Listed 72 sub titles with search on: Archaeological sites for wider area of: "ARGOLIS Prefecture PELOPONNISOS" .
DIMENA (Village) EPIDAVROS
At the hillock of Bassas there developed, first, a settlement of the Greek Middle Ages. Around the area were found tombs with remarkable objects. Because of the natural fortification, it survived during Mycenaean times. It is surrounded with blocks of stones, but only those at the south site have been saved. Some people guess that it was the capital of some small kingdom. Significant is the fact that there are still tracks from the corrugations that were on the carriage roads, impressed where the wheels of the carriages went deep.
This text is cited Mar 2003 from the Municipality of Epidavros URL below.
TIRYNS (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
Murus or Moenia (teichos). A wall surrounding an unroofed enclosure, as opposed
to paries (toichos), the wall of a building. The word maceria denotes a boundary
wall, fence-wall. Cities were enclosed by walls at a very early period of Greek
history, as is shown by the epithet used by Homer "well-walled" of Tiryns,
Mycenae, etc., and the massive remains of those cities have also demonstrated
the fact So vast, in truth, are some of these structures as to have induced a
belief among the ancients that they were the work of Cyclopes. (See Cyclopes.)
The following principal species of city walls are to be distinguished:
(a) those in which the masses of stone are of irregular shape and put together
loosely, the interstices being filled by smaller stones, as in the wall at Tiryns;
(b) those in which polygonal stones are carefully fitted together, and their faces
cut so as to give the whole a comparatively smooth surface, as in the walls at
Larissa and at Cenchreae; and (c) those in which the blocks are laid in horizontal
courses more or less regular with the vertical joints either perpendicular or
oblique, and are more or less accurately fitted together, as in the walls beside
the "Lion Gate" at Mycenae.
Brick was largely used in Egypt, Assyria, and Chaldaea, and also in
Greece and Italy; but was often defended against the weather by an outer casing
of stone, when the bricks were sun-dried instead of burned (See Fictile).
After the first Persian War the Athenians began to use marble for their finest
buildings, as in the Propylaea and the Parthenon. A century later marble was also
used for facing walls of brick. Less important structures were made of smaller
stones, rough or square, flints, or bricks.
At Rome there were several kinds of masonry (See Caementum).
(a) Blocks of stone were laid in alternate conrses, lengthwise in one course and
crosswise in the next. (b) The stones in each course were laid alternately along
and across. (c) The stones were laid all lengthwise. (d) The stones entirely crosswise.
(e) The courses were alternately higher and lower than each other. The earliest
walls at Rome, largely of Etruscan origin, were built of huge quadrangular stones,
hewn, and placed together without cement. Such were the Carcer Mamertinus (see
Carcer),
the Cloaca Maxima (see Cloaca),
and the Servian Walls (see Etruria).
The Romans also used small rough stones, not laid in courses, but held together
by mortar (opus incertum) and courses of flat tiles. Tiles were also introduced
in the stone and brick walls. Brick covered with painted stucco was a very common
material at Rome, and even columns were so constructed.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ELLINIKO (Village) ARGOS
At the distance of about a mile from the Erasinus,
and about half a mile to the right of the road, the remains of a pyramid are found,
occupying the summit of a rocky eminence among the lower declivities of Mt. Chaon.
Its site corresponds to that of the sepulchral monuments of the Argives,
mentioned by Pausanias (ii. 24.7); but its style of architecture would lead us
to assign to it an early date. The masonry of this edifice is of an intermediate
style between the Cyclopian and polygonal, consisting of large irregular blocks,
with a tendency, however, to quadrangular forms and horizontal courses; the inequalities
being, as usual, filled up with smaller pieces. The largest stones may be from
four to five feet in length, and from two to three in thickness. There are traces
of mortar between the stones, which ought, perhaps, to be assigned rather to subsequent
repairs than to the original workmanship. The symmetry of the structure is not
strictly preserved, being interrupted by a rectangular recess cutting off one
corner of the building. In this angle there is a doorway, consisting of two perpendicular
side walls, surmounted by an open gable or Gothic arch, formed by horizontal layers
of masonry converging into an apex, as in the triangular opening above the Gate
of Lions and Treasury of Atreus. This door gives access to a passage between two
walls. At its extremity on the right hand is another doorway, of which little
or nothing of the masonry is preserved, opening into the interior chamber or vault
(Mure, vol. ii. p. 196) This was not the only pyramid in the Argeia.
A second, no longer existing, is mentioned by Pausanias (ii. 25.7) on the road
between Argos and Tiryns;
a third, of which remains exist, is described by Gell (Itinerary of Greece, p.
102), on the road between Nauplia
and Epidaurus; and there
was probably a fourth to the S. of Lerna,
since that part of the coast, where Danaus is said to have landed, was called
Pyramia. (Plut. Pyrrh. 32; Paus. ii.38.4). It is a curious circumstance that pyramids
are found in the Argeia,
and in no other part of Greece, especially when taken in connection with the story
of the Aegyptian colony of Danaus.
This extract is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited April 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ASKLEPIEION OF EPIDAURUS (Ancient sanctuary) ARGOLIS
In the picturesque valley with a magical environment, where there were natural and healing sources, the sanctum of Asklepios was built in ancient times. It developed, over the years, to become the famous therapeutic center where many of the patients came from everywhere to the god "Deliverer", as they called him. Symbols of the Asklepios were the snake, the stick and the pot of therapeutic fluid. In the valley, at first, appeared a prehistoric settlement. The king of Epidavros "Malo" built then the first sanctuary in honor of Apollo of Maleata.
According to the local tradition, Asklepios was son of Apollo and Koronidos, daughter of the Thessaly king, Flegia. Askelpios was born at the Tithio rock, where his mother left him because she feared the anger of her father Flegia. So she left the child and a goat found and suckled the baby and the dog from the flock notified the shepherd, who found the infant. Then the first mountain was named Tithio in honor of the goat and the next mountain named "Kinos" in honor of the dog that found him. The influence and the brilliancy of Asklepios as the most important therapeutic god, brought huge economic power to the sanctuary during the 4th and 3rd century b.c, and the large group of buildings in the area materialized. Under the cover of these monumental buildings, the whole worship took place.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from the Municipality of Epidavros URL below, which contains image.
The Sanctuary of Epidavros is one of the most significant religious
and therapeutic centers of Ancient Greece. The sanctuary was dedicated to worshipping
the God, Asklepios, whose adoration brought him from Thessaly
to the city of Epidavros in the 6th century B.C. A hospital was gradually appended
to the sanctuary for the ill in addition to a Spa. Every four years (nine days
following the Isthmia celebration) gymnastics and drama competitions took place
in this area in order to honor Asklepios. Asklepios' splendor lasted throughout,
the course of Ancient Times approximately. It did, however, undergo a second prosperous
phase during the 2nd century B.C. upon, Pausanias' visit, a traveler. The excavations
within the Epidavros area began in 1879 and continue today within various sections
of the area. Until now, the archaeological mattock has discovered a plethora of
structures: the Tholos, the Gymnasium, the Palaestra, the Stadium, the «Katagogeion»
Hotel, the Thermae, and the Temple of Artemis . The structures however, that stand
out within the area are the Temple of Asklepios and the Ancient Epidavros Theatre.
The Doric Temple of Asklepios was built during the period 380 - 375
B.C. by the Architect Theodotus. In its construction, Corinthian poros stone was
utilized, excluding of course the sculptures and the decorated areas as well as
the waterspouts, which are made of marble. A trench tracing the length of the
wall was located on its right side, which was not unusual to the hospitals treating
the ill whilst it was also a significant instrument in the ritual for advice.
Later, they filled it with dirt. The Temple's interior contained an ivory and
gold statue of Asklepios that was the work of artist from Paros, Thrasimides.
In 1988, UNESCO enlisted the monument in its World Heritage List of Monuments.
The Epidavros Theatre was built in the 4th century B.C. by the Architect
and Sculptor, Polikleitos Junior. He is renowned for his exceptional - practically
perfect - acoustics, exhibited by the Theatre. He is also famous for the actors'
dialogues and the Chorus that played in the orchestra. The Orchestra is clearly
heard from the highest Theatre seats above. The Orchestra, along with the Chorus
as was usual in those days, is similar to all other theatres in that it is circular
and was constructed from dirt (a characterizing trait of theatres of the Hellenistic
Period). Also, the Orchestra's basis contained a drainage trench (2 meters in
width) that assisted in collecting rainwater. It is the only theatre in which
the Orchestra has been preserved and is in such excellent condition. The Altar,
however, has not been preserved, which was located in the center of the Orchestra.
The koilon (its right side has been rebuilt) maintains an occupancy rate of 14.000
spectators. The 34 rows of seats, which are located at the lower end of the Theatre,
have not been replaced and were constructed by following their original structure.
On the contrary, the 21 rows located in the upper section of the Theatre were
added later during the Roman years. The Stage was located behind the Orchestra
and exactly opposite the Koilon. This was the area the actors used to change costumes
and is referred to as the Proscenium. Only ruins are evident now. Access to the
Orchestra was available from the two parodoses (on the right and left sides),
which maintained monumental gates that were only recently reconstructed. Today,
the Epidavros Theatre continues to give ancient drama performances, which comprise
the most significant art and cultural events of the summer season.
This text is cited May 2003 from the Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs URL below.
Is it one of the most important and beautiful archeological places around Greece. In a green plain, surrounded by friendly mountains, a place of worldwide brilliancy and culture, the Ancient theatre at the side of mountain Kinortiou, the miracle of Epidavros, was built by the architect and sculptor Argous Poliklito the last. It built in two separate stages, the first at the end of the 4th century b.c. and the second in the middle of the 2nd century, when the famous three part characteristic of the Greek Theatre was finalized in Epidavros: concave - orchestra - stage. The highest distance of the concave is 58m while the diameter of the orchestra is about 20m. There are two friezes that separate into 13 stairs and 12 benches at the lower level and into 23 benches and 22 stairs at the upper level.
The theater displays the perfect form of the antique architecture, impressive with its beauty and symmetry. The capacity of the theatre is about 15.000 seats. The systematic excavation was started in 1881 by the archeologist Panagioti Kavvadia. The wonderful acoustics are the attraction of large number of visitors each year. Here, every summer, the Festival of Epidavros is held with famous performances of ancient drama and comedy.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from the Municipality of Epidavros URL below, which contains images.
The
building of the Theater
The famous theater
seems to have been built around the end of 4th century BC, as part of an extensive
building programme. Its architect remains unknown, although Pausanias mistakenly
identifies him with Polykletos, the famous sculptor. This missidentification testifies
to the fact that even since antiquity the theater at Epidaurus was considered
as one of the very best in the ancient world, due to its elegance and beauty.
The theater was originally designed to serve the production of Greek drama as
established in 5th century Athens. It was built probably in two phases, in any
case closely following the initial plan. The edifice was constructed entirely
of two types of stone: grey-pink limestone for the cavea and soft tufa covered
with stucco for the stage building and the retaining walls. The fine acoustics
of the theater is a natural consequence of the accuracy and geometry of its design.
Description
of the Theater
The orchestra (or dancing floor) has the shape of a perfect circle,
with a diameter just above 19,50 meters. A circular base still preserved at its
exact center most probably held an Altar to Dionysos, called Thymele. The orchestra
was the performing ground for the "choros" of the Greek drama.
Symmetrically placed within the circle of the orchestra are the three
geometrical centers of the concave seat wedges forming a triangle with two very
closed and one very wide corner angle pointing to the auditorium. The one exactly
coinciding with the center of the orchestra is also the center of the 8 central
wedges of the lower part, while the two sets of wedges at either side have their
centers located at each distant corner of the triangle, on a line parallel to
the Stage. Being extensions of the seat wedges of the lower part, those at the
upper part follow the same geometry. This choice of geometrical features enables
better visibility, without disturbing the impression of a perfect shape. The lower
part of the auditorium has 34 rows of seats and the upper 21, bringing the total
to 55, with a capacity of about 14000 spectators. As in most hellenic theaters,
the lowest row of seats has the form of a continuous throne, reserved for state
officials, priests, and other important personages. Through a pair of drains at
both ends of the circular corridor between the orchestra and the lowest row of
seats, the rain water running down from the stone cavea was driven into an underground
drainage system and carried away.
The auditorium had a slope of about 26 degrees. Strong lateral retaining
walls held both of its side limits facing outwards to the stage building. A tower
of unknown function crowned their top at either side. The two oblong passages
left between the retaining walls and the stage building at either side formed
the "parodoi" (passageways). Spectators taking their seats at the lower part of
the auditorium would enter the theater through them, and so would the "choros"
during the performance. Two imposing gateways made of stone, with pilasters carrying
an ionic entablature, architecturally linked the stage building to the auditorium.
Each had twin openings, one leading directly to the orchestra ground, the other
onto the stage via a ramp. Metal grills placed within these openings secured the
theater, when not in operation.
In its final phase during the late Hellenistic period the stage building
was a two-storey structure with a single storey projection towards the orchestra.
The stage building consisted of the following parts:
1. The "Proskenion" (fore-stage) This was a single-storey projection towards
the circular orchestra raising to a height of 3.5 meters. Its side facing the
spectators had the form of an elegant colonnade in the ionic order, with gate-like
wings at either end.
2. The free, flat space exactly above the proskenion was called "Theologeion".
There the main "hypocritae" (actors) would act their parts of the drama during
the performance. The theologeion was accesible from both sides via the ramps entered
through the openings at the gateways.
3. Behind the proskenion and the theologeion lay the stage proper, a two-storey
building. Its groundfloor was called the "Skene" (stage) and had four columns
carrying the upper floor called "Episkenion" (over-the-stage). The front side
of the episkenion facing the spectators was open, with four pillars that covered
the span from side to side. The openings between the pillars were blocked with
hanging "pinakes" (backcloth screens) carrying painted settings appropriate for
each play.
Recent
history of the Theater
The theater at Epidaurus was uncovered by the Athenian Archaeological
Society, which excavated the site around the turn of the century. The auditorium
survived the delapidation of all building material suffered by any structure standing
above ground during Middle Ages, due to landslide or gradual silting that covered
it with soil. On the contrary, almost nothing survived of the stage building itself
except scattered architectural members, thankfully enough to allow archaeologists
and architects to reconstruct its form at least on paper. Apart from a summary
report by the archeaologist P. Kavvadias in his general book dedicated to the
results of the excavations at Epidaurus, the theater was thoroughly measured and
studied by Armin von Gerkan and Wolfgang Mueller-Wiener of the German Archaeological
Institute. The results of their studies were published in "Das Theater von Epidauros"
(W.Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart, 1961).
The present state of the theater is the result of extensive restoration
work carried out during the 20th century. Restoration included complete rebuilding
of the collapsed retaining walls, and the gateways as well as reconstruction of
the lateral seat wedges.
Since the beginning of the current decade the Greek Ministry of Culture
has undertaken additional restoration work focusing on the auditorium and the
gateways. At the same time concerted efforts are made to enhance the protection
of the theater against overworning, by regulating the access of visitors and its
use during the summer festivals. After World War II the Greek Tourist Organization
initiated a Summer Festival of Greek Drama, which for years has been a major cultural
event.
Lately the whole site of the Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus,
including the theater, was enlisted in the List of International Cultural Heritage
of UNESCO.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from the Foundation of the Hellenic World URL below, which contains images.
Theatrum. As the Greek drama sprang from the choral dances round the altar
of Dionysus, so the architectural form of the Greek theatre was developed from
the circular dancing-place, the orchestra. At first there was no chorus distinct
from the general body of worshippers, all of whom were free to join in the dance.
As soon as a regular Chorus was instituted, it became necessary to reserve a
circular space of ground for it. A ring of stones sufficed to mark off this
circle. The altar of Dionysus was placed at its centre. The spectators stood
around it, and watched the dance. So long as the dramatic element was limited
to a dialogue between the Chorus and one actor, that person could stand on a
raised place in the middle of the Chorus, and address himself to various points
of the circle in turn. But when Aeschylus added a second actor, it became necessary
that the actors should play towards some one side. It was no longer possible
that the spectators should form a complete circle. They were now arranged in
a semicircle, or something like it. But the whole circle of the dancing-place
was still, as of old, kept clear for the Chorus. The actors stood facing the
spectators, not within the circle of the dancing-place, but on the further side
of it. Behind them was the tent or booth (skene) in which they dressed. It was
an easy improvement to conceal this tent from the spectators by a wooden screen,
which could represent the front of a house, or such other background as suited
the play. This screen was the proskenion--that which masked the skene. In the
matured theatre the term was retained, though its primitive sense may have been
forgotten. The proscenium was the background visible to the audience, whether
this was a temporary wooden structure, or, as in later times, a permanent wall.
Then skene came to denote that part of the theatre which belonged to the actors,
as distinguished from orchestra, the place of the Chorus. Thus the kommos, a
lyric dialogue between Chorus and actor, is defined by Aristotle as threnos
chorou kai apo skenes (Poet. 12): and he uses the phrase epi skenes where we
should say, on the stage (ib. 24).
The oldest theatre of which we have any knowledge is the Dionysiac
theatre at Athens. It has generally been supposed that a permanent stone theatre
existed in the Lenaion, or precinct of Dionysus, from the early years of the
5th cent. B.C. This belief rested on a passage in Suidas (s. v. Pratinas). He
states that in the 70th Olympiad (500-496 B.C.) Pratinas was exhibiting tragedy,
in competition with Choerilus and Aeschylus, when the wooden benches (ikria)
on which the spectators were standing happened to fall; and, in consequence
of this (ek touton), a theatre was built. But the history of the Dionysiac theatre
has been placed in a new light by the recent researches of the German Archaeological
Institute at Athens. The excavations, begun in 1886, have yielded the following
results, according to Dr. W. Dorpfeld:
(1) In the 5th cent. B.C., and down to about 330 B.C., the precinct contained
no permanent building for scenic purposes. There were in it two temples of Dionysus
(Fig. 1, D, E, see inside URL below), both to the south of the present theatre.
The older of these (D), which was the more northerly, dated from a time before
Peisistratus. Close to it, on the N.E., was a circular orchestra, about 78 feet
in diameter, of which traces have been found under the buildings erected by
Lycurgus. This orchestra was then the only permanent provision for drama. All
scenery, therefore, was temporary; and the spectators sat on wooden benches.
It is observed that Andocides, in the speech on the Mysteries (399 B.C.), speaks
of the conspirators whom he observed within the precinct of Dionysus as apo
tou odeiou katabainontas eis ten orchestran, not eis to theatron ( § 38): and
the latter word, when used by Aristophanes, always means the spectators.
(2) The first permanent building for drama in the Lenaion was that completed
by Lycurgus, about 330 B.C. It consisted of a stone wall with two small wings,
like towers, projecting from it on right and left (A, A); the length of the
wall between them was about 65 ft. 7 in. The temporary decorations (of wood,
with linen hangings) were erected in front of this wall, and supported by the
wings. Behind the wall was an oblong room, extending somewhat beyond the wings,
and serving for the use of the actors. A portico (C, C), opening on the precinct
of Dionysus, ran along the south side of it. The new orchestra was to the north
of this building. Dr. Dorpfeld supposes that it formed, like, the older one,
a complete circle, and that there was no raised stage; the actors stood on the
same level with the Chorus. Rows of stone seats for the spectators were now
constructed. After the time of Lycurgus no change, except of detail, took place
in the auditorium.
(3) At some later date, which cannot be fixed, a permanent stone proscenium
(B), adorned with columns, and about 10 or 12 ft. high, was built in front of
the wall with projecting wings which Lycurgus had erected. As the wings no longer
served a practical purpose (in supporting the temporary scenery), they were
annexed to the new proscenium, a part being cut off the front of each, so as
to bring them more nearly into line with it.
(4) An architrave-inscription found in the theatre shows that it was modified
and embellished in the reign of Claudius, by whom Nero seems to be meant. It
was probably at this time that the orchestra received its present pavement of
Pentelic and Hymettos marble; the significance of the diamond-shaped figure
traced in the centre is uncertain. To this period also is referred the erection
of a raised stage, supported in front by a sculptured wall.
(5) The latest recorded changes in the Dionysiac theatre are associated with
the name of a certain Phaedrus, and took place probably in the 3rd cent. To
these belong the existing front wall of the stage, adorned with sculpture of
an earlier period; also the balustrade which now separates the auditorium from
the orchestra, and the partial covering of the orchestra-canal with marble flags.
It is maintained by Dr. Dorpfeld that, not only in the Dionysiac
theatre, but in all theatres of the Greek type, the actors stood on the same
level with the Chorus; a stage raised above the orchestra was a Roman invention;
and where such a stage occurs in a theatre of Greek origin, it is a later addition,
made under Roman influence. The Roman raised stage, he thinks, was developed,
when a Chorus was no longer used, by depressing the level of the circular orchestra
in that part of it--the part furthest from the actors--where the Chorus formerly
stood. This startling theory is based chiefly on the nature of the proscenium
as it appears in the remains of some Greek theatres. The theatre of
Epidaurus (Fig. 2, see inside URL below), built about the middle of
the 4th century B.C., is the best-preserved example of the Greek type;
excavations have lately been made in it by the Greek Archaeological Society
(1883).
The orchestra forms a complete circle, defined by a ring of flat
stones. Beyond this circle, on the side furthest from the audience, are remains
of a wall, about 12 ft. high, adorned with Ionic half-columns, and flanked by
slightly projecting wings; there was one door in it, at the middle point. This
wall must have been either the background of the scene, or the front of a raised
stage. It is argued that it must have been the background, because (a) 12 ft.
would be too great a height for a stage; (b) the width of the stage--about 8
ft.--would have been too small; (c) there is no trace of steps leading from
the top of the wall to the orchestra. A similar wall occurs in the theatre at
Oropus, and is identified as the proskenion by an inscription which it bears.
The theatre in the Peiraeus affords another example.
On the other hand, several considerations tell in favour of the
received view, that Greek actors, at every period, had a raised stage.
(1) The statements of the architect Vitruvius, who wrote about 20 A.D., is decisive,
so far as the Roman period is concerned. He states that the Greek theatre had
a raised stage, about 10 or 12 ft. high, but narrower than the Roman; the Greeks,
he says, called logeion. Vitruvius uses the-word proscaenium to describe this
stage; and the same use of the term occurs in other writers, both Roman and
Greek. Dr. Dorpfeld is therefore reduced to assuming that Vitruvius has made
a mistake, confusing the background of the scene in a Greek theatre with the
front of a raised stage. But it is absurd to suppose that Vitruvius should have
made such a blunder about the Greek theatres of his own day; and that, having
accurately described a raised stage which did not exist, he should also have
invented a name for it, logeion.
(2) The theatre at Megalopolis in Arcadia has been excavated by members of the
British School at Athens (see an account by Mr. W. Loring in the Report of the
School for 1890). The date of the theatre may be placed in the second half of
the 4th century B.C. Here there is a raised stage, of which the height was originally
about 6 ft., and the width about 18 ft. A flight, of steps, extending from end
to end of it, led down to the orchestra. That it was a stage, and not a background,
is proved (a) by these steps, (b) by the fact, that access was given to it by
three doors in the wall behind it. There is no reason to doubt that this stage
is of the same date as the auditorium. A later Roman stage has been found in
front of it. By this example, then, the existence of a raised, stage in a Greek
theatre of the 4th century B.C. is placed beyond doubt.
(3) With regard to the 5th century B.C., it was not to be expected that any
remains of a raised stage should be found; temporary wooden structures would
leave no trace. The Greek plays do not supply any literary evidence which can
be deemed conclusive. There are some passages which indicate that the place
where the actors stood was accessible to the Chorus (e. g. Soph. Oed. Col. 836
ff.); -as would be the case, if we supposed a stage with steps leading up to
it, as at Megalopolis. Among the passages which seem to imply a raised stage,
we may notice Ar. Vesp. 1514, where Philocleon says, atar katabateon g' ep'
autous. This may, indeed, be rendered, I must enter the lists against them;
but it also implies some change of position, more marked than such as would
consist in moving merely from one spot in the orchestra to another, and would
be most naturally explained by a descent into the orchestra from the stage.
Some vases of Lower Italy, referable to the period 300-100 B.C., depict scenes
from the Old Attic Comedy acted on a raised logeion. Plato (Symp. p. 194 A)
speaks of the tragic poet Agathon as anabainontos epi okribanta meta ton hupokriton.
This probably refers, not to a performance in the theatre, but to the proagon.
Still, it shows that the idea of placing actors on a raised platform was familiar
to Athenians of the 5th century B.C. Even in the days before Thespis, when one
member of the Chorus held a dialogue with the rest, he was mounted, we are told,
on a kind of table (eleos: Pollux, iv. 123). A recent writer suggests that the
source of this story may have been a Comedy in which the beginnings of Tragedy
were burlesqued (Hiller, Rhein. Museum). If this were so, it would only show
that some sort of raised stage was conceived as necessary for even the most
primitive form of drama.
Lastly, there is a strong a priori objection to the theory that
actors and Chorus stood on the same level. The Chorus were usually drawn up
in ranks facing the actors. With his cothurnus and mask, a tragic actor would
still not overtop the Chorus by more than a head. Hence, a view of the actors
would have almost been wholly denied to spectators whose seats were in the middle
part of the lowest row. But those were the seats assigned to the most distinguished
persons. This argument cannot be met by saying, as Dr. Dorpfeld does, that the
Chorus was usually divided into hemichoria (leaving the actors visible between
the two groups). Such an arrangement was not usual, but very exceptional. It
may be allowed that, when the stage came to be as high as 12 ft., permanent
means of communication between stage and orchestra cannot have existed, though
temporary wooden steps might be employed at need. But before stages of that
height came into use, such communication had ceased to be requisite, since the
Chorus had no longer an active part in drama.
Vitruvius gives the ground-plan of a Greek theatre as follows. Describe a circle
for the orchestra, and in it inscribe three squares. One side of one of these
squares will represent the front line of the stage (A B). A parallel tangent
to the circle will be the back wall of the stage (C D). The stage (pulpitum,
logeion) must be not less than 10, or more than 12 feet high. Next, parallel
with A B, draw a diameter of the circle, E F. It will be seen in the diagram
that at E and F the semicircle is so continued as to make a horse-shoe, ending
at G H. The curves which thus continue it are segments of circles described
from E and F as respective centres, with E F as radius. This is known as the
construction from three centres, viz., E, F, and the centre of the orchestra.
The auditorium is shut in by lines which bisect the right angles at I and K.
The space between G H and C D is a raised stage.
The 4th century B.C. was the period at which stone theatres became
usual in Greece. We may now proceed to consider their characteristics more in
detail.
The orchestra.
It has been seen that, even in the matured theatre, the dancing-place
was still a complete circle, as in the old days of the cyclic choruses. Its
central point was sometimes marked, either by a small pit (as at the Peiraeus),
or by a stone (as at Epidaurus). Such marks probably indicate the spot on which
the altar of Dionysus was to be placed. The word thumele, a place of sacrifice,
means in classical poetry either a shrine, or, more specifically, an altar.
Lexicographers and scholiasts often mention a thumele in connexion with the
theatre; but they do not agree as to what it was, nor do they furnish any certain
clue. The most probable conclusion is that the thumele was the altar of Dionysus,
in the centre of the orchestra. Another view is that the name thumele was transferred
from the altar to a platform in the orchestra on which the altar was placed,
and that this platform was the station of the Chorus,--connected by steps with
the lower level of the orchestra (konistra) and with the higher level of the
stage (logeion). It is true that the use of thumele to denote a kind of stage
was current in later times, when thymelici, music-hall artists, were distinguished
from actors proper (Isidore, Orig. xviii. 47). But this use arose under Roman
influences, and cannot be assumed for the Greece of the 5th or 4th century B.C.
A channel, to carry off rain-water, often surrounded the orchestra, being bridged
by stones at the points from which the stairways led up to the seats.
The Auditorium.
In default of a special term like cavea, this is sometimes called
theatron: though that word, when it does not mean the whole building, more often
denotes the spectators (as we speak of the house ). In the older Greek theatres
the public entered by the side-passages (parodoi) between the proscenium and
the orchestra,--the same which the Chorus used. Sometimes, indeed, we find an
alternative mode of access, viz. by a path traversing high ground, and leading
directly to one of the upper tiers: this was the case at Athens, but it was
exceptional. A crowd entering by the parodoi would find the pressure greatest
at the mouths of the semicircular passage between the orchestra and the lowest
row of seats,--before the spectators had distributed themselves to the several
parts of the house. This fact helps to explain a peculiarity of construction.
The lowest row of seats is not, as a rule, completely concentric with the orchestra,
but is usually so contrived as to leave a wider space at the points just mentioned.
A further advantage of this arrangement was that it afforded a better view to
those who sat at each end of the semicircle.
Flights of steps ascending from the orchestra to the highest tier
of seats divided the auditorium into wedge-like segments. The Greek word for
such a segment was kerkis, which properly meant radius; the Latin term was cuneus.
A further division into upper and lower zones was effected by passages called
diazomata, girdles (praecinctiones), which ran completely round the semicircle.
At Epidaurus there is only one diazoma, which is not half-way between the lowest
and highest tier, but nearer to the latter; and, while the lower zone (between
the diazoma and the orchestra) is divided into only twelve kerkides, the upper
contains twenty-two. At Athens only one diazoma can now be traced, but there
may have been another: the number of kerkides is thirteen. The word diazoma
can denote, not only the passage itself, but the zone which it marks off: thus
the eleventh row in the upper zone is expressed by to hendekaton tou deuterou
diazomatos bathron. zone is also used in that sense. Above the highest tier,
another open passage ran round the house. The term ikria properly denoted the
wooden benches on which, in the earlier times, the spectators sat (cf. Ar. Ach.
24 f.: ostiountai . . . peri protou xulou). When stone seats were introduced,--which
at Athens does not appear to have occurred before the time of Lycurgus (c. 330
B.C.),--such seats were founded, where it was possible, on the natural rock
of the slope. At Athens, as at Megalopolis, artificial substructions were required
in several parts, and this must almost everywhere have been the case, more or
less. The material used for the seats varied much. Sometimes it is marble, as
at Iassus in Caria and Perga in Pamphylia; at Athens and in the Peiraeus, it
is (for the ordinary seats) a white limestone, finely wrought; while the smaller
provincial theatres were often content with coarser stone and workmanship. The
tiers of seats were called bathra or anabathmoi. At Athens the space allotted
to one person was indicated merely by a line engraved on the stone (as at Sparta
by a groove): it is described as hedra, topos, chora, chorion, or simply thea
(thean agorazein, katalambanein).
The privilege of proedria in the theatre was given chiefly to four
classes of persons: (1) certain priests and priestesses, among whom the priest
of Dionysus was foremost: (2) certain magistrates: (3) foreigners who were honoured
in an official character, as presbeis or theoroi: (4) citizens or foreigners
who were honoured in their personal capacity, as benefactors of the state. For
such persons special seats were provided, like armchairs, called thronoi or
kathedrai. At Athens these chairs, made of Pentelic marble, occupy the whole
of the lowest row, while others are placed in different parts of the house,
though in no case higher up than the twenty-fourth row; those assigned to priests
or officials bear their titles; thus the central chair of the semicircle is
inscribed, "Iereos Dionysou Eleuthereos". According, to one recent
view, the chairs in the lowest row date from the time of Lycurgus; it has more
generally been supposed that all these chairs are of the Roman age,--as all
the present inscriptions certainly are. At Epidaurus several rows of seats with
backs and arms were assigned to those who enjoyed proedria. Elaborate ornament
was often applied to such chairs,--the feet being shaped like lion's claws,--the
front or back carved with mythical subjects in relief, etc.
The acoustic properties of a Greek theatre would be naturally good,
since the actors had a high wall behind them and a rising slope in front. Vitruvius,
indeed, says that artificial aid was sought from brazen vessels, which the Greeks
call echeia, so placed in the auditorium as to reverberate the voices of the
actors. He even speaks of these resonators as being nicely adapted to the required
musical pitch (ii. 1, 9). The theatre at Aizani in Cilicia has a series of niches
above the diazoma: and similar niches exist elsewhere. According to one view,
these niches held the echeia, while another connects them merely with the substructions
of seats. The statement of Vitruvius leaves no doubt that echeia were used,
at least sometimes, in the theatres of his own day: but it remains uncertain
whether such a device was employed by the Greeks of an earlier time.
The outer wall enclosing the auditorium ordinarily followed the
curve of the semicircle, unless the nature of the ground caused some deviation.
At Athens the auditorium was partly bounded on the N. by the steep rock of the
Acropolis, while the rest of its boundary was formed by strong walls of conglomerate.
Where the external appearance of these walls became important, viz. in the S.
and S.W. portions, they were cased with finely-wrought limestone. The general
outline at Athens was that of a large segment of a circle, described from a
centre considerably N. of the point which served as centre of the orchestra:
for a small distance at the S.W. corner the curve passed into a straight line.
Examples also occur in which the walls enclosing the auditorium were rectangular,
as at Cnidus, and in the smaller theatre at Pompeii. The walls flanking the
seats at each end of the semicircle were either carried in a single sloping
line from the topmost tier to the orchestra, or built in a series of steps corresponding
with the tiers. In the best Greek period such walls were not exactly parallel
with the line of the proscenium, but started inwards a little, towards the centre
of the orchestra. This was the case at Athens and at Epidaurus.
Scenic Decoration.
The testimonies on this subject are of two classes.
(1) Notices in writers chiefly belonging to the Roman age, especially lexicographers
and scholiasts. Among these the most important is the grammarian Julius Pollux
(flor. 170 A.D.), in his Onomasticon, book iv., sections 128-132 (peri hupokriton
skeues). As has lately been shown by Rohde, the source principally used by Pollux
was a work by Juba, a writer of the later Alexandrian age, entitled Theatrike
historia, in at least seventeen books; while Juba, in his turn, had sources
going back to Aristophanes of Byzantium (200 B.C.), but not further. The besetting
fault of Pollux, in abridging from this ample material, seems to have been an
omission to distinguish between the normal and the occasional resources of the
stage.
(2) The second kind of evidence is that derived from the Greek dramatic texts
themselves. This source, scanty as it is, is the principal one on which we have
to rely in regard to the practice of the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. Not long
ago it was the custom to treat the notices. in Pollux and the other late authorities
as if they could be applied without reserve to the great age of Athenian Tragedy
and Comedy. A more critical study has shown the. need of greater caution in
this respect. It is not difficult to suppose that, when dramatic poetry had;
culminated, the art of scenic decoration may still have been very rude, while
it is probable that much of the apparatus described by late writers had its
origin under the Diadochi or the Empire. The history of our own stage could
show a similar, course, from the triumphs of poetry to those of mechanism.
In the extant plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes,
the action most often takes place in front of a house, with a practicable door;
sometimes in front of a temple, a cottage, a tent, a cave, or a rock. Painted
linen hangings, erected on a wooden frame, would have sufficed for such a background.
Aristotle, in sketching the growth of Tragedy, says that Aeschylus added the
second actor, and made the dialogue predominate over the choral part, while
Sophocles introduced the third, actor and the use of scenen-painting (skenographia).
Now, this last fact must have stood out clearly in Athenian tradition, which
Aristotle had every means of knowing, when he thus coupled it with the other
novelty as an invention distinctive of Sophocles. It is usually assumed, even
by recent writers, that Aristotle is here irreconcilable with Vitruvius, who
ascribes the introduction of scene-painting to Aeschylus. Such an assumption
is not, we think, necessary. The words of Vitruvius (vii. praef. 11) are: primum
Agatharchus Athenis, Aeschylo docente tragoediam, scaenam fecit et de ea commentarium
reliquit: and he then goes on to say how the stimulus given by Agatharchus.
led Democritus and Anaxagoras to develop principles of perspective. The phrase,
while Aeschylus was exhibiting tragedy, merely describes Aeschylus as contemporary
with the innovation. Sophocles first exhibited in 468 B.C., twelve years before,
the death, of Aeschylus. Aristotle and Vitruvius are reconciled if we suppose
that Sophocles introduced skenographia the early days of his career; a fact
which will also help us to understand why that improvement was peculiarly associated
with this name. Even before Agatharchus had made a beginning of artistic skenographia,
some ruder kind of drawing may have been used. Thus in the Persae of Aeschylus
(472 B.C.) the palace was probably indicated. In the Ion of Euripides (circ.
421 B.C.), where the scene is laid at Delphi, the Chorus of Athenian maidens
point with admiration to the sculptures which adorn the front of the temple.
We may suppose that some, representation of these, though not perhaps a very
elaborate one, appeared on the proscenium.
With regard to massive decoration, as distinguished from a painted
background, the objects required by the texts are simple, such as altars, statues
of gods or, heroes, rocks, and seats. But the texts further prove that certain
mechanical appliances were available at need.
(1) The ekkuklema was a small movable stage on wheels, which could be rolled
forward through the door in the proscenium. There was room on it for three or
four persons, and it was low enough to allow of an actor stepping off it with
ease. The most frequent use of the ekkuklema was when the corpse of a person
slain within the house was to be shown to the audience,--sometimes with the
murderer standing beside it. The moment at which the ekkuklema was pushed forward
is often, though not always, marked in the text by a reference to the opening
of the door.
Examples are:--in Aesch. Ag., Clytaemnestra is thus shown standing by the corpses
of Agamemnon and Cassandra; in Cho., Orestes with the corpses of Aegisth us
and Clytaemnestra: in Soph. El., Orestes and Pylades with the corpse of Clytaemnestra;
in Ant., the corpse of Eurydice: in Eur. Here. Furens, Heracles with the corpses
of his wife and children; in Hippol., the corpse of Phaedra.
But this was not the only case in which the appliance was used:
it could also be employed for any tableau in the interior of a house. Thus in
Aesch. Eum. the Pythia speaks. the prologue in front of the temple, and then
the ekkuklema is used to show Orestes at the omphalos within. Similarly in Soph.
Ai., when Tecmessa opens the tent, this machine serves to display Ajax prostrate
amid the slaughtered cattle. As appears from some passages, the ekkuklema could
be pushed far enough forward to admit of an actor entering, or making his exit,
at the door behind it. It should be noted that the use of the ekkuklema is not
merely an inference from later writers and from hints in Tragedy, but is proved
by the two parodies in Aristophanes, where Euripides and Agathon are wheeled
out, and are then once more withdrawn fiom view (Ach. 408 ff., ekkuklethet'
. . . ekkuklesomai: Thesm. 265,eskuklesato). The exact nature of the exostra
is uncertain, but it was evidently akin to the ekkuklema, differing from it,
possibly, only in the mode of propulsion.
(2) Machinery for showing persons in the air was required by the appearances
of the gods, and in some other cases, -as when Medea is, seen above the palace
in the chariot given to her by the Sun (Eur. Med. 1319), or when Trygaeus soars
aloft on his beetle (Aristoph. Pax, 80). Two different contrivances seem to
have been used: both were, of course, concealed by the proscenium. One was an
apparatus worked by a wheel (trochos) and ropes. (aiorai), and called aiorema,
-which was used when the person was to be seen gradually rising into the air,
or descending from above. As Trygaeus rises into the air, he begs the operator
to be carefult: o mechanopoie, proseche ton noun hos emhe (Aristoph. Pax, 174).
So in fragment 3 of the Daedalus the machinist is thus directed, ho mechanopoios,
hopote boulei ton trochon i elan anekas, lege, chaire, phengos heliou. The other
device was a sort of platform, projecting from the wings at the back of the
proscenium, close to its upper edge. This was the so-called theologeion, used
when the apparition of a god or hero was to be sudden, as it is in Soph. Phil.,
and in Eur. I. T., Helen., Suppl. The kremathra in which Socrates is suspended
(Aristoph. Nub. 218) is a burlesque of the tragic appliances.
