0521192447

T
Roman
Forum
A Reconstruction and ArchitecturalGuide
The Roman Forum was in many ways the heart of the Roman Empire. Today, the Forum exists in a fragmentary state, having been destroyed and plundered over the past two millennia.
Enough remains, however, for archaeologists to reconstruct its spectacular buildings and monuments. This richly illustrated volume provides an architectural history of the central section of the Roman Forum during the empire (31 BCE476 CE), from the Temple of Julius Caesar to the monuments on the slope of the Capitoline Hill. Bringing together state-of-the-art
technology in architectural illustration and the expertise of a prominent Roman archaeologist, this book offers a unique reconstruction of the Forum, providing architectural history, a
summary of each buildings excavation and research, scaled digital plans, elevations, and reconstructed aerial images that not only shed light on the Forums history but also vividly
bring it tolife.
With this book, scholars, students, architects, and artists will be able to visualize for the first time since antiquity the character, design, and appearance of the architecture in the
famous heart of ancientRome.
Gilbert J. Gorski is a licensed architect and the project designer for numerous buildings including the World Headquarters for the McDonalds Corporation in Oak Brook, IL, and the
Oceanarium, a major addition to the John G. Shedd Aquarium in Chicago. In 1987 he was designated the Burnham Fellow by the Chicago Architectural Club and was awarded an associate fellowship to the American Academy in Rome. Since 1989 Gorski has headed his own firm specializing in design and illustration. His drawings and paintings have been included in
numerous publications and exhibits on architecture and illustration. He was twice awarded the Hugh Ferriss Memorial Prize, the nations highest singular honor in architectural illustration, by the American Society of Architectural Illustrators. He is also the recipient of an Institute Honor for Collaborative Achievement, awarded by the American Institute of Architects.
He presently is an associate professor at the University of Notre Dame and holds the James A. and Louise F. Nolen Chair in Architecture.
James E. Packer is emeritus professor of classics at Northwestern University. He is the author of the three-volume The Forum of Trajan in Rome (1997); of numerous articles in journals,
including the American Journal of Archaeology, the Journal of Roman Archaeology, the Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma, the Maryland Historian, Natural
History, Croniche Pompeiane, Technology and Culture, Curator, Inland Architect, Archeo, and Archaeology; and of articles in collections, including the Lexicon Topographicum Urbis
Romae (19932000). He is the recipient of many grants, including from the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, the Getty Grant Program, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. He has excavated at Pompeii, in the Forum of Trajan (Rome), and in the Theater of Pompey (Rome). The Forum of Trajan exhibition at the opening of
the new Getty Museum in Los Angeles (1997) was based on Packerswork.
Frontispiece. The authors, Professors Gorski

(l.) and Packer (r.), discuss the architecture
of the Roman Forum overlooking the site from
a pavilion in the Domus Tiberiana on the
Palatine Hill. (G. Gorski)
Roman
Forum
A R e c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d A r c h i t e c t u ra l G u i d e
Gilbert J. Gorski
U n i v e r s i t y o f N o tr e D a m e
Ja mes E. Packer
P r o f e s s o r E m e r i t u s o f C l a s s i c s , N o rt h w e s t e r n U n i v e r s i t y
32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473,USA

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.
It furthers the Universitys mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521192446
Gilbert J. Gorski and James E. Packer2015
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published2015
Printed in Singapore by KHL Printing Co. Pte. Ltd.
A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging in PublicationData
Gorski, Gilbert
The Roman Forum : a reconstruction and architectural guide /
GilbertJ. Gorski, James E. Packer.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-521-19244-6 (hardback)
1. Roman Forum (Rome, Italy) 2. Rome (Italy) Antiquities, Roman.
I. Packer, James E. II. Title.
DG66.5.G67 2014
937.63dc23 2013029632
ISBN 978-0-521-19244-6 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of
URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
Fig 0.1. Plan of the Forum, c. 360. The buildings in the central Forum are numbered in the order treated in the text. (G. Gorski)
Contents
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page xiii
Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi
Part I. Architecture in the Roman Forum

during the Empire: A Brief History

1 The Augustan Reconstruction (31 BCE14 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Prologue: The Republican Forum (50831). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Problems and Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Meaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
34
2 From Tiberius to Phocas (14608 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Tiberius (1437 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
The Flavians (6996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
Antoninus Pius (138161). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
vii
viii
Contents
Septimius Severus (193211) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Maximian and Diocletian (285305) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
52
Restoration of the Temple of Saturn (c. 360). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
62
The End of the Roman Forum (after 608). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
62
Part II. The Monuments

3 The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70
4 The Temple of Caesar (Aedes divi Iuli). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
83
The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
86
5 The Basilica milia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
91
Modern Reconstructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
96
6 The Curia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7 The Arch of Septimius Severus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
The Arch of Severus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
117
Contents
8 Minor Monuments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
A. The West Rostra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
B. The Umbilicus Urbis Romae/Mundus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
C. The Miliarium Aureum Urbis Romae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
D. The East Rostra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
9 The Temple of Concord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
The Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
10 The Temple of Vespasian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
11 The Tabularium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
12 The Portico of the Dei Consentes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
13 The Temple of Saturn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
ix
Contents
14 The Basilica Julia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
15 The Arch of Tiberius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
The Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
16 The Schola Xanthi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
17 The Diocletianic Honorary Columns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
18 The Temple of Castor and Pollux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
19 The Parthian Arch of Augustus (19 BCE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
The Monument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
Contents
20 The Temple of Vesta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
Part III. Conclusions

21 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
The Augustan Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
The Flavian Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349
The Antonine Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
The Severan Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
The Diocletianic Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
The End of the Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Sources for Coin Images from the Internet and for Other Images. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
xi
Preface
If Roman builders and their patrons sired a great
architecture now in ruins, we, who wander through
the ruins with open eyes and ears, are parents to
its refashioning.
Rab u n Taylo r 1
Why another book on the Roman Forum (Figs. 0.14, 1.26)?

Surely, the many who have written on the site in the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries will have described it so thoroughly that
they must have satisfied all possible future interest. Surprisingly,
that is not the case. Works on the Forum fall into three general
categories: archaeological reports, articles in learned journals
and monographs, and guidebooks. For most readers in English,
the archaeological reports and the articles, largely in foreign languages, usually Italian, German, and French (listed here roughly
according to the volume of material available in each), are virtually incomprehensible. And should the casual reader live near
a good university library and have the skills and interest necessary to access these essays, he/she will find simple descriptions of the topography of the site and objects found, with or
without exegesis, and technical discussions of difficult, special
problems.
While recent archaeological monographs may investigate a
single building in detail, they do not necessarily reconstruct its
original appearance.2 They include invaluable measured drawings of architectural elements and standing ruins,3 but they normally do not use these elements in measurable restored plans,
elevations, and sections. They consider neither the relationship
of their monument to its neighbors nor its conceptual part in the
design of the whole Forum. Guidebooks in English are sometimes
more helpful, but they also have their limitations. Their short
sections usually do little more than identify and briefly characterize each monument,4 and even their longer entries present
every structure either as an excavation or as a three-dimensional
nexus for an essay on relevant historical sources.5 In other words,
neither scholarly articles and specialized monographs nor guidebooks in English treat the Forum as an architectural entity.
xiii
Fig.0.2. View of the Roman Forum looking southeast from the modern terrace
on the Tabularium. At the east end of the Forum, note the concrete foundations
for the Temples of Castor and Pollux (r.) and of Caesar (Aedes divi Juli) (center).
(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici diRoma)
Preface
Fig.0.3. View of the Roman Forum, c. 360 CE, looking southeast from the Tabularium. (G. Gorski)
Moreover, as David Watkin has pointed out in his recent book

on the Forum, contemporary travelerssee
fragmentary foundations of long-vanished ancient Roman
buildings at many levels, representing different periods of time.
Though instructive to scholars[they] are more or less impenetrable to everyone else.[M]uch of what we seedates from
the Early Christian Periodthe Middle Ages, the Renaissance
and Baroque periods, and the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. There are also frequent reconstructions and rebuilds often
unrecognized by the modern visitor.6
Thus, while millions of casual tourists visit the site each year,
most carry away only vague ideas of how the shattered ruins
before them actually appeared in antiquity; and relevant literature in English usually provides littlemore.
This book, therefore, has two aims: first and most importantly,
in the two initial chapters and in the Conclusions (Parts I, III),
we discuss the relationships of the Forums several buildings to
one another and to the architectural development of the site during the empire (Figs. 1.1, 21.2, 2124). Second, by providing
the reader with a topographically arranged series of chapters that
clearly present the history and character of the Forums buildings (Part II), we have assembled an architectural guidebook.
However, in an effort to produce a relatively compact volume from
the vast number of research materials available, we discuss only
the major structures around the central plaza with two notable exceptions: the Temple of Vesta (Figs. 20.119) and that of
xv
xvi
Preface
Antoninus and Faustina (Figs. 3.118) buildings too important

to the life and character of the Forum to omit. Of course, these
and the other neighboring monuments have histories that cover
several centuries, and most were rebuilt more than once. Hence,
following the example of architect Italo Gismondis famous plaster model of ancient Rome in the Museum of Roman Civilization,7
we portray the Forum at a particular moment in time, just after
360 CE, a year the same as or very close to the one used by
Gismondi. By then, all the Forums famous monuments had been
constructed, the Temple of Saturn had just been rebuilt after a
fire (Figs. 0.4, 21.2, 2126), and most of the other buildings were
still in good condition. Consequently, apart from a brief introduction, we do not discuss the general character of the Forum during
the Republic (50931 BCE, Fig.1.1), although for each building
we provide a full history, an account of its complete architectural
development, and bibliographical references.
For a book of this kind, images are essential. Most of those
that best displayed the Forums monuments previously, both in
ruins and as architectural reconstructions, were the work of the
young French architects of the cole nationale suprieure des
Beaux-Arts.8 For nearly a century and a half (18191968), during their third year of residence in Rome at the Villa Medici, they
were required to produce plans and views of a ruined monument
and a new reconstruction of its original appearance.9 Executed in
response to this rule and archived at the cole des Beaux-Arts
across the Seine from the Louvre in Paris, their splendid water-
Fig.0.4. Aerial view of the Roman Forum, c. 360 CE,

looking southwest. (G. Gorski)
Preface
colors constitute a major resource (as yet largely unexplored) on

the excavations of the Forum.
Done by experienced architects exhaustively trained in the
principles of classical architecture, their reconstructions are
sensible and frequently very useful to contemporary scholars.
Most, however, have never been completely published, and, even
if that were not the case, many are now outdated by the latest
research on the Forum. Yet each one, the product of a principal
(an ancien) and his less experienced student assistants (the nouveaux), a labor of several months or more,10 is a remarkable work
of art. Precisely rendered, brilliantly colored, their drawings are
immediately accessible to viewers. Recording their materials
sympathetically, they effortlessly instill in their viewers an abiding interest in their subjects.
To illustrate the complexity and detail of our architecture
adequately, then, our text would have profited from renderings
of this character. The time and expense involved in executing
our illustrations as traditional watercolors would have posed a
formidable challenge, however.11 Fortunately, the digital revolution came to our rescue. Utilizing its advances in hardware
and software, we have, in a relatively short interval, produced
a body of archaeologically updated images that are, we hope, as
compelling as those of the French architects. These renderings
are based both on our on-site photographs and studies and on
the best previous drawings available for each monument. Since
our treatments are not complete formal publication of each monument, we do not show which of its parts survive and which are
conjectural. For those who desire such information, however, we

provide a footnote, at the beginning of each chapter in Part II.
These indicate the written and visual sources used for our views,
scaled plans, and elevations.12 Each of these images represents
many hours of research and consultation between the authors,
and, as the work progressed, nearly all the illustrations underwent one or more revisions. Our figures are thus visual solutions
to protracted archaeological discussions, our own and those of
past scholars, and together all these renderings may, for the
first time since antiquity, facilitate a new approach to the nature
and underlying conceptual grammar of the Forum a site that
was, for the Romans, not a collection of isolated archaeological
trenches, but rather an intricate, three-dimensional architectural ensemble.
While previous reconstructions portray the monuments of the
Forum as undecorated marble, modern research suggests that,
like Greek buildings, those of the Romans may also have been
partly colored but to what extent is unclear. Referring to the
restoration of the Temple of the Castores in 70 BCE (p. 288),
Cicero describes columns that were reconstructed as freshly
whitened, suggesting both that large parts of the building must
have been predominantly white and that the stuccoed shafts
were rubbed down, not painted. Like the Temple of Mars
Ultor in the Forum of Augustus, parts of the buildings in the
Forum Romanum were, however, very probably colored. Indeed,
we would have preferred to show a colored Forum, and our two
detailed illustrations of a section from the east facade of the
x vii
xviii
Preface
Arch of Serverus (Figs. 7.12, 13) indicate what we might have

done. Yet, without any precise evidence, our colors would have
been entirely arbitrary, and, therefore, our Forum is traditionally
(if inaccurately) uncolored.
In order to position the buildings correctly, we based our
information on a number of sources: satellite images, on-site
photographs, unpublished drawings and photographs in the
files of the Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di
Roma, and published articles and books. A map of the existing ruins produced from aerial photographs by S.A.R.A. Nistri,
S.r.l., an engineering firm in Rome, provided the elevations
of the topography and the ruins. To produce views of the surrounding ancient city, we used the Gismondi model of ancient
Rome.13 Multiple overlapping three-dimensional laser scans
carried out at the Forum by a team of students and faculty from
the Architecture School at the University of Notre Dame in
August 2010 confirmed the accuracy of our on-site materials
(Figs. 0.56).14
Since our new, restored model of the Forum is three dimensional, we were able to document the site in a realistic manner.
Thus, for the readers information, we provide diagrams that
label the various architectural elements (Figs. G1G6), and, for
each structure, we provide measured drawings: a detailed plan,
front and lateral elevations, perspective views, and architectural
orders. We have also included four section-perspectives of
the entire Forum (Figs. 1.26) as well as aerial views (Figs. 0.3,
4). With these digital materials and our texts, we anticipate that
future visitors to the Forum will find the site more comprehensible and, we hope, far more rewarding than has ever previously
been the case.15
Winter 20122013
Ja mes E. Packer and

G i l b e rt J . G o r s k i
S an F r ancis co, Cali f ornia, an d
Sou th Bend, Indi ana
Fig.0.5. The Roman Forum: digital documentation plan, 2010. (Dharma)
xx
Preface
Fig.0.6. The Roman Forum: digital comparison of the elevations of standing monuments, 2010. (Dharma)
Acknowledgments
Two institutions deserve thanks and recognition for their mission to support creative people and bring them together. Many
years ago I was blessed to receive the Burnham Prize from the
Chicago Architectural Club and was awarded an associate fellowship to the American Academy in Rome. It is there I was
first introduced to Jim Packer and his work on ancient Rome.
Over the next three decades nearly one of them spent collaborating on this book Jim has remained a great friend and
mentor.
Finally I would like to thank my family: my daughters Jennifer,
Rebecca, and Emma and, most of all, my wife, Stacey. A fellow
artist who understands an artists needs, she has always given me
the space and time to pursue my many projects. This book would
not have been possible without her support.
My thanks both to Professor Angelo Bottini, soprintendente
per i beni archeologici di Roma (20052009), for his kind permission to work gratis in the Forum and in the Archives of the
Soprintendenza and to the current Soprintendente, Dottoressa

Mariarosaria Barbera, for her kind support. I am also extremely
grateful to Dottoressa Miriam Taviani, who aided me extensively in my research at the offices of the Archaeological
Superintendency of Rome and discussed with me her drawings
of the Basilica Julia, which she had submitted to the University
of Rome (La Sapienza) for her tese di laurea. Professor Klaus
S. Freyberger, wissenschaftlicher Direktor of the German
Archaeological Institute in Rome, generously outlined his work
on the Basilica Aemilia with me and gave us copies of the drawings the German team had made of the site and of its architectural fragments. Further, I am deeply indebted to Denise Gavio,
librarian at the American Academy in Rome, for her constant
help and encouragement.
Unfortunately, the Atlante di Roma Antica (Milan, 2012)by A.
Carandini and others did not reach me until our text had gone to
the publisher. Consequently, I do not evaluate herein any of its
important restored plans and elevations. My review in the Journal
of Roman Archaeology 26 (2013): 553561 does, however,
xxi
xx ii
Acknowledgments
include discussions of several of the Atlantes reconstructions of

the Forums buildings.
Ja mes E. Packer
Both authors profited in the Forum and at South Bend from the
two seasons of cloud-point documentation of the Forums monuments undertaken by Professor Krupali Krusche of the School of
Architecture at Notre Dame. From that project she also very kindly
gave us permission to publish two of her measured elevations of the
ruins (Figs. 0.56).
The authors are likewise extremely grateful to Dr. Beatrice
Rehl, director of humanities publishing at Cambridge University
Press (New York), for her support and encouragement of our proj
ect during the last eight years. We are also very much indebted
to Professor Penelope Davies of the Department of Art History
at the University of Texas (Austin) for invaluable suggestions
for our text and to Anne Laidlaw, Professor Emerita at Hollins

College, and Matthew B. Roller, Professor of Classics at Johns
Hopkins University, for useful advice on stylistic matters and
Latin translation.
And finally, for grants that made possible the publication of
this work and its illustrations in color, we wish to express our
deepest gratitude to the School of Architecture at Notre Dame
University and to the Loeb Classical Library Foundation at
Harvard University.
Sou th Bend, IN
Ja mes E. Packer
San Fr anci s co, CA
PartI.
Architecture in the Roman

Forum during the Empire: A Brief
History
The Augustan
Reconstruction
(31 BCE14CE)
Prologue: The
Republican Forum
(50831)
Established as a meeting place for the inhabitants of the adjacent, previously independent villages, the Republican Forum
occupied an irregularly shaped, marshy valley below the
Palatine and Capitoline Hills. Reclaiming the central marsh by
massive earth fills in the late sixth century, its builders initiated
the continuous evolutionary changes that, in the next five centuries (c. 52544), transformed the site into the Forum of the
late Republic. Literary tradition credited the Temple of Vesta

at the southeast end of the valley to Romes second king, Numa
Pompilius (715673), who had erected it next to the Regia,
his own residence. At the northwest end, Pompilius successor, Tullius Hostilius (672641), built the Curia Hostilia, the
Senate House named after him, and, in front of it, the Comitium,
the outdoor meeting place for Romes popular assemblies. At
the end of the sixth and the beginning of the fifth centuries, the
early republican Temples of Saturn and Castor went up to the
south, and, by the fourth century, a line of aristocratic dwellings
connected these temples and defined the edges of the piazza
(Fig.1.1).
Fig.1.1. The Republican Forum from above. (G. Gorski)
chapter
During the course of the second century, two rectangular

basilicas replaced many of these houses. On the north side of
the Forum stood the Basilica Fulvia (later called Aemilia), and
to the south, the Basilica Sempronia. In the late second century, a temple to Concord on the northwest side of the Forum
commemorated an aristocratic victory over the people, and by
early in the next century (after 78), the monumental facade of the
Tabularium, with its impressive second-story arcade and engaged
Doric Order (Figs. 11.1, 2, 6, 9, 10, 21.21), hid the slope of the
CapitolineHill.
By midcentury, the republican government could no longer control the state effectively, and Caesar began the imperial age with
the destruction of the ancient Comitium (Fig.1.1). He replaced it
with a new Rostra that faced east into the Forum along a line parallel to the front of the Tabularium (Fig. 8.4). He also aligned the
south lateral colonnade of his own new Forum to the northwest
with the site of the Curia and in 45 or 44 began the reconstruction
of the latter.1 This Curia Julia, named after Caesars clan, was
still unfinished when Caesar was assassinated, and in the political reaction against Caesar after his death, the Senate briefly
(and unsuccessfully) tried to call the new structure by its ancient
name, the Curia Hostilia (infra, p.12). Overlooking the south
side of the Forum, the front arcade of Caesars Basilica Julia, a
redesigned version of the old Sempronia, had engaged Doric columns and interior aisles with innovative concrete vaults. Facing
it stood Lucius Aemilius Paullus new splendidly rebuilt Basilica
Aemilia (finished in55).
/ The Augustan Reconstruction ( 31
Problems and
Resources
The Forum at the Beginning of
AugustusReign
When Augustus celebrated his victory in 31 over his last famous
rivals, Antony and Cleopatra, the political disturbances of the
recent past had interrupted construction of three of the Forums
major new sites. Owing to the recent civil wars, the temple to
the deified Caesar at the east end of the piazza, the site where
Caesars body had been cremated, was still unfinished (Figs. 0.3,
4.710). Caesars new Basilica Julia, his replacement for the old
Basilica Sempronia, and the promised new Curia were only partly
finished (Fig. 1.4). Of the Forums three great temples, Saturn
had been under construction since 42 (Figs. 1.35, 21.2123).
The other three, dedicated to Concord (Figs. 0.4, 1.3), Castor and
Pollux, and Vesta (Figs. 1.5, 19), also probably needed serious
maintenance. The former two were politically significant. In the
last years of the Republic, the Senate met often in the Temple of
Concord (and sometimes in the Temple of Castor), while speakers
frequently addressed the people from the rostrum in front of the
Temple of Castor. Concord was, unfortunately, too small for an
increasingly sizeable Senate, and both buildings, of tufa and travertine masonry finished in stucco, must have seemed to Romes
new first citizen (princeps) Octavian called Augustus after
b c e 14 c e )
Fig.1.2. Forum, elevation/section looking east. (G. Gorski)
chapter
Fig.1.3. Forum, elevation/section looking west. (G. Gorski)
b c e 14 c e )
part I / Architecture in the Roman Forum during the Empire
Fig.1.4. Forum, elevation/section 1 looking south. (G. Gorski)
chapter
Fig.1.5. Forum, elevation/section 2 looking south. (G. Gorski)
b c e 14 c e )
10
Fig.1.6. Forum, elevation/section looking north. (G. Gorski)
chapter
27 too simple, too old fashioned for the political center of an

expanding Mediterranean empire.
Clearly he needed to restore the Forum, but other sites also
demanded his attention. After Caesars assassination in 44,
Octavians pietas, personal and imperial, required that he complete the new Forum of Caesar, the principal architectural project
of his adopted father. And, with Octavians vow of a new temple to
Mars Ultor (Mars the Avenger) in 42, he had committed himself
to a major new project that ultimately resulted in the construction
of a second new forum just northeast of the old one. Designed
to meet the needs and government business of Romes increasing population, the new monument was to be even more splendid
than Caesars Forum. Of course, the new first citizen also undertook other novel projects throughout Rome and the empire. All,
however, had similar problems. How were they to be financed?
How would they be designed? From what materials would they
be constructed?
Financing
The answers to these questions affected all of Augustus buildings, but they were particularly important for his vast expenditures on the old Forum, the traditional political center of the
Roman world.2 While Augustus provided some funds for utilitarian monuments, roads, bridges, and harbors, he also required
local communities and private benefactors to copay the costs,
and, although the imperial government subsequently maintained
these monuments, it also had considerable help from taxes paid by

local landowners.3 The costs of government buildings like basilicas came from the treasury of the state or from private grants.4
Under the Republic, manubiae, military spoils, had paid most
of the expenses for grandiose public monuments,5 and Augustus
continued that tradition.6 The enormous booty from his conquest
of Egypt in 31 must have underwritten most of his early buildings
on the site,7 and these expenditures demonstrated to the citizens
of Rome the liberalitas of their new ruler.8
BuildingTypes
Temples. Long established, the older temples Vesta, Castor
and Pollux, Saturn, and Concord were traditionally laid out.
Only the Temple of Vesta, derived from a primitive round hut,
was uniquely circular. On a high podium, the outer colonnade
encircled the facade, but the stair to the podium was confined
to the northeast side and aligned with the entrance to the cella
(20.14, 15, 17). All the other temples were rectangular, frontally
oriented buildings on high podia reached by formal stairways
(Figs. 0.1, 4, 1.26).9
In some, like the imperial Temple of Castor (Fig.18.8), the
porch columns continued around the sides and back of the
building. Usually they ended at the facade of the cella with its
handsomely decorated front door (Antoninus and Faustina Figs
3.1517; Caesar Figs. 4.79; Concord Figs. 9.810; Vespasian
Figs. 610; Saturn Figs. 13.810), and pilasters either divided
b c e 14 c e )
11
12
the lateral walls into bays (Vespasian 10.7, 9)and/or served as

vertical points of emphasis at the backs of the porches and at or
near the rear corners of the buildings (Antoninus and Faustina
Figs. 3.15, 17; Caesar Fig.4.9). On other temples (Saturn Figs.
13.8, 10; Vesta Figs. 20.6, 14), columns attached to or embedded
in cella walls replaced the pilasters: the fronts of the columns
divided the sides and back facades intobays.
Basilicas. The Republican Forum originally had three or four
basilicas (Fig.1.1), although by the beginning of Augustus reign
or shortly thereafter, two no longer stood. Built by the elder Cato
in 184, the oldest of these, the Basilica Porcia located near the
Curia Hostilia, had burned along with the Curia during the disorders of 52.10 The Basilica Opimia may have adjoined the old
Temple of Concord, but while it could have been intact in 31, it
disappeared shortly afterward, leaving only the Aemilia and the
incomplete Julia.
Initially both probably had very similar plans. Rectangular
structures, they turned one long side toward the Forum.11 Streets
framed the other sides, and external colonnades gave access to
the interiors. The Forum facades also had colonnades in front
of shop rows, and stairways took visitors to second-floor terraces from which they could view the Forum. Short halls led
through the shops into interiors divided by colonnades into wide
naves flanked by narrow aisles. Walls and columns were of tufa.
Travertine blocks reinforced weak areas, and travertine was used
for column bases and capitals. As in the temples, stucco probably
hid (and embellished) the masonry. Roofs were identical to those

of temples (if larger) and consisted of wooden trusses and beams
protected externally by tiles. To lessen their weight and decorate
the spaces below, the wooden ceilings were coffered and would
also have been finished with stucco.
In the late Republic, architects introduced significant innovations. The first probably appeared when the consul Lucius
Aemilius Paulus rebuilt the Basilica Aemilia in 55.12 Influenced
no doubt by the designs of the Tabularium and the just-completed
Theater of Pompey (dedicated in the same year), Paulus architect roofed the shops by a series of parallel barrel vaults and the
arcade in front of them by a line of groin vaults. These vaults supported the wide terrace above the shops and arcade. The vaults
also radically altered the character of the facade. To provide adequate support for them, an arcade replaced the old front colonnade, its piers (as in the Tabularium and the Theater of Pompey)
ornamented with engaged columns. The walls were still of tufa
and travertine, but the new vaults would have been of concrete.
While more sumptuously executed, the interior of the basilica
behind the arcade probably changed very little.
These innovations were under way or had just been completed when Caesar began to rebuild the old Basilica Sempronia
as the Basilica Julia. Like Paulus architect(s), Caesars builders
devised an entirely new plan (Fig.14.12).13 It included piers and
vaults like the portico in the Aemilia but on a much grander
scale. Used throughout the building, they produced a larger,
stronger, multistoried structure of unprecedented design. The old
chapter
front shops, the tabernae veteres, were transferred to the back of

the building. Still accessible to the patrons of the basilica, henceforth they could be independently reached from a back street.
Thus much of the structures commercial activity could be carried on independently without disturbing legal proceedings in
the nave. On the back facade, shop doors facing a street replaced
the arcade. 14 Caesar dedicated this still incomplete new building
in 46, and when it burned in 14, Augustus rebuilt it larger and
more splendidly finished (infra, p.29).15
Shops (Tabernae).16 According to Livy,17 Tarquinius Priscus
(616579), the first of Romes two Etruscan kings, divided the
area around the Forum into private lots and built porticoes and
shops (tabernae). Butchers originally occupied many of the latter
(tabernae lanienae), but in the late fourth century, silversmiths or
money changers (Argentariae) took over those on the north side
of the piazza. By the late third century, rows of shops determined
the character and appearance of both the north and south sides
of the Forum. Offering protection against the weather, colonnades
along their facades linked the shops together into larger commercial structures, and terraces on the upper floors overlooked the
piazza. During the Second Punic War, arsonists burned the two
rows of shops (March 23, 210 BCE), but, as important parts of the
Forums civic furniture, both were quickly replaced. The south
group, the Seven shops, was rebuilt first in 209 after fires as
the Five.18 By 169, they had become known as the Veteres,
the old shops.19 Enlivening their facades, a famous work by the
scene painter Serapio was protected by projecting, second-story

maenian balconies, named after the owner of the first balcony
that overlooked the Forum, and the other art in the shops seems
to have been either satiric or popular in character.20 Rebuilt in
the same year as the old shops,21 the commercial row on the
north side of the Forum came to be known as the Argentariae
Novae (new money changers row) or simply as the Novae
(the new shops).22
The days of these separate shop rows in the Forum were coming to a close, however. The last five shops built near the Forum
during the Republic were integrated into the second story of the
Tabularium in 78.23 Offering modern tourists extended vistas of
the Forums ruins, this arcaded gallery is today accessible from
the basement of the Capitoline Museum. In antiquity, however,
as a paved, covered street accessed through high arches to the
north and south,24 it connected the Capitolium and the Arx. The
gabled roof of the old Temple of Concord closed off the first two or
three arches at the north end of this street, but most of its arcades
were open, flooding the interior with light and giving customers of
the shops sweeping views of the Forum (Figs. 0.23). For nearly
the first century of its existence, the shops in this fine arcade,
profiting from their handsome views, probably sold the luxurious
products that attracted an upper-class clientele. After the new
temples of Concord and Vespasian went up in the first century
CE, however, their massive roofs blocked out most of the arcades
light and hid the wonderful views of the Forum (Figs. 0.4, 1.3).
If the shops survived thereafter, they must have sold only poorer
b c e 14 c e )
13
14
merchandise, but their proprietors may have abandoned them

altogether, using the empty spaces only for storage.
All the new shops must have reproduced the plans of earlier
Forum shops. Nonetheless, following the design of the Tabularium
arcade, one significant design change took place: shop rows were
no longer completely independent. To construct an enlarged basilica on the site of the Sempronia, Caesar had demolished the old
shops, the tabernae veteres, and, to compensate for their loss,
had included a row of new ones in his basilica but to emphasize the open, public character of its Forum side, he banished the
seventeen shops to a back wing. While accessible from the basilica, these stores although some may have been offices also
opened into the street behind the building. Indeed, since most of
their supplies must have come from that street, these shops were
rather more separate from the life of the basilica and the Forum
than those attached to the Basilica Aemilia. The heavy vaulting that survives in the southwest corner of the Basilica Julia
indicates that, closed off from the Basilica, the windows of the
shop mezzanines must have opened into the back street. And
from there, stairways could have led to offices and apartments
on a third floor, giving the basilicas south facade the character of
an insula, an apartment house with a commercial ground floor
and halls that led to the interior of the basilica. When Augustus
rebuilt the structure after a disastrous fire in 12 (infra, p.27), he
kept this arrangement.
The position and architectural treatment of the Argentariae
was very different. Long attached to the Basilica Fulvia-Aemilia
(or vice versa), when rebuilt along with the basilica, they were the
most important architectural part of the new complex. Their plan

(Fig. 5.18) repeated that of the earlier shop block: generously
proportioned stores, close access to the Forum, a broad internal corridor, and, for the proprietors of the shops, living space in
mezzanines lighted (as in the Tabularium) from the access corridor.25 Their size and adroitly finished marble fittings completely
outclassed those of their predecessor (Fig.5.12). Both the covered arcade and the eleven new shops were decorated with marble. Between the shops the three discreetly integrated marble
halls that led into the basilica were the same size as the adjacent
stores. Only their wide openings into the arcade and their richer
internal decorations distinguished these vestibules from their
commercial neighbors.
The locations of other shops in the imperial Forum were associated with one or perhaps two religious structures, the Temple of
Castor and Pollux and the Portico of the Dei Consentes. Owing to
the design of its podium, Castors tabernae (Figs. 18.3, 10) were
narrow, restricted spaces without mezzanine windows. Some, in
fact, seem to have been used only as bank vaults. Still, if the
physical limitations of the premises did not attract the same highclass business that distinguished the basilica stores, the customers may still have come from a slightly better class than many of
the neighborhood habitus: those [in the nameless street behind
the Temple of Castor] whom you would do ill to trust too quickly
or the gay hustlers who hung out in the Vicus Tuscus on the east
side of the temple.26 Yet, like the two cobblers who occupied adjacent shops and came to blows over the death of a pet crow in the
early first century CE (infra, p.289), these tiny stores probably
chapter
housed only lower-class tradesmen like the barber/dentist who

conducted his business in the north shop on the west side of the
podium, the largest of the temples shops. Accessible through a
trap door, a channel in its floor, originally covered with wooden
boards, served as a drain for hair, nail cuttings, and teeth. Water
poured into the channel expedited after-hours cleanups, but the
existence of the channel also assured superstitious customers
that parts of their bodies could not fall into the hands of practitioners of black magic.27 Some of the shops had metal grills in front
of their doors; some attached fixtures to the pilaster bases that
flanked the doors. When one adds to this the different interiors,
functions and customers of the tabernae, a bazaar-like picture is
conjured up.28
The first- and second-story rooms in the Portico of the Dei
Consentes look like shops (Figs. 12.12, 4, 12): on the main floor,
smallish rooms with wide doors behind an L-shaped portico; on
the ground floor, six similar rooms that flank the little street that
runs between the portico and the Temple of Vespasian. The surviving architectural details are too fine for a commercial building,
however. On the upper floor, the portico columns have shafts of
expensive Greek cipollino with elaborately decorated flutes (see
p.217; Figs 12.1, 1213); and the white marble Corinthianizing
capitals include trophies, some with the sagging pectorals and
pot bellies of satirical cartoons (Figs. 12.89, 13). That the rooms
behind the colonnade did not have mezzanine windows suggests
uninhabited spaces. The rooms on the street below also lacked
mezzanine windows, and, in place of the travertine thresholds
that appear in virtually all Roman shops, they had thresholds

of marble and internal marble decorations (p. 217). In short,
while one of the rooms on the main floor may have been used as
a small shrine to the Dei Consentes, most of this structure seems
to have been divided into rows of small government offices, and
the building may in fact have been a Flavian replacement for the
republican annex to the Tabularium demolished for the Temple of
Vespasian (infra, pp. 40, 212).
Materials
Wood and Metals. The wooden boats and carts that transported
building materials to Rome and all kinds of woods, oak, willow,
chestnut, elm, ash, cypress, and pine played an important part
at every stage of building projects. Scaffolds were of oak (for the
sturdy support posts) and willow, alder, beech, and poplar (for the
planks) the same woods used in the forms needed for pouring
concrete.29 Internally of wood, the roofs of the Forums buildings
had external tiles.30 For buildings that required light roofs (like
the Temple of Vesta), these were probably made of thin sheets of
bronze protected and enhanced by gold facing. The commonest
metals in the Forums buildings iron, lead, and bronze came
from widely scattered sources: iron mines from Elba, Gaul, and
Britain; copper and lead from Spain; tin for bronze, from southwest Britain.31
Travertine, Tufa, Concrete, Pozzolana, Selce. Local
quarries provided less expensive stone. The tufa blocks that
b c e 14 c e )
15
16
characterized foundations (Saturn) and wall cores (Antoninus

and Faustina, Vespasian) came from sites in and around Rome.
The travertine in areas that required a stronger material, corners,
and foundation facings (the Temple of Vespasian) was quarried
near Tibur (modern Tivoli) a few miles outside Rome. The materials for the concrete that provided the bulk of the material inside
foundations (the Temples of Caesar, Vespasian, Castor, Concord,
Vesta) and formed wall cores and vaults (the podia of the Temples
of Antoninus and Faustina, Caesar, Saturn, the Basilicas Julia
and Aemilia) also had local sources. Its reddish-brown volcanic
sand (pozzolana) originated near Rome or came from the Bay of
Naples. The selce, a hard gray to black volcanic stone used for fill
in the concrete and for street pavers, also had local quarries.
The larger second- and early first-century republican shrines
had travertine Corinthian capitals and bases with tufa shafts
assembled from sections or drums, all expertly finished in stucco.
Surviving examples include the temple on the Via delle Botteghe
Oscure near Piazza Venezia,32 the Sullan phases of temples A and
B in Largo Argentina, and, in the Forum, the Temples of Concord
and (probably) of Castor. However finely worked, the capitals
and bases needed regular maintenance, and subsequent repairs
might not accurately reproduce the original designs.
Marble. By the later second century, Roman aristocrats, while
traveling widely in the marble-clad cities of the Greek East, had
been impressed by their monuments and thus had introduced
marble architecture into Rome (Fig. G6). Thereafter, builders for
whom expense was unimportant chose marble. Dense and easily carved, it supported details more finely worked than those in
stucco and was far more durable. Indeed, for designers of expensive, lavishly executed luxury projects, like the mid-secondcentury round temple in the Forum Boarium,33 Pentelic marble
was a favored if prohibitively expensive material.
By 40, however, after the Roman conquest of Liguria in the
second century, new quarries at Luna (modern Luni) on the
northwestern Italian coast had begun to produce a less expensive
substitute.34 Consequently, for costly temples, most exterior fittings, revetments, and tiles were of white Luna marble. For particularly fine work like statues or delicately carved reliefs, Augustus
still imported Pentelic marble from Athens, Proconnesian marble
from the island of Proconnesus in the Sea of Marmara off the
northwest coast of modern Turkey, or marble from the Aegean
Island of Thasos. For interiors, white marble fittings contrasted
with column shafts, pavements, and revetments of colored stone,
red and gray granite, alabaster, porphyry, and colored marbles
from all parts of the Mediterranean (Fig. G6). The most popular of
the latter included white, purple-veined pavonazzetto; reddishpurple, black-veined africano from Asia (modern Turkey); graygreen cipollino from the Aegean island of Carystos; and golden,
purple-veined giallo antico from Numidia (modern Tunisia).
Techniques of Construction
Foundations. While Augustus buildings in the Forum had
major political and artistic significance, the manner of their
chapter
construction was typical of the late Republic/early empire. Their

deep foundations of unfaced concrete (where visible) supported
massive concrete podia that raised the buildings above the Forum
pavement and leveled their interiors.35 The basilica podia were
comparatively low;36 those of the temples ranged from just under
4 m to 10 m.37 Spread footings,38 slightly wider foundations,
supported these platforms. Courses of stone, tufa, or travertine,
held in place by swallow-tail clamps, framed them,39 and layers
of concrete, either solid, filled with earth,40 or configured with
hollow spaces or rooms, occupied their interiors.41 The walls
above, also of tufa or travertine blocks, had the same dimensions
as those of the podia.42 Like them, the sides of the blocks would
have been shaped in the quarry, leaving a protective surface a
few centimeters thick.43 When a block arrived on the site, masons
used a crane operated by two or more men to lift it and then
smooth-finished its surface.44 Since both the podia and wall cores
of imperial monuments had marble veneers and moldings, their
blocks were not polished with sandstone or pumice.45
Columns. Travertine blocks or piers supported the columns.46
Cut from single marble blocks, the composite bases included
double scotias on square plinths (Glossary, Figs. G2, 5). The
shafts had three drums of varying heights. When these arrived
from the quarry, thin, outer layers of marble protected the final
surfaces. At the ends of each drum, narrow borders, cut to the
final diameter, guided masons in assembling the shafts. As additional aids, they inserted three bronze pins into the bottom of
each upper drum. By sliding these into correspondingly located

sockets on the drum below, they accurately fitted together both
drums. To allow for slight shifts as the drums were put in place,
the positions of these pins varied. After they had raised the
shafts, the stonecutters removed the protective outer layers on
the drums and cut each shaft into an identical final profile: the
lower part of the shaft rose straight for the first third of its height,
then narrowed to a lesser upper diameter (entasis and diminution). Finally, masons on scaffolds fluted the shafts.47
Corinthian Capitals. Corinthian capitals were variously
manufactured. Masons either completely finished them in their
shops48 or, partly roughing them out, raised them into position
on site and finished them from scaffolds. Sometimes they combined the two methods. The volutes of the capitals of the Temple
of Vespasian are separated from their bells, and, to prevent the
volutes from breaking, the workmen may have positioned the
capital before cutting away the infills that attached the upper
sections of the volutes to the bell.49 However the capital was
made, occasionally the projecting tip of an acanthus leaf broke.
To avoid abandoning the piece (and all the work it represented),
the sculptor bored a hole in the position of the broken tip and,
inserting a smaller piece of marble, cut it to the proper shape.
With the capital in position, the substitution would have been
scarcely noticeable, but an application of stucco may have hidden the division between the insertion and the original leaf. And
finally, on the top of the abacus was a raised, square pad. With
b c e 14 c e )
17
18
sides equal to the width of the architrave above, this pad, invisible from the ground, cushioned the weight of the architrave and
prevented it from breaking off the fleurons and the projecting
corners of the abacus.50
Architrave/Friezes and Cornices. The manufacture of architrave/friezes architrave and frieze combined in a single stone
and cornices was very similar to that of capitals. Architrave/
frieze blocks were the length of an intercolumniation (from
column center to column center). Corner blocks either were
L-shaped or had an L-shaped corner.51 In the latter case, the
similarly configured end of the adjacent block was reversed, and
swallow-tail clamps helped steady the joint. At corners, cornice
blocks might be L-shaped or square like that at the northeast
corner of the Temple of Vespasian. There, facing the facade,
the front and right sides are profiled; the back and left sides,
smoothly finished.52 Adjacent cornice blocks were usually considerably shorter than the architrave/frieze blocks below, and
bronze and swallow-tail clamps stabilized the joints.
Both architrave/frieze and cornice blocks were sometimes
nearly finished in the shop and, when set in position, had only
a few incomplete areas.53 Alternatively, artisans worked them
on the site. In either case, less skilled stonecutters roughed out
the different levels with a point chisel.54 The front and the back
architrave of architrave/frieze blocks were usually profiled; the
backs of cornice blocks were unfinished.55 Masons more experienced than the initial stonecutters established models of the final
profiles as guidelines by cutting a series of vertical strips 4cm

wide separated initially by unfinished zones.56 Then they positioned the block and, standing on scaffolds, extended the final
profile along its whole length starting from the vertical strips.57
After similarly finishing the adjacent blocks, they carved the decorations of the moldings or completed the unfinished sections of
a block worked on the ground.58 In either case, the sculptors who
cut the decorations, probably far more experienced than those who
had previously worked on the block, specialized in carving one or
more types of ornament (egg-and-dart, bead-and-reel, etc.). Those
responsible for a floral frieze must have been even more senior,
and only the best sculptors would have executed figured reliefs.
Roofs. The temples of the Forum were sizeable structures,59
and while there is little evidence for the structure of their roofs,60
later examples suggest that those in the Forum consisted of rows
of triangular wooden trusses aligned with the columns or pilasters at the sides of the building and set into sockets in the lateral cornice blocks and the front and back pediments.61 Each
truss had four principal parts: a flat tie beam across the cella,
two raking principal rafters, and a central, vertical king post.
Since all four were in tension, they formed a rigid structure that
transferred the weight of the roof to the walls. At right angles to
the principal rafters, the purlins above connected the trusses,
and over these, common rafters paralleled the principal ones.
Contiguous boards on the common rafters supported the tiles
that completed the roof.62 The latter were of marble or terracotta
chapter
and consisted of pan tiles of variable sizes with flanges concealed on the completed roof by semicircular or triangular cover
tiles hidden on the sides of the buildings by decorated acroteria
(Figs. 20.1519).63
The roofs of the naves in the basilicas were almost certainly
identical to those of the temples (Figs. 0.34), but since the
naves were narrower than the temple cellas,64 they were less
technically demanding. The roofs over the third-story side aisles
of the Basilica Aemilia were probably supported by shed roofs
(Fig.5.17), but the arcade on the Forum and the lateral aisles
and shops in the Basilica Julia had vaulted roofs (Fig. 5.17).
In both buildings, these were probably groin vaults over the
aisles,65 but in the Basilica Aemilia, each of the front shops had
its own one-and-a-half-story barrel vault over the shop and its
mezzanine (Fig. 5.12). In both basilicas, stone piers or walls
supported these vaults, and their construction required the scaffolds and wooden forms that modern scholars have extensively
discussed.66
Interiors. As first-class imperial buildings, the temples and
basilicas in the Forum had elaborate internal decorations: floors,
the lower sections of walls, and columns were embellished
with colored marbles.67 Upper walls (as in the enormously high
Curia)68 would have had paintings (Fig.6.15)69 and were probably also fitted with the kinds of stucco moldings found around
the Bay of Naples and used in earlier periods for the exteriors of
temples and other public buildings.70 Wooden ceilings and the
intrados of vaults will also have been enlivened with geometric

and human figures, plant motifs, and moldings in painted and
gilded stucco. Larger architectural elements (base moldings, column bases and capitals, small architrave/friezes and cornices)
were either of white marble or, in the richest interiors, of colored
marbles. In the Temple of Concord, the surviving threshold of the
entrance is of africano. The lower, vertical section of the interior
base molding is revetted with cipollino; the upper, molded section, with giallo antico; the orthostat above, with pavonazzetto
(Figs. 9.3, 4), and the columns of the tabernacles were of giallo
antico. Surviving fragments of portasanta and pavonazzetto provided additional contrasts. A list of randomly preserved marble
fragments from the interior of the Temple of Castor and Pollux
indicates an equally ambitious marble decor;71 and the presence
of so many varicolored marbles in both temples suggests that for
all the grandiose interiors of the Forum, striking visual contrasts
were important elements of design.72
Style: The CorinthianOrder

After the reign of Augustus (d. 14 CE), virtually all the temples in
the Forum had Corinthian orders (Figs. 1.710).73 On its origins,
Vitruvius, the famous Augustan architect, relates this charming
anecdote (4.1.910):74
A young Corinthian girl was struck down by disease and
passed away. After her burial, her nurse collected the few little things which the girl had delighted in during her life, and
b c e 14 c e )
19
20
Fig.1.7. Capital from the Temple of the Sybil at Tivoli. (G. Gorski)
Fig.1.8. Capital from the Temple of Apollo Sosianus. (G. Gorski)
Fig.1.9. Capital from the Round Temple by the Tiber. (G. Gorski)
Fig.1.10. Capital from the Temple of Mars Ultor. (G. Gorski)
chapter
gathering them all in a basket, placed this basket on top of the

grave. So the offering might last there a little longer, she covered
the basket with a rooftile.
This basket, supposedly, happened to have been put down on
top of an acanthus root. By springtime, therefore, the acanthus
root, which had been pressed down in the middle all the while by
the weight of the basket, began to send out leaves and tendrils,
and its tendrils, as they grew along the side of the basket, turned
outward; when they met the obstacle of the corners of the roof
tile, they first began to curl over at the ends and finally they were
induced to create coils at the edges.
Callimachus, who was called Katatexitechnos [thoroughly
skilled] by the Athenians for the elegance and refinement of his
work in marble, passed by this monument and noticed the basket and the fresh delicacy of the leaves enveloping it. Delighted
by the nature and form of this novelty, he began to fashion col-
century, the order had become so popular that it was the obvious
choice for new temples in the Roman Forum and elsewhere. But
which Corinthian style would their architects adopt? Was it to be
the Italic capital or the elaborately ornamented Corinthianizing
capitals Gaius Sosius had used in 32 for the external order of his
Temple of Apollo in circo (Fig.1.8)? Neither completely satisfied Augustan designers. They viewed the Italic style as cheap
and provincial,78 while to Augustus own austere, classicizing
tastes, Sosius profusely decorated capitals held little appeal.
Instead, the artisans who modeled the capitals for his temple to
Mars Ultor (Fig.1.10) copied a Hellenistic order of the previous
century, that of the Round Temple by the Tiber (Fig.1.9).79 With
minor revisions derived in part from the Temple of Apollo in Circo
(Fig.1.8),80 the capitals from the Round Temple became the precursors of the later ones of the Temples of Castor (Fig.18.11) and
probably of Concord (Fig.9.11) in the imperial Roman Forum.81
umns for the Corinthians on this model, and he set up symmetries and thus he drew up the principles for completing works of
the Corinthiantype.
However accurate this tale, after the Corinthian capital first

appeared in late fifth-century Greece,76 it evolved gradually during the next centuries.77 By the first century BCE, the Italians had
devised a popular variant with exaggerated features and fleshy,
scalloped leaves, a type preserved today in the ruins of the socalled Temple of Vesta or the Sibyl at Tivoli (Fig.1.7). By the next
75
Design: The AugustanForum

For his own Forum, Caesar had used a plan derived from the fora
of provincial Italian towns: a rectangular space flanked on three
sides by columnar porticos with a temple at one of the short ends.
Augustus adopted a variant of the same plan for his own new
Forum, but the ancient traditions of the Republic, which Augustus
claimed to have restored, determined the layout of the old Forum:
a lively mix of temples, basilicas, and commercial zones.
b c e 14 c e )
21
22
Buildings
The Temple of Caesar
Replacing the Gradus Aurelii, an area with seats and a rostrum in
wood (Fig.1.1), the site of the urban praetors court,82 the Temple
of Caesar was an Augustan addition to the Forum (Figs. 0.1, 3,
1.2, 4.110). Yet, Caesars cremation had consecrated the site,
and the decision of Augustus (then called Octavian) and the
other triumvirs to build a temple to the slain dictator celebrated
their fidelity to his memory and advanced their political ambitions. During Octavians struggle for power, the construction of
the temple languished, and it was not finished and consecrated
until 29, after the celebrations for his victory over Antony and
Cleopatra at Actium in 31. For these, Octavian canceled all debits owed by the people and held a magnificent triumphal procession that lasted for three days. As described by Dio Cassius,
[A] vast amount of money circulated through all parts of the city
alike, and the Romans forgot all their unpleasant experiences
and viewed his triumph with pleasure, quite as if the vanquished
had all been foreigners. The first day of the triumph celebrated
Octavians victories along the Adriatic coast; the second, his victory at Actium; the third, his conquest of Egypt.
But the Egyptian celebration surpassed them all in costliness and magnificence. Among other features, an effigy of the
dead Cleopatra upon a couch was carried by, so that she too,
Fig.1.11. Caesarian denarius (l.), 44 BCE: obverse, head of Caesar,

veiled and wreathed; reverse, statue of Victory with a staff or spear
and shield. (Numismatica Ars Classica NACAG)
together with the other captives and with her children, Alexander,
also called Helios [the sun], and Cleopatra, also called Selene
[the moon], were a part of the spectacle and a trophy in the
procession.83
Against all earlier traditions, the Senate emphasized Octavians
unprecedented power by following his triumphal chariot into the
city.84 After these festivities came the consecration of Caesars
new temple and of the Curia. Each celebrated the extraordinary
positions Augustus and his family now held. Symbolizing both,
the statue of Venus Genetrix that may have crowned the pediment
of the temple appears on a series of denarii issued by P. Sepullius
Macer (Fig.1.11).
chapter
Fig.1.12. Augustan denarius (r.), 2927 BCE: obverse, head of

Augustus; reverse, the Augustan Curia. (Dr.Busso Peus Nachfolger)
The CuriaJulia
After Caesars assassination, Octavian continued the construction
of Caesars new Curia Julia (p.119). Nothing of the Augustan
Curia survives, but its portrait on Augustan coins (Figs. 1.12, 6.2)
suggests that the surviving Diocletianic building (Figs. 1.6, 6.1,
419) copied it very closely. It was aligned with the south colonnade of Caesars new Forum and opened to the south onto the old
Forum. Since it was formally a temple, a pediment crowned the
high rectangular facade. As in its Diocletianic successor, a side
stair led to the portico on the Augustan coins, Ionic, and in the
Diocletianic building, Corinthian that shaded the high, paneled
front door. Above were the three lofty rectangular windows that
were reproduced in the Diocletianic building, and the inscription
on the entablature read IMP CAESAR (Figs. 1.12, 6.2). The
pediment had sculpture, and the statues above (and probably the
reliefs in the pediment) were three-dimensional representations
of Augustan propaganda. At the peak of the gable, a winged victory stood on an orb that represented the world. In her left hand,
she held a crown of victory; in her right, a palm leaf, trophy, or
military banner.85 With their right hands, the draped, probably
female, lateral figures raised lances; with their left, naval implements that recalled the battle at Actium. The right figure held an
anchor; the left, a rudder.86
While the new Curia Julia (Fig. 6.2) was probably very
similar to the Sullan building it replaced, it accommodated
Augustus new, much larger Senate. The dedicatory inscription and statuary on the facade reminded each senator, at every
visit, of Augustus high military position, of his extraordinary
naval victory, and of the exalted religious, social, and political
status of Octavians family, the Julian clan. Dedicated in 29, the
Temple of Caesar (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 4.110) conveyed the same
kinds of visual messages. Closing the east side of the Forum,
it hid the old Regia, and a later cryptoporticus (Figs. 4.7, 9)
attached the two buildings, visually connecting Caesars temple and the regime it symbolized with the hall that represented
Romes ancient monarchy (infra, p.86). Of the shrine itself, a
colossal cult statue of Caesar was the chief feature. Clad in a
toga with covered head, he was shown as Pontifex Maximus in
the act of sacrifice (Fig. 4.3). As coins indicate, the doors of
the temple may have been left open on special occasions, and,
clearly visible in a shallow cella that was little more than its
b c e 14 c e )
23
24
shelter, the gigantic cult statue would have been the central feature of the buildings design. Apelles famous painting of Venus,
the ancestress of the Julian clan, may also have been visible
through the open door, and the star on the pediment above
recalled the famous comet of Caesar that had appeared in the
year of his assassination (44).87 A Caesarian coin that depicts a
statue of Venus Genetrix holding a victory (Fig.1.11) another
reference to the grandeur and antiquity of Augustus family and
his own achievements may show the statue that crowned the
pediment. The bronze prows from Antony and Cleopatras ships
on the front of the temples Rostra (Figs. 4.1, 8) were further
reminders of Augustus victory at Actium. Mirroring the prows
on the Augustan Rostra at the west end of the Forum, commemorations of Romes fourth-century victory over a Latin fleet
from Antium (modern Anzio; Figs. 1.3, 8.2, 10), the Caesarian
bronzes implied that the victory at Actium had equalled that
earlier victory, one traditionally recognized as a major event in
the annals of the early Republic.88
The East Arches

The completed Temple of Caesar was initially isolated from the
two flanking basilicas, but Augustus designers later connected
them conceptually and visually. They installed a new south
branch of the Via Sacra that, beginning at the Fornix Fabianus
(the Arch of Fabius) on the south side of the Regia (Figs. 1.13,
Gatefold 1), ran along the facade of the Basilia Julia and ended at
Fig.1.13. The east side of the Forum looking west toward the
Capitoline Hill. In the foreground are (from the l.) the Arch
of Fabius (Fornix Fabianus), the Regia, the Arch of Gaius and
Lucius, and the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina. (G. Gorski)
the Clivus Capitolinus. An arch spanned each branch connecting

the temple visually with its neighbors.
The earlier of the two, the Parthian Arch of Augustus (Figs.
0.3, 1.2, 19.1), was aligned with but slightly behind the facade
of the temple, and on the south it almost touched the temple
of Castor. The first and for some centuries the only triple
arch in the Forum, it celebrated Augustus recovery of the standards Crassus had lost to the Parthians in 53. The high central
wing was its dominant feature. Framing the middle of the Via
Sacra, it had finely finished reliefs and architectural elements
in imported Proconnesian marble. In a fashionably modern
Corinthian style, the engaged columns that flanked the central
opening echoed the adjacent temples of Caesar and Castor while
the monumental inscription on the attic (Figs. 19.1, 8) listed the
offices Augustus had held during his negotiations for the standards with the Parthians and specifically mentioned the recovery of these sacred trophies. Very probably of gilded bronze, the
statuary above portrayed the event as a military victory. Dressed
as a soldier, Augustus drove a quadriga led by soldiers, a visual
reference that implied a military victory. Fluted, elaborately decorated Doric columns supported airy lateral wings of Luna marble crowned with pediments. On the apex of each, the statue of a
Parthian saluted the emperor in the quadriga above with raised
spear. Elaborately decorated, these wings subtly connected the
facade of the arch with those of the flanking basilicas. Handsome
tabernacles inside the three passages through the arch framed
official lists of consuls and those who had triumphed (Fig.19.9).89
chapter
Fig.1.14. View of the facade of the Arch of Gaius

and Lucius looking west on the Via Sacra between
the Regia (l.) and the Temple of Antoninus and
Faustina (r.). (G. Gorski)
Not only did Augustus power confirm the ancient traditions of

the Republic, but it also protected its historical records.
For some years, the north branch of the Via Sacra lacked a
pendant to the Arch of Augustus. Augustus, however, matched it
with a new monument built over the north branch of the Via Sacra
and connected with both the Basilica Aemilia and the Temple of
Caesar (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 1314, 5.1, 18, 20). The remains of this
Portico of Gaius and Lucius (Augustus grandsons)90 were partly
cleared in two separate excavations, and a dedicatory inscription
that may come from the monument (Figs. 1.1314, 5.20) suggests
a construction date late in the first century.91 The portico was
apparently connected with a continuation of the south arcade of
the Basilica Aemilia, and, by the use of an elaborate Doric order,
its west facade at least may have repeated the designs of the
facades of the Basilica and the Arch of Augustus (Figs. 0.3, 1.2,
5.1, 18, 20). To match the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, the
east facade may, however, have been remodeled in the late second century CE with a Corinthian Order (Figs. 1.1314).92
The Basilicas
The Basilica Aemilia. While Augustus was finishing the
east side of the Forum, he also had the opportunity to redo
its central section by rebuilding both the Basilica Aemilia in
14 and the Basilica Julia in 12. We know little about the elevation of the Basilica Aemilia in 34, but its facade may have
had some of the features of the building erected twenty years
later by M. Aemilius Lepidus, Augustus and the friends of
Paullus. Like its predecessors, the earlier structure probably

had shields above the entablature of the arcade on the facade.93
The Augustan basilica, partly redecorated some years later
(22 CE) by M. Aemilius, was constructed of white marble with
finely carved architectural elements (Figs. 1.6, 5.1, 1821).
The Doric columns of the arcade were richly decorated (infra,
p.104) in a heavily Hellenistic style. The shields and bucrania
of the entablature, the statue pedestals, the pavonazzetto figures
of Parthian prisoners, and the imagines clipeatae of the attic
display an elegance and precision that suggest skilled sculptors. The anthemia that ornament the rectangular piers from the
second-story porch are among the finest of Augustan decorative
reliefs (Fig.5.13). Like all the Forums Augustan buildings, the
roof had marble tiles.94
The interior was even more lavish. The lower and upper colonnades (Ionic below, Corinthian above) had africano shafts; the
nave was paved with slabs of colored marbles: africano, giallo
antico, and cipollino (infra, pp. 110115).95 Dating from 55 to
34, the figured frieze of the lower order displays scenes from the
history of Rome (Fig.5.16). Tarpeia is punished, and the Sabine
women are raped amid energetically rearing horses, charging
combatants, and women with flowing hair and swirling garments.
Here the heroes of the early Republic save the state; there the
fate of traitorous Tarpeia contrasts with the seemly behavior of
properly married couples. While entertaining their viewers, such
morally uplifting scenes also delivered significant social messages: the value of heroic deeds, the importance of marriage, the
proper behavior for respectable Roman matrons.96
b c e 14 c e )
27
chapter
Fig.1.15. The west facade of the Basilica Julia showing a

half column with an Attic base. (G. Gorski su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
On the south and west facades, the classically detailed Doric

Order of the arcade provided a suitable backdrop for the north
side of the Forum and the Argiletum (Figs. 1.6, 5.1, 19, 6.1). The
busts in the imagines clipeatae of the attic on the facade probably mixed the faces of historical notables with those of Augustus
family and supporters. And, with their lovely Hellenistic faces
clearly the work of a master97 the Parthians that framed these
shields (infra, p.107) recalled the theme of the nearby Arch of
Augustus. Worked with superb skill in a restrained, knowledgeably eastern idiom, the rich materials and classicizing details of
the order of the arcade and its attic enhanced the artistic and
political status of the Forum and linked Rome with the best and
most recent architectural trends of the Greek world.
The Basilica Julia. Since the Augustan Basilica Julia perished in the great fire of 283 CE, we can make only an educated
guess about the character of its internal and external details. The
Diocletianic basilica preserves the Augustan plan (Fig. 14.12)
and even some of the original exterior walls (those of the possibly
Caesarian shops in the southwest corner, Fig.14.5) and parts of
the original travertine piers. Like the Basilica Aemilia, there was
an exterior arcade decorated with engaged Doric columns (Figs.
14.1017). Although two columns on the west facade preserve
attic bases and parts of unfluted shafts (Fig. 1.15), they may not
have reproduced their Augustan predecessors precisely. On the
Anaglypha Traiani,98 the keystones on the arches of the arcade are
decorated with lions heads framed laterally by acanthus leaves,
and below, by architectural moldings.99 That detail suggests an

elaborately finished Augustan facade.100 The upper sections of
the exterior could have displayed statuary and reliefs related to
Augustan propaganda.101 On Augustus interior, we have no exact
information, but, like its Diocletianic successor (Figs. 14.8, 12), it
must have had a fine floor of colored marbles.102 There may have
been one or more colossal statues (at the short ends of the nave?),103
and nave and aisles might have displayed statues by famous sculptors.104 There would also have been painted stucco decorations on
the piers and vaults around the nave,105 and, for both decoration
and propaganda, there were probably figured reliefs like those
in the Aemilia. Since Augustus named the reconstructed monument after his deceased grandchildren, the Basilica of Gaius and
Lucius, the building was apparently of great personal importance
to him, and he probably decorated it lavishly.106
The Temples
Saturn. The other major Augustan projects in the Forum were
all temples. With the exception of the Temple of Caesar (supra,
p.22), the earliest was Munatius Plancus Temple of Saturn (Figs.
21.2123). Begun in 42, it was completed twenty years later, long
after Augustus victory at Actium, when Plancus had become one
of his supporters. Consequently, although he retained control of
the project, he must surely have consulted with Augustus and
his architectural and artistic advisers, and the finished building would almost certainly have reflected their views. Its cornice of white Luna marble (Figs. 13.4, 7, 911) with its S-shaped
b c e 14 c e )
29
30
modillions (pp. 229231) resembled that of the Temple of Caesar

(under construction in the same period, Figs 4.2, 56, 10). The
walls and the elements of the Ionic order would also have been
Luna marble, and the fluted columns, their shafts assembled with
drums,107 would have had Attic bases.108 The necking bands that
the Anaglypha Traiani show on the shafts of the columns may
symbolize their rich decorations, and the frieze above was probably equally elaborate.109 Pilasters or half columns will have continued the order around the sides and back of the building.110
Castor (Figs. 1.45, 18.1, 811). Tiberius supervised the
reconstruction of Augustus last two temples in the Forum, those
of Castor and Concord. Largest and most elegant of the Forums
shrines, they both ultimately symbolized Tiberius extraordinary
position as Augustus heir. Yet, in the last years of the first century
BCE, troubles at court had complicated his role in these projects.
The fire that destroyed Caesars Basilica Julia before 12 also damaged the Temple of Castor, and Tiberius may have begun work on
the building during the reconstruction of the Basilica. The size
and complexity of the temple meant, however, that its rebuilding
proceeded slowly; and, before it was complete, family problems
(Augustus preference for his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius Caesar;
the serial infidelities of Tiberius wife, Augustus daughter Julia)
forced Tiberius to retire to Rhodes in 6. Eight years later (2 CE),
he returned to Rome, and with the deaths of Lucius that same year
and of Gaius two years later, Augustus finally recognized him as
his official heir. Once back in Rome, along with his more important
duties, he could again supervise the construction of both temples.
Reconstruction of the ruined Temple of Castor involved a number of important decisions. How would Tiberius pay for the work?
How big would the temple be? What style would be employed for
the new orders, the entablature, and the other decorations? What
materials would be used? Tiberius may have debated these questions with the sophisticated group of artisans and architects by
whom Augustus must have been surrounded during his numerous
construction projects. Indeed, many of these undertakings (like
the Forum of Augustus) were still in progress as work began on
the Temple of Castor, and Tiberius designers must have been
able to discuss their problems, conceptual and practical, with a
large number of skilled fellow craftsmen.
Tiberius and his advisers decided the important design
questions immediately. The spoils from Tiberius campaigns in
Germany paid for the new temple.111 Successor to a structure that
had been at the center of the political world of Rome for centuries, it was to be larger and more sumptuously finished than its
predecessor.112 Like the still incomplete Temple of Mars Ultor
in the Forum of Augustus, it was to have a Corinthian order,
and, while foundations and walls were to be of tufa, travertine,
and concrete, all the visible elements of the exterior would be
of Luna marble.113 As in the Temple of Mars Ultor, the fluted
shafts of the columns had drums of different heights;114 the bases
were Attic with double scotias (Figs. 18.11, G2).115 While the
Corinthian capitals were similar to those of Mars Ultor (Figs.
1.10, 18.11),116 they also had much in common with the external
capitals of the earlier Temple of Apollo in Circo (Fig.1.8) and
the lavishly ornamented capitals of the Hellenistic East.117 In
chapter
profile, the architrave followed that of Mars Ultor, but an atypical lotus and palmette relief on the center fascia enlivened the
design.118 The crown moldings of the two architraves were different,119 and both temples had undecorated friezes, although, while
assembled from many of the same moldings and ornaments, each
cornice was unique.120
Little remains of the interior,121 but random fragments show that
it was finely finished (infra, p.296). The inscription onthe architrave of the Forum facade has long vanished, but on theupper fascia of the architrave is recorded the dedication of the Temple of
Castor by Tiberius (called Tiberius Claudianus) and his brother
Drusus.122 The position of the inscription probably explains the
atypical decoration on the middle fascia: it emphasized and drew
attention to the inscription above. The mention of Drusus, dead
in the recent military campaigns in Germany in 9, both comforted the inhabitants of the capital (with whom he had been popular) and expressed Tiberius brotherly love. The brothers bond
recalled also the affection between the now deceased princes,
Gaius and Lucius Caesar, who had been Principes Iuventutis,
the heads of the states Young Equestrian Order. With this honor,
they had connected the Julian family both with the equestrians
and with the Temple of Castor, their traditional urban center. In
public and lasting fashion, the dedication of the magnificent new
temple by a second pair of (adopted) Julian princes renewed and
strengthened these earlier associations.123
Concord. The architectural style of the Temple of Concord was
very close to that of Castor, and the same workshops probably
turned their attention to Concord as work on the Castor project

wound down (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 9.111).124 Booty from Germany
again defrayed the building expenses (infra, p. 168), and the
materials of construction were identical to those used for Castor,
but site and size made the new temple more important. Alone
on the location of its predecessor below the massive walls of the
Tabularium, its cella was greatly enlarged, extending north (partly
incorporating the possible site of the older Basilica Opimia) and
south well beyond the position of the lateral colonnades of the
old rectangular Opimian temple.125 The new cella was thus more
than two and a half times as long as, and much wider than, that
of Castor.126 Even if it had been conventionally positioned just
behind the temples pronaos, it would have been unusually large.
These proportions, of course, resulted from Tiberius intention to
use the interior as art museum and meeting place for the Senate,
and the narrow width of the traditional site necessitated locating
the cella at right angles to the pronaos. Nonetheless, the cellas
great length and impressive height (28.75 m = 97 Roman feet,
roughly the size of a modern ten-story building) together made
the structure a commanding visual presence on the west side of
the Augustan Forum (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 21.2122).127
Although the cella of Concord was larger than that of Castor,
the exterior orders of both were approximately the same size (Figs.
9.11, 18.11),128 and their architraves and cornices had similar
profiles, although the cornice of Concord was more elaborately
decorated.129 Even with a simpler cornice, Castors Corinthian
capitals are lavishly configured, and their rich embellishments
suggest that, with a more ornate cornice, those of Concord were
b c e 14 c e )
31
32
at least as complex if not even more so. The decorated bases

and Corinthianizing capitals of Concords inner orders (Figs.
1.1617) also point toward an exterior order with elaborately
styled capitals.130
Size, rich decorations, and unusual plan set the Temple of
Concord apart from the other buildings in the Forum. Yet, more
importantly, these visual devices emphasized the structures symbolic meaning. The old temple had commemorated L. Opimius
infamous victory over a popular reformer (infra, pp. 167168).
To replace this well-known monument, Augustus himself, long
a devotee of Concord, the guardian of domestic peace and harmony, ordered the construction of the new temple. Drawing on
the spoils of a defeated Germany,131 Tiberius assigned himself
the project to celebrate his own victories and those of Drusus.132
Impressive and beautiful in their own right, the buildings great
size, fine marbles, and profuse ornamentation were thus the
three-dimensional expressions of a far-reaching military success
that had brought together access to wealth and the best artists in
the Mediterranean. The fine architectural decorations testified to
their skill. The famous Hellenistic statues and artistic oddities
in Tiberius museum inside symbolized the cultivated tastes and
powerful reach of the new regime.
The exterior sculpture emphasized these themes (Figs. 1.18,
9.7, 9). On the left side of the entry stair, the statue of Mercury
symbolizing wealth and commerce recalled Augustus, who
had been compared to a new Mercury. A bronze image of the
gods caduceus inset into the portasanta threshold of the cella
Fig.1.16. Decorated base from the interior order of the Temple of Concord. (J. Packer su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
chapter
b c e 14 c e )
33
Fig.1.18. Sestertius, reverse, facade of the Temple of Concord. (The

Trustees of the British Museum)
connected him even more intimately with the cella and its contents.133 The opposite statue of Hercules with his club symbolized
the end of strife in a Roman world now safe for Mercurys commerce. Indeed, as Tiberius himself is reported to have said in his
funeral oration for Augustus,
Fig.1.17. Corinthianizing capital from the interior order of the Temple of Concord. (J. Packer su
concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
Archeologici di Roma)
34
With Hercules alone and his exploits, I might compare him

[Augustus] and should be thought justified in so doing but
even so I should fall short of my purpose, in so far as Hercules
in childhood only dealt with serpents, and when a man, with a
stag or two and a boar which he killed, oh, yes, and a lion
whereas Augustus, not among beasts, but among men, of his own
free will, by waging war and enacting laws, literally saved the
commonwealth and gained splendid renown for himself.134
In the pediment relief, opposed reclining figures perhaps may

have raised a victory wreath.135 The statues above celebrated
Tiberius and Drusus, their loving fraternal association, their victories, and their close association with Concord herself.136
The Rostra and Its Neighbors

The Forums lesser monuments received the same careful attention. To provide a suitably ample setting for public speakers,
Augustus had, by 12 BCE, enlarged Caesars West Rostra (Figs.
8.45), but its colors and decorations and the features of the monuments with which he surrounded the new Rostra (Figs. 0.34,
1.3, 8.112) made it the visual center of the Forums west side.
The Rostras rich marble revetments portasanta panels framed
by africano borders (Figs. 8.2, 1112) contrasted with the surrounding, largely monochromatic architectural landscape, and
the bronze prows attached to its front panels provided further
lively accents. Two contiguous monuments added notes of architectural whimsy to the back of the Rostra. At its northwest corner
stood the Umbilicus urbis Romae, the belly button of Rome,

a small, round tholos with miniature columns and a gilded dome
or conical roof; at its southwest corner, the Miliarium Aureum,
a pedestal that supported a gilded column with attached brackets
and statuettes indicating distances to points outside the city (Figs.
8.1112). When viewed from the back of the Rostra (Fig.8.1),
both lateral monuments framed the curved staircase that led to
the speakers platform, enlivening and extending its rectilinear
facade. The small office of the scribes and heralds, the Schola
Xanthi next to the south side of the Rostra (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 8.10,
16.15), had a simple exterior (although the interior was richly
decorated with bronze seats and tablets and silver statues of the
gods), but its white marble decoration presumably, a dado,
door, and window frames and simple cornices could have provided a pleasingly restrained contrast to the colored marbles of
the Rostra.137
Meaning
With the final work on the West Rostra and the dedication of the
Temple of Concord, Augustus work in the Forum was complete;
with the help of a sophisticated (and probably ever-changing)
staff of architects and artists, he and members of his faction had
completely restored the Forum. In addition to the Temple of
Caesar and the flanking arches, he had given the central space a
new east end, but all the other structures were simply modernized
versions of their predecessors. These changes occurred gradually
chapter
over a period of nearly fifty years, and during these five decades,
the Forum must have been a constantly evolving construction site.
Yet, the projects were not random. Each must have been carried
out in strict accordance with a single general plan that probably
also developed as time passed. All the new construction used
the same material: marble. Expensive imported colored marbles
lavishly decorated the interiors, but behind blocks and slabs of
decorous white Luna marble or occasional white marble imports
from the Greek East, the exteriors with the exception of the
West Rostra (p.152) retained a proper republican gravitas.
The chief initial anchors for the new Augustan design were,
to the west, the preexisting Doric arcade of the Tabularium (Figs.
1.3, 21.21); to the east, the Temple of the Deified Caesar (Figs.
1.2, 4.1); and to the north and south, the facades of the Basilicas
Aemilia and Julia (Figs. 1.56). Indeed, substituting for the lateral colonnades of the new imperial fora and their republican
predecessors, the basilicas elegant Doric arcades (Figs. 5.1, 21,
14.12, 17) echoed one another across the Forum and offered
richly updated versions of a design traditional on the site since
the construction of the Tabularium. Echoing the Tabularium and
the basilicas, the sophisticated Doric orders on the arches that
framed the Temple of Caesar (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 5.21, 14.17) visually
linked the temple to the two basilicas. On their upper floors, terraces provided convenient platforms from which to watch everyday business and special events in the Forum below.
Two shrines, both early, were Ionic: Plancus Temple of Saturn
(Figs. 21.2122), which had an elegantly updated version, and
the Temple of Vesta, perhaps its contemporary, which featured
an Ionic-Corinthianizing style (Fig. 1.19). All the other Forum
b c e 14 c e )
Fig.1.19. The Augustan (?) Temple of Vesta: ancient relief now in the Uffizi Museum in
Florence. Drawing showing the relief before restoration in 1783. (Fototeca Unione, FU1954)
35
36
temples were Corinthian, a style that evolved rapidly. With some

additional decoration, the capitals of the Temple of Caesar (Figs.
4.1, 810) carefully quoted the normal capitals of the round
temple on the Tiber (Fig.1.9),138 and the profile of its simple cornice was very close to that of the Temple of Saturn (Figs. 4.10,
13.7, 11).139 By the later part of Augustus reign, the Forums two
other temples, those of Concord and Castor, displayed developed
Corinthian orders (Figs. 9.11, 18.11), and both their patrons and
sculptors seem to have acquired a taste for novel and elaborate
decoration.
The interlocking helices and complex vegetal motifs on the
abacuses and helices of Castors exterior capitals conspicuously
announce the new style (Figs. 18.3, 11), but the decorations of
the cornice from the facade of Concord are even more extreme.
Clearly visible from below, the undersides of its wide exterior
modillions display moldings normally confined to the horizontal zones of architraves and cornices (Figs. 9.56, 11). On the
exterior order of Castor (Fig. 18.6), the slightly lower sima is
plain. That of Concord (Figs. 9.5, 11) is enriched with acanthus and laurel leaves. Since the exterior columns at Concord
have not survived, we can only guess at their character, but
the elaborate ornamentation of the bases from the lower interior

order (Figs. 1.1617) suggests that the exterior bases, unlike
those of Castor, would have been similarly finished. Like the
exterior capitals of Castor (Figs. 18.5, 11), those of Concord
probably mixed ornaments from the buildings interior orders
with features from the capitals of Castor, and the final complex
design would have both emphasized the major importance of
Concord as a religious, political, and cultural monument and
conspicuously displayed the wealth produced by the military
successes of its patron.
And finally, possibly in connection with his last work on the
West Rostra in 12 BCE, Augustus paved the Forum with rectangular slabs of travertine, an amenity commemorated by a largescale inscription in bronze letters that records the name of the
praetor who supervised the work, L. Naevius Surdinus.140 Through
his own projects and those of his friends, Augustus had thus,
until the end of the empire in the West, permanently established
the general character of the Forum and its principal monuments
(Fig.21.21). In the five centuries that followed, neither necessary
reconstructions nor the few major additions significantly altered
thesite.
From Tiberius to
Phocas (14608CE)
Tiberius (1437CE)
After Augustus death in 14, to commemorate the recovery of
the military standards lost in Germany by the hapless Varus,
Tiberius erected his own modestly proportioned arch (after 17).
Tiberius architect(s) modeled its high rectangular form and
general elevation after the center wing of Augustus Parthian
Arch, which, standing across the west end of the south branch
of the Via Sacra (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 19.1), Tiberius monument
faced (Figs. 0.1, 4, 1.3, 15.1, Gatefold 1). That location and
its elevation showed the close conceptual relationship between
the two. With their close proximity, one after the other, the
arches, the facades of the Basilica Julia, and the Temple of
Castor clearly emphasized the south block of the narrow Via
Sacra (Figs. 0.1, 1.2, 18.1) as a well-defined border for the
Forum. By decisively terminating the procession of monuments
aligned with the Rostra, Tiberius Arch thus gave the Forum a
new westend.
The Flavians (6996)

The great fire of the reign of Nero burned across the east end
of the Forum in 64.1 It destroyed the Temple of Vesta,2 but left
the rest of the Forum untouched. By the end of his reign in 68,
Nero had begun reconstructing the temple (Fig.20.2), and by 73
Vespasian had completed the work (Figs. 2.1, 20.3). Thereafter,
the slightly enlarged structure had a standard Corinthian order
(Figs. 2.1, 20.23).3 Occupied with imperial reform and construction projects throughout the city after the Neronian fire,
Vespasian made no further changes in the Forum, but his sons,
Titus and Domitian, added three striking new monuments. Since
37
38
Fig.2.1. Aureus: obverse, bust of Vespasian; reverse, the

reconstructed Temple of Vesta. Note the conventionalized Corinthian
columns. (Classical Numismatic Group,Inc.)
they had no connection with the major fire of 80 (which destroyed

large parts of the Campus Martius and the Temple of Jupiter
Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill),4 all three, set down
in a public space traditionally associated with the Senate, prominently displayed to the Senate and people the exalted imperial
status of the new emperor and his family.
The Temple of Vespasian

Titus began the first two projects and these,5 with his new baths
opposite the Colosseum on the Oppian Hill,6 were the most important monuments of his brief reign (7981). After the Senates deification of his father, Titus first care both as a mark of filial
piety and as a means of publically stressing his own legitimacy

was to provide the new cult with a suitable shrine (Figs. 0.4, 1.3,
10.110). He chose an important site just south of and next to
the Temple of Concord on the Clivus Capitolinus (Figs. 0.1, 1.3,
10.1). The Clivus connected it directly with the Temple of Jupiter
Optimus Maximus (which Vespasian had recently rebuilt). Since
the lot also had a clear view of the Temple of Caesar across the
Forum (Fig. 21.11), its position encouraged those who saw the
new shrine to link Caesar, founder of the fortunes of the Julian
dynasty, to Vespasian, the first of the Flavian emperors.
Several considerations affected the size of the new building
(Figs. 0.1, 10.7). Its proximity to the Capitoline Hill meant that
it (like the Temple of Concord) could not have a deep cella,7 and,
to ensure its visibility from the Forum, the space (about 22 m
wide) between the north facade of the Temple of Saturn and the
south side of the podium of Concord determined its width.8 And,
with a necessary passage between the two buildings, not quite
all of that area was available. Moreover, Titus (and Domitians)
architect(s) established a visual relationship between the older
Temple and the new shrine. Vespasians facade resembled that
of Concord (Figs. 1.3, 9.9, 10.8), but since the latter was larger
and more splendidly decorated, it visually dominated its new
neighbor. Like the facade of Concord, that of Vespasians temple was hexastyle with a Corinthian order, but with respect to
Concords facade, it was reduced in size with the slightly smaller
porch columns9 that conventionally hid the cella from viewers
in the Forum. The length of the new building provided ample
chapter
/ From Tiberius to Phocas ( 1 4 6 0 8 c e )
39
Fig.2.2. Entablature from the Temple of Vespasian as restored by Canina, now displayed in the
Tabularium. (J. Packer Roma. Musei Capitolini su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale)
space for an approximately rectangular cella and a porch and

stairs, but the front step, aligned with the columns on the porch of
the Temple of Concord, respectfully set Vespasians facade well
behind that of Concord. The rise of the Clivus Capitolinus in front
of the building also drew the visitors gaze up the hill and gave the
new facade a transitional character between the buildings at the
west end of the Forum and those including Vespasians newly
reconstructed Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus farther up
on the CapitolineHill.
The architectural style of the new building is fashionably
Flavian. The acanthus leaves on the Corinthian capitals are less
naturalistic and more rigidly stylized than their Augustan predecessors (Figs. 10.10, 19.10). The cornice (Figs. 2.2, 10.10)
is more elaborately decorated than even that of Concord (Figs.
9.56, 11).10 It has more moldings than that of Concord, and their
elaborate, naturalistic ornament covers virtually all possible
spaces. Nonetheless, the proportions of these elements and the
consummate care with which they were rendered set this decoration considerably above the execution of the Domitianic cornices
in the imperial palace on the Palatine or in Domitians Villa at
Castel Gondolfo.11 The sculptors who executed the Temples decorations were clearly the best available in contemporary Rome,
and although in this period they must have been near the ends of
their careers, they may have been trained by the craftsmen who
had executed the Temple of Concord. The simple sacrificial elements of the frieze (Figs. 2.4, 10.4, 9)are worked with the same
skill and probably had some relationship to that of the Temple of
40
Vesta and the missing frieze of the Temple of Concord. The execution of a handsome head of a victory and tropea from a capital
of the interior tabernacle12 also attests a highly skilled sculptor.
The Portico of the Dei Consentes

Next to the Temple of Vespasian, Titus began and Domitian completed the enigmatically designed Portico of the Dei Consentes
(Figs. 0.4, 12.113). Although laid out as a shopping center
rows of rooms with wide doors on two floors it was apparently intended for other uses. The interior and exterior marble
veneers and the fine cipollino shafts of the upper colonnade
(Figs. 12.12:46, 13), expensive materials omitted in commercial
buildings, suggest an official character,13 and on the plain white
marble thresholds of the lower rooms, the recesses and grooves
that characterize shop entrances are omitted. The famous fourthcentury inscription repositioned on the entablature of the colonnade by the nineteenth-century excavators commemorates the
restoration of the structure by Praetextatus, prefect of the city, in
367, and indicates that at least a part of the upper floor housed
the cult of the Dei Consentes (infra, p. 212). The other rooms
and those on the ground floor below opposite the podium of the
Temple of Vespasian would then have been imperial offices.
Both the portico and the adjacent temple were discreet and
probably welcome additions to the Forum. In size and style, the
Temple of Vespasian visually matched the Temple of Concord, its
famous neighbor. Up-to-date, it was finished with irreproachably
high-quality workmanship. Even better, it completed the procession of important monuments along the west end of the Forum
and filled an empty space previously occupied by a small annex
of the Tabularium (Fig. 21.21) and the impressive if now
dated tufa masonry of the Tabulariums lower story (Fig.11.6,
9). It thus enhanced the Forum, finished its design, and directed
visitors attention to the ascending Clivus Capitolinus and the
important monuments farther up the hill. Its fine marble decorations and unassuming design made the Portico of the Dei
Consentes an equally appropriate addition to the Forums monuments (Fig. 12.12). Its small, second-story rooms with their
wide entrances provided adequate, if not particularly magnificent, homes for the gods of an ancient but minor cult, and the six
ground-floor rooms offered convenient office space for officials
who needed to work near the Forum but did not require and
probably did not want to be on prominent public display.
The Equus Domitiani

Domitians final addition to the Forum was an equestrian statue
that celebrated his victories against the Germans, Dacians, and
Chatti (8485, 89). Giacomo Boni partly excavated what he
believed to be the site near the Basilica Julia in 1902, but more
recently, Verduchi and Giuliani, pointing out that the foundations
of Bonis site probably date from the time of Caesar,14 have proposed as the correct location another site adjacent to Bonis and
near the Basilica Julia.15 Its size, 7.80 m 12.20 m, suggests
chapter
a colossal statue (Fig.2.3) two and a half times larger than the
famous equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius now housed in the
Museo dei Conservatori on the Capitoline Hill.16 Like the statue
of Marcus Aurelius, Domitians equestrian monument was of
bronze, and the image on the reverse of a rare Domitianic sesterius has been identified as a picture of the monument.17 The
emperor rides a stationary war horse, its left hoof on a human
head. The riders cloak extends back to drape over the body of the
horse, and he raises and extends his left hand. Little else is visible on the coin, but according to Statius address to the rider,
the spread of the flanks is surveyed from one side by the
Julian structure [the Basilica Julia] and from the other by the
martial Paullus [the Basilica Aemilia]. The back your father
beholds [from the Temple of Vespasian] and Concord with her
smiling face [from her temple]. Your right hand bans battles.
Tritonia [Minerva, Domitians divine patroness] is no burden to
your left as she holds out severed Medusas neck as though to
spur the horse forward.... Your breast is such as may suffice to
unwind the cares of the universe; to make it Temese [a rich copper-producing center] has given her all, exhausting her mines.18
The monument thus stood in the Forum facing east with the
Temples of Caesar and Vesta and Domitians new palace on the
Palatine in front of it. On its right was the Basilica Julia; to its
left, the Basilica Aemilia; behind it, the Temples of Vespasian and
Concord. The emperors breastplate was an impressive work of art,
Fig.2.3. Conjectural restoration of the Equus Domitiani. After a reconstruction of Filippo Coarelli,
illustration of Francesco Corni (su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
41
42
and the statuette of Minerva with the severed head of Medusa in his
left hand was a potent talisman that turned the viewer of legend to
stone. The obverse of the sesterius that shows the monument styles
Domitian Germanicus that is, the conqueror of Germany
and the human head under his horses hoof represents the Rhine
River. His outstretched arm symbolizes the peace his campaigns
had graciously conferred on the Rhenish tribes,19 and this was a
lasting peace, for, as the equestrian statue indicated, Minerva, a
famous warrior goddess and the emperors divine patron, enjoyed
the protection of Medusas formidable powers.20
Domitian seems to have been a competent general, and a
life-size or perhaps somewhat larger equestrian statue might
have been received without much controversy, but the location
and size of this monument made it immediately controversial.
Addressing the statue, Statius writes, Your lofty head [is] in the
pure air,21 and even if the poet exaggerates, the figure will have
been almost as high as the second story of the Basilica Julia.22
The horses glittering posterior faced the Senate, and the gaze
of the emperor as conqueror ignored the surrounding buildings
to concentrate on his own palace on the Palatine Hill. With its
vast size and central position, this was a monument that plainly
expressed Domitians contempt for the historical traditions and
artistic conventions that had previously characterized the Forum.
Its builder, the Lord and God23 of the empire as he styled himself, would rule as he saw fit. No wonder that, after Domitians
assassination in 96, raging mobs pulled down and destroyed the
hated statue. As Suetonius notes,
The senators were so overjoyed [at the news of Domitians

death], that they raced to fill the House [the Curia]. They even
had ladders brought out and his shields and images torn down
before their eyes and dashed upon the ground.24
Adds Pliny the Younger,

It was our delight to dash those proud faces [from the equestrian statue and Domitians other monuments] to the ground, to
smite them with the sword and savage them with the axe, as if
blood and agony could follow from every blow. Our transports of
joy so long deferred were unrestrained; all sought a form of
vengeance in beholding those bodies mutilated, limbs hacked in
pieces, and finally that baleful, fearsome visage cast into the fire,
to be melted down, so that from such menacing terror something
for mans use and enjoyment should rise out of the flames.25
Antoninus Pius
(138161)
After the assassination of Domitian and the destruction of his
grandiloquent equestrian statue, his successors, preoccupied
with reworking and completing his other vast projects in Rome,26
remodeled the House of the Vestal Virgins but made no other
architectural changes to the Forum. Nonetheless, by the reign
of Antoninus Pius (138161), the situation had changed. As an
chapter
emperor who had not himself led armies,27 Antoninus could not,
like the Julio-Claudians and the Flavians, erect architectural trophies financed by military conquest. Yet, like all his predecessors, he needed to decorate the capital and preserve for future
generations his own memory and that of his family. The death of
his wife, Faustina, and her deification by the Senate in 141 provided a suitable opportunity. Indeed, a temple to Faustina (Figs.
0.1, 1.13, 3.118) would not only satisfy such needs, but also
notably express the emperors affection for his deceased consort
and even provide, after his death and deification (as the emperor
himself must have intended), an appropriate and dignified venue
for his own imperial cult.
Since the new temple was in the Forum on the Via Sacra,28
its dedication was also a major religious and political statement.
Although the Arch of Gaius and Lucius now visually separated
the monuments farther west from the site (Figs. 0.12, 1.14, 5.18,
20), it was still in an important part of the Forum. Just across the
Via Sacra from the Regia, the House of the Vestal Virgins, and
Temples of Caesar, Vesta, and Castor, this was a zone that had
already attained, even before Antoninus temple, a quasi-sacred
character linked to memories of the Republic and the early
empire. After the dedication of the temple, the proximity of the
Regia, the ancient residence of the Pontifix Maximus (the high
priest of the Roman state), and the Temples of Vesta and Castor
associated Antoninus and Faustina with cults of the Republic.
The adjacent Temple of Caesar invited a favorable comparison between the Julio-Claudian and Antonine dynasties: like
the Julio-Claudians, the Antonines had been sound, successful

administrators, and they ruled a peaceful and prosperous state.
During her life, Faustina had always received notable honors from
her husband. On the obverse of imperial coins in all denominations, her portrait appears coupled (on the reverse) with images of
various goddesses.29 After her death and deification, Antoninus
chose a site for her temple across from major republican and
early imperial temples that gave Faustina important divine colleagues. Like Caesar, she was now part of the illustrious series of
deified rulers who had shaped the Roman world. With Castor and
Pollux, she joined the ancient deities of the Roman state. With
Vesta, who symbolized the security of the Roman household, she
guaranteed the stability of the imperial family. As she had faithfully guarded the imperial marriage in her lifetime, so, after her
death, she symbolized the unity of the imperial family30 and its
generous care for less fortunate citizens like the needy young
women, Faustinas girls (the Puellae Faustinianae), to whom
it offered charity in the name of the Diva Augusta (Fig.2.4).31
And after the deified Antoninus joined her in the temple, both
new imperial deities oversaw the safety of the imperial family
and, consequently, of the empire itself.
Speculating on the earlier history of the temples site, Lugli
proposes that shops and apartment houses stood there during the
Republic; Thomas suggests an empty lot.32 More recently, however, Freyberger locates the Shrine of Jupiter Stator on the site.33
If he is right, and this earlier shrine had partly burned in the
fire of 64 or had fallen into disrepair, its surviving podium and
43
44
Fig.2.4. Denarius: obverse, bust of the deified Faustina; reverse,

Faustina and an official on a platform ministering to the needs of
the empress young clients (the Puellae Faustinianae). (Gemini,LLC)
walls might still have saved Antoninus the expense of putting up

the greater part of a new building. He need only have provided
certain new elements: porch columns, entablatures, veneers, the
interior finish, the front stairs, and reliefs and statues.
Whether the fabric of the temple was completely new or a
skillful mixture of the old and new, the final structure was finely
finished to a grand if conventional design. The model for the
facade was that of the Temple of Vespasian. Both had prostyle
hexastyle porches, but that of Antoninus temple was slightly
wider with broader intercolumniations.34 The proportions of the
columns themselves were virtually identical (Figs. 3.16, 18,
10.8, 10),35 but those of Vespasian have three drums of fluted
Luna marble. The Antoninine shafts, in the style of the late second century, are of monolithic, gray-green cipollino perhaps an
indirect reference to the decor of the other Flavian building in the

Forum, the Portico dei Consentes (Figs. 3.2, 18, 12.12).
The differences between the orders of the two buildings reflect
the Antonine rejection of the ornate Flavian style. The Temple
of Vespasian has Attic bases with double scotias (Fig.10.3, 10),
and that of Antoninus and Faustina, Attic bases (Fig.3.18). The
leaf patterns of the capitals of the two orders are stylistically
very similar,36 although the abacuses of the Antonine capitals
(Fig. 3.18) omit the elaborate decorations that characterize the
Flavian capitals (Fig. 10.10). The Flavian architrave has three
fasciae separated by richly decorated moldings; plain moldings
divide the two fasciae of the Antonine architrave, and while both
buildings have richly ornamented friezes Vespasian: sacrificial
implements; Antoninus: elongated griffins flanking richly decorated craters on high bases ornamented with acanthus leaves
the cornice of the Antonine temple is a simplified version of its
Vespasianic model.
A cyma reversa and a fillet separate both architraves from
the friezes: embellished with a rich floral pattern (Vespasian =
V; Vespasianic = Vc.) and (Antoninus and Faustina = AF;
Antonine= An.) plain. The cornices begin above the frieze with
a low ovolo and a fillet, the ovolo decorated with acanthus leaves
(V) and plain (AF). The subsequent moldings are an ovolo with
egg-and-dart, the eggs framed with acanthus leaves (V), a cyma
recta with alternating lotus blooms and acanthus leaves (AF).
Above are a low quarter-round decorated with acanthus leaves
(V) and a plain fillet (AF). On the Vc. cornice, dentils follow.
chapter
In the same position, the An. cornice uses a wide, undecorated

fillet. Above, on both cornices, low fillets emphasize an ovolo
with egg-and-dart. The Vc. eggs are oval, and the shells, hollowed out. The shells of the rounder, An. eggs are much thinner
without the internal hollow. The Vc. arrows end in sharp, fully
realized arrow heads. The An. arrows, bands with raised centers,
end at V-shaped points. Above, the Vc. cornice has modillions
with coffers and, between the modillions, rosettes. The An. cornice omits these features and reproduces the Vc. hollow tongues
on the corona. On both cornices, the tongues rest on a fillet; the
An. tongues are slightly wider with double crescent bases not
the hollow tongues of the Vespasianic cornice. The Vc. molding
concludes with a smaller decorated cyma recta with palmettes
separated by stylized vertical plants, a fillet, a wider cyma recta
with two rows of laurel leaves (one behind the other), and a final
fillet. None of these moldings survives on the An. cornice,37 but
they may have been identical, although on the An. building they
will not have had the elaborate decorations of the Vc. cornice.
Such modern touches did not distract from the general character of the building, however. Proportioned to its surroundings,
handsomely finished in a visual idiom that recalled without reproducing the style of the Flavian shrine at the west end of the Forum,
it also embodied important themes in Antoinine propaganda. Its
size, the old-fashioned character of its structural masonry (originally hidden under the Antonine marble revetments), and the
glamor and expense of the cipollino porch columns represented
the antiquity, the wealth, the effortless power of the imperial
regime. The statues of victories with wreaths at the corners of the

pediment recalled the familys military achievements. The divine
Faustina commemorated in the pediment and in the chariot at its
apex (Figs. 3.1, 3, 1617)was a virtuous guardian who embodied
the concern of the deified empress and her consort for the welfare of the empire and its people. The relief on the pediment, the
empress and Faustinas girls (the Puellae Faustinianae), illustrated an important instance of imperial munificence, and the
statues on the pedestals flanking the entry stair would have harmonized with these themes. The female statue on the right could
have been Providentia,38 and the male statue on the left, one of
the princes of the imperial house (the young Marcus Aurelius
perhaps) or a divinity like Mercury, the god of prosperity and
business.
Fig.2.5. Aureus: obverse, bust of the deified Faustina; reverse,

labeled CONSECRATIO. The goddess riding in a quadriga.
(Numismatica Ars Classica NACAG)
45
46
Septimius Severus
(193211)
The Historical Background
The next four decades (150192) passed without further changes
to the Forum, but in March of 192, a serious fire broke out near
the east side of the Templum Pacis, the great Flavian complex
just north of the Forums center. Destroying much of the temple,
it ignited the Horrea Piperateria, a massive, stepped warehouse
with storerooms around several internal courts, which stood just
behind the Templum Pacis on the site of the later Basilica of
Maxentius and Constantine (Gatefold 1). Racing through the
Forum, the blaze spared the shrine of Antoninus and Faustina
but completely destroyed the Flavian Temple of Vesta (Figs. 2.1,
20.3) and gutted a section of the Palace of Tiberius at the northwest
corner of the Palatine Hill (frontispiece, Fig.19.1 background).
Nine months later, the reigning emperor, Commodus, last of the
Antonines, was assassinated.39 His successor, Helvius Pertinax,
an able and respected administrator favored by the Senate, lasted
only three months before his murder by the Praetorian Guard. But
Commodus governor of Upper Pannonia,40 Septimius Severus,
had his own imperial ambitions.41 Vowing to avenge Pertinax
and backed by the sixteen legions on the Rhine and Danube
frontiers he marched into Italy. By the time he had reached
Interamna (modern Terni), seventy-six miles northeast of Rome,
the unarmed Senate had prudently recognized him as emperor.
His next ten years were busy. Campaigns against the other claimants to the imperial throne Pescennius Niger, governor of Syria,
and Clodius Albinus, governor of Britain were his first order of
business, and provincial reform in Egypt in 199 and Syria in 200
kept Severus in the East until 202. He did not ignore his responsibilities in Rome, however.
The Temple of Peace was in ruins, and behind it lay the Horrea
Piperateria where notables and government offices had stored
their records and belongings and the remains of the Temple
of Vesta. The welfare of the state (which Vesta, as protectress of
Rome and the official guardian of the citys hearth, had famously
ensured) demanded the reconstruction of her temple, and some
parts of the old Forum, its pavement, and the Temple of Vespasian
were apparently in need of maintenance.
Indeed, upon establishing himself in power in 193,42 Severus
immediately stressed the Forums importance by using it to stage a
magnificent funeral for the slain Pertinax (infra, p. 149).43 Although
the emperor was largely in the provinces during his first decade
in power, he may thus have organized work on the Forum almost
immediately after the funeral, and he had probably begun by 195
when he may have started work on his famous triumphal arch.44
Severus Equestrian Statue

