 38, and another may have been depicted in a fragmentary mosaic now in the Antiquarium Communale in Rome. The painted pinakes in the wall-paintings of the villa of Oplontis would seem to confirm the existence of panel paintings with landscape scenes (see fig. 98)33. Naturally these political and touristic journeys between Rome and Alexandria will not have been made via Delos but more directly, from Puteoli past Sicily and along the North Mrican coast. The same route will have been used for direct commercial contacts between Rome and Alexandria, such as those involving the Alexandrian corn-fleets, a few decades later34. So it appears that in the later part of the second century B.C. the relationships between Rome and Alexandria were manifold. The Roman aristocracy fostered a political, economic and cultural interest in Egypt in a general imperialistic way. A mainly com mercial interest existed among the rising classes of merchants, which included large-scale entrepreneurs and smaller mer chants and shippers, often of foreign origin, who were usually organised into corporations according to their nationality and trade. Among the Italians we find that the entrepreneurs included members of the aristocracies of important trading-towns as Puteoli and Praeneste and even of smaller ones as Pompeii, not to mention their freedmen, often acting as their agents, and their slaves35. This cosmopolitan crowd passed through the various trading ports of the Mediterranean and converged upon the common exchange-market at Delos. In the more important ports they established trading posts and sanctuaries for their gods as THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC 87 may be illustrated by the examples at Delos and Puteoli36. It is from these sanctuaries that the eastern cults spread among the local population of these ports and among fellow-merchants, their freedmen and their slaves37. We may therefore distinguish essentially between two kinds of Roman interest in Egypt: a more general political, economic and cultural interest on the part of the Roman aristocracy and a mainly commercial interest on the part of the merchants, although of course the two do not exclude each other. A religious interest was confined to the cosmopolitan merchants, and it was through these that the Egyptian cults were spread through Italy. Because of the connection between the Egyptian cults and the foreign elements among the merchants, whose sympathies in general lay with the Populares, the Senate was hostile to the Egyptian cults38. Since there were such different attitudes to Egypt and the Egyp tian cults we must seriously reckon with the possibility that Egyp tian motifs and scenes could have different meanings according to the interest and background of the beholder. To juxtapose the two extremes: a Roman senator or a large-scale entrepreneur will have associated Egyptian motifs and scenes with the political and economic potential of that exotic country; but for a merchant shipper or a slave of Alexandrian origin they may have brought to mind the blessed land of Isis and Sarapis39. Returning to the Nilotic scenes which have been preserved at Pompeii, we have seen that they lack clear religious motifs and are mainly of a generic and exotic character. Moreover, there is no evidence that the owners of the Pompeian houses which we have discussed were particularly interested in the Egyptian cults. For people who had a serious religious interest one would expect to find sacred images, cult objects, ritual scenes etc. Actually no such scenes or objects have been preserved at all from the Republi can period. They exist, however, in considerable numbers from the Imperial period, and we can safely assume that similar scenes and objects decorated the sanctuaries and private shrines of the Egyptian gods before that time (see e.g. figs. 71, 75, 76)40. The Egyptian scenes which have been preserved at Pompeii from before the Imperial period evidently reflect the taste of a public which had a commercial and touristic interest in Egypt. The second half of the second century B.C. saw an enormous 88 CHAPTER V increase in wealth in Central Italy owing to the Roman conquest of, and trade with, the eastern Mediterranean. In Latium this is illustrated by the building of great sanctuaries like that of Praeneste. In Campania it is illustrated by the rich town houses of a minor town like Pompeii41. The Nilotic scenes in the public buildings and houses of these prospering towns will have evoked the exotic splendour of the Ptolemaic world and expressed the cosmopolitan taste and economic interest of the men who com missioned them, just as Chinoiserie has done in Western Europe since the 17th century42. When we look again at the Egyptian motifs which were used as control-marks on Roman coins, we see that only the Isis head dress and the sistrum are in fact religious in character and that the other motifs, such as the Nilotic animals, are mainly exotic in character. The only thing they have in common is that they are Egyptian. Their existence shows merely that such Egyptian and Nilotic subjects must have been fairly common also in Rome during the late Republic, just as they were at Pompeii. They only seem to be illustrative of a general interest in and knowledge of Egypt which existed in Rome at a time when it was the