Friday, September 25, 2026

Art Eyewitness Essay: Cloud Spotting with John Constable and Alfred Stieglitz

 


Cloud Spotting with John Constable & Alfred Stieglitz

Constable's Year by Susan Owens (Thames & Hudson, 223 pages, $35)

Chasing Clouds at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Thru Feb. 28, 2027)

By Ed Voves  Original photos by Anne Lloyd

On the evening of September 12, 1821, John Constable painted a dramatic view of the sunset over Hampstead Heath.  

Constable was working outdoors. He used a palette loaded with dabs of oil paint, rather than his water color box, to create Hampstead Heath, looking toward Harrow at Sunset.

 

      John Constable,  Hampstead Heath, looking toward Harrow at Sunset, 1821

In this remarkable painting, Constable reversed the order of priority of sky and ground in landscape painting. The dramatic sky above is accorded the starring role. The soil beneath Constable's feet - and of the barely visible people traveling on the path in the foreground - is almost an afterthought.

Constable would later write of this shift of perspective. "It will be difficult to name a class of landscape in which the sky is not the key note," Constable affirmed, "the standard of scale and the chief organ of sentiment.” 



Ramsay Richard Reinagle, Portrait of John Constable, c. 1799

With this remark, John Constable, born 250 years ago, launched a hugely significant dialog with nature. In due course, our perception of the world around - and above -  us would change. Constable's "refocus" continued to resonate in works by John Singer Sargent and Alfred Stieglitz over a century later.

In this Art Eyewitness essay, I will comment on a new book from Thames & Hudson, Constable's Year by Susan Owens, a former curator at the Victoria and Albert Museum and author of a superb history of drawing. Then, we will shift our focus to the just-opened exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum, Chasing Clouds. 



To these insightful surveys, several photos by my wife, Anne, will be added, showing how sky and clouds can continue to strike an artistic "key note" - even when the vantage point is a studio or bedroom window.




Anne Lloyd, Studio Window Skyscapes, 2026

By the standards of the early nineteenth century, Constable's Hampstead Heath, mentioned above, was an oil sketch, not a finished work. Painting in the open air on the following day, September 13, 1821, Constable looked-up again at the clouds swirling overhead. Then, he made a very bold decision.

Constable decided to paint the sky.



John Constable, Study of altocumulus clouds, September 13, 1821

 No distant horizon line. No misty mountains. No path through the forest. Just sky and clouds, very accurately depicted and scientifically classified. Constable entitled his first "skyscape", Study of altocumulus clouds.

On the back of this oil on paper, Constable jotted the following notation,"13 September 1821. one o'clock. Slight wind at North West, which became tempestuous in the afternoon, With Rain all the night following."



John Constable, Cloud Study, September 25, 1821

During the remainder of the early autumn of 1821, Constable continued to paint oil sketches of the cloud-laden skies. As Susan Owens points out in Constable's Year, autumn, with its fading colors and falling leaves, little appealed to Constable. The September skies, with their "peculiar tone and beauty" were a different matter.

A year later, again in September, he was back for another season of "skying" from his favorite vantage points on Hampstead Heath. Constable painted cloud-filled skies, until he could write to his friend, Archdeacon Fisher, "I am the man of clouds."

However, another Englishman of Constable's era was also directing his attention skyward. In 1803, an amateur scientist named Luke Howard (1772-1864) published An Essay on the Modification of Clouds. In this illustrated book, Howard defined and described the cloud types with terminology still in use today: Cirrus, Cumulus and Stratus.

Constable was certainly familiar with Howard’s cloud "modification" (which then meant classification). In many respects, he was more than ready to embrace such close study of nature as an integral facet of art. In an 1836 lecture, Constable asserted:

Painting is a science, and should be pursued as an inquiry into the laws of nature. Why then may not landscape painting be considered as a branch of natural philosophy of which pictures are but the experiments?

Constable's actual practice of art was notably less definitive. He remained more a man of sentiment, rather than a practitioner of "painting as a science." 



