baños bizantinos de Chiara

1. - -
The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples
Paul Arthur
Naples is a city rich in material remains of the past. It has suffered little modem recon-
struction, and the majority of buildings present in the historic city centre date to no later than
the 17th c. whilst many are substantially earlier. Much of Naples has quite literally been
erected on antique foundations and sometimes encapsulates standing structures. This evidence
awaits critical study and constitutes a mine of information regarding urban development.
In the course of research on early mediaeval Naples a rather unusual structure was found
incorporated within the monastic complex of Santa Chiara (fig. 1). Its position and architec-
ture, which presents characteristics of Byzantine and early Arabic baths, leads to the conclus-
ion that it preceded both the building of the monastery and represents the remains of an early
mediaeval bath building. Furthermore, it is sited close to the recently-excavated remains of
Roman baths. It is enclosed by a hall of the monastic complex, on the western side of the small
southern cloisters and just to the south of the old kitchens and the refectory. The building
comprises two roughly square adjoining and communicating rooms. It is architecturally distinct
from the hall which encloses it as, unusually, its roofs are preserved beneath the vaulted roof
of the monastic hall (fig. 2). This, in itself, is enough to suggest that it is architecturally
earlier than the hall, and confirmation is provided by the fact that two of the outer walls of
the hall are clearly seen to be built directly upon two walls of the building. As the monastic
hall is part of the original construction of S. Chiara, it follows that the building is earlier
than the construction of the monastic complex, which was begun in 1313 and completed by 1340.
The present external walls of the building have different thicknesses (fig. 3). That of the S
wall cannot be measured but it must be over 0.30 m so as to accommodate a niche and water
conduit. The E wall varies from 0.80 to 0.95 m, the N wall is almost 0.50 m, whilst the W wall
ranges between 0.37 and 0.43 m in thickness. Of these, the E wall is almost certainly an original
external wall as cracks in the plaster can be seen on the outside where the cloister wall abuts
the wall of the building. Whether the N wall has been trimmed or not is hard to say; the
fragility of the W wall, which does not appear to have been trimmed, suggests that it was an
original internal wall, and that other rooms formerly extended to the west of the actual
building. It will be seen below how this can be understood within the scheme of early
mediaeval baths.
The two rooms of the building are separated by a partition wall which, though recent,
almost certainly follows the line of an original wall (fig. 4). This is indicated by the fact that
the two rooms bear quite separate roofs. The better preserved room, henceforth called room 1,
bears an ogival dome. The other, room 2, has a cross-vault which replaces an earlier roof. The
details of the two rooms are presented next.
Description of rooms 1 and 2 (figs. 3-5)
Room 1
Room 1 is almost perfectly preserved. It is almost square in plan, measuring just over 3 x 3 m, and supports
a dome on spherical-triangle pendentives. The dome is of slightly ogival form and, on the interior, where it
bears a coat of thick rough plaster, is divided into triangular segments by plain cordon mouldings (fig. 5). The
inner surfaces between the cordons are flat, whilst the dome's exterior is slightly curved and smoothed, rising
to a blunt point. The interior of room 1 now bears an overall coating of plaster which obscures most
construction details. On a small patch of the interior of the dome, where the rough plaster coating has collap-
sed, a mortared rubble walling is visible.1 This suggests that the dome was constructed by casting a semi-
liquid fill of mortar and rubble over a wooden framework. The rubble includes three fragments of cut yellow
1 This volcanic tuff, or tllfo giallo napoletano, is the local building stone of which much of Greek and
Roman Naples was built.

2. ,
....
~
~TEIi3iW.i5.£iYIi;::::-:1)<li,:<'f~O0°0°°010Oo~~.,,__'....".)C»illS!l--<.1l0
~
S-
f
@
Fig.1.TheSantaChiaracomplex,showingboththeRomanand'Byzantine'baths,andtheirregularcourseoftherock-cutwatersystem.
/

3. - -- - - - - --
The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples 137
Fig. 2. The 'Byzantine' baths of Santa Chiara beneath the vault of the monastic hall (photo P. Arthur).
volcanic tuff which appear to be reticulate blocks. This leads to the suggestion that the building was, at least
in part, built Qut of re-used masonry recovered as spolia from the adjacent Roman baths at S. Chiara, where
the use of opus reticlllatum is well attested.
