8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/favro-johansondeath-in-motion-funeral-processions-in-the-roman-forum 1/27 Death in Motion: Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum Author(s): Diane Favro and Christopher Johanson Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 69, No. 1 (March 2010), pp. 12-37 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural Historians Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jsah.2010.69.1.12 . Accessed: 06/08/2012 03:40 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. . University of California Press and Society of Architectural Historians are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians.
Transcript
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
Death in Motion: Funeral Processions in the Roman ForumAuthor(s): Diane Favro and Christopher JohansonReviewed work(s):Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 69, No. 1 (March 2010), pp.12-37
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural HistoriansStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jsah.2010.69.1.12 .Accessed: 06/08/2012 03:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
University of California Press and Society of Architectural Historians are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians.
d i a n e f a v r oUniversity of California, Los Angeles
c h r i s t o p h e r j o h a n s o nUniversity of California, Los Angeles
Death in Motion Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
T he calendars of republican and imperial Rome wereoverowing with a plethora of religious and stateevents, many of which were marked by animated
parades that wound through the city. Interspersed amongthese were melancholy processions that carried the deceasedfrom home to a nal resting place outside the walls of thecapital. For members of the elite, the route and activities ofthe Roman funeral offered a valuable opportunity to displayand increase their symbolic importance. 1 Previous studieshave considered the long history of funerals in antiquity,commemorative activities such as the burning of the pyreoutside the city limits, or specic features such as the carry-ing of death masks.2 Few have contextualized the funeraryprocession ( pompa funebris ) with specic spaces or in relationto the intricately constructed Roman experience of a funeral. 3 Rome’s most illustrious and ambitious citizens choreo-graphed their funerals with memorable activities in theForum Romanum, yet the effect of this symbol-laden public venue on the honoric imperial funeral parades and activitieshas not been critically evaluated. 4
Three funeral parades will be analyzed and illustratedcontextually using interactive, immersive digital models ofthe Forum Romanum that have been specically designed to
represent spatial and urban relationships. 5 The examples,one from the mid-Republic and two from the imperial pe-riod, demonstrate changes in the interplay between Romanfunerary practices and a specic urban space and provide aplatform for the use of phenomenological analysis. This re-search lays the groundwork for a comparison of the use andmanipulation of architecture and imagery in the Republicand Empire.
The experiential aspects of any event in the forum re-quire an understanding of that entire space as well as of thoseparts of the surrounding cityscape that are connected visuallyand aurally to the forum. With only fragmentary physicalremains, the forum has rarely been reconstructed in toto asit existed in any specic period, although there are general-ized reconstructions representing entire eras (e.g., the repub-lican forum) and simplied representations devoid of texture,color, artwork, people, and other rich sensory-stimulatingfeatures.6 The late imperial forum has most frequently beenreconstructed because the archaeological remains from thisera are the best preserved.
In general, scholars have avoided making either pictorialor three-dimensional physical reconstructions of the forumas an urban space, for obvious reasons. The scientic recre-ation of larger scale environments is extremely time consum-ing, requiring extensive research, which detracts from ascholar’s focus on particular issues.7 In addition, there are dis-ciplinary deterrents. The fashioning of an entire urban spacerequires hypotheses and assumptions about many unknown
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 13
aspects, including the upper oors of buildings, the place-ment and scale of art, colors, textures, and ephemera (such asplantings, scaffolding, and banners). Too often reconstructionimages or models do not make variations in level of accuracy visible. Such indeterminacy, no matter how well reasoned, isunpalatable to many scholars, but especially to archaeologists, who are trained to appreciate accuracy, not speculation. 8
The close experiential reading of historic processionssuch as the Roman funeral has also been hampered by thescarcity of specic details of these events. Only a few impe-rial funerals are described at length by ancient authors; evenfewer by contemporary eyewitnesses. Furthermore, theseaccounts by male elite voices generally serve specic agen-das and often use the description of a funeral for calculatedeffect.9 Few detail the setting of the funeral or mention thesensorial impact of the sights, sounds, and smells of theemotionally and politically charged event, perhaps becausethey considered such perceptual information too obvious tomerit comment. The same familiarity may explain the rela-tive silence about funeral activities. 10 Depictions of ancientprocessions in art tend to focus on the participants and offeronly limited representation of the physical context, which would inform an assessment of the experiential impact. Gra-ham Zanker has perceptively noted that the omission ofarchitectural environments in ancient art provoked viewersto complete the picture in their minds, an act of supplemen-tation that engaged ancient observers, but frustrates modernhistorians (Figure 1). 11
The situation is exacerbated for the Forum Romanum. The geographical touchstone of the Roman world, thisurban space was well known; throughout the vast empire,
Romans constructed complex mental pictures of this site, which were informed by references in texts, depictions ofindividual buildings, word of mouth, and actual visits. 12 Given this collective familiarity, it is not surprising that theforum was rarely represented holistically in Roman art.
Two notable exceptions are the marble imperial reliefsknown as the Anaglypha or Plutei Traiani/Hadriani, which were found in the forum in 1872. 13 Although their exactplacement and date are disputed, scholars agree that thescenes represent events occurring in the forum. On one anemperor (either Trajan or Hadrian) stands on the Rostra Au-gusti (speaker’s platform) while giving a public address oradlocutio backed by six lictors (Figure 2); on the other an em-peror seated on the opposing rostra oversees the burning ofdebt books (Anaglypha) (Figure 3).14 Behind the gures risethe Basilica Iulia and other buildings on the southwest sideof the forum. Although the reliefs may not have been seentogether in their original disposition, they show a continuousarchitectural setting. The myth-laden g tree (Ficus Rumi-nalis) and the statue of Marsyas appear in both reliefs, afrm-ing the coincidence of the setting; one depicts the area eastof the statue and the other, the west.
The overall representation is quite revealing about theRomans’ experience of public events in the forum. The carv-ings selectively mix accurately represented features (such asthe blank segments that correspond to the streets that enteredthe forum) with inaccurate building orientations. 15 All of thestructures are seen frontally, regardless of their actual posi-tioning. For example, in the Debt Burning relief, the Templesof Saturn, and of Divine Vespasian are shown side by side,though they actually stood at right angles (see Figure 3). Such
Figure 1 Late republican or early imperial relief depicting a funerary procession from Amiternum, Italy. Museo Nazionale d’Abruzzo, L’Aquila (photo
an unrealistic arrangement was not solely a result of thepragmatic restrictions of the relief format, but owed alsoto Roman experiential interpretations that were lteredthrough cultural ideas of viewing and processing. 16
Ancient texts and pictorial representations afrm that theRomans believed buildings of importance should be viewedfrontally, ideally from an inferior position. 17 Vitruvius spe-cically recommended that temples along “the sides of publicroads should be arranged so that the passers-by can have a view of them and make their reverence in full view.” 18 Suchhierarchical positioning was regularly employed to indicatethe status of depicted individuals. In the Adlocutio relief, theemperor is elevated atop a speaker’s platform; all gures look
up to him both literally and metaphorically (see Figure 2). Action occurs below and leads the eye toward the emperoreither by the directional movement of the gures or the turnof their heads. In the Debt Burning relief, soldiers carry theheavy account books toward the seated emperor atop theRostra Augusti. The re consuming the records is appropri-ately set before the Temple of Saturn, site of the state treasury,and at the feet of the seated emperor on the rostra. In reality,Saturn’s temple stood farther west, at a higher elevation andbehind the speaker’s platform. In the Adlocutiorelief the menforming the crowd lean slightly forward toward the emperor,their garments clearly identifying status: the toga for senatorstoward the front of the crowd, the paenula for poor citizens
Figure 2 Adlocutio relief of the Anaglypha (Plutei Traiani), showing events in the imperial Forum Romanum with the buildings on the southwest side as
backdrop; late 2nd century. Currently located in the Curia of the Forum Romanum, Rome (photo by Diane Favro). See JSAH online for high-resolution,
zoomable image with buildings of the Forum identied
Figure 3 Debt Burning relief, from the same monument as the Adlocutio relief, showing action in front of the opposing Rostra just visible in the
lower right corner. Currently located in the Curia building of the Forum Romanum, Rome (photo by Diane Favro). See JSAH online for high resolution,
zoomable image with buildings of the Forum identied
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 15
pushed to the rear (see Figure 2). Gestures clarify the action, with the standing emperor raising his arm in a familiar signalof address. Overall, the emphasized body language under-scores the importance of visual cues in an open space where aspeaker’s words quickly wafted away.19
The reliefs also demonstrate the active role of statues whose location in the visual hierarchy is equal (or superior)to that of the human participants in forum events. 20 In thiscase the artist selected, from among all the statues in theforum, a depiction of Marsyas, which was associated withlibertas,and a group with Italia, her children, and the seated Trajan, which celebrated the alimentary program. The reliefsreinforce the closed topographical experience of the imperialForum Romanum, which afforded limited views of the sur-rounding city, focusing inward on the two opposing rostrathat dened the space and action.
Despite their usefulness in explicating the interactionbetween public events and the forum, the Plutei Traiani leavemany questions about the experience of the events unan-swered. How did accompanying sounds reinforce the activi-ties? Did lighting and temperature affect the participants’comfort? Was color used to attract the eye? Did the smell ofthe burning books drive the audience away? Where did spec-tators stand? Were women and slaves allowed to watch? What route to the forum was taken by participants?
Unfortunately, the established methodological appara-tus for analyzing the symbiotic exchange between kineticceremonies and urban form is not especially useful for an-
cient specialists. Modern anthropological and urban analysesare usually based on rst-person documentation, interviews,and cognitive mapping; such approaches are not applicableto periods when voices are few and primarily of the elite. Techniques developed to convey kinetic progression, such asthe serial views and cognitive maps popular with urban plan-ners in the 1960s, have rarely been included in the architec-tural historian’s toolbox. 21
During subsequent decades, the popularity of receptiontheory led to increased interest in the “gaze.” In Roman stud-ies, a number of publications dealt with viewing in situ. Mostconsidered intervisuality in elite artworks and environments,usually the Roman house. 22 A few employed semiotic ideasto consider the experiences of urban buildings as linked to-gether to form narratives. 23 While some authors exploredkinetic viewing, the majority emphasized what could be seenfrom xed positions, a preference that minimized the impactof peripheral viewing and the full-bodied, synergistic inter-play of all the senses.24 Beyond sight, sensorial analyses ofRoman environments have been few. 25
In part, the available representational tools have beendeterministic. Sketches, measured drawings, and physical
models have for decades been the primary instruments formaking reconstructions of historic environments, yet thesecan be costly and require skills not developed by scholars.Furthermore, the necessity to present scholarship in text-based publications has favored simplied, static visual repre-
sentations, which are in many ways antithetical to theexperience of events such as ritual processions. In the formu-lation of research, as well as its publication, lively parades withuttering banners, cacophonous sounds, and animated danc-ers are distilled into static lines on two-dimensional plans(Figure 4).26 Such depictions disguise the realities of topogra-phy, three-dimensional sequencing, temporal changes, andthe ease (or difculty) of movement, among other factors, while emphasizing particular aspects (sequencing), experi-ences (static viewing), and approaches (semiotics). Verbal orcinematic attempts to recreate the experience of movingthrough a historic city can be evocative, but are often devaluedby the scholarly community as too fanciful or entertaining.
Today researchers interested in the experiential aspectsof the ancient funeral—its sights, movement, sounds, andsmells—have more data, improved tools, and advancedmethods with which to work. New technologies and ap-proaches to “knowledge representation,” a term borrowedfrom the sciences, facilitate the reconsideration of historicevents that were situated within sensorially rich, kineticallyexperienced environments. Digital recreations visually andexperientially aggregate current knowledge about the
Figure 4 Diagram of triumphal route from Campus Martius, moving
counterclockwise around the Palatine, through the forum, and up to
environment. Digital technologies have made possible thefashioning of more dynamic and exible depictions of ancient
spaces for use in research, teaching, and presentation, allreadily linked to metadata that documents the level of accu-racy of restored components. 27 Scholars can now reconstructhistoric environments that allow observers to move in realtime through carefully constructed topographic contexts. Arich range of sensorial stimuli can be added to kinetic viewingto shape more robust recreations of the original environmen-tal experience. Depictions of actual times of day, year, andcentury reafrm the essential temporal aspects—the fourthdimension. Various experimental scenarios can be presentedto ascertain the impact of alternative reconstructions, climaticconditions, and hypothetically distributed ephemera. 28
Every sensorial layer requires a method of citation andanalysis, and a large measure of scholarly caution. How canit be proved that ancients experienced light in the same wayas moderns? How does one add scholarly rigor to the simula-tion of smell or sound? Various sensorial additions to a sim-ulation can detract if they are included as an afterthought,even if an illustrative one.
