User:TempleByTheTiber/sandbox

The Round Temple by the Tiber is a Roman temple in Piazza Bocca della Verità, in the area of the Forum Boarium close to the Tiber in the city of Rome.

Temples are known to be locations designated for religious and spiritual activities. They can house multiple deities in represented with statues or be devoted to one deity in particular. Other characteristics include a depiction of the deities, a building structure that conforms to the usual type of buildings devoted to that deity (in terms of ex. architecture), ornaments, and a designated spot outside the building to perform activities such as sacrifices. One of its functions is to be built in such a way that it can be recognized as a temple attributed to that deity. Additions to the sanctuary, such as decorations and altars, continue to convince the audience of the existence and power of the deity who's house is the temple. The Round Temple by the Tiber is easily recognized as a temple through its building structure, but the identification of the deity it belongs to has mystified many for ages.

Architecture
The circular form of the Round Temple is an example of a 4th century B.C. Greek tholos by featuring a peripteral design of Corinthian orders on the outside of the cella. Arranged in a dense pycnostyle composition, the twenty freestanding, fluted columns surround the base of the dome. Despite its modern improper context, we can appreciate the refinement of its details and the statement of its materials by referring to the Roman standards of that time and how this particular Temple pierced them.

From a structural point of view, the Round Temple by the Tiber fits within the convoy of fourth century temples such as those at Delphi, Epidaurus, and Olympia. Although the these structures combined in various ways the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian Orders, in each case the Corinthian Order, which is of an increased aesthetic complexity, was confined to columns or piers inside the cella as opposed to the outer colonnade. Moreover, the high density of the columns is constructionally superfluous to the task of supporting a lighter wooden dome structure. Under these considerations, we interpret the choice of design as a rhetorical statement of wealth and power. The light dome and the outer exhibit of Corinthian columns can connote the delimitation of an espace sacré.

The base plan dimensions of the temple corresponds with Vitruvius' standard for a circular shrine, which mentions two steps before the stylobate and the cella recessed within the stylobate about one fifth of the breadth. The height of the columns, however, is considerably taller than the prescribed standard, which pegs it to the interior dimension of the cella's diameter. At a height of 10.6 meters and an inner diameter of 8.53 meters, the height is more than 2 meters taller. This inconsistency carries on to the proportion of the columns' height to their lower diameter which stands at 11.15 to 1 instead of the 10 to 1 from Vitrivius' expectation of a classic sanctuary. Admitting such proportional abnormality while conforming to the general image of a temple, one can imagine an outlandish, wealthy deviser who's rhetorical intention is to follow the architectural norms, but to give a twist in order to accentuate his affluency and distinction from the local norm.

The use of Pentelic marble, typical of Attic Corinthian tradition indicates the erection took place between 143 and first century B.C., as halfway the first century, Luna marble came in to use. It was one of the first marble buildings in Republican Rome, after the Temple of Jupiter Stator. The use of this exquisite material and the highly complex column capitals discloses a gripping quality of design and craftsmanship.

Reconstructions
Nowadays, the Round Temple features two sets of capitals. The temple's original capitals, those of its south and east quadrants, have broad divisions of the lobes, widely spread points, and rounded fleshy ribs. Sculpted in rich three-dimensionality, the sharply delineated elements represent a Hellenistic style with origins in building like the Hekateion in Lagina in southwest Asia Minor, reaching the highest point of the style in the time of Antiochus IV, in 175-164 B.C.

The later capitals feature typical characteristics of the post-Augustan period with the flat midrib of the acanthus leaf, drilled holes to make the lobe divisions, and the rough carving of the cauliculi. Such trademarks became almost universal by the time of the Flavians in the 70's and 80's A.D. The replacement of the capitals are dated to ca. 20 A.D., motivated by a theory that proposes that the original columns may have been destroyed in a catastrophic flood of the Tiber River in 15 A.D. during the reign of Tiberius.

During the Middle Ages, the Round Temple was transformed into a Christian church. As such it functioned until 1809, when it fell under the hand of the architectural restorer Giuseppe Valadier. The shallow conical roof remains that of the medieval church, but in other respects it is still the classical building. It remains a familiar landmark of Rome, more so indeed than it ever was in antiquity, when it was just one among the many temples of the overcrowded capital.

Identification of Deity
This discusses the history of the temple and its identification: To whom is it dedicated? Vesta? Hercules Oliviarus? Mater Matuta? Stripped of an inscription, only the positioning, surroundings and exterior of the temple can contribute to the identification of the deity.