(3) Akin to the theologeion must have been the contrivance used when a person
is to appear on the roof of a palace (as the watcher in Aesch. Ag.: Antigone
and the paedagogus in Eur. Phoen., etc.). A wooden platform, high up behind
the proscenium, would have sufficed: according to Pollux, it was called a distegia.
These seem to be the only forms of decoration or mechanism which
can certainly be inferred from the texts of the tragedians and of Aristophanes.
They are all compatible with a temporary wooden structure, and with a comparatively
simple phase of scenic art. When, in the course of the 4th century B.C., permanent
stone theatres became usual in Greek lands, the general character of scenic
decoration was perhaps not at first affected thereby. Behind the proscenium
there was now a permanent wall, forming the front of the building assigned to
the actors. But the proscenium itself probably continued, for a time, to be
temporary,--a wooden structure, with painted hangings. In the Dionysiac theatre,
as Lycurgus left it, two small tower-like wings project from each end of the
permanent back wall. These, it is conjectured, were designed to facilitate the
erection of the wooden proscenium.
It may have been at this period that periaktoi were first introduced.
These were triangular wooden prisms, revolving on a pivot (whence the name),
with scenery painted on each of their three faces. One periaktos was placed
at the left wing, and another at the right. They took the place of modern side-scenes,
and also served to indicate changes of scene, according to a regular conventional
method. The periaktos on the spectator's right hand represented the locality
in which the action was taking place. The periaktos on his left hand represented
a region outside of that locality. If, for instance, the scene of the play was
laid at Delphi, the Tight-hand periaktos would illustrate that place, while
the other might represent the road leading to Athens. The same rule governed
entrances and exits: a Delphian would come on from the right, a stranger from
the left. If the scene was to be changed from one spot near Delphi to another
in the same vicinity, the lefthand periaktos would be turned so as to present
a new face, but the right-hand one would be left unaltered. If the scene was
shifted from Delphi to Athens, both periaktoi would be turned. The first case
was technically a change of topos: the second, of chora.
There are only two Greek plays in which it is necessary to assume
a chance of scene. In the Eumenides the action is transferred from Delphi to
Athens: in the Ajax, from the front of the hero's tent to a lonely place on
the sea-shore. It is probable that, in the first of these examples, the change
was merely symbolised, by substituting the bretas of Athena for a statue of
Apollo; while the building painted on the background was identified, first with
the Delphian temple, and then with the Erechtheum. In the second example, if
the background was a landscape, nothing was required, but to remove the hangings
which represented the tent. The use of periaktoi in the 5th century B.C. cannot
be proved from the dramatic literature. On the other hand, they would have been
found peculiarly convenient when the old wooden proscenia, with painted hangings,
were replaced by stone proscenia adorned with sculpture. At Epidaurus there
is such a proscenium, with Ionic half-columns, which is probably of a later
date than the rest of the building; and the small wings which slightly project
from it at each end may have served, according to a probable conjecture, for
the reception of periaktoi. In the Dionysiac theatre a permanent proscenium
was similarly introduced, after the time of Lycurgus. The projecting towers
of his scene-building (noticed above) then became wings of the new structure,
like those at Epidaurus. There is no evidence that, in addition to revolving
scenery, the Greek theatre had scenes which could be shifted on grooves; though
the Roman stage, as Servius tells us, had both (scaena versilis--scaena ductilis:
on Georg. iii. 24).
Entrances for the actors.
Pollux speaks of three doors in the proscenium, the central one
being called thura basileios, because the chief persons of the play used it.
Vitruvius confirms this statement. Ruins of the Hellenistic or Roman age show
sometimes three doors, sometimes five. In the latter case, the two extreme doors
may have opened, not on the stage, but on spaces at either side of it (paraskenia),
used by actors waiting for their turns, or by officials. In the theatre at Megalopolis
(4th cent. B.C.) there were three entrances to the stage. Only one entrance
is traceable in the remains at Epidaurus, Zea, and Oropus respectively. It is
on a level with the orchestra; hence those who disbelieve in a raised stage
regard it as the entrance for the actors. But it may have passed beneath a raised
stage, serving to give the employes of the theatre a direct access to the orchestra.
How many doors there may have been in the painted hangings of the old wooden
proscenia, we cannot tell. The 5th century texts show that, besides the door
or doors in the proscenium, there were also entrances for the actors from the
sides, right and left.
Pollux says that when ghosts appeared on the scene they came up
either by anapiesmata (our trap-doors ), or by the charonioi klimakes. It has
generally been supposed that these klimakes led from the orchestra to the stage.
This is the case at Megalopolis, where the steps extend along the whole front
of the logeion. Another theory is that they connected the stage with a passage
beneath it, invisible to the spectators.
No curtain was used in the Greek theatre. When a play opened with
a group in position (such as the suppliants in the Oed. Tyr.), the actors must
have simply walked on to the scene, and assumed that position. When one play
followed another, and the background had to be changed, that change took place
before the eyes of the spectators. In such matters we cannot judge the feelings
of Athenians, assembled at the Dionysia, by the requirements of modern playgoers.
At Athens dramatic idealism went hand in hand with scenic simplicity.
The Administration of the Theatre.
A Greek theatre was the property of the state, and the performances
in it were acts of public worship, under state control. At Athens, in the 5th
and 4th centuries B.C., drama accompanied two Dionysiac festivals,--the Lenaea,
in January, and the Great Dionysia, in March. (We are not here concerned with
the Rural Dionysia, in December,--at which, during this period, no new pieces
seem to have been acted.) At each festival, both Tragedy and Comedy were produced;
but the Lenaea was peculiarly associated with Comedy, and the Great Dionysia
with Tragedy. There was a period, indeed, of some fifty years, dating from the
first institution of the Great Dionysia (circ. 478 B.C.), during which Comedy
alone appears to have been produced at the Lenaea. The cost of the
performances at each festival was defrayed from three sources.
(1) The theatre was let by the state to a lessee, who received the money paid
for admission, and in return undertook certain charges. One of these, as appears
from an extant document, was the maintenance of the building in good repair.
Hence the classical name for the lessee, architekton (Dem. de Cor. 28): later
writers call him theatrones (Theophrastus), or theatropoles (Pollux). He was
also bound to provide a certain number of free seats (as for the persons entitled
to proedria): but for these he was probably reimbursed by the Treasury. The
provision of scenery, and of costume for the actors (excepting the choreutae),
appears also to have devolved upon the lessee. He was certainly charged with
the custody of the scenery and of all the theatrical dresses and properties.
He also paid the cashiers, the persons who showed spectators to their places,
and all other employes of the theatre.
(2) The second source of contribution was the choregia. For each festival the
Archon Eponymus appointed as many choregi as there were competing poets; at
the Great Dionysia the number was usually three for Tragedy and three for Comedy.
The choregi were chosen from men nominated by the ten Attic tribes in rotation.
The duty of the choregus was to furnish one chorus of fifteen persons for Tragedy,
or of twenty-four for Comedy. He provided a suitable place for their training
(choregeion), and maintained them till the festival was over. If the poet did
not train them himself, the choregus had to find a chorodidaskalos. He had also
to supply the flute-player (auletes) who preceded the Chorus on entering or
quitting the orchestra, and played the occasional music. He purchased the costumes,
masks, etc., for the Chorus. But his task was not finished when the Chorus was
trained and equipped. He had also to supply any mute persons (kopha prosopa)
that might be required for the piece.
(3) The third contributor was the state. When a poet had applied to the Archon
for a Chorus, and his application had been granted, the Archon next assigned
to him three actors, who were paid by the state. It did not rest with the poet
to decide which of these three should be protagonistes, etc.: he received them
from the state already classified according to merit, as actors of first, second,
and third parts. This classification rested ultimately on special agones in
which actors were directly tried against each other, and which were distinct
from the performances at the festivals. If a poet ever required a fourth actor
(probably a very rare case), he could only go to the choregus, who might make
an extra grant (parachoregema). The state also paid the marshals (rhabdouchoi)
who kept order in the theatre, and who were stationed in the orchestra. Lastly,
a certain honorarium (distinct from the festival-prizes) was paid by the Treasury
to each of the competing poets, according to the order in which they were placed
by the judges.
The character of the dramatic contests as solemnities conducted
by the state was strongly marked in the forms of procedure. A few days. before
the Great Dionysia, the ceremony called the proagon ( prelude ) was held in
the old Odeion near the Enneacrunos. The competing poets, with their respective
choregi, were then formally presented to the public; the actors and choruses
were also present, in festal, but not in scenic, attire; and the titles of the
plays to be produced at the approaching festival were officially announced.
When the first day of the Great Dionysia arrived, the dramatic contests were
preceded by the transaction of some public business in the theatre. It was then
that crowns of honour were awarded for public services, and that the orphans
of Athenians slain in war were presented to the citizens. In due course a public
herald summoned the first on the list of competing poets. He entered the orchestra,
attended by his choregus and chorus) and poured a libation at the thymele to
Dionysus. His procession then withdrew; the orchestra was once more empty (until
the Chorus should make its dramatic entrance); and the play began. One prize
for Tragedy and one for Comedy were awarded by ten judges, taken by lot from
a large number of persons whom the senate (with the choregi) had chosen from
the tribes. At the close of the contests, five judges (taken from the ten by
a second ballot) announced the awards. The successful poets were then crowned,
before the audience, by the archon. Shortly after the festival, a public meeting,
for business connected with it, was held in the theatre. Any complaints of misconduct
which might have arisen were then heard; and officials who had distinguished
themselves received public commendation.
The Audience.
According to a recent estimate, the Dionysiac theatre was once
capable of seating about 27,500 persons. It must be remembered that all the
upper tiers have been destroyed, and that the ancient capacity was enormously
greater than it would appear from the seats which still exist. Plato was using
round numbers when he spoke of more than 30,000 Greeks as present in the Dionysiac
theatre at the tragic contests (Symp. 175 E), but it is quite conceivable that
the number was sometimes nearer to 30,000 than to 20,000. The vast theatre at
Megalopolis could hold, according to one modern computation, no fewer than 44,000
persons. Such numbers become intelligible when we consider that the Greek drama
was essentially a popular festival, in which the entire civic body was invited
to take part. Even young boys were present, both at Comedy and at Tragedy. Women
were certainly present at Tragedy; and a fragment of Alexis shows that, in the
4th cent. B.C., they were admitted to the performances of Comedy also. This,
however, was the Middle Comedy -very different, in some respects, from the Old
Comedy of Aristophanes. It would be a natural inference from the seclusion in
which Athenian women lived that they were not admitted to the Old Comedy. But
against this a priori argument may be set another,--viz. that, at the Dionysia,
Tragedy and Comedy were merely different sides of one agon: those who could
participate in one were entitled to share in the other. A line drawn on grounds
of decorum would dissever elements which, in the Dionysiac idea, were inseparable.
There is no conclusive literary evidence. But one passage in Aristophanes (Pax
964 ff.) cannot be naturally explained except on the supposition that women
were present. Another passage in the same play (Pax 50 ff.) speaks, it is true,
of males only: but that is, obviously, because the speaker, a slave, is describing
his despotes to actual, or future, despotai. At Athens the metoikoi were admitted
to the theatre. (Their exclusion fiom the Lenaea is not proved by Aristoph.
Ach. 507 f., even if v. 508 be sound.) Foreigners were also admitted, whether
officials or private persons.
In the earliest days of Athenian drama, admission was doubtless
free of charge; payment may have been introduced after the expulsion of the
Peisistratidae, when the city began to find the cost too heavy. In the 5th and
4th centuries B.C. the price of admission for one day was two obols, or not
quite 4d. Pericles introduced the system by which the state paid two obols to
each citizen for each day of the Dionysiac festivals, in order that he might
attend the theatre. This theorikon was partly defrayed from the tribute of the
allies, and probably began about 454 B.C. It was distributed by the demarchs
in the several demes; and, though it was first devised in the interests of the
poor, the only condition of obtaining it seems to have been inscription on the
lexiarchikon grammateion of the deme. The number of persons receiving the theorikon
in 431 B.C. has been computed at 18,000. In its later and wider form (as extended
to non-dramatic festivals) the theorikon became an abuse: in its original form
it was substantially a state-grant in aid of education. All seats were of the
same class, except those reserved for persons who had the right of proedria,
and who paid nothing. (Cf. Dem. de Cor. 28.) The places of payment were probably
in the parodoi leading to the orchestra. Specimens of ordinary Greek theatre--tickets
are extant. These are small leaden coins, bearing on one side some emblem of
the theatre, such as a Dionysus with a tripod, or an actor's mask; and on the
obverse, the name of an Attic tribe, or a numeral... Another kind of theatre-ticket
also occurs. This is a small round mark of bone or ivory, bearing on one side
some artistic device (such as the head of a deity), and on the other a number
(never higher than 15), in both Greek and Roman figures. These were tickets,
of the Imperial age, for persons who had proedria. The numbers probably indicate
divisions of the house.. How far such division was carried is uncertain. It
is a probable conjecture that at Athens a certain portion of the house (perhaps
a whole segment, kerkis) was allotted to each of the Attic phulai. This is confirmed
by the occurrence of tribal names on the leaden tickets noticed above; also
by the fact that the choregia was organised on a basis of tribes; and, lastly,
by the analogy of Roman colonies in which certain cunei of the theatre were
assigned to certain curiae. The members of the senate sat together in a definite
part of the Dionysiac theatre (to bouleutikon, Aristoph. Av. 794). For youths
between the ages of 18 and 21, a space was similarly reserved (to ephebikon).
The performances began in the morning, and lasted till evening;
but it is attested by the comic poet Pherecrates -who gained his first prize
in 438 B.C.- that the spectators had usually taken the morning meal (ariston)
before they came (Athen. x. 464 e). In the next century, however, we hear of
performances beginning at daybreak (Aeschin. in Ctes.76). The older Athenian
custom was for all the spectators to wear wreaths (as at a sacrifice); but this
had perhaps gone out before 350 B.C. As the whole day was spent in the theatre,
the visitors brought light refreshments (tragemata) with them. Choregi sometimes
courted popularity by a distribution of cakes and wine: and Aristophanes has
pilloried those rival poets who employed slaves to throw nuts about the house.
An Athenian audience was closely attentive,--detecting the slightest fault of
speech,--and highly demonstrative. Loud clapping of hands, and shouts of applause,
expressed their delight; disapproval found vent in stamping with the feet, hissing,
and hooting (klozein). Never, probably, has the ordeal for an actor been more
severe than it was at Athens. Persons of note who entered the house were recognised
with frank favour, or the reverse. Indeed, the whole demeanour of Athenians
at the Dionysia appears to have been marked by a certain sense of domestic ease,
as if all the holiday-makers were members of one family.
From the latter part of the 4th century B.C. onwards, it became
usual to produce drama, not merely at the Dionysia, but on any occasion of special
rejoicing; a result partly due to the personal taste of Alexander the Great
for theatrical shows of every kind. Hence the theatres gradually lost that sacred
character which had been theirs so long as they were set apart for the worship
of Dionysus. A further consequence was that they began to be used for various
entertainments which had nothing to do with drama, such as the exhibitions of
conjurers or acrobats, and, in the Roman age. gladiatorial shows, or combats
with wild beasts. Even in the 5th century B.C., indeed, cockfighting had been
held on one day of the year in the Dionysiac theatre, -a custom which legend
connected with an omen seen by Themistocles in the Persian wars: but this -unlike
the later innovations- was consistent with the religio loci, since the cult
of Asclepius had points of contact with that of Dionysus. Thus the proagon of
the Dionysia (noticed above) was held on the day, and near the place, of the
sacrifice to Asclepius.
Mention has been made of the meetings for public business held in
the Dionysiac theatre just before and after the Great Dionysia. In the latter
part of the 5th century we hear of [p. 820] the citizens convening the ecclesia
in the theatre at Munychia, and in the Dionysiac theatre itself, when, under
the Four Hundred, the Pnyx was not available (Thuc. viii. 93 f.). By 250 B.C.
it had become usual to hold ordinary meetings of the ecclesia in the Dionysiac
theatre; though the elections of magistrates (archairesiai) continued to be
held on the Pnyx. From the 5th century B.C. the theatre had been the regular
place for the bestowal of public honours, such as crowns. In later times a theatre
was often also the scene of an exemplary punishment. One of the earliest instances
is the execution of Hippo in the theatre at Messana, of which place he had been
tyrant (circ. 338 B.C.; Plut. Timol. 34). Sepulchral inscriptions, of the Roman
age -sometimes commemorating Christians- have been found both in the Dionysiac
theatre and in the Odeum of Herodes Atticus; whence it has been conjectured
that, in late times, burials occasionally took place within those precincts.
As statues of Themistocles and Miltiades stood in the Dionysiac theatre, so,
at every period of Greek antiquity, such places were adorned with monuments
of statesmen and soldiers, no less than of poets, musicians, and actors. This
was in accord with the true idea of the Greek theatre, which was not merely
the home of an art, but also a centre of civic reunion.
THE ROMAN THEATRE.
Rome possessed no theatre of stone till 55 B.C. Just a century earlier
such an edifice had been in progress, when P. Cornelius Scipio Nasica procured
a decree of the senate for its destruction (Liv. Epit. 48). The spirit of the
Roman veto on permanent theatres was one which refused to regard the drama except
as a passing frivolity. Wooden theatres were erected, and pulled down when the
occasion was over. But before the middle of the 1st century B.C. these temporary
structures had already begun to show a high elaboration. The building put up
by the aedile M. Aemilius Scaurus in 58 B.C. contained 80,000 seats; the proscenium
was adorned with pillars of marble and statues of bronze; and the whole work
seems to have possessed every element of grandeur except permanence. The old
interdict had already lost its meaning; and three years later Pompeius was allowed
to erect, near the Campus Martins, the first theatre of stone. The model is
said to have been the theatre of Mitylene, and the number of seats 40,000. The
theatre of Marcellus, built by Augustus, and named after his nephew, was also
of stone, and could hold 20,500 persons. A third such building, with a capacity
of 11,510, was completed in 13 B.C. by L. Cornelius Balbus. These are the trina
theatra of Suetonius (Aug. 45). Meanwhile many provincial towns in Italy and
elsewhere had long possessed stone theatres, built or altered under Roman influence.
The Roman type of theatre is simply the Greek type modified in certain
particulars. The ground-plan is thus described by Vitruvius (see image inside
URL below). In a circle, of the same diameter which the orchestra is to have,
inscribe three equilateral triangles. Take one side of any triangle, and let
this be the back wall of the stage, scaenae frons (A B). A diameter of the circle,
drawn parallel with A B, will represent the line dividing the stage from the
orchestra (C D). The seats for the spectators are arranged round the orchestra
in semicircles concentric with it. The five points above the line C D, where
the angles touch the circumference, are the points from which five flights of
steps lead up to the seats, dividing them into six cunei. Above the first zone,
or semicircular passage (praecinctio), the seats are divided into twelve cunei
by eleven stairways. Just above the points C and D, access is given to the orchestra
by two vaulted passages which pass under the upper rows of seats (E, F). The
platform of the stage is prolonged right and left, so that its total length
(G H) is equal to twice the diameter of the orchestra. In the back wall of the
stage there are to be three doors, the positions of which are marked by the
points I, K, L. Thus the distinctive features of the Roman theatre are these
two:
(1) The orchestra is not, as in the Greek theatre, a circle (or the greater
part of it), but only a semicircle. The diameter of the orchestra is now the
front line of a raised stage. Consequently the auditorium, also, forms only
a half-circle. The primary cause of this change was that the old Dionysiac chorus
had disappeared; the orchestra, therefore, had no longer a dramatic use.
(2) In the Greek theatre the auditorium and the scene-buildings were not architecturally
linked. The parodoi were open passages between them. In the Roman theatre the
side-walls of the scene-building were carried forward till they met the side-walls
of the auditorium. By this organic union of the two main parts the whole theatre
was made a single compact building.
These two main differences explain the other points in which the
Roman theatre varied from its Greek original. Thus:
(i.) Having closed the openings afforded by the parodoi, the Romans needed some
other access to their semicircular orchestra. Here the arch served them. By
cutting off a few seats in the lower rows at the angles right and left of the
stage, they obtained height enough for vaulted passages, which ran under the
auditorium into the orchestra.
(ii.) The solid unity of the Roman theatres lent itself to the Roman taste for
decoration of a monumental character. The permanent Greek proscenia, though
usually adorned with columns, had been simple. But the richest embellishments
of architecture and sculpture were lavished on the Roman proscenia, in which
two or more stories were usually distinguished by carefully harmonised modes
of treatment.
(iii.) A similar magnificence was shown in the external facades. Greek theatres
had usually been erected on natural slopes. A Roman theatre was more often built
on level ground. The auditorium rested on massive substructions, of which the
walls were connected by arches. From the open spaces thus afforded, numerous
wide staircases ascended, beneath the auditorium, to the several rows of seats.
Corridors, opening on these staircases, ran along the inner side of the semicircular
wall which enclosed the auditorium. The exterior of this wall was adorned with
columns, having arcades between them, and rising in three or more successive
stories, divided by architrave and cornice. Thus, while the architectural significance
of a Greek theatre depended wholly on the interior, a Roman theatre had also
the external aspect of a stately public building.
With regard to the internal arrangements of the Roman theatre, the
following points claim notice.
(1) The raised stage (pulpitum, logeion) is in some instances on a level with
the lowest row of seats behind the orchestra, as at Aizani in Cilicia and Aspendus
in Pamphylia. Sometimes, again, the stage is rather higher, but the (originally)
lowest tow of seats has been abolished, leaving the stage still level with those
seats which are actually lowest: this is the case at Pergamnum and Assus. In
a third class of examples, the stage is higher than the lowest row of seats,--as
it is at Orange. The Roman stage in the Dionysiac theatre at Athens is of this
class.
(2) Awnings were spread over the theatre to protect the spectators from sun
or rain.: These were usually called vela: the term velaria occurs only in Juv.
iv. 122. Pliny, who describes them as carbasina vela (made of linen), says that
they were introduced by Q. Catulus, in 78 B.C. (xix. 23). They were supported
by masts (mali), fixed to the outer walls of the theatre by massive rings or
sockets, which can still be seen at Orange or Pompeii. Between the masts were
cross-beams (trabes), for greater convenience in unfurling the vela. Such awnings
were of various colours, as yellow, red, darkblue (Lucr. iv. 75 ff., where see
Munro).
(3) Until the play began, the stage was concealed by a curtain; which was then
lowered. The place into which it sank, just inside of the front line of the
stage, can be seen in the larger theatre at Pompeii. At the end of the piece
the curtain was drawn up. Hence, where we say, the curtain rises, the Romans
said, aulaeum mittitur or subducitur: the curtain is up, aulaeum premitur: the
curtain falls, aulaeum tollitur. The word siparium (from the rt. of sipharos,
top-sail, supparum) meant a folding screen. Apuleius (150 A.D.) describes a
kind of, ballet as beginning when the curtain had been lowered, and the screens
folded up (sipariis complicitis, Met. 10, p. 232; cp. ib. 1, p. 7). If these
screens were within the curtain, the reason for using them along with it may
have been to heighten the effect of a tableau by disclosing it gradually. In
the later parts of the piece, they may have served to conceal sceneshifting.
Another use is also possible. Theatres of the Macedonian and Roman period sometimes
had two stages, the higher being used by the regular actors, the lower by mimes
or dancers; and the latter may have been concealed by the siparium, as the other
by the aulaeum.,The word siparium is regularly associated with comedy or mimes.
(Seneca, de tranq. An. c. 11, 8; Juv. Sat. 8, 186.)
(4) Allocation of seats. The orchestra was reserved for senators. As a special
mark of distinction, foreigners (usually ambassadors) were occasionally admitted
to it (see Tac. Ann. xiii. 54). The rest of the auditorium was called cavea.
The Lex Roscia, proposed by the tribune L. Roscius Otho in 67 B.C., provided
that the fourteen rows of seats in the cavea nearest to the orchestra should
be reserved for the equites--excluding any who should have become bankrupt (Cic.
Phil. ii. 44). Owing to the large number of equites who had been ruined by the
civil wars, Augustus decreed that the privilege given by the Lex Roscia should
be enjoyed by any eques who had at any time possessed, or whose father had possessed,
the amount of the equester census, viz. 400,000 sesterces (Suet. Aug. 40). This
is probably the Lex Julia Theatralis meant by Pliny (xxxiii. 8). Augustus farther
assigned special portions of the cavea to (1) women; (2) praetextati, i.e. boys
who had not yet assumed the toga virilis, and their paedagogi; (3) soldiers;
(4) married men belonging to the plebs. This was a premium on marriage, like
others provided in the Lex Julia et Papia Poppaea. In some provincial theatres
the town-councillors (decuriones) had seats of honour (bisellia) on the rows
next the orchestra. Corresponding to the royal box in a modern theatre was the
tribunal, immediately over the stage on the spectator's left. This was occupied
by the emperor, or by the president of the performance. A corresponding responding
tribunal on the left side was assigned to the Vestals, among whom the empress
sat. Thus, from the Augustan age onwards, the contrast between a Greek and Roman
theatre was extended to the arrangements for the audience. Instead of the simple
Greek distinction between those who had or had not proedria, the Roman auditorium
exhibited an elaborate classification by sex, age, profession, and rank.
Odeum.
The term oideion, denoting a species of theatre appropriated to
musical performances, occurs first in a fragment of the comic poet Cratinus
(circ. 450 B.C.), with reference to the Odeum of Pericles (Thraittai, fr. 1);
but it may have been in use from a much earlier time. The oldest recorded example
is the Skias at Sparta, which is said to have been round, and to have been named
from the resemblance of its top to a sunshade (skias or skiadeion: Etym. Magn.).
It was said to have been built by the architect Theodorus of Samos (circ. 600
B.C.). On its walls the Spartans hung up the cithara of the famous musician,
Timotheus of Rhodes (circ. 400 B.C.),--not as an honour, but as a stigma, because
he had marred the ancient simplicity of the instrument by increasing the number
of its strings. In the latter part of the 2nd century A.D. the Skias was still
used as a place for public assemblies (Paus. iii. 12, 10). No traces of it remain.
The circular brick building of which ruins still exist near the Eurotas seems
to have been originally an Odeum, modified perhaps, with a view to other than
musical performances, in the Roman age of Sparta.
Athens possessed three oideia:
(1) The oldest of these stood near the fountain Enneacrunus by the Ilissus.
Its origin is uncertain, but has been conjecturally referred to Peisistratus,
or even to Solon. The most probable inference from the notices concerning it
is that it was a semicircular building, arranged on the general plan of a Greek
theatre, but with a roof. It was in this Odeum that the proagon was held before
the Great Dionysia, as described above. This, too, is the Odeum to which Aristophanes
refers as being used for a law-court (Vesp. 1109); the scholiast on that passage
identifies the place with the scene of the proagon. The same building must be
understood when we read of the Odeum as a rendezvous or a lodging for troops
(Xen. Hellen. ii. 4, 9, 24), and as place for the distribution of corn (Dem.
c. Phorm. 37: [Dem.] in Neaer. 52). It appears to have been restored, or built
anew, by Lycurgus (circ. 330 B.C.); for the words of Hypereides (fr. 32, oikodomese
de to theatron, to oideion) cannot well refer to the Periclean building,--then
little more than a century old.
(2) The Odeum of Pericles stood a little S.E. of the Acropolis and N.E. of the
Dionysiac theatre: modern houses cover its probable site. Plutarch preserves
a tradition that the shape of the building was intended to recall the tent of
Xerxes (Per. 13). The fact that the top rose to a peak--like that of the Spartan
Skias, as we may suppose--apparently prompted the joke of Cratinus, when he
described Pericles, the Zeus with peaked head (schinokephalos), as toideion
epi tou kraniou echon (Thraitt. 1). These notices at least prove that the form
was round, and such as to suggest a tent. In the conception of Pericles, the
new Odeum, like the new temple of Athena, was associated with the Great Panathenaea.
As the final act of the festival was celebrated in the Parthenon, so the Odeum
was the place for the performances with which the festival began,--contests
of flute-players, singers, and rhapsodes. The Odeum of Pericles was completed
about 444 B.C. It was burnt down in 86 B.C. by Aristion, the tyrant of Athens,
when he fled before Sulla to the Acropolis. The restoration of the building
by Ariobarzanes II. (Philopator), king of Cappadocia, about 60 B.C., is the
last recorded incident in its history. It is remarkable that Pausanias speaks
as if, at the time of his visit (circ. 155 A.D.), the old Odeum by the Ilissus
was the principal building of its kind in Athens (i. 14,1). He refers to the
Odeum of Pericles merely as a structure (kataskeuasma) said to have been built
in imitation of the tent of Xerxes, and does not even name its founder (i. 20,4).
(3) The third Odeum at Athens was built by the eminent rhetorician Herodes Atticus,
in memory of his second wife, Appia Annia Regilla, who died before 161 A.D.
It had not been commenced when Pausanias described Athens; but he mentions it
in speaking of the Odeum at Patrae, which was, he says, second only to that
of Herodes (vii. 20,6). The Odeum of Herodes stood on the south slope of the
Acropolis, W. of the Dionysiac theatre. Considerable remains still exist. It
was not a round building, but a theatre of the ordinary Roman type, with a roof
superadded. Hence Philostratus describes it as to epi Rhegillei theatron (Vit.
Soph. ii. 1, 5, cf. 8), and Suidas (s. v. Herodes) as theatron huporophion,--the
Latin theatrum tectum. It was distinguished by the great splendour of the internal
decoration. The ceiling was of cedar,--with probably an open space for light
in the middle. The seats in the cavea were cased with marble, and divided into
an upper and lower zone by a diazoma. The floor of the orchestra was inlaid
with marble mosaic-work. The proscenium, which had three doors, was decorated
with columnar arcades, in four successive storeys, and with statuary. A similar
mode of decoration, though less elaborate, was applied to the external facade.
Behind the proscenium spacious accommodation was provided for the performers.
Philostratus mentions a smaller theatre in the Cerameicus at Athens, called,
after its founder, the Agrippeion, which seems to have been used for rhetorical
declamations rather than for music or drama (Vit. Soph. ii. 5, 3 and 8, 2).
The building of Pericles and that of Herodes Atticus illustrate
the twofold relation of the ancient Odeum to the ancient theatre. (1) The circular
Odeum, such as that of Pericles, was the place for music or recitation, as the
Greek theatre for drama or chorus. From an artistic point of view, it was the
supplement of the Greek theatre. (2) The semicircular Odeum, such as that of
Herodes, was merely a roofed Roman theatre; and, as such, it was used not only
for music, but for other entertainments also, such as mimes, or even regular
drama. In the Roman period the first type continued to exist along with the
second. Trajan built a round Odeum at Rome (Paus. v. 12, 4, theatron mhega kukloteres),
called oideion by Dio Cassius (lxix. 4). In many instances where an Odeum is
mentioned, the type to which it belonged remains uncertain.
In conclusion, it may be useful to enumerate some of the more important
Greek and Roman theatres of which remains exist. The following list is mainly
based on that given by Dr. A. Kawerau in Baumeister's Denkmaler. A fuller enumeration,
with references to the topographical and archaeological literature in each case,
will be found in Dr. A. Muller's Lehrbuch der griechischen Buhnenalterthumer
(1886).
I. Greece Proper.
Attica.
1. The Dionysiac theatre at Athens. Excavated in 1886 by the German Archaeological
Institute.
2. Theatre at Zea in the Peiraeus. Excavated in 1880 and 1885 by the Greek Archaeological
Society. The orchestra was surrounded by a canal, like that in the Dionysiac
theatre.
3. Theatre at Oropus. Excavated in 1886 by the Greek Archaeological Society.
The proscenium, with one door, remains.
4. Theatre at Thoricus. Excavated in 1886 by the American School. Remarkable
for the irregular curve of the orchestra, which recedes more than anywhere else
from the form of a semicircle, and approaches that of a semiellipse.
Epeirus.
1. Theatre at Dramyssus. The cavea well preserved. It had two diazomata.
2. Theatre at Elatria (now Rhiniassa). A great part of the cavea remains.
Sicyonia.
Theatre at Sicyon. Excavations begun in 1887 by the American School.
Argolis.
1. Theatre at Epidaurus. Excavated in 1883 by the Greek Archaeological Society.
The best-preserved and finest example of a Greek theatre of the classical age.
It was built about 350 B.C. by the younger Polycleitus (Paus. ii. 27, 5).
2. Theatre at Argos. The central part of the cavea was hewn from the rock; sixty-seven
rows of seats remain, separated by two diazomata. The two ends of the cavea
were formed by substructions of rude masonry.
Arcadia.
1. Theatre at Mantineia. Notable as an exception to the rule that Greek theatres
were built on natural slopes. Here the cavea rested on an artificial mound supported
by polygonal walls.
2. Theatre at Megalopolis. The largest known to Pausanias (ii. 27, 5). The site
was a natural slope, but recourse was had also to an artificial embankment at
each horn of the auditorium. Excavations begun here in 1889 by members of the
British School at Athens have disclosed the stage and the lowest portion of
the seats.
II, Islands of the Aegean Sea
The older theatre at Delos is that in which the segment of a circle formed by
the curve of the cavea most largely exceeds a semicircle. The Cretan theatres
at Gortyna, Hierapytna, and Lyctus are among those which have the niches intended,
as some have supposed, for echeia (see above).
III. Asia Minor
Among the theatres of the later Greek or Hellenistic age, those at the following
places show a peculiarity in the curve of the cavea like that noted above at
Delos: Side (Pamphylia), Myra (Lycia), Telmissus (do.), Iassus (Caria), Aizani
(Cilicia). The last-named theatre affords another example of the niches mentioned
above. Other interesting theatres of the same period are those of Pergamum (excavated
in 1885 by the German Expedition) and Assus (excavated in 1883, for the American
Archaeol. Institute, by Mr. J. P. Clarke). The Roman theatre at Aspendus (Pamphylia)
is the best-preserved ancient theatre in existence. The proscenium has five
doors.
IV. Italy
1. The two theatres at Pompeii. The larger shows a peculiarity in the four lowest
rows of seats, which are separated from those above, and appear to have been
the places of honour. The stage is also of interest. The smaller theatre was
roofed.
2. Theatre at Falerii. One of the best preserved. It was finished in 43 B.C.
V. Sicily
Theatres at Syracuse, Acrae, Catana, Tauromenion, Tyndaris, and Segesta. The
general characteristic of the Sicilian theatres is that they were founded in
Greek times and afterwards modified, or reconstructed, under Roman influences.
VI. France.
The Roman theatre at Orange (Arausio) is well preserved. The reconstruction
of it by A. Caristie (Monuments antiques a Orange, Paris, 1856) conveys a probably
just idea of its original beauty. In one respect it forms an exception to the
ordinary Roman rule; for use was made of a natural slope to support the cavea.
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
EPIDAVROS (Ancient city) ARGOLIS
On the acropolis of the ancient city of Epidavros and at the south west side there was, in the ancient age of Asklepios, a small theater for the public necessities, but the main reason that this theater was used was to honor the god Dionisios. From the dedicated inscriptions it is known that the construction of the theatre was finished in the 4th century, aided by the donations of the local lords and famous people of that age. At the concave of the theater, at the time, 9 benches were arranged with 18 series of images at each one. When the theatre was first built, it had a capacity of about 5000 seats. Characteristic of the theatre were the inscriptions that they made it to look like a museum.
After 23 centuries of silence, in 1971, the excavation began. Every July here, in Epidavros, music performances take place under the auspices of the Ministry of Development.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from the Municipality of Epidavros URL below, which contains images.
MYCENAE (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
. . . The most celebrated of these are the so-called thesaurus of Atreus at Mycenae,
and that of Minyas at Orchomenus (see Trophonius). The latter is only partly,
the former wholly, preserved. The ground-plan of these structures is circular,
and consists of one enclosed room with a domed roof, constructed of horizontal
layers of massive stone blocks, projecting one over the other. This circular chamber
was used probably for service in honour of the dead. The actual resting-place
of the body was a square room adjoining. The large room at Mycenae is fifty feet
in diameter, and about the same in height. It consists of thirteen courses, the
uppermost of which was only a single stone. It was decorated with hundreds of
bronze plates, the holes for the nails being still visible.
This extract is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Dec 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
I. Greek.
Sepulchral chambers cut in the rock are found at all periods and in all parts
of the Greek world. The so-called prison of Socrates at Athens is a well-known
example of this kind of grave (Curtius, Atlas von Athen, vii. 4). The form and
arrangement of these rock-cut tombs are very various. They consist sometimes of
a single chamber, sometimes of an assemblage of chambers forming a small catacomb.
Generally one or more shelves are cut in the rock, at the side of each chamber,
for the reception of the bodies, and for the vases and other objects which are
placed beside them. (Rock-cut graves found in Cyprus, at and near Paphos, at Rhodes,
at Selinus in Sicily, in Karpathos)>
In the greater part of the Hellenic world rock-tombs are rather the
exception than the rule, and were probably a luxury of the rich; but in Asia Minor,
and especially in Phrygia and Lycia, they are found in enormous numbers, and often
of elaborate and ornate kinds.
(1) The commonest type of ornate rock-tomb in Lycia is a very close imitation
of a wooden structure, in which a framework of beams, the intervening spaces being
filled with wooden panels, supports a flat roof with projecting eaves. The minutest
details of wood-construction are reproduced in stone. Sometimes the facade only
of such a house is cut in a wall of rock; sometimes it stands cornerwise, with
two sides free; sometimes it is attached to the rock at the back only; and sometimes
it stands entirely free. The interior consists of a small low chamber, generally
furnished with three stone couches upon which to place the bodies. In some cases
a pointed arch is found above the flat roof, similar to that which forms the top
of the sarcophagus tombs. In the later examples the whole facade is gradually
assimilated to the typical facade of orthodox Greek architecture, with columns
and architrave. The pointed arch then becomes converted into a pediment.
(2)The sarcophagus tombs are very numerous. Benndorf estimates that there are
some two thousand of them in Lycia ...
(3)Tombs in the shape of a high square column or pedestal, with a projecting cornice
at the top, are found at Xanthos and elsewhere. Benndorf enumerates eleven of
them. The best known example is the Harpy Tomb --the sculptures from which are
now in the British Museum...
In Phrygia many rock-tombs are found. In some cases the facade is
architectural in character, and ornamented with geometrical patterns.
Large temple-tombs or hcroa are found in various parts of Asia Minor.
A central chamber stands upon a high basis or podium, and is surrounded by a colonnade.
The Nereid Monument at Xanthus was of this type, and was probably sepulchral...
This type found its highest development in the Mausoleum
at Halicarnassus in Caria, which was so widely celebrated in the ancient world
that the word Mausoleum was used by the Romans in the meaning of a splendid tomb.
Large stone or marble structures of this type are seldom found in Greece proper;
perhaps to some extent on account of the sumptuary laws, which restrained expenditure
upon monuments. Thus, at Athens, it was provided by one of Solon's laws that no
one should erect a monument which could not be completed by ten men in the course
of three days; and Demetrius Phalereus forbade the erection of any funeral monument
more than three cubits in height (Cic. de Legg. ii. 2. 6, 66).
An early and very remarkable form of tomb is that known as
the bee-hive, or domed tomb. The best known example of this type is the socalled
Treasury of Atreus at Mycenae (image in the link below). A large circular
chamber is built of courses of stones, which gradually overlap until they meet
at the apex, so as to form a dome-shaped building, but not a true dome. The space
for this chamber is excavated in the side of a hill, so that the whole projects
very little above the natural level of the ground. It is approached by a stone-lined
passage or dromos cut into the slope of the hill. The lintel of the door to which
the dromos leads is formed of a single enormous block of stone. A door at one
side of the domed chamber leads into the small sepulchral chamber cut in the rock.
