| Description Apart from the bottom portion (now fr. 10m) this fragment is largely lost. However, Renaissance drawing Cod. Vat. Lat. 3439 - Fo 23r (see photo detail above or PM 1960, pl. 14, no. 3) shows the piece as it looked in the later 16th c. At the bottom of the fragment is part of a large, curved structure, with niches all along the interior. Just inside this larger curve is a smaller curve with niches along both the inside and the outside. Just inside this inner curve are two dots; they appear to have been the first two in a line of columns curving along the interior of the apse. In front of the apse ran a straight corridor; it was separated from an open space beyond by a straight row of columns, of which three can be seen on this drawing. The corridor runs straight up the fragment, separating it in two. On the left, just above the three columns and open space beyond, an opening in the corridor allows entry into a perpendicular passage that gives access to a horizontal row of rectangular rooms with doorways at top and bottom. Above, a corridor with central colonnade separates the bottom row of rooms from another horizontal line of rectangular rooms with doorways at top and bottom. These are all longer than the lower row of rooms. To the left, the colonnaded corridor and the series of long rooms abut a large space whose internal walls alternately curve outward along the walls and dip deeply into the corners with three niches in each corner. In the top left corner of the fragment, flanked below by the long rooms and on the right by the central corridor, is a large rectangular or square open space. A single colonnade and what is perhaps a step frame the open space on the bottom and on the right. Part of this space can be seen on fr. 10m.
On the right side of the central corridor, a series of tightly packed spaces can be seen. Just above the large apse, the corridor opens onto three increasingly short rectangular rooms followed by a small, apsidal room with three entrances. Behind these rooms, and in an oblique angle to them, lies a large, rectangular room with apses at both ends. It gives access to a series of small and elongated spaces. These spaces are bounded by a long wall that breaks off slightly and then continues down past the large curved structure in the bottom of the fragment. Above the double apsed room, the corridor opens onto a series of four differently shaped spaces. First it gives access to a room that owes its irregular shape to the double apsed room below; then the corridor gives entry to a large room with an apse in the top wall; above that lies a trapezoidal space with a stairway in the bottom right corner and two small semi-circular niches in the top wall. Finally, the corridor opens onto a rectangular room (also preserved in fr. 10m) with elaborately niched walls (rectangular niches alternate with semicircular ones) and a central square that may represent a fountain or a statue base. Unlike the Renaissance drawing, the surviving fragment 10m shows that this room had two axial entrances, one onto the corridor and one opposite it into a space outside this large building. This niched room is flanked above by four small rectangular rooms. Behind the trapezoidal space the corner of a city block can be seen; this is discussed in more detail in the entry for the surviving fragment 10lm.
Identification: Thermae Traiani The monumental building depicted in this missing fragment has been identified as the Baths of Trajan (PM 1960, pp. 69-70). Other parts of the Baths are depicted in frs.
10lm,
10opqr,
10s,
10wxy,
10z,
12,
13q,
13r,
13s
(see AG 1980, pl. 8), and fr. 565 (see Rodríguez-Almeida 1994b). This enormous bath complex was built between 104 and 109 CE by the architect Apollodorus of Damascus (Cassius Dio 69.4.1) on a great platform at the top of the Oppian Hill in Regio III (LTUR V, p. 67). Standing and excavated remains, combined with this drawing of the Baths made in the Renaissance and the fragments of the FUR, tell us of their internal design (see LTUR V, figs. 42-43 for Piranesi's drawing of the remains and for a reconstruction that includes the actual remains). Like all the imperial thermae of Rome from at least the Baths of Titus onward (fr. 110), these were designed as a central bathing block within a large open space (ca. 300 x 216 m.) surrounded by a precinct wall that included additional rooms and architectural features. The bathing block proper was placed against the center of the NE precinct wall to give maximum sun exposure to the hot rooms, which were situated in a row along the SW side of the building (partly visible on fr. 10xwy)(LTUR V, p. 68). The bathing rooms were symmetrically duplicated on either side of a central axis, the line of which is faintly visible in the guideline on frs. 10lm and 10xwy. This central axis began at the monumental entrance in the NE wall (seen in fr. 10lm) and led directly into the natatio, depicted as a large, colonnaded open space top left on this fragment. From there, this axis extended through a great central cruciform hall, not visible on the surviving fragments of the Plan, and finally into the tepidarium and the caldarium, seen on fr. 10xwy. Visitors could move off this central axis into suites of small rooms near the entrance, perhaps dressing rooms, as seen in this fragment. Two elaborately built rotundae with curving walls that were interrupted at each corner by triple niches, probably filled with statuary (visible in this fragment and fr. 10z), may have been frigidaria. There were rectangular palaestrae as well, not visible on the surviving Plan fragments, and numerous smaller rooms throughout. Along the SW side of the bathing block, on either side of the caldarium, was a row of sunrooms, placed to take maximum advantage of the sun. The visitor might also turn left or right from the monumental entrance along a colonnaded passageway which led to a suite of rooms within the NE precinct wall (as seen in this fragment and 10lm) and ultimately to the great hemicycles at the far ends (this fragment and frs. 10r, 10s, and 12). These hemicycles are thought to have been monumental display fountains; they looked out onto the large open area that enclosed the bathing block on three sides. In these gardens were meeting rooms and libraries, the latter perhaps in the semicircular exedrae near the S and W corners of the outer wall, one of which survives to this day with two storeys of niches (LTUR V, p. 68). The apsidal hall in this fragment is by some believed to have been a schola for athletes, the curia acletarum (see Bollmann 1998 on this issue). At the far end of this open area, at the center of the SW wall of the precinct, a vast hemicycle opened outward (frs. 13q and 13r). Seats around its curve suggest that this was a space for performances or athletic contests (Richardson 1992, p. 397). Staircases along the SW precinct wall and other minor entrances gave access to the Baths from multiple directions.
