Domus
（
οἰκία, οἴκησις, οἰκητήριον, a dwellinghouse;
οἶκος, generally a room; in Homer and the tragedians,
δόμος, but more usually in the plural as a dwelling-house). A house.
I. Pre-historic
One special form of hut appears to have been commonly used by many different races of men
at an early stage of their development. This was a small circular structure made of branches
of trees stuck into the ground in a circle, and then bent inwards till their ends met and
were tied together at the top. This rude frame-work was then filled in by wattled work woven
in and out, and the whole was daubed over with tempered mud or clay. The hut of Achilles,
thatched with rushes (
Il. xxiv. 450), was probably a dwelling of this sort.
In historic times a survival of this ancient circular form of house existed in the form of
the Prytaneum in Athens and elsewhere, and also in the Athenian
Θόλος, which was built in the newer part of Athens as an adjunct, in a more
convenient position for the use of the Prytanes. The Tholus was a round building with a
conical roof, and must have had some resemblance to the Roman Temple of Vesta, to which the
same name was frequently applied. The original Temple of Vesta was a round hut formed with
wattle-work of osiers (Ovid,
Fast. vi. 261 foll.; Fest. p. 250 M.).
Even during the imperial period in Rome one or more wattled huts were preserved in memory
of the primitive dwellings of its founders. One of these, which stood at the western angle of
the Palatine Hill, was known as the
Casa Romuli (
Dionys.
i. 79); it was twice burned and repaired during the reign of Augustus (
Dio Cass. xlviii. 43, and
liv. 29). The
Tugurium Faustuli is probably another name for the same thing. Another hut, also called after
Romulus, appears to have been
 |
|
Casa Romuli.
|
preserved on the Capitoline Hill (Vitruv. ii. 1;
Contr. i. 6).
A careful representation of this early form of house, as used by the prehistoric Latin
race, exists in the small sepulchral “houseurns,” which are found in
considerable numbers in the early cemeteries of central Italy and elsewhere. These curious
pieces of archaic pottery have small movable doors fixed with a wooden peg. See Virchow,
Die italienischen und deutschen Haus-Urnen (Berlin, 1884).
During the many centuries which elapsed before the commencement of the historic period of
Greece, a state of society existed very different from that with which Greek literature has
made us familiar. Instead of large cities, a number of small, highly fortified towns or
villages were ruled in an autocratic way by some chieftain of semi-Oriental habits, who lived
in a style of much luxury and splendour, surrounded by a group of followers, very much like
those of a mediæval feudal lord. At this early period wealth and splendour, which
in historic times were devoted to the more public uses of the agora, the council chamber, and
the temples of the gods, were lavished on the palace of the chief. It is this period that is
celebrated in the Homeric poems which, there is every reason to believe, give us a faithful,
if highly coloured, picture of the magnificence which adorned the dwellings of wealthy
chiefs, such as Alcinoüs and, in a lesser degree, Odysseus. The recent discoveries
made by Dr. Schliemann and Dr. Dörpfeld, within the massive walls of Tiryns (the
Τίρυνς τειχιόεσσα of Homer), have for the first time
shown us that the stately and richly decorated palaces of the
Odyssey were not
wholly the offspring of a poet's fancy. See
Tiryns.
II. The Homeric Palace of Odysseus
The palace of Odysseus, as depicted in the
Odyssey, may be taken as
representing the Homeric house. It has been most clearly described by Prof. Gardner, of whose
valuable paper in the
Quarterly Review (January, 1886) what
follows under this head is practically a summary.
The Homeric house consisted of three parts:
αὐλή, the fore-court;
δῶμα or
μέγαρον, the hall of the men; and
θάλαμος, called in later times
γυναικωνῖτις, the apartments of the women. The house was entered by massive
folding-doors (
θύραι δικλίδες), and on either side were
stone seats (
ἑδραι). The doors led into the
αὐλή, or open court-yard, which was used as a kind of farm-yard. On
either side and behind were chambers (
θάλαμοι) used for
various purposes, such as grinding the corn (
Od. xx. 105), and sometimes for sleeping in (
Od. xix. 48). In one corner of the court was the
θόλος, a circular building. In the midst of the court was the altar of
Ζεὺς ἑρκεῖος. In the court were two colonnades or porticoes, each
called
αἴθουσα, one on either side right and left of the
court-yard (
αἴθουσα αὐλῆς), and the other opposite the
entrance to the court-yard and along the front of the
δῶμα
or
μέγαρον. The latter is often considered as part of the
πρόδομος, so that
αἴθουσα
and
πρόδομος are often used as synonymous terms. Crossing
the
αἴθουσα, the visitor passed into the
μέγαρον or
δῶμα, where the chiefs
lived. At either end of the
μέγαρον was a door, one leading
into the court-yard through the
αἴθουσα, and the
other into the women's apartments, the
θάλαμος, properly so
called. In front of either door was a threshold (
οὐδός),
probably raised. The threshold in front of the door into the
μέγαρον was made of ash-wood, and the threshold in front of the door into the
women's apartments was of stone,
λάϊνος οὐδός (
Od. xx. 258), a distinction which is most important for understanding
the combat between Odysseus and the suitors. By the ashen threshold was the
δουροδόκη, or spear-stand, close to one of the pillars (
Od. i. 128). The
μέγαρον was of great
size. In the palace of Odysseus the three hundred suitors of Penelopé feasted in
it. Its height was that of the house itself, and its roof was supported by lofty pillars
(
κίονες). In the upper part of the
μέγαρον was the
ἐσχάρα, or hearth, where the
food was cooked (
Od. xx. 123), and the smoke escaped through a hole in the roof, as in
the old Roman
atrium. Besides the two principal doors of the
μέγαρον already mentioned, there was a third, or postern-door,
called
ὀρσοθύρη, the position of which has given rise to
much dispute. It should, however, probably be placed, for the reasons given by Gardner and
Jebb, on the side of the
μέγαρον, as shown in the plan
(Plan, 6), leading into the
λαύρη (
Od. xxii. 128 Od., 137), or narrow
passage which gave access to the women's apartments from the outer court-yard, thus avoiding
the necessity of passing through the
μέγαρον (Plan, 8).
The women's rooms, or
θάλαμος, properly so called, also
styled
μέγαρα γυναικῶν (
Od. xxii. 151), were immediately behind the
μέγαρον on the ground-floor, directly communicating with the latter by a door.
This is clear from the whole narrative in the
Odyssey of the combat between
Odysseus and the suitors. The passages proving this have been critically examined by Prof.
Jebb in the essay quoted below. (Cf.
Od. xvii. 506 Od., xx. 389, etc.; see
also iv. 718.) Here the women sat engaged in weaving and domestic occupations. Here was the
nuptial chamber, with the marriage-bed made by Odysseus with his own hands (
Od. xxiii. 192 Od., 295). The
ordinary sleeping and other rooms of the women were in the upper story (
ὑπερώϊον), which was reached by a ladder,
κλίμαξ (
Od. xxi. 5; cf.
Od. ii. 358 Od., iv. 760;
Il. ii. 514 Il., xvi. 184; Eustath.
ad Od. i. 328, p. 1420, 53). Hence we find Penelopé, after
sleeping with Odysseus in the nuptial chamber, ascending with her handmaids into the upper
chamber (
Od. xxiii. 364). It is therefore a mistake on the part of some modern
writers to describe the women's rooms as situated only in the upper story. In the women's
rooms was the armory (
θάλαμος ὅπλων, cf.
Od. xxii. 140 Od., 151-156), and the
treasury at the further extremity (
θάλαμος ἔσχατος), with
a high roof (
Od. xxi. 8). In the women's part of the house there was also an open
court, in which grew an olive-tree in the palace of Odysseus (
Od. xxiii. 190).
For further details regarding the Homeric house, reference may be made to Gardner,
Journ. of Hellenic Studies, iii. p. 264 foll.; Jebb, ib. vii. p. 170 foll.;
Dörpfeld, in Schliemann's
Tiryns (London, 1866);
Winckler,
Die Wohnhäuser der Hellenen (Berlin, 1868);
Protodikos,
De Aedibus Homericis (Leipzig, 1877); Rumpf,
De Aedibus Homericis (Giessen, 1884). Valuable accounts of the
architecture and other arts of the Homeric period are given by
Helbig, Das homerische Epos (1876), and by Buchholz,
Die homerischen Realien (Leipzig, 1883-85).
III. The later Greek House
The discoveries of recent years have shown that bricks made of unbaked clay were very
extensively used down to quite late times for the private houses of the Greeks, and this is
one reason why examples of Hellenic domestic architecture are so very rare. Burnt bricks were
first introduced by the Romans (Blümner,
Technol. u. Terminol., etc.,
ii. p. 11). Till quite recently very few remains of Greek houses were known to exist. The
excavations, however, made in the Greek city of Naukratis in the Egyptian Delta during
1884-86 by Messrs. Flinders Petrie and Ernest Gardner have brought to light remains of a
large number of Greek streets and
 |
|
Plan of a Greek House at Naukratis in Egypt.
|
houses, all built of sundried brick, coated with painted stucco. The accompanying
figure shows part of Mr. Petrie's discoveries: A is a single house forming a complete
insula, as the Romans would call it; it consists of six rooms, with what was
probably a small central open court. B B appear to be shops. C C are narrow streets. In this
Greek city the streets seem all to be very narrow, and the
insulae are
mostly very small—in many cases, like the figured example, consisting of one house
only. Though but very scanty remains were found of the unbaked-brick walls, yet in a few
places patches of painted stucco on the exterior were found
in situ.