John Constable, Hadleigh Castle, 1829

In 1829, Constable, grief-stricken over the death of his wife, painted Hadleigh Castle. Here the sky, though memorably executed, was treated as a backdrop to land and sea and the crumbling battlements erected by man.

Owen's book - compulsively readable, even for readers familiar with British art history - traces Constable's reactions to all four seasons of the year. Owens brilliantly correlates the annual rhythms of life in Regency England to Constable's creative efforts. Predictably, winter put him in a reflective, melancholy frame of mind. 

Constable had a lot more on his mind than the weather when he looked at clouds.

During the last years of his life, Constable wrestled with issues of mortality and morality. Was the sky, merely a "standard of scale" or was it "the chief organ of sentiment?” In 1839, two years after his passing, science, in the shape of photography, seemed to settle the issue. 

"From today, painting is dead," the artist Paul Delaroche exclaimed upon seeing one of the first photographs, a daguerreotype.

Delaroche's obituary for painting was premature, especially in regards to daguerreotypes. These one-of-a-kind pictures were produced from silver-coated sheets of copper, making them unsuitable for almost anything but portraits.

One of the most fascinating works of art in the Met's Chasing Clouds directly relates to the difficulties in trying to expand the range of early photography. In 1844, a pair of French "lensmen", Marie-Charles-Isidore Choiselat and Stanislas Ratel, took-up the challenge of creating a daguerreotype landscape.



Marie-Charles-Isidore Choiselat & Stanislas Ratel, Landscape, 1844

The result of this experiment is little short of miraculous. The astonishing mirror image of the cottage is a masterpiece in its own right. 

Yet, the daguerreotype of Choiselat and Ratel is an unsettling work. It is so focused on surface detail that there is little depth to the photo. And because of the slow exposure speed of daguerreotypes, not a trace of clouds can be seen. If any were in the sky at the time, these would have been moving too fast to be captured by Choiselat and Ratel! 

For artists and the scientific-minded of the Romantic era, the allure of clouds was too great to be resisted. The process of photography was still in its adolescence, when Gustave Le Gray and Charles Marville successfully addressed the problem of focusing on landscape and skyscape. 

Gustave Le Gray (1820-1884) approached this task by combining photographic negatives. This was a process already in use in studio photos, but Le Gray audaciously took it out-of-doors. Beginning in 1855, he took photos of the shoreline and the sky along France's Mediterranean coast, especially the seaport of Sète. He joined the negatives at the horizon line, almost seamlessly.



Gustave Le Gray, The Great Waves, Sète, 1857

Images like The Great Wave earned Le Gray international acclaim. He had succeeded in creating photographs with expertly focused expanses of sky and of land & sea. Moreover, he was able to evoke the pictorial interest and emotional impact of paintings like Constable's Hadleigh Castle.

While Le Gray was preoccupied with his remarkable combination technique, Charles Marville took some time-off from photographing the architecture of Paris to do a little "cloud spotting" for himself.

Marville was anything but a "romantic" photographer. His eye for precision and expert camera work would earn him the commission from Napoleon III to document the demolition of vast swathes of old Paris by Baron Haussmann in order to make way for the boulevards and public spaces of the new "city of light" Paris.

Yet, Marville was intrigued by the masses of clouds he could see from the window of his studio on the rue Saint Dominique. With the dome of the hospital, Les Invalides, as the center point, Marville adjusted the camera lens to focus on the skies, leaving the lower reaches of the scene in shadow. Since the silhouette of Les Invalides was instantly recognizable, the photo succeeded without the need to combined negatives.


Charles Marville, Cloud Study, Paris (top)1855-56; (below)1856-57

A year later, Marville tried again. This time, he achieved a more balanced focus of cloud structure and of architectural detail in the streets below. Given, the technology of the time, this ranks as one of the great achievements of early photography.

Both Le Gray and Marville were "pushing the envelope" of what was feasible for photographers during the 1850's. Though innovations in camera design and film quality were made later, a gulf continued to exist between vision and practice for much of the nineteenth century.