The Baths of Trajan were built on a massive platform supported by a series of vaulted tunnels; they covered much of the filled-in Esquiline wing of Nero's Golden House (domus Aurea), damaged in a fire in 104 CE and no longer in use. Some later sources refer to the emperor Domitian as the builder, but this is contradicted by the Trajanic brickstamps found in the complex, the building's unified design, and the epigraphic and textual evidence of the Baths' dedication in 109 CE (LTUR V, p. 67). The immense water supply needed was provided in part if not entirely by the aqua Traiana and distributed to the Baths from the huge nearby cistern divided into nine long chambers and known as the Sette Sale (LTUR V, pp. 68-69; this is not depicted on the surviving fragments of the Plan). The Baths remained in use into the 4th and 5th c. CE; they may have been experiencing gradual abandonment even before their decisive ending in 537 CE when the aqueducts were cut by Vitigis' Ostrogothic army. In the 16th c. and later, the surviving remains on the Oppian Hill were referred to indiscriminately as the Baths of Trajan and the Baths of Titus, until R. Lanciani (BullCom 1895, pp. 110-115) disentangled this conflation (LTUR V, p. 67). Only one fragment of the Plan, fr. 110, has been associated thus far with the adjacent Baths of Titus.
Significance
The Renaissance drawing of a partially missing (10i) and partially surviving fragment (10m) is significant on a variety of levels. First of all, it lets us assess the accuracy of Renaissance drawings of FUR fragments: The rendering of the missing fr. 10i is largely accurate, yet it shows no doorway on the outside of the monumental entrance in the Baths of Trajan, clearly visible in fr. 10m. In addition, along with the other fragments that depict the Baths of Trajan, this missing fragment is key to our knowledge of the architecture of this monument of which little remains. It also gives us insight into the work of the architect of the Baths, Apollodorus of Damascus (Cassius Dio 69.4.1) who also designed Trajan's Forum. Furthermore, comparing this bath complex to other imperial thermae on the Marble Plan (Baths of Agrippa in fr. 38 and Baths of Titus in fr. 110) shows great consistency in the rendering of the architecture of such buildings: Rooms are symmetrically arranged around the center axis; great hemicycles add variety to the otherwise rectilinear design, and the walls of the central bathing building proper are rendered with thick, recessed lines on the FUR. Such symmetrical and rectilinear architecture forms a stark contrast to the small, irregular neighborhood baths, the balnea, hidden in crowded insulae. The difference must lie with the organic growth of small baths within already existing neighborhoods, as opposed to architecture designed for a blank space where preexisting buildings had been removed to give the imperial architects free reigns to design these gargantuan structures. However, does the strange jog in the outer line of Baths just outside the large curved hemicycle in this fragment reflect an attempt by the architect of the Baths to accomodate an earlier building? I.e. is this an example of a constraint being placed on the emperors' ability to confiscate land and destroy pre-existing buildings, similar to what happened to Augustus when planning his forum (odd angle of NE corner)?
The fragments that depict the Baths of Trajan are also invaluable in clarifying the role complexes such as these played in the social life of Rome. Women as well as men used these Baths (LTUR V, p. 67 with reference), and the complex included not only the great central bathing block, but also gardens, probably libraries, a large semicircular area with seating that would have provided room to watch sports or performances, clubrooms and informal meeting rooms.
|
Prev
