[image ALT: Much of my site will be useless to you if you've got the images turned off!]
mail:
Bill Thayer

[image ALT: Cliccare qui per una pagina di aiuto in Italiano.]
Italiano

[Link to a series of help pages]
Help
[Link to the next level up]
Up
[Link to my homepage]
Home

Concordia

p137 Several articles on pp137‑140 of

Samuel Ball Platner (as completed and revised by Thomas Ashby):
A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome,
London: Oxford University Press, 1929.


Concordia, aedes: a temple to Concord on the arx, vowed probably by the praetor L. Manlius in 218 B.C. after he had quelled a mutiny among his troops in Cisalpine Gaul (Liv. XXII.33.7; cf. XXVI.23.4). It was begun in 217 and dedicated on 5th February, 216 (Liv. XXIII.21.7; Hemerol. Praen. ad Non. Feb., Concordiae in Arce;1 CIL I2 p233, 309; p138Fast. Ant. ap. NS 1921, 86, Concordiae in Capitolio; Hermes 1875, 288; Jord. I.2.112). It was probably on the east side of the arx, and overlooked the great temple of Concord below.

Concordia, aedicula: * a bronze shrine of Concord erected by the aedile, Cn. Flavius, in 304 B.C. in Graecostasi and in area Volcani. It stood therefore on the Graecostasis (q.v.), close to the great temple of Concord, and must have been destroyed when this temple was enlarged by Opimius in 121 B.C. Flavius vowed this shrine in the hope of reconciling the nobility who had been outraged by his publication of the calendar, but as no money was voted by the senate, he was forced to construct the building out of the fines of condemned usurers 'summa nobilium invidia' (Liv. IX.46; Plin. NH XXXIII.19; Jord. I.2.339).

Concordia, aedes:º a temple said by Ovid to have been built by Livia (Fast. VI.637‑638: te quoque magnifica, Concordia, dedicat aede Livia quam caro praestitit ipsa viro). The description of the Porticus Liviae (q.v.) follows immediately, and it is probable therefore that the temple was close to or within the porticus, but the small rectangular structure marked on the Marble Plan (frg. 10) can hardly have been a temple deserving of the epithet magnifica (HJ 316). There is no other reference to the temple.

Concordia Nova: a temple voted by the senate in 44 B.C. in honour of Caesar (Cass. Dio XLIV.4: νεών τε Ὁμονοίας Καινῆς ὡς καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ εἰρηνοῦντες οἰκοδομῆσαι ἔγνωσαν. It is not certain that it was ever built.

Concordia, aedes, templum: (Act. Arv. LVI, Plin. NH XXXIV.73, 80, 89, 90; XXXVI.196, Serv. Aen. II.116, Notitia), delubrum (Plin. XXXV.66; XXXVII.4): a temple at the north-west corner of the forum, said to have been vowed by L. Furius Camillus in 367 B.C. during the disturbances that took place over the passage of the Licinian laws. Its erection was voted by the people immediately after their enactment (Ov. Fast. I.641‑644; Plut. Cam. 42). It stood between the Volcanal and the foot of the Capitoline (Ov. cit. 637‑638; Act. Arv. passim; Serv. Aen. II.116; Stat. Silv. I.1.31; Plut. Cam. 42; Varro, LL V.148, 156), and the space around it was called area Concordiae, which is mentioned only in connection with prodigia of 183 and 181 B.C. (Liv. XXXIX.56.6; XL.19.2; Obseq. 4). The date of the actual erection of the temple is not known; the day of its dedication was probably 22nd July (Fast. Ant. ap. NS 1921, 103), while that of the later structure was 16th January (Ov. Fast. I.637; Fast. Praen. ad XVII Kal. Feb., CIL I2 p231, 308; Fast. Verol. ap. NS 1923, 196). In 211 B.C. a statue of Victory on its roof was struck down by lightning (Liv. XXVI.23.4).

In 121 B.C., after the death of C. Gracchus, the senate ordered this temple to be restored by L. Opimius, to the great disgust of the democracy (App. B. C. I.26; Plut. C. Gracch. 17; Cic. pro Sest. 140; August. de civ. d. III.25). Opimius probably built his Basilica (q.v.) at the same p139time, close to the temple on the north. In 7 B.C. Tiberius undertook to restore the temple with his spoils from Germany (Cass. Dio LV.8.2), and the structure was completed and dedicated as aedes Concordiae Augustae, in the name of Tiberius and his dead brother Drusus, on 16th January, 10 A.D. (Ov. Fast. I.640, 643‑648; Cass. Dio LVI.25; Suet. Tib. 20, where the year is given as 12 A.D.). It is represented on coins (Cohen, Tib. 68‑70; BM Tib. 116, 132‑4). A later restoration, perhaps after the fire of 284, is recorded in an inscription (CIL VI.89), which was seen on the pronaos of the temple by the copyist of the inscriptions in the Einsiedeln Itinerary.