In the four angles just above the springing of the dome, at the juncture of each pendentive, are a number of
pipes inserted obliquely into the wall. Sets of five Original pipes are preserved in two of the angles, whilst
only three pipes are preserved in each of the other two angles. Though the pipes presumably pierced the walls
in antiquity, later re-plastering of the exterior surface of room 1 has obliterated their exits. The pipes are
wheel-turned and have a fairly fine grey fabric (7.5YR 6.5/0), with abundant minute muscovite mica,
occasional small calcareous and dark specks, and a larger red-brown (iron-oxide?) grit.2 This is not a
typical local fabric, and the pipes were probably imported to Naples.
The wall opposite the entrance has a small arched niche which contains a limestone conduit lodged in the
original masonry. Further along the same wall, towards the eastern corner of the room, is another arched
niche which, I believe, is a later addition.
The mortar used in the whole construction is very coarse. It is predominantly a white lime mixed with
abundant volcanic grey "lapilli" or pumice grits, giving it a highly speckled effect. Occasional pyroxene
crystals may also be noted. The "lapilli" average around 0.4-0.6 cm, though are occasionally well over 1 cm
in size.
There are no indications as to how the room was lit.
Room 2
The original features of room 2 are not as well preserved as room 1. It too is virtually square, measuring
c.3 x 2.80 m. At some stage, perhaps during the construction of S. Chiara, the original roof was demolished
and substituted by a cross-vault. This is marked on the interior surface by two crossed cordon mouldings, one
2 The colour reading is taken from the Mllnsell soil calor charts (Baltimore 1975).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

4. ..
....
~
[
f
Room2
o1mIIRoom1
Fig.3.The'Byzantine'bathsofSantaChiara,sectionbyM.Varchetta.
/

5. /
/
The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples
o
CI
E
8a;
J
139
tU
tl
]
~
;>
~
~
C
«:S
Q..
~
:E
u
s
ij
rn
.....0
'"-5«:S
~
"<I)
c.;::
ij
N
;:...
~
~
-.:i
bO
1t

6. 140 PaulArthur
Fig. 5. The 'Byzantine' baths of Santa Chiara, axonometric view by M. Varchetta.

7. //
The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples 141
marked by a string pattern, which divide the four sections of the vault. Scars of the original roof, which may
have partly collapsed prior to its reconstruction, are clearly visible on two of the inner wall surfaces, and
suggest that room 2 too may once have possessed a dome, although cross-vaults are known in Arab baths
since Umayyad times.3 The roof seems also to have been originally furnished with hot air conduction pipes.
One clay pipe may still be seen piercing the outer surface of the roof though, as it is not visible on the interior
surface, it may have led from ducts within the walls.
A masonry bench is preserved on the north side of room 2. Analogy with other mediaeval baths suggests
that it may be an original feature of the room.
The architrave of the entrance porch to room 2 is rudely decorated with plaster moulding and marked off
by an incised line. On present evidence, it is not possible to assign this feature to the original construction or
to a later phase. On the opposite wall is a window which opens out to the small cloisters. Presumably it is a
secondary feature.
Discussion
Excavations have shown that the site of S. Chiara was in part originally occupied by
Roman public baths which lay just outside the walls of Greek and Roman Neapolis.4 They were
fed by cisterns receiving water from the Augustan aqueduct of the Serino. At the time of
construction of the monastery of S. Chiara the baths had already been abandoned.
The monastery itself was built for Franciscan friars between 1313 and 1340, in an area known
as "fuori gli orti", probably outside the wall circuit.s It sits on the edge of the tuff platform,
overlooking the now-extinct water-course of Via Monteoliveto. Very little is known of the area
between Roman times and the construction of the monastic complex. One possibility is that the
area had been abandoned during the increasingly insecure times of the 5th and 6th c., like the
neighbouring extra-mural area of S. Maria la Nova, where a Roman building with private
baths was converted into a rubbish dump and burial area during the later 6th or 7th c.6
However, some form of functional continuity may have existed, as it is no small coincidence
that early mediaeval baths stand side by side with the remains of Roman baths. Indeed, it
may be suggested that the land upon which S. Chiara was built was already in monastic hands
before the arrival of the Franciscans, and that it may have passed into monastic possession
from the moment that local government could no longer administer the land upon which the
Roman baths stood. In fact, the area immediately to the south of S. Chiara, if not part of the
land of S. Chiara itself, is attested as having formed part of the Basilian monastery of St.
