CHAPTER IV.

THE IMPERIAL FORA AND THE CAPITOLIUM.

[Sidenote: Trajan’s Forum.]

[Sidenote: Ruin in the Salita del Grillo.]

The whole space between the Quirinal and the Capitoline Hills was occupied by the immense Forum and public buildings which Trajan constructed. The Column of Trajan, with its wonderful spiral reliefs, still marks the site of this great mass of masonry; but the remainder, which included a basilica, two libraries, a temple, and two extensive porticoes, has disappeared with the exception of a fragmentary ruin in the Via della Salita del Grillo under the Quirinal. This ruin is the remains of a part of the great semicircular side of Trajan’s Forum under the Quirinal Hill. It consists of a brick building of two stories high, containing in the lower story small rooms measuring about ten feet square, probably shops or offices for notaries and lawyers’ clerks. The interior of three of the rooms is covered with plaster, and painted roughly. The floors were covered with mosaic pavement of a common kind, of which much still remains in situ. Above these rooms runs a corridor with arched windows, at the back of which a row of large and high chambers opens, resting upon the natural rock of the Quirinal Hill. The front is faced with brick pilasters on travertine basements, in a mixed Doric and Ionic style, and there were formerly pediments over the windows.

It will be seen by reference to the plan that a small portion of the Forum of Trajan can be now seen in the Piazza della Colonna Trajana. The arch from which the beautiful bas-reliefs on Constantine’s Arch were robbed, probably stood in the Via del Priorato at some distance from the Piazza.

The two double rows of bases now to be seen in the Piazza formed a part of the great Basilica Ulpia, part of the ground-plan of which is still preserved on two fragments of the Capitoline map. Many fragments are to be seen here of the columns which supported the roof of the basilica, among which those of grey granite, probably belonging to the outer rows of columns, are most conspicuous.

[Sidenote: Column of Trajan.]

The great PILLAR with its well-known spiral bas-reliefs, perhaps the most interesting and instructive monument of antiquity in Rome, was surrounded when the buildings round it were complete with a narrow court not more than forty feet square. The south side of this was formed by the Basilica Ulpia, the eastern and western by the libraries, and on the north there was probably an open colonnade, the line of which can be traced leading to the structures beyond, where stood the temple dedicated to Trajan. Thus we discover a fact which seems at first somewhat surprising, that the pillar could not be viewed in its full height from any side, and that the upper part of it alone was visible from the Forum over the roof of the basilica. That it was intentionally thus enclosed is evident, for had the Greek architect Apollodorus of Damascus, who designed the Forum, wished it to be where the full colossal proportions could be seen, the open space of the Forum was close at hand, in the centre of which it might have been placed. But it is not unlikely that the sight of a column was almost inseparable in the Greek architectural ideas from an entablature and pediment. The Greeks did not place their statues on the top of columns, and probably had this reason for it, that a single column cannot form a whole by itself, and wears a forsaken and deserted aspect when viewed from any distance. An obelisk conveys a different meaning, and the use of a single column cannot be justified by it. The obelisk tapers upwards and completes itself, but a column instantly brings the idea of support with it. Obelisks, moreover, were never used singly by the Egyptians, but always placed in pairs. The intention of the architect was not that the column should be viewed as we now view it, as a whole, but that the colossal statue of the emperor might be raised on high above his splendid group of buildings, and also that the bas-reliefs should be conveniently viewed from the surrounding galleries.

The height of the column is 124 feet from the pavement to the foot of the statue. It stands upon a pedestal of marble eighteen feet high, ornamented on three sides with highly interesting bas-reliefs representing trophies of Roman and Dacian armour of various kinds, the Roman labarum and the Dacian dragon, coats of mail made of scale or chain armour, helmets, curved and straight swords, axes, clubs, bows, quivers, arrows, lances, trumpets, and several kinds of military tools. On the fourth side two genii bear the tablet on which is the inscription: SENATUS POPULUSQUE ROMANUS IMP. CAESARI DIVI NERVAE F. NERVAE TRAJANO AUG. GERM. DACICO PONTIF. MAXIMO TRIB. POT. XII. IMP. VI. PP. AD DECLARANDUM QUANTAE ALTITUDINIS MONS ET LOCUS TANT[is operi]BUS SIT EGESTUS.

