Baths

vol. II p.2743-2758

Baths

Warm baths were already common with the Greeks at the time of Homer; <30> they were called ἀσάμινθος (see its respective article), and weren’t just for cleaning - since Diomedes and Odysseus first wash themselves in the sea before they take a warm bath -, but were for refreshment and recovery after exertion; so, those coming from a journey or back from battle bathed. The concept of warm baths can be followed throughout all of antiquity, Plat. leg. VI 761c. Arist. probl. 1, 39 p. 863 Bk. Gal. X 714 K. Artemid. I 64. <40> The Odyssey was also aware of a frequent warm bath as being an integral part of a comfortable life. VIII 249. 453.

Swimming pools, or κολυμβήθραι (Diοd. IV 78. XI 25) were also very early. Learning how to swim was seen as a necessary part of education in Athens; hence the saying μήτε νεῖν μήτε γράμματα (Plat. leg. III 689d; also Paroemiogr. I 278 and the quote there). The baths of the Spartans in Eurotas are famous; <50> cf. also Gal. X 715 K. Sea baths are mentioned in Arist. probl. 23, 10.

As well as this, the warm baths remained common throughout everything, Hesiod. op. 784ff. In the early days, there were public baths, usually called βαλανεῖα from the time of old comedy onwards. Athen. XII 518c is about [the baths] of Sybaris, destroyed in 510 BCE; here, tubs are supposed to have been invented (ibid. 519e) for hot baths (probably a particular kind of these). <60> But θερμολουτεῖν - by which the regular use of warm baths is most likely meant - was criticized for a long time for making people soft by the followers of old custom (Aristoph. nub. 991. 1044. The comedian in Athen. I 18c). The remark in Athen. I 18b that baths were not allowed in the city (Athens?) to begin with is unclear. For the Spartans, warm baths were only allowed in exceptional circumstances (Plut. Lyc. 16); <page break 2743/2744> ψυχρολουτεῖν (Plut. Alc. 23; de adul. et am. 7) was a rule for them, as it also was in Macedonia (Polyaen. IV 2, 1). In Athens, there were public baths built at public expense (Xen. de republ. Athen. 2, 10), and such baths were owned by private individuals, Isai. V 22. VI 33, where such a bath was sold for 3000 drachma. In both, you had to pay an entrance fee, ἐπίλουτρον, to the operator, renter, or manager, βαλανεύς; <10> the mysteries-inscription from Andania (Dittenberger Syll. 388) names two χαλκοῖ. Lucian. Lexiph. 2 two obols; cf. Athen. VIII 351f. Arist. nub. 835. Finally, rich people had baths in their houses, Xen. de rep. Athen. 2, 10.

It can’t really be decided with certainty from Arist. pax 1139 or Plat. Crit. 117b about baths for women, and also, in Athen. XIII 590f, Phryne only says that she doesn’t bathe with the men like other hetairai. <20> But depictions like Panofka Bilder antiken Lebens 18, 9 (often repeated, eg. Baumeister Denkm. d. kl. Alt. I 243), where women let water flow over them from animal heads (cf. Roulez Choix de vases peints du musée de Leyde 19, 1 = Daremberg-Saglio Dict. d. Ant. I 649), and the vase from Paris Daremberg-Saglio Dict. d. Ant. I 650, where women swim in a κολυμβήθρα, depict nothing other than a public bath for women. <30> Finally, for the Romans, who took the idea from the Greeks in the 3rd century BCE under the Greek name, the baths had always had two sections for men and women: Varro de l. l. IX 68. Charis. I 15. So, baths for women can also be assumed as existing in Greece. But communal baths not split by gender were in no way non-existant; the comedian Theopompus in Poll. VII 66 mentions the underwear common in those baths, ᾤα λουτρίς. <40>

