Notes on Roman Historical Sculptures

H. Stuart Jones

doi:10.1017/S0068246200005006

Notes on Roman Historical Sculptures

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 August 2013

H. Stuart Jones

Show author details

H. Stuart Jones: Affiliation:
British School at Rome Trinity College, Oxford German Imperial Archaeological Institute

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Extract

§ I.—That the three historical reliefs, of which two are immured in the north and south walls of the portico of the Villa Borghese, while the third rests on the ground to the left of the entrance, once belonged to a triumphal arch erected by Claudius in commemoration of his conquest of Britain, seems to be the accepted belief at the present time. The reliefs are published under this title in Brunn-Bruckmann's Denkmäler; their provenance from the Arch of Claudius is affirmed without question by Helbig in his guide to the Roman collections, and has been assumed in all recent discussions of the history of Roman art. Nevertheless it has no foundation, save in a conjecture of Nibby, contained in his Monumenti scelti della Villa Borghese, a work published in 1832. The Villa had been stripped of its principal treasures during the Napoleonic period—when some scores of statues and reliefs found their way to Paris, and now form no inconsiderable portion of the sculptures of the Louvre—and their places were partly filled by less important works gathered from the gardens of the Villa and from the other properties of the Borghese. It was thus that the reliefs in question came to be employed in the decoration of the portico; up till that time they had, as it would appear, lain neglected and scarcely noticed in the gardens of the Villa.

Type: Research Article
Information: Papers of the British School at Rome , Volume 3 , 1906 , pp. 213 - 271

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068246200005006 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © British School at Rome 1906

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 215 note 1} No. 403, from which Pl. XX. Fig. 1 is taken.

^{page 215 note 2} No. 939–941, p. 122 f. (Ed. 2).

^{page 215 note 3} E.g. by Wickhoff, Roman Art (Eng. trans.), p. 74 ff., and Courbaud, Le basrelief romain à représentations historiques, p. 117 f. (who notices the view of Winckelmann, to be referred to later, only to reject it).

^{page 215 note 4} Save by Winckelmann (v. infra).

^{page 215 note 5} Winckelmann speaks of them as works ‘die in der Villa Borghese liegen,’ and Nibby (in the passage quoted above) says, ‘ber lungo tembo rimasero negletti nel giardino vecchio.’ They do not seem to be mentioned in the descriptions of the Villa by Manilli ( Villa Borghese …descritta [1650]) and Montelatici (Villa Borghese [1700]). Visconti (1796) described only the monuments contained in the main building.

^{page 216 note 1} Urlichs, (Beschr. Roms iii. 3. p. 91)Google Scholar in treating of the Arch of Claudius merely says that the reliefs in Villa Borghese ‘sollen daher genommen worden sein’; but Platner (ibid. p. 231) explains clearly that the identification of the features of Claudius is the sole base of the conjecture.

^{page 216 note 2} ‘Ueber die römischen Triumphalreliefs’ (Abhandlungen der k. sächs. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, xvi. 247 ff.).

^{page 216 note 3} Pp. 42 ff.

^{page 217 note 1} Mem. 28 (v. infra).

^{page 217 note 2} See Lanciani, , Storia degli Scavi, i. 133 ff.Google Scholar; also Geffroy, in Mélanges de l'École francaise, x. 1651Google Scholar, and Adinolfi, , Roma nel medio evo, ii. 104 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 218 note 1} Aldrovandi (p. 221) briefly mentions some statues, etc., in the palace, not the gardens, of the Cesarini.

^{page 218 note 2} Archivio del Collegio dei Notari, No. 1573 (no longer 1562, as given by Schreiber,Die antiken Bildwerke der Villa Ludovisi, p. 6⁶).

