ROMA. tliat an elevated terrace, presenting the segment of a circle, which was excavated at this part of the forum some years ago, is the actual rostra (^Indi- cazione, ]>. 270, ed. 1850, and his Dissertation "iS?«' Rostri del Foro Romano" in the Atti delV Acca- demia Rom. di Archeolnr/ia, viii. p. 107, seq. ; cf. Becker, Ilaiulluch, p. 359). It seems also to have been here that Augustus received the homage of Tilierius, when the latter was celebrating his German triumph: "Ac priusquam in Capitolium flecteret, descendit e curru, seque praesidenti patri ad genua submisit." (Suet. Tib. 20.) The scene is represented on the large Vienna Cameo. (Eckhel, Pierres gra- vees, 1 ; Mongez, Iconogr. Rom. 19, vol. ii. p. 62.) If these inferences are just the ancient rostra would appear to have been used occasionally after the erec- tion of the new ones. The Statues of Sulla and Pompey, of which the former appears to have been a gilt equestrian one, were re-erected near the new rostra, as they had for- merly stood by the old ones. After the battle of Phar- salus they were both removed, but Caesar replaced them. Besides these there were two Stattjes of Caesar, and an equestrian Statue of Octayian. (Dion Cass. xlii. 18, xliii. 49, xliv. 4; Suet. Caes. 75: App. 5. C.i. 97.) Caesar also began the large basilica on the S. side of the foram, called after him the Basilica Julia; but, like most of his other works, he left it to be finished by Augustus (" Forum Julium et Basilicam quae fuit inter aedem Castoris et aedeni Saturni, coepta profligataque opera h, patre meo perfeci," Mon. Ancyr.). Its situation is here so accurately fixed PvO:IA, 793 that it cannot possibly be mistaken, namely, between the temple of Saturn, which, as we have seen, stood at the head of the forum, and the temple of Castor, which lay near that of Vesta; and the Notitia indi- cates the same position; so that it must have been situated between the Vicus Jugarius and Vicus Tuscus. It has been seen before that this was the site of the ancient Basilica Sempronia, a building of which we hear no more during the imperial times ; whence it seems probable that it was either pulled down by Caesar in order to erect his new basilita upon the site, or that it had previously gone to ruin. And this is confirmed by the fact that, in the exca- vations made in 1780, it was ascertained that the basilica was erected upon another ancient foundation, which Canina erroneously supposes to have been that of the comitium. (Fredenheiin,£'a-^os^ d'une Dtcou- vertefaite dans le Forum Romain, Strasbourg, 1796; Fea, Varieta di Notizie e della Basilica Giulia ed alcuni Siii del Foro Romano, ap. Canina, Foro Ro- mano, p. 118.) In some excavations made in 1835 near the column of Phocas, another proof of the site of the basilica was discovered. It was the following fragment of an inscription, which taken by itself seems too mangled and imperfect to prove anything: . . . A . . . ASILICA . . . ER REPARATAE . . . SET ADIECIT. It was recollected, however, that this must be the fragment of an inscription discovered in the 16th century at this .spot, which is recorded by Grutcr (clxxi. 7) and by Panvinius in his De- scriptio Urhis Ronnie (Graevius, iii. p. 300). The two inscriptions, when put in juxta-position, appear as follows : — ASILICA . . Ell KEPARATAE SET ADIECIT thus leaving no doubt that they were the same. (^Bulletlino dell' hist. Marzo, 1835) PanvLiiius, whose work was written in 1558, as appears from the dedicatory epistle, says that the inscription was f lund " paulo ante in foro Romano prope columnam," that is, the column of Phocas. The basis on which it stood must therefore have been again covered with rubbish, till the inscription was re-discovered in its more imperfect form after a lapse of nearly three centuries. Anulinus and Fronto were consuls A. d. 199, and consequently in the reign of Septimius Severus, when the basilica appears to have been repaired. Altogether, therefore, the site of the basilica may be considered as better ascertained than these of most of the imperfect monuments. It must have been bounded on the E. and V., like the basilica Sempronia, by the Vicus Tuscus and the Vicus Jugarius. It appears from the Monumentiim Ancy- runum that the original building, begun by Caesar, and completed by Augustus, was burnt down during the reign of the latter, and again rebuilt by him on a larger scale, with the design that it should be dedicated in the names of his grandsons Caius and Lucius (" Et eandem basilicam consumptam incendio ampliato ejus solo sub titulo nominis filiorum G.VHINIUS VETTIUS PROIilASUS . V. C. PRAEF. VRB STATUAJI QVAE BASILICAE IVLIAE A SE NOVITER EEPARATAE . ORNAMENTO ESSET ADIECIT DEDIC . XV. KAL . FEBRVARI PVBLICORVAI CORNELIO ANNVI.INO fl ET. AVFID . FRONTONE COS. [meorum] inchoavi et, si vivus non perfecissem, |)erfici ab heredibus [meis jussi]." But, from a supplement of the same inscription recently disco- vered, it appears that Augustus lived to complete the work (" Opera fecit 7iova — forum Augustum, Ba- silicam Juliam," etc. ; Franz, in Gerhard's Archiwlog. Zeit. No. ii. 1843). Nevertheless it seems to have anciently borne the names of his grandsons; " Quac- dam etiam opera sub nomine alieno, nepotum scilicet et uxoris sororisque fecit: ut porticum basilieamquo Lucii et Caii, &c." (Suet. Aug. 29). The addition which Augustus mentions having m.sde to tho building (" ampliato ejus solo") may probably have been the portico here mentioned. In A. d. 282 it was again destroyed by fire, and was rebuilt by Diocletian (Catul. Imp. Vienn. p. 247, Rone.) The Basilica Julia was chiefly used for the sitting.^ of law-courts, and especially for the causae centum- virales (Plin. Epint. v. 21, ii. 14.) Its immen.sc size maybe inferred from another pas.sage in Pliny (vi. 33), from which we learn that 180 judices, divided into 4 concilia, or courts, with 4 separate tribunals, and numerous benches of advocates, besides a large con- course of spectators, both mon and women, were accus- tomed to assemble here. The 4 tribunals are also mentioned by Quintilian {In. Or. xii. 5, 6).