Demetrius from 917.7
Several baths existed in Roman Naples, of which four buildings are known archaeologi-
cally and two are known from the sources.8 Indeed, the tradition of baths in the area in ancient
times is so strong, largely on account of the volcanic nature of central Campania, that a Cam-
panian origin has been attributed to the invention of the hypocaust itself.9 As the tradition of
thermal bathing continues to this day and as the city remained closely linked to Byzantium
throughout early mediaeval times, it is perhaps not surprising that mediaeval baths existed,
3 G. Ventrone Vassallo, "Bagno, Islam" in Enciclopedia dell'Arte Medievale III (Roma 1992) 21-26.
4 On the Roman baths see G. Vecchio, "11 complesso archeologico di S. Chiara," in E. Pozzi et al., Napoli
antiea (Naples 1985) 225-27.
S Unfortunately, the circuit of the city wall in the W part of Naples is still unknown. M. Napoli, "Topo-
grafia e archeologia," Storia di Napoli 1(1967) 455, suggested that an extension to the Greek walls was
provided by Valentinian Ill, thus enclosing the area of S. Chiara.
6 P. Arthur and G. Vecchio, "Saggi a Santa Maria la Nova," in Pozzi (supra n.4) 424.
7 B. Capasso, Topografta della cittii di Napoli nell'XI seeolo (Naples 1895) 149; G. A. Galante, Guida saera
della cittii di Napoli (Naples 1872) 143-44.
8 On the Roman baths in Naples see Napoli (supra n.5) passim.
9 It is said that the hypocaust was an invention of C. Sergius Orata by the 1st c. RC. On this question see
Nielsen, "Prime fasi" and DeLaine, "Observations".

8. 142 PaulArthur
though those at S. Chiara are unique as having survived and appear especially important
given their date.10
Comparanda with Middle Byzantine and Islamic baths elsewhere
Unfortunately, virtually nothing survives of the urban baths of Byzantium itself, where one
might have expected to find comparanda,11 Though they obviously existed, new constructions
in Middle Byzantine times cannot have been particularly frequent given the pressing economic
problems suffered by the Byzantine empire. The Byzantine scholar Michael Psellus in the 11th
c. included amongst his works a text De Balneis, as well as a number of studies, both in prose
and in verse, on aspects of health, medicine and disease, with which by then they were inti-
mately linked. In urban contexts, two examples have been excavated at Byzantine Corinth.12
However, for standing Middle and Later Byzantine baths we have to turn to monastic complex-
es in Greece, where examples are preserved at the monastery of the Virgin, near Derbenosalesi,
at Kaisariani, and near the Heraion at Samos.13 These are all small buildings, composed of few
and simple rooms, with benches and without piscinae.
The tradition of Roman bath architecture seems also to have been kept alive by Islam;
indeed, the Arabs seem to have been so well aware of the functioning of Roman baths that, as
at Tocra in Cyrenaica, they continued to make use of them.14 Thus it should be of little surprise
that, in the absence of surviving Middle Byzantine baths, the examination of early Islamic
baths can provide us with most useful comparative information. Of the various extant
examples, those at ~ayr cAmra, Jordan, and their close parallel at Hammam as-Sarakh, are
particularly interesting for their analogies with the S. Chiara baths.1s The ~ayr cAmra
complex is composed of a large hall to which are attached the baths proper. These are
composed of three small rooms deployed in L-shape. The first is a sort of vestibule or
apodyterium through which the main hall is linked to the hot rooms. Both other rooms are
basically square and heated through a hypocaust system. The first has a cross-vault and a
fountain niche in the wall opposite its entrance. The second has a dome on pendentives, two
lateral hemispherical niches, and is directly connected to the furnace which heats both the
hypocaust system and a water inlet. Both have clay pipes which pierce their ceilings. The
sequence of the vaulting at ~ayr cAmra is matched by the baths at Ruhayba and is similar in
the baths at cAbda.16 These Islamic forms undoubtedly developed from late Roman and early
Byzantine bath plans and may reflect the development of Middle and Late Byzantine bath
plansP The ~ayr CAmra baths date to between 711 and 715, and it may be recalled that it
was precisely between 705 and 712 that, according to Arab tradition, al-Walid constructed the
Prophet's Mosque at Medina and the Great Mosque at Damascus with the direct involvement of
Byzantine craftsmanship.1S
10 On the tradition of mediaeval baths in Naples, see P. G. Taglialatella, "Gli antichi bagni civili e sacri in
Napoli," in Atti dell'Accademia Pontiniana 41 (1911) 21-53.
