Roman Baths Origin

The Genesis of the Roman Public Bath: Recent Approaches and Future Directions
Author(s): Garrett G. Fagan

Source: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 105, No. 3 (Jul., 2001), pp. 403-426
Published by: Archaeological Institute of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/507363 .
Accessed: 20/03/2013 21:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Archaeology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Genesis of the Roman Public Bath:
Recent Approaches and Future Directions
GARRETT G. FAGAN
Abstract strengths and weaknesses but also future directions

The problem of the origins and earlydevelopment of for further research.
the Roman public bath has proven an intractableone for Before proceeding, it must be appreciated that
classical archaeologists. In the absence of hard ancient the main problem facing an investigation into the
evidence, many modern propositions have been put for-
ward to explain the process of development. In this pa- early history of Roman baths is the sparsity of source
per, the six most influential of these approaches are pre- material, so that a handful of available archaeologi-
sented and critiqued for their strengths and weaknesses. cal sites has tended to be used as a basis for extrap-
It is found that none is sufficient in itself to explain the olating general schemes of early development. The
appearance of the Roman-stylebath but that most ad- issue of typicality has usually not been seriously
vance the analysis in some measure. Consideration of
the often bypassed literary and epigraphic material is considered.2 Similarly, literary testimony either has
also included to help identify the third and second cen- been glossed over or addressed only in the most
turyB.C. as the crucialperiod in the historyof this build- general fashion.3 The epigraphic evidence, which
ing type's evolution. Finally,it is argued that the case for derives from a period when bathing culture appears
Campania remains the strongest, but not (as often well entrenched in Roman life, is largely uninfor-
claimed) as the place where Roman baths exclusively
evolved. Rather, Campania provided an apt context for mative as to origins but offers contemporary docu-
the final appearance of an architecturalgenre that had mentary evidence as to use and construction from
demonstrable roots extending farther afield and deeper the late second century B.C. onward. Overall, these
into the past. Throughout, directions for future research difficulties inherent in the early evidence have re-
are suggested.* sulted in a greater latitude for varied modern in-
terpretations.
In the recent surge of work on Roman baths, the In any investigation, it is essential to be clear what
problem of origins and early development ranks one is looking for. The truly vital question, there-
high among the most contentious and insoluble fore, is what constituted a Roman-style public bath
issues.' In the absence of a consensus, a variety of in contrast to, for example, a Greek one. Two fea-
propositions has been advanced to explain the tures define the Roman bath: first, it comprises gra-
unusual form of the typical Roman bath, with its dations of heat in a clear sequence of rooms (usual-
system of variously heated rooms and communal ly termed in modern studies frigidarium, tepidari-
bathing pools. It is the purpose of this paper to um, caldarium) that channels the bather purpose-
collate, present, and analyze these propositions, fully from one room to the next; second, the Ro-
and thereby help identify not only their individual man-style bath features heated communal bathing
*Iwould like to thank the Researchand GraduateStudies en 1993; Pasquinucci1987;Weber 1996;Yegul 1992. There
Officeand the Institutefor the Artsand HumanisticStudiesat have also been numerous articleson the subject, especially
Penn StateUniversityforsupportingthe researchforthispaper those byDeLaine 1988, 1989,1992,1993,1999. (Mostof these
with substantialfunding in the summer of 1998. Partsof this worksfeaturediscussionsof the problemof originsandwillbe
paperwere deliveredorallyat variousinstitutionsand profes- referredto in more detail below.) In 1993 the International
sional meetings, and I thank all the commentatorsfor their Associationfor the StudyofAncientBathswasestablished,and
input.Variouscolleaguesreadearlierversionsof the paper (or two international conferences on Roman baths have been
partsof it) and offered insightfuland substantialcomments, staged in 1992 and 1996. DeLaine (1988, 14; 1993, 354-5)
notablyP.B. HarveyJr.,RJ.A.Wilson,and the editor and two has brieflysurveyedthe disagreement over the question of
anonymousrefereesof the AJA.Mythanksalso go to A.I.Wil- origins.
son, N. DeHaan, H. Manderscheid,and A.O. Koloski-Ostrow 2For a
lengthier discussionof the evidence for the baths
for assistancewith bibliography,illustrations,and other mat- and the difficultiesof interpretingit, see Fagan 1999b.
ters.None of the above,naturally,are responsiblefor any er- 3E.g.,Yegul (1992, 48-91) verybrieflysurveysthe testimo-
rorsthatremain. ny of Plautus,Varro,Livy,and otherswho allude to earlybath-
'The mainworksare:Brodner1992;DeLaine1997;DeLaine ing conditions (infra,pp. 419-21). In contrast,Nielsen (1993,
andJohnston 1999; Ecole francaise de Rome 1991; Fagan 1:6-36, esp. 1:28-30) addressesthis evidence more fully but
1999a;Heinz 1984;Manderschied1988;Merten 1983;Niels- withoutclose criticalanalysis.
403
AmericanJournal ofArchaeology105 (2001) 403-26

404 GARRETT G. FAGAN [AJA 105
pools (termed solia or alvei).4 It would be fair to say

that a truly Roman bath cannot be identified unless
both of these elements are present in conjunction.
The search for origins must not therefore become
sidetracked by optional secondary features that
came to be associated with Roman baths as they
developed, such as exercise grounds, (palaestrae),
sweat baths (sudatoria or laconica), strigiling rooms
(destrictaria), ball courts (sphaeristeria), or open-air
pools (natationes or piscinae). All of these elements
are indeed found in Roman baths, but they are not
in themselves defining features of those baths. What
is characteristic of Roman practice is communal
bathing in heated pools deployed in a sequential
arrangement of heated rooms. For the proper func-
tioning of this sort of bathing establishment, the
underfloor heating technique called the hypocaust
(termed suspensura)5 proved to be particularly ef-
fective. The suspensura raised the entire floor on
pillars and, in a subsequent development, rendered 0 10_
the walls hollow to produce rooms all but lined with _j -
surfaces radiating heat. So many Roman baths fea- m

nn
ture a version of the suspensura that the first ap-
Fig. 1. Gortys.Groundplanof the "ThermalEstablishment."
pearance of the hypocaust has been considered by (After Ginouves 1959, fig. 187)
many researchers as synonymous with the genesis
of the Roman-style bath itself. This is certainly the nored the question of the hypocaust in the Stabian
case with those who propose Sergius Orata or the Baths.8 In reality, Orata's contribution to the devel-
Greeks as the progenitors of the form. opmental process is a moot point: a full suspensura
has been identified in the Stabian Baths well be-
THE HYPOCAUST, SERGIUS ORATA, AND THE
fore Orata; the physical evidence from Greek sites
GREEK CONNECTION
demonstrates that a form of the hypocaust existed
Until quite recently, the issue of the origins of up to 150 years before his activities; and there is
Roman baths did not appear to be an issue at all. underlying uncertainty in identifying Orata's pen-
Ancient literary notices about a certain Sergius siles balineae with the hypocaust in the first place.
Orata seemed conclusive: Orata, living near Baiae Indeed, there is reason to suspect that Orata's de-
in Campania in the early first century B.C., is re- vice had nothing to do with human bathing at all.9
ported to have invented pensiles balineae (literally, The greatest challenge to Orata's central role in
"hanging baths") which he fitted into villas to great developing the hypocaust came from R. Ginouves,
profit.6 In the minds of many the pensiles balineae who, in two influential studies, argued that the
were none other than the hypocaust, leading to the Greeks had created the hypocaust and, along with
conclusion that Roman baths must have appeared it, the style of bathing commonly ascribed to the
in Campania after Sergius Orata.7 The Stabian Baths Romans. On this view, the Romans, as in so many
at Pompeii, with their second-century B.C. hypoc- other cultural respects, merely took over a form from
aust predating Orata, generally did not feature in the Greeks, elaborated it, and built on a larger
the discussion. The literary sources seemed clear scale.'? For Ginouves, Orata did no more than in-
enough, and some proponents of Orata's role ig- troduce this heating system to the Romans, or tam-
4See DeLaine1988,15-6; Heinz 1984,51;Yegul1992,33-5. detailsareunclear.

5See Sen. Ep.90.25; Vitr.De arch.5.10.2. 8Di Capua (1940, 97-115) offers a good example: the hy-
6Fagan(1996) andWikander(1996) collectand discussthe pocaust is Orata's invention (97-9); the StabianBaths are
pertinentreferencesbut come to divergentconclusionsabout mentioned in connectionwithGreekgymnasia(100) andwith
them. medicinalbathing (115), but the date of the hypocaustin the
7Forearlier,largelyItalianworkspropoundingthisview,see facilityis not addressed.
DeLaine 1988, 14-5. See also Benedum 1967;Hilton Turner "Fagan1996.
1947-1948; Nielsen 1993, 1:20-2. Wikander (1996) consid- 0Ginouves 1959, 1962.
ers Orataas the inventorof the system,though he admitsthe

2001] THE GENESIS OF THE ROMAN PUBLIC BATH 405
pered with it in some unspecified way." On close changing room (B), and thence to the central room
inspection, however, his case is far from cogent. (C). Here a series of possibilities presented them-
The two cardinal buildings for Ginouves's theory selves. One could wash at the fountains in the cen-
are the "thermal establishment" at Gortys in Arcadia tral room (0 and A in room C) or avail of various
(fig. 1) and the "Greek hypocaust bath" at Olympia amenities, such as the immersion tubs (D), the sweat
(fig. 2). At Gortys, Ginouves was convinced that the room (E), the waiting area (F), or the hip-baths in
two requisite components of the Roman bath could the adjacent tholos (G). The presence of the hip-
be identified in a building dated to the middle of baths placed the building firmly in the Greek tra-
the third century B.C., while at Olympia a Greek an- dition, since these curious little tubs are the hall-
tecedent for the developed Roman hypocaust could mark of Greek bathing practice.'4 For Ginouves, this
be found dating to ca. 100 B.C. At a stroke, not only ground plan constituted a recognizable series of
was Sergius Orata's contribution to the history of baths rooms and was the final proof that the Greeks had
placed under a cloud, but the Greeks could now be fully developed all the elements of Roman baths.15
shown, through a direct line of descent linking Gor- The construction date was firmly fixed by numis-
tys, Olympia, and Roman baths, to have fully evolved matic and ceramic evidence at the fourth or early
the form of the public bath that had previously been third century B.C., with the hypocaust installed in
considered peculiarly Roman. While an exhaustive the middle of the third century B.C.16
description of the two buildings is unnecessary here,
some discussion of their form is essential if the thrust
of Ginouves's argument is to be assessed.
Gortys, Arcadia
The features of the "thermal establishment" at
Gortys that most impressed Ginouves were the so-
phistication of the heating and the water supply/
drainage systems, and the complexity of the inter-
nal room arrangement (fig. I).12 The underfloor
heating system comprised a furnace (Y) with a sub-
terranean corridor running out from it, under a
water heating system (G'), immersion tubs (D), and
a round room (E), and then turning south to run
under the east apse of the central room (C) and
the north apse of the vestibule (B). It is worth not-
ing that here, in one of the earliest examples, the
hypocaust is used to heat both water (in G' and D)
and space (in E, C, and B).13 An aqueduct-fed res-
ervoir (X) supplied the facility with water, and drains
placed to take advantage of the sloping topography
dealt with the effluent. The capstone in Ginouv&s's
thesis was the arrangement of the rooms, where he 0 5
saw a precursor of the room sequence normally as- I _ J
sociated with Roman baths. Ginouves went so far as m
to reconstruct the path of the bather through the
Fig. 2. Olympia.Groundplanof the "Greekhypocaustbath."
building: from the portico (A), into the vestibule/ (After Kunze and Schleif 1994, fig. 19)
1 Ginouves 1962, 208-9. cuse,and Gela (infra,pp. 414-7; see figs.10 and 15);inAfrica,
'
Ginouves 1959, 58-77 (heating), 78-88 (watersuppy/ they are found in the rock-cutbaths at Cyrene.For the hip-
drainage).Heinz (1984,47) detects"dieplanendeHand eines bath as the trademarkof the Greek bathing establishment,
geschulten Architekten"in the building'ssubtleties. see Ginouves 1962, 101-3, 185-7; Yegul 1992, 24-9.
3 DeLaine (1988, 16) has
forcefullyarguedthat the hypoc- '5 Ginouves 1959, 46-8 and quote at 167: "Le role des Ro-
austwasdevelopedfirstandforemostto heatwaterandwasonly mains fut de concentrerles dispositifs,en poussantplus loin
extended to heat spacesin a secondarydevelopment.The ar- l'analysedes fonctions, et de harmonisera leursgofitsmoins
rangementat Gortysunderminesher positionto some degree. <sportifs-."See also Ginouves1962, 209.
14 There are numerous
examples of Greekestablishments 16 Ginouves
1959, 135-45. An earlierbath had been built
withhip-baths,usuallyfittedinto rotundas:e.g., those at Olym- ca. 370 B.C.butwasdestroyedin the middle of fourthcentury
pia,Eretria,Oeniadae,Athens,Piraeus,and Eleusis;in Magna and replacedwith the currentstructure.
Graeciatheyare found at MegaraHyblaea,Morgantina,Syra-

