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

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

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

 p216  Fortuna huiusce Diei

Articles on p216 of

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

Fortuna huiusce Diei, aedes: a temple vowed by Q. Lutatius Catulus on the day of the battle of Vercellae, 30th June, 101 B.C. (Plut. Mar. 26: Τύχη τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης), and dedicated by him on an anniversary of the battle (Fast. Allif. Pinc. ad III Kal. Aug., CIL I2 p217, 219, 323). It was in the campus Martius (Fast. locc. citt.: in campo), but the exact site is unknown. This Fortuna is clearly the deity to whom the happy issue of each day is owing (Cic. de leg. II.28: Fortunaque sit vel Huiusce diei, nam valet in omnis dies, etc.). Certain statues by Pythagoras of Samos stood ad aedem huiusce diei in Pliny's time (NH XXXIV.60), but whether this temple is meant or that on the Palatine is uncertain (see below). In the sixth century (Procop. B. G. I.15.11) there was a stone replica of the Palladium which Diomede had brought from Troy to Italy ἐν τῷ τῆς Τύχης ἱερῷ, and it is generally assumed that this temple is referred to, although without much reason (HJ 491; Rosch. I.1514; RE VII.32).

Paribeni (BC 1915, 168) proposes to interpret Fortune Camcesi (sic) on the plinth of a statuette of Fortuna (CIL VI.185 = 30709; MD 895) as an error for Campesi (Campensi) and to refer it to this temple.

Fortuna huiusce Diei: a shrine of some sort dedicated to this goddess on the Palatine, as is shown by the existence of a Vicus huiusce Diei (q.v.). The date of its erection is not stated, but it was probably this temple in which L. Aemilius Paullus and (later) Q. Lutatius Catulus set up statues by Phidias (Plin. XXXIV.54; see also above). Possibly Aemilius built the temple (cf. Aust. de sacris aedibus 26). Nothing is known of its later history (HJ 104; Rosch. I.1514; RE VII.32; WR 262).

[image ALT: Valid HTML 4.01.]

Page updated: 16 May 20