Chapter 2 Writing and Restoration in Rome:

From Goodson, Lester, and Symes, Cities, Inscriptions, Statues and the Late Antique Texts, and Social Networks 400-1500 (Burlington: Ashgate, 2010). Preservation of Buildings GregorKalas

In late antique Rome, restoring significant public buildings necessitated strategic choices to maintain favoured memories from the city's past while relegating discredited events to oblivion. Guarding against the unnecessary erasure of honoured memories caused by time's passage, inscriptions placed either on restored buildings or carved into nearby statue plinths documented the history of notable patrons who supported the repairs. By late antiquity, Rome's accumulation of inscriptions over time created a notional community of those honoured in the public texts that synchronized individuals from different eras. In other words, architectural restoration built up an imaginary society that allowed each generation of aristocrats to revive the memories of esteemed predecessors. During the sixth century an elite senator in the service of Italy's Ostrogothic king named Cassiodorus alluded to this situation when he wrote a letter to be sent upon the appointment of a new architect overseeing Rome's infrastructure. 'It is desirable that the necessary repairs to this forest of walls and population of statues, which make up Rome, should be in the hands of a learned individual who will make the new work harmonize with the old'.' The author, however, glossed over a dramatic fourth-century rupture in which pro-Christian legislation had terminated the traditional purposes of pagan statues due to the ban on most

The author extends heartfelt thanks to the members of the University of Tennessee Research Seminar in Late Antiquity: Tom Heffernan, Julian Hendrix, Michael Kulikowski, Maura Lafferty and Tina Shepardson, who generously read and commented upon a draft version of this essay. Anne Lester and Carol Symes also provided valuable guidance and Caroline Goodson made terrifically insightful comments that benefited the author tremendously, Andrew Ruff ably produced the plan of the Roman Forum. 1 'Romanaefabricae decus peritum convenithabere custodem, ut illamirabilis silva moenium diligentia subveniente servetur et moderna facies operis affabris dispositionibusconstruatur. Hoc enim studio largitasnostra non cedit, ut et facta veterum exclusisdefectibus innovemus et nova vetustatis gloria vestiamus', Cassiodorus, Variae7.15, CassiodoriSenatus Variae,ed. T. Mommsen, MonumentaGennaniae Historica, Auctorum Antiquissimorum12, (Berlin, 1894), pp. 211-12. 22 Cities,Texts and Social Networks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 23

ancestral rites practiced at cultic shrines. Without mentioning the earlier conflict of Rome's culture. The core of the study focuses on inscriptions from the Roman over paganism, Cassiodorus focused on the secular roles of exhibitions, claiming Forum that attribute restoration to senators during the fourth and fifth centuries. that Rome had 'an artificial population of statues almost equal to its natural one'. 2 In the late antique Forum, the Roman populace listened to political speeches while Indeed, his attention to the statues and public inscriptions confirms that the senators met in the Curia Senatus within the precinct. The authoritative tones publicly displayed monuments in Rome chronicled the achievements of illustrious of the Forum's public inscriptions joined with restored buildings to destabilize citizens. During late antiquity, one goal of the architect overseeing restoration was subtly the Christian power structure and to reinstate Rome's ancestral traditions to create a space in which elite patrons supported a flourishing political life that during the second half of the fourth century. Through epigraphic texts alluding to deserved to be recorded for subsequent generations. Cassiodorus praised statues architectural or cultural restoration, late antique senators pegged their status on for 'still maintaining the signatures of their creators, in order that the reputation reversing the neglect to ancestral traditions. Indeed, fourth-century restoration of praiseworthy people would survive much as images preserve the likenesses campaigns relied upon architectural techniques that physically maintained some of living bodies'.' Rooting architectural designs firmly in the past and fostering evidence of former ruination as testimony to the fragile persistence of the city's preservation was good public policy, since the sponsorship of buildings clearly venerable traditions. The evidence from the Forum, thus, suggests that late antique established political legitimacy. Cassiodorus implicitly defined the urban space restoration projects redeemed past virtues or even acknowledged the rough edges oflate ancient Rome as where the living elite performed their status among old, of the past when new statues or inscriptions were set up in conjunction with inert statues.' Thus, elites imagined that they could maintain the prestige of their rebuilt structures.' While the responses of audiences to the restoration projects ancestors through public texts that linked restored buildings and statues with are difficult to register, the 'artificial population of statues' noted by Cassiodorus cultural renewal. implies that a precinct such as the Roman Forum offered the city's residents a Later Roman architectural restoration raises questions as to what conservation public space in which to they might encounter the dissonance between the meant: was it mostly practical or were ideological concepts advanced by the commemorated past and the living present. Late antique senators wished to claim revival of buildings? Did audiences perceive conserved buildings as paying cultural capital through the social networks they established with their ancestors; tribute to honoured memories by making the past seem alive much as statuary the restoration they desired was one that reaffirmed the hierarchies of the past. made historic figures feel palpably present to Cassiodorus? By the fourth century, Yet, the populace at large must also have yearned for building restorations that Rome's accumulation of publicly displayed inscriptions, consistently updated instigated cultural change rather than a frozen social structure. over generations, associated the refurbished city with the addition of new statues, Inscriptions featuring the term restituere ('to restore') were widespread thereby indicating that each additional statue reactivated powerfully evocative in Rome, particularly after the third century. Edmund Thomas and Christian memories. 5 This essay makes the case that late antique senators used inscriptions Witschel have explained that restituere,the term that connotes to put something mentioning restoration to rehabilitate the traditions of the local aristocracy while in its former place, often referred to a demolished old building replaced by a attempting to undo the traces left by shameful events that disrupted the continuity newer one at the same spot, in which case the concept of reconstruction prevailed despite the preponderance of new material.' In other cases, restituereimplied the insertion of a new statue or an altar in front of or inside an old structure. By 2 'populumurbi dedit quam naturaprocreavit', Cassiodorus, Variae7.15. comparing the archaeological evidence for restoration with the claims advanced 3 'auctorumsuorum scilicetadhuc signa retinentes,ut quamdiu laudabiliumpersonarum in building inscriptions, Thomas and Witschel assert that restituerefrequently opinio superesset, tamdiu et similitudinem vivae substantiae imago corporis custodiret', involved the notional appearance of an antique revival while skimping on Cassiodorus, Variae7.15. 4 rebuilding or focusing mostly on ornamental details. Garrett Fagan has pointed Cassiodorus also attests to the Ostrogothic policy of allowing private owners to out that decoration garnered significant attention from the public and required acquire crumbling public buildings for individual private use provided that the new significant expenditures from the patrons; thus, ornamental restoration was by owners preserved the old structures; see Variae3.29; 4.24; 4.30. See also Bryan Ward­ no means trivial. Also, Fagan established that the term restitueremight indicate Perkins, 'Reusing the Architectural Legacy of the Past: entre tdeologieet pragmatisme',in Gianpietro Brogiolo and Bryan Ward-Perkins (eds), The Idea and Ideal of the Town between LateAntiquity and the MiddleAges (Leiden, 1999), pp. 225-44, at pp. 240-4. 6 For the moral achievements of senators as a forceful tradition, see Geza Alfoldy, 5 Charles W. Hedrick, Jr., Historyand Silence:Purge and Rehabilitationin Late Antiquity 'Individualitat und Kollektivnorm in der Epigraphik des r6mischen Senatorenstandes', in (Austin, 2000),pp. 89-94; Franz Alto Bauer, 'Informamantiquamrestitutus: Das Bewahren der Silvio Panciera (ed.), Epigrafiae ordtnesenatorio I, Tituli 4 (Rome, 1982), pp. 37-53. Vergangenheit in der Spi:itantike am Beispiel des Forum Romanum', in Volker Hoffmann, 7 Edmund Thomas and Christian Witschel, 'Constructing Reconstruction: Claim and · et al. (eds), Die'Denkmalpflege' vor den Denkmalpfiege:Akten desBerner Kongresses 30. ]uni- 3Juli Reality of Roman Rebuilding Inscriptions from the Latin West', Papersof the BritishSchool 1999 (Berlin, 2005), pp. 39-61. ' at Rome,60 (1992): 135- 77, at 152. 24 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500