We find out less about the establishment of Greek baths than we do about the Roman ones. It seems that they didn’t contain as many rooms with different purposes. Mostly, an individual changing room doesn’t seem to have been available, in Aristot. probl. 29, 14, where he talks about theft in baths, it’s taken as a given that you would leave your clothes in the communal bathing room. <50> There is also no trace of a connecting room like the Roman tepidarium, and a palaestra was missing in the baths in Vitr. V 11, 2. In the main room, according to Polyb. XXX 23 (20), 3, there was a large communal bath, μάκτρα, and smaller ones, πύελοι, which were individual baths used by more noble people (κομψότεροι), and so costed more. Though, Eupolis also calls the communal bath πύελος in Poll. VII 168. The bath was also called πυρία in Athen. V 207f. Anth. Pal. XI 243. Phrynich. p. 325 Lob. <60> It seems that the individual baths were more common in Greece and in the Greek east (cf. Koldewey Athen. Mitt. IX 1884. 45ff. about the baths in Assos, Ephesos, and Alexandria Troas) than they were in Italy and in the west. In the same room, as it seems, there was also a large washbasin, λουτήρ, Poll. VII 187. Moschion in Athen. V 207f, where a 5-metretes (19.7 litre) λουτήρ is mentioned. <page break 2744/2745> This, which was round and rested on a foot (ὑπόστατον Poll. X 46), is often depicted on vases (see Labrum). Also in the same room, according to Plut. Demetr. 24, there were ἐσχάρα (Poll. VII 166), on which the water was heated up in the χάλκωμα or χαλκεῖον; and on these there were also both containers of boiling water (Plut. Demetr. 24) to mix in, and also containers of cooler water to pour over (Theophr. char. 9). <10> The correct temperature in the baths was produced by pouring water in (παραχέειν, Plut. apophth. Lac. var. 49). There were also incidences of showers (Plat. de rep. I 344d); the container used for this was called ἀρυταίνα (Aristoph. in Poll. X 63. Theophr. char. 9). According to the latter source, people would have had water poured over them by the attendants at the baths as they stood; showers in the baths in Homer (see Ἀσάμινθος) and later Gal. X 725 K. The attendants at the baths were called παραχύται (Athen. XII 518c. Plut. de invid. 6), as well as λουτροχόοι (even in Hom. Od. XX 297. Athen. loc. cit.), <20> βαλανεῖται (Polyb. XXX 23 (20), 3), and as an umbrella term also βαλανεῖς (Plut. loc. cit.). As well as this, the βαλανεύς is the manager of the baths (Ar. Plut. 955; ran. 710. Alciphr. III. 40. 3 [corrected from: 1, 23.] Plut. de cup. div. 5. Anth. Pal. IX 617), who delivered the cleaning materials that took the place of soap, ῥύμμα, σμῆγμα, νίτρον, κονία, Κιμωλία γῆ (Arist. ran. 710; Lys. 378 with the Schol.), and who took the money from the baths, ἐπίλουτρον.

Alongside the actually warm bath, <30> there was also the ‘sweating’ in a heated room, πυρία, πυριατήριον, common in early times, and this followed by pouring over cold water (cf. also Plut. de primo fig. 10) seems to have been thought of as a particularly Spartan custom (Strab. III 154. Mart. VI 42, 16), and so the room for that was called the laconicum by the Romans. Though, Herodot. IV 75 calls it Ἑλληνικὴ πυρίη, and Arist. probl. 2, 29. 32 speaks about it as if it’s something entirely usual. <40> It’s likely in itself that this room was different from the warm bath, or at least could have been, like the Roman laconicum (see below), since it was easier to heat up a smaller room. Furthermore, we are told that the dome shape common in Roman times for the laconicum appeared in Greek baths, Athen. XI 501 d-f; cf. Alciphr. I 23. And Vitruvius (V 11, 2), alongside the concamerata sudatio, prescribes a laconicum for the bath in the palaestra, which isn’t Italicae consuetudinis. <50> Finally, it seems that this room had the name ἀλειπτήριον because people rubbed themselves with oil either before or during the sweating (Orib. X 1, 21). The name turns up in Theoph. de sud. 28 cf. with Aristot. probl. 2, 29. 32; cf. also Theophr. de igne 37. Plut. Cim. 1. Strab. III 154. Poll. VII 166, finally the mystery-inscriptions from Andania (Dittenberger Syll. 388) Z. 108. <60> The temperature was probably increased through braziers and hot stones, Strab. loc. cit. In Aristot. loc. cit., the temperature increase is described with ἐπεισφέρειν. The use of the πυριατήριον was originally - as its Spartan origin suggests - a hardening-treatment, and first became a luxury with the Romans. <page break 2745/2746>

The usual time for bathing was before the main meal, Arist. eccl. 652; av. 132. Xen. conv. I, 7; hell. VII 2, 22. Plut. VII sap. conv. 3. Lucian. Lex. 9. Artemid. I 64. Alciphr. 3, 60 (μεσοῦσα ἡμέρα). Softer people bathed more often during the day, Menand. in Athen. IV 166a. Those who lived simply didn’t bathe regularly, Socrates bathed very rarely for instance (Plat. symp. 174a [corrected from Plut. symp. 174a]); Phokion (Plut. 4) was never seen in a public bath. Poor people went to the baths to warm up, and likely also slept there, Arist. Plut. 951. Alciphr. I 25. Teles in Stob. flor. XCVII 31. <10>

Only Greek baths from later time periods have been preserved: in Assos, Alexandria Troas (at the time of Hadrian; Koldewey Athen. Mitt. IX 1884, 36ff.) and Ephesos (even more modern; Antiqu. of Ionia II 40). These all have similar floor plans, and are different from the Roman hot baths in how they seemingly didn’t contain a larger swimming pool, but mainly had devices for washing and showering, <20> and this doesn’t allow the importance of the individual rooms to be determined.