11 The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium (Oxford 1991) s.v. baths.
12 Scranton, Corinth XVI.
13 A. Orlandos, MovaaTT/plam apXIT£XTovIX17 (Athens 1958).
14 G. D. B. Jones, "The Byzantine bath-house at Tocra: a summary report," Libyan Studies 15 (1984) 111.
15 See M. Almagro, L. Caballero, J. Zozaya and A. Almagro, Qusayr cAmra, residencia y banos omeyas en el
desierto de Jordania (Madrid 1975). An examination of the surviving Arab baths of Spain, generally
dating no earlier than the 11th c., appears to show a development away from the eastern baths, to which
the S. Chiara baths seem more clearly related. See, for example, L. B. Roldan, Banos arabes del Palacio de
Villardompardo, Jaen Gaen 1989); Ventrone Vassallo (supra n.3).
16 K. A. C. Creswell, A short account of Muslim architecture (rev. and suppl. by J. W. Allan) (Aldershot
1989) 115.
17 Brodner, Thermen 271.
1S H. A. R. Gibb, "Arab-Byzantine relations under the Umayyad Caliphate," DOP 12 (1958) 225.

9. /
/
The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples 143
Parallels with and influences on the baths at Santa Chiara
If for the moment it is assumed that Byzantine baths, typified by Islamic baths such as
those of ~ayr cAmra, provided the model for those at S. Chiara, then the absence of a frigi-
darium comes as no surprise, and it may be suggested that the missing features in this latter
building are essentially a vestibule/apodyterium, the furnace for a hypocaust system, wall
flues, and a cistern or other suitable water source.19 It is clear how these may easily have been
obscured by the construction of the monastery of S. Chiara. Indeed, the supposed area of the
furnace would now lie beneath Vico Banchi Nuovi, a small road coasting the southern limit of
the monastery and probably dating to the 16th c. The water, however, may have been provided
by a branch of the Roman aqueduct built by Augustus.2o The complex of S. Chiara is, in fact,
crossed by an aqueduct which has only been mapped in part (fig. 1). Though the date of its
construction has still to be ascertained, it is interesting to note that its southemmost extension
runs directly towards the early mediaeval baths. It would be interesting to find out whether
the two are related. Other features of the baths at S. Chiara - two square hot rooms of 2.5 to 3
m in size, a wall fountain and the roofing forms with pipes - are remarkably well paralleled
in the Umayyad baths. On the pipes piercing the roofs of the baths at Qu~ayr cAmra, K.
Creswell noted that
at about 2 m above the floor the walls overhang 12 cm, and in each corner beneath this projection
are four clay water-pipes, about 7 cm in diameter, leading from the roof. The water was conducted
along the roof in cemented channels.21
Again, this component appears to be similar to the pipes at S. Chiara, although it may be
questioned if any of these were effectively water pipes, as Creswell suggests, as opposed to
steam-vents. Caldaria and tepidaria of later Islamic and Sel<;uk baths often have so many
openings that their domes resemble inverted colanders. A striking example is represented by
the recently-excavated Seljuk baths near the Isa Bey Camii at Sel<;uk/Ephesus, dated to 1372,
where portions of re-used commercial amphorae may substitute pipes.22
At the site of the Crypta Balbi in Rome, recent excavations have revealed a small mediae-
val bath complex, dating to about the 11th c., built against the Roman exhedra.23 Two rooms
furnished with hypocausts have been unearthed. One of them has benches built against the
walls, similar to rooms at Derbenosalesi, Kaisariani and Samos, and to room 2 at S. Chiara.
