Search Results for: roma

During the excavations of the Forum of Ostia in the early 20^th century, large quantities of archaeological material was unearthed. Among this material were large amounts of architectural marble fragments, which was gathered by the excavators in deposits/piles around the Forum area. These deposits would be left largely untouched until the meticulous examinations conducted by the Ostia Forum Project between 2014 and 2019. The examinations revealed a rich body of material stemming from several buildings around the forum dating to the Roman Imperial period. The largest of the deposits can be found in the area called TFR (Taberna Forum Rooms), which is located on the eastern side of the northern forum facing the Decumanus. This deposit contained thousands of architectural fragments – some of which are discernible as having been from elements such as capitals, columns, cornices, architraves etc. Many of these fragments are datable and can even be attributed to specific buildings around the forum, thereby having the potential to provide new insight into the appearance of Ostia’s Forum in the Imperial period. It is therefore the aim of this Ph.d. project to 1) create an overview of the material in the shape of a database and 2) to determine and virtually reconstruct the marble furnishings in their original context.

The focus of study is for the moment on the southern part of the Forum where several marble-clad, public buildings were built during the Early Imperial period (1^st – early 2^nd centuries CE). This includes the supposed first marble building of Ostia, the Temple of Roma and Augustus, from which we have found several fragments relating to the entablature and parts of the interior decoration. The deposits likewise contain several fragments from other known buildings such as the large Basilica on the west side of the Forum, the Tempio Rotondo complex, the Palaestra of the Forum’s Baths, and the Capitolium.

Apart from the traditional archaeological methods such as drawing, an important tool used for documenting the marbles of the forum is 3D modeling. Generated from a series of photos of the fragment through photogrammetry software (Agisoft Metashape), the dimensionally accurate models have proven to be very useful in day-to-day research where access to the actual fragments is restricted. This is due to the fact that the models can be used to visualize and measure the fragments from every angle, which is essential when trying to determine the context from which the fragments originate. Apart from being useful in their own right, these 3D models can likewise be included into larger virtual reconstructions of whole buildings showing the marbles in their original position. These kinds of reconstructions allow us to see the building and its various elements from different angles and under different light conditions as well as its relation to the surrounding buildings. All these factors are important when attempting to get an idea as to how the average Roman would have experienced these buildings and the Forum in which they stood.

You can find more here.

The Taberna della Venere, TDV, is very important in the research concerning the late antique phase of the shops overlooking the Forum square. The room apparently presents a situation very similar to that attested by the excavations of the Progetto Ostia Marina of the Università di Bologna (696 coins), with the same prevalence of coins from the end of the 4^th – beginning of the 5^th century CE, with a sequence that seems to start with the reign of Constantius II and be interrupted around the 440s (the terminus post quem coin is a nummus of Valentinianus III minted around 435 A.D.). In the case of the Ostia Marina Project, the sequences of clay and silt levels suggest that the burial of the site would have occurred following flooding of the Tiber and/or the sea.

As we do not have any other indications about the use of this structure, we can rely on some archaeological data that can lead us to suppose the activity that took place there. The analysis of the numismatic material is proving to be particularly important in answering this question.

The coins found during the excavation of these two rooms are 558 from TDV 1 and 18 from TDV 2. The great difference in the number of coins from the two rooms is quickly explained; in TDV 1 the excavations were carried out over the whole surface of the room, finding sealed and representative contexts, while TDV 2 was investigated only near the doorway that divides it from TDV 1, as there the archaeological context was damaged by more recent excavations. Of these big number of coins, most are illegible, either because they are very worn and/or have been fragmented already in antiquity, or because they are deeply corroded or affected by bronze cancer. The poor legibility of coin finds from this period is not surprising, as even 4^th-5^th century hoards are often in fair condition, for example in the Portus hoard only a quarter of the total coins (77 out of 200 specimens) were legible. Another reason why coins from the Late Antique period (especially those from the 4^th century) are very often illegible is the prolonged circulation of these coins and their residuality in contexts long after they were issued. An example of this is certainly the analysis of coins from Portus, where 4^th century specimens are documented in phases datable to the second half of the 6^th century.

The access to the deposits was impossible due to the pandemic, so no cleaning of the surface soil of the coins was carried out during this year, which would have been indispensable for a secure data. Fortunately, most of the coins had already been weighed and measured at the time of discovery, and a selection of coins had already been surface cleaned, so their identification and cataloguing was possible.

Of the total 558 coins, there are complete measurements of 409 specimens. Among these we have sporadic older denominals, such as the as and the sestertius, while 2 appear to be bronze tokens and 3 are lead tesserae. The majority of the coins are small denominals, such as the AE3 (in the number of 152 specimens) and the AE4 (234 coins). In addition, 11 coins that straddle the two denominals (AE4 under 14 mm. in diameter and 1.5 g. in weight) were counted separately, while taking into account the weight variation due to corrosion, wear and surface encrustation.