Literature about the Greek baths: Becker-Göll Charikles III 98. Hermann-Blümner Griech. Privataltert. 210. Daremberg-Saglio Dict. d. Ant. I 648.

We know much more about the ancient manner of bathing since it was introduced to the Romans. And this knowledge is based partially on the many times it’s mentioned in literature, <30> amongst those Vitruvius’ instructions (V 10) should be especially noted, the description of a bath in Lucian (Hippias), and Galen’s text about the baths (X 708ff. K.; cf. also Oribas. X 1), and partially on the numerous baths, some preserved better than others.

Amongst these, the ones with the most to offer are those of Pompeii, partially because of their good condition, <40> and partially because of its clear nature and perfect clarity regarding determining the importance of each of the rooms. These rooms are:

Two double-establishments, for men and for women, the so-called Stabian and Forum-thermae, the first[?] from the pre-Roman times (2nd cent. BCE), but renovated in Sulla’s time and improved upon, and the latter[?] from Sulla’s time (just after 80 BCE); both are attested as belonging to the state in inscriptions: CIL X 817. 829. Overbeck Pompeii⁴ 200ff. A third double-establishment, the so-called Villa of Iulia Felix, has been previously excavated, <50> but has been reburied, though its floor-plan is known, Mon. d. Inst. I 16.

A large establishment, the so-called central baths, without a specific female-only bath, was still under construction at the time of it being buried in 79 CE. Because of how good its location is, it’s also considered to belong to the state, Overbeck⁴ 233.

Two neighbouring baths, perhaps owned by a private individual for public use, and perhaps one for men and one for women, Röm. Mitt. III 1888, 194. V 1890, 130. ;60:

Finally, a considerable number of smaller baths in private houses for the use of their owners, Overbeck⁴ 284. 343. 348. 358. 364. 368. 372. Mau Pomp. Beitr. 194; Röm. Mitt. II 1887, 133. VIII 1893, 51. IX 1894, 352.

In Rome, the baths best preserved are those built after 212 CE by Caracalla, <page break 2746/2747> Blouet Les thermes de Caracalla, Paris 1828. Less well preserved, and made rather unrecognisable through modern installations, are the baths of Diocletian opened in 305-306 CE; though the design of the entire facility has been able to be determined, Paulin Les thermes de Dioclétien, Paris 1890; also Hülsen Röm. Mitt. VII 1892, 308. The baths originally built by Titus and rebuilt by Trajan have now been destroyed, but their layout is known from earlier reports; <10> the most complete report is in Hülsen Röm. Mitt. VII 1892, 302. Likewise, those of Constantine, Palladio Terme dei Romani 28. The baths of Agrippa are not known completely, Lanciani Not. d. Scavi 1882, 347.

Finally, in various places in Italy and in the provinces, we find a large number of smaller and larger baths, though these are usually less well preserved and offer us little in terms of new knowledge. A register of these is in Marquardt Privatl. d. R.² 275; about the great baths of St. Barbara in Trier, cf. further Hettner Westd. Ztschr. X (1891), 261. <20>