Roman environments have been among the rst to beextensively recreated digitally. The attraction reects aware-ness of the experiential richness of Roman design. Not sur-prisingly extensively designed rooms, such as those preservedat Pompeii, are cited as early immersive “simulations.” 29
Given the ancient evidence and the current technologicaltoolset, Roman spatiality offers the greatest opportunity forserious scholarly investigation.
The Mid-Republican Funeral Procession(183 BCE–145 BCE) Ancient accounts of funerals during the mid-Republic de-scribe the movement of the aristocratic pompa funebristhrough the city to the Forum Romanum. Unfortunately,
specics about the route are few. 30 There is no descriptionof the parade path before it arrived in the forum, and the
purpose of the procession can only be speculated. It wouldseem that it functioned both as a means of gathering theparticipants, who would later crowd the forum during thefuneral oration, and as a way of displaying the popularityof the deceased and the family. 31 Hence, the more circu-itous the route, the better the attendance for the event, animportant factor at least during the Republic when funer-als had to vie for attention from citizens who continued toconduct their daily business in the forum. 32 The reality ofhousing distribution in Rome further complicated mat-ters. The aristocracy lived along the streets that led intothe forum (including the Sacra Via) and on the nearby
Palatine Hill.33
Therefore, most aristocratic funeralsbegan only a few hundred meters away from the forumitself. In order to lengthen the parade route and attract alarger audience, processions from residences near theforum may have diverted to side streets to extend the routeto the forum (Figure 5). 34
Parades most likely entered along the Sacra Via in themid-republican period, a symbolically potent route followedin numerous ritual processions, including the triumphal pa-rade, which was an event that the funeral procession mim-icked in many ways.35 Upon entering the forum, the pompa funebris crossed the central open plaza to the rostra, where
the deceased was put on display (Figure 6). 36 From atop therostra the primary heir gave a eulogy, anked by members ofthe cortege who wore ancestor masks ( imagines ) and sat in arow of ivory chairs that faced the assembled crowd. Scholarshave underlined the obvious potential for symbolic manipu-lation in the content of the speech ( laudatio funebris),theancestor masks, and the composition of the crowd. 37 Lessanalyzed, but equally signicant, are the sights, kineticsequences, and interaction with the physical environmentexperienced by the funeral parade.
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 17
Physical and textual evidence demonstrate that theforum during the mid-republican period was radically differ-ent in appearance than its imperial descendants. 38 Sadly,there is a severe lack of robust archaeological data about thebuildings in the forum during the rst half of the secondcentury BCE. In situ evidence for the third (vertical) dimen-sion is particularly difcult to nd. Today’s researchers canbring into play additional information, including high-reso-lution satellite imagery, citywide cadastral maps, and GPScoordinates that precisely situate veriable archaeologicalremains within a geographic coordinate system, yet they stilllack sufcient data to create academically justiable hyper-realistic reconstructions. 39
In most cases, only the general massing of buildings andarchitectural monuments can be modeled with any certainty.For this research the models are schematic, shaded for legibil-ity, but necessarily textureless. 40 They are knowledge repre-sentations of the current evidence—more often textual thanmaterial—and can approximate only one of many interpreta-tions of the mid-republican forum’s appearance. 41 Strict caremust be taken to map out the parameters for each explorationand to explain its experimental nature (Figure 7). 42 Withinthese working parameters, however, valuable investigationscan be undertaken about the experiential and propagandisticimpact of the funeral on the processors and audience mem-bers, and in particular the importance of the critical intervis-ibility between buildings in and near the Forum Romanum.
The multilayered visual effects of the parade route re-quire three-dimensional analysis, but an in situ examinationof the viewshed and relationship between the Capitoline Hilland the republican forum is impossible due to present-day
conditions. The current paving in the modern archaeologicalpark lies 2 to 4 meters above the republican forum oor. Major buildings from the mid-Republic period are repre-sented by scattered fragments often immured or obliteratedby subsequent rebuildings. 43 The republican remains of thegreat temple to Jupiter atop the Capitoline are today encased within the Palazzo dei Conservatori, its visual connection tothe forum blocked by post-antique construction.
Experiential understanding has been further compro-mised by the inaccurate siting of buildings on publishedplans. For example, no readily available plans use a unifyinggeographic coordinate system to demonstrate and validatethe precise location of the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maxi-mus in relation to the buildings of the mid-republican forum. Three-dimensional paper-based reconstructions, hamperedby modern in situ viewshed difculties, only approximate theoriginal visual relationship between Capitoline and forum;furthermore the majority of reconstructions depict the stateof the forum in the imperial period and adopt an omniscientgod’s-eye view.44 The most accurate three-dimensional re-constructions represent the area during either its Augustanor late imperial phases, and even these frequently exaggeratethe elevation information to such an extent that perceptionshave been powerfully informed by the image of Jupiter’stemple looming majestically over the city (Figure 8). 45
Case Study 1: The Funerals of the Cornelii The funerals of the mid-Republic (183–145 BCE) providea useful case study of republican funerary practices. 46 TheCornelii were a prominent aristocratic family of the middle
Figure 7 Schematic representations overlaid on a geographic coordi-
republic, and the only clear evidence of the occasional altera-tion of the usual processional route is associated with thisclan.47 To the traditional cortege path, which moved from thehouse of the deceased to the rostra in the forum and then tothe burial site, the Cornelii added a visit to the Capitoline Hill
to collect the wax mask (imago) of Scipio Africanus, the famedconqueror of Hannibal during the second Punic Wars and themost illustrious member of their family. They introduced thisnew itinerary after Scipio’s death in 183 BCE. 48
Roman aristocratic families usually housed such imagines of ancestors who had attained a curule magistracy in dedicatedcupboards in the atria of their residences. Only on special oc-casions were these open for viewing, and only at the Romanfuneral were the masks paraded through the streets. 49 For rea-sons not entirely clear, the wax mask of Scipio Africanus wasplaced in the cella of the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus,in effect equating the residence of the most powerful god in
the Roman pantheon with the atrium of Scipio’s house. 50
The Cornelii followed other practices that differed fromthe norm. For instance, while the rest of Rome cremated theirloved ones, the Cornelii continued to inhume the deceased. 51 Perhaps the reason was pragmatic; the house of Scipio Afri-canus stood immediately next to the Roman forum behind the Tabernae Veteres, which meant that a funeral procession tothe republican rostra (located directly to the northeast of thelater Rostra Augusti) would have been a short walk of lessthan one hundred meters—not long enough to attract an
appropriately large crowd (see Figure 5, Figure 9). 52 The de-tour to the Capitoline Hill to acquire the important ancestralmask signicantly lengthened the parade. Simultaneously, itemphasized a sequence of vistas to notable buildings, art, andurban features that were seen by parade participants and a
reciprocal sequence of views of the funeral parade by the au-dience gathered in the forum. Although it is problematic tobuild an argument about the Roman funeral of the middleRepublic based on a famous exception, a visual analysis of the
Figure 8 Reconstructed drawing of Roman Forum and Capitoline Hil l showing the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill, after
Alberto Carpiceci in Rome 2000 Years Ago (Florence: Bonechi, 1981), 8–9. See JSAH online to compare the elevation of the temple in this hypotheti-
cal reconstruction to that of the same temple in the more accurate digital reconstruction
Figure 9 Schematic reconstruction of the Roman Forum (183 BCE).
The House of Africanus may have been located adjacent to the Temple
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 19
alteration of the Cornelii’s processional route offers a poten-tial key to understanding the choreography of this mid-sec-ond-century event. The case study places the evidence for thefuneral into the reconstructed topographic context of 183–145 BCE (Figure 10).
After the imagoof Scipio Africanus was placed in the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, funeral processions forthe Cornelii clan began at the house of the deceased familymember, moved through the forum, and then turned awayfrom the gathering crowd to ascend the Clivus Capitolinus(Figure 10a).53 Once the cortege moved past the Temple ofSaturn, visual contact with spectators in the low-lying forumplaza was severed. How the imago was collected from thetemple has not been recorded, but presumably the event oc-curred atop the Capitoline Hill before the south-facing Temple of Jupiter, where an actor wearing triumphal regalia
donned the mask (Figure 10b). The action would have been visible from the aristocratic houses on the northwesternPalatine for those with an unobstructed view and good eye-sight, yet most of the nobility would have already joined theawaiting audience in the low-lying forum. 54 Some curiousspectators may have followed the musicians, mimes, anddancers as they proceeded up the hill to the Capitoline tem-ple, but the Clivus Capitolinus, and even the much largerplatform on the hill above, offered only limited room to turna large procession. Doubtless, most spectators preferred tosecure good viewing spots for the oration in the forum. Howdid the Cornelii connect this unique segment of their family
funeral with the more traditional program of the republicanfuneral? To what degree were the symbolic connections be-tween the funerary activities at the rostra and those on theCapitoline magnied by spectacle?
Digital reconstructions facilitate the experiential ex-amination of the connections between the forum and the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus in this period (Figure10c).55 Unfortunately, without information on sounds,smells, and haptic responses, the exploration remains vision-centered, an emphasis that must be constantly kept in mind.Static and kinetic viewsheds are predicated on the accuratedepiction of an environment and of building massing in par-ticular. In this instance, the height and footprint of the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus remain somewhat con-troversial. The dispute centers on whether the measure-ments given by Dionysius of Halicarnassus and conrmedby recent archaeological work can refer to the temple’s po-dium, as asserted by Einar Gjerstad in the 1960s—a recon-struction that produces intercolumniations substantiallylarger than even those of the Pantheon—or to a platform on which a smaller structure rose, as championed more recentlyby John Stamper. 56
The two reconstructions give notably different results when viewed virtually from the mid-second century BCEforum as reconstructed. With Gjerstad’s version, whosedominating form is seen in most reconstructions, the templepediment looms over the city, clearly visible to spectatorsstanding at ground level in the eastern end of the forum (Fig-ure 10d). From elsewhere in the forum, observers would haveseen the entablature and roof of the temple, but caught onlyglimpses of its podium (Figure 10e). The fortunate ones whohad staked out desirable positions near the rostra were wellsituated to see the bier and the actors wearing ancestor masksline up in front (see Figure 7). They could readily hear theeulogies and see other activities associated with the funeral,but except for those positioned directly in front of the rostra,the view to the façade and area in front of Jupiter’s distanttemple was almost entirely occluded.
Stamper’s reconstruction reduces the temple’s overallsize and prole, eliminating nearly all views of it from theground level of the forum (Figure 10f). Viewsheds frommore elevated positions would not have been much better.Observers who jockeyed successfully for viewing spots in theupper balconies (maeniana) above the shops in front of theBasilica Sempronia on the west side of the forum had good views of the rostra and the central open space, but not of theCapitoline (Figure 10g). Only those on the upper level of theshops fronting the Basilica Fulvia across the open space couldreadily see the Temple of Jupiter and, at a lower level, theCornelii funeral parade as it re-entered the forum (Figure
10h). Furthermore, in a culture where seeing and being seen were both important, most of these spectators would nothave been visible to those clustering around the rostra. 57 Cu-riously enough, in the two reconstructions only the Comi-tium, the natural caveato the northwest of the rostra, affordsclear views of the Temple of Jupiter (Figure 10i).
Clearly, an understanding of the Roman funeral neces-sitates knowledge of the context of the event. Just as there arealternative reconstructions of the built environment, thereare likewise alternative reconstructions of the performance,including most importantly, the orientation of the primaryspeakers. One interpretation is based on the later funerarycustoms of Ciceronian Rome in the late rst century BCE;the other is shaped by an appreciation of the oratorical prac-tices of the mid-Republic over a century earlier. An assess-ment of the visual impact of the funeral parade of the Corneliiclaries the differences between these two scenarios.
