building acts, not unlike those of modern London, were enacted
by several of the emperors. These fixed the materials to be used,
thickness of walls, minimum width of streets, maximum height
allowed for houses, &c. After the great fire in Nero's reign, A.D.
64, an act was passed requiring the lower storeys of houses to be
built with fire-proof materials, such as peperino or burnt brick.
Enormous accumulations of statues and pictures enriched Rome during its period of greatest splendour. In the first place, the numerous statues of the republican and even of the regal period were religiously preserved at a time when, from Ancient works of art. their archaic character, they must have been regarded rather as objects of sacred or archaeological interest than as works of art (Plin. H.N. xxxiv. 15 ff., xxxv. 19 ff.). Secondly came the large Graeco-Roman class, mostly copies of earlier Greek works, executed in Rome by Greek artists. To this class belongs most of the finest existing sculpture preserved in the Vatican and other museums. Thirdly, countless statues and pictures were stolen from almost every important city in Greece, Magna Graecia, Sicily and western Asia Minor. These robberies began early, and were carried on for many centuries. The importations included works of art by all the chief artists from the 5th century downwards. Long lists are given by Pliny (H.N. xxxiii.-xxxvi.), and pedestals exist with the names of Praxiteles, Timarchus, Polyclitus, Bryaxis and others. These accumulated works of sculpture were of all materials—gold and ivory (Suet. Tit. 2), of which seventy-four are mentioned in the catalogue of the Breviarium, many hundreds or even thousands of silver[1] (Plin. H.N. xxxiii. 151 f.), while those of gilt bronze and marble must have existed in almost untold numbers (Paus. viii. 46). Nor were the accumulated stores of Greek paintings much inferior in number; not only were easel pictures by Zeuxis, Apelles, Timanthes and other Greek artists taken, but even mural paintings were carefully cut off their walls and brought to Rome secured in wooden frames (Plin. H.N. xxxv. 173, and compare ibid. 154).
|
|
Fig. 4.—Example of Early Basalt Road by the Temple of Saturn on the Clivus Capitolinus. A. Travertine paving. B. Polygonal basalt blocks. C. Concrete bedding. D. Rain-water gutter. The curb shown is taken from another part of the road. |
The roads were made of polygonal blocks of lava (silex), neatly fitted together and laid on a carefully prepared bed, Roads. similar to that used for mosaic paving (see Mosaic and Roads). Roads thus made were called viae stratae. A good specimen of Roman road-making, in which the blocks were fitted together with the utmost accuracy, is to be seen in a portion of the Clivus Capitolinus in front of the temple of Saturn (see fig. 5, which also shows the massive travertine curb which bordered the road; sometimes the curb was of lava). In 1901 the late and badly laid pavement of the Sacra Via on the ascent of the Velia was removed, and the earlier paving laid bare at a lower level. The original pavement of the Nova Via was exposed in 1904. Other well-preserved viae stratae are those leading up to the Palatine from the Summa Sacra Via and that which follows the curved line of shops in Trajan's forum.
The following is a list of the chief roads which radiated from Rome:—(1) Via Appia issued from the Servian Porta Capena and the Aurelian P. Appia; from it diverged (2) Via Latina, which issued from the Aurelian P. Latina; (3) Via Labicana and (4) Via Tiburtina issued from the Servian P. Esquilina; from (3) diverged (5) Via Praenestina at the double arch of the Claudian aqueduct, now P. Maggiore, while (4) passed through the Aurelian, P. Tiburtina; (6) Via Nomentana and (7) Via Salaria issued from the Servian P. Collina and passed respectively through the Aurelian P. Nomentana and P. Salaria; (8) Via Flaminia issued from the Servian P. Fontinalis, and was called Via Lata for the first half-mile or more, then passed through the Aurelian P. Flaminia; (9) Via Aurelia, from the Transtiberine P. Aurelia; (10) Via Portuensis, from the Transtiberine P. Portuensis; (11) Via Ostiensis, from the Servian P. Trigemina and the Aurelian P. Ostiensis; (12) Via Ardeatina, from the Servian P. Naevia and the Aurelian P. Ardeatina.
Remains of Prehistoric Rome.
It is evident from recent discoveries that the site of Rome was inhabited at a very early period.[2] Flint implements and remains of the Bronze Age have been found on the Aventine and elsewhere; and from the Early Iron Age onwards we have a continuous archaeological record, owing to the discovery of ancient burial-places. In 1902 a very early necropolis was brought to light at the S.E. corner of the temple of Antoninus and Faustina, some 17 ft. below the level of the Forum. The graves contain either the ashes of cremated bodies placed in a large vessel (dolio), or skeletons buried either in a simple trench (fossa), a tufa sarcophagus or a tree-trunk. The cremation graves are the earlier, and none are later than the 6th century, while the oldest maybe of the 9th; the pottery and other objects placed in the graves belong to the Early Iron Age. It is clear that this cemetery is earlier than the union of the Palatine and Quirinal settlements in one city (see below, p. 759). Other early cemeteries have been discovered on the Quirinal and Esquiline, which were in use from the beginning of the Iron Age down to the beginning of the historic period. The large necropolis on the Esquiline is cut in two by the “Servian” wall, which is evidently of later date. The later tombs contain objects of Etruscan, Phoenician and Greek manufacture.
There is no doubt that the earliest settlement bearing the name of Rome was on the Palatine hill,[3] which was both easy The Palatine city. of defence and possessed the means of communication with its neighbours in the proximity of the Tiber. The name Roma is said to mean “river,” but this is uncertain. The Palatine is roughly square in outline, and the Roman antiquarians sometimes applied the name Roma Quadrata to the earliest settlement; but the term seems more properly to have applied to a sanctuary connected with the foundation of the city. The ideal boundary of the city was formed by the Pomerium (see Varro, L.L. v. 143; Liv. i. 44; Dionys. i. 88), whose original course is traced by Tacitus (Ann. xii. 24). It passed along the foot of the hill (per ima montis Palatini), the angle-points being given by the Ara Maxima in the Forum Boanum, the Ara Consi in the Circus Maximus, the Curiae Veteres (near the arch of Constantine) and the Sacellum Larum (at the N. angle). But this was of course not a defensible site, and the extent of the fortified city can only be determined by the traces of its early walls. These enable us to fix its line along the whole valley of the Velabrum, on the west of the hill, and along the valley of the Circus Maximus as far as the so-called Paedagogium, about half-way on the south side.
Considerable remains of this fortification exist near the west angle of the hill. These show that the natural strength given by the cliff was increased by artificial means. The wall was set neither at the top nor at the foot of the hill, but more Ancient fortifications. than half-way up, a level terrace or shelf all round being in the rock on which the base of the wall stood. Above that the hill was cut away into a cliff, not quite perpendicular but slightly “battering” inwards, to give greater stability to the wall, which was built up against it, like a retaining wall, reaching to the top of the cliff, and probably a few feet higher. The stones used in this wall are soft tufa, a warm brown in colour, and full of masses of charred wood. The cutting to form the steep cliff probably supplied part of the material for the wall; and ancient quarries, afterwards used as reservoirs for water, exist in the mass of rock on which the so-called temple of Jupiter Victor stands. It has been asserted that these tufa blocks are not cut but split with wedges; this, however, is not the case. Tufa does not split into rectangular masses, but
- ↑ Eighty silver statues of Augustus, some equestrian and some in quadrigae, are mentioned in the Mon. Anc. 4, 51.
- ↑ On the prehistoric remains of Rome and Latium, see Pinza in Monumenti antichi pubblicati per cura della reale Accademia dei Lincei, vol. xv., 1905; also Comm. Boni's reports on the necropolis adjoining the Forum in the Notizie degli scavi, and Modestor, Introduction à l'histoire romaine (Paris, 1907).
- ↑ The “primacy of the Palatine” has been disputed by Carter (Amer. Jour. Arch., 1908, p. 181), who thinks that the first city was that of the Four Regions (see below) formed by the Etruscan kings.