political centre of the Mediterranean and in fact had complete power over Egypt in everything but name43. So it appears that the Egyptian scenes and motifs which have been preserved at Pompeii and Rome from the Republican period were not manifestations of the influence of Egyptian religion. They do not seem to have come to Italy directly in combination with the Egyptian cults and through the trade with Delos. They seem to be tokens of a rapidly spreading fashion for those exotic decorations which was a result of the growing political, com mercial and cultural relations between Alexandria and Rome in general44. If we look at the Nile Mosaic again we cannot fail to notice that its salient characteristic is its descriptive character. It portrays the amazing phenomenon of the Nile flood from its origin in Aethio pia to its height in the Delta, and all its various effects and the aspects of life and society associated with it. The religious aspects, notably the ritual of Osiris are included. This comprehensive picture illustrates the happy state of Egypt due to the Nile flood. It thus has a basically religious meaning in that it portrays the trnphe of the country bestowed by Isis and Osiris and the Bene THE FUNCTION OF THE NILE MOSAIC 89 factor Gods. Nevertheless, the ritual scenes in the Nile Mosaic are not very explicit but are simplified to basic elements. Nor do they play a dominant role or occupy an obtrusive position but are distri buted in a natural manner among the generic scenes. This is indeed the reason why the religious character has never been fully understood45. The same applies to the entire genre of Nil otic scenes. Despite the fact that the ritual aspects are generally omitted, they still have a basically religious character, because they illustrate the blissful state, the truphe, conferred to Egypt by the Nile and the gods. We have seen that at Pompeii and elsewhere in the Roman world Nilotic scenes were especially favourite for those places where people chose to enjoy the delights of nature, such as sum mer triclinia, nymphaea, gardens and baths. It appears therefore that Nilotic scenes were not only exotic decorations suggesting the presence of water and coolness, but that they expressed in general terms the well-being of nature and mankind, the truphe, just like Dionysiac scenes and motifs 46. For these reasons, and assuming that the grotto containing the Nile Mosaic was a nymphaeum which adorned a public build ing, the Nile Mosaic of Palestrina must, for all its essentially religious content, in the first place be considered an early and very elaborate example of a new decorative fashion which appeared at the same time in Pompeii and presumably in Rome. This view of the Nile Mosaic seems the more probable because the Fish Mosaic, as far as we know, lacked specific religious motifs. It was mainly generic and descriptive in character, and again belongs to a class of scenes which were popular in nymphaea, summer triclinia, gardens and baths, as illustrations of the affluence of nature47. The great pictures of Egypt and Aethiopia offered by the Nile Mosaic, were presumably a monumental token of the commer cial and cultural relations which Praeneste probably maintained with Alexandria, the metropolis of the eastern Mediterranean. Praeneste was one of the important commercial towns of Latium which traded with the eastern Mediterranean via Puteoli and Delos48. In the Ptolemaic world Isis had merged with Tyche and Aphrodite into one mighty goddess who ruled the world. In Italy this great goddess was assimilated with Fortuna and Venus, the 90 CHAPTER V tutelary goddess of Roman imperatores like Sulla, Pompey and Caesar. For this reason we find that at Pompeii Fortuna and Isis were often associated or assimilated with Venus49. The assimilation of Isis-Tyche and Fortuna must therefore have been well-known, and for the contemporary beholder the Nile Mosaic must have been illustrative, or at least suggestive, of the beneficial power of Isis-Tyche-Fortuna. Considered together, the two Palestrina mosaics depict Aethiopia, Egypt and the Medi terranean. These three domains were actually the three domains of Isis, who was not only Mistress of Egypt and Aethiopia but also, from the Ptolemaic period onwards, Mistress of the sea. Isis her self is not depicted in these naturalistic scenes but her omni present power is clearly revealed because all three domains are represented in their most affluent state with animals, fish or fruits, and with mankind enjoying these delights, which the goddess seems to pour from her horn of plenty (cf. figs. 93, 97)50. Mter all, it would be only natural for Praeneste's enterprising aristocracy, which presumably commissioned the mosaics for one of their main public buildings, to choose scenes which, as common truphe motifs, were not only suitable decorations for nymphaea and which may have been found widely in late Hellenistic Italy, but could also be associated with Fortuna, the tutelary goddess of their town, to whom they owed their prosperi ty. For this purpose scenes depicting the beneficial power of Isis Tyche were ideally suited. Just like Fortuna, she was the bringer of fortune and affluence, and the protectress of navigation. In this less direct way it is possible to speak of the Palestrina mosaics as having a religious meaning51

