A Stranger in Town: Finding the Way in an Ancient City

Author(s): Roger Ling

Source: Greece & Rome , Oct., 1990, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Oct., 1990), pp. 204-214
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/643047

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.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Classical Association and Cambridge University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Greece & Rome

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greece & Rome, Vol. xxxvii, No. 2, October 1990

A STRANGER IN TOWN:
FINDING THE WAY IN AN ANCIENT CITY

By ROGER LING

My subject concerns the practicalities of finding one's

ancient city. What aids were there to guide a stranger
did he trace a particular house or other destination? I propose to
examine the problem with reference to one of the best known of all
ancient cities, Pompeii.
In modern towns we are used to systems of named districts and
streets and named or numbered houses. Indeed Pompeii itself has
since the 1860s been given a neat reference system for the benefit of
historian and archaeologist: it is divided into nine regions, each
containing a series of numbered blocks (insulae); and within each
block the doorways are numbered in clockwise or anti-clockwise
sequence. Large or distinctive houses have conventional names, based
on a notable feature (House of the Large Fountain), on the names of
the last owners (House of the Vettii), on the supposed profession of
the owner (House of the Surgeon), on the date of its excavation
(House of the Centenary), on the presence of a distinguished visitor
at the time of excavation (House of Queen Caroline), and so forth. A
modern postman would have no trouble in making deliveries.
In ancient cities, which lacked the luxury of a postman, direction-
finding was a very informal business. There is no evidence for any
systems of numbering; and, though names certainly existed, there is
little evidence for their having been applied on a full and systematic
basis, still less for their having been indicated by signposts.
Names known from Pompeii include districts, city-gates and
streets. But the city is less informative than we might have expected
for such a well-preserved and extensively excavated site.
Firstly vici (wards). The use of names for vici is amply attested in
other Italian cities. In Rome, for example, an inscription on a
Hadrianic base lists sixty-six by name; others are known from
individual inscriptions; and a fourth-century A.D. regional survey of
the city gives a total of 424.1 In Puteoli (Pozzuoli) there is a
dedication to Domitian by the 'REG. VICI VESTORIANI ET
CALPURNIANI'.2 At Pompeii no wards are specifically named in
the inscriptions known to us, but that wards existed is confirmed by
an inscribed list of 'magistri vici et compiti' for the year 47-46 B.C.
and by frequent mention of 'vicini' in painted street-posters.3 The
names of wards almost certainly lurk in four group-names found in

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A STRANGER IN TOWN 205

\R(N

x<
~x

Fig. 10Mo00d

,SALINIENSES O

electoral progra
Forenses. The d
Salinienses were
in the north-east, the Urbulanenses in the south-east and east central
districts, and the Forenses in the old quarter (the south-west). It has
been argued, with some merit, that the first three at least were named
after neighbouring city-gates (see below) and the fourth after the
forum (unless the south-west gate was called the Porta Forensis).4
The ward-names were presumably the Vicus Saliniensis, Vicus
Campaniensis, Vicus Forensis, and Vicus Urbulanensis.
Secondly pagi (suburban districts). Only one is definitely known:
the 'pagus Augustus Felix Suburbanus'. This was perhaps created by
Sulla (thus 'Felix') and received the honorary title 'Augustus' when it
set up an organization for the administration of the Imperial cult in 7
B.C.5 It may have included all the residents of Pompeii's territorium;
its members are named in several inscriptions, including examples
from both the cemetery of Via dei Sepolcri to the north-west of the
city and that of Via Nocera to the south-east.6
Thirdly the city-gates. Most would probably have been named, as
they are today (Fig. 2), after the destinations to which they led; thus
the putative Porta Campana, which gives its name to the Campanien-
ses, would be the modern Capua Gate, or possibly the Nola Gate.' But
only two names are definitely recorded. Inscriptions in the Oscan
language dated to 89 B.c. refer to the 'Veru Sarinu' and 'Veru