Alternative 1: Orators Face the People
Since their view was blocked by many of the surroundingbuildings (Figure 11), the audience gathered in the forum would have gauged the approach of the Cornelii funeral
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
of California, Christopher Johanson, and the Experiential Technologies Center [ETC], UCLA). See JSAH online for a bird’s-eye view of a real-time, three-
dimensional model of the republican Roman Forum set in its geographic context. 11a View from the area in front of the Rostra, populated by hypothet-
ical bystanders, looking toward the Temple of Saturn and the Clivus Capitolinus, the main road leading down from the Capitoline Hill; 11b View of the
orator, bier and ancestors atop the Rostra; 11c Elevated view from the balcony in front of the Basilica Sempronia; 11d View of the Basilica Porcia (to
the left of the Curia Hostilia). The Basilica is represented in schematic form omitting the colonnaded lower and upper levels; 11e Privileged view of
the Rostra from the northern side of the Comitium; 11f Bird’s eye view of the Forum illustrating the intimacy of the Comitium in comparison to the
open Forum plaza; 11g View from the Comitium of the imago of Scipio Africanus as it returns from the Capitoline Hill; 11h View from the Comitium
of the imago of Cato entering or leaving the Curia Hostilia. See JSAH online for an analogous view keyed to a real-time, three-dimensional model
procession down from the Capitoline by the smoke risingfrom torches and the sounds (Figure 11a). The accompanyingmusic and chants became gradually louder, reaching a cre-
scendo as the cortegerounded the Temple ofSaturn at the lower ter-minus of the Clivus Cap-itolinus and burst intofull view of the awaitingcrowd.58 At this potentmoment the sound level
escalated, freed from the constraints of the narrow, building-lined street. (Of course, wind, weather, and ambient noise would have diminished this aural effect.) The elevated imago of Scipio Africanus was prominent, along with the ancestormasks of the deceased and other illustrious Cornelii. The pro-
cession stopped at the northwest corner of the forum andmounted the rostra where the body of the departed was dis-played (Figure 11b). The jostling audience at ground levellooked up to the famous ancestors represented by actors wear-ing death masks who were seated among the statues crowdingthe platform; behind them the Curia Hostilia formed a monu-mental backdrop. 59 The ancestors, in turn, looked down onthe majority of the audience—the inverse of the spatial ar-rangement in Greek oratory. Only the spectators on the upperoors of the basilicas could look down on the speakers, buttheir viewing status from a position on high was diminishedby a lack of visual clarity due to distance (Figure 11c).60
As appropriate for Roman viewing conventions, the fu-neral participants on the rostra saw senators and other elitecitizens positioned close by, identiable by their garb andplacement, an important factor since no clear physicalboundary separated them from the masses on the forumoor. The son of the deceased, if there was one of suitableage, faced the forum and the crowd to give the laudatio andthen praised, in chronological order, the ancestors arrayedbehind him. 61 After the speech the group descended from therostra and, amid mourning wails, carried the deceased to hisnal resting place outside the city. 62 Funerary games (ludi funebres and munera), most likely held in the forum followed, completed the ceremony.
Alternative 2: Orators Face the Senate
As recognized by modern scholars, the rostra became the ora-torical stage for the forum in the late Republic. Only in 145BCE did the orientation reverse when a tribune rst turnedhis back on the Curia to address the people directly, a populistmove meant both to appease the masses and annoy the mag-isterial classes.63 Thus the interpretation given in Alternative1 is based on a retrojection from a later period. Prior to the
mid-second century, orators faced the Comitium and theCuria, not the forum. 64 The implications of this original, re- versed staging have not been fully explored. Was the funerarylaudatio originally congured in the same way?
The topography of the area facilitates a reconstruction with a Curia-centered oration. Until at least 184 BCE theCloaca Maxima, which ran through the middle of the forum, was apparently uncovered.65 It would have formed a naturalpartition between the large eastern portion of the forum’scentral plaza and the western half, occupied by the politicalnucleus of the Curia, the Comitium, the senaculum, and theGraecostasis. 66 The natural topography of the area formed atheatrical cavea centered on the rostra. The Comitium lies ina small depression surrounded by gentle upward slopes on allsides save the forum plaza.67 The Temple of Saturn offered alengthy stepped approach that would have served as a con-
venient tiered viewing area. M. Porcius Cato’s decision ascensor to buy up land near the Curia to build the rst namedbasilica in Rome (the Basilica Porcia) implies that this was aspace that, among other things, would benet from a publicporticoed structure, that is, a shaded viewing area (Figure11d).68 The masses would have gathered in the forum plazaand at the southwest end of the forum in front of the Templeof Saturn, but the elite would ll the Comitium, line its steps,and command the privileged views next to the seat of magis-terial power, the Senate House (Figure 11e). The speaker would be elevated above many of the people, but the elitecould demonstrate their own station by being in clear sight
of the speaker and by forming the backdrop seen by the sur-rounding audience.
If political oratory required the speaker to face theCuria, one must contemplate the practical ramications ofthis substantially different staging. While the famous beaksof the rostra pointed toward the forum, in which directiondid the statues face? Imperial reliefs always depict the speakerand the statues facing the same way. It seems unlikely that themajority of political oratory in the mid-Republic would beframed by the backs of those commemorated in stone. 69 What of the audience? A Curia-centered oration would havetaken place in a relatively intimate setting. Because of thenaturally sloped and stepped viewing area, the audiencecould both see and be seen more effectively. Many would beclose enough to hear the speech clearly. Moreover, assem-bling in the western end of the forum would mitigate theinterference caused by the open shops and the ongoing busi-ness surrounding the forum plaza (Figure 11f). Of course,for those farther removed from the rostra and who could nothear, gestures would still convey the meaning, although it would require a skilled orator to use gestures that even anaudience facing his back could interpret.
See JSAH onlinefor a re-creation of Romanfuneral music and rituallamentation based onexperimental archaeology.
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 23
The grouping of the spectators on the western side of theforum also alters the potential symbolic viewsheds, for in thislocation the speaker and the audience can share the same de-ictic references to the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus .70
As the procession of the Cornelii began to ll the Comitiumand the surrounding space, a branch of the parade moved upthe slope of the Clivus Capitolinus, in clear view of the major-ity of the more privileged spectators, those in the caveato the west of the Comitium (Figure 11g). Such attendees weresituated well for the upcoming laudatio and could also viewthe ceremony that was occurring on top of the Capitoline, ineither the Gjerstad or Stamper reconstruction of the Templeof Jupiter Optimus Maximus. Even many of those outside theComitium would be able to witness the spectacle above. The value placed on such intervisuality explains why the Cornellii’srevered ancestor Scipio Africanus was transported in such a
way that he emerged from around the corner of the Templeof Saturn, thus clarifying the symbolic association. Even theuneducated (and the non-Latin speakers) would immediatelyunderstand that this relative of the Cornelii’s clan had beencommuning with the most powerful god in the city. Perhapsit was in emulation of the Cornelii’s bold symbolic association with the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus that the familyof the novus homo, Marcus Porcius Cato, installed his imago inthe Curia Hostilia, whence it was retrieved during funeraryevents.71 This familial competition would have been not onlysymbolic, but spectacular. Rather than remain hidden fromthe audience by the rostra, the imago of Cato would have
emerged from the Curia in full view of the parting crowd and would have served as a reminder of this particularly admirableancestor (Figure 11h).
Ancient sources note the exceptional funeral choreog-raphy of the Cornelii. Having two parades enter the forumcertainly drew attention to the event and helped differentiatethis funeral from others—a necessary goal given the numberof distractions in the city of Rome. Experiential analysis fa-cilitates a consideration of the link forged between the Cap-itoline and the forum by the procession. The effect of this visual connection, in turn, permits reevaluation of the textualevidence and reconsideration of the conguration of theevent. By emphasizing movement from the forum up to the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the program recalledthe triumphal parade, an association reinforced by the garb-ing of the actor who wore the mask of Scipio Africanus intriumphal regalia. Yet the directional change of the proces-sion, coming down from the hill rather than moving up tothe temple, underscored another connection even morestrongly. The famous conqueror of Hannibal was acknowl-edged by some Romans to be the son of Jupiter, and his fu-neral mask was thus kept in the “residence” of his progenitor.
The parade route from Jupiter’s temple to the forum sug-gested a direct connection between Scipio Africanus, hisdescendants, and the great god by highlighting a genetic anda spectacular topographic descent. 72
The visual connection with the Temple of Jupiter wasdesirable, but not essential. As the most important shrine inthe Roman world, its appearance was familiar to all specta-tors. They did not have to see the connection; the wisps ofsmoke, the echoes of processional music, and the entrance ofthe cortege from the direction of the temple were enough toforge the associations desired by the Cornelii. It is clear,however, that in one possible conguration most of the audi-ence could have seen the event on the hill, and that an un-derstanding of the visual impact of the Cornelii’s processionhelps to clarify the organization of the event below. Theoratorical stage of the mid-Republic prior to 145 BCE was
different than that of the rst century, and the earlier con-guration both better accommodates the evidence and bettersolves practical logistical problems.
The Imperial Funeral and the Roman Forum In the imperial era, power was focused in the hands of singleindividuals, but republican traditions and governmentalstructures continued, at least supercially. 73 Beginning withthe commemorations of Augustus, funerals for the emperorsbecame iconic, with grand events in the forum. The choreog-raphy still included a parade and eulogies from the rostra, butthe ancestors who marched were largely stand-ins, not a col-
lection of genetically related ancestors, but an assembly offamous persons from Rome’s history. The body of the de-ceased, too, was often represented symbolically rather thanactually included. The speeches, like the event in general,addressed a world audience, since the death marked a changein state leadership. 74
Imperial funerals were characterized by their great size,magnicence, and especially by the inclusion of participantsand features from throughout the empire. 75 At the rostra theemperor’s body (or its simulacrum) lay on display in a shrine-like structure recalling the baldachins of Eastern Hellenisticrulers. The pompa funebrisbegan at the imperial residence onthe Palatine, descended the Clivus Palatinus, then moved intothe forum. While no exhaustive description of an imperialfuneral exists, accounts written around 200 CE provide anumber of visual details about the events in the Forum Ro-manum. In 193 CE the emperor Septimius Severus organizeda lavish funeral in honor of his predecessor Pertinax and him-self was honored by an extravagant event at his death in 211CE. Cassius Dio gave an eyewitness account of the first;Herodian, who resided in Rome during this period, com-mented on the funeral of Septimius and others of his day. 76
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
While funerals grew steadily larger, the physical spaceof the performance shrank signicantly after the mid-Repub-lic period. More permanent buildings and over-scale monu-ments crowded the Forum Romanum. The increased verticality of the surrounding buildings sealed off much ofthe forum from external visual inuence. While views towardthe Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus had been difcultto gain during the mid-Republic, they were almost entirelyblocked by the middle of the Empire (Figure 12). The arter-ies leading into the area were narrowed as the basilicas ex-panded on each side and arches spanning entire streetsoperated as doorways into the forum. The surrounding
urban fabric also changed. To the east, the expanding impe-rial fora wiped out vast areas of housing. The large imperialpalace system on the Palatine supplanted private aristocratichouses as the focus of power and the launching point formajor funerals. As a result the route of a pompa funebrisfor anemperor became truncated. Well publicized, the deceasedemperor, or rather, his imago, did not have to move throughthe city to attract spectators from their houses (most of which were now concentrated away from the city center). Thecrowds came to him in the forum.
By the middle of the second century, the forum had like- wise become more restricted in activities and meaning. Al-though significant objects from the Republic remained visible, every building, sculpture, painting, space, and event was now imprinted with calculated imperial messages. Thelayout of the forum had also become more rigidly dened. The central forum was now smaller, its “walls,” higher. Thelarge, opposing Basilica Julia and Basilica Aemilia framed thetwo long sides. The central area was unied by sparklingpaving, mostly of white marble, although the clarity of thespatial volume was obscured by numerous eye-catching com-memoratives and statues. 77
In relation to funeral activities, the most significantphysical change to the forum was the alteration to the speak-er’s platform. At the end of the rst century BCE Julius Cae-sar reworked the traditional locus of speechmaking andassembly near the Senate House. He summarily eliminatedthe republican rostra and began construction on a new speak-er’s platform, the so-called Rostra Caesaris, shifted to the west, directly on axis with the open space that was now moreclearly dened by his large new Basilica Julia on the south- west.78 The new platform, enlarged and completed by Au-gustus (designated by scholars the Rostra Augusti), was thelocus for many memorable events of those tumultuous years,including the funerals of Caesar and Augustus whose impactreverberated throughout subsequent state funerals. 79 Cae-sar’s funeral also inspired a major addition to the forum. Aftera riotous crowd burned the dictator’s body in the forum
rather than at the burial site outside the city limits, Augustusmarked the spot with a magnicent new temple to the deiedCaesar (Divus Iulius) directly opposite the rostra. 80
Documentation of imperial funerals is more completethan for those of the mid-Republic. Much more is alsoknown about the physical layout of the entire Forum Roma-num in the later period. Better preserved and more thor-oughly excavated, the archaeological evidence for the highImperial period is far more extensive, and it is thus moreeasily reconstructed. At least partial remains of many build-ings survive in situ, which facilitates modern surveys andsubstantially increases the delity of the reconstructed set-
ting. The funerals of Pertinax and Septimius Severus offer achance to explore how the topography of the forum affectedand guided funerary activities.
Case Study 2: The Funeral of Pertinax In 193 CE Septimius Severus became emperor following thebloody and short reigns of four predecessors, the last of whom was Pertinax. Hoping to signal an end to turmoil, he imme-diately afrmed his right to power by declaring his predeces-sor to be a god and accepting the name Pertinax as his own. 81 To celebrate further his restoration of liberty and peace, thesame year Severus held a lavish funeral honoring the previousemperor. At the head of the cortege were carried statues ofthe viri illustri , famous Romans of the past, conrming thecontinuity and stability of Rome; these themes were rein-forced later in the parade by more statues of other historicgures who were admired for their great deeds or discoveries,and by representatives of the city’s various collegia (associa-tions). Along with male choruses singing funeral hymns pro-cessed subordinate ofcials, soldiers and bearers of heavybronze statues whose regional costumes identied them asrepresentations of Rome’s provinces—symbols of the power
Figure 12 Digital reconstruction model of the Roman Forum in the late
imperial period. See JSAH online for an analogous view keyed to a real-
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 25
and geographic extent of the Empire. Racehorses and a pano-ply of funeral gifts alluded to the elaborate games to follow. The procession climaxed with a portable golden altar be-decked with ivory and precious stones.
