1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Rome

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

ROME (Roma), the capital of the modern kingdom of Italy, in the province of Rome, on the river Tiber, 17 miles N.E. from its mouth on the Mediterranean. As formerly the centre of the ancient Roman republic and of the Roman empire, and the headquarters of the Christian Church, Rome is unique among historical cities, and its antiquarian interest far surpasses that of any other locality in the world. In the following account the general subject of Rome is treated broadly under two aspects, themselves subdivided. These are:—(1) the topography and growth of the city of Rome, the evolution of which is traced from the earliest times to the present, and (2) Roman history, i.e. the political and social history of the Roman republic, empire and medieval commune.

The nine or ten hills and ridges on which the city stands are formed of masses of tufa or conglomerated sand and ashes thrown out by neighbouring volcanoes now extinct, but active down to a very recent period. One group of these volcanoes is that around Lago Bracciano, while another, still nearer to Rome, composes the Alban Hills. That some at least of these craters have been in a state of activity at no very distant period has been shown by the discovery at many places of broken pottery and bronze implements below the strata of tufa or other volcanic deposits. Traces of human life have even been found below that great flood of lava which, issuing from the Alban Hills, flowed towards the site of Rome, only stopping about 13 miles short, by the tomb of Cecilia Metella.

The superficial strata on which Rome is built are of three main kinds: (1) the plains and valleys on the left bank of the Tiber are covered, as it were, by a sea of alluvial deposits, in the midst of which (2) the hills of volcanic origin rise like so many islands; and (3) on the right bank of the Tiber, around the Janiculan and Vatican Hills, are extensive remains of an ancient sea-beach, conspicuous in parts by its fine golden sand and its deposits of greyish white potter’s clay. From its yellow sand the Janiculan has been sometimes known as the Golden Hill, a name which survives in the church on its summit called S. Pietro in Montorio (Monte d'Oro). In addition to these three chief deposits, at a few places, especially in the Aventine and Pincian Hills, under-strata of travertine crop out—a hard limestone rock, once in solution in running water, and deposited gradually as the water lost its carbonic-acid solvent, a process still rapidly going on at Terni, Tivoli and other places in the neighbourhood. The conditions under which the tufa hills were formed have been very various, as is clearly seen by an examination of the rock at different places. The volcanic ashes and sand of which the tufa is composed appear in parts to lie just as they were showered down from the crater; in that case it shows but little sign of stratification, and consists wholly of igneous products. In parts time and pressure have bound together these scoriae into a soft and friable rock; in other places they still lie in loose sandy beds and can be dug out with the spade. Other masses of tufa again show signs either of having been deposited in water, or else washed away from their first resting-place and redeposited with visible stratifications; this is shown by the water-worn pebbles and chips of limestone rock, which form a conglomerate bound together by the volcanic ashes into a sort of natural cement. A third variety is that which exists on the Palatine Hill. Here the shower of red-hot ashes has evidently fallen on a thickly growing forest, and the burning wood, partly smothered by the ashes, has been converted into charcoal, large masses of which are embedded in the tufa rock. In some places charred branches of trees, their form well preserved, can be easily distinguished. The so-called “wall of Romulus” is built of this conglomerate of tufa and charred wood; a very perfect section of the branch of a tree is visible on one of the blocks by the Scalae Caci.

So great have been the physical changes in the site of Rome since the first dawn of the historic period that it is difficult now to realize what its aspect once was. The Forum Romanum, the Velabrum, the great Campus Martius (now the most crowded part of modern Rome), and other valleys were once almost impassable marshes or pools of water (Ov. Fasti, vi. 401; Dionys. ii. 50). The draining of these valleys was effected by means of the great cloacae, which were among the earliest important architectural works of Rome (Varro, Ling. Lat. iv. 149); Again, the various hills and ridges were once more numerous and very much more, abrupt than they are now. At an early period, when each hill was crowned by a separate village fort, the great object of the inhabitants was to increase the steepness of its cliffs and render access difficult. At a later time, when Rome was united under one government, the very physical peculiarities which had originally made its hills so populous, through their natural adaptability for defence, became extremely inconvenient in a united city, where architectural symmetry and splendour were above all things aimed at. Hence the most gigantic engineering works were undertaken: tops of hills were levelled, whole ridges cut away, and gentle slopes formed in the place of abrupt cliffs. The levelling of the Velia and the excavation of the site for Trajan’s forum are instances of this. The same works were continued in the middle ages, as when in the 14th century an access was made to the Capitoline Arx[1] from the side of the Campus Martius; up to that time a steep cliff had prevented all approach except from the side of the Forum.

Finally, after Rome had become the capital of united Italy, in the last quarter of the 19th century, an extensive government plan (piano regulatore) was gradually carried out, with the object of reducing hills and valley to a uniform level and constructing wide boulevards on the chessboard method of a modern American city. The constant fires which have at times devastated Rome have been a powerful agent in obliterating the natural contour of the ground; and the accumulated rubbish from this and other causes has in some places overlaid the ground to a depth of 40 ft., notably in the valleys.

The Ancient City

The chief building materials used in ancient Rome may be enumerated as follows: (1) Tufa, the “ruber et niger tophus” of Vitruvius (ii. 7), varying in colour from warm Building materials. brown to yellow or greyish green (called capellaccio). The Aventine, Palatine and Capitoline Hills contained quarries of the tufa, much worked at an early period (see Liv. xxvi. 27, xxxix. 44, and Varro, L.L. iv. 151). It is a very bad “weather-stone,” but stands well if protected with stucco (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 166). (2) Lapis Albanus, from Alba Longa, of volcanic origin, a conglomerate of ashes, gravel and fragments of stone; its quarries are still worked at Albano and Marino. This is now called peperino, from the black scoriae, like peppercorns, with which the brown conglomerate mass is studded. (3) Lapis Gabinus, from Gabii, very similar to the last, but harder and a better weather-stone; it contains large lumps of broken lava, products of an earlier eruption, and small pieces of limestone. According to Tacitus (Ann. xv. 43), it is fire-proof, and this is also the case with the Alban stone. Lapis Gabinus is now called sperone. (4) Silex (mod. selce), a lava from the now extinct volcanoes in the Hills, used for paving roads; when broken into small pieces and mixed with lime and pozzolana it formed an immensely durable concrete. It is dark grey, very hard and breaks with a slightly conchoidal fracture (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 135; Vitr. ii. 7), but does not resemble what is now called silex or flint. (5) Lapis Tiburtinus (travertine), the chief quarries of which are at Tibur (Tivoli) and other places along the river Anio; a hard pure carbonate of lime, of a creamy white colour, deposited from running or dripping water in a highly stratified form, with frequent cavities and fissures lined with crystals. As Vitruvius (ii. 5) says, it is a good weather-stone, but is soon calcined by fire. If laid horizontally it is very strong, but if set on end its crystalline structure is a great source of weakness, and it splits from end to end. Neglect on the part of Roman builders of this important precaution in many cases caused a complete failure in the structure. This was notably the case in the rostra. (6) Pulvis Puteolanus (pozzolana), so called from extensive beds of it at Puteoli—a volcanic product, which looks like red sandy earth, and lies in enormous beds under and round the city of Rome. When mixed with lime it forms a very strong hydraulic cement, of equal use in concrete, mortar or undercoats of stucco. It is to this material that the concrete walls of Rome owe their enormous strength and durability, in many cases far exceeding those of the most massive stone masonry. Vitruvius devotes a chapter (bk. ii. ch. 6) to this very important material.

Bricks were either sun=dried (lateres crudi) or kiln-baked (lateres cocti, testae). The remarks of Vitruvius (ii. 3) seem to refer wholly to sun-dried bricks, of which no examples now exist in Rome. It is important to recognize the fact that among the existing ancient buildings of Rome there is no such thing as a brick wall or a brick arch in the true sense of the word; bricks were merely used as a facing to concrete walls and arches and have no constructional importance.[2] Concrete (opus caementicium, Vitr. ii. 4, 6, 8), the most important of all the materials used, is made of rough pieces of stone, or of fragments of marble, brick, &c., averaging from about the size of a man's fist and embedded in cement made of lime and pozzolana-forming one solid mass of enormous strength and coherence. Stucco, cement and mortar (tectorium, opus albarium and other names) are of many kinds; the ancient Romans especially excelled in their manufacture. The cement used for lining the channels of aqueducts (opus signinum) was made of lime mixed with pounded brick or potsherds and pozzolana; the same mixture was used for doors under the “nucleus” or finer cement on which the mosaic or marble paving-slabs were bedded, and was called caementum ex testis tunsis. For walls, three, or four coats of stucco were used, often as much as 5 in. thick altogether; the lower coats were of lime and pozzolana, the finishing coats of powdered white marble (opus albarium) suitable to receive painting. Even marble buildings were usually coated with a thin layer of this fine white stucco, nearly as hard and durable as the marble itself—a practice also employed in the finest buildings of the Greeks—probably because it formed a more absorbent ground for coloured decoration; stone columns coated in this way were called “columnae dealbatae” (Cic. In Verr. ii. 1, 52 seq.). For the kinds of sand used in mortar and stucco, Vitruvius (ii. 4) mentions sea, pit and river sand, saying that pit sand is to be preferred.

Marble appears to have come into use about the beginning of the

1st century B.C. Its introduction was at first viewed with great Decorative materials. jealousy, as savouring of Greek luxury. The orator Crassus was the first to use it in his house on the Palatine, materials built about 92 B.C.; and, though he had only six small columns of Hymettian marble, he was for this luxury nicknamed the “Palatine Venus” by the stern republican M. Brutus (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 7). The temporary wooden theatre of the aedile M. Aemilius Scaurus, built in 58 B.C., appears to have been the first building in which marble was more largely used; its 360 columns and the lower order of its scena were of Greek marble (see Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 5, 50). In a very few years, under the rule

of Augustus, marble became very common.[3]
Of white statuary marble four principal varieties were used.

(1) Marmor Lunense, from Luna, near the modern Carrara (Strabo, v. p. 222), is of many qualities, from the purest creamy white and the finest grain to the coarser sorts disfigured with bluish grey streaks. (Ex., the eleven Corinthian columns-in the Borsa.) (2) Marmor Hymettium, from Mount Hymettus, near Athens, is coarser in grain than the best Luna marble and is usually marked with grey or blue striations (Strabo ix. p. 399). (Ex., the forty-two columns in the nave of S. Maria Maggiore and the columns in S. Pietro in Vincoli.) (3) Marmor Pentelicum, from Mount Pentelicus, also near Athens, is very fine in grain and of a pure white; it was more used for architectural purposes than for statues, though some sculptors preferred it above all others, especially Pheidias and Praxiteles. (Ex., the bust of the young Augustus in the Vatican.) (4) Marmor Parium, from the Isle of Paros, is very beautiful, though coarse in texture, having a very crystalline structure. (Ex., the nineteen columns of the round temple in the Forum Boarium.)

Nine chief varieties of coloured marbles were used in Rome. (1) Marmor Numidicum (mod. giallo antico; Plin. H.N. v. 22), Coloured marbles. from Numidia and Libya, hence also called Libycum, is of a rich yellow, deepening to orange and even pink. Enormous quantities of it were used, especially for columns, wall-linings and pavements. (Ex., seven columns on the arch of Constantine, taken from the arch of Trajan; the eighth column is in the Lateran basilica.) (2) Marmor Carystium (mod. cipollino), from Carystus in Euboea (Strabo x. p. 446), has alternate wavy strata of white and pale green—the “undosa Carystos” of Statius (Silv. i. 5, 34). From its well-defined layers like an onion (cipolla) is derived its modern name. (Ex., columns of temple of Antoninus and Faustina.) (3) Marmor Phrygium or Synnadicum (mod. pavonazzetto), from Synnada in Phrygia (Strabo xii. p. 577; Juv. xiv. 307; Tibull. iii. 3, 13), is a slightly translucent marble, with rich purple markings, violet verging on red. It was fabled to be stained with the blood of Atys (Stat. Silv. i. 5, 37). (Ex., twelve fluted columns in S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, and four columns in the apse of S. Paolo fuori, saved from the ancient nave of the basilica, burnt in 1823.) (4) Marmor Iasium (probably the modern porta santa), from Iasus, is mottled with large patches of dull red, olive green and white. The “holy doors” of the four great basilicas are framed with it, hence its modern name. (Ex., the slabs in front of the hemicycle of the Rostra and four columns in S. Agnese fuori le Mura). (5) Marmor Chium (probably the modern Africano), from Chios, is similar in the variety of its markings to the portasanta, but more brilliant in tint. (Ex., a great part of the paving of the Basilica Julia and two large columns in the centre of the façade of St Peter's.) (6) Marmor Taenarium (mod. rosso antico), from Taenarum in Laconia (Strabo viii. p. 367; Pliny, H.N. xxxvi. 158), is a very close-grained marble, of a rich deep red, like blood. As a rule it does not occur in large pieces, but was much used for small cornices and other mouldings in interiors of buildings. Its quarries in Greece are still worked. (The largest pieces known are the fourteen steps to the high altar of S. Prassede and two columns nearly 12 ft. high in the Rospigliosi Casino dell' Aurora.) (7) The name Mormor Taenarium is also applied by the ancients to a black marble (nero antico) now no longer quarried. It is mentioned by Tibullus (iii. 3, 14) in conjunction with Phrygian and Carystian marbles; see also Prop. iii. 2, 9, and Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 135., (Ex., two columns in the choir of S. Giovanni in Laterano.) (8) Lapis Atracius (verde antico), found at Atrax in Thessaly, was one of the favourite materials for decorative architecture; it is not strictly a marble (i.e. a calcareous stone) but a variety of “precious serpentine,” with patches of white and brown on a brilliant green ground. It seldom occurs in large masses. (The finest known specimens are the twenty-four columns beside the niches in the nave of the Lateran basilica.) (9) The hard oriental alabaster, the “onyx” or “alabastrites” of Pliny (H.N. xxxvi. 59, xxxvii. 109); its chief quarries were on the Nile, near Thebes,[4] in Arabia and near Damascus. In Pliny's age it was a great rarity; but in later times it was introduced in large quantities, and fragments of a great many columns have been found on the Palatine, in the baths of Caracalla and elsewhere. It is semi-transparent and beautifully marked with concentric nodules and wavy strata. An immense number of other less common marbles have been found, including many varieties of

breccia, whose ancient names are unknowns.[5]
From the latter part of the 1st century B.C. hard stones—granites

and basalts—were introduced in great quantities. The Granites and basalts. basalts—“basanites” of Pliny (xxxvi. 58)—are very refractory, and can only be worked by the help of emery or diamond dust. The former was obtained largely at Naxos; diamond-dust drills are mentioned by Pliny (H.N. xxxvii. 200). The basalts are black, green and brown, and are usually free from spots or markings; examples of all three exist, but are comparatively rare. The red variety called “porphyry” was used

in enormous quantities. It is the “porphyrites” of Pliny (H.N.

xxxvi. 57), and was brought from Egypt. It has a rich red ground, covered with small specks of white felspar; hence it was also called "leptopsephos." A large number of columns of it exist, and it was much used for pavements of opus Alexandrinum. A rich green porphyry or basalt was also largely used, but not in such great masses as the red porphyry. It has a brilliant green ground covered with rectangular light green crystals of felspar. This is the lapis Lacedaemonius (wrongly called by the modern Romans "serpentine"), so named from its quarries in Mount Taÿgetus in Lacedaemonia (Paus. iii. 21, 4; Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 55; Juv. xi. 175). It appears to have been mostly used for pavements and panels of wall linings. The granites used in Rome came mostly from near Philae on the Nile (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 63). The red sort was called lapis pyrrhopoecilus and the grey lapis psaronius. The columns in the Basilica Ulpia are a fine example of the latter; both sorts are used for the columns of the Pantheon and those of the temple of Saturn in the Forum. Gigantic ships were specially made to carry the obelisks and other great monoliths (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 2, 67).

The style of architecture employed in ancient Rome (see Architecture, section Roman, and Roman Art) may be Architectural styles. said to have passed through three stages—the Etruscan, the Greek and the Roman. During the first few centuries of the existence of the city, both the methods of construction and the designs employed appear to have been purely Etruscan. The earliest temples were either simple cellae without columns, or else, in the case of the grander temples, such as that of Capitoline Jupiter, the columns were very widely spaced (araeostyle), and consequently had entablatures of wooden beams. The architectural decorations were more generally in gilt bronze or painted terra-cotta than in stone, and the paintings or statues which decorated the buildings were usually the work of Etruscan artists.[6] The Greek influence is more obvious; it is found in the period following the Second Punic or Hannibalic War, and almost all the temples of the earlier imperial age are Greek, with certain modifications, not only in general design but in details and ornaments. Greek architects were largely employed, such as Apollodorus of Damascus, who designed Trajan's forum and other buildings; on the other hand, a Roman, Cossutius, was employed on the building of the Olympieum at Athens, in the 2nd century B.C. Roman architects such as Vitruvius and C. Mucius in the 1st century B.C., Severus and Celer under Nero, and Rabirius under Domitian, were Greek by education, and probably studied at Athens (see Vitr. vii. Praef.; Hirt, Gesch. d. Baukunst, ii. p. 257).[7] The Romans, however, though far below the Greeks in artistic originality, were very able engineers, and this led to the development of a new and more purely Roman style, in which the restrictions imposed by the use of the stone lintel were put aside and large spaces were covered with vaults and domes cast in semi-fluid concrete, a method which had the enormous advantage of giving the arched form without the constant thrust at the springing which makes true arches or vaults of wide span so difficult to deal with. The enormous vaults of the great thermae, the basilica of Constantine, and the like, cover their spaces with one solid mass like a metal lid, giving the form but not the principle of the arch, and thus allowing the vault to be set on walls which would at once have been thrust apart had they been subjected to the immense leverage which a true arched vault constantly exerts on its imposts.[8] This is a very important point, and one which is usually overlooked, mainly owing to the Roman practice of facing their concrete with bricks, which (from an examination of the surface only) appear to be a principal item in the construction. The walls of the Pantheon, for example, are covered with tiers of brick arches, and many theories have been invented as to their use in distributing the weight of the walls. But a recognition of the fact that these walls are of concrete about 20 ft. thick, while the brick facing averages scarcely 6 in. in thickness, clearly shows that these "relieving arches" have no more constructional use as far as concerns the pressure than if they were painted on the surface of the walls. The same applies to the superficial use of brick in all arches and vaults. Although, however, the setting of the concrete rendered the brick facing superfluous, it played its part in sustaining the fluid mass on its centring during the process of solidification.

EB1911 Rome - Example of Construction.jpg

Fig. 1.—Example of Construction in which many materials are used; upper part of one of the inner radiating walls under the cunei of the Colosseum. A, A. Marble seats on brick and concrete core, supported on vault made of pumice-stone concrete (C). B. Travertine arch at end of raking vault (C). D. One of the travertine piers built in flush with the tufa wall to give it extra strength. E, E. Wall of tufa concrete faced with triangular bricks, carrying the vaults of pumice concrete which support the marble seats. F. Travertine pier at end of radiating wall. G. Brick-faced arch of concrete to carry floor of passage. H, H. Tufa wall, opus quadratum. J, J, J. Line of steps in next bay. K, K. Surface arches of brick, too shallow to be of any constructional use, and not meant for ornament, as the whole was stuccoed; they only face the wall (which is about 4 ft. thick) to the average depth of 4 in.

At first tufa only was used in opus quadratum, as we see in the so-called wall of Romulus. Next the harder peperino began to be Opus quadratum. worked: it is used, though sparingly, in the "Servian" wall, and during the later Republic appears to have been largely employed for exterior walls or points where there was heavy pressure, while other parts were built of tufa. Thirdly, travertine appears to have been introduced about the 2nd century B.C., but was used at first for merely ornamental purposes, very much as marble was under the Empire; after about the middle of the 1st century A.D. travertine began to be largely used for the solid mass of walls, as in the temple of Vespasian and the Colosseum. The tufa or peperino blocks were roughly 2 (Roman) ft. thick in regular courses (the "isodomum" of Vitruvius) by 2 ft. across the end, and under the Republic often exactly 4 ft. long, so that two blocks set endways ranged with one set lengthways. They were arranged in alternate courses of headers and stretchers, so as to make a good bond; this is the "emplecton" of Vitruvius (ii. 8). The so-called Tabularium of the Capitol is a good example of this. The harder and more valuable travertine was not cut in this regular way, but pieces of all sizes were used, just as they happened to come from the quarry, in order to avoid waste: blocks as much as 15 by 8 ft. were used, and the courses varied in thickness—the "pseudisodomum" of Vitruvius. When tufa or peperino was mixed with the travertine, it was cut so as to range with the irregular courses of the latter.

It is interesting to note the manner in which the Roman builders mixed their different materials according to the weight they had to carry. While tufa was frequently used for the main walls, peperino (e.g. in the "Servian" wall on the Aventine) or travertine (e.g. in the forum of Augustus and the temple of Fortuna Virilis, so called) was inserted at points of special pressure, such as piers or arches (see fig.). The Colosseum is a particularly elaborate example of this mixed construction with three degrees of pressure supported by three different materials.

EB1911 Rome - ancient map.jpg
Based on Plan in Kiepert's Formae Orbis Antiqui, by permission of Dietrich Reimer, Berlin. Emery Walker sc.

The use of mortar with opus quadratum is a sign of a comparatively

early date. It occurs, e.g. in the “Servian” wall on the Aventine Mortar. and in the Tabularium. Under the Empire massive blocks, whether of tufa, travertine or marble, are set without any mortar. It must, however, be observed that in these early instances the “mortar” is but a thin stratum of lime, little thicker than stout paper, used not as a cement to bind the blocks together, but simply Clamps. to give the joints a smoothly fitting surface. The actual binding together was done by clamps and dowels, as well as by the mass and weight of the great blocks used. Except in the earliest masonry, each block was very carefully fastened, not only to the next blocks on the same course, which was done with double dove-tailed dowels of wood, but also to those above and below with stout iron clamps, run with lead (Vitr. ii. 8).[9] In more ornamental marble work bronze clamps were often used. Concrete is rarely found in connexion with opus quadratum; part of the “Servian” wall on the Aventine received a backing of concrete at a relatively late period. Up to the 1st century B.C. it was faced with opus incertum—small irregularly shaped blocks of tufa, 3 to 6 in. across, with pointed ends riven into the concrete while it was soft, and worked smooth on the face only (see fig. 2). From the beginning Opus reticulatum. of the 1st century B.C. opus reticulatum,[10] formed of rectangular tufa prisms laid in a regular pattern like a net (whence the name), is found. It is very neat in appearance, and is often fitted with great care, though it was generally covered with stucco. The so-called “house of Livia” on the Palatine is a good example of the earlier sort, when the quoins were made of small rectangular blocks of tufa. Under the Empire brick quoins came into use (as may be seen, e.g. in the so-called palace of Caligula). Though in Rome opus reticulatum was almost always made of tufa, in the neighbourhood of the city it was sometimes of peperino or even lava, where these materials were

found on the spot.
EB1911 Rome - Concrete Walls (two sorts).jpg EB1911 Rome - Section of Concrete Wall.jpg
Fig. 2.—Concrete Wall

faced with (A) Opus Incertum and (B) Opus Reticulatum. C shows the

section, similar in both.
Fig. 3.—Section of Concrete Wall, showing the use of bricks merely as a facing.
Of concrete walls faced with burnt bricks no dated example

earlier than the middle of the 1st century B.C. is The facing Brick facing. consisted at first of triangular fragments of tiles (tegulae), broken for the purpose and more or less irregular in shape and size, but from the latter part of the 1st century A.D. onwards triangular bricks were specially manufactured for wall-facings. This shape was adopted in order to present a large surface on the face with little expenditure of brick, and also to improve the bond with the concrete behind (see fig. 4). Even party walls of small rooms are not built solid, but have a concrete core faced with brick triangles about 3 in. long. In order to support the facing until the concrete was set, the Roman builders used a wooden framing covered with planks on the inside. Sometimes the planks were nailed outside the wooden uprights, as was done with unfaced concrete walls, and then a series of grooves appear in the face of the brickwork. Walls faced with opus reticulatum must have been supported temporarily

in the same way.
The character of the brick facing is a great help towards determining

the date of Roman buildings. In early work the bricks are thick and the joints thin, while in later times the reverse is the case, so that brickwork of the time of Severus and later has more bricks to the foot than that of the Flavian period.

The length of the bricks as it appears on the face is no guide to the date, since one or more of the sharp points of the brick triangles were frequently broken off before they were used. Moreover, varieties both in quality of workmanship and size of the bricks often occur in work of the same date. In the remains of Nero's Golden House great varieties appear, and some of the walls in the inferior rooms are faced with very irregular and careless brickwork.[11] Special care and neatness were employed in the rare cases when the wall was not to be covered with stucco, which in the absence of marble was usually spread over both inside and outside walls. All these circumstances make great caution necessary in judging of dates; fortunately after the 1st century A.D., and in some cases even earlier, stamps impressed on bricks, and especially on the large tiles used for arches, give clearer indications. The reason of the almost universal use of smooth facings either of opus reticulatum or of brick over concrete walls is a very puzzling question; for concrete itself forms an excellent ground for the stucco coating or backing to the marble slabs, while the stucco adheres with difficulty to a smooth facing, and is very liable to fall away. The modern practice of raking out the joints to form a key was not employed by the Romans, but before the mortar was hard they studded the face of the wall with marble plugs and iron or bronze nails driven into the joints, so as to give a hold for the stucco—a great waste both of labour and material.[12] The quality of the mortar varies according to its date: during the 1st and 2nd centuries it is of remarkable hardness—made of lime with a mixture of coarse pozzolana of a bright red colour; in the 3rd century it began to be inferior in quality; and the pozzolana used

under the later Empire is brown instead of red.
EB1911 Rome - Example of Marble Lining.jpg
Fig. 4.—Example of Marble Lining, from

the Cella of the Temple of Concord. A. Slabs of Phrygian marble. B. Plinth moulding of Numidian “giallo.” C. Slab of cipollino (Carystian marble). D. Paving of porta santa. E and F. “nucleus” and “rudus” of concrete bedding. G, G. Iron clamps run with lead to fix marble lining. H. Bronze clamp.

J. Cement backing.
Concrete was at first always made of lumps of tufa; then travertine,

lava, broken bricks and even marble were used, in fact all Concrete walls and vaults. the chips and fragments of the mason's yard. Under the Empire the concrete used was made with travertine or lava for foundations, with tufa or broken bricks for walls, and with tufa or pumice-stone (for the sake of lightness) for vaults. Massive walls were cast in a mould; upright timbers, about 6 by 7 in. thick and 10 to 14 ft. long, were set in rows on each face of the future wall; planks 9 to 10 in. wide were nailed to them, so as to form a case, into which the semi-fluid mass of stones, lime and pozzolana was poured. When this was set the timbers were removed and refixed on the top of the concrete wall; then fresh concrete was poured in; and this process was repeated till the wall was raised to the required height. Usually such cast-work was only used for foundations and cella walls, the upper parts being faced with brick; but in some cases the whole wall to the top was cast in this way and the brick facing omitted. In strength and durability no masonry, however hard the stone or large the blocks, could ever equal these walls of concrete when made with hard lava or travertine, for each wall was one perfectly coherent mass, and could only be destroyed by a laborious process like that of quarrying hard stone from its native bed. Owing to this method of building the progress of the work from day to day can often be traced by a change in the look of the concrete. About 3 ft. appears

to have been the average amount of wall raised in a day.
Marble linings were fixed very firmly to the walls with long

clamps of metal, hooked at the end so as to hold in a hole made in Marble linings, &c. the marble slab. Fig. 4 gives an example, of the time of Marble Augustus, fixed against a stone wall. The blocks were usually marked in the quarry with a number, and often with the names of the reigning emperor and the overseer of the quarry. These quarry-marks are often of great value as

indications of the date of a building or statue.[13] Metropolitan

building acts, not unlike those of modern London, were enacted

by several of the emperors. These fixed the materials to be used, thickness of walls, minimum width of streets, maximum height allowed for houses, &c. After the great fire in Nero's reign, A.D. 64, an act was passed requiring the lower storeys of houses to be built with fire-proof materials, such as peperino or burnt brick.

Enormous accumulations of statues and pictures enriched Rome during its period of greatest splendour. In the first place, the Ancient works of art. numerous statues of the republican and even of the regal period were religiously preserved at a time when, from their archaic character, they must have been regarded rather as objects of sacred or archaeological interest than as works of art (Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 15 ff., xxxv. 19 ff.). Secondly came the large Graeco-Roman class, mostly copies of earlier Greek works, executed in Rome by Greek artists. To this class belongs most of the finest existing sculpture preserved in the Vatican and other museums. Thirdly, countless statues and pictures were stolen from almost every important city in Greece, Magna Graecia, Sicily and western Asia Minor. These robberies began early, and were carried on for many centuries. The importations included works of art by all the chief artists from the 5th century downwards. Long lists are given by Pliny (H.N. xxxiii.-xxxvi.), and pedestals exist with the names of Praxiteles, Timarchus, Polyclitus, Bryaxis and others. These accumulated works of sculpture were of all materials—gold and ivory (Suet. Tit. 2), of which seventy-four are mentioned in the catalogue of the Breviarium, many hundreds or even thousands of silver[14] (Plin. H.N. xxxiii. 151 f.), while those of gilt bronze and marble must have existed in almost untold numbers (Paus. viii. 46). Nor were the accumulated stores of Greek paintings much inferior in number; not only were easel pictures by Zeuxis, Apelles, Timanthes and other Greek artists taken, but even mural paintings were carefully cut off their walls and brought to Rome secured in wooden frames (Plin. H.N.

xxxv. 173, and compare ibid. 154).
EB1911 Rome - Example of Early Basalt Road.jpg
Fig. 4.—Example of Early Basalt Road by

the Temple of Saturn on the Clivus Capitolinus. A. Travertine paving. B. Polygonal basalt blocks. C. Concrete bedding. D. Rain-water gutter. The curb shown is taken from another

part of the road.

The roads were made of polygonal blocks of lava (silex), neatly fitted together and laid on a carefully prepared bed, Roads. similar to that used for mosaic paving (see Mosaic and Roads). Roads thus made were called viae stratae. A good specimen of Roman road-making, in which the blocks were fitted together with the utmost accuracy, is to be seen in a portion of the Clivus Capitolinus in front of the temple of Saturn (see fig. 5, which also shows the massive travertine curb which bordered the road; sometimes the curb was of lava). In 1901 the late and badly laid pavement of the Sacra Via on the ascent of the Velia was removed, and the earlier paving laid bare at a lower level. The original pavement of the Nova Via was exposed in 1904. Other well-preserved viae stratae are those leading up to the Palatine from the Summa Sacra Via and that which follows the curved line of shops in Trajan's forum.

The following is a list of the chief roads which radiated from

Rome:—(1) Via Appia issued from the Servian Porta Capena and the Aurelian P. Appia; from it diverged (2) Via Latina, which issued from the Aurelian P. Latina; (3) Via Labicana and (4) Via Tiburtina issued from the Servian P. Esquilina; from (3) diverged (5) Via Praenestina at the double arch of the Claudian aqueduct, now P. Maggiore, while (4) passed through the Aurelian, P. Tiburtina; (6) Via Nomentana and (7) Via Salaria issued from the Servian P. Collina and passed respectively through the Aurelian P. Nomentana and P. Salaria; (8) Via Flaminia issued from the Servian P. Fontinalis, and was called Via Lata for the first half-mile or more, then passed through the Aurelian P. Flaminia; (9) Via Aurelia, from the Transtiberine P. Aurelia; (10) Via Portuensis, from the Transtiberine P. Portuensis; (11) Via Ostiensis, from the Servian P. Trigemina and the Aurelian P. Ostiensis; (12) Via Ardeatina,

from the Servian P. Naevia and the Aurelian P. Ardeatina.

Remains of Prehistoric Rome.

