THE HOUSE AND ITS FURNITURE
REFERENCES: Marquardt, 213-250, 607-645; Göll, II, 213-417; Guhl and
Koner, 556-580, 676-688, 705-725; Ramsay, 516-521; Pauly-Wissowa,
_ātrium_, _compluvium_; Smith, Harper, Rich, under _domus_, _mūrus_,
_tegula_, and the other Latin words used in the text; Lübker, 507-509;
Baumeister, 1365 f., 631, 927 f., 1373 f.; Mau-Kelsey, 239-348,
361-373, 446-474; Overbeck, 244-376, 520-537; Gusman, 253-316.
§186. Domus.--The house with which we are concerned is the residence
(_domus_) of the single household, as opposed to lodging houses or
apartment houses (_īnsulae_) intended for the accommodation of several
families, and the residence, moreover, of the well-to-do citizen, as
opposed on the one hand to the mansion of the millionaire and on the
other to the hovels of the very poor. At the same time it must be
understood that the Roman house did not show as many distinct types as
does the American house of the present time. The Roman was naturally
conservative, he was particularly reluctant to introduce foreign
ideas, and his house in all times and of all classes preserved certain
main features essentially unchanged. The proportion of these might
vary with the size and shape of the lot at the builder's disposal, the
number of apartments added would depend upon the means and tastes of
the owner, but the kernel, so to speak, is always the same, and this
makes the general plan much less complex, the description much less
confusing.
§187. Our sources of information are unusually abundant. Vitruvius, an
architect and engineer of the time of Caesar and Augustus, has left a
work on building, giving in detail his own principles of construction;
the works of many of the Roman writers contain either set descriptions
of parts of houses or at least numerous hints and allusions that are
collectively very helpful; and finally the ground plans of many houses
have been uncovered in Rome and elsewhere, and in Pompeii we have even
the walls of some houses left standing. There are still, however,
despite the fullness and authority of our sources, many things in
regard to the arrangement and construction of the house that are
uncertain and disputed (§12, end).
§188. The Development of the House.--The primitive Roman house came
from the Etruscans. It goes back to the simple farm life of early
times, when all members of the household, father, mother, children,
and dependents, lived in one large room together. In this room the
meals were cooked, the table spread, all indoor work performed, the
sacrifices offered to the Lares (§27), and at night a space cleared in
which to spread the hard beds or pallets. The primitive house had no
chimney, the smoke escaping through a hole in the middle of the roof.
Rain could enter where the smoke escaped, and from this fact the hole
was called the _impluvium_; just beneath it in later times a basin
(_compluvium_) was hollowed out in the floor to catch the water for
domestic purposes. There were no windows, all natural light coming
through the _impluvium_ or, in pleasant weather, through the open
door. There was but one door, and the space opposite it seems to have
been reserved as much as possible for the father and mother. Here was
the hearth, where the mother prepared the meals, and near it stood the
implements she used in spinning and weaving; here was the strong box
(_ārca_), in which the master kept his valuables, and here their couch
was spread.
[Illustration: FIGURE 35. CINERARY URN]
[Illustration: FIGURE 36. PLAN OF HOUSE]
§189. The outward appearance of such a house is shown in the Etruscan
cinerary urns (Fig. 35; see also Smith, I, 668; Schreiber, LIII, 5;
Baumeister, Fig. 146) found in various places in Italy. The ground
plan is a simple rectangle, as shown in Figure 36, without partitions.
This may be regarded as historically and architecturally the kernel of
the Roman house; it is found in all of which we have any knowledge.
Its very name (_ātrium_), denoting originally the whole house, was
also preserved, as is shown in the names of certain very ancient
buildings in Rome used for religious purposes, the _ātrium Vestae_,
the _ātrium Lībertātis_, etc., but afterwards applied to the
characteristic single room. The name was once supposed to mean "the
black (_āter_) room," but many scholars recognize in it the original
Etruscan word for house.
[Illustration: FIGURE 37. PLAN OF HOUSE]
§190. The first change in the primitive house came in the form of a
shed or "lean-to" on the side of the _ātrium_ opposite the door. It
was probably intended at first for merely temporary purposes, being
built of wooden boards (_tabulae_), and having an outside door and no
connection with the _ātrium_. It could not have been long, however,
until the wall between was broken through, and this once done and its
convenience demonstrated, the partition wall was entirely removed, and
the second form of the Roman house resulted (Fig. 37). This
improvement also persisted, and the _tablīnum_ is found in all the
houses from the humblest to the costliest of which we have any
knowledge.
[Illustration: FIGURE 38. PLAN OF HOUSE]
§191. The next change was made by widening the _ātrium_, but in order
that the roof might be more easily supported walls were erected along
the lines of the old _ātrium_ for about two-thirds of its depth. These
may have been originally mere pillars, as nowadays in our cellars, not
continuous walls. At any rate, the _ātrium_ at the end next the
_tablīnum_ was given the full width between the outside walls, and the
additional spaces, one on each side, were called _ālae_. The
appearance of such a house as seen from the entrance door must have
been much like that of an Anglican or Roman Catholic church. The open
space between the supporting walls corresponded to the nave, the two
_ālae_ to the transepts, while the bay-like _tablīnum_ resembled the
chancel. The space between the outside walls and those supporting the
roof was cut off into rooms of various sizes, used for various
purposes (Fig. 38). So far as we know they received light only from
the _ātrium_, for no windows are assigned to them by Roman writers,
and none are found in the ruins, but it is hardly probable that in the
country no holes were made for light and air, however considerations
of privacy and security may have influenced builders in the towns.
From this ancient house we find preserved in its successors all
opposite the entrance door: the _ātrium_ with its _ālae_ and
_tablīnum_, the _impluvium_ and _compluvium_. These are the
characteristic features of the Roman house, and must be so regarded in
the description which follows of later developments under foreign
influence.
[Illustration: FIGURE 39. PLAN OF HOUSE]
§192. The Greeks seem to have furnished the idea next adopted by the
Romans, a court at the rear of the _ātrium_, open to the sky,
surrounded by rooms, and set with flowers, trees, and shrubs. The open
space had columns around it, and often a fountain in the middle (Fig.
39). This court was called the _peristylum_ or _peristylium_.