The emperors first Forum project was, however, an equestrian
statue that commemorated the famous dream that he had, according to Herodian, while still in Pannonia (Figs 2.67, 14.12):
chapter
At the time Pertinax was reported to have assumed control of the

empire, Severus [as governor of Pannonia], after making the sacrifices and swearing the oath of allegiance to the new emperor,
went back to his house at dusk and fell asleep. He dreamed that
he saw a large, noble stallion adorned with the imperial trappings carrying Pertinax down the middle of the Sacred Way at
Rome. But when the horse arrived at the entrance of the Forum,
where, in the old days of the Republic, the popular assemblies
had been held, in his dream the stallion unseated Pertinax and
Fig.2.6. Aureus: obverse, bust of Septimius Severus; reverse, Severus
as an equestrian figure on a rearing horse. (Baldwins Auctions,
Ltd., Dmitry Markov Coins and Metals)
threw him to the ground. While Severus stood there motionless,

the horse slipped under him, taking him up on his back, and
bore him safely along. Then, halting in the middle of the Forum,
the stallion raised Severus aloft, so that he was seen and cheered
by all. And in our time a huge bronze statue depicting this dream
still stood on that spot.45
Fig.2.7. Denarius: obverse, head of Severus; reverse, Severus as

an equestrian figure on a striding horse. (Used by permission of
Freeman &Sear)
That monument is no longer extant, but its spot was probably the site of Domitians infamous monument.46 As Herodians
description indicates, this was a huge, overlife-sized figure, but its scale was nonetheless probably nearer to that of the
surviving equestrian monument of Marcus Aurelius than that
of Domitian. Unlike Domitians statue, it would have turned
its back on the imperial palaces and faced respectfully west,
its gaze fixed piously on the goal of all who had celebrated triumphs in Rome, the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the
CapitolineHill.
47
48
Like the later equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, it

would have been of gilded bronze, and Severan coins suggest
two possible designs.47 In the first, more dramatic version on
an aureus (Fig.2.6), Severus, in armor, his cloak billowing out
in elegantly rounded folds behind him, sits on a rearing horse,
its extended tail apparently caught by the same wind that animates the emperors cloak. In his right hand, he holds a spear
pointed at both ends. In the second, a less agitated image on a
denarius (Fig.2.7), the emperor, in civilian garb, wears a less
prominent cape with simpler configurations. In his left hand,
he holds the horses reins; in the right, he raises a pole with a
flag. Massively muscled with a tightly curled mane, the majestic charger lifts its right hoof in a deliberate stride. While the
first image is more finely rendered and exciting, the pose of the
second is closer to that of the surviving monument of Marcus
Aurelius and may, therefore, represent the actual appearance
of Severus statue.48
Initial Interventions
The Forum Pavement and the Temple of Vespasian. The
completion of the statue led to a partial restoration of the Augustan
pavement. But in comparison to the emperors other projects in
the Forum, this was a relatively minor project.49 So, too, his work
on the Temple of Vespasian while important enough to be commemorated on the new Severan dedication on the entablature
(Fig.10.8) has left no other clear traces on the surviving ruins
of the building and may have been little more than long-deferred
maintenance grandiosely commemorated to emphasize Severus

legitimacy and his commendable concern for the major monuments of his imperial predecessors.50
Julia Domna and the Temple of Vesta. The reconstruction
of the Temple of Vesta (Figs. 20.1419) was a major project,
however. We have no information on its length, but it may have
started either during initial work on the Arch of Severus in 195
or slightly later, when Severus reconstruction of the Templum
Pacis began in 196197.51 The emperor left supervision of the
Vesta project to his wife, Julia Domna, and a handsome commemorative aureus (Fig 20.4) suggests that she had completed
and dedicated the building by 207.52 Her design was conservative and traditional: a modernized copy of the earlier Flavian
Temple of Vesta (Figs. 2.1, 20.34). The Severan cornice probably varied and slightly abbreviated the original Flavian design.53
Significantly, Vestas cornice differs from that of the cornice of
the Composite order on the Arch of Severus (cf. Fig.20.19 with
Figs. 7.1214), which seems to have more in common with the
spare, classicizing designs of Trajanic and Hadrianic cornices
than with those in the heavily ornamented Flavian style.54 The
friezes of the Temples of Vespasian and Vesta (Figs. 10.4, 10,
20.19) also illustrate very similar collections of religious objects,
and the architraves of both include three fasciae, although the
moldings that separate the Flavian fasciae are more complex
than those of the Severan temple. On identical Attic bases with
two scotias, the column shafts of the two buildings are also similar with fluted white marble shafts assembled from drums. Only
chapter
the cabling of Vestas shafts identifies them as later than those

of Vespasian.
The Arch of Severus

All these Severan projects in the Forum followed the Antonine
model: sensible repairs, architectural innovations in a decorative style derived from impressive Flavian predecessors. In
those traditions, a new arch (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 7.114, 8.12) would
continue the procession of monuments aligned with the West
Rostra. Just as the arches of Augustus and Gaius and Lucius
closed the east end of the Forum (Figs. 0.3, 1.2), monuments
aligned with the West Rostra might be visually strengthened
and completed by an arch at its north end in a position corresponding to the opposite Arch of Gaius and Lucius. Such considerations determined the site of the new structure. Adjacent to
the north side of the West Rostra, it corresponded to the Arch of
Tiberius on its south side (Figs. 0.3, 1.3), and, just as Tiberius
monument faced the Arch of Augustus on the south branch of
the Via Sacra, the new arch looked toward the opposite Arch of
Gaius and Lucius. Henceforth, arches at the four corners of the
Forum spanned both branches of the Via Sacra (Figs. 0.1, 34,
1.2, 3, General Plan), formalizing the entrances on the east and
west sides of the piazza.55
The design of the arch was conventional (Figs. 7.114, 8.1).
On each facade, four freestanding columns on pedestals divide
the lower section into three bays. Two smaller lateral arches flank
the higher central one, and above the entablature, the sizeable
attic is about one-quarter the total height of the monument.56 This

venerable design went back to the early Julio-Claudian period,
when it was used for the arch still standing at LOrange, and it
had been known in Rome since at least the late first century,
when it appears in the Arcus ad Isis, one of the arches that led
into temenos of the Isaeum et Serapaeum,57 the vast temple of
the Egyptian gods Isis and Serapis in the Campus Martius.
Two important characteristics, however, distinguished Severus
arch from its predecessors in the Forum: its size and its decorations. With a width of 23.27 m and an elevation about ninety percent of that size (20.88 m), it was 3 m wider and 6.50 m higher
than the arch at LOrange. Indeed, it towered above the other
arches in the Forum. At 6 m wider and over 3 m higher than the
Arch of Augustus, it was 9 m higher and nearly 3 times as wide
as the neighboring Arch of Tiberius.58 At this scale, Severus arch
dwarfed the Rostra, the surrounding structures, and the Arch of
Tiberius. Looking west from the Via Sacra, it concealed at least
half the facade of the Temple of Concord even from the center of
the Forum and from the Forum and the Via Sacra, it obstructed
the approach to the buildings adjacent to the Senate (cf. Figs.
21.2122 and 21.2324). Henceforth, for an uninformed tourist approaching from the Via Sacra (the chief entrance into the
Forum for out-of-town visitors), the size and gaudy decorations of
the new arch completely upstaged the south facade of the Curia,
which had formerly stood in dignified isolation.
Moreover, where the facades of other monuments that faced
the Forum were traditionally configured and their architectural
49
50
details accented with color the decoration of the new arch,

breaking with past decorative precedents in the Forum, was almost
completely covered with bright, polychrome reliefs (Figs. 7.78,
10, 1213). Their form and style were entirely new, the narrative
sculpture of the Columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius recast
on a series of four large flat panels that, collecting and abridging the events of Severus campaigns against the Parthians, led
up to and celebrated his major victories. The Severan Master
who conceived this program designed each relief as a part of his
general narrative, but different sculptors, responsible for various
sections of each relief, had individualistic styles that ranged from
the classicizing, naturalistic late Antonine to the more schematic
early Severan, the latter related perhaps to those popular paintings that had probably been exhibited in Severus triumphal procession in 202. Different colors picked out the individual figures,
and inserted gilt bronze fittings may have emphasized the details
of the military equipment.59
Design, finish, and color were responsible for only part of
the monuments effects, however. The density of the letters and
words of the long inscription that stretched proudly across the
entire attic flashed brightly in the sun,60 and the gilded bronze
statuary on the top of the attic must have created a memorable
impression. None of it survives, but Severan coins show that it
consisted of at least nineteen separate figures (Figs. 1.3, 2.8, 7.1,
1011, 8.12).61 All would have been of gilded bronze, and to
fit the scale of the arch, they would have been extremely large.62
The number and size of this assemblage would have far exceeded
those of the statuary groups on the adjacent arches,63 and

together with the gilded inscription and the strikingly colored,
innovative reliefs (Figs. 7.1213), the initial effect of the arch on
traditionally minded contemporaries in the brilliant sunlight of
the early morning must have been nearly overwhelming and,
very probably, for traditionalists who had loved and respected
the Forum in its previous state, deeply disturbing (cf. 21.2122
and 21.2324).
Of course, the emperor had very carefully calculated the position of his new arch. Although Severus must have appreciated
its innovative decoration, it was neither just an additional ornament for the Forum nor simply a means of continuing the monuments aligned with the West Rostra. Rather, it had two major
purposes, one negative, the other positive. On the negative side,
it was intended as a monstrous three-dimensional rebuke to the
traditions and power of the Senate. With its great size and extravagant decoration, it outclassed the sober facades of the Forums
earlier buildings. Although rebuilt by emperors from Augustus
onward, these were still the monuments associated with the
republican Senate, and by the standards of the new arch, they
were small, old fashioned, and colorless. The arch thus exalted
Severus and his sons beyond the builders of these pallid relics
and implied that, as the Arch had outshone their monuments, so
the Severans had surpassed the Senate and the traditional aristocracy it represented.
The character and position of the arch reinforced these messages. By its decorations, its inscriptions, and its statuary, it
chapter
Fig.2.8. Denarius: obverse, bust of Severus; reverse, the original

statuary on top of the Arch. The reconstructions here omit the
wooden balcony shown on the coin. (Numismatica Ars Classica
NACAG)
represented the emperor, and its proximity to the Curia implied

that the emperor had the Senate under close observation. Indeed,
after the completion of the arch, no senator could enter the Curia
without being reminded of the emperors overwhelming power. By
his command and by the lavish use of his Parthian spoils, he had
positioned this enormous imperial monument in close proximity
to the Curia in an area once dominated by its facade. And the fact
that the arch hid the Curia from much of the Forum might even be
interpreted as a not-so-subtle threat against the senators who had
so injudiciously supported the emperors rivals. As Severus had
already hidden the Curia from the piazza to the east, who knew
what further action he might undertake against the Senate and its
members if again provoked?
On the positive side, the arch glorified Severus and his sons as
the legitimate rulers of the empire. Its location on a site in the Forum,
the historical center of Romes political life, marked Severus as a
legitimate ruler. The size and rich decoration suggested that his
accomplishments were greater than any previously commemorated
in the Forum. Neither cited nor shown on the arch, his victories
over his Roman rivals were officially forgotten. Instead, the reliefs
showed that, like any of Romes past heroes, Severus had proved
his abilities by conquering foreign enemies, the Parthians, who had
notoriously fought with Rome on her eastern borders since the late
Republic. The four great reliefs on both sides of the arch gave an
edited account of Severus battles and victories. The low striplike
reliefs just above the keystones of the lateral arches recorded the
triumphal procession that had celebrated these victories in 202.
The grand inscription repeated on the attics of the north and south
facades gave the titles that the emperor and his sons had received
after their victories and noted that the arch had been dedicated to
them for having restored the Republic and for having augmented
the Empire of the Roman People by their outstanding virtues at
home and abroad. And finally, the gilded bronze statuary on the
attic captured the emperor and his sons just at the moment of their
triumph, raising their colossal, gilded images far above the throngs
in the Forum below, setting them permanently before the gaze of
the Roman world.
51
52
Maximian and
Diocletian (285305)
The Historical Background
With the end of the Severan dynasty in 235, the Roman world
underwent fifty years of crisis. Military revolts, usurpations, barbarian invasions, plague, and economic decline broke the empire
into three major blocks, an eastern polity led by Palmyra, a caravan city in a frontier oasis, and a Gallic Empire that included
Spain, Britain, Gaul and (briefly) north Italy, and the loyal northern provinces in the west and north of Africa (except Palmyrene
Egypt). Despite nearly overwhelming obstacles, two Illyrian
emperors, Aurelian (270275) and Probus (276282), both formidable military commanders, reunited the empire. Aurelian,
justly called the restorer of the world,64 crushed the Palmyrenes
and reincorporated the Gallic state. Probus cleared Gaul of barbarian invaders and restored order in Asia Minor. Both died in
military revolts, but to Diocletian (285305), their ultimate imperial heir, they left a unified state, and his military, political, and
social reforms assured its survival in the West for another two
centuries.
Aurelian as Builder
The five troubled decades after 235 saw no further changes in
the Forum, but after Aurelian reunited the empire, he sought to
protect the capital with a new set of city walls, and, to commemorate his victory over Palmyra, he dedicated what was in effect
another imperial forum, an enormous Temple to the Unconquered
Sun in the Campus Martius east of the Corso and perhaps under
the Church of San Silvestro and the modern post office.65
With the riches of conquered Palmyra66 and the craftsmen in
Rome who would later rebuild the Forum (infra, p. 54), Aurelian
had, even after a period of political turmoil, economic decline,
and virtually no government construction, sufficient resources
to make the new shrine most magnificent.67 Of its two vast
rectangular peristyles (Fig. 2.9),68 the eastern one (48 100
m) ended in a hemicycle; the much larger western one (85
125 m) framed a temple,69 and a small, rectangular court with
external lateral entrances joined the two spaces. On the sides
of the smaller east court, two superimposed Corinthian orders
of cipollino columns framed niches (Fig.2.10) arched on the
first story, rectangular on the second. Above the upper order,
broken pediments enlivened the profile of the walls, and giant
Corinthian columns, twice the size of those of the smaller orders,
flanked the six arched entrances, two on each of the long sides
of the court, one at each end. In the west court, the colonnades
(omitted from the Palladian plan) probably had gray granite
shafts, and two smaller (?) africano columns screened each of
the rectangular recesses behind them on the north, south, and
west sides of the court. The larger lateral recesses had apses.
The smaller central ones on the long sides of the court omitted
the columnar screens and the apses, but the central recess on
chapter
Fig.2.9. Aurelians Temple of the Sun. (G. Gorski after Palladio)
53
54
Fig.2.10. Temple of the Sun: elevation of the east court. (G. Gorski
after Palladio)
Fig.2.11. Sestertius, 276282 CE: obverse, bust of Probus; reverse,

the Temple of the Sun. (Classical Numismatic Group,Inc.)
the west side of the court was apsidal with a generously proportioned exterior entrance.
The rectangular temple (Fig.2.11) had a low podium.70 Its
stair continued around its sides, and the hexastyle facade had
Ionic columns with porphyry shafts 6.88 m high.71 Inside the
cella, the colossal nude male cult statue of Helios, made of
gilt bronze with a radiate crown, turned toward the left: raising
its right arm, it held an orb in its outstretched left hand (Figs.
2.1213).72
The ruins of these extraordinary structures underlie the center of modern Rome, and to describe something of their original
appearance, we have relied on ancient literary sources, scattered
medieval references, the Renaissance drawings of Palladio, and
surviving images from the coins of Aurelians successor, Probus.
From this fragmentary evidence, however, we can draw important even surprising conclusions. Palmyra had been one of
the richest commercial cities in the East, and possession of its
resources obviously gave Aurelian control of new financial means
that far exceeded the previous holdings of an imperial treasury
that had been seriously depleted by the disasters of the previous several decades. Yet, even with such problems, the emperors
resources for new construction in Rome had still been impressive.
To build an imperial monument that for all practical purposes was
in endowments, size, design, fittings, and execution an imperial
Forum, he still had the necessary skilled architect(s) and highly
trained craftsmen,73 whether they came exclusively from Rome or
were also recruited from the provinces.74 His walls were of local
chapter
materials, travertine, peperino, and concrete faced with brick (like

what he used for his famous new walls around the city), but the
link between Rome and the traditional imperial quarries abroad
still functioned well enough to provide column shafts from Greece
(cipollino and probably fine white marble for reliefs and statues),
Asia Minor (africano), and Egypt (gray granite, and porphyry) and
probably other marbles for the interior veneers.
Fig.2.12. Aureus, 278 CE: obverse, bust of Probus; reverse, image

of the cult statue of the sun god, heroically nude, cape over the left
forearm, an orb in the outstretched left hand. (Leu NumismatikAG)
Fig.2.13. Heavy aureus, 276282 CE: obverse, bust of Probus;

reverse, Hellenistically styled bust of the sun god (from the Temple of
Sol?). (Leu NumismatikAG)
Maximian and Diocletian

as Patrons of Architecture
Aurelians vast projects thus presumably reanimated the construction industry, and during the next generation repairs to state monuments and private projects must have provided enough demand
to keep open the imperial marble quarries and ensure the continued training of competent architects and craftsmen. Thus when
Maximian, Diocletians imperial colleague in command of much
of the Western Empire, arrived in Italy in 299 after celebrating his
victories over rebels in North Africa, he could advertise his success and that of his regime with new building projects. Named in
honor of his colleague, the most famous monument, an enormous
set of baths, the thermae Diocletiani, still stand partly intact near
Romes modern railway station.75 The wall cores, vaulted roofs,
and domes are of concrete, and the exteriors of the walls are faced
with brick from a newly reorganized local industry. Inspired by the
Baths of Caracalla, the new structure surpassed its model in some
aspects of its design and, with imported marble and granite
55
56
floors, revetments and column shafts, and polychromed decorative stuccos, its interior displayed the same sumptuous decorative
style. The red Egyptian granite columns of the frigidarium (the
cold baths, converted by Michelangelo into the Church of Saint
Maria degli Angeli) are still in position, and the surviving fragments of their entablatures combine the simple, elegant shapes of
Trajanic/Hadrianic architectural ornament with elaborate decorative motifs from the age of the Flavians.76
Maximian and Diocletian in theForum

Reconstructions. In the same period, the regime of Maximian
and Diocletian must have used the designers and craftsmen
working on the new baths and their colleagues to undertake three
major projects in the Forum. In 283, during the brief reign of
the emperor Carus (282283), another terrible fire had ravaged
its northwest and southwest sides.77 The Curia was damaged; on
the Basilica Julia, which was completely destroyed, and with
the rapid turnover of rulers in the decade between the death of
Aurelian and the accession of Diocletian, the imperial government had not had the time, resources, or political will to repair the
damage. Reemphasizing the importance of Rome after decades of
official neglect and clearly benefitting from the advice and the
full support of the absent Diocletian, Maximians regime restored
both buildings. Since the large-scale bronze doors Domitian had
installed in the Curia remained intact,78 Maximians repair of
the structure may have been less extensive,79 although almost
certainly he refurbished the facade, reconstructed the roof (?),

and relaid the fine marble floor of the interior.80 The work on the
Basilica Julia involved an expensive, presumably accurate,81
reconstruction of the entire building, which, as the elaborate
character of the project shows, must still have been extensively
needed for legal business and commerce after283.
The Five-Column Monument. Former emperors had not
merely built baths and repaired the Forums monuments, however. Traditionally, the installation of new monuments in the
Forum had been a most effective advertisement for the success
of a reign. To display their fitness for power and to prepare for an
elaborate celebration of the twentieth anniversary of Diocletians
reign (his vicennalia) in 303, Maximian and Diocletian devised a
third major project that included the whole central Forum. At its
west end, on the back of the Augustan Rostra, they erected what
one modern scholar has called the Five-Column Monument82
(Figs. 1.3, 8.2, 1113), five marble pedestals that carried red
granite Corinthian columns with statues of (from left to right)
Galerius (Caesar or associate emperor in the East), Maximian
(Augustus or senior emperor in the West), Jupiter, Diocletian
(Augustus in the East), and Constantius Chlorus (Caesar in
the West) (Figs. 8.1, 1013).83 To support these pedestals,
Maximians workmen added heavy foundations to the internal
structure of the Rostra.
Found in 1547 not far from the Arch of Severus and set up
today on a modern brick foundation in front of the north corner
chapter
of the east side of the West Rostra,84 one pedestal (the support
for the statue of a Caesar) still survives (Figs. 2.1416). In comparison with the finely detailed architectural elements from the
Basilica Julia or the Baths of Diocletian, its cornice and base are
extremely simple, and reliefs adorn all four sides.
Cornice and base are undecorated. The cornice consists
of two fasciae: a single wide fascia above with a narrower one
just above and emphasizing the sculpture on the four faces. The
base has two fasciae: the lowest, broader and higher, and the
upper, lower and thinner.85 On the front of the pedestal (which
would have faced east into the Forum), two heraldic winged victories hold an oval shield inscribed CAESARUM DECENNALIA
FELICITER, on the happy occasion of the decennalia of the
Caesars (Fig.2.14).86 A post supported by two seated barbarian
prisoners, one on each side, holds up the shield, and a military
standard flanks each victory. On the left side (Fig.2.15), there
are four male figures in the foreground (the tetrarchs?), the last
accompanied by his small son (?) and what may be a female attendant behind the boy. The long-haired, bearded soldiers in the
background carry four military standards with banners. The right
side (Fig.2.14) depicts a suovetaurilia, a traditional sacrificial
procession that includes a bull, sheep, and pig. The animals are
shown according to size: the bull on the left, the sheep slightly
behind, the pig behind the sheep. The sacrificial attendants with
their instruments stand behind the animals. They are being led
to a triple sacrifice that probably celebrated Diocletians recent
Fig 2.14. One of the bases from the Five-Column Monument, plaster copy in the Museum of Roman
Civilization, front and right side. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana su Concessione della
Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale)
57
58
Fig.2.15. Back and left side. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana su Concessione della
Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale)
victory over the Persians (299) and the victories of all four rulers.
The back (Figs. 2.1516) shows the sacrifice. On a small round
altar, apparently supported by metal legs, above a brisk blaze, the
unidentified Caesar in a toga, his head, as customary during religious rites, covered by one of its folds, offers sacrifice. A winged
victory (l.) and the Genius of the Senate (r.) crown him. A boy
with an incense box stands to the left of the altar, and behind
him a slightly older boy plays a double flute. The flamen (priest)
behind them wears a spiked helmet. On the left, Mars, nude with
a helmet, receives the sacrifice, and behind him stands a togate
figure. At the corner of the composition on the far right lies the
partly recumbent figure of the unconquered sun.87
From the other four columns, pieces of the red granite column shafts, their Corinthian capitals, and the porphyry, togaclad figures of the three of the original four rulers have been
preserved.88
The East Rostra and the Honorary Columns. The FiveColumn Monument was only part of the new scheme, however.
On the east side of the Forum, in front of the Temple of Caesar,
Maximian and Diocletian installed a new East Rostra with the
same dimensions and decorations as the earlier Augustan monument (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 8.1317; infra, pp.151152). It too had five
honorary columns that duplicated the dimensions and materials of
those on the Augustan Rostra. And finally, to link the two Rostra
along the north side of the Via Sacra in front of the Basilica Julia,
chapter
59
the tetrarchs erected a row of seven honorary columns (Figs. 0.4,

1.45, 17.16b). Their bases equaled the heights of the Rostra.
The columns were as high as those on the Rostra; their shafts may
all originally have been of red granite.89
The Column of Phocas. The final element of the project was the pedestal and column later transformed in the seventh century into the Column of Phocas (Figs. 0.24, 2.17).
Its site rendered it the most visible monument in the Forum
as seen from the Argiletum and the entrances into the Forum
Transitorium (Gatefold 1) and the Forum of Caesar. Steps fully
enclosed all four sides of the pedestal,90 and the white marble
shaft must have clearly distinguished it from the other honorary columns. Its extraordinary position and the special treatment of the base suggest that the column originally celebrated
Diocletian himself.
Assserting that the new East Rostra and the honorary columns overcrowded the Forum and concealed the facades of
important earlier monuments, one modern scholar has harshly
criticized the design of this last great project as randomly conceived.91 But, Maximian and Diocletian intended something far
more interesting. Their expensively reconstructed Curia and
Basilica Julia showed that, wherever political necessity had
forced the tetrarchs to live, they still formally recognized the
prestige and importance of Rome as the traditional capital of
the empire, and they all continued to regard the Forum as heart
of the city. Yet the political disorders of the recent past had ill
Fig.2.16. Back. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di
Roma Capitale)
60

Fig.2.17. View of the Forum from the Argiletum
looking toward the Column of Phocas at the
end of the third century. (G. Gorski)
served the Forum. Since it was a visual anthology of the architectural achievements of previous rulers, the existing buildings
could not be touched, but the whole site now needed updating.
The tetrarchs new columnar monuments brilliantly addressed
these problems. As innovative architectural elements in the
Forum, they reproduced a traditional form that went back to
the glorious days of the emperor Trajan: a massive pedestal
that supported a column with an honorary statue. The lavishly
sculpted bases and shafts of the colossal Columns of Trajan and
Marcus Aurelius were too large, too complicated, and too expensive to be reproduced sequentially in the Forum, but the style of
Antoninus Pius column, an undecorated red granite shaft on a
sculpted base, offered a workable model.92
On columns like these, the statues of a new set of distinguished statesmen could be spectacularly introduced into the
Forum. This procession of notables may have begun at the north
end of the Forum on the new East Rostra in front of the Aedes
Caesaris93 and, continuing along the Via Sacra in front of the
Basilica Julia, culminated with the statues of the tetrarchs themselves, piously flanking an all-powerful Jupiter on Augustus
historically significant West Rostra. With the disappearance
of the revetments on the bases of the honorary columns, we no
longer know the names of the twelve statesmen they commemorated, but the parade of sculptures could have begun with the
Severi, included some of their successors (Gallienus? Aurelian?
Carus?), and may have ended with important members of the

tetrarchs own courts.
This whole grand historical procession would have centered
on the monument later reconfigured as the Column of Phocas
(Figs. 2.17, 21.2526). There, picked out by position, material, and size rather as if a modern spotlight illuminated the
statue stood Diocletian himself. At the center of the Forum
on his higher column, his image introduced the Forum and its
updated summi viri94 to visitors arriving from the imperial fora.
As their columns transformed Trajan and Marcus Aurelius into
superhumans, so Diocletians column raised him to a quasidivine height, but unlike his predecessors, Diocletian stood
not in a new forum or a sacred precinct but at the center of
the Roman world in a Forum Romanum now reconfigured as a
Forum of Diocletian. Thus, by its position, his statue not only
connected the Roman and imperial fora,95 but also visually subsumed into itself all of Roman imperial history. The monuments
around the Roman Forum, the great statesman of the third century on Diocletians honorary columns, and the monuments of
the imperial fora were all conceptually united by the image of
Diocletian that stood, like a modern conductor in front of an
orchestra, summing up the deeds of past great emperors, commemorating the achievements of Diocletian himself, and pointing the way toward pious hopes of a peaceful empire, and a
secure future.
bibliography
61
62
Restoration of the
Temple of Saturn
(c.360)
Maximian and Diocletians installation of the honorary columns
and the associated monuments was the last major project in the
Forum. Some time after 350, fire seriously damaged the Temple
of Saturn (Figs. 1.3, 13.111; cf. Figs. 21.2324). The emperors
of an increasingly Christian age no longer resided in Rome, however, and they had no intention of restoring a pagan temple. The
costs of the reconstruction were, therefore, probably paid by a
group of wealthy pagan aristocrats, who may even have obtained
some funds from the ancient aerarium in the temples podium
now only a local treasury for the city of Rome. For those pious
aristocrats, reconstruction of one of Romes most ancient shrines
must have been an important political statement of sympathy for
Romes traditional religion. Unfortunately, the character of their
repairs indicated only the sad state of the local building trades
(Figs. 1.45, 13.511). The workmen for the great projects of
the early fourth century, the Basilica of Maxentius/Constantine
on the upper Via Sacra and the Arch of Constantine next to the
Colosseum, had been professionals trained in the same skills that
had produced the major imperial structures of the previous century, but by 360380, talented craftsmen like these seem to have
been no longer available for the reconstruction of the Temple of
Saturn.
The capitals of the restored building were in a late Ionic style

(Figs. 13.46, 911), but they came from either North Africa or
Constantinople, or they were the work of craftsmen imported specially from one or both those areas.96 Since new building materials were apparently not available, the rest of the building was
reconstructed from salvaged parts. The monolithic shafts are all
of Egyptian granite, but those on the facade are gray, while the
ones on the sides are red. They vary slightly in height, and one
appears to have been installed upside down. The bases are of different dimensions and types, and the restored cornice (Figs. 13.4,
7, 911) includes fragments from its Augustan predecessor while
the entablature is an assemblage of marble blocks from various
other structures.
The End of the Roman

Forum (after608)
Early in the next century, the Basilica Aemilia burned in Alarics
sack of Rome in 410, but a new brick wall with statue niches, probably originally stuccoed, hid the ruins from the Argiletum, and
a crude colonnade replaced the Augustan arcade on the facade.
Forty-five years later, during the Vandals sack of Rome in 455,
the surviving buildings must have been plundered, but even after
Rome became part of the Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy in 490, it
still displayed the preeminent prosperity. [of] a great city of
wonderful beauty.97 Regarding Rome as the proper center of the
chapter
empire,98 Theodoric, the first Ostrogothic king, treated the city

carefully, preserving, maintaining, and sometimes restoring her
ancient monuments.99 When Theodoric died in 526, however, his
immediate successors allowed craftsmen in the Forum to strip the
foundations of the honorary columns of parts of their facings, to
hollow out the cores, and to graft onto them hutlike additions for
use as workshops. After a long and brutal war with the Ostrogoths
(535554), Justinian, then emperor in Constantinople, reimposed Byzantine rule on a ruinous and depopulated Italy. Most
of Romes ancient aristocratic families had died in the wars, and
the Senate had been scattered. The exarchs, the new local representatives of the emperors in Constantinople, resided in the
increasingly derelict imperial places on the Palatine Hill and
initially retained enough interest in the Forums reputation for
Smaragdus, an exarch of the early seventh century, to remodel
the Column of Diocletian. Rebuilding the stairway around the
pedestal, he replaced the statue of Diocletian (which may have
already disappeared) with one of Phocas, the Eastern emperor

in 608. A new dedication to Phocas on the base completed the
transformation.
With little interest in such useless ancient traditions,
Smaragdus successors effectively abandoned the Forum. In
some of the buildings, like the Curia and the Temple of Antoninus
and Faustina, a church took over the whole structure. In others,
like the Basilica Julia, the church occupied only a part in the
Basilica Julia, the east section of the arcade along the facade.
Still other monuments were adapted for less important ends.
The Temple of Concord served as a warehouse. An upscale residence took over the east end of the fifth-century colonnade along
the derelict facade of the Basilica Aemilia. Increasingly ruinous, partly concealed by vegetation, and buried by rising piles of
detritus, the other structures served only as quarries for the stone
and lime used in contemporary buildings.
A new age had begun.
63
PartII.
The Monuments
Fig.3.1. View of the restored temple looking

northwest. (G. Gorski)
The Temple of
Antoninus and
Faustina
History
Antiquity
Antoninus Pius father was descended from a wealthy family in Trans-Alpine Gaul that had migrated to Rome, attaining the consulship in the days of Antoninus grandfather.1 His
mother came from the upper echelons of the senatorial aristocracy in Rome.2 Born September 19, 86 CE, Antoninus was
reared at a family estate at Lanuvium about ten miles west of
Rome.3 His lofty family connections led to an official career that
Antoninus described in his ancient biography as a brilliant,
handsome young man4 carried out with notable success. His
achievements attracted the attention of the emperor Hadrian,
who appointed him chief judge of one of Italys four judicial

districts (120).5 His later career was equally distinguished, and
when the emperor became fatally ill early in 138, he adopted
Antoninus as his successor. Dio Cassius reports the formal
adoption in some detail:
the emperor [Hadrian] convened at his house the most
prominent and most respected of the senators; and lying there
upon his couch, he spoke to them as follows: by the process of nature a maimed and witless child is often given to
a parent, but by process of selection one of sound body and
sound mind is certain to be chosen.I have found as emperor
for youthe man whom I now give you, one who is noble,
mild, tractable, prudent, neither young enough to do anything
67
68
Part II / The Monuments
reckless nor old enough to neglect aught, one who has been
brought up according to the laws and one who has exercised
authority in accordance with our traditions, so that he is not
ignorant of any matters pertaining to the imperial office, but
can handle them all effectively.Although I know him to be
the least inclined of men to become involved in affairs and be
far from desiring such power, still I do not think he will deliberately disregard either me or you, but will accept the office
even against his will.6
Coming to the throne in middle age (he was 52)after long government service, Antoninus was, as Hadrian indicated, thoroughly
trained for his new position, and his twenty-three-year reign was
famously peaceful and prosperous. Yet, he had had some misfortunes. His two sons and his eldest daughter were dead before he
ascended the throne,7 and in 141 his wife, Faustina, also died
prematurely.
Refusing to listen to court gossip about her licence and loose
living,8 Antoninus had apparently cared deeply for her. The
Senate promptly canonized her, and the emperor treated her new
cult with an emphasis and concern that suggest real feeling behind
what might otherwise have been a merely dutiful gesture of imperial respect. Her temple could have been in the Campus Martius
(where there were other imperial shrines),9 but instead Antoninus
chose a prestigious and expensive site in the Roman Forum that
had been previously occupied by a small public square leading to
the Temple of Peace or perhaps a ruinous earlier temple.10 On the
north side of the Sacred Way (Figs. 0.1, 1.13, 3.1, General Plan),
the new temple faced the side of the Temple of Caesar and was
very close to the ancient Temple of Vesta.11
After Antiquity
Although the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina is one of the few
buildings in the Forum to have survived in recognizable form
(Figs. 3.2, 5, 8), it has suffered massive damage since antiquity.
Relatively intact in the seventh or eighth century, it was then
transformed into a church dedicated to San Lorenzo in Miranda.12
Many of the original architectural fittings of the interior were probably removed at that time, and the colossal cult statues may have
been broken up. Represented with the temple facade on various
Antonine denarii and aurei (Figs. 3.3, 913),13 the original cult
statue was a draped, seated Faustina looking right. With a staff
crowned by an orb in her left hand, she holds what appears to be
a miniature winged victory in her outstretched right hand. After
the death of Antoninus in 161, his statue, a standing male figure
(?), may also have been installed in the cella. The male torso now
on the porch (Fig.3.4), distinguished by its comparatively small
dimensions (slightly larger than life-size), may, however, originally have been part of the statue that, on the Antonine sestertius
(Figs. 3.3, 1011), flanked the front stair on the left side.14
The pediment (see p. 76, infra) was totally destroyed in the
late fourteenth century.15 Between 1540 and 1546, the stairs
to the cella and the marble veneer on the temples left wall
were removed,16 and by 1602, the facade of the cella had been
Fig.3.2. The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
70
demolished and replaced by a new baroque facade designed by

the architect Orazio Torriani. He raised the floor of the cella to
the same level as the current ground level of the Forum (nearly
6 m above the cellas ancient floor),17 adapted the interior of the
cella to the requirements of the church, demolished the front wall
of the old church down to the new ground level, and used the
remainder as the foundation for his entirely new facade.18 The
surviving pilaster capitals on both sides of the cella (Figs. 3.8,
17) indicate the position of the ancient facade, one intercolumniation north of Torrianis.
The Building
Materials
Begun after the death of Faustina in 141 and complete by 150,19
the original temple had like Antoninus himself an aristocratic but conservative style. Solidly built, it was distinguished
by site, by expensive materials, and by superb workmanship. The
foundation consists of tufa blocks overlaid by a platform that consists of a single course of travertine blocks. The podium and cella
walls above are of rectangular peperino blocks laid in courses of
headers and stretchers (Figs. 3.5, 7).20 In antiquity white marble
slabs veneered these surfaces (Figs. 3.1617),21 and a high stair
with a central altar22 led to the porch.
Framed by a base molding and a cornice at the top of the
podium, the white marble veneer on the podium slabs on the
Fig.3.3. Antonine denarius, c. 141 CE; reverse, temple showing

interior cult statue of Faustina. (The Trustees of the British Museum)
lateral facades was smoothly finished (Figs. 3.1, 6, 1617). On

the side walls of the cella (and presumably between the pilasters on its original facade), in a lower zone one-third the height
of the columns, the marble slabs were also smooth. Below, a
base molding continued the profile of the pilaster bases at the
corners of the building (Figs. 3.1, 6, 17).23 Above was a cornice. The section of white marble veneer, probably configured
as regular courses of rectangular marble blocks, ended at the
Chapter
/ The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina
tops of the pilaster shafts. Of the same marble, either a series

of upright rectangular panels, the height of the pilaster capitals and separated from one another by vertical panels,24 or
an undecorated zone with the same height (Fig.3.17) characterized the spaces at the tops of the cella walls just under the
entablature.25
The Stairs andPorch

Excavations in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries uncovered
the foundations of the seven lowest steps,26 the concrete foundation of the altar, and several fragments of the white marble treads
(Fig.3.7).27 Thus, just after 1899, the entire stair was accurately
rebuilt in modern brick (Fig.3.2).28 On each side, the hexastyle
porch had two additional columns and two pilasters at the corners
of the cella (Figs. 3.8, 15, 17). The two inner pilasters on the
cella facade probably aligned with the second and fifth columns
(Fig.3.15). J. F. J. Mnager, who studied and made reconstructions of the temple in 1809, suggests that, including its moldings, the front door had a width equal to that of the outer faces
of the plinths of the two central columns and the intercolumniation between them. His elevation of the facade shows the top
of the doors cornice at the same height as the tops of the column shafts.29 The massive columns have diameters of 1.48 m (5
Roman feet) and are 14.18 m (48 Roman feet) high. The Attic
bases and Corinthian capitals are of white marble, and the shafts
of gray-green cipollino marble from the Greek island of Euboea
(Figs. 3.2, 1617, G6).30
Fig.3.4. Fragmentary male statue found near the temple, now stored on the temple
podium. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
71
72
Fig.3.5. Temple of Antoninus and Faustina: west side of the podium. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
Chapter
Fig.3.6. Profiles of the base molding and cornice from the podium
and from the exterior cella wall above: A. the podium base molding
and cornice; B. the base molding and cornice of the lower section of
the cella wall; C. both sections together with a pilaster. (G. Gorski)
Fig.3.7. The excavation of the podium stair at the end of the nineteenth century. (A. Migliorati, c.
1903 su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Beni Archeologici diRoma)
73
74
The Frieze
Extensive sections of the frieze survive on the sides of the cella. It
consists of a single scene, about the length of a bay and a half of
the porch, repeated numerous times around the sides and, originally, on the back of the building (Figs. 3.8, 17). Each scene
begins and ends with a candelabrum that rises from and is flanked
by acanthus scrolls. These frame two heraldically opposed central griffins with elongated torsos. Each rests its outer paw on
a shoot from acanthus leaves that cover a round, splayed base
under an elaborately decorated crater.31 At the corners of the
building, half scenes conclude the frieze. On that at the southeast
corner, the components include (left to right) a crater on an acanthus base, a griffin facing left, and the candelabrum and acanthus
scrolls between scenes. The elements in the excised scenes that
framed the dedication to Faustina (p.76) would have included
Fig.3.8. Upper section of the west side of the Temple: the positions of its two facades, the ancient one
with the two-sided Corinthian pilaster (the later wall hides most of its front face). The modern facade
aligns with the rear lateral column of the ancient porch. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i
Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)

temple with empty pediment. (Classical Numismatic Group,Inc.)
Chapter

temple with a single figure in the pediment. (Baldwins Auctions
Ltd., Dimitri Markov Coins & Metals)

temple with a single figure flanked by reclining figures in the
pediment. (Used with permission of Freeman andSear)

temple pediment with a single figure flanked by standing figures (l.)
and reclining figures. (Classical Numismatic Group,Inc.)
Fig.3.13. Aureus: obverse, bust of the deified Faustina; reverse,

temple pediment with a single figure flanked by standing and
reclining (?) figures. (Jean Elsen et ses filsSA)
75
76
(on the right side of the inscription) a candelabra and acanthus

scrolls, a griffin facing right, and a crater on an acanthus base.
The scene on the left side of the inscription would have been a
mirror-reverse image of that on the right.32
Inscriptions
Two dedicatory inscriptions survive (Figs. 3.2, 16). Contemporary
with the construction of the temple in 141, the dedication to
Faustina on the architrave reads as follows:
DIVAE FAVSTINAE EX SC
To the deified Faustina by decree of the Senate.
The one, installed on the frieze after Antoninus death in 161

adds the following:
DIVO ANTONINOET
Inscriptions, however, were not normally on architraves. The

dedication to Faustina was probably, therefore, originally on the
frieze. Like the surviving inscription, the earlier one probably had
bronze letters attached by metal tangs to sockets in the surface of
the marble. When Antoninus died, the first inscription was taken
down, and, to make room for the line honoring Antoninus, the
two lateral scenes were erased, and the surface of the frieze was
planed down below the level of the original tangs. On the architrave, the area between the second and the fifth columns was cut
down to the level of the lowest fascia, and on this zone the new
dedication to Faustina was inscribed. Executed in smaller letters, it now serves as the second line in the new inscription that
honors both Faustina and Antoninus:
DIVO ANTONINOET
DIVAE FAUSTINAE EXSC
To the divine Antoninus and Faustina by decree of the Senate.33
The Pediment
Antonine coins show sculptural reliefs on the pediment, but
in representing them, the numismatic images on denarii fall
into five, clearly defined major types: (1) an empty pediment
(Fig. 3.9),34 (2) a central figure standing alone (Fig. 3.10),35
(3) a standing central figure flanked by two reclining figures
(Fig.3.11),36 (4) a design reminiscent of the apotheosis on the
pedestal of the Column of Antoninus Pius now in Giardino della
Pigna in the Vatican,37 and a final type (5) on denarii and aurei
(Figs. 3.1213) shows the central figure flanked on the left by
smaller standing figures.38 These latter images probably represent the original design on the pediment: Faustina framed by the
little girls who, after her death, received charity in her name,
the Puellae Faustinianae (Fig.2.4).39 Between 1540 and 1546,
fragments of this relief and many other beautiful things were
found and removed.40
Chapter
Statuary
At the apex of the pediment, all the previously cited coins indicate a quadriga probably accurately depicted on an Antonine
aureus (Fig.2.5). On the obverse, the inscription DIVA AVG
FAVSTINA identifies the empress as a deity. On the reverse,
she rides in a four-horse chariot labeled CONSECRATIO.41
Although its label marks this coin as symbolic, it probably gives
a fairly accurate picture of the statues on the pediment. Suited to
the relatively small space in which it was mounted, the chariot, a
light racing vehicle, is atypically drawn by four horses instead of
the usual two. Rearing and prancing, they toss their heads spiritedly. A strong, bare-chested young charioteer, surely modeled
after one of the youthful celebrities so popular with the crowds in
the Circus Maximus, reins in the lively animals with a firm hand.
Meanwhile the diva, in the impressive draperies of a goddess,
holds a spear and looks left toward the viewer. To avoid artificial supports, the horses on the pediment probably each kept one
front hoof firmly on the pedestal, but otherwise the decorative
equestrian group on the pediment (Figs. 3.1, 1617) must have
been very similar to this lively design. At the corners of the pediment, almost all the Antonine representations of the facade (Figs.
3.3, 913) show female figures (probably victories) who either
raise large wreaths (circular shields?) or are framed by windblown mantels.42 The fragmentary, draped, seated female statue
found in 1885 on the marble pavement east of the temple, now
also on the porch (Fig.3.14),43 probably also belongs to the group
Fig.3.14. Seated draped female statue found north of the Temple of Faustina in 1885 (see infra,
p. 387 n. 43)now exhibited on the porch of the temple. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero
per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
77
78
Fig.3.15. Restored plan. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
of statues that surrounded the temple in antiquity.44 Flanking

the stairs, two high pedestals with statues appear on the coins:
a nude male, heroic statue on the left (supra, p. 68 n. 14)and a
draped female statue on the right.45 Decorated on all four sides
with reliefs, one of these pedestals (?) was found in the sixteenth
century.46 Antonine coins (Figs. 3.3, 913) show a low screen in
front of the building (Figs. 1.13, 3.1,16).
Fig.3.16. Restored south elevation. (G. Gorski)
79
80
Fig.3.17. Restored east elevation. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.3.18. Restored order (G. Gorski)
81
Fig.4.1. View of Caesars temple looking

southeast toward the Palatine and the
Palace of Tiberius. (G. Gorski)
The Temple of Caesar

(Aedes diviIuli)
History
The momentous events that followed Caesars assassination
(March 15, 44 BCE) inspired the construction of a temple dedicated to his divine spirit. As Pontifex Maximus, high priest of
the Roman state, Caesar formally lived in the Regia, the official residence of the Pontifex Maximus. The slain dictators body
was carried back to the Forum, and Mark Antony then consul,
Caesars friend, relative, and lieutenant delivered a brilliant
funeral oration. Standing on the Rostra in front of the Temple
of Castor and Pollux,1 he called Caesar superhuman, inviolable, and a veritable god and lifted the dictators bloody robe on a
spear. While the audience echoed his lamentations, he chanted
the dictators honors and achievements, and, when an aide raised
on high a life-sized wax image of Caesar clearly showing his
many brutal wounds, the crowd rioted. Led (says Suetonius) by
two divine spirits with swords, the spectators set fire to the bier,
feeding the flames with nearby wooden benches. Soldiers threw
in their weapons, and women, their jewels and amulets of their
children. The frantic grief of the wild scene spread throughout
the city as groups of foreigners ran through the streets bewailing Caesars death.2 To honor Caesars memory on the site of his
funeral pyre, in front of the Regia about halfway between the
front of the Basilica Aemilia and the Temple of Castor, the people
set up an altar with a giallo antico column almost twenty Roman
feet high (5.92 m) with the inscription PARENTI PATRIAE (to
the father of his country).3
Thirteen years later (31), Octavian came to power. Grandson
of Caesars sister, he was Caesars adopted son. To carry out a
senatorial decree of 42 (issued at the request of the triumvirs)
to commemorate the memory of his famous father and to demonstrate the power of his own new regime, he built a temple behind
83
84
Fig.4.3. Denarius: obverse, bust of Octavian/Augustus; reverse,

facade of the Temple. (Stacks)
Fig.4.2. Cornice fragments of the Temple of Caesar against the north side of the temples concrete
podium. Cf. the icons with the rosettes in Figs. 4.5 and 4.6. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i
Fig.4.4. Sestertius, 126 CE: obverse, bust of Hadrian; reverse,

Hadrian (?) addressing the people from the Rostra of the (restored)
Temple of Caesar. (Mnzen & MedaillenA.G.)
Chapter
Fig.4.5. Cornice block from the exterior order. Note that the
rosettes differ from those in Figs. 4.2 and 4.6. (G. Gorski su
concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
the small round altar that had replaced the earlier Caesarian
monuments (Figs. 4.110).4 Three days of triumphs helped commemorate the dedication. On the first day, Octavian celebrated
his victories over the Pannonians and Dalmatians, the Iapydes
and their neighbors and some Germans and Gauls. On the second, he honored his victory over Antony and Cleopatra at Actium,
and on the third, his conquest of Egypt. At the formal dedication
of the temple on August 18, 29,5 Dio Cassius tellsus,
. there were all kinds of contests, and the boys of the patricians performed the equestrian exercise called Troy, and men
of the same rank contended with chargers, with pairs, and with
four-horse teams; furthermore, one Quintus Vitellius, a senator,
fought as a gladiator. Wild beasts and tame animals were slain
in vast numbers, among them a rhinoceros and a hippopotamus,
beasts then seen for the first time in Rome.6
/ The Temple of Caesar (Aedes diviIuli)
Site, style, and architecture marked the new temple as a major

new government monument.
The position of the new shrine at the east end of the Forum
in front of and adjacent to the Regia, once presumably the palace of the kings and now the residence of the Pontifex Maximus
(Figs. 1.1314, 4.7), linked the new god to both the ancient
monarchs and the official forms of the current state religion. The
colossal cult statue inside portrayed Caesar as Pontifex Maximus
and augur (Fig.4.3). Toga-clad with covered head, he held the
curved staff of an augur (the lituus).7 A star (symbol of his deification) crowned the statue,8 and a second star with seven or eight
points decorated the pediment (Figs. 4.1, 3, 8). The spoils from
Augustus conquest of Egypt underwrote rich interior furnishings that included the Greek master Apelles famous painting of
Venus Anadyomene, revered as ancestress of the Julian clan.9
The temples important location and the high podium prominently displayed a Corinthian porch to the Roman public (Figs.
4.810), and this early example of imperial style, here concealing the old, irregular walls of the Regia and the short street in
front of them, gave the Forum an elegant new east end (Figs. 0.3,
1.2). The speakers platform in the front of the Temple (the rostra
aedis divi Iuli, Figs. 4.1, 89)10 reflected and supplemented the
West Rostra, remodeled by Caesar and Augustus, at the opposite end of the Forum (Figs. 0.3, 8.12). Attached to the front of
the Caesarian Rostra in 30, bronze prows from Actium recalled
Octavians victory over Antony and Cleopatra,11 thus visually
connecting his government with the Roman state and identifying
Octavian (and, by implication, his successors) as its guardians.
85
86
During the reign of Octavian (31 BCE14 CE), called

Augustus after 27, the temple went through three stages. In
the first, a stair parallel to each side of the podium led to the
speakers platform. The semicircular niche in the center of the
podium framed an altar, and a central stair led from the lower
podium to the columnar porch and the cella. In the second
period (30), Augustus widened the podium, moved the podium
stairs to the front ends of the Rostras facade, closed the altar
niche, and installed the ship prows (Figs. 4.78). In the third
phase (Figs.4.7, 9), a one-story arcade framed the sides and
back of the temple. Between the Temple of Caesar and the
Regia, its back wing was probably a windowless cryptoporticus
with skylights. On the north and south sides of the temple, this
arcade ended at the two ramps that gave access to the Rostra
(Fig. 4.7). The north branch of the arcade continued east to
the front of the Regia, ending at a tetrastyle porch in front of
its entrance (Figs. 1.13, 3.1).12 In this last stage, the Temple
of Caesar and the Regia became parts of the same complex,
conceptually giving Caesar a preeminent position both in the
Roman pantheon and in the imperial government under its protection. Those who sought asylum might use the temple, and
it was also the meeting place of the twelve Arval Brothers, an
ancient priesthood that annually blessed the fields. As coins
from his reign show (Fig.4.4), the emperor Hadrian (117138)
restored the building without altering its architectural style,
and thereafter it apparently needed no further repairs in
antiquity.13
Fig.4.6. Blocks from the exterior cornice. Cf. rosettes with those in
Fig. 4.5. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
The Building
Early Excavations
When excavators cleared the site in 1872,14 they found that
most of the buildings superstructure had been destroyed, either
when a medieval tower, the torre della Inserra, occupied part
of the site, or after July 22, 1540, when Pope Paul III licensed
crews working on Saint Peters Basilica to quarry stone and marble throughout Rome and its suburbs.15 With its tufa blocks and
remnants of the post-Caesarian altar, the front of the podium was
reasonably well preserved, however, and, with several internal
barrel-vaulted rooms, the massive concrete foundation survived
(Figs. 0.2, 4.2).16 Since its internal vaults had collapsed, Otto
Chapter
Fig.4.7. The plan of the Temple of Caesar and the Regia. (G. Gorski)
87
88
Fig.4.8. Restored west elevation. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
89
90
Richter, one of the later excavators (infra), suggested that they

may have been damaged in an earthquake.17
Otto Richter
Starting from Vitruvius famous statement that the temples columns had been laid out with pycnostyle spacing, that is, with
plinths 1.5 shaft diameters apart,18 Otto Richter worked out the
dimensions and spacing of the six columns on the facade and
made a detailed reconstruction of the building in the late nineteenth century.19 The wider interval between the third and the
fourth columns (3.39 m = about 11.50 Roman feet) allowed a better view of the door to the shallow cella and, when it was open, of
the colossal statue of Caesar inside (Fig.4.3). The architectural
fragments of white Carrara marble that have been preserved come
from all parts of the building. From the Rostra, parts of the cornice and base molding survive, and from the porch colonnade, an
Attic column base with double scotia,20 a shaft fragment,21 pilasters, parts of Corinthian capitals, and fragments of the architrave,
frieze, and cornice (Figs. 4.2, 56).22 Some of the most important
fragments of the frieze, which shows archaically styled, draped
winged female figures amid scrolls (Figs. 4.810), are kept in the
nearby storerooms of the Archaeological Superintendency, but
many cornice fragments still remain on the site in and around the
podium (Figs. 4.2, 56).23
Fig.4.10. Restored order.

(G. Gorski)
The Basilica milia

History
The Early Republic
During the early Republic, butcher stalls (Tabernae Lanienae)
occupied the north side of the Forum, but in the late fourth
century, silversmiths shops (Tabernae Argentariae) replaced
them. As Vitruvius famous description of a typical forum suggests,1 a colonnade may have shaded these shops while balconies and apartments (?) would have occupied the floor(s)
above. Behind them stood an early basilica, built probably in
195191 after a fire had burned through the area some years
earlier (210).2 The fate of this earlier basilica is uncertain, but
in 179 Marcus Fulvius Nobilior, one of the two censors (who,
among other duties, took care of Romes public buildings), let
a contract for a basilica behind the new shops of the silversmiths.3 Since Nobilior died the same year, his colleague,
Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, completed the structure, which
was, therefore, subsequently known as the Basilica Aemilia
and Fulvia.4
In 159, P. Cornelius Scipio Nasica, then also censor, installed a

water clock in the building,5 and in 78 the consul Marcus Aemilius
Lepidus decorated its facade with portrait shields (imagines clupeorum). In commemoration of that gift, his son, Lepidus, issued a
silver denarius in 61.6 Since it omits the south shops, it shows either
the north facade of the building facing the Macellum (Fig.5.2) or
the interior.7 The shields in this design appear as decorated frames
around portrait busts. To emphasize their importance, they are
quite large, completely covering the entablature of the lower order.
Judging by the proportions of the later basilicas decorations, however, they were actually no higher than the frieze. The building
on the denarius is two stories high. The lower colonnade is Ionic
or Doric/Tuscan,8 and that above, Ionic (and one-third the size of
the colonnade below). Between the columns of both orders, rows
of Ionic columns are visible. Upstairs, the larger (outer) colonnade
probably stood at the back of a terrace that, on the front facade,
overlooked the Forum, and on that in back, the space between the
Basilica and the Macellum. The smaller, upper columns on the
denarius would thus indicate a second story colonnade around
thenave.
91
Chapter
Fig.5.1. Restored general view looking
northeast. (G. Gorski)
The Late Republic and the Empire

In 55, with an enormous political bribe of 1,500 talents paid
by Caesar from the spoils of his Gallic wars, Lepidus brother,
the consul L. Aemilius Paullus Lepidus, remodeled the old
Basilica Aemilia et Fulvia.9 But, says Cicero, while he
used the same old columns, he has executed most magnificently the part he put out at contract.10 Unfortunately, either
Lepidus never finished the construction or his building was
severely damaged. Whatever the circumstances, in 34, his
son, Lucius Aemilius Lepidus Paullus, constructed at his own
expense a new structure, the Basilica Pauli, and dedicated it
in his consulship.11 Twenty years later (14), Paullus basilica
burned, and the same patron supposedly rebuilt it, although
actually Augustus and the friends of Paulus carried out the
reconstruction.12 Finally, in 22 CE, with the permission of
the Senate, Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, the son of Augustus
associate in the reconstruction of 14, stabilized and decorated
the Basilica of Paullus, a monument of the Aemilian house,
at his own expense.13
Destruction and Subsequent History

Thereafter, the building stood largely undamaged until the basilica, the back wing of a combined structure that also included
the impressive arcade on the south facade, burned in Alarics
sack of Rome (August 24, 410).14 The fierce fire melted the
bronze coins in the bankers offices inside the basilica, and the
greenish marks from those coins appear still today on the marble pavement. The roof collapsed, and the interior was abandoned.15 To hide the ruins from passersby on the Argiletum
(Figs. 0.1, 2.17), the city government built a new wall aligned
with the Curia across the street. Faced externally with reused
brick, its partly preserved pilasters frame seven surviving
niches (Fig.5.4).16 To replace the original Doric arcade on the
Forum (which must have been severely damaged), the restorers built a Corinthian colonnade with red granite columns on
pedestals. Three of the columns have been reerected at the east
end of the basilicas facade (Fig.5.3). One was found in situ; the
two others, discovered nearby, were reerected in corresponding
positions that show that these columns had been spaced more
closely than the piers of the original arcade.17
The Middle Ages and the Renaissance

Inside the ruined basilica, the walls gradually collapsed, and, in
the eighth century, the wall between the ancient shops and the
basilica fell.18 In the late seventh or early eighth century, a local
grandee erected a large-scale, partly preserved house, almost a
fortress, which still stands in the middle of the arcade. With a
facade of roughly cut blocks of greenish and brown tufa, it originally had two floors linked by a crude stair. The threshold was
a fragment of the Fasti Consulares, the official inscription that
commemorated the names and dates of ancient Romes consuls.
On the front and east walls are two ancient white marble reliefs
found in the medieval street in front of the Basilica, where they
/ The Basilica milia
93
94
served as drain covers (Fig. 5.3).19 A second early medieval

house occupied shops 35 (from the east end of the basilica).
Its external front stair and facade, which stood in the ancient
arcade in front of the shops, are now demolished, but the interior
pavements of white marble, giallo antico, serpentine, and porphyry scavenged from the ruins of the basilica and the adjacent
buildings still survive (Fig.5.8).20 Nearby, a small church stood
in the penultimate shop of the arcade/colonnade across from the
Temple of Antoninus and Faustina.21 Commemorating Giovanni
de Campo Turriciano, it survived until at least the seventeenth
century, and its presence protected part of the site from systematic quarrying.22
Indeed, by the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, San
Giovannis Campo Torrecchiano,23 an open, irregular lot next
door, known in this period as the Zecca vecchia (the old
mint), had become a quarry for ancient marble. Yet the west
facade of the basilicas original arcade still survived, and the
bulls skulls (bucrania) on its entablature were so familiar to
Renaissance artists24 that they nicknamed the whole surrounding area the cow forum (Forum Boarium).25 Around 1494,
Giuliano Da Sangallo and, a little later, his brother Antonio could
still sketch the ruin in great detail (Fig.5.5), but six years later
(1500), Bramante demolished the structure to reuse its largescale white marble blocks in the palace of Cardinal Adriano
Castellesi da Corneto (now the Palazzo Giraud-Torlonia on the
modern Via della Conciliazione).26 Today in the Vatican Library
Fig.5.2. A. C. Silver denarii of c. 61 BCE: reverses showing the

basilicas north facade as reconstructed by Marcus Aemilius Lepidus,
father of the mint master Lepidus. B. The coin images in perspective.
(A. Tkalec AG; B. after Fuchs 1969; C. Mnzen & Medaillen,
DeutschlandGmbH)
in Rome and the Uffizi in Florence,27 the Sangallos drawings

are thus major pieces of evidence for modern reconstructions
of the building.
Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century

Excavations
By the early nineteenth century, the Basilica Aemilia lay buried
under a mass of fill nearly 12 m deep. A drawing executed before
1810 shows that houses aligned with the facade of the Temple of
Antoninus and Faustina occupied the site, and after their demolition, the first serious excavations took over ten years (18991912).
Directed by Giaccomo Boni and later by A. Bartoli,28 the excavators cleared the arcade along the Via Sacra, the shops inside
it, and a part of the basilicas interior. After twenty years, the
east facade across from the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina
was freed, and a few years later, the facade along the Argiletum.
Finally, in 1939, the city of Rome announced the full liberation
of the building (Figs. 5.3, 14).29
Chapter
Fig.5.3. View of the Basilica Aemilia looking northwest from the Palatine Hill. Note the three red granite columns from the late antique colonnade that replaced the original
arcade on the facade. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
95
96
Modern
Reconstructions
Italo Gismondi
For the model of imperial Rome displayed today in the Museum
of Roman Civilization in Romes E.U.R. district, Italo Gismondi
undertook the earliest modern reconstruction of the Basilica
Aemilia, circa 1939 (Figs. 5.67).30 Since this model shows
only the basilicas exterior, his conception of the interior is not
entirely clear. The exterior, however, consists of three grand,
superimposed rectangles. The lowest includes the Doric arcade
on the Forum. At the southeast corner, a pavilion, one bay
wide, projects toward the north side of the Temple of Caesar.
The south end of the west facade features the architectural elements and doors taken from the Giuliano Da Sangallo drawing
(Fig.5.5), and the rest of this continuous wing runs unbroken to
the basilicas northwest corner. Decorated with engaged Ionic
half columns, the arcaded south facade of the second floor
aligns with the front of the shops inside the ground-floor arcade,
leaving space for a wide terrace that continues on the west side
of the building. On the terrace, projecting bays frame north and
south arches that apparently would have accessed interior halls
above the basilicas lateral aisles. From these, visitors could
have overlooked the nave. The north corridor, which would have
provided views over the imperial fora, would have had open
arcades, but since Gismondi had no information on this part
Fig.5.4. The late antique wall erected on the west side of the Basilica Aemilia after the fire of 410 CE.
(M. Jackson su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per
i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
Chapter
97
of the building, he left this side of his model featureless (Fig

5.7). The third-floor clerestory (which also has a blank north
facade) features large thermal windows to the east and west,
and smaller windows to the south. All overlook the flat terrace
above the second floor. Timber trusses could have supported the
gabled roof of the clerestory.
HeinrichBauer
Facade. Heinrich Bauers reconstruction of the Basilica Aemilia31
relies on an earlier unpublished German plan (Fig. 5.8) rather
more accurate than that on which Gismondi based his model.32
Sloping back toward the northeast, the west facade of the arcade
ends at the rear wall of the shops.33 After a break at that point,
the late antique wall begins (Figs. 5.4, 8, 18). Roughly aligned
with the earlier wall and running in the same direction, it ends
at the northwest corner of the building. Based on surviving ruins
and architectural fragments found in the various excavations,
Bauers elevation of the lower exterior Doric order on the south
facade is accurate (Fig.5.9). He also believes, however, that the
facade had two full stories, the upper one a Doric arcade threequarters the size of that below. On its attic, statues stood above
the piers of the two orders below. The facade was 100 Roman
feet tall (about 30 m) and was, therefore, the same height as the
Temple of Castor34 or the adjacent Curia.35 Bauers north facade
(Fig.5.10) includes a lower Ionic order, a Corinthianizing attic,
and an upper Corinthian colonnade. To the right (east) well
behind the north facade is the north side of the Sangallos
Fig.5.5. Giuliano da Sangallos drawing of the south end of the west facade (c. 1494). (Fototeca Unione,
FU 12204)
98
Fig.5.6. Italo Gismondi, the Basilica Aemilia in the model of Constantinian Rome, E.U.R Museum, Rome,
looking northeast. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della Sovraintendenza
di Roma Capitale)
pavilion.36 The north attic is on the same level as that around the
nave and repeats its design (Figs. 5.11, 13). The low Corinthian
order on the second story, apparently a clerestory, would have
helped illuminate the nave. The light wells in the roof must have
lighted the space above the coffered ceiling over the nave (Figs.
5.1011).
South Arcade. A stair from the Forum gives access to the interior of the arcade. To strengthen its structure, iron rods, 0.11m
thick, stretch across this broad, groin-vaulted hall. Behind the
arcade are ten shops (Figs. 5.1112). Visitors to the basilica
would have had three entrances from the arcade, a wider central
door37 and two lateral ones reached through marble paved vestibules. Inside the arcade, Doric pilasters flank the shop doors
and embellish the backs of the exterior piers across from them.38
At either end of the arcade, dogs leg stairs led to the upper
floors.39 Bauers section (Fig. 5.11) shows the arcade roof as a
groin vault that supports a floor aligned with that over the lateral aisles inside the basilica. The second story of the arcade on
the Forum is also groin vaulted, although wooden trusses support
the gabled roof above this vault. There are two floors of mezzanine rooms over the shops and, above them, at the level of and
behind the second-story arcade, an additional set of low rooms. A
light well that separates the second stories of the arcade and the
basilica would have lighted the basilicas upper story. At the east
end of the arcade, a pavilion, equal in width to a bay of the south
facade, projects toward the Temple of Caesar (Fig.5.8).
Chapter
Interior. Separated by a high attic (Figs. 5.11, 5.13), two superimposed Corinthian orders frame the nave. On the ground floor,
Ionic columns on cipollino shafts close the north aisle, and,
across an adjacent hall, a second Ionic colonnade on the north
facade gives access to the Macellum. When the Flavians constructed the Temple of Peace in the later first century (Figs. 0.1,
3), they would have closed this outer colonnade.40 The lower
order includes the famous earlier friezes with scenes from Roman
history (supra, p.77).41 The aisles around the nave have concrete
vaults partly masked by the high attic that separates the upper
and lower orders. Here, on ressauts above and in front of the
columns around the nave, Bauer locates the surviving overlifesize pavonazzetto statues of the Parthians Boni recovered during his excavations in the early twentieth century (supra, pp. 27,
29).42 Behind and slightly above these images (Fig.5.11) stand
Corinthianizing marble piers, their shafts ornamented with vines
and flowers (Fig.5.13).43 Aligned with the Parthians, the lateral
ones are square in section. The central ones, rectangular in section, rest on slightly projecting bases separated by a parapet.
Their narrow ends face the nave.44 Standing above the scrolled
piers behind Parthians, the columns of the upper order support a
timber-truss roof and, above the nave, a coffered wooden ceiling
suspended from the trusses.
linked to the Forum, also led to the Macellum, the market that
occupied the zone to the northeast where the Flavian emperors
later built the Templum Pacis. Indeed, Marcus Fulvius Nobilior
had added a new section to the Macellum (for the sale of fish) in
179 BCE, the same year he built the Basilica Fulvia.46 Surrounded
A New Reconstruction45
Original Project. In 14, Augustus and the friends of Paulus
(supra, p.27) designed and built a structure that, while closely
Fig.5.7. The Gismondi model of the Basilica Julia looking south. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della
Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale)
99
10 0
Fig.5.8. Bauer, plan. (Deutsches Archologisches InstitutRom)
Chapter
Fig.5.9. Bauer, south elevation. (Deutsches Archologisches InstitutRom)
101
10 2
Fig.5.10. Bauer, north facade. (Deutsches Archologisches InstitutRom)
Chapter
Fig.5.11. Bauer, northsouth section. (Deutsches Archologisches InstitutRom)
103
10 4
by high tufa walls, the Temple of Peace (begun after CE 71, dedicated in 75)later cut the basilica off from the surrounding neighborhood and focused it more closely on the Forum (Figs. 0.1, 3).
Indeed, framing the central section of the Forum, the long Doric
facades of the Basilicas Aemilia and Julia determined its visual
character.
Exterior. The Augustan Basilica Aemilia stands on a podium
(Figs. 5.1, 17, 1920), and on three sides, a continuous white
marble stair led from the Forum into the arcade. Surviving white
marble fragments of the entablature and the late fifteenth-century drawings of the Sangallos show that the engaged columns
of the Doric order flanking the arches on the south facade had
Attic bases and fluted shafts. On each shaft rosettes ornamented
the zone between the astragal and the capital, and egg-and-dart
enriched the latter (Fig. 5.21). In every bay the frieze had five
triglyphs (the two lateral ones above the flanking columns) and
in the four metopes, bucrania alternated with small decorative
shields (Fig. 5.19). On the cornice a flat rectangular modillion
projected above each triglyph. Between the modillions, coffers
with rosettes decorated the soffit.47
Arcade. The east and west sides of the arcade differed (Figs.
5.18, 20). On the east, facing the Temple of Antoninus and
Faustina, there were three arches (Figs. 1.1314, 5.18). Flanked
by Corinthian columns, the north one accessed the arcade, the
middle one led to the Via Sacra in front of the basilicas south
facade, and the south one was part of the arch between the
Fig.5.12. Bauer, interior arcade, looking northwest. (Deutsches Archologisches InstitutRom)
Fig.5.13. Bauer, bay and partial section of the second-story colonnade. (Deutsches Archologisches Institut)
10 6
Fig.5.14. Interior looking west toward the Curia. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di
Roma)
Chapter
107
basilica and the Temple of Caesar. On the elaborate west facade

documented by the Sangallo brothers (Figs. 5.5, 20), the entablature of the south facade continued, and fluted Doric pilasters
on podia emphasized the corners of the wall. Immediately next
to them on the podia were half columns, and these and two additional, central half columns divided the wall into four bays within
which were three equal-sized doors.48 The podium on the west
facade continued that on the south facade (Figs. 5.1820) and,
as the Argiletum rose slightly towards the north, required from
seven to two steps to reach the doors. On the east facade of the
arcade, the piers between the two north doors framed steps.
Behind the arcade, at right angles to its south facade (Figs. 0.1,
5.18), the basilicas east and west facades opened through five
identically sized doors into the side streets (the Argiletum and
the road that separates the basilica from the Temple of Antoninus
and Faustina).
Attic. On all three facades, the Doric entablature had an attic.49
Above the half columns on the south side stood decorated bases
with colossal statues of Parthian prisoners (Figs. 5.17, 1920).50
About 3.50 m high,51 several poorly preserved statues, now in
the office of the Archaeological Superintendency on the Palatine
Hill, have pavonazzetto bodies. Others were of giallo antico or
africano.52 The separate heads, at least in the surviving examples, were of white marble.53 Between the statues in each bay
were spaces for two imagines clupeatae,54 obviously intended
Fig.5.15. The south interior wall looking west. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per
i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
Fig.5.16. The entablature of the lower order. The fragments of the architrave (bracketed with modern sections) and cornice are original; the sections of the frieze are casts of the
originals. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
Chapter
Fig.5.17. Section looking east. (G. Gorski)
109
11 0
to recall those Marcus Aemilius Lepidus had installed in 78

(p.91).55 The attic cornice projected above a shallow pier behind
each statue.56 At the west end of the building, the drawing by
Giuliano Da Sangallo (Fig.5.5, supra, n. 27)shows a fragmentary pediment above the attic, a feature that suggests a gabled
roof at the east and west ends of the arcade. The south side of
that roof would have intersected the upper section of the wall in
front of the arcade shops, creating a flat terrace above the shops.57
Excavated by Boni and Bartoli (supra, p.94), the white marble
Corinthianizing piers with scrolls and flowers were part of a colonnade that closed the north side of the terrace and was aligned
with the back wall of the shops.58
Interiors. Inside the arcade, Doric pilasters flanked the shop
doors (Fig. 5.12),59 and stairways at the east and west ends of
the front arcade led to the terrace and the upper floors of the
basilica (Fig. 5.18). Three doors, the wider one in the center,
connected the arcade to the basilica. The interior of the central
door (and originally probably the other two) has a fine, partly preserved white marble frame. The interior walls were also faced
with marble.60 On the wall of the south aisle (Fig.5.15), the lower
unprofiled section of the surviving baseboard molding is of white
marble, and the cornice of pavonazzetto. Above the base molding
runs a course of portasanta and above that were rectangular slabs
of cipollino (the short sides at the top and bottom). The floors
were also paved with a variety of imported, colored, now fragmentary marble slabs (Fig.5.18).
Between the columns that frame the nave, gray-green bardiglio borders continue the color of the pavement in the aisles
and frame the pavement in the nave. Against a portasanta
background, three large squares mark the position of the main
(Forum) entrances from the south. In the east square, the bestpreserved of Augustan date, the four borders, in giallo antico
(the outer one), portasanta, africano, and portasanta, frame
an inner giallo antico square. Separated from the square by
a course of portasanta slabs, an africano strip on the east side
of the nave, framed by cipollino borders and flanked by fields
of portasanta, runs toward the east doors. The larger, central
square (a wider outer border of giallo antico, a narrower inner
one of africano with a portasanta center) represents a later
repair. The smaller west square, the result of an even later
repair, has a giallo antico border. On the front and back of
the interior, cipollino strips frame upper and lower rectangular portasanta spaces bracketing a rectangular cipollino border
that frames a central giallo antico rectangle. Against a porta
santa background, three partly preserved parallel giallo antico
borders, the outer ones narrow, the inner one wide, appear to
have connected the center and west squares. In later periods,
the whole pavement was extensively patched with miscellaneous marbles.61
On the floor between the columns and in the side aisles are
marks and outlines of objects that were burned (or melted) in the
fire that destroyed the building: masses of wood from the roof and
ceiling, door hinges, nails, bolts with nail holes, and melted coins.
Chapter
These probably all came from wooden counters with metal fittings
that stood between the columns where silversmiths/bankers kept
their money and the costly silver objects they sold. Indeed, it
appears that the space between the columns and in the side aisles
(except in front of the doors) served as a banking and financial
area conveniently close to zones where other marks on the pavement indicate the presence of organized games of chance. Uses
of this kind suggest that, after business hours, the doors were
secured, and the public was no longer allowed into the interior.62
The two internal superimposed orders both had africano shafts.
The lower order was Ionic, the upper Corinthian.63 The burned,
fragmentary shafts of the lower Ionic order (Fig. 5.14),64 7.10
m high,65 had white marble attic bases, some of them recently
restored in travertine. The columns of this order used the foundations of the previous late republican building,66 and the famous
reliefs with historical scenes depicting events in Roman history
(Fig.5.16) served as either wall decorations on the interior walls
of the aisles or as the frieze of the lower order.67
The surviving architectural elements set up on at the northeast side of the site fully document the architrave and cornice
of the lower order. On the architrave, half rounds with beadand-reel separate the three fasciae. The cornice combines a fillet
above a cyma reversa with normal-leaf-and-dart. Of the frieze,
if the historical reliefs cited above were not used with these elements, nothing survives. On the cornice, starting at the top
of the block, the moldings include an ovolo with egg-and-dart,
normal-leaf-and-dart, a half round with bead-and-reel, a cyma
recta with lotus-and-palmette, a narrow fillet, a cyma reversa with

shear-shaped leaf-and dart, a corona, raking modillions that flank
soffit panels with rosettes, a fillet, a half round with bead-and
reel, an ovolo with egg-and-dart, a fillet, dentils, a fillet, and a
cyma reversa with normal-leaf-and-dart.68
The columns of the upper Corinthian order, between 5.50 m
and 6 m high,69 carried a typical order, parts of which survive.
The architrave has three fasciae. The cornice consists of a
fillet and a cyma reversa with normal-leaf-and-dart. The frieze
is decorated with a stylized lotus-and-palmette, and, starting at
the top, the cornice has the following moldings: a fillet, a cyma
recta decorated with lotus-and-palmette, a low corona, flat-faced
modillions flanking soffit panels with rosettes, dentils with fillets,
an ovolo with egg-and-dart, a fillet, and an undecorated cyma
reversa.70
Measured together, both orders had, according to Toebelmann,
a height of 15.73 m (54.25 Roman feet).71
In the north branch of the colonnade that frames the nave, the
columns to the north have cipollino shafts. Behind these, a second narrow aisle, possibly barrel vaulted,72 may, before the construction of the Temple/Forum of Peace, have opened into the
Macellum (Gatefold1).
The smaller Corinthian order on the second floor opened into
an aisle above the one on the ground floor. Accessible from the
stairways in the arcade, it will have allowed visitors to look down
on proceedings in the nave (Figs. 5.1718). The same stairways,
after a short walk through the terrace above the arcade and the
111
11 2
Fig.5.18. Plan. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.5.19. South elevation. (G. Gorski)
113
11 4
Fig.5.20. West elevation. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
115
Corinthianizing colonnade, led to a third-story aisle that would

again have allowed a view of the nave. At this level, visitors could
have observed events both in the Forum and, passing through
the Corinthianizing colonnade, in the nave. And finally, there
may have been a clerestory above the nave. On the east and west
facades, it probably had thermal windows (Figs. 5.1, 20), but over
the Corinthianizing colonnade to the north and south, there must
have been a row of smaller windows (Figs. 5.1,19).
Fig.5.21. Lower order of the south facade.

(G. Gorski)
Fig.6.1. Curia: general view looking

northwest. (G. Gorski)
TheCuria
History
The Curia Hostilia
According to Livy,1 Romulus (771717 BCE), Romes legendary founder, established the Senate, originally a royal advisory
council of a hundred men, the heads of the noble clans (patres)
whose descendants became Romes aristocracy (the patricians).
Where the Senate held its sessions in the early decades of its
existence is unknown. Eventually, using war booty from the conquest of the neighboring Latin town of Alba Longa, King Tullius
Hostilus (672641) brought the Alban aristocrats to Rome and,
for his newly enlarged Senate, built a meeting house, a Curia
(Fig.1.1), on the northwest side of the Forum just north of and
adjacent to the voting area (the Comitium) for Romes earliest
popular assembly, the comitia curiata.2 Like the surviving building, this Curia, which, says Livy, continued to be called the
Curia Hostilia as late as the time of our own fathers,3 was a rectangular structure with a wooden roof that was formally considered a temple.4 Oriented to the cardinal points, its south entrance
opened directly into the Comitium, an area enclosed by rows of

seats that served as the Curias steps.5 Major historical paintings
decorated the interior. The one installed in 363 by M. Valerius
Messala commemorated his Sicilian victory over King Hiero of
Syracuse and the Carthaginians during the First PunicWar.6
To house his newly enlarged Senate of six hundred members, the
dictator Sulla reconstructed and extended the building in 81 BCE.7
The site and the general plan remained the same, but, wrote Cicero
disparagingly, Thenew building looks to my eyes smaller since
its enlargement.8 It lasted a little over thirty years. Then, in the
disorders at the fall of the Roman Republic, the mob burnedit:
Milowho was seeking the Consulship, met Clodius [his
chief rival] on the Appian Way and at first simply wounded him;
then, fearing he would avenge the deed, slew him.The people
in the city heard of this toward morning and were thrown into a
terrible uproar.Rufus and Titus Munatius Plancus took them
in hand and excited them to greater wrath. As tribunes they conveyed the body into the Forum just before dawn, placed it on
the rostra, exhibited it to all, and spoke appropriate words over
117
11 8

Fig.6.4. The Curia: the present Forum facade after Bartolis restoration. (J. Packer su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Cultrurali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
Fig.6.2. Denarius: obverse, head of Augustus; reverse, the Augustan

Curia. (Gorny & Mosch Giessener Mnzhandlung)
Fig.6.3. Denarius: obverse, head of Augustus; reverse, victory,

her garment blowing out behind her, standing on a globe (on the
pediment of the Curia?). (Numismatik Lanz Mnchen)
Chapter
/ The Curia
119
Fig.6.5. The original door of the Curia at San Giovanni in Laterano. (G. Gorski su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Cultrurali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
it with lamentations. So the populaceno longer showed any

regard for things sacred or profane.[and] took up the body of
Clodius and carried it into the senate-house, laid it out properly, and then after heaping up a pyre out of the benches burned
both the corpse and the building.at the ninth hour, they held
the funeral feast in the Forum itself, with the senate-house still
smouldering.9
The CuriaJulia
In 52 BCE, Faustus Sulla, eldest son of the dictator Sulla, again
restored the Curia.10 However, a few years later, allegedly to
build a temple to Felicitas (Fortune), it was again demolished,
and, in early 44, the Senate assigned its reconstruction to
Caesar, who on the present site began a building aligned with
and annexed to his forum.11 After his assassination, the Senate
proposed to call this incomplete structure the Curia Hostilia,
the traditional name for the Senate House.12 But in 29 BCE,
Octavian finally finished and dedicated the new monument as
the Curia Julia, a name that emphasized his relationship with
Caesar and thereby legitimized his own political aspirations
(Figs. 6.23).13 In 94 CE, Domitian repaired the structure after
the great Neronian fire of 64.14 The restored building burned
again in the fire of 283,15 and Diocletian (286305) rebuilt it
(Figs. 6.1, 419).16
12 0
Later History and Early Excavation
Fig.6.6. The medieval interior colonnades flanking the nave in Saint Adriano. (Istituto Nazionale di
Studi Romani)
The Middle Ages. In the seventh century, Pope Honorius I

(625638 CE) converted the Curia into the Church of Saint
Adriano. Despite the installation of the new cult, however, the
Senate, now a purely local council, continued to meet in the
room. For the next two centuries, the chamber remained essentially unchanged, although an apse was added to the back, and
the rear east door to the north led then to a small chapel built
into the colonnade of the Forum of Caesar.17 Indicating that
they were still used, the three broad steps that supported the
chairs of the senators on both sides of the room were carefully
maintained and even restored, and portraits of senators were
painted on the walls. One was labeled consul and general, and
another consul and tabellio (an official who gave decisions at
law and wrote legal documents). Indeed, the Senate only abandoned the chamber after the eleventh century (c. 1000),18 when
the Senate became the council of the city of Rome (the Comune
di Roma) and met thereafter in the adjacent Saints Martina and
Luke or on the Capitoline Hill.19 During the early Middle Ages,
the ancient (Domitianic) bronze leaves of the front entrance
remained in position, but, as the ground level outside rose with
the continuing destruction of the Forum, the old door opening
was closed.20 Raised first to the level of the medieval church,
then to the level of the Baroque interior (1655),21 its leaves
were finally transported in 1660, to the Basilica of Borrominis
San Giovanni in Laterano by Pope Alexander VII (16551667),
Chapter
/ The Curia
and they still close its main entrance today (Fig. 6.5).22 On
either side of main door in the Curia, the designers of the late
medieval church of the twelfth or thirteenth century opened
two additional entrances. In the interior, now 3 m above the
ancient pavement, two lateral Corinthian colonnades supported arcades (Fig. 6.6). Assembled from ancient elements,
these colonnades separated a nave from two lateral aisles. For
the new apse, the medieval workers cut a hole through the back
(north) wall.23
Later History. After the Mercedarian Order took over the church
in the mid-seventeenth century, the architect(s) for the order
enclosed the building in a new convent and remodeled the interior
of the church in a conventional baroque style. Closing the three
large central windows on the original facade, they introduced a
set of two superimposed windows above each lateral entrance and
lighted the nave with a roughly configured arched window above
the central door (Fig.6.7). They embedded the medieval columns
in rectangular piers, each with a Composite pilaster toward the
nave (Fig.6.8). These supported comparatively low arches. The
entablature above featured a flattened architrave and a richly
configured cornice with modillions. Above the arches, flat pilasters flanked lateral windows. Two giant Composite columns en
ressaut framed the apse,24 and a wooden roof protected the vault
over the nave. Apart from its much patched walls,25 nothing of
the ancient Curia its floor six meters below that of the medieval
church seemed to have survived.26
Fig.6.7. Saint Adriano: the front and side toward the Basilica Aemilia after Bonis excavations.
(Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
121
12 2
Restoration: The Sources for the

Reconstruction
Modern Excavations. In 1900, Giaccomo Boni excavated the
area in front of Saint Adriano down to the ancient level, revealing the original opening of the front door closed with rubble
(Figs. 6.7, 9). Extending his excavation 5 m beyond the door, he
uncovered a section of the Diocletianic pavement in pavonazzetto, porphyry, giallo antico, and serpentine marbles (Figs. 6.10,
12).27 That encouraged him to propose excavation of the Curia.
Although Bonis bad health delayed the excavation, in 1923, the
Italian government acquired the church and the adjacent convent
from the Mercedarians. In 1930, during the construction of the
Via del Impero (now the Via dei Fori Imperiali), Mussoli assigned
the excavation and restoration of the building to Alfonso Bartoli,
Bonis successor as director of the excavations of the Palatine and
the Roman Forum (19251945).28
Fig.6.8. Saint Adriano: the Baroque interior before Bartolis

restoration of the Curia. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
Alfonso Bartoli. Bartoli exposed, photographically documented,

and demolished the medieval and baroque remains.29 Shoring up
the brick-faced concrete walls, he closed the medieval and modern doors and windows and reopened the ancient ones (indicated
by alterations in the masonry of the original walls). Restoring
Diocletians marble pavement and what remained of the wall
niches and speakers platform (Figs. 6.1516), he built a new
wood and tile roof and installed a coffered ceiling that repro-
Chapter
/ The Curia
duced Roman forms. On the completion of this work in 1939, the

Curia was largely restored to its Diocletianic state (Fig.6.4).30
The DiocletianicCuria
Exterior (Figs. 6.15, 18). The simple rectangular front and
back facades incorporate four lateral buttresses (Figs. 5.14, 6.1,
16, 19). Consequently, with a width of 24.84 m and a height
of 31.17 m,31 the facade is generously proportioned. As in the
Augustan Curia (Fig.6.2), a portico with a shed roof originally
shaded the front of the building (Figs. 6.1, 16, 1819). Although
it had almost completely disappeared, Bartoli found enough
surviving evidence to restore it on paper. A tract of white marble pavement that survives 6.88 m (23.25 Roman feet) from the
facade shows the width of the colonnade, and the double row
of beam holes that run across the facade above the entrance
(Fig. 6.4) indicate the height of the porticos sloping roof. For
the convenience of modern visitors, Bartoli constructed the modern stair that leads to the main door. In the original building,
however, a lateral stair of five treads on the right side of the portico gave access to the porch (Figs. 6.1, 1619).32 Bartoli found
remnants of these stairs preserved on the facade.33 The east side
of the portico, however, continued along the front of the building west of the Curia (infra, pp. 129130), and some traces of
its original polychrome marble decoration survive.34 Rectangular
sockets in the pavement in front of the colonnade mark the positions of a series of pedestals for statues that flanked the front of
Fig.6.9. Saint Adriano: the lower part of the facade after Bonis excavations. (Istituto Nazionale di
Studi Romani)
123
12 4
the colonnade (Figs. 6.1, 1819).35 A heavy coat of plaster the

means used to attach the veneer shows that the interior of the
portico was revetted with marble slabs and had a pavonazzetto
dado 0.70 m high with a base molding and cornice (Figs. 6.1,
18).36 The entrance lacked a tympanum and had a simple frame
with three fasciae. Coins found inside the original leaves at S.
Giovanni Laterano dated them to the reign of Domitian,37 and
they must have been fabricated for his reconstruction of the Curia.
By additions to all four sides, these leaves have been enlarged,
and the metal bosses (although in ancient sockets) are mostly
from the seventeenth century. Since the ancient leaves (Fig.6.5)
could not be moved, Bartoli installed modern reproductions in
the Curia. Modern casts of the two kinds of metal bosses on the
originals decorate these.38
Above the colonnade, the stucco on the facade was drafted
to look like masonry blocks. (Some survive just under the lower
cornice of the front and back pediments.) This decoration adjoins
the cornices under these pediments, and the interior of the front
pediment probably had stucco reliefs similar to those of the
Augustan Curia (Figs. 6.12, 18).39 The cornice that framed this
pediment was elaborately configured with stucco decorations.
Early drawings and some minor traces on the surviving travertine
modillions indicate the character of this (unrestored) decoration
(Fig.6.11).40 The pedestals on the apex and sides of the pediment
(Figs. 6.1, 1819) have disappeared, but, although they are not
restored, they were drawn in the Renaissance, and their general
appearance is thus preserved.41 The sides of the building must
Fig.6.10. The Diocletianic floor after Bartolis excavation. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
Chapter
/ The Curia
have been finely finished (Fig.6.19), but nothing has survived.42

Since on the front and back pediments the modillions of the cornices were different sizes, there were no modillions on the sides
of the building.43
Interior (Fig. 6.15). The interior is rectangular, and its
proportions approximate those recommended by Vitruvius.44 The
intricate, serially repeated designs of the fully restored inlaid
pavement are composed of four marbles: pavonazzetto, giallo
antico, porphyry, and serpentine (Fig. 6.12).45 On both sides,
three broad steps flank the central pavement. Varying slightly
in width and height, each was originally paved with two types of
marble, and a central pavonazzetto zone flanked front and back
on the long sides by wide borders of giallo antico. The wooden
seats of the senators were probably set on the wider central space
on each step, and on each side of the chamber, there was space
for at least 146 senators, just under 300 in all (Fig.6.17). After
the early third century, the Senate, then scattered throughout the
empire, had at least 900 members, but the spaces in the Curia
must have been intended only for those senators who lived in or
near Rome or were visiting the capital.46
The praesidium platform, 0.40 m high, is at the back of the
room (Figs. 6.1517) between the two back doors. Reached by two
shallow steps, it is paved with slabs of pavonazzetto. The official
who presided over the meetings of the Senate sat on this platform
in front of the famous statue of the winged victory that dominated
the interior.47 On each side of the steps to the praesidium, the
Fig.6.11. The ancient cornice of the pediment restored. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
125
12 6
Fig.6.12. The restored marble pavement of the Curia. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
pavement consists of a giallo antico square bordered with pavonazzetto. A gray granite disk accents its center. On the wall behind
the presidium, the pavonazzetto revetment ends at the rear doors.
At the center of the presidium, a white marble pavement and part
of a broken pedestal (0.95 m 1.15 m), attached to the back wall
and originally faced with white marble, indicates the position of
the famous altar of victory. An altar for the cult of the victory on
which, at entry, each senator dropped a pinch of incense probably stood near the front door.48
The side walls (Fig. 6.15) were veneered with pavonazzeto
slabs arranged in two zones (the lowest 1.50 m high; the upper,
1.80 m). A molding separates the two; a cornice crowns the upper
zone. Both moldings are of white marble. On each wall, three
niches interrupt the upper pavonazzetto zone. At the center of
each side, the arched middle niche has a semicircular plan. The
lateral niches are rectangular. Veneered inside with pavonazzetto,
all the niches had simple white marble frames (some fragments
survived, and Bartoli restored the missing parts in travertine).
At the lower corners of the lateral niches, the fronts of the elaborately decorated projecting brackets are decorated with eagles
(Fig. 6.13). In the same positions, the slightly narrower brackets of the central niches display busts of the seasons (Fig.6.14).
Except for one, which had fallen, these brackets survive in their
original positions. Based on white marble fragments found in
the excavations, the column bases have been restored in travertine. These supported miniature columns, some with shafts
of alabaster, and all had entablatures and pediments. Those of
Chapter
/ The Curia
the lateral niches would have been unbroken; those of the two
central ones must have had arcuated (Syrian) pediments that
framed the arched niches. The decoration between the niches
has disappeared, destroyed in the mid-sixteenth century, but, as
on the north wall behind the praesidium, it probably included
Corinthian pilasters that divided the upper zone above the dado
into alternating rectangular and square bays enlivened internally
with polychrome marble panels of serpentine, porphyry, and
other marbles.49 Above the marble facing hung paintings, probably on tablets like Manius Valerius Maximus Messalas Tabula
Valeria50 or the painting of Nemea by Nicias put up by Augustus
in the Curia Julia.51 For the restored ceiling, Bartoli copied the
proportions of the coffers in the nearby Basilica of Maxentius.52
Adjacent Buildings
In the late nineteenth century, Rodolfo Lanciani used an inscription copied in the sixteenth century by a certain Celso Cittadini
in the Church of Saint Adriano (the Curia)53 to identify two
buildings immediately west of the church on the nearly contemporary plan of Antonio da Sangallo the Younger as the Atrium
Minervae (the Atrium of Minerva) and the Secretarium
Senatus the (Archive of the Senate).54 On the Sangallo Plan,
an open (?) space west of the Curia (?) adjoined a rectangular,
groin-vaulted (?) chamber divided in two by a row of five central piers.55 Beyond lay a narrow rectangular building with an
apse. Under the later Baroque Church of Saints Martina and
Luke in the Roman Forum, that space, according to Lanciani,
Fig.6.13. Bracket from the rectangular, lateral niches of the interior. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi
Romani)
was initially the Secretarium Senatus and had been converted

in the Middle Ages into the original Church of Saints Martina and
Luke. Sangallos odd room with piers (and the apparently open
space that separated it from the Curia?) had been the emperor
Domitians Atrium Minervae.56
In the mid-1970s, however, Ernest Nash more accurately
defined the Secretarium Senatus as a court of law where the
Praefectus Urbi (prefect of the city) pronounced judgment in
capital cases against Senators.57 Locating it in one of the shops
on the southeast side of the Forum of Caesar, he noted that
127
12 8
Fig.6.14. Bracket from one of the central, arched lateral interior

niches. (Istituto Nazionale di Studi Romani)
excavations in 1932 and 1963 had shown these chambers 3 m

below the medieval Church of Saints Martina and Luke (which
stood above the fourteenth and fifteenth shops on the southeast
side of Caesars Forum). While representing the medieval site,
Sangallos plan had, therefore, conveyed no information about its
ancient layout.58 Thus we would know virtually nothing about the
character of the zone in imperial times. Bartoli, however, notes
Fig.6.15. Curia: a restored view of the interior. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.6.16. Curia and the neighboring buildings: restored floor plans. (G. Gorski)
/ The Curia
129
13 0
Fig.6.17. Curia restored plan with conjecturally placed seats for the senators. (G. Gorski)
that the colonnade in front of the Curia originally continued

toward the west59 and states unequivocally that I was able to
ascertain that its facade [that of the Secretarium Senatus] was
aligned with the main facade of the Curia.60
Following Lancianis earlier reconstruction, Gismondis model
in the Museum of Roman Civilization shows a peristyle west of the
Curia (the Atrium of Minerva) and an adjacent structure (the
Secretarium Senatus). Given the problems connected with this
area, our reconstruction follows that of Gismondi, since a visualization of Nashs response to Lanciani would show the colonnade
in front of the Curia ending abruptly at an otherwise empty lot!
Nonetheless, the west extension of the Curias colonnade and the
close association between Cittadinis inscription and the inscriptions on several architectural fragments Bartoli found behind the
Curia,61 some from its interior (and unmentioned by Nash), suggest reasonable grounds for locating what Lanciani identified as
the Secretarium adjacent to the Curia and behind the shops in
the Forum of Caesar. Were this building and its neighbors similar
to at least parts of the structures shown on Sangallosplan?
Chapter
Fig.6.18. Curia and the neighboring buildings: restored elevations of the south facades. (G. Gorski)
/ The Curia
131
13 2
Fig.6.19. Curia: elevation of the east facade. (G. Gorski)
The Arch of
Septimius Se verus
History
The Rise of Severus
On December 31, 192, the rule of the Antonine dynasty, which
had given Rome almost a century of unparalleled peace and
prosperity, ended abruptly with the murder of Marcus Aurelius
son, Commodus. Neglectful of his official duties and increasingly
unstable, he had alienated his own courtiers. Laetus, his praetorian prefect, and Pertinax, a prominent senator, arranged the
assassination and Pertinaxs succession.1 Although Pertinax was
a stable, conservative reformer, his common sense and discipline
enraged the Praetorian Guards who had been thoroughly corrupted by Commodus excesses. They murdered the new emperor
after three months and sold the throne to Didius Julianus, a
wealthy senator who had promised each praetorian a bounty of
25,000 sesterces.2
The Roman people and the members of the imperial administration refused this dishonorable pact, and the governors of
three militarized provinces, Pescennius Niger in Syria, Clodius
Albinus in Britain, and Septimius Severus in Upper Pannonia
(the western part of modern Hungary) openly rebelled.3 On
April 9, Severus was proclaimed emperor. By June 1, he was in
Italy. When he was sixty miles north of Rome, Julianus was murdered, and the Senate recognized Severus as emperor. The next
year (194) he gained control of the East from Niger and marched
against Nigers Parthian supporters.4 The probable annexation
of northern Mesopotamia in 195 prompted him to adopt the
titles of Parthicus Arabicus and Parthicus Adiabenicus;5
and, in 197, a final battle with Albinus at Lugdunum (Lyons)
gave him the Western Empire.6 Returning to the East in 198,
he conquered the Parthian capital at Ctesiphon (thirty-five
miles south of modern Bagdad) and took the title of Parthicus
Maximus.7
133
Fig.7.1. View of the arch in antiquity.