Ginouves's propositions, however, fall into diffi- among their buildings and tended to be situated
culties when closely scrutinized, especially his re- in well-watered places.22 Ginouves downplays the
constructed room sequence. For instance, there is cultic aspects the establishment's function; he ar-
no recognizable frigidarium, since all the bathing gues that it was primarily a regular thermal estab-
rooms are at least partially heated, and it is equally lishment, although under the patronage of a god.23
difficult to identify specifically a caldarium or tepi- But this division of function strikes a hollow chord.
darium."7 The supposed series of rooms is there- The building's patrons would have been frequent-
fore largely illusory, especially when one considers ing it not merely to get clean and to socialize, but to
that once in the central room (C) the bather had at meet requirements of purification or to implement
least four possibilities available (five, if one counts the god's remedial prescriptions.24 There are indi-
the bench and fountain in F), with none clearly lead- cations from the building itself that this was so. Two
ing to any other. More importantly, there is no facil- statue bases were found (in rooms A and I), quite
ity for communal immersion in either hot or cold possibly for images of the god or his associates (such
water at Gortys, and without this we cannot think of as Hygieia). In the northeast section of the estab-
Roman-style bathing taking place there."8 Unlike lishment, two rooms (H and I) had no discernible
the alleged room sequence, the hypocaust is an function in the bathing process and may well have
undeniable feature of the building, but the extent served as a shrine or healing rooms, to be used af-
to which it can be linked directly with the Roman- ter purification in the establishment's facilities; it
style suspensura is less clear-cut. The system at Gor- may be significant that they are accessible only
tys, like other Greek hypocausts (e.g., at Gela, Syra- through the hip-bath tholos (G). An inscribed terra-
cuse, or Megara Hyblaea), is quite different from cotta votive foot was found in the reservoir (X). This
the familiar Roman suspensura.19 In the latter, the is a familiar element of the cult attested at other
entire floor area of a room was raised and heated, Asclepieia, where model body parts were regularly
while in the Greek "annular" models only sections used to call the god's attention to an afflicted limb
of rooms were heated by means of a subterranean or organ. Other inscriptions of a religious or votive
corridor (although at Gortys, the entire floor area of nature were found reused in the Roman walls on
the small room E was raised). The two systems are the site, although none could be definitely con-
similar only to the extent that they share the same nected with the thermal establishment.25
basic principle of underfloor heating. But from this In short, while the establishment at Gortys shows
feature alone, a formal line of descent from Greek beyond doubt that the Greeks developed certain ru-
to Roman baths can be traced only very tenuously. dimentary forms of technology later commonly em-
Finally, broader contextual considerations cast ployed in Roman baths, it is difficult to see the build-
doubt on a direct link between the establishment ing as a direct forerunner of those baths. To the best
at Gortys and the developed Roman bath. It is diffi- of our knowledge, it stood in a relative backwater of
cult to see how a backwater such as Arcadia could Greece, lacked elements essential to Roman baths,
contribute a major new form to leisure architecture, and, for all that, operated in the religious context of
especially in the context of the instability of mid- a sanctuary of Asclepius. Whatever else may be
third century central Greece.20 The structure is also claimed about the building, this last point is surely
the centerpiece of a sanctuary of Asclepius, whose
important as it suggests a function for the Gortys es-
healing cult required rites of purification and bath- tablishment quite distinct from the mundane servic-
ing.21 Other sanctuaries of this god featured baths es offered by the civic baths of the Roman era.26
7Heinz (1984, 48) and Ginouves himself (1959, 167-8) "lapropret6et la vie religieuse."
concede some of these weaknesses. 22 Such as Epidauros;see Lambrinoudakis1994. On other
'8Butnote thatroomYwasonce a largecold pool, before it Asclepieia,see Aleshire1989, 1991;Jackson1988, 148-55. For
was converted into the furnace of the hypocaustin the mid the well-waterednatureof Asclepiansanctuaries,see Burford
thirdcenturyB.C.,see Ginouves1959,56-7. Room D contains 1969, 45-7.
hot immersionpools but theyare for individualuse. Nothing 23Ginouves1959, 47, 156.
like the Romanpiscinaor alveusis found here. 24Ginouves(1959, 48) practicallyadmitsas much when he
' See DeLaine 1989, 111-4; Nielsen 1993, 1:20-1. concedes that the immersionbaths in room D in particular,
20Apoint well made by DeLaine 1988, 15. and the whole building in general, would have been visited
21Bathingfeaturedin the
preparatoryritualsbefore sacri- mainlyby the ill.
fice and often in the cures "prescribed" by the god; see Boud- 25 For all of
this, see Ginouves1959, 7-19 (room A), 44-6
on 1994;Ginouves1962, 349-61. A concise summaryof this (rooms H and I), 139 (votivefoot), and 143 (inscriptions).
cult is providedbyJackson1988, 140-55 (note especiallythe 26It is
certainlythe case that the Romans later equipped
place of bathingin the cult, ibid., 145). In fact,bathsplayeda Greeksanctuarieswith"regular" baths(e.g.,atEpidauros,Olym-
significantrole in Greekreligiouslife in general:over half of pia, Delphi, and Eleusis,among others), whichwereidentical
Ginouves'smagnumopus (1962, 234-428) is concerned with in form to those found in civiccontexts,but the role suchsanc-

Olympia
The other key facility in Ginouves's case is phase
four of the baths at Olympia, usually termed the
"Greek hypocaust bath." The establishment as a
whole had a long history stretching back at least to
the fifth century B.C. The first three structures were
all Greek-style facilities, equipped with hip-baths.27
With phase four a new departure was evident. A
room was built featuring a full Roman-style suspen-
sura on 90 pillars supporting the entire floor area
of the room (fig. 2). In addition, there was a heated
communal pool (A) at one end, and, at the other,
_. J
..-...._r~~~~~ _vii. 114
an apse (B) that yielded vestiges of an emplace-
ment for a labrum (a raised basin for dousing). There
vii.1.9 vii.l.9a
was even a place in the rear wall of the communal
0 5 10
pool for setting the device (C) called a "pool tor- m
toise" (testudo alvei), which was used to keep all the
water in the pool at an even temperature.28 This Fig. 3. Pompeii. Groundplan of StabianBaths. (AfterYegul
bath was dated by the excavators, rather shakily, to 1996, fig. 59)
ca. 100 B.C.29 Ginouves believed that it clinched
the case for the mainland Greeks' development of Furthermore, Romans had been directly involved
a Roman-style caldarium, in all its details.30 More- in Greek affairs for over a century, and some had
over, the building was a decade or more older than emigrated to live there. In particular, there is evi-
Sergius Orata and had been constructed a century dence for Roman architects at work in the Greek
and a half afterthe baths at Gortys. It appeared to be east in the early second century B.C., and Romans
a missing link. had been given permission to participate in pan-
As with Gortys, however, there are serious ques- hellenic athletic games at least since the late 190s
tions. The excavator himself expressed the opin- B.C. Romans would undoubtedly have been spec-
ion that phase four marked a sharp change in bath- tators at the great Greek athletic festivals through-
ing practices at the site, here expressed architec- out the second century B.C. Roman suppression of
turally.3' What could have caused such a change? the Achaean revolt and the destruction of Corinth
There is no evidence for a local, gradual evolution in 146 B.C. can reasonably be seen as heralding a
from the use of hip-baths to communal bathing.32 more lasting Roman presence in the area.33 Given
Rather, the change at Olympia is abrupt. A reason- all this, it is more likely that phase four of the baths
able explanation is that phase four, rather than at Olympia is the result of Roman influence on Greek
evolving organically from what came before, marked bathing practice, so that the supposed "Greek hy-
the grafting of new, already evolved forms onto ear- pocaust bath" was really a "Roman hypocaust bath
lier structures. The source for those forms is not far at Olympia." Recent work at the site redates it to ca.
to seek: Rome and Italy. By the time the Olympia 40 B.C. and argues forcefully for the structure be-
caldarium was built in the first century B.C., the ing an import from Italy into Greece.34 The absence
Roman public bath was well established in Italy. of the other requisite rooms of a Roman-style bath
tuaryfacilitiesplayedin the religiouslife of their clients and found usuallyin associationwith sanctuariesand therefore
how their use differed, if at all, from "regular"Roman baths possiblyof religiousfunction (e.g., at Olympia,Delphi, Delos,
remainsin need of closer investigation.Among the Greeks, Nemea).
however,where "civic"bathswere far more rare,the appear- 33The architect Cossutius,a Roman citizen, worked for
ance of bathsin religiouscontexts probablyindicatesan asso- AntiochusIVEpiphanes(175-163B.C.),seeVitr.Dearch.7.15-
ciation of these facilitiesprimarilywith the purifyingaspects 17. For Romanslivingin Greece, see Wilson 1966, 94-8. M'.
of worship (this is especiallytrue of the Asclepiancult). For a AciliusGlabrio,among other honors, had been granted the
recent assessmentof the role of bathsin Greekmedicalsanc- right to participatein athletic contests in 191/90 B.C., see
tuaries,see Ginouves1994. SIG3.608(Delphi). On the Achaean revoltand its aftermath,
27Kunzeand Schleif 1944, 51-6; Mallwitz1972, 270-3. see Gruen 1984, 514-27.
28Theterms are given in Vitr.De arch.5.10.1. 34
See Ladstatter1995. Ladstatter'swork corroboratesthe
29Kunzeand Schleif 1944, 79-80 (on the basisof pottery). earlierdate alreadyproposed by Nielsen (1985, 101-4; 1993,
30Vitr.(Dearch.5.10.) providesthe classicdescriptionof the 1:22).DeLaine(1988,15)brandsita "Romanimport."Recently,
caldarium.See also Ginouves1959, 168;supra,n.11. Farrington(1999, 62 n. 27) ratherelusivelyconsidersphase
'3 Kunze and Schleif 1944, 51. four at Olympiaa "transitionalstage"and maintainsitsdate of
32Thisexcludesthe occasionalGreekcommunalcold pool, ca. 100 B.C.