For years this temple has misled many a historian in its identity. The Corinthean style as seen in the columns on the exterior, as well as the shape of the temple make a strong case for the temple to be identified as a Temple of Vesta – of which the aforementioned features are characteristics. The temple, round and with approximately twenty Corinthean columns, is similar to the Temple of Vesta on the Forum Romanum.

Another argument supports a different deity: Mater Matuta. The temple finds itself near Rome’s harbour for livestock, as the Forum Boarium is adjacent to the temple. Mater Matuta is known as the goddess of the sea, of the dawn, and of harbours. A temple to honour the patron of the profession carried out on the forum before it, is not a wrong assumption. Moreover, the temple next to the Round Temple on the Tiber has been positively identified as a temple of Mater Matuta. This leads to the debate of whether they have the same goal (worship of Mater Matuta), or, contrarily, to the reasoning that if the first one already tells of this deity, the latter one must tell of another one.

A third possible deity is Hercules Victor or Hercules Invictus – the names are used interchangeably. Dedicated to the great deeds of Hercules, the term ‘Victor’ (from ‘victorious’) or ‘Invictus’ (from ‘invincible’), Macrobius’ Saturnalia identify the temple as such : on the 13th of August, the Saturnalia take place not far from the Forum Boarium.

Identification of Founder
There is discussion about who sponsored the construction of the Round Temple by the Tiber. Within this discourse, there are two camps: the consul-standpoint, supporting L. Mummius Archaicus as founder, and the merchant-standpoint, who put M. Octavius Herrenus as founder. Here the two theories regarding the identification of its founder are discussed - the arguments tackle multiple criteria: Why would the temple have been built? With what purpose? And why would this theory be accepted?

M. Octavius Herrenus
Following the merchant-standpoint, the building of the Round Temple by the Tiber is rightly attributed to M. Octavius Herrenus. He built his empire as an olive merchant and most noticeably took a stand against and actively sought to eradicate pirates on the Mediterranean sea. Believing it was Hercules Oliviarius who saved him from a pirate’s attack, he vowed to dedicate a tenth of his profit to the deity. Here the building would function as a place of worship for the common merchant entering the Forum Boarium. Here the commercial identity of the Forum Boarium play into the founder's identity: an olive merchant erects a temple in gratitude for the deity that assured him successful and safe travels. The temple targets those inspired by this tale who want to secure safe and/or successful travels for themselves, or those relating to the (olive) merchant-identity and invites them to make use of the temple's function of worship whilst simultaneously endorsing a personality cult around Herrenus. The temple could be recognized as belonging to Hercules Oliviarius by a statue in his image at the foot of the temple. The recognition of a marble block on the same spot that could be the base of a statue, would confirm this.

Arguments against the theory indicate that Herrenus did not have the status (he was not a general) nor the financial means to erect a marble temple of this caliber. Moreover, the lex Papiria did not give the right to dedicate public temples to somebody who had merely persuaded and the approval of the people. Herrenus was a private person, not a magistrate, therefore if he has ever built a temple, it could not be considered publice consecrata, and if it was private, it must have been infinitely more modest than the marble Round Temple on the Tiber. According to Macrobius, M. Octavius Herrenus is tied to Hercules Victor, although possibly in some other way. An explanation currently entertained for the connection between the Round Temple by the Tiber and M. Octavius Herrenus is that he did erect the statue honouring Hercules Oliviarus, but not the temple.

L. Mummius Achaicus
The consul-standpoint focuses on L. Mummius Achaicus, a novus homo, praetor (154 B.C.) and then and a consul in 146 B.C. He acquired the needed status, financial means and materials to possibly build the Round Temple by the Tiber from his campaigns against the Achaeans (which climaxed in the Battle of Corinth, 146 B.C.). The war booty consisted, among other things, of Corinthian columns, which were used or used as an inspiration for the temple.

This theory focuses on the interpretation of the temple as being dedicated to Hercules Victor - in light of recent victory of L. Mummius Achaicus. As rivalry amongst successful military men was not uncommon, L. Mummius takes on the cognomina of those he has conquered (‘Achaicus’), as do his rivals: Metellus Macedonicus (c. 210-116 B.C.), Brutus Callaicus (180-112 B.C.), and P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus (185-129 B.C.). Obedient to this continuous trend of rivalry, it was custom to build a temple celebrating one’s victory. Building the Temple of Hercules Victor to celebrate his victory and to establish his status as victor, placing himself ahead of his rivals, is in line with the rivalry argument. Here the temple's main function is the personality cult of L. Mummius Achaicus: even the use of certain elements in the temple's building structure is to remind the audience of L. Mummius' deeds and achievements, the deity Hercules Victor ever more so.

