Chapter IV: Part 4

The _Curia Hostilia_ was situated on the πρόπους of the Palatine, just opposite the narrow side of the rostra. Its name is no doubt derived from Tullus Hostilius, who is certainly an historical personage; but we ought not to assert that he reigned from A.U. 78 till 110, for no one can know when he lived. This Curia existed down to the time of Cicero, when the populace led on by Sext. Clodius, carried into it the body of P. Clodius, who had been killed by Milo, and, in burning the corpse, reduced the building to ashes. Even Sulla had made some alterations in the district around the rostra, but we do not know in what they consisted. The Curia was not restored on the ancient site, but farther to the right; Caesar commenced the new building, and Augustus completed it: this is the _Curia Julia_, near which the new rostra were constructed. The three splendid Corinthian columns which are still standing, belong to this Curia Julia; they stand parallel to the ridge of the Palatine and the line of the Capitoline, and are generally considered to have belonged to the temple of Jupiter Stator, while Fea believes them to be remnants of the temple of Castor. This latter hypothesis is impossible, for we read in Suetonius[22] that the arch of Caligula extended over the temple of Castor as far as the Capitol: but this is impossible, if the three columns belonged to the temple of Castor. They belong, I repeat it, to the Curia Julia; and this accounts for the fact that the rostra are found close by, and that the Capitoline Fasti, which formed one wall in that Curia, were found among its ruins. There can be no doubt that the very ancient plan of Rome,[23] which formed the floor of the church S. Cosma e Damiano, likewise belonged to it: there could not be a better place for it than one of the walls in the Curia Julia. The idea of Pirro Ligorio, that the Fasti were set up in an arch, is as improbable as many others of his views; attempts have been made to justify him, but he has evidently been guilty of many falsehoods. Notwithstanding this, however, his papers ought not to be neglected; they are preserved partly in the Vatican and partly among the manuscripts at Turin.[24] Rome, accordingly, had two Curiae, the Hostilia and Julia, which, however, did not exist at any time simultaneously; but the two rostra, the _vetera_ and the _nova_ or _Julia_, both existed at the same time. The _nova rostra_ were built on the site of the ancient Curia.

The whole of the Forum was surrounded by a portico, which had been built either in the time of the kings or at the commencement of the republic; the columns were undoubtedly Etruscan, that is, old Doric, and the whole was made of peperino, covered with stucco, and not high. The booths (_tabernae_ or _mensae argentariorum_), the stalls of money-changers or bankers, were set up in this portico to be protected against the weather. The armour taken from an enemy after a glorious victory was hung upon the pillars, whence the expression _postes ornare tropaeis_ in one of the fragments of Ennius. Whether these trophies were carefully preserved, is unknown; but the old ones probably made room for new ones, though many a splendid memorial may have been seen there for a long time. In the Forum, below the Capitol, but beyond the clivus, were the temples of Saturn and Concord; further, when you look southward, having the Capitoline on the right and the Palatine on the left, you have on your right-hand side the temple of Castor, which was dedicated by the dictator A. Postumius; near it was the well of Juturna, in which the Dioscuri, after the battle of lake Regillus, washed their horses; next to it was the temple of Vesta, of which remains would certainly be found, if excavations were made; distinct mention of it is made in books written as late as the fifteenth century. On the opposite side was situated the Regia and the Atrium Vestae, which ought not to be confounded with the temple of that goddess. Rome contained many Atria, that is, open square spaces surrounded by houses and a portico, under which people walked in rainy weather. Such was the Atrium Libertatis, a kind of _bourse_; the most correct Latin name for a _bourse_ or exchange accordingly would be _atrium negotiatorum_ or _mercatorum_. The Atrium Vestae must have been like the cloisters of a monastery, the cells of the Vestals being built around a square; the priestesses moreover were buried beside the Atrium, as they had the privilege of being buried within the city. This circumstance has caused great confusion in the antiquities of Rome, for when in the sixteenth century the church of S. Maria Liberatrice was erected on the left-hand side of the Atrium Vestae, and a number of tomb-stones of Vestal virgins were found there, it was inferred at once that this must be the site of the temple of Vesta. But this is opposed to all the statements of the ancients. I think it was one of my friends who had the happy idea that the temple ought not to be sought near the Atrium; I had previously said, that I could not believe the temple to have been there, and that, from all accounts, I must infer that it stood on the opposite side, not far from the lacus Curtius.