According to Vitruvius its breadth should have exceeded its depth by
one-third, but we do not find these or any other proportions strictly
observed in the houses that are known to us. Access to the
_peristylium_ from the _ātrium_ could be had through the _tablīnum_,
though this might be cut off from it by folding doors, and by a narrow
passage[1] by its side. The latter would be naturally used by servants
and by others who did not wish to pass through the master's room. Both
passage and _tablīnum_ might be closed on the side of the _ātrium_ by
portières. The arrangement of the various rooms around the court seems
to have varied with the notions of the builder, and no one plan for
them can be laid down. According to the means of the owner there were
bedrooms, dining-rooms, libraries, drawing-rooms, kitchen, scullery,
closets, private baths, together with the scanty accommodations
necessary even for a large number of slaves. But no matter whether
these rooms were many or few they all faced the court, receiving from
it light and air, as did the rooms along the sides of the _ātrium_.
There was often a garden behind the court.
[Footnote 1: This passage is called _faucēs_ in the older books. Mau
has shown that the _faucēs_ was on the entrance side of the _ātrium_.
He calls the passage by the _tablīnum_ the _andrōn_.]
[Illustration: FIGURE 40. PLAN OF HOUSE]
§193. The next change took place in the city and town house only,
because it was due to conditions of town life that did not obtain in
the country. In ancient as well as in modern times business was likely
to spread from the center of the town into residence districts, and it
often became desirable for the owner of a dwelling-house to adapt it
to the new conditions. This was easily done in the case of the Roman
house on account of the arrangement of the rooms. Attention has
already been called to the fact that the rooms all opened to the
interior of the house, that no windows were placed in the outer walls,
and that the only door was in front. If the house faced a business
street, it is evident that the owner could, without interfering with
the privacy of his house or decreasing its light, build rooms in front
of the _ātrium_ for commercial purposes. He reserved, of course, a
passageway to his own door, narrower or wider according to the
circumstances. If the house occupied a corner, such rooms might be
added on the side as well as in front (Fig. 40), and as they had no
necessary connection with the interior they might be rented as
living-rooms, as such rooms often are in our own cities. It is
probable that rooms were first added in this way for business purposes
by an owner who expected to carry on some enterprise of his own in
them, but even men of good position and considerable means did not
hesitate to add to their incomes by renting to others these
disconnected parts of their houses. All the larger houses uncovered in
Pompeii are arranged in this manner. One occupying a whole square and
having rented rooms on three sides is described in §208. Such a
detached house was called an _īnsula_.
§194. The Vestibulum.--Having traced the development of the house as a
whole and described briefly its permanent and characteristic parts, we
may now examine these more closely and at the same time call attention
to other parts introduced at a later time. It will be convenient to
begin with the front of the house. The city house was built even more
generally than now on the street line. In the poorer houses the door
opening into the _ātrium_ was in the front wall, and was separated
from the street only by the width of the threshold. In the better sort
of houses, those described in the last section, the separation of the
_ātrium_ from the street by the row of stores gave opportunity for
arranging a more imposing entrance. A part at least of this space was
left as an open court, with a costly pavement running from the street
to the door, adorned with shrubs and flowers, with statuary even, and
trophies of war, if the owner was rich and a successful general. This
courtyard was called the _vestibulum_. The derivation of the word is
disputed, but it probably comes from _ve-_, "apart," "separate," and
_stāre_ (cf. _prōstibulum_ from _prōstāre_), and means "a private
standing place"; other explanations are suggested in the dictionaries.
The important thing to notice is that it does not correspond at all to
the part of a modern house called after it the vestibule. In this
_vestibulum_ the clients gathered, before daybreak perhaps (§182), to
wait for admission to the _ātrium_, and here the _sportula_ was doled
out to them. Here, too, was arranged the wedding procession (§86), and
here was marshaled the train that escorted the boy to the forum the
day that he put away childish things (§128). Even in the poorer houses
the same name was given to the little space between the door and the
edge of the sidewalk.
[Illustration: FIGURE 41. MOSAIC DOG]
§195. The Ostium.--The entrance to the house was called the _ōstium_.
This includes the doorway and the door itself, and the word is applied
to either, though _forēs_ and _iānua_ are the more precise words for
the door. In the poorer houses (§194) the _ōstium_ was directly on the
street, and there can be no doubt that it originally opened directly
into the _ātrium_; in other words, the ancient _ātrium_ was separated
from the street only by its own wall. The refinement of later times
led to the introduction of a hall or passageway between the
_vestibulum_ and the _ātrium_, and the _ōstium_ opened into this hall
and gradually gave its name to it. The threshold (_līmen_) was broad,
the door being placed well back, and often had the word _salvē_ worked
on it in mosaic. Over the door were words of good omen, _Nihil intret
malī_, for example, or a charm against fire. In the great houses where
an _ōstiārius_ or _iānitor_ (§150) was kept on duty, his place was
behind the door, and sometimes he had here a small room. A dog was
often kept chained in the _ōstium_, or in default of one a picture was
painted on the wall or worked in mosaic on the floor (Fig. 41) with
the warning beneath it: _Cavē canem!_ The hallway was closed on the
side of the _ātrium_ with a curtain (_vēlum_). This hallway was not so
long that through it persons in the _ātrium_ could not see passers-by
in the street.
[Illustration: FIGURE 42. IMPLUVIUM IN TUSCAN ATRIUM]
[Illustration: FIGURE 43. SECTION OF TUSCAN ATRIUM]
§196. The Atrium.--The _ātrium_ (§188) was the kernel of the Roman
house, and to it was given the appropriate name _cavum aedium_. It is
possible that this later name belonged strictly to the unroofed
portion only, but the two words came to be used indiscriminately. The
old view that the _cavum aedium_ was a middle court between the
_ātrium_ and the _peristylium_ is still held by a few scholars, but is
not supported by the monumental evidence (§187). The most conspicuous
features of the _ātrium_ were the _impluvium_ and the _compluvium_
(§188). The water collected in the latter was carried into cisterns;
over the former a curtain could be drawn when the light was too
intense, as over a photographer's skylight nowadays. We find that the
two words were carelessly used for each other by Roman writers. So
important was the _impluvium_ to the _ātrium_, that the latter was
named from the manner in which the former was constructed. Vitruvius
tells us that there were four styles. The first was called the _ātrium
Tūscanicum_. In this the roof was formed by two pairs of beams
crossing each other at right angles, the inclosed space being left
uncovered and thus forming the _impluvium_ (Figs. 42, 43). The name
(§188) as well as the simple construction shows that this was the
earliest form of the _ātrium_, and it is evident that it could not be
used for rooms of very large dimensions. The second was called the
_ātrium tetrastylon_. The beams were supported at their intersections
by pillars or columns. The third, _ātrium Corinthium_, differed from
the second only in having more than four supporting pillars. It is
probable that these two similar styles came in with the widening of
the _ātrium_ (§191). The fourth was called the _ātrium displuviātum_.