^{page 218 note 3} I transcribe the passage from the copy referred to, giving it more fully than Ratti, , Storia della famiglia Sforza, ii. 291 fGoogle Scholar. Ratti says that the will is dated July 23, 1574, and is contained in the acts of the notary Paccichelli. I cannot find that any members of that family practised as early as the sixteenth century; the papers of the office, which afterwards passed through their hands, are now in the Archivio Distrettuale, and I have not been able to search them. The instrument of which a copy is preserved in the Archivio di Stato is dated Dec. 18, 1581 (with a codicil of Apr. 7, 1585), and was drawn up by the notary Curzio Saccocci. The passage in question runs as follows (f. 322 v.):—‘et perche nella eredità di mio padre ho ritrovato il Giardino di San Pietro in Vincola con il palazzo vecchio senza mobili utensili et baramenti et havendolo io aobbato et ornato di molti paramenti teste di marmo statue colonne tavoie commesse di varie sorte, diverse altre sorte di marmo bronzi antichi camei intaglii di goie pitture quadri et molte altre cose a ornamento del palazzo che tutto serranno inventariate in un libro, et havendo io similmente detto giardino ampliato di altri siti et nove fabriche et dessiderando io che detto luogo sia tenuto et conservato con quelle sopra dette delitie che io lo tengo, il che non si può fare che non con spese notabili et volendo provedere come miglio posso, che detto luogo con suoi edificii vechii et novi fatti et da farsi et tutte le altre cose sopradette restino sempre indivisi, et (fol. 323 r.) non si possano mai per alcun tempo sino a infinito ne in tutto ne in parte etiam minima alienare, et cognoscendo, che il primo genito per haver maggiore entrata serrà biù atto a conservarlo nel debito modo, ordino voglio comando et lasso che il detto primo genito solo et insolidum succeda in detto giardino edificii antichi et novi terreni et altre cose contigue che ho comprati sin qui et comprarò sino al tempo della morte mia, marmi statue diverse cose di marmo bronzi camei intaglii diversi pitture paramente et altre robbe che sono et serranno in detto luogo eṫ descritte in detto inventario quale finito che serrà spero dar sotto scritto di man mia al notaro che si rogarà del presente testamento o altri notari o persone a chi più mi piacerà, et quando detto libro o vero invenlario come di sopra non si trovasse da me consignato a detto notaro o altri voglio che Subiio di pot la morte mia se ne faccia inventario distintamente di cosa per cosa di tutte le sopradette robbe, et detto giardino palazzo et altre robbe di sopra narrati voglio che perpetuamente siano conservati indivisi et vadano da primogenito in brimogenito di tutti i detti miei descendenti, etc. (provisions against alienation follow).

^{page 218 note 4} This inventory, which would, if preserved, have been of the highest value for museographic research, was either never made or, if made, seems irretrievably lost, though it might possibly be discovered in the Archives of Casa Sforza-Cesarini. (The houses of Sforza and Cesarini became merged by the marriage of Donna Livia Cesarini (1646–1711), great-granddaughter of Giuliano 11 and heiress of the house, to Duca Federico Sforza.)

^{page 219 note 1} The inventory is printed by Schreiber, Die antiken Bildwerke der Villa Ludovisi, p. 25 f.

^{page 219 note 2} Mem. 104.

^{page 219 note 3} The find is mentioned by Ligorio, (Taur. xxiii. fol. 63)Google Scholar, who names thirteen of the busts. Three have with greater or less probability been identified with works now in Naples (Hülsen,Die Hermenbildnisse berühmter Griechen [Röm. Mitth. 1901, p. 123 ff.], Nos. 21 (Carneades), 24 (Lysias), 38 (Posidonius). I should be inclined to add No. 9 (Euripides), described by Gallaeus as belonging to the Farnese, and now at Naples.

^{page 219 note 4} (i) De Cavalleriis, , Antiquarum Statuarum Urbis Romae, i/ii. Pl. 93Google Scholar (Oceani effigies Romae in edibus nobilis Romani in regione platee de Sciarra) = Vaccaria, Antiquarum Statuarum Urbis Romae icones, Pl. 30 (in viridario Cesarinorum) = Reinach, i. 434, 5; (ii) Vaccaria, op. cit. Pl. 30 (Bacchi statua in viridario Cesarinorum) [the engraving and legend were appropriated by the De Rossi firm in the seventeenth century] = Reinach i. 397, 6.

^{page 220 note 1} Mem. 28.

^{page 220 note 2} Bull. Comm. 1878, p. 16 f.

^{page 220 note 3} Storia degli Scavi, ii. 83.

^{page 220 note 4} See Helbig, Führer², No. 562, p. 378.

^{page 220 note 5} Röm. Mitth. 1890, 75.

^{page 221 note 1} Lanciani is therefore wrong in saying (Bull. Comm. l.c.) that all the inscriptions are now in the Capitoline Museum; and he falls into a still graver error when he quotes Smetius and Manutius as stating that the relief purchased by the Conservatori was found in Sciarra, Piazza ( Storia degli Scavi, ii. 83)Google Scholar. They refer to the inscriptions only. He proceeds to quote Vacca's words ( v. supra), omitting the essential phrase ‘ in opera.’

^{page 221 note 2} See the statement of Fulvio, Andrea (Antiquitates Urbis Romae [1527], iv. p. 60Google Scholar) quoted in an additional note at the end of this paper.

^{page 221 note 3} Reinach, L'Album de Pierre Jacques, Pls. 29, 30, 63.

