BaBesch 72 (1997) The Sanctuary of Isis on the Campus Martius in Rome A Review Article M.J. Versluys Lembke, K. 1994, Das Iseum Campense in Rom. in Italy and imperial Rome3. Yet we still know lit- Studie über den Isiskult unter Domitian (Archäo- tle about it, particulary in comparison to the temple logie und Geschichte, Band 3) Verlag Archäologie of Isis at Pompeii, for example, a very modest und Geschichte-Heidelberg, 1994, ISBN 3-9801863- sanctuary compared to the Iseum Campense. The 2-6, 271 pages of text, 31 figures, 48 pages of illus- Isis temple on the Campus Martius is not only trations. important for the study of the topography of ancient Rome but it is also an important testimony for the confrontation of Roman and Egyptian culture and INTRODUCTION religion on Roman soil. A study devoted to the most important temple of the goddess Isis, who was The Isis sanctuary on the Campus Martius, usually so popular in the Roman world, is therefore very referred to as Iseum Campense, was the most impor- welcome. tant temple of the goddess in Rome throughout the entire imperial period. The existence of the sanctu- ary is recorded in various literary sources, the most PLAN OF THE MONOGRAPH famous of which is Juvenal’s 6th satire which ridicules the followers of the Isis cult1. Nothing of The book consists of two parts. the architecture of the temple has survived today In the first half, which consists of seven chapters, although from the Middle Ages onwards numerous the sanctuary is reconstructed, placed into a histor- objects were found on the site of the ancient sanc- ical and topographical context and interpreted. After tuary. The sculptural decorations of the temple thus the introduction (chapter I) and a description of the were dispersed all over the city of Rome and to status quaestionis (chapter II), there follows an many museums. For instance the obelisk which attempt to reconstruct the sanctuary in chapter III. adorns the Piazza Navona since the 17th century, Here the author reaches different conclusions from together with Bernini’s fountain, originally belonged preceding studies. Hereafter follows the contextual- to the sanctuary and so do the lions flanking Miche- isation. In chapter IV the historical phases of the langelo’s stairway leading to the Capitol. Also the sanctuary are discussed, based mainly on literary well-known columns in the Capitoline Museum, texts, while in chapter V the sanctuary is placed in depicting a detailed representation of an Isis pro- the topographical context of the Campus Martius. cession, once belonged to the decoration of the sanc- Chapters VI and VII are more general in character tuary, as did the colossal statues of Nile, Tiber and and deal with the history of the Isis cult, its recep- Okeanos now in the Vatican Museum, the Louvre, tion in Rome and the possible change in character and the Archaeological Museum of Naples. Although which it thus experienced. A concluding summary there remain no traces, in situ, of the architecture closes this part of the book. of the sanctuary, we can still visualize the ground- The second part of the book comprises a catalogue plan of the temple with the help of the Forma Urbis of all the information relating to the sanctuary which Romae. On this marble city plan, dating from the is classified and discussed. This is very useful because, reign of Septimius Severus, a damaged inscription as discussed above, the material is widely dispersed has been preserved which is usually restored as and often inaccessible due to various circumstances. ‘ISEUM ET SERAPEUM’. There are also illustra- tions on reliefs and coins which depict the temple 1 Juvenal, Satire VI, 487-491 and 526-541. and can provide information for a reconstruction. 2 Lanciani, R. 1883, L’Iseum et Serapeum della Regione IX, At the end of the last century Lanciani was the first BullCom 11, 33-60. to attempt a synthesis of all these data2. Following 3 Gatti, G. 1943/44, Topografia dell’Iseo Campense, Rend- PontAcc 20, 117-163; Malaise, M. 1972, Inventaire Prélimi- new conclusions by Gatti regarding the ground- naire des Documents Égyptiens découverts en Italie, Leiden plan, the sanctuary was discussed again by Malaise (EPRO 21); Roullet, A. 1972, The Egyptian and egyptianizing and Roullet in their reviews of Egyptian monuments Monuments of Imperial Rome, Leiden (EPRO 20). 