Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume II.djvu/804

 r84 EOMA. Metellus Dalmaticns (Cic. Scaur. 46, et ibi Ascon), and afterwards rebuilt by Tiberius, and dedicated in his and Drusus's name, A. D. 6. (Suet. Tib. 20 ; Dion Cass. Iv. 27.) Caligula connected it with his palace by breaking through the back wall, and took a foolish pleasure in exhibiting himself to be adored between the statues of the twin deities. (Suet. Cal 22 ; Dion Cass. lix. 28.) It was restored to its former state by Claudius (Id. Ix. 6). We learn from Dionysius that the Roman knights, to the number sometimes of 5000, in commemoration of the legend respecting the fomidation of the temple, made an aimual procession to it from the temple of Mars, outside of the Porta Capena. On this occa- sion, dressed in their state attire and crowned with olive, they traversed the city and proceeded over the COLUMNS OF THE TEMPLE OF CASTOR AND rOLLUX. ROJIA. forum to the temple (vi. 13). Its neighbourhood was somewhat contaminated by the offices of certain persons who trafficked in slaves of bad character, who might be found there in shoals. (" Num moleste feram si mihi non reddiderit nomen aliquis ex his, qui adCastoris negotiantur, nequam mancipia ementes vendentesque, quorum tabernae pessiuiorum servorum turba refertae sunt," Senec. de Sapient. 13 ; cf. Plaut. Cm-c. iv. 1. 20.) The three elegant columns near the forum, under the Palatine, are most probably remains of this temple. We have seen in the pre- ceding account that it stood close to the forum, as well as to the temple of Vesta, a position which precisely agrees with that of tlie three columns. None of the other various appropriations of this ruin will bear examination. Poggio (cfe Var. Fort. p. 22) absurdly considered these columns to be re- mains of Caligula's bridge. By the earlier Italian topographers they were regarded as belonging to the temple of Jupiter Stator ; but it has been seen that this must have stood a good deal higher up on the Velia. Nardini thought they were remains of the comitium, and was followed by Nibby (^Foro Rom. p. 60) and Burgess {Antiq. of Rome, i. p. 366). We have shown that the comitium was not at this side of the forum. Canina takes them to have belonged to the Curia Julia (^Foro Rom. parte i. p. 1 32), which, however, as will appear in its proper place, could not have stood here. Bunsen (Les Forum de Rome, p. 58) identifies them with a temple of Minerva, which, as he himself observes (p. 59), is a " denomination entierement nou- velle," and indeed, though new, not true. It arises from his confounding the Chalcidicum mentioned in the Monumentwn Ancyranum with the Atrium Minervae mentioned by the Notitia in the 8th Region. But we have already observed that the curia and Chalcidium, which adjoined it, would be quite misplaced here. The Curiosum, indeed, under the same Region, mentions besides the Atrium Minervae a Templum Castorum et Minervae, but this does not appear in the Notitia. Bunsen was more correct in his previous adoption of the opinion of Fea, that the columns belonged to the temple of Castor. {BuUetti?io deW Inst. 1835 ; cf. Bunbury in Class. Mus. iv. p. 19.) The capture of the city by the Gauls, b. c. 390, which, as we have before said, inflicted so much injury that the Romans entertained serious thoughts of migrating to Veil, must of course have occasioned considerable damage in the vicinity of the forum. The Curia Hostilia, however, must have escaped, since Livy represents the senate as debating in it respecting this very matter (v. 55). Such shops and private houses as h.ad been destroyed were proliably restored in the fashion in which they had previously existed. It was now that the little temple to Aius Loquens, or Locurius, to which we have before alluded, was erected on the Nova Via, not far from the temple of Vesta {Ih. 50). From this period the forum must have remained without any important alterations down to the time of M. Porcius Cato, when basilicae first began to be erected. During tbis interval all that was done was to adorn it with statues and other ornaments, but no building was erected upon it ; for the small ex voto temple to Concord, which appears to have been made of bronze, erected on the Vulcanal by the aedile C. Flavins, B. c. 303 (Id. ix. 46), can hardly come under that denomination. It was pro- bably also during this period that the Gkaecostasis,