The Meaning of Insula in Roman Residential Terminology

The Meaning of "Insula" in Roman Residential Terminology
Author(s): Glenn R. Storey

Source: Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Vol. 49 (2004), pp. 47-84
Published by: University of Michigan Press for the American Academy in Rome
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4238817
Accessed: 16-04-2015 19:29 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Academy in Rome and University of Michigan Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 155.54.189.36 on Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:29:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE MEANING OF INSULA
IN ROMAN RESIDENTIALTERMINOLOGY
Glenn R. Storey,Universityof Iowa
at did the Romansmeanby the terminsulawhenappliedto urbanarchitectural

XXTTh configura-
Vtions? Obviously,thebasicmeaningof thewordis "island," buttheRomansusedthewordto
describesomethingto do withresidences,in contextsforwhichthebasicmeaning"island"doesnot
applyin anyobviousway.Thispaperaimsto reviewthe terminsulaas it occursin the documentary
sourcesfor residentialcontextswhileexaminingthetermaspartof thesemanticfield of Romanresi-
dentialterminology.1Mymaincontentionis thattheterminsula,in residential andurbanarchitectural
contexts,is highlyambiguousas to its exactreferent,butin manycasesin whichthe terminsulahas
typicallybeentranslated asan "apartment house,""apartment block,"or "blockof flats,"thesources
actuallyconveya meaningthatis equallycompatible withthetranslation "streetblock"or "cityblock."
Furthermore, overthecourseof severalcenturiesfromthefirstcenturyB.C.to thefourthcenturyA.D.,
thetermcameto beartwochiefmeanings, thesecondbeinganelaboration of thefirstandbothcoming
to be usedin everydayparlance:(1) cityblock,includingallthe unitsthatconstitutedthe structural
fabricas a wholefor a citystreetblock;(2)the individualunitsof privatepropertythatwereisolated
(separated off andlockable)withinthe structural fabricof thatstreetblock.2If therewasa separate
of
meaning "apartment house,"it wasa speciesof bothmeaningsof theterm,in thatsuchapartment
houseswerea visiblydistinctandseparatepropertywithinthe fabricof the cityblock(sense2) and
probablytookup largeportionsof a streetblock,asseenin a numberof examplesat Ostia(sense1).
Bothleadingmeaningsarethuscompatiblewiththe basicmeaningof the termas "island."
Thisanalysisattemptsto followthesuggestionof Wallace-Hadrill in his discussionof housingin
PompeiiandHerculaneum: "Thereis stillroomformorethoroughinvestigation thatwouldlook at
shopsandurbanpropertyin generalin legal,literary,andepigraphicsources,andattemptto relate
theresultsto thearchaeological remains."3Wallace-Hadrill
furtherpointedoutthatdescribing Roman
residentialconfigurations in bothliterarysourcesandthe archaeological recordis challengingdue
to the highlycomplexpicturerevealedin bothtypesof information. Coarelli,whosearticlesetsout
mostof thelegalreferencesto insulaandthuswenta longwaytowardansweringthataspectof Wal-
lace-Hadrill'schallenge,similarlyconcludedthatthe termwasdifficultbecauseof its polysemy.4
Wallace-Hadrillarguedthatthe mainproblemin comingto termswiththe meaningof insula
in urbanresidentialcontextsis thatthe terminsulahasbeentreatedas an architectural termwhen
For helpful suggestions, I thank Paul B. Harvey,Jr., Robert contextbut ratherfocuseson the normativestructural
cor-
E. A. Palmer,Carin Green, Robert Ketterer,Craig Gibson, relatesrelevantto Romanresidentialunits.
Susan Alcock, and the anonymous reviewers for MAAR.
2 Guilhembet
1996andCoarelli1997argueforthismeaning
of
1 For the definition of semanticfield, see Crystal 1995, 137, theterm.SeeStorey2001and2002fora reviewof theissue.
157. I have consulted especially Coarelli 1997 and Wotsch-
itsky 1962 for comparison of sources cited. All translations I Wallace-Hadrill
1994,133.
are my own, unless otherwise specified. This essay is not
an exhaustive survey of the term insula in an architectural 4 Coarelli1997,98 ("lapolisemicitadel termine").
MAAR 49, 2004
48 GLENNR. STOREY
it is clearthatit is in facta legalterm.5However,I wouldrespondthatsucha realization,however

accurate,cannotbe the end of the matter,since the Romansused the termin nonlegalcontexts
wherethereis clearlyan architectural correlate.The legalconnotationsof the termarehelpfulin
explicatingits meaning,but the mainchallengeis the aforementioned polysemy,becausethe term
seemedto coverunitsrunningthegamutfromcityblocksdownto small,one-roomapartment units
andevenfuneraryenclosures.Therealsoappearsto havebeen a not unexpectedshiftin language
use continuingthroughtime,giventhatthe sourcesthatdescribeentitiesforwhichit is possibleto
suggestarchaeological correlatesfor the termspanseveralcenturies.
Thereis, however,the problemthatit is misleadingto imaginethatwe canmakea one-to-one
correspondence of termsfoundin documentary sourcesandthe archaeological featuresfoundin
Romanstructures.6 Grahamegivesa usefulsummary:
Thetraditionalpractice ofusingtheliterarysourcestoidentify
certain socialidentities
andprac-
ticesandthenmapthemontothephysical remains,inordertoexplaintheirformandfunction,
ismoreproblematic thanisusually thought. thispractice
Firstly, oflabelingislimitedinthatitis
notpossible todescribe allthespaceswithinthehouseaccordingtotraditional Latinterminology.
In addition,wehaveto assumethattheconventional text-basednomenclature, whenapplied
to specificspaces,is a reliableguidebothto thesocialidentities
of thepersonswhohabitually
occupiedthemandto practices routinelycarriedoutin them.Finally,thismethoddoesnot
allowusto resolvethespatialstructure of anyhouseinsuchawayasto account for
adequately
theactualpattern of relations presentwithinit.7
Allisonstatesthatlabelingof spaces"doesnot actuallydemonstratethatthis label

Similarly,
was usedfor thisparticularspacein the Romanperiod,nor canit elucidatethe activitiesthattook
placetherein.... [L]abelingprovidesa technicalconvention."8Hermainpoint"demonstrates how
the evidenceis compromisedby the use of unrelatedtextualdatato interpretmaterialremainsor
by the incorporation of unsubstantiated
analysisby pastscholarsin currentinterpretations."9
This
pitfalland dangerappliesto the currententerpriseinsofaras "themore a termwas used in the
writtensources,the morediversecanbe its meaning,andthe moredifficultandineffectualcanbe
anyattemptsto relateit to the extantphysicalspacesin Romanhouses."'10
Leach's"archaeology of nomenclature"
is equallysoberingas a cautionarytaleregardingthe
"discrepancies . . . betweensomeof the termsgenerallyappliedto the archaeologyof the Roman
houseandsomeof the vocabularyof Romaneverydayusage."11Sheprovidesthe importantinsight
that "theRomansthemselvestendedto thinkof roomsas spatialcontainersthattook theirreal
identityfromaction."'2Dickmannspeaksof "blurredancientterminology"'3 and concludesthat
termsgiveno explicitindicationof functionandthatthe terminologywasheterogeneousprecisely
becauseit expressedthe numerousfunctionsthatroomsserved.
As necessaryas thesecaveatsmaybe, thereis no needto go to the otherextremeanddenythe
I Wallace-Hadrill1994, 132. Allison 2001, 184.
6Wallace-Hadrill1994 stresses that problem, as do Allison " Leach 1997, 51.

1994 and 2001, Leach 1997, and Dickmann 1999.
12
Leach 1997, 62.
' Grahame 1997, 146.
13 Dickmann 1999, 31 ("unscharfenantiken Terminologie";
8 Allison 2001, 185. cf. his conclusions at 1999, 39).
9 A-lison 2001, 182.
THEMEANINGOF INSULAIN ROMANRESIDENTIAL
TERMINOLOGY 49
terminologyanyutilityasa guideto function,but,of course,noneof the citedauthorsmeanthat.It

is simplythat,forthe purposesof thiscurrentanalysis,the taskof interpretingwhatis meantby the
terminologyis on a grossscaleof urbanstructuralconfigurations, not on the smallscaleof rooms
or evenpartsof roomsof singlestructureswherethe issueof correlationis mostcontroversial. In
this case,we arenot suggestinganysignificantbehavioralor functionaldimensionto the factsof
how termswere appliedto architectural entities.Whetheran insulawas streetblock, apartment
house,or independentunitin the block,littlein thewayof behavioralor functionalcharacteristics
is meantto be elucidated.Therealsignificanceof the procedureheremaywellbe mostlylegal:how
propertiesweredefined.Alsocrucialis clarifyingthe rangeof sizesof unitsto whichthetermswere
applied,not the activitiesthatmayhavetakenplacewithinthem.
Thereis thusreasonto believethaton thismacroscale,we shouldbe ableto sortoutwhatthe
Romansmeantby certaintermsbecausewe havefullcityscapeevidence(botharchaeologically from
sites and in suchpieces as the FormaUrbisRomae).14Becausethe terminsulaas explicatedhere
is an architectural
termlargelyassociatedwith residentialconsiderations, a discussionof related
residentialandarchitectural termsis in orderto put the discussionof insulain propercontext.
1. RelatedResidential/Architectural
Terms
DOMUS
The termdomusis frequentlycontrastedwithinsula(seebelow)andappearsto be the chiefterm

for "house"or "residence" in Romanterminology. Whatstructuremightbe impliedby thatterm
is as ambiguousin Latinas it is in severalmodernEuropeanlanguages."5 Accordingto TLL(5.1:
1954.32-84underConspectus MateriaeJ. B. Hofmann]),thiswordhasthreebasicclassesof mean-
ing:(1)generally,a particular kindof building,thatis, a person'shome;(2)moreabstractly, theplace
wherea personlives,whetherthebuildingitselforthelocalemorewidelydefined;and(3)thepersons
constitutinga householdunit.Theoriginalmeaningof thebuildingservingas a homeappearsto be
cognatewiththe conceptof ownershipexpressedby the termdominus,an associationthatthe TLL
notesas significant(5.1:1955.1-1956.21[J.B. Hofmann]).The termrefersto the totalpossession
of a singleowner,encompassingall the landandthe itemsstandingon the landthatcomprisethe
dwelling.This definitionis refinedin the OLD(s.v.domus1 and2): domusis "1 The buildingin
whicha persondwells,house,home. . . 2 A house(asa building),esp. a townhouse."
Theredoes not appearto be a definitivepassagethat categorically statesthatthe domusis a
buildingconfinedto theurbansetting,butthatis certainlytheimplicationof its usage.Theevidence
of theAugustanagearchitectVitruvius Polliois crucialto understanding theusageof thetermdomus
(andinsula,aswe shallsee).Vitruvius's treatiseis ultimatelyanessayon theidealof thebestcontext
in whichto livethe life of a memberof Rome'selitegoverningclass,so thatthe idealizedcontextof
his evidencemustbe bornein mind.However,Vitruviusprovidesvaluableandimportantdetails
on the semanticfieldof Romanresidentialterms.He beginswitha contrastof the constructionof
substantialhouseswithfoundations("theybeganto constructnot justhuts,but evenhouseswith
foundations,"noncasas,sedetiamdomosfundatas ... perficere
coeperunt: 2.1.7).
Vitruviusfrequentlyalludesto aedificiaprivata("privatebuildings";e.g., 6.2 heading),and
he beginswith suchstructuresin the city (in urbeaedificiorum [6.5.3],the subjectof sections6.1
14
See Carettoni et al. 1960; Rodriguez-Almeida 1981; 15 The issue is touched on brieflyin Storey2002, 431.
Reynolds 1996.
50 GLENNR. STOREY
to 6.5) and contrasts them with those in the country (rusticorumaedificiorum,the subject of 6.6,
explicitly called villae in 6.6.1). A number of terms using the aed- root are of some relevancehere
(OLD, s.v. aedes through aeditus):aedes or aedis and aediculaappearto have strong ritual connota-
tions referringto dwellings, abodes, houses, temples and shrines, and sanctuaries-the referenceis
to special purpose structureswith overtones of the family,city, and its religious associations;while
aedificatioand aedificiumreferto buildings in general or built-up areas (plus the charmingdiminu-
tives aedificatiunculaand aedificiolum,which just mean little buildings).
The richest examples of these private buildings, equipped with the proper necessities for a
Roman statesman-libraries, art galleries, audience halls (basilicas)-Vitruvius explicitly labels as
domus (6.5.2). From the organizationof his book, it appearsthat Vitruviusstartswith domusas the
basic form of the Roman private house, and it certainlyseems that his concept of it is urban. And,
contraryto what one might expect from the Romanconceit that they startedout as a "simplefarming
folk," to Virtruviusthe country villa is best understood as the same things as a domus,transplanted
into the ruralcountryside, and not the other way around.
Domus, though not usually associatedwith rental property,clearlycould refer to a rental unit.
There are two passages of Vitruvius in his discourse on the Greek-style house that contain very
unusual uses of domusand challenge the tidiness of the vision of it as a house of a wealthy member
of the elite (6.7.3). Twice within one paragraph,Vitruviususes domus, and it is almost certainthat
he means a suite of rooms within a largerhouse. Here the term is perhaps best translatedas "apart-
ment,"'"6 especially because the women's quartersend section 2 and are contrastedwith a new part
of the house with wider and more ornatevestibules.In 6.7.4, he uses domusagain,and here it means
"house," if construed as a genitive singularwith peristylia ("peristylesof the house"). It means
"apartment"if it is construed as an accusativeplural with andronitides("men'sapartments").The
latter possibility is perhaps strengthenedby the use of a diminutivevariantof domus,domunculae,
in the next phrase, which also seems to mean "apartment."'8The term domus is sometimes con-
trastedwith habitatio,but the latterterm appearsto referto a generic "placeof residence"and thus
seems to have had no real significancerequiringa search for either architecturalor archaeological
correlatesrelatingto this discussion.
Despite these apparent anomalies, the referent for the term domus most frequently seems to
be an abode for a single residentialunit (usuallya family and its co-residents), of the characterof
what we would call a "privatehouse." A reasonable translationfor the term is a "townhouse"or
"mansion."Domus, in most contexts, is conceptually well understood from its representationin
the archaeologyof Roman urban contexts, especially the Vesuviancities.
TABERNA
Perhaps it is appropriateto begin the considerationof the terms associatedwith residences used as
rental property with one of the most basic terms in this semantic field, taberna.The term came to
mean basically a "shop (front) with associated living quarters,"evolving from a possibly Etruscan
16
Vitr. De arch. 6.7.2-3: haec pars aedificiigynaeconitisap- cumbere.haecautemperistyladomusandronitides dicuntur,
pellatur.coniungunturautemhis domibusamplioreshabentes quodin is viri sine interpellationibus
mulierumversantur.
lautioraperistyla.... habentautemeae domusvestibulaegregia praeterea
dextraacsinistradomunculae constituuntur.
et ianuasproprias.
18 Fordomus asa rentalunitin thecontextof archaeological
17
Vitr. De arch. 6.7.4: in his oecisfiunt virilia convivia. non studiesin Pompeii,see Pirson1997.
enimfuerat institutummatresfamiliarumeorummoribusac-
TERMINOLOGY 51
word thatoriginallymeantin Latina simplesheltersuch as a "tent,""shack,"or "hut."'19

