This bibliography is work in progress; our aim is to build a comprehensive post-1960 bibliography to accompany the progressive release
of our database of fragments over the next few years. Links to specific fragments are included, but please note that only
435 fragments are currently available, so not all the fragments in question can be seen at this time. We welcome suggestions
of scholarly works we have missed. Please send e-mail to
Tina Najbjerg (najbjerg@alumni.princeton.edu) or to
Jennifer Trimble (trimble@stanford.edu).
Rodríguez Almeida, Emilio. Forma Urbis Marmorea. Aggiornamento Generale 1980
(Rome 1981).
The second major twentieth-century publication of the Severan Marble Plan, this is an invaluable
compendium of research on the Plan between 1960 and 1980. Volume I includes an updated bibliography, new observations about
the inscriptions and about the placement and distribution of the marble slabs, an analysis of the
reconstruction of the Plan, and a discussion of all fragments that includes several new matches. The line
drawings of all the fragments in Volume II should be used with care, as they contain errors.
Italo Novelli, ed. Atlas of Rome (New York 1992). Translated from the Italian edition, Atlante di Roma
(Venice 1991), by C. Heffer and D. Kerr.
Invaluable photographic map of the city of Rome. The aerial photographs are complemented by
feature maps of the same area. These include detailed information such as height above sea level and names of streets.
G. P. Bellori. Fragmenta vestigii veteris Romae ex lapidibus Farnesianis nunc primum in lucem edita cum notis
(Rome 1673).
This first attempt to publish the surviving fragments was hampered by the loss of numerous of the fragments recovered
in 1562. Many had by then been used as building materials in the construction of the "Secret Garden" between the Farnese palace
and the Tiber. Bellori worked partly from the drawings published by Orsini and partially from the extant fragments. As he
unwittingly copied fragments already drawn, duplications occurred in the resulting publication. It was revised and re-edited
several times to include minor and formerly "lost" fragments. The final edition was published much later, in 1764, as Ichnographia
veteris Romae XX tabulis comprehensa...accesserunt aliae VI tabuale ineditae cum notis. Click
here to view the 1673 edition on line (the site includes
the complete text as well as all the plates).
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (1863-).
Large volumes with transcriptions and interpretations (some in Latin) of all known Latin
inscriptions from different periods and different regions of the Roman Empire. To see an index, click
here.
Claridge, Amanda. Rome. An Oxford Archaeological Guide
(Oxford - New York 1998).
With contributions by Judith Toms and Tony Cubberley. Based on extensive scholarship and current research,
Claridge's book is the most up-to-date and most comprehensive archaeological guide to Rome in English. The many plans
and reconstruction drawings make it a valuable tool for scholars and laypeople alike.
Codex Vaticanus Latinus 3439, f. 13-23.
Several sets of drawings of fragments of the Forma Urbis Romae were made in the years following its discovery in 1562.
This codex, kept in the Vatican Library, contains in folios 13-23 the largest and most accurate group of these Renaissance
drawings of the map. They are reproduced in plates 1-14 of PM 1960. They may have
been made by the architect Giovanni Antonio Dosio, although some scholars suggest there were more than one engraver
(PM 1960, p. 43, with references).
What motivated the choice of these
particular fragments is not clear. The fragments were drawn between one quarter and one eighth of their actual size.
The drawings were done in pencil and then inked,
at which point occasional mistakes crept in. There is evidence of two different hands, at least at the inking stage; one is
neater and more confident than the other. The incisions and inscriptions were much more accurately and completely
rendered than were the outlines of the fragments. Sometimes the outlines appear to have been
added after a drawing of the surface was finished, without reference to the actual fragment; this appears to be the case
of all those outlines done in haematite. For some fragments
that are now lost, the Renaissance drawings are the only surviving record. For others, heavily damaged since the 16th c.,
the drawings record the fragments in a more complete state. On the accuracy of the drawings,
see PM 1960, pp. 43-51, and esp. 50-51. See also the discussion in
Reynolds 1996. For an index of all lost fragments known
from the Renaissance drawings in Stanford's database, click
here.
Jordan, Henric. Forma Urbis Romae. Regionum XIIII (Berlin 1874).
This monumental work was essentially the first scientific publication of the Severan Marble Plan. Jordan began the project
in 1866, collaborating with scholars such as Rodolfo Lanciani, but did not publish it until 1874.
The publication was an impressive attempt to gather all the known information about the map and record it in an
organized manner. Jordan here tackled the daunting task of imposing order upon a confused mass of material that
already by then included not only the existing pieces, but fragments that had been lost and found, often in incomplete
bits, marble copies of formerly lost pieces that often did not match the originals, marble copies of still lost fragments,
and drawings of existing and lost pieces. In the Prolegomena (pp. 1-56), Jordan analyzes the history of the fragments, the
origin and the making of the map, its date (Severan) and then discusses the representation of different types of public
and private buildings on the map. Pages 49-54 present a useful list of monuments in each of the 14 regions based on the two
versions of the Regionary Catalogues, the Notitia and the Curiosum. The section called Enarratio et Adnotatio Tabularum
(pp. 57-66) briefly identifies each drawing in each plate and provides a bibliography for each piece. This is followed by
a synopsis of fragment numbers in this and earlier publications by Bellori, Piranesi, and Canina. The final section consists of
37 plates of handsome, shaded drawings of the fragments, organized by regions. Renaissance drawings appear as miniature line
drawings next to the partially preserved fragments. Plate 35 is a drawing of the aula wall with measurements; plate 37 represents
Jordan's attempt to position identified fragments on the wall. Written in Latin, the text of Jordan's publication is hardly
user friendly today; the drawings, however, are crisp and clear and exhibit fewer mistakes than those in AG 1980. One interesting error is Jordan's rendering of fr. 4b in pl. 10, no. 45, which depicts a section of
the Templum Divi Claudi: according to PM 1960, p. 63, the bottom edge of fr. 4b is a slab edge; Jordan, however, did not render it as
such. He drew it with a rough and uneven bottom edge and included in outline the
plaster part (by then missing) that had been reconstructed and attached to the lower right edge of the fragment in 1742 based on a
false assumption by the engraver of Renaissance drawing Cod. Vat.
Lat. 3439, fo 17r, which showed the fragment as having an uneven bottom edge with two projecting corners
(click here to see
the Renaissance drawing). The discovery
of numerous reused fragments in the Via Giulia in 1888 (186 pieces) and 1899 (451 fragments) rendered Jordan's work incomplete
only a few decades after its publication.
Steinby, Eva Margareta, ed. Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae
(Rome, vol. 1 [1993], vol. 2 [1995], vol. 3 [1996], vol. 4 [1999], vol. 5 [1999], vol. 6 [Index][2000]).
The newest and most authoritative topographical dictionary of ancient Rome.
Detailed entries are written by distinguished scholars, often those
involved with the excavations of the individual monuments. Entries are supplemented by a great number
of reproductions of archaeological plans, Renaissance drawings, and FUR fragments. Entries are mainly in Italian.
Platner, Samuel Ball and Ashby, Thomas. A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (London 1929).
Before LTUR and Richardson 1992, this dictionary was the main resource for the monuments of ancient Rome.
Carettoni, Gianfilippo; Colini, Antonio; Cozza, Lucos; and Gatti, Guglielmo, eds. La pianta marmorea di Roma antica.
Forma urbis Romae (Rome 1960).
Since 1960, this has been the fundamental reference work on the Severan Marble Plan of Rome.
It marked the first photographic presentation
of all the known fragments and offered the most comprehensive and scientific review to date of the fragments and the
Plan itself.
Only 400 copies were printed, however, so this work is difficult to find outside specialized research libraries.
Volume one includes a bibliography (Carettoni), a history of the fragments (Colini),
a list of fragments reproduced in Renaissance drawings (Carettoni), detailed study and
decriptions of identified, non-identified, and lost fragments, a list of inscriptions (Colini),
a thorough study of the aula, the wall, and the marble slabs (Cozza), a technical analysis of
the Plan (Gatti), a discussion of its date, scope, and precedents (Gatti), and a reconstruction (Gatti).
The first volume also includes helpful concordances that relate the fragments to the
numbering systems of earlier publications, as well as indices that organize the fragments by number,
thickness, epigraphy, building typology, and topography.
Volume two reproduces the Renaissance drawings (pls. 1-14) but is mostly taken up by black and white photographs of the
712 incised fragments known to the authors, in three groups: complexes and monuments with known locations
(pls. 15-32), complexes and monuments with unknown locations (pls. 33-34), and fragments with
non-identified topography (pls. 35-60). Plate 61 (a-b) is Cozza's detailed drawing of the wall
of the aula on which the Plan hung. Finally, plate 62 (a-b) is Gatti's schematic reconstruction
of the marble slabs in situ with drawings of the identified fragments (both existing and known only from Renaissance drawings)
superimposed onto the wall.
Richardson, Jr., Lawrence. A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (Baltimore and London 1992).
Readers of English only, and those without access to the expensive LTUR volumes,
may find this topographical dictionary a useful resource.
Bollmann, Beate. Römische Vereinshäuser. Untersuchungen zu den Scholae der römischen
Berufs-, Kult- und Augustalen-Kollegien in Italien (Mainz 1998).
This is a detailed examination of Roman scholae or meeting halls of professional and/or religious
organizations (collegia), from the Republican period to the 4th century, in Rome, Ostia, and other Italian cities.
The author first investigates the history, social standing, purpose and activities of these organizations; she then
attempts to classify the buildings in which these collegia met and proceeds to discuss the sculptural decoration in the
scholae. To determine the architectural shape of scholae in Rome, Bollmann makes extensive use of the evidence
provided by the Severan Marble Plan, especially
frs. 11d (cat. no. A25, fig. 15),
28c (cat. no. A26, fig. 16),
4b (cat. no. A3, fig. 61),
24a (cat. no. A21, fig. 67),
10i (cat. no. A6, fig. 70), and
25a (cat. no. B2, fig. 73).
Castagnoli, Ferdinando. "Un nuovo documento per la topografia di Roma antica." Studi Romani 33 (1985) 205-211.
The existence of a temple to Castor and Pollux in circo Flaminio is attested by Vitruvius and by the 16th-century
discovery of two statues of the Dioscuri (now flanking the stairs to the Campidoglio) near the church of San Tommaso and
close to the Tiber. Comparison of the recently discovered Via Anicia map, which depicts the temple, with frs.
32i and
32gh
of the Severan Marble Plan locates the building. On the via Anicia plan, the temple is shown as having the pronaos
on the long side, as described by Vitruvius. Two windows flank the central staircase, in front of which sits a circular altar.
The open space in front of the temple is the paved area of the Circus Flaminius. On either side and behind the temple there
are shops and perhaps storerooms (whose owners are indicated with inscriptions), demonstrating that the S side
of the Circus was flanked by commercial structures in the Imperial period. Further to the south runs a porticoed street,
rendered as a line with small rectangles lining the N side of the line. Below the street, the edge of the Tiber is indicated.
On the right, between t he street and the edge of the river, the W end of a structure is visible. A street runs along the W
side of the temple towards the river. Along the line of the porticoed street, the numbers XCVIIII, VI, LIII and LI appear at
irregular intervals. These numbers must indicate the distance in feet of each straight section of the river's edge,
which consists of the portico. Thanks to Rodríguez-Almeida's positioning of frs. 32gh and i on the Severan Marble Plan, it
is now possible to locate the temple of Castor and Pollux to the area near the church of S. Tommaso dei Cenci. In addition,
the porticoed street on the Via Anicia plan coincides more or less with the actual vie della Regola and della Fiumara (pl. 11).