The coins for which we have a complete cataloguing are 97 specimens and it is this group that will be examined in detail below.

Among the mints identified so far, Rome is certainly the most present, with 15 coins, while others come from the workshops of Siscia (5), Aquileia (3), Cyzicus and Arelate (2 each). Among the datable coins, the later ones, from Galla Placidia to Valentinianus III, including Theodosius II (8 coins), we can see that all the recognisable mints of issue are Rome (6 specimens). What emerges is a general context of affirmation of the small circulating currency, which is generally considered to be conditioned by the production of the nearest local mint. Very interesting is the information that emerges from the coins found during the Classe excavations in Ravenna. In the period 378-395 CE, the specimens that can be traced back to the production of a specific part of the Empire are equally divided between Eastern and Western mints, while in the following period (395-455 CE), Western productions related to Honorius and Valentinianus III are abundant. Thereafter, an equal division between the mints of the two parts of the empire returns. This period corresponds to the important reorganisation of the Roman mint in the Theodosian age and under the last of the Valentinians. A complete break in style and fabric occurs about half way through Valentinianus III’s reign, suggesting a change (not for the better) in the personnel of the mint. After his death, the output of bronze declined sharply.

Most of the depictions on the reverse are typical of 4^th-5^th centuries coins, like the winged Victoria, with the legend SECVRITAS REI PVBLICAE or SALVS REI PVBLICAE/SALVS REI PVBLICE (28 coins). Other well represented reverses are those with the two Victoriae and the legend VICTORIA AVGG and VICTORIA AVGGG (9 coins). Of great importance is a Vota Vicennalia of Valentinianus III, which will be analysed specifically for the philological problems it presents.

Because of their poor preservation, the coins for which it was possible to recognise the type on the reverse have been placed in a more or less broad chronological horizon.

The large number of undated coins (42 coins, 40,74 % of this selection) are mostly corroded and completely illegible flans, mostly AE4 (27 coins) and AE3 (11). Of the coins that can be dated, the 46.56 % (48 specimens) are coins dating from the mid-IV century to the 430’s. The oldest coin is an as minted during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (172-180 CE) with the representation of a Victoria on the reverse, unfortunately in fair conditions (context 002a). The coin shows heavy wear, probably due to prolonged circulation time or prolonged rubbing (it cannot be excluded that it was carried by water or debris). The presence of such an old coin is not surprising in relation to the dating of the strata formation from which it came, as bronze coinage, even of old issue, was used for much of late antiquity. From context 004 comes an ancient specimen in good condition, it is a sestertius of Gallienus with the legend SECVRITAS AVG, dated at the 253-260 CE.

Thus, with the exception of a few sporadic specimens, we can say that the coins in this selection were minted from the Constantinian era until the second quarter of the 5^th century, with a high concentration of denominals from the second half of the 4^th century. The coin data in TDV are consistent with those from the Late Antique strata of the Basilica Portuense, where there is a very high attestation of 4^th century coins and an abrupt stop during the following century. In contrast to the Basilica, in the TDV we apparently have no attestation of 6^th and 7^th century coins. The numismatic data published so far, from the excavations of Castrum Novum (Santa Marinella, Rome), which are still in progress, seem to attest to an exploitation of the area until the middle of the 5^th century, with the presence, also in this case, of 4 coins attributed to Valentinianus III, as well as a thickening of specimens at the turn of the two centuries. Among the coins found in the TDV, special mention should be made of the voluntarily cut coins, which number about 129 (the 23.04 % of the total coins). The division mainly concerns coins such as AE3, which were split into two or more parts, so that they are equivalent in weight to the AE4 of the late 4^th-5^th centuries, although AE4 are also present split down the middle.

Vota soluta or Vota suscepta?

The AE4 minted in the name of Valentinianus III and celebrating the Emperor’s Vota Vicennalia, found in context 004a, needs a specific historical-numismatic analysis to be dated accurately.

Vota are promises made to gods’ conditional upon receiving specified benefits, sharply contrasted with free-will offerings. Despite this, there was a tendency for emperors, from Commodus at least, to hold a consulship in quinquennial years that this tendency became an almost invariable rule in the 4^th century and was strongest in the 5^th. Vows for the decennalia alone could look ahead both five and ten years, with VOT X MVLT XV and VOT X MVLT XX both being found; formulae such as VOT XX(X) MVLT XX(X)V never appear. Single figures are often difficult to evaluate: VOT XV and VOT XXV, for example, are always soluta, but VOT X or VOT XX can be either soluta or suscepta. Valentinianus III has only bronze issues marking his vicennalia. He was consul in 425, 426, 430, 435, 440, 445, 450, and 455, and his quinquennial years would have been 23 October 429 to 22 October 430, 434-5, 439-40, 444-5, 449-50, and 454-5. The VOT XX could, however, be suscepta and refer to the decennalia.

From the area where the Taberna counter was to be located comes what has been identified as a lead scale weight. The shape is that of a globe with a flat side, on which is soldered what must have been an iron hook, thanks to which the weight could slide on a steelyard. The weight is over 200 grams and is 9 cm. wide.

Unfortunately this type of weights have been used for centuries and do not have a precise chronological horizon. From the same layer comes a large shell, in particular is a Charonia Tritonis specimen shell, a gasteropod relatively widespread along the Eastern and Western Atlantic Coasts, from the Cape Verde Islands to the African Coast and from North Carolina to Brazil. In Italy, it is found in the waters of the central and southern Tyrrhenian Sea and in the southern Adriatic Sea. In the Mediterranean Sea, it is most common in the eastern part, particularly in Greek waters. It could therefore be a shell that arrived in the TDV as a result of the trade that might have taken place there.

As far as iron materials are concerned, a ring with a small stalk is of interest (TDV 1 001, 40 mm., 6,95 g.). It might be interpreted as part of a wall ring, with the stalk embedded inside the wall. Another possibility is that it was the end part of an iron key, or the end part of a knife.

From the surface layers, close to the lead weight (001, 001a) come two other noteworthy objects; a fragment of pie and what appears to be a guide for hinges, both made of lead.

The coins found in the sealed layers of the room are certainly a large number, but as they are exclusively bronze coins, their purchasing power is very low. In order to appreciate the value of these coins at the half of the 5^th century, we have to mention the famous Novella XVI of Valentinianus III of the 445 CE, in which the collectarii were granted the price of 7000 nummi in exchange for one solidus. Thus, the coins found may have been used to buy and sell goods that were not particularly expensive, such as food. All these clues, are compatible with the use of the room as a Taberna, probably for the sale of shellfish, but also with a shop linked to the activity of a currency exchange.

As far as bronze finds are concerned, only two objects in this material were found in the TDV. One is what appears to be an ornithomorphic fibula or flat type with rectangular ring, highly corroded. The first type seems to find comparisons with fibulae found in Viminacium (Serbia) and the second with specimens found in Südtirol and Trentino, dating to the Late Antique period.

The second item is a cut, rectangular bronze sheet, with a hole and a sort of relief decoration. It is not easy to attribute a function to this object, as it could be part of a harness, just as it could be part of the decoration of a piece of furniture or a casket.

The reuse after the Taberna phase

The accumulation of marble fragments from the superficial layers of the southwest corner of the room, removed during the 2015 excavation campaign, indicate a reuse of the room after its destruction around the middle of the 5^th century. A coin, attributable to the reign of Zeno (474-491 CE), found in the level of the marble accumulation, may suggest a superficial cleaning of the room from the rubble and an almost immediate reuse of the structure. Other objects worth mentioning are the lead slugs found in various areas and contexts of TDV, some of which are considerable in size and weight (well over 200g). Such a quantity of molten metal slag could make one think of the processing waste of a factory dedicated to the production of lime, using ancient marble, in this case lead could be the claws that could join parts of marble.

Conclusions and perspectives

The large amount of numismatic material presented here needs a thorough study, which will be resumed as soon as the health situation makes it possible. The proposed identification as a Taberna for the sale of seafood derives from the interpretation of the data just described, but also the hypothesis that it was a currency change office cannot be ruled out. That said, a full comparison with the other classes of material found will be needed in order to get a complete analysis. The numismatic data analysed so far is consistent with those from other excavations of this period. Above all, it should be noted that the abrupt interruption of circulating coins can be dated to around the 440’s, since the most recent group of coins are nummus of Valentinianus III. This seems to indicate that there was a particular event that marked the end of activities in the Taberna della Venere around that time.

You can find more here.

For a number of years the OFP has been excavating the area of Ostia’s main forum. In 2016 excavations of the area known as TFR (Taberna Forum Rooms) were conducted, in the hopes of exposing structures predating the Hadrianic building program. The area revealed a previously unknown sanctuary, housing both a temple and alters with several building phases. The sanctuary is suggested by the OFP to belong to the god Vulcan, who was a prominent deity in ancient Ostia. The location of the Vulcan sanctuary has up until now been unknown but ancient texts identify him as the main deity of the city and locate his sanctuary to somewhere on the forum[1]. Early excavators believed the Capitolium to be the temple of Vulcan[2] but this has turned out to be incorrect. The finding of the Vulcan sanctuary on the forum is a major discovery, both because of his important position in the ancient city but also because the sanctuary would be the only discovered Vulcan sanctuary in the Roman Empire.[3] Many religious deposits were found among the sanctuary’s structures. The deposits mostly contained ceramic material, such as pottery both fine ware and cooking ware, as well as oil lamps. Several of the deposits also contained bones, including the heads of three sacrificial pigs.

Theme four focuses on studying the ritual practices of the sanctuary through the contents, location and development of the religious deposits. Reconstruction of ritual practice can be a difficult task. Unlike other humanistic fields, archaeologists are not able to ask the subjects of their research. Instead, we must study the remains of the cultic activity and puzzle our way to an answer.

Previously, religious deposits have not been ignored by scholars but have often been studied in a way that ignores the deposit’s context as well as the deposit as a context, and the information this can give. There are several reasons behind this. Firstly, the focus of scholars has mostly been on the individual objects, rather than the deposits as an assemblage. Secondly, it is in fact quite difficult to identify religious deposits. Especially at a site with many phases. Lastly, not studying single objects but a whole assemblage of objects means to study the cognitive aspect of ancient peoples – the way in which people in the past thought and felt.  ‘Cognitive archaeology’ is a fairly new concept within the classical archaeological community.[4] In archaeological research, objects are mostly classified based on type and not context. This is because the classification of individual objects is essential to archaeological research, especially when creating a relative chronology, which has always been a vital part of understanding a site. However, ignoring the identification and classification of religious deposits as a collected context limits the information, we can gather from the sanctuary. In this thesis, the deposits will be treated as an amassed context. The focus will be on the location of the deposits within the sanctuary as an indicator of activity and the general types of objects indicating the nature of religious activity in the sanctuary.

You can find more here.

---

[1] There are several mentions of the priests of Vulcan in the Fasti Ostienses, which indicates the importance of the cult in Ostia. The sanctuary is also mentioned to be one of the oldest in the city.

[2] Among others Vagleri and Fenilli, who was the earliest archaeological excavators of Ostia Antica. In Fenilli’s excavation report ‘Giornale degli Scavi’ he refers to the area of the Capitolium as the Vulcan sanctuary.

[3] The suggested alter to Vulcan on the Forum Romanum is still a debatable identification and is not the first suggested location. See: Boni, G. 1900: ‘Esplorazioni nel Comizio’, NSc 9, 295-340. The site of a U-shaped altar and the later Niger Lapis have been interpreted as being the shrine to Vulcan by Coarelli. See: Coarelli, F. 1977: ‘Il Comizio dalle origini alla fine della repubblica’. PP 32 (1977). 166-238.

[4] Osborne, R. 2004: ‘Hoards, votives, offerings: the archaeology of the dedicated object’, World Archaeology, 36:1, 1-10.

The first eight months of the Ostia Forum Project’s graduate programme have certainly not been the easiest, as the Covid-19 pandemic has shut down one and a half of our two planned fieldwork campaigns in Ostia. The circumstances even prevented us from getting access to the ceramic finds kept in the Deposito of Ostia antica whatsoever. Nevertheless, new insights into the already documented material and the complex stratigraphy of the area TFR2 (Taberna Forum Rooms) could be gained during the last couple of months. This has resulted into a new layout of my PhD-project and Trine Bak Pedersen’s PhD- project (Theme 4: Sacrifices and Ritual Deposits). The focus of my dissertation shifted to analysing the entire development of the area TFR2. It is the aim to reconstruct its history with the help of Prof. Dr. Axel Gering’s newest results regarding the building history of the area north-east of the main forum¹ and the results of the analysis of the complex stratigraphy of the area TFR2 with a focus on its massive amount of ceramic finds.

Before the Hadrianic building programme changed the whole appearance of the forum and the area around it, the TFR area belonged to a so far undiscovered sanctuary (see fig. 1). In the course of the Hadrianic building programme, the sanctuary was given up and torn down. In its place, the north-eastern Forum portico ‘Main Forum East’ (MFE) and the Taberna complex ‘Taberna Forum Rooms’ (TFR) were erected.

Needless to say, the earliest and the latest phases of the area are of great interest to us: When was the sanctuary founded? Has the area east of the forum always been used as a sanctuary? In which period were the earliest structures built? And when exactly were the sacred structures given up and the area reused as a taberna complex? Other key questions concern the development of the sanctuary and its structures, as it is obvious that not only the temples but also the associated altars had several building phases. These questions can be answered to some extend by analysing the remaining podium structures of the temple and its phases. Some are still visible today, as they have not been torn down completely and were integrated in the backwalls of the MFE portico, while others are noticeable in excavation photos of the early 20th century. With the help of geophysics, it is possible to get a general idea of the different building phases of the temples. In the following months, a thorough analysis of the excavation diaries from 1913 should shed more light on the stratigraphy around the temples.

East of the portico, the Taberna complex TFR was partly excavated by the OFP team (see fig. 2). The room TFR2 was explored up until its deepest layers, revealing multiple drains belonging to several altar phases. Only a small trench near the threshold of TFR3 was excavated and the digging activities in the room TFR1 remained mainly in late antique strata. In order to answer the abovementioned questions, the focus consequently lies on the trench TFR2. As this area is not directly connected to the Vulcan temple itself but more so to its altar, interpretations regarding the building phases of the temple must be approached with caution. In addition, the stratigraphy in the area TFR2 is extremely complex, so that proposing a chronology even around the area of the altar is a complicated task.

Issues concerning the stratigraphy of the area TFR2

As a fast-growing city dealing with frequent Tiber floods, the accumulation of material and soil in Ostia’s centre was enormous. Especially in an area around an altar, a lot of rubbish must have had collected in relatively short amount of time. It is thus logical, that pavements and corresponding layers have been removed from time to time, especially as the podium of the oldest temple has been reused for its successor temples, resulting in the need to prevent the walking level within the sanctuary from rising endlessly.

Before a new pavement or any other flooring is laid out, the ground below it must be levelled and prepared. In the area TFR2, this is achieved with the help of a layer of soil, mortar, crushed ceramics and a mortar layer or beaten earth on top. When a new building project was initiated (in our area TFR f. ex. a new altar), sometimes the old floor and its bedding have been removed before laying out a new pavement. This explains phenomena like the difference in dating of the layers TFR2 002a and 003b. The layers are only separated by the layer TFR2 003a which is max. 13 cm thick and still, there are at least 150 years between their respective creation. TFR2 003b has most probably been created as a floor preparation layer around the middle of the 1st c BCE, while TFR2 002a, the preparation for the Hadrianic taberna floor, has been created after 130 CE. This stratigraphic situation could for example be explained by pavements, floor preparation and mortar layers from the > 150 years in between the creation of TFR2 002a and TFR2 003b being removed at some point. Of course, such phenomena render it extremely difficult to treat layers in this area as a fine stratigraphy dating specific building phases. It is not quite clear if several layers of old flooring were removed at once when the Hadrianic taberna complex was built or if it was a continuous process of raising and lowering of the levels. On the other hand, we could also be dealing with a beaten-earth floor which was used and repaired for an extended period.

A look at the stratigraphy in the Domus di Giove e Ganimede, which is situated north of the forum, also supports my assumption of either pavements being either removed or used for extremely long periods of time in the area TFR (see Tab. 1).

Giove e Ganimede: Height ASL	Giove e Ganimede: Date	Giove e Ganimede: Context		TFR2: Height ASL	TFR2: Date	TFR2: Context
3,30 m	128–138 CE	Wall foundations for the insula		2,43 m	post 130 CE	Opus spicatum floor in TFR1 Beaten-earth floor in TFR2
2,56 m	120–130 CE	Threshold destroyed in fire		2,07 m	Post 119–121 CE / pre 130 CE (brick stamps)	Beaten-earth floor
1,89 m	Late 1st c – early 2nd c CE	Mosaic floor		1,96 m	After the middle of 1st c BCE – 119–121 CE (coins)	Repair of beaten-earth floor
1,35 m	Augustan	Beaten-earth floor		1,87–1,90 m	Mid-1st c BCE	Beaten-earth floor
0,64 m	Late 2nd c – 1st c BCE	Floor pavement		1,70–1,75 m	2nd half of 2nd c – mid-1st c BCE	Tuff pavement
				1,54–1,60 m	Beginning of 2nd c – 1st half of 2nd c BCE	Tile pavement
				1,30 m	End of 3rd c BCE	Tile pavement
-0,30 m	Late 4th c – early 3rd c BCE	Sand layer, possibly natural		1,14 m	Middle – end of 3rd c BCE	Beaten-earth floor

Tab. 1. Levels in the Domus di Giove e Ganimede (DeLaine – Wilkison, The House of Jove and Ganimede (1999) compared to the levels in the area TFR2

In the Domus di Giove e Ganimede, there is a difference in elevation of 1,95 m – 2,66 m between the late Republican to Augustan levels and the foundations of the insula walls (128 – 138 AD). Between TFR2 003b and 002a (middle of 1st c BCE – 2nd quarter of 2nd c CE) are only 14 cm of soil (TFR2 003a), proving the constant removal of layers in the sacred area. As mentioned above, this phenomenon is certainly caused by the need to keep the walking level from raising indefinitely because of the permanent reuse of the old temple podium.

