II. A frigidarium, or cella frigidaria, by which we must not understand, with Gell, a mere unwarmed room, but the cold bath itself. Pliny says in his description of the Laurentian villa (ii. 17, 11): Inde balinei cella frigidaria spatiosa et effusa, cujus in contrariis parietibus duo baptisteria velut ejecta sinuantur, abunde capacia, si innare in proximo cogites; and of his Tuscan villa (v. 6, 25): Inde apodyterium balinei laxum et hilare excipit cella frigidaria, in qua baptisterium amplum et opacum. While then in Pompeii the cella frigidaria had the basin in the middle, and the proper cool-room, which also served as apodyterium, lay before it, in the former villa at least, the baptisteria were at the alcoveshaped ends of the frigidarium, so that what was there separated, 17 and 18, seems here to have formed one room. But baptisterium may be taken to mean the same as piscina, according to Sidon. Ep. ii. 2: Huic basilica appendix piscina forinsecus, seu, si græcari mavis, baptisterium ab oriente connectitur.

The frigidarium in the baths of Pompeii and those of Stabiæ has just the same form and probably the rooms which appear similar, in the sketch in the baths of Titus, and which Palladio pronounces to be temples, and Hirt laconica, are also frigidaria. In the baths of Constantine (Palladio, le terme de Rom. t. xiv.) there are six such saloons, which are declared to be baths of all three temperatures.

III. The tepidarium: of this division we know least, and it may even be doubted whether the usual assumption that the tepid bath was there, be a correct one. In Pompeii, at least, in the room which is rightly taken to be it (n. 15), there is no apparatus for bathing. Pliny says (v. 6, 26): Frigidariæ cellæ connectitur media, cui sol benignissime præsto est; caldariæ magis; prominet enim. In hac tres descensiones, etc. The media can only be the tepidaria; but whilst the baptisterium of the frigidarium, and the tres descensiones of the caldarium are mentioned, no labrum, nor piscina of the tepidarium, is named. Such a receptacle, with lukewarm water, was probably in the middle of the frigidarium itself: Si natare latius aut tepidius velis, in area piscina est; in proximo puteus, ex quo possis rursus adstringi, si pœniteat teporis. Thus also in the ruins of Badenweiler, a double water-bath only seems to be admissible; and if in the baths of Hippias, one of the rooms, perhaps the pipa xλiaióμevog, is to pass for a tepidarium, still there were piscinæ or descensiones only in the cold and warm bath. In the often-mentioned picture, it is true that there is a tepidarium next to the sudatio, but it cannot be seen whether there was a labrum in it or not.

CC

But there are two passages in Celsus, i. 3, which are most calculated to raise doubts about that acceptation. Communia deinde omnibus sunt post fatigationem cibum sumpturis, ubi paullum ambulaverunt, si balneum non est, calido loco, vel in sole, vel ad ignem ungi atque sudare: si est, ante omnia in tepidario residere; deinde ubi paullum conquieverunt, intrare et descendere in solium. The second passage from c. 4, which contains the whole economy of the bath, is still plainer: Si in balneum venit, sub veste primum paullum in tepidario insudare, ibi ungi, tum transire in calidarium: ubi sudarit in solium non descendere, etc. There the tepidarium is a warm room, where a person sits down as in the sudatio, which has only a higher temperature. Those who wished to bathe must go into another room, the caldarium, intrare et descendere in solium. We may therefore assume that there was not, at least in all cases, a tepid bath.

IV. The caldarium; which was, at least in later times, the most important part of all. We must here, after Vitruvius and the Pompeian baths, make four distinct divisions; (1) the room itself, sudatio; (2) the laconicum; (3) the labrum; and (4) the basin for the hot water, or the highest degree of the warm bath.

The whole room had suspensuræ, that is, the floor rested on small pillars, so that underneath it the heat and even the flame from the fire-places might be disseminated. See Winckelm. W. ii. tab. iv.; Hirt, tab. xxiv. Fig. III., and in the picture from the baths of Titus (p. 384). The walls were hollow, and usually the warmth was conveyed in pipes from the hypocausta between them, as we see in the baths described by Fernow. In Pompeii the whole space between the regular wall and the interior one was hollow, and without pipes, which is represented in the sketch by the white line running round: the same arrangement appears the caldarium and tepidarium of the women's bath.