Though walls of this sort would last very well so long as they were roofed over and protected
by their coating of hard stucco, yet when once they had fallen into a ruined state the
process of decay would be rapid and complete, even in Egypt, and of course much more so in a
more rainy climate.
The other more important examples of Greek domestic architecture which have yet been
discovered are some houses in the Piraeus, the foundations of which were exposed in 1884
during the laying out of a new street by the municipality. (See Dr. Dörpfeld, in
Mittheil. d. deutsch. archäol. Inst. in Athen, vol. ix. no. 3,
1884.) The figure shows a reduction made from Dr. Dörpfeld's plan.
On the southeast and southwest sides the block faces upon streets; it appears to be a
double
 |
|
Plan of a Greek House discovered in the Piraeus.
|
house, though this is not quite certain, owing to the impossibility of ascertaining the
positions of all the doors. On the northwest side remains were found of a large open
peristyle, apparently derived from the
αὐλή of the earlier
Hellenic plan; under the covered porticus of this cloister an altar was found, probably
dedicated to Zeus Herkeios. On the southeast side the house was entered through a long
shallow porch, with two columns, in which stood another altar, probably that of Apollo
Agyieus. This porch led into a small open court, surrounded on three sides by a covered walk
(
στοά or
porticus). The pavement of
this was laid so as to drain into an open gully, through which the rainwater escaped into a
drain. In one corner of the court was a well, and on the other side a stone cistern for
storing water; a second cistern stood in the room adjoining the open court on the northwest.
Some remains of paving were found, as is indicated on the plan. In one room it consists of
stone flags; in another of a sort of rude mosaic, formed of pebbles set in concrete. On the
southwest side are some rooms which were entered directly from the street, these may have
been shops or public offices. Traces of a staircase leading to an upper floor were found at
one end of the room with the flagging pavement. This block measures, without counting the
large peristyle, about 140 feet by 75 feet. The clear open space of the peristyle was about
68 feet wide; its other dimension was not discovered. It is possible that this block may have
been all part of the same house— one portion being the
ἀνδρωνῖτις, or men's part, and the rest the
γυναικωνῖτις, or women's part.
During the most flourishing period of Greece the private houses appear to have been small
and simple in design; splendour of materials and ornament were reserved for the temples of
the gods and the public buildings, such as the Agora and the great
στοαί, which in Athens especially contributed so largely to the architectural
magnificence of the city. The front of the house towards the street was not large, as the
apartments extended rather in the direction of its depth than of its width. In towns the
houses were often built side by side, with party walls between (
ὁμότοιχοι οἰκίαι). The exterior wall was plain and often covered with plaster
or stucco. Sometimes, as in Tanagra, the exterior was adorned with what was probably
terra-cotta ( Dicaearch. p. 245, Fuhr). Plutarch says that Phocion's house was ornamented
with plates of bronze (
Plut. Phoc. 18).
Unbaked clay, as we have already shown, was used for the walls; thus it was easy for the
Plataeans to break through the party walls of their houses, so as to communicate with each
other. For the same reason the burglar was called
τοιχωρύχος, because he found it easier to obtain an entrance into houses by
breaking through the soft walls than by the door or windows (
De Leg. 831 E).
Foreigners were specially struck by the mean appearance of the private houses of Athens in
the time of Pericles, as strongly contrasting with the splendour of the public buildings
(
Thuc. ii. 14,
Thuc., 65).
“A stranger,” says Dicaearchus, “might doubt upon a sudden view
whether this were really the city of Athens,” so mean were the houses and crooked
and narrow the streets. It was not till the time of Demosthenes that good houses began to be
built in Athens.
In all cases the country houses must have been much finer buildings than
those in the old cities, where streets were narrow and sites often very cramped (Isocr.
Areop. 20). Thucydides (ii. 14) speaks of the preference of the Athenians for
houses in the country. See
Villa.
The plan and whole arrangement of town and country houses would naturally be absolutely
different, and it is unreasonable to suppose that one fixed type of house was used by the
Greeks. Existing remains show us that the Roman houses had as many varieties of plan as we
have now, and yet many archæologists have written as if there was one stereotyped
plan of house used in classical times. The somewhat pedantic language of Vitruvius (vi. 7,
10) on the subject has tended to support the belief in the existence of one fixed type of
Greek house, but at his date, in the reign of Augustus, archæology was practically
an unknown science, and it may reasonably be suggested that the so-called Greek plan of
Vitruvius does not represent the domestic architecture of the bygone days when the Greeks
were an independent race, but rather Vitruvius's private notion, as a practising architect,
of a house to be built for some wealthy Roman in the revived pseudo-Hellenic style which
began to be popular in the reigns of the early emperors of Rome.
Nevertheless, many of Vitruvius's statements may be of great use in illustrating difficult
passages in older Greek writers, which treat of some details in the Hellenic house,
especially when the description is compared with some of the existing Roman dwellings, which
are evidently designed to some extent after a real or supposed Greek model.
Greek houses had three principal features in common. First, there were one or two open
courts, surrounded by the various rooms. Secondly, in a Greek family the women lived in
private apartments allotted to their respective use. Hence the house was always divided into
two distinct portions, already mentioned—the Andronitis (
ἀνδρωνῖτις), or men's apartments, and the Gynaeconitis (
γυναικωνῖτις), or women's apartments. Thirdly, the Gynaeconitis was, as a
general rule, in larger houses behind the Andronitis, and on the same floor as the latter
Much difficulty has been occasioned in the arrangement of a Greek house by the statement of
Vitruvius (vi. 7 [10]) that the principal entrance led at once into the Gynaeconitis, and
that the Andronitis therefore was behind the women's rooms, or rather, if we construe his
words strictly, by their side. But such an arrangement is alike inconsistent with the careful
state of seclusion in which the Greek women were kept, and also with the positive statements
of the writers of the period. It is very likely that Vitruvius misunderstood to some extent
the descriptions given by his Greek authorities, and has assigned to the Gynaeconitis the
arrangement of the Andronitis.
The plan below of the ground-floor of a Greek house of the larger size, with two courts or
peristyles, is taken, with slight alterations, from Guhl and Koner. It is of course
conjectural, but it will serve for the
probable arrangements (for
further we cannot go) of the Greek house at the period we are speaking of. Other plans,
differing very much from this, have been given by several modern writers; but this appears on
the whole the most consistent with the ancient authorities. In smaller
 |
|
Plan of a Greek House. (Guhl and Koner.) EntranceA. -hall. B. Peristyle of the
Andronitis. a. Altar of Ζεὺς
ἑρκεῖος. C. Andron, or dining-hall. b.
ἑστία. K. Peristyle of the Gynaeconitis. H. Rooms of the
Andronitis. F. Perhaps sanctuaries of the θεοὶ κτήσιοι
and θεοὶ πατρῶοι. D. Thalamos. E. Amphithalamos. G. Rooms
of the Gynaeconitis, for working in wool and other purposes. I. Rooms of the Andronitis,
and in some houses perhaps shops opening to the street. 1. Πρόδομος, and farther back, street-door, αὔλειος
θύρα. 2. Door between the men's and women's rooms, μέσαυλος or μέταυλος θύρα. 3. Garden-door,
κηπαία θύρα.
|
houses the Gynaeconitis was much more limited, having no open court, and in some
cases was restricted to the upper story.
Some other matters connected with a Greek house require notice.
1. Upper Stories.
When there was an upper story (
ὑπερῷον, διῆρες), it
seldom extended over the whole space occupied by the lower story. The principal use of the
upper story was for the sleeping apartments, both of the family and of the slaves. Houses
rarely had more than two stories; but in later times we find in the larger towns mention of
houses with three stories (
τριστέγη,
Artemid. iv. 46; Acts, xx. 8, 9). The access to the upper floor seems to have been
sometimes by stairs (
ἀναβαθμοί) on the outside of the
house, leading up from the street, as was the case at Rome (Aristot.
Oec. ii. 5, p. 1347
Oec., 5). The upper
story was sometimes let, or used for lodging guests (
De Venef. 14). But in
some large houses there were rooms set apart for the reception of guests (
ξενῶνες) on the ground-floor.
Portions of the upper story sometimes projected beyond the walls of the lower part,
forming balconies or verandas (
προβολαί, γεισιποδίσματα,
Pollux, i. 81), like the Roman
maeniana.
2. Roofs.
The roofs were generally flat, and it was customary to walk about upon them, as on the
solaria at Rome (
adv. Simon. 11;
Lysistr. 389), or to pass from one house to another (Demosth.
c.
Androt. p. 609.53). But highpitched roofs were also used, covered with tiles
(
κέραμος, Pollux, i. 81).
3. Doors.
For particulars, see
Ianua and
Clavis. In the interior of the house the place of doors
was sometimes supplied by curtains (
παραπετάσματα,
παρακαλύμματα), which also hung between the pillars of the peristyle. They were
either plain, dyed, or embroidered (Pollux, x. 32; Theophr. 5).
 |
|
Aula of Greek House. (Von Falke.)
|
4. Windows.
The principal openings for the admission of light and air were in the uncovered peristyle
and perhaps in the roofed part of the peristyle; but it is incorrect to suppose that the
houses had no windows (
θυρίδες), or at least none
overlooking the street. They appear to have been chiefly in the upper story, and in ancient
works of art women are represented looking out of them (
Thesm. 797,
Eccles. 961).