Other graves of a similar type have been found at Mycenae, and at
many other places on the eastern shores of Greece; for example, at Menidi (Acharnae),
Spata in Attica, Orchomenos, Nauplia, near the Heraeon in the neighbourhood of
Argos, and at Volo in Thessaly. It seems probable that these tombs represent a
later stage of the same civilisation which produced the graves excavated by Dr.
Schliemann upon the Acropolis at Mycenae; but it is impossible here to discuss
the questions which arise in connexion with them.
The normal form of Greek grave may be considered sidered to be a hole
or trench in the ground, whether dug in earth or cut in rock. These are generally
found in groups; forming, in fact, cemeteries. They are often marked with a monument;
and they contain many objects besides the body. We have therefore to consider
(1) the position in which graves were placed; (2) the form of the grave; (3) the
monument placed above the grave; (4) the contents of the grave.
1. Place of Burial.
In the earliest times it was the custom, in Attica at any rate, for
the dead to be buried in their own houses (Plat. Minos, 315 D); and traces of
graves inside houses have been found at Athens. At Mycenae the very early graves
excavated by Dr. Schliemann are within the circuit of the citadel walls; and at
certain places the burial of the dead within the city was not forbidden in historical
times; as at Sparta (Plut. Lyc. 27:en tei polei thaptein tous nekrous kai pleoion
echein ta mnemata ton hieron ouk ekoluse), Megara (Paus. i. 43 3), and Tarentum
(Polyb. viii. 30). As a general rule, however, the places of burial were outside
the city walls, and frequently by the side of roads and near the gates of the
city. Thus at Athens the place of burial for those who had fallen in war was the
outer Kerameikos, outside the Dipylon gate, on the road leading to the Academia
(Thuc. ii. 34; Aristoph. Av. 395; Paus. i. 29, 4); and the common place of burial
was outside the Itonian Gate, near the road leading to the Piraeus (Eriai pulai,
Etym. Mag. and Harpocr; Theophr. Char. 14); while burial within the walls was
strictly forbidden (Cic. ad Fam. iv. 1. 2, 3). At Tanagra the tombs are outside
the ancient town; the three chief cemeteries being on the E., N., and S., and
the groups of tombs chiefly cluster round the roads.
2. The Forms of Graves.
At the Necropolis. of Myrina, far the commonest form of grave was
an oblong trench cut in the tufa, corresponding in size with the body to be buried.
This sometimes had a covering of stone plaques, but often was merely filled in
with earth. This form of grave was also common at Tanagra; but when it was covered,
tiles were used instead of stone plaques, and the trenches are for the most part
dug in the earth, not cut in rock. At Tanagra round pits, 1 ft. 6 in. to 5 ft.
in diameter, are also found. At both places the graves are sometimes lined with
stone slabs. In Cyprus, in the neighbourhood of Paphos, the tombs consist almost
entirely of vaulted chambers, cut in the rock or earth, sometimes with niches
radiating from a central chamber. The cut below shows one of the more. elaborate
rock-tombs.
There are various statements in ancient authors as to the orientation
of tombs (Plut. Solon, c. 10; Aelian, V. Hist. v. 14; Diog. Laert. i. 2, 48);
but in cases in which careful observations have been made, no uniformity of direction
has been found.
3. Outer Adornment or Monument.
The earliest kind of mark placed over a grave was probably the simple
tumulus. In later times a grave-stone of some kind was generally set up. The shapes
of these grave-stones are extremely various. They are divided by Koumanoudes into
the following classes: (1) kionisko. Small round columns, often with a simple
moulding near the top, below which is the inscription. This is the commonest shape.
(2) plakes, rectangular slabs, lying upon the ground. (3) stelai. (4) Aediculae
or shrine-shaped stones. The top is generally of pedimental form, supported by
pilasters or free columns. The space thus enclosed is filled by a sculptured representation,
in very high relief in the later examples. (5) Mensae (a term used by Cicero,
apparently for monuments of this class). Large rectangular blocks of stone, with
architectural ornament at the base and on the cornice. (6) Hydriae. Large marble
vases, in the shape of a lekythus, or of a tall amphora, of the kind used for
funeral purposes (funus),
were sometimes set up as funeral monuments. Eustathius (ad Il. xxiii. 141) says
that tois pro gamou teleutosin he loutrophoros, phasin, epetitheto kalpis, eis
endeixin tou hoti aloutos ta numphika kai agonos apeisi. Koumanoudes argues from
this passage that these marble vases were loutrophoroi, and marked the graves
of unmarried persons, and confirms his view by the fact that out of 171 cases
in which the tombstone is a vase or bears a representation of one, all but five
are certainly to be referred to unmarried persons. Other passages, however (Demosth.
adv. Leoc. § 18; Pollux, viii. 66), seem to show that the loutrophoros was a figure
bearing a vase: as, indeed, the formation of the word would indicate. (7) thekai,
stone receptacles, for the ashes after cremation; round or square, with a lid.
(8) Sarcophagi. The word stele is also used in a more general sense to include
most kinds of funeral monuments; and a fuller discussion of the artistic ornament
of funeral monuments will be found in... sarcophagus.
This classification of Attic monuments will apply with little modification
to other parts of Greece. Thus at Tanagra we find classes (1), (3), (4), and in
addition tombstones in the shape of altars. Altar-tombs are also common in Delos.
4. The Contents of the Grave
It was the universal custom, at all periods and in all parts of the
Greek would to bury objects, of a great. variety of kinds and often in great numbers,
with the corpse. Our knowledge of the minor Greek arts -pottery, vase-painting,
jewellery, terra-cotta work, gem-engraving e.t.c.- is almost entirely due to this
custom. The scores of thousands of vases and terra-cottas contained in the Museums
of Europe were, with few exceptions, discovered in tombs.
That the custom goes back to very early times is shown by the rich
contents of the Mycenaean graves, now in the National Museum at Athens. These
include gold and silver cups and ornaments; bronze caldrons and other vessels;
bronze sword-blades and other weapons, sometimes decorated with inlaid work of
gold or other metals; and other objects, too numerous to mention here.
The objects usually placed in tombs may be thus classified (La Necropole
de Myrina):
(a) The vase which contained the ashes, if the body had been burnt. This was most
often of pottery, but sometimes of gold, silver, or other precious material. If
the body had not been burnt, a coffin was often used. This was either of wood
(as in some Greek graves in the Crimea, or of earthenware, or of stone.
(b) Objects which apparently belonged to the dead, and were used by him when alive:
such as strigils, mirrors, perfume bottles, needles, &c.; rings, brooches, and
other personal ornaments, including wreaths and diadems, which were often made
of flimsy material for funeral purposes.
(c) Vessels intended to hold meat and drink for the dead. Sometimes remains of
food are found in these vessels. The number of them is sometimes very large; in
some tombs at Myrina as many as sixty or seventy earthenware bottles and vases
were found.
(d) Small terracotta figures. The reason for placing these in the tomb has been
much discussed. They are specially frequent in Boeotia, and are usually named
after Tanagra, the place where they were first found in large numbers. They were
sometimes intentionally broken before being placed in the tomb. Some connexion
may be traced between the subject represented and the owner of the grave. Statuettes
of women and of female divinities are more common in the graves of women; male
divinities, as Dionysus, Heracles, Atys, in those of men; and toys in those of
children (La Necropole de Myrina - terra-cotta).
(e) Charon's coin (see funus).
To these must be added a variety of miscellaneous objects,
such as engraved gems, earthenware lamps, small objects of bronze, glass bottles
and cups, so far as they are not included under the first category.
II. Italian.
Among the nations of Italy the Etruscans are remarkable for the care which they
gave to their graves. These graves are almost always subterranean. The more sumptuous
tombs consist of chambers hewn in the rock; either beneath the surface of the
ground, or penetrating horizontally into a cliff. A large number of such tombs
are described and represented in Dennis's Etruria, and the accompanying woodcut
of the Tomb of the Tarquins at Cervetri is taken from that work (i. 242).
It will be observed that this tomb is hewn in imitation of wood-construction;
and in fact the sepulchral chambers generally imitate the abodes of the living.
For example, a tomb at Corneto has its roof cut in the form of a cavaedium displuviatum.
In these tombs the bodies were generally placed upon stone couches, accompanied
by numerous vases and other objects (see below). The walls also are frequently
adorned with paintings, representing scenes of the cult of the dead, and of daily
life, and, in some of the late examples, scenes from Greek mythology.
But, as in Greece, so in Italy, rock-tombs are not the most common
form. Extensive and careful excavations in the neighbourhood of Bologna, at Falerii,
and in other places, have given us full knowledge of several Italian cemeteries.
The objects found in graves at Bologna are admirably arranged in the Museo Civico
at that place. The results obtained from comparison of them are, shortly, as follows.
The graves may be divided into three classes.
(1) Umbrian. The graves are oblong, polygonal, or square holes lined with stone.
In each tomb is a large earthenware vase, containing the ashes of the burnt body.
In a few of the later tombs unburnt skeletons are found, but these are very rare.
Arms, knives, and ornaments are found in great numbers; in the earlier tombs of
bronze only, in the later of iron also. Vases, spindles. and whorls of pottery
also occur in great numbers. In the later tombs a great advance is shown in the
skill with which the potter varies the forms and adornment of the vases.
(2) Etruscan. The earliest Etruscan tombs appear to be of about the same date
as the latest Umbrian: possibly of the 6th century B.C. They are distinguished
from the Umbrian tombs partly by the method of burial,--two-thirds of the bodies
are buried without burning, and one-third only are burnt,--partly by the tombstones,
often bearing representations of Etruscan religious scenes, which are placed above
the graves, and partly by the contents. The shapes of the bronze objects found
are characteristic and varied; and the pottery is almost all of Greek workmanship,
or imitated from Greek models. The Greek vases are for the most part red-figured;
but vessels of the Corinthian style, and an amphora partly black-figured and partly
red-figured, have been found in the earlier tombs.
(3) Gallic. A certain number of graves, of a rather late period, appear to be
Gallic in character.
The collection of objects found at Falerii is now displayed in the
new museum at the Villa Giulia, outside the Porta del Popolo at Rome. The graves
at Falerii consist for the most part of chambers furnished with a number of niches,
and so capable of receiving the remains of a number of persons. This peculiarity
makes the investigation of the chronological sequence of the graves difficult;
for the interments in each chamber extend over a considerable period. It is impossible
here to discuss in detail the questions involved. It must suffice to mention one
remarkable method of burial. In several cases coffins have been found made of
the trunk of a tree, cut in half and hollowed. A similar coffin has been found
near Gabii; and at Rome, beneath the agger of Servius, a terra-cotta sarcophagus
has been discovered, resembling in form the trunk of a tree. This form of treecoffin
appears frequently in Northern Europe, especially in Westphalia.
At Rome it has been shown by recent excavations that a large cemetery
lay on the east side of the city, outside the Porta Viminalis, and that it was
still in use in the latest times of the Republic. This was the place of burial
for slaves and poor people (Hor. Sat. i. 8, 8). The graves are of various kinds;
among others puticuli or well-graves; that is to say, pits which served as a common
grave for the bodies of those who could not afford the expense of separate burial.
(Varro, L. L. 5, 25: a puteis puticuli, quod ibi in puteis obruebantur homines,
nisi potius, ut Aelius scribit, puticulae, quod putescebant ibi cadavera projecta.
Qui locus publicus ultra Exquilias. Festus, Ep. p. 216; Com. Cruq. ad Hor. Sat.
i. 8, 10, &c.) Here, too, the bodies of executed criminals were thrown unburied
(Hor. Sat. i. 8, 17; Epod. 5, 99; Dionys. xx. 16). This cemetery was disused from
the time of Augustus onwards, and was turned into gardens, to the great improvement
of the sanitary condition of the district (Hor. Sat. i. 8, 14; Porphyrio and Com.
Cruq. in loc.).
Burial within the city was forbidden, from the time of the Twelve
Tables; but exceptions might be made in the case of specially distinguished persons--as,
for example, in the case of C. Fabricius (Cic. de Legg. ii. 2. 3, 58) and Valerius
(Plut. Q. R. 79), and generally in the case of those who had celebrated a triumph
(Plut. ib.). The Vestal Virgins and the emperors were buried in the city, according
to Servius (ad Aen. xi. 205), because they were not bound by the laws, but Eutropius
(8, 5) tells us that Trajan was the only emperor for whom the privilege was used.
By a rescript of Hadrian, those who buried a person in the city were liable to
a penalty of 40 aurei (Dig. 47, 12, 3, 5). The practice was also forbidden by
Antoninus Pius (Capitol. Anton. Pius, 12) and Theodosius II. (Cod. Theod. 9, 17,
6). A similar prohibition was in force elsewhere (Lex Coloniae Genetivae, lxxiii.;
Ephem. Ep. iii. p. 94).
The customary place for the tombs of well to-do families was by the
side of the roads leading out of the city. Many such tombs are still preserved
by the side of the roads leading out of Rome, especially the Appian Way, and many
more have been destroyed in comparatively recent times. A row of them also stands
outside the Herculanean gate at Pompeii. Part of this Pompeian street of tombs
is represented in the accompanying woodcut, taken from Mazois, Pompeiana, part
i. pl. 18. These private tombs vary very widely in arrangement and architecture.
In some cases we have underground chambers, similar to those found in Etruria;
as, for instance, the tomb of the Scipios on the Via Appia. But generally the
tomb consists of a building enclosing a chamber; and in this chamber are placed
the urns containing the ashes of the dead. Some not uncommon forms are shown in
the above representation of tombs at Pompeii. Other forms are the pyramid, as
in the case of the tomb of C. Cestius, near the Porta Ostiensis; the round tower,
as in the well-known tomb of Caecilia Metella; and the conical turret, as in the
so-called tomb of Virgil near Naples, and the so-called tomb of Aruns or of the
Horatii and Curiatii near Albano. This last shape seems to follow an Etruscan
model, for conical turrets are the chief feature of the tomb of Porsenna, as described
by Pliny (H. N. xxxvi 91-93). One of the most splendid sepulchral edifices was
the Mausoleum of Hadrian.
Another form of grave is the columbarium. This is found not unfrequently
at Rome, but is hardly known elsewhere; probably because land; at Rome was much
more valuable than at any other place. It consists of a building provided on the
inside with a large number of niches, flat at the bottom, arched at the top. Each
niche, as a rule, is intended to hold two urns, in which the ashes were placed.
The name columbarium was given to such graves because of the resemblance which
these niches bear to the holes of a pigeon-house. The general arrangement of a
columbarium is shown in the above woodcut, which represents one found in the year
1822 at the Villa Rufini, about two miles beyond the Porta Pia. Columbaria were
sometimes provided by great families as a burying-place for their slaves, freedmen,
and dependents: e. g. by the Statilii Tauri, by the Volussi, and by Livia.. But
most frequently they were erected by burial societies, formed by persons who were
too poor to purchase a place of burial for themselves. Considerable light has
been thrown upon the constitution and arrangement of these societies by inscriptions,
and especially by those found in the year 1852 in a columbarium upon the Via Appia,
not far from the tomb of the Scipios.
An account of Roman tombs would not be complete without some mention
of the Catacombs; but as they were almost exclusively used by the Christians,
it must suffice here to refer to the Dictionary of Christian Antiquities and the
authorities there cited.
Contents of Tombs.
If the body was not burnt, it was placed in the tomb either enclosed
in a coffin or sarcophagus, or unenclosed. In the latter case in Etruscan tombs
it is generally placed upon a couch of stone, as is shown in the accompanying
representation of a tomb at Veil (see in the URL below). If the body was burnt,
the ashes were placed in an urn or pot (urna, olla). The urn takes many forms.
The hut-urns found at Albanos (see cut under tugurium)
are made of earthenware, and represent a primitive hut, with a peaked straw roof,
similar apparently to the contemporary dwellings of the living. The urns also
in the Bolognese cemeteries and in the columbaria are generally of earthenware.
In Etruria a favourite form is a miniature sarcophagus of earthenware or stone,
with a recumbent figure upon the lid. Marble, stone, and alabaster are commonly
used; and the next woodcut (see in the URL below) represents a sepulchral urn
of marble in the British Museum. The inscription shows that it contained the ashes
of Cossutia Prima. It is of an upright rectangular form, richly ornamented with
foliage and supported at the side. by pilasters. Its height is 21 inches, and
its width about 15. Other materials used are glass, and various metals, -lead,
bronze, silver, and even gold.
A large number of other objects (of which some mention has been made
above) were generally placed in the tomb, apparently with the intention of supplying
the dead with the customary apparatus of life. Thus in the early tombs weapons
and armour frequently occur. Later, agricultural implements and tools are often
found; and in the case of women, articles of the toilet, scent-bottles, ornaments,
and so forth. Clothes, money, food and drink, and vessels for containing them,
were often added. The last purpose may explain to some extent the large number
of vases which are often found in tombs. Several are to be seen in the picture
of a tomb at Veii given above. In Etruria Greek vases and native imitations of
Greek vases were used in very large numbers for this purpose; and it is from Etruscan
tombs that the majority of extant Greek vases comes. With the exception of those
which were found at Pompeii, nearly all the objects of daily use in our Museums
have been taken from graves. We must add lastly altars, lamps and candelabra,
intended for ritual purposes.
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Mycenae was the center of the Mycenaean Civilization during the period
that Greece prospered, that is, the Bronze Age. Mycenae, with all its wild beauty,
is located in the northern section of the Argolic Gulf and has been built at the
top of a fortified hill. This location comprised a transport intersection. Homer
refers to Mycenae as "polychryses" and "efktimenes", meaning well built with multiple
gold. Perseus (son of Zeus and Danae) is said to have built Mycenae in 1500 B.C.
Under the Atreides' Dynasty, Mycenae reached great prosperity. King Atreus was
the leader of the Greeks in their crusade to Troy.
In 468 B.C., the people of Argos destroyed Mycenae and Tiryns.
Since then, the buildings' ruins were covered with dirt. The excavations within
the Mycenaean site began in 1841. H. Schliemann began excavating Grave Circle
A. The work of the Archaeology Service in conjunction with P. Stamatakis, Ch.
Tsountas, J. Papadimitriou, N. Verdelis, G. Mylonas, S. Iakovides as well as the
British School of Archaeology of Athens (A.J. B, Wace, W. Taylor) maintains great
significance.
Mycenae was comprised within a Citadel or an Acropolis during the
period of prosperity, which could be accessed only through the renowned Lion Gate
(it was named after the pictured sculpture) from the Lower City, which was also
encased within the surrounding settlements that were found outside the walls.
The Acropolis Wall was built between 1350 - 1300 B.C. and was comprised of a rectangular
stone cube (Cyclopean Fortification wall). The Palace of Atreides as well as the
framework of a Doric Temple that was built in place of a Mycenaean Palace were
located at the Citadel's peak. The most noteworthy area is the Royal Cemetery,
which was protected by a circular surrounding wall. Schliemann discovered five
shaft graves (1876) and P. Stamatakis uncovered the sixth (1877). On the east
side of the Citadel, remains of many Mycenaean buildings are found, the largest
of which is the House with the columns. This comprises the central section of
the Palace's east aisle, which was surrounded by warehouses, workshops, shops
and the Residences of the Officials. The southeastern side of the hill was constructed
in 1225 B.C., a tunnel of circular inner walls that led to an underground cistern
fed by the Persian Spring (12 meters in depth) that was used for the purpose of
ensuring water in the event of a siege.
There was a series of houses in the Lower City of Mycenae, such as
the House of Shields (Aspidon), the House of an olive-oil trader (13th century),
which was found in 1950 upon which tile was used that illustrated linear graphics
as well as the House of Sphinxes. Today, only their foundations have been preserved.
The famous Tomb of Agamemnon or Treasury of Atreus is found in the Lower City.
It was agreed that it would be referred to as such even though it was constructed
in 1350 B.C. and belongs to a King that followed. A narrow path carved into a
cliff leads to a colonnade and lintel that are formed by two massive blocs. The
arched booth continues, which comprises a circular hall that is shaped like a
beehive. The Tholos is comprised of 33 successive rings built in accordance with
the bearing system, thus resulting in the fact that the peak can only be closed
by one slab. A passage leads to a side hall (ossuary). The tomb walls are covered
by bronze slabs and the entire structure is covered with dirt. To the right of
the Treasury of Atreus is Clytmenestra's Tomb and the Aegisthus in addition to
a fourth tomb, a little older and near the Lion Gate. Additional tombs were uncovered
in 1902 by J. Papadimitriou. Numerous tombs are located on the west side of the
hill with the Treasury of Atreus (Tomb of Spirits, the Hill of Panagia, Epano
Phournos and Kato Phournos).
This text is cited May 2003 from the Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs URL below.
ASSINI (Ancient city) ARGOLIS
Asine in the Argolid
In the ship's catalogue in the Iliad, Homer informs us who sent ships
to the Trojan War. In connection with the Argolid he notes that Asine, situated
at the head of the bay, sent six ships. This Asine has been identified with modern
day Kastraki near the village of Tolo. The Swedish Crown Prince Gustaf Adolf came
here in 1920 on a private tour of Greece. One of the reasons for his choice of
country was his interest in archaeology. He had already participated in archaeological
excavations in Sweden and believed that Sweden should join in investigating ancient
Greece. He was the initiator of the Asine excavations, Sweden's first excavation
on a large scale in the country.
For nearly two decades, until the outbreak of the Second World War,
Swedish archaeologists worked extensively in the Argolid and always under the
direction of Axel W. Persson. He was Swedish archaeology in Greece. As he was
not a field archaeologist but a philologist the Asine Committee appointed Otto
Frodin, an experienced field archaeologist to direct the fieldwork together with
Persson. When the publication appeared in 1938 (Results of the Swedish excavation
at Asine 1922 - 1930) in Stockholm it reflected the main interest of the two directors
as well as the focus of archaeological research at the time: prehistory. Extensive
investigations were carried out on the acropolis and in the so-called Lower Town
or the northern slopes of the rock.
Further, on the Barbouna Hill two cemeteries were partly investigated:
a Late Bronze Age one (c. 1600 -1100 BC) on the eastern slopes and a Late Geometric
one (8th century BC) on the south slopes.
Methodologically the excavations were very advanced. Much of the soil
was sieved in order not to miss small objects and all material was considered
important enough to keep. A large sherd collection is now kept in the Asine Collection
at the University of Uppsala as a result of an exchange of materials done in the
1930's between the Swedish Asine Committee and the Greek government. From several
Swedish museums prehistoric flint tools and weapons were given to Greece.
In 1970 investigations at Asine were resumed by the Swedish Institute
at Athens under the direction of Carl-Gustaf Styrenius, its director at the time.
The brothers Karmaniola who owned land east of the acropolis wished to build a
camping-place and test trenches by the local archaeological authorities indicated
extensive ancient remains. A year later Robin Hagg joined the project and the
southern slopes of the Barbouna Hill were included in the investigations. The
Karmaniola area was excavated from 1970 - 1974 and is today mostly published (in
the Acta of the institute); Hagg did his last field season in 1989. The results
of the work on Barbouna are partly published in a periodical of Uppsala University:
Boreas.
In 1985 Berit Wells investigated the Late Geometric walls on the northern
slopes of the Barbouna Hill ('Early Greek building sacrifices' in Early Greek
cult practice, eds. R. Hagg, N. Marinatos and G.C. Nordquist, Stockholm 1988)
and in 1990 the previously unexcavated corner north of the Hellenistic bastion
(A. Penttinen, 'Excavations on the acropolis of Asine in 1990', Opuscula Atheniensia,
1966). At present no fieldwork is being carried out at Asine.
At all times Asine was a site of strategic importance. This is today
reflected in the Hellenistic fortifications built by the Macedonians (probably
by Demetrios Poliorketes) c. 300 BC and in the trenches and guard towers built
by the Italian army during the occupation of Greece in the Second World War.
There is more or less continuous habitation at Asine from the Neolithic
period onwards. The place flourished through the Bronze Age and continued doing
so also after the destruction of the Mycenaean citadels and into the early Iron
Age. Not until c. 700, when Argos destroyed Asine, do we see a decline in settlement
but not a discontinuance as was proposed in the old publication. People continued
living here and c. 300 BC there was a re-colonization, when the above-mentioned
fortifications were built.
About the later history we catch only glimpses. In the Late Roman
period (c. 400 - 500 BC) at least one bath was erected; in 1686 Morosini landed
on the eve of the capture of Nauplion; and after the War of Independence Cretan
fishermen attacked and destroyed a still Ottoman village (according to tradition)
on the island of Romvi. They settled on the shore opposite and founded the village
of Tolo.
Berit Wells, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
MIDEA (Mycenean acropolis) ARGOLIS
Dendra and Midea in the Argolid
The neighbouring villages Dendra and Midea are situated in the northern
Argolid, c. six km east of the town of Argos. At Dendra there are remains of habitation
from the Early Neolithic and from the Early Helladic periods. There are also tombs
dated to various Bronze Age periods. The village of Midea is situated c. two km
to the east of Dendra. South of the village is the 270 m high mountain of Midea
where German archaeologists already in 1907 made some investigations. It has been
assumed that the habitation on the acropolis of Midea and the necropolis at Dendra
were connected because of the short distance between the sites, i.e. the inhabitants
of Midea may have used Dendra as a burial place.
Axel W. Persson initiated the Swedish field work in the area with
the excavation of a Mycenaean (LH IIIA) tholos tomb at Dendra in 1926. It was
noted that there were also chamber tombs of the same date. A Mycenaean necropolis
had been identified. Many of the chamber tombs were excavated in the following
years and the present ephoros in Nauplion at that time, N. Bertos, participated
in this work.
Already during his first excavation season, Persson had concluded
that Midea was a fortified Mycenaean citadel. In 1939 the line of the wall was
recorded, some cleaning was done in the East Gate area and some excavations were
conducted on the higher plateau as well as on the lower terraces. Persson?s results
were published in two volumes: The Royal Tombs at Dendra near Midea (1931) and
New Tombs at Dendra (1942). Persson had probably intended to continue the excavations,
but all field activities ceased because of the start of the second world war.
Instead, it was Paul Astrom who continued the Swedish archaeological commitment
at Dendra and Midea, and it was at this time, in 1960, that the field work became
a joint Greek-Swedish project. Astrom and N. Verdelis, ephor at Nauplion, made
an important and unique discovery in the excavation of 'The Cuirass Tomb', namely
a bronze cuirass, which is in the Nauplion Museum. In 1963 Verdelis and Astrom
made a small excavation on the citadel of Midea. These activities are published
in The Cuirass Tomb and other Finds at Dendra (1977) and (1983).
Twenty years passed before Midea once more became the focus of field
archaeological interest. In 1983 a joint Greek-Swedish excavation project was
initiated under the direction of Katie Demakopoulou and Paul Astrom. Work has
been concentrated on the area within the citadel wall and more specifically to
the two gate areas. The higher plateau has mostly been left untouched, probably
because this is the most eroded part of the citadel area. Since 2000 the Swedish
side of the project is directed by Ann-Louise Schallin.
The wide citadel wall on the slope of Midea is clearly visible from
far away in the Argolid plain. The wall is dated to c. 1200 B.C. According to
Persson, a Mycenaean megaron was situated on the higher plateau of the citadel.
In 1939 cutting marks in the bedrock were noted here and a preliminary sketch
plan of the layout of the 'palace' was published. These observations are hard
to verify today, because of the erosion of the bedrock and the dense vegetation
covering the plateau where the cliff is not visible. The excavations which were
begun in 1983 have been concentrated to the East and the West Gate respectively.
The soil is packed thickly against the citadel wall and it has been noted that
walls dating to approximately the same period as the citadel wall were built against
and parallel with it. There is a lot of material in the thick layers of soil and
in the upper layers the material is very mixed as it represents material eroded
from higher levels. The material mostly consists of pottery sherds and covers
a wide chronological range. The earliest pottery is dated to the Middle and Final
Neolithic periods; all the main periods of the Bronze Age are represented; some
limited activity can be noted in the Archaic, as well as in the Classical and
possibly the Hellenistic periods. In Late Roman and in Early Byzantine times,
there is also evidence of habitation.
Except for the investigations along the citadel wall, excavations
have also been undertaken on the lower terraces within the eastern citadel area.
Under the direction of Gisela Walberg an impressive, rectangular building was
excavated (LH IIIB and LH IIIC). Parts of the results from this work has been
published in The Excavations on the Lower Terraces 1985-1991 (1998). In the various
excavations on Midea it has been noted that a severe destruction occurred c. 1200
B.C., i.e. shortly after the erection of the citadel wall. The destruction is
characterized by ashy, grey soil, mixed with bits and pieces of charcoal and other
burnt organic material. We do not know the cause behind the destruction, but it
may have been the result of an earthquake or conflagration caused by enemies invading
Midea.
In the future the Swedish part of the Midea project will continue
to investigate the east side of the citadel area and especially the areas of the
East Gate and east of the East Gate. One of the goals is to find architectural
evidence for the early prehistoric habitation. We also want to explore the activity
on Midea in historic times.
Ann-Louise Schallin, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
MYCENAE (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
PROSYMNA (Archaeological site) MYKINES
Berbati in the Argolid
In 1934 Axel W. Persson initiated his archaeological investigations
in the Berbati Valley east of Mycenae. In the ensuing years he worked in the valley
together with among others: Ake Akerstrom, Gosta Saflund and Erik J. Holmberg.
Each of them had his own excavation: Saflund the south slope of the Mastos Hill
and the Western Necropolis, Holmberg a chamber tomb to the east and Akerstrom
the Potter?s Quarter. Akerstrom continued working in that area after the War.
The investigations in the 1930?s were concentrated in the western
part of the valley, where Orestes from Mycenae, who had worked with Persson at
Dendra, had pointed out the most promising site: that on the eastern slope of
the Mastos Hill (i.e. the Potter?s Quarter). In 1935 Persson excavated the tholos
tomb, which contained one burial. The Palace style and other pottery associated
with it date the tomb to the LH II period or c. 1400 BC. Pottery of Late Geometric
(late 8th century BC) and Late Roman date attest the fact that the tholos tomb
was reused in later periods. The tholos tomb was published by Barbro Santillo
Frizell in Opuscula Atheniensia 15, 1984. The chamber tombs were published much
later by Saflund (1965) and Holmberg (1983).
The most interesting excavations were the ones on the Mastos Hill,
where Saflund and Akerstrom investigated each his settlement area: Saflund the
Early Helladic (c. 2600-2000 BC) one on the south slope and Akerstrom the Late
Helladic (c. 1600-1200 BC) on the east slope. Saflund published his results (together
with the chamber tombs in the Western Necropolis) in 1965 in the Stockholm University
Studies, while Akerstrom resumed work at the Mastos in 1953 and finished fieldwork
in 1959. He published the pictorial pottery in the institute series in 1987. The
large amounts of pottery that remain are now under study by Mats Johnson (Neolithic),
Jeannette Forsen (Early Helladic), Michael Lindblom (Middle Helladic), Ann-Louise
Schallin (Mycenaean) and Jenni Hjohlman (Medieval).
The most spectacular structure in the Potter?s Quarter is the kiln,
which Akerstrom dated stratigraphically to the transition LH II/LH IIIA1 or c.
1400 BC. He found a dump south of the kiln with pottery supporting the date. Production
continued at the site and dumped material east of the kiln testifies to hundreds
of years of pottery making. Akerstrom maintained that Berbati was the production
center of the spectacular pictorial vases found on Cyprus and in the Levant. Not
everybody has accepted his theory but most scholars now seem to agree that the
northeast Peloponnese was the origin of these prestigious vessels. Analyses of
the fabrics have shown that the clays are consistent with the clays in the general
Berbati/Mycenae area. Schallin?s research into the Berbati production aims at
studying the relationship of shape and decoration in the local Mycenaean repertoir
employing statistical methods.
In the late 1980?s Berit Wells initiated fieldwork on a large scale.
A surface survey of the valley and of the mountainous area to the east around
Limnes was carried out. The scope of the survey was to study the interaction of
man and environment through time, from the Middle Palaeolithic 50,000 years ago
until the 18th century AD. The publication, which appeared in 1996 in the institute
series, changed the hitherto accepted view of the Berbati valley as an archaeological
entity. The previous Bronze Age finds now could be put into a historical framework.
Before the survey we knew nothing, or next to nothing, about the Neolithic (5th-4th
mill. BC), the Early Hellenistic (3rd century BC) and the Late Roman (4-6th century
AD) periods in the valley. Now we know that it flourished during those times.
Regional and diachronic studies became almost the rule in Greece during the last
two decades of the last century, but The Berbati-Limnes Survey is one of the few
that has been completely published so far.
From 1994 onwards several sites documented during the survey were
investigated or underwent further documentation. These sites were included in
a larger research project (the Berbati Valley Project) to investigate the agrarian
economy of the valley. In 1994 the Late Geometric/Archaic cult place defined in
the survey and associated with the tholos tomb was excavated. Gunnel Ekroth is
studying the assemblage and published a preliminary report on the material in
the Opuscula Atheniensia 21 for 1996. The same season a study of the Late Roman
bath was carried out, also reported on in the same Opuscula. Kai Holmgren did
a CAD model of the extant structure within the framework of a project designed
jointly by the departments of Archaeology at Lund University: Swedish Prehistory,
Medieval Archaeology and Classical Archaeology and the Swedish Institute at Athens.
From 1995 onwards the project focused entirely on the agrarian economy
of the valley. Although several targets had been chosen for excavation, only one
at Pyrgouthi or the Hellenistic Tower could be realized. It turned out to represent
a spectrum of chronological phases contrary to what the survey had shown: from
the early Iron Age to the 6th century AD.
Penttinen (diss. 2001) redefines the Berbati Valley as a typical border
region, which sometimes is dominated by Corinth, sometimes by Argos. Most of the
material comes from disturbed contexts, which, however, reflects migrant animal
husbandry rather than sedentary agriculture thus defining a border zone. The most
spectacular finds at Pyrgouthi date from the 6th century AD (Hjohlman diss. 2002).
A farmstead with its press-house was destroyed in a conflagration. Whatever was
in the press-house at the time was buried under the debris, presenting a frozen
moment in the history of the site. Large storage jars, which could be mended,
wine presses and agricultural tools were found.
Kilns datable to the 5th century BC were found also at Pyrgouthi.
At present we have a substantial amount of evidence of ceramic production in the
valley with all in all four production sites: the previously well-known Early
Mycenaean kiln from the Mastos Hill, the 5th century Pyrgouthi kilns, a Late Roman
kiln found by our Greek colleagues west of the Roman bath, and the waste from
a kiln built for the production of roof tiles after the German destruction of
the village of Berbati in 1943. Obviously the manufacture of ceramics was a by-product
of the agrarian economy during several periods of the history of the valley. Berit
Wells together with Ian Whitbread and Matthew Ponting of the Fitch Laboratory
at the British School at Athens are doing a comprehensive study of the Berbati
clay beds and ceramics through time. Undoubtedly ceramic production was an added
asset for people living in the valley.
See Arto Penttinen, Berbati between Argos and Corinth (diss. University
of Stockholm, Department of Classical Archaeology and Ancient History), 2001 and
Jenni Hjohlman, Farming the land in Late Antiquity. The case of Berbati in the
northeastern Peloponnese (diss. Stockholm University, Department of Classical
Archaeology and Ancient History), 2002.
These dissertations together with a number of specialist reports on
botanical and faunal remains etc will be published in the institute series in
early 2005.
The Berbati Valley Project was brought to conclusion in 1999 with
an intensive survey of the Mastos Hill, which had been excluded from our permit
for the 1988-1990 survey. The aim of the 1999 survey was to test new methods of
field sampling and digital processing of data. Terrace by terrace all artifacts
were collected and analyzed in the field. Small samples were collected for further
study in the laboratory. The artifact database was related to a digitized model
of the hill creating distribution maps to illustrate artifact density on each
terrace and thus activity on each terrace period by period. In this way we have
gathered new information on the history of the hill. So far our knowledge of the
medieval period was very scant. It is now obvious from the distribution map below
that a small medieval habitation must be sought on the top of the Mastos Hill.
The investigations in the Berbati Valley during the 1980?s and 1990?s
have not produced artifacts comparable to the old excavations at Asine and Dendra.
The objectives have been different. The importance of the investigations for Swedish
Classical Archaeology lies in the fact that new methods have been tested and young
scholars have been entrusted with the publication of material, sometimes for their
dissertations, which has ensured quick publication. Therefore Berbati also became
a training ground for a whole new generation of archaeologists. In this respect
it can be compared only to Asine in the 1920?s and Acquarossa in Italy in the
1960?s and 1970?s.
Arto Penttinen, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
Report on the investigations carried out at the Mastos, Berbati, in 1999
The 1999 investigations at the Mastos hill in the western part of
the Berbati Valley (Prosimni) had two objectives: a) to carry out a surface survey
of the entire hill in order to learn how it was utilized in different periods
and b) to create a computerized 3D map which would visualize human activity in
relation to the landscape and such modern human activity as harrowing and grazing.
All artifacts lying on the surface were classified in the field and entered into
the computer together with information on landscape type and land use A small
sample of material was brought to the museum, where it will be studied in detail
in the summer of the year 2000.
The excavations on the southern and eastern slopes of the Mastos in
the 1930s and 1950s showed that habitation on the hill goes back to Middle Neolithic
times and that there is continued activity until the Late Helladic IIIB period.
Coins found in 1953 assert activities in the historical period as late as the
12th century AD but the excavators correctly saw Mastos primarily as a prehistoric
site. Although this year's investigations corroborate this general picture we
now have a more complete grasp of human utilization of the slopes through the
period and can further modify the picture for the historical periods.
In the Neolithic period activity was almost exclusively documented on the southern and eastern slopes, although it should be noted that the top terrace of the hill yielded a number of sherds. Whether these originated there or were brought there through manuring or similar activities cannot be ascertained at this point.
From the old excavations we know that there was an important Early
Helladic settlement with preserved architecture in the south and that this continued
towards the east into the southwestern part of the Potter's Quarter. Our survey
now has registered a considerable density of EH material not only on all the terraces
in the south but also on the terraces in the east and southeast.
In the Middle Helladic period, if we are to judge by the numbers of
sherds studied, activity at the Mastos increases. Although we see particularly
dense concentrations on some of the terraces in the south and southeast, it is
obvious that all slopes were utilized. Much of the transitional MH/LH pottery
is notoriously difficult to define and this is especially true of survey material.
Therefore some caution should be applied when studying the distribution maps of
MH and LH I-II.
Even with great caution applied it is quite evident from the map that
Late Helladic I-II was a major phase at the Mastos. Now, this is of course may
come as no surprise considering the production connected with the LH I-II kiln
excavated in the 1930s. However, activity is not restricted to the kiln area but
is very much in evidence in the west, a fact that heralds a major extension of
habitation or other activities in LH III.
Studying every single sherd on the surface at the Mastos is, as everybody understands who has walked the area, very time consuming. For this reason we did not manage to survey all the fields neither in the south nor in the east. The carpet of material stretches some 20-30 meters south of the lowest terrace of the hill and in the east the fields below the road all the way to the rema would yield masses of material, predominately Late Mycenaean to judge from walking over the fields.
Late Helladic III by far yielded the most sherds. Now, sherd counts
can be vastly misleading, as Mycenaean pottery easily breaks into tiny fragments
during cultivation or even walking over the surface. EH and MH pottery is preserved
in large fragments on the same surface. However, in the case of the Mastos we
can still safely conclude that activity in LH III superceded that in any other
period as the numbers are overwhelming, which can be observed on the distribution
map.
In the Archaic to Hellenistic and Roman periods there is scattered
evidence of human activity. For the earlier periods most of the artifacts are
tiles and there is evidence that especially Corinthian tiles were reused in later
walls. Thus they could well have been brought from a wider area around the Mastos.
There is clearly a Late Roman presence but the nature of it is, as is the case
also with the Archaic to Hellenistic, impossible to discern.