(G. Gorski)
Chapter
/ The Arch of Septimius Severus
The Arch of Severus

Antiquity and the MiddleAges
Dedicated in late 202 or early 203,8 The Arch of Septimius
Severus in the Forum celebrates these momentous Eastern conquests and the victorious reigns of Severus and of his two newly
elevated sons, Caracalla and Geta.9 The fire in the reign of Carinus
(283) may have damaged some of the reliefs,10 and, in late antiquity or the early Middle Ages, the statues were removed from the
attic. Otherwise, the existence of the arch was largely ignored,
although the Einsiedlen Itinerary of the age of Charlemagne cites
the arcus Severi.11 Later guidebooks also mention it, but in
1199 Pope Innocent III gave the south half of the arch to the
Deaconate of Saints Sergius and Bacchus, which at that time had
a building near the temple of Vespasian.12 He assigned the north
half of the arch to the Ciminius family, who fortified it with crenelations on the attic, built a small watch tower on the north pier
above the lateral opening below, and incorporated this part of the
arch into their fortress.13 A second tower occupied the same position on the south pier.14
The Renaissance to ModernTimes

In the following centuries, since the arch was centrally located
adjacent to the steps that led up the Capitoline Hill,15 it was excavated and reburied on at least three different occasions. Popes
Paul II (14641471) and Sixtus IV (14711484) maintained it,16
Fig.7.2. Sestertius of Septimius Severus: obverse, head of Severus;

reverse, Arch of Severus. (Numismatica Ars Classica NACAG)
but in 1520 Pope Leo X completely cleared much of the surrounding area. Under Pope Paul III (15341549), the excavations continued, and the arch was completely exposed from
1547 to 1563,17 but, since the surrounding earthlittered
with statues, columns, and similar things had inconvenienced
pedestrians,18 it was again partially reburied. In the reign of Pope
Gregory XV (16211623), half was still exposed, and a retaining wall held back the encroaching rubble. But, the surrounding space became a garbage dump, and the arch was quickly
reburied. The surviving medieval tower on its top was removed
in 1636,19 but even in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the city of Rome rented the spaces under the lateral openings as storerooms or shops.20 In 1803, Carlo Fea again excavated
the arch and surrounded it with a retaining wall, but parts of his
structure were demolished in 1831 when the street from the Arch
135
13 6
of Titus to the Capitoline stairs was rerouted through the central

opening of the arch.21 Finally, between 1895 and 1898, Giaccomo
Boni cleared away the detritus that had again risen to nearly a
third the height of the monument, and its whole structure is fully
exposed today.22
Structure
Dedicated in 203, the arch (Figs. 7.18.1) is the only monument in the Roman Forum to have survived virtually intact. On
its podium23 at the northwest corner of the Forum between the
Rostra and the Curia Julia in front of the Temple of Concord and
the Curia, the impressively dimensioned exterior24 is built of
blocks cut from several kinds of Turkish, Greek, and Italian marble. The columns are of Proconnesian marble from Turkey; the
masonry, of Pentelic from Attica; the four great narrative reliefs
on the front and back (Figs. 7.78), of Luna from north Italy.
The core is of travertine, and there is some concrete, brick-faced
where exposed, in the interior of the attic.25
Statuary and Inscriptions

In antiquity the arch served as a colossal pedestal for the gilt
bronze statuary on the attic (supra, p.50 n. 61, Figs. 7.12, 10
11, 8.1). For the identical inscriptions that fill the attics of both
facades (Figs. 7.1, 4, 10, 8.1),26 the arch functions in effect as an
enormous billboard (p.50). Except for an occasional punctuation
point between the words,27 the gilded bronze letters have been
Fig.7.3. Perspective of the arch with architectural elements numbered. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.7.4. The inscription facing the Forum. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale
per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
ripped out, but the sockets in the marble background read as

follows:
1.IMP CAES LVCIO SEPTIMIO M FIL
5.OBREM 29 PVBLICAM RESTITVTAM

IMPERIVMQUE POPVLI ROMANI
PROPAGATVM/
SEVERO PIO PERTINACI AVG PATRI
6.INSIGNIBVS VIRTVTIBVS EORVM
PATRIAE PARTHICO ARABICO ET/
DOMI FORISQVE S P QR
2.PARTHICO ADIABENICO PONTIFIC

MAXIMO TRIBUNIC POTEST XI IMP
XI COS III PROCOS ET/
3.IMP CAES M AVRELIO L FIL
ANTONINO AVG PIO FELICI TRIBUNIC
POTEST VI COS PROCOS PP/
4.OPTIMIS FORTISSIMISQUE
PRINCIPIBVS/ 28
1. The Senate and the Roman People [dedicate] this monument to the Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius
Pertinax, son of Marcus [Aurelius], Augustus, Father of his
Country, Parthicus, Arabicus/and
2. Parthicus Adiabenicus, Pontifex Maximus, with Tribunician
Power for the 11th time, proclaimed imperator for the 11th
time, Consul for the 3rd time, proconsul
137
13 8
Fig.7.5. Capitoline facade: column and pilaster base on the l. side of the central arch. (G. Gorski su concessione
del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
3. and to the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius, Antoninus, son of

Lucius, Augustus, Pius the Fortunate, with Tribunician Power
for the 6th time, proconsul, father of his country [= Caracalla],
4. the best and most fortunate princes,
5. for having restored the Republic and for having augmented
the Empire of the Roman People
6. by their outstanding virtues at home and abroad.30
A vertical line of holes in the face of the right-projecting pedestal
flanking the inscription (on the Forum facade only) suggests that
gilded floral pieces or tropaic emblems31 or perhaps large-scale
eagles enlivened these pedestals (Figs. 7.1, 10). On both facades,
similar horizontal holes on the blank borders below the inscriptions show that these areas too had bronze ornaments, perhaps
friezes of alternating eagles and trophies.32
Decoration
Four freestanding columns on high pedestals divide the greater
part of the facade below into three bays (Fig.7.3). Measuring on
column centers, the two lateral ones are about sixty percent of the
width (5.61 m) of the central one (9.41 m).33 The column bases
each stand on three smoothly finished blocks. On each pedestal a
simple base molding and a deep, undecorated projecting cornice
frame a wider scene on the front of the base and two narrower
scenes on the sides (Figs. 7.1, 3, 10). In all three reliefs, Roman
captors in togas guard Parthian prisoners dressed in characteristic close-fitting caps, the blunt ends turned toward the prisoners
faces.34 The columns have Attic bases (Fig. 7.5), fluted shafts,
Chapter
139
Fig.7.6. Capitoline facade: column capital on the l. side of the central arch. (G. Gorski su concessione del
and the Composite capitals that had become traditional on monumental arches (Fig.7.6). Carved from the blocks that make up
the facade, decorative pilasters stand close behind each column,
and column and pilaster share a lower plinth on the top of the
pedestal (Fig.7.5). Since the columns are freestanding, their en
ressaut entablatures project from the plane of the facade, and its
entablature serves as an elaborately configured border between
the body of the arch and the attic.
A rounded archivolt with three fasciae and a cornice with
rosettes frame the central arch, and the figure on the keystone
(Figs. 7.3) represents Mars.35 Winged victories carrying trophies
decorate the adjacent spandrels (Figs. 7.1, 3, 10).36 A smaller
figure delineating one of the four seasons stands under each victory,37 and the spandrels visually rest on the impost cornice that
marks the spring of the arch (Figs. 7.1, 3). On the smaller lateral
arches, the keystones represent deities, but most are in such bad
condition that only the Hercules on the left lateral (northwest)
arch facing the Capitoline Hill is still recognizable.38 Images of
river gods occupy the spandrels of the lateral arches, and the
impost cornices for the lateral arches (Figs. 7.3, 10) have simple
cornices with dentils above acanthus friezes terminated below by
astragals.
The barrel vault that roofs the central passage is decorated
with coffers (Fig. 21.19). In each, the frames, enriched with
acanthus leaves, terminate at the face of the vault with a narrow half-round molding decorated with bead-and-reel. Rosettes
of four different types occupy the center of each coffer.39 On a
14 0
smaller scale, the coffers of the vaults of the lateral arches and
of the doors between the central and lateral passages had similar
decorations (Figs. 7.1, 10, 21.19).40
The sides of the arch are largely undecorated. On that to the
south (Fig.7.11), a projecting stone band marks the height of the
pedestals on the facades, and a cornice, low frieze, and astragal
continue the impost cornice of the lateral entrances and mark the
bottom of a door that leads to the attic stair. Above the door is a
second, wider stone band. Above these bands, a second astragal continues the one on the pilasters of the facades, and just
under the astragal, a small, off-center window lights the stair.
The moldings of the entablature and attic on the facades continue
across both ends of the structure, and a small maintenance door
opens from the attic rooms onto the cornice of the columnar order.
Without the doors and the window, the same features also appear
on the north side of the arch. While the arch was brightly colored,
the evidence for these colors is unknown, and we therefore suggest two possible color schemes (Figs. 7.1213).
Relief Sculpture
Above the lateral arches run triumphal registers (Figs. 7.3,
10) low friezes 0.60 m high and 4.75 m long. Their squat figures
represent Severus triumphal procession of 202.41 Progressing
left to right, the procession begins on the southeast panel and
continues around the other three. The great panels employ a style
derived from the grand narratives on the Columns of Trajan and
Marcus Aurelius and perhaps also from the paintings exhibited
in triumphal processions or from the painted narratives Severus

put up in Rome to commemorate his sack of Cteisiphon (198), the
Parthian capital, and other related victories.42 Above the lateral
arches (Figs. 7.3, 7, 8),43 they depict Severus two Parthian Wars
(195, 197199 CE). The narrative begins on the left panel facing
the Forum (Fig.7.7, top) and continues around the arch. The first
panel is poorly preserved, but its details (and, where missing,
those of the other three reliefs) are approximately documented
by drawings published by P. S. Bartoli in the late seventeenth
century, when all the panels were in much better condition than
they are today.44
Located originally either at Zeugma on the Euphrates or at
Carrhae, some sixty-five miles farther east (today both in southeast Turkey), the Roman camp in the lower right-hand side of the
first panel has fine ashlar walls to protect the departing Romans
(Fig.7.7, above A). The marching troops meet the Parthians in
a fierce battle (Fig.7.7, above B). The Parthian king, Vologeses,
flees on horseback past the walls of Nisibis (a little over sixty
miles northeast of Carrhae). His flight symbolizes the Roman
liberation of Nisibis, which became Severus headquarters. At
the end of the First Parthian War, the emperor (?), probably at
Nisibis, addresses his troops (Fig.7.7, aboveC).45
In the second panel (right side of the Forum facade), the
Roman army drags a massive battering ram toward the walls of
Edessa. Greeting the Romans, King Abgarus and his followers
join forces with them (Fig.7.7, A, below). In the middle part
of the relief (Fig.7.7, B, below), Severus meets with Abgarus
Chapter
surrounded by a mixed force of Romans and barbarians. In

the upper right scene (Fig.7.7, C, below), he discusses strategy with his advisers at a Roman camp not far from the great
ram, probably one of the emperors most important weapons.
(Bartoli erroneously shows it as a tile-covered platform with
steps.) On the left, surrounded by his officers, the emperor
directs the course of the war.46 On the third panel (Capitoline
facade, left), the Romans besiege Seleucia (Fig.7.8, A, above),
a major Parthian city, and the Parthians flee. The emperor
receives their submission (Fig.7.8, B, above), and the Romans
march into Seleucia (shown a second time) to be received
by the Parthians.47 In the fourth (Capitoline facade, right;
Fig. 7.8, A, below), the Romans beseige Ctesiphon, the capital of Parthia. With their great battering ram supported on a
multistoried tower, they break through the walls. On a high
platform (Fig. 7.8, B, below), Severus addresses his victorious troops below the walls of a city, again probably Ctesiphon.
Significantly, this frieze faced the Capitoline Hill, the site of
the Temple of the Capitoline Triad, where Severus and earlier
Roman generals gave formal thanks for their victories.48
Fig.7.7. Schematic views of the panels on the east (Forum) side of the Arch of
Severus: top, left panel; bottom, right panel. (G. Gorski)
141
14 2
Fig.7.8. Schematic views of the panels on the Capitoline side of the arch: top, left
panel; bottom, right panel. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
143
14 4
Chapter
Fig.7.12. Partial elevation, east (Forum) facade: color

proposal 1. (G. Gorski)
Fig.7.13. Partial elevation, east (Forum) facade: color

proposal 2. (G. Gorski)
145
14 6
Fig.7.14. Partial elevation, east (Forum) facade.

(G. Gorski)
Minor Monuments
A. The West Rostra
History
The Late Republic and Empire. By the late Republic, the
West Rostra, the structure from which speakers addressed the
people, flanked by statues of Pythagoras and Alcibiades,1 was
incorporated into the seating area (the Comitium) immediately
in front of the old Senate House, the Curia Hostilia, a site buried
today under the Church of Saints Martina and Luke (Fig 1.1).2
Before his assassination, Caesar had started a new Curia aligned
with the colonnade on the south side of his Forum, and, at right
angles to it and just west of it, he built a new rostra (Figs. 8.45).3
The space on Caesars Rostra was limited, but Augustus gradually enlarged it between 42 and 12 BCE.4 While repeating the
general plan and decorations of its predecessor, Augustus Rostra
was much larger. Flavian repairs (6996 CE) strengthened an
upper platform now crowded with heavy honorary statues and
their pedestals. But in the reign of Septimius Severus (193211),
five massive new honorary columns erected at the back of the
podium required heavy foundations (Figs. 8.12, 1012), and,

in the fifth century CE, a concrete brick-faced concrete addition,
the so-called Vandalic Rostra,5 extended the front of the older
platform farther north.
The remodeling, repairs, and later additions to the Rostra
suggest that, even in the empire when ambitious politicians no
longer contended for political power, the Rostra was a major
center for Roman political life. Between Augustus (d. 14) and
Claudius Gothicus (268270), fewer statues were set up there,6
but the Rostra was a major center for state ceremonies (Figs. 0.3,
4, 8.6, 912, 21.21). When Augustus died, Drusus, the son of
Tiberius, Augustus successor, pronounced a eulogy from the
old Rostra,7 and when Nero, the last emperor of Augustus family, wanted to impress Tiridates of Armenia, a client-king from
the East, he arranged a sumptuous ceremony at the Rostra:
With the praetorian cohorts drawn up in full armor about the
temples in the Forum,he [Nero] himself sat in a curule chair8
on the rostra in the attire of a triumphing general, surrounded by
military ensigns and standards. As the king approached along a
sloping platform [that led to the top of the Rostra], the emperor at
147
Chapter
Fig.8.1. View from the Capitoline Hill of the Palace of Tiberius on the
Palatine (back r.), the west (Capitoline) facade of the Arch of Severus,
the back of the West Rostra and (r.) a corner of the Temple of Concord.
(G. Gorski)
first let him fall at his feet, but raised him with his right hand and
kissed him. Then, while the king made supplication, Nero took
the turban from his head and replaced it with a diadem, while a
man of praetorian rank translated the words of the suppliant and
proclaimed them to the throng.9
The funeral for the slain emperor Pertinax (193 CE) was even
more elaborate. From the historian Dio Cassius, we have an eyewitness account:
In the Roman Forum, a wooden platform was constructed hard by
the marble rostra, upon which was set a shrine without walls, but
surrounded by columns, cunningly wrought of both ivory and gold.
Upon this rested an effigy of Pertinax in wax, laid out in triumphal
garb; and a comely youth was keeping the flies away from it with
peacock feathers as though it really were a person sleeping. While
his body lay there in state, Severus10 as well as we senators and
our wives approached, wearing mourning; the women sat in the
porticoes, and we men under the open sky. After this there moved
past first, images of all the famous Romans of old, then choruses
of boys and men singing a dirge-like hymn to Pertinax; there followed all the subject nations, represented by bronze figures attired
in native dress, and the guilds of the City itself those of the lictors, the scribes, the heralds, and all the rest. Then came images of
other men who had been distinguished for some exploit or invention or manner of life. Behind these were the cavalry and infantry
in armour, the race horses, and all the funeral offerings that the
emperor and we [senators] and our wives, the more distinguished
/ Minor Monuments
Fig.8.2. The West Rostra looking southwest. (G. Gorski)
149
15 0
knights, and communities and the corporations of the City, had

sent. Following them came an altar gilded all over and adorned
with ivory and gems of India. When these had passed by, Severus
mounted the rostra and read a eulogy of Pertinax. We shouted our
approval many times in the course of his address, now praising
and now lamenting Pertinax, but our shouts were loudest when
he had concluded. Finally when the bier was about to be moved,
we all lamented and wept together. It was brought down from the
platform by the high priests and the magistrates, not only those
who were actually in office at the time but also those who had been
elected for the ensuing year; and they gave it to certain knights
to carry. All the rest of us, now, marched ahead of the bier, some
beating our breasts and others playing a dirge on the flute, but the
emperor followed behind all the rest; and, in this order, we arrived
at the Campus Martius.11
The later empire still used the Rostra for public ceremonies. On
October, 28, 312 CE, Constantine defeated Maxentius, the current ruler at Rome, in the famous Battle of the Milvian Bridge,
and, on October 29, conveyed in a four-horse coach, he entered
Rome from the Via Appia. Speeches to the Senate and the people
followed, and the Senate voted the new ruler a triumphal arch.12
One of its famous scenes records his first address to the people
from the Rostra (Figs. 8.3, 21.1). On either side, the buildings
of the Forum are clearly recognizable: on the left, the Basilica
Julia and the Arch of Tiberius, and on the right, the Basilica
Aemilia. On both sides, crowds fill all available space, and the
spectators turn toward the emperor on the central Rostra. The

sculptor shows only its top, but he renders its details clearly. On
the sides, a transenna, a railing, divided by piers capped with
miniature heads, prevents the crowds around the emperor from
falling. To view the emperor more easily, the center front of the
Rostra is entirely open. On each side sits a colossal, bearded
male statue in a toga holding a staff (on the viewers left, the staff
and the figures right arm are missing). Flanked on either side by
members of his court, the now headless emperor stands in military dress with a voluminous cloak at the center of the Rostra
(and the composition). The five columns at the back of the Rostra
rise above the crowd.13 The porphyry statues on their capitals are
highly detailed,14 and invisible soldiers behind the crowds around
the emperor probably held the military standards that flank the
central column.15 After Constantine, no further written or visual
information illuminates official ceremonies on the Rostra, but,
until the early fifth century CE, new statues were installed there
to honor the powerful.16
Burial and Excavation. After antiquity, the West Rostra disappeared under the later fill that covered much of the Forum.
But, in 1833, a part of the curved back steps was uncovered.
To connect the excavated area around the Arch of Severus with
that around the Column of Phocas, a tunnel was installed under
the Via Consolazione, and a part of the Rostras east (front) wall
appeared. By 1858, its grooves and holes had been interpreted
as evidence for the bronze prows that had decorated the front of
Chapter
/ Minor Monuments
151
Fig.8.3. The West Rostra on the Arch of Constantine. Cast from the Museum of Roman Civilization, Rome. (G. Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della
Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale; cf. Fig. 21.1)
the ancient Rostra, and in July 1882, when the carriage road
that had run from the Capitoline to Saint Adriano (the Curia) was
removed, the whole structure was finally revealed.17
Plan and Structure

The extant facade of Caesars concrete platform has the form of a
circle segment measuring about fifty-three degrees with a chord
just under 24 m. The surviving revetments include a baseboard

molding: a lower section of smooth travertine blocks (30cm high,
23cm wide) and the upper, a white marble cornice. Above are
high rectangular slabs of portasanta marble, originally separated by narrow, now vanished africano pilasters (a design later
repeated on the front of the Augustan Rostra).18 According to a
representation of the platform on a silver denarius of Q. Lollius
Palikanus (45 BCE, Fig.8.5), the Ionic capitals of the pilasters
15 2
supported shallow arches. The coin shows also that the bronze
prows (rostra) that gave the platform its name were attached to
the front of each africano slab (Figs. 8.12, 1012).19 At the back
of the rostrum, a curving stair led to a narrow speakers platform,
3.70 m above the Forum pavement.
Retaining the stair (Figs. 8.1, 9), Augustus new Rostra
(Fig.8.9) embedded Caesars platform in a much larger structure
the same height but measuring 23.69 m 13 m. Its walls rest on a
foundation of travertine blocks of different sizes with a surface the
same elevation as that of the pavement of the Augustan Forum.
On this foundation the walls (best preserved in the northeast corner) consisted of five courses of sizeable Anio tufa blocks, slightly
more than 2 Roman feet in height (0.600.62 m), 2 Roman feet
wide (0.590.60 m), and of lengths that vary between 1.20 m and
2.20m.20 These were secured with thin layers of lime and swallow-tail clamps of which only the impressions survive.21 Like the
Caesarian Rostra, the exterior had a base molding that consisted
of a plinth (0.29 m high, 0.30 m wide) and a cornice with a height
of 0.21 m. Its upper surface, with a width of 0.005 m, supported
the marble revetment: thin slabs of portasanta separated by strips
of africano. Reproducing the same elements from the Rostra of
Caesar, the cornice (of which several fragments survive) and base
molding (Fig.8.6) are both of white Luna marble. The surviving
rows of sockets and grooves show that two rows of bronze prows
were attached to the facade (Figs. 8.6, 10).22
Fig.8.4. The facade of the Caesarian Rostra looking southwest.

(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
Fig.8.5. Denarius of Lollianus Palicanus, c. 45 BCE: obverse, head

of Liberty; reverse, the Rostra of Caesar with an officials stool
(sella). (Classical Numismatic Group,Inc.)
Chapter
/ Minor Monuments
In the accessible interior (used for storage?), three rows of

travertine piers set up with their horizontal grain running vertically a position that seriously weakened their load-bearing
capacity supported a network of horizontally laid wooden or
travertine beams on which the floor above rested.23 Accessible
from side doors, the interior was paved with opus spicatum. By
the Flavian period (probably the reign of Domitian, 8196),
repairs were necessary. A fire in 81 had caused some damage,
and honorary statues had apparently stressed the Augustan floor.
By the addition of brick partitions with arches, the existing travertine piers were converted into cruciform supports, and the front
corners of the platform may also, at this time, have been strengthened with massive brick-faced concrete inserts. In the reign of
Severus (193211), the Rostra underwent even more drastic
changes. To support five new honorary columns (the predecessors of the ones visible on the relief on the Arch of Constantine;
Figs. 8.13, 1012), Severus workmen built a great stone spine
of blocks that occupied the center of the interior. Although the
stones of this foundation have now disappeared, the imprints of
its lowest course are still visible on the surviving concrete foundation.24 Finally, in the fifth century, the rostrum was extended
to the north by the construction of a still partially intact, brickfaced, internally barrel-vaulted concrete wing, the so-called
Rostra Vandalica.25
Fig.8.6. Restored southeast corner of the Augustan Rostra showing fragments of

the cornice and base moldings. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e
le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
153
15 4
Fig.8.7. The remains of the Umbilicus Urbis Romae looking southeast. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
Chapter
/ Minor Monuments
155
B. T
he Umbilicus Urbis
Romae/Mundus
Attached to the northwest corner of the Rostra is a circular, threestepped concrete structure faced with brick26 that, since its discovery in the early nineteenth century,27 has been identified as the
Umbilicus Urbis Romae,28 a monument that represented the
center of Rome and the empire. On the basis of her study of the
area, Verduchi reports its site to have been originally occupied by
a rectangul ar structure. Preceding the Augustan Rostra, it was
respected by its builders.29 Verzar has identified on-site architectural fragments, marble base moldings and cornice fragments
(Fig.8.8), as parts of a second-century BCE tholos, a round, open
structure with a Corinthian order supporting a conical or domed
roof (Figs. 8.1012);30 Coarelli supposes that, although Septimius
Severus rebuilt this structure (probably during construction of
his adjacent triumphal arch),31 he would have reused the original
republican architectural elements. And finally, both Coarelli and
Verzar identify this building as the Mundus, a temple dedicated
to the gods of the underworld.32 Unfortunately, Verduchis conclusions are incompatible with those of Verzar and Coarelli (unless
Severus moved Verzars republican architectural fragments to
their present location), and the site clearly needs further study.
For the moment, therefore, we accept Verzars reasonable suggestion that Severus stepped circular podium supported a tholos with or without earlier architectural elements (Figs. 8.12,
Fig.8.8. The entablature from the base of the Miliarium Aureum. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
15 6
Fig.8.9. Plan of the upper floor of the West Rostra and surrounding monuments. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
/ Minor Monuments
Fig.8.10. West Rostra, east elevation (l. to r.): Arch of Tiberius, Schola Xanthi, Miliarium Aureum, Five-Column Monument, Umbilicus Urbis Romae. (G. Gorski)
157
15 8
Fig.8.11. The West Rostra and its neighbors, south elevation (l. to r.): the Umbilicus
Urbis Romae, the Miliarium Aureum, the Arch of Tiberius, Five-Column Monument, the
West Rostra, south elevation. (G. Gorski)
Fig.8.12. The West Rostra and its neighbors, north elevation (l. to r.): West Rostra, the
Five-Column Monument, the Arch of Tiberius, the Miliarium Aureum, the Umbilicus Urbis
Romae. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
1012, 21.1) rather than the conical structure that appears on

earlier reconstructions33 but this Severan tholos may or may not
have been the Umbilicus Urbis Romae or the Mundus.
C.The Miliarium
Aureum UrbisRomae
Several ancient references to the golden milestone of the city
of Rome survive.34 According to Dio Cassius, Augustus set it
up early in his reign, while serving as Curator Viarum, caretaker of the streets.35 On the west side of the Forum, sub aede
Saturni, hard by the Temple of Saturn,36 it was generally supposed to be the center of the city and of the empire, although
later legal experts decided (somewhat confusingly) that the
thousand paces constituting a mile are not reckoned from the
milestone of the City of Rome, but from the houses contiguous
thereto.37
On Christmas Eve, 1833, a column shaft that may have been
part of the monument was uncovered near the Umbilicus Urbis
Romae/Mundus,38 and, during the excavation of the Basilica Julia
in 1852, more fragments came to light. Parts of a round, white
marble podium set on a round travertine foundation (Fig. 8.8),
they displayed beautiful style.39 The podium had two parts:
the lower ornamented with the usual moldings 0.40 m high; the
upper, [a frieze] decorated with foliage, 0.35 m [high]. When the
remains were dismantled in 1882, the surviving elements were
moved to the Basilica Julia.40 Both fragments, the base molding
and the frieze ornamented with lotus-and-palmette, are today displayed near the Temple of Saturn. In the 1960s, Kahler located
the original position of the Miliarium built into the southwest corner of the Rostra.41 Thus our reconstruction (Figs. 8.12, 1012)
combines on that site the white marble fragments of the podium
and the column shaft found in 1833 with a second shaft fragment
that now lies at the beginning of the Clivus Argentarius. With
its rough finish and similarly sized holes, it is comparable to the
first shaft, and together, both suggest a complete shaft covered by
a (gilded?) bronze sheath with brackets, applied figures, and/or
other decorative elements (Figs. 8.1112).42
D. The East Rostra

The ruins of the East Rostra43 stand in front of the Temple of
Caesar to the north of the Temple of Castor and Pollux and at
a right angle to its facade (Figs. 0.1, 1.2). Although mentioned
in the Regionary Catalogues, the building did not fare well when
the area around it was excavated in the late nineteenth century.
At least one scholar recognized it as a rostrum, but P. Rosa, the
excavator, and E. Brizio, his colleague, did not agree.44 Rosa commented on its extraordinary solidity and the size of its walls
but concluded that the strange architecture makes [us] recognize it as the remains of a medieval tower.45 Brizios opinion of
the finds was even lower: From the beginning, the excavation
in front of the steps of the Temple of the Castors was very hard
owing to the continuous debris from falling masses and medieval
/ Minor Monuments
159
16 0
Fig.8.13. The East Rostra looking northeast. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
Chapter
Fig.8.14. Plan of the upper floor of the East Rostra. (G. Gorski)
/ Minor Monuments
161
16 2
Fig.8.15. Axiometric sketch and plan of the structure. (G. Gorski)
brick structures without foundation and of the worst construction. So, it was thought necessary to demolish them down.46
A few remnants survived: a room at the south end of the complex, an on-site outline of the structure and some of its walls, and
parts of a base molding. Later scholars offered various identifications. For Nichols, these elements were probably the same tribunal which is frequently mentioned by Cicero under the name
of Tribunal Aurelium. For Lanciani, they were a line of shops
of the beginning of the fifth century, and of the utmost importance
for the history of the place.47 For Lugli, they were the stationes
municipiorum, the offices of foreign cities in Rome.48
More than thirty years after Luglis attribution, P. Verduchi
and C. F. Giuliani carefully studied the site again and concluded
that the ruins were those of a second tribunal put up at the end of
the third century CE by the emperors Diocletian and Maximian
(Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 8.1317).49 The proportions 12 m 30 m, 3.90m
above the level of the Forum, were very similar to those of the
West Rostra (supra, p.34), and the pattern of holes in the south
end of the west facade followed that of the east facade of the
West Rostra indicating the presence of bronze prows and marble revetments copied after its fittings.50 The interior was divided
into six rooms with heavy barrel vaults. All were reached by east
doors, and, separated from the rest of the interior by the foundations of honorary columns at the ends of the platform, the rooms
in the southwest and northwest corners had their own external
doors. Stairways reached from east doors at each end of the structure led to the speakers platform, and heavy stone foundations
supported the five honorary columns (Figs. 8.1317).51
Chapter
Fig.8.16. West elevation. (G. Gorski)
/ Minor Monuments
163
16 4
Fig.8.17. South elevation. (G. Gorski)
The Temple of
Concord
History
the calendar on white notice boards about the Forum, that men
The Republic
dedicated a temple of Concord in the precinct of Vulcan, greatly
Roman tradition credited the vow to build the Temple of Concord to

Marcus Furius Camillus, dictator, conqueror of the Etruscans. In the
midst of the plebeian fight to obtain admission to the consulship from
the patricians in 367 BCE, turning to the Capitol, he [Camillus]
prayed the gods to bring the present tumults to their happiest end,
solemnly vowing to build a temple to Concord when the confusion
was over.1 According to the poet Ovid, he kept his vow,2 but
archaeological remains of this early monument have been difficult
to identify, and it may not have been built after all.3 Indeed, the first
shrine to Concord on the site seems to have been founded by Gnaeus
Flavius, a curule aedile, the son of a former slave, despised by the
patricians for his humble origins and popular measures.
chief pontiff, was forced by the unanimous wishes of the people
He published the formulae of the civil law, which had been

filed away in the secret archives of the pontiffs, and posted up
might know when they could bring an action [a legal suit]. He

to the resentment of the nobles; and Cornelius Barbatus, the
to dictate the words to him, though he asserted that by custom
of the elders none but a consul or a commanding general might
dedicate a temple. So, in accordance with a senatorial resolution, a measure was enacted by the people providing that no one
should dedicate a temple or an altar without the authorization of
the senate or a majority of the tribunes of the plebs.4
Flavius had hoped that the new temple would promote reconciliation between the patricians and plebeians, but the Senate
indicated its opinion of the project by refusing to allocate funds.
With property confiscated from condemned criminals, Flavius
did, however, erect a small bronze shrine with an inscription that
dated its foundation to the 449th year after the founding of the
city (304). On a highly visible site on the Graecostasis which
165
Chapter
/ The Temple of Concord
Fig.9.1. Restored view looking

southwest. (G. Gorski)
at that date stood above the Assembly-place [Comitium],5 the

new pavilion, although small, became an important landmark.6
Whether or not rains of blood actually fell on it in 183 and in
181, Livys reports on these dire omens more than a hundred
years later suggests that, by the early second century BCE, the
cult and the surrounding area had attained major significance.7
Sixty years after these omens (123 BCE), the terrible events
around the death of Gaius Gracchus resulted in a new Temple
to Concord. By anti-senatorial, populist policies, Gracchus, a
member of the ancient aristocracy, had alienated many of his
fellow nobles. During his two successive years as Tribune of
the People (123122), he had been enormously popular with
common citizens. After a dispute with his fellow tribunes (who
were said to have falsified the votes), the elections of 121 cost
Gracchus the Tribunate. In the same contest, Lucius Opimius,
a conservative opponent of Gracchus backed by the Senate,
gained the consulship. Shortly thereafter, citing adverse omens,
the Senate called a meeting of the popular assembly to cancel
the new colony Gracchus and his friend and supporter Fulvius
Flaccus had founded at Carthage in the last months of their
tribunates.8 Gracchus and Fulvius attended the meeting with a
band of armed followers. Opimius, who presided over the sacrifice that opened the proceedings, had also come with armed
supporters. One of these, Quintus Antyllus,
for honest citizens, ye rascals! Some say too, that along with this
speech Antyllus bared his arm and waved it with an insulting
gesture. At any rate he was killed at once and on the spot stabbed
with large writing styles said to have been made for that very
purpose.
The murder ended the meeting. The next day, the Senate
ordered Gracchus and Flaccus to explain what had happened.
Instead, hoping to get better terms from the Senate by the threat
of force, they occupied the Temple of Diana on the Aventine
Hill. As they refused to lay down their arms and appear at
the Curia, the Senate directed Opimius to save the state.
When Opimius armed forces marched against the rebels,
Gracchus fled across the river and committed suicide. Flaccus
was arrested and executed.9 The bodies of Gaius and Fulvius
and of the other slain were thrown into the Tiber, and they
numbered three thousand; their property was sold and the proceeds paid into the public treasury.10 To compensate for the
slaughter, the Senate purified the city and, putting Opimius in
charge, constructed a Temple to Concord on the site of Flavius
bronze tabernacle.11
However, what vexed the people more than this or anything else
was the erection of a temple of Concord by Opimius, for it was felt
that he was priding himself and exulting and in a manner celebrat-
as he was carrying from one place to another the entrails of the
ing his triumph in view of all this slaughter of citizens. Therefore
[sacrificial] victims, said to the partisans of Fulvius: Make way
at night, beneath the inscription on the temple, somebody carved
167
16 8
this verse: A work of mad discord produces a temple of

Concord.12
Since the new temple initially symbolized the victory of the Senate
over the democratic elements of the state, the Senate frequently
met there. Indeed, during the conspiracy of Catiline (62), armed
knights guarded the temple13 where Cicero gave information on
the plot.14 The Senate held hearings on the case, witnesses faced
and testified against the conspirators,15 and Cicero discussed the
rebels punishment.16 After Ciceros exile (58), the Senate continued to meet in the temple,17 and mobs surrounded it to hear news
of the Senates decisions on rising prices and threatened famine.18 On Ciceros return to Rome, his Philippics give a detailed
picture of his struggle with Mark Antony at the temple. Antony
held open-door sessions of the Senate. Filling the chamber, his
armed men threatened Cicero, and, on the steps outside, crowds
of knights listened to the angry debate.19 After Ciceros assassination (43), the ominous events that presaged the end of the
Roman Republic also involved the temple. On the execution of
Pompeys son, Sextus, a rival to the reigning triumvirs, Octavian
and Mark Antony, Octavian honored Antony with a statue at the
temple (35),20 and divine omens still centered around the building. In 43, crowds of vultures settled on the temple of the Genius
Populi and on that of Concord (to predict Ciceros death?).21
Thirteen years later (32), an owl flew into the temple.22 But after
Octavian defeated Antony and took over the government (31), we
hear nothing of the temple until 9, when a fire on the Capitoline
Hill totally destroyed the structure.23
The Empire
To inscribe on it his own name and that of [his brother] Drusus,
Tiberius, Augustus adopted son and future heir, assigned
himself the duty of repairing the temple of Concord.24 And,
as patron for rebuilding one of Romes most famous religious
and political monuments, Tiberius carried out his duties faithfully. Spoils from his campaigns in Pannonia (modern Austria,
western Hungary, parts of other eastern European nations) and
Dalmatia (the east coast of the Adriatic) financed a building considerably larger and more splendid than its predecessor (supra,
pp. 32, 167).25 Since it was also to be a museum, Tiberius must
have spent the seventeen years necessary to complete the project (7 BCE10 CE) in assembling a remarkable collection of
famous Greek statues of deities and mythological figures,26 and
after the dedication, the emperor and empress also enriched the
temples collections. Augustus gave four obsidian elephants,27
and Livia, a sardonyx set in a golden horn, once the property of
Polycrates, the sixth-century tyrant of Samos. To commemorate
the achievements of the imperial family, the Senate declared
the day of the dedication January 16, 10 a holiday. In a
toga and crowned with laurel leaves for his victories in Illyria
(Pannonia and Dalmatia), Tiberius, presenting himself before
Augustus and the consuls, dedicated the temple,28 and the
emperor formally took the name Augustus for the seventh time.
Yet, while honoring the successes of the imperial family, the
temple also celebrated the familys friendly relations with the
Senate and, even more importantly, with the establishment of
Chapter
peace throughout the empire.29 Even outside the immediate

imperial circle, well-known poets like Ovid celebrated the completion of Tiberius splendid new building.30
During the reign of Tiberius (1437), the temple retained
much of its earlier importance. In 16,31 when youthful follies
led to a charge of treason against Libo Drusus, a descendant
of Pompey the Great and a relative of Augustus first wife,
Scribonia, the unhappy youth committed suicide. The emperor
divided his estate among his accusers, and several prominent
nobles moved in the Senate to make sacrificial offerings at various temples including that of Concord.32 When, at the end of
Tiberius reign, the emperor removed Sejanus, his overly powerful praetorian prefect, he cast Sejanus into prison, and a little
later, in fact that very day, the Senate assembled in the temple
of Concord not far from the jail, when they saw the attitude of
the populace and that none of the Praetorians was about, and
condemned him [Sejanus] to death.33 Closely associated with
the Senate, the temple retained its importance even after the
end of Tiberius reign. Seeking favor from the emperor Domitian,
Statius, a Flavian court poet, took care to mention the building,34
and the elder Pliny carefully listed the sculptors and sculpture
in its collections.35
In the later empire, the Senate met in both the Curia and the
temple. After the assassination of Commodus (193), when the
Praetorian Guard declared Pertinax emperor, During the night
he came from the [Praetorian] camp to the senate, but when
he ordered the opening of the hall of the senate house and the
attendant could not be found, he seated himself in the Temple of

Concord.36 And the Senate still regularly met in the temple. Thus
when Alexander Severus formally visited the Senate a few months
after he had come to the throne, on the day before the Nones of
March [March 6, 222], the senate met in full session in the
Senate Chamber (that is, in the Temple of Concord, a formally
consecrated sanctuary) 37
Indeed, when the disorders of the third century broke out,
the Senate took refuge in the temple. When the elder Gordian
and his son were now slain in Africa and Maximinus came raging toward the city to take vengeance because the Gordians had
been named Augusti, the senate, in great terror, came together
in the Temple of Concord on the seventh day before the Ides of
July [July 9, 238].38 Understandably, when the temple needed
repairs, the Senate, as attested in the following inscription on the
entablature of the Temple, took the responsibility:
S P QR
AEDEM CONCORDIAE VETVSTATE
COLLAPSAM
IN MELIOREM FACIEM ET CULTV
SPLENDIDORE RESTITVIT
The Senate and the Roman people restored the Temple of
Concord, collapsed from age, to a better appearance and with a
more splendid cult.39
169
17 0
After Antiquity
The Middle Ages and the Renaissance. The later history of
the temple is obscure. While the porch stood long enough for
the author of the Einsiedeln Itinerary to copy the inscription
quoted above at the end of the eighth century, the fabric of the
building was then in so perilous a state that the custodian of
the nearby Deaconate of Saints Sergius and Bacchus, the little
church that in later times stood near the northeast corner of
the Temple of Vespasian, demolished his sanctuary and moved
it to a safer site where, if the Temple of Concord collapsed,
it would survive intact.40 At the end of the twelfth century, a
document mentions a garden with columns up to the apse [of
the Deaconate of Saints Sergius and Bacchus] and as far as the
Mamertine Prison,41 and this may have been the period when
the marble columns and entablature were taken down. The interior ornaments of the cella would have been burned for lime in a
kiln found in the cella in the nineteenth century (infra, p.172),
while the blocks of the foundation and walls may have been
reused for the deaconate and for construction projects in the
Senatorial Palace, the medieval (and modern) city hall built
into the ancient Tabularium.
During the fifteenth century, restoration and consolidation
of the foundations of the Senatorial Palace must have affected
the remains of the temple. The construction in 14521453 of
the tower of Pope Nicholas V, which rests directly on the temple
foundations (Fig.9.2), probably resulted in further destruction
of the remains. In 1536, the Deaconate of Saints Sergius and

Bacchus was demolished, and Michelangelo began his reconstruction of the Senatorial Palace. Related excavations on the
east side of its foundations at the site of the temple uncovered
some of the decorated column bases from the interior of the
cella (Figs. 1.1617). At least one of these bases is now in the
National Museum in Berlin; contemporary drawings record its
original appearance.42 By 1551, the foundations for a wide,
shallow stairway that led to the top of the Capitoline had also
been constructed on the foundations of the temple, and as
Michelangelos palace project continued through his lifetime
(he died in 1564)and into the seventeenth century, rubble from
the work, dumped behind the Capitoline Hill, covered the temple to a considerable depth.43
Excavations. In 1812, excavation of the site began. The workers removed much of the modern fill, but not until 1817 did they
uncover the interior of the cella. Archaeologist Carlo Fea enthusiastically describes the finds in a newspaper article:
On Thursday last the remains of a most noble structure as ever
was were discovered with yellow marble, africano and pavonazzetto [marbles] of the most beautiful quality that formed the
pavement, the walls and the internal fluted columns of the building. The capitals, the cornices and the cuttings of every sort of
a minor internal order are of a work so delicate and of the best
taste that art has never achieved better. The [structural] marble
Chapter
Fig.9.2. The podium of the Temple of Concord looking northwest toward the modern steps that lead to the top of the Capitoline Hill. The tower
of Pope Nicholas V stands on the foundations of the temple at the right corner of the Tabularium. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i
171
17 2
Fig.9.3. View of the interior of the Temple of Concord looking south from
the Capitoline steps. At the center of the south internal wall is the south
aediculum. The mass of formless concrete to its right is the remains of a
later statue pedestal. Behind it and projecting slightly on its right side are
the remains of the marble wall veneer. The travertine/tufa blocks to the r. of
these thin marble slabs belong to the south wall. (J. Packer su concessione
del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale
per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
itself is white and of the finest waxy character such as never seen
before.
44
On August 7, the excavators announced new discoveries: sculpture, architecture, and dedications to Concord (which precisely
identified the monument) and, in the cella, the remains of
the lime kiln in which much of the sculpture and architecture
must have perished. In 1825, sixteen of the best pieces went to
the Vatican for restoration, and architects began trying to reassemble the fragments of the exterior entablature on paper. With
additional elements from the excavations, Canina concluded
these studies with his own three-dimensional reconstruction of
a section of the entablature still displayed today in the interior of the Tabularium (Figs. 9.56). By 1829, the front of the
porch and the podium had been uncovered and by 1832, the
remains of the stairs. In 1843, the wide stair to the Capitoline
(supra, p. 170) was demolished. It was rebuilt on a narrower
plan (Fig.9.2), and the removal of the old stair allowed excavators to clear the north side of the temple and the cellas marble
pavement. The French architect Alfred-Nicolas Normand accurately recorded the design of the pavement in 1850, but the constituent marbles have now almost disappeared.45 Later minor
excavations unearthed additional architectural and sculptural
elements. Work in June 1977 recovered minor fragments reburied by the excavators of the nineteenth century.46 In 1983, the
Via della Consolazione was closed. Dating from 1943, it had
run along the edge of the Capitoline Hill across the foundation
of the ancient stair to the Temple of Concord and had separated
the main Forum from a smaller west section under the slopes
of the Capitoline Hill. Its removal unified the remains of the
Forum and led to a small excavation that recovered the plan
and some small architectural fragments from Opimius Temple
of Concord.47
The Temple
The Structure of Opimius
Different zones of concrete in the foundation of the Tiberian building allowed A. M. Ferroni and his colleagues to trace the plan of
the Opimian building. Unlike the Tiberian structure, it stood on a
rectangular podium, 40.80 m 30 m, at least 4 m high. The cella
was twice the length of the porch, and the lateral foundations of
the podium, which used different methods of construction to support walls and columns, indicate that the facade of the porch was
octastyle. The Corinthian columns continued around the sides
of the cella,48 terminating at extensions of the cellas back wall.
Abutting the east facade of the Tabularium, that wall and presumably the others was constructed of rectangular blocks of
Gabine stone (brownish tufa). The travertine columns, assembled
from drums, were faced with stucco.49
Tiberius Building
Podium. Viewed from the Forum, the Temple of Concord (Figs.
0.4, 1.3, 9.111) consists today of two rectangular, seamlessly
Chapter
173
17 4
Fig.9.4. Elements of the marble revetments on the south wall of the cella preserved behind the concrete core of the
later podium: a cipollino base with giallo antico moldings and a pavonazzetto orthostat. (G. Gorski su concessione
del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
attached concrete mounds (Fig. 9.2). The larger (behind the

smaller) was the foundation for the cella; the smaller, for the
pronaos, a projecting porch that presently partly underlies the
steps leading from the Forum to the top of the Capitoline Hill.
Fragmentary stone walls abut the foundation of the cella on the
south and west sides; the front of the porch is faced with modern masonry. Although featureless and unprepossessing, covered with marble fragments and, intermittently, with grass, these
foundations provide the buildings dimensions.50 To construct
these podia, the builders erected massive masonry walls of Anio
tufa, two blocks thick, laid alternately as headers and stretchers.
These walls framed the remains of Opimius temple and served
as temporary supports when the ancient workmen poured the
concrete that now makes up the greater part of both podia.51 As
our reconstruction shows (Figs. 9.1, 810), on three sides, the
exterior of the podium would have been veneered in marble with
a base molding and cornice.52
Walls. With the exception of a small tract at the southwest corner of the building, most of the cella walls have disappeared. As
the remaining section indicates, they were of travertine blocks
0.66/65 m high and 0.88 m thick (2 3 Roman feet), the probable width of the wall.53 Thin slabs of marble configured with a
design imitating marble masonry would have formed their external veneer.54 The profile of the Corinthian porch columns will
have continued as a base molding for the cella walls.55 Above, as
in the Temple of Mars Ultor in the Forum of Augustus (a nearly
Chapter
contemporary building), would have been an orthostat, a cornice (which our reconstruction shows as a corona bounded by
fillets: wide below, narrower above). A line of raised circular
elements would have decorated the corona.56 Such elements
could have connected the door frame with the engaged columns
at the corners of the building, and we assume that they underlay and emphasized the window frames. Tiberian sestertii (Figs.
1.18, 9.7) show that the entablature of the porch also continued
across the upper section of the cella walls, and, as we have seen,
fragments of its architrave and cornice survive (supra, p.172,
Figs. 9.56).57 The sestertii also indicate a generously proportioned window on each side of the entrance. Some elements of
the frames still exist.58 The door59 had jambs of white marble,
and the marble foundation for the south jamb remains in position. The largely preserved threshold consists of two portasanta
slabs. The outer one preserves the sockets for the vertical sections of the latches (thin metal or metal-clad cylinders) that
locked the two leaves of the closed door.60 Since the outer slab
of the threshold is slightly higher than the inner one, the leaves
opened inward.
Porch. Very little remains from the elements of the porch. The
column bases have completely disappeared, and there is no evidence for their profile. We suppose, however, that they were Attic
(Figs. 9.911) and that the individual moldings were elaborately
decorated in the style of bases from the interior orders. The only
surviving fragment shows that the shafts were of white marble
Fig.9.5. Cornice displayed in the Tabularium as reconstructed by L. Canina in the mid-nineteenth
century. (G. Gorski Museo della Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma
Capitale)
175
17 6
Fig.9.6. The entablature of the Canina reconstruction in the Tabularium. (G.Gorski. Museo della
and fluted.61 Like the shafts of the Temples of Castor and Pollux
and Vespasian, each shaft was probably composed of three drums
of slightly different heights. Based on the images on Tiberian sestertii (Figs. 1.18, 9.7), which show a porch order with capitals that
have curved sides wider at the top than the bottom and volutes
at the corners, we show a Corinthian order. The measurements of
the elements in the restored entablature (below) indicate an order
the size of that of the Temple of Mars Ultor or perhaps somewhat
shorter.62 On the coins, the columns at the corners of the building
stand on projecting pedestals, and the entablature profiles above
the capitals. These features were thus not pilasters, as earlier
restorers have suggested, but partially engaged columns that supported shallow ressauts.63
Decorative moldings divide the architrave (Fig. 9.6) into
three fasciae. That between the two lower ones is ornamented
with bead-and-reel, and the ovolo between the middle and upper
fasciae, with egg-and-dart. The cyma reversa that crowns the
architrave is embellished with a normal-leaf-and-dart that substitutes rosettes of different kinds for the usual central tongues.
Above its fillet, the frieze, which must have been elaborate, has
completely disappeared, and, following Caninas reconstruction
in the Tabularium, we show it as a plain surface.64
The cornice (Fig. 9.5) begins above the frieze with a cyma
reversa with normal-leaf-and-dart. A low fillet separates it from
precisely cut dentils. A thin fillet connects their upper sections.
Above are a fillet and a half round with a carefully executed
bead-and-reel. On the subsequent ovolo with egg-and-dart, the
Chapter
sides of the eggs slope away from the darts that end in sharp
points.
The modillions spring from a plain, wide corona, and all display the same complex decorative scheme. On the sides, delicately carved rosettes occupy the centers of equally sized front
and back volutes. Two continuous fillets connect the volutes and
outline their curving edges. A shear-shaped leaf-and-dart occupies the space between the fillets. A thin palmette is attached to
the inner curve of the front volute. Its three leaves with curved
ends face the back of the modillion. Its back and lower edges are
fully finished. On the underside of the modillion (Fig.9.56), the
edges, carved as three contiguous half rounds, project above the
decorated lower surface, and concave moldings separate them
from half rounds with bead-and-reel. Concave moldings also set
off the center guilloche. The concave moldings conclude at the
edges as thin fillets. All these decorations appear on the inner surface of the front volute. But on the front volute, between the three
half rounds on the edges and the half rounds with bead-and-reel,
the surfaces, curving inward, are decorated with shear-shaped
leaf-and-dart. At the top of the front and sides, the modillions
decoration ends with a low cyma reversa enriched with shearshaped-leaf-and-dart. This molding continues around the back of
the soffit between the modillions.
The soffit panels between the modillions frame coffers set off
by half rounds with bead-and-reel. The rosettes are elaborately
configured. On each of the eight outer petals, the ends (wider
than the centers) are curved with inward-facing tips. The stem of
Fig.9.7. A Tiberian sestertius, reverse, c. 3435 CE, showing the

Temple of Concord. Note the reliefs in the pediment. (UBS Gold and
Numismatics)
each petal is indicated. The sides of the petal are grooved, and its
surface is wavy and irregular. The inner row of eight leaves with
pointed, inward-curving tips frames a carpel represented as an
internal rosette with seven petals and its own carpel.
A hollow tongue with crescent base decorates the corona
above. The hollow tongues almost completely cover the leaves
177
17 8
between them. Only the leaf tips project between the tongues
at the top of the corona. Above a half round with bead-and-reel
and low cyma reversa with decoration that, with slight variations,
repeats that on the architrave, the sima, a high cyma recta, is finished with delicately executed acanthus leaves separated by plain
laurel leaves. A low fillet concludes the decoration. (For a comparison between these elements and the corresponding ones on
the Temple of Castor and Pollux, see also p.31 n. 129.) Although
the fine finish and elaborate decoration of the building suggest a
pediment with sculpture, none survives,65 and the sculpture in
our pediment (Figs.9.1, 9) is, therefore, hypothetical.66
Roof. The character of the temples roofs is also not entirely
clear. Taking his views from the image of the building on
Tiberian sestertii (Figs. 1.18, 9.7), Ferroni suggests flat terraces over the wings of the cella. The resulting rainwater would
then, in his view, have been conveyed to an extant drain under
the foundations. Two considerations suggest gabled roofs,
however. First, since the roof of the porch would have divided
the space above the cella into two equal parts, both would
have required periodic maintenance. To reach these terraces,
therefore, two interior stairways would have been necessary
and there are no remains of even one. Secondly, the widths of
the porch and the ends of the cella are almost exactly equal.
These equivalent dimensions suggest two intersecting, gabled
roofs of the same height, the principal one over the cella, the
porch roof attached to it at a right angle (Figs. 9.1, 910). Yet,
even though porch and cella would have had identical roofs,
to emphasize the statues on the sides of the pediment and at
the corners of the cella, the Tiberian die makers omitted the
roof of the cella: had they included it, its details would have
obscured the statues, and the shape of the coin would have cut
off its upper sides.
Exterior Statuary. Some of the statues that crown the facade
on the Tiberian coins (Figs. 1.8, 9.7) have been identified. The
two on the podium projections framing the stair are Mercury
and Hercules. Their wings and draperies show that the statues
at the corners of the cella are victories. Those in the middle of
the pediments sides are Tiberius and his brother Drusus. The
three figures at its apex, however, have been variously called
Concord, Pax (peace), and Salus (health), Jupiter with Juno
on the right and Minerva on the left, or a triad of feminine
divinities: the three graces or three personifications that represent concord. Yet, close inspection of the better-preserved
coins under high magnification indicates that the central figure is a fully draped female (Fig.1.18). The two flanking ones
are male, the upper parts of their bodies bare. Thus the group
may represent additional statues of Tiberius and Drusus with
Concord.67
Interior. The interior was richly decorated, and some of the
important architectural elements survive. The central, partially
preserved features at the centers of the back and side walls (Figs.
Chapter
9.3, 8) are podia. These are bases for aedicula, the two lateral
ones somewhat narrower than the one at the back.68 The podia
and the fronts of the aedicules consist of Anio tufa blocks interspersed with ones of travertine that mark column positions. The
back sections of the aedicules are of concrete, and originally
marble revetments would have hidden these varied materials.
The remains of a later concrete podium built against the south
wall covered and preserved part of the revetment (Figs. 9.34).
The cipollino base molding has a giallo antico cornice, and the
thin sheets of pavonazzetto that cover most of the wall probably
ended below a white marble (?) cornice.69 While we know nothing of the wall design above, the thin fragments of white marble, cipollino, portasanta, breccia verde, alabaster onyx, rosso
antico, and gray granite found by the excavators of the 1970s
suggest rich and subtly varied decorations.70 Some small sections of the checkerboard pattern of the marble floor still survive
(Fig.9.8).71 With sides of 6 Roman feet (2 m), each of its modular squares is composed of interlocking rectangles that frame a
central square. With lateral slabs alternately of pavonazzeto and
giallo antico and a central one of africano, the pattern artfully
ensured that the constituent marbles varied from one rectangle
to the next.72
A number of elaborately decorated composite column bases
with double scotias survive (Figs. 1.1617).73 Including the
plinth, each base is cut from a single block. On the front (?) of
one of the plinths, a simple frame encloses the design: an undulating ribbon flanked below by large palmettes and above by
smaller reversed palmettes. The other plinths had slightly different designs.74 Acanthus leaves separated by those of oak embellish the lower torus. A bead-and-reel decorates the half round
that separates the two scotias, both enlivened with hollow tongue.
On the lower bead-and-reel, opposed acanthus leaves replace the
usual reels. Oak and acanthus leaves also alternate around the
upper torus.
The shafts were of fluted giallo antico, portasanta, and pavonazzetto.75 The columns on the tabernacles may have had the
giallo antico shafts. The others on the podia were of portasanta
and pavonazzetto. Fragments of the elaborate Corinthianizing
capitals survive, and one (Fig 1.17) has been completely
restored.76 The leaves of the upper and lower corona are standardized, but thin, outward-curving leaves flank the cauliculus.
They are attached to the helices, the volutes of which are barely
visible behind rosettes. Above, on the abacus, the fleuron has
a wide ovary and a circular row of petals giving it the appearance of a sun flower. Separately carved leaping rams replace
the volutes, and the abacus is elaborately decorated. A shearshaped-leaf-and-dart ornaments the cavetto. Above are a low
fillet, an ovolo ornamented with egg-and-dart, and the plain
abacus.
The architrave and frieze have disappeared, but parts of the
cornice survive.77 The positions of their surviving travertine foundations indicate that on each side of the back aedicule, there
were wider intercolumniations and between second and third columns from the corners of the room, and behind the aedicules the
179
18 0
Chapter
181
18 2
Fig.9.10. Restored north elevation. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
intercolumniations were also wider (Fig.9.8). All the aedicules

had four columns apiece: two in front, two in back. All three aedicules probably had pediments. As the coins indicate (Figs 1.18,
9.7), the cult statue of Concord occupied the back aedicule. The
Hestia from Paros may have taken up one of the lateral ones, and
a seated statue of the goddess Roma, the other across the room.
The wider intercolumniations along the rear wall would almost
certainly have framed statues: perhaps the Aesculapius and
Hygeia of Niceratus and the Latona with the sons of Euphranor.78
The other statues mentioned by Pliny the Elder must have been
arranged along between the columns of the podium.79
On the interior east cella wall, four large-scale pilasters, two
on either side of the entrance, would have served as the chief
decorations (Fig.9.8). Standing on the floor, they were about the
same height as the exterior columns. Spaces between the last
pilasters and the corners of the room bracketed the sizeable windows that appear on the Tiberian coins (Figs. 1.18, 9.78). And
finally, since the north, south, and west walls had an order, with
a height of 1112 m,80 they must also have had a second, somewhat smaller upper order. Here would have hung the Marsyas
bound by Zeuxis; [the] ... Liber Pater by Augustus favorite painter, Nicias; and [the] ... Cassandra by Theoros.81
Fig.9.11. Restored porch order.

(G. Gorski)
183
Fig.10.1. The Temple of Vespasian (center), restored view

looking past the stair of the Temple of Saturn (l.) to the
Temple of Concord (r.). (G. Gorski)
The Temple of
Vespasian
History
Antiquity
When the emperor Vespasian died in 79 CE, his son, Titus, succeeded him. In the next year, the Senate canonized the deceased
emperor, and shortly thereafter Titus began the temple for his
father.1 After Titus premature death in 81, Domitian, his brother
and successor, continued the project and finished it before 87.2
Despite its prominent location and rich decoration (Figs. 0.4, 1.3,
10.610; see pp. 192195), during the reign of Domitian, only
the poet Statius mentioned it briefly in a flowery composition that
celebrates the emperors now long-lost equestrian statue in the
Forum.3 Thereafter, we hear nothing of the temple until its restoration by Septimius Severus, an event commemorated by a grand
dedication in gilt bronze letters on the front of the entablature (infra,
pp.192193). References to the temple in late antiquity suggest
10
that it still stood,4 although it may have been quite damaged by the
fire in the reign of Carinus (283) or by the sacks of Alaric (410) and
the Vandals (455CE).
After Antiquity
Since the excavators of 1829 found layers of carbonized wood and
fused metal on the podium,5 a fire (before 1000 CE?) must have
burned the interior and the roof, but the cellas marble pavement and
fittings may have already disappeared.6 Some of its materials were
probably used in later buildings like the Church of Saints Sergius
and Bacchus built in the seventh century. The church is adjacent to
the modern entrance to the Forum from the Via dei Fori Imperiali,
but the apse of an outbuilding, its deaconate, stood close to the northeast corner of the temple. More of the temple may have disappeared
when Pope Hadrian I (CE 772795) rebuilt the church.
Thereafter, we have little information on the temple. When the
Deaconate of Saints Sergius and Bacchus was repaired from the
185
18 6
Fig.10.2. View of the three surviving columns looking southeast. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero
Fig.10.3. The facade with the restored podium, the column

bases and the stair between the bases. (G. Gorski su
twelfth through the fifteenth centuries, materials from the temple

were probably used, and by the early sixteenth century, the ruins
had been reduced to the three extant columns (Figs. 10.24).
By then, the original name and purpose of the building had long
since been forgotten. Some identified the surviving columns as
remnants of a colonnade at the foot of the capitol. Others supposed
them to have been part of a bridge Caligula was supposed to have
built across the Forum from his palace on the Palatine Hill to the
Capitoline.7 But, in 1555, Pirro Ligorio ridiculed such suggestions
as nonsense and recognized the columns as part of a temple
that of Jupiter Tonans.8 His contemporaries accepted his views,
and not until the early nineteenth century were the remains again
correctly identified. Meanwhile, sketches of the ruins by successive generations of artists and architects enable us to watch the
gradual burial of the columns under tons of detritus.9
Excavations
By 1809, fill had nearly reached the tops of the column shafts,
but by then, scholars were already interested in excavating the
Forum. As part of this larger excavation, the well-known papal
architect Giuseppe Camporesi cleared the Temple of Jupiter
Tonans in 18111812.10 He began by checking the stability of
the three surviving columns, which had been largely supported
by the great mass of earth in which they stood. Clearing the lateral
(north) column, he found that many of the blocks in its foundations were missing. Working from a scaffold, his laborers, temporarily removed the entablature and in trenches that extended
18 8
Fig.10.4. The columns and entablature on the north (l.) and west (r.) sides looking southwest. (G. Gorski
su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
to the Vespasianic ground level, reconstructed the foundations.

Repositioning the entablature, they resupported both columns
and entablature with metal clamps and definitively stabilized
the ruins.11 They also recovered some minor architectural fragments: parts of female statues (including a partially draped foot)
and a piece of a railing (pluteus). Directed by Carlo Fea, further
excavation in 1817 cleared part of the stair on the facade and,
in front of it, the remains of the Clivus Capitolinus and part of
the apse of the Deaconate of Saints Sergius and Bacchus. Fea
promptly removed the latter, but at the conclusion of his work, he
had exposed part of the poorly preserved podium and unearthed
a number of architectural fragments. Apparently falling from
the building when it was still in relatively good condition, these
had been immediately covered with detritus and had escaped
later quarrying on the site.12 The excavation of the narrow space
between the temples of Vespasian and Concord in 1821 revealed
additional important architectural fragments from both buildings that Canina later used in his reconstructions of the complete
sections of entablatures from both temples today in the secondstory arcade of the Tabularium (Fig. 2.2). A final excavation in
1829 cleared the podium completely and uncovered a fragment
of a giallo-antico shaft with spiral fluting, a marble slab with
coffers, an architrave with three fasciae inscribed SACRUM
(sacred perhaps part of the entrance to the cella), a fragment
from the cornice of the pediment, and a broken marble pedestal.
The first two elements may have been part of the tabernacle for
the cult statue, but, with the exception of the pedestal, they and
all the other elements have now disappeared.
Chapter
Fig.10.5. View of the base molding on the podium looking northeast.

(G.Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di
Roma)
Nonetheless, by the end of the 1830s, the remains of the temple had been cleared and partially rebuilt. In 1844, the celebrated archaeologist and architect Luigi Canina finally identified
the enigmatic ruins.13 Today, nearly two centuries later, the site
remains very much as Canina and his early nineteenth-century
predecessors left it (Fig.10.2).
Structure
Podium
The surviving remains allow a plausible reconstruction of the
exterior elevations and give some idea of the interior of the cella
(Figs. 10.67). Abutting the wall of the Tabularium, the back wall
closes a small door that once gave access to a stair that led to the
10
/ The Temple of Vespasian
upper floors of the Tabularium. The foundation of the temple rests

on a massive platform that extends under the adjacent Portico
of the Dei Consentes. Including the front stair,14 the building is
rectangular.15 On both sides of the podium, the ground level is
considerably higher than along the facade and slopes down to
meet the level of the Clivus Capitolinus in front of the building. Since the Clivus rises gradually as it ascends the Capitoline
Hill, it is not clear whether the southeast corner of the podium
was entirely visible (Figs. 10.8, 11.1). The partially preserved
podium is about 4.20 m high, and courses of massive, differently
sized travertine blocks (well preserved at the southwest corner)
originally framed its concrete core on all four sides.16
Held in place by metal pins and clamps, now vanished white
marble revetments covered the travertine facing, and, on both
sides of the podium, considerable sections of the marble base
molding survive (Fig. 10.5).17 The front stairs have completely
disappeared, but the impressions of the five original steps between
the two surviving columns on the facade (Fig.10.3) suggest treads
about 0.25 m high.18 The substantial cella walls, also of travertine blocks, are, in the preserved section on the left (south) side,
0.85 m deep, and their courses, respectively, are 0.85 and 0.90 m
high. The holes in the blocks indicate that metal clamps attached
marble revetments to the interior and exterior faces.
Facade
The width of the podium and the dimensions and intercolumniations of the two surviving columns (3.65 m) indicates that there
189
19 0
Chapter
were originally six columns on the facade (Figs. 10.6, 8). Traces
on the top of the front cornice show that the pediment (Fig.10.8)
was about 1.75 m deep, 12.85 m long, and 6.15 m high. It probably
had sculpture, although none has survived.19 The foundations on
the sides of the building suggest three columns (Figs. 10.7, 9).20
Since the proximity of the Tabularium restricted the depth of the
site, they were more closely spaced (intercolumniations of 3.25 m)
than those on the facade. Six identically spaced pilasters continued
the lateral colonnades, but, owing to the immediate proximity of the
Tabularium facade, the outer edges of the last (west) pilasters were
omitted.
Cella
The cella was nearly square (Figs. 10.67), 19 m wide 18 m
deep. No trace of the front wall remains, and we can, therefore,
only guess at the dimensions of the front door. The pavilion for
the cult statues of Vespasian (and probably Titus, who was also
deified) dominates the space. With a depth of 6.85 m, it is 5.75
m wide and 1.35 m high. It is composed entirely of brick-faced
concrete and was originally faced with colored marble. Wellpreserved white marble slabs still pave much of the top (Fig. 9.2).
On the south side, a connected base composed of two travertine
blocks supports the travertine foundation for the base of one of
the two columns that sustained the front entablature and the roof
of the pavilion.21 Behind the base, a low, narrow stair led to the
top of the podium. Abutting the back of the stair, a second base
indicates that a pier (or engaged column) sustained the back
Fig.10.7. Restored section looking south. (G. Gorski)
10
191
19 2
of the entablature and the ceiling of the pavilion.22 Sockets in

the now missing upper section of the back wall would also have
helped support these structures. The same features must have
been duplicated on the right (north) side of the podium.
On the left (south) side of the cella are the remains of a platform
(1.35 m high, 0.95 m wide) that ran along the interior wall (Fig.9.2).
It is composed of concrete faced with brick (most of which has disappeared) and travertine blocks. Two sets of these blocks survive:
the one in the middle of the platform and the other against the wall
of the cella. Pinholes in the upper surface of the center block show
that it obviously supported a column, and the dimensions of this
surface suggest shafts with diameters of 0.40 m and intercolumniations of 2.25 m. The top of the platform was veneered with white
marble, its front with pavonazzetto. An identical platform with columns would have decorated the north cella wall.23
Walls andOrder
Like the columns and entablature, all visible parts of the temple were of white Luna marble (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 10.110, 11.1).24
The finely carved bases of the three surviving columns (Figs.
10.3, 10) are composite with two scotias, and drums of different
heights make up the fluted shafts.25 In an early Domitianic style,
the Corinthian capitals (Figs. 10.4, 10) are distinguished both by
the high quality of their workmanship and by the decorations on
their abacuses.
The elements project in high relief. The two bands of mechanically ordered leaves (coronae) display noticeable drill work. On
each of the capitals four faces, the leaves are flat with articulated
central bands. Set off by continuous narrow channels, each band
has a deeper central groove flanked on both sides by upturned
grooves (each horizontal pair V-shaped) representing stylized
veins. The tops of the leaves, originally elongated sprays, divide
into six clearly articulated sections and overhung the bases.26 The
sides of the leaves have three sprays, each with five lobes. Divided
by parallel channels into ribs that end above their bases, the upper
leaves are smaller than those of Augustan capitals. The ovolo of the
abacus is enriched with miniature egg-and-dart, and the cavetto
with hollow tongues, each with a triple crescent base.27
Inscription
The impressive inscription that commemorated Septimius
Severus restoration of the temple dominated the front architrave/
frieze (Figs. 10.8, 10). Only the last word, [r]ESTITVER[unt],
restored, survives,28 and for the rest, we have only the early
medieval transcription from the late eighth or early ninth century. Since the temples facade was still standing,29 the anonymous author of the Codex Einsiedlensis could transcribe both the
Senates original consecration to Vespasian on the frieze and the
later inscription of Septimius Severus on what had formerly been
the architrave (Figs. 10.8,10):
DIVO VESPASIANO AVGVSTO SPQR
[original inscription]
Chapter
IMPP CAESS SEVERVS ET ANTONINVS

PII FELIC AVGG RESTITVER 30
The Senate and Roman People [dedicate this temple] to the
Divine Vespasian Augustus
The pious and fortunate emperors, Severus and Antoninus
[Caracalla, the] Caesars and Augusti, restored [this building]31
Cut into the marble, each with two or more internal pinholes, the
sockets for large-scale, inset letters (0.381 m high)32 indicate that
they were originally of (gilded) bronze (Fig.10.10).
The frame of the inscription, a fillet and a cyma reversa, is
decorated with an elaborate anthemion, and a part of the original
architrave/frieze appears at the right of the inscription. Decorated
moldings set off the three fasciae of the architrave (best seen on
the side entablature and on the restored section of the entablature in the Tabularium, Figs. 2.2, 10.9): acanthus leaves (bottom
and middle) and bead-and-reel (top). A cyma reversa ornamented
with an elaborate anthemion of alternately upright and reversed
acanthus sprays concludes the architrave.
Frieze
The frieze (Figs. 2.2, 10.9), 1.02 m high, is decorated with bull
skulls and tools for sacrifice.
On the in situ section, these include (from left to right) a bulls
skull (bucranium),33 an obliquely positioned, curved handled
ewer (urceus) decorated with Bacchic scenes. It pours liquid, and
10
the sculptor has indicated the drops. Next are a sacrificial knife
(culter) with a triangular blade and a handle that ends in a lion
head, a bulls tail, here without a handle (aspergillum), a plate
(patera) decorated with acanthus leaves and a central medusa
head. Under the plate is a long-handled axe with a triangular
blade and a curved cutting edge (securis). The sacred objects
end with a long-handled, nearly vertical hammer (malleus) with
a round head (seen from the end), a priests woolen cap (galerus)
decorated with an olive branch, and rosettes with five petals. A
part of the bulls skull marks the end of the scene.34
Since the ceiling of the colonnade would have hidden these
surfaces, the inner sides of the frieze are unfinished. At the back
of the architrave/frieze block on the facade, on the top of the cornice, in approximately the center of the exposed section of the
block, a roughly finished rectangular socket once held one of the
beams for the attic floor above the pronaos.35
Cornice
The cornice has a standard profile (Figs. 2.2, 10.6, 910), but the
individual elements are richly decorated.
The half round that borders the frieze is embellished with acanthus leaves. In the ovolo above, acanthus leaves frame the eggs,
each of which is enlivened with vines and rosettes. The spaces
between the dentils above end at the top with half-round openings. Below every opening are two tiny circles with thin marble
frames. Delicately cut with extreme care, these typically characterize Flavian dentils.36 A narrow fillet separates the dentils from
193
19 4
Chapter
an ovolo decorated with standard egg-and-dart. The shells of the

eggs are delicately finished with a central groove, and the arrows
end in finely detailed triangular heads. The spaces between the
modillions above display two rows of water-leaves, the upper one
projecting slightly past the one below. The frame around the coffers, a Lesbian cymatium, is enriched with shear-shaped leafand-dart. The rosettes in the coffers of the soffit are of slightly
different diameters with individually styled petals. Acanthus
leaves enliven the undersides of the modillions. On their sides,
vines form scrolls that end, front and back, with rosettes, the rear
one larger. On top of each modillion, the cyma reversa is decorated with shear-shaped acanthus leaf-and-dart. The design on
the wide fillet above the modillions consists of hollow tongues,
and on the cyma reversa above, palmettes and reversed lotus
flowers alternate. A low fillet separates this molding from the high
cyma recta with water-leaf, and the low fillet that terminates the
cornice.
10
195
19 6
Fig.10.10. Restored order.

(G. Gorski)
The Tabularium
History
The Early CapitolineHill
In its original form, the Capitoline Hill consisted of two low
rises separated by a narrow, sloping, saddle-shaped depression.1 The Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus/Jupiter Optimus
Maximus occupied the Capitol, the south rise. Romes citadel
fortified the higher north elevation, the Arx. The depression
between the peaks was called in antiquity inter duos lucos,
between the two groves, although by the early first century
BCE, the groves had long since disappeared.2 Overlooking the
Forum, however, the depression was an important site. In the
early first century BCE, it was occupied by a substantial structure of externally rusticated tufa blocks. A major fire destroyed
that building in 83, but its partially preserved remains survive
as foundations visible today from the interior of the arcade on
the third floor of the Tabularium.
11
The Republic
Roman literature does not mention a Tabularium, but two
ancient descriptions identify it. Now lost, the first, which Nicol
Signorili recorded before 1431,3 reads,
[Q LV]TATIVS Q F Q N
C[ATVLVS CO(n)S(ul)
DE S]EN(ATUS) SENT(ENTIA)
FACIVNDV[M
COERAVIT ] EIDEMQVE [P]ROB[AVIT] 4
Q. Lutatius, son of Quintus (when) Quintus, Catulus, the grandson, was consul began what the Senate had ruled must be undertaken and approved it for him (Catulus).
In the second-story rooms on the north side of the Tabularium,

Luigi Canina found the second inscription in 1845. Since it
partially repeats the text of the previous one, it confirms its
accuracy:5
197
Fig.11.1. Restored, aerial view

looking northwest. (G. Gorski)
Chapter 11 / The Tabularium
Fig.11.2. Restored, ground-level view looking northwest. (G. Gorski)
[Q LV]TATIVS Q F Q N C[ATVLVS
COS DE SEN SENT FACIVNDV[M
COERAVIT ] EIDEMQVE PRO[BAVIT] 6
Q. Lutatius, son of Quintus [when] Quintus, Catulus, the grandson, was consul began what the Senate had ruled must be undertaken and approved it for him [Catulus].
Canina set the new inscription on the lintel of a door that

leads from the modern Via San Pietro in Carcere (the ancient
Gradus Monetae?)7 into the rooms on the north side of the building, where it may still be seen today. Since the first inscription
calls Quintus Catulus consul, it dates the construction of the
Tabularium to 78, the year he held the office. A funerary inscription found on the Via Praenestina and now kept in a courtyard
in the Hospital of the Fatebenefratelli on Tiber Island may also
provide the name of the architect:
L[ucius] CORNELIUS L[uci] F[ilius]
VOT[uria tribu]
Q[uinti] CATVLI CO[n]S[ULIS]
PRAEF[ectus] FABR[um]
CENSORIS ARCHITECTVS
Lucius Cornelius, son of Lucius, of the Voturiantribe
Catulus Prefect of Works when he was Consul
[His] Architect when [Catulus was] Censor8
199
20 0
Fig.11.3. Tabularium, east facade looking north. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i
The Empire
The uses to which the new structure was put are far from clear
(see infra, pp.208209), but in the latter part of the first century CE, nearly one hundred and fifty years after its construction, some remodeling took place. In the fighting between the
forces of Vitellius and the Flavians (6869), the latter, besieged
by Vitellius and driven back to the Capitoline, took shelter in
the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. Setting the temple
on fire, Vitellius burned it along with many of the surrounding buildings.9 To restore the capitol when he became emperor,
Vespasian personally cleared away the rubble and began reconstruction. That work also apparently included the Tabularium,
where there hadbeen
three thousand bronze tabletsdestroyed with the temple.
[These included] decrees of the senate and laws of the plebeian
assembly on treaties and alliances and individual grants of personal privilege.10
As part of this project, a second-floor gallery, effectively abandoned, was probably filled in and thereafter housed only a
large water pipe. The subsequent construction of the Temple of
Vespasian effectively closed the entrance to the stair that had
connected the Forum with the Temple of Veiovis farther up the
Capitoline (supra, p. 189), and, the stair, partially dismantled,
was abandoned.11 In later antiquity, the history of the building is
completely unknown.
Fig.11.4. Marten Van Heemskerck, view of the Senatorial Palace from the Forum, 1536. (Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen, Berlin, Germany)
201
20 2
After Antiquity
Fig.11.5. Tabularium, Italo Gismondis reconstruction model looking north. (G. Gorski. Museo della
In the Renaissance, while Michelangelo transformed the three

superimposed medieval arcades that made the west facade of
the Senatorial Palace into an assured classical design,12 the east
facade, which faced the Forum and incorporated the remains of
the Tabularium, remained irregular. In a 1536 drawing by Martin
van Heemskerck (Fig. 11.4), it is characterized by two lateral
medieval towers (the fifteenth-century tower of Nicholas V on the
right)13 and the irregular roofs of the two central wings. Much
of the Roman masonry from the Tabularium may have then survived, but the overlying medieval concrete concealed its character.14 In front of the building, a great mass of fill hid the two lower
stories, and, on the north (right) side of the facade, a monumental
arch led from the Forum into the palace cellars.15
By the mid-nineteenth century, the fill in front of the building
had been removed, the roof line had been regularized, and the
interior rooms on all floors had been cleared.16 One of the arches
on the third-floor arcade had also been opened and documented.17
In 1940, for the Worlds Fair of 1942, which never took place,18
two additional arches were opened, and some of the later brick
walls that helped support the internal arches that divided the
arcade into sections were removed.19 Shortly thereafter, A. M.
Colini uncovered the well-preserved remains of the miniature
Temple of Veiovis. Built into a rectangular recess at the southwest corner of the Tabularium, it stands on a level slightly higher
than the floor of the arcade (Fig.11.8) and may be seen at the end
of a transverse hall connected with the modern access corridor

that leads from the Palazzo dei Conservatori into the arcade.20
East of the temple, a colonnade 4 m wide embellished the temple
precinct and sheltered an entrance into the Tabularium that gave
access to one of the Tabulariums main stairs. Its lower ramp led
down to the Forum, and the upper one, to the fourth floor above
the arcade.21
Structure
The Lower Stories
Plan. Roughly trapezoidal in plan (Fig. 11.8),22 the building
masked the ancient area Between the Groves and, when intact,
would have hidden this depression from the Forum (Figs. 0.4, 1.3,
11.110, 21.2126). The lowest story on the Forum is completely
closed. The facade abuts the rock of the Capitoline, and only the
door that led to the stair to the Temple of Veiovis (supra, pp.189,
200) was actually used. Relatively large (1,875 m 3.33 m), it
is flanked by two narrow decorative piers.23 Although walled up
for the construction of the Temple of Vespasian in the late first
century CE, it may originally have been left permanently open
to facilitate access to the Temple of Veiovis and the upper section of the Capitoline. Running directly from the Forum to the
Temple of Veiovis, this stair bypasses the rooms on the second
floor. Reached by a stair and narrow hallways from the rooms in
the north wing, these five rooms (or recesses) are accessed from
a narrow west corridor. The walls between the rooms, nearly as

wide as the rooms themselves, indicate that the architect intended
to support a very considerable weight. Each room has a narrow,
rectangular window that overlooks the Forum, but the restricted
plans and reduced dimensions of these spaces suggest that they
may always have been used as storage. By the early empire, they
were, as we have seen, abandoned, and the corridor was used for
a pipe that brought water into the building.
Walls. The lower stories of the tabularium facade on the Forum
survive largely intact, and the methods used for their construction are impressive. The exterior walls are of heavy masonry
(opus quadratum): large blocks of light gray tufa with small black
inclusions from the ancient Latin town of Gabii twelve miles east
of Rome (Figs. 11.3, 67). They are laid in thin layers of mortar
with alternating courses of headers and stretchers. The inner
walls are of less durable Anio tufa; the vaults and the interiors of
the lower walls are of concrete. Door frames, stairs, the cornices
at the springing of the arches, and the Doric capitals are of travertine. Most of the visible walls would have been stuccoed.
Third-Floor Arcade. The third-floor arcade, the most elegant
and visible part of the building, was actually a covered street that
connected a narrow branch of the Clivus Capitolinus (the modern
Via del Campidoglio) to the south with the Gradus Monetae (the
modern Via San Pietro in Carcere) on the north. Floored today
with rectangular travertine slabs, it was originally covered with
203
20 4
Fig.11.6. View of the east facade. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Beni Archeologici di Roma)
205
the basalt pavers used for streets.24 The vaulted passage, 5 m

wide 10 m high, originally had large-scale arched entrances at
each end. Both survive, although the north one is partly closed
while only the outline of that to the south frames a modern brick
fill. Dividing the corridor into eleven sections, partially preserved
tufa piers supported stone arches and pavillion vaults.25 Three
survive; later barrel vaults roof the other sections. The travertine
cornices of the piers adjoin and continue those of the piers on
the facade. The eleven arches of the exterior were each originally
7.50 m high and about 3.60 m wide.26 Flanked by fluted Doric
half columns of tufa with capitals and an incomplete entablature of travertine (Figs. 11.67, 910),27 these generously proportioned openings provided splendid views out over the Forum.
Indeed, before the Temples of Concord and Vespasian largely
obstructed these arches in the first century CE, this corridor must
have attracted crowds of passersby, and the five adjacent rooms
were probably exclusive shops.28 Only two survive, but one near
the end of the arcade still preserves a travertine threshold with
grooves for the planks used to close the shop at night and the
rectangular depression for the night door the proprietor used
for access when the planks were in position. When the views disappeared, the shops fashionable location may or may not have
assured their continued prosperity. The restored cornices from
the Temples of Concord (Figs. 9.56) and Vespasian (Fig. 2.2)
together with bases from the internal order of the latter are displayed in the arcade. In the sunken area near its center, a modern
Fig.11.7. Detail of the east facade. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
20 6
207
20 8
wooden stair leads down to the remains of the building that occupied the site of the Tabularium before the fire of 83BCE.
Accessible today from a door on the Via San Pietro in Carcere,
the rooms of the north wing have a simple plan: two stories of
barrel-vaulted chambers, a row of six interconnected rooms on
each floor. Completely separate from the arcade, the lowest floor
is on approximately the same level. According to Coarelli, these
rooms housed the Roman mint.29
Fig.11.10. Restored third-story

order. (G. Gorski)
The Fourth Story. There was certainly a story above the arcade:
the thick walls on the Forum level were obviously intended to
support at least one floor above the arcade. A ramp from the stair
reached from the exterior door next to the Temple of Veiovis led
to this upper story,30 and sockets in the ancient masonry revealed
during nineteenth-century work above the arcade as well as travertine fragments from its Corinthian colonnade identified by
Delbrueck (Figs. 11.3, 12.3, 4, 7) offer additional proof for its
existence.31 Did this upper floor house the Tabularium? Was this
the space where Vespasian housed the three thousand bronze
tablets, decrees of the senate and laws of the plebeian
assembly on treaties and alliances and individual grants of personal privilege (supra, p. 200)?
Some scholars have doubted this identification. Theodore
Mommsen, the most famous historian of ancient Rome in the
nineteenth century, argued that the Roman government did
not need a vast storehouse for its papers. Any space, however
small, could serve as a tabularium, and, moreover, the famous
inscription found by Canina (supra, pp. 197199) was probably not genuine.32 Most of Mommsens contemporaries and their
successors ignored these suggestions, but Purcell has recently
championed them, identifying the Tabularium as the Atrium
Libertatis, the Atrium of Liberty, another imperfectly known
republican building.33
More recently, Tucci has suggested that the two central
voids in the foundations of the Tabularium indicate that its two
existing floors were merely the foundations for the grandiose
temple to Juno Moneta previously supposed to have been on
the Arx under the Church of Saint Maria in Ara Coeli. With
so grand a platform, the Temple of Juno would have resembled
the partially preserved Temple of Jupiter Anxur at Terracina.34
Moreover, since the travertine fragments Delbrueck used for the
fourth-floor Corinthian order (Figs. 11.3, 12.3, 4, 7) are not all
imperial, as Delbrueck suggested, but republican and imperial,
the monument from which they come is unclear.35 And finally, F.
Coarelli, accepting Tuccis identification of the Tabularium as a
temple platform, recently attributed the temple to Venus Victrix,
Venus the Victorious, and suggested further that two additional,
smaller temples flanked this central shrine: that of the Genius
publicus populi Romani (l.) and that of Fausta Felicitas (r.).36
Thus the floor above the arcade has been variously characterized. In his mid-nineteenth-century reconstruction, Moyaux, a
winner of the French Rome Prize, followed Canina in assuming

that the Forum elevation of this floor largely repeats the design
of one below: an arcade with Ionic half columns.37 Behind it, he
postulates a Corinthian peristyle that opens onto the Capitoline
through an arcade with half columns.38 In the next century,
however, Delbrueck rejected this design. Instead, he identified
the travertine fragments of the Corinthian order still visible in
the Forum on the podium of the Portico of the Dei Consenti as
elements of a fourth-floor Corinthian colonnade on the Forum
facade of the Tabularium (Figs. 11.3, 12.3, 4, 7). The complete
height of this order would have been 13 m.39 This suggestion
has been very widely accepted. For his reconstruction of the
Tabularium in the model of ancient Rome in the Museum of
Roman Civilization, Gismondi used this colonnade, assuming
that, behind it, on the upper Capitoline, the Tabularium would
have had at least one additional floor arranged around a small
peristyle or light well (Fig.11.5). The most recent reconstruction of the building by the Comune di Roma (on display inside
the monument) follows Delbrueck and to some extent Gismondi,
assuming that behind the fourth-floor Corinthian colonnade
on the Forum there would have been a Corinthian peristyle
that would have opened out into what is now the Piazza del
Campidoglio, the ancient asylum.40 This was the basis for our
reconstruction (Figs. 11.12, 910).41
209
Fig.12.1. General view looking

southwest. (Gorski)
The Portico of
the Dei Consentes
History
against Hannibal to the distinguished conservative, Quintus

Fabius Maximus, naming him dictator and propitiating the gods:1
The Republic
A lectisternium (a sacred banquet with special sacrifices) was
Located on the Clivus Capitolinus (Figs. 0.1, 4, 12.113), the

Portico of the Dei Consentes perpetuated the name of a Greek
cult introduced into Rome during the the late third century BCE
while the Romans were fighting the Second Punic War. In 217,
with a beachhead in Italy, Hannibal had just defeated the Romans
at Lake Trasimene some 141 km northeast of Rome. The Roman
commander, the consul, Gaius Flaminius, had been killed. Fifteen
thousand Romans died with him, and ten thousand fled. To calm
Romes terrified citizens, the Senate gave command of the war
12
celebrated during three days. Six couches were displayed:

one for Jupiter and Juno, a second for Neptune and Minerva, a
third for Mars and Venus, a fourth for Apollo and Diana, a fifth
for Vulcan and Vesta, a sixth for Mercury and Ceres.2
This was the first appearance in Rome of the Olympian deities who
formed an advisory council for Jupiter, the Dei Consentes,3
those twelve gods who are included by Ennius, with a metrical
arrangement of their names in two verses:
211
21 2
Juno, Vesta, Minerva, Ceres, Diana, Venus,Mars,

Mercurius, Jovi [sic], Neptunus, Vulcanus, Apollo
Urban gods whose gilded images stand in the Forum, six males,
six females.5
Their temple may have been on the southeast slope of the

Capitoline Hill near the location of the later Portico of the Dei
Consentes,6 but from the early first century BCE to the later first
century CE, an annex of the Tabularium took up the greater part of
the site, leaving little room for a large structure (Fig.21.21). This
annex may have housed offices for the nearby mint in the podium
of the Temple of Saturn, and the presence of a government center
of that importance near the temple of the Dei Consentes emphasized the early significance of thecult.
arcade of the Tabularium.10 Trajan continued the project,11 and,

with further work on the colonnade in front of the upper shops,
Hadrian finally finished it.12 The statues of the twelve gods may
have been exhibited either in one or more of the second-floor
rooms or in the colonnade.13 Thereafter, for nearly two centuries,
the building apparently remained in good repair, but in 367 CE,
Vettius Praetextatus, a distinguished senator, Prefect of the City
(Praefectus Urbi), and dedicated supporter of traditional paganism,14 undertook a major restoration.15 The still extant, on-site
inscription that commemorates his work (Fig.12.10) reads in part,
Vettius Praetextus, of senatorial rank, Praefectus Urbi, replaced
the sacred images of the Dei Consentes after the cult had been
restored to its ancient form with complete [re]-decoration of the
whole shrine. Longeius, an ex-consul of senatorial rank [was] in
charge [of the project].16
The Empire
When the emperor Titus began the neighboring Temple of
Vespasian, he also apparently demolished the Tabularium annex,7
and, with the construction of the podium that later also supported
the Portico of the Dei Consentes, he transformed the area (Figs.
21.2122).8 The rising temple closed the Forum entrance to the
Tabularium, and, across a narrow street paved with travertine
slabs, its south side fronted the seven shops in the podium
of the Dei Consentes (Figs. 12.1, 4, 12). Domitian finished both
temple and portico,9 and, in the latter, paving the open court over
the lower shops, he completed the eight upper shops. A door
in shop 8 still allowed access from the Forum to the third-floor
Excavations
Thereafter, we know little of the buildings history. In the Middle
Ages, the deep fill around the lower stories of the Tabularium hid
it completely (Fig.11.4), and it was first excavated in late 1833
and early 1834.17 Of these excavations, we have several reports.
The first describes the finds and gives the text of Praetextatus
inscription:
Of that portico ten bases of columns are now found in their
place and form an obtuse angle. Many of the fluted shafts of
cipollino pertaining to this portico are preserved and no less
Chapter
Fig.12.2. Restored plan of the upper floor. (G. Gorski)
12
/ Portico of the Dei Consentes
213
21 4
Fig.12.3. View of the upper portico looking northwest. The first

seven columns are ancient; the last five, modern. (J. Packer su
are the number of composite [= Corinthianizing] capitals

and great masses of marble that together form the architrave.
which together have a length of 8 palms (1.787 m). And in the
past week the inscription [of Praetextatus; supra, p. 212 n. 16]
has been found.
Antonio Nibby conducted the excavations, and his published

account of his work records some extraordinary finds:
Parallel to the Temple of Jove (Vespasian) is a row of brick shops
[on the lower level] which were revetted with marble, since the
thresholds are of solid marble. These I found divided up by formless medieval walls and, for up to two-thirds of the pavement,
full of rubble, despoiled, in fact, of every veneer. In the last stratum lower down they were filled with human bodies mixed with
active lime, an indication that they had been used for burials in
some extraordinary circumstance such as plague.18
As a Latin inscription above the door to shop 3 attests (Fig.12.5),

to avoid reburying the shops and to support the road that climbed
the Capitoline Hill, the papal government of Pope Gregory XVI
(18311846) supported the road with a picturesque arch that
soared above the flattened ruins. Between 1856 and 1858, the
government of Pope Pius IX restored the shops on both levels and
set up the columns and surviving architrave in approximations
of their original positions. A second Latin inscription above the
door of shop 7 (Fig.12.6) commemorates this work. And finally, in
1942, Antonio Muoz carried out further repairs. Reconditioning
Chapter
12
the shops on both levels, he added a brick-faced pier at the northwest end of the colonnade (Figs. 12.4, 10), installed new travertine columns modeled on the ancient originals (Figs. 12.3, 4, 6,
9), and removed the arch that had carried the nineteenth-century
road over the colonnade.19
Structure
Plan
After more than a century and a half of excavation and reconstruction, apart from the missing roof, the marble revetments, and
some of the columns, the Portico of the Dei Consentes is largely
intact. Cut into the Capitoline Hill, the irregularly shaped platform is, on the north and east sides, of concrete faced with brick
(Figs. 12.12, 4, 12). The north end with the seven chambers that
open large commercial doors into the short street across from
the Temple of Vespasian is the widest section of the podium. Its
facade and the barrel-vaulted rooms behind it are built directly
against the rock of the hill. Disappearing into the ascending Clivus
Capitolinus, the still largely unexcavated east side of the podium
reaches its full height only at its northeast corner. Its walls meet
there at a ninety-degree angle, but the last third of that to the west
bends slightly to follow the course of the Clivus Capitolinus. On
the second story, the seven south rooms and three on the west join
at an obtuse angle, and a small triangular chamber in between
(Fig.12.2) separates the two wings. In front of these rooms (Figs.
215
21 6
Fig.12.4. View of the lower story looking southwest.

(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e
le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Chapter
12
217
12.14, 12), the original colonnade with fluted cipollino shafts

and Corinthianizing capitals has been re-erected (Figs. 12.34),
and the white marble pavement on top of the first-floor chambers
partially survives.
Structure and Decoration

On both floors, the shops had barrel vaults, most of which have
been restored, as well as evidence for marble revetments.20 The
grotta oscura blocks in the lower section of the walls in shop 6 are
probably remnants of the earlier Tabularium annex or perhaps
the original temple to the Dei Consentes. The marble pavement
in front of the shops (Figs. 12.2, 7) is the latest of the areas two
similar pavements.21 The exterior walls were originally veneered
with marble, and, in its present state, the colonnade in front of the
upper shops has twelve columns (Figs. 12.34). The first seven
are original, and the last five are reconstructions in travertine. Of
the originals, the Attic bases are of white marble, the fluted shafts
of cipollino, and the fillets between the flutes have semicircular
profiles. The four faces of the white marble Corinthianizing capitals are identical (Figs. 12.89,13).
On each of the four faces, a trophy, centered over the middle
leaf of the lower row, is flanked by two equally sized rosettes that
replace the volutes of the cannonical helices. The breastplate on
the trophy has raised decoration set on a cross-shaped frame. On
each face and from capital to capital, the details vary. The kilt
Fig.12.5. The inscription of Pope Gregory XVI above the door to shop 3. (J. Packer su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma).
21 8

Fig.12.7. Looking northeast across the Portico from the
terrace on the Capitoline Hill. (G. Gorski su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
Fig.12.6. The inscription of Pope Pius IX above the door to shop 7. (J. Packer su concessione del
below the breastplate consists of five strips (ptergyes, of heavy

leather or linen in the actual equipment) held together by small,
round (bronze) ornaments. The folds of the underlying military
tunic hang down from under the armor. On the abacus, the trophys cone-shaped helmet replaces the usual fleuron, and, immediately below the abacus, from under the helmet, the sides of a
cloth hood22 extend for a short distance on either side of the trophy. The scrolls for the volutes at the upper corners of the capital
issue from a vegetable sheath that extends from the helices to the
top of the bell.23
Except for the later inscription of Praetextatus (Fig.12.10),
the entablature is undecorated. A cyma reversa and a half round
separate the three fasciae of the architrave (Fig. 12.6, 10). A
cyma reversa and fillet divide the architrave from the blank frieze.
Beginning at the bottom, the cornice consists of a fillet, a cyma
reversa, a fillet, a fascia, a fillet, a cyma recta, and a fillet.24
There is no evidence for the ceiling of the colonnade and
the roof of the building. The smooth finish on the backs of the
entablature blocks (Figs. 11.3, 12.7) in the colonnade suggests
that they were visible from the interior of the portico. But the
means by which the roof was attached to the cornice blocks is
not clear. In his model of ancient Rome in the Museum of Roman
Civilization (Fig.12.11), Gismondi assumes that the shops were
in a two-story back building with a shed roof. His front colonnade is similarly roofed, and our reconstruction (Figs. 12.12,
1213) follows Gismondi.
22 0
Fig.12.8. Ancient capital on (restored) column x. (J. Packer su

Fig.12.9. Modern (simplified) travertine capital on Column ii.

Chapter
Fig.12.10. The position of the Praetextatus inscription, just left of column 12 on the dark-colored
architrave/frieze fragment. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
12
221
22 2
Fig.12.11. Gismondis model (l., center) from the model of ancient Rome in the Museum of Roman
Civilization. (Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma
Capitale)
Chapter
Fig.12.12. Elevation of the upper and lower floors. (G. Gorski)
12
223
22 4
Fig.12.13. Colonnade order.