It is evident from recent discoveries that the site of Rome was inhabited at a very early period.[15] Flint implements and remains of the Bronze Age have been found on the Aventine and elsewhere; and from the Early Iron Age onwards we have a continuous archaeological record, owing to the discovery of ancient burial-places. In 1902 a very early necropolis was brought to light at the S.E. corner of the temple of Antoninus and Faustina, some 17 ft. below the level of the Forum. The graves contain either the ashes of cremated bodies placed in a large vessel (dolio), or skeletons buried either in a simple trench (fossa), a tufa sarcophagus or a tree-trunk. The cremation graves are the earlier, and none are later than the 6th century, while the oldest maybe of the 9th; the pottery and other objects placed in the graves belong to the Early Iron Age. It is clear that this cemetery is earlier than the union of the Palatine and Quirinal settlements in one city (see below, p. 759). Other early cemeteries have been discovered on the Quirinal and Esquiline, which were in use from the beginning of the Iron Age down to the beginning of the historic period. The large necropolis on the Esquiline is cut in two by the “Servian” wall, which is evidently of later date. The later tombs contain objects of Etruscan, Phoenician and Greek manufacture.

There is no doubt that the earliest settlement bearing the name of Rome was on the Palatine hill,[16] which was both easy The Palatine city. of defence and possessed the means of communication with its neighbours in the proximity of the Tiber. The name Roma is said to mean “river,” but this is uncertain. The Palatine is roughly square in outline, and the Roman antiquarians sometimes applied the name Roma Quadrata to the earliest settlement; but the term seems more properly to have applied to a sanctuary connected with the foundation of the city. The ideal boundary of the city was formed by the Pomerium (see Varro, L.L. v. 143; Liv. i. 44; Dionys. i. 88), whose original course is traced by Tacitus (Ann. xii. 24). It passed along the foot of the hill (per ima montis Palatini), the angle-points being given by the Ara Maxima in the Forum Boanum, the Ara Consi in the Circus Maximus, the Curiae Veteres (near the arch of Constantine) and the Sacellum Larum (at the N. angle). But this was of course not a defensible site, and the extent of the fortified city can only be determined by the traces of its early walls. These enable us to fix its line along the whole valley of the Velabrum, on the west of the hill, and along the valley of the Circus Maximus as far as the so-called Paedagogium, about half-way on the south side.

Considerable remains of this fortification exist near the west angle

of the hill. These show that the natural strength given by the Ancient fortifications. cliff was increased by artificial means. The wall was set neither at the top nor at the foot of the hill, but more than half-way up, a level terrace or shelf all round being in the rock on which the base of the wall stood. Above that the hill was cut away into a cliff, not quite perpendicular but slightly “battering” inwards, to give greater stability to the wall, which was built up against it, like a retaining wall, reaching to the top of the cliff, and probably a few feet higher. The stones used in this wall are soft tufa, a warm brown in colour, and full of masses of charred wood. The cutting to form the steep cliff probably supplied part of the material for the wall; and ancient quarries, afterwards used as reservoirs for water, exist in the mass of rock on which the so-called temple of Jupiter Victor stands. It has been asserted that these tufa blocks are not cut but split with wedges; this, however,

is not the case. Tufa does not split into rectangular masses, but

would be shattered to pieces by a wedge; moreover, distinct

tool-marks can be seen on all the blocks whose surface is well preserved and in the quarries themselves. Chisels from one-fourth to three-fourths of an inch in width were used, and also a sharp-pointed pick or hammer. The wall is about 10 ft. thick at the bottom, and increases in thickness above as the scarped cliff against which it is built recedes. It is built of blocks laid in alternate courses of headers and stretchers, varying in thickness from 22 to 24 in., in length from 3 to 5 ft. and in width from 19 to 22 in. These blocks are carefully worked on their beds, but the face is left rough, and the vertical joints are in some cases open, spaces of nearly 2 in. being left between block and block; in other cases the vertical joints are worked true and close like the beds. No mortar was used. At two points on the side of the Velabrum winding passages are excavated in the tufa cliff, the entrance to which was once closed by the ancient wall. One of these in early times (before water in abundance was brought to the Palatine on aqueducts) was used as a reservoir to collect surface water, probably for use in case of siege; circular shafts for buckets are cut downwards through the rock from the top of the hill. A similar rock-cut cistern with vertical shafts, of very early date, exists at Alba Longa. Opposite the church of S. Teodoro a series of buttresses belonging to the early wall exists, partly concealed by a long line of buildings of the later years of the Republic and the early Empire, to make room for which the greater part of the then useless wall was pulled down, and only fragments left here and there, where they could be worked into the walls of the later houses.

The age of the walls here described cannot be determined with certainty, but their resemblance to the remains of the “Servian” wall, especially in the system of “headers and stretchers” and the dimensions of the blocks, makes it certain that they do not differ greatly in date from that work. The chief technical difference lies in the open vertical joints found in some cases; but too much stress should not be laid on this feature. There are, however, at the western angle of the hill some remains of an earlier fortification, constructed with blocks of grey-green tufa, smaller in size than those of the main wall. A few courses have been preserved, owing to the fact that at the angle of the hill this wall was encased first of all by that described above and afterwards by concrete substructures of imperial date. The technique is primitive, as the blocks are of irregular size and are not laid in courses of “headers and stretchers”; the nearest parallel is supplied by the foundations of the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. These remains are shown by Delbrück, Der Apollotempel auf dem Marsfelde, pl. iii., cf. p. 13 f.

Pliny (H.N. iii. 66) tells us that the city of Romulus had three gates (cf. Serv. Ad. Aen. i. 222); and three approaches to the Gates of Roma Quadrata. Palatine city can be traced. One is the so-called Scalae Caci, a long sloping ascent cut through the rock (see fig. 17) from the side of the Circus Maximus; some remains of the early wall still exist along the sides of this steep ascent or staircase. The upper part of this has remains of a basalt pavement, added in later times, probably covering the more ancient rock-cut steps. The name of the gate which led at this point into the Palatine city is unknown. The only two gates whose name and position can be (with any degree of probability) identified are the Porta Romanula and the Porta Mugonia. The former of these is called Porta Romana by Festus (ed. Müller, p. 262), who states that it was at the foot of the Clivus Victoriae (see fig. 17) and was so called by the Sabines of the Capitol because it was their natural entrance to Roma Quadrata (see also Varro, L.L. v. 164 (who only mentions the two gates named above), vi. 24). It would thus have been at the foot of the hill in the Velabrum (see below, p. 600); but Varro says that it was approached by steps from the Nova Via,[17] which would place it at the N. angle of the Palatine. The stairs connecting the Nova Via with the Clivus Victoriae still exist. Doubtful traces of the Porta Mugonia (see Sol. i. 24) have been discovered where a basalt paved road leads up into the Palatine from the Summa Sacra Via and the Summa Nova Via, which join near the arch of Titus; exposure to weather has now destroyed the soft tufa blocks of which this gate was built. This is probably the “vetus porta Palatii” of Livy (i. 12), through which the Romans fled when

defeated by the Sabines.
The Palatine settlement was the nucleus around which, by a series

of expansions, the historical city of Rome grew up. The first step Growth of early Rome. was the amalgamation of Roma Quadrata with the villages on the neighbouring spurs of the Esquiline and Caelian. This gave birth to the community of the Seven Hills, whose existence is proved by the survival of the festival known as the Septimontium, celebrated on the 11th of December (Fest. 340; Macrob. i. 16, 6). The seven hills were not those familiar in later nomenclature, but the following:—(1) Palatium and (2) Cermalus, the two summits of the Palatine; (3) Velia, the saddle between the Palatine and Esquiline; (4) Oppius and (5) Cispius, the two Westernmost spurs of the Esquiline, together with (6) Fagutal, the extreme crest of the Oppius; (7) Sucusa (confused by later writers with Subura), the eastern spur of the Caelian. Varro (L.L. v. 48) mentions the murus terreus Carinarum, which may have belonged to the defences of this community, since the N.W. slope of the Oppius bore the name Carinae; but there is no proo that the

Septimontium was a walled city.
The next stage in the development of Rome was marked by the

division of the city into four regions, ascribed by tradition to Servius Tullius,[18] who was said to have formed the four city tribes, corresponding with the regions: (1) Suburana, including the Caelian and the valley between that hill and the Esquiline; (2) Esquilina, the Oppius and Cispius; (3) Collina, the Quirinal and Viminal; (4) Palatina, including the Palatine and Velia. The third region was an addition to the City of the Seven Hills; the new city was, in fact, formed by the union of the old Latin settlement with a Sabine community on the Quirinal. The Capitol was the citadel, but was not included in the city (hence the phrase urbs et Capitolium).

Tradition likewise assigned to Servius Tullius[19] the construction of the great wall which embraced not merely the four regions but Line of Servian wall. a considerably extended area, including the Aventine. Excavations have done much to determine the line of the Servian wall, especially the great works undertaken in laying in out a new quarter of the city on the Quirinal, Esquiline and Viminal, which have laid bare and then mostly destroyed long lines of wall, especially along the agger. Beginning from the Tiber, which the Servian wall touched at a point near the present Ponte Rotto, and separating the Forum Holitorium (outside) from the Forum Boarium (inside), it ran in a straight line to the Capitoline hill, the two crests of which, the Capitolium and the Arx, with the intermediate valley the Asylum, were surrounded by an earlier fortification, set (Dionys. ix. 68) ἐπὶ λόφοις . . . καὶ πέτραις ἀποτόμοις. In this space there were two gates, the Porta Flumentana, next the river (see Cic. Ad Att. vii. 3; Liv. xxxv. 19, 21); and the Porta Carmentalis close to the Capitolium.[20] From the Capitoline hill the wall passed to the Quirinal along a spur of elevated ground, afterwards completely cut away by Trajan. Close to the Capitol was the Porta Fontinalis, whence issued the Via Lata. Remains of the wall and foundations of the gate exist in Via di Marforio. After passing Trajan's forum, we find remains of the walls on the slope of the Quirinal. A piece of the wall has been exposed in the new Via Nazionale, and also an archway under the Palazzo Antonelli, which may represent the Porta Sanqualis (see Festus, ed. Müller, p. 343). The Porta Salutaris (Festus, pp. 326-327) was also on the Quirinal, probably on the slope between the Trevi fountain and the royal palace. Its position is indicated by the existence of some tombs which give the line of the road. On the north-west of the Quirinal was the Porta Quirinalis (Festus, p. 254), probably near the “Quattro Fontane.” In the Barberini palace gardens, and especially in those of the Villa Barberini (Horti Sallustiani), extensive remains of the wall have been recently exposed and destroyed,—which was also the fate of that fine piece of wall that passed under the new office of finance, with the Porta Collina, which was not on the line of the present road, but about 50 yds. to the south (see Dionys. ix. 68; Strabo iv. p. 234). Thus far in its course from the Capitol the wall skirted the slopes of hills, which were once much more abrupt than they are now; but from the Porta Collina to the Porta Esquilina it crossed a large tract of level ground; and here its place was taken by the great agger described below. About the middle of it the Porta Viminalis was found in 1872; it stood, as Strabo (iv. p. 234) says, ὑπò μέσῳ τῷ χώματι, and from it led a road which passed through the Porta Chiusa (ancient name unknown) in Aurelian's wall. Foundations of the Porta Esquilina were found in 1875 close behind the arch of Gallienus. The further course of the wall across the valley of the Colosseum is the least known part of the circuit. Hence the wall skirts the slopes of the Caelian (where, as is probable, it was pierced by the Porta Caelemontana and Porta Querquetulana) to the valley along which the Via Appia passed through the Porta Capena, near the church of S. Gregorio. Its line along the Aventine is fairly distinct, and near S. Balbina and in the Vigna Torlonia are two of the best-preserved pieces (see below). There were three gates on the Aventine,—the Porta Naevia on the southern height, P. Raudusculana in the central depression, and P. Lavernalis on the northern summit. Under the Aventine it appears to have touched the river near the existing foundations supposed to be those of the Pons Sublicius. The Porta Trigemina was close by the bank. Hence to our starting-point the

river formed the defence of the city, with its massive quay wall.
The wall is built of blocks of tufa, usually the softer kinds, but

varying according to its position, as in most cases the stone used Its construction. was that quarried on the spot. In restorations a good deal of peperino is used. The blocks average from 23 to 24 in. in thickness—roughly 2 Roman feet—and are laid in alternate courses of headers and stretchers. The method

of construction varied according to the nature of the ground

traversed by the fortification. Where the wall followed the face of

the cliffs, as for instance on the Capitol and Quirinal, it was raised on an artificial shelf after the fashion employed on the Palatine (vide supra). In other places, where the slope was gentler, the wall was formed of rubble with revetments of opus quadratum, e.g. on the Aventine; finally, where the ground was flat, as on the plateau of the Esquiline, a ditch was dug and an embankment formed by the upcast; this agger, as it was called, was then faced with retaining walls of opus quadratum. The length of the agger on the Esquiline is put by Dionysius (ix. 68) at 7 stadia, which agrees, roughly speaking, with the discoveries made in 1876-1879, when the railway station was built and the new quarters laid out. The total length was about 4225 ft., the thickness of wall and agger about 50 ft., while the ditch was 100 Roman ft. in width and 30 in depth. There is, however, a difference in technique between the inner and outer retaining walls of the agger. The inner wall is built of greenish tufa in blocks of irregular size, while in the outer brown tufa is employed and the blocks are of standard size, two headers ranging with each stretcher. Between the railway station and the Dogana a fine lofty piece of the front wall remains, with traces of the Porta Viminalis and of the lower back wall. Unfortunately the whole of the bank or agger proper has been removed, and the rough back of the great retaining wall exposed. Both tufa and peperino are used, the latter in restored parts; the blocks vary in length, but average in depth the usual 2 Roman ft. The railway cutting, which has destroyed a great part of the agger, showed clearly the section of the whole work: the strata of different kinds of soil which appeared on the sides of the foss appeared again in the agger, but reversed as they naturally would be in the process of digging out and heaping up. Dionysius (ix. 68) states the length of the agger to have been 7 stadia—that is, about 1400 yds.—which agrees (roughly speaking) with the actual discoveries. Originally one road ran along the bottom of the foss and another along its edge; the latter existed in imperial times. But the whole foss appears to have been filled up, probably in the time of Augustus, and afterwards built upon; houses of mixed brick and opus reticulatum still exist against the outside of the great wall, which was itself used as the back wall of these houses, so that we now see painted stucco of the time of Hadrian covering parts of the wall of the kings. Another row of houses seems to have faced the road mentioned above as running along the upper edge of the foss, thus forming a long street. As early as the time of Augustus a very large part of the wall of the kings had been pulled down and built over, so that even then its circuit was difficult to trace (Dionys. iv. 13). A very curious series Masons' marks. of masons' marks exists on stones of the agger wall (as well as on those of some other early buildings). They are deeply incised, usually on the ends of the blocks, and average from 10 to 14 in. in length: some are single letters or monograms; others are numbers, e.g. ↓, the numeral 50. Fig. 6 shows the chief forms from the Palatine and


EB1911 Rome - Masons' Marks.jpg

Fig.—Masons' Marks on Early Walls.
There are also

extensive remains of the “Servian” wall on the Aventine, in the Via di Porta S. Paolo. Here the wall has a backing of concrete and the upper portion is built with blocks of peperino, set in mortar and bevelled at the edges. These are unmistakable signs that the wall has undergone restoration. This portion is pierced by an arch about 9½ ft. high, which probably served as an embrasure for a military engine. Finally, where the wall skirts the bank of the Tiber it is built in two sections—a foundation about 2 metres in height and 3 in width, which forms a landing-stage, and an upper wall, 6 metres high, which retains the bank. It is built of peperino, and is probably later than the rest of the fortification.

The age of this wall is uncertain, but it has been rendered exceedingly probable that it belongs to the 4th century B.C. The evidence for this is derived from the comparison of other fortifications in central Italy, from the measurements of the blocks employed, which presuppose the later Roman foot of 296 millimetres, and from the character of the alphabet from which the masons' marks are taken.[22] Livy (vi. 32) speaks of a contract entered into by the censors of 378 B.C. for the construction of a wall of opus quadratum, and this probably refers to the older portions of the existing wall,

which was built owing to the fear of a second Gallic invasion.[23]
The Servian city did not include what is now the most crowded

part of Rome, and which under the Empire was the most architecturally magnificent, namely, the Campus Martius, which was probably to a great extent a marsh. It was once called Ager Tarquiniorum, but after the expulsion of the Tarquins was named Campus Martius from an altar to Mars, dating from prehistoric times (Liv. ii. 5).

Of that wonderful system of massive arched sewers[24] by which, as Dionysius (iii. 68) says, every street of Rome was drained into Cloacas. the Tiber, considerable remains exist, especially of the Cloaca Maxima, which runs from the valley of the Subura, under the Forum along the Velabrum, and so into the Tiber by the round temple in the Forum Boarium; it is still in use, and well preserved at most places. Its mouth, an archway in the great quay wall nearly 11 ft. wide by 12 high, consists of three rings of peperino “voussoirs,” most neatly fitted. The rest of the vault and walls is built of mixed tufa and peperino.[25] Pliny (H.N., xxxvi. 104) gives an interesting account of what is probably this great sewer, big enough (he says) for a loaded hay-cart to pass along. The mouths of two other similar but smaller cloacae are still visible in the great quay wall near the Cloaca Maxima, and a whole network of sewers exists under a great part of the Servian city. Some of these are not built with arched vaults, but have triangular tops formed of courses of stone on level beds, each projecting over the one below—a primitive method of construction, employed in the Tullianum. The great quay wall of Great quay wall. tufa and peperino which lined the Tiber at the mouth of the Cloaca Maxima is also of early date. In later times this massive wall was extended, as the city grew, all along the bank of the Campus Martius, and, having lost its importance as a line of defence, had frequent flights of stairs built against it, descending to the river. Some of these are shown in one of the fragments of the marble plan (see Jordan, F.U.R. Frag. 169). In 1879 a travertine block was dredged up inscribed P. BARRONIVS . BARBA . AED . CVR . GRADOS . REFECIT, dating from the 1st

century B.C. This records the repair of one of these river stairs.[26]
The Tullianum is the earliest of the existing buildings of

Rome. Imprisonment as a punishment was unknown to Roman Tullianum and Carcer. law, and hence the Carcer, where criminals were detained pending trial, was of small dimensions. Its remains are preserved beneath the church of S Giuseppe dei Falegnami, and below them is the Tullianum, a dungeon where executions took place. It is partly cut in the tufa rock of the Capitoline hill and partly built of 2-ft. blocks of tufa, set with thin beds of pure lime mortar, in courses projecting one over the other. Its name is derived, not from Servius Tullius, as Varro (v. 151) asserts, but from an early Latin word, tullus, a spring of water; its original use was probably that of a cistern or well. It was closed by a conical vault, arched in shape, but not constructionally an arch—very like the so-called “treasury of Atreus” at Mycenae, and many early Etruscan tombs. When the upper room with its arched vault, also of tufa, was built the upper part of the cone seems to have been removed, and a flat stone floor (a flat arch in construction) substituted.[27] That its use as a cistern was abandoned is shown by the cloaca which leads from it, through the rock, to a branch of the Cloaca Maxima. This horrible place was used as a dungeon, prisoners being lowered through a hole in the stone floor—the only access. The present stairs are modern. The two chambers are vividly described by Sallust (Cat. 55). The entrance to the upper prison was on the left of the stairs leading up from the Forum to the Clivus Argentarius, the road to the Porta Fontinalis (see fig. 7, General Plan of Ancient Rome). Lentulus and the Catiline conspirators, as well as Jugurtha, Vercingetorix and other prisoners of importance, were killed or starved to death in this fearful dungeon, which is called τὸ βάραθρον by Plutarch (Marius, xii.). According to a doubtful tradition of the Catholic Church, St Peter was imprisoned in the Tullianum. The name Mamertine prison is of medieval origin. The front wall of the prison was restored in the reign of Tiberius A.D. 22, and bears this inscription on a projecting string-course—C. VIBIVS . C . F . RVFINVS . M . COCCEIV[S . M . F . NERVA]COS . EX . S . C.[28] The floor of the upper prison is about 16 ft. above the level of the Forum. The Capitol was approached

from the Carcer by a flight of steps—Scalae Gemoniae—on which

the bodies of criminals were exposed;[29] Pliny (H.N. viii. 145) calls it the “stairs of sighs” (gradus gemitorii).

Forum Romanum and Adjacent Buildings.

The Forum Romanum or Magnum, as it was called in late times to distinguish it from the imperial fora, occupies a valley which extends from the foot of the Capitoline hill to the north-west part of the Palatine. Till the construction of the great cloacae it was, at least in wet seasons, marshy ground, in which were several pools of water. In early times it was bounded on two sides by rows of shops and houses, dating from the time of the first Tarquin (Liv. i. 35). The shops on the south-west side facing the Sacra Via, where the Basilica Julia afterwards was built, were occupied by the Tabernae Veteres.[30] The shops on the northern side, being occupied by silversmiths, were called Tabernae Argentariae, and in later times, when rebuilt after a fire, were called Tabernae Novae (see Liv. xxvi. 27, xl. 51).[31] An altar to Saturn (Dionys. i. 34, vi. 1), traditionally set up by the companions of Hercules, and an altar to Vulcan, both at the end towards the Capitol, with the temple of Vesta and the Regia at the opposite end, were among the earliest monuments grouped around the Forum. The Lacus Curtius vanished, as Varro says (L.L. v. 148-49), probably with other stagnant pools, when the cloacae were constructed (Liv. i. 38, 56).[32] Another pool, the Lacus Servilius, near the Basilica Julia, was preserved in some form or other till the imperial period. Under Sulla it was used as a place to expose the heads of many senators murdered in his proscriptions (Cic. Rosc. Am. 32, 89; Seneca, De Prov. 3, 7). The Volcanal was an open area, so called from the early altar to Vulcan, and was (like the Comitium) a place of public meeting, at least during the regal period.[33] It was raised above the Comitium, and was a space levelled on the lower slope of the Capitoline hill behind the arch of Severus; the foundations of the altar were discovered in 1898. It was probably much encroached upon when the temple of Concord was enlarged in the reign of Augustus. Fig. 8 gives a carefully measured plan of the Forum, showing the most recent discoveries.

Unlike the fora of the emperors, each of which was surrounded

by a loft wall and built at one time from one design, the architectural form of the Forum Romanum was a slow growth. The marshy battlefield of the early inhabitants of the Capitol and Palatine became, when the ground was drained by the great cloacae, under a united rule the most convenient site for political meetings, for commercial transactions, and for the pageants of rich men's funerals, ludi scenici, and gladiatorial games.[34] For these purposes a central space, though but a small one, was kept clear of buildings; but it was gradually occupied in a somewhat inconvenient manner by an ever-accumulating crowd of statues and other honorary monuments. On three sides the limits of this open space are marked by paved roads, faced by the stately buildings which gradually took the place of the simple wooden tabernae and porticus of early times. The Comitium[35] was a level space in front of the Curia; the construction of both is ascribed to Tullus Hostilius. For the position of the Comitium and the Curia[36] see plan of Forum (fig. 8). Varro (L.L. v. 155-56) gives the following account of the buildings which were grouped along the northern angle of the Forum:—

“Comitium ab eo quod coibant eo comitiis curiatis et litium causa. Curiae duorum generum, nam et ubi curarent sacerdotes res divinas, ut Curiae Veteres, et ubi senatus humanas, ut Curia Hostilia, quod primum aedificavit Hostilius rex. Ante hanc Rostra; quojus loci id vocabulum, quod ex hostibus capta fixa sunt rostra. Sub dextra hujus a Comitio locus substructus, ubi nationum subsisterent legati qui ad senatum essent missi. Is Graecostasis appellatus a parte ut multa. Senaculum supra Graecostasim, ubi Aedis Concordiae et Basilica Opimia. Senaculum vocatum, ubi senatus, aut ubi seniores consisterent.”

The curia or senate-house passed through many vicissitudes.[37] At first called Curia Hostilia, from its founder Tullus Hostilius Curia. (Liv. i. 30), it lasted till 52 B.C., when it was burnt at the funeral of Clodius, and was then rebuilt by Faustus Sulla, and from his gens called Curia Cornelia (Dio Cass. xl. 50). It was again rebuilt by Julius Caesar, and dedicated by Augustus (B.C.) under the name of the Curia Julia, as recorded in the inscription of Ancyra (q.v.)—CVRIAM . ET . CONTINENS . EI . CHALCIDICVM . . . FECI. Little is known about the adjoining buildings called the Athenaeum and Chalcidicum; Dion Cassius (li. 22) mentions the group. In the reign of Domitian the Curia Julia was restored (Prosp. Aquit. p. 571), and it was finally rebuilt by Diocletian. The existing church of S. Adriano is the Curia of Diocletian, though of course much altered, and with its floor raised about 20 ft. above the old level. The level of the entrance was raised in the middle ages, and again in 1654. Sixteenth-century drawings and engravings show the lower level. The ancient bronze doors now at the end of the nave of the Lateran basilica originally belonged to this building, and were removed thence by Alexander VII. The brick cornice and marble consoles, covered with enriched mouldings in stucco, and the sham marble facing, also of stucco, if compared with similar details in the baths of Diocletian, leave no doubt as to this being a work of his time, and not, as was at one time assumed, the work of Pope Honorius I. (A.D. 625-38) who consecrated it as the

church of S. Adriano.
From the Curia a flight of steps led down to the Comitium (Liv. i.

36), a space consecrated as a templum according to the rules of augury Comitium. (Cic. De Or. iii. 3) and used for the meetings of the Comitia Curiata, and for certain religious ceremonies performed, after the fall of the monarchy, by the rex sacrificulus. It contained ancient monuments, relics, such as the ficus ruminalis, and the supposed tomb of Romulus, whose site was marked in later times by a “black stone” (lapis niger). Facing the Curia stood the platform from which speakers addressed the people, adorned in 338 B.C. with the beaks of the ships captured from the Latins at the naval victory of Antium and hence called the rostra. Caesar determined to remove the rostra from the Comitium to the Forum, and this plan was carried out after his murder. From the original rostra Cicero Original rostra. delivered his Second and Third Catiline Orations, and they were the scene of some of the most important political struggles of Rome, such as the enunciation of their laws by the Gracchi. Beside the Comitium another monument was erected, also adorned with beaks of ships, to commemorate the same victory at Antium. This was the Columna Maeniana, so called in honour of Maenius (Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 20, vii. 212). The Columna Duilia was a similar monument, erected in honour of the victory of C. Duilius over the Punic fleet in 260 B.C.; a fragment of it with inscription (restored in imperial times) is preserved in the Capitoline

Museum.[38] Columns such as these were called columnae rostratae.
In 1899-1900 the site of the Comitium—which was considerably

reduced in extent by the building of the later Curia—was excavated by Commendatore Boni, in some parts as far as the virgin soil.[39] Remains of walls and pavements of various periods (some very early) were discovered; some of the walls, there is no doubt, supported the platform of the early rostra, which appears to have been at first rectangular and at a later time curved. Opposite to the Curia is a square paved with black marble slabs, which it is natural to identify with the lapis niger of tradition. Beneath this pavement was found a group of early monuments, which were at some time destroyed and afterwards covered over. We are told on the authority of Varro that Romulus was buried in front of (or behind) the rostra, and that two lions were sculptured as guardians of his tomb; and we find in fact a foundation (D, fig. 9) from which project two moulded bases of tufa (A, B) on which the lions may well have stood, on either side of a block (C) which might serve as an altar. Beside this tomb (if such it be) stood the trunk of a tufa column (E) and a rectangular stele (F) which bears on all its faces an inscription written alternately upwards and downwards, so that only the ends of the lines can be read. That it is the earliest specimen of the Latin language is undoubted; and it certainly

mentions the rex. But after the expulsion of the kings the rex

sacrificulus performed his functions in the Comitium, and the

inscription may refer to him. This may be the stele to which Dionysius of Halicarnassus refers as marking the tomb of Hostus Hostilius (father of Tullus Hostilius) whose site (according to those who believed in the translation of Romulus to heaven) was marked

by the lapis niger.
The Senaculum appears to have been a place of preliminary

meeting for the senate before entering the Curia (Liv. xli. 27; Senaculum. Val. Max. ii. 2, 6); it adjoined the temple of Concord, Mum and when this was rebuilt on an enlarged scale in the reign of Augustus it appears probable that its large

projecting portico became the Senaculum.

EB1911 Rome - Early Monuments in the Comitium.jpg

Fig. 9.—Early Monuments in the Comitium.
A, B. Moulded tufa bases.

C. Base of altar (?).
D. Rectangular foundation.
E. Truncated column.
F. Stele with inscription.

G. Steps leading to platform of rostra.
The dotted line shows the position of the lapis niger.
A great part cf the north-east side of the Forum was occupied by

two basilicae, which were more than once rebuilt under different Basilicae in Forum. names. The first of these appears to have been adjacent to the Curia, on its west side; it was called the Basilica Porcia, and was founded by the elder Cato in 185 B.C. (see Liv. xxxix. 44, and Plut. Cato Major, 19); it was burnt with the Curia at Clodius's funeral. On the north side of the Forum another basilica, called Aemilia et Fulvia (Varro vi. 4), was built in 179 B.C. by the censors M. Fulvius and M. Aemilius Lepidus;[40] it stood, according to Livy (xl. 51), “post argentarias novas;” the line of silversmiths' shops along the north-east side of the Forum. In 50 B.C. it was rebuilt by L. Aemilius Paulus with Caesar's money (Plut. Caes. 29; Appian, Bell. Civ. ii. 26), and was more than once restored within the few subsequent years by members of the same family. Its later name was the Basilica Pauli, and it was remarkable for its magnificent columns of Phrygian marble (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 102) or pavonazzetto. Part of the western end was still standing in the 16th century, and was drawn by Giuliano da Sangallo (Huelsen, The Roman Forum, fig. 61). Recent excavations have shown that it was approached from the Forum by a flight of steps leading to a two-storeyed colonnade. Behind this was a row of tabernae in the middle of which was the entrance to the main hall, consisting in a nave and three aisles (two on the north

Near the middle of the north-east side of the Forum stood also

the small bronze temple of Janus,[41] the doors of which were shut Temple of Janus. on those rare occasions when Rome was at peace.[42] A first brass of Nero shows it as a small cella, with richly ornamented frieze and cornice. Another aedicula near that of Janus was the shrine of Venus Cloacina (or the Purifier),

on the line of the cloaca which runs under the Basilica Aemilia;

its foundations and plinth were brought to light in 1899 (Liv. iii. 48; Plin. H.N. xv. 119).

EB1911 Rome - The Roman Forum and the Sacra Via (left).jpg
From Baedeker's Central Italy, by permission of Karl Baedeker. Emery Walker sc.
Fig. 8.—The Roman Forum

EB1911 Rome - The Roman Forum and the Sacra Via (right).jpg
From Baedeker's Central Italy, by permission of Karl Baedeker. Emery Walker sc.
and the Sacra Via.

Fig. 8 shows plan of the rostra as they existed under the Empire.

We see an oblong platform about 78 ft. long and 11 ft. high above Existing rostra. the level of the Forum; its ground floor, paved with herring-bone bricks, is 2 ft. 6 in. below the Forum paving. Its end and side walls are of tufa blocks, 2 ft. thick and 2 ft. wide, each carefully clamped to the next with wooden dovetail dowels. Its floor was supported by a series of t raver tine piers, carrying travertine lintels, on which the floor slabs rested. Outside it was completely lined with Greek marble and had a richly moulded plinth and cornice; the front wall was restored in 1904, and the fragments of the cornice replaced. A groove cut in the top of the cornice shows the place where marble cancelli were fixed; one of the cornice blocks is partly without this groove, showing that the screen did not extend along the whole front of the rostra. This agrees with a relief on the arch of Constantine, representing the emperor making an oration from the rostra, with other buildings at this end of the Forum shown behind. In this relief the screen is shown with a break in the middle, so that the orator, standing in the centre, was visible from head to foot. Two tiers of large holes to hold the bronze rostra are drilled right through the tufa wall, and even through the travertine pilasters where one happens to come in the way; these holes show that there were nineteen rostra in the lower tier, and twenty above set over the intermediate spaces of the lower row. The back wall of the rostra is of concrete faced with brick. The inside space, under the main floor of the rostra, is coated thickly with stucco—the brick wall being studded

in the usual way with iron nails to form a key for the plaster.
Immediately behind the rostra is a curved platform approached

by steps from the side facing the Capitol. It has been much disputed Curved platform. whether this platform is earlier or later than the rostra; but the evidence of the construction at the point of juncture seems to show that the hemicycle is the earlier. When the arch of Severus was built, part of the platform of the rostra was cut away and a court of irregular shape was thus formed, from which the rostra was approached by steps. The front wall of the hemicycle was now exposed in its eastern half; this was faced with slabs of porta santa marble, pilasters of africano, and a moulded plinth of white marble, whose blocks bear the Greek characters Τ, Δ, Ε, Ζ, Η, Θ, Κ; the omissions make it clear that the blocks were removed from some other building. A number of holes in the marble, some of which contain fragments of metal pins, show that bronze ornaments were at onetime attached to the facing. The hemicycle has been identified (without sufficient reason) with the Graecostasis, a platform near the rostra reserved for foreign embassies (Varro, L.L. v. 155; Cic. Q.F. ii. 1), which continued to exist throughout the imperial period and was restored by Antoninus Pius (Vita 9, 2). It is, however, far more likely that it represents the original form of the rostra as removed to the Forum according to Caesar's design.[43] When the oblong platform was built (perhaps by Trajan) it was approached from the back by the hemicycle. The bronze rostra on the imperial structure were believed to be the original beaks from Antium, moved from the old rostra (Florus, i. 11). On its marble platform stood many statues,[44] e.g. of Sulla, Pompey, two of Julius Caesar, and others (Dio Cass., xlii. 18 and xliv. 4); these are represented on a bas-relief from the arch of Constantine. It is further commonly believed that the marble plutei which now stand in the centre of the Forum once decorated the rostra. Owing probably to the weight of the many statues proving too much for the travertine piers, which are not set on their natural beds but endways, and therefore are very weak, the structure seems to have given way at more than one time, and the

floor has been supported by piers and arches of brick-faced concrete,

inserted either in place of or at the sides of the shattered piers. These

later additions, apparently of the 3rd and 4th centuries, are omitted in fig. 8 for the sake of clearness. In or about A.D. 470 the façade of the rostra was prolonged northwards by an addition in very poor

brickwork, apparently to celebrate a naval victory over the Vandals.
At the northern end of the curved platform there is a cylindrical

structure of concrete faced with brick and lined with thin marble Umbilicus and Milliarum. slabs; it is in three stages, each diminishing in size, and appears to be an addition of about the time of Severus. This is usually identified with the Umbilicus Romae, or central point of the city, mentioned in the Notitia and the Einsiedeln MS. (Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom, ii. 655). Near the rostra, below the temple of Saturn, stood the Milliarium Aureum, a marble column sheathed in gilt bronze and inscribed with the names and distances of the chief towns on the roads which radiated from the thirty-seven gates of Rome (Plin. H.N. iii. 66). It was set up by Augustus in 20 B.C., and its position “sub aede Saturni” is indicate by Tacitus (Hist. i. 27; see schol. on Suet. Otho. 6, and Plut. Galba, 24). The Miliarium is mentioned in the Notitia (Reg. viii.) as being near the Vicus Jugarius. Its precise position cannot be determined. Fragments of a marble cylinder and cornice with floriated reliefs, now lying in front of the temple of Saturn, probably belonged to this monument; they were found

in 1835 near the supposed site.
The position of the temple of Saturn is indicated in Mon. Anc.

(see below, n. 6) and shown on the marble plan, and is also identified Temple of Saturn. by various passages in ancient writers. Varro (L.L. v. 42) speaks of it as being in faucibus Capitolii; Servius (Ad Aen. ii. 115) says that it is in front of the Clivus Capitolinus, and near the temple of Concord (see Plate VIII.). It was built against a steep slope or outlying part of the Capitoline hill[45] (cf. Dionys. i. 34) on the site of a prehistoric altar to Saturn, after whom the Capitoline hill was originally called Mons Saturnius. The public treasury was part of this temple (Serv. Ad Aen. ii. 116, and Macrob. Sat. i. 8). The original temple is said by Varro (ap. Macrob. i. 8) to have been begun by the last Tarquin, and dedicated by T. Larcius, the first dictator, 498 B.C.; but Dionysius (vi. 1) and Livy (ii. 21) attribute it to the consuls A. Sempronius and M. Minucius in 497 B.C. It was rebuilt on a larger scale by L. Munatius Plancus in 42 B.C. (Suet. Aug. 29). The only part remaining of this date is the very lofty podium of massive travertine blocks, and part of the lower course of Athenian marble, with which the whole was faced. In the 16th century a piece of the marble frieze was found, inscribed L . PLANCVS . L . F . COS . IMPER . ITER . DE . MANIB . (C. I. L. vi. 1316). The erection of the six granite columns in the front and two at the sides, with their clumsily patched entablature, bearing the inscription SENATVS . POPVLVSQVE . ROMANVS . INCENDIO . CONSVMTVM RESTITVIT, belongs to the last rebuilding in the time of Diocletian. Some of these fine columns are evidently earlier than this rebuilding, but were refixed with rude caps and bases. One of the columns is set wrong way up, and the whole work is of the most careless sort. Part of the inscription, once inlaid with bronze, recording this latest rebuild in, still exists on the entablature. On the Forum side the temple is flanked by the Vicus jugarius, while the steep Clivus Capitolinus winds round the front of the great flight of steps leading up to the cella, and then turns along the north-west side of the temple.[46] The Vicus Jugarius. Vicus Jugarius (see fig. 8), part of the basalt paving of which is now exposed, was so called (see Festus, ed. Müller, p. 104) from an altar to Juno Juga, the guardian of marriage. Starting from the Forum, it passed between the temple of Saturn and the Basilica Julia, then close under the cliff of the Capitolium (see Liv. xxxv. 21) and on to the Porta Carmentalis. It was spanned at its commencement by a brick-faced arch lined with marble, the lower part of which exists, and is not earlier than the 3rd or 4th century.[47] At this end of the Forum the arch of Tiberius was built beside the Sacra Via. It was erected in A.D. 17, to commemorate the recovery of the standards lost by Varus.[48]

The concrete foundation has recently been exposed.
The Basilica Julia[49] occupies a great part of the south-west side

Basilica Julia. of the Forum, along the line of the Sacra Via; its ends are bounded by the Vicus Jugarius and the Vicus Tuscus. It was begun by Julius Caesar, who dedicated it when still unfinished, on the 26th of September 46 B.C., completed by Augustus, and again rebuilt by him after a fire, as is recorded in Mon. Anc. 4, 13,[50] in an important passage which gives its complete early history. It consisted of a central hall with aisles, galleries and clerestory, surrounded on three sides by a colonnade in two storeys approached by steps; on the S.W. a row of rooms or tabernae took the place of the colonnade. The central nave was paved with richly coloured oriental marbles, namely pavonazzetto, cipollino, giallo and africano. The covered aisles are paved with large slabs of white marble.[51] Many tabulae lusoriae, or gambling boards, are scratched on this marble paving (cf. Cic. Phil. ii. 23).[52] Low marble cancelli, with moulded plinth, closed the otherwise open arches of the basilica; many fragments exist, and one piece of the sub plinth is still in situ. This basilica held four law-courts, which in important cases held joint sessions. Trajan and other emperors held law courts there (Dio Cass. lxxxviii. 10). An inscription found near it (C. I. L. vi. 1658) records its restoration by Septimius Severus in A.D. 199, after a fire; it was again burnt in 283 and restored by Diocletian. These fires had destroyed nearly all the fine marble arches of Augustus; and Diocletian rebuilt it mostly with brick or travertine piers, portions of which remain.[53] A final restoration is recorded in inscriptions discovered at various times from the 16th century onwards, as being carried out by Gabinius Vettius Probianus, praefect of the city in 377; one of these is on a pedestal which now stands in the Vicus Jugarius. Suetonius (Cal. 37) mentions that it was one of Caligula's amusements to throw money to the people below from the roof of this basilica, which formed a link in the bridge

by which this maniac connected the Palatine with the Capitolium.
The Vicus Tuscus passes from the Sacra Via between the Basilica

Julia and the temple of Castor to the Velabrum and Circus Maximus; Vicus Tuscus. its basalt paving has been exposed at many points along its whole line. A very early statue of Vortumnus stood in this street, a little to the south-west of the Basilica Julia, where part of its pedestal was found in 1549 inscribed VORTVMNVS TEMPORIBVS DIOCLETIANI . ET . MAXIMIANI . . . (C. I. L. vi. 804;[54] see also Pseudo-Ascon, Ad Cic. Verr. ii. 1, 59). The Vicus Tuscus was also called Thurarius, from shops of perfume-sellers (see Schol. ad Hor. Sat. ii. 3, 228, and Ep. ii. 1, 269). It is the street along which processions passed, mentioned by Cicero

(Verr. ii. 1, 59) as extending a signo Vertumni in Circum Maximum.
The temple of Castor[55]—or, more properly, of “the Castores,”

i.e. Castor and Pollux—on the south-east side of the Vicus Tuscus Temple of Castor. was founded to commemorate the apparition in the Forum of the Dioscuri, announcing the victory of Aulus Postumius at Lake Regillus, 496 B.C., and was dedicated in 484 B.C. by the son of A. Postumius (Liv. ii. 20, 42; Dionys. vi. 13; Ov. Fast. i. 706). In 119 B.C. it was restored by the consul L. Caecilius Metellus Dalmaticus (Ascon. In. Cic. Pro Scaur. 46), and finally rebuilt in the reign of Augustus by Tiberius and Drusus, A.D. 6 (Suet. Tib. 20; Ov. Fast. i. 705; Dio Cass. lv. 8, 27); the three existing Corinthian columns and piece of entablature, all very delicate and graceful in detail, and of the finest workmanship, in Pentelic marble, belong to a still later restoration under Trajan or Hadrian. One point shows Roman timidity in the use of a lintel: the frieze is jointed so as to form a flat arch, quite needlessly, with the object of relieving the weight on the architrave. Its plan, hexastyle, with only eleven columns on the sides, is shown in fig. 8. It had a lofty podium, faced with marble and decorated with a heavy cornice and pilasters, one under each column. The podium is an interesting example of the enormous solidity of Roman buildings of the best period. Solid tufa walls, 8 ft. thick, are built under the whole of the cella and the front row of columns, while the columns of the sides rest on spurs of similar walling, projecting at right angles from that under the cella; the part immediately under the columns is of travertine, and the spurs are united and strengthened laterally by massive flat arches, also of travertine. Between the foundations of the columns were chambers used as offices, &c. With the exception of a small chamber under the steps, entered from the Vicus Tuscus, the entire podium is filled up by a solid mass of concrete, made of broken tufa, pozzolana and lime, the whole forming a lofty platform, about 22 ft. high, solid as a rock, on which

the columns and upper structure are erected. The podium contains

a few remains[56] of the earliest temple, built of blocks of grey-green

tufa. Two fragments of mosaic, with simple lozenge pattern in white marble and basalt, still exist in the cella of this temple. The level of the mosaic, which probably belongs to the rebuilding of Tiberius, lies considerably below that of the later floor, which seems to date from Hadrian's reign. It has all the characteristics of early mosaic—very small tesserae fitted with great accuracy, like the early mosaic in the Regia. The temple of Castor was often used as a meeting-place for the senate, and its lofty podium formed a tribunal for orations.[57] The Fons or Lacus Juturnae (see Ov. Fast. i. 705, and Dionys. vi. 13), at which the Dioscuri were fabled to have watered their horses, was beside their temple; the precinct was discovered in 1900-1. The Lacus itself, a basin 16¾ ft. square and 6½ ft. deep, is immediately opposite the three standing columns of the temple; in the centre is a base of opus reticulatum, which supported statues of the Dioscuri; an altar with reliefs, together with other sculptures, has been found close by, and a few yards off is a small chapel or aedicula, intended for a statue of Juturna, and in front of it a well-curb (puteal) of white marble, set up by the aedile M. Barbarius Pollio in the reign of Augustus.

Close to the temple of Castor, at the angle of the Forum, stood the arch of Augustus, set up in 20 B.C. to commemorate the recovery Arch of Augustus. of the standards taken from Crassus by the Parthians. Its foundations were discovered in 1888; it had three bays, and rested on the pavement of a street which before

the time of Augustus formed the E. boundary of the Forum.
On the other side of the Sacra Via stand the remains of the temple

of Divus Julius, erected by Augustus. Though little beyond its Temple of Divus Julius. concrete core is left, its plan can be fairly well made out from the voids in the concrete, which show the position of the tufa foundations under the walls and columns (as in the temple of Castor). The temple itself, a hexastyle prostyle building, with close intercolumniation (Vitr. iii. 2), stood on a lofty podium with a curved recess in the front between two flights of stairs (see Plate VIII.). The wall which now fills up the recess is a late addition. In 1898 the base of a large altar was discovered in the niche, doubtless that mentioned by Appian (Bell. Civ. ii. 148). The podium, which projects in front of the temple itself, was adorned with beaks from the ships taken at Actium (Dio Cass. li. 19), and hence it was called the Rostra Julia, to distinguish it from the other rostra described above. Both were used for the funeral orations in honour of Augustus (Suet. Aug. 100; see also Dio Cass. liv. 35). Besides the concrete core and the curved tufa wall of the recess, little now exists except a small bit of the mosaic of the cella floor and some fragments of the cornice and pediment, of fine Greek marble. This temple is

represented on coins of Augustus and Hadrian.
The temple of Vesta, founded according to tradition by Numa,[58]

stands at the southern angle of the Forum on the ancient line of Temple of Vesta. the Sacra Via (Ov. Trist. iii. 1, 28). No shrine in Rome was equal in sanctity to this little circular building, which contained the sacred fire and the relics on which the welfare and even the existence of Rome depended. The original building was destroyed in 390 B.C. by the Gauls; it was burnt again in 241 B.C., again in the great fire of Nero's reign, and then in the reign of Commodus; after this it was rebuilt by Severus, to whose age belong the fragments of columns, cornice and other architectural features now lying around the ruined podium. With the aid of coins[59] and a relief preserved in the Uffizi at Florence[60] it is possible to make a sufficiently accurate restoration of the temple.[61] It consisted of a circular cella, surrounded by eighteen columns, with screens between them; the circular podium, about 10 ft. high, still exists, mainly of concrete with some foundations of tufa blocks, which may belong to the original structure. Recent excavations have disclosed a pit (favissa) in the middle of the podium, where the ashes of the sacred fire were temporarily stored. In the time of Pliny (H.N. xxxiv. 7) the tholus or dome over the cella—symbolizing the canopy of heaven (Ov. Fast. vi. 276)—was covered with Syracusan bronze. Its position near the temple of Castor is

mentioned by Martial (i. 7I-73).[62]
The Regia, or office of the pontifex maximus, was on the Sacra

Via, close by the temple of Vesta. It also was traditionally Regia. founded by Numa, and used as his dwelling-house; it was destroyed in 390 B.C. by the Gauls, and was again burnt in 210 B.C. (Liv. xxvi. 27), when the temple of Vesta narrowly escaped. Ovid (Trist. iii. 1, 28) describes this end of the Forum

“Haec est a sacris lquae via nomen habet,
Hic locus est Vestae, qui Pallada servat et ignem,
Hic fuit antiqui Regia parva Numae."
It was again damaged by fire in 148 B.C. and 36 B.C., after which

it was rebuilt in marble by Cn. Domitius Calvinus, and its outer walls inscribed with the lists of consuls and triumphs (fasti consulares et triumphales) of which many fragments have been recovered. Recent excavations have brought to light the tufa foundations of the republican building, including a round substructure, which may have supported the sacrarium Martis, in which were preserved the ancilia or sacred shields and spears (Gell. iv. 6), and an underground cistern, which has been brought into connexion with the shrine of Ops Consiva (Varro, L.L. vi. 21). The official residence of the pontifex maximus was not the Regia, but the domus publica; when Augustus succeeded to the office, he conveyed a part of his residence on the Palatine to the state in order to satisfy the claims

of tradition, and presented the domus publica to the vestals.
The excavations of 1883-84 laid bare remains of this very interesting

building, and showed that it was a large house extending close up to the Atrium Vestae; its orientation corresponded with that of the Regia. The existing remains are of several dates—first, walls of soft tufa, part possibly of the earliest building; second, walls of hard tufa, of rather later date; and lastly, concrete walls faced with brick, decorated with painted stucco, and columns of travertine, also stuccoed and painted,[63] with a large quantity of fine mosaic of that early sort which has very small tesserae put together with great accuracy. These valuable remains were preserved in spite of the erection of later buildings over them, because the levels of the later floors were higher than those of the Regia, and thus covered and protected the mosaics and lower parts of the walls and columns.

The Atrium Vestae, or house of the vestals, like the temple, was many times burnt and rebuilt; the existing building, which was Atrium Vestae. excavated in 1883-84 and more completely in 1901, seems to have been built after the great fire of A.D. 64, and to have been restored or enlarged several times—by the Flavian emperors, who added the colonnade; Hadrian, who built the tablinum and other rooms at the end; the Antonines, and Septimius Severus, who restored the whole after the fire of A.D. 192.[64] It consists of a large atrium or quadrangle with columns of cipollino. At one end is the tablinum, with three small rooms on each side of it—probably for the six vestals. A bathroom, bakehouse, servants' offices, and some rooms lined with rich marbles extend along the south-west side. This extensive building is set against the side of the Palatine, which is cut away to admit the lower storey. Thus the level of the first upper floor is nearly the same as that of the Nova Via, on which it faces, about 23 ft. above the ground floor. The upper floor is in part well preserved; it contains a large suite of bath and other rooms, which were probably the sleeping apartments of the vestals. All the better rooms and the baths are lined with polished marbles, many of great beauty and rarity; the floors are mostly mosaic of tessellated work. The paving of the tablinum was a beautiful specimen of inlay in orphyry and marble. In many places alterations and clumsy patchings of the 4th and 5th centuries are apparent. A number of statues of the chief vestal, or virgo vestalis maxima, with inscribed pedestals, were found in the atrium, mostly of the 3rd century, though a few are earlier; these are of especial interest as illustrating the sacerdotal dress of the vestals.[65] Nothing but the Nova Via separates the Atrium Vestae from the imperial palace (see Plin. Ep. vii. 19; Aul. Gell., i. 12), which extends over the site of the Lucus Vestae—“qui a Palatii radice in Novam Viam devexus est” (Cic. De Div. i. 45). A curious octagonal structure in the middle of the atrium looks very much like a border for flower-beds; and it is possible that this miniature garden was made by the vestals when the Lucus Vestae ceased to exist. By the main entrance from the Forum stood a small aedicula—a large pedestal, at the angles of which were columns supporting an entablature.[66] It no doubt contained a statue of Vesta, there being none within the temple. It is of the time of Hadrian. Gratian confiscated the house and endowments of the vestals in A.D. 382, but the atrium continued to be partly inhabited for many centuries

later by imperial or papal officials.[67] In September 1884 a road was

discovered leading up past the tablinum end of the atrium from

the Sacra Via to the Nova Via. In about the 4th century this road appears to have been blocked up at the Nova Via end by a building which adjoined the Atrium Vestae.

At the north-east corner of the Forum stood the arch of Q. Fabius Maximus, consul in 121 B.C. called Allobrogicus from his victory Arch of Fabius. over the Allobroges (Schol. on Cic., In Verr., Actio i. 7); Liv. Ep. lvi.; Plin. H.N. vii. 166). It marked the extreme, limit of the Forum in this direction (Cic. Pro Planc, 7, 17), as the rostra did at the other end. Remains of this arch were dug up and mostly destroyed in 1546, near the temple of Faustina; on one of the fragments then discovered was inscribed Q . FABIVS . Q . F . MAXSVMVS . AED . CVR . REST. (Dessau, Inscr. Lat. Sel., 43a). About twenty-five other fragments, were

found in 1882.[68]
The temple of Faustina the elder stands at the east angle of the

Forum, facing the later line of the Sacra Via. It is prostyle Temple of Faustina. hexastyle, and has monolithic columns of cipollino and a rich entablature of Greek marble, with graceful reliefs of griffins and candelabra on the frieze.[69] The walls are of massive peperino, once lined with marble. On the front is inscribed DIVO . ANTONINO . ET . DIVAE . FAVSTINAE . EX . S. C. This temple, built by Antoninus Pius in memory of his wife, who died in 141, was after his death dedicated also to him, and the first line was then added (Vita Ant. Pii, 6). In the Middle Ages it was consecrated as the church of S. Lorenzo in Miranda, and a great part of its cella has been destroyed. The front is now excavated to the original level. This temple is shown on the reverse of several coins of Antoninus Pius; some have the legend DEDICATIO .

The space between the north-west end of the Forum and the

Tabularium is occupied by a range of important buildings (see Temple of Concord. Plate VIII.). The chief of these is the temple of Concord concert (see Festus, ed. Müller, p. 347) shown on a fragment of the marble plan, founded by Camillus in 366 B.C. (Plut. Cam. 42), and restored by Opimius after the death of C. Gracchus (121 B.C.). It was afterwards rebuilt by Tiberius out of the spoils gained in Germany; it was rededicated by Tiberius in A.D. 10 in his own name and that of his brother Drusus (who had died in B.C. 9) [Suet. Tib. 20; Dio. Cass. lv. 25]. It is shown with unusual minuteness on the reverse of a first brass of Tiberius. The existing remains[70] are of the rebuilding by Tiberius, and show that it was unusual in plan, having a large cella much wider than its depth, and a very large projecting portico. Its construction is an interesting example of the Roman use of many different materials. The lower part of the walls was of massive tufa blocks, the upper part of the cella of travertine; and the inner low wall, which supported ranges of internal columns, was of mixed concrete, tufa and travertine. The whole was lined with marble, white outside, and rich oriental marbles inside (see fig. 4), which were also used for the pavement. The door-sill is made of enormous blocks of porta santa marble, in which a bronze caduceus (emblem of Mercury), was inlaid. Between the internal columns of the cella stood rows of statues; and the temple also contained a large collection of pictures, engraved gems, gold and silver plate, and other works of art; mostly the work of ancient Greek artists (see Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 19; xxxv. 36, 40, xxxvi. 67, xxxvii. 2). On the apex of the pediment was a group of three figures embracing; the tympanum was filled with sculpture; and statues were set in the open porch. Though now only the podium and the lower part of the cella wall exist, with foundations of the great flight of steps, many rich fragments both of the Corinthian entablature and of the internal caps and bases are preserved in the Tabularium; and some of the marble lining is still in situ. The Einsiedeln MS. gives part of the inscription of the front—S . P . Q . R . AEDEM . CONCORDIAE . VETVSTATE . COLLAPSAM . IN . MELIOREM . FACIEM . OPERE . ET . CVLTV .

The temple of Vespasian stands close by that of Concord, abutting

on the Tabularium in a similar way, and blocking up a doorway Temple of Vespasian. at the foot of a long flight of steps (see fig. 1). It consists of a nearly square cella with prostyle hexastyle portico of the Corinthian order; three of the columns are still standing, with their rich entablature, the frieze of which is sculptured with sacred instruments. The walls are of enormous blocks of travertine with strong iron clamps; the whole was lined with white Pentelic marble outside, and inside with coloured oriental marbles. There was an internal range of columns, as in the temple of Concord. This temple was begun by Titus in A.D. 80, in honour of his father Vespasian, and finished by Domitian, who dedicated it to Vespasian and Titus. The inscription on the entablature, given in the Einsiedeln MS., records a restoration by Severus and Caracalla—DIVO . VESPASIANO . AVGVSTO . S . P . Q . R . IMPP . CAESS . SEVERVS . ET . ANTONINVS . PII . FELIC . AVGG .

RESTITVERVNT; part of the last word only now exists.
In the narrow space between the temples of Concord and Vespasian

(only about 7 ft. in width) a small brick and concrete edifice stands against the Tabularium. In it was found an inscribed base dedicated to Faustina the younger by one of the viatores (messengers) of the quaestors, who probably had their office here.

The next building is the Porticus Deorum Consentium, a colonnade in two wings which join at the obtuse angle, with a row of small Porticus Deorum Consentium. rooms or shrines partly cut into the tufa rock of the hill behind. This conjunction of twelve deities was of Etruscan origin; they were six of each sex and were called Senatus Deorum (Varro, L.L. viii. 70, and De Re Rust, i. 1).[72] The columns are of cipollino with Corinthian caps; on the frieze is an inscription recording a restoration by. Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, praefect of the city in A.D. 367. Under the marble platform is a row of seven small rooms, the brick

facing of which is perhaps of the Flavian period.
The arch of Severus stands by the rostra, across the road on the

north-east side of the Forum; the remains of the ancient travertine Arch of Severus. curb show that originally the road went along a rather different line, and was probably altered to make room for this great arch, which was accessible only by steps, and was not used for ordinary traffic. It was built in A.D. 203, after victories in Parthia, and was originally set up in honour of Severus and his two sons M. Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla) and Geta. Caracalla, after murdering Geta, erased his name from all monuments to his honour in Rome. Representations of the arch on coins of Severus show that its attic was surmounted by a chariot of bronze drawn by six horses, in which stood Severus crowned by Victory; at the sides were statues of Caracalla and Geta, with an equestrian statue at each angle. The arch, except the base, which is of marble-lined travertine, is built of massive blocks of Pentelic marble, and has large crowded reliefs of victories in the East, showing

much decadence from the best period of Roman art.
The central space of the Forum is paved with slabs of travertine,

much patched at various dates; it appears to have been marked Central space of Forum. out into compartments with incised lines (see Plate VIII.), the use of which is not known. There are also square holes which probably held masts on which awnings could be spread. Numerous clamp-holes all over the paving show where statues and other ornaments once stood. The recorded number of these is very great, and they must once have thickly crowded a great part of the central area. Two short marble walls or plutei covered with reliefs, discovered in 1872, stand on the north side. The rough travertine plinth on which they have been set is evidently of late date. Each of these marble screens has (on the inside) reliefs of a fat bull, boar and ram, decked out with sacrificial wreaths and vittae—the suovetaurilia. On the outside are scenes in the life of Trajan: in both cases the emperor is speaking from the rostra. On one we also see him seated on a suggest us instituting a charity for destitute children in A.D. 101—a scene similar to one shown in one of his first brasses with the legend ALIM[ENTA] ITALIAE;[73] at the other end the emperor stands on the rostra, on which the two tiers of beaks are shown; he is addressing a crowd of citizens. In the background is shown the long line of arches of the Basilica Julia, with (on the left) what is probably the temple of Castor and the arch of Augustus. On the right are the statue of Marsyas and the sacred fig-tree.[74] On the other slab a crowd of officials are bringing tablets and piling them in a heap to be burnt. This records the remission by Trajan of some arrears of debt due to the imperial treasury (Auson. Grat. Act. 32). The background here represents again the Basilica Julia, with (on the right) the Ionic temple of Saturn and the Corinthian temple of Vespasian. Between

them is an arch, which may be that of Tiberius.[75] On the left the

fig-tree and the statue of Marsyas are repeated. Other explanations

of these reliefs have been given, but the above appears the most probable. Towards the other end of the Forum are remains of a large concrete pedestal. It may possibly have supported an equestrian statue of Constantine, which was still standing in the 8th century. A smaller foundation, laid bare by Comm. Boni's excavations in 1905, is thought by him to have supported the equestrian statue of Q. Marcius Tremulus, the conqueror of the

Hernici, set up before the temple of Castor in B.C. 305 (Liv. ix. 43).
The seven cubical brick and concrete structures, once faced with

marble, which line the Sacra Via are not earlier than the time of Diocletian. They are probably the pedestals of honorary columns such as those shown in the relief on Constantine's arch, mentioned above. The column erected in honour of the tyrant Phocas by Smaragdus in the eleventh year of his exarchate (608) is still standing. It is a fine marble Corinthian column, stolen from some earlier building; it stands on rude steps of marble and tufa. The name of Phocas is erased from the inscription; but the date shows that this monument was to his honour. In the 4th century, or perhaps even later, a long brick and concrete building faced with marble was built along the whole south-east end of the Forum, probably a row of shops. They were destroyed by Comm. Rosa's order. Two columns—one of pavonazzetto, the other of grey granite—were set up on two of the brick bases in 1899.

In 1902 a network of passages (cuniculi) was discovered about 3 ft. beneath the pavement of the Forum. These have tufa walls and concrete vaults; they are about 8 ft. high and 5 ft. broad. At the intersections of the passages are square chambers, in the centre of which are travertine blocks with sockets for windlasses. The construction of the passages seems to date from the time of Julius Caesar, and it is thought that they were used for scenic purposes when games were given in the Forum.

In 1903 a large concrete foundation was found, partly blocking the E. end of one of the cuniculi. There can be no doubt that this once supported the colossal equestrian statue of Domitian described by Statius (Silv. i. 1, 21 ff.) which was destroyed after his murder. Embedded in the concrete was a cist of massive travertine blocks which was found to contain five archaic vases similar to those from the early necropolis (above, as init.). One held a nugget of quartz containing pure gold. It is uncertain whether these were buried here for ritual purposes or were the contents of an early tomb found in digging the foundations. Near this monument there were found in 1904 remains of an enclosure of irregular shape which once contained an altar. This must have been the altar which in imperial times represented the Lacus Curtius (Ov. Fast. vi. 403). Beside this were found some remains of a structure of imperial date which Comm. Boni identified with the Tribunal at which justice was administered

by the emperors.[76]

Palatine Hill or Palatium.

In addition to the early walls described above, only a few remains now exist earlier in date than the later years of the republic; these are mostly grouped near the Scalae Caci (see fig. 10, in Plan), and consist of small cellae and other structures of unknown use.[77] They are partly built of the soft tufa used in the “wall of Romulus,” and partly of hard granulated tufa so called. Various names, such as the “hut of Faustulus” and the “Auguratorium,” have been given to these very ancient remains, but with little reason. On thing is certain, that the buildings were respected and preserved even under the empire, and were probably regarded as sacred relics of the earliest times.

Remains of more than one temple of the republican period exist

near this west angle of the Palatine. The larger of these (see Plan) Temple of Jupiter Victor. has been called conjecturally the temple of Jupiter Victor (Liv. x. 29; Ov. Fast. iv. 621).[78] It stands on a levelled platform of tufa rock, the lower part of which is excavated into quarry chambers, used in later times as water reservoirs. Two ancient well-shafts lined with tufa communicate with these subterranean hollows. Extensive foundations of hard tufa exist in the valley afterwards covered by the Flavian palace (see Plan, “Foundations of the Domus Augustana”). The masonry is in parts of republican date, and was used to support the Flavian palace. Not far from the top of the Scalae Caci are the massive remains of a large cella, nothing of which now exists except the concrete core faced with opus incertum in alternate layers of tufa and peperino. It was probably once lined with marble. By it a Statue of Cybele. noble colossal seated figure of a goddess was found, in Greek marble, well modelled, a work of the 1st century A.D. The head and arms are missing, but the figure is probably rightly called a statue of Cybele; and inscriptions dedicated to Magna Mater have been found close to the temple. Augustus in the Monumentum Ancyranum (4, 8) records AEDEM . MATRIS . MAGNAE . IN . PALATIO . FECI; and there can be little doubt that this is the temple in question. Some interesting early architectural fragments are lying near this temple; they consist of drums and capitals of Corinthian columns, and part of the cornice of the pediment, cut in peperino, and thickly coated with hard white stucco to imitate marble. Between this and the temple of Jupiter Victor are extensive remains of a large porticus, with tufa walls and travertine piers, also republican in date. The use and name of this

building are unknown.
Remains of extensive lines of buildings in early opus reticulatum

exist on the upper slopes of the Palatine, all along the Velabrum side, and on the south-west side as far as the so-called Paedagogium. These buildings are constructed on the ruins of the wall of Romulus, a great part of which has been cut away to make room for them; their base is at the foot of the ancient wall, on the shelf cut midway in the side of the hill; their top reached originally above the upper level of the summit. They are of various dates, and cannot be Domus Tiberiana.

House of Livia.
identified with any known buildings. Part is apparently of the time of the emperor Tiberius, and no doubt belongs to the Domus Tiberiana mentioned by Suetonius (Tib. 5; Tac. Hist. i. 27, iii. 71); this palace covered a great part of the west corner of the hill. Of about the same date is a very interesting and well-preserved private house built wholly of opus reticulatum, which formed part of the imperial property, and was respected when the later palaces were built. The discover of lead-pipes bearing the inscription IVLIAE . AVG (C. I. L. xv. 7264) has led to the conjecture that the house was that bequeathed to Livia by her first husband, Tib. Claudius Nero. At the north-west end is a small atrium, out of which open three rooms commonly called the tablinum and alae, as well as a triclinium, all decorated with good paintings of mythological and domestic scenes, probably the work of Greek artists, as inscriptions in Greek occur, e.g. EPMHC, under the figure of Hermes, in a picture representing his deliverance of Io from Argus.[79] This suite of rooms was a later addition to the house. The south-east portion was three storeys high, and is divided into a great number of very small rooms, mostly bedrooms. The house is built in at sort of hole against the side of an elevation, so that the upper floor behind is level with an ancient paved road. The dampness caused by this is counteracted and kept off the paintings by a lining of flange-tiles over the external walls, under the stucco, thus forming an air-cavity all over the surface. From the back of the house, at the upper level, along subterranean passage leads towards the Flavian palace, and then, turning at right angles and passing by the foundations of the so-called temple of Jupiter Victor, issues in the ancient tufa building mentioned above. Another crypto-porticus starts near this house and communicates with the long semi-subterranean passage by which the palaces of Caligula and Domitian are connected. It is ornamented with very beautiful stucco reliefs of cupids, beasts and foliage, once painted and gilt. Some hold that the house was that of Germanicus, into which the soldiers who killed Caligula in the long crypto-porticus escaped, as described by Josephus (Ant. Jud. xix. 1;

see also Suet. Cal. 58).
From the Summa Sacra Via a road led to the Area Palatina in

the centre of the hill. Here was the sanctuary called Roma quadrata, Palace of Augustus and Area Apollinis. containing the mundus, a pit in which the instruments used in the founding of the city were deposited. To the east was the Area Apollinis, the entrance of which led through lofty propylaea into a very extensive peristyle or porticus, with columns of Numidian giallo; the temple was of white Luna marble. In the centre of this enclosure stood the great octostyle peripteral temple of Apollo Palatinus. The

splendour of its architecture and the countless works of art in gold,

silver, ivory, bronze and marble, mostly the production of the best

Greek artists, which adorned this magnificent group of buildings, must have made it the chief glory of this splendid city. This temple was begun by Augustus in 36 B.C.,[80] after his Sicilian victory over Sextus Pompeius, and dedicated on the 9th of October 28 B.C.[81] A glowing account of the splendours of these buildings is given by Propertius (ii. 2, iii. 31). Inside the cella were statues of Apollo between Latona and Diana by Scopas, Cephisodotus and Timotheus respectively (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 24, 25, 32); beneath the base of the group were preserved the Sibylline books. The pediment had sculpture by Bupalus and Archermus of Chios (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 13), and on the apex was Apollo in a quadriga of gilt bronze. The double door was covered with ivory reliefs of the death of the Niobids and the defeat of the Gauls at Delphi. The Ancyran inscription records that Augustus melted down eighty silver statues of himself and with the money “offered golden gifts” to this temple, dedicating them both in his own name and in the names of the original donors of the statues.[82] The Sibylline books were preserved under the statue of Apollo (Suet. Aug. 31); and within the cella were vases, tripods and statues of gold and silver, with a collection of engraved gems dedicated by Marcellus (see Plin. H.N. xxxvii. 11, xxxiv. 14). In the porticus was a large library, with separate departments for Latin and Greek literature,[83] and a large hall where the senate occasionally met (Tac. Ann. ii. 37). Round the porticus, between the Numidian marble columns, were statues of the fifty Danaids, and opposite them their fifty bridegrooms on horseback (see Schol. on Pers. ii. 56). In the centre, before the steps of the temple, stood an altar surrounded by four oxen, the work of Myron (Prop. iii. 31, 5). In the centre of the Palatine stood the palace of Augustus, built in the years following 36 B.C., and renewed after a fire in A.D. 3. It contained a small temple of Vesta (C. I. L. i.2 p. 317), dedicated on the 28th of April 12 B.C., when Augustus was elected pontifex maximus. Augustus's building was completely transformed by later emperors, but the name domus Augustana was retained in official use. The Area Apollinis and its group of buildings suffered in the fire of Nero, and were restored by Domitian. The whole was finally destroyed in the great fire of 363 (Ammian. xxiii. 3, 3), but the Sibylline books were

To the north-west of the Area Palatina stood the Domus Tiberiana,

a palace built by Tiberius on substructures of concrete which crown the Domus Tiberiana. north-west slope of the hill and form a platform now occupied by the Farnese gardens, overlooking the Clivus Victoriae. Caligula is said to have added to this palace on the side towards the Forum, making the temple of Castor into a vestibule, and to have connected it with the Capitol by a bridge whose piers were found by the temple of Augustus and the Basilica Julia; but this was destroyed after his death. At a later time the palace was extended so as to include the northern angle of the Palatine, which had once been covered with private houses. Among these were the dwellings of Q. Lutatius Catulus, Q. Hortensius, Scaurus, Crassus (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 3, 24), whose house was afterwards bought by Cicero.[84] Many other wealthy Romans had houses on this part of the Palatine. The part now existing is little more than the gigantic substructure built to raise the principal rooms to the level of the top of the hill. The lowest parts of these face the Nova Via, opposite the Atrium Vestae, and many storeys of small vaulted rooms built in mixed brick and opus reticulatum rise one above the other to the higher levels.[85] The palace extends over the Clivus Victoriae, supported on lofty arches so as to leave the road unblocked; many travertine or marble stairs lead to the upper rooms, some starting from the Nova Via, others from the Clivus Victoriae. A large proportion of these substructures consist of dark rooms, some with no means of lighting, others with scanty borrowed light. Many small rooms and stairs scarcely 2 ft. wide can only have been used by slaves. The ground floors on the Nova Via and the Clivus Victoriae appear to have been shops, judging from their wide openings, with travertine sills, grooved for the wooden fronts with narrow doors, which Roman shops seem always to have had—very like those now used in the East. The upper and principal rooms were once richly decorated with marble linings, columns and mosaics; but little of these now remains. The upper part of the palace, that above the Clivus Victoriae, is faced wholly with brickwork, no opus reticulatum being used as in the lower portions by the Nova Via. This marks a difference of date, and this is confirmed by the occurrence of brick stamps of the

2nd century A.D.
The next great addition to the buildings of the Palatine was the

magnificent suite of state apartments built by Domitian, over Flavian Palace. a deep natural valley running across the hill (see Plan). The valley was filled up and the level of the new palace raised to a considerable height above the natural soil. Remains of a house, decorated with painting and rich marbles, exist under Domitian's peristyle, partly destroyed by the foundations of cast concrete which cut right through it. The floor of this house shows the original level, far below that of the Flavian palace. This building is connected with the palace of Caligula by a branch subterranean passage leading into the earlier crypto-porticus. It consists of a block of state-rooms, in the centre of which is a large open peristyle, with columns of oriental marble, at one end of which is the grand triclinium with magnificent paving of opus sectile in red and green basalt and coloured marbles, a piece of which is well preserved; next to the triclinium, on to which it opens with large windows, is a nymphaeum or room with marble-lined fountain and recesses for plants and statues. On the opposite side of the peristyle is a large throne-room, the walls of which were adorned with rows of pavonazzetto and giallo columns and large marble niches, in which were colossal statues of porphyry and basalt; at one side of this is the basilica, with central nave and apse and narrow aisles, over which were galleries. The apse, in which was the emperor's throne, is screened off by open marble cancelli, a part of which still exists. It is of great interest as showing the origin of the Christian basilica (see Basilica).[86] On the other side of the throne-room is the lararium, with altar and pedestal for a statue; next to this is the grand staircase, which led to the upper rooms, now destroyed. The whole building, both floor and walls, was covered with the richest oriental marbles. Outside were colonnades or porticus,—on one side of cipollino, on the other of travertine, the latter stuccoed and painted. The magnificence of the whole, crowded with fine Greek sculpture and covered with polished marbles of the most brilliant colours, is difficult now to realize; a glowing description is given by Statius (Silv. iv. 11, 18; see also Plut. Poplic. 15, and Mart. viii. 36). Doors were arranged in the throne-room and basilica so that the emperor could slip out unobserved and reach by a staircase (g on Plan) the crypto-porticus which communicates with Caligula's palace. The vault of this passage was covered with mosaic of mixed marble and glass, a few fragments of which still remain; its walls were lined with rich marbles; it was lighted by a series of windows in the springing of the vault. This, as well as the Flavian palace, appears to have suffered more than once from fire, and in many places important restorations of the time of Severus, and some as late as the 4th century, are evident. In 1720-28 extensive excavations were made here for the Farnese duke of Parma, and an immense quantity of statues and marble architectural fragments were discovered, many of which are now at Naples and elsewhere. Among them were sixteen beautiful fluted columns of pavonazzetto and giallo, fragments of the basalt statues, and an immense door-sill of Pentelic marble, now used for the high altar of the Pantheon; these all came from the throne-room. The excavations were carried

on by Bianchini, who published a book on the subject.[87]
In the middle of the slopes of the Palatine, towards the Circus

Maximus, are considerable remains of buildings set against the early Domus Gelotiana. wall and covering one of its projecting spurs, consisting in a series of rooms with a long Corinthian colonnade. The rooms were partly marble-lined and partly decorated with painted stucco, on which are incised a number of interesting inscriptions and rude drawings. Here, in 1856, was found the celebrated caricature of the Crucified Christ, now in the Museo Kircheriano.[88] The inscription CORINTHVS . EXIT . DE . PEDAGOGIO suggests that this building was at one time used as a school, perhaps for the imperial slaves.[89] A number of soldiers names also occur, e.g. HILARVS . MI . V . D . N . (Hilarus miles vestitor domini nostri?); some are in mixed Latin and Greek characters. After one pair of names is inscribed PEREG, showing that they belonged to the corps called frumentarii stationed in the Castra Peregrinorum on the Caelian. Most of these inscriptions appear to be as early as the 1st century A.D.[90] These interesting graffiti have in great part perished during the last few years. Some inscriptions found in the larger rooms seem to indicate that the

imperial wardrobe found a place in them.
To the south of the Flavian state-rooms, on the side of the hill

overlooking the Circus, was a building with a central peristyle

(“Palace of Domitian” on Plan), which was excavated in 1775 and

again partly laid bare in 1869 and the following years. This has

often, but wrongly, been called the palace of Augustus; we should rather see in it the dwelling-rooms of the Flavian palace. Adjoining it is the so-called stadium of the Palatine (“Hippodromus” on Plan), begun by Domitian, enlarged by Hadrian, and much altered or restored by Severus. The greater part of the outer walls and the large exedra or apse at the side, with upper floor for the emperor's seat, are of the time of Hadrian, as is shown by the brick stamps, and the character of the brick facing, which much resembles that of the Flavian time (bricks 1½ in. and joints ½ in. thick).[91] The stadium is surrounded with colonnade of engaged shafts, forming a sort of aisle with gallery over it. Except those at the curved end, which are of Hadrian's time, these piers are of the time of Severus, as are also all the flat piers along the outer wall,—one opposite each of those in the inner line. Severus restored the galleries after the great fire of A.D. 191. This building was the hippodromus Palatii;

the word here means, not a racecourse, but a garden (Plin. Epp. 5, 6, 19).
EB1911 Rome - Plan of the Palatine.jpg
From Richter's Topographie der Stadt Rom, by permission of C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Emery Walker sc.
Fig. 10.—Plan of the Palatine.
In addition to the stadium, Hadrian built a number of very

handsome rooms, forming a palace on the south-east side and at the south-west end of the stadium. These rooms were partly destroyed Hadrian's palace. and partly hidden by the later palace of Severus, the foundations of which in many places cut through and render useless the highly decorated rooms of Hadrian. The finest of these which is now visible is a room with a large window opening into the stadium near the south angle; it has intersecting barrel vaults, with deep coffers, richly ornamented in stucco. The oval structure shown in the plan (fig. 10), with other still later additions, belongs to the 6th century; in its walls, of opus

mixtum, are found brick stamps of the reign of Theodoric, c. 500.
The palace of Septimius Severus was very extensive and of

enormous height; it extends not only all over the south angle of the Palatine but also a long way into the valley of the Circus Maximus and towards the Coelian. This part (like Caligula's palace) is carried on very lofty arched substructures, so as to form a level, uniform with the top of the hill, on which the grand apartments stood. The whole height from the base of the Palatine to several storeys above its summit must have been enormous. Little now remains of the highest storeys, except part of a grand staircase which led to them. Extensive baths,

originally decorated with marble linings and mosaics in glass and

marble, cover a great part of the top of the hill. These and other

parts of the Palatine were supplied with water by an aqueduct built by Nero, in continuation of the Claudian aqueduct, some arches of which still exist on the slope of the Palatine (“Aqua Claudia” on Plan) (see Spart. Sept. Sev. 24). One of the main roads up to the Palatine passes under the arched substructures of Severus, and near this, at the foot of the hill, at the south angle, Septimius Severus built an outlying part of his palace, a building of great splendour called the Septizodium,[92] or House of the Seven Planets. Part of the Septizodium existed as late as the reign of Sixtus V. (1585-90), who destroyed it in order to use its marble decorations and columns in the new basilica of St Peter; drawings of it are given by Du Pérac, Vestigj di Roma (1575), pl. 13, and in other works of that century.[93]

The name Palatium seems to have originally denoted the southern height of the Palatine hill, while the summit overlooking the Velabrum Vella and Cermalus. was called Cermalus, and the saddle connecting the Palatine and the Esquiline on which the temple of Venus and Rome and the arch of Titus now stand bore the name Velia.[94] It is evident that this was once higher than it is now; a great part of it was cut away when the level platform for the temple of Venus and Rome was formed. The foundations of part of Nero's palace along the road between this temple and the Esquiline are exposed for about 20 to 30 ft. in height, showing a corresponding lowering of the level here, and the bare tufa rock, cut to a flat surface, is visible on the site of Hadrian's great temple; that the Velia was once much loftier is also indicated by the story

of the removal of Valerius Publicola's dwelling.[95]
The arch of Titus, erected in memory of that emperor's subjugation

of the Jews, but not completed until after his death, Arch of Titus. stands at the point where the Sacra Via crosses the Velia; it is possible that it once stood farther to the east and was removed to its present position when the temple of Venus and Rome was built. The well-known reliefs of the archway depict the Jewish triumph and the spoils of the Temple. In the middle ages the arch was converted into a fortress by the Frangipani; their additions were removed and the arch restored in its present

shape in 1821.
On the Velia and the adjoining Summa Sacra Via were the temples

of the Lares and Penates which Augustus rebuilt.[96] The “Aedes Sacra Via.

Temple of Jupiter Stator.

Temple of Victory.
Larum” is probably distindt from the “Sacellum Larum” mentioned by Tacitus (Ann. xii. 24) as one of the points in the line of the original pomerium. The temple of Jupiter Stator, traditionally vowed by Romulus during his repulse by the Sabines (Liv. i. 12), stood near the Porta Mugonia, and therefore near the road leading up to the Palatine Sacra Via.[97] To the south-east of the arch of Titus (see Plan) are the remains of a concrete podium which may have belonged to this temple in its latest form; and Comm. Boni discovered (in 1907) some early tufa walling, close to the above-named arch in which he recognized the foundations of the early temple. Augustus rebuilt the temple of Victory, which gave its name to the Clivus Victoriae; this temple stood on the site of a prehistoric altar (Dionys. i. 32), and was more than once rebuilt,—e.g. by L. Postumius, 294 B.C. (Liv. x. 33). In 193 B.C. an aedicula to Victory was built near it by M. Porcius Cato (Liv. xxxv. 9). Remains of the temple and a dedicatory inscription were found in 1728[98] not far from the church of S. Teodoro; the temple was of Parian marble, with Corinthian columns of Numidian giallo antico. The Sacra Via started at the Sacellum Streniae, an unknown point on the Esquiline, probably in the valley of the Colosseum (Varro, L.L. v. 47), in the quarter called Cerolia. Thence it probably (in later times) passed round part of the Colosseum to the slope leading up to the arch of Titus on the Velia; this piece of its course is lined on one side by remains of private houses, and farther back, against the cliff of the Palatine, are the substructures of the Area Apollinis. From the arch of Titus or Summa Sacra Via the original line of the road has been altered, probably when the temple of Venus and Rome was built by Hadrian. Its later course passed at a sharp angle from the arch of Titus to the front of Constantine's basilica, and on past the temple of Faustina. It is uncertain whether the continuation of this road to the arch of Severus was in later times called the Sacra Via or whether it rejoined its old line along the Basilica Julia by the cross-road in front of the Aedes Julii. Its original line past the temple of Vesta was completely built over in the 3rd and 4th centuries, and clumsily fitted pavements of marble and travertine occupy the place of the old basalt blocks.[99] The course of the Nova Via[100] (see Plan) along, the north-east slope of the Palatine[101] was exposed in 1882-84. According to Varro (L.L. vi. 59) it was a very old road. It led up from the Velabrum, probably winding along the slope of the Palatine, round the north angle above the church of S. Maria Antiqua. The rest of its course, gently ascending towards the arch of Titus, is now exposed, as are also the stairs which connected it with the Clivus Victoriae at the northern angle of the Palatine; a continuation of these stairs led down to the

The extent of the once marshy Velabrum (Gr. Ϝέλος) is not known,

though part of its site is indicated by the church of S. Giorgio in Velabro; Varro (L.L. vi. 24) says, “extra urbem antiquam fuit; non longe a porta Romanula.” It was a district full of shops (Plaut. Capt. 489; Hor. Sat. ii. 3, 30). The Vicus Tuscus on its course from the Forum to the Circus skirted the Velabrum (Dionys. v. 26), from which the goldsmiths' arch was an

entrance into the Forum Boarium.
From the S.W. end of the Velabrum the Clivus Victoriae rose in

a gradual ascent along the slope of the Palatine and ultimately

wound round the northern angle.

Capitoline Hill[103]

The Capitoline hill, once called Mons Saturnius (Varro, L.L. v. 42), consists of two peaks, the Capitolium and the Arx,[104] with an intermediate valley (Asylum). The older name of the Capitolium was Mons Tarpeius (Varro, L.L. v. 41). Livy (i. 10) mentions the founding of a shrine to Jupiter Feretrius on the Capitolium by Romulus;[105] this summit was afterwards occupied Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. by the great triple temple dedicated to Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, a triad of deities worshipped under the names of Tinia, Thalna and Menerva in every Etruscan city. This great temple was (Liv. i. 38, 53) founded by Tarquin I., built by his son Tarquin II., and dedicated by M. Horatius Pulvillus, consul suffectus in 509 B.C.[106] It was built in the Etruscan style, of peperino stuccoed and painted (Vitr. iii. 3), with wooden architraves, wide intercolumniations and painted terra-cotta statues.[107] It was rebuilt many times; the original temple lasted till it was burnt in 83 B.C.; it was then refounded in marble by Sulla, with Corinthian columns stolen from the temple of Olympian Zeus in Athens (Plin. xxxvi. 4, 5), and was completed and dedicated by Q. Lutatius Catulus, whose name appeared on the front. Augustus, although he restored it at great expense (Mon. Anc. 4, 9), did not introduce his name by the side of that of Catulus. It was again burnt by the Vitellian rioters in A.D. 70, and rebuilt by Vespasian in 71.[108] Lastly, it was burnt in the three days' fire of Titus's reign[109] and rebuilt with columns of Pentelic marble by Domitian; the gilding alone of this last rebuilding is said to have cost 2½ millions sterling (Plut. Publ. 15). Extensive substructures of tufa have been exposed on the eastern peak; in 1875 a fragment of a fluted column was found, of such great size that it could only have belonged to the temple of Jupiter; and a few other architectural fragments have been discovered at different times. The western limit of the temple was determined in 1865, its eastern limit in 1875, and the S.E. angle in 1896. It appears that the figures given by Dionysius (iv. 61) for the area are slightly too large. The true measurements were 188 × 204 Roman ft.[110] The temple is represented on many coins, both republican and imperial; these show that the central cella was that of Jupiter, that of Minerva on his right and of Juno on his left. The door was covered with gold reliefs, which were stolen by Stilicho (c. 400; Zosim. v. 38), and the gilt bronze tiles (cf. Plin. xxxiii. 57) on the roof were partly stripped off by Geiseric in 455 (Procop. Bell. Vand. i. 5), and the rest by Pope Honorius I. in 630 (Marliani, Topogr. ii. 1).[111] Till 1348, when the steps up to Ara Coeli were built, there was no access to the Capitol from the back; hence the three ascents to it mentioned by Livy (iii. 7, v. 26-28) and Tacitus (Hist. iii. 71-72) were all from the inside of the Servian circuit. Even on this inner side it was defended by a wall, the gates in which are called “Capitolii fores” by Tacitus. Part of the outer wall at the top of the tufa rock, which is cut into a smooth cliff, is visible from the modern Vicolo della Rupe Tarpeia; this cliff is traditionally called the Tarpeian rock, but that must have been on the other side towards the Forum, from whence it was visible, as is clearly stated by Dionysius (vii. 35, viii. 78).[112] Another piece of the ancient wall has been exposed, about half-way up the slope from the Forum to the Arx. It is built of soft yellow tufa blocks, five courses of which still remain in the existing fragment. The large temple of Juno Moneta (“the Adviser”) on the Arx, built by Camillus in 384 B.C., was used as the mint; hence moneta = “money” (Liv. vi, 20).

A large number of other temples and smaller shrines stood on

the Capitoline hill, a word used broadly to include both the Capitolium and the Arx.[113] Among these were the temple of Honos and Virtus, built by Marius, and the temple of Fides, founded by Numa, and rebuilt during the First Punic war. Both these were large enough to hold meetings of the senate. The temples of Mars Ultor (Mon. Anc. 4, 5) an Jupiter Tonans (Suet. Aug. 29; Mon. Anc. 4, 3) were built by Augustus. Other shrines existed to Venus Victrix Ops, Jupiter Custos, and Concord—the last under the Arx (Liv. xxii. 33)—and many others, as well as a triumphal arch in honour of Nero, and a crowd of statues and other works of art (see Plin. H.N. xxxiii. 9, xxxiv. 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, 79, xxxv. 69, 100, 108, 157), so that the whole hill must have been a mass of architectural and artistic magnificence.

The so-called Tabularium[114] occupies the central part of the side towards the Forum; it is set on the tufa rock, which is cut away Tabularium. to receive its lower storey. It derives its name from an inscription which remained in situ until the 15th century (C. I. L. vi. 1314); whilst all public departments had their tabularia, this was a central Record Office, where copies of laws, treaties, &c., were preserved. It was built by Catulus, who was also the dedicator of the great temple of Jupiter (Tac. Hist. iii. 72; Dio Cass. xliii. 14), consul in 78 B.C. Its outer walls are of sperone, its inner ones of tufa; the Doric arcade has capitals, imposts and entablature of travertine. Above the arcade was a gallery or porticus, faced with a Corinthian colonnade, of which a few architectural members have been found. The columns appear to have belonged to the 1st century A.D. A road paved with basalt passes through the building along this arcade, entered at one end from the Clivus Capitolinus, and at the other probably from the Gradus Monetae, a flight of steps leading from the temple of Concord and the Forum up to the temple of Juno Moneta on the Arx. The entrance from the Clivus Capitolinus is by a wide flat arch of peperino beautifully jointed; the other end wall has been mostly destroyed. The back of this building overlooked the Asylum or depression between the two peaks. From this higher level a long steep staircase of sixty-seven steps descends towards the Forum; the doorway at the foot of these stairs has a flat arch with a circular relieving arch over it; it was blocked up by the temple of Vespasian. Great damage was done to this building by the additions of Boniface VIII. and Nicholas V., as well as by its being used as a salt store, by which the walls were much

The Imperial Fora.
The Forum Julium (see fig. 11, Plan), with its central temple of

Venus Genetrix, was begun, about 54 B.C., by Julius (who dedicated Forum Julium. it in an unfinished state in 46 B.C.) and completed by Augustus.[116] Being built on a crowded site it was somewhat cramped, and the ground cost nearly a hundred million sesterces.[117] Part of its circuit wall, with remains of five arches, exists in the Via delle Marmorelle; and behind is a row of small vaulted rooms, probably shops or offices. The arches are slightly cambered, with travertine springers and keys; the rest, with the circular relieving arch over, is of tufa; it was once lined with slabs of marble, the holes for which exist. Foundations of the circuit wall exist under the houses towards S. Adriano, but the whole plan has not been made out. In the centre of the Forum stood the temple of Venus Genetrix whose remains were seen and described by Palladio (Arch. iv. 31). This temple was vowed by

Caesar at the battle of Pharsalus.[118]
The forum of Augustus (see fig. 11) adjoined that of Julius on

its north-east side; it contained the temple of Mars Ultor, built to Forum of Augustus. commemorate the vengeance taken on Caesar's murderers at Philippi, 42 B.C. (Ov. Fast. v. 575 seq.).[119] It was surrounded with a massive wall of peperino, over 100 ft. high, with travertine string-courses and cornice; a large piece of this wall still exists, and is one of the most imposing relics of ancient Rome. Against it are remains of the temple of Mars, three columns of which, with their entablature and marble ceiling of the peristyle, are still standing; it is Corinthian in style, very richly decorated, and built of fine Luna marble. The cella is of peperino, lined with marble; and the lower part of the lofty circuit wall seems also to have been lined with marble on the inside of the forum. The large archway by the temple (Arco dei Pantani) is of travertine. Palladio (Arch. iv.) and other writers of the 16th century give plans of the temple and circuit wall, showing much more than now exists. The temple, which was octastyle, with nine columns and a pilaster on the sides, occupied the centre, and on each side the circuit wall formed two large semicircular apses, decorated with tiers of niches for

The Forum Pacis, built by Vespasian, was farther to the south-east;

the only existing piece, a massive and lofty wall of mixed Forum Pacis. tufa and peperino, with a travertine archway, is opposite the end of the basilica of Constantine. The arch opened into the so-called Templum, Sacrae Urbis, a rectangular building entered by a portico on its west side, whose north wall was decorated with a marble plan of the city of Rome (see below, p. 608). The original plan was probably burnt with the whole group of buildings in this forum in 191, in the reign of Commodus (Dio Cass. lxxii. 24); but a new plan was made, and the building restored in concrete and brick by Severus. The north end wall, with the clamps for fixing the marble plan, still exists, as does also the other (restored) end wall with its arched windows towards the forum; one hundred and sixty-seven fragments of this plan were found c. 1563 at the foot of the wall to which they were fixed, and are now preserved, in the Capitoline Museum; drawings of seventy-four pieces now lost are preserved in the Vatican[121] (Cod. Vat. 3439). The whole. of these fragments were published by Jordan, Forma Urbis Romae (Berlin, 1874). Other 'fragments have since been brought to light, and the whole series was rearranged in the Palazzo dei Conservatori in 1903. The circular building at the end facing on the Sacra Via is an addition built by Maxentius in honour of his deified son Romulus; like the other buildings of Maxentius,

it was rededicated and inscribed with the name of his conqueror

Constantine.[122] The original building of Vespasian was probably an

archive and record office; it was certainly not a temple. The fine bronze doors at the entrance to the temple of Romulus are much earlier than the building itself, as are also the porphyry columns and very rich entablature which ornament this doorway. Pope Felix IV. (526-30) made the double building into the church of SS. Cosmo e Damiano, using the circular domed temple of Romulus as a porch.[123] The chief building of Vespasian's forum was the Templum Pacis,[124] dedicated in 75, one of the most magnificent in Rome,

which contained a very large collection of works of art.
EB1911 Rome - Imperial Fora.jpg
From Richter's Topographie der Stadt Rom, by permission of C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Emery Walker sc.
Fig. 11.—Imperial Fora.
The forum of Nerva (see fig. 11) occupied the narrow strip left

between the fora of Augustus and Vespasian; being little more Forum of Nerva. than a richly decorated street, it was called the Forum Transitorium or Forum Palladium, from the temple to Minerva which it contained. It was begun by Domitian, and dedicated by Nerva in 97 (see Suet. Dom. 5; Mart. i. 2, 8). Like the other imperial fora, it was surrounded by a peperino wall, not only lined with marble but also decorated with rows of Corinthian columns supporting a rich entablature with sculptured frieze. Two columns and part of this wall still exist; on the frieze are reliefs of weaving, fulling and various arts which were under the protection of Minerva. A great part of the temple existed till the time of Paul V., who in 1606 destroyed it to use the remains for the building of the Acqua Paola.[125] In the reign of Severus Alexander a series of colossal bronze statues, some equestrian, were set round this forum; they represented all the previous emperors who had been deified, and by each was a bronze column inscribed with his res gestae

(Hist. Aug.; Sev. Alex. 28).
The forum of Trajan with its adjacent buildings was the last and,

at least in size, the most magnificent of all; it was in progress from Forum of Trajan. 113 to 117, at least. A great spur of hill, which connected the Capitoline with the Quirinal, was cut away to make a level site for this enormous group of buildings. It consisted (see fig. 11) of a large dipteral peristyle, with curved projections, lined with shops on the side. That against the slope of the Quirinal, three storeys high, still partly exists. The main entrance was through a triumphal arch (Dio Cass. lxviii. 29). Aurei of Trajan show this arch and other parts of his forum.[126] The opposite side was occupied by the Basilica Ulpia (Jordan, F. U. R. iii. 25, 26), part of which, with the column of Trajan, is now visible; none of the columns, which are of grey granite, are in situ, and the whole restoration is misleading. Part of the rich paving in oriental marble is genuine. This basilica contained two large

libraries (Dio Cass. lxviii. 16; Aul. Cell. xi. 17).
The Columna Cochlis (so called from its spiral stairs) is, including

capital and base, 97 ft. 9 in. high,[127] i.e. 100 Roman ft.; its pedestal Trajan's column. has reliefs of trophies of Dacian arms, and winged Victories. On the shaft are reliefs arranged spirally in twenty-three tiers scenes of Trajan's victories, containing about 2500 figures. Trajan's ashes were buried in a gold urn under this column (Dio Cass. lxviii. 16); and on the summit was a colossal gilt bronze statue of the emperor, now replaced by a poor figure of St Peter, set there by Sixtus V.[128] Beyond the column stood the temple of Trajan completed by Hadrian; its foundations exist Temple of Trajan. under the buildings at the north-east side of the modern piazza, and many of its granite columns have been found. This temple is shown on coins of Hadrian.[129] The architect of this magnificent group of buildings was Apollodorus of Damascus (Dio Cass. lxix. 4), who also designed many buildings in Rome during Hadrian's reign.[130] In addition to the five imperial fora, and the Forum Magnum, Holitorium and Boarium, mentioned above, there were also smaller markets for pigs (Forum Suarium), bread (Forum Pistorium) and fish (Forum Piscarium), all of which, with some others, popularly but wrongly called fora, are given in the

regionary catalogues.
Other Temples, &c.
Besides the temples mentioned in previous sections remains of

many others still exist in Rome. The circular temple by the Tiber, Other temples. in the Forum Boarium (Plan, No. 5), formerly thought to be that of Vesta, is possibly that of Portunus, the god of the harbour (Varro, L.L. vi. 19). Its design is similar to that of the temple of Vesta in the forum (fig. 8), and, except the

entablature and upper part of the cella, which are gone, it is well

preserved. It may date from the 2nd century B.C. The neighbouring

Ionic temple, popularly called of Fortuna Virilis, is of special interest from its early date, probably the end of the 3rd century B.C. The complete absence of marble and the very sparing use of travertine, combined with the simple purity of its design, indicate an early date.[131] It has a prostyle tetra style portico of travertine, and a short cella of tufa with engaged columns; the bases of these and of the angle columns are of travertine. The frieze has reliefs of ox skulls and garlands. The whole was originally stuccoed and painted so that the different stones used would not show. Fig. 12 gives the plan, showing the hard travertine used at the points of greatest pressure, while the main walls with the half columns are of the weaker and softer tufa. The dedication of this temple is doubtful; but it is probably either that of Fortuna or of Mater Matuta, both of which were destroyed by fire in 213 B.C. and restored in the following year. The church of S. Maria in Cosmedin contains some remains of a temple (Plan, No. 4) which has been identified with that of Hercules built by Pompey ad Circum Maximum (Vitr. iii. 2, 5; Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 57). The temple stands close to the carceres of the Circus Maximus, in the Forum Boarium. The columns built up in the church did not, however, belong to a temple, but to a porticus. Within the walls of S. Niccoló in Carcere in the Forum Holitorium (Plan, No. 18) are preserved remains of three small hexastyle peripteral temples, two Ionic and one Tuscan, set close side by side.[132] A fragment of the marble plan includes part of this group. The Tuscan temple is built of travertine, the others of tufa and peperino, with travertine at the points of greatest pressure. They are probably those of Janus ad Theatrum Marcelli, dedicated by C. Duilius in the First Punic War (Tac. Ann. ii. 49); of Spes, built by A. Atilius Calatinus, of about the same date (Tac. Ann. ii. 49); and of Juno Sospita, dedicated by C. Cornelius Cethegus in 197 B.C. (Liv. xxxiv. 53). Near the Forum Holitorium are extensive remains of the large group of buildings included in the Porticus Octaviae (Plan, No. 16), two of which, dedicated to Juno Regina and Jupiter Stator, with part of the enclosing porticus and the adjoining temple of Hercules Musarum, are shown on a fragment Porticus Octaviae. of the marble plan. The Porticus Octaviae, a large rectangular space enclosed by a double line of columns, was built in honour of Octavia by her brother Augustus on the site of the Porticus Metelli, founded in 146 B.C. This must not be confounded with the neighbouring Porticus Octavia founded by Cn. Octavius, the conqueror of Perseus (Liv. xlv. 6, 42), in 168 B.C., and rebuilt under the same name by Augustus, as is recorded in the Ancyran inscription. The whole group was one of the most magnificent in Rome, and contained a large number of works of art by Pheidias and other Greek sculptors. The existing portico, which was the main entrance into the porticus, is a restoration of the time of Severus in 203. The church of S. Angelo in Pescheria and the houses behind it conceal extensive remains of the porticus and its temples (see Ann. Inst., 1861, p. 241, 1868, p. 108;

and Contigliozzi, I. Portici di Ottavia, 1861).[133]
EB1911 Rome - Temple of Fortuna Virilis plan.jpg
Fig. 12.—So-called Temple of Fortuna Virilis. The black shows tufa; the shading travertine.
Remains of a large peripteral Corinthian temple are built into

the side of the Borsa (formerly the Custom House). Eleven Temple of Neptune. marble columns and their rich entablature are still in situ, with the corresponding part of the cella wall of peperino; in 1878 a piece of the end wall of the cella was discovered, and, under the houses near, part of a large peribolus wall, also of peperino, forming an enclosure with columns all round the temple nearly 330 ft. square (see Bull. Comm. Arch. Rom. vi. pl. iv., 1878). This temple has commonly been identified with that of Neptune (Dio Cass. lxvi. 24), built by Agrippa, and surrounded by the Porticus Argonautarum (Dio Cass. liii. 27; Mart. iii. 20, 11); but it clearly dates, at least in its present form, from the 2nd century A.D., and is not improbably the temple of

Hadrian, mentioned in the Notitia as being near this spot.
The temple of Venus and Rome on the Velia (see fig. 8) was the

Temple of Venus and Rome. largest in Rome; it was pseudo-dipteral, with ten Corinthian columns of Greek marble at the ends, and probably twenty at the sides; it had an outer colonnade round the peribolus of about 180 columns of polished granite. Of these only a few fragments now exist; for several centuries the whole area of this building was used as a quarry, while the residue of the marble was burnt into lime on the spot in kilns built of broken fragments of the porphyry columns. A considerable part of the two cellae with their apses, set back to back, still exists; in each apse was a colossal seated figure of the deity, and along the side walls of the cellae were rows of porphyry columns and statues in niches. The vault is deeply coffered with stucco enrichments once painted and gilt. The roof was covered with tiles of gilt bronze, which were taken by Pope Honorius I. (625-38) to cover the basilica of St Peter's. These were stolen by the Saracens during their sack of the Leonine city in 846. The emperor Hadrian himself designed this magnificent temple, which was partially completed in 135; the design was criticized severely by the architect Apollodorus (Dio Cass. lxix. 4; Vita Hadr. 19). The temple was probably finished by Antoninus Pius; it was partly burned in the reign of Maxentius, who began its restoration, which was carried on by Constantine. The existing remains of the two cellae are mainly of Hadrian's time, but contain patches of the later restorations. Between the south angle of this temple and the arch of Constantine stand the remains of a fountain, usually known as the Meta Sudans. This was a tall conical structure in a large circular basin, all lined with marble. From its brick facing it appears to be

a work of the Flavian period.
That part of the Caelian hill which is near the Colosseum is

covered with very extensive remains—a great peribolus of brick-faced Buildings of the Caelian, Esquiline and Quirinal. concrete, apparently of Flavian date, and part of a massive travertine arcade in two storeys, similar to that of the Colosseum; most of the latter has been removed for the sake of the stone, but a portion still exists under the monastery and campanile of SS. Giovanni e Paolo. There can be no reasonable doubt that these substructures carried the temple of Claudius, built by Vespasian

(Suet. Vesp. 9).
The so-called temple of Minerva Medica (“Nympheum” on Plan)

on the eastern slope of the Esquiline (so named from a statue found in it), a curiously planned building, with central decagonal domed hall, probably belonged to the palace of Gallienus (263-68). Somewhat similar ruins beside the neighbouring basilica of S. Croce formed part of the Sessorium, a palace on the Esquiline. The remains on the Quirinal, in the Colonna gardens, of massive marble entablatures richly sculptured were formerly thought to belong to Aurelian's great temple of the Sun, but it now appears certain that they belong to the very extensive thermae of Constantine, part of the site of which is now occupied by the Quirinal palace and neighbouring buildings.[134]

The excavations of recent years have brought to light, and in many cases destroyed, a large number of domestic buildings; Private houses. these discoveries are recorded in the Notizie degli Scavi and the Bull. Comm. Arch. Rom. The extensive cutting away of the Tiber bank for the new embankment exposed some very ornate houses near the Villa Farnesina, richly decorated with marble, fine wall-paintings, and stucco reliefs, equal in beauty to any works of the kind that have ever been found. These are now exhibited in the Museo delle Terme, but the houses themselves have been destroyed. The laying out of the new Quirinal and Esquiline quarters has also exposed many fine buildings. Some remains on the Esquiline have been supposed (without much probability) to belong to the villa of Maecenas. A very remarkable vaulted room, decorated with paintings of plants and landscapes, has been shown to be a greenhouse;[135] at one end is an apse with a series of step-like stages for flowers. This one room has been preserved, though the rest of the villa has been destroyed; it is on the road leading from S. Maria Maggiore to the Lateran. The walls are a very fine speimen of tufa opus reticulatum, unmixed with brick, evidently of the early imperial period. Among the numerous buildings discovered in the Horti Sallustiani near the Quirinal was a very fine house of the 1st century A.D., in concrete faced with brick and opus reticulatum. It had a central circular domed hall, with many rooms and staircases round it, rising four storeys high. This house was set in the valley against a cliff of the Quirinal, so that the third floor is level with the upper part of the hill. It is nearly on the line of the Servian wall, which stood here at a higher level on the edge of the cliff. This park was laid out by the historian Sallust, and remained in the possession of his family until the reign of Tiberius, when it became imperial property; it was used as a residence by Nero (Tac. Ann. xiii. 47) and other emperors till the 4th century.[136] In 1884, near the Porta S. Lorenzo, a long line of houses was discovered during the making of a new road. Some of these were of opus

reticulatum of the 1st century B.C.; others had the finest kind of

brick-facing, probably of the time of Nero; all had been richly

decorated with marble linings and mosaics. The line of the street was parallel to that of the later Aurelian wall, which at this part was built against the back of this row of houses. At the same time, behind the line of houses were uncovered fine peperino and tufa piers of the aqueduct rebuilt by Augustus, one arch of which forms the Porta S. Lorenzo. These interesting remains have all been completely destroyed. A fine house of the end of the 1st century A.D., with richly decorated walls, was exposed in June 1884 against the slope of the Quirinal, near the Palazzo Colonna; it was immediately destroyed to make room for

new buildings.
The praetorian camp was first made permanent and surrounded

with a strong wall by the emperor Tiberius (Suet. Tib. 37). Owing Praetorian camp. to the camp being included in the line of the Aurelian wall, a great part of it still exists; it is a very interesting specimen of early imperial brick-facing. The wall is only 12 to 14 ft. high, and has thinly scattered battlements, at intervals of 20 ft. The north-east gate (Porta Principalis Dextra) is well preserved; it had a tower on each side, now greatly reduced in height, in which are small windows with arched heads moulded in one slab of terra-cotta. The brick-facing, is very neat and regular,—the bricks being about 1½ in. thick, with ½-in. joints. On the inside of the wall are rows of small rooms for the guards. Part of the Porta Praetoria also remains. This camp was dismantled by Constantine, who removed its inner walls; the outer ones were left because they formed part of the Aurelian circuit. The present wall is nearly three times the height of the original camp wall. The upper part was added when Aurelian included it in his general circuit wall round Rome. The superior neatness and beauty of Tiberius's brick-facing make it easy to distinguish where his work ends and that of the later emperors begins. Owing to the addition of the later wall it requires some care to trace the rows of battlements which belong

to the camp.
The Pantheon is the most perfect among existing classical buildings

in Rome. The inscription on the frieze of the portico (M . Pantheon. AGRIPPA . L . F . COS . TERTIVM . FECIT) refers to a building erected by Agrippa in 27 B.C., consecrated to the divinities of the Julian house (Mars, Venus, etc.) under the name Pantheum (“all-holy”); cf. Dio Cass. liii. 27; Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 43. It was sometimes used as the meeting-place of the Fratres Arvales before they began to meet in the temple of Concord (C. I. L. v. 2041). Pliny mentions the sculpture by the Athenian Diogenes which adorned it, and its capitals and dome covering of Syracusan bronze (xxxiv. 7). It was long supposed that the present rotunda was the Pantheon of Agrippa; but this was destroyed in the great fire of A.D. 80 (Oros. 7, 12; Hieron. Abr. 2127); and recent investigations have shown that the rotunda is a work of Hadrian's reign, bricks of that period having been found in all parts of the building. Excavations have made it probable that the site of the rotunda was previously occupied by an open piazza, whose pavement of coloured marbles has been discovered beneath the flooring, and that Agrippa's Pantheon covered the present piazza and faced southward. The present portico has been reconstructed; it is probable that Agrippa's portico had ten columns in the front. The ceiling of the portico too was of bronze, supported by hollow bronze girders,[137] which remained till Urban VIII. melted them to make cannon for S. Angelo; the bronze weighed 450,000 ℔. The bronze tiles of the dome were stolen long before by Constans II., in 663, but on their way to Constantinople they were seized by the Saracens. The portico has eight columns on the front and three on the sides, all granite monoliths except the restored ones on the east side,—sixteen in all. The capitals are Corinthian, of white marble; the tympanum (ἀετός) of the pediment was filled with bronze reliefs of the battle of the gods and the giants.[138] The walls of the circular part, nearly 20 ft., thick, are of solid tufa concrete, thinly faced with brick. The enormous dome, 142 ft. 6 in. in span, is cast in concrete made of pumice-stone, pozzolana and lime; being one solid mass, it covers the building like a shell, free from any lateral thrust at the haunches. On the face of the concrete is a system of superimposed relieving arches in brick. These no longer possess any constructive value, but were designed to preserve the stability of the dome whilst the concrete became firmly set. Round the central opening or hypaethrum still remains a ring of enriched mouldings in gilt bronze, the only bit left of the bronze which once covered the whole dome. The lower storey of the circular part and the walls of the projecting portico were covered with slabs of Greek marble; a great part of the latter still remains, enriched with Corinthian pilasters and bands of sculptured ornament. The two upper storeys of the drum were covered outside with hard stucco of pounded marble. Inside the whole was lined with a great variety of rich oriental marbles. This magnificent interior, divided into two orders by an entablature supported on columns and pilasters, has been much injured by alteration.[139] About 608 the Pantheon was given by Phocas to Boniface IV., who consecrated it as the church of S. Maria ad Thermae of Agrippa. Martyres. In 1881-82 the destruction of a row of houses behind the Pantheon exposed remains of a grand hall with richly sculptured entablature on Corinthian columns, part of the great thermae of Agrippa, which extend beyond the Via della Ciambella. A great part of the thermae appears from the brick stamps to belong to an extensive reconstruction in the reign

of Hadrian[140] (see Baths).
Close by the Pantheon is the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva,

which stands (as its name records) on or near the site of a temple to Minerva Chalcidica (Plan, No. 12), probably founded by Pompey the Great, c. 60 B.C. (Plin. H.N. vii. 97), and restored by Domitian. Adjoining this were temples to Isis and Serapis, a cult which became very popular in Rome in the time of Hadrian; large quantities of sculpture, Egypto-Roman in style, have been found on this site at

many different times.[141]
Several of the barracks (excubitoria) of the various cohorts of the

vigiles or firemen have been discovered in various parts of Rome. Firemen's barracks. That of the first cohort (Plan, No. 29) is buried under the Palazzo Savorelli; that of the second (Plan, No. 30) was on the Esquiline, near the so-called temple of Minerva Medica; that of the third (Plan, No. 31) was near the baths of Diocletian. The most perfect is that of the seventh cohort (Plan, No. 34), near S. Crisogono in Trastevere, a handsome house of the 2nd century, decorated with mosaic floors, wall-paintings,

The excavations made in exposing the ancient church of S.

Clemente brought to light interesting remains of different periods; drawings are given by Mullooly, St Clement and his Basilica (1869), and De Rossi, Bull. Arch. Crist. (1863), 28.

Some remains exist of the Golden House of Nero, which, including its parks, lakes, &c., covered an incredibly large space of ground, Golden House of Nero. extending from the Palatine, over the Velia and the site of the temple of Venus and Rome, to the Esquiline, filling the great valley between the Caelian and the Esquiline where the Colosseum stands, and reaching far over the Esquiline to the great reservoir now called the “Sette Sale.” No other extravagances or cruelties of Nero appear to have offended the Roman people so much as the erection of this enormous palace, which must have blocked up many important roads and occupied the site of a whole populous quarter. It was partly to make restitution for this enormous theft of land that Vespasian and Titus destroyed the Golden House and built the Colosseum and Thermae of Titus on part of its site. Adjoining the baths of Titus were those built on a much larger scale by Trajan. Under the substructions of these extensive remains of the Golden House still exist;[143] and at one point, at a lower level still, pavements and foundations remain of one of the numerous houses destroyed by Nero to clear the site. The great bronze colossus of Nero, 120 ft. high (Suet. Nero, 31), which stood in one of the porticus of the Golden House, was moved by Vespasian, with head and attributes altered to those of Apollo (Helios), on to the Velia; and it was moved again by Hadrian, when the temple of Rome was built, on to the base which still exists near the Colosseum. Several coins show this colossus by the side

of the Colosseum.
Under the Palazzo Doria, the church of S. Maria in Via Lata,

and other neighbouring buildings extensive remains exist of a Saepta Julia. great porticus, with long rows of travertine piers; this building is designated on fragments of the marble plan with the words SAEPT . . . LIA. This must be the Saepta Julia, begun by Julius Caesar, and completed by Agrippa in 27 B.C., as the 'voting place for the Comitia Centuriata, divided into compartments, one for each century. The building contained rostra, and was also used for gladiatorial shows. Under the later

empire it became a bazaar and resort of slave-dealers.
That curiously planned building on the Esquiline, in the new

Piazza Vit. Emmanuele, where the so-called trophies of Marius once were placed (see Du Pérac, Vestigj, pl. 27), is one of the numerous castella or reservoirs from which the water of the various aqueducts was distributed in the quarters they were meant to supply, and

may perhaps be identified with the Nymphaeum Alexandri built

by Severus Alexander at the termination of his Alexandrine aqueduct,

opened in 225 (see Hist. Aug. Sev. Alex. 25). But, the marble trophies now set at the top of the Capitoline steps bear a quarry mark which shows them to be of the time of Domitian: it consists of the following inscription, now not visible, as it is cut on the under part—IMP . DOM . AVG . GERM . PER . CHREZ . LIB . * Cᛊ.[144]

Places of Amusement.

The Circus Maximus (see Circus) occupied the Vallis Murcia[145]

between the Palatine and the Aventine. Its first rows of seats, Circuses. which were of wood, are said to have been made under the Tarquins (Liv. i. 26, 35; Dionys. iii. 68). Permanent carceres were set up in 329 B.C. and restored in 174 B.C. (Liv. viii. 20, xli. 27). In the reign of Julius Caesar it was rebuilt with (for the first time) lower seats of stone (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 102), the upper being still of wood (Suet. Caes. 39); Dionysius (iii. 68) describes it as it was after this rebuilding. It was further ornamented with marble by Augustus, Claudius and other emperors. The wooden part was burnt in the great fire of Nero, and again under Domitian; it was considerably enlarged by Trajan, and lastly it was restored by Constantine. In its later state it had a marble façade with three external tiers of arches with engaged columns, and (inside) sloping tiers of marble seats, supported on concrete raking vaults (Plin. Paneg. 51). A great part of these vaults existed in the 16th century, and is shown by Du Pérac. It is said by Pliny (H.N. xxxvi. 102)—if the text be not corrupt—to have held 250,000 spectators, while the Regionary Catalogues give the number of seats as 485,000; but Huelsen has shown (Bull. Comm. Arch., 1894, 421 ff.) that the figures are much exaggerated and must, moreover, be interpreted, not of the number of spectators, but of the length of the tiers expressed in feet. The end with the carceres was near the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin.[146] Some of its substructures, with remains of very early tufa structures on the Palatine side, still exist below the church of S. Anastasia (see Plan of Palatine). The obelisk now in the Piazza del Popolo was set on the spina by Augustus, and that now in the Lateran piazza by Constantius II. The Circus Flaminius in the Campus Martius was built in 221 B.C. by the C. Flaminius Nepos who was killed at the Trasimene Lake in 217 B.C.; remains of the structure existed until the 16th century, when they were destroyed to build the Palazzo Mattei. In the middle ages its long open space was used as a rope-walk, hence the name of the church called S. Caterina dei Funari, which occupies part of its site.[147] The circus of Caligula and Nero was at the foot of the Vatican Hill (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 74). The modern-sacristy of St Peter's stands over part of its site. The obelisk on its spina remained standing in situ till it was moved by Fontana[148] for Sixtus V. to its present site in the centre of the piazza. The great stadium, foundations of which exist under most of the houses of the Piazza Navona (Agonalis), and especially below S. Agnese, is that built by Domitian and restored by Severus Alexander. That it was a stadium and not a circus is shown by the fact that its starting end is at right angles to the sides and not set diagonally, as was always the case with the carceres of a circus; nor is there any trace of foundations of a spina. The best preserved circus is that built by Maxentius in honour of his deified son Romulus, by the Via Appia, 2 m. outside the walls of Rome. It was attributed to Caracalla till 1825, when an inscription recording its true dedication

was found.[149]
The first permanent naumachia was that constructed by Augustus

between the foot of the Janiculan hill and the Tiber. The naumachia of Domitian was pulled down and the materials used to restore the Circus Maximus (Suet. Dom. 5); it was perhaps restored by Trajan, for the remains of a naumachia built of opus reticulatum mixed with brick have been discovered near the mausoleum of Hadrian.

The first stone theatre in Rome was that built by Pompey in 55-52 B.C. (see Theatre: Roman); it contained a temple to Venus Theatres. Victrix, and in front of it was a great porticus, called Hecatostylum from its hundred columns. This is shown on the marble plan.[150] Considerable remains of the foundations exist between the Piazza dei Satiri, which occupies the site of the scena, and the Via de' Giubbonari and Via del Paradiso. Adjoining this was the porticus Pompeiana, which contained the curia of Pompey, where Caesar was murdered, after which it was walled up. The colossal statue, popularly supposed to be that of Pompey, at the feet of which Caesar died,[151] now in the Palazzo Spada, was found in 1553 near the theatre. This theatre was restored by Augustus (Mon. Anc. 4, 9); in the reign of Tiberius it was burnt, and its rebuilding was completed by Caligula. The scena was again burnt in A.D. 80, and restored by Titus. According to Pliny (H.N. xxxvi. 115), it held 40,000 spectators; the Regionary Catalogues give the number 17,580. Huelsen estimates its capacity at 9000-10,000 spectators. In 1864 the colossal gilt bronze statue of Hercules, now in the Vatican, was found near the site of the theatre of Pompey, carefully concealed underground. The theatre of Marcellus is much more perfect; complete foundations of the cunei exist under the Palazzo Savelli, and part of the external arcade is well preserved. This is built of travertine in two orders, Tuscan and Ionic, with delicate details, very superior to those of the Colosseum, the arcade of which is very similar to this in general design. This theatre was begun by J. Caesar, and finished by Augustus in 13 B.C., who dedicated it in the name of his nephew Marcellus.[152] It was restored by Vespasian (Suet. Vesp. 19). Foundations also of the theatre dedicated by Cornelius Balbus in 13 B.C. (Suet. Aug. 29; Dio Cass. liv. 25) exist under the Monte dei Cenci; and in the Via dei Calderari there is a small portion of the external arcade of a porticus (Plan, No. 42); the lower storey has travertine arches with engaged columns, and the upper has brick-faced pilasters. This has been supposed to be the Crypta Balbi mentioned in the Regionary Catalogues, but is more probably the Porticus Minucia, built in 110 B.C. An interesting account of the temporary theatre of M. Aemilius Scaurus, erected in 58 B.C., is given by Pliny (H.N. xxxvi. 5, 113). The same writer mentions an almost incredible building, which consisted of two wooden theatres made to revolve on pivots, so that the two together made an amphitheatre; this was erected by C. Curio in

50 B.C. (H.N. xxxvi. 116).
The first stone amphitheatre in Rome was that built by Statilius

Amphitheatres. Taurus in the reign of Augustus. (For the Colosseum and the Amphitheatrum Castrense, see Amphitheatre; for

the Baths, see that article.)
Arches, Columns, Tombs and Bridges.
The earliest triumphal arches were the two erected by L. Stertinius

(196 B.C.) in the Forum Boarium and in the Circus Maximus, out Arches. of spoils gained in Spain.[153] In the later years of the empire there were nearly forty in Rome. The arch of Titus and Vespasian on the Summa Sacra Via was erected by Domitian to commemorate the conquest of Judaea by Titus in his father's reign. Reliefs inside the arch represent the triumphal procession—Titus in a chariot, and on the other side soldiers bearing the golden candlestick, trumpets and table of prothesis, taken from the Jewish temple. The central part only of this monument is original; the sides were restored in 1823.[154] Another arch in honour of Titus had previously been built (A.D. 80) in the Circus Maximus; its inscription is given in the Einsiedeln MS. (C. I. L. vi. 944). A plain travertine arch near the supposed palace of Commodus on the Caelian is inscribed with the names of the Consul Publius Cornelius Dolabella (A.D. 10) and of the flamen martialis, C. Junius Silanus. It may have originally been used to carry the Aqua Marcia; in later times the Aqua Claudia passed over it. The so-called arch of Drusus by the Porta Appia also carries the specus of an aqueduct—that built by Caracalla to supply his great thermae. Its composite capitals show, however, that it is later than the time of Drusus, and it was very possibly the work of Trajan. Adjoining the church of S. Giorgio in Velabro a rich though coarsely decorated marble gateway with flat lintel still exists—built, as its inscription records, in honour of Severus and his sons by the argentarii (bankers and silversmiths) and other merchants of the Forum Boarium in 204. It formed an entrance from the Forum Boarium into the Velabrum. The figure of Geta in the reliefs and his name have been erased by Caracalla; the sculpture is poor both in design and execution (see Bull. Inst., 1867, p. 217, and 1871, p. 233). Close by is a quadruple

arch, set at the intersection of two roads, such as was called by the

Romans an arch of Janus Quadrifrons. Though partly built of

earlier fragments, it is late in style, and may be the Arcus Constantini mentioned in the XIth region. The finest existing arch is that by the Colosseum erected by Constantine. It owes, however, little of its beauty to that artistically degraded period. Not only most of its reliefs but its whole design and many of its architectural features were stolen from an earlier arch erected by Trajan as an entrance to his forum (see above). The arch of Claudius, built in 43 to commemorate his supposed victories in Britain, stood across the Via Lata (modern Corso) in the Piazza Sciarra. Its exact position is shown in Bull. Comm. Arch. Rom., 1878, pl. iv. Its remains were removed in the middle of the 16th century,[155] and nothing now is left but half its inscription, preserved in the garden of the Barberini palace. It is shown on both aurei and denarii of Claudius, with an attic inscribed DE BRITANNIS, and surmounted by a quadriga and trophies. A little to the N. of the Piazza Colonna was an arch popularly called the Arco di Portogallo, destroyed in 1665, whose reliefs are now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori. They appear to date from the reign of Hadrian, but may have been used at a later time to decorate this arch. An arch also stood opposite S. Maria in Via Lata until 1498, which was probably erected by Diocletian in A.D. 303. The central part of the once triple arch of Gallienus still exists on the Esquiline; it took the place of the ancient Porta Esquilina of the Servian wall. It is built of travertine, is simple in design, with coarse details, and has an inscription on its attic. The two side arches and pediment over the centre existed in the 16th century, and are shown in the Mantuan oil-painting of Rome,[156] and in several antiquarian works of the 16th century. The inscription (C. I. L. vi. 1106) records that it was erected in

honour of Gallienus and his wife Salonina by Aurelius Victor.[157]
The column of Antoninus Pius was a monolith of red granite,

erected after his death by his adopted sons M. Aurelius and L. Columns. Verus. One fragment of it is preserved in the Vatican with an interesting quarry inscription, recording that it was cut in the ninth year of Trajan's reign, under the supervision of Dioscurus and the architect Aristides. The rest of its fragments were used by Pius VI. to repair the obelisk of Monte Citorio, set up by Augustus in the Campus Martius as the gnomon of a sundial (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 72). The marble pedestal of the Antonine column is now in the Vatican; it has reliefs representing the apotheosis of Faustina and Antoninus Pius, and the decursio equitum which formed part of the funeral ceremony. This and the column of M. Aurelius were both surmounted by colossal portrait statues of gilt bronze. The column of M. Aurelius is very similar in size and design to that of Trajan. Its spiral reliefs represent victories in Germany from 171-175, arranged in twenty tiers. Like the column of Trajan, it is exactly 100 Roman ft. high, without the pedestal. The pedestal was originally much higher than at present, but is now partly buried; it is shown by Gamucci, Du Pérac and other 16th-century writers. This column stood in front of a temple to M. Aurelius, and within a great peribolus, forming a forum similar to that of Trajan, though much smaller; the remains of this temple, amongst other buildings, probably form the elevation now

called Monte Citorio.[158]
For the catacombs, see Catacombs; for obelisks, see Obelisk and Egypt.
The prehistoric cemeteries of Rome are described above (Prehistoric

Rome). Few tombs exist of the Roman period earlier than the 1st Tombs. century B.C.,—probably owing to the great extension of the city beyond the Servian limits, which thus obliterated the earlier burial-places. The tomb of the Cornelii Scipiones is the most important of early date which still exists. It is excavated in the tufa rock at the side of the Via Appia, outside the Porta Capena. Interments of the Scipio family went on here for about 400 years, additional chambers and passages being excavated from time to time. The peperino sarcophagus of Lucius Cornelius Scipio Barbatus (Liv. x. 12, 13), consul in 298 B.C., is now in the Vatican; its inscription. in rude Saturnian verse, is one of the most important existing specimens of early Latin epigraphy. Many other inscribed slabs were found in the 17th century, covering the loculi in which lay the bodies of later members of the family. Those now existing in the tomb are modern copies.[159] This burial-place of the Scipios is unlike those of other families, owing to the gens Cornelia keeping up the early custom of interment without burning; thus stone sarcophagi or loculi (rock-cut recesses) were required instead of mere pigeonholes to hold the cinerary urns. The tomb of M. Bibulus, a few yards outside the Porta Fontinalis, and remains of two recently discovered during the destruction of the Aurelian towers at the Porta Salara, date from about the middle of the 1st century B.C., as does also the curious tomb of the baker Eurysaces outside the Porta Maggiore. In 1863 an interesting tomb of the Sempronia gens[160] was discovered on the Quirinal, below the royal palace, near the site of the Porta Salutaris. It is of travertine, with a rich entablature and frieze sculptured with the Greek honeysuckle ornament (see Bull. Comm. Arch., 1876, 126, pl. xii.). This also is of the last years

of the republic.
The mausoleum of Augustus, built 28 B.C., stood in the north

part of the Campus Martius, between the Tiber and the Via Flaminia. Mausolea. It is a massive cylindrical structure of concrete, faced with opus reticulatum; according to Strabo, this was faced with “white stone,” i.e. travertine; inside was a series of radiating chambers, in plan like a wheel. On the top was a great mound of earth, planted with trees and flowers (Tac. Ann. iii. 9). In the middle ages it was converted into a fortess by the Colonna, which was destroyed in 1167. In the 16th centuiy the central portion was occupied by a garden.[161] Only the bare core exists now, with its fine opus reticulatum, best seen in the court of the Palazzo Valdambrini. The inside is concealed by modern seats, being now used as a concert-hall (Anfiteatro Chorea). The sepulchral inscription in honour of Augustus, engraved on two bronze columns at the entrance, is preserved to us by its copy at Ancyra (q.v.). It records an almost incredible amount of building: in addition to the long list of building mentioned by name Augustus says, DVO . ET . OCTAGINTA . TEMPLA . DEVM . IN . VRBE . CONSVL . SEXTVM . REFECI. The first burial in the mausoleum of Augustus was that of M. Claudius Marcellus (died 23 B.C.), and it continued to be the imperial tomb till the death of Nerva, A.D. 98, after whose interment there was no

more room.
The mausoleum of Hadrian, built by that emperor as a substitute

for that built by Augustus, and dedicated in A.D. 138 by his successor, was a large circular building on a square podium; its walls, of enormous thickness, were of tufa faced with Parian marble and surrounded by a colonnade with rows of statues,—a work of the greatest magnificence. The splendour of the whole is described by Procopius (Bell. Goth. i. 22), who mentions its siege by the Goths, when the defenders hurled statues on to the heads of the enemy. In the 7th century the church of S. Angelus inter Nubes was built on its summit, and all through the middle ages it served as a papal fortress. The interior chambers are still well preserved, but its outside has been so often wrecked and refaced that little of the

original masonry is visible.[162]
Several of the grander sepulchral monuments of Rome were built

in the form of pyramids. One of these still exists, included in the Sepulchral pyramids. Aurelian wall, by the Porta Ostiensis. It is a pyramid of concrete, 118 feet high, faced with blocks of white marble, and contains a small chamber decorated with painted stucco. An inscription in large letters on the marble facing records that it was built as a tomb for C. Cestius, a praetor, tribune of the people, and septemvir of the epulones (officials who supervised banquets in honour of the gods). It was erected, according to Cestius's will, by his executors, in the space of 330 days. It dates from the time of Augustus[163] (see Falconieri, in Nardini, Roma Antica, iv. p. 1, ed. 1818-20). Another similar pyramid, popularly known as the tomb of Romulus, stood between the mausoleum of Hadrian and the basilica of St Peter. It was destroyed at the close of the 15th century, during the rebuilding of the long

bridge which connects the former building with the Vatican.
The earliest bridge was a wooden drawbridge called the Pons

Sublicius from the piles (sublicae) on which it was built. The Bridges. river being an important part of the defence of Rome from the Aventine to the Porta Flumentana (see plan of Servian wall, fig. 8), no permanent bridges were made till the Romans were strong enough not to fear attacks from without. The Pons Sublicius had a sacred character, and was always restored in wood, even in the imperial period.[164] Its exact site is doubtful, but it must be placed some distance below the Ponte Rotto. The first stone bridge was begun in 179 B.C. and completed in 142 B.C., when the conquest of Etruria and the defeat of Hannibal had put an end to fears of invasion; it was called the Pons Aemilius, after the pontifex maximus[165]

M. Aemilius Lepidus, its founder. It was also called Pons

Lapideus, to distinguish it from the wooden, Sublician bridge. The

modern Ponte Rotto represents this bridge; but the existing arches are mainly medieval. An ancient basalt-paved road still exists, leading to the bridge from the Forum Boarium. The Pons Fabricius united the city and the island (Insula Tiberina).[166] The bridge derived its name from L. Fabricius, a curator viarum in 62 B.C.; its inscription, twice repeated, is L . FABRICIVS . C . F . CVR . VIAR . FACIVNDVM . COERAVIT. Like the other existing bridges, it is built of great blocks of peperino and tufa, with a massive facing of travertine on both sides. Corbels to support centering were built in near the springing of the arches, so that they could be repaired or even rebuilt without a scaffolding erected in the river-bed. The well-preserved Pons Cestius, probably named after L. Cestius, praefectus urbi in 46 B.C., unites the island and the Janiculan side; on the marble parapet is a long inscription recording its restoration in 370 by Gratian, Valentinian, and Valens.[167] The next bridge, Ponte Sisto, is probably on the site of an ancient bridge called in the Notitia Pons Aurelius. Marliano gives an inscription (now lost) which recorded its restoration in the time of Hadrian. About 100 yards above this bridge have been found the remains of sunken piers, which are proved by an inscription (C. I. L. vi. 31545) to have belonged to the Pons Agrippae, not otherwise known. The Pons Aelius was built in 134 by Hadrian, to connect his mausoleum with the Campus Martius; it is still well preserved, and is now called the Ponte S. Angelo (see Dante, Inferno, xviii. 28-33). It had eight arches, of which the three in the centre were higher than the rest, so that the road sloped on both sides. The material is peperino, with travertine facings. Its inscription, now lost, is given in the Einsiedeln MS.—IMP . CAESAR . DIVI . TRAIANI . PARTHICI . FILIVS . DIVI . NERVAE . NEPOS . TRAIANVS . HADRIANVS . AVG . PONT . MAX . TRIB . POT . XVIIII . COS . III . P . P . FECIT. The Pons Aelius is shown on coins of Hadrian. A little below it are the foundations of another bridge, probably the Pons Neronianus of the Mirabilia, called also Vaticanus, built probably by Nero as a way to his Vatican circus and the Horti Agrippinae. At the foot of the Aventine, near the Marmorata, are the remains of piers which seem to have belonged to the Pons Probi, mentioned in the Notitia. It is uncertain whether this bridge is to be identified with the Pons Theodosii, which was built in A.D. 381-387 (Symm.

Ep. 4, 70, 2; 5, 76, 3), and is mentioned in the Mirabilia.[168]

Regiones of Augustus.

In spite of the extensive growth of the city under the republic no addition was made to the four regiones of Servius till the Augustan regiones. reign of Augustus, who divided the city and its suburbs into fourteen regiones. The lists in the Notitia and Curiosum are the chief aids in determining the limits of each, which in many cases cannot be done with any exactness (see Preller, Die Regionen der Stadt Rom (1846) and Urlich's Codex Topographicus (Würzburg, 1871)). Each regio was divided into vici or parishes, each of which formed a religious body, with its aedicula larum, and had magistri victorum. The smallest regio (No. II.) contained seven vici, the largest (No. XIV.) seventy-eight.

The list is as follows:—


Porta Capena, a narrow strip traversed by the Appian Way; it extended beyond the walls of Aurelian to the brook Almo.


Caelemontium, the Caelian Hill.


Isis et Serapis, included the valley of the Colosseum and the adjoining part of the Esquiline.


Templum Pacis, included the Velia, part of the Cispius, most of the Subura, the fora of Nerva and Vespasian, the Sacra Via, and also buildings along the north-east side of the Forum Magnum.


Esquiliae, north part of the Esquiline and the Viminal.


Alta Semita, the Quirinal as far as the praetorian camp.


Via Lata, the valley bounded on the west by the Via Lata, and by the neighbouring hills on the east.


Forum Romanum, also included the imperial fora and the Capitoline hill.


Circus Flaminius, between the Tiber, the Capitol, and the Via Flaminia.


Palatium, the Palatine hill.


Circus Maximus, the valley between the Palatine and the Aventine, with the Velabrum and Forum Boarium.


Piscina Publica, the eastern part of the Aventine, and the districts south of and beyond the Via Appia, including the site of Caracalla's thermae.


Aventinus, the hill, and the bank of the Tiber below it.


Trans Tiberim, the whole district across the river and the Tiber Island.[169]

EB1911 Rome - Aurelian's Wall.jpg

Fig. 13.—Aurelian's Wall; plan showing one of the towers and the passage in thickness of wall.

The walls of Aurelian (see fig. 7), more than 12 m. in circuit,

enclosed almost the whole of the regiones of Augustus, the greater Aurelian wall. part of which were then thickly inhabited. This enormous work was begun in 271, to defend Rome against sudden attacks of the Germans and other northern races when the great armies of Rome were fighting in distant countries.[170] After the death of Aurelian the walls were completed by Probus in 280, and about a century later they were restored and strengthened by the addition of gate-towers under Arcadius and Honorius (A.D. 403), in place of the earlier gateways of Aurelian; this is recorded by existing inscriptions on three of the gates.[171] At many periods these walls suffered much more from the attacks of the Goths (Procop, Bell. Goth. iii. 22, 24), and were restored successively by Theodoric (about 500), by Belisarius (about 560), and by various popes during the 8th and 9th centuries, and in fact all through the middle ages. A great part of the Aurelian wall still exists in a more or less perfect state; but it has wholly vanished where it skirted the river, and a great part of its trans-Tiberine course is gone. The best-preserved pieces are between Porta Pinciana and Porta Salaria (in which breaches have lately been made for streets), and between the Lateran and the Amphitheatrum Castrense. The wall, of concrete, has the usual brick-facing and is about 12 ft. thick, with a guard's passage formed in its thickness. Fig. 13 shows its plan: on the inside the passage has tall open arches, which look like those of an aqueduct, and at regular intervals of about 45 ft. massive square towers are built, projecting on the outside of the wall, in three storeys, the top storey rising above the top of the wall. The height of the wall varies according to the contour of the ground; in parts it was about 60 ft. high outside and 40 inside. Necessaria, supported on two travertine corbels, projected from the top of the wall on the outside beside most of the towers. The Einsiedeln MS. gives a description of the

complete circuit, counting fourteen gates, as follows:—
Porta S. Petri (at the Pons Aelius, destroyed); P. Flaminia

(replaced by P. del Popolo); P. Pinciana (in use); P. Salaria (now P. Salara); P. Nomentana (replaced by P. Pia); P. Tiburtina (now P. S. Lorenzo); P. Praenestina (now P. Maggiore); P. Asinaria (replaced by P. San Giovanni); P. Metrovia or Metroni (closed); P. Latina (closed); P. Appia (now P. S. Sebastiano); P. Ostiensis (now P. S. Paolo). On the Janiculan side, P. Portuensis (destroyed); P. Aurelia (now Porta San Pancrazio). Besides these there was a gate, now closed (Porta Chiusa), to the south of the Castra Praetoria; and in all probability a gate on the right bank of the Tiber, replaced by the modern Porta Settimiana.

These existing gates are mostly of the time of Honorius; each is flanked by a projecting tower, and some are double, with a second pair of towers inside. Several have grooves for a portcullis (cataracta) in the outer arch. The handsomest gate is the P. Appia, with two massive outer towers, three stages high, the upper semicircular in plan. Many of the gates of Honorius have Christian symbols or inscriptions. The general design of all these gates is much the same—a central archway, with a row of windows over it and two flanking towers, some square, others semicircular in plan. In many of the gates older materials are used, blocks of tufa, travertine, or marble. The doors themselves swung on pivots, the bottom ones let into a hole in the threshold, the upper into projecting corbels,

At many points along the line of the Aurelian wall older buildings

form part of the circuit-near the Porta Asinaria a large piece of

the Domus Lateranorum, a house of the 3rd century which gave its

name to the Lateran basilica, and a little farther on, by S. Croce in Gerusalemme, the Amphitheatrum Castrense; the latter, of about the end of the 1st century A.D., has two tiers of arches and engaged columns of moulded brick on the outside. Between the P. Praenestina and the P. Tiburtina comes a large castellum of the Aqua Tepula. The Praetorian Camp forms a great projection near the P. Nomentana. Lastly, the angle near the Porta Flaminia, at the foot of the Pincian Hill, is formed by remains of a lofty and enormously massive building, faced with fine opus reticulatum of the 1st century B.C. Owing to the sinking of the foundation this is very much out of the perpendicular, and was known as the “murus tortus” at a very early time.[172] What this once important building was is uncertain. Two archways which form gates in the Aurelian wall are of much earlier date. The Porta Maggiore consists of a grand double arch of the aqueducts Anio Novus and Claudia built in travertine. The Porta S. Lorenzo enclosed a single travertine arch, built by Augustus where the aqueduct carrying the Aqua Marcia, Tepula, and Julia crossed the Via Tiburtina. The inner gateway, built of massive travertine blocks by Honorius, was pulled

down by Pius IX., in 1868.[173]
Bibliography of Ancient Roman Topography.—Amongst ancient

writers special mention is due to Varro (De Lingua Latina), Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Antiquitates Romanae), Ovid (Fasti), Vitruvius (De Architectura), Pliny the Elder (Naturalis Historia), Frontinus (De Aquis) and the remains of ancient commentaries on Virgil, Horace, &c. The inscriptions found in the city of Rome are contained in vol. VI. of the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Many of them are of the highest importance for Roman topography, e.g. the Basis Capitolina, preserved in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, a pedestal which once supported a statue of Hadrian, dedicated in A.D. 136 by the vicomagistri of five regions; on the sides are inscribed the names of the vici and their officials. Vol. XV. of the C.I.L. contains the inscriptions stamped on tiles and water-pipes, which are likewise of great importance. The Monumentum Ancyranum (Res gestae divi Augusti, ed.² Mommsen, 1883) reproduces the bronze tablets set up by Augustus on his mausoleum at Rome, and contains a list of the buildings which he erected or restored. The marble plan of Rome (Forma urbis Romae, ed. Jordan, 1874; the more recently discovered fragments have only been published in periodicals) dates from the reign of Septimius Severus, who restored the building to which it belonged after the fire of 191 B.C. The plan which it replaced was executed by order of Vespasian. The scale was generally 1 : 250; it was oriented with S.E. at the top, N.W. at the bottom. Buildings are of course frequently represented on coins and works of art, and these may often be identified with existing

In the reign of Constantine the Great there was compiled a

catalogue of the principal buildings of Rome, arranged according to the fourteen regions of Augustus. This has been preserved in two recensions, one made in A.D. 334 and known as the Notitia, the second in or about A.D. 357, and known as the Curiosum urbis Romae. These are called the Regionary Catalogues, and contain, besides lists of buildings, statistics as to the number of vici, domus, insulae, &c., in each region, which are of great value. (See Preller, Regionen

der Stadt Rom, Jena, 1846.)
In the middle ages, guide-books were written for the use of

pilgrims visiting Rome. Besides giving the routes for the principal churches and cemeteries, they mention ancient buildings and give current legends regarding them. The earliest is the Itinerary of Einsiedeln, a MS. of the 8th century preserved in the monastery of Einsiedeln in Switzerland (see C. Huelsen, L'Itinerario di Einsiedeln, 1908). In the 12th century was compiled the Mirabilia urbis Romae, which became the foundation of later guide-books. The last recension is contained in a MS. of the early 15th century. These and other medieval documents are printed in Urlichs' Codex Topographicus urbis Romae (1871). The Ordo Benedicti Canonici (see Jordan, Topographie, II. 1, 646, and Lanciani, Monumenti Antichi, I. 437), which gives the route of papal processions, belongs also to the 12th century, and was perhaps written by the author of the Mirabilia. The Liber Pontificalis (ed. Duchesne, Paris, 1886; ed. Mommsen, in Monumenta Germaniae historica, vol. i.), which gives the biographies of the early popes and was continued throughout the middle ages, is of value as illustrating the transition from pagan to Christian Rome.

Several early views and plans of Rome exist, beginning with the painting by Cimabue in the upper church of S. Francesco at Assisi (1275). A collection of these was published by De Rossi, Piante icnografiche e prospettiche di Roma anteriori al secolo XVI. (1879). Many others have since come to light. (See Huelsen in Bull. Comm. Arch., 1892, p. 38).

In Italian and other libraries are preserved large numbers of plans and drawings from ancient remains by the architects of the 15th and later centuries, e.g. Bramantino, Fra Giocondo, the members of the families of Sangallo and Peruzzi, Pirro, Ligorio, Palladio, &c. These are of immense value, since the monuments which they drew have to a large extent been destroyed. Unfortunately they are not always trustworthy, especially those of Ligorio. The drawings at Florence have been indexed by Ferri; amongst recent publications may be noted those of the Codex Escorialensis by Egger (Vienna, 1905), and of a sketch-book, probably by A. Coner, in the Soane Museum by Dr Ashby, in Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. ii. (1903). Amongst the printed works of the early Italian architects may be named Palladio, Architettura(Venice, 1542), and Terme dei Romani (London, 1732), Serlio, Architettura (Venice, 1545), and Labacco, Architettura ed Antichità, (Rome, 1557). Engravings of ancient remains in Rome have been published in great numbers since the 16th century; the most importantiof the earlier collections are the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, a series extending over many years in the 16th century, and Du Pérac's Vestigj di Roma (1575). To the 18th century belong the etchings of Piranesi, published in several volumes, and still reproduced from the copper-plates by the Calcografia.

The literature of Roman topography would in itself form a large library; the best bibliographical guide is Mau's Katalog der Bibliothek des k. deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Rom (1900). The earliest modern work which can be called scientific is Flavio Biondo's Roma instaurata, written under Eugenius IV. (1431-1447), first dated edition, 1479. Biondo's work was based on the study of ancient literary authorities; he was followed in his method and results by the scholars of the 15th and early 16th centuries, e.g. Pozzo, Leo Battista Alberti and Andrea Fulvio. In the 16th century the study of ancient remains took its place beside that of ancient literature. Marliani, who had followed Biondo in the first edition of his Antiquae urbis Romae topographia (1538), issued a second edition in 1544, which contained, plans and illustrations. For more than a century his book formed the foundation upon which such writers as Fauno, G. Fabricius, Mauro, Panvinius, &c., raised their works. Unfortunately the Regionary Catalogues were largely interpolated during this period, and published in this form by Panvinius. In 1666 Famiano Nardini's Roma antica appeared, based upon the interpolated version of the Regionary Catalogues; this was productive of disastrous errors, many of which remained uncorrected until our own time. Nardini was followed in the 18th century by such writers as Ficoroni and Venuti; the most important works of this period were those produced by excavators such as Bianchini (Il palazzo dei Cesari, 1738), or independent students of the monuments such as Raphael Fabretti (De Columna Trajana, 1683; De Aquis et Aquaeductibus, 1680). In the 18th century Winckelmann revived interest in ancient, including Roman, art (especially by his Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums, 1764), and his follower, Carlo Fea, inaugurated the era of systematic and scientific excavation, especially in the Forum. In 1829 there was founded the international Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica (which in 1874 became the Kaiserlich deutsches archäologisches Institut); in 1830-42 was issued the Beschreibung der Stadt Rom, by Bunsen and others, in which the grosser errors which had passed current since Nardini's time were corrected. To the same period belong the magnificently illustrated works of Luigi Canina (Indicazione di Roma antica, 1830; Esposizione topografica, 1842; Architettura antica, 1834-44; Foro Romano, 1845; Edifizj di Roma antica, 1848-56), the value of which is impaired by their inaccuracy and the imaginative character of the restorations.

The books on Roman topography written in the early 19th century; such as those of Antonio Nibby, still pursued the uncritical methods of Nardini; from 1830 onwards, however, we find a series of writers whose work shows the influence of the new criticism. Such were Becker (Topographie der Stadt Rom, 1843), Sir Wm. Gell (Rome and its Vicinity, 1834; rev. ed. E. H. Bunbury, 1846), Braun (Ruinen und Museen Roms, 1854), Reber (Die Ruinen Roms, 1862) and T. H. Dyer (The City of Rome, 1864).

Since 1861, when excavations were begun on the Palatine at the instance of Napoleon III., under the direction of P. Rosa, the discovery of ancient remains has made constant progress, and the results have been incorporated in a number of works, of which only the most important can be named here. These are: Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom im Alterthum, of which three vols. (I1, I2, and II.) appeared in 1871-85, and a third (I3) was written after Jordan's death by C. Huelsen and published in 1907; Gilbert, Geschichte und Topographie der Stadt Rom im Alterthum (3 vols., 1883-9O); the works of Lanciani, especially Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome (1897) and Storia degli Scavi (in progress); O. Richter, Topographie der Stadt Rom (ed. 2, 1901); Middleton, The Remains of Ancient Rome (2 vols., 1892). A short handbook may be found in S. B. Platner's Topography and Monuments of Ancient Rome (Boston, 1904). For the study of recent discoveries (besides the special works referred to in the course of this article) the following periodicals are the most important:— Notizie degli Scavi, published by the Accademia dei Lincei since 1876; Bullettino della Commissions Archeologica comunale di Roma

(from 1872); Mittheilungen des k. deutschen archäologischen Instituts

(from 1886); Papers of the British School at Rome (from 1903). Brief

reports of discoveries are published by Dr T. Ashby in the Classical Review.

All previous archaeological maps of Rome have been superseded by Lanciani’s Formae urbis Romae, in 46 sheets (Milan, 1893–1902). The best recent maps are those in Kiepert’s Formae orbis antiqui, sheets 21 and 22. Kiepert and Huelsen’s Formae urbis Romae antiquae date from 1896; they are accompanied, by a Nomenclator Topographicus. Homo, Lexique de topographie romaine (1900), is

also useful.

 (J. H. M.; H. S. J.) 

Christian Rome

From the 4th to the 12th Century

The era of church building in Rome maybe said to begin with the reign of Constantine and the peace of the church. Before then Christian worship, was conducted with various degrees of secrecy either in private houses or in the catacombs (q.v.), according as the reigning emperor viewed the sect with tolerance or dislike. The type of church which in the beginning of the 4th century was adopted with certain modifications from the pagan basilica, though varying much in size, had little or no variety in its general form and arrangement. One fixed model was strictly adhered to for many centuries, and, in spite of numberless alterations and additions, can be traced in nearly all the ancient churches of Rome. It is fully described and illustrated in the article Basilica.

The walls of these early churches were mostly built of concrete,

faced with brick, left structurally quite plain, and decorated only with painted stucco or glass mosaics—especially (internally) in the apse and on the face of its arch, and (externally) Construction. on the east or entrance wall, the top of which was often built in an overhanging curve to keep off the rain. The windows were plain, with semicircular arches, and were filled with pierced marble screens, or in some cases with slabs of translucent alabaster; the latter was the case at S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, and examples of the former still exist in the very early church formed in the rooms of some thermae on the Esquiline (possibly those of Trajan), below the 6th-century church of S. Martino ai Monti. Almost the only bit of external architectural ornament was the eaves cornice, frequently (as at the last-named church) formed of marble cornices stolen from earlier classical buildings. Internally the nave columns, with their capitals and bases, were usually taken from some classical building, and some churches are perfect museums of fine sculptured caps and rich marble shafts of every material and design.[174] At first the nave had no arches, the columns supporting a horizontal entablature, as in old St Peter’s, S. Clemente, and S. Maria Maggiore, but afterwards, in order to widen the intercolumniation, simple round arches of narrow span were introduced, thus requiring fewer columns. The roof was of the simple tie-beam and kingpost construction, left open, but decorated with painting or metal plates. The floor was paved either with coarse mosaic of large tesserae (as at S. Pudentiana) or with slabs of marble stripped from ancient buildings. A later development of this plan added a small apse containing an altar at the end of each aisle, as in S. Maria in Cosmedin

and S. Pietro in Vincoli.[175]
The type of church above described was used as a model for by

far the majority of early churches not only in Rome, but also in England, France, Germany, and other Western countries. Another form was however occasionally used in Rome, Circular churches. which appears to have been derived from the round temple of pagan times. This is a circular building, usually domed and surrounded with one or more rings of pillared aisles. To this class belong the combined church and mausoleum of Costanza (see fig. 14) and that of SS. Marcellinus and Petrus, both built by Constantine, the former to hold the tomb of his daughters Constantia (or Constantina) and Helena, the latter that of his mother Helena. The latter is on the Via Labicana, about 2 m. outside Rome; it is a circular domed building, now known as the Torre Pignattara, from the pignatte or amphorae built into the concrete dome to lighten it. The mausoleum of S. Costanza, close by S. Agnese fuori, is also domed, with circular aisle, or rather ambulatory, the vault of the latter decorated with mosaic of classical style (see Mosaic, vol. xviii. p. 885). The red porphyry sarcophagi, sculptured richly with reliefs, from these mausolea are now in the Vatican. On a much larger scale is the church of S. Stefano Rotondo on the Coelian, built by Pope Simplicius (468-482), with a double ring of pillared aisles, the outer one of which was pulled down and a new enclosure wall built by Nicholas V. Other round churches are S. Teodoro (by the Vicus Tuscus), restored in the 8th century, and S. Bernardo, which is one of the domed halls of Diocletian’s thermae, consecrated as a

church in 1598.
EB1911 Rome - Plan of Church and Mausoleum of Constanza.jpg

Fig. 14.—Church and Mausoleum of Costanza; A, Recess for altar. B, Porphyry slab in floor where the tomb stood. C, Modern altar. D, D, Slabs of white marble, part of ancient paving. E, E, Recesses with mosaics. F, F, Ambulatory with mosaic vault.

Space will not allow any individual description of the very

numerous and important churches in Rome which are built on the basilica plan. The principal examples are these:— S. Pudentiana, traditionally the oldest in Rome, restored in 398; S. Clemente, restored under Siricius (384–399), now forming the crypt of an upper, church built in the 12th century; S. Sabina, 5th century; S. Vitale, 5th century, founded by Innocent I. (401–417); S. Martino ai Monti, c. 500; S. Balbina, 6th century; church of Ara Coeli, founded by Gregory the Great (590–604) as S. Maria in Capitolio; S. Giorgio in Velabro, rebuilt by Leo II. (682–683); S. Cesareo, 8th century; S. Maria in Via Lata, restored by Sergius, I. (687–701); S. Crisogono, rebuilt in 731 by Gregory III.; S. Maria in Cosmedin; S. Pietro in Vincoli, and S. Giovanni ad Portam Latinam, rebuilt c. 772 by Adrian I.; S. Maria in Dominica, rebuilt by Paschal I. (817–824), who also rebuilt S. Cecilia in Trastevere and S. Prassede; S. Marco, rebuilt by Gregory IV. in 833; S. Maria Nuova, rebuilt by Nicholas I. (858–867), now called S. Francesca Romana; the church of the SS. Quattro Coronati, rebuilt by Paschal II. about 1113; and S. Maria in Trastevere, rebuilt by Innocent II. in 1130.[176]

Though the apses and classical columns of the naves in these churches were built at the dates indicated, yet in many cases it is difficult to trace the existence of the ancient walls; the alterations and additions of many centuries have frequently almost wholly concealed the original structure. Except at S. Clemente, the early choir, placed as shown in fig. 26, has invariably been destroyed; the side walls have often been broken through by the addition of rows of chapels; and the whole church, both within and without, has been overlaid with the most incongruous architectural features in stucco or stone. The open roof is usually concealed either by a wooden panelled ceiling or by a stucco vault. The throne[177] and marble benches in the apse have usually given place to more modern wooden fittings, to suit the later position of the choir, which has always been, transferred from the nave to the apse. In many cases the mosaics of the apse and the columns of the nave are the only

visible remains of the once simple and stately original church.[178]

From 1200 to 1450; and the Papal Palaces

The 10th and 11th centuries in Rome were extraordinarily barren in the production of all branches of the fine arts, even that of architecture; and it was not till; the end of the 12th that any important revival began. The 13th century was, however, one of greatEra of the Cosmati. artistic activity, when an immense number of beautiful works, especially in marble enriched with mosaic, were produced in Rome. This revival, though on different lines, was very similar to the rather later one which took place at Pisa (see Pisano), and, like that, was in great part due to the great artistic talents of one family,—the Cosmati,[179] which, for four or five generations, produced skilful architects, sculptor sand mosaicists.

The first member of the family of whom we have knowledge was

Lorenzo, who, with his son Jacopo, made the ambones of S. Maria in Ara Coeli and an altar-canopy (ciborium) in SS. Apostoli. Jacopo decorated the door of S. Saba in 1205 and, together with his son Cosma (who gave his name to the family), that of S. Tommaso in Formis; the father and son worked together at Civita Castellana in 1210. Cosma made a ciborium for SS. Giovanni e Paolo in 1235, and worked with his sons Luca and Jacopo at Anagni and Subiaco during the first half of the 13th century. So far the inscriptions enable us to trace the relations his of the Cosmati with certainty; it is not so clear whether the Cosma above mentioned is to be identified with the master who decorated the chapel of the Sancta Sanctorum belonging to the old Lateran palace which was rebuilt by Nicholas III. (1277-1280). This Cosma was, however, almost certainly the father of Giovanni, the last of the family, who made the tombs of Cardinal Durand (died 1299) in S. Maria sopra Minerva, Cardinal Rodriguez in S. Maria, Maggiore, and Stefano de' Surdi in S. Balbina. Another artist who seems to have belonged to this family, Deodato, made the ciboria of S. Maria in Cosmedin and (probably) of S. John Lateran; he is probably identical with the Deodatus filius Cosmati who, together with another Jacopo, executed a pavement at S. Jacopo alla Lungara. A large number of other works of this school, but unsigned, exist in Rome. These are mainly altars and baldacchini, choir-screens, paschal candlesticks, ambones, tombs, and the like, all enriched with sculpture and glass mosaic of great brilliance and decorative effect.

Besides the more mechanical sort of work, such as mosaic patterns and architectural decoration, they also produced mosaic pictures and sculpture of very high merit, especially the recumbent effigies, with angels standing at the head and foot, in the tombs of Ara Coeli, S. Maria Maggiore, and elsewhere. One of their finest works is in S. Cesareo; this is a marble altar richly decorated with mosaic in sculptured panels, and (below) two angels drawing back a curtain (all in marble) so as to expose the open grating of the confessio.

Besides the Cosmati, other artists, such as Paulus Romanus and his sons in the 12th century, and Petrus Vassallectus in the 13th, contributed to the revival of art. The beautiful cloisters of S. Paolo fuori le Mura, begun by “Magister Petrus,” and those of S. John Lateran, the work of Vassallectus, are the finest architectural works of this school. In the latter part of the 13th century we find the sculptor Arnolfo del Cambio at work in Rome. His altar-canopy at S. Paolo fuori le Murai (1285) seems to have been imitated by the Cosmati in their latest works; his tomb of Cardinal de Braye (d. 1282) at Orvieto also shows his intimate connexion with that school. Another artist of the same period, Petrus Oderisius, worked in England; the shrine of the Confessor at Westminster (1269) was made by him.

The earlier works of the Cosmati are Romanesque in style, but in the 13th century Gothic elements were introduced, especially in the elaborate altar-canopies, with their geometrical tracery. In detail, however, they differ widely from the purer Gothic of northern countries. The richness of effect which the English or French architect obtained by elaborate and carefully worked mouldings was produced in Italy by the beauty of polished marbles and jewel-like mosaics,—the details being mostly rather coarse and often

carelessly executed.

Chiefly to the 13th century belong the large number of beautiful campanili, which are the most conspicuous relics of Campanili. the medieval period in Rome. The finest of these are attached to the churches of S. Francesca Romana, SS. Giovanni e Paolo, and S. Maria Maggiore. Others belong to the basilicas of S. Lorenzo fuori and S. Croce in Gerusalemme, and to S. Giorgio in Velabro, S. Maria in Cosmedin, S. Alessio, S. Giovanni ad Portam Latinam, S. Cecilia, S. Crisogono, and S. Pudentiana. They occupy various positions with regard to the church, being all later additions; that of SS. Giovanni e Paolo stands at some distance from it. In design they are very similar, consisting of many stages, divided by brick and marble cornices; in the upper storeys are from two to four windows on each side, with round arches supported on slender marble columns. They are decorated with brilliantly coloured ciotole or disks of earthenware, enamelled and painted in green or turquoise blue, among the earliest existing specimens of the so-called majolica (see Ceramics). Sometimes disks or crosses made of red or green porphyry are inlaid in the walls. In most cases on one face of the top storey is a projecting canopied niche, which once contained a statue or mosaic picture. The walls are built of fine neat brickwork. The largest and once the handsomest of all, that of S. Maria Maggiore, has string-courses of enamelled and ooloured terra-cotta.[180] The slender columns of the windows have often proved insufficient to support the weight, and so many of the arches are built up.[181]

Though but little used for churches, the Gothic style, in its modified Italian form, was almost universally employed for Domestic architecture. domestic architecture in Rome during the 13th and 14th centuries. Tufa[182] or brick was used for the main walls, the lowest storey being often supported on an arcade of pointed arches and marble columns. The windows were usually formed of large marble slabs with trefoil-shaped heads or cusped arches. As a rule the upper storeys projected slightly over the lower wall, and were supported on small ornamental machicolations. The top storey frequently had an open loggia, with rows of pointed arches. When vaulting was used it also was of the pointed form, usually in simple quadripartite bays, with slightly moulded groin-ribs. The finest existing specimen of this style is the palace built about 1300 by Boniface VIII. (Benedetto Gaetani), enclosing the tomb of Cecilia Metella on the Via Appia, with a graceful little chapel within the precincts of the castle. This building is well worthy of study; the remaining part is well preserved. Many houses of this period, though generally much injured by alterations, still exist in Rome. They are mostly in out-of-the-way alleys, and, not being mentioned in any books, are seldom examined. The Ghetto (now destroyed) and the quarter near the Ponte Rotto contained many of these interesting buildings, as well as some of the most crowded parts of the Trastevere district, but most have disappeared owing to the wholesale destruction of old streets. Among those which may possibly escape for a while is the 13th-century house where Giulio Romano lived, near the Palazzo di Venezia, and the Albergo del Orso, at the end of the Via di Tordinona, of the same period, which was an inn in the 16th century and is one still; this has remains of a fine upper loggia, with rich cornices in moulded terra-cotta; the lowest storey has pointed vaulting resting on many pillars. Another graceful but less stately house exists, though sadly mutilated, opposite the entrance to the atrium of S. Cecilia in Trastevere.[183] Few, now remain of the once numerous lofty towers built by the turbulent Roman barons for purposes of defence. The finest, the Torre delle Milizie on the Viminal, was built in the 13th century by the sons of Petrus Alexius; of about the same date is the Torre dei Conti, near the forum of Augustus, built by Marchione of Arezzo; both these were once much higher than they are now; they are very simple and noble in design, with massive walls faced with neat brickwork.

Till the 14th century the Lateran was the usual residence of the pope; this was once a very extensive building, covering Lateran Palace. four times its present area. The original house is said to have belonged to the senator Plautius Lateranus in the reign of Nero; but the existing part on the line of the Aurelian wall is of the 3rd century. This house, which had become the property of the emperors, was given by Constantine as a residence for S. Sylvester; it was very much enlarged at many periods during the next ten centuries; in 1308 a great part was burnt, and in 1586 the ancient palace was completely destroyed by Sixtus V., and the present palace built by Domenico Fontana. The Cappella Sancta Sanctorum (see list of Cosmati works) is the only relic of the older palace.[184] The present palace has never been used as a papal residence; in the 18th century it was an orphan asylum, and is now a museum of classical sculpture and early Christian remains.