The last words of this inscription are illustrated by a passage of Dion Cassius, who says that Trajan placed a colossal pillar in his Forum to be his own tomb, and also to show the amount of labour expended upon the Forum, the slope of the hill which previously occupied the site having been dug away so as to afford a level space for the Forum. There is no need to interpret this, as some writers have done, to mean that the ground on the spot where the column stands had previously been as high as the top of the column. Such an interpretation seems highly improbable. The view taken by Becker and Brocchi is more tenable, that the words allude to the cutting away of the Quirinal Hill, which was steep and inaccessible before but was sloped away to a point on the side of the hill as high as the top of the column. Brocchi’s geological observations have made it almost certain that the ground has not been cut away to any great depth between the two hills.

The top of the column is only six feet lower than the level of the Villa Aldobrandini on the top of the Quirinal, and two feet higher than the Piazza di Ara Cœli. If, therefore, at any time the ground on the site of Trajan’s Forum was as high as the column, it must have formed a ridge between the Capitoline and Quirinal Hills, higher than the Capitoline and very nearly as high as the Quirinal.

In the base of the column the ashes of Trajan were deposited in a golden urn. Sixtus V. had the chamber in which the urn was placed opened, but found it empty, and it has now been walled up.

Above the pedestal are two flat stones ornamented with garlands of oak leaves, and upon them rests a round base carved in the shape of a laurel wreath. The shaft which stands immediately upon this is composed of nineteen cylindrical blocks of marble, on the outside of which a spiral band of beautifully executed bas-reliefs winds from bottom to top, covering the whole shaft. The capital is a single ring of egg-shaped ornaments with arrowheads between them, and a simple border below. On a pedestal above it stood originally the colossal bronze-gilt statue of Trajan. This statue and pedestal were probably carried off during the robberies committed at Rome by the Byzantine emperors, A.D. 663. Sixtus V. replaced it by a modern cylindrical pedestal and statue of S. Peter. The ancient winding staircase hewn in the solid blocks of marble, and lighted by narrow openings, still leads to the top. From thence it may be seen how difficult it is to suppose that the ground ever rose to such a height between the Capitoline and Quirinal as has been imagined by many historians and topographers.

[Sidenote: Bas-reliefs representing scenes in the Dacian wars.]

The magnificent wreath of bas-reliefs which winds round the shaft may be best studied by means of the model to be seen in the French Academy on the Pincian Hill, or that in the Kensington Museum. It contains the history of two campaigns against the Dacians, and has been ingeniously and minutely interpreted by several writers. A complete account of this marble history of the Dacian wars, with a discussion of all the historical and antiquarian points connected with it, would occupy several volumes, and we must, therefore, content ourselves with noticing the general character of the work and some few of the more interesting portions.

[Sidenote: Trajan’s first campaign in Dacia.]

Two campaigns are represented. The first of these took place in the year 101, and during it Trajan’s army passed down the river Save and crossed the Danube in two divisions at Kastolatz and at the confluence of the Tjerna. The two divisions effected a junction at the pass of the Bistra, called the Iron Gate, which they forced, and then attacked and took the royal city Zermizegethusa. Trajan was not satisfied with this success, but pushed on into the heart of the enemy’s country, and gained a great victory at Tapæ, after which Decebalus, the Dacian king, sued for peace.

The bas-relief begins at the base by a representation of the banks of the Save, down which the Roman army passed, and shows military storehouses, piles of wood, stacks of hay, and wooden huts. Then follow forts with soldiers on guard, and boats carrying barrels of provisions.

The river god Danube then appears and looks on with astonishment at the bridge of boats over which the Roman army is passing. The baggage of the soldiers on the march, tied to the top of the vallum or palisade which they carry, and the different military standards, are very distinctly shown. Many of the men are without covering on their heads, but some wear lions’ skins. The emperor and his staff are then introduced. He is sitting upon a suggestus or platform, and Lucius, the Prætorian prefect, sits beside him. The suovetaurilia, a grand sacrificial celebration, is the next scene, with priests in the Cinctus Gabinus and trumpeters. After this the emperor is seen making a speech to the army, and a little farther on the building of a stone encampment enclosing huts is being carried on with great vigour, and bridges are being thrown across a river, over which cavalry are passing.