The author, however, challenges M. Conticello de' Spagnolis' positioning of the temple immediately underneath the church
(BullCom 91 [1986] 91-96) and proposes instead to locate it ca. 20-30 m. further to the east, in an area now covered
partially by a modern building and
partially by Via delle Cinque Scuole. First of all, in this position, the temple would align better with the Porticus Octavia
on the Severan Marble Plan and, secondly, the street west of the temple would coincide precisely with the great drain dell'Olmo.
The Via Anicia map is of the same scale as the Severan Marble Plan (1:240), suggesting that both were drawn from the same
cadastral map, perhaps dating to the first half of the second century CE. A comparison between the two marble maps can
demonstrate how faithfully each copied the prototype. The orientation is not the same in the two maps: The Via Anicia plan
is oriented north/northeast; the Severan Marble Plan southeast. Perhaps the original cadastral map was oriented towards the
south, and each plan was turned to the orientation most advantages for its purpose. The delineation of the Tiber, and the
inclusion of proprietors' names and river edge measurements in the Via Anicia plan suggest that it served as a guide for
river commerce or for the administration of the river.
Cecamore, Claudia. "Le Curiae Veteres sulla Forma Urbis Marmorea e il pomerio romuleo secondo Tacito."
Römische Mitteilungen 109 (2002) 43-58.
Cecamore develops Cozza's reconstruction of the inscription on fragment group
452ab,
452c, and
452d
as CVRIAE VETAERES.
She reviews the various possible reconstructions of the inscription and discusses what the sixth letter
might be, taking into account the kinds of errors found on the Plan's inscriptions and the observable conventions concerning
the location of inscriptions and the types of words used. Having concluded that the inscription probably
indicates the Curiae Vetaeres, she reviews what we know of this building, its possible comparanda outside
Rome, and curiae in general. Excavation and ancient textual sources place the building near the NE corner of the Palatine;
Cecamore places these fragments on slab VIII-5 (the slab containing the Septizodium and the eastern half of the Circus Maximus).
The smooth back, thickness of the slab, and veining all match, as do the orientations of the buildings and
streets between the newly located fragment and the known buildings on that part of the Palatine.
If this position is correct, the fragment also depicts part of the triumphal way.
Cecamore, Claudia. "Faustinae Aedemque Decernerent (SHA, Marcus, 26). Les Fragments 69-70 de
la Forma Urbis et la Première Dédicace du Temple de la Vigna Barberini." Mélanges de
l'École Française de Rome, Antiquité 111 (1999) 311-349.
Cecamore suggests
that the temple and colonnade depicted on frs.
70a,
70b,
70c and
103
represent the Temple of the Deified Faustina on the Palatine, rededicated in 221 CE
to Elagabalus. She convincingly reconstructs the temple (fr. 103) as having been surrounded on three sides
by double colonnades (frs. 70a and 70b). This identification is supported by the
inscription on fragments 70a and 70c, by the author's comparison with the 2nd cent.
CE structures excavated in the Vigna Barberini on the Palatine, by
her close study of the original location on the wall of the dowel hole on the back of frs.
70a and 70c, and by the similarity between these fragments and known parts of slab VII-11 of
the Plan, to which this location corresponds.
Cecamore, Claudia. "Apollo e Vesta sul Palatino fra Augusto e Vespasiano." Bullettino
della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 96 (1994-95) 9-32.
In this article, Cecamore proposes a series of solutions to the problematic topography of the area
around the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine. Based on brick stamps, inscriptions and 16th-century drawings,
she suggests that
the nymphaeum under the triclinium of the so-called Domus Flavia belonged to the Domus
Aurea and that the remains of a circular feature above it are Vespasianic in date. The walls surrounding
this circular structure align perfectly with the Temple of Apollo (fig. 5). The discovery of
Flavian lamps and Claudian coins in the fill of a
Republican house situated on the upper terrasse west of the Temple of Apollo indicates that the burial of the
Republican structure cannot be connected to the construction of the House of Augustus, as has been argued,
but must be of a post-Claudian and pre-Domitianic date. This careful reassessment of the archaeological remains
allows Cecamore to
reconstruct two symmetrical spaces on either side of the Temple of Apollo, which she proposes are from a Vespasianic
restructuring of the temple, perhaps undertaken in connection with the centennial of the temple in 72 CE but soon
obliterated by the Domitianic construction of the "Domus Flavia" above. After a detailed discussion of the evidence
for the existence of a round Temple to Vesta on the Palatine in the area Apollinis, the author
argues in favor of such a Palatine temple, the construction of which she suggests was undertaken by the
senate during the time of Augustus. This temple, then, must be the circular building next to the Temple of Apollo and
the house of Augustus that was restored by Vespasian and subsequently buried underneath the "Domus Flavia." Finally,
Cecamore discusses E. Rodríguez-Almeida's identification of FUR fragments
20fg,
20e,
and 20h
as the area Apollinis
on the Palatine (see AG 1980, pp. 99-100). She points out, as Rodríguez-Almeida
himself admitted, that
the proposed position of these fragments does not allow the square monument
with the dual stairs depicted there to be matched to any known archaeological remains in front of the Temple to
Apollo. Nor can the square feature be identified with the statue base mentioned by Propertius and shown in Augustan
coins, as Rodríguez-Almeida had argued, because the area completely changed in the Flavian period. The square feature,
however, matches perfectly a
brick foundation discovered within the Flavian compound southwest of the temple. If this identification is correct, the
FUR fragments must be moved north (down and to the left on the map). In this position, there is a good correspondence between the
back wall of the S portico in fr. 20h and the corner visible just south of the libraries (fig. 21).
Ciancio Rossetto, Paola. "Rinvenimenti e restauri al portico d'Ottavia e in piazza delle
Cinque Scole." Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 97 (1996) 267-278.
Ciancio Rossetto here summarizes the most recent excavations of the facade and the SE corner
of the Porticus Octaviae. Of special interest is the discovery that the entrance of the porticus went through 3
phases: In the republican period it was rectangular and flush with the back and front edges of
the S portico. In the Augustan period, it was made to project out from the face of the S
portico by the addition of a podium to the center of the latter.
Finally, in the Severan period, a platform was added to the (entire?) front of the S portico, and the
propylaeum was made to project out in the back and further out in front. The excavations also
show that the S portico of the building consisted of a double row of colonnades in the Augustan period,
and that it was closed off and rebuilt as a wall and an outer colonnade in the Severan period.
This demonstrates that
frs. 31u,
31z (missing),
31bb,
and 31cc
of the Severan Marble Plan depict the
Porticus Octaviae in its Augustan, not Severan, phase. The final section of the article discusses
the relationship of the temple remains discovered in Piazza delle Cinque Scole to the Temple
of Castor and Pollux depicted in the Via Anicia plan.
Coarelli, Filippo. "The Odyssey frescos of the Via Graziosa: a proposed context." Papers of the British
School at Rome 66 (1998) 21-37.
Coarelli here focuses on the date and context of the famous Odyssey frieze, which was discovered in 1848 in a
building underneath the Via Graziosa. Redating the calendar associated with the frieze to a pre-Julian date allows
Coarelli to confirm H.G. Beyen's date of the paintings to mid-1st cent. BCE - a date that corresponds well with the
style of the masonry of the building as recorded in the 19th-cent. excavation notes and drawings. Based on the 19th-cent.
descriptions, he suggests that the paintings came from a large domus on the slopes of the Cispius that faced the
Via Patricius. Corealli furthermore proposes that this domus appears on fr. 11e of the Severan Marble Plan - a
fragment located to this very area by E. Rodríguez-Almeida (Rodríguez-Almeida
1975-76). Finally, based on a somewhat tenuous connection between the Papirii family and the divinity Mefitis, whose
temple is known to have been located on the Cispian Hill and which the author situates next to the Odyssey house (fig. 8),
Coarelli associates the Odyssey domus with the Papirii and suggests that the domus Papiria belonged to
this particular family throughout the Republic and as late as the Antonine period.
Coarelli, Filippo. Il Campo Marzio (Rome 1997).
This is the fundamental publication on the archaeology of the Campus Martius. In Section 1, Coarelli explores
the boundaries of the Campus Martius, the origins of the name, and the earliest known purposes of the area.
In Sections 2 and 3 he discusses the specific monuments known to have been located in campo and in
circo, respectively. The reconstructed plans and epigraphical sources included in these sections are especially
helpful. In Section 4, Coarelli explores the building programs of Pompey the Great and of Julius Caesar in the
Campus Martius, and in appendices 1 and 2 he briefly discusses the presence there of two specific building types,
tombs and theaters.
Coarelli, Filippo. "Aedes Fortis Fortunae, Naumachia Augusti, Castra Ravennatium. La via Campana
Portuensis e alcuni edifici adiacenti nella Pianta Marmorea Severiana." Ostraka 1 (1992) 39-54.
Fragment groups 28, 33 and 34 depict an extensive swathe of the city on the right bank of the Tiber;
they cover what is ca. 700 x 300m of what is now Trastevere. This article focuses on three structures among those
incised on these fragments.
1) The large round feature at the lower left of group 28
(fr. 28a)
is usually interpreted as a funerary monument
(PM 1960, p. 88), but the surrounding buildings all appear to be public,
making this an exceptional tomb.
The circular feature protrudes into the front of the surrounding rectangular enclosure; this looks to the
author more like a monumental temple entrance. Moreover, the location is marked; the Via Campana-Portuensis
changes its course directly in front of this round structure (to return to its original course ca. 270m
farther south), and on the circular structure's south side is the only visible opening into a large open
space behind the street-side buildings. Coarelli proposes that this is the Temple of Fors Fortuna at the
first mile of the Via Campana.
2) The great open space at the lower right of the same slab
(frs. 28b
and 28c),
which seems to continue on frs.
33abc,
and 34c,
was identified in 1942 as the Naumachia Transtiberina of Augustus; this was not accepted by PM 1960.
Coarelli finds that other proposed locations for this Naumachia simply aren't extensive enough; here there
is both sufficient space and the arrival of the Aqua Alsietina, built for the Naumachia. Indeed, the
deviation of the Via Campana here and farther to the south may be linked to the construction of the
Naumachia, which needed all available space. What may be an atrium house with a small peristyle alongside
the Via Campana entrance into the Naumachia may represent the preserved nucleus of the villa of Caesar's
Horti, in which the Naumachia was built. The Naumachia's northern edge is clearly visible at the middle
right edge of group 33, giving a total length of ca. 540m, a good correspondence to the 533m reported in
the Res Gestae 12.23. To the north, a warehouse intrudes into the area of the Naumachia and should therefore
postdate it; the Plan offers precious evidence of the state of the Naumachia in the Severan period. He
places the Nemus Caesarum, where the Aqua Alsietina came out and where the monument to Lucius and Gaius
stood, just to the north of the Naumachia.