in

At one end of the caldarium was the laconicum, the part most difficult to be explained. Schneider (385) has collected with great diligence the passages relating thereto, but his explanation is not perfectly clear, and must at least remain uncertain, as he has not taken into consideration any ancient monument, not even the painting from the baths of Titus, which is here of special moment, and which had already put Galiani on the right way. What Vitruvius says (c. 11), proxime autem introrsus e regione frigidarii collocetur concamerata sudatio, longitudine duplex quam latitudine, quæ habeat in versuris ex una parte Laconicum ad eundem modum, uti supra scriptum est, compositum: ex adverso Laconici caldam lavationem, entirely agrees with the arrangement of the caldarium

at Pompeii, though we judge fit to assume that there was no regular laconicum there, but merely a common sudatio. In the painting, the cella, which is designated as concamerata sudatio, appears as a small cupola-shaped building, into which the flame streams above the floor, through a broad pipe. Underneath is to be found the name laconicum, and under the arch, on which two chains are visible, the name clipeus. Comparing with this the passage of Vitruvius about the clipeus (10): mediumque lumen in hemisphaerio relinquatur ex eoque clypeum æneum catenis pendeat, per cujus reductiones et demissiones perficietur sudationis temperatura, we should imagine a valve, which hung at the orifice in the middle of the arch, in order to allow the excess of warm air to escape; but this idea does not at all agree with the painting. On the contrary, it seems that we must assume from this, that the laconicum was by no means the semicircular-shaped recess where those desirous of perspiring sat, but the cupola-like hypocaustum, which rose in this alcove above the floor, and that it was closed by the clipeus. When this was drawn up by the chains, or let down within, the heat and the flame itself streamed out more vehemently, and heightened the temperature of the alcove; and perhaps we must so understand what Suet. Aug. 84, calls ad flammam sudare, although Celsus (i. 3) mentions, outside of the bath too, the ungi et sudare ad ignem. We are further decided in assuming the laconicum to be something different from the alcove, where the sweaters sat, from the consideration that it seems inconceivable how this alcove could possibly have another temperature than the whole sweating bath, as it was only a part of the same, and was separated from it by no partition wall. But if the laconicum were placed there in the manner above given, then the heat must have been greatest next to it. With this idea of the laconicum, best agrees also what Vitruvius (vii. 10) says about the oven for the preparation of atramentum, which was also to be arranged uti laconicum. Galiani, too, has taken this view of the subject; probably Schneider likewise; while Hirt, Gell, and Bechi, are perfectly at fault, and Stratico also as well as Marini misunderstand Vitruvius. The error appears to arise from the word hemisphærium, which suggested to them the alcove, in which at Pompeii the labrum is. But Vitruvius means the cupola above the laconicum, as it is in the picture, and this is a hemisphærium. By this means everything is clear, and we see that the clipeus did not hang on the opening in the arch of the alcove, in order by opening it to moderate the temperature, but, on the contrary, served to let the heat confined in the laconicum stream out, and increase the temperature of the sudatio.

At Pompeii no such arrangement is to be found. In the alcove is the labrum already described, and on the use of which opinions are likewise divided. The explanation of Bechi, that it was designed for those who wished to take only a partial bath, does not seem very probable; for the proper warm-bath, which was in the same apartment, was so arranged with steps, that the bather could sit at any depth he chose. Gell's supposition seems correct, that it contained cold water, into which a person plunged after the sweating-bath, or with which he was sprinkled.

Lastly; at the opposite end of this room was the hot-water bath already described. The name we should like to assign to it, at least in the baths of Pompeii, is alveus, and the proportions agree with the plans given by Vitruvius. [Dio. Cass. lv. 7, calls it κολυμβήθραν θερμοῦ ὕδατος.] And then what Vitruvius says becomes explicable: quanta longitudo fuerit, tertia demta latitudo sit præter scholam labri et alvei; and in the like manner it reaches, in agreement with the same, as far as the wall. [Others falsely suppose labrum and alveus to be identical, and others that alveus is the name of warming-pipes in the walls; or of the space round the labrum. Wüstemann himself understands by labrum a detached kettle, while alveus he takes to have been a tank or canal on the ground for many bathers. Labrum certainly would seem to be something standing high; alveus, something low. See Auct. ad Her. iv. 10, in alveum descenderet.]

The scholae were the free spaces between the receptacles of water and the wall, where those who intended to bathe, or only visited the bath for the sake of amusement, stood or sat.

The water was warmed, according to Vitruvius, by erecting three kettles: Enea supra hypocaustum tria sunt componenda, unum caldarium, alterum tepidarium, tertium frigidarium, et ita collocanda, uti ex tepidario in caldarium, quantum aquæ caldœ exierit, influat. De frigidario in tepidarium ad eundem modum. This might be effected in more ways than one. The simplest was to place the kettles one over the other, and join them by means of pipes, and we thus find them in the bath discovered at the country-house of Diomedes at Pompeii. See Voyage pitt. de Naples, livr. 10 et 11, pl. 79; Fernow on Winck. ii. tab. iv. C. n. 2; although there are only two kettles there; but we find it different in the painting from the bath of Titus.

There are two expressions still requiring explanation. Firstly, the solium is often mentioned, and by some understood to mean an apparatus in the caldarium, by which single persons might sit and take a shallow bath. Festus, 298: Alvei quoque lavandi grutia