By the
fourth centuryA.D., the meaning had become even more specialized in that the word seems to have
stood only for a shopfront devoted to entertainmentby providing food and drink (tabernadever-
soria), from which the modern English correlate "tavern"derives.
Klebergcontainsa brief but informativediscourseon the evolutionof the term, and he was most
interested in how it came to mean "tavern"in the modern sense. He gives a table that compares
the occurrence of tabernain the sources and its meanings.20During the first three centuries A.D.,
the term was used in overwhelming frequency to mean simply a shopfront, the use most relevant
to this discussion. In any event, whether a generalizedshopfront or one devoted to food and drink,
the term implied a shop with living quartersin the first few centuries A.D.21
The originalmeaning, "shelter,"was also appliedto the smallstructuresbuilt as partof funerary
monuments.22In these cases, presumably,little booths of some type or other were incorporatedinto
the funerarycomplex. In the semantic field of Roman funeraryritual,the same words for "house"
and "abode"frequentlywere used to mean "eternalhomes" or "tombs."Examples used in the fu-
neraryinscriptions are:domus,sedes, aedicula,cubiculum,and aedis.23As we shall see, this context
of the funerarymonument is also one in which the term insula was active. However, the meaning
"shopfront"is primaryin the context of residentialterminology.An importantadded featureis that
tabernaewere frequently connected to dwelling units, either in a back room behind the shopfront
or in a unit on the second floor above the shopfront.24This linking of a shopfront with a connected
dwelling unit, often on an upper floor, is too ubiquitous in the archaeologicalevidence of Roman
cities to requireextensive comment.The taberna,originallya shelter,appearsto be the terminological
building block of humble dwellingsfor the common people of Roman cities, many of whom derived
their livelihood from smallbusiness. How other humble dwellingswere referredto calls for a review
of the possible terms used to designate the dwelling unit connected to the taberna.
C[O]ENACULUM
This term originallyappears to have been applied to dining rooms, which were commonly found
on the second floor of residences.25Soon, any upstairs room could be called a c[ojenaculum;by
the first century B.C., the referent of the term had changed, and its meaning seems to have been
completely transferredto the equivalent of the modern term "apartment,"although the origin of
the word as a dining room was still recognized. Most passages containing the term either explicitly
state or implicitly suggest that a c[oienaculum meant an individual apartment unit somewhere
above ground, but exactly where above ground is unclear.26That Augustus watched the races in
19 Isid. etym. 15.2.43. See also Ernout and Meillet 1967, 23 Lattimore 1962, 162-169.
968-969.
For the latter, often referred to as a "mezzanine apart-
24
20 Kleberg 1957, 19-22, 129-130 (table on p. 20). ment," see Apul. Met. 9.40; lulianus, Dig. 33.3.1; Donatus,
De Comoedia6.2.
21Reasonably representative passages are: Hor. Carm.
1.4.13-14; Ulp. Dig. 50.16.183, 50.16.185. 25 Varro,Ling. 5.162; Paul. Fest. 54M.
22
Funerary tabernaein CIL 6 (City of Rome-a sampling 26
PorphyryPomponius, Commentaryon Horace'sArsPoetica
only) include: 1396, 1600, 5183, 5339, 9053, 9053a, 9054, 52; Plaut. Amph. 861-864; Liv. 39.14.2; Cic. Leg. agr.2.96;
9494,9681,9664,9919,10245, 13061,13267, 13562,17228, Scholiast on Horace's Epistles 1.10.6; Vitr. De arch. 2.8.17;
17992, 19035, 21894, 28375, 29726, 29907, 29964, 29967, Donatus, De Comoedia6.2; the idea that one must ascend
29970, 29971, 30058, 30480, 31895, 36262. in some fashion to reach a c[ojenaculumis also common in
the Vulgate;see TLL3:782.61-81 J. Poeschl).
52 GLENNR. STOREY
the Circus Maximus from the c[o]enacula of friends suggests that he was in the upper floors of
buildings that stood around the Circus, sufficientlyhigh to see the action within, but we are given
no further details.27The implication of the totality of the passages cited is that these apartment
units were of at least common utility if not of outstanding luxury.28There is also the implication
that the c[o]enaculumwas a unit of not inconsiderable size and was probably the correct term for
an apartment unit with more than one room. In the Digest, Ulpian, Paul, and Gaius record the
laudable quest of the praetor going to great lengths in order to establish blame where blame was
due in cases of objects thrown from upper stories. The language makes clear that apartmentswere
subdivided (diviso ... cenaculo).29The c[olenaculumwas certainlya multiroom apartmentin many
cases. Severalpassagesclearlyindicate that other buildings,especiallya domus,could be subdivided
into cfo]enacula30 though it is not completely clear whether such units had to be on upper floors
and could not be ground-floorunits.31However, this is the word that seems to mean the equivalent
of the modern multiroom apartmentor flat.
CELLA
Cella is another term used in the residential context. Both OLD (s.v. cella 3) and TLL (3: 759.19-
760.80 [C. Wulff]) agree that a cella is a small room, the bedroom or apartment of a person in
poverty,32or a slave'scubicle.33Nothing in the passages cited explicitly states that the cellahad to be
a single room, but the referent certainlysuggests something small and cramped, as is echoed even
in its English derivative, "cell."A possible archaeologicalcorrelatefor this term is found upstairs
in the Ara Coeli Insula in Rome, on the fourth floor (fig. 1): we have here a veritable rabbit warren
of small, single- or double-occupant rooms that would seem to be perfect candidates for the term
cella.34Meiggs argued that slaves of shopkeepers in Roman cities did not sleep on the floors of the
shops, as is often assumed, but may instead have slept in small rooms in the upper floors of the
multiple-residencebuildings.33Certainlythe fourth floor of the Ara Coeli Insula could have served
as that kind of accommodation for slaves, although by no means is there conclusive evidence to
that effect. Slaves appear to have been given tiny cells in the basement, as is demonstratedby the
house of Marcus Aemilius Scaurus (praetor 115 B.C.) in the Forum at the intersection of the Via
Sacraand the Clivus Palatinus (fig. 2). The underground service area for this elite domushas been
excavated and mapped. The slave "cells,"with remainingsupports for their beds (only about 50),
were easily discernible.36
This neat scheme is challenged,however,by Dickmann'sreview of the sources for cella,37 which
illustratesin microcosmthe problem of the ambiguityof the ancientterms.Dickmannpoints out the
similarityin usage of cella and cubiculum,which seems understandableuntil a complicatingfactoris
27 Suet.Aug. 45.1. 33 Cic. Phil. 2.67; Vitr.De arch.6.7.2.
28 Mart. 1.108.3-4; Suet. Vit. 7; lulius Paulus, Dig. 1.15.1-A. 34Packer 1968-1969, 135, 140, and 143 describes the struc-
ture with floor plans.
29
Ulpian, JuliusPaulus, Gaius in Dig. 9.3.1-5.
35 Meiggs1973, 585-586.
30 Ulp. Dig. 7.1.13.8, 43.17.3.7.
36
Carandini1988, 359-387, esp. 370, fig. 2. Figure 2 here is
31Scaevola, Dig. 8.2.41 and Ulp. Dig. 43.17.3.7 are both an adapted detail of Carandini'splan.
ambiguousin that regard-they could be ground-floorapart-
ments, but they equally could be upper-floorones. 37 Dickmann1999, 25-29.
32
Mart. 3.30.3-4, 7.20.20-22, 8.14.5-6; Suet. Ner. 48.4.
TERMINOLOGY 53
Fig. 1. AutoCAD drawingof thefourth-floorplan of the Ara

Coeli Insula, Rome, at the base of the CapitolineHill (after
0 1 Om Packer1968-1969, 140, fig. 7).
Jr g-- w
* Fig.2. Basement
planof theDomusof MarcusAemilius
Ii I . Scaurus,RomanForum.Thesupportsfor theslatsof the
-I- J_ * *A J beds are visible, and units are markedthat might be cellae
(afterCarandini1988, 370 fig. a 2).
Entrance to Basement
CLIVUS
PALATINUS
Ledges for
of
SupDport
Pallet Beds
cellae?
SACREDWAY
0 lO Xn__
m
SCALE
introduced,the usageof cellaasin the cellaof a temple,followedby the usesof cellaas a storeroom
or secure"safe"room.Dickmanncombinescella,cubiculum, andconclaveasthearchetypical smaller
varietyof roomsin the upscaleRomandomusof Pompeii,thelatterterm,conclave,provingto have
a surprisingfrequencyin the sourcesaccordingto Leach.38 The interrelation
of thesethreeterms
is complex,but it seemsthattheycouldservemultiplefunctions.
Cellaseemsnaturallypairedwithcubiculum, butin termsof apartmentliving,whichis generally
the focusof ourreviewhere,c[olenaculum is moreproperlycontrastedwithcella,becauseit seems
38 Dickmann 1999, 29; cf. Leach 1997, 64-67.
54 GLENNR. STOREY
thata cellacouldstandfor a smallapartmentin a waythatdoes not seemthe casefor cubiculum.

Thattermappearsto be the favoredtermfor privateroomsin the domus,whichareprobablybest
seenas roomswitha particular pieceof furniturein them,the bed, thoughtheymaynot necessarily
havebeensleepingrooms,asemphasizedby Dickmann.39 So perhapsc[olenaculum
wasthegeneral
wordfor an apartmentof somesize,probablywithmultiplerooms,andpossiblythoseconfinedto
upperfloorsin a building.Cella mayhavebeen a smallerapartmentof "Bohemian" character-a
"garret"or "attic"apartment-butalsothe "cell"for slaves,whetheron upperfloorsof multiple-
floorstructuresor in the basementof a substantialdomusresidence.40
Withthisbriefreviewof relatedtermsin the semanticfieldof Romanresidentialterms,we can
now turnto the focusof this analysis:insula.
2. Insula
A numberof studieshaveattemptedto clarifythe relationbetweenthe terminsulaandits possible

archaeological correlates.41The mostlogicalplaceto beginis withan examinationof the meaning
and occurrencesof the termin the standarddictionaries.Accordingto the OLD (s.v.insula2),
an insulain an architectural contextis "alargebuilding,let out in separatedwellings,a tenement
house,blockof flats."The TLL(7.1:2038.54-2039.38[M.Gonzalez-Haba]) affirmsthatmeaning,
groupingandthen citingpassagesunderthe headingaedesconducitiae (buildingsfor rent).
Themeaningof thistermis,unfortunately, notasclearandstraightforward astheseentriessuggest.
I arguethatwe canenvisionfourmaincategoriesof architectural correlatesfor thistermin Roman
antiquity.Whenit appears,however,the termis largelyambiguousasto its actualarchitectural refer-
ent.Thatis, it is frequentlyunclearwhichof thesecorrelatesappliesin anyparticular case.I contend
thatmostof theusagesaresubsetsof themeaningof insulaas a streetblockandthatallof the others
arean expansionor elaboration of the basicconceptof a structural
entitysurrounded by freespace
on all sides.As timepassedandRomanurbanstructural configurationsbecamemorecrowdedand
complex,the termevolvedintoonewithanimportantlegaldimensionandusagedenotinga unitof
privatepropertysealedoff fromotherproperties,whilethe originalconceptof a largefreestanding
configuration wasmaintained in dailyparlance.Thefourambiguoustypesareasfollows:
(1) insulaas a streetblock.This seemsto be a fundamentalcorrelateof the term,definedby the
conceptof the ambitus,a walkingspacethat"isolates"a structuralconfiguration. Thisfeature
seemsto go backto the timeof the TwelveTables.42
(2) insulaasa freestanding buildingseparatedfromotherbuildingsby spaceson itsfoursides,with
no indicationof whetherthe featuretakesup anentirecityblockor merelya portionof it. This
appearsto be the favoredinterpretation of both the OLDand TLL.I arguethatvirtuallyall
examplesof this secondcategoryof correlatesfor the termareso ambiguousin theirreferent
thatit is possiblethattheyareall actuallyexamplesof the firstcategory.
3 Dickmann 1999, 26-27. to the two terms, chiefly by size and quality, in much the
manner that I have set out.
40
It should be noted that OLD (s.v. cenaculum1) defines a
c[o]enaculum as "a top-storey, garret, attic (often as lodg- 41 Castiglione 1884; Richter 1885; Calza 1914; Cuq 1916;
ings)" and a cella (s.v.) as "a small room . . . a poor man's Boethius 1932; 1934; 1951; Lugli 1941-1942; Homo 1951;
apartment,'attic', 'garret':(w pauperis,etc.)." Although the Dureau de la Malle 1971.
semantic fuzziness (Crystal1995, 169) to be expected in any
review of terminologycan explain this overlap, the passages 42
Twelve Tables 7.1 (Riccobono 1968, 1.48).
cited above suggest that it is possible to distinguishreferents
TERMINOLOGY 55
(3) insulaas equivalentto an independentunitwithinthe structuralfabricof someotheredifice.

Thisis whatthe meaningof the termappearsto be in the RegionaryCatalogues of the fourth
centuryA.D.,43 and a common configurationfor this term is the taberna/c[o]enaculumcombina-
tion (a shopfront with or without an attachedresidentialapartmenteither above or behind the
shop) or simply a c[olenaculum(apartment).In essence, insula here is only a rentalportion of a
city block, commonly distinguishedfrom a domusin legal discourse and derivingits definition
from the ability to delineate and close off such a unit as some form of "privateproperty."
(4) insula as a funerarystructure.This last categoryhas the fewest examples and is closely related
in form and function to the funerarymaterialon tabernadiscussed previously.
Remarkableas it may seem, it is perhaps of utmost moment that, of all the examples cited here,
virtuallynot a single one is unambiguouslycorrelatablewith any one of these classes of referents.
3. The StreetBlock
I startwith this possible referentfor insula, not because it necessarilypossesses any superiortextual
attestation but because I am proceeding down the scale from the largest possible referent to the
smallestand because I am arguingthat this meaningin fact might subsume two of the other possible
referents (apartmenthouse and independent unit within the fabric of the block).
1 Vitruvius,De Architectura1.6.8 (after27 B.C.,describing the Augustan age 27 B.C. to A.D. 14):
Quasob res convertendaesuntab regionibusventorumdirectionesvicorum,uti advenientes

ad angulosinsularumfrangantur
repulsiquedissipentur.
Forthisreason[tokeepwindsfromrushingthroughthestreets]theorientations
of mainstreets
mustbe turnedawayfromthe sourcesof the winds,in orderthatgustsbe deflected,broken,
anddispersedwhenstrikingthe insulaeon the corners.
It seems that if one were to translateinsulae in this passage as "buildings,"it would make perfectly
good sense and supportthe usualinterpretationof insulaas a separatebuilding,such as an apartment
house (sense2). However,Vitruviusis suggestingthat,in town planning,careshouldbe takenin order
that "windsbe brokenup by cityblocks."Romantown planningis the context of this passage,and the
layingout of rectangularcity blocks was axiomatic,so there is a strong presumptionthat city blocks
arethe referentfor insulaein this passage."Now it is quite true that cityblocks, as lines on the ground
made by Romansurveyors,would not breakup winds becauseit is constituentbuildingsthatmakeup
the fabricof the block thatwould do that. However,the interpretationof insulaeas city blocks rather
than the constituentstructuresis preferablebecause all streetsmust conform to a single orientation
for the advice to apply,and the laying out of streets and blocks in town planning is a process prior
to that of the siting and constructionof individualbuildings such as apartmenthouses within those
blocks. Nevertheless,this passageis ultimatelyambiguousbetween senses 1 and 2.
The next passagerefinesthe notion of insulaas an architecturalentityby delineatingthe reasons
why the word meaning "island"could be so applied:
43Jordan1970 contains an excellent edition of the Regionary 44See, for example, Castagnoli 1971; Dilke 1971; Ward-
Catalogues.See Storey2001 and 2002 for a full bibliography Perkins 1974; Rykwert1976; Owens 1991.
and discussion, with referencesfor this meaning.
56 GLENNR. STOREY
2 Paulus in Festus, De SignificatuVerborum111M:
Insulaedictaeproprie,quaenon iungunturcommunibus parietibuscumvicinis,circumituque