The distribution of Medieval sherds (see design inside URL below)
shows an interesting pattern. The main concentrations are on the top terrace of
the Mastos and on the rather steep slopes immediately below. We interpret this
as activity mainly on the top terrace and from there material has spilled over
on the slopes. On the northern side this terrace still preserves a substantial
fortification wall, clearly built in Byzantine times but utilizing a prehistoric
wall as its foundation. Here lay a fort which ties in very nicely with the finds
of Late Byzantine coins referred to at the beginning of this report.
Arto Penttinen, ed.
This text is cited Jun 2005 from The Swedish Institute at Athens URL below
Murus or Moenia (teichos). A wall surrounding an unroofed enclosure, as opposed
to paries (toichos), the wall of a building. The word maceria denotes a boundary
wall, fence-wall. Cities were enclosed by walls at a very early period of Greek
history, as is shown by the epithet used by Homer "well-walled" of Tiryns,
Mycenae, etc., and the massive remains of those cities have also demonstrated
the fact So vast, in truth, are some of these structures as to have induced a
belief among the ancients that they were the work of Cyclopes. (See Cyclopes.)
The following principal species of city walls are to be distinguished:
(a) those in which the masses of stone are of irregular shape and put together
loosely, the interstices being filled by smaller stones, as in the wall at Tiryns;
(b) those in which polygonal stones are carefully fitted together, and their faces
cut so as to give the whole a comparatively smooth surface, as in the walls at
Larissa and at Cenchreae; and (c) those in which the blocks are laid in horizontal
courses more or less regular with the vertical joints either perpendicular or
oblique, and are more or less accurately fitted together, as in the walls beside
the "Lion Gate" at Mycenae.
Brick was largely used in Egypt, Assyria, and Chaldaea, and also in
Greece and Italy; but was often defended against the weather by an outer casing
of stone, when the bricks were sun-dried instead of burned (See Fictile).
After the first Persian War the Athenians began to use marble for their finest
buildings, as in the Propylaea and the Parthenon. A century later marble was also
used for facing walls of brick. Less important structures were made of smaller
stones, rough or square, flints, or bricks.
At Rome there were several kinds of masonry (See Caementum).
(a) Blocks of stone were laid in alternate conrses, lengthwise in one course and
crosswise in the next. (b) The stones in each course were laid alternately along
and across. (c) The stones were laid all lengthwise. (d) The stones entirely crosswise.
(e) The courses were alternately higher and lower than each other. The earliest
walls at Rome, largely of Etruscan origin, were built of huge quadrangular stones,
hewn, and placed together without cement. Such were the Carcer Mamertinus (see
Carcer),
the Cloaca Maxima (see Cloaca),
and the Servian Walls (see Etruria).
The Romans also used small rough stones, not laid in courses, but held together
by mortar (opus incertum) and courses of flat tiles. Tiles were also introduced
in the stone and brick walls. Brick covered with painted stucco was a very common
material at Rome, and even columns were so constructed.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Porta (pyle, pule), the gate of a city, citadel, or other open space enclosed
by a wall, in contradistinction to janua
(=door) which was the door of a house or any covered edifice. The word pule is
often found in the plural, even when applied to a single gate, because it consisted
of two leaves (Thuc. ii. 4, &c.).
In tracing out the walls of an Italian city with the ceremony described
under pomerium
the plough was lifted and carried across the openings to be left for the gates.
The number and position of city gates in ancient Greece and Italy naturally varied
according to circumstances. The old Etruscan custom was to give three gates to
a walled city, dedicated to the three chief deities of the Etruscans: the same
custom may possibly be seen in the three gates of Roma Quadrata (Plin. H. N. iii.66,
where an alternative tradition of four gates is mentioned): two of these were
the Porta Mugonia and Porta Romanula (Varro, L. L. v. 164). The ancient walls
of Paestum, Sepianum, and Aosta enclose a square: in the centre of each of the
four walls was a gate; the arrangement, however, was obviously affected by the
nature of the ground, and the size of the city. Thus Megara had five gates; Thebes
seven; others, as Rome, many more.
The gates in ancient Greek walls were formed in various ways, showing
progressive art in building. We may give, from Reber (Gesch. d. Baukunst, 231),
four distinct methods:
1. The simple straight lintel, consisting of a long and massive block, as in the
Lion Gate of Mycenae.
2. Stones projecting one beyond another in a step form from each side, and so
gradually approaching till they can be topped by a flat lintel: an example is
afforded by a gate at Phigalia.(see image in URL below)
3. A gable shape, formed by two massive stones meeting in an angle, as shown in
a gate at Delos.(see image in URL below)
4. A refinement on No. 2, where the stones approach gradually, cut into shape,
sometimes with a slight curve, till they join at the apex: they sometimes begin
their slope from the ground, as in the gates of Missolonghi and Thoricos, or,
in a more developed form, they are straight in their lower part, as the gate of
Ephesus.(see image in URL below)
When the arch was introduced (see arcus
=arch), the construction of the gate itself varied only as regards its size: but
there were many differences and improvements as regards its defence. From early
days the importance of flanking bastions had been seen; these were at first simple
projections of the wall at right angles, from the summit of which the defenders
could shoot, and this developed into bastions formed by circular swellings of
the wall on each side of the gate, and thence into regular flanking towers, round
or square (see turris
=tower), often with additional defences, such as are shown in the gate of Posidonia,
or Paestum (see murus
=wall). An additional security to the entrance was given by a double gateway,
having an outer and inner gate with a space between. At Messene the space between
was circular, so that the wall at that part had the shape of a round tower pierced
by two opposite openings. This system of double gates was very early, as in the
second and third gateways of the fortress at Tiryns; and it is instructive also
in this early fortress to see how the besiegers were exposed to fire when they
forced one gateway and passed round to the next. Care was taken here, and elsewhere,
that the right or unshielded side should be towards the wall in their approach.
At Como, Verona, and other ancient cities of Lombardy, the gate contains
two passages close together, the one designed for carriages entering, and the
other for carriages leaving the city. The same provision is observed in the magnificent
ruin of a gate at Treves (see image in URL below). In other instances we find
only one gate for carriages, but a smaller one on each side of it (parapulis,
Heliodor. n viii) for foot-passengers. Each of the fine gates which remain at
Autun has not only two carriage-ways, but exterior to them two sideways for pedestrians.
Such sideways are well seen in the Porta d'Ercolano of Pompeii. When there were
no sideways, one of the valves of the large gate sometimes contained a wicket
(portula, pulis: rhinopule), large enough to admit a single person. The porter
opened it when any one wished to go in or out by night (Polyb. viii. 20, 24; Liv.
xxv. 9).
The contrivances for fastening gates were in general the same as those
used for doors, but larger in proportion. The wooden bar placed across them in
the inside (mochlos) was kept in its position by the following method. A hole,
passing through it perpendicularly (balanodoke, Aen. Tact. 18), admitted a cylindrical
piece of iron, called balanos, which also entered a hole in the gate, so that,
until it was taken out, the bar could not be removed either to the one side, or
the other (Thuc. ii. 4; Aristoph. Vesp. 200; bebalanotai, Aves, 1159). Another
piece of iron, fitted to the balanos and called balanagra, was used to extract
it (Aen. Tact. l. c.). When the accomplices within, for want of this key, the
balanagra, were unable to remove the bar, they cut it through with a hatchet (Thuc.
iv. 111; Polyb. viii. 23, 24), or set it on fire (Aen. Tact. 19). (For the portcullis,
see cataracta
=katapakte)
The gateway had commonly a chamber, either on one side or on both,
which served as the residence of the porter or guard. It was called tulon (Polyb.
viii. 20, 23, 24). Its situation is shown in the following plan.The Porta Ostiensis,
the finest and best-preserved of the gates in the Aurelian wall, affords an instance
of the more elaborate kind:--The central part of the gate with its arched doorway
is of travertine, the outer arch is grooved, to receive a portcullis, and from
the inner and higher arch two travertine corbels project, which received the upper
pivots of the doors, the lower ones being let into holes in a massive travertine
threshold. Above this stone archway is a battlemented wall of brickfaced concrete,
pierced with a row of 7 arched windows, opening into a gate chamber with similar
windows on the inside. On each side are two brick-faced towers with semicircular
projections on the outside. In the gates of Como and Verona the gatehouse is three
stories high. At Treves it was four stories high in the flanks, although the four
stories remain standing in one of them only, as may be observed in the annexed
woodcut. The length of this building is 115 feet; its depth 47 in the middle,
67 in the flanks; its greatest height, 92. All the four stories are ornamented
in every direction with rows of Tuscan columns. The gateways are each 14 feet
wide. The entrance of each appears to have been guarded, as at Pompeii, first
by a portcullis, and then by gates of wood and iron. The barbican, between the
double portcullis and the pair of gates, was no doubt open to the sky, as in the
gates of Pompeii. The gate at Treves was probably erected by Constantine.
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Architectura (architektonia, architechtonike).
(I.) Greek
Of the earliest efforts of the Greeks in architecture we have evidence
in the so-called Cyclopean Walls surrounding the castles of kings in the Heroic
Age of Tiryns, Argos, Mycenae, and elsewhere. They are of enormous thickness,
some being constructed of rude, colossal blocks, whose gaps are filled up with
smaller stones; while others are built of stones more or less carefully hewn,
their interstices exactly fitting into each other. Gradually they begin to show
an approximation to buildings with rectan gular blocks. The gates let into these
walls are closed at the top either by the courses of stone jutting over from each
side till they touch, or by a long straight block laid over the two leaning side-posts.
Of the latter kind is the famous Lion Gate at Mycenae, so called from its two
lions standing with their forefeet on the broad pedestal of a pillar, and remarkable
as the oldest specimen of Greek sculpture.
Among the most striking relics of this primitive age are the so-called
thesauroi (treasuries, usually subterranean) of ancient dynasties, the most considerable
being the treasure-house of Atreus at Mycenae. The usual form of these buildings
is that of a circular chamber vaulted over by the horizontal courses approaching
from all sides till they meet. Thus the vault is not a true arch. The interior
seems originally to have been covered with metal plates, thus agreeing with Homer's
descriptions of metal as a favourite ornament of princely houses (See Domus).
An open-air building preserved from that age is the supposed Temple of Here on
Mt.
Ocha (now Hagios Elias ) in Euboea, a rectangle built of regular square blocks,
with walls more than a yard thick, two small windows, and a door with leaning
posts and a huge lintel in the southern side-wall. The sloping roof is of hewn
flag-stones resting on the thickness of the wall and overlapping each other, but
the centre is left open as in the hypaethral temples of a later time.
From the simple shape of a rectangular house shut in by blank walls
we gradually advance to finer and richer types, formed especially by the introduction
of columns detached from the wall and serving to support the roof and ceiling.
Even in Homer we find columns in the palaces to support the halls that surround
the court-yard and the ceiling of the banqueting-room. The construction of columns
(see Columna)
received its artistic development first from the Dorians, after their migration
into the Peloponnesus about B.C. 1000, next from the Ionians -and from each in
a form suitable to their several characters. If the simple, serious character
of the Dorians speaks in the Doric order, no less does the lighter, nimbler, and
more showy genius of the Ionian race appear in the order named after them. By
about B.C. 650, the Ionic style was flourishing side by side with the Doric.
As it was in the construction of temples that architecture had developed
her favourite forms, all other public buildings borrowed their artistic character
from the temple (See Templum).
The structure and furniture of private houses were, during the best days of Greece,
kept down to the simplest forms. About B.C. 600, in the Greek islands and on the
coast of Asia Minor, we come across the first architects known to us by name.
It was then that Rhoecus and Theodorus of Samos, celebrated likewise as inventors
of casting in bronze, built the great Temple of Here in that island, while Chersiphron
of Cnosus in Crete, with his son Metagenes, began the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus,
one of the seven wonders of the world, which was not finished till one hundred
and twenty years after. In Greece Proper a vast temple to Zeus was begun at Athens
in the sixth century B.C. (see Olympieum),
and two more at Delphi and Olympia -one of the Corinthian Spintharus, the other
by the Elean Libon. Here, and in the western colonies, the Doric style still predominated
everywhere. Among the chief remains of this period, in addition to many ruined
temples in Sicily, especially at Selinus and Agrigentum, should be mentioned the
Temple of Poseidon at Paestum (Posidonia) in South Italy, one of the best preserved
and most beautiful relics of antiquity. The patriotic fervour of the Persian Wars
created a general expansion of Greek life, in which architecture and the sister
art of sculpture were not slow to take a part. In these departments, as in the
whole onward movement, a central position was taken by Athens, whose leading statesmen,
Cimon and Pericles, lavished the great resources of the state at once in strengthening
and beautifying the city. During this period arose a group of masterpieces that
still astonish us in their ruins, some in the forms of a softened Doric, others
in the Ionic style, which had now found its way into Attica, and was here developed
into nobler shapes. The Doric order is represented by the Temple of Theseus; the
Propylaea, built by Mnesicles; the Parthenon, a joint production of Ictinus and
Callicrates -while the Erechtheum is the most brilliant creation of the Ionic
order in Attica.
The progress of the drama to its perfection in this period led to
a corresponding improvement in the building of theatres. A stone theatre was begun
at Athens even before the Persian Wars, and the Odeum of Pericles served similar
purposes. How soon the highest results were achieved in this department, when
once the fundamental forms had thus been laid down in outline at Athens, is shown
by the theatre at Epidaurus, a work of Polyclitus, unsurpassed, as the ancients
testify, by any later theatres in harmony and beauty. Another was built at Syracuse
before B.C. 420. Nor is it only in the erection of single buildings that the great
advance then made by architecture shows itself. In laying out new towns, or parts
of towns, men began to proceed on artistic principles, an innovation due to Hippodamus
of Miletus. (See Theatrum)
In the fourth century B.C., owing to the change wrought in the Greek
mind by the Peloponnesian War, in place of the pure and even tone of the preceding
period, a desire for effect became more and more general, both in architecture
and sculpture. The sober Doric style fell into abeyance and gave way to the Ionic,
by the side of which a new order, the Corinthian, said to have been invented by
the sculptor Callimachus, with its more gorgeous decorations, became increasingly
fashionable. In the first half of the fourth century arose what the ancients considered
the largest and grandest temple in the Peloponnesus, that of Athene at Tegea,
a work of the sculptor and architect Scopas. During the middle of the century
another of the "seven wonders", the splendid tomb of Mausolus at Halicarnassus,
was constructed (See Mausoleum).
Many magnificent temples arose in that time. In Asia Minor, the temple at Ephesus,
burned down by Herostratus, was rebuilt by Alexander's bold architect Dinocrates.
In the islands the ruins of the Temple of Athene at Priene, of Apollo at Miletus,
of Dionysus at Teos, and others, even to this day offer a brilliant testimony
to their former magnificence. Among Athenian buildings of that age the Monument
of Lysicrates is conspicuous for its graceful elegance and elaborate development
of the Corinthian style. In the succeeding age, Greek architecture shows its finest
achievements in the building of theatres, especially those of Asiatic towns; in
the gorgeous palaces of newly built royal capitals; and in general in the luxurious
completeness of private buildings. As an important specimen of the last age of
Attic architecture may also be mentioned the Tower of the Winds at Athens. (See
Andronicus)
(II.) Etruscan and Roman.
In architecture, as well as sculpture, the Romans were long under
the influence of the Etruscans, who, though not possessing the gift of rising
to the ideal, united wonderful activity and inventiveness with a passion for covering
their buildings with rich ornamental carving. None of their temples have survived,
for they built all the upper parts of wood; but many proofs of their activity
in building remain, surviving from various ages, in the shape of tombs and walls.
The latter clearly show how they progressed from piling up polygonal blocks in
Cyclopean style to regular courses of squared stone. Here and there a building
still shows that the Etruscans originally made vaultings by letting horizontal
courses jut over, as in the ancient Greek thesauroi above mentioned: on the other
hand, some very old gateways, as at Volterra and Perugia, exhibit the true arch
of wedge-shaped stones, the introduction of which into Italy is probably due to
Etruscan ingenuity, and from the introduction of which a new and magnificent development
of architecture takes its rise. The most imposing of ancient Italian arch building
is to be seen in the sewers of Rome constructed in the sixth century B.C. (See
Cloaca =sewer, drain, hyponomos)
When all other traces of Etruscan influence were being swept away
at Rome by the intrusion of Greek forms of art, especially after the conquest
of Greece in the middle of the second century B.C., the Roman architects kept
alive in full vigour the Etruscan method of building the arch, which they developed
and completed by the inventions of the cross-arch (or groined vault) and the dome.
With the arch, which admits of a bolder and more varied management of spaces,
the Romans combined, as a decorative element, the columns of the Greek orders.
Among these their growing love of pomp gave the preference more and more to the
Corinthian, adding to it afterwards a still more gorgeous embellishment in what
is called the Roman or Composite capital. Another service rendered by the Romans
was the introduction of building in brick. A more vigorous advance in Roman architecture
dates from the opening of the third century B.C., when they began making great
military roads and aqueducts. In the first half of the second century they built,
on Greek models, the first basilica, which, besides its practical utility, served
to embellish the Forum. Soon after the middle of the century appeared the first
of their more ambitious temples in the Greek style. There is simple grandeur in
the ruins of the Tabularium, or Record Office, built B.C. 78 on the slope of the
Capitol next the Forum. These are among the few remains of Roman republican architecture;
but in the last decades of the Republic simplicity gradually disappeared, and
men were eager to display a princely pomp in public and private buildings; witness
the first stone theatre erected by Pompey as early as B.C. 55. Then all that went
before was eclipsed by the vast works undertaken by Caesar--the Theatre, Amphitheatre,
Circus, Basilica Iulia, Forum Caesaris with its temple to Venus Genetrix. These
were finished by Augustus, under whom Roman architecture seems to have reached
its culminating-point. Augustus, aided by his son-in-law Agrippa, a man who understood
building, not only completed his uncle's plans, but added many magnificent structures
-the Forum Augusti with its temple to Mars Ultor, the Theatre of Marcellus with
its Portico of Octavia, the Mausoleum, and others. Augustus could fairly boast
that "having found Rome a city of brick, he left it a city of marble".
The grandest monument of that age, and one of the loftiest creations of Roman
art in general, is the Pantheon, built by Agrippa, adjacent to, but not connected
with, his Thermae, the first of the many works of that kind in Rome. This structure
is remarkable as being the only ancient building in Rome of which the walls and
arches are now in a complete state of preservation. It was erected by Agrippa
in B.C. 27, the original inscription being still retained upon the architrave
of its porch. The Pantheon is a circular structure 146 feet and 6 inches in height
and inner diameter, with a portico 103 feet long composed of sixteen Corinthian
columns, 46 feet in height. Inside the portico at the entrance are two niches
which once contained the colossal statues of Agrippa the builder, and of Augustus
Caesar. The walls of the building, which are 19 feet thick, support a dome or
cupola of vast dimensions, constructed of concrete. At the vertex of the cupola
is an opening nearly 30 feet in diameter, lighting the interior.
A still more splendid aspect was imparted to the city by the rebuilding
of the old town burned down in Nero's fire, and by the "Golden House"
of Nero, a gorgeous pile, the like of which was never seen before, but which was
destroyed on the violent death of its creator. The immense and complicated structure,
or rather mass of structures, known as the Palace of the Caesars, formed one of
the most striking achievements of Roman architectural genius (See Palatium).
It was, as Professor Lanciani puts it, a labyrinth of "endless suites of
apartments, halls, terraces, porticoes, crypts, and cellars", having its
main approach on the Via Sacra. At its arched entrance was a magnificent quadriga
cut from a single block of white marble by Lysias. Beyond was a peristyle of fifty-two
fluted columns adorned with a host of exquisite statues representing the Danaidae,
and adjacent to a great library. The magnificence of the palace as a whole may
be conjectured from a simple summary of the treasures which we know to have been
lavished upon the mere vestibule--a hundred and twenty columns of marble and bronze,
statuary, bas-reliefs by Bupalus and Anthermus, a quadriga in gilded bronze, exquisite
ivory carvings, hundreds of medallions in gold, silver, and bronze, immense collections
of gold and silver plate, gems and cameos, and a colossal bronze statue of Augustus,
fifty feet in height.
Of the luxurious grandeur of private buildings we have ocular proof
in the dwelling-houses of Pompeii, a petty country town in comparison with Rome.
The progress made under the Flavian emperors is evidenced by Vespasian's amphitheatre,
known as the Colosseum, the mightiest Roman ruin in the world; by the ruined Thermae,
or Baths, of Titus, and by his triumphal arch, the oldest specimen extant in Rome
of this class of monument, itself a creation of the Roman mind. But all previous
buildings were surpassed in size and splendour when Trajan's architect, Apollodorus
of Damascus, raised the Forum Traianum with its huge Basilica Ulpia and the still
surviving Column of Trajan, besides other magnificent structures, including libraries,
a great temple, a two-storied gallery, and a triumphal arch. The Basilica had
five halls, the central one being 27 yards long, and the whole structure 61 yards
wide. It was paved with slabs of rare marble. Only a part of this Forum has yet
been excavated, but enough has been brought to light to justify the vivid description
of Ammianus Marcellinus (xvi. 10), whose account refers to the time of the emperor
Constantine's visit to Rome in the year 356. No less extensive were the works
of Hadrian, who, besides adorning Athens with many magnificent buildings, bequeathed
to Rome a Temple of Venus and Roma, the most colossal of all Roman temples, and
his own Mausoleum, the core of which is preserved in the Castle of St. Angelo.
While the works of the Antonines already show a gradual decline in architectural
feeling, the Triumphal Arch of Severus ushers in the period of decay that set
in with the third century. In this closing period of Roman rule the buildings
grow more and more gigantic -witness the Baths of Caracalla, those of Diocletian,
with his palace at Salona (three miles from Spalatro) in Dalmatia, and the Basilica
of Constantine, breathing the last feeble gasp of ancient life. But outside of
Rome and Italy, in every part of the enormous Empire to its utmost barbarian borders,
bridges, numberless remains of roads and aqueducts and viaducts, ramparts and
gateways, palaces, villas, marketplaces and judgment-halls, baths, theatres, amphitheatres,
and temples, attest the versatility, majesty, and solidity of Roman architecture,
most of whose creations only the rudest shocks have been able to destroy.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Pseudisodomum: An early style of masonry used by the Greeks, in which the stones were regularly laid but were not of the same size. (See Isodomus.) An example is found in the wall of the Lion Gate at Mycenae
TIRYNS (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
Domus (oikia, oikesis, oiketerion, a dwelling-house; oikos, generally a room;
in Homer and the Tragedians, domos, but more usually in the plural as a dwelling-house),
a house.
1. PRE-HISTORIC.
One special form of hut appears to have been commonly used by many
different races of men at an early stage of their development. This was a small
circular structure made of branches of trees stuck into the ground in a circle,
and then bent inwards till their ends met and were tied together at the top.
This rude framework was then filled in by wattled work woven in and out, and
the whole was daubed over with tempered mud or clay. The hut of Achilles, thatched
with rushes (Il. xxiv. 450), was probably a dwelling of this sort, and similar
huts are said to have been used in Lydia, Sardis, and other places in Western
Asia Minor (Herod. v. 101): it seems probable that a reminiscence of this form
of building exists in the stone domical structures of Mycenae, Orchomenos, and
other early sites in Greece.
Even in historic times a survival of this ancient circular form
of house existed in the form of the Prytaneum in Athens and elsewhere, and also
in the Athenian Tholus, which was built in the newer part of Athens as an adjunct,
in a more convenient position for the use of the Prytanes. The Tholus was a
round building with a domical roof, and must have had some resemblance to the
Roman Temple of Vesta, to which the same name was frequently applied. The original
Temple of Vesta was a round hut formed with wattle-work of osiers (Ov. Fast.
vi. 261 seq.; Fest. p. 250, M.). Mr. James Frazer, in a valuable article, derives
the form both of the Greek Tholus and the Roman Temple of Vesta, in both of
which a perpetual fire was kept burning, from the pre-historic round hut of
the village chief, under whose charge was the ever-burning fire, which was kept
lighted for the general convenience -a very important thing at a time when a
fresh fire could only be obtained by the laborious process of friction.
Even during the imperial period in Rome one or more wattled huts
were preserved in memory of the primitive dwellings of its founders. One of
these, which stood at the western angle of the Palatine hill, was known as the
Casa Romuli (Dionys. i. 79; Plut. Rom. 20); it was twice burnt and repaired
during the reign of Augustus (Dio Cass. xlviii. 43, and liv. 29. See also Ov.
Fast. iii. 183; Val. Max. iv. 4, 11; Liv. v. 53). The Tugurium Faustuli is probably
another name for the same thing. Another hut, also called after Romulus, appears
to have been preserved on the Capitoline hill (Vitruv. ii. 1; Senec. Contr.
i. 6; Macrob. Saturn. i. 15).
A careful representation of this early form of house, as used by
the pre-historic Latin race, exists in the small sepulchral house-urns, which
are found in considerable numbers in the early cemeteries of Central Italy and
elsewhere. In these the construction is less simple, the roof being evidently
formed of separate branches, laid so as to form projecting eaves. These curious
pieces of archaic pottery have small movable doors fixed with a wooden peg.
During the many centuries which elapsed before the commencement
of the historic period of Greece, a state of society existed very different
from that with which Greek literature has made us familiar. Instead of the large
cities with their flourishing trade and carefully constructed systems of political,
religious, and social organisation, a number of small, highly-fortified towns
or villages were ruled in an autocratic way by some chieftain of semi-oriental
habits, who lived in a style of much luxury and splendour, surrounded by a group
of followers, very much like those of a mediaeval feudal lord. At this early
period wealth and splendour, which in historic times were devoted to the more
public uses of the agora, the council chamber, and the temples of the gods,
were lavished on the palace of the chief. It is this period which is celebrated
in the Homeric poems; which, there is every reason to believe, give us a faithful,
if highly coloured, picture of the magnificence which adorned the dwellings
of wealthy chiefs, such as Alcinous and, in a lesser degree, Ulysses. The discoveries
made by Dr. Schliemann and Dr. Dorpfeld, within the massive walls of Tiryns
(the Tiruns teichioessa of Homer), have for the first time shown us that the
stately and richly decorated palaces of the Odyssey were not wholly the offspring
of a poet's fancy.
Plan of the Palace of Tiryns. (see inside URL below)
Some doubt has been thrown on the remote antiquity of these remains;
but new discoveries of a similar pre-historic building at Mycenae have put an
end to any doubt as to the antiquity of the Tirynthian palace. On the whole
the evidence of the general planning of the building, its methods of construction,
and the style of its ornament give overwhelming proofs that the house is one
which belongs to a far-off prehistoric period of Greek architecture, prior in
all probability to the Dorian invasion of the Peloponnesus. The house itself
occupies more than a third of the Tirynthian Acropolis, the massive stones of
which excited the wonder of Herodotus, Diodorus, and Pausanias, and led to their
being associated with the fables of Heracles and Perseus, and the mysterious
Cyclops, who were supposed to have been their builders. The accompanying plan
shows the arrangement of the house, which is evidently carefully designed to
suit its special purpose.
On entering through the main gateway of the Acropolis, the approach (as shown
by the dotted line on the plan) leads through a narrow passage, strongly defended
on both sides by massive walls, to a second doorway. A continuation of the passage
leads to the outer porch of the palace--a propylaeum, decorated on both sides
by two columns in antis, very similar in design to the 5th-century propylaeum
built by Ictinus at Eleusis. On passing this an outer court is reached; and
then a second propylaeum, smaller but of similar design to the first, leads
into the main courtyard of the palace. Rooms for guards are placed at the sides
of both these propylaea. The main court (aule), round which the apartments of
the men are grouped, was surrounded on three sides by a colonnade (aithousa),
forming a cloister. Near the propylaeum stands a stone altar with a rock-cut
hollow beneath it, into which the ashes would fall. This was probably an alter
to Zeus herkeios, which is frequently mentioned in the Odyssey (e. g. xxii.
335) as being placed in the courtyard of a house. Opposite the propylaeum is
the great hall (megaron, Od. xvi. 341, xvii. 604), with an open portico of two
columns, and an inner proch (prodomos), into which three doors open from the
portico, and one into the hall. The roof of the hall was supported on four columns,
which probably carried a partly open lantern to give light, and also to form
an escape for the smoke of the fire--below, the circular stone hearth (eschara)
of which is placed midway between the pillars. On the west side of the hall
are a number of small rooms for the use of the men; among them is a small bathroom,
about 12 feet by 10 feet, the construction of which is very remarkable for its
ingenuity and the extreme care which has been taken in the workmanship.
The whole floor is formed of one great slab of stone, smoothed accurately
so as to fall to one point, where the water made its exit through a stone pipe,
and so into the main drain. The walls were lined with wooden boards, each of
which had its lower end fastened to the stone floor by two wooden pegs or dowels.
The edge of stone on which these boards rested is raised about an inch above
the general level of the floor, so that water splashed by the bathers might
not soak in under the wooden wall-lining. The bath itself, which was made of
clay deco-rated with a red spiral pattern, much resembled in shape and size
the fire-clay baths now made in large quantities at Stourbridge.
The eastern half of the house seems to have been intended for the
use of the women, and probably the married members of the chief's family. This
portion, like the other, contains two open courts, and a hall with a single
vestibule--all on a rather smaller scale. In this hall the hearth is square,
and, the span being less, the roof was not supported by pillars. On the east
of the hall and court are two ranges of rooms, more in number and larger than
those on the men's side of the house. There appear to have been three means
of access to the women's part: one by a long passage (laure) leading from a
side door in the outer propylaeum, another from the north-east corner of the
men's court, while a third way led by a long passage round the back of the two
halls to a rock-cut stairway, at the foot of which was a small postern door
in the outer fortification wall. In case of a siege this little postern would
be blocked up with stones, but in times of peace the women of the household
probably used this path to fetch water from some spring in the plain below.
When blockaded by an enemy, the garrison appear to have depended on their stores
of rain-water, large cisterns for which were formed in the thickness of the
outer wall. The surface water was collected and carried to the cisterns in clay
pipes and stone drains.
In addition to the rooms on the ground-floor, the walls of which
still exist to a height of from two to three feet, there was also an upper story
(huperoion), which probably extended over all the rooms except the two halls.
Traces of a staircase in two flights still exist on the east side of the women's
hall.
Construction of the Palace of Tiryns.
The walls, about three feet thick, are built of roughly-dressed
limestone bedded in clay up to a height of about two feet above the floor level:
the rest of the wall was of sun-dried brick, and the whole was covered inside
and out with three coats of hard stucco, made of lime mixed with sand, gravel,
and broken pottery, forming a coating nearly as hard as stone, which must have
completely protected the unburnt bricks from the effects of weather.
The floors, both of the roofed parts and of the open courts, were
made of a thick layer of good lime concrete. In the rooms the pavement was worked
to a smooth surface, on which simple patterns of squares or spirals were incised,
and then painted blue and red. Pliny (H. N. xxxvi.184) speaks of painted floors
having been used by the Greeks before mosaic came into use: those at Tiryns
are the first examples of this kind of paving that have been found.
The concrete paving of the open-air courts is laid so as to fall
towards open stone gullies, through which the rain-water escaped into the drains:
its upper surface is formed of a sort of rough mosaic made of pebbles; these
are set more closely together in places where there was most traffic.
The various doorways have massive stone sills or thresholds (lainos
oudos), mostly provided with two large drill-holes, in which the bronze pivots
of the doors revolved, showing that in most cases folding doors were used. Some
of these bronze pivots were found during the excavations: they are of very neat
and solid workmanship, and much resemble the pivots of the great Balawat gates
of Shalmaneser II. (859-824 B.C.), which are now in the British Museum. It is
probable that the construction of the doors themselves in the Tirynthian palace
resembled that of the Balawat doors. A number of thick wooden planks were placed
side by side, and held in their place by strong bronze bands, which were nailed
on to them, and lapped round the circular post on which the door swung; each
end of this post was shod with a pivot, which revolved at the bottom in a hole
drilled in the sill, and at the top in a similar hole in the lintel (huperthurion).
The neatly-fitted planks are spoken of by Homer (Od. ii. 344) as sanides pukinos
araruiai. This method of hanging heavy doors lasted throughout the Greek and
Roman periods, and was used, as can still be seen, for the great doors in Aurelian's
wall round Rome. The wide bronze bands which were constructionally necessary
for this sort of door formed also in some cases a rich and elaborate method
of decoration, as they could be enriched with repousse reliefs and gilt. A beautiful
little earthenware box (pyxis) of the 4th century B.C. in the British Museum
shows that doors of similar construction were used by the Greeks of later times.
The painting on it represents a toilet scene in a lady's room, and in the background
is a double door covered with wide bands, attached by rows of rivets along each
edge, exactly like the Balawat doors. Owing to the use of soft unbaked brick
for the jambs of the doorways, it was necessary to line the whole opening with
woodwork, so as to protect the angles from injury. In some cases there seems
to have been a stone lining, but even then the woodwork was not omitted. Grooves
cut in the stone upright of some of the door-jambs (stathmos) show with what
extreme care and neatness the wood lining was fitted into its place. It is interesting
to note that this system of using wooden doorlinings survived till later times,
and was used in cases where it would seem needless. Even the beautifully-finished
white marble doorways in the Parthenon and Propylaea at Athens had their reveals
concealed by wooden casings.
The roof of the men's hall was supported by four intermediate columns
(kiones), which, like all the columns at Tiryns, were made of wood, resting
on a carefully-levelled block of stone. The construction of the roof, of which
nothing but charred fragments and ashes remains, may be guessed from an early
rock-tomb in Phrygia discovered by Prof. Ramsay. In this a copy of a wooden
roof is carved in the rock: it is a simple lowpitched roof, having a principal
rafter with tlebeam and king-post. These principal rafters are, according to
some commentators, the mesodmai of Homer (Od. xix. 37); the small rafters or
ceiling joists being the dokoi (Od. xxii. 176), and the ceiling itself the melathron
(Od. viii. 279): the whole roof is called the orophe (Od. xxii. 298). A similar
arrangement of hall with central hearth and pillar-supported roof was discovered
by Dr. Schliemann at Hissarlik, and in both cases there was an open porch with
wooden columns.
Part of a wooden column found at Khorsabad shows us what was probably
a common method of decoration: the whole was sheathed with plates of bronze,
beaten so as to represent the scales on a palm-tree; the metal was then thickly
gilt. This system of ornament is probably a survival of an earlier time when
a real palm-tree, with all its outer scales still attached, was used as a support.
In some of the rooms at Tiryns, part of the wall surface was decorated in a
very magnificent way. The wall was first lined with wooden planks, and on these
plates of bronze were nailed, repousse with reliefs and gilt. Examples of these
bronze linings on doors or walls, dating from the 6th century B.C., have been
found at Olympia. The designs of these plates retain a very strongly-marked
Oriental influence. Nothing could exceed the splendour of effect produced by
these wall-linings of what would seem to be gleaming gold, broken into half-tones
and high lights by their delicate reliefs. Homer's description of the bronze
walls of the palace of Alcinous (Od. vii. 84) may have a foundation of reality;
and even such apparently fabulous details as the golden doors and silver posts
and lintels probably refer to a real custom of sheathing woodwork with gilt
or silvered bronze.
Another of Homer's phrases, hitherto of somewhat doubtful meaning,
has been rendered intelligible by a discovery at Tiryns. This is the thrinkos
kuanoio (Od. vii. 87) which ornamented the walls of the hall of Alcinous. In
the porch of the Megaron at Tiryns Dr. Dorpfeld discovered a frieze of alabaster,
about 22 inches deep, which was carved with delicate patterns of rosettes and
spirals, very early in character, and studded at intervals with jewel-like rows
of bits of deep blue glass or paste, extremely magnificent in effect. The pieces
of alabaster which form this magnificent frieze are fitted together with extreme
neatness, the joints being concealed by rebates. Other similar fragments of
friezes set with sham jewels have been found at Mycenae, Orchomenos, and Menidi.
All the wall surfaces at Tiryns which were not lined with bronze
or with bands of alabaster and marble, seem to have been ornamented with paintings
on stucco, executed in simple earth colours with much decorative effect. These
paintings were of several different styles: some had simple patterns of chequers
and spirals which were evidently copied from the designs on woven stuffs; others
were human figures or beasts with great spreading wings of purely Oriental style,
treated in a very effective way by painting the feathers in alternate colours--red,
yellow, and white. One very spirited painting represents a man on the back of
a bull galloping at full speed. The exterior of the building seems to have been
decorated with similar paintings on the stucco, which protected the unbaked
clay of the upper part of the walls from the effects of weather.
The Homeric Palace of Ulysses. (see inside URL below)
It is interesting to compare the palace of Tiryns with that of Ulysses
as depicted in the Odyssey. Among the many descriptions of the latter, one of
the clearest is that given by Prof. Gardner, of which we subjoin an abstract,
together with his ground-plan of the palace. But it is necessary to remember
at the outset that there is this difference between the abode of Ulysses and
the palace of Tiryns, that the former is rude and rustic, while the latter is
more like the glorious abode of Alcinous in Phaeacian fairy-land, or the splendid
house of Menelaus, which glittered like the sun and moon as one drew near to
it. The Homeric house, observes Prof. Gardner, consisted of three parts: aule,
the fore-court; doma or megaron, the hall of the men; and thalamos, called in
later times gunaikonitis, the apartments of the women (hoi hoi epoiesan thalamon
kai doma kai aulen, Il. vi. 316). The house was entered by massive folding doors
(thurai diklides, Od. xvii. 267), and on either side were stone seats (hedrai,
cf. Od. iii. 406, xvi. 344). The doors led into the aule, or open courtyard,
which was used as a kind of farm-yard. On either side and behind were chambers
(thalamoi) used for various purposes, such as grinding the corn (Od. xx. 105),
sometimes for sleeping in (Od. xix. 48; Il. ix. 473). In one corner of the court
was the tholos (Od. xxii. 442, 459), a circular building, no trace of which
is found in the palace at Tiryns. (See above, p. 654.) In the midst of the court
was the altar of Zeus herkeios (Od. xxii. 335), which, as we have already seen,
existed at Tiryns. In the court were two colonnades or porticoes, each called
aithousa, one on either side right and left of the court-yard (aithousa aules),
and the other opposite the entrance to the court-yard, and along the front of
the doma or megaron. The latter is often considered as part of the prodomos,
so that aithousa and prodomos are often used as synonymous terms (for references
see aithousa).
Crossing the Aithousa, the visitor passed into the megaron or doma, where the
chiefs lived. At either end of the megaron was a door, one leading into the
court-yard through the aithousa, and the other into the women's apartments,
the thalamos, properly so called. In front of either door was a threshold (oudos),
probably raised. The threshold in front of the door into the megaron was made
of ash-wood (melinos oudos, Od. xvii. 339), and the threshold in front of the
door into the women's apartments was of stone, lainos oudos (Od. xx. 258), a
distinction which is most important, as Prof. Gardner points out, for understanding
the combat between Ulysses and the suitors. By the ashen threshold was the dourodoke
or spear stand, close to one of the pillars (Od. i. 128). The megaron was of
great size. In the palace of Ulysses the three hundred suitors of Penelope feasted
in it. Its height was that of the house itself, and its roof was supported by
lofty pillars (kiones, Od. xix. 38). In the upper part of the megaron was the
eschara, or hearth, where the food was cooked (Od. xx. 123), and the smoke escaped
through a hole in the roof, as in the old Roman atrium. Such a hole, called
kapnodoke by Herodotus, is mentioned in an early Macedonian house, where the
sun shone through it (Herod. viii. 137). Besides the two principal doors of
the megaron already mentioned, there was a third, or postern-door, called orsothure
(Od. xxii. 126, 132, 333), the position of which has given rise to much dispute.