5. Privies.
These were called
ἀπόπατοι, ἄφοδοι, or
κοπρῶνες. Their position is nowhere expressly indicated, but they
were probably, as in Roman houses (see below), in proximity to the kitchen.
6. Heating.
Artificial warmth was procured by little portable stoves (
ἐσχάρια,
ἐσχαρίδες) or chafing-dishes (
ἀνθράκια). (See
Focus.) It is often supposed that the chimney was
altogether unknown, and that the smoke escaped through an opening in the roof; but it
is not easy to understand how this could be the case when there was an upper story. The
καπνοδόκη mentioned by Herodotus (viii. 137) was not
really a chimney, but only an opening in the roof. But the
κάπνη of Aristophanes (
Vesp. 143) seems to have been really a chimney, as it is described by
the Scholiast on the passage as pipe-shaped (
σωληνοειδής).
In any case, the chimney seems to have been used only in the kitchen (
ὀπτάνιον, Alexis
ap. Athen. ix. p. 386 b).
7. Decoration.
The decorations of the interior were very plain at the period to which our description
refers. The floors were mere plaster. At a late period coloured stones were used (
Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 184). Mosaics are first
mentioned as introduced under the kings of Pergamus. The walls, up to the fourth century
B.C., seem to have been only whitewashed. The first instance of painting them is that of
Alcibiades (
In Alcib. 17)—an innovation that met with considerable
opposition (
Xen. Mem. iii. 8.10;
Oecon. ix. 2). Plato mentions the painting of the walls of houses as
a mark of a
τρυφῶσα πόλις (
Repub. ii. 373
A). These allusions prove that the practice was not uncommon in the time of Plato and
Xenophon. We have also mention of painted ceilings at the same period, and at a later period
this mode of decoration became general.
8. Letting and Price of Houses.
There was a great deal of speculation in the building and letting of houses at Athens
(
Oecon. iii. 1). A distinction was made at Athens between the
οἰκία, which was a dwelling-house for a single family, and the
συνοικία, which was adapted to hold several families—like the Roman
insula. The lodging-houses
were let mostly to foreigners who came to Athens on business, and especially to the
μέτοικοι, whom the law did not allow to acquire real property, and
who therefore could not purchase houses of their own. Pasion, the banker, had a
lodging-house valued at 100 minas (Demosth.
c. Steph. i. p. 1110.28). Two
counting-houses are mentioned by Isaeus (
De Hagn. Her. 42) as yielding a
return of rather more than 8 1/2 per cent. interest on the purchase-money. But this probably
was much below the average. The summer season was the most profitable for the letting of
houses, when merchants and other visitors flocked to Athens. The rent was commonly paid by
the month. Lodging-houses were frequently taken on speculation by persons called
ναύκληροι or
σταθμοῦχοι (Ammon. ,
Harpocrat.), who made a profit by underletting them, and sometimes for not very reputable
purposes (Isaeus ,
De Philoct. Her. 19). Boeckh has given an account from the
ancient writers of the prices of houses at Athens, which seem to have been very small. They
varied from 3 minas ($54) to 120 minas ($2160), according to their size, situation, and
condition, from 30 to 50 minas ($540 to $900) being an ordinary price (Boeckh,
Publ.
Econ. of Athens, pp. 65, 141;
Staatshaush. i. p. 84).
Bibliography.
For further details regarding the Greek house, see the commentators on Vitruvius;
Schneider,
Epim. ad Xen. Mem.; Hirt,
Die Lehre der
Gebäude, pp. 287-289; Stieglitz,
Archäol. d.
Baukunst, vol. ii. pt. 2, pp. 150-159; Krause,
Deinokrates, p. 488
foll.; Winckler,
Die Wohnhäuser der Hellenen (Berlin,
1868); Becker-Göll,
Charikles, ii. p. 105 foll.;
Hermann-Blümner,
Griech. Privatalt. p. 143 foll.; Guhl and Koner,
Leben d. Griech. u. Röm. p. 95 foll., 5th ed.);
Laloux,
L'Architecture Grecque (1888).
IV. The Roman House
The earliest dwellings of the Latins on the Palatine Hill were probably mere huts of
mud-daubed osiers, like the hut of Romulus, which was preserved as a sacred relic for many
centuries. After the burning of Rome by the Gauls, the city was rebuilt in haste, with very
narrow streets and on no regular plan (
Liv.v. 55). Even the houses
of the richest citizens were small and of inexpensive materials, such as unburnt brick or
soft brown tufa. No examples of fired bricks are known in Roman buildings till the time of
Iulius Caesar; and the remarks of Vitruvius seem to refer wholly to crude or sun-dried
bricks, of which no examples in Rome have survived to modern times. Down to the beginning of
the last century of the Republic, Romans of rank continued to live in small houses. In B.C.
125, the censors censured Lepidus, the augur, because he paid 6000 sesterces (about $250) for
his house rent (Vell. Paterc. ii. 10); and Sulla , when a young man, paid only 3000 sesterces
for his rooms on the ground-floor, while a freedman in the upper part of the same house paid
only 2000 sesterces, or $80 (
Sall. c. 1).
The earliest regulation we find respecting houses is a law of the Twelve Tables that each
building should be separated from another by a space of 2 1/2 feet called
ambitus (
Fest. pp. 5,
Fest. 11,
M.). But this enactment was disregarded, and was again enforced by Nero when he rebuilt the
city (
Tac. Ann. xv. 43; see below). As Rome
increased in population, the houses were raised in height. The
insula,
in which the lower and middle classes lived, was a building of several stories, let out in
flats or separate rooms to different families or persons. The
domus or
aedes privatae, on the contrary, was a separate house,
in later times a palace, usually with only one story above the ground-floor, the abode of the
rich and great, and inhabited for the most part by a single family; though, as in the case of
the palazzi in modern Rome, parts of them, especially at the back or top of the
domus, were sometimes rented (Plaut.
Trin. i. 2, 157;
Suet. Ner.
44,
Vitell. 7). In the general description of a Roman house our remarks
apply only to the
domus, properly so called, as the
insula was built on an entirely different plan.
The
insula is defined by Festus (p. 111, M.) to be
a building not joined by common walls with neighbouring houses, but surrounded by a street,
so that it stood like an island surrounded by rivers or the sea. It was thus, as has been
said, very much like one of the large hotels in modern cities, with one or more courts, and
bounded on all sides by streets, like the Louvre Hotel at Paris. The ground-floor was usually
rented for shops (
tabernae), and the upper stories in flats or separate
rooms, as in continental and American cities at the present day. Such an
insula, containing various tenements and shops, is the house of Pansa at Pompeii,
described below. The number of
insulae at Rome naturally exceeded that
of the
domus; and accordingly we find in the
Notitia,
which was compiled between A.D. 334 and 357, that there were at Rome 44,171
insulae and 1782
domus (Marquardt,
Staatsverw.
ii. p. 120). To the same effect Suetonius, in describing the fire at Rome under Nero, speaks
of the “immense number” of
insulae that were burned,
in addition to the palaces (
domus) of the nobles (
Suet. Ner. 38). Becker and some other writers
erroneously suppose that a single floor or a separate room in such a house was also called
insula, but the proper name for such a separate lodging was
cenaculum (Becker-Göll,
Gallus, ii. p. 221).
It was apparently usual for an
insula to have been built on
speculation, and let by the proprietor to different occupants (
Plut.
Crass. 2;
Mart.iv. 37). Hence the stories
or separate rooms were called
cenacula meritoria (
Vitell.
7;
Juv.iii. 234) or
conducta. Cicero had
some shops, which he let (
Ad Att. xiv. 9). The rent (
pensio) at Rome was considerable, even for a miserable garret (
Juv. iii. 166,
Juv. 3.225). Poor persons in the time of Iulius
Caesar appear to have paid 2000 sesterces ($80 or $85) as the usual rent (
Suet. Caes. 38). Caelius was said to have paid 30,000 sesterces (about
$1200) for the rent of a third floor in the
insula of P. Clodius, though
Cicero says the real rent was only one third of this sum (
Cael. 7, 17). The
insularii were not the
occupants of the
insulae, but the agents who had charge of the
insulae and collected the rents. They were also called
procuratores insularum. The
insula appears to have been named
after the person to whom it belonged. Thus we find in inscriptions the
insula Arriana
Polliana, the
insula Sertoriana, etc. (Orelli, 4324).
The upper stories and the separate rooms of the
insula were, as we
have already said, called
cenacula. This word properly signifies rooms
to dine in; but after it became the fashion to dine in the upper part of the house, all the
rooms above the ground-floor were called
cenacula (Varr.
L.
L. v. 162). There were different flights of stairs connecting the upper stories with
the lower part of the house, as we find to be the case in houses at
Pompeii. Sometimes the stairs had no connection with the lower part of the house, but
ascended at once from the street (
Liv. xxxix. 14, 2;
xxi. 62, 3). As the different stories could not
all be lighted from openings in the roof, as in the
domus, they had
windows looking out into the street (
Liv.i. 41Liv., xxiv. 21). They also had sometimes balconies, supported by brackets,
projecting into the street, from which an occupant could shake hands with his next-door or
opposite neighbour (
Mart.i. 86). These balconies were called
maeniana, and the same name was also given to the stories which projected
over those below, as we see in some old houses in England (
Fest. p.
134;
Fest. 22, M.; Isid. xv.