A battle seems then to take place, and the heads of two enemies are being brought to the emperor. The Dacian army with the dragon ensign and the Dacian cap, the symbol of superior rank, seen upon the statues of the Dacian prisoners on the Arch of Constantine, appears. Jupiter gives the victory to the Romans, the Dacian camp is burnt, and the Dacians fly.

Numerous representations of forts, boats, different kinds of troops, skirmishes, and sieges follow, ending with the surrender of Decebalus and the return of Trajan to Rome, where a great festival is celebrated. The arrival at Rome, and the crowd of Romans going to meet the great conqueror, are very vividly drawn. An immense number of bulls for sacrifice, altars, camilli, and half-naked popæ are introduced into the triumphal rejoicings, and the first campaign ends with the figure of Trajan offering incense on the altar of Jupiter Capitolinus.

[Sidenote: Trajan’s second campaign in Dacia.]

A somewhat similar series of scenes are represented in the sculptures which depict the second campaign. Perhaps the most interesting is that of the great bridge over the Danube, made of wood supported on stone piers, the foundations of which may still be seen in the bed of the river. Apollodorus, the architect of the Forum, designed this immense work, which crossed the Danube at a spot where it is not less than 1300 yards wide, near the village of Gieli. A permanent road into Dacia and secure communications with his basis of operations having thus been secured, Trajan gradually advanced from post to post, driving the Dacians into the mountainous parts of the country. The sculptures represent a number of skirmishes and assaults upon fortified places, but no regular pitched battle. At last the ghastly spectacle of the head and hands of Decebalus is exhibited on a board by two soldiers in front of the Prætorium. This disgusting scene is followed by a representation of the storming of the last strongholds of the enemy in the mountains, and a mournful procession of fugitives carrying away their goods and driving their cattle into exile forms the close of the sculptured history of the Dacian campaigns of Trajan.[76]

In these curious bas-reliefs we have a treasury of information on the religion, the military science, the habits and dress of the Romans of the Empire far more valuable than ten thousand pages of descriptive writing. The lover of Roman antiquities will learn more by studying Fabretti’s engravings of these reliefs, or the casts at the French Academy at Rome, and at the Kensington Museum, than by much book-labour. The descriptions of Livy and Polybius, Cæsar and Tacitus, receive life, and movement, and interest as we look at the actual figures (oculis subjecta fidelibus) of the general and his staff; the Prætorian guards marked by their belts over the left shoulder; the fierce-looking standard-bearers and centurions with their heads covered by lions’ skins, the shaggy manes of which stream down their backs; the rank and file carrying enormous stakes; the master masons, sappers, and pioneers, with their axes and crowbars; the lancers, heavy and light cavalry, and royal chargers; the Sarmatian horsemen, clothed, both riders and steeds, in complete scale armour, and the Moorish cavalry, riding without reins.

Bridges are constructed, Roman causeways laid, forts attacked with all kinds of military engines; the charge of cavalry, the rout and confusion of a defeated army, are all most vividly depicted. Trajan in person traverses the ranks on foot, or mounts the suggestus and harangues his men, or receives with simple dignity the submission of the enemy, or marches with all the pomp of a Roman procession under the triumphal arch. The soldierlike simplicity of the great military emperor is strikingly portrayed. There is no silken tent, or richly decorated chariot, or throne, or canopy of state to be seen. His colonel of the guards sits beside him, as an equal, on the suggestus. In the midst of a battle the emperor tears up his robe to bind the wounds of his soldiers; he is present everywhere, wearing a sword and fighting in person. Nothing could be more illustrative of the state of Roman affairs in that iron age when again, as in the olden times, a rough and unlettered warrior, fresh from the camp, swayed the destinies of the empire.