The Vatican palace originated in a residence built by Symmachus (498-514) adjoining the basilica of S. Peter. This was The Vatican. rebuilt by Innocent III. (c. 1200) and enlarged by Nicholas III. (1277-80). It did not, however, become the fixed residence of the popes till after the return from Avignon in 1377. In 1415 John XXIII. connected the Vatican and the castle of S. Angelo by a covered passage carried on arches. But little of the existing palace is older than the 15th century; Nicholas V. in 1447 began its reconstruction on a magnificent scale, and this was carried on by Sixtus IV. (Sistine chapel), Alexander VI. (Torre Borgia), Julius II. and Leo X. (Bramante's cortile and Raphael's Loggie and Stanze), and Paul III. (Sala Regia and' Cappella Paolina by Antonio da Sangallo). Sixtus V. and his successors built the lofty part of the palace on the east of Bramante's cortile. The Scala Regia was built by Bernini for Urban VIII. and Alexander VII., the Museo Pio-Clementino under Clement XIV. and Pius VI., the Braccio Nuovo under Pius VII., and lastly the grand stairs up to the cortile were added by Pius IX.[185]

The Quirinal palace, now occupied by the king of Italy, is devoid of architectural merit. It stands on the highest part of The Quirinal. the hill, near the site of the baths of Constantine. This palace was begun in 1574, under Gregory XIII., by Flaminio Ponzio, and was completed by Fontana and Maderna under subsequent popes.

The only important church in Rome which is wholly Gothic in

style is S. Maria sopra Minerva, the chief church of the Dominican Ecclesiastical Gothic. order. This was not the work of a Roman architect, but was designed by two Dominican friars from Florence—Fra Ristori and Fra Sisto—about 1289, who were also the architects of their own church of S. Maria Novella. It much resembles the contemporary churches of the same order in Florence, having wide-spanned pointed arches on clustered piers and simple quadripartite vaulting. Its details resemble the early French in character.[186] It contains a large number of fine tombs; among them that of Durandus, bishop of Mende (the author of the celebrated Rationale divinorum officiorum), by Giovanni Cosma, c. 1300, and the tomb of Fra Angelico, the great Dominican painter, who died in Rome, 1455. The most elaborate specimen of ecclesiastical Gothic in Rome is that part of S. Maria in Ara Coeli which was rebuilt about 1300, probably by one of the Cosmati, namely, the south aisle and transept. During the 14th century (chiefly owing to the absence of the popes at Avignon) the arts were neglected at Rome, and a period of decadence set in. The sculptured effigy and reredos of Cardinal d'Alençon (d. 1405) in S. Maria in Trastevere, executed by a certain Paulus Romanus, is a fair example of the works produced during this period; the effigy is a very clumsy and feeble copy of the

fine recumbent figures of the Cosmati.

Florentine Period, c. 1450-1550.

The long period of almost complete artistic inactivity in Rome was broken in the 15th century by the introduction of a number of foreign artists, chiefly Florentines, who during this and the succeeding century enriched Rome with an immense number of magnificent works of art. The dawn of this brilliant epoch may be said to have begun with the arrival of Fra Angelico (see Fiesole) in 1447, invited by Nicholas V. to paint the walls of his small private chapel in the Vatican dedicated to S. Lorenzo.

In the latter half of the 15th century a large number of sculptured tombs (as well as tabernacles, altar frontals, Florentine and Lombard sculptors. reredoses and the like) were made for Roman churches by sculptors from Tuscany and north Italy. The earliest of these tombs is that of Eugenius IV. (d. 1447) in S. Salvatore in Lauro, by Isaia da Pisa. It presents the typical form of a life-sized recumbent effigy resting on a richly ornamented sarcophagus over which is a canopy decorated with reliefs and statuettes. The type was brought to perfection by the Florentine Mino da Fiesole (see Mino di Giovanni), who worked in Rome under Pius II. and succeeding popes, being assisted in some cases by another artist of almost equal skill, Giovanni Dalmata. A Lombard sculptor, Andrea Bregno, came to Rome under Paul II. and worked there until the closing years of the century; his tomb is in S. Maria Sopra Minerva. The works of these artists and their followers are to be found in a great number of churches, notably S. Maria del Popolo.[187]

The architecture no less than the sculpture of the latter part of the 15th century was mainly the work of Florentines, especially of Baccio Pontelli, who is said by Vasari to have built S. Maria del Popolo, S. Agostino,[188] and S. Cosimato in Trastevere. He also was the architect of S. Pietro in Montorio, erected in 1500 for Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. Other buildings were carried out by another Florentine, Giuliano da Majano. The Palazzo di Venezia, begun for Cardinal Barbo, afterwards Paul II., about 1455, a very massive and stately building of medieval character, was built by Giuliano da Sangallo and Francesco di Borgo San Sepolcro.

During the latter part of the 15th and the first few years of the

succeeding century Rome was enriched with a number of buildings Bramante. by Bramante (q.v.), one of the greatest architects the world has ever seen. He combined the delicacy of detail and the graceful lightness of the Gothic style with the measured stateliness and rhythmical proportions of classic architecture. Though he invariably used the round arch and took his mouldings from antique sources, his beautiful cloisters and loggie are Gothic in their general conception. Moreover, he never committed the prevalent blunder of the 16th century, which was a fruitless attempt to obtain magnificence by mere size in a building, without multiplying its parts. His principal works in Rome are the Palazzo della Cancelleria, built for Cardinal Riario (1495-1505), with its stately church of S. Lorenzo in Damaso; the so-called Palazzo di Bramante in the Governo Vecchio, built in 1500; and the Palazzo Giraud, near St Peter's, once the residence of Cardinal Wolsey, built in 1503. He also built the cortile of S. Damaso in the Vatican, the toy-like tempietto in the cloister of S. Pietro in Montorio (1502), and the cloisters of. S. Maria della Pace (1504).[189] In 1503 Bramante was appointed architect to St Peter's, and made complete designs for it, with a plan in the form of a Greek cross. The piers and arches of the central dome were the only parts completed at the time of his

death in 1514, and subsequent architects did not carry out his design.[190]
Baldassare Peruzzi (q.v.) of Siena was one of the most talented architects

of the first part of the 16th century; the Villa Farnesina Peruzzi. and the Palazzo Massimi alle Colonne are from his designs. His later works bear traces of that decadence in taste which so soon began, owing mainly to the rapidly growing love for the dull magnificence of the pseudo-classic style. This falling off in architectural taste was due to Michelangelo (q.v.) more than to any other one man. His cortile of the Farnese palace, though a work of much stately beauty, was one of the first stages towards that lifeless scholasticism and blind following of antique forms which were the destruction of architecture as a real living art, and in the succeeding century produced so much that is almost brutal in its coarseness and neglect of all true canons of proportion and scale. During the earlier stage, however, of this decadence, and throughout the 16th century, a large number of fine palaces and churches were built in and near Rome by various able artists, such as the Villa Madama by Raphael, part of the Palazzo Farnese by Antonio da Sangallo the younger, S. Giovanni de' Fiorentini by J. Sansovino, and many

others.[191] (J. H. M.; H. S. J.)

Later Development

The transformation of Roman architecture after the 16th century was marked by the abandonment of classical models. The works of Michelangelo were too grand to be accused of exceeding the extreme limits of good taste, but his scholars and imitators exaggerated his manner, and the barocco style, which had its cradle in Rome, was soon adopted throughout Italy. Vignola (1507-1573) had done his best to bind the Architecture. art of building to strictly classic rules, but in spite of his efforts the degeneration made progress during his own lifetime and under Carlo Maderna (1556-1639), and proceeded still more rapidly under Bernini (1598-1680). The characteristics of the barocco are the reckless abuse of curves and extravagantly broken lines, of contorted columns, twisted tympanums and highly exaggerated ornaments; yet we must confess that many monuments of this period of art exhibit such exuberant life, such contrasts of relief and shadow, and such a wonderful combination of variety and solidity as cannot fail to please the many, even now, by the magnificence of their general effect. In Rome, the numerous works of Bernini, Borromini, Maderna, Rainaldi, Salvi, Fuga, Longhi and others bear witness to the gifted activity of Italian architects during that period, if genius necessarily creates, those men showed more of it than their predecessors who adhered to the classic and revered the teachings of Vitruvius. Degeneration is tolerated and sometimes even pleases, under the name of transformation, but there is nothing to be said for the real decay which marks the 18th century. It was not universal at first, for it is by nature a slow process; such men as A. Galilei, Specchi, Peparelli, Marchionni, Morelli, Camporese and Piranesi left works not altogether without value; but the outrageous abuse of ornament increased with every year, and was made more and more evident by the clumsy heaviness of the pillars and pilasters that supported the whole. The refined purity of the Renaissance disappeared as completely as the delicate grace and exquisite ornamentation of the Cosmatesque period. Many works of the greatest beauty were destroyed outright, and many more were disfigured and often wholly hidden by horrible stucco constructions and decorations; or, on a larger scale, by the application of hideous stone façades to churches of which the simple good taste had delighted generations of mankind. The deformation of the noble old Lateran basilica is a conspicuous instance of such deeds; another is Santa Maria Maggiore, and the false fronts plastered upon San Marcello and Santa Maria in Via Lata, both in the Corso, give a very clear idea of what was generally done. The interiors of old churches suffered quite as much, and even the frescoes of early masters were not spared; those by Pinturicchio in the third chapel (south) of S. Maria del Popolo were covered with wretched stucco ornaments, only removed in 1850, and numberless works of art by Giotto and other early painters were wilfully destroyed.

The decline of architecture continued in the 19th century, notwithstanding the laudable efforts of Valadier and a few other painstaking imitators, who produced the so-called “academic neo-classic” reaction; among them may be noted the names of Canina, Poletti, Sarti and Azzurri. The futility of their works invited the feeble eclecticism which soon afterwards became so general that the architecture of the period is wholly without individuality, good or bad. The chief architectural work of the 19th century was the rebuilding of the great basilica of S. Paolo fuori le Mura, burnt in 1823, in a style of cold splendour which is anything but devotional in its general effect. The pillars are huge monoliths of grey granite from the Alps; the confession and transepts are lined with rosso and verde antico from quarries then recently rediscovered in Greece, and with Egyptian alabaster and lapis lazuli and malachite adorn the bases of the columns round the high altar in lavish profusion. Thirty years were required for the rebuilding of the frigidly magnificent edifice, which was reconsecrated in 1854. The east façade displays a quantity of gaudy mosaics, and the projected quadriportico is wanting. The belfry is nothing but a steeple, and has an unfortunate resemblance to a lighthouse. In extenuation of the result it must be admitted that the original building had been totally destroyed by fire, but no such excuse can be found for the barbarous assault on Christian art which was perpetrated by Francesco Vespignani in the extension of the Lateran basilica. This work was begun underr Pius IX. and finished under Leo XIII.; it involved the destruction of the ancient tribune and its ambulatory, the only parts of the church which had so far escaped complete disfigurement, and the priceless mosaics (1290), among the most beautiful in Rome, were taken down and replaced in the new apse in a sadly mutilated and restored form. (For the interesting discoveries made in excavating for the new foundations, see Ann. 1st. 1877, p. 332.)

The Vatican contains the largest collection in the world of Greco-Roman

and Roman sculpture, with a few specimens of true Hellenic Galleries and collections. art. It is also very rich in Greek vases and in objects from Etruscan tombs; this latter division is called the Museo Gregoriano. There is also an Egyptian museum which contains a few important curiosities. In the great library are preserved a number of early glass chalices and other rare objects from the catacombs, as well as many fine specimens of later Christian art—church plate and jewels. The picture gallery, though not as large as some of the private collections in Rome, contains few inferior pictures. The Lateran palace, still, like the Vatican, in the possession of the pope, contains a fine collection of classical sculpture, but is most remarkable as a museum of Christian antiquities. The two capitoline museums are very rich in classical sculpture, bronzes, coins, pottery and the contents of early Etruscan and Latin tombs. A large hall has been added, and is filled with sculptures found in Rome since 1870, of which the arrangement was completed on the occasion of King Edward VII.'s visit. The picture gallery contains a few masterpieces and a large number of inferior works. The new Museo delle Terme has been formed in the great cloister of S. Maria degli Angeli, to hold the numerous fine examples of classical painting and sculpture found along the Tiber during the excavations for the new embankment, and in other places in Rome. The university of Rome possesses fine collections of minerals, fossils and other geological specimens, and examples of ancient marbles used in the buildings of Rome. A Museo Artistico Industriale has been formed in a monastery in the Capo le Case, to contain medieval works of art. It is, however, a matter for regret that the few, medieval works which Rome possesses should be scattered in three small collections, namely, the one last mentioned, the Capitol and the Castle of S. Angelo, where an attempt is being made to form a real medieval museum; many objects, too, are dispersed throughout the city, and will doubtless disappear unless they are better protected. The Museo Kircheriano contains an unrivalled collection of prehistoric objects of stone, bronze, iron and pottery, found in Italy and the Italian islands, and more particularly a number of ancient Latian urns, capanne and the like. The collection of aes grave is the finest yet made; and the museum also contains a large quantity of interesting classical antiquities of various kinds. Another branch is the Ethnological Museum. Unfortunately all these museums are badly adapted for purposes of study, being neither well arranged nor well catalogued. The Museo Baracco, presented to the city in 1905 by the senator of that name, contains some ancient sculptures of great value. The Museum of Etruscan and Faliscan antiquities in the Villa Giulia, near Porta del Popolo, is of considerable importance, as is also the Borgia Museum in the Propaganda palace, the latter for its ancient geographical curiosities. The museum of plaster casts in the Testaccio quarter contains reproductions of the principal ancient

sculptures possessed by foreign museums.
Among the private collections of pictures the Borghese is unrivalled.

The next in importance is that in the Doria palace, Private collections. which, however, like most Italian collections, contains a large proportion of very inferior works. The Corsini picture gallery, bought by the government, is chiefly rich in the works of the Bolognese and other third-rate painters, but also possesses a fine collection of engravings and etchings. There are a few fine paintings in the Barberini palace, but the Sciarra gallery no longer exists. There are some good pictures by Raphael and Guido Reni in the Academy of St Luke; the. Galleria d'Arte Moderna is a collection of modern paintings

acquired by the government.
The largest private collection of sculpture is that of the Villa

Albani, which, among a large mass of inferior Roman sculpture, contains a few gems of Greek art. The original Albani collection was stolen and brought to Paris by Napoleon I., and was there dispersed; one relief, the celebrated Antinous, is the only piece of sculpture from the original collection which was sent back from Paris. This is in the collection of Prince Torlonia, which contains several very fine works, but unfortunately the greater number are much injured and falsified by restorations. The casino in the Borghese gardens possesses a great quantity of sculpture, mostly third-rate Roman works, the most important of which, however, are executed in precious marbles. The small collection which formerly existed in the Villa Ludovici has been bought by the government and removed to the Museo delle Terme; it contained a few works of Greek sculpture of great value, the most important being the Pergamean group representing the suicide of a Gaulish

chief, a Medusa's head in relief and a male terminal figure. The

Giustiniani collection, which was considerable, is now dispersed, but

many private residences, such as the Colonna palace, still contain collections of sculpture and painting of a secondary order.

The principal libraries in Rome are, for old and modern works, the Biblioteca Vittorio Emanuele and the library of the German Libraries. Archaeological Institute; for manuscripts and early books, the Angelica, the Casanatense, the Alessandrina and the Chigi libraries; but none of them can be compared with that of the Vatican, which now contains also the former library of the Barberini. Mention must also be made of the Corsiniana, now belonging to the Accademia dei Lincei. The Biblioteca Sarti,

beside the Academy of S. Luke, contains works on art.

EB1911 Rome - map (modern).jpg
Emery Walker sc.

The Modern City

Great changes in the municipal and social conditions of Rome followed the occupation of the city by the Italians (20th September 1870), and the rapid increase of population due to immigration from other parts of Italy. It is a mistake, however, to attribute all the works undertaken and executed since 1870 to the initiative of the new government. The first plan for modernizing and improving Rome was that of Pope Julius II., who aimed at the enlargement of the lower city on both sides of the Tiber. The modern Via Giulia shows in part what he meant to do. Following him, Sixtus V. did his best to develop the upper part of the city by laying out the Via Sistina, from the Trinità dei Monti to S. Maria Maggiore and Porta S. Giovanni. Almost in our own time a plan for the improvement of the city was made, under the direction of Mgr. de Merode, during the reign of Pius IX.; and although but a small portion of the projected changes were carried out under the pope, the general scheme was in most respects satisfactory, and proved a good foundation for further extensive developments. He was able to complete the construction of the beautiful ascent to S. Pietro in Montorio, as well as that which leads up to the Quirinal Palace; and the Via Nazionale, which was to have been called Via De Merode, was also begun. His plan did not include, however, the destruction of villas such as the Ludovisi, nor the wholesale removal of trees, which is so greatly to be deplored. These acts of barbarism were the consequences of the reckless speculations in land and buildings that accompanied and followed the active and excellent work done by the municipality, and might have been checked by vigorous and timely action of the government. As it was, a number of the most important Roman families were ruined. At the outset, and as soon as political circumstances admitted the consideration of such matters, the municipality set to work; and though a comprehensible love of the picturesque has caused many persons to regret the result, altogether or in part, it is not to be denied that the improvements carried out have been of the highest advantage to the city, and that the work is in many instances of creditable solidity.

Two principal problems presented themselves. The more important was the confinement of the Tiber in such a manner as to render impossible the serious floods which had from time to time inundated the city, often causing great damage to property and rendering the lower streets more or less impassable. There were floods which almost reached the level of the first storey near San Carlo in the Corso, and it was common to see the great Piazza Navona and the neighbourhood of the Pantheon full of water for days together during the winter. The interruption of traffic can be imagined, and the damage to property was serious. The other urgent matter was one of which the government of Pius IX. had been partially aware, namely, the necessity for opening better thoroughfares between different parts of the city. In the middle ages the population of Rome had dwindled to twenty or thirty thousand inhabitants, who lived huddled together about the strongholds of the barons, and the modern city had slowly grown again upon the exiguous foundation of a medieval town. The need for changing this condition of things, which had been felt under Pius IX., became overwhelmingly apparent as the population rapidly increased. That which under a continuance of the old government might have been done by degrees during a long period, had to be accomplished in the shortest possible time, with means which, though considerable, were far from adequate, and in the face of opposition by many holders of real estate, the most important of whom were conservatively attached to the papal government, and resisted change for no other reason. In what was now done it is necessary to distinguish clearly between the work undertaken and carried out by the municipality, under considerable pressure of circumstances, and that which was done in the way of private speculation. The first was on the whole good, and has proved enduring; the second was in many cases bad, and resulted in great loss. As soon as the opening of such streets as the Via Nazionale and the Via Cavour, the widening and straightening of the Via dell' Angelo Custode, now the Via del Tritone Nuovo, and similar improvements, such as the construction of new bridges over the Tiber, had demonstrated that the value of property could be doubled and quadrupled in a short time, and as soon as the increase of population had caused a general rise in rents, owners of property awoke to the situation of affairs, and became as anxious as they had at first been disinclined to improve their estates by wholesale building.

The most important and expensive work executed by the government with the assistance of the municipality was the construction of the embankments along the Tiber. Though damaged by the great flood of December 1900, their truly Roman solidity saved the city from the disastrous consequences of a wide inundation. It is impossible not to admire them, and not to feel respect for a people able to carry out such a plan in such a manner and in so short a time, in the face of such great difficulties. But so far as the life of the city was concerned, the cutting of new streets and the widening of old ones produced a more apparent immediate result. The opening of such a thoroughfare as the Via Nazionale could not but prove to be of the greatest value. It begins at the Piazza delle Terme, in which the principal railway station is situated, and connects the upper part of the city by a broad straight road, and then, by easy gradients, with the Forum of Trajan, the Piazza dei Santi Apostoli and the Piazza di Venezia, whence, as the Corso Vittorio Ernanuele, it runs through the heart of the old city, being designed to reach St Peter's by a new bridge of the same name, near the bridge of S. Angelo. It is true that, in order to accomplish this, the Villa Aldobrandini had to be partially destroyed, but this is almost the only point which lovers of beauty can regret, and in compensation it opened to full view the famous palace of the Massimo family, the imposing church of S. Andrea della Valle, and the noble pile of the, Cancelleria, one of the best pieces of architecture in Rome. Another great artery is the Via Cavour, which was intended to connect the railway station with the south-western part of Rome, descending to the Forum, and thence turning northwards to reach the Piazza di Venezia on the east side of the monument to Victor Emanuel II. These are only examples of what was done, for it would be impossible to give a just idea of the transformation of the city. Rome is now divided clearly into two parts, the old and the new, of which the old is incomparably the more artistic and the more beautiful, as it will always remain the more interesting. Among the works carried out by the government and municipality the fine tunnel under the Quirinal Hill (completed in 1902) deserves mention; it forms a connecting channel for the traffic between the streets at the north end of the old city, the Corso, Babuino, &c., and the upper part of Rome, including the Via Nazionale and the Esquiline. Another difficult undertaking, successfully completed in April 1908; was the construction of the enormous causeway and bridge which now unite the Pincio with the Villa Borghese, or, as it is now called, the Villa Umberto Primo, to the immense advantage of the public. In the same year the building for the new law courts was finished; it stands near S. Angelo, and presents, on the whole, an imposing appearance, though overloaded with clumsy stone ornamentation.

It is unnecessary to mention a number of public buildings and government offices which have little architectural merit, but we cannot overlook such a magnificent group of buildings devoted to scientific purposes as the Policlinico, on the Macas, which is admittedly one of the finest hospitals in Europe, and the military hospital on the Coelian. The rebuilding of the Palazzo del Parlamento is only second to the enormous monument of Victor Emanuel II. The majority of the buildings erected by individuals and corporations since 1870 present no original or characteristic features, and the best of them are copies or imitations of well-known models. The Cassa del Risparmio, in the Corso, reproduces a Florentine palace; the Palazzo Negroni, near the Piazza Nicotia, is modelled on the Cancelleria and the Palazzo Giraud; many of the large, residences in the new quarters beyond the Tiber are fairly good copies of palaces in the Florentine style, though the magnificent carved stone of earlier centuries is disadvantageously replaced by stucco, a material which lasts tolerably well in the mild climate of Rome. Opposite the beautiful and severe Palazzo di Venezia, what might have been a faultless reproduction of it is marred by tasteless ornament. Finally, so far as the construction of new streets is concerned, which lovers of the picturesque so greatly deplore, it must be admitted that they have been rendered necessary by the great increase of traffic and population, and it should be remembered that after the 16th century the wisest of the popes did their best to open up the city by widening and straightening the thoroughfares.

Municipal Administration.—After the taking of Rome, those persons who remained loyal to Pius IX. took no part whatever in public affairs, and the municipal administration was entirely in the hands of the monarchists. The expression “nè eletti nè elettori,” meaning that Catholics are to be neither voters nor candidates, which came to be regarded as a sort of rule of the party, was invented at that time by an epigrammatic journalist, and it seems at first to have been applied also to municipal matters, whereas it was later understood to refer only to parliamentary elections. Leo XIII. encouraged the formation of a Catholic party in the municipal administration, and the municipal government drifted largely into the hands of Catholics, though circumstances make it necessary that the Syndic (Mayor) should always, be a royalist. Between 1870 and the end of the century the socialist party had no great influence in Rome, which can never be a city of manufacturing interests. For purposes of municipal government the division of the city into districts has been modified, but the old division into fourteen rioni is adhered to in principle, the new quarters of Castro Pretorio and the Esquiline having been included in the first Rione, which still bears the name of “Monti.” The municipality consists of a mayor and eighty communal councillors, of whom a large proportion were for many years members of the aristocracy. Later, however, the three democratic parties, known as the monarchist, socialist and republican, united to form a popular coalition, and succeeded in completely excluding the conservative, aristocratic and Catholic elements.

Population.—The population in 1870 was 226,022, as against 462,743 in 1901 (communal population). It therefore more than doubled in thirty years. The increase, however, did not take place at a regular rate, owing to the changes in the rates of immigration and emigration. The largest increase was in 1870, reaching 22,186; the next most important in 1884, 1885, 1886, 1887, in which years it constantly remained near 20,000. The least increase in later years was 4417 in 1891. The garrison of Rome is about 10,000 men. Careful inquiry has placed it beyond doubt that there are in Rome about the same number of ecclesiastics of all orders, including about 1500 students in the theological seminaries. The average birth-rate is lower in Rome than in the majority of great cities. The number of births increased after 1870 very nearly in proportion with the increase of population.

Climate and Hygiene.—The climate of Rome is mild and sunny, but the variation in temperature between day and night is very great. December and February appear to be the coldest months, the thermometer then averaging 47° F.; the greatest heat, which averages 75°, is felt in July and August. The surrounding Campagna is still not all habitable during the summer, though the dangerous malaria has been checked by the planting of numerous eucalyptus trees. A remarkable instance of the effect produced upon the marshy soil by these plantations may be studied at the Trappist monastery of the Tre Fontane, situated on the Via Ardeatina, about 4 m. from Rome. Whereas in former times it was almost always fatal to spend the whole summer there, the monks have so far dried the soil by means of the eucalyptus that they reside in the monastery throughout the year. The municipality has everywhere made strenuous efforts to reduce the mortality due to malaria; in 1890, 14% of all the deaths in Rome and the Campagna were attributed to this cause; in 1905 the proportion had dropped to 3%. Very large sums have been expended in a scientific system of drainage and sub-drainage on both sides of the Tiber, and the use of wire gauze mosquito nets for the doors and windows of the humblest habitations in the Campagna has contributed much to the present satisfactory result. The hygienic conditions of Rome itself have greatly improved, largely through the ceaseless efforts of Commendatore Baccelli, a distinguished man of science, who repeatedly held office in the Italian Ministry. The publication of exceedingly accurate graphic tables in February 1900 shows the following facts. Ninety per 1000 deaths occurred in 1871 from typhoid (the so-called “Roman fever”), and the average has now fallen to a low constant. Deaths from small-pox, formerly of alarming frequency, can be said not to occur at all, and their numbers diminished suddenly after the introduction of compulsory vaccination.

Charities and Education.—A great number of small charitable

institutions for children and old people have been founded, which are organized on the most modern principles, and in many of these charitable persons of the upper classes give their individual assistance to the poor. There are also private hospitals for diseases of the eye, in which poor patients are lodged and treated without payment. There are two hospitals entirely maintained by private resources, where infants are treated whose mothers fear to send them to a public hospital, or in cases refused by the latter as not being serious enough for admission. Of course, the numbers of the poor greatly increased with the growth of population, especially after the failure of building speculations between 1888 and 1890, though great efforts were made by the municipality to send all persons then thrown out of employment back to their homes. One of the difficulties under which Rome labours is that while it attracts the population of the country, as other capitals do, it possesses no great mechanical industries in which the newcomers can be employed. Efforts to create small industries in the populous quarters of the poor met with little success. Before 1870 a society was formed, which has since greatly developed as an intelligent private enterprise, to provide the poor with sanitary tenements; but its success is much hampered by the absence of employment, which again is partly due to the heavy taxation of small industries. A number of trade schools are also maintained by private funds, such as the Instituto degli Artigianelli, managed by the Fratelli della Dottrina Cristiana, and the Ricovero pei Fanciulli Abbandonati (home for friendless children), which is under lay management and has flourishing workshops. The character of official charities has certainly improved in principle, so far as their educational and moral scope are concerned; for whereas in former times the limited number of the poor made individual and almost paternal relief possible, that form of charity had a pauperizing influence. If anything, the present tendency is to go too far in the opposite direction, and to require too many formalities before any relief is granted; and while the union of the principal charities under a central management on advanced theories improved the methods of administration, it destroyed numerous small sources of immediate relief on which the poor had a traditional right to count, and was in that way productive of hardship. At the same time, however, mutual benefit societies (società di mutuo soccorso) have been organized in great numbers by the different crafts and professions, and are chiefly distinguishable by the political parties to which they belong. It is characteristic of the modern Roman people that the most widely different elements subsist without showing any signs of amalgamating, yet without attacking each other. Some of these societies have an exclusively clerical character, others are merely conservative, some consist of monarchists and some of avowed republicans.

Popular education is principally in the hands of the municipality, but besides the public schools there are numerous religious institutions attended by the children of the lower classes; they follow the curriculum prescribed by the government, and are under the constant supervision of municipal inspectors, both as regards their teaching and their hygiene. The pope also expends large sums in the maintenance of the people's schools, managed entirely by laymen, and also under government inspection. For education of the higher grade, besides the regular lyceums and gymnasiums, there are many private schools similarly designated from which pupils

can present themselves for the regular government examinations,

the privilege of conferring certificates and degrees having been

allowed only to very few private institutions.

Society.—After 1870 both the aristocracy and the middle classes were divided into hostile factions, each of which maintained a press of its own and rallied round representative individuals. So far as the middle classes were concerned, the common interest of commercial operations soon concentrated political differences. The aristocracy, however, kept rigidly aloof from all speculations for a time, and maintained its traditional attitude of contemptuous superiority, to which the middle class answered with its profound hatred. This state of things lasted about ten years, until the time of the great building speculations, in which a number of noble families were tempted, and in which they soon found themselves hopelessly involved, and brought into close contact with the middle class. The two classes thus became necessary to each other, and the result was a notable and salutary diminution of prejudice, soon leading to alliances by marriage, which would formerly have seemed impossible, but which the redistribution of wealth rendered mutually advantageous. The appearance at social gatherings of an official element, almost exclusively taken from the middle class, also tended to reduce inequalities of caste. Yet it must be admitted that the parties composing Roman society were drawn together mechanically, rather than fused into anything really homogeneous. It is worth mentioning that the Jewish element, which is very strong in business, in journalism, and in the administrations, had made no attempt to enter Roman society. Rome and Genoa are practically the only Italian cities in which Israelites are rigidly excluded from

social intimacy, and are only met on official occasions. (M. Cr.)

  1. By the great flight of marble steps up to S. Maria in Ara Coeli.
  2. In less solid constructions than those which have survived until modern times bricks were doubtless used by themselves.
  3. The oft-quoted boast of Augustus (Suet. Aug. 29) that he “found Rome of brick and left it of marble” has probably much truth in it, if for “brick” we read “peperino and tufa.” In the time of Augustus burnt brick was very little used, the usual wall facings being opus quadratum of tufa or peperino, and opus reticulatum of tufa only.
  4. These Nile quarries were worked during the 19th century, and many blocks were imported into Rome for the rebuilding of S. Paolo fuori le Mura.
  5. On the subject of Roman marbles, see Corsi, Delle pietre antiche (ed. 3, 1845). and Pullen, Handbook of Roman Marbles (London, 1894); also Brindley in Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects (1887). A collection of 1000 specimens, originally formed by Corsi, is preserved in the museum at Oxford.
  6. Pliny (H.N. xxxv. 154), quoting Varro, says that the decorations in painting and sculpture of the temple of Ceres near the Circus Maximus were the work of the first Greek artists employed in Rome, and that before that (c. 493 B.C.) "all things in temples were Etruscan." Vitruvius (iii. 3) says, "Ornantque signis fictilibus aut aereis inauratis eorum fastigia Tuscanico more, uti est ad Circum Maxiniium Cereris, et Herculis Pompeiani, item Capitolii" (cf. iv. 7, vi. 3).
  7. The frequent use of engaged columns is a peculiarity of Roman architecture, but it is not without precedent in Greek buildings of the best period, e.g. in the temple of Zeus at Agrigentum. Surface enrichments over the mouldings were used far more largely by the Romans than by the Greeks.
  8. In the beautiful drawings of Choisy (L'Art de bâtir chez les Romains, Paris, 1873) the structural importance of the brick used in vaults and arches is very much exaggerated.
  9. The expansion of the iron through rust, which caused the stone to split, has frequently been a great source of injury to Roman walls, as well as the practice, common in the middle ages, of breaking into the stones in order to extract the metal.
  10. These two kinds of stone facings are mentioned thus by Vitruvius (ii. 8), “reticulatum, quo nunc [reign of Augustus] omnes utuntur, et antiquum, quod incertum dicitur.
  11. Some of the bricks are as much as 2½ in. thick, while 1½ in. is the usual maximum for Roman bricks.
  12. The Roman method of applying stucco to walls with a wooden “float” exactly as is done now, is shown in a painting from Pompeii (see Ann. Inst., 1881, pl. H.).
  13. See Bruzza, in Ann. Inst. (1870), pp. 106-204; Hirschfeld, Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten (1905), pp. 162 ff.
  14. Eighty silver statues of Augustus, some equestrian and some in quadrigae, are mentioned in the Mon. Anc. 4, 51.
  15. On the prehistoric remains of Rome and Latium, see Pinza in Monumenti antichi pubblicati per cura della reale Accademia dei Lincei, vol. xv., 1905; also Comm. Boni's reports on the necropolis adjoining the Forum in the Notizie degli scavi, and Modestor, Introduction à l'histoire romaine (Paris, 1907).
  16. The “primacy of the Palatine” has been disputed by Carter (Amer. Jour. Arch., 1908, p. 181), who thinks that the first city was that of the Four Regions (see below) formed by the Etruscan kings.
  17. “ Novalia,” MSS. “Navalia” has been conjectured.
  18. Varro, L.L. v. 46-54.
  19. Livy i. 44; Dion. Hal. iv. 13. The wall is, however, said to have been planned and partly executed by Tarquinius Priscus (Liv. i. 36, 38; Dion. Hal. iii. 37); and the fortification of the Aventine is ascribed to Ancus Martius (Dion. Hal. iii. 43).
  20. See Sol. i. 13; Liv. ii. 49, xxiv. 47, xxv. 7. xxvii. 37; Ascon. Ad. Cic. in Toga, p. 81.
  21. See Bruzza, Ann. Inst. (1876), 72; Jordan, Topographie, i. 250; Richter, Über antike Steinmetzzeichen (1885).
  22. See Richter in the work quoted above, and Beiträge zur römischen Topographie (Berlin, 1903); also Delbrück, Der Apollotempel auf dem Marsfelde in Rom, pp. 14 ff.
  23. For earlier studies of the Servian wall consult Nibby and Gell, Le Mura di Roma (1820); Piale, Porte del Recinto di Servio (1833); Becker, De Romae Muris (Leipzig, 1842); Lanciani, Ann. Inst. (1871), p. 40, Mon. Inst. ix. pl., xxvii.; Borsari, “Le mura e porte di Servio,” Bull. Comm. Arch. (1888), pp. 12 ff.
  24. See Liv. i. 38, 56; Dionys. iv. 44.
  25. In the upper part of its course the Cloaca Maxima was restored in some places, under the Empire, with a vault of brick-faced concrete; at the entrance to the Forum a large bend was made when the Basilica Aemilia was extended westwards in 34 B.C.
  26. A great quay wall with arched cloaca, similar in style to those in Rome, exists at the mouth of the river Marta near Tarquinii, and similar constructions are found in other Etruscan cities.
  27. Livy (i. 33) mentions the “carcer . . . media urbe imminens foro,” and also speaks (xxxiv. 44) of an “inferiorem carcerem,” and at xxix. 22 of a criminal being put in the Tullianum.
  28. Consules suffecti for A.D. 22.
  29. See Tac. Hist. iii. 74, 85; Suet. Vit. 17.
  30. See Livy (xliv. 16), who mentions a house of P. Africanus, “pone veteres ad Vortumni signum,” which was bought by T. Sempronius to clear the site for the Basilica Sempronia in 169 B.C. This basilica was afterwards absorbed in the Basilica Julia.
  31. Hence these two sides of the Forum are frequently referred to in classical writings as “sub veteribus” and “sub novis.”
  32. In later times it was an enclosed space containing an altar; it is described by Ovid (Fast. vi. 403); according to one tradition it marked the spot where Curtius's self-immolation filled up the chasm which had opened in the Forum (see Dionys. ii. 41). (See below.)
  33. See Dionys. ii. 50, vi. 67; Plin. H.N. xvi. 236; Plut. Quaes. Rom. 47.
  34. The first gladiatorial show in Rome was given in 264 B.C. in the Forum Boarium by D. Junius Brutus at his father's funeral (Liv. Epit. xvi.), the first in the Forum Romanum in 216 B.C. (Liv. xxiii. 30). See also Liv. xxxi. 50, xli. 28; and Suet. Caes. 39; Aug. 43; and Tib. 7.
  35. On the Comitium see Detlefsen, Ann. Inst. (1860), pp. 128 ff., and the works mentioned below, note 11.
  36. Livy (xlv. 24) indicates their relative positions by the phrase “comitium vestibulum Curiae.”
  37. On the Curia and its vicissitudes see Lanciani, L'Aula e gli Uffici del Senato Romano (1883).
  38. The column itself is a copy made by Michelangelo; it is at the foot of the stairs of the Palazzo dei Conservatori.
  39. The discoveries of Comm. Boni have given rise to much discussion. Of the numerous articles, &c., which have appeared it will suffice to name Petersen, Comitium, Rostra, Grab des Romulus (1904), and Pinza, Il Comizio romano nell' etá repubblicana (1905); see Huelsen, The Roman Forum, pp. 110 ff.
  40. The Forum Piscatorium or fish-market appears to have been at the back of this basilica (see Liv. xl. 51).
  41. The original temple was one of the prehistoric buildings attributed to Romulus and Tatius (Serv. Ad. Aen. i 291), or by Livy (i. 19) to Numa.
  42. See Mon. Anc. 2, 42; Procop. Bell. Goth. i. 25; Liv. i. 19; Suet. Aug. 22.
  43. See Mau in Röm. Mitt. 1906, pp. 230 ff.
  44. The original rostra had specially honorary statues to those Roman ambassadors who had been killed while on foreign service (Liv. iv. 17); these were probably removed during Cicero's lifetime (Cic. Phil. ix. 2, 4; see also Dio Cass. xliii. 49; and Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 23, 24). Ghastly ornaments fixed to these rostra in the year 43 B.C., shortly after they were built, were the head and hands of the murdered Cicero, (Appian, Bell. Civ. iv. 20; Dio Cass. xlvii. 8; Juv. x. 120), as on the original rostra had been fixed many heads of the chief victims of the proscriptions of Marius and Sulla (see Appian, Bell. Civ. i. 71, 94; Florus iii. 21). The denarius of the gens Lollia with the legend PALIKANVS represents the rostra of the late republican period.
  45. Below the temple of Saturn the Clivus Capitolinus is carried on an arched substructure of somewhat irregular opus reticulatum. This has been described (but without much probability) as the rostra of Caesar.
  46. A portion of these streets with part of the temple of Saturn and the Basilica Julia is shown on fragments of the marble plan (see Plate VIII.).
  47. One side of this gate was built against one of the marble piers of the Basilica Julia, a perfect print of which still exists in the concrete of the gate, though the marble pier itself has disappeared. The other side of the gate abutted against the marble-lined podium of the temple of Saturn.
  48. See Tac. Ann. ii. 41, who says it was propter aedem Saturni.
  49. See Suet. Aug. 29; Gerhard, Bas. Giulia, &c. (1823); and Visconti, Escavazione della Bas. Giulia (1872).
  50. [note 6]“Forvm . Ivlivm . et . basilica . qvae . fvit . inter . aedem . Castoris . et . aedem . Satvrni . coepta . profligataqve . opera . a . patre . meo . perfeci . et . eandem . basilica . consvmptam . incendio . ampliato . eivs . solo . svb . titvlo . nominis . filiorvm . inchoavi . et . si . vivvs . non . perfecissem . perfici . ab . haeredibvs . [meis . ivssil].” The filii here referred to are Augustus's grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, adopted by him in 17 B.C. (see Dio Cass. lvi. 27).
  51. Three medieval lime-kilns were found by Canina within this basilica, which accounts for the scantiness of the existing remains.
  52. A few have inscriptions, e.g. “Vinces . gaudes: perdes . plangis.”
  53. The whole building has unhappily been much falsified by needless restoration.
  54. A drawing of this pedestal, which is now lost, with MS. note by Ligorio, exists in Cod. Vat. 3439, fol. 46.
  55. The temple of Castor is shown on two fragments of the marble plan, and its position is also indicated by the passage in the Mon. Anc. quoted above (note 6).
  56. On these see Delbrück, Das Capitolium von Signia (1903), p. 22; Der Apollotempel auf dem Marsfelde (1903), p. 14; van Buren in Class. Rev. xx. pp. 77 ff.
  57. The front of the podium was decorated with ships' beaks. One of the mad acts of Caligula was to make the temple of Castor into the vestibule of his palace by breaking a door through the back of the cella (Suet. Cal. 22).
  58. Another legend attributes its founding to Romulus.
  59. On the coins see Dressel, Zeitschr. für Numismatik (1899), 20 ff.
  60. Lanciani, L'Atrio di Vesta (1884), pl. xix.
  61. See Huelsen, The Roman Forum, p. 190, fig. 108.
  62. See Jordan, Vesta und die Laren (Berlin, 1865); and Auer in the Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie (1888), ii. 209 ff.
  63. The columns were crimson, the travertine rain-water gutter bright blue, and the inner walls had simple designs in panels, of leaf ornament and wreaths.
  64. A full account of the Atrium Vestae and its successive restorations is given in Miss E. B. Van Deman's Atrium Vestae (1909).
  65. The most important of these have been removed to the Museo delle Terme.
  67. In the excavations of December 1883 a pot was found in the north corner containing 830 silver pennies of English kings of the 9th and 10th centuries—Alfred the Great, Edward I., Aethelstan, Eadmund I., and others. A list of these is given by De Rossi in Lanciani's work, L'Atrio di Vesta (Rome, 1884). None are later than 946, and a bronze fibula inlaid with silver with the name of Pope Marinus II. (942-46) makes it seem probable that this hoard was concealed during his pontificate.
  68. Not. degli Scavi (1882), p. 225.
  69. This finely sculptured frieze is almost an exact copy of that on the temple of Apollo at Miletus.
  70. The size of the earlier and smaller temple is indicated by the rough blocks on the face of the wall of the Tabularium, close against which the temple stands. When the Tabularium was built it was not thought worth while to dress to a smooth face that part of its wall which was concealed by the then existing temple of Concord.
  71. Little is known of the Basilica Opimia, which probably adjoined the earlier temple of Concord, and the existing building appears also to have occupied the site of the Senaculum (see Festus, ed. Müller, p. 347). For various exciting scenes which took place in the temple of Concord and on its steps, see Cic. Phil. vii. 8; Sallust, Bell. Cat. 49. Another temple of Concord, built in 216 B.C., stood on the Capitoline Arx (Liv. xxii. 33, xxiii. 21); and a bronze aedicula of Concord in the Area Vulcani, which must have been close by the great temple. This was dedicated by Cn. Flavius, 305 B.C. (see Liv: ix. 46); according to Pliny (H.N. xxxiii. 19) it stood “in Graecostasi, quae tunc supra Comitium erat.” Both these were probably only small shrines.
  72. Twelve gilt statues are mentioned by Varro.
  73. Cohen, vol. ii. 303-5.
  74. This is not the ficus ruminalis in the Comitium, but another mentioned by Pliny (H.N. xv. 20) in the middle of the Forum.
  75. As it seems to be on a higher level, it may indicate the Tabularium.
  76. Authorities on the Forum; For the earlier literature of the subject it will suffice to refer to Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom, i. 2, 195-429, and, in English, to Nichols, The Roman Forum (1877). By far the best account based on the recent discoveries of Comm. Boni is Huelsen, The Roman Forum (Eng. trans. from the 2nd German edition, by J. B. Carter, 1906), in which full references are given. The official reports of excavations by Comm. Boni appear at intervals in the Notizie degli Scavi, and are largely concerned with the ancient necropolis. Huelsen publishes reports in the Römische Mitteilungen which are of great value.
  77. Our knowledge of these remains has been considerably increased by excavations in this region begun in 1907, which form the subject of a series of reports in the Notizie degli Scavi; their significance is discussed by Pinza in the Annali della Società degli ingegneri ed architetti Italiani for that year, cf. Ashby in Classical Quarterly (1908), p. 145 ff. It is almost too much to hope that the difficult problems raised by these discoveries will ever be solved; meanwhile it may be noted (i) that abundant traces of a primitive settlement (pottery, foundations of huts, &c.) have come to light near the W. angle of the hill; (ii) that walls of various epochs have been found which may have belonged to a system of fortification, though this cannot be demonstrated: (iii) that beneath a piece of walling built with regularly laid tufa blocks was found an inhumation-grave containing pottery of the 4th century B.C.
  78. It has recently been argued by Pinza that this is the temple of Apollo built by Augustus.
  79. See Mon. Inst. xi. pls. xxii., xxiii.; Mau, Geschichte der Wandmalerei, pl. ix.; Reriier, Les Peintures du Palatin (Paris, 1870.
  81. See Dio Cass. xlix. 15, liii. 1, and C. I. L. i.2 p. 331.
  82. See also Suet. Aug. 52, whose account is rather different.
  83. Schol. to Juv. i. 128, and Suet. Aug. 29.
  84. Cic. Pro Domo, 43; Val. Max. vi. 3, 1; and see Becker, Handb. i. p. 423.
  85. At this point the Palatine is cut away into four stages like gigantic steps; the lowest is the floor of the Atrium Vestae, the second the Nova Via, the third the Clivus Victoriae, and the top of the hill forms the fourth.
  86. The brick stamps on the tiles laid under the marble paving of the basilica have CN . DOMITI . AMANDI . VALEAT . QVI . FECIT.,—the last three words a common augury of good luck stamped on bricks or amphorae.
  87. Pal. dei Cesari (Verona, 1738); see Guattani, Not. di Antich. (1798).
  88. See Kraus, Das Spottcrucifix vom Palatin (Freiburg, 1872), and Becker, Das Spottcrucifix, &c. (Breslau, 1866).
  89. The paedagagium was, however, on the Caelian. Huelsen suggests that it is here used as a slang term for a prison.
  90. See Henzen, in the Bull. Inst., 1863, p. 72, and 1867, p. 113.
  91. In parts of the outer wall brick stamps of the Flavian period appear, e.g. FLAVI . AVG . L . CLONI—“[A brick] of Flavius Clonus, freedman of Augustus” (C. I. L. xv. 1149).
  92. The form Septizonium is also found.
  93. See Huelsen, Das Septizonium des Septimius Severus (Berlin, 1886); Maass, Die Tagesgötter in Rom und den Provinzen (Berlin, 1902).
  94. “Huic (Palatio) Germalum et Velias conjunxerunt . . . Germalum a germanis Romulo et Remo, quod ad ficum Ruminalem ibi inventi” (Varro, L.L. v. 54).
  95. Liv. ii. 7; Cic. Rep. ii. 31; see also Ascon. Ad Cic. in Pis. 52.
  97. Dionys. ii. 50; see also Plut. Cic., 16; Ov. Fast. vi. 793, and Trist. iii. i. 131. Near this temple, and also near the Porta Mugonia, was the house of Tarquinius Priscus (Liv. i. 41; Solin. i. 24). Owing to the strength of its position this temple was more than once selected during troubled times as a safe meeting-place for the Senate; it was here, as being a “locus munitissimus,” that Cicero delivered his First Catiline Oration (see Cic. In Cat. i. 1).
  98. See Bianchini, Pal. dei Cesari (1738), p. 236, pl. viii.
  99. See Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom. i. 2. 274-91.
  100. See Solinus (i. 24) and Varro (ap. Gell. xvi. 17), who mention its two ends, summa and infima (cf. Liv. v. 32).
  101. See Not. d. Scavi (1882), p. 234. Original level laid bare, 1904.
  102. See marble plan on Plate VII. and cf. Ov. Fast. vi. 395.
  103. See Rodocanachi, Le Cagitole romain (1903; Eng. trans., 1906).
  104. The first-named was the southern, the second the northern summit.
  105. This is the earliest temple mentioned in Roman history. It was rebuilt by Augustus (Mon. Anc. 4, 5).
  106. See Plut. Publ. 14; C. I. L. i. p. 487; Liv. ii. 8. Dionys. v. 35 wrongly gives 507 B.C.
  107. Plin. xxxv. 157; see Tac. Hist. iii. 72; Val. Max. v. 10.
  108. Suet. Vit. 15, and Vesp. 8; cf. Tac. Hist. iv. 53, and Dio Cass. lxvi. 10.
  109. Suet. Dom. 5; Dio Cass. lxvi. 24.
  110. See Bull. Comm. Arch. iii. (1875), p. 165; Mon. Inst. v. pl. xxxvi., x. pl. xxxa; Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom, i. 2, 69; Notizie degli Scavi, 1896, p. 161, 1897, p. 30; Richter, “Der kapitolinische Jupitertempel und der italische Fuss,” in Hermes (1887), p. 17.
  111. The pediment is shown on a relief now lost, but extant in the 16th century and reproduced in drawings of that date. It has been recently proved to have decorated the Forum of Trajan (Wace in Papers of the B.S.R. iv. p. 240, pl. xx.). The front of the temple is shown on one of the reliefs of Marcus Aurelius now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Papers of the B.S.R. iii. pl. xxvi.).
  112. See Rodocanachi, The Roman Capital, p. 50. A graceful account of the legend of Tarpeia is given by Propertius, Eleg. iv. 4.
  113. A structure of great sanctity, dating from prehistoric Etruscan times, was the Auguraculum, an elevated platform upon the Arx, from which the signs in the heavens were observed by the augurs (see Festus, ed. Müller, p. 18).
  114. On the Tabularium see Delbrück, Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, i. (1907), pp. 23-45.
  115. The Porta Pandana (“ever-open gate”) gave access from the Area Capitolina, upon which the temple of Jupiter stood, to the Tarpeian rock.
  116. See Mon. Anc. (quoted above); Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxv. 156, xxxvi. 103.
  117. Cic. Ep. ad Att. iv. 16; Suet. Caes. 26; Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 103.
  118. See Dio Cass. xliii. 22; Appian, Bell. Civ. ii. 102; Vitr. iii. 3; Plut. Caes. 60.
  119. The Ancyran inscription records—IN . PRIVATO . SOLO . [EMP]TO . MARTIS . ULTORIS . TEMPLVM . FORVMQVE . AVGVSTVM . EX . [MANI]BIIS . FECI. See Suet. Aug. 29, 56; Dio Cass. lvi. 27; Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 102, xxxv. 94, xxxiv. 48, vii. 183, where many fine Greek works of art are mentioned as being in the forum of Augustus.
  120. Those of Roman leaders and generals, from Aeneas and Romulus to Augustus. See Borsari, Foro d'Augusto, &c. (1884).
  121. An interesting description of this discovery is given by Vacca, writing in 1594 (see Schreiber in Berichte der sächs. Gesellsch. der Wissenschaften, 1881). The scale is roughly 1 to 250.
  122. For accounts of this group of buildings, see De Rossi, Bull. Arch. Crist. (1867), p. 66 ff.; and Lanciani, Bull. Comm. Arch. Rom. (1882), pp. 29 ff.
  123. “Hic (Felix) fecit basilica SS. Cosmae et Damiani . . . in Via Sacra, juxta Templum Urbis Romae” (Lib. Pont., Vita S. Felicis IV.). By the last words the basilica of Constantine is meant.
  124. Statues by Pheidias and Lysippus existed in the Forum Pacis as late as the 6th century (Procop. Bell. Goth. iv. 21).
  125. Drawings of it are given by Du Pérac and Palladio (Arch. iv. 8).
  126. See Aul. Gell. xiii. 25, 2; and Amm. Marc. xvi. 10, 15.
  127. Its pedestal is inscribed, “Senatus Populusque Romanus Imp. Caesari Divi Nervae F. Nervae Trajano Aug. Germ. Dacico Pontif. Maximo Trib. Pot. XVII. [i.e. A.D. 113] Imp. VI. Cos. VI. P. P. ad declarandum quantae altitudinis mons et locus tantis operibus sit egestus.” This would seem to indicate the height of the hill removed to form the site, and is so explained by Dion Cass. (lxviii. 16). It is impossible that the saddle connecting the Quirinal with the Capitoline hill can have been 100 ft. in height (Brocchi, Suolo di Roma, p. 133), but it may be that the cliff of the Quirinal was cut back to a slope reaching to a point about 72 ft. high; thus the statement of the inscription is much exaggerated. Comm. Boni has found the remains of a road beneath the pavement of the Forum, near the column, and believes that the inscription refers to the height of the buildings. Comparetti refers mons to the mass of marble quarried to build the Forum; Sogliano to the mass of ruins and rubbish carted away; Mau to the Servian agger between the Capitol and Quirinal (see Rom. Mitth., 1907, 187 ff).
  128. For the reliefs, see Cichorius, Die Reliefs der Trajanssäule (1896-1900); Petersen, Trajans dakische Kriege (1899-1903); Stuart Jones, Papers of the B. R. S., vol. v. From their lofty position they are now difficult to see, but originally must have been very fairly visible from the galleries on the colonnades which once surrounded the column.
  129. See Aul. Gell. xi. 17, 1; Hist. Aug. Hadr. 19; and compare Pausanias (v. 12, 6; x. 5, 11), who mentions the gilt bronze roofs of Trajan's forum.
  130. See Richter and Grifi, Ristauro del Foro Trajano (1839).
  131. Fiechter (Röm. Mitth., 1906, pp. 220 ff.) has endeavoured to show that the temple in its present form dates from the 1st century B.C.
  132. For drawings of them, see the list given by Huelsen in Jordan, Topographie, i. 3, 511, note 11.
  133. The remains of the Porticus Octaviae have been more completely exposed by the demolition of the Ghetto.
  134. See Palladio (Terme dei Romani, London, 1732), who gives the plan of this enormous building, now wholly hidden or destroyed.
  135. Bull. Inst. (1875), 89-96; see also Bull. Comm. Arch. (1874), 137 ff., pls. xi.-xviii.
  136. During excavations made here in 1876, lead pipes were found inscribed with the name of the estate, the imperial owner (Severus Alexander), and the plumber who made them—ORTORVM SALLVSTIANOR . IMP . SEVER . ALEXANDRI . AVG . NAEVIVS . MANES . FECIT. (C.I.L. xv. 7249).
  137. A drawing of this interesting bronze work, by G. A. Dosio, is preserved in.the Ufiizi at Florence (No. 1021).
  138. On the architrave is cut an inscription recording the restoration of the Pantheon by Severus in 202.
  139. The bronze door is not in its present form antique, having been recast by order of Pius IV.
  140. The plan of the whole group, including the Pantheon, is given by Palladio (op. cit.). The recent discoveries are given by Lanciani, Not. d. Scavi (1882), p. 357, with a valuable plan. See also Geymüller, Documents inédits sur les Thermes d'Agrippa (Lausanne, 1883); Beltrami and Armanini, Il Panteon (1898); Durm, Baukunst der Römer, ed. 2, pp. 550 ff.; Rivoira, Rivista di Roma (1910), p. 412.
  141. See Lanciani in Bull. Comm. Arch. Rom. (1883), and Marucchi, ibid. (1896); Fea, Miscell. ccliv. 112. Part of the Serapeum is shown on fragments of the marble plan, which have been pieced together by Huelsen (Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom. i. 3, pl. x.).
  142. See Visconti, La stazione della Coorte VII. de' Vigili (1867).
  143. See De Romanis, Le antiche camere esquiline (1822). It should be noted that the paintings said to have belonged to the baths of Titus really decorated the Golden House, over which the baths of Titus and Trajan were built.
  144. See Bruzza, in Ann. Inst. (1870), and Lenormant, Trophées de Marius, Blois (1842). This once magnificent building, with the marble trophies in their place, is shown with much minuteness on a bronze medallion of Severus Alexander (see Froehner, Médaillons de l'empire, Paris, 1878, p. 169).
  145. So called from a prehistoric altar to the Dea Murcia (Venus); Varro, L.L. v. 154.
  146. Part of it is shown on a fragment of the marble plan (see Jordan, F. U. R.); it is represented on a bronze medallion of Gordian III., with an obelisk on the spina and three metae at each end; in front are groups of wrestlers and boxers (see Grueber, Rom. Med. pl. xli., London, 1874).
  147. The remains extant in the 16th century were described by Ligorio, Libro delle Antichitá (1553), p. 17.
  148. See his Trasportazione dell' Obelisco Vat. (1590).
  149. Nibby, Circo di Caracalla (1825); Canina, Edifizj di Roma, iv. pls. 194-96.
  150. Plut. Pomp. 52; Dion Cass. xxxix. 38; Tac. Ann. xiv. 20.
  151. See Fea, Rom. Ant. lxviii. 57, for an account of its discovery.
  152. Suet. Aug. 29. See Mon. Anc. 4, 22: “Theatrvm . ad . aedem. Apollinis . in . solo magna . ex . parte . a . [privatis .] empto . feci . qvod . svb . nomine . M . Marcelli . generi . [me]i . esset.” The temple of Apollo here named was one of the most ancient and highly venerated in Rome; it was dedicated to the Delphic Apollo in 431 B.C. by Cn. Julius (Liv. iv. 25); meetings of the Senate were held in it; and it contained many fine works of art—an ancient cedar-wood statue of Apollo (Plin. H.N. xiii. 11) and the celebrated statues of the slaughter of the Niobids by Praxiteles or Scopas (Plin. H.N. xxxvi. 28), of which many ancient copies exist.
  153. Liv. xxxiii. 27.
  154. This arch is the earliest known example of the so-called Composite order, a modification of Corinthian in which the capitals combine Ionic volutes with Corinthian acanthus leaves; in other respects it follows the Corinthian order.
  155. See Vacca, ap. Fea, Misc., p. 67.
  156. Reproduced by De Rossi in his Piante di Roma Anteriori al Sec. XVI. (1879).
  157. See Bellori, Veteres Arcus (1690), showing some now destroyed; and Rossini, Archi Trionfali (1832).
  158. On the Antonine column see Petersen in Amelung's Katalog der vaticanischen Sculpturen, i. p. 883; on that of M. Aurelius see Die Marcussäule, by Petersen, v. Domaszewski and Calderini (Munich, 1896).
  159. The inscriptions are given in C. I. L. i. 29-39—vi. 1284-94. On the earlier ones see Woelfflin, Münchener Sitzungsberichte (1892), 188 ff.
  160. This is shown by an inscription (C. I. L. vi. 26152) found on the site in the 17th century.
  161. See Du Pérac's Vestigj, pl. 36, which shows the garden on the top.
  162. On the mausoleum of Hadrian, see Borgatti, Castel S. Angelo (1890).
  163. Near the tomb of Cestius is that extraordinary mound of potsherds called Monte Testaccio. These are mostly fragments of large amphorae, not piled up at random, but carefully stacked, with apertures at intervals for ventilation. It has been shown by Dressel (Ann. dell' Inst., 1878, 118 ff.; C. I. L. xv. p. 492) that damaged or imperfect vessels were thus disposed of.
  164. See Varro, L.L. v. 83; Ov. Fast. v. 622; Tac. Hist. i. 86; Vita Antonini Pii, 8.
  165. The bridges were specially under the care of the pontifex maximus, at least till the later years of the republic (Varro, I. L. v. 83).
  166. Livy (ii. 5) gives the fable of the formation of this island from the Tarquins' corn, cut from the Campus Martius and thrown into the river.
  167. The two stone bridges connecting the island with the right and left banks took the place of earlier wooden structures.
  168. See Mayerhöfer, Die Brücken im alten Rom, 1883.
  169. The text of the Regionary Catalogues is printed by Richter, Topographie der Stadt Rom,² pp. 371 ff.
  170. Vita Aurel. 21, 39; Zosimus, i. 37, 49; Eutrop. ix. 15.
  171. The inscriptions run thus: S. P. Q. R. IMPP . CAESS . D. D. INVICTISSIMIS . PRINCIPIBVS . ARCADIO . ET . HONORIO . VICTORIBVS . AC . TRIVMPHATORIBVS . SEMPER . AVGG . OB . INSTAVRATOS . VRBIS . AETERNAE . MVROS . PORTAS . AC . TVRRES . EGESTIS . IMMENSIS . RVDERIBVS—the rest refers to honorary statues erected to commemorate this work.
  172. Cf. Procop. Bell. Goth. i. 23.
  173. On the walls of Aurelian, see (in addition to the general works, mentioned in the bibliography) Nibby and Gell, Le Mura di Roma (1820); Quarenghi, Le Mara di Roma (1880); and especially Homo, Essai sur le règne de l'empereur Aurélien (Paris, 1904), IV.e partie, ch. ii., “L'Enceinte de Rome.”
  174. S. Lorenzo and S. Agnese fuori, S. Maria in Trastevere, Ara Coeli, and numberless other churches are very rich in this respect.
  175. Heinrich Holtzinger, Die altchristliche Architectur (Stuttgart, 1889–99); Dehio and von Bezold, Die kirchliche Baukunst des Abendlandes (Stuttgart, 1884–99).
  176. This list does not include the great basilicas of Rome, for which see Basilica. On the churches of Rome see Armellini, Le chiese di Roma (2nd ed. 1891); Tuker and Malleson, Handbook to Christian and Ecclesiastical Rome (1900); Marucchi, Basiliques at églises de Rome (1902); Frothingham, Monuments of Christian Rome (1910).
  177. Some of these marble thrones which still exist are very interesting relics of Hellenic art, much resembling the existing seats in the theatre of Dionysius at Athens. Examples of these thrones exist at S. Pietro in Vincoli, S. Stefano Rotondo, and in the Lateran cloister.
  178. The interior of S. Maria in Cosmedin has in recent years been restored according to primitive tradition.
  179. On the Cosmati see Boito, Architettura del Medio Evo (Milan, 1880, pp. 117–182); Clausse, Les Marbriers romaines et le mobilier presbytéral (Paris, 1897); Crowe and Cavalcaselle, History of Painting in Italy (ed. Douglas, 1903), ch. iii.
  180. The campanile was restored and enriched in 1376.
  181. See De Montault, Les Cloches de Rome (Arras, 1874).
  182. For many centuries wall-facing of small tufa stones was used, e.g. in the medieval part of the Capitol; this was called “opera saracinesca” from its supposed adoption from the Saracena; it is largely employed in the walls and towers of the Leonine city, built by Leo IV. (847-855) to defend the Vatican basilica and palace against the inroads of the Moslem invaders. The greater part of this wall is now destroyed and built over, but a long piece with massive circular towers well preserved exists in the gardens of the Vatican.
  183. The house of Crescentius, popularly called the “house of Rienzi,” near the Ponte Rotto, is perhaps the sole relic of the domestic architecture of an earlier period—the 12th century. Its architectural decorations are an extraordinary mixture of marble fragments of the most miscellaneous sort, all taken from classical buildings; it has an inscription over the doorway, from which we learn that it was the property of “Crescentius, son of Nicolaus.”
  184. See Rohault de Fleury, Le Latran au moyen âge (Paris, 1877).
  185. See Letarouilly, Le Vatican et le basilique de St Pierre à Rome (Paris, 1882).
  186. The absence of a triforium is one of the chief reasons why the large Gothic churches of Italy are so inferior in effect to the cathedrals of France and England.
  187. On Mino da Fiesole, see Gnoli in Archivio Storico dell' Arte (1890-91); on Giovanni Dalmata, Fabriczy in Jahrb. der preuss-Kunstammlungen (1901); on Andrea Bregno, Steinmann in the same periodical, vol. xx.; many of the monuments are drawn in Tosi, Raccolta di monumenti sacri e sepolcrati scolpiti a Roma (1853).
  188. These two churches were the first in Rome built with domes after the classical period.
  189. The upper storey of the latter is varied by having horizontal lintels instead of arches on the columns.
  190. See Geymüller, Projets primitifs pour le basilique de St Pierre à Rome (Paris, 1875-85).
  191. A valuable account of Raphael's architectural works is given by Geymüller, Raffaello come Architetto (Milan, 1882). Drawings of many of the finest palaces of Rome are given in the fine work by Letarouilly, Édifices de Rome moderne (Brussels, 1856-66).