The Forum contained yet another class of buildings; it certainly was a market-place as well as a place for assembling; but in ancient times it was also the place for the administration of justice. In like manner, our own ancestors met under the open sky, and the estates of Lüneburg, as late as 1660, assembled in a forest, because decrees formed in a covered building were considered invalid. Such also was the case at Rome, all business was transacted in the open air. This is the native and natural custom of Italy: man there feels the necessity of living and doing his work under the free canopy of heaven; every artizan, if the weather permits it, works in front of his house where he has his shop. There still exist at Rome a great many houses built in exactly the same style as in the most ancient times. These shops have no windows, but are closed by means of a large door; and in bad weather the people take refuge within and work by candle-light; when the weather becomes fine again, they resume their seats in the door or in the street. Such also was the case with the ancients. Those who worked with their minds, had similar arrangements: during the night they remained in their rooms, but in the day-time they walked out into the open air, to some public place where they dictated or wrote. The air at Rome is very good, if we consider the dress of the ancients, which consisted of wool, over which they wore the toga; the climate is more healthy than ours, and old age there commences later than with us. Justice, as I said before, was administered in the Forum in the open air; but as this was not without its disadvantages, it became necessary to devise some protection against them. When the Romans had become acquainted with Greece, they were much pleased with the στοὰ βασίλειος at Athens, and the idea of building _basilicae_ suggested itself to them. The Stoa at Athens was probably a portico composed of several rows (we do not know how long these rows were), and afforded both sufficient light and protection in bad weather. When, therefore, an active intercourse between Rome and Greece had arisen, the Romans built such basilicae as courts of justice. They are by no means imitations of royal palaces of the East. Later Greeks, e.g., Agathias, always translate the word basilicae, whether at Rome or at Constantinople, by στοὰ βασίλειος. We must conceive that originally they were mere rows of columns supporting a roof, and without side-walls. They generally had six rows of columns in front, so that there were five entrances. Afterwards the two extreme rows, the first and sixth, were changed into walls; the back part also was walled up, and the tribunal for the presiding praetor was set up in a crescent formed in this back wall. This is the origin of the closed buildings called basilicae. As they were well adapted for public meetings, they became, ever since the time of Constantine, the regular types of Christian churches. What was the construction of churches before the time of Constantine, is a question which we cannot answer; we do not possess the slightest allusion to it. An immense number of fables are current respecting churches said to have been built by Constantine, but the only one which he really did build, is still known; it is the church of the Lateran, justly called _princeps ecclesiarum urbis et orbis_. The day on which that church was consecrated by Constantine, is quite certain, and is celebrated every year, I believe about the end of November. The import of this festival of the consecration of the Church has at Rome itself been completely forgotten, and there is not one canon of the Lateran who knows it. I have learned it from an old Flemish gentleman, who, among much that was strange, also possessed a good deal of interesting information. The form of the basilicae, as I have described it, is very ancient, and in the Christian churches it is quite simple: all have five gates, and in the interior, four rows of columns, the two inner ones high, and the outer ones lower. This change, however, was not a matter of necessity. From this form I recognised the _basilica C. et L. Caesarum_, _Julia_, or _Caesaris_ in what is commonly called the temple of Concord.

In the course of time the Forum became quite filled with basilicae, monuments, statues, and the like; it contained three or four basilicae, the Opimia, Porcia, Paulli, etc. Caesar set up a number of statues, so that during the latter period of the republic there was little space left for public assemblies, which, however, even without this, were rarely held; the idea of a free space must in the end have been entirely forgotten, and the comitium alone preserved this character. About sixty years ago, the pavement of the Comitium consisting of slabs of the most beautiful yellow Numidian marble, was discovered, but it was broken to pieces and sold in a disgraceful manner. In later times all the edifices were rebuilt, and the portico was restored with far more splendour (we know this from Orosius) and floored with magnificent stones, while the roof was of bronze and no doubt gilt.

This may suffice in regard to the Forum Romanum or Maximum. The word Forum originally, as is stated by the ancient lexicographers, signified “hollow ground;” but afterwards it assumed the same meaning as ἀγορά, and thus presupposes an open space. In later times the meaning underwent so strange a change, that the Fora, e.g., the Forum Ulpium or Trajani, were not open spaces at all, but places wholly covered with buildings. Of the same kind were the Fora of Nerva and Domitian. The same must be supposed to have been the case even with the Forum of Caesar; in regard to that of Augustus, it may appear doubtful, as to whether a portion of it was not an open space. This change arose from the fact, that the idea of a free space, in the case of the Forum Maximum, was entirely lost sight of, and a Forum was regarded as a place containing courts of justice.

As, therefore, the ancient Forum was already filled with basilicae, Caesar, wishing to build a handsome one, erected it in a separate locality, which he purchased by the side of the Forum. This is the _Forum Caesaris_, which was not an open space at all, but a basilica with the temple of Venus Genitrix. It was situated at the foot of the Palatine, by the side of the Forum Maximum, its southern part turning towards the Vicus Tuscus, opposite the temple of Castor, as I have ascertained beyond a doubt. I cannot give you the proofs, because I have neither maps nor plans at hand.

The next _Forum_ planned in the same manner is that of _Augustus_, except that a portion of it was probably an open space. It was situated at some distance from the Roman Forum, beyond the Via Sacra and, perhaps, a few more streets. Hirt, who is himself not rich in ideas, but in Roman topography has often successfully revived those of earlier writers (such as Palladio and Serlio), has demonstrated the site of this Forum. He is not a learned man, but has a well practised eye in observing antiquities; none of his own original views are good, but among the things he finds in earlier authors, he can well distinguish what is correct from what is not, a thing which learned men often cannot. The Forum of Augustus contained the temple of Mars Ultor, where the standards of Crassus, recovered from the Parthians, were set up, and also a magnificent basilica; there also stood—it was a noble conception—the statues of the most illustrious Romans, which had formerly stood in the market-place and in the orchestra of the theatre, with the _tituli gestorum_. A fragment of the latter is still extant fastened in a wall of the Vatican; but it is not even possible to see whose name is mentioned in it. The writing certainly belongs to the age of Augustus, as every one can see who has an eye for such things. I cannot be mistaken in such a matter, I can immediately see whether an inscription was cut before the time of Caesar or in the age of Augustus. Such things make a residence at Rome so pleasing, when on seeing monuments one can immediately determine to what period they belong. The inscriptions, however, are still extant in copies, as for instance, at Pesaro. About a Roman mile from Tivoli, I found an overturned pedestal of a statue of Plancus, with an inscription, which had been quite rudely cut by a common mason, probably an ignorant slave. I was not able to convince a native of Tivoli, who even wrote on the antiquities of his own town, that such inscriptions are genuine.

The Forum Augusti is now foolishly called Forum Nervae, probably because it is situated near the latter; while down to the seventeenth century its ruins were regarded as part of the Forum Trajani. The _Forum Nervae_ was very easy to be recognised by a temple built by Nerva and dedicated by Trajan, but the ruins of it were formerly believed to belong to the temple of Mars Ultor. Among these ruins there were six or eight columns, which unfortunately were lying on the ground, in consequence of which they were cut in pieces by Pope Paul V., who made use of the beautiful marble in building an aqueduct (_Acqua Paola_). This circumstance was so quickly forgotten that Nardini, who wrote only about forty or fifty years later, was perfectly ignorant of a temple having ever stood there, and that after him no modern ever even thought of it. All that was known of this temple of Nerva, was transferred to that of Mars Ultor. I discovered this fact from the work of Gamucci, an author of the sixteenth century, who gives a minute account of it, and representations of the ruins in woodcuts. I saw that three columns of exquisite beauty, which were generally referred to the temple of Mars Ultor, could be no other than those which he assigned to the Forum of Trajan. I also found copper-plate engravings of the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and made out quite clearly, that those columns were not what they were believed to be, and that the space of the Forum Nervae was covered with houses by Cardinal Alessandrini, under Paul V.

By the side of the Forum Augusti, another was built by Domitian, which was called _Forum Nervae_ or _Palladium_, because he erected a temple of Pallas in it; architraves and disfigured columns (_colonnacce_) of it still exist. The Palladium is also seen represented in reliefs. But Domitian’s name, as I have already observed, being detested by posterity, it afterwards obtained the name of Forum Nervae, for Nerva dedicated the temple of which the building had been commenced by Domitian.

The most magnificent of all the Fora was the _Forum Ulpium_, between the Capitoline and Quirinal, a whole complex of buildings, the splendour of which was unequalled by anything; as is seen even from the trifling remains which have escaped destruction during the middle ages. Its centre was adorned with the column of Trajan which made the destructiveness of the barbarians quail. By barbarians, I do not mean the Germans, for Goths and Vandals did not destroy buildings, but I allude to the feudalism of the middle ages, when all strong buildings were occupied as fortresses. Thus the senator Brancaleone knew no more expeditious way than to raze to the ground one hundred and forty ancient edifices, because they had been used as fortresses: such things happened at the time of the emperor Frederick II.[25], and if it were not for this barbarism the buildings might be still standing. The marble was used as lime, as was done even at the time when I lived in Rome, for an ancient street was then broken down for the convenience of a high road, and specimens of the most beautiful architecture were burnt down at Ostia into lime.

In regard to the name Forum Ulpium, you must remember that adjectives of gentile names were taken, without change, from the primary adjective form, provided they applied to architectural works, whence _Forum Ulpium_ and not _Ulpianum_, _Curia Julia_ and not _Juliana_; when applied to writings and other works, however, the adjectives take the ending _anus_, as _orationes Tullianae_. Near the gigantic column of Trajan there were two basilicae of immense magnitude, and also two other large buildings, one of which, at least, contained a library. Statues of the most illustrious men were then set up in these basilicae, as they had formerly been in the Forum Augusti; this was the greatest honour that could be shown to a man, and the custom was preserved down to the latest times of the empire; the statues of Merobaudes, Sidonius Apollinaris, Claudian, and others, were found among the ruins of those basilicae. I recommend you to read Sidonius Apollinaris; I will not set up my authority in this matter as of much value, but J. M. Gesner calls Sidonius Apollinaris a _vir magnus_, although he is an incorrect writer. But he is a man of such genius and talent, that his equal is not easily to be met with in the course of centuries. He has something that reminds one of modern French authors; but in regard to his mind, he is thoroughly an ancient of the time when the night of barbarism was threatening to sink down upon mankind.

These are the real Fora. There can be no doubt, that the basilica of Antoninus Pius stood in the Piazza Colonna, where the façade of the columns is still preserved. What a pity that everything is now so much destroyed! for as late as the sixteenth century, there still existed in that place the pedestals of a number of allegorical statues representing the Roman provinces; some of them have been recovered though not recognised, but most of them have disappeared. I have not seen one of them, and have read only the notice that some have been found. Provincial coins of Antoninus Pius also exist showing on the one side the emperor’s head, and on the other the name of a province, as Gallia, Bithynia, etc. That locality therefore seems to have been the _Forum Aurelium_, which, however, is not mentioned in the Regionaria, because it was outside the city.

Besides these, Rome had yet a different kind of Fora, which were real market-places, for those I have hitherto mentioned are only the splendid ones. Two of these market-places belong to the period of ancient Rome, viz., the _Forum Boarium_ towards the Circus, and the _Forum Olitorium_ between the Capitoline and the Tiber, in the neighbourhood of the theatre of Marcellus, where I lived for six years. The Forum Boarium was no doubt a cattle market, where live cattle were sold, although we have no distinct statement to prove this; the Forum Olitorium was of course a vegetable market. Meat, however, was not sold in the Forum Boarium, but in the _macellum_ which contained the butchers’ stalls. In Greece, butchers’ shops were unknown; people there ate so little meat, that it was never bought or sold in the market at Athens; for they ate meat only when they themselves killed an animal, that is, when they sacrificed. On such an occasion an entertainment was given on account of the meat, whence θύειν is synonymous with “to give an entertainment.” Otherwise both the rich and poor at Athens lived as frugally as the modern Greeks on anchovies, the tunny fish, salt fish, salad, fruit, and olives; many a man in easy circumstances ate nothing all day except some olives with bread and without sitting down to a regular meal. This is the λιτὴ τράπεζα Ἀττικὴ mentioned by Athenaeus as opposed to Macedonian luxury. The Roman mode of living, on the other hand, was very like our own; the Romans took a great deal of meat, especially ham, like the German peasantry, bacon and other salt meat; they did not require a sacrifice to feast their friends. One of their principal dishes was a kind of porridge made of spelt; it is a very excellent dish and affords most healthy nourishment. For children, I know nothing better than this porridge with milk, on which I have brought up my own. There can be no doubt that oxen were sold in the Forum Boarium, though there is a statement that it derived its name from a brazen bull which stood there.

There are a few other names in Roman topography which may be easily mistaken. One of them is _vicus_. Many years ago, before I had gone to Rome, a gentleman engaged in archaeological studies said to me, that it was utterly impossible to define what _vicus_ meant. If by this he meant to say, that a vast deal had been written about it without making the matter clearer, he was quite right. But the cause of this was the base of a statue belonging to the period of the first emperors.[26] Each region of Augustus was subdivided into _vici_, which means nothing else but a quarter or district under the superintendence of its own police officer. Even at a much earlier time the regions of Servius Tullius had been similarly subdivided, in the city into _vici_, and in the country into _pagi_, and each had its own _magister_. The word _vicus_ may be rendered by the German _Wik_, or _Wich_; in ancient times, many towns in lower Saxony were divided into _Wiks_. Now as it happened by accident that sometimes a single street constituted such a vicus, and as of course the houses on both sides of the street belonged to it, such a street was naturally called a vicus, as, for example, the _vicus Sceleratus_. The _vicus Patricius_ and the _vicus Cornelius_, on the other hand, are obviously larger districts in the regio Collina and Esquilina. I think (I may be mistaken, but I believe I am right) that in the Regionaria every region of Augustus was regularly divided into seven vici. Many a street at Rome is called _vico_ to this day, and a narrow lane is called _vicolo_, which, however, is only a secondary meaning.

The word _platea_ is likewise one of those which may mislead, and of which only vague notions are current. The general opinion, I believe, is, that platea signifies a broad street on account of its derivation from the Greek πλατεῖα; but it is something else; it is what we call _place_ or _piazza_. In the early times of Rome the name does not seem to have been used; it occurs only at a later period, when an intercourse was established with Greece. We have to understand by it a wide open space, such as we have in front of many large buildings; but not a market-place. The authority which has enabled me to establish this as the real meaning of the word, shows how necessary it is for an historical philologer not to limit his reading: for I know it from several passages of St. Augustin’s work, “De Civitate Dei.” St. Augustin, one of the greatest minds, ought to be recommended on account of his intellect, and independently of any historical information which his works may furnish; his genius is a mighty one, and was extremely developed in that agitated period, which forms the boundary line between the ancient and modern world. In his account of the conquest of Rome by the Goths, which he gives merely in passing, there are passages from which it is quite evident that _platea_ is a space such as I have described before. These are generally speaking, the only open spaces which Rome, after its rebuilding since the middle ages, now possesses, as, for example, the Piazza di Spagna below the Collis Hortulorum; a large place of the size of the market-place of Bonn is scarcely to be found at Rome.