As Chasing Clouds at the Met shows, photography did not kill painting, even when it came to depicting clouds. Many artists continued to follow Constable's lead and kept painting the skies above. 



John Singer Sargent, Clouds, 1897

One of my favorites in the Chasing Clouds exhibition is a watercolor by John Singer Sargent. Sargent's Clouds was painted in 1897, exactly one year before a major technological innovation which would change photography and cloud spotting forever.

A new hand-held camera, the Graflex single-lens-reflex, was introduced by the Folmer and Schwing Manufacturing Company of New York City in 1898. Though bulky-looking to modern eyes, the Graflex had a rapid-shutter speed and portability that Gustave Le Gray and Charles Marville could only have dreamed of using.

In the hands of a skilled photographer, the Graflex was capable of producing masterpiece-caliber pictures. In the hands of Alfred Stieglitz (1864-1946), it did. 



Clara Sipprell, Alfred Stieglitz, 1932

Stieglitz used a Graflex to create his iconic The Steerage in 1907. A decade and a half later, Stieglitz tilted his Graflex upward and began taking cloud photos. Initially, he called this series, Music - a Sequence of Ten Cloud Photographs. Then, as the number of cloud photos escalated, the title was changed to Equivalents. 



 Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent,1924

Stieglitz prints of the Equivalent photos are prized possessions of a number of American art museums. But they cannot be shown on a long-term basis. Thus, Metropolitan Museum is doing art lovers a great service by presenting twenty-one Equivalents for their close inspection. Opportunities like this do not often occur.

In a short essay, published in 1923, Stieglitz explained his motivation for taking cloud photos:

I wanted to photograph clouds to find out what I had learned in 40 years about photography. Through clouds to put down my philosophy of life—to show that my photographs were not due to subject matter—not to special trees, or faces, or interiors, to special privileges—clouds were there for everyone. 

Thus, in looking toward the clouds, Stieglitz was grappling with Constable's dilemma. When depicting the skies, is the artist's goal to establish a "standard of scale" or to gain access to "the chief organ of sentiment?” 

Stieglitz' answer was one of ironclad certainty, nothing is "due to subject matter... clouds were there for everyone." 

Perhaps unconsciously, this assertion provides a clue for the way that the clouds became less-and-less identifiable and the images more cryptic as the Equivalent series evolved. Some of the cloud-filled skies look the ripples in a stream of water or a crust of ice on a frosted window in winter.



Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent, 1926


Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent, 1926

Other photos bore little resemblance to anything, including clouds. This ambiguity would lead to applause for Stieglitz from the connoisseurs of modern art and the embrace of the Equivalents as an important addition to the growing body of Abstract art. 

Stieglitz' effort to use cloud study to open a portal to personal feelings and insights was certainly a heroic endeavor. It took place over an extended period, 1922 to 1931. Over four hundred sky and cloud photos were taken, some of which were quickly presented in exhibitions such as Seven Americans in 1925 at the Anderson Galleries in New York. Others were not published or exhibited until many years later. 

Stieglitz' cloud photography was something of an on-going venture during his lifetime. Might we then interpret the Equivalents as an open-ended, never officially closed endeavor? Might we not add some of our own renderings of the ethereal realm above our heads?

Here to answer these questions and to conclude our essay is a selection of Anne's cloud studies. 


                                                                                   
                                                                                        


Anne Lloyd, Sky & Cloud Studies, 2022, 2024 & 2025  

There is no doubt in my mind, reflecting on Anne's photos, that Constable was correct in stating that the sky supplies the "keynote" of landscape art.




And clouds? Stieglitz was right, too. The clouds are "there for everyone."

***

Text: Copyright of Ed Voves, all rights reserved                                                                                          

Original photography, copyright of Anne Lloyd, all rights reserved

Book Cover of Constable’s Year by Susan Owens Courtesy of Thames & Hudson

Promotional Image for the Chasing Clouds exhibition, Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, NYC

The Equivalent photos by Alfred Stieglitz, used in this review, are from the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago. These are comparable to those on display in the Metropolitan Museum’s exhibition, Chasing Clouds. The Met’s Stieglitz photos are currently embargoed for use in Internet articles and reviews.