3, 11; Vitruv. v. 1, 2). Projecting stories were
forbidden in A.D. 368 to be erected in Rome (Ammian. Marcell. xxvii. 9, 8) on account of the
narrowness of the streets, and were again forbidden by the emperors Honorius and Theodosius
unless there was an open space, in some cases of ten, in others of fifteen feet, clear of any
adjacent building (
Cod. Iust. viii. 10, 11). Such a projecting story is seen
in some of the Pompeian houses.
 |
|
Maenianum, or Projecting Story. (Overbeck, Pompeii. ）
|
We find mention of a house three stories high in B.C. 218 (
Liv.xxi.
62, 3); and Martial considered the third story, where he
lived, as very high. If we were to estimate the height of the Roman houses by the way in
which they are spoken of by the ancient writers, we should probably assign to them too many
stories; for the houses, as Friedländer observes, very likely appeared higher than
they really were in consequence of the narrowness of the streets. We have no express mention
of any houses more than four stories high; but from various circumstances we may infer that
some of the houses at Rome had a larger number of stories than are expressly mentioned. Thus
Augustus limited the height of houses to seventy feet, which implies that they had been built
still higher, and Cicero describes the houses as hoisted up and suspended in the air
(
Leg. Agr. ii. 35, 96). See Friedländer,
Sittengesch.
Roms, i. p. 5 foll.
The houses let for hire were in Rome, as in modern cities at the present day, badly
built by speculators. The upper stories were of wood (
tabulata,
contignationes) and frequently fell down, while their material made them more liable to
fires, which were very frequent in Rome. Catullus speaks ironically of the advantages of a
beggar, who had nothing to fear from fire or the fall of houses. The returns from house
property in Rome were large, but people feared to invest in it on account of fires (
Gell. xv. 1). The inundations of the Tiber also caused the fall of
houses. For further details, see Friedländer, i. p. 26 foll.
It was not, however, till the reign of Nero that a complete reform was effected in the
arrangement and construction of the houses and streets of Rome. Nero had a new and elaborate
Building Act drawn up, which required fire-proof materials, such as
peperino, a hard volcanic stone, to be used for the external walls of houses. He also
enacted that each building should have separate walls and a space (
ambitus) left open all round it. As a means of escape and assistance in the case of
fire he also caused arcades or colonnades to be built at his own expense in front of the
insulae. In Trajan's reign the limit of height for street houses was fixed
at sixty feet (Aurel. Vict.
Epit. 13). The emperors Antoninus and Verus again
made an ordinance about the space to be left round the
insulae
(
Dig. viii. 2, 14).
We now turn to the history and construction of the
domus, or mansion of the great and wealthy. It was not till the last century of the
Republic, when wealth had been acquired by conquests in the East, that houses of any
splendour began to be built; but it then became the fashion not only to build houses of an
immense size, but to adorn them with marble columns, paintings, statues, and costly works of
art. They covered a large space, most of the rooms being on the ground-floor. The spacious
atria and
peristylia, being open to the sky, did
not permit an upper story, which, if it existed, must have been confined to the sides of the
building, and could not have been very high, as otherwise it would have darkened the
atria and
peristylia. These splendid mansions were
erected for the most part on the hills and along the slopes of the Palatine, on the side near
the Forum, which was the favourite quarter for the Roman nobles. In later times the various
palaces of the emperors swallowed up almost the whole of this site.
The house of the orator L. Crassus on the Palatine, built about B.C. 92, was the first
which had marble columns. For this, Crassus was severely blamed, and the stern republican M.
Brutus nicknamed him the “Palatine Venus.” This house was valued at
6,000,000 sesterces (about $240,000); but Pliny says that it yielded in magnificence to the
house of Q. Catulus on the same hill, and was much inferior to that of C. Aquilius on the
Viminal. The house of Catulus had a fine colonnade (
porticus), adorned
with the spoils of the Cimbric War. It was near the house of Cicero, as a portion of the
colonnade was destroyed when Clodius razed the house of Cicero (Val. Max. vi. 3.1).
In B.C. 78, M. Lepidus, for the first time in Rome, used the rich Numidian marble not only
for columns, but even for the thresholds of his doors; yet the fashion of building
magnificent houses increased so rapidly that the house of Lepidus, which in his consulship
was the first in Rome, was thirty-five years later eclipsed by a hundred
others. Lucullus was especially celebrated for the magnificence of his houses. The Romans
were exceedingly fond of marble for the decoration of their abodes. An advance in costly
magnificence was made by the ædile M. Aemilius Scaurus in the middle of the first
century B.C. He purchased the house of L. Crassus and greatly enlarged it. He introduced, as
the supports of his atrium, columns of the black “Lucullean” marble no
less than thirty-eight feet in height, and of which the weight was so great that he had to
provide security for an indemnity in case of injury that might be done to the main sewers
while these immense blocks of marble were being carted through the streets (
Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 5 foll.). This house was sold
to Clodius for nearly 15,000,000 sesterces (about $600,000)—a price, says Pliny ,
worthy of the madness of kings. This is the highest price recorded in the time of the
Republic for a house. The consul Messalla bought the house of Autronius for 3,400,000
sesterces (about $140,000), and Cicero the house of Crassus (not L. Crassus, the orator) for
3,500,000 sesterces (about $140,000) (
Ad Att. i. 13, 6, with Tyrrell's note;
Ad Fam. v. 6). Cicero's house was on the lower slope of the Palatine towards
the
Regia, the official residence of Iulius Caesar as Pontifex Maximus, whom
Cicero calls his neighbour (
Ad Fam. v. 6,
Ad Att. xiii. 45).
These houses will serve as samples of the value of the mansions of the nobles during the
Republic. Sallust speaks of them as like cities in size (
Cat. 12), and Seneca describes them in the same terms under the Empire
(
Ep. 90 Ep., 43), when the imperial
palaces became still more magnificent. Many of them, like the houses of Sallust and Maecenas,
described below, were surrounded by gardens. The rich noble, we are told, was not content
unless he had a
rus in urbe (
Mart. xii.
57, 21), and the extensive pleasure-grounds are
alluded to in other passages.
According to Vitruvius, the principal parts of a Roman house were:
- 1. Vestibulum,
- 2. Ostium,
- 3. Atrium,
- 4. Alae,
- 5. Tablinum,
- 6. Fauces,
- 7. Peristylium.
The parts of a house which were considered of less importance, and of which the
arrangement differed in different houses, were:
- 1. Cubicula,
- 2. Triclinia,
- 3. Oeci,
- 4. Exedrae,
- 5. Pinacotheca,
- 6. Bibliotheca,
- 7. Balineum,
- 8. Culina,
- 9. Cenacula,
- 10. Lararium or Sacrarium,
- 11. Diaetae,
- 12. Solaria,
- 13. Cellae.
We shall speak of each in order.
1. Vestibulum.
There has been much dispute respecting the exact signification of this word, which has
arisen from the different meanings attached to it at different periods of history and in
different kinds of houses. In the palaces of the nobles the
vestibulum
was a vacant space before the house, forming a court-yard or entrance-court, surrounded on
three sides by the house, and open on the fourth to the street. The two wings ran out beyond
the façade of the building, and the door was in the third side opposite the
street. In some houses the projecting sides were occupied by shops opening into the street.
In the
vestibulum the clients assembled, till the door was opened, to
pay their respects (
salutatio) to the master of the house, so that they
might not be left standing either in the street or within the house (
Gell. xvi. 5.3Gell. , 8;
vestibulum, quod est
ante domum, Varr.
L. L. vii. 81; Macrob. vi. 8.15). Hence in the
smaller houses in Rome and the municipal towns, there was either no
vestibulum, so that the door opened straight upon the street, or the
vestibulum was simply indicated by the door standing back a few feet from the
street, as in many of the houses at Pompeii. Sometimes there were steps from the street
leading up to the
vestibulum (
Plin.
Ep. 84). In the houses of the nobility the
vestibulum was adorned with statues, arms, and other trophies (
Plin. H. N. xxxv. 7). Public buildings also had
vestibula, as the curia or senate-house (
Liv. i.
48Liv., ii. 48), and various temples (
Plin. Ep. 86).
2. Ostium.
The
ostium was the entrance to the house, and is constantly used as
synonymous with
ianua and
fores, “the
door.” But
ostium properly signified the small vacant space
before the
ianua, whence Plautus (
Pers. v. 1, 6) says
ante ostium et ianuam. Here
stood the
antae (q. v.), two posts or pillars flanking the doorway. On
the threshold the word
Salve was frequently wrought in mosaic, as we see in
the Pompeian houses; and over the threshold there sometimes hung a cage containing a magpie
or a parrot, taught to greet those who entered (
Petron. 28;
Mart.vii. 87, 6; xiv. 76). Over the door a few words of good omen
were sometimes written, such as
nihil intret mali (OrelliHenz.
Inscr. 7287), or
deprecatio incendiorum (
Plin. H. N. xxviii. 20). Sometimes the house was
indicated by a sign over the door, as in mediæval times. Thus we are told that
Augustus was born
ad Capita Bubula (
Suet.
Aug. 5), and Domitian,
ad Malum Punicum (
Suet. Dom. 1). The street-door itself is fully
described under
Ianua.
Whether the street-door opened into a hall or directly into the
atrium has been a subject of dispute. Vitruvius mentions no entrance-hall in a Roman
house; but there are reasons for believing there must have been an entrance-hall in the
palaces of the nobility, as behind the door there was a small room (
cella) for the house-porter (
ostiarius or
ianitor), and it is difficult to suppose that this was in the
atrium (
Petron. 28), especially as a dog was kept by his
side, chained to the wall, with a written warning
Cave Canem (Plaut.