It should, however, probably be placed, for the reasons given by Gardner and
Jebb, on the side of the megaron, as shown in the plan (Plan, 6), leading into
the laure (Od. xxii. 128, 137) or narrow passage, which gave access to the women's
apartments from the outer court-yard, thus avoiding the necessity of passing
through the megaron.
The women's rooms, or thalamos, properly so called, also called
megara gunaikon (Od. xxii. 151), were immediately behind the megaron on the
ground-floor, directly communicating with the latter by a door. This is clear
from the whole narrative in the Odyssey of the combat between Ulysses and the
suitors. The passages proving this have been critically examined by Prof. Jebb
in the essay quoted below (Cf. Od. xvii. 506, xx. 389; iv. 718). Here the women
sat engaged in weaving and domestic occupations. Here was the nuptial chamber,
with the marriage bed made by Ulysses with his own hands (Od. xxiii. 192, 295).
The ordinary sleeping and other rooms of the women were in the upper story (huperoion),
which was reached by a ladder, klimax (Od. xxi. 5; cf. Od. ii. 358, iv. 760;
Il. ii. 514, xvi. 184; Eustath. ad Od. i. 328, 53). Hence we find Penelope,
after sleeping with Ulysses in the nuptial chamber, ascending with her hand-maids
into the upper chamber (Od. xxiii. 364). It is therefore a mistake on the part
of some modern writers to describe the women's rooms as situated only in the
upper story. In the women's rooms was the armoury (thalamos hoplon, cf. Od.
xxii. 140, 151-156), and the treasury at the further extremity (thalamos eschatos),
with a high roof (Od. xxi. 8). In the women's part of the house there was also
an open court, in which grew an olive-tree in the palace of Ulysses (Od. xxiii.
190). There was a similar court in the palace of Priam, where fifty chambers
were built for his fifty sons and their wives (Il. vi. 242).
II. THE LATER GREEK HOUSE.
The discoveries of recent years have shown that bricks made of unbaked
clay were very extensively used by the Greeks down to quite late times. This
point is well brought out by Dr. Dorpfeld (vol. ix. of the Mittheil. d. deutsch.
archaol. Inst. in Athen), who shows that even important structures, such as
the Heraion at Olympia and the walls round Athens which were destroyed by Sulla,
were mainly formed of sun-dried bricks. The same perishable material was commonly
used for the private houses of the Greeks, and this is one reason why examples
of Hellenic domestic architecture are also very rare. Burnt bricks were first
introduced by the Romans. Till quite recently very few remains of Greek houses
were known to exist. In the Ionian Antiquities there is figured a Greek house
at Delos, of which a ground-plan is given by Guhl and Kone. The excavations,
however, made in the Greek city of Naukratis in the Egyptian Delta during 1884-86
by Messrs. Petrie and Ernest Gardner have brought to light remains of a large
number of Greek streets and houses, all built of sun-dried brick coated with
painted stucco. The accompanying figure (see inside URL below) shows part of
Mr. Petrie's discoveries: A is a single house forming a complete
insula, as the Romans would call it: it consists of six rooms, with what was
probably a small central open court. B B appear to be shops. C C are narrow
streets. In this Greek city the streets seem all to be very narrow, and the
insulae are mostly very small; in many cases, like the figured example, consisting
of one house only. Though but very scanty remains were found of the unbaked
brick walls, yet in a few places patches of painted stucco on the exterior were
found in situ. Though walls of this sort would last very well as long as they
were roofed over and protected by their coating of hard stucco, yet when once
they had fallen into a ruined state the process of decay would be rapid and
complete, even in Egypt, and of course much more so in a more rainy climate.
The other most important examples of Greek domestic architecture
which have yet been discovered are some houses in the Peiraeus, the foundations
of which were exposed in 1884 during the laying out of a new street by the municipality.
(See Dr. Dorpfeld in Mittheil. d. deutsch. archaol. Inst. in Athen, vol. ix.,
No. 3, 11884.) The figure (see inside URL below) shows a reduction made from
Dr. Dorpfeld's plan.
On the S.E. and S.W. sides the block faces on to streets: it appears
to be a double house, though this is not quite certain, owing to the impossibility
of ascertaining the positions of all the doors. On the N.W. side remains were
found of a large open peristyle, apparently derived from the aule of the earlier
Hellenic plan: under the covered porticus of this cloister an altar was found,
probably dedicated to Zeus Herkeios.
Plan of a Greek house discovered in Peiraeus.
On the S.E. side the house was entered through a long shallow porch,
with two columns, in which stood another altar, probably that of Apollo Agyieus.
This porch led into a small open court, surrounded on three sides by a covered
walk (stoa or porticus). The pavement of this was laid so as to drain into an
open gully, through which the rain-water escaped into a drain. In one corner
of the court was a well, and on the other side a stone cistern for storing water;
a second cistern stood in the room adjoining the open court on the N.W. Some
remains of paving were found, as is indicated on the plan. In one room it consists
of stone flags; in another of a sort of rude mosaic, formed of pebbles set in
concrete, as in the open courts of the palace at Tiryns. On the S.W. side are
some rooms which were entered directly from the street: these may have been
shops or public offices. Traces of a staircase leading to an upper floor were
found at one end of the room with the flagging pavement. This block measures,
without counting the large peristyle, about 140 feet by 75 feet. The clear open
space of the peristyle was about 68 feet wide; its other dimension was not discovered.
It is possible that this block may have been all part of the same house one
portion being the andronitis or men's part, and the rest the gynaeconitis or
women's part.
During the most flourishing period of Greece the private houses
appear to have been small and simple in design: splendour of materials and ornament
were reserved for the temples of the gods and the public buildings, such as
the Agora and the great stoai, which in Athens especially contributed so largely
to the architectural magnificence of the city. The front of the house towards
the street was not large, as the apartments extended rather in the direction
of its depth than of its width. In towns the houses were often built side by
side, with party walls between (homotoichoi oikiai, Thuc. ii. 3; Isaeus, de
Philoctem. hered. 39, Plut. de Genio Socr 33 Plaut. Mil. Glor. ii. 2). The exterior
wall was plain, and often covered with plaster or stucco (Plut. Comp. Arist.
et Cat. 4). Sometimes, as in Tanagra, the exterior was adorned with what was
probably terra-cotta . Plutarch says that Phocion's house was ornamented with
plates of bronze (Plut. Phoc. 18). Unbaked clay, as we have already shown, was
used for the walls, with probably a good deal of timber in the upper story (Xen.
Mem. iii. 1,7): thus it was easy for the Plataeans to break through the party
walls of their houses, so as to communicate with each other (Thuc. l. c.). For
the same reason the burglar was called toichoruchos, because he found it easier
to obtain an entrance into houses by breaking through the soft walls than by
the door or windows (Plat. Legg. E; Plut. Dem. 11).
Foreigners were specially struck by the mean appearance of the private
houses of Athens in the time of Pericles, as strongly contrasting with the splendour
of the public buildings (Thuc. ii. 14, 65). A stranger, says Dicaearchus (p.
8), might doubt upon a sudden view whether this were really the city of Athens,
so mean were the houses and crooked and narrow the streets. It was not till
the time of Demosthenes that good houses began to be built in Athens (Dem. c.
Aristocr. p. 689, 207 if.; Olynth. iii. p. 35, 25 ff.). Meidias built a house
in Eleusis larger than any in that place. But after the time of Alexander the
Great the decay of public spirit and the growth of private luxury led to the
erection of larger and more richly decorated houses throughout the Greek cities,
and especially in the chief colonies of Magna Graecia and Sicily. In cities
such as Tarentum and Syracuse the costly magnificence of the private houses
far surpassed those of the mother country.
The views of Socrates as to the arrangement of a good house are
given by Xenophon (Mem. iii, 8, 9, 10). It should (he says) be cool in summer
and warm in winter, with convenient accommodation for the family and their possessions.
The chief rooms should be lofty, and should face the south so as to get the
full rays of the sun in winter, while for the sake of shade, when the sun was
high up in summer, the house was to be shaded by projecting eaves; the rooms
on the north, for the sake of shelter, were to be lower. Paintings and any sort
of elaborate decorations destroyed, Socrates thought, more pleasure than they
gave.
In all cases the country houses must have been much finer buildings
than those in the old cities, where streets were narrow and sites often very
cramped (Isocr. Areop. 20). Thucydides (ii. 14) speaks of the preference of
the Athenians for houses in the country.
The plan and whole arrangement of town and country houses would
naturally be absolutely different, and it is unreasonable to suppose that one
fixed type of house was used by the Greeks. Existing remains show us that the
Roman houses had as many varieties of plan as we have now, and yet many archaeologists
have written as if there was one stereotyped plan of house used in classical
times. The somewhat pedantic language of Vitruvius (vi. 7, 10) on the subject
has tended to support the belief in the existence of one fixed type of Greek
house, but at his date, in the reign of Augustus, archaeology was practically
an unknown science, and it may reasonably be suggested that the so-called Greek
plan of Vitruvius does not represent the domestic architecture of the bygone
days when the Greeks were an independent race, but rather Vitruvius' private
notion, as a practising architect, of a house to be built for some wealthy Roman
in the revived pseudo-Hellenic style which began to be popular in the reigns
of the early emperors of Rome.
That the domestic architecture of the Roman empire was to a great
extent derived from that of the far more artistic Greeks is shown in many ways,
and especially by the fact that nearly all the names used in Rome for the different
parts of a house were not Latin, but Greek: yet it should be remembered that
the luxurious and ostentatious habits of imperial Rome had little in common
with the austere simplicity of private life in Greece during its period of glory,
and that therefore it is almost certain that a plan and arrangement of house
would be required in Rome very different from that used in Athens during the
age of Pericles, or even much later. Nevertheless, with this important reservation,
many of Vitruvius' statements may be of great use in illustrating difficult
passages in older Greek writers, which treat of some details in the Hellenic
house, especially when the description is compared with some of the existing
Roman dwellings, which are evidently designed to some extent after a real or
supposed Greek model.
Greek houses had three principal features in common. First, there
were one or two open courts, surrounded by the various rooms. Secondly, in a
Greek family the women lived in private apartments allotted to their respective
use. Hence the house was always divided into two distinct portions, -the Andronitis
(andronitis), or men's apartments; and the Gynaeconitis (gunaikonitis), or women's
apartments. Thirdly, the Gynaeconitis was, as a general rule, in larger houses
behind the Andronitis, and on the same floor as the latter. Much difficulty
has been occasioned in the arrangement of a Greek house by the statement of
Vitruvius (vi. 7, (10)) that the principal entrance led at once into the Gynaeconitis,
and that the Andronitis therefore was behind the women's rooms, or rather, if
we construe his words strictly, by their side Conjunguntur autem his [i.e. the
Gynaeconitis] domus ampliores [i.e. the Andronitis]). But such an arrangement
is alike inconsistent with the careful state of seclusion in which the Greek
women were kept, and also with the positive statements of the writers of the
period. It is very likely that Vitruvius misunderstood to some extent the descriptions
given by his Greek authorities, and has assigned to the Gynaeconitis the arrangement
of the Andronitis. In any case, as we have stated above, his account cannot
be accepted as a correct representation of a Greek house in the period from
the Peloponnesian war to the time of Alexander the Great. The general plan was
much the same as that of the Homeric house. He shows that the Peristyle of the
Andronitis is the successor of the Homeric Aule; the Andron, or eating-room,
of the Homeric Megaron; and the peristyle of the Gynaeconitis of the Homeric
Thalamos. As the Greeks grew in culture and took to living in cities, the Aule
would naturally become civilised, and the rooms round it part of the house,
while the feeding-room of the men would lose its enormous proportions, and become
a dining-room instead of a feasting hall. That this was the case is shown by
the position of the altars of the deities, which were least likely to be changed
in an ancient house. Thus the altar of Zeus herkeios was situated alike in the
Homeric Aule and the historical court of the Andronitis, and the sacred hearth
or altar of Hestia occupied the same position in the Homeric Megaron and the
historical Andron.
The above plan (see inside URL below) of the ground-floor of a Greek
house of the larger size, with two courts or peristyles, is taken, with slight
alterations, from Guhl and Koner. It is of course conjectural, but it will serve
for the probable arrangements (for further we cannot go) of the Greek house
at the period we are speaking of. Other plans, differing very much from this,
have been given by several modern writers; but this appears on the whole the
most consistent with the ancient authorities. In smaller houses the Gynaeconitis
was much more limited, having no open court, and in some cases, as we shall
presently see, was restricted to the upper story.
1. Fore-court.
That there was, in some cases, no open space between the street
and the house-door, like the Roman vestibulum, is plain from the law of Hippias,
which laid a tax on house-doors opening outwards, because they encroached upon
the street (Aristot. Oecon. ii. 6, 5). The prothuron, which is sometimes mentioned
(Herod. vi. 35), may be the space indicated in the cut before the passage A.
We learn, however, from the same law of Hippias, that houses sometimes had projections
encroaching upon the street (prophragmata or druphaktoi, Aristot. l. c.; Heracl.
Pont. Polit. 1). In front of the house was generally an altar of Apollo Agyieus,
or a rude obelisk emblematical of the god. Sometimes there was a laurel-tree
in the same position, and sometimes a terminal bust of the god Hermes or Hecate
(Thuc. vi. 27; Aristoph. Thesm. 489 seq., Vesp. 804) .
2. Entrance.
A few steps (anabathmoi) led up to the house-door, which generally
bore some inscription, for the sake of a good omen, or as a charm, such as Eisodos
Krateti Agathoi Daimowi (Plut. Frag. Vit. Crat.). There was also frequently
inscribed meden eisito kakon, an inscription which has been found also at Pompeii
and even in Kurdistan (Diog. Laert. vi. 39, 50). The form and fastenings of
the door are described under Janua
(=door) and Clavis
(=key). This door, as we have seen, sometimes opened outwards; but the opposite
was the general rule, as is proved by the expressions used for opening, endounai,
and shutting it, epispasasthai and ephelkusasthai (Plut. Pelop. 11; Dion 57).
Immediately behind the door was the sanctuary of Hermes strophaios (Aristoph.
Plut. 1153).
The house-door was called auleios, auleia, aulios, or aulia thura
(Pind. Nem. i. 19; Menandros ap. Stob. Serm. xxxiv. 11; Harpocr. s. v.; Eustath.
ad Iliad. xxii. 66), because it led to the aule. It gave admittance to a narrow
passage called thuroreion by Vitruvius, and pulon, thuron by Pollux (i. 77),
on one side of which, in a large house, according to Vitruvius, were the stables,
on the other the porter's lodge. The duty of the porter (thuroros, puloros)
was to admit visitors, and to prevent anything improper from being carried into
or out of the house (Aristot. Oecon. i. 6). It was also his duty to sweep the
house (Pollux, x. 28). Plato (Protag. D) gives a lively picture of an officious
porter. The porter was attended by a dog (Apollod. apud Athen. i; Theocr. xv.
43; Aristoph. Thesm. 416, Equit. 1025). Hence the phrase eulabeisthai ten kuna
(Aristoph. Lysistr. 1215), corresponding to the Latin Care canem.
At the further end of the passage Vitruvius places another door (thuroreion
. . . locus inter duas januas), which, however, is not mentioned by other writers.
Plutarch (de Gen. Socr. 18) mentions the house-door as being visible from the
peristyle.
3. Peristyle of the Andronitis
From the thuroreion we pass into the peristyle (peristulion) of
the Andronitis. This was the most important part of the house, corresponding
to the Homeric aule, by which name it is frequently called (Plat. Protag. A,
Rep. C; Pollux, i. 77), though used for very different purposes. It was a court
open to the sky in the centre (hupaithron), and surrounded on all four sides2
by colonnades (stoai), whence the name Peristyle. The one nearest the entrance
was called prostoion (Plat. Protag. E), and the same name was also given to
the colonnade opposite the entrance (en toi kat' antikru prostoioi, ib. C).
The word is also used by later writers as equivalent to peristulion (Pollux,
i. 77). These colonnades were used for exercise, and were sometimes of considerable
extent, as in the house of wealthy Callias, and meals were occasionally taken
in them (Plat. l. c., Symp.; Plut. de Gen. Socr. 32; Dem. in Euerg. 55; Pollux,
i. 78). Here, as in the Homeric aule, was the altar of Zeus herkeios, where
sacrifices were offered (Harpocr. s. v.; Eustath. ad Od. xxii. 335; Plat. Rep.
i. 328 C). The colonnades were arranged for the purpose of obtaining as much
sun in winter, and as much shade and air in summer, as possible (Xen. Oecon.
ix. 4 ; Mem. iii. 8, 9 ; Aristot. Oecon. i. 6.)
Round the peristyle were arranged the chambers used by the men called
by the general name of oikoi, oikemata, and andrones, though the latter more
specifically indicated a dining-room. (See below.) There were banqueting-rooms
large enough to contain several sets of couches (triklinoi, heptaklinoi, triakontaklinoi),
and at the same time to allow abundant room for attendants, musicians, and performers
of games; parlours or sitting-rooms (exedrai), sleeping-rooms (koitones, oikemata),
guest-chambers (xenones), picture-galleries and libraries, and sometimes store-rooms.
The store-rooms were generally in the women's part of the house; but in the
house of Callias a store-room (tamieion) in the Andronitis was fitted up as
a guest's room (Plat. Protag.D). In the arrangement of these apartments attention
was paid to their aspect. (Vitruv. l. c.; Lys. de caede Eratosth. 24, in Eratosth.10;
Aristoph. Eccles. 8, 14; Pollux, i. 79, vii. 28, x. 32). The disposition of
these rooms is quite uncertain. F in plan, corresponding to the alae in a Roman
house, may, according to Guhl and Koner, be the sanctuaries of the theoi ktesioi
and patroioi (cf. Lycurg. adv. Leocr. 25) when these gods had sanctuaries in
later times.
4. Andron, or dining-hall.
The andron was situated in the centre of the house between the two
courts opposite the entrance to the court of the Andronitis. It corresponds
to the megaron of Homer, but greatly reduced in size, as the court of the Andronitis
contained the principal rooms for the men. Here stood the hestia, or sacred
hearth, which is placed by Aeschylus in the centre of the house (mesomphalos
hestia, Agan. 1056); but in historical times it only stood as a symbol of domestic
worship, the hearth being removed to a special kitchen (optanion). In later
times it took the form of a round altar sacred to the goddess Hestia, the Roman
Vesta, and was a sanctuary for suppliants. Thus it was the Hestia in the house
of the Molossian king Admetus at which Themistocles took refuge (Thuc. i. 136;
Plut. Them. 34), and it is mentioned as a place of refuge by Lysias in a small
Greek house (epi ten hestian kataphugon, de caede Eratosth. 27). The Andron
is said by Xenophon to be the place where dinner was taken (epi toi androni
entha to deipnon en, Symp. i. 13; cf. Aristoph. Eccles. 676), and Thales is
represented by Plutarch as going through the porch to the banquet in the Andron
(eis ton androna dia tes stoas, VII. Sap. Conv. 3). In a Greek inscription a
large dining-hall is called andreion, and Pollux (i. 79) defines it generally
as a place where men assemble (andron hina suniasin hoi andres). It is sometimes
used as equivalent to Andronitis, and it is not always easy to distinguish its
specific and more general meaning (cf. Herod. i. 34; Aeschyl. Agam. 243, Choeph.
712). The place occupied by the Andron is called by Vitruvius (l. c.) prostas
or parastas, probably the same as the pastas of other writers, though he is
clearly in error in placing it in the Gynaeconitis, as we have already seen.
He says that on the side of the peristyle facing the south (i. e. opposite the
entrance door) are two antae
(=parastades), at a considerable distance apart, which carry beams, and that
the recess behind them is equal to one-third less than their distance from each
other, and that this recess or room is called prostas or parastas. It is expressly
identified by later writers with the Andron, and the word pastas is absurdly
derived from feeding (apo tou pasasthai, Pollux, vi. 7; Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod.
i. 789; Etym. M. 46). It would seem that the word pastas or prostas did not
originally signify a chamber, but simply a colonnade on the side of the peristyle
opposite the entrance (Xen. Mem. iii. 8, 9; Herod. ii. 169), and was thus the
same as the prostoion mentioned by Plato in the passage already quoted (Protag.
l. c.; see above, 3). We may therefore reasonably conjecture that the name was
afterwards transferred from the colonnade to the dining-room lying immediately
behind it; that is, to the Andron.
5. Peristyle of the Gynaeconitis.
The peristyle of the Andronitis was connected with that of the Gynaeconitis
by a door called metaulos, mesaulos, or mesaulios, which was in the middle of
the portico of the peristyle of the Andronitis, or more specifically of the
Andron. Vitruvius applies the name mesaulos to a passage between the two peristyles,
in which was the mesaulos thura; but such a passage is not mentioned by other
writers, and was probably suggested to Vitruvius by the position of the Roman
Fauces. By means of this door all communication between the Andronitis and the
Gynaeconitis could be shut off. Its uses are mentioned by Xenophon, who calls
it thura balanotos (Oecon. ix. 5; cf. Plut. Arat. 26). Its name mesaulos is
evidently derived from mesos, and means the door between the two aulai or peristyles
(Suidas, s. v. Mesaulion: Ael. Dion. apud Eustath. ad Iliad. xi. 547, 17; Schol.
in Apoll. Rhod. iii. 335). The other name, metaulos, is taken by some writers
as merely the Attic form of mesaulos. But Becker derives metaulos from meta,
as being the door behind or beyond the aule, with respect to the auleios thura
(Lys. de caede Eratosth. 17; Plut. Symp. vii. 1; Ael. Dion. apud Eustath. l.
c.)
This door gave admittance to the peristyle of the Gynaeconitis,
which, like that of the Andronitis, was surrounded by colonnades. It was, as
we have already said, situated in larger houses immediately behind the Andronitis
(Lys. c. Simon. 6; Dem. c. Euerg. 53; Xen. Oecon. ix. 5). In like manner Sophocles,
doubtless representing the practice of his own time, describes both sets of
rooms as on the same floor (Oed. Tyr. 1241-1262). But in smaller houses, where
there was no space for a separate court for women, the Gynaeconitis was in the
upper story. Such was the case in the small house (oikidion) spoken of by Lysias
(de caede Eratosth. 19). There was the same arrangement in other houses (Aristoph.
Eccles. 961, Thesm. 482; Babr. Fab. 116); and considering the small value of
many houses at Athens, we may conclude that the women's rooms were often in
the upper story. On the right and left of this pastas (see above), according
to Vitruvius, were two bed-chambers, the thalamos and amphithalamos, of which
the former was the bed-chamber of the master and mistress of the house, and
where also seem to have been kept the vases and other valuable articles of ornament
(Xen. Oecon. ix. 3). The Thalamus, called by Sophocles numphika leche (Oed.
Tyr. 1242), is constantly described as the bridal chamber (Pind. Pyth. ii. 60;
Soph. Trach. 913; Eur. Hipp. 940; Theocr. ii. 136), and was rebuilt or re-adorned
on occasion of a marriage (ethos en tois gemasi thalamon oikodomeisthai, Schol.
ad Hom. Il. ii. 701; Weograptos thalamos, Theocr. xviii. 3; cf. Theocr. xxvii.
36; Apoll. Rhod. iii. 36; Hesych. s. v. thalamoio Weoio). This chamber is frequently
called domation (Lys. de caede Eratosth. 24; Aristoph. Eccl. 8; Theophr. Char.
13; Plat. Rep. iii. C), and sometimes pastas or pastos (Theocr. xxiv. 46; Anth.
P. ix. 245; Heliod. Aethiop. x. 16; Lucian, Dial. Mort. xxiii. 3; Anth. P. v.
52, vii. 711). In the Thalamus were placed the theoi gamelioi. The Amphithalamus
is supposed by some to be the bed-chamber for the grown--up daughters of the
family (cf. Achill. Tat. ii. 9). Beyond these rooms (for this seems to be what
Vitruvius means by in his locis introrsus) were large apartments (histones)
used for working in wool (oeci magni, in quibus matres familiarum cum lanificis
habent sessionem, Vitruv.). Round the peristyle were the eating-rooms, bed-chambers,
storerooms (tamieia, cf. Aristoph. Lysistr. 495), and other apartments in common
use (triclinia quotidiana, cubicula, et cellce familiaricae).
Besides the auleios thura and the mesaulos thura, there was a third
door (kepaia thura) leading to the garden. (Pollux, i. 76; Dem. in Euerg. 53;
Lys. in Eratosth.16).
Some other matters connected with a Greek house require notice.
1. Upper stories.
When there was an upper story (huperoion, dieres), it seldom extended
over the whole space occupied by the lower story. The principal use of the upper
story was for the sleeping apartments, both of the family and of the slaves
(Cf. Dem. in Euerg. p. 1156,56, where the words en toi purgoi seem to imply
a building several stories high). Houses rarely had more than two stories; but
in later times we find in the larger towns mention of houses with three stories
(as in Cyzicus, Aristid. Or. xvi.; tristege, Artemidor. iv. 46; so also in Troas,
Acts xx. 8, 9). The access to the upper floor seems to have been sometimes by
stairs (anabathmoi) on the outside of the house, leading up from the street,
as was the case at Rome (Aristot. Oec. ii. 5; cf. Liv. xxxix. 14). The upper
story was sometimes let, or used for lodging guests (Antiph. de Venef. 14).
But in some large houses there were rooms set apart for the reception of guests
(xenones) on the ground-floor (Vitruv. l. c.; Pollux, iv. 125; Eurip. Alcest.
564). In cases of emergency store-rooms were fitted up for the accommodation
of guests (Plat. Protag.).
Portions of the upper story sometimes projected beyond the walls
of the lower part, forming balconies or verandahs (probolai, geisipodismata,
Pollux, i. 81), like the Roman maeniana.
2. Roofs.
The roofs were generally flat, and it was customary to walk about
upon them, as on the Solaria at Rome (Lys. adv. Simon. 11; Aristoph. Lysistr.
389 ; Plaut. Mil. ii. 2, 3) or to pass from one house to another (Dem. c. Androt.
p. 609, 53). But high-pitched roofs were also used, covered with tiles (keramos,
Galen, xviii. 1, K.; Pollux, i. 81).
3. Doors.
For particulars, see Janua
(=door) and Clavis
(=key). In the interior of the house the place of doors was sometimes supplied
by curtains (parapetasmata, parakalummata), which also hung between the pillars
of the Peristyle (Aristoph. Vesp. 1215). They were either plain, or dyed, or
embroidered (Pollux, x. 32; Theophrast. 5).
4. Windows.
The principal openings for the admission of light and air were in
the uncovered Peristyle and perhaps in the roofed part of the peristyle; but
it is incorrect to suppose that the houses had no windows (thurides), or at
least none overlooking the street. They appear to have been chiefly in the upper
story; and in ancient works of art women are represented looking out of them
(Aristoph. Thesm. 797, Eccles. 961; Plut. de Curios. 13, Dion 56. Also called
photagogoi Lucian. Conv. 20).
5. Privies.
They were called apopatoi (Aristoph. Acharn. 81; Pollux, x. 44),
ephodoi (Aristoph. Eccles. 1059), koprones (Pax, 99, Thesm. 485; Dem. c. Arist
g). Their position is nowhere expressly indicated, but they were probably, as
in Roman houses, in proximity to the kitchen.
6. Heating.
Artificial warmth was procured by little portable stoves (escharia,
escharides), or chafing dishes (anthrakia) (Plut. Apophth. i; Aristoph. Vesp.
811; Pollux, vi. 89, x. 101), see Focus
(=estia, fire-place).It is supposed that the chimney was altogether unknown,
and that the smoke escaped through an opening in the roof; but it is not easy
to understand how this could be the case when there was an upper story. The
kapnodoke mentioned by Herodotus (viii. 137) was not really a chimney, but only
an opening in the roof. But the kapne in Aristophanes (Vesp. 143) seems to have
been really a chimney, as it is described by the Scholiast on the passage as
pipe-shaped (solenoeides). In any case the chimney seems to have been only used
in the kitchen (optanion, Alexis ap. Athen. ix.b).
7. Decoration.
The decorations of the interior were very plain at the period to
which our description refers. The floors were mere plaster. At a late period
coloured stones were used (Plin. H. N. xxxvi.184). Mosaics are first mentioned
as introduced under the kings of Pergamus.
The walls, up to the fourth century B.C., seem to have been only
whitewashed. The first instance of painting them is that of Alcibiades (Andoc.
in Alcib. 17, Dem. c. Mid. 147; Plut. Alcib. 16). This innovation met with considerable
opposition (Xen. Mem. iii. 8, 10; Oecon. ix. 2). Plato mentions the painting
of the walls of houses as a mark of a truphosa polis (Repub. ii). These allusions
prove that the practice was not uncommon in the time of Plato and Xenophon.
We have also mention of painted ceilings at the same period (Plat. Repub. vii,
cf. kata taichou graphein, Lucian, Hist. Conscr. 29). At a later period this
mode of decoration became general.
8. Letting and price of houses.
There was a great deal of speculation in the building and letting
of houses at Athens (Xen. Oecon. iii. 1). A distinction was made at Athens between
the oikia, which was a dwelling-house for a single family, and the sunoikia,
which was adapted to hold several families--like the Roman insula. The distinction
is thus expressed by Aeschines (c. Timarch. 124): hopou men gar polloi misthosamenoi
mian oikesin dielomenoi echousi, sunoikian kaloumen, hopou d'heis enoikei, oikian.
The lodging-houses were let mostly to foreigners who came to Athens on business,
and especially to the metoikoi, whom the law did not allow to acquire real property,
and who therefore could not purchase houses of their own (Dem. pro Phorm. 6).
As they, with their families, formed a population of about 45,000, the number
of sunoikiai must have been considerable. Pasion, the banker, had a lodging-house
valued at 100 minas (Dem. c. Steph. i. 28). Xenophon recommended that the metoikoi
should be encouraged to invest their money in houses, and that leave should
be granted to the most respectable to build and become house proprietors (oikodomesamenois
enkektesthai, de Vectig. ii. 6). The isoteleis laboured under no such disability;
for Lysias and his brother Polemarchus, who belonged to that class, were the
owners of three houses.
The value of houses must have varied according to the size, the
build, the situation, and other circumstances. Those in the city were more valuable
than those in the Peiraeus or the country, caeteris paribus. Two counting-houses
are mentioned by Isaeus (de Hagn. her. 42) as yielding a return of rather more
than 8 1/2 per cent. interest on the purchase-money. But this probably was much
below the average. The summer season was the most profitable for the letting
of houses, when merchants and other visitors flocked to Athens. The rent was
commonly paid by the month. Lodging-houses were frequently taken on speculation
by persons called naukleroi or stathmouchoi (Ammon., Harpocrat., Phot., Hesych.
s. v.), who made a profit by underletting them, and sometimes for not very reputable
purposes (Isaeus, de Philoct. her. 19). Boeckh has given an account from the
ancient writers of the prices of houses at Athens, which seem to have been very
small. They varied from 3 minas to 120 minas, according to their size, situation,
and condition, from 30 to 50 minas being an ordinary price.
III. ROMAN.
The earliest dwellings of the Latins on the Palatine hill were probably
mere huts of mud-daubed osiers, like the hut of Romulus, which was preserved
as a sacred relic for many centuries. After the burning of Rome by the Gauls,
the city was rebuilt in haste, with very narrow streets and on no regular plan
(Liv. v. 55). Even the houses of the richest citizens were small and of inexpensive
materials, such as unburnt brick, or the soft brown tufa which could be quarried
in nearly all the hills of Rome. No examples of fired bricks are known in Roman
buildings till the time of Julius Caesar; and the remarks of Vitruvius seem
to refer wholly to crude or sun-dried bricks, of which no examples in Rome have
survived to modern times. Down to the beginning of the last century of the republic,
Romans of rank continued to live in small houses. In B.C. 125 the censors censured
Lepidus, the augur, because he paid 6000 sesterces (about £50) for his houserent
(Vell. Pat. ii. 10), and Sulla, afterwards the dictator, when a young man, paid
only 3000 sesterces for his rooms on the ground-floor, while a freedman in the
upper part of the same house paid only 2000 sesterces (Plut. Sall. c. 1).
The earliest regulation we find respecting houses is a law of the
XII. Tables, that each building should be separated from another by a space
of 2 1/2 feet, called ambitus (Fest. pp. 5, 11, M.; Varr. L. L. v. 22; Isidor.
xv. 16, 12). But this enactment was disregarded, and was again enforced by Nero,
when he rebuilt the city (Tac. Ann. xv. 43). As the city increased in population,
the houses were raised in height. The immense size and population of Rome, says
Vitruvius (ii. 8, 17), make it necessary to have a vast number of habitations;
and as the area is not sufficient to contain them all on the ground-floor, the
nature of the case compels us to raise them in the air. The buildings thus referred
to are the Insulae, which must be carefully distinguished from the Domus. The
insula, in which the lower and middle classes lived, was a building of several
stories, let out in floors or separate rooms to different families or persons.
The domus or aedes privatae (Suet. Ner. 44), on the contrary, was a separate
house, in later times a palace, usually with only one story above the ground-floor,
the abode of the rich and great, and inhabited for the most part by a single
family; though, as in the case of the palazzi in modern Rome, parts of them,
especially at the back or top of the domus, were sometimes let out (Plaut. Trin.
i. 2, 157; Liv. xxxix. 14, 2; Suet. Ner. 44, Vitell. 7). In the general description
of a Roman house our remarks apply only to the domus, properly so called, as
the insula was built on an entirely different plan. But we must say a few words
on the insula.
The insula is defined by Festus to be a building not joined by common
walls with neighbouring houses, and surrounded by a street, so that it stood
like an island surrounded by rivers or the sea. It was thus, as has been said,
very much like one of the large hotels in modern cities, with one or more courts,
and bounded on all sides by streets, like the Louvre hotel at Paris. The ground-floor
was usually let out in shops (tabernae), and the upper stories in flats or separate
rooms, as in continental cities in the present day. Such an insula, containing
various tenements and shops, is the house of Pansa at Pompei. The number of
insulae at Rome naturally exceeded that of the domus ; and accordingly we find
in the Notitia, which was compiled between A.D. 334 and 357, that there were
at Rome 44,171 insulae and 1782 domus. To the same effect Suetonius, in describing
the fire at Rome under Nero, speaks of the immense number of insulae that were
burnt, in addition to the palaces (domus) of the nobles (Suet. Ner. 38). Other
writers, in like manner, distinguish between the insulae and domus (Sen. de
Benef. vi. 5, 5; Tac. Ann. xv. 43; Suet. Ner. 16; Cic. de Off. iii. 1. 6, 65).
Becker and some other writers erroneously suppose that a single floor or a separate
room in such a house was also called insula, but the proper name for such a
separate lodging was cenaculum. The insulae are first mentioned in B.C. 456
in connexion with the Lex Icilia de Aventino publicando, from which it appears
that each occupier had a story in absolute ownership, and could alienate and
transmit it, as is customary in modern Rome and other continental cities (Dionys.
x. 32; Niebuhr, Hist. of Rome, ii. p. 301, Engl. Tr.). But it was apparently
more usual for an insula to have been built on speculation, and let by the proprietor
to different occupants (Plut. Crass. 2; Mart. iv. 37). Hence the stories or
separate rooms were called cenacula meritoria (Suet. Vit. 7; Juv. iii. 234;
Dig. 7, 1, 13, 8) or conducta (Dig. 19, 2, 30; cf. mutat cenacula, Hor. Ep.
i. 1, 91). Cicero had some shops, which he let (Cic. ad Att. xiv. 9; merces
insularum, ib. xv. 17). The rent (pensio, Juv. ix. 63) at Rome was considerable,
even for a miserable garret (Juv. iii. 166, 225; cf. Mart. iii. 30, 3). Poor
persons in the time of Julius Caesar appear to have paid 2000 sesterces (£17
or £18) as the usual rent (Suet. Caes. 38). Caelius was said to have paid 30,000
sesterces (about £266) for the rent of a third floor in the insula of P. Clodius,
though Cicero says the real rent was only one-third of this sum (Cic. Cael.
7, 17). Hence it was a profitable speculation to build or hire a whole insula,
and to sublet the cenacula to different tenants (Dig. 19, 2, 30). The insularii
were not the occupants of the insulae, but those who had charge of the insulae
and collected the rents. They were also called procuratores insularum (Dig.
1, 15, 4; 7, 8, 16; Petron. 95, 96; Becker-Goll, Gallus, i. p. 17). The insula
appears to have been named after the person to whom it belonged. Thus we find
in inscriptions the insula Arriana Polliana, the insula Sertoriana &c.
The upper stories and the separate rooms of the insula were, as
we have already said, called cenacula. This word properly signifies rooms to
dine in; but after it became the fashion to dine in the upper part of the house,
all the rooms above the ground-floor were called cenacula (Varr. L. L. v. 162).
Hence Festus says, cenacula dicuntur, ad quae scalis ascenditur. Jupiter humorously
describes his abode, in superiore qui habito cenaculo (Plaut. Amph. iii. 1,
3); Ennius speaks of cenacula maxima coeli (ap. Tertull. adv. Valent. 7); and
Prudentius (c. Symm. i. 580) of celsa cenacula. There were different flights
of stairs connecting the upper stories with the lower part of the house, as
we find to be the case in houses at Pompeii. Sometimes the stairs had no connexion
with the lower part of the house, but ascended at once from the street. (Liv.
xxxix. 14, 2; xxi. 62, 3; si cenaculum ex publico aditum habeat, Dig. 43, 17,
3, 7). As the different stories could not all be lighted from openings in the
roof, as in the domus, they had windows looking out into the street (Liv. i.
41, xxiv. 21; Prop. v. (iv.) 7, 15, seq.; Juv. vi. 31). They also had sometimes
balconies, supported by brackets, projecting into the street, from which an
occupant could shake hands with his next door or opposite neighbour (Mart. i.
86). These balconies were called maeniana, and the same name was also given
to the stories which projected over those below, as we see in some old houses
in England. (Fest. p. 134, 22, M.; Isidor. xv. 3, 11; Vitruv. v. 1, 2; Val.
Max. ix. 12, 7; Cic. Acad. iv. 2. 2, 70; Dig. 50, 16, 242.) Projecting stories
were forbidden in A.D. 368 to be erected in Rome (Amm. Marc. xxvii. 9, 8) on
account of the narrowness of the streets and were again forbidden by the emperors
Honorius and Theodosius, unless there was an open space in some cases of ten,
in others of fifteen feet, clear of any adjacent building (Cod. Just. 8, 10,
11). Such a projecting story is seen in some of the Pompeian houses.
We find mention of a house three stories high in B.C. 218 (Liv.
xxi. 62, 3); and Martial (i. 117, 7) considered the third story, where he lived,
as very high. If we were to estimate the height of the Roman houses by the way
in which they are spoken of by the ancient writers, we should probably assign
to them too many stories; for the houses, as Friedlander observes, probably
appeared higher than they really were in consequence of the narrowness of the
streets. We have no express mention of any houses more than four stories high.
In Juvenal's description of Rome (iii. 199 seq.) the dwellings of the poor are
in the fourth story, under the roofs, where the doves lay their eggs. In the
same satire he describes (iii. 269) the danger to which the passing traveller
was exposed from the potsherds thrown from the lofty house-tops ( tectis sublimibus
). So frequently were persons injured in this way that the praetor gave them
a right of action against the occupier. But from various circumstances we may
infer that some of the houses at Rome had a larger number of stories than are
expressly mentioned. Thus, as we shall presently see, Augustus limited the height
of houses to 70 feet, which implies that they had been built still higher, and
Cicero describes the houses as hoisted up and suspended in the air (Romam cenaculis
sublatam atque suspensam, Leg. Agr. ii. 35, 96). In like manner Tertullian (adv.
Valent c. 7) compares the Gnostic idea of several stages in heaven to an insula
called Felicula, which seems to have been celebrated for its numerous stories.