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CAPUA GATE NOLA GATE

MERCU-
LANEUM
GATE

FORUM

STABIAE
GATE

Fig. 2 METRE

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A STRANGER IN TOWN 207

Urubla(nu)'.8 The former is cle

north-west gate, the present Herculaneum Gate; and the Latin
equivalent is given on one of the towers as 'Porta Salis'.9 This was
probably so named because it led to the Salt Works (salinae) which
Columella (10.135) tells us were situated near Pompeii (Salinae is a
fairly common name for salt-producing centres: there was a Salinae
north of Ostia, and the salt emporium in Rome was known as Salinae
Romanae).o0 Presumably the Porta Salis or Saliniensis would have
given its name to the Vicus Saliniensis mentioned above. The
identification of the 'Veru Urublanu' is uncertain, but the location of
the inscription points either to the Sarno Gate or possibly to the
Nuceria Gate. The meaning of 'Urublanu' is uncertain, but it is
presumably the source of the name Vicus Urbulanensis.
Fourthly the streets. The evidence is once more very meagre. The
chief source is a single inscription, again in Oscan, immured inside
the main south gate of the city, the Stabiae Gate:" two named
aediles are recorded as having 'marked out this road as far as the
Stabian Bridge to a width of 50 feet' (or according to another
interpretation 'a length of 620 feet'); 'they also marked out the Via
Pompeiana to a width of 15 feet' (or 'a length of 2070 feet') 'as far as
the sanctuary of Jupiter Milichius. They also had these roads made
up, along with the Via Jovia and the Via Dequviaris ...' The Via
Pompeiana was evidently the present Via Stabiana, and the length
described was from the gate in which the inscription was set to the
first cross-roads (the junction with the Via del Tempio d'Iside). The
whereabouts of the Via Jovia and the Via Dequviaris are uncertain,
but presumably the former was named after a temple of Jupiter or a
procession in honour of the god, whilst the Via Dequviaris (De-
curialis?) may have had something to do with a council or council-
chamber of decuriales. It has been suggested that the three streets
were connected and the aediles were in fact paving a processional
route, in which case the Via Jovia and Via Dequviaris should be
identified respectively with the modern Via del Tempio d'Iside and
Via dei Teatri;12 but there is no means of confirming or disproving
this theory.
Another inscription in Oscan seems to refer to a 'Via Mef[iu?]' and
possibly to a tower with the same or a similar name ('Turris Mefira');
but the text is incomplete and the restoration uncertain.'3
That is the sum total of our knowledge on Pompeii. It is clear that
the quarters of the city had names, just as they did in other cities. But
we know of only a handful of named streets. Is this an accident of
survival? Did all the streets have names which have not been
preserved, or were the majority really anonymous?

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
208 A STRANGER IN TOWN

We may transfer the enquiry to

any evidence for a systematic nom
Certainly major arterial route
Via Aurelia, the Via Appia, the
builders), or the Via Salaria (the Salt Road), had well established
names, which they would retain where they passed through cities.
But the evidence for the naming of non-through routes is contra-
dictory.
On the one hand, some sources give the impression that names
were vague and created on an ad hoc basis, or simply did not exist. At
Cales in northern Campania, for instance, an official surfaced 'the
road from the alley of the temple of Juno Lucina as far as the temple
of Matuta, and the incline (clivus) from the Janus Arch to the
coaching-station at the Porta Stellatina'.14 At Pozzuoli an official
surfaced 'the road from the forum to the city-boundary' and 'the
incline from the upper city to the emporium'.15 At Falerii, north of
Rome, an inscription refers to 'a new road surfaced through the
middle of the sheep market from the top of Long Street to the arch
next to the Capitolium'.'6 It is of course possible that descriptions
such as 'the alley of the temple of Juno Lucina' and even 'new road'
could have had the force of street-names (or could subsequently have
acquired that force), whilst Long Street at Falerii certainly seems to
have been an established name. So too with a 'broad road' (via
patula) which is mentioned in a later part of the Cales inscription.
But the general tenor of the inscriptions implies that for many streets
the authorities had to resort to periphrases to get round the problem
of the lack of an official nomenclature. More unambiguous is an
Augustan inscription from Ostia: P. Lucilius Gamala surfaced 'the
street which is connected to the forum, linking the two arches'."7 If
any street should have had a name, this one should! It may also be
significant that street-names are rarely marked on the fragments of
marble city-plans surviving from the Roman world, such as the
Severan plan of Rome set up on a wall in the Forum of Peace.'8 On
the plan of a funerary garden now in Urbino roads are labelled
merely as 'via privata' or 'via publica'.19
On the other hand there is, in some cases, unequivocal evidence for
the existence of regular street-names. If we go back to Greek times,
we find that in the Greek colony of Thurii (founded in 443 B.C.) the
main east-west streets were named Herakleia, Aphrodisias, Olympias,
and Dionysias, and the main north-south ones Heroa, Thuria, and
Thurina.20 And at Oxyrhynchus streets are named after prominent
buildings, local citizens or other features: for instance, Gymnasium
Street, North Church Street, South Gate Street, Seuthes Street,