They have been interpreted as sudatoria largely because of these benches, provided to limit
the physical exertion of the bathers.
However, the types of rooms, their vaulting, and the details of the pipes and the wall foun-
tain in room 1 of the S. Chiara baths suggest that rooms 1 and 2 may equally well have been a
caldarium/sudatorium and a tepidarium respectively. Two sudatoria would seem unlikely in a
small bath suite. One clay pipe may still be seen piercing the outer surface of the roof of room 2
though, as it is not visible on the interior surface, it may have led from ducts within the walls,
thus providing a hot and dry atmosphere, as opposed to the hot and humid atmosphere of room
19 Islamic baths and the way they function are delightfully described by M. Ecochard and C. Le Coeur, Les
baines de Damas (Beyrouth 1942) in their examination of those at Damascus.
20 On the Roman aqueduct see K.I. Beloch, Campanien. Geschichte und Topographie des antiken Neapel und
seine Umgebung (1890; Italian ed. and transl., Naples 1989) 86-88, and W. Johannowsky, "L'organiz-
zazione del territorio in eta greca e romana," in Pozzi et al. (supra n.4) 333-399. For the water system
beneath S. Chiara see C. Esposito, "Spaccanapoli. 11 sottosuolo," in U. Carughi (ed.), Spaccanapoli
(Naples 1992) 62-67.
21 Creswell (supra n.16) 108.
22 Personal observation. See also Miletus: G. Kleiner, Die Ruinen von Milet (Berlin 1968); K. Wulzinger, P.
Wittek and F. Sarre, Das Islamische Milet (Berlin-Leipzig 1935).
23 L. Sagui, "L'esedra e il complesso dei bagni nel medioevo: un problema topografico," in D. Manacorda
(a cura di), Archeologia urbana aRoma: il progetto della Crypta Balbi, 5. L'esedra della Crypta Balbi nel
Medioevo (XI-XV secolo) (Rome 1990) 95-116.

10. 144 PaulArthur
1 if that was a caldariumlsudatorium. As in room 2, benches, of masonry or otherwise, could
also have existed in room I, to have been removed at a later date after a change in room
function. Furthermore, the water conduit in room 1 may have helped to provide the steam
necessary in a sudatorium, for perspiration to run off the bathers without evaporating.24 Room 1
of S. Chiara has no entrance or exit other than that shared with room 2, and apparently never
had one. Room 2, on the other hand, has a further door, which now opens onto the later
monastic hall. So as to maximise heat retention, a sudatorium should have been the closest
room to the primary heat source and furthest from heat outlets, such as would have been formed
by doors to unheated rooms.
Though room 2 presents no exterior wall scars, perhaps because of the heavy plastering
which now obscures the original surfaces, it may have been linked to other rooms through its
outer door. If it is a tepidarium, then it would probably have been connected to an apodyterium
which, in turn, could have been connected to any number of associated spaces. Only excavation
can solve this problem.
The ogival dome of room 1 is rather unusual in Italian mediaeval architecture. The closest
parallel is perhaps the more pronounced dome of the so-called "trullo chapel" at Olevano suI
-Tusciano, in the province of Salerno. It has been dated to the 10th c., and has been likened by A.