Most. iii. 2, 169). Sometimes a dog was painted on the wall (
Petron. 29) or wrought in mosaic on the pavement, as we find in the
House of the Tragic Poet at Pompeii. (See illust. p. 296.) At the end of the hall, which
seems to have been called
ostium, there was no inner door, as Becker
describes, but the entrance to the
atrium was closed by a curtain (
velum), which was drawn aside by the usher when he admitted strangers to an
interview (Lamprid.
Alex. Sev. 5,
Heliog. 14;
Plin. Ep. 20). The entrance-hall was small, so that
a person in the
atrium could look through it at those walking in the
street (
Calig. 41).
3. Atrium.
The first point to be determined in connection with the
atrium, upon
which the whole disposition of a Roman house depends, is whether the
atrium and the
cavum aedium or
cavaedium
denote two separate courts or one and the same. Some modern writers maintain that they were
distinct courts, and accordingly place three courts in a Roman house—first the
atrium, then the
cavum aedium in the centre, and
lastly the
peristylium in the rear. But this view cannot be maintained;
it is rejected by the best modern authorities; it is in direct opposition to the statements
of Varro (
L. L. v. 161) and Vitruvius (vi. 3 and 8), who call
 |
|
Restoration of the Interior of Roman House. (Overbeck,
Pompeii. ）
|
sometimes the chief room of the house
atrium and sometimes
cavum aedium; and it is contradicted by the fact that no houses in
Pompeii have yet been discovered containing more than two courts —namely, the
atrium and the
peristylium. We may therefore conclude
that the
atrium and the
cavum aedium denote the
same room, the only difference perhaps being that
cavum aedium
indicated originally the open part, and
atrium the entire area; but in
general the two words are used as synonymous. The
atrium or
cavum aedium was a large room or court roofed over, with the exception of
an opening in the centre, called
compluvium, twoards which the roof
sloped so as to throw the rain-water into a cistern in the floor, termed
impluvium (Varr. 1. c.; Fest. p. 108, M.;
Liv. xliii. 13,
6;
Plaut. Amph. v. 1, 56). The water
from the
impluvium flowed into a well (
puteus）
under ground; for before the construction of the aqueducts the Romans were dependent upon
wells for their supply of water. The word
impluvium, however, is
sometimes employed in a wider sense to denote the whole uncovered space in the
atrium, and therefore the opening in the top as well as the cistern at the
bottom (
Act. in Verr. i. 23, 61, with the note of Pseudo-Ascon. p. 177, Or.).
Compluvium in like manner is sometimes used in the same wide signification
as equivalent to
impluvium (
Suet.
Aug. 92). The
compluvium was sometimes covered
with hangings, as a protection against the sun (Ovid,
Met. x. 595). The breadth of the
impluvium,
according to Vitruvius, was not less than a quarter nor greater than a third of the breadth
of the
atrium; its length was in the same proportion according to the
length of the
atrium.
Vitruvius (vi. 3) distinguishes five kinds of
atria or
cava aedium, which were called by the following names:
- a. Tuscanicum. In this the roof was supported by four beams,
crossing each other at right angles, the included space forming the compluvium. This kind of atrium was the most ancient of all.
- b. Tetrastylum. This was of the same form as the preceding,
except that the main beams of the roof were supported by pillars, placed at the four
angles of the impluvium.
- c. Corinthium was on the same principle as the
tetrastyle, only that there were a greater number of pillars around the impluvium, on which the beams of the roof rested.
- d. Displuviatum had its roof sloping the contrary way to the
compluvium, so that the water fell outside the house instead of
being carried into the impluvium, and was carried off by gutters.
- e. Testudinatum was constructed in the same way as the displuviatum, but it was roofed all over and had no compluvium. We are not informed, however, how light was admitted into an atrium of this kind.
The
atrium, as we have already seen, was originally the only room of
the house, serving as sitting-room, bedroom, and kitchen, which it probably continued to do
among the lower classes even in later times (
Serv. ad
Verg. Aen. i. 726Verg. Aen., ix. 648). Here was the
focus, or hearth, which
served not only for cooking, but from its sacred character was used also for the receptacle
of the Lares or Penates that were sometimes kept in little cupboards near the hearth (Plaut.
Aul. ii. 18, 15; Tibull. i. 10, 20;
Juv. viii.
110;
Petron. 29). The Lar, or tutelary god of the house,
stood close to the entrance behind the door leading into the
atrium
(Ovid,
Fast. i. 136 foll.); and we find him so placed in some of the
Pompeian houses. Near the sacred flame the members of the family took the common meal, and
the same custom continued in the country even in the time of Augustus (
Hor. Sat. ii. 6, 65 foll.). In the
atrium the
master of the house kept his
arca (q. v.), or money-chest, which was
fastened to the floor. Here stood the nuptial bed (
lectus genialis）
against the back wall, opposite the entrance to the
atrium, whence it
was also called
lectus adversus (
Gell. xvi.
9). Here sat the mistress of the house, spinning and weaving with her maids (
Liv. i. 57, 9). Here all visits were paid
and here the patron received his clients (
Plin. Ep.
i. 5, 31). Here the corpse was placed before
it was carried out to burial. (See
Funus.) Here, in
the
alae, were placed the waxen
imagines (q. v.)
of the ancestors of the house.
But as wealth increased, and numerous clients came to wait upon their patron, new rooms
were built, and the
atrium ceased to be the only room for the family. A
kitchen (
culina) was made for cooking; the Lares
were placed in a special
lararium; the meals were taken in the upper
story, hence called
cenaculum; the master and mistress slept in a
separate
cubiculum. As the
atrium now became the
reception-room, it was fitted up among the wealthy with much splendour and magnificence for
the reception of their clients. The opening in the roof was enlarged for the admission
 |
|
Section of a Roman House. (From Von Falke's Hellas und Rom. ）
|
of more light, and was supported by pillars frequently made of costly marble.
Between the pillars and along the walls, statues and other works of art were placed
(
Verr. i. 23, 61). In the middle of the
impluvium was a
marble fountain, with jets of water, frequently adorned with reliefs, of which many
beautiful specimens have been found at Pompeii. Near the fountain, where the hearth formerly
stood, was a marble table, called
cartibulum (q.v.). The
atrium, however, still continued, as in ancient times, to be the chief room of the
house, and it was not only the room for the reception of guests, but its primitive character
was preserved by its retaining the symbolical nuptial couch (
Plin.
Ep. i. 1, 87), the
imagines of the ancestors, and the instruments for weaving and spinning.
The rooms which opened out of the
atrium were lighted only through
the
compluvium, as there were no windows, as a general rule, upon the
ground-floor.
4. Alae
Alae, wings, were two small quadrangular apartments or recesses
on the left and right sides of the
atrium (Vitruv. vi. 4), but at its
farther end and open to the
atrium, as we see in the Pompeian houses.
Here the
imagines were kept in the houses of the nobles. But as the
alae were really a part of the
atrium, the
imagines were frequently described as standing in the
atrium (
Juv.viii. 19 foll.;
Plin. H. N. xxxv. 6; Ovid,
Fast. i. 591; Marquardt,
Privatl. p. 235).
5. Tablinum
Tablinum was in all probability a recess or room at the farther
end of the
atrium opposite the door leading into the hall, and was
regarded as part of the
atrium. It contained the family records and
archives (Vitruv. vi. 4 and 8). It appears, from the houses of Pompeii, to have been
separated not by a door, but simply by a curtain or
velum, while it had
a door at the back leading into the
peristylium. Marquardt supposes
that the
tablinum was originally an alcove made of wood (whence its
name) built at the back of the
atrium, in which meals were taken during
the summer, and was afterwards joined to the
atrium by breaking through
the walls of the latter.
With the
tablinum the Roman house appears to have originally ceased,
the sleeping-rooms being arranged on the upper floor. But when the
atrium and its surrounding rooms were used for the reception of clients and other
public visitors, it became necessary to increase the size of the house, and the following
rooms were accordingly added:
6. Fauces
Fauces was a passage by the side of the
tablinum, which passed from the
atrium to the
peristylium, or open court, as we see in the Pompeian houses. We must not suppose,
however, that the plural indicates two passages (Vitruv. vi. 4).
7. Peristylium
Peristylium was in its general form like the
atrium, but it was one third greater in breadth, measured transversely, than in
length (Vitruv. vi. 4); but we do not find these proportions preserved in the Pompeian
houses. It was a court open to the sky in the middle; the open part, which was surrounded by
columns, had a fountain in the centre, and was planted with flowers, shrubs, and trees
forming a
viridarium. The
atrium and
peristylium were the two important parts of a Roman house.
The arrangement of the rooms leading out of the
peristylium, which
are next to be noticed, varied, as has been remarked, according to the taste and
circumstances of the owner. It is therefore impossible to assign to them any regular place
in the house.
(a) Cubicula, bed-chambers, appear to have been usually small. There were
separate
cubicula for the day and night (
cubicula diurna
et nocturna,
Plin. Ep. i. 3); the
latter were also called
dormitoria, and were mostly on the upper floor
(
id. v. 6, 21). Vitruvius (vi.
7) recommends that they should face the east for the benefit of the rising sun. They
sometimes had a small ante-room, which was called by the Greek name of
προκοιτών, in which the
cubicularius, or valet, probably
slept (
Plin. Ep. ii. 17Plin. Ep., 23). In some of the Pompeian houses we find a recess in which the bed
was placed. This recess was called
zotheca or
zothecula.
(b) Triclinia, dining-rooms, are treated of in a separate article. See
Triclinium.