(G. Gorski)
13
The Temple of Saturn
History
Saturn in EarlyRome
For modern scholars, Saturn (Fig.13.2) was a Sabine agricultural deity originally from Sicily. His name and shrine had
once dominated the Capitoline Hill.1 Romes late Etruscan
kings purportedly banished him from its summit, but his cult
survived, and from Romes Etruscan overlords, the god took
on the darker, bloodier, more ominous character associated
with human sacrifices and their later survival in traditional
gladiatorial games held annually in December.2 By the end of
the first century BCE, learned writers identified Saturn with
the remote ages prior to the foundation of Rome. Before the
war with Troy,3 a Greek expedition with a small Trojan element had followed Hercules into Italy and built a town on
a suitable hillnow called the Capitoline Hill, but by the
men of that time, the Saturnian Hill or, in Greek, the hill of
Cronus.
Locating a Saturnian Gate behind the Temple of Saturn on

the Clivus Capitolinus that led to the top of the hill, Varro called
this venerable Capitoline settlement Saturnia.4 Its inhabitants (or perhaps other Greeks) erected the altar to Saturn which
remains to this day [the first century BCE] at the foot of the hill
near the ascent that leads from the Forum to the Capitol, and
it was they who instituted the sacrifice which the Romans still
performed even in my time observing the Greek ritual.5 Later
imperial writers perpetuated and revised the memories of these
antiquities.6
The cult statue in the cella must have represented Saturn as
he appears on late republican denarii: a mature bearded man
with flowing hair bound with a fillet (Fig. 13.2).7 The statue
would have been colossal with an internal framework. An
internal oil reservoir (or reservoirs) lubricated the ivory face
and bare body parts.8 The vestments may have been of gilded
wood. The statues crimson veil9 may have been of real fabric,
and its scythe of wood and metal. A second image kept in the
temple was carried in processions, and this image and/or the
225
Chapter
13
Fig.13.1. The Temple of

Saturn looking southwest.
(G. Gorski)
cult statue was bound during the year with a woolen bond,
and is released on his [Saturns] festal day, December 17,
the first day of the nearly week-long Saturnalia, a festival that
symbolized Saturns role as the divine patron of liberation.10
The Republic
Roman sources traditionally locate the Temple of Saturn on the
site of the surviving ruins (Figs. 0.1, 1.3). Across from the west
end of the Basilica Julia between the Vicus Iugarius and the Clivus
Capitolinus, the street that ran from the Forum to the top of the
Capitoline Hill, it was one of the oldest shrines in the Forum.11
Dating from the late sixth or early fifth century BCE, it had
been founded by Tarquin the Proud, the last Etruscan king of
Rome, or by one of the magistrates of the early Republic.12 The
new temple also sheltered the state treasury called the aerarium Saturni because It was once the custom to pay by the use
of apair of scales[and] even nowthe Temple of Saturnhas
a pair of scales set up ready for weighing purposes. From aes
copper money the Aerarium treasury was named.13 Always
identified with the Temple of Saturn,14 the aerarium, originally
in the temple (or its podium), was, during the Republic, administered by the quaestors, the treasurers of state. After the reign
of Nero (d. 68 CE), praefecti aerarii Saturni, prefects of the
Treasury of Saturn, oversaw the treasury.15 In addition to their
supervision of its funds, they, like the earlier quaestors, probably looked after the military standards stored in the treasury and
handed them out to generals in time of war.16 They administered
Fig.13.2. Denarius: obverse, portrait of Saturn; reverse, the seated

goddess Roma crowned by a standing victory. (Numismatik Lanz
Mnchen)
oaths at the temple,17 and lists of their assistants, the viatores

(messengers, official summoners) and the praecones (heralds),
appeared on a nearby wall.18 In the later Republic, the aerarium
may have been transferred to an adjacent building, a wing of the
Tabularium later replaced by the Portico of the Dei Consentes
(Fig. 21.21),19 but copies of many laws were associated with
the temple. Those that governed private buildings were put up
behind it.20 Others could be seen on bronze tablets around its
exterior.21 Accounts of the maintenance and repairs of the original temple have not survived,22 and we know only that in 174
BCE, the censors (who let contracts in the republic) paved the
Clivus Capitolinus with volcanic stone and built a portico from
the temple to the Curia and to the assembly room for the Senate
on the Capitoline.23
/ The Temple of Saturn
227
Chapter
13
229
Fig.13.3. The Temple of Saturn looking southeast. (G. Gorski

su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
The Reconstruction of L. Munatius

Plancus
Nearly a century and a half later, in 42, Lucius Munatius Plancus
began a reconstruction of the temple. A distinguished senator,
he had been consul, censor, and several times general. The conqueror of Raetia,24 he used the spoils from that campaign to
underwrite the project.25 In the struggle for empire among the triumvirs after Caesars assassination, he supported Mark Antony,
and campaigns for Antony kept him in the Greek East for the next
nine years. When Antonys fortunes declined, Plancus joined
Octavians party and, on his return to Rome, continued construction of the temple. The project was thus finally completed
in the early 20s BCE as part of Augustus reconstruction of the
Forum.26
Parts of Plancus building survive (Figs. 13.4, 7), but our
only representation of the complete structure comes from the
Anaglypha Traiani, which shows a facade with a simplified Ionic
order. The column shafts are not fluted, and, with the exception
of the three wide borders that mark the cornice, the entablature is
plain. Yet, since the relief shows the columns and entablature of
the adjacent Temple of Vespasian in the same way, although the
shafts of the real temple were fluted with a complex entablature
(supra, pp. 193195), we may assume that, despite the image on
the relief, Plancus Temple of Saturn also had an elaborate entablature and fluted columns.27 The handsome decorations of the
Fig.13.4. The front entablature with the inscription recording damage by fire in the fourth century CE.
(G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Chapter
13
Fig.13.5. The Temple of Saturn looking northeast and showing part

of the interior foundations. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero
per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
s urviving cornice (infra, pp. 237238) also indicate the elegant

design of the entablature (Figs. 13.4,7).
Late Antique Rebuilding

A fire severely damaged the temple during the fourth century,
and, as the surviving inscription on entablature attests (infra), the
Senate restored it, probably between 360 and 380 CE (cf. Figs.
21.2123 with 21.24, 25):28
SENATVS POPVLVSQVE ROMANVS
INCENDIO CONSVMPTVM RESTITVIT29
The senate and the Roman people
restored [this temple after it had been] consumed byfire
After Antiquity
Unlike many of the Forums buildings, the temple remained largely
intact until the early fifteenth century, when Poggio Bracciolini
famously recorded the fate of the greater part of its fabric. In his
first trip to Rome (1402), he saw the temple
almost intact with fine marble work. Afterwards [by Braccolinis
second visit in 1447] the Romans took the cella and part of
the portico to the lime kiln and when the columns had been
detached, demolished the whole building.
30
Thereafter modern houses occupied the site. By the later sixteenth century, a two-story structure with buttresses against the
walls of the lower floor, built behind the surviving columns of the
temples porch facade, extended along the east side of the podium.
Behind lay a small garden overlooked by the grill-covered windows
of the second floor. By the mid-eighteenth century, on the east side
of the house, a shed and a second garden extended through the
temple portico. The garden and shed walls partially incorporated
the temple columns. On its west side, the shed seems to have been
a stable, and three sizeable arched doors led to the stalls.31
Excavations
The excavations of the nineteenth century eliminated these later
buildings. The French work of 1810 uncovered the remains of
the temple.32 Later projects during the greater part of the century
cleared other parts of the Forum, but in 1898, Gioccomo Boni
removed the foundation of the post-medieval buildings that occupied the area in front of the temple facade to reveal a stretch of
ancient pavement and a vaulted room and other masonry that had
supported the steps to the temple (Fig.13.3).33
The Structure
The Character of the Monument
Although the Romans of Bracciolinis day destroyed much of
the temple, the material they left the surviving front facade,
231
23 2
Fig.13.6. The reused architrave/frieze blocks inside the pronaos looking northeast. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
the outline of the podium, the internal foundations for the lost
architectural elements from the interior of the cella, and smaller
surviving fragments of other decorative elements allows a reasonably accurate modern restoration (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 13.111,
21.2126). Owing to the slope of the Capitoline Hill, the sides of
the podium have different heights, but its other dimensions are
impressive.34 A series of closed spaces, probably originally barrel- or groin-vaulted, occupied the interior (Fig.13.5). Thin slabs
of marble veneer enlivened by base molding and cornice would
have hidden the massive, irregularly sized travertine blocks that
Chapter
13
The Foundations
The foundations inside the podium provide a reasonably accurate plan for the interior of the cella. The lateral columns were
engaged and may have been visible from the interior (Figs. 13.8,
10). At its center there are also foundations for what appears
to be a colonnade, but these extra foundations probably sustained only decorative items such as sizeable statues and their
bases.38 The massive foundation at the back of the cella probably
supported the cult statue and, perhaps, a central apse the width
of the nave.
The Facade
Fig.13.7. External cornice fragment. (J. Packer su concessione
del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
are now visible on the exterior.35 Including two small rooms on the
east side of the building, the ruins in front of the facade give little
idea of the original plan of the access stair,36 but a Renaissance
drawing of a lost fragment of the Forma Urbis suggests that a narrow lower ramp flanked by broad extensions of the podium led to
a significantly wider upper ramp framed by narrower extensions
of the podium about a third the width of those below (Fig.13.9).37
The triangular area in front of the ramp on the Forma Urbis was
probably a sacred zone connected with the temple.
Ionic Columns. The surviving materials of the facade date from

different periods and, with the exception of the Ionic capitals,
were salvaged from earlier buildings. Half the eight existing column bases are identical.39 The others are of approximately the
same size but of different marbles and types (Figs. 13.5, 910).40
The shafts, of gray and red Egyptian granite, also come from different orders.41 The capitals, however (Figs. 13.36, 911) were
made specifically for the restoration of the temple in the late
fourth century and are in an early Byzantine style.42
On each capital, there are four identical faces with four main
sections: at the top, the abacus, then below, the echinus with the
four attached volutes at the corners of the capital, a projecting
collar, and a hypotrachelion (the molding between the capital and
the astragal of the shaft). The shape of the abacus is a simplified
233
23 4
Fig.13.8. Restored plan of the fourth-century temple. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
13
version of that of a Corinthian capital. The profile, theoretically

an ovolo, a fillet, and a scotia, is flattened: while the ovolo pro
jects beyond the moldings below, all three have vertical surfaces.
At the center of each curved face, the projecting rounded device
that takes the place of a rosette, broader at the top than the bottom, is left either plain or enriched with a vertical hollow tongue
(the internal columns on the facade) or half rounds (the capitals
at the corners of the facade). The echinuses display egg-and-dart,
but only the capitals at the ends of the facade have the conventional darts. On the others, two lotus flowers (one facing up, the
other down) bound together by a central cord replace each dart.
The traditional palmettes project from the corner between the
inner side of each volute and the abacus. The sides of the volutes
display three zones, a border on each side and a concave inner
zone embellished in some of the capitals, with hollow tongues.
Below the volutes, the projecting collar is enriched with a twisted
rope pattern profiled as a half round. The hypotrachelion is decorated with miniature acanthus leaves. Since different sculptors
apparently worked on each capital, the individual details vary
slightly from one to the other.
The Architrave/Frieze. The architrave/frieze used for the interior (Fig.13.6) consists of five blocks with faces very similar to
nearly identical elements from the Forum of Trajan.
Palmettes and acanthus plants connected by curved vines (or
bands) decorate the frieze. Under the palmettes, these bands form
loosely wound scrolls. On the architrave, half rounds embellished
Fig.13.9. Restored north elevation of the fourth-century temple. (G. Gorski)
235
23 6
Fig.13.10. Restored west elevation of the fourth-century temple. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
13
237
with bead-and-reel separate three fasciae, their heights decreasing from top to bottom. The molding that separates the architrave
from the frieze is divided into an upper fillet and a cyma reversa
with normal-leaf-and-dart.43
The exterior sides of these blocks were cut off, and, to provide
a suitable surface for the surviving inscription, which occupies
the zone normally divided into architrave and frieze, thin slabs of
smooth-finished marble were clamped to them. Our reconstruction
of the east side of the building shows an entablature divided into
architrave and frieze (Fig.13.10), but, like that on the facade, the
lateral entablatures could have also been smoothly finished.44
Cornice. The fine surfaces and elegantly configured details of
the low cornice in white Luna marble (Figs. 13.7, 911) suggest that it came from the building of Munatius Plancus and was
reconfigured for later use on the reconstructed building.
The brackets are prototypes of the more complicated ones
used for later imperial temples like those of Concord or Vespasian
(Figs. 10.6, 21.2024). A plain cyma reversa and fillet divide the
cornice from the architrave. The dentils above are separated by
ovolos. The modillions project from a plain fascia. Each modillion is finished below as an S-curve, the center enlivened by a
wide, concave channel. The front of the modillion, a plain, vertical rectangle, finishes above in a low cyma reversa and fillet
that extend around the back of the vertical fascia and the coffer
above it to continue on the next modillion. Elegantly conceived
and executed flowers of different types project from the originally
Fig.13.11. Order of the fourth-century CE facade.

(G. Gorski)
23 8
painted backgrounds in the interiors of the shallow coffers, which

are framed by wide fascias. A narrower upper fascia above the
modillions ends at the low cyma reversa and fillet that introduce
the larger cyma recta and fillet that conclude the cornice. Never
used as water spouts, the lion heads on the cyma recta were
purely decorative.45
The Pediment. The marble facing and decorations of the pediment have long since disappeared, but sections of raking cornice
on both sides allow us to re-create its original elevation accurately, and much of its structure still survives. Brick faces the
front. On the back, brick fills the spaces between the travertine imposts above the inner columns, and the imposts support
brick-relieving arches that carry the unfinished concrete back
(Fig.13.6). Only the pier supported by a relieving arch between
the third and fourth columns is faced with brick. The pier supports two travertine blocks on which rested the statue(s) or other
decoration(s) at the apex of the pediment.
The BasilicaJulia
History
The Republic
In 169 BCE, the Roman people elected as one of the two censors
Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, a distinguished member of the
senatorial order, consul, conqueror of the Celtiberians in Spain
and of the Sardi in Sardinia and, for these conquests, recipient of
two triumphs. In that year, motivated by growth of the empire and
the increase in the number of Roman citizens, the quaestors gave
the censors half the state revenues for needed public improvements, and Sempronius used his money to build a basilica, on the
south side of the Forum. The project also incidentally must have
provided a rather handsome profit for Gracchus father-in-law,
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the conqueror of Carthage.
Africanus house stood on a block bounded on the north by the
Roman Forum, on the east by the Vicus Iugarius (General Plan.
IV), on the west by the Vicus Tuscus (Gatefold 1), and to the
south by a street whose name has not survived. Purchasing the
house and the other the buildings on the block, the old shops
14
on the Forum dating from 209 BCE,1 the butchers stalls close by,
and the shops adjacent, Gracchus assembled a spacious plot
for the new basilica he built between the Temples of Castor and
Saturn.2
Occupying the site of later Basilica Julia, Gracchus building,
the Basilica Sempronia, named for Gracchus clan, lasted just
over a century before Caesar replaced it with a new (and probably
strikingly original) building. Dedicated in 46 BCE,3 it survived
for only a few decades.4 In his autobiography, Augustus notes that
Caesars basilica had burned and that, in 12, he had replaced it
with a new structure named for his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius
(Figs. 0.3, 1.45, 14.117, 21.2126).5 For the next century, the
new building was known as the Porticus and Basilica of Gaius
and Lucius or the Porticus Julia (infra, p. 256).6
The Early Empire

The structure quickly became a center for activities in the Forum,
some bizarre. For several days, the emperor Caligula threw from
an upper story large sums of money to a crowd below.7 But,
239
24 0
PART II / The Monuments
Fig.14.1. View looking southwest: the north facade on the Forum restored with a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
CHPATER
Fig.14.2. View looking southwest: the north facade on the Forum restored without a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
241
24 2
official business also regularly attracted the crowds that thronged

the building in the early empire. The letters of Pliny the Younger
picture these activities.8 Of equestrian rank, Pliny became a senator in 80s CE.9 As a senator, he had a successful government
career, ultimately becoming an intimate of the emperor Trajan and
governing the province of Bithynia. For most of his life, however,
he practiced law, and as a young man, he served in cases in the
court of the centumviri that met regularly in the Basilica Julia.
In Plinys day, despite its name (the hundred men), that
sizeable court of appeals on inheritances had 180 members who
usually met in 4 numbered juries of 45 selected by the emperor.10
Separated from the others by wooden screens, each had its own
chairman. Occasionally, for an important case, all four juries
reunited, supervised by a praetor.11 He had an office in the building and an honor guard of lictors. The epitaph of one of these
functionaries proudly records his title and service in the basilica:
Caius OctaviusEucarpusfrom the Basilica Julia. Lictor 3
times.12
Pliny complained that the juries heard very few important
cases, either from the importance of the question or the rank of
the persons concerned,13 but some cases attracted good speakers.
Few surpassed Plinys slightly older contemporary, Trachalus:
Fig.14.3. Ancient graffito from the Basilica Julia showing a soldier or gladiator. (Su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici diRoma)
... when he was speaking, he seemed to tower above his

contemporaries. This was the effect of his height, the fire of his eye,
the authority of his bearing, the impressiveness of his gestures, and
the voice that was ... better than any tragic actor I ever heard. I
CHPATER
well remember when he was speaking in the Basilica Julia before

Tribunal One, and (as is customary) four juries were being empaneled and there was a total uproar everywhere, he could nevertheless be heard and understood and (a thing particularly galling to
the other pleaders) actually applauded in all four Tribunals.14
Most of the attorneys were, however, impudent fellowsobscure

young men, and their audience was even worse: a low rout of
hired mercenariesapplauders by profession. These sat in
benches in front of the jury and gathered around its periphery,
One of Plinys most important cases concerned an aristocratic

lady, Attia Variola, the wife of a man of praetorian rank who had
lost her inheritance when her eighty-year-old father disinherited
her in favor of his new youngwife.
The court was composed of one hundred and eighty jurors;
a host of advocates appeared on both sides; the benches were
infinitely thronged and the spacious court was encompassed by
a circle of people standing several rows deep. In addition, the
tribunal was crowded, and the very galleries crowded with men
and women, hanging over in their eagerness to hear (which was
... and thus it is that those unmerciful shouts are raised, when the
difficult) and see (which was easy).
chorus conductor gives the word. [These auditors hear little and
understand less of the proceedings. They] would be at a loss, without a signal, how to time their applause.... [and] he that has the
loudest commendations is the worst orator.... nothing seems wanting to compleat [sic] this sing-song oratory, but the claps, or rather
the cymbals and tambourines of [the goddess] Cybils votaries.15
The big cases, however, drew crowds who watched them as

entertainment. Even children could not resist the excitement:
Do you see how little Regulus, not yet three years old, harkens
to his father and joins in the applause? How he leaves his mothers lap when he sees his sire and feels his fathers glory as his
own? Already the hubbub and the Hundred Men [the centumviri]
and the dense encircling crowd and the Julian Hall please the
infant.16
Pliny spoke convincingly. Variola recovered her inheritance, and

her stepmother lost her legacy.17
When the cases were over or the centumviri were not in session, the basilica was still busy. Some came to consult the nummulari, the money changers like Titus Flavius Genethlius who
had their offices in the row of new shops on the south side of
the hall.18 Some of these, the successors of the old shops that
had occupied part of the site before Gracchus construction of
the Basilica Sempronia, must have attracted an exclusive clientele. Idlers met and chatted with their friends, watched other
visitors, wandered about, or sat in the arcades, scratching still
preserved, round game boards into the white marble pavement.
Using diameters, they divided some of these boards into sections identified by letters and numbers. Other boards consisted
of circles with smaller circles drawn on or around the internal
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
243
24 4
circumference of the larger figure. Square boards were divided

into smaller squares.19 Some idlers, however, preferred to draw
human figures. A sketch of a man in armor (Fig.14.3) roughly
illustrates either a statue in the Basilica or favorite gladiator from
the amphitheater.20
In 283, the fire that ravaged the Curia across the Forum also
destroyed the Basilica Julia. Diocletian completely restored the
structure on its original plan.21 Diocletians building survived the
sack of 410, and, six years later, the prefect of the city, Gabinius
Vettius Probianus, repaired the damage from the sack.22 The statues he installed have all disappeared, but some of their pedestals
still survive.23 According to the Laterculus of Polemius Silvius
(448449), a well-known Gallic writer,24 the restored basilica
was still in use in his ownday.
After Antiquity
Saint Maria Cannapara. After the time of Silvius, we know
nothing about the structure until the sixth- or seventh-century
installation at the west end of the building, of the small Church of
Santa Maria de Cannapara, St. Mary of the Ropewalk, the medieval name in church catalogues of the twelfth through fifteenth
centuries25 for this area where rope makers apparently laid out the
materials used in their trade.26 Excavated and removed in 1871
(infra, p. 247), this little chapel seems to have been richly furnished. One of its walls closed the west arch on the basilicas north
facade. The others had religious paintings of the sixth century.
The finds in the church included marble fittings with reliefs of

crosses, small columns of alabaster, with parts of the associated
entablature, little capitals in the usual Christian style, and
shafts of porphyry, cipollino, and verde antico from the side aisles
of the church. A beautiful, well-preserved alabaster table decorated with a lions head may have been part of the original furnishings.27 The construction of this church suggests that, although it
was no longer used for trials, the basilica was still relatively well
preserved. By the eighth or ninth century, however, when traces on
the marble pavement of the nave indicate the presence of a small
house,28 the basilica must have fallen intoruin.
The Late Middle Ages. In this period, lime burners destroyed
much of the basilica. A document of 1426 freely granted one of
their companies the right to take down the remains of the basilica, reserving half their production for the papacy. This company
was presumably only the latest of the generations of scavengers
who had quarried the remains of the basilica. In the middle of the
nave, the excavators of 1871 found a lime burners pit filled with
broken statues, bas-reliefs, and cornices with an admixture of
travertine chips from the basilicas internal piers. The lime burners had abandoned it before burning its contents.29
The Renaissance. Nonetheless, compared with the damage
done by later excavators, the depredations of the lime burners
were still relatively minor. In the late fifteenth century, Hadriano
Castellensis de Corneto, the collector of the papal revenues in
CHPATER
14
Fig.14.4. Travertine pilaster (r.) between the north aisle and the nave looking south. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
/ The BasilicaJulia
245
24 6

Fig.14.5. Augustan wall between two of the south shops. (J. Packer su concessione
del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
England,30 started a magnificent new palace near the Vatican

(now Palazzo Torlonia on the Via delle Conciliazione). In 1496,
to supply materials for this project all the travertine in the palace facade came from the Basilica Julia his workmen dug in
an orchard flanked by ruins, the site of the Basilica Julia, then
the property of the former Church of Saint Maria delle Grazie. In
1500, 1511, 1512, and 1514, similar depredations occurred.31 A
list of items licensed for excavation in 1500 suggests the probable richness of the site: marble and travertine stones (lapides)
statues, and other things (alias res).32 Not content with the small
finds, the workers also removed travertine blocks from the piers
and walls of the basilica. When they exhausted those above floor
level, they dug holes 23 m below its pavement.33 Between 1566
and 1572, they unearthed a marble statue of a seated Roman
magistrate.34 The sculptor Flaminio Vacca reworked the head to
represent Caesar covering his head from Brutus, his assassin.
Vacca later sold the statue and sent it to Sicily. According to the
excavators of 1871, the frenzied quarrying of these sixteenth-century scavengers covered the site with strata composed entirely of
cast-off remnants. The lowest, 2 m deep, consisted of earth mixed
with tile and other construction materials, and the second, 1.50
m high, of travertine chips. The third, filled with human bones,
came from the burials at the nearby hospital and Church of Saint
Maria delle Grazie.35
The Eighteenth Century. Unrecorded work probably continued on the site, but the next known excavation took place in
CHPATER
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
247
Fig.14.6. Diocletianic pier on the southwest side of the Basilica. Note the travertine (Augustan?) base
and the travertine block at the spring of the (restored) arch. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i
1742. Laborers cleared the marble pavement at the east end of

the nave, just over the Cloaca Maxima. Removing most of its
giallo antico slabs, they sold them to the stonecutter de Blasii.36
Four decades later, C. F. Friedenheim initiated the first systematic excavation of the monument (November 1788March 1789).
Friedenheim had hoped to show that the Forum continued on
the site for a considerable distance toward the south. Instead, he
found and cleared a part of the basilica. Despite the relentless
excavations of past years, his discoveries were impressive: the
steps along the Forum facade, an inscribed block, two Corinthian
capitals, fallen vaults decorated with stucco figures, a fine piece
of alabaster, and a colossal marble thumb.37
Modern Excavations. In 1834, Luigi Canina began a new
excavation that completely uncovered the remains of the arcade
around the building and brought to light several bases from the
statues put up in the mid-fourth century by Probianus (supra,
p.244). In 18481854, after the papal government bought and
demolished some of the houses built over the site, Canina also
found fragments of piers and vaults embellished with stucco
decorations and new inscriptions from the Temples of Concord
and Vesta. His death in 1856 ended the excavations, and it was
not until 1871 that the Sopraintendenza per gli scavi e la conservazione dei monumenti della provincia di Roma definitively
cleared the basilica. The most spectacular finds were remnants
of the Church of Santa Maria de Cannapara (supra, p.244), miscellaneous statue fragments, part of a colossal porphyry statue,
24 8
Fig.14.7. The core for the large statue base at the northeast corner of the facade looking northwest from the Vicus Tuscus.
(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
a Greek inscription to the emperor Septimius Severus that had

been used to repair the floor of the nave, and various Tuscan
capitals and cornices. Two statue bases inscribed opus Polycleti,
opus Timarchi had supported statues by the noted Greek sculptors Polycleitus (fifthfourth centuries BCE) and Timarchus
(346290 BCE), a son of the famous sculptor Praxiteles.38
The last excavation on the site took place in the early 1960s.
Gianfilippo Carettoni, Giuseppe Lugli, Giuseppina Cerulli-Irelli,
and others from the Archaeological Superintendency of Rome
and the Archaeological School of Rome opened a trench on the
east side of the nave where the marble floor had been removed in
the eighteenth century. Their excavation cleared the neat reticulate walls or foundations of the Augustan building that underlay
the piers of the Diocletianic basilica and revealed two parallel
walls of tufa blocks that may have belonged to the republican
Basilica Sempronia
The Building
Materials
The various excavations have revealed enough of the Diocletianic
basilica and its republican and Augustan predecessors to give a
preliminary account of their construction. As shown by the two
walls excavated by Carettoni and his colleagues, the Basilica
Sempronia was probably constructed of sizeable tufa blocks laid
alternately as headers and strechers.39 The Augustan building
CHPATER
Fig.14.8. The marble floor of the nave in 1852: pav = pavonazzetto; ga = giallo antico; af = africano; cip = cipollino. (G. Gorski)
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
249
25 0
used several different techniques of construction. As in the walls

visible in Carettonis trench on the east side of the nave, some
walls were of concrete faced with reticulate.40 The piers of the
nave, the aisles, and the Porticus Julia were of large-scale travertine blocks (Fig.14.4). The walls that divided the shops from
each other consisted of several courses of tufa blocks separated by
single courses of travertine blocks (Fig.14.5). The wall that separated the shops from the south aisle was again of travertine, and,
as shown by one surviving example, the voussoirs of its arches
were also of travertine.41 These walls and some of the internal
piers of the Augustan building survived the fire of 283CE,42 and
Diocletian incorporated them into his rebuilt structure, which was
largely of brick-faced concrete (Fig.14.6). The piers rest on the
lower sections of the original travertine Augustan piers. At the
spring lines of the arches, there were travertine blocks, the sides
of which must have been configured as decorative moldings. At
the top of each pier, an additional travertine block supported the
concrete vaults. Inside the basilica, the piers were faced with
marble,43 and, in the finished basilica, marble or stucco would
have hidden these different fabrics.
Plan
Fig.14.9. Rosas reconstructed pier on the north facade, looking

southwest. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici
di Roma)
Dimensions and Features. The Basilicas dimensions, 107 m

51 m (Fig.14.12), are impressive: the nave measures 75 m
16 m, and the aisles are 5.50 m wide.44 Since the site rises slowly
from east to west,45 the podium on the east side of the building
CHPATER
Fig.14.10. Basilica Julia, view looking southeast to the north facade on the Forum restored with a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
251
25 2
Fig.14.11. Basilica Julia, view looking southeast to the north facade on the Forum restored without a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
CHPATER
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
253
25 4
Fig.14.13. Restored north elevation with a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
CHPATER
Fig.14.14. Restored north elevation without a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
255
25 6
is 2.50 m above the level of the Forum; on the west side, the
podium is just a single step (about 0.25 m) above the Forums
pavement. From west to east along the north facade, the number
of steps thus increases from one to six. Omitted only on the south
side of the structure, an outer arcade (7 m wide) characterizes
three of the basilicas four facades.46 On the south facade, a row
of thirteen shops replaces the arcade. At the east and west sides
of the building, this row ends with a stair to the second floor and
a broad passage that extended the lateral arcade to the (unexcavated) street south of the building.47 Each shop was the width of
one of the arches on the north facade and had one entrance on the
basilicas south lateral aisle and, very probably, a second, on the
south street behind the basilica (Fig.14.12).48
The Porticus of Gaius and Lucius. The exterior arcade (the
Porticus of Gaius and Lucius/Julia) was, architecturally speaking,
an entirely separate element. In front of each pier on the Forum
facade, a projecting podium supported a statue base, and, in late
antiquity, a colossal base (the brick-faced concrete core of which
still survives) was installed at the northeast corner of the building
(Figs. 14.12, 7, 1017). Two steps separate the porticus from the
stairs to the Forum; an additional step leads from it to the lateral
aisles around the nave. The floor was paved with regular, rectangular slabs of white marble, much of which still survives. The
roof would have been a series of groin vaults, decorated, like the
similar internal vaults over the lateral aisles, with stucco reliefs.
The numerous graffiti (like the one shown in Fig.14.3) scratched
on the pavement (supra, pp. 243244) attest to the popularity of

this shady corridor. Slightly narrower, the lateral aisles replicated
the plan of the porticus and separated the nave from the noise
and distractions of the Forum.
The Nave. The naves elaborate pavement identified it as the
most important part of the building. Generations of tourists
have stolen the marble slabs,49 but a drawing by Alfred-Nicolas
Normand showing the pavement after it was cleared in 1852 preserves the design: three giant squares (Figs. 14.8, 12). The two
lateral ones were of giallo antico, with the central one of pavonazzetto. Africano rectangles separated the three, and narrow borders of giallo antico, pavonazzetto, africano, and cipollino framed
the central elements.50 A spacious, two-story space, the hall got
indirect lighting through the surrounding arcades, and a thirdfloor clerestory admitted direct light.51 The roof and the coffered
ceiling were of wood, probably ornamented with stucco decorations and gilding.52
Statuary. The elegant pavement and the finds of various excavators over the centuries give some indication of the naves expensive decorations. The porphyry fragment of a colossal statue may
have been part of an imperial portrait that could have been located
at one end of the building. Fragments of other statues found in
1500 and 1871 suggest an elaborate sculptural program, perhaps
a statue on a pedestal aligned with each of the piers that framed
the nave.53 The statue of a seated statesman found in the nave in
CHPATER
the mid-sixteenth century54 probably indicates that many of these

works were of noted political figures, orators, or even emperors
and members of the imperial families. The bases for statues by
Polycleitus and Timarchus show also that, at least in the period of
Diocletian and thereafter, the nave was something of a museum.
If, like the lower interior order of the Basilica Aemilia, the frieze
for the engaged Tuscan pilasters featured historical or mythological scenes, their bright colors would have provided additional
visual accents to emphasize the opulent character of thehall.
Modern Reconstructions. After the excavations of the 1850s
and 1870s, the general character of the Basilicas architecture
thus seemed clear, and Rosas reconstructions of missing elements apparently satisfied all doubts. Since the plunderers of
the sixteenth century had removed most of the internal piers,
Rosa rebuilt the lower sections in brick in 1871, and, to give
some indication of the character of the facade of the Porticus
Julia, he put up one of its external marble piers (in travertine).55
Unfortunately, his engaged Doric shaft has no base (Fig.14.9),
and the lower section of a surviving pier on the east facade of
the porticus shows that all the exterior engaged columns originally had Attic bases (Fig. 1.15).56 Nonetheless, almost every
subsequent reconstruction of the building followed Rosas erroneous scheme and omitted these bases. The complete watercolor
reconstruction executed by Ferdinand Dutert for the cole des
Beaux-Arts just after Rosas excavations of 1871 was even more
widely accepted. Dutert assumed that the Porticus Julia and the
internal aisles had all been two stories high and that the roofs of
the porticus and the aisles aligned. Thus for a visitor standing
next to the massive facade of his basilica, it would have loomed
over the south side of the Forum and cut off all views of surrounding buildings.57
Upper Floors. Without clear evidence one way or another,58
the original character of the basilicas design cannot be precisely determined, but its plan suggests a rather different reconstruction (Figs. 1.45, 14.1, 10, 13, 15). Since the floor of the
Porticus Julia is lower than the basilicas aisles, this wing may
have been, as Normand showed in 1850,59 only one story high
(Figs. 14.13, 15). Its roof will then have been a terrace that
would have provided abundant space for visitors to view events
in the Forum or, passing into the corridor above the groundfloor aisles, to overlook proceedings in the interior of the basilica. Extending completely around all four sides of the building,
this terrace would have provided exciting views of the activities in the streets below, and slabs fallen from its pavement
preserve the same kinds of designs as those on its ground floor.
On the second (or third) story, this area was just as popular with
visitors as the arcades below. On the second story, the exterior
of the aisles outer wall would thus have been the facade, its
arches flanked by Ionic half columns.60 The aisles inner wall,
or colonnade, as Normand has suggested (cf. Figs. 14.15 and
16), would have supported the clerestory above the nave.61 A
one-story Porticus Julia would also have allowed visitors on
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
257
25 8
Fig.14.15. Restored west elevation with a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
CHPATER
Fig.14.16. Restored west elevation without a second-story terrace. (G. Gorski)
14
/ The BasilicaJulia
259
26 0
its roof or in the Forum to see the Temple of Jupiter Optimus

Maximus looming over the Forum from the Capitoline Hill.
Moreover, omitting the largely useless second story around the
entire building over the Porticus Julia would have saved much
building material, without significantly affecting the interior.
Construction costs for first Augustus and later Diocletian would
also have been considerably lower. Finally, since the Basilica
Aemilia also had a one-story arcade on the Forum, the facade
of the Basilica Julia would have closely resembled that of its
neighbor across the Forum. By their matching Tuscan arcades,
the two almost contemporary basilicas would have defined the
Forums central open space and given it a tightly planned, uniform character.
Fig.14.17. Restored lower-story order. (G. Gorski)
15
The Arch of Tiberius
History
Varus
The Arch of Tiberius (Figs. 0.34, 1.3, 8.912, 15.16, 21.2226)
was connected with one of the most terrible disasters of the reign
of Augustus. By 9 CE, the Romans were beginning to expand
in Germany. In 6 or 7, Augustus appointed Publius Quinctilius
Varus, a member of the imperial family by marriage, as governor. Varus had enjoyed a long and successful political career
including governorships in Africa (87) and Syria (74).1 In
67, Tiberius, Augustus adopted son and heir, was still fighting in nearby Pannonia, but Germany was relatively peaceful.
With three legions, Varus marched through the partially pacified
zone between the Rhine and the Elbe introducing the inhabitants
both to Roman power and to the Roman administrative system.
Described as placid in mind and body, he was reputed to be more
accustomed to life in the camps than to campaigning. In endless
legal proceedings, he behaved more like a city praetor than
a general in command of an army in hostile German territory.2
Worse yet, treating the Germans like slaves, he exacted money

fromthem.
A revolt was inevitable, and its potential leader, Arminius,
shared Varus mess, seeming so friendly that Varus suspected
nothing. At the last banquet before the beginning of hostilities
(9), Segestes, a local chieftain and Arminius rival, urged Varus to
arrest Arminius and his friends. If they were in Roman custody,
he assured Varus, their leaderless followers would be immobilized. Varus could sort the whole matter out later.3 Varus, however,
refused to listen to any accusations against his friend. Indeed, on
Arminius advice, he broke up the Roman army into small local
units that posted to police duties throughout the province
By forcing Varus to respond to small, local rebellions, the
Germans gradually lured him into the mountainous, nearly impenetrable Teutoburg Forest (Kalkriese near modern Osnabrck),
where Arminius and his people, the Cherusci, had prepared an
ambush. As the lightly armed Germans attacked, continuous wind
and rain added to the Romans difficulties. The heavy underbrush
prevented their foot soldiers and cavalry from fighting in regular
units. Without space for using their spears, bows, and arrows
261
Fig.15.1. Restored view of the east

facade looking west. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.15.2. The plan of the Arch of Tiberius. (G. Gorski)
15
/ The Arch of Tiberius
263
26 4
properly, they were completely disorganized, and, in four days of

continuous attacks, the Germans easily defeated them.4
Varusand all the more prominent officers, fearing that they
should either be captured alive or be killed by their bitterest
foes (for they had already been wounded)took their own lives.
When news of this had spread, none of the rest, even if he had
any strength left, defended himself any longer. Some imitated
their leader, and others, casting aside their arms, allowed anybody who pleased to slay them.Every manand every horse
was cut down without any fear of resistance5
Three legions, the 17th, 18th, and 19th, were lost together with
their military standards. When news of the disaster reached
Augustus,
he was so greatly affected that, for several months in succession,
he cut neither his beard nor his hair, and sometimes he would
dash his head against a door, crying, Quintilius Varus, give me
back my legions! And he observed the day of the disaster each
year as one of sorrow and mourning.6
Germanicus
By 15 CE, Augustus was dead. Tiberius had succeeded to the
throne, and his adopted son Germanicus led an army back toward
the site of the disaster.
Fig.15.3. The Arch of Tiberius on the Arch of Constantine: cast in the Museum of Roman Civilization.
(G.Gorski. Roma, Museo della Civilt Romana. Su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma Capitale)
Chapter
There came upon the Caesar [Germanicus], therefore, a passionate

desire to pay the last tribute to the fallen and their leader, while
the whole army present with him were stirred to pity at the thought
of their kindred, of their friends, ay! and of the chances of battle
and of the lot of mankind. Sending Caecina forward to explore
the secret forest passes and to throw bridges and causeways over
the flooded marshes and treacherous levels, they pursued their
march over the dismal tract, hideous to sight and memory. Varus
first camp with its broad sweep and measured spaces for officers
and eagles, advertised the labors of three legions; then a halfruined wall and shallow ditch showed that there the now broken
15
During his campaigns, Germanicus recovered two of the

legionary standards,8 and the next year (CE 16)saw the dedication of the Arch of Tiberius near the Temple of Saturn
in the Roman Forum commemorating the recovery, under
the leadership of Germanicus and the auspices of Tiberius,
of the eagles lost with Varus.9 The following year, during Germanicus triumph over the Cherusci, the Chatti, the
Angrivarii, and other German tribes (May 26, 17), a procession of spoils and captives, of mimic mountains, rivers, and
battles, again celebrated the events with which the arch was
connected.10
remnant had taken cover. In the plain between were bleaching

bones scattered or in little heaps, as the men had fallen, fleeing or
standing fast. Hard by lay splintered spears and limbs of horses,
while human skulls were nailed prominently on the tree-trunks.
In the neighboring groves stood the savage altars at which they
had slaughtered the tribunes and the chief centurions. Survivors
of the disaster, who had escaped the battle or their chains, told
how here the legates fell, there the eagles were taken, where the
first wound was dealt on Varus, and where he found death by the
The Remains
The first piece of the dedicatory inscription (A) appeared in
Caninas excavations of 1833,11 along with the ruins of a wall
that no one could doubt would have pertained to the piers of
[the] arch:12 Caninas find was later combined with two additional fragments of the same inscription (B, C):
suicidal stroke of his own unhappy hand. They spoke of the tri-
bunal from which Arminius made his harangue, all the gibbets
and torture pits for the prisoners, and the arrogance with which he
assaulted the standards and eagles.
]C[AESARI AVGVSTO]
P O N[TIF. MAX.]
B
R]OMAN[
]M V M[
C
QV[I IN]
F[LVMIN]E
O R I BVS[
And so, six years after the fatal field, a Roman army, present on
Q[VE SVM[
]VTO C[
R[ECIP] 13
the ground, buried the bones of the three legions.
]A M IND[
265
26 6
A second excavation in 1852 produced additional fragments: a

massive section of the foundation and marble fragments from the
structure of the arch. These included a wedge of marble from a triumphal arch, fragments of at least two imposts, and a column shaft
from the corner of the arch. The many fragments from the attic
included some with parts with the inscription (supra, p. 265) and a
corner from the cornice.14 The remains were reburied and cleared
again in 19001901. Accurate studies and a drawing of the foundations (Fig.15.2) showed that the arch had measured 9.30 m
6.30 m. It had four piers indicating a wide central arch and smaller
lateral ones.15 Some fragments of the reliefs may survive,16 but the
only sure view of the arch comes from one of the reliefs from the
north facade of the Arch of Constantine (Fig 15.3).17 Since the
sculptor aligned monuments actually at right angles to each other
(the basilica is actually situated at a ninety-degree angle to the site
of the arch and the Rostra), the arch appears between the Basilica
Julia and the West Rostra. Two Corinthian columns en ressaut
flank the central opening.18 The figures in the relief conceal the
lower part of the arch, and for the sake of uniformity, the sculptor
omits the attic, aligning the cornices of arch and basilica.
from that source and from other roughly contemporary arches:

the honorary gate of Augustus at Rimini, the Arch of Augustus
at Susa, and Kleiners reconstruction of the Arch of Nero.19 Our
restored inscription uses both the fragmentary remnants of the
original, and the account of Germanicus German campaigns
from the Annals of Tacitus:20
SENATVS POPVLVSQVE ROMANVS TI
CAESAREM DIVI AVGVSTI F AVGVSTVM
IMP VII PONTIFICEM MAXIMVM TRIB
POT XIIX COS II IANV HONORAVIT
QVOD
AVSPICIIS SVIS DVCTV GERMANICI
CAESAR QVI IN GERMANIA
MISSVSEST
GENTES GERMANIAE OMNES QVAE
INTER FLVMINA AMISIAM ET LVPIAM
AGENT BRVCTEROS ET CHERVSCOS
The Reconstruction
Our rendering of the arch (Figs. 15.1, 56) is thus based on the
Constantinian relief and the early twentieth-century plan. Its elevation may have been very similar to that of the central section
of the Arch of Augustus, and our architectural details are taken
FRISIOSQVE SVMMA VIRTVTE

DEVINXIT
ET A GALLIA SUMMOVIT SIGNAQ
MILITARIA RECIPERAVIT ET EXERCITVM
PR
Chapter
15
267
26 8
FRADVLENTA CLADE DECEPTVM

OMNIBVS IVSTIS RITE PERACTIS
VINDICAVIT
The Senate and the Roman people honored with an arch Tiberius
Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus, hailed general
seven times, Chief Priest, with tribunician power for the eighteenth time, consul for the second time, because under his own
authority, with the leadership of Germanicus Caesar, who was
sent into Germany, he conquered with the greatest valor all the
peoples of Germany who dwelled between the Amisa and Lupia
rivers, the Bructeri and Cherusci and Frisians, and removed
[them] from Gaul and recovered the military standards and, with
all the due ceremonies properly performed, avenged the army
of the Roman People (which had been) cut off by a deceitful
attack.21
The Schola Xanthi

History
Antiquity
Since we have no literary references to the Schola Xanthi (Figs.
0.34, 1.3, 8.910, 16.15), our reconstruction of its early history is largely conjectural. Possibly Augustan1 or erected during the construction of the Arch of Tiberius and the Temple of
Concord, it was remodeled when Titus and Domitian built the
Temple of Vespasian, and, finally, while Septimius Severus was
putting up his adjacent arch, it was again redone.2 After antiquity, the site disappeared under the rubble that covered the west
end of the Forum, and our only information on it comes from
documents that relate the history of the little Church of Saints
Sergius and Bacchus (built c. 685 CE, destroyed c. 1575). Near
the Arch of Severus, the church faced the Forum, its apse not far
from the three surviving columns of the Temple of Vespasian.3
16
Excavations in the Renaissance

andLater
In August 1539, while digging in front of the church close to
the Temple of Saturn, scavengers uncovered a small but elegant
building with white marble revetments and entablatures.4 The
inscriptions on both sides of the interior entablatures indicated
that this was the Schola Xanthi,5 the office of Xanthus, the
headquarters of one of the scribes, heralds, and curule aediles.6
Commemorating the buildings patrons, the inscriptions also list
its originally elegant fittings:
Interior of the architrave, above:
Caius Avillius Licinius Trosius manager
Created [this] school with his ownmoney
269
Chapter
Fig.16.1. Conjecturally restored east

elevation. (G. Gorski)
Interior of the architrave, below:

Bebryx Drusianus, freedman of Augustus, and A. Fabius
Xanthus, overseers
of the book scribes and heralds and curule aediles, completely
restored [the school]
Seven years after their original excavation (1546), these entablatures, according to Pirro Ligorio, were no longer to be found
since they were broken up and changed for another use.8 Filled
in and inaccessible thereafter, the site was abandoned until
the beginning of the twentieth century, when it was cleared by
Giaccomo Boni in 19001902.9
and adorned it with marble and they took care that the Augustan
victory [= a statue] and the bronze
benches and other ornaments be made from their own money
Exterior of the architrave,above

Bebryx Drusianus, freedman of Augustus and A. Fabius Xanthus
managers
after the dedication of the school gave from their own money the
seven silver images
of the gods and the [Doric] modillions with a bronze tablet
Exterior of the architrave,below

Bebryx Drusianus, freedman of Augustus, and A. Fabius
Xanthus, overseers
of the book scribes and heralds and curule aediles, completely
restored [the school]
and adorned it with marble and they took care that the Augustan
victory [= a statue] and the bronze
benches and other ornaments be made from their own money7
The Remains
Boni uncovered a small trapezoidal structure10 with a white marble pavement (Figs. 16.25).11 The intact north and south walls are
of concrete with white marble revetments.12 The internal veneers
have disappeared, but two slabs of the external white marble facing survive on the north wall (Fig.16.3).13 The north door (Figs.
16.24) led into a narrow alley between the West Rostra and the
Schola Xanthi (Fig.16.5), and the ends of two travertine steps from
the low stairway that runs from the door to the Clivus Capitolinus
are still in situ. The large holes at the bottoms of the revetment
slabs indicate an exterior base molding.14 The inscriptions on the
architraves found in the sixteenth century (supra, p.269) list the
elegant furniture: bronze seats, silver statues of the seven gods,
a marble Augustan victory, Doric modillions, a bronze tablet, and
(colored?) marbles of various kinds and uses.15
According to some scholars, when unearthed in the sixteenth century, the structure had a portico and three rooms.16
Consequently, the existing trapezoidal building cannot be that
16
/ The Schola Xanthi
271
Chapter
16
/ The Schola Xanthi
273
Fig.16.2. General view looking northeast. (J. Packer su

monument.17 Yet, in fact, the sixteenth-century excavators found

no such features. Lanciani and Hlsen reproduce their report:18
When diggers excavated the earth under the temple of Concord
[Saturn] to a great depth, they found a spot where the antae were
joined with entablatures of marble either as a portico or three
rooms in which those who recorded and published public affairs
conducted their business. Thus the excavators did not actually find a portico and/or three rooms, but they only speculated
about their probable existence.19 Consequently, to be recognized
as the Schola Xanthi, the small room that Boni cleared need display no such features.
The unique construction of the walls (a concrete core apparently poured between interior and exterior marble facing) suggests a building only one story high, and, although the front (east)
and back (west) walls do not survive, we hypothesize that the east
facade had a central door flanked by two windows, external cornices to match the exterior base molding, and a gabled, marbletilecovered roof (Fig.16.1).
Fig.16.3. The north wall from the alley between the West Rostra and the Schola Xanthi looking southeast.
(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
27 4
Fig.16.4. The north door looking northeast from the interior of the Schola Xanthi. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
Chapter
Fig.16.5. The alley between the West Rostra and the Schola Xanthi looking east. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
16
/ The Schola Xanthi
275
Fig.17.1. The honorary columns (15A, B in the

foreground) looking northwest along the Via Sacra.
(J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
The Diocletianic
Honorary Columns
History
century, the deep fill that covered most of the central area in
Antiquity
neighboring rostra.
The seven large-scale pedestals that border the north side of
Excavations
17
the Forum hid the remains of the pedestals, the huts, and the
the Via Sacra in front of the Basilica Julia (plans: Figs. 0.1,
17.2) originally supported honorary columns and statues (Figs.
With the excavation of the adjacent Column of Phocas in 1817
0.34, 1.45, 17.16, 21.1516, 2426).1 Identical designs
or 1818, the first two of the bases (labeled 15F, G) reappeared.6
and spacing suggest a single construction project in the reign of
They had, the excavators noted, supported red granite shafts,7
Diocletian.2 The pedestals and their columns survived for two
the fragments of which may still be seen today adjacent to bases
centuries after Diocletians death (311 CE). But, by the early
15E and F (Fig.17.4). During the construction of the walls that
sixth century, although some of the honorary columns may have
buttressed the fill around the Column of Phocas in 1835, the third
still stood, most of the bases, stripped of their decorative mar-
base appeared. When the next four bases were cleared (1872
ble revetments, supported primitive wood-and-masonry huts
1874),8 the attached medieval huts were also revealed and, to
that housed workshops. Some huts were attached to the bases.4
return the forum to its ancient appearance, removed.9 A con-
For others, the builders removed parts of the bases and partially
temporary photograph shows that parts of the exteriors of the two
occupied their interiors. By the beginning of the nineteenth
east bases (15A, B) still stood. The next five (15CG) were only
277
27 8
Fig.17.2. Plan. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
17
/ The Diocletianic Honorary Columns
Fig.17.3. Base numbers 15B, 15A looking northeast. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero
partially preserved, but brick stamps found near several date

them to the reign of Diocletian.10
The Remains
Although the seven bases are of the same size and evenly spaced,
several occupy problematic sites.11 Number 15A stands above
the east edge of the Cloaca Maxima, and numbers 15B and C
on the remains of a small late republican shrine 15B is also
directly above the rectangular space that ends one of the republican tunnels under the Forum. Number 15E is also located above
a similar space.12 Slightly different techniques were thus used to
excavate each foundation trench.
Square in plan, rectangular in elevation, the surviving bases
(numbers 15A, B; Figs. 17.1, 3) are sizeable structures.13 Outer
cores of tufa or peperino blocks framed and supported a concrete
fill, and the exterior walls, of concrete with an aggregate of differently sized marble caementa, are faced with brick.14 The original
marble revetment included white base moldings15 and cornices16
and the same alternation of africano and porphyry that characterized the East and West Rostras.17
In 1898, Giacomo Boni, then director of the excavations of
the Roman Forum, restored two of the best-preserved honorary
columns (numbers 15A, B).18 To support the columns on both
bases, his workers replaced the vanished cores19 and reproduced
the shape of the upper white marble pedestal in brick-faced
concrete.20 Although they did not include the surviving base
279
Chapter
17
Fig.17.4. Red granite shaft from one of the original columns next to the east side of base number
15E. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza
Fig.17.5. The white marble column base on base number 15B

looking northeast. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i
Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
Fig.17.6A. Cap that supported a statue from the top of one of the honorary columns
(leaning against the south side of base number 15B. (J. Packer su concessione del
Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
281
28 2
Fig.17.6B. Probable part of the base molding from one of the pedestals. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
Chapter
moldings (Fig. 17.6B) in their reconstructions, they did insert

the single preserved cornice fragment into the brick reconstruction of the cornice of the pedestal on base number 15B. The
pavonazzetto shaft from base number 15A was set up on base
number 15B, and the fragmentary gray granite shaft found near
the Temple of Castor and Pollux on the adjacent base (number
15A; Fig. 17.1, 3). While the shafts of the last three bases to
the west were in red Egyptian granite, the materials of the other
shafts are unknown.21 The columns had Attic bases of white marble (Fig.17.5),22 and the Corinthian capitals must have been of
the same material. Several of the blocks from the abbreviated,
undecorated architraves on the tops of the capitals still survive.
17
Of white marble, they are simply configured (Fig.17.6A). The

cornice includes several moldings. From the top, they are a wide
fascia, a cyma recta, a low fillet, and a cyma reversa. Its bottom
raised slightly above the upper fascia. The upper fascia projects
over the lowerone.
None of the statues on these architraves has survived, but
since the decorations of the honorary bases and columns harmonized with those of the East and West Rostras and their columns,23 the statues on the honorary columns, like those on the
columns of the Diocletianic Rostra, were probably of porphyry
with heads, arms, and feet of white marble (Figs. 0.34, 1.45,
21.1516, 2426).24
283
Fig.18.1. Tiberian Temple of Castor and Pollux,

view looking southwest. (G. Gorski)
The Temple of
Castor and Pollux
History
The Early Republic
Located close to the Shrine of Vesta (Figs. 0.1, 18.2, 20.1),1 the
Temple of Castor and Pollux2 (famous and important deities
throughout Roman history3) was the largest sacred structure in
the Forum4 and, in all periods, one of its most important centers. It dated from the early fifth century BCE, and tradition connected it with a famous Roman victory over Romes neighbors,
the Latins, near Lake Regillus, fourteen miles from Rome, just
north of Frascati. In this crucial battle for Romes safety, the
Latins had sided with the ousted king of Rome, who had been
expelled some years earlier. In the prosaic account by the Roman
historian Livy,5 the battle was long and hard. Finally, hoping for
divine help, the Roman commander, Aulus Postumius, vowed a
18
temple to Castor and Pollux and promised rewards to the first and
second soldiers to enter the Latin camp.6 Thus encouraged, his
forces bested the Latins. But, for the more credulous, there was a
famous legend about the battle and its aftermath.
As the Roman cavalry (the equites) charged the Latins,
two extraordinarily handsome young men on horses appeared.
Leading the charge, they drove the helpless Latins before
them. When the Romans had captured the Latin camp, the
two appeared again at the Spring of Juturna near the Temple of
Vesta in the Roman Forum. By the disorder of their clothes and
the sweat on their steeds, they appeared to have been fighting,
and, after they had watered their steeds, the Romans gathered
around to ask news of the battle with the Latins. The youths
described the fight and reported the Roman victory. Then, vanishing from the Forum, they were never seen again. The next
day, when a letter from Postumius arrived with news of the
285
28 6
Chapter
18
/ The Temple of Castor and Pollux
Fig.18.2. The Temple of Castor and Pollux looking southeast.

Roman victory, the Romans realized the two handsome strangers were the gods Castor and Pollux, the children of Zeus and
Leda, and accepted Postumius vow for a temple in their honor.7
Postumius died before completing the temple, but, some years
later, his son dedicated it on July 15, 484/483, the anniversary
of the famous battle.8
Since the temple (Fig.18.4A) was founded to commemorate
the victory of the Roman cavalry over the Latins at Lake Regillus,
it was always closely associated with the name of Postumius and
his knights. Honoring Postumius vow, the Senate ordered that,
every year on July 15, the date of his victory, five hundred minae
of silver be expended on a military parade, sacrifices and games
that were regularly celebrated until the beginning of the wars
with Carthage in the third century. In these celebrations, the
chief magistrates led a procession of young knights and foot
soldiers in military order. Charioteers followed, on horseback or
in two- and four-horse chariots. Behind marched the contestants
in athletic contests, naked except for breach clouts. Three bands
of male dancers, older men in bronze helmets with prominent
crests and plumes, young men, and boys followed. Flutes and
ivory lyres accompanied them, and they all wore scarlet tunics
with bronze belts, swords, and short spears. Following traditional
rhythms, a lead dancer directed each group in armed, Pyrrhic
dances. Behind the dancers, capered men dressed as satyrs with
prominent manes on their heads. Wearing goatskins, some had
shaggy tunics, and others, tunics with flowers. These satyrs
poked fun at the military dancers and amused the spectators.
Lyre and flute players followed, preceding censer bearers burning perfumes and frankincense, and men carrying showy vessels of silver and gold that belonged to the state. Statues of the
gods, including Castor and Pollux, concluded the procession.9
Afterward, with a priest in gilded robes officiating, the knights
performed costly sacrifices. Then, at the Temple of Mars at
Porta Capena, armed with shields and spears and crowned with
olive branches, attired in purple robes with stripes of scarlet.
wearing whatever rewards for valor in battle they have received
from their commanders, they began their own parade. Riding
through Rome into the Forum, they passed the Temple of Castor
and Pollux.10 By the time of Augustus, these equestrian parades
took place every four years, but Augustus reorganized the event11
and arranged to celebrate it annually. Henceforth, the equestrians were to be loyal supporters of his new imperial regime, and he
named his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, leaders of the youth
(Principes Iuventutis). In an obvious bit of dynastic propaganda,
they headed the equestrian parade, riding on white horses (like
the Dioscuroi) and holding silver shields and spears given them
by the knights.
More than a shrine, the temple was also one of the most prominent political centers in the Forum.12 In 340/339, the text of an
important treaty between the Romans and the knights of Capua
was set up on a bronze tablet in the temple,13 and statues of heroic
commanders decorated the front of the building.14 For several
centuries thereafter we have little information on the temple, but
archaeological investigations indicate a renovation (Fig. 18.4B)
287
28 8
in the early part of the second century, possibly following the

Battle of Pydna in 168.15 After 117, Lucius Caecilius Metellus
Delmaticus, financing the work from his conquests in Dalmatia,
probably completely rebuilt the structure (Fig.18.4C).16
In front of the Temple of Castor, pro aede Castoris,17 the
speakers platform on the facade (Fig.18.4C), an important staging
area for legislative and judicial assemblies,18 came to symbolize
the temples place in the administration of the Republic. After 159,
the Senate also frequently met in the building,19 and for several
decades, the structure was scrupulously maintained. The whole
roof (probably the ceiling) was beautifully paneled, everything
else in fresh and sound condition.20 But by 70, some repairs may
have been necessary. The ground about the temple was (and still
is) marshy, and some of the columns might have been dangerously
weakened.21 Gaius Verres, the praetor responsible for the job, took
down and set up again several columns without further expense,
stone for stone as before, and then freshly whitened them.22
Cicero, however, claimed that the work had been unnecessary and
accused Verres of fraud. According to Cicero, one of Verres friends
had told him that practically no pillar could possibly be exactly
plumb.23 Thus, since he had intended to profit illegally from the
repairs, Cicero implied, Verres had been certain that no one could
say whether his work had been necessary.
The Late Republic

In the late Republic, many of the most tumultuous political events
of the times centered around the temple. Thus, for example, in
88, when Sulpicius Rufus killed Q Pompeius Rufus, the son of

the consul, he had had been holding a meeting near the Temple
of Castor and Pollux.24 From the Rostra of the temple, the dictator Sulla arbitrarily condemned an enemy to death,25 and in
62, Caesar and his party, seeking to bring Pompey back from his
military campaigns in the East against the opposition of Cato the
Younger, physically fought off Cato, forcing him to take refuge
inside the temple.26 As consul, Caesar spoke from the Rostra in
front of the temple,27 but, the next year (58), Clodius, a tribune and
political agitator, turned the building into a fortress. Removing
its front steps and door, with the help of runaway slaves,28 he
brought weapons into the building and ordered a slave to murder
Pompey. One of Pompeys men wrenched the mans dagger from
him, and he confessed his guilt, but thereafter, Pompey shunned
the forum, shunned the Senate, shunned the public eye.29 In
57, when the tribune Publius Sestius visited the temple, Clodius
gang attacked him with swords and pieces of wood. Sestius collapsed on the floor and survived only because, after his attackers
left him for dead, Lucius Calpurnius Bestia, a candidate for the
aedileship, was able to rescue him.30 After the assassination of
Caesar, Antony addressed the people and made threats against
his enemies from the rostra of the temple,31 and Octavian, during
his struggles with Antony after Caesars death (44), also used the
temple as a rallying point.32
The fate of Metellus Delmaticus building is not entirely clear,
but either the fire that ruined the Basilica Aemilia and threatened
the Temple of Vesta in 14 destroyed or seriously damaged the
temple or it was severely burned in a second fire of 9.33 Tiberius,
Chapter
heir to the throne, undertook the reconstruction. Financed by

the spoils of his conquests,34 the project took several years, and,
when he finally dedicated the new building on January 27, 6 CE
(Figs. 1.2, 1.45, 18.111), he inscribed his name and that of his
deceased brother (Drusus) on the architrave,35 an inscription that
emphasized the major status of the two princes in the imperial
family and identified them with Castor and Pollux.
18
measures inscribed with the name of the temple.41 Since the

neighborhood around the temple, especially Tuscan Street, had
a shady reputation,42 such rooms had exterior metal grills (supra,
p.15). Most of the shops had modest tenants, however. During
the reign of Tiberius, two of the neighboring proprietors were
cobblers. On March 28, 36, their relationship ended violently. As
Pliny the Elder reports,
The Empire
a young raven from a brood hatched on the top of the temple
Caligula and Claudius. Even an extraordinary event in its

early history did not seriously damage the Tiberian temple. The
emperor Caligula (3741) extended the imperial palace on the
Palatine Hill up to the back of the shrine. With the temple as
his vestibule, as he was wont to say, he had the Dioscuroi
for gate keepers, and, seated between the cult statues of Castor
and Pollux, he demanded that his guests worship him as Jupiter
Latiaris.36 After his assassination, his successor, Claudius,
restored to Castor and Pollux their temple, returning it to its
previous state.37
ity, being also commended to the master of the establishment
of Castor and Pollux flew down to a cobblers shop in the vicinby religion. It soon picked up the habit of talking, and every
morning used to fly off to the Platform that faces the forum [the
rostrum] and salute Tiberius and then Germanicus and Drusus
Caesar by name, and next the Roman public passing by, afterward returning to the shop; and it became remarkable by several
years constant performance of this function. This bird the tenant
of the next cobblers shop killed, whether because of his neighbors competition or in a sudden outburst of anger, as he tried
to make out, because some dirt had fallen on his stock of shoes
from its droppings; this caused such a disturbance among the
Other uses of the Temple. Located in the Forums financial

district,38 the temple was also a bank,39 a service probably housed
in one or more of the shops built into the narrow, rectangular
spaces between the stone piers that supported the columns at
the sides of the cella (Figs. 18.3, 10). Some rooms in the podium
seem to have been bank vaults, called Loricata,40 and another
(or others) may have housed surviving round bronze weights and
public that the man was first driven out of the district and later
actually made away with, and the birds funeral was celebrated
with a vast crowd of followers, the draped bier being carried on
the shoulders of two Ethiopians and in front of it going in procession a flute player and all kinds of wreathes right to the pyre
which had been erected on the right hand side of the Appian
Way at the second mile stone.43
289
29 0
After final repairs by Domitian,44 the restored temple served as

a venerable imperial landmark,45 and, in the later empire, the
Senate continued to meet there. At the momentous session of June
238, it appointed the proconsul Gordian (the governor of Africa)
emperor,46 and, in a session in the building in October 251, it
named one of its members, Valerian (later briefly emperor), as
censor.47
The MiddleAges
Fragments of the temples superstructure found in a late fourthcentury CE wall that separated the Spring of Juturna from the
temple suggest that, by that date, it had already begun to fall
into ruins. For more than a thousand years, scavengers removed
stone from the site until, in the reign of Pope Eugenius IV
(14311447), the name of a street of three columns (Via tria
columniarum) shows that the remains of the temple had been
reduced to the surviving structure (Figs. 18.23, 5).48 Sixteenthcentury architects regularly drew the columns, but excavators
seeking further spoils in 1773 found only small fragments of colored marbles (probably from the interior), and an excavation by
Francesco Piranesi, son of the famous artist, had meager results.
In 1816, a scaffolding around the columns enabled the French
architect Jean-Tilman Franois Suys to draw the order from
closely observed detail, and, the same year, Carlo Fea and the
French architect Auguste Caristie separately carried out similar
investigations around the temples columns, its front stair, and
its southwest corner.49
Excavations
In 1870, Pietro Rosa excavated the west side of the temple along
the Vicus Tuscus, cleared the front stair, and found fragments of
the entablature of the Tiberian building, an early black and white
mosaic floor and a fluted, stuccoed column fragment of a tufa from
one of the earlier temples.50 In 1896, after minor excavations and
extensive on-site study, Otto Richter produced a restored plan and
elevations,51 and in 1900, Giaccomo Boni restored and strengthened the standing columns. Clearing the back of the temple, he
found various large architectural fragments including parts of
bases and shafts from fallen columns.52 The Scandinavian excavations of 19831989 investigated evidence for the original fifthcentury BCE temple (Fig.18.4A), the reconstructions of 168 and
117 BCE (Figs. 18.4BC), Tiberius handsome marble structure
of 6 CE (Figs. 18.12, 811), and the evidence for its earlyruin.
The Building
The Early Temple
While the Tiberian temple is not well preserved, its podium incorporates the remains of is predecessors. These include the fragmentary walls of private houses that preceded the construction of the
first temple;53 the remnants of that structure, built in the fifth century
BCE in a style reminiscent of the temples in Etruscan cities like
Pyrgi and Caere (Fig.18.4A);54 a remodeled shrine dated after 200
Fig.18.3. East side of the podium looking northwest showing the preserved podium base moldings and the shop entrances.
(G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
(Fig.18.4B3);55 and the building of 117 (Fig.18.4C).56 The original

temple of 496 was a massive structure, 27.50 m wide (93 Roman
feet) 3740 m (125135 Roman feet) long, on a podium nearly
5 m high.57 Following the precedent set by the Temple of Jupiter
Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill, the tetrastyle front porch
had three rows of widely spaced columns and was slightly deeper
(19 m) than the three-room cella (18 m).58 Its middle chamber was
somewhat wider (8.60 m) than the two lateral ones (8.30 m), and
all three were about 18 m deep. The foundations, the outer walls,
and the columns were of tufa blocks originally probably stuccoed.
The interior walls may have been of sun-dried brick.59 The wooden
entablature and the roof were decorated with colored, finely executed terracotta revetments, acroteria,60 and statues.
The Temple in the Late Republic

Aemilius Paullus. By the beginning of the second century BCE,
this temple was old fashioned, and it was remodeled in 168,
possibly by Aemilius Paullus, the conqueror of King Perseus of
Macedonia. The reconstruction (Fig.18.4B) left unchanged the
back of the high podium and the three rooms of the cella but radically altered the facade and front porch. The two rows of columns
on the pronaos were removed, and the front of the podium was
cut down to create a tribunal 11 m wide, 6.50 m deep. Lateral
stairs accessed the new tribunal from the adjacent streets, and
from it a stair flanked by extensions of the podium led to the front
porch. With the removal of the inner row of columns, the interior
29 2
Fig.18.4. Tentative plans of the stages in the development of the Temple of Castor and Pollux: A. 496 BCE; B. 168 BCE?; C. 117 BCE. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
of the porch was now completely open. More closely spaced, the
columns on the facade increased in number from four to six, but,
without any surviving fragments, their order is uncertain. Bits
of painted stucco suggest an interior decorated in the so-called
First Style used at Pompeii, and the floor seems to have had a
white mosaic. A terracotta door frame in Hellenistic style survives, and the terracotta architectural decorations on the wooden
entablature exhibited Hellenistic designs. The wooden roof was
also enriched with the fine terracotta architectural revetments
and statues typical of the period.61
Metellus Delmaticus. The last rebuilding of the temple during the Roman Republic (Fig.18.4C) in 117 BCE by Metellus
Delmaticus (supra, p. 288) resulted, over several years, in a
completely new structure assembled on the podium of the older
temples. Two adjoining concrete, earth-filled boxes made up
the foundations the tribunal, the pronaos or porch, and the cella
(Fig.18.2) and there may have been shops along the sides of
the podium. A long front stair and two small lateral stairways
accessed the tribunal at the front of the building. From the tribunal, steps between the columns led up to the pronaos or porch.
Since the width of the temple was not enlarged, the eight columns on the facade were closely spaced with intercolumniations
of 1.5diameters (pycnostyle). On each side of the porch, the columns on the facade and a rectangular lateral pier framed two
inner columns that created a double colonnade. On each side
of the square cella (14.50 m 14.50 m), much smaller than its
18
predecessor, there was now space for an external lateral colonnade. The precise arrangement of the back of the building is not
clear. Either the colonnade continued around the rear facade,
or, ending at a pier projecting from the back wall of the cella,
it left the rear facade blank. The walls and columns above the
foundations were of stuccoed travertine, and the order was either
Corinthian or Ionic (both popular styles at the end of the second century BCE).62 The columns have not survived, but since
they were stuccoed,63 the shafts probably had tufa drums and
travertine capitals.64 The interior of the cella was elaborately finished. The walls were decorated in the Pompeian First Style (faux
marbles and stucco moldings).65 A meander framed the original
floor in black and white mosaic.66 The external border of the later
opus sectile floor emphasized adjacent lozenges laid in a star
pattern.67
The Imperial Temple of Tiberius

Podium and Walls. The Tiberian temple reproduced the plan
of its Metellan predecessor (Figs. 18.4C, 8).68 Roughly the same
size, it used finer materials and benefitted from the work of superb
architectural sculptors (Fig.18.6). Like the Metellan building, its
podium69 had three sections for the tribunal, for the pronaos,
and for the cella and rose nearly 7 m above the pavement of
the Forum (Figs. 18.2, 3).70 Concrete faced the earth fill inside
the podium. Thick walls of Anio tufa and adjacent travertine
blocks reinforced and protected the exterior and supported the
293
29 4
columns. Barrel vaults between them roofed square rooms (each

side about 2.67 m long; Figs. 18.3, 10) used as shops or storage
spaces (supra, pp. 1415). As indicated by the in situ elements,
the veneer was of Luna marble, the same material used for the
columns and entablature.71 On the sides and back of the podium,
simple moldings served as bases for the flat pilasters that flanked
the shop doors. Above them, a cornice projected to form the pilaster capitals. Aligned with the three surviving columns, pilaster
bases are still in position, although the cornice is known only from
detached fragments. Above this cornice was a second base molding, its profile similar to that of an Attic column base, and the profile of the podium concluded with a cornice and a fillet.72
At the front of the building, two narrow, lateral stairs initially
gave access to the tribunal, and from the tribunal, an upper stair,
flanked by extensions of the podium, led to the pronaos. At the
end of the second century CE, some time before the period of
Septimius Severus (when the temple appears on a fragment of
the Forma Urbis),73 the tribunal was removed, and, while the lateral stairs survived framed by low walls, the central stair was
extended down to the Forum pavement (Figs. 18.89).74 This was
essentially the form in which the stairs were photographed in
1871 after the buildings excavation the previous year.75
The Order and Pediment. The number of columns on the
four facades (thirty-four) and the plan of the pronaos replicated
those of the Metellan temple (Fig.18.4C), and the external colonnade extended around the back of the building (Fig. 18.8).
The Corinthian order (Figs. 18.56, 911) has several distinctive

characteristics:
The sizeable columns have variable diameters that were
approximately 1.48 m (5 Roman feet). They are 14.82 m (50
Roman feet) high.76 Supported on Composite bases with
square plinths and double scotias separated by two half
rounds,77 the fluted shafts are assembled in drums, originally
probably all of different heights.
The capitals are more richly ornamented than usual.
Acanthus leaves embellish the volutes, and the helices are
intertwined. On some of the capitals, the left helix overlies the
right one; others reverse this scheme (Fig. 18.5).78 The fleuron
is really no flower but a poppy capsule surrounded by acanthus
foliage.79 The upper molding of the abacus is an ovolo decorated
with egg-and-dart, and the cavetto below with acanthus-leaf-andflowers that spring from chalices placed in the spaces between
the volutes and helices.80
The entablature is 3.70 m high (12.50 Roman feet).81
The architrave is divided into three fascia. An astragal, a
fillet, and half round with bead-and-reel separate the lower and
middle fasciae; a cyma reversa with shear-shaped leaf-and-dart
separates the middle and upper one. The middle fascia is decorated
with a relief of alternating lotus-and-inverted-palmette separated
by S-shaped scrolls with thin, raised rims.82 A half round with
bead-and-reel separates the upper fascia from the cyma reversa
with normal-leaf-and-dart that terminates the architrave. Acanthus
leaves replace the usual tongues of the trilobed elements.83
Chapter
18
295
The smoothly finished frieze is undecorated.

The moldings of the cornice (from the top) are a fillet;
an undecorated cyma recta with decorative, nonfunctional lionshead rain spouts;84 a fillet; an ovolo with egg-and-dart; a corona
with hollow tongue; a cyma reversa with shear-shaped leafand-dart; modillions separated by soffits with coffers that frame
rosettes; a fillet; a cyma reversa decorated with a pattern similar
to that which crowns the architrave; a half round with bead-andreel; a fillet; dentils separated by spaces that end above with low,
recessed fillets; an ovolo with egg-and-dart, a half round, with
bead-and-reel; and a low fillet that divides the cornice from the
frieze.85
The vanished pediment would almost certainly have had a
frieze and statues at its apex and corners (Figs. 18.1, 9).86 More
than 5.93 m high (20 Roman feet), it brought the height of the
whole building to more than 30 m, well over 100 Roman feet.87
The Cella. Since nothing remains of the cella, we can only theorize about its detailing. Its lateral walls probably ended on the
facade as square pilasters profiled on three faces (Fig. 18.8).
Two-sided pilasters would have decorated the back corners.
The interior was completely stripped of its decorations, which
were perhaps removed for subsequent reuse.88 The few surviving
remnants do, however, give some idea of what has been lost. A
fragment of a base ornamented with oak leaves suggests richly
decorated architectural elements.89 A lower order on a podium
of red marble (like a fragment found in the vicinity of the ruins)
Fig.18.5. The in situ capitals looking east. On the right two capitals, the right helix covers the left helix;
on the left one, the left helix covers the right one. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
29 6
Fig.18.7. The southeast corner of the (back) tympanum. (G. Gorski

Fig.18.6. The in situ cornice. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
may have decorated the sides of the cella.90 Twenty-five fragments of small, fluted giallo antico columns must belong to the
shafts,91 and the capitals (none of which survive), like those
from the interiors of the Temples of Mars Ultor and Concord,
may have been Corinthianizing, substituting the heads of horses

for the usual volutes.92 The frieze of the lower order included
reliefs of swans, and the superimposed order above may have
had pavonazzetto shafts.93 Numerous marble and granite fragments rosso antico, africano, green serpentine, basalt, gray
marble, alabaster, pink marble with black veins, gray granite,
and porphyry hint at sumptuous interior revetments lavishly laid out as brilliantly colored foils to the cult statues along
the back wall.94 The foundations for their pedestal are sizable,
(3.35 m 11.70 m). They were, therefore, almost certainly
over life-size and that of Castor may have been covered in thin
sheets of gold.95
Chapter
Fig.18.8. Tiberian Temple, plan (late second century CE). (G. Gorski)
18
297
29 8
Fig.18.9. Tiberian Temple of Castor and Pollux, restored north facade (late second century CE). (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.18.10. Tiberian Temple of Castor and Pollux, restored west facade. (G. Gorski)
18
299
30 0
Fig.18.11. Tiberian Temple

of Castor and Pollux, restored
order. (G. Gorski)
The Parthian
Arch of Augustus
(19BCE)
History 1
Crassus in Parthia
On May 6, 53 BCE, Marcus Licinius Crassus, triumvir with
Pompey and Caesar, consul in 55 BCE, arrived near Carrhae, a
small town near the Balihu River, a tributary of the Euphrates
in northwest Mesopotamia.2 He was marching to the western
Parthian capital of Seleucia3 with seven legions of heavily armed
troops, 4,000 cavalry, and 4,000 light-armed soldiers, a massive expeditionary force totaling between 42,000 and 50,000
19
with a military reputation equal to that of his fellow triumvirs.

Unfortunately, he had neither the military ability of Pompey
nor the genius of Caesar, and his Parthian campaign had been
unpopular when proposed in Rome. Had Crassus not been
ambitious, wrote Cicero later, he would never have crossed the
Euphrates.5 A tribune, Gaius Ateius Capito, and a large band
of his adherents opposed the departure of the expedition on the
grounds that anyone should go out to wage war on men who had
done the state no wrong, but were in treaty relations with it. Yet,
since Pompey accompanied the troops out of the city, when they
(Ateius followers)saw
men.4 If all went according to plan, he would capture Seleucia
Pompeys beaming countenance in front of him [Crassus], they
and conquer Parthia, an achievement that would provide him
were mollified and gave way in silence.but Ateius ran on ahead
301
Chapter
19
/ The Parthian Arch of Augustus ( 1 9 b c e )
Fig.19.1. The Arch of Augustus, restored, view

looking souteast. (G. Gorski)
to the city gate, placed there a blazing brazier, and when Crassus
came up, cast incense and libations upon it, and invoked curses
which were dreadful and terrifying in themselves, and were reinforced by sundry strange and dreadful gods, whom he summoned
and called by name. The Romans say that these mysterious and
ancient curses have such power that no one involved in them
ever escapes, and misfortune falls also upon the one who utters
them ... accordingly at this time they found fault with Ateius
because it was for the citys sake that he was angered at Crassus,
and yet he had involved the city in curses which awakened much
superstitious terror.6
This was the first of many evil omens.7

Crassus initially occupied several cities in a Parthian province in northern Mesopotamia and then retired to winter quarters
in Syria (54 BCE). When the campaign continued the next year,
his forces crossed the Euphrates at Zeugma. Marching down the
rivers east bank to Seleucia, his troops would have water and
provisions, and the Greeks of Seleucia, virtually a suburb of the
Parthian capital at Ctesiphon, might welcome a Roman army and
turn against their Parthian overlords. Had Crassus followed this
plan, he might well have defeated the Parthians. Instead, a local
chieftain lured him away from the river, treacherously urging him
to attack a supposedly small Parthian force led by the famous
Parthian general Surenas.8
The march from the Euphrates to the Balihu near Carrhae
was exhausting. The men were tired and thirsty, and, when they
Fig.19.2. The Arch of Augustus, the pier between the central and lateral openings looking
southwest. The fragments on it include the lower section of an engaged Corinthian capital
from the central wing, and the duplicate of a well-preserved Doric column from one of
the lateral wings (cf. Figs. 19.811). (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
303
30 4
and his sons youthful cavalry escort, immediately assaulted the

small and presumably disorganized Parthian force that opposed
his advance. This was a serious miscalculation.
Surenas, the Parthian commander, a brilliant young military strategist of high rank, had hidden most of his soldiers. A
camel core (Surenas invention) continuously supplied arrows to
his troops 1,000 heavily armed cavalry and 10,000 mounted
archers.9 Together they rapidly immobilized Crassus larger
army. Surrounding the Romans, the Parthian archers rained
arrows down on their hapless enemies. Against such tactics,
their shields offered little protection. Crassus son, Publius,
charged the attackers and was killed. Crassus himself held out
until dark, but the next day, the Parthians captured and killed
him. Of his vast force only 10,000 escaped. The rest of his men
died,10 and the Parthians captured Crassus legionary standards.
One of Romes worst military disasters, it was a long-lasting
national disgrace.
Fig.19.3. The Arch of Augustus, the reconstructed pediment from one of the lateral wings in the court
of the Palatine offices of the Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma. (J. Packer
su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
reached the Balihu, their officers suggested a rest by the river.

After reconnoitering, they could attack the next day. Crassus,
however, influenced by demands for prompt action from his son
Caesar, Mark Antony,

and Augustus
Before his assassination, Caesar had planned a new Parthian
campaign,11 and, in fact, his lieutenant, Mark Antony, did campaign unsuccessfully in Parthia later.12 But, when Augustus came
to power in 31 BCE, he followed a course of prudent diplomacy
with the Parthians, and, by 20, he had induced the Parthian king
to return Crassus standards and the captives taken during Mark
Antonys expedition.13 On his return from this mission in 19 BCE,
Chapter
19
305
Augustus celebrated an ovation, a minor triumph, and, says Dio

Cassius, he was honored with a triumphal arch.14 Officially, he
claimed, I compelled the Parthians to restore to me the spoils
and standards of three Roman armies and to ask as suppliants for
the friendship of the Roman people. Those standards I deposited
in the innermost shrine of the Temple of Mars the Avenger.15 By
the time Tiberius, Augustus stepson (and heir), reconstructed
the adjacent Temple of Castor and Pollux in CE 6, the arch was
probably complete.16
The Monument
Site and Remains
An ancient source locates the arch commemorating the return
of Crassus standards iuxta aedem divi Iulii (next to the temple of the divine Julius),17 and, just south of the temple, the
remains of an arch with three bays have been excavated (Figs.
0.1, 18.2, 19.2). These are the foundations of the arch built after
19 BCE. Some remains were uncovered in the sixteenth century,
but most of our information derives from nineteenth- and twentieth-century excavations (1872,18 1888, 1899, 1949, 19501952,
19861991).19 These showed that the arch stood on a concrete
foundation in a space 18 m 6 m overlaid, at the positions of the
central piers and lateral columns, by a layer of travertine blocks
(Fig.19.2).20 The central passage has a width of 4.13 m (14 Roman
feet), and the side passages of 2.66 m (9 Roman feet).21 Only the
Fig.19.4. The soffit with a coffer and one of the mutules. (J. Packer su concessione del Ministero per i Beni
e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma)
central piers are now still visible. On the north one, part of the
interior base and base molding survives. Above are Proconnesian
blocks,22 one of the engaged Corinthian capitals from the central bay, and a reproduction of an elaborate Tuscan capital from
30 6
one of the lateral bays (the original is in the storerooms of the

Archaeological Superintendency).23 On the south central pier,
part of the base and base molding is extant, and above, another
Proconnesian marble block. A very large number of richly decorated Luna marble fragments from the other parts of the arch
also survive.24 Most of these fragments belong to the entablature
and pediment of a lateral bay (Figs. 19.34, 6, 8, 11), but during
excavations in 19501952, Riccardo Gamberini Mongenet found
parts of the tabernacle that housed the Fasti Consulares (the lists
of consuls) and pieces of the flanking pilasters inscribed with the
Fasti Triumphales, the lists of those who had celebrated triumphs
(Fig.19.9).25
A New Reconstruction
Fig. 19.5. Two denarii (A, B) and an

aureus (C): obverses, head of Augustus;
reverses, the Parthian Arch. (A. Classical
Numismatic Group, Inc.; B. Used by permission of Freeman & Sear; C. Classical
Numismatic Group)
These materials, together with those uncovered in the earlier excavations, provide many of the original architectural
elements. At the conclusion of his excavations, therefore,
Gamberini Mongenet and architect Giovanni Ioppolo assembled their new reconstruction, basing it in part on coins issued
at Rome and in the provinces to commemorate the arch. A coin
stamped in the capital under the direction of Lucius Vinicius
(16 BCE), one of the three tresviri monetales (the government
coin commission), is particularly important.26 Its reverse shows
the arch (Fig.19.5A, B). The central bay is slightly less than
one and a half times as high as its width, and the columns that
flank the central arch stand on the ground. An inscription in the
Chapter
attic gives the initial words of the original inscription: S.P.Q.R./

IMP CAE. Slightly earlier coins from the western provinces in
gold and silver (aurei and denarii) probably preserve the complete inscription (Fig.19.5C):27
S P QR
IMP CAES AVG COS XI TRI POT VI
(obverse)
CIVIB ET SIGN MILIT A PART RECVP
(reverse)
The Senate and Roman People to the emperor Caesar Augustus,
Consul for the 11th time, holder of the Tribunician Power for the
sixth time, on the occasion of the recovery of citizens and military standards from the Parthians.
In the two smaller lateral bays of Vinicius coin, columns support an entablature and pediment. On the apex of both pediments, a podium (widened by the die maker) is a sizeable statue:
a Parthian identified by his high, conical hat, a loosely fitting
long-sleeved shirt, and tight pants. In his right hand, he holds
a bow, and in his left, a standard raised toward the figure of
Augustus in the quadriga on the central bay. Augustus stretches
out his right arm in a beneficent gesture and lifts his left arm.28
19
Ioppolo and Gamberini Monganet used this image as the

basis of their reconstruction (Fig.19.6). As Ioppolos elevation
shows (the surviving architectural fragments shaded), they had,
for the side bays, in addition to the excavated foundations, a
complete fluted column (base, shaft, and capital), other small
column fragments, and parts of the entablatures and pediments.
The foundations provided the horizontal dimensions of the central bay, and the restorers based its height on the proportions
shown on the coin (where its height equals one and a half times
its width) and those derived from the dimensions of surviving fragments: a base, a shaft fragment, and a capital from the
Corinthian order.
The Corinthian columns raise a problem, however. As we
have seen, Vinicius coin (Fig.19.5AB) shows their bases on the
ground. Yet, as the Ioppolo/Gamberini Monganet drawing indicates, parts of the cornice and the base molding of the pedestal on
which the columns stood still survived (Fig.19.6). If Ioppolo had
simply enlarged the columns and omitted the podium, the columns
could not have had the same proportions as the surviving capital
and entablature fragments. In short, in this particular, Vinicius
image seems to have been incorrect, and it may represent an earlier design later modified by the on-site builders. Consequently
our reconstruction (infra, p. 413 unnumbered n. for Chap. 19) follows the Joppolo-Gamberini-Mongenet drawing, not the images on
Vinicius denarii (Figs. 19.56,89).
307
30 8
Fig.19.6. The Arch of Augustus, restoration of R. Gamberini Mongenet, drawing by G. Ioppolo. All the darkened fragments still apparently survived in the early 1950s,
when Ioppolo executed this drawing. (Fototeca Unione, FU4789)
Chapter
19
309
31 0
Fig.19.8. Restored west (Forum) elevation. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.19.9. Restored south lateral elevation. (G. Gorski)
19
Fig.19.10. Restored center order. (G. Gorski)
311
31 2
Fig.19.11. Restored lateral

order. (G. Gorski)
The Temple
ofVesta
History
Early Republic
Foundation. The Temple of Vesta (Figs. 0.1, 3, 20.119), one
of the oldest sacred buildings in the Roman Forum, was first
built by Numa Pompilius, Romes second king (715673 BCE)
and founder of the order of Vestals.1 As Romulus had shaped
the military and political character of the early Roman state, so,
says Plutarch, Numa, an austere religious man, gave Roman religion its earliest form. He established state priests (the pontifices
or those who build bridges between the human and divine) and
became their chief, the Pontifex Maximus.2 As a pious ruler concerned about the relations between his subjects and their gods,
Numa was particularly interested in the cult of Vesta, believed to
be a sister of Jupiter and patron of the domestic hearth. As a symbol of the goddess close association with the state, her temple
20
was set up at the southeast side of the Forum, near the Fountain
of Juturna3 and the Temple of Castor and Pollux,4 just across from
the Regia, traditionally supposed to be the palace of the kings
and, after the establishment of the Roman Republic in 509 BCE,
the ceremonial office for the Pontifex Maximus (Figs. 0.1, 1.5,
1314).5 Never formally considered a temple,6 Vestas shrine was
unconsecrated. Indeed, it lacked a cult statue,7 and the representation of the goddess stood nearby in the Aedicula Vestae, a
small tabernacle next to the entrance to the house of the Vestal
Virgins.8
The Vestal Virgins. Six freeborn, aristocratic ladies formally
sworn to celibacy served Vesta from childhood to maturity (from
six to thirty-six years). In their first ten years, they learned their
sacred duties; in their next ten, they carried them out; in their
last ten, they taught them to the younger Vestals. After thirtysix, a Vestal might resign her priesthood and marry, but, notes
313
Chapter
20
Fig.20.1. Restored view (roof according to

Hlsen) looking west. (G. Gorski)
Fig.20.2. Aureus of Nero: obverse, bust of Nero; reverse, the Temple

of Vesta. (Gorny & Moesch Giessener, Stuttgart)
Fig.20.3. Aureus of Vespasian: obverse, head of Vespasian; reverse,

the temple of Vesta with Corinthian columns. (Numismatica Ars
Classica NACAG)
Fig.20.4. Aureus of Julia Domina: obverse, bust of the empress;

reverse, Julia Domna presenting the rebuilt temple to the Pontifex
Maximus (her husband) and the head Vestal with an attendant (one
of the other Vestals?). (Leu NumismatikAG)
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, although some, though very few,

have done thisthey came to ends that were not at all happy
or enviable.9 Most spent their entire lives as priestesses. Their
fellow citizens treated them with deep respect, and they had
important legal and social privileges (like special seats at the
Colosseum). Yet, they had to dress and behave decorously, and,
for minor misdeeds, the pontiffs might scourge them with rods.
A Vestal who had sexual relations or had allowed the sacred fire
of Vesta to go out (an omen said to foretell the destruction of
Rome) was conveyed, as if deceased, in a funeral-like procession
to the Colline Gate, where she was interred in a subterranean
cell with small amounts of food and water.10 The entrance to the
cell was buried, and the hapless priestess was left to die. Events
/ The Temple ofVesta
315
31 6
of this kind were very rare, however, and most Vestals normally
spent their days preparing sacred grain for sacrifices and tending Vestas holy fire. Kindled every year in March, it burned in
her temple throughout the year, the symbol of Romes safety and
prosperity.11
Destruction of the Early Temple. Some learned Romans saw
the round plan of the Vestas temple as a symbol of a spherical
universe that, according to Pythagorean philosophers, had fire
at its center.12 Others traced the temples plan back to Romes
earliest round huts, primitive buildings with thatched, conical
roofs and walls of willow branches.13 Although fires destroyed
the temple several times during the ten centuries of its formal
use, they usually started elsewhere. The Gauls, who, according to Livy and Diodorus Siculus, invaded and burned much
of Rome in the early fourth century BCE, destroyed the temple, but immediately after their return to the ruined shrine, the
Vestals rekindled their sacred fire.14 The fire of 241 may indeed
have started in the temple itself. Immobilized by fear of the
flames, the Vestals made no attempt to save the cult objects, and
Lucius Caecilius Metellus, the Pontifex Maximus, had to break
into the temple (from which tradition barred him), seize the cult
objects, and carry them off to safety.15 The flames blinded him,
but a vote of the people allowed Metellus to ride to meetings of
the Senate in a chariot. A great and sublime privilege for him,
says Pliny the Elder, but paid for by hiseyes.16
Enraged by the execution of their fathers for disloyalty

to Rome in the struggle against Hannibal during the Second
Punic War, young Capuan nobles set fires in and around the
Forum in 210. Adjacent shops and houses burned, but thirteen slaves the state later purchased and freed them for their
heroism managed to save the Temple of Vesta.17 In 14, the
Basilica Aemilia burned, and fire again threatened the Temple
of Vesta. The Vestals rescued the sacred objects, and, although
the neighboring basilica had to be entirely rebuilt, the temple
survived.
The Empire
In 64 CE, the great fire of Neros reign again destroyed the temple along with most of Rome.18 As shown on some of his coins,
Nero started reconstruction of the temple (Fig. 20.2),19 and
the historian Tacitus records the murder at its door, of Lucius
Calpurnius Piso, the adopted son of Galba, Neros successor.20
During the military revolt of Otho, after the murder of Galba,
he had hidden, with the help of a sympathizer, in the temple.
As Vespasians coins with representations of the temple suggest
(Figs. 2.1, 20.3), the final work on the reconstruction probably
took place during the reign of Vespasian and would have been
largely complete by 73CE.21
In 192, a fire, started perhaps by a minor earthquake,
completely destroyed the neighboring Forum of Peace (Gatefold
1) and burned for several days.22 The Temple of Antoninus and
Chapter
Faustina was saved, but, for the last time in antiquity, the Temple
of Vesta was destroyed. Julia Domna, wife of the new emperor
Septimius Severus, rebuilt it (Fig. 20.4),23 and in this reincarnation it lasted until, as a mark of Christian piety, the emperor
Theodosius finally suppressed the cult of Vesta nearly two centuries later (394 CE).24
After Antiquity
The Renaissance. Without its cult the ruins of the Severan
building survived more than a thousand years of neglect. The roof
almost certainly collapsed, taking with it parts of the intercolumnar walls, but in 1497 Fra Giocondo could still report significant
remains.25 These lasted for only another few decades. On July 22,
1540, a decree of Pope Paul III encouraged work crews for Saint
Peters Basilica to look for new materials by excavating stones,
both marble and travertine, even columns, throughout Rome,26
and in the next ten years the popes zealous scavengers destroyed
most of the surviving ancient structures in the Forum, including the Temple of Vesta and the surrounding buildings (1549).27
Earth fill, rising to nearly a third the original height of the adjacent Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, buried the fragments
that remained.
Modern Excavations. Modern archaeological work began on
the site in the late nineteenth century. In 1877, archaeologist
20
R.Lanciani undertook the initial scientific excavation, publishing his results in 1884.28 He uncovered parts of the entablature and ceiling of the circular colonnade around the exterior
of the cella, and Jordans later drawings provide clear, accurate
measured representations of the architectural fragments and a
sketch of the restored order.29 From 1898 to 1900, Giaccomo
Boni, director of the Roman Forum, undertook a new series of
excavations, which were published in 1900. His careful work
includes measured plans and sections of the temple foundations
(precisely indicating and dating its various strata), photographs
and drawings of the principal architectural elements, a restored
plan of the building, and a measured section/elevation of the
exterior order (Fig.20.5).30
The Work of Bartoli. Finally, in 19301931, Alfonso Bartoli,
Bonis successor as director of the Forum, reerected two and
a half bays of the structure, embedding the largest and best
preserved of the surviving Luna marble fragments in a modern, full-size travertine matrix that today stands in the Forum
on the site of the temple (Figs. 20.911). He based this work
on a series of lively, handsome drawings (preserved in the files
of the Archaeological Superintendency of Rome) by engineer/
architect Luigi Crema (Figs. 20.68)31 and others. In her recent
study of the temple, Francesca Caprioli publishes some of
Cremas drawings and includes a new digital reconstruction of
the building.32
317
31 8
Fig.20.5. Bonis measured drawing of the order of the Temple of Vesta. The darker elements
are those Boni found during his excavations. (G. Gorski)
Fig.20.6. Section of the restored colonnade of the Temple of Vesta.