In this vast spiral relief there are said to be above 2500 figures of men sculptured, and the higher they are placed on the column the larger are their dimensions, showing the care that was taken to counteract the effects of the increased distance from the eye. The whole of the carving from base to summit is executed with equally minute care, though the upper part can never have been easily visible, except from the windows or roofs of the basilica and the libraries which, as we have seen, were placed very near. The opinion which prevailed for some time, that the figures had been coloured, is incorrect, as the more minute examination since made has proved that the colours imagined to be artificial are the natural results of the decay of the stone and oxidisation of the metallic parts of the structure, under the effects of the rain, sun, and dust.

[Sidenote: Remains found on the site.]

A vast number of fragments of columns, of inscriptions, and of architectural ornaments have been dug up at various times on the site of Trajan’s Forum. The great granite columns which now lie near the base of the pillar were found in laying the foundations of the Church of S. Maria in Loreto, by the architect, the elder San Gallo, and are mentioned as lying near that church in the middle of the sixteenth century. The equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, in the Piazza del Campidoglio, stands upon a pedestal made by Michael Angelo out of an immense fragment of entablature found on the site of Trajan’s Forum.

An inscription, which is now built into the wall on the north of the pillar, commemorates the remission of all debts to the emperor’s private purse (fiscus) by Hadrian, a fact which we find also mentioned in Dion Cassius and Spartianus. The latter writer adds that it was in the Forum of Trajan that Hadrian publicly burnt the list of his debtors, and the inscription was no doubt intended to mark the spot of this act of liberality or bribery.

[Sidenote: Ruins of the Forum Julium.]

The ruins of two portions only of the Forum Julium, which adjoined that of Trajan, have been discovered in modern times. The first is a considerable part of the outer wall of the Forum, standing in the court of the house No. 18 in the Via del Ghetarello, a small street which opens out of the Via di Marforio, near the Carcer and the Church of SS. Martina e Luca. This ruined wall consists of three arches composed of large blocks of peperino and travertine skilfully cut and joined without mortar and under-built by another arch, as if in order to enable the wall to bear a great weight. The length of the fragment of wall is about 50 feet and the highest point about 30 feet.

The other relic of Cæsar’s Forum is now no longer visible. We obtain our information about it from Palladio, the architect, about the middle of the sixteenth century, who relates that while he was at Rome the ground-plan of a temple was uncovered in digging the foundations of a house between the Salita di Marforio and the temple of Mars Ultor, a description which points plainly to the block of houses behind SS. Martina e Luca. There was a peculiarity in the inter-columniations of this temple, which Palladio particularly remarked. The distance between the columns, he says, was the eleventh part of the diameter of a column less than a diameter and a half.

[Sidenote: Forum of Augustus. Temple of Mars Ultor.]

The almost universal opinion of Roman topographers now is that the three Corinthian columns on the left-hand side of the Via Bonella and the massive arch which leads from it into the Via di Tor di Conti are the remains of the Temple of Mars Ultor, which Augustus built in his Forum, and of the north-eastern portion of the enclosing wall.

This opinion was already held by Palladio in the sixteenth century, but the Italian antiquaries since his time have adopted the most various hypotheses on the subject. There is, it is true, no actual proof that this was the temple of Mars Ultor, but there is strong presumptive evidence that it was so. The ‘Catalogue of the Curiosum’ places it next to the Forum Julium in the eighth region. Now the eighth region was bounded on the east, in this neighbourhood, by the Quirinal Hill and the Via del Sole, or a street a little to the east of it, and we are tolerably sure that the forum transitorium filled up a great part of the space between the temple in question and the above-mentioned street, and that the Forum Julium intervened between it and the Forum Romanum, while the Forum Trajani limits the space to the westward within which we can suppose the Forum Augusti to have been. Thus the only space left in the eighth region within which the Forum of Augustus can be supposed to have been contained, is that bounded by the Via della Croce Bianca, the Via del Priorato, and the Via di Tor di Conti.

The ruins of the temple consist of three lofty fluted Corinthian columns, a pilaster of white Carrara marble, a part of the surmounting architrave, and the corresponding wall of the cella of the temple. Antiquarians are of opinion that the purity of style and elegance of these columns, and their ornamentation, forms a strong proof that they were designed and executed in the best times of Roman architectural art, and cannot belong to a period later than that of Augustus. The richest decorative work is to be seen under the roof of the portico, between the columns and the wall of the cella.