After the restoration by Opimius, this temple was frequently used for assemblies of the senate (Cic. Cat. III.21: pro Sest. 26; de domo 111; Phil. II.19, 112; III.31; V.18; Sall. Cat. 46, 49; Cass. Dio LVIII.11.4; Hist. Aug. Pert. 4; Alex. Sev. 6; Max. et Balb. 1, cf. Herod. II.10; Prob. 11; Hermes, 1875, 290‑291; Willems, Le Sénat romain II.159), and as a meeting-place for the Arval Brethren (see Henzen, p5, for list from 63 A.D.; DE I.176).

Tiberius compelled the Rhodians to sell him a statue of Vesta for this temple (Cass. Dio LV.9.6), and it evidently became a sort of museum, for Pliny mentions many works of art that were placed in it — statues of Apollo and Juno by Baton (XXXIV.73), Latona with the infant Apollo and Diana by Euphranor (77), Aesculapius and Hygeia by Niceratus (80), Mars and Mercury by Piston (89), Ceres Jupiter and Minerva by Sthennis (90), paintings of Marsyas by Zeuxis (XXXV.66), Liber by Nicias (131), Cassandra by Theodorus (144); four elephants of obsidian dedicated by Augustus (196); and a famous sardonyx that had belonged to Polycrates of Samos (XXXVII.4; see also Jacobi, Grundzüge einer Museographie d. Stadt Rom zur Zeit d. Kaisers Augustus, 1884).

A few other incidental references to the temple occur (Val. Max. IX.7.4; Cass. Dio XLVII.2; XLIX.18; L.8), and gifts were deposited here by order of the senate in 16 A.D. after the alleged conspiracy of Libo (Tac. Ann. II.32). Several dedicatory inscriptions have been found among its ruins (CIL VI.90‑94, 30856, 30857), and three others mention an aedituus of the temple (2204, 2205, 8703). It is represented on a coin of Orbiana, the wife of Alexander Severus (Froehner, Med. 177‑178),2 and on a fragment (22) of the Marble Plan; and is mentioned in the Regionary Catalogue (Reg. VIII). The structure was threatening to collapse in the time of Hadrian I, 772‑795 A.D. (LPD I.512, 522).

Its situation with respect to other buildings and the contour of the ground led to the adoption of a plan which made this structure unique among Roman temples (FUR fr. 22). Instead of having the usual proportions, the cella of the Augustan temple was 45 metres wide and only 24 deep, while the pronaos was only 34 metres wide and 14 deep, and therefore did not extend across the whole front of the cella. The p140back wall of the cella abutted against the front of the Tabularium, and a very wide flight of steps led down from the pronaos to the area. So far as investigations have been carried, they seem to show that the ground plan of the temple of Opimius was similar to that of Tiberius (see Van Buren, CR 1906, 82‑84, 184 f. for such an investigation, and the traces of successive structures — II being doubtful — and compare TF 47‑49). The interior of the Augustan cella was surrounded by a row of white marble columns, standing on a low shelf which projected from the main wall. This wall contained eleven niches, in the central one of which, opposite the entrance, a statue of Concord must have stood. The exterior of the temple was entirely covered with marble, and the building must have been one of the most beautiful in Rome.

The existing remains consist of the concrete core of the podium, much of which belongs to the construction of 121 B.C., and is probably the oldest known concrete in the city (AJA 1912, 244, 245); the threshold of the main entrance, composed of two blocks of Porta Santa marble, together 7 metres long; a very few fragments of the marble pavement of the cella and the pronaos; and a part of the magnificent cornice, now in the Tabularium, together with numerous small architectural fragments. The bases were also very fine — the only perfect example is in the Berlin museum (No. 1013; cf. PBS II. No. 126b — not 105d). For the cornice, see Toeb. I. pl. vi, vii pp42‑51). In the podium are two chambers which may have been store-rooms for treasure.

See also DE II.572; RE IV.831‑833; Rosch. I.914‑916; Jord. I.2.332‑339; HC 93‑96; LR 288‑289; Théd. 122‑125, 362‑364;a Middleton I.332‑338; D'Esp. Fr. I.83‑86; DR 170‑178; Mem. Am. Acad. V.53‑77; RE Suppl. IV.492‑494; ASA 72; HFP 21.


The Authors' Notes:

1 For the discovery of this fragment of the Fasti Praenestini, see DAP 2.xv.330.

2 Cohen, Alex. Sev. et Orbiana, 3.


Thayer's Note:

a Platner cites the 1908 edition of Thédenat, which I haven't found online. Online at Gallica, however, is the 1898 edition; in it, the main section on the Temple of Concordia is on pp139‑143 and 338‑340; but see also the (rather discreet) "Module de recherche" search function to the left of the pages.


[image ALT: Valid HTML 4.01.]

Page updated: 2 Jul 11