»Velike salonitanske terme« – nova razmatranja prostorne organizacije kupališnoga sklopa. (Slovenian)
In: Journal of the Institute of Art History, Jg. 37 (2013), S. 7-22
Online
academicJournal
Zugriff:
A number of studies dealing with the architectural monuments of Salona, the ancient capital of the Roman province of Dalmatia, have been published in the past two hundred years; however, the town is still an inexhaustible resource for new generations of researchers. The so-called Large Salonitan Thermae certainly deserve special attention; not only do they belong to the best preserved monuments of the ancient metropolis, but are also an excellent testimony to the bathing culture in the ancient town. The “Large Thermae” are situated in the north-western section of the so-called Urbs Orientalis, to the east from the remains of the grand episcopal complex, separated from it by the so-called Petrus’ Street. The complex was archaeologically explored at the beginning of the 20th century, and the first study with detailed plans and drawings was published by W. Gerber in 1917. Some sixty years later, in 1980, S. Piplović dealt with the baths again, in an attempt to clarify their function and to identify the phases of their development. However, a number of these conclusions now need to be re-examined, as some of them were clearly not based on a comprehensive study of Roman baths, especially the technical requirements of the Roman heating system. The “Large Thermae” were installed in a Roman domus, which, contrary to the prevailing opinion, was situated in a residential quarter. They consisted of two bathing tracts, organized in two rows of bathing facilities. Our aim here is to explain the structure and organization of the baths at the moment when both of these tracts were in function, leaving the chronology of their construction for some other occasion. A careful examination of the archaeological remains and of Gerber’s detailed plans, drawings, photographs and descriptions, which also include a detailed presentation of the sewage system, as well as an insight into numerous studies of Roman baths and bathing culture, hypocaust heating system etc., has led us to a number of new conclusions, quite different from those presented by previous researchers. The larger bathing tract consisted of two apoditeria, three frigidaria (one with a large piscina and two with simple tubs), two tepidaria (which were probably equipped with benches and may have functioned as an unctorium and a sudatorium), a caldarium with three alvei, and a large praefurnium located to the south. The smaller bathing tract consisted of a frigidarium with a tub, a tepidarium, then a caldarium with two alvei, and a praefurnium in the easternmost room. These conclusions about the organization of the bathing tracts have been made on the basis of numerous details – the flooring and the floor levels of the premises (for example, the stone pavements of the two rooms in the north-eastern corner of the complex, rooms 4 and 5 according to Piplović, indicate that they must have been frigidaria); the structuring of certain walls (the remains of the walls, as well as their thickness in room 17, or room 9, clearly indicate the position of praefurnia); the elevations (Piplović overlooked that Gerber had registered two large windows in room 11, which indicate that it may have functioned as a sudatorium); an ingenious double-door system that must have divided the heated from the non-heated part of the eastern tract (installed between rooms 4 and 10 and serving as another clue to identify their function); and the hypocaust openings, pilae, tubuli, waterproof mortar and other details which help us understand the operation of the heating system and the usage of certain parts of the building (for example, clearly showing that the niches in room 16 and room 8 were not used as sweating cubicles but as alvei), etc. Finally, a thorough study of the sewage system, very carefully recorded by W. Gerber, supports our conclusions. The duct placed along the northern part of the building (together with the water tanks) supplied with cold water the large piscina and the tubs in frigidaria, and then, reaching the easternmost corner of the complex, turned southwards in order to supply the boiler above the furnace. The scrutiny of the drainage system is equally instructive – to mention only the small ducts carrying the used water from the exedra and niches in rooms 16 and 8, which again confirms that they functioned as alvei. The room with a large exedra at the western side of the complex, in which no traces of sewage system or bathing installations were found, must have been a kind of a meeting hall, an equivalent of the socalled basilica thermarum in the large imperial thermae; and latrinae must have been placed at the front of the building, and flushed by the already used water. Finally, it should be mentioned that these Salonitan baths, traditionally called the “Large Thermae” cannot be counted among the major bathing complexes of the time, as can be concluded from the extensive corpus of Roman bathing architecture. They also could not have been the largest and most richly equipped baths in the ancient metropolis. According to their size and structure they should rather be compared to a number of late antique baths arranged inside the walls of former Roman houses, and their type is actually the most common type of Roman baths, with rooms arranged in rows. Their size, shape, furnishing, and decoration, as well as their position and the specific circumstances of their erection, all serve to indicate that they were not a municipal building, but a private investment intended for commercial exploitation. Consequently, instead of calling them thermae it would be more appropriate to use the term balneum – judging from the vast corpus of Roman bathing architecture and the terminology used by the ancient Roman writers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Na temelju pomne analize arheoloških ostataka i neizmjerne količine vrijednih podataka zabilježenih u studiji W. Gerbera početkom 20. stoljeća, kao i brojnih, u međuvremenu objavljenih pregleda i studija rimske kupališne arhitekture i hipokaustnog sustava grijanja, donosi se novo tumačenje prostorne organizacije i načina funkcioniranja tzv. Velikih salonitanskih termi. Problematizira se i njihov uobičajeni naziv te njihova uloga u životu provincijske metropole, prvenstveno u kontekstu bogatog korpusa danas poznatih rimskih kupelji i termina kojima su se ta žarišta urbanoga življenja nazivala još od antičkoga doba. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of the Institute of Art History is the property of Radovi Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Titel: |
»Velike salonitanske terme« – nova razmatranja prostorne organizacije kupališnoga sklopa. (Slovenian)
|
---|---|
Autor/in / Beteiligte Person: | Maraković, Nikolina ; Turković, Tin |
Link: | |
Zeitschrift: | Journal of the Institute of Art History, Jg. 37 (2013), S. 7-22 |
Veröffentlichung: | 2013 |
Medientyp: | academicJournal |
ISSN: | 0350-3437 (print) |
Sonstiges: |
|