publicoautprivatocinguntur;a similitudinevidelicetearumterrarumquaein fluminibusac
marieminent,suntquein salo.
Insulaeproperlydefinedareentitiesnot joinedby partywallswith neighboringentities,and

aresurroundedby a publicor privatepathway.Theyareso calledby clearanalogywiththose
landmassesthatareat the confluenceof riversandthe sea,andarefoundin the openocean.
The operative phrase here is "publicor privatepathway."The implication of that phrase, followed
by the analogy of landmasses, suggests that the isolation of the structure (akin to that of an island)
must be on a relativelylarge scale. Certainlya public pathway,such as a street, would meet that
criterion, and an architecturalmass surroundedby streets is a city block.
4. The Ambitus
Passages 3 and 4 introduce the concept of ambitus, the space left around a structure, which ap-
pears to be the species of "public or private pathway"referredto in passage 2 (both 2 and 3 use
the Latin noun circu[m]itus, "circuit"or "wayround").The concept of that space originatedat the
time of the Twelve Tables, and its extent, two and one-half Roman feet, seems to be a tradition of
considerable antiquity,as previouslynoted.45
3 Varro,De LinguaLatina5.22 (published after 43 B.C.):
etiamambitusiter, quod circumeundoteritur;nam ambituscircuitus;ab eoque duodecim

tabularum
interpretes'ambitusparietis'circuitumesse describunt.
Accessis a paththathasbeenwornby pedestrianswalkingabout;for accessis a circuit;from

of the TwelveTablesdescribethe "accessof the wall"as a circuit.
thatfact,the interpreters
4 Paulus in Festus, De SignificatuVerborum16M:
ambituspropriediciturintervicinorumaedificialocus duorumpedumet semipedisad cir-

cumeundifacultatemrelictus.
Accessproperlyunderstoodis the spacebetweenthebuildingsof neighborhoods[orstreets?],

of two andone-half[Roman]feet [= 70 cm],to facilitatecircuit.
Although the term insula appearsin neither passage, in 4 we are told that the ambituswas located
"between the buildings of a neighborhood." We can reconstruct the correlates of passages 1-4
by envisioning that a Roman residentialsubdivision (vicus or vicinum)was defined by one major
thoroughfare(vicus,via, or clivus). Vicus(OLD, s.v. vicus,2a and b) means street (but also "neigh-
borhood"; see below); via also means street (OLD, s.v. via 1) as does clivus, basicallyan incline or
slope, although all citationsof that meaning appearto derive solely from the city of Rome, probably
45 See n. 42.
TERMINOLOGY 57
because the streets so named went up the slopes of Rome's famous hills (OLD, s.v. clivus 2). If
city blocks were defined in some fashion by that main thoroughfare,it is reasonable to infer that
the subdivision immediatelybelow that of a vicus or vicinumwould be a city block. (The region,
regio,would almost certainlyhave been the division above that of neighborhood-OLD, s.v. reglo,
5a, b, and c.) The features that define a city block would be streets, although the words for street
just cited seem to refer to majorthoroughfaresand not smaller streets. The best candidate for the
smaller streets that would define the blocks that in turn define a vicus would be the ambitus.46The
ambitus is only 70 cm, and the probable reason for that minimum space is that it was perceived
to be enough for one person to walk straightbetween architecturalmasses without having to turn
the shoulders. In Roman thinking, that space was sufficientto define an independent architectural
unit, the "island"of the insula.
Richardsonreconstructsthe configurationof a vicus as a neighborhood originallyencompass-
ing four city blocks (later including more) off a main thoroughfareand converging on a compital
shrine of the crossroads.This is based on what little is known of the administrationof the vici. OLD
(s.v. vicus2) lists passage 1 as illustrating"ablock of houses, street, group of streets, etc. in a town,
often forming a social or administrativeunit." In this sense, vicus could be the term for block, and
insulaewould mean separatebuildings, such as the apartmenthouses. But, because the word means
basically a zone defined by a street and thus a configurationfor an administrativeunit, especially
in reference to the neighborhoods of Rome, it is here probably best translatedas "neighborhood"
or "groupof streets,"because each of the 265 vici in Rome almost certainlywere not confined to a
single city block but encompassed several.47
Of course, the relativelysmall size of the ambitus (about 70 cm) suggests more of an alleyway,
but it must be borne in mind that the size mandated is a minimum and that all that the term meant
to convey was walking space around an architecturalmass. Largerstreets might have been loosely
covered by the term, since the Roman terms for streets suggest wide boulevards,with no term that
appears to sit in the middle between the narrow alleylike ambitus and the larger thoroughfares.
Smaller alleywaysmight have been reasonablyregularand created naturalhalf-block divisions, as
seen in many modern city layouts. Pompeii and Ostia are full of small pathways,about the legal size
of the ambitus,that meanderwithin the largercity blocks, peeking in and out between the separate
structures but usually not going all the way around them so as to isolate them and thus become
technicallyan angiportus. This may be the reasonwhy an angiportus is encountered so frequentlyin
the fabric of street blocks in both cities. Only the city block seems fully isolated by a thoroughfare,
which is the entire thrust of passages 3 and 4 in defining the insula.
5 Vitruvius,De Architectura2.9.16:
certetabulaein subgrundiscircuminsulassi essentex ea conlocatae,ab traiectionibus

incen-
diorumaedificiapericuloliberarentur.
Certainlyif panelsmadefromit [larchwood]wereto be connectedto theeavesrunningaround

the insulae,the buildingswouldbe freedfromthe dangerof firescrossingoverto them.
This passage, as a piece of town-planningrationale,perhaps gives as good an explanation as any as
46
Richardson 1992, 329, 413. insulaeas "blocks,"meaningcity blocks, thus conformingto
the interpretationadopted here.
47Morgan 1960,27 translatesvicorumas "lineof houses" and
58 GLENNR. STOREY
to whyRomanthoughtseemsso eagerto createaninsula,an "island"of structuralconfigurations.

Probablyit wasbecauseof the perceiveddangerof firesspreadingquicklyfrombuildingto build-
ing in the urbanenvironment.Hence the importanceof the interveningspace,the ambitus.Even
the mostfire-resistantwoods,however,wouldhavehadlittleeffectin preventingfiresthathad to
crossgapsof onlytwo andone-halfRomanfeet (70 cm).But,if indeedthe referentfor insulahere
is a cityblocksurroundedby a streettwo to severalmeterswide, such a gap as a firebreakwould
havemeanta significantreductionin firehazard.Consequently, Vitruvius'sargumentin favorof
larchwood extremitiesalongentirecityblockfronts,ratherthanjustindividualapartmenthouses,
wouldpossessgreaterforce.
It mightappearthatthispassagesuggestsindividualapartment housesbecauseit focusesonwood
to be appliedto aninsula,whichwouldfreethebuildings(aedificia) fromthe dangerof fire.Thatis,
thewood couldnotbe appliedto theblock(therectangular-shaped entity)butonlyto thebuildings
of the block.However,thatobjectionneed not be consideredconclusivebecauseVitruvius,as has
alreadybeen demonstrated in passage1, couldbe interpretedas envisioningan entirestreetblock,
as definedby its constituentstructuresandconceivedas a unitaryentity.On the otherhand,aswith
passage1, ultimatelythispassagetoo is ambiguousandcouldmeaninsula as eitherconfiguration 1
or 2, and Vitruviushas not defined for us clearlyand conclusivelythe referentfor the term.
5. Some PossibleArchaeologicalCorrelatesfor Insula Plus Related Examples
We turn now to three epigraphicpassagesfrom Pompeii that may be construed as operationalizing

firsthandthe meaningof the terminsulaas a cityblock:
6 CIL 4.4429 (Pompeii-latest possible date, A.D. 79):
M[arci]Iuniinsulasum.
I amthe insulaof MarcusJunius.
This inscription was found in Region 6, Block 5 (fig. 3, marked as number 5). It is a very large
block immediatelynorth of the Casadi Pansa complex. It may refer to the whole block, which may
have been the property of one owner. However, it is a block full of separateunits isolated from one
another,though often sharingpartywalls, within the fabric of the block. All these units could have
been rented out individually,severally,and in different combinations, but the short text provides
no details. The location of the inscriptionis an importantpoint: it is in two places on the wall in the
line of two domus with entrances numbered 10 and 19, about one-third of the way up the block.
This location is not consistent with the notion that the entire street block is referredto; it is more
likely that the referent is one or all of the units in this part of the block: 9, 10, 18, or 19, all small
domus.Although there is ambiguitybetween senses 1 (streetblock) and 3 (independentunit within
the block fabric), this case seems to be a better candidatefor sense 3. However, no one seems ready
to argue that the configurationreferredto is an apartmentbuilding of the Ostian type, sense 2.
7 CIL4.138 (Pompeii-latest possible date, A.D. 79):
InsulaArrianaPollianaGn.AlleiNigidiMailocanturex k. Julisprimistabernaecumpergulissuis
et cenaculaequestriaet domus.conductorconvenitoPrimum,Gn. AlleiNigidiMaiservum.
THE MEANINGOF INSULAIN ROMANRESIDENTIAL
TERMINOLOGY 59
Fig. 3 AutoCAD map of

/ \t ? \ > < z 0 \ Pompeii, Region 6. Block 5
is the location of the Insula
A 9) >Marci.
\ Thearrowsindicate
/ ( s E -g p,A ,4 t,| the location of the two
<oA
o a,>v X \\r2US\r
inscriptions identifyingthe
property.Structures9, 10,
18, and 19 are most closely
,7\\ associatedwith the properties
or groupof propertiesthat
might togetherconstitute
the Insula, or even more
configurationsadjacentto the
numberedpropertiesmight be
includedin the unit, perhaps
even 13, 14, 15, 16, 8, and 20.
--I-Fig. 4 AutoCAD map of

Scace Pompeii, Region 6, Block
6. Numher 1 is the Casadi
i 0 5 m I Pansa.
j 17-2 1 T=
6 ,
22 LL |1
.....
j __ ...............~~ ~~~~
~~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
In the insula of Arrius Polio, properties of Gnaeus Aleus Nigidius Maius are for rent from July
1 next:shopswithattachedmezzanineapartments, andhouse[s].Prospective
luxuryapartments,
contractors should apply to Primus, the slave of Gnaeus Aleus Nigidius Maius.
In this passage,the term insula stronglysuggests referenceto an entire street block. The inscription
was painted on the wall of doorway 19 in Region 6, Block 6, containing the famous Casa di Pansa,
which is doorway 1 in the same block (see fig. 4). The Casadi Pansa dominates the block.
60 GLENNR. STOREY
The translationof the term cenaculaequestriais problematic. Literally,it means "equestrian

apartments."This is usuallyrendered "luxuryapartment"on the reasonableassumptionthat apart-
ments fit for people of equestrianstatus,members of Rome'selite, would requirea relativelyluxuri-
ous unit similarto a domusin its amenities.48What such a unit actuallylooks like in this block is not
at all clear;nor is it entirely clear what counts as a luxury apartment.Frierhas arguedthat many of
the apartmentunits in Ostia were meant for tenants of some means, and therefore the designation
"luxuryapartment"is appropriateto many rentalpropertiesthat arewell known there.49Such units
at Pompeii are harder to identify.It is not impossible that the designation in this passage refers to
one of the smallerhouses in the block, which one would in most circumstancescall a domus, and
not one of the shop/mezzanine apartmentcombinations found so frequently at Pompeii.
The translation "house[s]" is used for domus because it is not clear whether it is singular or
plural in the passage. If it is singular,the term obviously refers to the Casadi Pansa, and it is inter-
esting that such a splendid domicile should itself be a unit for rent. However, it is probably plural
because there is more than one domus in the block.50Of course, the passage might not be about
the entire block, and so the singularcould be correct and refer to the Casadi Pansa. However, it is
as likely as not that the entire block is the referent because of the multiple units mentioned in the
inscription.
The advertisedunits could be the shops separatefrom the Casadi Pansa and might include the
separatebakerycomplex (fig.4, numbers 17-2 1). There is also a suite of roomswith an independent
entrancethat might count as the advertised"luxuryapartment,"let out separately,which is difficult
to identify (in the areaof fig. 4, numbers22, and 17-2 1). Pirson arguedthat the unit referredto was
a second-floor unit over the southwest corner of the block.51That is possible, as long as the unit
extended over the front of the block, ratherthan over its western side, because it could not have
extended very far over the-bakerycomplex itself;the bakeryoven about midwayup the west side of
the block would have precluded comfortable second-floor occupancy.However, any second-floor
configurationwould probably have been allocated to a poor person renting from the main house
or slaves from the main house, so the idea of a "luxuryapartment"over the southwest corner of
the block does not seem particularlyplausible.
Allison reviews the evidence of this inscription and notes that it is impossible actuallyto cor-
relate the rentable units referred to in the inscription with any units in the block, simply because
even the identification of the shopfronts as tabernaeis conjectural.52 This is unfortunatelytrue;
however,the thrust of the argumenthere is that the term either refersto the entire street block or a
suite of units within the fabric of the street block but not every single entity in the street block. For
our purposes, it does not matterwhether it is possible to identify the actual units.
There is also the question of why the configurationis called ArrianaPollianawhen it is clearly
owned by a member of the gens Alleus. It is probable that the block name refers to a previous
owner, and the name simply stuck to the block, even after the transferof ownership. Neither refer-
ent-street block nor suite of units-is by any means necessarily established as the correct one.
48 Pirson 1997, 168-169 concludes that a good translationof then advertisedon a street corner in the city.The term here
c[ojenaculaequestriawould be "belleetage"or "pianonobi- is probablyplural and refersto smaller,self-enclosed domus
le," citing Preller 1846. See also Vos and Vos 1982, 223-224, house units on the east side of the block (numbers 6, 7, 9,
who concur in the translation"luxuryapartment." and 10 on the plan in fig. 4).
49 Frier 1980, esp. 3-20. 51 Pirson 1997, 171-172.
50Pirson 1997, 172 arguesconvincinglythat it is unlikelythat 52 Allison 2001, 186-188.

such an elaborate house would have been up for rent and
TERMINOLOGY 61
Fig. 5. AutoCAD map of

4 Pompeii,Region2, Block4,
1 so marked.This blockhas
the inscriptionnoting the
Praediaof Julia Felix. The
amphitheater isjust to the
lower rightof this block.
The propertieslistedmighthavereferredto onlya portionof the block,not the whole.Thereis of

courseno wayto tell.
In the next passage,althoughthe terminsulais not used,it is verylikelythatthe praediaad-
vertisedare directlysynonymouswith the featuressubsumedin the previouspassageunderthe
terminsula.
8 CIL4.1136 (Pompeii-latest possibledate,A.D. 79):
In praedisIuliaeSp. F Felicislocantur,balneumVeneriumet nongentum,tabernae,pergulae,

cenaculaex IdibusAug.primisin IdusAug.sextas,annoscontinuosquinque...
In the propertyof JuliaFelix,the daughterof Spurius,thereis for rent:a bathof Venus,fit for
the gentry,shopswith mezzanineapartments,second-floorapartments.Availablefromnext
15thof Augustto the sixth 15thof Augustfollowing,fivecontinuousyears.
Thisunithasalsobeenidentified,Region2, Block4, the so-calledPraediaofJuliaFelix,so named

becauseof thisinscription(seefig.5, markedasnumber4). As withthe previouscase,we have,on
the face of it, a numberof shopswith mezzanineapartmentsas well as somepurelysecond-floor
apartments(cfojenacula), independentfromthe dcomusdominatingthe block (or they could be
closedoff fromit). A bathcomplex(balneum),a fineone, if the normallyunderstoodmeaningof
nongentemapplies,was alsofor rent.53 Thelayoutandcharacterof thispropertysuggestthe same
5 "Fit for the gentry" as translation for nongentum (OLD meantfor wealthypeople. See Mau 1907,490 and Richardson
s.v. nongenti;literally "900") comes from an interpretation 1988, 292-293 and n. 3. Pirson 1997, 179-180 appears to
of Plin. HN 33.31, where it is suggested that the equestrian take nongentumas "semipublic."
orderwas known as the "ninehundred,"and so the bath was
62 GLENNR. STOREY
featuresaslaidoutin passage7, a cityblockwithrentalunitsassociatedwitha largeprivateproperty.