^{page 222 note 1} Roma ricercata nel suo sito [Ed. 1662], 108.

^{page 222 note 2} Nibby, Ap., Roma antica nel 1838, i. 441Google Scholar.

^{page 222 note 3} Ap. Lumbroso, Cassiano dal Pozzo, p. 52.

^{page 222 note 4} Fea, Ap., Miscellanea, ii. 252Google Scholar = Schreiber, Sächs. Berichte, 1885, 146. It is addressed to alexander VII. (1655–1667).

^{page 223 note 1} Hülsen suggested ( Röm. Mitth. 1891, 79) that some of the drawings of Panvinius in Coa. Vat. 3439 might reproduce the fragments discovered in 1562; but I have not found any indication of such provenance in the MS. and do not believe that any of the drawings can be traced with any degree of probability to this source.

^{page 223 note 2} Cohen, 49 = Pl. XXIX. 4. The legend TR·P·IMP· proves nothing as to date; unfortunately the faint indications of reliefs are lost in the reproduction.

^{page 223 note 3} Fol. 27.

^{page 223 note 4} Fol. O. iii. b.

^{page 223 note 5} Mem. 68.

^{page 223 note 6} In 1588, see Nibby, , Roma moderna nel 1838, i. 539Google Scholar. The church has since then borne the title S. Martina e S. Luca.

^{page 224 note 1} 1594.

^{page 224 note 2} Storia degli Scavi, ii. 92., quoting the minutes of the Consiglio pubblico held Sept. 22, 1592 : ‘ Exposito per primum Conservatorem (Andream Vellium)in ecclesia Sanctae Martinae in foro Boario adesse duas tabulas marmoreas sculptas et triumphum Marci Aurelii forsan concomitantes, quas expedit populo habere decretum est quod Conservatores curent illas habere cum populi maiori utititate.’

^{page 224 note 3} See Baglioni, Vite de'pittori, etc., pp. 74, 152 (1st ed.).

^{page 224 note 4} Röm. Mitth. 1893, p. 236 ft.

^{page 225 note 1} The height of fr. A is circ.2·10 m., of fr. B circ. 2·30 m.

^{page 225 note 2} Catalogue sommaire, No. 412: photogr. Giraudon, 1078 (whence Fig. 1).

^{page 226 note 1} Matz-Duhn, 3518.

^{page 227 note 1} We may add the fragments from Turin published in the Memorie dei Lincei, serie v. vol. VIII. p. 34 ff.

^{page 227 note 2} Die Marcussäule, p. 95 f.

^{page 228 note 1} There are several examples on the panels of the Arch of Beneventum.

^{page 228 note 2} Roman Art (Eng. trans.), p. 76 f.

^{page 228 note 3} See esp. Cichorius, Pl. XI. and LXXVII. It is to be noted that the Arch of Beneventum in this respect follows more closely the classical tradition, being in fact clearly inspired by the Arch of Titus, which it resembles in design. We see a trace of the Trajanic convention, however, in the relief of the passage-way, representing the foundation of the alimentary institutions.

^{page 228 note 4} Bird's-eye perspective may of course be freely illustrated from the reliefs of Trajan's Column, especially in the case of palisading.

^{page 228 note 5} Thus, the form of the helmet corresponds with that worn by the Romans on the Great Frieze. The ornamentation is variable, as in the case of the frieze, but the fulmen on the cheekpiece is characteristic. The crest is worn exactly as in the reliefs of the Archway (where in some cases the wheel and aigrettes take its place), and, as is to be noted, in some scenes of the Column, including those already quoted in illustration of the superposition of rows of heads ( supra, n. 3), where it has been supposed with some probability that praetorians rather than legionaries are represented. Again, the form of the cuirass with the narrow scarf forms a point of resemblance. So far as is at present known, the only first-century cuirass with the scarf is that worn by the Nero at Constantinople (Reinach, Répertoire, ii. 577, 9). It is true that Greek bronze statuettes, representing e.g. Alexander, sometimes show the scarf, and this may perhaps have been transferred to the Roman Imperial type in Asia Minor during the first century (the Nero was found at Thyatira): but we have a considerable series of statuae loricatae from Rome and Italy, and they seem to furnish no example earlier than Trajan (von Rohden in Bonner Studien, p. 5 f.).

^{page 229 note 1} Werke (Donaueschingen, edition), vi. 259 f.Google Scholar:= Geschichte der Kunst, xi. 3,§ 31.

^{page 229 note 2} Winckelmann strangely speaks of the two standards with medallion portraits as being on different fragments, whereas they are in reality on the same relief. He no doubt wrote from memory.

^{page 229 note 3} From the sixteenth century we have Giovanni Battista Mercati's engravings of four of the scenes—Nos. I.-IV.—which are of no archaeological value. The figures are freely restored, in several cases with beards.

^{page 229 note 4} Plates 35–42.

^{page 230 note 1} With the enterprising firm of de Rossi (the name often appears in the Latin form de Rubeis), who were for more than a century the chief art-publishers of Rome and appropriated the work o most of the well-known engravers of the later sixteenth century.

^{page 230 note 2} Plates 32–39.

^{page 230 note 3} E.g. the nimbus omitted by Perrier is correctly given in three out of the four instances in which it occurs (not, however, in No. IV.), and the attendant in the act of crowning the statue of Silvanus is rightly restored.

^{page 230 note 4} See below, p. 251, with note.

^{page 230 note 5} P. 314 ff.

^{page 231 note 1} I. Pl. 42 f.

^{page 231 note 2} Shewn in Röm. Mitth. 1889, Pls. vii, viii.

^{page 231 note 3} Nos. 555, 559, 560, 565.

^{page 231 note 4} This figure was in point of fact bearded.

^{page 233 note 1} On the portraits of Constantine see Petersen, , Atti dell' Accademia Pontificia, Serie II., vol. vii. pp. 159 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 235 note 1} Nos. 54, 124.

^{page 235 note 2} E.g. Braccio Nuovo, 63; Museo Capitolino, Salone, 38: two unpublished examples in the Magazzino Archeologico.

^{page 236 note 1} Loc. cit.

^{page 236 note 2} This is not consistent with his dating ( circ. 230 A.D.).

^{page 236 note 3} Whose significance has been explained by Riegl, Die spätrömische Kunstindustrie, pp. 109 ff. and Strena Heibigiana, pp. 250 ff.

^{page 236 note 4} See Dessau, in Hermes, xxiv. 341 f.Google Scholar; Klebs, in Historische Zeitschrift, xxv. 227Google Scholar; and Seeck in Neue Jahrbücher f. klass. Philologie, 1890, 623, and Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, I², 109 f., 487.

^{page 236 note 5} avita cognatio (§2).

^{page 237 note 1} Schanz, , Römische Litteraturgeschichte, iii. 130Google Scholar; Seeck, , Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, I ², 487Google Scholar.

^{page 237 note 2} Elag. 2. 4, 35. 2; Gall. 7. 1, 14. 3; XXX Tyr. 31. 6; Claud, passim; Aurel. 44, 4. Two facts are noteworthy in connection with these allusions :( a) in the only passage where the relationship of Claudius to the house of Constantine is definitely explained( Claud. 13. 2), Constantius is represented as the son of Claudia, niece of Claudius through his brother Crispus, and a certain Eutropius, i.e. as the great-nephew of Claudius. This circumstantial account is, however, in conflict with the primary version of the story, which is not only found in the Panegyric of Eumenius, but is implied in numerous inscriptions(C.I.L. xi. 9=Dessau 699; Bull. Comm. 1881, p. 197=Dessau 702; C.I.L. ii. 4742 and Suppl. 6029=Dessau 725; C.I.L. ii. 4844=Dessau 730; C.I.L. iii. 3705=Dessau 732 [from Sirmium; date 354–5 A.D.]), according to which Constantius was the son of Claudius. It must therefore be regarded as a modification of the official legend due to Christian influence. But( b)in several of these passages the so-called Trebellius Pollio speaks of Constantius as ‘ Caesar,’ from which fact Peter ( Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae, p. 36) and Mommsen, ( Hermes, xxv. 230)Google Scholar infer that Pollio wrote under Diocletian (Constantius became Augustus May 1, 305). In that case he could not allude to a story first put forward in 310, much less to a later modification of it; and there is no reason to suspect interpolation in Claud. 13. 2. Thus Mommsen's view is untenable.

^{page 237 note 3} Eusebius, probably on account of the objections entertained by the Christians to the story, alludes to it only distantly ( Vita Const, i. 50; Hist. Eccl. x. 8, 4) by the use of the phrase βασιλικοῦ ἀνέκαθєν αἴματος Julian( Orat. i. 6D, ii. 51 c; Caes. 313 D) gives no explicit account of the relationship.

^{page 237 note 4} 2, 4

^{page 237 note 5} 3, 4.

^{page 237 note 6} In the Epitome (34, 3) and Caesares (34, 3) of Aurelius Victor the honour is represented as a reward for the devotio of Claudius.

^{page 238 note 1} Bernoulli, , Römische Ikonographie, iii. 2Google Scholar, Münztafel VI, Nos. 4, 5; Imhoof-Blumer, Porträtköpfe auf römischen Münzen, Pl. IV. 96.

^{page 240 note 1} Pp. 10, 58 ff.

^{page 240 note 2} Röm. Mitth. 1899, 104.

^{page 240 note 3} Figs. 2, 3, from photographs kindly supplied to me by Prof. Petersen.

^{page 240 note 4} Ara Pacis Augustae, p. 73, note.

^{page 240 note 5} Veil. ii. 100.

^{page 240 note 6} Mon. Anc. iv. 8; Val. Max. i. 8, 11.

^{page 241 note 1} Fig. 4, Dütschke, iii. 29; Amelung, Florentiner Führer, 147. The relief came from Rome with the slabs from the Ara Pacis, etc. Mr. Wace suggests that it may possibly be identical with that described by Flaminio Vacca ( Mem. 37) as un sacrificio con il vitello et alcuni leviti which was discovered at or near the Quattro Fontane. In that case it might well have come from the Gens Flavia (v. infra, p. 243 ). Mr. Wace has examined the original, and believes it to belong to the Flavian period; he also states that the proportions admit of our assigning the relief to the same series as those which represent the temples of Magna Mater and Mars Ultor, since the height is now 1·23 m., and the relief is of course incomplete at the top. Petersen estimates the original height of the Villa Medici reliefs at 1·55, in accordance with that of the frieze of the Ara Pacis; it might, however, have been somewhat less. The height of the standing figures would seem to be about the same. Fig. 4 is from photo. Brogi 4085.

^{page 242 note 1} Aug. 92.

^{page 243 note 1} It was situated close to the Quattro Fontane, as has been convincingly demonstrated by Hiilsen, ( Rheinisches Museum, xlix. 399 ff.)Google Scholar.

^{page 243 note 2} In the same way the name Valerius (which was borrowed by Constantine from Diocletian) is assigned to Claudius in the acclamatio given by his biographer (c. 18, 3); see Klebs, in P.I.R. i., p. 199Google Scholar.

^{page 243 note 3} C.I.L. xi. 5625=Dessau, 705; a pontifex gentis Flaviae at Hispellum, C.I.L. x. 5283=Dessau, 6623. There were also pontifices Flaviales at Rome ( C.I.L. vi. 1690 f.).

^{page 243 note 4} Caes. 40, 28.

^{page 243 note 5} op. cit.., p. 230, n. 5.

^{page 244 note 1} It may be asked why the scene of the Imperial cortège (No. 1.) was removed from its fellow, and not selected to bear the portrait of Constantine. It is possible that Constantine thought it necessary that all the Flavian Emperors—even including Domitian, whose portrait would of course have survived in the private mausoleum of his family—should be represented on the southern front, and that no other medallion remained with Domitian's portrait, either Claudius or Constantine having replaced it by their own features.

^{page 244 note 2} The earliest allusions to the Gens Flavia are to be found in the Fourth Book of the Silvae of Statius and the Ninth of Martial, i.e. in 95 A.D. The temple of Minerva in the Forum Transitorium, unfinished at Domitian's death, was dedicated by Nerva after Sept. 18, 97( C.I.L. vi. 31213), and the Janus Quadrifrons, which it contained, by Trajan (Mart. x. 28; 51). The construction was in progress in 95 (Stat., Silv. iv. 3, 9 f.Google Scholar), but the use of the expression Palladium forum in Mart. i. 2 is no proof that it was begun much earlier; for i. 2 does not necessarily belong even to the time when a second edition of i.—vii. was issued (Schanz, , Römische Litteraturgeschichte, ii. p. 329Google Scholar), but may have been prefixed to the final edition of Martial's poems. The Forum is not otherwise mentioned in i.—ix. (up to 95 A.D.).

^{page 245 note 1} See the list, pp. 290, 291, Nos. 2, 6, 9, 10, 12, 16, 22. See also J.H.S. 1900, pp. 33 f.

^{page 245 note 2} Mr. Wace informs me that this treatment is found on the Uffizi relief (Fig. 4) in two cases.

^{page 245 note 3} No. 97 A; J.H.S. 1900, Pl. IV.

^{page 247 note 1} This however is not a central composition, but has two culminating points in the figures of the Emperor and his comes, so that the rise and fall of the interest may be represented by the line M.

^{page 247 note 2} Archi trionfali, p. II.

^{page 247 note 3} Cohen, 167; Pl. XXIX. No. 5.