3) The building aligned N-S at middle left of fragment group 33,
with a double courtyard, each one surrounded by
tabernae, was already interpreted by E. Rodríguez-Almeida as an ergastulum or barracks rather than a
warehouse
(AG 1980, pp. 119-120). Coarelli estimates that it housed 600-1000 people;
given its location, orientation, and
apparent early date (1st c. CE), he suggests that this was functionally linked to the Naumachia, and may have
housed the Castra Ravennatium, who were known to be in Trastevere and connected to the complex. The double
courtyard perhaps suggests that two cohorts were present; after the abandonment of the Naumachia (ca. 80AD?),
they seem to have functioned as the local port and river police.
Coarelli, Filippo. "Il Campo Marzio occidentale. Storia e topografia." Mélanges de l'Ecole
Française de Rome, Antiquité 89.2 (1977) 807-846.
Coarelli here sets out to investigate in detail the little-known western section of the Campus Martius. That the area was a
separate entity in antiquity is suggested by two inscriptions that seem to define the area as that between
the Tiber, the Euripus of the Baths of Agrippa, and in a line between the stagnum Agrippa and the Tiber,
and by the NW-SE orientation of streets and buildings in the area, which to this day is different from the E-W
axis of the central Campus Martius. Arguing that this area was located within in the pomerium at least by
the Claudian period, and noting that it was oriented like the Circus Flaminius, Coarelli attributes a "triumphal function"
to it (p. 822). Monuments situated within this area included the Navalia, the arsenal, and the pons Agrippae
(now the Ponte Sisto). The NE corner of the area was delineated by the stagnum Agrippae (whose S edge,
Coarelli argues, is visible in FUR
fr. 39ac
just south of the Hecatostylum) and to the north, it was defined by the
course of the Euripus between the Tiber and the Stagnum. The nature and exact course of the Euripus have been determined
by archaeological excavations in several spots (figs. 12-16). The 3.35 m wide and 1.70 m deep canal was accompanied on
its W side by two parallel walls (perhaps coinciding with the pomerium): one, built in opus reticulatum,
followed the canal at a distance of 3.20 m; the other, a tufa wall in opus quadratum, at a 6 m distance. Coarelli
suggests that
fr. 252ac
of the FUR depicts a section of the canal, and that the rectangle visible between the double
lines in that fragment represents a podium for a statue base, measuring ca. 2.50 x 3 m. The dots that frame the canal
probably represent trees as opposed to columns. He associates a statue base discovered near the course of the Euripus
underneath the SIP palace with the base depicted on the FUR fragment and suggests (without attempting to prove this
posited location within the map itself) that fr. 252 be located in this area of the Campus Martius on the FUR (pp. 834-837).
(Note that E. Rodríguez-Almeida's convincing positioning of
fr. 252, now 37gi,
in
slab IV-6 [Rodríguez-Almeida 1978-80a]
has since made Coarelli's identification of the canal depicted in this fragment
as the Agrippan Euripus impossible.) The principal
sanctuary in the western section of the Campus Martius was the Tarentum; Coarelli associates this building, whose precise
location is known, with a rectangular area depicted in FUR
fr. 672abcd.
Here, it is flanked by two small temples. Other
structures known to have been located in this area are the training grounds for horses, the Trigarium, and
their stables, the stabula factionum. The location of the latter was solidified when Rodríguez-Almeida
positioned the vicus Stabularius in this area on the FUR (Rodríguez-Almeida
1970-71 ). Finally,
Coarelli suggests that the building remains discovered underneath the Palazzo Farnese belonged to a public structure that
was related to the nearby stabula factionum.
Coarelli, Filippo. "Il tempio di Bellona." Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale
di Roma 80 (1968) 37-72.
Coarelli discusses a number of buildings whose identity and location now can be established thanks to
G. Gatti's correct location of the Circus Flaminius (see Gatti 1960
and
Gatti 1961). He reaffirms that
the Temple of Iuno Regina must be inside the Porticus Octaviae; that the Temple of Apollo is the one
next to the Theater of Marcellus; and that the three temples underneath the San Nicola in Carcere are
those of Janus, Spes, and Juno Sospita. The remains of a Republican temple in Via delle Botteghe Oscure
cannot be those of the Temple of Bellona but must belong to the Temple of the Lares Peremarini,
which sources tell was situated inside the Porticus Minucia. That the porticus around the temple
in Via delle Botteghe Oscure is the Porticus Minucia is proven by L. Cozza's positioning of FUR fragment
35ff.
Finally, Coarelli identifies the remains of an unknown temple next to that of Apollo in the Forum
Holitorium as the Temple of Bellona. Ancient sources suggest that the Temple of Bellona, founded in 296 BCE by
Appius Claudius Ciecus, was located not far from the
pomerium and the walls of the city, that it was situated close to the Temple of Apollo, near the Theater
of Marcellus, and that one could see the curved (according to Coarelli the SE) end of the Circus
Flaminius from it. In addition, we know the Temple of Bellona was in circo which is assumed
to mean that it had the same orientation as the Circus Flaminius. The only buildings known to be in circo
without having the same orientation as that of the circus Flaminius are the Temple of Apollo and the
"tempio ignoto" right next to it. These two are on a N-S orientation, which is what F. Castagnoli
has proven was typical of the most ancient buildings on the Campus Martius. Of the temples known
to be "in circo" only two were founded earlier than the Circus Flaminius: those of Apollo and Bellona.
This confirms that the "unknown temple" next to the Temple of Apollo is the Temple of Bellona.
Colini, Antonio Maria. "Storia e Topografia del Celio nell'antichità." Atti della Pontifica accademia
romana d'archeologia. Serie 3. Memorie, vol. 7 (Rome 1944).
Conticello De' Spagnolis, M. "Nuove osservazioni sull'area del tempio dei Dioscuri in Circo Flaminio."
Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 91 (1986) 91-96.
Cozza, Lucos. "Adonaea nella Pianta marmorea severiana." Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 19 (1990)
233-237.
FUR fr. 68ab
must belong with frs.
46acd and
46b
(the Adonaea) for the following reasons: a) they have similar type of rough backs, b) they are of same
thickness (52-62 mm), c) the ductus is by the same engraver, d) the veining of the Proconnesian
marble falls in the same direction (NB. the veining direction of fr. 68ab in PM 1960, pl. 35 is not
exact - see fig. 1 for the correct veining line), e) both are from a slab edge (and both have a clamp hole).
The architectural corner visible in fr. 68a is thus opposite the corner of the Adonaea in fr. 46d and
the center of the semi-circular exedra in 68ab coincides with the principal axis of the Adonaea in fr. 46 which
falls along the center of the euripus (fig. 1). The direction of the inscription in fr. 46, ADONAEA,
indicates that these fragments were either positioned along the top or the left edge of the slab. The
addition of fr. 68ab to the structure of the Adonaea in frs. 46 confirms that the latter
cannot be identified with the Hall of Adonis in Domitian's palace on the Palatine, mentioned by the
Severan writer Philostratus (Apoll. 7.32). Neither of the possible orientations of frs. 46 and 68
allows for the semi-circular exedra to be incorporated into the existing architecture in the Vigna Barberini
on the Palatine, as has been proposed. Philostratus' "Hall of Adonis" should perhaps be interpreted as smaller, mobile gardens in planters as opposed to a
large, architecturally fixed structure. The Adonaea on the FUR is probably located somewhere in the Campus Martius, as
has been proposed.
Cozza, Lucos. "Sul Frammento 212 della Pianta Marmorea." Journal of Roman Archaeology
2 (1989) 117-119.
Cozza suggests that fragment
212b, which displays
the letters ANVS, belonged to the area
immediately in front of the Basilica Aemilia in the Roman Forum, represented by fr.
16e
on slab VI-5. This would correspond with evidence provided by ancient textual sources, according
to which a small temple of Janus stood at the Forum end of the Argiletum. The smooth back
and thickness of this fragment also match the identified fragments from slab VI-5:
16a,
16b,
16d,
and 16e.
Cozza, Lucos. "Pianta marmorea severiana: nuove ricomposizioni di frammenti." In Quaderni
dell'Istituto di Topografia Antica della Università di Roma. Studi di Topografia
Romana 5 (1968) 9-22.
In this important article Cozza joins FUR
fr. 35ff
with fr. 35ee
and suggests that its
fragmentary inscription, MINI, identifies the quadriporticus in fr.
35dd,
remains of which have been discovered along the Via Celsa, the Via delle Botteghe
Oscure, and the Via San Nicola de' Cesarini, as the porticus Minucia. The temple in fr. 35ee
Cozza associates with the Temple of the Lares Permarini which is known to have been situated in the
porticus Minucia. Remains of this temple, which was vowed by L. Aemilius Regillus in 190 BCE
and dedicated by M. Aemilius Lepidus in 179 BCE, were unearthed under the Via delle Botteghe
Oscure. The discovery of marble revetment from the temple with carvings of the Flavian period
supports this identification, as ancient sources relate that Domitian repaired the porticus
Minucia Vetus in the Campus Martius.
Based on the thickness of the pieces, on the quality of the marble, on the veining direction, depth of
incisions, and in one case, on visible guidelines, Cozza also joins
fr. 37l
to the Porticus
of Pompey group in slab IV-6; he adds frs.
10wxy and
10z to the Bath of Trajan complex in
slab VIII-3;
he matches fr. 33d
with group 33abc in slab V-17,
fr. 29h with the
Basilica Ulpia group 29a-g,
fr. 417c with
417ab,
fr. 421ab with
frs. 421c, and
421d
fr. 570 with
fr. c of 543bcd;
and finally he joins frs. 457,
458,
470, and
482.
Ferrea, Laura. Gli dei di terracotta. La ricomposizione
del frontone da Via di San Gregorio (Rome 2002).
The beautifully executed catalogue illustrates in detail the history, restoration, and identification of
large architectural terracottas that were discovered in 1878 along Via di San Gregorio, in the valley between the
Palatine and the Caelian hills. Ferrea devotes a section of the catalogue (pp. 61-73) to locating the
Temple of Mars whose pediment the terracottas once adorned. The statues were intentionally removed from the temple,
destroyed, and deposited near the Via San Gregorio, suggesting that the temple was somewhere close by. Two hypotheses
have prevailed thus far: The temple must have been located in the Campus Martialis on the Caelian Hill, known to have
served as a place for military exercises when the Campus Martius was flooded. Or it was situated outside the Porta
Capena, in Regio I, as recorded by ancient authors and by the Regionary Catalogues. The latter thesis has been
considered problematic because it places the temple far from the spot where the statues were deposited. Based on
16th-c. maps of Rome and an extant stretch of wall behind the San Gregorio, Ferrea demonstrates that the Servian
wall made a turn towards the precinct of San Gregorio (also argued by R. Lanciani in 1871), and that the area behind
this church, a short distance from the statue deposit, in fact was outside the walls, not inside as has generally been
assumed. FUR frs.
200a,
200b,
674ac, and
674b
confirm the location of a sacred area of Mars on this slope of
the Caelian. The similar style and ductus of the letters [---]AR[---] in
fr. 674b and [---]IS in fr. 200b, as well as a visible guide line in both, suggest they belong to a single
inscription. A Renaissance drawing of fr. 674abc
complete the AR in 674b as AREA MAR[---]. Imprecise rendering of fr. 674ac by the Renaissance engravers probably
accounts for the slight misalignment of the lines in the fragments. Ferrea locates fr. 200ab along the top edge of
slab XI-6 and 674abc in the upper right corner of slab X-5 (fig. 66). They thus occupy the area just south of
the Temple of Claudius on the Caelian. The period engraved after the final S in fr. 200ab, rare on the Marble Plan,
must signify that the inscription continued below, since the open space to its right coincided with the top of the Plan.