Regular and sophisticated use of warm baths was a foreign idea to the Romans of more ancient times; brachia et crura cotidie abluebant, ceterum toti nundinis lavabantur Sen. ep. 86, 12; cf. Cato in Non. 108. see ephippium. The swimming pool in the Tiber also remained well used after exercise in the Martian fields (Plut. Cat. mai. 20. Cic. p. Cael. 36. Hor. od. I 8, 8. III 12, 7; sat. II 1, 8). <30> However, from at least the middle of the 3rd century BCE, the Greek βαλανεῖον made its appearance under these names (balineum, balneum, balnea, balneae; cf. Keller Lat. Volksetymologie 263). The relevant terms were already familiar to Plautus. After the Second Punic War, the baths were introduced into Spain from Rome (Iustin. XLIV 2, 6). In Italy and the provinces, there were state-run bath complexes, as well as public baths under private ownership; <40> and also baths in private houses for the use of those who lived there. This can be understood from what has already been said about Pompeii above. There were state-owned baths in Rome run by the aediles at Cato’s time, Seneca ep. 86, 10; in municipalities from the time of the republic, in Praeneste and Grumentum, CIL I 1141. 1263 = XIV 3013. X 221; in the time of the empire they turn up a lot in inscriptions, Marquardt. Privatl.² 272, 5. Private enterprises are mentioned often, namely in Rom, Cic. d. or. II 223; p. Cluent. 141; p. Rosc. Am. 18; p. Cael. 62. Martial. I 59, 3. II 14, 11. <50> In Rome, there were only a few public baths to start with (Sen. ep. 86, 9); in the year 33 BCE there were at least 170 of them, which, under Agrippa’s organisation during his aedileship, were able to be used free of charge, Plin. n. h. XXXVI 121 (mostly misunderstood as saying that Agrippa built so many baths). Cass. Dio XLIX 43, 3. Pliny adds: quae nunc Romae ad infinitum auxere numerum. <60> The regional-directory lists 856 balinea; five which are mentioned by name were clearly owned privately. Plin. ep. II 17, 26 shows how numerous they were in smaller places as well. The great complexes built first during the empire by Agrippa, which were then also built by many other emperors, known by the name thermae (though balneus Agrippae Inschr. Röm. Mitt. III 1888, 146) correspond to these smaller establishments. <page break 2747/2748> They were connected to places for physical exercise and spaces for various kinds of entertainment. About these, see eg. Richter Topographie, Register s. Thermae. About baths in private houses, namely villas, see Sen. ep. 86, 4. Cic. ad Qu. fr. III 1, 1. Plin. ep. II 17, 11. V 6, 25.

The design of the Roman baths was based on the perfection of their heating system, <10> particularly on the idea of putting in hollow spaces under the floors and in the walls of the bathing rooms, which would warm up the rooms after being filled with hot air. The invention of the hollow spaces under the floors and the physical baths (balineae pensiles) was attributed to C. Sergius Orata, at the beginning of the last century BCE (Cic. in Non. 194, 12. Val. Max. IX 1, 1. Plin. n. h. IX 168. XXVI 16). According to Vitruvius, the hollow spaces should be two feet deep; though they have been found with many different depths, including a depth of over 1m. <20> The floors above the hollow spaces, which were mosaics or signina, rested on top of two feet of large strong tiles. These tiles either rested on little pillars made of small square bricks, or on hollow clay columns fired for this specific purpose; the whole mechanism was referred to as suspensura (Vitr. loc. cit.). The hollow spaces were connected to the fireplace, hypocausis, through an opening, which the floor of the hollow space was supposed to be sloped against, according to Vitruvius. <30> Finally, there must have been a hole for ventilation in a spot as far away as possible. The idea of hollow walls followed that of the suspensura well into the time of the republic, and the hollow walls could be manufactured in two ways: either through clay pipes with a rectangular cross-section, or through so-called tegulae mammatae (see there) - ie, brick tiles - which were adorned with wart-like protrusions on each of the four corners, which meant a space could be created between the tiles and the wall. <40> The hollow spaces in the walls were connected with those beneath the floors, and had one or more openings for air-flow at the top, and if they extended onto the arched ceiling, these were at the very top of the ceiling (Röm. Mitt. II 1887, 134), or if not then they were at the high point of the vaults, in which place the openings in the Stabian baths in Pompeii are found (Röm. Mitt. VI 266). In order to establish the air-flow quickly when heating began, they probably also set up a ‘pilot fire’ somewhere away from the fireplace, <50> as in the tepidarium of the Stabian baths; cf. v. Roessler Westd. Ztschr. XI 260. Because, in each room, there could either be a hollow space beneath only the floor or behind the walls as well, and because these could either be behind all walls or only behind one or two (Mau Pomp. Beitr. 150, 9; Röm. Mitt. VIII 1893. 52), and because these either extended to the ceiling or not, and also because the heated rooms were different distances from the fireplace, <60> they were able to achieve very varied temperatures in the rooms. In the Stabian baths in Pompeii, which were built before the invention of the suspensura, we can clearly see how these were put to use, as well as the hollow walls later, Mau Pomp. Beitr. 117ff. In earlier times, the heating was achieved with coal braziers, just as the tepidarium in the forum baths did it for a while. <page break 2749/2750>