Venditti to Armenian architecture.25 I would strongly doubt that the inspiration for the ogival
dome came directly from another cultural area, but rather suppose that it is to be explained on
technological grounds, through inexperienced engineering. There is little evidence that domed
buildings were current in early mediaeval Naples, despite the fact that the origin of the
hemispherical or true dome might be sought in late Republican Campania. It was the discovery
of a quick-setting hydraulic mortar characterised by the use of the volcanic pozzolana (the
Roman pulvis puteolanus), quarried especially in the hinterland of Pozzuoli (Puteoli), that
permitted the construction of buildings such as the-large domed baths at Baiae from Julio-
Claudian times. Roman Imperial architecture made great use of this technological innovation,
of which the greatest surviving expression must be the Hadrianic Pantheon in Rome. Roman
techniques of monumental building were carried through early mediaeval times almost
exclusively by the Church, often as the sole institution which continued to possess sufficient
capital for the erection of large buildings. It may be argued that it was a decline in the
necessity for pozzolanic mortar, with all its cementing qualities, that led to the substantial
disappearance of vaulted and domed architecture in early mediaeval Italy. Indeed, early
mediaeval monumental building was virtually confined to church architecture which, in Italy,
was principally of basilical form with gabled roofs, unlike the Byzantine East. In the standard
basilical church the only curved surface was that of the apse. Towards the end of the millen-
nium the dome re-appeared through influence of eastern church architecture. Few examples
exist, such as the 10th- or 11th-c. "Cattolica" at Stilo, the church of S. Marco at Rossano
Calabro and that of S. Pietro ad Otranto, all of evident Byzantine derivation. The only
surviving example of Eastern Byzantine architecture close to Naples is the late Roman Church
of S. Costanzo, on Capri, which was converted into Byzantine quincunx form perhaps around
987.26 Apart from S. Costanzo, none of these buildings has domes constructed through the use of
mortared rubble; rather, they made use of overlapping bricks or stones, just like their
equivalents in Eastern Byzantine territory.27 The hemispherical form of the 5 Italian domes
constructed with overlapping elements rather suggests that such use of mortared rubble had not
generally been passed down in the mason's technical heritage. Furthermore, they were all
constructed with true hemispherical domes, unlike the ogival form of S. Chiara which reduces
24 T. Rook, "The development and operation of Roman hypocausted baths," JArchSci 5 (1978) 272.-
25 A. Venditti, Architettura bizantina nell'Italia meridionale (Naples 1967) 388-90.
26 P. Arthur (ed.), "La Chiesa di S. Costanzo a Marina Grande, Capri. Scavi 1990," in L'Isola e il Santo
(Civilta del Mediterraneo monograph no. 1, Naples 1992) 13-115.
27 Cf. C. Mango, Architettura bizantina (Italian ed., Milan 1989), for example.

11. The 'Byzantine' baths at Santa Chiara, Naples 145
outward thrust and the danger of vertical compression, spreading the load squarely on the
walls. This may suggest that the builders of the s. Chiara baths were not sufficiently
experienced to be able to produce a hemispherical dome without fear of structural problems.
If we return to room 1 of the building at s. Chiara, it may be suggested that the ogival form
of the dome resulted less from cultural influence than from limited technical experience.
However, as we have indicated, the apparent use of setting mortar against a wooden frame-
work is unusual in early mediaeval times, though paralleled at the nearby church of s. Costan-
zo on Capri. This may suggest that the use of some form of opus caementicium was preserved by
master masons in the Campanian building tradition, perhaps because of a well-established
experience in the use of the local pulvis puteolanus. In this context it is worth remembering that
the mortar employed in the baths at S. Chiara contains abundant volcanic inclusions which
must have been voluntarily added to the lime mortar during its preparation.
Conclusions
The existence of early mediaeval baths in Naples should occasion little surprise given the
status of the city at the time and its links both with Byzantium and with the Islamic world,
though the preservation of an example down to this day is rather unusual. Baths, however, are
amongst the few buildings that require the use of relatively robust and non-inflammable mater-
ials and this, at a time when the majority of secular buildings were largely of wood or of care-
less construction, may explain the re-use and conservation of the building at S. Chiara. Even
the monastery of S. Sophia, in Lombard Benevento, possessed heated baths in the later 8th c.,
as is indicated by a donation of firewood by Duke Arechis 11. A document dating to 983 illus-
trates the construction of a bath complex in Naples by the monastery of ss. Marcellinus and
Petrus, a foundation patronised by the dukes of the city.28 It was composed of a balneum, puteus,
expoliatorium, Ienarium, fornaces and stationes. The fornaces show that it was heated.29
Other baths are attested in early mediaeval Italy, up and down the peninsula, and most were
apparently run by the clergy and the monasteries.3o
When private patronage, which saw to the maintenance of such buildings in Italy, effec-
tively ceased during the 5th c., the Church and monastic orders took over the burden, and it is
probably in this context that we should view the baths at S. Chiara. Indeed, it was presum-
ably in a social spirit that Bishop Nostrianus constructed his baths in Naples around the mid-
5th C.31 Later, baths were frequently associated with the diaconia or centres of poor relief
(hospices), and soap "pro Iabandis cura" is recorded as having been distributed to the poor in
the city. In 984 there is evidence that private baths could once again be afforded by some of the
wealthier citizens of Naples.32
28 Capasso (supra n.7) 190-91; id., Monumenta ad Neapolitani ducatus historiam pertinentia 11 (Naples
1885) regesta 241.