It also becomes apparent, that the initial rising of the levels in Republican times was not differing as much as in the Imperial strata. In the Domus di Giove a Ganimede, there is a difference of 0,94 m in between the lowest sand layer from the late 4th – early 3rd c BCE and the late Republican layer, in the area TFR2 it is 0,83 m in between those levels. Only after the late Republican period, the development seems to diverge drastically. Below the late Republican layer TFR2 003b, at least two different pavement levels are preserved, above 003b, all floorings have seemingly been removed at some point to avoid the walking level from continuing to rise.

This phenomenon shows explicitly how differently the area within the sanctuary has been treated compared to a residential complex close by. The walking levels of the Domus di Giove e Ganimede and its underlying structures did not react to a relatively fixed walking level determined by a specific building, like the area around the temple did. Reusing the podium of the first temple for its successors created the necessity of the walking level in the sanctuary to always correspond with that structure.

Similar phenomena are documented in other Ostian sanctuaries, such as the Cybele sanctuary and the Hercules temple. In these two cases, it even seems as if the sanctuaries’ levels were lower than the street level after a general raising of the levels in Ostia in the 1st c AD.²

The comparison of the absolute heights of the two sites also illustrates another particularity of the area TFR2: the lowest layer consisting of sabbia marina and a few singular finds from the 2nd half of the 4th c BC – 3rd c BCE (see figs. 3-6) is on a height of 0,92 – 1,12 m ASL, while a similar context in the Domus di Giove e Ganimede is on 0,30 m BSL. Does that mean that the area of the altar of the sanctuary possibly lies on a natural elevation, for instance a small hill or a dune? That would propose an additional explanation to the comparatively high levels in the lower strata of the area TFR2. Already the old excavations in the north-eastern forum portico indicated higher levels than elsewhere in Ostia.

Another reason for the necessity of keeping the walking level relatively low is the proximity of the sanctuary to the main forum itself and hence to the Decumanus and the Cardo. It is a common phenomenon in Roman cities that the further away from the two main roads a site is located, the less inhibited is the rising of the levels, whereas the walking levels connected to building complexes near the main streets are kept at a certain absolute height as the road level usually stays unaltered for a long period of time.

Level raises (‘rialzimenti’) are well-documented in Ostian research, while the discussion around the lowering of levels (‘abbassamenti’) is lacking.⁷ In the following months, it is my aim to compare the sanctuary’s stratigraphy to those of other sites in Ostia, as well as other Roman cities, focussing on the area around their main streets.

You can find more here.

---

[1] Forthcoming: A. Gering, Geophysics and archaeological surface documentation in Ostia, in: Springer-Handbook of Cultural Heritage Analysis (2021)

[2] Mar – Nolla – Ruiz de Arbulo – Vivó, Cambios de nivel en las callas de Ostia. Los datos de la excavación
arqueológica en el santuario de Cibeles. MededRom 58 (1999), 83.

[3] G. Olcese, Ceramiche da contesti repubblicani del territorio di Ostia (Rome 2016), stamp 128 on base cat. 203.

[4] Similar kylices with painted-on figural decoration have been found in Ostia (NSc 1950, 93. 96–97), Cosa (D. M. Taylor, Cosa: Black Glaze Pottery (Rome 1957), 78–79, cat. A1; A. Reynolds Scott, Cosa: The Black-Glaze Pottery 2 (Rome 2008), 20–21, cat. A1) and Gabii (J. P. Ballester, Las cerámicas de figuras Negras, figuras rojas y sobrepintadas de Gabii (Rome 1981), 51–52, cat. 156, 157, 158, 159).

[5] Morel 2734a–c; Olcese 2016, cat. 28.

[6] Olcese 2016, stamp Olcese 49 on Morel 2783 / Olcese cat. 38.

[7] For the discussing on level raises in Ostia: MededRom 58 (1999), chapter II.

The Capitolium has always formed part of the research on Ostia’s Forum conducted by the OFP. But the amount of work, so far, never gave space for a closer look on its history and state of preservation. However, since 2009, the Capitolium has always been part of the documentation, which means that until today we already have a good amount of material to work on. At the same time, it became clear that the Capitolium needed to be researched for itself, which resulted in a PhD-project that started in 2020 and deals with the appearance of the Hadrianic Forum until Late Antiquity.

2019

Besides the excavation, parts of the team documented the large amount of marble fragments. Most of those fragments were stored in the adjacent rooms in the Forum by the excavators in the beginning of the 20^th century. However, for a few pieces, it is possible to reconstruct their original (find)-context, before they were stored there. Dealing with those fragments, means to take into account that we also have possible finds from the excavations from the 19^th century as well as undocumented finds from the later excavations. These can be be identified on the old photographs from those times – partly in their original context (for example in a lime kiln in the Forum).

Of course, in that mass of marble fragments, there are supposed to be fragments belonging to the Capitolium, the Forum’s Porticoes and other monuments.