The hypocaust systems were also used to heat up the bathing water, and Vitruvius does say that three large copper pots should be set up there - for hot, lukewarm, and cold water - and that they should be such that the first could be refilled from the second, and the second refilled from the third, after each use. The places for these large cylindrical pots can be easily recognised in Pompeii, in the Stabian and forum baths: the pot for hot water stood over the fireplace, <10> as close as possible to the alveus; the pot for lukewarm water stood next to it above a hollow space connected to it; the pot for cold water stood on stone walls in the Stabian baths, and in the forum-baths it stood on a hollow space, which wasn’t linked with the fireplace but with the hollow space of the suspensura. The only pot of this kind which we still have along with its plumbing is found in the small bath of a recently [from 1896’s perspective] excavated villa rustica in Boscoreale in Pompeii. <20> The system here is, however, a simple one. Outside of the cylindrical iron pot for hot water which stood over the hypocaust, the only other container they had was a four-cornered container of cold water. By opening and closing the taps, they were able to draw the hot or cold water into the alveus as well as into the labrum, and by mixing them they could get the temperature they wanted, Mau Röm. Mitt. IX 1894, 353ff. Rostovtseff Journ. des (russ.) Minist. f. Volksaufkl., Jan./Febr. 1894. <30>

The state-owned establishments, as well as privately owned ones for public use, were run by a conductor, who paid the owner a set amount of money and for that he was allowed to take the bathing revenue, balneaticum. As in Metallum Vipacense, Eph. epigr. III 166, 19; cf. Dig. XIX 2, 58, 2. XX 4, 9 (here it’s privately owned). Iuv. VII 4. Perhaps the publicum Interamnitum vectigal balnearum of the late inscription CIL IX 5144 was referring to direct management by the local authority, <40> cf. Borghesi Oeuvr. VI 510. The bathing cost amounted to the often mentioned quadrans (eg. Hor. sat. I 3, 137), which was ¼ as (2⅕ Pfennig [I have no idea how much that is in modern currency]); in Metallum Vipascense it was ½ as for men, and 1 as for women. We also learn that women paid more in Rome from Iuv. VI 447, where quandrante lavari referred to a woman who acted like a man. <50> Diocletian’s edict (VII 75. 76) sets a maximum cost of 2 denarii (3⅗ Pfennig) balneatori privatorio and just as much for the capsario. Children of some age which we don’t know specifically went free (Iuv. II 152 with Schol.); in Metallum Vipascense it was all impuberes who went free (Eph. ep. III 166, 24); though, according to CIL XI 720, this wasn’t the case in Bononia.

It often happened that people in office would pay for their citizens bathing during their time in office. <60> So, in Rome, Faustus Sulla (Cass. Dio XXXVII 51, 4) and Agrippa (Cass. Dio XLIX 43, 3). The latter left behind his baths for free use for all time, with estates responsible for the costs, according to Cass. Dio. LIV 29, 4; though there is no trace of this later on, and rather in Mart. III 36, 6, Agrippa’s baths seem much more like the more elegant baths. For similar acts outside of Rome, CIL XI 720. XII 594. XIV 2978. Dig. XIX 2, 30, 1. <page break 2749/2750>

Right from the start, there were also baths for women, and it was a general rule that public baths should also have a section for women; this is where the plural noun, balnea or balneae, comes from (Varro de l. l. IX 68; about the linguistic usage Marquardt Privatl.² 272, 5). Noble women also visited the same baths, Suet. Aug. 94. <10> Two such double-establishments are in Pompeii, while a third facility ibid. only has all the rooms once; similarly, in Lanuvium there were two male baths and one female bath, CIL XIV 2121; cf. also C. Gracchus in Gell. X 3, 3. Cass. Dio XLIX 43, 3. However, in smaller places there weren’t always specific rooms for women; instead, they made it work by reserving specific times for women and for men. And so, in Metallum Vipascense, the bath was open for women from the morning until the seventh hour, <20> and then from the eighth hour to the second hour at night it was open for men. The large bathing facilities of the empire had no specific sections for women, as far as we know. Since the bodged solution of having timetables for men and women cannot have been the case for such great establishments, as well as the fact that the Greek gymnasium seems to have been their model and that they were even called gymnasia occasionally (clearest in Cass. Dio LXVIII 15, 3; further LIII 27, 1. LXI 21, 1. Tac. ann. XIV 47; cf. also Becker Handb. I 684), <30> it must be assumed that they were only for men, and were only otherwise visited by freedwomen who were bathing together with men.