The first _aqueduct_ was built by Appius Caecus during the second Samnite war; it was very low, and for the most part under ground. It led to the Aventine, and was intended to provide a supply of good water to the districts between that hill and the Tiber, which had scarcely any water but that of the river. Water is still derived in one place, and I believe even in two, from this aqueduct, without most people being aware of it. It was built under ground, because the enemies sometimes advanced to the very neighbourhood of Rome, and might, therefore, easily have cut off the supply of water. Afterwards the number of aqueducts at Rome rose to fourteen. Fresh water is a real blessing to the inhabitants of the south; one must have lived there in order to comprehend that these aqueducts were not a matter of luxury. The _Aqua Marcia_ led to the Capitol; of the _Aqua Virgo_ (now Acqua di Trevi) a large _specus_ is still visible. The greatest aqueduct was that of the emperor Claudius, which was preserved as late as the eighth century of the Christian era; it might easily have been restored; its arches were taken down gradually after the restoration of Rome in the sixteenth century, because people wanted the bricks to build their houses.

Rome had two great _Circuses_ which were destined for races, for these were the national games of the Romans from the earliest times. The most ancient, the _ludi magni Romani_, which were traced back to the time of Tarquinius Priscus, were established for the patrician burgesses; but besides these there existed, likewise, from very ancient times, _ludi plebeii_, a very remarkable instance of the manner in which in all Roman institutions the populus and the plebs stood by the side of each other. Down to the latest period, these two kinds of games were never held in the same place. In the early times the plebeians had no share whatever in the _ludi Romani_. In the Circus Maximus the places were assigned to the populus according to curiae, _ad spectacula facienda_,[27] as scaffoldings are still erected on both sides of the Corso at the time of the races. The _Circus Maximus_ may have had its present extent from the very first, for it could not be very small on account of the chariot races, but it was not as high as afterwards. A greater height became necessary when, instead of the small number of the populus and their clients, the whole Roman people took part in the spectacle; the plebeians may indeed not have been excluded in the early times, but they had no places assigned to them. This Circus between the Palatine and Aventine cannot have been laid out before the building of the Cloacae, and the carrying through of the Marrana, since previously the whole was a marsh. At present the sewers must be blocked up, for in digging to the depth of a few feet nothing but morass and marshy ground appears. The splendid obelisk which now stands before the church of the Lateran, was dug out there as late as the sixteenth century: and there can be no doubt that valuable treasures of art are still buried there. The Circus occupied the whole length of the valley, now la Via de’ Cerci. That form of it, of which we have a description, was planned and undertaken by Caesar, and probably completed by Augustus, for it is inconceivable that the short duration of Caesar’s dictatorship should have sufficed for it. It is said to have contained room for 300,000 men, the seats rising in terraces above one another as in the Colosseum. On the outside, it presented rows of porticoes one above the other, the lowest one being occupied by shops or stalls. In the middle ages, the Circus Maximus was used as a fortress.

The _Circus Flaminius_ must have been the place for the plebeian games: the plebs met for its deliberations and elections on the place of the _prata Flaminia_ even before the Circus was built, when after the abolition of the decemvirate the ancient order of things was restored; whence the locality appears to have been essentially plebeian. The traces of this Circus, which can still be recognised, are somewhat more numerous than those of the Circus Maximus, although here, too, every thing is built over; the ancient walls have been used as foundations only in cellars and a few houses, whence the houses there are built in a curve or crescent. In the middle ages, this Circus was used as a place for rope making, whence the church in that part is called _S. Catarina de’ funari_.

These two Circuses were destined for chariot races, as the _Circus Agonalis_ was for Greek games or contests. This latter Circus was situated on the place now called Piazza Navona. It was built by Alexander Severus, in the form of a Greek Stadium, which was in reality not very different from that of a Roman Circus. All the houses there have the strong ancient walls for their foundations, whence the form of the Circus is preserved, whereas in the case of the Circus Flaminius it is lost, buildings having been erected right across it.

_Theatres_, in the Greek sense of the term, were not numerous at Rome. In early times there even existed a censorial interdict forbidding the erection of a permanent theatre for plays; and when about the end of the sixth century an attempt was made to break through this regulation, the censors ordered a theatre, which had been built, to be pulled down. This was a terrible piece of pedantry, and a scrupulous adherence to ancient customs for which there was no good reason at all. Plays, therefore, were performed before the people in the Circus or in the Forum on temporary stages, which were erected with the greatest extravagance; the aediles were obliged to give spectacles in order to gain popularity, and the actors had to be paid. Subsequently the first and almost only theatre was built by Augustus, and called after young Marcellus, his sister’s son. Pompey had indeed erected a theatre a few years before, but it does not appear to have been kept for the purpose for which it was built. About one-third of the theatre of Marcellus became the property of the house of Savelli, who made it a fortress; it was then pulled down and rebuilt as a palace. When the family of the Savelli became impoverished, the palace passed into the hands of the Orsini. I have lived in it for six years, and know every corner of it well: the Doric story below and the Ionic above still exist, but upon them enormous blocks of stone and rubbish are accumulated; the cellars still exist with their vaults and are inhabited. By the side of it there is an immense mound of rubbish, and close by my residence seventy-two steps led up to a garden, which is at the top. The house contains rooms built in the ancient fashion of about the end of the sixteenth century.