In this the roof sloped toward the outer walls, as shown in the
cinerary urn mentioned in §189, and the water was carried off by
gutters on the outside, the _compluvium_ collecting only so much as
actually fell into it from the heavens. We are told that there was
another style of _ātrium_, the _testūdinātum_, which was covered all
over and had neither _impluvium_ nor _compluvium_. We do not know how
this was lighted; perhaps by windows in the ālae.
[Illustration: FIGURE 44. SMALL HOUSE AT POMPEII]
§197. The Change in the Atrium.--The _ātrium_ as it was in the early
days of the Republic has been described in §188. The simplicity and
purity of the family life of that period lent a dignity to the
one-room house that the vast palaces of the late Republic and Empire
failed utterly to inherit. By Cicero's time the _ātrium_ had ceased to
be the center of domestic life; it had become a state apartment used
only for display. We do not know the successive steps in the process
of change. Probably the rooms along the sides (§191) were first used
as bedrooms, for the sake of greater privacy. The need of a detached
room for the cooking must have been felt as soon as the _peristylium_
was adopted (it may well be that the court was originally a kitchen
garden), and then of a dining-room convenient to it. Then other rooms
were added about this court and these were made sleeping-apartments
for the sake of still greater privacy. Finally these rooms were needed
for other purposes (§192) and the sleeping-rooms were moved again,
this time to an upper story. When this second story was added we do
not know, but it presupposes the small and costly lots of a city. Even
the most unpretentious houses in Pompeii have in them the remains of
staircases (Fig. 44).
[Illustration: FIGURE 45. ATRIUM IN HOUSE OF SALLUST IN POMPEII]
§198. The _ātrium_ was now fitted up with all the splendor and
magnificence that the owner's means would permit. The opening in the
roof was enlarged to admit more light, and the supporting pillars
(§196) were made of marble or costly woods. Between these pillars and
along the walls statues and other works of art were placed. The
_compluvium_ became a marble basin, with a fountain in the center, and
was often richly carved or adorned with figures in relief. The floors
were mosaic, the walls painted in brilliant colors or paneled with
marbles of many hues, and the ceilings were covered with ivory and
gold. In such a hall (Fig. 45) the host greeted his guests (§185), the
patron received his clients (§182), the husband welcomed his wife
(§89), and here his body lay in state when the pride of life was over.
[Illustration: FIGURE 46. RUINS OF THE HOUSE OF THE POET IN POMPEII]
§199. Still some memorials of the older day were left in even the most
imposing _ātrium_. The altar to the Lares and Penates remained near
the place where the hearth had been, though the regular sacrifices
were made in a special chapel in the _peristylium_. In even the
grandest houses the implements for spinning were kept in the place
where the matron had once sat among her maidservants (§§86, 105), as
Livy tells us in the story of Lucretia. The cabinets retained the
masks of simpler and may be stronger men (§107), and the marriage
couch stood opposite the _ōstium_ (hence its other name, _lectus
adversus_), where it had been placed on the wedding night (§89),
though no one slept in the _ātrium_. In the country much of the
old-time use of the _ātrium_ survived even Augustus, and the poor, of
course, had never changed their style of living. What use was made of
the small rooms along the sides of the _ātrium_, after they had ceased
to be bedchambers, we do not know; they served perhaps as conversation
rooms, private parlors, and drawing-rooms.
§200. The Alae.--The manner in which the _ālae_, or wings, were formed
has been explained (§191); they were simply the rectangular recesses
left on the right and left of the _ātrium_, when the smaller rooms on
the sides were walled off. It must be remembered that they were
entirely open to the _ātrium_, and formed a part of it, perhaps
originally furnishing additional light from windows in their outer
walls. In them were kept the _imāginēs_, as the wax busts of those
ancestors who had held curule offices were called, arranged in
cabinets in such a way that, by the help of cords running from one to
another and of inscriptions under each of them, their relation to each
other could be made clear and their great deeds kept in mind. Even
when Roman writers or those of modern times speak of the _imāginēs_ as
in the _ātrium_, it is the _ālae_ that are intended.
[Illustration: FIGURE 47. VIEW FROM THE ATRIUM]
§201. The Tablinum.--The probable origin of the _tablīnum_, has been
explained above (§190), and its name has been derived from the
material (_tabulae_, "planks") of the "lean-to," perhaps a summer
kitchen, from which it developed. Others think that the room received
its name from the fact that in it the master kept his account books
(_tabulae_) as well as all his business and private papers. He kept
here also the money chest or strong box (_ārca_), which in the olden
time had been chained to the floor of the _ātrium_, and made the room
in fact his office or study. By its position it commanded the whole
house, as the rooms could be entered only from the _ātrium_ or
_peristylium_, and the _tablīnum_ was right between them. The master
could secure entire privacy by closing the folding doors which cut off
the private court, or by pulling the curtains across the opening into
the great hall. On the other hand, if the _tablīnum_ was left open,
the guest entering the _ōstium_ must have had a charming vista,
commanding at a glance all the public and semi-public parts of the
house (Fig. 47). Even when the _tablīnum_ was closed, there was free
passage from the front of the house to the rear through the short
corridor (§192) by the side of the _tablīnum_. It should be noticed
that there was only one such passage, though the older authorities
assert that there were two.
[Illustration: FIGURE 48. THE PERISTYLE FROM HOUSE IN POMPEII]
[Illustration: FIGURE 49. ROOF OF PERISTYLE]
§202. The Peristyle.--The _peristylium_ or _peristylum_ was adopted,
as we have seen (§192), from the Greeks, but despite the way in which
the Roman clung to the customs of his fathers it was not long in
becoming the more important of the two main sections of the house. We
must think of a spacious court (Fig. 48) open to the sky, but
surrounded by a continuous row of buildings, or rather rooms, for the
buildings soon became one, all facing it and having doors and latticed
windows opening upon it. All these buildings had covered porches on
the side next the court (Fig. 49), and these porches forming an
unbroken colonnade on the four sides were strictly the peristyle,
though the name came to be used of the whole section of the house,
including court, colonnade, and surrounding rooms. The court was much
more open to the sun than the _ātrium_, and all sorts of rare and
beautiful plants and flowers bloomed and flourished in it, protected
by the walls from cold winds. Fountains and statuary adorned the
middle part; the colonnade furnished cool or sunny promenades, no
matter what the time of day or the season of the year. Loving the open
air and the charms of nature as the Romans did, it is no wonder that
they soon made the peristyle the center of their domestic life in all
the houses of the better class, and reserved the _ātrium_ for the more
formal functions which their political and public position demanded
(§197). It must be remembered that there was often a garden behind the
peristyle, and there was also very commonly a direct connection with
the street.