[Sidenote: Exterior wall. Arco dei Pantani.]

These three columns stood at the side of the temple which abutted on the exterior wall of the Forum, as the ruins show. A large portion of this wall is still standing on each side of the arch called the Arco dei Pantani. The arch itself is built of travertine, the wall of blocks of peperino laid alternately with the longer and shorter sides outwards as in the masonry of the tabularium. In the middle ages a door was fitted on to this archway, and a portion of the stone was cut away on the west side. This has injured its architectural beauty very much. It has also been stripped of the marble facing with which it was probably covered originally, and being now half buried in the rubbish of ages, it presents a somewhat mean and rough appearance.

This archway formed one of the entrances to the Forum Augusti from the east. The wall of the enclosure can be traced for a considerable distance on each side of it, but there are no other archways now open. The monotonous appearance of so high a wall is relieved by having the edges of the stones cut so that each block stands out separately, and the lower part of the wall is divided into two, and its upper into three stages by projecting ruins of travertine.

It is said that the blocks of stone in this masonry are fastened with wooden bolts made in the shape of double swallow tails, and that some of these have been found completely petrified. When the Forum was first designed Augustus encountered great opposition from owners of private house property; and through fear of the unpopularity which wholesale evictions might have caused, he accommodated the shape of the external walls to that of the ground he could occupy. Hence arose the irregular line of the exterior, which was, however, reduced to a symmetrical plan inside by secondary walls. The general shape of the interior area of the enclosure was that of a broad oblong piazza with two large semicircular side extensions or wings (somewhat like those in the Piazza S. Pietro) opposite to and corresponding to each other. The area was large, for the horse races, and games in honour of Mars were held here once when the Tiber had overflowed the circus.[77] The temple stood at the northern end between these two side extensions, and occupied about one-sixth of the whole space. Tribunals were placed in the hemicycles and courts of law held there. Some portions of the semicircular recesses are still extant by which their plan may be traced, but the outer wall is in no part preserved entire except at the back and sides of the temple. Its height at the back of the temple is 120 feet, and over the Arco dei Pantani 100 feet, which we must suppose to have been the normal height of the rest of the enclosure. These enormous walls served as a defence against fire, no less than to exclude the traffic and noise of the streets.

Although it is possible that Augustus may have entertained the design of erecting a new group of public buildings as a means of gaining distinction and popularity before the battle of Philippi which established his power, yet so far as we know, the temple of Mars Ultor and the Forum Augusti owed their existence to a vow made by the emperor immediately before the decisive battle of Philippi, B.C. 42, to build if victorious a temple to Mars as the avenger of his adopted father. The dedication of the temple took place in B.C. 2, accompanied with most magnificent shows of gladiators and splendid sham sea-fights.

[Sidenote: Forum of Nerva.]

[Sidenote: The Colonnacce.]

The Forum of Nerva was in the district through which the Via della Croce Bianca passes, and was connected with the ruin commonly called the Temple of Minerva, still standing on the right-hand side of that street where it is crossed by the Via Alessandrina. Two columns are there to be seen now called the Colonnacce, half buried in the earth, surmounted by an entablature and an attica. The wall behind the columns is built of blocks of peperino of unequal size, and is in a style of masonry inferior to the walls of the Forum of Augustus. In it may be seen the traces of an arch which has been filled up with the same stone as that of which the wall is built. The columns, which are of fluted marble, stand out in front of the wall; but, as in the Arch of Severus, the entablature does not lie between them, but projects from the wall over the capitals, and unites them with the wall. The edges of the architrave are richly decorated, and the frieze contains an elaborately carved bas-relief, which, though unfortunately much disfigured, can be partially understood by the help of old engravings taken before it was reduced to its present lamentable state.

From these it appears that the figures represent various attributes of Minerva as the patroness of household management. Some of them are drawing water, others weaving or spinning, and others dyeing, washing, holding scales and purses as if bargaining. The remaining portion of the design is incomplete, and was probably carried round the rest of the frieze of the enclosure.[78] On the cornices, both upper and lower, the ornamentation is very rich, but not so chaste as work of the Augustan period. In the centre of the attica stands a figure of Minerva in alto-relievo, with spear, helmet, and shield.