Likethe previouspassageit is unclearas to the extentof the propertyinvolvedand,interestingly,
hasthe sameproblemasto theidentification of a purportedly"luxuryapartment." And,aswiththe
previouspassage,it is ultimatelyambiguousas to the actualreferent,a situationnot helpedby the
factthatthispaintedinscription,foundin the eighteenthcentury,wasmovedearlyon to the Naples
Museum,so thatthe actualoriginallocationis not recordedin CIL.However,in thesetwo cases,
the ambiguityof referencesis betweeninsulaas sense1 (streetblock)andsense3 (anindependent
unitwithinthefabricof the streetblock).I knowof no moderninvestigator whohaseversuggested
thateitherof the entitiesreferredto in passages7 and8 (andas we observedfor 6) wereseparate
apartmentbuildingsof the typefamiliarfromOstiaor anythingremotelysimilar.
The similarityof the descriptionsusing insulaand praediumis significantin emphasizing
the importanceof the legal conceptof a separateproperty,as discussedat the outset,makinga
powerfulcasethatonly a portionof the blocksmaybe the referent.Nevertheless,giventhatthe
archaeological entitieswith whichboth theseinscriptionsare associatedarereasonablycoherent
in theirconfiguration,usingmultiplepluraldescriptorsacrossthe extentof the entirestreetblock
in both cases,I wouldarguethatthereis a strongprimafaciecasethatthe entirestreetblockis the
referentfor bothpassages7 and8.
6. A RelatedExample
9 CIL6.29791(Rome,dateunknown):
in hispraedisinsulaSertoriana
boloesseAur.Cyriacetis
filiaemeaecenacula
n. vi tabernas
n.
xi et repossone subscalire
[=repositione] feliciter.
Amongtheseproperties,
theinsulaofSertorius
istobethefortunate
gainofAurelia
Cyriacis,
my
sixupper-floor
daughter: apartments,elevenshopfronts,
andoneclosetunderthestaircase.
Passage9, fromRome,stronglyresemblespassage8, referring to a propertyaspraediaandincluding

unitsof differentfunction.As with the Pompeianexamples,the unitsarerentableand represent
incomefor the landlord.Thereis an importantdifference,however,in thatthispassagetreatsthe
insulaas a subsetof thepraedia.Thatmightbe thoughtto supportthe suggestionthatthe referent
for insulaherewouldbe sense2 (apartment house)or 3 (independentunitwithinthe blockfabric),
beforeit wouldbe 1 (the streetblock itself).However,the pluralpraediamightmeanthatthere
werea numberof separatepropertiesin differentplaces;thatis, the termis not justdescriptiveof
the one locationbut refersto many.Note alsothat,althoughthismightbe an apartmenthouse,the
configuration seemsmorelike a narrowcityblockwithshopfrontsandmezzanineapartments in a
rowor backto back.No deeperconfigurations arementioned.
BoersmaarguedthatItalianurbanconfigurations (heavilyinfluencedby theirGreekpredeces-
sors)tendedto havelong narrowcity blocks,whereasRomancolonialcity plansin the western
Romanprovinceswerelargeranddeeper.Boersmaexplicitlycharacterized Ostia'sblocks,in terms
of urbanplanning,asa mixof republicanItalian(narrowblocks)andimperialwesternRoman(asin
the provinces,wheretherewereverylargeanddeepsquareblocks)."An exampleof thatwouldbe
Ostia,Region1, Block1,whichhasabouteightground-floor shopunitsandanunknownnumberof
54 Boersma 1982, 50.
TERMINOLOGY 63
Fig.6. AutoCADdrawingof OstiaRegion

1, Block1. Theblacklineoutlinesthe
extentof theblock.
n - nI~I
L _
upper-floorunits (fig. 6). Another example is Ostia, Region 5, Block 4, with about thirteen ground-
floor units. These configurations,both a single city block, are also the size of a small apartment
house. Now in these cases the apartmenthouse and block coincide; it would not necessarilybe so
in all cases. It may be that, conceptually,such configurationswere perceived by the inhabitantsfirst
and foremost as a city block and only secondarilyas separate apartmenthouses.
The situation in Rome (appropriatebecause this inscription is from there) suggests that there
were even narrowerconfigurations,such as a simple line of shops that were almost totally isolated
and for all practicalpurposes defined a narrow city block on their own. The fragmentsof the FUR
(albeit often incomplete) suggest many such configurations,demonstratingthat Rome probablydid
not even have Ostia's mix of narrow and large squareblocks but mostly possessed the former,due
both to its longer trajectoryas a large Italianurban center and the haphazardfashion in which the
city grew.55So this configurationfrom Rome is ambiguous among sense (1) street block (small and
narrow), sense (2) apartmenthouse, and sense (3) independent unit within the block fabric.
7. Insula Used without Any OtherStructuralReferents,Standingas a Legal Categoryof Property
This group of sources employs the term insulawithout including any other termsthat referto build-
ings, structures,or residentialunits. In these passages, the term indicates an entity that appearsto
denote nothing more than a legal category of privateproperty,and the passages mostly convey the
55 See Reynolds 1996, 257-424, passim,where illustrationsof the Plan." Allison 2001, 187 points out that we do not know
the FUR'sfragmentsshow ubiquitous shopfrontsin a variety that these units were called tabernae:"Asfar as I know, there
of configurations, but with many hinting at their isolation is no 'archaeologicalevidence'for the physicalcharacteristics
very like a small narrowcity block. Reynolds 1996, 355 notes of 'tabernae,'as no excavated space can be labeled a taberna
that "Tabernaeare the most common architecturalunit on without recourse to textual analogy."
64 GLENN R. STOREY
jurisprudential
considerations
thereinrelevant.In all passages,an individualis referredto as the
ownerof an insulawho reapssomebenefit(chieflymonetary)fromthatownership.
10 JuliusPaulus, Digest 25.1.4 (third quarterof the third century A.D.):
si fulseritinsulamruentemeaqueexustafit, impensasconsequitur,si non fecerit,deustaea

nihilpraestabit.
If he shouldprovidefor an insula that is fallingdown and shouldit bum downinstead,he

is awardedthe costs;but if he did not so provide,nothingcomesto himwhenit has burned
down.
11 Ulpian, Digest 19.2.19.6 (published after A.D. 225):
Si quis,cumin annumhabitationem annidederit,deindeinsula

conduxisset,pensionem.totius
postsex mensesrueritvelincendioconsumptasit,pensionemresiduitemporisrectissimeMela
scripsitex conductoactionerepetiturum...
Shouldanyone,afterhavinghireda habitationfor a year,payrentforthe wholeyear,andthen

shouldtheinsulafalldownorbe burnedin a fireaftersixmonths,Melaverycorrectlywrotethat
the rentfor the restof the periodshouldbe claimedby a legalactionon contractfor hire...
12 Cicero, Ad Atticum 16.1 (uly 8, 44 B.C.):
Hinc ex Kal.Apr.ad HS LXXXaccommodetur.

Nunceniminsulaetantum.
Fromthe 1stof April,let himtake80,000sesterces.Thatis the currentsumfromthe insula.
13 JuliusPaulus, Digest 19.2.7 (third quarterof the third century A.D.):
Si tibi alienaminsulamlocaveroquinquaginta
tuqueeandemsexagintaTitiolocaveris...
If I shouldhaverentedto you for 50,000sestercesan insulabelongingto someoneelse, and

shouldyouthenrentthe sameinsulato Titiusfor 60,000sesterces...
14 CIL 6.33893 (Rome, date unknown):
P[ublius]TulliusFelusfecitoficinatorinsul[a]eVitalian[a]e
donumfecit[sic]G[eniolP[opuli]
R[omani]F[eliciterl.
PubliusTulliusFelus,theworkshopmanagerof theinsula of Vitalis,happilymadethisas a gift,

a dedicationto the Geniusof the RomanPeople.
These various examples contain virtuallynothing that tells us exactly what kind of an entity is the
insula mentioned. In passage 11 it is used in association with the term habitationem(habitation).
There are issues of rent and who can sue for damages under laws of contract for hire but nothing
that indicates the characterof the structuralentity itself. One other passage is relevanthere:
TERMINOLOGY 65
15 CIL 6.1682 (Rome, A.D. 334) :56
... honoriAmmioManioCaesonioNicomachoAnicioPaulinov[iro] c[larissimo]consule

ordinariopref[ecto]urbiiud[icandi]sacrar[um]cognit[andi]proconsuliprovinciaeAsia[e]
et Hellespontivice sacra[rum]iudicantilegatoKartaginissub pro consuleAfric[a]eAnicio
Iulianopatresuo cuiusprovidentiaadquelelutilitaset integritasreipublicaecorporiscoriari-
oruminsulasad pristinumstatumsuumsecundumlegesprincipumpriorumimp[eratorium]
Val[entis]SeptimiSeveriet M[arci]Aur[elii]AntoniniAug[ustiorum]restaurari adqueador-
naripervigilantia
suaproviditin miramemoriaadquein omniaiustitiasuacorpuscoriariorum
patronodignostatuerunt.
Tothehonorof AmmiusManiusCaesoniusNicomachusAniciusPaulinus,senator,consulelect,
prefectof the city,memberof the boardfor judgingsacrifices,proconsulof the provinceof
Asiaandthe Hellespontin the post of judgingrituals,legateto Carthageunderthe proconsul
of Africa,AniciusJulianus,his father:thanksto his providence,eagernessto makehimself
useful,uprightoutlookon behalfof the State,andhis incrediblythoroughattentionto detail,
he hasrestoredandadornedthe insulaeof the Guildof Tannersto theiroriginalpristinestate,
accordingto the regulationsof the previousemperorsValens,SeptimiusSeverus,andMarcus
AureliusAntoninus,allAugust.The Guildof Tanners,in adulatorymemoryandin allproper
justice,hasput up thisstatueto theirworthypatron.
Passage 15 is especially difficult to intepret. The insulae mentioned might have been a rentalprop-
erty owned by the guild as a revenue-producingproperty,since guilds could realizelarge property
holdings in movables, buildings, and land.57Guilds could own property on the analogyof property
received through a dowry (fundi dotales), as noted in the Theodosian Code (14.3.7 and 14.3.13).
This is possible, but the tenor of the passage suggests personal interest in the structureon the part
of guild members beyond simple real estate revenue.
Perhaps the insula was a house used by the guild. It is probably not the guild house, however,
because there is no evidence that insula could have that meaning, unless this were to be taken as the
sole example of such a usage. The usual term for guild house was schola.58The term could referto a
property owned by the guild and used by them in some other capacity.It is possible that these are
apartmenthouses in a separatebuilding (sense 2), owned and used by the guild members either as
places of work or habitation, or as a revenue-producingproperty,or both (the purposes need not
be mutually exclusive). Nothing in the passage compels one interpretationas opposed to another.
Perhaps the answer lies in the familiarpattern of craftsmenwho ply the same craft living in
the same district or street.59Probably,the insula referred to is simply the line of shops in a block
that are all tanners' shops (tabernae).This is the interpretationof several commentators.60It is no
stretch of the imaginationto suggest furtherthat the tabernaehad connected mezzanineapartments
(c[olenacula) and that each insula denoted (it is plural in the passage) refers to that combination,
thus indicating sense 3, independent units within the structuralfabric of the street block.
Would it not also be possible, however,to suggest that this example refers to the street blocks
56Date according to Waltzing 1979, 1:191, 438 n. 4 and 58 Waltzing 1979, 1:471-473.
2:112, 377.
59 Paoli 1963, 33-34.
57Waltzing 1979, 1:430, 456-463. See also De Robertis
1973, 2:14, 169. Waltzing 1979, 1:191, 438, 463, 2:112, 377; Dureau de la
60
Malle 1971, 1:394; and De Robertis 1973, 2:14.
66 GLENN R. STOREY
Fig. 7. AutoCAD drawingof Fragment543 of Forma Urbis

Romaewitharrowsshowingarcadesorporticoesinfrontof A or
the structuralfabricof city blocks.
...........
themselvesratherthanjust units within them?There might have been severalstreetblocks of tanners'

facilities, all repairedby the generosityof this man Anicius Paulinus, who probably carriedout this
benefaction as part of his duties while prefect of the city (praefectusurbi). The configurationmight
best be understood as a single line of shops in a row house, as seen on fragments of the FUR (fig.
7). The narrowness and spareness of configurationseems common on the FUR, in the need to fit
buildings into the complex undulatingtopographyof the city of Rome. However, the interpretation
of the referentas the entire "tanners'district" or "all the city blocks where tannersreside and work"
does not seem out of the question. Something of what is going on may be akin to this epigraphic
example from Brixia:
16 CIL5.4488 (Brixia, date unknown):
Qui legaveruntcoil fabrise centHS N II et oc ampliu taberas cum cenac coil centonariorum
quaesuntmnvico Herc ...
Someonewilledto thecollegeof buildersandfirefighters in coin,andin addition

2,000 sesterces
thetabernae(shopfronts)
withcfo]enacula (mezzanineapartments) forthecollegeof firefighters
who arein HercE[ules]
Street.. .
In passages 15 and 16 we might detect the implications of smaller and smallerunits being used as
contrasts for the basic units of discourse. Passage 16 does not mention insula at all, but the tab-
erna/cfo]enaculumpairing is the focus of the discourse. We will see a similar disappearanceof the
term insula in passage 27.
The late date of passage 15 shows that there appeared to be some confusion surroundingthe
term insula, which came to a head in the near contemporaryusage of the term in the Regionary
Catalogues.The next passage, which could well be contemporarywith the Regionaryinformation,
might throw some light on how the term was evolving into the fourth century and later.
THE MEANINGOF INSULAIN ROMANRESIDENTIAL
TERMINOLOGY 67
17 Ammianus Marcellinus29.6.18 (events of A.D. 367):
Et stagnantibus
civitatisresiduismembris,quaetendunturin planitiemmolliorem,montessoli
et quiquidinsularumcelsiuseminebat,a praesentimetudefendebatur.
Thosepartsof the citythatextendeddowninto virtuallylevelterrainwerein standingwater.