The inscription in the second line probably named the temple itself, which must have been depicted in the area right
behind the Church of San Gregorio.
Ferrea, Laura. "Il Monumento Funerario del
Console Ser. Sulpicius Galba." Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 99
(1998) 51-72.
Ferrea discusses the excavation, restoration, and identity of the funerary monument of
Ser. Sulpicius Galba, consul in 144 BCE, and confirms its location S of the Porticus
Aemilia, as suggested by its position on fr.
24c
of the FUR.
Gatti, Guglielmo. Topografia ed edilizia di Roma antica (Rome 1989).
Several of Gatti's fundamental writings on the Marble Plan are collected in this volume, including
Gatti 1979,
1961,
1960,
1938,
1937 and
1934.
Gatti, Guglielmo. "Il Teatro e la Crypta di Balbo in Roma."
Mélanges de l'Ecole Française de Rome, Antiquité 91 (1979) 237-313
(= Gatti 1989, 183-259).
This lengthy article is a detailed exposition of the facts that led Gatti to propose that the
Theater of Balbus, consisting of the theater itself and an adjoining portico, the crypta Balbi,
was situated in an area that is now bordered on the north by the Via delle Botteghe Oscure, on the west
by the Via and Piazza Paganica, and on the south by the Via dei Delfini (fig. 10). It is the second
response to the continued criticism by G. Marchetti Longhi of this thesis, which Gatti made public
almost two decades earlier in two brief articles (see Gatti 1960
and Gatti 1961).
In Section 1, Gatti recounts the ancient sources relating to the theatrum and crypta Balbi;
in Section 2 he discusses earlier hypotheses on the location of the theater; and Section 3 is a detailed
account of the theater and its location as witnessed by FUR fr.
30abc
and surrounding fragments. Section
4, the focus of the article, is dedicated to showing the actual remains found in
the proposed area of the theater (shown in numerous photos, plans, and elevations) and how they relate
to Gatti's reconstruction of the building complex, based on the FUR fragments. Especially helpful drawings
are Gatti's reconstruction of the theater complex with the actual remains shown in black (fig. 10) and
a plan showing the ancient remains in relation to modern buildings and topography (fig. 48).
Gatti, Guglielmo. "Ancora sulla vera posizione del Teatro di Balbo e del Circo Flaminio."
Palatino 5.1-2 (1961) 17-20 (= Gatti 1989, 179-182).
In response to strong doubts expressed especially by G. Marchetti Longhi concerning the proposed relocation
of the Theater of
Balbus and the Circus Flaminius (see Gatti 1960), Gatti here confirms
his thesis that the Theater of Balbus
was located along the Via delle Botteghe Oscure and that the Circus Flaminius was situated west of the
Theater of Marcellus. In addition to reiterating the arguments from his 1960-article, Gatti points to
specific remains that match the architecture of the crypta Balbi as seen in FUR fr.
30abc.
These
include a semi-circular exedra behind the church of S. Caterina dei Funari, walls of tufa and
travertine along Via delle Botteghe Oscure and Via dei Delfini that correspond exactly with the N and S
sides of the Crypta Balbi, and a brick wall southeast of the exedra which matches a wall delineated in fr.
30def.
In addition, the orientation and outline of the buildings around the Piazza Margana follow those
of the ancient buildings. G. Marchetti Longhi's addition of the cavea of the theatrum Balbi
to the S side of the crypta Balbi in the FUR fragment is not acceptable because: 1) the concentric
arcs do not correspond to the lines emerging from the S side of the crypta, 2) this scenario
proposes that the cavea emerged straight from the sides of the portico without an intermediary
scaenae which is unlike the known architecture of the Theaters of Pompey and Marcellus, and 3) the
cavea would have interfered with the back wall of the Porticus Octaviae and Philippi. Facing
strong opposition from Marchetti Longhi on this point, Gatti also reiterates his arguments from 1960
on the relocation of the Circus Flaminius to the area west of the Theater of Marcellus. Especially
helpful is Gatti's drawing on p. 18 [= p. 180] of his proposed location of these buildings on the FUR.
Gatti, Guglielmo. "Dove erano situati il Teatro di Balbo e il Circo Flaminio?"
Capitolium 35.7 (1960) 3-12 (= Gatti 1989, 169-178).
In this ground-breaking article, Gatti relocates the Theater of Balbus and the Circus Flaminius.
The theatrum Balbi as depicted in fr.
30abc
of the FUR cannot be associated with
the remains discovered on Monte Cenci as shown in PM 1960 pl. 62. The edge of the FUR fragment and the
orientation of its inscription demonstrate that the orientation of the Theater of Balbus differed from
the remains in via di S. Maria de’ Calderari. These remains are in
line with the Porticus of Octaviae and Philippi but not with the Porticus of Pompey which is the orientation
the Balbus theater ought to have. The joining of frs.
398ab
to the theatrum Balbi fragment
demonstrates with certainty that the monument could not have been located on the Monte Cenci: The new
fragments would have "pushed" the theater in fr. 30abc into the Tiber. Gatti instead
locates the theatrum Balbi south of the Via delle Botteghe Oscure (fig. 10) and adds that the portico
shown behind the stage of the theater in fr. 30abc is the famous Crypta Balbi.
He identifies the theatrum and crypta Balbi complex with remains between the Via delle
Botteghe Oscure and the Piazza Mattei, formerly assumed to be those of the Circus Flaminius.
These remains cannot be of the Circus
Flaminius because: 1) the different building material of the cavea and the rest of the building
indicates that
this was not one building but two different ones; 2) ancient remains of a completely different
type were discovered where the foundation of the circus ought to have been, had it been located in this
area; 3) two arched entrances were discovered which would fit well with the architecture of a theater
but not of a circus, which would have had more than just two entrances; 4) there is no evidence of a
spina. Repositioned to the lower right corner of slab V-11, the theatrum Balbi fragments
make a perfect join with those already positioned there, and the architecture of the crypta
depicted in the fragment, such as the semi-circular exedra, matches actual remains between
the Via delle Botteghe Oscure, Via Caetani, and Via dei Delfini. Ancient sources confirm Gatti's
identification and location of the theatrum Balbi in this space: According to Suetonius
(Aug., 29.5) theatrum Balbi was constructed during the reign of Augustus; this date
matches the opus reticulatum construction of the cunei discovered under the Palazzo
Mattei Caetani. The theater's location close to the Tiber is confirmed by Cassius Dio's statement
(54.25.2) that the building had to be approached by boat during a flood in 13 BCE. According to the
Regionary Catalogs the Theater of Balbus had half the seating capacity of the Theater of Marcellus, and
the remains of the cavea of the former indeed witness a much smaller building. Finally, the
triumphal route of Titus and Vespasian in 81 CE "between the two theaters" (Joseph., Bell. Jud.,
7.5.4) can now be reconstructed exactly as being between the theaters of Marcellus and Balbus.
Gatti then relocates the Circus Flaminius to an area by the Tiber that was bordered on the southwest
by the Tiber, on the southeast by the Theater of Marcellus, and on the northeast by the Porticus Octaviae
and Philippi (fig. 10). This is the only spot devoid of ancient construction and large enough to
accommodate the circus. The discovery of a large square paved with travertine blocks in this area,
between S. Angelo in Pescheria and Piazza Giudea, coincides well with the ancient sources according
to which the circus Flaminius was paved in imperial times and thus transformed into a large
piazza. This thesis also fits with the evidence provided by FUR fragment
31ii
which can now be joined with the group that shows the fronts of
the Porticus Octaviae and Philippi (fig. 9); it has the same color and veining direction. The line
in fr. 31ii continues in fr.
31cc.
The location
of the Circus Flaminius in this spot fits the evidence that the Temple of Apollo, the Theater of Marcellus,
and the temples of Juno Regina, of Iuppiter Stator, and of Hercules Musarum were "in circo," i.e. close
to the circus. Finally, the discovery of statues of Castor and Pollux in this area indicates that the
temple of the Dioscuri, also known to have been "in circo," must have been nearby.
Gatti, Guglielmo. "Il portico degli Argonauti e la basilica di Nettuno." Atti del III Convegno
Nazionale di Storia dell'Architettura 16 (Rome 1938) 61-73 (= Gatti 1989, 107-119).
Building upon evidence presented in two earlier articles (Gatti 1934 and
Gatti 1937), Gatti here sets
out to prove what had been proposed in 1912 by V. Lundström: that the Porticus of
Neptune [Stoa of Poseidon], a structure built by Agrippa in 25 BCE and adorned with painted images of
the Argonauts (Cass. Dio 53.27.1), is identical to the porticus Argonautarum, listed with the
porticus Meleagri in the Regionary Catalogues in Regio IX, and that it is to be associated with the
W portico of the Saepta Iulia. To prove this, Gatti uses a combination of ancient sources: FUR
fragments frs.
36b,
35uv, and
35nozaa
demonstrate that the porticus Meleagri is the E portico
of the Saepta (Gatti 1937); Pliny (NH 36.29) notes that the Saepta was filled with works
of art, including sculptural groups of Olympos and Pan and of Achilles and Chiron; and Martial (2.14.5-6)
refers to the Saepta as exhibiting images of the sons of Philyra (=Chiron) and of Aeson
(=Jason, leader of the Argonauts). Gatti further suggests that the buildings referred to as the porticus
agrippiana (schol. ad Iuv. 6.154) and the Poseidonion (Cass. Dio. 66.24)
are identical to the porticus Argonautarum and that the Basilica of Neptune, which Hadrian repaired (SHA
Hadr. 19.10) must be a building close to the latter. This is also suggested by the Regionary
Catalogues in which the Basilica of Neptune is listed immediately after the Pantheon. Excavations south and
east of the Pantheon have revealed a N-S wall with niches facing east. It is generally assumed that Hadrian built
this wall to support the Pantheon, but it probably also functioned as the back wall of the porticus
Argonautarum and thus the Saepta, which Hadrian also restored. Gatti suggests that the remains of a
large aula west of this wall and south of the Pantheon is the Basilica of Neptune, and not part of the Baths of
Agrippa, as generally assumed (reconstruction in fig. 7). The marine motifs in the frieze of this aula might
support this identification.
Gatti, Guglielmo. "I Saepta Iulia nel Campo Marzio." L'Urbe 2.9 (1937) 8-23 (= Gatti 1989, 89-104).
In 1934, Gatti successfully disproved that the large building of opus incertum by the Tiber, depicted
in FUR fragments 23 and 24a-c was to be associated with the Saepta Iulia
(Gatti 1934).
In this
equally important article, the author follows up upon his earlier argument with the suggestion
that the Saepta Iulia is to be identified with a structure visible in FUR frs.
35bb,
gg,
hh,
lpqr,
nozaa,
uv, and the missing
36a.