The idea of _amphitheatres_ arose in Italy at an early period. Until then, all gymnastic games, and even the contests of gladiators and wild beasts (of which the humane Greeks knew nothing) were held in the same locality in which also the more national chariot-races and the Hellenic games took place, that is, in the Circus. But this was connected with great disadvantages and inconveniences: the form of the Circus was very well adapted to races, for in them it made no difference where a person sat, whether at the beginning or at the end of the course, for the starting as well as the arrival at the goal had its interest for the connoisseur. But when a contest took place on a definite spot, the immense length of the Circus rendered it a matter of importance as to where a person sat. The Circus can scarcely be said to have formed an ellipsis, it was in reality an irregular figure, which cannot be described with mathematical precision, the length being disproportionately great in comparison with the breadth. The idea then occurred to the Romans to supply in some measure the place of a Greek theatre by combining two theatres in the form of an ellipsis, so that persons could see round the whole building, a thing for which the Greeks had no occasion. This combination produced the amphitheatres, which were not built at Rome before the time of Caesar. That they are a late invention is clear from the fact, that, in all the provincial towns of Italy, they are, without exception, not within the walls, but outside of them. This observation has not yet been made by any one; and I believe I was led to it by Lami, the excellent dean of Florence, though I may have made it without any hint. At Rome, too, the amphitheatres were not within the ancient city; the _amphitheatrum Flavium_ alone (the Colosseum, now called Coliseum), which was built by Vespasian, was situated close to the Velia, and required the purchase of a whole district. The amphitheatre of Statilius Taurus was situated by the river-side, where enormous ruins still exist, and where the family of the Cenci has a palace.

The amphitheatres, moreover, do not belong to the ancient kind of architecture, but show their late origin also by a somewhat different style. Imagine the amphitheatre intersected and composed of a large number of segments, which are broad at the periphery but narrow towards the interior, running in the direction of an acute angle: the interior is on all sides surrounded by these segments. Between them are steps, by which, from the interior, persons reached their seats; the steps are high, though not too much so, and lead to the different terraces. At present a person may get down even without these steps, but it is necessary to leap from bench to bench. Great as is the perfection of ancient buildings, yet their stairs were essentially bad, the steps being too narrow and too high, which arose from a desire to save space. The segments separated by the steps were called _cunei_; the interior, or the real scene, bore the name of _arena_. In some amphitheatres, the arena consisted of a permanent and solid floor, whereas in others, as, for example, in the Colosseum, the floor was not fixed: several walls traversed it in different directions, so that boards covered with sand could be laid upon them, in order to absorb the blood of the gladiators: hence the name arena. After an exhibition the boards were taken away, and renewed at the next. Sometimes water was let in or trees were planted in the ground, so that the place of the arena presented the appearance of a forest: in short, a thousand artifices were contrived. It is a circumstance which must be borne in mind, that the arena, at least in the Colosseum and probably in all the larger amphitheatres of all great cities also, was moveable. Next to the arena was the first place for persons of rank, and in front of this first row of seats there was a canal full of water and steep embankments to prevent the animals rushing among the spectators. In addition to this, iron spikes were planted before the first seat, so that even if a wild beast had leapt across the canal, it would have run itself through with the pointed irons. This first row of seats, which went all round, was called _podium_, a word which, besides this technical application, occurs only in the middle ages and in the languages derived from the Latin, in the sense of “a hill” (Italian, _poggio_; Catalonian, _puig_; Provençal, _puy_, as also in _Puycerda_, hill of Cerda). This row contained the seats of the emperor and the imperial family, of the nobles and the senators, for it was spacious enough to afford room for the whole senate. We can still with tolerable certainty determine the place containing the imperial box.

These are the most essential points in the structure of an amphitheatre. Many things connected with the arrangements, however, still remain obscure, and the lower part of the Colosseum has not yet been sufficiently excavated. It is, for example, still uncertain in what manner it was contrived to introduce the wild beasts into the arena. All the explanations which have been proposed are unsatisfactory. Excavations have indeed been made, but have been discontinued partly from a fear of weakening the building, which point certainly is not to be overlooked, on account of the many earthquakes, and partly on account of erroneous suppositions, because people could not understand that the arena was moveable. Another reason why the excavations are not continued, is the belief that at one time there was an altar in the arena, and that accordingly the ground is sacred through the blood of the martyrs. Such perverse notions are obstacles to the discovery of truth.

Another amphitheatre, the _amphitheatrum castrense_, was close to the wall; Procopius calls it _Vivarium_.