Pliny n. h. XXXIII 153 likely first mentions men and women bathing together; however, it was in no way seen as decent, Quintil. inst. V 9, 14; also in Martial (III 51. 72. 87. VII 35. XI 75) only disreputable people seem to have taken part; <40> cf. further Ammian. Marc. XXVIII 4, 9. However, the practice was widely spread, even in the higher classes, and spread to Greece from Rome (Plut. Cat. mai. 20). Hadrian forbade it (Hist. Aug. 18, 10. Cass. Dio LXIX 8, 2); just as Marcus Aurelius (Hist. Aug. 23, 8) and Severus Alexander, after whom Elagabalus allowed it again (Hist. Aug. Sev. Al. 24, 2). For later times, Clem. Alex. Paed. III 5, 275. Cyprian de virg. hab. 19. <50> According to old-Roman custom, even fathers and sons and fathers-in-law and sons-in-law didn’t bathe together, Plut. Cat. mai. 20. Cic. off. I 129. Hist. Aug. Gord. tres VI 4. Val. Max. II 1, 7.

A Roman bath was made out of the following rooms: 1) apodyterium (see Ἀποδυτήριον), the unheated changing room, 2) frigidarium (see there), the cold bath; 1 and 2 could also have been connected in such a way that the pool for the cold bath was connected to the apodyterium, <60> which was then at the same time the frigidarium, like in Pompeii in the central-baths, in the women’s bath of the Stabian baths, and in the two private baths. 3) Tepidarium (see there), cella tepidaria, cella media, a slightly heated room to lessen the shock of the entrance into 4) calidarium (see there), caldarium, cella caldaria, the strongly heated room for the warm bath and for sweating in the hot air; <page break 2750/2751> on one end, it contained the large common bath, alveus (see there nr.1), and on the other end it contained the basin, labrum (see there), which lukewarm water bubbled into. Next, they would sometimes have 5) the laconicum (see there), assa sudatio, assum, the circular and hottest room to sweat in the dry air, which you could get to from the tepidarium (Vitr. V 10, 5. Villa of Iulia Felix), and sometimes also from the caldarium (central baths). <10> These rooms were ordered in such a way that the apodyterium, the tepidarium, and the caldarium followed on from one another in this order, and that in the double-establishments, for men and women, both of the caldaria stood close together and between them the fireplace, at first only used to heat up the water and later used to heat up the bathing rooms themselves, was attached to its own room nearby, the praefurnium. The tepidarium, which people didn’t spend much time in, was consistently the smallest of the three rooms. <20> The frigidarium and the laconicum could be connected to the apodyterium, or rather, the tepidarium and caldarium, in various different ways. Single rooms are extant in the Stabian baths in Pompeii, though they had clearly been out of use for long before 79 AD, <page break 2751/2752> and therefore they were probably specifically for warm baths and had been put out of use since the heating had been perfected inside the caldarium, which meant that people preferred to take their baths there. The numerous individual rooms of the Caracalla baths were specifically for cold baths. Furthermore, since gymnastic or other kinds of physical exercise belong to the bathing process, every somewhat larger bathing complex contained an area specifically for this, <10> which was likely usually surrounded completely or at least partially by porticos; this is what it was like in the Stabian and central baths in Pompeii; in the former, this area was named the palaestra on inscriptions; cf. also Petron. 27. This is, therefore, the opposite relationship as in the Greek gymnasia and palaestra, which also happened to have a bath as an adjacent room. The cold swimming pool, piscina, natatio, which is also extant in both of the Pompeian baths above, also belonged to the palaestra. <20> Warm piscinae Cass. Dio LV 7, 6. Plin. ep. II 17, 11; cf. Val. Max. IX 1, 1.

In order to illustrate how these rooms could have been grouped in a huge establishment, we will now look at the floorplan of the so-called Stabian baths in Pompeii: <page break 2752/2753>

People entered the palaestra 2 through the main entrance 1 and the side entrance 8; on the right of the palaestra 2 is a tiled path 3, and from 9 outwards stone balls would be rolled down it, two of which have been found here. 10 is a spot for a spectator of the palaestra (?). Further, on the left there is the swimming pool 6 and next to it there are two covered rooms, 5 and 7, which originally contained one shallow pool each, about 0.65m deep, which a stream of water flowed into from the west wall. <10> They probably served for washing and shower-baths[?]; though in 7, the pool was later filled in and the room was used for something different. 4 is a changing room with traces of lockers on the walls. On the right of the palaestra are the actual bathing rooms: 21-25 for men, 16-19 for women, in the middle <page break 2753/2754> between them both, there was the heater 20. As well as this, 24 + 25 and 16 are apodyteria, one having two specific entrances to the street 15, 17, the other having two rooms before it, 26, 27, which held benches for the waiting attendants. There was a frigidarium 22, while 16 held the pool for the cold bath in a corner. The tepidaria are 18, 23, the caldaria 19, 21, both with an alveus at one end and a labrum at the other. Finally, on the corridor 13, <10> with an entrance onto the street and onto the palaestra, four individual rooms which weren’t used at the end of the complex’s lifespan with a brick bath each, and the exit 14.