(G.Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
Chapter
20
319
The Building
Numismatic and Sculptural Evidence
for the Republican Temple
Republican coins and those from the early empire show that,
in its earlier phases, the Temple of Vesta was always a round
building on a high podium with an approximately conical roof
(Figs. 20.23).33 On a marble relief from the Uffizi in Florence
that dates from before the great fire of the reign of Nero (64 CE,
Fig.1.19),34 each projection from the podium supports a column
with a fluted shaft and a Corinthianizing capital with Ionic volutes
above a band of pointed leaves.35 The undecorated entablature
supports a low, conical roof, divided into two sections. The outer
one sheltered the exterior colonnade, and the inner, the cella.
Protected by gilding, thin, bronze tiles probably covered both.36
The entrance appears to have been built into the exterior colonnade. Thus the building may have actually been an open tholos
in which only the screens in the intercolumniations (so carefully
rendered in the relief) closed off the interior. Alternatively, the
sculptor may have intended to show an exterior colonnade with
screens in front of a circular cellawall.
The Severan Temple

Cremas Drawings. Whatever the architecture of the early
empire, we are well informed about that of the Severan temple.
Fig.20.7. Drawing of a restored section of the ceiling in the colonnade of the Temple of Vesta. Top to
bottom: the cornice seen from below; the outlines (broken lines) of the column shafts (circles), column
capitals (concave lines), and the soffit panels between them in the external colonnade (dotted lines); the
two rows of coffers with individualized rosettes between the colonnade and the curved wall of the cella.
The cella wall (double lines) links the column shafts and capitals. The soffit panels outside and inside
the wall are narrower than those between the external columns (cf. Fig.20.11). (L. Crema, Drawing
95[0?]/95, su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i
32 0

Fig.20.9. Section of the Temple of Vesta in the Forum restored after Luigi
Cremas drawings. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit
Fig.20.8. Column fragments

with wall segment from the
entrance to the temple. (Luigi
Crema, Drawing 892/40, su
concessione del Ministero per
i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Chapter
Cremas plan (used for Fig.20.14), his accompanying drawings of

the surviving architectural fragments, and the partial reconstruction in the Forum that Bartoli based on these materials (Figs.
20.613) provide the evidence for the present reconstruction
(Figs. 20.1419).37
Podium. Although the modern reconstruction in the Forum repositions only a few of its decorated fragments, the podium,38 with
a diameter of about 50 Roman feet (14.80 m), and the attached
pedestals that supported the columns, were elaborately decorated
(Figs. 20.56, 9, 1213, 1518).39
The base begins with a high plinth.40 The lower torus was
decorated with lance-shaped leaves with berries bound at intervals with crossed ribbons. A narrow fillet separated the torus from
a wide, reversed cyma recta ornamented with vines that formed
semicircular patterns open at the top of the molding (where the
ends formed opposed scrolls) and alternately enclosing reversed,
vertical acanthus plants and palmettes. At the bottom of the molding, small, semicircular seashells occupied the spaces between
the larger semicircular vine patterns. Long, reversed acanthus
leaves decorated the corners. Above are two low moldings: a half
round with water-leaf (?) and a cavetto with hollow tongue.
Dado. All the sections were rectangular, but the fronts of the
projections were narrower, and their sides, narrower still. Every
section (including the sides of the projections) featured a central
panel, and all had identical outer frames: wide fasciae, bordered
by narrow cyma reversas decorated with shear-shaped leaf-and-
20
dart. On the projections, the frames for the central reliefs began
with an outer cyma reversa with shear-shaped leaf-and-dart, a
plain and narrow fillet, and a half round with beads followed. On
the wider panels between the projections, the moldings around
the center relief started with an outer cyma reversa with shearshaped leaf-and-dart. An undecorated fillet at the top and sides
of the relief widened as a fascia at the bottom of the panel. Inside
the top and sides of the panel a wide, undecorated cyma reversa
ended at the fascia. On the sides of the projections, this interior
cyma reversa continued around all four sides of the panel. All the
panels had figurative reliefs, but their subjects are not well preserved, although we assume single figures in the projection panels, and groups in those between the projections (Figs. 20.56, 9,
1213, 1518).
Cornice. Shear-shaped leaf-and-dart with serrated edges
decorated the lower cavetto. A low fillet separated it from a half
round with bead-and-reel. The ovolo above was decorated with
egg-and-dart, the points of the darts completely rendered as
arrowheads. The spaces between the dentils left a filletlike interval above them. On the fillets between the dentils, central round
holes intersected the fillets lower edges. The half round that
separated the dentils from the cyma recta above was finished as a
continuous row of beads. On the cyma recta, palmettes alternated
with acanthus plants, and a plain fillet completed the cornice.
Lower Base. Set on the cornice (the faces aligned with the
column base below), this element had decorated sides: bucrania
linked by festoons framed by two fillets, one inside the other.
321
32 2
Stair and Entrance. Cremas plan (Fig. 20.14) shows the

position and character of the stair and entrance.41 His stair is
four bays wide. The upper treads pass between the columns on
the facade; the center door is the width of a single intercolumniation. Basing his conception on the Severan aureus that shows
the temple door (Fig.20.4), Crema assumes that the two bays
that flanked the door were identically configured with bronze
screens. Flanked by columns with bases and shafts identical
to those of the central bay, the lateral openings also served as
additional entrances. The screens in all three bays were decorative, and, providing most of the daylight that reached the
interior, they recalled perhaps the appearance of the building
in its earlier phases. For the columns in these three screen/
door bays, Crema uses the column bases with tabs in back42
documented originally by Jordan and Boni.43 A second drawing from the Soprintendenza Archeologica44 combines these
bases with shafts ornamented at the sides with decorative
moldings (Fig. 20.8). Crema here suggests that the decorated
tabs begin on the bases and continue up the shafts, ending at
approximately two-thirds their height. The upper third of the
shaft would have been normally configured. Thus in the central opening, screens two-thirds the height of the flanking column shafts would have served as doors. The decorative bands
on the flanking columns show that the door screens were supported but by vertical, circular hinges, rather like extended
rods, embedded in the floor of the podium and attached to the
bronze screens above thedoor.
Main Floor. The Corinthian columns of the outer order had Attic
bases with double scotias, their plinths on the low, decorated bases
described above (pp. 321322).45 The fluted, cabled shafts were
all originally cut from single pieces of Luna marble. Cremas drawings46 and Bartolis reconstruction in the Forum show that narrow
wall segments (about 0.14 m or a little less than half a Roman foot
wide) joined the row of inner columns around the cella.47 Since
these segments were so thin, they stabilized the columns but provided only incidental support for the roof. The few fragments of
these walls that survive were enough to give Bartoli the design of
the exterior pattern (faux marble blocks), and he embedded some
of these original marble fragments which appear darker in his
reconstruction (Fig. 20.9).48 The colonnades supported a marble
ceiling enlivened by two rows of coffers (Figs. 20.7, 11). The inner
row is smaller than the outer, but ovolos with egg-and-dart frame
both, the arrows again sharply pointed. The rosettes differ from
panel to panel.49
Screens between the Columns? Cremas sections also eliminate the screens earlier reconstructions show between the columns of the exterior portico.50
These would have had to have been supported on tangs in
sockets aligned with the centers of the shafts. Yet, positioned
above the spaces between the projecting podia under the columns, they would have been useless for securing the interior of
the building.51 Thus, as the Severan aureus shows (Fig.20.4),
Chapter
20
323
Fig.20.10. The Crema reconstruction: detail of the entablatures showing ancient (marble) and modern
(travertine) fragments. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali
the only screens in the building must have been those between
the columns flanking the door and in the adjacentbays.
Entablature. The decorations of the entablature were very similar to those of the podium (Figs. 20.5, 911,19).
Architrave/frieze blocks.
Soffit. Under the architrave (profiled on both sides) were
decorated soffit panels, thinner between the columns along the
cella wall, and wider between the outer columns. They were all
enclosed by cyma reversa frames with shear-shaped leaf-anddart, and the curved centers of the short ends mark the positions of the fleurons of the Corinthian capitals. Only the ends of
the external panels survive (visible in Bartolis reconstruction
of the outer order), but Crema restores the interior design as
lance-shaped leaves with berries bound by ribbons.52 The narrower centers of the panels between the interior columns were
plain.
Exterior and interior elevations. The profiles of both
sides were identical, but only the exterior was decorated. The
fasciae were successively higher from bottom to top. Half rounds
separate the lower and middle fasciae. The lower (exterior) one
is decorated with bead-and-reel, and the upper with beads. The
cyma reversa is finished with shear-shaped leaf-and-dart, and a
fillet crowns the architrave.
The frieze. The bottom of the frieze (externally and internally) curves upward from the top of the architrave. Serially
positioned bucrania frame the repeated elements of the frieze: a
32 4
Fig.20.11. Crema reconstruction: detail of a Corinthian capital, the architrave and the coffered
ceiling of the colonnade (cf. Fig.20.6). (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le
bucranium, a vase (oinocchoe), a sacred band for the priestess

forehead (infula), an axe (securis), a spray of laurel, a dish (patera). A fillet marks the upper end of the frieze.53
Exterior cornice. The interior and exterior cornices are the
same size, but since the exterior cornice is decorated, its profile
differs from the interior cornice. It begins (at the bottom) with
a fillet followed by a cyma reversa finished with shear-shaped
leaf-and-dart. Double fillets (the upper one narrower and higher)
separate the dentils above. The following half round is embellished with bead-and-reel. The ovolo is decorated with egg-anddart (the darts with sharp, arrowlike points), and the modillions,
finished below with acanthus leaves, feature lateral scrolls. The
back ones are loosely curled and shallowly cut into the surface
of the modillion. Between the modillions are soffit panels with
rosettes framed by a shear-shaped leaf-and-dart that continues
across the tops of the modillions. In the interiors of the coffers,
plain fasciae frame the rosettes. The undecorated corona above
terminates with a low cyma reversa ornamented with shearshaped leaf-and-dart. A low fillet separates it from a cyma recta
with reversed water-leaf (the leaves with serrated edges), and a
final fillet concludes the decoration.54
Interior cornice begins with a fillet followed by a cyma
reversa, a fillet, an ovolo, a fillet, a fascia, a fillet, a cyma recta,
and a fillet.
Roof. Although the inner row of columns and the wall segments
in the intercolumniations between them supported the interior
Chapter
Fig.20.12. Podium: Elevation, side, one of the projections. (G.Gorski

20
325
Fig.20.13. Podium, elevation, front of a projection and one of the spaces between the projections.
(G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
32 6
Chapter
Fig.20.15. Restored front elevation, roof after Severan coin (Fig.20.4). (G. Gorski)
20
327
32 8
Fig.20.16. Restored lateral elevation, roof after Severan coin (Fig.20.4). (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.20.17. Restored front elevation, roof after Ch. Hlsen. (G. Gorski)
20
329
33 0
Fig.20.18. Restored lateral elevation, roof after Ch. Hlsen. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
20
ceiling and the roof, light construction of this kind could not have
sustained the domes of some earlier reconstructions.55 Thus, like
that of the earlier temple, the slightly curved roof would have
consisted of timber trusses protected externally by thin sheets
of gilded bronze (Figs. 20.1, 1518).56 To direct smoke from the
sacred fire to the chimney in the roof, the interior ceiling might
also have been conically shaped with coffers very similar to the
ones in the marble ceiling in the exterior colonnade. Of wood
with decorative plaster, it will, however, have been considerably
lighter.
Fig.20.19. Restored external

order. (G. Gorski)
331
PartIII.
Conclusions
Fig.21.1. The emperor

Constantine addresses the
citizens of Rome, 312 CE.
(G. Gorski)
Conclusions
The AugustanForum
Purpose
Augustus, as we have seen, continued Caesars projects and had,

by the end of his reign (14 CE), totally rebuilt the Forum (Figs.
21.2, 21). Beginning with the Temple of Caesar (dedicated in 29
BCE), he ended by sponsoring Tiberius reconstruction of the
Temple of Concord (dedicated in 6 CE). This work concluded
centuries of piecemeal change: new buildings and monuments
that related only incidentally to one another and to the architecture of the Forum as a whole. In contrast, the design, materials,
and detailing of Augustus structures were the homogenous products of local craftsmen and numerous imported, highly experienced Hellenistic artisans. Enormous in scale, crafted from local
materials and Italian and foreign marbles, superbly finished and
detailed, they recalled, equaled, and even surpassed the structures in the great urban centers of the Greek East. Components
of a single design, worked out gradually over three and a half
decades, they all displayed four distinguishing characteristics:
purpose, siting, design, and decoration.
Augustus and his associates evidently considered the existing state

of the Forum inviolable. That is, they generally did not demolish extant structures to erect substitutes. The Temple of Caesar,
the new flanking arches, and Augustus enlargement of Caesars
West Rostra marked the major exceptions to this rule (Figs. 0.34,
8.12). But for the temple, popular demand after Caesars assassination had already sanctioned a memorial column on the site,
and the triumvirs who had preceded Augustus rise to power (and
included Augustus himself) had decided on a new shrine. Indeed,
for a youthful autocrat whose initial claim to power rested on the
success and prestige of his adoptive father, deification of and a
temple to that father were a political necessity. For the decorative arches that flanked the temple the Parthian Arch on the
south, the Arch of Lucius Caesar on the north (Figs. 0.3, 1.2)
major political and dynastic achievements, diplomatic success
abroad (the Parthian Arch), and the promise of future dynastic
stability at home (the Arch of Lucius Caesar) offered acceptable
reasons. And, for Augustus enlargement of Caesars Rostra (Figs.
21
335
33 6
Part III / Conclusions
0.4, 1.3), a need for more space is probably the best explanation.
All Augustus other Forum projects were restorations: after fires
(the Temples of Castor and Concord, Figs. 1.34; the Julian and
Aemilian Basilicas, Figs. 1.56) or after an unpopular demolition
(the Curia Julia, which replaced the Republican Curia Hostilia,
Fig.1.6). Moreover, since all these projects were, as had always
been the case for the Forums earlier monuments, expressions of
the patrons power and prestige, they commemorated the achievements of Augustus and his relatives. While glorifying him and his
clan, they also visualized the themes of his propaganda. Indeed,
by their size, by their expensive materials, and by their intricately
executed ornaments, they also represented a highly evolved, layered reflection of the states relationship to its gods and to nature.
These were the buildings through which Augustus displayed the
power and majesty of the omnipotent empire that had incorporated the people and resources of the Mediterranean.
Siting
Although not revealed by casual observation of the Forums
plan, the careful psychological and physical relationships
among Augustus new buildings appeared most clearly when
the ancient visitor explored the Forum at ground level. At the
Arch of Augustus (Figs. 0.1, 1.2, 19.1), steps closed the south
Via Sacra to vehicular traffic, a feature that indicates that the
opposite Arch of Lucius Caesar, located between the Temple
of Caesar and the Basilica Aemilia (Figs. 1.2, 4, 5.20), was the
primary entrance to the Forum. To appreciate the theatrical

effect of the site, movement was essential. As the visitor moved
west along the Via Sacra toward the Forum, the street began
to narrow between the Temple of Antonius and Faustina and
the Regia. The Arch of Lucius Caesar further constricted the
pedestrians view, heightening the contrast for the overwhelming vision that greeted him beyond. Framed by the front of the
podium of the Temple of Caesar and the facades of the Basilica
Aemilia and the Temple of Castor and Pollux, this carefully
composed scene revealed the full extent of the Forums complete Augustan architectural ensemble and its visual relationship to the temples on the Capitoline Hill particularly the
shrines of Jupiter Optimus Maximus and Juno Moneta historically Romes most sacred spots (Fig.1.3).
To enter the Forum from the Argiletum, the visitor walked
south between the Curia and the Basilica Aemilia (Fig.21.3A).
To his left, the corner of the Basilica Aemilia appeared as a onestory arcade with an attic. Curiously, this wall ended at a corner
that, uncharacteristically for much of classical architecture, was
less than ninety degrees. What was the purpose for this? Was
the consequent slight shift of the street to the west a deliberate
manipulation by the architects to direct the south-bound pedestrian to a spot where, at the intersection of the Argiletum and the
Via Sacra, he faced the exact center of the Basilica Julias facade
across the piazza (Fig.21.3A)? At this point the piers of the basilica aligned so that he could see through its center arcade to the
other side of the building.
Fig.21.2. Roman Forum, from above, late fourth century. (G. Gorski)
Fig.21.3. Plan: A, sight line from the intersection of the Argiletum and Via Sacra through the center of the Basilica Julia; B, sight line from the Vicus Tuscus through the center of
the Basilica Aemilia. C, sight line from the Vicus Iugarius terminating at the Milliarium Aurem Urbis; D, sight line from the Clivus Argentarius terminating at the Umbilicus Urbis
Romae/Mundus; sight line from the Vicus Tuscus to the south branch of the Via Sacra and the Basilica Aemilia. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.21.4. View A (Fig.21.3), looking south from the intersection of the Argelitum and the Via Sacra. (G. Gorski)
21
/Conclusions
339
34 0
In plan, the Basilica Julia appears to be a massive structure

supported by a forest of piers. Moving around the structure at
ground level just as the ancient Romans would have seen it, a
three-dimensional computer model reveals the remarkable character of the plan. By virtue of its regularly positioned piers, its
lack of exterior walls, and its openings on four sides, the structure, despite its great size and ponderous construction, is transparent and light (Fig.14.12). As the visitor moved around and
past the building, his views toward the interior recomposed,
aligning the interior piers with four axes: the two major ones and
those at forty-five degrees. Vantage points where the columns
align gave the building a sense of transparency most noticeable
near the buildings corners. Enhancing this feature, sunlight
illuminating the light-colored pavement in the external arcade
reflected light onto the piers and vaults, darkening toward the
interior. On sunny days the clerestory would have brightly illuminated the nave, silhouetting people and columns inside creating a light-dark-light-dark contrast, drawing the visitor in toward
the center of the building (Fig.21.6). Movement made the effect
even more dramatic. The curtains and screens put up at different times to mark off particular areas for trials would have temporarily negated these visual effects, but since these partitions
were not permanent, they would only briefly have obstructed the
transparency that characterized what would otherwise have been
a ponderously heavy building.
The same carefully calculated effect also occurs at the opposite side of the Forum. Walking north along the Vicus Tuscus, the
visitor, as he came into the piazza and looked across its width,
discovered at least before the East Rostra was added that he
was aligned with the center arcade of the Basilica Aemilia, and
that from this position he could see through the entire width of the
building to its opposite side (Figs. 21.7, 8). The Temple of Caesar
blocked his view to the northeast, but when he looked toward the
northwest corner of the Basilica Aemilia, he would have observed
the same transparency as in the Basilica Julia: the piers aligned on
a forty-five-degree axis that revealed views to the street beyond.
Other temples in the Forum also were sited to form carefully
orchestrated visual relationships. The exception was the Temple of
Saturn. One of the first temples constructed in the Forum, it was
sited by factors presently unknown. Similarly regarding the Temple
of Castor, Tiberius oriented the shrine parallel to the east facade of
the Basilica Julia just across the Vicus Iugarius, following the outline
of the earlier temple on the site (Figs. 14.1011, Gatefold 1). As for
the other Forum temples, Augustus architects and their successors
carefully worked out orientations often for political reasons that
meticulously related each shrine to its neighbors. Looking east from
the cella of Vespasians Temple, the visitor would have seen that
its axis aligned with that of the Temple of Vesta (Fig.21.10:45),
recalling Vespasians restoration of Vestas shrine.
Similarly the orientation of the surviving foundations of the
Temple of Caesar suggests that from its cella the statue of the
deified Caesar looked across the Forum to the shrine of Concord,
the gift of Tiberius, Caesars adopted grandson (Figs. 21.10:31,
13).1 Turned toward Hadrians Temple of Venus and Rome, the
Chapter
21
/Conclusions
341
Fig.21.5. View A (Fig.21.3), looking south from the intersection of the Argelitum and the Via Sacra after the addition of the Diocletianic columns and the Column of Phocas. (G.
Gorski)
34 2
Fig.21.6. View looking southeast to the interior of the Basilica Julia. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.21.7. View B (Fig.21.3),

looking north along the Vicus
Tuscus toward the Basilica
Aemilia. (G. Gorski)
Fig.21.8. View B (Fig.21.3), looking

north along the Vicus Tuscus toward
the Basilica Aemilia, after the
addition of East Rostra. (G. Gorski)
21
/Conclusions
343
34 4
Design
Temples. The size of the Augustan temples in the Forum varied according to site. With a more restricted plan, the Temple
of Caesar had a smaller order than the Temples of Concord and
Castor (Figs. 4.8, 9.9, 18.9),2 but Concords imperial order reproduced the size of its republican predecessor.3 In the Temples of
both Caesar and (until the later empire) Castor, a speakers platform occupied parts of the front stairs. That had been a traditional
republican feature, and the temple of Caesar may have occupied
part of the site of an earlier Rostra for the urban praetor, the
Gradus Aurelii/Tribunal Aurelium (Fig. 1.1).4 Otherwise, the
plans of the Augustan temples followed the architectural traditions of the late Republic: a high podium, an impressive front stair,
a deep front porch, and the cella, the house for the deity.5
Fig.21.9. View C (Fig.21.3), looking north from the Vicus Iugarius to the Milliarium Aureum. (G. Gorski)
axis of the Temple of Concord aligned with the center of the Arch
of Lucius Caesar on the Via Sacra between the Temple of Caesar
and the Basilica Aemilia (Figs. 21.10:12), again reaffirming the
close connections between the princes of the Julio-Claudian family (Figs. 21.10:21,13).
Basilicas. The designs for Augustus basilicas, probably based

on what Caesar had already implemented in the Basilica Julia
prior to his assassination, were more original. The Doric arcades
on the facades (Figs. 1.4, 6) reflected that of the facade of the
Tabularium looking down from its pivotal position on the slopes of
the Capitoline Hill (Fig. 21.21).6 After Augustus, these arcades,
extending on three sides of the Forum (Fig.0.1), gave the piazza a
unity that it had lacked in the late Republic when colonnades (of
various designs and eras?) had hidden the facades of the basilicas and (perhaps) of the adjacent houses (Fig. 1.1). The new
arcades also recalled famous recent landmarks (like the lofty,
superimposed arcades on the facade of the Theater of Pompey),
Chapter
21
/Conclusions
Fig.21.10. Plan, view 12, looking east from the Temple of Concord to the Arch of Gaius and Lucius; view 31, looking northeast from the Temple of Caesar to the temple of
Concord; view 45, looking southeast from the porch of the Temple of Vespasian to the Temple of Vesta. (G. Gorski)
345
34 6
and, since they repeated an urban feature then visible along

many of Romes most up-to-date streets, they gave the Forum a
progressive new look.7 Their vaults stabilized the surrounding structures and easily supported upper floors and terraces.
But Augustus architects still used these new vaults sparingly.
The walls that supported them were of stone, and only the vaults
themselves were of concrete. And in both basilicas, arcades made
up only part of the structure. In the Basilica Julia, they formed a
series of concentric rectangles that framed the nave (Fig.14.12).
The walls of the upper floors of the nave were probably of stone
and supported a wooden, timber-truss roof with marble tiles and
a coffered ceiling below.8 In the Basilica Aemilia, they constituted a two-and-a-half-story commercial building: in front of the
shops, a grand arcade with four interior entrances to the basilica,
mezzanine apartments over the shops, a terrace above (Figs. 5.1,
1820). Again, however, in the Augustan structure,9 stone veneer
faced interiors. The basilica behind the arcade was splendidly
decorated but conventionally structured with stone walls and a
woodenroof.
The Parthian Arch. The Parthian Arch between the
Temples of Caesar and Castor was another highly original
Augustan structure (Fig. 19.1). Conceptually related to gateways, such monuments had normally been rectangular blocks,
supports for statuary over arched passages. Instead, the
Parthian Arch had two additional, lateral bays, and all three
supported statuary. The position and greater size of the central
Fig.21.11. View looking east from the porch of the Temple of Vespasian. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
21
/Conclusions
347
wing indicated its primary importance, but the colossal statues

it carried the victorious emperor clad in military garb conveyed in a quadriga was one of the earliest uses of a group
that would become commonplace on later triumphal arches.10
The conquered barbarians (here Parthians) who offered their
weapons to the emperor from pedestals on the pediments of the
lateral wings were also a new feature. Even more noteworthy,
the arch mirrored the surrounding buildings. Facing Hadrians
Temple of Venus and Rome, the pediments of the lateral wings
quoted those of the neighboring Temples of Caesar and Castor
(Fig.0.3, 1.2), and the complete facade conceptually mirrored
the pattern of the Forums new east end: a Corinthian structure
flanked by Doric arcades.11 Refined and elaborately decorated,
the Doric orders of the arch echoed those of the flanking basilicas and of the Tabulariums distant Doric arcade (Fig. 21.21).
And the archs Parthians not only represented the enemies over
whom Augustus had triumphed; they also obviously referred to
the long line of their sculpted countrymen on the attic facade of
the Basilica Aemilia (Figs. 1.6, 5.1,19).
Decoration
Replacing the older stuccoed buildings of the Republic,
Augustus structures were all of white marble whether Italian
or Greek with numerous painted accents. Only interior walls
and pavements had the lavish colored marbles that had recently
become so popular with the wealthy upper classes. The new
Fig.21.12. View looking east from the porch of the Temple of Vespasian, after the addition of the Diocletianic
columns. (G. Gorski)
34 8
materials and the taste for them came largely from the great
Hellenistic capitals of the East, the same places that popularized the prototypes of the architectural orders used throughout
the Forum. While tradition sanctioned the incorporation of the
Doric order in the basilicas and, very probably, in both the south
arches,12 Augustus substituted modern forms for the outmoded
style of the Tabularium Doric with its thick shafts and small,
plain capitals.13 His new Doric monuments echoed the current
styles of the Hellenistic world: richly decorated, they had lavishly detailed entablatures and, sometimes, as in the Parthian
Arch, idiosyncratically profiled shafts with reverse entasis (cf.
Figs. 5.21, 19.1, 6,8).14
In almost all the new temples, the Corinthian order replaced
its formerly dominant Ionic rival.15 Over the course of Augustus
reign, the order underwent a gradual evolution as it too became
more complicated. For the simple profiles of the cornice on
the Temples of Caesar and Saturn (Figs. 4.10, 13.7, 11), it
substitutedthe complex, richly detailed style that characterized
the Temples of Concord and Castor (Figs. 9.11, 18.11).
Consistently present is the organizing element of rhythm,
established by light and dark shadow patterns created by sharply
or vaguely defined geometric shapes. The carvings display a
sophisticated awareness of the effects of reflected light. Smallscale detail rewarded ever-closer inspection. On vertical surfaces ornament was often organized in horizontal bands or fields
of repetitive elements that recall chanting or dance. Ornament
frequently appears at edges or transitional zones: where the roof
Fig.21.13. View from the porch of the Temple of Caesar looking west to the Temple of Concord.
(G. Gorski)
Chapter
21
/Conclusions
349
met the sky or the columns met the entablature. Color further
heightened these effects. Surfaces overhead were often heavily
decorated. Representations of procreation and regeneration are
reoccurring themes: the ubiquitous egg-and-dart, rosettes and
flowers in various states of maturation, pine cones (a symbol of
eternal life) that terminate a run of dentils at the corners of many
entablatures, even the juxtaposed curves of the popular normalleaf-and-dart pattern (Fig.21.20), nothing less than conventionalized representations of female genitalia, combined to impregnate
the architecture with the effervescence of life (Figs. 9.5, 21.19
20). Mimetically reimagined by the Romans as living beings,
these buildings are infused with a vitality that transcends their
inert matter. Indeed, the vast expenses the emperors incurred in
acquiring and transporting the building materials and the laborious craftsmanship and artistic skill their artisans applied to them
were so many testaments to their societys collective hope and
faith in the future of the empire.
The FlavianForum
The Temple ofVesta
Augustus remodeled Forum, a completely new architectural
ensemble, was so visually satisfying that none of his Julio-Claudian
successors significantly changed it. But, for the subsequent Flavian
dynasty (6996), an addition to the site, the prestige of which still
apparently outranked that of the splendid new imperial fora of
Fig.21.14. View from the porch of the Temple of Caesar looking west after the construction of the East
Rostra and the Diocletianic columns. (G. Gorski)
35 0
Fig.21.15. View looking west along the lower Via Sacra between the Basilica Julia (with a terrace), and the Diocletianic honorary columns. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
Fig.21.16. View looking west along the lower Via Sacra between the Basilica Julia and the Diocletianic honorary columns. (G. Gorski)
21
/Conclusions
351
35 2
Caesar and Augustus, was an essential exercise in public relations.

Vespasian began by reconstructing the Temple of Vesta (Figs. 2.1,
20.3), destroyed in the great fire of Neros reign, but a reconstruction, while considered an essential governmental duty, did not
convey the same prestige as an entirely new building. Hence,
after Vespasians death and deification in 79, his sons, Titus and
Domitian, dedicated to him a decorously ornamented and proportioned shrine next to the Temple of Concord (Figs. 10.1,89).
The Temple of Vespasian andTitus

By its size and location, the new building discreetly amplified the
Augustan layout of the west end of the Forum. Its smaller size did
not challenge Concords imposing bulk next door, and its hexastyle
facade echoed that of its neighbor (Figs. 1.3, 21.22). In complexity and style, the decorations of the new building matched those of
Concord but with discrete modern variations. Like the columns
of the Temple of Castor (and probably of Concord), those of Vespasian
had fluted white marble shafts assembled from drums (Figs. 10.2,
18.911). Yet unlike the columns of Concord, those of Vespasian
had plain bases and standardized Corinthian capitals (which, however, as in the Temple of Castor, had decorated abacuses). The cornices of Vespasian and Concord were similarly complex, although,
following contemporary Flavian tastes in architectural ornament,
that of Vespasian was slightly more ornate with thinner modillions articulated from below by artfully rendered acanthus leaves.16
Nonetheless, its cleverly chosen site, modest size, tasteful design,
Fig.21.17. Cornice from the Temple of Concord, with a normal-leaf-and-dart pattern with rosettes
(second molding from the top). (G. Gorski. Roma, su Concessione della Sovraintendenza di Roma
Capitale)
Chapter
21
/Conclusions
and finely crafted decoration immediately integrated the new building into the preexisting Augustan complex. Equally well received
was the two-story Portico of the Dei Consentes next door (Figs. 12.1,
12), a small shrine with offices behind an L-shaped colonnade with
another row of offices (?) downstairs.
The Equestrian Statue of Domitian

Domitians infamous equestrian statue next to the east end of the
Basilica Julia was not so fortunate (Fig.2.3). Hiding a major section of that basilica from viewers in the central Forum, its vast
size obstructed the graceful character of the Forums Augustan
design. The arrogant character of the monument disdaining
the surrounding buildings, the sculpted emperor gazed fixedly at
his new palaces on the Palatine Hill must also have alienated
contemporaries still attached to the idea, if not the substance, of the
ancient Republic. After Domitians assassination in 96, the irate
citizens of Rome promptly tore down the unpopular monument.
The Antonine Forum

By the reign of Antoninus Pius (CE 138161), no emperor had
added buildings to the Forum for over five decades. Hence
Antoninus construction of a temple to his deified wife on the
Via Sacra just to the east of the Arch of Lucius Caesar was a
radical decision. The new building was a model of imperial discretion (Figs. 0.1, 3.1, 1617), however. Although it located the
Fig.21.18. Entablature and capital from the Arch of Severus. (G. Gorski su concessione del Ministero
353
35 4
Fig.21.20. Pattern details from the cornice of the Temple of Concord:

l. normal-leaf-and-dart with rosettes; r. shear-shaped leaf-and-dart.
(G. Gorski. Roma su Concessione della Sovrintendenza di Roma
Capitale)
Fig.21.19. Arch of Severus, details of the soffits of the lateral and main arches. (G. Gorski su
concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attivit Culturali Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
shrine of the empress near those of traditional deities like Vesta,

Julius Caesar, and Castor thus emphasizing the importance
both of the empress and, later on, of her husband when Marcus
Aurelius added Antoninus cult to the shrine its position carefully respected the now canonical Augustan layout of the central
Forum. Modeled on the Temple of Vespasian (Figs. 10.1, 810,
11.1), it was, with some minor changes, very nearly the same
size, and apart from different friezes, the entablature copied in
abbreviated and modernized form that of Vespasian. While the
monolithic column shafts of unfluted colored marble on the porch
were fashionably Antonine (and very different from the austere, fluted white shafts of the Augustan and Flavian buildings),
Antoninus decision to use cipollino for these elements may have
Chapter
Fig.21.21. Roman Forum,

looking west, 14 CE. (G. Gorski)
Fig.21.22. Roman Forum,

looking west, 98 CE. (G. Gorski)
21
/Conclusions
355
35 6
been intended as a reference to the marble used for the shafts of

another, by now traditional, Flavian building in the Forum, the
Portico of the Dei Consentes (Figs. 12.1213).
The SeveranForum
Early Projects
In some projects, Septimius Severus, although the founder of
a new imperial dynasty, continued Antoninus Pius discreet,
conservative approach toward the monuments of the Forum.
In location, size, and decoration, his equestrian statue was an
appropriate addition to the piazza (Figs. 14.12, 1011). The
emperor himself saw to repaving the open area and restoring
the Temple of Vespasian. The richly restrained style in which
his wife, Julia Domna, rebuilt the Temple of Vesta, destroyed in
the destructive conflagration of 192 CE, may have reproduced
that of its ruined Flavian predecessor (Figs. 20.1, 1419).
And yet, Severus most famous (and best-preserved) building in the Forum, his triumphal arch (Figs. 7.1, 8.1), was violently antithetical to the layout and decoration of the Augustan
buildings.17
The Arch of Severus

Severus new arch had little in common with the earlier monuments of Augustus and Tiberius. From the center of the Forum, its
enormous size hid much of the facade of the Temple of Concord,

formerly one of the sites chief monuments (cf. Figs. 21.2223).
The archs profusion of brightly colored sculpture (Figs. 7.12
13), an innovation in the Forum, struck a discordant note in the
restrained old-fashioned decoration, and when the bright light
of the rising sun hit the crowd of statues on top of the monument, picked out the letters of the lengthy inscription on the east
attic, and shone blindingly on the gilded bronze accents to the
reliefs below, it must have been hard to see any of the Forums
other buildings. None of Severus predecessors had so radically
changed the appearance of the Forum (Figs. 21.2223). Yet, after
he defeated his imperial rivals, his power was never again challenged. His sons succeeded him, and subsequently his distant
relatives ruled the empire until 235. During that period, the
demolition of the arch would have been unthinkable. Thereafter,
it had become a traditional part of the Forums monuments, intrusive but unchallenged.
The Diocletianic
Forum
Reconstructions
By the reign of Diocletian, in the great fire of 283, several buildings around the plaza had burned, and the Forum was in a sad,
partly ruined state. The Curia and the Basilica Aemilia required
Fig.21.23. Roman Forum, looking

west, 211 CE.(G. Gorski).
Fig.21.24. Roman Forum, looking

west, 380 CE. (G. Gorski)
35 8
major repairs, and the Basilica Julia had to be completely

rebuilt. Maximian, Diocletians coruler and alter ego, undertook
these reconstructions as conservatively as an Antonine emperor.
Where possible, he used parts of the earlier structures;18 the rest
he rebuilt in its original form, with brick-faced concrete revetted
with marble veneers.19
A RemodeledForum
The new rulers, who had restored the political stability of the
empire and hoped to establish a successful, long-lived political
regime, were not content with restoring the Forums preexisting
monuments. They needed also to commemorate themselves in
what was still considered the heart of the empire. And, while
the political and architectural traditions associated with the
Forum which Maximian and Diocletian had already shown
themselves to have accepted forbad changes to the plan of the
space or to its individual structures, they certainly allowed new
construction.
The East Rostra and the Honorary Columns. Hence the
emperors maintained the Forums ancient traditions while comprehensively changing its orientation and appearance. On the
east end, they hid the Temple of Caesar and its ancient reference to his deification behind a new Rostra, which was a
careful copy of its Augustan prototype across the Forum (Figs.
8.2, 1417). On this Rostra, on its predecessor opposite, and

on seven large pedestals built along the south branch of the
Via Sacra, they erected equally sized honorary columns, probably all originally of red granite (Figs. 2.17, 21.24). Crowned
almost certainly by statues of contemporary statesmen and military heroes, these columns were intended as so many political
statements that advertised Diocletians power above that of the
long-gone Augustus. They also partly masked the facades of the
earlier buildings on the east, west, and south sides of the Forum.
Moreover, the honorary columns atop the new East Rostra may
have completed an earlier concept. Henceforth all northsouth
streets leading into the Forum ended visually at honorary columns or vertical monuments. By contrast, on the two branches
of the Via Sacra, the major eastwest streets, triumphal arches,
marking eastwest movement through the Forum, visually oriented and directed the visitors path into and through the vast
piazza.
From the interior of the Forum looking across the south
branch of the Via Sacra, the honorary columns partly hid the
Basilica Julia. Yet, with respect to the basilica, their positions
were also carefully calculated. Visitors in the piazza could still
look between the pedestals and through the arcades of the basilica to the street beyond, an effect of transparency traditionally
associated with the original Augustan building (Fig. 21.5).20
And, in relation to the other columns, the spacing of the easternmost column is a little greater than the spacing of the others,
Fig.21.25. Roman Forum view looking west, 380 CE. (G. Gorski)
Fig.21.26. Roman Forum view looking west, late sixth century. (G. Gorski)
Chapter
yet this mistake was probably another visual refinement to

preserve an unobstructed view of the basilicas northeast corner from the Argiletum. That the new columns did not continue
along the north side of the Forum suggests that the principal
entrance to the piazza was no longer from the Via Sacra but from
the Argiletum and the imperial fora. Hence by keeping this side
in its original state, the Diocletianic architect(s?) left open the
visitors first view of the Forum from the Argiletum and involved
him immediately in the architectural ensemble that opened out
before him (Fig.2.17).21
The Column of Phocas. The most significant of the Diocletianic
monuments in the Forum was called in later times the Column
of Phocas after a Byzantine usurper of the early seventh century CE. Standing alone in front of the south end of the West
Rostra, aligned with the axis of the Argiletum,22 it rests, like the
other honorary columns, on two superimposed bases: the larger
one below is of concrete faced with brick. White marble slabs
revetted the smaller one above. Unlike the other honorary columns, however, a stair framed and almost completely hid the
lower pedestal, and the fluted shaft was of white marble assembled from three drums, a technique that suggests a first-century
origin. An inscription on the north plinth attributes the structure
to Smaragdus, the Byzantine exarch (governor) of Rome (602
609), and identifies the column as the support for a vanished
statue of Phocas.23 That inscription, however, replaced an earlier, now illegible one, and the design and structure of the two
superimposed bases suggest that they were contemporary with

those of the other honorary columns.
The character of the original monument thus seems clear:
the white pedestal and column must have supported a colossal (gilded?) statue of Diocletian himself. For visitors arriving
from the Argiletum, this would have seemed the first and most
prominent of the Forums many monuments. On his lofty perch,
its white supports contrasting notably with the colors of the
bases and shafts of the other honorary columns, Diocletian, the
restorer of the empire, framed by its most famous monuments,
would have appeared to welcome the visitor into the living heart
of ancientRome.
The End of the Forum

The restoration of the Temple of Saturn in the later fourth century after another disastrous fire was a last feeble attempt to
maintain the historic fabric of the Forum. Ensconced in their
new capital of Constantinople, the Eastern emperors no longer
worried about the Forums monuments, and local pagan senators underwrote the project as a discrete protest against the new
Christian faith of the empire. By the end of the century, a decree
of Theodosius closed the temples in the Forum, and elsewhere,
and in 410, the Basilica Aemilia burned down in Alarics sack
ofRome.
21
/Conclusions
361
36 2
It was not restored, and although the Ostrogothic kings,

especially Theodoric (511526), did their best to maintain
the site, when the Byzantines reconquered Rome in 555, the
ancient attitudes toward the Forum and its careful maintenance
ended. Small workshops were built into the bases of the honorary columns. Some monuments became churches (the Curia
after 625; the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the seventh or eighth century). Houses and small churches were built
inside and adjacent to the ancient monuments.24 Yet, as the
work of Smaragadus shows, some of the sites ancient prestige
survived into the beginning of the seventh century (Fig.21.26).

Indeed, the memory of that prestige probably explains the survival of Smaragdus own monument, which (minus the statue of
Phocas) still stands today in the Forum. But after Smaragdus,
the Forums monuments, now valuable as the property of the
popes, became quarries. Using the surviving marbles for construction or burning them for lime, successive generations
covered the remains with rubble (a process aided by Tiber
floods) and built over them, almost entirely burying what
remained.
Glossary
abacus A flat, square element that crowns a classical capi-
Anio tufa A brown tufa quarried north of Rome along the
tal. Depending on the order, the sides are plain or profiled,

straight or concave.
Anio River. Large blocks of it are visible on the east side of

the podium of the Temple of Castor and Pollux (Fig.18.3).
acanthus Stylized versions of the leaves of this plant decorate
antefix Ornament at the end of a row of cover tiles over the
the four faces of the Corinthian and Composite capital.
joint between two rows of adjacent flat or pan tiles.
acroterium The pedestals at the apex and eves of the pedi-
anthemion, anthemia A sculpted palm leaf or honeysuckle
ment, sometimes also describing the statuary or ornament the

pedestals support. The singular form, acroterion, acroterium,
refers to the ridge of the building.
apophyge The slight curve of a column shaft outward above
aedicule A miniature temple or tabernacle with columns,
pattern in a decorative design.

the fillet over the base and inward below the fillet under the
capital.
entablature, and a triangular or rounded pediment. Also:

Aedicula (sing.), Aediculae (pl.).
arcade A series of arches on piers or columns. Sometimes also
africano A decorative, brecciated marble that includes
architrave The horizontal, wood, or stone element that
intense red, rose, dark red, and violet fragments with dark
gray inclusions and veining (Fig. G6). Widely used in imperial Rome, it was quarried on the Aegean island of Chios
seven miles off the coast of Turkey.
connects two columns or piers, usually the lowest element of

an entablature.
alabaster (Sometimes called oynx in antiquity) The surface

displays a whitish, yellowish, or honey-colored background
broken by pinkish, darker yellow, or whitish swirls or by dark
gray spatters or inclusions. Quarried in Egypt, alabaster was
sometimes used in thin sheets for window panes.
Anaglypha Traiani Two balustrades found in September

1872 in the Roman Forum near the Column of Phocas. Set
on travertine blocks, they flanked an ancient passage and
were embedded in the remains of a medieval tower. The
outer sides portray sacrificial animals, and the interiors,
scenes in the Forum: an emperor (Trajan? Hadrian?) speaking; tax documents being burned. Now displayed in the
Curia, these reliefs provide important information about
the appearance of the Forums buildings in the second
centuryCE.
a roofed space behind such arches.
arcuated A structural system that utilizes the arch to span an

opening in a facade, as opposed to a trabeated system, which
employs post-and-lintel construction.
Argiletum A principal street that ended at the north side of

the Forum between the Curia and the Basilica Aemilia. It
connected the Forum with the Forum Transitorium and the
Suburra, a popular quarter.
astragal A low half-round molding (above) combined with a

fillet (below) at the top of column shafts.
attic The story above a cornice.

Attic base A column base named from Athens, its place of
origin. Its profile consists of a vertical (rectangular) plinth
and two toruses separated by a scotia (Figs. G1, G4). The
Forums larger columns have bases with attic profiles and
double scotias.
augur A priest or official diviner practiced at interpreting

omens.
aureus A Roman imperial gold coin weighing 8 to 7 grams

(less in later periods). Calculating the current value of gold
at $1,000.00 an ounce, an aureus was in modern terms worth
roughly between $250 and $280.
barrel vault See vault.

basilica A public building characterized by a two-story nave
with a clerestory, flanked by single or double colonnades or
arcades.
bead-and-reel Decoration on a low half-round molding:

pairs of lozenges separate serially repeated ovals or long
beads (each with rounded ends) from each other.
breccia verde An Egyptian marble with a greenish background and yellow, red, white, and brown inclusions.
bucranium, bucrania (pl.) A sculpted relief of an ox

skull.
cabling Convex infills set in the flutes and extending approximately one-third up a column shaft.
caementa Stone or terracotta fragments, aggregate, found in

concrete.
Canina, Luigi Canina (17951856) A prominent

architect and archaeologist in Rome who constructed buildings for the Borghese family and wrote several major books
on Greek and Roman architecture. His reconstructions of the
entablatures of the Temples of Concord and Vespasian are
still displayed in the Tabularium, and in the Forum, he excavated part of the Basilica Julia (1834, 18481854).
363
36 4
Glossary
capital The element above, or at the head of, the column shaft
that most expresses the character of the five orders: Tuscan,
Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, Composite.
Carrara A fine white marble with a pure, crystalline composition that gives the stone a luminescent character. After
48BCE, it was (and is) quarried at Carrara (Luni) in modern
Italy.
cauliculus A stalklike element in the Corinthian capital from

which spring the helices and volutes.
cavetto A concave molding.

cella The enclosed sacred chamber of a temple.
censor One of two Roman republican magistrates elected
every five years to make up the lists of citizens and supervise
public morals.
centumviri A panel that, despite its name, had 180 members.

From it were selected courts of 45 members that, on appeal
from a praetor, presided over cases concerning inheritances.
cipollino A white or greenish marble with lighter and

darker sometimes waved greenish veining (Fig. G6).
Normally used for interior decoration and unfluted columns
(occasionally for fluted ones as in the Portico of the Dei
Consentes in the Forum), it came from the town of Karystos
on the Greek island of Euboea just off the Attic coast near
Athens.
clipeata With, on, framed by a shield. A term applied to the

rounded decorative shields with central sculpted heads on
the attic of the Basilica Aemilia and elsewhere.
Clivus Argentarius A street leading into the Forum from

the northwest.
Clivus Capitolinus A street leading southwest from the

Forum up the CapitolineHill.
G1. Arch of Severus: Composite order. (G. Gorski)
Glossary
coffer A recessed panel in a ceiling or overhead structure

decorated with different moldings; it usually has a central
rosette.
colonnette A small column.

column A vertical pillar usually composed of a base, shaft,
and capital.
columniation An arrangement of columns.

comitia A Roman assembly of the people. In the Forum, an
open circular area for public gatherings, located historically
immediately in front of the Curia.
Composite order An order with an entablature like those

of the Ionic and Corinthian orders. The capital combines the
large Ionic volutes and echnius with a Corinthian bell and
acanthus leaves.
cong A molding concave at the top, vertical below.

console An S-shaped bracket, used either vertically or horizontally (a modillion), to support a projecting shelf or the
upper moldings of a cornice.
consul One of the two chief magistrates who administered the

Roman Republic and led its armies. The later emperors held
consulships until the sixth centuryCE.
Corinthian order A Hellenistic Greek architectural order

conventionalized and widely distributed by the Romans. The
base, shaft, and entablature resemble those of the Ionic order;
the capital is higher and employs acanthus leaves and volutes
(Fig.G2).
Corinthianizing orders Capitals in which unusual features

replace some of the traditional Corinthian elements (leaping
animals instead of volutes, vines with rosettes in place of
helices, etc.).
G2. Temple of Vespasian: Corinthian order. (G. Gorski)
365
36 6
Glossary
cornice The horizontal, projecting, profiled upper element

of an entablature. Also a molding at the top of a pedestal
orwall.
corona The molded element at the upper section of a cornice,

frequently just below the topmost fillet.
crenelation Battlements, an indented parapetalong the top

of awall.
Curia The Senate. Also, in the Roman Forum, the building in

which the Senatemet.
curule aedile One of the two normally patrician members of

the four-man board of aediles who after 367 BCE were elected
each year to take care of Romes physical plant (walls, streets,
sewers, etc.).
curule chair A seat, molded after a camp stool, used by

Romes chief magistrates. The legs and arms curved in opposite directions.
cyma A wave or S-shaped molding that combines a concave

and convex profile. The cyma recta sets the concave profile
above the convex, and the cyma reversa, the convex, above
the concave.
cymatium A molding that crowns a section of an entablature;

the profile varies.
dado The lower section of a wall treated decoratively as a

plinth or wainscoting.
decastyle A portico or colonnade with ten columns.

denarius A Roman imperial silver coin, worth 1/25 of an
aureus or between $10.00 and $11.00.
dentils A continuous horizontal line of small, rectangular,

closely spaced blocks most typically found in Roman cornices
of the Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite orders.
G3. Doric order: Tabularium. (G. Gorski)
diminution The gradual taper of a column shaft from bottom

totop.
Glossary
dipteral Describing a temple with two rows of columns around

thecella
dodecastyle A portico with twelve columns.

Domus Tiberiana The palace of the emperor Tiberius on
the northwest side of the Palatine Hill inRome.
Doric order An originally Greek architectural order. The

shaft in the Greek version lacks the base normally used in the
Roman order. The capital combines an echinus with a square
abacus, and the entablature includes triglyphs and metopes.
drum A round section of a column shaft.

echinus A quarter-circle convex molding crowning the top of
a Doric capital below the abacus.
egg-and-dart See ovolo.

Einsiedeln Itinerary A late eighth- or early ninth-century
CE summary of an earlier guide to the churches and cemeteries of Rome. Containing a number of building inscriptions
from the Forum that were subsequently lost, it is housed in
the Einsiedeln Monastery in Switzerland.
en ressaut A projecting entablature supported by a column

or pier.
entablature A horizontal superstructure, usually divided

into an architrave, frieze, and cornice, carried by a colonnade
or superimposed on the upper section of awall.
entasis Describes the subtle swelling of a column: the lower

third usually straight, then a subtle curving profile reducing
the radius of the column toward thetop.
exedra A rectangular or semicircular recess.

facade The exterior, usually principal, face of a building.
fascia One of the two or three plain, wide bands that make up
an architrave.
G4. Basilica Aemilia: Roman doric order. (G. Gorski)
367
36 8
Glossary
fillet A flat, narrow band, usually between two molding

profiles.
fleuron The flower at the center of the abacus on each of the

four faces of a Corinthian capital.
flutes, fluting The vertical concave channels carved into a

column shaft.
Forma Urbis A marble plan of ancient Rome (c. 203211

CE) affixed to a wall in the Temple (Forum) of Peace. The
wall still stands as part of the exterior of the Church of Saints
Cosmas and Damien on the Via dei Fori Imperiali. At a scale
of 1:230, the plan showed all of ancient Rome in a space
that measured 60 43 Roman feet. Only fifteen to eighteen
percent of the original survives. Discussions of the plan and
fine photographs of the fragments appear at http://formaurbis.
stanford.edu/docs/FURmap.html.
frieze The middle element of the entablature, below the

cornice and above the architrave; in the Doric order, it usually
features triglyphs, and in the others, it often has reliefs.
giallo antico A brecciated marble that most commonly exhibits a yellow background with veins that vary from brownish
yellow to brownish red (Fig. G6). It was quarried near ancient
Chemtou in Numidia (modern Tunisia).
gray granite White granite with numerous, irregularly

spaced blackish-gray inclusions. Sometimes called granite
of the Forum in Italy, it was quarried at Mons Claudianus
(Gebel Fatireh) in Egypt.
groin vault See vault.

grotta oscura A porous yellowish tuff found fifteen miles
north of Rome along the Fosso di Grotta Oscura, which gives
the stone its traditional name. It was used in Rome after
396BCE.
G5. Temple of Saturn: Ionic order. (G. Gorski)
Glossary
G6. Types of marble and stone. (G. Gorski)
369
37 0
Glossary
guilloche An ornamental pattern or border of paired lines or

bands that interlace around a series of central elements.
guttae Small conical peglike elements below a triglyph that

imitate the timber construction of earlier Greek buildings.
helix, helices (pl.) Two opposing spirals in the Corinthian

capital that sprout from the lateral cauliculi and meet just
below the abacus.
hexastyle A portico composed of six columns.
macellum A roman market for provisions with a rectangular internal peristyle that frames a central round structure,
a tholos.
marble A type of limestone, relatively easy to carve (Fig. G6).

Some types are white (carrara/luna, parian, pentelic, proconnesian), some colored (africano, alabaster, bardiglio, breccia verde, cipollino, giallo antico, pavonazzetto, porphyry,
portasanta, rosso antico, verde antico). When burned, marble
provides lime for cement.
hemicycle An attached semicircularroom.
masl Meters above sea level.
Ionic order A Greek architectural order, column, capital,
metope The space between the triglyphs in a Doric entab-
and entablature, in which on each capital spiral volutes flank

an echinus decorated with egg-and-dart.
lature, sometimes ornamented with a bucranium or other

sculpted reliefs.
intercolumniation The distance between columns measured
modillion A cantilevered bracket either rectangular or with
as units that equal the diameter of the lower part of the shaft.
Lesbian cymatium A molding with a cyma reversa profile,

often ornamented with normal leaf-and-dart.
lictor One of the official retinue of the emperor, a consul, or

a praetor. Each carried the fasces, bundles of rods around an
axe that symbolized the officials power to punish or execute
a guilty citizen.
lintel A horizontal beam supporting the wall above an opening.
lithostroton A material composed of tightly packed marble

chips set into mortar and ground down to a smooth finish,
most often used in floors.
Livy Titus Livius (59 BCE17 CE), a famous Roman historian

from Pavia, and a friend of Augustus. His history of Rome
covered the period from its foundation to 9 BCE in 142 books.
Only books 110 and 2145 survive.
Luna See Carrara.
volutes at either end normally used in a series that supports

the overhanging part of a Corinthian or Composite cornice.
mullion A slender vertical support in a window or opening.

muntin The center vertical framing element in a window or
door opening. The side frames adjacent to the wall are called
stiles.
mutule A projecting flat block that supports the corona of a

Doric cornice; sometimes also describing similar brackets/
flattened modillions in the other orders.
nave A high-space or multistory central hall in a building,

usually a basilica, typically illuminated by clerestories,
flanked on either side by lower, narrower aisles.
niche A semicircular or rectangular recess in a wall, often

containing statuary.
octastyle A portico with eight columns.

oculus A round opening in a wall or dome or the center button
in the spiral of an Ionic volute.
onyx See alabaster.

opus quadratum [Construction in] squared or rectangular
stone blocks laid in courses.
opus spicatum Brick pavement laid in a herringbone pattern.

orthostat The large plane above the base molding in a wall
(cf. dado), but below the upper area of smaller blocks, typical of temple exteriors.
ovolo A convex quarter-round molding in Greco-Roman architecture ornamented with eggs separated by darts (sometimes
shaped like miniature arrows).
palmette A stylized fan-shaped ornament resembling a

palmleaf.
parapet A low wall that serves as a barrier to a drop or a

concealment for aroof.
patera, paterae (pl.), also called a pluteus A shallow, circular dish for drinking or ritual libations. It occurs
in friezes, and Greco-Roman statues of gods and goddesses
frequently hold paterae.
pavilion vault See vault.

pavonazzetto A fine marble with a white background broken
by bluish-gray-violet veins and inclusions (Fig. G6) quarried
at the ancient Dokimeion (Iscehisar), Turkey.
pedestal The support for a column or statue that usually

consists of a base, dado, and cornice.
pediment A triangular facade element, it is usually set above

a temple entrance, and its tympanum often has sculpted
reliefs. Roman pediments are steeper than Greekones.
pentelic marble A fine white marble quarried on Mt.

Pentelicus sixteen miles northeast of modern Athens.
peperino A volcanic tuff, brown or gray in color from the

Alban Hills southeast ofRome.
Glossary
peripteral A structure enclosed by a continuous single row

of columns.
peristyle A colonnaded interior court.

pier More massive than a pilaster, it is the load-bearing
construction between two openings.
pilaster A feature, rectangular in section with base and capital attached to or against awall.
plinth The lower projecting element of a base that marks the

intersection of a wall or column with the floor or ground.
Pliny the Elder (23/479 CE) A Roman statesman and
371
praetor An annually elected republican official who by
rosso antico A dark, reddish marble with infrequent black
the late Republic served in a board with eight (later more)

members. They assisted the consuls, governed provinces, and
served as judges.
veins and lighter red (sometimes white) inclusions (Fig. G6)

quarried at Cape Matapan in southern Greece.
rostrum, rostra (Figs. 8.12, 10) The bronze battering
Proconnesian marble A fine white marble from the
ram of a warship. Used in the plural, the word came to mean
Turkish island of Proconnesus in the sea of Marmara. The

Romans used it for statues of high quality and for architectural elements.
the first speakers platform in the Forum (and its successors)
pronaos The front porch of a temple.

prostyle A temple with a front porch.
through the display of captured rams on the front wall of this

structure.
scotia A concave molding, typically found in column bases.

seiugis A six-horse chariot.
scholar, the author of the surviving thirty-seven books

(modern chapters) of Naturalis Historia (Natural History).
Modern scholars find his references to Greek and Roman
art and artists particularly valuable. As commander of the
Roman fleet stationed at Misenum, he died in 79 AD during
the famous eruption of Vesuvius that buried Pompeii and
other nearby communities.
pseudo-peripteral A temple with pilasters or half columns
porphyry An extremely hard stone with a dark purplish-red
regula The band in a Doric entablature that continues each
background broken by numerous small, white inclusions

(Fig. G6), it was quarried at Mt. Porphyry (Mons Porphyrites,
Gebel Dokhan) in Egypt.
triglyph below the taenia. The guttae are attached to it

(Fig.G3).
soffit The underside, horizontal plane of a projecting cornice.
ressaut A length of entablature that projects from an entabla-
stucco Primarily a mixture of cement and sand sometimes
ture on a wall and is usually positioned above a pilaster, a half

column, or a column.
mixed with marble dust to form plaster. Applied in a plastic
portasanta A brecciated marble with a light reddish background broken by white and grayish-pink inclusions and
random white and orange veins (Fig. G6), it was quarried on
the Greek island of Chios.
portico A porch formed by columns. If the columns project

past the facade, it is called prostyle; if the columns are incorporated in the facade, they are said to be in antis. Porticoes
are named according to the number of columns on the front of
the building to which they belong: tetrastyle (four), hexastyle
(six), octastyle (eight), decastyle (ten), dodecastyle (twelve).
attached to the side and back walls. These simulate a

peripteral building.
quadriga A four-horse chariot.

quaestor One of an annually elected board of republican
magistrates that supervised the state treasury (the aerarium).
reticulate Late republican/early imperial concrete walls

faced with small, rectangular tuff blocks laid in a netlike
pattern.
roof tiles Primarily of marble or terracotta, Roman tiles were

of two types: pan (or flat) tiles with raised edges, and cover
tiles, round or V-shaped tiles that cover the abutting edges
of the pan tiles.
serpentine An Egyptian marble with a green background that

varies from light to dark broken by darker, irregularly shaped
green inclusions and wispy gray-green light veining.
sestertius A Roman brass coin valued after Augustus at 1/100

of an aureus or in modern terms about $2.50 to $2.80.
sima The cornice molding just below the upper fillet, usually
with a cyma recta profile. Not to be confused with acyma.
state, it protects and decorates a rough surface and was often

used to simulate the appearance of marble.
stylobate A continuous support that conveys the weight of the

columns to the foundation.
taenia The horizontal molding at the top of the Doric architrave between the guttae and the triglyph (Fig. G3).
tetrastyle A portico with four columns.
37 2
Glossary
thermal window Three closely spaced windows, the tops of

which together form a semicircle. Windows of this type appear
in the great imperial baths (thermae), hence thename.
torus A large convex molding typically found in pairs in a

column base, the larger one below, just above the plinth, the
smaller one above, at the top of thebase.
travertine A porous, crystalline white/gray stone deposited

by flows of water. Found at ancient Tibur (modern Tivoli)
twenty miles east of Rome in the Alban Hills, it was (and is)
used for construction in and aroundRome.
triglyph A raised, rectangular element in the frieze of the

Doric order, characterized by two vertical, V-shaped channels that divide the surface into three strips. Used in a row
across a frieze, triglyphs are separated from each other by
metopes (Fig. G3).
triumvir A member of one of the two extralegal juntas of three

leading politicians at the end of the Roman Republic. The
first included Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus (6053 BCE), and
the second included Mark Antony, Octavian, and Lepidus

(Marcus Aemilius) (4332BCE).
tympanum The triangular plane framed by the roof of a pedi-
trophy A simple Roman monument that symbolizes victory.
vault An arched structure that forms a ceiling or roof. It is
Consisting of a pole with a crosspiece, it carries a military

helmet on top, and the crosspiece supports a breastplate and
a kilt while shields are sometimes attached to the ends of the
crosspiece. Representations of such monuments also appear
on marble reliefs and coins.
tufa One of Romes earliest building materials. A volcanic

rock with ingredients that vary from fine sand to coarse
gravel. Various kinds with names indicating the site quarried are found in and around Rome and in the Alban Hills
nearby.
Tuscan order Originally an Etruscan order dating from the

sixth century BCE. The unfluted shafts normally have bases
(a plinth and a torus), and an astragal separates a narrow band
(the necking) just under the echinus of the capital from the
rest of the shaft below (Fig. 5.21).
ment, often decorated with sculpted figures.

usually constructed of individual masonry units or poured
concrete. A vault with a circular profile is a barrel vault; two
barrel vaults intersect to form a groin or cross vault. In a pavilion or cloister vault, a type of groin vault, both the component
vaults spring from the walls of a square space below.
verde antico Fine-grained, compact Greek marble from

Thessaly. The background is light green; the colors of differently sized inclusions vary: green, blueish green, blackish
green, even white.
Via Sacra The principal street leading into the Forum from the
east; in the Forum it divides into an upper and lower Via Sacra.
Vicus Iugarius The street leading into the Forum from the
southeast between the Temple of Saturn and the Basilica Julia.
Vicus Tuscus The street leading into the Forum from the
south between the Basilica Julia and the Temple of the
Castores.
Notes
Preface
1 Taylor 2003,255.
2 As, for example, in Pensabene1984.
3 De Angeli 1992, 127 fig.145, restores the facade of the
Temple of Vespasian but in faint, broken lines. For the
Temple of Concord, Gasparri 1979, pl. 24, provides only a
restoredplan.
4 As, for example, Claridge 1998, 9192.
5 This is particularly true of the treatments in Grant1970.
6 Watkin 2009,45.
7 The best published account of the model is that of
Pavia2006.
8 The recent sources showing reproductions of some of these
drawings are Roma antiqua 1985; Cassanelli 1998,2002.
9 See Pinon 1988, 431435, for the complete chronologically
arranged list of these projects. Until 1923, they
concentrated largely on classical Greco-Roman monuments.
10 Chaffe 1977, 7988,92.
11 Dr.Roberto Meneghini, now in charge of the Forum of
Trajan for the Comune di Roma, told Professor Packer that
the firm Inklink in Florence (http://www.inklink.it/inklink/
home_archivio.php?&langit) charges the Comune di Roma
4,0005,000 euros for a single illustration such as those
published in Meneghini 2009, figs. 1, 38, 53, 61, 77, 84,
102, 113, 163, 172, 210, 226, 269, 274, 277, 281, pl.5.
12 Professor Gorski digitally rendered all the monuments with
Form Z software (versions 3.1 to 6.5). Most of the individual
buildings were so detailed that they challenged even
the most robust computer processing capabilities. Thus
structures in views with multiple buildings were rendered
individually and combined with one another on black
screens using Photoshop.
13 The images containing depictions of the buildings
immediately surrounding the Forum are accurate
re-creations of Gismondis physical model in the Museum
of Roman Civilization in EUR. Professor Gorski took

more than 100 digital photos of the Gismondi model and
then used PhotoModeler, a software that generates threedimensional models by simultaneously comparing points
on three or more two-dimensional photos of the original
subject taken from different angles.
14 Members of the team included Larissa Esmilla, Elizabeth
Fuller, Kaitlyn Smous, Luke Golesh, Benjamin Keller, Ryan
Hughes, and Lon Stousland, led by Notre Dame University
Architecture School faculty Krupali Krusche, advised and
assisted by James Packer and Gilbert Gorski.
15 Unless otherwise indicated, all illustrations are by
Professor Gorski, and, except for Chapter21 (by both
Professors Gorski and Packer), the texts are by Professor
Packer.
1. The Augustan
Reconstruction (31 BCE14 CE)
1 Faustus Cornelius Sulla, the son of the dictator, had
replaced the structure in 52, probably renaming it after his
own family. The new name made the building unpopular,
and by 44 Marcus Aemilius Lepidus had taken it down to
build a temple Felicitas (Fortune) in its place. Because by
45 Caesar had begun the new Senate house on the site as
an integral part of his own forum, either the new temple
was not actually built or it had a very short life. The Senate
confirmed the project at the beginning of 44, and by March
of that year, Caesar was dead. See LTUR s.v. Felicitas,
Naos, Curia Hostilia; Delfino 2008, 5354; Liverani
2008, 4546.
2 Eck 1998, 106: Augustusmade the city [Rome] the
architectural centerpiece of the entire empire.The
inhabitants of the capital could see the power of the
monarchy with their own eyes, for it was now expressed in
architectural imagery. But Public works were important
3
4
8
9
because they provided employment for the free population.

Lo Cascio 2007,632.
Ibid., 632633.
Livy 44.16.10 says specifically that Tiberius Sempronius
Gracchus used his share of the state revenues for 169 to
build the Basilica Sempronia. Private funds paid for the
Basilica Pauli (Aemilia), which in 14 was restored by
Augustus and by the friends of Aemilius Paulus, a member
of the family that had reconstructed the building in 5554
(Dio Cass. 54.24.3, LTUR s.v. Basilica Paul[l]i).
These policies continued into the age of the triumvirs. Gaius
Sosius, a conqueror of Jerusalem who had put King Herod on
his throne in 37, used his spoils for the Temple of Apollo in
Circo. From the wealth that had resulted from his campaign
against the Parthini, an Illyrian people, Asinius Pollio built
a famous library in the Atrium Libertatis (Liberty Hall)
between the Capitoline and the Quirinal Hills northwest of
the Forum of Caesar. See Kienast 1982,338.
Thus when Tiberius reconstructed the Temple of Castor and
Pollux, spoils from his campaigns paid for the expensive
project: infra, n. 7.
We do not know the exact amounts of Octavian/Augustus
Egyptian spoils, but Dio Cass. 51.8.56 suggests they were
considerable: Yet he [Octavian/Augustus] was afraid that
they [Antony and Cleopatra] might destroy their wealth,
which he kept hearing was of vast extent; for Cleopatra had
collected it all in her tomb and she threatened to burn it
all up with her in case she should fail of even the slightest of
her demands (trans. E. Carey, Loeb).
Kienast 1982, 336337, 340341.
Although when Tiberius rebuilt the Temple of Concord
(dedicated in 6 CE), he needed a larger cella to serve as
a museum and place of assembly for the Senate. Since
the traditional site was too narrow for a more spacious
conventional plan, his architect positioned the cella at right
angles to the porch, a plan shared by only two other temples
373
37 4
10
11
12
13
14
Notes to pages
12 15
in Rome, that of Veiovis on the Capitoline Hill (Colini

1942), and of the Temple of Castor and Pollux in the Circus
Flaminius: LTUR s.v. Castor et Pollux in Circo...; Vitti
2011, 109134.
Asc. Mil. 33C.8 (ed. Lewis 2006, 6667).
On the early plan of the Basilica Aemilia, see Carettoni
1948, 111128, and, more recently, Ertel etal. 2007,
110117; Freyberger etal. 2007, 494501; Freyberger
2009, 3843. Despite preliminary investigation of the
remains under the floor of the imperial Basilica Julia
(Carettoni and Fabrini 1961, 5360), summarized in LTUR
s.v. Basilica Sempronia), we know very little about the
plan of its predecessor, the Basilica Sempronia, except that
it had shops on the Forum facade (the tabernae veteres).
That suggests, however, that its plan was very close to
that of the Basilica Aemilia where the plan of the imperial
basilica (without the front arcade) must be very similar to
that of the republican building.
This account of the development of the basilicas in the
Forum is entirely conjectural, if plausible. We do not know
precisely how the earlier buildings with colonnaded facades
evolved into the grand arcaded structures of the early
empire, and scholars have generally ignored this problem.
The structure of the Basilica Julia is unique. However, it
was not widely reproduced in other parts of the empire, and
ultimately, for public buildings, it was not very popular in
Rome. The last large-scale imperial basilica in Rome, the
Basilica Ulpia, had a colonnaded facade. Concrete vaults
roofed its interior lateral aisles, but the roof of the nave was
a traditional timber truss.
The two architects (or groups of architects) would almost
certainly have been acquainted. Indeed, the same
professional(s) might have been responsible for both
projects.
On the date of the dedication and on this hypothetical
street since it has never been excavated in back of the
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
basilica, see LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia. Papi 2002, 46 figs.

1, 4849, calls this street the Vicus Ungentarius or, in
the fourth century CE, inter pigmentarios.
Mon Anc. 20.23 (ed. and trans. P.M. Moore and
P.J. Brunt): I completed the Forum Iulium and the
basilica between the temples of Castor and Saturn,
works begun and almost finished by my father. When
that same basilica was burned with fire, I began to
rebuild it on an enlarged site, to be dedicated in the name
of my sons, and in case I do not complete it in my life time,
I have given orders that it should be completed by my
heirs.
Useful modern summaries of the history of shops in the
Forum appear in Richardson 1992, 375376; Purcell 1994,
659673.; LTUR s.v. Tabernae Argentariae, Tabernae
circa Forum, Tabernae Lanienae, Tabernae Novae,
Tabernae Veteres; Papi 2002, 4562.
Livy 1.35.10 (cited in LTUR s.v. Tabernae circa Forum):
ab eodem rege et circa Forumporticus tabernaeque
factae.
Livy 26.27.23: septem tabernae quae postea quinque
(the seven shops which later were five).
Livy 44.1011: to construct the Basilica Sempronia,
Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus bought the lots behind the
Veteres (a space that included the house of his father-inlaw, Scipio Africanus). Livy notes also that the site included
a row of butchers stalls.
Plin. HN. 33.37.113 (Serapio, trans. H. Rackham, Loeb).
The other pictures in the shops included a Gaul putting
out his tongue in a very unbecoming fashion and an Old
Shepherd with his staff, about which the Teuton envoy when
asked what he thought was the value of it said that he would
rather not even have the living original as a gift (Pliny HN.
35.8.35).
Richardson 1992, 375, dates this reconstruction to 193,
and Freyberger 2007, 495, to209.
22 Livy 3.48.5, cited in Richardson 1992, 375, says that

the latter short name was common nunc, now, in
his own day. For the longer name, Livy 40.51.5post
argentarias novas. These shops went through two later
periods of construction (159, 80), but while the materials
of the earlier phases were less costly, their general plan
remained very much the same: a row of shops behind a
broad colonnade. After 179 this structure was connected
with the Basilica Aemilia, which was built behind it:
Freyberger et al. 2007, 495501; Ertel et al. 2007,
110117.
23 These rooms are not usually identified as shops.
Richardson 1992, 377, calls them small exedras;
LTUR s.v. Tabularium, ambienti interni. A surviving
travertine threshold at the wide entrance of the last
room to the north is, however, typical of Roman shops.
On the left-hand side, the visitor can still see the
small, rectangular recess for a night door, the exit the
shopkeeper used after closing the shop for the night. Next
to it runs the long, narrow groove that once supported the
shutters that protected the shop. The impressive height
of the barrel-vaulted room would also have provided
adequate space for a wooden mezzanine. Probably lighted
from a small, square window looking into the arcade (in
the vanished front wall of the shop), that space would have
been the shopkeepers residence.
24 LTUR s.v. Tabularium.
25 Bauer 1988, 208 fig.97 (herein Fig.5.12).
26 Plaut. Curc. 480486.
27 Sande and Zahl 2008, 56, 6667 (shop TW1).
28 Ibid.,58.
29 DeLaine 1997, 9193.
30 Freyberger 2009, 72, notes that the Basilica Aemilia
had marble acroteria (infra, p. 376 n. 63). The Temple of
Antoninus and Faustina had them as well, and the Basilica
Julia almost certainly had marble tiles.
Notes to pages
31 Davies 1935, 6869, 71, 83, 86, 91, 98, 142; Healy 1978,
4567; DeLaine 1997, 9798.
32 This has been identified as either the Temple of the
Nymphs or of the Lares Permarini:

LTUR s.v. Lares Permarini, Aedes; Zevi1993.
33 Probably this was dedicated to Hercules Olivarius
by Lucius Mummius (Coarelli 1992, 96103) in
commemoration of his victory over Corinth in the Achaean
War. Wilson Jones 2000, 138, suggests that a Corinthian
Order celebrating a victory over the Corinthians had ironic
undertones.
34 Humphrey and Oleson 2002,196.
35 The site of the Basilica Julia, for instance, slopes from
west to east resulting in higher stairways on the east side
and at the northeast corner of the building. The lot of the
Basilica Aemilia is more even, but, as the stairs along
the west facade of the building indicate, ground level at
the northwest corner of the structure is higher than at the
southwest corner.
36 Blake 1947, 176, describes the podium of the Basilica
Aemilia as a concrete platform approached along its
entire front by a flight of stairs, consisting of four steps, a
landing 1.35 m wide, and three more steps
(Figs. 5.1820). The platform of the Basilica Aemilia
was about 1.80 m high; that of the Basilica Julia varied
from 0.50 m (at the northwest corner) to 2.40 m (at the
northeast corner).
37 The heights of the temple platforms differed considerably:
Castor and Pollux, 8.75 m; Vesta, 2.40 m; Concord, 8.25 m;
Caesar, 3.80 m; Saturn, 10 m (east side) to 9 m (west side);
Antoninus and Faustina, 4.70 m; Vespasian, 5.90m.
38 Taylor 2003,76.
39 Judging from the surviving travertine facing on the sides of
the podium of the Temple of Vespasian (De Angeli 1992, 71
fig.49), the heights and lengths of the blocks in different
courses varied.
40 Like the podium of the Metellan Temple of Castor and

Pollux: Nielsen 1988, 9; Nielsen and Poulson 1992, 87,
106108.
41 Like the Temple of Caesar: Richter 18881, pl. 28.
Construction workers initially built the exterior stone walls,
and interior spaces or hollows were created with wooden
formwork left in place after the concrete cured (if there
were to be interior spaces or rooms, wooden shuttering was
positioned to keep the concrete out of these areas). After
the concrete around the shuttering had cured, the in-place
shuttering rotted away (Taylor 2003, 77). A poured upper
layer of concrete served as the subfloor for the interior
(DeLaine 1997,139).
42 In the earlier buildings, tufa is the material of choice; in
later ones, travertine. The shop walls in the southwest
corner of the Basilica Julia, those of the south shops of the
Basilica Aemilia, parts of the foundations of the Temple
of Concord (Gasparri 1979, 2831), and probably the
missing walls of the Temple of Caesar are all of tufa. The
foundation facings and walls of the Temple of Vespasian are
of travertine. Courses of tufa strengthened the foundation
(Richter 1889, 138), but the tufa foundation facing and
walls in the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina were
probably a meticulous reproduction of earlier construction
types: cf. Lugli 1957, vol. 1, 332: Lultimo monumento
in Roma, costruito in vero opus quadratrum il tempio di
Antonino e Faustina nel Foro Romano, le cui pareti sono
fatte di blocchi di peperino a strati alterni impiallacciate
poi di marmo.
43 Cozza 1982, 8. These were the techniques used to build
the later Temple of Hadrian, but the stone for the buildings
in the Forum must have been quarried with very similar
techniques.
44 On these cranes, see Adam 1994, 4351.
45 The character of such surfaces on the podium of the Temple
of Vespasian can be clearly seen in De Angeli 1992, 7273
46
47
48
49
1517
375
figs. 50, 52. For exteriors, all veneers were of white (usually
Luna) marble. These were applied in thin sheets attached
to the stones of the interior with metal clamps. A piece of
surviving veneer from one of the lateral walls of the Temple
of Venus Victrix in the Forum of Caesar is finished with a
faux-masonry design: large rectangular blocks separated
by broad, recessed courses. The exterior walls of the
Forum temples must have been similarly detailed. For
interiors, the most popular foreign colored marbles were
pavonazzetto, giallo antico, africano, and cipollino (infra,
Glossary, Fig.G6).
These provided stable foundations within the surrounding
concrete fill of the podia. Single blocks support the in situ
columns of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, while
the piers under the three, still standing columns of the
Temple of Castor and Pollux are the same height as the
podium and undoubtedly extend deep below the surface.
Although Camporesi removed the entablature and rebuilt
the foundations of the columns of the Temple of Vespasian
in 18111812 (infra, pp.386388). they are now and
appear to have been originally supported on the travertine
walls that still partly frame the podium.
Cozza 1982, 2730.
Ibid., 15, notes that, in the surviving columns of the
Temple of Hadrian, the joint between the shaft and base
of the capitals lower leaves was so narrow that it did not
allow sufficient space to configure the bottom of (fully
finished) leaves properly: proof that the capital had
been executed prior to its installation. In other cases
completed capitals might be imported from marbleworking centers like Aphrodisias in Asia Minor, or
capitals might be roughed out in a workshop near the
quarry or in Rome. Imported craftsmen or their pupils
also undertook various projects: Heilmeyer 1970, 2223;
Pensabene 1973,189.
Pensabene 1973,194.
37 6
Notes to pages
18 19
50 Cozza 1982, 15, points out that, in the Temple of Hadrian

in the Campus Martius, in those capitals where the builders
eliminated the pads to reduce the heights of the columns,
the corners of the abacuses are now broken.
51 De Angeli 1992, 90 fig.82, diagrams both types as used in
the Temple of Vespasian.
52 De Angeli 1992, 103 fig.109. In this drawing, on the top of
the block on the facade, half a socket for one of the lateral
clamps (there were probably at least three on each side) is
clearly visible.
53 This seems to have been the case for the architectural
elements of the Temple of Hadrian, but, since these were
Proconnesian marble, they were perhaps specially finished:
Cozza 1982, 8, 1016.
54 Rockwell 1993,99.
55 Ibid., 100, says of the Vespasianic entablature, At what
stagethe stone was moved into place on the building is
not sure. But since the rough-cut zone with the molding
strip survived, it must have been set in place after
roughing out with the point chisel and would have been
inserted into the face of the Tabularium, before the final
finishing began.
56 These zones are still visible in a partly finished section
(originally on the south facade and probably embedded in
the facade of the Tabularium) of the restored entablature
from the Temple of Vespasian now exhibited in the
Tabularium (Fig.10.6): De Angeli 1992, 106 fig.112.
Rockwell 1993, 99100, suggests that the unfinished zones
(about 10cm wide) were cut first, then the molding strips.
But, as De Angelis photo makes clear, the unfinished
zones were probably the surface to which the whole block
had been worked before cutting the molding strips. The
rest of that surface (and the molding strips) were removed
before smoothing down the section of the block that
projected from the face of the Tabularum and cutting the
final ornament.
57 From the molding strips, they checked the accuracy of

their profiles with straight edges, calipers, and plumb lines
and worked with round-headed and flat chisels, drills, and
rasps: Rockwell 1993, 5052, 89, 99,100.
58 The architectural elements of the Temple of Hadrian seem
to have been worked on the ground (or in the shop) and
then raised into position, leaving zones at the ends and
bottom of the block to protect its surface as it was raised:
Cozza 1982, 1718. Rockwell 1993, 95, however, suggests
that the final decorative carving was executed only after the
block had been set into position.
59 The approximate widths of the cellas are impressive: Caesar
(Fig.4.7), 14.75 m; Antoninus and Faustina (Fig.3.15),
18.50 m; Curia (Figs. 16.1516), 18.25 m; Concord, porch
(Fig.9.8), 26 m; Vespasian (Fig.10.8), 15.50 m; Saturn
(Fig.13.8), 17.25 m; Castor (Fig.18.8), 14.75 m; Vesta
(Fig.20.14),10m.
60 Most walls of the cellas do not survive to sufficient heights
even in the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, where
the proportions of the pediment which would otherwise
offer useful information on the ancient roof need to be
reconstructed: Bartoli 1916, pl. 2. A beam hole in the
front cornice block of the Temple of Vespasian suggests
substantial beams 0.15 m high, 0.50 m wide, supported by
sockets 0.40 m deep: De Angeli 1992, 103 figs. 109110.
61 Drawings of Christian basilicas like San Paolo Fuori le
Mure, which had a fourth-century CE roof before it burned
in 1823, and the contemporary old Saint Peters Basilica
show structures of this kind: Adam 1994, 211 fig.495, 212
fig.496. The Temple of Bacchus at Baalbek, with a cella
20.95 m wide and a truss with additions and variations,
shows that roofs in the Forum could have been even more
complex than the diagrams of the structures at old Saint
Pauls and Saint Peters suggest: Wiegand 1923, vol. 2, 44
figs. 88, 90, 46 fig.92, pl.8.
62 Adam 1994, 209 fig.491.
63 Blake 1947, 304; Ginouvs 1992, vol. 2, pl. 80.1. From

Bartolis discovery of marble antefixes, Freyberger etal.
2007, 508, suggest marble tiles on the roof of the Basilica
Aemilia. Since acroteria from both the Basilica Aemilia
(supra, p. 374 n. 30)and the Temple of Antoninus and
Faustina were of marble, and Carlo Fea (Nielsen and
Poulsen 1992, 16)found marble tiles (probably from the
roof of the Temple of Castor and Pollux) in his excavation
near the temple in 1816, we assume that the tiles of all the
Forum basilicas and temples (except Vesta) were of marble.
64 The width of the nave of the Basilica Aemilia (Figs. 5.14,
18) is approximately 10.50 m, and that of the Basilica Julia
(Fig.14.12), 14.60m.
65 The second-story corridor in the Tabularium is an early
example of a similarly vaulted passage. On the Aemilia,
Bauer 1988, 202, 208 fig.9, shows groin vaults. Freyberger
etal. 2007, 501, suppose a barrel vault. The Diocletianic
vaults in the southwest corner of the Basilica Julia seem
to have been groin vaults, and the Augustan building may
have used the same design.
66 See Adam 1994, 174181, 191195; DeLaine 1997,
145150, 169; Taylor 2003, 174190.
67 Mosaic floors were common in the earlier phases of these
buildings, but by the late republican and Augustan periods,
as in the Metellan phase of the the Temple of Castor and
Pollux (Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 116117), marble had
replacedthem.
68 Bartoli 1963, pl. 95 (elevation of the facade), restored the
ceiling of the Curia at approximately 23 m above the floor.
69 This image shows, above the marble inlay of the lower
level, decorations roughly similar to those of the Pompeian
First Style (cf. Bonis discovery of First Style fragments
from the earlier Curia Hostilia: LTUR s.v. Curia Hostilia.
Prominent citizens also displayed paintings in the building
(perhaps even higher on the walls). In 264, one sponsored
by Messala showed his victory over the Carthaginians and
Notes to pages
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
King Hiero in Sicily: Plin. HN. 35.7.22. In the Curia Julia,

Augustus installed Hellenistic masterpieces by Nicias and
Philocares (LTUR s.v. Curia Julia), Plin. HN. 35.1. The
painting of the latter was apparently a famous mythological
scene that Pliny describes in detail: HN. 35.10.2728.
On techniques of interior decoration, see Taylor 2003, ch.
6, 212255; Adam 1994, chaps.89.
See infra, p.296.
Gasparri 1979, 6869.
The Temple of Vesta was the exception. As shown by a
relief in the Uffizi in Florence (Nash 1968, vol. 2, 508,
no.1327, fot. 3007, herein Fig.1.19), in the age of
Augustus, the Ionic capitals, were each enlivened by a
central fleuronlike shield and a lower row of simplified
acanthus leaves. After the great fire of Neros reign (64
CE), however, Vespasian rebuilt the structure with standard
Corinthian columns (Figs. 2.1, 20.3).
Translation from Rowland and Howe 1999,55.
Wilson Jones 2000, 137, noting that Kallimachus was
a famous fifth-century Athenian sculptor, suggests that
Vitruvius story may contain some elements of truth.
Three columns at the end of the interior hall in the Temple
of Apollo at Bassae: Wilson-Jones 2000, 136 figs. 7.34.
The delicate capitals of the late fourth-century monument
of Lysikrates in Athens already displays these elements
clearly. The two main elements, the abacus (Vitruvius roof
tile) and the bell (Vitruvius basket) are clearly visible.
Wilson-Jones 2000,141.
Claridge 1998, 256 fig.121; Wilson-Jones, 141 fig.7.13a.
The upper molding of the abacus is an ovolo; the lower, a
cavetto. The small volutes and helices are hollow, and both
rise from the same cauliculus or stem. The fleuron has a
high oval stigma. Both rows of acanthus leaves are finished
naturalistically, the bottom section bulging out slightly.
The capitals of the Temple of Mars Ultor in the Forum of
Augustus (Fig.1.10) are considered the acme of Augustan
capital design. Unlike the capitals of the round temple,

the Mars Ultor ovolo and fillet of the abacus recall Greek
capitals like those of the monument of Lysicrates, but with
respect to the underlying cavetto are larger and better
proportioned. The volutes of adjacent Mars Ultor faces are
closer together than those of the round temple (which have
a wide space between them) and appear to be adjacent
parts of a single element (Fig.1.9). On the round temple
capitals, the curved upper lip of the bell is invisible;
on the Mars Ultor capitals (Figs. 1.10), it is completely
visible with a sharp edge just above the helices. From
this edge, it slopes back to the bottom of the abacus with
a gently curving profile. On the round temple, the stem
of the fleuron separates the helices and originates behind
the acanthus leaf below. On those of Mars Ultor, the stalk
rises from two small leaves just above the central leaf of
the upper corona. The scrolls of the helices partly conceal
the stem of the fleuron. The lower section of the stigma
of the fleuron is loosely coiled. Thin raised edges border
the central channels of the volutes and helices. Acanthus
leaves hide only the lower sections of these elements near
the buttons of the cauliculi. On each face, concealed by
thin, sheetlike leaves, the stems of the two heraldically
opposed cauliculi curve out toward the buttons.
81 While convention thus played a large part in Augustus
choice of orders, he had other reasons as well. As Wilson
Jones 2000, 141 n. 7.13, points out, Augustus architects
took up the design of the Tiber round temple capitals
(which thus became the normal pattern for later orders)
owing to the lively character of their layout the tension
between the cardinal axes of the helices and the diagonal
axes of the volutes. Providing more convincing support for
the upper elements of the building, the partly visible bell
(kalathos) also reminded viewers of the designs mythical
origins, making it more preferable in the eyes of Vitruvius
and like-minded theorists. By the end of the first century,
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
1927
377
the normal capital had thus displaced its older Italic

rivals (Figs. 1.7, 9,10).
LTUR s.v. Forum Romanum (the Republican Period),
332333; Kondratieff 2010, 101102.
Dio Cass. 51.21.48 (trans. E. Carey, Loeb); Zanker 1972,
8,10.
Dio Cass. 51.21.49 (trans. E. Carey, Loeb).
Zanker 1972, 9. Zanker suggests that this may have copied
the famous Greek statue that Augustus had brought from
Tarentum. According to Dio Cass. 51.22.12, the statue
(which survived into late antiquity) stood inside the temple,
probably behind and above the platform for the consuls and
the emperor.
Zanker 1972,8.
Ibid., 13. Hor. Carm. 1.12.47Iulium sidus. LTUR s.v.
Iulius, divus, aedes notes that, although the cult statue is
supposed to have been crowned with a star, many coins also
show a star in the middle of the temple pediment.
Zanker 1972,14.
Ibid.,16.
For Zanker 1972, 17, the close proximity of this arch to the
Caesars temple linked Gaius and Lucius to their divine
kinsman, a relationship that, in contemporary Augustan
propaganda, gave them the right torule.
Gatti 1899, 141, pl. 1314, describes and illustrates the
late nineteenth-century discovery of the inscription, CIL
6.36908, which celebrates the career of Lucius Caesar:
una monumentale iscrizione, con bellissime lettere
dellet augustea, la quale nel cadere dallalto delledificio
si ruppe in vari pezzi; e questi pezzi sono stati trovati
nella medesima giacitura che presero al primo momento,
quando precipitarono insieme con le varie parti della
trabeazione.chiusa entro semplice cornice, incisa su
tre grandi blocchi di marmo ed appartiene ad un grandioso
monumento. Now set up at the east end of the south
arcade of the Basilica Aemilia, this inscription suggests a
37 8
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
Notes to pages
27 30
construction date of around 4 (3 according to Zanker 1972,

17). See also LTUR s.v. Porticus Gai et Luci. The plan of
the second excavation on the site by Riccardo Gamberini
Mongenet in 19501952 was published by Andreae
1957, 174, abb. 26, no.19 (Porticus Gai et Luci). On
Gamberini Mongenets excavation, see Gurval 1995, 3637
nn. 2830.
Drawings by Palladio 1965, bk. 4, 9092, pls. 1720
(particularly pl. 20)wrongly show the Temple of Antoninus
and Faustina enclosed by a Corinthian arcade. Palladio
may have actually seen such colonnades and assumed
that they had been parts of the temples temenos, but what
he assumed was an enlosure wall may in fact have been
the east facade of the Arch of Gaius and Lucius. We thus
base the Corinthian colonnade in our reconstruction (Figs.
1.1314) on his drawings.
Nash 1968, vol. 1, 176, 191 (MCR B /285) and Freyberger
2009, 73, 74, interpret the coin of M. Aemilius Lepidus
(Fig.5.2) as showing the interior of the earlier basilica
with the shields (imagines clipeatae) between the firstand second-story colonnades. However, given the fact
that the shields in the Augustan building (and the lateral
colonnades that copied it in the Forums of Augustus
and Trajan) were on the exteriors, the coin also probably
indicates a facade: probably that on the north towards the
Macellum.
Freyberger 2009, 72. See supra, p. 376 n. 63.
Freyberger 2009, 7172.
Kleiner 1992, 8889.
I am grateful to Dr.Klaus Freyberger for providing me with
a photograph of the finest surviving Parthian head, a piece
long inaccessible to the public.
Zanker 1972, 17, 35 n.95.
On the slab with the longest section of the Basilica Julias
facade, the third keystone from the left (just above the hole
in the relief) shows below the lions head a half round

100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
enriched with bead-and-reel (below) and an ovolo with

egg-and-dart.
The Anaglypha Traiani portray a Basilica Julia with
unfluted rectangular pilasters and a plain entablature.
However, while the columns of all the adjacent temples
on the relief are also plain, most (like the Temple of
Vespasian) actually had fluted shafts. Thus the facade of
the Augustan basilica was probably much more elaborate
than it appears to be on the relief. The half columns of
the Diocletianic facade also suggest an Augustan building
with engaged half columns, not pilasters.
A winged victory could have come from similar
decorations on the Diocletianic building: Fabbrini 1961
1962, 3754 figs.15.
Freyberger 2009, 74, suggests that the fragmentary
marble floor that presently survives (infra, p.256,
Fig.14.8) dates from the Augustan building. Parts
may have been Augustan, but most (or all) of the
floor must be Diocletianic. The earlier pavement
would have been heavily damaged in the fire of 283
and if not replaced would have needed extensive
restoration.
The colossal porphyry statue of which Rosa 1873, 52,
reports a fragment (infra, p.256) may have replaced
similar image(s?) destroyed in 283CE.
The bases for statues by the famous Greek sculptors
Polycleitus and Timarchus found in 1871 (infra, pp.
248, 256257) could have replaced other famous works
damaged in 283CE.
Like the ones from the Diocletianic building Friedenheim
found before 1856 (infra, p. 407 n. 52).
Mon. Anc. 20.3. But as Zanker 1972, 8, 18, points
out, Augustus new name for the building gradually
disappeared in favor of the more familiar Basilica Julia.
The shafts of the Temple of Castor have drums, as did
those of Concord (probably), and Vespasian.
108 Since only parts of the cornices of the Augustan building

survive, this description is necessarily conjectural. It
is based, however, on the features of the intact Temple
of Portumnus in the Forum Boarium. Despite its Greek
Ionic Order, that building is still constructed of tufa
and travertine finished with stucco. The Luna marble of
Plancus cornice (Figs. 13.7, 11), however, suggests a
temple of the same material, although the foundations
(which partly survive) and the walls, of concrete and,
most probably, of tufa blocks, would have had veneers in
Luna marble. On the Anaglypha Traiani, the architrave
and cornice of the Temple of Saturn are smoothly finished
surfaces. The Temple of Vespasian is also undecorated,
but, since that building actually has an architrave and
sculptured frieze (Fig. 10.9), the entablature of Plancus
temple probably didtoo.
109 On his drawing of the Temple of Portumnus, Palladio
1965, bk. 4, pls. 3233, shows garlands held by cupids
and the horns of bucrania.
110 Plancus half columns were probably part of the external
decoration of the lateral wall and did not extend through
the cella walls. Since the restorers of the building had a
ready source of granite columns, they repeated the earlier
scheme but used complete shafts either embedded in the
cella walls or connected (as in the temple of Vesta) by thin
partitions (Figs. 20.6,14).
111 Suet. Tib.20.
112 But the order was five-sixths the size of that of Mars Ultor.
The columns of the latter are 60 Roman feet high (17.76
m) and those of Castor, 50 Roman feet (14.82 m): WilsonJones 2000, 222, table1; Sande and Zahl 2008,90.
113 Sande and Zahl 2008,20.
114 Ibid., 132145.
115 Smaller orders generally have Attic bases. Later, larger
imperial buildings (like those in the Forum) had more
elaborate ones. Sandi 2008, 227, characterizes Castors
Notes to pages
116
117
118
119
120
bases as Attic with double scotias; for Ginouvs 1992,

vol. 2, each is a base composite double scotie sur
plinthe carre.
Like the latter, they were assembled from two blocks
of marble (a republican practice): Sande and Zahl
2008,147.
Cf. Sande and Zahl 2008, 148 fig.6.4.1 with Viscogliosi
1996, 47 fig.44 (herein Fig.1.8) and MacKenzie 2007,
87 figs. 132133.
Sande and Zahl 2008, 178 figs. 6.5.45, 180 fig.6.5.11.
Ibid., 179180. Cf. Sandes fig.6.5.11 (p.180) with
Ungaro 2007, 133 fig.160.
The Mars Ultor cornice (Ungaro 2007, 132 fig.159, 134
fig.161) began below with a half round decorated with
bead-and-reel; Castor (Fig.18.11), with a fillet and an
identical half round. Above, in both were ovolos with
egg-and-dart and the dentils. Mars Ultors dentils do
not have fillets; those of Castor do. Both feature fillets
above the dentils, but on Mars Ultor, a fillet and an ovolo
with egg-and-dart follow; on Castor a cyma reversa with
a normal-leaf-and-dart with varied, complex vegetable
ornaments. On both, the modillions project from plain,
vertical surfaces (Sande and Zahl 2008, 187188 figs.
6.6.3; Ungaro 2007, 132 fig.159). The modillions of
both cornices are S-shaped, but on the Castor cornice,
the underside of each modillion is enlivened with an
acanthus leaf (Sande and Zahl 2008, 191 fig.6.7.1);
on Mars Ultor, with a chain pattern: Ungaro 2007, 134
fig.163. A hollow leaf-and-tongue design decorates
the corona of the Castor cornice (Sande and Zahl
2008, 193 fig.6.7.8), and on both cornices, the corona
is plain with lions-head spouts. On Castor, however,
eight-petalled rosettes frame them (Sande and Zahl
2008, 187 fig.6.6.2), and since there were shops in the
sides of the podium, the lions heads were ornamental
because they have been placed in such a way that had
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
they been pierced, visitors to the tabernae would have

got a shower from right and left [from the drains at the
edge of the roof] unless they were extremely careful
and went through the [shop] door just in mid-axis.
the sculptorsaimed at [a] certain naturalism, although
angry domestic cats rather than lions seem to have been
their models (Sande and Zahl 2008, 203). On the Mars
Ultor cornice, the fully functional lions-head spouts on
the sima are not framed.
Sande and Zahl 2008, 208, note that not one piece has
been found in situ.
Dio Cass. 55.27.4. According to Dio, the inscription
called Tiberius Claudianus indicating that Augustus
had adopted him. Sande and Zahl 2008, 180, suggest a
short, one-line inscription of which a surviving fragment
(ARC19) cites the building as T[emplum] C[astoris/
Castorum]. But see infra, p. 411 n. 35.
Zanker 1972,19.
Sande and Zahl 2008, 247, follow Gros 1976, 62, in
suggesting that the style of the inner columns of Concord
is very similar to that of the outer columns of Castor;
hence the decorative styles of the two temples were
probably produced by the same craftsmen. Sande notes
also that the two temples are nearly contemporary and
had the same patron.
For combined plans of the Opimian and Tiberian
buildings: LTUR s.v. Concordia, aedes, fig.188.
Measuring from our plans (Figs. 9.8, 18.8), the cella of
Concord was approximately 16.50 m long; that of Castor,
about 37 m (measuring from the exterior wall facades).
The width of Concords cella equals that of the pronaos,
but in Castor, reduced by the measurements of the lateral
colonnades, the cella is considerably narrower than the
pronaos.
A sketch by Zanker 1972, 20 (cf. Fig 21.21), stresses the
visual importance of the new building.
3031
379
128 Rebert-Marceau 1923, 72, gives the exterior order a lower

diameter of 1.645 m and a height of 16.45 m. Toebelmann
1923, vol. 1, 51 fig.46, estimates the height of the order
at 21.38 m (72 Roman feet). He measures the height of
the restored entablature as assembled by Canina in the
arcade of the Tabularium at 3.78 m and assumes that the
shafts were 60 Roman feet (17.60 m) high. We accepted
these figures. Yet, when Professor Gorski executed our
digital reconstruction of the building (Figs. 9.1, 811), he
compared the remaining fragment of Concords cornice
with other surviving temples and found that a column
height of 54 Roman feet (18.22 m) was more in keeping
with the average proportion of column height to cornice.
He therefore shows our Concord columns with a height
of 54 Roman feet (18.22 m). Indeed, the size of Castors
entablature (126 Roman feet = 3.704 m), Sande and
Zahl 2008, 76 fig.41, indicate that, while Concords
entablature was slightly higher, the complete orders
of both buildings would have been approximately the
samesize.
129 Architraves (Figs. 9.6, 18.11): On Castor a cymation
with shear-shaped leaf-and-dart separates the middle
and upper fascia of the architrave. On Concord, a higher
ovolo with egg-and-dart occupies the same position. Since
the middle of Concords architrave lacks a frieze like
that of Castor (where this element probably emphasized
the inscription on the upper fascia of the architrave), the
original dedicatory inscription was probably on the frieze.
The crown moldings of both architraves are very similar,
although, on Concord, rosettes serve as the tongues
of the normal-leaf-and-dart, while on Castor, flowers,
each defined by two large, curved petals. On Castor, the
crown moldings of the frieze (or the lowest molding of
the cornice) consist of a low half round with bead-andreel and an ovolo, and on Concord (a more developed
design), of a cyma reversa enriched by a boldly carved
38 0
130
131
132
133
134
135
Notes to pages
32 38
shear-shaped leaf-and-dart. Cornices: Above, on Castor,

there is an ovolo with bead-and-reel; on Concord, a plain
fascia. On both cornices, dentils follow. On each, a half
round with bead-and-reels runs above the dentils, and
both cornices emphasize the tops of the modillions with
low cyma reversas decorated with shear-shaped leaf-anddart. On the two cornices, the modillions are similar, but
those of Concord are more richly decorated. On their
sides, a line of shear-shaped leaf-and-dart runs between
two raised lateral borders. Front and back volutes are
embellished with rosettes, and a guilloche pattern with
eyelets flanked on each side by concave fillets and half
rounds with bead-and-reel decorates the bottom. An
acanthus leaf replaces these elaborate decorations on
the Castor modillions. A hollow leaf-and-tongue pattern
enriches the corona of both cornices, but while the sima
of Castor is plain, alternating acanthus and laurel leaves
enrich that of Concord.
For that reason, the bases of our external order (Figs.
9.9, 11) are decorated like the surviving interior
bases. However, without any clear information on any
elaborations on the capitals, we show them in a standard
Corinthian style.
Ov. Fast. 1. 637650 quoted in Gasparri 1979, 14, source
23; supra,p. 373 n. 6.
Dio Cass. 55.8.2.
Zanker 1972, 22; Gasparri 1979, 3940.
Zanker 1972, 22; Dio. Cass. 56.36.45.
Most of the coins (see Fig.1.18) show a blank pediment,
but a sestertius with Drusus counter stamp, NCAPR (Nero
Caesar Augustus Probavit), portrays two reclining figures
(Tiberius and Drusus?) holding up a a victory wreath
(Fig.9.7): http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?searc
h=Tiberius+and+Concord+and+Lot+1405&firmid=&s=0
&results=100 (accessed June 27, 2011). In showing reliefs
in the pediment, we freely interpret this image.
136 The victories at the corners of the pediment are clearly

recognizable on the coins (Fig.1.18), but, as Zanker
1972, 22, points out, Die figuren auf den Giebelschrgen
sind nicht sicher zu benennen. For the left figure, he
suggests a warrior; for the right, eine weibliche Gottheit
mit Fllhorn. We have interpreted both as Tiberius and
Drusus, but they may also have been female divinities,
perhaps Security and Fortune; idem 1972, 36 n. 140.
Zanker interprets the three figures on the top of the
pediment as die drei Grazien, but the magnified view in
Fig.1.18 shows the two lateral figures as half-clad males
and the central one as a draped female. Hence we interpret
these figures as Concord flanked by Drusus and Tiberius.
137 This description is based on our partly conjectural
reconstruction of the West Rostra and the neighboring
monuments (Figs. 0.4, 1.3, 8.2, 1012).
138 The pilaster capitals are notably straightforward, although
fragments of the freestanding capitals are embellished
with acanthus festoons: Montagna Pasquinucci 1973, pls.
9.cd, 12.ab.
139 On both, S-shaped modillions alternate with soffit panels
with rosettes and other designs (on the Temple of Caesar,
a victory crown and a pine replace rosettes). Below the
modillions, both have low dentils separated by ovolos.
For the cornice of Saturn, see Pensabene 1984, 4142
figs. 3338, 51 fig.49, pls. 1, 3, 5, 6; for that of Caesar,
Pasquinucci 1973, pls. 3.b, 4.ab, 6.ac.
140 Zanker 1972, 2425; Giuliani 1987,94.
2. From Tiberius to Phocas

(14608 CE)
1 Tac. Ann. 15.3841; Suet. Ner. 38; Dio Cass. 62.1618.
2 Tac. Ann. 15.41.
3 The large number of coins Nero issued in two contemporary
imperial denominations, aurei and denarii, and sestertii, show
how important he thought the project. All his coins render

the temple on a high, rectangular, stepped podium: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Nero+Vesta&s=0&re
sults=100 (accessed August 25, 2011) while a later aureus of
Vespasian, Kent 1978, pl. 66.227 and http://pro.coinarchives.
com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=320501&AucID=575&Lot=373
(accessed August 25, 2011) (herein Fig.20.3) show the same
temple with a plain podium (omitted from the image but
implied by the presence of the central stair) and the wedgeshaped stair, its top the width of the central intercolumniation.
Since this second arrangement resembles the plan of the later
Severan temple, it suggests that Vespasian actually completed
a project Nero had only begun. The date of the Vespasianic
coin (73) may be the year in which Vespasian finished the
temple. On the difference between Corinthianizing style of
the temples Augustan period and its Vespasianic Corinthian
Order, cf. Figs. 1.19, 20.19.
4 Suet. Tit. 8.4; Dio Cass. 66.24.13; De Angeli 1992,
137138. Coarelli 2009, 75, implies, however, that
the reconstruction after the fire prompted Domitian to
undertake a vast number of new projects in the Campus
Martius. These extended to the Forum and included
the insertion of the new temple to Vespasian in an
area Augustus had previously set aside as the Forums
republican space (Curia, the West Rostra, the aerarium,
and, on the Capitoline Hill, the Temples of Jupiter Optimus
Maximus and Juno Moneta). But since, excluding the
buildings of the Capitoline Hill, Augustus had redone the
entire Forum, it is difficult to regard any of its zones as
more republican than any other. And while Domitian
finished the Temple of Vespasian, Titus began it in late 79
or early 80: De Angeli 1992,137.
5 De Angeli 1992, 137138; Nieddu 1986, 46, suggests that
Titus completed only the lower floor of the Portico of the Dei
Consentes; the upper story, like most of the adjacent Temple
of Vespasian, was Domitianic.
Notes to pages
6 Yegul 1992, 139142; G. Caruso 1999; LTUR s.v.

Thermae Titi/Titianae.
7 The total length of the temple is about 35 m. Including
its walls, the cella takes up half that space. The architect
allotted one-fourth of the remaining space to the depth of
the porch and one-half of that to the depth of the stairs.
8 The temple measures about 20 m 35 m, that is, its width
is four-sevenths its length. Since this is not an obvious
geometric ratio, it suggests that the requirements of the
site determined proportions of the building. Although the
south side of the temples podium is one intercolumniation
of Saturns porch behind the facade of the Temple of Saturn,
visitors to the west side of the Forum (Fig.1.3) could
still easily see nearly the whole facade of the Temple of
Vespasian (Fig.10.1).
9 The podia of the two temples were about the same height
(7 m), but the order of Vespasians building was smaller.
Whereas the Temple of Concord had columns 54 Roman
feet (15.98 m) high (supra, p.379 n. 128), those of
Vespasian had a diameter of 1.49 m (4.25 Roman feet) and
a height of 14.175 m (about 48 Roman feet). The figures
given by Wilson Jones 2000, 223, differ slightly from those
of De Angeli 1992, 8287. But the latter, based apparently
on numerous on-site measurements from scaffolds, are
probably more accurate.
10 Supra, 3132; infra, pp. 176178.
11 Pensabene and Caprioli 2009, 112 fig.6, 113 fig.9.
12 De Angeli 1992, 122123, cat. no.28, figs. 142ab.
13 With even an attempt at humor. Some of the central
cuirasses of the Corinthianizing capitals (faces toward the
facade, Nieddu 1986, 43), columns 4 and 5 (infra, Fig.
12.2) seem to have been executed as jokes. That to the left
has sagging, breastlike pectorals and a potbelly; that to the
right is also potbellied like the figure on the face of column
10 (Fig.12.8). Nieddu 1986, 48, implies these capitals may
be Hadrianic.
14 Verduchi and Giuliani 1987, 133139; Thomas 2004,21.

