DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44944#0079
ARCUS TIBERII—ARCUS TITI 45
arcus Stillans consequently identified with the Fornix Augusti (RAP
iii. 143-190) ; but the evidence is insufficient (HCh 593).
Arcus Tiberii (in campo Martio) : mentioned only by Suetonius (Claud. 11),
who says that Claudius erected in honour of Tiberius, near the theatre
of Pompey, a marble arch ‘ decretum quidem olim a senatu verum
omissum
Arcus Tiberii : erected in 16 a.d. to commemorate the recovery of the
standards which had been captured by the Germans at the defeat of
Varus in 9 a.d. (Tac. Ann. ii. 41). It stood at the north-west corner of the
basilica Julia, on the north side of the Sacra via, which was made narrower
at this point by having its curb bent toward the south. The arch was
single, as represented on a relief on the arch of Constantine (HC 74, fig. 28),
and was approached by steps from the level of the forum. Various
architectural fragments were discovered in 1835 and 1848, with parts of
the inscription1 (CIL vi. 906, 31422, 31575), and its concrete foundations,
9 metres long and 6.3 wide, in 1900 (PAS ii. 47 ; Jord. i. 2. 211-13 ;
HC 68-69; DR 443-448; HFP 18).
Arcus Tiburii or Diburi : mediaeval names of an arch near the site of
the Porticus Divorum (q.v.) of Domitian, and perhaps forming its
entrance (HJ 470, 567).
Arcus Titi : often called Arcus Vespasiani et Titi, erected in 80/81 a.d.
by the senate in honour of the emperor Titus, and to commemorate the
capture of Jerusalem. We have no information about this arch, except
what is contained in the inscription (CIL vi. 944) preserved in the
Einsiedeln Itinerary and reported to have been found in the circus
Maximus. As a fragment (No. 38) of the Marble Plan indicates an arch
at the east end of the circus, it is supposed that this arch replaced the
porta Pompae, as the entrance at this point of the circus was regularly
called.
Arcus Titi : erected in honour of Titus and in commemoration of the siege
of Jerusalem in summa Sacra via (Haterii relief, CIL vi. 19151 ; Mem.
Accad. di Napoli xxiv. (1906), 227-262,2 but not finished and dedicated
until after his death (CIL vi. 945). There is no mention of this arch in
ancient literature, though it may be alluded to by Martial (de spect. 2)
1 The fragments of inscriptions supposed to have belonged to the arch have as a fact
(as is pointed out in CIL cit., following RGDA2, 127) no connection with it—despite the
statement in HC cit. But the arch, which, as Tacitus tells us, was propter aedem Satumi,
has certainly been correctly identified (AJA 1912, 398).
2 In this article the relief is assigned to the Flavian period (so also SScR 120, 130-131) J
but the appearance in it of the goddess Roma, which one would otherwise suppose to be
an allusion to the neighbouring Templum Veneris et Romae (q.v.), then becomes
difficult to explain (HF 1193). The question has become more important since an attempt
has been made to draw conclusions as to the state of the Amphitheatrum Flavium (q.v.)
at the time of the accession of Titus. This, however, we have no right to do ; for the
arch of Titus certainly appears in it, and was equally certainly not erected until after
his death.
arcus Stillans consequently identified with the Fornix Augusti (RAP
iii. 143-190) ; but the evidence is insufficient (HCh 593).
Arcus Tiberii (in campo Martio) : mentioned only by Suetonius (Claud. 11),
who says that Claudius erected in honour of Tiberius, near the theatre
of Pompey, a marble arch ‘ decretum quidem olim a senatu verum
omissum
Arcus Tiberii : erected in 16 a.d. to commemorate the recovery of the
standards which had been captured by the Germans at the defeat of
Varus in 9 a.d. (Tac. Ann. ii. 41). It stood at the north-west corner of the
basilica Julia, on the north side of the Sacra via, which was made narrower
at this point by having its curb bent toward the south. The arch was
single, as represented on a relief on the arch of Constantine (HC 74, fig. 28),
and was approached by steps from the level of the forum. Various
architectural fragments were discovered in 1835 and 1848, with parts of
the inscription1 (CIL vi. 906, 31422, 31575), and its concrete foundations,
9 metres long and 6.3 wide, in 1900 (PAS ii. 47 ; Jord. i. 2. 211-13 ;
HC 68-69; DR 443-448; HFP 18).
Arcus Tiburii or Diburi : mediaeval names of an arch near the site of
the Porticus Divorum (q.v.) of Domitian, and perhaps forming its
entrance (HJ 470, 567).
Arcus Titi : often called Arcus Vespasiani et Titi, erected in 80/81 a.d.
by the senate in honour of the emperor Titus, and to commemorate the
capture of Jerusalem. We have no information about this arch, except
what is contained in the inscription (CIL vi. 944) preserved in the
Einsiedeln Itinerary and reported to have been found in the circus
Maximus. As a fragment (No. 38) of the Marble Plan indicates an arch
at the east end of the circus, it is supposed that this arch replaced the
porta Pompae, as the entrance at this point of the circus was regularly
called.
Arcus Titi : erected in honour of Titus and in commemoration of the siege
of Jerusalem in summa Sacra via (Haterii relief, CIL vi. 19151 ; Mem.
Accad. di Napoli xxiv. (1906), 227-262,2 but not finished and dedicated
until after his death (CIL vi. 945). There is no mention of this arch in
ancient literature, though it may be alluded to by Martial (de spect. 2)
1 The fragments of inscriptions supposed to have belonged to the arch have as a fact
(as is pointed out in CIL cit., following RGDA2, 127) no connection with it—despite the
statement in HC cit. But the arch, which, as Tacitus tells us, was propter aedem Satumi,
has certainly been correctly identified (AJA 1912, 398).
2 In this article the relief is assigned to the Flavian period (so also SScR 120, 130-131) J
but the appearance in it of the goddess Roma, which one would otherwise suppose to be
an allusion to the neighbouring Templum Veneris et Romae (q.v.), then becomes
difficult to explain (HF 1193). The question has become more important since an attempt
has been made to draw conclusions as to the state of the Amphitheatrum Flavium (q.v.)
at the time of the accession of Titus. This, however, we have no right to do ; for the
arch of Titus certainly appears in it, and was equally certainly not erected until after
his death.