Introductory Image:

Anne Lloyd, Photo (2014) A cloud study made at Haworth, Yorkshire, UK, near the Bronte Parsonage Museum.

John Constable Hampstead Heath, looking toward Harrow at Sunset, 1821 Oil on paper: 24.1 x 29.8 cm. (9 ½ x 11 ¾ in.) Private collection. Courtesy of Thames & Hudson

Ramsay Richard Reinagle, Portrait of John Constable, c.1799 Oil on canvas: 76.2 cm × 63.8 cm (30.0 in × 25.1 in) National Portrait Gallery, London.

Anne Lloyd, Photo (2026) Studio Window Skyscapes, 2026.

John Constable, Study of altocumulus clouds, September 13, 1821. Oil on paper: 24.8 x 30.3 cm. (9 7/8 x 11 ½ in.) Yale Center for British Art. B1981.25.156

John Constable, Cloud Study, September 25, 1821. Oil on paper: 24.8 x 30.3 cm. (9 7/8 x 11 ½ in.) Yale Center for British Art. B1981.25.156 Courtesy of Thames & Hudson

John Constable, Hadleigh Castle, 1829. Oil on canvas: 122 x 164.5 cm. (48 1/8 x 64 7/8 in.) Yale Center for British Art. B1977.4.42Courtesy of Thames & Hudson

Marie-Charles-Isidore Choiselat & Stanislas Ratel, Landscape, 1844. Daguerreotype: 16.4 x 21.7 cm (6 7/16 x 8 9/16 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art. #1994.417J

Gustave Le Gray, The Great Wave, Sète, 1857. Albumen silver print from two glass negatives: 33.7 x 41.4 cm (13 1/4 x 16 5/16 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art. #1976.646

Charles Marville, Cloud Study, Paris (top) 1855-56. Albumen silver print from glass negative: 15.4 x 21 cm (6 1/16 x 8 1/4 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art. #2005.100.353; (below) 1856-57. Albumen silver print from glass negative: 16.7 x 20.6 cm (6 9/16 x 8 1/8 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art. #1987.1094

John Singer Sargent, Clouds, 1897. Watercolor on white wove paper: 35.6 x 25.2 cm. (19 x 9 15/16 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art #50.130.30

Clara Sipprell, Alfred Stieglitz, 1932. Gelaton Silver Print: Image Sheet: 22.3 x 17.6 cm. (8 ¾ x 6 15/16 in.) National Portrait Gallery, Washington D.C. NPG 82.196

Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent, 1924.Gelatin silver print: Image: 9.6 × 12.1 cm (3 13/16 × 4 13/16 in.); Paper: 10.1 × 12.7 cm (4 × 5 in.): Art Institute of Chicago. Alfred Stieglitz Collection. #1949.793

Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent, 1926. Gelatin Silver print. Image: 11.9 × 9.3 cm (4 11/16 × 3 11/16 in.) Art Institute of Chicago. Alfred Stieglitz Collection. #1949.809

Alfred Stieglitz, Equivalent, 1926. Gelatin Silver print: Image: 11.6 × 9.2 cm (4 5/8 × 3 5/8 in.)Art Institute of Chicago. Alfred Stieglitz Collection. #1949.809

Anne Lloyd, Photos. Sky & Cloud Studies, 2022, 2024 & 2025

Anne Lloyd, Photo (2025) November Clouds, 2025.

   

Saturday, September 12, 2026

Art Eyewitness Book Review: Uncovering Antioch by Robert Kanigel

 

                       

Uncovering Antioch

By Robert Kanigel

Simon & Schuster/383 pages/$30

Reviewed by Ed Voves

The 1930's excavation of the ancient city of Antioch by archaeologists from Princeton University, with support of the French government, is one of the great success stories in the recovery of the material remains of antiquity. It is also an example of the proverb, "be careful what you wish for - you might get it."