^{page 248 note 1} Arndt calls attention to the fact that Hadrian hunted boars (Dio, lxix. 10), bears (Dio, , l.c. Vita Hadr. 20. 13Google Scholar, Kaibel, Epigr. Graeca, 811), and lions (Ath. xv. 677 E, Vita Hadr. 26. 3), and his passion for the chase is perpetuated by coin-types (Cohen, 502 f.). And it cannot be denied that, if the medallions are later than the Flavian period, they are far more in keeping with the spirit of Hadrian's time than with that of Trajan's rule.

^{page 248 note 2} The representation of Silvanus is perhaps not without significance. In 1887 a sanctuary of Silvanus was discovered at no great distance from the site of the Gens Flavia (Notizie degli Scavi, 1887, p. 109; Bull. Comm. 1887, p. 102; Rhein. Mus. 1894, p. 400), and one of the three dedications there found belongs to Flavius Sabinus, whose house, as is well known, adjoined the Gens Flavia ( Rhein. Mus. i.c.). Cp. C.I.L. vi. 644, Silvanus Flaviorum.

^{page 249 note 1} Petersen sees a resemblance between this figure and the bust in the Museo Capitolino, Galleria 32. This latter is, however, a modern work; it is intended as a portrait of Hadrian.

^{page 249 note 2} See below, p. 263 (and note).

^{page 249 note 3} From Vespasian's time they are separately mentioned in the Diplomata.

^{page 249 note 4} E.g. on the Arch of Titus. See Mr. Wace's remarks, infra, p. 278.

^{page 250 note 1} But not with the so-called ‘Domitius Ahenobarbus’ of the Museo Chiaramonti (No. 561; Bernoulli, , Römische Ikonographie, i. Pl. IX.Google Scholar), with which the head has been compared by Petersen.

^{page 251 note 1} Figs. 5 and 6 are from photographs taken by Mr. A. J. B. Wace.

^{page 251 note 2} The true dating first appears in Petersen's article on the tondi, Röm. Mitth. 1889, 317. His paper on the reliefs is published Röm. Mitth. 1890, 73 ff.

^{page 251 note 3} Perrier, Icones et segmenta, Pls. XXVII.–XXXIV.; Bellori, Veteres arcus Augustorum, Pls. XXIV.–XXXI.

^{page 251 note 4} Bartsch, , Le Peintre-graveur, xvi. 135, Nos. 48–53Google Scholar.

^{page 252 note 1} It is contained in vol. xi. fol. 24 of the Hamilton Laing drawings and is reproduced (Plate XX. Fig. 2) from a photograph by Mr. Inglis, taken by the kind permission of the President and Fellows of the Royal Scottish Academy.

^{page 252 note 2} See Rodocanachi, Le Capitole romain, 143⁵; Lanciani, , Storia degli Scavi, i. 221 fGoogle Scholar. Rodocanachi gives the date as 1524. I am unable to reconcile the discrepancy between these authors as to the document recording the transaction. R. gives Cred. i. 15, f. 139; L., Cred. i. 35, c. 177.

^{page 253 note 1} Von Rohden, (in Pauly-Wissowa, , Realencyclopädie, i. 2302Google Scholar) thinks that the triumph took place Nov. 27, on which date Commodus received the title of Imperator, and that Commodus triumphed alone on Dec. 23; but it is repeatedly stated (as he admits) that father and son triumphed jointly, and the fact that the inscription quoted above is dated in the 30th tribunicia potestas of Marcus furnishes no proof whatever of the fact that the actual triumph had taken place by Dec. 10.

^{page 253 note 2} Jordan, , Topographie der Stadt Rom, ii. 669 f.Google Scholar; Urlichs, Codex Topographicus Urbis Romae, pp. 199 f.

^{page 253 note 3} Amer. Journ. Arch. 1904, pp. 26 (No. 261), 34.

^{page 254 note 1} We have coins with the legend DE GERM. (Cohen, 154, 161) and DE SARM. (Cohen, 164 f.).

^{page 254 note 2} On the date see p. 253, note 1.

^{page 254 note 3} Scene xvi.

^{page 254 note 4} Imp. VII. is found on some coins of 174 (Cohen, 311 ff.), but not e.g. on the Adventus Augusti coins struck early in the year.

^{page 254 note 5} The title is not found e.g. on C.I.L. xi. 371 (Ariminum), but is e.g. on C.l.L. viii. 17869 (Lambaesis).

^{page 255 note 1} Coins of 169 have the legend profectio Augusti (Cohen, 500).

^{page 255 note 2} Eutrop. viii. 13, cum apud Carnuntum iugi triennio perseveraret, bellum Marcomannicum confecit.

