Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:01:47.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palatine Apollo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

J. H. Bishop
J. H. Bishop
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The purpose of this note is to redirect attention to some of the literary evidence that concerns the site of Apollo's temple on the Palatine. For this evidence has an irritating habit of refusing to confirm what would otherwise be irrefutable archaeological proof of the temple's site. It is now fashionable to identify the site of the temple with that occupied by the temple-core that was originally assigned to Iuppiter Victor on the south-west angle of the Palatine in the region of the Scalae Caci, the Temple of Magna Mater, the Casa Romuli, and the so-called House of Liuia. This was, in the view of most scholars, Euander's citadel that Virgil calls Pallanteum and this must be the site of the Augustan buildings. Now the House of Liuia has been identified with apparent probability as the House of Augustus, and we know from literary evidence (Suet. Aug. 29, 72, Vell. 2. 81, Dio Cass. 49. 15. 5) that the temple of Apollo, Augustus' private house, and the house decreed to him by the senate (Richmond, J.R.S., 1914, pp. 194 f.) must have been in close proximity to each other. The temple-core on the south-west of the Palatine is of Augustan date and is built over the remains of houses of the late republic1 which appear to have been demolished for the purpose. If Liuia's House was the house of Augustus then Iuppiter Victor's temple must be assigned to Apollo.

Type
Articles
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 6 , Issue 3-4 , December 1956 , pp. 187 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1956

Access options

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

References

page 187 note 1 The Temple of Iuppiter Victor was vowed in 295 B.C. and presumably built sometime soon thereafter: this seems to refute its claim. Similarly with the claims that have been advanced on behalf of Iuppiter Propugnator.

page 187 note 2 There is no proof that this was Augustus' house. It merely seems likely. Supporters of the Reber-Pinza-Richmond theories will naturally tend to take proof for granted.

page 188 note 1 There seems to be no certainty what Ovid means by this. According to Tacitus (Ann. 12. 24) the pomerium of Romulus included four points, the ara maxima of Hercules (in the Forum Boarium), the altar of Consus (in the Circus Maximus), the curiae ueteres (north-east corner of Palatine), and the sacellum Larum. It is disputed whether Tacitus' sacellum is the aedes restored by Augustus in summa sacra uia (R.G. 19. 2) or whether it is the ara Larum Praestitum mentioned by Ovid (Fast. 6. 791–2) (for a discussion cf. Platner-Ashby, pp. 314–15). But it is probably to the former that Tacitus refers, as he continues his line from the sacellum Larum to die forum Romanum (i.e. straight down the via Sacra). It is, therefore, tempting to assume mat this sacellum Larum, mentioned by Tacitus in connexion wim die pomerium of Romulus, stood on a site connected with Romulus. The sacellum or aedes was situated in the region of the Arch of Titus and might well have flanked the Porta Mugonia on the opposite side from the Temple of Iuppiter Stator.

page 188 note 2 Richmond would transpose these lines to follow lines 7 and 8, and read concubuere (with the MSS. except Vo), i.e. concubuere cum tauris. This will not affect my argument.

page 189 note 1 Because of Actium.

page 189 note 2 But Warde Fowler's article in C.Q. 1910, pp. 145–55 and particularly the not at the beginning seem to imply that he had accepted the south-west corner as the site of Apollo's temple. But perhaps he had recanted by 1917, the date of ‘Aeneas at the site of Rome’.Google Scholar

page 190 note 1 I accept the view that Roma Quadrata was the name of a particular mundus, of which there may have been more than one, on the Palatine. It is possible that Ovid's words hoc primum condita Roma loco est refer to the site of the mundus called Roma Quadrata.

page 192 note 1 Statius is talking of the palace of Domitian: hence a uicina regia will be a neighbouring building, uicina regia Tonantis cannot, in this context, merely refer to the sky.