Onlythehilltopsandsomepartsof the insulae,
higherthanthe rest,stoodout abovethewater
andwerefreefromthe dangerof the moment.
This passage from Ammianus Marcellinusdescribes the effects of a notable flood of the Tiber that
inundated the low-lying parts of the city. It can similarlybe interpretedto suggest a configuration
compatible with eminences arisingout of a city block, not just separateapartmenthouses. Nothing
compels us to visualize the described features as tall apartmenthouses of uniform size and profile,
with numerousfloors, as in the Ostia types. The featuresdescribed could have been individualunits
in towerlike configurationsthat projected out of the basicallytwo- to four-floormass of the street
block, in conformitywith the view that a Roman city presented an irregularskyline of buildings of
highly varied heights and upper-floorconfigurations.6" So all three basic senses of the term might be
the referentfor this passage, although sense 1, I would argue, seems the most naturalcandidate.
8. Insula Contrastedwith Domus
Passages that contrast insula and domus are perhaps the most common of all the passages that jux-
tapose insula with another structuralterm. This juxtapositionappearsas a reasonablecase of sense
2 because the term insula is contrastedwith another residentialunit, the domus,which, as we have
seen, is usually a separate structure,although not alwaysin Vitruvius.So it would be reasonableto
maintain that an insula is a separate building because we have here a straightforwardcontrasting
of two types of residences that are naturallycontrastingprecisely because they are both examples
of separate buildings. However, alternativeinterpretations are possible. The term insula occurs
frequentlyin passages discussing the danger of frequent fires in the city of Rome, which harksback
to the concerns that were identified with the considerationof passage5, leading us to conclude that
the separation of buildings as a firebreakto discourage the rapid spread of fire was an important
concern in Roman town planning. It is in this group of citations that the ambiguityof referent,in
the use of a pairing that seems so naturallyto mean a separatebuilding, sense 2, reallystands out.
The result is that it is possible to understand virtuallyevery juxtaposition of domus and insula as
equally compatible with the meaning of an entire street block.
18 Tacitus,Annals 6.45 (events of A.D. 36):
Idemannusgraviigneurbemadfecit,deustapartecirci,quaeAventinocontigua,ipsoqueAven-
tino, quod damnumCaesarad gloriamvertitexsolutisdomuumet insularumpretiis.Miliens
sestertiumin munificentia
ea conlocatum.
Thatveryyeara majorconflagration
ravagedthecity,destroyingthatpartof theCircusMaximus
areanextto theAventineHill,andtheAventineitself.Caesar[Tiberius]turnedthiscatastrophe
61
See Storey 2003 for an elaboration of this view.
68 GLENNR. STOREY
to hisownbenefitwhenhe undertookto payforthedomusandinsulaedestroyed.Onehundred

millionsesterceswereinvestedin thisactof munificence.
19 Seneca, De Beneficiis6.15.7 (A.D. 50s-60s):
Quantumnobis praestatqui labentemdomumsuscipit,et agentemex imo ruinasinsulam

incredibiliartesuspendit!
How muchthe mangivesto us who repairsa totteringdomusand,withincredibleskill,shores

up an insulawithcracksrunningfromtop to bottom!
20 Suetonius, Nero 38.4 (events of A.D. 64):
veterumaedificiorum
Namquasioffensusdeformitate et angustiisflexurisque
vicorum,incendit
urbem.... praeterimmensumnumeruminsularumdomuspriscorumducumarserunt.
As thoughoffendedby the deformityof the old structuresandthe narrowtwistingstreets,he

[Nero]burnedthe city.... In additionto animmensenumberof insulae,domusof theleading
citizensof old burned.
Domuumet insularumet templorum,quae amissasunt, numeruminire haud promptum

fuerit.
It wouldnot be easyto estimatethe numberof domus,insulae,andtemplesthatwerelost.
22 Suetonius, Nero 16.1 (events of A.D. 64):
Formamaedificiorum urbisnovamexcogitavitet ut anteinsulasac domosporticusessent,de

quarumsolariisincendiaarcerentur;
easquesumptusuo exstruxlt.
He deviseda newplanforthe buildingsin the city,andhe hadporticoesplacedalongthefront

of the insulaeand domusin orderthatfirescouldbe foughtfromthe balconies.He paidfor
themout of his ownfunds.
In all these passages, in which domus and insula so easily seem to differentiateseparatebuildings,
it is possible to interpretthe configurationsas separatecity blocks. In 19, the tottering domuslooks
run down, as does the insula, the description of which could be construed as "the insula owner [of
the entire block] repairsall the cracks in the structuralfabric of the [city] block."
Passages21 and 22 are especiallysignificantin that the contrastbetween the two terms suggests
a scale commensuratewith entities the size of a city block. In 21, there is actuallythe juxtaposingof
three terms, domus, insula, and templum.Temples so frequently constitute their own blocks in the
cityscapes of Rome, Pompeii, and Ostia that it seems naturalto suggest these referents are all the
equivalentof a city block.62In 22, we have the informationfrom Tacitusthat the domusand insulae
were given the added configurationof porticoes to run along their street fronts as a fire-fighting
62Reynolds 1996, figs. 2.48 and 2.49 present examples from

the FUR of temples constituting their own block.
TERMINOLOGY 69
device.This featureis describedmorefullyin passage35, but examplescan be found on figure

7,63There is good reason to assume that entire city blocks received coverage from these porticoes.
That would certainlyhave been a simplerway administrativelyto organize the constructionof such
ubiquitous features,ratherthan building by building. That this passageexplicitly adds the domusas
an entity protected by the porticoes certainlystrengthensthe previous conclusion that the porticoes
shown on figure 7 did indeed run along the street front of entire city blocks.
23 Aulus Gellius, NoctesAtticae 15.1.2-3 (A.D. 178-192):
Nos ergofamiliareseiuscircumfusiundiqueeumprosequebamurdomum,cumindesubeuntes
montemCispiumconspicimusinsulamquandamoccupatamigni multisarduisquetabulatis
editamet propinquaiamomniaflagrarevastoincendio.Tumquispiamibi ex comitibusIuliani
"Magni,"inquit,"reditusurbanorumpraediorum,sed periculasuntlonge maxima.Si quid
autempossetremediifore,ut ne tamadsiduedomusRomaearderent,venumherclededissem
resrusticaset urbicasemissem."
We, his friends,surrounding

him [the second-century
A.D. rhetoricianAntoniusJulianus]on
allsides,wereaccompanying himhomewhen,whileascendingthe CispianHill,we saw,from
wherewe were,a certaininsulawithmanyhighfloorsattackedby fire.Everythingnearbywas
alreadyburningin a greatconflagration.
Somefriendof Julianusthen said,"Theprofitsfrom
urbanpropertiesareworthmuch,but they arefar exceededby the dangers.But if someone
coulddevelopa remedyso thatdomusatRomewouldnotburnso assiduously, then,byheaven,
I wouldput up mycountrypropertiesfor saleandbuyin the city."
Passage 23 at first might be thought clearlyto involve only one single structure,sense 2. However,
it is possible to argue that the item on fire could well have been a single street block, built up with
a number of tallerthan usual structures,and that the fire had spreadfrom the single block in which
it started to the neighboring blocks (propinqua.. . omnia). This interpretationmay be supported
by the comment of Julianus'sfriend, who states that a remedy is needed because houses at Rome
burn so frequently.The term he uses for houses is domus.Did he mean domusas the abstractrefer-
ent of a person's home or residence, or did he mean simply a house as a building? No doubt, the
term seems to be used here in its basic sense of abode, but the looseness of the language employed
mitigatesanynecessitythat the referentof the term insulamust be a single building. Is there a domus
within the block (insula),and is it too burning,for example? It is reasonableto ask whethermodern
scholars misleadingly attribute to these residential terms a precision-i.e., this is a single type of
building-that the terms did not possess. Less precision, ratherthan greater,should be expected
because the ancient Romanswere speaking a common, fluid, living language.64
24 ScriptoresHistoriae Augustae,Antoninus Pius 9.1 (an incident of about the mid-second century
A.D.):
et Romaeincendium,quodtrecentasquadraginta
insulasvel domosabsumpsit.
63Figure 7 is from Fragment543 of FUR, which shows two the shownporticoesdid indeedcontinuebetweenseparate
examples of the portico indicator on the FUR; cf. Reynolds structures.The ubiquityof porticoeson the FURsuggests
1996, 355, fig. 3.4. Such arcades are particularlycommon thatNero'sregulationstookhold andweremaintainedfor
in front of shops. In the figure they appear to be running severalcenturies.
along the front of discrete structuralunits within the block.
Because the examples are fragmentary,we do not see the '-
The point is stressed in a number of papers in Laurence
continuation, but it is certainlyreasonableto conclude that andWallace-Hadrill
1997,aswellas by Allison1994.
70 GLENN R. STOREY
And at Rometherewas a fire,whichdestroyed340 insulaeor domus.
The ambiguity of insula is well illustratedby this passage. Here 340 domus and insulae allegedly
burned down in one city fire serious enough to be recorded. What level of destruction does that
statisticimply? To assess the severityof this report, it is necessaryto determinewhat percentageof
the structuresin Rome the figure340 represents,assumingthat the termshere referto separatestruc-
tures. How many buildings were in Rome? A common statisticfor that total has been derived from
the RegionaryCatalogues,which report 1,790 domusand 46,602 insulaein fourth-centuryA.D. Rome,
for a total of 48,392 residentialbuildings (not including public buildings).65Assuming that Rome
of the mid-second centuryhad the same number of such structuresreported by the fourth-century
Regionaries(48,392), then the 340 destroyed buildings amounted to only 0.7 percent of the total
numberof domusand insulae.That does not seem a greatproportionof destruction,given how much
of the city was wasted by a conflagrationsuch as that of A.D. 64. However, one could arguethat it is
unrealisticto assumethat the numberof buildingsin the second centurycould have been the same as
in the fourth. There may well have been fewer buildings in the time of Antoninus Pius, and thus the
percentage of destructionwould have been greater.But even if Rome had had on the order of only
10,000 buildings, the 340 still amounts to only 3.4 percent.66Although these percentagesmight be
small in proportionalterms, the effect of such destructionon the ground, especiallyif localized and
confined to certainsections of the city,might well appearvery serious.However,if the term insulain
this passagewere referringto an entire city block, the 340 figurewould have a much greaterimpact,
reporting devastationon a scale commensuratewith the severityof the report. But in the end the
referentsdo remainambiguous,as in the next series of passagestaken from legal sources:
25 Papinianus,Digest 32.91.6 (A.D. 198-204):
Appellationedomusinsulamquoqueiniunctamdomuivideri,si uno pretiocumdomufuisset

comparataet utriusquepensionessimiliteracceptolatasrationibusostenderetur.
Aninsulato be includedinthedomusis consideredto be a domusif it hasbeenpurchased

withthe
domusfor one priceandif the purchaseis enteredin the accountswiththe rentsfromboth.
26 Ulpian, Digest 39.2.15.14:
si insulaadiacensdomuivitiumfaciat...
if an insulanextto a domusbearssomedefect...
These passages juxtapose domus and insula in a fashion that conforms to an interpretationof an
insula as a feature very similarin size and configurationto a taberna(shopfront) or cLolenaculum
(upper-floorapartment)and consisting of a single unit, sense 3. That is supported especiallyby 25,
65 See n. 43. well not have been as large as it was in the second century;
cf. Robinson 1992, 9: "It is agreed by all that Rome shrank
661I am gratefulto R. E. A. Palmer for pointing out long ago
considerablyin the third century."In Storey2002, 429-430
in a personalcommunication(1990) the probabledifferences I dispute the interpretation of the Regionary statistics as
in number of buildings between second- and fourth-century referringto separate buildings and argue that a far smaller
A.D. Rome. However, there is a general consensus that Rome total of buildings for ancient Rome, 10,000 to 15,000, seems
was declining in size and that fourth-century Rome may much more realistic.
TERMINOLOGY 71
which suggests that the insula could (at the beginning of the third centuryA.D.) be subsumed under
the domus, so it is likely that the insula is a unit that is smaller than a domus (an apartmentin the
domus) and no longer is a contrastbetween two building or city-block size entities, as is being sug-
gested for passagesin this section. Although this usage may have appearedearlyin the common era
(see 32), it probably became more normal in the third and fourth centuries A.D. for the term insula
to have the meaning of shopfront and upper apartmenttogether, perhaps due to the then current
limitation of tabernato a specialized kind of restaurant/barestablishment.
According to Kleberg, the term tabernaevolved from the basic meaning of shopfront to the
more confined meaning of shopfront specializingin prepareddrink and the vending of food.67Us-
ing a passage of Nonius, Kleberg narrowed down the time of the transformationto the beginning
of the fourth centuryA.D.68So tabernahad ceased to mean what it had meant in the time of Tacitus,
for example, who reported that the Great Fire of A.D. 64 had started in the tabernaeencircling the
Circus Maximus, surely meaning all the shopfronts located there. This change in the referent for
the term tabernamay have paralleledsimilarchanges for insula as well. Thus insula had come to be
confined to an independent single owner/family unit of shop and/or mezzanine apartment.That
would take us some way, at least in the realm of philology, toward solving the difficulty with the
insulae statisticsin the Regionaries(see below).
Of course, this suggestion is not new. We have here some possible philological observations
that support the long-standing view that insulae must refer to units within what we would call an
apartment house. Cuq put forth this view best with an extensive review of the textual sources,
concluding that an insula was an ensemble of rooms that made up a distinct apartment,physically
blocked off within a larger structure and forming an isolated unit-an "island"according to the
basic meaning of the word. Cuq furthersuggested that insula had taken on this specializedmeaning
mostly in an official administrativecontext, whereas the meaning of insula as a separateapartment
house (possibly meaning a city block, as argued here) might have remained current in everyday
discourse.69This degree of elaboration may be unnecessary.It might simply be the case that the
term insula originallycovered the basic meaning of city block (sense 1), or some of the units within
that block (sense 3), configurationssuch as a row of shops with mezzanine apartments,or even one
such unit alone. It might also have referredto buildings the size of apartmenthouses (sense 2) but
chiefly as an expression of sense 3 only on a larger scale-one whole building.
What then did insula mean in the fourth centuryA.D.? The question is relevantbecause of the
controversyover the referentof the term as it is used in the Regionaries.70 The Regionariesseem to
use a straightforwardjuxtaposition of domus and insulae to reach a residentialstructurecount for
Rome. The problem is that the insulae statistic, 46,602, does not make sense if it is assumed that
the term refersto separatebuildings. That idea becomes completely untenableif domusand insulae
figures, understood as separatebuildings, are applied for individual regions of the ancient city.For
example, according to the Regionaries,Region 8, the Forum region, contained 3,480 insulae. If
67 See p. 51 and n. 20 above. of bureaucraticlanguage. It is belied by Coarelli's correct