^{page 255 note 3} The subscriptio of the first book of the Meditations of Marcus is τὰ ἐν Κουάδοις Γρανούạ, that of the second is τὰ ἐν καρνούντψ.

^{page 255 note 4} Cohen, 260, 267 ff., 276, 279.

^{page 255 note 5} Cohen, 214, 215 f., 217–226.

^{page 256 note 1} Commodus received the title Oct. 15, 172 ( Vita Comm. 11, 13), and it is found on C.I.L. iii. 1450 (tr. pot. xxvi., but Imp. v.), viii. 4209 (arch at Verecunda).

^{page 256 note 2} Philostr., Soph. ii. I, p. 67 KGoogle Scholar.

^{page 256 note 3} Dio, lxxi. 13.

^{page 256 note 4} Cohen, 353–355.

^{page 256 note 5} C.I.L. viii. 2276.

^{page 257 note 1} This is not the place to discuss the source and value of the apocryphal letter of Marcus relating the story of the miraculous thunderstorm (recently treated by Geffcken, Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Alterthum, 1899, 264 ff.); but it may be observed that it shews some signs of accurate knowledge, e.g. of the legions engaged ( not including xii. Fulminata), and also of the district in which the occurrence took place—ἐν κοτίνῳ MS., corrected to ἐν κοτίνοις—for the Κοτινοι who, as v. Domaszewski shews, are to be placed on the upper course of the Gran, were precisely (ἐν τῇ μεθορίᾳ κουάδων καὶ Σαρματῶν restored for the corrupt forms of the MS.) and came into contact with the Imperial troops (Dio, 71, 12).

^{page 257 note 2} Von Domaszewski, adds the testimony of inscriptions ( Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher, v. 119 f.Google Scholar; Marcussäule, 106⁶), but those which he quotes as mentioning bellum Gernianicium et Sarmaticum. all clearly refer to the wars after 176, in which Commodus was also engaged.

^{page 257 note 3} Die Marcussäule, 46 f.

^{page 258 note 1} As we have seen, at least four of the series (including three in the Palazzo dei Conservatori were not employed by Constantine in the decoration of his arch. Monaci ( Bull. Comm. 1900, 25 ff.) is not therefore justified in treating the series as complete and in arguing from the order of the arch as original.

^{page 259 note 1} A bronze medallion in the Cabinet des Médailles (Cohen, 3). The legend of the obverse is M. ANTONINVS AVG. TR. P. XXVIII, of the reverse ADVEXTVS AVG. IMP. VI. COS. III.

^{page 259 note 2} We may add that the dedication of a temple to Fortuna Redux at Ascoli in 172 ( C.I.L. ix. 5177) is likewise the embodiment of a hope not destined to immediate fulfilment.

^{page 259 note 3} Parallel cases are those of Hadrian (Cohen, 91 f. [118 A.D.]) and Commodus (Cohen, I, 2 [ Adventus Caesaris, 176 A.D.—not 175, as Cohen states], and 3 [180 A.D.]).

^{page 260 note 1} Vita Marci, 27, 3.

^{page 261 note 1} See note at end of this paper.

^{page 261 note 2} Mabillon, , Mus. ltal. ii. 143Google Scholar; Jordan, , Topographic, ii. 664 ff.Google Scholar; Lanciani, , Mon. Linc. i. 549 ffGoogle Scholar. Mgr. Duchesne has recently conjectured ( Mélanges de l'École française, xxiv. 485) that Benedict, Canon of St. Peter's, author of the Ordo Romanus, was also the compiler of the Mirabilia and wrote under Innocent II. It is therefore not surprising to find the arch mentioned under the same name in both documents.

^{page 261 note 3} Lanciani, F.U.R. 21.

^{page 261 note 4} Cohen, 530 (cos xi. = 85 A.D.), 531 (cos xvii. = 95 A.D.), 672 (cos xv = 90–91 A.D.). All are large bronzes. Pl. XXIX. Figs. 1–3. The specimen given of the last (Pl. XXIX. Fig. 3) has the reverse type incuse, in place of the usual obverse.

^{page 261 note 5} It is noteworthy that Suetonius, in recalling the number of arches erected by Domitian, speaks of ‘ianos arcusque’ (Dom. 13).

^{page 261 note 6} That two sides of the same arch are represented on the successive panels is clear from the position of the wreath. In accordance with the abbreviation practised by the artist, only one of the quadrigae of elephants is shewn.

^{page 262 note 1} It is found on coins of Trebonianus Gallus (Cohen, 78), Trebonianus Gallus and Volusianus (Cohen, 3 [ = Gruber, Roman Medallions, Pl. 46, 3], 78), and Volusianus (Cohen, 83).