[Illustration: FIGURE 50. KITCHEN RANGE]
[Illustration: FIGURE 51. LATRINA]
§203. Private Rooms.--The rooms surrounding the court varied so much
with the means and tastes of the owners of the houses that we can
hardly do more than give a list of those most frequently mentioned in
literature. It is important to remember that in the town house all
these rooms received their light by day from the court (§193), while
in the country there may well have been windows and doors in the
exterior wall (§191). First in importance comes the kitchen
(_culīna_), placed on the side of the court opposite the _tablīnum_.
It was supplied with an open fireplace for roasting and boiling, and
with a stove (Fig. 50) not unlike the charcoal affairs still used in
Europe. Near it was the bakery, if the mansion required one, supplied
with an oven. Near it, too, was the bathhouse (_lātrīna_) with the
necessary closet, in order that all might use the same connection with
the sewer (Fig. 51). If the house had a stable, it was also put near
the kitchen, as nowadays in Latin countries.
[Illustration: FIGURE 52. DINING-ROOM IN COURT]
§204. The dining-room (_trīclīnium_) may be mentioned next. It was not
necessarily in immediate juxtaposition to the kitchen, because the
army of slaves (§149) made its position of little importance so far as
convenience was concerned. It was customary to have several trīclīnia
for use at different seasons of the year, in order that the room might
be warmed by the sun in winter, and in summer escape its rays.
Vitruvius thought that its length should be twice its breadth, but the
ruins show no fixed proportions. The Romans were so fond of the air
and the sky that the court must have often served as a dining-room,
and Horace has left us a charming picture of the master dining under
an arbor attended by a single slave. Such an outdoor dining-room is
found in the so-called House of Sallust at Pompeii (Fig. 52).
[Illustration: FIGURE 53. BEDROOM]
§205. The sleeping-rooms (_cubicula_) were not considered so important
by the Romans as by us, for the reason, probably, that they were used
merely to sleep in and not for living-rooms as well. They were very
small and the furniture was scant (Fig. 53) in even the best houses.
Some of these seem to have had anterooms in connection with the
_cubicula_, which were probably occupied by attendants (§150), and in
even the ordinary houses there was often a recess for the bed. Some of
the bedrooms seem to have been used merely for the midday siesta
(§122), and these were naturally situated in the coolest part of the
court; they were called _cubicula diurna_. The others were called by
way of distinction _cubicula nocturna_ or _dormitōria_, and were
placed so far as possible on the west side of the court in order that
they might receive the morning sun. It should be remembered that in
the best houses the bedrooms were preferably in the second story of
the peristyle.
§206. A library (_bibliothēca_) had a place in the house of every
Roman of education. Collections of books were large as well as
numerous, and were made then as now by persons even who cared nothing
about their contents. The books or rolls, which will be described
later, were kept in cases or cabinets around the walls, and in one
library discovered in Herculaneum an additional rectangular case
occupied the middle of the room. It was customary to decorate the room
with statues of Minerva and the Muses, and also with the busts and
portraits of distinguished men. Vitruvius recommends an eastern aspect
for the _bibliothēca_, probably to guard against dampness.
[Illustration: FIGURE 54. CHAPEL IN HOUSE]
§207. Besides these rooms, which must have been found in all good
houses, there were others of less importance, some of which were so
rare that we scarcely know their uses. The _sacrārium_ was a private
chapel (Fig. 54) in which the images of the gods were kept, acts of
worship performed, and sacrifices offered. The Lar or tutelary
divinity of the house seems, however, to have retained his ancient
place in the _ātrium_. The _oecī_ were halls or saloons, corresponding
perhaps to our parlors and drawing-rooms, used occasionally, it may
be, for banquet halls. The _exedrae_ were rooms supplied with
permanent seats which seem to have been used for lectures and similar
entertainments. The _sōlārium_ was a place to bask in the sun,
sometimes a terrace, often the flat roof of the house, which was then
covered with earth and laid out like a garden and made beautiful with
flowers and shrubs. Besides these there were, of course, sculleries,
pantries, and storerooms. The slaves had to have their quarters
(_cellae servōrum_), in which they were packed as closely as possible.
Cellars under the houses seem to have been rare, though some have been
found at Pompeii.
[Illustration: FIGURE 55. HOUSE OF PANSA]
§208. The House of Pansa.--Finally we may describe a house that
actually existed, taking as an illustration one that must have
belonged to a wealthy and influential man, the so-called House of
Pansa at Pompeii (Fig. 55; and see also Overbeck's _Pompeii_, p. 325;
Harper, p. 549; Becker, II, p. 214; Smith, I, p. 681; Schreiber, LIII,
16; the various plans are slightly different). The house occupied an
entire square, facing a little east of south. Most of the rooms on the
front and sides were rented out for shops or stores; in the rear was a
garden. The rooms that did not belong to the house proper are shaded
in the plan here given. The _vestibulum_, marked 1 in the plan, is the
open space between two of the shops (§193). Behind it is the _ōstium_
(1'), with a figure of a dog (§195) in mosaic, opening into the
_ātrium_ (2, 2) with three rooms on each side, the _ālae_ (2', 2')
being in the regular place, the _compluvium_ (3) in the middle, the
_tablīnum_ (4) opposite the _ōstium_, and the passage on the eastern
side (5). The _ātrium_ is of the _Tūscanicum_ style (§196), and is
paved with concrete; the _tablīnum_ and the passage have mosaic
floors. From these, steps lead down into the court, which is lower
than the _ātrium_, measures 65 by 50 feet, and is surrounded by a
colonnade with sixteen pillars. There are two rooms on the side next
the _ātrium_, one of these (6) has been called the _bibliothēca_
(§206), because a manuscript was found in it, but its purpose is
uncertain; the other (6') was possibly a dining-room. The court has
two projections (7', 7') much like the _ālae_, which have been called
_exedrae_ (§207); it will be noticed that one of these has the
convenience of an exit (§202) to the street. The rooms on the west and
the small room on the east can not be definitely named. The large room
on the east (T) is the main dining-room (§204), the remains of the
dining couches being marked on the plan. The kitchen is at the
northwest corner (13), with the stable (14) next to it (§203, end);
off the kitchen is a paved yard (15) with a gateway into the street by
which a cart could enter. East of the kitchen and yard is a narrow
passage connecting the peristyle with the garden (§202). East of this
are two rooms, the larger of which (9) is one of the most imposing
rooms of the house, 33 by 24 feet in size, with a large window guarded
by a low balustrade, and opening into the garden. This was probably an
_oecus_ (§207). In the center of the court is a basin about two feet
deep, the rim of which was once decorated with figures of water plants
and fish. Along the whole north end of the house ran a long veranda
(16, 16), overlooking the garden (11, 11) in which was a sort of
summer house (12). The house had an upper story, but the stairs
leading to it are in the rented rooms, suggesting that the upper floor
was not occupied by Pansa's family.
