Identification: Templum divi Claudi The inscription identifies this fragment as a section of the Temple to the Deified Claudius; the other surviving fragments of the monument are 4b, 5a, 5b, 5dg, 5e, 5h. Fr. 5c is missing but is reproduced in a Renaissance drawing. This temple was vowed shortly after Claudius' death in 54 CE but remained unfinished during the reign of Nero, who preferred to use the E side of the massive platform built for this purpose on the Caelian Hill as a monumental nymphaeum, part of his sprawling Domus Aurea. Sections of this platform are visible today along the Via Claudia. Nothing remains of the temple, which was not finished until the reign of Vespasian (Suet., Vespasian 9), and the missing FUR fr. 5c, reproduced in Cod. Vat. Lat. 3439, is our only evidence for its design. The drawing shows the temple as prostyle and pentastyle (although it surely had six columns in front, suggests C. Buzzetti in LTUR I, p. 277), oriented to the west, and with four steps in front providing access to its podium. The recessed double line in this fragment is one of many long, narrow strips that formed clamp-shaped frames around the temple in center (see reconstruction in PM 1960, pl. 16). These have been interpreted as hedges consisting of low bushes and flowering shrubs, similar to those excavated in the extensive gardens of the villa at Fishbourne in England (Lloyd 1982, pp. 94-95). Spaces in front of and behind the temple were left clear, and paths along the central N-S axis provided direct access through the hedges from the edges of the platform to the temple. Porticoes have been excavated around the outer wall, and Martial calls the building a porticus (Epig. 2.9-10), yet there is no trace of covered colonnades on the Marble Plan (LTUR I, p. 277).

Significance The inscription in this and in the missing fragment 5c identified the building as the Temple of the Divine Claudius. The depiction of the Temple in this and other FUR fragments is crucial for our knowledge of the architecture and layout of the structure of which little remains. The depiction of the hedges constitutes a break from the general rule that only architectural features are included on the FUR. This might indicate that the hedges were framed by built edges. Enough of the platform remains today to bear witness to the fact that the orientation of the temple complex on the FUR in relation to the Flavian amphitheater is shifted ca. 21% from its real position (AG 1980, p. 44). This was probably caused by the difficulty of mosaicking together the individual surveys of different sections of the city.

Text by Tina Najbjerg and Jennifer Trimble.