Notes

Introduction

  • The Nile Mosaic is the earliest and most comprehensive example of an Egyptian scene from the Roman world.

  • The mosaic's purpose is debated:

    • Did it have religious significance, depicting the blessed land of Isis?

    • Or was it simply an exotic decoration?

Context of the Nile Mosaic

  • The mosaic was originally laid in a grotto-nymphaeum at Praeneste.

  • There was a supposition linking the site with the sanctuary of Fortuna Primigenia, leading to religious interpretation:**

    • Isis identified with Tyche, the Greek counterpart of Fortuna.

  • However, it is likely the site was a group of public buildings in the forum, having no connection with the sanctuary.

Companion Works and Symbolism

  • The Fish Mosaic is a companion piece situated in a similar nymphaeum.

  • Both mosaics heavily feature water, significant for their context.

  • Fish Mosaic:

    • Depicting fishing scenes, possibly referencing Poseidon, Aphrodite, or Isis.

    • Symbolically broad in messages, with no specific religious interpretation.

Functionality of Mosaics in Nymphaea

  • Both mosaics were suitable for nymphaea, where water flowed over them.

  • Viewers experienced the scenes of the Mediterranean and inundation of Egypt reflected in the waters.

Characteristics of the Nile Mosaic

  • The mosaic transitions from rocky surfaces, symbolizing the Nile's origin and its inundation scenes.

  • Depicts an abundance of fauna, flora, and human activities associated with this natural element, illustrating water's fertility.

Comparison with Other Nilotic Scenes

  • Nilotic Scene from Casa del Fauno, Pompeii (c. 90-80 B.C.):

    • Fewer details, including fauna but lacking human figures, primarily for exotic decoration.

  • Painted Nilotic Frieze from Villa dei Misteri (c. 70 B.C.):

    • Fragments showing land, sanctuaries, and human activities but without specific religious ceremonies.

  • Later scenarios depict simplified forms of landscapes with vague Egyptian themes, indicating a trend towards generic river or coastal depictions.

Pygmy Landscapes and the Evolution of Nilotic Scenes

  • Pygmy representations in murals from c. 40-30 B.C. highlight standard motifs in Nilotic scenes.

  • Increasing use of dwarfs emphasizes the fertility and bliss attributed to Egypt, reflecting Roman exoticism.

Egyptian Motifs on Roman Coins

  • Egyptian motifs used as control marks on coins (e.g., crown of Isis) but mainly decorative.

  • Some could suggest veiled propaganda for Egyptian cults but were more likely arbitrary.

Conclusion

  • Overall Implication of the Nile Mosaic:

    • The Nile Mosaic exemplifies the blend of political, commercial, and decorative interests in Roman society's fascination with Egypt.

    • It signifies the relationship between Rome and Egypt, suggesting a broader decorative trend rather than a direct religious function.

  • In Roman contexts, Nilotic scenes served more as exotic decor rather than explicit religious symbols, reflecting a complex cultural exchange driven by commerce and tourism

  1. "The Nile Mosaic is the earliest and most comprehensive example of an Egyptian scene from the Roman world."

  2. "This question can actually be applied to the whole genre of Egyptianising scenes in the Roman world."

  3. "It may be assumed that the Fish Mosaic originally showed no more than a large fishing scene."

  4. "The two mosaics share the common factor that water plays an essential part in them, notably the Mediterranean sea and the flooded Nile."

  5. "The Nile Mosaic was adapted to the nymphaeum in a particularly subtle way."

  6. "It appears that the Egyptian scenes and motifs which have been preserved at Pompeii and Rome from the Republican period were not manifestations of the influence of Egyptian religion."

  7. "The only things which they all have in common are the Nile flood and its beneficial effects upon nature and population."

  8. "The Nile Mosaic exemplifies the blend of political, commercial, and decorative interests in Roman society's fascination with Egypt."