There, we have fragments of the altar: the undecorated cymatium also resembles strikingly to the presumed frieze of the Capitolium as the measurements and material fit 100%!

As a consequence, it became clear, that this monument again needed to be reconsidered: that is to say that either the frieze (the bucranium piece) is not part of the temple’s frieze or the altar is not an altar.

Both possibilities are dealing with an unusual phenomenon. On the one hand, the motifs like the weapons of Athena in combination with the bucranium and the undecorated cymatium, existing also as corner pieces, seems very plausible for a temple’s frieze. On the other hand, the format of the postulated altar is getting in a rectangular due to the connection of Athena’s shield with the eagle fragment and a postulated balanced motif.  A very good comparison in general could be found in the Boccus-Monument. For several other reasons the actual hypothesis is not seeing the fragments as parts of the Capitolium’s frieze.

A large fragment of the pilaster capital of the Capitolium is able to tell us a lot about its placement on the temple‘s brick body.

The capitals were inserted into the cut-outs in the brick body of the Capitolium and in most cases fixed with two dowels. In the preserved fragment in the Forum, we can see that there was also a dowel hole in the top surface of the capital that served as connection to the three-fascia-architrave. The analysis of the cut-outs in the temple‘s brick body are showing a dovetail groove. It seems very probable that the capitals were inserted from above on their places.  

2020

In 2020, I tried to get clearance in the question on the measurements of the architectural decoration of the temple. Especially the capital’s height is hitherto not known exactly. Therefore, I made a lot of photos from the temple’s crown part and during the post excavation work, I added additional photos, which was taken by a copter in a former campaign. In general, it was not an easy task processing the data and it took a lot of time to find appropriate photos as lots of the existing photos in good angles were not sharp in their detailed resolution. The consequence is an unsharp model, but it is sufficient to measure with a reference (the clear red ‘restauro-1966’-bricks:  those were set in the restored Capitolium wall to point out where parts or walls were repaired) in the model, of which I know the exact measurements. This allowed me to measure in the created 3D-model. Additionally, I know the width of the pilaster columns and the width of the capitals, which is delivered by drawings from architects from the first quarter of the 19^th century and are confirmed by the fragment in the Forum. At this working state, the measurements are not easy to capture in the model (mostly it is difficult to estimate from which point in the dowel hole the measurement should start) but their accuracy grade is +-2cm. In addition, it is to remark that it should be possible with the dowel hole on the capital fragment and model of the Capitolium crown in a higher resolution to find the exact placement of the existing capital(fragment).

In this example for a photogrammetric method it should be pointed out, like for every visual operating method, that you can only work with the for the capture device visible surface. A laser scanner for example is dependent on its position. In this model here, we can see that the inner edges of the cut-outs are not visible in a clear resolution, which is caused by shadow and visual axis of the camera.

The key measurements are the following (see also image): three-fascia-architrave ca. 62,8 cm; capital height ca. 130 cm; capital width including the joint surface for the revetment plaques (complete width of the cut-outs) ca. 168,5 cm; distance between dowel holes for the pilaster (width of the pilaster) 107,59 cm; width of the ‘restauro-1966’-brick 9,8cm.

In the next campaign I will of course try to create a model in a higher resolution (as there is also a pigeon visible in the actual).

A single fragment is basically able to tell you a lot about its history if you ask kindly for it: we found lots of fragments from pilasters and columns. They differ in terms of material, size and fragmentation/preservation. Two of those are in good condition and are fitting to the columns of the Capitolium. What makes them special is that they are patches and they seem to fit to one another, but one piece is made of Pavonazzetto and the other of Giallo Antico. They possess the same thickness and working technic. The wavy sides are fitting to a luckily still preserved column fragment of the Capitolium, which shows the identical inserting features but in the negative form. Thus, we have prove of a standardized and accurate repairing process and not only through these pieces the maintenance and modification of the Capitolium and its appearance is verifiable.

Another fragment is bringing up a discussion about its belonging to the Capitolium. It shows a little bit of a preserved side. There we can identify fur or hair arranged in hook formed locks. Through this fragment leads a 7 cm wide round channel. We can connect this fragment to two already known huge waterspouts. These appear as lionheads. One of them was already found at the beginning of the 19^th century (the piece is now in the Vatican), the other in 1938. Both were coming from the Terme del Foro. In 1805, Guattani wanted to ascribe the waterspout, despite its find spot in the Terme del Foro, to the Capitolium. This is still often assumed, even though in combination with the other waterspout, it has been stated otherwise in the revision of  the early excavation’s material by Filippo Marini-Recchia. It should be added that the style of the known lionhead waterspout is speaking against a Hadrianic dating as all of the so far known fragments of the Capitolium are of a accurate, classical manner. This third waterspout fragment was found in the material of the Roma and Augustus Temple, which seems to be a little confusing, but could also be arranged by the excavators in the 20^th century, who often formed marble deposits with the found fragments. It is at the end still to remark, that we have not had the chance to get access to one of the complete waterspouts. Thus, it is still not possible to compare the measurements and gain certainty for its original context. But at this moment it seems to be from the Terme del Foro (where the waterspouts possibly served as endpoints of water drains to a pool).