Other theories
Other minor theories speak of the temple being erected to worship a foreign god – as the Forum Boarium was a place of commerce, trade, and served the function of Rome’s harbour (apart from Ostia), it must have seen many foreigners in its days, with each their own gods; such interpretation interpretation is possible, but less likely. Another theory points to Servius Tullius, the sixth king of Rome as founder, tying the temple to the temple of Mater Matuta found beneath the Church of St. Omobono or the temple of Mater Matuta next to it. This theory leans on the works of S. B. Platner, an American classicist and archaeologist, most famous for his contributions towards topographical works regarding Ancient Rome.

Rhetoric
A rhetorical analysis can be applied in order to answer questions about what the building and the positioning of the Round Temple wanted to convey, persuade and what feelings it tried to inflict on its viewers. The Aristotelian ēthos-logos-pathos, not being restricted to words only, can be applied to works of art and buildings, where it grasps the discursive action connecting their commissioners, patrons, artists to the audience of spectators. Since there is no speaker addressing himself directly to the public, the logos must be directly built into the Temple itself, covering characteristics such as architecture and public function. For example, the sheer fact that the construction materials were obtained by wiping out the entire city of Corinth (of which the public's pathos was aware by their alien provenance) makes a strong statement and constitutes the part of logos which instils emotions of fear and humbleness.

Marble and Rivalry
One characteristic that joins together the topos of monuments and temples has certainly been the use of a specific type of marble. The Pentilic marble has before only been used for the Temple of Jupiter Stator. Therefore, in the audience's eyes, this material is associated with its commissioner (ethos) - Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, a brilliant general and son in a family of generations of consuls. L. Mummius Achaicus, could take advantage of this topos to solve the problem of being the first novus homo of plebeian descent and the anxiety caused by the lack of cultural capital down his parentage.

Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, who, as a praetor, has defeated the uprising of Andriscus and turned Macedonia into a Roman province, was still in function in 146 BC when the Achaean War broke out. Before the consular army under L. Mummius, sent to deal with the new enemy, arrived in Greece, Metellus defeated the Achaeans at Skarpheia would have finished the war by himself if Mummius had not reached Metellus when he was already on the Isthmos. Upon orders from the superior magistrate which forced Metellus to withdraw, Mummius decisively defeated the Achaeans at Leukopetra and finished the war by devastating Corinth.

The turn of events during the Achaean War paints the story of a lower-ranking general, L. Mummius, who nearly stole the victory from his superior, Metellus. This rivalry may have incentivised Mummius to build a marble temple: like Metellus he took an enormous amount of booty; like Metellus he exercised his imperium in the immediate neighbourhood of Attica, where Pentelic marble came from. Through the erection of the marble Temple, he could emphasize his share in the great work.

Sociological context and impact
Acceding to the aforementioned premise, the choice of location - Forum Boarium, near the great Pons Aemilius - then becomes blatantly clear. First of all, since L. Mummius Achaicus is of plebeian parentage, he may seek a way to self-validate himself in the eyes of the patrician class and transcend the image of a mere plebeian. There seems to not be a better place than the busy economic forum of the cattle market where in the midst of strive for wealth the tall, imposing temple uses the stage of competition between either two merchants or a merchant and a plebeian to sketch in a similar fashion, but on a much larger scale the difference between the now victorious consul L. Mummius Achaicus and the rest of the associates of his plebeian past.

With the assistance of the topos of Hercules Victor, L. Mummius might have ingrained the pathos of Romans in the last decades of the first century B.C. In the sixth book of the Aeneid, when Anchises presents future generations of great Romans to his son in the underworld, Mummius is described in the following words: "ille triumphata Capitolia ad alta Corintho / victor aget currum caesis insignis Achivis" (836-837):"'That one having triumphed over Corinth, shall drive his chariot victorious to the lofty Capitol.'"Via these verses, Mummius is in fact the only Roman general endowed by Virgil with the epithet victor. By providing a clue, even if a very indirect one, the Aeneid suggests that the temple built by the destroyer of Corinth sank deeper into the pathos of the last generations of Republican Rome, showcasing an ancient, yet very common today, rhetorical mechanism.

See more

 * Forum Boarium
 * Statue of Hercules Victor
 * L. Mummius Achaicus