When the Antioch expedition was first conceived in the late 1920's, excitement over the 1922 discovery of the tomb of King Tutankhamun was still high. Likewise, a joint British Museum/University of Pennsylvania expedition was conducting a "dig" of the ancient city of Ur, in southern Iraq. Fabulous artifacts, including some believed to be directly relevant to the Bible, were being unearthed. 

Antioch, located in Syria, was the Roman Empire's third city in size and importance. Though located in a fertile, climate-friendly region, Antioch was unknowingly built astride a geological fault line. It was devastated by a massive earthquake in 526. The citizens of Antioch rebuilt their beloved metropolis to some degree, but it never fully recovered. 

What treasures, buried by the killer quake, might lie under the ruins of Antioch?

The Princeton archaeologists certainly recovered phenomenal works of art during the eight years they spent at Antioch, 1932-39. But, as Robert Kanigel's compelling account of the excavations relates, these discoveries were overwhelmingly of one artistic genre. Moreover, it was a type of art which the Princeton scholars and their French colleagues had not expected to find, certainly not in the vast numbers which they discovered.

Mosaics ... Mosaics and, yet more, mosaics.



A 1932 photo from the Antioch excavations, showing clearing of the floor of a building known as the Atrium House. The mosaic, at left, is the Dancing Satyr, now in the collection of the Baltimore Museum of Art.



The Dancing Satyr Mosaic (left) before being removed from the Atrium House floor and, now, as it appears at the Baltimore Museum of Art.

The Princeton archaeologists unearthed entire mosaic floors, covered with intricate depictions of scenes from Greek mythology. Walkways and garden paths decorated with eye-dazzling geometric patterns. All composed of small fingernail-sized pieces of stone or glass, called tesserae.


The Dancing Satyr Mosaic from the Atrium House (detail) 

According to Kanigel, three hundred mosaics were excavated during the eight-year "dig" at Antioch. It was as if 
Goethe's poem,The Sorcerer's Apprentice, had come true. The Princeton team kept digging, the mosaics kept appearing. Local landowners raised the rental fees for the fields surveyed as likely sites for new discoveries... and the "dig" resumed.

At the height of the annual campaigns, in the mid-1930's, so many mosaics had been unearthed that they were stacked-up against nearby walls (below), as if they had just been massed-produced in a workshop or factory. 



A color photo of mosaics being readied for shipment to the museums which had financially-backed the Antioch excavations, 1932-39

Some of the Antioch mosaics were colossal in size. The Worcester Art Museum's Hunt Floor Mosaic measures slightly over 246 by 281 feet (625.8 x 716.2 cm.) and weighs around 1200 lbs.



Gallery view of the Worcester Art Museum's Hunt Floor Mosaic

The Princeton team should not have be surprised that mosaics were a major feature of Antioch's culture. Pompeii, by comparison, had many well-known mosaics. It was the content of the Antioch mosaics and the dates of their creation which raised the eyebrows of the excavators and of the scholarly community reading the annual reports from the field. 

The subject matter depicted on the Antioch mosaics was almost entirely devoted to Greek gods and goddesses. In Christian parlance it was "pagan" art. 



Fragment of a Floor Mosaic depicting Tethys in a Marine Background, 
c. 250-275. Collection of the Baltimore Museum of Art

This was no small point. Antioch was one of the earliest cities where Christians established congregations. In fact, the Acts of the Apostles, 11:26, affirms that Antioch was the first place where the followers of Jesus were called Christians. Two of the most important Christian theologians of the post-Apostolic age, St. Ignatius and St. John Chrysostom, were from Antioch.

Yet, no Christian art works or artifacts, of any real significance, were ever unearthed during the 1930's excavations. Nor did the Princeton team ever discover the remains of a Christian church, many of which certainly existed.

This is indeed puzzling. Most of the mosaics excavated in Antioch date to the third through sixth centuries. During all this period, Christianity was in the ascent, while belief in the gods and goddesses of Olympus was fading away. 

What caused this perplexing failure to create public art matching Christian piety in Antioch? Was it a case of the age-old dilemma, "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak"?