an aristocratic benefaction in late antique Rome in which a patron inaugurated a building in conjunction with lavish games or the distribution of coins to the public.' When placed in close proximity to civic buildings, senatorial inscriptions from the late empire usually applied restituere to projects in which architectural repairs partially reversed accidental damage or purposeful pillaging so as to offer physical testimony that degradation had been overcome. The term restitutiofeatures prominently in a late fourth-century monument from the Roman Forum's central area that resuscitated Trajanic sculptural reliefs (the Anaglypha Traiani) to publicize Libya's return to its former place within the empire (fig. 2.1, A). The monument, probably a type of triumphal arch, commemorated emperors Arcadius and Honorius Qoint rule 394-408) for having sent Stilicho to overturn Gilda's illegitimate rule of Libya in 398. The inscription, with several fragments currently on view in front of the western Rostra in the Roman Forum's central area, credited both emperors along with the Roman senate for the 'joyous restoration of Africa'. 9 Here, the late antique monument maintained evidence of former ruination by combining the spoliated Trajanic sculptural reliefs with the fourth-century inscription. Indeed, reusing the Trajanic reliefs implied the fourth-century revival of Trajan's esteemed memory. By mentioning HIIIU the recent events in Africa, the inscription deploys the term restoration to indicate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 that imperial stewardship returned a province to legitimate imperial rule after a 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 period of usurpation. ·" 0 0 0 q 0 0 0 0 ,o, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' ~ ,O' 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 RESTORATIONATTRIBUTED TO EMPERORSIN THE LATEANTIQUE ROMAN o" ,, 0 0 0 FORUM 0 0 0 o, 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 Imperial projects in the late antique Roman Forum embraced restoration D 0 00 0 0 as 'restitution,' implying that architectural practices were closely linked to political messages. During the fourth century, inscriptions honoring emperors flaunted the legitimacy of imperial officeholders through references to the

8 Garrett Fagan, 'The Reliability of Roman Rebuilding Inscriptions', Papersof the BritishSchool at Rome,64 (1996): 81-93. 9 'Imperatoribusinvictissimis felicissimisque / dd(ominis) nn(ostris)Arcadia et Honoria fratribus / Senatus PopulusqueRomanus { vindicata rebellioneI et Africae restitione laetus', CIL, 6, 1187, Although some of the inscription is lost, it was carefully copied during the Renaissance. Evidence that the monument was an arch appears in Claudian's panegyric ofHonorius' sixth consulate, Claudian, DeSexto Consulatu Honorii, 369-73 (Claudian, Works, ed. and trans, M. Platnauer (Cambridge, MA, 1972) vol. 2, pp. 100-101). See Christian Hillsen, 'Miscellanea epigrafica', Mitteilungen des Deutschen ArchiiologischenInstituts, ROmischeAbteilung, 10 (1895): 56; Giuseppe Lugli, Monumentiminori del fora Romano(Rome, 1947), p. 108; Franz Alto Bauer, Stadt,Platz und Denkmalin der Spiitantike:Untersuchungen zur - Ausstattungdes OffentlichenRaums in den spiitantikenStiidten Rom, Konstantinopel und Ephesos (Mainz,1996), 41-42. 26 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 27