Ancient sources relate that the arcus Virginis terminated in front of
the Saepta and that the Iseum lay next to it. Since excavations have uncovered the end of the aqueduct near the via del
Seminario and have unearthed a plethora of Egyptian artefacts between via Pie' di Marmo and piazza S. Macuto,
the Saepta Iulia must have occupied an area nearby. Gatti then demonstrates that C. Hülsen and
V. Lundström's earlier organizations of the FUR fragments listed above are slightly incorrect, and that the
Saepta is the large open structure seen west of the Porticus Divorum and the Serapaeum and north of
the Diribitorium on the Plan, exactly as suggested by excavations. Gatti confirms Lundström's reading
of PORTIC[US] M[ELEA]GRI but suggests that the letters [...]AE[...] and [...]VLI[...] in
frs. 36a, 35nozaa, and 35bb
read [S]AE[PTA I]VLI[A] as opposed to Lundström's AE[DES I]VLI[ORUM]. The author
concludes that the Saepta occupied the space bordered by the Iseum and the Villa Publica to the east,
the Baths of Agrippa and the Pantheon to the west, the Diribitorium to the south, and the via del Seminario
to the north. Combining the evidence presented by the FUR fragments, ancient sources, and archaeological
excavations, Gatti demonstrates that the Saepta was an open space that was bordered to the east and the
west by two covered porticos. The E portico of the Saepta can then be associated with the Porticus Meleagri, known from the
Regionary Catalogues to have been located in Regio IX.
Gatti, Guglielmo. "'Saepta Iulia' e 'Porticus Aemilia' nella 'Forma' Severiana."
Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 62 (1934) 123-149 (= Gatti 1989, 57-88).
In this ground-breaking article Gatti delivers three major proposals concerning the Marble Plan:
He concludes that the scale of the Plan is 1:240. He then suggests that the building depicted in
FUR fragments
23
and
24b
and 24c
is the Porticus Aemilia and not
the Saepta Iulia, as long believed. The letters ]LIA in frs. 23 and 24b are not the last
three letters of the name IU[LIA] but of AEMI[LIA]. The remains of a large structure
near the Tiber, S of the Aventine, is to be identified with the Porticus Aemilia (pl. 4 shows Gatti's
famous reconstruction of the building by the Tiber). The opus incertum construction of this building
matches the date of the Porticus Aemilia,
which, according to Livy (35.10.12), was built by the aediles M. Aemilus Lepidus and M. Aemilius Paulus in 192
BCE. Finally, Gatti challenges the identification of the large building depicted in FUR frs. 24a-c as the Statio
Coh. I Vigilum. The architecture of the structure, parts of which were excavated, suggests it was used for
storage of grain, and its proximity to the funerary monument of Servius Sulpicius Galba (discovered in 1885
and visible as a small square in fr. 24c) is a strong indication that the building is to be identified with
the Horrea Galbana (pl. 2).
Hülsen, Christian. "La rappresentazione degli edifizi Palatini nella 'Forma Urbis Romae' dei tempi
Severiani." Dissertazione alla Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 11 (1914) 101-120.
The author, one of the early 20th-century experts on the Severan Marble Plan, here identifies frs.
20a,
20b,
20c,
and 20d
as sections of the imperial buildings on the Palatine Hill. His thesis that frs. 333, 391,
363, and 35q also depicted Palatine structures, namely the Hippodrome and the Domus Augustiana, have since
been proven incorrect (PM 1960, pp. 77-78). Building upon an earlier thesis by Lanciani, who proposed
that the Roman Forum and the Palatine were carved on a larger scale (1:200) than the rest of the Severan map,
Hülsen here suggests that the Palatine structures were depicted on a scale of 1:220, whereas the scale used
everywhere else on the Plan was 1:250. G. Carettoni has since refuted the idea that these areas were carved
on a different scale than the rest of the Map: he demonstrated that of those buildings on the Forum whose depiction
on the FUR was complete enough to warrant precise measurements, some were carved precisely on a scale 1:240, while
others were not (PM 1960, pp. 75-76). He used the same argument to refute the thesis presented here by Hülsen,
noting that the sparse and fragmentary depictions of the Palatine buildings on the Plan do not allow for precise
measurements either way (PM 1960, p. 78). In the remainder of the article, Hülsen argues that the Temple of
Apollo -- not the Adonaea as represented in fr. 44 of the FUR -- must have been located on the S end of the Palatine,
in the area of the Vigna Barberini.
Insalaco, Antonio. "Rilettura di un gruppo di frammenti della Forma Urbis." In A. Englen (ed.), Caelius 1:
Santa Maria in Domnica, San Tommaso in Formis e il Clivus Scauri (Rome 2003) 106-112.
The author reexamines the topography between the S. Gregorio and the piazza dei Ss. Giovanni and Paolo based on
frs. 5Aa,
5Abcd,
5Ae, and
5Af
of the FUR.
The fragments depict three trapezoidal porticos and a large building, surrounded by tabernae, which is
labeled SEVERI ET AN/TONINI AV[G]G/NN. The street that flanks the porticos on the southeast is labeled [CLI]VVS VICTORIAE.
Based on certain physical aspects of the fragment, the authors of PM 1960 tentatively positioned the fragment group to an
area on the map that corresponds to the western slope of the Caelian Hill, between the templum Divi Claudi and the Circus
Maximus. E. Rodríguez-Almeida subsequently confirmed this position. This position does not, however, correspond precisely
with the ancient topography of the area around S. Gregorio. This is not surprising, as it has long been known that this
area of the Plan is distorted; in fact, the templum Divi Claudi is 21 degrees off its correct position and thus exhibits
the greatest skewing known on the map. Insalaco suggests that this skewing towards the east, which translates into
approximately 40 m. on the ground, also caused the misalignment between the buildings depicted in frs. 5A and the topography
of the S. Gregorio area. He demonstrates this by rotating the fragment 21 degrees counterclockwise and showing the
consequential correspondences between certain elements on the fragment and on the ground. A short section of the Clivus Scauri,
for example, excavated in 1890, matches the wide street, flanked by north-facing shops on both sides, that runs to the left
of the SEVERI ET AN/TONINI AV[G]G/NN inscription. The course of the Vicus Trium Ararum corresponds to the street depicted
right above the main inscription. A building faced with shops in the Piazza dei Ss. Giovanni and Paolo aligns with the point
where the street labeled Clivus Victoriae joins with the Clivus Scauri. The paved area discovered under the monastery of
S. Gregorio probably corresponds to the northeast side of the great piazza that must have existed in front of the Septizodium.
The SW side of this piazza is visible in
fr. 7abcd.
It must have been a great nodal point, onto
which flowed several streets: Via Appia, Vicus Piscinae Publicae, the vici that corresponded to the Via dei Cerchi and Via
di S. Gregorio, and the Vicus Trium Ararum and the Clivus Victoriae. The author associates this piazza with the ad Septem Vias,
mentioned in Medieval sources as being located in front of the Septizodium. A fifth corresponding element is the trapezoidal
building divided into three separate porticos, surrounded by outward-facing shops; since the shops
do not open onto the internal courtyards, it is probably not a ware house, as was once believed, but a grandiose market.
A section of these shops is visible today underneath the S. Gregorio. The brickwork and preserved wall paintings date
them to the beginning of the 3rd century. The pre-existing streets and buildings caused their trapezoidal shape. There
are enough similarities between the ground plan of these shops and those that face the Vicus Trium Ararum in front of the
three trapezoidal porticos in frs. 5A to indicate that they are the same: their position, proportions, and the fact that
they seemed to have been backing onto a courtyard. There are also some inconsistencies in the orientation, however, which
the author explains as a change in the original building plans during the course of construction in order to incorporate
the preexisting architecture. Since these shops were constructed at the same time as the Marble Plan was being carved,
they would not have appeared in the surveys on which the engravers of the map based their work. Insalaco suggests that
the carvers instead relied on an architectural project drawing of the shop complex, one that was then changed during the
course of construction. He concludes that positioning frs. 5A correctly demonstrates the existence of a large, commercial
quarter in the area of S. Gregorio, probably attributable to Septimius Severus and Caracalla, as G. Gatti hypothesized.
Like the Septizodium, this commercial quarter on the slopes of the Caelian would have flanked Severus' Piazza ad Septem
Vias and thus have played a vital role in the emperor's attempt to create a monumental entrance to the city from the south.
Jordan, Henri. Forma Urbis Romae Regionum XIIII (Berlin 1874).
Jordan's publication of the Plan is a systematic study (in Latin) that includes chapters on
the history of the fragments; the origins, setting and function of the Plan; and the
various types of Roman
architecture illustrated on the Plan. It contains a synopsis of the fragment numbers
assigned by Jordan, Bellori, Piranesi, and Canina and color coded
drawings of all the incised fragments: grey for extant fragments, yellow for fragments
known only through modern marble copies, and white line drawings for fragments known only from
Renaissance drawings.
Koller, David, Trimble, Jennifer, Najbjerg, Tina, Gelfand, Natasha, and Levoy, Marc. "Fragments of the City:
Stanford's Digital Forma Urbis Romae Project." In L. Haselberger and J. Humphrey (edd.),
Imaging Ancient Rome: Documentation – Visualization - Imagination. Proceedings of the
Third Williams Symposium on Classical Architecture. JRA suppl. (forthcoming 2005).
Lanciani, Rodolfo. "I nuovi frammenti della Forma Urbis." Bullettino della Commissione
Archeologica Comunale di Roma 27 (1899) 3-21.
Lanciani's article is a response to the discovery of 451 fragments of the
FUR in the demolition of walls of the Secret Garden of the Farnese Palace along the Via
Giulia in the 1880's and 90's. He includes photographs of 28 of these rediscovered fragments,
but does not attempt to identify them. The article is mainly an outline of the
excavation history of all the FUR fragments and a discussion of the value of their publications.
Lloyd, R. B. "Three monumental gardens on the Marble Plan." American Journal of Archaology
86 (1982) 91-100.
The author examines the large, formal gardens that appear inside the porticoed courtyards of the Temple
of Peace, the Temple to the Deified Claudius, and the Adonaea on the Severan Marble Plan. In the Temple
of Peace, depicted in FUR fragments
15ab,
15c, and
16a,
3 parallel rows of connected rectangles flank
the central altar. Each of the rectangles measure ca. 5 m. in width and 12-20 m. in length; the channels
that connect them are 2 m. long and 1 m. wide. According to the author, the rectangles are too large to
represent hedges and shade trees are usually indicated with dots on the FUR (here, he refers to PM 1960,
p. 202). Quoting examples from painted wall fragments in Campania, Lloyd proposes that the rectangles in
Vespasian's forum represented flower beds surrounded by low marble fences. (NB. The current excavations in
the Forum of Vespasian
have unearthed remains of these rectangles. The brick features seem to have been used as bases for statuary.
Rows of clay pots for plants and flowers surrounded these podia and drainage channels of marble ran
along their base. Click here to see images of the excavated remains).
The Claudianum, depicted in FUR frs.
4b
and
5a-h, consists of a large, rectagular courtyard or podium in the center of which the temple itself is
positioned. Long, narrow strips (recessed double lines) create clamp-shaped frames around the temple.
The strips are traversed by two paths: one along the central E-W axis, another along the central N-S axis.
The 1 m. wide strips are too narrow to represent flower beds and cannot depict trees. Comparison to the extensive
garden at the villa at Fishbourne demonstrates, however, that the elongated features inside the Claudianum
most likely were hedges consisting of bushes and flowering shrubs. The cistern-like tanks in the
buttress wall on the N side of the Claudianum may have served an extensive watering system similar to
that discovered at Fishbourne.
The building called the Adonaea is only known from FUR frs.
46acd,
46b, and the missing
46e.
The author reconstructs the Adonaea as a T-shaped structure, surrounded on the sides by walls, on one end
by a row of columns, and by a deep, colonnaded porch at the top of the T (fig. 2). The three inner rows of
dotted lines contain too many dots to represent columns, they are too dense to depict large trees, and the
small potted plants and herbs that formed part of the worship of Adonis were temporary offerings and would
probably not have been included on the Marble Plan. Based on a description of the festival of Adonis in
Theocritus 15, Lloyd suggests that the 3 inner lines of dots represented rows of stakes or small columns
that held up grapevines, thus essentially creating a double arbor or vineyard underneath which the
participants would dine al fresco. The long rectangular feature in the center of the Adonaea
in Rome must be the pool of a euripus, surrounded by semicircular and square niches for statuary or
fountains. The 16 lines divided evenly on either side of the pool probably represented low beds or hedges
planted with herbs for use in the cult. That the shrine of Adonis, essentially a funerary monument, should
be surrounded by vineyards in which dining took place is not surprising; numerous inscriptions and a passage from
Petronius' Satyricon (71) prove the existence of such funerary gardens and their use for feasting. Whether
the Adonaea depicted in the FUR is to be identified with the Hall of Adonis, supposedly part of Domitian's
palace complex on the Palatine, or is to be located somewhere else in Rome remains uncertain.
Manacorda, Daniele. "Un nuovo frammento della Forma Urbis
e le calcare romane del Cinquecento nell'area della Crypta Balbi." Mélanges de l'Ecole Française de
Rome, Antiquité 114.2 (2002) 693-715.
In 2001, a new fragment belonging to the Severan Marble Plan was discovered during the construction of a
subterranean passageway along the Via delle Botteghe Oscure, destined to connect to the underground
path near the Museo della Crypta Balbi (see Mancini-Ricci-Manacorda 2002).
The significance of the discovery is increased by the fact that this
is the first FUR fragment to have emerged in a stratigraphic investigation far from the Templum Pacis and its
surrounding area (not counting the numerous pieces that were discovered in a wall belonging to the Farnese "Secret
Garden" by the Tiber). An examination of the history of the buildings in the area shows that several lime kilns
were active there during the 15th and the 16th centuries, a clear indication of why the fragment ended up here.
The smooth back of the fragment itself (fig. 3) shows traces of a clamp hole or a tassello; it is approximately
0.55 to 0.57 cm thick, and there are no discernible veining lines. The well-preserved front depicts a series of
large rooms with a common back wall. Parallel to this back wall the incomplete letters [---]REA are written, perhaps
to be interpreted as [HOR]REA or [A]REA. The smooth back, the thickness of the piece, the size and style of the letters,
and the architecture provide clues that may allow us to match this new fragment to still unidentified pieces of the Marble
Plan. Good candidates for matches may be frs.
256,
260,
266, and
269, none of which has yet
been assigned to a specific slab. There is, however, no physical match between the new fragment and any
surviving or lost fragments (the latter group is known from Renaissance drawings). The new fragment was probably one
of the many pieces that were discovered in 1562 in a garden behind the Church of Saints Cosmas and Damian. For some
reason, it was not transferred to the Farnese palace like most of its companion pieces, but ended up in the Via delle
Botteghe Oscure, destined to be burned in one of the many active lime kilns there. While it escaped this fate, chances
are that many other FUR fragments were destroyed in these kilns.
Najbjerg, Tina and Trimble, Jennifer. "The Severan Marble Plan since 1960." Bullettino
della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma. Suppl. (forthcoming 2005)
Palombi, Domenico. Tra Palatino ed Esquilino: Velia, Carinae, Fagutal. Storia Urbana di tre
quartieri di Roma antica. Rivista Dell'Istituto Nazionale d'Archaeologia e Storia dell'Arte, suppl. 1.
(Rome 1997).
Palombi takes up an existing suggestion and reconstructs the inscription on fr.
672abcd
as IN TEL(LURE),
used in imperial times as a toponym for an area near the Argiletum (pp. 149-153). Based on similar
letter size, guidelines, paleography and quality of the incisions, he positions fr.
577
(-LV-) next to 672,
filling out the inscription (fig. 62). He further identifies the AEDE(S) on fr. 672 as the Temple of Tellus
itself (pp. 153-159), rejecting Coarelli's location of that temple just east of the Compitum Acilium
(Coarelli, in L'Urbs, pp. 22-35). This suggestion raises the problem of matching the textual attestations of a single
temple with the visual evidence of twin temples; he suggests that the second is most likely a temple of Ceres.
Based on this identification, and taking into account the slab edge, wedge hole (tassello), smooth back and orientation
of the inscriptions, frs. 672 and 577 are placed along the upper left edge of slab VII-9 (the slab just to the
left of the Templum Pacis slab).
Pedroni, Luigi. "Per una lettura verticale della Forma Urbis Marmorea." Ostraka 1.2 (1992) 223-230.
Pedroni examines the V-shaped staircase symbols on the Plan, focusing on the transverse bars that appear on many of them;
he proposes that the number of bars indicated how many upper floors were present. These bars can number from 1 to 6 (there
is a useful tabulation of his study of the V-shaped symbols on the Plan, the number of bars, and the fragments on which
they appear on pp. 226-227). An exploration of the textual and archaeological evidence for Roman housing, included legislated
heights of buildings, allows for this suggestion. The author is not able to explain convincingly why so many V-symbols have
no bars, or why 5- and 6-bar examples are so rare; nor does he investigate the possibility of different heights within a
single building, or the spatial distribution of these symbols.
Reynolds, David West. Forma Urbis Romae: The Severan Marble Plan and the Urban Form of Ancient Rome
(PhD Diss. University of Michigan, 1996).
The contribution of this dissertation, apart from being a recent and wide-ranging study of
the Plan in English, lies in Reynolds' attempt to chart new ground in the study of the Plan and the urban fabric of Rome.
He provides a study of non-monumental architecture on the Plan (chapter 3) and combines data from
the Plan and the fourth-century Regionary Catalogues to assess elements of the urban structure of Rome (chapter 4).
The dissertation also includes useful analyses of the accuracy of the Renaissance and later drawings of FUR fragments,
and analyzes the Plan's significance within Roman mapping and surveying traditions.
Richardson, Lawrence, Jr. "A Note on the Architecture of the Theatrum Pompei in Rome."
American Journal of Archaeology 91 (1987) 123-126.
The structure that extends from the outer arc of the Theater of Pompey in
fr. 39f
is generally identified as the Temple of Venus Victrix. In this article, Richardson challenges
this identification and suggests that the feature depicts a tree-lined avenue that led from Pompey's
house to his theater. He points out the following in support of this thesis: there is no similarity
between this structure and known temples on the Plan; it is, in fact, more similar to the plantations
or pools in the nearby porticus (fr.
39ac);
the structure is skewed in relation to the axis of the theater which would not make sense if it were
a building at the top of the cavea; had the feature been a temple, it would have
intruded upon the space of the cavea on the Plan; and, finally, there are no archaeological
remains of the sturdy (and very tall) foundation needed for such a temple.
Richardson, Lawrence, Jr. "The Approach to the Temple of Saturn." American Journal of Archaeology 84 (1980) 51-62.
G. and P.M. Lugli's reconstruction of the Temple of Saturn in the Roman
Forum from 1947 shows the approach to the temple as consisting of two rectangular
platforms framing each side of a narrow, central staircase that widens at the top to span the width of
the entire podium. In this reconstruction, the Aerarium was situated underneath the E platform and
reached through a small door in the E wall of the temple podium. Richardson here claims that this reconstruction
is incorrect, mainly because it is based on a misreading of the lost FUR fragment
19 which, he proposes,
does not depict the Temple of Saturn, of the deified Vespasian, and of Concordia in the Roman forum.
The general plan of these three buildings is known today, and what is rendered in the Renaissance drawing of the missing
fragment does not match these remains: The triangular area in front of the presumed Temple of Saturn seems
to be approached by stairs, which is unlikely as the clivus Capitolinus rises here; if the lines that
frame this triangular area represent a precinct boundary, then where is the entry?; there are too few front steps shown in the
drawing - in comparison to the Temple of Castor, there should be many more; and the line of the podium is not
indicated here although it is included in fr. 18d which shows the S wall of the temple. The rendering of the Temple
of Vespasian in fr. 19 also does not correspond to reality: It is situated incorrectly in relationship to the
Temple of Saturn, and it shows no columns or steps in front. Finally, the Renaissance drawing shows the
supposed Temple of Corcordia as having columns along the side, which is incorrect; it does not repeat the
famous T-shape of the building; and the imposing frontal staircase is missing. The author does not think it
likely that the Renaissance draftsman could have made so many mistakes, and concludes that the fragment
belongs some where else on the Marble Plan. He proposes that the [---]ORDIA inscription in fr. 19 refers not to
[CONC]ORDIA but to [VENUS VERTIC]ORDIA. The temple to Venus Verticordia must have been sitauted some where between
the Circus Maximus and the Aventine Hill, an area that corresponds to slabs VIII-6 and VII-14 on the Marble Plan. Hardly
any fragments have been located in this area of the Plan, and there is thus ample space to position fr. 19 here.
The stairs in front of the Temple of Saturn probably spanned the entire width of the podium.
Richardson, Lawrence, Jr. "The evolution of the Porticus Octaviae." American Journal of Archaeology
80 (1976) 57-64.
Richardson here argues two things: a) G. Gatti's identification of the extensive 2nd cent. BCE structure by the Tiber as the Porticus
Aemilia (Gatti 1960 and 1961) is erroneous. The building does not have the form of a porticus and it is not situated outside the Porta
Trigemina (we know from Livy 35.41.10 that the Porticus Aemilia was located outside this gate). The remains by the Tiber are
more reminiscent of a warehouse (he later suggests they are those of the Porticus Minucia Frumentaria [Richardson 1992, pp. 315-316]),
and the Porticus Aemilia must have been a insignificant building, probably of wood, that disappeared by the early Empire.
b) The premise of the second argument is the problem of identifying the Porticus Octavia. Festus (188L) records that there
were two buildings in Rome by the name of Porticus Octavia: One was built by Augustus' sister Octavia near the Circus Flaminius,
and one was built in 168 BCE by Cn. Octavius next to the Theater of Pompey and it was restored by Augustus. In an attempt to
reconcile the ancient accounts, Richardson suggests that Cn. Octavius' Porticus Octavia was a single-wing portico that faced the
Circus Flaminius and stood in front of the temples to Iuno Regina and Juppiter Stator. Then Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus
built a three-sided portico behind the Porticus Octavia, thus creating a quadriporticus around the two temples. The Porticus Metelli was
considered a separate entity from the Porticus Octavia. Octavian restored the Porticus Octavia in 33 BCE, and his sister
Octavia rebuilt the remaining three sides a decade later and included a library with the name of her son, Marcellus, and she named the new
curia, the schola, and the three wings of the porticus after herself. The inscription in FUR fragment
31u,
which generally is believed
to name the two large quadriporticus across from the Circus Flaminius, the porticus Octaviae and Philippi, refers only to the E porticus,
the Porticus Octaviae, dedicated to Octavia and her son, and it reads OCTAVIAE ET FILI, not OCTAVIAE ET FILIPPI.
That this is the correct reading is suggested by the fact that there is not enough space in the inscribed field for the latter interpretation.
The problem that Festus situates the Porticus Octavia next to the Theater of Pompey remains.
Rickman, Geoffrey. Roman granaries and store buildings (Cambridge, England, 1971).
The author examines the archaeological evidence for granaries and store buildings in Rome, Ostia, and in the provinces.
For Ostia and the provinces, he relies mainly on the archaeological remains; the scarcity of remains of this type of
buildings in Rome, however, forces the author to rely on the evidence provided by the Severan marble plan (pp. 87-122).
The only excavated horrea in Rome is the Horrea Agrippiana; despite certain inconsistencies, it was for years
associated with a structure depicted in fragment group
42,
until this identification was firmly rejected by the authors
of PM 1960. The architecture of the Horrea Galbana is known mainly from fragment group
24
of the FUR and from a few
scattered late 19th-c. excavations. Having discussed the meagre remains of the Horrea Piperataria and Horrea Seiana and
a few unidentified structures, Rickman concentrates on the evidence for horrea presented by the FUR, thus building upon
the work of R.A. Staccioli (Staccioli 1962). Some of the horrea on the marble plan are easily identified,
either because they are labeled, such as the Horrea Lolliana in fr.
25
and the building labeled SUMMI CH[ORAGI] in fr.
3
which was probably used for storing theatrical machinery and equipment; or because their ground plan compares well to the excavated remains from Ostia. Frs.
28,
for example, depict several monumental horrea on the banks of the Tiber and across the Via Portuense. More are visible
in frs.
33abc and
34.
Rickman, however, rejects Staccioli's identification of warehouses in slab VI-7 (fr.
27),
counterarguing that the lack of urban planning in the area and of a secure environment makes it more
likely to have been shops and insulae. A building of unusual design in fr.
44
is labeled Horrea Candelaria and must be accepted as showing the ground plan of a ware house. Fr.
92
clearly shows part of a horrea. Rickman concludes that some of Staccioli's identifications are more certain than others; he considers the identification of buildings in frs.
421,
543,
548, and
563
as horrea secure, those in frs.
123,
163,
165,
184, and
185 less so.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. Formae Urbis Antiquae: le mappe marmoree di Roma tra la Repubblica e Settimio Severo
(Rome 2002).
In his latest work, Rodríguez-Almeida first surveys the cartographic tradition in Rome. He then discusses the
existence and reconstruction of a pre-Augustan map of Rome, based on the writings of Livy (V.55.5) and Varro (De Ling. Lat.,
V.45-47, 50-56). In chapters 3-5, the author examines seven maps of the Augustan period or in the Augustan tradition: the
so-called pianta "del priorato" or "dell'Aventino," "di Tivoli," "di Perugia," "di Via della Polveriera," "di Via Anicia,"
"di Amelia," and "della necropoli di Porto." He devotes a separate chapter to a little-known and at the time of his writing
still unpublished marble map discovered in 1995 in the Forum Transitorium (fig. 20 is author's own drawing). The style of the
engraving and the partial inscriptions on this pre-domitianic map lead the author to believe that it dates to the late
Republican period. The disppointingly brief final chapter focuses on the map
to which Rodríguez-Almeida has devoted most of his life: the Severan Marble Plan of Rome. The author recounts the history
of the map's discovery and publication and touches upon its date and the problem of its function. Unlike some of the other maps
discussed in this book, the Severan Marble Plan did not serve as a great cadastral map for public use, nor as a fiscal or
administrative map for the city government. What is certain, however, is that there existed smaller, precise, cadastral maps
to which the Severan surveyers referred when they created this large-scale map. The piecing together of such smaller maps explains
why the details engraved on the Severan map generally are extremely precise, while the angles of monuments and
city sections on occasion are skewed and incorrect. While the text of this chapter adds nothing new to the scholarship on
the Severan map, fig. 24 is a schematic rendering of the map that reflects a new numbering system of the 150 slabs, first
proposed by the author in 1994 (see Rodríguez-Almeida 1994). In addition, a large foldout
plan of the map (pl. 12) shows fragments added since 1960 - colorcoded according to author. Notably missing from this plan
are the convincing matches proposed by Claudia Cecamore (Cecamore 1999 and
2002) and Laura Ferrea (Ferrea 2002).
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "A proposito della Forma marmorea e di altre formae."
Mélanges de l'Ecole Française de Rome, Antiquité 112.1 (2000) 217-230.
1. Certain characteristics of slab III-12 enable the author to locate
frs. 278ab ,
289,
280ab
in this very slab (fig. 5).
Frs. 286ab,
287,
292,
296,
307ab, and
374 may also belong.
2. Fig. 6 is a drawing of one of the 23 new FUR fragments that were discovered in 1998 in the
ongoing excavation of the Forum Pacis
(click here
for more information about the excavation). The drawing precedes the official publication of the new fragments (in preparation by
the Sovraintendenza).
3. S. Rizzo (Archeo 1999, p. 10-11) published a recently discovered marble fragment on which a section of the
Forum of Augustus is engraved. Concerned that future scholars may mistake the new piece as belonging to the FUR
Rodríguez-Almeida makes the following observations about the fragment and its publication:
1) unlike the FUR, the new fragment is not an area map; 2) the archaeological context provides a terminus post quem non of
the 10th/11th c.; 3) the suggestion that the piece is incompletely engraved and therefore a reject is unsubstantiated;
4)the argument that the Forum Transitorium had not yet been built when this fragment was engraved because the stairs
that joined it to Forum of Augustus do not appear, does not hold. The plan was perhaps designed to show only the
architecture of Augustus' forum; 5) the arch depicted is erroneously attributed to Gaius and
Lucius Caesar--it can only be that of Germanicus; 6) the assumption that this new fragment proves that some of the pieces of
the Severan Marble Plan are in reality from a similar Vespasianic plan is without foundations; 7) the Via Anicia plan has
nothing in common with another fragment, recently discovered in the Forum Transitorium (to be published by the author in his
second large publication on the FUR, forthcoming). According to Rodríguez-Almeida, inconsistencies between the
overall scale of the plan and the existing remains (figs. 8-9) indicate that the new fragment was never intended to depict
the entire plan of the Forum but only a very small section of its NE corner. The plan may therefore represent an architect's
sketch, used as guide in the construction of a small feature in this section of the forum, perhaps the arch of
Germanicus which was put up in 18 CE. The Augustan-Tiberian date of the engraving
technique supports this thesis.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "Euristica materiale e Forma marmorea. Alcuni falsi problemi."
Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia: Rendiconti 68 (1995-96) 3-20.
The author here challenges the proposal by M. Steinby (Steinby 1989)
and others that
fr. 18a,
depicting the Temple of Castor in the Roman forum, as well as
fr. 38
(Baths of Agrippa) belong to an earlier, probably
Vespasianic, version of the marble plan.
1. The pieces of the FUR were scattered over a large area in medieval times. The fact that fr. 18a was discovered
near the monument it depicts is a strange coincidence but does not prove that it did not belong to the Severan marble
plan. The dark color of fr. 38 does not indicate it belonged to a different map; this was simply caused by exposure to
intense heat from a fire. The "thin incisions" of same fragment are merely an optical illusion caused by the
extreme wear of its surface. Contrary to the statement by the proponents of an earlier, Vespasianic plan, frs. 18a and 38
were not the only fragments discovered far from the aula of the Forum Pacis: At least 10 were discovered in the Forum
Romanum and in the forum of Caesar, 37 are of unknown provenience, and hundreds were rediscovered in the walls of the
Farnese "Secret garden." Besides, the author has discovered a hithertoo unnoticed clamphole in fr. 38 which positions
it securely in slab III-10, as proposed in PM 1960, p. 98.
2. The insertion of
fr. 18c
into a plaster copy, fr. 18bc, based on a Renaissance drawing, has made it impossible to prove
the author's suggestion, first proposed in AG 1980, p, 98, that frs. 18a and 18bcd were located on two different slabs,
with the edges of slabs VI-6 and V-11 separating the Temple of Castor from the Basilica Iulia. The size of the
Basilica Iulia, however, which spans the height of the horizontal slab VI-6, makes it impossible to squeeze the Temple
of Castor into the same slab.
3. The 3 differences in the rendering of the Temple of Castor in frs. 18a and 18bc (podium rendered with a double
line on E side, with a single line on W side; colonnade adjoining the line of the podium on the E side, separate from
it on the W side; and columns adjoining the back edge of the podium in fr. 18a but separate from it in 18bc) are
difficult to explain, but there are many such anomalies on the FUR, and to conclude from this that 18a belongs to a
separate map is too hasty.
4. The author corrects his positioning of frs. 18a and 18bc based on new observations (fig. 7). Close vicinity of
wedge holes (tasselli) to slab edges is a characteristic of the FUR; they range from 10 to 22 cm (the tassello in fr.
24, which is 40 cm from the slab edge, may be modern). The tassello in fr. 18a, which is 8-10 cm from the proposed edge
is therefore not unusual, as has been suggested.
5. It has been argued that fr. 18a must belong to a Vespasianic map because the rooms that are shown at an oblique angle in
the building behind the Temple in Castor in the fragment must be pre-Domitianic. Rodríguez-Almeida, however,
insists they belong to Domitian's palace, and the reason the walls are rendered oblique while the front is parallel
to the back of the Temple of Castor, is because the Severan engravers had problems combining the separate surveys for
Regio 8 and 10, the joining of which occurred right at this point. Furthermore, fr. 18a is of
proconnesian marble like the rest of the FUR fragments; this type of marble was not in use in Rome before the Antonine period.
The known marble maps of Rome that pre-date the Severan Plan are not of proconnesian marble, and their scope, engraving technique,
and precise renderings that include proprietary names and measurements, are undeniably different from those of the FUR.
6. The style of the letter "T" in fr. 18a is unique on the FUR; the orthography of the "R" is repeated in fr. 38 only. This
does not, however, justify a Flavian date for these two fragments; in fact, the style of the letters "A" and "M" in fr. 38 is
of late date.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "Aemiliana."
Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia: Rendiconti 68 (1995-96) 373-383.
In this article, Rodríguez-Almeida proposes that the enigmatic Aemiliana were located south of the Aventine, in the area of
the Emporium.
A. The author first summarizes the evidence he considers certain: the name Aemiliana is a
patronym, the feature was located outside the pomerium (Varro, RR, 3.2.6), it was connected to the grain dole
(annona), it consisted of a large quarter or complex of buildings of different use
(including residential), it was damaged perhaps twice by fire and must have been located in an urban area, and it was
located near the Tiber (CIL 15.7150). Despite his assertion to the opposite in
LTUR I, pp. 19-20, the author is now convinced that the Aemiliana are identical to the
praedia Aemiliana Tigillini (Tacitus, Ann. 15.40); it may, in fact, have been located
in the same area as other large, mixed-use complexes, named praedia on the FUR, outside the porta Trigemina, near the
porticus Aemilia.
Varro's use of the adverb aut signals two analogous urban situations, but not neccessarily neighboring; we should
therefore not assume that the Aemiliana were near the porta Flumentana.
B. Recent research on the annonia and the location of the porticus Minucia frumentaria have overcomplicated matters by
assuming that the archive, administration, and physical distribution of the grain dole had to take place/be located in the same area. The author
suggests that once the grain recipient had had his name recorded in the temple of the Nymphs, he would go to the porticus
Minuciae to receive his ticket, and thereafter to the Porticus Aemilia where his ticket would direct him to one of the
50 openings, and here he would receive his grain portion.
C. The baths of Tigillinus (Mart., Epigr. 3.20) were probably part of the praedia Aemiliana Tigillini, and
Martials's wording indicates they were not located in the Campus Martius. According to Tacitus, the fire of 64 CE
burned in two stages. The first began near the circus Maximus and
destroyed most of the city, leaving only 4 regions unharmed. Those who blamed the fire on Nero considered the second
fire, which burned in an area that was more open and less residential, even more infamous than the first, because it
started in the praedia Aemiliana of Tigillinus, Nero's debauched and much-hated friend, and
was thus a sure sign that Nero, desiring to free an even larger area for his new city, was the instigator.
Rodríguez-Almeida suggests that the second burning happened on the south slopes of the Aventine and in the area of the
Emporium just south of it. This was one of the few places
the first fire had not reached, and it was occupied mainly by warehouses and markets, thus corresponding well with Tacitus'
description. This area was repaired immediately by Galba after Nero's death and Galba may even have entrusted Tigellinus
with the rebuilding of the important buildings. The praedia Aemiliana Tigillini were probably
located in this area. The bath complex visible in FUR fr. 25a is perhaps to be identified as the balnea Tigillini.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "La ricostruzione della Forma Urbis Marmorea: Qualche
proposta di metodo." Journal of Ancient Topography = Rivista di Topografia Antica 4 (1994) 109-118.
The author suggests that future scholarship on the FUR include a data bank of information about all the fragments, as well as
casts "in resine leggere."
To facilitate the renumbering of fragments included in future matches, he proposes two solutions:
1) Retain the current numbers of groups 1 through 41; assign all remaining slabs a number in sequence from 42, beginning
in the upper left corner and finishing in lower right corner.
2) Assign new numbers to ALL 150 slabs, from upper left to lower right corner.
(NB. Stanford's Digital Forma Urbis Romae Project fulfills three of Rodríguez-Almeida's wishes: Its core is a database
with information about all fragments, including digital 3D models, and the slab map system in our viewer has been
adapted from his proposal #2.)
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "Il frammento 565 della Forma marmorea."
Ostraka 3 (1994) 417-426.
1. Fragment 565
adjoins fr. 10wxy
from the Baths of Trajan; they fit together with a "lock" of the marble.
The angle created between a faint guideline and the marble
veining helps place the fragment. Comparison with the Baths of Trajan caldarium group (10x-w) shows the same angle
between the veining and the guideline, an orthogonal guideline dividing the space into symmetrical halves,
the same architectonic structure, and the same thickness. The fragment perhaps depicts the tepidarium, elaborated
architecturally as a passageway between the caldarium and frigidarium. It shows that this room had, at both ends,
a double passageway with central body, elaborated on the 'outside' of the room and flat on the 'inside'. On the caldarium
end, the caldarium side was
niched/apsidal, and the side facing the intervening room was flat. At the far end, on the frigidarium side, the
interior was again flat, and the far side was
elaborated with two columns and flanking antae with columns at the end.
2. This increases our knowledge of the internal layout of the Baths and of the way in which the Marble Plan deformed
certain architectural features with respect to the actual topography.
Comparison to drawings of the building made in the Renaissance shows that the overall ordering is the same, but
details are quite different. The incisions on the FUR represent the spaces in a schematic manner, in a "drastic but effective"
simplification (p. 422). There are additional disparities--for example, the FUR shows the natatio as much more
rectangular than the practically
square Renaissance version. There are also places where the FUR provides information we do not have otherwise.
3. Frs. 497,
498,
504ab share
characteristics with frs. 10A, such as micaceous veining ("serie fitta di righe erosive
lievemente lucicanti per la presenza di mica," p. 425), and a similar treatment of the slab edge ("il bordo di
lastra smusato per uno spazio di ca. 4
centimetri di ampiezza," p. 425). Fr. 493
in particular shows the same thickness, similar veining, and the same
treatment of the slab edge, as well as
topographic continuity in the incisions.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "Marziale in marmo."
Mélanges de l'Ecole Française de Rome: Antiquité 106.1 (1994) 197-217.
I. One of the two pitchers carved in high relief in the frieze of the Temple of Vespasian in the forum Romanum, dedicated in 86 CE,
depicts in the top register a gladiator (venator)
fighting a lioness and a panther; in the bottom register, a bull locks horns with a rhinocerous. Martial's detailed
description of the games held at the inauguration of the Flavian amphitheater in 80 CE, Spectaculorum liber,
included the battle between a famous venator, Carpoforo, and a lion and a leppard, and between a rhinocerous
and a bull. The author suggests the second pitcher commemorates the highlights of these games.
II. Three marble statues, discovered in the Roman theater at Tarraco, are now in the archaeological museum
in Barcelona. The acephalous, life-sized statues, almost certainly from the same workshop, are remarkably similar:
they represent 3 cuirassed men, standing barefoot with the weight on the right leg and with the heavy military cloak
draped over the left arm. The aegis of Minerva that each figure wears above the cuirass indicates, according to
Rodríguez-Almeida, that they belonged to a sculptural program of the Domitianic period. That Domitian's own
military cuirass actually depicted the aegis of his patron goddess, similar to that worn by the 3 statues
in Barcelona, is witnessed by Martial's detailed description of it (Mart., 7.1, 7.2). The statues were either 3 copies
of a statue of Domitian, or they depicted him and Vespasian and Titus.
III. Martial opens the second verse of his Spectaculorum liber, which honors the Flavian building program in
the area previously occupied by Nero's Golden House, with a reference to pegmata that crescunt
in the middle of the road. Martial is here not refering to the ruin of a Neronian feature, as has been
suggested, but instead to the scaffolding that must have been "growing up" around the many new Flavian buildings
in the Colosseum valley in 80 CE, when Martial wrote the epigram. A marble slab, perhaps funerary, that was
discovered underneath the Palazzo della Cancelleria, shows a circular structure under construction (fig. 9). The
building is covered and surrounded with pegmata, and the slab is thus a unique representation of a situation
simiilar to the one described by Martial.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "De la Forma Urbis Marmorea, en torno al Collis Capitolinus." In R. T. Scott and
A. R. Scott, eds., Eius virtutis studiosi. Classical and postclassical studies in memory of F.E. Brown
(Washington 1993) 31-43. NB. The article is in Spanish.
1. The author observes two grooves, hitherto unnoticed, below and to the left of the row of columns
in fr. 499
(fig. 1); the 1 cm-wide grooves are similar to the recessed lines that designate the cella walls
of temples elsewhere on the FUR. As is typical for FUR fragments that have been exposed to great heat, the veining
is not visible; saw marks (zigrinature) show up clearly on the smooth back, however. The thickness, smooth back,
damaged surface, and zigrinature of fr. 499 place it securely in slab V-12. Fragments previously located
along the top left edge this slab, frs.
31a ,
31b, and
31c,
show two small temples separated from two long ramps by a thick, double-lined wall. L. Cozza recognized the
stepped ramps as the centum gradus on the west side of the Capitoline hill, but did not venture to
identify the temples nor the arch that straddles the top ramp. Similar saw marks and thickness locate fr. 499
(proposed new number = 31kk)
just above the Capitoline group (fig. 3). It thus depicts the access ramp, one of the "one hundred
steps," on the SW slopes of the collis Capitolinus, just above the sacred area of San Omobono (fig. 8).
The temple in the new fr. 31kk, which was peripteral sine postico and
thus typically Republican, was oriented at an oblique angle to the Temple to Jupiter. Its dimensions suggest there
were at least 12 columns along the sides and that it was hexastyle. Remnants of travertine columns and a colossal
female head (figs. 5-6), perhaps brought down to the area of San Omobono by a landslide,
are possibly to be associated with this temple. Among the 4 known Capitoline temples dedicated to a female divinity,
the Temple of Fides best matches the architectural criteria of the structure in fr. 31kk. NB. The argument presented
in section 1 is a repetition and development of Rodríguez-Almeida 1991b.
2. The slight deformations in the topography on the Severan Marble plan must have been caused by the engravers
when they mosaicked together the surveys of different sections of the city. Attempts to adjust these errors are visible
throughout the
map, and overall, the accuracy is astonishing. One major error is the Templum Divi Claudii which is oriented 21°
off course. The author has discovered the vague traces of a hitherto unnoticed concentric circle with a diameter of 3.1 cm in
fr. 31eno,
in the blank space between the Theater of Marcellus and the temples of Apollo and of Bellona in slab V-12 (fig. 9). Also
visible around it are two vague guide lines.
Lines extending from the center of the Temple of Apollo, the N edge of the Circus Flaminius, and the 45-degree radius
of the Theater of Marcelllus form a perfect, equilateral triangle around the circle (fig. 10). On the FUR, however, the
Theater of Marcellus is located 30 meters too far to the west and has been turned 13° clockwise from its correct
orientation. Its middle radius is not parallel to the E side of the Porticus of Octavia, as shown on the FUR (fig. 11).
Fig. 12 shows the real distances and orientation of the structures in question. The concentric circle must be the remains
of compass mark, later incompletely erased, by which triangulation was performed to lay out the buildings on the map.
Rodríguez-Almeida, Emilio. "Novitŕ minori dalla Forma Urbis marmorea."
Ostraka 1 (1992) 55-80.
1. A second aqueduct is observed at the edge of fr. 517. By comparison with the actual course of
aqueducts in Rome, this fragment is placed toward the upper left corner of the Plan, i.e. outside
the Esquiline Gate.
2. Frs. 200a
and 200b are
reconstructed to read TIBERIS and placed just south of
the Emporium (the warehouse and port district south of the Aventine hill) in Slab VIII-9.
The inscription on fr. 216
is read as ]MINA[, perhaps to be reconstructed as "collis [VI]MINA[LIS]." Its thickness suggests it belonged
to the top or middle part of the Plan.
Frs. 195
and 196
are put together to spell the letters DAE.
3. There are very few rough-backed slabs; they descend in a slanting pattern from the top of the wall (fig. 17).
This is surely because when rough-hewn blocks of marble were sawn into slabs, only the two "heel" ends of
the block had a rough side, while all the inner slabs from a single block were equally smooth on front and
back. Several joins are made on the basis of fragments with rough or potentially rough backs: frs.
134 and
667;
frs. 97 and
84;
frs. 327ab and
324;
frs. 661a,
661b, and
666.
4. The join of
frs. 330 and
284, based on a wedge hole
(tassello) on the back, results in the complete floor plan of an insula, somewhat similar to one
excavated underneath the Palazzo Piombino along the Via Lata.
5. "Scalini" are explained as sawing irregularities on the backs of certain slabs; those on slabs V-12, VI-7, IV-5
and III-12 are especially visible. The scalini on slab VII-7 (fig. 16) confirm Rodríguez-Almeida's argument that
frs. 11b,
11c,
11d,
11e,
11fgh, and
11i, belong to this slab.
6. Based on rough backs, future identifications may be possible for
frs. 138, 165, 157, 70, and 46.
Fr.