That this beautiful ruin, which is one of the most picturesque in Rome, belonged to the wall of Nerva’s Forum is rendered certain by the old views of the sixteenth century, which represent it as part of the inner side of the wall enclosing a splendid temple which stood to the north-west of it. Seven of the columns of this temple were still standing in the fifteenth century, belonging to the left-hand side of the portico, and a considerable part also of the walls of the cella with the pilasters of the portico. The cella of the temple adjoined the semicircular part of Augustus’s Forum on one side, and, as will be seen by the plan, the wall of the enclosure met it on the other, so that only the portico of the temple projected into the open space of the Forum.

On the front were the words, probably the last line of a longer inscription, IMP. NERVA CÆSAR AUG. PONT. MAXIM. TRIB. POT. II. IMP. II. PROCOS, showing that the temple was dedicated by Nerva.

There can be but little doubt that this was the temple of Minerva begun together with the Forum by Domitian, and finished by Nerva. It is true that there is no actual mention in any of the ancient writers of a temple of Minerva here, but the assertion of Dion Cassius that Domitian had a particular reverence for Minerva and Janus, and the character of the designs and statues of Minerva found upon the ruined part of the enclosure already described, leave little doubt on the subject. The name of Palladium given to the Forum by Martial also agrees with this supposition.

The fate of the Temple of Minerva is better known than that of most of the ancient temples in Rome.

In the time of Pope Pius V. (1566-1572) the building of a new quarter of the city was begun in this district. The streets Via Alessandrina and Via Bonella were laid out, and as the new quarter grew, the ruins of the old temple became an impediment to their progress, which Paul V. in the beginning of the seventeenth century ordered to be removed, and to be applied to the construction of the Chapel of S. Paul in the church of S. Maria Maggiore and that of the Fontana Paolo upon the Janiculum. The great gateway which stood at the end of the Via della Croce Bianca was suffered to remain for a century longer, but is now quite gone.

[Sidenote: Tomb of Bibulus.]

We now return to the Piazza Trajana. Between it and the Piazza del Campidoglio, in a street called the Via di Marforio, are two of the more ancient ruins in Rome consisting of tombs now built into the walls of houses. These tombs are monuments of imperial Rome, and were probably outside the ancient Servian Wall not far from the Porta Ratumena.

The more prominent of the two, the Tomb of Bibulus, stands close by the junction of the modern streets of Macel de’ Corvi and Marforio. The front of it only can be seen, as the rest is built into the wall of a house. The inscription is as follows,

C . POPLICIO . L . F . BIBULO AED . PL . HONORIS. VIRTUTISQUE . CAUSSA . SENATUS. CONSULTO . POPULI . QUE . JUSSU . LOCUS. MONUMENTO . QUO . IPSE . POSTEREIQUE. EIUS . INFERRENTUR . PUBLICE . DATUS . EST.

The inscription was also placed on the side of the tomb, where the beginning of it may still be seen. It must not be inferred that the privilege of being buried within the walls was granted to Bibulus contrary to the regulations of the twelve tables, which forbade any corpse to be buried or burnt within the city walls. Had this been the case the exemption would have been expressly mentioned in the inscription, and besides this the course of the Servian Wall, which crossed the depression between the Quirinal and Capitoline, would naturally run so as to exclude the tomb. The inscription only records the gift of the burial place to Bibulus by the Senate, and is intended to prevent the burial of any other person there, except the family of Bibulus.

An Ædile of the name C. Bibulus is mentioned in the ‘Annals’ of Tacitus in the reign of Tiberius, A.D. 22, and the style of the tomb agrees tolerably well with this date. The whole is built of travertine, and the basement is of the simplest description possible. Four Doric pilasters with Attic bases surmounted by an Ionic entablature, ornamented with wreaths of fruit and ox-skulls, form the whole decoration of the front. Bergau, however, thinks that the architecture is Italian, and should not be called by these Greek names.[79]

The other ruin of a tomb is in the wall of a house nearly opposite to that of Bibulus, and is reduced to a shapeless mass of remains.

[Sidenote: Capitolium. Temple of Jupiter.]