In order to make the site of the laconicum clearer, here is the floorplan of the central baths: <page break 2754/2753>

There was apodyterium and frigidarium 1, tepidarium 2, caldarium 3 with two alvei and a small tub instead of the labrum, laconicum 4. <60> Two heaters were supposedly connected to 5 and 6; piscina 7. Compared with the other Pompeian baths, this one also shows one of the advances highlighted in Seneca ep. 86, 11: the large windows were facing south-west and south-east, which was also in accordance with Vitruvius’ requirements: because people would bathe in the afternoon, the windows ought to be facing south-west. <page break 2753/2754>

Although in these kinds of establishments, the bathing rooms could have been ordered arbitrarily and in no way symmetrically, <60> like the relations between the rooms would have demanded, a particular kind of great baths developed, which were set up by the emperors, which we can see in the establishments that generally match up built by Titus (Trajan), Caracalla, Diocletian, and Constantine. Below is the floorplan for the main building of the baths of Diocletian. <page break 2754/2755>

Just like in the other establishments of the same kind, this also has a large space in the middle, likely adorned with gardens, <page break 2755/2756> which was surrounded by a separated-off area containing various rooms (in the Caracalla baths, these were individual rooms for cold baths). The separated-off area was in the shape of a long rectangle, just as the building itself. <page break 2756/2755> In the building, along a line parallel to the shorter side, there is the piscina 1 (covered over in the baths of Caracalla), <40> frigidarium = apodyterium 2 (mistakenly called tepidarium in the publications), tepidarium 3, caldarium 4, the latter projecting out a little bit past the opposite front side of the piscina, in order to receive as much sunlight as possible. The frigidarium contained four spacious baths, as well as the caldarium, probably, in the baths of Diocletian as well as in the other baths. The heaters were next to the tepidarium. There is no evidence for a laconicum. <50> Either side of the main section of the baths lie other rooms in perfect symmetry, the purpose of which can’t be known in detail. In all cases, however, on each side of the frigidarium there was a large colonnaded courtyard, which could have been used for walking or ball games and other physical exercise.

This kind of bath also turns up in the great baths from St. Barbara in Trier, <60> adapted for the harsher climate through a larger number of heated side-rooms, which are grouped on either side of the large main rooms around a spacious (20 + 11.20m.) calida piscina. Amazingly, it seems that there definitely wasn’t a large cold piscina in the spot where you would have expected it to be. <page break 2755/2756> The large number of combs, hairpins, and spindle whorls found in the side-rooms of one half of the building (only a small part of the other half has been excavated), <40> seem to suggest that these rooms, at least at the end of the establishment’s lifespan, was used by women; however, this is not enough to come to any conclusions about the building as a whole, and the building is in no way a proper double-establishment, because all the main rooms only appear once down the middle of the building.

In this context, the baths of Thelepte in Africa take on a special position. <50> Here, the piscina goes down the centre line; this only appears once, but everything else appears twice: frigidarium, tepidarium, caldarium, laconicum. It seems, therefore, that men and women were separated here, but that they used the piscina together, although one group had their changing room on one side, and the other group had their changing room on the other (Arch. des miss. scient. 3. S. XIII 116ff.). <60>

The people bathed was often different according to taste or medical requirements; cf. eg. Celsus I 4. IV 5; more in Daremberg on Oribas X 1. However, the written sources and the baths themselves let three main kinds of bathing come to light. 1) The most common and complete way of bathing was the following: people would first do some kind of physical exercise; playing ball games before bathing was very popular, Sen. ep. 56, 1. Petron. 27. Martial. VII 32, 7. XII 82, 3. XIV 163. Plin. ep. III 1, 8. V 6, 27. <page break 2756/2757> Then they would get undressed in the apodyterium or tepidarium, after staying in the latter for a short while they would go to the caldarium, sweat there, take a warm bath, then head back to the apodyterium (or frigidarium) either through the tepidarium or by some other route, if any such route was available (Lucian. Hipp. 7), take a cold bath, then turn back to the caldarium (or laconicum, if there was one available), <10> sweat once more, and finally get themselves scraped down, Gal. X 708. 713 K.; about the final sweating process, ibid. 714. 2) People went through the tepidarium into the laconicum (if one was available, otherwise they would go into the caldarium), sweat there, then head back into the apodyterium (frigidarium) and take a cold bath or have cold water poured over them, Mart. VI 42, 16. Petron. 28. Suet. Aug. 82. In the laconicum, the air was dry (arido rapore, Mart. loc. cit.), <20> while they tried to keep the air humid in the other rooms, Gal. X 724 K. Agathinus in Oribas. X 7, 9. 3) They would warm themselves up by exercising in the palaestra, which therefore stood in for the warm baths and sweat baths (Gal. X 717), and then, after the dust and oil was scraped off them, they would take a cold bath in the piscina, Ovid. trist. III 12, 21.