characterizationof the term's "polysemy,"which was noted
68 Kleberg1957,21. at the outset.
69
Cuq 1916. His most ardent opponent on this interpreta- 70 The full discussion, including review of the archaeological
tion was Calza 1917, who steadfastlymaintainedthat insulae ramificationsregardingthis interpretationof the term insula,
were separate apartmentbuildings and who further argued is set out in Storey 2001 and 2002. There is no need to re-
that administrative language was of maximum precision hearse those arguments,but the few relevant documentary
and thus not liable to Cuq's dichotomy. No doubt many ad- sources reviewed here complement the archaeologicalargu-
ministratorswould like to believe this myth of the precision ments presented in those two publications.
72 GLENNR. STOREY
every square meter of that region's26 hectareswas occupied by an insula understood as a separate
building, each insula would have been only 75 meters square-an implausiblysmall size. And that
would have left no room for the 130 domus and one of the largest public areas (all of the Roman
Fora) in the known ancient world. If the same calculationis carriedout for Region 11, the region of
the Circus Maximus, each of the 2,600 purported insulaewould have been only 19 square meters,
a clear impossibility.71And by the fifth century A.D., the term insula is dropped completely in an
official juridicalnumerationof architecturaltypes.
27 Codex Theodosianus 11.20.3 (October 5, A.D. 400 or 405):
Peromnesautemcivitatesmunicipiavicoscastellaex horreisbalneisergasteriis
tabernisdomibus
cenaculissalinisetiamomnibuspraetermancipum. . .
Throughall commonwealths,municipalities,
villages,andfortresses:warehouses,bathestab-
lishments,workshops,tabernae,domus,cenacula,salt cellars,and all additionalpropertyof
tenants...
Although domus is mentioned and contrasted with tabernaeand c[olenacula,there is no mention

of insulae. Given the frequency of juxtapositions of domus and insulae in the passages above, this
seems odd. Why, in the later source, has the term insula dropped out? The answer to this may be
that the units mentioned could be subsumed under the term insula and, inasmuch as they were
alreadyenumerated,there was no need to use the term itself. Alternatively,had the insula referent
as city block versus the referentas small unit within the block become so confusing that the offend-
ing term had come to be dispensed with? As Lo Cascio argued,72insula in the Regionariesseems to
work as an enumeratoror catch-allterm: as if to carrythe meaning of "so many small buildings of
such and such a type, name, and function, that is. . ." [and the "thatis" equals insula].
Lo Cascio'spoint is a good one in conveying that insula, from the beginning of the chronology
partly documented here, was an inclusive term-meaning a variety of multiple-residence archi-
tectural configurations that chiefly bear the implication of being closed off as a piece of private
property, either physically by streets or alleys or conceptually and legally.Domus, in opposition,
was an exclusiveterm, generallydenoting a separatebuilding as an architecturalterm. Insula could
mean both city block and small unit within the block from the beginning of its frequent usage as an
architectural/residentialterm, althoughthe lattervariantwas not fully exploited until the third and
fourth centuries A.D. and the usage in that sense (3) did not come into its (ratherconfusing) own
until its appearancein the RegionaryCatalogues,where it has caused immense confusion (catch-all
building, small unit such as an apartment,but almost certainlynot city block). So confusing had it
become that in a subsequent legal collection (the Theodosian Code) it was abandoned altogether.
9. Insula Contrastedwith StructuralTermsOther than Domus
A whole host of passagessuggestsense 2, insulaas a separateapartmenthouse building,and although

scholarshave not explicitly identified them as such, there is certainlyan auraof interpretationthat
71See Homo 1951, 632-643 and Lot 1945, 29-38. A full 72 Lo Cascio 1997, 58-63.
discussion of these issues with new analysisis presented in
Storey 2002.
TERMINOLOGY 73
assigns them this sense.73Close inspection of these passages also reveals the crucial ambiguityin
referent that underlies them all.
28 Cicero, De Officiis3.66 (events of 98-92 B.C.):
Ut, cumin arceauguriumauguresacturiessentiussissentqueTi. ClaudiumCentumalum, qui

aedesin Caeliomontehabebat,demoliriea, quorumaltitudoofficeretauspiciis,Claudiuspro-
scripsitinsulam,emitP. Calpurnius
Lanarius.
So,whenthe augurswereaboutto carryout anauguryon theCapitolandhadorderedTiberius

ClaudiusCentumalus,who ownedbuildingson the CaelianHill, to demolishsaidbuildings
becausetheirheightblockedthe viewfor the augury,Claudiusput up the insulafor sale,and
PubliusCalpurniusLanariusboughtit.
29 Cicero, ProCaelio17 (ca. 56 B.C.):
Nunc demumintellegoP. Clodiinsulamessevenalem,cuiushis in aediculishabitat[Caelius]

decem,ut opinor,milibus.
Now finallyI understandthatthe insula of PubliusClodiusis for sale,whereCaeliuslivesin a

smallhousefor,I believe,10,000sestercesperyear.
Passages28 and 29 do not unequivocallydescribeinsulaas a single structure.In passage29, the term

for "structure"is in the plural (aediculis)and is a diminutive appropriateto the description of one
unit within a multi-unit entity.Passage 28 also uses a plural term to describe the structures(aedes).
Both could be describingan entire city block, if, as the Pompeian evidence suggests,separateblocks
could have been owned by individualswho let out parts of them as rental properties.
Bon(ae)Deae restitui[restitutrice?]
simulacr(um)
intui [in tutelam]insul(ae)Bolan(i)posuit,
itemaed(em)deditCladusl[ibens]m[erito].
He placedthe imageof the Good Goddessthe Restorerfor the protectionof the insulaof
Bolanus.Cladus,willinglyregardingit a worthydeed,gavethe shrineas a gift. (Adoptingthe
alternative by the editorsof CIL)
reconstructions
31 Alfenus, Digest19.2.30.pr (latterhalf of first century B.C.):
Qui insulamtrigintaconduxerat,singulacaenaculaita conduxit,ut quadraginta ex omnibus

colligerentur: dominusinsulae,quiaaedificiavitiumfacerediceret,demolierateam:quaesitum
est, quantilis aestimarideberet,si is quitotamconduxeratex conductoageret.
Someonehiredan insula for30,000sesterces.He thenhiredout individualapartments so as to

collect40,000sestercesfromallthe tenants.Theownerof the insulademolishedit, becausehe
73 Two publications stand out as fostering this aura, both of still (rightly) cited frequently among Roman scholars is
which are still cited, one frequentlyin generalizingliterature Packer 1971.
on Roman urbanism:Carcopino 1940; still well known and
74 GLENNR. STOREY
saida flawaffectedthe structures.A questionof law arose:for how muchis the action,if the
one who hiredthe wholethingsuedunderthe contractof hire?
The abovepassagesseemconsistentwiththe interpretation of insulaas an apartmenthouse(sense

2) becausethey directlyand explicitlycorrelateinsulawith othertermsfor buildings(aedesor
aedis,aedificium,aediculum).Passage28 describesthe insulain questionas madeup of several
aedes(it is clearlyplural)whosegreatheightblockedthe viewfor takingthe auspices.Thissingle
passageservesas as good an exampleas anyotherfor illustratingmyargument.Nothingcompels
us to understandthe configurationdescribedas equivalentto a modernapartmentblock, one
singlebuilding,as opposed to one city block with a profileincludingelementshigh enoughto
causecomment.
Furthermore,understandingthe referentin 31 as a cityblockis arguablymoresensiblethan
interpretingit as a single apartmenthouse building.If it were just an apartmenthouse, there
would be no reasonto thinkthat it would be hiredout in anythingotherthanindividualapart-
ments.Highlightinga differencein the cost betweenthe wholeentityandits individualrentable
units suggeststhat it startedout as a city block, and then the unitswere rentedout piecemeal.
That interpretationis strengthenedby the pluralaedificia,"structures": i.e., it was not just the
one structurefor the one building,the apartmenthouse, but manydifferentstructuresin the
fabricof the cityblock.
10. Insula,Horrea,andFires
Passages32-34 contrastinsulaandhorrea.As with templumin passage21, the implicationis that

relativelylargestructuralconfigurations arecontrasted,andthatentitiesthatcouldbe the size of
cityblocksarethe itemscontrasted.If thatinterpretation is not exactlymandatedby thisrecitalof
passages,it is at leastas compatiblewiththe evidence.
32 Proculus,Digest8.2.13.pr.(firsthalfof the firstcenturyA.D.):
Quidam Hiberusnomine,quihabetposthorreameainsulam,balnearia
fecitsecundum pari-
etemcommunem: nonlicetautemtubuloshabereadmotos
adparietem communem, sicutine
parietem
quidemsuumperparietem communem: detubuliseo amplius
hociurisest,quodper
eosflammatorretur
paries.
A certainman,Hiberusby name,whoownsaninsulaat thebackof mywarehouse, builta

privatebathhouse
nextto ourpartywall.However, it is notpermitted
to haveheatingpipes
positioned apartywalljustasit isnotpermitted
against tobuildyourownwallagainsta party
wall.Withregardto heatingpipes,thelawis evenmorein forcebecausethewallmightbe
scorchedbytheflames.
A difficultywiththis passageis its date,firsthalfof the firstcenturyA.D., becauseit readsmorein

line withjuristicuses of insulain the thirdandfourthcenturiesA.D. andthe Regionaries. The pas-
sagementionsan insulaand a partywall.It is unlikelythatthe passagerefersto a warehousethe
size of a cityblocknext to anothercityblock.It suggeststhatthe interpretation of the insulaas a
smallunitwithinthe structuralfabricof a cityblockis not necessarilya latedevelopmentat alland
that the two ways of understandinginsula, as the entire city block or as a small private property
unit within the block, are both currentfrom the beginning of the usage of the term in a residential
TERMINOLOGY 75
contextaroundthe turnof the commonera.But again,nothingin anyof thesepassagesrequires

thatthe insulanext to a horreumnecessarilybe a separatebuilding.
33 JuliusPaulus,Digest1.15.3.2(firstquarterof the thirdcenturyA.D.):
Effracturae
fiuntplerumque
in insulisin horreisque,
ubihominespretiosissimam
partemfor-
tunarumsuarum cumvelceliaeffringitur
reponunt, velarmarium
velarca.
Burglariesoccurmostlyin theinsulaeandwarehouses,wherepeoplestorethemostprecious
portionof theirpossessions,
whetherin a storageroom,cupboard,
orchest.
34Orosius,HistoriesagainstthePagans7.7.5 (fourth-century
A.D.reportdescribingthe GreatFire
of Rome in A.D. 64):
horreaquadrostructalapide,magnaeque
illaeveterum
insulaequasdiscurrens
adireflamma
nonpoterat...
Thewarehouses
builtwithdressed
stoneandthosegreatinsulae
ofoldwhichthespreading
fire
hadnotbeenableto reach...
Ceterum urbisquaedomuisupererant
non,utpostGallica
incendia,nulladistinctione
necpassim
erecta,seddimensisvicorumordinibus
etlatisviarum
spatiiscohibitaque
aedificiorum
altitudine
acpatefactis
areisadditisque
porticibus,
quaefronteminsularum protegerent.
EasporticusNero
suapecuniaextructurum purgatasque areasdoministraditurum pollicitusest.... aedificiaque
ipsa
certasuipartesinetrabibussaxoGabinoAlbanovesoliderentur, quodis lapisignibusimpervius
est;iam aquaprivatorum licentiainterceptaquo largioret pluribuslocis in publicumflueret,
custodesadessent;
et subsidiareprimendisignibusinpropatuloquisquehaberet; neccommunione
parietum,sedpropiisquaequemurisambirentur. Eaex utilitateacceptadecoremquoquenovae
urbiattulere.Eranttamenqui crederent,veteramillamformamsalubritati magisconduxisse,
quoniamangustiaeitinerumet altitudotectorumnon perindesolisvaporeperrumperentur: at
nuncpatulamlatitudinemet nullaumbradefensamgravioreaestuardescere.
Therestof the citythatsurvivedthe fire,nearthepalace,wasrebuiltnotwithoutregardto con-

siderationsof spaceandrandomly(asafterthe burningof the cityby the Gaulsin [387B.C.]),
but in a calculatedarrangement of neighborhoods andwithwidespacesfor streets.He [Nero]
limitedthe heightsof buildingsandmandatedthatspacebe left open andporticoesbe added
to the frontof the insulaeforprotection.Neromadethe commitment of payingforthebuilding
of the porticoesfromhis own fundsandthathe wouldturnoverthe buildingsites,clearedof
rubble,backto the owners.He orderedthatthebuildingsthemselves be constructed,
in specific
sectionsof the structures, withoutwoodenbeams,but solidlyof Gabineor Albantufa,because
thosevarietiesof stonewereimperviousto fire.He establishedguardsoverwater(whichhad
been illegallydivertedto privateuse) to assurethatit be availablein greaterquantitiesand at
moredistribution pointsforpublicuse.Everyonewasto keepimmediatesupplyforfirecontrol
outin theopen.Jointwallsforstructures wereforbidden,andeverybuildingwasto be fullybuilt
on allsideswithits ownwalls.Thesemeasures,acceptedfortheirutility,alsocontributed to the
appearance of thenewcity.However,therewerethosewhobelievedthattheoldlayoutof thecity
wasmoreconduciveto generalhealth,becausethe narrowness of thoroughfaresandthe height
of the roofsdidnot allowtheheatof the middaysunto penetrateallthewayto the ground.Ac-
cording to this view, the wide-open spaces of the new citywere subjectto more oppressiveheat,
undefended by any shadow.
76 GLENN R. STOREY
Passages33-35 returnto the theme of firehazardto the buildingsof Rome. In most of these passages,
the standard interpretationof domus and insula to mean separate buildings is tenable. However,
the referent of insula according to sense 1-city block-is equally tenable.
Passage 35, regardingNero's improvements in architectureafter the Great Fire of A.D. 64, is
an excellent example of the ambiguity of the term insula. Nothing in the passage mandates iden-
tification of the correlate for the term as a street block (sense 1), an apartmenthouse (sense 2), or
isolated units within blocks or apartmenthouses (sense 3). But the extent of Nero's legislation is
emphasized by construing the correlate here as street blocks as a whole rather than single apart-
ment buildings. We have mentioned the porticoes as likely running the length of street blocks, as
suggested in the FUR evidence from Rome (fig. 7), rather than simply along the front of isolated
buildings.74
One last passage is quoted here because, though it can be interpreted as illustratingthat the
term insula refersto separateapartmentbuildings (sense 2), it is equally possible that it is properly
understood as an example of sense 1-a city block. That is especiallytrue because, as with passage
4, it seems a naturalsubdivision immediatelybelow that of vicus, or neighborhood.
36 Suetonius, Iulius Caesar41.3 (events of 46 B.C.):
Recensumpopulinec morenec loco solitosed vicatimper dominosinsularumegit.
He carriedout a recensus
of thepeople,not accordingto customarypractice,norin thecustom-
arylocation,but neighborhoodby neighborhood, withthe aidof the insulaeowners.
In this passage, we are not given a good idea of what the insula might be as an architecturalentity.
It does, however,suggest a procedure convenientlyutilizing apartmenthouse landlords,as it would
today.However, perhaps the modern procedure is proving a source of confusion. We tend to think
of residentiallandlordsowning separatebuildings ratherthan owning and rentingthe separatesuite
of units strongly implied in some of the Roman documentation we have reviewed here or entire
blocks, which would significantlysimplify a counting procedure with cooperating landlords. We
are simply told that the special recensusprocedure was carriedout by neighborhoods (or possibly
"street-by-street") .75 The reference to owners of insulae suggests a situation similarto that of Pom-
peii, illustrated in passages 6-8 and hinted at for Rome in passage 9, where individual blocks or
suites of units appear to have one owner and are then rented out piecemeal, and the name of the
block or suite is taken from one owner, senses 1 and 3. But in the end, this passage seems especially
ambiguous among all three residentialsenses of insula.
We now turn to perhaps the most important passage on insula from Roman antiquity,which
has fostered the view that insulae were separate apartmentbuildings, the equivalent of squalid,
high-rise tenements in modern cities:
37 Tertullian,Adversus Valentinianos7.1-3 (Severanage, A.D. 193-21 1):
PrimusomniumEnniuspoetaRomanus'caenacula maximacaeli'simpliciter
pronuntiavit,
elati
situsnomine,vel quia Jovemillic epulantemlegeratapudHomerum.Sed haereticiquantas
sublimitates
sublimitatumin habitaculumdeisuicuiusquesuspenderint
extulerintexpanderint,
74 See n. 63. 75The recensusprocedure is fully discussed by Lo Cascio