dual connotations of restoration, one implying the return to rightful rule and the other indicating architectural renewal. Senators frequently paid for building projects while honouring emperors, since aristocrats in Rome felt obliged to share patronage credit with imperial sponsors who garnered most of the credit. Yet, inscriptions usually masked the degree to which imperial authorities competed with local senators in establishing pre-eminence over the urban fabric of Rome. Such struggles motivated Valentinian I (364-75) to address a letter in 364 to Rome's urban prefect prohibiting the construction of new buildings and encouraging the restoration of extant historic structures, effectively preventing senators from using new building projects to assert their local agendas. 10 Curiously, Valentinian's rescripts condoning architectural reuse opened up new possibilities for the aristocrats of Rome to exploit restored buildings as almost billboards for senatorial political agendas." Several senatorial inscriptions in the Roman Forum nonetheless maintained the message that rebuilding enhanced the emperor's legitimacy. As mentioned above, the fourth century linked 'restitution' with both the restoration of proper authority and the revival of Rome's public space. For example, prior to the construction of the monument celebrating the victory over Gildo mentioned previously, emperor Constantius II (337-61) received credit for conquering the usurper Magnentius in 353 CE with an impressive equestrian statue monument placed prominently in the Roman Forum (fig. 2.1, B). The inscribed plinth praises Constantius II as 'restorer of the city of Rome Fig. 2.2 Rome, Statue Base of Constantius II in the Roman Forum (photo: and the world' (fig. 2.2)." Erected by the urban prefect Neratius Cerealis, the author) statue plinth featured the term restoration (restitutio) to celebrate that the city's governance had returned to its proper place within the empire (or what alluding to the campaign fought in Pollentia in 403. Further, the senatorial the inscription designates as the world). Cerealis had negotiated the senate's sponsors credited legitimate authorities, the collegial emperors Arcadius and opposition to Magnentius; thus, the senator worked to ensure the restitution Honorius Qoint rule, 394-408); emperor Theodosius I (378-95) is honoured of legitimacy to emperor Constantius II. The monument to Constantius II was as well. Stilicho's campaign of 403 vanquished the foes of Rome; yet, in 408 one of several fourth-century monuments from Rome in which emperors the general fell from grace dramatically, was executed, and his monument celebrated the restitution of political legitimacy with terms alluding to the received visible signs of the condemnation. Indeed, erased lines remain visible glory of urban restoration. in the inscription and attest to the purposeful purging of Stilicho's name from Another statue base from the Roman Forum, made from the repurposed the city's public exhibition space (fig. 2.3)." The visible harm to Stilicho's plinth of an equestrian statue, originally commemorated Stilicho for another monument effectively urged viewers to recall the military leader's fall from successful military campaign (fig. 2.1, C). In the inscription, both the urban grace. In fact, the ruination ofStilicho's memory coincided with the restoration prefect and the senate commemorate Stilicho for a victory over Goths, of honourable governance. Clearly, the late antique _epigraphic preoccupation

1° CodexTheodosianus 15.1.11 (25 May 364). 11 CodexTheodosianus 15.1.16; 15.1.17. 13 'Fideivirtutiqu(ue) devotissimorumI militum domnorum nostrorumI Arcadi Honoriet 12 'Restitutoriurbis Romae adque orb(is) { et extinctori pestiferae tyrannidis / d(omino) Theodosi/ perenniumAugustomm, I post confectumGothicum I bellum felicitateaeterni I principis n(ostro)Fl(avio) Iul(io) Constantia victori ac triumfatoriI semperAugusto I NeratiusCer[e]alis v(ir) domni nostri Honori,/consiliis et fortitudine { inlustris viri comitis et { [erased) I [erased] I cOarissimus)praef(ectus) urbi I vice sacra iudicansd(evotus) n(umini) m(aiestati)queeius', CIL, [S(enatus)P(opulus)Q(ue) R(omanus)] / curantePisidio Romulo v(ir) c(larissimus)/ praef(ectus) 6, 1158. The original location of this statue base was in front of the Arch of Septimius urbivice sacra { iterum iudicante',CIL, 6, 31987. The erased portions have been reconstructed , Severus, close to its current display spot according to Carlo Fulvio Giuliani and Patrizia as reading: 'magister utriusqu(e)militiae Stilichonis'.See Franz Alto Bauer, Stadt, Platz und Verduchi, L'areacentrale del FaroRomano (Florence, 1987), pp. 72-3. Denkmalin der Spiitantike,p. 20. 28 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 29 with legitimacy emerged from a desire to maintain the appearance of an Inscriptions from the Forum in which senators credited imperial authorities empire under proper imperial rule. for restoration implicitly rejected the approach of an early fourth-century usurper, Maxentius, who used his status in Rome to proclaim that he alone was the 'conservator of his city'. 14 Thus, senators confronted the connotation of restoration as sanctioning imperial governance. Interestingly, the metaphor of restoration as the renewal of political control allowed conserved architecture to rehabilitate ruling authorities along with the built environment. Senatorial monuments with imperial dedications attest that Rome's local aristocracy negotiated the city's proper allegiance to legitimate emperors;" yet subtler and more subversive claims to local senatorial pre-eminence appeared at the same time.

SENATORIALSPONSORSHIP OF ARCHITECTURALRESTORATION IN LATE ANTIQUITY

Senators in late antique Rome used architectural restoration to commemorate reinstated local prerogatives by coordinating building projects with rehabilitated aristocratic traditions. Senators had long exploited Rome's civic areas downtown to preserve individual memories, particularly through honorific statuary. Yet, during late antiquity some aristocratic senators also pursued the restoration of public buildings to preserve the memories of polytheistic traditions threatened by anti-pagan imperial legislation." Some senators considered cultic rites and the associated shrines as worthy of restoration, particularly after 364 when pagan monuments suffered after the Christian emperors Valentinian I and Valens Qoint rule 364-75) reclaimed the endowments belonging to temples." To be sure, the two emperors forbade the outright harm to pagan architecture, condemning only illicit or privately conducted rites. Prior to the proclamation of the most stringent anti-pagan legislation in the 380s, budgets for the upkeep of public buildings had been transferred to regional governors, who created fiscal conditions favouring restoration over new construction. 18 Therefore, temples fell under local control

14 The term, 'conserv(ator)urbis suae', appears in copper coinage (aes) issued by Maxentius, H. Mattingly, et al. (eds), RomanImperial Coinage, (London, 1923-94), vol. 6, p. 344. 15 Mark Humphries, 'Roman Senators and Absent Emperors in Late Antiquity', Acta ad archaeologiamet artium historiampertinentia, 17 (2003): 27-46. 16 Andre Chastagnol, La prcffectureurbaine ClRome sous le bas empire (Paris, 1960), Fig. 2.3 Rome, Statue Base of Stilicho in the Roman Forum (photo: Fototeca pp. 363-8; Heike Niquet, Monumenta virtutum titulique: SenatorischeSelbstdarstellung im Unione, American Academy in Rome) spiitantikeRom im Spiegelderepigraphischen Denkmciler (Stuttgart, 2000), pp. 77-86. 17 CodexTheodosianus 10.1.8 (February 4, 364). 18 Ariel Lewin, 'Urban Public Building from Constantine to Julian: The Epigraphic Evidence', in Luke Lavan (ed.), RecentResearch in Late Antique Urbanism,Journal of Roman 30 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 31 and restoration presented senators with opportunities to imbue restitutio with Ammianus Marcellinus provides an anecdote concerning a praetorian prefect a new meaning 1 the renewal of traditional rites. Senatorial stalwarts in Rome who restored buildings in the 360s without properly crediting emperors, hinting jumped at the opportunities presented by their newly acquired responsibilities at the public's reactions to elite patrons who conserved civic architecture. C. for architectural upkeep and responded to anti-pagan legislation by rehabilitating Ceionius Rufius Volusianus, referred to by his signum Lampadius, also served in some ancestral religious traditions along with the buildings. Senators sponsoring the urban prefecture of Rome in 365-6. Ammianus recounts that on buildings, temple restoration projects also effectively repurposed the architectural legacy 'which had been adorned at the expense of various emperors, he had his own of paganism, since the late antique restoration of shrines cleaned up some of name inscribed, not as the restorer of old buildings, but as their founder'." With the objectionable aspects of pagan cults, particularly superstition and secretly disdain for the predecessors who originally built the structures, Lampadius practiced sacrifice. Some temples restored during late antiquity cast aside offended the public by failing to distinguish between the role of founder and memories of superstitious practices and other illicit rites offensive to Christian restorer. A riot broke out over Lampadius' scorn for popular demands, since the residents of Rome, presenting reconfigured architectural formats for temples prefect neglected to provide public entertainment and to distribute alms fairly. that were palatable to the population at large. Lampadius' failure to be generous toward the populace made the inappropriate Beginning in 331, the responsibility for maintaining public buildings in claims articulated in the numerous inscriptions all the worse; the mob drove Rome fell under the urban prefect, the president of the senate." Legislation Lampadius from his house, but he escaped to a spot outside the city's walls. The codified that the completion of a civic building, as a state project, required an angry reactions to Lampadius interestingly hint that the praetorian prefect inscription giving proper credit to the emperor; yet, the regulations governing violated a norm dictating that the names visible on civic buildings should naming rights may not have applied to architectural restoration. A code issued coincide with generous acts that benefited the public. in 394, but which claimed to reiterate an earlier law, stated that, 'if any of the The story of Lampadius' contempt for popular opinion reveals how judges should inscribe their own names, rather than the names of Our Eternity, architectural restoration could potentially build up a local aristocrat's fame, on any completed work, they shall be held guilty of high treason'.'° Reports but only if pursued with the correct commitment to the common good. With suggest that senators exploited the ambiguity of the term 'completed work' flagrant disregard for civic norms, Lampadius further sneered at the necessity to attach the names of local aristocrats rather than those of emperors upon to pay for building materials or furnish fair wages to his employees. 'When restored buildings. Thus, an implied benefit of restoration, particularly if it were preparing to erect new buildings or restoring old ones, he did not order material undertaken without the funds allocated from the imperial court, was that the to be obtained from the usual taxes, but if there was need of iron, lead, bronze, emperor's name need not be attached. In addition, senators had free range to act or anything of the kind, attendants were hired, in order that they might, under as restorers, even though this did not imply that they could presume to be the pretence of buying the various articles, seize them without paying anything'." founders of new buildings." The objections to Lampadius' behaviour reveal that the honour of patronage only belonged to those who maintained the traditions oflegitimate munificence ArchaeologySupplementary Series 42 (Portsmouth, R.I., 2001), pp. 27-37. For the by acknowledging earlier sponsors and properly paying for building repairs. importance of senatorial sponsorship beginning in the 360s, see John Matthews, Western Lampadius did not understand that a restorer accrued the honour that had Aristocraciesand the ImperialCourt, AD 364-425 (Oxford, 1975), pp. 21-22. emerged over time by maintaining the inscriptions of earlier patrons. The 19 Andre Chastagnol, La prefecture, 43-63; 335-9; 353; Bryan Ward-Perkins, From account nonetheless suggests that restoration provided opportunities for ClassicalAntiquity to the MiddleAges: Urban Public Buildings in Northernand CentralItaly, AD senators, urban prefects and praetorian prefects to pursue architectural projects 300-850 (Oxford,1984), pp. 38-48. without according written credit to emperors, even though restorers needed to 20 'Si qui iudicesperfecta operi suum potius nomen quam nostraeperennitatis scribserint, maiestatisteneantur obnoxii', Codex Theodosianus 15.1.31 (Theodosianilibri XVI, T. Mommsen, ed., vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 808). Translation from The TheodosianCode, ed. and trans. C. Pharr, p. 22 'Per omnia enim civitatis membra, quae diversorumprincipum exornarnnt impensae, 426. nomenproprium inscribebat, non ut veteruminstaurator, sed conditor',Ammianus Marcellinus 21 The edict of 364 CE, CodexTheodosianus, 15.1.11, has been understood as giving 27.3.7; translation from AmmianusMarcell/nus, ed. and trans.JC. Rolfe (Cambridge, Mass., blanket permission for senators and urban prefects to undertake restoration as their 1939),vol. 3, pp.16-7. 23 local responsibility, while emperors pursued new construction; see Heike Niquet, 'Die · 'Aedificia erigereexoriens nova, vel vetusta quaedam insaurans,non ex titulis solitis valentinianische Dynastie und Rom: das Selbstverstandnis der Kaiser und ihre Haltung parariiubebat impensas,sed si ferrum quaerebatur,aut plumbum, aut aes aut quicquamsimile, zur Senatsaristokratie im Licht van Bau- und Ehreninschriften', in Geza Alfoldy and Silvio apparitoresimmittebantur, qui velut ementesdiversas raperent species, nulla pretiapersolvendo', Panciera (eds), InschristlicheDenkmiiler als Mediender Selbstdarstellungin der rOmischenWelt Ammianus Marcellinus 27.3.10, translation from AmmianusMarcellinus, ed. and trans.J.C. (Stuttgart,2001), pp. 143-4. Rolfe,vol. 3, pp. 18-9. 32 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 33 attend to a city's own codes of civility. Evidently, imperial politics presented a TEMPLERESTORATION IN THE LATEANTIQUE ROMAN FORUM less pressing concern to the citizens of Rome than continuing the traditions of civic munificence by local benefactors. Finally, the Lampadius episode suggests Some senators, whose authority relied upon their ability to continue traditional that the populace was attentively committed to properly restored civic buildings forms of patronage, did not forsake the temples and relished opportunities and thus accorded respect to those who used conservation to uphold culture to memorialize their ongoing care for shrines. The civic benefactions offered while disdaining those patrons who selfishly proclaimed their status. by senators marked important achievements along the trajectory of their The senatorial sponsorship of restoration in Rome had extensive political advancing careers, which had once included support for pagan priesthoods implications, since conservation connoted the public restitution of honour, or rites. Late antique senators hoped to continue such honours by restoring whether associated with an individual, a statue, a civic tradition, or the city at buildings that reactivated traditional modes of civic benefaction. For example, large. By promotingrestituted honour, moreover, inscriptions on some conserved the Portico of the Harmonized Gods (porticusdeorum consentium), at the west end public buildings maintained individual fame and implicitly reversed the memory of the Roman Forum, was one of the last pagan buildings to have undergone sanctions that could cast a name into oblivion. Known today as damnatio an official restoration in Rome (fig. 2.4). Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, a high­ memoriae,the official erasure of memory produced evident signs of obliteration ranking senator, pursued the project in 367 during his tenure as urban prefect such as the chisel marks left after removing a name from an inscription of one (fig. 2.1, D). whose identity had been condemned, as in the case of the monument to Stilicho mentioned above (fig. 2.3).24 Within the urban context of the Roman Forum, temples potentially suffered from impending memory lapses due to the illegality of cultic rites. The late antique Forum suffered from the threat of oblivion, since the non-functioning temples lining the urban precinct suggested to some that the past had been neglected rather than allowing for memories potentially to be rekindled in the future. Indeed, many fourth-century inscriptions anticipate future updates to the city's built fabric." An interesting dimension of the late antique city is that the official condemnation of individuals extended to the cultural erasure imposed upon temples, since the Christian imperial bureaucracy worked to obliterate the memory of pagan sacrifices."

24 Harriet I. Flower, TheArt of Forgetting:Disgrace and Oblivionin RomanPolitical Culture (ChapelHill, 2006), 1-10. 25 Rowland B.E. Smith, "'Restored Utility/ Eternal City": Patronal Imagery at Rome in the Fourth Century AD', in Kathryn Lomas and Tim Cornell (eds), 'Breadand Circuses': Euergetismand MunicipalPatronage in RomanItaly (London, 2003), pp. 150-1. 26 A code of 341 penalizing pagan sacrifices (CodexTheodosianus 16.10.2) seems not to have been successfully enforced in Rome, see Michele R. Salzman, OnRoman Time: The Codex-Calendarof354 and the Rhythmsof UrbanLife in LateAntiquity (Berkeley,1990), pp. 205- Fig. 2.4 9. for the idea that idol destruction was a form of damnatiomemoriae, see Peter Stewart, Rome, Portico of the Harmonized Gods in the Roman Forum 'The Destruction of Statues in Late Antiquity', in R. Miles (ed.), ConstructingIdentities in Late (photo: Fototeca Unione, American Academy in Rome) Antiquity(London, 2002), 167-82. See also Charles W. Hedrick,Jr., Historyand Silence,37-88; Harriet I. Flower, 'DamnatioMemoriae and Epigraphy', in Eric Varner (ed.), FromCaligula to Constantine:Tyranny & Transformationin RomanPortraiture (Atlanta, 2000), pp. 58-69. 34 Cities, Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 35

The scope of Praetextatus' sponsorship involved either reconstructing code articulates what Praetextatus restored: the possibility of displacing the or building from scratch a replacement for a structure originating in the first scorn toward sacred images of the twelve gods by reintroducing them as public century CE which had also undergone repairs during the reign of Hadrian." monuments divorced from the taint of illicit sacrifice. The portico visible today consists of a trapezoidal paved area framed by two A large component of Praetextatus' restoration focused on the twelve statues, colonnades meeting at an obtuse angle. One side of the portico is parallel with recorded as early as the first century BCE at the site." Possibly the sculptures the clivus Capitolinus(the pathway up the Capitoline hill), while the other is had originally been arranged in the small chambers situated at both levels of aligned with the adjacent Temple of Vespasian. The colonnades provide access the portico. Praetextatus must have invented a new manner of displaying sacred to a series of eight rooms on the upper level; these are supported by a lower pagan images that forestalled potential Christian objections. Indeed, Praetextatus substructure of seven rooms. 28 appears to have exhibited the statues between the portico's columns in locations Praetextatus placed a prominent inscription on the portico's frieze facing addressing the very public civic passageway ascending the Capitoline. As a the trapezoidal paved area. Documenting his sponsorship in collaboration result, the fourth-century senator pioneered a new role for pagan statues as civic with a curator named Longeius (probably the overseer of Rome's statues), the decoration decoupled from what Christians deemed as offensive and secretive inscription identified the restoration of sculptures as a key component of the religious rites. Indeed, the portico provided a backdrop to public ceremonies project. 'The sacred images of the harmonized gods were restored by Vettius that progressed up the hill from the Forum, as this had been the traditional Praetextatus, urban prefect of the highest senatorial rank, who put them back to route of imperial triumphs. Thus, Praetextatus redefined temple architecture to their ancient form with respect for all the decorations of this place, curated by provide a new context for exhibiting previously hidden statues, configuring an Longeius'.29 The involvement of Praetextatus and Longeius as senatorial office open-air display of artworks that addressed public, outdoor rites. holders stressed the civic nature of rehabilitating the sacred images. The restored Temples remained public property and were protected from structural portico's inscription further hinted that audiences should remember the past, damage, despite fourth-century legislation that placed restrictions on sacrifices. yet forget the setbacks to ancestral practices that affected pagan statues. In 342, the urban prefect of Rome received explicit word of the emperor's edict The portico's inscription glosses over the reasons for the restoration and that forbade damage to certain pagan sanctuaries. 'Although all superstition puts particular emphasis on bringing back the statues as ornaments that attest must be completely eradicated, nevertheless, it is Our will that the buildings of to the city's earlier traditions. In a subtle manner, the fourth-century rebuilding the temples situated outside the walls shall remain untouched and uninjured. of the portico provided an alternative to the previous role for images hidden on For since certain plays or spectacles of the circus or contests derive their origin the interior of temples, probably reacting to such legal codes as one from 356 of from some of these temples, such structures shall not be torn down since from Constantius II that imposed the death penalty on those who worshiped statues. them is provided the regular performances of long established amusements Constantius addressed the letter to the western half of the empire, stating: 'If of the Roman people'." Even though the code earmarked suburban temples as any person should be proved to devote their attention to sacrifices or to worship those most vulnerable to dilapidation, the legislation upheld the public's right to images, We condemn that they should be subjected to capital punishment'.'° enjoy public ceremonies in well-maintained shrines. Regulations also curtailed The enforcement of this legislation in Rome must have been spotty at best, even cult practices before statues during the fourth century, but these were initially though Constantius intended it to be applied within Italy. Nonetheless, the legal focused only on those images that functioned in secretive rites. Despite the vehemence of the fourth-century legislation condemning idols, there had been a moderate approach to sanctuaries articulated earlier in the fourth century. 27 Giuseppe Nieddu, 'Dei Consentes, Aedes', in Margareta Steinby (ed.), Lexicon Traditional rites practiced openly, for example, had remained legal in the year TopographicumUrbis Romae (Rome, 1993-9), vol. 2, pp. 9-10. 28 Patrizia Tucci, et al., 'The Portico degli Dei Consenti (Roman Forum). Archaeometric Study of a Late Ancient Colonnade Made of Cipollino Verde Marble', Periodicidi Mineralogia, 31 'Et quoniam, ut aiunt, dei facientes adivvant, prius advocaboeos ... duodecim deos 71 (2002): 247-52. Consentis;neque tamen eos urbanos,quorum imagines ad forum auratae stant, sex mares et 29 '[Deorumc]onsentium sacrosanctasimulacra cum omni lo[ci adornatio]necultu in feminae totidem', Varro, Res Rusticae1.1.4. {formam antiquam restituto]/ [V]ettius Praetextatus, v(ir) c(larissimus),pra[efectus u]rbi 32 'Quamquamomnis superstitio penitus eruendasit, tamen volumnus,ut aedestemplorum, [reposuit]/curante Longeio [---v(ir) c(/arissimus, c]onsul[ari]', CIL, 6,102: quae·extra muros sunt positae, intactae incorruptaequeconsistant. Nam cum ex nonnullis vel 30 'Poenacapitis subiugari praecipimus eos, quos operam sacrificiis dare vel coleresimulacra ludorumvel circensiumvel agonumorigo fii.erit exorta, non convenitea convelli,ex quibuspopulo costiterit'Codex Theodianus 16.10.6 (Theodosianilibri XVI, ed. T. Mommsen, Berlin, 2000 Romanopraebeatur priscarum sollemnitas voluptatum,' Codex Theodosianus 16.10.3 (Theodosiani _ [1904], vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 898), translation from The TheodosianCode, ed. and trans. C. Pharr, libriXVI, ed. T. Mommsen, vol. 1, pt. 2,898), translation from The TheodosianCode, ed. and pp. 472-3. trans. C. Pharr, p. 472. 36 Cities,Texts and Social Networl

319,presumably because they avoided the taint of superstition." There had been senate and the people of Rome made restitution for a destructive fire'. 38 After a temporary lapse in anti-pagan legislation during the brief imperial tenure the fire necessitated the restoration of the earlier temple, the rebuilt structure of Julian (361-3). Presumably, once Praetextatus assumed the post of Roman definitively departed from the original. This is most evident in the frieze that urban prefect in 367, the ability of shrines to uphold either divination or blood reused the inverted entablature from the previous building with the inscription sacrifices was legally problematic; nonetheless, certain publicly practiced civic on the blank side and the frieze decorated with relief sculptures turned outside celebrations were allowed. 34 in (fig. 2.6).39 The restoration campaign probably dated as late as 380 according Moreover, the portico's architecture manifestly expressed its restored state to Patrizio Pensabene, who reached the conclusion after examining the podium's through the reuse of pre-existing bases, capitals and columns. These fragmented brickwork. 40 With this act of restoration, memories and traditions were mapped architectural elements (or spolia) taken from collapsed buildings produced onto a building that displayed its age by showcasing that old materials had the visu.al effect of salvaged ruination, shaping what subsequent generations been salvaged. The manufactured effect of ruination attested to restoration, would remember about the city's architectural history." Fluted columns made reworking the architectural elements from the past in a manner that signalled of cipollino verde initially comprised the two colonnades (the travertine how the temple was at once vulnerable and impervious to the effects of time. columns are modern replacements); the original columns supported two types This may have also have been reinforced by now-lost statues depicting Tritons of Hadrianic capitals featuring trophy reliefs." Praetextatus did not reuse blowing horns and Saturn with bound feet, interpreted by Macrobius as signs building materials from the earlier portico, but chose to arrange heterogeneous of Saturn in his manifestation as Cronus personifying time." Thus, the temple structural elements originating from numerous other buildings to create the of Saturn marks a further attempt by members of the senate to remake temple visual effect of restoration. The spoliaand the unusual temple format consisting architecture by reconfiguring a structure into a historical monument testifying of two colonnades meeting at an oblique angle militate against the notion to the past with specific references to the effects of time. With the spoliaand the that Praetextatus replicated the building's earlier appearance. 37 As a result, inscription calling attention to restoration, the Temple of Saturn functioned as Praetextatus presented a further way of reinventing temple architecture, since a manifesto on salvaging temple architecture in late antiquity as built testimony the spoliafrom heterogeneous sources provided an architectural format whose to time's passage. built fabric manifestly revealed a modification of the past. Both the Portico of the Harmonized Gods and the Temple of Saturn illustrate A late antique display of reused architectural elements also occurred at how the restitution of temples in late antiquity established an abstract manner one of the most important temples of the Roman Forum, the Temple of Saturn of honouring pagan architecture while transforming the approach to building a (fig. 2.1, E). Restored by the senate in the late fourth century, the temple shrine. The late antique structures associated with the polytheistic past marked displayed spolia prominently in the mismatched monolithic grey and pink this change through the display of spolia,the evident signs of repair and the granite columns resting upon a heterogeneous array of bases (fig. 2.5). The insertion of inscriptions. Senatorial conservation projects in the Forum also frieze displays a prominent inscription crediting the project to the senate: 'the aimed to reverse the memory of sanctions that had been imposed upon pagan images and shrines, disguising the return of these implements from a contested religion under the pretext of a pious respect for the past.

33 'nee enim prohibemus praeteritae usurpationis officia libera lucae tractari,' Codex Theodosianus9.16.2 (Theodosianilibri XVI, ed. T. Mommsen, vol. 1. pt. 2,460). 34 CodexTheodosianus 9.16.7 (Theodosianilibri XVI, ed. T. Mommsen, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 462), banning sacrificiafu.nesta in 364, was addressed to the praetorian prefect of the East. While the law may not have applied to Rome, it points toward the curtailing of pagan sacrifices, but not the burning of incense, immediately following the reign of Julian. 35 Dale Kinney, 'Spolia.Damnatio and RenovatioMemoriae', Memoirs of the American Academyin Rome,42 (1997): 117-48;Joseph Alchermes, 'Spoliain Roman Cities of the Late Empire: Legislative Rationales and Architectural Reuse', DumbartonOaks Papers, 48 (1994): 33 'senatuspopulusque romanus incendio consumptum restituit', CIL, 6,937. 167-8. 39 Maria Fabricius Hansen, The Eloquence of Appropriation: Prolegomenato an 36 Giuseppe Nieddu, 'Portico degli Dei Consenti', in Roma:Archeologia nel Centro, UnderstandingofSpolia in EarlyChristian Rome (Rome, 2003), p. 101. Lavori e studi di archeologia 6, vol. 1 (Rome, 1985), pp. 24-8; idem, 'Il portico degli Dei 40 Patrizio Pensabene, Tempiodi Saturno:Architettura e decorazione(Rome, 1984), pp. Consenti', Bollettinod'Arte, 71 (1986): 40-52. 62-3. 37 Patrizia Tucci, et al., 'The Portico degli Dei Consenti', p. 251. 41 Macrobius, Saturnalia,1.8.4-6, written in the early fifth century. Fig. 2.5 Rome, Temple of Saturn in the Roman Forum (photo: author)

·,v+'f">'., A'·'Vf."'>('7:"'·AZ

Fig. 2.6 Rome, Temple of Saturn, detail of inverted frieze (photo: Fototeca Unione, American Academy in Rome) 40 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 41

RESTORINGSECULAR ARCHITECTURE IN THE LATEANTIQUE ROMAN FORUM Although the need for repairs after the sack of Rome in 410 apparently indicates that the Probianus in question pursued the project in the early fifth century, Secular architecture in the Roman Forum also benefited from conceptual there is some evidence that it was actually Rufius Probianus who held the urban restoration during late antiquity and the statues placed before the civic buildings prefecture in 416.'" Attributing the statues to 377 - and thus prior to the most mostly emphasised the continuity of aristocratic benefactions over time. Some stringent ban on polytheistic practices that Theodosius I sent to Rome in 391 - restoration projects amended for tragic events such as the attack on Rome in dissipates the argument that the sponsor Probianus pursued polemical work by 410 CE. In the case of the Secretarium Senatus, an annex to the Senate House secularizing cultic art." There is, finally, no reason to presume that cult images constructed out of a hall originally belonging to the Forum of Caesar, the building originating from temples furnished Probianus with statues that he secularized was restored by 414 under the urban prefect Flavius Anni us Eucharius Epiphanius by transferring them to public space.'" In fact, another of his inscriptions states: (fig. 2.1, F). An inscription attests that Epiphanius restored the building that 'Gabinius Vettius Probianus, senator of the highest rank and urban prefect, with had been previously rebuilt by Nicomachus Flavianus the younger. Thereby the use of great care restored [this] statue fallen over due to deadly fate in the the early fifth-century restorer paid due respect to Flavianus who reinstated most frequented part of the city'." Thus, Probianus used statues with inscribed the structure only about a decade earlier." Interestingly, Epiphanius' repairs plinths to indicate that architectural restoration redoubled aristocratic honours to the Secretarium Senatus used the structure in part as a representation of a by gesturing toward the memories contained in the urban fabric. comeback that Nicomachus Flavianus the younger had staged after recovering The numerous statues that Probianus set up indicate his desire to create an from official disgrace." Due to his close allegiance with the usurper Eugenius exhibition in the Roman Forum. Probianus turned the Forum into an outdoor who launched a pagan revival in 394, Flavianus the younger needed his status museum in which art restoration played a prominent role, but he claimed that to be resuscitated, for which Epiphanius apparently obliged. The inscription the architectural fabric rather than the ornamental displays benefited from the articulating Epiphanius' homage to an illustrious predecessor whose status was maintenance. A further set of bases, recovered during modern times near the in need of rehabilitation offered an explicit guideline for understanding the Senate House for the most part, stated that a basilica had undergone conceptual restored Secretarium Senatus. restoration through the use of statues as decoration. The statue bases include To memorialize the past mostly through the installation of outdoor statues the following text: 'Gabinius Vettius Probianus, senator of the highest rank established the strategic importance of urban public space for preserving the and urban prefect, ordered [this] statue be set up so that it could serve as an memories of patrons even when the nearby buildings showed signs of ruination. ornament to this famous basilica'. 50 There is no definitive indication as to which Statues set up in front of the Basilica Aemilia and the Basilica Julia by Gabinius statues Probianus set up, but the serial nature and the secular contexts indicate Vettius Probianus highlighted the architectural implications of re-erecting statues. Probianus sponsored numerous statues with inscribed plinths in front 46 Franz Alto Bauer (Stadt,Platz und Denkmal,pp. 29-30) proposed the later date for of the damaged structures in the Roman forum, raising questions about the Probianus' prefecture; evidence that Rufius Probianus held a post that was a prerequisite repetitive nature of his patronage. Serially repeated inscriptions from at least for the urban prefecture is presented in Santo Mazzarino, Stilicone.La crisi imperialedopa three separate plinths state that, 'Gabinius Vettius Probianus, senator of the Teodosio(Rome, 1942), pp. 383-4. highest rank and urban prefect, added [this] statue that it might be an ornament 47 The ban of 391 was sent to the urban prefect of Rome, CodexTheodosianus 16.10.10. for the Basilica Julia that he restored once again'." The date of Probianus' Dating Gabinius Vettius Probianus' prefecture to 377 was argued cogently in Carlos prefecture is unclear, since a prefect of that name served in 377 and again in 416." Machado, 'Building the Past: Monuments and Memory in the ForumRomanum', in William Bowden,et al. (eds), Socialand PoliticalLife in LateAntiquity (Leiden,2006), pp. 170-1. 48 John Curran, 'Moving Statues in Late Antique Rome: Problems of Perspective', 42 'Sa/vis dominis nostris Honoriaet Theodosiavictoriosissimis principibus Secretarium Art History, 17 (1994): 46-58. Curran disputes the idea that Probianus transferred amplissimiSenatus quad vir inlustris Flavianusinstituerat et fatalis ignis absumpsit Flavianus deconsecrated pagan statues that was presented by G.B.De Rossi, 'La base d'una statua di Annius EuchariusEpifanius v(ir) c(larissimus)praef(ectus) urb(i) vice sacra iud(icans)reparavit Prassitele test€ scoperta e la serie di simili basi alla quale essa appartiene', Bullettinodella et ad pristinamfaciem reduxit',CIL, 6, 1718. Nichomachus Flavianus the younger held the commissionearcheologica municipale, 2 (1874): 174-81. urban prefecture in 393-4, 399-400 and 408. 49 'Gabinius Vettius Probianus v(ir) c(larissimus) praef(ectus) urb(i) statuam fatali 43 Hedrick.Jr., Historyand Silence,pp. 25-8. necesSitateconlabsam celeberrimo urbis locoadhibita diligentia reparavit', CIL, 6, 3864 a-b. They 44 'GabiniusVettius Probianusv(ir) c(larissimus)praef(ectus) urbi statuam quae Basilicae were discovered in front of the steps in front of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, but Iuliaea se noviterreparatae omamento esset adiecit',CIL, 6, 1156b; 1658c-d; 37105. this was not their original display spot. 45 For the 377 prefecture: CodexTheodosianus 11.2.3; for that of 416, CodexTheodosianus 50 'Gabinius Vettius Probianusv(ir) c(larissimus)praef(ectus) urb(i) statuam conlocari 14.10.4. praecepitquae ornamentobasilicae esse posset inlustri',CIL, 6, 1658 a-b. 42 Cities,Texts and SocialNetworks, 400-1500 GregorKalas 43 that venerable individuals were on display. Possibly, Probianus used his plinths Deeming a restoration after a civil war as one that renewed the 'happiness of to support older statues of historic predecessors; thus, his 'museum' plausibly our times' indicates that the restoration inscriptions in the Forum asked viewers expressed the accumulation of greatness that was essential to maintaining the both to remember and forget. In the case of Faustus' restoration, the restored parallel between the glory of Rome and the tradition of senatorial virtue. After pagan statue transformed a cult implement into a memorial of the good old all, Probianus himself belonged to the highest rank of the senatorial hierarchy; he days; the artwork was purged of its sacrificial value as well as its fire damage. overemphasised the point through his repetitive inscriptions. Overall, Probianus Furthermore, the remarkably unspecific terminology of 'the happiness of our illustrates that restored statues conveyed the renewal of senatorial virtue while times' alludes to the cultural renewal or revived rituals that actually earned his placement of so many statues in the most highly trafficked sectors of the aristocrats popular support, since the Lampadius narrative reveals that the Forum reveal that the statues brought back life to the precinct's dilapidated populace disdained boastful assertions of elite status that did not coincide with buildings. public entertainments. Throughout the Forum, late antique monuments utilized the textual concept of restitution to evoke vivid associations with the restoration of cultural and social life. Thus, late antique restoration erased memories of CONCLUSION Rome's troubled past by calling upon viewers to remember just the events that conferred honour on the local elites and to restore these recollections effectively Architectural restoration undertaken during late antiquity did not typically bring by reinstating cultural activities, buildings back to their pristine state, but rather explicitly retained aspects of ruination. Epigraphic evidence hints that architectural conservation expressed the renewal of senatorial virtue in buildings that maintained visible signs of former decay together with the evident restoration of such dilapidation. The architecturally prominent spoliaand the obviously re-erected statues placed in front ofbuildings illustrated the process of rehabilitation. Maintaining senatorial status, furthermore, drew upon the powerful metaphor of restoring tradition as an aristocratic position that faced off with an absolutist imperial regime and its increasingly powerful bureaucracy. Yet cultural restoration was also at stake, since restitution provided senators with opportunities to reinvent pagan shrines by reconfiguring them into heritage sites that preserved memories, undoing the erasure enforced by anti-pagan legislation. The Temple of Saturn and the Portico of the Harmonized Gods displayed such renewed dilapidation that undid the secrecy of pagan shrines by making art works manifestly public. In other cases, pagan art was simply damaged due to tragic events. One instance of the latter occurred when a portico's roof caved in at the atrium of Minerva, located on the front side of the Senate House in the Roman Forum according to Augusto Fraschetti." The inscription records the sponsorship of the urban prefect of Rome in 472-3. 'The image of Minerva had been broken during a civil war when a destructive fire caused the roof to fall. Anicius Acilius Aginatius Faustus ... restored it for its better and in its entirety for the happiness of our times'."

51 Augusto Fraschetti, Laconversione. Da Roma pagana a Romacristiana (Rome, 1999), pp. 168-70; see also: Franz Alto Bauer, 'BeatitudoTemporum: Die Gegenwart der Vergangenheit im Stadtbild des spiitantiken Rom', in Franz Alto Bauer and Norbert Zimmermann (eds), Epochenwandel?Kunst und Kulturzwischen Antike und Mittelalter (Mainz, 2001), pp. 87-9. 52 'SimulacrumMinerbae I abolendo incendio l tu.multus civilis igni I tecto cadente confractumI AniciusAciliu.s Aginatius I Faustusv(ir) c(larissimu.s)et inl (ustris)praef (ectu.s)urbi I vic(e)sac(ra) iud(icans) in melius I integroproviso pro I beatitudinetemporis restituit,' CIL, 6,526.