A highlight from 2019

During the excavation and for the first time in more than a century, we brought a sculptural find from the Forum’s area to light. Emerging at first with only a glimpse of wavy hair, which was hidden by a little fragment of a strigils-sarcophagus and accompanied by a funeral inscription, was the portrait of Emperor Hadrian. It took several days to uncover it from the earth. It was placed as filling material underneath a late antique pavement. After its discovery and excavation, the head was directly handed over to the Direction of the Parco Archeologico di Ostia Antica.

This portrait is a combination (Typen-Klitterung) of two well known types: The main part is copying the type Baiae and parts of the back of the head can be allocated to the type Busti 283.

This marble portrait will be part of a separate article in the near future.

You can find more here.

– Gering, Axel. 2020. ‘Zum Aussagewert umgenutzter Bauteile des Roma- und Augustustempels für die Bau- und Verfallsgeschichte Ostias. Ergebnisse der Spoliensurveys 2016-2018 des Ostia-Forum-Projekts (OFP)’. In Umgebaut. Umbau-, Umnutzungs- und Umwertungsprozesse in der Architektur. Internationales Kolloquium in Berlin vom 21.-24. Februar 2018 veranstaltet vom Architektur des DAI. Katja Piesker & Ulrike Wulf-Rheidt (eds.). Berlin. Pp. 383-402

Structure-from-Motion (SfM) and LiDAR have led to a revolution within recording archaeological sites as well as objects. SfM is essentially digital photogrammetry, which we have applied to the Forum of Ostia since 2010.

An important aspect of both the excavation- and post-excavation work is the 3D modelling of not only objects, but also large excavated areas. On site, it is therefore important to take the adequate number of photographs. If an object has finely carved ornamental decoration, detailed photos of these carvings are very important. Especially since these carvings often are the defining hints towards a date. Some examples are presented beneath. Here the detailed ornamental decoration can be seen.

Objects consist of everything from large architectural elements in marble to the smallest terra sigillata fragments. Since we often conduct our work outside, the lighting is very important – shadows from the sun are a disturbing factor regarding the quality of the 3D model. Using a DSLR camera, such as a Canon with a standard lens, it usually takes no more than 5 to 10 minutes to record an object. How it is done can be seen in the three pictures below. The two first photos show the documentation of architectural elements in marble with detailed carvings. The third photo shows the documentation of an oil lamp.

It is essential that the camera settings are the same throughout the process, which makes it easier for the SfM technique to identify the corresponding points in the attempt to generate a dense point cloud.

Besides the Canon, a Sony Mark I and Mark III were also utilised in the documentation of rooms and their surfaces. An example can be seen underneath, where the room TFR_2 has been photographed with the Sony Mark I and III documenting the status quo of the excavation as well as the walls.

The documentation of the walls were done from on the top of walls.

At times we are hindered by existing structures, and we thus have to create 3D models based on thousand of photos. Such an example is the podium wall of the Late Republican temple preserved under the Hadrianic portico, MFW.

For the aerial views and documentation of walls as well, our colleagues from Budapest used a Phantom III drone with great success, as can be seen in the picure below. The first picture shows one of our Hungarian colleagues with the Phantom III. The second picture shows the Temple of Roma and Augustus located in the southern half of the Forum after it has been processed.

In the post-excavation work we use programs such as PhotoScan and MetaShape. MeshLab has also been used. When analysing the individual architectural fragments as well as the overall views of groundplans, Sketch-Up is a program, which we sometimes use to gather all the information and create a 3D model of for example the Temple of Roma and Augustus and its interior. We do this to visualise our theories and thus to analyse whether it makes sense with the amount of columns or aediculae on the inside. Some examples of this can be seen below.

Another programme, which we also use to visualise our ideas is Cinema 4D. This has generated some great results, which can be seen here.

The different methods developed for the requirements of our project are promising in their flexibility and cost efficiency. The method furthermore allows one to re-work an object or a plan and to create a newer 3D model in the future. The method is also efficient in cultural heritage, since the photos are stored and saved for future research.

The work is still in progress. However, some results and more detailed descriptions can be found here.

– Damgaard, Daniel. 2019. ‘Architectural Terracottas from Etrusco-Italic Temples on the Later Forum of Ostia – Archaic Ostia Revisited’. In Analecta Romana Instituti Danici (ARID) vol. 43, 2018. Pp. 91-109.