Abstract
The aim of the present survey was an investigation of the processes implemented for conceiving and setting up three types of ancient mazes which have come down to us on various media (stone, mosaic, painting, ceramic, coins…) from Prehistory to Middle Ages (and, for some, even later). The first part of this study was devoted to the so-called ‘Cretan’ mazes, and this second part focusses on a corpus of 43 ‘Roman’ mazes ranging from Portugal and England to Cyprus and from 100 BC to AD 330. Like the other one, this type is well individualized and homogeneous; it is characterized by several similar sectors run through, clockwise or anticlockwise. An introductory study of a maze exemplifies the fundamental duality between path and walls and the various types of meanders which are to be met with. Then a general processes for setting up a Roman maze, beginning with making a regular grid, going on with filling a sector and duplicating it and ending with managing an entrance/exit device, is proposed. Variants of the general prototype are also reviewed. In particular, in the course of this work a comparative study enabled to investigate the complex and intriguing maze of Pula (Croatia), the structure of which can now be better understood.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Among the 42 mazes for which the running direction is identifiable, 12 are clockwise and 30 anticlockwise.
See Virgil’s Aeneid for the trick by which Queen Dido was able to obtain enough land to build the city of Carthage.
In this particular case, the filling of the sector is centrifugal: it includes the successive setting up of three return meanders.
As said above, the reason of this ‘Italian improvement’ is to avoid inserting an exit path.
This is a possible reason for the researchers’ confusion.
References
Balmelle, Catherine et al. 2002. Labyrinthes. In : Le décor géométrique de la mosaïque romaine. Vol. II : Répertoire graphique et descriptif des décors centrés, 126–134. Paris: Picard:
Bar-Shay, Avraham. 2011. Méthode d’analyse des labyrinthes en mosaïque romaine. O mosaico romano no centro e nas periferias: originalidades, influências e identidades. Actas do X Colloquio international da AIEMA, 353–366. Conímbriga: Instituto dos Museos e das Conservaçãos.
Darmon, Jean-Pierre and Henri Lavagne. 1977. Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule II. Province de Lyonnaise 3. Paris : CNRS.
Daszewski, Wiktor Andrzej. 1977. La mosaïque de Thésée. Étude sur les mosaïques avec représentations du Labyrinthe, de Thésée et du Minotaure. Trans. Zsolt Kiss. Warsaw: Éditions scientifiques de Pologne.
Joannès, F. 2019. Salomon et la Reine de Saba. Histoire et Civilisation 55: 72-85.
Lonegren, Sig. 1993. Les labyrinthes. Mythes traditionnels et applications modernes.. Escalquens: Dangles. Fr. trans. of Labyrinths: Ancient Myths and Modern Uses.
Mosca, Fabio. 2018. Come evitare di perdersi nel labirinto: lo schema grafico usato in due mosaici con Teseo e il Minotauro. Atti del XXIII Colloquio dell’AISCOM,C. Angelelli, C. Cecalupo, M.e. Erba, D. Massara, F. Rinaldi, eds. Roma: Quasar.
Munier, Claudine, ed. 2017. Le quartier antique du Palatium et des domus. Archéologie au collège Lumière de Besançon. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.
Parzysz, Bernard. 2020. Geometry of Ancient Mazes, Part I: ‘Cretan’ Mazes. Nexus Network Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-020-00528-7.
Phillips, Anthony. 1992. The Topology of Roman Mosaic Mazes. Leonardo Journal of Sciences 25(3-4): 321-329.
Saint-Hilaire, Paul de. 1992. L’univers secret du labyrinthe. Paris: Robert Laffont.
Saward, Jeff and Kimberly. 2020. Labyrinthos. Labyrinth and Maze Resource. labyrinthos.net, accessed 14 July 2020.
Vassal, Véronique. 2016. Influences et adoptions de schémas grecs et romains dans la mosaïque hérodienne. Atti del XIII Congreso Internacional de la AIEMA, Estudios sobre mosaicos antiguos y medievales, ed. Luz Neira Jiménez, 31–42. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix: Corpus of Roman Mazes
Appendix: Corpus of Roman Mazes
Site | Country | Date | Shape | Sect | Dir | Section 1 | Section 2 | Section 3 | Section 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Annaba | Algeria | AD 150–200 | Rectangle | 4 | C | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Avenches | Switzerl | ca AD 250 | cCrcle | 4 | A | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 |
Besançon 1 | France | AD 150–175 | Square | 4 | C | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Besançon 2 | France | AD 150–175 | Octagon | 4 | Pseudo maze | ||||
Brindisi | Italy | AD 200–250 | Square | 4 | A | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 |
Caerleon | UK | AD 200–220 | Square | 4 | C ? | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Calvatone | Italy | AD 25–50 | Square | 4 | C | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | BF |
Cherchel | Algeria | AD 180–220 | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Chusclan | France | AD 150–200 | Square | 4 | A | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 |
Cirencester | UK | AD 300–350 | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Conimbriga 1 | Portugal | AD 200–250 | Square | 4 | C | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Conimbriga 2 | Portugal | AD 150–200 | Square | 4 | C | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Cormerod | Switzerl | AD 175–225 | Circle | 8 | C | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Cremona | Italy | AD 80–120 | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | BF |
Cyrene | Libya | AD 180–220 | Square | 4 | C | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Dellys | Algeria | AD 180–220 | Square | 4 | A | E | E | E | E |
Dougga | Tunisia | AD 150–200 | Square | 4 | A | R 5 | R 5 | R 5 | R 5 |
El Asnam | Algeria | AD 328 | Square | 4 | A | E | E | E | E |
Gamzigrad | Serbia | AD 280–320 | Hexagon | 3 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | |
Giannutri | Italy | AD 150–200 | Rectangle | 4 | A | E 2 | E 2 | E 2 | E 2 |
Harpham | UK | AD 300–320 | Square | 4 | A | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Henchir-el-Faouar | Tunisia | AD 300–320 | Square | 4 | A | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Itálica | Spain | AD 140–160 | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Mactar | Tunisia | AD 199 | ½ circle | 2 | C | R 5 | R 5 | ||
Merida | Spain | AD 200–300 | Circle | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Oldcoates | UK | ? | Square | 4 | C | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Orbe | Switzerl | AD 175–200 | Square | 4 | A | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Ostia | Italy | ca AD 150 | Square | 4 | C | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Paphos 1 | Cyprus | AD 280–300 | Circle | 4 | A | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 | R 1 |
Paphos 2 | Cyprus | AD 100–200 | Circle | 4 | A | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Pompeii 1 | Italy | 80–60 BC | Square | 4 | A | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | BF |
Pompeii 2 | Italy | 80–60 BC | Rectangle | 4 | A | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 |
Pompeii 3 | Italy | 60–40 BC | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | BF |
Pompeii 4 | Italy | 60–40 BC | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | BF |
Pont-Chevron | France | AD 150–175 | Square | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Pula | Croatia | AD 100–200 | Square | 4 | Pseudo maze | ||||
Sabratha | Libya | AD 1–100 | Circle | 4 | C | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Loigsfelder | Austria | AD 275–300 | Square | 4 | C | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Sousse | Tunisia | AD 200–250 | Square | 4 | A | 2 × R 2 | 2 × R 2 | 2 × R 2 | 2 × R 2 |
St Cyr / Mer | France | ? | Circle | 4 | A | Z | Z | Z | Z |
Stolac | Bosnia | ca AD 300 | Square | 4 | A | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Taormina | Italy | AD 100–200 | Square | 4 | ? | R 2 ? | R 2 ? | R 2 ? | R 2 ? |
Thuburbo | Tunisia | AD 250–300 | Square | 4 | A | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 | R 4 |
Thysdrus | Tunisia | AD 175–225 | Circle | 4 | A | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 | R 3 |
Verdes | France | AD 200–250 | Circle | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Vienne | France | AD 200–250 | Circle | 4 | A | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 | R 2 |
Direction: C clockwise, A anticlockwise; Meander: R n returning in n registers, BF back-and-forth, C coiling (C 2 = coiling in two registers), Z zigzag.
About this article
Cite this article
Parzysz, B. Geometry of Ancient Mazes: A Synthesis Part II: ‘Roman’ Mazes. Nexus Netw J 23, 267–298 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-021-00549-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-021-00549-w