(c) Oeci, from the Greek
οἶκος, were
spacious halls or saloons borrowed from the Greeks, and were frequently used as
triclinia. (Cf. Plin.
H. N. xxxvi. 184.) They were to have the same proportions as
triclinia, but were to be more spacious on account of having columns, which
triclinia had not (Vitruv. vi. 5). Vitruvius mentions four kinds of
oeci:
（
α) The
Tetrastyle, which needs no further
description. Four columns supported the roof.
（
β) The
Corinthian, which possessed only
one row of columns, supporting the architrave (
epistylium), cornice (
corona), and a vaulted roof.
（
c) The
Egyptian, which was more splendid and more
like a basilica than a Corinthian
triclinium. In the Egyptian
oecus, the pillars supported a gallery with paved floor, which formed a
walk round the apartment; and upon these pillars others were placed, a fourth part less in
height than the lower, which surrounded the roof. Between the upper columns windows were
inserted.
（
d) The
Cyzicene (
Κυζικηνός) appears in the time of Vitruvius to have been seldom used in Italy.
These were meant for summer use, looking to the north, and if possible facing gardens, to
which they opened by folding-doors. Pliny had
oeci of this kind in his
villa.
(e) Exedrae, which appear to have been in form much the same as the
oeci, for Vitruvius (vi. 5) speaks of the
exedrae in
connection with
oeci quadrati, were rooms for conversation and the
other purposes of society (
De Nat. Deor. i. 6, 15). They served the same
purpose as the
exedrae in the Thermae and Gymnasia, which were
semicircular rooms with seats for philosophers and others to converse in. See
Balneae.
(f, g, h) Pinacotheca, Bibliotheca, and
Balineum (see
Balneae), are treated of in separate articles.
8. Culina
Culina, the kitchen.—The food was originally cooked in
the
atrium, as has been already stated, but the progress of refinement
afterwards led to the use of another part of the house for this purpose. In the kitchen of
Pansa's house, of which a restoration is given below, a stove for stews and similar
preparations was found, very much like the charcoal stoves used in the present day. Before
it lie a knife, a strainer, and a kind of fryingpan with four spherical cavities, as if it
were meant to cook eggs.
 |
|
Culina, or Kitchen, in Pansa's House.
|
In this kitchen, as well as in many others at Pompeii, there are paintings of the Lares
and Penates, to whom the hearth in the
atrium was sacred, and under
whose care the kitchen was also placed (Arnob. ii. 67). In the country the meals were taken
in the kitchen, as they were in ancient times in the
atrium (Colum. i.
6). The kitchen was in the back part of the house, and in connection with it was the
pistrinum, or bake-house, where bread was baked at home (Varr.
ap. Non. p. 55, 18); but after B.C. 171
there were public bake-houses in Rome. (See
Pistor.) In Pompeii have been found sinks of kitchens, called
confluvia (Varr.
ap. Non. p. 544,
20) or
coquinae fusoria (Pallad.
R. R. i. 37).
In close and inconvenient proximity to the kitchen was the
latrina,
or privy, in order that a common drain might carry off the contents of both to the
cloaca or public sewer (Varr. l. c.; Colum. x. 85; cf. Plaut.
Curc. iv. 4, 24;
Suet. Tib.
58;
Met. i. c. 17, p. 15). In many of the Pompeian houses we find the
latrina contiguous to the kitchen, as is shown in the annexed cut from
the house
 |
|
Culina and Latrina in the House of Sallust. (Gell, Pompeiana , p.
107.)
|
of On the right are two small arches, which are the kitchen stove. On the left is
an arched recess, which is the
latrina. At the bottom is the mouth of a
pipe supplying it with water.
9. Cenacula
Cenacula, or rooms in the upper stories, have been already
explained.
10. Lararium
Lararium or
Sacrarium.—The Lares or
Penates were originally placed near the hearth of the house in the
atrium, but when the latter became only a reception-room they were removed to a
special chapel, called
Lararium (Lamprid.
Alex. Sev. 29, 31)
or
Sacrarium (
ad Fam. xiii. 2), in which statues of other
divinities were also placed. Such a chapel is found in the
peristylium
of many of the Pompeian houses.
11. Diaeta
Diaeta does not denote any particular kind of room, but is a word
borrowed from the Greek (
δίαιτα) to signify a room used for
any of the purposes of life (
Plin. Ep. ii.
17, 12). Thus it denotes a bed-chamber (
Plin. Ep. vi. 16,
14), a dining-room (Sidon. Apoll.
Ep. ii. 2), a summer-house or a room in a garden (
Plin. Ep. ii. 17,
20;
Dig. 7, 1, 66.1; Orelli,
Inscr. 4373, etc.). It is
also the collective name of a set of chambers. Thus Pliny speaks (
H. N. v. 6 H. N., 31) of two
diaetae, in one of which were four bed-chambers and in another three.
12. Solarium
Solarium, literally a place for basking in the sun, denotes a
terrace on the flat roof of a house, frequently used by the Romans, as is still the case in
Italy and the East (Isid. xv. 3,
12; Plaut.
Mil. Glor. ii. 3, 69; ii. 4, 25;
Claud. 10).
In the time of the emperors these
solaria on the tops of houses were
turned into gardens, which contained even fruit-trees and fish-ponds (
Plin. Ep. 122). Somewhat similar were the
solaria built by Nero on the colonnades in front of the
insulae and
domus (
Suet.
Ner. 16). Sometimes the
solaria were covered by
a roof (Orelli,
Inscr. 2417).
13. Cellae servorum, familiares
Cellae servorum, familiares or
familiaricae,
the small bedrooms of the slaves, were usually situated in the upper story, as in the house
of Pansa at Pompeii, or in the back of the house, with the exception of the
cella of the house-porter, which naturally was close to the front door (Colum. i. 6;
Cic. Phil. ii. 27, 67;
Hor. Sat. i. 8, 8).
Cella also denoted the store-room, of which there were
several, bearing various names, according to their contents. Of these an account is given
under
Cella.
Cellars underground and vaulted are rarely mentioned (
hypogea
concamerationesque, Vitruv. vi. [8] 11), though several have been found at
Pompeii.
V. Some Existing Remains of Roman Houses
The oldest remains of a house in Rome are those of the Regia, which was the residence of
the Pontifex Maximus and built on the site of the house occupied by Numa. It stood at the
southeast limits of the Forum, adjoining the House of the Vestal Virgins. (See Dio Cass.
xliii. 42, xliv. 17;
Gell. iv. 6.) Another house which is also of
interest from its early date is that known as “the House of Livia” or
“of Germanicus,” which is built in a hollow in the northwestern part of
the Palatine Hill. That it is probably not later in date than the time of Augustus is shown
by the construction of its walls, which are formed of concrete faced with very neat
opus reticulatum of tufa, no brick being used. The figure below shows its
plan, which, owing to the irregularity of the site, is at two different levels, the small
rooms grouped round the staircase F being at a much higher level than the larger rooms by the
atrium: the stairs D lead from the
atrium up to
the higher floor behind. The main entrance is at B, approached down a short flight of steps.
C C are pedestals for a statue and an altar; E E are bedrooms; G is a narrow
crypto-porticus, which branches out of H, another dark passage, forming hidden
communications with different buildings on this part of the Palatine. A is a third vaulted
passage which leads to Caligula's palace; this is possibly the path by which Caligula's
murderers escaped when they hid themselves in the house of Germanicus (Joseph.
Ant.
Iud. xix. 1, 2;
Calig. 58).
The paintings in the principal rooms of this house are among the finest examples of Roman
wall decoration that still exist. See Renier,
Les Peintures du Palatin.
The floors are formed of marble mosaic in simple geometrical patterns, very neatly fitted
together,
 |
|
Plan of the so-called House of Livia. Passage. Stairs. C C. Pedestals for statues. D.
Stairs. E E. Bedrooms. F. Stairs. G. Crypto-Porticus. H. Crypto-Porticus. Q. Piscina. J K L
M. Bath-rooms. N N. Shops. O O. Street. P. Early Building.
|
with much smaller
tesserae than were used under the later Empire.
On the upper floor a long passage, approached by the staircase D, divides the house into
two parts. J K L M seem to be small bath-rooms. N N are shops with no communication with the
house, facing a public street, O O. At P are remains of a very ancient tufa building. Q is a
piscina, which seems partly to have supplied the house with water. A
number of inscribed lead pipes were found, but these were of later date than the house
itself; water was laid on to the upper as well as to the ground floors.
In 1874, remains of a very interesting house of the time of Augustus were found on the
Esquiline Hill, not far from the Basilica of S. Maria Maggiore. From its position on the line
of the Servian wall and
agger, it has been called “the House
of Maecenas,” who lived in that quarter, where he converted the public
burial-ground into a large park (
Hor. Sat. i. 8,
14). One fine room of this house, still well preserved, is of especial interest. It
appears to have been a sort of greenhouse for plants and flowers, and is a large vaulted
chamber, with a semicircular apse at one end. All round the walls are tiers of high steps
once lined with marble, intended to form stands for rows of flower-pots—arranged
exactly as in a modern conservatory. Prof. Mohr (
Bull. Inst. Arch. for 1875)
has pointed out that the cultivation of shrubs and flowers in this way was largely practised
by the Romans. On each side of the hall are six recesses, decorated with paintings of garden
scenes, with fountains among the flowers, treated in a skilfully deceptive way, so as to look
as if each recess were a window opening upon a real garden. The light was admitted only
through openings in the barrel-vault of the hall, on which were paintings of similar floral
subjects—a remarkable example of the theatrical scene-painter's style of decoration
which was popular among the Romans.