Saints and sinners do figure in Kanigel's account, though none of the latter are especially culpable. Kanigel's protagonists date more from the twentieth century than antiquity. They share in the familiar strengths and weaknesses of modern times, giving Kanigel plenty to work with in shaping an enthralling narrative.

Uncovering Antioch is an astutely written account of academic "politics", international diplomacy and personal ambition. As readers of Kanigel's earlier books know, he has an almost uncanny knack of taking an unconventional subject and explaining it with insight and elan.

In the case of Uncovering Antioch, Kanigel performs a "magic-trick" of sustained narrative brilliance. He summons the ancient past to life, evokes the "between-the wars" era of the 1920's and 30's, recounts the epic eight-year "dig" at Antioch and then ties-up the "loose ends" in such a way that both the general reader and the scholar of archaeology will comprehend all of the arcane details.

The saga of the Antioch excavations can only be briefly reprieved here. In 1927, a Princeton academic, Charles Rufus Morey, launched the bold enterprise when he learned that the French were considering an expedition to Antioch. France governed Syria as part of the post-World War I settlement, but needed funding to carry out the "dig."

Morey struck a deal with the French. He promised to finance the effort for two digging "campaigns, beginning in 1932, and recruit American team members for the excavations. By the terms of the agreement, the French and the Americans would each get a third of whatever treasures would be unearthed. The remaining third would be donated to a new, projected museum in Syria.

What the Princeton/French team needed was a sensational discovery which would grab international news headlines and generate cash flow to keep the "dig" going. They got their wish almost immediately when the astonishing mosaic, The Judgement of Paris, was unearthed in 1932. Dating to the era of the Roman emperors, Trajan and Hadrian, c. 115 to 150, this incomparable mosaic was sent to the Louvre.

 

The Judgement of Paris mosaic, c. 115 to 150



Detail of The Judgement of Paris mosaic, c. 115 to 150

After that, the mosaics kept coming and coming. But Uncovering Antioch is not a mosaic-driven story, despite the wealth of knowledge and insight which Kanigel provides for these ancient artworks. This is primarily a story of human dynamics.



The "Main Street Dig" excavations to determine the course of Antioch's main concourse, buried under layers of sediment over the centuries

Like all great story-tellers, Kanigel finds a way into the minds and souls of the individuals he writes about. Like the heroes at Troy, they went out to the dusty, sometimes flooded, fields around Antioch for year-after-year in what was truly an epic endeavor.



A 1933 photo showing some of the participants in the Antioch excavations.  At left, in suit and tie, is the first director, Clarence Fisher; seated at right is William "Sandy" Campbell, who succeeded him in 1934. Standing behind his wife & son, is Jean Lassus.

In the above photograph, we see several of the remarkable team who rescued the Antioch mosaics from their centuries-long confinement below ground.There is the taciturn Clarence Fisher, a specialist in Egyptology who led the initial campaigns, his charismatic successor, William "Sandy" Campbell, and the charming, yet thoroughly professional, French archaeologist, Jean Lassus, later a hero of the World War II anti-Nazi Resistance.

Among the many notable protagonists of Uncovering Antioch, it should be noted, is the author himself.



      Robert Kanigel, author of Uncovering Antioch  

Kanigel, a man of many accomplishments, is also an "amateur" mosaicist. His personal commentary on making mosaics - of modest dimensions, no floor-sized hunting scenes - enlivens the account of the aftermath of the 1930's dig. 

Even more worthy of note are Kanigel's reflections on the emotional impact of working with and studying mosaics from antiquity. In a moving passage, he writes:

Early in my evolving fellowship with the mosaics, as I encountered them on museum walls, online, or in the pages of books, I developed genuine intimacy with only a few of them. But with time, seen repeatedly and in varied contexts, they together worked their way into me, with their gods and goddesses, warriors, heroes, Greek inscriptions, animals wild and domestic, food, drink, revelry, jewels, scenes sweet and grotesque, wild hair, piercing eyes...