The houses let for hire were in Rome badly built by speculators.
The upper stories were of wood (tabulata, contignationes), and frequently fell
down, while their material made them more liable to fires, which were very frequent
in Rome. Many of the houses were propped up, and old cracks simply plastered
over (Juv. iii. 193 seq.). Catullus speaks ironically of the advantages of a
beggar, who had nothing to fear from the fire or fall of houses ( non incendia,
non graves ruinas, Catull. xxiii. 9); Strabo mentions both dangers, and the
fear of them drove timid persons out of Rome ( incendia, lapsus, Juv. i. 7;
cf: Sen. Ep. 91, 13; tanta altitude aedificiorum est, ut neque adversus ignem
praesidium nec ex ruinis ullum ullam in partem effugium sit, de Controv. ii.
9; Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 110). The returns from house property in Rome were large,
but people feared to invest in it on account of fires (Gell. xv. 1). The inundations
of the Tiber also caused the fall of houses (Tac. Ann. i. 76; Suet. Aug. 30).
To guard against these dangers, in the reign of Augustus the height
of new houses in streets was limited to seventy feet, by a Metropolitan Building
Act, as it would now be called (Strab. v. p. 235). Augustus recommended a work
on this subject by Rutilius, entitled De Modo Aedificiorum (Suet. Aug. 89).
Vitruvius (ii. 8, 17) gives some of the provisions of this Act, e. g. that houses,
if several stories high, were to be built pilis lapideis, structuris testaceis,
parietibus caementitiis; that is, on stone piers, with walls of concrete and
burnt brick,--not of sun-dried clay, as had been the usual custom. It was not,
however, till the reign of Nero that a complete reform was effected in the arrangement
and construction of the houses and streets of Rome. Nero had a new and elaborate
Building Act drawn up, which required fireproof materials, such as peperino,
a hard volcanic stone, to be used for the external walls of houses. He also
enacted that each building should have separate walls, and a space (ambitus)
left open all round it. As a means of escape and assistance in the case of fire,
he also caused arcades or colonnades to be built at his own expense in front
of the insulae. (See p. 672 b.) It is not improbable that Nero, as Tacitus and
Suetonius seem to think, wilfully caused the great fire which destroyed so much
of Rome, in order that his new Act might come into immediate effect, and also
that he might lay out the streets on wider and straighter lines (Tac. Ann. xv.
43; Suet. Ner. 38). In Trajan's reign the limit of height for street houses
was fixed at sixty feet (Aur. Victor, Epit. 13). The emperors Antoninus and
Verus again made an ordinance about the space to be left round the insulae (Dig.
8, 2, 14).
We now turn to the history and construction of the domus, or mansion
of the great and wealthy. It was not till the last century of the republic,
when wealth had been acquired by conquests in the East, that houses of any splendour
began to be built; but it then became the fashion, not only to build houses
of an immense size, but to adorn them with marble columns, paintings, statues,
and costly works of art. They covered a large space, most of the rooms being
on the ground-floor. The spacious atria and peristylia, being open to the sky,
did not permit an upper story, which, if it existed, must have been confined
to the sides of the building, and could not have been very high, as otherwise
it would have darkened the atria and peristylia. These splendid mansions were
erected for the most part on the hills, and along the slopes of the Palatine,
on the side near the Forum, which was the favourite quarter for the Roman nobles.
In later times the various palaces of the emperors swallowed up almost the whole
of this favourite site, especially the palace of Caligula, which was built over
the place where Cicero, Clodius, Crassus, and other famous men once resided.
The house of the orator L. Crassus on the Palatine, built about
92 B.C., was the first which had marble columns,--namely, the six (or four)
columns of the atrium, 12 feet in height, which were of Hymettian marble. For
this Crassus was severely blamed; and the stern republican M. Brutus nicknamed
him the Palatine Venus (Plin. H. N. xxxvi.7, xvii. 2-6; Val. Max. ix. 1, 4).
This house was valued at 6,000,000 sesterces, about £62,000 (Val. Max. l. c.);
but Pliny says (xvii. 2) that it yielded in magnificence to the house of Q.
Catulus on the same hill, and was much inferior to that of C. Aquilius on the
Viminal. The house of Catulus had a fine colonnade (porticus), adorned with
the spoils of the Cimbric war. It was near the house of Cicero, as a portion
of the colonnade was destroyed when Clodius razed the house of Cicero (Val.
Max. vi. 3, 1; Cic. pro Dom. 43, 114; ad Att. iv. 2, 4, iv. 3, 2; ad Q. Fr.
iii. 1, 4, 14).
In 78 B.C. M. Lepidus, for the first time in Rome, used the rich
Numidian marble (mod. giallo antico) not only for columns, but even for the
thresholds of his doors (Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 48); but the fashion of building
magnificent houses increased so rapidly that the house of Lepidus, which, in
his consulship, was the first in Rome, was thirty-five years later eclipsed
by a hundred others (Plin. xxxvi. 109). Lucullus was especially celebrated for
the magnificence of his houses (Cic. de Off. i. 3. 9, 140). The Romans were
exceedingly partial to marble for the decoration of their houses. Pliny (H.
N. xxxvi. 48), quoting Cornelius Nepos, says that marble slabs were first used
for wall-linings by a knight named Mamurra, one of Caesar's prefects in Gaul:
in whose house were columns of Carystian (cipollino) and Luna marble. A further
advance in costly magnificence was made by the aedile M. Aemilius Scaurus in
the middle of the first century B.C. He purchased the above-named house of L.
Crassus and greatly enlarged it. He introduced as the supports of his atrium,
columns of the black Lucullean marble no less than 38 feet in height, the weight
of which was so great that he had to provide security for an indemnity in case
of injury that might be done to the main sewers, while these immense blocks
of marble were being brought along the streets (Plin. H. N. xxxvi.5 seq.). This
house was sold to Clodius for nearly 15 million sesterces, about £132,000; a
price, says Pliny, worthy of the madness of kings (Ascon. in Mil. p. 33, Or.;
Plin. H. N. xxxvi.115). This is the highest price recorded in the time of the
republic for a house. The consul Messalla bought the house of Autronius for
3,400,000 sesterces, about £29,000, and Cicero the house of Crassus (not L.
Crassus, the orator) for 3,500,000 sesterces, about £30,000 (Cic. ad Att. i.
1. 3, 6, with Tyrrell's note; ad Fam. v. 6). Cicero's house was on the lower
slope of the Palatine towards the Regia, the official residence of Julius Caesar
as Pontifex Maximus, whom Cicero calls his neighbour (ad Fam. v. 6; ad Att.
xiii. 45). It was originally built by M. Livius Drusus, from whom it passed
to Crassus, of whom Cicero bought it. It was destroyed by Clodius during Cicero's
exile, but was rebuilt at the public expense on his return (Vell. Pat. ii. 14;
Cic. pro Dom. 37). These houses will serve as samples of the value of the mansions
of the nobles during the republic. Sallust speaks of them like cities in size
(Cat. 12), and Seneca describes them in the same terms under the empire (Ep.
90, 43), when the imperial palaces, of which we shall speak further on, became
still more magnificent. Many of them, like the houses of Sallust and Maecenas,
described below, were surrounded by gardens. The rich noble, we are told, was
not content unless he had a rus in urbe (Mart. xii. 57, 21; cf. viii. 68, 2),
and the extensive pleasure-grounds are alluded to in other passages (cf. Mart.
xii. 50; Sen. Ep. 114, 9). The atria and peristylia, with the baths and other
public rooms described by Vitruvius, were magnificent, but the sleeping and
other private rooms were small and inconvenient, so that Martial, after describing
one of. these mansions, adds (xii. 50, 7): Atria longa patent. Sed nec cenantibus
usquam, Nec somno locus est. Quam bene non habitas!
In describing the domus properly so called, our chief authority
is Vitruvius, whose descriptions of the various parts are elucidated by the
existing remains of houses at Pompeii. There can be no doubt that the latter
are constructed upon the model of the houses at Rome; and not, as some have
supposed, borrowed from the Greeks. The municipal towns imitated in their buildings
those of Rome. The plan and arrangement of the Pompeian houses not only correspond
in general with the description of Vitruvius, but we find in them the atrium,
the alae, the tablinum, and the fauces, which are all characteristic of a Roman
house, and have no counterpart in a Greek house. Moreover, the Pompeian houses
resemble those in the Capitoline plan of Rome, made in the reign of Septimius
Severus, and the house of Livia on the Palatine. Still, it should be observed
that the Romans themselves derived all the later and ornamental additions to
their houses from the Greeks, as the names themselves show, their peristylia,
triclinia, oeci, exedrae, diaetae, pinacothecae, bibliothecae, &c. Moreover,
in the disposition and arrangement of the rooms, it should be remembered that
Vitruvius in his description of a Roman house, as of a Greek house, is giving
his own private views on the subject, and not simply describing the existing
methods of arrangement. His chapters on this subject are chiefly useful to the
modern student for the long list of names which he gives to the various parts
of the house, and his indications of the special uses of each part. Still the
chief rooms in the house of a wealthy Roman appear to have been arranged in
the same manner, while the others varied according to the taste and circumstances
of the owner.
According to Vitruvius, the principal parts of a Roman house were:
1. Vestibulum, 2. Ostium, 3. Atrium, 4. Alae, 5. Tablinum, 6. Fauces, 7. Peristylium.
The parts of a house which were considered of less importance, and of which
the arrangement differed in different houses, were: 1. Cubicula, 2. Triclinia,
3. Oeci, 4. Exedrae, 5. Pinacotheca, 6. Bibliotheca, 7 Balineum, 8. Culina,
9. Cenacula, 10. Lararium or Sacrarium, 11 Diaetae, 12. Solaria. We shall speak
of each in order.
But before doing so, it must be observed that the old Roman house
contained only one room, the atrium, to which all other rooms were subsequently
added, and that this was probably the name of the old Roman house. Thus we find
that there was in Rome a considerable number of old buildings of simple construction
bearing the name of atrium, such as the atrium Vestae, in which the Vestals
lived, the atrium sutorium, the atrium Libertatis, the atria Tiberina, atria
Licinia, atria auctionaria, and others. The atrium was probably derived from
the Etruscans, though we need not accept the etymology of Varro, that it came
from the Etruscan town of Atria or Adria. Some ancient writers, indeed, derive
it from the Latin word ater (Serv. ad Verg. Aen. i. 726; Isidor. Or. xv. 3,
4), an etymology accepted by many modern writers, and among others by Marquardt;
but the Etruscan origin is the more probable. Its earliest form is represented
in Etruscan cinerary urns, of which an example is given below, where we see
the opening in the roof, and the entrance door leading direct into the atrium.
This opening was intended to give light to the building, and as a vent for the
smoke, but as the atrium became enlarged, it took the form of the compluvium
or impluvium mentioned below. The roof was supported by four beams, crossing
each other at right angles, and sloping towards the roof in the centre. This
kind of roof, only found in later times in small houses, retained in memory
of its origin the name of Tuscan (Vitruv. vi. 3). The development of the atrium
is explained further on. We now follow the description of Vitruvius.
1. Vestibulum
There has been much dispute respecting the exact signification of
this word, which has arisen from the different meanings attached to it at different
periods of history and in different kinds of houses. In the palaces of the nobles
the vestibulum was a vacant space before the house, forming a courtyard or entrance-court,
surrounded on three sides by the house, and open on the fourth to the street.
The two wings ran out beyond the facade of the building, and the door was in
the third side opposite the street. In some houses the projecting sides were
occupied by shops opening into the street. In the vestibulum the clients assembled,
till the door was opened, to pay their respects (salutatio) to the master of
the house, so that they might not be left standing either in the street or within
the house (Gell. xvi. 5.3, 8, vestibulum, quod est ante domum, Varr. L. L. vii.
81; Macrob. vi. 8, 5; Sen. ad Marc. 10, 1; Quintil. xi. 2, 20; Cic. Caec. 12,
35; Mil. 27, 75). Hence the vestibula regalia alta, or magnifica vestibula,
as Vitruvius calls them, were only required by the nobility on account of the
salutatio; and the ordinary citizens ( qui communi fortuna sunt ) had no occasion
for a vestibulum (Vitruv. vi. 8.1, 2). Accordingly, in the smaller houses in
Rome and the municipal towns, there was either no vestibulum, so that the door
opened straight upon the street, as in the Capitoline plan of Rome or the vestibulum
was simply indicated by the door standing back a few feet from the street, as
in many of the houses at Pompeii.
Sometimes there were steps from the street leading up to the vestibulum
(Sen. Ep. 84). In the houses of the nobility the vestibulum was adorned with
statues, arms, and other trophies (Plin. H. N. xxxv. 7; Liv. x. 7, xxii. 57;
Cic. Phil. ii. 2. 8, 68; Verg. Aen. ii. 504; Tibull. i. 1, 54; Ov. Trist. iii.
1, 33; Suet. Tib. 26, Ner. 38), sometimes with quadrigae (Juv. vii. 125; Sil.
Ital. vi. 434); and in the vestibulum before the Golden House of Nero there
was the colossal figure (see colossus)
of the emperor, 120 feet in height (Suet. Ner. 31). It was for the most part
uncovered (Plaut. Most. iii. 2, 132), but sometimes had a porticus or colonnade
(Suet. Ner. 16; Tac. Ann. xv. 43), and was adorned with trees or shrubs (Verg.
Georg. iv. 20). But as the influence of the nobility declined in the first century
of the Christian era, and the clients gradually disappeared, there was no longer
any occasion for a vestibulum in the houses of the nobles; and hence the exact
meaning of the word became a matter of dispute among antiquarians [p. 669] in
the time of the Antonines (Gell. xvi. 5.2, 8). Moreover, as the master of the
house no longer lived in the atrium, but in the peristylium and the adjoining
rooms, the atrium became the place of waiting for visitors, and is thus sometimes
apparently used as synonymous with vestibulum (Liv. v. 41, 2; Ov. Fast. vi.
297; Suet. Aug. 100).
Public buildings also had vestibula, as the curia or senate-house
(Liv. i. 48, ii. 48), and various temples (Liv. Ep. 86; Val. Max. i. 8.2, 11;
Tac. Hist. i. 86).
2. Ostium
The ostium was the entrance to the house (Vitruv. ap. Serv. ad Verg.
Aen. vi. 43 ; Isidor. xv. 7), and is constantly used as synonymous with janua
and fores, the door. But ostium properly signified the small vacant space before
the janua, whence Plautus (Pers. v. 1, 6) says ante ostium et januam. Here stood
the antae, two posts or pillars flanking the doorway (Isidor. l. c.; Fest. p.
16, M.). On the threshold the word Salve was frequently wrought in mosaic, as
we see in the Pompeian houses; and over the threshold there sometimes hung a
cage containing a magpie (pica) or a parrot (psittacus), taught to greet those
who entered (Petron. 28; pica salutatrix, Mart. vii. 87, 6, xiv. 76; Pers. prol.
8). Over the door a few words of good omen were sometimes written, such as nihil
intret mali (Orelli-Henz. Inscr. 7287), or deprecatio incendiorum (Plin. H.
N. xxviii. 20). Sometimes the house was indicated by a sign over the door, as
in mediaeval times. Thus we are told that Augustus was born ad Capita Bubula
(Suet. Aug. 5), and Domitian ad Malum Punicum (Suet. Dom. 1). The street-door
itself is fully described under Janua
(=door)
Whether the street-door opened into a hall, or direct into the atrium,
has been a subject of much dispute. Vitruvius mentions no entrance-hall in a
Roman house, and he seems to speak of the Greek entrance-hall (thuroreion) placed
between two doors as a peculiarity of a Greek house (Vitruv. vi. 10). But there
are reasons for believing there must have been an entrancehall in the palaces
of the nobility, as behind the door there was a small room (cella) for the house-porter
(ostiarius or janitor), and it is difficult to suppose that this was in the
atrium (Ov. Am. i. 6, 1; Suet. de Rhet. 3, Vitell. 16; Colum. i. praef. 10;
Petron. 28), especially as a dog was kept by his side, chained to the wall,
with a written warning Cave Canem (Suet. Vitell. 16; Plaut. Most. iii. 2, 169;
Sen. de Ir. iii. 37). Sometimes a dog was painted on the wall, or wrought in
mosaic on the pavement, as we find in the house of the Tragic poet at Pompeii.
At the end of the hall, which seems to have been called ostium, there was no
inner door, but the entrance to the atrium was closed by a curtain (velum),
which was drawn aside by the usher when he admitted strangers to an interview
(Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 5; Heliog. 14; Sen. Ep. 20; Plin. Ep. ii. 17). The entrance-hall
was small, so that a person in the atrium could look through it at persons walking
in the street (Suet. Cal. 41). The smallness of the hall explains, the passages
cited by Marquardt to prove that the street-door led directly into the atrium.
3. Artium.
The first point to he determined in connexion with the atrium, upon
which the whole disposition of a Roman house depends, is, whether the atrium
and the cavum aedium (or cavaedium, as Pliny, Ep. ii. 17, 5, writes it) denote
two separate courts or one and the same. Some modern writers, notably Becker
in his Gallus, whom Burn has followed, maintain that they were distinct courts,
and accordingly place three courts in a Roman house,--first the atrium, then
the cavum aedium in the centre, and lastly the peristylium in the rear. But
this view cannot be maintained; it is rejected by the best modern authorities;
it is in direct opposition to the statements of Varro (L. L. v. 161) and Vitruvius
(vi. 3 and 8), who call sometimes the chief room of the house atrium and sometimes
cavum aedium; and it is contradicted by the fact, that no houses in Pompeii
have yet been discovered containing more than two courts,--namely, the atrium
and peristylium. We may therefore conclude that the atrium and the cavum aedium
denote the same room, the only difference perhaps being that cavum aedium indicated
originally the open part, and atrium the entire area; but in general the two
words are used as synonymous. The atrium or cavum aedium was a large room or
court roofed over, with the exception of an opening in the centre, called compluvium,
towards which the roof sloped so as to throw the rain-water into a cistern in
the floor, termed impluvium (Varr. l. c.; Fest. p. 108, M.; Liv. xliii. 13,
6; Plaut. Amph. v. 1, 56). The water from the impluvium flowed into a well (puteus)
under ground; for before the construction of the aqueducts the Romans were dependent
upon wells for their supply of water. The word impluvium, however, is sometimes
employed in a wider sense to denote the whole uncovered space in the atrium,
and therefore the opening in the top as well as the cistern at the bottom. (Cic.
Act. in Verr. i. 2. 3, 61, with the note of Pseudo-Ascon. p. 177, Or.; Serv.
ad Verg. Aen. ii. 512; per impluvium introspectant, Plant. Mil. ii. 2, 3, ii.
3, 16; Ter. Eun. iii. 5, 40). Compluvium in like manner is sometimes used in
the same wide signification as equivalent to impluvium (Suet. Aug. 92; Varr.
L. L. v. 125). The compluvium was sometimes covered with hangings, as a protection
against the sun (Ov. Met. x. 595 ; Plin. H. N. xix. 24, 25; Dig. 33, 7, 12,
20). The breadth of the impluvium, according to Vitruvius, was not less than
a quarter nor greater than a third of the breadth of the atrium; its length
was in the same proportion according to the length of the atrium.
Vitruvius (vi. 3) distinguishes five kinds of atria or cava aedium, which were
called by the following names:
(1) Tuscanicum. In this the roof was supported by four beams, crossing each
other at right angles, the included space forming the compluvium. This kind
of atrium was the most ancient of all, as it is more simple than the others,
and is not adapted for a very large building.
(2.) Tetrastylum. This was of the same form as the preceding, except that the
main beams of [p. 670] the roof were supported by pillars, placed at the four
angles of the impluvium. Such an arrangement would be necessary in a large atrium,
as the roof could not otherwise be well supported.
(3.) Corinthium was on the same principle as the tetrastyle, only that there
were a greater number of pillars around the impluvium, on which the beams of
the roof rested.
(4.) Displuviatum had its roof sloping the contrary way to the compluvium, so
that the water fell outside the house instead of being carried into the impluvium,
and was carried off by gutters.
(5.) Testudinatum was constructed in the same way as the displuviatum, but it
was roofed all over and had no compluvium. We are not informed, however, how
light was admitted into an atrium of this kind. This form went out of use: we
have no instances of it in the Pompeian houses.
The atrium, as we have already seen, was originally the only room
of the house, serving as sitting-room, bed-room, and kitchen, which it probably
continued to do among the lower classes even in later times (Serv. ad Verg.
Aen. i. 726, ix. 648; Varr. ap. Non. p. 83, s. v. cortes). Here was the focus,
or hearth, which served not only for cooking, but from its sacred character
was used also for the receptacle of the Lares or Penates, which were sometimes
kept in little cupboards near the hearth (Juxta focum Dii Penates positi fuerunt,
Schol. ad Hor. Epod. ii. 43; Plaut. Aul. ii. 18, 15; Tibull. i. 10, 20; Juv.
viii. 110; Petron. 29). The Lar or tutelary god of the house stood close to
the entrance behind the door leading into the atrium (Ov. Fast. i. 136 seq.);
and we find him so placed in some of the Pompeian houses. Near the sacred flame
the members of the family took the common meal (Serv. ll. cc.), and the same
custom continued in the country even in the time of Augustus (Hor. Sat. ii.
6, 65 seq.). In the atrium the master of the house kept his area or money-chest
(Serv. ll. cc.), which was fastened to the floor. Here stood the nuptial bed
(lectus genialis, Fest. p. 94, M.) against the back wall, opposite the entrance
to the atrium, whence it was also called lectus adversus (Prop. iv. (v.) 11,
85; Gell. xvi. 9; Ascon. in Mil. p. 43, Orelli). Here sat the mistress of the
house, spinning and weaving with her maids (Liv. i. 57, 9; Ascon. l. c.; Arnob.
ii. 67). Here all visits were paid, and the patron received his clients (Hor.
Ep. i. 5, 31, more patrio sedens in solio consulentibus responderem, Cic. Leg.
i. 3, 10). Here the corpse was placed before it was carried out to burial. Here,
in the alae (see below), were placed the waxen imagines of the ancestors of
the house.
But as wealth increased, and numerous clients came to wait upon
their patron, new rooms were built, and the atrium ceased to be the only room
for the family. A kitchen (culina; see p. 671 b) was made for cooking, the Lares
were placed in a special lararium; the meals were taken in the upper story,
hence called cenaculum (Varr. L. L v. 162); the master and mistress slept in
a separate cubiculum. As the atrium now became the reception room, it was fitted
up among the wealthy with much splendour and magnificence for the reception
of their clients. The opening in the roof was enlarged for the admission of
more light, and was supported by pillars frequently made of costly marble. Between
the pillars and along the walls statues and other works of art were placed (Cic.
Verr. i. 2. 3, 61; Apul. Met. ii. 4). In the middle of the impluvium was a marble
fountain, with jets of water, frequently adorned with reliefs, of which many
beautiful specimens have been found at Pompeii. Near the fountain, where the
hearth formerly stood, was a marble table, called cartibulum
(Varr. L. L. v. 125). The atrium, however, still continued, as in ancient times,
to be the chief room of the house, and it was not only the room for the reception
of guests, but its primitive character was preserved by its retaining the symbolical
nuptial couch (Hor. Ep. i. 1, 87), the imagines of the ancestors, and the instruments
for weaving and spinning. The ancient writers frequently contrast the simplicity
of the ancient with the splendour of the modern atrium.
The rooms which opened out of the atrium were lighted only through
the compluvium, as there were no windows, as a general rule, upon the ground-floor.
4. Alae.
Wings, were two small quadrangular apartments or recesses on the left and right
sides of the atrium (Vitruv. vi. 4), but at its further end, and open to the
atrium, as we see in the Pompeian houses. Here the imagines were kept in the
houses of the nobles. But as the alae were really a part of the atrium, the
imagines were frequently described as standing in the atrium. (Juv. viii. 19
seq.; Plin. H. N. xxxv.6; Or. Fast. i. 591, Am. i. 8, 65; Mart. ii. 90, 6, v.
20, 5-7)
5. Tablinum
It was in all probability a recess or room at the further end of
the atrium opposite the door leading into the hall, and was regarded as part
of the atrium. It contained the family records and archives (Vitruv. vi. 4 and
8; Plin. H. N. xxxv.7). It appears from the houses of Pompeii to have been separated
not by a door, but simply by a curtain or velum, while it had a door at the
back leading into the peristylium. Marquardt supposes that the tablinum was
originally an alcove made of wood (whence its name) built at the back of the
atrium, in which meals were taken during the summer, and was afterwards joined
to the atrium by breaking through the walls of the latter (Varr. ap. Non., s.
v. cortes).
With the tablinum, the Roman house appears to have originally ceased;
the sleeping rooms being arranged on the upper floor. But when the atrium and
its surrounding rooms were used for the reception of clients and other public
visitors, it became necessary to increase the size of the house; and the following
rooms were accordingly added:
6. Fauces.
It was a passage by the side of the tablinum, which passed from
the atrium to the peristylium or open court, as we see in the Pompeian houses.
We must not suppose, as Rich does, that the plural indicates two passages (Vitruv.
vi. 4).
7. Peristylium.
It was in its general form like the atrium, but it was one-third
greater in breadth, measured transversely, than in length (Vitruv. vi. 4); but
we do not find these proportions preserved in the Pompeian houses. It was a
court open to the sky in the middle; the open part, which was surrounded by
columns, had a fountain in the centre, and was planted with flowers, shrubs,
and trees forming a viridarium. The atrium and peristylium were the two important
parts of a Roman house; the former, during the last century of the republic
and under the empire, being the public reception room, and the latter the inner
or private court-yard, which gave access to the private rooms, such as the oeci
or saloons, the triclinia or dining-rooms, the baths, and the other rooms described
below. The peristylium having never been used, like the atrium, as a place in
which the family lived, the opening to the sky was much larger than the compluvium
in the atrium, and the columns which surrounded it more numerous. Thus, in the
house of the Faun at Pompeii, there were forty-four Doric columns in the peristylium.
It was ornamented in much the same way as the atrium; and consequently it is
sometimes difficult to determine whether the description of this ornamentation
applies to the atrium or the peristylium. But the large. marble fountain, with
the steps leading down to it, on which the waters splashed (Sen. Ep. 86, 6;
in peristylio saliente aqua, Suet. Aug. 82), and the numerous shrubs and trees,
of which the ancient writers frequently speak, belong properly to the peristylium.
Hence we may safely assign to the peristylium the descriptions of Horace (Ep.
i. 10, 22): nempe inter varias nutritur silva columnas, and (Carm. iii. 10,
5) nemus inter pulchra saturn tecta, and of Tibullus (iii. 3, 15), et nemora
in domibus sacros imitantia lucos. (Cf. Juv. iv. 7; Plin. H. N. xvii. 4; Sen.
Controv. v. 5.) Between the columns of the peristylium statues were placed (
in silva sub divo, Cic. Verr. i. 1. 9, 51), and vases filled with flowers (Dig.
33, 7, 26).
The arrangement of the rooms leading out of the peristylium, which
are next to be noticed, varied, as has been remarked, according to the taste
and circumstances of the owner. It is therefore impossible to assign to them
any regular place in the house.
1. Cubicula, bed-chambers, appear to have been usually small. There
were separate cubicula for the day and night (cubicula diurna et nocturna, Plin.
Ep. i. 3); the latter were also called dormitoria, and were mostly on the upper
floor (Id. v. 6, 21; Plin. H. N. xxx.52; Sidon. Apoll. Ep. ii. 2).Vitruvius
(vi. 7) recommends that they should face the east for the benefit of the rising
sun. They sometimes had a small ante-room, which was called by the Greek name
of prokoiton, in which the cubicularius or valet probably slept. (Plin. Ep.
ii. 17, 23.) In some of the Pompeian houses we find a recess in which the bed
was placed. This recess was called zotheca or zothecula, and was used by Pliny
in his villa in the day-time as well as the night (Plin. Ep. ii. 17, 21, v.
6, 38; Sidon. Apoll Ep. viii. 16, ix. 11). Statues also were placed in this
recess, as we learn from inscriptions (Orelli, 1368, 2006).
2. Ttriclina, dining-rooms, are treated of in a separate article (see
triclinium).
3. Oeci, from the Greek oikos, were spacious halls or saloons borrowed
from the Greeks, and were frequently used as triclinia (Cf. Plin. H. N. xxxvi.
184). They were to have the same proportions as triclinia, but were to be more
spacious on account of having columns, which triclinia had not (Vitruv. vi.
5). Vitruvius mentions four kinds of oeci:
(i.) The Tetrastyle, which needs no further description. Four columns
supported the roof.
(ii.) The Corinthian, which possessed only one row of columns, supporting
the architrave, (epistylium), cornice (corona), and a vaulted roof.
(iii.) The Egyptian, which was more splendid and more like a basilica
than a Corinthian triclinium. In the Egyptian oecus, the pillars supported a
gallery with paved floor, which formed a walk round the apartment; and upon
these pillars others were placed, a fourth part less in height than the lower,
which surrounded the roof. Between the upper columns windows were inserted.
(iv.) The Cyzicene (Kuzikenoi) appears in the time of Vitruvius to
have been seldom used in Italy. These oeci were meant for summer use looking
to the north, and, if possible, facing gardens, to which they opened by folding-doors.
Pliny had oeci of this kind in his villa.
4. Exedrae, which appear to have been in form much the same as the
oeci, for Vitruvius (vi. 5) speaks of the exedrae in connexion with oeci quadrati,
were rooms for conversation and the other purposes of society. (Cic. de Nat.
Deor. i. 6, 15; de Orat. iii. 5, 17.) They served the same purposes as the exedrae
in the Thermae and Gymnasia, which were semicircular rooms with seats for philosophers
and others to converse in. (Vitruv. v. 11, vii. 9).
5, 6, 7. Pinacotheca,
Bibliotheca, and Balineum (Balneae
=baths), are treated of in separate articles.
8. Culina, the kitchen. The food was originally cooked in the atrium
but the progress of refinement afterwards led to the use of another part of
the house for this purpose. In the kitchen of Pansa's house (see image in the
URL below), a stove for stews and similar preparations was found, very much
like the charcoal stoves used in the present day. Before it lie a knife, a strainer,
and a kind of frying-pan with four spherical cavities, as if it were meant to
cook eggs.
In this kitchen, as well as in many others at Pompeii, there are
paintings of the Lares and Penates, to whom the hearth in the atrium was sacred,
and under whose care the kitchen was also placed. (Serv. ad Verg. Aen. ii. 469;
Arnob. ii. 67.) In the country the meals were taken in the kitchen, as they
were in ancient times in the atrium (Colum. i. 6; Varr. R. R. i. 13). The kitchen
was in the back part of the house, and in connexion with it was the pistrinum
or bake-house, where bread was baked at home (Varr. ap. Non. p. 55, 18; Lucil.
ap. Non. p. 217, 20); but after B.C. 171 there were public bake-houses in Rome
(Plin. H. N. xviii,107). In the houses of the wealthy, as may be supposed, the
kitchens were often of great size (Sen. Ep. 114, cf. 64). In Pompeii have been
found sinks of kitchens, called confluvia (Varr. ap. Non. p. 544, 20) or coquinae
fusoria.
In close and inconvenient proximity to the kitchen was the latrina
(contraction of lavatrina, Varr. L. L. v. 118), or privy, in order that a common
drain might carry off the contents of both to the cloaca or public sewer (Varr.
l. c.; Colum. x. 85; cf. Plant. Curc. iv. 4, 24; Suet. Tib. 58; Apul. Met. i.
c. 17, p. 15; on the Spongia mentioned by Sen. Ep. 70, 20, cf. Mart. xii. 48,
7). In many of the Pompeian houses we find the latrina contiguous to the kitchen,
as is shown in the annexed cut from the house of Sallust. On the right are two
small arches, which are the kitchen stove. On the left is an arched recess,
which is the latrina, originally closed by a wooden door, of which the marks
of the hinges may still be seen; and at the bottom is the mouth of the pipe
supplying the place with water.
9. Cenacula, or rooms in the upper stories.
10. Lalarium
(=worship place, chapel) or Sacrarium
(=a place in which sacred things were deposited and kept). The Lares or Penates
were originally placed near the hearth of the house in the atrium but when the
latter became only a reception room, they were removed to a special chapel,
called Lararium (Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 29, 31; Vopisc. Florian. 4; Capitol. Anton.
Phil. 3) or Sacrarium (Cic. ad Fam. xiii. 2; Cic. Verr iv. 2, 4), in which statues
of other divinities were also placed. Such a chapel is found in the peristylium
of many of the Pompeian houses.
11. Dieta does not denote any particular kind of room, but is a word
borrowed from the Greek (diaita) to signify a room used for any of the purposes
of life (Plin. Ep. ii. 17, 12 vii. 5, 1 ; Stat. Silv. ii. 2, 83). Each diaeta
was sometimes called by a name, as the one belonging to Claudius (Suet. Claud.
10). Thus it denotes also a bed-chamber (Plin. Ep. vi. 16, 14), a dining-room
(Sidon. Apoll. Ep. ii. 2), a summer-house or a room in a garden (Plin. Ep. ii.
17, 20; Dig. 7, 1, 66, 1). It is also the collective name of a set of chambers,
Thus Pliny speaks (v. 6, 31) of two diaetae, in one of which were four bed-chambers,
and in another three.
12. Solarium literally a place for basking in the sun, denotes a terrace
on the flat roof of a house, frequently used by the Romans, as is still the
case in Italy and the East (Isidor. xv. 3, 12; Dig. 8, 2, 17; Plant. Mil. Glor.
ii. 3, 69, ii. 4, 25; Suet. Claud. 10; Macrob. ii. 4, 14). In the time of the
emperors, these solaria on the tops of houses were turned into gardens, which
contained even fruit-trees and fish-ponds (Sen. Ep. 122; Contr. Exc. v. 5).
Somewhat similar were the solaria built by Nero on the colonnades in front of
the insulae and domus (Suet. Ner. 16; Tac. Ann. xv. 43). Sometimes the solaria
were covered by a roof (tectum solarium, Orelli, Inscr 2417).
Some other parts of a Roman house require a brief mention:
1. Cellae servorum, familiares or Familiaricae, the small bed-rooms
of the slaves, were usually situated in the upper story, as in the house of
Pansa at Pompeii, or in the back of the house, with the exception of the cella
of the house-porter, which was naturally close to the front door. (Colum. i.
6 ; Cic. Phil. ii. 2. 7, 67; Hor. Sat. i. 8, 8; Vitruv. vi. 7; Plin. Ep. ii.
17, 9).
2. Cella
also denoted the store-room, of which there were several, bearing various names,
according to their contents.
3. Cellars underground and vaulted are rarely mentioned ( hypogea concamerationes-que,
Vitruv. vi. (8) 11; constructum sub terris aedificium, Isidor. xvi. 3), though
several have been found at Pompeii.
Etruscan Houses.
Though no Etruscan houses are extant, we obtain a good idea of their
form and general disposition from their tombs, as there can be no doubt that
their cemeteries were often intentional representations of their cities, and
the separate tombs of their houses. The arrangement of the latter throws light
upon that of the Roman house, the original form of which was borrowed from the
Etruscans. Thus in the cemetery of Cervetri, the ancient Agylla or Caere, the
tombs have a large central chamber, representing the atrium, with others of
smaller size opening out of it, lighted by windows in the wall of the rock,
as they could of course have no opening or compluvium in the roof. The ceilings
of all the chambers have the usual beams and rafters hewn in the rock. The smaller
rooms round the atrium were triclinia, for each has a bench of rock round three
of its sides, on which the dead had been deposited, reclining as at a banquet.
The following plan of one of these tombs shows a clear resemblance to an ancient
house.
We find a similar arrangement in the tombs at Chiusi, the ancient
Clusium, where the passage leads into the principal chamber or atrium, out of
which open several smaller chambers or triclinia.
Existing remains of Roman houses.
The oldest remains of a house in Rome are those of the Regia, which,
according to Dio Cassius (xliii. 42), was the residence of the Pontifex Maximus,
and was on the site of the house occupied by Numa. The Regia stood at the S.E.
limits of the Forum, close by the Temple of Vesta, adjoining the House of the
Vestal Virgins (Dio Cass. xliv. 17; Gell. iv. 6; Cic. ad Att. x. 3). The existing
remains are of several dates: the oldest walls are of the softest tufa, and
belong probably to a structure many centuries earlier than the Christian era
; next comes a part built of hard blocks of peperino (lapis Albanus). A later
part of the house is built of concrete faced with burnt bricks, and has columns
of the hard travertine thickly coated with stucco, and painted in brilliant
tints of blue and red. This is probably part of the rebuilding carried out by
Domitius Calvinus after his victories in Spain, c. 35 B.C. Another portion of
the same or an adjoining building was built of solid blocks of white marble.
This also may be part of Calvinus's work. There are many reasons for believing
that the Consular Fasti (now in the Capitoline Museum) were engraved on the
solid marble walls of one of these rooms in the Regia (see Bull. Inst. Arch.
Rom. 1886, p. 99). This interesting building exists only in a very fragmentary
state, and its complete plan cannot be made out. The rooms are small, and the
atrium also appears to have been of very limited extent. The mosaic pavements
and painted decorations belong to the alterations made in the time of Augustus.
One of the best preserved houses in Rome is also of special interest
from its early date. This is the small dwelling usually known as the House of
Livia (see image in the URL below) or of Gemanicus, which is built in a hollow
in the N.W. part of the Palatine hill. That it is probably not later in date
than the time of Augustus is shown by the construction of its walls, which are
formed of concrete faced with very neat opus reticulatum of tufa, no brick being
used. The figure on the next page shows its plan, which, owing to the irregularity
of the site, is at two different levels: the small rooms grouped round the staircase
F being at a much higher level than the larger rooms by the atrium; the stairs
D lead from the atrium up to the higher floor behind. The main entrance is at
B, approached down a short flight of steps. C C are pedestals for a statue and
an altar: E E are bedrooms; G is a narrow crypto-porticus, which branches out
of H, another dark passage, forming hidden communications with different buildings
on this part of the Palatine. A is a third vaulted passage which leads to Caligula's
palace: this is possibly the path by which Caligula's murderers escaped when
they hid themselves in the house of Germanicus (Joseph. Ant. Jud. xix. 1, 2;
Suet. Calig. 58).
The paintings in the principal rooms of this house are among the
finest examples of Roman wall decoration that still exist (see Renier, Les Peintures
du Palatin). The most remarkable (in the tablinum) is a scene of the liberation
of lo by Hermes, who approaches stealthily to kill Argus, who is watching her.
In composition, colour, and in delicacy of touch, this is a work of much beauty.
As the names of the figures were painted under each in Greek, it appears probable
that it is the work of a Greek artist: only one name (EPMEX) is now legible.
On the same wall is a street scene, with lofty houses several stories high,
and fanciful balconies and porticoes. In the triclinium are some very clever
paintings of bowls of fruit, in which grapes and apples are seen through the
transparent glass of which the bowls are made.
The floors are formed of marble mosaic in simple geometrical patterns,
very neatly fitted together, with much smaller tesserae than were used under
the later empire.
On the upper floor a long passage, approached by the staircase D,
divides the house into two parts. J K L M seem to be small bath-rooms. N N are
shops with no communication with the house, facing a public street, O O. At
P are remains of a very ancient tufa building. Q is a piscina, which seems partly
to have supplied the house with water. A number of inscribed lead pipes were
found, but these were of later date than the house itself: water was laid on
to the upper as well as to the ground floors.
As seems to have been usually the case in Roman houses till the
reign of Augustus, the only method of heating was by charcoal braziers (foculi).
