The approach taken durante constructing Chart 2 was sicuro reallocate the sarcophagi catalogued as Christian but lacking Christian iconography

anche., following the proportions established before this incremental expansion. The process (more fully explained con the Appendix) is generous onesto the pagans. Instead of the twelve late pagan sarcophagi cited by Dresken-Weiland, the Chart 2 tempo include 120. The marcatura of this exercise was not preciso resolve but rather preciso circumvent the thorny and ultimately insoluble problem of classification.

The evolution of populations and sarcophagi as represented in Charts 1 and 2 are directionally similar but the curves fall more steeply durante Chart 2. Footnote 5 The sharper plunge of its upper line reflects and illustrates the decline of the Roman sarcophagus habit and its ultimate disappearance early in the fifth century. The collapse of the bottom line, asymptotically approaching niente, points puro per more rapid and totalizing Christianization of the monuments than of their potential occupants. Chart 3 represents this discrepancy more directly, recasting the scadenza in the first two charts puro compagno pagan deaths with pagan sarcophagi.

They were first placed within the half-century date ranges and then allocated between pagan and Christian applying the respective percentages otherwise determined, i

These percentages should not be taken literally; the purpose here is not preciso measure the disparity between demography and the material record but merely to support its existence. Even at this coarse level of granularity, the dissonance is apparent, corroborating the sense per the literature that there are ‘not enough’ late pagan sarcophagi.

The bars in Chart 3 could be levelled either by lowering the percentage of pagan deaths or by raising the percentage of pagan sarcophagi. The demographic assumptions are certainly open puro challenge; there is, con particular, giammai consensus regarding the rate of Christianization. The range of options, however, provides insufficient leeway preciso resolve the discrepancy. MacMullen ( Reference MacMullen 1984: 81) thought Rome still ‘more pagan than Christian until the 390s’; such an estimate would considerably widen the sarcophagus gap. Stark ( Reference Stark 1996: 7) put the tipping point for the Colmare as verso whole closer esatto 350, which might slightly narrow it. Christian conversion in the upper income strata might have been verso bit slower than assumed, but not likely much faster.

Thus, the balance of this article addresses the https://www.datingranking.net/it/single-parent-match-review/ other bars on the chart, those representing the pagan sarcophagus percentage. Three categories of explanation will be considered. The first attempts puro eliminate the disequilibrium by altola-tuning the archaeological record: searching for more pagan sarcophagi outside the catalogues or, following per conjecture proposed by Paul Veyne (on which, see below), revising the canone chronology. Per second option is puro accept the material supremazia as accurately reflecting a precipitous decline sopra fourth-century production, presumably resulting from per shift in pagan mentalities. Neither erroneous interpretation of the supremazia nor insufficient pagan production, however, provides an adequate explanation for the sarcophagus deficit. Instead, the imbalance between Christian and non-Christian monuments will be ascribed esatto a difference in survival rates, the result of per bias over the longue duree favouring the preservation of Christian imagery.

CORRECTING THE Primato

Neither the accuracy nor the completeness of the archaeological record is entirely satisfactory. One way to close the fourth-century pagan sarcophagus gap would be esatto find more pagan sarcophagi. The most obvious source is within the large number dubiously classified as Christian, but that group has already been scoured mediante the construction of the scadenza. Another place sicuro immagine is outside the catalogues. Not all surviving sarcophagi and fragments have been published in accessible and convenient form, or at all; however, the lacunae are mostly irrelevant. Proposed or delayed additions onesto the ASR series, sopra particular, would mainly include sarcophagi that are either too early or extra-metropolitan. Footnote 6 Of potentially greater concern are motifs that can escape publication, notably portraits and strigils.