[Illustration: FIGURE 56. SECTION OF THE HOUSE OF PANSA IN POMPEII]
§209. Of the rooms facing the street it will be noticed that one,
lightly shaded in the plan, is connected with the _ātrium_; it was
probably used for some business conducted by Pansa himself (§193,
end), possibly with a slave (§144) or a freedman (§175) in immediate
charge of it. Of the others the suites on the east side (A, B) seem to
have been rented out as living apartments. The others were shops and
stores. The four connected rooms on the west, near the front, seem to
have been a large bakery; the room marked C was the salesroom, with a
large room opening off of it containing three stone mills, troughs for
kneading the dough, a water tap with sink, and a recessed oven. The
uses of the others are uncertain. The section plan (Fig. 56)
represents the appearance of the house if all were cut away on one
side of a line drawn from front to rear through the middle of the
house. It is, of course, largely conjectural, but gives a clear idea
of the general way in which the division walls and roof must have been
arranged.
[Illustration: FIGURE 57. WALL OF ROMULUS]
§210. The Walls.--The materials of which the wall (_pariēs_) was
composed varied with the time, the place, and the cost of
transportation. Stone and unburned bricks (_laterēs crūdī_) were the
earliest materials used in Italy, as almost everywhere else, timber
being employed for merely temporary structures, as in the addition
(§190) from which the _tablīnum_ developed. For private houses in very
early times and for public buildings in all times, walls of dressed
stone (_opus quadrātum_) were laid in regular courses, precisely as in
modern times (Fig. 57). Over the wall was spread a coating of fine
marble stucco for decorative purposes, which gave it a finish of
dazzling white. For less pretentious houses, not for public buildings,
the sun-dried bricks were largely used up to about the beginning of
the first century B.C. These, too, were covered with the stucco, for
protection against the weather as well as for decoration, but even the
hard stucco has not preserved walls of this perishable material to our
times. In classical times a new material had come into use, better
than either brick or stone, cheaper, more durable, more easily worked
and transported, which was employed almost exclusively for private
houses, and very generally for public buildings. Walls constructed in
the new way (_opus caementīcium_) are variously called "rubble-work"
or "concrete" in our books of reference, but neither term is quite
descriptive; the _opus caementīcium_ was not laid in courses, as is
our rubble-work, while on the other hand larger stones were used in it
than in the concrete of which walls for buildings are now constructed.
[Illustration: FIGURE 58. METHOD OF CASTING CONCRETE WALLS]
§211. Paries Caementicius.--The materials varied with the place. At
Rome lime and volcanic ashes (_lapis Puteolānus_) were used with
pieces of stone as large or larger than the fist. Brickbats sometimes
took the place of stone, and sand (§146) that of the volcanic ashes;
potsherds crushed fine were better than the sand. The harder the
stones the better the concrete; the very best was made with pieces of
lava, the material with which the roads were generally paved. The
method of forming the concrete walls was the same as that of modern
times, familiar to us all in the construction of sidewalks. It will be
easily understood from the illustration (Fig. 58). Upright posts,
about 5 by 6 inches thick, and from 10 to 15 feet in height, were
fixed about 3 feet apart along the line of both faces of the intended
wall. On the outside of these were nailed horizontally boards, 10 or
12 inches wide, overlapping each other. Into the intermediate space
the semi-fluid concrete was poured, receiving the imprint of posts and
boards. When the concrete had hardened, the frame-work was removed and
placed on top of it and the work continued until the wall had reached
the required height. Walls made in this way varied in thickness from a
seven-inch partition wall in an ordinary house to the eighteen-foot
walls of the Pantheon of Agrippa. They were far more durable than
stone walls, which might be removed stone by stone with little more
labor than was required to put them together; the concrete wall was a
single slab of stone throughout its whole extent, and large parts of
it might be cut away without diminishing the strength of the rest in
the slightest degree.
[Illustration: FIGURE 59. WALL FACINGS]
[Illustration: FIGURE 60. BRICK FOR FACING WALL]
§212. Wall Facings.--Impervious to the weather though these walls
were, they were usually faced with stone or kiln-burned brick
(_laterēs coctī_). The stone employed was usually the soft tufa, not
nearly so well adapted to stand the weather as the concrete itself.
The earliest fashion was to take bits of stone having one smooth face
but of no regular size or shape and arrange them with the smooth faces
against the frame-work as fast as the concrete was poured in; when the
frame-work was removed the wall presented the appearance shown at A in
Fig. 59. Such a wall was called _opus incertum_. In later times the
tufa was used in small blocks having the smooth face square and of a
uniform size. A wall so faced looked as if covered with a net (B in
Fig. 59) and was therefore called _opus rēticulātum_. A section at a
corner is shown at C. In either case the exterior face of the wall was
usually covered with a fine limestone or marble stucco, which gave a
hard finish, smooth and white. The burned bricks were triangular in
shape, but their arrangement and appearance can be more easily
understood from the illustration (Fig. 60) than from any description
that could be given here. It must be noticed that there were no walls
made of _laterēs coctī_ alone, even the thin partition walls having a
core of concrete.
§213. Floors and Ceilings.--In the poorer houses the floor (_sōlum_)
of the first story was made by smoothing the ground between the walls,
covering it thickly with small pieces of stone, bricks, tile, and
potsherds, and pounding all down solidly and smoothly with a heavy
rammer (_fistūca_). Such a floor was called _pavīmentum_, and the name
came gradually to be used of floors of all kinds. In houses of a
better sort the floor was made of stone slabs fitted smoothly
together. The more pretentious houses had concrete floors, made as has
been described. Floors of upper stories were sometimes made of wood,
but concrete was used here, too, poured over a temporary flooring of
wood. Such a floor was very heavy, and required strong walls to
support it; examples are preserved of the thickness of eighteen inches
and a span of twenty feet. A floor of this kind made a perfect ceiling
for the room below, requiring only a finish of stucco. Other ceilings
were made much as they are now, laths being nailed on the stringers or
rafters and covered with mortar and stucco.