In the tablinum a small recess is provided for the foculus or caminus. The use
of hypocausts for private houses was a later introduction, and the very complete
system of heating rooms, which provided not only for hot air under the hypocaust
floors, but also wall-linings of flue-tiles all over the internal wall-surface
of a room, did not come into ceneral use till about the end of the second century
A.D. In the third century especially the rapidly-growing effeminacy of the Romans
led them to provide in the most elaborate manner for the heating of their houses;
and the contrast is very great between the shut-in, highly-heated apartments
of the later empire, as compared with the half open-air life and scanty warming
of the earlier houses. In the above figured plan the tablinum and its alae are
open on one side to the only partially roofed atrium; an arrangement fitted
only for a hardy race, such as the Romans once were. The later houses, with
their glazed and curtained windows, hollow floors, and walls radiating heat
from their whole surface, must have had an atmosphere very like that of a modern
hot-house. For details of the construction of hypocausts and the arrangement
of flue-lined walls, the reader is referred to the article Balneae.
Owing to the fact that no Roman house now exists with walls perfect
up to the roof, it had for long been a matter of doubt how the hot air and smoke
from the hypocausts escaped after passing through the flue-tiles which lined
the walls. An explanation of this has now been furnished by an extremely interesting
mosaic picture found in 1878 at Oued-Atmenia in Algeria. This most valuable
picture is a perspective view of a very large country mansion, built by a wealthy
Roman named Pompeianus, who was Proconsul of Africa under Honorius. The mosaic
itself formed part of the pavement of the house which it represents. The building
is one of immense extent, and varies from four to six stories in height. The
ground-floor has only a few plain rectangular windows, fitted with strong iron
gratings. In the upper stories the windows, partly arched and partly square-headed,
are placed at frequent intervals. The long line of the main block is broken
by t c lofty tower-like structures. The central and most important part of the
house has a low-pitched roof covered with red tiles, from the ridge of which,
at four different points, chimney stacks project, just as they would in a modern
house. What appears to be a conical smoke-cowl is set over each chimney. This
unique mosaic gives a clear notion of the external appearance of one of the
large mansions of the later empire, such as could never be gained from an examination
of any of the very imperfect existing remains of Roman dwellings. numerous though
they are, from which little more than the plan of the ground-floor can usually
be gathered. And here it may be remarked that most writers on the subject of
Roman houses appear to have ignored the fact that it was usually, if not invariably,
the custom to build with an upper story, and hence it is obviously a mistake
in examining the existing remains of any house to expect to find the whole accommodation
of the dwelling provided on the ground-floor. It appears probable that in nearly
all cases the best bedrooms were placed upstairs, where there was ample space
for rooms of a good size, and yet it is usual to describe small cell-like rooms
on the ground-floor as being the chief sleeping apartments of the family, in
spite of] their obvious drawbacks from damp and want of light. In Italy especially
ground-floor bedrooms are far from being healthy.
In 1874 remains of a very interesting house of the time of Augustus
were found on the Esquiline hill, not far from the Basilica of S. Maria Maggiore:
from its position on the line of the Servian wall and agger, it has been called
the House of Maecenas, who lived in that quarter, where he converted the public
burial-ground into a large park (Hor. Sat. i. 8, 14; horti Maecenatiani, Suet.
Tib. 15). This palace of Maecenas from its lofty position on the Esquiline is
called by Horace (Epod. 9, 3) alta domus, and is probably alluded to in another
passage ( molem propinquam nubibus arduis, Hor. Carm. iii. 29, 10); and on account
of its healthy situation Augustus slept there when he was ill (Suet. Aug. 72).
Tiberius took up his residence there. These gardens were of great extent, and
were united by Nero with his palace on the Palatine hill (Tac. Ann. xv. 39;
Suet. Ner. 31), and it was from one of the towers of Maecenas, which commanded
an extensive view, that he surveyed the conflagration of Rome (Suet. Ner. 38;
cf. Burn, Rome, 227). One fine room of this house, still well preserved, is
of especial interest; this appears to have been a sort of greenhouse for plants
and flowers: it is a large vaulted chamber, with a semicircular apse at one
end; all round the walls are tiers of high steps once lined with marble, intended
to form stands for rows of flower-pots; arranged exactly as in a modern conservatory.
Prof. Mohr has pointed out that the cultivation of shrubs and flowers in this
way was largely practised by the Romans. On each side of the hall are six recesses,
decorated with paintings of garden scenes, with fountains among the flowers,
treated in a skilfully deceptive way, so as to look as if each recess were a
window opening on to a real garden. The light was admitted only through openings
in the barrel vault of the hall, on which were paintings of similar floral subjects;
a remarkable example of the theatrical scene-painter's style of decoration which
was popular among the Romans.
The House of Sallust, the historian, was one of the finest houses
in Rome. It had, like the house of Maecenas, extensive gardens, whence the residence
was frequently called the Horti Sallustiani. It was built by Sallust with the
riches obtained in his government of Numidia (Pseud.-Cic. Respons. in Sall.
17, 19); and after the death of his heir, Sallustius Crisp us, in the reign
of Tiberius, it appears to have passed into the hands of the emperor, as it
is subsequently mentioned as an imperial palace, and the residence of several
of the emperors. So large were the gardens, that the Emperor Aurelian, who preferred
living there to the Palatine, erected in them a colonnade, 1000 paces long,in
which he took horse exercise. Part of this house still exists in the narrow
valley between the Pincian and Quirinal hills, near the Porta Collina in the
Servian wall. (Tac. Ann. xiii. 47; Hist. iii. 82; Plin. H. N. vii. § 75; Dio
Cass. lxvi. 10; Vopisc. Aurel. 49; Procop. Bell. Vand. i. 2.)
The position of this house (see image in the URL below) is peculiar:
part of it stands on the lower ground at the foot of a cliff of the Quirinal,
and part on the top of the cliff; so that the floor of the third story of the
lower part was level with the ground-floor of the rest. The figure shows the
plan of the existing remains, which will be soon destroyed by the filling up
of the valley, where the building stands, to make new boulevards: a most serious
loss. The circular part A is a lofty domed hall: B B is a balcony-like gallery,
supported on corbels, which runs round the outside of the main building, at
a height of about forty feet above the ground: C is a fine vaulted room, with
two stories over it: D D is a retaining wall, built against the scarped face
of the cliff to keep the crumbling tufa rock from decay: E E are rooms in four
or five stories, some with concrete and others with wooden floors: F are winding
marble-lined stairs, with mosaic landings, which led to the top of the house
and the rooms on the higher level of the hill. This part is still about seventy
feet high. G is another marble-lined staircase. A great part of the house is
still unexcavated. The date of the existing portion is of the first century
A.D., and is evidently part of additions made by the early emperors. In the
sixteenth century an immense quantity of valuable marbles, including magnificent
columns of Oriental alabaster and Numidian giallo antico, were found in the
ruins of Sallust's house, and used to decorate several of the churches of Rome...
Some very splendidly decorated houses have recently, during the
formation of the new Tiber embankment, been discovered and then-destroyed, along
the line of the Farnesina gardens, by the right bank of the river. These were
very richly ornamented with paintings, and especially with stucco reliefs of
extraordinary beauty, evidently dating from the middle or early part of the
first century A.D. Many of these were almost of pure Greek style, free from
any of the usual Roman coarseness of detail or clumsiness of form. The reliefs
were executed rapidly by the artist in the quick-setting wet stucco, which he
applied in lumps to the previously prepared flat [p. 676] surface, and then,
before the stucco had time to harden, he modelled the figures into shape with
his fingers and thumb, assisted by a few simple wooden modelling tools. The
decision and rapid skill shown in this manipulation are very remarkable; and
an amount of life and vigour appears in these hastily executed reliefs, which
could hardly have been equalled by the slow process of chiselling a hard substance.
Many of the scenes represented are Dionysiac, fauns playing on the double pipes,
nymphs dancing with timbrels and other musical instruments, and sportive genii
bearing the thyrsus or bunches of grapes. Some figures of winged Victories are
marvels of delicate beauty, lightly poised on large wings, with drapery flowing
behind them in graceful curving folds. The modelling of the nude limbs of the
fauns is perfect for its skilful suggestion of the play of muscles under a supple
skin, and is quite free from the anatomical exaggerations of the late Attic
School of Sculpture, which the Romans seem specially to have admired.
The Tiber banks opposite the Campus Martius formed a favourite site
for the houses of wealthy Romans: some of these are shown on fragments of the
Capitoline marble plan of Rome (see image in the URL below); most of them have
stairs leading down to the water's edge. The accompanying figure shows another
fragment of this celebrated plan, which was made in the reign of Severus to
decorate the end wall of the Templum Sacrae Urbis by the Forum. This shows us
a common type of street house in Rome, such as belonged to men of moderate means.
On this fragment are engraved the plans of three houses in a row, almost identical
in arrangement. (1) is the entrance passage, with two shops (2) on each side.
(3) is a small Tuscan atrium, as Vitruvius calls it, being without columns:
(4) is the passage leading into (5) the peristylium, round which are four small
rooms (6), one at each corner.
Some interesting examples of houses not owned by private persons,
but used by corporate bodies, have been found during the last few years. The
chief of these is the Atrium Vestae or House of the Six Vestal Virgins, which
was exposed to view in 1883-4.
The plan above (see image in the URL below), reproduced from Middleton's
Ancient Rome in 1885, shows the position of the house, near the circular Temple
of Vesta, and close to the northern angle of the Palatine, where the immense
substructures of Caligula's palace still exist. The rooms are arranged round
a long open peristylium or cloister; not unlike the plan of a mediaeval monastery.
At one end is the tablinum, with three small chambers on each side ; probably
each of the six vestals had one of these. On the N.E. side of the tablinum is
a large hall, with recesses for statues, and on the other side is a bath-room,
and near it a kitchen, a baker's oven with a corn-mill, and other domestic offices.
On both the long sides of the peristylium is a number of very handsome rooms,
decorated in a very costly and elaborate manner: in all cases there was at least
one upper story. On the verge of the N.E. side of the house is a row of shops:
at this place the remains of the Regia are indicated on the plan. In the centre
of the peristylium was what seems to have been a series of flower-beds, in the
shape of a circle within an octagon: traces of the low brick kerbs which separated
these beds are still easily distinguishable. On the S.W. side a great part of
the upper story still exists. here, as in the previously mentioned houses of
Livia and Sallust, the building is set against the side of a slope, so that
in one part an upper story has its floor level with the higher ground. In this
case a considerable part of the lower slopes of the Palatine has been cut away
to make a site for the Vestals' house, probably at the time of its enlargement
under Hadrian, to whose period most of the existing structure belongs. The upper
rooms consist chiefly of bedrooms and small bath-rooms, mostly with marble wall-linings
and mosaic floors. Part of this upper story was rebuilt in the reign of Severus,
after a destructive fire in the time of Commodus in 191 A.D.; and these later
rooms have a very luxurious system of warming, both with hypocausts and wall-linings
of flue-tiles. The stairs which led to a still higher floor still partly exist,
so the whole amount of accommodation must have been very large, as befitted
the dignified state of a Vestal's life. The internal decorations were very magnificent;
in some of the rooms both walls and floors were covered with the rich coloured
marbles from Africa and Greece. In one of the six small rooms by the tablinum
a very curious precaution has been taken to keep the floor dry. Halves of large
amphorae are set close together all over the area of the room: over them concrete
was laid, and finally the marble paving-slabs were bedded in cement on the concrete.
The hollows formed by the half amphorae would prevent the damp from rising.
In some cases the rooms had moulded skirtings and cornices made of very hard
and brilliant marbles, such as rosso antico, the cost of which must have been
enormous. In some rooms niches for statues and other parts of the wall-surface
were encrusted with gorgeous jewellike glass mosaics, and ceilings and vaults
were richly decorated with painting of the most glowing tints. As might be expected,
the dwelling of this wealthy and highly honoured corporation of Vestals far
exceeded in splendour even the richest houses at Pompeii. See the separate works
on the Atrium Vestae published by Comm. Lanciani, Rome, 1884, and by Prof. Jordan,
Berlin, 1885.
A corporate dwelling of a very different class is the Barrack (excubitoria)
of the Seventh Cohort of the Roman Vigiles, discovered in 1867 near the Church
of S. Crisogono in Trastevere. This is a handsome house of the second century
A.D.; with a large mosaic-paved atrium or cloister, round which are arranged
rooms in two or three stories. The decorations are partly of moulded terra-cotta,
painted with brilliant colours, and partly of the usual marble linings in very
thin slabs. The barracks of other cohorts of these Vigiles, who combined the
offices of policemen, firemen, and lamplighters, have been found in many other
quarters of Rome, but none so well preserved as the residence of the Seventh
Cohort.
Another corporate or, as it might be called, monastic establishment
was recently excavated a short distance outside the Porta Portuensis of Rome:
this was the residence of the Collegium of the Fratres Arvales, one of the most
dignified of the priestly Collegia of Rome; but its remains were too scanty
for the whole plan to be distinguishable.
Within the last few years a number of streets and houses have been
discovered at the mouth of the Tiber, at Ostia: these in plan much resembled
the Pompeian houses, but were much more richly decorated with costly foreign
marbles, most of which would pass Ostia on their way to Rome, where they were
unladen on a long wharf called the Marmoratum.
Of the imperial palaces of Rome, which at last covered the whole
site of the primitive Roma Quadrata, the earliest was the house of Augustus
(Domus Augustana), which was built on the S.W. edge of the Palatine, overlooking
the Circus Maximus. He at first occupied, on the Palatine, the house of Hortensius,
a dwelling conspicuous neither for size nor splendour; and when it was struck
by lightning, he consecrated the spot to a temple of Apollo, and bought some
neighbouring buildings, where he built a house for himself.
The house of Tiberius (Domus Tiberiana) on the Palatine is mentioned
as distinct from that of Augustus, though it adjoined it, the palace of Augustus
being more conspicuous towards the forum, while that of Tiberius formed the
back front. Its situation is indicated by the descriptions of the ancient writers,
that Otho descended through the back of the palace of Tiberius into the Velabrum
(Tac. Hist. i. 27; Suet. Oth. 6; Pint. Galb. 24), and that Vitellius surveyed
from it the conflagration of the Capitol (Suet. Vitell. 6). During the reign
of Augustus Tiberius lived first in the house of Pompey in the Carinae, and
afterwards in that of Maecenas on the Esquiline (Suet. Tib. 15); but when he
became emperor, he probably resided in this house on the Palatine till he withdrew
to Capreae. In later times this palace was the residence of Antoninus Pius and
Marcus Aurelius, and a library was established there (Capitol. Ant. Pius, 10,
Ant. Phil. 6, Ver. 2; Gell. xiii. 19; Vopisc. Prob. 2). The palaces of Augustus
and Tiberius were destroyed in the fire of Nero; but they were rebuilt, as they
are mentioned as separate buildings in the Notitia; and Josephus tells us that
the different parts of the complex of buildings forming the imperial palace
were named after their respective founders (Ant. xix. 1,15).
The palace of Augustus was excavated in 1775, and drawings (see
image in the URL below) made of it by Guattani, who published them in his Monumenti
Antichi di Roma, 1785; the whole was soon covered in again, and no part is now
visible. That part of the woodcut on the next page, which represents the palace
of Augustus, is taken from Guattani's plan.
This palace, which was of very modest size, had a number of small
rooms in two stories grouped round one peristyle: its comparative simplicity
must have formed a striking contrast to the stately splendour of the public
halls, libraries, and temples in the adjoining Area Apollinis, all built by
Augustus, and adorned by him with countless works of art of every kind. (Prop.
iii. 29; for other authorities, see Dict. Gr. & Rom. Geogr. ii. p. 805.) Nevertheless,
though the palace of Augustus was small, yet it appears to have been designed
with great taste, and decorated with considerable richness in its mixture of
white and coloured marbles. That it was a very carefully designed architectural
composition is shown even by the bare plan, with its series of domed and vaulted
halls, and small apse-like recesses arranged with some complication and much
ingenuity.
The Flavian Palace, which is shown on the same woodcut, was built
by Domitian, adjoining the Area of Apollo and the Palace of Augustus on the
N.W. side. (Plut. Popl. 15; Mart. viii. 36; Stat. Silv. iii. 4, 47, iv. 2.)
Extensive remains of this building still exist, and are among the most conspicuous
of the imperial palaces on the Palatine. It was a very different building from
that of Augustus; being not so much a place of residence as a magnificent series
of state apartments intended for public use. Hence Nerva had the words Aedes
publicae inscribed on it. (Plin. Panegyr. 47.) At one end is a very splendid
throne-room, with a lararium or imperial chapel on one side, and a basilica
for judicial business on the other. At the other end of the peristyle is the
triclinium for state banquets; and beyond it a series of stately halls, which
may possibly be libraries (bibliothecae), and an Academia for recitations and
other literary purposes. A sort of Nymphaeum, or room containing a fountain,
with flowers, plants, and statues of nymphs and river-gods, was placed at one
side of the triclinium, if not on both, so that the murmur and coolness of the
water and the scent of the flowers might refresh the wine-heated guests. The
whole of this magnificent palace was adorned with the greatest richness, both
of design and materials, with floors, wall-linings, and columns of Oriental
marbles, alabaster, and red and green porphyry. Even the rows of colossal statues,
which decorated the throne-room, were made of the very refractory basalts and
porphyry from the quarries of Egypt, at a cost of an almost incredible amount
of labour: remains of these were found early in the last century. The position
of the Flavian palace is remarkable: it is built on an immense artificial platform
which bridges over a deep valley or depression in the summit of the Palatine.
Remains of a lofty building of republican date still exist deep
below the floor-level of the so-called libraries; and a small house of early
imperial date, richly decorated with marbles and paintings, can still be seen
buried under the great peristyle. In many parts of the palace traces are distinctly
visible of restorations made by Severus after the great fire in the reign of
Commodus (191 A.D.), which devastated a large portion of the imperial palaces:
the cracked and partly calcined marbles which suffered in the fire were broken
up, and used to make concrete for the new walls of Severus; and thus, in many
places, the somewhat curious sight is to be seen of concrete made of the most
costly Oriental marbles and porphyries. (Dio Cass. lxxii. 24; Herodian. i. 14;
Spartian. Sept. Sev. 19, 24.) Spartianus (l. c.) says that Septimius Severus
made the Septizonium an atrium to the palace, so that it should be the first
object to strike the eyes of those coming from Africa, his native country. Considerable
remains of this Septizonium existed till near the end of the 16th century, when
Pope Sixtus V. caused the pillars to be carried off to the Vatican.
The enormous palace of Caligula occupied the northern corner of
the Palatine hill, and the adjoining slopes as far as the Forum, covering the
ground once occupied by the houses of Clodius, Cicero, and other wealthy Romans
(Dio Cass. lix. 28; Suet. Cal. 22; Plin. H. N. xxxvi.111). The equally large
palace of Severus occupied the opposite end of the Palatine. They are both remarkable
for the gigantic substructures on which they stand, constructed so as to form
at the foot of the hill a basement for state rooms on a level with the highest
part of the ground, or, in other words, at both places the Palatine itself was
enlarged by the construction of an artificial hill of massive concrete walls
and vaults. On one side Severus used the very stately palace of Hadrian as a
sort of platform on which to extend his new palace at the higher level; and
so we see the rough concrete walls of Severus' substructure cutting through
and rendering useless the richly ornamented halls of Hadrian. The enormous height
of the palace of Severus must have made it one of the most imposing of all the
buildings of Rome: its southern part, which stood at the foot of the Palatine
hill, not only equalled the hill in height, but towered high above its summit.
In costliness of material, though not in delicacy of design, this palace more
than equalled the buildings of the earlier emperors, with the exception of that
which Nero built. Some additions and improvements were made to the palace of
Septimius Severus by Heliogabalus and Alexander Severus. (Lamprid. Hel. 3, 8,
24; Alex. Sev. 24, 25.)
The Golden House (Domus
Aurea) of Nero, which covered part of the Palatine and Esquiline hills and
the great valley between them, must have been a building of the most marvellous
splendour and extent. It was nearly a mile in length, and included large gardens
and parks for wild animals, all surrounded by a triple porticus or colonnade
of marble. The interior was decorated in the most lavish way, with gold, ivory,
and jewels. (Tac. Ann. xv. 42; Suet. Ner. 31; Mart. Spect. 2.) Some rooms, according
to Suetonius, were entirely plated with gold, and studded with precious stones
and pearls. The supper-rooms were vaulted with ivory panels (lacunaria), from
openings in which flowers and perfumes were scattered on the guests. An enormous
number of works of art of every class collected from Greek cities were brought
to adorn the palace, and others were made by Nero's orders, such as the bronze
colossal statue of himself, 120 feet high, the work of the Greek sculptor Zenodorus,
and a painted portrait on canvas of the same ridiculous size. The destruction
of the Golden House and the restoration of most of its site to public uses were
among the most popular acts of the Flavian emperors. Both the Colosseum and
the great Thermae of Titus stand on part of the site of Nero's palace, of which
a small portion was used, after being stripped of its rich marble linings, to
form the substructures of part of the Thermae of Titus. This is almost the only
part which now exists: remains of a large peristyle, and the lofty rooms round
it, are still fairly well preserved: the vaults are richly decorated with stucco
reliefs and paintings, which are rapidly perishing. It was the discovery of
these elaborate ornaments early in the sixteenth century which gave so great
an impulse to the growing love for classical methods of decoration. Raphael
and his pupils with great skill copied the stucco-work, and painted arabesques
in the Vatican palace, in the Villa Madama, and in a large number of other buildings.
Owing to these magnificent rooms having been used as the substructures of the
baths of Titus, most writers on the subject have described the paintings as
being part of the work of Titus. Both these valuable illustrated works, which
give much that is now lost, really deal with the Golden House, not with the
Thermae. Though the walls of these two structures are mixed in a somewhat complicated
way, it is very easy to distinguish one from the other. Titus's walls are of
plain brick-faced concrete, without any stucco covering, while Nero's are in
all cases either coated with painted stucco, or with the cement backing of the
missing marble lining. Even where the stucco has in some places fallen off Nero's
walls, clear evidence as to its former existence is given by the marble plugs
with which the wall-surface was studded to form a key for the plastering.
Pompeian Houses. Though of course less magnificent than the palaces
of Rome, the houses of Pompeii, from their exceptionally perfect state of preservation,
are of special value as examples of Roman domestic architecture, and have the
advantage of being in most cases of known date. Few are older than the Christian
era, and none of course are later than 79 A.D., when the city was overwhelmed
by the eruption of Vesuvius. The existing remains show us, as a rule, only the
ground-floor of each house; and it should be remembered that a number of the
best rooms--especially, there is reason to believe, the bedrooms and the women's
apartments--were on the upper floors. The presence of stairs in apparently all
the houses proves that one-storied buildings were practically unknown in Pompeii:
the few fragments of the upper story which have been found standing show that,
in some cases at least, the upper part of the house was partly constructed of
wood, and was arranged so as to project beyond the line of the lower story,
very like the half-timbered houses of England or France in the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries.
In one respect the Pompeian arrangement resembled that of mediaeval
and modern Italy: that is, the street front on the ground-floor, even of large
and handsome houses, was usually occupied by a row of shops. In some cases these
shops have no doorway or passage communicating with the main house, and were
probably rented by the owner to independent tradesmen ; in others the shops
could be entered from the house, and in these cases we may suppose that the
shops were managed by the slaves or clients of the house-owner, who perhaps
in this way made a profit out of the produce of his country estate.
The accompanying plan (see image in the URL below) shows a small
shop, to which is joined the residence of its owner, forming a small block independent
of the adjoining larger house. (1) An open archway, in which a wooden shop-front
was fitted; the threshold of this opening is rebated to receive the wooden partition,
part of which was hinged so as to form a narrow door: the upper part would be
closed at night by flap-shutters hinged at the top, an arrangement very like
that of a modern Oriental bazaar. This method of constructing shop-fronts was
very common, not only in Pompeii, but in Rome and elsewhere. The presence of
a shop appears always to be indicated by this long grooved sill, with marks
of the hinged door on one side. A large number of examples still exist in Rome.
The L-shaped counter (2) is formed of concrete and brick stuccoed: in it are
inserted a row of amphorae, apparently for the reception of hot food or drink
of some kind. At one end is a charcoal stove (3); 5, 5 are the dining-room and
store-room of the shopkeeper; 4 is the staircase leading to the sleeping apartments.
The whole forms a complete house of the smallest type.
In the next cut (see image in the URL below) a similar shop has
more extensive private accommodation connected with it. It has a separate passage
from the street into the private part, which leads into a very small atrium,
supported on four columns, two engaged in the wall; out of the atrium open a
closet-like kitchen and a small dining-room. A very narrow staircase leads to
the upper floor.
A third variety (see image in the URL below) was evidently the property
of a richer tradesman: in this case the front door is in the middle of the facade;
the passage from the street has a small kitchen and other offices on one side
and the shop on the other, forming a wider frontage. Behind is a Tuscan atrium,
occupying the whole width of the house, and behind it are two private rooms,
probably dining-room and parlour. The stairs are placed in an angle of the atrium.
Next we come (see image in the URL below) to a class of small houses
with no shop attached: in one of these (see cut opposite) the whole width of
the house, a space of 38 feet, is occupied by the dining-room and entrance-hall,
from which it is separated by two wide open archways. Part of the dining-room
was without a roof, forming a sort of atrium; the pavement of this open part
has a long gutter to catch the rain-water, which was stored in an underground
cistern, and drawn out through a well-mouth (puteal) at one end. The triclinium,
or triple bench for the diners, still exists under the covered portion of the
room: it is made of rubble stonework covered with stucco. Behind the dining-room
are a small kitchen and a lararium, with an altar in front of a recess in which
a goddess holding a cornucopia is painted. Next comes a small room, probably
a cella for a slave, and by the side of it the staircase to the bedrooms above.
In the larger houses the atrium is a very important feature, on
which the chief architectural beauty of the building depends. It is usually
supported by Corinthian columns formed of concrete and brick, coated with brilliant
painted stucco: marble, except in thin slabs for pavements or wall-linings,
is rare in Pompeii; and even in the best houses display is made at the least
possible cost,--a striking contrast to the lavish expenditure on the rich houses
of Rome or even of Ostia. Shams of every kind were specially popular at Pompeii.
The central paved space under the open part (impluvium) of the atritun is usually
of marble, either in thin slabs or in mosaic; a fountain is a very common ornament,
and flower-pots seem often to have been ranged round it.
The two woodcuts annexed represent two atria of houses at Pompeii.
The first is the atrium of what is usually called the House of the Quaestor.
The view is taken near the entrance-hall facing the tablinum, through which
the columns of the peristyle and the garden are seen. This atrium, which is
a specimen of what Vitruvius calls the Corinthian, is surrounded by various
rooms, and is beautifully painted with arabesque designs upon red and yellow
grounds.
The next woodcut represents the atrium (see image in the URL below)
of what is usually called the House of Ceres. In the centre is the impluvium;
and as there are no pillars around the impluvium, this atrium must belong to
the kind called by Vitruvius the Tuscan.
The three following plans (see images in the URL below) are good
typical examples of the best class of houses in Pompeii. The first is popularly
known as the House of the Tragic Poet.
Like most of the other houses at Pompeii, it had no vestibulum according
to the meaning which we have attached to the word. The ostium or entrance-hall,
which is six feet wide, is nearly thirty long,--a length occasioned by the shops
on each side. Near the street door there is a figure of a large fierce dog worked
in mosaic on the pavement, and beneath it is written Cave Canem. The two large
rooms on each side of the vestibule appear from the large openings in front
of them to have been shops; they communicate with the entrance-hall, and were
therefore probably occupied by the master of the house. The atrium is about
twenty-eight feet in length and twenty in breadth; its impluvium is near the
centre of the room, and its floor is paved with white tesserae, spotted with
black. On the left-hand corner of the atrium is a small room (marked 1 in plan),
perhaps the cella of the ostiarius, with a stair-case leading to the upper rooms.
On each side of the atrium are chambers for the use of the family, or intended
for the reception of guests, who were entitled to claim hospitality. When a
house did not possess a hospitium, or rooms expressly for the reception of guests,
they appear to have been lodged in rooms attached to the atrium. At the further
end of the atrium is the tablinum, with the fauces or passage at the side, leading
into the peristylium, with Doric columns and garden (viridarium). The large
room on the right of the peristyle is the triclinium; beside it is the kitchen,
with a latrina.
The second cut contains the ground-plan of an insula surrounded
by shops, which belonged to the owner and were let out by him. The house itself,
which is usually called the House of Pansa, evidently belonged to one of the
principal men of Pompeii. Including the garden, which is a third of the whole
length, it is about. 300 feet long and 100 wide.
A. Ostium, or entrance-hall, paved with mosaic. B. Tuscan atrium. I.
Impluvium. C. Chambers on each side of the atrium, probably for the reception
of guests. D. Ala. E. Tablinum, which is open to the peristylium, so that the
whole length of the house could be seen at once; but as there is a passage (fauces),
F, beside it, the tablinum might probably be closed at the pleasure of the owner.
C. Chambers by the fauces and tablinum, of which the use is uncertain. G. Peristylium.
D. Recesses in the peristylium. C. Cubicula by the side of the peristylium.
K. Triclinium. L. Oecus, and by its side there is a passage leading from the
peristylium to the garden. M. Back door (posticum ostium) to the street. N.
Culina. H. Servants' hall, with a back door to the street. P. Portico of two
stories, which proves that the house had an upper floor. The site of the stair-case,
however, is unknown, though it is thought there is some indication of one in
the passage, M. Q. The garden. R. Reservoir for supplying a tank, S.
The preceding rooms belonged exclusively to Pansa's house; but there
were a good many apartments besides in the insula, which were not in his occupation.
a. Six shops let out to tenants. Those on the right and left hand corners were
bakers' shops, which contained mills, ovens, &c., at b. The one on the right
appears to have been a large establishment, as it contains many rooms. c. Two
houses of a very mean class, having formerly an upper story. On the other side
are two houses much larger, d. Mr. Fergusson observes that architectural effect
has been carefully studied in the design [p. 683] of Pansa's house, a vista
nearly 300 feet in length being obtained from the outer door to the garden wall,
varied by a pleasing play of light and shade, and displaying a gradually increasing
degree of spaciousness and architectural richness as we advance. All these points
must have been productive of the most pleasing effect when complete, and of
more beauty than has been attained in almost any modern building of like dimensions.
The third plan is that of one of the most elaborately decorated
houses, usually (though without any real reason) called the House of Sallust,
which is remarkable for its very complete separation into two parts; one of
which is carefully cut off from the more public rooms, and is supposed by many
writers to be a venereum, or women's division of the house. But the division
of a house into men's and women's apartments is quite foreign to the Romans;
and though the Pompeians may have borrowed in this instance the Greek arrangement,
yet it is better to conclude with Overbeck, that these were really the apartments
devoted to the private use of the family. From the irregular nature of the ground,
situated between two streets, as seen in the plan opposite, the private rooms
could not be placed beyond the atrium and around the peristylium, which is here
wanting, the usual position of the peristylium being occupied by the porticus
and garden.
A row of shops occupies the main street fronts In the usual way: between two
of these a wide passage leads into a large and handsome Tuscan atrium,
round which the rooms of the more public part of the house are ranged: behind
is a small garden, in one corner of which is a miniature summer-house, with
three marble seats, and a fountain by it. The side of the house which fronts
on to this little garden has an open loggia or portions built along it. The
private apartments are approached from the main atrium by a narrow door guarded
by a small porter's cell. This, the only means of access, leads into a Corinthian
peristylium, with a very small room cut out of each angle, and one larger apartment
at one side. The bedrooms seem all to have been upstairs, and the fact that
the same complete division of the two parts was kept up in the upper story is
shown by the existence of a separate staircase in each portion of the house.
A picture on the wall of the peristylium opposite the entrance, representing
the fate of Actaeon when he surprised Diana, may have been intended as a warning
to unauthorized visitors, supposing these apartments to be a venereum.
These are fairly typical examples of the arrangement of Pompeian
houses, though there is an immense number of variations. In the main these first-century
examples of Roman dwellings have a great deal in common with the house which
Vitruvius describes, and show that his example as an architect was very largely
followed for some years. In later times, however, the Roman houses were designed
on a very different plan, less uniform in type, and with rooms much less open
to the air.
Roman houses in Britain and Gal.
A very large number of important Roman houses has been discovered
in England and France, but most of these have been country villas, not town
houses like those at Pompeii. At Silchester, however, one of the chief Roman
towns in Britain, some remains of street houses have been exposed, of various
dates from the first to the third century, showing a succession of alterations
and rebuildings. In its original form one of these houses was very similar to
some of the Pompeian dwellings: see Archaeologia, xlvi. p. 332. But in most
cases the existing remains in England, being those of country houses and of
later date than the buildings of Pompeii, have no resemblance to them in plan.
More ample space, and a much colder and wetter climate, led the
Romans to adopt here a very different system of house-building from that which
suited them in their earlier and hardier days in a mild climate like that of
Italy. Thus we find that the later Romano-British or Gaulish houses had no group
of rooms with wide arches opening on to a roofless atrium, but instead of this
the rooms are commonly ranged in a long straggling line, with a passage along
one side. In many cases a peristylium is used, but the rooms only open on to
it by small carefully closed doors or well-glazed windows. The large villas
at Lydney, Woodchester, Chedworth, and many other places have an extensive cloister
or peristylium, round all four sides of which the rooms are arranged very like
the plan of a mediaeval monastery: in none of these is there any atrium. In
other cases, as at Cromhall in Gloucestershire, the rooms are ranged in L form,
with one long passage running the whole length of the building: in other cases
the rooms are all set in one line I and have a similar passage from end to end.
This seemingly inconvenient system of house-plan was largely used in England
down to quite recent times; as, for example, in Hampton Court Palace. The villa
at Witcomb in Gloucestershire was a very large and handsome building, arranged
in the form of an H, with an octagonal hall projecting from the centre of the
middle block.
One peculiarity of the British houses is the extreme frequency of
rooms with semicircular apses at one end, especially in cases where there is
a hypocaust floor. The warming of Romano-British houses was very completely
provided for; a very large proportion of the rooms have hypocausts, and many
also have wall-linings of flue-tiles. Moreover the use of glazed windows seems
to have been universal in Roman Britain; fragments of windows are nearly.always
found during excavations in the site of a house. Glass of several kinds occurs:
rough-cast plate, ground plate, and crown glass are all common. Even in Pompeii
remains of glass windows have been found, though they were apparently much less
common there.
Construction of Roman houses.
1. Walls.
The wall of a house was called paries in contradistinction to maurus,
the wall of a city. The manner in which the walls were built varied according
to the date and the locality. In Italy, during the Republican period in Rome,
Pompeii, and other places, some easily-worked stone, such as tufa or peperino
(lapis Albanus), was used, in large squared blocks (opus quadratum) for the
best houses, unburnt brick being the usual material for ordinary dwellings.
In the time of Augustus concrete began to be the chief building material, faced
at first with small squares of stone, about four inches by four inches on the
face (opus reticulatum); then triangular kiln-baked bricks came into use, first
employed together with the opus reticulatum, and then alone. In all cases, however,
in Central and Southern Italy the main bulk of the wall was of concrete, and
the brick only formed a thin facing. In other countries, however, where a fine
natural cement like the pozzolana (pulvis puteolanus) of Italy was not to be
found, a different method of construction was used. In Gaul and Britain houses
were mostly built of rubble stonework, thickly bedded in hard mortar, with lacing
courses of large square tiles (tegulae bipedales) built in at intervals of three
or four feet; a method of building which still survives in some flint districts,
like parts of Sussex.
The inner walls of the rooms were originally simply whitewashed
(dealbati) and subsequently covered with a white cement or stucco (opus albarium),
the workers of which were called tectores albarii, or albarii simply. (Vitruv.
v. 10, 3, vi. 10, 3; Pallad. i. 14; Plin. H. N. xxxv. 194, xxxvi. 183; Cod.
Theod. xiii. 4, 2; Orelli, Inscr. 4142.) The plain surface of the walls was
broken by quad-rangular panels, called abaci (Plin. f. N. xxxiii. § 159; xxxv.
§ § 3, 32; Vitruv. vii. 3, 10). In the second century B.C., the practice was
introduced from Greece of painting these panels with an endless variety of figures,
landscapes, buildings, gardens, &c., of which we have numerous examples in the
existing remains of houses in Rome and Pompeii. So general was the practice
that even the smallest houses in Pompeii have paintings on their walls, of which
a general idea may be formed from the annexed cut. The way in which these paintings
were executed is described under Pictura.
In addition to painting, other methods of decoration were used:
in Rome especially the chief way of ornamenting the rooms of the best houses
was by lining the walls with slabs of sawn marble, moulded into a skirting below
and a cornice above. Mamurra, one of Caesar's prefects in Gaul, was the first,
as we have already said, who lined the walls of his rooms with marble slabs
(Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 48). Great magnificence of effect was produced by the skilful
admixture of marbles of different rich colours, the moulded part being usually
of a deeper tint than the flat surfaces. In the most careful work these marble
linings were fastened to the walls by bronze clamps, but more often the slabs
were simply attached by a thick bedding of cement behind them. (Sen. Ep. 86,4;
Dig. 19, 1, 17.3; Isidor. xix. 13)
Another very rich method of decoration was the application of stucco
reliefs enriched with gold and colours. The discovery of fine examples of these
in a house near the Tiber has been mentioned above.
A third system, applied also to vaults, was to encrust the walls with mosaics,
chiefly made of glass tesserae of the most brilliant jewel-like colours.
The crypto-porticus, which leads from the Palace of Caligula to
the Flavian Palace, had the lower part of its walls lined with Oriental marbles,
the upper part and vault was covered with sparkling glass mosaics, and the branch
passage which leads to the supposed house of Livia was covered with very beautiful
and delicately modelled stucco reliefs, gilt and coloured. The splendour of
the state rooms may perhaps be guessed from the costly decorations of this long
and half-subterranean passage. On the whole, splendour of effect, rather than
refinement of design, was the chief characteristic of Roman house-decoration,
and after the first century A.D. beauty of design and delicacy of workmanship
were less valued than costly richness of material.
2. Roofs.
The roofs (tecta) of Roman houses were in the oldest times covered
with straw, of which a memorial was preserved in the casa Romuli even in imperial
times (Vitruv. ii. 1). Next came the use of shingles for the roofing of houses,
which continued down to the time of the war with Pyrrhus (Plin. H. N. xvi.36).
Subsequently clay tiles, called tegulae and imbrices, superseded the shingles
(Plaut. Mil. Glor. ii. 6, 24; Most. i. 2, 28; Isidor. xix. 10, 15; Plin. H.
N. xxxv.152).
The roofs of houses were sometimes flat, but they were also gabled
(pectenata) like modern houses. These were of two kinds, the tecta pectenata,
sloping two ways, and the tecta testudinata, sloping four ways. Both kinds of
roofs were displuviata, that is, sloping towards the street, and the houses
had around them, according to a law of the XII. Tables, an ambitus, or vacant
space of 21 feet, to receive the rain water running off the roofs. The projecting
eaves of roofs were called suggrundae (Varr. R. i. iii. 3, 5; Vitruv. x. 21;
Dig. 9, 3, 5,6). The gabled roofs rose to a point called fastigium (Cic. ad
Qu. Fr. iii. 1, 4,14), though this word was strictly applied to the triangular
pediment (see fastigium
=aetoma), which was only allowed in the temples of the gods and other public
buildings.
The roofs were usually of simple construction, with principal rafters
framed with tie-beam and king post. The roof-covering was often very ,carefully
fitted so as to exclude wet. The tegulae, with a flange on each side, were nailed
with bronze or large iron nails, and the joints were covered by specially moulded
joint-tiles (imbrices), the ends of which at the eaves were hidden by ornamental
terra-cotta antefixa, which formed a sort of cresting all along the eaves. The
eaves-course of tiles was often worked into the form of the cymatium or top
wave-moulding of the cornice, and all along it pierced lions' heads were moulded
to form escapes for the rain-water. In other cases less ornamental roofs were
covered with doubly-curved pantiles, exactly like those still used in Rome and
some parts of England. For the most magnificent buildings, such as some of the
imperial palaces, the roofs were covered with tiles made of white marble, or
even with bronze tiles plated with gold. For further details, see Tegula
(=keramos, akrokeramon).
In places where brick-earth was scarce or bad, and laminated stone
plentiful, as in Oxford-shire and Gloucestershire, the Romans roofed their buildings
with roughly-dressed tiles made of such stone as the so-called Stonesfield slate.
Traces of Roman workings of the quarries of this stone at Kineton Thorns in
Gloucestershire have been recently found, and extensive remains of the long
barracks where the quarrymen were housed, forming a sort of quadrangle about
300 feet square. These slates were dressed in a lozenge form, and fixed by one
large iron nail at the top corner, which of course was hidden by the lap of
the next row of slates above. Clay tiles of many other forms were used; and
local materials were nearly always utilized for roofing, as for all other purposes,
by the practical and ingenious Roman builders.
3. Floors.
The floor (solum) of a room was seldom boarded (strata solo tabulata,
Stat. Silv. i. 5, 57), except in the upper stories. The floor on the ground-floor
was usually of stone, and, in the case of common houses, consisted of small
pieces of stone, brick, tiles, &c. (ruderatio, opus ruderatum), beaten down
(pavita) with a rammer (fistuca), whence the word pavimentum became the general
name for a floor (Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 185 seq.; Vitruv. vii. 1). Sometimes the
floors were paved with thin slabs of richly-coloured marbles, brought from Northern
Africa, Arabia, or Greece (Fest. p. 242, M. ; Tibull. iii. 3, 16; Sen. Ep. 86,
6; Pallad. i. 9), and still more frequently with mosaics (opus musivum). For
a fuller account of the different kinds of floors, see Pavimentum
(=edaphos, dapedon =flooring) and Musicus
Opus (=mosaic).
In Rome and other parts of Italy, owing to the wonderful strength
of the pozzolana, the upper floors of houses were very frequently made of concrete
cast in one great slab on temporary boarding, fixed at the required level. This
set into one compact mass, like a piece of solid stone. Examples in Rome are
to be seen where the upper floor had a span of twenty feet, and simply consisted
of one slab of concrete about fourteen inches thick. On this, mosaic and other
paving was laid, as on the ground-floors. For the peculiar construction of the
hollow hypocaust floors, see Balneae
(=loutron, bath). In other cases in Rome, and nearly always in Britain, the
upper floors were of wood: projecting stone corbels were built to carry the
plates for joists on which floor boards were nailed, just as in many modern
buildings. Vitruvius (vii. 1) also mentions mosaics being laid on the wooden
doors of upper stories, as is the custom in modern Rome; but this appears not
to have been done where there was a strong cement with which upper floors could
be made of unsupported concrete.
4. Ceilings.
Ceilings were very commonly semicircular or barrel vaults (camarae),
decorated with stucco reliefs, mosaics, or painting. The extrados of the vault
was filled in level with concrete to form the floor above. Wooden ceilings and
flat concrete ceilings were decorated in the same way. One common method of
ceiling decoration, applied both to brick and concrete or to wooden ceilings,
was to divide the whole area into a number of deeply-sunk panels, like pits
or lakes (lacus, lacunae), whence they were called lacunaria or laquearia (Vitruv.
vii. 2; Cic. Tusc. v. 2. 1, 62; Hor. Carm. ii. 18, 2). These were richly ornamented,
either by stucco reliefs gilt and coloured, or, in the case of wooden ceilings,
by inlaid work of ivory, ebony, or other precious materials, as well as by paintings.
In a few cases the coffers were covered with enriched bronze plates, thickly
gilt (Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 57, xxxv. 124; Hor. Carm. 1. c.; Verg. Aen. i. 726;
Sen. Ep. 90, 42). The artists who executed this work were called laquearii (Cod.
Theod. xiii. 4, 2). The design of these coffered ceilings was derived from the
marble ceilings of the peristyles of Greek temples, such as the Parthenon.
5. Windows.
The Roman houses had few windows (fenestrae). The atrium and peristylium
were lighted, as we have seen, from above, and the smaller rooms leading out
of them generally derived their light from them, and not from windows looking
into the street. The rooms only on the upper stories (cenacula) seem to have
been usually lighted by windows, and looked out upon the street, as well as
the inner courts. Hence they are frequently mentioned by the ancient writers
(Liv. i. 41, xxiv. 21; Hor. Carm. i. 25; Prop. iv. (v.), 7, 16; Juv. iii. 270;
Mart. i. 86, xi. 19; Plin. H. N. xix. 59). in Pompeii, in like manner, the ground-floor
rooms were mostly lighted from the inner courts, so that few lower windows opened
on the street. There is an exception to this in the House of the Tragic Poet,
which has six windows on the ground-floor. Even in this case, however, the windows
are not near the ground as in a modern house, but are six feet six inches above
the foot-pavement, which is raised one foot seven inches above the centre of
the street. The windows are small, being hardly three feet by two; and at the
side there is a wooden frame, in which the window or shutter might be moved
backwards or forwards. The lower part of the wall is occupied by a row of red
panels four feet and a half high. The following woodcut reprer sents part of
the wall, with the apertures fo-windows above it, as it appears from the street.
The tiling upon the wall is modern, and is only placed there to preserve it
from the weather.
The windows appear originally to have been merely small openings
in the wall, closed by means of shutters, which frequently had two leaves (bifores
fenestrae, Ow. Pont. iii. 3, 5), whence Ovid (Amor. i. 5, 3) says, Pars adaperta
fuit, pars alters clausa fenestrae.
They are for this reason said to be joined (junctae fenestrae),
when they are shut. (Hor. Carm. i. 25.) Windows were also sometimes covered
by a kind of lattice or trellis work (clathri), and sometimes by network, to
prevent serpents and other noxious reptiles from getting in (Plant. Mil. Glor.
ii. 4, 25; Varr. R. R. iii. 7). The transennae were a kind of lattice-work of
the same kind (Cic. de Or. i. 3. 5, 162).
There has been much discussion whether glass (=vitrum,
hyalos)windows were known to the ancients; but in the excavations at Pompeii
many fragments of flat glass have been discovered, and in the tepidarium of
the public baths a bronze lattice was found with some of the panes still inserted
in the frame. Besides glass, other transparent substances were also used, such
as talc, the lapis specularis of Pliny (H. N. xxxvi.163), and windows made of
it were called specularia (Sen. Ep. 90, 25; Plin. I. N. xix. 64, Ep. ii. 17;
Mart. viii. 14; Juv. iv. 21), though some modern writers think that specularia
also denoted glass windows. The best pieces of this transparent highly laminated
substance came from Spain and Cappadocia, but it was also brought from North
Africa, Cyprus, and Sicily. Pliny mentions pieces as large as five feet long
(Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 160 seq.). From an expression in Philo (Leg. ad Caium, 45)
it appears that the palace of Caligula had glass windows; and glass windows
are expressly mentioned by Lactantius (de Opif. dei, 8).
6. Doors.
The subject of doors, with their locks and keys, is discussed under
Janua
(=door) and Clavis
(=key). It is only necessary to mention here that many of the rooms in Roman
houses had no doors, but only curtains, vela, aulaea, centones (Sen. Ep. 80;
Plin. Ep. ii. 17; Petron. 7; Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 4, Heliog. 14). Hence among
the slaves in the imperial household we find mention of velarii. Sometimes,
when there were doors, curtains were also drawn across them (Suet. Claud. 10;
Tac. Ann. xiii, 5; Sidon. Apoll. Ep. iv. 24; Mart. xi. 45).
7. The heating of Houses.
The rooms were heated in winter in different ways. The cubicula,
triclinia, and other rooms, which were intended for winter use, were built in
that part of the house upon which the sun shone most; and in the mild climate
of Italy this frequently enabled them to dispense with any artificial mode of
warming the rooms. Rooms exposed to the sun in this way were sometimes called
heliocamini (Plin. p. ii. 17, 20 ; Dig. 8, 2, 17). The rooms were sometimes
heated by hot air, which was introduced by means of pipes from a furnace below
(Plin. Ep. ii. 17, v. 6, 24; Sen. Ep. 90), but more frequently in earlier times
by portable furnaces or braziers (foculi), in which charcoal was burnt. The
caminus, however, was a fixed stove, in which wood appears to have been usually
burnt (Suet. Vitell. 8; Hor. Sat. i. 5, 81; Ep. i. 11, 19; Cic. ad Pam. vii.
1. 0; Sid. Apoll. Ep. ii. 2). It has been a subject of much dispute among modern
writers, whether the Romans had chimneys for carrying off the smoke, except
in the baths and kitchens. From many passages in ancient writers, it certainly
appears that rooms usually had no chimneys, but that the smoke escaped through
the windows, doors, and openings in the roof (Vitruv. vii. 3, 4; vii. 4, 4);
but chimneys do not appear to have been entirely unknown to the ancients, as
some have been found in the ruins of ancient buildings, and it is impossible
to believe that, among a luxurious people like the Romans in imperial times,
they were unacquainted with the use of chimneys. The passage of Horace ( lacrimoso
non sine fumo, Sat. i. 5, 80), which has been quoted in proof that there were
no chimneys, proves nothing, as damp wood would cause smoke, even if there had
been chimneys. On the heating of houses.
8. The water supply.
The water supply of a good Roman house was very complete in towns
the main usually ran under the pavement in the middle of the street, and from
it rising mains branched off to the houses right and left, and often were carried
to the upper stories, where a cistern supplied the fountain-jets (salientes)
and other purposes below. For further details on the water-supply, see Aquaeductus(=Hydragogeio,
Hyponomos, water-conduit) .
This text is from: A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (eds. William Smith, LLD, William Wayte, G. E. Marindin). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ASKLEPIEION OF EPIDAURUS (Ancient sanctuary) ARGOLIS
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Two part stoa; forming part of northwest boundary of the
central Sanctuary of Asklepios, north of the Temple of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 400 B.C. - 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Two part stoa. Earlier eastern section was a two-aisled stoa opening south with
Ionic inner and outer colonnades. The later, western extension was two-storied;
the lower level reached by an outside staircase to a court on its southern side.
The extended stoa had 29 Ionic columns on the southern face and 13 inner columns.
Octagonal pillars in the lower level. The lower floor of the western extension
was enclosed by a wall with doors and decorated with Doric pilasters. A stone
balustrade filled the openings between the Ionic columns of the upper level. There
were probably wooden dividers between the inner columns of both stoas.
History:
Also known as the Enkoimeterion, the stoa was used as a dormitory for those awaiting
Asklepios' advice. The later two-storied western extension was probably Roman.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 4 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Rectangular building; attached to the north side of the
Roman House, to the east outside the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
On the west a pronaos of 4 Doric columns in antis (3 openings) led to an open
court.
History:
Previously identified as a Roman temple to the Egyptian Asklepios and Apollo (mentioned
by Pausanias), this sanctuary is now believed to have been dedicated to the Dioskouroi
(the twins Castor and Pollux).
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Summary: Two rectangular buildings; on the southern side of the
Sanctuary of Asklepios, southeast of the Tholos.
Date: ca. 480 B.C. - 338 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Two small, adjoining rectangular buildings. The western building a single room.
The larger, eastern building divided into a large inner room and a smaller entrance.
A connecting structure of 3 parallel walls formed 2 small square areas.
History:
The buildings have not been positively identified, but may have served as storage
or residences. A later Roman wall was built over the structures.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Baths
Summary: Rectangular buildings; east of the Abaton (Dormitory) and
north of the Temple of Asklepios, in the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 500 B.C. - 400 B.C.
Period: Archaic/Classical
Plan:
Two simple, rectangular buildings; the western one divided into 2 parts.
History:
Possibly the 1st baths in the sanctuary, the baths may have had religious and
curative uses. The water came from the sacred well of Asklepios southwest of the
Baths. A later Roman wall was built over the remains.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse Summary: Small prostyle building; on the eastern
edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios, between the Northeast Stoa and the Anakeion.
Date: ca. 250 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Small rectangular tetrastyle prostyle building opening south with a gathering
basin on its northern side and draw basin on the southern side.
History:
Rebuilt in the 2nd century A.D.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse
Summary: Fountainhouse with a circular niche; west of the Roman
cistern, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Rectangular room on north, opening north, with 3 rooms leading off. On the southern
side were a nearly circular room, perhaps with a fountain, and a nearly rectangular
room. On the east a small rectangular room.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Baths
Summary: Rectangular building; south of the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios and of the Gymnasium.
Date: ca. 300 B.C. - 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Many rooms with bathtubs and basins.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Gymnasium
Summary: Courtyard surrounded by stoas and rooms; south of the central
Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
In the center was a square peristyle court with 16 columns to a side. Behind the
northern side of the peristyle was an interior colonnade of 20 columns, and beyond
this a long, narrow hall, an ephebeum or exercise room, with a small rectangular
exedra (probably a shrine) in its rear wall. Behind the southern side of the peristyle
was a wall with doors leading into a long room (probably a dining room) with a
central colonnade and 2 rooms at each end. Behind the eastern and western walls
of the peristyle were various rooms, the largest on each side having a central
colonnade with the one on the east probably serving as a dining hall. An enormous,
later propylon on the northern side was the main entrance, with 2 smaller entrances
on the eastern side.
History:
Dinsmoor refers to this building as the Palaestra. In Roman times an Odeion was
built over the ruins of the Gymnasium.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 4 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Guest House Summary: Large square building with courts; northwest
of the Theater, about midway between the Theater and the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios.
Date: ca. 320 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Four square peristyle courts with 10 Doric columns to a side. The two-storied
Doric peristyles formed portico entrances to the surrounding 160 rooms. Around
each courtyard ran a channel for water.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 28 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Group of narrow buildings forming the northeast corner
of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 325 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A narrow court surrounded by colonnades and rooms on all but the eastern side.
History:
Coulton tentatively identifies this as the Stoa of Kotys. His reconstruction includes
a two-aisled portico, Doric outer colonnade and Ionic inner colonnade, on the
south and west sides. Colonnade on the north side may have been of wood. The area
immediately south of this complex is lined with dedications.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Odeion Summary: Small, roofed theater; built on the ruins
of the Gymnasium, south of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Walled, roofed theater with cavea facing west and a two-storied stage building.
Mosaic paved orchestra less than a complete semi-circle.
History:
Built on the ruins of the earlier Gymnasium, the northeast corner of the Odeion
and the northwest corner of its stage were the same as those corners on the peristyle
court from the earlier building.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 3 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Square building with court; in the Sanctuary of Asklepios,
southeast of the Temple of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Rooms around a court. Extant various interior walls from later uses.
History:
Originally this area may have been sacred to Apollo, whose altar stands to the
west. Later, when the area was sacred to Asklepios, the open area was surrounded
on 3 sides by rooms, perhaps serving as dormitories. Many dedications surround
the building, and it forms a boundary to the open air sanctuary to Asklepios that
occupies the southeastern corner of the Sanctuary of Asklepios. Parts of the building
were rebuilt and in use during the Roman period.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Palaestra
Summary: Large rectangular building; just outside the southern perimeter
of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios, east of the Temple of Artemis.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Small porch entrance on western side led through a short passage to a rectangular
room with 4 pillars and 4 half-columns dividing the area into 3 aisles. There
was a narrow hall with 4 columns on the north side and many smaller rooms around
the other sides. A 2nd passage and entrance opened on the south.
History:
Misidentified as the Stoa of Kotys. Kavvadias considered this building a palaestra
with an open court, constructed in Classical times. Roux suggests that the building
was built by Antoninus and used by a religious group. Roux believes that the central
court had an opaion roof, and a circular bath area at the south side of the building.
The stone tables and benches on the north side of the central room were brought
from elsewhere.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Palaestra
Summary: Complex of buildings; southwest of the central Sanctuary
of Asklepios, north of the stadium.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Large courtyard with colonnade facing south toward the stadium and entered by
a passage on that side. Various other rooms. An entrance also on the north side.
History:
Function uncertain, may have housed athletes or been a palaestra.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Gate
Summary: Gate building; located on the northwest, outside the central
Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Hexastyle, prostyle Ionic colonnades at north and south ends of the rectangular
platform. Between the walls on the eastern and western sides was a 4 x 5 inner
colonnade of Corinthian columns. The Propylon was approached on both ends by ramps.
History:
Before the 4th century A.D. the Sanctuary of Asklepios was not enclosed by a peribolos
wall, thereafter the Sacred Way passed through this Propylon which marked the
entrance to the sanctuary.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 22 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: House
Summary: House; adjoined the Anakeion, just outside the east wall
of the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Colonnaded larger courtyard with a well and surrounded by rooms. Smaller courtyard
to the east surrounded by rooms. North wall shared with Anakeion.
History:
May have been a priests' house or a place for important guests to stay.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Fountainhouse Summary: Narrow rectangular building; on the
eastern edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios, between the Northeast Stoa and the
Anakeion, west of the Doric Fountainhouse.
Date: Unknown
Plan:
Narrow building entered from the west by a courtyard leading to a vaulted chamber
has a draw basin at its eastern wall. Storage cistern in rear wall.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: House
Summary: Building with a courtyard; south and east of the Stoa of
Apollo Maleatas, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Complex of several rooms, most of them nearly rectangular.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Cistern
Summary: Large oblong cistern; located southwest of the Priests'
House, in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: Unknown
Period: Roman
Plan:
Rectangular shape.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stadium
Summary: Rectangular area; southwest of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 480 B.C. - 338 B.C.
Period: Classical
Plan:
Rectangular area with starting line on the west and finishing line on the east
surrounded by water channel with settling basins. Stone seats on the north and
south sides.
History:
Earth banks were built up to supplement the slopes of a natural ravine, and to
create the original seating. The stone seats and staircases were added during
Hellenistic and Roman times. A paved platform on southern slope could have been
for victors or to seat honored guests, with a possible judges' bench opposite
the finishing line. A Hellenistic vaulted passageway under seats led to a possible
Palaestra to the north. Small stone pillars marked the stadium into 6 equal parts
and Hellenistic lane markers were later added to the finishing and starting lines.
Contests held in the stadium included: running events, broad jumping, discus,
javelin, wrestling, boxing and pankration (a type of wrestling in which striking
was allowed). Performances may have been held here before the Theater was built.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Stoa
Summary: Stoa; on the north side of the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
One-aisled stoa with colonnade of Doric attached half-columns facing south. Stone
screens in the intercolumniations. Massive back wall was a retaining wall.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Small prostyle temple; east of the central Sanctuary of
Asklepios, west of the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 320 B.C. - 280 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
Ionic prostyle temple with pseudo-peripteral cella, 4 x 7 columns. All but 6 outer
columns were attached to the cella walls. A ramp on the east led over 4 steps
to a tetrastyle prostyle porch of 6 columns and the cella. The interior of the
cella was lined with Corinthian columns which nearly touched the walls.
History:
An excavated statue of Aphrodite with a sword (attributed to Polykleitos the Younger,
2nd century B.C.) may have stood near this temple.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Temple; southwest of the Stoa of Apollo Maleatas, in the
Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas.
Date: ca. 350 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Small cella opening east onto a pronaos, distyle in antis. Adyton at the west
end of the cella and a ramp on the east.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Prostyle temple; southeast of the Temple Asklepios on the
edge of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 330 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A cella opening east onto a hexastyle prostyle pronaos of Doric columns. Ten Corinthian
columns lined the cella interior on 3 sides. A ramp and paved area on the east
connected the temple to an altar.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Peripteral temple; northeast of the Tholos, in the Sanctuary
of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 380 B.C. - 375 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Small Doric peripteral temple, 6 x 11 columns, with a cella opening east onto
a pronaos, distyle in antis. Inside the cella was a colonnade of unknown order
with 4 columns at the rear and 7 along the sides. A ramp on the east led into
the pronaos. A paved area led east from the ramp to the Altar of Asklepios. The
altar south of this building is an Altar of Apollo.
History:
Alternative reconstructions of this building show no interior colonnade. It was
dedicated to Asklepios and designed by the architect Theodotos. The temple displaced
an earlier Temple of Asklepios farther southeast in the sanctuary.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Temple
Summary: Prostyle temple; southwest of the Propylon, between the
Propylon and the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 320 B.C.
Period: Hellenistic
Plan:
A cella opening east onto a tetrastyle prostyle pronaos. Inner colonnade of Corinthian
columns on 3 walls. Ramp on east led up to the pronaos over a three-stepped platform.
History:
Alternative reconstructions show the pronaos distyle in antis.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Theater
Summary: Theater; located southeast of the Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 350 B.C. - 300 B.C.
Period: Late Clas./Hell.
Plan:
Cavea, orchestra and skene. A round orchestra defined by a low curb with an altar
stone in the center. A paved depression between the orchestra and the cavea was
a used as an ambulatory. The cavea of 55 rows of seats was divided vertically
by 13 staircases reached through the doors at either end of the scene building.
The diazoma divided the cavea into 21 upper, steeper rows of seats and 34 lower
rows. The lowest row of seats had back supports and was reserved for honored guests.
The scene building, which may have been added later in the Hellenistic period,
was two-storied. On its southeastern side, facing the cavea, was a one-storied
stage. The stage rested on 14 pillars with engaged Ionic half-columns. Between
all but the 2 central pillars were painted wooden panels used as a back drop during
performances. There were slightly projecting wings and a ramp at each end of the
stage. At the far end of each ramp, and almost perpendicular to it, were gateways,
each with 2 doors, one leading through the parodos to the orchestra and one leading
to the ramp. The lower story of the scene had 10 pillars along its northwestern
front and four along its central axis. At either end were two square rooms. The
upper story also had two square rooms at each end, but no central pillars.
History:
Designed by Polykleitos the Younger, in the 4th century B.C., the seats were wide
enough to allow those sitting in the upper rows to rest their feet on the lower
seats without touching the persons below. Originally seating 6,210, the expansion
of 21 rows above the diazoma allowed the theater to accommodate about 14,000.
The best preserved theater in Greece, with unparalleled acoustics. Modern performances
are held here.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Tholos
Summary: Circular building; southwest of the Temple of Asklepios,
in the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: ca. 360 B.C. - 320 B.C.
Period: Late Classical
Plan:
Circular building with outer colonnade of 26 Doric columns and inner colonnade
of 14 Corinthian columns. Leading to the east entrance, which had windows at either
side, was a ramp over the three-stepped platform. Beneath the floor of the Tholos
was a labyrinth reached by a hole in the center of the floor.
History:
Also known as the Thymele, the activities of the cult of the Hero Asklepios took
place here, and the labyrinth below may have housed sacred snakes. Pausanias wrote
that Polykleitos the Younger was the architect. The building had elaborately carved
architectural elements and fine paving of black and white limestone. Dinsmoor
states that the paving was marble.
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Epidauros
Type: Reservoir
Summary: Rectangular structure; west of the Temple of Themis, outside
the central Sanctuary of Asklepios.
Date: Unknown
This text is cited Jan 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
MYCENAE (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
Site: Mycenae
Type: Palace
Summary: The palace at Mycenae is on the summit of the citadel hill
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Built in different levels on the uneven ground, the main elements of the complex
were the megaron with central hearth and anteroom and the central court. Two entrances
led to the central court: the propylon and west passage at NW, and the Grand Staircase
to the S. A long corridor separated the official room from the private apartments
and bath located to the N, at the highest position on the summit. The House of
Columns or Little Palace and artists' quarters to the E may have been a part of
the palace complex. Other corridors, guard rooms and store rooms have also been
identified.
History:
Large scale levelling and terracing for the palace destroyed remains of an earlier,
smaller palace. Construction in later Hellenistic times and erosion destroyed
much of the palace, especially the private rooms and the area to SE.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 6 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Gate
Summary: Postern Gate at Mycenae is located in the N wall ca. 250
m. E of the Lion Gate.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A narrow gate for double wooden doors built with an enceinte or narrow passage
before it and massive flanking walls. Same strategic construction as the Lion
Gate, but on smaller scale.
History:
Constructed at same time as Lion Gate, Northeastern Extension and other enlargements
to the citadel at ca. 1250 BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: The Cult Center at Mycenae is a complex S of Grave Circle
A and between the Great Ramp and the E citadel circuit wall
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A maze-like complex of structures that may, on the basis of layout and character
of artifacts, be grouped into 4 zones: E group including "Tsountas' House" and
Shrine with altar, N group with large open area, Central group including Room
with the Idols, and W group including Room with the Fresco. Perhaps an indication
of different cult deities. Also indications of temple industries in ivory and
other materials.
History:
The area, as Grave Circle A, was originally outside the citadel walls and the
basic layout of the buildings date to just after the enlargement of the fortress
walls at ca. 1250 B.C. There may have been earlier cult activity in the area before
the citadel walls enclosed it.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Fortification
Summary: Citadel walls of Mycenae protected the palace, administration
buildings and some habitations.
Date: 1350 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A roughly triangular fortress around a low hill (280 m. above sea level) with
1 main gate, a postern gate and 1 or 2 sally ports. A paved ramp-road winds from
the main gate, past Grave Circle A, past buildings of lower citadel, and up to
the palace.
History:
3 stages of construction: 1) ca. 1350 BC, walls enclosed highest portion of hill;
2) ca. 1250 BC, area enlarged to S and W, enclosing Grave Circle A. Lion Gage
and postern gate added: 3) ca. 1200 BC, NE Extension encloses access to water
reservoir. SE section of citadel lost to later natural erosion.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Fortification
Summary: Northeastern Extension is a small enlargement to the Mycenae
citadel walls at the NE.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Walls, 7 m. thick., enclose an area added to the circuit walls to provide access
to an underground water reservoir and a sally port. A second opening in the wall
gave access to a watch platform along the SE side of the citadel extension or
served as a S sally port.
History:
A major element in the strengthening of the citadel defenses at cat 1250 - 1200
BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 1 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Tomb
Summary: Grave Circle A is inside the citadel walls at Mycenae,
S of the Lion Gate.
Date: 1550 B.C. - 1500 B.C.
Period: Middle Bronze Age
Plan:
A circular area enclosed by a low wall with a wide entrance facing the Lion Gate.
In circle were 10 grave stelai carved in low relief and 6 shaft graves containing
19 bodies.
History:
Originally outside the citadel walls, Grave Circle A seems to have been established
as a heroon and was enclosed within the enlargement of the fortress at ca. 1250
BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 9 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Tomb
Summary: One of 9 tholos tombs located outside the walls at Mycenae
Date: 1300 B.C. - 1250 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
Subterranean circular chamber with a corbelled dome (hence also called "beehive
tombs"), small adjacent rock-cut chamber and level dromos or access way leading
to the side of the hill.
History:
Largest and best preserved of the 9 tholos tombs at Mycenae. Believed to be one
of the latest built. In Pausanias' time thought to have served originally as a
treasury.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 19 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Site: Mycenae
Type: Gate
Summary: The Lion Gate is main entrance to citadel of Mycenae, located
in NW wall of the fortress.
Date: 1250 B.C. - 1200 B.C.
Period: Late Bronze Age
Plan:
A gateway for double wooden doors set into the thick fortification walls. Approach
to the gate is up a ramp and through an enceinte or confining passage. A second
passage and guardroom are located inside the gate. From here the ramp-road circled
through the lower citadel up to the palace.
History:
The monumental gateway was erected when the citadel walls were enlarged and strengthened
ca. 1250 BC.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 8 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ALIIS, ALIA (Ancient city) KRANIDI
Region: Argolid
Periods: Archaic, Classical
Type: Fortified city
Summary: City of southern Argolid with Hippodamian city grid.
Physical Description:
Halieis is located on the E shore of a naturally sheltered,
S-facing bay at the S tip of the Argive peninsula. Originally (in the 8th-7th
century B.C.) the acropolis and the small settlement at the shore had independent
fortification walls. Probably in the 5th century B.C. the town expanded to the
E and S up the slopes of the low acropolis hill, and the later city walls enclosed
those of the acropolis. In the Classical period the city had at least 4 gates
and the walls also enclosed a small fortified military harbor. The streets, houses
and workshops of the expanded city were organized on the Hippodamos grid system
and there was a separate industrial quarter SE and uphill from the town's center.
A Sanctuary of Apollo (now under water) is located ca 500 m NE of the town and
contains a temple, altar and stadium.
Description:
The earliest evidence for occupation at the site dates
to the Proto-Geometric period: by the 7th century B.C. there was a small fortified
settlement on the shore. Early in the 5th century B.C., refugees from Tiryns settled
at Halieis and the town expanded in size. During the Classical period Halieis
was a pawn in the endless Athens-Sparta conflict and suffered attacks from one
side and then the other. The site was abandoned near the end of the 4th century
B.C., although there was some minor reoccupation in the late Roman period.
Exploration:
Excavations in 1962 and 1965-1968 by the University of
Pennsylvania directed by M. Jameson and in 1970-1974 by Indiana University directed
by W. Rudolph.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 11 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ARGOS (Ancient city) ARGOLIS
Region: Argolid
Periods: Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age, Dark
Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Modern
Type: Fortified city
Summary: One of the major Mycenaean and ancient city-states of the
Peloponnese.
Physical Description:
Argos lies ca. 7 km inland, near the center of the 200
square km Argive plain, and between the bases of the Aspis and Larissa hills and
the Kharadros river. The W half of the modern town of Argos covers the ancient
city and excavations have been limited to small areas and rescue work. Features
that have been excavated or investigated include the theater, agora, sanctuary
of Apollo and Athena, the Roman odeion and baths, and sections of the Classical
circuit wall.
Description:
Traditionally Argos was claimed as one of the oldest cities
of ancient Greece, and the birthplace of Perseus, the son of Danae and Zeus. Some
Neolithic remains have been found in the area, but the best evidence for early
occupation is the Early to Middle Helladic settlement on the summit of Aspis.
By Mycenaean times the center of settlement had moved to the higher Larissa hill
to the W (where the Frankish castle now stands). Although Argos was a major Mycenaean
center and its citizens figure prominently in the Homeric epics, the city was
over-shadowed by nearby Mycenae. After the fall of the Mycenaean Empire Argos
seems to have had the predominant role in the Peloponnese until the 6th century
B.C. when it begins a long struggle with Sparta. Throughout the Classical period
Argos allied itself with Corinth or Athens against Sparta. In 229 B.C. Argos joined
the Achaean League and after 146 B.C. it became part of the Roman province of
Achaea. Substantial Roman building activity indicates prosperity in the 1st to
5th centuries A.D. Argos was capital of King Pheidon and home of sculptors Ageladas
and Polykleitos.
Exploration:
In 1892, I. Kophiniotis partially excavated the theater;
between 1902 and 1930 W. Vollgraff carried out several excavations on behalf of
the French School. French School excavations have continued under the direction
of G. Daux and P. Courbin since 1952.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 61 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
ASKLEPIEION OF EPIDAURUS (Ancient sanctuary) ARGOLIS
Region: Argolid
Periods: Dark Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: Sanctuary of Apollo and Asklepios and an Asklepieion or
healing center.
Physical Description:
On the E coast of the Argolid, the health spa and religious
center at Epidauros maintained a bath, hotels and dwellings for the priest-physicians
as well as a tholos building, temples, stoas, gymnasium, palaestra, stadium and
a theater. The theater is one of the best preserved ancient structures in Greece
and is now used for modern presentations of ancient Greek drama. The Asklepieia
(athletic and dramatic festival) was held every 4 years. Epidauros is claimed
as the birthplace of Asklepios and it was the most celebrated center of his cult.
Description:
Traditionally the region of Epidauros is said to have first
been inhabited by the Carians. There existed, in Archaic or earlier times, a cult
of Malos in the region, but the establishment of a sanctuary to Apollo and Asklepios
is not older than the 6th century B.C. It appears that the sanctuary was first
dedicated to Apollo and that only in the 5th century B.C. did Apollo's son Asklepios
gain prominence. At the end of the 5th century B.C. and throughout the 4th century
the Asklepieion grew in fame and influence. Every 4 years (9 days after the Isthmian
Games) the Panhellenic Asklepieia Games were held. At ca. 380 B.C. poetry and
music contests were added to the competition. During the 4th century the cult
of Asklepios spread throughout the Greek world. Epidauros was claimed as the birthplace
of Asklepios and more than 200 new Asklepieia were built (most notably at Athens,
Kos, and Pergamon). Also at this time the previously unadorned sanctuary at Epidauros
was filled with votive offerings and monuments. Fame and prosperity continued
throughout the Hellenistic period. In 87 B.C. the sanctuary at Epidauros was looted
by Sulla and in 67 B.C. it was plundered by pirates. In the 2nd century A.D. the
sanctuary enjoyed a new upsurge under the Romans and the worship of new gods from
the East was introduced into the sanctuary. In 395 A.D. the Goths raided the sanctuary.
Although the cults of the ancient gods died out under Christianity, the sanctuary
at Epidauros was known as late as the mid 5th century A.D. as a Christian healing
center.
Exploration:
Excavations: P. Kavvadias and V. Stais of the Greek Archaeological
Society began in 1881, the French School of Archaeology for a short time just
after W.W. II, and J. Papadimitriou in 1948-51.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 34 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
IREON (Ancient sanctuary) ARGOS - MYKINES
Region: Argolid
Periods: Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, Roman
Type: Sanctuary
Summary: The main sanctuary to Hera in the Argive territory.
Physical Description:
The Heraion is located approximately equidistant from Argos
and Mycenae, in an area referred to by Pausanias as Prosymna. The sanctuary occupies
3 artificial terraces below Mt. Euboea and has a commanding view of the Argive
plain. The upper terrace, supported by a retaining wall of possible late Geometric
date, is a level paved area occupied by the Old Temple and an altar. The later,
middle terrace supports the New Temple, where a chryselephantine statue of Hera
by Polykleitos was housed. Other structures located on this terrace included one
of the earliest examples of a building with a peristyle court, which may have
served as a banquet hall. On the lowest terrace is a stoa and an Archaic step-like
retaining wall. To the W are Roman baths and palaestra.
Description:
Although tradition states that Agamemnon was elected at
the Heraion to lead the Trojan expedition, the earliest finds at the cult area
date to the Geometric period. The sanctuary grew and expended during the Archaic
and Classical period and most of the remains (with the exception of the Roman
baths and palaestra) date to the 7th through 5th centuries B.C. The sanctuary
continued in importance through the Roman period.
Exploration:
Discovered 1831 by T. Gordon. Minor excavations: Gordon
(1836), Rangabe and Bursian (1854), Schliemann (1874), Stamatakis (1878) and Caskey
and Amandry 1949. Major excavations: American School of Classical Studies; C.
Waldstein 1892-1895, C. Blegen 1925-1928.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 77 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
LERNA (Prehistoric settlement) ARGOLIS
Region: Argolid
Periods: Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age
Type: Settlement
Summary: Archaeologically important Early Bronze Age settlement.
Physical Description:
Lerna is one of the largest (ca. 180 sq. m.) prehistoric
mounds in S Greece and probably owed its importance to its position on the narrow
strip of land between sea and mountains that formed the route from the Argolid
to the S Peloponnese. It is located in the marshy area on the Gulf of Argos (10
km S of Argos). Early Bronze Age Lerna had substantial fortification walls and
a palace or administrative center in a central building referred to as the "House
of Tiles." This was a large two-story building with terracotta rooftiles and several
storage rooms where clay sealings were found. In Classical times the area was
claimed as home of the Nereids, place where Herakles slew the Hydra and location
of the entrance to Hades (through the Aleyonean Lake).
Description:
After a long period of Neolithic occupation (Lerna I and
II) the site seems to have been deserted for a time before it was levelled off
and reoccupied in the Early Helladic II period (Lerna III). The new settlement
had a double ring of defense walls with gates and towers and a number of substantial
buildings within. The largest building has been named the House of Tiles because
of the unusual early occurrence of terracotta roofing tiles associated with the
building. The walls of the large building are nearly 1 m thick and stairs indicate
an upper story. The building was perhaps still under construction when the whole
settlement was destroyed by fire. In the Early Helladic III period (Lerna IV),
the inhabitants (who supposedly destroyed the earlier settlement) covered the
site of the House of Tiles with a low tumulus surrounded by a ring of stones,
as though to mark off a sacred area. In the Early Helladic III period Lerna was
an open settlement of smaller buildings, some of them having an apsidal megaron
floor plan. Bothroi, or "rubbish pits" were an unusual characteristic of this
settlement. The Early Helladic III levels at Lerna produced, in addition to the
typical pottery of that period, a few examples of a pottery type known as "Minyan"
ware, which was sometimes wheel-made and is a common feature of the Middle Helladic
period. The clearly defined Middle Helladic level at Lerna (Lerna V) follows without
a break. The settlement at Lerna continues to exist throughout the Middle Helladic
period, but does not continue into the Late Helladic or Mycenaean period. At the
end of the Middle Helladic period, 2 rectangular shaft graves were cut into the
tumulus of the House of Tiles, indicating that the meaning of that monument had
been forgotten.
Exploration:
Excavations: 1952-58, J. Caskey, American School of Classical
Studies.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 2 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
MYCENAE (Mycenean palace) ARGOLIS
Region: Argolid
Periods: Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze
Age, Geometric, Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic
Type: Fortified city
Summary: Center of the Mycenaean Empire and traditional palace of
Agamemnon.
Physical Description:
Located ca. half-way between Corinth and Argos and controlling
the natural pass from the Isthmus to the Peloponnese, Mycenae was a citadel palace
that included extensive fortifications, granaries, guardrooms, shrines and a few
private dwellings situated around the palace complex. The palace consisted of
a central megaron meeting hall, throne room and courtyard with adjacent private
quarters, storerooms, guard stations and administrative rooms. Outside the Lion
Gate and massive walls of the citadel are found the private houses, workshops,
public works and other features of the dispersed settlement and the tholos tombs
of the ruling clans.
Description:
Mycenae, on a naturally defensible hill with a commanding
view and plentiful nearby fresh water, was first occupied in the Neolithic period.
Habitation continued throughout the Early and Middle Helladic periods and the
first palace complex was probably built at the beginning of the Late Helladic
period. In the Late Helladic IIIA period the fortifications probably followed
the natural boundary of the hilltop. In Late Helladic IIIB the circuit was enlarged
to the S and W, and toward the end of Late Helladic IIIB an E extension to the
citadel was added with a sally port and access to an underground water supply.
It was at this time that the great Lion Gate was also constructed. The citadel
and palace of Mycenae were destroyed at the end of the Late Helladic IIIB, although
some occupation continued at the site during the Late Helladic IIIC period. In
the Geometric period only a few small houses occupied the summit of the hill.
In the Archaic period a temple was built on the summit. During the Persian Wars
Mycenae sent a small force to fight at Thermopylae and Plataea. In 468 B.C. Argos
destroyed the acropolis at Mycenae and the city later came under direct Argive
control. As a deme of Argos the acropolis was rebuilt and fortification walls
were built around the lower town. The site continued to be inhabited until the
end of the 3rd century A.D.
Exploration:
Lord Elgin explored the Treasury of Atreus in 1802 and
Lord Sligo took the columns from it to London in 1910. Excavations: 1874-76, H.
Schliemann; 1876-77, P. Stamatakis; 1884-1902, C. Tsountas; 1920-23, 1939, and
1950-57, A. Wace, British School of Archaeology; 1950s to present, J. Papadimitriou,
G. Mylonas, D. Theocharis, N. Verdelis, A. Orlandos, E. Stikas, A. Keramopoullos,
S. Marinatos, and S. Iakovidis of the Greek Archaeological Society and the Greek
Archaeological Service and E. French and W. Taylour of the British School of Archaeology.
Donald R. Keller, ed.
This text is cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains 54 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