I shall now proceed to speak of the _thermae_. Public baths existed at Rome from the earliest times. Southern countries really require them, and they were universally used until late in the middle ages. Under Gregory I., one of the greatest and most excellent men of his period, whose government was distinguished for its beneficial measures, though he did not reign as a sovereign, Rome was already quite deserted; still, from one of his letters, I have learned that the use of baths was then quite common. Pope Hadrian I.,[28] likewise a very great man, restored the Aqua Claudia, which had been neglected, for the purpose of supplying the baths with water. Gregory I. states, that in his time many people considered it sinful to bathe on a Sunday; but he himself, who was more clear-sighted than his flock, issued a proclamation[29] advising the people not to be so foolish as to allow themselves to be prevented by such a prejudice. This is a proof that baths were then still in general use. In Germany, too, they were more common in the middle ages than they are now. Such _balnea_ or _balneae_ were very popular in ancient Rome even before the manners of the Greeks had commenced exercising their influence. _Thermae_ (θερμαί) were first built under Augustus; but we must not infer from this, that previously people bathed in cold water in the city, for whenever they wished to do this, they plunged into the Tiber. I explain the name _thermae_ in the following manner:—It had become customary at Baiae and other watering places to combine warm baths with the use of the mineral waters and with sea-bathing: the life in those places was like that in our watering-places: people frequented them for the purpose of diverting their minds and taking care of their bodies. Greeks (commonly called _Graeculi_) were not wanting to provide amusements of every description with the same industry which Italians and Frenchmen display in German watering-places. People there threw off all cares and put aside every kind of work, whence the Roman nobles repaired to such places every spring. This, however, required a large fortune, for those who had to maintain themselves by their own industry could not afford to go to Baiae and stay there for a month. For this reason, Augustus and Agrippa, whose object was to keep the great body of the population in comfort and good humour, built artificial baths as a place in the capital itself, where the people, without travelling to Baiae, might have similar enjoyments; just as at present mineral waters may be enjoyed at a great distance from the springs. To these places, then, every one who wished it, could go and take a bath; they contained sulphureous baths, vapour-baths, etc., and people might lounge there without the fatigue of a journey. The most magnificent buildings, most luxuriously furnished, were erected for this purpose: besides the bath-rooms, there were others, in which all kinds of amusements were provided, such as places for the games of the time, for games at ball, drafts, and the like, nay, even a library existed there, as at present newspapers are kept in the Cafés. They were accordingly, in reality, institutions to while away leisure hours in ease and comfort, and were peculiarly fitted to extinguish the mutinous spirit of the people, and to tame them by the enjoyments of life. These thermae became extremely popular, whence one emperor after another contributed one to the number already existing to prevent people being obliged to go to a distant part of the city, and to provide each quarter with its own. The thermae of Agrippa were outside the city, near the Campus Martius and the Pantheon, for he would not disturb any part of the city with his new institution: he took care, by irrigation, that everything was green in the Campus Martius during the summer, and near to the Pantheon he ordered avenues of trees to be planted. The thermae of Titus bear this name unjustly; the earlier antiquarians, even as late as the fifteenth century, called them thermae of Trajan; they existed in the Carinae and were of quite a monstrous extent. In the middle ages the building was called Curia Vecchia. The thermae of Caius and Lucius Caesar in the eastern part of the city are now quite foolishly called _templum Minervae Medicae_. The building which now bears this name, was nothing else than a large portico belonging to the Thermae. There also existed thermae of Nero, Titus, Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Alexander Severus (near those of Agrippa), Decius, Diocletian, and Constantine, so that we can scarcely understand how all these colossal buildings had room within the circumference of Rome. In these thermae some of the choicest specimens of ancient art have been discovered; they contained excellent galleries of paintings, and the most beautiful statues were set up there in the most suitable places. If the group of the Laocoon were still standing in the thermae of Titus, where it originally stood, it would have a far more appropriate place than that which it occupies at present.

The _Palatine_ was originally nothing but an inhabited district like the other hills. Cicero’s house stood upon it, and coming from the Via Sacra, one may still approximately determine the spot where it stood. Augustus, too, lived on the Palatine, but only as a private person. Tiberius built another house for himself by the side of that of Augustus, and probably inhabited it before his accession. Caligula built a palace there in another part; but notwithstanding this, the whole of the Palatine was full of private dwelling-houses, and there was no other public building on it except temples. The conflagration under Nero destroyed all the buildings on this hill. Nero then erected a palace on the Palatine; but not satisfied with this, he continued it down to the Esquiliae and even up the Esquiliae. The so-called golden house was situated between the two hills, on a splendid spot, and extremely well chosen. But, at a later time, we see that the imperial palace occupied the whole of the Palatine. We must not imagine this to have been one homogeneous and regular building, constructed on one plan, with a large front, like our royal palaces. Nothing is more senseless than the restorations which the old Italian antiquarians, such as Bianchini and Panvini, have made of this golden house: the latter has drawn an outline of a building which never existed at all. It is only now that the eyes of antiquarians have been opened in regard to this subject. The whole of the Palatine hill is covered with ruins, which have raised its height. The lower part of the building is completely filled with earth; and if a person wishes to investigate it, he must break through the ground until he reaches these vaults. They are a real labyrinth; I have been successful in many points of the topography of Rome, but I have not been able to form an idea of the imperial palace. The excavations which were made in 1724 extended only over a small part, but the _aula Domitiani_ was then brought to light; the outlines of an enormous hall and splendid columns, partially preserved, belonged to this aula, and can easily be made out; but there is also a great number of I know not what kind of chambers: I can give you no information about them. It would be desirable to see systematic excavations made there. The whole district is the private property of the king of Naples, whence the pope cannot order excavations to be made; the ambassador of the king had permission to do so, but he was recalled from Rome. The palace must have existed as late as the middle ages, perhaps until the 11th or 12th century; it was then reduced to ashes, as is attested by the excavations, which have shown traces of a great conflagration. In a ritual of the coronation of the emperors belonging to the end of the 11th century, which has been printed from the original of Cencius Camerarius,[30] we read—“When the emperor is crowned in St. Peter, he and the empress proceed to the _palatium Romanum_, the emperor entering the apartment of Augustus, and the empress that of Livia.” These apartments are correct and have been found, and the statement shows that they were inhabited. Some fifty years ago a French dealer in works of art made excavations there, on which occasion many things are said to have been found, but the place was pillaged in a most disgraceful manner. Traces of a magnificence appeared which surpass all our conceptions: the walls of the rooms were covered with silver plate, and large pieces of silver texture served as tapestry; in other palaces the walls were covered with ordinary tapestry (_aulaea_), but here silver was employed instead. The treasures among the ruins were so numerous, that even after the pillage some things still remained.