15 Verduchi and Giuliani 1987, 118122. It would have been
centered on the third arch from the south on the facade of
the Basilica Julia: Coarelli 2009, 81 fig.21. Thomas 2004,
3743, locates the statue near the site of the later Column
of Phocas at the end of the Argiletum and proposes that, in
this location, it would have connected the old Forum with
Domitians Forum Transitorium. If, however, we accept this
new position, we lose the suitably impressive dimensions of
the Verduchi/Giulianisite.
16 Coarelli 2009, 82. He thus suggests a statue 10 m long, 11
m high. With a base 7 m high, the whole monument would
have been 18 m high. In comparison, the dimensions of
the statue of Marcus Aurelius are much smaller: 3.87 m
(length), 4.24 m (height). See infra, n.22.
17 Thomas 2004, 28 fig.5; Coarelli 2009, 79 fig.17.
18 Stat Silv. 1.3242 (trans. D.R. Shackleton Bailey, Loeb).
19 Your right hand bans battles, Stat Silv. 1.1.37 (trans.
D.R. Shackleton Bailey, Loeb).
20 Thomas 2004,27.
21 Stat Silv. 1.1.3233.
22 With a height of 18 m (supra, p. 381 n. 16), the head of
the statue would have reached two-thirds the height of the
Basilica Julias second-story arcade.
23 Suet. Dom. 13.2 (trans. J.C. Rolfe, Loeb).
24 Suet. Dom. 23.1 (trans. J.C. Rolfe, Loeb).
25 Plin. Pan. 52.45.
26 During his brief reign (9698), Nerva completed Domitians
Forum Transitorium, the monumentalization of the section
of the Argiletum just north of the Forum between the Forum
and the Suburra, the popular quarter on the slopes of the
Quirinal Hill. Trajan (98117) redesigned and finished the
vast new Forum that bears his name; and Hadrian (117
138) moved the Colossal bronze statue of Nero to its final
position adjacent to the Colosseum and, at the east end of
the Via Sacra just above the Colosseum on the east side
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3843
381
of the Velia, built for Venus and Rome a vast new double
temple (which has two cellas back to back). For changes to
the House of the Vestals by Trajan and Hadrian, see LTUR
s.v. Atrium Vestae.
The SHA Ant. Pius 5.45, notes that Antoninus legates
(provincial governors) commanded his major campaigns.
Antoninus also built the temple dedicated to Hadrian in the
Campus Martius and repaired other buildings in Rome like
the Colosseum and Hadrians tomb: SHA Ant. Pius8.2.
Many of these coins appear online at: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Faustina&firmi
d=&s=0&results=100 (accessed March 1, 2010). These
combine Faustinas bust with images of at least sixteen
deities or personifications: Ceres, Venus, Providentia,
Fecunditas, Aeternitas, Vesta, Fortuna, Juno Regina, Salus,
Diana, Pietas, Pudicitia, Concordia Augusta, Aeternitas,
and Victoria.
Thomas 2001, 159160.
SHA Ant. Pius 8.1; Ramsey 1936, 480481; Stanton 1969,
586587; Hill 1989, 12; Boatwright 1991, 514n.5.
Lugli 1946, pl. 3, facing p.80; Thomas 2001,
136137,152.
The Temple of Jupiter Stator was located somewhere in the
vicinity of the east end of the Via Sacra, but its position
has not been precisely established. Coarelli supposes that
it may have been on the site of the later temple of Romulus
Augustulus farther east along the Via Sacra and suggests
that it had been destroyed by the great fire of Neros reign in
64: LTUR s.v. Iuppiter Stator, Aedes, Fanum, Templum.
Freyberger 2009, 2426, attributes parts of the Antonine
temple to the earlier shrine, dating the podium, the
travertine base on which it sits, the travertine foundations
for the columns on the facade, and the Lapis Albinus
walls of the cella to an earlier structure of the second
century BCE. Since that zone presumably burned in the
Neronian fire (which also destroyed the Temple of Vesta),
38 2
34
35
36
37
38
Notes to pages
44 48
they may not be that old although since the Romans

traditionally regarded Lapis Albinus as virtually fireproof,
the temples walls and these features could have survived
that conflagration. Indeed, while the podium of the Temple
of Concord is of concrete (although the walls of the cella are
of peperino in a travertine framework, and the fabric of the
Temple of Vespasian is of brick-faced concrete), the solid
Lapis Albinus foundation of the Temple of Antoninus and
Faustina and the Lapis Albinus cella walls appear curiously
old fashioned (Fig.3.5). And, as shown in an unpublished
early drawing by Angelo Migiliorati, 1904 (herein Fig.3.7),
from the files of the Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma,
the original supports for the front stairs (now hidden by the
restored modern brick stair) are of a brick-faced concrete
that notably contrast with the buildings earlier (?) Lapis
Albinus fabric and suggest that the steps were a later
addition. Nonetheless, Lugli identifies the temples masonry
as Antonine (infra, p.386 n. 20).
The approximate dimensions are: Antoninus and Faustina,
width 20.75 m (about 70 Roman feet), intercolumniations
(on column centers) 4.15 m (14 Roman feet), 2.8 column
diameters; Vespasian, width 18.50 m (62.50 Roman feet),
intercolumniations (on column centers), 3.70 m (12.50
Roman feet), 2.5 column diameters.
Diameter 1.48 m, height 14.18 m (48 Roman feet).
See infra, p.192 for a description of the Vespasianic
capitals and Figs. 10.4, 10.9, G2.
For the moldings on the pediment, the only sure evidence
is the four cornice fragments shown on Bartolis restored
elevation: Bartoli 1914, pl.2.
The coins (Figs. 3.3, 1011) do not show identifying
attributes with the female (right-hand) figure, and thus
we can only guess at its identity. Perhaps this was
Providentia, of the deities with whom Faustina had been
joined (supra, p. 381 n. 29), the one who best harmonizes
with the meaning of the relief on the pediment.
39 Commodus bizarre behavior had terrified his intimates,

and the conspirators included Marcia, his chief concubine;
Laetus, the commander of the Praetorian Guard; and
Electus, the emperors chamberlain: SHA Comm.17;
Herodian 1.1617; Dio Cass. 73.22.16; Birley 1988,
8788.
40 Just east of northern Italy, about 125 miles from the
northern Adriatic: see map 100 in Talbert2000.
41 Dio Cass. 75.3.13 lists the omens that encouraged
Severus hopes.
42 Dio Cass. 75.4.1
43 Dio Cass. 75.4.275.5.7.
44 LTUR s.v. Arcus: Septimius Severus (Forum).
45 Herodian 2.9.57 (trans. E. Echols 1961, 63); Thomas
2000, 170172.
46 Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 139; Thomas 2001, 171172.
47 Thomas 2001,172.
48 Aureus, obverse: Mattingly and Sydenham, RIC 112, 165 b
(this specimen): Baldwins Auctions Ltd., Dimitry Markov
Coins & Metals, M&M Numismatics Ltd., the New York
Sale 22, January 6, 2010, lot no.190, dated 200201:
http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=3381
69&AucID=604&Lot=190 (accessed August 29, 2011).
Denarius: Freeman & Sear, Manhattan Sale I, January 5,
2010, lot no., 344: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=339531&AucID=608&Lot=344 (accessed
August 29, 2011).
49 Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 65, 184185.
50 De Angeli 1992, 159163, dates this work to 209211
and implies that, owing to the character of the existing
inscription, which obliterated most of the original
architrave/frieze, Severus undertook a major reconstruction
of at least the facade. His work on the Pantheon would
then have been less significant since he recorded it on the
architrave without destroying its original configuration. It is
also possible, however, that, as suggested above, the greater
prominence of the Severan inscription on the Temple of

Vespasian had more to do with the importance of the site for
propaganda than with the character of Severus restoration.
51 This was a major undertaking. Our ancient sources do
not clearly say when Severus began work on the Temple
of Peace, but a series of denarii (and rarer aurei) with
Severus head on the obverse and a seated state of the
goddess Pax on the back that date from Severus fifth grant
of tribunician power and his second consulship (196197)
may suggest a date: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/results.
php?search=Septimius+Severus+Pax&firmid=&s=0&res
ults=100 (accessed August 30, 2010). Since Severus did
not defeat Albinus until February 197, these coins (dated
196197) may commemorate not the restoration of peace
in the empire, but the beginning of the restoration of the
Temple of Peace. De Angeli 1992, 159 n. 606, suggests that
since the Severan inscription on the Temple of Vespasian
was originally nearly identical to CIL 6.935, the probable
dedication of the restored Temple of Peace, they were
probably contemporary.
52 Aurei and denarii that date from that year show Julia
Domna (IVLIA AVGVSTA) in front of the temple beside a
round altar holding across the altar the hand of either the
Pontifex Maximus (her husband, Septimius Severus; one of
the aurei, Fig.20.4) or that of the chief Vestal (the denarii).
The female figure behind the central right figure is probably
the chief Vestal (the aurei) or a second Vestal (the denarii)
with a colleague or attendant: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
results.php?search=IVLIA+AVGVSTA+VESTA+MATER&
firmid=&s=0&results=100, Lots Nos. 308, 154, 159, 1754,
198, 61 (accessed August 30, 2011).
53 We know nothing of the architectural details of the
Flavian Temple of Vesta, but we assume that its cornice
was identical with (or very similar to) that of the Temple
of Vespasian, not to the less finely finished work in the
imperial palaces on the Palatine (cf. Figs. 10.10, 20.19).
Notes to pages
54
55
56
57
58
59
As Brilliant 1967, 8283, points out, the other important

Flavian monuments outside the Forum the Arch of Titus
and the Forum Transitorium could also have been used as
models.
Cf. Brilliant 1967, 7576, pl. 17a, with Packer 1997, 2, pl.
102.12. The two cornices both use the same elements, but
the Severan cornice reverses the ovolo and dentils. On the
Trajanic cornice, the ovolo is above and roughly the same
height as the dentils. On the Severan cornice, the dentils
are above and higher than the ovolo. Brilliant 1967, 83,
refers to the generally classicizing character of the archs
architectural ornaments.
Cf. Brilliant 1967, 8788.
Counting the fascia above its cornice, the attic is 5.54 m
high, about one-quarter (0.265percent) of the whole height.
The measurements here and below are taken from Astra
Zarinas carefully measured drawing in Brilliant 1967,
pl.1.
These earlier arches had engaged columns, however.
Freestanding columns were a novelty. The Isaeum may date
from the mid- or late first century BCE (LTUR s.v. Iseum
et Serapeum in Campo Martio; Isis Campensis), and
the Arcus ad Isis (LTUR s.v. Arcus ad Isis) could have
served as one of its entrances. It may, however, have been
somewhat later (contemporary with or slightly earlier than
the Tiberian arch at LOrange?), and we know its name and
elevation from a famous topographical relief from the late
Flavian or early Trajanic Tomb of the Haterii now exhibited
in the Vatican Museums: Kleiner 1992, 196197.
In our reconstruction, the Arch of Tiberius is 7.80 m wide,
11.40 mhigh.
The architectural elements also created strong patterns
of light and shade that sharply differentiated Severus
monument from the other more classicizing arches in the
Forum (like the Arch of Titus) and from the surrounding
monuments. Franchi 19601961,32.
60 The size and position of this inscription, which covered the

whole attic and not just a central section, was innovatory,
and the reliefs and statuary show an emperor more
interested in commemorating his own historic deeds than in
emphasizing divine patronage.
61 The seiugis, a six-horse chariot, housed three figures.
Kaehler, RE 1939, 13, 393, suggests only Severus and a
victory in the chariot drawn by six or eight horses, but the
coins (Figs. 2.8, 7.2) show only six. The figures included
in the chariot Severus and his two sons (Bauten 1973, 22;
Hill 1989, 51), Caracalla and Geta (Caracalla probably
later removed the statue of Geta after he murdered him in
211). There were also nine other separate statues including
the horses: two soldiers led the chariots horses (Fig.2.8,
standing figures flanking the chariot), and at each corner of
the arch was an equestrian figure (eight figures including
the horses).
62 Our reconstruction (Figs. 7.1, 1012, 8.1) suggests a
central group 7.40 m high; the horses of the equestrian
figures, about 3.50 m; the standing figures, about 3.40m.
63 Based on their relationship to their monuments, the central
group of the Arch of Augustus (Figs. 19.710) would have
been 3.90 m high; that of the Arch of Tiberius
(Figs. 15.56), about 3.40m.
64 Watson 1999,174.
65 Ibid. 1999, 192, locates the temple east of the modern
Corso, but rejects its identification with remains found
under Piazza San Silvestro.
66 SHA Aurel. 28.5: Then were brought in those garments
encrusted with jewels, which we now see in the Temple
of the Sun (here and in the following passages, trans.
D. Magie, Loeb); 39.6: He [Aurelian] dedicated great
quantities of gold and jewels in the Temple of the Sun;
41.11: by his liberality one temple alone [probably the
Temple of the Sun] contains fifteen thousand pounds of
gold; SHA Tacitus 9.2: In this same speech he proposed
67
68
69
70
71
72
4854
383
that a golden statue of Aurelian be set up in the Capitolium,

likewise a silver onein the Temple of the Sun.The
golden one, however, was never set up and only the silver
ones were ever dedicated.
SHA Aurel. 39.2: Templum Solis magnificentissimum
constituit.
The most complete summary of our knowledge about
the temple is that in LTUR s.v. Sol, templum. Less
detailed accounts in English are: Ward-Perkins 1994, 417;
Richardson 1992, 363364.
The general description and measurements below are
based on Palladios sixteenth-century plan redrawn with
a scale in Bothius and Ward-Perkins 1970, 499 fig.189
(herein Fig.2.9). We base our descriptions of the materials
characterized in and the Palladio sketches reproduced for
(herein Figs. 2.910) LTUR s.v. Sol, templum.
In LTUR s.v. Sol, templum, the authors characterize
the round temple on the Palladian plan as an invention
and suggest that the facade can be seen on a sestertius
of Probus with the legend CONSERVAT[O] AVG (herein
Fig.2.11).
The materials used for the columns in the two courtyards
included cipollino, gray granite, africano, and porphyry.
The gray granite shafts were probably from the exterior
columns in the west court (as, e.g., in the possibly Severan
reconstruction of the peristyle in back of the Theater of
Pompey); the finer africano columns would have been better
protected inside the colonnades and were probably located
at the entrances to the niches. The cipollino columns stood
in the east court. The porphyry columns were used for
the central temple. Ward-Perkins 1994, 417, gives their
height. According to Watson 1999, 192, Justinian later took
eight porphyry columns to Constantinople for use in Santa
Sophia.
This description comes from coins of Probus. The one Hill
1989, 18, publishes (his fig.16) is typical of the poor
38 4
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
Notes to pages
54 60
draftsmanship of the later third century and gives no idea

at all of the magnificence of the original, but for similar,
better-preserved, and more informative coins, see Figs.
2.1113 and their captions herein.
The fine, classically styled features of the cult statue on an
aureus of Probus (Fig.2.13) suggest that at least some of
the project sculptors came from the GreekEast.
At 117.52 m (400 Roman feet), the length of the central
space of the Forum of Trajan (Packer 1997, 1, folio 24)was
considerably smaller than the length of both Aurelians
courts (280 m, LTUR s.v. Sol, templum).
Yegul 1992, 163169.
Cassanelli etal. 1998, 177 fig.126, Terme di Diocleziano.
Particolari archittetonici (E. Paulin, 1881).
Infra, p. 393 nn. 15, 16.
Infra, Curia, p. 394 n. 37.
According to E. Tortorici, LTUR s.v. Curia Julia,
however, the building was completamente ricostruita da
Diocleziano and, according to Bartoli, 38, the Materiale
laterizio [] di seconda mano.
That is, he was probably responsible for the stucco
finish configured as a pattern of rectangular stone blocks
(originally probably an Augustan design) and for the
elaborate stucco decorations of the cornice: Bartoli 1963,
4748, pls. 9.12, 42.12, 89. On the Diocletianic marble
floor, Bartoli 1963, 5456 figs. 2931, pl. 44.12.
To verify the character of Diocletians architectural
sculpture, we have some elements from the lower story
of the facade: along the Vicus Iugarius, a pier with a half
column and a finely detailed Attic base and its partly
preserved neighbor; on the north (Forum) facade, a broken
pier capital and, throughout the site, surviving fragments
of cornices from the piers. All show that the facades were
finished to a traditional high standard. For the architectural
sculpture of the building destroyed in 283, our only sure
evidence comes from the schematic, lower-story elevation
82
83
84
85
86
87
on the Anaglypha Traiani (now permanently displayed

in the Curia). Thus we cannot say whether Diocletians
building accurately included and/or mimicked all the
features of its Augustan predecessor. Whatever the case,
the fine geometric pavement of the nave (infra, Chap. 14,
Basilica Julia, p. 256, Figs. 14.8, 12) and the statues found
in the interior (infra, pp. 256257), including original
works by Hellenistic masters, show that Diocletians
reconstruction spared no expense.
Khler 1964. Also called, Kleiner 1992, 413, the
Decennial Monument or the Tetrarchic Monument, its
three names describe its major characteristics.
Khler 1964, 7. This monument appears in a relief on the
Arch of Constantine (Fig.8.3).
Khler 1964, 7; Kleiner 1992,413.
On the surviving pedestal, the cornice is intact; the
description of the base is taken from the restored cast of the
pedestal in Romes Museum of Roman Civilization (Figs.
2.1416).
Kleiner 1992, 414. Khler 1964, 89, notes that in 1509,
the inscriptions from two other bases were found in the
Forum: AVGVSTORVM VINNALIA FELICITER and
VINNALIA IMPERATORUM, twenty year celebrations
of the emperors, and she suggests that the two missing
inscriptions would have read: CAESARUM VINNALIA
FELICITER AVGVSTORVM TRINNALIA FELICITER,
on the happy occasion of the twenty year celebrations
of the Caesars and on the happy occasion of the thirty
year celebrations of the Augusti. The above description
is based partly on observation of the original monument,
partly on Kleiners description, 1992, 416417.
Kleiner 1992, 414, suggests that the sculptors of the reliefs
were trained in a third century sarcophagus workshop,
and they certainly appear to have been less skilled than the
sculptor(s) who executed the finely proportioned overlifesize porphyry statue of one of the tetrarchs. Nonetheless,
88
89
90
91
92
at least one of the artists [of the pedestal reliefs]

demonstrates in his rendition of Mars that he can still
model a nude figure (Kleiner 1992,417).
On the statues, columns, capitals, and statue pedestals,
Khler 1964, 911, 4756. The body of the largest statue,
now in the Curia, is virtually complete. Fragments of two
others are today in the Vatican Museums.
Although the columns with the two reerected shafts (nos.
15a, b: Figs. 17.13) have, respectively, shafts of gray
granite and fluted white marble. These shafts have been
moved and were put up after the modern excavation of the
monument (infra, p. 283), and their installation may have
occurred after the period of Diocletian. The fact that the
shafts of the columns on the West Rostra and some of those
of the honorary columns were of red granite suggests that,
as our reconstructions show, all the columns of the original
tetrarchic monument may have been uniformly of red
granite.
The existing stair, partly reconstructed in 1830, Giuliani
and Verduchi1987, 174175, dates from the seventh
century (p.176), but an examination of the podium in 1984
showed that it had never had a marble revetment like the
honorary columns. Instead, it originally had steps of which
a brick foundation survives on the west side of the base:
Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 177; P. Verduchi in LTUR s.v.
Columna Phocae.
Zanker 1972, 28: Vom frhen vierten Jahrhundert an
werden Neubauten ohne Rcksicht auf die Platzwirkung
errichtet. And he sees the history of the Forum after
Diocletian as a period of long decline in which, without
much concern for Augustus original design of the Forum,
emperors randomly inserted occasional monuments like
the equestrian statues of Constantine and Constantius and,
ultimately, the statue dedicated to the Byzantine usurper,
Phocas.
Kleiner 1992,414.
Notes to pages
93 The necessity to create positions for the new columns and

their statues partly explains the construction of the new
Rostra. Large columns could not have been integrated
into the Rostra on the front of Caesars temple without
destroying the building. The new Rostra left the Temple
of Caesar intact an important strategic concern and
was specifically constructed to support heavy pedestals
and their columns: Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 148166,
reconstruction drawing, 161 fig.227. The Rostra also hid
the Temple of Caesar from the Forum, one of its honorary
columns, perfectly placed to obscure the view linking the
Temple of Concord with the Temple of Caesar (Figs. 21.13
14), thus emphasizing the importance of the tetrarchs above
that of the Julio-Claudians. And finally, the new monument
made the Forum stylistically axial as it had not previously
been in its whole long history.
94 Thomas 2001,210.
95 Thomas 2000, 212213.
96 Pensabene 1984, 6670.
97 Zacharias of Mytilene, describing Rome in the early sixth
century, quoted in Barnes 1984,68.
98 Ibid.,90.
99 Like the seats (cavea) of the Theater of Pompey: Cassid.
Var. 4.51.3.
3. The Temple of Antoninus

and Faustina

Sources for the new reconstructions: Bartoli 1916, 950974,

pls. 13; Nash 1968, vol. 1, 27 fig.16, MCR C/ 532; M.
Royo in Roma Antiqua 1986, 92109; unpublished drawings
from the files of the Soprintendenza Speciale per I Beni
Archeologici di Roma: Tempio di Antonino e Faustina:
unsigned plan of stair foundations, probably by Elladio
Migliorati, c. 1903; Tempio di Antonino e Faustina.
Sezione della gradinata del Tempio, [signed] Elladio
3
4
5
6
7
Angelo Migliorati, 1903; Tempio di Antonino e Faustina:

[illegable] della parte anteriore bassa del tempio e ruderi
sotto la Sacra Via, [signed] Elladio Angelo Migliorati, 1902
(herein Fig.3.7); Tempio di Antonino e Faustina: Parte
bassa del fronte del con sezione dei ruderi sotto la Sacra
Via, [signed] Elladio Angelo Migliorati, 1903; Antonio
e Faustina. Drawing invn No. 780: Unlabeled, unsigned,
undated sketch of a restored section of the stairs; Desgodetz
1682, [1972], 111119, pls. 13. From the online site, Coin
Archives (accessed March 25, 2011, and earlier): http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=337729&AucID
=603&Lot=1457; http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=236415&AucID=339&Lot=259; http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=198915&AucID=2
64&Lot=430; http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lo
tID=105332&AucID=111&Lot=1636.
Nemausus (Nimes) in Gallia Narbonensis west of the Rhone
delta: SHA Ant. Pius 1; Bryant 1895, 79; Httl 1936, 1,
2829, discusses the career of his grandfather, Titus Aurelius
Fulvius.
Httl 1936, 1, 2731: his father came from the wealthy and
powerful Aurelian clan (the gens Aurelia); his mother, Arria
Fadilla, from a wealthy family (SHA Ant. Pius1).
SHA Ant. Pius 1.8; Httl 1936, 1,27.
SHA Ant. Pius 2.1:Fuit vir forma conspicuus, ingenio
clarus, moribus clemens, nobilis vultu
Bryant 1895, 1119; Httl 1936, 1, 3145, reconstruct
a career that included the traditional republican cursus
honorum, in which Antoninus served successively as
quaestor, praetor, and consul (SHA Ant. Pius2.9).
Dio Cass. 69.20.15 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb).
Bryant 1895, 1314, notes that the names of Antoninus sons,
M. Aurelius Fulvius Antoninus and M. Galerius Aurelius
Antoninus, appear in the inscriptions from Hadrians
Mausoleum without any mention of offices held, a probable
indication that they died young.
6070
385
8 SHA Ant. Pius 3.7. Bryant 1895, 4849, assesses the

charge as extremely vague, suggesting only that
Faustina did not preserve that care for ceremonial and that
staid dignity that were expected in an Empress.
9 Like the Temples of Hadrian and the emperor Trajans
niece, Salonina Matidia. Canonized by Hadrian, she had a
temple near his and the modern Piazza Capranica: LTUR
s.v. Matidia, templum.
10 Supra, p.43 n.33.
11 Supra, p.43.
12 Armellini 1942, 1, 200201. Armellini suggests the
new church commemorated the site where the saint was
condemned to martyrdom (probably at the nearby office of
the urban prefect). Bartoli 1916, 957, agrees but notes that
there is no actual proof for dating the church to this period.
13 Mattingly 1940, vol. 4, 243, pl. 36.2, shown enlarged
in Nash 1968, 27 fig.16 MCR C/532. A similar, if less
detailed, coin appears online at Coin Archives Pro, Auction
Haus Meister & Sonntag, auction 6, October 1, 2008, inv.
no.427: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID
=232041&AucID=333&Lot=427.
14 Bartoli 1916, 960: found in 1876, quasi certo che abbia
appartenuto al prospetto del tempio.
15 As proof of the date (c. 13621370), Bartoli 1916, 958,
cites a document of Urban V: quod marmora existentia
in supereminentia fabricae s. Laurentii in Miranda intra
palatium Antonini de urbe deportentur ad fabricam
Lateranensem, dummodo absque destructione supradicte
ecclesie removeri possint. That marble surviving in very
plain view on the structure of S. Lorenzo near the palace
of Antoninus may be taken from the city to the Lateran
building whereby the above mentioned church may be
saved from destruction. For Bartoli, the pediment was the
Marmorain supereminentia.
16 Bartoli 1916,959.
17 Ibid.
38 6
Notes to pages
70 76
18 Bartoli 1916, 959; LTUR s.v. Antoninus, divus et Faustina,

diva, templum. Modern excavation has now fully exposed
the original front wall of the early church under Torrianis
facade.
19 Hill 1989,13.
20 Supra, p.382 n. 33. Lugli 1957, vol. 1, 332, calls the
Temple of Antoninus and Faustina Lultimo monumento
in Roma costruito in vero opus quadratum. Miglioratis
drawing (Fig.3.7) may, however, show evidence of an
earlier building on thesite.
21 Bartoli 1916, 960, pl.2.
22 Shown on some Antonine coins (Fig.3.3). In its original
rectangular form, the marble altar measured 1.74 m
0.855 m. Its reliefs of Olympian deities were rendered in
a cool, self-consciously archaizing Antonine style (Lissi
1957, 57 figs. 1, 2). The coins (cf. Figs. 3.1, 1617) show
the altar with a metal cover equipped with a semicircular
handle.
23 Bartoli 1916, 971972 fig.8 (redrawn herein as Fig.3.6),
pl.3.
24 Ibid., pl.23.
25 Ibid., pl. 3. There is no evidence for this zone on the
site today. Bartoli 1916, vol. 3, took its features from
the drawings of the Renaissance authorities he lists on
pp.959962. As indicated in the text above, our Fig.3.17
omits these features.
26 The earliest was by J.F. J Mnager. He cleared the
surviving base of the stairs and showed that they had been
constructed in brick-faced concrete set with marble treads.
His surviving section, Cassanelli 1998, 8283 fig.27,
shows these details clearly. The stairs were again excavated
in 1876 and documented in 1902: Bartoli 1916, 960. A
later sketch preserved in the archives of the Soprintendenza
Archeologia di Roma (no.780)indicates that, during the
subsequent rebuilding of the stairs, their original number
and measurements were duplicated: twenty-one treads
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
averaging 0.237 m in height. The face of each tread was,

according to Mnager, decorated on the top with a fillet and
a low cyma reversa.
Two drawings by Migliorati in the archives of the
Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma (one reproduced
herein, Fig.3.7) clearly show the condition of these features
in1903.
Bartoli 1916, 960961. Lugli 1957, vol. 2, pl. 49.5,
notes that under the stairs the blocks are marked signs
that indicated la quantit di pietra inviata dalla cava
al cantiere, la maestranza che laveva tagliata, oppure
formule contro il malocchio.
RA 1985, 9697, 100. Our door (Figs. 3.1516) is slightly
wider.
Like the shafts of the Portico of the Dei Consentes: supra,
p. 44.
The existing craters have been worn nearly smooth, but in
the early nineteenth century, Mnager saw and reproduced
these decorations: RA 1985, 105= Mnager drawing9.
Desgodetzs careful drawing of the west lateral facade shows
these details: Desgodetz 1682/1972,113.
CIL 6.1005.
Classical Numismatic Group, Electronic Auction 212,
June 17, 2009, lot no.306: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=312892&AucID=561&Lot=306.
Baldwins Auctions Ltd., Fritz Rudolf Knker GmbH & Co.
KG, Dimitri Markov Coins & Metals, the New York Sale
20, January 7, 2009, M&M Numismatics, Ltd., lot no.425:
&AucID=360&Lot=425.
This is the most common group. Recent sales include:
Freeman and Sear, Mail Bid Sale 17, December 15, 2009,
lot no.375: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?L
otID=338826&AucID=607&Lot=375; Baldwins Auctions
Ltd., Auctions 6263, September 29, 2009, lot no.113:
82&AucID=574&Lot=113; Classical Numismatic Group,

Electronic Auction 203, January 28, 2009, lot no.453:
01&AucID=552&Lot=453; Classical Numismatic Group,
Electronic Auction 202, January 14, 2009, lot no.288: http://
pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=308608&A
ucID=551&Lot=288; Auktionshaus H.D. Rausch GmbH.
Auction New York, January 11, 2009, lot no.97: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=249285&AucI
D=362&Lot=97; Classical Numismatic Group, Electronic
Auction 194, August 20, 2008, lot no.246: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=305767&AucID=
543&Lot=246; Baldwins Auctions Ltd., Auction 44, May 2,
2006, lot no.232: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=144157&AucID=172&Lot=232; Numismatik
Lanz Mnchen Auction 147, November 2, 2009, lot no.356:
Baldwins Auctions Ltd., Dimitri Markov Coins & Metals, the
New York Sale 11, January 11, 2006, M&M Numismatics,
Ltd., lot no.307: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php
?LotID=132583&AucID=157&Lot=307.
37 Kleiner 1992, 285287 figs. 253,254.
38 Hill 1989, 12. Recent sales of denarii: Classical
Numismatic Goup, Triton 13, January 5, 2010, lot 1457
(fig.66): http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID
=337729&AucID=603&Lot=1457; Stacks Coin Galleries.,
September 10, 2008, lot no.398: http://pro.coinarchives.
98; Freeman & Sear, Mail Bid Sale 15, June 27, 2008, lot
no.364: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotI
D=219342&AucID=309&Lot=364; Gemini, LLC, Auction
II, January 11, 2006, lot no.454: http://pro.coinarchives.
com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=133651&AucID=159&Lot
=454; Classical Numismatic Group, Electronic Auction,
May 28, 2003, lot no.74: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=270907&AucID=415&Lot=74;
Classical Numismatic Group, Electronic Auction,
Notes to pages
39
40
41
42
43
53, November 20, 2002, lot no.108:

&AucID=403&Lot=108. Recent sales of aurei: Numismatica
Ars Classica, Auction 49, October 21, 2008, lot no.259:
http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=236415&
AucID=339&Lot=259; Gemini, LLC, Auction IV, January 8,
2008, lot no.430: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.ph
p?LotID=198915&AucID=264&Lot=430.
Thomas 2001, 146, quoting Hill 1989, 12. Since the
gold received and preserved complex designs better, it is
significant that the aurei show this scene, which would
have been lost on the denarii. Since, however, the aurei do
not indicate the grill in front of the temple and the altar
which seems to be a later addition to the facade they were
probably issued before the completion of the temple. Types
13 on denarii simplify the scene, but, as the type 3 images
on denarii suggest, there must also have been reclining
figures at the corners of the pediment, flanking the central
deified empress and the young recipients of her charity (see
Fig.3.16). Supra, pp. 43, 44 Fig. 2.4, 45.
Bartoli 1916, 959, il [Piro] Ligorio [15401546] nota
per fianco al tempio sono state tolte via molte altre belle
cose.
Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 49, October 21,
2008, lot no.258: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=236414&AucID=339&Lot=258
. We show these figures of gilded bronze, but, if a find of
15401546 (Bartoli 1916, 959)was identified correctly,
frammenti di figura che su il fastigio, la quale
tirata dai cavalla, they may have been of marble since
marble fragments would have been more likely to survive
than those of bronze.
Mattingly 1940, vol. 4, 49, no.330, pl.8.8.
Lanciani 1885, 248 (quoted also in part by Bartoli 1916,
959): Eseguendosi due cavi di sottofondazione al muro
sul lato sinistrodel tempio del Divo Pio, si trovato la
platea del sacro recinto, lastricato con tavoloni di marmor

bianco, come nel lato opposto scoperto nellanno 1880. Sul
pavimento marmoreo giaceva il torso di una statua colossale
muliebre, di eccelente artificio, ma seriamente danneggiata
prima dal fuoco e poi dallumidit.
44 For a list of these: LTUR s.v. Antoninus, divus et Faustina,
diva, aedes templum.
45 Best seen on the previously cited Antonine coins (nn.
3436)and on http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=248947&AucID=360&Lot=425; http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=320082&AucID=
574&Lot=113. The torso from the male statue is now in the
pronaos (Fig.3.4).
46 Lissi 1956, 50. Caronna 2001, 93113, has suggested it
may instead have been part of the altar on the front steps of
the temple.
4. The Temple of Caesar (Aedes

divi Iuli)

1
2
3
4
5
6
Sources for the new reconstructions: Richter 1889,

137162; Richter 1891, 1415, pls. 2728; Andreae 1957,
150166, 173, abb. 26; Pasquinucci 1973, 257280;
Squarciapino 1957, 270284; Stacks, Saint Ludovio, and
Firth of Clyde Collections, April 22, 2009, lot no.1358:
93&AucID=377&Lot=1358 (accessed March 30, 2011)
(herein Fig.4.3).
Plut. Vit. Ant. 14.34.
Suet. Iul. 84. 35; App. Civ. 2.143147.
Suet. Iul. 85 quoted in Pasquinucci 1974, 145146, and
LTUR s.v. Iulius, divus, aedes.
Mon. Anc. 19.1: aedem divi Iuli feci. I built the
temple of the divine Julius.
Inscr. Ital. 13.2, Commentarii Diurni, 497, August18.
Dio Cass. 51.22.4 (trans. Herbert Foster, Loeb).
7685
387
7 Grueber 1910, vol. 2, 580, no.32 (aureus); vol. 3, pl. 122.4,

nos. 4 (aureus) 5 (denarius); Crawford 1974, 1, 537538,
nos. 540.1 (aureus), 2 (denarius), 2, pl. 64.8. In addition to
these standard references (in which the illustrations are not
clearly visible), good reproductions of similar coins appear
online at: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?searc
h=DIVO+IVL&firmid=&s=0&results=100. We reproduce
herein one of the best, a denarius (Fig.4.3).
8 Suet. Iul. 88 (trans. J.C. Rolfe, Loeb): he [Caesar]
was numbered among the gods, not only by formal
decree, but also in the conviction of the common people.
For at the first of the games which his heir Augustus
gave in honour of his apotheosis, a comet shone for
several successive nightsand was believed to be the
soul of Caesar, who had been taken to heaven; and this
is why a star is set upon the crown of his head in his
statue. Dio Cass. 35.7.1, however, locates this statue
(wrongly?) in Caesars Temple of Venus Victrix in his
own Forum.
9 Mon. Anc. 21.2: Dona ex manubiisin aede divi Iulii
consacravi. I consecrated gifts from spoilsin the
Temple of the divine Julius. On Apelles picture of Venus
Anadyomene, Plin. HN 35.36.87 (the model for Venus was
Alexanders famous mistress Pancaspe, whom Alexander
gave to Apelles after the artist fell in love with her). NH
35.36.91 (trans. H. Rackham, Loeb): Venerem exeuntem
e mari divus Augustus dicavit in delubro patris Caesaris,
quae anadyomene vocaturcuius inferiorem partem
corruptam, qui reficerit non potuit reperiri.Consenuit
haec tabula carie, aliamque pro ea substituit Nero in
principatu suo Dorothei manu. Augustus dedicated in the
shrine of his father Caesar the Venus Rising from the Sea,
which is called anadyomene.Its lower part ruined, no
one could be found to repair it. This picture aged and rotted
and in his reign Nero substituted another for it from the
hand of Dorotheus.
38 8
Notes to pages
85 91
10 Frontin. Aq. 2. 129: in foro pro rostris aedis Divi Iulii.

in the Forum in front of the rostra of the temple of the
Divine Julius.
11 Dio Cass. 51.19.2 quoted in LTUR s.v. Iulius, divus,
aedes. These prows also appear on Hadrianic sestertii
that show the front and right side of the temple (Fig.4.4),
and the side of the Rostra with its ramp appears on the
Anaglypha Traiani: Andreae 1957, 162 fig.10.
12 Andreae 1957, 157162, 173174 fig.26. The
development of the Rostra has occasioned recent scholarly
controversy: LTUR s.v. Iulius, divus, aedes.
13 LTUR s.v. Iulius, divus, aedes. The Hadrianic rendering
(Fig.4.4) portrays a Corinthian temple. The naval prows
from Actium and a low balustrade ornament the Rostra:
Pasquinucci 1973,258.
14 The reconstruction presented here is thus essentially that
of Richter (supra, p. 387 sources)corrected according to
the results of later research. Thus we illustrate a Corinthian
temple, not the Ionic one on Caesarian coins (Fig.4.3):
Pasquinucci 1973, 272273. The arcades on the sides and
back of our podium are those Gamberini-Mongenet cleared
during his excavation of the site in the 1950s (supra, p. 387
sources).
15 Pasquinucci 1973, 260261.
16 Rosa 1873, 5962.
17 Richter 1891, 14, pls. 27 (plan of the foundations), 28
(sections of the foundations). For a more recent plan of the
podium, Cecchini 1985, 70 fig.5.
18 Vitr. 3.2.2.
19 The width of the space for the vanished foundation of
travertine blocks that supported the columns is 1.77 m, the
space between the existing foundation of the podium and that
of the porch (Richter 1891, pl. 27), and this is the probable
width of the missing column plinths it supported. Following
Vitruvius prescription (3.5.1) that the width of a column plinth
is 1.5 times the diameter of its shaft, the diameters of the shafts
20
21
22
23
will have measured 1.18 m (4 Roman feet). The length of the

foundation trench is 15.19 m. Brizio 1872, 263, had calculated
the pycnostyle spacing of the columns at 2.98 m; the column
diameters at 1.16 m; Richter (1889, 138), however, found
fragments of a base and a fluted shaft that came from columns
with diameters of 1.18 m. Thus on the facade, with pycnostyle
spacing (which Vitruvius, 3.3.2, attests for the Temple of
Caesar), the on-center intervals between the temples four
lateral columns would have been 10 Roman feet (2.95 m)
apart, leaving the two middle columns with a wider on-center
intercolumniation of 3.39 m (11.50 Roman feet). Despite the
tetrastyle facades in portraits of the temple on contemporary
coins (Fig.4.3) the result of the die makers conventional
abbreviation of the elevation the temple would thus have
been hexastyle: Richter 1889, 137138, 140 (restored plan),
141 (restored elevation; cf. Figs. 4.710 herein).
Richter 1889, 138, reproduced more legibly by
Pasquinucci 1973, 275 fig.1.
On his plan of a column base, Richter 1889, 138, shows a
single fluted shaft fragment (now lost and not perhaps from
the temple), cited by Pasquinucci 1973,276.
Pasquinucci 1973, 263265.
Brizio 1872, 257; Squarciapino 1957, 270284, pls. 14; a
number of these fragments appeared during excavation by
Giaccomo Boni in 1899: Pasquinucci 1973, 265272.
5. The Basilica milia

Sources for the new reconstructions: Toebelmann 1923,

vol. 1, 2734; E. Hbrard 1904/1981, 103; Bauer 1988,
200212; Ertel etal. 2007, 109163; Freyberger 2009,
7178, 105109; Freyberger etal. 2007, 493552. On
Dr.Freyberger, see infra, p. 390 n. 45.
1 Vitr. 5.1.2.
2 Fire of 210 and earliest basilica: Coarelli 1985, 137.
Between 1946 and 1948, excavating under the imperial
basilica, Carettoni 1948, 112, revealed the remains of two

earlier structures: one, just south of the fourth to the seventh
columns from the west on the north side of the imperial
nave (ibid., 111 fig.1., 116117) was a now reburied,
fragmentary foundation of cappellacio. Supporting columns
with intercolumniations of 4.93 m (about 16.50 Roman
feet), it started 2.80 m below the level of the later pavement
and was 1.50 m high. The circles with diameters of 1.10 m
engraved on its surface probably indicate the positions of the
column bases, not, as Carettoni suggests, the diameter of the
shafts.
3 Livy 40.51.5.
4 On the difficult problems connected with this nomenclature,
see McDaniel 1928, 155178, and, more recently, LTUR
s.v. Basilica Aemilia. Carettonis second grotta oscura
foundation, ibid., 111 fig.1, F1, 112113, is still visible
under a low modern roof on the west side of the imperial
basilica. It runs northsouth and supports three column
foundations with diameters of less than 1.05 m and
intercolumniations of 5.85 m (Carettoni 1948, 112 fig.2).
Three massive tufa piers (3.50 m 2.80 m) support smaller
square blocks (2.50 m per side). Cut from the latter, the
raised, round foundations of the columns (with diameters of
1.05 m) probably represent, as in the earlier structure, the
size of the column bases, not the somewhat smaller shafts.
The vanished shafts would, therefore, have had diameters
smaller than those Carettoni gives. For Coarelli 1985,
137138, and Bauer 1988, 200212, these are the remains
of the 179 BCE Basilica Aemilia and Fulvia of Nobilior
and Lepidus, restored in 80 BCE. But, for all the earlier
remains on the site, Freyberger etal. 2007, 495, suggest
only the following relative chronology: (1) a tufa pavement
below and flanking the west wall of the basilica of 179 BCE;
at the northeast corner of the area today protected by the
roof is a contemporary northsouth wall, Carettoni 1948,
111 fig.1.a, f; (2) walls and a canal, Carettoni 1948, fig.1.
Notes to pages
, , c; (3) the remains of the basilica of 179, Carettoni

1948, fig.1.F,13.
5 Varro Ling. 6.4, quoted by Blake 1947, 142 n. 50; Plin. HN.
7.60.215.
6 Plin. HN. 35.4, 13. McDaniel 1928, 160, suggests that,
since the inscription on the reverse of the commemorative
coins reads M. LEPIDVS (the nominative case citing the
authority who struck the coins), Lepidus himself, not his
father, had redone the basilica. Had he been commemorating
his father, his inscription would have read LEPIDO.
7 Fuchs 1969, 1922; Fuchs 1969, 4951, accepted in
LTUR s.v. Basilica Aemilia. Jordan 1878, 392, however,
indentifies the image as the facade on the Forum. For
Richardson 1979, 212213, the coin shows a Porticus
Aemilia. Coarelli 1985, 203209, sees the view as the
basilicas Forum facade in the 80s. And Freyberger etal.
2007, 500, suggest a rendering of the interior.
8 De Ruggiero 1913, 398, identifies it as Doric.
9 App. B. Civ. 2.4.26; Cic. Att. 16.14; Plut. Vit. Caes. 29.3,
quoted by Blake 1947, 151n.6.
10 Steinby 1987, 167184, and in LTUR s.v. Basilica
Aemilia, suggests, however, that the different names for
the basilica in our sources and archaeological discoveries
in and around the later Temple of Caesar mean that
Lepidus built on the site of that temple a new portico open
to the Forum closed toward the Temple of Vesta. It would
later have been demolished for the construction of Caesars
temple.
11 Dio Cass. 49.42.2.
12 Dio Cass. 54.24.3. Yet, despite Augustus patronage (supra,
p. 27), Statius, at the end of the first century, calls the
structure (Stat. Silv 1.1.30) belligeri sublimis regia Pauli,
the magnificent palace of the war-like Paullus. According
to Blake 1947, 176, the floor was (and is) at a level of
14.0314.27 masl. The new walls were of Anio tufa cut to
different measurements from those in the earlier structure,
the blocks being decidedly larger

(11.50m. 9092cm. 60cm. high). Standing on
heavy foundations of Anio tufa 1.201.50 m wide, the
walls of the shops (0.890.90 m wide) were also of Anio
tufa. Sized like the blocks of the basilica, they ended
in pilasters of Luna marble. For the concrete used in
the reconstruction, see Blake 1947, 336337. Concrete
foundations under the columns helped stabilize them:
Blake 1947, 342343; construction of the vaults above the
shops: Blake 1947,344.
13 Tac. Ann. 3.72. De Ruggiero 1913, 401, suggests that a
partly preserved inscription from the interior of the basilica
PAVL[lvus] RESTI[tuit] refers to that work. Thereafter
the basilica was usually called the Basilica Paulli. The
inscription survives on three fragments in the storerooms
of the Soprintendenza Archeologica (Carettoni 1961,
8, 67 n. 14): on the first, OMA; on the second,
REST; on the third,PAVL. La superficie dei tre
frammenti molto consunta dal fuoco. This was also
the building that Pliny the Elder, HN. 36.24.102, calls the
basilicam Pauli columnis e Phrygibus [pavonazzetto].
Since, according to Bauer 1988, 205, 206 (cf. Freyberger
etal. 2007, 509510 fig.20), the columns of the upper
order were also of africano, although approximately a third
smaller than those of the lower order (lower-order diameter
= 0.96 m; upper-order diameter = 0.60 m), it is difficult to
locate these pavonazzetto columns. Were they at both ends
of thenave?
14 As indicated by brick stamps from the period of Diocletian
and Maximian, the building sustained some minor damage
in the fire of 283 CE, and Constantine and Constantius
made further repairs: Lipps 2011,20.
15 Following Hlsen 1905, 58; 1909, 128. De Ruggiero 1913,
102, 401402, suggests, however, that the building actually
largely survived the invasion. Citing three statue pedestals
with inscriptions of Gabinius Vettius Probianus (Praefectus
9193
389
Urbi in 416)and a dedication to the emperors Arcadius

and Honosrius by Aurelius Anicius Symmachus (Prefectus
Urbi, 418420) on a partly preserved architrave, he holds
that their installation had taken place when la basilica
esistesse ancora (p.401). Lincendio si sarebbelimitato
al soffito e non avrebbe cagionato il crollo dei colonnati
dellaula a tanto meno della fronte (p.102). Lipps 2011,
20, however, attributes the destruction of the building to the
fire of410.
16 The north and south ends of the wall, Carettoni 1948, 111
fig.1.M, have disappeared, but Carettoni shows that its
surviving north side partly covers the northwest column
base of the imperial basilicas north aisle. Although the
facade on the Argiletum is of (resused) brick, the back
is faced with small tufa blocks laid in two to four courses
separated by single courses of reused brick. In front of
this late wall, Carettoni cleared a pavement, 2.30 m wide,
composed of travertine slabs. He suggests (p.125) that,
since this pavement was on the same level as his secondphase basilica (fig.1.F, 13), it may have been its internal
pavement. Since, however, in his plan (p.111 fig.1) the
pavement aligns with wall M, not with the remains of the
second-phase basilica, it may have been a either a sidewalk
contemporary with that wall or part of the pavement of
irregular travertine slabs of the Argiletum that Bartoli found
between the Curia and the Basilica Aemilia: Bartoli 19381
550, unnumbered figure; Bartoli 1954, 130. A report by
Bauer 1973/1974, 546 describes M as a sptantike
Ziegelmauer mit rechteckigen und halbrunden Nischen lngs
dem Argiletum. See also Morselli and Tortorici 1989,75.
17 De Ruggiero 1913, 402. A large number of broken shafts
from this colonnade are stored along the front of the arcade,
and some of their bases are also still to beseen.
18 Bartoli 1912, 759, describes the archaeological evidence as
follows: above the pavement of the basilica was a stratum of
ashes, 0.060.10 m deep, filled with ancient coins, pieces
39 0
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Notes to pages
94 107
of metal, and burned wood, and above that, a stratum,

1m high, of tiles, architectural elements, and fragments of
statues. On these lay the remains of the wall between the
shops and the basilica.
Hlsen 1909, 134135.
The structure appears in Hlsen 1902, 43 fig.11; 1909,
131 fig.64, and somewhat less accurately in De Ruggiero
1913, 407. The marble floors, buried under protective
modern earth fill, date to the period after the Gothic Wars
in the second half of the sixth century: Guidobaldi 1984,
505513.These later pavements from two of the shops (the
third and fourth from the east end of the arcade) appear in
Bauers site plan (Bauer 1988, 203 fig.90; herein Fig.5.8).
De Ruggiero 1913,405.
Bartoli 1912, 761766.
This medieval name comes either from the nearby Torre
dei Conti on the ruins of the adjacent Forum Transitorium
(Fig.0.1) or from the towers and strongholds around the
imperial and Roman Fora: Armellini 1942, 147; Hlsen
1902,57.
Hlsen 1902, 4546; De Ruggiero 1913, 403; Frommel
1973 vol. 2, 207n.1.
Hlsen 1909, 128129.
Hlsen 1902, 46; 1909,128.
The most detailed one by Giuliano (14431516; Vat. Codex
Barbarinianus Latinus 4424, folio 28r; see Lehman 1982,
126 n. 13, for this corrected folio number). This drawing
(herein Fig.5.5) is reproduced (the upper section omitted)
in Nash 1968, vol. 1, 178 fig.195, inst. neg. 53.391, and
Lehman 1982, 126 fig.7 (complete image). The sketches of
Antonio (14531534; Lehman 1982, 127 figs. 810) are in
the Uffizi: Gabinetto Desegni e Stampe, 1590A, 1594A.
Tomei 2010, 9, 1213, reproduces rare photographs of
Bonis excavation of the basilica. On the date of his work in
the Basilica Aemilia, see Bartoli 1912,758.
Morselli and Tortorici 1989,75.
30 Gismondi never published any observations on his

reconstruction. The drawings from which the model maker,
Pierino Di Carlo, worked (and the model fabricated from
them) are in the Museum of Roman Civilization in Rome,
and we base this description on G. Gorskis comprehensive
photographs of the model (Figs. 5.67).
31 Bauer provides only brief descriptions and a selection of
his reconstruction drawings: 1977, 8693; 1977/1978,
544547; 1977, 310311; 1988, 200212 (his fullest
treatment).
32 Personal communication to Professor Packer from K.S.
Freyberger.
33 Carettonis plan 1948, 111 fig.1, shows that Bauer has
extended the late antique wall toward the southwest corner
of the building adding three additional niches. The later
wall and the Da Sangallo wall thus erroneously seem to be
part of the same structure.
34 Bauer 1988, 201202, Da alle Glieder der Ordnung,
Kapitelle, Architrave, Friese und Geisa, in zwei sich
um die Hhe von 78cm order etwa Viertel Fu
unterscheidenden Ausfhrungen vorhanden sind, ist daraus
Zweistckigkeit der Front abzuleiten; 204205 figs. 9192
(herein Fig.5.9).
35 Bauer 1988,202.
36 Bauer 1988, 202, dismisses Giuliano Da Sangallos
drawings as unrichtig, labeling as more correct a drawing
from the Codex Escurialensis (ibid., 206 fig.94), which
shows a single door flanked by full-size, engaged Doric
columns.
37 Bauer 1988,205.
38 Ibid., 203 fig.90 (herein Fig.5.8) and 208 fig.97 (herein
Fig.5.12).
39 Ibid., 209 fig.98 (herein Fig.5.8).
40 Ibid., 203 fig.90 (herein Fig.5.8); 209 fig.98 (herein
Fig.5.11).
41 Ibid., 202,206.
42 Boni worked between 1900 and 1914: LTUR s.v. Basilica

Fulvia. The statues are today preserved in the courtyard of
the Archaeological Superintendency on the PalatineHill.
43 Bauer 1988, 203,210.
44 Ibid., 202203.
45 In the last several years, a German group headed by
Dr.Klaus Stefan Freyberger, the associate director of
the German Archaeological Institute in Rome, has been
studying the Basilica Aemilia. They have rechecked
Bauers plan, measured and drawn the surviving
architectural elements, and produced a partly published
new reconstruction. We base our reconstruction on their
preliminary conclusions, drawings, and publications
although, in some details, our conclusions differ from
theirs. We are very grateful to Dr.Freyberger and his
colleagues for their help, for supplying us with copies of
their unpublished drawings of many of the architectural
fragments, and for the important discussions Professor
Packer had with Dr.Freyberger on the basilicas history
and structure. On this reconstruction, see Ertel etal. 2007,
109163; Freyberger etal. 2007, 493552; Freyberger
2009, 3843, 7178, 105109; Tomei 2010, 1657.
46 For the history and structure of this building, see LTUR s.v.
Macellum.
47 The surviving fragments include a triglyph with half a
shield from the adjacent metope, a bulls head from a
metope, and a fragment of a white marble shaft: Nash
1968, vol. 1, 178 fig.196, fot. 167. Pinon and Amprimoz
1988, 388, cite E. Hbrards restored order (supra, p.
388 sources), and Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1, 29 fig.35,
reproduces it. These and Bauers renderings were probably
the sources Ch. Ertel used for the reconstruction of the
facade in Freyberger etal. 2007, 510 fig.18.
48 Freyberger etal. 2007,509.
49 For the facade, Freyberger etal. 2007, 508, reject Bauers
second-story Doric Order. The elements from his second
Notes to pages
story belong to the lower order. Bauers differently sized

architectural elements are explicable as the result of
incomplete preservation or the varied dimensions that may
normally occur in a portico 105 m long. Roman designers
would never have superimposed two Doric Orders. For a
second-floor facade over a Doric arcade, they would have
used an Ionic Order.
50 Freyberger etal. 2007, 513518. For a detailed treatment
of these and related statues, see Bitterer 2007, 535550.
51 Freyberger etal. 2007, 514. That is, these figures would
have been taller than the 3.084-meter-high Dacians on the
facade of the Basilica Ulpia: Packer 1997, vol. 3, folio 33.
Freyberger etal. 2007, 514515, admit that the Parthians
could have been inside the basilica on the cornice of the
lower order. Yet, there is no evidence for the ressauts on
which Bauer claimed they stood, and, had they been in
the nave, they would have been virtually consumed by
the fire that gutted the interior. Then too we might have
expected statues weighing at least three tons to have left
marks on the surviving fragments of the cornice below (as
they did not). Inside the basilica, moreover, the statues
would not have been easily seen by passersby in the
Forum, and, had they been on the terrace that overlooked
the Forum, they would still have not been completely
visible. On the attic they would have been easily seen
from the Forum, and their close affinity with neighboring
monuments like Augustus Parthian Arch would have
been apparent to all. And, of course, as Freyberger does
not say, on the attic, they would have been the inspiration
for the nearly contemporary caryatids in the adjacent
Forum of Augustus and the later Dacians in the Forum of
Trajan.
52 Bitterer, in Freyberger etal. 2007, 538, table2, lists only
one giallo antico torso, but with six arms and twenty-six feet
of giallo antico, there must have been many more. Could
the giallo antico statues have alternated across the facade
53
54
55
56
with those of pavonazzetto? For Lipps 2011, 148149,

however, these statues and their bases would have been
inside the building: as Bauer assumed (supra, pp. 99, 103
Fig.5.11), their structure and colors suit them best for
a position on a mezzanine between the upper and lower
orders.
Bitterer in Freyberger etal. 2007, 543, divides these
heads into two types: (1) with a cone-shaped central mass
of projecting curls and a lively plasticity, and (2) with a
smoother hairstyle and a broader face. Both of the bestpreserved heads are of this second type. Bitterer shows the
damaged one (Freyberger etal. 2007, fig.57, inv. 3132).
The other, complete and very nearly intact, is in private
hands and has never been published.
Freyberger etal. 2007, 516517 figs. 22, 23, 518. These
shields measured 2.17 m, and Freyberger has insisted (in
conversation with Professor Packer) that there was only one
shield in each attic bay. The bays, however, measure about
5.50 m and could easily have framed two shields (as our
reconstruction shows in Figs. 5.1, 19). Had there been only
one shield in each bay, it would probably have been framed
by unknown decorative devices. Lipps 2011, 155156,
suggests, however, that these shields could have come from
the nearby Forum of Augustus.
Freyberger etal. 2007, 518, suggest that, since there are
no remains of the portrait heads that the shields framed,
these were probably of bronze. That the heads in the similar
shields in the Forums of Augustus and Trajan were of
marble may indicate, however, that those in the Aemilia
were probably of the same material.
Ibid., 514, note that, in all the surviving Parthian heads,
there is no trace of sockets for pins that might have
connected them to projecting cornices and that the heads
were connected to the bodies only by internal metal
elements. But even without external pins, the Parthians
could have had cornices (though there are no remains of
57
58
59
60
61
62
107111
391
any such elements). The statues of the Dacians on the east

colonnade in the Forum of Trajan were also not (as they
appeared to be) connected with the cornices over their
heads. Held up by chamfered blocks on both sides of their
stems, these self-supporting cornices put little (if any)
weight on the heads of the Dacians below: Packer 1997,
1,427.
Freyberger has not yet formally published his complete
reconstruction of the basilica/arcade, but a view of it in the
computer model illustrated in Tomei 2010, 2021 fig.5,
shows that he discounts Sangallos pediment. In the drawing
(Fig.5.5 herein), the inscription on the attic below that
refers to the [for]O IN BOARIO is certainly Sangallos
invention. Yet, since he was so careful about all his other
architectural details, we believe that the pediment was
also part of the ruin. In our model, therefore, we assume it
to have been attached to the wall behind the shops, and,
consequently, our second-story terrace is narrower and
higher than that of Freyberger.
Freyberger etal. 2007, 512513, 515 fig.21, note that,
despite Bauers use of these piers in the interior (supra, pp.
99, 105 Fig.5.13), there was actually no place for them
inside the building. Thus he locates them at the back of the
terrace. In his reconstruction (used here) he accepts Bauers
suggestion that these piers formed groups of four: Bauer
1988, 209 fig.100 (herein Fig.5.13). The wider piers form
the ends of the group, with the narrower ones sides turned
toward the front of the building face toward the Forum. Our
portico starts above the second bay from the west end of the
facade and aligns with the piers of the Doric portico below
(figs. 5.1,19).
Supra, p.98 n.38.
Freyberger etal. 2007,501.
Ibid., 509, 511 fig.19 (color plate). Our Fig.5.18 only
approximates the scheme verbally described above.
Ibid. 2007, 509510 fig.20.
39 2
Notes to pages
111 117
63 Ibid. 2007,502.
64 J. Lipps, in Freyberger etal. 2007, 525528, 526 fig.28,
finds two types of Ionic capitals (the later, smaller series
dated to Neoronian or Flavian times) and suggests
therefrom that the building underwent an undocumented
repair in that period (the late first century CE). Although
the Corinthian capitals (p. 111) also display two types, both
may be dated to the mid-Augustan period or perhaps to
14. Since the upper capitals are all of one period, the later
Ionic capitals were inserted as part of a planned repair, not
as a reconstruction after a catastrophe.
65 Ertel etal. 2007, 120 fig.11, restores columns of the lower
order with a height of around 9.40 m and a diameter of
about 0.85 m. For Toebelmann 1923, 1, 31 fig.37, they
have a height of 7.10m.
66 Freyberger etal. 2007,502.
67 Ibid., 502504. Earlier scholars like Carettoni 1961, 578,
all thought the frieze was part of the lower order around the
nave: Carettoni 1961, 7 fig.1, gives a theoretical section
of the order configured with the frieze, and surviving
fragments of the cornice and architrave are combined with
casts of the frieze and displayed on the northeast corner
of the site (Fig.5.16). Freyberger argues as follows. In the
north-side aisle of the basilica, two architrave/frieze blocks
survive (inv. no.398006, 504 fig.11, and inv. no.388029,
505 fig.12). The profiles of both were left rough to attach
friezes sculpted from a different marble (probably Pentelic,
the material of surviving historical friezes), but the
architraves were 0.63 m high, and the friezes (the tops of
which survive on these blocks) have a height of 0.75 m.
In other words, with that height the historical friezes were
too large, proportionally speaking, for the architraves.
They could have been used as balustrades for the upper
order, but since, in that position, they would have been
10 m above the pavement of the nave, they could not
have been easily seen. Hence, they are most likely to
have been on the walls of the aisles: Tomei 2010, 2425

fig.6. Nonetheless, there are still good arguments for
considering these friezes part of the lower order. Since so
many fragments from the buildings internal orders have
survived, the total disappearance of the frieze of the lower
order (if the historical friezes were on the walls) seems
unlikely. Moreover, since the friezes would have been far
above the pavement of the nave and their subjects had
enormous propagandistic value, enlarging them somewhat
might have made very good sense. And finally, there is the
reconstruction described above that stands in the northeast
corner of the site (Fig.5.16). To confirm the friezes original
location, its fragments should be partly disassembled and
studied. If, to integrate the friezes into the lower order,
the supervisor of the reconstruction (A. Bartoli?) did
not raise the height of the architrave or diminish that of
the reproduced frieze, the ancient friezes actually could
have been part of the lower order, and the Freybergers
smaller architrave/frieze must come from the slightly lower
architraves over the cipollino columns on the north facade.
And indeed, pointing out that the architrave blocks of
the lower order display three different sizes, Lipps 2011,
5253, suggests that the friezes (on independent slabs)
were probably used in the nave on the architrave/frieze
blocks (his seriesA3a).
68 Carettonis section of the cornice (supra, p. 392 n. 67)
clearly shows the profile of the cornice, which is not very
clear from the poorly preserved surviving fragments.
69 Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1, 31 fig.37, estimates 5.50 m;
Freyberger etal. 2007, 508, estimate6m.
70 Freyberger etal. 2007, 508; Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1,
2930 figs. 35, 36, reproduces Ernest Hbrards renderings
(supra, p. 388 sources), which appear also in Blatteau and
Sears 1981, 103. With sections and elevations, Hbrard
clearly depicts the decorations of the engaged exterior order
and the upper interior Corinthianone.
71 Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1, 1.31 fig.37, height (H) of the

columns of the lower order, 7.10 m; H of entablature,
1.77m; H of upper order columns, 5.50 m; H of
entablature, 1.36 m. Since the upper order is approximately
three-quarters the size of the lower one, these orders would
have been proportioned according to Vitr. 5.1.3.
72 Freyberger etal. 2007, 501502, thinks that vaults over this
aisle are unlikely, and our Fig.5.17 follows him. However,
concrete fragments found there rested on a meter-high layer
of rubble indicating that they fell after the basilica burned
and came from neither the aisle nor the nave: according
to Freyberger, they may have been from either the Temple
of Peace or the Forum Transitorium. Collapsed concrete
vaults are, however, useless to later builders. Hence once a
vault fell, it usually stayed put (unless disturbed or removed
by later construction). Consequently a better explanation
for the evidence Freyberger describes assumes that the
roof of the basilica collapsed first while the vaults over the
aisles stayed in position long enough to allow detritus to
accumulate underthem.
6. The Curia

1
2
3
4
Sources for the new reconstructions: Bartoli 1963,

especially pls. 1, 6, 7997; Nash 1976, 190204; Morselli
and Tortorici 1989, vol. 1: 1326, 8491; http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Curia&firmid=&
s=0&results=100, select lot nos. (in order of appearance
on screen): 1205, 696, 707, 443, 7574, 344, 198, 342,
141, 2058, 1234, 120, 653, 8496 (accessed September 14,
2011).
Livy 1.8.7.
Livy 1.30.2; Varro Ling. 5.155.
Livy 1.30.2.
A senatorial decree was valid only in a place sanctified
by an augur, a state priest responsible for omens. With
Notes to pages
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
this blessing, both the Curia Hostilia and its successor,

the Curia Julia, were temples: Var. Ling. 5.155; Gell. NA.
14.7.7; Serv. Comm. in Verg. Aen. 11.235.
Livy 1.48.3; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 4.38. Coarelli 1985, 23
fig.5 (cf. Fig. 1.1) shows the Curia and a round Comitium.
Amici 20042005, 359361 fig.11, suggests, however,
that the earliest Comitium was rectangular. The circular
configuration dates from the age of Sulla, and, with its
rigidly northsouth orientation, the Curia extended under
the modern Church of Saints Martina and Luke at a roughly
forty-five-degree angle.
Plin. HN. 35.7.22.
Bartoli 1963, 37, 38 fig.19: in a random sounding near the
facade of Saint Luke and Martina, Bartoli found a finely
finished, stuccoed Ionic capital, and in his excavations, Boni
had recovered fragments of stucco configured like courses
of opus quadratum, and painted First Style decorations.
These he attributed to the Sullan structure, both its exterior
(the fragments with faux opus quadratum) and interior (the
painted fragments). These remnants suggest a structure
much like the one Augustus later built. Amici 20042005,
372373 fig.25, locates the Sullan Curia around the
northwest side of the later Curia. While the later Curia was
enlarged and rebuilt, it always remained on its traditional
site. The orientation of the Curia thus determined that of the
Forum of Caesar and of the later imperialfora.
Cic. Fin. 5.1.2.
Dio Cass. 40.484 (translated by E. Carey, Loeb); Cic. Mil.
33.12; Asc. Mil. 33C.20, 42C.12.
Dio Cass. 40.50.2.
Dio Cass. 44.5.12. Dio notes that the Temple of Felicitas,
while actually built, was the means of destroying Sullas
building and putting up one connected the Julian family.
Thus the Senates assignment was in fact already one of
Caesars projects.
Dio Cass. 45.17.8.
13 Dio Cass. 47.19.1; 51.22.12. Richardson 1978, 360,

suggests that the platform with Ionic columns in front of
the building shown on Augustan denarii (see Fig.6.2 and
supra, p. 392 sources)served as a speakers platform. If
that was its purpose, it was the only Rostra in the Forum
behind a colonnade. In fact, what the coins show is simply
the porch of the building. For Zevi 1971, 237251, this
colonnade was the Chalcidicum Augustus mentions in
his autobiography, Mon. Anc. 19: Curiam et ei continens
Chalcidicumfeci, I built the Senate House, and the
Chalcidicum adjacent to it. De Ruggiero 1913, 336337,
had, however, located the Chalcidicum just west of the
Curia in the space later traversed by the Via Bonella, and
Morselli-Tortorici 1989, 1, 3436, tentatively identifies
the colonnade behind the Curia, at the southeast corner
of the colonnade around the Forum of Caesar, as the
Chalcidicum, a identification accepted in LTUR s.v.
Chalcidicum.
14 LTUR s.v. Curia Julia.
15 Although parts of the building or at least its rubble
have been preserved. Bartoli 19491950, 5054;
1954, 133134, found a pedestal with a partly intact
inscription that commemorated Elagabalus and his
immediate family. Once probably displayed near the
Curia or in one of the adjacent buildings, later used
in a stair (Bartoli 19491950, 50, 54), it indicates
that at least some remains of Domitians building (or
its surroundings) survived for centuries on or near the
site. These remains recall Herodians account, 5.5.67,
of Elagabalus orders to hang his portrait in the Curia
above the famous statue of the winged victory behind the
presiding magistrates.
16 Chron. Urb. 16: For the text, see infra, p. 406 n. 21. The
pottery Lambroglia 19641965, 111112, uncovered
in the foundation of the Curias north wall confirms the
Diocletianic construction date (303).
117120
393
17 Morselli Tororici 1989, 85, stato cos possible stabilire

che ledificio paleocristiano (VIIIX secolo)non alter
i livelli e la configurazione architettonica generale della
Curia di et dioclezianea; ad essa furono aggiunte le parti
relative allabside, le cui fondazioni sono state remesse in
luce negli scavi effettuati da Lambroglia.e la capella
esterna alla parete di fondo, inserita del portico del Foro
di Cesare.
18 Cecchelli 1933,268.
19 From documentary evidence, De Francisci 19461947,
275317 holds that the Curia was severely damaged
in the fifth century and completely abandoned by the
seventh century. While the Senate continued to exist, it
met elsewhere ad Palmam or in the nearby Atrium
Libertatis. Citing the above evidence, Bartoli 1954,
13637, however, argues that the Curia continued to be
used until 11431145, and indeed, Hlsen 1902, 40,
reports that, on the foundation of the steps in front of the
door to the medieval church, two coins of the twelfthcentury Roman Senate were found. Until 1870, according
to Bartoli 1954, 137, the Senate of the Comune was called
the Roman Senate.
20 In 15661572, Alessandria Michele Bonelli, nephew of
Pope Pius V, raised the zone between the Forum of Trajan
and the Forum by 34 m to bury the pantani, the marshes
that had given the area a bad name in the Middle Ages.
He thus created an entirely new quarter that Mussolini
demolished in the 1930s to open the Via dellImpero (now
the Via dei Fori Imperiali): Insolera and Perego 1983, vii,
2425. See infra, p. 393 n.55.
21 Hlsen 1902, 39. The early medieval threshold was 3.25
m above the position of its Diocletianic predecessor. The
upper half of the door was then still exposed, but in 1655,
P. Sotermeyer closed that also, raising the threshold to its
early twentieth-century level. Boni also found niches for
medieval burials that had been cut into the facade. The
39 4
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Notes to pages
121 127
archaeological evidence for the early twentieth-century

door and its predecessors and the burial niches (filled with
modern cement) are visible in Fig.6.4, more clearly in
Morselli and Tortorici 1989, 16 fig.4, and in detail herein,
in Figs. 6.7,9.
Lanciani 1897, 265; Bartoli 1963,16.
Bartoli 1963, 10 fig.3,15.
Ibid.,20.
Ibid., figs. 1, 7, 7981.
As Bartoli 1963, 20, notes, the later architecture
was very clever (genialissima), and this was un
edificio dimportanza artistica e di assai pi grande
importanza storica (p.16), a building of artistic merit
and more significantly of great historical importance.
See his pls. 1314, 7476 for views of the baroque
interior.
On the clearing of the facade and Bonis initial investigation
of the remains of the ancient interior, see Hlsen 1902,
34 fig.8, 37 fig.9, 3941; Bartoli 1963, 13. Fragments of
the marble wall facing of the lower wall were found, one
used as a cover for a medieval tomb. A fallen fragment of
the ancient travertine door frame had been built into the
medieval fill closing the ancientdoor.
Bartoli 1963, 13. Trecciani, Enciclopedia Italiana, http://
www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/alfonso-bartoli/ (accessed
September 25, 2011).
The work lasted from 1930 through spring 1939: Bartoli
1954,129.
Bartoli 1963, 1536.
Ibid.,38.
Ibid.,39.
Richardson 1978, 366; 1992, 103 suggests instead a frontal
stair. However, Bartoli 1963, 39 fig.20, pls. 8283, clearly
shows the location of the lateral stairs which Richardson
interprets as the east end of the stair on the front of the
porch.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Bartoli 1963,39.
Ibid.,40.
Ibid., pls. 83,87.
Ibid.,44.
Ibid., 4547.
Ibid.,48.
Bartoli, quoted in Cecchelli 1933, 270, modeled the
restored modillions in the pediment after those on the
cornice below. Reproductions of the drawings of the
decorations on the original cornice were originally
published by Hlsen 1905, 4752.
Bartoli 1963, 4748, pls. 8.2, 9.12.
Ibid.,49.
Ibid., 4849.
Vitr. 5.2.1 specifies that the height of an oblong Curia
should be half the sum of its length and height. The
dimensions of the Curia are according Bartoli 1963, 51,
25.63 m 17.75 (= 86.5 60 Roman feet) and 23.40 m
(nearly 70 Roman feet) high, a dimension approximately
in accordance with the Vitruvian fromula. Bartoli 1954,
132, argues that, for this reason, the Augustan and the
Diocletianic Curia had the same layout.
Bartoli 1963, frontispiece, 53 fig.29 (herein Fig.6.12),
5456, pl. 44.12.
Ibid., 54, pls. 4647,96.
Augustus set up the statue, a celebrated masterpiece from
Tarentum in the Curia Julia: Dio Cass. 51.22.12. After
the statue was removed from the Senate by order of the
emperor Gratian (375383), it was transferred to the house
of Symmachus, where it was broken in pieces during the
battle in which the usurper Eugenius was killed (September
6, 394). Its pieces (?), found in the late nineteenth century,
were assembled and displayed, in the 1930s, in the
Antiquarium on the Caelian Hill: Cecchelli 1933, 266, 270
(photograph).
Bartoli 1963,57.
49 Lanciani 1897, 264; Bartoli 1963, 5860 fig.32, pls.

5159.
50 Plin. NH 35.7.22; Richardson 1978, 364. It was later
moved to the Basilica Porcia.
51 This was a personification of the forest (Nemea) where
Hercules killed the Nemaean lion: Plin. NH 35.10.7.
52 Bartoli 1963,35.
53 Bartoli 19491950, 77. Nash 1976, 191, locates the
inscription in the Church of Saints Martina and Luke,
but since Bartoli spent years investigating the Curia, his
location of the inscription is preferable. The inscription,
CIL 6.1918, quoted by Bartoli, 80, and Nash 1976,
191 reads: SALVIS DOMINIS NOSTRIS HONORIO
ET THEODOSIO VICTORIOSISSIMIS PRINCIPIBVS
SECRETARIVM AMPLISSIMI SENATVS QVOD VIR
INLVSTRIS FLAVIANVS INSTITVERAT ET FATALIS
IGNIS ABSVMPSIT FLAVIVS ANNIVS EVCHARIVS
EPIFANIVS V C PRAEF VRB VI SACRA IVD
REPARAVIT ET AD PRISTINAM FACIEM REDVXIT,
Annius Eucharis Epifanius, most distinguished gentleman,
Urban Prefect in the Sacred City, while Our Lords Honorius
and Theodosius were our most victorious princes, repaired
and restored to its original condition the Secretarium
Senatus which the illustrious Gentleman Flavianus founded
and the fatal fire consumed. According to Nash 1976, 191,
the inscription has been missing since the middle of the
seventeenth century.
54 Lanciani 18821883, 3ff.; Bartoli 1963, 6162. But see
infra, pp. 129130.
55 After Cardinal Bonelli had raised the area behind the
Curia (supra, p. 393 n. 20), in the papacy of Sixtus V
(15851590), he ran a street he named for himself, the Via
Bonella, across the site: Lanciani 1897, 265; Bartoli 1963,
1112 figs. 1 (view of the Curia before the Via Bonella), 2
(view down the Via Bonella looking north from the Forum).
De Ruggiero 1913, plan facing p.332 (followed by Cecchelli
Notes to pages
56
1933, 271), shows the streets location and locates the

Chalcidicum (supra, p. 303 n. 13)under the street.
So Lugli 1946, 134. On the current scholarly definitions
of the Atium Minervae, see Zevi, LTUR s.v. Atrium
Minervae.
Nash 1976, 193, followed by Anderson 1984,51.
Nash 1976, 200201.
Bartoli 1963,39.
Bartoli 1954, 130: ho potuto accertare che la sua facciata
era allineata con la facciata principale della Curia.
These mention repairs of the Curia in the early fifth
century and may have been undertaken by the prefect of
the city who restored the SECRETARIVM AMPLISSIMI
SENATVS, in CIL 6.1718; Bartoli 19491950, 7884, 78
fig.1; 1954, pl.30.
57
58
59
60
61
7. The Arch of Septimus Severus

1
2
3
4
5
6
Sources for the new reconstructions: Brilliant 1967,

especially pls. 17b, executed by Astra Haner (Zarina);
Desgodetz 1682 (reproduction, 1972), pls. 194215;
Normand, 39 pl. 21 in Roma antiqua 1985, 39 pl. 21.
Severan denarii from Coin Archives.com: select lot nos.
(in order of appearance on computer screen), http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Arch+of+Severus&fir
mid=&s=0&results=100, lot nos. 2047, 750, 1747, 143, 756,
942, 1616, 940, 327 (accessed September 20, 2011).
Dio Cass. 73.22.46; 74.1.1; Herodian 1.13.78, 1617;
SHA Comm.17.
Dio Cass. 74.11.16; Herodian 2.1.510.
Dio Cass. 74.14.315.3; Herodian 2.715; SHA Did. Jul.,
Sev.5.
Dio Cass. 75.6.18.3; Herodian 3.14; SHA Sev.89.
Franchi 1964, 20, 26; Brilliant 1967,92.
Dio Cass. 76.67.3; Eutr. 8.18.14; Herodian 3.57; SHA
Sev. 1011.
7 Dio Cass. 76.9.15.

8 Using the titles of Severus and his sons on the attic
inscription, Franchi 1964, 20, dates the dedication of the
arch from December 10, 202, to December 9, 203 CE. Cf.
Brilliant 1967, 9192. According to a newly identified
fragment of the Forma Urbis, Rodriguez Almeida 1981,
170171, the arch was known in antiquity as the Arcus
Severianus.
9 But see infra, p. 396 n. 28.
10 Hannestad 1986,262.
11 De Ruggiero 1913, 457; Brilliant 1967,255.
12 For Marten Van Heemskercks rear view of the deaconate
from the Capitoline Hill, see Lanciani 1897, 281 fig.107;
Brilliant 1967, pl. 97.ab.
13 Brilliant 1967,256.
14 Masini etal. 1985, 39,40.
15 So Nibby 1819,118.
16 Lanciani Storia2, 1989, vol. 1, 90, 98; Brilliant
1967,262.
17 Brilliant 1967, 256; Lanciani 1990 Storia2, vol. 2, 209
fig.136 (1547 drawing by Antonio Lafreri showing the
complete arch),210.
18 Quoted in De Ruggiero 1913, 459: il suolo interno
rimase ingombro di frammenti di statue, colonne, e simili.
Lanciani 1990, Storia2, vol. 2, 207, gives a slightly different
description: il terreno ancor tutto ingombrato da
piedistalli di statue equestri e pedestri, da basi di colonne,
da travi, etc. The arch was completely excavated in 1563,
but was reburied the same year: Lanciani 1990, Storia2, vol.
2, 208 figs. 134,135.
19 Masini 1985, 40; Brilliant 1967,263.
20 Nibby 1819, 118, says these spaces were shops until
1803; Lanciani 1897, 204205 fig.109, reports
eighteenth-century leases for these shops and provides a
drawing of the fruit shop in the north lateral arch in 1803.
See also Brilliant 1967,263.
127136
395
21 An inscription of Pius VII, transcribed by Nibby 1819, 118,

dates the excavation to 1803. De Ruggiero 1913, 460. A
1820 print by L. Rossini, Veduta dellArco di Settimio,
shows the arch (looking west toward the Capitoline)
surrounded by Nibbys walls. Arriving from the Arch of
Titus, visitors circled around the north side of the Arch
of Severus and continued up the Capitoline steps: http://
www.invaluable.com/catalog/searchLots.cfm?scp=m&arti
stRef=IJSDPIHMV6&ord=2&ad=DESC&alF=1, Lot 331
(accessed September 23, 2011). The view by Taylor and
Crecy 1821, vol. 1, pl. 11, facing p.15 (probably made in
1820 or before) shows the same features even more clearly,
and on p.16, they also transcribe Pius VIIs inscription and
estimate the depth of the fill surrounding the arch from 4.44
m (on the Forum side) to 7.40 m (Capitoline side). Another
Rossini drawing reproduced by Brilliant 1967, pl. 7a,
Arco di Settimio Severo in Roma, shows the arch in 1835
with the street running throughit.
22 Brilliant 1967, 263. After Boni, scholars of the late
1970s and early 1980s have documented the monuments
structure: Brilliant 1967; Nardi 19841985, 299313;
Claridge and Cozza 1985, 3439; Masini etal. 1985,
3940; Nardi 1985, 4155.
23 It is 1.85 m high (6.25 Roman feet).
24 Brilliant 1967, pls. 1, 37b: 23.27 m long, 11.20 m wide,
20.88 m high (about 78.5 37.75 70.50 Roman feet). The
central passageway has widths of 6.77 m, 6.82 m (about
22.75 Roman feet) and a height of 3.45 m (about 11.50
Roman feet), and the side passages, widths of 2.97 m (10
Roman feet), and heights of 6.21 m (about 21 Roman feet).
25 Brilliant 1967, 5557; Claridge and Cozza 1985, 38 fig.5.
26 Interestingly, the coin portraits of the arch (Fig.7.2)
suggest that the inscription was not originally intended to
take up the whole attic. Rather, it would have occupied
the central bay and about half to a third the space over the
lateralbays.
39 6
Notes to pages
136 151
27 Brilliant 1967, 74: the gilding [is] still extant on the

triangular punctuation mark of the IMP CAES
beginning the third line on the side facing the Capitol (Pl.
16b).
28 When Caracalla murdered his brother Geta in 212 CE after
the death of their father, he expunged the last two letters ET
(and) in the third line and (Brilliant 1967, 91, 94)added
a new fourth line (in italics above) that substitutes for the
originaltext:
P SEPTIMIO GETAE NOB CAESARI
[and] To the noble Caesar Publius SeptimiusGeta
29 The identical inscriptions on both sides of the arch both

run together ob and rem. Since these words are usually
separate, virtually all copies of the inscription erroneously
put a space between them (including CIL 6.1033).
Only Rossinis drawing of 1835 (Brilliant 1967, pl. 7a)
transcribes this part of the inscription correctly.
30 Discussed by Brilliant 1967, 9195.
31 Ibid.,74.
32 Ibid., 75, pls. 14,17a.
33 We derive these figures from Brilliant 1967, pl.3.
34 Ibid., 47, 8284, 151165.
35 Ibid., 101105.
36 Ibid., 107113.
37 Ibid., 115120.
38 Ibid., 121128.
39 Ibid., 7980. To add variety to the composition, the types
are randomly distributed.
40 Ibid., 8082.
41 Ibid., 139147, but De Maria 1988, 184, thinks these
scenes show Severus entry into Rome the sameyear.
42 Herodian 3.9.312; Franchi 19601961, 28, 32; Brilliant
1967, 219224; Hannestad 1986,264.
43 They measure 3.92 4.72 m (13.25 16 Roman feet):
Brilliant 1967, pls.1,3.
44 Bartoli 1690, pls. 1, 38, 44, 60, 66, 76, 86; for
reproductions, see Brilliant 1967, 260 n. 64, pls. 60a, 66a,
76a,86a.
45 Brilliant 1967, 176, 184188.
46 Ibid., 179180, 188195.
47 Ibid., 180181, 195207.
48 Ibid., 181182, 207217. With a different set of
identifications, Koeppel 1990, 17, 932, sees the first
two scenes as the First Parthian War, and the last two, the
Second Parthian War with the seiges of Cteisiphon (panel
3)and of Hatra (panel 4). Rubin 1975, 426437, 441,
agrees with his identification of the two latter episodes.
8. MINOR MONUMENTS

1
2
Sources for the new reconstructions: Richter 1884, pls. 1,

2; Richter 1889, drawings on pp.2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14; Hlsen
1909, 7281 figs. 2630; Khler 1964, 29 figs. 6, 3338,
4756; Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 156 fig.218.
Plin. HN. 34.12.26.
Coarelli 1983, 138156, 139 fig.39; LTUR s.v. Curia
Hostilia, Rostra (et repubblicana). The former dates the
circular Comitium to 263 BCE, but it was probably Sullan
(supra, p. 393 n. 5).
We here follow the interpretation of the remains given
in LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti. The curved, marble-clad
facade behind (west of) the facade of the Augustan Rostra
(Fig.8.4) is usually identified as Caesars Rostra of early
44BCE.
Dio Cass. 56.34.3 (Rostra of the orators); Pompon. 1.2.2.43
(Rostra of Augustus); Asc. Mil. 12: Erant enim tunc rostra
non in eo loco quo nunc sunt, sed ad comitium, prope iuncta
curiae. For then [in the early first century BCE], the rostra
were not where they are now but at the Comitium almost
joined to the Curia; LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti provides
the dates.
5 See infra, p. 397 n.25.

6 The statue of Lucius Vitellius the father of Aulus Vitellius,
briefly emperor in 69 CE, was one of the last early statues
mentioned in our sources: Suet. Vit. 3. But, by the later third
century, we hear that by action of the entire world there was
placed on the rostra a column bearing a silver statue arrayed
in the palm-embroidered tunic and weighing fifteen hundred
pounds. SHA Clod. 3.5 (trans. D. Magie, Loeb). See LTUR
s.v. Rostra Augusti. Lugli 1946, 145146.
7 Suet. Aug.99.3.
8 The image of Caesars Rostra on the coin of Q. Lollius
Palikanus (Fig.8.5) shows a similar seat on the Rostra.
9 Suet. Ner. 13. Without citing the source, Hlsen 1909,
7677, paraphrases this passage and quotes that given
supra, pp. 147149.
10 Septimius Severus, the governor of Pannonia Superior,
who had become emperor after the murder of Pertinax and
the brief reign of the senator Didius Julianus. With this
elaborate ceremony, Severus asserted the legitimacy of his
claim to the throne as Pertinaxs legal successor.
11 Dio Cass. 75.4.15.5 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb).
12 MacMullen 1969, 78, 81; Barnes 1981, 4447.
13 The central shaft had a diameter of 1.35 m and the ones at
the side, of 1.18 m: Khler 1964, 9. All were of red granite,
and a number of fragments survive: Khler 1964, 4850,
51, pl. 8; they carried pedestals with cornices, simpler than
those on the Diocletianic honorary columns (supra, p. 57
n.85).
14 Supra, pp. 56 n. 83, 58 n. 88.
15 Bianchi-Bandinelli 1970, 7778 fig.69; Giuliani and
Verduchi1987, 154156 fig.217.
16 Lugli 1946, 146, mentions statues of the emperor Honorius
and of the general Stilicho (406CE).
17 Nichols 1885, 26; Jordan 1883, 23; LTUR s.v. Rostra
Augusti.
18 This description is based on that of Nichols 1885, 3637.
Notes to pages
19 LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti, fig.96. The coin in fig.146 is

shown at: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lot
ID=418468&AucID=755&Lot=428 (accessed September
25, 2011). The centered hole in the one nearly complete
portasanta slab (Fig.8.4) is probably a socket for attaching
a rostrum.
20 Nichols 1885, 7. As Nichols shows in p.6, pl. 1, only
three courses and a part of the fourth survived on the north
side of the facade. On the south side of the monument,
some additional blocks remain. In the early part of the last
century, Boni completely rebuilt the facade in concrete with
a copious mixture of fragments of Anio tufa, reattaching
fragments of the cornice and the base molding (Fig.8.6):
LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti. His published account, Boni
1900, 627634, documents his interest in the site and some
of his miscellaneous finds.
21 Blake 1947,173.
22 Nichols 1885, 12, suggests twenty prows above, nineteen
below.
23 LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti identifies the material of the
floor supports as wood, and Nichols, 16, as travertine.
According to his account, these stone beams measured
0.60m 0.60 m, and one of the surviving fragments had a
length of 1.30m.
24 Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 155156 fig.218; LTUR s.v.
Rostra Augusti.
25 Named from an inscription found nearby (CIL 6.32005) c.
470 CE, this addition may perhaps be better dated to the
late third century CE: LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti.
26 Sources for the new reconstructions: Verzar 19761977,
378398 figs. AD; LTUR s.v. Mundus.
27 Nichols 1885, 2, dates its original discovery (and reburial)
to 1802. Bunsen 18351, 21 n. 1, records the rediscovery on
December 24,1833.
28 Verzar 19761977, 378. On 381 n. 12, she lists the ancient
sources.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Verduchi1985, 33 fig.6.
Verzar 19761977, 380398.
LTUR s.v. Mundus, 288289.
Verzar 19761977, 379382; LTUR s.v. Mundus,289.
Like that of C. Moyaux: Roma Antiqua 1985, 73 Moyaux 4,
recently copied in the UCLA digital model of the Forum:
http://dlib.etc.ucla.edu/projects/Forum/reconstructions/
view/11530 (accessed October 3, 2011).
Sources for the new reconstructions: Khler 1964, 5859,
section and plan along section line GH, Z; LTUR s.v.
Miliarium Aureum.
Dio Cass. 54.8.4; LTUR s.v. Miliarium Aureum.
Suet. Otho. 6.2; Tac. Hist. 1.27. Both use exactly the
same words in their account of Othos plot against Galba,
and this identical phraseology probably indicates either
a common source or a phrase traditionally used for the
monument.
Dig. 50.16.154 in Scott 1973, 9, pt. 2,281.
Bunsen 1834, 21n.1.
Bunsen 18352, 81; LTUR s.v. Miliarium Aureum.
Jordan 1883, 5657.
Khler 1964, 5859, section and plan. On that section, the
foundation of the Miliarium has an elevation of 14.42 masl.;
on the plan, it is situated along section lineGH.
LTUR s.v. Miliarium Aureum.
Sources for the new reconstructions: Giuliani and Verduchi
1980, 52 fig.35; Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 149 fig.205,
157 fig.219, 158 fig.220, 161 fig.227 (herein redrawn
as Fig.8.15), 163 fig.233, 165166; LTUR s.v. Rostra
Diocletiani.
Rosa was the superintendent of the Sopraintendenza per
gli scavi e la conservazione dei monumenti della provincia
di Roma established by royal decree on November 8,
1870; Brizio was its secretary: Rosa 1873, 4,143.
Rosa 1873, 58: La sua costruzione, la solidit strordinaria
e grossezza delle sue pareti, e specialmente il genere strano
46
47
48
49
50
51
152165
397
darchitettura la facevano riconoscere come risiduo duna

torre del medioevo.
Brizio 1872, 230: Lo scavofu da principio assai
malagevole per lingombro continuo dei massi caduti e
di fabbriche laterizie dell et mediovale, che ad ogni
tratto sincontravano, fabbriche senza fondamento e di
pessima costruzione, cosicch fu stimato opportuno di
abbatterle.
Nichols 1877, 81; Lanciani 1897,243.
Lugli 1946, 96,164.
Giuliani and Verduchi 1980, 5159; Giuliani and Verduchi
1987, 148166; LTUR s.v. Rostra Augusti.
Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 152154 fig.211ab.
Ibid., fig.227 (redrawn herein as Fig.8.15), 162
fig.228.
9. The Temple of Concord

Sources for the new reconstructions: Rebert and Marceau 1923,

pls. 5154; Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1, 4251; vol. 2, pls. 6,
7; Gasparri 1979, particularly pls. 9.1, 10, 2225; LTUR s.v.
Concordia, aedes. Late Tiberian Sestertii dated 3435 CE,
Nash 1968, vol. 1, 294 fig.347, fot. 3549, and at: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Temple+of+Concord&f
irmid=&s=0&results=100, lot nos. (in listing order on computer
screen) 322, 342, 1405 (pediment decorated with two reclining
male figures flanking a central wreathe), 75, 733, 1516, 1517,
1287 (accessed October 4, 2011), herein Figure 9.7.
1 Plut. Vit. Cam. 42.3 (trans. B. Perrin, Loeb).
2 Ov. Fast. 641644 (trans. G. Frazer, Loeb).
3 Gasparri 1979, 16. Although, in LTUR s.v. Concordia
aedes, Ferroni admits that the structure of Camillus
has been controversial, he points out that fourth-century
remains have been found under the temple of Tiberius
(scavi stratigrafici in corso stanno portando alla luce
strutture di IV d.C. in livelli sottostanti il tempio).
39 8
Notes to pages
165 170
4 Livy 9.46.58 (trans. B. Foster, Loeb).

5 Plin. NH 33.6.19 (trans. H. Rackham, Loeb).
6 LTUR s.v. Concordia, aedicula summarizes recent
scholarly interpretations of Flavius foundation. Its
location in the Graecostasis (where foreign embassies
waited for introductions to the Senate) symbolized
accord with foreign nations. Part of the same project as a
makeover of the Comitium, it indicated popular sentiment
against the nobles, and the Greek origins of the new cult
showed increasing foreign influences inRome.
7 Livy 39.56.6 (183 BCE) (trans. E. Sage, Loeb): At the
end of the year there was a period of prayer by reason of
the prodigies, because the Romans were well persuaded
that there had been a shower of blood, lasting two days,
in the precinct of Concord.; 40.19.2 (181 BCE): In
the precinct of Vulcan and Concord there was a shower of
blood.
8 Rutilius, a fellow tribune, had passed a law authorizing a
colony at Carthage, then desolate after its destruction by
the Romans at the end of the Third Punic War (146 BCE).
To oversee the colonization and incidentally remove
them from the political scene in Rome the Senate
ordered Gracchus and Flaccus to establish the colony.
Despite adverse omens (wolves allegedly stole the new
boundary stones), they finished their mission in seventy
days and returned from North Africa to confront their
senatorial opponents in Rome: App. B Civ. 1.3.24; Plut.
Vit. C. Gracch.11.
9 App. B. Civ. 1.3.2526.
10 Plut. Vit. C. Gracch. 17.5 (trans. B. Perrin, Loeb).
11 App. B. Civ. 1.3.26.
12 Plut. Vit. C. Gracch. 17.6 (trans. B. Perrin, Loeb).
13 Sall. Cat.49.4.
14 Plut. Vit. Cic.19.1
15 Cic. Cat.3.21.
16 Sall. Cat. 4647.
17 Cic. Sest. 11.26 (trans. R. Gardiner, Loeb): At the

same time the senate had assembled in the temple of
Concord, the very temple that recalled the memory of my
consulship.
18 Cic. Dom. 11 (trans. Watts, Loeb): When prices were
rising so steadily, that we began to fear not mere dearness
but actual destitution and famine, the mob flocked to
the temple of Concord, whither the consul Metellus was
summoning the senate.
19 Cic. Phil. 2.19, 112; 5.18;7.21.
20 Dio Cass. 49.18.6.
21 Dio Cass.47.3.
22 Dio Cass.50.8.
23 Dio Cass. 55.1.1 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb). LTUR s.v.
Concordia aedes quotes this passage to suggest that this
was the date on which the Opimian building burned. Dio
Cass. only says, however, Many buildings were destroyed
by storm and by thunderbolts, among them many temples;
even that of Jupiter Capitolinus. Rebert and Marceu
1923, 64, attribute the rebuilding to the splendor of the
AugustanAge.
24 Dio Cass. 55.8.2; 56.25.1.
25 Suet. Tib. 20; Cal. Praen (Fasti Praenestini) ad diem
XVIIan.
26 Tiberius compelled the Parians to sell him the statue
of Vesta, in order that it might be placed in the temple of
Concord (Dio Cass. 55.9.6, trans. E. Cary, Loeb), and in
the NH, the elder Pliny lists the others: Leto holding Apollo
and Diana as infants (34.19.77); Aesculapius and Hygea
(34.19.80); Mars and Mercury (34.19.89); Ceres, Minerva,
and Jove (34.19.90); Marysas (35.36.66); Liber Pater
(35.40.131); and Cassandra (35.40.144).
27 Plin. NH, 36.66.196.
28 Gasparri 1979,19.
29 Cal. Praen (Fasti Praenestini), Fasti Verulani ad diem XVI
Ian.; LTUR c.v. Concordia, aedes.
30 Ov. Fast. 1.63740 (trans. J. Frazer, Loeb): Candida, te

niveo posuit lux proxima templo,/qua fert sublimes alta
Moneta gradus:/nunc bene prospicies Latiam, Concordia,
turbam,/nunc te sacratae constituere manus. Fair
goddess, thee the next morning set in thy snow-white fane,
where high Moneta lifts her steps sublime: well shalt thou,
Concord, o ersee the Latin throng, now that consecrated
hands have stablished thee.
32 Tac. Ann. 2.2732.
33 Dio Cass. 58.11.4 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb).
34 Stat Silv. 1.1. 2931: supra, p.42 n.21.
35 Supra, p. 398 n. 26; infra, p. 183 nn. 79, 81.
36 SHA Pert. 4 (trans. D. Magie, Loeb).
37 SHA Alex. Sev. 6 (trans. D. Magie, Loeb).
38 SHA Max. et Balbinus 1 (trans. D. Magie, Loeb).
39 CIL 6.89. The Einsiedeln Itinerary transcribes this
inscription with that of the Temple of Concord. For the text
above, we follow Gasparri 1979, 15; De Angeli 1992, 27,
gives its last word as the plural restituerunt. Normand
Drawing 10 (1855) in Roma antiqua 1985, 31, puts the
inscription in the frieze; C. Moyaux 1866 in Cassanelli
1998, 7879, put the first line in the frieze, and the second
on the architrave:. For our reconstruction (Figs. 9.1, 9), we
assume that, as in the temples of Vespasian and Antoninus
and Faustina, the restorers, removing the original
inscription on the frieze, reconfigured both architrave
and frieze to suitably house the new text. None of these
proposals rests on firm evidence. Lugli 1946, 112, dates
this inscription after the fire of Carus in 283 CE, which, as
we saw (supra, p.56) also destroyed the Basilica Julia and
the Curia.
40 Gasparri 1979, 23. LTUR s.v. Concordia aedes suggests
that it was the collapse of the temple at this time (rather
than later, as suggested in the text below) that led to the
reconstruction of the church. According to Lanciani 1901,
Notes to pages
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
206, Poggio Braccolini saw the porch intact when he visited

Rome in1431.
Gasparri 1979, 34: Papal Bull of Innocent III, July 2,
1199: hortum inter columnas usque ad abscidam et usque
ad custodiam Mamortinam.
Gasparri 1979, 96, cat. no.54 (Berlin, Staatliche
Museen inv. no.1013)and pl. 8, drawings in the Berlin
Kunstbibliothek.
Gasparri 1979, 38, pl.3.2.
Quoted in Gasparri 1979, 9: da gioved scorso si scoprono
gli avanzi di una fabbrica nobilissima quantaltra mai, per I
marmi gialli, africani e pavonazzetti della pi bella qualit
che formavano il pavimento le pareti e le colonne interne
scanalate della fabbrica. I capitalli, le cornici e intagliati di
ogni sorte dun ordine minore interno sono di lavoro tanto
delicato, e del miglior gusto, che larte non mai giunta pi
oltre. Il marmo stesso, bianco, della qualit pi fine, e
cerea, che mai siasi veduta.
Roma antiqua 1985, 30 (Normand 8). According to
Lanciani 1897, 287288, at the time of the discovery,
half the pavement [in the center of the room just in front
of the podium for the statue of Concord, according to
Normand] was perfect; but its slabs of africano, giallo, and
pavonazzetto were afterward stolen by [one of the] stone
cutters, and probably made into paper-weights and other
such marketable articles.
Dayan 1979, 127135.
On nineteenth- and twentieth-century excavations
of the temple, see Gasparri 1979, 910; on Opimius
temple of Concord, LTUR s.v. Concordia aedes;
on the closure of the Via della Consolazione, Maetzke
1986,372.
Lugli 1957, vol. 1, 321, notes the discovery in an
otherwise unpublished excavation of the mid-1950s of a
travertine capital of an Opimian travertine base 0.90 m in
diameter.
49 Dayan 1979, 130, lists travertine fragments of bases,

drums, and capitals. See also LTUR s.v. Concordia,
aedes.
50 LTUR s.v. Concordia aedes: cella, 43.40 m 22.70 m;
porch, 25.60 m 14.80 m. Gasparri 1979, 38, gives the
external dimensions of the cella as 21 m 43.40 m and
calculates the internal dimensions of the room as 19.20 m
41.60m.
51 Broken architectural fragments from the earlier shrine are
mixed in with this concrete: Gasparri 1979,36.
52 At least a part of the cornice may survive: Gasparri 1979,
cat. no.48, p.56 figs. 51,94.
54 As in the Temple of Venus Genetrix in the Forum of Caesar:
Amici 1991, vol. 1, 8789, figs. 133, 136138. Large slabs
of external veneer are stacked against its cellas north wall,
and, as Amici indicates, the upper sections of the cella
walls had figured friezes between pilasters. The exterior
cella walls of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina had
the same type of veneer (supra, p. 70).
55 As in the Temple of Venus Victrix in the Forum of Caesar.
56 Decoration copied from that of the Temple of Mars Ultor:
Ganzert 1996, vol. 1, pls. 43.25, 62.1, 3; vol. 2, 1919A,
22. See also the useful diagram in Ginouvs 1992, vol. 2,
pl.14.1.
57 Gasparri 1979, 4651 figs. 3441.
58 Ibid., 5153.
59 5.32 m wide (18 Roman feet): Gasparri 1979,40.
60 Gasparri 1979, 3940.
61 Dayan 1979, 129 figs. 138.7,131.
62 Toebelmann 1923, vol. 1, 5051 figs. 4647, gives the
heights of the elements of Caninas reconstruction of
the entablature in the Tabularium arcade as follows:
architrave, 1.11 m; frieze, 1.15 m; cornice (minus the
sima), 1.52 m; total height of entablature, 3.78 m;
Ganzert 1996, vol. 2, beilage 48ab, the corresponding
170176
399
elements of the entablature of the temple of Mars Ultor

as: architrave, 1.18 m; frieze, 1.09 m; frieze (minus the
sima), 1.52 m; total height of the entablature, 3.79 m. The
temple of Mars Ultor had columns with diameters of 1.78
m; the diameters of Concords shafts must have been the
same, and their height, therefore, could have also been 60
Roman feet. Comparing the ratio of entablature to column
height of other known Roman temples, however, a height
of 5054 Roman feet seems more likely, and the visual
proportions more satisfactory. Architect Gorski has thus
shortened the height of the columns in our restoration
from 60 Roman feet (= 17.76 m) to 54 Roman feet
(15.984m).
63 The evidence from the Temple of Mars Ultor provides
some clues. With an entablature about the same size as
that of Concords porch, the exterior colonnade had fluted
white marble shafts and capitals in a standard, if elegantly
styled and finely carved, Corinthian style. A surviving
Corinthianizing capital and some analogous fragments from
interior pilasters famously substitute winged horses for
volutes, and the shafts were of pavonazzetto: Ungaro 2007,
133 figs. 177, 178. Similarly, in the Temple of Concord, the
exterior columns would have been of fluted white marble
(supra, p.399 n. 61), while the interior order was more
elaborate (supra, p. 33 Fig. 1.17; infra, p. 179). Misreading
the coins on the corners of the facade, Normand and
Moyaux (supra, p. 398 n. 39)show pilasters, and Gasparri
1979, 65, also suggests pilasters.
64 Gasparri 1979, 47: Non stato rinvenuto nello scavo
nessun frammento sicuramente attribuibile al fregio
esterno. He suggests that the frieze may have been
reused in antiquity or recovered in later times and sold
block by block in commercio antiquario. In Caninas
mid-nineteenth-century reconstruction (herein Fig. 9.6),
smooth travertine slabs of approximately the correct height
substitute for the frieze.
40 0
Notes to pages
178 189
65 Gasparri 1979, 5557, suggests that the single piece of

surviving sculpture a female figure in a flowing dress
along with other, now vanished figures drawn by L. Rossini
in the early nineteenth century (Gasparri 1979, 57 fig.53)
are, given the character of the decoration on the molding
under the surviving figure, more likely to belong to the
adjacent Temple of Vespasian than to that of Concord.
But, one of the Tiberian sestertii (Fig.9.7 herein) shows in
the pediment two opposed reclining figures that hold up a
central imago clipeata.
66 The pediment of earlier restorer C. Moyaux (1866) did have
sculpture, however: Cassanelli (1998), 7879.
67 LTUR s.v. Concordia aedes; Gasparri 1979,
1922.
68 Measurements from Gasparri 1979, 65, central aediculum,
7.50 m 3.60 m (23 12 Roman feet); lateral podia, 5.30
m 2.90 m (18 10 Roman feet); width of podium that
connected the central aediculum and the lateral podia, 1.50
m (5 Roman feet). The cult podium was 2.60 m (10 Roman
feet) high (Gasparri 1979, 41), and the others, 2.01 m (7
Roman feet).
69 Gasparri 1979, 4142.
70 Ibid., 69.
71 In the southwest corner of the cella and near the
northwest corner of the aedicula on the back wall: Ibid.,
pl.24.
72 Ibid., 68 (dimensions): side, modular square, 6 Roman feet
(2 m); interlocking rectangles, 2 4 Roman feet (1 1.184
m); central square, side, 2 Roman feet (1m).
73 Ibid., 57, 9495 (Tipo A): height, 0.35 m; upper
diameter, about 0.245 m (ibid., pl.30).
74 Ibid., 95101, Tipi B1B10.
75 Ibid., 5758.
76 Ibid., 59: height, 0.79 m; width, 0.97 m. The restored
capital is in the offices of the Soprintendenza on the
PalatineHill.
77 On a reduced scale, the decorations on these badly

preserved fragments resemble those of the external cornice:
Ibid., 59, pls. 21,28.
78 Ibid., 67 n.49.
79 Ibid., 6667. Kellum 1990, 293295, suggests a different
grouping: On the side aedicula, Pistons Apollo and Jupiter,
Mercury and Mars; Vesta and Ceres on the back aediculum
(discounting the Concord on Tiberian coins, one of which
appears as her fig.2). Supra, p. 398 n.26.
81 Kellum 1990, 278279.
10. The Temple of Vespasian

Sources for the new reconstructions: Roma antiqua 1985,

3537 figs. 1719 (Normand), 7681 figs. 14 (Provost);
De Angeli 1992, 7273 figs. 50, 5354, 80 fig.63, 8283
figs. 6567, 85 fig.70, 89 figs. 7980, 93 figs. 8687,
121 fig.140ab, 124 fig.143, 126127 figs. 144145,
pls.1,2.
The emperor had presumably discussed his divinization
with his son, and the new shrine was an important sign
of dynastic prestige. Perhaps referring to these plans, on
his deathbed, Vespasian famously exclaimed, Woes me.
Methinks Im turning into a god (Suet. Vesp. 23.4, trans.
J.C. Rolfe, Loeb).
The evidence comes from the Acta fratrum Arvalium
(= CIL 6.2065, 5152): in pronao aedis Concordiae,
quae e[st] prope/ [templu]m divi Vespasaiani., a
fragmentary inscription dated to 87 CE quoted in De Angeli
1992, 25. See also De Angelis discussion of the date:
137138. Ancient sources attributed the building entirely
to Domitian: Chron. 146= De Angeli 1992, 25: Hoc
[Domitiano] imperante multae operae publicae fabricatae
sunt:templum Vespasiani et Titi; Jer. (Hieronymus)
Chronicon, p.191 (De Angeli 1992, 26), c. 382 CE: [A
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Diomitiano] multa opera Romae facta, in quisVespasiani

templum.
Stat Silv. 1.1.2931.
These include the Curiosum and the Notitia Urbis Romae
regionum XIIII (mid-fourth century CE), which list and
locate the monument (called by the Curiosum Templum
Vespasiani et Titi) in the eighth Augustan region. Later
works, like that of Prosper (516 CE), Chronicon, and
Cassiodorus Chronica reproduce Hieronymus attribution
of the temple to Domitian. De Angeli 1992, 27, cites and
reproduces these sources.
De Angeli 1992,21.
The excavators of the 1830s found the only traces of the
bedding for the pavement between the podium of the cult
statue and the left (south) cella wall: De Angeli 1992,12.
Ridley 1989,79.
De Angeli 1992, 1415.
Ibid., 3160, has assembled a representative selection of
these drawings.
Ridley 1992, 5758.
De Ruggiero 1913, 201, notes that the columns were
leaning a half diameter (un mezzo diametro) from their
original position. Since the stylobate was almost completely
destroyed, the new construction has a foundation 15
mdeep.
De Angeli 1992, 1819.
Canina pointed out that since the RESTITVER on the
entablature abbreviated RESTITVER[unt] (infra, p. 401
n. 29)the last word of the Severan inscription as reported
by the Anonymous Einsiedelensis, these must be the ruins
of the Temple of Vespasian: Ridley 1989, 80; De Angeli
1992, 24 n.132.
Since the rising Clivus Capitolinus ran in front of the
building and intersected the front stair on the south side,
the stair on that side had a height of about 3 m, and on the
north side of about 4.50m.
Notes to pages
15 Length, 27.75 m; width, 21 m: De Angeli 1992,125.