The House of Sallust, the historian, was one of the finest houses in Rome. It had, like the
House of Maecenas, extensive gardens, whence the residence was frequently called Horti
Sallustiani. So large were the gardens that the emperor Aurelian, who preferred living there
to the Palatine, erected in them a colonnade 1000 paces long, in which he took horse
exercise. Part of this house still exists in the narrow valley between the Pincian and
Quirinal Hills, near the Porta Collina in the Servian wall. The following figure shows the
plan of the existing remains, which will be soon destroyed by the filling up of the valley
where the building stands to make new boulevards—a most serious loss. The circular
part A is a lofty domed hall; B B is a balconylike gallery, supported on corbels, which runs
round the outside of the main building, at a height of about forty feet above the ground; C
is a fine vaulted room, with two stories over it; D D is a retaining wall, built against the
scarped face of the cliff to keep the crumbling tufa rock from decay; E E are rooms in four
or five
 |
|
House of Sallust in Rome.
|
stories, some with concrete and others with wooden floors; F are winding
marble-lined stairs, with mosaic landings, which led to the top of the house and the rooms on
the higher level of the hill. This part is still about seventy feet high. G is another
marble-lined staircase. A great part of the house is still unexcavated. The date of the
existing portion is of the first century A.D., and is evidently part of additions made by the
early emperors. In the sixteenth century an immense quantity of valuable marbles, including
magnificent columns of Oriental alabaster and Numidian stone, were found in the ruins of
Sallust's house and used to decorate several of the churches of Rome.
VI. Pompeian Houses
Though of course less magnificent than the palaces of Rome, the houses of Pompeii, from
their exceptionally perfect state of preservation, are of especial value as examples of Roman
domestic architecture, and have the advantage of being in most cases of known date. Few are
older than the Christian era, and none of course are later than A.D. 79, when the city was
overwhelmed by the eruption of Vesuvius. The existing remains show us, as a rule, only the
ground-floor of each house; and it should be remembered that a number of the best
rooms—especially, there is reason to believe, the bedrooms and the women's
apartments—were on the upper floors. The presence of stairs in apparently all the
houses proves that one-storied buildings were practically unknown in Pompeii; the few
fragments of the upper story which have been found standing show that, in some cases at
least, the
 |
|
Atrium of the House of the Quaestor. (Pompeii.)
|
upper part of the house was partly constructed of wood, and was arranged so as to
project beyond the line of the lower story, very like the half-timbered houses of England and
France in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
In one respect the Pompeian arrangement resembled that of mediæval and modern
Italy; that is, the street-front on the ground-floor, even of large and handsome houses, was
usually occupied by a row of shops. In some cases these shops have no doorway or passage
communicating with the main house, and were probably rented by the owner to independent
tradesmen; in others the shops could be entered from the house, and in these cases we may
suppose that the shops were managed by the slaves or clients of the house-owner.
The accompanying plan shows a small shop, to which is joined the residence of its owner,
 |
|
Plan of House with Shop.
|
forming a small block independent of the adjoining larger house.
- 1. An open archway, in which a wooden shopfront was fitted; the threshold of this
opening is rebated to receive the wooden partition, part of which was hinged so as to form
a narrow door; the upper part would be closed at night by flap-shutters hinged at the top,
an arrangement very like that of a modern Oriental bazaar. This method of constructing
shop-fronts was very common, not only in Pompeii, but in Rome and elsewhere. The presence
of a shop appears always to be indicated by this long grooved sill, with marks of the
hinged door on one side. A large number of examples still exist in Rome. The L-shaped counter
- 2. is formed of concrete and brick stuccoed; in it are inserted a row of amphorae, apparently for the reception of hot food or drink of some kind.
At one end is a charcoal stove
- 3.; 5, 5 are the dining-room and store-room of the shopkeeper; 4 is the staircase
leading to the sleeping apartments. The whole forms a complete house of the smallest
type.
The two illustrations annexed represent two
atria of houses at
Pompeii. The first is the
atrium
of what is usually called the “House of the Quaestor.”
The view is taken near the entrance-hall facing the
tablinum, through
which the columns of the peristyle and the garden are seen. This
atrium,
which is a specimen of what Vitruvius calls the Corinthian, is surrounded by various rooms,
and is beautifully painted with arabesque designs upon red and yellow grounds.
The next illustration represents the
atrium of what is usually called
the “House of Ceres.” In
 |
|
Atrium of the House of Ceres. (Restoration.)
|
the centre is the
impluvium; and, as there are no pillars
around the
impluvium, this
atrium must belong to
the kind called by Vitruvius the “Tuscan.”
The three following plans are good typical examples of the best class of houses in Pompeii.
The first is popularly known as “the House of the Tragic Poet.”
 |
|
House of the Tragic Poet.
|
Like most of the other houses at Pompeii, it had no
vestibulum
according to the meaning which we
 |
|
Pompeian Mosaic. (Overbeck.)
|
have attached to the word. The
ostium, or entrancehall, which
is six feet wide, is nearly thirty long—a length occasioned by the shops on each
side. Near the street-door there is a figure of a large fierce dog worked in mosaic on
the pavement, and beneath it is written
Cave Canem, as here shown. The two
large rooms on each side of the vestibule appear from the large openings in front of them to
have been shops; they communicate with the entrance-hall, and were therefore probably
occupied by the master of the house. The
atrium is about twenty-eight
feet in length and twenty in breadth; its
impluvium is near the centre
of the room, and its floor is paved with white
tesserae, spotted with
black. On the left-hand corner of the
atrium is a small room (marked 1
in plan), perhaps the
cella of the
ostiarius, with
a staircase leading to the upper rooms. On each side of the
atrium are
chambers for the use of the family or intended for the reception of guests, who were entitled
to claim hospitality. When a house did not possess a
hospitium (q. v.),
or rooms expressly for the reception of guests, they appear to have been lodged in rooms
attached to the
atrium. At the farther end of the
atrium is the
tablinum, with the
fauces, or
passage, at the side, leading into the
peristylium, with Doric columns
and garden (
viridarium). The large room on the right of the peristyle
is the
triclinium; beside it is the kitchen, with a
latrina.
The second illustration contains the groundplan of an
insula
surrounded by shops, which belonged to the owner and were let by him. The house itself, which
is usually called the “House of Pansa,” evidently belonged to one of the
principal men of Pompeii. Including the garden, which
 |
|
Ground-plan of an Insula, known as the House of Pansa.
|
is a third of the whole length, it is about 300 feet long and 100 wide.
Ostium, or entrance-hall, paved with mosaic. Tuscan
atrium. I.
Impluvium. C. Chambers on each side of the
atrium, probably for the reception of guests. D.
Ala. E.
Tablinum, which is open to the
peristylium, so that the
whole length of the house could be seen at once; but as there is a passage (
fauces), F, beside it, the
tablinum might probably be closed at
the pleasure of the owner. C. Chambers by the
fauces and
tablinum, of which the use is uncertain. G.
Peristylium. D. Recesses
in the
peristylium. C.
Cubicula by the side of the
peristylium. K.
Triclinium. L.
Oecus, and by
its side there is a passage leading from the
peristylium to the garden.
M. Back door (
posticum ostium) to the street. N.
Culina.
H. Servants' hall, with a back door to the street. P. Portico of two stories, which proves
that the house had an upper floor. The site of the staircase, however, is unknown, though it
is thought there is some indication of one in the passage M. Q. The garden. R. Reservoir for
supplying a tank,
The preceding rooms belonged exclusively to Pansa's house; but there were a good many
apartments besides in the
insula, which were not in his occupation:
a. Six shops let out to tenants. Those on the right and left hand corners
were bakers' shops, which contained mills, ovens, etc., at
b. The one on
the right appears to have been a large establishment, as it contains many rooms.
c. Two houses of a very mean class, having formerly an upper story. On
the other side are two houses much larger,
d.
VII. General Details of Roman Houses
1. Walls.
The wall (
paries) in earlier times was made of some easily worked
stone, such as tufa or peperino in large square blocks; or for the best houses unburnt brick
was used. In the time of Augustus concrete began to be the chief building material, and
later kiln-dried bricks. The inner walls were originally whitewashed (see
Dealbatores), and later were covered with stucco
(
opus albarium). The plain surface of the walls was broken by
quadrangular panels, called
abaci (
Plin.
H. N. xxxiii. 159;
xxxv. 3Plin. H. N.,
32). (See, also,
Abacus.) In the second
century B.C., the practice was introduced from Greece of painting these panels with an
endless variety of figures, landscapes, buildings, gardens, etc., of which we have numerous
examples in the existing remains of houses in Rome and Pompeii. See
Pictura.
In addition to painting, other methods of decoration were used: in Rome especially the
chief way of ornamenting the rooms of the best houses was by lining the walls with slabs of
sawn marble, moulded into a skirting below and a cornice above. Great magnificence of effect
was produced by the skilful admixture of marbles of different rich colours, the moulded part
being usually of a deeper tint than the flat surfaces. In the most careful work these marble
linings were fastened to the walls by bronze clamps, but more often the slabs were simply
attached by a thick bedding of cement behind them (
Plin.
Ep. 86.4).
Another very rich method of decoration was the application of stucco reliefs enriched with
gold and colours. A third system, applied also to vaults, was to encrust the walls with
mosaics,
 |
|
Specimen of Decorative Wall-painting at Pompeii. (Reber.)
|
chiefly made of glass
tesserae of the most brilliant
jewel-like colours. See
Musivum Opus.