Passing from the Tomb of Bibulus to the Piazza del Campidoglio, and thence to the Caffarelli or southern end of the Capitoline Hill, we find in the gardens of the German Embassy an excavation which shows a number of tufa blocks fitted together without mortar, and in an irregular manner.[80]

The area of the great temple and the wall surrounding it have been traced out by Lanciani and Jordan among the fragments which are found in this garden, and on the north side of the Caffarelli palace, and between the garden and the rotunda of the museum. Jordan thinks that the measurements of the area indicated by these fragments correspond to the size of the environs of the temple as given by Dionysius, and that they afford a conclusive proof that the great temple of Jupiter was on the Caffarelli and not on the Ara Cœli height. The north-eastern corner of the excavation in the Caffarelli garden shows a part of these constructions, and a fragment may be seen in the wall of the Montanara Garden in the Vicolo di Monte Caprino.

The natural features of the Capitoline Hill could hardly have been more completely concealed than they are by the present situation of the buildings upon it, even if those buildings had been erected with the express purpose of changing the appearance of the hill. For the convent of Ara Cœli and the Palazzo Caffarelli, which occupy respectively the north-eastern and south-western summits of the hill, are comparatively low and unconspicuous, while the so-called Tabularium and above it the Palace of the Senator compose a lofty pile which nearly fills up the depression between these two heights. To the spectator looking at the Capitol from the Forum, the higher part of the hill appears to lie nearly in the centre, whereas in reality the shape is that of a double hill rising at each end. The north-eastern end is somewhat curved round towards the north, while the south-western approaches within 300 paces of the river. The whole core of the hill is formed of the harder volcanic tufa, a section of which may be plainly seen, composing the face of the low precipice now shown as the Tarpeian rock, and also in a courtyard surrounded by cottages, near the spot called Palazzaccio. This tufa was, as has been frequently mentioned, used as a building stone in the early ages of Rome before the lapis Gabinus, or Albanus (peperino) or the lapis Tiburtinus had been introduced.

[Sidenote: Tarpeian Rock.]

The Tarpeian Rock whence criminals were hurled, was, according to the older Italian topographers down to the time of Nardini, placed at the western edge of the hill towards the Tiber, where the Piazza Montanara now is. But Dureau de la Malle in the Mémoires de l’Académie for 1809, pointed out that this was inconsistent with the statements of Dionysius, who says that it was over the Forum, and that the executions took place in full view of all the people. This would seem to place it on the S.E. side towards the Palatine near S. Maria della Consolazione. Becker’s objection that the hill is less steep there than at the western edge, may be met by the fact that several large masses of rock are recorded to have fallen down from this spot, and therefore the face of the cliff is entirely changed. The further objection that the criminals would have fallen into the Vicus Jugarius, instead of which they ought, according to custom, to have been cast over the city walls, seems to rest on the assumption that criminals were always thrown over the walls, no proof of which has been adduced. Tradition is equally divided between the two localities, and therefore the passages of Dionysius above quoted must be held at present decisive in favour of the side towards the Palatine and Forum.

[Sidenote: Thermæ of Constantine.]

It has been conclusively proved by Becker, that Aurelian’s Temple of the Sun which was commonly supposed to have occupied the Colonna Gardens, and to which the huge fragments near the Capitol which lie there were thought to have belonged, was not here but in the Campus Agrippæ on the Campus Martius. For the Notitia and the Chronologers both place it in the seventh region or Via Lata, which occupied the eastern side of the Campus, and mention castra as attached to it. Further, Vopiscus when describing a drive in which he accompanied Junius Tiberianus, the prefect of the city, seems to place the Temple of the Sun at a much greater distance from the Palatine than the Colonna Gardens are.

The ruin with which it was identified, formerly called turris Mæcenatis, or Frontispicium Neronis, has now been pulled down, but a part of it, and especially one huge mass of carved marble, remains in the Colonna Gardens. Representations of the Frontispicium Neronis as it was before its destruction, may be seen in Donatus and the older topographers. The fragments of stonework are now thought to have belonged to the entrance of the Thermæ of Constantine.

The site of the building erected upon the Quirinal by the mad emperor Heliogabalus, and called Senaculum Mulierum in which he assembled the Roman matrons for consultation about the laws of fashion in dress and manners, is not known.

The site of the Thermæ of Constantine, which are placed by the Notitia next to the Capitolium antiquum, is tolerably well defined by the notices of the Anonymous MS. of Einsiedlen, and by an inscription found near the Quirinal Palace, recording their restoration by Petronius Perpenna probably in the year 443. Both of these indicate the Palazzo Rospigliosi as standing upon the ground once occupied by the central building of the Thermæ. The Anonymous MS. mentions the Thermæ on the road between the Church of S. Agata and that of S. Vitale. Pozzio, Albertini, Fulvius, Q. Fauno, and Gamucci, all agree in confirming this evidence. Large portions of the ruins were still standing in their time, and in Du Perac’s views, published in the seventeenth century, the central part of the buildings is represented. Another part of the ruins of these baths was found in the construction of the Quirinal Palace in the time of Paul V.

[Sidenote: Statues found in the Thermæ of Constantine.]

There can be no doubt that these Thermæ, which were of great extent, reached nearly across the Quirinal Hill, occupying the sites of the present Palazzo Rospigliosi, part of the Colonna Gardens and the Quirinal Palace. Three statues were found in the ruins, representing Constantine and two of his sons. These are supposed to have stood near the grand entrance of the Thermæ. The first is now in the Portico of the Lateran Basilica, the two others were placed by Paul III. on the balustrade of the Piazza Capitolina. The famous pair of the Dioscuri and their horses, which now ornament the Piazza di Monte Cavallo, were also discovered on this site. The history of these well-known sculptures cannot be traced farther back than the time of Constantine, whose Thermæ they adorned. The old tradition which states that they were a present from Tiridates to Nero is in some degree supported by the mention of the equi Tiridatis in the Notitia, but is not confirmed by any other evidence. That they are not rightly supposed to represent the Dioscuri can hardly be doubted, and the inscriptions which ascribe them to the chisels of Phidias and Praxiteles respectively are erroneous. For not to mention that the exact reproduction of nature in its highest type of symmetry, peculiar to the style of the highest Greek art is absent, and that we find instead the conventional mode of representation characteristic of the revival of art under the emperors, it seems hardly possible that Praxiteles, who lived more than half a century after Phidias, should have occupied himself in imitating and completing a group begun by his predecessor.

These colossal figures and the statues of Constantine mentioned above, probably stood in the grand court of the Thermæ. There are now no traces left of the outer enclosure of this court, but the plan of the central blocks of buildings has been preserved by Palladio, in whose time there was doubtless a sufficient portion left to enable him to reconstruct the whole. It is somewhat different from the plan of most of the other Thermæ, having a large semicircular court on one side surrounded with arcades, the purpose of which has not been discovered. The other halls and apartments are of the usual size and shape, with the exception of the exedræ, which are rectangular. At one side of the enclosing court, apparently the north side, there was a large theatre similar to that at the baths of Titus.

Some of the older topographers had conjectured that the ruins in the Colonna Gardens, wrongly, as has been shown, ascribed to Aurelian’s Temple of the Sun, and also the massive substructions and stairs which have been found behind the stables of the Quirinal Palace on the west slope of the hill, belonged to the Thermæ of Constantine. This conjecture has been revived and ingeniously supported by Professor Reber, who remarks that the outer court of the Thermæ, to judge by the extent of that of the baths of Diocletian or of Caracalla, may very well have reached across the whole breadth of the hill from east to west, and further that the approach to the Thermæ would naturally be placed on the west side, where the Imperial fora lay. If so, the building called the tower of Mæcenas stood exactly in the position at the summit of the colossal flight of stairs now hidden under the Papal stables which would answer to the entrance portico of the Thermæ. The fragments of the so-called Tower of Mæcenas are very similar to those of the portico of Octavia, which was also the entrance to a grand enclosure. They consist of two huge blocks of marble, the largest of which is seventeen feet in length, ornamented with mouldings of the usual Corinthian character, and with a frieze beautifully decorated with festoons of foliage enclosing birds and genii. The style is of a late epoch, and might very probably belong to the Constantinian age.