16 De Angelis drawing of the blocks that survive on the left
(south) side of the podium, De Angeli 1992, 71 fig.49,
shows that the blocks of at least three courses of the seven
that survive are approximately the same height, although
they vary in width. The sides, tops, bottoms, and faces are
regular with smooth finishes.
17 The top of one of the blocks of this base molding gives the
depth of the slabs of marble facing above as 0.30 m: De
Angeli 1992,72.
18 Lugli 1946, 114, suggests that the stairs between the
columns were the result of the narrow site. Since, however,
the same feature appears in other Forum temples (Caesar,
Antoninus, and Faustina), that feature here is clearly the
result of fashion, not spacing.
19 De Angeli 1992,125.
20 Ibid., 6364, 124 figs. 143,125.
21 These had lower diameters of 1.49 m and heights between
14.19 m and 14.151 m. A fragment of one of the shafts is
still preserved adjacent to the north side of the tabernacle
podium (Fig. 9.3): Ibid., 82 figs. 6566, 8384, 125128,
pls.12.
22 De Angelis reconstructed plan, 124 fig.143, does not agree
with his plan of the surviving ruins (pl. 1). On the latter,
the size of the base behind the little stair at the back of the
podium shows that it supported either a pier or an engaged
column. The restored plan omits the stair and the base
behind it, substituting a pilaster for the latter.
23 Ibid., 78, 124 fig.143,128.
24 Early sources like Middleton 1892, 339, and Thdenat
1904, 159, characterize the marble as Pentelic, but De
Angeli 1992, 83 n. 211, identifies it asLuna.
25 These differences resulted from the varying sizes in
which the drums came from the quarry. On the site, a
setter-out assembled these drums into complete shafts
of slightly different heights. By inserting marble chips,
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
he compensated for these inequalities in the finished

columns and evened out the tops of the capitals so that the
entablature was completely level. Although their heights
varied slightly, the columns were, including bases and
capitals, about 14.19 m high: De Angeli 1992,125.
All the leaves on the surviving capitals have lost these
projections, but a sixteenth-century drawing by Alberti
records their original appearance: Ibid., 49 fig.30e.
The capitals of the temple are noticeably more naturalistic
than later Domitianic capitals, and cornices from the
temple and the imperial palace on the Palatine display
the same style. Cf. Pensabene and Caprioli 2009, 112
figs.56.
Since the surviving remains are all Flavian (supra, p.
38, p. 380 n.5), De Ruggiero 1913, 203, suggests that
the Severan reconstruction was relatively limited. The
complete entablature is 3.012 m high: De Angelis 1992, 89
fig.79,125.
De Angelis 1992, 12, 27. Hlsen 1928, 20, and Lugli 1946,
114, date the transcription to the period of Charlemagne
(742814CE).
Einsiedeln 326, folio 72b: De Angeli 1992,27.
Reber 1879, 85, notes the absence of the name of Geta,
Caracallas brother, from the inscription. Shortly after their
accession as joint rulers, Caracalla murdered Geta, and
Reber suggests, therefore, that the inscription postdates
Severus death (211 CE). Had he been alive when it was
installed, it would, like the inscriptions on Severus arch,
have included the names of bothsons.
De Angelis 1992, 89 fig.79.
On both sides, these are draped with a sacred tassle (infula)
that hangs down from a decorative bow tied around a horn
and ending with a tassel. A skull ends and begins each
frieze section, which is the width of the on-center distances
between the columns. Carved from a single block, each part
of the architrave/frieze ended over a column center.
189197
401
34 De Angeli 1992, 9296. The section of the frieze in the

Tabularium restored by Canina (Reber 1879, 81)includes
the same elements but in different position. Since one of
the surviving fragments incorporated in it has a sequence
priests cap, bulls tail (here with a handle), vase, sacrificial
knife different from those of the same elements on the
extant frieze, either the order of these elements in each
section differed from the others or two or more versions
of the scene may have repeated several times. Middleton
1892, 340, describes the use of these sacrificial items.
35 De Angeli 1992, 96 fig.94, 103 figs. 109110. De Angeli,
however, suggests (p.110) that this socket would have
supported the ceiling of the pronaos. But, as the roughly
finished zone above the architrave (the frieze on the facade)
shows, the cyma reversa/fillet of the architrave and now
vanished sockets above them would have held up that
ceiling. Hence the socket in the top of the cornice must
have sustained the floor of the attic. Our Fig.10.7 thus
incorrectly shows the ceiling of the pronaos above the
frieze.
36 Lanciani 1897, 288289.
11. The Tabularium

Sources for the new reconstructions: Delbrueck 1907

1912, vol. 1, 24 figs. 2223, 32 fig.28, 34 fig.30, 35
fig.31, 37 fig.33, 38 fig.34, 41 fig.38, 43 fig.41, 45
fig.42; vol. 2, pls. 29; Somella 1981, 127 fig.1, 2829
fig.2; Roma Antiqua 1985 (Sommella), 6675 figs. 2531
(Moyaux, drawings 17); De Angeli 1992, 80 fig.63;
Somella 1994, 53 figs. 2930; Museo Capitolino, Rome:
Tabularium Display Posters,13.
1 Parker 1874, vol. 1, section 2, pl. 4a, roughly outlines the
hills original shape.
2 Rodocanachi 1904, 2324.
3 Purcell 1993, 138 n.48.
40 2
Notes to pages
197 212
4 CIL 1.592, 6.1314; quoted both by Delbrueck 1907, 2324,

and Purcell 1993, 138 n. 48, in slightly different forms. I
combine the two versionshere.
5 Mommsen 1858, 209210 noting that, toward the end
of the century, Fra Giovanni Giocondo could not find the
inscription (quaesivi et non inveni) suggests that
Signorellis transcription was inaccurate. See also Purcell
1993, 138 n.48.
6 CIL I2, 368= VI 1313. Canina found the stone with this
inscription in 1835 and put it up as the keystone of one of
the ancient doors that face the Via San Pietro in Carcere:
Sommella 1984, fig.1; Jordan 18811, 6769.
7 Platner and Ashby 1929,507.
8 Coarelli 1994, 5152.
9 Suet. Vit.15.3
10 Suet. Vesp. 8.5; Canina 1851, 275276.
11 Comune di Roma, unpublished text on display in the
arcade of the Tabularium accompanying drawings that
illustrate the surviving ancient floor plans.
12 Tittoni 1994, 48 figs. 2122, 85 figs. 5354, 8099,
especially 80, pl. 10, 8687 figs. 5558.
13 Sommella 1981,126.
14 Tittoni 1994, 76 fig.51.
15 Sommella 1994, 47 fig.9 (cited in her accompanying text as
fig.10).
16 Ibid., 4753; Canina 1851, vol. 5, pl.31.
17 G. Azzurri, a professor at the Rome school of architecture
at Accademia di Saint Luca, oversaw and documented
the opening of the arch in January 1839: Azzurri 1839,
unnumbered text plate and plate; Sommella 1994,52.
18 Blake 1947,143.
19 Sommella 1981, 126; Roma Antiqua 1985 (Sommella),67.
20 Colini 1942,555.
21 Cf. Ibid., pl. 2, with Purcell 1993, 136 fig.2.
22 The south wall slopes back toward the north, and, as we
have seen, the rectangular site for the Temple of Veiovis
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
occupies what would have been the southeast corner.

Buried under the Senatorial Palace, the precise location of
the east wall is unknown.
Delbrueck 1907, 32 fig.28.
LTUR s.v. Tabularium.
Coarelli 1994, 53; Sommella 1981, 129 fig.2.
Platner and Ashby 1929,507.
Azzurri 1839, unnumbered plate, renders only lower,
surviving section of the architrave, but twenty years later
(18651866); C. Moyaux, Roma Antiqua 1985, 75 fig.31/
Moyaux 7, restores a complete order with triglyphs,
metopes, and a simple cornice.
Purcell 1993, 136 fig.2.
LTUR s.v. Tabularium.
Purcell 1993, 136 fig.2.
Delbrueck 1907, 4446; LTUR s.v. Tabularium.
Mommsen 1858, 206212.
Purcell 1993, 142155. Linked earlier by Lamboglia
19641965, 123, with the area just behind the Curia
where there was a pedestal for a statue of Avitius (emperor,
455456CE).
Tucci 2005, 2133. Tucci assumes that the voids underlay
the interior of the podium and the cella, but see infra,
p.402 n. 41.
Tucci 2005, 26; Sommella 1981, 126, says that measured
drawings were being made of these elements in the 1980s.
Tucci, however, does not seem to have used these, and in
any case, Delbrueck 1907, 43 fig.41, 45 fig.42, provides
scale drawings of one of the Corinthian capitals and a
cornice block from what he attributes to the second story of
the Tabularium.
Coarelli 2010, 126 figs. 15,127.
Canina 1845, pl.5.
Roma Antiqua 1985, 6875.
Delbrueck 1907, vol. 1, 4446; vol. 2, pl. 3. In this view he
follows Bunsen 18351,910.
40 Drawings of this reconstruction are on display in the

Tabularium.
41 We are not convinced that the existing structure of the
Tabularium was designed to support one or more temples
(Tucci 2005, 633, followed by Coarelli 2010, 107132).
While Tucci cleverly adapts his inserted temple plan (his
fig.9) to the existing foundation voids, if the Tabularium
were simply a platform, for greater strength, it should have
been solid like the platform of the Temple of Jupiter Anxur.
The hollows, therefore, must be, as they have previously
been interpreted, the lower parts of rooms accessible
fromthe fourth floor, and, regardless of the varied uses to
which the lower parts of the building were put, however
arranged, the fourth floor, with its ready access to the
asylum, was very probably, as Coarelli 1994, 53, suggested
earlier, where Vespasian stored his replaced documents.
12.The Portico of the Dei

Consentes

1
2
3
4
Sources for the new reconstructions: Nieddu 1985, 25 figs.

12, 26 fig.3; Nieddu 1986, 40 fig.5, 43 figs. 1012, 44
figs. 1315, 45 figs. 1618; LTUR s.v. Dei consentes,
aedes.
Livy 22.7.12, 6; 22.8.57.
Livy 22.10.9 (trans. B. Foster, Loeb).
Livy 22.10.9; De Ruggiero 1913, 235236; Nieddu
1986,49.
Apul. De deo Soc. 2.121: Quorum in numero sunt illi
duodecim [numero] situ nominum in duo versus ab Ennio
coartati: Iuno, Vesta, Minerva, Ceres, Diana, Venus, Mars,
Mercurius, Jovis, Neptunus, Vulcanus, Apollo (trans.
Tighe Gurney 1902, 352353).
Varro Rust. 1.1.4: invocaboeosduodecem deos
Consentiseos urbanos, quorum imagines ad forum
auratae stant, sex mares et feminae totidem.
Notes to pages
6 Nieddu 1986,48.
7 Ibid.,49.
8 According to Blake 1959, 97, Titus had accomplished little
more than the construction of the platform with the lower
shops.
9 Blake 1959, 100; Lugli 1957, vol. 1, 600, dates completion
to 9296CE.
10 Nieddu 1986,50.
11 Nieddu 1985, 26; Nieddu 1986, 5051.
12 Ibid.,47.
13 Lugli 1946, 115, locates them in the shops, but he says
that there were dodici stanze quasi quadrate oggi sette
soltanto. There seems, however, to be no evidence for
more than eight rooms. Their plans suggest shops, but
the original marble fittings may indicate a more elevated
purpose. The twelve gods were sometimes displayed in
pairs, and some rooms may have housed two or more
statues. For gilded statues, display in rooms with doors
may seem reasonable, but if these representations were
life-size or larger, they could not have been easily moved,
and, in any case, they were probably of bronze with only a
thin layer of gilding. They thus could also have been safely
displayed in the colonnade Platner and Ashby 1929,
421422 and the marble-clad rooms behind might then
have been storerooms for cult objects, very luxurious stores,
or government offices.
14 Lanciani 1897, 292; Thdenat 1908,163.
15 Lugli 1957, vol. 1,441.
16 Nieddu 1986, 38, quotes the inscription, CIL 6.102:
[deorum c] ONSENTIVM SACROSANCTA SIMVLACRA
CVM OMNI LO[ci totius adornatio]NE CVLTV IN
F/[ormam antiquam restituto] V[ettius Praetextatus
V C Praefectus u]RBI [reposuit] CVRANTE
LONGEIO... [v.c. c]/ONSUL/[ari]. It was
uncovered from late 1833 to early 1834: Nibby 1838, 546.
Jordan 1885, 367 n. 74, locates it on the architrave. On
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the frieze and on only the upper fascia of the architrave

(Fig.12.10), the frieze is today positioned above columns
10 and 11 on the west side of the colonnade, but originally
it may have been in a more obvious, central position.
Nieddu 1986,39.
Nibby 1838, 546: parallela al tempio del Giove
(Vespasian) una fila di taberne di opera laterizia che gi
furono rivestite di marmo, come di marmo solido sono le
soglie. Queste da me furono trovata chiuse da muri informi
detempi bassi, e piene di macerie fino a due terzi del
pavimento, spogilate affato di ogni rivestimento: nel ultimo
tratto poi pi aderente al suolo erano state riempiute di
corpi umani misti a calce viva, indizio che avevano servito
di sepultura in qualche circostanza straordinaria e forse di
peste.
Nieddu 1986, 39 fig.4, 40; Lanciani 1897, 292, dating
the reconstruction to 1853, credits Luigi Canina with its
execution.
These were outside: supra, p. 403 n. 18; Blake 1959, 100;
and inside. When the building was first excavated in 1833
1834, the lower rooms had marble thresholds. In shop 1 are
sockets for iron supports for the veneer, and in shops 13
the internal bedding plaster (height 2.20 m in shop 3)also
probably backed marble veneer: Nieddu 1986, 4142.
Nieddu 1986, 44. Visible in front of column viii (Nieddu
1986, 46 fig.20), the earlier pavement is 0.15 m below the
laterone.
De Ruggiero 1913, 233234, calls this feature un berretto
frigio.
Ibid., 43. The colonnade is 2.80 m wide; the
intercolumniations (axis to axis), 2.40 m, 1.62 m between
plinths. Shafts, height: 4.20 m; lower diameter: 0.503 m;
upper: 0.45 m; Corinthianizing capitals, height: 0.685m.
In their present state, cornice and architrave frieze are held
together in back by iron clamps. Inserted in the tops of the
212225
403
cornice blocks and the facade of the shops, iron bars further
stabilize the structure (Figs. 11.3, 12.7).
13. The Temple of Saturn

1
2
3
4
5
Sources for the new reconstructions: Pensabene 1984, 6

fig.1, 16 fig.4, 3637 pls. 12, 3839 figs. 3132, 4041,
pls. 34, 42 fig.38, 48 figs. 4647, 4849, pl. 5, 51 fig.49,
6061, pl. 6, 6465, pl. 8, 119, cat. no.69, 147 fig.85.
Guittard 1976, 6263.
Ibid., 71; Leglay 1966,461.
Festus 322 (quoted by Pensabene 1984,12).
Varro Ling.5.42.
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.34.4 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb). At 6.1.4,
Dionysius describes the offerings to Saturn as first fruits
burnt offerings according to the customs of the Greeks.
They were in the Forum (Livy 41.21.12), under the
Capitoline crag (Serv. Ad Aen. 8.319), upon the ascent
leading from the Forum to the Capitol (Dion. Hal. Ant.
Rom. 6.1.4), adjacent to the Clivus Capitolinus (Serv.
Aeneid 2.116), on the Saturnian Mount in the land of
Saturn (Varro Ling. 5.42), next to the basilica [Julia]
which was between the temple of Castor and the temple of
Saturn (Mon. Anc. 20), at the golden milestone (Tac.
Hist. 1.27; Suet. Otho. 6.2), and close to the Arch of Tiberius
(Tac. Ann. 2.41).
Such late republican portraits probably reproduce the
head of the cult statue in the temple prior to 41 BCE.
Sextus Nonius Sufenas, one of the three republican officers
responsible for coining money, issued this demarius and
similar ones in 59 BCE, combining Saturns bearded head
(obverse) with (reverse) the goddess
Roma seated, a spear in her right hand, a sword pommel
on her right side, a pile of weapons behind her on the right.
Behind her, Victory holds a palm leaf in her left hand and
a laurel crown in her right hand over the head of Roma:
40 4
9
10
11
12
Notes to pages
225 231
Numismatik Lanz Mnchen, auction 151, June 30, 2011,

lot no.640: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lo
tID=420990&AucID=761&Lot=640 (accessed October 19,
2011).
We have no clear evidence for this statue, but cult statues
were usually colossal, and, according to Plin. HN. 15.7.32
(trans. H. Rackahm, Loeb), The ancients also used oil for
soft things and they thought it also useful for preventing
gaps in ivory: certainly the statue of Saturn at Rome was
filled inside with oil. A statue of this kind must have had
an internal framework, and its vestments almost certainly
would not have been of marble. Gilding will have protected
the wood and recalled the famous cult statue of Athena in the
Parthenon in Athens. Given the Hellenistic style of Saturns
face on Sufenas coins (p. 403 n. 7) the statue (and the coins)
may have been the work of Greek sculptors.
Macrob. Sat. 3.6.17; LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes; Lapatin
2001,125.
Macrob. Sat. 1.8.5 (trans. R. Kaster, Loeb). If the cult
statue was colossal, the statue in processions must have
been a second, smaller image; cf. Richardson 1992,343.
According to Platner and Ashby 1929, 463, the archives
of the priests recorded the construction of the shrine as the
oldest known.
Solin. 1.12 attributes the foundation to the companions
of the mythical Arcadian hero Evander, and Dion. Hal.
6.1.4 to the early consuls of the Roman Republic or even
to Tarquin, the last deposed king. For Macrob. Sat. 1.7.30
(trans. R. Kaster, Loeb), Pelasgians originated the cult,
and (1.8.1), after [king] Tullius Hostilius celebrated two
triumphs from victories over the Albans and a third from
the Sabines, he consecrated a shrine that he had vowed
to Saturn and established the Saturnalia for the first time
in Rome. But in Book 6, concerning sacred buildings,
Varro writes that king Lucius Tarquinius contracted for the
construction of the temple of Saturn by the Forum, whereas
13
14
15
16
the dictator Titus Larcius dedicated it at the time of the

Saturnalia Nor am I unaware that according to Gellius
the senate decreed that the temple of Saturn be built with
the military tribune Lucius Furius in charge. Gjerstad
1962, 757, plausibly attributes these various suggestions
to different traditions and attempts to reconstruct the
historical record. More recently, Pensabene 1984, 9, dates
the foundation to the years between 501 and 497 BCE,
while LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes identifies L. Furius as
L. Furius Medullinus, a military tribune of 381 BCE who
would have reconstructed the temple after the Gauls had
destroyed it in386.
Varro Ling. 5.183 (trans. R. Kent, Loeb).
Plut. Vit. T. Gracchus 10.4.6; Solin. 1.12; Aur. Vict. Origo
3.6; Serv. Ad Aen. 8.319; Macrob. Sat. 1.8.3. Richardson
1980, 57, identifies the two rooms, one vaulted, in front
of the columnar facade as the aerarium Saturni, an
identification rejected by Pensabene 1984, 25 and LTUR
s.v. Saturnus, Aedes. Pensabene 1984, 10, dates the
vaulted room later than Plancus reconstruction of the
temple. For LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes, the aerarium
was in the wing of the Tabularium later replaced by
the Portico of the Dei Consentes in which the imperial
aerarium was located.
When in 133 BCE Tiberius Gracchus closed the aerarium
with his personal seal in order that the quaestors might
not take any money from the treasury or pay any into it,
and he made proclamation that a penalty would be imposed
upon such praetors as disobeyed (Plut. Vit. T. Gracchus
10.4.6, trans. B. Perrin, Loeb), he virtually closed down the
government.
Livy 3.69.8, 7.23.3; LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes. The
younger Pliny thanked the emperor Trajan profusely for his
appointment to the imperial prefecture of Saturn. No mere
legal case, he promised, would distract him from his new
duties: Ep. 10.3A.
17 App. B. Civ. 1.4.31 (trans. H. White, Loeb): the temple of

Saturn where the quaestors were accustomed to administer
oaths.
18 CIL 1.202= 587 (tablet 8 of the Lex Cornelia de XX
Quaestoribus), a bronze tablet was found in 1528olim
parieti adfixa, reperta est Romae in ruinis aedis Saturni.
19 LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes.
20 Varro Ling.5.42.
21 Dio Cass. 45.17.3.
22 Richardson 1980, 53, suggests that the earliest building
had a Tuscan Order.
23 Livy 41.27.7; Pensabene 1984, 35. Lugli 1946, 52,
describes the remains in the piazza della Consolazione as
un piccolo portico ad archi di tufo di fattura assai antica
che era addossato ad un taglio artificiale della rupe e ad
livello notevolmente pi basso dellattualevia.
24 Its territories included parts of modern Switzerland,
Germany, and northern Italy.
25 Information from CIL 10.6087, the inscription from
Plancus well-preserved tomb at Gaeta. For a photograph
of the tomb and a photograph, text, and translation of the
inscription, see http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/
Gazetteer/Places/Europe/Italy/Lazio/Latina/Gaeta/Gaeta/
Mausoleo_dI_Planco/inscription.html (accessed July 13,
2011).
26 Pensabene 1984,10.
27 De Angeli 1992,28.
28 Pensabene 1984, 11, 5962,179.
29 CIL 6.937.
30 Pensabene 1984, 155, quotes a part of Bracciolinis account
from De varietate fortunae, bk. 1, p.12): [Capitolio
contigua Forum versus superest porticus aedis Concordia],
quam, cum primum ad urbem acessi, vidi fere integram
opere marmoreo admodum specioso, Romani postmodum,
ad calcem aedem totam et porticus partem, disiectis
columnis, sunt demoliti. Bracciolini began the work in
Notes to pages
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
1431 after the death of Pope Martin V, whose secretary he

was. He here mistakenly identifies the Temple of Saturn as
that of Concord: LTUR s.v. Concordia, Aedes.
Pensabene 1984, 154165 figs. 89, 91, 9495.
Ibid., 155. The structures around the Temple of
Saturn were demolished in December 1810: Ridley
1992,60.
Ibid.,155.
To the east, on the Vicus Iugarius, the podium is 11 m high,
and to the west, on the Clivus Capitolinus, 5 m. Excluding
the front stair, it is about 24 m wide, 33 m long: Pensabene
1984, 17; LTUR s.v. Saturnus, Aedes.
Pensabene 1984, 2328 figs. 1214 (irregularity
of travertine blocks). A number of elementi di
basamento, Pensabene 1984, 125130, probably from
the temple and now in the storage area at the southeast
corner of the temple, particularly Ibid., cat. no.93
(ibid., 129), suggest that the podium base molding would
have been identical to that of the adjacent Temple of
Vespasian: (from the bottom) a smooth, vertical surface,
a torus, a fillet, a reversed cyma recta, an astragal, and
an apophyge. Behind the latter, on his catalogue number
93, there is a socket for the marble facing above the
base molding. Pensabene suggests that this is one of
the two types into which such fragments fall: the other
has a smooth upper surface (cat. no.87, ibid., 126127)
and is from a different location, the walls of the pronaos
(ibid.,74).
Pensabene 1984,23.
Carettoni etal. 1960, vol. 2, pl. 21.19; for the online
Stanford reference, see http://formaurbis.stanford.edu/
fragment.php?record88. Pensabene 1984, 10, 25,
suggests (p.25) that the vaulted room and the attached
stair foundations erano occupati probabilmente sempre
dal nucleo cementizio su cui poggiavano una serie di
gradini larghi come la facciata che si estendevano per
38
39
40
41
42
43
m. 5 circa. Poi la scala proseguiva per altri m. 15 fino al

Clivus Capitolinus, ma con una larghezza che si andava
restringendo fino a corrispondere con lintercolumnio
centrale (Figs.13.8, 9). See also LTUR s.v. Saturnus,
Aedes.
Interpreting the foundations inside the podium as supports
for vaults that sustained the floor of the cella, architect John
Burge (personal communication) suggests that they were
unconnected with its internalplan.
Of Luna marble, they are composite bases with
double scotias without plinths. Three are on the facade
(Pensabene 1984, 7172, 115116, nos. 5557). The
fourth (ibid., 116, no.60)is on the east facade (ibid.,
pl. 3, facing p.40). All are 0.370.60 m in height (ibid.,
115116).
Ibid., 71, 116, no.59, at the northeast corner of the
building, is also of Luna marble, but the two scotias are
shallower, and it has a plinth. Pensabene, nos. 53, 55 (ibid.,
71, 115)have Attic profiles and lack plinths. Both, 0.49 m
high, are of Proconnesian (Greek) marble. Originally the
base for a white marble column assembled from drums,
no.54 (ibid., 115, 71), of Luna marble with an Attic profile,
has a plinth.
The lateral shafts (Pensabene 1984, 73, 116117, nos.
61, 68)are in red Assuan granite. The others are all gray
granite (granito del Foro). The ones in the center of the
facade are monolithic. The others are divided into two
drums, and nos. 6263, and 65, may come from the same
colonnade.
Ibid., 6470, 103115.
Ibid., 5557, notes the similarities of these elements
to the architrave/frieze from the East Colonnade of the
Forum of Trajan (inv. no.2582; Packer 1997, vol. 1,
349350), and the ressaut blocks perhaps from the interior
of the Temple of Trajan (inv. nos. 2544, 2546, 3022; Packer
1997, vol. 1, 347349). The blocks on the Temple of Saturn
231239
405
are, however, slightly smaller than either of the Trajanic

orders, and, while the detailing of the architraves is similar
to those of the Trajanic orders, the acanthus plants
and palmettes differ slightly from those of the Trajanic
friezes.
44 On the east side of the building (Pensabene 1984, pl. 3
facing p.40), the corner block is configured with architrave
and frieze. The adjacent block is smoothly finished. The
surviving entablature on the west side of the building is
smoothly finished. We have no evidence for the finish of the
vanished sections of the entablature.
45 Ibid., 4647, 118119.
14. The Basilica Julia

Sources for the new reconstructions: no architectural

study of the site exists. Like LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia,
therefore (infra, p. 406 nn. 47, 48), we used the scaled
drawings completed by M. Taviani and M. De Felice for
their Tese di Laurea at the University of Rome in 1986.
We are extremely grateful for their help in letting us see
copies that included (1) site map with plan of the building
and materials of construction including the remains of
the marble floor in the nave, (2) elevation of the existing
north facade, (3) elevation of the existing east and west
facades, (4) restored elevation of the north facade, and (5)
partial section of the north facade. Several elevations of
the well-preserved southwest corner of the building from
the Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di
Roma helped us determine the elevation of the lower story.
The first four are from Studio M. Sabatini [1964?] (13),
labeled Area nord-occidentale del Foro, sezioni A-A,
B-B, C-C; (4) Prospetto trasversale ad ovest (1964);
and (5) Soprintendenza archeologica di Roma. Prospetto
delle murature al limite sud ovest del Foro Romano
1982. A.N. Normands measured 1852 drawing of the
40 6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Notes to pages
239 256
surviving opus sectile pavement on the west side of the

nave, in Cassanelli etal. 1998, 72 fig.17 (redrawn herein
as Fig.14.8), gave us the plan and materials of these
elements (infra, p. 256). Two unpublished R. Moscioni
photographs from the Soprintendenza, nos. 11 and 12,
dating from the late nineteenthearly twentieth centuries,
labeled BASILIA GIULIA: Fronte sul Vicus Iugarius,
also show that the Tuscan half columns on the facades had
Attic bases (as indicated in our Fig.1.15).
The seven Tabenae novae (supra, p. 374 n. 16). Fire had
destroyed them in 209 BCE, and the censors had rebuilt
them: Livy 27.11.16; LTUR s.v. Tabernae novae.
Livy 44.16.1011.
LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia.
Blake 1947, 151, describes remains reported by Frank
Brown as blocks of anio tufa on foundations of grotta
oscura stone.
Mon. Anc.20.
Suet. Aug.29.4.
Suet. Calig.37.
Plin. Ep. 2.14; 5.9;6.33.
OCD3 s.v. Pliny the Younger.
OCD3 s.v. Centumviri. Plin. Ep. 5.9.2: praetor, qui
centumviralibus praesidebat
CIL 6.32296: DE BASILICA IVLIA/ C OCTAVIVS C
L/ EVCARPVS/ LICTOR III.
Plin. Ep. 2.14.1 (trans. W. Melmoth, Loeb).
Quint. Inst. 1.2.56 (trans. D. Russel, Loeb).
Plin. Ep. 2.14, (trans. W. Melmoth, Loeb).
Mart. 6.38.56 (trans. D. Shackleton Bailey, Loeb).
Plin. Ep. 6.33 (trans. W. Melmoth, Loeb), 529533.
CIL 6.9709: T FLAVIVS GENETHLIVS NVMMVL
DE BASILICA IVLIA.
Lanciani 1897, 277; Thdenat 1904, 218222.
21 Chron. 1, 148: Diocletianus et Maximianus.His imper.

multae operae publicae fabricatae sunt: senatum, forum
Caesaris, basilica Iulia, scaena Pompei. Docletian
and Maximianmany public works were built by these
emperors: the Senate, the Forum, of Caesar, The Basilica
Julia, the stage of the Theater of Pompey. De Ruggiero
1913, 413414.
22 Lanciani 1897, 275276; De Ruggiero 1913, 414; Platner
and Ashby 1929, 79; LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia.
23 CIL 6.1156, 1658, 3188331886. Infra, p.247.
24 De Ruggiero 1913,414.
25 Ibid., 414415; Thdenat 1923, 224; Platner and Ashby
1929,79.
26 Thdenat 1904, 224n.2.
27 R. Lanciani 1891, 229231; De Ruggiero 1913, 414415;
Trendelenburg 1871, 232. A photograph in the files of the
Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma,
23.2 FR/BG/R Basilica Giulia: frammenti medievali
(disegno Morigi), shows the architectural fragments from
the church.
28 Jordan 1873, 286; De Ruggiero 1913,414.
29 De Ruggiero 1913, 415416.
30 Lanciani 1891,234.
31 Lanciani 1897,277.
32 Lanciani 1891,232.
33 Ibid., 233234.
34 Lanciani 1897, 277; De Ruggiero 1913,416.
35 Lanciani 1899, 233234.
36 Lanciani 1897,277.
37 Von Bildt 1901, 1016.
38 Rosa 1873, 5053; De Ruggiero 1913, 417418.
39 Carettoni and Fabrini 1961, 54,59.
40 Ibid., 5354, 55 fig.1.
41 Blake 1947, 34, suggests that the travertine wall is
somewhat later than Augustus, but the surviving travertine
piers are probably Augustan, and the tufa walls with
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
the intermittent travertine courses between the shops

look almost exactly like the exterior walls of the Forum
of Augustus. LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia, 408 fig.93 (cf.
Fig.14.12), indicates that the travertine wall of the south
aisle was built into the transverse tufa. The Augustan
builder probably used this technique to reconstruct the
Caesarian walls (as can still be seen on the southwest side
of the building today: Fig.14.5).
In Blakes description 1947, 177, these walls display the
combination of travertine and Anio tufa [associated with]
the Augustan era. The foundations and lower courses,
the piers carefully keyed into the partition walls, are all
of travertine. The Anio blocks constituting the rest of the
wall were 5561cm. high and 89cm. broad, but show
considerable variation in length.
Lanciani 1897,273.
Lanciani 1897, 266267 (Fig. 14.12).
With some slight additions, LTUR s.v. Basilica Iulia.
408 fig.93, publishes the site plan by M. Taviani M. De
Felice. It suggests that the spaces at the ends of the basilica
adjacent to the stair were shops. In effect, however, they
continue the lateral branches of the Porticus Julia. While
their south walls remain unexcavated, it makes sense to
suppose that, on both sides of the building, these spaces
were not shops but halls that connected the porticus
directly with the south street.
Like the plan in LTUR (supra, p. 406 n. 7) most modern
plans show the basilica with a closed south facade. If
some of these spaces were offices the praetor in charge
of the basilica (supra, p. 406 n. 11)may have had his
office in one of these rooms they may have had smaller
(noncommercial) south entrances. But to facilitate contact
with customers, all the rooms used as stores probably had
ordinary shop doors on the street behind the basilica.
Notes to pages
49 Trendelenburg 1871,229.
50 Roma antiqua 1985, 26 (Normand, 4); Casinelli etal. 1998,
72 fig.17 (redrawn herein as Fig.14.8). This measured
drawing allows an accurate reconstruction of an all but
vanished pavement.
52 Ibid., Von Bildt 1901, 1314 fig.4, notes that, in his
eighteenth-century excavations, Friedenheim found fallen
vault fragments with complex stucco decorations. From the
vaults, these were probably Diocletianic. The coffers of the
wooden ceiling, supported by the timber-truss roof over the
nave, would have been similarly embellished.
54 Supra, p. 406 n. 34.
55 Lanciani 1897,273.
56 Jordan 1873,288.
57 Roma antiqua 1985, 52 fig.16 (drawing by Ch. Dutert);
Cassanelli etal. 1998, 7677 fig.23.
58 Giuliani and Verduchi in LTUR s.v.Basilica Iulia, p.178,
quote Pliny and Suetonius to mean that Gli ambulacra
ebbero due piani (The lateral aisles had two floors).
But Pliny says, Ep. 6.33, ex superiore basilicae parte
qua feminae qua viri et audiendi (men and women
listening from the upper part of the basilica); Suet.
Calig. 37, Quin et nummos non mediocris summae e
fastigio basilicae Iuliae per aliquot dies sparsit in plebem
(Indeed from the roof of the Basilica Julia for some days
he [Caligula] threw large amounts of money to the plebs).
Plinys men and women listened from an upper floor;
Caligula stood on the roof (or on an upper terrace). Neither
source necessarily means that both lower aisles had upper
stories.
59 Roma antiqua 1985, 31 fig.10 (drawing by A.-N.
Normand).
60 There are no remains of the upper order from the facade.
Normand (supra, p. 407 n. 59)suggests that it was
Corinthian, Dutert (supra, p. 407 n. 57)that it was Ionic. We

follow Dutert (Figs. 14.12, 1316), but Dutert and moderns
copy the sequence of orders on the Theater of Marcellus,
and Normand could be right (infra, p. 407 n.61).
61 Von Bildt 1901, 12 fig.3, 14, and De Ruggiero 1913,
416, note that Friedenheim (supra, p. 406 n. 37)found
Corinthian capitals during his excavations. While they
may have been brought into the basilica after it had been
abandoned to be cut up and burned for lime, they could
also have come from a portico on the second story around
the nave (as Normand, supra, p. 407 n. 60, suggests). Many
of these capitals are still displayed on the partially rebuilt
piers of the basilica. Apart from Normands nearly forgotten
reconstruction these capitals are usually not connected with
the basilica. Careful investigation and measurement could
show whether his suggestion was correct.
15. The Arch of Tiberius

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
Sources for the new reconstructions: Pensabene 1984, 33

fig.25; the elevation appears in the small relief on the north
side, left half, of the Arch of Constantine (herein Fig.15.3).
For the inscription, see infra, pp.266268.
OCD3 s.v. Quinctilius Varus Publius.
Vell. Pat. 2. 117118.
Tac. Ann.1.55.
Dio Cass. 56.18.21.
Dio Cass. 56.21.5 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb).
Suet. Aug. 23.2 (trans. J. Rolfe, Loeb).
Tac. Ann. 1.6162 (trans. J. Jackson, Loeb).
Tac. Ann. 1.60 (the standard of the 19th legion) and 2.25, in
his conquest of the German tribe, the Cauci, the Roman
commander Publius Gabinius recovered the third standard.
De Ruggiero 1913, 444 n. 1; Dio Cass. 60.8.7.
Tac. Ann.2.41.
Tac. Ann. 2.41; De Ruggiero 1913,444.
256266
407
11 Pensabene 1984, 3134; Kleiner 1985, 5153; De Maria

1988, 275276. With the exception of Coarelli and De
Maria, all locate the arch on the north side of the south
branch of the Via Sacra across from the Basilica Julia to
the south and the Temple of Saturn to the southwest. In our
opinion, however, there would not have been space between
the stair of the Basilica Julia and the remains of the arch
to have allowed for a sufficiently wide section of the Via
Sacra to have bypassed the arch. Consequently, we assume
that the great part of the street passed under it. Coarelli,
LTUR s.v. Arcus Tiberii (Forum), ignoring the earlier
archaeological evidence (infra, pp. 407408 nn. 1216),
identifies the arched buttress on the Vicus Iugarius between
the west side of Basilica Julia and the east side of the
Temple of Saturn as the Arch of Tiberius. The foundations
that, for the others, are the remains of the arch are, for him,
a fountain, the lacus Servilius.
12 ruderi di muro che non si dubt apartenessero ai
piedritti del nostro arco, De Ruggiero 1913, 447, quoted
by Pensabene 1984,33.
13 Kellermann 1835, 3536; CIL 6.906,1269.
14 Montiroli 1859, 1113, quoted by Jordan 1885, 212,
Ruggiero 1913, 447 n. 2, and cited by Pensabene 1984, 33
n. 12, who reproduces two of his figures (Pensabene 1984,
33 figs. 2627).
15 Ashby 1901, 329330; Vaglieri 1901, 2627; Vaglieri
1903, 163; De Ruggiero 1913, 447448; Pensabene 1984,
2934, his fig.25 (p.33) gives a copy of the plan made in
19001901 (redrawn herein as Fig.15.2).
16 Pensabene, 32 fig.24, provides also a photograph of a
relief with a fallen warrior found tra il tempio di Saturno
e lArco di Tiberio, ora nell Antiquario Forense
(between the temple of Saturn and the Arch of Tiberius,
now in the Antiquarium in the Forum = the offices of the
Soprintenmdenza Speciale per I Beni Archeologici di Roma
on the Palatine Hill). De Maria 1988, pl. 53.12, gives
40 8
17
18
19
20
21
Notes to pages
266 271
photographs of what may be part of the architrave/frieze

and a relief with two male heads.
The simple rendering of the ghostly arch between the
Temples of Saturn and Vespasian on the Anaglypha
Traiani (Pensabene 1984, 32 fig.23) suggests that it
probably does not represent the Arch of Tiberius.
Kleiner 1985, 52, suggests that these features are
pilasters, but they are clearly either full or half columns.
Susa: De Maria 1988, fig.76; Rimini: De Maria 1988,
fig.36. Kleiner 1985, 52: The Constantinian relief
reproduces only the essential features of the arch
and does not record any inscriptions or reliefs or attic
statuary. We cannot conclude from this that the facade of
the arch was plain because the Arch of Septimius Severus,
which still stands and is quite ornate, is also depicted on
the same frieze without any sculptural or epigraphical
embellishment. For the elevation of the arch, Kleiner
notes, 5253, that no other Tiberian arches outside Gaul
were embellished with narrative relief sculptures[so]
it is preferable to assume [that the Arch of Tiberius had]
reliefs of victories in the spandrels and a statuary group
on the attic, but [that it] was otherwise without significant
sculptural ornament.
Supra, p. 407 nn. 9, 10.
For his reconstruction of this inscription and for the
English translation, we are grateful to Professor John Bodel
of Brown University.
16. The Schola Xanthi

Sources for the new reconstruction: Khler 1964, 59;

Verduchi 1985, 32 fig.5. For the exact dimensions, infra,
p. 408 n.10. Our elevation of the south facade and its
architectural elements is necessarily conjectural (infra,
p.273).
1 Scheel 1928,273.
2 De Ruggiero 1913, 385387; LTUR s.v. Schola: scribae

librarii et praecones aedilium curulium (Schola Zanthi).
3 Bonfioli 1974, 7084; Maetzke 1986,376.
4 As noted by the excavator.
5 Hlsen 1888, 208209; Lanciani 1990, Storia, 2, 204.
Lanciani also quotes the original text from Marliani and
Barbarasa 1548, 29. He also cites Pirro Ligorio, who
identifies the building as parte e ornamento della schola
chiamata Xanta. See also LTUR s.v. Schola: scribae librarii
et praecones aedilium curulium (Schola Zanthi).
6 Hlsen 1909,69.
7 CIL 6.103:
Interior, above:
C AVILLIVS LICINIVS TROSIVS
CVRATOR
SCHOLAM DE SVO FECIT
Interior, below:
BEBRYX AVG L DRVSIANVS A FABIVS
XANTHVS CVR SCRIBIS LIBRARIIS ET
PRAECONIBVS AEDIL CVR SCHOLAM
AB INCHOATO REFECERUNT
MARMORIBVS ORNAVERVNT VICTORIAM
AUGUSTAM ET SEDES AENEAS ET
CETERA ORNAMENTA DE SVA PECVNIA
FACIVNDA CVRAVERVNT
Exterior,above
BEBRYX AVG L DRVSIANVS A FABIVS
XANTHVS CVR IMAGINES ARGENTEAS
DEORUM SEPTEM POST DEDICATIONEM
SCHOLAE
ET MVTVLOS CVM TABELLA AENEA DE

SVA PECVNIA DEDERUNT
Exterior,below
A FABIVS XANTHVS BEBRYX AVG L
DRVSIANVS CVR SCRIBIS LIBRARIIS ET
PRAECONIBVS AEDIL CVR SCHOLAM
AB INCHOATO REFECERVNT
MARMORIBVS ORNAVERVNT VICTORIAM
AUGUSTAM ET SEDES AENEAS ET
CETERA ORNAMENTA DEDERVNT
8 Quoted by Hlsen 1888, 211: Hoggi non si trovano pi per

essere stati rotti e convertiti in altrouso.
9 According to LTUR s.v. Schola: scribae librarii et
praecones aedilium curulium (Schola Zanthi), Boni
destroyed the building, but Turchetti 1989, 41, reports only
that he removed later structures, leaving visible the existing
remains. Cf. Platner and Ashby 1929,468.
10 Scheel 1928, 245, cited in LTUR s.v. Schola: scribae
librarii et praecones aedilium curulium (Schola Zanthi).
Scheel measured the pavement: 6.03 m (west side?) 4.45
(east side).
11 Scheel 1928, 247, suggests that the pavement belongs to a
restoration connected with the construction of the Arch of
Tiberius.
12 The walls have been variously described: Hlsen 1909, 69,
nothing of the superstructure is left.; Lanciani 1897,
281, of solid marble; Lugli 1946, 95, tutto rivestito
di marmo; Nash 1968, vol. 2, 301, richly decorated with
marble; LTUR s.v. Schola: scribae librarii et praecones
aedilium curulium (Schola Zanthi), 257, alzato in opera
laterizia. Only Scheel and Verduchi/Giuliani accurately
describe the construction: Scheel 1928, 245, Es ist
ein unbeputzter Gusskern, in dem Kiesel als Material
Notes to pages
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
benutzt ist; Verduchi and Giuliani 1980, 13, La struttura

cementizia priva di cortina, il rivestimento esterno ed
interno marmoreouna sorta di lacus.
Unlike virtually all Roman concrete buildings, the walls
of this one-story structure were never faced with brick.
The builders set up the white marble slabs of internal and
external veneer and filled the space between them with
concrete.
To remove the clamps that once secured the base moldings,
scavengers enlarged these sockets to their presentsize.
Hlsen 1888, 208209, says that, when excavated, the
schola preserved (conservazione perfettissima) these
contents. The account of the excavator (supra, p. 408
n.5) indicates, however, that only the inscriptions on the
architraves described these items.
Lanciani 1897, 281282; Nash 1968, vol. 2, 301 (the
upper structure no longer exists).
Turchetti 1989, 41: Siccome lo Hlsen aveva collocato
la notizia del rinvenimento della Schola Xantha sul
fianco meridionale dei rostri, quando fu riscoperto questo
ambiente ne eredit il nome. Riesce tuttavia difficile
accettare tale ipotesi poich la struttura non ha nulla in
comune con i tre piccoli vani con portichetto antistante
ad architrave con iscrizione, ricordati dal Marliano
e dal Ligorio. Giuliani and Verduchi (supra, p. 408
n.12)identify the structure as a lacus or fountain.
Hlsen 1888, 210211; Lanciani 1990, 204, quoting
Marliani and Barbarasa 1548, 29: Sub Concordiae
autem templo in capite Fori, dum fossores altius terram
moliuntur, invenere locum, cuius antae cum epistyliis
marmoriae efficiebant veluti porticum vel apothecas
treis; in quibus consisterent, qui publica acta notarent ac
publicarent.
Since the excavators were working in the space between
the West Rostra and the Arch of Tiberius, both still buried
and not then visible, there would not have been space for
a portico or three rooms, as Boni proved when he cleared

the site in the early twentieth century.
17.The Diocletianic Honorary

Columns

1
2
3
Sources for the new reconstruction: plans: Giuliani and

Verduchi1987, pls. 13; proportions: drawing from the
Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma,
Colonne Onorarie: Relievo e Ricostruzione: Rapp.1:25
by A. Finesi; colors: Giuliani and Verduchi1987, 173. The
architectural elements were taken from photographs of the
on-site remains (Figs. 17.1,36).
Rosa 18711872, 5657; Lanciani 1897, 258; Lugli 1946,
153154; Lugli 1970,232.
Giuliani and Verduchi1987,164.
The fluted white marble shaft now on base number
15B was originally on 15A. Ibid., 167 fig.239, show
that, when it fell from that base, it landed on a pile
of fill 2 m + above the ancient street level. That
circumstance suggests that the column stood for a
considerable period after the bases were no longer
considered monuments.
Basing their comments on the holes still visible in the
surviving sides of the bases, Giuliani and Verduchi 1987,
173, suggest that these houses, with shed-and-gable roofs,
were all of wood. Brizio 1872, 232, however, cites masonry
remains (infra, p. 409 n. 9). Are Giuliani and Verduchi
mistaken, or were the separate structures of different types
and/or periods?
Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, fig.239, show that initial
excavation revealed that the interiors of bases 15A and 15B
were missing. The cores of the other bases were also removed
either to use the resulting space or to quarry the tufa blocks
of the stone core (for the construction of the huts?) or for
both purposes.
271279
409
6 Brizio 1872, 231, and Rosa 1872, 56, give the date as
1817; Fea 1824, 286, as1818.
7 Fea 1824,286.
8 Giuliani and Verduchi 1987,166.
9 They were apparently well preserved. Notes Brizio 1872,
232, alcuni di questi basamentinel medioevo furono
convertiti in altretanti tugurii e abitazioni provvisorie.qu
incontraronsi frequenti costruzioni posticcie, formate per
via di frammenti di tufi tolti dai pi antichi edifizi. Era assai
interessante di contemplare le vicende e le trasformazioni
subite dal Foro Romano nellepoca di mezzo colle reliquie
di tali curiosi monumenti che ancora sopravanzavano. Ma
siccome nessuna di quelle cataste di massi poggiavano
sovra solida base, cos in seguito fu deciso demolirle per
ridonare al Foro il suo aspetto dellepoca imperiale.
10 After their discovery, Rosa 18711872, 56, had suggested
that the bases were Constantinian. Noting that Fea had
seen the brick stamps at the base 15G, Jordan 18812, 106,
agreed and quoted their texts (but see infra, p. 409 n.11).
11 Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 167, dates both
inscriptions OFF S R F DOM (illustrated by Giuliani and
Verduchi1987, 169 fig.242) and R SP | OF TER SIII| to
the reign of Diocletian.
12 Ibid., 168173, 139142, 140141 figs. 192193
(republican shrine).
13 Except on the west side, the exterior of base number 15A
is almost completely preserved measuring 4.34 m (base)
3.78 m (height), dimensions taken from Finesis fine pencil
drawing (supra, p. 409 sources).
14 According to Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 167, this was
typical Diocletianic construction. The cores were not, as
suggested by Lugli 1946, 153; 1970, 232, remnants of
earlier structures.
15 Several fragments of a thick base molding stored next to
the south side of base 15A probably ornamented the lower
podium (Fig.17.6B). They have (from the bottom) a high
41 0
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Notes to pages
279 285
plinth, a large half round, a low fillet, and the lowest section
of what is probably a large-scale, reversed cyma recta that
continued on the now missing block above. A traditional
design for monumental base moldings, this sequence would
probably have ended with a half round.
No fragments of the base cornices survive, but we suppose
them to have been larger versions of the pedestal cornices
(Fig.17.5).
Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 173. We assume that, as on
the Rostra, the wider africano strips framed a rectangular,
sunken porphyry panel. The inscriptions that identified
the person to whom the column was dedicated must have
appeared on the panels facing the interior of the Forum.
Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 168 fig.240, shows the
reerection of the white marble shaft originally on base
number 15A on number 15B, dating the procedure to1898.
From Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 167 fig.239, it is clear
that the interiors of both bases had been removed during
the MiddleAges.
They used Finesis design (supra, p. 409 sources, n.
13)His rendering incorporates the surviving fragments
of the pedestals base molding and its one extant cornice
fragment. Another of his drawings in the files of the
Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma, labeled 5/Area
Centrale del Foro. Colonne honorarie/ 418, shows that he
experimented with different heights for the pedestals.
Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 167. Since the gray granite
shaft on base number 15A was found near the Temple of
Castor and Pollux, it was probably not originally on one of
the bases. Since, however, the shafts of the Diocletianic
columns on the West Rostra were all of red granite,
assuming that the pavonazzetto shaft originally on base 15A
was a later (a last-minute) substitution, we show red granite
shafts on all the bases.
The fragments of one surviving column base support the
pavonazzetto shaft on base 15B (Figs. 17.1,3).
23 Giuliani and Verduchi 1987,173.

24 Supra, p.384 n.88.
18.The Temple of Castor and

Pollux

Sources for the new reconstruction: Richter 1898, 87

(unnumbered figure), 95 figs. 4ad, 96 figs. 4c, f, 97 figs.
5ad, 102 fig.7a, 103 figs. 7ab, 104 figs. 8ac, 105 fig.9a,
106 fig.9b, 113 fig.10; Strong and Ward-Perkins 1962, pls.
29; Nylander and Zahl 1985, 136 fig.2; Roma antiqua 1985,
8587 figs. 3638 (J. Suys, 13); Nielsen and Zahle 1985, 5
fig.2, 25, pl. 1; Sande and Zahl 1988, 214215 figs. 106109,
216 figs. 110111; Steinby 1989, 27 fig.3, 29 fig.4, 30 fig.5,
pl. 1; Nielsen 1990, 91 fig.2, 9697 (unnumbered figure);
Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, pls. 67, 1011, A, B; Sande and
Zahle 2008, 13 fig.1.1.2, 16 fig.2.1, 63 fig.3.4.6, 76 fig.4.1,
81 fig.4.5, 9091, 106107 figs. 5.2.2ab, 116 figs. 5.3.1ab,
148 fig.6.4.1, 151 fig.6.4.6, 177 fig.6.5.3, 180 fig.6.5.11,
187 fig.6.6.2, 188 figs. 6.6.35, 193 fig.6.72, 193 figs. 6.7.3
6, 6.7.7, 6.7.8, 200208, pls. 6.8.16.10.6.
1 Fragments 18ac of the Forma Urbis show parts of the
temples plan as it was in the early third century CE:
Carettoni etal. 1960, vol. 1, 7576; vol. 2, pl. 21. RodriguezAlmeida 1980, 9698 fig.22, pl. 13; for the most recent
work on this material on the Forma Urbis, see the Stanford
Digital Forma Urbis Project: http://formaurbis.stanford.edu/
fragment.php?record87 (accessed November 2, 2011). The
temple appears also on the Anaglypha Traiani/Hadriani (with
only five columns: Nielsen and Zahle 1985, 1; Nielsen and
Poulsen 1992, 135 fig.108); D. Kleiner 1992, 248 fig.216,
identifies the monuments in the Adriano, adlocutio (l. to r.)
as the Rostra, the Temple of Caesar, and the Basilica Julia.
But, as the emperor stands on the Rostra of the Temple of
Caesar, the temple behind him must be the Temple of the
Castores. Cf. Khler 1964,32.
2 Although it was occasionally called the Temple of Castor

and Pollux (Cic. Nat. D. 3.5.13; Suet. Calig. 22.2) or in
the lists of buildings in the Augustan regions (neighborhoods)
in the Rome of the later empire, the Curiosum and the
Notitia, Nordh 1949, 85 the Templum Castorum, it was
more normally known as simply the Temple of Castor,
Aedes Castoris, as in Gell. NA. 11.2. Thus Marcus Bibulus,
Julius Caesars colleague as consul, joked that, when Caesar
exhibited combats with wild beasts and stage-plays too,
both with his colleague [Bibulus] and independently.
Caesar alone took all the credit even for whatever they spent
in common, andBibulussaidhis was the fate of Pollux:
For, said he, just as the temple erected in the Forum to the
twin brethren, bears only the name of Castor, so the joint
liberality of Caesar and myself is credited to Caesar alone
(trans. J. Rolfe, Loeb), Suet. Iul. 10; Dio Cass. 37.8.2. See
also Sihvola 1989,78.
3 For treatments of these deities by Greco-Roman authors, see
Sironen 1989, 92103.
4 Sande and Zahle 1988,213.
5 Livy 2.1920.
6 Nylander and Zahle 1985, 135, suggest that Postumius
vow may have been an exoratio, a means of attracting to
Rome gods that had formerly protected the Latin League.
Yet, since exoratio usually meant that the original center
of the cult had been destroyed, and the worship of Castor
and Pollux flourished until the imperial period at Latin
Tusculum, that cannot have been the case. Indeed,
Castor and Pollux were important in the mythology of the
Etruscans, and, in any case, cults founded by exoratio could
not legally, like Postumius temple, have been built inside
the pomerium. The Romans did not seem to regard this
originally Greek cult as foreign, and the Greeks could have
introduced it into Etruria and Latium. Thus it may
actually have been established in Rome before the time of
Postumius: Sihvola 1989, 7980.
Notes to pages
7 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6.13.13; Cic. Nat. D. 3.5.13; Flor.

1.5.4.
8 Livy 2.42.5; Ov. Fast. 1.705708; Cic. Nat. D. 3.5.13; Plut.
Vit. Coriolanus 3.4. For modern views on the significance
of the temples foundation, see Sihvola 1989, 8185. About
forty fragments of early terracotta and pavement from the
original temple were excavated along the Vicus Tuscus
in 1987: Poulsen, Grnne, and Steinby 1988, 28, 3031;
Grnne 1990, 105117.
9 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7.7172.
10 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6.13.4. Quintus Fabius Maximus
Rullianus, a general in the wars with the Samnites,
instituted this procession when he was master of the horse
in 325 BCE: Val. Max. 2.2.9a. Sihvola 1989, 81; Nielsen
and Poulsen 1992, 5960.
11 Suet. Aug.38.3.
12 Frank 1925, 79, suggests that the importance of the temple
related to the ever-increasing social prestige of the knights
during the republic. See, for example, Cic. Verr. 2.1.49.129
(trans. L. Greenwood, Loeb): that temple of Castor, that
famous and glorious memorial of the past, that sanctuary
which stands where the eyes of the nation may rest upon
it every day, in which the Senate not seldom meets, and
which is daily thronged with those who come to take
counsel on matters of high import Cic. Verr. 72.187
(trans. L. Greenwood, Loeb): Castor and Pollux; ye who
have your place at the central heart of populous Rome,
who watch and witness all that is done in our Forum, our
solemn deliberations, our laws and our courts of law.
See also Cic. Verr. 2.5.72. In his autobiography, Augustus
locates his new Basilica Julia by specifying that it stood
between the temple of Castor and the temple of Saturn:
Mon. Anc. 20.3, and legal inscriptions (CIL I, section 2,
582)and those from burials also refer to the temple as an
official site: CIL 6.1.2202, 2203; 6.2.8688, 8689, 9177,
9393, 9872, 10024.
13 As we have seen (supra, p. 411 n. 12), the temple was the

center for knights in Rome, and the treaty commemorated
the faithful service of the Capuans to the Romans (to whom
the treaty gave Roman citizenship) in Romes war with her
Latin allies: Livy 8.11.16.
14 Pliny NH 34.11.23 mentions a togate equestrian statue of
Quintus Marcius Tremulus, victor over the Samnites, that
dated from the late fourth centuryBCE.
15 Nielsen 1990, 9091; Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 86, suppose
that, while the renovation may have generally updated the
original temple, it was intended, after the transfer of the
meetings of the comitia from the west side of the Forum to the
opposite side, mainly to enlarge the size of the Rostra in front
of the temple to accommodate these large-scale assemblies.
16 Frank 1925, 87, suggests that the original archaic Tuscanstyled structure had lasted until this reconstruction. But, as
Poulsen 1988, 29, indicates, the floor of that building shows
clear traces of fire either from the attack of the Gauls in
387386 BCE or from another major fire in 210BCE.
17 Gell. NA.11.2.
18 As when, at the beginning of the struggles between the
optimates (the conservative aristocrats) and the populares
(liberal aristocrats and knights), the consul Opimius
gathered his forces there before moving against the popular
champion, Gaius Gracchus: App. B Civ. 1.3.25.
19 CIL 1.586; Frank 1925, 80; Sihvola 1989,87.
20 Cic. Verr. 2.1.50.133, 2.72.186.
21 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,114.
22 Cic. Verr. 2.1.55.145, 2.56.146, 147; Nielsen 1990, 93,
found no evidence for Verres repairs.
23 Cic. Verr. 2.1.50.133. The drums of four columns were
taken down, reassembled, and stuccoed, and one shaft was
even replaced in marble: Frank 1925, 90n.2.
24 Plut. Vit. Sull.8.3.
25 Plut. Vit. Sull.33.4.
26 Plut. Vit. Cat. Min. 2728.
287289
411
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Dio Cass. 38.6.2.

Cic. Sest. 15.34, 39.85; Pis. 11, 23; Asc. Pis. c. l.600.
Cic. Mil. 18.91.
Cic. Sest. 37.7980; Quinct.7.6.
Cic. Phil. 3.11.27.
App. B Civ. 3.4142.
Dio Cass. 54.24.23 (fire of 14 BCE); 54.1.1 (many temples
destroyed by storms and lightening strikes) quoted by Nielsen
1988, 13 n. 43; Nielsen 1990, 92. Frank 1925, 81, however,
supposes the reconstruction undertaken not to repair, but to
transform the building into a modern marble shrine.
34 Suet. Tib.20.
35 Dio Cass. 55.27.4. Von Gerkan 19531954, 205, suggests
that the original inscription might have read as follows:
POLLVCI ET CASTORI TI IVLIVS AVG
F DIVI N CAESAR CLAVDIANVS
GERM PONT COS II IMP II TRIB
POT VII ET NERO CLAVDIVS TI F
DRVSVS GERM AVGVR COS IMP D
D DE MANVBIIS
Tiberius Julius Claudianus Germanicus, son of Augustus,
grandson of the god Caesar, pontifex, consul twice, twice proclaimed imperator, with tribunician power seven times and
Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus, son of Tiberius, augur, consul, proclaimed imperator, dedicated [this temple] from spoils
to Pollux and Castor.
36 Dio Cass. 59.28.5; Suet. Calig. 22.23 (trans. J. C. Rolfe,

Loeb).
37 Dio Cass. 60.6.8.
38 Cic. Quinct.4.17.
39 Juv. 14.260.
40 CIL 6.2.8688.
41 CIL 5.8119.4; 10030.1314.
42 Supra, p.14 n.26.
41 2
Notes to pages
289 296
43 Pliny NH 10.60.121 (trans. H. Rackham, Loeb).

44 Chron. 146; Platner and Ashby, 103; Nielsen and Zahle
1985,1.
45 So in the early imperial period, it appears in Martials
directions (Mart.1.70) to the house of his friend Proculus.
46 SHA Max.16.
47 SHA Valeriani5.4.
48 Fourth-century CE coins found in the swallowtail clamps
in the tufa blocks in the western part of the podium also
indicated that already in that period, the temple was in
ruins: Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,9.
49 Ibid., 12, 1418.
50 Ibid., 2021.
51 Ibid., 2123; Richter 1898, 87114, pl. 7 (existing,
restored lower front elevation), 8 (existing and restored
plan), 9 (existing and restored side elevation).
52 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 2325.
53 These buildings had stone foundations, adobe walls
decorated internally and externally with painted plaster,
and pitched roofs protected with the terracotta pan and
cover tiles, a style typical of Roman buildings and most
later Italian structures down to modern times: Nielsen and
Poulsen 1992, 912. They seem to have burned in a major
fire before the building of the temple. This destruction
may have been the result of the attack on Rome by Lars
Porsenna, king of the Etruscan city of Clusium. Either
he intended to restore Tarquinius Superbus, Romes last
exiled king, or he aimed at conquering Rome for himself
and perhaps did: Nielsen and Zahle 1985,13.
54 Nielsen and Zahle 1985, 2324; Nielsen and Poulsen
1992, 6179.
55 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 8286.
56 Ibid., 87117.
57 Ibid., 7576.
58 Nielsen and Zahle 1985,21.
59 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,78.
60 Philips 1989, 278, 300301; Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,

157176, pls.35.
61 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,8486
62 Ibid., 108111.
63 Cic. Verr. 2.1.55; Nielsen and Poulsen 1992,114.
64 Like the restored columns of the Temple of the Nymphs on
the Via di Grotta Oscura.
65 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 188220, pls.616.
66 Sande and Zahle 2008,204.
67 Ibid., 117, 177187.
68 Based on the architectural details, A. Von Gerkan 1953
1954, 206, suggests that the remains of the temple were not
those of the original Tiberian structure, but should be dated
to the early reign of Trajan. D. Strong and J. Ward Perkins
1962, 2728, subsequently rejected his proposal, and,
although Von Gerkan later proposes a Domitianic (?) date,
Von Gerkan 1964, 654; Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 58;
and Sande and Zahle 2008, 227224, currently accept the
verdict of Strong and Ward-Perkins, but note, Nielsen and
Poulsen 1992, 26 n. 78, that M. Wegner 1990, 103107,
following Von Gerkans later proposal, again suggests that
the temples superstructure is Flavian. Considering the
close correspondence between the measurements of the
elements of the Forums two Tiberian temples (Castor and
Pollux and Concord), supra, pp. 176, 399 nn. 62, 63, we
should, however, probably also reject Wegners dating.
69 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 30, 32 figs. 2021, pls. 7A,B.
70 Actually 6.80 m: according to Sande and Zahle 2008, 9, the
ground level on the east side of the podium lies at 13.30
masl.; the top of the podium is at 20.20masl.
71 In its surviving form, the foundation consists of three
concrete boxes (for the steps, the pronaos, and the
cella) filled with earth and rubble and separated by the
empty spaces, 2.50 m wide, that originally housed stone
foundation blocks (Figs. 18.2); Sande and Zahle 2008, 13
fig.1.1.2, 1520, 16 fig.2.1, 49 fig.3.2.1.1.
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
Sande and Zahle 2008, 81 fig.4.5, 103126.

Supra,p. 412 n. 1.
Sande and Zahle 2008, 7273.
Nielsen and Poulson 1992, 19 fig.10.
Sande and Zahle 2008, 90, 132145. Their illustrations are
particularly helpful: 148 fig.6.4.1, 151 fig.6.4.6.
Ibid., 129132.
Ibid., 147176.
Ibid.,150.
Ibid.,151.
Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 135136 fig.109, give a very
useful sketch of the entablature by the late fifteenth- to
early sixteenth-century Florentine craftsmen Bernardo della
Volpaia, and Sande and Zahle 2008, 187 fig.6.6.2, provide
a more finished rendering.
Sande and Zahle 2008,179.
Best seen in ibid., 180 fig.6.5.11.
Ibid., 202204 figs. 6.9.12.
Ibid., 186204.
Several fragments of the tympanum survive, including
one from the southeast corner of the back facade, inv.
no.23282 (herein Fig.18.7): Ibid., 200 fig.6.8.1a,
201202 fig.6.8.4.
Ibid., pls. 9, 11, 12.1, show the restored building with a
height of 31.35 m, or 105.9 Roman feet (1Roman foot =
0.296 m). Our model, with a slightly higher pediment, is
also somewhat taller.
Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 9, 12; Sande and Zahle
2008,208.
Sande and Zahle 2008, 205 fig.6.10.1, 206207.
The Forma Urbis (supra, p. 410 n. 1)shows this inner
colonnade: Sande and Zahle 2008, 216, 217218.
Nylander and Zahle 1985,138.
The close chronological and artistic connections among
the three temples suggest this possibility. In the Temple of
Castor and Pollux, the horse heads would have celebrated
Notes to pages
the gods ancient connections with the equestrian order in

battle (supra, pp. 31, 287).
93 Sande and Zahle 2008, 218219. The Forma Urbis,
fragment 18b (supra, p. 410 n. 1), does not show a platform,
but as we have only a Renaissance drawing for this
fragment, either the original engraver or the Renaissance
copyist may have omitted the line that would have indicated
the platform. For the lateral walls, Sande and Zahl 2008,
206, also suggest an alternative plan: one row[of]
columnson a high podium. A hypothetical section of the
temple by her colleagues, K. Nilson and C. Persson (Sande
and Zahle 2008, 76 fig.4.1), opts, however, for the two
superimposed colonnades. Indeed, a surviving pavonazzetto
shaft fragment (Sande and Zahle 2008, 218, exc. 82)may
belong to a pilaster from the upper order, and, since the
interiors of the Temples of Apollo in Circo and Mars Ultor
had such double interior colonnades, this arrangement was
probably more common than a one-story order.
94 The majority of these fragments are so small that it is
impossible to determine their original use; Sande and Zahle
2008, 13 fig.1.1.2, 216225, 295, pl.12.2.
95 Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 58; Sande and Zahle 2008,
5859.
19.The Parthian Arch of

Augustus (19 BCE)

The reconstruction that appears in these figures draws on

various sources: G. Ioppolos elevation based on Gamberini
Mongenets excavations of the early 1950s (supra, p. 378 n.
91). First published by Andreae 1957, 149152 fig.16, it was
subsequently reprinted by Nash 1968, vol. 1, 100 fig.102,
fot. 10966, the version we used in a clear reprint from the
Fototeca Unione at the American Academy in Rome (Fig.
19.6). On this reconstruction and the numismatic evidence on
which it is partially based, see infra, pp.306307.
Andreae gives only a general account of Gamberini

Mongenets excavations, but he says (p.153), Auch von
diesem Bogen fanden sich bei den neuen Ausgrabungen
weitere Fragmente. Andere nicht nur auf dem Forum
Romanum sondern in den Museen Roms und Europas
verstreute Architekturfragmente konnte Gamberini Mongenet
in unermdlicher und grndlicher Forschunbgsarbeit
identifiziern und so die erste zuverlssige Rekonstruction
des Bogens anfertigen. Thus according to Andreae, the
fragments clearly shown in Ioppolos drawing come from the
site and from museums in Rome and in other parts of Europe.
Since Andreae provided no indication of where any of these
fragments were and some were apparently widely scattered,
how were we to find them so we could check and draw them
ourselves?
Nedergaards in-progress research, Nedergaard 1988, 41,
provides a part of the answer: La revisione dei frammenti
ha inoltre rivelato che gli elementi decorativi dei quattro
grandi frammenti (una kyma lesbico sul frammento con la
Vittoria e su quello decorato con il trofeo, foglie di acanto
sulla chiave dellarco, un motivo di palmette sul soffitto di
tutti i frammenti eccetto quello della Vitoria) sono totalmente
diversi da quelli del complesso dorico-corinzio con i fasti.
la Vittoria stata ritrovata lontano dal Foro, nelle vicinanze
di Castro Pretorio, e che il luogo di rinvenimento degli
altri tre frammenti ignoto. In other words, we should
disregard the trophy Iopplo shows on the frieze of the central
Corinthian Order and the elements he uses to frame the
arch including the winged victory. The original now in the
Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek (inv. 511)comes from a different
monument: E. Nedergaard, LTUR s.v. Arcus Augusti.
But, Nashs photograph of the Doric capital and two large
cornice fragments, Nash 1968, 99 fig.100, fot. 1169, and
Nedergaards brief catalogue of some of the fragments,
Nedergaard 19882, 232 figs. 131136, 234 figs. 137141,
237239, suggest that the other smaller fragments were
3
4
296301
413
in the storerooms of the Sorprintendenza on the Palatine

Hill. And indeed, many of them are in the court yard of the
Soprintendenzas offices, including a rebuilt section of a part
of one the lateral pediments, Nedergaard 19882, 237238,
cat. no.106 (inv. no.371949). Most of the fragments come
from the cornices from the center and lateral wings.
For our images, we thus drew on these elements both
from close study of the originals and from our measured
photographs of them. Ioppolos drawing also shows, however,
that there are fragments of the bases and the base moldings
from the podia of both orders. Since we did not find these
in the storerooms of the Soprintendenza on the Palatine,
they are probably in other Soprintendenza storerooms. At
the beginning of the last century, they were the models for
the Soprintendenzas unlabeled drawing of a Doric temple.
Since this was, in effect, a version of one of the lateral bays
of arch, we used the detailing of the podia and the column
bases in our reconstruction. Several large-scale, unlabeled,
meticulously rendered drawings of the reconstructed
entablature of one of the side bays (stored with the previous
drawing in the archive of the Soprintendenza) were also very
useful in working out the details of the upper sections of the
lateral bays (Figs. 0.3, 1.2, 19.111).
There have been long scholarly discussions about the
location and remains of so-called Asiatic Arch of Augustus
(29 BCE). We here follow Nedergards conclusion, LTUR s.v.
Arcus Augusti (a 19 a.C.), that it was not in the Roman
Forum, and we do not discuss it herein.
An ancient, now ruined commercial center/fortress in
Mesopotampia, Carrhae is about 56 miles east of the
Euphrates and about 6.25 miles east of the Balihu River,
which, downstream, flows into the Euphrates. It is about fortyfive miles southwest of Edessa: Talbert 2000, 1, Map 3,C2.
Dio Cass. 40.16.3.
App. B Civ. 2.3.18 attributes 100,000 troops to Crassus
forces, but the somewhat smaller figure in Plut. Vit. Crass.
41 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Notes to pages
301 313
20 (about 88,000 troops) is probably more reliable. Crassus

son also brought an additional 1,000 horsemen from
Caesar: Plut. Vit. Crass.17.4.
Cic. Fin.3.75.
Plut. Vit. Crass. 16.46 (trans. B. Perrin, Loeb). According
to Cic. Div. 1.29, Appius Claudius, the censor, blamed
Ateius for Crassus misfortunes, but, says Cicero, these
resulted not from any actions of Ateius, an honourable
man and a distinguished citizen, but from Crassus failure
to heed Ateius dreadful warning.
Plut. Vit. Crass. 17.6, 18.5, 19.36; Dio Cass. 40.1718.
Dio Cass. 40.20.34.
Plut. Vit. Crass. 21.67.
App. B Civ. 2.3.18. Dio Cass. 40.27.4 says, however, that
most of the troops escaped to allied territory, and Plut.
Vit. Crass. 31.7 that 20,000 troops died; 10,000 were
captured.
App. B Civ. 2.16.110; Dio Cass. 44.15.4; Plut. Vit. Caes.
58.3; Suet. Iul.79.3.
Plut. Vit. Ant. 25.1, 30.2, 33.1, 33.4, 34.15, 35.4, 3752.
Suet. Aug. 21.3; Livy Per.141.
Dio Cass. 54.8.13; Eutr. 7.9; Flor. 2.34.63; Oros.6.21.
Mon. Anc.299.
The position of the lateral stair of the Temple of Castor
furnishes the proof for this date. The arch has a slightly
different orientation from the temple, yet the east lateral
stair of the temple is turned to accord with the south
lateral passage of the arch. Thus when the arch was built,
Tiberius had not yet reconstructed the temple, and, during
its construction (before 6 CE), the workers configured the
temple stair to fit the existing arch: Nedergaard 19881, 42;
Nedergaard 19882,236.
Nedergaard 19881, 38; 1993,82.
Rosa 1873,59.
Nedergaard 19881, 3739; 19882, 224, 226230;
Nedergaard 1993, 8283.
20 These appear on E. Ferrettis 1904 drawings of Bonis

excavation: a plan (Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni
Archeologici di Roma, 271/19; Degrassi 1947, pl. 6), an
isometric perspective (SSBAR, 270/18 similar but not
identical to Degrassi 1947, pl. 5), and front and back
elevations (Degrassi 1947, pl. 7). The first has been widely
published. In 1949, Holland 1953, 2, pls. 12, measured
and drew The extant foundations[which] are all of a
single course of blocks c. 0.700.74 m. in height, laid on a
bed of concrete.The blocks are approximately square in
section, except for the wider outer rows.
21 Nedergaard 1993,83.
22 The Proconnesian blocks that now make up parts of the
piers were, however, set on the foundations in the early
part of the last century and may not belong to the original
monument, which seems to have been constructed of Luna
marble: LTUR s.v. Arcus Augusti (a 19 a.C.).
23 Nedergaard 19882, 232233 fig.134 (Corinthian capital,
inv. no.371974); 237 no.104 (Doric capital, inv. 371954),
cat. no.104. Rosa 1873, 57, reports its discovery near the
Column of Phocas in una fabbrica medioevalenella
quale era stato adibito per materiale da costruzione.
24 These include elements originally found by Rosa in
1873. First, during the excavation of the Temple of Castor
and Pollux, fragments of triumphal and consular fasti
had appeared: Nedergaard 19882, 230, 235, 237. Then,
according to Rosa 1873, 59, Uscirono alla luce a volta
a volta preziosi frammenti architettonici, la maggior
parte di cornice e darchitravi con resti di fregio, tutti di
piccole proporzioni, ma di squisito lavoro. Toebelmann
1923, vol. 1, 1316, lists ten of Rosas fragments.
According to Andreae 1957, 150, Dr.Riccardo
Gamberini Mongenets new excavations around the arch
began in May 1950, and ended in 1952; Nedergaard
19881, 38. Among these were, Degrassi 1953, 97, several
fragments of tabernacles from the consular and triumphal
25
26
27
28
fasti, a base from one of the latter with trofei darmi.

Nedergaard 19882, 232 figs. 131135, gives photographs
and inventory numbers for four cornice fragments and
for the lower section from one of the engaged Corinthian
capitals from the archs central wing, and today fragments
of the column shafts, probably from the central wing and
from one of the lateral wings (from one or the other of the
reported excavations), lie close to the northeast corner of
the centralbay.
Degrassi 1953,97.
Mattingly, Sydenham, RIC I 359; RSC544.
BMCRE, 7374, nos. 427428, pls. 10.2, 3. Hill 1989,
53 fig.83, suggests reading the inscriptions on both sides
of the coin together (as here). As portrayed on these and
similar coins (Fig.19.5C), the representation of the arch is
only approximate: a rectangle with three identical openings.
Very different from that on Vinicius coins (Fig.19.5AB),
this image may still, according to Nedergaard 1993, 82, be
identified as Augustus Parthian Arch. Thus the provincial
moneyers either worked from an earlier design or were
not well informed about the final appearance of the arch.
Vinicius design, however, BMCRE 1, p.14, no.77, pl.
3.4; Mattingly, Sydenham, RIC (rev. 1984), 68, no.359,
accurately records the front elevation of the monument
but shows only three words of the inscription on the attic:
SPQR/ IMPCAE.
Nedergaard 19882, 225; LTUR s.v. Arcus Augusti.
20. The Temple of Vesta

Sources for the new reconstruction: Lanciani 1884, pl. 20;

Jordan 1886, pls. 57, 11, 13; Auer 1888, pls. 57; Boni
1900, 161 fig.2, 164 fig.6, 165 figs. 78, 186 fig.43,
187 fig.44, 188 fig.45, 189 figs. 4647, 190 figs. 4851;
Caprioli 2007, pls. 213, 2324, 7779; for the drawings
A. Bartoli used to reconstruct the section of the temple in
Notes to pages
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
the Forum (today in the files of the Soprintendenza Speciale

per I Beni Archeologici di Roma), infra, p. 416 n.37.
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.64.5, 2.66; Livy 1.20.3; Plut. Vit.
Num.11.
Plut. Vit. Num. 9.14.
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6.13.2
Mart. 1.70.34.
LTUR s.v. Regia.
Gell. NA. 14.7; Platner and Ashby 1929, 557; Caprioli
2007,86.
Ov. Fast. 6.295298. Imperial coins, however, beginning
with those of Vespasian, do show an image inside the
temple (Figs. 2.1, 20.24), but these images may have
served only to identify the temple, not to portray a real
statue: LTUR s.v. Vesta, aedes.
Jordan 1886, 2527, describes the structure in detail,
identifying it as a prominent Hadrianic tabernacle that
housed the statue of Vesta omitted in the temple. He
provides a measured drawing of the architectural elements
(pl. 11)and transcribes the surviving dedicatory inscription
(p.27) that commemorates the public funds that paid for
the monument: SENATVS POPVLVSQUE ROMANVS
PECVNIA PVBLICA FACIENDAM CVRAVIT. For a
photograph of the partially restored structure, see Nash
1968, vol. 2, 510, fot.257.
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.67.2 (trans. E. Cary, Loeb).
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.67.4; Plut. Vit. Num.10.2.
Caprioli 2007, 7475.
Ov. Fast. 6.275282; Plut. Vit. Num.11.1.
Ov. Fast. 6.261262.
Our sources do not exactly say that the temple was
destroyed, but Plut. Vit. Cam. 21.1 reports that the Vestals
hid or took with them the important sacred objects from
the temple and fled along the Tiber, and Livy 5.42 and
Diod. Sic. 14.115.6 imply that the Gauls pulled down or
burned most of the city and stationed their troops in the
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Forum. On the reconstruction of the temple, see Caprioli

2007,47.
Ov. Fast. 6.439454; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.66.4.
Plin. HN. 7.43.141: magnum ei et sublime, sed pro oculis
datum. Ov. Fast. 6.439454; Val. Max. 1.4.5.
Livy 26.27.19.
Tac. Ann. 15.41.
The coins, aurei and denarii, were struck c. 6566, that is,
just after the fire, and so celebrated the beginning of the
reconstruction: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?
search=Nero+Vesta&firmid=&s=0&results=100 (accessed
March 14, 2011, lot nos. 389,177).
Tac. Hist.1.43.
The date suggested for the aureus shown in Fig.20.3:
&AucID=575&Lot=373 (accessed November 12, 2011).
Herodian 1.14.46. For the effect of this fire on the area
around the temple and on the possessions of the physician
Galen, see Tucci 2008, 133149.
Platner and Ashby 1929, 558. An aureus with a portrait of
Julia Domina on the obverse, and the restored temple on
the reverse, commemorates the reconstruction: http://pro.
coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=100520&AucID
=108&Lot=61 (accessed November 12, 2011). In earlier
Antoine coins with approximately the same scene on the
reverse, Caprioli 2007, 6566, the six human figures (three
on each side of the temple) were probably the six Vestals.
While the Severan coin above keeps these groupings, it
changes the identity of the central figures: the L female
adjacent to the central altar is probably Julia Domna; the
bare-chested male figure facing her, Septimius Severus as
Pontifix Maximus. Alternatively, the L female figure may
be the chief Vestal who would then be personally accepting
the rebuilt temple from the emperor. On the blurred reverse
of a similar coin, Caprioli 2007, 66, interprets the blurred
device above the altar as a seated figure of Vesta within the
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
313319
415
temple. Here, however, it may be simply an indication of

smoke rising above the central altar.
Platner and Ashby 1929,558.
Caprioli 2007, 3334.
Supra, p.86.
Lanciani 1897,224.
Lanciani 1884, 4445, pl.20.
Jordan 1886, pls.67.
Boni 1900, 159191, particularly 186190 figs. 4351.
Subsequently the author of the well-known Larchitettura
romana (Turin: Societ editrice internazionale, 1959).
Caprioli 2007, pls. 47 (by Crema), 8789 (digital
reconstruction).
Cody 1973, 4350, pls. 56; Caprioli 2007, 6167, pls.
2021.
According to LTUR s.v. Vesta, aedes, the relief is Trajanic.
Additional research suggests a date of the mid-first century
CE, perhaps during the reign of Nero: Caprioli 2007, 51 n.
109. Thus the temple it represents dates from the period of
Augustus or perhaps from that of Caesar.
This unusual order appears nearby in the small aediculum
at the entrance to the House of the Vestal Virgins: Jordan
1886, 2527, pl. 11; Nash 1968, vol. 2, 510, fot. 257.
Coarelli, 1985, 266270; LTUR s.v. Lares praesites
attributes this little shrine to these deities, but it has
also been identified as the location for the statue of Vesta
omitted in her temple (supra, p. 415 n. 8). The similarity
between the capitals of the temple on the marble relief and
this shrine certainly suggests that both were dedicated to
the same deity. But, since the temple shown on the relief
burned in the fire of 64 CE, and, as coins of Nero and
the Flavians show (Figs. 20.23), its replacement had a
conventional Corinthian Order, so why did the aediculum,
dated by its brick stamps to the reign of Hadrian, Coarelli
1985, 269, copy the earlier temple? Could its capitals,
from a previous aediculum contemporary with the original
41 6
Notes to pages
319 322
913. 59. Sacrario di Vesta. Rilievo e una pianta e rocchio di
temple, have been reused on a new, second-century

podium?
36 Ov. Fast. 6.261.
37 Cremas most important surviving renderings, preserved
today in the archive of the Soprintendenza Speciale per I
Beni Archeologici di Roma, are as follow:
colonna con aletta. Raff. 1:10. Scale1:10.

927. 72 bis. Untitled. Restored plan of the Temple. [signed]
L. Crema.
931. 76. Sacrario di Vesta. La composizione del basamento.
[signed] Ing. L. Crema, 1931-ix; Il Direttore, Bartoli.
870 (bold = black no.). 20 (= red number). Sacrario di Vesta.
932. 77. Untitled. [signed] Ing. L. Crema, 1931-ix; [signed]
Studio per la ricostruzione di un tratto di muro della cella con
Bartoli. Sacrario di Vesta. Studio della trabeazione. Section
I pochi avanzi di bugnato. [signed] ? Ciacchi. Scala 1:10.
and elevation of external entablature blocks with elevations of
Temple of Vesta. Study for the reconstruction of a wall section
the exterior and interior soffit panels, the latter adjacent to the
of the cella with the few remains of the wall with ashlar facing
inside and outsideof the exterior wall between the columns.
[and their measurements].
945. 90. Ricostruzione della parte del tempio di Vesta.
879. 27. [pencil] Tempio di Vesta. Ricomposizione dell
[in pencil] Modello di quello, al vero, eseguito dall arch.
[illegible] architettonico dell epoca Severiana.
Ciacchi. [signed] Arch. ? Ciacchi.
882. 30. Tempio di Vesta. Ricomposizione della cornice allo
95[0]. 95. (Caprioli 2007, pl. 11, herein Fig. 20.7). Sacrario
stilobate al vero. [signed] ? Ciacchi. Cornice from the podium,
di Vesta. Studio di recomposizione di un settore del soffito dal
fine life-size rendering of the decorative elements at a large
colonnato.
scale.
952. 97. (Caprioli 2007, pl. 9) [pencil] Sacrario di Vesta.
892. 40. [sectioned, illegible label] (herein Fig. 20.8). Plan
Studio schematico di ricomposizione dellabsato [sic].
and reconstructed elevation of two fragments from a column at

the door. [signed] L. Crema.
893. 42. Sacrario di Vesta. Relievo di ricomposizione.
Scale1:50.
902.50. (Caprioli 2007, pl. 10). Pezzo di un cuneo del chiave
del soffito del peribolo con la cornice della cella e due lacunari.
Scala 1:10. [signed] T. Ciacchi. Section and lower elevation.
904. 52. (Caprioli 2007, pl. 6). [Label cut off] Section plan of
a column from the exterior order and one from the interior one.
[signed]. Ing. L. Crema 1930 ix, Il Direttore Bartoli.
905. 55 bis. Sacrario di Vesta. Sezione del rudero e studio
di restauro. Inked section of the podium with various pencil
sketches of reconstructions. [signed] ? Ciacchi.
Unnumbered (Caprioli 2007, pl. 5), [signed] L. Crema,

1930-IX). Sacrario di Vesta. Recomposizione del
basamento.
38 In drawing no.952 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)(herein Fig.20.6),

Crema reassembles the interior and exterior orders; his
drawing no.932 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)provides measured
elevations and sections of the exterior and interior entablature.
39 Drawing nos. 927 and 931 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)show
the podium. See also Caprioli 2007, 193213, pl. 5. The
description above is based on those drawings since only
tiny fragments of this decoration have been inserted into
the reconstructed travertine podium, which is otherwise
undecorated (Figs. 20.5, 12, 13).
40 The description begins at the bottom of the podium.

41 Drawing no.927 (supra, p. 416 n. 37). Caprioli does not
give a (restored)plan.
42 Drawing no.913 (supra, p. 416 n. 37). This drawing shows
a column base with a flat back and two shaft fragments with
lateral projections the wider right one with a decorated
strip, and the narrower left one plain. Fragments of similar
bases appear in Caprioli 2007, 218219, cat. nos. 73,
7879, pl. 27. For the shaft, she also provides a catalogue
entry (223, cat. no.87)and plates (nos. 7, 40.34, 41.14).
Since, however, she omits any discussion of the access
stair and door (p.183: La ricostruzionenon comprende
elementi sicuramente presenti nella struttura, quali le scale
o la porta daccesso o le grate poste negli intercolumni della
peristasi esterna), she neither reproduces nor discusses
drawing 913 and thus does not, like Crema, connect the
flat-backed bases and shafts with the entrance to the cella.
43 Jordan 1886, pl. 13.d; Boni 1900, 190 fig.48.
44 Drawing no.892 (supra, p. 416 n.37).
45 Caprioli 2007, 206212, pls. 5, 3436.
46 Drawing nos. 904 (Caprioli 2007, pls. 4, 6), 952 (supra,
p.416 n.37).
47 Drawing no.904 (Caprioli 2007, pl.6).
48 Drawing no.870. The blocks of the faux masonry are
square with sides of 0.48 m. The joints measure 0.02m.
49 Drawing. no.95[0] (supra, p. 416 n. 37)(Caprioli 2007,
255261, pl.11).
50 Drawing no.952 (supra, p. 416 n.37).
51 Drawing no.952 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)shows that the center
of the shafts (the best location for screen sockets) is over
the front of the upper cornice of the podium. If the tangs of
the screens ran along those lines, there would have been
gaps of 0.25 m (nearly a Roman foot) between the column
centers and the front of the podium. And yet, Caprioli 2007,
221236, pls. 7, 37.3, 56, documents a number of shaft
fragments with what she identifies as screen sockets (p.220).
Notes to pages
52
53
54
55
56
The columns used in Bartolis reconstruction, however

(except for Capriolis cat. no.83, p.222, her pl. 39.3), do
not seem to have rows of visible socket holes for the screens.
Could Capriolis shaft fragments with screen holes come from
the four columns that flanked the three entrances?
Drawing no.932 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)(Caprioli 2007, 159,
pl.10).
Caprioli 2007, 160165, 254, cat. no.157.
Drawing no.932 (supra, p. 416 n. 37)(Caprioli 2007,
262279, pls. 10, 6776).
Lanciani 1884, pl.21.a.
Supra, p. 416 n. 36.
4
5
6
7
21.Conclusions
1 All earlier reconstructions place the former temple squarely
upon its podium. But careful scrutiny of satellite photos and
civil-engineering drawings suggests it may have been slightly
rotated in relation to its base, thus aligning the view from
its cella with the door of the Temple of Concord. (Although
the Tiberian Temple of Concord was built after the Temple
of Caesar, its cella door occupied the exact position of the
earlier Opimian temple).
2 The order of Caesars temple was about 35 Roman feet high
(10.40 m), and the orders of Castor and Concord 50 Roman
feet (14.80 m). The order of the republican Temple of Castor
had been about the size of the Temple of Caesar. With
diameters of approximately 1.47 m (LTUR. s.v. Concordia,
aedes, 473 fig.188), those of the Opimian Temple of
Concord were about the size of the later Tiberian temples.
3 The order of the Tiberian Temple of Castor was considerably
larger than its republican predecessor. The diameters of the
earlier structure were between 1.03 m and 1.17 m (Nielsen
and Poulson 1992, 110); those of the Tiberian temple average
1.50 m (Sande and Zahl 2008, 132). The Tiberian Temple of
Concord had an order slightly smaller than that of
10
11
the earlier republican building (the later order with column

diameters of 1.47 m), and by turning the cella at a right
angle to the porch and widening it considerably, Tiberius
had created a temple with a much larger interior than that
of the earlier building.
LTUR s.v. Tribunal Aurelium/Gradus Aurelii.
Usually, these chambers were relatively small. But since
Castor and Concord had been traditional meeting places for
the Senate, both cellas were considerably larger than usual.
Jordan 1878, 396; Bauer 1988,207.
The best example of a nearly contemporary arcade survives
in the nearby Forum Holitorium: G. DeAngelis dOssat
1934, 6769. The same design is commonplace on the
facades of apartment houses (insulae) in the second and
third centuriesCE.
A few travertine piers from Augustus basilica (or Caesars?)
are partially intact along the north side of the nave. As
rebuilt by Maximian after 283 CE, the structure seems
to have been largely of brick-faced concrete, the usual
building material for local mansions and apartment houses.
Only at the southwest corner of the building are some
Augustan (?) cross-walls of tufa with widely separated
courses of travertine still in position (Fig.14.5).
Where preserved, the walls of the shops are of tufa.
Maximian rebuilt the wall behind them (the south wall of
the basilica in brick-faced concrete) and also made some
restorations in elements of the first two orders: H. Bauer,
LTUR s.v. Basilica Paul(l)i.
Kleiner 1985, 24, notes that Augustus had used a chariot
group on an arch to his father on the Palatine, but in that
vehicle were the gods Apollo and Diana. He first put his
own figure in a chariot on the arch that celebrated his
victory at Actium. According to Nedergaard 19881, 43, that
monument did not earlier occupy nearly the same site as
the later ParthianArch.
Kleiner 1985,27.
323348
417
12 We know about the order of only the Parthian Arch, but,

on the other side of the Temple of Caesar and adjacent to
the long Doric arcade of Lucius Caesar, the arch of Lucius
Caesar very probably had a rather similar order.
13 These were the features of a local style that also appears,
for example, on the Temple of Hercules at Cori: Blatteau
and Sears 1981, pl.C.
14 Reproducing Hbrard (supra, p. 388 n. 1), Toebelmann
1923, vol. 1, 29 fig.35, shows the Doric Order on the
facade of the Basilica Aemilia with an Ionic cornice, and
G. Ioppolos much published restored elevation of the Arch
of Augustus for Gamberini Mongenet (herein Fig.19.6)
indicates that the columns of the lateral wings did not
diminish until approximately two-thirds their height (not
the usual one-third). An untitled drawing in the files of
the Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma (the shafts
on a conjectural temple facade) records also that their
lower diameters were slightly smaller than those of their
midsections. The surviving abacus sports a complicated
scroll; egg-and-dart embellishes the echinus, and the
astragal that tops the shaft consists of an upper fillet,
a cyma recta with normal-leaf-and-dart, a fillet, and a
half round with bead-and-reel. Smith 2003, 15, suggests
disapprovingly that the Arch of Augustus contains many
of the mistakes Vitruvius warned [Augustus] against.;
Cross-pollinations of eastern and western Mediterranean
traditions make the Parthian Archfascinating to
contemporary observers, but for Vitruvius, who strove
to introduce a new standard of clarity and a renewed
understanding of and respect for the formal and intellectual
syntax of the Hellenistic canon, the Parthian Arch must
have been proof of the cultural illiteracy of his peers
(p.24).
15 The only Ionic temple was Munatius Plancus Temple of
Saturn for which the design, while stressing the antiquity of
the cult, predated Augustus rise to power.
41 8
Notes to pages
352 362
16 With its thin columns and slimmer modillions, the

decoration of the new temple set the style for later
Corinthian buildings.
17 De Maria 1988, 180, notes that Severus had little interest
in maintaining the character of the sites older urban
fabric.
18 These included the door leaves of the Curia and probably
some parts of the walls, the columns (?) and parts of lower
(and upper?) entablature of the Basilica Aemilia, and some

of the shop walls (and the south facade?) at the southwest
corner of the Basilica Julia.
19 Some are still visible along the south interior wall of the
Basilica Aemilia.
20 This statement assumes that the street doors of the
shops/offices (?) at the south side of the Basilica were
usuallyopen.
21 Claridge 1998, 89, suggests that the new arrangement

converted the Forum into a forecourt (presumably to the
imperial fora).
22 LTUR s.v. Columna Phocae.
23 Ibid.; CIL 6.1200.
24 The house at the east end of the arcade of
the Basilica Aemilia is still partially preserved
(Fig.5.3).
Bibliography
Ancient Sources
The abbreviations of classical sources are largely based on the
listings in the Oxford Classical Dictionary (OCD) 2003, xxixliv.
For those not in that list, the abbreviation (by which the item is
alphabetized) appears at the beginning of the bibliographical
entry.
App. B. Civ.
Appian Bella Civilia.
Apul. De Deo Soc.
Apuleius De Deo Socratis. In H. Gurney,

M. Tighe (Blachford), The Works of
Apuleius, Comprising the Metamorphoses,
or Golden Ass, the God of Socrates, the
Florida, and His Defence or A discourse
on Magica. To which are added a metrical
version of Cupid and Psyche. London: G.
Bell,1902.
Asc.
Mil.
Pis.
Aur. Vict. Caes.
Origo
Cal. Praen.
Cassiod. Chron.
Chron.
Cic.
De domosua.
Jer. Ab Abr.
Jerome, Chronicon ab Abraham.
Fin.
De Finibus.
Juv.
Juvenal, Satires.
Har. Resp
De haruspicum responso.
Livy
Mil.
Pro Milone.
Nat. D
De natura deorum.
Ab urbe condita. From the Founding of the City (History

ofRome)
Phil.
Orationes Philippicae (Philippics).
Per.
Pis.
in Pisonem.
Macrob. Sat.
Quinct.
Pro Publio Quinctio.
Mart.
Martial, Epigrams.
Rep
De Republica.
Mon Anc.
Scaur.
Pro Scauro.
Sest.
Pro Sestio.
Vatin.
In Vatinium.
Monumentum Ancyranum (Res Gestae

Divi Augusti): P. M. Brunt and J. M.
Moore. 1967. The Achievements of
the Divine Augustus. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Verr.
In Verrem.
Notitia
Notitita Urbis Romae regionum XIII.
Oros.
Orosius, The Seven Books of History

against the Pagans.
Ov.
Ovid
Asconius
CIL
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. 1863.
In Milionianum, Piso, Scaurus in Asconius

Commentaries on the Speeches of Cicero
by R. G Lewis. 2006. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Curiosum
Curiosum urbis Romae regionum XIIII

(infra Nordh).
Dio Cass.
Dio Cassius.
Commentary on Cicero In Pisonem.