Notably, the actual remains of the deceased were not inthe funeral parade. Pertinax, who had died months earlierand had been cremated, was represented by a wax efgy,dressed in triumphal regalia and placed on view in a smallbuilding with columns of gold and ivory erected atop a tem-porary stage in front of the rostra. 82 To maintain the ctionof a traditional funeral with a corpse, and to displace thememory of Pertinax’s bloody beheading, a slave boy waved afan of peacock feathers as if to keep ies away from the de-composing body. The new emperor, now called Lucius Sep-timius Severus Pertinax, not the deceased’s son, gave thefuneral oration, conrming his role as heir.
A participant in these funerary ceremonies, Cassius Dioprovided a detailed description. Septimius rst moved acrossthe forum to the speaker’s platform (Figure 13). Behind himcame Cassius Dio and other senators dressed in somber togasof mourning; their wives followed, having eschewed colorfulgarments for respectful white. 83 Elite male attendees tookseats in the open air near the Rostra Augusti, where they were visible to all; the women moved to less-exposed loca-tions out of the sun in the shadowy porticos of the ankingbasilicas.84 In solemn anticipation, the patrician audienceawaited the procession. Hearing a muddled cacophony ofsounds coming from the walled portion of the sacred roadbetween the Basilica Aemilia and the Temple of Divus Iulius,all looked to the southwest. As the funeral parade passed thepodium of the temple the sounds distilled into the distinctivedirges sung by the funerary chorus that accompanied the
statues of viri illustresat the head of the pompa (see Figure11b).85 From their elevated position, the sculpted representa-tives of Rome’s history carried aloft in the procession looked
directly toward the Temple of Concord, symbol of harmonyamong the classes, rising majestically behind the rostra (Fig-ure 13a). As the procession extended into the sunlit openspace, attention was drawn to the efgy of the deceased in hispurple robes ensconced in a glittering golden shrine clearly visible above the heads of the seated senators. Behind thistableau rose the towering façade of the Tabularium. 86
Once the parade had passed the inuential spectators,Severus mounted the rostra and gave the laudatio with thestatues on the platform behind him bearing silent witness andthe crowd shouting in approbation .87 The senators seatednear the Rostra Augusti craned their necks upward, their eldof vision lled by the gesticulating emperor, surroundingretinue, and statuary (Figure 13b). One can imagine that thelaudatioincluded gestures toward the Temple of Concord, where Pertinax had rst met the senate after being proclaimedemperor, or to the Temple of Jupiter, where the father of thegods would welcome the newest member of the Roman pan-theon. 88 At the end of the speeches the senators proceededout of the forum toward the tomb. They marched ahead ofthe bier amid beating of breasts and cries of lamentation, withthe emperor and the efgy of the deceased following.
Septimius used the funeral of Pertinax to validate hisclaim to the throne. Traditional and reverential in nature, thechoreography reected the continuation (or fossilization) ofthe established model for funerals, which emphasized the em-peror as representative of the collective. In Pertinax’s funeral,participants carried statues representing illustres viri fromRome’s history, not the illustrious ancestors of the deceased. The staging reected the realities of the imperial govern-ment, assigning the senators to a more symbolic and passiverole than that played by their republican predecessors. Theysat as spectators awaiting the action and responded on cue with moans and lamentations. A hint of their attitude is given
in an aside by Cassius Dio about the eulogy by Septimius:“We shouted our approval many times in the course of hisaddress, now praising and now lamenting Pertinax, but our
shouts were loudest when he concluded.” 89 The forum pro- vided a familiar, history-laden background for the action.
Once in power, Septimius Severus and his wife JuliaDomna began to imprint their identity on the Forum Roma-num.90 Among the sculpted monuments that they added wasa large equestrian statue, the Equus Severi, which recalledthe equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius whom Septimiusalso claimed as his father.91 In the southern forum they re-paired various structures ravaged by an earlier re in 191/192CE.92 Afrming her role as matronaand wife of the pontifexmaximus, Julia Domna assumed responsibility for rebuildingthe Temple of Vesta. 93 At the opposite end of the urban spaceSeptimius and his sons restored the Temple of Vespasian andadded an inscription commemorating their work. Honoriccolumns placed on top of the rostra date to the Severan pe-riod as well (Figure 14).94
These interventions paled beside the addition of a mag-nicent new arch. Signicantly, this was the rst large, com-plete building added to the central area of the forum sincethe Temple of Divus Iulius over a century earlier. 95 In 202CE Septimius celebrated the tenth anniversary of his reign(decennalia) and returned from successful eastern campaignsagainst the Arabs, Parthians, and Adiabeneans. He declineda triumph, but along with his sons was voted an arch by thesenate and people of Rome completed by 203 CE. 96 Themassive monument still stands north of the Rostra Augusti,near the Comitium, a spot chosen in part to afrm the locusof a prescient dream of Septimius (Figure 15). 97 The inscrip-tion honored the emperor as “Pertinax” and “son of Mar-cus” for having achieved “the restoration of the state and theextension of the empire.” 98 Detailed reliefs recounting thesuccessful campaigns embellished the two facades, and animpressive sculptural display of the emperor in a chariotanked by his sons originally stood atop the monument
Figure 14 Oration relief from the Arch of Constantine depicting the Rostra Augusti with columns. Behind rise the Basilica Iulia and Arch of Tiberius
and Basilica Iulia on the left, and the Arch of Septimius Severus on the right
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 27
(Figure 16). The style and complex iconography of thecarvings and sculpture have been thoroughly explored. 99
The monument was obviously a counterpoint to thearch located southwest of the rostra, which Tacitus describedas propter aedem Saturni .100 That memorial celebrated theGermanic successes of the emperor Tiberius, who was alsostrongly associated with Parthia. 101 A third Parthian memory
was evoked by the Arch of Augustus that anked the Templeof Divus Iulius. The large size of the new Severan arch, andthe inclusion of stairs in the central opening, impeded ve-hicular access to the Rostra Augusti and Clivus Capitolinusthereby necessitating adjustments to the area, including thereworking of the surrounding paving and the street ap-proaching from the east. 102
Case Study 3: The Funeral of Septimius SeverusIn 211 Septimius died in Eboricum (York) at the age of sixty-six. His wife and their two sons Caracalla and Geta broughthis ashes to Rome and placed them in the Mausoleum ofHadrian. Herodian records that an efgy of the dead em-peror was fashioned out of wax and laid atop an ivory couchdisplayed before the imperial residence. 103 For seven daysdoctors attended the efgy before proclaiming him ofciallydead; an apotheosis ceremony followed shortly. Dressed inpurple, the combative sons of Septimius led the funeral pro-cession down from the Palatine and into the forum. Es-teemed young senators and equestrians followed, carryingthe ersatz corpse to the Rostra Augusti. The voices of women
garbed in white rang out from temporary bleachers on oneside of the “body,” those of children similarly dressed rosefrom bleachers from the other side.
Such a generalized description only partially conveysthe symbolic and physical complexities of the processionalexperience. The insertion of the Arch of Septimius Severusinto the forum substantially altered movement along themain imperial processional route, advancing straight fromthe Temple of Divus Iulius along the front the Basilica Aemilia northwest toward the Severan arch. 104 The stairs onthe southeast side of the monument prevented the choreog-raphy of wheeled trafc passing through the dynastic arch.Instead, the elite participants in the funeral procession werenow compelled to leave their vehicles and walk uphillthrough the arch to approach the rear stairs of the rostra, orto climb to the rostra by means of temporary wooden stairson the front; the latter was perhaps the better alternative. 105
Alternative 1: Entry North of the Temple of Divus Iulius
Two possible scenarios can be suggested for the parade chore-ography (Figure 17). According to the rst, the processionentered the forum along the north side of the Temple of DivusIulius (Figure 17a). After passing the temple’s ank, wheeled vehicles lined up in front of the Basilica Aemilia or parkedtemporarily in one of the side streets (Argiletum or Clivus Argentarius). The new co-emperors Geta and Caracalla, as well as others who needed to ascend the rostra, walkedthrough the Severan arch, turned left along the Clivus Capi-tolinus, and then climbed the curved stairs of the Rostra
Figure 15 Reconstruction model of the Arch of Septimius Severus;
[ETC], UCLA); 17b View of the Rostra Augusti from the north side of the Arch of Septimius Severus in front of the Temple of Concord; 17c View
from in front of the Temple of Saturn toward the Rostra Augusti and Arch of Septimius Severus
Augusti (Figure 17b). This choreography, however, was notideal, since it hid these notables from the audience’s view fora signicant amount of time at a key moment in the event. Atemporary wooden stairway may have provided direct accessto the rostra front or to an adjacent temporary stage such asthat constructed for the funeral of Pertinax. 106 Other paradeparticipants dispersed into the crowd that gathered behindthe senators who, dressed in black, congregated (or sat) be-fore the rostra. Alternatively, the parade may have passedbefore the front of the rostra and then around the southwestend of the speaker’s platform to reach the stairs at the rear(Figure 17c).
Alternative 2: Entry South of the Temple of Divus Iulius
It is also possible that the parade entered the forum on thesouthwestern side of the Temple of Divus Iulius movingthrough the Arch of Augustus and then along the road infront of the Basilica Iulia (Figure 18). 107 Following this paththe procession turned right in front of Tiberius’s arch(viewed to the left between the basilica and the Temple of
Saturn), to approach the rear stairs of the Rostra Augusti.Elite participants mounted the platform, later rejoining thefunerary retinue gathered below for the march to thetomb.108
The kinetic viewsheds along these two possible proces-sional routes differ signicantly. Each affected the paradeparticipants by drawing their attention to different referents. The rst processional route along the Basilica Aemilia of-fered internal views of the forum. The Temple of JupiterOptimus Maximus, which had loomed above the smaller,more recessed basilicas anking the forum in the mid-repub-lic, was now hidden from view by the towering verticality ofthe enormous Basilica Iulia. The Arch of Septimius Severusdirectly ahead dened the end of the imperial Sacra Via, itsfront-facing billboard-like façade celebrating not only theemperor’s military successes, but also the dynasty he estab-lished (see Figure 17a).109 As they moved farther into theforum, the imperial heirs at the head of the cortege wouldhave been drawn toward the rostra, attracted in part by themournful songs and white robes of the singers on the
bleachers. The sea of black-garbed senators in front of thechoir provided a neutral base above which they could see thehonoric columns erected by Septimius on the rostra, the Temple of Saturn housing the state treasury, and fartherback, the Temple of Vespasian restored by the deceased.
If the pompa funebrisfollowed the second route, enteringthe forum through the Arch of Augustus south of the Templeof Divus Iulius, however, a related but different panorama ofimperial imagery unfolded before the viewer. Those whopassed along the road in front of the Basilica Iulia would havefaced the Temple of Vespasian; the Temple of Saturn partiallyblocked the view of the facade, leaving visible a potent wordin the lowest line: severus (Figure 18b).110 The visually andprogrammatically rich Rostra Augusti to the right wouldsoon draw their gaze, with the broad Temple of Concordrising behind, evoking Severan claims of state and dynastic
harmony. Simultaneously the great Severan arch loomed to- ward the north. 111 In fact, to view the rostra from this routedemanded that one view the arch as well. Although too dis-tant to be read in detail, the great panels on the arch evokedthe well-known spiral narratives on the columns of Trajanand Marcus Aurelius (Figure 18c). This association was re-inforced for viewers on the southwest side of the forum infront of the Basilica Julia; far in the distance they could see Trajan’s statue atop his column (Figure 18d). 112 Moving to- ward the rostra this visual link was soon obstructed by theimpressive Severan arch (Figure 18e).
Following the disruptions that preceded his accession to
power, Septimius had been anxious to secure his position byassociations with revered past dynasties and to lay thegroundwork for future stability. 113 By erecting his monumentafter a long hiatus in new building additions to the forum, heestablished a clear association with earlier Julio-Claudianprojects. The Severan arch responds directly to the Arch of Augustus that stood diagonally across the forum, south of the Temple of Divus Iulius, and which similarly honored suc-cesses in Parthia.114 Just as Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, and Lu-cius Verus, Septimius was given the name Parthicus. Aliterate observer viewing the funerary events at the rostra would doubtless note the bronze inscription parthico re-peated on the upper corners of the arch attic. Like the tri-level relief, the reference was a verbal extension of theColumn of Trajan in the distance (see Figure 18d). Whereasthe column depicted the Dacian conquest, the arch remindedknowledgeable viewers that Trajan’s Parthian conquest wasshort-lived and that it was Septimius Severus who ultimatelycompleted the task begun years before. The recorded datefor Severus’s Parthian triumph was 28 January 198 CE, thesame day as the dies imperii of Trajan (when he was ofciallyproclaimed emperor in 98 CE, one hundred years earlier). 115
The views of the arch observed by the procession werecompelling, suggesting that the monument was specicallydesigned to interact with the funeral, a hypothesis that requiresa further investigation of its place in imperial history. The deathof an emperor always entailed great difculties, and it was Au-gustus who rst decided to plan ahead in monumental fashion. As early as 28 BCE, in his sixth consulship, Octavian, not yet Augustus, established a dynastic funerary tradition by buildinga monumental family tomb, the so-called Mausoleum. 116 Butit was much more. In name and form it recalled funerary mon-uments of the east and in so doing advertised his victory, oper-ating as a Mausoleum-Tropaeum, a “tomb and trophy.” 117
In the rst century CE Domitian erected a commemo-rative arch for his elder brother, the emperor Titus, south-east of the forum. Although not specically celebrating atriumph, the memorial drew upon triumphal associations,
while simultaneously underscoring dynastic continuity andreminding viewers of the donor’s quasi-divine status asbrother of a god. Celebrating the achievements of the de-ceased, the arch echoes the funerary practice of presentinga res gestae (list of accomplishments).118
While the funerary function of the Arch of Titus is ques-tionable, that of the Column of Trajan is not. Whether it wasenvisioned as a tomb from the beginning, this memorial ofthe successful Dacian campaign certainly functioned as one when Trajan’s ashes were placed within a chamber in thebase.119 The Arch of Septimius Severus follows the traditionstarted with these imperial memorials. It was built as a tri-
umphal trophy, but this function was compromised by thestairs on the forum side, which prevented a triumphing gen-eral in his gilded chariot from passing through the centralopening. The arch also served specic propagandistic pur-poses: it was both an advertisement for dynastic continuityand a visual res gestae in the style of the Column of Trajan. 120
During the Republic, Romans visually represented con-tinuity by parading their revered ancestors from variouscenturies. Roman emperors continued to honor illustriouspredecessors with displays of the state’s viri illustresat theirfunerals. On other days of the year, they relied on forged visual connections among imperial monuments, especiallyamong funerary memorials, to afrm their ties to past rulers.For example, an elite observer who climbed the Column of Marcus Aurelius exited the door on top to face the mausoleaof Augustus and Hadrian. 121 While no ancient referencesdescribe exactly who was allowed to ascend to such heightsand see the visual lines that were drawn between Rome’simperial funerary monuments, the architectural accommo-dation of such elite viewing afrms its signicance.
The Arch of Septimius Severus participated in similar visual interconnectivity. An internal stair led to chambers in
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 31
the attic and to an external walkway at the same level protectedby a metal balustrade. 122 From this vantage point, a privilegedimperial observer had a view over the entire Forum Roma-num, a panorama almost on a par with that seen by the gods.He could easily observe the Arch of Titus to the southeast andthe Column of Trajan to the north. However, his view of the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline wasfragmentary and oblique (Figure 19). After all, since that tem-ple had originated in the Republic and undergone numerousrebuildings by various patrons, it did not belong among the visually interconnected imperial memorials that honored in-
dividuals and dynasties. Looking up at the Severan arch, mor-tal observers in the forum might have seen a live gure movingalong the narrow elevated walkway at a height associated withthe divinities who were represented in nearby temple pedi-ments. In fact, spectators who were standing at the north cor-ner of the Basilica Aemilia’s upper portico saw the pedimentof the Temple of Concord rising above and behind the arch toframe the triumphal chariot atop the arch (Figure 20). 123 Un-fortunately, there is no information revealing which Romanscould enjoy this potent prospect, or their reactions.
The Arch of Septimius Severus continued the traditionof Mausoleum-Tropaeum begun by the Mausoleum of Augus-tus and extended the visual web of associations woven by thecommemorative columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius. Yet with his arch the so-called son of Marcus went further thanhis predecessors, boldly imposing his memorial on the ritualsheld in the forum. The Arch of Septimius dictated the cho-reography of future triumphal processions and dominatedthe viewshed of those who participated in and observed thefunerary parade. While these conclusions could be made byanalyzing a plan of the forum, the three-dimensional model-ing of the arch in its imperial setting has made the signicance
of the siting and program fully comprehensible. In particular,the orientation of the arch approximately parallel to the rostrais seen to have created a formal tableau that concretized thestatus-associated frontal view appreciated by the Romans. The result is evident in a relief on the Arch of Constantine(see Figure 14). The artist shows the emperor performing anoratio from atop the rostra, anked by the Arch of Tiberius tothe left and the Arch of Septimius to the right. The two impe-rial memorials form potent bookends that eliminate the needto represent other buildings. 124 Signicantly, the Basilica Iuliais added to this panorama, an afrmation of both the build-
ing’s impact on the peripheral vision of Roman spectators,and the artist’s need to counterbalance the scale and power ofthe large Arch of Septimius.
Conclusion Computer visualizations replete with movement, sound,light, and other features are changing the way we think aboutreconstructions. A digital laboratory facilitates experimenta-tion by allowing consideration of alternative reconstructionsof both human actions and the environments in which theyoccur. In creating digital reconstructions of events and places,scholars can yoke together disjointed archaeological sites intoa holistic environment, united by a common coordinate sys-tem. The experimental insertion of ritual events in theseenvironments can restore human activity to the context itonce inhabited. Although the topographical picture and thegranularity of the reconstructed evidence have changed, themeans of reinterpretation is the same. The exploration of ahistorical event within its context and the reading of theinterrelationship among reconstructed digital forms that aretied to more scientically accurate topography can give rise
Figure 19 View from walkway on the Arch of Septimius Severus toward
to new questions and conclusions. The visualization of his-torical phenomena temporally and topographically prompts,in turn, the reassessment of literary and material evidence. The digital recreations are not post-research presentations,but integral research tools. 125
The study of digital experiential models of the ForumRomanum during the mid-Republic period conrms theclear visual interconnection between the Capitoline Templeof Jupiter Optimus Maximus and the Comitium. The inter-active reconstructions also demonstrate the striking concur-rence between textual allusions to the oratorical stage andthe schematic, reconstructed topography. An enriched inter-pretation of the spectacle is the result. The contextualized,three-dimensional analysis of viewsheds underscores theCornelii’s exploitation of sight lines between Jupiter’s templeabove and the ceremonial actions below, informing the much
discussed question of speaker orientation.For scholars of the high imperial period, immersivedigital models facilitate the testing of hypotheses regardingbuildings, topography, and processions. The consideration ofevents in situ illustrates how the Romans choreographed theirprocessions to exploit the scale, orientation, sequencing, andsymbolic associations of structures and places. The Severanbuilding program in the forum refocused funeral activities. Itsarchitecture, inscribed propagandistic texts, and sculpturalprogram redirected both the processional route and the gazeof the audience and participants. The result was an imperialpanorama that reied the res gestaeof the emperor and con-
rmed through visual associationism the symbolic connectionbetween the deceased and revered earlier rulers.
Notes We would like to t hank Hilary Ba llon, David Brownlee, the Society of Architectural His torians, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation for theopportunity to publish born-digital research in the rst online issue of the JSAH . Abbreviations of ancient sources and related texts follow SimonHornblower and Antony Spawforth, ed. The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), xxxix–liv.1. Egon Flaig, Ritualisierte Politik: Zeichen, Gesten und Herrschaft im Alten Rom. Historische Semantik (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003), vol.1, 49–68. Polybius specically cited the wearing of ancestral masks and giv-
ing eulogies at funerals as evidence of Roman superiority; Polyb. 6.52–54;see also Sallust Iug.4.5–6; the merits of various forms of symbolic capital arediscussed in Sallust Iug.85, passim.2. For a broad overview of Roman funerary practices see J . M. C. Toynbee,Death and Burial in the Roman World (London: Thames & Hudson, 1971),43–64; for funerary spectacles see Keith Hopkins, Death and Renewal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 201–56; for the use ofancestral imagery see Harriet Flower, Ancestor Masks and Aristocratic Powerin Roman Culture (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 91–158.3. The most detailed analysis of the experience of the Roman funeral is foundin John Bodel, “Death on Display: Looking at Roman Funerals,” in The Artof Ancient Spectacle, ed. Bettina Ann Bergmann and Christine Kondoleon
(Washington D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1999), 259–80; and Javier Arce, Memoria De Los Antepasados: Puesta En Escena y Desarrollo del Elogi Romano (Madrid: Electa, 2000).4. The major modern works on funerals of the emperors are by Javier Arce, Funus Imperatorum: los funerales de los emperadores romanos (Madrid: Alianza,1990); Paul Zanker, Die Apotheose Der Römischen Kaiser: Ritual Und StädtBühne(Munich: Carl Friedrich von Siemens Stiftung, 2004); and S. R. FPrice, “From Noble Funerals to Divine Cult: the Consecration of RomanEmperors,” in Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Soc,ed. David Cannadine and S. R. F. Price (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1987), 56–105. The distinction between funerals at public expense( funus publicum) and other privately funded events, as well as the process forallowing funerals in the Forum Romanum, remains uncertain.5. The real- time digita l models of the Forum Romanum used in theseanalyses were created at UCLA over a number of years; http://www.etc.ucla.edu. This study conta ins two disti nct types of models , each built withrelated, but not entirely similar, goals and methodologies. The two types areclearly distinguished by surface material. The fully textured, highly detailedmodels showing imperial Rome in the fourth century CE were developed
in a multi-university project directed by Bernie Frischer and Diane Favro;the construction of the models was overseen by Dean Abernathy initially atUCLA and later at the University of Virginia. For a full list of participantsand data, see http://dlib.etc.ucla.edu/projects/Forum . Scholarly scienticcommittees vetted each building reconstruction. The original models wererebuilt by Itay Zaharovits (UCLA ETC), Steven Guban (UCLA ETC), TomBeresford (UCLA ETC), and Brendan Beachler (UCLA ETC) under thedirection of Christopher Johanson (UCLA) in order to further rene thegeographical accuracy of the models and to accommodate the demands ofinternet-based distribution. The schematic, textureless models depictingrepublican Rome were based on the doctoral research of Johanson, whooversaw development by Tom Beresford (UCLA ETC) and Kathryn Fallat(UCLA ETC); Philip Stinson (University of Kansas) worked on sections ofan initial investigation of the Curia and Comitium complex.
A graphic representation is a bearer of meaning. In creating the mod-els of the Forum Romanum, two general operating principles were imple-mented. First was the decision to convey the level of evidence on which it isbased through graphical means. Since data for the forum in the republicanperiod is limited and often controversial, the buildings are depicted as sim-ple masses without detail. The models represent possible, but not denitivereconstructions of the form and location of individual monuments. In con-trast, the richer archaeological and textual information for the imperialperiod allows (if not encourages) a higher level of detail, including materialtextures and colors and architectural details and inscriptions, as well asincreased specicity about building heights. The result has a greater senseof verisimilitude, but is consciously mediated by the second operating prin-ciple. The modeling team members decided not to aim for a hyperrealisticdigital representation. Instead, they conceptualized the digital reconstruc-
tion models as knowledge representations based on documented archaeo-logical information, period-specic analogs, and valid secondary informationsuch as Renaissance drawings of lost building components. Features thatcannot be recreated or located with certainty are not included. At timestechnological and resource limitations restricted development. Thus thereare few statues, no people, little vegetation, and no grafti; building surfacesdo not show age or wear. Structures whose form and placement are contro- versial are not shown. The result occupies a precarious position between thehyperrealistic renderings familiar from contemporary lms, with historicenvironments recreated in toto, and rigorously documented archaeologicalreconstructions often depicted as a sanitized (if informative) line drawings without textures or color.
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 33
6. For well-executed line drawings of the reconstructed forum see those byElizabeth H. Riorden in John E. Stambaugh, The Ancient Roman City (Bal-timore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988); Cairoli Fulvio Giuliani andPatrizia Verduchi, L’area centrale del Foro Romano (Florence: L.S. Olschki,1987), 163, g. 233. For a discussion and bibliography of two- and three-dimensional reconstructions of ancient Rome, see Lothar Haselberger,“Mapping Augustan Rome: Introduction to an Experiment,” in Mapping Augustan Rome, ed. Elisha Ann Dumser, Journal of Roman Archaeology, suppl.series 50 (2002), 9–28. Zanker’s inuential book Forum Romanum: Die Neug-estaltung durch Augustus considered over six hundred years of the forum’shistory, but provided only two reconstructions for the Imperial period: asimplied black-and-white sketch and a tightly cropped photograph of thefamous plaster model of Rome at the time of Constantine built at approxi-mately 1:250 scale; Forum Romanum: Die Neugestaltung durch Augustus (Tübingen: E. Wasmuth, 1972).7. It is only in rare cases that researchers possess the technical and scienticskills to execute complex restoration drawings, models, or full-scale buildingreconstructions; Fikret Yegül and Tristan Couch, “Building a Roman Bathfor the Cameras,” Journal of Roman Archaeology 16, no. 1 (2003), 153–77.
8. Diane Favro, “In the Eyes of the Beholder: VR Urban Models and Aca-demia,” Journal of Roman Archaeology, suppl. series 61 (2006), 321–34.9. The most deta iled descr iption of the Roman funeral remains Polybius(6.52–54) who was writing in the rst half of the second century BCE. Hisaim, however, was not to describe the funeral; rather he used certain aspectsof the funeral institution as examples to illustrate why Romans are braverthan their Carthaginian foes.10. Flower, Ancestor Masks , 97.11. Graham Zanker, Modes of Viewing in Hellenistic Poetry and Art (Madison:University of Wisconsin Press, 2004). In the Roman funerary context, thepatron (the family of the deceased) may have prevented the representationof buildings in the forum because they were associated with other clans.12. Catharine Edwards, Writing Rome: Textual Approaches to the City (Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Andrews Burnett, “Buildings
and Monuments on Roman Coins,” in Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire: E. Togo Salmon Papers II, ed. George Paul and Michael Ierardi (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999).13. Diana Kleiner, Roman Sculpture (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1992),248–50; Mario Torelli, Lexicon Topigraphicum Urbis Romae ( LTUR), ed. Eva Margareta Steinby (Rome: Quasar, 1999) vol. 4, 95–96. The building identi-cations are for the most part agreed upon by scholars, though the arch depictedon the Debt Burning relief remains variously identied either as the Arch of Tiberius equated with the arch joining the Basilica Iulia and Temple of Saturnover the Vicus Iugarius or as an unveried arch on the Clivus Capitolinus. Aprocession of sacricial animals (the souvetaurilia) is carved on the back of eachrelief which led early restorers to place the Analgypha as opposing balustradesatop the rostra; however, the archaeological evidence is inconclusive.14. The Rostra Augusti was a speaker’s platform usually reserved for popu-
lar assemblies, political campaigning, and imperial rituals. In the Julio-Claudian age it was common for speeches to be delivered across the forum, with the emperor on the plat form at the Temple of Divus Iulius and thepresumptive heir on the Rostra Augusti as at the funerals of Octavia Maiorand Augustus; Dio Cass. 54.35.5; Suet. Aug . 100. The depiction of Romanspeakers atop a simplied dias was an established artistic trope and in thesereliefs substitutes for a more realistic representation of the rostra.15. On the Debt Burning relief the Temple of Castor and Pollux and theBasilica Iulia are accurately sited in relation to one another. The Temple ofSaturn is shown in alignment, but actually juts far forward; the Temple of Vespasian and Titus is also aligned frontally, though in the forum it sits atright angles to the other buildings depicted.
16. The following interpretation of the building depictions on the Anagly-pha reliefs runs contra to Richardson’s proposal that their placement wasarbitrary; Lawrence Richardson Jr., A New Topographical Dictionary of A Rome (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 292–93.17. Visuality refers to the cultural constitution of vision. While the conceptof the period eye has been explored for post-antique painting and artwork,it has only recently been considered in relation to Roman architecture,urban design, and processional events. Paul Zanker wisely cautions scholarsnot to over generalize by imaging ancient viewers are imbued with theknowledge of all antiquity, rather than the specics of a particular period,class, and gender; “In Search of the Roman Viewer,” in The Interpretation of Architectural Sculpture in Greece and Rome, ed. Dianna Buitron-Oliver (Wash-ington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1997), 179; Diane Favro, “AncientRome through the Veil of Sight,” in Sites Unseen: Landscape and Vision, ed.Dianne Harris and Dede Ruggles (Pittsburgh: University of PittsburghPress, 2007), 111–30; Diane Favro, “The Festive Experience: Roman Pro-cessions in the Urban Context,” in Festival Architecture, ed. Sarah Bonnemai-son and Christine Macy (New York: Routledge, 2007), 10–42.18. De arch.4.5.1. Vitruvius also told architects to locate altars “on a lower
level than the statues in the temples, so that those who are praying andsacricing may look upwards towards the divinity;” De arch. 4.9.19. Gregory S. Aldrete, Gestures and Acclamations in Ancient Rome (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999); Richard Brilliant, Gesture and Rank in Roman Art: The Use of Gestures to Denote Status in Romand Coinage (New Haven: The Academy, 1963).20. Roman statues could depict both deceased and living people. The numer-ous sculpted works in Rome formed a second population, as evident in a funer-ary relief showing the deceased shaking hands with a sculpture; Kleiner, RomanSculpture, 236. In republican-period funeral processions the actors or familymembers wearing ancestral masks imitated motionless statues in chariots; bythe time of the Principate actors were more animated, interacting directly withthe audience; Jörg Rüpke, “Triumphator and Ancestor Rituals: Between Sym-bolic Anthropology and Magic,” Numen 53, no. 3 (2006), 251–89.
21. Especially inuential in architectural and urban design circles wereDonald Appleyard, Kevin Lynch, and John Myer, The View from the Roa (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1964); and Kevin Lynch, The Image of the City (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1960). The diagrams and notational systemsexplored in these works, however, did not gain wide popularity. In a few casesthese representational strategies were applied to the analysis of historicalenvironments, but generally by practitioners, not historians; G. E. KidderSmith, Italy Builds: Its Modern Architecture and Native Inheritance (New York:Reinhold, 1955); Rob Krier, Urban Space, trans. Christine Czechowski andGeorge Black (New York: Rizzoli, 1979).22. Heinrich Drerup, “Bildraum und Realraum in der römischen Architek-tur,” Römische Mitteilungen 66 (1959), 145–74; Daniela Corlàita Scagliarini,“Spazio e decorazione nella pittura pompeiana,” Palladio 23–25 (1974–76),3–44; Lise Bek, “Towards Paradise on Earth: Modern Space Conception in
Architecture, a Creation of Renaissance Humanism,” Analecta romana IstitutDanici , suppl. 9 (Rome, 1980); Franz Jung “Gebaute Bilder,” Antike Kunst 17 (1984) 71–122; John R. Clarke, Houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C.–A.D Ritual, Space, and Decoration (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991),1–77; Bettina Bergmann, “The Roman House as Memory Theater: TheHouse of the Tragic Poet in Pompeii,” Art Bulletin 76, no. 2 ( June 1994),225–56. For consideration of urban sightlines see Francesca Bocchi, “Nuovemetodologie per la storia delle città: La città in quattro dimensioni,” in Medieval Metropolises , Proceedings of the Congress of Atlas Working Group,ed. Francesca Bocchi (Bologna: Gras, 1999), 11–28; S. J. R. Ellis, “TheDistribution of Bars at Pompeii: Archaeological, Spatial and Viewshed Analysis,” Journal of Roman Archeology 17, no. 1 (2004), 371–84.
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
23. Diane Favro, “Reading the Augustan City,” in Narrative and Event in Ancient Art , ed. Peter Holliday (New York: Cambridge University Press,1993), 230–57; Michael Koortbojian, “ In Commemorationem Mortuorum: Text and Image Along the ‘Streets of Tombs’“ in Art and Text in RomanCulture, ed. Ja´ s Elsner (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).24. The domestic architecture preserved around the Bay of Naples is the mostcommon subject of kinetic, as well as stationary, visual analyses, thoughresearch is expanding; Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, Houses and Society in Pompeiiand Herculaneum (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994); G. P. Earl,“Wandering the House of the Birds: Reconstruction and Perception at RomanItalica,” The 6th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeologyand Cultural Heritage VAST (2005), http://public-repository.epoch-net.org/ publications/VAST2005/shortpapers/short1056.pdf (accessed 30 July, 2007).Fixed sightline analysis is problematic for ancient processional events wherethe audience members, as well as the parade participants, were frequently inmotion; Favro, “The Festive Experience,” 10–42.25. Research on the senses in historical contexts is expanding in tandem with asurge of publications about sensorial contemporary architecture; Michael Bene-dikt, “Coming to Our Senses,” Harvard Design Magazine 26 (Spring/Summer
2007), 83–91. For example, olfactory stimuli are mentioned for the Romanfuneral (specically the need for perfumes to mask the smell of death), but suchdiscussions rarely consider the architectural context; Herodian 4.2; ConstanceClassen, Aroma: The Cultural History of Smell (London: Routledge, 1994), 13–50.26. In effect, illustrations are used to present ndings of research rather thanoperating as part of the research; Diane Favro, “The Street Triumphant: The Urban Impact of Roman Triumphal Parades” in Streets: Critical Perspec-tives on Public Space, ed. Zeynep Çelik, Diane Favro, and Richard Ingersoll(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994) 151–64.27. Seamless access to archaeological and modeling data about a digitalreconstruction is essential. Experiments are underway to make the veracityparameters of reconstructions evident either graphically (e.g., digital water-marks) or with accompanying graphs (e.g. veracity sliders); Kim Veltman,“Developments and Challenges in Digital Culture,” Proceedings of the Moscow
EVA Conference (Moscow: Russian Ministry of Culture, 2001), http://www.sumscorp.com/articles/pdf/2001%20Developments%20in%20Digital%20Culture.pdf (accessed 30 June 2007); John Pollini, “The Problematics of Making Ambiguity Explicit in Virtual Reconstructions: A Case Study of the Mausoleum of Augustus,” abstract, http://www.chart.ac.uk/ 21st AnnualConference of CHArt: Computers and the History of Art http://www.chart.ac.uk/chart2005/abstracts/pollini.htm (accessed 30 June 2007).28. Such phenomenological experiments acknowledge a greater scholarlycomfort level today with fuzzy logic and indeterminacy.29. Oliver Grau, Virtual Art: From Illusion to Immersion translated by GloriaCustance (Cambridge MIT Press, 2003), 25–26.30. For short references to funeral processions of the middle and late Repub-lic period, see Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 5.17.2; 11.39.55; Horace, Serm.1.6.43;Plutarch, Lucul.43. For the speech on the rostra see Polybius 6.53.1; “in foro,”
Cicero, De Orat . 11.84.341; the ancient sources are collected in Friedrich Vollmer, “Laudationum funebrium Romanorum historia et reliquiarum edi-tio,” in Jahrbücher für classische Philologie, Suppl. (1891), 445–528.31. The crowd may have already gathered in the forum since, by the lateRepublic, some funerals were announced in advance; see Cic. de Leg. 2.24.61.32. Court cases did not adjourn for a funerary parade; Cic. De Or . 2.225. Tocompensate, funerals were loud; see Horace Sat . 1.6.42–44 where an orator issaid to have such a loud voice that he could drown out three concurrent funerals.33. The housing situation for Roman senators is examined in J. P. Guilhembet,“Les résidences urbaines des sénateurs romains des Gracques à Auguste: Lamaison dans la ville,” L’Information historique 58, no. 5 (1996), 185–97. Usefulcase studies are Steven M. Cerutti, “The Location of the Houses of Cicero and
Clodius and the Porticus Catuli on the Palatine Hill in Rome” American Jour-nal of Philology 118, no. 3 (1997), 417–26; M. Medri, “Fonti letterarie e fontiarcheologiche: un confronto possibile su M. Emilio Scauro il Giovane, la suadomus magnica e il theatrum opus maximum omnium,” Mélanges d’archéologieet d’histoire de l’École française de Rome 109, no. 1 (1997), 83–110; E. Papi,“Domus est quae nulli villarum mearum cedat (Cic. Epist . 5.6.18). Osservazionisulle residenze del Palatino alla metà del I secolo a.C.,” in Horti romani: atti delconvegno internazionale, Roma, 4–6 maggio 1995 , ed. Maddalena Cima and Euge-nio La Rocca (Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 1995), 45–67. The exactroute of the Sacra Via is controversial. Some scholars argue the name refers toa processional path rather than to a specic street, a distinction that is sup-ported by the discrepancies between the textual and archaeological evidence,and by changes in denition over time, most specically after the re of Nero;Filippo Coarelli, LTUR, vol. 4, 223–28; Richardson, New Topographical Diction-ary, 338–40. Debates over the pre-Neronian route are explored by AdamZiolkowski in Sacra Via: Twenty Years after , Journal of Juristic Papyrology Supple-ments 3 (Warsaw: Fundacja im. Rafała Taubenschlaga, 2004).34. Possible but not necessarily probable entries existed along the Argiletumto the north, the Vicus Iugarius and the Vicus Tuscus to the south, the Clivus
Argentarius to the northwestern entrances that connected to the Sacra Viaand the southeastern entrances to the forum along the road paralleling thenorthern course of the Sacra Via. Parades could be quite long. By the lateRepublic, Sulla’s funeral was remarkable even for a funus publicum; in additionto the countless horn and ute players, the professional mourners and thefamily, priests and priestess, the senate, all magistrates including their lictors,many knights, and all of his legions joined the parade; App. B. Civ. 1.14.106.35. The similarity was noted in antiqui ty; Sen. Consolatio ad Marciam 3.1refers to the funeral of Drusus as “very much like a triumph;” HendrikSimon Versnel, Triumphus: an Inquiry into the Origin, Development and Meanof the Roman Triumph (Leiden: Brill, 1970). Understanding of the triumphalroute implicitly guides the discussion of the pompa funebris .36. See above, note 2; Polybius 6.53–54 contains the fullest description.37. See above, note 3. Jörg Rüpke, contends that the parade of ancestors is
actually a parade of living statuary; “Triumphator and Ancestor Rituals,” 272.38. Nicholas Purcell, LTUR, vol. 2, 325–36 descr ibes the sta te of the evi-dence and provides bibliography. For a relatively recent three-dimensionalreconstruction of the republican forum, see Karthryn Welch, “A New Viewof the Origins of the Basilica: The Atrium Regium, Graecostasis, andRoman Diplomacy,” Journal of Roman Archaeology 16, no. 1 (2003), 5–34.39. Mark Gillings, “The Real, the Virtually Real, and the Hyperreal: TheRole of VR in Archaeology,” in Envisoning the Past, ed. Sam Smiles andStephanie Moser (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2004), 229–30.40. Siting validation is obtained through the use of a GIS base layer. 1:500geo-referenced cadastral maps of the modern archaeological site created byS.A.R.A. Nistri, Srl. function as the glue that holds the individual archaeo-logical studies together. All maps and plans were geo-referenced in ESRI ArcMap, exported to Google Earth via Arc2Earth, and then imported into
Google Sketchup.41. Randall Davis, Howard Shrobe, and Peter Szolowits, “What Is a Knowl-edge Representation?” AI Magazine 14, no. 1 (Spring 1993), 17–33.42. Each type of model (from schematic to the more detailed) is limited. The nature of the evidence for the forum of the mid-Republic invites con-troversy. The most in-depth examination of the republican forum is FilippoCoarelli’s two-volume work Foro Romano (Rome: Quasar, 1983–85), butmany of its conclusions have been challenged. For example, Coarelli’s recon-struction of a circular Comitium has been repeatedly questioned, and por-tions of the reconstruction seem to defy archaeological evidence. Nosatisfactory alternative, however, has been proposed. The approach taken inthis study is to work within research boundaries already established by
D E AT H I N M O T I O N : F U N E R A L P R O C E S S I O N S I N T H E R O M A N F O R U M 35
archaeologists, classicists, and historians, focusing on experiential analysisand avoiding topographical debate. Where feasible, alternatives are consid-ered. Above all, the use of a GIS as a base layer ensures that the reconstruc-tions adhere to real-world constraints.43. For temples of the mid-Republic the plans and positions may be knownas with those of Opimian Concord, Castor and Pollux, Vesta, and Saturn,but the height and exact conguration in the Republic era remain uncertain.For the Temple of Saturn, only the podium may relate to the republican version of the structure; the rest of the temple, which would have affectedthe view from the forum, has been obliterated. The Basilica Porcia and theCuria Hostilia exist only as fragmented foundations of questionable identity. While signicant portions of the Basilica Iulia survive, its form and elevation would have differed drastically from the earlier Basilica Sempronia.44. Republican reconstructions are found in Peter Connolly, The AncientCity: Life in Classical Athens & Rome (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998)108 and Welch, “A New View,” 29 g. 11 (by Stinson), though with distort-ing views elevated above eye level.45. Not only do most pictorial reconstructions place the observer highabove ground level, they also exaggerate the topography as with the depic-
tion by Alberto Carpiceci in Rome 2000 Years Ago(Florence: Bonechiedizioni, 1981), 8–9 (g. 8). The same is true for the plaster of paris modelof Rome (generally referred to as the Plastico) begun in the 1930s, whichelevated major hills in Rome by 15 to 25 percent to make them more visible;Giuseppina Pisani Sartorio, “Le plan de Gismondi,” in Rome: L’Espace urbainet ses repr é sentations, ed. Francois Hinard and Manuel Royo (Paris: Pressesde l’Université de Par is–Sorbonne, 1991), 264. For the inuence of Jupiter’stemple and the Capitoline Hill on the mental image of the city, see Cathe-rine Edwards, Writing Rome: Textual Approaches to the City (Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 1996) 69–95.46. The following case studies explore hypothetical funerals of the Corneliidating roughly to 183–145 BCE. There is no direct evidence from thesefunerals. Instead, we use the funerals as a point of departure to follow thehypothetical routes that such events must have taken.
47. Flower, Ancestor Masks , 48–52; Val. Max. 8.15.1; and App. Iber . 23.48. For an alternate view on this manipulation, see Flower, Ancestor Masks ,48–52, who notes (48): “Although our sources are not explicit on this point,they imply that the whole procession started at the house and continued up tothe temple of Jupiter on the Capitol to pick up Africanus, before making its way to the Forum.” Appian and Valerius Maximus both note the retrieval ofScipio Africanus’simago from the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. Vale-rius Maximus writes (“Whenever the gens Cornelia need to hold a funeral, theimago is sought from [the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus].”) Most likely, Valerius Maximus is ignoring the details of the stemma of the Cornelii. Whileit is possible that every branch of the Cornelii brought out the imago of Africa-nus—the Sullae did—one wonders whether the Cornelii Lentuli did the same.49. For a comprehensive collection of the ancient sources see Flower, Ances-tor Masks, 185–222.
50. Ancient sources do not specify why or when the imago of Scipio Africa-nus was placed in the Capitoline temple. Certainly, Scipio had always dem-onstrated a special relationship with the temple; Liv. 38.51.12; and 26.19.7; J. R. Fea rs “The Cult of Jupiter and Roman Imperial Ideology” II .17.1 Aufsteig und Niedergang der römischen Welt (1981), 44; Ann Vasaly, Represen-tations: Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory (Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1993), 73. The similar mythologies of Scipio and Alexanderthe Great underscore the particular difculties of republican evidence; James S. Ruebel, “Politics and Folktale in the Classical World,” Asian Folk-lore Studies 50, no. 1 (1991), 17–18.51. On the Cornelii and the Tomb of the Scipios, see Toynbee, Death andBurial , 39–40.
52. Livy (44.16.10–11) notes that the house, which probably stood on the Vicus Tuscus, was purchased and demolished by Tiberius Sempronius Grac-chus in 170 BCE to build the Basilica Sempronia; Richardson, New Topo- graphical Dictionary, 134; E. Papi, LTUR, vol. 2, 88. Therefore, the purelypragmatic need to compensate for the extremely short march to the rostraby extending the parade to the Capitoline Hill would have been obviated within thirteen years of Scipio’s death.53. Did the main procession move up the Capitoline to retrieve the mask? Or was it a separate processional element? Appian reports that the imago of Scipio was still being fetched from the temple during his own time; App. Iber . 23. Heimplies that the imago was incorporated into the full procession, but comparesit to other imagines that are brought “from the Forum.” Rather than consider“from the Forum” an egregious error, recall that Appian was writing duringthe rst third of the second century CE. While the form of the funeral andthe representation of the imagines had changed drastically since the Republic,the tradition of manipulating the conveyance of the imagines continued.54. They may have been sitting in bleachers that were built in anticipation ofthe upcoming games; E. J. Jory, “Gladiators in the Theatre,” The Classical Quar-terly, new series 36, no. 2. (1986), 537–39. See below for the imperial model,
which included bleachers that served a different purpose; Herodian 4.2.5.55. It must be underscored that such abstracted models are experiments. Asa result they should be treated as hypotheses for investigations much like thetrials undertaken within a scientic laboratory. These models represent anaggregation and 3-D visualization of the published work of others. Theyaddress the question, “If the forum had looked like this, how might we re-read the rest of the evidence?”56. Dion. Hal. Rom. Ant. 4.61.3; Einar Gjerstad, Early Rome III: Fortications, Domestic Architecture, Sanctuaries, Stratigraphic Excavatio (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1960); John W. Stamper, The Architecture of Roman TemThe Republic to the Middle Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2005). For a full discussion of the reconstruction problem see, Mantha Zar-makoupi, review of Stamper, Bryn Mawr Classical Review, 4:22, 2006, and thereview of Stamper by John Senseney, American Journal of Archaeology 111,
no. 2 (April 2007), 384. Cairoli Giuliani notes that in the Gjerstad recon-struction the dimensions of the Temple of Jupiter would have exceededthose of the Parthenon in its 12-meter central intercolumniation; L’edilizianell’antichita (Rome: La Nuova Italia Scientica, 1990), 16–17.57. The Capitoline temple was frequently mentioned in speeches given inthe forum, underscoring the crucial intervisuality between these urbannodes. Livy notes that Manlius Capitolinus was not convicted for seditionbecause the site of his trial in the Campus Martius afforded magnicent views of Jupiter’s temple; Livy 6.20.5; for a full discussion see Vasaly, Repre- sentations , 15. While elite speakers in the Comitium could have seen the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the audience could not. They reliedon their knowledge of its location rather than an actual prospect.58. The Roman funeral procession included bands of musicians and, often,persons singing dirges in praise of the dead; John G. Landels, Music in
Ancient Greece and Rome (London: Routledge, 1999), 179–80. The recreationof both the basic sounds and the music of ancient instruments is extremelyproblematic; as a result, only generalized interpretations of sound can beinferred from the architectural context. New attempts to simulate Romanperformances are underway by experimental archaeologists; see for examplehttp://www.soundcenter.it/synauliaeng.htm and http://www.musica-romana.de/ (accessed 30 June 2007).59. Pliny mentions the statues on the rostra; NH 34.23–25. For a hypothe-tical plan of statue placement in the Comitium and on the rostra, see MarkusSehlmeyer, Stadtrömische Ehrenstatuen der republikanischen Zeit: Hund Kontext von Symbolen nobilitären Standesbewusstseins (Stuttgart: FranzSteiner, 1999), map 2.
60. Though Roman spectators in elevated locations (such as the poor in thehighest seats in theaters) may have had totalizing views of events, their sight was compromised by distance and lack of precision, especially without ocu-lar aids. Regarding ancient spectator seating and associated legislation seeElizabeth Rawson, “Discrimina Ordinum: The Lex Julia Theatralis,” Papersof the British School at Rome 55 (1987), 83–114; F. Pina Polo, Contra ArmaVerbis: Der Redner vor dem Volk in der späten römischen Republik (Stuttgart:Franz Steiner, 1996), 23–25; cf. Robert Morstein-Marx, Mass Oratory andPolitical Power in the Late Roman Republic (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2004), 51, esp. note 57.61. On the effect of the chronological arrangement, see Maurizio Bettini, Anthropology and Roman Culture: Kinship, Time, Images of the Soul(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 167–83; and Bodel, “Death on Dis-play,” 264.62. Cic. De leg 2.23.58. Elite Roman women could also receive similar funer-ary honors; Cic. De orat . 2.11; Suet. Iul . 26, Suet. Calig . 10.63. Cic. Amic. 25.96; Varro, Rust . 1.2.9.64. Plut. C. Grach 5.3; for a full discussion of the evidence, see Morstein- Marx, Mass Oratory, 45–7.
65. Plautus Curc . 475–6 refers to a canalis in the forum and archaeologicalexplorations have conrmed the existence of second-century vaulting; JohnN. Hopkins, “The Cloaca Maxima and the Monumental Manipulation of Water in Archaic Rome,” Aquae Urbis Romae: The Waters of the City of Rome 4 (March 2007), 9.66. The senaculum was the area where senators congregated before beingsummoned to enter the Senate House; Varro, Ling.5.156. The Graecostasis was a raised tribunal for ambassadors from foreign states; Varro, Ling.5.155.67. For the general topography of the area, see Paolo Carafa, Il comizio di Roma dalle origini all’etá di Augusto (Roma: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 1998).68. On the Basilica Porcia, see E. M. Steinby, LTUR, vol. 1, 187; and Liv. 39.44.7.On porticoed viewing at funerals during the Empire, see Cassius Dio 75.74.4.69. Though it is possible statues faced different directions, the majority ofexamples found in situ were oriented in the same direction; Peter Stewart,
Statues in Roman Society: Representation and Response (Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2003), 262.70. For a discuss ion of Cicero’s famous reference to the Capitol, see Vasaly, Representations, 83–84.71. The evidence is hardly clear. Valerius Maximus in the paragraph subse-quent to his description of Scipio’s imago recounts that an efgies of Cato wasplaced in the Curia, but makes no direct funerary association; Val. Max.8.15.2.72. Valerius Maximus notes that Scipio allegedly did not participate in busi-ness without rst having spent some time in the Temple of Jupiter on theCapitoline and for this reason was considered by some to be the god’s prog-eny; Val. Max. 1.2.2, Raymond Marks, From Republic to Empire: Scipio Afri-canus in the Punica of Silius Italicus (New York: Peter Lang, 2005), 169, 187.73. Price, “From Noble Funerals,” 57–58.
74. For example, Herodian records that at the funeral of Septimius Severusthe Roman magistrates gave up their authority; 4.2.75. Price emphasizes the role of the deceased emperor’s apotheosis as adening act that separated him from his mortal republican forebears; “FromNoble Funerals,” 57–105.76. Dio Cass.75.4–5, Herodian 4.2, SHA Sev. 7.77. Dozens of statues stood in the forum, including republican remnantssuch as the statue of Marsyas. By the late second century CE the new sculp-tural additions were predominantly of the imperial family; Stewart, Statues (see note 69), 5, 87–8, 134.78. Dio Cass. 43.49.79. Suet. Iul. 84–85; Aug . 100.
80. The high podium of this building was identied as “rostra aedes diviIuli;” Pierre Gros, LTUR, vol. 3, 117. At his funeral Augustus was eulogizedat the opposing rostra; Roger B. Ulrich, The Roman Orator and the SacredStage: The Roman Templum Rostratum, Collection Latomus 222 (Brussels:Latomus, 1994), 186–87.81. Cassius Dio includes the description of the funeral after a list of dreamsas part of Septimius’s propaganda to legitimize his rule; 75.4–5; TimothyBarnes, “The Composition of Cassius Dio’s ‘Roman History,’” Phoenix 38,no. 3 (Autumn 1984), 245; Price, “From Noble Funerals,” 59–61.82. The funeral given by Septimius compensated for the numerous disre-spectful acts against Pertinax after he was murdered; SHA Pert . 11, 14; DioCass., 74.13.1–2.83. The traditional dress of mourning was the grayish toga pulla; Juv. X.245.In addition, Roman men put aside all ornaments and did not cut their hair;Herodian, 4.2; Terent. Heaut. II.3.47; Suet. Jul. 67, Aug.23, Cal. 24.84. Evidence on the time of day for imperial Roman funerals is scant. Presum-ably the funeral procession did not arrive at the rostra until the sun fell on theplatform at mid-morning. It exited the forum in mid-afternoon to allowenough daylight to complete the activities at the burial site; Plut. Vit. Sull. 38.
85. Roman funeral music and ritual lamentation has been reconstructed bycomposer Walter Maioli. His “Neniae,” performed by Synaulia ResearchGroup, is recorded on Synaulia, Music of Ancient Rome, Volume 1: Win Instruments(Amiata Records 1996). Regarding the signicance of music infunerals of the Imperial era see John R. Levison, “The Roman Character ofFunerals in the Writings of Josephus, Journal for the Study of Judaism 33, no.3 (Sept. 2002), 274–76.86. Damaged in the re of 191/192 CE, the condition of the temple of Vespasian and Titus directly south of Concord’s temple is uncertain for thetime of Pertinax’s funeral; Dio Cass. 72.24.1.87. The Rostra Augusti was embelli shed with statues, including one of Augustus (Tac. Ann. 4.67), as documented by ancient texts and the orationrelief on the Arch of Constantine (see Figure 14).88. SHA Pert.3.4.9.
89. Dio Cass. 75.5.90. Septimius may have undertaken more extensive reworking of the ForumRomanum in lieu of creating an imperial forum. The addition of his great arch visually, if not literally, closed in and dened the space with monumental gatewaysat the four main entries. Septimius Severus is also associated with the creation ofthe Forma Urbis Romae, a great marble map of the entire city. A comprehensivestudy of Severan building in Rome is underway by Susann Lusnia.91. Though not ofcially adopted by Marcus Aurelius, Septimius referredto him as “father;” Dio Cass. 76.7. The equestrian statue also reected theimpact of the gigantic Equus Domitiani that stood in the center of the forumuntil Domitian suffered damnatio memoriae; Stat. Silv.1.1.92. A re in the late second century ravaged the Palatine slopes and Templeof Vesta, as well as the Forum Pacis; the extent of destruction in the centralforum is uncertain; Dio Cass. 73.24.
93. Charmaine Gorrie, “Julia Domna’s Building Patronage, Imperial Fam-ily Roles and the Severan Revival of Moral Legisla tion,” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 53, no. 1 (2004), 65–68.94. Restoration work on the Temple of Vespasian is thought to date tobefore 203 CE; CIL VI.938. Archaeological evidence afrms the erection ofthe columns as part of the Severan reworking of the area around the rostra;Patrizia Verduchi, “Rostra Augusti,” LTUR, vol. 4, 216.95. In the intervening years numerous sculptures had been added to theforum, including the large reliefs of the Plutei Traiani/Hadriani. Most majorbuildings had been restored or renovated. The new Temple of Antoninusand Faustina to the southeast, erected in the mid-second century CE, stood just outside the main open part of the forum.
8/12/2019 FAVRO, JOHANSON,Death in Motion- Funeral Processions in the Roman Forum
96. The SPQR dedication refers not only to Septimius’ foreign conquests,but also obliquely to the defeat of his political rivals, though he did not wantto overtly celebrate a triumph for a victory over other Romans. One sourcerecords Septimius declined a Parthian triumph claiming ill-health; SHA Sev.9; 16,6; Simon Swain, Stephen Harrison, Ja´ s Elsner, Severan Culture (Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press), 202–6. Nevertheless, the honor of thetriumph was acknowledged in various events as memorialized in a friezeabove the side arches depicting the pompa triumphalis.97. The bronze Equus Severi commemorated a dream of Septimius thatforetold his succession. In the dream a horse threw off Pertinax and thenlifted Septimius on his back; the event took place at the spot where popularassemblies met during the Republic just to the east of the site selected forthe arch; Herodian 2.9.6.98. The original bronze letters are not extant, but the inscription can be readfrom the cuttings into the stone; CIL VI.1033, cf. 31230.99. Richard Brilliant, The Arch of Septimius Severus in the Roman Forum, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 29 (1967); LTUR, vol. 1, 103–5.100. Ann. 2.41.101. Through the location of the arch of Tiberius remains controversial,
many follow Coarelli, who identies it with the buttressing arch betweenthe Temple of Saturn and the Basilica Iulia; Coarelli, LTUR, vol. 1, 107–8.In line with Roman pictorial conventions the arch is depicted frontally onthe oration relief from the Arch of Constantine (see Figure 14).102. Early scholars argued that stairs and a small open space were cut intothe rostra’s northern side to provide access after the construction of theSeveran arch; Christian Hülsen, The Roman Forum, Its History and Monu-ments, trans. Jesse Carter, 2nd ed. (Rome: Loescher, 1906), 62–64. Such anadjustment has been called into question by subsequent excavations; Verdu-chi, LTUR, vol. 4, 216. The remains of the nearby Umbilicus also seem todate to the Severan period. After the restoration of the central pavement ofthe forum, Septimius emphasized his reverence for Rome’s history by pre-serving the Augustan-era inscription of L. Naevius Surdinus. On the com-plex archaeology of the area see Giuliani and Verduchi, L’area centrale,
38–50. The Roman exploitation of architectura l design to exclude wheeledtrafc is evident at Pompeii where the higher level of the forum prevented vehicles from entering.103. SHA Sev.7; Herodian 4.2; Toynbee, Death and Burial , 59–61.104. Many modern sources identify this as the route followed by the Sacra Via after the devastating re of Nero; Coarelli, LTUR, vol. 2, 227.105. A third alternative would have the processional vehicles drive around the Arch of Septimius on the east. The exact conguration of the paving in thearea during the Severan age complicates assessment of this route; furthermore,the circumvention of the emperor’s arch seems unlikely for symbolic reasons.106. The break in the f ront balustrade of the upper rostr a shown on theoration relief on the Arch of Constantine may indicate the position of atemporary stair; Hülsen, The Roman Forum, 70.107. The procession could also have entered the forum north of Caesar’s
temple and then moved across the front to rejoin the southern street thatparalleled the Basilica Iulia, but this route would have omitted passagethrough the Parthian arch of Augustus.108. The parking of processional vehicles (such as those carrying the giftsto the deceased) remains problematic in every scenario. In this case the spacebehind the rostra was especially tight, compelling the parade participantsand vehicles to line up along one of the streets to the east.109. Facing southwest, the façade of the arch was lit by the sun for most ofthe day, increasing its visual attraction. The triumphal procession has gener-ally been given as the raison d’être for the si ting of the arch. The argumentis far from secure. The exact entry point of the triumph into the forum is
into question by comprehensive digital reconstructions indicating that thelarge triumphal retinues could not easily navigate certain spaces such as thearch with steps and the sharp turn onto the Clivus Capitolinus, necessitatinga transfer from vehicles to foot transport.110. Beneath this was added a second line ( impp. caes. severus et antoni-
nus pii felices augg. restituerunt ), which indicates a restoration, probablynot extensive, by Severus and Caracalla; CIL VI.938.111 . Brilliant argued persuasively that the iconographic program on thearch was meant to be read by moving around the structure beginning at thesouth corner facing the forum; Arch of Septimius , 169, 220–50.112. The familiar left to right narrative of the triumphal register as well as thelarger relief panels encouraged viewers to move their gaze toward the north.113. Regarding the dynastic emphasis of Severan architecture in Rome seeSusann Lusnia, “Urban Planning and Sculptural Display in Severan Rome:Reconstructing the Septizodium and Its Role in Dynastic Politics,” American Journal of Archaeology108, no. 3 (Oct. 2004), 534.114. Brilliant, Arch of Septimius , 87–88; LTUR, vol. 1, 104. The new Severanarch directly faced another monument spanning the road between theBasilica Aemilia and the Temple of Divus Iulius; this arched structure
remains controversial, identied either as part of the Porticus Gaii et Luciior, less convincingly, as Augustus’s Parthian arch; Richardson, New Topo- graphical Dictionary, 313; Filippo Coarelli, Il Foro Romano II(Rome: EdizioniQuasar 1985), 269–308.115. Dies Imperiiof Trajan: CIL VI.42–44; ofcial date of the Par thian Tri-umph of Septimius Severus: Feriale duranum col. 1, lines 14–16.116. For the name and date see, Suet. Aug.100.4; for the name alone see,Strabo 5.3.9; cf. Mart. 2.59.2. On the mausoleum and funeral of Augustussee Price, “From Noble Funerals,” 67–70.117. Penelope J. E. Davies, Death and the Emperor: Roman Imperial Fun Monuments, from Augustus to Marcus Aurelius (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2000), 49–67.118. The funerary associations of commemorative arches in or near the forumhave been noted by scholars; Karl Lehmann-Hartleben, “L’Arco di Tito,” Bul-
lettino della Commissione archeologica del Governatorato di Roma 62 (1934), 107–11.119. Davies, Death, 32–34.120. Cornelius Vermeule speculated that the arch of Septimius was intendedas a dynastic funerary monument with chambers to house the deceased;“Review of The Arch of Septimius Severus in the Roman Forum by RichardBrilliant,” American Journal of Archaeology 72, no. 3 (July 1968), 296. Theroughly nished surfaces and difcult access of the chambers probably pre-cludes such an interpretation.121. Viewing platforms in commemorative columns and arches were onlyaccessible by narrow stairs that passed by or through interior chamberspossibly holding valuables. This, as well as the lack of wear, indicates thesebelvederes must have been used only occasionally by privileged viewers.Regarding the Column of Marcus Aurelius, a construction date after theemperor’s death indicates a funerary association; Aur. Vict. Caes.16; Davies,
Death, 42–48.122. Signicantly, images of the Arch of Septimius Severus on coins empha-size the balustrade thus reinforcing the signicance of the walkway; BMCoins, Rom. Emp. 5.216n.320; RIC 4.124 no. 259.123. The great bronze sculptures on top of the arch may have been so largeas to obscure the pediment of the temple of Concord depending on theirform and scale, and on the exact height of the temple.124. The artists working for Constantine, the rst Christian emperor, mayhave purposely omitted the temples from this depiction of the forum.125. Richard Bayliss, “Archaeological Survey and Visualization: The Viewfrom Byzantium,” in Theory and Practice in Late Antique Archaeology, ed. Luke
![Johanson Manufacturing Corporation1].pdf · Johanson Manufacturing Corporation • 301 Rockaway Valley Road, Boonton, New Jersey 07005 • Phone 973.334.2676 • Fax 973.334.2954](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5ab2e9dc7f8b9ac66c8dc929/johanson-manufacturing-1pdfjohanson-manufacturing-corporation-301-rockaway.jpg)