159 The information presented is split into a number of of the sanctuary. The northern and southern court- categories. First and foremost these are the literary yards were reached through monumental entrances (A) and epigraphic (B) sources. Category C com- in the centre of the dividing walls. On the Forma prises the so-called secondary material. This is the Urbis Romae there are small rectangles drawn most diverse category, and is subdivided into four against the southern wall which Lembke interprets parts: the Forma Urbis Romae, a few reliefs which as niches in which statues were placed. Niches, may possibly be linked to the Iseum Campense, however, are open in front and the maker probably coins depicting the temple and lastly architectural would have represented them on the plan in a dif- drawings from the 15th to 17th century which relate ferent way. Moreover, if statues had been placed in to the architecture of the sanctuary. It is the first the niches, there is a good chance that they would time that the architectural drawings are presented as have been found near the south wall. Not a single evidence relating to the Iseum Campense. Architec- statue, however, was found in this courtyard. On the tural remains have been collected in category D, the plan a small square and a circle are indicated in the preserved sculptural decoration of the Iseum forms centre of the courtyard. It is generally accepted that the last category E. the square denotes the so-called obelisk of Domitian, now in Piazza Navona. Lembke follows this assump- tion and suggests that the circle could represent a THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SANCTUARY (FIG. 1) well or a round temple. The latter interpretation does not seem likely. As we will see below, the relief in According to the Forma Urbis Romae the southern Ariccia may not be interpreted as a representation of part of the sanctuary consisted of a semi-circular the Iseum Campense and thus cannot be used as a courtyard which was surrounded on all sides by a comparison. In addition, in my opinion, the circle is porticus. Lembke interprets this exedra as a large far too small for a temple. A well with sacred water waterbasin, producing as evidence the recovered which, according to Lembke, also occupies such an statues of watergods which would have been placed important place in the exedra, seems to be a more in the basin. In addition, she points out the great plausible explanation. It could even be interpreted as resemblance to the so-called Canopus in the villa of a nilometer, since in Egypt these were found in all Hadrian near Tivoli where a similar exedra served important sanctuaries and could have the form of a as a nymphaeum. On the semi-circular side of the well. The combination of a nilometer, through which exedra, there were four niches of different depths, the rise of the Nile flood was measured, and an separated from the porticus by columns and in these obelisk, symbolising a succesful flood, was not niches cult statues of various Egyptian gods would unusual in Egyptian temples5. To the north of this have been placed. Many of the recovered columns courtyard there was another large, rectangular court- would have been part of this porticus surrounding yard. There probably was a porticus before the par- the exedra, which was undoubtly a colourful sight tition wall of the first courtyard. On the Forma Urbis to judge from the many different kinds of marble Romae there are dots on the west side, at regular that were used. intervals from each other and from the boundary Adjoining the straight side of the exedra to the wall. Because of the large intervals they can not rep- north, there was a rectangular courtyard on the east resent columns here and Lembke suggests that they and west side of which stood a large arch. The were meant to indicate trees or obelisks. The latter diverging orientation of the eastern arch, the ‘arco interpretation does not seem probable. Since in the di Camilliano’, can be explained by the building first courtyard an obelisk is indicated by a small history of the sanctuary. This arch was probably square, one expects them to be indicated in the same built on the occasion of the triumphal procession of way in another part of the sanctuary. The northern Vespasian and Titus after their victory in Judea and eastern boundary have not been preserved and will have been constructed somewhat later than on the Forma Urbis Romae, but probably existed. 71 A.D. Flavius Josephus records that Vespasian This courtyard covered a large area with an approx- and Titus spent the night before their triumph in imate length of 140m and a width of 65 m. The area the Iseum in the Campus Martius4. The triumphal was open and might be regarded as a kind of gar- arch may have been erected nearby and later incor- den or park. The floor consisted, at least partly, of porated in the sanctuary constructed by Domitian. marble slabs decorated with Egyptian figures and The ‘Giano accanto alla Minerva’, the west entrance, was a monumental quadruple arch dating to 4 Flavius Josephus, Bell. Iud. 7, 123.