Aurelius Victor, Eptitome de Caesaribus.
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Antiquitates

romanae.
Fasti Praenestini of Marcus Verrius

Flaccus, 69 CE = CIL 12236.
Cassiodorus, Chronica (infra De Angeli
[1992],27).
Chronographus anni CCCLIIII. 1892.
In Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
ed. Theodor Mommsen: Avctorum
antiqvissimorum 9. Chronicorum minorum
saec. IV. V. VI. VII, vol. 1. Berlin:
Weidmann, 141148.
Epistulae ad Atticum.
Periochae.
Macrobius, Saturnalia.
Fast.
Fasti.
Tr.
Tristia.
Einsiedeln
Einsiedeln Anonymous, Codex

Einsiedlensis.
Plaut. Curc.
Plin. HN.
Pliny the Elder, Naturalis historia.
Eutr.
Eutropius.
Plin. Ep.
Pliny the Younger. Epistulae (Letters).
Festus
Festus De verborum significatione quae

supersunt.
Plut.
Plutarch
Flor.
Lucius Annaeus Florus Epitome rerum

romanorum.
Origo gentis romanae.
Cicero
Att.
dom.
Vit.
Plautus Curculio.
Vitae Parallelae.
Ant.
Mark Antony.
Caesar.
Frontin. Aq.
Frontinus De aquae ductu Urbis Romae.
Caes.
FUR
Carettoni. 1960 (infra).
Cam.
Camillus.
Gell. NA.
Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae.
Cat. Mai.
Cato Maior (Cato the Elder).
Herodian
Herodian History of the Roman Empire.
Cic.
Cicero.
Hor.
Horace.
Crass.
Crassus.
Carminae orOdes.
Num.
Numa.
Carm.
419
420
bibliography
Ti. Gracch.
Tiberius Gracchus.
Gaius Gracch. Gaius Gracchus.

Pompon.
Pomponius, Digest.
Prosper Ep.
Prosper Tiro, Epitoma Chronicon.
Quint. Inst.
Quintilian, Institutio oratoria (The

Orators Education).
Sall. Cat.
Sallust, Bellum Catilinae (The War with

Castiline) or De Catilinae coniuratione
(The Conspiracy of Catiline).
Sen. Dial.
Seneca (the Younger), Dialogi.
Serv.
Servius, In Vergilii carmina

Commentarii.
SHA
Scriptores Historiae Augustae.
Tac.
Tacitus
Ann.
Annales.
Hist.
Historiae.
Val. Max.
Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta

memoribilia (Memorable Doings and
Sayings.
Vell. Pat.
Velleius Paterculus Historiae romanae.
Varro
Varro
Ling.
De lingua latina
Rust.
De re rustica.
Verg.
Vitr.
De Arch.
Vergil Aeneid.
Vitruvius.
De Architectura.
Ant. Pius
AntoninusPius.
Clod.
Divus Claudius.
Gallus.
Gallus.
Max. et Balb.
Maximinus and Balbinus (Maximini).
ModernWorks
Sev.
Septimius Severus.
Valeriani
Valeriani
AA.VV. 1979. Studi sullarco onorario romano. Rome: LErma

di Bretschneider.
Solinus, Collectanea Rerum

Memorabilium.
Adam, J. 1993. Roman Building: Materials and Techniques.

Translated by A. Mathews. London: B. T. Batsford.
Stat. Silv.
Statius, Silvae.
Strabo
Strabo, The Geography
Albertson, F. 1990. The Basilica Aemilia Frieze: Religion and

Politics in Late Republican Rome. Latomus 49: 801815
Suetonius.
Amici, C. 1991. Il Foro di Cesare. 2vols. Florence: Olschki.
Iul.
Divius Iulius (The Deified Julius Caesar).
Aug.
Divus Augustus (the deified Augustus).
. 20042005. Evoluzione architettonica del Comizio

a Roma. Atti della Pontificia Accademia romana di
Archeologia 77/3: 351379.
Tib.
Tiberius.
Calig.
Gaius Caligula.
Ner.
Nero.
Otho
Otho.
Vit.
Vitellius.
Vesp.
Divus Vespasianus (the Divine Vespasian).
Solin.
Suet.
Zonar.
Zonarus.
Anderson, J. 1984. Imperial fora: Bruxelles: Latomus, Revue des

tudes Latines.
Andreae, B. 1957. Archologische Funden und Grabungen im
Bereich der Soprintendenzen von Rom 19491956/57. AA
72: 110358.
Arco di Settimio Severo: Analisi archeologica
econservative. 1985. In Roma: Archeologia nel
centro: Lavorie Studi di Archeologia, vol. 6, section 1,

4155. Rome: DeLuca.
Armellini, M. 1942. Le chiese di Roma dal secolo IV al XIX.
2vols. Rome: Tipografia Vaticana.
Ashby, T. 1901. Recent Excavations in Rome, vol. 2: Arch of
Tiberius. Classical Review 14: 329330.
Auer, H. 1888. Der Tempel der Vesta und das Haus der
Vestalinnen am Forum Romanum. Vienna: Tempsky.
Azzurri, G. 1839. Descrizione della arcata dorica dellantico
Tabulario romano nuovamente scoperta. Rome: Alessandro
Monaldi.
Barnes, T. 1981. Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
. 1984. A History of the Ostrogoths. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Bartoli, A. 1912. Ultime vicende e trasformazioni
cristiane della Basilica Aemilia. RendLinc 21/5:
758766.
.1916. Il Tempio di Antonino e Faustina. MonAnt 23:
950974, pls.13.
. 19381. Il monumento della perpetuit del Senato.
Campidoglo 13: 547552.
. 19382. I lavori della Curia. Rome: Istituto di studi
romani.
. 19491950. Lavori nella sede del Senato romano al
tempo di Teodorico. BullCom 73:788.
. 1950. Il fregio figurato della Basilica Emilia. BdA 35:
289294.
. 1953. Ricordi di Elagabalo nella sede del Senato
romano. RendPontAcc 27: 4754.
. 1954. Il monumento della perpetuit del Senato.
StRom 2: 129137.
. 1963. Curia Senatus: Lo scavo e il restauro. Rome:
Istituto dei Studi romani.
Bartoli, P. S. 1690. Veteres arcus Augustorum triumphis insignes
ex reliquiis qu Rom adhuc supersunt / cum imaginibus
bibliography
triumphalibus restituti, antiquis nummis notisquae. Rome:

ad Templum S. Mariae dePace.
Bauer, H. 1973/1974. Archologische Funde und Forschungen,
Rom. AA 88: 544547.
. 1977. Kaiserfora und Ianustempel. RM 84: 301329.
. 1988. Basilica Aemilia. In Kaiser Augustus und die
verlorene Republik, 200212. Mainz: Von Zabern.
Bianchi-Bandinelli, R. 1970. Roma: La fine dellarte antica.
Milan: Feltrinelli.
Bildt, C.v. 1901. Die Ausgrabungen C.F. Friedenheims auf dem
Forum Romanum (178889). RM 16: 320.
Birley, A. 1988. The African Emperor: Septimius Severus.
London: Batsford.
Bitterer, T. 2007. Sulla statue degli orientali della Basilica
Aemlia. Archeologia Classica 58: 155163.
Blake, M. 1947. Ancient Roman Construction in Italy from the
Prehistoric Period to Augustus. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie
Institution.
. 1959. Roman Construction in Italy from Tiberius
through the Flavians. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie
Institution.
Blatteau, J., and C. Sears. 1981. Fragments from Greek and
Roman Architecture: The Classical America Edition of
Hector dEspouys Plates. London: Norton.
BMCRE. Mattingly, H., and R. A. G. Carson. 19231962. Coins
of the Roman Empire in the British Museum. London:
Trustees of the British Museum.
Boatwright, M. 1991. The Imperial Women of the Early Second
Century A.C. AJP 112/4: 513540.
Bracciolini, Poggio. c. 1448/1969. De varietatae fortunae,

libri quattuor, ex ms. codice Bibliothecae Ottobonianae
nunc primum editi, et notis illustrati a Dominico Georgio.
Accedunt eiusd. Poggii Epistolae LVII. quae nunquam antea
prodierunt. Omnia a Joanne Oliva vulgata. Bologna:
Forni.
Braun, E. 1852. Scavi di Roma e dArdea. Scoperta della
crepidine e del cornicione del Miliario aureo. BdI81.
Brilliant, R. 1967. The Arch of Septimius Severus in the
Roman Forum. MAAR 29 (full volume).
. 1993. Arcus: Septimius Severus (Forum). LTUR 1:
103105.
Brizio, E. 1872. Scavi del foro romano, BdA 40: 257264
(Temple of Julius Caesar).
Bryant, E. 1895. The Reign of Antoninus Pius. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bunsen, M. 1834. Fouilles du Forum romain. AdI 6: 1324.
. 18351 (?). Le Forum romanum expliqu selon ltat des
fouilles, le 21 avril 1835. Rome:n.p.
. 18352. Foro romano: TOPOGRAFIA: Il Foro romano
secondo gli scavi fino al 21 Aprile1835. BdI 6596.
Canina, L. 1845. Esposizione storica e topografica del Foro
romano e le sue Adiacenze. Rome: Canina.
. 18491853. Untitled drawings. MonInst 5: pl.31.
. 1851. Sulle recenti discoperte fatte nel grande edificio
Capitolino. AdI n.s. 23/8: 268278.
421
Carettoni, G., etal. 1960. La pianta marmorea di Roma antica:

Forma Urbis Romae. 2vols. Rome: X Ripartizione del
Comune diRoma.
Carettoni, G., and L. Fabrini. 1961. Esplorazione sotto la
basilica Giulia al Foro Romano. RendLinc 16: 5360.
Caronna, E. 2001. Ancora sulla cosiddetta ara del tempio di
Antonio e Faustina. RendLinc 12/9: 93113.
Cassanelli, R., M. David, etal., eds., 1998. Frammenti di Roma
antica: nei disegni degli architetti francesi vincitori del
Prix de Rome, 17861924. Novara: Istituto Geografico
DeAgostini.
Cassanelli, R., M. David, eds. 2002. Ruins of Ancient Rome: The
Drawings of French Architects Who Won the Prix de Rome,
17861924. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum.
Cecchelli, C. 1933. La Curia che risorge. Capitolium 9:
261271.
Cecchini, M. 1985 Tempio del divo Giulio: la zona prima della
costruzione del tempio. In Roma: archeologia nel centro.
Lavori e studi di archeologica, vol. 6, section 1. Rome: De
Lucca, 6772.
Chaffe, R. 1977. The Teaching of Architecture at the Ecole des
Beaux-Arts. In The Architecture of the cole des BeauxArts, edited by A. Drexler, 61109. New York: Museum of
ModernArt.
Chron. Urb. Chronica Urbis Romae CCCLIIII, in L. Johannes
and T. Mommsen. 1891. Monumenta Germaniae historica.
Auctores antiquissimi, vol. 9. Berlin: Wiedmann.
Cioffi, L. 1999. Schola: Scribae Librarii et Praecones Aedilium
Curulium (Schola Xanthi). LTUR 4: 257258.
Bothius, A., and J. Ward-Perkins. 1970. Etruscan and Roman

Architecture. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Caprioli, F. 2007. VESTA AETERNA: LAEDES VESTAE e la sua

decorazione architettonica. Studia Archeologica 154. Rome:
LErma Bretschneider.
Bonfioli, M. 1974. La diaconia dei SS. Sergio e Bacco nel Foro

romano: Fonti e Problemi. RACrist 50: 5585.
Carandini, A., P. Carafa. 2012. Atlante di Roma antica. 2vols.

Verona: Electa.
Claridge, A., and L. Cozza. 1985. Arco di Settimio Severo. In

Roma: archeologia nel centro: Lavori e studi di Archeologia,
vol. 6, section 1, 3439. Rome: DeLuca.
Boni, G. 19001. Le recenti esplorazione nel Sacrario di Vesta.

BullCom 28/5: 159191.
Carettoni, G. 1948. ROMA (Foro Romano): Esplorazioni nella

basilica: Emilia. NSc 2/8: 111128
Coarelli, F. 1985. Il foro romano. Periodo repubblicano e

augusteo, vol. 2. Rome: Quasar.
. 19002. Regione VIII: La esplorazione dei Rostri. Nsc

627634.
. 1961. Il fregio figurato della Basilica Emilia.

RivIstArch 10: 578.
. 1986. Il foro romano. Periodo arcaico, vol. 1. Rome:

Quasar.
Claridge, A. 1998. Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.
422
bibliography
. 1992. Il Foro Boario. 2nd. ed. Rome: Quasar.

. 1994. Roma: Guide archeologiche Mondadori. Milan:
Mondaori.
. 1999. Saturnus, Aedes. LTUR 4: 234236.
. 2009. I Flavi e Roma. In Divus Vespasianus, edited
by F. Coarelli, 6897. Rome: Electa.
. 2010. Substructio et tabularium. PBSR 78: 107132.
Cody, Jane M. 1973. New Evidence for the Republican Aedes
Vestae. AJA 77/1: 4350.
Colini, A. M. 1942. Aedes Veiovis inter Arcem et Capitolium.
BullCom 70: 555, pls. 15,AD.
Cozza, L. 1982. Tempio di Adriano: Lavori e studi di archeologia,
vol. 1. Rome: DeLuca.
. 1989. Sul frammento 212 della Pianta marmorea.JRA
2: 117119.
Crawford, M. 1974. Roman Republican Coinage. 2vols. London:
Cullhed, M., and K. Slej. 2008. The Temple of Castor and
Pollux: The Finds, vol. 2, section 2. Rome: Bretscheider.
David, M., ed. 1992. Roma antiqua, grandi edifice pubblici.
Rome: Carte segrete.
Davies, O. 1935. Roman Mines in Europe. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Dayan, S. 1979. Appendice: I saggi di scavo. In C. Gasparri,
Aedes Concordiae Augustae, 127135. [Rome:] Istituto di
studi romani.
De Angeli, S. 1992. Templum Divi Vespasiani: Lavori e studi di
archeologica pubblicati dalla soprintendenza archeologica
di Roma, 18. Rome: DeLuca.
De Angelis DOssat, G. 1934. Il portico in peperino del Foro
Olitorio. BullCom 62: 6573.
Degrassi, A. 1953. Inscriptiones Italiae. In Actes du deuxime

Congrs international depigraphie grecque et latine,
94105. Paris: A. Maisonneuve.
Freyberger, K. S., C. Ertel, J. Lipps, and T. Bitterer. 2007.

Neue Forschungen zur Basilica Aemilia auf dem Forum
Romanum. RM 113:493552.
DeLaine, J. 1997. The Baths of Caracalla. Journal of Roman

Archaeology, Supplementary Series25.
. 2009. Das Forum Romanum. Mainz am Rhein: Von

Zabern.
Delbrueck, R. 19071912. Hellenistische Bauten in Latium.

Strassburg: Trbner.
Frommel, C. 1973. Der rmische Palastbau der Hochrenaissance,

vol. 2. Tbingen: Ernst Wasmuth.
Dillon, M., and L. Garland. 2005. Ancient Rome from the Early
Republic to the Assassination of Julius Caesar. New York:
Routledge.
Fuchs, G. 1969. Architekturdarstellungen auf rmischen

Mnzen der Republik und der frhen Kaiserzeit. Berlin: De
Gruyter.
De Maria, S. 1988. Gli archi onorari di Roma e dellItalia

romana. Rome: Bretschneider.
Ganzert, J. 1996. Der Mars-Ultor-Tempel auf dem Augustusforum

in Rom. 2vols. Mainz am Rhein.
De Ruggiero, E. 1913. Il Foro romano. Rome: Societ

Tipografica Arpinate.
Gasparri, C. 1979. Aedes Concordiae Augustae.
Desgodetz, A. 1682/1972. Les edifices antiques de Rome dessins

et mesurs tres exactement. Portland: Collegium Graphicum.
Echols, E. 1961. Herodian of Antiochs History of the Roman
Empire. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Eck, W. 1998. Augustus. Translated by Deborah LucasSchneider. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ertel, Ch., K. S. Freyberger, etal. 2007. Nuove indagini sulla
Basilica Aemilia nel Foro Romano. Archeologica classica
n.s. 58/8: 109142.
Espouy, H. d 1905. Fragments darchitecture antique daprs
les relevs et restaurations des anciens pensionnaires de
lAcadmie de France Rome. Paris: C. Scmid.
Gatti, G. 1899. Notizie di recenti trovamenti di antichit.

Area della basilica Emilia. BullCom 27/5:126167 (esp.
140142: Inscription found in the Basilica Aemila).
Ginouvs, R. 1992. Dictionaire Mthodique de larchitecture
grecque et romaine, vol. 2. Paris: cole franaise dAthens,
cole franaise deRome.
Giuliani, C., and P. Verduchi. 1980. Foro Romano: Larea
centrale. Florence: Olschki.
. 1987. LArea centrale del Foro Romano. Florence:
Olschki.
Giuliano, A. 1955. Un nuovo frammento del fregio della
Basilica Emilia. BdA 40: 165167.
Fabbrini, L. 19611962. Un acroterio di vittoria rinvenuto

nella Basilica Iulia. BullCom 78: 3754.
Gjerstad, E. 1962. The Temple of Saturn in Rome.

Hommages Albert Grenier, Collection Latomus 58.
Brussels: Berchem.
Fea, C. 1824. Descrizione di Roma e suoi contorni, 4th ed. Rome:

A. Bonelli [dai Torchi di C. Puccinelli].
Grant, M. 1970. The Roman Forum. New York: MacMillan.
Ferroni, A. 1993. Concordia aedicule. LTUR 1: 316320.
De Francisci, P. 19461947. Per la storia del Senato romano e

della curia nei secoli V e VI. RendPontAcc 22: 275317.
Franchi, L. 19601961. Ricerche sullArte di Et Severiana in

Roma. StMisc 4: 1730.
Degrassi, A., ed. 1947. Inscriptiones Italiae: Fasti et Elogia, vol.

13. Rome: Instituto poligrafico dello Stato.
Frank, T. 1925. The First and Second Temples of Castor and

Pollux at Rome. MAAR 5: 79102.
Grifi, L. 1860. Dissertazione circa gli dei consenti. Loro

portico sul Clivo Capitolino. Dissertazioni della Pontificia
Accademia Romana di Archeologia 14/1: 115138.
Groag, E., A. Stein, and L. Petersen, eds. 18971898.
Prosopographia Imperii Romani saec. IIII. Berlin: G.
Reimer.
bibliography
423
Grnne, G. 1988. Terracotte architettoniche dal Vicus Tuscus.

ArchLaz 9: 3031.
Healy, J. 1978. Mining and Metallurgy in the Greek and Roman

World. London: Thames and Hudson.
Jordan, H. 1873. Ausgrabungen auf dem Forum. Hermes 7:

285293.
. 1990. Fragments of Architectural Terracottas from the

First Temple of Castor and Pollux on the Roman Forum. A
Preliminary Report. AnalRom 19: 105117.
Hbrard, E. 1904/1981. Basilica Aemilia in Rome. In H.

DEspouy, Fragments From Greek and Roman Architecture,
102, with introductory notes by J. Blatteau and C. Sears.
New York: Norton.
. 18811. Il tabulario capitolino. AdI 53: 6073.
Heilmeyer, W. 1970. Korinthische Normalkapitelle, RM-EM, vol.

16. Heidelberg: F. H. Kerle.
. 1883. Sui rostri del Foro Romano. AdI 60: 2358.
Gros, P. 1976. Aurea templa: recherches sur larchitecture

religieuse de Rome lepoque dAuguste. Rome: Ecole
franaise de Rome, Palais Farnse.
. 2009. La Roma dei Flavi. Larchitettura. In Divus
Vespasianus, edited by F. Coarelli, 98109. Milan:
Electa.
Grueber, H. A. 1910. Coins of the Roman Republic in the
British Museum. Vols. 23. London: Trustees of the British
Museum.
Guidobaldi, A. 1984. I pavimenti in opus sectile delle tabernae
della Basilica Aemilia: Testimonianze Bizantine a Roma
nel VI secolo. In Il Mosaico antico, vol. 3: Colloquio
internazionale sul mosaico antico 610 Settembre 1980,
505513. Ravenna: Edizione del Girasole.
Guittard, Ch. 1976. Recherches sur la nature de Saturne
des origines a la rforme de 217 avant J.C. In R. Bloch,
ed., Recherches sur les religions de lItalie antique, 4371
(Geneva: Librairie Droze).
Hill, P. The Monuments of Ancient Rome as Coin Types. London:

Seaby,1989.
Holland, L. 1953. The Foundations of the Arch of Augustus.
AJA 57:14.
Hlsen, Ch. 1888. Il sito e le inscrizioni della Schola Xantha
sul Foro romano. RM 3: 208232.
. 1893. Das Comitium und seine Denkmler in der
republikanischen Zeit. RM 8: 7994.
. 1902. Jahrsbericht ueber neue Funde und
Forschungen zur Topographie der Stadt Rom. Neue Reihe.
I. Die Ausgrabungen auf dem Forum romanum 1898
1902. RM 17:197.
. 1905. Nordseite des Forums. RM 20: 5362, 7677.
. 1909. The Roman Forum. Translated by J. B. Carter.
Rome: Loescher and Co.; New York: G. Stechert andCo.
. 18812. Una retificazione della pianta del foro romano.

BdI: 106107.
. 1885, 1907. Topographie der Stadt Rom in Alterthum,
vols. 1.2, 3. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
.1886. Der Tempel des Vesta und das Haus der
Vestalinnen. Berlin: Weidmann.
Khler, H. 1939. Triumphbogen. RE 13: 379381 (nos. 89),
392ff. (no.34).
. c. 1964. Das Fuenfsaeulendenkmal fuer die Tetrarchen
auf dem Forum Romanum. Monumenta Artis Romanae 3.
Kellermann, G. 1835. Scavi, viaggi ed altre notizie
topografiche: Scavi del Foro romano. Iscrizione del Portico
Capitolino e della Basilica Giulia. AdI: 3336.
Kellum, B. 1990. The City Adorned: Programmatic Display
at the Aedes Concordiae Augustae. In Between Republic
and Empire: Interpretations of Augustus and his Principate,
edited by K. Raflauub and M. Toher, 276304. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Guldager, P., and K. Sledge. 1986. Il tempio di Castore e

Polluce. Archeologia Viva 5/4: 2437.
. 1910. I pi recenti scavi del Foro Romano: appendice

allopera Il foro romano. Rome: E. Loescher.
Gurval, R. 1995. Actium and Augustus: The Politics and

Emotion of Civil War. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
. 1928. The Forum and Palatine. Translated by H.

Tanzer. New York: Bruderhausen.
Kienast, D. 1982. Augustus: Prinzeps und Monarch. Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Humphrey, J., J. Oleson, and A. Sherwood. 1998. Greek and

Roman Technology: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge.
Kleiner, D. 1992. Roman Sculpture. New Haven: Yale University

Press.
Hadzsits, G., ed. 1931. History of the Name of the Temple of

Castor in the Forum. In Classical Studies in Honor of J. C.
Rolfe, 101114. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvannia
Press.
Hamilton, C. 1969. The Tresviri Monetales and the Republican
Cursus Honorum. TAPA 100: 181199.
Hannestad, N. 1986. Roman Art and Imperial Policy. Moesgrd:
Jutland Archaeological Society.
Httl, W. 19331936. Antoninus Pius. 2vols. Prague: Calvesche

Universitts-Buchhandlung.
Insolera, I., and F. Perego. 1983. Archeologia e citt: Storia
moderna dei Fori di Roma. Rome: Laterza.
Jonsson, M. 1986. La cura dei monumenti alle origini: Restauro
e scavo di Monumenti antichi a Roma 18001830. SkrRom
8; 14. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet iRom.
Kent, J. P. C. 1973. Roman Coins. New York: Abrams.
Kleiner, F. 1985. The Arch of Nero in Rome. Rome:

Bretschneider.
. 1989. The Study of Roman Triumphal and Honorary
Arches 50 Years after Khler. JRA 2: 198200.
Koeppel, G. 1982. Official State Reliefs of the City of Rome.
ANRW section 2, book 12, part1:482.
424
bibliography
. 1990. Die historischen Reliefs der Rmischen

Kaiserzeit, vol. 7: Der Bogen des Septimius Severus. Bjb
190: 17,932.
. 2011. Die Basilica Aemilia am Forum Romanum: Die

kaiserzeitliche Bau und seine Ornamentik. Wiesbaden:
Reichert.
McKenzie, Judith. 1948. The Consecration of Faustina the

Elder and Her Daughter. Harvard Theological Review
41/2: 147151.
Kondratieff, E., 2010.The urban Praetors Tribunal in the

Roman Republic, F. De Angelis, ed. Spaces of Justice in
the Roman World. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 89126.
Lissi, E. 1956. Di un frammento marmoreo rinvenuto presso il

tempio di Antonino e Faustina. RendLinc 12/8: 5057.
. 2007. The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt, c. 300

B.C. to A.D. 700. New Haven: Yale Universiity Press.
Lo Cascio, E. 2007. The Early Roman Empire: the state and

the economy. In The Cambridge Economic History of the
Greco-Roman World, 619647. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Meneghini, R. 2009. I Fori Imperiali e i Mercati di Traiano.

Rome: Libreria dello Stato, Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca
dello Stato.
Kthmann, H., etal. 1973. Bauten Roms auf Mnzen und

Medaillen. Munich: Verlag Egon Beckenbauer.
Lamboglia, N. 19641965. Uno scavo didattico dietro la Curia
Senatus e la topografia del Foro di Cesare. RendPontAcc
37: 105126.
LTUR. 19932000. Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae. 6vols.

Edited by M. Steinby. Rome: Quasar.
Lanciani, R. 18821883. Laula e gli uffici del Senato romano.

MemLinc 3/11:3ff.
Lugli, G. 1946. Roma antica: Il centro monumentale. Rome:

Bardi.
. 1884. Latrio di Vesta. Rome: Libreria Spithver.
. 1947. Monumenti minori del Foro Romano. Rome:

Bardi.
. 1885. III. Roma: Note del comm. Lanciani, sopra

scoperte avvenute in Roma e nel suburbia: Regione IV.
NSc248.
. 1891. Miscellanea topografica: La Basilica Giulia.
BullCom: 229236.
. 1957. Tecnica edilizia romana. 2vols. Rome: Bardi.

. 1970. Itinerario di Roma antica. Milan: Periodici
scientifici.
MacMullen, R. 1969. Constantine. New York: Dial Press.
. 1897. The Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome. New

York: Houghton Mifflin.
Maetzke, G. 1986. Area nord-occidentale del Foro Romano.

BullCom 91: 372380.
. 1899. The Destruction of Ancient Rome: A Sketch of the

History of the Monuments. New York: Macmillan.
Mansuelli, G. 1958. Galleria degli Uffizi: Le sculture, vol. 1.

Rome: Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, Libreria dello Stato.
. 19021912. Storia degli scavi di Roma1. Rome:

Loescher andCo.
Marliani, B., and H. Barbarasa. 1548. Lantichit di Roma.

Rome: Antonio Blado.
. c. 1989c. 2002. Storia degli scavi2. Rome: Quasar.

Lapatin, K. 2001.Chryselephantine Statuary in the Ancient
Mediterranean World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leglay, M. 1966. Saturne africain, Histoire. Paris: Boccard.
Lehmann, P. 1982. The Basilica Aemilia and S. Biagio at
Montepulciano. ArtB 64/1: 124131.
Lipps, J. 2007. Sulla decorazion architettonica della Basilica
Aemila: Un contributo alla coronologia delledificio.
Archeologia Classica 58: 143153.
Masini, P., L. Messa, and R. Motto. 1985. Arco di Settimio

Severo: fonti medioevali e Iconografiche. In Roma:
archeologia nel centro: lavori e studi di archeologia, 6/1:
3940. Rome: DeLuca.
Mattingly, H. 1940. Coins of the Roman Empire in the British
Museum: Antoninus Pius to Commodus, vol. 4. London:
British Museum.
Mattingly, H., and E. A. Sydenham. 19231994. The Roman
Imperial Coinage. London: Spink andSon.
McDaniel, W. 1928. Basilica Aemilia. AJA 32: 155178.
Micheli, M. 1987. Un nuovo frammento di relieveo con Enea.

Xenia 13: 2530.
Middleton, J. H. 1892. The Remains of Ancient Rome, vol. 1.
London: Adam and Charles Black.
Mommsen, T. 1858. Su i modi usati da Romani nel conservare
e pubblicare le legi ed i Senatus Consulti: Appendice: Il
supposto tabularium in Roma. AdI 30: 206212.
Montagna Pasquinucci, M. 1957. La decorazione architettonica
del tempio del Divo Giulio nel Foro Romano. RendLinc
12/8: 257280.
. 1974. L altare del tempio del Divo Giulio.
Athenaeum 52: 144155.
Montiroli, G. 1859. Osservazioni sulla topografia della parte
meridionale del Foro Romano e de suoi pi celebri
monument dimostrata in quattro tavole ed illustata da una
veduta generale. Rome: Typografia Delle BelleArti.
Morselli, C., and E. Tortorici. 1989. Basilica Aemilia.
In Curia, Forum Iulium, Forum Transitorium, vol. 1,
7280. Lavori e studi di archeologia pubblicati dalla
soprintendenza archeologica di Roma 14. Rome: DeLuca.
Nardi, R. 19821984. LArco di Settimio Severo: Indagini
storiche e conservative. RendPontAcc 5556: 299313
. 1985. Arco di Settimio Severo: Annalisi archeologica
e conservative 19791983. Roma: archeologia nel
centro: Lavori e studi di archeologia pubblicati dalla
soprintendenza archeologica di Roma 6/1: 4155. Rome:
DeLuca.
Nash, E. 1968. Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome. 2vols.,
2nd rev. ed. New York: Praeger.
bibliography
425
. 1976. Secretarium Senatus. In In Memoriam Otto

J. Brendel, edited by L. Bonfante and H. Von Heinze,
191204. Mainz: Von Zabern.
Nielsen, I, and B. Poulsen. 1992. The Temple of Castor and

Pollux 1: Lavori e studi di achaeologia pubblicati dalla
soprintendenza archeologica di Roma, 17. Rome: DeLuca.
. 1984. Tempio di Saturno: Lavori e studi di archeologia

pubblicati pubblicati dalla soprintendenza soprintendenza
archeologica di Roma. 5. Rome: DeLuca.
Nedergaard, E. 19881. Nuove indagini sullArco di Augusto nel

Foro Romano. ArchLaz 9: 3743.
Nielsen, I., and J. Zahle. 1985. The Temple of Castor and

Pollux on the Roman Forum: A Preliminary Report on the
Scandanavian Excavations 19831985, part1. ActArch
56:129.
Pensabene, P., and F. Caprioli. 2009. La decorazione

architettonica det flavia. In Divus Vespasianus. Il
bimillenario dei Flavi, edited by F. Coarelli, 110115.
Milan: Electa.
Nordh, A. 1949. Libellus de regionibus urbis Romae. Lund:

Gleerup.
Phillips, K., Jr. 1989. The Architectural Terra Cottas. In

Lacus Juturne, edited by E. M. Steinby, 277301. Rome:
DeLuca.
. 1988.2 Zur Problematik der Augustusbgen auf dem

Forum. In Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik:
eine Ausstellung in Martin-Gropius-Bau, Berlin 7. Juni14.
August 1988, 234239. Mainz-am-Rhein: von Zabern.
. 1993. Arcus Augusti. LTUR, vol. 1. Rome: Quasar.
8185.
Nylander, C., and J. Zahle. 1985. Indagini al tempio dei Castori

1984. ArchLaz 7: 135138.
OCD. 2003. Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd rev. ed. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Pinon, P., and F.-X. Amprimoz. 1988. Les envois de Rome,

architecture et archologie. Collection de lcole franaise
de Rome 110. Rome: cole franaise deRome.
Jh. Jahreshefte des sterreichischen Archologischen Institutes

in Wien. Vienna: Koch Neff & VolckmarGmbh.
Platner, E., C. Bunsen, E. Gerhard, W. Rstel, and L. Urlichs.

1838. Beschreibung der Stadt Rom. Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta.
Nichols, F. 1877. The Roman Forum: A Topographical Study.

London: Longmans andCo.
Packer, J. 1997. The Forum of Trajan in Rome. A Study of the

Monuments. 3vols. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Platner, S. B., and T. Ashby. 1929. A Topographical Dictionary

of Ancient Rome. London: Oxford University Press.
. 1885. Notizie dei Rostri del Foro Romano e dei

monumenti contigui. Rome: Libreria Spithoever,1885.
Palladio, A. 1570/1965. The Four Books of Architecture. Edited

by A. Placzek. New York: Dover.
Nieddu, G. 1985. Portico degli Dei Consenti. In Roma:

archeologia nel centro: Lavori e studi di archeologia
pubblicati dalla soprintendenza archeologica di Roma, 6/1:
2428. Rome: DeLuca.
Pallottino, E. 2008. Cultura della ricostuzione a Roma tra

Ottocento e Novecento e Precedenti e prospettive (Casa
della Vestali, del Tempio e dell Edicola di Vesta al Foro
Romano). Ricerche di storia dellarte 95:729.
. 1994. The City of Rome and the Plebs Urbana in

the Late Republic. In CAH: The Last Age of the Roman
Republic, 14643 B.C., vol. 9, 2nd ed., edited by J.
Crook, A. Lintott, and E. Rawson, 659673. Cambridge:
Nibby, A. 1819. Del Foro Romano, della Via Sacra, del Anfeatro
Flavio e de luoghi adjacenti. Rome: V. Poggioli.
. 1838. Roma nel anno MDCCCXXXVIII, part1: Antica.
Rome: Tipografia delle BelleArti.
. 1986. Il Portico degli dei consenti. BdA, supp.

71/6: 3752.
. 1995. Dei Consentes, Aedes. In LTUR, vol. 2, 910.
Rome: Quasar.
Nielsen, I. 1988. The Temple of Castor and Pollux on the
Roman Forum: A Preliminary Report on the Scandinavian
Excavations 19831987, part2. ActaArch 59:114.
. 1990. The Forum Paving and the Temple of Castor
and Pollux. AnalRom 19: 89104.
. 1993. Castor, aedes, templum. In LTUR, vol. 1,
242245. Rome: Quasar.
Papi, E. 2002. La turbia inpia: artigiani e commercianti del

Foro e dintorni (I sec. a.C. 64 d.C.). JRA 15: 4562.
Parker, J. 1874. The Archaeology of Rome, vol. 1, section 2.
London: Murray.
Pasquinucci, M. 1973. La Decorazione architettonica del
Tempio del Divo Giulio Cesare nel Foro Romano. MonAnt
48/1.4: 257280.
. 1974. Laltare del Tempio del Divo Giulio.
Athenaeum 52/12: 144155.
Pavia, C. 2006. Roma antica, comera. Rome: Gangemi.
Pensabene, P. 1973. Scavi di Ostia. Vol. 7. I Capitelli. Rome:
Istiuto Poligrafico dello Stato.
Purcell, N. 1993. Atrium Libertatis. PBSR 61: 12555.
RA. Roma Antiqua: envois degli architetti francesi (1788

1924), Larea archeologica centrale. 1985. Rome:
Acadmie de France: Ecole franaise; Paris: Ecole
nationale suprieure des beaux-arts.
Ramsay, H. G. 1936. Government Relief during the Roman
Empire. CJ 31/8: 479488.
RE. A. Pauly, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll. 18941972. RealEncyclopdie der klassischen Altertumwissenschaft: neue
Bearbeitung. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.
Reber, F von. 1879. Die Ruinen Roms. Leipzig: T. G. Weigal.
Rebert, H., and H. Marceau. 1923. The Temple of Concord in
the Roman Forum. MAAR 5: 5377, pls. 5257.
Res Gestae Divi Augusti. See Mon.Anc.
426
bibliography
Richardson, L. Jr. 1978. The Curia Julia and Janus Geminus.

RM 85: 359369.
Rodocanachi, E. 1904. The Roman Capitol in Ancient and

Modern Times. Paris: Hachette.
Scott, S. W. P. 1973. The Civil Law 9, Digest. Cincinnati: The

Central Trust Co.,1973.
. 1979. Basilica Fulvia, modo Aemilia. In Studies in

Classical Art and Archaeology, edited by G. Kopcke and M.
Moore, 209215, pl. 55.3.4. Locust Valley: Augustin.
Rodriguez Almeida, E. 1981 Forma Urbis marmorea:

Aggioramento generale. 2vols. Rome: Quasar.
Sihvola, J. 1989. Il culto dei Dioscuroi nei suoi aspetti

politici. In Lacus Juturnae, vol. 1, edited by E. M. Steinby,
7691. Rome: DeLuca.
. 1980. The Approach to the Temple of Saturn in

Rome. AJA 84/1: 5162.
. 1992. A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient
Rome. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Richter, O. 1884. Rekonstruktion und Geschicte der rmische
Rednerbhne. Berlin: Weidmann,1884.
. 18881. Der Tempel des Divius Iulius und der Boden
des Augustus auf dem Forum Romanum. AntDenk 1:
1415, tav. 2728.
. 18882. Sitzungprotocolle RM 3: 99100.
. 1889. Die Augustusbauten auf dem Forum
Romanum. JdI 4: 118 (Rmische Rednerbhne),
137162.
. 1899. Der Castortempel am Forum Romanum, JdI
13: 87114.
Ridley, T. 1989. The Monuments of the Roman Forum: The
Struggle for Identity. Xenia 17: 7190.
. 1992. The Eagle and the Spade: The Archaeology of
Rome during the Napoleonic Era 18091814. Cambridge:
Ritter, H. W. 1978. berlegungen zur Inschrift des
Augustusbogens auf dem Forum Romanum. RM 85:
371384, tav.131.
Robertson, A. 1971. Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin
Cabinet, vol. 2: Trajan to Commodus. New York: Oxford
University Press,1971.
Rockwell, P. 19871988. Carving Instructions on the Temple of
Vespasian, RendpontAcc 60: 5369.
. 1993. The Art of Stoneworking: A Reference Guide.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 19951996. Euristica materiale e Forma marmorea:

alcuni falsi problemi. RendPontAc 68:320.
Romanelli, P. 1954. Review of Studien zur Topographie des
Forum Romanum by E. Welin. Gnomon 26: 258265.
Rosa, P. 1873. Sulle scoperte archeologiche della citt e provincia
di Roma negli anni 187172. Rome: Regia topografia.
Rowland, I., and T. Howe. 1999. Vitruvius Ten Books on
Architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, E. 19631972. In W. Helbig, Fhrer durch die

ffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertmer in Rome4,
vol. 2. Tbingen: Ernst Wasmuth.
Sironen, T. 1989. I Dioscuri nella letteratura romana. In
Lacus Juturnae, vol. 1, edited by E. M. Steinby, 93103,
277302. Rome: DeLuca.
RSC. Seaby, H., C. King, D. Sear. 19521987. Roman Silver

Coins. London: B. A. Seaby.
Slej, K. 1990. The Three Columns in the Forum Romanum:

The Temple of Castor and Pollux Viewed by Danish and
Foreign Artists. Acta hyperborea: Danish Studies in
Classical Archaeology 2: 85103.
Rubin, Z. 1975. Dio, Herodian, and Severus Second Parthian

War. Chiron 5: 419441.
Smith, Thomas Gordon. 2003. Vitruvius on Architecture. New

York: Monacelli Press.
Sande, S. 1990. Indagini sullelevato augusteo del tempio dei

Castori. ArchLaz 10/2: 3842.
Sommella Mura, A. 1981. Il Tabulario: progetto di

consolidamento e restauro. ArchLaz 4: 126131.
Sande, S., and J. Zahle 1988. Der Tempel der Dioskuren

auf dem Forum Romanum. In Kaiser Augustus und die
verlorene Republik, 213224. Mainz: Von Zabern
. 1984. Lesplorazione archeologica per il restauro del

Tabularium. ArchLaz 6: 159163.
. eds. 2008. The Temple of Castor and Pollux, vol. 3.

Rome: Bretschneider.
Scheel, W. 1928. Die sog. Schola Xanthi. RM 43: 244248.
In W. Scheel, Die Rostra am Westende des Forum
Romanum. RM 43: 176255.
Schneider, R. 1986. Bunte Barbaren. Worms: Wernersche
Verlagsgesellschaft.
Scott, R. 19931. Lavori e ricerche nellarea sacra di Vesta.
ArchLaz 11: 1117.
. 19932. Studies in the Area Sacra of Vesta. In Eius
Virtutis Studiosi. Classical and Postclassical Studies in
Memory of Frank Edward Brown 19081988, edited
by Russell T. Scott and Ann Reynolds Scott, 161181.
Hanover: University Press of New England.
. 1985. Il Tabularium. In Roma antiqua, Envois

degli architetti Francesi (17881924): Larea archeologica
centrale, 6670. Rome: Acadmie de France Rome,
cole franaise de Rome, and cole nationale suprieure
des Beaux-Arts.
. 1994. Contributo allo studio del Tabularium attraverso
lanalisi di alcuni documenti iconografici ed archvio relativi
al Palazzo Senatorio. Palladio 14: 4554.
Squarciapino, M. 1957. Il fregio del tempio del Divo Giulio.
RendLinc 12/8: 270284.
Stanton, G. R. 1969. Marcus Aurelius, Emperor and
Philosopher. Historia 18/5: 570587.
Steinby, E. 1987. Il lato oritentale del Foro Romano. Proposte
di lettura. Arctos 21: 139184.
. 1988. Il lato orientale del Foro. ArchLaz 9: 3236.
bibliography
. 1989. Il frammento 18a della Forma Urbis Romae,

In Lacus Juturnae, vol. 1, edited by E. M. Steinby, 2433.
Rome: De Luca,1989.
Tucci, P. 2005. Where High Moneta Leads Her Steps Sublime:

The Tabularium and the Temple of Juno Moneta. JRA
18:633.
Strong, D. E., and J. Ward-Perkins. 1962. The Temple of Castor

in the Forum Romanum. BSR 30: 130, pls.120.
. 2008. Galens Storeroom, Romes Libraries, and the

Fire of A.D. 192. JRA 21: 133149.
Stucchi, S. 1958. I monumenti della parte meridionale del Foro

Romano. Rome: Ateneo.
Turchetti, N. c. 1989. Archeologia a Roma nelle fotografie di

Thomas Ashby, 18911930. Naples: Electa.
Talbert, R. J. 2000. Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman

World. 2vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Taylor, G. L., and E. Cresy. 18211822. The Architectural
Antiquities of Rome. 2vols. London: G. L. Taylor.
Taylor, R. 2003. Roman Builders: A Study in Architectural
Process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thdenat, H. 1904. Le Forum Romain et les forums impriaux.
Paris: Hachette.
Thomas, M. 2001. Constructing Dynastic Legitimacy:
Imperial Building Programs in the Forum Romanum from
Augustan to Diocletian. Ph.D. diss. University of Texas,
Austin.
. c. 2004. (Re)locating Domitians Horse of Glory: The
Equus Domitiani and Flavian Urban Design. MAAR 49:
2146.
Ungaro, L., ed. 2007. Il Museo dei Fori Imperiali nei mercati di
Traiano. Milan: Electa.
Vaglieri, D. 1901. Nuove Scoperte nel Foro romano. BullCom
29/6: 2627 (Arch of Tiberius).
. 1903. Gli scavi recenti nel Foro romano. BullCom
31/6: 163164 (Arch of Tiberius).
Valentini, R., and G. Zucchetti. 19401953. Codice
topografico della citt di Roma. 4vols. Rome: Tipografia
del Senato.
Van Deman, E. 1912. Methods of Determining the Date of
Concrete Monuments. AJA 16: 387432.
Verduchi, P. 1985. Le tribune rostrate. In Roma: Archeologia
nel centro: Lavori e studi di archeologia 6/1: 2933. Rome:
DeLuca.
Verduchi, P., and C. Giuliani. 1980. Foro romano: Larea
centrale. Florence: Olschi.
427
. 1964. Die Daterung des Castorstempel in Rom. AA

79: 648656.
Von Sydow, W. 1973. Archologische Funde und Forschung.
AA 88: 544547.
Ward-Perkins, J. 1994. Roman Imperial Architecture. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Watkin, D. 2009. The Roman Forum. London: Profile Books.
Watson, A. 1999. Aurelian and the Third Century. London:
Routledge.
Wegner, M. 1987. Bauschmuck der Basilica Aemilia am Forum
Romanum. RM 94: 325329, pls. 142144.
. 1990. Rmische Miszellen. I. Neubau des
Castortempels in Rom. jh 60: 103107.
Welin, E. 1953. Studien zur Topographie des Forum Romanum.
Lund: Gleerup.
Wiegand, T., ed. 1923. Baalbek; Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen
und Untersuchungen in den Jahren 1898 bis 1905. 2vols.
Berlin: De Gruyter.
Wilson Jones, M. 2000. The Principles of Roman Architecture.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Yegul, F. 1992. Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Tittoni, M. 1994. La facciata del Palazzo Senatorio in

Campidoglio. Pisa: Pacini.
Verzar, M. 19761977. LUmbilichus Urbis: Il Mundus in et

tardo-repubblicana. DialA 910/12: 378398.
Zanker, P. c. 1972. Forum Romanum: Die Neugestaltung durch

Augustus. Tbingen: E. Wasmuth.
Toebelmann, F. 1923. Rmische Geblke. 2vols. Heidelberg: C.

Winter.
. 1988. The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus.

Translated by Alan Shapiro. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press.
Tomei, M. 2010. Memorie di Roma/Memories of Rome. Milan:

Electa.
Vitti, M. 2011. Il tempio dei Castori in Circo; lo stato della

Questione. In Tradizione e innovazione: Lelaborazione del
Linguaggio ellenistico nellarchitettura romana e italica di
et tardo-repubblicana, by E. La Rocca and A. DAlessio,
109134. Rome: LErma di Bretschneider.
Zevi, F. 1971. Il calcidico della Curia Iulia. RendLinc 26/8:

237251.
Tosi, G. c. 1983. Larco dei Gavii. Rome: LErma di

Bretschneider.
Von Bildt, C. 1901. Die Ausgraben C. F. v. Friedenhems auf

dem Forum romanum (178889). RM 16:320.
. 1993. Per lidentificazione della Porticus Minucia

Frumentaria. MEFRA 105: 661708.
Trendelenburg, A. 1871. Scavi: Escavazione della basilica

Giulia. BullCom 225237.
Von Gerkan, A. 19531954. Einiges zur Aedes Castoris in

Rom. RM 6061: 200206.
Zorzi, G. 1959. I desegni delle antichit di Andrea Palladio.

Venice: Neri Pozza.
Sources for Coin Images from

the Internet and for Other Images
All Coin images are from Coin Archives Pro. Ancient
Coins at: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/.
1.11. Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 59, April 4, 2011,
lot no.836: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?
LotID404193&AucID=725&Lot=836 (accessed June 2,
2011).
1.12. Dr.Busso Peus Nachfolger, Auction 403, April 27, 2011,
lot no.895: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?
LotID=414131&AucID=743&Lot=895. (accessed June 2,
2011).
2.1. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Mail Bid Sale 63, May
21, 2004, lot no.1271: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
(accessed August 25, 2011).
2.4. Gemini, LLC, Auction 2, January 11, 2006, lot no.455:
&AucID=159&Lot=455 (accessed August 4, 2011).
2.11. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Triton 13, January 5,

2010, lot no.349: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.p
hp?LotID=336808&AucID=603&Lot=349 (accessed April
19, 2014).
4.4. Mnzen & Medaillen A. G. Basel, Auction 93, December

16, 2003, lot no.152: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
(accessed February 11, 2012).
2.12. Leu Numismatik AG, Auction 91, May 10, 2004, lot
no.109: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID
=80757&AucID=87&Lot=657 (accessed April 19, 2014).
5.2. A. Tkalec AG, Auction May 2005, Auction Date, May 9,

php?LotID=25061&AucID=27&Lot=257&Match=1; B. G.
Gorski after Fuchs 1969, 49 fig.1; C. Mnzen & Medaillen,
Deutschland GmbH, Auction 11, November 7, 2002, lot
no.222: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer
.php?LotID=38079&AucID=41&Lot=222 (A and C
accessed December 14, 2012).
2.13. Leu Numismatik AG, Auction 93, May 10, 2005,

lot no.109: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/browse.
php?aucid=108&sort=&page=2 (accessed August 26,
2012).
3.6. G. Gorski after Bartoli 1916, 971 fig.8.
3.9. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Electronic Auction 212,
June 17, 2009, lot no.306: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=312892&AucID=561&Lot
=306 (accessed April 19, 2014).
6.2. Gorny & Mosch Giessener Mnzhandlung, Auction 190,

October 11, 2010, lot no.443: http://pro.coinarchives.
com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=378414&AucID=686&Lot=
443 (accessed August 11, 2011).
6.3. Numismatik Lanz Mnchen, Auction 146, May 25, 2009,
lot no.341: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?L
otID=266485&AucID=394&Lot=341 (accessed April 19,
2014).
2.5. Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 49, October 21, 2008

lot no. 258: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?
LotID=236414&AucID=339&Lot=258 (accessed August
4, 2011).
3.10. Baldwins Auctions Ltd., Dimitri Markov Coins &

Metals, the New York Sale 20, January 7, 2009, M&M
Numismatics, Ltd., lot no.425: http://pro.coinarchives.
425 (accessed April 19, 2014).
2.6. Baldwins Auctions, Ltd., Dmitry Markov Coins and

Metals, the New York Sale 8, Coins and Metals, January 6,
2010, lot no.190 (accessed March 20, 2010, and June 2,
2011.
3.11. Used by permission of Freeman & Sear, Mail Bid Sale 17,
December 15, 2009, lot no. 375: http://pro.coinarchives.
2.7. Freeman & Sear, Manhattan Sale 1, January 5, 2010, lot

no. 344: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lot
ID=339531&AucID=608&Lot=344 (accessed April 19,
2014).

2010, lot no. 1457: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=337729&AucID=603&Lot=1457; cngcoins.
com) (accessed April 19, 2014).
2.8. Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 40, May 16, 2007, lot
no. 755: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=
septimius+severus&s=0&upcoming=0&results=100&firmi
d=14&aucid=223 (accessed November 30, 2012).
3.13. Jean Elsen et ses fils SA, Aiction 95, March 15, 2008, lot
no.410: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?
LotID=217874&AucID=307&Lot=410 (accessed April 19,
2014).
2.9. G. Gorski after Palladio in Bothius and Ward Perkins

[1970], 499 fig.189.
9.7. UBS Gold and Numismatics, Auction 78, September 9,

2008, lot no. 1405: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.
php?LotID=224959&AucID=325&Lot=1405 (accessed
April 10, 2014).
4.3. Stacks, Saint Ludovico and Firth of Clyde Collections,

April 22, 2009, lot no.1358: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?AucID=377&Lot=1358 (accessed November
30, 2012).
13.2. Numismatik Lanz Mnchen, Auction 151, June 30, 2011,

lot no.640: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lot
ID=420990&AucID=761&Lot=640 (accessed August 16,
2011).
2.10. G. Gorski after Palladio in LTUR 4: 505506 figs.

162163.
7.2. Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 59, April 4, 2011, lot

no.2047: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lot
ID=405401&AucID=725&Lot=2047 (accessed April 19,
2014).
php?LotID=93098&AucID=99&Lot=950 (accessed April
19, 2014).
8.15. G. Gorski after Giuliani and Verducchi 1987, 157 fig.
219, 161 fig. 227.
429
430
sources for coin images from the internet and for other images
14.8. G. Gorski after Normand 1852 in Cassanelli etal. 1998,

72 fig.17.
15.2. G. Gorski after Ciacchi in Pensabene 1984, 33 fig.25.
18.4. G. Gorski after Nielsen and Poulsen 1992, 77 fig.55, 83
fig.61, 109 fig.101.
19.5. A. Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Mail Bid Sale 78,
May 14, 2008, lot no.1668; http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=213893&AucID=293&Lot=1668; B.
Used by permission of Freeman & Sear, Manhattan Sale 1,
January 5, 2010, lot no.186; http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=339373&AucID=608&Lot=186; C.
Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Electronic Auction 168,
July 11, 2007, lot no.222: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/
lotviewer.php?LotID=297821&AucID=517&Lot=222 (all
accessed April 19, 2014).
20.2. Gorny & Moesch Giessener, Stuttgart Auction 1,
November 22, 2010, lot no.389: http://pro.coinarchives.
20.5. G. Gorski after Giaccomo Boni 1900,187.

20.6. G. Gorski after L. Crema, section of the restored
colonnade of the Temple of Vesta (Soprintendenza Speciale
per i Beni Archeologici di Roma, Drawing 952/97).
20.12. G. Gorski after L. Crema (Soprintendenza Speciale per i
Beni Archeologici di Roma, drawing no.931/76).
20.3. Numismatica Ars Classica, Auction 52, October 7, 2009,

lot no.373: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?Lo
tID=320501&AucID=575&Lot=373 (accessed August 20,
2011).
20.13. G. Gorski after L. Crema, elevation (Soprintendenza

Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma, drawing
no.931/76).
20.4. Leu Numismatik AG, Auction 93, May 10,2005, lot no.
61: http://pro.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=100
520&AucID=108&Lot=61 (accessed April 19, 2014).
20.14. G. Gorski, after L. Crema (Soprintendenza

Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma, drawing
no.927/72bis).
Index
Abgarus,140
aedes divi Iulii, seetemples, Caesar
aerarium Saturni,227
acroteria, 19, 291,363
Actium, 22, 23, 24, 29, 85,423
Aesculapius,183
Alaric, 62, 93,185
Albinus, Clodius, 46,133
Alexander VII, seepopes
Alexander Severus, seeemperors
altar of victory,126
Anaglypha Traiani, 29, 30, 229,363
Angrivarii,265
Antoninus Pius, seeemperors
Apollo, 211,212
arches (monuments)
Arcus ad Isis,49
Fornix Fabianus, 24Fig.1.13
of Constantine, 62, 151Fig.8.3, 153, 264Fig.15.3, 407
unnumberedn.forChap.15)
of Gaius and Lucius Caesar, 24Fig.1.13, 27Fig.1.14, 43, 49,
345Fig.21.10, LOrange, 49
Parthian, of Augustus, 24, 37, 301312, 301312Figs.
19.111, 335, 346347,348
of Severus, 48, 4951, 56, 134146,Figs.7.114, 149Fig.
8.1, 150, 269, 353Fig.21.18, 354Fig.21.19, 356, 364
Fig.G1
of Tiberius, 49, 150, 157158Figs.8.1012, 261268Figs.
15.16, 269, 420,427
Arminius, 261,265
Arx, 13, 197, 203,209
asylum,209
Atrium Libertatis, 209,425
Atrium Minervae,127
Augustus (Octavian), seeemperors
Aurelian, seeemperors
Bartoli, A., 94, 110, 118Fig.6.4, 122, 122Fig.6.8, 123, 124,
124Fig.6.10, 126, 127, 128, 130, 317, 321, 322, 429
Fig.3.6
Bartoli, P. S., 140,141
base moldings, 19, 70, 73Fig.3.6, 90, 110, 124, 138, 152, 153
Fig.8.6, 159, 162, 174, 179, 189, 189Fig.10.5, 232, 271,
273, 279, 282Fig.17.6B, 283, 291Fig.18.3, 294, 305,
306, 307,370
basilicas
Aemilia/Fulvia, 5, 12, 14, 16, 19, 27, 29, 35, 41, 62,
63, 83, 91, 92115, 92115Figs.5.121, 121Fig.6.7,
150, 257, 260, 288, 316, 336, 338Fig.21.3, 340,
343Figs.21.78, 344, 346, 347, 356, 361, 363, 364,
367Fig.G4
Julia, 5, 12, 14, 16, 19, 24, 27, 29, 29Fig.1.15, 30, 35, 37,
40, 41, 42, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 104, 150, 159, 227,
239260, 239260Figs.14.117, 266, 277, 336, 338Fig.
21.3, 340, 342Fig.21.6, 344, 346, 350Fig.21.15, 351Fig.
21.16, 353, 356, 358, 363,372
Maxentius/Constantine, 46, 62,127
Opimia, 12,31
Porcia, 12, 394n.50
Sempronia, 5, 12, 14, 239, 243,248
baths (thermae)
of Caracalla, 55,135
of Diocletian,57
Bauer, H., 9799, 100105, 100105Figs.5.813
Bestia, Lucius Calpurnius,288
Bibulus, Marcus, 410n.2
Bithynia,242
Boni, Giaccomo, 40, 94, 99, 110, 121Fig.6.7, 122, 123Fig.6.9,
136, 231, 271, 273, 279, 290, 317, 318Fig.20.5, 322, 430
Fig.20.5
Borromini, Francesco,120
Bracciolini, Poggio,231
Bructeri,268
Bucrania, 27, 94, 104, 193, 321, 323, 363,370
buttresses, 123, 231, 277, 407n.11
Caesar, Gaius and Lucius, 30, 31,239
Caesar, Julius, 5, 12, 13, 14, 21, 22Fig.1.11, 30, 38, 40, 83, 85,
93, 119, 147, 239, 288, 304, 340, 344,372
assassination of, 5, 11, 22, 23, 83, 147, 229, 288,304
comet of,24
deification of,86
deified, 5, 43, 340,354

statue of, 23, 85, 90,246
Caligula, seeemperors
Camillus, Marcus Furius,165
Campo Torrecchiano,94
Camporesi, Giuseppe,186
Campus Martius, 38, 49, 52, 68,150
Canina, Luigi, 39Fig.2.2, 172, 175Fig.9.5, 176, 176Fig.9.6,
188, 189, 197, 199, 209, 247, 265,363
Capitoline Museum,13
Caprioli, Francesca,317
Capua,287
Caracalla, seeemperors
Carettoni, Gianfilippo, 248,250
Carinus, seeemperors
Caristie, Auguste,290
Carrhae, 140, 301,303
Cassandra,183
Castor and Pollux, 43, 287,289
Castor and Pollux, temple of, seetemples
Catiline,168
Catulus, Quintus, 197,199
ceilings, 12, 19, 110, 127, 192, 193, 218, 288, 324
Celtiberians,239
Ceres, 211, 212, 381n.29
Cerulli-Irelli, Giuseppina,248
Chatti, 40,265
Cherusci, 261, 265,268
churches
S. Adriano (Curia), 120, 120Fig.6.6, 121Fig.6.7, 122, 122
Fig.6.8, 123Fig.6.9, 127,151
Deaconate of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, 135, 170, 185,
188,269
S. Giovanni in Laterano, 119Fig.6.5,120
S. Lorenzo in Miranda (Temple of Antoninus and Faustina),68
S. Silvestro,52
Santa Maria de Cannapara, 244,247
SS. Martina and Luke, 120, 127, 128,147
SS. Sergius and Bacchus, 135, 170, 185,269; deaconate of,
135, 170, 185,188
Cicero, Marcus Tullius, 93, 117, 162, 168, 288,301
431
432
index
Circus Maximus,77
clamps, 188,189
swallow-tail, 17, 18,152
Claudius, seeemperors
Claudius Gothicus, seeemperors
Cleopatra, 5, 22, 24,85
clerestories, 97, 98, 115, 256, 257, 340, 363,370
Clodius, 117, 119,288
Clodius Albinus, 46,133
Coarelli, Filippo, 41Fig.2.3, 155, 208,209
coffers, 104, 122, 139, 140, 177, 188, 195, 237, 238, 295, 305
Fig.19.4, 319Fig.20.7, 324, 365
columns
bases, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, 29, 29Fig.1.15, 30, 32, 32Fig.
1.16, 36, 44, 45, 48, 57, 57Fig.21.14, 59, 60, 62, 63, 70,
71, 72, 74, 76, 90, 99, 104, 107, 111, 126, 138, 138
Fig.7.5, 170, 175, 179, 186Fig.10.3, 191, 192, 205,
212, 217, 233, 257, 277, 281Fig.17.5, 283, 290, 294,
295, 305, 306, 307, 322, 352, 361, 363, 365, 367, 370,
371,372
capitals, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Figs.1.710, 21, 30, 31,
32, 33Fig.1.17, 36, 39, 40, 43, 44, 58, 62, 70, 71, 90, 104,
139, 139Fig.7.6, 150, 151, 170, 176, 179, 192, 203, 205,
215, 217, 218, 220Figs.12.89, 233, 235, 244, 247, 248,
283, 293, 294, 295Fig.18.5, 296, 303Fig.19.2, 305, 307,
319, 319Fig.20.7, 323, 324Fig.20.11, 348, 352, 353Fig.
21.18, 363, 364, 364Fig.G1, 365, 365Fig.G2, 366, 366
Fig.G3, 367, 367Fig.G4, 368, 368Fig.G5, 370, 371,372
drums, 16, 17, 30, 44, 48, 172, 176, 192, 293, 294, 352,
361,367
engaged, 5, 12, 24, 29, 96, 104, 175, 176, 191, 233, 257, 303
Fig.19.2,305
fluted,24
gilded,34
shafts, 15, 16, 17, 27, 29, 30, 40, 44, 48, 49, 52, 54, 55, 56,
58, 59, 60, 62, 71, 90, 99, 104, 111, 126, 138, 159, 175,
176, 179, 186, 188, 192, 212, 217, 229, 233, 244, 257,
266, 277, 281Fig.17.4, 283, 290, 293, 294, 296, 307, 319
Fig.20.7, 322, 348, 352, 354, 356, 361, 363, 364, 364Fig.
G1, 365, 365Fig.G2, 367, 367Fig.G4, 368, 368Fig.G5,
372,379; cabled,322
columns, monumental
of Antoninus Pius,76
of Diocletian,63
honorary, 5859, 60, 62, 63, 147, 153, 162, 277283,
277283Figs.17.16B, 350Fig.21.15, 351Fig.21.16,
358361,362
of Marcus Aurelius, 50, 60,140
of Phocas, 5960, 150, 161Fig.2.17, 277, 341Fig.21.5,
361,363
of Trajan, 50, 60,140
Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheater), 38, 62,315
Comitia curiata,117
Comitium, 3, 5, 117, 147,167
Commodus, seeemperors
Constantine, seeemperors
Constantinople, 62, 63,361
Constantius Chlorus, seeemperors
consuls, 24, 93, 168, 306,371
Cornelius, Lucius,199
Corneto, Hadriano Castellensis de, 94,244
coronae,192
Crassus, Marcus Licinius, 24, 301304, 305,372
Crassus, Publius,304
Crema, Luigi, 317, 31921, 322, 323, 323Fig.20.10, 324Fig.
20.11, 430Figs.20.614
Cronus,225
Ctesiphon, 133,141
Curia (Senate House), 19, 42, 49, 51, 56, 59, 63, 93, 97, 147,
151, 167, 169,227
Hostilia, 3, 5, 12, 117119, 147,336
Julia, 5, 22, 2324, 106Fig.5.14, 116132, 116132Figs.
6.119, 136, 336, 356, 362, 363, 365,366
curule aediles, 165, 269,366
Cybil,243
Dacians,40
Da Sangallo, Antonio, 94, 127, 128,130
Da Sangallo brothers (Giuliano and Antonio), 94, 104, 107,
390n.27
Da Sangallo, Giuliano, 94, 96, 97Fig.5.5, 110, 390 nn. 33, 36,
391n.57
Delbrueck, R., 208,209

Delmaticus, Lucius Caecilius Metellus, 288,293
Diana, 211,212
Didius Julianus, seeemperors
Dio Cassius, 22, 67, 85, 149, 159,305
Diocletian, seeemperors
Diodorus Siculus,316
Dionysius of Halicarnassus,315
Domitian, seeemperors
Drusus (brother of Tiberius), 31, 32, 34, 168, 178,289
Drusus (son of Tiberius),147
Drusus, Libo,169
Dutert, Ferdinand,257
Edessa,140
Einsiedlen Itinerary, 135,192
emperors (except as indicated all dates belowCE)
Alexander Severus (222235),169
Antoninus Pius (138161), 4243, 60, 6768,
76, 353,356
Augustus (Octavian, 31 BCE14 CE) 5, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19,
21, 22, 23, 23Fig.1.12, 24, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37,
49, 50, 60, 84Fig.4.3, 85, 86, 93, 99, 118Figs.6.23, 127,
147, 152, 159, 168, 169, 183, 229, 239, 260, 261, 264, 268,
271, 287, 304, 305, 306Fig.19.5, 307, 335, 336, 340, 344,
346, 347, 348, 349, 352, 356, 358, 370,371
Aurelian (270275), 5255, 56,60
Aurelius, Marcus (161180), 45, 60, 133,354; equestrian
statue of, 41, 47,58
Caligula (3741), 239,289
Caracalla (212217), 135, 138, 193, 383n.61
Carinus (284285), 135,185
Carus (281283), 56,60
Claudius (4154),289
Claudius Gothicus (268270),147
Commodus (180192), 46, 133,169
Constantine (311337),150
Constantius Chlorus (293306),56
Didius Julianus (193),133
Diocletian (284305), 52, 5560, 62, 119, 162, 244, 250,
257, 260, 277, 279, 356, 358,361
index
Domitian (8196), 37, 38, 4042, 41Fig.2.3, 47, 56, 119,

124, 127, 153, 169, 185, 212, 269, 290, 352,353
Galba (6869),316
Gallienus (259268),60
Geta (209211),135
Gordian (238244), 169,290
Hadrian (117138), 67, 68, 86, 212,363
Justinian (527565),63
Maximian (286305), 52, 5560, 62, 162,358
Maximinus (Thrax) (235238),169
Nero (5468), 147, 149, 227, 315Fig.20.2,316; fire in reign
of, 37, 316, 319,352
Pertinax (193), 46, 47, 133, 137, 149, 150,169
Probus (276282) 52, 54, 54Fig.2.11, 55Figs.2.12, 13
Severus, Alexander (222235),169
Severus, Septimius (193211), 46, 47Fig.2.6, 133, 135Fig.
7.2, 137, 147, 155, 185, 192, 248, 269, 294, 317,356;
equestrian statue of,4648
Theodosius (379395), 317,361
Titus, 37, 38, 40, 185, 191, 212, 269,352
Trajan (98117), 60, 212, 242,363
Valerian (253259),290
Vespasian (6979), 37, 38, 38Fig.2.1, 39, 185, 192, 193,
200, 208, 315Fig.20.3, 316, 340,352
Vitellius (68),200
empresses
Faustina the Elder (d. 140), 43, 44Fig.2.4, 45, 45Fig.2.5,
68, 70, 70Fig.3.3, 74, 74Fig.3.9, 75Figs.3.1013,76
Julia Domina (d. 217), 4849, 315Fig.20.4, 317,356
Livia (d. 29),168
Ennius,211
entablatures
architrave/friezes, 18, 19, 192, 193, 221Fig.12.10, 232Fig.
13.6, 235237,323
cornices, 18, 19, 29, 31, 34, 36, 39, 4445, 48, 57, 62, 70, 71,
73Fig.3.6, 84Fig.4.2, 85Fig.4.5, 86Fig.4.6, 90, 104,
108Fig.5.16, 110, 111, 121, 124, 125, 125Fig.6.11, 126,
138, 139, 140, 151, 152, 153Fig.8.6, 155, 170, 174, 175,
175Fig.9.5, 176, 179, 188, 191, 193195, 203, 205, 218,
229, 231, 232, 233Fig.13.7, 237238, 244, 248, 266, 273,
279, 283, 294, 295, 296Fig.18.6, 307, 319Fig.20.7, 321,
324, 348, 352, 352Fig.21.17, 354Fig.21.20, 363, 365,

365Fig.G2, 366, 366Fig.G3, 367, 367Fig.G4, 368, 368
Fig.G5, 370,371
friezes, 18, 27, 30, 31, 39, 39Fig.2.2, 40, 44, 48, 7476, 90,
91, 99, 104, 108Fig.5.16, 111, 138, 139, 140, 141, 159,
176, 192, 193, 218, 257, 295, 296, 323, 354, 367, 368,
370,372
equites,285
Equus Domitiani, 4042, 41Fig.2.3
Eugenius IV, seepopes
Fasti Consulares,306
Fea, Carlo, 135, 170, 188,290
Felicitas, 119,209
Ferroni A. M., 172,178
Fires, 388 n. 2, 406n.1
Five-Column Monument, 5658, 57Fig.2.14, 157Fig.8.10, 158
Figs.8.1112
Flaccus, Fulvius,167
Flavius, Gnaeus,165
Forums (Fora)
of Augustus, 30,174; pavement of,152
of Caesar, 11, 59, 120, 127,130
Roman (magnum): during the Republic, 35, 4Fig.1.1;
pavement, 17, 46, 48, 77, 121, 123, 152, 231, 256, 293,294
Templum Pacis (Temple, Forum of Peace), 46, 48, 99, 104,
111, 316,368
Transitorium (of Nerva), 59,363
Form Z, 373n.12
foundations, 16, 17, 30, 40, 56, 63, 70, 71, 86, 111, 147, 152,
153, 159, 162, 165, 170, 171Fig.9.2, 172, 174, 175, 178,
179, 186, 188, 189, 191, 197, 209, 225, 231, 231Fig.13.5,
232, 233, 248, 266, 279, 291, 293, 296, 305, 307, 313, 317,
340, 370371
Freyberger, K. S.,43
Friedenheim, C. F.,247
friezes, seeentablatures
Gabii,203
Galba, seeemperors
Gallienus, seeemperors
433
Gauls,85
Germans, 40, 85, 261264
Geta, seeemperors
Gismondi, Italo, 9697, 98Fig.5.6,218
model of ancient Rome, 96, 97, 98Fig.5.6, 99Fig.5.7, 130,
202Fig.11.5, 209, 218, 222Fig.12.11
Gordian, seeemperors
Gracchus, Gaius,167
Gracchus, Tiberius Sempronius, the Elder, 239,243
Gradus Aurelii, 22,344
Graecostasis, 165167
granite, 55,296
gray, 16, 52, 55, 62, 126, 179, 233, 283, 296, 368, 369Fig.G6
red, 16, 56, 58, 59, 60, 62, 93, 95Fig.5.3, 233, 277, 280Fig.
17.4, 283, 358, 369Fig.G6
Gregory XV, seepopes
Gregory XVI, seepopes
griffins, 74, 74Fig.3.8
Hadrian, seeemperors
Hadrian I, seepopes
Hannibal, 211,316
Heemskerck, Martin van, 201Fig.11.4,202
Helios,54
Helios, Alexander,22
Hercules, 33, 33Fig.1.18, 34, 139, 178, 225, 375n.33
Hestia,183
Hiero,117
Hills ofRome
Capitoline, 3, 5, 24Fig.1.13, 38, 39, 41, 47, 120, 135, 136,
139, 141, 148Fig.8.1, 151, 168, 170, 171Fig.9.2, 172,
174, 186, 189, 197, 200, 203, 209, 212, 215, 219Fig.12.7,
225, 227, 232, 260, 291, 336, 344, 364, 373 n. 5, 374 n. 9,
380 n. 4, 395 nn. 12, 21, 403n.6
Oppian,38
Palatine, 3, 39, 41, 42, 46, 63, 82Fig.4.1, 95Fig.5.3, 107,
122, 148Fig.8.1, 186, 289, 353,367
Honorius I, seepopes
Horrea Piperateria,46
Hospital of the Fatebenefratelli,199
Hygeia,183
434
index
imagines clipeatae, 27,29

Innocent III, seepopes
Interamna,46
inter duos lucos,197
Jordan, H., 317,322
Julia (daughter of Augustus),30
Jupiter, 60, 178,211
Anxur,209
Latiaris,289
Stator,43
Tonans,186
Justinian, seeemperors
kings ofRome
Numa Pompilius (715673 BCE), 3,313
Tarquinius Priscus (615578 BCE),13
Tarquinius Superbus, the Proud (534510 BCE),227
Tullius Hostilius (673641 BCE),3
Lanciani, Rudolfo, 127, 130, 162, 273,317
Latins, 285,287
Latona,180
Leo X, seepopes
Lepidus, 91, 94,372
Lepidus, Lucius Aemilius Paullus,5,93
Lepidus, Marcus Aemilius, 27, 91, 93, 94Fig.5.2,110
Liber Pater,183
lime kilns, 170, 172,231
Lucius Aemilius Lepidus Paullus, 41,93
Lugli, Giuseppe, 43, 162,248
Lutatius, Quintus, 197, 199
Macellum, 91, 99, 111,370
Mamertine Prison,170
manubiae (spoils),11
marble, colored, 369Fig.G6,370
africano, 16, 19, 27, 34, 52, 55, 107, 110, 111, 151, 152, 170,
179, 249Fig.14.8, 256, 279, 296, 363,370
alabaster, 16, 126, 179, 244, 247, 296, 363,370
bardiglio, 110,370
breccia verde, 179, 363,370

cipollino, 15, 16, 19, 27, 40, 44, 45, 52, 55, 71, 99, 110, 111,
174Fig.9.4, 179, 212, 217, 244, 249Fig.14.8, 256, 354,
364,370
giallo antico, 16, 19, 27, 83, 94, 107,
110, 122, 125, 126, 174Fig.9.4, 179, 188,
247, 249Fig.14.8, 256, 296, 368,370
onyx, 179,370
pavonazzetto, 16, 19, 27, 99, 107, 110, 122, 124, 125, 126,
170, 174Fig.9.4, 179, 192, 249Fig.14.8, 256, 283,
296,370
porphyry, 16, 54, 55, 58, 94, 122, 125, 127, 150, 244, 247,
256, 279, 283, 296, 370,371
portasanta, 19, 32, 34, 110, 151, 152, 175,
179, 370,371
rosso antico, 179, 296, 370,371
serpentine, 94, 122, 125, 127, 296,371
marble, white, 15, 16, 19, 27, 29, 34, 35, 40, 48, 55, 59, 70, 71,
90, 93, 94, 104, 107, 110, 111, 123, 126, 151, 152, 159,
175, 179, 189, 191, 192, 217, 237, 243, 249Fig.14.8, 256,
269, 271, 279, 281Figs.17.517.6A, 282Fig.17.6B, 283,
347, 352, 354, 361, 364,370
Luni (Luna), 16, 24, 29, 30, 35, 44, 136, 152, 192, 237, 294,
306, 317, 322, 364,370
pentelic, 16, 136,370
proconnesian, 16, 24, 136, 305, 306, 370,371
Marcus Aurelius, seeemperors
Marcus Fulvius Nobilior, 91,99
M. Valerius Messala,117
Mark Antony, 5, 22, 24, 83, 85, 168, 229,288
Mars, 58, 139, 211,212
masonry materials
concrete, 5, 12, 15, 16, 17, 30, 55, 71, 84Fig.4.2, 86, 99, 122,
136, 147, 151, 153, 155, 172, 173Fig.9.3, 174, 174Fig.
9.4, 179, 189, 191, 192, 202, 203, 215, 238, 250, 256, 271,
279, 293, 305, 346, 358, 361, 363, 371,372
travertine, 5, 12, 1516, 17, 29, 30, 36, 55, 70, 111, 124, 126,
136, 151, 152, 153, 159, 172, 173Fig.9.3, 174, 179, 189,
191, 192, 203, 205, 208, 209, 212, 215, 217, 220Fig.12.9,
232, 238, 244, 245Fig.14.4, 246, 247Fig.14.6, 250, 257,
271, 293, 305, 317, 323Fig.20.10, 363,372
tufa, 12, 15, 16, 17, 30, 40, 70, 86, 93, 104, 152, 172, 173
Fig.9.3, 174, 179, 197, 203, 205, 248, 250, 279, 290,
291, 293, 371,372; Anio, 152, 174, 179, 203, 293, 363,
389n.12; grotta oscura, 217,368; peperino, 55, 70,
279,371
Maximian, seeemperors
Maximus, Quintus Fabius,211
Medusa, 41, 42,193
Mercedarian Order, 121,122
Mercury, 32, 33, 45, 178,211
Mesopotamia, 133,301
Messala, M. Valerius,117
Metellus, Lucius Caecilius, 288,316
Michelangelo, 56, 170,202
Miliarium Aureum Urbis Romae, 34, 155Fig.8.8, 157Fig.8.10,
158Figs.8.1112,159
Milo,117
Milvian Bridge,150
Minerva, 41, 42, 178, 211,212
modillions (brackets), 29, 34, 36, 45, 65, 104, 108Fig.5.16,
111, 121, 124, 125, 126, 128Fig.6.14, 159, 177, 195, 237,
238, 271, 273, 295, 324, 352, 365, 365Fig.G2,370
eagles on, 127Fig.6.13
moldings, decorative motifs
acanthus leaves, 29, 39, 44, 74, 139, 178, 179, 193, 195, 235,
294, 321, 324, 352, 365, 365Fig.G2
bead-and-reel, 18, 111, 139, 176, 177, 178, 179, 193, 237,
294, 295, 321, 323, 324,363
dentils, 44, 111, 139, 176, 193, 237, 295, 321, 324,
349,366
egg-and-dart, 18, 44, 45, 104, 111, 176, 179, 192, 195, 235,
294, 295, 321, 322, 349, 367, 367Fig.G4,370
guilloche, 177,370
hollow tongue, 45, 176, 177, 178, 179, 192, 195, 235, 294,
295, 321, 379 n.120; with crescent base, 45, 177,192
laurel-leaf, 36, 45, 168, 178,323
lotus-flowers, 195,235
lotus-and-acanthus,44
lotus-and-palmette, 31, 111, 159,294
normal-leaf-and-dart, 111, 176, 237, 294, 349,
352Fig.21.17, 354Fig.21.20,370
index
palmettes, 45, 177, 179, 235, 321,370; inverted, 179,294;

and reversed lotus flowers, 195,235
shear-shaped-leaf-and-dart, 111, 177, 179, 195, 294, 295,
321, 323, 324, 354Fig.21.20
moldings, profiles
cyma recta, 44, 45, 78, 111, 195, 218, 238, 283, 295, 321,
324, 366,371
cyma reversa, 44, 111, 176, 177, 178, 193, 195,
218, 237, 238, 283, 294, 295, 321, 323, 324,
366,370
fillet, 44, 45, 111, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 193, 195, 217,
218, 225, 235, 237, 238, 283, 294, 295, 321, 323, 324, 363,
366, 368,371
ovolo, 44, 45, 111, 176, 179, 192, 193, 195, 235, 237, 294,
295, 321, 322, 324, 367,370
Mongenet, Riccardo Gamberini, 306, 307, 308Fig.19.6
Moyaux, C.,209
Muoz, Antonio,215
Museo dei Conservatori,41
Museum of Roman Civilization (Museo della Civilt Romana),
xvi, xviii, 57Fig.2.14, 58Fig.2.15, 59Fig.2.16, 96,
98Fig.5.6, 99Fig.5.7, 130, 151Fig.8.3, 202Fig.11.5,
209, 218, 222Fig.12.11, 264Fig.15.3
Nash, Ernest, 127,130
Nasica, Cornelius Scipio,91
naves, 12, 13, 19, 27, 29, 91, 96, 98, 99, 110, 111, 115, 120Fig.
6.6, 121, 233, 244, 245Fig.14.4, 247, 248, 249Fig.14.8,
250, 256, 257, 340, 346, 363,370
Neptune,211
Nero, seeemperors
Nibby, Antonio,215
Nicias, 127,183
Niger, Pescennius, 46,133
night doors,205
Nisibis,140
Nobilior, Marcus Fulvius, 91,99
Normand, Alfred-Nicolas, 172, 256, 257, 430Fig.14.8
Numa Pompilius, seekings ofRome
Octavian, seeemperors, Augustus
Opimius, Lucius, 32, 167,172
opus quadratum,203
orders
Composite, 17, 48, 121, 139, 215, 294, 363, 364, 364Fig.G1,
365, 366,370
Corinthian, 16, 1718, 1921, 20Figs.1.710, 23, 24, 27, 30,
31, 36, 37, 38, 38Fig.2.1, 39, 52, 56, 58, 71, 74Fig.3.8,
85, 90, 93, 97, 98, 99, 104, 111, 121, 127, 155, 172, 174,
176, 192, 208, 209, 235, 247, 266, 283, 293, 294, 303Fig.
19.2, 305, 307, 315Fig.20.3, 322, 323, 324Fig.20.11,
347, 348, 352, 363, 364, 365, 365Fig.G2, 366, 368,370
Corinthianizing, 15, 21, 32, 33Fig.1.17, 35, 35Fig.1.19, 97,
99, 110, 115, 179, 215, 217, 296, 319,366
Doric, 5, 24, 27, 29, 35, 91, 93, 96, 97, 98, 104, 107, 110,
203, 205, 257, 271, 273, 303Fig.19.2, 344, 347, 348, 364,
366Fig.G3, 367, 367Fig.G4, 368, 370, 371,372
Ionic, 23, 27, 30, 35, 54, 62, 91, 96, 97, 99, 111, 151, 209,
229, 229Fig.13.4, 233, 257, 293, 319, 348, 364, 365, 366,
368Fig.G5,370
Tuscan, 91, 248, 257, 260, 305, 364,372
Ostrogoths, 62, 63, 361,362
Ovid, 165,169
paintings, 19, 24, 50, 85, 117, 127, 140,244
palaces (Palatine), 39, 41, 42, 46, 47, 82Fig.4.1, 148Fig.8.1,
186, 289,353
Domus Tiberiana (Palace of Tiberius), 82Fig.4.1, 149Fig.
8.1,367
Palazzo dei Conservatori,203
Palladio, 53Fig.2.9, 54, 54Fig.2.10
Palmyra, 52,54
Pannonia, 46, 47, 133, 168,261
Parthia, 141, 301304
Parthians, 24, 27, 29, 50, 51, 133, 303304, 305,307
reliefs of, 138, 140141
statues of, 99, 107, 307,347
wars with, 140, 141,301
Paul II, seepopes
Paul III, seepopes
Paullus, Lucius Aemilius, 5, 27, 41,93
Pax,178
pedestals, 27, 34, 45, 49, 56, 57, 57Fig.2.14, 58Fig.2.15, 59,
59Fig.2.16, 60, 63, 76, 77, 79, 93, 123, 124, 126, 136,
435
138140, 147, 173Fig.9.3, 176, 188, 244, 256,

276Fig.17.1, 277, 279283, 279283Figs.17.217.6B,
296, 307, 321, 347, 358, 361, 363, 365,370
pediments, 18, 22, 23, 24, 34, 45, 52, 68, 74Fig.3.9, 75Figs.
3.1013, 76, 77, 85, 110, 118Figs.6.24, 124, 125, 125
Fig.6.11, 126, 127, 177Fig.9.7, 178, 183, 188, 191, 238,
294, 295, 304Fig.19.3, 306, 307, 347, 363, 370,372
Perseus, King of Macedonia,291
Pertinax, seeemperors
Pirro Ligorio, 186,271
Piso, Calpurnius,316
Pius IX, seepopes
Plancus, Munatius, 29, 35, 117, 229231,237
Pliny the Elder, 169, 183, 289, 316,371
Pliny the Younger, 42, 242243
Plutarch,313
Pompey the Great (Magnus), 168, 169, 288, 301,372
Pompey, Sextus,168
Pontifex Maximus, 23, 83, 85, 137, 313, 315Fig.20.4,316
popes
Alexander VII (16551667),120
Eugenius IV (14311447),290
Gregory XV (16211623),135
Gregory XVI (18311846), 215, 217Fig.12.5
[H]adrian I (772795),185
Honorius I (625638),120
Innocent III (11981216),135
Leo X (15131521),135
Paul II (14641471),135
Paul III (15341549), 86, 135,317
Pius IX (18461878), 215, 218Fig.12.6
Sixtus IV (14711484),135
Portico of the Dei Consentes, 14, 15, 40, 189, 210224, 210224
Figs.12.113, 227, 353, 356,364
Postumius, Aulus,285
pozzolana,1516
praefecti aerarii Saturni,227
Praetextus, Vettius, 40, 212, 215, 218, 221Fig.12.10
Praetorian Guard, 46, 133, 147,169
Praxiteles,248
Probianus, Gabinius Vettius, 244,247
Providentia,45
436
index
Puellae Faustinianae, 43, 44Fig.2.4, 45,76

PunicWars
First (264241 BCE),117
Second (218201 BCE), 13, 211,316
Third (149146 BCE), 398n.8
quaestors, 227,239
Raetia,229
Regia, 3, 23, 24, 25Fig.1.13, 26Fig.1.14, 43, 83, 85, 86, 87
Fig.4.7, 313,336
Republic, 3, 5, 11, 12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 27, 43, 47, 51, 9193,
117, 138, 147, 165168, 197, 211212, 227, 239,
285293, 313316, 344, 347, 353, 365, 371,372
ressauts, 99, 121, 139, 176, 266, 367,371
Richter, Otto, 90,290
Rimini,266
Romulus, 117,313
roofs, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, 21, 27, 34, 55, 56, 93, 97, 98, 99, 110,
117, 121, 122, 123, 139, 155, 178, 185, 191, 202, 205, 215,
218, 256, 257, 260, 273, 288, 291, 293, 294, 314Fig.20.1,
316, 317, 319, 322, 324331, 346, 348, 363, 370, 371,372
Rosa, Pietro, 159, 250Fig.4.9, 257,290
rosettes, 45, 84Fig.4.2, 85Fig.4.5, 86,Fig.4.6, 104, 111, 139,
176, 177, 179, 193, 195, 217, 235, 295, 319Fig.20.7, 322,
324, 324Fig.20.11, 349, 352Fig.21.17, 354Fig.21.20,
365,366
rostra,371
East, 5859, 60, 159164, 159164Figs.8.1317, 279, 283,
340, 343Fig.21.8, 349Fig.21.14, 358361
Vandalic,147
West, 24, 34, 35, 36, 37, 49, 50, 56, 57, 60, 83, 85, 86, 136,
147153, 147153Figs.8.16, 155, 156157Figs.
8.912, 159, 162, 266, 271, 273Fig.16.3, 275Fig.16.5,
277, 279, 283,335
Rufus,117
Rufus, Q. Pompeius,288
Rufus, Sulpicius,288
sack ofRome
by Alaric (410 CE), 62, 93, 244,361
by Vandals (455 CE), 62,185
S. Peters Basilica, 86,317

Sardi,239
Saturnalia,227
Saturnia,225
Saturnian Gate,225
Schola Xanthi, 34, 157Fig.8.10, 269275,
269275Figs.16.15
Scribonia,169
Secretarium Senatus, 127130
Sejanus,169
Seleucia, 141, 301,303
Senate, 5, 22, 23, 31, 38, 42, 43, 46, 49, 50, 51, 63, 68, 93, 117,
119, 120, 125, 133, 137, 147, 150, 165, 167, 168, 169, 185,
192, 193, 197, 199, 211, 227, 231, 268, 287, 288, 290, 307,
316,366
Senate House, seeCuria
Senatorial Palace, 170, 201Fig.11.4,202
Septimius Severus, seeemperors
Sestius, Publius,288
Silvius, Polemius,244
Sixtus IV, seepopes
Smaragdus, 63, 361,362
Sosius, Gaius,21
Statius, 41, 42, 169,185
streets
Argiletum, 29, 59, 61Fig.2.17, 62, 93, 94, 107, 336, 338Fig.
21.3, 361,363
Clivus Argentarius, 159, 338Fig.21.3,364
Capitolinus, 24, 38, 39, 40, 188, 189, 203, 211, 215, 225, 227,
271,364
Via (della) Consolazione, 150,172
Via dei Fori Imperiali (Via dellImpero), 122, 185,368
Via del Campidoglio,203
Via delle Botteghe Oscure,16
Via Praenestina,199
Via Sacra, 24, 26Fig.1.14, 27, 37, 43, 49, 58, 60, 62, 94, 104,
276Fig.17.1, 277, 336, 338Fig.21.3, 339Fig.21.4, 341
Fig.21.5, 344, 350Fig.21.15, 351Fig.21.16, 353, 358,
361,372
Via San Pietro in Carcere (Gradus Monetae), 199, 203,208
Vicus Iugarius, 227, 239, 338Fig.21.3, 340, 344Fig.
21.9,372
Vicus Tuscus, 14, 239, 248Fig.14.7, 290, 338Fig.21.3, 340,

343Figs.21.78,372
Suburra,363
Suetonius, 42,83
Sulla, Faustus Cornelius,119
Sulla, Lucius Cornelius, Felix, 117, 119,288
Surdinus, L. Naevius,36
Surenas, 303,304
Susa,266
Suys, Jean-Tilman Franois,290
tabernae (shops)
Argentariae, 13, 14,91
Lanienae, 13,91
Novae,13
Veteres, 13,14
Tabularium, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 31, 35, 39Fig.2.2, 40, 170, 171
Fig.9.2, 172, 176, 188, 189, 191, 193, 197209, 197209
Figs.11.110, 212, 217, 227, 344, 347, 348, 363, 366
Fig.G3
Tacitus, 266,316
Tarpeia,27
Tarquinius Superbus (the Proud), seekings ofRome
temples
Antoninus and Faustina, 11, 12, 16, 25Fig.1.13, 26Fig.1.14,
27, 43, 44, 46, 63, 6681, 6681Figs.3.118, 94, 104,
107, 317,362
Apollo in Circo, 21,30
Capitoline Triad = Jupiter Optimus Maximus, 38, 39, 47, 197,
200, 260, 291,336
Caesar (aedes divi Iulii), 12, 16, 22, 23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 34, 35,
36, 38, 41, 43, 58, 60, 68, 8290, 8290Figs.4.110, 96,
98, 107, 159, 335, 336, 340, 344, 345Fig.21.10, 346, 347,
348, 348Fig.21.13, 349Fig.21.14,358
Castor and Pollux, 5, 11, 14, 19, 83, 159, 176, 178, 283,
284300, 284300Figs.18.111, 305, 313, 336,363
Concord, 5, 11, 12, 13, 16, 19, 21, 30, 3134, 32Fig.1.16,
33Figs.1.1718, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 49, 63, 136, 148Fig.
8.1, 165183, 165183Figs.9.111, 184Fig.10.1, 188,
205, 237, 247, 269, 273, 296, 335, 336, 340, 344, 345Fig.
21.10, 348, 348Fig.21.13, 352, 352Fig.21.17, 354Fig.
21.20, 356,363
index
Felicitas, 119,209
Isis and Serapis,49
Juno Moneta, 209,326
Mars Ultor, 11, 20Fig.1.10, 21, 30, 31, 51, 174, 176,296
Saturn, 3, 5, 11, 12, 16, 2930, 35, 36, 38, 62, 159, 184Fig.
10.1, 212, 225238, 225238 Figs 13.111, 239, 265, 269,
273, 340, 348, 361, 368Fig.G5,372
Unconquered Sun, 5255Figs.2.913
Veiovis, 200, 202, 203,208
Venus and Rome, 340,347
Venus Victrix,209
Vespasian, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 3840, 41, 44, 45, 46,
48, 49, 135, 170, 176, 184196, 184196Figs.10.110,
200, 203, 205, 212, 215, 229, 237, 269, 340, 345Fig.
21.10, 346Fig.21.11, 347Fig.21.12, 352253, 354, 356,
363, 365Fig.G2
Vesta, 3, 5, 11, 12, 15, 16, 21, 35, 35Fig.1.19, 37, 38Fig.
2.1, 40, 41, 43, 46, 48, 49, 68, 247, 285, 288, 313331,
313331Figs.20.119, 340, 345Fig.21.10, 349352,
354,356
Theater of Pompey, 12,346
Theoderic, 63,362
Theodosius, seeemperors
thermae, seebaths
Tiber Island,199
tiles, 12, 15, 18, 19, 21, 122, 141, 246, 363,371
bronze, 15, 319,331
marble, 16, 18, 27, 273, 346,371
terracotta, 18,371
Timarchus, 248,257
Tiridates,147
Titus, seeemperors
torre (towers)
della Inserra,86
of Pope Nicholas V, 170, 171Fig.9.2,202
Torriani, Orazio,70
Trajan, seeemperors
Tresviri monetales,306
Triumvirs, 22, 83, 168, 229, 301, 335,372
tropea(trophies),40
Troy, 85,225
Tucci, P.,209
Tullius Hostilius, seekings ofRome
Umbilicus Urbis Romae/Mundus, 34, 154Fig.8.7, 155159,
155159Figs.8.812, 338Fig.21.3
Vacca, Flaminio,246
Valerian, seeemperors
Vandals, 62,185
437
Varro,225
Varus, Publius Quinctilius, 37, 261264,265
Vatican Library,94
vaults, 5, 14, 16, 29, 99, 121, 140, 203, 205, 231, 247, 250, 289,
340, 346, 370,372
barrel, 12, 19, 86, 111, 139, 153, 162, 205, 208, 215, 217,
232, 294, 363,372
groin, 12, 19, 98, 127, 232, 256, 368,372
Venus, 22, 24, 85, 211,212
Verres, Gaius,288
Vespasian, seeemperors
Vesta (goddess), 5, 43, 46, 211, 212, 313, 315, 316, 317,354
Vestal Virgins, 313316
Viatores,227
Victory, winged, statue of, 22Fig.1.11, 23, 24, 58, 68, 118Fig.
6.3, 125, 126, 271, 273, 277Fig.13.2
Vitellius, seeemperors
Vitruvius, 19, 90, 91,125
Vologeses,140
Vulcan, 165, 211,212
Worlds Fair of 1942, 202
Zecca vecchia,94
Zeugma, 140, 303
Gatefold 1: GeneralPlan
Gatefold 2: Figure 1.6 (top); Figure 1.2 (bottom left); Figure 1.3 (bottom right).
Gatefold 3: Figure 1.4 (top); Figure 1.5 (bottom).
Gatefold 4: Figure 21.24.

0521192447

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

0521192447

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

T

Frontispiece. The authors, Professors Gorski

32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473,USA

Part I. Architecture in the Roman Forum

1 The Augustan Reconstruction (31 BCE14 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Prologue: The Republican Forum (50831). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Problems and Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 From Tiberius to Phocas (14608 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Tiberius (1437 CE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Flavians (6996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Antoninus Pius (138161). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Septimius Severus (193211) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Maximian and Diocletian (285305) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Restoration of the Temple of Saturn (c. 360). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The End of the Roman Forum (after 608). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part II. The Monuments

3 The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

4 The Temple of Caesar (Aedes divi Iuli). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

5 The Basilica milia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

6 The Curia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

7 The Arch of Septimius Severus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

The Arch of Severus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

8 Minor Monuments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

A. The West Rostra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

B. The Umbilicus Urbis Romae/Mundus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

C. The Miliarium Aureum Urbis Romae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

D. The East Rostra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

9 The Temple of Concord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

The Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

10 The Temple of Vespasian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

11 The Tabularium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

12 The Portico of the Dei Consentes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

13 The Temple of Saturn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

14 The Basilica Julia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239

The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

15 The Arch of Tiberius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

The Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266

16 The Schola Xanthi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

17 The Diocletianic Honorary Columns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

The Remains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279

18 The Temple of Castor and Pollux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285

The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

19 The Parthian Arch of Augustus (19 BCE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301

The Monument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305

20 The Temple of Vesta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

The Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319

Part III. Conclusions

The Augustan Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335

The Flavian Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349

The Antonine Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353

The Severan Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

The Diocletianic Forum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

The End of the Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361

Why another book on the Roman Forum (Figs. 0.14, 1.26)?

Moreover, as David Watkin has pointed out in his recent book

Antoninus and Faustina (Figs. 3.118) buildings too important

Fig.0.4. Aerial view of the Roman Forum, c. 360 CE,

colors constitute a major resource (as yet largely unexplored) on

conjectural. For those who desire such information, however, we

Arch of Serverus (Figs. 7.12, 13) indicate what we might have

Ja mes E. Packer and

Fig.0.5. The Roman Forum: digital documentation plan, 2010. (Dharma)