^{page 262 note 2} Lib. Pont. ed. Duchesne, , ii. 145Google Scholar.

^{page 262 note 3} Röm. Mitth. 1903, 17 ff..

^{page 262 note 4} Religion des römischen Heeres, 6 f.

^{page 263 note 1} The trecenarius is thus represented on several coins of Hadrian: Cohen, 236 ff. (COH. PRAETOR.), 554, 560, 563, 565, 588 ( allocutiones addressed to the armies of Moesia, Dacia, Spain, Noricum, and Syria respectively), and Caracalla: Cohen, I (ADLOCUTIO). Most instructive of all is a coin of Trajan (Cohen, 329) representing the submission of Parthamosiris, who faces the Emperor, while the trecenarius stands between them.

^{page 263 note 2} Scene lxii. Pl. 70 f. The lance was the special weapon of the speculatores: cf. Suet. Galb. 18, descendentem speculator impulsu turbae lancea prope vulneravit; Claud. 35, neque convivia inire ausus est nisi ut speculatores cum lanceis circumstarent.

^{page 263 note 3} Lanciani, K.U.R. 11.

^{page 263 note 4} ‘Quo die imp. Augustus primum imperium orbis terrarum auspicatus est,’ C.I.L. xii. 4333 (Ara Narbonensis), cp. C.I.L. p. 383. See Eph. Epigr. iv. 317 ff. (Bormann). The allocutio was not necessarily delivered on this day, e.g. in C.I.L. ix. 2995 = Dipl. xlvii. we have a case dated May 6 in some year previous to the death of Verus.

^{page 264 note 1} A fragment of the oratio divi Marci is preserved in the Fragmenta Vaticana (ed. Bethmann-Hollweg), § 195.

^{page 264 note 2} Pauly-Wissowa, iv. 879.

^{page 264 note 3} Garrucci, , Piombi Altieri, iii. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 264 note 4} Commodus left Rome on May 19 for Germany, and assumed the toga virilis on July 7. The congiarium is doubtless that commemorated by coins of 175 with Lib(eralitas) I. (Cohen, 291–294).

^{page 265 note 1} C.I.L. iii. Dipl. xlvi.

^{page 265 note 2} Dio, lxxi. 3, who is surely anticipating events in coupling the name of Pertinax with that Pompeianus.

^{page 265 note 3} Vita Pert. 2, 4.

^{page 265 note 4} Vita Pert. l.c.

^{page 265 note 5} Herodian. i. 6, 4.

^{page 266 note 1} lxxi. 5 (iii. p. 256, Boissevain).

^{page 266 note 2} C.I.L. vi. 1599.

^{page 266 note 3} B.G.U. 902 f. See Festschrift für Otto Hirschfeld, pp. 123 ft.

^{page 266 note 4} The number of statues exceeds that of those granted to Vitrasius Pollio, a connexion by marriage of the Emperor, who was also highly distinguished in these campaigns ( C.I.L. vi. 1540).

^{page 266 note 5} Vit. Soph. ii. 11, p. 68 K.

^{page 266 note 6} A few examples from Cohen will suffice: Galba, I ff.; Trajan, 324–329; Hadrian, 236 ff., 565, 910, 930; Antoninus Pius, 149, 489 f., 501, 531; Marcus, 1 f., 75, 409, 427; Veins, 1 f.; Commodus, 293 ff.; Caracalla, I, 127; Septimius Severus, 300.

^{page 267 note 1} grandaevus, Vita Marci, 20, 6.

^{page 267 note 2} genere Antiochensi, Vita Marci, l.c.

^{page 267 note 3} The reference is of course to Tarrutenius Paternus.

^{page 267 note 4} Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher, v. (1895), p. 121Google Scholar; cf. Die Marcussäule, p. 107.

^{page 268 note 1} Die Maracussäule, Pl. 16A [praetorians to the Emperor's r., legionaries to his 1.].

^{page 268 note 2} Plates XXIII.–XXVIII. are from photographs by Anderson. Fig. 4 is from a negative by Brogi. Casts of the coins reproduced in Pl. XXIX. 1–4, 6 were kindly furnished by M. de Foville of the Bibliothèque Xationale.

^{page 271 note 1} E.g. Cod. Oltob. 2553, ff. 311–313, which the Rev. H. M. Bannister kindly consulted on my behalf. S. Maria in Via Lata is not in the regione of Colonna.

^{page 271 note 2} Michaelis' proposal to identify it with a relief in the Louvre (Clarac-Reinach, 90, 1) has nothing to recommend it.

Article contents

Notes on Roman Historical Sculptures

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests