Identification: Aedis Iunonis Reginae The podium temple is identified as the aedis Iunonis by the inscription written above it (PM 1960, pp. 91-92, pl. 29). Dedicated by M. Aemilius Lepidus in 179 BCE, the temple was constructed next to the temple of Juppiter Stator (visible in frs. 31u, 31vaa and the now missing 31z) in the Campus Martius (LTUR III, pp. 126-127). Both temples were incorporated into the Porticus Metelli and remained there after the latter was rebuilt and renamed Porticus Octaviae (LTUR III, p. 126-127; Richardson 1992, pp. 216-217, 315). Remains of the temple podium, cella, pronaos, and columns have been unearthed--almost all belong to a Severan rebuilding of the entire structure after a fire in 203 CE. The excavations have demonstrated that the temple was hexastyle, not tetrastyle as depicted in this fragment (LTUR III, p. 127; Richardson 1992, p. 217). The strangely shaped feature behind the temple, a mirror image of that behind the Temple of Juppiter, was a large (Augustan?) exedra, that has been associated with the curia Octaviae or the schola Octaviae (LTUR III, p. 127; IV, p. 142).

Identification: Aedis Hercules Musarum The crenulated outline in the bottom of the fragment is the E edge of the podium wall of the Temple to Hercules of the Muses, handily identified by the inscription in this fragment and in the now missing fr. 31gg (PM 1960, p. 91, pl. 29). This temple was built by M. Fulvius Nobilior after his victory over the Aetolians in 189 BCE. In it he dedicated sculpture taken as spoils of war, including a Hercules Musagetes (leader of the Muses) and a group of Muses taken from Ambracia (LTUR III, p. 18). The temple was restored in the Augustan period by L. Marcius Philippus, probably Augustus' stepbrother (LTUR III, p. 19). The temple proper is visible in the now missing fragments 31ee, 31ff, and 31gg (see Renaissance drawings and reconstruction in PM 1960, pls. 13, 14, and 29). It seems to have consisted of a tholos with a tetrastyle pronaos, part of which has been exposed through excavation (LTUR III, p. 19). The round temple faced a sacred enclosure inside which a small, circular feature may represent the bronze aedicula of Numa, which Nobilior moved there from the sanctuary of the Camenae (LTUR III, p. 19). A semicircular niche was built into the short N end of the crenulated podium (LTUR III, p. 19; Richardson 1992, p. 187).

Identification: Porticus Octaviae The building identified as porticus Octaviae et Philippi by the inscription in fr. 31u was in reality two separate structures. Augustus or his sister Octavia constructed the easternmost building, the porticus Octaviae, which replaced an earlier structure, the porticus Metelli (see LTUR IV, pp. 130-132; Richardson 1992, pp. 315, 317. For the suggested identification of the S wing of the building as the porticus Octavia, built by Cn. Octavius in 168 BCE, see Richardson 1976, pp. 60-61). The building was rebuilt in the Severan period and may be the structure referred to twice in the Historia Augusta as the porticus Severi (LTUR IV, p. 142). The Plan shows a building that consisted of an open courtyard surrounded by a covered, double row of colonnades in front and double colonnades and walls along the sides, also covered. The rear of the building is missing on the Plan but it presumably consisted of a covered, double colonnade with a wall behind it. The Plan does not show what is demonstrated by excavations, namely that the three porticoes were raised 1.70 m above the central courtyard (Ciancio Rossetto 1996, p. 267). The entrance (visible in frs. 31u and the missing 31z) was centered in the S portico. On the Plan, it is depicted as a double row of six columns on pedestals, the front row projecting slightly out from the outer colonnade. Recent excavations have shown, however, that in the Severan period, the S portico was closed off with a wall (Ciancio Rossetto 1996, pp. 270, 273). At that time, the entrance was also changed into a monumental propylaeum (still visible today) whose front and back faces projected far out from the front and the rear of the S portico. Each face consisted of two antae that flanked four columns on piers (Ciancio Rossetto 1996, pp. 267-270; LTUR IV, p. 144). This demonstrates that the Marble Plan depicted the Porticus Octaviae (frs. 31u, 31z (missing), 31vaa, 31bb, 31cc, 31ii) in its Augustan, not Severan, phase (Ciancio Rossetto 1996, pp. 267). In the central courtyard of this great quadriporticus stood the temples to Juppiter Stator and to Iuno Regina. The bistyle exedra seen in the W wall of the Porticus Octaviae in this fragment probably held some of the many works of art that were displayed in the building (LTUR IV, pp. 144-145).

Identification: Porticus Philippi The westernmost portion of the double structure, visible in the bottom third of this fragment, has been identified as the porticus Philippi (PM 1960, pp. 91-92, pl. 29; AG 1980, p. 114, pl. 23). The identification is based on the assumption that the inscription [PORTI]CUS OCTAVIAE ET FIL[IPPI] in fr. 31u is a joint label for the two separate quadriporticoes visible in this fragment (for a different interpretation, see Richardson 1976, p. 63), and that L. Marcius Philippus, probably Augustus' stepbrother, built the quadriporticus (and named it after himself) when he reconstructed the Aedis Herculis Musarum, the temple enclosed in its center (LTUR IV, p. 146). The porticus Philippi consisted of an open courtyard that was surrounded on all four sides by double porticoes. On the Plan, a line separates the outer from the inner colonnade. Recent excavations have demonstrated that the outer portico was raised high (at least 3 m) above the inner courtyard (LTUR IV, p. 147), and the line may denote the inner wall of this raised portico. The columns of the inner colonnade have been interpreted as trees because they do not line up with those of the outer colonnade (LTUR IV, p. 146). This, however, does not concur with the observation that the Marble Plan in general only depicts man-made, architectural features. The inner colonnade is probably a covered portico that was built against the tall inner wall of the outer portico. The back wall of the E portico was parallel to the back wall of the W portico of the porticus Octaviae. The function of the narrow, elongated space between these walls is uncertain; it was accessed from both buildings through openings in the back walls, visible in fr. 31cc, and through the portico that ran along the front of both structures.

Significance Together with fragments 31u, 31cc, 31ii, and 31hh, this piece is key to identifying the Porticus Octaviae, the Porticus Philippi, the temples to Iuno Regina, to Iuppiter Stator, and to Hercules of the Muses. It also helps us understand how the ancients viewed the layout of their city, as some of these monuments were referred to as in circo or ad Circum Flaminium. In a series of articles in the 1960's, G. Gatti identified the correct location of the Circus Flaminius and demonstrated that these buildings all faced and were aligned with the N side of the Circus, hence the common use of the identifying in circo (Gatti 1961). For a more detailed explanation of the ancient locators in circo and in campo, see Rodríguez-Almeida 1991-92.

Text by Tina Najbjerg