I positively agree with these insights on the way that ancient works of art can "work their way" into one's mind and thoughts. In my case, it is the Fayum mummy portraits which I regularly examine at the Metropolitan Museum of Art that have "worked their way into me."

As I finished reading Uncovering Antioch, I could not help but compare one of the  Fayum portraits from the Met with a type of mosaic discussed in the book. These are termed "personifications." Kanigel describes them as "well-coiffed and bejeweled woman of imposing aspect." 

These stylish beauties are posed in conjunction with a word in Greek signifying a special attribute or desired aspect of the "good life" of this world.



At left, a "personification" mosaic from Antioch, Agora, contrasted with a Fayum Mummy portrait (photo by Anne Lloyd, 2019)

An especially impressive "personification" from the collection of the Worcester Art Museum shows a young woman with the inscription "Agora" above her, denoting "abundance of the marketplace."

I have yet to visit the Worcester Art Museum (WAM) and meet "Lady Agora" in person. After looking - and looking - at her via WAM's website, I can only shake my head in wonder. She is an allegorical figure, yet her physical presence is palpable. She even has the "strong eye, weak eye" which is visible in many a living human countenance.



Did a real woman from Antioch pose for this "personification", as the Egyptian woman did (either before or after death) in the case of the Met's Fayum portrait? 

If both images depict real women, then both died well-onto two thousand years in the past. Yet so vivid, so "alive" are these portraits - as is the lively, insightful text of Uncovering Antioch - that two thousand years ago seems like yesterday.

***

Text: Copyright of Ed Voves, all rights reserved

Archival photos courtesy of the Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes. https://ochre.lib.uchicago.edu/antioch                                                                                                                                                    

 Introductory Image: Cover art of of Uncovering Antioch by Robert Kanigel, 2026. Courtesy of Simon & Schuster

Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes.  Floor of the triclinium of Atrium House being cleared, 1932.  Photograph N108

Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes. The Dancing Satyr Mosaic before being removed from the Atrium House floor.  Photograph N111

Dancing Satyr Mosaic from the Atrium House (Fragment of floor mosaic depicting a dancing satyr), Early 2nd century. Mosaic: Stone, glass, and lime mortar, 73 5/8 x 44 1/2 x 2 7/8 in. (187 x 113 x 7.3 cm.) Baltimore Museum of Art, Antioch Subscription Fund. #1933.52.2.

Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes. Color photograph of mosaics from Antioch being prepared for shipment. Photo by G.E. Kidder Smith.  Photograph ANT PH KS 8015.

Gallery view of the Hunt Floor Mosaic gallery at the Worcester Art Museum.   https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mosaics,_Worcester_Art_Museum_-_IMG_7443.JPG

Fragment of floor mosaic depicting Tethys in a Marine Background, c. 250-275. Mosaic: Stone and lime mortar, 76 1/4 x 53 5/8 x 2 5/16 in. (193.7 x 136.2 x 5.9 cm.) Baltimore Museum of Art

Mosaic of the Judgment of Paris, from Antioch on the Orontes, 115-150 AD. Mosaic (polychrome):196 cm x 196 cm x 8 cm. Estimated weight: 120 kg. Louvre Museum, Paris.

Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes. Photograph of the Main Street dig. Workmen placing shoring timbers in postion. Photograph N294.

Committee for the Investigation of Antioch-on-the-Orontes. Staff of 1933 Season. Photo N1269b. 

Photograph of Robert Kanigel. Courtesy of Simon & Schuster

Floor Mosaic of Personification of Agora (Abundance of the Marketplace), late 4th century. Mosaic: marble, limestone and glass embedded in lime mortar: 80.6 x 98.4 cm (31 3/4 x 38 3/4 in.) Worcester Art Museum, funded by bequests of Rev. Dr. Austin S. Garver and Sarah Garver.

Anne Lloyd, (Photo 2019) Portrait of a Young Woman in Red (detail), c. 90-120 AD. A.D. 90–120. Encaustic on limewood with gold leaf: H. 38.1 x W. 18.4 cm (15 x 7 1/4 in.) Metropolitan Museum of Art.