Part 8

The _Curia Hostilia_ was situated on the πρόπους of the Palatine, just opposite the narrow side of the rostra. Its name is no doubt derived from Tullus Hostilius, who is certainly an historical personage; but we ought not to assert that he reigned from A.U. 78 till 110, for no one can know when he lived. This Curia existed down to the time of Cicero, when the populace led on by Sext. Clodius, carried into it the body of P. Clodius, who had been killed by Milo, and, in burning the corpse, reduced the building to ashes. Even Sulla had made some alterations in the district around the rostra, but we do not know in what they consisted. The Curia was not restored on the ancient site, but farther to the right; Caesar commenced the new building, and Augustus completed it: this is the _Curia Julia_, near which the new rostra were constructed. The three splendid Corinthian columns which are still standing, belong to this Curia Julia; they stand parallel to the ridge of the Palatine and the line of the Capitoline, and are generally considered to have belonged to the temple of Jupiter Stator, while Fea believes them to be remnants of the temple of Castor. This latter hypothesis is impossible, for we read in Suetonius[22] that the arch of Caligula extended over the temple of Castor as far as the Capitol: but this is impossible, if the three columns belonged to the temple of Castor. They belong, I repeat it, to the Curia Julia; and this accounts for the fact that the rostra are found close by, and that the Capitoline Fasti, which formed one wall in that Curia, were found among its ruins. There can be no doubt that the very ancient plan of Rome,[23] which formed the floor of the church S. Cosma e Damiano, likewise belonged to it: there could not be a better place for it than one of the walls in the Curia Julia. The idea of Pirro Ligorio, that the Fasti were set up in an arch, is as improbable as many others of his views; attempts have been made to justify him, but he has evidently been guilty of many falsehoods. Notwithstanding this, however, his papers ought not to be neglected; they are preserved partly in the Vatican and partly among the manuscripts at Turin.[24] Rome, accordingly, had two Curiae, the Hostilia and Julia, which, however, did not exist at any time simultaneously; but the two rostra, the _vetera_ and the _nova_ or _Julia_, both existed at the same time. The _nova rostra_ were built on the site of the ancient Curia.

The whole of the Forum was surrounded by a portico, which had been built either in the time of the kings or at the commencement of the republic; the columns were undoubtedly Etruscan, that is, old Doric, and the whole was made of peperino, covered with stucco, and not high. The booths (_tabernae_ or _mensae argentariorum_), the stalls of money-changers or bankers, were set up in this portico to be protected against the weather. The armour taken from an enemy after a glorious victory was hung upon the pillars, whence the expression _postes ornare tropaeis_ in one of the fragments of Ennius. Whether these trophies were carefully preserved, is unknown; but the old ones probably made room for new ones, though many a splendid memorial may have been seen there for a long time. In the Forum, below the Capitol, but beyond the clivus, were the temples of Saturn and Concord; further, when you look southward, having the Capitoline on the right and the Palatine on the left, you have on your right-hand side the temple of Castor, which was dedicated by the dictator A. Postumius; near it was the well of Juturna, in which the Dioscuri, after the battle of lake Regillus, washed their horses; next to it was the temple of Vesta, of which remains would certainly be found, if excavations were made; distinct mention of it is made in books written as late as the fifteenth century. On the opposite side was situated the Regia and the Atrium Vestae, which ought not to be confounded with the temple of that goddess. Rome contained many Atria, that is, open square spaces surrounded by houses and a portico, under which people walked in rainy weather. Such was the Atrium Libertatis, a kind of _bourse_; the most correct Latin name for a _bourse_ or exchange accordingly would be _atrium negotiatorum_ or _mercatorum_. The Atrium Vestae must have been like the cloisters of a monastery, the cells of the Vestals being built around a square; the priestesses moreover were buried beside the Atrium, as they had the privilege of being buried within the city. This circumstance has caused great confusion in the antiquities of Rome, for when in the sixteenth century the church of S. Maria Liberatrice was erected on the left-hand side of the Atrium Vestae, and a number of tomb-stones of Vestal virgins were found there, it was inferred at once that this must be the site of the temple of Vesta. But this is opposed to all the statements of the ancients. I think it was one of my friends who had the happy idea that the temple ought not to be sought near the Atrium; I had previously said, that I could not believe the temple to have been there, and that, from all accounts, I must infer that it stood on the opposite side, not far from the lacus Curtius.

The Forum contained yet another class of buildings; it certainly was a market-place as well as a place for assembling; but in ancient times it was also the place for the administration of justice. In like manner, our own ancestors met under the open sky, and the estates of Lüneburg, as late as 1660, assembled in a forest, because decrees formed in a covered building were considered invalid. Such also was the case at Rome, all business was transacted in the open air. This is the native and natural custom of Italy: man there feels the necessity of living and doing his work under the free canopy of heaven; every artizan, if the weather permits it, works in front of his house where he has his shop. There still exist at Rome a great many houses built in exactly the same style as in the most ancient times. These shops have no windows, but are closed by means of a large door; and in bad weather the people take refuge within and work by candle-light; when the weather becomes fine again, they resume their seats in the door or in the street. Such also was the case with the ancients. Those who worked with their minds, had similar arrangements: during the night they remained in their rooms, but in the day-time they walked out into the open air, to some public place where they dictated or wrote. The air at Rome is very good, if we consider the dress of the ancients, which consisted of wool, over which they wore the toga; the climate is more healthy than ours, and old age there commences later than with us. Justice, as I said before, was administered in the Forum in the open air; but as this was not without its disadvantages, it became necessary to devise some protection against them. When the Romans had become acquainted with Greece, they were much pleased with the στοὰ βασίλειος at Athens, and the idea of building _basilicae_ suggested itself to them. The Stoa at Athens was probably a portico composed of several rows (we do not know how long these rows were), and afforded both sufficient light and protection in bad weather. When, therefore, an active intercourse between Rome and Greece had arisen, the Romans built such basilicae as courts of justice. They are by no means imitations of royal palaces of the East. Later Greeks, e.g., Agathias, always translate the word basilicae, whether at Rome or at Constantinople, by στοὰ βασίλειος. We must conceive that originally they were mere rows of columns supporting a roof, and without side-walls. They generally had six rows of columns in front, so that there were five entrances. Afterwards the two extreme rows, the first and sixth, were changed into walls; the back part also was walled up, and the tribunal for the presiding praetor was set up in a crescent formed in this back wall. This is the origin of the closed buildings called basilicae. As they were well adapted for public meetings, they became, ever since the time of Constantine, the regular types of Christian churches. What was the construction of churches before the time of Constantine, is a question which we cannot answer; we do not possess the slightest allusion to it. An immense number of fables are current respecting churches said to have been built by Constantine, but the only one which he really did build, is still known; it is the church of the Lateran, justly called _princeps ecclesiarum urbis et orbis_. The day on which that church was consecrated by Constantine, is quite certain, and is celebrated every year, I believe about the end of November. The import of this festival of the consecration of the Church has at Rome itself been completely forgotten, and there is not one canon of the Lateran who knows it. I have learned it from an old Flemish gentleman, who, among much that was strange, also possessed a good deal of interesting information. The form of the basilicae, as I have described it, is very ancient, and in the Christian churches it is quite simple: all have five gates, and in the interior, four rows of columns, the two inner ones high, and the outer ones lower. This change, however, was not a matter of necessity. From this form I recognised the _basilica C. et L. Caesarum_, _Julia_, or _Caesaris_ in what is commonly called the temple of Concord.

In the course of time the Forum became quite filled with basilicae, monuments, statues, and the like; it contained three or four basilicae, the Opimia, Porcia, Paulli, etc. Caesar set up a number of statues, so that during the latter period of the republic there was little space left for public assemblies, which, however, even without this, were rarely held; the idea of a free space must in the end have been entirely forgotten, and the comitium alone preserved this character. About sixty years ago, the pavement of the Comitium consisting of slabs of the most beautiful yellow Numidian marble, was discovered, but it was broken to pieces and sold in a disgraceful manner. In later times all the edifices were rebuilt, and the portico was restored with far more splendour (we know this from Orosius) and floored with magnificent stones, while the roof was of bronze and no doubt gilt.

This may suffice in regard to the Forum Romanum or Maximum. The word Forum originally, as is stated by the ancient lexicographers, signified “hollow ground;” but afterwards it assumed the same meaning as ἀγορά, and thus presupposes an open space. In later times the meaning underwent so strange a change, that the Fora, e.g., the Forum Ulpium or Trajani, were not open spaces at all, but places wholly covered with buildings. Of the same kind were the Fora of Nerva and Domitian. The same must be supposed to have been the case even with the Forum of Caesar; in regard to that of Augustus, it may appear doubtful, as to whether a portion of it was not an open space. This change arose from the fact, that the idea of a free space, in the case of the Forum Maximum, was entirely lost sight of, and a Forum was regarded as a place containing courts of justice.

As, therefore, the ancient Forum was already filled with basilicae, Caesar, wishing to build a handsome one, erected it in a separate locality, which he purchased by the side of the Forum. This is the _Forum Caesaris_, which was not an open space at all, but a basilica with the temple of Venus Genitrix. It was situated at the foot of the Palatine, by the side of the Forum Maximum, its southern part turning towards the Vicus Tuscus, opposite the temple of Castor, as I have ascertained beyond a doubt. I cannot give you the proofs, because I have neither maps nor plans at hand.

The next _Forum_ planned in the same manner is that of _Augustus_, except that a portion of it was probably an open space. It was situated at some distance from the Roman Forum, beyond the Via Sacra and, perhaps, a few more streets. Hirt, who is himself not rich in ideas, but in Roman topography has often successfully revived those of earlier writers (such as Palladio and Serlio), has demonstrated the site of this Forum. He is not a learned man, but has a well practised eye in observing antiquities; none of his own original views are good, but among the things he finds in earlier authors, he can well distinguish what is correct from what is not, a thing which learned men often cannot. The Forum of Augustus contained the temple of Mars Ultor, where the standards of Crassus, recovered from the Parthians, were set up, and also a magnificent basilica; there also stood—it was a noble conception—the statues of the most illustrious Romans, which had formerly stood in the market-place and in the orchestra of the theatre, with the _tituli gestorum_. A fragment of the latter is still extant fastened in a wall of the Vatican; but it is not even possible to see whose name is mentioned in it. The writing certainly belongs to the age of Augustus, as every one can see who has an eye for such things. I cannot be mistaken in such a matter, I can immediately see whether an inscription was cut before the time of Caesar or in the age of Augustus. Such things make a residence at Rome so pleasing, when on seeing monuments one can immediately determine to what period they belong. The inscriptions, however, are still extant in copies, as for instance, at Pesaro. About a Roman mile from Tivoli, I found an overturned pedestal of a statue of Plancus, with an inscription, which had been quite rudely cut by a common mason, probably an ignorant slave. I was not able to convince a native of Tivoli, who even wrote on the antiquities of his own town, that such inscriptions are genuine.

The Forum Augusti is now foolishly called Forum Nervae, probably because it is situated near the latter; while down to the seventeenth century its ruins were regarded as part of the Forum Trajani. The _Forum Nervae_ was very easy to be recognised by a temple built by Nerva and dedicated by Trajan, but the ruins of it were formerly believed to belong to the temple of Mars Ultor. Among these ruins there were six or eight columns, which unfortunately were lying on the ground, in consequence of which they were cut in pieces by Pope Paul V., who made use of the beautiful marble in building an aqueduct (_Acqua Paola_). This circumstance was so quickly forgotten that Nardini, who wrote only about forty or fifty years later, was perfectly ignorant of a temple having ever stood there, and that after him no modern ever even thought of it. All that was known of this temple of Nerva, was transferred to that of Mars Ultor. I discovered this fact from the work of Gamucci, an author of the sixteenth century, who gives a minute account of it, and representations of the ruins in woodcuts. I saw that three columns of exquisite beauty, which were generally referred to the temple of Mars Ultor, could be no other than those which he assigned to the Forum of Trajan. I also found copper-plate engravings of the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and made out quite clearly, that those columns were not what they were believed to be, and that the space of the Forum Nervae was covered with houses by Cardinal Alessandrini, under Paul V.

By the side of the Forum Augusti, another was built by Domitian, which was called _Forum Nervae_ or _Palladium_, because he erected a temple of Pallas in it; architraves and disfigured columns (_colonnacce_) of it still exist. The Palladium is also seen represented in reliefs. But Domitian’s name, as I have already observed, being detested by posterity, it afterwards obtained the name of Forum Nervae, for Nerva dedicated the temple of which the building had been commenced by Domitian.

The most magnificent of all the Fora was the _Forum Ulpium_, between the Capitoline and Quirinal, a whole complex of buildings, the splendour of which was unequalled by anything; as is seen even from the trifling remains which have escaped destruction during the middle ages. Its centre was adorned with the column of Trajan which made the destructiveness of the barbarians quail. By barbarians, I do not mean the Germans, for Goths and Vandals did not destroy buildings, but I allude to the feudalism of the middle ages, when all strong buildings were occupied as fortresses. Thus the senator Brancaleone knew no more expeditious way than to raze to the ground one hundred and forty ancient edifices, because they had been used as fortresses: such things happened at the time of the emperor Frederick II.[25], and if it were not for this barbarism the buildings might be still standing. The marble was used as lime, as was done even at the time when I lived in Rome, for an ancient street was then broken down for the convenience of a high road, and specimens of the most beautiful architecture were burnt down at Ostia into lime.

In regard to the name Forum Ulpium, you must remember that adjectives of gentile names were taken, without change, from the primary adjective form, provided they applied to architectural works, whence _Forum Ulpium_ and not _Ulpianum_, _Curia Julia_ and not _Juliana_; when applied to writings and other works, however, the adjectives take the ending _anus_, as _orationes Tullianae_. Near the gigantic column of Trajan there were two basilicae of immense magnitude, and also two other large buildings, one of which, at least, contained a library. Statues of the most illustrious men were then set up in these basilicae, as they had formerly been in the Forum Augusti; this was the greatest honour that could be shown to a man, and the custom was preserved down to the latest times of the empire; the statues of Merobaudes, Sidonius Apollinaris, Claudian, and others, were found among the ruins of those basilicae. I recommend you to read Sidonius Apollinaris; I will not set up my authority in this matter as of much value, but J. M. Gesner calls Sidonius Apollinaris a _vir magnus_, although he is an incorrect writer. But he is a man of such genius and talent, that his equal is not easily to be met with in the course of centuries. He has something that reminds one of modern French authors; but in regard to his mind, he is thoroughly an ancient of the time when the night of barbarism was threatening to sink down upon mankind.

These are the real Fora. There can be no doubt, that the basilica of Antoninus Pius stood in the Piazza Colonna, where the façade of the columns is still preserved. What a pity that everything is now so much destroyed! for as late as the sixteenth century, there still existed in that place the pedestals of a number of allegorical statues representing the Roman provinces; some of them have been recovered though not recognised, but most of them have disappeared. I have not seen one of them, and have read only the notice that some have been found. Provincial coins of Antoninus Pius also exist showing on the one side the emperor’s head, and on the other the name of a province, as Gallia, Bithynia, etc. That locality therefore seems to have been the _Forum Aurelium_, which, however, is not mentioned in the Regionaria, because it was outside the city.

Besides these, Rome had yet a different kind of Fora, which were real market-places, for those I have hitherto mentioned are only the splendid ones. Two of these market-places belong to the period of ancient Rome, viz., the _Forum Boarium_ towards the Circus, and the _Forum Olitorium_ between the Capitoline and the Tiber, in the neighbourhood of the theatre of Marcellus, where I lived for six years. The Forum Boarium was no doubt a cattle market, where live cattle were sold, although we have no distinct statement to prove this; the Forum Olitorium was of course a vegetable market. Meat, however, was not sold in the Forum Boarium, but in the _macellum_ which contained the butchers’ stalls. In Greece, butchers’ shops were unknown; people there ate so little meat, that it was never bought or sold in the market at Athens; for they ate meat only when they themselves killed an animal, that is, when they sacrificed. On such an occasion an entertainment was given on account of the meat, whence θύειν is synonymous with “to give an entertainment.” Otherwise both the rich and poor at Athens lived as frugally as the modern Greeks on anchovies, the tunny fish, salt fish, salad, fruit, and olives; many a man in easy circumstances ate nothing all day except some olives with bread and without sitting down to a regular meal. This is the λιτὴ τράπεζα Ἀττικὴ mentioned by Athenaeus as opposed to Macedonian luxury. The Roman mode of living, on the other hand, was very like our own; the Romans took a great deal of meat, especially ham, like the German peasantry, bacon and other salt meat; they did not require a sacrifice to feast their friends. One of their principal dishes was a kind of porridge made of spelt; it is a very excellent dish and affords most healthy nourishment. For children, I know nothing better than this porridge with milk, on which I have brought up my own. There can be no doubt that oxen were sold in the Forum Boarium, though there is a statement that it derived its name from a brazen bull which stood there.

There are a few other names in Roman topography which may be easily mistaken. One of them is _vicus_. Many years ago, before I had gone to Rome, a gentleman engaged in archaeological studies said to me, that it was utterly impossible to define what _vicus_ meant. If by this he meant to say, that a vast deal had been written about it without making the matter clearer, he was quite right. But the cause of this was the base of a statue belonging to the period of the first emperors.[26] Each region of Augustus was subdivided into _vici_, which means nothing else but a quarter or district under the superintendence of its own police officer. Even at a much earlier time the regions of Servius Tullius had been similarly subdivided, in the city into _vici_, and in the country into _pagi_, and each had its own _magister_. The word _vicus_ may be rendered by the German _Wik_, or _Wich_; in ancient times, many towns in lower Saxony were divided into _Wiks_. Now as it happened by accident that sometimes a single street constituted such a vicus, and as of course the houses on both sides of the street belonged to it, such a street was naturally called a vicus, as, for example, the _vicus Sceleratus_. The _vicus Patricius_ and the _vicus Cornelius_, on the other hand, are obviously larger districts in the regio Collina and Esquilina. I think (I may be mistaken, but I believe I am right) that in the Regionaria every region of Augustus was regularly divided into seven vici. Many a street at Rome is called _vico_ to this day, and a narrow lane is called _vicolo_, which, however, is only a secondary meaning.