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A STRANGER IN TOWN 209

SN

Fig

Fig. 3 EITUNS INSCRIPTIONS

Shepherd's Street, and so forth.21 From th

references to three streets in Capua: the Via
the Seplasia.22
Let us assume that there were names in us
but also for streets and the like at Pompeii. How was information
about these names transmitted, especially to strangers?
The nearest thing to signposts are a number of painted notices
dated to the time of the siege of Pompeii by Sulla in 89 B.C.: the so-
called 'eituns' inscriptions.23 Situated on street-corners (Fig. 3), these
give directions to particular points of the city-defences. Six of them
have now been noted. It used to be thought that they were designed
to guide defending troops (many of whom were no doubt drawn from
Pompeii's allies and were unfamiliar with the city); but a more
plausible interpretation sees them merely as notices for local residents,
indicating marshalling points for the men of each neighbourhood.
In either case they were set up only in response to a particular
emergency: there was no intention of providing permanent indicators.
Permanent street-signs, whether official or unofficial, seem never
to have existed. We must assume that names of streets were
transmitted orally, and that strangers simply had to ask
today, in many Mediterranean towns, and even in small English
villages such as the one where I live, there are no street-signs; but
names exist, both in popular usage and in official documentation.
Similarly in the medieval period: though there is no reason to believe
that street-names were inscribed or painted on actual walls, they are

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
210 A STRANGER IN TOWN

occasionally marked on maps or (more frequently) recorded in

documents. They are also reflected in the modern street-names. In
York, for example, some streets preserve Viking names, such as
Micklegate and Stanegate, and others perpetuate the memory of
trading activities in medieval times (Butchers Row, The Shambles).
In the absence of street-signs, directions must have been given by
reference to prominent landmarks (as they are in some of the
inscriptions already mentioned). In modern Britain we often tend to
refer to shops and pubs, most of which are distinguished by their
signs, and many of which are situated at road-junctions: thus 'turn
right at Marks and Spencers, left at the Red Lion', and so forth. In
Pompeii there were various inscribed buildings, such as temples,
which could have been used; but shops and bars may again have been
convenient markers, and additional assistance would have been
provided by the public fountains, which were almost invariably at
street-corners. The fountains are easy to refer to, because each carrie
a distinctive emblem; today, significantly, four Pompeian streets ar
named after fountain sculptures: Via dell'Abbondanza, Via and Vico
di Mercurio, Vico del Gallo (but these are unlikely to have corre-
sponded to ancient names, since fountains did not exist in the
Republican period). Shops and bars would have had names as
nowadays, whether based on those of their owners (for example, the
Hospitium Hygini Firmi)24 or perhaps, like modern pubs, derived
from a conventional idea which could be embodied in a visual image
or pictogram (the elephant sign of the Inn of Sittius).25 Outside
Pompeii we have interesting literary and epigraphic evidence for
conventional names. Cicero and other writers refer to the Inn or
Shop of the Cimbric Shield in the Roman Forum, which eviden
had a sign in the form of a captured shield painted with a Gaul
sticking his tongue out.26 At Narbonne in Gaul an epitaph records the
'landlord of the Cock'.27 At Herculaneum there was a pub apparently
called Ad Cucumas (The Jugs) or Ad Sanctum (The Holy Image).28
The ancient traveller might therefore have been told to 'turn right
at the cock fountain', 'turn right at the Inn of Hyginius Firmus',
'turn left at the Inn of the Elephant', and so forth. By this means,
together with more basic directions like 'first left' and 'second right',
he would easily have found the street that he wanted. But how did he
locate a specific house? How, in other words, were private addresses
designated?
A rough count of the properties in Hans Eschebach's gazetteer28
reveals that there were well over 1,000 private premises in Pompeii;
Andrew Wallace-Hadrill (personal communication) estimates that the
overall total was perhaps as high as 1,200-1,300. Yet, as already