[Illustration: FIGURE 61. HUT OF ROMULUS]
[Illustration: FIGURE 62. TILE FOR ROOF]
[Illustration: FIGURE 63. TILE ROOF]
§214. Roofs.--The construction of the roofs (_tēcta_) differed very
little from the modern method, as may be seen in the illustration
shown in §196. They varied as much as ours do in shape, some being
flat, others sloping in two directions, others in four. In the most
ancient times the covering was a thatch of straw, as in the so-called
hut of Romulus (_casa Rōmulī_) on the Palatine Hill preserved even
under the Empire as a relic of the past (Fig. 61). Shingles followed
the straw, only to give place in turn to tiles. These were at first
flat, like our shingles, but were later made with a flange on each
side (Fig. 62) in such a way that the lower part of one would slip
into the upper part of the one below it on the roof. The tiles
(_tēgulae_) were laid side by side and the flanges covered by other
tiles, called _imbricēs_ (Fig. 63) inverted over them. Gutters also of
tile ran along the eaves to conduct the water into cisterns, if it was
needed for domestic purposes. The appearance of the completed roof is
shown in Fig. 49, §202.
[Illustration: FIGURE 64. DOOR OF ROMAN HOUSE]
§215. The Doors.--The Roman doorway, like our own, had four parts: the
threshold (_līmen_), the two jambs (_postēs_), and the lintel (_līmen
superum_). The lintel was always of a single piece of stone and
peculiarly massive. The doors were exactly like those of modern times,
except in the matter of hinges, for while the Romans had hinges like
ours they did not use them on their doors. The door-hinge was really a
cylinder of hard wood, a little longer than the door and of a diameter
a little greater than the thickness of the door, terminating above and
below in pivots. These pivots turned in sockets made to receive them
in the threshold and lintel. To this cylinder the door was mortised,
their combined weight coming upon the lower pivot. The cut (Fig. 64)
makes this clear, and reminds one of an old-fashioned homemade gate.
The comedies are full of references to the creaking of these doors.
§216. The outer door of the house was properly called _iānua_, an
inner door _ōstium_, but the two words came to be used
indiscriminately, and the latter was even applied to the whole
entrance (§195). Double doors were called _forēs_, and the back door,
usually opening into a garden (§208), was called the _postīcum_. The
doors opened inwards and those in the outer wall were supplied with
bolts (_pessulī_) and bars (_serae_). Locks and keys by which the
doors could be fastened from without were not unknown, but were very
heavy and clumsy. Finally it should be noticed that in the interiors
of private houses doors were not nearly so common as now, the Romans
preferring portières (_vēla_, _aulaea_).
[Illustration: FIGURE 65. WINDOW]
§217. The Windows.--In the principal rooms of the house the windows
opened on the court, as has been seen, and it may be set down as a
rule that in rooms situated on the first floor and used for domestic
purposes there were no windows opening on the street. In the upper
floors there must have been windows on the street in such apartments
as had no outlook on the court, as in those for example above the
rented rooms in the House of Pansa (§208). Country houses may also
have had outside windows in the first story (§203). All the windows
(_fenestrae_) were small (Fig. 65), hardly larger than three feet by
two. Some were provided with shutters, which were made to slide
backward and forward in a frame-work on the outside of the wall. These
shutters were sometimes in two parts moving in opposite directions,
and when closed were said to be _iūnctae_. Other windows were
latticed, and others still were covered with a fine network to keep
out mice and other objectionable animals. Glass was known to the
Romans of the Empire but was too expensive for general use. Talc and
other translucent materials were also employed in window frames as a
protection against cold, but only in very rare instances.
[Illustration: FIGURE 66. STOVE FOR HEATING]
§218. Heating.--Even in the mild climate of Italy the houses must
often have been too cold for comfort. On merely chilly days the
occupants probably contented themselves with moving into rooms warmed
by the direct rays of the sun (§204), or with wearing wraps or heavier
clothing. In the more severe weather of actual winter they used
charcoal stoves or braziers of the sort that is still used in the
countries of southern Europe. They were merely metal boxes (Fig. 66)
in which hot coals could be put, with legs to keep the floors from
injury and handles by which they could be carried from room to room.
They were called _foculī_. The wealthy had furnaces resembling ours
under their houses, the heat being carried to the rooms by tile pipes;
in some instances the partitions and floors seem to have been made of
hollow tiles, through which the hot air circulated, warming the rooms
without being admitted to them. These furnaces had chimneys, but
furnaces were seldom used.
§219. Water Supply.--All the important towns of Italy had abundant
supplies of water piped from hills and brought sometimes from a
considerable distance. The Romans' aqueducts were among their most
stupendous and most successful works of engineering. Mains were laid
down the middle of the streets and from these the water was piped into
the houses. There was often a tank in the upper part of the house,
from which the water was distributed as it was needed. It was not
usually carried into many of the rooms, but there was always a jet or
fountain in the court (§202), in the bathhouse, the garden, and the
closet. The bathhouse had a separate heating apparatus of its own,
which kept the room or rooms at the desired temperature and furnished
hot water as required.
§220. Decoration.--The outside of the house was left severely plain,
the walls being merely covered with stucco, as we have seen (§212).
The interior was decorated to suit the tastes and means of the owner,
not even the poorer houses lacking charming effects in this direction.
At first the stucco-finished walls were merely marked off into
rectangular panels (_abacī_), which were painted deep, rich colors,
reds and yellows predominating. Then in the middle of these panels
simple center-pieces were painted and the whole surrounded with the
most brilliant arabesques. Then came elaborate pictures, figures,
interiors, landscapes, etc., of large size and most skillfully
executed, all painted directly upon the wall, as in some of our public
buildings to-day. Illustrations of these decorations may be found in
Baumeister II, L, and LI, and in colors in Gusman IX-XI, Kelsey XI. A
little later the walls began to be covered with panels of thin slabs
of marble with a baseboard and cornice. Beautiful effects were
produced by combining marbles of different tints, and the Romans
ransacked the world for striking colors. Later still came raised
figures of stucco work, enriched with gold and colors, and mosaic
work, chiefly of minute pieces of colored glass which had a jewel-like
effect.