29 The Neapolitan historian Bartolomeo Capasso believed the lenarium to have been a room where wool-
len blankets were stored, though the suggestion that it was a sudatorium, where bathers used such
blankets to increase perspiration, is far more plaUSible: G. Vitale, "Case ed abitanti della regio Nilensis
in eta ducale: osservazioni," in I. Bragantini and P. Gastaldi (edd.), Palazzo Corigliano tra archeologia e
storia (Naples 1985) 14.
30 On this question see B. Ward-Perkins, From classical antiquity to the Middle Ages. Urban public building
in Northern and Central Italy AD 300-850 (Oxford 1984) 128-30, as regards N and central Italy, and, for
Constantinople, P. Magdalino, "Church, bath and diakonia in medieval Constantinople," in R. Morris
(ed.), Church and people in Byzantium (Birmingham 1990) 165-87. V. Von Falkenhausen, La dominazione
bizantina nell'Italia meridionale dal IX all'XI secolo (Bari 1978) 153, gives a summary of the evidence for
early mediaeval baths in Naples and in Byzantine S Italy. See also the dated study by Taglialatella
(supra n.lO), and the recent work by Sagui (supra n.23).
31 MGR, Scriptores ren/m Langobardicarum et Italicarum saec. VI-IX (Hannover 1878), Gesta Episcoporum
Neapolitanorum 406.
32 A. Leone and F. Patroni Griffi, Le origini di Napoli capitale (Cava dei Tirreni 1984) 14; see also Vitale

12. 146 PaulArthur
With the economic crisis that invested the ancient world, very little major building outside
of the ecclesiastical sphere was undertaken during much of the later first millennium. Only
towards the end of the millennium an economy in growth once again permitted substantial
capital investment and the appearance of various durable buildings. In such a cosmopolitan
environment as Naples, style and form in public and ecclesiastical architecture could and often
did look east. This is the context in which I would place the baths of S. Chiara and, pending
excavation, I would venture to assign the baths to a period around the close of the first
millennium.
However, the fame of Campanian baths in the Phlegrean Fields, near Naples, survived into
later mediaeval times such that Pietro da Eboli could write his verses on De balneis terrae
laboris in the 13th c. for Frederick 11. He used them as a guide to where to cure his ailments
contracted in Puglia while on a crusade to the Holy Land.33 Thus, the unusual and important
monument discovered at S. Chiara may take its place in the history of Byzantine architecture
and in the long tradition of thermal bathing in Naples and the Phlegrean Fields, kept alive
today by the long-lived therapeutic spa at Agnano.
Dipartimento di Beni Culturali, Universita degli Studi di Lecce, 73100 Italy
Acknowledgements
The study of the monument would not have been possible without the understanding and goodwill of Father
Adolfo Pagano of the monastery of S. Chiara, who opened what at first seemed to be an interminable number
of doors. Michele Varchetta has prepared and discussed the drawings of the building with me, assisted by
Antonio D'Angelo. Catello Pasinetti, of the Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, accompanied me to the site on
various occasions. Both he and Giovanna Ventrone Vassallo have provided much useful discussion of the
architecture, whilst Giuseppe Vecchio,lnspector of the Soprintendenza Archeologica, has guided me around
the earlier Roman baths at S. Chiara. Janet DeLaine has kindly read and improved upon my text. Their
contributions to this paper are fundamental.
(supra n.29) 14.
33 On the Phlegrean baths in the Middle Ages, the changing concepts of their use, and on Pietro da Eboli,
see C. Russo Mailler, "La tradizione medievale dei bagni flegrei," Puteoli III (1979) 141-53; id., "L'ac-
qua dall'antichita al medioevo: le terme flegree," Quaderni Medievali 26 (1988) 79-98; A. Daneu Lattan-
zi (ed.), Petrus de Ebulo, Nomina et virtlltes balneorum seu de balneis puteolorum et Baiarum. Codice
Angelico 1474 (Rome 1962).
--