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A STRANGER IN TOWN 211

stated, there is no evidence of any

or labelling. Surprising as it ma
properties were normally known
plan-fragment and in various insc
names of their owners. This is cle
inscriptions which refer to pri
inscriptions refers to the 'House of Maius Castricius and Maras
Spurnius'.31 A painted advertisement for apartments to rent names
the 'Insula Arriana Polliana of Cn. Alleius Nigidius Maius' (evidently
a city-block formerly owned by Arrius and Pollius but now in the
hands of Maius).32 Another names the 'praedia (property) of Julia
Felix'.33 An inscribed stone refers to the 'Baths of M. Crassus
Frugi'.34
Where such nomenclature was inappropriate, for example in
documents which had to define the house independently of its
owner's identity, there was apparently no convenient alternative.
Especially interesting is a record of a house-sale at Oxyrhynchus,
where the house has to be described by an elaborate periphrasis: 'a
three-storeyed house ... situated by the Serapeum at Oxyrhynchus in
the southern part of the street called Temgenouthis to the west of the
lane leading to the street named Shepherds' Street, its boundaries
being, on the south and east, public roads, on the north the house of
the aforesaid Thamounis ... on the west, the house of Tausiris ...
separated by a blind alley'.35 There is no handy name or number to
reduce the verbiage.
This should perhaps not strike us as so strange. Street-numbering
systems in the modern world are no older than the establishment of
organized public postal services, for which there was no ancient
equivalent. (The introduction of postal codes is, of course, even more
recent.) Before this, as we know from medieval documents, properties
were named as in ancient times after their owners. Where properties
stayed in the same family for generations, a family-name would
naturally be appropriate. Nowadays, where no numbering system
exists, houses are given conventional names (Red Roofs, Sea View,
etc.); but this is partly a reflection of the greater mobility of
ownership in the modern world.
To summarize. Someone coming to Pompeii in search of a
particular house would perhaps have had the name of a quarter and o
a street, but he would have been guided by no street-signs, still less
by a system of numbered houses. He would have had to ask the way;
and people would have given him ad hoc directions via recognizable
landmarks. The fact that this was standard practice in Roman times i
confirmed in a play by Terence where a slave gives directions

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
212 A STRANGER IN TOWN

(admittedly with comic exaggerati

a portico, a temple, a fig-tree, an
Similarly Ovid makes his book o
directions in Rome from a passer-b
the city; here the guide actually t
notable monuments en route.37 O
street, he would have had to enqui
Thus in a passage in the Acts of t
Ananias in Damascus: 'Go into the
enquire in the house of Judas .
graffito advising the passer-by, '
genia in the Vicus Venerius by the
a well-known prostitute who plied
of a neighbouring town. Potenti
have had to track her down in pr
from elsewhere sought out the ho
As a last comment on the comparability of ancient and medieval
practice we may quote the advice given to lustful travellers by
Antonio Beccadelli (1394-1471) in his Hermaphroditus: 'Look for the
magnificent temple of Santa Reparata ... Arriving there take a right,
then proceeding a little stop and ask ... [for directions] to the
Mercato Vecchio. Near the obelisk, betraying itself by its odour, is
the genial bordello. Enter and say hello to the procuress and whores
for me; you will be welcomed by all ...'40