In fact, splendour of effect and a brilliant
ensemble were the
characteristics of Roman house-decoration from the Augustan era down to later times.
2. Roofs.
The roofs (
tecta) of Roman houses were in the oldest times covered
with straw. Next came the use of shingles for the roofing of houses, which continued down to
the time of the war with Pyrrhus (
Plin. H. N. xvi.
36). Subsequently clay tiles, called
tegulae and
imbrices, superseded the shingles. The roofs of houses were sometimes flat, but they
were also gabled (
pectenata) like modern houses. These were of two
kinds, the
tecta pectenata, sloping two ways, and the
tecta testudinata, sloping four ways ( Fest. p. 213, M). Both kinds of roofs were
displuviata—that is, sloping towards the
street—and the houses had around
 |
|
Roof in Peristyle of the House of C. Vibius. (Overbeck.)
|
them an
ambitus, or vacant space of 2 1/2 feet, to receive
the rain-water running off the roofs. The projecting eaves of roofs were called
suggrundae. The gabled roofs rose to a point called
fastigium (q. v.). For the most magnificent buildings, such as some of the imperial
palaces, the roofs were covered with tiles made of white marble, or even with bronze tiles
plated with gold. For further details, see
Tegula.
3. Floors.
The floor (
solum) of a room was seldom boarded (
strata
solo tabulata,
Stat. Silv. i. 5,
57), except in the upper stories. The floor on the ground-floor was usually of stone,
and, in the case of common houses, consisted of small pieces of stone, brick, tiles, etc.
(
ruderatio, opus ruderatum), beaten down (
pavita）
with a rammer (
fistuca), whence the word
pavimentum became the general name for a floor (
Plin.
H. N. xxxvi. 185 foll.). Sometimes the floors were paved with thin
slabs of richly-coloured marbles, brought from Northern Africa, Arabia, or Greece (Tibull.
iii. 3, 16;
Plin. Ep. 86Plin. Ep., 6; Pallad. i. 9), and still more frequently with mosaics (
opus musivum). See
Pavimentum and
Musivum Opus.
In Rome and other parts of Italy, owing to the wonderful strength of the
pozzolana, the upper floors of houses were very frequently made of concrete cast in
one great slab on temporary boarding, fixed at the required level. This set into one compact
mass, like a piece of solid stone. On this, mosaic and other paving was laid, as on the
ground-floors.
4. Ceilings.
Ceilings were very commonly semicircular or “barrel” vaults (
camarae), decorated with stucco reliefs, mosaics, or painting. (See
Camara.) The
extrados of the
vault was filled in level with concrete to form the floor above. Wooden ceilings and flat
concrete ceilings were decorated in the same way. One common method of ceiling decoration,
applied both to brick and concrete or to wooden ceilings, was to divide the whole area into
a number of deeply sunk panels, like pits or lakes (
lacus, lacunae),
whence they were called
lacunaria or
laquearia.
These were richly ornamented, either by stucco reliefs gilt and coloured, or, in the case of
wooden ceilings, by inlaid work of ivory, ebony, or other precious materials as well as by
paintings. In a few cases the “coffers” were covered with enriched
bronze plates, thickly gilt.
5. Windows.
The Roman houses had few windows (
fenestrae). The
atrium and
peristylium were lighted, as we have seen, from
above, and the smaller rooms leading out of them generally derived their light from them and
not from windows looking into the street. The rooms only on the upper stories (
cenacula) seem to have been usually lighted by windows, and looked out upon
the street as well as the inner courts. Hence they are frequently mentioned by the ancient
writers (
Livy, i. 41Livy, xxiv. 21;
Hor. Carm. i. 25; Propert. iv. [v.], 7, 16;
Juv.iii. 270). In Pompeii, in like manner, the ground-floor
rooms were mostly lighted from the inner courts, so that few lower windows opened on the
street. There is an exception to this in the “House of the Tragic Poet,”
which has six windows on the ground-floor. Even in this case, however, the windows are not
near the ground, as in a modern house, but are six feet six inches above the foot-pavement,
which is raised one foot seven inches above the centre of the street. The windows are small,
being hardly three feet by two; and at the side there is a wooden frame, in which the window
or shutter might be moved backwards or forwards. The lower part of the wall is occu
 |
|
Pompeian Fenestra or Window. (Overbeck.)
|
pied by a row of red panels four feet and a half high. The following illustration
represents part of the wall, with the apertures for windows above it, as it appears from the
street. The tiling upon the wall is modern, and is only placed there to preserve it from the
weather.
 |
|
Wall with Apertures for the Windows in a House at Pompeii.
|
There has been much discussion whether glass windows were known to the ancients; but in
the excavations at Pompeii many fragments of flat glass have been discovered, and in the
tepidarium of the public baths a bronze lattice was found with some of the panes still inserted in the frame (Gell,
Pompeiana,
i. p. 99). (See
Vitrum.) Besides glass, other
transparent substances were also used, such as talc, the
lapis
specularis of Pliny. Windows made of this were called
specularia
(
Plin. Ep. 90,
25).
6. Doors.
The subject of doors, with their locks and keys, is discussed under
Ianua and
Clavis. It is only
necessary to mention here that many of the rooms in Roman houses had no doors, but only
curtains,
vela, aulaea, centones (
Plin.
Ep. 80;
Plin. Ep. ii.
17;
Petron. 7; Lamprid.
Alex. Sev. 4,
Heliog. 14). Sometimes, when there were doors, curtains were also drawn
across them. See
Velum.
7. The Heating of Houses.
The rooms were heated in winter in different ways. The
cubicula,
triclinia, and other rooms which were intended for winter use, were built in that part
of the house upon which the sun shone most; and in the mild climate of Italy this frequently
enabled them to dispense with any artificial mode of warming the rooms. Rooms exposed to the
sun in this way were sometimes called
heliocamini (
Plin. Ep. ii. 17,
20;
Dig. 8, 2, 17). The rooms were occasionally heated by hot air,
which was introduced by means of pipes from a furnace below (
Plin.
Ep. ii. 17Plin. Ep., v. 6, 24;
Plin. Ep.
90), but more frequently in earlier times by portable furnaces or braziers (
foculi), in
 |
|
Bronze Braziers from Pompeii. (Overbeck.)
|
which charcoal was burned. (See
Focus.)
The
caminus, however, was a fixed stove, in which wood appears to have
been usually burned (
Vitell. 8;
Hor.
Sat. i. 5, 81;
Ep. i. 11 Ep., 19;
Ad
Fam. vii. 10; Sidon. Apoll.
Ep. ii. 2). It has been a subject of much dispute among modern
writers whether the Romans had chimneys for carrying off the smoke, except in the baths and
kitchens. From many passages in ancient writers it certainly appears that rooms usually had
no chimneys, but that the smoke escaped through the windows, doors, and openings in the roof
(Vitruv. vii. 3, 4); but chimneys do not appear to have been entirely unknown to the
ancients, as some have been found in the ruins of ancient buildings, and it is impossible to
believe that among a luxurious people like the Romans in imperial times, they were
unacquainted with the use of chimneys.
8. The water supply
The water supply of a good Roman house was very complete; in towns the main usually ran
under the pavement in the middle of the street, and from it “rising
mains” branched off to the houses right and left, and often were carried to the
upper stories, where a cistern supplied the fountainjets (
salientes）
and other purposes below. For further details on the water-supply, see
Aquae Ductus.
VIII. Bibliography
Becker-Göll,
Gallus, ii. pp. 213 foll.; Marquardt,
Privatl. pp. 208 foll.; Guhl and Koner, pp. 462 foll., 5th ed.; Hirt,
Gesch. d. Baukunst, iii. pp. 267 foll.; Fergusson,
Hist. of
Arch. i. pp. 363 foll.; Burn,
Rome, pp. lxvii. foll.;
Friedländer,
Sittengesch. i. pp. i. foll., pp. 26 foll.;
Ménard,
La Vie Privée des Anciens (Paris,
1880-83); Zumpt,
Ueber die bauliche Einrichtung des röm.
Wohnhauses (Berlin, 1844); Mazois,
Le Palais de Scaurus
(Paris, 1859). Although a large number of well-illustrated works on Pompeii have been
recently published, they have by no means superseded the earlier ones, which describe a great
deal that is now lost; this is specially the case with Sir William Gell's valuable
Pompeiana (London, 1824); and second part
(London,
1832). The objects discovered are well illustrated by Pistolesi,
Real
Museo Borbonico (1824-67). Dyer's
Ruins of Pompeii
(London, 1867) is a convenient hand-book. Niccolini and others,
Le Case
di Pompeii (Naples, 1854-84), is a valuable work, which gives recent
discoveries. A very splendidly illustrated work is the
Recueil des Peintures,
etc., de Pompéi (Paris, 1870-77). See also Zahn,
Die
schönsten Ornamente aus Pompeji (Berlin, 1827-59); Mazois and Gau,
Les Ruines de Pompéi (Paris, 1824- 38); Ternite,
Wandgemälde aus Pompeji (Berlin, no date); Presuhn,
Les
Décorations de Pompéi (Leipzig, 1878); Man's edition
of Overbeck's
Pompeji (Leipzig, 1884); and Nissen,
Pompejanische Studien (Leipzig, 1877). Reference may be made to
the extensive bibliography at the end of the article
Pompeii in this Dictionary. Middleton, in his
Ancient Rome in 1888,
and
Remains of Ancient Rome (London, 1892), gives some account of
existing houses in Rome.