1997.
THE MEANING OF INSULA IN ROMAN RESIDENTIAL TERMINOLOGY 77
mirumest. EtiamcreatorinostroEnnianacoenaculain aedicularum dispositasintforma.Aliis

atquealiispergulissuperstructis
et unicuiquedeo per totidemscalasdistributisquothaereses
fuerint,meritorium factusestmundus.InsulamFeliculamcredastantatabulatacaelorumnescio
ubi. illicetiamValentinianorumdeusad summastegulashabitat.
Ennius,the firstpoet of all, spokeof "thegreatestapartments of heaven,"by reasonof their

exaltedstate,or ratherbecausehe hadreadin HomerthatJovedinedthere.Butit is amazing
howthe pagans,to whatheightof heights,raised,suspended,andexpandedthepersonallittle
habitationof each and everygod. Certainlythe apartmentsof Enniuswere arrangedin the
formof smallbuildingsby our Creator.Theworldwasmadeas a rentalpropertywith spaces
distributedin someplacesin shops,in othersbuiltup one uponthe other,as manyheresiesas
thereare,throughso manyfloors,by the one God.Youwouldthinkthe manyfloorsof heaven
constituteda kindof Insulaof Felicles.I do not knowwhereverin thatplaceyouwouldfindthe
god of the Valentinianheretics.Theydwellat the highestpartof the roofon the tiles.
This passage ranks as the locus classicusfor insula understood as sense 2. But what does it tell us?
Nothing more than that the feature possessed many floors (tantatabulata).One view is that Tertul-
lian's "Insulaof Felicles" was exceptional and that it was a kind of "skyscraper."76 The designation
might be appropriate,but only in the context of what would perceptually count as a particularly
high structurein the eyes of the ancient Romans, which might not be very high to moderns.
The context of Tertullian'scomments has not properlybeen a focus of discussion.77The many
followersof Valentinusalmostcertainlyhad variousbeliefs, but in accordancewith their generalneo-
Platonist outlook, they would have accepted Valentinus'sfavored belief in an octad of eight major
deities (and thus levels of heaven), made of two tetrads, an upper (Bythos,Sige, Nous, Alethela) and
a lower (Logos,Zoe,Anthropos,Ekklesia).A Demiurge,in imitationof the eight levels, organizedthe
materialworld into seven heavens and presided over all in an eighth heaven. The number of levels
referredto by Tertullianwas almost surelyno more than eight. An eight-floor structurecould have
been the monstrosity implied by reaction to the Insula of Felicles-it is singled out in the fourth-
centuryA.D. Regionaries,two centuries after Tertullianintroduced it. But this structurecould have
been the one and only record holder at that height.
The problem has been that this exceptional structurehas been taken as more typical than can
be known for certain. Carcopino described it thus: "Even if this particularbuilding remained an
exception, an unusually monstrous specimen, we know from the records that all around it rose
buildings of five and six stories."78The "records"referredto are the mixed bag of written sources,
and many of the passages from that bag have been presented here. Contraryto Carcopino, these
records do not prove that "all around it rose buildings of five and six stories"-that is, there is no
specific reference at all to houses around the Insula Feliculathat were five and six stories tall-and
its precise location has not been securely established. Consequently, Carcopino's assertion that
five- and six-story buildings characterizedancient Rome is misleading.
Not even this famous and oft-cited passage is incompatible with the suggestion that what we
have here is one city block, with a number of separateproperties, characterizedby severaltall pro-
jections rising out of its fabric. It may be that only certain sections of the structure reached high
into the sky in only one or two locations within the fabric of the street block, which may have been
generallytwo to four floors with towerlikeunits projectingupward.Probablythere were only a very
76 Homo 1951, 555; Mazzarino 1951, 232-242. Finamore2000.
77 Dillon 1977, 384-389 sets out the basic beliefs; see also 78 Carcopino 1940,26.
78 GLENNR. STOREY
few individualhabitationunits that may have piled up to an eighth floor.9 Ultimately,this, like every
other passage on insula so far explored, remains ambiguous as to its precise physical referent.
11. Insula as FuneraryStructure
The last group of passages using the term insula has little to do with apartmentrental properties
or city blocks. It is added here to highlight the possible confounding of funeraryinsulae with resi-
dential ones-another case in this litany of ambiguities.The structuresdescribed in these passages
are funerarymonuments, a little "block" of rooms (perhaps intended for personal funeraryrites)
built as part of the funerarycomplex. In this usage, insula works just like taberna (as previously
noted) to describe an eternal abode or tomb. There are also examples in which a cfolenaculumand
even a garden are clearlypart of the funerarycomplex.80The use of insula as a funerarystructure
illustrateshow virtuallyevery Roman term for an abode could be co-opted for use in describing a
funerarymonument, reflectingthe deep-seated Roman belief that the burial plot should serve as a
sufficient home for eternity.8'
D[is] M[anibus]AureliusHermiasAug[usti]Lib[ertus]proc[urator]k[astrensis]heroum
maceria[m]cinctumcum superficioinsulaecomparavitsibi posterisquesuisitemquelibertis
libertab[us].
Sacredto the godsof the shades:AureliusHermias,the imperialfreedman,campcommander,

purchasedthiswallenclosinga gardenwiththe groundof an insula,for himself,his progeny,
andhis freedmenandfreedwomen.
Huicmonimentoiteraditusambitusdebeturex sententiaErotiAug[usti]l[iberti]iudicisa via

Campana publicadextrosusintermaceriem
Calamianamet insulamEucarpianam perlatitudinem
pedesduossemisusqueadhoc monumentum et hincpercircuitumtotiusmonumentiusquein
viaquaeducitin agroitemidemmonumentiiteraditusdebeturhincsecundummonumentum
AfiniaeTycheset inde secundummaceriemEucarpianam in qua ollari[a]sunt et inde recto
usq[ue]ad viampublicamCampanam.
Accessand circuitmustbe maintainedfor this funerarymonument,by the orderof Erosthe

imperialfreedmanactingas judge:thatis, fromthe publicthoroughfare"Campana" on the
right[spacemustbe left] to thewidthof two andone-half[Roman]feetbetweenthe Calamian
enclosureandthe Eucarpianinsula,all the wayup to the monument.Fromthere,the full cir-
cuit aroundthe monumentmustbe maintainedallthe wayto the pathleadinginto the fields.
Again,rightof passagemustbe maintained: fromhereto the monumentof AfiniaTyche;from
thereup to the Eucarpianenclosure,whichcontainsfuneraryurns;andfromtherestraightto
"Campana" street.
7 As hypothesized in Storey 2003. 81

See nn. 22 and 23 above. Gordon 1983, 8-9 discusses
these issues as well as Hope 1997.
80
CIL 10.6069 (Minturnae)and CIL 9.1938 (Beneventum)
are good examples.
TERMINOLOGY 79
The insula mentioned in passage 38 could have been funerary(a burial complex for the members
of the guild [collegium]), either a small shelter in the funeraryenclosure or an actual columbarium
("dovecote," i.e., niches for cineraryurns). Although the language might suggest a funeraryfoun-
dation (tombs are usually "adorned"),no mention of the number of loci (niches, places) or ollae
(urns), as in 39, tends to weaken this alternative.
The EucarpianInsulafeaturedin passage39 has been identified as an example of an apartment
house lying outside the line of the Aurelian Walls.82The language of the passage is quite clear in
identifyingthis feature as part of a funeraryenclosure,inasmuchas the passagespeaks of an insulam
Eucarpianamand a maceriemEucarpianam.It is clear that the two items referredto are part of the
same complex. And the language of this text brings us full circle. We are back to the TwelveTables
and the ambitus of two and one-half Roman feet. That this requirementis noted so assiduously
conveys the sense that the delineatingof an insula seems in many contexts a relativelyformal affair.
It isn't just a building that is the isolated entity; it is something more elemental. Something on the
order of a city block, defined rituallyin the ceremonyof layingout the grid of a full cityscape,seems
to be conceptually and philosophically the right referent to be seeking.
12. Insula:Summary
The passagesusing insula illustratethe difficultyof reconstructingthe characterof Romandomestic

architecture,from both a terminologicaland an archaeologicalperspective.The term could be used
in different ways in different periods and contexts. Regardingthe term insula, modern visitors to
Pompeii and Ostia learn that the ruins have addresses expressed in terms of regions, blocks, and
doorways (Pompeii and Herculaneum) or structures (Ostia). Although this convention is entirely
modern, Roman insulae as "blocks"are directly analogous to a modern urbanite'snotion of a city
block. I hope to have demonstrated that such a meaning seems much more prevalent in passages
using the term in antiquitythan has perhaps hitherto been appreciated.
This basic meaning of insula as city block may have been the original meaning that was later
expanded. The grammarians(Isidorus and Paulus in Festus) reported the meaning of insula in its
manifestationin the structuralfabric within the street blocks as a structurelacking partywalls and
with paths on all four sides (ambitus). The preferredsize of this passage was two and one-half Ro-
man feet (passages 4 and 39). That figure goes back as far as the early Latin legal tradition of the
TwelveTables83and showed a remarkableresilience;as suggested in more than one location above,
the reason for that persistence may have been the fire-control aspects of leaving space between
buildings.
Many of the sources quoted show that the characterof urban layout in Rome could be quite
varied. The kinds of structuresdiscussed in the sources were packed close together and were often
built as one complex or were added onto an existing complex over time. Gardens, houses, store-
rooms, and apartmentswere located in close proximity within the ancient city. Rome was not an
unbrokenmass of dwellings, althoughclearlymore thicklybuilt up than the countryside-hence the
Roman legal term for the true definition of the city, the continentia,the extent of rooftops packed
closely together into an unbroken mass without majorinterruptions.84
82
Palmer 1981, 381 n. 101. 84 The following sources discuss the continentia:Pomponius,
Dig. 50.16.239.6-8 (first half of second century A.D.); Fest.

83
See n. 42 above. 371M; Gonzalez 1986, section 62; Lex MunicipiiMalacitani
80 GLENNR. STOREY
It wascommonfora buildingfabricto containa mixtureof domesticor commercial

functional
elements. A privatehouse (domus),shops (tabernae),or workshops could be conjoined in the same
overall structure. Residential apartments (c[olenacula) on the upper floors were common by the
first centuryB.C. The owner of the ground-floordwellingmight or might not own the upstairsapart-
ments, and it was also quite normal for upper apartmentsto have stairs opening directly onto the
street. The sources suggest a complex situation.Conjoinedstructureswith differentfunctions could
sometimes be treated as separateunits or as one unit, both physicallyand in legal terms.
Given that situation, the terminology,whether everydayor legal, might serve as a ratherpoor
guide to the characterof habitation, although I would argue that it is possible to identify in the
archaeologicalrecord good candidates for correlatesof most of the terms that we have. Some of
that work has been attempted elsewhere, and it is of course the case that a one-to-one identifica-
tion of terms and units is not as straightforwardas has been suggested in the past.85However, a
range of features in the archaeologicalrecord and the range of terminologicalpossibilities can and
must be explored. Domus have adjacent insulae that are not clearly manifest as separate entities
and, most importantly,do not fit the strict definition of an insula in that they are not separateand
isolated "island"structures,with a definite open space between them. Insistence on this criterion
as a definition leads to immediate problems in any event because the archaeologicalexamples that
have been called insulae as separate apartmentbuildings (in Ostia especially) do not obey this re-
quirement. The insula of Diana in Ostia (Region 1, Block 3, Structure4) shared a party wall with
the insula immediatelyadjacentto the north called the Caseggiatodel Mitreo di LucrezioMenandro
(Region 1, Block 3, Structure5; see fig. 8). That situation is by no means atypical. Consideration
of the occurrences of the terms juxtaposed here leads to the conclusion that the modern use of the
word insula to describe only the tenementlike, multifamily,multidwellinghouses of ancient Rome
(sense 2) is not quite equal to the ancient usage, which seems to indicate two other figurations:the
entire city block itself or smallerunits of private propertywithin the fabric of the city block.
I do not mean to imply that the term could never have meant an apartmenthouse or "blockof
flats"as per sense 2. I simplyassertthatthat definitionwas probablynot the chief one and that sense 1
and sense 3 were the chief referents.Sense 2 mayhave been currentfrom the turn of the common era
on to the fifthcenturyA.D., but only as a speciesof sense3. In anyevent,sense 1, the city-blockreferent,
probablyis sufficientto bear the conceptualweight of most uses of the term found in our surviving
sources, especiallythose associatedwith the exigencies of apartmentliving in ancientRome.
Now it is possible to assert that advocating sense 1, the street block, as the best referent in
most cases will severely tax credibilityin many cases. For example, figure 7, illustratingthe Vicus
Patricius region on Fragment543 of the FUR, shows three very clear,apparentlystandard,atrium-
peristyle domus, and neither individuallynor as a group do they occupy an entire city block, thus
weakening the argumentsmade previously as to the significanceof the domus/insulajuxtaposition
as possibly indicating separate street blocks. Granted; but the painful truth is, as so compellingly
argued recently by Allison,86that no evidence whatsoever indicates that the Romans themselves
(Riccobono 1968) 62; Frontin. Aq. 1.29; Marcellus, Dig. on architectural

andtextualdetailsaloneto determineroom
50.16.87 (second half of second centuryA.D.); JuliusPaulus, functions.Weneedbetterandmoresystematic consideration
Dig. 10.1.4.10, 50.16.2 (first quarter of third century A.D.); of artifactassemblages,
the kindthatarestaplesin the ar-
Macer,Dig. 50.16.154 (firsthalf of third century A.D.); Ulp. chaeologyof otherculturalareas.Herworkalsohighlights
Dtg. 50.16.139 (A.D. 225). howcomplexaretherelationsamongarchitecture, artifacts,
andthetextualdata.
85See n. 6. See also Allison 1997, and now 2001 (and a forth-
coming book) whose work with the artifactassemblages at 86 Allison2001,passim.
Pompeii has directed attentionto the fact that we cannot rely
THEMEANING
OFINSULA
INROMAN
RESIDENTIAL
TERMINOLOGY 81
I - if - Fig. 8. AutoCAD mapo a section o Region 1ofsta

IF J Tf _ I showing how separateapartmentbuildingssharedparty
walls. The arrowsmarkthe northernwall of the Casa
B l di Diana, which then sharesa wall with a shopfront
-4 F- A . that is part of the adjacentCaseggiatodel Mitreo di
LucrezioMenandrocomplex. The wall is thus a party
M
h I*?
| I wall between two apartmenthouses.
r-I -
VTd T T-
A = Casa di Diana
B = Caseggiatodel Mitreodi Lucrezio
Menandro
C = Caseggiato dei Molini
referredto those three structuresas domus.If rentalproperties,they may have constituted an insula
(or a praedium)in sense 3, just as a group of such properties appearto have been called an insula in
the Pompeian epigraphicexamples (6-8). Notwithstandingthe quirkinessof the suggested primacy
of sense 1 urged here, it may be so.
In the final analysis,however, it must be conceded and then emphasized, and reemphasized,
that virtuallyall of the passages reviewed here remainprofoundly ambiguous among the three resi-
dential senses of the term insula and thus make it enormously difficult to identify reliablyconcrete
physical referents in the archaeologicalrecord. All that can be asserted here is that sense 1, insula
as street block, may have been the primaryreferent.
82 GLENNR. STOREY
Bibliography
ABBREVIATIONS
CIL CorpusInscriptionumLatinarum,17 vols. (Berlin 1862-).

FUR Forma UrbisRomae (see Carettoniet al. 1960).
LTUR Lexicon TopographicumUrbisRomae, 6 vols., ed. E. M. Steinby (Rome 1993-2000).
OLD OxfordLatin Dictionary,ed. P. W. Glare (New York 1982).
TLL ThesaurusLinguaeLatinae (Leipzig 1900-).
WORKS
CITED
Allison, P., "RoomUse in Pompeian Houses," in PompeiiRevisited:The Life and Death of a Roman Town,ed.
J.-P. Desccedres (Sydney 1994) 82-89.
,"Roman Households: An Archaeological Perspective," in Roman Urbanism:Beyond the Consumer
City, ed. H. M. Parkins (New York 1997) 112-146.
, "Using the Materialand Written Sources:Turn of the Millennium Approaches to Roman Domestic
Space,"AmericanJournalof Archaeology105 (2001) 181-208.
Boersma,J. S., "Large-sizedInsulae in Italy and the Western Roman Provinces,"BulletinAntieke Beschaving
57 (1982) 38-51.
Boethius, A., "The 'Neronian Nova Urbs'," CorollaArchaeologica2 (1932) 84-97.
, "Remarkson the Development of Domestic Architecturein Rome,"AmericanJournalofArchaeology
38 (1934) 158-170.
, "Notes from Ostia," in Studies Presented to David Moore Robinson, ed. G. E. Mylonas (St. Louis
1951) 440-450.
Calza, G., "La preminenza dell' 'Insula' nella edilizia romana,"MonumentiAntichi 23 (1914) 541-608, pls.
1-6.
"La statistica delle abitazioni e il calcolo della popolazione in Roma Imperiale," Rendiconti
dell'AccademiaNazionale dei Lincei 26 (1917) 60-87.
Carandini,A., Schiaviin Italia: Gli strumentipensanti dei Romanifra tardaRepubblicae medio Impero(Rome
1988).
Carcopino,J., Daily Life in Ancient Rome: The People and the City at the Height of the Empire,ed. with bib-
liography and notes by H. T. Rowell, trans. E. 0. Lorimer (New Haven 1940).
Carettoni, G., A. M. Colini, L. Cozza, and G. Gatti, La pianta marmoreadi Roma antica:Forma UrbisRomae
(Rome 1960).
Castagnoli,F, OrthogonalTownPlanning, trans. V. Calindro (Cambridge 1971).
Castiglioni,P., Monografiadella cittddi Roma, 2 vols. (Rome 1884).
Coarelli,E, "Laconsistenza della citta nel periodo imperiale:Pomerium,Vici,Insulae,"in La Rome imperiale:
demographieet logistique,actes de la table ronde (Rome, 25 mars 1994), E1coleFrancaisede Rome (Rome
1997) 89-109.
Cuq, M. E., "Une statistiquede locaux affectes a l'habitation dans la Rome imperiale,"Memoiresde l'Institut
National de France,Academiedes Inscriptionset Belles-Lettres40 (1916) 279-335.
Crystal,D., The CambridgeEncyclopediaof the English Language(Cambridge1995).
De Robertis, F. M., Storiadelle corporazionie del regimeassociativonel mondo romano(Bari 1973).
Dickmann, J.-A., Domusfrequentata:AnspruchsvollesWohnenim pompejanischenStadthaus(Munich 1999).
Studien zur antiken Stadt 4.1.
Dilke, 0. A. W., The Roman Land Surveyors:An Introductionto the Agrimensores(New York 1971).
Dillon, J., The Middle Platonists, 80 B.C. to A.D. 220 (Ithaca 1977).
Dureau de la Malle, M., Economiepolitique des Romains (Paris 1840; repr.New York 1971).
TERMINOLOGY 83
Ernout, A., and A. Meillet, Dictionnaire etymologiquede la langue latine: histoire des mots, 4th ed. (Paris
1967).
Finamore,J. F., "Jamblichus,the Sethians,and Marsanes,"in Gnosticismand LaterPlatonism:Themes,Figures
and Texts,ed. J. D. Turnerand R. Majercik(Atlanta2000) 225-257.
Frier,B. W., Landlordsand Tenantsin ImperialRome (Princeton 1980).
Gonzalez, J., "The Lex Irnitana:A New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law,"Journalof Roman Studies 76
(1986) 147-243.
Gordon, A. E., IllustratedIntroductionto Latin Epigraphy(Berkeley 1983).
Grahame,M., "Publicand Privatein the RomanHouse: Investigatingthe Social Order of the Casadel Fauno,"
in Laurence and Wallace-Hadrill1997, 137-164.
Guilhembet, J.-P., "Ladensit6 des Domus et des Insulae dan les XIV regions de Rome selon les Regionnaires:
repr6sentationscartographiques,"Melangesde l'Ecole Francaisede Rome, Antiquite 108 (1996) 7-26.
Homo, L., Rome imperialeet l'urbanismedans l'Antiquite (Paris 1951).
Hope, V., "A Roof over the Dead: CommunalTombs and FamilyStructure,"in Laurenceand Wallace-Hadrill
1997, 69-88.
Jordan, H., Topographieder StadtRom im Althertum,4 vols. (Berlin 1871-1907; repr.Rome 1970).
Kleberg, T., Hotels, restaurantset cabaretsdans l'antiquiteromaine(Uppsala 1957).
Lattimore,R., Themesin Greekand Latin Epitaphs(Urbana,Ill. 1962).
Laurence, R., and A. Wallace-Hadrill,eds., DomesticSpacein the Roman World:Pompeiiand Beyond (Ports-
mouth, R.I. 1997). Journal of Roman Archaeology suppl. 22.
Leach, E. W., "Oecus on Ibycus: Investigatingthe Vocabularyof the Roman House," in Sequenceand Space
in Pompeii, ed. S. E. Bon and R. Jones (Oxford 1997) 50-73. Oxbow Monographs 77.
Lo Cascio, E., "Le procedure di Recensus dalla tarda repubblica al tardo antico e il calcolo della popolazione
di Roma,"in La Rome imperiale:demographieet logistique:actes de la table ronde (Rome, 25 mars 1994)
(Rome 1997) 3-76.
Lot, E, "Capitalesantiques, capitales modernes,"Annales d'histoiresociale 8 (1945) 29-38.
Lugli, G., "Ilvaloretopograficoe giuridicodell''Insula' in RomaAntica,"RendicontidellaPontificiaAccademia
Romana diArcheologia 18 (1941-1942) 191-208.
Mau, A., Pompeii:Its Life and Art, trans. E W. Kelsey (New York 1907).
Mazzarino,S., Aspetti sociali del quartosecolo: richerchedi storia tardo-romano(Rome 1951).
Meiggs, R., Roman Ostia, 2nd ed. (Oxford 1973).
Morgan, M. H., trans., Vitruvius,The Ten Books on Architecture(Cambridge,Mass. 1914; repr. New York
1960).
Owens, E. J., The City in the Greek and Roman World(London 1991).
Packer,J. E., "La Casa di Via Giulio Romano," Bulletino della commissionearcheologicacomunaledi Roma
(1968-1969) 127-148.
, The Insulae of ImperialOstia (Rome 1971). Memoirs of the AmericanAcademy in Rome 31.
Palmer,R. E. A., "The Topographyand Social History of Rome's Trastevere(Southern Sector)," Proceedings
of the AmericanPhilosophicalSociety 125 (1981) 368-397.
Paoli, U. E., Rome:Its People, Life and Customs,trans. R. D. Macnaghten,based on the 1941 Italian edition
(New York 1963).
Pirson, B, "RentedAccommodationat Pompeii:The Evidence of the InsulaArrianaPollianaVI 6," in Laurence
and Wallace-Hadrill1997, 165-181.
Preller,L., Die Regionen der StadtRom (Jena 1846).
Reynolds, D. W., Forma Urbis Romae: The SeveranMarblePlan and the UrbanForm of Ancient Rome (Ann
Arbor 1996).
Riccobono, S., Fontes Iuris RomaniAntejustiniani (Florence 1941; repr.Florence 1968).
Richardson,L., jr.,Pompeii:An ArchitecturalHistory (Baltimore 1988).
84 GLENNR. STOREY
Richardson,
L., jr.,A New Topographical of AncientRome(Baltimore1992).
Dictionary
Richter,O., "Insula,"Hermes 20 (1885) 91-100.
Robinson,0. F, AncientRome:CityPlanningandAdministration (NewYork1992).
Rodriguez-Almeida, E., FormaurbisMarmorea: aggiornamento1980(Rome1981).
Rykwert,J., TheIdeaof a Town:TheAnthropology of UrbanFormin Greece,Italy,and theAncientWorld
(Princeton1976).
Storey,G. R., "Regionaries-Type Insulae1: Architectural/Residential
Units at Ostia,"AmericanJournalof
Archaeology 105 (2001)389-401.
,"Regionaries-Type Insulae2:Architectural/Residential
UnitsatRome,"American JournalofArchaeol-
ogy 106 (2002)411-434.
,"The 'Skyscrapers' of the AncientRomanWorld,"Latomus62 (2003)3-26.
Vos,A. De, andM. De Vos,PompeiErcolanoStabia,2nd ed. (Rome1982).
Wallace-Hadrill,A., HousesandSocietyin PompeiiandHerculaneum (Princeton1994).
Waltzing,J.-P.,Etudehistorique surlescorporations
professionnelles
chezlesRomainesdepuislesoriginesjusqu'a
la chutede l'Empired'occident, 4 vols. (Louvain1895-1900;repr.New York1979).
Ward-Perkins, J. B., CitiesofAncientGreeceandItaly:Planningin Classical Antiquity(NewYork1974).
Wotschitsky,A., "Insula-I. Terminologische Untersuchungen,"in SertaPhilologica
Aenipontana,ed. R.Muth
(Innsbruck1962)363-375.

The Meaning of Insula in Roman Residential Terminology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Meaning of Insula in Roman Residential Terminology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Meaning of "Insula" in Roman Residential Terminology

Author(s): Glenn R. Storey

at did the Romansmeanby the terminsulawhenappliedto urbanarchitectural

MAAR 49, 2004

it is clearthatit is in facta legalterm.5However,I wouldrespondthatsucha realization,however

Allisonstatesthatlabelingof spaces"doesnot actuallydemonstratethatthis label

I Wallace-Hadrill1994, 132. Allison 2001, 184.

6Wallace-Hadrill1994 stresses that problem, as do Allison " Leach 1997, 51.

9 A-lison 2001, 182.

terminologyanyutilityasa guideto function,but,of course,noneof the citedauthorsmeanthat.It

The termdomusis frequentlycontrastedwithinsula(seebelow)andappearsto be the chiefterm

word thatoriginallymeantin Latina simplesheltersuch as a "tent,""shack,"or "hut."'19

27 Suet.Aug. 45.1. 33 Cic. Phil. 2.67; Vitr.De arch.6.7.2.

Fig. 1. AutoCAD drawingof thefourth-floorplan of the Ara

thata cellacouldstandfor a smallapartmentin a waythatdoes not seemthe casefor cubiculum.

A numberof studieshaveattemptedto clarifythe relationbetweenthe terminsulaandits possible

(3) insulaas equivalentto an independentunitwithinthe structuralfabricof someotheredifice.

Quasob res convertendaesuntab regionibusventorumdirectionesvicorum,uti advenientes

2 Paulus in Festus, De SignificatuVerborum111M:

Insulaedictaeproprie,quaenon iungunturcommunibus parietibuscumvicinis,circumituque

Insulaeproperlydefinedareentitiesnot joinedby partywallswith neighboringentities,and

3 Varro,De LinguaLatina5.22 (published after 43 B.C.):

etiamambitusiter, quod circumeundoteritur;nam ambituscircuitus;ab eoque duodecim

Accessis a paththathasbeenwornby pedestrianswalkingabout;for accessis a circuit;from

4 Paulus in Festus, De SignificatuVerborum16M:

ambituspropriediciturintervicinorumaedificialocus duorumpedumet semipedisad cir-

Accessproperlyunderstoodis the spacebetweenthebuildingsof neighborhoods[orstreets?],

certetabulaein subgrundiscircuminsulassi essentex ea conlocatae,ab traiectionibus

Certainlyif panelsmadefromit [larchwood]wereto be connectedto theeavesrunningaround

This passage, as a piece of town-planningrationale,perhaps gives as good an explanation as any as

to whyRomanthoughtseemsso eagerto createaninsula,an "island"of structuralconfigurations.

5. Some PossibleArchaeologicalCorrelatesfor Insula Plus Related Examples

We turn now to three epigraphicpassagesfrom Pompeii that may be construed as operationalizing

6 CIL 4.4429 (Pompeii-latest possible date, A.D. 79):

I amthe insulaof MarcusJunius.

7 CIL4.138 (Pompeii-latest possible date, A.D. 79):

Fig. 3 AutoCAD map of

--I-Fig. 4 AutoCAD map of

The translationof the term cenaculaequestriais problematic. Literally,it means "equestrian

49 Frier 1980, esp. 3-20. 51 Pirson 1997, 171-172.

50Pirson 1997, 172 arguesconvincinglythat it is unlikelythat 52 Allison 2001, 186-188.

Fig. 5. AutoCAD map of

The propertieslistedmighthavereferredto onlya portionof the block,not the whole.Thereis of

8 CIL4.1136 (Pompeii-latest possibledate,A.D. 79):

In praedisIuliaeSp. F Felicislocantur,balneumVeneriumet nongentum,tabernae,pergulae,

Thisunithasalsobeenidentified,Region2, Block4, the so-calledPraediaofJuliaFelix,so named

featuresaslaidoutin passage7, a cityblockwithrentalunitsassociatedwitha largeprivateproperty.

Passage9, fromRome,stronglyresemblespassage8, referring to a propertyaspraediaandincluding

Fig.6. AutoCADdrawingof OstiaRegion

7. Insula Used without Any OtherStructuralReferents,Standingas a Legal Categoryof Property

10 JuliusPaulus, Digest 25.1.4 (third quarterof the third century A.D.):

si fulseritinsulamruentemeaqueexustafit, impensasconsequitur,si non fecerit,deustaea

If he shouldprovidefor an insula that is fallingdown and shouldit bum downinstead,he

11 Ulpian, Digest 19.2.19.6 (published after A.D. 225):

Si quis,cumin annumhabitationem annidederit,deindeinsula

Shouldanyone,afterhavinghireda habitationfor a year,payrentforthe wholeyear,andthen

12 Cicero, Ad Atticum 16.1 (uly 8, 44 B.C.):

Hinc ex Kal.Apr.ad HS LXXXaccommodetur.

Fromthe 1stof April,let himtake80,000sesterces.Thatis the currentsumfromthe insula.

13 JuliusPaulus, Digest 19.2.7 (third quarterof the third century A.D.):

If I shouldhaverentedto you for 50,000sestercesan insulabelongingto someoneelse, and

14 CIL 6.33893 (Rome, date unknown):

PubliusTulliusFelus,theworkshopmanagerof theinsula of Vitalis,happilymadethisas a gift,

15 CIL 6.1682 (Rome, A.D. 334) :56