There are, properly speaking, only two streets in ancient Rome, which are known as such, namely, the _Via Sacra_ and the _Subura_. The former began at the ridge, which extended from the Palatine to the Esquiliae, and was called _Velia_, known as the place where the house of P. Valerius Poplicola stood; from this Velia it ran across the Forum, and on the other side of the Palatine, the form of which is almost square, it turned towards the boundary line between the Roman and the Sabine town. We know from Varro, that in the language of ordinary life only the first part of the street, namely, that on the Velia, bore the name of Via Sacra. The buildings by which it was lined were by no means splendid; the houses which have been dug out are very small, and no person of rank lived there; but, at the same time, it was the street through which the processions passed, and there were a great many statues in it. The street, as I said before, began at the height; it passed between the temples of Venus and Peace, and had several triumphal arches. At the point where it touched the Forum there stood the _fornix Fabianus_. It is possible that it may have been the custom, even in early times, to make temporary arches of foliage on the occasion of a triumphal procession; but the first arch made of stone was that for the triumph of Q. Fabius Allobrogicus. The arches still existing are those of Titus, Septimius Severus, and that of Constantine, which is entirely composed of stolen basreliefs; but there were many more, as, for example, two of Trajan, one of Valentinian and another of Gratian. They stood in the street of the Ponte St. Angelo, and existed as late as the middle ages; their inscriptions are preserved in copies.

The _Subura_ is still called by the same name. Nardini is quite mistaken in his assertion, that the ancient Subura was situated in a different locality, near the Lateran; no man in his senses can admit this, for it is opposed to all our evidence. We even have the express testimony of Varro, that its site is identical with that of the present Subura, that is, in the plain north of the Esquiliae, whence it had the advantage of being completely built on both sides. In it stood the house of Caesar, and in the times of the republic the aristocracy generally lived there and in the Carinae on the Esquiline. Afterwards, in the time of emperors, a change took place in this respect, and every one removed to the new quarters, whence, in the days of Juvenal and Martial, the Subura was inhabited only by the lowest classes; at present, too, it is the abode of poverty. The _Carinae_ were a quarter rather than a single street, in the district of S. Pietro in Vincola. After the great fire, Nero built a palace (not the golden house) there; and not far from it was the palace of Titus and the thermae of Trajan.

The Quirinal had no remarkable buildings; at a later period Aurelian erected there the temple of the Sun, the most gigantic building in all Rome, of which vast ruins still exist in the garden of the Colonna family. At that time there was a taste for everything gigantic, because architects were no longer able to produce the beautiful. The _Viminal_, too, contained nothing worth noticing. The Carinae, as I have already remarked, were on the _Esquiline_. Within the walls of Servius Tullius, I know of no particularly remarkable edifice belonging to the early period, though it contained a large number of small temples. The same must be said of the _Caelius_ in its narrower sense; only one arch still exists there; in the middle ages it contained many buildings.

On the rugged side of the _Aventine_, towards the river, stood the temple of Diana, which, according to tradition, Servius Tullius had built as a point of union for the Romans and Latins, and in which the table containing the ancient treaty was preserved. On the same hill there existed the thermae of Decius and a number of other buildings. I have already observed, that the Porta Trigemina was on the Aventine towards the river. On the side of the Palatine towards the Aventine there was a flight of marble steps, called the _Scala Caci_; one tradition assigned it to the Palatine, and another to the Aventine, a discrepancy which probably arose from the opposition between the inhabitants of the two hills.

Having thus rapidly passed over the hills, I shall now proceed further. A _suburb_ was first formed between the Palatine, Aventine, and Esquiline on the one side, and the Tiber on the other. I have already mentioned as a part of it the _Forum olitorium_, which was at the same time a fish-market, and still exists unchanged. The suburb became a thickly inhabited district, and in it Augustus built the theatre of Marcellus and the great portico of his sister Octavia.