408 GARRETT G. FAGAN [AJA105
Bathingwing 0 10
Trli
li n nt m
vii. 1.9a
Fig.4. Pompeii.Eschebach'sphase one for the StabianBaths.
(After Eschebach 1979, fig. 43a)
Fig.5. Pompeii.Eschebach'sphase twofor the StabianBaths.
(After Eschebach 1979, fig. 43b)
may suggest that phase four was experimental in
some way, a local and partial adaptation of the more bach, returned in the 1970s and carried out a close
elaborate forms of a Roman bath. It certainly has no analysis both of the building's surviving fabric and,
parallels among Greek baths and, like Gortys, it is through sondages at various points around the
located in a religious sanctuary. building, of the underlying strata. His results were
While Ginouves's work established beyond doubt startling. Although the middle of the second cen-
that the Greeks had evolved a culture of public bath- tury B.C had been established as the construction
ing and had developed technology to serve it well date for the Stabian Baths, Eschebach deduced a
before the Romans, his Greek connection is not traceable history in seven distinct phases dating
sufficient in itself to explain the origin of the Ro- back into the fifth century B.C. What is more, for
man-style bath as defined above. When one inspects the first three phases-covering the fifth to the sec-
the evidence, there are serious problems with the ond century B.C.-he reconstructed the building
two sites he adduces as the chief support for his as largely Greek in form.35 Here, at a single site, the
view. Nevertheless, his opinions appeared to find evolution of a set of baths from Greek-style to Ro-
strong confirmation when the Stabian Baths at man could be charted (figs. 4-7). Ginouves's Greek
Pompeii were subjected to a close investigation in origin for Roman baths seemed fully vindicated,
the early 1970s. and Eschebach's reconstruction of the building's
history has met with widespread acceptance, so that
THE STABIAN BATHS AT POMPEII: FROM
it is now frequently cited as established fact.36 In
GREEK TO ROMAN?
reality, it is largely conjecture.
Eschebach's Scheme Eschebach's principal means for deducing his
The Stabian Baths at Pompeii are the oldest near- building phases is construction technique, a weak
intact set of Roman public baths to survive from basis for determining detailed chronological rela-
antiquity (fig. 3). H. Sulze was carrying out analyti- tionships within or between structures. On a broad
cal work on the structure when his investigations perspective, it ought to be a matter of concern that
were interrupted by the Second World War. His this analytical method works so well for the early
notes were subsequently destroyed in the firebomb- periods of the building's alleged evolution, for
ing of Dresden. His student, architect H. Esche- which the evidence is scarcest, but less effectively
35Forthe originaldatingof the building'sconstruction,see en (loc. cit.) goes so far as to use Eschebach'sscheme for the
Mauand Kelsey1907,189-201.ForEschebach'sinvestigations, StabianBathsas a blueprintfor the development of the Ro-
see Eschebach 1970, 41-5; 1979. man-stylepublicbathin general.One prominentvoiceof pro-
36For a summaryof the building'shistory,see Eschebach test is Richardson(1988, 100-5), but since his overallsynthe-
1979, 51-3 (on the Greek bath), 64-73. For acceptance of sis has failed to garnerwidespread support, his perceptive com-
Eschebach'sphases,see, e.g., Gros1996,391;Heinz 1984,52- ments about the Stabian Baths appear to have gone largely
7; Nielsen 1993, 1:25-36;Weber 1996, 34-9, Yegil 1992, 61, unnoticed, although see the comments ofYegul 1992, 434-5
373-4. Zanker(1998, 50) implicitlyacceptsa pre-secondcen- n. 19. Koloski-Ostrow (forthcoming) takes a moderate and
turyexistence of the StabianBaths,presumablyin deference sensible line on these issues.
to Eschebach's reconstruction of the building's history. Niels-

Fig. 6. Pompeii. Immersion tub in north wing of StabianBaths (measuring tape set at 0.5 m)
(G. Fagan)
for the later periods, when more of the structure is plex, in which the tubs were deployed in five indi-
available for examination. It seems strange that his vidual "bathing cells" (Badezellen), as opposed to
first three (Greek) phases can be so precisely dis- being arranged around the inside walls of an open
tinguished and dated while the last two phases, the room, which was the norm for such early balaneia
sixth and seventh, embrace over a century of the (compare figs. 1, 11, 13). The hip-baths themselves
building's history during which numerous alter- were of unusual form, not least their orientation
ations, repairs, and extensions were carried out that within their cells: the bather would have been re-
Eschebach has great difficulty identifying as dis-
crete operations. More troublingly, Eschebach's 0 10
chronology rests on unstable stratigraphic founda- m
tions, a fact commented upon by reviewers when
his major publication of the site first appeared but
largely overlooked since.37 The dating of his early
phases remains unclear. Indeed, only the fifth
phase is truly datable, on the basis of an inscription
recording the activities of the duoviri Uulius and
Aninius in ca. 80 B.C.38A pottery sherd discovered
under the floor of a room in the north wing (the
present-day latrine) establishes only a terminus post
quem for the laying of that floor, that is, sometime
after the fourth century B.C. No more precise a date
for Eschebach's phase three can be offered. Aside
from these dating difficulties, the form and nature
of Eschebach's first three phases raise more ques-
tions than they answer. A closer look is in order.
vii. 1.9a
The supposed fifth-century bath (phase one) is
most unusual, without parallel in any Mediterra- Fig. 7. Pompeii. Eschebach's phase three for the Stabian
nean context (fig. 4). It comprised a hip-bath com- Baths. (After Eschebach 1979, fig. 36b)
37E.g.,Ling 1981;Yegfil1981.Forthe unreliabilityof draw- 38 CIL 1.1635 = CIL 10.829 = ILS 5706 = ILLRP 648 = Fa-
ing chronologicalconclusionsprimarily
fromconstructiontech- gan 1999, 250 (no. 61).
nique at Pompeii,see FulfordandWallace-Hadrill1998.

c
D E
Fig. 8. Pompeii. Some entrances to the Stabian Baths. (G. Fagan). A, entrance vii.1.48 on Vicolo del Lupanare; B, entrance
vii.1.9a on Via dell'Abbondanza; C, entrance vii.1.17 on Via Stabiana; D, entrance vii.1.51 on Vicolo del Lupanare; E, entrance
vii.1.14 on Via Stabiana.

THE GENESIS OF THE ROMAN PUBLIC BATH 411
quired to sit in the tub facing the far wall with his or the scheme (fig. 7). There was now a sequence of
her back to the door, which was the main light source rooms (I-III) arranged diagonally, although the
for these gloomy little spaces. This disposition con- function of each remains uncertain and there was
travenes all known Greek examples, where the hip- no clear evidence of heating or plumbing in any of
baths face outward from back walls. Eschebach's cu- them; the use of braziers should not be ruled out.
rious hip-bath complex was then associated bodily What is more, the bathing cells continued in use.
with a palaestra to form what he believed was an "ath- Eschebach gives no indication how this building
lete's bath" (Athletenbad).No such association of hot- was to be used. The inspiration for the introduc-
water bathing and palaestra came into existence on tion of a room sequence is also unclear, since the
the Greek mainland until the third century B.C.39 It period to which Eschebach assigned this phase (the
strains credibility to accept that here, at the very edge fourth century or earlier) was that of the Oscan oc-
of the Greek world, such a farsighted development cupation of Pompeii, and the Oscans were known
had taken place two centuries earlier. Furthermore, neither for their devotion to public bathing cul-
the shape of Eschebach's palaestra in this early bath ture nor their architectural innovation.42
presupposes the later road system at Pompeii; his Eschebach's remaining phases (four through
attempt to explain the shape by arguing that the seven) rest on more solid ground, since they cover
original town wall ran along the western side is un- the period of the building's generally accepted
convincing and lacks supporting evidence.40 The existence, from the mid second century B.C. on-
same can be said for his belief that this early bath was ward. Throughout these periods the baths were fully
buried in an eruption of Vesuvius at the end of the Roman in type, with communal pools and clear se-
fifth century B.C. If this were the case, it is curious quences of rooms heated with hypocausts. It is
that the building was reconstructed along identical therefore unnecessary to review them in detail. The
lines in Eschebach's phase two-dated on no secure difficulties lie primarily with Eschebach's first three
grounds to the fourth or third centuries B.C.-but phases, which are critical for establishing the Greek-
now stripped of its most innovative feature, the hip- to-Roman development of the Stabian Baths. Rich-
baths in their bathing cells (fig. 5). Instead, the re- ardson has offered an argument that, in my opin-
built cells were fitted with individual immersion ion, settles this debate. He noticed that five of the
tubs (still to be seen today, fig. 6), although they public entrances to the building, on the three sides
remained associated with a palaestra. He contends that front onto streets, were constructed of the same
that some ancillary "gymnasial" elements of unclear material (tufa) and fashioned in the same style
function were added in this phase along the north- (e.g., fig. 8a-c; the location of all entrances is indi-
ern and southern flanks of the exercise court (A in cated in fig. 3 with the tufa examples underlined).
fig. 5). As with phase one, this whole arrangement is Three entrances are of a noticeably different de-
entirely without parallel in the contemporary Medi- sign and construction (e.g., fig. 8d-e). The conclu-
terranean basin. It is also worth noting that the bath- sion seems inevitable that the whole building, as
ing cells with their supposed immersion tubs show suggested by the five tufa entrances, was conceived
no sign of plumbing and may well have served needs as an entirety and erected in a single operation,
unrelated to bathing proper.41 probably ca. 140-120 B.C., as originally proposed
With Eschebach's phase three, the rudiments of by Mau, or slightly later.43 The alterations and re-
a Roman-style bath make their first appearance in pairs of the Sullan, Augustan, and early Imperial
39SeeYegiil1992,21-4 withamplereferenceto earlierstud- earlyfirstcenturyB.C., see Zanker1998, 32-60.

ies. Later Greek-stylebaths in the West (e.g., at Gela, Syra- 43Maubased his dating on overallconstructiontechnique
cuse, MegaraHyblaea,all dating to the fourth and third cen- (MauandKelsey1907,35-44,esp.40;see alsoRichardson1988,
turiesB.C.)werenotassociatedwitha palaestra,so one cannot 103). This method has come under serious assaultrecently
argue that this wasa regional innovation. (FulfordandWallace-Hadrill1998),but the presenceof a sun-
40See Richardson(1988, 100-5) for a counterview.On the dial bearing an Oscan inscriptionin the east portico of the
obscurityof the city'searlyhistory,see Cerchiai1995, 129-39; palaestra(Eschebach1979, 17 and abb. 5) probablysuggests
Fulfordand Wallace-Hadrill1998;Zanker1998, 31,44-53. an earlydate for the building, before 100 B.C. at the latest.
41 On the absence of water
supplyor drainsin the "bathing Stratigraphicworkon the site could clarifythe matter.What-
cells,"see Eschebach1979,38-9. Comparethe uncertaintyover ever the case, Eschebach'sscheme requiresthat each of the
the function of a similarrowof cells in the laterSarnoBathsat tufaentranceswasconstructedat differenttimesoverhis early
Pompeii;Ioppolo 1992,72; Koloski-Ostrow1990,94-5. phases (compare figs. 5 and 7 with fig. 3), necessitatingthe
42Note here the
"rudimentary" privatebath in a house at buildersto adhere closelyto a particulardoor design up to his
RoccagloriosainLucania;seeFracchia1999.Publicbathingdoes fifth phase, when they changed over to a new model. This is
not featureasan attestedpartof Samnitelife;see Salmon1967, an exampleof the illogicofEschebach'sentirereconstruction
50-64; Tagliamonte 1996, 156-78, 236-42. Most of the re- criticizedbyRichardson(1988).
mains of "OscanPompeii"are usuallydated to the second or

Fig. 9. Pompeii. Niches in the women's apodyterium of the StabianBaths. (G. Fagan)
periods-corresponding to Eschebach's fourth so Nielsen deduces their existence from the pres-
through seventh phases-then account for the three, ence of niches in some of the surviving structure's
evidently later entrances. Finally, no features of the rooms. They are most clearly visible in the men's
construction techniques employed in the north wing and women's changing rooms (apodyteria),although
suggest that it existed independently of and earlier she presents evidence that they once featured also
than the rest of the facility. If these arguments are in the other bathing rooms (fig. 9). Nielsen rea-
accepted, there was no Greek bath on the site.44 sons that, since analogous niches were found over
hip-baths in Greek-style establishments to accom-
Nielsen's Scheme modate the bathers' belongings as they soaked in
The notion of its existence, however, persists. the tubs, so hip-baths must once have stood beneath
Nielsen, who accepts Eschebach's overall scheme these niches in the Stabian Baths. Therefore, the
in a slightly modified form, has offered an alterna- Stabian Baths of the second century B.C. may be
tive version of the Greek-to-Roman evolution of this identified as a fully-fledged Greek balaneion.45
building. She reconstructs Eschebach's phase four Once more, however, closer inspection renders
(of the second century B.C.) as a Greek balaneion, this position questionable. In the first place, that
with dozens of hip-baths occupying the bathing no trace of a single hip-bath has survived in the
rooms in the east wing (fig. 3). In contrast to Esche- Stabian Baths is at least suspicious, since they would
bach, she believes the building lacked hypocausts have numbered 100 or more, and the niches sup-
at this time: they were added later. Unfortunately, posedly associated with them can still be traced with
no trace of hip-baths remains in the Stabian Baths, such facility.46 Second, the presence of niches is
44It remainsunclearwhat exactlyEschebachfound in the 1:27) reconstructsfour or five hip-bathchambers,a total of

Badezellen,since he providesno photographsof the hip-baths 150 hip-bathsis not inconceivablefor the complex. Nielsen
in his book, only drawings (1979, 51 abb. 16 and taf. 33c). (1985, 86) aversthat the hip-bathswere made of terra-cotta
Indeed, there areneitherphotographsnor full-scaledrawings and mayhave been movable.But even portablehip-bathsof-
of the crucialnorthwingin the book,althoughthe otherwings ten leave some trace of their presence, as at the Greek Har-
enjoyample illustration.In an attemptto clarifythisissue,the bour Bathsat Eretria,or the Greekbathhouseat Morgantina;
author plans to conduct investigationsin the cells in the fu- see Ginouves1962, 183-98 (HarbourBaths)and Allen 1974,
ture. 379,381 (Morgantina).Also,Greekbathsthatwerelatertrans-
45See Nielsen 1985; 1993, 1:27-30. Nielsen's reconstruc- formedinto Roman-stylefacilitiescanleaveindicationsof their
tion is acceptedby,for example, DeLaine 1989, 117-20; Gros original Greek character;see the examples cited by Nielsen
1996, 392. (1993, 1:101)fromAthens,Egypt,and Pergamon.This is not
46DeLaine(1989,118) suggeststhatasmanyas 35 hip-baths so for the StabianBaths.
stood in the women's apodyteriumalone. As Nielsen (1993,

Fig. 10. Pompeii. Niches in the men's tepidarium of the Forum Baths. (G. Fagan)
not, in itself, justification for postulating hip-baths pocaust and the niches are more likely contempo-
beneath them. The Forum Baths at Pompeii, for raneous.48 Finally, if all the rooms in the east wing
instance, feature niches in the men's and women's were fitted with hip-baths, there seems little reason
tepidaria (fig. 10). There is no suggestion that hip- for their linear sequence and their deployment on
baths ever stood under these niches, since the Fo- either side of a centrally located furnace. Rather,
rum Baths were built in ca. 80 B.C. and indisput- the room sequence alone suggests that a Roman-
ably served Roman-style bathing habits. The same style bathing habit, not a Greek one, was being ca-
can also be said for other examples of Roman pub- tered to in the building's design.
lic baths, where the niches appear to have served as After all this discussion, it must be concluded
both decorative elements and temporary storage that the Stabian Baths cannot offer any secure evi-
shelves for bather's gear as they proceeded through dence concerning the supposed transition from
their routines.47 Third, according to Nielsen the Greek to Roman baths. The evidence of the site is
hip-bath rooms were later transformed into hypoc- ambiguous and debatable, and short of total exca-
austed and tubulated Roman-style bathing rooms. vation of the lower strata the picture is unlikely to
This renovation would require that the cavea of the be clarified. It seems more plausible that this build-
hypocaust was installed by digging down below the ing was constructed as a Roman-style facility in ca.
hip-bath floor-level, a dubious procedure that 140-120 B.C., with its sequence of rooms, hypoc-
risked destabilizing the foundations; thus the hy- austs, and heated communal pools all present at
47For instance, the CentralBathsat Cales (built ca. 90-70 purposeof such shelvesand niches in heated rooms,see Hei-
B.C. according to Nielsen's catalogue entry, C.35), featured nz 1984, 52-3.
niches which Nielsen (1993, 1:32n. 59) explainsas "presum- 48Asnoted, DeLainealso acceptsthe presence of hip-baths
ablymerelydecorationadoptedfromthe earlierestablishments in the StabianBaths (suprann. 45, 46) and therefore seems
at Cumaeand Pompeii."Other examplesof niches in hypoc- to thinkthe hypocaustand hip-bathswereutilizedcontempo-
aust-heatedbathrooms are found in Spain at, e.g., Baetulo raneously;see also DeLaine 1989, 119-20. This seems unlike-
(C.100 in Nielsen's catalogue; first century B.C.) and Los ly,since hip-bathchambersand hypocaustsare routinelysep-
Banales (C.113; mid first centuryA.D.). On the functional arateinstallationsin survivng Greekbaths.

0 the questions that remain open about the early ap-

pearance of the Stabian Baths, but for now only spec-
A m ulation prevails. In any case, even if a Greek-to-Ro-
man evolution could be securely identified at the
r l l Stabian Baths, the issue of typicality surely advises
caution before extrapolating wholesale from this
one building an entire development scheme for
the Roman public bath as an architectural genre.
I! THE ROLE OF MAGNA GRAECIA
While the case for the Romans adopting their

bathing habits wholesale from the mainland Greeks
no longer appears convincing, that is not to deny
the influence of Greek culture on Roman bathing
habits entirely. The Greeks had a fully developed
culture of public bathing, not just in athletic facili-
ties such as gymnasia and palaestrae but also in bal-
aneia, genuine public baths with heated water. In-
deed, the initial stimulus for the Italic adoption of
the public bathing practice in an urban context most
Fig. 11. Syracuse, Sicily. Groundplan of the Greek Bath.
(After DeLaine 1989, fig. 5b) likely came from the Greeks, since other Italic cul-
tures (such as Oscan) show no overt penchant for a
the outset. There are indications in the confident bathing in public.49 Ancient Italians would have en-
hand of the architect that these features had as yet countered many models of public baths in the Greek
unidentified predecessors of uncertain location poleis of Magna Graecia, and several balaneia have
and date, perhaps reaching back into the early years indeed been found in the Greek cities of the West.
of the second century or beforehand. A detailed It therefore seems reasonable that some scholars
examination at some future date of other early but have credited the Western Greeks with taking the
ill-investigated establishments-such as the Cen- critical steps toward developing Roman-style bath-
tral Baths at Cumae or Cales-may answer some of ing habits, which were then picked up and adapted
Fig. 12. Syracuse,Sicily.Rooms A (top right) and B (foreground) in the Greek Bath. (G. Fagan)
49
Supran. 42. The intense hellenizationof Etruscancivilizationmakesits contributionto Italianpublic bathingmoot.

by neighboring Italians. Pointing especially to the er's experience and, coincidentally, was precisely
fourth-century Greek baths at such sites as Syracuse the procedure followed by the author on a visit to
and Gela in Sicily,J. DeLaine has detected the pres- a Tunisian hammam in 1995, where patrons col-
ence of communal immersion pools heated by hy- lected water from a large communal pool and
pocausts, used in conjunction with a tholos fitted washed with it while seated on built-in benches. If
with hip-baths (figs. 11-14). It was but a short step so, the function of such heated pools at Syracuse
from this arrangement to extending the hypocaust and elsewhere in western Greek sites was quite
under an entire room, a process DeLaine sees pre- different from that of the later Roman solium/
saged in the parallel heating channels of the Greek alveus, and the bathing habits the pools served
baths at Gela (figs. 13-14).50 With these communal were more Greek than Roman.
immersion pools, we are clearly on the road to the DeLaine argues that the double-channel hypoc-
Roman-style bath. Thus the Roman bath owes its aust in the Greek bathhouse at Gela, dating to the
origins to the Greeks, not of the mainland, but of late fourth and early third century B.C., offers a pre-
Magna Graecia. cursor to the hypocaust in the so-called Republi-
Despite the cleverness and attractive elegance can Baths in Pompeii, which was raised not on pil-
of this theory, a closer look at some of DeLaine's lars but on walls radiating from the furnace (figs.
model Greek establishments generates doubts. 13-15). On the basis of this unusual hypocaust,
None of them, for instance, has a clear room se-
quence; all retain the randomized internal ar-
rangement that typifies the traditional Greek bath-
ing establishment. The revolutionary feature of
the Greek baths at Syracuse (which functioned in
the fourth and third centuries B.C.) is the room B
with an associated annex A that DeLaine inter-
prets as a communal bathing pool heated by a hy-
pocaust (see figs. 11-12). But DeLaine's commu-
nal pool A, while superficially resembling the
Roman solium or alveus, was 0.35 m deep, which
is considerably shallower than the habitual depth
of Roman pools and rather meager for a sufficient
bodily immersion.51 Yet pool A was certainly meant
to contain water, since a drainage channel flowed
from it into room B. The question really is how the
pool was used. A genuine possibility is that it served
as a tank out of which individual bathers collected
their hot water for use in the associated larger
room. That room B at Syracuse, and the analogous
room in the Greek bath at Megara Hyblaea, bore
indications of permanent fixtures around the in-
side surfaces of its walls (indicated in fig. 11) could
be a significant factor: the bathers may have col-
lected water from pool A and used it individually
in room B at wall emplacements, whether they were
benches or basins. Such a practice would be con-
sistent with what we know of Greek bathing prac-
Fig. 13. Gela, Sicily.Groundplan of the Greek Bath. (After
tices that stressed the separateness of each bath- Orlandini 1960, fig. 1)
50DeLaine1989. Broise (1994) has argued a parallelposi- Romanbaths tend to be deeper: the two pools in the caldari-
tion, apparentlyunawareof DeLaine'simportantarticle.Note um of the Bathsof Neptune at Ostia, 1.09 n and 1.19 m; the
that both authors consider the hypocaustprimarilya water- threecaldariumpools in the ForumBathsat Ostia:1.21m, 1.06
heating device. m, and 0.62 m; the men's caldariumin the Forum Baths at
51 See the
original excavator'sreport (Cultrera1938, esp. Pompeii,0.6m;thewomen'scaldariumpoolin theStabianBaths
268-70) on this room. For parallel examples from Megara at Pompeii: 0.61 m; the caldariumpool, SuburbanBaths at
Hyblaeaand Morgantina,see Broise 1994. The depth of the Pompeii, 0.66 m. Cultrera(1938, 269) wasstruckalso by the
Syracusebath's"pool"(0.35 m) wasmeasuredbythe authorat Syracusepool's shallownessand designatedit "unampio ma
the site in June 1998. By wayof comparison, soliain typical non profondocanale."

Fig. 14. Gela, Sicily.Hypocaust channels in the Greek Bath, southward view (above) and
northwardview (below). (N. De Haan)
DeLaine proposes a date for the Republican Baths more, this duplex annular hypocaust is located di-
in the mid second century B.C.52 DeLaine consid- rectly opposite the entrances to the two bathing
ers the system at Gela a departure from the arrange- chambers fitted with hip-baths (rooms A and A' in
ment at Gortys, since at Gela she identifies a "series fig. 13), and one of the heating channels from this
of heating channels in parallel," which is an ante- admittedly curious double arrangement continues
cedent to the multiple heating-channel system further south, entering a rectangular subterranean
found in the Republican Baths (figs. 14-15). But area (B in fig. 13) from which two channels emerge
the Gela "series" of channels is, in reality, a minor as vents. The excavator could not decide whether
variation on the familiar Greek annular system this whole hypocausted arrangement was a contin-
where a single heating channel has been replicat- uous paved sweat bath or a partially paved system
ed to form a double channel (figs. 13-14). Further- intended to heat water for use in the hip-bath cham-
52DeLaine 1989, 120. On the Gela bath's licanBathsat PompeiiremainsMaiuri1950.

hypocaust,see
Orlandini1960,189-95. The fullestdescriptionof the Repub-

bers; no walls survive to help determine its func-

tion. To my mind, it looks like both, a minor varia-
tion on the near-contemporary system at Gortys,
where an annular hypocaust heated both space and
a water tank located outside a hip-bath room (see
the box Y in fig. 13; cp. the Gortys hypocaust, de-
scribed above, p. 405). In terms of form and func-
tion, the Gela bath clearly belongs to the bathing
tradition represented at Gortys rather than that
served by the Republican Baths at Pompeii. In ad-
dition, the relatively crude nature of the hypocaust
system in the Republican Baths need indicate noth-
ing as to the earliness of its date but could have
been generated by any number of intangible fac-
tors, such as cost-cutting or individual preference.53
What DeLaine has shown unquestionably, how-
ever, is that the technological potential for the de-
velopment of the Roman-style suspensura was
_^
_A Onm m
present in the cities of the Greek West. Moreover,
these baths seem to offer varieties of bathing op- Fig. 15. Pompeii. Groundplan of the Republican Baths. (After
tions to their customers, a feature later common in Nielsen 1993, 2:fig. 77)
Roman facilities. The physical remains, however,
are insufficient to prove that the Western Greeks Numerous country villas and townhouses in cen-
in the Hellenistic Age had moved toward the famil- tral Italy have therefore been the focus of scholarly
iar Roman practices of communal immersion and attention.54 But there are several problems with us-
sequentially heated spaces. Instead, they appear to ing this type of evidence. Chief among them is the
have developed and expanded techniques to facil- issue of variation in bathing habits and the deter-
itate their traditional bathing procedures. minative effect of personal taste on the form of pri-
vate bathing suites. Initially, when Roman-style bath-
THE INFLUENCE OF PRIVATE BATHS ON
ing was not yet fully formed and alternatives were
PUBLIC ONES
on hand from Greek sources, these factors make
The archaeological record for private baths in discerning a scheme of development among pri-
Italy has also been brought into the debate, on the vate baths from different regions of Italy extremely
reasonable assumption that private leisure habits difficult. Is the presence of a simple bathing suite a
precede public ones. Seneca, in a famous passage sign of early date, or of the owner's personal pro-
(Ep. 86.4-12), describes the primitive simplicity of clivities or limited means, or all of the above? The
Scipio Africanus's small bathing suite in his rustic imprecise dating of several crucial examples of vil-
villa and then rails against the bathing excesses of la baths is also a genuine concern, since many date
his own time, and Varro (Ling. 9.68) mentions the to the first century B.C. or A.D., by which time pub-
simple "washing room" (lavatrina) as a predeces- lic bathing habits were well entrenched and the
sor to the fully-fledged private bath, or balneum. valence of influence is hard to determine.55 The
53Fagan 1999a, 59-60. Note a fragmentary bath construct- many flaws and is gradually being replaced by the work of N.
ed in opusreticulatumat
Tiburthatfeaturesan apsidalroomwith De Haan (e.g., 1996, 1997, 2001). Note also the commentsof
a central wall dividing it into two halves, lengthwise. This ar- Di Capua 1940, 124-38; Lafon 1991;Yegfil 1992, 50-5.
rangementof substructuresseems to be anothervariantof the 55See, for instance, Fabricotti's discussion of
simple private
wall-supported hypocaust. No firm date can be assigned to the suites in villas such as those near S. Basilio in Nomentana (first
facility, but the "eta repubblicana" was proposed by Carducci century B.C.), at Centopiedi near Pompeii (late second/early
(1940, 61-3). Similarly, Roman suspensurae in Britian (by first century B.C.), or at the Villa of Mysteries at Pompeii (late
definition of imperial date) can be of the channel variety, second century B.C.); see Fabricotti 1976, 32-3, 35, 37-8 re-
sometimes found side by side with the more familiar pillared spectively. In each case, the private bath suite dates to periods
form, as at the Chedworth villa (Goodburn 1979, 13-24), or when Roman public bathing was already established (i.e., the
even in combination with it in single rooms (Yegil 1992, 357- second century B.C. and later), and this is true also of many of
61, who also cites other examples from Asia Minor and Gaul). her other examples; seeYegil 1992,377. Similarly, simple two-
These hypocausts attest variations in design that do not re- roomed bathing suites may seem, on formal grounds, to pre-
flect chronological or evolutionary relationships. date more complex suites with three or more rooms. In fact,
54The major study remains Fabricotti 1976. The article has many bicameral suites are coeval with or later than more com-

Fig. 16. Sperlonga. Villa Prato bathroom. (EFR,neg. SP1254)
evidence from the houses at Cosa reflects this vari- B.C., making it one of the earliest examples of the
ety in the archaeological record. Here, several hous- system in a private bath anywhere in Italy, and the
es of quite late date (early first century B.C.) still earliest in Etruria.57 Assuming the earlier date is
contained very simple bathing suites, comprised of correct, this site demonstrates conclusively that pri-
a single room attached to the kitchen, when both vate bathing rooms fully fitted with hypocausts could
private and public bathing suites elsewhere in Italy be found by 100 B.C. Less clear is the direct influ-
were at this time displaying greater complexity and ence of the private habits of the rich (who owned
pretension.56 the villas) on the form of the public baths used by
Some recently investigated facilities shed partic- all. While such examples as the Vulci villa may sug-
ularly interesting light on the issue. At Vulci a villa gest a pioneering role for private baths, other ex-
(the so-called House of the Cryptoporticus) was amples confuse the issue. A villa unearthed at Ci-
equipped with a four-roomed bathing suite. Recent ampino near Rome, and perhaps dating to the mid-
arguments have redated the hypocaust in the sweat second century B.C., contained a bathing suite with
room (sudatorium) back from ca. 50 B.C. to 100 a communal pool but no hypocaust.58 The Villa Pra-
plex setsof bathingrooms;see Fabricotti1976;BrunoandScott bathingroom onlyin ca. 90 BC;see Brunoand Scott 1993,21,
1993, 161-91 (on the House of the Birdsat Cosa;Augustan). 81-97. Such basicfacilitiesare more evocativeof supposedly
In the imperialperiod,lavishpublicbathsappearto haveinflu- earlyRomanwashrooms(Sen. Ep.86.4-5) than the elaborate
enced the form,scale,and decorationof privateones; see De- bathing suites found at other Italian sites, which are often
Laine 1999, 73. Netzer (1999) notes that, among the bath- contemporarywithandsometimespredatethese Cosanexam-
houses built by Herod the Greatin his palacesca. 35-15 B.C., ples (e.g., supra,n. 55).
somewereof the olderJudeao-Hellensticstyle(witha minimal 57BroiseandJolivet 1991, esp. 85-8. For the redating,see
decorationand a characteristicsteppedritualbath) whileoth- De Haan 1996. (Myparticularthanksgo to N. De Haan for
ers were of the fully Roman type. This constitutesa striking sending me the text of her paper and for severalother rele-
exampleof personaltastedeterminingtheformof privatebaths. vant references.)
56For instance, the House of the Skeleton and its neigh- 58DeRossi1979, 64-5 (no. 89); Lafon 1991, 113-4. Broise
boring house, with their kitchen/washroom arrangements, (1994, 28) implicitlydates the Ciampinobath to the ca. 150-
were dated by coin finds to the period 89-70 B.C.;see Bruno 100 B.C.,whileDe Rossi(1979,65) postulatesthe firstcentury
and Scott 1993,123-7 (House of the Skeleton), 153-8 (neigh- B.C. This is a good example of the difficultythat prevailsin
bor'sproperty).The House of the Treasureacquireda simple datingmanyexamplesof privatebaths.

to at Sperlonga, dated to the third quarter of the ment.61 The suggestion is a plausible one but is
third century B.C., contains a most unusual bicam- vitiated by the very simplicity of so many early pri-
eral bathing suite. One room, with a pool and traces vate baths: most have two elements and one cannot
of a labrum, appears to have been a cold-bath and really talk of a "row" of two. More importantly, the
changing room. The other, apparently for hot bath- sequence of rooms in Roman baths does not seem
ing, contained a single-person immersion tub along- to be the product of circumstance, as this sugges-
side an unusual variant of the hip-bath called a "boot- tion holds, but rather a purposeful arrangement
bath," which on the basis of its shape and dimen- that met a need for varying grades of heated space
sions cannot have been used to wash more than the and water. The origins of this need are far murkier
feet and lower legs. Both the immersion tub and and will be addressed below.
the boot-bath formed a single architectural element,
a sort of raised bathing platform into which the tubs THE LITERARY AND EPIGRAPHIC EVIDENCE
were sunk and which was accessible by a single step In studies of the origins of Roman baths, the lit-
from the floor level (fig. 16).59 The nearly contem- erary sources have tended to be treated only per-
porary date of this odd arrangement with the pri- functorily while archaeological data have dominat-
vate hypocaust bath at Vulci or the non-hypocausted ed the discussion. Aside from the difficult issue of
private suite at Ciampino both highlights the vari- Sergius Orata, the literary evidence is quite infor-
ety apparent in private suites and raises questions mative, although there are certainly challenges in
about how direct the influence of private baths was interpreting it. Livy (23.7.3) provides one of our
on public ones, since nothing comparable with the very earliest references to public baths when he
Villa Prato arrangement is discernible in the public describes Hannibal suffocating the councilors at
record.60 That influences flowed between public Capua in a bathhouse in 216 B.C. Given Livy's re-
and private facilities is beyond question, but their search methods and the transferal of the tale to
direction and extent need to be more fully investi- Nuceria by Dio (15.57.30) and Valerius Maximus
gated before reliable conclusions can be drawn. (9.6 ext. 2), it seems possible that we are dealing
One scholar has detected the influence of pri- with a later tale inserted into the tradition about
vate baths in one detail of the Roman public bath's Hannibal. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that the
form: the linear sequence of rooms. In all the early anecdote locates early baths in Campania, a region
private baths, the bathing rooms are located near later attested as a focal point of bathing culture (and
the kitchen, often in a restricted space. As a result, excess) in the Italian peninsula. Plutarch puts an
bathing rooms with two or more elements tend to accusation of ill-discipline into the mouth of Bibu-
assume a simple row arrangement with respect to lus, tribune in 209 B.C., who accuses Marcellus of
each other and the heat source in the kitchen. In dereliction of his command against Hannibal: Mar-
our earliest public baths in the Vesuvian cities, the cellus, rails Bibulus, has devoted himself to Cam-
bathing rooms are also in a simple linear alignment, panian pleasures, hot baths prominently among
conceivably derived from this domestic arrange- them.62 Somewhat later, a speech attributed to C.
59Broise 1994, 26-7; Lafon 1991, 102-11. A terra-cottatub Given the form of the bath, a date not much earlierthan ca.
similarto the Sperlonga "boot-bath"was found broken and 100 B.C. is more likely;see Wilson 1990, 24-5.
reused in the House of the Birdsat Cosa (and is now in the 60Broise (1994, 26-8) sees things a little differentlyand
museum at the site). The tub belonged to an undetermined arguesthattheVillaPratoimmersiontubwasinspiredbythose
phase predating the extensive remodeling of the Augustan he identifiesin Greekpublic baths in Sicily.Evenby his own
era;see Bruno and Scott 1993, 38-42. Giventhe evidence for argument,however,the public exampleswere for collective
other privatebathsat Cosa (supran. 56), the boot-bathis un- immersion(whichis crucial)and theVillaPratotubforindivid-
likelyto be anyolder than the earlyfirstcenturyB.C.and thus ual use. In all such cases, the interpretationof the physical
appearsto offer yet another example of contemporaryvaria- record remainsdifficultand highlycontentious,especiallyin
tions in privatebathing practicesat a single site. Another rel- detecting and tracingthe causalconnections between specif-
evant site is the privatebath in the peristyle house at letas ic facilitiesacrossregions and over time.
(MonteIato) in westernSicily,whichfeaturedtworoomsand 61For this observation,see Yegfil 1992, 63. For domestic
afurnace.Asingle-personimmersiontubandan emplacement examples, see Fabricotti1976, 31-41.
for a labrumstood in one of the main rooms (cf. the arrange- 62Plut.Marc.26.4-27.2.Foranalogoussentimentsaboutthe
ment at Sperlonga). Interestingly,in this facilitythe under- ruinouseffectsof hot bathson militarydiscipline (often set in
floor heating systemfor the immersiontub wasdiscontinued Campania) see Livy23.18.12; Plut. Mor.785F;Dio 27.94.2,
in the thirdand finalphase-the preciseopposite ofwhatone 62.6.4; SHA Comm.11.5, Avid. Cass. 5.5, Pesc. Nig. 3.10, Alex.
would expect, and yet another indication of the impact of Sev.53.2. Campaniawasalso home to the notoriouspleasure
personaltastesor circumstanceson the form of privatebaths. resort at Baiae, see Yegul 1996. Other thermal sites in the
The date of the bath has been suggested as falling between region also show clear evidence of development, see Crova
the fourth and second centuryB.C.;see Dalcher 1994, 37-9. 1953;Houston 1992.

Gracchus locates baths in three Campanian towns, Nielsen argues that, since the bather takes his
Gales, Ferentinum, and Teanum Sidicinum (Gell. clothes with him into the bathroom, Plautus is de-
NA 10.3.1-3). Thus the early Roman tradition ex- scribing a Greek-style balaneion where the bather
plicitly associated public bathing with Campania and deposited his or her belongings in niches over the
adjacent municipia (in Latium Adiectum, for in- hip-baths. But early Roman baths can also have nich-
stance). It may well be that this tradition reflects the es in the bathing rooms and presumably, if one
broader and later association of Campania with lux- could not afford to hire a clothes guard, such nich-
urious living and excess, but that observation does es would have been used to house the bathers'
not detract from the historical significance of the street clothes as well as their bathing gear. If the
notices: later Romans nevertheless associated very bather in Plautus's bath were attending to his ablu-
early baths with these regions. tions in a hip-bath while his belongings sat in an
With Plautus we are on more solid ground. In overhead niche, would not the thief have to lean
several plays written at the end of the third and over the bather to reach the clothes? How, then,
the beginning of the second century B.C., the play- could the bather be unclear as to who the thief was?
wright refers to public baths and bathing as a reg- But if, instead, the bather is envisaged sitting in a
ular part of the urban scene.63 While Plautus's de- communal pool or perspiring on a bench in a crowd-
pendency on his Greek models might raise legit- ed Roman-style tepidarium or caldarium equipped
imate concerns about these passages' applicabili- with storage niches, then Plautus's scenario makes
ty to Roman conditions, there are good grounds perfect sense: the bather has to watch his clothes
to believe that Plautus was relying on his audi- from a distance, uncertain who in the surrounding
ence's familiarity with public baths to render his crowd harbors larcenous intent. Plautus's baths are
observations effective.64 A reference in Seneca Roman balnea, not Greek balaneia.
supports the conclusion that Plautus's public For the remainder of the second century we have
baths were real enough and not shadows cast by merely bits and pieces of testimony. There are some
his Greek sources. Seneca (Ep. 86.10) comments references in Terence, a fragment of Caecilius Sta-
that among the duties of aediles of old was the tius, and a questionable passage cited by Nonius.66
task of checking public baths for cleanliness and Two references in later writers are of particular in-
suitably heated water. Seneca specifically men- terest. Varro (Ling. 9.68) implies that the first baths
tions the Cornelii, Fabius Maximus, and Cato the in the city were introduced to Rome from elsewhere,
Elder in this connection-all contemporaries of and Pompeius Trogus, as epitomized byjustin (Epit.
Plautus. These references reveal unequivocally 44.2.6), refers to the Roman introduction of hot-
that public baths were a regular feature of Rome's water bathing to the Spanish following the Second
cityscape by ca. 200 B.C. Punic War. Assuming both of these statements are
What type of bathhouse was Plautus alluding accurate and do not anachronistically represent
to? Nielsen has suggested that one particularly il- later conditions, they show, first, that the Roman
lustrative passage in Plautus (Rud. 382-85) indi- bath evolved elsewhere than at Rome and, second,
cates they were Greek-style balaneia.65 The pas- that the habit was sufficiently well ingrained by 204
sage reads: B.C. to allow the Romans to export it to Spain.67
etiam qui it lavatum in balineas, cum ibi sedulo sua The latter conclusion, particularly, is consistent with
vestimenta servat, tamen surripiuntur, quippe qui the regular appearance of public baths in the works
quem illorum observet falsust; fur facile qui observat of Plautus. The epigraphic record is of little use,
videt: custos qui fur sit nescit. since most Republican inscriptions pertaining to
baths date to the first century B.C., when public
When a man goes to the public baths to wash, though
he watches his clothes like a hawk, they're stolen all baths were already well established in Italian com-
the same, as he doesn't know which of his fellow bath- munities.68 A notable exception is the late second-
ers to watch. The thief easily spots the watcher; the century B.C. inscription from Aletrium in the hills
guard doesn't know who the thief is. bordering southern Latium, which records the gen-
13 Plaut.Asin.
356-57, Persa90-91, Poen.703, Rud.382-85, the AugustanAge) is evocativeof Tacitus'sacerbic observa-
Trin.405-8, Truc.322-5. tion in the Agricola(21.3) that the once hardyBritonswere
4
Fagan 1999, 45-6; see also Fraenkel1960;Harvey1986; weakenedbythe pleasurableamenitiesof Romancivilization,
Moore 1998, 50-66. including "porticoes,baths,and elegant dinner parties"(por-
65Nielsen1993, 1:27 n. 1 3. ticusetbalineaetconviviorum The notion of intro-
elegantiam).
66SeeTer.Haut.655, Eun.592,596,600; Caec.fr.98R;Non. ducing enervatinghot baths to hitherto stout nativepopula-
108M (155L), s.v."ephippium."For discussionof these refer- tions might therefore have emerged as a literarytoposbyTro-
ences, see Fagan 1999, 46-7. gus's day.
67Itis noteworthythat the comment in Trogus (awriterof 8 See Fagan 1999, 53-4.

erosity of a local benefactor in gracing the town with is essentially an evolutionary proposition: artificial-
numerous functional structures. Among them is a ly-heated Roman baths grew out of the natural con-
lacus balnearius.69Even if the precise meaning of this ditions occurring in Campania.
term remains unclear, the adjective balnearius sure- In recent years, however, there has been an ap-
ly suggests a familiarity among the people of Aletri- peal to move the focus of investigation away from
um with baths and bathing; and since the benefac- Campania. It has been argued, for instance, that
tor's other actions pertain to public structures, the naturally heated pools and vents occur elsewhere
lacus balnearius also must have served the local than in Campania or that, as we have seen, the con-
populace. The text, then, offers epigraphic sup- tributions of private baths in central Italy or public
port for the presence of public baths bordering baths in Magna Graecia were crucial in determin-
Rome by this date, but we can say nothing as to the ing the form of Roman baths.72 In a parallel devel-
physical form of those baths, their construction opment, other leisure buildings traditionally ar-
date, or when they first had been introduced to the gued to have originated in Campania have had their
region. origins reassigned to other locations.73 Many schol-
The literary evidence, sparse though it is, plays ars of Roman baths today, therefore, downplay the
an essential role in establishing the third century importance of Campania and turn to other sources
B.C. as a pivotal period in the early history of Ro- as critical to the genesis of the Roman public bath.
man public baths. By the end of that century, the In my view, however, the case for Campania re-
Romans had already taken up the bathing habit in mains the strongest. Three factors in particular
the capital; by the end of the following century it make it so. First, most of our earliest evidence for
can be archaeologically attested in different regions Roman baths points to Campania. Here are found
of south and central Italy. The archaeological mate- our earliest physical remains (at Cumae, ca. 180
rial would further suggest that the distinctively B.C., and the facilities in the towns buried by Ve-
Roman form of bathhouse was already in existence suvius), and the region provides the setting from
by the middle of the second century B.C., quite many early literary references to public baths (419-
possibly earlier. The question then begs, how and 21). Even if the plays of Plautus suggest that there
where did this form evolve? were public baths in Rome (or at least in an un-
specified Roman urban setting) by 200 B.C., it will
THE CASE FOR CAMPANIA
be remembered that Varro (Ling. 9.68) expressly
It was long ago suggested that Roman baths orig- states that public baths were introduced to the city
inated in Campania, a position recently supported from without. At the very least, the focus of so much
forcefully by I. Nielsen.70 The chief basis for the of the earliest material on Campania needs to be
centrality of Campania is twofold: first, the tradi- respected.
tion about Sergius Orata and his elusive pensiles Second, wider contextual considerations make
balineae and, second, the presence there of volca- Campania an excellent candidate for the appear-
nically heated pools and vents, especially in the ance of the Roman public bath. Campania in the
Campi Flegrei near Cumae. While the role of Ora- third and second centuries B.C. was a rich and pros-
ta remains too uncertain to offer a concrete basis perous place. Many of Pompeii's first grand hous-
for argument, the case to be made from the Campi es, such as the House of the Faun or House of the
Flegrei is more cogent. Italian scholars of the early Figured Capitals, were constructed during this
20th century argued that local populations in Cam- period and several major public buildings were
pania had used the natural pools for communal added to the city's fabric, such as those clustering
immersion bathing and the vents for steam-bath- around the theater at the southern end of the city.
ing, and that a desire to recreate artificially such But Pompeii was not alone in prosperity: other sites,
conditions generated the Roman-style bath.7" This too, reveal the region's wealth.74 The region was also
69CIL12.1529= CIL10.5807= ILS5348= ILLRP528= Fagan 72De Haan 1996;DeLaine1989;Yegul1992,48-91, 377-80.

1999, 285-6 (no. 157). For the location of Aletrium,see Tal- 73See the ingenious argumentsof Welch (1994;forthcom-
bert 2000, 44 D2. ing) for the non-Campaniansourcesof the amphitheateror
70Nielsen1985;her positionis recappedin ead. 1993, 1:20- the basilicarespectively.See also the perceptiveobservations
2. Nielsen'sworkbuildson the observationsof earlierscholars; of Gros 1996, 235-44 (on basilicas)and 317-23 (on amphi-
see infra, n. 71. theaters).
71Crova1953; DiCapua 1940; Sgobbo 1929. It should be 74Richardson1988, 67-127; Zanker1998, 32-60. On the
noted that the politicalclimate surroundingSgobbo and Di- historyof Campaniain this era, see Cerchiai1995, 195-224;
Capua'sworkmadearguingforan entirelynativeItalianorigin Frederiksen1984, 221-84; PuglieseCarratelli1991,esp. 151-
for Romanbathsadvisable,althoughthisobservationdoes not 91 (P. Somellaon urbanization)and 193-233 (F.De Martino
in itselfvitiate their arguments. on economy and society).

culturally diverse and vibrant in the years before vided the context for the culmination of a devel-
and after 200 B.C. Greeks, Oscans, and Romans opmental process that stretched back chronologi-
all enjoyed a permanent presence in the area, and cally before the third century and extended geo-
exposure to more far-flung cultures came daily graphically farther afield than the region itself.
through Campania's many ports. An apt illustra- The evolution of complex architectural genres is
tion of this cultural interaction comes from the unlikely to display a simple linear profile, so that
House of the Faun at Pompeii. Here, the affluent the unique position of third and second century
Oscan owner of the property adorned one room B.C. Campania as a prosperous and innovative
of his palatial house with a magnificent mosaic. cultural confluence offers all the more reason to
The subject he chose was thoroughly Greek, al- look to it as the progenitor of the Roman bath's
though set in the Near East: a victory of Alexander's peculiar form, itself clearly the product of multi-
over Darius III, which was copied in tesserae from ple influences.78
a painting of ca. 300 B.C. by Philoxenos of Ere- Finally, as earlier scholars emphasized, Campa-
tria.75 The introduction into Campania of foreign nia offers ready explanations for the chief charac-
cultural influences and the subsequent folding teristics of the Roman public bath: the communal
of those influences into local tastes could not be pools and the heated sequential spaces. While
clearer. Although not specifically a Campanian hard evidence for early Italic natural bathing prac-
phenomenon, concrete had also been introduced tices is lacking, attention has focused especially
as a building material by ca. 200 B.C.76 The impor- on the monumental and confusing leisure com-
tance of this substance for the construction of Ro- plex at Baiae. Although the visible remains date
man-style baths needs little elucidation. Without to the Augustan period and later, the hillsides at
it, the erection of a series of barrel-vaulted cham- Baiae are riddled both with natural caverns and
bers of the sort that characterizes surviving exam- man-made tunnels and chambers fashioned for
ples of early Campanian baths would have been sweating and bathing. That local populations had
far more difficult. All of the preceding factors long used such subterranean places in an unde-
found public expression in new architectural veloped state is surely beyond doubt; certainly
forms that are first found in Campania, such as the Medieval manuscript illustrations of Peter of Ebo-
basilica and the amphitheater. In my view, the Ro- li's De Balneis Puteolanis-themselves possibly de-
man public bathhouse can be added to the list. rived from now-lost classical depictions-clearly
Recent objections notwithstanding, Campania still show people bathing in natural caverns.79 Later
offers the first clear examples of each type, even if classical authors also commented explicitly on the
further levels of inspiration can be detected earli- existence of these natural phenomena and their
er and elsewhere.77 In this sense, Campania pro- use by locals.80
75Zanker1998, 33-43; see also Cohen 1997. are located in Campania,strong testimonyfor that region's
76See Adams 1994, 79-81; Anderson 1997, 145-51; Boeth- prosperityand architecturalvitality.
ius 1978, 126-9; Lamprecht1996. The observationsof Blake 79Yeguil1996,142 (caverns)and 148-55 (illustrations).The
(1947, 324-30) remaininstructive.It is not possibleto locate manuscriptdepictionsof the BalneumGimborosumand Bal-
the discoveryof concrete in anyparticularregion of Italy.The neum OrtiDonici (ibid.,figs.25-26) areparticularlynotewor-
substancehas long been thought to have arrivedin Rome by thy;note also the Balneum ForisCryptae,Balneum Cryptae
174 B.C., as represented in the remodeled PorticusAemilia Palumbariaeseu Sybillae,BalneumColme,and BalneumSpe-
along the bank of the Tiber (Gatti 1934); however,a recent luncae (see the relevantentriesin Di Bonito and Giamminelli
reevaluationof thisstructure(Tuck2000) proposesa laterdate 1992). Physicalevidence for early human activityin the re-
for it, in the Sullan era. The Temple of MagnaMateron the gion, nevermind the exploitationof the CampiFlegrei,is scat-
Palatine (constructed204-191 B.C.) maywell representthe tered, and the literarysourcescouched in myth;see Adinolfi
earliestappearanceof concrete in the city;see LTUR3.206-8 1982;Giacomelliand Scandone 1992, 16-23; and next note.
(P. Pensabene). 80Dio48.50-51; Livy41.16.3-4; Vitr. De arch.2.6.2. Note
77Evenif, asWelch argues (supra,n. 73), the amphitheater also Celsus Med.2.17.1; Strabo5.2.9 and 5.4.5. In the latter
had its ultimate roots in Rome or the basilicain Hellenistic notice, Strabocites the historianEphorus (ca. 405-330 B.C.)
palaces,thereisno reasonto supposethatwhatmightbe termed in reportingthat the firstinhabitantsof the region, the Cim-
the definitiveform of each genre-that commonly designat- merians,lived entirelyunderground.Ephorusmaywell here
ed "Roman"- did not firstappearin Campania.The evidence be transmittinglocaltraditionsaboutage-oldhumanuse of the
would still suggestthat it did. cavernsin the region and possiblyreflectingpracticesof his
78Futrell(1997, 33-44) comes to an analogousconclusion ownday.Note alsothe traditionthatOdysseus'ssteersmanBaios
about the origins of the stone amphitheater:it appeared in wasburiedhere, givingriseto the name "Baiae"(e.g., Lycoph.
prosperousand innovatoryCampaniabutunder the influence Alex.688-91; Strabo 5.4.6); the notice suggests at least an
of Romancolonists.WorkingfromJouffroy(1986), she notes awarenessof Baiae's attractionsamong the learned of the
(40) that128of 310 knownpublicbuildingsin RepublicanItaly HellenisticAge.

The establishment of local bathing habits cen- A combination of factors generated the suspensu-
tered on communal immersion in hot water would ra, not any single requirement or circumstance.
have been an obvious corollary of such conditions. Campania provides all the conditions conducive
Furthermore, the putative use of caverns for sweat- to the development of the Roman public bath, and
ing may well have generated the need for grada- at the very time suggested by the literary sources
tions of heated space, whereby an original, nonarti- as critical for the appearance of that type of facili-
ficially-heated bathing ritual entailed exposure to ty. Here was a wealthy and vibrant place, standing
steam in different degrees. In other words, the Cam- at a cultural crossroads not only of Italy but of the
pi Flegrei offered the natural conditions required wider Mediterranean, displaying signs of architec-
to stimulate the development of existing technolo- tural innovation, and boasting the local natural
gies to fit specific, long-established needs. On a conditions to stimulate the move toward the de-
broad perspective, this order of events also makes velopment of the Roman-style bath. All of these
the most sense, since the ancients rarely if ever factors combined make the case for Campania,
modified technologies without a reason to do so. despite its necessarily circumstantial nature, the
The Campanian desire to reproduce their natural strongest on available evidence; unless a more via-
bathing habits artificially offers a likely stimulus for ble alternative can be found, it must remain our
the extension of the Greek "annular" hypocaust best option.82
into a full suspensura. The Greek-style hypocaust, My reassertion of the centrality of Campania in
used from the outset to heat both water and space, the development history of the Roman-style pub-
was thus elevated into the suspensura primarily out lic bath, it must be stressed, does not entail the
a desire not to heat communal pools (which it could abandonment or even the less vigorous pursuit of
do already), but to recreate the conditions of a other lines of inquiry. The region in the third and
steam-cavern. If this were so, then it was the estab- second centuries B.C., as a crucible of cultural in-
lished bathing habits of the Campanians that pro- teraction, merely represents the final stage of an
vided the crucial factor in bringing the Roman-style evolutionary sequence that surely has roots extend-
bath to its final fruition. ing much farther afield and deeper into the past.
The reconstruction proposed above is necessar- Whereas earlier scholars attributed the Roman
ily speculative. It is true, as some have pointed bath in its entirety to the region, it is argued here
out, that hot pools and steam vents occur outside that Campania offered the context for its final
the Campi Flegrei, or that other possibilities exist appearance. The Roman public bath did not "orig-
for the evolution of the Roman sequence of bath- inate" anywhere-it was generated by various cir-
ing rooms.81 What makes the case for Campania cumstances, all of which are locatable in and
compelling, however, is its cumulative cogency, not around Campania. Narrowly focused claims that
any one element of it. Thus, although the Campa- the origins of Roman baths lie specifically with
nians may have wanted to heat spaces in accor- the Greeks or with the private baths of Italy ought
dance with their established bathing practices, therefore to be replaced in favor of a more em-
they did not the need hypocausts to do it; braziers bracing search for diverse precursors. Previous
would have sufficed, and did in certain facilities. unitary claims have all been found wanting as ex-
However, the presence in the region of hypocaust- planations for the appearance of the Roman bath
ed Greek baths offered alternatives, which, if in and of themselves although, in most instances,
adapted, proved far more effective, and new build- threads of influence can be detected. It is here
ing technologies facilitated the entire endeavor. argued that conditions in third- and second-cen-
81
Supra, n. 72. Various reasons for the development for seems far more likely that the bathers' need for gradations
the sequence of rooms can be speculated, such as the de- of heat came first, and the sequence of heated rooms re-
sire to make use of leftover gases from a single heated room flected that need.
(caldarium) led to the addition of a second, lesser-heated 82 One line of inquirythat might throwmore light on this
room (tepidarium); or the structuraladvantagesof using a question is that of third- and second-centurywater supply
series of chambers as mutually-buttressingbarrel-vaults;or and irrigationsystemsin Campania.It is true that most sim-
by appealing to the "natural"orderliness of Roman archi- ple baths did not need aqueduct water and could function
tecture.All are essentially"accidental"explanations and are effectively from wells or cisterns (see Fagan 1999a, 73 n.
not particularlyconvincing: it is not immediately clear why 106), but nevertheless investigation of Campanianhydrau-
a seriesof chambersintended to buttressbarrelvaultsshould lics in the crucial period could yield pertinent results. For
be sequentiallyheated, nor whyleftovergases had to be used some recent work on the subject of Campanianwater sup-
instead ofvented (as theywere in Greekhypocaustedbaths), ply (mostlydealing with laterperiods), see De Haan andJan-
nor how "natural"orderliness generates heated spaces. It sen 1996; Ohlig 2000 (non vidi).

tury B.C. Campania brought those threads togeth- Cerchiai, L. 1995. I Campani.Biblioteca di archeologia
er. Even if Campania was not necessarily the birth- 23. Milan: Longanesi.
Cohen, A. 1997. TheAlexanderMosaic: Storiesof Victory
place of every facet of the Roman public bath, it and Defeat.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
was surely the nursery of its final form. Crova, B. 1953. "Le terme romane nella Campania."Atti
dellVIIIcovengonazionaledi storiadell'architettura:271-88.
CLASSICS AND ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN Cultrera, G. 1938. "Siracusa- rovine di un antico stabil-
STUDIES AND HISTORY imento idraulico in contrada Zappala." Nsc:261-301.
PENN STATE UNIVERSITY
Dalcher, K. 1994. Das Peristylhaus1 von Iaitas: Architektur
und Baugeschichte.Studia letina 6. Zurich: E. Rentsch.
108 WEAVER BUILDING
De Haan, N. 1996. "The Significance of Roman Private
UNIVERSITY PARK, PENNSYLVANIA 16802-5500 Baths for the Development of Public Baths." Paper
GGF2@PSU.EDU read at the Second International Conference on
Ancient Baths, 22-27 April, Varna.
. 1997. "Nam nihil melius esse quam sine turba lavari:
Works Cited Privatbader in den Vesuvstadten." Papersof theNether-
lands Institutein Rome56:205-26.
Adams, J.-P. 1994. Roman Building: Materials and Tech- . 2001. "Si aquae copia patiatur: Pompeian Pri-
niques. London: Batsford. vate Baths and the Use of Water." In WaterUse and
Adinolfi, R. 1982. I CampiFlegreinella preistoria.Naples: Hydraulicsin the Roman City,edited by A.O. Koloski-
Massimo. Ostrow, 41-9. AIA Colloquia and Conference Papers
Aleshire, S. 1989. The Athenian Asklepieion:The People, 3. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt.
theirDedications, and the Inventories.Amsterdam: J.C. De Haan, N., and G.M.C. Jansen, eds. 1996. Cura
Gieben. Aquarumin Campania:Proceedingsof theNinth Interna-
. 1991. Asklepiosat Athens:Epigraphicand Prosopo- tional Congresson the Historyof WaterManagementand
graphicEssays on the Athenian Healing Cults. Amster- HydraulicEngineeringin theMediterraneanWorld.Bulle-
dam:J.C. Gieben. tin Antieke Beschaving Suppl. 4. Leiden: BABesch.
Allen, H.L. 1974. "Excavations at Morgantina (Serra DeLaine,J. 1988. "Recent Research on Roman Baths."
Orlando) 1970-1972." AJA78:368-83. JRA 1:11-32.
Anderson,J.C. 1997. RomanArchitecture and Society.Balti- . 1989. "Some Observations on the Transition
more:Johns Hopkins University Press. from Greek to Roman Baths in Hellenistic Italy."Med-
Benedum,J. 1967. "Die Balnea Pensilia des Asklepiades itArch2:111-25.
von Prusa." Gesnerus24:93-107. .. 1992. "New Models, Old Modes: Continuity and
Blake, M.E. 1947. AncientRomanConstructionin Italyfrom Change in the Design of Public Baths." In Die romische
thePrehistoricPeriodto Augustus. Carnegie Institution Stadt im 2. Jahrhundertn. Chr:DerFunktionswandeldes
of Washington Publication 570. Washington, D.C.: offentlichenRaumes:AktendesKolloquiumsXanten 1990,
Carnegie Institution of Washington. edited by H-J. Schalles, H. von Hesberg, and P. Zank-
Boethius, A. 1978. Etruscanand EarlyRomanArchitecture. er, 257-75. Cologne: Rheinland.
2nd ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 1993. "RomanBaths and Bathing."JRA6:348-58.
Boudon, V. 1994. "Le r6olede l'eau dans les prescrip- - . 1997. TheBathsof Caracalla:A Studyin theDesign,
tions medicales d'Asclepios chez Galien et Aelius Aris- Construction, andEconomicsofLarge-scaleBuildingProjects
tide." In L'eau, la sante et la maladiedans le mondegrec, in ImperialRome.JRASuppl. 25. Portsmouth, RI:Jour-
edited by R. Ginouves, A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets, J. nal of Roman Archaeology.
Jouanna, and L. Villard, 157-68. BCH Suppl. 28. Par- . 1999. "Benefactions and Urban Renewal: Bath
is: de Boccard. Buildings in Roman Italy."In Roman Baths and Bath-
Brodner, E. 1992. Die romischenThermenund das Antike ing: Proceedingsof the First International Conferenceon
Badewesen:Eine kulturhistorischeBetrachtung.2nd ed. RomanBaths Held at Bath, England, 30 March-4 April,
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. 1992. 2 pts., edited byJ. DeLaine and D.E.Johnston,
Broise, H. 1994. "Lapratique du bain chaud par immer- 67-74. JRA Suppl. 37. Portsmouth, RI: Journal of
sion en Sicile et dans la peninsule italique a l'epoque Roman Archaeology.
hellenistique." XeniaAntiqua 3:17-32. DeLaine, J., and D.E.Jonhston. 1999. RomanBaths and
Broise, H., and V. Jolivet. 1991. "Le bain en Etrurie i Bathing: Proceedingsof theFirstInternationalConference
l'epoque hellenistique." In Les thermesromains:Actes on RomanBathsHeld at Bath,England,30 March-4April,
de la table ronde organis&e par l'Ecolefranfaise de Rome 1992. 2 pts.JRA Suppl. 37. Portsmouth, RI:Journal of
(Rome,11-12 novembre1988), Ecole francaise de Rome, Roman Archaeology.
79-95. CEFR142. Rome: Ecole francaise de Rome. De Rossi, G.M. 1979. Bovillae.Forma Italiae: Topografi-
Bruno V.J.,and R.T. Scott. 1993. Cosa.Vol. 4, TheHouses. ca antica, regio 1, v. 15. Florence: Olschki.
University Park: Penn State University Press. Di Bonito, R., and R. Giamminelli. 1992. Le Termedi Cam-
Burford, A. 1969. The GreekTempleBuilders at Epidau- pi Flegrei:Topografiastorica.Milan:Jandi Sapori.
ros:A Social and EconomicStudyof Building in theAskl- Di Capua, F. 1940. "Appunti su l'origine e sviluppo delle
epian Sanctuary, During the Fourth and early Third terme romane." RendNap20:81-160.
CenturiesB. C. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Ecole franqaise de Rome. 1991. Les thermesromains:Actes
Carducci, C. 1940. Tibur:Regio IV, Sabini et Samnium. de la table ronde organiseepar 1'Ecolefrancaise de Rome
Italia romana: municipi e colonie, ser. 1, v. 3. Rome: (Rome,11-12 novembre1988). CEFR142. Rome: Ecole
Istituto di studi romani. francaise de Rome.

Eschebach, H. 1970. Die StddtbaulicheEntwicklung des Gruen, E.S. 1984. TheHellenisticWorldand the Comingof
antikenPompejimiteinemPlan 1:1000 und einemExkurs: Rome.2 vols. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Die Baugeschichteder StabianerThermennach H. Sulze. Harvey, P.B.,Jr. 1986. "Historical Topicality in Plautus."
Heidelberg: F.W.Kerle. CW79:297-304.
. 1979. Die StabianerThermenin Pompeji.Berlin: de Heinz, W. 1984. RomischeThermen:Badewesenund Bade-
Gruyter. luxus im romischenReich.Munich: Hirmer.
Fabricotti, E. 1976. "I bagni nelle prime ville romane." Hilton Turner,J. 1947-1948. "Sergius Orata, Pioneer of
CronPomp2:29-111. Radiant Heating." CJ43:486-7.
Fagan, G.G. 1996. "Sergius Orata: Inventor of the Hy- Houston, G.W. 1992. "The OtherSpasof Ancient Campa-
pocaust?" Phoenix 50:56-66. nia." In The Two Worldsof thePoet:New Perspectiveson
. 1999a. Bathing in Public in theRoman World.Ann Vergil,edited by R.M. Wilhelm and H.Jones, 356-70.
Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
---. 1999b. "Interpreting the Evidence: Did Slaves loppolo, G. 1992. Le termedel Sarno at Pompei:Iter di
Bathe at the Baths?"In RomanBaths and Bathing:Pro- un 'analisiper la conoscenza,il restauroe la protezionesis-
ceedingsof the First International Conferenceon Roman micadelmonumento.Rome: L'ERMAdi Bretcschneider.
Baths Held at Bath, England, 30 March-4 April, 1992. 2 Jackson, R. 1988. Doctorsand Diseases in the Roman Em-
pts., edited byJ. DeLaine and D.E. Johnston, 25-34. pire.Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
JRA Suppl. 37. Portsmouth, RI: Journal of Roman Jouffroy, H. 1986. La constructionpubliqueen Italie et dans
Archaeology. l'Afriqueromaine.Strasbourg: AECR.
Farrington, A. 1999. "The Introduction and Spread of Koloski-Ostrow, A.O. 1990. The Sarno Bath Complex.
Roman Bathing in Greece." In RomanBaths and Bath- Rome: L'ERMAdi Bretschneider.
ing: Proceedingsof the First International Conferenceon -.Forthcoming. "The City Baths in Pompeii and
RomanBaths Held at Bath, England, 30 March-4 April, Herculaneum." In Pompeiiand the Ancient Settlements
1992. 2 pts., edited byJ. DeLaine and D.E.Johnston, underVesuvius,edited by P. Foss andJJ. Dobbins. Lon-
57-65. JRA Suppl. 37. Portsmouth, RI: Journal of don: Routledge.
Roman Archaeology. Kunze, E., and H. Schleif. 1944. IV Berichtiiberdie Aus-
Fracchia, H. 1999. "Western Lucania, Southern Samni- grabungenin Olympia.Berlin: de Gruyter.
um, and Northern Apulia: Settlement and Cultural Ladstatter, G. 1995. "Das sog. 'Griechische Hypocaus-
Changes, Fifth-Third Centuries B.C." Paper read at tenbad' in Zeusheiligutm von Olympia: Eine Neube-
the Third E. Togo Salmon Conference, 1-2 October, trachtung in Verbindung mit fruihen italischen Ther-
Hamilton. menarchitektur." Paper read at the conference
Fraenkel, E. 1960. ElementiPlautini in Plauto. Florence: "Constructions publiques et programmes edilitaires
"La nuova Italia" Editrice. en Grece du IIe S. av.J.-C. au Ier S. ap.J.-C.," 14-17
Frederiksen, M. 1984. Campania.London: British School May,Athens.
at Rome. Lafon, X. 1991. "Les bains prives dans l'Italie Romaine
Fulford, M., and A. Wallace-Hadrill. 1998. "Unpeeling au IIe siecle av.J.-C."In Les thermesromains:Actesde la
Pompeii." Antiquity72:128-45. tablerondeorganiseepar 'Ecolefranfaise de Rome(Rome,
Futrell, A. 1997. Bloodin theArena:TheSpectacleof Roman 11-12 novembre1988), Ecole francaise de Rome, 97-
Power.Austin: University of Texas Press. 114. CEFR142. Rome: Ecole francaise de Rome.
Gatti, G. 1934. "Saepta Iulia e Porticus Aemilia nella Lambrinoudakis, V. 1994. "L'eau medicale a Epidaure."
forma severiana." BullCom62:135-44. In L'eau,la santeet la maladiedans le mondegrec,edited
Giacomelli, L., and R. Scandone. 1992. CampiFlegrei, by R. Ginouves, A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets, J. Jouanna,
CampaniaFelix: II Golfodi Napoli tra storia ed eruzioni. and L. Villard, 225-36. BCH Suppl. 28. Paris: de Boc-
Naples: Liguori. card.
Ginouves, R. 1959. L'etablissement thermal de Gortys Lamprecht, H.-O. 1996. Opus Caementitium:Bautechnik
d'Arcadie.Paris:J. Vrin. derRomer.5th ed. Dusseldorf: Beton.
-. 1962. Balaneutike: Recherchessur le bain dans Ling, R. 1981. Review of Die StabianerThermenin Pompeji,
l'antiquitegrecque.BEFAR200. Paris: de Boccard. by H. Eschebach. JRS 71:213-4.
--. 1994. "L'eau dans les sanctuaires medicaux." Maiuri, A. 1950. "Scoperta di un edificio termale nella
In L'eau, la sante et la maladie dans le mondegrec,edit- Regio VIII, Insula 5, Nr. 36." Nsc:116-36.
ed by R. Ginouves, A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets,J.Jouan- Mallwitz, A. 1972. Olympia und seine Bauten. Munich:
na, and L. Villard, 237-46. BCHSuppl. 28. Paris: de Prestel.
Boccard. Manderschied, H. 1988. Bibliographie zum romischen
Ginouves, R., A.-M. Guimier-Sorbets,J.Jouanna, and L. Badewesenunter besondererBeriiksichtigungder offentli-
Villard, eds. 1994. L'eau, la sante et la maladie dans le chen Thermen.Munich: Drucken.
mondegrec:Actes du colloqueorganisea Paris (CNRS et Mau, A., and F.W.Kelsey. 1907. Pompeii:Its Life and Art.
Fondation Singer-Polignac)du 25 au 27 novembre1992 Rev. ed. New York: MacMillan.
par le Centre de recherche "Archeologie et systemes Merten, E.W. 1983. Bider und Badegepflogenheiten in der
d 'information "etpar I'URA1255 "Medecine
grecque."BCH DarstellungderHistoriaAugusta. Bonn: Habelt.
Suppl. 28. Paris: de Boccard. Moore, T.J. 1998. The Theatreof Plautus. Austin: Univer-
Goodburn, R. 1979. ChedworthRoman Villa. London: sity of Texas Press.
National Trust. Netzer, E. 1999. "Herodian Bath-Houses."In RomanBaths
Gros, P. 1996. L'architecture romainedu debutdu IIIe siecle and Bathing:Proceedingsof theFirstInternationalConfer-
av. J.-C. a la fin du Haut-Empire.Vol. 1, Les monuments enceon RomanBaths Held at Bath, England, 30 March-4
publics.Paris: Picard. April, 1992. 2 pts., edited by J. DeLaine and D.E.

426 G.G. FAGAN, THE GENESIS OF THE ROMAN PUBLIC BATH
Johnston, 45-55.JRA Suppl. 37. Portsmouth, RI:Jour- Talbert, R.J.A., ed. 2000. BarringtonAtlas of the Greekand
nal of Roman Archaeology. Roman World.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Nielsen, I. 1985. "Considerazioni sulle prime fasi Tuck, S.L. 2000. "ANew Identification for the 'Porticus
dell'evoluzione dell'edificio termale romano." Anal- Aemilia."'JRA 13:175-82.
Rom14:81-112. Weber, M. 1996. AntikeBadekultur.Munich: C.H. Beck.
. 1993. ThermaeetBalnea: TheArchitectureand Cul- Welch, K. 1994. "The Roman Arena in Late-Republican
turalHistoryof RomanPublicBaths. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Aar- Italy: A New Interpretation." JRA 7:59-80.
hus: Aarhus University Press. . Forthcoming. "Explaining the Origin of the
Ohlig, C. 2000. De AquisPompeiorum:Die Herkunft,Zulei- Roman Basilica."
tung und Verteilungdes Wassersim CastellumAquae.Cir- Wikander, 0. 1996. "Senators and Equites VI: Caius
cumvesuviana 4. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. Sergius Orata and the Invention of the Hypocaust."
Orlandini, P. 1960. "Gela:Impianto greco di bagni pub- OpRom20:177-82.
blici presso l'Ospizio." NSc:181-211. Wilson, A.J.N. 1966. Emigrationfrom Italy in theRepubli-
Pasquinucci, M. 1987. Termeromane e vita quotidiana. can Age of Rome.Manchester: Manchester University
Modena: F.C. Panin Editore. Press.
Pugliese Carratelli, G., ed. 1991. Storiae civiltddella Cam- Wilson, R.J.A. 1990. Sicily under the Roman Empire:The
pania. Vol 1, L'evoantico.Naples: Electa. Archaeologyof a RomanProvince,36 BC-AD 535. Warm-
Richardson, L.,jr. 1988. Pompeii:An ArchitecturalHistory. inster: Aris and Phillips.
Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press. Yegul, F. 1981. Review of Die StabianerThermenin Pompeji,
Salmon, E.T. 1967. Samniumand theSamnites.Cambridge: by H. Eschebach. AJA85:506-7.
Cambridge University Press. . 1992. BathsandBathingin ClassicalAntiquity. Cam-
Sgobbo, I. 1929. "Terme flegree ed origine delle terme bridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
romane." AttiCStR1:186-94. . 1996. "The Thermo-Mineral Complex at Baiae
Tagliamonte, G. 1996. I Sanniti: Caudini, Irpini, Pentri, and deBalneisPuteolanis."ArtB78:137-61.
Carricini,Frentani. Biblioteca di archeologia 25. Mi- Zanker, P. 1998. Pompeii:Public and Private Life. Cam-
lan: Longanesi. bridge: Harvard University Press.


Roman Baths Origin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Roman Baths Origin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Genesis of the Roman Public Bath: Recent Approaches and Future Directions

Author(s): Garrett G. Fagan

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

Abstract strengths and weaknesses but also future directions

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

pools (termed solia or alvei).4 It would be fair to say

surfaces radiating heat. So many Roman baths fea- m

4See DeLaine1988,15-6; Heinz 1984,51;Yegul1992,33-5. detailsareunclear.

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

39SeeYegiil1992,21-4 withamplereferenceto earlierstud- earlyfirstcenturyB.C., see Zanker1998, 32-60.

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

44It remainsunclearwhat exactlyEschebachfound in the 1:27) reconstructsfour or five hip-bathchambers,a total of

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

0 the questions that remain open about the early ap-

I! THE ROLE OF MAGNA GRAECIA

While the case for the Romans adopting their

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

52DeLaine 1989, 120. On the Gela bath's licanBathsat PompeiiremainsMaiuri1950.

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

bers; no walls survive to help determine its func-

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

Fig. 16. Sperlonga. Villa Prato bathroom. (EFR,neg. SP1254)

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

69CIL12.1529= CIL10.5807= ILS5348= ILLRP528= Fagan 72De Haan 1996;DeLaine1989;Yegul1992,48-91, 377-80.

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:46:17 PM

You might also like