NOTES

This article is based on part of a talk given at a classical archaeology semin

of Manchester and at the triennial meeting of the Hellenic and Roman So
in 1985. It has previously appeared in a privately printed volume of essa
E. B. French and is reproduced here with an additional plan and one or tw
am grateful to members of the audiences at the original talk for various sug
wife for her advice on the medieval period. Professor Andrew Wallace-Ha
the manuscript and added further valuable comments. Generally on th
houses in ancient cities, with special reference to Rome, U. E. Paoli, Rome
Customs (1963), pp. 138--52.
Abbreviations follow the conventions of The Oxford Classical Dictiona
ix-xxii. Add: Mem./Rend. Napoli = Memorie/Rendiconti della Accademia di
e Belle Arti (Societa Nazionale di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti di Napoli).
1. Hadrianic base: CIL vi, 975. Regional survey: Libellus de regionibus u
Nordh, 1949) (Skrifter Utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Rom, iii. 8').
2. CIL x, 1631 (A.D. 93-4); cf. G. Camodeca, 'L'ordinamento in regiones
Puteoli. Studi di storia antica, i (1977), 62-98.
3. List of 47-46 B.C.: CIL iv, 60; Inscriptiones Italiae xiii: Fasti et elogia
Vicini: CIL iv, 193, 367, 440, 458, 2978, 3460, etc.