[Illustration: FIGURE 67. MOSAIC THRESHOLD]
[Illustration: FIGURE 68. CARVED DOORWAY]
§221. The doors and doorways gave opportunities for treatment equally
artistic. The doors were richly paneled and carved, or were plated
with bronze, or made of solid bronze. The threshold was often of
mosaic (see the example from Pompeii in Fig. 67). The _postēs_ were
sheathed with marble elaborately carved, as in the example from
Pompeii, shown in Fig. 68. The floors were covered with marble tiles
arranged in geometrical figures with contrasting colors, much as they
are now in public buildings, or with mosaic pictures only less
beautiful than those upon the walls. The most famous of these, "Darius
at the Battle of Issus," is shown in black and white in all our
reference books (best in Baumeister under _Mosaik_, Fig. 1000, and in
colors in Overbeck after p. 612). It measures sixteen feet by eight,
but despite its size has no less than one hundred and fifty separate
pieces to each square inch. The ceilings were often barrel-vaulted and
painted brilliant colors, or were divided into panels (_lacūs_,
_lacūnae_), deeply sunk, by heavy intersecting beams of wood or
marble, and then decorated in the most elaborate manner with raised
stucco work, or gold or ivory, or with bronze plates heavily
gilded.[2]
[Footnote 2: The magnificence of some of the great houses, even in
Republican times, may be inferred from the prices paid for them.
Cicero paid about $140,000 for his; the consul Messala the same price
for his; Clodius $600,000 for his, the most costly known to us. All
these were on the Palatine Hill, where ground was costly, too.]
§222. Furniture.--Our knowledge of Roman furniture is largely
indirect, because only such articles have come down to us as were made
of stone or metal. Fortunately the secondary sources are abundant and
good. Many articles are incidentally described in works of literature,
many are shown in the wall paintings mentioned above (§220), and some
have been restored from casts taken in the hardened ashes of Pompeii
and Herculaneum. In general we may say that the Romans had very few
articles of furniture in their houses, and that they cared less for
comfort, not to say luxurious ease, than they did for costly
materials, fine workmanship, and artistic forms. The mansions on the
Palatine were enriched with all the spoils of Greece and Asia, but it
may be doubted whether there was a comfortable bed within the walls of
Rome.
§223. Principal Articles.--Many of the most common and useful articles
of modern furniture were entirely unknown to the Romans. No mirrors
hung on their walls, they had no desks or writing tables, no dressers
or chiffoniers, no glass-doored cabinets for the display of
bric-a-brac, tableware, or books, no mantels, no hat-racks even. The
principal articles found in even the best houses were couches or beds,
chairs, tables, and lamps. If to these we add chests or cabinets, an
occasional brazier (§218), and still rarer water-clock, we shall have
everything that can be called furniture except tableware and kitchen
utensils. Still it must not be thought that their rooms presented a
desolate or dreary appearance. When one considers the decorations
(§§220, 221), the stately pomp of the _ātrium_ (§198), and the rare
beauty of the peristyle (§202), it is evident that a very few articles
of real artistic excellence were more in keeping with them than would
have been the litter and jumble that we now think necessary in our
rooms.
[Illustration: FIGURE 69. THE LECTUS]
§224. The Couches.--The couch (_lectus_, _lectulus_) was found
everywhere in the Roman house, a sofa by day, a bed by night. In its
simplest form it consisted of a frame of wood with straps across the
top on which was laid a mattress. At one end there was an arm, as in
the case of our sofas; sometimes there was an arm at each end, and a
back besides. It was always provided with pillows and rugs or
coverlets. The mattress was originally stuffed with straw, but this
gave place to wool and even feathers. In some of the bedrooms of
Pompeii the frame seems to have been lacking, the mattress being laid
on a support built up from the floor (§205). The couches used for beds
seem to have been larger than those used as sofas, and they were so
high that stools (Fig. 69) or even steps were necessary
accompaniments. As a sofa the _lectus_ was used in the library for
reading and writing, the student supporting himself on the left arm
and holding the book or writing with the right hand. In the
dining-room it had a permanent place, as will be described later. Its
honorary position in the great hall has been already mentioned (§199).
It will be seen that the _lectus_ could be made highly ornamental. The
legs and arms were carved or made of costly woods, or inlaid or plated
with tortoise-shell or the precious metals. We even read of frames of
solid silver. The coverings were often made of the finest fabrics,
dyed the most brilliant colors and worked with figures of gold.
[Illustration: FIGURE 70. THE SELLA]
[Illustration: FIGURE 71. CURULE CHAIRS]
§225. The Chairs.--The primitive form of seat (_sedīle_) among the
Romans as elsewhere was the stool or bench with four perpendicular
legs and no back. The remarkable thing is that it did not give place
to something better as soon as means permitted. The stool (_sella_)
was the ordinary seat for one person (Fig. 70), used by men and women
resting or working, and by children and slaves at their meals as well.
The bench (_subsellium_) differed from the stool only in accommodating
more than one person. It was used by senators in the _cūria_, by the
jurors in the courts, and by boys in the school (§120), as well as in
private houses. A special form of the _sella_ was the famous curule
chair (_sella curūlis_), having curved legs of ivory (Fig. 71). The
curule chair folded up like our camp-stools for convenience of
carriage and had straps across the top to support the cushion which
formed the seat.
[Illustration: FIGURE 72. THE SOLIUM]
[Illustration: FIGURE 73. CATHEDRA]
§226. The first improvement upon the _sella_ was the _solium_, a
stiff, straight, high-backed chair with solid arms, looking as if cut
from a single block of wood (Fig. 72), and so high that a footstool
was as necessary with it as with a bed (§224). Poets represented gods
and kings as seated in such a chair, and it was kept in the _ātrium_
for the use of the patron when he received his clients (§§182, 198).
Lastly, we find the _cathedra_, a chair without arms, but with a
curved back (Fig. 73) sometimes fixed at an easy angle (_cathedra
supīna_), the only approximation to a comfortable seat that the Romans
knew. It was at first used by women only, being regarded as too
luxurious for men, but finally came into general use. Its employment
by teachers in the schools of rhetoric (§115) gave rise to the
expression _ex cathedrā_, applied to authoritative utterances of every
kind, and its use by bishops explains our word cathedral. Neither the
_solium_ nor the _cathedra_ was upholstered, but with them both were
used cushions and coverings as with the _lectī_, and they afforded
like opportunities for skillful workmanship and lavish decoration.
[Illustration: FIGURE 74. MENSA DELPHICA]
[Illustration: FIGURE 75. ADJUSTABLE TABLE]
§227. Tables.--The table (_mēnsa_) was the most important article of
furniture in the Roman house whether we consider its manifold uses, or
the prices often paid for certain kinds. They varied in form and
construction as much as our own, many of which are copied directly
from Roman models. All sorts of materials were used for their supports
and tops, stone, wood, solid or veneered, the precious metals,
probably in thin plates only. The most costly, so far as we know, were
the round tables made from cross-sections of the citrus-tree, found in
Africa. The wood was beautifully marked and single pieces could be had
from three to four feet in diameter. For one of these Cicero paid
$20,000, Asinius Pollio $44,000, King Juba $52,000, and the family of
the Cethegi possessed one valued at $60,000. Special names were given
to tables of certain forms. The _monopodium_ was a table or stand with
but one support, used especially to hold a lamp or toilet articles.
The _abacus_ was a table with a rectangular top having a raised rim
and used for plate and dishes, in the place of the modern sideboard.
The _delphica_ (sc. _mēnsa_) had three legs, as shown in Fig. 74.
Tables were frequently made with adjustable legs, so that the height
might be altered; the mechanism is clearly shown in the cut (Fig. 75).
On the other hand the permanent tables in the _trīclīnia_ (§204) were
often built up from the floor of solid masonry or concrete, having
tops of polished stone or mosaic. The table gave a better opportunity
than even the couch or chair for artistic workmanship, especially in
the matter of carving and inlaying the legs and top.
[Illustration: FIGURE 76. VARIOUS FORMS OF LAMPS]
§228. The Lamps.--The Roman lamp (_lucerna_) was essentially simple
enough, merely a vessel that would hold oil or melted grease with a
few threads twisted loosely together for a wick and drawn out through
a hole in the cover or top (Fig. 76). The light thus furnished must
have been very uncertain and dim. There was no glass to keep the flame
steady, much less was there a chimney or central draft. As works of
art, however, they were exceedingly beautiful, those of the cheapest
material being often of graceful form and proportions, while to those
of costly material the skill of the artist in many cases must have
given a value far above that of the rare stones or precious metals of
which they were made.
[Illustration: FIGURE 77. BASES FOR LAMPS]
[Illustration: FIGURE 78. CANDELABRA]
§229. Some of these lamps (cf. Fig. 76) were intended to be carried in
the hand, as shown by the handles, others to be suspended from the
ceiling by chains. Others still were kept on tables expressly made for
them, as the _monopodia_ (§227) commonly used in the bedrooms, or the
tripods shown in Fig. 77. For lighting the public rooms there were,
besides these, tall stands, like those of our piano lamps, examples of
which may be seen in the last cut (Fig. 78). On some of these, several
lamps perhaps were placed at a time. The name of these stands
(_candēlābra_) shows that they were originally intended to hold wax or
tallow candles (_candēlae_), and the fact that these candles were
supplanted in the houses of the rich by the smoking and ill-smelling
lamp is good proof that the Romans were not skilled in the art of
making them. Finally it may be noticed that a supply of torches
(_facēs_) of dry, inflammable wood, often soaked in oil or smeared
with pitch, was kept near the outer door for use upon the streets.
[Illustration: FIGURE 79. STRONG BOX]
§230. Chests and Cabinets.--Every house was supplied with chests
(_ārcae_) of various sizes for the purpose of storing clothes and
other articles not always in use, and for the safe keeping of papers,
money, and jewelry. The material was usually wood, often bound with
iron and ornamented with hinges and locks of bronze. The smaller
_ārcae_, used for jewel cases, were often made of silver or even gold.
Of most importance, perhaps, was the strong box kept in the _tablīnum_
(§201), in which the _pater familiās_ stored his ready money. It was
made as strong as possible so that it could not easily be opened by
force, and was so large and heavy that it could not be carried away
entire. As an additional precaution it was sometimes chained to the
floor. This, too, was often richly carved and mounted, as is seen in
the illustration from Pompeii (Fig. 79).
§231. The cabinets (_armāria_) were designed for similar purposes and
made of similar materials. They were often divided into compartments
and were always supplied with hinges and locks. Two of the most
important uses of these cabinets have been mentioned already: in the
library (§206) for the preserving of books against mice and men, and
in the _ālae_ (§200) for the keeping of the _imāginēs_, or death-masks
of wax. It must be noticed that they lacked the convenient glass doors
of the cabinets or cases that we use for books and similar things, but
they were as well adapted to decorative purposes as the other articles
of furniture that have been mentioned.
§232. Other Articles.--The heating stove, or brazier, has been already
described (§218). It was at best a poor substitute for the poorest
modern stove. The place of our clock was taken in the court or garden
by the sun-dial (_sōlārium_), such as is often seen nowadays in our
parks, which measured the hours of the day by the shadow of a stick or
pin. It was introduced into Rome from Greece in 268 B.C. About a
century later the water-clock (_clepsydra_) was also borrowed from the
Greeks, a more useful invention because it marked the hours of the
night as well as of the day and could be used in the house. It
consisted essentially of a vessel filled at a regular time with water,
which was allowed to escape from it at a fixed rate, the changing
level marking the hours on a scale. As the length of the Roman hours
varied with the season of the year and the flow of the water with the
temperature, the apparatus was far from accurate. Shakspere's striking
of the clock in "Julius Caesar" (II, i, 192) is an anachronism. Of the
other articles sometimes reckoned as furniture, the tableware and
kitchen utensils, some account will be given elsewhere.
[Illustration: FIGURE 80. A STREET IN POMPEII]
[Illustration: FIGURE 81. A PUBLIC FOUNTAIN]
[Illustration: FIGURE 82. STEPPING-STONES]
§233. The Street.--It is evident from what has been said that a
residence street in a Roman town must have been severely plain and
monotonous in its appearance. The houses were all of practically the
same style, they were finished alike in stucco (§212), the windows
were few and in the upper stories only, there were no lawns or
gardens, there was nothing in short to lend variety or to please the
eye, except perhaps the decorations of the _vestibula_ (§194), or the
occasional extension of one story over another (_maeniānum_, Fig. 80),
or a public fountain (Fig. 81). The street itself was paved, as will
be explained hereafter, and was supplied with a footway on either side
raised from twelve to eighteen inches above its surface. The
inconvenience of such a height to persons crossing from one footway to
the other was relieved by stepping-stones (_pondera_) of the same
height firmly fixed at suitable distances from each other across the
street. These stepping-stones were placed at convenient points on each
street, not merely at the intersections of two or more streets. They
were usually oval in shape, had flat tops, and measured about three
feet by eighteen inches, the longer axis being parallel with the walk.
The spaces between them were often cut into deep ruts by the wheels of
vehicles, the distance between the ruts showing that the wheels were
about three feet apart. The arrangement of the stepping-stones is
shown clearly in Fig. 82, but it is hard to see how the draft-cattle
managed to work their way between them.