Oil balms were connected to the baths. People would rub themselves with oil before and while they sweated (Gal. X 724. Oribas. X 1, 21), <30> and once more after their bath was finished, Gal. X 725. Petron. 28. According to Cels. I 4, people would first rub themselves with oil in the tepidarium. It’s unclear what is meant by unctorium in Plin. ep. II 17, 11, perhaps the unctorium hypocauston is a laconium, like in the Greek ἀλειπτήριον (see there, then the duae cellae are the tepidarium and the caldarium). In Sidon. Apoll. ep. II 2, 4, the cella unguentaria seems to lie between the frigidarium and the caldarium, so it seems to correspond with the tepidarium. <40> There definitely weren’t specific rooms for oiling in the baths in Pompeii, only on the male apodyterium of the forum baths was there a small dark room; though this could only be for storing oil at best (elaeothesium, elsewhere only a name used for the gymnasium, Vitruv. V 11, 12), but not for oiling. People believed they would avoid getting colds if they rubbed themselves with oil after bathing, Gal. X 481 K. <50>

In different time periods, people had different preferences for the temperatures in the baths. Although in more ancient times they preferred a moderate temperature, at the beginning of the empire people began to like more extreme temperatures, Cels. I 3. Sen. ep. 86, 10. 11. Petron. 72; piscinae nivatae Suet. Nero 27. However, it seems that in the time of the Flavians, this preference left with the grand luxury of this time period, and people liked a more moderate temperature again, Mart. X 48, 3. <60>

Refined luxury also manifested itself in mixing perfumes, spiced wine, and the like with the bath water, Plin. n. h. XIII 22. Hist. Aug. Elag. 19, 8. 21, 6. For healing purposes, medicinal things were also put in the bath water, Antyllos in Oribas. X 2. <page break 2757/2758>

For the services of oil rubbing, drying, wiping off (destringere) and scraping off (defricare), plucking out hair (depilare), people would bring a slave with them, if they had one. If they didn’t have any slaves, they scraped themselves off, by probably using the walls of the bathing rooms to scrape their back, Hist. Aug. Hadr. 17, 6. It’s likely in and of itself that you would find people in the baths themselves (aliptae, iatraliptae, alipili) who you could pay for these services, <10> but the anecdote loc. cit. requires that this was not the case; perhaps this was different at different times. People would bring the scraper (strigilis) and the bottle of oil (ampulla) with them, or have them brought to them by a slave; the same was true for the towels, lintea, for drying off, Plaut. Pers. 124; Stich. 228. Cic. de fin. II 30. Mart. XII 70, 1. 82, 7. XIV 51. Apul. flor. I 9, 34; met. I 23. Lucian. Lexiph. 2. <20>

At the head of the management of a bathhouse stood the balneator, Plaut. Poen. 703. Cic. p. Cael. 62; Phil. XIII 26, who could also have been the conductor or the ownner (Dig. III 2, 4, 2. XIX 2, 30, 1). They had a staff of a different size depending on the size of their establishment: to guard the clothes (Dig. III 2, 4, 2), to control the heating (fornacarii, Dig. XXXIII 7, 14) and for other jobs. On the other hand, it seems that the business of the capsarius, <30> who would keep bathers’ things safe in a box for a price, was a business independent from the management, Dig. I 15, 3, 5. Ed. Diocl. VII 75. CIL VI 9232.

Places to get food (popinae) were connected with the larger baths, and otherwise food (sausages, baked goods) would have been on sale: Seneca ep. 56, 2 describes this business; cf. also Lucian. Hipp. 5. The food and drink in the baths is often mentioned, Plaut. Trin. 406. Quintil. I 6, 44. Sen. ep. 122, 6. Mart. XII 19. 70. <40> Out of the baths in Pompeii, only the central baths had four rooms attached to a connecting room before the apodyterium which would have been able to serve these purposes; otherwise, the tabernae were unconnected to the inside of the baths. Palladio Le terme dei Romani. Becker-Göll Gallus III 104ff. Marquardt Privatl. d. Römer² 269ff. Daremberg et Saglio Dict. des ant. I 648.

[Mau.]

This article is referenced by: Ball Games, Caldarium. Frigidarium