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A STRANGER IN TOWN 213

4. G. Spano, 'Porte e regioni pompeian

269-359. Generally on these names and t
sannitici e di quartieri a Pompei', Mem.
Pompeianus (Acta Instituti Romani Finla
at Naples (Regio Herculanensium: CIL x,
5. CIL x, 924; cf. Castren, op. cit., 81.
6. Via dei Sepolcri: CIL x, 1027, 1042. Via Nocera: A. D'Ambrosio and S. De Caro, Un
impegno per Pompei. Fotopiano e documentazione della necropoli di Porta Nocera (1983), no. 17
ES.
7. But gates in ancient cities were not always named in this way: cf. the Porta Jovis at Cap
(Livy 26.14.6) and the Porta Laeva and Porta Domestica at Cales (CIL x, 4660).
8. R. S. Conway, The Italic Dialects (1897), p. 70, no. 61; M. Della Corte, Notizie degli scav
di antichitd (1916), pp. 155-8: Sgobbo and Spano, artt. citt.; E. Vetter, Handbuch der italisc
Dialekte i (1953), pp. 54f., 57, nos. 23-4, 28.
9. CIL iv, 9159.
10. Salinae north of Ostia: Livy 5.45.8; 7.17.6; CIL xiv, p. 4. Salinae Romanae: Livy
24.47.15; Dessau, ILS, 6178.
11. Conway, op. cit., pp. 58f., no. 39; G. O. Onorato, 'La sistemazione stradale del
quartiere del Foro Triangolare di Pompei', Rend. Linc., 8th ser. vi (1951), 250-64; Vetter, op.
cit., pp. 47-9, no. 8.
12. Onorato, art. cit.
13. Della Corte, Sgobbo, locc. citt. (note 8); Vetter, op. cit., p. 57, no. 28.
14. CIL x, 4660.
15. CIL x, 1698.
16. CIL ix, 5438 (A.D. 119).
17. CIL xiv, 375 (lines 15-16).
18. G. Carettoni, A. M. Colini, L. Cozza and G. Gatti, La pianta marmorea di Roma
antica: Forma urbis Romae (1960); E. Rodriguez Almeida, Forma urbis marmorea. Aggiornamento
generale 1980 (1981). Street-names: Carettoni and others, op. cit. pp. 59f., pl. XV, no. 1 (Vi[a
Nova?]); p. 71, pl. XIX, no. 14 ([Vicus] Patricius); pp. 109-11, pl. XXXIII, no. 42 (Clivus
Victoriae); pp. 131f., pl. XLIV, no. 285 ([Vicus Bulblarius); p. 158, pl. LIX, no. 685 ([Vicus
h]ast[ati]?); Rodriguez Almeida, op. cit., p. 57, pl. I, no. 3 ([Vicus] Summi Ch[oragi]).
19. C. Huelsen, Rim. Mitt. v (1890), 52-60, fig. 4; Carettoni and others, op. cit., pp. 270 f.,
no. 3, tav. agg. Q, fig. 51.
20. Diodorus 12.10.7.
21. B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and others, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (1898-) (P. Oxy.),
passim.
22. Via Diana: CIL x, 3913. Seplasia: Cicero, In Pisonem 11.24 (cf. Asconius, In
Pisonianum 9); Pro Sestio 8.19; Pliny, NH 16.40; 33.164. Albana and Seplasia: Cicero, De Lege
Agraria 2.34.94; Valerius Maximus 9.1, ext. 1.
23. H. Nissen, Pompejanische Studien zur Stadtekunde des Altertums (1877), pp. 497-502;
Conway, op. cit., pp. 69-71, nos. 60-3; H. Degering, 'Uber die militirischen Wegweiser in
Pompeji', Rim. Mitt. xiii (1898), 124-46; Sgobbo and Spano, artt. citt.; Vetter, op. cit., pp. 54-
7, nos. 23-8.
24. CIL iv, 3779.
25. CIL iv, 806-7.
26. Cicero, De Oratore 2.266; Quintilian 6.3.38.
27. CIL xii, 4377 (hospitalis a Gallo Gallinacio). Generally on shop- and inn-signs H.
Jordan, 'Ober r6mische Aushangeschilder', Archdologische Zeitung, xxix (1872), 65-79; A. Mau,
'Aushdingeschilder', in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencylopddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft ii,
2 (1896), 2558f.; cf. T. Kleberg, Hdtels, restaurants et cabarets dans l'antiquite romaine
(Bibliotheca Ekmaniana lxi) (1957), passim.
28. A. and M. de Vos, Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia (Guide archeologiche Laterza xi) (1982), p.
302; cf. M. Grant, Cities of Vesuvius: Pompeii and Herculaneum (1971), p. 190.
29. H. Eschebach, Die stddtebauliche Entwicklung des antiken Pompeji (Rom. Mitt. Ergiinz-
ungsheft xvii) (1970), pp. 117-52.
30. Plan-fragment: Carettoni and others, op. cit., p. 207, no. 2, tav. agg. Q, fig. 47; cf. pp.

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
214 A STRANGER IN TOWN

208f., no. 6, tav. agg. Q, fig. 49; Rodriguez

vi, 67, 10248, 10250, 29791, 33893 (named in
some properties with conventional names,
NH 15.137; Suetonius, Galba 1) or Tiberius'
31. Conway, op. cit., p. 71, no. 63; Sgobbo,
32. CIL iv, 138.
33. CIL iv, 1136.
34. CIL x, 1063. The original function of the inscription is uncertain: cf. V. Kockel, Die
Grabbauten vor dem herkulaner Tor in Pompeji (1983), p. 7, note 65.
35. P. Oxy. i (1898), 161-3, no. 99.
36. Terence, Adelphi 572-84.
37. Ovid, Tristia 3.1.21-34.
38. Acts 9.11.

39. A. Maiuri, La Casa del Menandro e il suo tesoro di argenteria (1932), p. 471, no.
Della Corte, Not. Scav. (1933), 294, no. 180.
40. Cited in V. L. Bullough and J. Brundage, Sexual Practices and the Medieval Church
(1982), pp. 179f.

This content downloaded from

137.111.162.20 on Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:27:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms