Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume II.djvu/800

 780 EOMA. compass, but these are trifles. The correct bearings are given in Canina's large plan and in Becker's map, and are wholly at variance with those laid down by Mommsen. Again, it is not to be imagined that Opimius would have built up his temple of Concord immediately in front of the ancient curia, thus screening it entirely from the view of the forum and comitium; a state in which it must have re- mained for nearly half a century, according to the hypothesis of Iilommsen. Another decisive refutation of Mommsen's view is that the Basilica Porcia, as we shall see further on, was situated on the forum close by the curia, whilst according to Mommsen the two buildings were separated by a considerable interval. We hold it, therefore, to be quite impossible that the curia could have stood where Mommsen places it ; but at the same time we confess our inability to give a satisfactory expla- nation of the passage in Livy. A word, or several words, seem to have dropped out, as is the case fre- quently in the very same sentence, where the gaps are marked in the editions with asterisks. Such a corrupt sentence, therefore, does not suffice as au- thority for so important a change, in the teeth of all evidence to the contrary. We shall only further observe that the preceding passages of Varro and Pliny thus appear, when rightly interpreted, mutually to support and ex- plain one another, and show the Graecostasis to have stood to the W. of the curia, first from its prox- imity to the senaculum and temple of Concord, and secondly, from the mid-day line falling between it and the rostra. That the curia was considerably raised appears from the circumstance that Tarquin the Proud nearly caused the death of SeiTius Tullius by hurling him down the steps in front of it, which led to the comitium. (Dionys. iv. 38 ; Liv. i. 48.) It was an inaugurated temple in order that the senate might hold their meetings in it, but not a sacred one. (Liv. i. 30; Varr. I. c.) In the reign of Tullus the forum was adorned with the tro- phy called PiLA Horatia:sa, consisting of the spoils won from the Curiatii; but where it stood cannot be determined. (Dionys. iii. 22 ; Liv, i. 26.) The Senaculum referred to in the preceding ac- count appears to have been a raised and open area, adjoining the Graecostasis and curia, on which the senators were accustomed to assemble before they entered the curia in order to deliberate. Thus Varro : " Senaculum vocatum ubi senatus aut ubi seniores consisterent : dictum ut Gerusia apud Graecos " (v. § 156, MUll.). Valerius Maximus gives a still more explicit account: "Senatus assi- duam stationem eo loci peragebat qui hodieque Senaculum appellatur: nee exspectabat ut edicto contraheretur, sed inde citatus protinus in Curiam veniebat " (ii. 2. § 6). Festus mentions that there were three Senacula in all; namely, besides the one alluded to, another near the Porta Capena, and a third by the temple of Bellona, in the Campus Jlar- tius. But as his account is in some respects con- tradictory of the two preceding authorities, we shall here insert it : " Senacula tria fuisse Eomae, in quibus senatus haberi soUtus sit, memoriae prodidit Nicostratus in libro qui inscribitur de senatu ha- bendo: unum, ubi nunc est aedis Concordiae inter Capitolium et Forum; in quo solebant magi»tratus D. T. cum Senioribus deliberare ; alteram ad por- tam Capenam; tertium, citra aedem Bellonae, in quo exterarum nationum legatis, quos in urbem ad- mittere nolebaut, senatus dabatur " (p. 347, Mlill.). EOJIA. Here the senaculum is represented, not as a place in which the senate assembled previously to delibe- ration, but as one in which it actually deliberated. It is impossible, however, that this could have been so. For in that case what would have been the use of the curia? in which the senate is constantly represented as assembling, except in cases where they held their sittings in some other temple. Be- sides we have no accounts of the senaculum being an inaugurated place, without which it would have been unlawful for the senate to deliberate in it. Nicostratus therefore, who, from his name, seems to have been a Greek, probably confounded the sena- cula with the curia, and other temples in which the senate assembled; and at all events his account cannot be set against the more probable one of Varro and Valerius Maximus. There is, however, one part in the account of Festus, which seems to set the matter in a difierent point of view. The words, " in quo solebant magistratus D.T. cum senioribus deliberare," seem to point to the senaculum not as a place where the senators deliberated among them- selves, but where they conferred with the magis- trates; such magistrates we may suppose as were not entitled to enter the curia. Such were the tribunes of the people, who, during the deliberations of the senate, took their seats before the closed doors of the curia ; yet as they had to examine and sign the decrees of the Fathers before they became laws, we may easily imagine that it was sometimes ne- cessary for the tribunes and senators to confer together, and these conferences may have taken place at the senaculum (" Tribunis plebis iutrare cu- riam non licebat: ante valvas autem positis sub- selliis, decreta patrum attentissima cura exami- nabant; ut, si qua ex eis improbassent, rata esse non sinerent. Itaque veteribus senatus consultis T. litera subscribi solebat: eaque nota significabatur, ita tribunos quoque censuisse," Val. Max. ii. 2. § 7.) In this manner the senacula would have answered two purposes; as places in which the senators met previously to assembling in the curia, and as a sort of neutral ground for conferences with the plebeian magistrates. With regard to the precise situation of the sena- culum belonging to the Curia Hostilia, we car hardly assume, with Mommsen, that it occupied the spot ou which the temple of Concord was afterwards actually built; nor do the words of Varro and Festus, — '■ Senaculum ubi aedis Concordiae " — seem to re- quire so very rigorous an interpretation. It is sufficient if it adjoined the temple; though it is not improbable that the latter may have encroached upon some part of its area. After the temple was erected there still appears to have been a large open space in front of it, part of the ancient senaculiun, but which now seems to have obtained the name of " Area Concordiae." Its identity with the sena- culum appears from its adjoining the Vulcanal, like the laiter: "In area Vulcani et Concordiae san- guinem pluit." (Liv. xl. 19.) " In area Vulcani per biduum, in area Concordiae totidem diebus san- guinem pluit." (Jul. Obseq. 59.) The temple of Concord became a very usual place for assemblies of the senate, as appears from many passages in ancient authors. (Cic. Phil. ii. 7 ; Lampr. Alex. 6, &c.) From the area a flight of steps led up to the vestibule of the temple: " (Equites Itomani) qui frequentissimi in gradibus Concordiae steterunt." (Cic. Phil. viii. 8.) According to Ma- crobius the temple of Saturn also had a senaculum